2012年-世界发展银行全球_Current_Trends_in_Cross-Border_Funding_for_Microfinance_4页_245kb

Summary of Current Trends in Cross-Border Funding for Microfinance

Core Content

This document provides an overview of the trends in cross-border funding for microfinance from 2007 to 2011, based on data from CGAP's Cross-Border Funder Survey and Symbiotics MIV Survey. It highlights the evolution of funding sources, allocation patterns, and the purpose of such funding.

Main Points

1. Overall Commitment Trends

• Cross-border funding commitments to microfinance increased over the past five years, but at a slower rate.
• From 2007–2009, the average annualized growth rate was 17%, whereas from 2009–2011, it dropped to 6%.
• In 2011, total commitments reached at least US$25 billion.
• The net new commitments to microfinance dropped significantly, representing 7% of total commitments in 2011, down from 31% in 2009.

2. Public vs. Private Funding

• Public funding continues to dominate, accounting for two-thirds (US$17 billion) of total commitments.
• Private funding represents one-third (US$8 billion), but has grown faster than public funding.
• From 2009–2011, private funding grew at an average of 12% per year, while public funding grew at 3%.
• Between 2007–2009, private funding grew at 19%, slightly faster than public funding's 16%.

3. Funding Channels

• Indirect funding is more common, with half of all cross-border funding channeled through intermediaries such as MIVs (Microfinance Investment Vehicles) and local apex institutions.
• Direct funding accounts for one-third, with DFIs (Development Finance Institutions) providing the majority of this, at 63%.
• Multilateral agencies mainly fund through governments, contributing 20% of total cross-border funding.

4. Regional Allocation Trends

• South Asia, Europe and Central Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean continue to receive the highest amounts of funding, accounting for over 60% of total commitments.
• However, there is a shift in regional allocations:
  • ECA saw a 5% annual decline in funding from 2009–2011.
  • SSA experienced a 12% annual increase, reaching US$2.7 billion.
  • MENA and EAP also saw significant growth, with 20% and 19% annual increases, respectively.
• These changes reflect a rebalancing of focus toward Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia and the Pacific.

5. Purpose of Funding

• The main purpose of cross-border funding is refinancing loan portfolios of retail providers, which accounted for 77% of total commitments (US$13.5 billion).
• Capacity-building received 15% of total funding (US$2.7 billion).
• There has been little change in the purpose of funding over the past two years.

6. Funding Instruments

• Debt remains the dominant instrument, accounting for 55% of total commitments.
• Equity and guarantees are on the rise, with:
  • Equity investments increasing by 12% annually.
  • Guarantees rising by 32% annually, driven by large programs in EAP and India.
• DFIs decreased their debt commitments by 1% annually, while increasing their equity investments.

7. DFI Funding Concentration

• DFIs are the largest type of cross-border funders, accounting for 38% of total commitments (US$9.6 billion).
• Their funding is concentrated in a few countries and MIVs:
  • Five countries (India, Turkey, Peru, Indonesia, Russia) received 20% of DFI commitments (US$1.9 billion).
  • 25% of DFI commitments to retail providers supported only 10 institutions.
  • 30% of DFI funding went to 10 MIVs, with two-thirds of this funding directed to only 10 MIVs.

Key Information

• Funding growth slowed due to increased project closures and a more stable funding pipeline.
• Private funders are becoming more active, despite challenges in some markets.
• Indirect funding is more prevalent than direct, with MIVs and local apex institutions playing a key role.
• Regional shifts are occurring, with SSA and EAP gaining traction.
• Debt remains dominant, but equity and guarantees are growing in importance.
• DFIs are becoming more selective and concentrated in their funding.

Looking Ahead

Cross-border funders expect microfinance to remain central to their development agenda, with a focus on agricultural finance, rural finance, branchless and mobile banking, and responsible finance. They are also likely to adjust priorities and operations in response to the broader financial inclusion goals and current economic conditions.