10 Responses to “To help the poor live with dignity”

1. John S. Says:
   December 11th, 2006 at 8:43 pm

   Sam Daley Harris,

   In his laureate’s lecture Professor Yunus said much that
   is profound, much that is hopeful, and some that I don’t
   (at least yet) fully understand.

   But what hit me hardest wasn’t in his speech. It was in
   his last reply in the article you linked to in the Times
   in your post on December 10:

   “They say, I’m asking for a job. He says I will create
   jobs? How am I going to do that? Some say we don’t
   know how to create a job. I said, if you don’t know, if
   you don’t find an answer, you look at your mother, what
   she has done. She didn’t apply for a job. Even if she
   applied for a job, she will never get a job. She’s an
   illiterate person.

   “She borrowed from Grameen Bank. That’s why you
   are here. And as a child she helped you to go to school,
   maintained you and brought you all the way. You are
   becoming a doctor, you are becoming an engineer. See
   what she did? You know it much better than I do. If an
   illiterate woman can create her job, what good is your
   education if you cannot do better than your mother?”

   What microcredit and Grameen’s encouragement of
   education and scholarships have already done was done
   for them at home and at school. What Professor Yunus
   said in the Timesarticle is about their future
   beyond home and school. About a transformation from
   expecting to be job finders and job holders into becoming
   job creators and job enhancers.

   And I wonder: if they make this transformation and
   become entrepreneurs, will that make as great an
   improvement in what their lives will be after school as
   microcredit has already made in their lives at home and
   at school?

   Will that make as great a change in the economics of
   Bangladesh and other developing countries in years to
   come as microcredit has already made?

   Which leads me to this question: should we give this
   more thought and discussion until we have the
   understanding that will enable us to encourage it?

   John S.

   P.S. “In 1979 the Nobel Peace Prize went to Mother
   Theresa for her work to help the poor die with dignity.
   This year the Prize went to Muhammad Yunus for his
   work to help the poor live with dignity.”

   What a phenomenal quote. Did you catch the name
   of the person who said it?

2. Umoja Says:
   December 13th, 2006 at 1:37 am

   Professor Yunus,

   Thank you. Bless you and your people.

   Namaste,

   Umoja

   For my other compliment…http://spiritedseeker.zaadz.com/blog/2006/12/to_live_with_dignity

3. Peter van Dijk Says:
   December 13th, 2006 at 11:14 am

   It is thanks to the vision and relentless work of Professor Yunus and his team (and that includes the MicroCredit Summit in my opinion), that Micro-Finance has the opportunity to become a strong tool in poverty alleviation. I sincerely hope that the next Nobel Prize will go to the team of people who can link development aid to supporting local processes of economic inclusion.

   At the moment, there is so much proof of weaknesses in micro-credit activities and lack of its structural impact on the poor, that the examples of success stories appear to be anecdotical, ornamenting festivities organised by the mega-rich in first world countries.

   Professor Yunus admits that Micro-Credit should be about making profits from financial intermediation of poor people’s capital (and not only women groups), to turn micro-credit institutions into sustainable Micro-Finance Institutions that demonstrate sustainable growth and continued improvement as a result of a local relationship between the MFIs and their clients, within a framework developed and supervised by local authorities. Fighting poverty is about creating wealth from the mutual trust in a specific local society; the value of money (and thus of financial services) depends on the emotional and moral values that citizens share.

   At the moment, too many anti-poverty activities depend on charity from the mega-rich and are not based on local collaboration within the poorest countries ensuring lasting results. Nobels, Madonnas and Bonos invite the poor to their homes for some moments, and that is good for attracting attention to a problem, but these initiatives only have a signalling function.

   Kind regards, Peter

4. John S. Says:
   December 13th, 2006 at 6:26 pm

   Dear Peter,

   Certainly anyone looking at the thousands of
   organizations bringing microcredit to 100 million people
   will find many organizations that are weak and —
   worse— some that are abject failures. If that is what you
   have seen, you are correct to point it out.

   It is also possible that the Nobel Peace Prize Committee,
   the more than 60 other organizations that have given
   Professor Yunus awards for his work, and the more than
   25 universities that have awarded him honorary
   doctorates have made a mistake.

   But when Professor Yunus walks into villages like Jobra
   where his first micro loans were made 25 and 30 years
   ago and sees relative prosperity where he once saw
   abject poverty. . .when he walks into villages where
   branches of the Grameen Bank are just being established
   or are yet to be established and sees nearly the same
   level of abject poverty he saw in Jobra 30 years ago, he
   knows his work has been a success.

   And if Bono and the awards and the honorary doctorates
   and the Nobel Peace Prize perform a “signaling
   function” that encourages you and me and others to
   donate time and money to organizations like the
   Grameen Foundation. . . and if that “signaling function”
   gets legislators and executives and regulators to give
   microcredit organizations the freedom and regulation
   they need to do their best work, then those signals will
   help microcredit organizations raise more people out of
   poverty faster than ever before.

   Sincerely yours, John S.

5. peter van dijk Says:
   December 15th, 2006 at 8:28 am

   Dear John,

   The point I wanted to make is that, as the transformation of GrameenBank shows (please read a recent report made by MicroSave, available on the MicrofinanceGateway) but which is not being highlighted by its Director Professor Yunus, the success of microFinance and not credit (only), depends on undertaking it as a business.

   Doing business with money, and especially to help the poor, has always been and still being condemned by many people (including religious leaders). To make MicroFinance work as a tool to support the integration of the poor into the formal economies of developing countries is a complex local process that is based on local alliances, where foreign input often works as a frustrating factor.

   Not explaining why MicroFinance, and not microCredit, can work as a strong tool in sustainable poverty alleviation, is an important risk. Stars do not appreciate that complexity as yet or decide to ignore it, risking condemning microCredit (and MicroFinance) to dependence and slow, if at all, progress.

   Regards, Peter

6. susandavis Says:
   December 16th, 2006 at 12:20 am

   What other microfinance institution is owned and governed by the poor themselves? What institution has a full range of loan products and savings products? What institution is not only profit-making but social-impact maximizing? Grameen has combined the best aspects of the business model with the best elements of the social development model. It is not a failing of Dr. Yunus that the world has failed to replicate or even understand the full implications of the Grameen model. It’s impact on poverty and other important indicators is well documented - and not just for Grameen but for microcredit groups around the world. Check out Grameen Foundation’s website for a review of the studies and empirical evidence. There may be a few weak institutions (though I am yet to hear of them), but the strategy is as strong as ever.

   Susan Davis

7. John S. Says:
   December 17th, 2006 at 12:05 am

   Peter,

   Thank you for referring me to the MicroSave summary
   report on Grameen II.

   (I’m assuming you mean the one at http://www.microfinancegateway.org/content/article/detail/36640?PHPSESSID=22157fb459beb1f21e3148a889552e24
   = http://tinyurl.com/yfhe6f)

   Well worth the read.

   It reinforces my understanding that Professor Yunus and
   the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh are doing good work
   that is raising people out of poverty. Particularly that they
   continue to find ways to improve their methods.

   Although I’ve spent only a few minutes reading the full
   report on the study, that too, encourages me to continue
   to support the Grameen Foundation in spreading
   Grameen style microcredit throughout the world

   Sincerely yours,
   John S. .

8. peter van dijk Says:
   December 17th, 2006 at 6:42 am

   Dear Ms Davis,

   I think that even many strong and knowledgable supporters of GrameenBank do not know or chose to ignore the big challenges GB and its colleagues face in the world.

   Do you know whether GrameenBank has a Bank License with its Central Bank in Bangladesh, why not and why it is nevertheless allowed to use the (normally protected) term Bank? Do you know who GB’s biggest competitors are in BD and why they compete with each other in an unfair manner?, not on level playing field transparent and controlled market conditions, which bears risks for sustained development.

   Finally, as you probably know, GB has changed its strategy and operations substantially, from group loans and rejecting voluntary savings (”the poor are too poor to save”) to becoming a professional retail bank (without proper regulation and supervision however) with continued commitment toward the poorer clients (women and men, groups and individuals). Why profile itself still as a micro-credit organisation for women groups of the poorest of the poor?

   Please check out more sources of data and other information to better appreciate GB’s work, the huge complexity of making financial intermediation work for the poor. Finance can only be democratised, and can only support broad and sustained economic growth, when its supporters are fully knowledgeable.

   Regards, Peter

9. Sam Daley-Harris Says:
   December 17th, 2006 at 10:18 am

   Peter my friend

   I am a little surprized by your comments and your calls for others to become better informed.

   Grameen bank
   became a regulated bank under the supervision of the central bank of Bangladesh in 1983 after 2 years of lobbying by .Prof YUNUS.

10. peter van dijk Says:
    December 19th, 2006 at 5:19 am

    Dear Sam,

    I checked again relevant sites to find the accurate legal status of GrameenBank, the Bangladeshi Central Bank, IMF, World Bank, GrameenBank, only to find that, unless there are more clearer sources, GrameenBank is NOT a regulated bank. The government issued in 1983 a special law for GrameenBank as a MFI.

    If you look on the Central Bank website, you find detailed lists of the banking sector in the country where GB is not mentioned (I did see BRAC Bank listed as a Private Commercial Bank); you find GrameenBank mentioned under NGO-MFIs, without even explaining the special status GrameenBank enjoys under the above-mentioned law.

    This again underlines my point Sam, the lack of transparency frustrating the national process of Micro-Finance integrating into the formal financial sectors as an important tool in economic growth, job creation and poverty alleviation. I also had the opportunity of talking to Professor Yunus and he explained how difficult his relationship is with government authorities on the one side and with other, “competing”, NGO-MFI on the other. There are over 1.000 NGO-MFIs in Bangladesh alone, “fighting” for official recognition (including regulation and professional, impartial oversight) and the donor-bug.

    We know each other now since the first MCS you organised in Washington ten years ago, and you know that I support MF as an important tool in poverty alleviation, and that I promote straight talk in a complex process that is local. Why don’t you ask GrameenBank, BD Finance Ministry and Central Bank to clarify the issue ?

    Kind regards, Peter