Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: The use of equity finance by development finance institutions in Malawi.
Author: McKendry, Ian Michael.
ISNI:       0000 0001 3625 1301
Awarding Body: University of Sussex
Current Institution: University of Sussex
Date of Award: 1992
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
The main purpose of the thesis is to investigate one possible reason for the poor performance of Development Finance Institutions, and consequently to identify one possible way in which future performance might be improved. Financial Institutions can choose from two main investment instruments: loan and equity. Most DFIs have chosen to use loans almost exclusively. However, equity funding has a number of potential advantages over loans. One such advantage is equity's ability to compensate for risk, thus allowing a DFI to invest in higher risk projects which have the potential for higher returns. The research considers two DFIs in Malawi, both of which invest loan and equity finance. Five hypotheses are used to test whether equity's potential advantages have been of practical benefit. Each of these hypotheses is summarised below, followed by the result of the research. i Equity financed projects are more fully funded than are loan financed projects: not supported. ii The servicing cost of equity finance is more flexible, but the overall returns to equity are higher for the DFI: only the second part supported. iii Further funding is more likely to be provided in equity cases: only weakly supported. iv Some investments can only be financially justified by using equity: not supported. v More management help is given by the DFI in the case of equity investments: supported. A sixth hypothesis considers whether other factors, such as project appraisal methodology, external political pressure and internal operating procedures may have outweighed financial considerations such as the choice between equity and loan finance. (If so, then the potential advantages of equity would not have resulted in much practical benefit. ) There is evidence, although it is not conclusive, to support this hypothesis. The thesis concludes that the DFIs examined have hardly used the potential advantages of equity. The likeliest explanation for this appears to be that decisions on whether or not to use equity finance were dominated by the other factors identified in the sixth hypothesis.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available
Keywords: Banking