Finance for Food 2013
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-54034-9_6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Busting Agro-Lending Myths and Back to Banking Basics: A Case Study of AccessBank’s Agricultural Lending

Abstract: One third of AccessBank's micro-business loans are extended to farmers. The portfolio of this segment has grown quickly and performed well. Why is Access-Bank Azerbaijan successful in agricultural lending, a sector often disliked by other commercial banks? And why is the bank viewing farmers as a strategic core clientele? This case study aims to give some answers and explore some of the myths around agricultural lending. 1 Greenfield Small Business Bank in a Transitional Economy AccessBank was founded in 2002 … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Accordingly, MFIs may consider lending relationships with farmers as easier and more sustainable and could therefore apply a more targeted progressive lending for farmers. Mostly, studies that have addressed the issue of farmers' general financial access, report that farmers face higher financial obstacles than non‐farmers (Petrick, ; Weber and Musshoff, ; Zeller et al., ) owing to the higher risk perception reasoned by cyclical or irregular cash flows, relatively high capital intensity, weather and price risk, as well as the threat of diseases (Binswanger and Rosenzweig, ; Jainzik and Pospielovsky, ). Combining the above findings, the first hypothesis is formulated as follows:
H1: Initially, farmers face a higher degree of loan volume rationing than non‐farmers, but benefit more from repeated interaction in terms of a decrease in rationing .
…”
Section: Previous Empirical Findings and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Accordingly, MFIs may consider lending relationships with farmers as easier and more sustainable and could therefore apply a more targeted progressive lending for farmers. Mostly, studies that have addressed the issue of farmers' general financial access, report that farmers face higher financial obstacles than non‐farmers (Petrick, ; Weber and Musshoff, ; Zeller et al., ) owing to the higher risk perception reasoned by cyclical or irregular cash flows, relatively high capital intensity, weather and price risk, as well as the threat of diseases (Binswanger and Rosenzweig, ; Jainzik and Pospielovsky, ). Combining the above findings, the first hypothesis is formulated as follows:
H1: Initially, farmers face a higher degree of loan volume rationing than non‐farmers, but benefit more from repeated interaction in terms of a decrease in rationing .
…”
Section: Previous Empirical Findings and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two types of loans are included under micro-lending: The standard micro-loan and, since 2007, the socalled agro-loan, which is exclusively available to borrowers who operate in agriculture-affiliated business. In fact, according to the bank's assertions, the pricing and conditions of the loans do not differ in order to avoid strategic manipulations of loan applications (Jainzik and Pospielovsky, 2014). For both loan types, the bank promises ever-improving credit conditions for long-term cooperation with the bank.…”
Section: Dataset Of the Accessbank Azerbaijanmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Another example of a commercially oriented microfinance bank having entered the rural and agricultural client segment successfully is AccessBank in Azerbaijan. See the contribution of Jainzik and Pospielovsky (2013). Meyer (2013) also refers to a number of examples.…”
Section: The (Potential) Contribution Of the Financial Sectormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding the application of lending policies, several studies show that microfinance institutions (MFI) differentiate between their client groups. For instance, farming clients often face higher obstacles in terms of financial access than non-farmers since farming activities are exposed to higher external risk, which lenders often associate with lower repayment performance ( Jainzik and Pospielovsky, 2014;Petrick, 2004;Simtowe et al, 2008;Weber and Musshoff, 2012;Zeller et al, 1998). Nevertheless, findings of Raghunathan et al (2011), Vogel (1981), and Weber and Musshoff (2012) refute the higher risk perception of farming clients, indicating a contradiction between lending policies to farmers and their repayment behaviour.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%