Thesis (D.P.H.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1991. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 156-162). / Microfiche. / xvi, 162 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm

The idea of microfinance has burst into the area of global poverty reduction. Many comments have been made about its benefits such as; it is an alternative tool for poverty alleviation and sustainable development. Many studies have attempted to assess different facets of the impact of microfinance, especially trying to show its potential for greater financial inclusion and economic benefits using advanced rigorous quantitative approaches. Although some studies have evaluated this topic in the past there remains some significant gaps in the literature, including the impact of microfinance on other dimensions such as the social impact, education or environmental impact, the impact on happiness and subjective wellbeing of its clients has been hardly examined. This study aims to fill this gap by using rigorous quantitative methods with a rich qualitative dataset to assess the impact of microfinance on both economic and non-economic aspects, especially the happiness and psychological dimension. I Use primary data from a household survey and an ethnographic approach combining quantitative methods such as matching estimators, propensity score matching with nonparametric regression. The mixed methods were employed in order to evaluate the impact of the microfinance schemes on the improvement of borrowers’ wellbeing, household condition and local economic and environmental development. The most notable findings were that the borrowers from the savings group using group lending schemes utilised the loan for mainly entrepreneurial purposes and household spending, performed better than other groups of borrowers. This could be seen from the increase in household income and a high repayment rate. In addition, by observing the social impacts, it indicated that the group lending together with the ecotourism project generated and strengthened the social ties in the community. The group members also produced high positive psychological indicators compared to the non-member households. Easterlin’s paradox was revisited and found that not only was it income that affected happiness and wellbeing, but other factors seemed to have an influence on self-reported happiness. Those factors included health or health condition of family members which significantly influenced self-reported happiness in all models. Considering the impact of microfinance on happiness and wellbeing, it was found that clients of the group lending scheme can repay better and led to a higher level of self-reported happiness and subjective wellbeing. The ability to repay also affected a low level of stress or negative moods.

No description available.

This study was a secondary analysis of survey data on participants and nonparticipants in Thai rural education programs. The original data were collected in 1987 by the Office of the National Educational Commission, Office of the Prime Minister, Bangkok Thailand. This study was conducted in order to examine the effect of selected demographic variables on participation and to determine why some rural villagers participate in nonformal educational programs and other villagers do not. The data were collected from a survey of nonformal education in Thai rural areas conducted as part of the evaluation of the Fifth Five-Year Plan. The population consisted of 590 participants in nonformal education programs and 860 nonparticipants. The statistical techniques employed to analyze data were logit analysis, z-test, tables of binomial distribution, and ranking by each of the groups (participants and nonparticipants). The evidence from this study indicates that the average nonformal education participant is an adult between the age of 36 and 50 years, who has completed four or less years of education, and who is married and works in farming (cultivating rice). The findings reveal that participants and nonparticipants in nonformal education programs were significantly different according to their needs for health knowledge, agricultural knowledge, further education, knowledge for living, and vocational knowledge. The reasons associated with participation in nonformal education programs, in this study, were to gain knowledge useful for making a living, for personal interest, to interact with instructors and students, or to make new friends. In this study, the reasons that villagers did not participate in the program were because they lacked time and transportation. While majority of the participants responded that they were satisfied with the nonformal educational courses, four subgroups, adults from age 21 to 35 years, single adults, adults who completed P.5 (grade 5) and above, and farmers, indicated dissatisfaction.