shifts the focus of interventions towards the formal, growth-oriented sector and away from poorer microenterprises, which are not so much unwilling to pay as unable to pay. Moreover,it is difficult to promote
markets for BDS where the small enterprise sector is not buoyant and demand for such services is very weak. The author distinguishes between business-to-business services, which even the poorest microenterprises
are prepared to pay for, and business development services,which promote growth or innovation and for which microenterprises and small businesses are less willing to pay the full costs because of the risks
involved. It is argued that for such BDS, subsidy is still justified.
The market development approach to SMME development: Implications for local government in South Africa
Rogerson, Christian M.
Urban Forum, Vol. 17 (2006), Iss. 1 P.54https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02681258 [Citations: 5]
- Development impact bonds: learning from the Asháninka cocoa and coffee case in Peru
- Trade-off between outreach and sustainability of microfinance institutions: evidence from sub-Saharan Africa
- Value chain development for rural poverty reduction: A reality check and a warning
- Impact assessment of commodity standards: towards inclusive value chains
- What is cocoa sustainability? Mapping stakeholders’ socio-economic, environmental, and commercial constellations of priorities