Profiting from poverty: ethics of microfinance in BOP

Linda M. Sama · R. Mitch Casselman

24 citations0/0 files storedSouth Asian Journal of Global Business Research

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Innovation and Socioeconomic Development Microfinance and Financial Inclusion Ethics in Business and Education

Abstract

Purpose This paper seeks to examine the ethical dilemmas that emerge when offering microfinance services in BOP markets. Design/methodology/approach Utilizing the ethical lenses of deontology, teleology, virtue ethics and moral relativism, the paper builds on prior research on ethical issues in BOP markets and the ethics of microfinance to highlight the specific stakeholder impacts facing MFIs. Relevant literature and examples from practice are utilized to illustrate the different ethical perspectives. Findings In general, many of the key dilemmas represent themselves in the extreme poverty segment of the BOP where commercial business models have the least traction. Research limitations/implications Propositions are developed for the corrective actions in the paper which might allow future research to uncover differences in intervention success in different BOP markets. Practical implications The discussion of potential interventions for the various stakeholders may ameliorate criticisms of MFIs, suggest opportunities for cross‐sectoral partnerships and improve outreach to the poorest of the poor. Social implications For each issue addressed, this paper looks at the types of corrections that are made or called for through markets, government actions and civil society to respond to the negative impacts uncovered through our analysis. Originality/value The analysis in this paper contributes to the theoretical ethical literature with a very specific application to an emerging concern in the field of microfinance. It also offers prescriptive scenarios for industry and public policy makers. It challenges the ethics underlying businesses that wish to target the full spectrum of Base of Pyramid participants.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

References

1983The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields 2004The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields 2004Case Study Research 1982In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory And Women's Development 1988The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice 2003Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business 1999The Microfinance Promise 1997The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate

Cited by

2016Issues and challenges in financing the poor: case of Baitul Maal Wa Tamwil in Indonesia 2016Learning From Poverty: Why Business Schools Should Address Poverty, and How They Can Go About it 2013Revisiting fortune at base of the pyramid (BoP)2021The factors that influence small and medium enterprises’ intention to adopt the government credit program 2016Analyse et conceptualisation des stratégies BoP par le prisme des performances économique et sociale : du sondage de cas aux tests empiriques

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.