Who Gets Credit? The Gendered Division of Microfinance Programs in Egypt
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11401484 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ghada Barsoum (0000-0002-1050-0215, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2006 |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 51-64 |
| Publication date | 2006-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0225-5189 • E-ISSN: 2158-9100 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/02255189.2006.9669120 |
| OpenAlex | W1542879058 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 3 |
Microcredit is a poverty alleviation strategy strongly associated with gender inequality and the feminization of poverty. In Egypt, microcredit operates within two major models. The economic survival model targets a female clientele with very small loan sizes and mainly group lending mechanisms. The business enhancement model primarily targets a not-so-poor clientele. A gap emerges where there are hardly any lending mechanisms addressing poorer men. I argue in this paper that the lopsided focus on providing microfinance services within the economic survival model to poor women and the exclusion of poor men constitutes a myopic poverty alleviation strategy that can actually oppress women rather than empower them. It is also a strategy that excludes a significant proportion of the poor, namely poor men who primarily work within the rubrics of the informal economy. The paper is based on fieldwork in rural Upper Egypt and in two urban squatter areas in Cairo
Development economics · Economic growth · Economics · Inequality · Informal sector · Labour economics · Loan · Microfinance · Political science · Poverty · Rubric · Sociology · African studies and sociopolitical issues · Microfinance and Financial Inclusion · Urban and Rural Development Challenges · Finance
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,27 |
| Citation span | 2015 - 2022 (8) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |