MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281493274 · doi:10.1080/15228916.2022.2079275

Gender, Credit Risk and Performance in Sub-Saharan African Microfinance Institutions

2022· article· en· W4281493274 on OpenAlexaff
Hadizatou Ali, Jean‐Pierre Gueyié, Elie Chrysostome

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of African Business · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofinancePovertyLoanBusinessCredit riskFinancial systemSample (material)Developing countryEconomic growthDevelopment economicsMicro creditDemographic economicsEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The involvement of women in business in developing countries has become a subject of great interest for many researchers. In particular, female involvement in microfinance institutions has received special attention from governments and development institutions given its potential impact on poverty alleviation. This paper assesses the effect of gender on the credit risk and performance of microfinance institutions in sub-Saharan Africa. A sample of 43 microfinance institutions from 19 sub-Saharan African countries was selected and data was collected over the period 2010–2016. Seemingly unrelated regressions (SURs) were performed to examine how gender affects the credit risk and performance of microfinance institutions. The findings do not show any significant impact of female loan officers on credit risk, financial performance or social performance. Thus, all else being equal in the countries analyzed, female loan officers do not impact the credit risk and performance differently compared to male credit officers. The contribution of this paper is to shed light on the debate on the impact of gender on the performance of microfinance institutions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of African BusinessSame topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207