Impact of Microcredit in Rural Areas of Morocco: Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation

Microcredit has rapidly expanded in the past years, providing access to financial services to a large population previously excluded from the financial system. However, whether it helps the poor has been a subject of intense debate on which, until very recently, there was no rigorous evidence. This paper reports the results of a randomized experiment designed to measure the impact of microcredit in rural areas of Morocco. Within the catchment areas of new MFI branches opened in areas that had previously no access to microcredit, 81 pairs of matched villages were selected. The treatment villages, randomly selected within each pair, were offered microcredit just after Al Amana opened the branch, while the control villages were offered access only two years later. Al Amana program increased access to credit significantly. Its main effect was to expand the scale of existing self-employment activities of households, for both non-livestock agriculture and livestock activities. We find little or no effect on average consumption as well as on other outcomes such as health, education, etc. However, treatment effects are heterogeneous depending on whether the households had an existing self-employment activity at baseline. Households that had a pre-existing activity decrease their non-durable consumption and consumption overall, as they save and borrow to expand their activities. Households that had not a pre-existing activity increase food and durable expenditure and no effects on business outcomes are observed.

Crepon et al (2011)RuralRCTA randomly selected half of 82 paired villages in the catchment areas of newly opened microfinance branches with no previous access to microcredit were offered microcredit (group liability loans), with the remaining villages receiving the same offer two years later.13% increase in HH having a microfinance loan in the treatment villages. Both livestock and non-livestock agricultural activities expanded in the treatment villages (limited to households with a business activity pre-intervention). No effect on average household consumption, poverty or on other outcomes such as health and education. The majority of borrowers were men, and there was no measurable effect on women's empowerment.,495 households in 80 pairs of villages.