Acceso al Crédito y Redistribución del Ingreso en los Mercados de Crédito en Países de Ingresos Bajos

This means that only a small proportion of rural producers receive formal loans, and among those with access to institutional credit, a small group holds a disproportionate share of the total credit disbursed. It has been estimated that, on average, only about 15% of farmers in Asia and Latin America, and less than 5% of farmers in Africa, have had access to institutional credit. The limited access to credit and the high degree of concentration in the loan portfolios of formal financial institutions characterize the evolution of formal credit markets in low-income countries. These problems are particularly acute in the case of rural financial markets. Since most of the population in these countries lives and works in rural areas, these phenomena have important implications for income distribution. The circumstances associated with both the demand for and the supply of credit explain the limited access and the high degree of concentration in loan portfolios. Low average returns and high risks associated with many agricultural activities explain, in part, a limited demand for agricultural credit. High transaction costs, both for borrowers and lenders, reduce the size of the markets and restrict access to loans for many rural producers. The high degree of concentration in loan portfolios is often explained by the concentration of wealth and underlying political power. If a few wealthy producers can control a significant portion of the community's assets, it is not surprising that they also receive a significant portion of the credit. Increasing evidence, however, suggests that the distribution of loan sizes in credit portfolios is more concentrated than the distribution of income, the distribution of agricultural production value, or the distribution of land. The concentration of credit, for one, requires additional explanation. Although initial wealth is an important determinant of differential access to loans, in fragmented capital markets, highly restricted access to credit explains a significant portion of the differences in wealth growth over time. Access to credit is not only a consequence but also a cause of these differences in wealth. Authorities and politicians concerned with income inequality have emphasized the redistribution of land as a solution to concentration problems. Despite the importance of access to credit in providing farmers with control over resources, financial reform has been less popular. In fact, financial policies, particularly the imposition of interest rate ceilings, have restricted access to limited credit and exacerbated the problem of unequal wealth distribution. Through different types of controls, most low-income countries have maintained fixed nominal interest rates for long periods. In real terms, these rates have often been negative, unrealistic, and unbearable. Additionally, preferential interest rates have been established to favor agriculture and other priority sectors. This chapter proposes that these interest rate policies have significantly contributed to the concentration of loan portfolios of formal institutions and have accentuated restrictions on access to institutional credit. Modifying these policies is a necessary, although not sufficient, condition for greater equality in rural areas. Interest rates affect income distribution in several ways. As the relative price of present goods in terms of future goods, interest rates affect flows of savings and investment and, therefore, affect the intertemporal distribution of income between present and future generations. In terms of financial assets, interest rates affect the composition of wealth portfolios, the distribution of income among asset holders. As a component of borrowing costs, interest rates also affect the distribution of income among debtors and creditors, as well as between those with access to credit and those without. Interest rates also affect financial income distribution.