• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

`Micro-credit has to be targeted right'

Rasheeda Bhagat

There is a lot of difference between the way men and women spend money. Women spend it ``more responsibly'' because they have the immediate task of providing for the family, says Prof. RUTH PEARSON, an international expert on gender rights an d the Director of the Centre for Development Studies, Institute for Politics and International Studies, at the University of Leeds. In Bangkok last week to participate in a conference on Gender and Indo-China, organised by the Women's Action and Research Initiative, she spoke to Business Line on why micro credit programmes all over the world are focussed on women.

Excerpts:

Globalisation has almost become a dirty word... at this conference and elsewhere... and is criticised for going against women in the emerging economies. How far do you support this theory?

I think there are lots of things hidden in terms of globalisation.... the way in which global finance, markets and technology affect livelihoods in every part of the world. It is a fact rather than something we desire or not. But I think several trends a re being mixed up.

For example?

One is the extension of the market as the basic means of distributing the services, goods and resources within society. The balance between social distribution and market distribution is part of globalisation, and I think that is to be challenged.

Second, there is confusion _ especially in regions in transition _ between the extension of market relation and the dominance of internationally strong economies which dominate international institutions and markets. Most people, when they talk of global isation, do not mean only marketisation. They also mean a contemporary form of imperialism, where the northern countries _ the rich ones _ set the rules.

For example, when a country such as Laos or Cambodia is interested and sees the advantages of better economic opportunities in global markets, who sets the rules of engagement for increased integration? In the WTO, it is the rich countries _ the US and the European Union _ which lay down the rules for developing countries to engage in global markets.

Another issue which came up at the conference was that when credit is given to women, their burden only doubles. Your comments?

If you give women just credit and no other support, you may add to the burden they already have. On the other hand, as many people said at this meeting, if credit is given in the right way, and targeted with other complementary services, it could help th e women better. This would also enhance their position in the community or the family by increasing the visibility and profitability of their work and the general power and respect they wield.

I think one of the interesting measures to assess the status of women and men is how much sleep they get. If you can use credit in a way that makes women's work more profitable, so that they do not have to work for long hours, and can sleep more, I think that's a very good thing.

I see a big role for NGOs, in terms of economic literacy, to support women dealing and participating in the market and understanding the basics for opportunities in the market and its limitations. There is a lot of room for creative partnership here, and as banking institutions have learnt, there is a big market out there to lend money to small borrowers. NGOs will have to provide a lot of complementary services.

Why are micro-credit programmes all over the world targeted mainly at women?

For various reasons. For example the Grameen Bank was not originally targeted at women. But it discovered that women were the best borrowers because they had a better repayment rate. The Grameen methodology is based on group members bringing pressure on each other to fulfill their financial obligations. And women are more susceptible to these pressures because of their role within their families and communities.

The recognition that women were good borrowers and repayers, and would make good use of their funds is the reason credit programmes are focussed on them.

Also, there is the notion that women are the solution to many problems. So, if families are poor and the women are responsible for provisioning for households, they are the ones who should receive the financial support.

Would you subscribe to the view that women repay because they are `weak' and susceptible to pressure, or because they are more honest and responsible. When you borrow from somebody, you have to repay... that would be the basic principle anybody should fo llow.

As women shoulder the immediate responsibility for feeding the families, they are more responsible with money that comes into the household. If one looks at household budgets, it is clear that women's patterns of expenditure are very different. Women use money for the family. They very rarely take money for their own consumption, or their leisure or other activities.

But men treat money very differently. So, as far as donors are concerned, one is likely to find that if the women are targeted, the results of that assistance benefits the whole family. I think it is a realisation that, at the level of the household budg et, the trickle-down effect does not necessarily work.

You have had an opportunity to study both SEWA and Grameen. How would you compare the two organisations?

I think SEWA and Grameen have very different approaches. Grameen, the most well-disseminated in the world, is very much a micro-credit focussed approach. This assumes that if there was more working capital for poor households, women could increase the ho usehold income, have more profitable enterprises and make more money as a result of that activity.

SEWA's approach is more holistic. It is based on an analysis of what women in different communities need. So, in addition to financial services, there is also an emphasis on training, on leadership development, on skill-upgrading and marketing. Also, in Sewa, micro-finance _ both savings and credit through the Sewa bank and other institutions _ is an important aspect of the approach. It is one kind of support within a whole spectrum of services to help women make a living in the informal sector.

With more women getting economic empowerment, do you see equations in the home changing, especially in the developing countries? And in terms of more tension within the family?

Inevitably, once people who have less power see the opportunity for, or experience a situation where they have, more power _ whether or not they have sought it _ there are bound to be tensions. This happens in terms of international relations, national p olitics and, of course, it will happen in terms of gender relations within the household, too.

But we have to accept that there are complex and sometimes varying interests within households, not only between men and women but between older women and younger women, or between children and their parents. Conflict is a normal part of life. But a lot more attention needs to be focussed on working with men to make them understand the changes that are going on, and how they can work together more harmoniously, rather than thinking that the way things used to be are the only way they can be.

Gender's not all about women, right... it involves men too.

Of course gender is about the relations between men and women. There should be more emphasis on how changing the status of women and supporting them will also change the way men and women relate. In terms of globalisation, we need to think much more abou t how men also have to change and respond to the changing conditions of production and reproduction within market economies and within a globalising world.

Response to this column may be sent to rasheeda@thehindu.co.in or faxed to 044-841 5325.