The Benefits and Costs of Microfinance: Evidence from Bangladesh

179 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Microfinance: its Impact, Outreach and Sustainability (2011, methodology): “(Chemin, 2008; Dunford, 2006).”
High Noon for Microfinance Impact Evaluations: Re-investigating the Evidence from Bangladesh (2012, methodology): “While not engaging in debate with PnK or Morduch, Chemin ( 2008 – henceforth Chemin), applied propensity score matching (PSM) to his reconstruction of the data and finds ‘positive, but lower than previously thought’ (Chemin, 2008 : 463) impacts compared to PnK; Chemin does not explain whether the ”
Does Microfinance Reduce Poverty in Bangladesh? New Evidence from Household Panel Data (2012, methodology): “These results are broadly consistent with the past studies which have confirmed the poverty reducing effects of microfinance programmes in Bangladesh (for example, Pitt and Khandker, 1998; Khandker, 2005; Chemin, 2008).”
The Impact of Microcredit on the Poor in Bangladesh: Revisiting the Evidence (2014, unknown): “While questions have been raised about the robustness of results to alternative estimation methods (Morduch, 1998; Chemin, 2008; Duvendack and Palmer-Jones, 2012), Pitt (1999; 2012) has strongly defended PK against”
Systematic Review. What is the evidence of the impact of microfinance on the well-being of poor people? (2011, background): “Papers dealing with PnK data include: Chemin (2008), Duvendack (2010b), Duvendack and Palmer-Jones (2011), Khandker (1996, 2000, 2005), Khandker and Latif (1996), Khandker et al.”