PRESENTED BY: MRS. SHERRY KATWAROO-RAGBIR
PRESENTED BY: MRS. SHERRY KATWAROO-RAGBIR
4th Biennial International Business, Banking & Finance Conference
JUNE 22ND – JUNE 24TH
microfinance regulation were critically studied
in order to formulate policy recommendations
for the introduction of microfinance regulation
in the Caribbean region.
The paper seeks to emphasize the need for an
appropriate regulatory framework:
to support stable expansion of the regional industry
to protect the vulnerable client base
to deliver on expected social and economic objectives
Features of Microfinance
(Basel Committee 2010).
Provision of financial services
transfers and microinsurance
In limited amounts
Clients generally shunned from the commercial
banking sector because of their unfortunate
Consultative Group to Assist the Poor
(CGAP)2003 - guidelines on regulation and
supervision of microfinance:
Regulation – binding rules governing the
conduct of legal entities and individuals,
whether they are adopted by a legislative
body (laws) or an executive body
Prudential financial regulation serves the
following macroeconomic goals (Wright
1. Ensuring the solvency and financial soundness
of all financial institutions.
2. Providing depositors protection against
excessive risks that may arise from failure,
fraud or opportunistic behaviour on the part
of the financial institution.
3. Promoting efficient performance of financial
intermediaries and markets.
Non-prudential regulation & supervision - span a wide
spectrum and include:
◦ reporting and disclosure requirements; ‘fit and proper’
requirements for directors and officers; restrictions on
interest or deposit rates, setting up of credit information
services and preventing fraud and financial crimes.
(Microfinance Gateway 2011).
Applies not only to licensed financial institutions but also to
registered financial service providers.
Wright (2000) discussed the following
options for microfinance regulation
◦ No External Regulation
◦ Blended approach: a mix of self-regulation and
part supervision by a third party
◦ Regulation through the existing legal and
regulatory framework: Banco Sol - Bolivia
◦ Regulation through MFI-specific regulation:
Grameen Bank - Bangladesh
Microfinance is fundamentally different from traditional
banking and regulation must be built on an understanding of
Self Regulation is ineffective - does little more than improve
the financial reporting and internal controls in the
Protection of the Poor:
in the pursuit of profit-maximization, actions by MFIs and
their investors can disadvantage clients.
◦ e.g. Compartamos in Mexico, investors earned a return of roughly 100
percent a year compounded over eight years as Compartamos charges
interest rates that exceed 100 percent per year on loans to the poor.
Increased transparency is required to provide greater client
protection, in areas such as interest rate reporting.
Table I: Growth in Demand and Supply of Microfinance Services from 1997 to 2007
Number of Programs
Total Number of Clients
Number of Poorest Clients
Source: (Daley-Harris 2009)
Credit Union Non-Bank
Figure1: Percentage Composition of MFIs by Institution type as at Dec 31st 2000 and 2009
To enable sustained growth many MFIs are opting to transform from a nonprofit status to registered and regulated financial institutions, with start-up
MFIs generally opting for regulated status.
Benefits of the licensed NBFI over the
Access to additional sources of funds
- NGOs’ sources of funds are limited
to donations, income from lending
and subsidized loans. Regulated MFIs
can access commercial sources of
funds for both equity and debt.
Wider range of financial services –
including but not limited to savings
mobilization, this gives the MFI
access to a stable source of local
resources, and enables expanded
outreach. Prudential regulation to
protect depositors and guard against
moral hazard is critical.
Self Sustainability and Profitability –
2007 MicroBanking Bulletin
2005 Benchmarking Exercise
Commercial Funding %
Increase in commercial
borrowing from 2003 to
Portion of Increase to
Wenner and Chalmers (2001)
Caribbean microfinance suffers from substandard financial
performance and lacks outreach into the microenterprise
sector when compared to Asia and Latin America.
To date most programs are financially unsustainable and
remain dependant on government or donor-supported
The Economist Intelligence Unit (2009) conducted a study which ranked
fifty-five countries worldwide based on each country’s regulatory,
investment and institutional environment for microfinance.
The only two Caribbean countries in the study were Jamaica and
Both countries ranked in the top twenty for investment climate
Under institutional development Trinidad ranked forty with a score of
16.7 out of 100, and Jamaica ranked fifty-second with a score of 8.3.
Under the regulatory framework dimension, Jamaica scored 25 out of
100 and ranked fifty and Trinidad came in last at fifty-five with a score
Players in the industry are:
◦ specialized financial institutions, state owned and funded
companies, credit unions and donor supported NGOs.
Primary focus of Caribbean MFIs is the provision of
funding to small entrepreneurs and microenterprises
(Lashley and Lord 2002)
Mainly the NGO type institutions have focussed directly
on reaching those disenfranchised and excluded from
participation in the traditional banking sector,
explaining the continued importance of this business
type in regional and global microfinancing.
Constraints to the Growth of the Microfinance Sector in the
Wenner and Chalmers (2001) in comparing Caribbean and Latin
American MFIs associate a number of limiting factors for
…. the smaller and more concentrated financial markets, the greater degree
of macroeconomic stability, lower rates of poverty and superior standard
of living, the prevalence of inappropriate lending technologies...
Poor re-payment culture of Caribbean borrowers. Lashley and
Lord (2002) commented that clients generally take loans as
handouts never to be re-paid.
Caribbean MFIs operate in an environment of fixed interest
rates. These rates are set too low to allow MFIs to profitably
cover their high operating costs or to take advantage of their
clients’ willingness to pay higher than market rates.
Divergence between the goals of government and
private MFIs leading to market inefficiencies:
◦ Many government initiatives designed to ease the conditions of
the poor create a dependency syndrome that can suppress
entrepreneurial spirit among those for whom microfinance is
◦ State owned and funded MFIs use state funds to compete with
well-established private MFIs that fund their operations from
Wenner (2005) points out that these state funded programs lend at
lower interest rates and are not as aggressive in ensuring portfolio
quality or enforcing debt recovery.
Where to Start?
Gain a comprehensive understanding of the present state of
the microfinance industry.
Role of Government:
Clearly articulate the role of microfinance in the financial
sector and in social development. These goals should be
Counts and Sobhan (2002) – recommends a government
appointed “Microfinance Commission” to create a supportive
regulatory environment for microfinance
◦ Consist of wide representation of knowledgeable members and be
representative of donors, government, NGOs, academia and the private sector.
A phased approach focussing on critical priority areas:
Clear distinctions must be drawn between the various types of MFIs. A
tiered approach where different classes of institutions are subject to
differing levels of regulation can be applied.
Regulations should be updated for the Non Bank Financial Institutions
◦ Liquidity requirements should be tightened if MFIs are to intermediate
◦ Reserve requirements should however be less onerous than the
Increased transparency on interest rates charged should replace fixed
◦ Standardize the methods to calculate and communicate interest rate
charges to borrowers and the public (Counts and Sobhan 2002).
Christen et al. (2003) warn that regulation that is not
enforced can be worst than no regulation at all, build
adequate supervisory capability.
Resist the temptation to copy what other nations have done.
Over-regulation must be guarded against as this can shut
down rather than promote development in the sector.
Realism must be maintained at all times.
Regulation alone will not lead to sustainable
growth in the microfinance sector. It must
be enacted together with other enabling
policies such as institutional rationalization