1 / 21

Social Capital and Access to Credit: Evidence from Uganda

Social Capital and Access to Credit: Evidence from Uganda. Panu Kalmi ( joint with Anni Heikkilä and Olli-Pekka Ruuskanen) CERMi, May 14, 2013. Financial access in developing countries.

alisa
Download Presentation

Social Capital and Access to Credit: Evidence from Uganda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Social Capital and Access to Credit: Evidencefrom Uganda Panu Kalmi (joint with Anni Heikkilä and Olli-Pekka Ruuskanen) CERMi, May 14, 2013

  2. Financial access in developingcountries • Despite the increase of variousforms of microfinance, financialaccessremainsproblematic in manydevelopingcountries • Thispaperlooks at the connectionsbetween social capital and financialaccess in Uganda

  3. Previousliterature • Separatestrands of literature of: • Financial access: e.g. Johnston and Morduch 2008; Cull and Scott 2010; Johnson and Nino-Zarazua 2011; Aterido et al. 2013 • Social capital in development: e.g. Narayan and Pritchett 1999; Grootaert and van Bastelaer 2002 • A separatelargeliterature on social capital and repaymentundergroupincentivestructures: • Besley and Coate 1995; Sharma and Zeller 1997; Zeller 1998, Wydick 1999; Karlan 2007 • Literature on social capital and financialdevelopmentin developingcountries: Calderon et al. 2002; Hong et al. 2004; Guiso et al. 2004, 2008 • However, role of social capital and financialaccess in developingcountriesdoesnotseem to bestudied

  4. In thispaper • Westudywhether social capital influences the access to creditfrom Ugandan financialinstitutions • Weusetwodifferentdefinitions of social capital: • Individual-level social capital, in the sense of social connections; • Collective-level of social capital, using the measure of generalizedtrust at regionallevel

  5. Overview • Differentdefinitions of social capital, and howtheyarerelated to financialaccess • Institutionalframework, data • Empiricalanalysis • Conclusions

  6. Specialproblems of lendingrelationship in developingcountries • The general agencyproblembetweenlender and borrower is morepronounceddue to: • Lack of collateral • Problems of legalenforcement • However, social capital canmitigatetheseproblems

  7. Individual social capital • Quantity and quality of an individual’s social connections (Glaeseret al. 2002) • Largernumber of social connectionsmayimplygreatertrustworthiness • Improvesaccess to grouplendingschemes and creditcooperatives • People with more social connectionsfinditeasier to findguarantors

  8. Generalizedtrust • Collective-levelattribute • Reduces the agencycosts as lendersperceiveborrowersmorereliable (Guiso et al. 2004)

  9. Financial sector in Uganda • Three layers: • Formalsector, supervisedby the Central Bank, includesbanks and deposit-takingmicrofinanceinstitutions • Semi-formalsector, regulatedbyparliamentaryacts, includesSACCOs and credit-onlyMFIs • Informalsector, unregulated, includese.g. ROSCAs and ASCAs

  10. Our data • Weuse the Finscope Uganda 2006 survey • Allows us to determinewhether an individualhastakenloansfromfinancialinstitutions (positionedsomewherealong the threelayers), hastakeninformalloans (friends, relatives, moneylenders…) orhasnottakenloans

  11. Measuringaccess • Non-usedoesnotimplynon-access • Amongnon-users of financialinstitutions, threedifferentcasescanbeidentified: • Hastried to get a loan, butbeenturneddown (lack of access) • Hasnottried to get a loan, becauseexpects to beturneddown(lack of access) • Has no demand for loans (no implications for access)

  12. Measuring loan accessfrom Ugandan Finscope 2006 • No directquestion on loan demand • Wecanobservebothloansfrominstitutions and informalloans • There is also a questionwhether an individualhastried to access a loan frominstitutionbuthasbeenunsuccessful • To ensureweincludeonlyobservations for whichtherehasbeen a demand for loans, weincludeonlythosewhohavetakenloans, whetherfrominstitutionsorinformal

  13. Measuring loan access, cont. • Firstmeasure: 1: a person hasaccessed a loan from a financialinstitution (formal, semi-formal, informal); 401 cases (36%) • 0: a person hasaccessedonlyinformal loan; 727 cases (64%) • Second measures: 1: as above (64%) • 0: a person hasaccessedonlyinformal loan & reportsbeingunsuccessful in applying a loan from an institution; 222 cases (36%)

  14. Measuring social capital • Measure of individual social capital: Affirmativeanswer to the question”I havemanystablefriendships and wesupport and trusteachother” (73%) • Measure of generalizedtrust: regionallevel-averages to the question ”Generallyspeaking, wouldyousaythatmostpeoplecanbetrustedorthatyouneed to beverycareful in dealing with people” (from World ValuesSurvey); average 7.8%

  15. Method • Probit regression, usingtwoalternativeversions of dependentvariable • Social capital measuresincludedfirstseparately, the together • A host of controls: marital status, age, employment, education, literacy, wealth, rural

  16. Results • Social capital has a significantpositive association in bothregressions • Generalizedtrustdoesnothave a statistical association with the dependentvariable • Otherresultsmostly as expected, showing the role of education, literacy, wealth and age

  17. Regressions

  18. Furtherresults • Social capital mayhave an interactioneffect • Wetestit for wealth, rurallocation, and generalizedtrustbysplitting the sample in thesedimensions

  19. Results

  20. Results • Social capital matters for poorerpersons, for peopleliving in ruralareas, and for peopleliving in districtswheregeneralizedtrust is low

  21. Conclusions • The paperprovidesevidencethat social capital maybe an importantdeterminant of financialaccess • The role of social capital seems to depend on the context • Furtherresearchcouldinvestigate the mechanismthroughwhich social capital operates

More Related