Sefa Awaworyi Churchill

Fractionalization, entrepreneurship, and the institutional environment for entrepreneurship

The vast majority of the literature on ethnicity and entrepreneurship focuses on the construct of ethnic entrepreneurship. However, very little is known about how ethnic heterogeneity affects entrepreneurship, and the institutional arrangements affecting entrepreneurship. This study attempts to fill the gap, and thus examines the effect of ethnic heterogeneity on various outcomes associated with entrepreneurship and the institutional environment for entrepreneurship. Using indices of ethnic and linguistic fractionalization, we show that ethnic heterogeneity negatively influences entrepreneurship. We argue that potential channels that can explain the negative effect of fractionalization on entrepreneurship include trust, social network, and innovation, among others. This study provides a new perspective on the existing debate that seeks to understand why the levels of entrepreneurial success vary across countries.

Internet Use and Ethnic Heterogeneity in a Cross‐Section of Countries

This paper investigates the association between ethnic heterogeneity and information technology related outcomes such as internet access and internet use. We argue that the global digital divide, as measured by cross-country differences in internet access and use, could be explained by cross-country differences in ethnic heterogeneity. We use indices of ethnic and linguistic fractionalization as measures of ethnic heterogeneity. Using data on a cross-section of 93 countries, we find evidence of a negative association between ethnic heterogeneity and the use and access of internet. Thus, cross-country differences in the global digital divide can be explained by the levels of ethnic fractionalization. Other determinants of the digital divide include income, infrastructure, literacy level, level of urbanization and inequality.

What has failed: microfinance or evaluation methods?

ABSTRACT This research note reflects on existing research and perspectives on the efficacy of microfinance as a poverty alleviation tool. We argue that while the story about the success of microfinance is widespread, its failure is also well documented at various levels. More importantly, systematic reviews of the existing research on microfinance performance do not support the efficacy of microfinance. This suggests that microfinance has failed. However, these reviews are based on studies that have adopted widely criticized empirical/quantitative techniques. Thus, in this research note, we attempt to sensitize both the research community and policy-makers to reconsider what has really failed in the context of microfinance, and act accordingly.

Sustainability and outreach: a comparative study of MFIs in South Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean

Previous studies indicate that microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have different operational strategies to MFIs in South Asia (SA). Given the recent emphasis placed on the feasibility of MFIs to achieve the dual goals of outreach and sustainability concurrently, we examine and compare the relationship between sustainability and outreach of MFIs in LAC with MFIs in SA. Our results indicate that trade-offs exist between outreach and sustainability in both regions. However, the severity of trade-off is dependent on which goal MFIs decide to focus on in each region.

SUSTAINABILITY AND OUTREACH: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MFIs IN SOUTH ASIA AND LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

Previous studies indicate that microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have different operational strategies to MFIs in South Asia (SA). Given the recent emphasis placed on the feasibility of MFIs to achieve the dual goals of outreach and sustainability concurrently, we examine and compare the relationship between sustainability and outreach of MFIs in LAC with MFIs in SA. Our results indicate that trade-offs exist between outreach and sustainability in both regions. However, the severity of trade-off is dependent on which goal MFIs decide to focus on in each region.

EXCLUSIVE OR EXCLUSION? AN EXAMINATION OF STRATEGIC DISCRIMINATION IN MARKETING

Marketing managers must strategically decide which markets they will serve and which ones they will not serve. This means marketers must strategically discriminate among markets and market segments; this is the logic that underlies segmentation, targeting and positioning. Although such strategic use of discrimination is considered acceptable in marketing, it can also sometimes lead to consumer backlash and criticism. When is strategic discrimination acceptable and when is it deemed unacceptable? Using six domains of marketing practice, this paper seeks to examine the fuzzy boundary of acceptable strategic discrimination-often labelled as exclusive- and unacceptable strategic discrimination-often labelled as exclusion- as well as offer suggestions to marketing managers and policy makers to navigate it.

SUSTAINABILITY AND OUTREACH: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MFIs IN SOUTH ASIA AND LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN: Microfinance Sustainability and Outreach

Previous studies indicate that microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have different operational strategies to MFIs in South Asia (SA). Given the recent emphasis placed on the feasibility of MFIs to achieve the dual goals of outreach and sustainability concurrently, we examine and compare the relationship between sustainability and outreach of MFIs in LAC with MFIs in SA. Our results indicate that trade-offs exist between outreach and sustainability in both regions. However, the severity of trade-off is dependent on which goal MFIs decide to focus on in each region.