id,collection,dc.contributor.author,dc.contributor.firstReferee,dc.contributor.furtherReferee,dc.contributor.gender,dc.date.accepted,dc.date.accessioned,dc.date.available,dc.date.issued,dc.description,dc.description.abstract[de],dc.format.extent,dc.identifier.uri,dc.identifier.urn,dc.language,dc.rights.uri,dc.subject,dc.subject.ddc,dc.title,dc.title.subtitle,dc.title.translated[de],dc.title.translatedsubtitle[de],dc.type,dcterms.accessRights.dnb,dcterms.accessRights.openaire,dcterms.format[de],refubium.affiliation[de],refubium.mycore.derivateId,refubium.mycore.fudocsId "567f3611-6f47-41db-8048-1086bae0c1ca","fub188/14","Kirchstein, Katja","Prof. em. Dr. Manfred Nitsch","Prof. Dr. Barbara Fritz","w","2012-06-01","2018-06-07T23:20:48Z","2012-08-15T10:24:34.090Z","2011","PART I – Introduction 1 1 Ratings in Microfinance? – Research Questions, Methodology and Structure of the Study 3 1.1 Research Question – Functions and Functionalities of Ratings in Microfinance: What Does That Mean? 6 1.2 Research Design, Methodology and Case Selection– A Qualitative, Comparative Approach 8 1.3 Structure of the Study – From Major Credit Ratings to Ratings in Microfinance 13 2 Contextualizing Ratings in Mainstream Financial Markets and in Microfinance 16 2.1 The Evolution of Credit Ratings and Their Spreading in the U.S. and Beyond 16 2.1.1 The Growing Importance of Credit Ratings in the U.S. 16 2.1.2 The Internationalization of Credit Ratings 22 2.2 The Appearance of Ratings in Microfinance – Expression of a Maturing Sector? 26 2.2.1 The Microfinance (Investment) Market – An Overview 28 2.2.2 The Origins and Evolution of Ratings in Microfinance 41 PART II - Functions and Functionalities of the Major Credit Rating Agencies from a Theoretical and Empirical Perspective 51 3 Ratings in the Light of the Theory of Financial Intermediation and Beyond – Different Functions of Credit Ratings 53 3.1 Credit Ratings – General Characteristics of External Credit Risk Assessments 54 3.2 The Theory of Financial Intermediation – From an Institutional to a Functional Perspective 58 3.2.1 New Institutional Economics and Financial Intermediation – About Transaction Costs and Asymmetric Information 59 3.2.2 Financial Intermediation from a Functional Perspective – The (single most) Importance of Risk Management 64 3.3 Dealing with Credit Risk – Linking and Confusing Uncertainty with Default Probability 74 3.3.1 Different Approaches to Define Credit Risk 76 3.3.2 Uncertainty and Irrationality – Credit Ratings from a Behavioral Perspective 81 3.3.3 Summing-up – Anticipating the Future as a Matter of Judgment 84 3.4 Rating Agencies from a Sociological Perspective – The Meaning of Global Scientization within a “Risk Society” 87 3.4.1 Abolishing Self-Interest and its Consequences – Systemic Organization of Risk Management 88 3.4.2 Epistemic Communities – The Principles of Expert-Systems 92 3.5 The Different Functions of Credit Ratings 95 3.5.1 Economies of Scale in Environments of Increasing Complexity - The Information Function 96 3.5.2 Signaling Integrity and Classifying Levels of Risk – The Certification Function 101 3.5.3 Aligning Interests of Issuers and Asset Managers – The Control Function 103 3.5.4 Influencing Investors’ Beliefs and Behavior – The Coordination Function 107 3.5.5 Summarizing the Different Functions of Credit Ratings 108 3.6 Safeguarding Reliability – Reputation as the Driving Force for Information Quality 110 4 Ratings above Suspicion? - Empirical Analysis Regarding Critical Aspects of the Performance of the Major Rating Agencies and the Functionality of their Assessments 116 4.1 Additional Factors Influencing the Demand for Credit Ratings – Network-effects, Lock-in and Rating-based Regulation 116 4.2 The Behavior of Credit Rating Agencies 119 4.2.1 The Lack of Transparency 119 4.2.2 Conflicts of Interest 121 4.2.3 Declining Rating Quality and Timeliness 124 4.2.4 Anticompetitive Behavior 127 4.3 Credit Ratings and Market Dynamics 129 4.3.1 Financial Market Instability and Over- reliance of Investors 130 4.3.2 Monopolistic Power and its Possible Abuse 135 4.4 Interim Results – Assessing the Functionality of Credit Ratings and its Limits 139 PART III – Functions and Functionalities of Ratings in Microfinance – with Special Reference to the Case of Peru 143 5 The Peruvian Microfinance Market - Contextualizing Ratings in this Specific Environment 145 5.1 The Microfinance Sector in Peru 145 5.2 International Investments into Peruvian MFIs and their Refinancing Strategies 150 5.3 The Diffusion of Microfinance Ratings in Peru 155 6 Microfinance Ratings – Characteristics, Products and Methodologies of Different Rating Agencies 159 6.1 Performance versus Credit Ratings – What is the Difference? 159 6.1.1 Characteristics of the Four Specialized Rating Agencies, their Products and Rating Methodologies 162 6.1.2 Credit Ratings – Main Characteristics of Conventional Rating Agencies’ Methodologies and their Differences to Specialized Approaches 177 6.2 Social Ratings – Underlying Concepts and Practical Approaches to Implementation 186 6.2.1 The Objectives of Social Performance Management and Global Social Performance Reporting 186 6.2.2 Rating the Social Performance of Microfinance Institutions – Similarities and Differences of Methodologies and Report Styles 191 7 Functions and Functionalities of Ratings in Microfinance – Assessing the Role of Rating Agencies in Peru and Beyond 197 7.1 The Relevant Functions of Rating Agencies in the Context of Microfinance 200 7.1.1 The Information Function in a Highly Intermediary-Driven and Long-Term Investment Market 201 7.1.2 The Certification Function in Different Markets and the Importance of Regulatory Recognition 212 7.1.3 The Control Function – Ratings as an Advisory Service 223 7.2 Functionality of Microfinance Raters regarding their Performance and Reliability 229 7.2.1 The Information Function – Ratings or Audits? 230 7.2.2 The Certification Function – The Behavior of Rating Agencies and the Reliability of their Judgments 242 7.2.3 The Control Function – The Importance of a Specific Microfinance Focus 253 PART IV – Conclusions 258 8 Similarities and Differences of Rating Agencies’ Functions and Functionalities in Distinct Markets 260 8.1 Motivation and Methodology of the Study 260 8.2 Summary of the Theoretical Framework - The Functions of Ratings in the Mainstream Capital Markets 263 8.3 Ratings in the Context of Microfinance – Empirical Findings, Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Further Research 269 8.4 The (Questionable) Importance of Ratings in Microfinance and Future Prospects 278 References 284 Annex 321 Annex 1– Rating reports reviewed for the analysis of rating methodologies 321 Annex 2 - List of interviews held in Peru between February 16 and March 30, 2010. 323 Annex 3 – Interview guidelines 325 Annex 4 – Questionnaire MIV survey February 2009 331 Annex 5 - Rating grades and rating scale definitions of the four specialized rating agencies 336 Annex 6 - Rating categories and sub-categories covered by the four specialized rating agencies 338 Anex 7 – Categories and sub-categories covered in social ratings by the four specialized rating agencies 340 Annex 8 - Rating scales and definitions for social ratings 341 Weitere Anhänge laut Prüfungsordnung 343 Kurzfassung der Ergebnisse auf Deutsch 343 Tabellarischer Lebenslauf 349","Since the 1980s, the microfinance sector in many countries evolved into an economically sustainable industry and integral part of the financial system. In order to secure the increasing refinancing needs, an increasing number of economically successful microfinance institutions began to approach international and also commercial investors. Actors of international cooperation supported this process by creating or boosting the necessary infrastructure at the meso level. This includes initiatives to establish an adequate regulatory regime at the national level or the fostering of information services to increase the international visibility and transparency. The financial and political support of specialized microfinance rating agencies is just another example. This dissertation studies the possible contribution of rating agencies to the sustainable development of microfinance institutions. At the same time, it provides answers to the question which particular role specialized microfinance rating agencies play and what this could mean for the future development of the microfinance rating industry. The analysis and carving out of the functions of the “big three” internationally recognized U.S. rating agencies - Moody’s, Standard & Poor‘s and Fitch – build the theoretical conceptional framework for the study. Apart from (micro-)economic theories the study also builds on insights from psychology and (economic) sociology. A central element is the discussion of the meaning of risk. Linked to this discussion the possible reliability of rating agencies to assess future defaults is analyzed. The debate of often criticized aspects of the activities and behavior of rating agencies is presented. The analysis of these aspects provides further important insights into the functionalities of rating agencies in international capital markets. The developed analytical framework is then applied to the case of microfinance. Using a comparative approach the study gives answers to the question which functions of rating agencies are relevant within the microfinance industry at the present moment. Besides, it is analyzed in how far specialized microfinance raters distinguish themselves from conventional rating agencies. These differences again provide insights into the context- specific relevance of the different functions as well as the functionality of different rating methods and products. The study shows that in the case of Peru with its highly developed microfinance sector and partly also beyond this specific case, ratings have a relatively important information function which can improve the refinancing conditions of microfinance institutions. Yet, because of the restricted functionality with regard to their certification function they cannot be considered as critical for the access to funds. The control function, where ratings serve as a disciplining instrument, is at the present moment of little relevance. Still ratings have a consulting function for less developed small microfinance institutions. The coordination function which might foster the stability of (micro-) financial systems does not play a role yet.||Seit den 1980er Jahren hat sich der Mikrofinanzsektor in vielen Ländern zu einer wirtschaftlich nachhaltigen Industrie und integralem Bestandteil des Finanzsystems entwickelt. Um ihren hohen Refinanzierungsbedarf zu decken, begannen eine zunehmende Anzahl von wirtschaftliche erfolgreichen Mikrofinanzinstitutionen damit, sich internationalen, auch kommerziellen Investoren zuzuwenden. Akteuren der internationalen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit begleiteten diesen Prozess auch dadurch, die nötige Infrastruktur auf der Meso-Ebene zu schaffen oder zu stärken. Die Maßnahmen reichen von der Beratung zur Etablierung eines geeigneten, regulativen Rahmens auf nationaler Ebene bis hin zur Schaffung von auf internationale Visibilität und Transparenz abzielende Informationsdienste. Die politische und finanzielle Unterstützung von auf Mikrofinanzinstitutionen spezialisierte Ratingagenturen ist hier ein weiteres Beispiel. Diese Dissertation zielt darauf ab, den möglichen Beitrag von Ratingagenturen für die nachhaltige Entwicklung von Mikrofinanzinstitutionen zu ergründen. Gleichzeitig werden Antworten zu der Frage geliefert, welche besondere Rolle den spezialisierten Ratingagenturen dabei zukommt und was dies für mögliche Entwicklung der Mikrofinanz-Rating- Industrie bedeuten könnte. Den theoretisch konzeptionellen Rahmen für die Analyse bildet die Herausarbeitung der Funktionen von den drei großen, international anerkannten U.S. Rating Agenturen: Moody’s, Standard & Poor‘s und Fitch. Neben den (mikro-)ökonomischen Theorien basiert diese Arbeit auf Ansätzen aus der Psychologie und (Wirtschafts-) Soziologie. Ein zentrales Element ist dabei die Auseinandersetzung mit dem Risikobegriff und der damit einhergehenden, möglichen Verlässlichkeit von Ratingagenturen hinsichtlich ihrer Einschätzung von zukünftigen Zahlungsausfällen. Die Debatte hinsichtlich oftmals kritisierter Aspekte in Bezug auf die Aktivitäten und das Verhalten der drei großen Ratingagenturen wird dargestellt. Diese Analyse liefert weitere, wichtige Anhaltspunkte in Bezug auf die Funktionalität von Ratingagenturen in internationalen Kapitalmärkten. Das so erarbeitete Analyseraster wir dann auf den Fall der Mikrofinanzindustrie angewendet. Mit einem vergleichenden Ansatz wird zum einen der Frage nachgegangen, welche Funktionen von Ratingagenturen zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt innherhalb der Mirkofinanzindustrie relevant sind. Zum anderen wird analysiert, inwiefern sich die auf Mikrofinanzen spezialisierten Ratingagenturen von konventionellen lokalen und internationalen Ratingagenturen unterscheiden. Diese Unterschiede lassen wiederum Rückschlüsse auf die Kontext-spezifische Relevanz der verschiedenen Funktionen sowie die Funktionalität unterschiedlicher Ratingmethoden und –produkte zu. Die Studie zeigt, dass, für den Fall von Peru mit seinem weit entwickelten Mikrofinanzsektor, aber zum Teil auch darüber hinaus Ratings eine relativ wichtige Informationsfunktion haben und damit die Konditionen der Refinanzierung von Mikrofinanzinstitutionen verbessern können. Die eingeschränkte Funktionalität von Ratings in Bezug auf die Zertifizierungsfunktion lassen sie jedoch nicht als kritisch für den Zugang zu Refinanzierungsquellen erscheinen. Die Kontrollfunktion, bei der Ratings ein Disziplinierungsinstrument darstellen, ist bis dato wenig ausgeprägt. Ratings haben jedoch vor allem für weniger weit entwickelte, kleine Mikrofinanzinstitutionen eine Beratungsfunktion. Die Koordinationsfunktion als Garant für die Stabilität des (Mikro-) Finanzsystems spielt im Mikrofinanzsektor noch keine Rolle.","XV, 351 S.","https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/10374||http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-14572","urn:nbn:de:kobv:188-fudissthesis000000038540-4","eng","http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen","Ratings||Microfinance||Development||Peru","300 Sozialwissenschaften","Functions and Functionalities of Ratings in Microfinance","A comparison with the major credit rating industry with special reference to the case of Peru","Funktionen und Funktionalitäten von Ratings im Mikrofinanzsektor","Ein Vergleich mit der U.S. Rating Industrie und speziellem Bezug zum Fall Peru","Dissertation","free","open access","Text","Wirtschaftswissenschaft","FUDISS_derivate_000000011870","FUDISS_thesis_000000038540"