Effects of microfinance services on the livelihoods of marketeers in Zambia: A case of Matero market in Lusaka

Abstract

Over the years, marketers in Zambia have increasingly turned to microfinance institutions (MFIs) to access financial assistance for the purpose of driving socio-economic development and alleviating poverty within their households. Recognizing the pivotal role of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and microfinance services in fostering economic growth, the Government of Zambia has proactively established an enabling environment through various policy initiatives. Key among these are the inclusion of provisions for financial inclusion in national policy documents, such as the lapsed Seventh National Development Plan (2017–2021), the National Financial Inclusion Strategy (2017–2022), and the creation of the Ministry of Small Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) to oversee the comprehensive development of SMEs. The primary objective is to empower under-serviced economic agents such as marketers, enabling them to spur business growth and augment their income. In this article, we delve into the impact of microfinance services on the livelihoods of marketers in Zambia. To accomplish this, the study employed a robust quantitative research design, utilizing a research instrument comprising closed-ended questions. The data collected through questionnaires was subjected to meticulous analysis using descriptive statistics and regression analysis, employing the Excel package. The findings of the study revealed that several determinants influence marketers’ participation in MFIs. These determinants include gender, the level of knowledge and understanding, marital status, the type of business, and the duration of business operation. Furthermore, the study reveals that marketers who engage with MFIs experience significantly improved livelihoods compared to those who do not. Access to MFI services plays a pivotal role in enhancing the overall well-being of marketers. Based on the study’s insights, it is strongly recommended that MFIs continue to extend their support and management of loans by providing comprehensive education on loan utilization. Such educational initiatives, offered by MFI officers, should be implemented after clients receive their loan disbursements. By empowering marketers with knowledge and guidance on optimizing loan utilization, MFIs can significantly contribute to the sustained growth and success of marketers’ businesses while simultaneously improving their livelihoods.

Keywords:

• Microfinance
• Livelihoods
• Marketers
• Zambia

1. Introduction

Microfinance in Zambia can be traced as far back as 1970s and the government was the earliest provider of microfinance. In 1980, the Bank of Zambia put up a scheme as a means of encouraging financial institutions to extend credit to small-scale industries. It was after this that the earliest microfinance institutions sprung up and these were Lima Bank in 1987, Cooperative bank in 1989 and Zambia National Building Society (ZNBS) in 1970. Another vital institution established by the government at that time included the Small Industries Development Organization (SIDO) and the Small Enterprise Promotion Unit (SEPU). In 1990s, formal microfinance was dominated by the cooperative societies which were registered as credit unions under the Cooperative Society Act. Unfortunately, these cooperative societies depended on government and donors hence resulted in lots of inefficiency and lack of sustainability (Maimbo & Mavrotas, 2003).

In addition, there was lack of savings mobilization and emphasis on subsidized loans as borrowers considered government loans as fruits of independence (Ibid). Savings mobilization is an interesting topic among low-income individuals because savings increase considerations for development programs that enhance and boost productive income and employment among low-income groups. Moreover, the process of regular saving is often an empowering experience for people used to living at the subsistence level and can greatly contribute to improvement in the quality of their lives. It serves to capitalize on the productive activities, which sustain the household and consequently enhance income (Khan & Rahaman, 2007).

When Zambian government liberalised its economy in the early 1990s by opening the market to the development of various sectors, state-owned financial institutions were not left out. Today, the country has allowed many projects that seek to combat poverty through the provision of finances to citizens needed to expand their businesses or boost the wealth to thrive, which is one of the cornerstones in the vision 2030 which aims to create a Zambia that is a “strong and dynamic middle-income industrial nation that provides opportunities for improving the well-being of all and embodying values of socio-economic justice” (Ministry of National Development Planning, 2008).

The principles laid out in this policy document and others such as the Seventh National Plan (2017–2021) and National Financial Inclusion Strategy (2017–2022) have created an enabling space for financial institutions to exist within the market. According to Bank of Zambia (2022), there are currently 135 Microfinance branches operating in Lusaka that have sprung up seeking to address the credit gaps that exist between larger commercial enterprises and the smaller business entities, to which marketeers constitute. These MFIs offer services such as small loans and savings facilities as well as capacity building to these market traders which traditional banking sector does not offer to individuals with little collateral.

The growth of MFIs in Zambia has been attributed by others to be consumption-based. Most MFIs created in early 2000s were expressly found to be consumer lending based since they did not emphasize small-scale enterprise development, they simply required formal employment before making a loan. One could almost conclude that MFIs operating in the financial sector at the time aimed at meeting the needs of the corporate sector and working-class elite. In addition, the scope of services offered by MFI was particularly limited and low (Dixon et al., 2006).

Currently, financial inclusion in Zambia, as revealed by the FinMark Trust Financial Scoping Survey of 2020, stands at 69.4% of Zambian adult population. This has mainly been attributed to policy reforms and interventions from both the Government and financial stakeholders which has led to the increased uptake of digital financial services from 33.7% in 2005. Although 52.6% of Zambia’s population resides in rural areas and the reminder 47.4% resides in urban areas, the level of inclusion is higher in urban areas at 84.4% compared to 55.9% in rural areas . The concentration of financial institutions in urban areas has been attributed to the fact that Zambia’s rural environment is not particularly conducive to the establishment of viable businesses. One of the criteria used previously by financial providers in determining whether to establish a branch in a particular locality is the economic activity and level of business existing within the region (Martínez, 2006).

MFIs have also thrived due to the fact they provide credit to clientele without hefty collateral requirements as compared to traditional banks. Collateral is a security in the form of asset that one pledges to access loans. According to Shave (1983, p.38), mortgage on property or chattel, floating charges on other assets, and personal guarantees will serve as security for a loan. Often, Small Medium Enterprises (SMEs) fail to get financial assistance from institutions due to lack of collateral have stated that the lack of collateral has been repeatedly raised as being one of the most difficult hurdles of entrepreneurs to overcome when trying to obtain loans. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that in many countries, the SMEs sector has only existed for just about 10 years, and businesses have not had sufficient time to build up a good equity base.

The Zambian government in recognising the importance of SMEs and the need to promote their businesses formed the Ministry of Small and Medium Enterprise Development (MSME) in 2021 to promote development and growth of cooperatives and SMEs to create jobs and wealth across the country. The ministry has uniquely created marketeer booster loans that seek to empower the growth of marketeer businesses (Tutu, 2022).

Thus, in the recent past, market traders have accessed microfinance assistance from MFIs which have included Entrepreneurs Financial Centre (EFC) with its market trader loans; the Zambia National Marketeers Credit Association (ZANAMACA) which disbursed soft loans to marketeers countrywide through funding from the Citizen Economic Empowerment Commission (CEEC) in 2009 (Lusaka times, 2009) and continues to empower market traders through credit, and FINCA with its loans for marketeers. The rationale behind providing these services is in line with many scholars’ views that microenterprise programs can play a significant role in fostering savings among the low-income earning population, with considerable benefits both for the savings and for the programs. Domestic savings provide the critical assets for any economy’s investment in future production. Without them, any given economy cannot expand unless there are other alternative sources of investment that are explored (Adjei et al., 2009; Dzisi & Obeng, 2013; McIntosh et al., 2011).

In addition, the borrowed fund serves as additional or working capital for marketeer clients. Ledgerwood (1999) however stated that the purpose of this loan is to help businesses grow, which translates into high revenue to the entrepreneur. In this regard, Dzisi and Obeng (2013), proves that microfinance gives power to poor self-employed people to generate productive capital, to protect the capital they have, to deal with risk, and to avoid the destruction of capital.

For the very poor, microfinance becomes a liquidity tool that helps smooth their consumption patterns and to reduce their level of vulnerability. Revenue generated is either ploughed back into the business or otherwise saved and used in times of adverse shock. In summary, microfinance is an important tool for developing the poor at both individual and institutional levels. Accessed to only when business capital is well managed and yields returns, then there can be some form of impact in the lives of the poor loan clients. Credit facility from MFIs facilitates improved human development in education, access to health care, increase in consumption, as well as an empowerment tool (Sebstad & Cohen, 2001).

Even though marketeers in Zambia have been recipients of MFI intervention, the extent to which these interventions have had an impact on the welfare of the marketeers has yet to be established. Despite them accessing this assistance for a prolonged time, they do not seem to expand their operation and graduate from one level of business to the next to accumulate larger profits beyond provision of basic commodities. It then raises questions on the extent to which the MFIs services offered to the marketeers have had a positive influence on their livelihoods when many of the marketeer population within Matero community continue to live in informal structures and inadequate provision of water and electricity due to their inadequate income (ILO, 2019; World Bank, 2002).

This research focused on understanding the effects of two MFI services, credit and savings interventions of these institutions on marketeers by using group-based lending method, which is one of the most novel approaches of lending small amounts of money to several clients who cannot offer collateral.

This research consists of three parts. The first is a brief review of the theoretical literature on Microfinance services in Zambia. The second section presents the methodological approach that was used to collect data during the research. Finally, the last section discusses the research findings and shares potential recommendations for enhancing livelihoods among marketeers in Zambia.

2. Method

2.1. Ethics statement

The researchers ensured informed consent before undertaking the study. All respondents were asked to sign a consent form to show that they had agreed to participate in the study. Interviewees were adequately informed prior to taking the interview that the study was purely for academic purposes. Additionally, the researchers ensured anonymity and confidentiality of the notes. The questionnaires did not require respondents to write their names but were instead given a respondent code. Ethical approval was sought from the University of Zambia, School of Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Clearance Committee (HSSREC) before the study was undertaken.

3. Study design

The study used a quantitative research design which involved the use of closed ended questions within the research instrument. The study used both primary and secondary sources of data. Primary data were collected through interviews using questionnaires and analysed using Microsoft excel pivot tables by way of descriptive and inferential statistics. Secondary data sources such as journals, government policy documents, and the internet were also used to inform the study.

The sample was drawn from all marketeers both women and men in Matero market. A total of 194 questionnaires administered to marketeers in Matero market. Of the sample, 94% were responsive, while 6% were non-responsive. The study used simple random sampling to select marketeers and purposive sampling to select microfinance institution officers.

Slovin’s formula was used to determine the sample size because this is the recommended formula for drawing out finite population to make generalisation on the larger population (Ryan, 2013). The formula is presented;

Sample (n) = N/(1 + Ne²)

Where:

• n = sample size,

• N= population.

• e = Allowable error, taken to be 5% in the study, and the confidence level of 95%.

4. Results

4.1. Demographic data

The demographic data of the survey revealed that out of 183, 51.37% were non-MFI clients and 48.63 were MFI clients. A gender comparison shows that 60% of the respondents were female, while 40% were male suggesting women were more active in seeking and accessing credit compared to men.

In relation to education attainment, the findings reveal that most MFI clients and non-MFI clients attained a secondary education of 50.27% and 47.61%, respectively. 21.31% of MFI clients and 28.93% of non-MFI clients attained primary education, while 18.58% of MFI clients and 7.69% of non-MFI clients had attained Tertiary education. Those who had not attained any formal education constituted 9.84% of MFI clients and 15.77% of non-MFI clients. These results show that most marketeers had received some form of education which is an important aspect of operating a business.

On the marital status and family size, the results show that 39.9% of MFI clients and 45.38% of non-MFI clients were, while those single represented 22.4% for MFI clients and 18.31% for non-MFI clients. The divorced and widowed represented 19.12% for MFI clients and 26.30% for non-MFI clients and 18.58% for MFI clients and 10.01% on non-MFI clients, respectively. More than half (66.29%) of MFI clients had a household range between 9 and 11 members, while non-MFI clients had 7.45% in the same bracket. 15.73% MFI clients had a household of 6–8 members, while their counterparts had 7.45%. 10.11% MFI clients and 5.32% non-MFI clients had households above 11 members. 5.62% of MFI clients and 59.57% non-MFI had households with 3–5 members, while 2.25% MFI clients and 20.21% had households with 0–2 members. These results reveal that MFI clients have larger households than non-MFI clients, suggesting that the number of household members could contribute to the reason clients accessing finance.

The survey showed that 61.27% of MFI clients and 50.75% of non-MFI clients were female headed households, while 38.73% MFI clients and 49.25% of non-MFI clients were male headed households. The findings reveal that most marketeers’ households are female headed households. In addition, more female headed households are clients of MFIs than their counterparts.

4.2. Determinants of participating in MFI

An investigation as shown in Table 1, reveals that the most MFI and non-MFI clients are involved in food preparation and a considerable number engaged in grocery stores, hairdressing, and dressmaking. A small proportion of 3.22% MFI clients were involved in carpentry, welding, and hardware as compared to 16.39% of MFI clients that were involved in the same.

Table 1. Businesses operated by marketeers

Business type	Proportion of MFI clients (%)	Proportion of Non-MFI clients (%)
Food preparation and sale	38.82	32.24
Grocery	21.55	20.22
Dress making/tailoring	17.30	13.66
Hairdressing/barbershop	19.11	17.49
Other	3.22	16.39

Source: field survey 2022.

Most of the marketeers (79.78%) were aware of MFIs operating within the market, while 20.22% were not aware of any MFIs. The survey in Table 2 reveals that most (53.76%) marketeers made loan applications to MFIs because they wanted to expand their businesses, while considerable 34.41% wanted to start a business and a small proportion of 11.83% wanted to pay for their children/dependant’s school fees.

Table 2. Loan application information

	Frequency (no. respondents)	Percentage (%)
Ever made a loan application
Yes	93	50.82
No	90	49.18
Successful loan applications
Yes	89	95.69
No	4	4.31
Number of loan application
Once	87	93.55%
More than once	6	6.45%
Reason for loan application
Start business	32	34.41
Expand business	50	53.76
Pay school fees	11	11.83
Able to pay loan on time
Yes	33	37.08
No	56	62.92

Source: field survey 2022.

Most MFI clients with successful loan application were not able to repay their loans on time citing reasons alluding to COVID-19 pandemic disrupting business operations consequently affecting consistent cash flow, having too many financial obligations and responsibilities than income received, not making enough profit to repay the required loan amounts and high loan interests from the MFI making it hard for the marketeers to pay back.

All the respondents who had received loans stated that there were sanctions to delayed payments. The respondents claimed that they were given grace period after the lapse of loan repayment period, which seemed to vary among the institutions but was mainly between 2 and 4  weeks, after which, marketeers were visited by the MFI loan officers for confiscation of collateral acquisition in case of failure of repayment of the loan.

4.3. Business registration

The study investigations show that 85.25% of the respondents had their businesses registered with either the Patent and Company Registration Agency (PACRA) or Lusaka City Council (LCC), while 14.75% did not have their businesses registered with either institutions or any local business registration body. In addition, 82.51% felt that business registration influenced acquisition of credit, while 17.49% felt that registration had no influence on credit acquisition from the MFI. When a cross tabulation was done between business registration and members of MFIs, a considerable number of marketeers who did not have their business registered where MFI clients.

4.4. Socioeconomic indicators of MFI clients and potential clients

In monthly sales, 14.62% of MFI clients had k0-k1000, while non-MFI clients in the same sales range were 59.57%. The sale bracket of k1001-k2000 had similar results for MFI clients and non-MFI clients of 19.1% and 19.15%, respectively. The sales bracket of k2001-k3000 had 32.58% MFI clients and 11.7% non-MFI clients. 20.22% of MFI clients had k3001-k4000, while their counterparts in the same bracket were 7.45%. The sales bracket of above k4001 had 13.48% of MFI clients and 2.13% of non-MFI clients.

In relation to the monthly net profits, most (71.28%) of non-MFI clients made of their K0-K1000 compared to 23.6% of MFI clients. A larger proportion of 71.78% of MFI clients made between K1001-k4000 compared to 25.53% of non-MFI clients. 5.62% MFI clients made above k4001 compared to 3.19% non-MFI clients.

Clients’ monthly household expenses also varied among the two groups with 6.74% MFI clients spending k0-k1000 monthly compared to 10.64% of non-MFI clients, 24.72% of MFI clients spent k1001-k2000 monthly compared to 31.91% of their counterparts, 41.57% of MFI clients spent k2001-k3000 monthly compared to 43.62% of non-MFI clients, 15.73% MFI clients spent k3001-k4000 monthly compared to 8.5% of their counterparts, and 11.24% MFI clients spent above k4001 compared to 5.32% of non-MFI clients.

4.5. Changes in lifestyle

The findings reveal that 34.83% were able to diversify their income since obtaining a loan from MFI and 65.17% had no diversification in income streams. In addition, 43.82% were able to increase their income, 41.57% had no changes in income and 14.61% had decreased income after accessing credit from MFI.

Savings prepares individuals for unforeseen risks and helps minimise shocks that arise in one’s daily life. Savings has an impact on the lifestyle of every household, and the study wanted to explore how this had been affected since the clients accessed credit from MFIs. Research results further reveal that 49.44% had increased capacity to save, 38.20% had their saving capacity remain the same, and 12.36% had reduced saving capacity after acquiring a loan. About the household (structural) condition, 40.45% were able to increase their housing condition, 47.19% had their housing condition remain the same and 12.36% had deteriorating housing condition after accessing credit. In terms of household nutrition/diet, results indicate that 53.93% had increased household nutrition, 31.46% had their household nutrition remain the same and 14.61% had reduced nutrition.

Regarding access of health care by clients’ households, 40.45% had increased health care, 51.68% had no changes, while 7.87% had reduced health care. The findings also show that 42.70% agreed to MFIs contributing to increased access to their household’s education, 44.94% had no changes and 12.36% had reduced access to education since obtaining a loan.

4.6. Relationship between changes in income and changes in lifestyle

To establish the relationship between microfinance credit and its impact on the household income of the clients. Table 3 below shows the variation between MFI clients and non-MFI clients in terms of sales and profit. In relation to sales, more than half (78.72%) of non-MFI clients made less than K2, 000 sales while 21.3% made more than K2, 001 in monthly sales and 66.28% of MFI clients made more than K2, 001 sales while 33.72% made less than K2, 000 in monthly sales. In relation to monthly profits, 71.28% of non-MFI clients made less than K1, 000 profit while 28.72% making more than K1, 000 profit per month. 76.4% of MFI clients made more than K1, 0001 profit while 23.6% made less than K1, 000 profit per month.

Table 3. Household income and expenses

Economic variable	MFI clients		Non-MFI clients
Monthly Sales	Frequency	Percentage	Frequency	Percentage
K0-k1000	13	14.62	56	59.57
K1001-k2000	17	19.1	18	19.15
K2001-k3000	29	32.58	11	11.7
K3001-k4000	18	20.22	7	7.45
Above k4001	12	13.48	2	2.13
Sum	89	100	94	100
Monthly Net Profits
K0-k1000	21	23.6	67	71.28
K1001-k2000	32	35.96	12	12.77
K2001-k3000	20	22.47	6	6.38
K3001-k4000	11	12.35	6	6.38
Above k4001	5	5.62	3	3.19
Sum	89	100	94	100
Monthly Expenses
K0-k1000	6	6.74	10	10.64
K1001-k2000	22	24.72	30	31.91
K2001-k3000	37	41.57	41	43.62
K3001-k4000	14	15.73	8	8.51
Above k4001	10	11.24	5	5.32
Sum	89	100%	94	100%

Source: field survey 2022..

Using Excel, a Pearson correlation test between income and the seven variables was computed; diversity income, housing condition, household diet, capacity to save, health care, and education access. The null hypothesis is that no relationship exists between the increase in income level and the changes in the changes in lifestyle using the variables identified in the study. In contrast, the alternative hypothesis is that relationship exists between increases in income and changes in lifestyle. The results of the correlation are shown in Table 4 below;

Table 4. Correlation between income and lifestyle

	Income	Diversity of income	Housing condition	Household diet	Capacity to save	Health care	Education access
Income	1
Diversity of income	0.849268	1
Housing condition	0.858369	0.9418	1
Household diet	0.718901	0.907469	0.855325	1
Capacity to save	0.783539	0.94511	0.912522	0.934988	1
Health care	0.86903	0.945002	0.90479	0.839584	0.901625	1
Education access	0.851676	0.988517	0.95332	0.89376	0.95479	0.95372	1

N**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).

The results in the Table 4 demonstrate that the null hypothesis is rejected, and it is statistically significant and the relationship between these seven variables is strongly positive. The results conclude that marketeers, who were able to increase their income by taking loan from MFIs were also able to improve their lifestyle by diversifying their income, improving their housing condition, improving their household diet, having capacity to save, and having better access to health care and education.

4.7. Household energy and sanitation

The findings reveal that 83.61% of non-MFI clients and 92.63% of MFI clients obtained water from a water utility company, 13.66% of non-MFI clients and 6.17% of MFI clients obtained from a kiosk, and 2.73% of non-MFI clients and 1.2% of MFI clients obtained water from a well.

Also, the study reveals that 83.61% of non-MFI clients and 91.6% of MFI clients use flushable toilets, while the remaining 16.39% of non-MFI clients and 8.4% of MFI clients use pit latrines.

In relation to garbage disposal, 66.12% of non-MFI clients and 69.37% of MFI clients had their garbage collected by maintenance companies/individuals and 33.88% of non-MFI clients and 30.63% of MFI clients disposed their waste in home dug-up pits. All respondents constituting MFI and non-MFI clients used hydroelectric energy supplied by the national energy cooperation, i.e., Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO).

4.8. Asset information

The investigation as shown in Table 5 reveals that 47.87% of MFI clients and 29.21% of non-MFI clients owned property, while 52.13% of MFI clients and 70.79% of non-MFI clients did not own property. From the percentage that owned property, 68.89% of MFI clients and 34.62% of non-MFI clients had made improvements to their property in the past 6 months, while 31.11% of MFI clients and 65.38% of non-MFI clients had not made any improvements. When asked the reason why they were not able to make any improvements to their properties, many cited having inadequate funds to undertake such projects and lack of adequate planning within their limited resources to undertake such huge developments.

Table 5. Asset information

Economic variable	MFI clients		Non-MFI clients
	Frequency	Percentage	Frequency	Percentage
own property
Yes	45	47.87	26	29.21
No	49	52.13	63	70.79
improvements made to property
Yes	31	68.89	9	34.62
No	14	31.11	17	65.38
own a radio
Yes	85	95.5	88	93.62
No	4	4.5	6	6.38
Own a sofa
Yes	87	97.75	91	96.81
No	2	2.25	3	3.19
own a television set
Yes	88	98.87	92	97.87
No	1	1.13	2	2.13
own a refrigerator
Yes	75	84.27	68	72.34
No	14	15.7	26	27.66
Sum	89	100%	94	100%

Source: field survey 2022.

Concerning the question on the type of household property owned, the findings reveal that 95.5% of MFI clients and 93.62% of non-MFI clients owned a radio, while 4.5% of MFI clients and 6.38% of non-MFI clients did not, 97.75% of MFI clients and 96.81% of non-MFI clients owned a sofa, while 2.25% of MFI clients and 3.19% of non-MFI clients did not, 98.87% of MFI clients and 96.81% of non-MFI clients owned a television set, while 1.13% of MFI clients and 2.13% of non-clients did not, and 84.27% of MFI clients and 72.34% of non-MFI clients owned a refrigerator, while 15.7% of MFI clients and 27.66% of non-MFI clients did not.

4.9. Saving history

When all MFI clients’ respondents were asked whether they had mandatory savings with MFIs, none of them agreed to this. The researcher further asked what mode of savings each respondent had, 47.54% of MFI clients and 53.23% of non-MFI clients saved using mobile money services, 31.15% of MFI clients and 32.11% of non-MFI clients saved with commercial banks, 17.49% of MFI clients and 8.2% of non-MFI clients hoarded, and 3.82% of MFI clients and 6.46% of non-MFI clients saved using their village banking. The findings of this study dispute those of Salia (2015) who investigated the impact of microfinance on microenterprise development in Ghana that showed that many of the microfinance clients had a bank account and made savings with commercial banks.

5. Discussion

5.1. Theme 1: determinants of participating in MFIs among marketeers in Matero market

Most of the respondents were women, and data from the MFI indicate that they had more female clients than male clients. Most MFIs target businesswomen because several have acknowledged that gender discrimination is one of the major causes of poverty, slower economic growth, and weaker governance and lower standards of living, and often women are poorer and more disadvantaged than men. However, women contribute decisively to the wellbeing of their family comparatively more than men, and thus women are seen to be better clients than their counterparts, so there is need to financially empower them (Dzisi & Obeng, 2013).

Furthermore, women’s access to loans is more likely to yield better developmental results because they are inclined to use the gains from their enterprises to fulfil their household’s basic needs (Leach & Sitaram, 2002). Besides, D’Espallier et al. (2009) assessed the repayment characteristics of 350 microfinance institutions in 70 different countries and reported that women borrowers are associated with a lower portfolio-at-risk and lower credit loss provisions. Our findings do not conclude that being a woman marketeer is a determining factor to accessing loans from MFIs as men also formed part of the respondent group.

The respondents’ education levels showed that most of the marketeers had received basic education (both from the MFI and non-MFI groups) as shown by 50.27% and 47.61%, respectively who attended secondary school. Secondary school entails a fair level of knowledge and understanding of concepts and transactions concerning their businesses. There were more MFI clients (18.5%) who had attained tertiary education than non-MIFI clients (7.7%) who had attained this level of education. This also speaks to the level of knowledge and understanding of microcredit terms and conditions. The MFI clients could have sought and accessed the credit services because they understood the terms and conditions better. Education and training are crucial components in the success of microfinance borrowers. Financial education curricula can greatly improve microfinance projects by increasing participants’ knowledge of money management, savings, and budgeting. Because education enables individuals to develop entrepreneurial skills, a joint venture of microfinance and education is more effective than a microfinance program in isolation. A meta-analysis of 126 impact evaluation studies conducted by Kaiser and Menkhoff (2017) on effects of financial education on financial literacy and behaviour revealed that financial education significantly impacts financial behaviour and to a greater extent financial literacy.

Our study results also showed that there were more married clients from both groups. This speaks to household headship and decision-making capacity in the business and at household level in line with living standards. This study revealed that there were more male-headed households among MFI clients than among non-MFI clients who were mostly female. What was not made clear in this study is whether the females who were married and running the businesses were making the decisions to partake in MFI credit facilities.

The research also discovered that MFI had most frequent number of people living in one household being between 9 and 11 higher than in non-MFI marketeers. With this number of people in a household, more income may be required as the cost of living has risen in the country in the past few years (Consumer Unit and Trust Society, 2018). There is some evidence to suggest that the size of the family and the age of the family head are factors that have been deployed in the study of poverty theory (Orbeta, 2006). Larger families are often susceptible to being poor, since there will be more mouths to feed and provide for. Adjasi and Osei (2007) seem to agree with this view; they argued that larger households are more likely to be poor and to remain in a persistent vicious cycle of poverty and concluded that poverty reduction policies should be designed to target specific inequality factors to improve poverty conditions.

The results also showed that the most frequent business for both MFI and non-MFI clients was food preparation and sale which was followed by grocery selling. Grocery selling is often characterised by the sale of items in retail stores. In Zambia, retail shops offer food and household products which normally include specialist shops like butcheries, bakeries, and greengrocers. It is not surprising that food preparation and sale and grocery selling were at the top of the list because food is required for survival and therefore a carefully set up and run food business is likely to thrive.

It is also vital to understand if the respondents were aware of microfinance services because this is a major determinant of taking up the credit facilities; one cannot take up a service that they did not know existed. The results of this study show that the majority (79.8%) of the respondents from both groups were aware of such services. This is also linked to their level of education which influences their access to information sources concerning microfinance.

Our results dispute those of a study conducted in Rewari city on 90 female microfinance beneficiaries to check the level of awareness of microfinance. The study revealed that most of the respondents were less educated, had education level just up-to matric and low-income levels. Most of the female respondents were not aware of the microfinance schemes and services. The findings revealed that most of the female respondents were not aware of microfinance schemes and services. Friends/Relatives/Neighbours were the major source from which respondents got information about the various schemes and services of microfinance. They received less information from the TV, advertisement, and awareness campaigns (Kaushik, 2019).

The study also showed MFI services are becoming more accessible, as the majority (95.7%) of the respondents reported to have successful loan applications. Despite this ability to obtain the loans, marketeers also reported that they had difficulties paying back these loans because their businesses were affected by the occurrence of the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the reasons for the easy access to microfinance credit is the business registration. This study revealed that the majority (82.5%) of the respondent’s linked the acquisition of credit to their businesses being registered with PACRA or LCC. Accessibility and prudent utilization of microcredit by the poor can serve as a vital role in poverty reduction and economic development, particularly in a developing economy.

A study examined the factors that determine the accessibility of the poor to microcredit loan in Nigeria on 1,134 microfinance loan beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. Using descriptive statistics and Logit Regression Model analysis, results revealed that age; household size, business worth, skill/experience, education level, assets, health standard, living standard, and income were significant in determining the accessibility of the poor to microfinance loans (Kasali et al., 2016).

5.2. Theme 2: socio-economic indicators of MFI clients and potential clients in Matero market

This study also showed that most non-MFI clients had lower monthly net profits compared to MFI clients, but both groups had similar monthly expenditures. This is not good for the low-income households because it means that they will lack some daily needs or will be forced to borrow. Income is understood to be salary or cash proceeds from a business. Income of both groups ranged from K0-K1, 000 to above K4, 000 with most MFI clients having an income above K2, 001, while non-MFI clients had less than K2, 000.

These findings are consistent with those of Banerjee et al. (2013) in India, which found a positive impact on revenues although insignificant. The researcher believes a possible explanation to the insignificant increase in revenues in Banerjee et al.’s study was the difference in methodology between our study and theirs. Banerjee et al. investigated the impact on people living in areas with access to a microcredit program with those living in areas without access to microcredit, while our study investigated the participants in the microcredit program against participants with no microcredit access within the same locality. In addition, their evaluation was made over time for both groups and ours just considered one point in time for the control group. Furthermore, the studies are conducted in different continents, with different external conditions. Nevertheless, even though they could not provide a significant result in revenues, their study and ours have a point of convergence; microcredit seems to have a positive effect on the level of sales.

From the results of our study, it can thus be concluded that MFI loans contributed to enlarging the business of marketeers in terms of sales. An increase in revenues gives the opportunity to achieve higher earnings. However, knowledge of the business’ expenditures is necessary to calculate the earnings. In this study, the researchers measured the impact of the microcredit on the enterprise level using the business’ monthly net profit. Our findings reveal that the participation in MFI program has influence on the business’ monthly profit of the marketeers. This is consistent with McKenzie and Woodruf (2008) who found that access to finance raised the micro entrepreneurs’ monthly profit. On the other hand, Banerjee et al. (2013) did not find an increase in profit for the average borrower. The ambiguity in these results most likely depends on the differences in research designs. The McKenzie and Woodruff study used micro grants instead of microcredits to analyse the impact of access to additional capital.

Taking the discussion on income further, high levels of income are associated with lifestyle changes. The results showed that among the marketeers, there were very notable (57.3%) increments in their sources of income (diversity) with no decrease; there was also an increase in respondent’s capacity to save (49.44%), in the household condition (47.19%), healthcare (53.93%), and household’s access to education with minimal decreases across all the listed changes in lifestyle after accessing credit. Access to education and healthcare is well established as a dimension of socioeconomic status (Krishnakumar & Ballon, 2008). The higher sales among the MFI clients than non-MFI clients may be a result of clients having used their loans from MFIs to invest in working capital, such as more inventories. With more working capital, it becomes possible for marketeers to broaden their businesses, which can make them more attractive and appeal to more customers.

To strengthen the above findings, Pearson correlation test was conducted between income and the six variables, namely, diversity in income sources, housing conditions, household nutrition, capacity to save, healthcare, and education access whose results determined that marketeers who were able to increase their income by taking a loan from MFIs were able to improve their lifestyle by diversifying their income, improving their housing condition, improving their household diet, having capacity to save and having better access to health care and education.

The findings from this study contradict evidence from seven randomised evaluations in low- and middle-income countries that showed that giving small loans in the form of microcredit did not lead to transformative impacts on income or long-term consumption on average, but it did help households better manage financial choices (Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab J-PAL, 2018).

Other variables that are linked to a high source of income are household sources of sanitation and energy, asset ownership and modes of transportation used. Under sanitation and energy use, the results showed that most of the respondents from both the MFI clients and non-MFI clients had a good source of water from the utility companies, used modern flushable toilets, used garbage collection companies and hydroelectric power. Despite all (100%) of the respondents using hydroelectric power, there were slight variations in favour of MFI across all variables considered. Access to safe and affordable water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure and services is essential to quality of life Mohindra and Haddad (2005).

On asset information, the results showed that MFI clients owned more property and made more improvements to property owned than non-MFI clients. However, the results showed that most marketeers in both groups had owned household items such as a radio, sofa, and TV set with low numbers of those that owned refrigerator. In the same sense as Afrane (2002) and McIntosh et al. (2011), the study has shown that access to microcredit makes it possible to improve housing conditions following the construction or maintenance of the home or the purchase of new equipment or furniture. This comes from the idea that the intervention of MFIs helps the poor to accumulate capital and therefore to invest in improving their homes, either as a space for permanent living or to earn income through its rental.

5.3. Theme 3: role of MFIs on marketeers’ livelihoods in Matero market

After applying the methodology, the findings from this study have established a link between the provision of loans by MFI’s and the improvement of livelihoods among marketeers within the study area. According to the findings, some recipients of MFI loans were able to improve their household diet, increase access to their children’s education and health care, increase in income, and their propensity to save. This finding is supported by studies done by Datta and Sahu (2021) and Al-Shami et al. (2018).

In the case of Datta and Sahu (2021), their study observed a significant impact of microfinance on the lives of beneficiaries. The study found that MFIs support shaped beneficiary lifestyle overtime and the credit accessed from these institutions when utilised helped borrowers to start up income-generating activities. While Al-Shami et al. (2018) concluded that microcredit had an impact on women empowerment in decision-making process and resource controlling. The study showed that credit accessed from MFIs positively affects their monthly income and empowers women borrowers in their daily expenditure, school children’s expenses, health expenditure and loan order decision.

These findings are further supported by a similar study that was conducted by Adjei et al. (2009) on Sinapi Aba Trust in Ghana to ascertain the role of microfinance in business expansion, income generation, and asset building, where they concluded that beneficiaries could purchase durables, provide better education to their children and cater for the healthcare expenses of their households. They also found out that participation in the microfinance programme enabled clients to own savings deposits and to become members of welfare schemes that provided insurance for them to pay off debts in times of ill health or death.

According to the findings, there is an increased number of marketeers with credit from MFIs that own land and household assets. It is necessary to add that it is not just the loans that enabled these clients to acquire land and household assets but with prudent management of their resources. It is appropriate to note that there were some loan clients in the same group that were in default and were struggling to pay their loans. These defaulting clients had also not acquired any assets. This finding supports those by Zeller et al. (2001) that concluded that savings and credit facilities assist individuals to acquire funds for all kinds of investments. In this situation, assets (landed or movable) are investments. From the research findings, the loan clients who invested their savings and profits into building assets did so to get short to long-term returns on them. While Ahamad et al. (2021) in their study found that the majority of MFI beneficiaries had their assets such as farm, land, and livestock remain the same while having marginal increases in housing conditions and household appliances.

The importance of education or business advice cannot be underrated when dealing with MFIs and their loan clients (Armendariz de Aghion & Morduch, 2005). From the data received, it was not clear what advice or education the loan clients received after the loans were disbursed to them. None of the loan clients interviewed made it known to the researcher of any advice or education by loan officer’s post receiving their loans. All the education received was given during the preparation towards the disbursement of their loans. This finding is supported by Adjasi and Osei (2007) who conducted a study to ascertain causes and control of loan delinquency/default in Ghana. He suggested that to control default, pre- and post-disbursement training as one of the measures which MFIs should implement.

6. Conclusion

The research in investigating the determinants of participating in MFIs among marketeers in Matero market listed the various determinants as gender (being a woman especially), the level of knowledge and understanding of microcredit terms and conditions. In addition, it has been noted that financial education curricula can greatly improve microfinance projects by increasing participants’ knowledge of money management, savings, and budgeting, marital status acted as a determinant in both the savings of the members, number of people living in one household, household headship, the type (business worth) and duration of business operation (skill/experience), and the source of initial capital.

To compare the socio-economic indicators of MFI clients and potential clients in Matero market, the results showed that across all socioeconomic indicators such as monthly income and monthly sales (profits), the marketeers belonging to MFIs had better socio-economic improvements and ratings. MFI clients also had higher changes in lifestyle that were monitored through an increase in respondent’s capacity to save, in household condition, improvements in healthcare, and household’s access to education. Other variables that are linked to a high source of income are household sources of sanitation and energy, asset ownership and modes of transportation used which also showed that MFI clients were doing better than non-MFI clients. Therefore, the MFI clients were living better livelihoods compared to the non-MFI clients.

To analyse the role of MFIs on marketeers’ livelihoods in Matero market, the study findings have established a link between the provision of loans by MFI’s and the improvement of livelihoods among marketeers within the study area. Some recipients of MFI loans were able to improve their household diet, increase access to their children’s education and health care, increase in income, and their propensity to save. Therefore, access to MFI plays a positive (but quite minimal) role in marketeers’ livelihoods.

The overall objective of this study was to investigate the effects of microfinance services on the livelihood of marketeers in Matero market of Lusaka District. The research shows that MFIs contribute highly but not fully to empowering marketeers, thereby improving their livelihoods. The research findings reveal that microfinance is a tool for poverty reduction, wealth creation, as well as marketeer empowerment when funds from loans are invested in profit generating businesses. Savings and investing profit gained are essential elements in creating wealth. On the other hand, diverting loan funds can lead to collapse of businesses hence default in repayment which results in disempowering marketeers. Therefore, the researchers believe that as a form of continued support and management of loans, MFI officers are to provide education on the utilization of loans after clients have received their disbursements. This would ensure that those who have applied and obtained the loans use it appropriately to avoid failure to repay, which has its own consequences.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the No funding recieved.

Notes on contributors

Dorothy Chibbonta

Dorothy Chibbonta is a dedicated researcher at the Education Partnerships Group, where her primary focus lies in enhancing policy systems within the education sector. Currently, she is in the final year of her Master of Science program in Development Studies at the University of Zambia. Her academic journey is marked by a profound interest in two critical areas: economic empowerment and the dynamic landscape of education systems

Hanson Chishimba

Hanson Chishimba, is a Researcher and Lecturer of development Studies and project management at the University of Zambia. He has also served as Technical Specialist- Investments for the Industrial Development Corporation in Zambia. He Holds a Doctor of Philosophy in Governance and Leadership with specialisation in public finance, a Masters and Bachelor’s Degree in Development Studies and Economics from the University of Lusaka and University of Zambia respectively. His works and research are in the field of public finance, poverty, rural livelihoods and sustainable development.