Does financial inclusion via microfinance reduce poverty?

16th February, 2016 @CLM 2.02

Watch the debate here!

Thank you everyone who has either shown their interest, helped us spread the word and became a part in the debate. Each and every one of your support has been the cornerstone of this event and we cannot thank you enough.

We would also like to thank Dr Milford Bateman, Dr Phyllis SantaMaria and of course Dr Kate Meagher, who participated in the debate.

The heated duel between Dr SantaMaria and Dr Bateman was excellent and fit for the topic, “Does financial inclusion via microfinance reduce poverty” as the topic itself is also subject to a very heated debate in the field of development studies. Both sides had very good arguments and both sides were able to capture the audience as after the debate was over, a lot of them managed their way towards the panel to ask personal questions.

This debate marks the end of the LSE SU Microfinance Society’s 15-16 agenda, with which we will say thank you for the continued support towards our society and our organisation. We will return soon with announcements for the 16-17 committee elections.

In the mean time: some photos for your visual entertainment.

President Jung Woo Yang makes the opening speech
Dr Phyllis SantaMaria presents her case first: Microfinance does improve the quality of life
Next is Dr Milford Bateman, who argues that Rubik’s Cubes are as effective as microfinance in terms of reducing poverty
Dr Bateman answers questions from Dr Kate Meagher and the audience
Dr SantaMaria also answers questions from Dr Kate Meagher and the audience
Thank you to everyone who attended the event!