In October, 2010, GIVE founder Steven Van Yoder published a feature story, "Fixing the free market", in Ode Magazine about the role of cooperatives in addressing global poverty. Fixing the Free Market provides a comprehensive take on how co-ops in general, but also details how they are playing a growing role in poverty alleviation in the developing world by merging economic growth with social goals. The story was recently recommended by the Tucson Citizen as one of Ode's top stories in 2010.
The story showcases GIVE's work in Manila, Philippines, with field partner Inner City Development Cooperative (ICDC), a cooperative that is bringing fresh life to impoverished neighborhoods in Manila. Through the Urban Entrepreneurship Center co-founded with GIVE in 2010, ICDC is offering microcredit loans, training in business skills and financial literacy, healthcare support, emergency programs and other services to urban squatter communities .
Friday, May 20, 2011
GIVE featured in Ode Magazine
Labels:
fixing the free market,
GIVE,
ICDC,
Inner City Development Cooperative,
Ode Magazine,
Tucson Citizen
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Entrepreneurship in Siem Reap, Cambodia
Steven Van Yoder just returned from an exploratory meeting in Siem Reap, Cambodia to discuss a possible project with several local Cambodian NGOs. The meeting was organized by Michael Horton, founder of ConCERT (Connecting Communities, Environment & Responsible Tourism), an organization committed to reducing poverty by connecting people who want to help with local organizations. GIVE has been in discussion with Horton for the past few months, who agrees that GIVE's entrepreneurship model could be a beneficial supplement to the efforts of ConCERT and its member organizations.
Steven led a discussion about the challenges and opportunities in Siem Reap, a province that is home to the world famous Angkor Wat temple complex which attracts over 1 million visitors a year. Steven provided an overview of GIVE's work in the Philippines, including a summary of GIVE's proprietary Entrepreneurship Center concept already established in Manila.
Despite the thriving local tourism industry, poverty persists. A number of ConCERT member organizations are applying social entrepreneurship, earned income and vocational training programs to help the local population.
Stay tuned for a possible partnership project in Siem Reap that applies GIVE's poverty alleviation model through existing local NGOs.
Labels:
Angkor Wat,
Cambodia,
ConCERT,
entrepreneurship,
GIVE,
NGO,
nonprofit,
responsible tourism,
Siem Reap
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Teaching Barefoot MBA to Microentrepreneurs
Since February 2010, Inner City Development Cooperative (ICDC), GIVE’s field partner in the Philippines, has trained 1,700 microloan recipients in the Barefoot MBA. It was just last fall that their staff were trained in the program themselves, so they haven’t wasted any time passing it along to people who can benefit from the training.
Many of the Filipinos who receive microloans had to empty any savings they had in the wake of last winter’s typhoons. With huge sections of Manila damaged or destroyed, residents often had to spend everything they had to get food, water, and shelter for their families.
Because savings accounts looked so depleted, ICDC tailored the Barefoot MBA lessons toward helping loan recipients save money. One of the benefits of the program is that it is modular, so MFIs can tailor the training they offer to the specific needs of the community they’re in. This flexibility makes the Barefoot MBA ideal for a number of situations because it can be relevant to all of them.
In case you’re wondering, the program is working! 40% of the 1700 people trained this year have increased their savings. With this kind of response, ICDC and GIVE are excited about what could happen when they start teaching the other modules in the program, probably sometime this winter.
Many of the Filipinos who receive microloans had to empty any savings they had in the wake of last winter’s typhoons. With huge sections of Manila damaged or destroyed, residents often had to spend everything they had to get food, water, and shelter for their families.
Because savings accounts looked so depleted, ICDC tailored the Barefoot MBA lessons toward helping loan recipients save money. One of the benefits of the program is that it is modular, so MFIs can tailor the training they offer to the specific needs of the community they’re in. This flexibility makes the Barefoot MBA ideal for a number of situations because it can be relevant to all of them.
In case you’re wondering, the program is working! 40% of the 1700 people trained this year have increased their savings. With this kind of response, ICDC and GIVE are excited about what could happen when they start teaching the other modules in the program, probably sometime this winter.
Labels:
Barefoot MBA,
GIVE,
ICDC,
Inner City Development Cooperative,
Manila,
microentrepreneurs,
microloans,
Philippines,
Steven Van Yoder
Thursday, May 6, 2010
New Projects for 2010
In our last post, we mentioned some problems with microfinance today. While difficult issues have arise in the industry, it's still one of the keys to poverty alleviation. In fact, GIVE is already working with MFIs and NGOs in Southeast Asia to combat some of the downsides of the microfinance industry so it can become even more effective at helping the poor and building stronger, more stable communities in the region.
Last month, we opened our first entrepreneurship center in Manila. In partnership with a local NGO, Inner City Development Cooperative (ICDC), we plan to offer education via the Barefoot MBA, an entrepreneurship course aimed at helping the poor start sustainable businesses, including other business training modules that are being developed. Additionally, we hope to integrate other business support services for the local community which we will announce when they become available.
We're working to develop a childcare co-op through the entrepreneurship center, too. Many women cannot utilize their microfinance loans to their utmost capacity because they have children at home and no one else to care for them. This co-op will help meet these childcare needs so the women have the time and energy to start businesses that will not only sustain their families, but also help their local communities.
Successful businesses are run by resilient business owners. Alongside these business-oriented opportunities, we're also pioneering a group-support program to help the recipients of microfinance loans combat learned helplessness. While learning business skills will give these microentrepreneurs the chance to improve their businesses by improving their minds, these group sessions will help them overcome culturally ingrained ideas that defeat them before they even get started.
We have three major MFIs in Cambodia on board with starting a similar entrepreneurship center there. We hope to have the details of this ironed out later this year so we can begin working with those entrepreneurs as soon as possible. This is a great opportunity for us to not only aid entrepreneurs, but to develop scales and metrics that will help us measure GIVE's success and grow an in-house set of tools aimed at giving microentrepreneurs the very best resources for success.
These are only the first of many ventures GIVE has in the works to support MFIs and the microentrepreneurs who receive their loans. Getting money into these communities is an important step, and GIVE plans to help take these loans even further by making them a more effective tool to combat poverty.
Last month, we opened our first entrepreneurship center in Manila. In partnership with a local NGO, Inner City Development Cooperative (ICDC), we plan to offer education via the Barefoot MBA, an entrepreneurship course aimed at helping the poor start sustainable businesses, including other business training modules that are being developed. Additionally, we hope to integrate other business support services for the local community which we will announce when they become available.
We're working to develop a childcare co-op through the entrepreneurship center, too. Many women cannot utilize their microfinance loans to their utmost capacity because they have children at home and no one else to care for them. This co-op will help meet these childcare needs so the women have the time and energy to start businesses that will not only sustain their families, but also help their local communities.
Successful businesses are run by resilient business owners. Alongside these business-oriented opportunities, we're also pioneering a group-support program to help the recipients of microfinance loans combat learned helplessness. While learning business skills will give these microentrepreneurs the chance to improve their businesses by improving their minds, these group sessions will help them overcome culturally ingrained ideas that defeat them before they even get started.
We have three major MFIs in Cambodia on board with starting a similar entrepreneurship center there. We hope to have the details of this ironed out later this year so we can begin working with those entrepreneurs as soon as possible. This is a great opportunity for us to not only aid entrepreneurs, but to develop scales and metrics that will help us measure GIVE's success and grow an in-house set of tools aimed at giving microentrepreneurs the very best resources for success.
These are only the first of many ventures GIVE has in the works to support MFIs and the microentrepreneurs who receive their loans. Getting money into these communities is an important step, and GIVE plans to help take these loans even further by making them a more effective tool to combat poverty.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Reassessing the Microfinance Industry
When microfinance was pioneered, those leading the way saw it as a chance to provide loans for people who could not otherwise get them. Part of the tacit agreement was that the loans would carry the lowest possible interest rates, so marginalized people could afford to pay them back. These loans were intended to improve lives, allowing their recipients to pull themselves, their families, and eventually their communities out of poverty. Without these social objectives at the forefront, it's hard to distinguish a microfinance institution from any other lender, except that they lend smaller amounts to high-risk people.
Today, many MFI experts are calling for a reassessment of the microfinance industry calling into question whether microfinance has strayed from its original mission.
Neil MaqFarquhar of the New York Times sums it up well for an interview posted Wednesday, April 14, 2010 on The Takeaway entitled Micro-Lending Better in Theory Than Reality. MaqFarquahr says, "Experts tend to oversell it [microfinance]. Yes, it helps alleviate some of the worst pitfalls of poverty, but not everyone is an entrepreneur waiting to be discovered."
Today, many MFI experts are calling for a reassessment of the microfinance industry calling into question whether microfinance has strayed from its original mission.
Neil MaqFarquhar of the New York Times sums it up well for an interview posted Wednesday, April 14, 2010 on The Takeaway entitled Micro-Lending Better in Theory Than Reality. MaqFarquahr says, "Experts tend to oversell it [microfinance]. Yes, it helps alleviate some of the worst pitfalls of poverty, but not everyone is an entrepreneur waiting to be discovered."
Recently, some MFIs in India are taking this a step farther. They are looking to leap into the for-profit ranks by getting themselves listed on the stock exchange. If their bid for a listing is successful, they will no longer be working for the poor, who make up most of the recipients of their loans, but for their investors. This will encourage them to raise their interest rates in order to raise profits.
While loans from these MFIs will still be the best option for many of the people who receive them, this move towards lending to the poor in order to make a profit raises some red flags. It seems to leave behind the social objectives that have characterized microfinance institutions from the beginning.
Needless to say, this move is raising questions in the microfinance community. Is turning an MFI into a for-profit business simply taking advantage of poverty instead of helping turn it around? Should there be regulations on who can lend to the poor? Should the government set MFI interest rates?
Clearly, there's a need for more careful thought about what an MFI should be and how they can maximize their potential in such a way that as many people as possible receive as much help as they need. If microfinance loans are going to continue aiding and not harming marginalized families and their communities, these questions need to be answered as soon as possible.
Monday, April 12, 2010
David Roodman Discusses KIVA Controversy
This article was originally posted in Get Slightly Famous Webzine, an online publication for professionals, growing businesses, and corporate marketers run by Steven Van Yoder.
David’s blog has prompted an international discussion on poverty alleviation, generated national media coverage, including a story in the New York Times, and underscores a new publishing model where authors write books in real-time in partnership with their readers, forming a living dialogue between author and audience.
David shares his experiences and tips on how authors can now position themselves as thought leaders during the book writing process, building an audience for their books before they are published while shaping an national dialogue around their topics.
Can you tell us a bit about the Center for Global Development and the work you do there?
The Center for Global Development is a think tank based in Washington, DC. We do serious research that, we hope, leads to changes in how rich country governments help poor countries while going beyond foreign aid to include trade, migration and climate policies that affect poor people around the world.
Can you provide a short overview of microfinance?
The most popular type of microfinance is micro-credit, which involves making small loans of $50 to $100 to poor people. These loans are given to individuals who form into borrower groups of 5-40 people who are each responsible for each other’s loans, which is how you assure repayment.
The common perception perpetuated by microfinance charities is that the poor always invest these loans in their businesses by stocking items in corner stores or buying a new sewing machine. Sometimes that happens, but the reality is more complex and people use credit in all sorts of ways, and not necessarily in their small businesses.
You’re currently writing a book online. Why did you choose this approach as a way to build your book?
In 2008, after initial research, I realized that though I’d learned a lot about the history of microfinance, I didn’t know everything. Instead of writing my book from the seclusion of my office, I decided to share it online and get ideas from other people to improve the text.
My goal in writing the book was to get at the truth about microfinance and explain it to people. I wanted to explain the benefits, and even the harms, of microfinance and examine the implications of how to best support microfinance, or determine whether we even support it at all.
You recently wrote a blog post entitled, “KIVA is Not Quite What it Seems” which challenged the popular non-profit organization for posting inaccurate information on its website. Can you talk about that blog post and essentially what happened when it went live?
KIVA is a new player on the microfinanance scene. It started just four years ago and their big innovation, their big idea, was to bring the internet to micro-credit and make it sort of like Ebay so that someone like you or me could go on their website and choose exactly who we wanted to lend money to on the other side of the world.
Great idea, and they have been growing really fast. It’s been on Oprah and gotten lots of attention. However, after some basic research, I learned that Kiva doesn’t operate as most people believe. Here’s a summary of what I wrote on my blog post, Kiva Is Not Quite What It Seems:
Kiva is the path-breaking, fast-growing person-to-person microlending site. It works this way: Kiva posts pictures and stories of people needing loans. You give your money to Kiva. Kiva sends it to a microlender. The lender makes the loan to a person you choose. He or she ordinarily repays. You get your money back with no interest. It’s like eBay for microcredit.
You knew that, right? Well guess what: you’re wrong, and so is Kiva’s diagram. Less that 5% of Kiva loans are disbursed after they are listed and funded on Kiva’s site. Just today, for example, Kiva listed a loan for Phong Mut in Cambodia and at this writing only $25 of the needed $800 has been raised. But you needn’t worry about whether Phong Mut will get the loan because it was disbursed last month. And if she defaults, you might not hear about it: the intermediating microlender MAXIMA might cover for her in order to keep its Kiva-listed repayment rate high.
In short, the person-to-person donor-to-borrower connections created by Kiva are partly fictional. I suspect that most Kiva users do not realize this. Yet Kiva prides itself on transparency.
I started reading about the history. It turns out that they were inspired by child sponsorship, which comes from a previous generation where you sponsor a child in a developing country. And so, I wrote about everything that I learned and it was a very long blog post. And I think this is important to emphasize, I couldn’t quite justify what I was doing with my time. It just took a few days, but I felt passionate about it and I went with that passion.
I also tried to do it in a very gentle way, saying here’s a criticism I have but I’m not going to beat them over the head with it because I realize it’s easy for me to give it. It’s easy for me to Monday morning quarterback. They’re out there actually making a difference. So it was gentle but also passionate and thoughtful. And the other thing that made it of interest to a lot of people is that I was sort of tweaking a hot brand.
And so that combination, and I didn’t expect this to happen at all, just led to a huge amount of attention. It spread over a weekend after I posted it on Twitter. I got a couple hundred tweets. Then, a few days later, the bloggers started coming in and linking to it and it just swelled to this phenomenon and eventually led to an article on The New York Times.
Did you have any idea this would spark such a firestorm of conversation?
I had a mild idea, but I certainly didn’t anticipate the scale.
What does this controversy say not just about donors’ desires to feel a personal connection, but possibly even a distrust of NGOs and non-profits to the point that they can’t really be trusted by writing an anonymous check?
That’s a really good question. We need to recognize that helping is difficult and that we’re part of the problem. We shape how charities behave. I think it shows how we can sometimes be our own enemies when we want to give to a good cause. There’s a lot of skepticism of foreign aid that it doesn’t really work. That it just goes to the pockets of corrupt dictators.
Yes, even though donors know that helping is difficult, but when the right emotional pitch is made for charity, like look at the picture of this poor child that you can help, our emotions take over. We respond to pictures and simple stories that are not the whole truth, because that’s how we behave, we force charities to adapt to us. And so, in order to survive, they need to tell us simplistic messages.
In your opinion, what really points the way forward toward innovative, possibly or partially market inspired approaches to poverty alleviation?
What I would say is this: if you imagine your life without financial services, no credit cards, no mortgage, no bank account, nothing, no health insurance, no life insurance, it’d be pretty difficult. So, financial services are kind of invisible but they’re actually really important, and that goes for poor people too.
If you live on $2 a day, it doesn’t mean you get $2 everyday. It means you get $4 one day, $0 the next, $1 the next, and you’re constantly having to save on the good days and maybe even borrow on the bad days. So poor people actually need financial services more than middle class people in rich countries.
And so, from the perspective, it’s almost a no-brainer that appropriate financial services are good for poor people. That’s not to say that will lessen the amount of poverty and that’s not to say that there’s no danger in credit. We know that there are dangers in credit. But overall, it looks like it’s a useful thing.
Do you think microcredit helps poor people with no business experience just naturally grow their micro-enterprises?
There are lots of good uses of credit that don’t involve starting a business. More likely, it helps poor people with no business experience pay for their kids’ school fees or repay relatives for the money they had to borrow when their husband got sick and had to go in the hospital.
Your blog has gone beyond online buzz, and we talked about a story in The New York Times. What do you think this says about the future of ideas and how authors should gain influence in the future as they’re building their books?
The whole experience really helped me appreciate how the world has changed. It essentially has made journalism more democratic.
Roughly speaking, anybody can become a journalist--but that doesn’t mean people will listen to you! But if you do things right, and have something interesting to say, barriers to entry are far lower than they were fifteen years ago. It’s an amazing change in our society that I did not fully appreciated until I participated in this way.
The blogging experience has been terrific for my work, and again, it’s not that I planned it. I just sort of discovered this. It has slowed down the book writing. I’m trying to get this book done and I feel stressed about the fact that I’m not done yet.
But it has, in every other respect, advanced the purposes of my project. I’m learning more. I signal to the world that I have expertise and, of course, the blog does that. And I’m producing short pieces that are more likely to be read than the book itself.
And so it’s really been a boon for the project and I think this is the wave of the future.
You started the blog in February of 2009 and you already have quite a following. How did you go from publishing your first blog post to having thousands of people reading and passing your ideas around?
It’s not enough to just start putting up blog posts. You have to drive traffic to your blog and it’s a reinforcing process. The more people come to your blog, the more they tell other people who come to your blog, and so on.
So you do have to be your own agent, and there are a few ways to do that. One is finding email discussion groups on the topics you’re interested in. Find online forums where people who you want to reach are already congregating and submit occasional posts from your blog.
Don’t overwhelm them but submit a few and say, ‘Hey, I’m doing this blog. I’d welcome your comments.’ Do the same thing through Twitter. Find out who’s tweeting on your topics and re-tweet them and engage them in dialogues. Do it through all the various social media.
It’s a process that takes time. And it’s true I got a huge amount of traffic with the Kiva post. I don’t get that traffic on a daily basis. Nevertheless, some percentage of the people who first came to the website because of the Kiva story stuck. They became subscribers of the blog or what have you.
In summary, what would you tell potential authors about jumpstarting a respectable readership? What final words or what tips might you lead people with about making the move in this direction if they’re thinking about writing a book?
Well, if they’re thinking about writing a book, then presumably, they like writing and they care about it, because that’s an important requirement. If you don’t take to blogging per se, then you shouldn’t be doing it because your discomfort will come through. So that’s one.
I guess what I would say is everybody needs to find their own blogging voice and style and that will develop naturally as you do it over the months. And there’s some reward for being contrarian, as I was with the Kiva post.
But I think there’s also a reward for letting your passion and your personality show through up to a point. As time has gone on, I’ve revealed more about my personal life, my children and my activities outside of my work. I’ve become more comfortable stating my opinions with feeling.
At the same time, you need to apply all the disciplines that you need to apply in writing in general. You need to be aware of your audience, what jargon terms they won’t understand, how to write clearly, and so on, and how to keep things short when appropriate. I think that this is an area where we’re all inventing it as we go.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Cambodian-Expat Social Entrepreneur Becomes An Advisor
I joined Debbie Watson, a long-time Cambodian expat, microfinance expert and social entrepreneur for a tour of her new venture, FunkyJunk, an innovative social enterprise that makes beautiful and functional products from discarded plastic bags reclaimed from the streets and fields of Cambodia.
Debbie is on a personal mission to tackle the scourge of discarded, non-biodegradable plastic bags that litter the Cambodian landscape, hoping to develop a model that can be expanded throughout SE Asia and other developing countries.
“People in many countries are now very aware of the need to stop using plastic bags in their own country,” she says. “But in poorer nations this is often not the case, and especially not in Cambodia. By purchasing FunkyJunk products, consumers can contribute to a cleaner environment in countries less fortunate than their own, as well as making their home or office look funky too!”
FunkyJunk operates in accordance with fair trade standards and each product is labeled with the number of bags that have been reclaimed. After success in the local marketplace, she’s looking to move into the export market, and is seeking GIVE’s assistance via our Marketers Without Borders program in opening up international markets for FunkyJunk products.
Debbie is currently working with Mercy Corps in Indonesia, consulting on a variety of microfinance projects. Drawing from her extensive knowledge on microfinance and poverty alleviation, Debbie is assisting GIVE in establishing operations in Cambodia, including a new Urban Entrepreneurship Center (UEC) that is slated to come online later this year.
Debbie is on a personal mission to tackle the scourge of discarded, non-biodegradable plastic bags that litter the Cambodian landscape, hoping to develop a model that can be expanded throughout SE Asia and other developing countries.
“People in many countries are now very aware of the need to stop using plastic bags in their own country,” she says. “But in poorer nations this is often not the case, and especially not in Cambodia. By purchasing FunkyJunk products, consumers can contribute to a cleaner environment in countries less fortunate than their own, as well as making their home or office look funky too!”
FunkyJunk operates in accordance with fair trade standards and each product is labeled with the number of bags that have been reclaimed. After success in the local marketplace, she’s looking to move into the export market, and is seeking GIVE’s assistance via our Marketers Without Borders program in opening up international markets for FunkyJunk products.
Debbie is currently working with Mercy Corps in Indonesia, consulting on a variety of microfinance projects. Drawing from her extensive knowledge on microfinance and poverty alleviation, Debbie is assisting GIVE in establishing operations in Cambodia, including a new Urban Entrepreneurship Center (UEC) that is slated to come online later this year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



