In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Microcredit Pioneer Wins Nobel Peace Prize

This is awesome.

OSLO, Norway (AP) — Bangladeshi economist Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank he founded won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for their pioneering use of tiny, seemingly insignificant loans — microcredit — to lift millions out of poverty.

Through Yunus’s efforts and those of the bank he founded, poor people around the world, especially women, have been able to buy cows, a few chickens or the cell phone they desperately needed to get ahead.

Microcredit has been a most effective tool for lifting people out of poverty. It’s also a means of empowering women, since the overwhelming majority of the loan recipients are women who are trying to provide for their families but just don’t have the money to buy the one small thing that could help them start a business or just have enough resources to create a surplus of wealth that lets them get ahead rather than simply spinning their wheels. And it has broader effects, as well:

”Lasting peace cannot be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty,” the Nobel Committee said in its citation. ”Microcredit is one such means. Development from below also serves to advance democracy and human rights.”

Yunus is the first Nobel Prize winner from Bangladesh, a poverty-stricken nation of about 141 million people located on the Bay on Bengal.

”I am so, so happy, it’s really a great news for the whole nation,” Yunus told The Associated Press shortly after the prize was announced. He was reached by telephone at his home in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka.

Grameen Bank was the first lender to hand out microcredit, giving very small loans to poor Bangladeshis who did not qualify for loans from conventional banks. No collateral is needed and repayment is based on an honor system.

Anyone can qualify for a loan — the average is about $200 — but recipients are put in groups of five. Once two members of the group have borrowed money, the other three must wait for the funds to be repaid before they get a loan.

Grameen, which means rural in the Bengali language, says the method encourages social responsibility. The results are hard to argue with — the bank says it has a 99 percent repayment rate.

The inspiration for starting the bank in 1974 was a woman:

Yunus told The Associated Press in a 2004 interview that his ”eureka moment” came while chatting to a shy woman weaving bamboo stools with calloused fingers.

Sufia Begum was a 21-year-old villager and a mother of three when the economics professor met her in 1974 and asked her how much she earned. She replied that she borrowed about five taka (nine cents) from a middleman for the bamboo for each stool.

All but two cents of that went back to the lender.

”I thought to myself, my God, for five takas she has become a slave,” Yunus said in the interview.

”I couldn’t understand how she could be so poor when she was making such beautiful things,” he said.

The following day, he and his students did a survey in the woman’s village, Jobra, and discovered that 43 of the villagers owed a total of 856 taka (about $27).

”I couldn’t take it anymore. I put the $27 out there and told them they could liberate themselves,” he said, and pay him back whenever they could. The idea was to buy their own materials and cut out the middleman.

They all paid him back, day by day, over a year, and his spur-of-the-moment generosity grew into a full-fledged business concept that came to fruition with the founding of Grameen Bank in 1983.

In the years since, the bank says it has lent $5.72 billion to more than 6 million Bangladeshis.

Worldwide, microcredit financing is estimated to have helped some 17 million people.

”Yunus and Grameen Bank have shown that even the poorest of the poor can work to bring about their own development,” the Nobel citation said.

Today, the bank claims to have 6.6 million borrowers, 97 percent of whom are women, and provides services in more than 70,000 villages in Bangladesh. Its model of micro-financing has inspired similar efforts around the world.

The success has allowed Grameen Bank to expand its credit to include housing loans, financing for irrigation and fisheries as well as traditional savings accounts.

One of Yunus’ aides, Dipal Barua, said the award was an ”honor for millions of poor women who have made this possible.”

This is an example of how one person, with one idea, can change the lives of millions. Excellent choice, Nobel Committee.


18 thoughts on Microcredit Pioneer Wins Nobel Peace Prize

  1. That’s awesome news.

    There’s a cool article on the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4765856.stm ) about a similar bank in Sri Lanka inspired by Yunus. Samanthi Dissanayake, the journalist who wrote it, went out and spoke to dozens of women – and learnt that in fact

    Women have long pooled savings to provide loans for each other using a kitty system…. In the late 1980s, grassroots women’s groups in villages throughout the impoverished Hambantota province set up informal banks, where village girls studying A-levels handled all transactions.

    Cool.

  2. I’m proud to say that my 12-year-old son held two bake sales at his school last year to fund loans through Kiva. His older brother and I matched his funds. I just read him a lot of this piece and he was thrilled. 🙂

  3. Thanks so much for this post. I just signed up for their email alerts and hope that anyone who has not done so will consider it.

  4. The loans would need to be a little less micro, but I see no reason why the same arrangement wouldn’t work.

  5. The cost of starting a small business here is also much, much higher, and it’s a far more difficult road in a whole host of ways.

    It’s not that I think something similar couldn’t work, but it would be harder to work out just how to put it together.

  6. Microcredit would be tough to swing in the U.S. The cost of starting and maintaining a business is higher by several orders of magnitude, and any change in the lending laws that would allow microcredit transactions would also affect payday lenders. In fact, one could argue that payday lenders are our own form of microcredit, albeit a pernicious and evil one. Regulating them more stringently would do more good than erecting a new microcredit system. Subsidized small business and education loans would be nice, too…

  7. From one study on microcredit:
    (Aminur) Rahman found that more than 95% of the
    credit given to women is controlled by their husband or other male relative. The loans are often used for unapproved purposes, such as paying a dowry or buying medicine. Women then have to appeal to men for money to pay off the installments or sell household produce that would
    otherwise be consumed. This diversion of funds “has a negative impact on the well-being of household members,” says Rahman.

    a critique of microcredit:

    http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Micro.html

  8. KG, do you find this happens a lot? I’m semi-connected with libertarian groups, and while for years I’ve heard about how great microcredit is, is that really a problem? I would say microcredit is one of the things libertarian sorts mention most frequently when the conversation turns to development, because it fits in so well with a lot of libertarian beliefs/inclinations: the bottom-up aspect, the focus on voluntary transaction and entrepreneurship, the focus on responsibility (loans rather than gifts; this is probably the source of conservative appeal too). But again: if microcredit does work well, or at least as well as any development strategy can be said to, why is it a problem if libertarians or even conservatives also support it?

  9. I’m not KG, but I’d say the problem isn’t that conservatives and libertarians support microloans, but that they claim that they came up with the idea. Although microloans square with the libertarian and neoliberal views of development, they grew out of the intense experimentation associated with social liberalism.

    But at any rate, I like it when people don’t argue with success. If microcredit works, it’s good that people who don’t share my ideological framework support it. I’d much rather debate what to do next than whether to keep an existing (and successful) program.

  10. Alon’s right on. It doesn’t bother me when libertarians or neoliberals support it — hell, I would love it if there were more issues that we could find common ground on — that they they a: take credit for it and b: proclaim it as a triumph of the free market.

    It’s a triumph of giving people the power to make their own lives on their own terms, which is possibly the most anti-oppressive thing you can do. If it’s in a way that free-marketeers like, so be it.

    Again, Alon’s right on. If it works, let it keep working.

  11. and yeah, it would be harder here; possibly somewhat less so if we could also get back to some good old fashioned trust-busting (good luck in the current climate, but); there aren’t nearly enough checks on corporate Blob-ization.

  12. microcredit probably couldn’t help with starting a small business in the US – but it could seriously help defer cost of living expenses that hit the poor harder because they lack initial capitol –

    think of people living in hotels because they don’t have a deposit for an apartment, or those who eat convenience foods because they don’t have the basic tools to cook with, also people who rent furniture or buy really junk cars that cost them a fortune in repairs and missed/late work days.

    For less than a thousand, or even 500, you could seriously defray long term expenses for people in these situations.

Comments are currently closed.