English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  How Much Voice for Borrowers? Restricted Feedback and Recursivity in Microfinance

Mader, P. (2017). How Much Voice for Borrowers? Restricted Feedback and Recursivity in Microfinance. Global Policy, 8(4), 540-552. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12474.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
GP_8_2017_Mader.pdf (Any fulltext), 819KB
Name:
GP_8_2017_Mader.pdf
Description:
Full text open access
OA-Status:
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show
hide
Locator:
https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12474 (Publisher version)
Description:
Full text via publisher
OA-Status:

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Mader, Philip1, 2, Author           
Affiliations:
1International Max Planck Research School on the Social and Political Constitution of the Economy, MPI for the Study of Societies, Max Planck Society, ou_1214550              
2Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK, ou_persistent22              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: This paper studies the governance of microfinance and asks about its recursivity: whether the system is responsive to changes prompted by feedback from borrowers or not. It draws on Hirschmann's heuristic of exit and voice and the idea of participation in development, to examine three channels of feedback from borrowers to rule‐makers and ask to what extent they have facilitated or restricted recursivity in microfinance. The standardisation of microfinance along a financial template is shown to have created very open flows of financial information, useful for monitoring clients' exit, but not granting them voice. The more recent creation of systems for social performance management and pursuing ‘responsible' microfinance, however, has not resulted in similarly robust information flows, because, despite intentions to capture client satisfaction and feedback, these channels are severely restricted. They offer borrowers little chance to practically exercise voice and convey feedback which affects the rules. Recursivity studies, it is suggested, might integrate participation and exit/voice frameworks to explore the prospects of feedback from grassroots rule‐subjects and better understand the factors that can restrict it. For microfinance, it is suggested that government regulation and clients' collective action could be necessary where the sector's governance system shows itself to be unresponsive.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2017-09-112017
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12474
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Global Policy
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 8 (4) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 540 - 552 Identifier: ISSN: 1758-5880
ISSN: 1758-5899