Is agricultural microcredit really more risky? Evidence from Tanzania

Ron Weber and Oliver Musshoff

Agricultural Finance Review, 2012, vol. 72, issue 3, 416-435

Abstract: Purpose - Using a unique dataset of a commercial microfinance institution (MFI) in Tanzania, the purpose of this paper is to investigate first whether agricultural firms have a different probability to get a loan and whether their loans are differently volume rationed than loans to non‐agricultural firms. Second, the paper analyzes whether agricultural firms repay their loans with different delinquencies than non‐agricultural firms. Design/methodology/approach - The authors estimate a Probit‐Model for the probability of receiving a loan, a Heckman‐Model to investigate the magnitude of volume rationing for all loan applications and an OLS‐Model to examine the loan delinquencies of all microloans disbursed by the MFI. Findings - The results reveal that agricultural firms face higher obstacles to get credit but as soon as they have access to credit, their loans are not differently volume rationed than those of non‐agricultural firms. Furthermore, agricultural firms are less often delinquent when paying back their loans than non‐agricultural firms. Research limitations/implications - Even if the authors can show that access to credit and loan repayment is different for agricultural firms, the current regional focus of the MFI only allows for lending to agricultural firms in the greater Dar es Salaam area. Thus, these results might change in a rural setting. Besides general differences of the rural economic environment, the production type of agricultural firms might also differ in rural areas. Also, these results might change in different country contexts. Practical implications - The findings suggest that a higher risk exposition typically attributed to agricultural production must not necessarily lead to higher credit risk. They also show that the investigated MFI overestimates the credit risk of agricultural clients and, hence, should reconsider its risk assessment practice to be able to increase lending to the agricultural sector. In addition, the results might indicate that farmers qualify less often for a loan as they do not fit into the standard microcredit product. Originality/value - To the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper which simultaneously investigates access to credit and the repayment behavior of agricultural firms.

Keywords: Agricultural finance; Access to credit; Loan repayment; Microfinance institutions; Credit; Loans; Agriculture; Tanzania (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (32)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:afrpps:v:72:y:2012:i:3:p:416-435

DOI: 10.1108/00021461211277268

Access Statistics for this article

Agricultural Finance Review is currently edited by Valentina Hartarska and Denis Nadolnyak

More articles in Agricultural Finance Review from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().