Archive for the ‘Livelihoods’ category

Increasing BOP income through mobile phones

October 10th, 2011

Great article in Jakarta Globe on how a new mobile startup Ruma is helping to increase income for thousands of poor women in Indonesia through business transactions they are performing on their mobile (cell) phones.

Ruma is creating a supplemental income opportunity for agents in rural districts of Indonesia using the mobile phone that they already own. The first product Ruma agents offer is a convenient and price competitive mobile phone pre-paid “top up” (credit) service. Since it typically costs about $0.20 in travel costs (plus time) to visit the nearest town to purchase an additional typical $0.50 of top-up credit, this service is very popular with rural customers. Ruma buys the mobile credits in bulk from all of the major mobile operators, so their agents can provide top-ups for any mobile service and they share the profit margin with the agent. This is truly a win-win.

In addition to providing mobile top-up services, Ruma is reportedly testing some additional services such as a job posting/matching service which can also be distributed by their micro-franchise agents generating more supplemental income.

Ruma’s focus on providing an opportunity for supplemental income vs. primary income is smart. This makes it easier for them to find agents who can try out their system with less risk. As Ruma expands the income generating opportunities they provide to their agents, the agents can self-select whether they want to grow this livelihood opportunity as part of their income mix or keep it as a smaller, supplemental source. As the story of the shop owner demonstrates, having a high-interest service like this can also grow their footfall (foot traffic) and revenue (turnover) for their main livelihood.

BOP-focused businesses need to reach 100 million customers

October 6th, 2011

Matt Bishop of The Economist recently interviewed prolific inventor and global poverty innovator Paul Polak about his views on how best to reduce poverty on a large scale for base-of-pyramid (BOP) populations (< $2/day PPP income).

A few highlights on Paul’s comments from the below video interview:

  • We will not make a meaningful impact on poverty without selling useful products to the BOP and making a profit from them
  • There is a big difference between selling something to BOP customer which gives them more value than what they paid than ripping them off (which is mostly what they have experienced)
  • In order to be sustainable, businesses targeting BOP populations generally need to target reaching 100 million customers because of the low profit margins (his previous advice was at least 1 million customers)
  • Businesses need to seek out “radical affordability” and highly distributed last mile distribution strategies in order to be successful in BOP markets
  • To make your product/service attractive to BOP populations, it must double their income in a relatively short period of time in order for them to take the risk
  • He believes that most of the successful BOP businesses will come from new startups rather than multi-nationals who just don’t have the DNA to think about and build these new type of businesses
  • There will be huge failures of BOP-focused businesses — this doesn’t mean there isn’t an opportunity (he noted that the Indian Andra Pradesh microfinance crisis is hardly a wimper compared with the disruption that accompanied the changes in the Soviet Union/Russia starting in 1989)

Thanks to NextBillion.net for alerting me to this.

Book Review: Poor Economics – Part II

June 22nd, 2011

Poor Economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty

By: Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo

This is a continuation of my book review. See Part I of book review >

Here are a few highlights I took away for the book:

  • Most poor aren’t hungry. Despite what the experts say. Generally, the poor don’t eat more even if you give them food. There is though an age-old issue of micronutrient deficiencies in poor people’s diet. So, it’s a “quality” issue, not a quantity issue with lots of complicated behaviorial challenges to overcome.
  • Demand is low for many beneficial things. Many poor could afford water purification products and bed nets but don’t make them a budget priority. Much of this is based on focusing resources on the short-term.
  • Paying people to take vaccines can be cheaper. One of the biggest issues for global health is how few children complete a full series of vaccines leaving them unprotected and increasing drug-resistance for diseases. They have found in a trial that it is actually cheaper to provide gifts to mothers who get their children vaccinated and they get more compliance. Read for the details.
  • Making public good things free and the default. The authors argue that governments should make things like preventative care free, required and of consistent quality. Sounds paternalistic? Yep. They argue that those in the rich world are constant beneficiaries of paternalism that we hardly notice it!
  • Unconditional cash transfers to poor families work. We’ve heard about popular (and statistically effective to help people out of poverty) programs in South/Latin America like Mexico’s Oportuniadades which provide grants to poor families on the condition that they do things like ensure their kids are in school. Two studies have found that without these conditions that the poor still send their kids to school, etc.
  • Most poor people want a job, not a micro business loan. Despite what many microfinance advocates say, most self-employed do so out of necessity, not out of choice. Jobs bring more security which enables poor families to plan and invest for a brighter future.
  • Microcredit has high marginal ROI, but low overall ROI. Since most poor who take microcredit loans are underemployed, any capital can often quickly improve their income (think: having inventory on their store shelves). But most micro-businesses stay micro as they have insufficient capital to get to the next level. And micro businesses equal micro incomes. Better than no income, but not the jackpot.
  • Many poor parents don’t treat their children equally. They look for early signs of who might be “smarter” and often focus their resources on a single child’s education. They do this because they undervalue a smaller amount of education and overvalue a larger amount of education. Lots of parental expectations need reseting.
  • Micro insurance for the poor is a hard sell. Despite all the interest by promoters in the space. The poor don’t value insurance services enough to be willing to pay premiums, which results in the insurance pool being skewed to the higher risk people raising premiums further … a downward cycle. And then there’s fraud. Their conclusion: micro insurance will only work with government subsidy. Sounds like farm insurance in USA and EU?
  • Most poor need structure to save. If money sits around, it gets spent on other things, so the best savers amongst the poor are those who immediately invest their profits. Lots of good examples in book of structured savings. We know in USA that having opt-out approaches to things like auto-deduct-from-paycheck 401(k) savings programs result in much more saving than opt-in programs. We’re all human and subject to temptation.
  • Building small businesses into bigger businesses is very rare. There are always publicized examples of a poor entrepreneur who defied all odds to build a big business from scratch. But these are extremely rare — especially in developing markets. Most poor don’t even have the ambition for this.
  • Most small/micro business owners don’t benefit from training. Yep, that’s right. Mostly because they don’t care that much about growing their business because growing a business is very hard and not likely to succeed. This is unwelcome news to the many NGOs who believe that this is an important intervention.
  • Non-agriculture growth is more beneficial than agriculture growth. When a factory locates near a village, it most often results in faster wage growth than agricultural productivity growth resulting from innovations like the famed Green Revolution. Why? Because higher-paid employment becomes available even to those with low skills.

Summary of authors’ learnings

  1. The poor often lack critical pieces of information and believe things that are not true.
  2. The poor bear responsibility for too many aspects of their lives.
  3. There are good reasons that some markets are missing for the poor, or that the poor face unfavorable prices in them.
  4. Poor countries are not doomed to failure because they are poor, or because they have had an unfortunate history.
  5. Expectations about what people are able or unable to do all too often end up turning into self-fulfilling prophecies.

I’ve only covered a small portion of the book’s content. I recommend that you read it for full benefit.

Book Review: Poor Economics

June 22nd, 2011

Poor Economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty

By: Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo

This is one of the best books I’ve read on addressing global poverty. And I’ve read a LOT of books on this topic. It summarizes a massive amount of primary in-the-field research and has lots of interesting finds which will surely challenge some of your assumptions on effective poverty programs. The authors founded Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab in 2003. Also, there is a book website.

What works; not what you think should work

I was impressed with the authors’ focus on “what actually works” based on empirically validated experiments and data. This is very refreshing in a world where so many people approach poverty with pre-determined viewpoints. I particularly like how they compare, contrast and critique the two primary international development perspectives of “supply wallahs” (Jeff Sachs & co) and the “demand wallahs” (Bill Easterly & co). The authors (both economists) seek to test whether there are specific poverty traps (Sachs’ concept which Easterly contests) in specific situations. Their conclusion — sometimes there are and other times there aren’t. It just depends on the specific situation.

Similarly they critique the pessimism of both the political left and the right who (for different reasons — colonialism or unfortunate culture) think that political institutions in these countries must change first and they won’t. They look for pragmatic steps forward in both good and bad political regimes.

Progress generally comes incrementally and at the margins

They are not idealists. The authors are realists who believe that improvement comes incrementally at the margins. It is all about the small stuff which adds up. Much of what works isn’t “sexy” and therefore isn’t easy to raise donor money for. Some of the successful approaches they’ve discovered are counter-intuitive at first and many are far from perfect. But they are committed to taking a scientific approach and to judge things by their results and to learn as they go.

There are far too many excellent facts in this book to cover in a short review. So, I will call out a few as illustrative and recommend that you read the book for the full benefit.

Focus on testing specific interventions (with randomized controlled trials)

“This book will not tell you whether aid is good or bad, but it will say whether particular instances of aid did some good or not.” One of the big issues with aid is, how do we know what interventions are effective? or more effective than others?

Read Part II of book review >

Related Posts with Thumbnails