14.10.2016 Views

in the 21st Century

hTOE305aYVW

hTOE305aYVW

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.

174 Kenya’s F<strong>in</strong>ancial Transformation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>21st</strong> <strong>Century</strong><br />

The shift <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> pattern of f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>clusion over time is illustrated <strong>in</strong> Figure<br />

19, where we <strong>in</strong>clude both <strong>the</strong> 2009 and 2013 distributions (M-PESA users<br />

are not shown separately). We observe a more or less horizontal shift <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

distribution, which can be <strong>in</strong>terpreted as a move out of <strong>in</strong>formal <strong>in</strong>clusion<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> direction of formal <strong>in</strong>clusion, but while ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> likelihood of<br />

exclusion. This pattern suggests that it was difficult for <strong>in</strong>dividuals who had<br />

not entered <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial system to move up <strong>the</strong> ladder of f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>clusion,<br />

but that <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>tegration of those who were already <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> 2009 deepened<br />

over time.<br />

Figure 19: Change <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>clusion, all <strong>in</strong>dividuals, from 2009 to 2013<br />

Excluded<br />

Informally<br />

Included<br />

All households, 2009<br />

All households, 2013<br />

Formally<br />

Included<br />

Assess<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> welfare impacts of changes <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>clusion<br />

We care about changes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> distribution of f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>clusion only to <strong>the</strong><br />

extent that <strong>the</strong>y have welfare impacts. In this sub-section, we develop a simple<br />

framework to assess <strong>the</strong>se welfare impacts.<br />

Let u s be <strong>the</strong> utility derived from be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>in</strong>clusion state s = 1 (Formal<br />

<strong>in</strong>clusion), 2 (Informal <strong>in</strong>clusion), or 3 (Exclusion). Note that to simplify, we<br />

assume this utility is <strong>in</strong>dependent of o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>dividual characteristics. Then<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual i‘s expected utility at time t is<br />

U<br />

it<br />

3<br />

s<br />

= ∑ pˆ<br />

itu<br />

s=<br />

1<br />

s<br />

and we let aggregate welfare be <strong>the</strong> weighted sum of expected utilities across<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividuals,

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!