G2P means Get help to the People
by Jim Rosenberg : Thursday, March 12, 2009
To promote effective regulation of mobile banking, CGAP, DFID, and the Alliance for Financial Inclusion (AFI) have organized this week’s second Global Leadership Seminar for high-level policymakers and regulators who set policy for branchless banking, including mobile banking. CGAP’s Technology Program and AFI are supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The following is based on a session led by Anu Bajaj, Adviser, Financial Sector Team at DFID. You can download her presentation here.
CGAP and DFID are collaborating on work that explores how social welfare payments – government to person (G2P) transfers – could help to bring poor people into the formal financial system using branchless banking:
Until very recently, most G2P (government-to-person) payments were carried out in person and in cash. However, because such methods pose security risks and require high transaction costs for payers and beneficiaries, governments are increasingly switching to electronic delivery.
Government payment systems vary widely by country. Plan Familias in Argentina, for example, offers a debit card re-loadable only by the government. Funds must be drawn within 1 month or the beneficiary loses them, and they may not deposit additional funds into the prepaid account. In Brazil, the Ministry of Social Development is in the process of migrating 12 million recipients of Bolsa Familia, the financial program that represents 25% of Brazilian families, away from an electronic benefit card, and toward the option of a simplified account. In South Africa, several million of the country’s more than 9 million grant recipients receive their funds via a debit card from the nation’s largest bank or a smartcard from payment system provider Net1 UEPS Technologies.
While there’s been some exploration of the business case for agents and providers, we wanted to look at the implications for decision makers. Key takeaways:
- Some schemes may require specific regulatory approval or exemption to actually increase access to banking services;
- Social welfare departments may require or benefit from financial advice in designing payment elements and even appointing payment agencies (e.g. banks);
- Large scale schemes may affect payment system and financial sector through choice of standards and instruments;
- The current economic climate offers opportunities for a “big push forward” for financial inclusion with multiple developmental and economic growth spin offs;
- Financial regulators can enable and support this process through constructive engagement.
In this session we asked for a show of hands – how many banking and payment officials in the room have reached across department lines to speak with their social welfare departments to see how they could collaborate? Only a few hands went up, with this comment: “Dialogue doesn’t equal agreement.”
DFID and CGAP will have a Focus Note on this topic in the next few weeks.


One Comment
May 6th, 2009 at 9:24 am, Dean Procter ()
I find it difficult to see the majority of the developing nations populations being able to afford the mobiles, and the service levels to mobile bank. The western world is reticent and has reservations about security, and they are also cost conscious. Given the penetration in the developed nations, isn’t it a bit of a stretch to assume the success or benefits will be any greater in the developing world?
Unless of course you can work out a lower cost, and more secure way to provide mobile banking and payments on the phones that are already in service. This does not match the objectives of either the networks or the manufactures whom I note are keen to help you ‘get to the people’.
Success in your goal will not be found with either the manufacturers or the networks.
Mobiles could solve a lot of issues for governments and citizens without the feature phone or the premium data service. The networks would be unable to conceive how, they are limited in view to increasing their shareholder returns.
The objective of G2P is to assist the developing world and presumably the developed world as well. I doubt you’ll find a viable solution which meets all the present stakeholder’s diametrically opposed (in the short term) objectives.
It seems to me that you are seeking a cheap solution to financial services, but may merely transfer the costs from the financial industry to the telecommunications industry without reducing the costs.
If you can’t get the transaction costs down below 5c give me a call.
Mobile identity and mobile transactions go hand in hand with government savings of a magnitude hardly contemplated.