2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.soscij.2006.04.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Alleviating poverty through microfinance: Village banking outcomes in Central America

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The definition is considered apt for current purposes because it reconciles specific differences in organisational attributes such as religious versus secular organisations, and clearly distinguishes a social enterprise from a non-government organisation. This definition is also considered appropriate for research which examines social entrepreneurship from a socio-economic perspective (Crowell 2004;Hiatt and Woodworth 2006;Weerawardena and Mort 2001).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The definition is considered apt for current purposes because it reconciles specific differences in organisational attributes such as religious versus secular organisations, and clearly distinguishes a social enterprise from a non-government organisation. This definition is also considered appropriate for research which examines social entrepreneurship from a socio-economic perspective (Crowell 2004;Hiatt and Woodworth 2006;Weerawardena and Mort 2001).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In its short history, microfinance has generated much hope for alleviating poverty throughout the world by encouraging self-employment and enterprise development (Brau, Hiatt and Woodworth, forthcoming;Hiatt and Woodworth, 2006). Offering these financial services to poor entrepreneurs has improved individual lives and served as an engine of growth for entire economies.…”
Section: Microfinance and The Cooperative Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Adding to this pool of literature various noteworthy studies were conducted to capture the diverse dimensions of microfinance, for example, the theory on joint liability in group lending and repayment (Besley and Coate 1995), graduation from group lending to successful repayment (Rahman 1999), importance of social intermediation and participatory approach for sustainable village banks (Bennett et al 1996), financial intermediation roles of nongovernment organizations (Hiatt and Woodworth 2006), association between repayments and sustainability in thrift and credit groups (Handa and Kirton 1999), peer selection and joint liability in group lending (Ghatak 1999), rural poverty alleviation and development in developing nations (Khandker et al 1998;Mosley 2001;Hiatt and Woodworth 2006), microcredit lending models (Dasgupta 2005), fungibility of money and control on credit usages (Goetz and Sengupta 1996), women empowerment and gender roles (Kabeer 2005), importance of public resources, capital market and financial institutions in microfinance programmes (Mahajan 2005), microfinance impacts especially income effect, consumption effect, saving employment effect, empowerment effect, literacy effect (Morduch 1995;Khandker et al 1998;Rutherford 1998;Coleman 1999;Panda and Atibudhi 2010), impact assessment methodologies (Hulme 2000a;Karlan 2001) and the darker side of microfinance (Hulme 2000b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%