Search results

The rapid growth of foreign private lending to microfinance institutions (MFIs) in the past several years has led to a surprising reversal of roles between government-owned development agencies and private lenders. Development institutions [International Financial Institutions (IFIs)] are concentrating their loans in the strongest MFIs, leaving private lenders to look for opportunities among smaller, riskier borrowers. Development institutions are “crowding” private lenders out of the best MFIs.

This chapter surveys papers and the related literature on the relationship between banks’ creditor structure and bank risk during the period of liquidity crises. Departing from the conventional banking literature, which points to deteriorating asset quality to be the culprit for the amplified bank risk in the midst of financial crises, the studies in the aftermath of the global financial crisis look into the liability side of the bank balance sheet as a potential source for the augmented bank risk during the financial crisis when there is a liquidity contraction. Recent studies theorize and provide empirical evidence that banking institutions with a greater share of large lenders and an economy with high noncore bank liabilities in the banking sector may experience heightened bank risk or country risk. We also search for policy implications from this survey.

The global recession has strongly affected the credibility of the international banking system, damaging also the real economy.

Developing countries, not fully integrated with international markets, seem less affected and local microfinance institutions might also allow for a further shelter against recession, even if foreign support is slowing down and collection of international capital is harder and more expensive.

Intrinsic characteristics of microfinance, such as closeness to the borrowers, limited risk and exposure and little if any correlation with international markets have an anti-cyclical effect. In hard and confused times, it pays to be little, flexible and simple.

Healthcare innovations for bottom-of-pyramid populations face considerable risks and few economic incentives. Can entrepreneurial innovators provide new solutions for global health? This chapter examines how a technology enterprise built a collaborative network and supportive ecosystem making it possible to steer an innovation for TB patients through discovery, development, and delivery. Ecosystem resources were mobilized and upstream and downstream co-innovation risks were mitigated to commercialize a new diagnostic test. Detailed evidence on this innovation for TB care uses ecosystem analysis to clarify core issues in the context of joint value creation. The case study shows how resources from private and public partners can be leveraged and combined by the focal firm to build joint value and to lower execution, co-innovation, and adoption risks in healthcare ecosystems combating diseases of poverty.