Microfinance Banks and Household Access to Finance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 5. Synthetic panel datasetPanel A of this table shows the number of households/observations per country and year before and aftermatching on observables (ProCredit Bank close in 2006, Retail Bank close in 2006, Town close, Low income,Informal income). Panel B provides details on the characteristics of household pairs in the final synthetic paneldataset. Definition and sources of the variables are provided in table 2.Panel A. Number of matched householdsCountryAlbaniaBulgariaMacedoniaSerbiaAll countriesYearNumber of Households(unmatched dataset)Number of Households(matched dataset)2006 999 6782010 876 6782006 1000 5452010 917 5452006 996 6232010 1023 6232006 997 7672010 1450 7672006 3992 26132010 4266 2613Household pairs not close to Procredit in 2006 1604of which:close to Retail bank in 2006 & 2010 477not close to Retail bank in 2006 & 2010 1017Total synthetic panel sample (number of household pairs) 1494Panel B. Type of pairs in synthetic panelRetail bank close Retail bank not closeTown closeInformal income 76 16Low incomeFormal income 24 4Informal income 115 51High incomeFormal income 77 21Low incomeHigh incomeTown not closeInformal income 27 336Formal income 6 62Informal income 87 349Formal income 65 178Total 477 1017
Table 6. Volume effect: Univariate analysisThis table shows difference-in-difference estimates for account use (Account ) for the subsample ofthose households that are not close to a ProCredit branch in 2006. Households in 2006 are matchedwith households in 2010 based on observables (ProCredit Bank close in 2006, Retail Bank close in2006, Town close, Low income, Informal income). Standard errors and number of observations (N)are reported in brackets. ***, **, * denote significance at the 0.01, 0.05 and 0.10-level. Definitionand sources of the variables are provided in table 2.ProCredit close in2010ProCredit not closein 2010Difference inDifference (DiD)Retail Bank closeRetail Bank not close0.2329***(0.0370)(N=292)0.5385***(0.1141)(N=26)-0.0054(0.0488)(N=185)0.1302***(0.0202)(N=991)0.2383***(0.0605)(N=477)0.4083***(0.1264)(N=1017)
Page 1 and 2: Microfinance Banks and Household Ac
Page 4 and 5: stronger increase in the use of ban
Page 6 and 7: and Strøm (2010) examine data for
Page 8 and 9: of this extra interest in terms of
Page 10 and 11: households which have low transacti
Page 13 and 14: 3. Data and Methodology3.1. Life in
Page 15 and 16: anches in our sample increased from
Page 17 and 18: eluctant to use commercial banking
Page 19 and 20: more likely to open new branches in
Page 21 and 22: The results presented in Appendix 3
Page 23 and 24: estimate the location decision of P
Page 25 and 26: etail bank is already present, ProC
Page 27 and 28: household types with the interactio
Page 29 and 30: investment in microfinance banks se
Page 31 and 32: Table 2. Variable definitions and s
Page 33: Table 4. Summary statistics of all
Page 37 and 38: Table 8. Location and volume effect
Page 39 and 40: Table 10. Composition effect: Multi
Page 41 and 42: Appendix 2a. Albania: Bank and hous
Page 43 and 44: Appendix 2c. Macedonia: Bank and ho
Page 45: Appendix 3. Volume effect: Robustne

Microfinance Banks and Household Access to Finance

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

Delete template?

Save as template?