Archive for February, 2007

The world’s smallest yogurt factory

February 22nd, 2007

I heard about 6 months ago about the ingenious idea of Muhammad Yunus, founder of Grameen Bank and recent Nobel Peace Prize winner, to build a new yogurt business in Bangladesh.

The first factory just opened near Dhaka as part of a new venture called Grameen Danone Foods. The mini-factory produces a yogurt called Shakti-da (which means “yogurt with strength”) which is fortified with vitamins to address malnourishment. And each yogurt helping with be inexpensive … about 7 cents per cup … which affordable even for the poor.

The story I’ve heard goes something like this … Danone (major yogurt maker) CEO Franck Riboud was sitting next to Yunus at a lunch in Paris in the fall of 2005 and had asked Yunus to explain to him about microfinance and the Grameen Bank. At the end of the conversation, Riboud asked Yunus, “how might I help you?” Now this is a very dangerous question to ask Yunus! Yunus responded, “I’d like you to send your chief yogurt factory designer to Bangladesh to meet with me.” Riboud agreed. A short while later the Danone factory designer chief showed up at Yunus’ office in Dkaha to find out how he could help. Yunus said, “I’d like you design and build the world’s smallest yogurt factory to operate here in Bangladesh.” The factory designer said, “But, I design the world’s largest yogurt factories, not the smallest.” Yunus responded, “I need you to design the world’s smallest one. I’ll be here if you want to go off and think about it and come back later.” So, the factory designer left and went back to his hotel room. A little while later, he appeared back at Yunus’ office with the sketchings for an idea. And the venture was born…

This is setup as a for-profit, social enterprise joint venture between Danone and Grameen Bank. Danone is contributing $500,000 of seed capital. The plan is to re-invest all profits with the exception of paying back Danone their initial seed capital. The factory will buy milk from Grameen Bank microvenders (who’ve been financed by Grameen Bank to buy cows) and microentrepreneurs will sell the yogurt door-to-door. Each factory will employ 15-20 women directly and up to 1,600 people in an area. And the enterprise is designed to environmentally friendly using biodegradable cups made from cornstarch, solar panels for electricity generation and rainwater collection vats. If the first factory is successful, they have plans to launch 50 more in Bangladesh and then who knows where.

There is a good write-up of the story in Fortune magazine called Saving the world with a cup of yogurt.

Please post comments about other social enterprises you have heard about.

Grameen comes to the USA

February 22nd, 2007

Grameen Trust, the Bangladesh-based charitable arm of the Grameen Bank, is starting up a microfinance business in the USA called Grameen America. [I couldn't find a web site for this yet although there is a job posting for a CEO.] Grameen Bank has been a pioneer in microfinance and recently was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with its founder Muhammad Yunus.

Here are some of the highlights from a business plan overview I have seen:

  • It will be a for-profit social enterprise business setup as a joint venture between Grameen Trust and a large financial institution [likely to be H&R Block] with Grameen Trust having a controlling interest. They expect positive cash flow in 4-5 years.
  • A long-term Grameen executive, Prof. H. I. Latifee [see his recent whitepaper], the managing director of Grameen Trust will head up the initial “build, operate and transfer” team to setup and then hand-off operations to a USA team. The thinking is to transfer the know-how and DNA of Grameen Bank to seed this organization.
  • The business plan references the Association for Enterprise Opportunity which estimates that there are more than 750 existing microfinance organizations/programs in the USA. Most of them are characterized as “social welfare programs” and none are financially self-sustaining [without donors] with the best running at only 70% cost recovery.
  • Their initial focus will be on recent immigrants who have an entrepreneurial spirit. Micro-business loans will start at $500 and grow from there based on a positive repayment history. The borrowers will support one another in groups although they won’t guarantee each others loans.
  • It sounds like the focus is going to be on urban areas with the first test market of New York City. They are planning to take advantage of credit cards to simplify credit access and lower transaction processing costs (for borrower and themselves).
  • They expect to later offer a number of membership benefits including networking, member discounts, visa and citizen information, credit establishment and more.
  • They are hoping to ultimately create a lot of grief for the credit services for the working poor offered in the form of payday loans, loan sharks and other unscrupulous bottom feeders who prey on the vulnerable.

I am a big fan of introducing more competition and reasonable credit choices for the working poor in the USA. Grameen America has a lot of the right thinking on this including starting with a business (=sustainable) mindset, establishing a beach head with a likely-to-succeed client segment, partnering with a deep pocketed financial services company and taking advantage of technology to enable scale and cost containment. I think that the challenges of business licensing, regulations and tax reporting will likely require more of an incubator-type structure, but this is something that can evolve over time.

What do you think?

Reference: previous post on Microfinance in the USA

Update: Here is Grameen America’s web site.

India, the superpower?

February 12th, 2007

Good article in Fortune magazine titled: India, The Superpower? Think Again by Cait Murphy.

She points out that India has done a marvelous job in building a revenue (and tax) generating IT sector employing 1 million people, but it has only 7 million employed in the formal manufacturing sector vs. 100 million people in China. The bottom line is that India is not generating enough jobs for the 10+ million Indians who enter the job market each year.

Other economies in Southeast Asia have successfully developed ahead of India “by being relatively open to trade; by investing in primary and secondary education; and by building pretty decent infrastructure (not only roads and ports, but health clinics and water supplies). India has begun to embrace one leg of this triangle – freer trade … As for the other two legs of this development triangle – education and infrastructure – these are still badly broken. About a third of teachers fail to show up on any given day (and, of course, are unsackable); the supply of both water and power is expensive and unreliable.”

Other key areas which India needs to focus on before boasting about being a superpower: an unreformed state banking sector; labor regulations that actively discourage hiring; abstruse land laws (and consequent lack of land titles); misshapen subsidies that hurt the poor; and corruption that is broad, deep and ubiquitous.

It is a very good thing to have a free press which publicly calls out these kind of issues.

The Trouble with Africa book review

February 10th, 2007

The Trouble With Africa: Why Foreign Aid Isn’t Working

by Robert Calderisi

If you care about a hopeful future of Africa, you’ll want to read different perspectives to make sure that you’re getting the whole story. Calderisi tells about his experience working for much of his 30+ years in international development (mostly in Africa and mostly with the World Bank) and provides an insider perspective on why we are attaining so little results from our aid investments and makes some very specific recommendations on how we should re-direct international aid efforts.

The book is organized more into personal stories and observations which are helpful illustrations but make the book less organized that it could be. Calderisi finishes up with 10 recommendations which I thought could have been made earlier and then expounded on in more detail. Maybe that’s his next book ;-)

No cash to tyrants. Calderisi has a very different perspective than Jeffrey Sachs who has recently gained popularity with Tony Blair, Bono, Clinton and others with his End of Poverty ideas/book. Sachs advocates primarily for increasing the international aid budgets to help Africa out of what he calls its poverty trap (read Easterly’s critique of this theory). Calderisi argues that the international community (including donors) have to play hardball with the rampant corruption of government thugs in Africa who are more interested in flying first class and depositing ill-gotten cash overseas than in truly helping their countries build a better future for their citizenry. He goes into detailed stories of how these various thugs have ruled Africa and how most African countries are still ruled by thugs — even those considered democracies. He says we need to declare that the holiday is over for African tyrants.

Africa needs to move from victim to ownership. Calderisi argues that “slavery, colonialism, the Cold War, international institutions, high debt, geography, the large number of countries and population pressures all have had an effect on Africa. But none of these can explain why the continent has been going backward for the last 30 years.” He goes into specifics about how Africa’s cultural norms and lack of willingness to address widespread petty (and large-scale) corruption are also major issues. He also states that international donors are so often more interested in being politically correct in their public commentary on Africa than they are in telling the truth about what’s really going on in Africa. This “correctness” does no help to Africa despite its helpful intention.

The international trade large sucking sound. One of the most interesting topic Calderisi raises is the massive economic loss that Africa has experienced from its loss of export markets. He states that Africa in the past 30 years has lost over $70 billion a year (in 1990 dollars) in GDP related to exports (mostly to Asia) due to severe neglect by governments in managing their economies. He explains that this is equivalent of $700 per family per year which means that the current international aid budget at the equivalent of $40 per family per year is a pittance and even a doubling of aid would have little economic impact vs. these loss of exports. Calderisi says that accusations that Africa has suffered more than others from international trade rules (globalization) are just not true. If it were true, then we could simply lift all remaining foreign trade barriers and provide an immediate boost to Africa’s fortunes. Unfortunately, Africa has refused to concern itself with foreign markets and must reverse this approach to be in a position to benefit from international trade.

Good intentions are just that. A story about the trouble with foreign aid … “in the northeast corner of the Ivory Coast, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) spent $900,000 over three years trying, unsuccessfully, to show farmers how to grow onions. Just 90 miles away, in the neighboring country of Burkina Faso, farmers were growing onions in similar agricultural conditions quite profitably — with aid.” Sad, but not an isolated story of the results from paternalistic aid projects.

The complexity of aid. You might ask, does Calderisi actually care about African people and creating a better future? Is he saying that all aid is wasteful? He demonstrably does care. His stories of personally breaking ranks with traditional international aid approaches and connecting with common people to listen to them and help them are genuine and admirable. Calderisi states that the difficulty of providing effective aid is not a reason for not trying. He illustrates the complexity of aid though through a quote from the economist P.T. Bauer: “The argument that aid is indispensable for development runs into an inescapable dilemma. If the conditions for development other than capital are present, the capital required will either be generated locally or be available commercially from abroad to governments or to businesses. If the required conditions are not present, then aid will be ineffective and wasted.” This is a real dilemma.

His recommendations for international aid priorities:

  1. Introduce mechanisms for tracing and recovering public funds
  2. Require all heads of state, ministers, and senior officials to open their bank accounts to public scrutiny.
  3. Cut direct aid to individual countries in half (instead focus on regional initiatives).
  4. Focus direct aid on 4-5 countries that are serious about reducing poverty (he suggests Uganda, Ghana, Mozambique, Tanzania and perhaps Mali).
  5. Require all countries (receiving aid) to hold internationally-supervised elections.
  6. Promote other aspects of democracy including a free press and an independent judiciary.
  7. Supervise the running of Africa’s schools and HIV/AIDS programs.
  8. Establish citizen review groups to oversee government policy and aid agreements.
  9. Put more emphasis on infrastructure and regional links.
  10. Merge the World Bank, IMG and UN development programme.

Bold recommendations indeed! But I think many of them are right on. What do you think?

More resources:

Related Posts with Thumbnails