Print Page   |   Sign In   |   Register
Notes from the Network
Blog Home All Blogs

Explainer: For SMEs, access to finance isn't the problem. Lending is.

Posted By Steven Zausner, Office:FMA, Wednesday, August 16, 2017

This article originally appeared in Devex.

Few people like talking — or reading — about regulation. It's boring.

While frequently mind numbing, if ignored, regulation can often lay waste to the best-laid plans, especially when it comes to accessing financing for small and medium-sized enterprises. As it stands, there are two regulatory challenges that are causing major headwinds for SME lending and capital formation: Basel III regulatory capital requirements and Know Your Client guidelines, which has severely impacted correspondent banking .

Basel III

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision developed Basel III as a result of the lessons learned after the crash of 2008. The new, more stringent, regulations included changes to capital controls, leverage ratios and liquidity requirements. Compared to Basel II, Basel III requires banks to hold more capital. For SMEs, often twice as much. Basel-compliant countries use the committee’s standards to tailor laws and rules for their specific jurisdictions. For decades, the Basel framework sought to make international banking stronger and better able to withstand exogenous, macro-related shocks. Generally, holding more capital to withstand stress is wise, particularly in the wake of a financial crisis. It is, however, not ideal for SMEs.

Most importantly, or detrimentally, for SMEs, capital adequacy rules assign a risk weighting to each of a bank's assets that is meant to be proportionate to the credit and market risk that the asset in question represents. Under Basel III, loans to SMEs are assigned a relatively high risk rating. As such, banks have to hold more capital against SME loans than against, for example, government securities. In addition, banks struggle to measure the ex-ante riskiness of SMEs, which suffer from higher mortality bankruptcy — rates, lack of credit information and scarce collateral.

Banks exist on leverage. The higher the leverage they can get, the better returns they can generate. As such, the lower the capital requirements for an asset, the more capital they can deploy. This dynamic leads to banks making a choice between two ends of a spectrum: Either holding more capital to sustain the same amount of lending, or keeping the gross amount of capital and reducing risk. Most banks leaned towards reducing risk by cutting loans to riskier assets. SMEs became an easy target: High risk, lots of person-power needed to process loans and, with a higher capital requirement, now a guaranteed lower return.

Pretty simple, right? No? Okay, here's a sample problem.

XYZ Bank in Taxastania has the choice of the following investment options, yielding:

  • Treasuries: 5 percent
  •  Investment Grade Corporates: 10 percent
  •  Unrated SMEs: 15 percent

And assuming that the cost of processing/managing these investments was the same (which it is not), what would be the best investment. Easy, right? The SMEs.

Ah, but here's the rub. Under Basel , each of these instruments has a different capital requirement. Again, somewhat broadly, say they were required to hold the following percentages of capital against each of these investments:

  • Treasuries: 2 percent
  •  Investment Grade Corporates: 5 percent
  •  Unrated SMEs: 10 percent

As such, leverage for each is:

  • Treasuries: 50 times
  •  IG Corporates: 20 times
  •  Unrated SMEs: 10 times

Meaning investment return would be, assuming no defaults and linear payment (two huge assumptions):

  • Treasuries: 50 x 5 percent = 250 percent
  •  IG Corporates: 20 x 8 percent = 160 percent
  •  Unrated SMEs: 10 x 10 percent = 100 percent

So, what looks like a no-brainer, actually, generally, becomes a no-go.

Given their size, SMEs tend to be very dependent on bank credit, as other financing sources, such as wholesale debt or intra-firm funding are not available. As such, Basel III rules disproportionately affect SMEs access to capital.

At the time that the Basel III accords were formulated, contemporary commentators such as the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants , a prominent global accountancy body, anticipated negative consequences for small and medium-sized businesses, noting that: “... the credit crunch and economic slowdown that followed it have hit smaller enterprises hard. Although Basel III is often described as a recipe for mitigating and perhaps even avoiding future financial crises, its effects on lending to small businesses are generally expected to be disproportionately negative.”

The result of Basel III on SME lending has, indeed, been disproportionately negative. In May 2016, the European Banking Authority released a report trying to analyze the effect of Basel III on SME lending. One conclusion: “SME lending remained below its pre-crisis level.” The United States Treasury recently released a report that reached similar conclusions.

The way Basel III categorizes overdrafts also has bad consequences for SMEs. One of the key ways SMEs meet working capital needs is through bank overdrafts, which occur when money is withdrawn from a bank account and the available balance goes below zero. Under Basel III, banks have to consider overdrafts the same as draws on loan facilities. In other words, they have to hold credit risk capital on overdraft facilities, which are typically considered to be simple short-term liquidity products, instead of loans. Structurally, loans and overdrafts are different and should be treated differently under regulatory capital rules. This all means it’s no longer attractive for banks to offer overdrafts.

Know Your Client and the decline of correspondent banking

Through correspondent banking relationships, banks can access financial services in different jurisdictions and provide cross-border payment services to their customers, supporting international trade and financial inclusion.

Large global banks have traditionally maintained broad networks of correspondent banking relationships, but this situation is changing, rapidly. In particular, some banks providing these services are reducing the number of relationships they maintain and are establishing few new ones. As a result, many correspondent banks, especially in emerging markets, are at risk of being cut off from international payment networks. This implies a threat that cross-border payment networks might fragment, and that the range of available options for these transactions could narrow.

Bank of England Governor and Chairman of the G-20 Financial Stability Board Mark Carney recently highlighted the risk, writing: “So-called ‘de-risking’ in correspondent banking relationships has threatened the ability of some emerging market and developing economies to access the international financial system, and it risks driving flows underground.”

Rising costs and uncertainty about how far customer due diligence should go in order to ensure regulatory compliance and to what extent banks need to know their customers’ customers — the so-called Know Your Client — are cited by banks as among the main reasons for cutting back their correspondent relationships. In fact, “90 percent of bank officers surveyed by the International Chamber of Commerce in 2016 cited the cost or complexity of compliance requirements relating to anti-money laundering, Know Your Client and sanctions as a chief barrier to the provision of trade finance.”

A further 77 percent cited Basel III specifically as a significant impediment to trade finance. To avoid penalties and related reputational damage, internationally active banks have developed an increased sensitivity to the risks associated with this business. This sensitivity has particularly hurt SMEs, which encompassed 58 percent of rejected trade-finance proposals, despite forming only 44 percent of submissions.

As a consequence, they have cut back services for correspondent banks that: (i) Do not generate sufficient volumes to overcome compliance costs; (ii) are located in jurisdictions perceived as too risky, i.e., emerging and frontier markets; (iii) provide payment services to customers about which the necessary information for an adequate risk assessment is not available; or (iv) offer products or services or have customers that pose a higher risk for antimoney laundering/combating the financing of terrorism and are, therefore, more difficult to manage. The Middle East is often cited as being particularly vulnerable to this risk.

For first time participants in the financial sector — oftentimes SMEs that are graduating from the “grey economy,” a large segment in emerging markets — the intrusive nature of the expanded due diligence and regulations can be an insurmountable barrier. Most of these firms will not have ready, or sufficiently-prepared access to all of the financial information, historical data and other sources required by their counterpart at a financial institution. Adding the sometimes overlapping and excessive number of touchpoints to provide and recertifying key data can often lead to slow, tedious and inconsistent relationships between financial institutions and SMEs. This increases the opportunity and actual cost to a given financial institution, which can seemingly justify their reticence to lend to SMEs.

A recent WTO report on Trade Finance and SMEs found that superfluous and not harmonized regulatory requirements were seen as a serious impediment to trade finance.

Billy Evans, managing director of operations for Barclays Africa , summed it up nicely in a recent interview on how antimoney laundering, KYC and other regulations in Basel III have proliferated rapidly, with many inconsistencies or even incongruities, which can dramatically increase the time and expense needed to be compliant. Beyond highlighting the general burden of these regulations, he emphasized how most of this must be completed pre-deal: “You cannot do deals or conduct trade finance, for example, without having these things in place,” he said. “The onerous regulations really do lengthen the time between interest and execution on a loan or form of credit, which can hurt SMEs in particular, given their lower levels of free capital.”

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)

Crowdsourcing innovations that enhance economic stability. Submit by September 15!

Posted By Phil Psilos, FHI 360, Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Have your organization, investees, or clients created a product, program, or policy that enhances economic stability for poor and vulnerable people?  We'd like to hear about it!

FHI 360 is working with support from The Rockefeller Foundation to surface global innovations that improve economic stability for individuals, communities, local governments and businesses .

The research team is looking for innovations that enhance several dimensions of economic stability: (1) income and asset stability through more consistent employment, wages, and safety nets; (2) specific financial products, skill development approaches, or other means that help people plan for and invest in the future (3) innovations that improve people’s confidence in economic management, regulatory quality, and dispute resolution, or allow them to participate more effectively in shaping these environments in ways that enable better decisions at the household and business levels.  

Top innovations will be featured in an Atlas of Stability Innovation published by FHI 360 in early 2018, in our online media campaigns, and promoted in global media.

Please submit your innovations by September 15, 2017 at at the submission page or visit the project website to learn more. You can also reach us at innovation4stability at gmail dot com          

Tags:  crowdsourcing  emerging markets  Global. Development  inclusive business  inclusive innovation  innovation  Microfinance  social enterprise  social innovation 

PermalinkComments (0)

MIF Awards 2018: Applications closing in 1 week!

Posted By Chandrakant Komaragiri, Ennovent, Tuesday, August 15, 2017
Updated: Tuesday, August 15, 2017
Ennovent is supporting Marico Innovation Foundation Awards 2018 – one of the largest platforms for recognizing and showcasing best of Indian Innovation. Helping them to recognize innovations for both ‘for Profit ‘and ‘Not for Profit’ social organizations.
Any organization which is beyond the prototype stage and has contributed to the innovation space in the last 6 years is eligible to apply. The innovation could be the work of one person, a few people, a large team or a department.
You can fill the application using the online form. Here is offline form for your reference. 

Given your presence and connect with enterprises and entrepreneurs, we seek your support in identifying potential participants. 
Could you suggest the awards to the entrepreneurs, and startups in your networks? It would be great if you could refer the organizations from your network and we could follow up with them.

In case you have any queries or issues, please feel free to reach out to us at 

 Attached Thumbnails:

Tags:  inclusive business  India  innovation  larger SMEs  social enterprise  social innovation  sustainability 

PermalinkComments (0)

Millennials Seek Shift in Workplace Culture

Posted By Peter Ptashko, Global Social Entrepreneurship Network (GSEN), Wednesday, August 9, 2017
Updated: Friday, August 11, 2017

Today GSEN: the Global Social Entrepreneurship Network is delighted to launch the next blog in its 'Summer of Talent' series.

Rafael Achondo is founder at 'Matteria' and writes on how to manage a new generation of human capital eager for purpose and culture in the workplace. 

Considering the ambition and volatility of this growing workforce, attracting and retaining the best talent will depend on the ability of management to build teams with shared values and beliefs.

According to the 2016 Deloitte Millennial Survey, 66 percent of professionals between 25 and 35 years old are considering leaving their current jobs before 2020; 13 percent will leave in the next 6 months. A symptom of the disconnect between employers and employees is the perception that a search for work- life balance indicates a lack of interest in the job, or that impatience for advancement comes from arrogance and hubris. There are misunderstandings between managers and millennial workers because the workforce is changing, while the workplace is not.

The LinkedIn Job Switchers Global Report 2015 shows that the number of active job seekers has increased by 36 percent in the last four years, and that 34 percent of these ‘job switchers’ are expected to move not only to a new employer but into different industries and positions altogether. Yes, they want to be elsewhere, doing and learning something different. “Why should I keep working in the banking sector if I can also work in the energy, IT, or retail industries?” “Why should I learn only from finance if my skills allow me to gain knowledge in marketing, logistics or human capital management?”

Managers might wonder: “Why do our employees have this insatiable curiosity, flexibility and ambition?”

The answer is simple: because they can. We are dealing with young professionals who descend from the generation with the greatest purchasing power in history, the offspring of abundance and citizens of an increasingly connected global village, less ideological, modern and tolerant to diversity, and with access to inexhaustible sources of information, every day more democratized. This context empowers them to believe that they can achieve more: 77 percent of young professionals feel partially or absolutely in control of their professional future and 81 percent are willing to travel anywhere in the world in order to find a job to fulfil their expectations, according to 2016 Deloitte Millennial Survey.

The main challenge today is to see this labor turnover as a real trend that gives organizations the opportunity to develop management strategies that really add value to human capital and to every person on a team. To use millennials’ ambition and diversity to bolster an organization’s vision and fulfill its purpose of doing business.

What kind of organizations have taken advantage of this ’problem‘? Those who appreciate this new generation and their drive, both individual and collective, those who understand their personal quest for purpose, and even further those who value their aspiration to belong to a culture and a community. Purpose and culture are the current and future keys to managing the most important asset any organization could have: human capital.

Millennials take pride in contributing to something that really matters. Well-educated and with no shortage of opportunities, their ambitions go beyond job security or earning a large salary with benefits. Employment is not only about making enough money to enjoy leisure activities in one’s free time. Another key factor to happiness is personal fulfilment and self-esteem within work. This evolved perspective includes a society where individual behavior has consequences and in which each person contributes to the greater good. Millennials want their employers to be in tune with this world, the world they want to build, regardless of the product, service, or industry in which they operate.

Beyond purpose, millennials also have the human need to communicate and interact with others around a collective welfare goal. Young professionals are inspired more by causes rather than ideologies, by
convictions rather than religious beliefs. Many of these individuals have little confidence in current political establishments and economic systems that breed inequality, which is why they want to be part of organizational cultures that break these paradigms and solve these challenges. They are eager to be a part of work teams with values, behaviors, language, beliefs, and power structures that positively impact their lives and the lives of others. They seek a different, more holistic way of doing business.

The following strategies can help organizations create an environment that will attract and retain young professionals:

  • Generate a vision and culture that Millennials want to see reflected in society
  • Create collaborative environments
  • Encourage leadership that empowers individuals, providing opportunities both for innovation as
    well as failure
  • Manage global, multi-disciplinary teams and innovative projects where employees can contribute
    their talents and fulfil roles that enable them to grow and advance
  • Equip teams to work on common goals towards a better society
  • Measure performance by goals achieved rather than hours in the office

Most importantly, an employer’s invitation to future employees should not only be to fill a position, but to enter an open space where they can learn and become the best version of themselves, both personally and professionally.

What if after all this effort employees still leave the organization? While these strategies should help turnover rates to decrease, human capital management goals should target each professional passing through an organization individually. Investment in the talent of your employees will make a difference in the problems they might solve and the impact they create in the future. Equipping employees to become change makers will benefit society, even if that benefit is created with another organization. When young professionals have been proud to be part of a team, they will take the culture and values to other causes and organizations.

The trends are evident and growing. Society is evolving and with it the aspirations and demands of the new generation of professionals. The organizations that take risks and innovate in this area will attract and retain the best talent. To achieve this we will need leaders who not only understand sustainability\ as a competitive strategy, but who also adapt their management to develop professionals for a new
economy, focused on economic, social and environmental positive impact. Understanding this will allow leaders to become real cultural contributors, as they promote in their employees and teams the same positive values we want to see in society.

About Rafael Achondo

Founder at Matteria. Co-Founder and former CEO at Pegas con Sentido Chile. Former
Executive Director of Development at TECHO (Un Techo para mi País). Co-Founder and former CEO at TECHO U.S.
Twitter: @rafoachondo


Tags:  ANDE Members  social entrepreneurship 

PermalinkComments (0)

Social Entrepreneurship is Gambling for People with a Conscience

Posted By Jonathan Lewis, Opportunity Collaboration, Tuesday, June 27, 2017


Social Entrepreneurship is Gambling for People with a Conscience


Posted by Jonathan Lewis, Author, The Unfinished Social Entrepreneur.


Failure is not contagious. You don’t get it from toilet seats. It’s not transmitted by airborne pathogens. You don’t catch it from talking about it.


Nevertheless, in polite conversation among social entrepreneurs, failure – total, complete, abject failure – is taboo territory. It seems to go against human nature to readily acknowledge a mistake, let alone a failure. To twist a line from the poet Oscar Wilde, failure is the social entrepreneurship that dares not speak its name.


Unexamined failure is a social sector scandal, a cover-up as unproductive as failure itself. An un-scrutinized mistake leads to more of the same. Every airplane crash is automatically investigated by a team of taxpayer-financed independent experts. Industry-wide safety improvements ensue as a result, which is why, when I am in an airplane at 35,000 feet, it usually doesn’t fall out of the sky. Professional sports teams debrief after every game. Military maneuvers are unpacked in war colleges. In Silicon Valley, failure is practically a badge of honor; without a few failures under your belt, no one thinks you’re innovating enough.


In contrast, when a social enterprise crashes, we hardly hear about it. Without postmortems, quality improvement in the social sector remains elusive. Deprived of case studies about failure, we’re left with the probability that our social ventures will be the next road kill, and the next, and the next.


We keep our failures hidden to forestall becoming social sector pariahs. Failed organizations don’t get marquee billing at social change conferences. Workshops about failure are ghettoized, not lionized. We know that success compounds (called the cumulative advantage effect); conversely, underdogs (by class, by race, by gender, by physical appearance and – yes – by past performance) suffer a cumulative disadvantage effect. Failure can prefigure our future prospects.


Another reason to conceal our failures is that grantmakers, government decision-makers, board members, the media and everyone else prefer Hollywood endings to life’s uncertain nuances. Good triumphs over evil. Boy gets girl. Social venture solves social problem. It’s thorny to attract donors or impact investors with a story about mistakes, missed cues, fizzles and fiascos. Few funders fund R&D; fewer still will underwrite a flunking project for a second attempt.


Chiefly, change agents dislike discussing failure because it filets open our fears, cutting close to our insecurities. In comparison to everyone else’s boastful press releases and proud Facebook postings, failure makes me feel small and unattractive. Worse, failure makes me feel unworthy of the causes I fight for.


In both the social and non-social business categories, I have architected several prime-time fiascos. Moreover, in the nooks and crannies of my professional accomplishments, I’ve accomplished a thousand failures of character. At times, I failed to make a decision when one was needed. Other times, I acted impulsively, forgetting to pause long enough to consider all the factors indispensable to making a fully-informed judgment. I have failed in friendships and flagged in kindheartedness. Sometimes, I failed to live up to my own principles. Much to my surprise, I’m not perfect.


When I am rejected (by the marketplace, by funders, by whomever, by whatever), my thoughts whirl with questions: What did I do wrong? What could I have done differently? Will I be stigmatized as incompetent? Am I worthy of social entrepreneurship? Am I worthy, period?


Whether we’re a CEO-Founder, or one of the vital middle managers, consultants or volunteers working for an NGO or social venture, we each have our own ingredients to add to the collective stew of failure. With all the headlines and hype about social entrepreneurs and scaling innovations, it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that winning (or losing) at social change is a team sport. We can all succeed at failure.


Failing sucks. When a project fails, if we care enough (and of course we do), then it’s heartbreaking. As if replaying, over and over again, a failed friendship in my mind, I never quite get over a social venture crash and burn. The wincing memories and recycled self-doubt remind me that I’m human and vulnerable. They also remind me to treasure the heart-filling, awe-inspiring psychic rewards of social justice work.


If you get the choice, I recommend success over failure. Be that as it may, be prepared to make mistakes. Failure is how we live our lives. Things go wrong. It happens in life, in business, in government and, yes, in social justice work too. It behooves us to get good at the art of managing and mitigating failure; in my book (from which this blog is excerpted), I offer a few survival tips: Hug a colleague. Avoid self-delusion. Mess up early and often. Share your failure. Maintain perspective. Hang in there.


Social entrepreneurship is gambling for people with a conscience. Realizing with absolute certitude that I’m going to lose (probably more than once) is liberating. Accepting the prospect of failure means that I can shed paralysis-by-analysis and get started right away, right now, on my social justice work.


The anatomy of social change, and the core of our social entrepreneurship, depend on taking risk after risk for our convictions. Daring to fail is part of our job description.



 Jonathan C. Lewis is a life-long social justice activist and accomplished social entrepreneur. He is the founder of MCE Social Capital and the Opportunity Collaboration, and co-founder of Copia Global. He is a trustee of the Swift Foundation and general partner of Dev Equity

Jonathan may be contacted at his website: His twitter handle is @SoCentClinic.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (1)

Webinar Recording: Is everything we thought about job creation wrong?

Posted By Genevieve Edens, Aspen Institute, Wednesday, June 21, 2017

More Sweatshops for Africa?  
A Discussion of Research and Practitioner Responses

Much of work that the small and growing business sector does is based on the assumption that as small firms grow, they will create jobs that can lift people out of poverty, grow the middle class, and drive broad economic growth. However, there is relatively little research on the ways that the jobs that SGBs offer to low-skill workers might impact employees' income and overall well-being.  

This webinar will focus on recent research from Chris Blattman and Stefan Dercon that addresses this question: Occupational Choice in Early Industrializing Societies: Experimental Evidence on the Income and Health Effects of Industrial and Entrepreneurial Work

This evaluation focused on five firms in Ethiopia, and found that despite our expectations, low-skilled workers offered a job were not better off than the group who did not receive an offer.   In addition, retention at the firms was extremely low -- over 75% of workers quit within a year.  What are the implications of this research for the small and growing business sector?  

VIew the webinar recording to hear Chris Blattman (University of Chicago) and Leslie Johnston (C&A Foundation) discuss this research and what this means for practitioners focused on job creation, job quality, and small and growing businesses.  

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)

Toilet Accelerator India Edition Challenge - open for applications until 10th July!

Posted By Claire Balbo, Toilet Board Coalition, Tuesday, June 20, 2017
Do you have a business or business idea for toilet innovations and service models, circular economy waste management and resource recovery, or mobile, digital and e-heath applications for sanitation in India?

Apply for over 100,000 Euro in support from global brand companies by 10 July 2017!

The Toilet Accelerator India Edition challenge calls for applications from businesses that are addressing the most challenging water and sanitation issues in the country. 
Top 3 winners will be announced at the 9th Sankalp Global Summit from 6-8 December, 2017 in Mumbai. The winners will receive over 100,000 Euro of in-kind support from leading companies over a 12 month period, as part of the 2018 Toilet Accelerator cohort of the Swiss based Toilet Board Coalition. The Toilet Accelerator Program provides expert mentorship and support, as well as access to the TBC-Sankalp investor networks. The Toilet Board Coalition is supported by some of the largest multinational corporates like Firmenich, Lixil, Kimberly-Clark and Unilever.  

The Toilet Board Coalition brings together experts from business, investment, and the global sanitation community through our platform to cross-fertilise experiences, innovate at all levels, and catalyse the growth of profitable sanitation businesses that deliver sanitation to all.  The Toilet Accelerator is a corporate accelerator program to facilitate private sector engagement and mentorship to sanitation businesses and entrepreneurs serving low-income markets. For more information on the Toilet Board Coalition, please visit the website.
Sankalp Forum is one of the largest platforms promoting innovation and entrepreneurship in emerging markets and building the ecosystem for business-led inclusive development. Over the past nine years, Sankalp has showcased over 400 sustainable enterprises across India, Africa and Southeast Asia, enabled 500+ mentoring connections and facilitated over USD 240Mn of equity investments. For more information on Sankalp Forum, please visit the website.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to us by contacting Claire Balbo:
#WeCantWait to know about your business!!

 Attached Files:

Tags:  entrepreneurship  India  sanitation  Sankalp  SDGs  SGBs  SMEs  social entrepreneurship  sustainability 

PermalinkComments (0)

Introducing FINANCE CONNECT: Connecting SMEs with the best financing opportunity

Posted By Hitzel Trejo, Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade, Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Updated: Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Finance Connect is a unique service that focuses on addressing the needs of larger sustainable agricultural and forestry SMEs in developing countries that have financing needs of more than USD 800,000. These are usually enterprises that have larger projects, or projects that require both short and long-term finance. It is a tailor-made service that supports the enterprises throughout the process of obtaining finance, including linking SMEs to financial services providers (FSPs) that can meet their needs in an accurate, efficient, and effective manner. Ultimately, this service will enable FAST and its partners to create a tangible benefit on the ground by helping SMEs restructure their finances, reach their potential growth, employ more people, and have a more sustainable business model that will benefit them and their communities in the long term.

Download File (PDF)

Tags:  Access to Finance  financial inclusion  larger SMEs 

PermalinkComments (0)

Invitation to Launch Event of New Horizons: Accelerating Sustainable Development in Kenya through Inclusive Business

Posted By Tomohiro Nagasaki, Business Call to Action at UNDP, Tuesday, June 6, 2017
The Business Call to Action (BCtA) in collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Kenya, the Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA) and Sustainable Inclusive Business Kenya (SIB) have the pleasure to invite you to the launch of a new publication titled New Horizons: Accelerating Sustainable Development through Inclusive Business in Kenya on Thursday 22nd June, 2017The publication provides insights gathered from over 50 companies engaged in inclusive business in Kenya. It offers examples of successful and emerging models and recommendation on how inclusive business could be scaled to accelerate the achievement of the SDGs.
The launch will take place on 22nd June, 2017
at the Southern Sun Mayfair Hotel in Nairobi
from 8:00 am – 13.00 am.
After the launch of the publication, the Business Call to Action will further organize two optional trainings targeted for private sector participants on inclusive business and impact measurement. A detailed agenda for the event can be found attached.
Kindly confirm your participation at your earliest convenience or latest 15th June, 2017. 
Select your preferred option by clicking on one of the links below. 
·         Participate in the launch and in the inclusive business and SDGs training: LINK 
·         Participate in the launch and in the measuring impact training: LINK
·         Participate in the launch only: LINK 
Alternatively you can directly confirm to Nadia Boujdadi
We hope you can join us and look forward to your active participation.
 We are looking forward to meeting you at the launch, thank you.
Business Call to Action




Download File (PDF)

Tags:  #inclusivebiz #kenya #opportunities 

PermalinkComments (0)

Webinar Recording: Accelerating Startups in Emerging Markets

Posted By Abigayle Davidson, Aspen Institute, Thursday, May 25, 2017

GALI Webinar: Accelerating Startups in Emerging Markets from ANDE on Vimeo.

GALI Webinar: Accelerating Startups in Emerging Markets

This webinar presents the latest report from the Global Accelerator Learning Initiative (GALI). 

Accelerating Startups in Emerging Markets: Insights from 43 Programs examines data from over 2,400 early stage ventures that applied to 43 acceleration programs run by twelve different organizations in nine different countries. The report, developed in partnership with Deloitte Canada, compares the performance of accelerators in emerging markets with those run in high-income countries. It challenges commonly held assumptions about the perceived differences between the two geographies using quantitative and qualitative data collected from entrepreneurs, ventures, and the accelerator programs themselves.

In this webinar, we walk through:

  • Data on the early impacts of acceleration on revenues, employees, and investment 
  • Qualitative and quantitative insights into commonly-held beliefs about differences between emerging market and high-income country entrepreneurs and accelerators
  • Reflections from practitioners 


Peter Roberts is the Academic Director of Social Enterprise @ Goizueta (SE@G) and Professor of Organization and Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. Professor Roberts founded SE@G after many years of conducting research on how the behavior and performance of organizations evolve over time.  He directs the Entrepreneurship Database Program, which forms the foundation of GALI, and has been working with accelerator programs around the world to collect and analyze data describing the many entrepreneurs that they attract and support.

Abby Davidson is a Research Analyst at ANDE, with a special focus on the role of accelerators in emerging markets. She leads the Global Accelerator Survey at GALI, and co-authors major GALI publications, and leads the Data Brief series. 

Practitioner Reflections:

Anne-Lorraine Meunier, Communication and Public Relations Manager, New Ventures

Heather Strachan, Manager for Emerging Markets Operations and Product, Village Capital

Have questions? Share them with us here.

Tags:  2017  accelerators  GALI 

PermalinkComments (1)
Page 3 of 33
1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  >   >>   >|