User:Tgkwok/sandbox

Kiva (organization)

Controversy regarding Kiva transparency
Since the founding and growing popularity of Kiva, there have been many critics and criticisms surrounding the organization and their operations. Kiva has been accused of over-simplifying aspects of their organization when presenting information. Issues include representations of borrowers, distribution of loans, and representation of data in forms that raise questions.

There have been some incidents where Kiva has been criticized for keeping details from lenders about their borrowers. Kiva lenders have expressed difficulty in choosing borrowers, due to the fact that they want to feel like they are making a difference and they want to fully imagine a borrower's circumstances before they choose who to lend to. On one hand, Kiva needs to protect the privacy of the borrowers, but on the other, they still need to provide enough information for the lenders.

Kiva's transparency has been questioned is in the way they distribute loans to borrowers versus how they actually conduct this operation. Kiva loans are disbursed before they are funded, however, the "How Kiva Works" page implies that Kiva loans are disbursed after receiving funding. Arguments have been made that Kiva has simplified the microcredit process because this would attract more borrowers.

The way Kiva presents their statistics in the portfolio yield form has also raised alarm. The statistic itself has a reputation for being very flawed, but Kiva ensures this is the best way to present the data. Kiva is found to include all fees within these statistics in order to conceal interest rates other actors who are not borrowers. Kiva was accused of providing Kivans limited information that does not embody the entire operation as rates from 30%-50% may be concealed. Thus this questions if Kiva is truly transparent.

Controversy regarding lender biases
According to an analysis set to be released by researchers, lead by author Walter Theseira at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, lenders are more likely to loan to borrowers who are pretty, female, skinny, and light-skinned.

There is strong evidence in this study to support that lenders strongly prefer lending to women, to groups, and borrowers from poorer countries, especially borrowers and countries in Africa. Theseira et al suspect that this is because media has circulated success microfinance institutions which concentrate on lending to groups and women. The results about the impact of attractiveness, skin color, and weight are difficult to conclude with agreement or evidence based on the fact that there might be more access with more attractive, lighter skinned, skinny borrowers in terms of economic development. The authors can only suggest that the results of the study are because of the discriminatory behaviors of it's lenders.

They estimate that borrowers at the 75th percentile in terms of darker skin color takes roughly 20% more time to be funded their loans in comparison to a borrower with lighter skin in the 25th percentile. More attractive borrowers at the 75th percentile takes a quarter less time to get their funding.

Kiva has acknowledged the problem, and Kivans would like to transcend micro-discrimination. In order to do this, Kiva has shared it's data with researchers. They have looked at geography, industry, and gender bias.