29.12.2014 Views

Social Impact Assessment of Microfinance Programmes - weman

Social Impact Assessment of Microfinance Programmes - weman

Social Impact Assessment of Microfinance Programmes - weman

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.

Note: There are 239 and 271 respondents in each category respectively. t-value greater than 1.6 indicates<br />

the mean difference between two categories is statistically significant. The negative t indicates that<br />

average value <strong>of</strong> category 2 is greater than the average value <strong>of</strong> category 1.<br />

Table – 8.5<br />

KASHF – Children Education<br />

Variables Category Mean Standard<br />

Deviation<br />

t-value<br />

Significance<br />

Level<br />

School Going Children % Active Borrowers 87.2143 23.26893 1.482 .140<br />

New and Non-<br />

Borrowers<br />

81.8200 25.30298<br />

School Going Children - Boys Active Borrowers<br />

%<br />

90.0585 27.97030 1.845 .067<br />

New and Non-<br />

Borrowers<br />

80.0000 35.61127<br />

School Going Children - Girls Active Borrowers<br />

%<br />

75.1389 39.28180 1.185 .238<br />

New and Non-<br />

Borrowers<br />

67.1405 42.72509<br />

Children going to Private Active Borrowers<br />

School %<br />

38.8528 47.51905 -3.226 .001<br />

New and Non-<br />

Borrowers<br />

59.8700 45.11408<br />

Monthly Expenditure on Active Borrowers<br />

Education<br />

409.0000 435.23233 1.518 .131<br />

New and Non-<br />

Borrowers<br />

326.1560 355.05028<br />

Note: There are 239 and 271 respondents in each category respectively. t-value greater than 1.6 indicates<br />

the mean difference between two categories is statistically significant. The negative t indicates that<br />

average value <strong>of</strong> category 2 is greater than the average value <strong>of</strong> category 1.<br />

The differences on Household Ownership Assets – Table 8.6 – between Active<br />

Borrowers and others are also large and significant, implying that Active Borrowers own<br />

more/better Household Assets. Table 8.7 also shows the significant difference between<br />

the value <strong>of</strong> sales <strong>of</strong> Active Borrowers compared to the other categories.<br />

Perhaps the most surprising and unexpected results on impact, which relate to not Kashf<br />

alone but to almost all MFIs, relates to the decrease in women’s empowerment in most<br />

cases. Although, there is a significant (positive) difference at the Women’s Economic<br />

Empowerment level between Active Borrowers and the other three categories, in the case<br />

<strong>of</strong> other types <strong>of</strong> Empowerment, such as Income, Assets, Health and Education, we find<br />

that those women who have not joined the programme are ‘better-<strong>of</strong>f’. What this suggests<br />

that while women begin to take decisions related to Economic issues far more<br />

independently, perhaps they compromise the additional income earned by allowing their<br />

spouses/sons to control this income<br />

21

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!