PHÁt triển hệ thống tín dụng nông thôN Ở việt nam1

TÀI LIỆU THAM KHẢO

1. 
   Asian Development Bank (2000), The Role of Central Banks in Microfinance in Asia and the Pacific, (Chapter on Vietnam by Gilberto Llanto), 2000.
   
2. 
   Dao Van Hung & Andrea Hotte (1998), Notebook 14 Case Study: People’s Credit Funds in Vietnam, Développment International Desjardins, Ottawa, 1998.
   
3. 
   Du Zhixiong (1998), The Dynamics and Impact of the Development of Rural Cooperative Funds in China, Working Paper No. 98/2, Chinese Economies Research Centre, The University of Adelaide, 3/1998.
   
4. 
   Đầu Tư (1999), Vốn lên miền núi còn lắm gập ghềnh, đăng lại trên mạng VNN, http://home.vnn.vn/thong_tin/kinhte/dautu/1999_04_26_01.html, truy cập ngày 30/11/2002.
   
5. 
   Daniel C. Hardy, Paul Holden, & Vassili Prokopenko (2002), Microfinance Institutions and Public Policy, IMF Working Paper 02/159, International Monetary Fund, 9/2002.
   
6. 
   Alan Johnson (1996), Microfinance in Vietnam: A Collaborative Study Based upon the Experiences of NGOs, UN Agencies and Bilateral Donors, Main ReporConsultative Group to Assist the Poorest-United Nations Development Programme, Hanoi, 5/1996.
   
7. 
   Lê Văn Sở (2002), Ngân hàng Nông nghiệp và Phát triển Nông thôn Việt Nam với kinh tế nông nghiệp, nông thôn, Tạp chí Lý luận chính trị, Học viện Chính trị Quốc gia Hồ Chí Minh, 7/2002, http://www.cpv.org.vn/hcmnpa/nghiencuu/tapchi/lyluanchinhtri/so072002/07_levanso.htm, truy cập ngày 15/11/2002.
   
8. 
   Adam McCarty (2001), Microfinance in Vietnam: A Survey of Schemes and Issues, British Department of International Development and State Bank of Vietnam, 4/2001.
   
9. 
   Nguyễn Đức Hoàn (2001), Vốn tín dụng ngân hàng phát triển nông nghiệp nước ta trong giai đoạn mới, Tạp chí Phát triển Kinh tế, Đại học Kinh Tế TP. HCM, 10/2001.
   
10. 
    Sài Gòn Giải Phóng (1999), Nghịch lý tín dụng nông thôn – Ngân hàng thừa vốn, nông dân thiếu tiền, 1999, đăng lại trên mạng VNN, http://home.vnn.vn/thong_tin/kinhte/dautu/1999_07_14_01.html, truy cập ngày 1/11/2002.
    
11. 
    Hans D. Seibel (1998), Microfinance strategies: Strategies for developing viable microfinance institutions with sustainable services – The Asian experience, Near East – North Africa Regional Agricultural Credit Association. Microcredit Conference, Amman, Jordan, 1 – 3/6/1998.
    
12. 
    S. Tilakaratna (1996), Credit schemes for the rural poor: Some conclusions and lessons from practice, Issues in Development Discussion Paper 9, International Labour Organization, 1996.
    
13. 
    Tổng cục Thống kê (1999), Điều tra Mức sống Dân cư Việt Nam 1997-1998, Hà Nội, 1999.
    
14. 
    World Bank (2000), Vietnam: Advancing Rural Development – From Vision to Action, 2000.
    
15. 
    Jacob Yaron, McDonald Benjamin, & Gerda Piprek (1997), Rural Finance: Issues, Design, and Best Practices, Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Studies and Monograph Series 14, Washington , D.C., The World Bank, 1997.
    
16. 
    Jacob Yaron & McDonald Benjamin (1997), Developing Rural Financial Markets, Finance & Development, December 1997.
    
17. 
    Jacob Yaron, McDonald Benjamin & Stephanie Charitonenko (1998), Promoting Efficient Rural Financial Intermediation, The World Bank Research Observer, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 147-70, August 1998.
    

• 
  The key for success is “to bring banks to people”. The official financial system should be expanded with broader branch network, half-time transaction offices down to hamlets or even at fairs.
  
• 
  In general, successful rural micro credit programs have linked credit supply with saving mobilization. In supplying rural financial services, it is important to enable farmers to borrow and lend money (even very small savings). Such savings would ensure sustainable development of the credit programs as well as borrowers’ self-control.
  
• 
  Lending should not be separated with rural development programs. Credit should be supported by advance technology, infrastructure, input support (in seed, fertilizer) and output market for exchanging agricultural products and other products of farmers. Rural credit programs are usually integrated with community development including local capacity building, mutual affection and interdependence improvement, social linking development through responsibility-sharing credit groups.
  
• 
  One important contribution to the success of rural credit programs is to minimize transaction cost for both creditor and debtor. Transaction cost of credit organizations could be reduced by improving project assessment, simplifying lending procedures, rationalizing debt collection system, training credit staff who could be in close contact with people to catch up with their demand for credit and livelihood in order to manage loans more effectively.
  
• 
  Providing loans to responsibility-bearing groups has shown positive results. Risk sharing and inter-management within each group help raise its possibility of paying debt. Each member of the group would act as a guarantee for the other members.
  
• 
  Paying attention to potential profit is vital to the sustainable development of rural credit programs.
  

• 
  Specifying the very intervention form by the Government. The Government must intervene directly in special cases such as natural disaster relief, favorable programs for remote, island, and ethnic minority areas. However, such intervention is not necessarily under the form of abundant and soft credit. Traditional approaches including fixed interest rate or too high legal reserve ratio would end up with strangling the development of credit institutions, preventing the growth of rural credit system.
  
• 
  Bridging official and unofficial credit sectors. If the strength of these sectors are exploited and coordinated, more credit (with higher quality) for rural inhabitants, especially the poor, will be secured.
  
• 
  Focusing on the sustainable development. State-owned credit institutions need to reject their thinking of “credit program is charity” to be less motivated in pursuing interest subsidy that would be benefit for just a few people. Applying interest rates bringing about reasonable profit, self-mobilizing capital rather than depending on the state budget or soft loans, conforming to sound financial rules and practices, etc. are of some ways to help rural financial institutions stand on their own bottom in the long run.
  
• 
  Expanding range of services and supplementary activities. Despite their efforts in serving poor households, Vietnam Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (VBARD) has been limited in remote and mountain areas with the highest poverty rate. Their striving to establish mobile counters is worth expanded. However, there are many places out of service possibly because of the limitation of road system. In areas with low intellectual standard, formal credit institutions should combine their credit program with instructing to borrowers for reasonable use of capital and the feasible plan of risk management. Press has referred to many cases that borrowers, especially in ethnic minority, did not know how to deal with the loans, then did store the money or spend in drinking.
  
• 
  Diversifying rural credit. It is necessary to eliminate the thought of “serving big customers only”. Demand for loans, either of small or large farmers, should be met equally to secure the fairness of rural credit programs, contributing to income raising and poverty alleviation in rural areas. Besides, effectiveness of capital could be reached by improving project assessment and risk estimation.
  
• 
  Boosting saving mobilization. A common misunderstanding is that the poor could not put aside money, leading to the fact that credit programs usually focus on lending rather than saving. In addition to the lack of comprehensive efforts in mobilizing saving, interest policy with ceiling rate fixed by State Bank has limited the credit institutions’ potential of attracting savings.
  
• 
  Paying more attention to rural women. Lending directly to women is considered an important motivation to increase their possibility of participating in economic activities. Moreover, it has positive social effect, freeing them from economic dependency, raising their confidence and autonomy.
  
• 
  Simplifying lending procedures and requirements. Formal credit institutions normally require mortgage, of which land and house are the most popular. Additionally, a set of credit document needs up to 10 seals and signatures of different authorities. Troublesome procedures and principles are huge obstacles to people of low intellectual level, producing evils such as lending go-between.
  
• 
  Loosing the requirement for loan target. Presently, formal credit institutions often provide loans for agricultural production; therefore abandon non-agriculture business activities and other rural customers who do not involve in agriculture. Meanwhile, non-agriculture activities occupy the big share of rural economy indeed. Besides, strict rules in loan target seem to have discriminatory treatment on the poor, further locking them in the vicious circle of poverty.