IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/330975.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Case for Successful Microfinance Programs in China

Author

Listed:
  • de Aghion, Beatriz Armendariz
  • Tsien, Sarah

Abstract

Finding ways of empowering the poor in the impressive growth process in China is of key importance. Following the trend started by non- governmental and multilateral organizations, government officials have put microfinance on top of their agenda. While this paper supports the view that China represents a potentially fertile soil for microfinance programs to succeed in their attempt at reducing poverty, it pins-down to a number of methodological difficulties due to a misleading replication of the Grameen system, which emphasizes the group lending methodology. Such difficulties have been exacerbated by the increased involvement of the government over the past decade. In particular, we argue that excessive government intervention has come at the expense of borrowers’ discipline. It has also lowered the probability of government-sponsored microfinance institutions to succeed in becoming self-sufficient and thereby further attracting commercial loans and international aid. We spell out a few guidelines for an improved design of government support to microfinance in China. These guidelines can potentially apply to other developing countries and transition economies where financial markets are also weak.

Suggested Citation

  • de Aghion, Beatriz Armendariz & Tsien, Sarah, 2002. "A Case for Successful Microfinance Programs in China," Conference papers 330975, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:330975
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/330975/files/367.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 1996. "A New Approach to Evaluating Trade Policy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 63(1), pages 107-125.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    3. Canova, Fabio, 1995. "Sensitivity Analysis and Model Evaluation in Simulated Dynamic General Equilibrium Economies," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 36(2), pages 477-501, May.
    4. Anderson, James E & Neary, J Peter, 1994. "Measuring the Restrictiveness of Trade Policy," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 8(2), pages 151-169, May.
    5. Rod Falvey, 1994. "Revenue enhancing tariff reform," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 130(1), pages 175-190, March.
    6. Snow, Arthur & Warren, Ronald Jr., 1996. "The marginal welfare cost of public funds: Theory and estimates," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 289-305, August.
    7. Mr. Reint Gropp & Mr. Liam P. Ebrill & Ms. Janet Gale Stotsky, 1999. "Revenue Implications of Trade Liberalization," IMF Occasional Papers 1999/007, International Monetary Fund.
    8. Winer, Stanley L. & Hettich, Walter, 1991. "Debt and tariffs : An empirical investigation of the evolution of revenue systems," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 215-242, July.
    9. Anderson, James E & Neary, J Peter, 1992. "Trade Reform with Quotas, Partial Rent Retention, and Tariffs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 57-76, January.
    10. Mitra, Pradeep, 1992. "The Coordinated Reform of Tariffs and Indirect Taxes," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 7(2), pages 195-218, July.
    11. Devarajan, Shantayanan & Squire, Lyn & Suthiwart-Narueput, Sethaput, 1995. "Reviving project appraisal at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1496, The World Bank.
    12. Ahmad, Ehtisham & Stern, Nicholas, 1990. "Tax Reform and Shadow Prices for Pakistan," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 135-159, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. ERBIL Can, 2010. "Trade Taxes Are Better ?!? Short Answer: No," EcoMod2003 330700048, EcoMod.
    2. Can Erbil, 2004. "Trade Taxes Are Expensive," International Trade 0409002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. James E. Anderson & Arja Turunen-Red, 1999. "Trade Reform with a Government Budget Constraint," International Economic Association Series, in: John Piggott & Alan Woodland (ed.), International Trade Policy and the Pacific Rim, chapter 9, pages 217-244, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Hiau LooiKee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2009. "Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 172-199, January.
    5. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    6. John Christopher Beghin & Anne-Célia Disdier & Stéphan Marette, 2017. "Trade restrictiveness indices in the presence of externalities: An application to non-tariff measures," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 5, pages 81-104, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Christos Pantzios, 2000. "Trade Restrictiveness in the Presence of 'New' Goods," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 93-101, January.
    8. repec:hal:gmonwp:hal-00961727 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Irfan Aleem & Bushra Faizi, 2021. "Non-tariff Measures, Overall Protection and Export Competitiveness: Evidence from Pakistan and Regional Countries," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 60(3), pages 251-282.
    10. L. ALAN WINTERS & NEIL McCULLOCH & ANDREW McKAY, 2015. "Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Non-Tariff Barriers, Regionalism and Poverty Essays in Applied International Trade Analysis, chapter 14, pages 271-314, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Salvatici, Luca & Carter, Colin A. & Sumner, Daniel A., 1997. "The Trade Restrictiveness Index: The Potential Contribution To Agricultural Policy Analysis," 1997 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Toronto, Canada 21028, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Volpe Martincus, Christian & Estevadeordal, Antoni, 2009. "Trade Policy and Specialization," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2489, Inter-American Development Bank.
    13. Cletus C. Coughlin, 2010. "Measuring international trade policy: a primer on trade restrictiveness indices," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 92(Sep), pages 381-394.
    14. repec:hal:pseose:hal-00961727 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Salvatici, Luca & Carter, Colin A. & Sumner, Daniel A., 1997. "The Trade Restrictiveness Index and its Potential Contribution to Agricultural Policy Analysis," 1997 Conference, August 10-16, 1997, Sacramento, California 197065, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Bach, Christian F. & Martin, Will, 2001. "Would the right tariff aggregator for policy analysis please stand up?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 621-635, August.
    17. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde & Will Martin, 2008. "Choosing Sensitive Agricultural Products in Trade Negotiations," Working Papers 2008-18, CEPII research center.
    18. Smith, V. Kerry & Espinosa, J. Andrès, 1996. "Environmental and trade policies: some methodological lessons," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 19-40, February.
    19. Peter Neary & James E. Anderson, 2013. "Revenue Tariff Reform," Economics Series Working Papers 688, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    20. Marianna Belloc, 2007. "Protection for Sale in the EU," Working Papers in Public Economics 100, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Economics and Law.
    21. J. Peter Neary, 1998. "Pitfalls in the Theory of International Trade Policy: Concertina Reforms of Tariffs, and Subsidies to High‐Technology Industries," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 187-206, March.
    22. James E. Anderson & Will Martin, 2011. "Costs of Taxation and Benefits of Public Goods with Multiple Taxes and Goods," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(2), pages 289-309, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:330975. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.