Africa Finance Forum Blog
Currently the posts are filtered by: Agricultural & Rural Finance
Reset this filter to see all posts.
Let me begin by wishing you all a very happy and prosperous 2017, on behalf of all of us at the MFW4A Secretariat.
2016 was a rewarding year for MFW4A. We were proud to host the first Regional Conference on Financial Sector Development in African States Facing Fragile Situations (FCAS) in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire, jointly with the African Development Bank, FSD Africa, and FIRST Initiative. The conference attracted some 140 policy makers, business leaders, academics and development partners from over 30 countries, to discuss the role of the financial sector in addressing fragility. The conference has already led to several initiatives by MFW4A and our partners in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Somalia. We expect to build on this work in 2017.
Our support to the Conférence Interafricaine des Marchés d'Assurances (CIMA), the insurance regulator for francophone Africa, helped them to secure financing of EUR 2.5 million from the Agence Française de Développement. The funding will help to expand access to insurance in a region where penetration rates are less than 2% - well below the average for the continent. We worked closely with a number of our funding partners to help define their strategies in Digital Finance and Long Term Finance. These results are a clear demonstration of how the Partnership can directly support the operations of its membership.
With the support of our Supervisory Committee, we took steps to ensure the long term sustainability of the Partnership. The approval of a revised governance structure which fully integrates African financial sector stakeholders, public and private, was a first critical step. The ultimate objective is to expand membership and build a true partnership of all stakeholders in Africa's financial sector.
2017 will be a year of transition for the Partnership. It marks the end of MFW4A's third phase, and the beginning of its transformation into a new, more inclusive partnership, with an expanded membership. We will focus on revamping our value proposition to provide more focused, needs based services with the potential to directly impact our current and potential membership. In so doing, we hope to consolidate MFW4A's position as the leading platform for knowledge, advocacy and networking on financial sector development in Africa.
In closing, I must, on behalf of all of us at the MFW4A Secretariat, thank all our funding partners, stakeholders and supporters, for your constant support and encouragement over the years. We look forward to working together to strengthen our Partnership.
With our best wishes for a happy and prosperous 2017,
MFW4A Partnership Coordinator
USAID recently launched the Guide to the Use of Digital Financial Services in Agriculture, a step-by-step guide to help our partners support access to and use of sustainable financial services in rural areas. This Guide is the result of an ongoing effort within USAID to understand how digital financial services (DFS) can support Feed the Future initiative's goals of increasing agricultural incomes and reducing malnutrition while simultaneously building out ultra-inclusive economic infrastructure.
We see at least four areas where DFS is making a vital impact by overcoming many of the challenges with traditional financial services that have left many rural communities unbanked or underbanked:
- Reducing the cost of delivering financial services outside of bank branches and urban areas, making these services (savings, credit, insurance, etc.) accessible and relevant to rural communities.
- Increasing the traceability of payments to reduce loss of funds and ensure proper accounting, which can potentially increase trust between various actors within the agricultural supply chain.
- Improving household resistance to financial shocks through savings and on-demand receipt of funds, which evidence shows helps to smooth consumption and maintain household nutrition.
- Creating new business models (for example, alternative credit scoring such as M-Shwari in Kenya which is providing very small, on-demand loans to customers based on savings behavior).
The approach we document in this Guide follows three broad steps for assessment:
- Identifying the value-chain challenges;
- Assessing gaps and obstacles in existing services; and
- Assessing the maturity of the digital ecosystem in your area.
The Guide encourages the reader to walk through these steps without limiting his or her thinking, initially, based on gaps in the local DFS market. Rather, once the reader identifies opportunities, they can design interventions that integrate creative solutions and market facilitation to make these opportunities a reality, even in less mature markets, using the following four high-level intervention types:
- Utilizing digital finance along the value chain, the most immediate and direct way to use DFS in our programs;
- Organizing implementing partners around DFS solutions, in order to aggregate demand for services by working together with USAID and other development partners;
- Implementing other technology-enabled services in conjunction with DFS, which encourages the reader to look at the broader digital ecosystem and to integrate with other services that are relevant to smallholder farmers (such as mobile-enabled extension services).
- Market Facilitation, which recognizes the role that USAID, along with our partners, can play to stimulate the broad DFS market when key constraints, such as regulation or lack of adequate consumer protection are holding back use of services in rural areas.
One great example of the last intervention type which has seen great process over the past year comes from our Feed the Future partners in the Somali region of Ethiopia. Mobile money, although not widely available in the region, was identified as able to improve access to finance for livestock producers. Therefore, acting as a market facilitator, USAID supported Hello Cash to extend the services of Somali Microfinance Institution into hard-to-reach areas - creating the opportunity for customers to use mobile-based payments to transact, save, and increase access to loans, all of which will support the larger Feed the Future effort to build a reliable livestock market for Somalia and the bordering regions in Ethiopia.
In keeping with the Principles for Digital Development, this Guide is a dynamic resource that will be updated and improved based on your input and experiences in the field.
Please get in touch either through the comments section below or by sending an email to digitaldevelopment[at]usaid.gov. Whether it is related case studies, specific feedback, or ways that you're able to benefit from this Guide in your own work, we'd love to hear from you and to keep pushing forward our rural development goals together.
Warehouse receipt finance (WRF) is an ancient financing technique that has been found on Mesopotamian clay tablets. WRF played an important role in the financing of agriculture and agricultural processing in the USA and Europe. It is widely used across the developing world - but mostly for the financing of import and export operations. In recent years, there has been much effort by governments of developing countries (supported by their development partners) to extend its use to national agricultural value chains.
So what's an agricultural warehouse receipt system (WRS)? It is a re-emerging financing system whereby agricultural commodity warehouses with qualified warehouse operators and collateral managers provide storage and collateral management services intended to facilitate access to warehouse receipt finance and other forms of commodity-based finance in favour of smallholder farmers.
If financial service providers have a warehouse receipt finance product that is accessible to farmers, then such a product gives qualified farmers the flexibility in timing their sales. Instead of selling their commodity to meet immediate cash-flow needs at peak production season when commodity prices are generally at their lowest levels, the farmer can store their commodity in a qualified warehouse and postpone selling to a later date when prices are supposed to be higher. The farmer then uses the commodity in storage to pledge as collateral for a loan which is used for the immediate cash-flow needs. From the financier's perspective, warehouse receipts, when used as collateral, can facilitate lending to farmers. Warehouse receipt finance also makes it possible for processors to fund the stock they need for their operations throughout the year and for exporters to optimise the timing of their expected sales. In addition, it gives international banks a way of bringing loans to customers at interest rates that tend to be lower than those offered by local banks.
However, there are some pros and cons of WRS within the context of the smallholder farmer. WRS could strive better under conditions of some form of guaranteed higher future prices compared to the usual low prices experienced during the peak harvest season. Hedging instruments to reduce the risk of adverse price movements include contractual arrangements like futures or exchanged-traded and forward or private agreements. However, these kinds of price volatility risk management mechanisms are a little more sophisticated at smallholder value chain level, leaving the price-taker farmer vulnerable to marked-to-market speculation. Whatever the case, the difference in prices at harvest season and time of sale must be able to cover the full cost of warehousing plus interest paid on the loan taken to respond to immediate cash-flow needs at harvest. Yet, WRS has proved difficult, partly because local financiers - the most logical candidates for financing national and regional agricultural trade flows - are usually unfamiliar with the WRS approach and they are also wary about the adequacy of commodity pricing mechanism, political, legal and regulatory conditions that surround its use.
What about a one-size-fits-all WRS for the smallholder farmer in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)?
An investigation in the situation on the ground in nine SSA subject countries (Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Madagascar, Mozambique, Niger, Senegal and Uganda) identified bottlenecks to the wider use of various forms of WRS and formulated proposals for action. The investigation arrived at technical and legal recommendations, some of which are quite country- and context/commodity-specific, while others could be generalized, albeit with caution. The investigation came up with four main types of WRS, with the first type as the most appropriate for SSA smallholder, and the other three as a little more advanced at this time for the SSA smallholder who is yet to produce commercial volumes to be able to tap into such more advanced WRS types. However, one or two or all three of the other types or in some combination thereof, is the direction in which commercially-oriented SSA smallholder ought to be heading towards. The four types are:
- Type A for community inventory credit for smallholder farmers: This type is often supported by microfinance institutions (MFIs), which re-finance their operations with commercial banks. Stocks are normally held under a double-padlock arrangement in community stores or domestic buildings, with the keys to one lock held by the producers' organisation (PO) or group of farmers, and the other by the MFI.
- Type B for private warehouse receipting: This system provides financing against commodities stored in a private warehouse under the control and responsibility of a collateral manager (CM). This can include a field warehouse, where the goods are held in the borrower's store, which is temporarily leased to the CM.
- Type C for public warehousing: This system provides financing against commodities stored in a public warehouse. This is a warehouse that is open to depositors from the general public; it does not mean that the warehouse belongs to the State; indeed most public warehouses are privately owned.
- Type D for lending against the security of current or future production: In this case, the funding agencies lend against a documented security representing current or future production. This is the typical; system depicted under the value proposition for warehousing discussed above.
This blog is adapted from AFD/CTA/IFAD-PARM co-publication on warehouse receipt finance in Africa. For the detailed study, please, click here:
About the Author
Dr Jonathan N. Agwe (DM) is one of the Senior Technical Specialists in Inclusive Rural Financial Services in the Financial Assets and Markets (FAME) Cluster at the Policy and Technical Advisory Division (PTA) of the Rome-based International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Prior to joining IFAD, Jonathan worked as Operations Officer in the Washington-based World Bank's Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for 13 years. And before joining the World Bank, Jonathan worked over 12 years, developing private and public sector programs for smallholder and commercial agricture in Cameroon.Jonathan N. Agwe has a cumulative work experience over 29 years and holds a Doctor of Management (DM) degree in develeopment management from the University of Maryland University College, USA.
This post was originally published on the SME Finance Forum website.
On September 9, the G20 Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion (GPFI) brought together policymakers, financial service providers and researchers to discuss key trends and gaps in agricultural finance.
The demands on the global food system are rising rapidly. By 2050 there will be an additional two billion or more people to be fed. The agricultural sector is essential for food security, job creation and overall economic growth around the world. The proposed global Sustainable Development Goals call for increasing agricultural productivity, raising small holder income and ending hunger.
"There is large untapped potential to modernize the agricultural sector and boost productivity. The G20 recognizes that expanding access to finance in the agricultural sector is crucial to achieve these goals," said Susanne Dorasil (GPFI Co-Chair; German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)).
The Agricultural Finance Roundtable featured discussions around key emerging issues. What are new successful approaches to value chain finance? What are the opportunities for financial institutions to target women in the agriculture sector? Is index insurance viable for small holder farmers in emerging countries? Do we really understand the needs of smallholder farmers? How to exploit the potential of technological advances? International experts from academia and development organizations presented new research findings and policy recommendations in these areas. Five discussion papers formed the basis for the various sessions which led to the following main outcomes:
- The importance of value chains - a key ingredient for growth and scale
- Digital technology as a potential game changer
- Subsidies can be helpful, at many levels - but be SMART with them!
- Don't forget building human capital, and using expertise throughout VC
- Critical role of women in agriculture and in VCs
- Invest in better data
- Good overall legal framework is essential
A central theme of the event was the role of innovative digital technologies in transforming agrifinance. "Digital technologies have helped to lower credit risk, reduce costs and make the delivery of financial services more efficient. This has expanded the range of financial services available to smallholder families in emerging markets," said Michael Tarazi, senior financial sector specialist at the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP).
The G20 Agricultural Finance Roundtable was organized in partnership with the International Finance Corporation (IFC), BMZ, GIZ and SME Finance Forum. The outcomes of the roundtable will form a G20 synthesis report on new trends and innovations in agricultural finance.
In many parts of rural Africa today, microcredit schemes for women are increasingly being promoted as both a solution to women's limited access to credit and a strategy for poverty reduction and women's empowerment. Microcredit is simply the extension of a small amount of collateral-free institutional loans to jointly liable poor group members for their self-employment and income-generation. In a recent paper that we published in World Development (Vol. 66, pp.335-345, 2015), we studied the empowerment benefits of rural women's access to microcredit using data from a longitudinal multi-method research that we conducted with rural women who were involved in an NGO-run micro-lending programme in Ghana. We developed a simple, yet multifaceted model of empowerment in which the empowerment benefits of women's access to microcredit were evaluated based on three main pathway matrixes: material, relational, and perceptual pathways to women empowerment.
We found that some women are empowered along several dimensions as a result of their access to credit; several other women have little control over the use of loan funds and are therefore no better off due to receiving credit; while some women are subjected to harassment and abuse due to their indebtedness and inability to repay loans, and are therefore worse off. Those women who became more empowered as a result of their access to credit were women who either were already engaged in some business venture before receiving the loan or they exercised full or significant control over proceeds from their loans. Women borrowers who became vulnerable and even disempowered were however those who either received loans to start-up new businesses but who actually failed to do so due to loss of loans to other unapproved loan uses such as direct consumption, or those who had no control over investments and earnings from their loans.
Our findings suggest that having an understanding of the nature of potential loan recipients and the socio-cultural context within which they live could be vital for the survival, effectiveness and long-term success of any microcredit programme. In some cases, access to credit is the only input needed on the road to women empowerment. At the same time, our findings also suggest that in a culture in which women have little control over their loans and income from their investments, it is a singularly poor environment to give out credit to women to start-up new businesses.
This suggests the need to focus the lending approach of microcredit schemes for rural women on a number of things. First, it might be better to focus on women who already have an income-generating activity that generates sufficient income to repay the loan. This would not only help loan recipients to grow their existing businesses and generate more income, but it would also ensure the sustainability of the schemes themselves. Second, it might be useful to first screen and determine which clients have adequate control to be able to use a loan productively. This might require moving beyond individual women to focusing on families and communities to redress powerlessness and gender-based discrimination against women. Finally, borrower groups should be encouraged to build-up their own emergency savings through small regular contributions. Such funds could be loaned out (and to be replaced later) to group members who might have legitimate reasons for being unable to repay at the time of collection. This could reduce the harassment, abuse, and seizure of assets that insolvent borrowers often experience due to other group members having to cover for them out of their own pocket.
Overall, our study suggests that empowerment cannot always be assumed to be an automatic outcome of women's access to microcredit particularly in contexts such as Ghana where women still face considerable socio-economic disadvantage relative to men. However, with adequate loan size, appropriate timing, effective monitoring, and better screening methods that avoid giving loans to potentially insolvent borrowers, women's access to microcredit does have the potential to impact positively and powerfully on their empowerment.
This blog post is based on the study Microcredit: Empowerment and Disempowerment of Rural Women in Ghana, World Development, Vol. 66, pp.335-345, 2015. Corresponding Author: Dr. John Kuumuori Ganle, Department of Geography and Rural Development, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana, Tel: 0249957505, E: johnganle[at]yahoo.com
About the Authors
John Kuumuori Ganle, is a population, rural and international development researcher at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana. He holds a Doctor of Philosophy in Public Health from the University of Oxford, UK.
Kwadwo Afriyie is a Lecturer at the Department of Geography and Rural Development at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana. He holds a Master of Philosophy in Geography and Resource Development from the University of Ghana, Legon.
Alexander Yao Segbefia is a Lecturer and Head at the Department of Geography and Rural Development at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana. He holds a doctorate degree in Geography and Resource Development from the University of Ghana, Legon.