Assessing the Performance of Microfinance Institutions in Nepal
Bharat Ram Dhungana
School of Business,
Pokhara University,
Pokhara, Nepal
Ramkrishna Chapagain
School of Business,
Pokhara University,
Pokhara, Nepal
Om Prakash Pokhrel
Nepal Rastra Bank,
Pokhara, Nepal
Laxmi Kanta Sharma
Center for Economic Development (CEDA),
Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal
Corresponding author
laxmikantas@gmail.com
Jas Bahadur Gurung
Prithvi Narayan Campus,
Tribhuvan University,
Pokhara, Nepal
Abstract
This paper examines how microfinance institutions perform their client service and corporate governance activities and achieve subsequent financial and non-financial performance during the COVID-19 crisis. The study is based on a cross-sectional field survey of 391 respondents consisting of microfinance experts, regulators, and employees through a structured questionnaire using a purposive sampling technique. The structural equation modeling technique has been employed to analyze the data. Results indicate that microfinance client service and corporate governance enhanced financial and non-financial performance. Likewise, non-financial performance partially mediates the relationship between client service and financial performance and corporate governance and financial performance. However, there is no statistically significant relationship between non-financial and financial performance. The study offers directions on how policymakers can enhance financial and non-financial performance by carefully taking care of client service and governance activities during a crisis. This study intends to provide suggestions to regulators and executives of microfinance institutions to consider governance and client service activities along with financial and non-financial aspects to enhance the performance of MFIs in the long term.
Keywords: Corporate Governance, Non-Financial Performance, Financial Performance, Microfinance Institutions
JEL Classification: F65, G2, G21, G34
Introduction
Microfinance institutions (MFIs) are financial institutions that generally differ from other firms of financial institutions. They offer small-scale collateral-free microcredit to low-income households who are excluded from mainstream financial institutions (Bellazzecca & Biosca, 2021). This service was fully recognized in the 1970s when Muhammad Yunus initiated microlending in response to rising poverty rates in Bangladesh. MFIs have been urged to perform better client services worldwide and argued as a crucial developmental tool for poverty in developing countries (Adalessossi, 2024).
MFIs are guided by dual purposes such as financial and social missions. The financial purpose is attributed to its viability and profitability, while the social mission aims to serve the part of the population left behind by conventional banks (Wajdi Dusuki, 2008). The performance of MFIs in developing countries like Nepal is important because it directly impacts financial inclusion, poverty reduction, economic development, women's empowerment, and maintaining stability of the microfinance industry. This study attempts to assess the performance of MFIs governed by client service and corporate governance and shows the mediating effect of non-financial performance on financial performance in the context of Nepal.
Literature Review
The financial and social performance combinations of MFIs and their consequences have been the subject of ferocious dispute in microfinance literature and have become known as the trade-off theory. The debate is related to how MFIs can stick to their main social mission of outreach and provide services to poor households while at the same time being financially sustainable (Hermes & Hudon, 2018). The welfare theory claims its depth in the social welfare function and breadth of outreach in terms of the availability of financial services to low-income clients. The institutional approach aims at financial deepening, focusing both on the considerable eradication of poverty and the self-sustainability of financial institutions (Bhatt& Tang, 2011).
Client Service and Non-financial Performance
Client service describes how microfinance services have affected microfinance clients (Lensink et al., 2018). It covers poverty alleviation, income production, job creation, and access to financial services (Tria et al., 2022).Non-financial performance emphasizes social and developmental outcomes (Bartolacci et al., 2020). It contains elements like social cohesiveness, women empowerment, outreach to underserved groups, and advancements in health and education and empowerment (Dhungana et al., 2016; Lensink et al., 2018). Since women's empowerment is a significant development outcome, several MFIs have strongly emphasized providing non-financial services to women and encouraging female entrepreneurship (Hansen, 2021).
Empirical evidence such as Chapagain and Dhungana (2020), Niaz (2022), and Maeenuddin et al. (2023) argued that well-governed MFIs with better client services have favorable effects on income growth, poverty alleviation, livelihood improvement, and borrowers' quality of life. Khandker et al. (2010) indicated that microfinance programs helped Bangladesh's households consume more and reduce poverty as MFIs empower them. Some other literature also supports that better client services increase client awareness, creativity, and social engagement of client that help to enhance financial inclusion, and reduce poverty (Armendariz & Morduch, 2010; Dhungana, 2015; Duho et al., 2023).
Based on the above literature, the following hypothesis is developed:
Client service has a significant positive impact on the non-financial performance of microfinance institutions.
Client Service and Financial Performance
Client service can be measured through the retention, satisfaction, and responsiveness capacity of MFIs. Moreover, good client service is achieved through the policies, practices, and actions MFIs take to protect the rights and interests of their clients (Marini et al., 2017). Transparency, fairness, responsible pricing, privacy, and systems for resolving conflicts are just a few of its aspects (Chiu, 2014).
As per the welfare theory, poverty is a good indicator of depth when society prioritizes poor and low-income people. The breadth of outreach reveals the availability of financial services to low-income clients. While assessing the breadth of outreach, consider the client's financial situation, the variety of services provided to them, and the results obtained (Piot-Lepetit & Nzongang, 2014). Depth of outreach enables MFIs to achieve financial sustainability. Based on the above literature, the following hypothesis is developed:
Client service has a significant positive impact on the financial performance of microfinance institutions.
Corporate Governance and Non-financial Performance
Governance is crucial to the success of MFIs, and it has been shown to benefit profitability and outreach. This includes the independence of the board and a distinct separation of the CEO and board chair positions. MFIs can efficiently carry out their social mission, maintain stakeholder trust, and operate ethically by balancing financial and non-financial performance (Bardhan et al., 2021).Based on the above literature, the following hypothesis is developed:
Corporate governance has a significant positive impact on the non-financial performance of microfinance institutions.
Corporate Governance and Financial Performance
Corporate governance is vital in increasing an organization's effectiveness. The guiding principles of corporate governance are transparency and accountability, the board of directors, the role of the chairman and chief executive, and shareholder rights. Nowadays, good corporate governance is a widely discussed issue in the business world (Islam, 2023).
Profitability is primarily determined by factors like return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), portfolio yield (PY), and operating expense ratio (OER). Performance can immediately improve on both a social and a financial level because of innovations that lower the cost of providing services (Mosley & Hulme, 1998). The performance of MFIs, according to Kyereboah‐Coleman and Osei (2008), is significantly influenced by governance. Based on the above literature, the following hypothesis developed:
Corporate governance has a significant positive impact on the financial performance of microfinance institutions.
Non-financial Performance and Financial Performance
Any non-financial services that aim to enhance the welfare of the poor and their enterprises are referred to as microfinance "plus" services (Cosgrove, 2021).The delivery of non-financial services has no negative impact on the viability and effectiveness of MFIs' finances. But according to the findings, offering social services is linked to better loan quality and a wider range of outreach (Lensink et al., 2018).
The financial success of an institution can be evaluated using a variety of measures. Financial performance is important to consider when evaluating microfinance operations because of their unique feature (Janda & Turbat, 2013). Financial performance is an important issue for microfinance institutions, which need sustainability and self-sufficiency in the long run. Based on the above literature, the following hypotheses are developed:
Non-financial performance has a significant positive impact on the financial performance of microfinance institutions.
The mediating influence of non-financial performance has been tested based on the following hypotheses:
H6: Non-financial performance mediates the relationship between client welfare and financial performance.
H7: Non-financial performance mediates the relationship between corporate governance and financial performance.
Based on the intensive literature review, the following conceptual framework has been developed to assess the performance of microfinance institutions.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
|
Dependent variable |
|
Client service |
|
Corporate governance |
|
Financial performance
|
|
Non-financial performance
|
|
Independent variables |
Source: Idea based on literature review.
Methodology
The paper aims to examine the performance of microfinance institutions operating in the Gandaki province of Nepal. This study was confined to D-class microfinance institutions, microfinance service-providing banks, and the regulatory institutions located in Gandaki province. The research uses primary data collected through structured questionnaires from employees of MFIs and regulatory authorities using a convenience sampling technique. The survey included 391 respondents, selecting 318 from MFIs, 64 from the banks (Microfinance Department), and nine from the regulatory institution. The financial performance scale is constructed based on the variables measured by Wediawati et al. (2018) and the scale used by Horváthová et al. (2015) and Chiand Gursoy (2009).
Similarly, the non-financial performance scale was constructed based on the variables and scale used by Eyerusalem (2020), Wassie et al. (2019),and Conradi et al.(2014). Further, the study used a scale for client service based on the scale used in the study of Bakar et al. (2020) and Rambu Atahau et al. (2020). Finally, the scale for corporate governance activities was constructed based on the scale of Rambu Atahau et al. (2020), and Ssekiziyivu et al. (2018). The draft questionnaire was shown to two professors and three experts for finalization. After that, pilot testing was conducted, and unnecessary items were removed. The final questionnaire was administered online from October to December 2021 after the second phase of COVID-19 to evaluate the performance of MFIs during the COVID-19 period. We used descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling (SEM) to analyze performance effectiveness.
Results and Discussion
Demographic Information of Respondents
As per the survey of 391 respondents, most of them (79.8 percent) were male, followed by women (19.7 percent). According to their job category, most respondents worked at microfinance institutions (81.3 percent), followed by financial institutions having microfinance departments (16.4 percent). Furthermore, many respondents worked at the officer level (43.7 percent), followed by the non-officer level (37.9 percent). According to educational qualifications, the majority of the respondents have educational qualifications at least undergraduate (69.3 percent). Furthermore, most of the respondents (80.1 percent) were from private institutions.
Composition of Items under Constructs
We used confirmatory factor analysis as the scale we have used has already been validated(Jr et al., 2018). Here, we want to test the impact of non-financial performance, corporate governance performance, and client performance on financial performance. First, we ran the measurement model and used the structural model after the measurement model was fit to an acceptable fit.
Figure 2 and Table 1 show the items and their latent construct. We used four latent constructs along with their items. Figure 2 shows the latent construct along with their items and their covariances.
Figure 2
Path Diagram of the Measurement Model
Table 1
Results of Measurement Model
|
Latent Factor |
Measuring Items |
Notation |
Standardized Loading |
AVE |
CR |
|
Client service (Client) |
MFIs have prioritized digital financial product usage to become accountable for clients' well-being. |
CW6 |
0.757*** |
0.669 |
0.799 |
|
There is a high level of trust between MFIs and their clients for mutual benefits. |
CW3 |
0.797*** |
|||
|
The use of digital technology in MFIs has increased after COVID-19. |
CW2 |
0.888*** |
|||
|
MFIs are promoting Fintech or digital transactions to address the client's needs. |
CW1 |
0.825*** |
|||
|
Corporate Governance (Corporate) |
The role of the Board of Directors (BOD) was effective in risk management |
CG4 |
0.823*** |
0.75 |
0.92 |
|
The BOD respected the right of shareholders. |
CG3 |
0.963*** |
|||
|
The BOD has disclosed financial statements to the public. |
CG2 |
0.926*** |
|||
|
MFIs have conducted general assemblies regularly at the prescribed time. |
CG1 |
0.696*** |
|||
|
Non-financial Performance (Non-fin) |
The financial literacy programs are effective. |
NF1 |
0.839*** |
0.69 |
0.90 |
|
MFIs are empowering clients using different campaigns and training. |
NF2 |
0.899*** |
|||
|
MFIs have applied flexible strategies to satisfy clients. |
NF3 |
0.885*** |
|||
|
MFIs have applied supporting strategies to clients during the pandemic. |
NF4 |
0.684*** |
|||
|
Financial Performance (Financial) |
The leverage ratio of MFIs is good enough. |
F3 |
0.995*** |
0.67 |
0.91 |
|
The repayment ratio of MFIs is very high. |
F4 |
0.965*** |
|||
|
The profitability indicators (net profit, return on investment) of MFIs are good and encouraging. |
F5 |
0.615*** |
|||
|
The market value ratios of MFIs are good and encouraging. |
F6 |
0.779*** |
|||
|
The efficiency or activity ratios of MFIs are effective. |
F8 |
0.656*** |
CMIN/DF= 2.210; GFI= 0.937; CFI= 0.978; TLI= 0.972; RMSEA=0.056
Note. *** denotes significance at 1 percent level.
AVE denotes the average variance extracted.
CR denotes composite reliability.
The results presented in Table 1 show that four constructs client service, corporate governance, non-financial performance, and financial performance are loading significantly. The result of CR is greater than 0.7, and AVE is greater than 0.5, which shows the construct and convergent validity of the constructs. Similarly, the model passed all the fit indices criteria as CMIN/DF is less than 3, GFI is greater than 0.9, TLI is greater than 0.9, CFI is greater than 0.9, and RMSEA is less than 0.08(Nguyen et al., 2023). Thus, the measurement model is appropriately fit. As a result, we moved to the structural model for nomological validity.
Discriminant Validity
The measured constructs should be discriminant from each other, another criterion for the validity of the proposed scale(Rönkkö & Cho, 2022). The discriminant validity can be measured by comparing the AVE of the construct with the square of correlation of that construct with another construct. The results of correlations, AVE and square of correlations among constructs are shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Results of AVE, Correlations, and Square of Correlations
|
CW(F1) |
CG(F2) |
Non-Fin(F3) |
Fin(F4) |
|
|
CW |
0.669 |
0.190969 |
0.206116 |
0.152881 |
|
CG |
0.437 |
0.737 |
0.334084 |
0.114921 |
|
Non-Fin |
0.454 |
0.578 |
0.691 |
0.113 |
|
Fin |
0.391 |
0.339 |
0.336 |
0.667 |
In Table 2, the diagonal number shows the AVE of the constructs. The values below the diagonal show the correlations among the items, and values above the diagonal show the square of correlations among the constructs. Construct validity is only valid when the AVE of the construct is greater than the square of correlations of that construct with other constructs(Maini et al., 2021). From Table 2, all constructs are discriminated against from each other. For example, the AVE of CW is 00.669, the square of correlations between CW and CG is 0.190969, CW and Non-fin is 0.206116, and CW and Fin are 0.152881. These values are less than AVE, indicating CW is discriminant from other constructs. Likewise, the same results apply to CG, Non-fin and Fin.
Relationship between Exogeneous and Endogenous Constructs
We moved to the structural model after the measurement model fulfilled all the criteria. The structural model measures the impact of the exogenous construct on the endogenous construct. We proposed client performance and corporate governance variables as exogenous constructs as their value is not determined inside the model. Further, non-financial performance was proposed as a mediating construct that mediates the relationship between the client service construct, corporate governance construct, and financial performance construct. The relationship between the purposed constructs is presented in Figure3.
Figure 3
Structural Path Diagram
After the structural model is developed, the model should be tested to identify the nomological validity of the constructs. The results of the relationships of the construct are presented in Table 3.
Table 3
Relationship of Constructs with their Standardized Loadings
|
Endogenous variable |
Exogenous variable |
Standardized regression |
Bootstrap Upper limit |
Boots trap Lower limit |
|
Non- fin |
Client |
0.263*** |
0.397 |
0.138 |
|
Non- fin |
Corporate |
0.503*** |
0.379 |
0.609 |
|
Financial |
Non- fin |
0.128 |
0.264 |
-.004 |
|
Financial |
Corporate |
0.168*** |
0.30 |
0.032 |
|
Financial |
Client |
0.269*** |
0.407 |
0.131 |
|
Financial |
Client*Nonfinancial |
0.046** |
0.121 |
0.003 |
|
Financial |
Corporate*Nonfinancial |
0.092** |
0.208 |
0.0001 |
CMIN/DF= 2.819; GFI= 0.921; CFI=0.967; TLI= 0.958; RMSEA=0.068
Note. *** denotes significance at a 1 percent level and ** significance at a 5 percent level.
Before analyzing the results of the table, the model should have passed the appropriate fit indices. The result shows that the model passed the appropriate fit indices (CMIN/DF = 2.819, which is less than 3. Goodness of fit indices 0.921 which is greater than 0.9; comparative fit indices 0.967, which is greater than 0.9. Tucker–Lewis’s index is 0.958 which is greater than 0.9 and the root mean square of approximation is 0.068 which is less than 0.08. The Likert scale data may have the problem of non-normality. Boots trapping methodology with 5000 bootstrap samples with a 95 percent confidence interval was used to solve the non-normality problem. All the coefficients are significant, and the zero does not lie between the upper and lower limits. So, our results are valid and free from non-normality issues.
The results show that client service and corporate governance have a positive impact on financial and non-financial performance. Results imply that the financial soundness of microfinance depends upon the client service, sound governance, and microfinance capability to empower clients. Various studies have obtained the same results (Prieto et al., 2020; Setiawan et al., 2023).Besides, non-financial performance has a partial mediation impact on the relationship between client and financial performance and corporate governance and financial performance. This implies the empowerment of clients by offering training and literacy programs and the provision of flexible payment schedules are motivating factors that ultimately help to achieve better financial performance in well-governed and well-client-served MFIs. The results are aligned with Barry and Tacneng (2014) and Ssekiziyivu et al. (2018). Achieving sustainability of MFIs through better financial performance supports the institutional approach to financial deepening (De Briey, 2005).
The results confirm that a sound governance system, better client services, and strong connection with clients arranging different programs play significant and positive roles in the long-term sustainability of MFIs. This argument supports that as microfinance operates in society, it has to maximize the welfare of customers, society, and employees rather than only shareholders' wealth maximization. Likewise, communicating good practices to the stakeholders ultimately builds the trust and image of the firm, which eventually helps to attain a long-term competitive advantage known as the signaling theory. So, from the discussion, it is discovered that as business processes become so complex because of customer awareness, innovation, technological upgradation, rising competition, increasing social and stakeholder concerns, and increasing regulatory pressure, the MFIs should focus on all stakeholders' welfare rather than merely focusing shareholders wealth maximization.
Conclusion and Suggestions
The paper's objective was to identify the impact of client service, corporate governance, and non-financial performance on the financial performance of MFIs. The study used confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling to identify the impact. The results show that corporate governance and client service help to improve the financial and non-financial performance of MFIs. However, only focusing on improving non-financial performance does not help to improve financial performance significantly.
This study has two major implications for building responsible and sustainable MFIs. The client's service and corporate governance greatly affect the performance of MFIs in the long run. The success of MFIs is based on the quality of services rendered and the corporate governance mechanism of MFIs. For this, MFIs should focus on client service activities and good governance practices to improve the sustainable performance of MFIs rather than focusing on shareholders' value maximization.
This study was confined to the opinions of microfinance experts, managers, and regulators who were directly and indirectly involved in microfinance sectors. However, this study is valid and reliable as it covers the experts, regulators, and employees who are continuously involved in and monitoring microfinance activities. Future studies can be done by taking opinions from the clients and focusing on a qualitative approach.
References
Adalessossi, K. (2024). What are the determinants of the financial and social performance of MFIs in Togo? Does gender borrower matter on financial performance? Finance Research Letters, 105192.
Armendáriz de Aghion, B., & Morduch, J. (2010). Microfinance beyond group lending. Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, 8(2), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0351.00049
Bakar, N. M., Abdul Rahman, R., & Ibrahim, Z. (2020). Client protection and sustainable performance in microfinance institutions. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 69(4), 651–665. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2019-0127
Bardhan, A. K., Nag, B., Mishra, C. S., & Tarei, P. K. (2021). An integrated framework for analyzing performance indicators of Indian microfinance institutions: a multi-stakeholder perspective. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 28(9), 2711-2740. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-09-2020-0470
Bartolacci, F., Caputo, A., & Soverchia, M. (2020). Sustainability and financial performance of small and medium-sized enterprises: A bibliometric and systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1297-1309.
Bellazzecca, E., & Biosca, O. (2021). Intended and unintended effects of specialized regulation on microfinance institutions’ double‐bottom line management. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 12360. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12360
Bhatt, N., & Tang, S. Y. (2001). Delivering microfinance in developing countries: Controversies and policy perspectives. Policy studies journal, 29(2), 319-333.
Chapagain, R., & Dhungana, B. R. (2020). Does microfinance affect the living standard of the household? Evidence from Nepal. Finance India, 34(2).
Chen, C., & Hassan, A. (2022). Management gender diversity, executives compensation and firm performance. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 30(1), 115-142.
Chi, C. G., & Gursoy, D. (2009). Employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction, and financial performance: An empirical examination. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(2), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.08.003
Chiu, T. K. (2014). Putting responsible finance to work for Citi Microfinance. Journal of Business Ethics, 119, 219-234.
Conradi, K., Jang, B. G., & McKenna, M. C. (2014). Motivation terminology in reading research: A conceptual review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 127–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9245-z
Cosgrove, S. (2021). Financial services for the poor. In Understanding Global Poverty (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Dhungana, B. R. (2015). Microfinance, micro-enterprises, and employment: A case of Nepal. The International Journal of Nepalese Academy of Management, 3(1), 78-91.
Dhungana, B. R., Chapagain, R., & Ashta, A. (2023). Alternative strategies of for-profit, not-for-profit and state-owned Nepalese microfinance institutions for poverty alleviation and women empowerment. Cogent Economics & Finance, 11(2), 2233778. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2023.2233778
Dhungana, B. R., Singh, J. K., Acharya, D., Gautam, S., & Paudyal, P. (2016). Perceived usefulness of a microfinance intervention on health awareness and practices in Nepal. Frontiers in Public Health, 3, 289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2015.00289
Duho, K. C. T., Duho, D. M., & Forson, J. A. (2023). Impact of income diversification strategy on credit risk and market risk among microfinance institutions. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 39(2), 523-546.
Eyerusalem Kebede REFERA. (2020). Comprehensive performance measurement for microfinance institutions in Ethiopia. International Journal of Commerce and Finance, 6(2), 170–178.
Hansen, N., Huis, M. A., & Lensink, R. (2021). Microfinance services and women’s empowerment. Handbook on ethics in finance, 161-182.
Hermes, N., & Hudon, M. (2018). Determinants of the performance of microfinance institutions: A systematic review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 32(5), 1483–1513. DOI:10.1111/joes.12290
Horváthová, J., Mokrišová, M., Suhányiová, A., & Suhányi, L. (2015). Selection of key performance indicators of chosen industry and their application in formation of Creditworthy model. Procedia Economics and Finance, 34, 360-367.
Hudon, M., & Ashta, A. (2013). Fairness and microcredit interest rates: From Rawlsian principles of justice to the distribution of the bargaining range. Business Ethics: A European Review, 22(3), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12026
Islam, M. R. (2023). How to achieve financial flexibility: The role of corporate governance. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-37.
Janda, K., & Turbat, B. (2013). Determinants of the financial performance of microfinance institutions in Central Asia. Post-Communist Economies, 25(4), 557–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/14631377.2013.844935
Kyereboah‐Coleman, A., & Osei, K. A. (2008). Outreach and profitability of microfinance institutions: the role of governance. Journal of Economic Studies, 35(3), 236-248.
Khandker, S. R., Barnes, D. F., & Samad, H. A. (2010). Energy poverty in rural and urban India: are the energy poor also income poor? World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 5463.
Lensink, R., Mersland, R., Vu, N. T. H., & Zamore, S. (2018). Do microfinance institutions benefit from integrating financial and non-financial services? Applied Economics, 50(21), 2386–2401. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2017.1397852
Maeenuddin, Hamid, S. A., Fahlevi, M., Nassir, A. M., & Hashim, P. M. (2023). Predictors of microfinance sustainability: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Cogent Economics & Finance, 11(1), 2202964.
Maini, R., Sehgal, S., & Agrawal, G. (2021). Today's digital natives: an exploratory study on students' engagement and satisfaction towards virtual classes amid COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 38(5), 454–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-03-2021-0055
Marini, L., Andrew, J., & van der Laan, S. (2017). Tools of accountability: protecting microfinance clients in South Africa? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(6), 1344-1369. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2016-2548
Mosley, P., & Hulme, D. (1998). Microenterprise finance: Is there a conflict between growth and poverty alleviation? World Development, 26(5), 783–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00021-7
Nguyen, T. L., Nguyen, H. T., Nguyen, N. H., Nguyen, D. L., Nguyen, T. T. D., & Le, D. L. (2023). Factors affecting students’ career choice in economics majors in the COVID-19 post-pandemic period: A case study of a private university in Vietnam. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100338
Niaz, M. U. (2022). Socio-economic development and sustainable development goals: A roadmap from vulnerability to sustainability through financial inclusion. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 35(1), 3243-3275.
Piot-Lepetit, I., & Nzongang, J. (2014). Financial sustainability and poverty outreach within a network of village banks in Cameroon: A multi-DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 234(1), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.10.004
Prieto, A. B. T., Shin, H. K., Lee, Y., & Lee, C. W. (2020). Relationship among CSR initiatives and financial and non-financial corporate performance in the Ecuadorian banking
Rambu Atahau, A. D., Huruta, A. D., & Lee, C. W. (2020). Rural microfinance sustainability: Does local wisdom driven - governance work? Journal of Cleaner Production, 267, 122153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122153
Rönkkö, M., & Cho, E. (2022). An Updated Guideline for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Organizational Research Methods. 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120968614
Setiawan, B., Phan, T. D., Medina, J., Wieriks, M., Nathan, R. J., & Fekete-Farkas, M. (2023). Quest for financial inclusion via digital financial services (Fintech) during COVID-19 pandemic: a case study of women in Indonesia. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41264-023-00217-9
Ssekiziyivu, B., Mwesigwa, R., Bananuka, J., & Namusobya, Z. (2018). Corporate governance practices in microfinance institutions: Evidence from Uganda. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1488508.
Tria, D., Harun, M., & Alam, M. (2022). Microcredit as a strategy for employment creation: A systematic review of the literature. Cogent Economics & Finance, 10(1), 2060552.
Wajdi Dusuki, A. (2008). Understanding the objectives of Islamic banking: a survey of stakeholders' perspectives. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 1(2), 132-148.
Wassie, S. B., Kusakari, H., & Sumimoto, M. (2019). Performance of microfinance institutions in Ethiopia: Integrating financial and social metrics. Social Sciences, 8(4), 94–105. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8040117
