The role of micro-credit scheme of PRSP to alleviate poverty from the rural areas of Faisalabad region [Pakistan]

In 1998 the Punjab Rural Support Programme (PRSP) was started in the Punjab province. The main objectives of this project are to raise the socioeconomic conditions of the communities living in rural areas of the directs of Punjab, including Faisalabad district. In main goal of PRSP is to reduce poverty of the rural poor and to provide them proper facilities at their doorsteps. One of its segments is the micro credit scheme to alleviate poverty. PRSP deals with following four sector of the micro-credit i.e., Enterprise development, Livestock, Agricultural inputs and S.I.I.E. (Small Industrial Infrastructure Enterprise). The purpose of the study is to investigate the impact of micro credit scheme initiated by Faisalabad district on the socio-economic conditions of the people of the rural areas. From the total respondents, about 28.33 percent of the respondents had the age between 39 and 48 years, whereas 27.50 percent had 18-28 years, 20.83 percent had 29-38 years, 11.67 percent had 49-58 years, 6.67 percent had 59.68 years and only 5 percent had the age group of about the 69 years. From the total respondents, 60 percent of the respondents were male and rest of the respondents i.e. 40 percent were the female members. A large majority i.e. 49.2 percent were agriculturists, 29.2 percent were businessmen, 5.8 percent were government employees and 15.8 percent were involved in some kind of labour job. It was interesting that a large number of the respondents i.e. 38 percent were illiterate, 15.8 percent, and 16.7 percent were primary and middle respectively. The respondents having the education level of matric and inter were 20 percent and 6.7 percent respectively. Only 2.5 percent of the respondents had the qualification of graduate and above. A large number of the respondents i.e. 55.38 percent had the 6-9 members of the families. About 24.17 had 2-5, 15.83 percent had 10-13 and 4.77 percent had the 14 and above members of their families. From the total respondents only 15 percent had the Kacha houses whereas 41.7 percent and 43.3 percent of the total respondents had Pucca and Semi Pucca houses respectively. It was strange to the researcher that all of the respondents had their over houses and no body was living in rented one. From the total number of loanees, only 5 percent were well to do, 20.0 percent were better off, 26.7 percent were poor, 32.5 percent were very poor and 15.8 percent were the destitute according to the general perception of the society. At the part of the respondents, it was encouraging that a huge majority i.e. 90.0 percent of the respondents did not face any problem in acquiring the loan. However the not passing the case and mobility were the problems described by the 3.3 percent and 6.7 percent of the respondents respectively. There were 36.7 percent of the total respondents who got the information about PRSP credit scheme by their friends. About 24.2 percent, 20.8 percent and 18.3 percent of the respondents got such information by social organizers, neighbors and relatives respectively. There was a demand of loan of amount Rs. 15001-20000 by 39.2 percent of the total respondents. The ban amount of Rs. 10001-15000 was demanded by 26.7 percent, Rs. 25001-30000 by 18.3 percent, Rs. 5000-10000 by 10.8 percent and 20001-250000 by 5 percent of the total respondents. A high percentage i.e. 39.2 percent of the total respondents was granted loan amount Rs. 1500-10000. The loan amounted Rs. 10001-15000, Rs. 25001-30000, Rs. 5000-10000 and 2001-250000 was sanctioned to the 26.7, 16.3, 10.8 and 5 percent of the total respondents, respectively. There was a majority of the respondents i.e. 75.8 percent told that there was a partial fulfillment of the purpose for which the loan was acquired. Whereas 18.3 percent reported that to a great extent their purpose was fulfilled and 5.8 percent said that they had not benefited by the said loan. A major proportion i.e. 40.9 percent of the respondents told that they had paid the loan in 17-24 installments, about 33 and 26.6 percent of the respondents had paid the loan in 8-16 and 1-8 installments respectively. As far as the purpose of acquiring the loan was concerned investment and 25 percent of the respondents acquired the loan for agriculture. Inputs arrangements purpose. A large no. of the respondents i.e. 75.8 percent told that to some extent their purpose had been fulfilled. Whereas 18.3 percent reported that to a great extent their purpose was fulfilled. The rest of the 5.8 percent of the respondents responded that their purpose was fulfilled not at all. A large majority of the respondents i.e. 89.2 percent replied that their income were increased after taking the credit while 10.8 percent were not of the said view. There were 65.42 percent of the total respondents who reported about Rs. 100-500 increase in their income, the increase in income by Rs. 600-1000 and Rs. 1100-1500 were reported by 29.91 and 4.67 percent of the respondents respectively. The reasons for not increasing the income of the respondents after taking the loan were the loss in business by 53.85 percent, no investment by 23.07 percent, no experience in business by 15.38 percent and reasonal changes by 7.7 percent of such creditors who claimed no increase in their income. A large no of respondents i.e. 86.7 percent informed that their quality of life was improved after taking the credit, while the rest of 13.3 percent respondents were not of the save view. A major proportion i.e. 49.2 percent, of the respondents had expanded their business, 21.6 percent of the respondents informed that their production was increased after taking the credit, 19.2 percent of the respondents established their own business, whereas 9.2 percent reported that they started to give education to their children. Only 5.8 percent of the respondents informed that they built good house. About 76 percent of the respondents informed that the some extent the program had helped them in reducing the poverty, whereas 23.3 percent of the respondents reported that the reduction of their poverty was to great extent. Only 0.8 percent reported that the such loan did not effect of their poverty level. The three fourth of the respondents i.e. 75 percent said that they did not face any problem in returning the loan as per schedule while rest of 25 percent told that the problem was with them in this regard. A large majority of the respondents i.e. 97.5 percent informed that PRSP's credit scheme was better than other institutions, whereas only 2.5 percent reported that the PRSP's credit scheme is not better than other institutions. A majority of the respondents i.e. 67.5 percent reported that PRSP's credit scheme is better because it give credit at doorsteps, whereas 15.8 percent informed what it is better because it give credit without security, and without pledging the land. About 72 percent informed that they would contact PRSP again to acquire the loan again in case of need, whereas 28.3 percent reported that they wold not contact PRSP again.