Theorizing the Rise of Microenterprise Development in Carribean Context

Abstract

Luxembourg's (1951) and Nash's (1990) studies on subsistence or petty production under capitalism and the world-systems analysis of households (Wallerstein and Scott 1992a; 1992b)

Economic Entitlements via Entrepreneurial Conduct? Women and Financial Inclusion in Neo-liberal India

“…In the latter instance, the women converted state support for micro-enterprise development to a form of goverrnnent transfer or welfare provisioning through their (labor, cost, and effort-intensive) appropriation of the SGSY scheme, strengthening, thereby, the safety net (Karides 2010;Weber 2002) component of SHG-based microfinance. Although expected to cultivate disciplined repayment performance by the bank managers they interacted with, the women vigorously defended their right to permit flexibility and latitude with respect to the repayment schedules of their internal or group-generated loans.…”

“…SHG-based microfinance thus offers a safety net (Karides 2010;Weber 2002) for households in poverty or those belonging to the potentially "dangerous classes" (Chatterjee 2008) through the provision of low-cost bank credit for consumption purposes (via the Linkage scheme) and subsidy-bearing credit for initiating new income-generating activities (via the SGSY scheme). However, in order to avail of the promised financial assistance, the women members of SHGs must undertake to efficiently manage their "micro-banks," create and deepen "self-regulating" markets for microfinance at village levels, and inculcate the skills and capacities required to inhabit these market spaces, advancing thereby the goals of capital accumulation (e.g., Weber 2002).…”

“…The structural compatibilities between microfinance-based development interventions and economies undergoing neoliberal reform are further developed by Karides (2010) who observes that public assistance to low-income populations in the Caribbean region has increasingly taken the form of support for petty market operations, which was vigorously promoted during the SAPs. In effect, two historic and distinct strategies aiming to overcome the crisis of capitalism---namely governmental transfer and informal self-employment--have fused into the single form of 'micro-enterprise development' that has come to be perceived as a 'safety net under globalization' (Karides 2010).…”

“…I situate these with respect to transnational processes, such as neoliberal Structural Adjustment Programs, SAPs, and transnational development interventions, such as microfinance, which have flourished in India and elsewhere in consonance with the SAPs. Even as I draw upon theoretical debates that tease out the relationship between microfinance and capitalist accumulation (Aitken 2010;Karides 2010;Karim 2011;Mayoux 2002;Rankin 2001;Weber 2002), I situate these with respect to analytical literature on the Indian experience of neoliberal reforms (Chatterjee 2008;Corbridge et al 2011;Harriss 2011) and the Indian variant of the global microfinance phenomenon viz., Self Help Groups (SHGs) or villagelevel microfinance-centered peer groups. I do so in order to explore the irreducibly specific and particular forms that transnational strategies of capital accumulation may acquire in varied country contexts.…”

“…In effect, two historic and distinct strategies aiming to overcome the crisis of capitalism---namely governmental transfer and informal self-employment--have fused into the single form of 'micro-enterprise development' that has come to be perceived as a 'safety net under globalization' (Karides 2010). While Weber (2002) and Karides (2010) have underscored the "palliative" relief that microfinance programs offer to populations impacted adversely by neoliberal economic re-structuring, others have argued that microfinance itself may be seen as a "financial object" capable of generating and sustaining forms of profit and capital accumulation (Aitken 2010). To attract international investors specialized financial services providers and Microfinance Institutions (MFis) often charge their borrowers interest rates that are as high or even significantly higher than rates in the formal financial sector.…”