Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income

Volume: 6 Number: 1 May 30, 2016
  • Ayten Davutoğlu
EN

Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income

Abstract

Particularly for the last two decades along with the pivotal role of World Bank, microfinance has become one of the most popular poverty reduction strategies. There is a huge literature including empirical and theoretical studies on its efficiency and success on poverty alleviation. Despite this worldwide popularity, in a growing number of recent studies microfinance has been subjected to severe criticisms in that it has almost no success in solving inequality and redistribution problems deeply rooted in poverty. It has been accused of transforming the poor into the entrepreneur-client, being a poverty trap for the poor, reproducing the poverty cycle recursively and most crucially serving for neoliberalism. The first part of this study is allotted to these criticisms on microfinance policies. The main cause for poverty is lack of sustainable income. To generate this income for the poor to get out of poverty, there is one other alternative that has started to gain more interest in poverty reduction circle namely basic income. Basic income departs significantly from the microfinance model in that it is an income-generation suggestion based on the premise that the fight against poverty should be carried out within the context of social rights and inequality. This paper also aims to focus on the alternative paradigm of basic income poverty reduction by making a brief comparison between microfinance and basic income favoring the latter over the former.

Keywords

References

  1. Bateman, Milford (2003) '"New Wave" Micro-finance institutions in South-East Europe: Towards a more realistic assessment of impact', Small Enterprise Development, 14(3): 56-65.
  2. Bateman, Milford (2006) The Informalization of the BiH economy and the role of the Microfinance model paper prepared for the Economic Policy research Unit (EPRU) Seminar "Balkan Economies: Studies on Nopn-Standart Phenomena" September Sarajevo, Bosnia.
  3. Bateman, Milford &. Chang, H., (2008) The Microfinance Illusion. University of Juraj Dobrila and University of Cambridge: Mimeo.
  4. Bateman, M. (2010) Why doesn't Microfinance Work? The Destructive Rise of Local Neoliberalism. New York: Zed Books.
  5. Bohle, Dorothee & B. Greskovits ( 2007) Neoliberalism, Embedded Neoliberalism, and Neocorporatism: Paths towards Transnational Capitalism in Central-Eastern Europe, West European Politics, Volume 30, Number 3, May , pp. 443-466(24).
  6. Cammack, Paul (2010) "The Evolving Agenda of 'Poverty Reduction': from Structural Adjustment to Universal Competitiveness" Posted on June 1, Paper presented at the annual meeting.
  7. Chowdhury, Anis (2009) Microfinance as a Poverty Reduction Tool— A Critical Assessment DESA Working Paper No. 89 ST/ESA/2009/DWP/89 December
  8. Dichter, Thomas (2010) Too good to be true the remarkable resilience of microfinance, Harward International Review Spring.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Ayten Davutoğlu This is me
Yıldız Technical University

Publication Date

May 30, 2016

Submission Date

May 30, 2016

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2013 Volume: 6 Number: 1

APA
Davutoğlu, A. (2016). Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 6(1), 39-48. https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ
AMA
1.Davutoğlu A. Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income. ijsi. 2016;6(1):39-48. https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ
Chicago
Davutoğlu, Ayten. 2016. “Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income”. International Journal of Social Inquiry 6 (1): 39-48. https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ.
EndNote
Davutoğlu A (May 1, 2016) Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income. International Journal of Social Inquiry 6 1 39–48.
IEEE
[1]A. Davutoğlu, “Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income”, ijsi, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 39–48, May 2016, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ
ISNAD
Davutoğlu, Ayten. “Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income”. International Journal of Social Inquiry 6/1 (May 1, 2016): 39-48. https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ.
JAMA
1.Davutoğlu A. Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income. ijsi. 2016;6:39–48.
MLA
Davutoğlu, Ayten. “Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income”. International Journal of Social Inquiry, vol. 6, no. 1, May 2016, pp. 39-48, https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ.
Vancouver
1.Ayten Davutoğlu. Two Different Poverty Reduction Approaches: Neoliberal Market Based Microfinance versus Social Rights Defender Basic Income. ijsi [Internet]. 2016 May 1;6(1):39-48. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA42AR26AJ

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26134 26133     Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------