| Literature DB >> 31517090 |
Bayu Arie Fianto1, Hayu Maulida1, Nisful Laila1.
Abstract
This paper investigates the determining factors of non-performing financing in Islamic microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Indonesia. Using logistic regression, the study sample comprises data from 140 clients; 90 with a good financing status and 50 with a poor financing status. The results show that age, gender, occupation, and type of contract influence the non-performance of clients of Islamic MFIs in Indonesia. Probit regression confirmed the results.Entities:
Keywords: Determinant factors; Economics; Indonesia; Islamic microfinance institution; Non-performing financing
Year: 2019 PMID: 31517090 PMCID: PMC6728305 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02301
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
The countries with the world's five largest Muslim populations in 2010.
| No | Country | Share of the world's Muslim population | Share of Muslims within the country | Muslim population |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Indonesia | 13.1% | 87.2% | 209 million |
| 2 | India | 11.0% | 14.4% | 176 million |
| 3 | Pakistan | 10.5% | 96.4% | 167 million |
| 4 | Bangladesh | 8.4% | 90.4% | 134 million |
| 5 | Nigeria | 4.8% | 48.8% | 77 million |
Source: Pew Research Center (2015).
The variables used in the logit model.
| Variable | Type of variable | Description of variable |
|---|---|---|
| Age | Continuous | Age of client (in years) |
| Gender | Dummy | Gender of client (1 = female, 0 = male) |
| Educational level | Dummy | Educational level of client (1 = upper middle class, 0 = lower middle class) |
| Occupation | Dummy | Occupation of client (1 = formal, 0 = informal) |
| Distance | Dummy | Distance from member's residence to the cooperative (1 = far if >10 km, 0 = close <10 km) |
| Location | Dummy | Geographic location of member's residence (1 = city, 0 = district) |
| Type of contract | Dummy | Contract type used in financing (1 = PLS, 0 = Non-PLS) |
| Total financing | Dummy | Client's total financing (1 = Less than 3 mill IDR |
In 19th January 2019, 1 USD = 14,177 IDR (Bloomberg, 2019).
Profiles of the clients in the sample.
| Variable | Non-performing financing (N = 50) | Performing financing (N = 90) | Total (N = 140) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sub-total | % to N | Sub-total | % to N | Sub-total | % to N | ||
| Age | 21–35 | 1 | 2.0 | 8 | 8.9 | 9 | 6.4 |
| 36–55 | 42 | 84.0 | 75 | 83.3 | 117 | 83.6 | |
| 56–70 | 7 | 14.0 | 7 | 7.8 | 14 | 10.0 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Gender | Female | 20 | 40.0 | 73 | 81.1 | 93 | 66.4 |
| Male | 30 | 60.0 | 17 | 18.9 | 47 | 33.6 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Education level | Upper Middle Class | 45 | 90.0 | 80 | 88.9 | 125 | 89.3 |
| Lower Middle Class | 5 | 10.0 | 10 | 11.1 | 15 | 10.7 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Occupation | Formal | 7 | 14.0 | 5 | 5.6 | 12 | 8.6 |
| Informal | 43 | 86.0 | 85 | 94.4 | 128 | 91.4 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Distance | Far (11–25 km) | 11 | 22.0 | 20 | 22.2 | 31 | 22.1 |
| Close (1–10 km | 39 | 78.0 | 70 | 77.8 | 109 | 77.9 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Location | City | 22 | 44.0 | 54 | 60.0 | 76 | 54.3 |
| District | 28 | 56.0 | 36 | 40.0 | 64 | 45.7 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Type of contract | PLS | 42 | 84.0 | 30 | 33.3 | 72 | 51.4 |
| Non-PLS | 8 | 16.0 | 60 | 66.7 | 68 | 48.6 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
| Total Financing | Less than 3,000,000 IDR | 5 | 10.0 | 24 | 26.7 | 29 | 20.7 |
| 3,000,001–8,000,000 IDR | 16 | 32.0 | 37 | 41.1 | 53 | 37.8 | |
| 8,000,001–18,000,000 IDR | 11 | 22.0 | 15 | 16.7 | 26 | 18.6 | |
| 18,000,001–30,000,000 IDR | 10 | 20.0 | 10 | 11.1 | 20 | 14.3 | |
| >30,000,000 IDR | 8 | 16.0 | 4 | 4.4 | 12 | 8.6 | |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||||
Logit estimates for factors affecting non-performing financing.
| Independent variable | Coefficient | Standard Error | Wald Statistic | Marginal Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | -0.0829** | 0.0049 | -2.30 | -0.0122 |
| Gender | 1.1191** | 0.0664 | 2.28 | 0.1643 |
| Education level | 0.9084 | 0.1167 | 1.13 | 0.1334 |
| Type of occupation | -1.9154** | 0.1226 | -2.18 | -0.2813 |
| Distance | 0.4031 | 0.0783 | 0.75 | 0.0592 |
| Location | 0.6143 | 0.0660 | -0.98 | 0.0902 |
| Type of contract | -2.6755*** | 0.0846 | -3.83 | -0.3929 |
| Total financing | -0.1810 | 0.0268 | 1.33 | -0.0266 |
| Constant | 4.8164 | 1.9049 | 2.53 | |
| McFadden R-squared | 0.3118 | |||
| Log-likelihood | -62.795815 | |||
| LR chi-squared | 56.90*** | |||
| Degrees of freedom | 8 | |||
| Total observations | 140 |
** 5% significance level, *** 1% significance level.
Pairwise correlation of the independent variables for logistic regression.
| Age | Gender | Education | Occupation | Distance | Location | Contract | Financing | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1 | |||||||
| Gender | 0.156 | 1 | ||||||
| Education | -0.001 | -0.050 | 1 | |||||
| Occupation | 0.103 | -0.106 | -0.058 | 1 | ||||
| Distance | -0.049 | -0.203 | 0.129 | -0.101 | 1 | |||
| Location | 0.189 | 0.015 | -0.039 | -0.026 | 0.144 | 1 | ||
| Contract | -0.304 | -0.509 | 0.171 | -0.110 | 0.139 | -0.145 | 1 | |
| Financing | -0.079 | -0.286 | 0.112 | -0.111 | 0.107 | 0.044 | 0.490 | 1 |
Probit estimates for the factors affecting non-performing financing.
| Independent variables | Coefficient | Standard Error | Wald Statistic | Marginal Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | -0.0475** | 0.0208 | -2.28 | -0.0119 |
| Gender | 0.6620574** | 0.2880 | 2.30 | 0.1661 |
| Education level | 0.4864253 | 0.4624 | 1.05 | 0.1220 |
| Type of occupation | -1.084073** | 0.5048 | -2.15 | -0.2720 |
| Distance | 0.2190259 | 0.3120 | 0.70 | 0.0549 |
| Location | 0.4012522 | 0.2642 | -0.96 | 0.1006 |
| Type of contract | -1.515159*** | 0.3752 | -4.04 | -0.3802 |
| Total financing | -0.1063204 | 0.1105 | 1.52 | -0.0266 |
| Constant | 2.75462 | 1.1123 | 2.48 | |
| McFadden R-squared | 0.3131 | |||
| Log-likelihood | -62.676449 | |||
| LR statistics | 57.14*** | |||
| Degrees of freedom | 8 | |||
| Total observations | 140 |
** 5% significance level, *** 1% significance level.