2003年-世界发展银行全球_Fiji_Microfinance_Policy_Review_78页_544kb

Fiji Microfinance Policy Review Summary

Core Content

This document presents a comprehensive review of the microfinance (MF) environment in Fiji, commissioned by the East Asia Financial Sector Group of the World Bank. It outlines the current state of microfinance in Fiji, the sources of support, and the challenges and opportunities for the sector's development. The review was conducted following a mission in February 2003 and benefited from feedback from various stakeholders, including the National Microfinance Unit (NMFU), the Reserve Bank of Fiji (RBF), and international agencies like the World Bank and UNDP.

Main Points

Definition of Microfinance

• Microfinance in Fiji is defined as the provision of financial services to poor and low-income households that lack access to formal financial institutions.
• Due to low population density and high wage rates, unit costs of microfinance services are expected to remain high.
• The review highlights the importance of improving access to financial services for rural and low-income populations, especially in the context of urbanization and underused rural resources.

Microfinance Institutions in Fiji

• Microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Fiji are categorized into public, private, and community sectors.
• Public Sector: Includes the Fiji Development Bank (FDB), National Centre for Small and Micro-Enterprise Development (NCSMED), and the National Microfinance Unit (NMFU).
• Private Sector: Comprises commercial banks (e.g., ANZ, Westpac, CNB) and finance and hire-purchase companies.
• Community Sector: Includes savings and loans cooperatives, credit unions, and informal moneylenders.
• Not Subject to Financial Regulation: MFIs established by NGOs (e.g., Aglow, FCOSS), village banks, and informal moneylenders.

Sources of Support

• Government Support: The NMFU is the main government agency supporting microfinance, providing financial and technical assistance.
• Multilateral Support: UNDP has been particularly active in improving the policy and regulatory environment and promoting savings services.
• Bilateral Support: Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea have contributed through technical assistance and funding.
• International Agencies: The World Bank and ADB have also played roles in supporting microfinance, especially through the FDB and credit unions.

Challenges

• High Transaction Costs: For low-income and rural populations, accessing financial services is costly.
• Limited Savings Culture: Fijians generally do not have a strong savings culture, which affects microfinance sustainability.
• Inefficiency of Government Lending: The NMFU's own retail lending activities have proven unsustainable.
• Policy and Regulatory Environment: The current framework is not fully supportive of microfinance, with some policies potentially hindering its development.

Opportunities

• Community-Based Initiatives: Village banking and community-led MFIs show potential for growth.
• Savings Mobilization: Encouraging savings is a key element for the sustainability of microfinance.
• Sector Integration: The integration of microfinance into broader economic and social development strategies is necessary.

Key Information

Financial and Institutional Landscape

• The Fijian financial system is dominated by commercial banks, which are highly profitable and liquid but not focused on microfinance.
• The RBF oversees the financial sector, including commercial banks and finance companies, but does not regulate community sector MFIs.
• The NMFU plays a central role in providing direct support to microfinance institutions and village banks.

Support Mechanisms

• Government Support: Through grants and soft loans, but often not effective for long-term sustainability.
• Technical Assistance: Provided by international agencies like the World Bank, UNDP, and ADB.
• Donor Support: Includes bilateral aid from Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea.

Policy Recommendations

• The NMFU should refocus on sector-building rather than short-term operational issues.
• The RBF should be more involved in shaping a supportive financial sector policy.
• A comprehensive microfinance law is not currently necessary, as the sector is still in its early stages.
• Interest rate controls may hinder sustainability and should be reconsidered.
• A conducive policy framework should encourage incentives and improve access to savings services rather than relying on compulsion.

Conclusion

The review concludes that microfinance in Fiji is in its early stages and requires a more strategic and sustainable approach. While the NMFU has played a significant role in supporting microfinance, it needs to shift its focus from direct lending to broader sector development. The review also emphasizes the need for improved coordination between government and donor agencies to ensure the long-term viability of microfinance in Fiji.