SPECIALE ASSET CLASS

Riccardo Aguglia | Senior Investment Manager Guarantees, Securitization & Inclusive Finance

Il 13 ottobre 2006 il mondo ha scoperto cos’ è il microcredito. Il conferimento del premio Nobel per la Pace a Muhammad Yunus e alla banca da lui avviata, Grameen Bank, ha portato all’attenzione di tutti uno strumento no ad allora conosciuto solo dagli addetti ai lavori.
Il Nobel per la Pace, poi, e non per l’Economia, come sarebbe stato più naturale aspettarsi per un economista e la sua banca, ha trasmesso in maniera forte e dirompente l’essenza del fenomeno microcredito. L’accesso al credito si
è a ermato non solo come strumento di emancipazione economica ma di vera e propria pacificazione tra i popoli, nella misura in cui migliora la qualità della vita assicurando dignità, partecipazione sociale e godimento dei diritti civili a grandi fasce della popolazione no ad ora escluse. È così che la microfinanza può sconfiggere povertà e marginalizzazione.

Sulla scorta di queste premesse la Commissione Europea ha avviato sin dal 2008 una serie di misure volte a sostenere lo sviluppo della microfinanza in Europa. Un certo numero di operatori finanziari, tra cui quelli appartenenti ad un nucleo già consistente di Istituzioni di Microfinanza, raggruppate all’interno di “EMN” (European Microfinance Network), ha così potuto iniziare a beneficiare di misure volte a favorirne l’accrescimento delle loro capacità operative e finanziarie.

Consapevole del fatto che la microfinanza in Europa è ancora in una fase iniziale la Commissione ha concentrato l’attenzione su quegli strumenti finanziari più idonei per un settore giovane. Infatti, con l’eccezione della francese Adie, nata alla fine degli anni ’80, solo all’inizio del nuovo millennio si sono iniziate a sviluppare le prime istituzioni di microfinanza nel nostro continente.

Ancora più nuovo è un altro fenomeno: accanto agli operatori specializzati in questo settore, le istituzioni di microfinanza appunto, una serie di altre istituzioni finanziarie, dalle piccole banche di settore e locali, ai confidi, alle finanziarie regionali, hanno iniziato a guardare a questo strumento con interesse creando progetti ad hoc con cui poter avviare delle linee di attività da sviluppare nel tempo.

Il coinvolgimento del FEI (Fondo Europeo per gli Investimenti), istituzione Europea nata per stimolare l’imprenditorialità e l’innovazione in Europa, ha permesso alla Commissione di utilizzare al meglio le risorse finanziarie a disposizione da impegnare in questa iniziativa, garantendo un’ampia offerta di servizi finanziari in grado di coprire le differenti necessità di una variegata platea di operatori finanziari.

Il modello operativo del FEI è basato sul raggiungimento delle micro, piccole e medie imprese attraverso gli intermediari finanziari che si accreditano ad utilizzare strumenti incentivanti quali prestiti, garanzie, partecipazioni azionarie, in grado di stimolare l’erogazione del credito. La necessità di irrobustire le capacità oltreché finanziarie, operative e gestionali, di un settore non ancora maturo ha reso opportuno l’utilizzo di ulteriori strumenti non solo finanziari rivolti a questo scopo.

L’iniziativa EaSI (Employment and Social Innovation) lanciata dalla Commissione Europea nel 2015 e gestita dal FEI non è la prima del suo genere ma prosegue e amplifica l’azione già intrapresa nel 2010 da Progress Microfinance con una dotazione di risorse finanziarie più vasta e diversificata. La Commissione conferma quindi i suoi sforzi lanciando un secondo strumento finanziario europeo interamente dedicato al microcredito.

Le novità del nuovo strumento sono tante: oltre ad un ampliamento del concetto di finanza inclusiva che si allarga al settore delle imprese sociali, per il quale l’iniziativa EaSI prevede una dotazione di risorse consistente, si cerca di intervenire sulla struttura vera e propria degli operatori finanziari con un prodotto di “capacity building” nella forma di Equity o quasi-equity (prestito subordinato). Sviluppo di sistemi informativi e tecnologici, assunzione di nuovo personale, cosi come l’apertura di nuovi uffici, sono tutte spese ammissibili sotto questo strumento e hanno l’obiettivo di incidere sulla struttura dell’operatore finanziario, permettendogli di raggiungere la sostenibilità, nel caso in cui sia in una fase di start up, o di consolidarsi nel mercato di riferimento, laddove invece abbia già un suo ben delineato e stabile posizionamento.

La grande forza di questi strumenti destinati alla microfinanza, e all’imprenditoria sociale, sta proprio nel fatto che permettono di attrarre risorse private a complemento degli investimenti pubblici, assicurando un effetto leva consistente. In quest’ottica le garanzie di portafoglio sono sicuramente lo strumento più rilevante perché permettono di generare una leva che va da un minimo di 5.5 (per ogni euro di risorse pubbliche se ne generano 5.5 da destinare alle imprese) no anche a 30 e oltre.

La protezione del rischio di portafoglio determina un e etto aggiuntivo che da secondario sta diventando cruciale per lo sviluppo del settore; infatti gli operatori finanziari fanno sempre più attenzione alla qualità del loro portafoglio, che significa ridurre i casi di prestiti finiti in default. Quest’aspetto è rilevante perché pone sempre più in evidenza come la finanza inclusiva, riconosciuta nell’immaginario collettivo rischiosa e portatrice di istanze generalmente deboli ed economicamente poco significative, si stia affermando come uno strumento in grado di accostare al suo dichiarato obiettivo sociale solidi risultati finanziari ed economici.

La finanza inclusiva è anche uno dei settori maggiormente interessati dalla grandissima espansione dell’uso della tecnologia. Crowdfunding, Peer to peer, Invoice Finance, Trade Finance ecc. sono tutti esempi del recente sviluppo della FinTech applicata proprio a microfinanza e finanza sociale, che permettono di fornire vie alternative alle imprese per assicurarsi fondi necessari alla loro crescita. La possibilità di ridurre drasticamente i costi amministrativi e di struttura, di rendere più agevole l’accesso fisico e virtuale alle richieste di credito, di velocizzare i tempi di valutazione e risposta e di garantire un monitoraggio continuo ed efficiente fa sì che gli operatori finanziari specializzati in finanza inclusiva possano maggiormente beneficiare delle innovazioni della 1Fintech e raggiungere in tempi più brevi i loro obiettivi di sostenibilità.

Ma la vera rivoluzione di questo settore è rappresentata dall’interesse crescente d’investitori privati che finalmente intravvedono, sempre più, nel comparto della finanza inclusiva la capacità di garantire un ritorno equo e stabile nel tempo e di riportare al centro il concetto di etica, per un riposizionamento sociale, necessario dopo la grande crisi economica e finanziaria degli ultimi anni che ha posto interrogativi seri sul ruolo della finanza nella società odierna.

Grazie alla grande intuizione del visionario Yunus e al Nobel per la Pace del 2006 si è avviato un processo in grado di aprire al settore della microfinanza nuovi scenari e confini che hanno già avuto un e etto considerevole nel far crescere la consapevolezza di questa disciplina all’interno della società e che potranno offrire negli anni a venire occasioni e opportunità ancora non prevedibili.

1 Termine inglese derivante dalla contrazione di “Finance” e “Technology” con cui si definisce l’uso della tecnologia e dei modelli innovativi di business nei servizi finanziari.

Maria Doiciu | Senior consultant in access to nance and microfinance Eurom Consultancy –Romania

Abstract:

Investing in micro nance, can not only pursue social and sometimes environmental objectives but can often be pro table, more banks and commercial
investors are looking to the micro nance
market potential and at the risks related to the

investment in microfinance. Direct or indirect investment approaches tested by the more than 225 commercial banks and formal investors as well as the pro t records of successful players are encouraging more investors to invest in the massive potential of the micro nance market.

Investing in microfinance

Recently the de nition or re-de nition of micro nance was a subject of debate of main sector’s actors in Europe both Micro nance networks, European Micro nance Network and Micro nance Centre were involved in the process and the proposed new de nition submitted to the European Commission is:

Micro nance: all those activities oriented to provide access to financial services of individual amounts normally smaller than the EU per capita GDP, to socially or nancially excluded people (generally without collateral nor credit history), lacking access to traditional sources of nance, with a social and not for-pro t objective, on terms adapted to the analysed nancial capacity and coupled with access to high quality financial education and/or business development services.

During early In the 1990s the investments made by the international micro nance investors in Eastern, Central Europe and Balkans, e.g. World vision fund, Opportunity international, CHF International or HEKS Swiss, alongside with transfer of know-how, contributed decisively to the establishment of a sustainable micro nance sectors “ with social and not for-pro t objective” in the region.

Since 2009, the European Commission nanced programs Progress, JASMINE and currently EaSI micro nance implemented in partnership with European Investment Bank/ European Investment Fund are investing and providing nancial resources and guarantees as well as technical assistance to the European Micro nance Institutions and Microcredit Banks aiming at improvement of their capacity to outreach and serve the start-up entrepreneurs, self-employed and microenterprises.

Due to the growing demand for microcredits and lack of donations and social investments or government involvement, the Micro nance Institutions, supported by the enabling legal framework enacted by the policy makers, have been nanced by impact investors more concerned with results-based outcomes that either improve access to nance of underserved, social and economic inclusion of the beneficiaries or the environment while still garnering economic returns.

In this respect the new developments of the Romanian Micro nance market may offer a number of examples and lessons to be learned to those banks or investors now considering the microfinance market. The development drift towards commercialization of the Romanian MFIs may be seen in the Figure 1.

Figure1. Romanian MF sector landscape 2017; Source: Eurom Consultancy and Studies

The commercialization of the Romanian microfinance sector and rapid growth of the MFIs leaded to the transformation of the largest Romanian MFI into the first Romanian microcredit bank, banking investments in the micro nance institutions and partnerships of the banks with microfinance institutions for and improved outreach of the underserved.

The market-based solutions designed by the investors and micro nance institutions to address economic gaps within society, alongside with their social responsibility commitment is actually making a positive difference in the communities, being the base of growth of the micro nance sectors in all European countries.

2 http://www.cgap.org/publications/commercial-banks-and-microfinance-evolving-models-success

Commercial banks and investors are increasingly investigating themselves, entering the micro nance market because they see sustainable profit and growth opportunities within an increasing competition faced in their traditional retail markets, aiming to explore new potential markets that can generate growth in client numbers at acceptable pro t margins.

Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP) estimates that there are up to 3 billion potential clients in the microfinance market and despite of the high growth rate of the sector, a significant number of potential clients remain unserved. A recent CGAP1 survey identified over 225 commercial banks and other formal financial institutions that are engaged in microfinance.

If for most of them, investing in micro nance has been highly pro table, however success is not guaranteed, and some commercial investors have attempted to serve this market and failed because they did not understand the market or tried to move too quickly and unprepared.

There are currently two main approaches to invest in microfinance:

  • The banks / investors are entering the market directly by expanding their retail operations to reach the

    microcredit clients by creating an internal unit or buying an existing or establishing a separate microfinance vehicle company, such as a service company or specialized financial institution.

  • The banks/ investors are entering the market indirectly by working with existing micro nance providers.

    1 http://www.cgap.org/publications/commercial-banks-and-microfinance-evolving-models-success

    Commercial investors that wish to take advantage of the opportunities in micro nance should carefully evaluate specifically their own goals, the potential market size and competition, the regulatory environment, and how suitable for the micro nance are their current infrastructure and systems.

    The relations with the investors, funders and customers, as included in the clauses of the European Code of Good Conduct for microcredit provision Chapter I2, ensures that the sector operates with transparent and pan-EU reporting standards, it gives some reassurance that the sector operates according to sound business practices and principles, and that it is well governed.

    Looking to and learning from the experience of the existing traditional social investors in the micro nance sector, the decision of entering this market is a long-term business endeavor and needs real commitment. No investor should expect to make quick pro t from micro nance. The evolving investments and partnership models presented above and the pro t records of successful players are encouraging more investors to invest in the massive potential of the micro nance market, but Muhammad Yunus’s statement should be carefully assess and observed:

    “Microcredit should be seen as an opportunity to help people get out of poverty in a business way, but not as an opportunity to make money out of poor people”

    Muhammad Yunus

    2 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/thefunds/doc/code_bonne_conduite_en.pdf

Anna Kanze | Grassroots Capital

Abstract

Micro nance – the provision of nancial services to the poor, marginalized, and otherwise underserved clients – is a unique and trailblazing innovation: a scalable, sustainable business model to engage the poor in the market economy in a way that builds assets, skills, and opportunity. Over the past forty years, the industry has evolved from non-pro t institutions providing microcredit, funded by non-commercial capital and grant funding, to professionally run, nancially sustainable institutions providing a variety of nancial products and services (mostly credit, but also micro-savings, remittances, insurance, etc.) The majority share of capital for micro nance institutions (MFIs) now comes from commercial sources, and MFIs have also accessed the capital markets. MFIs have direct client relationships with hundreds of millions of poor families, making micro nance the only business model serving the bottom of the pyramid that has achieved scale while also being consistently pro table. The industry has also expanded to include many non-traditional actors, like digital and mobile service providers, vastly increasing the capacity for scale and scope of nancial services for the bottom of the pyramid. While microcredit on its own has not been proven to measurably reduce poverty, together with other areas of support—education, a ordable housing, healthcare, sustainable agriculture, infrastructure—micro nance and MFIs can signi cantly contribute to poverty alleviation.

Microfinance as an asset class

Over the past forty years, micro nance institutions (MFIs) have evolved from being mainly non-pro ts with relatively small scale to include a mix of formal, regulated credit unions, cooperatives, commercial banks, and non-bank nancial intermediaries (NBFIs) playing a signi cant role in national nancial sectors. Micro nance worldwide today has attracted more than $30 billion in cross-border investments, and the large majority (~80%) of micro nance institutions (MFIs) operate pro tably. The scalability and pro tability of MFIs are key features distinguishing micro nance as an asset class.

This has led to the “mainstreaming” of micro nance: MFIs have successfully accessed the capital markets and diversi ed funding sources beyond donors to include local deposits, well more than 100 specialized investment funds with an estimated $13.5 billion of assets under management, and a number of initial public stock o erings (IPOs) worldwide. Commercial sources of capital now make up the majority of investment in the sector. According to an annual survey by the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN), which interviewed over 200 impact investing organizations, micro nance commands the largest portion of impact investing assets1. Microloans and other nancial services targeting the poor and underserved now have a central role in national nancial systems all over the world, with hundreds of millions of clients; taking into account household members, outreach likely approaches one billion, far surpassing the earlier goal of one hundred million.

1 GIIN 2017 Annual Impact Investor Survey, Figure ii: AUM by sector; micro nance excluding outliers is 21%, including other financial services is 31%

Two of the main arguments in the past for micro nance as an asset class2 were the low correlation to traditional nancial markets and high portfolio quality. While micro nance for the most part was relatively una ected during the crisis that hit global nancial markets starting around 2008, the low correlation may begin to moderate as micro nance and MFIs become more interwoven in mainstream nancial systems. High repayment rates remain a hallmark of micro nance. There have been a number of crises in countries across the world which warn that high asset quality cannot be taken for granted; however, the sector overall has emerged stronger after dealing with these setbacks, as well as with the help of industry-wide principles like the Smart Campaign’s Client Protection Principles, multi-stakeholder standard setting bodies like the Social Performance Task Force, country-speci c credit bureaus and self- regulatory bodies, and other infrastructure.

Perhaps more consequential than low correlation or high asset quality are the many decades of infrastructure-building and investment and governance-strengthening support by donors, social investors and other sources of patient risk capital. As a result, MFIs have developed into well-run, professional institutions that employ tens of thousands of people often from the same demographics as the clients they are looking to serve. The sector has largely preserved its focus on the bottom of the pyramid and there is a growing emphasis on new nancial products that seek to provide more value to poor clients, like savings, insurance and remittances. As argued in a recent whitepaper on the future of micro nance3, the success of the industry in achieving scale and attracting capital is a result of a four-decades-long process of product development and testing, gaining insights into customer needs, earning client trust, building infrastructure, training, collecting data, benchmarking, and developing a robust supporting ecosystem. It is no longer debated that the poor can constructively use and be sustainably provided with a comprehensive range of financial services. Nevertheless, there is more work to be done to have a positive, measurable impact on poverty alleviation, gender equality, and other Sustainable Development Goals4.

Over the coming years, “the micro nance industry” will continue to blend into traditional financial systems as MFIs grow and develop, and more mainstream commercial banks acquire MFIs or launch subsidiaries dedicated to micro nance. Digital financial technologies will continue to reduce costs and the need for in-person interaction. MFIs as distinct institutions will become less crucial to providing financial services to their target populations, or will themselves evolve into more than just financial service providers to broaden the offerings of products and services to better meet the needs of their clients. MFIs are uniquely placed to address many social and environmental issues given their proximity to and deep relationships with their clients. Patient capital and likeminded investors that support innovation and target skill development, institutional capacity building and infrastructure required for better serving the bottom of the pyramid will remain essential for social value creation and deepening impact, in micro nance and beyond.

1 GIIN 2017 Annual Impact Investor Survey, Figure ii: AUM by sector; micro nance excluding outliers is 21%, including other financial services is 31%

2 For example, Microcapital.org August 2007 and 2009

3 “Microfinance: Revolution or Footnote? The Future of Microfinance Over the Next Ten Years”; Ira Lieberman, Paul DiLeo, Todd A. Watkins, and Anna Kanze; October 2017

4 https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org

Martina Grigorova | Head of Business Lending and International projects

SIS Credit is leading microfinance institution in Bulgaria. The company is providing loans up to EUR 25000 to start-ups, micro enterprises and agricultural producers. The mission of SIS Credit is to encourage the entrepreneurship and to grant access to funding to those clients with limited ways to finance themselves and to support the creation of new jobs in the depressed economic regions in Bulgaria. SIS Credit has an institutional rating BB- with stable outlook set by the international rating agency MICROFINANZA Rating.

SIS Credit is member of European Microfinance Network and Microfinance Centre. The company is among the first European institutions that signed the European Code of Good Conduct for Microcredit Provision launched by the European Comission. The institution is also one of 15 selected MFIs to participate in a publication of European Microfinance Network named European Good Practices in rural microfinance. Recently the company- shareholder of SIS Credit has become a member of CONFINDUSTRIA Bulgaria. In 2017 SIS has launched a project to support Italian micro enterprises that want to start business in Bulgaria by providing them funding and consultancies, as well as Bulgarian clients who want to develop export of production to Italia. For more information, please contact our relationship manager for Italy- Ms. Dari Grillini, e-mail: Questo indirizzo email è protetto dagli spambots. È necessario abilitare JavaScript per vederlo.

Core idea of microfinance

Initially microfinance had limited definition - provision of micro loans to the poor entrepreneurs. The core idea of microfinance was providing small amounts (e.g. 100 $) to poor people in underdeveloped economies. Thus, microfinance was considered as a tool to lift people from poverty and promote financial inclusion. These loans have been provided mostly by nonprofit organizations, because the social aspect has been considered as risky initiative for a traditional, for-profit company. Step by step the benefits of microfinance extended beyond the direct effect of giving people a source for capital. Entrepreneurs who create a successful business, create jobs, trade and overall economic improvement. Thus, microfinance couldn’t be considered only as a tool for “assisting the poor”, but for mechanism to support entrepreneurs with business ideas and boost the economic growth. This exactly is the opportunity for microfinance development- supporting start-ups and microenterprises that are in the position to generate income for themselves, for the MFI and for the economy in the same time.

Could microfinance be profitable and in the same time preserve the social idea?

ike conventional lenders, microfinance institutions (MFIs) must charge interest on loans. Here comes the question- how to cope with the high-risk profile of clients (to minimize losses for MFIs), to generate profit to be sustainable and in the same time not to drift from the social mission. Interestingly, even though the borrowers often qualify as financially excluded, repayment rates on microloans are often higher than the average rate on more conventional forms of financing. For example, the microfinancing institution Opportunity International reported repayment rates of approximately 98.9% in 2016.

Moreover, because of this new understanding that microfinance could be profitable, many nonprofit organizations (NGOs) have started becoming for-profit MFIs. And this doesn’t mean that they are not social any more, but means that they are not relying on grant funding and charity initiatives to be capable to do microfinance. Nowadays MFIs could operate more efficiently, and attract more capital by relying on profit-seeking investors. In fact, by becoming a profitable business, a MFI could extend its reach, providing more loans to the low-income or just neglected by conventional banking system applicants.

Price- how much is too much?

In the world of Microfinance many new trends have been developing over the last years. Companies have seen that it is very realistic to make a profit using microfinance in low income areas. This has caused an emerging trend of for-profit MFI’s to enter the microfinance space, mainly by providing fintech solutions and easy loan approval. Since for-profit MFI’s have a larger incentive to make money, they often charge higher interest rates and can become stereotypical loan sharks. So here comes the biggest question- how much is too much, or what is the price on micro loan that is not excessive, but in the same time allows MFIs to be sustainable. The pricing structure is considered as “the Pandora’s box” in microfinance, because there is no single position on the topic- when a forprofit MFI becomes a financial shark. The truth is that it is not a question of numbers, but of price composition and more specific- on the profit margin.

Responsible lenders, like SIS Credit, review and evaluate its pricing policy on a regular basis. It is updated as often as needed to be adequate to broad market developments and competition. Finally, the company adjusts the interest rates it charges on its loan products in a way that ensures that it will be able to cover its cost of operations and to be able to fund its growth. In SIS Credit there is an established framework for pricing of various loan products. Interest rates are determined based on 4 components:

1) Overall cost of funding;

2) Operational expenses, including delivery costs;

3) Expected loan losses in reliance to risk profile of clients;

4) Desired profit margin.

The fourth element is the most important one for determining the business model of a company- the responsible MFI is not committed to profit maximization and should reinvest profit in business, but still- it should be on profit.

SIS Credit aims to fill the gap left by the traditional commercial banks in financing of micro- and small companies. By being flexible and taking the business specific into consideration, the company is able to provide financial services to clients that are often neglected by the banks but have a sound business idea and good potential for growth. This is possible only because of the additional business development services (BDS) that give knowledge and opportunity to clients.

SIS Credit understands that provision of BDS plays crucial role in the business model of MFIs. Our experience has shown that many entrepreneurs who want to start their own business are not able to elaborate their projections and strategy. That’s why SIS Credit provides not only loans, but also BDS like: elaboration of business plan, legal advices, tax and accounting advices, assistance in applying for EU funding, etc. Moreover, SIS Credit is organizing free-of-charge educational seminars in smaller towns in Bulgaria. These additional services are free-of-charge, but of course, should be included in the overall price composition described above.

As a conclusion, apart from being social and creating benefits to clients, the MFI should keep sufficient return rate and be efficient as enterprise which allows the sustainable development of microfinance sector. This is a good model that ensures happy clients and happy investors.

Giovanni Nicola Pes | Vice Segretario Generale ENM

Sono stati 40 anni di successi, fallimenti, sperimentazioni, a dar vita agli attuali modelli di microfinanza, così come si sono sviluppati nelle varie parti del globo. In particolare, dovendo drammaticamente semplificare, possiamo ritenere ancora valida la distinzione proposta tra due principali modelli: quello sociale (Europa centrale, Italia in testa) e quello orientato al business (Pvs, economie emergenti), in “Tassi di interesse ed interessanti paradossi, un’analisi comparativa” (G. N. Pes, 2008, Rapporto sul microcredito in Italia, Rubettino). Costretto ad individuare un comune denominatore tra questi modelli, lo vedo senza dubbio (con le dovute eccezioni) nel raggiunto e sempre più raffinato equilibrio tra sostenibilità (intesa come la capacità di un dato strumento di funzionare sulla base delle leggi del mercato, dunque per esempio in assenza di iniezioni di denaro pubblico) e impatto sociale (ovvero la capacità di riuscire a perseguire con successo gli obiettivi sociali).

Infatti, esistono ormai strumenti micro-finanziari (i) orientati al profitto, (ii) che registrano performance rilevanti in relazione ad indicatori di impatto sociale. Questa premessa consente di spiegarci il perché le istituzioni di microfinanza oggi hanno accesso ai mercati di capitali e diversificato le fonti di finanziamento. Sono più di cento i fondi di investimento specializzati nel settore, con un asset di oltre 13,5 miliardi di dollari! (Come ci racconta Anna Kanze).

Un recente studio del Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP) identifica oltre 225 banche commerciali impegnate nell’erogazione di microcrediti e centinaia di altre istituzioni finanziarie. Peraltro ancora poco, per servire una domanda potenziale di servizi e prodotti microfinanziari di oltre 3 miliardi di beneficiari, ci ricorda Maria Doiciu. E’chiaro, puntualizza Martina Grigorova, che il pericolo di nuove derive speculative è sempre dietro l’angolo. D’altra parte non c’è e non può esserci, tra contesti sociali, economici e culturali molto diversi tra loro, unità di pensiero sulla struttura del prezzo di un microcredito. Il monitoraggio (legato a poteri sanzionatori), realizzato dai Governi sulla base di principi etici di protezione del beneficiario e common sense, resta l’antidoto più efficace. Se questi 40 anni sono stati intensi e ricchi di frutti, i prossimi 40 potrebbero essere entusiasmanti.

Principalmente per tre ordini di ragione:

Il sistema microfinanziario si sta notevolmente ampliando, anno dopo anno, di prodotti, servizi e misure (lo

accenna Riccardo Aguglia);

La tecnologia inciderà radicalmente sul sistema e trasversalmente ai prodotti, ai servizi e alle misure (vado per

parole chiave: disintermediazione vs outreach, criptovalute, strumenti crowd);

La geopolitica e la demografia pongono e porranno nuove complicate sfide (Margherita Pietrogrande) a cui si

potrà dare risposta con efficaci ed efficienti partenariati pubblico – privati finalizzati all’inclusione sociale e

finanziaria.