26.08.2013 Views

EMN 2008-2009 Overview - Réseau Européen de la Microfinance

EMN 2008-2009 Overview - Réseau Européen de la Microfinance

EMN 2008-2009 Overview - Réseau Européen de la Microfinance

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Italy was, once again, the country with<br />

the highest number of respon<strong>de</strong>nts. This was<br />

possible thanks to the combined efforts of<br />

members of the Italian <strong>Microfinance</strong> Network<br />

(RITMI) and the lead coordinator Giordano<br />

Dell’Amore Foundation, and due to the<br />

<strong>la</strong>rge number of actors that consist of a <strong>la</strong>rge<br />

number of small social microcredit initiatives<br />

and other religious organisations providing<br />

microcredit on a small scale.<br />

To the extent that year after year the Pan-<br />

European Microcredit survey is carried out,<br />

and in spite of an enormous effort on behalf of<br />

<strong>EMN</strong>, Fundación Nantik Lum and the country<br />

coordinators, the disparate col<strong>la</strong>boration<br />

between editions makes it very difficult to<br />

draw accurate comparisons between reports.<br />

The main motivation to track the evolution of<br />

microfinance in Europe is hampered by the<br />

difficulty in obtaining uniformity in the data<br />

sample.<br />

To better un<strong>de</strong>rstand this difficulty, Table<br />

1 below gives the total number of responses<br />

obtained from MFIs over the <strong>la</strong>st two editions<br />

of the survey. We can observe that only 58<br />

MFIs respon<strong>de</strong>d to both editions, representing<br />

only 61% of the institutions that participated<br />

in 2006-2007 that respon<strong>de</strong>d to the <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong><br />

edition. For this reason, only general data<br />

with comparable samples in both 2006-2007<br />

and <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong> will be analysed. The total<br />

number of institutions that respon<strong>de</strong>d for<br />

the first time, that is to say, that have never<br />

participated in the study, is 97 institutions.<br />

Moreover, there were 113 institutions that<br />

respon<strong>de</strong>d to the present edition that did not<br />

participate in the 2006-2007 edition but did<br />

participate in earlier editions (2004-2005 or<br />

2002-2003).<br />

Therefore, the data provi<strong>de</strong>d in this<br />

report will refer exclusively to the <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong><br />

survey, and in some cases, efforts have been<br />

ma<strong>de</strong> to compare data in or<strong>de</strong>r to highlight<br />

sector trends. When comparisons are<br />

used, it is important to keep in mind these<br />

aforementioned sample differences. This<br />

report will continue using the same structure<br />

as the previous one in or<strong>de</strong>r to make the<br />

analysis easier for rea<strong>de</strong>rs.<br />

Table 1: Comparison of responses in the <strong>la</strong>st two survey editions<br />

Total number of respon<strong>de</strong>nts for the <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong> survey 170<br />

Total number of newcomers for the <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong> survey 97<br />

Total number of respon<strong>de</strong>nts for the 2006-2007 survey 94<br />

Number of institutions that respon<strong>de</strong>d for 2006-2007 and <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong> 58<br />

The <strong>2008</strong>-<strong>2009</strong> survey questionnaire, which<br />

was trans<strong>la</strong>ted from English into six <strong>la</strong>nguages,<br />

covered the majority of the relevant topics that<br />

were inclu<strong>de</strong>d in the 2004-2005 and 2006-2007<br />

surveys. However, some modifications were<br />

ma<strong>de</strong> based on an agreement reached by the<br />

Core Members of the <strong>EMN</strong> Research Working<br />

Group. With these modifications in mind, the<br />

Research Working Group held two face-toface<br />

meetings, one on June 3rd in Mi<strong>la</strong>n and<br />

the other on September 7th in Madrid, and<br />

two conference calls over the span of <strong>2009</strong>.<br />

Briefly, the conclusions drawn from this<br />

process by the Research Working Group<br />

were:<br />

a) To inclu<strong>de</strong> questions that targeted<br />

information on personal credit, but not<br />

to differentiate personal and business<br />

credit this throughout the entire<br />

questionnaire;<br />

b) To remove specific questions to simplify<br />

and make coordinators’ work more<br />

efficient;<br />

c) To inclu<strong>de</strong> new questions to cover the<br />

topics of IT and technology, regu<strong>la</strong>tion<br />

and legal environment, sustainability<br />

and how the economic crisis has affected<br />

the sector;<br />

d) To establish a set of indicators on social,<br />

financial and operational performance<br />

to be asked systematically in the<br />

survey, in col<strong>la</strong>boration with the social<br />

performance and sustainability working<br />

group;<br />

e) To exp<strong>la</strong>in clearly these indicators and<br />

illustrate how to calcu<strong>la</strong>te them by using<br />

examples;<br />

f) To edit questions specifically regarding<br />

the interest rates charged so the reported<br />

rates would be more transparent.<br />

The survey used the European Union<br />

accepted <strong>de</strong>finition of microloans as loans of<br />

25,000 euros or less ma<strong>de</strong> to microenterprises<br />

or businesses with nine or fewer employees.<br />

Nevertheless, some EU len<strong>de</strong>rs have reported<br />

loans for higher amounts that have been<br />

15

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!