Advertisement

From Credit Risk to Social Impact: On the Funding Determinants in Interest-Free Peer-to-Peer Lending

  • Gregor DorfleitnerEmail author
  • Eva-Maria Oswald
  • Rongxin Zhang
Original Paper

Abstract

Based on a unique data set on US direct microloans, we study the funding determinants of interest-free peer-to-peer crowdlending aimed at borrowers in the US. By performing logistic regressions on funding success and Tobit regressions on the reversed funding time, the existence of a social underwriting by a third-party trustee and information in the description texts fostering the investors’ trust are shown to be the main predictors of successful funding. Regarding social impact, the possibility to empower women and groups of borrowers appeals to the investors, whereas empowerment of the family or community beyond the borrowers themselves appears to remain unappreciated. When examining the vulnerability of the borrowers as a predictor, the results manifest differences amongst the attitudes of the investors towards social impact. In the subsample of non-endorsed loans, the investors appear to prefer to support borrowers with an immigration background. In contrast, this is not the case with endorsed loans.

Keywords

Text analysis Crowdlending Microfinance Funding probability Funding time 

References

  1. Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for ‘lemons’: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldén, L., & Hammarstedt, M. (2016). Discrimination in the credit market? Access to financial capital among self-employed immigrants. Kyklos, 69(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allet, M. (2014). Why do microfinance institutions go green? An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(3), 405–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allet, M. et al. (2011). Measuring the environmental performance of microfinance. CEB Working Paper.Google Scholar
  5. Allison, T. H., Davis, B. C., Short, J. C., & Webb, J. W. (2015). Crowdfunding in a prosocial microlending environment: Examining the role of intrinsic versus extrinsic cues. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Allison, T. H., McKenny, A. F., & Short, J. C. (2013). The effect of entrepreneurial rhetoric on microlending investment: An examination of the warm-glow effect. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6), 690–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Alsos, G. A., & Ljunggren, E. (2017). The role of gender in entrepreneur–investor relationships: A signaling theory approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(4), 567–590.Google Scholar
  8. Barasinska, N., & Schäfer, D. (2014). Is crowdfunding different? Evidence on the relation between gender and funding success from a German peer-to-peer lending platform. German Economic Review, 15(4), 436–452.Google Scholar
  9. Barinaga, E. (2014). Microfinance in a developed welfare state: A hybrid technology for the government of the outcast. Geoforum, 51, 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beatriz, A., & Marc, L. (2011). The handbook of microfinance. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  12. Bendig, M., Unterberg, M., & Sarpong, B. (2012). Overview of the microcredit sector in the European Union 2010–2011. European Microfinance Network.Google Scholar
  13. Bendig, M., Unterberg, M., & Sarpong, B. (2014). Overview of the microcredit sector in the European Union 2012–2013. European Microfinance Network.Google Scholar
  14. Berger, S. C., & Gleisner, F. (2009). Emergence of financial intermediaries in electronic markets: The case of online p2p lending. BuR-Business Research, 2, 39–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Berns, J. P., Figueroa-Armijos, M., da Motta Veiga, S. P., & Dunne, T. C. (2018). Dynamics of lending-based prosocial crowdfunding: Using a social responsibility lens. Journal of Business Ethics.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3932-0
  16. Bourlès, R., & Cozarenco, A. (2018). Entrepreneurial motivation and business performance: Evidence from a french microfinance institution. Small Business Economics, 51, 943–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bruhn-Leon, B., Eriksson, P.-E., & Kraemer-Eis, H. (2012). Progress for microfinance in Europe. EIF Working Paper.Google Scholar
  18. Bruton, G. D., Khavul, S., & Chavez, H. (2011). Microlending in emerging economies: Building a new line of inquiry from the ground up. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(5), 718–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S. (2014). Cultural differences and geography as determinants of online pro-social lending. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 773–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Calic, G., & Mosakowski, E. (2016). Kicking off social entrepreneurship: How a sustainability orientation influences crowdfunding success. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), 738–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Carboni, B. J., Calderón, M. L., Garrido, S. R., Dayson, K., & Kickul, J. (2010). Handbook of Microcredit in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cheston, S., & Kuhn, L. (2002). Empowering women through microfinance. Publication sponsored by UNIFEM.Google Scholar
  23. Collier, B. C., & Hampshire, R. (2010). Sending mixed signals: Multilevel reputation effects in peer-to-peer lending markets. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. ACM, pp. 197–206.Google Scholar
  24. Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cozarenco, A., & Szafarz, A. (2018). Gender biases in bank lending: Lessons from microcredit in France. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(3), 631–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cozarenco, A., & Szafarz, A. et al., (2014). Microcredit in developed countries: Unexpected consequences of loan ceilings. CEB Working Paper.Google Scholar
  27. Demirguc-Kunt, A., Klapper, L., Singer, D., Ansar, S., & Hess, J. (2018). The Global Findex Database 2017: Measuring financial inclusion and the fintech revolution. Singapore: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dichter, T. W., & Harper, M. (2007). What’s wrong with microfinance?. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Diriker, D., Landoni, P., & Benaglio, N. et al., (2018). Microfinance in Europe: Survery Report 2016-2017. European Microfinance Network.Google Scholar
  30. Doms, M., Lewis, E., & Robb, A. (2010). Local labor force education, new business characteristics, and firm performance. Journal of Urban Economics, 67(1), 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dorfleitner, G., & Oswald, E. (2016). Repayment behavior in peer-to-peer microfinancing: Empirical evidence from Kiva. Review of Financial Economics, 30, 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dorfleitner, G., Oswald, E.-M., & Röhe, M. (2019). The access of microfinance institutions to financing via the worldwide crowd. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1062976918301601
  33. Dorfleitner, G., Priberny, C., Schuster, S., Stoiber, J., Weber, M., de Castro, I., et al. (2016). Description-text related softinformation in peer-to-peer lending: Evidence from two leadingEuropean platforms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 64, 169–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Duarte, J., Siegel, S., & Young, L. (2012). Trust and credit: The role of appearance in peer-to-peer lending. The Review of Financial Studies, 25(8), 2455–2484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Forcella, D., & Hudon, M. (2016). Green microfinance in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Freedman, S., & Jin, G. (2017). The information value of online social networks: Lessons from peer-to-peer lending. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 51, 185–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Freedman, S., & Jin, G. Z. (2008). Do social networks solve information problems for peer-to-peer lending? Evidence from prosper. com. NET Institute Working Paper. Bloomington. Indiana University.Google Scholar
  38. Gaiha, R., & Thapa, G. (2006). A methodology for assessment of the impact of microfinance on empowerment and vulnerability. Working Paper. International Fund for Agricultural Development.Google Scholar
  39. Galema, R., Lensink, R., & Spierdijk, L. (2011). International diversification and microfinance. Journal of International Money and Finance, 30(3), 507–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ghosh, S., & Van Tassel, E. (2013). Funding microfinance under asymmetric information. Journal of Development Economics, 101, 8–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hammill, A., Matthew, R., & McCarter, E. (2008). Microfinance and climate change adaptation. International Institute for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
  42. Heller, L. R., & Badding, K. D. (2012). For compassion or money? The factors influencing the funding of micro loans. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(6), 831–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Herzenstein, M., Sonenshein, S., & Dholakia, U. M. (2011). Tell me a good story and I may lend you money: The role of narratives in peer-to-peer lending decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 138–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hudon, M., & Ashta, A. (2013). Fairness and microcredit interest rates: From Rawlsian principles of justice to the distribution of the bargaining range. Business Ethics: A European Review, 22, 277–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hudon, M., & Traca, D. (2011). On the efficiency effect of subsidies in microfinance: An empirical inquiry. World Development, 39(6), 966–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Imai, K. S., Arun, T., & Annim, S. K. (2010). Microfinance and household poverty reduction: New evidence from India. World Development, 38(12), 1760–1774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jancenelle, V. E., Javalgi, R. R. G., & Cavusgil, E. (2018). The role of economic and normative signals in international prosocial crowdfunding: An illustration using market orientation and psychological capital. International Business Review, 27(1), 208–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Jayo, B., González, A., & Conzett, C. (2010). Overview of the microcredit sector in the European Union 2008-2009. European Microfinance Network.Google Scholar
  49. Jenq, C., Pan, J., & Theseira, W. (2015). Beauty, weight, and skin color in charitable giving. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 119, 234–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jiang, C., Wang, Z., Wang, R., & Ding, Y. (2018). Loan default prediction by combining soft information extracted from descriptive text in online peer-to-peer lending. Annals of Operations Research, 266(1–2), 511–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Johnson, S., Ashta, A., & Assadi, D. (2010). Online or offline: The rise of ‘peer-to-peer’ lending in microfinance. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 8(3), 26–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kabeer, N. (2001). Conflicts over credit: Re-evaluating the empowerment potential of loans to women in rural bangladesh. World Development, 29, 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kabeer, N. (2005). Is microfinance a ‘magic bullet’ for women’s empowerment? analysis of findings from South Asia. Economic and Political weekly, 40, 4709–4718.Google Scholar
  54. Kennedy, P. (2008). A guide to econometrics (6th ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  55. Khandker, S. R. (2005). Microfinance and poverty: Evidence using panel data from Bangladesh. The World Bank Economic Review, 19(2), 263–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Khavul, S. (2010). Microfinance: Creating opportunities for the poor? Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 58–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kiva, (2018a). Webpage – information on Kiva statistics. Retrieved July 8, 2018, from https://www.kiva.org/about.
  58. Kiva, (2018b). Webpage – requirements for Kiva direct loans. Retrieved July 8, 2018, from https://www.kiva.org/about/due-diligence/direct-loans.
  59. Kiva, (2019a). Webpage—information on Kiva trustees. Retrieved June 10, 2019, from https://www.kiva.org/trustees.
  60. Kiva, (2019b). Webpage—information on the risk of lending. Retrieved June 10, 2019, from https://www.kiva.org/about/due-diligence/risk.
  61. Kiva, (2019c). Webpage—information on the social performance. Retrieved June 10, 2019, from https://www.kiva.org/about/impact/socialperformance.
  62. Kraemer-Eis, H., & Conforti, A. (2009). Microfinance in Europe: A market overview. EIF Working Paper.Google Scholar
  63. Krauss, N., & Walter, I. (2009). Can microfinance reduce portfolio volatility? Economic Development and Cultural Change, 58(1), 85–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Larrimore, L., Jiang, L., Larrimore, J., Markowitz, D., & Gorski, S. (2011). Peer to peer lending: The relationship between language features, trustworthiness, and persuasion success. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 39(1), 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ledgerwood, J., Earne, J., & Nelson, C. (2013). The new microfinance handbook: A financial market system perspective. Singapore: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lee, E., & Lee, B. (2012). Herding behavior in online p2p lending: An empirical investigation. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(5), 495–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lester, R. H., Certo, S. T., Dalton, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Cannella, A. A, Jr. (2006). Initial public offering investor valuations: An examination of top management team prestige and environmental uncertainty. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lin, M., Prabhala, N. R., & Viswanathan, S. (2013). Judging borrowers by the company they keep: Friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Science, 59(1), 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Liu, D., Brass, D., Lu, Y., & Chen, D. (2015). Friendships in online peer-to-peer lending: Pipes, prisms, and relational herding. MIS Quarterly, 39(3), 729–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ly, P., & Mason, G. (2012a). Competition between microfinance NGOs: Evidence from Kiva. World Development, 40(3), 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ly, P., & Mason, G. (2012b). Individual preferences over development projects: Evidence from microlending on Kiva. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1036–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Michels, J. (2012). Do unverifiable disclosures matter? Evidence from peer-to-peer lending. The Accounting Review, 87(4), 1385–1413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Moss, T. W., Neubaum, D. O., & Meyskens, M. (2015). The effect of virtuous and entrepreneurial orientations on microfinance lending and repayment: A signaling theory perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Moss, T. W., Renko, M., Block, E., & Meyskens, M. (2017). Funding the story of hybrid ventures: Crowdfunder lending preferences and linguistic hybridity. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 643–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Obaidullah, M., & Shirazi, N. S. (2014). Integrating philanthropy with microfinance: Models of community empowerment. In F. M. Atbani & C. Trullols (Eds.), Social Impact Finance (pp. 75–96). London: Palgrave Macmillan.  https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137372697_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Parhankangas, A., & Renko, M. (2017). Linguistic style and crowdfunding success among social and commercial entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(2), 215–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Pedrini, M., Bramanti, V., Minciullo, M., & Ferri, L. M. (2016). Rethinking microfinance for developed countries. Journal of International Development, 28(2), 281–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pietraszkiewicz, A., Soppe, B., & Formanowicz, M. (2017). Go pro bono: Prosocial language as a success factor in crowdfunding. Social Psychology, 48(5), 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pope, D., & Sydnor, J. (2011). What’s in a picture? Evidence of discrimination from prosper.com. Journal of Human Resources, 46, 53–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Robinson, M. S. (2001). The microfinance revolution., Sustainable finance for the poor Washington, DC: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Robinson, P. B., & Sexton, E. A. (1994). The effect of education and experience on self-employment success. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(2), 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Schicks, J. (2014). Over-indebtedness in microfinance—An empirical analysis of related factors on the borrower level. World Development, 54, 301–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Schulz, A. J., Israel, B. A., Zimmerman, M. A., & Checkoway, B. N. (1995). Empowerment as a multi-level construct: Perceived control at the individual, organizational and community levels. Health Education Research, 10(3), 309–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Spence, M. (2002). Signaling in retrospect and the informational structure of markets. American Economic Review, 92(3), 434–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Stewart, F. (2005). Groups and capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6(2), 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Swain, R. B., & Floro, M. (2012). Assessing the effect of microfinance on vulnerability and poverty among low income households. Journal of Development Studies, 48(5), 605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Swain, R. B., & Wallentin, F. Y. (2009). Does microfinance empower women? Evidence from self-help groups in india. International Review of Applied Economics, 23(5), 541–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Tchouassi, G. (2011). Microfinance, inequality and vulnerability: Empirical analysis from central african countries. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics, 3(3), 150–156.Google Scholar
  91. Thorp, R., Stewart, F., & Heyer, A. (2005). When and how far is group formation a route out of chronic poverty? World Development, 33(6), 907–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Underwood, T. (2006). Overview of the microcredit sector in Europe 2004-2005. European Microfinance Network.Google Scholar
  93. Unger, J. M., Rauch, A., Frese, M., & Rosenbusch, N. (2011). Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(3), 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. UNIDO. (2018). Webpage—gender equality and the empowerment of women. Retrieved September 9, from, https://www.unido.org/our-focus/cross-cutting-services/gender-equality-and-empowerment-women.
  95. Yum, H., Lee, B., & Chae, M. (2012). From the wisdom of crowds to my own judgement in microfinance through online peer-to-peer lending platforms. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(5), 469–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Zaman, H. (1999). Assessing the poverty and vulnerability impact of micro-credit in Bangladesh: A case study of BRAC. Washington, DC: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Ziegler, T., Reedy, E., Le, A., Zhang, B., Kroszner, R. S., & Garvey, K., (2017). The Americas alternative finance industry report 2017. Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance, the Cambridge Judge Business School.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregor Dorfleitner
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Eva-Maria Oswald
    • 1
  • Rongxin Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of FinanceUniversity of RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.CERMi (Centre for European Research in Microfinance)BruxellesBelgium

Personalised recommendations