A Research Agenda for Financial Inclusion and Microfinance
Show Less

A Research Agenda for Financial Inclusion and Microfinance

Edited by Marek Hudon, Marc Labie and Ariane Szafarz

How can financial services, such as credit, deposit accounts, financial transfers, and insurance be provided to people in need? This challenging and complex issue has been a topic of interest for the international aid community for decades. Drawing on renowned experts in microfinance and financial inclusion, this Research Agenda sheds much-needed light on this multifaceted challenge and points the way ahead for future research.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 5: Social performance measurement in microfinance

Bert D’Espallier and Jann Goedecke


Microfinance institutions (MFIs) which provide financial services in developing economies are hybrid enterprises in the sense that they balance social and financial objectives. It is therefore not surprising that empirical researchers have studied characteristics, conditions and managerial practices related to increased social or financial performance1 or sometimes both.2 While the financial dimension of an MFI is straightforward to quantify given the abundance of accounting-based and comparable metrics, the social performance is harder to grasp. Most empirical studies resort to the framework of Schreiner (2002) who distinguishes the breadth of outreach referring to the number of poor clients reached from the depth of outreach referring to the poverty-level of the clients. Consequently, most studies use the (growth in) number of clients as proxies for outreach-breadth and average loans and proportion of vulnerable clients (female clients and rural clients) as proxies for outreach-depth. There is, however, discussion whether these MFI-level univariate proxies are reliable indicators to capture one or more dimensions of social performance, which is an inherently complex and multidimensional concept. Interestingly, the concept of social performance is viewed very differently by researchers and practitioners. Whereas practitioners advocate an encompassing view involving several institutional layers, empirical researchers typically zoom in on a single institutional outcome. It remains to be seen whether both views are reconcilable and offer complementary insights or whether they are discordant.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.