What's new

Bangladesh comes second in financial inclusion in S Asia

CaPtAiN_pLaNeT

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
7,685
Reaction score
0
Published: Sunday, August 25, 2013
Bangladesh comes second in financial inclusion in S Asia


Bangladesh comes second in financial inclusion in S Asia - Households pay more for loans from banks than from MFIs: study

Households pay more for loans from banks than from MFIs: study


bs091.jpg


Bangladesh comes second in financial inclusion in S AsiaBangladesh stands second among South Asian nations in ensuring access to financial services for its citizens, a recent study found.

Around 66 percent of the households in Bangladesh now have access to services including credit, savings and insurance from banks or microfinance institutions (MFIs) and cooperatives, according to Institute of Microfinance (InM).

The country comes second only to Sri Lanka, where 80.4 percent of the population is covered by the financial umbrella. In contrast, only 48 percent of the households in India have access to such services and 60 percent in Pakistan.

“Financial inclusion has occurred in a big way in Bangladesh thanks to the MFIs, who have been contributing greatly to resource mobilisation,” said MA Baqui Khalily, co-author of the study, ‘Access to Financial Services in Bangladesh: What Do We Know?”

It has been observed that financial inclusion as percentage of the total population increased to 56.43 percent in 2010 from 39.76 percent in 2004, Bangladesh Bank said in a report.

A little over 31 percent of the households have access to savings and credit in both the formal and quasi-formal markets. Of them, around 4 percent have access to both deposits and credit in formal financial market, according to the study.

The quasi-formal market has the dominant presence in deposit/savings mobilisation and credit, Khalily said yesterday at a two-day national conference on Microfinance and Development at the PKSF auditorium organised by InM.

A total of 8,936 households were randomly selected from 275 upazilas in 63 districts across the country for the study.

The households’ five-year credit profiles were used to define access to credit, while access to savings and access to insurance were measured by current or past use of these services.

The study found that households have to bear more borrowing cost for getting loan from formal credit market than from MFIs and cooperatives.

Non-interest cost as percentage of average total transaction cost is the highest in formal credit market, where it is over 16 percent. In contrast, it is only 9.20 percent in quasi-formal credit market.

“More than 50 percent of the non-interest cost in formal market is bribing, while it is very negligible in quasi-formal credit market,” said Khalily, also the executive director of InM.

A 10 percent increase in the total supply of credit at the village level boosts financial inclusion by 4.8 percent, he said.

“Financial inclusion is not only about bringing all households under financial network through savings. It is also about deepening credit services in every part of the country.”

Only around 11 percent of the households have access to formal insurance services due to less awareness of the service, he said.

The study, however, suggested that fundamental changes in financial policies and market structure are required for sustainable financial inclusion.

“We have to evaluate the proposition of establishing rural banks or transforming some of the sound MFIs into rural banks with appropriate governance structure.”

Khalily called for restructuring of private banks and insurance companies so that their services can be effectively expanded beyond urban areas.

“A mere policy statement will not suffice—a proper debate is required.”

Economic growth of a country plays a pivotal role for greater financial inclusion, said Hassan Zaman, chief economist of Bangladesh Bank.

Bangladesh Bank has been providing a big thrust to financial inclusion over the last couple of years by promoting mobile banking and compelling the banks to open more branches in rural areas, he said.

Zaman also agreed that non-interest costs are high in the formal credit market due to a number of factors that include loan processing fees and bribes.
 
48% of Indian households is much much more than 80.4% of Sri-Lankan houeholds, 60% of Pakistani households and 66% of Bangladeshi households combined together.....
 
48% of Indian households is much much more than 80.4% of Sri-Lankan houeholds and 60% of Pakistani households and 66% of Bangladeshi households combined together.....

India's total population is also much more then these countires...Now increase the population of these countries to the level of India and you will see the same result. Just tried a bit to make you understand in your own way.
 
India's total population is also much more then these countires...Now increase the population of these countries to the level of India and you will see the same result. Just tried a bit to make you understand in your own way.

That is what I'm saying too...
But don't think that, if you increase your population to that of India's level(hypothetically) you would still be able to manage the same percentage.....with increase in population you'll face more difficulties...
 
48% of Indian households is much much more than 80.4% of Sri-Lankan houeholds, 60% of Pakistani households and 66% of Bangladeshi households combined together.....

Your infrastructure is also bigger than this three countries combined....your economy is also bigger than the three countries combined.....So it is a failure in India's case that it has not put sufficient emphasis on its micro-economic growth!
 
That is what I'm saying too...
But don't think that, if you increase your population to that of India's level(hypothetically) you would still be able to manage the same percentage.....with increase in population you'll face more difficulties...

If we go by your argument then 10-15% would still be considered good for India as it will give higher number then Bangladesh or Sri Lanka. Right??
 
If we go by your argument then 10-15% would still be considered good for India as it will give higher number then Bangladesh or Sri Lanka. Right??

Definitely NOT.....
But there has to be a comparison 'standard'.....you cannot just compare a huge economy with a tiny economy....they have their own separate advantages and disadvantages........a small population is more easily manageable...experiences less social and political turmoil in general....
Therefore, Bangladeshi economy can be compared with Sri-Lankan and Pakistani due to their comparable sizes......and comparing the size and resources of the countries, Bangladesh is performing much better....

Bangladesh, GDP: $122.7 billion approx.
Sri-Lanka, GDP: $64 billion approx.
Pakistan, GDP: $240 billion approx.

Thus, in 'small economy' category, Bangladesh is performing well....may be because Bangladesh has more social and political stability than these two countries....

Now, if you compare Indian economy with similar comparable economies, India is far behind....there are geo-political, social reasons to it, but it is not prudent to compare Indian $1.824 trillion economy to that of Bangladesh's only because we're neighbors...

Bottom-line is, I'm not saying that Indian economy is faring better than Bangladeshi or viceversa, I am just saying that they are not comparable.....
 
That is what I'm saying too...
But don't think that, if you increase your population to that of India's level(hypothetically) you would still be able to manage the same percentage.....with increase in population you'll face more difficulties...

But in that case, you would have more people to manage the population. Your logic is not convincing.
 
But in that case, you would have more people to manage the population. Your logic is not convincing.

You guys are forgetting one simple thing.....'resource is limited'.

In an overpopulated country, how will you fend for everyone keeping a certain standard......that's why I said, with increasing population you will face more and more difficulties....if you add corruption to it....matter gets worse..
 
You guys are forgetting one simple thing.....'resource is limited'.

In an overpopulated country, how will you fend for everyone keeping a certain standard......that's why I said, with increasing population you will face more and more difficulties....

ok :D :tup:
 
Congrats to BDeshis
& India members please grow up learn to accept we are behind
Aur Karo Sonia & Kaun Angreez Party ko vote
 
@oFFbEAT, you better argue that you don't need access to credit simply because you are much more richer than others. Btw, I hate comparing with others- your achievements are yours and your limitations are yours too. Your being poorer or richer, better or worse, doesn't affect my well-being and vice versa.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You guys are forgetting one simple thing.....'resource is limited'.

In an overpopulated country, how will you fend for everyone keeping a certain standard......that's why I said, with increasing population you will face more and more difficulties....if you add corruption to it....matter gets worse..

I saw this resource argument coming. Again, you didn't put much thought into it before posting.

Bangladesh has less resources per head compared to India.

If India had the same resource per head (total would still be far more than Bangladesh's), we would be on even ground to make this comparison.

Basically, if you go by this resource argument, then you're flipping your own argument upside down - that reaching our level is more difficult for India!
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom