The Microcredit Bazaar

From NSwiki, the NationStates encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Resolution History

Overview

This resolution was the eighth proposal sponsored by Powerhungry Chipmunks to reach the United Nations floor as either a resolution or repeal, making the Powerhungry Chipmunks the nation with the largest number of successful UN proposals (although he was later surpassed by Gruenberg for the largest number of non-repeal proposals). The basic idea behind this resolution is to create grassroots information campaigns to educate citizens in various nations about their options to get small short-term loans, with the goal being to increase the level of economic activity in UN members.


Proposal Campaign

The first draft of this proposal was brought to the attention of the general UN membership on Jul 5 2005. This first draft, titled "The Traveling Microcredit Bazaar" also included provisions for a UN Committee to oversee the microcredit bazaar. The initial comments from UN members focused on the name of the bazaar itself, but the basic concept of the proposal remained relatively unchallenged. At the suggestion of the ambassadors from Roathin and Ecopoeia the name of the bazaar was changed to the "Microcredit Roadshow".

The proposal was tabled for a few weeks, to allow the Powerhungry Chipmunks to work with other National Sovereignty Organization members on the debates related to the implementation of the United Nations Security Act, but the proposal returned to the UN for additional comments again in early August 2005 under its original name but with slight changes based on comments from the original draft.

It was at this time that the subject of microcredit recieved more attention and approval from UN members. The proposal achieved quorum to reach the resolution queue in early August.


UN Debate

Though the initial responses in the official UN debate came from nations that had previously indicated their support for the proposal, Compadria pointed out that the resolution attempted to impose a system of capitalism on poor countries, that might be harmed if too many citizens applied for micro-credit. In response to Compadria's objections the Powerhungry Chipmunks pointed out that nations that don't believe in microcredit could agree to not have a chapter within its borders. The Powerhungy Chipmunks managed to convince Compadria to vote in favour after pointing out that the chapters would likely be run by UN officials, but that nations also had the right to negotiate how the bazaars are set up.

When Darvainia asked if the bazaars would be organized and paid for by the UN, local governments, or private enterprise, to which proponents pointed out that the bazaars themselves can be created and run in different manners, but are intended to promote the idea of private citizens applying for loans. The loans themselves would be handled by normal lending institutions.

This lead to Bienopolis's concern about some governments actually abusing the bazaars to mislead poor populations into borrowing money when they might not need it. In response to this, the Powerhungry Chipmunks pointed out that the bazaars still retain oversight over the lenders that use the UN sponsored program and suggested that ultimately the United Nations would have some ability to limit "predatory lending in microcredit".

In response to additional questions about how the bazaar would work, the ambassador from the Powerhungry Chipmunks summarized the resolution as follows:

Let me lay out all the choices your nation and its citizens can individually make regarding the Microcredit Bazaar.

(1) INITIAL NATION:
Do we want a bazaar chapter in our nation?
Do we want to distribute the bazaar literature in our nation?

(2) NATION WITH BAZAAR CHAPTER:
Where do we want it?
How long do we want it to stay, or stay open?
How do we want it to operate?
How extensive do we want its operations to be?

(3) INDIVIDUAL IN A NATION WITH A BAZAAR CHAPTER:
Do I invest in microcredit?
How much do I invest in microcredit?
Which lender do I invest through, and where/with whom do I want it to end up?

Your nation has a say in everything having to do with the bazaar chapter (whether it's in your nation at all, how extensive it is, etc.) and your citizens have the right to decide whether or not to invest in microcredit and how much to invest in it, and where.


Resolution Text

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #117
The Microcredit Bazaar
A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.

Category: Free Trade Strength: Mild Proposed By: Powerhungry Chipmunks


The United Nations,

REAFFIRMING the United Nations’ stance against poverty and suffering,


TAKING NOTE, via the impoverished throughout the world, of the cyclical nature of poverty across generations, and of the detrimental effect of poverty among a people to the surrounding peoples, nations, etc.,


OBSERVING previous success of so called "microcredit" at enhancing the lives of people or peoples currently trapped by deprivation, as well as the society surrounding them and future generations among them,


DETERMINING that citizens in UN nations, who have the ability to participate in “microcredit” but do not, might trade more regularly and freely via “microcredit” (which the UN believes to have greater effect than many forms of humanitarian aid) if they had information regarding “microcredit” and assurance of its financial security and honesty,


DETERMINING FURTHER that the distribution of such information would help free the trade of microcredit and make it more economically feasible for microcredit transactions to occur:


1.DEFINES “microcredit” as a financial transaction, or the trade of loans for relatively small sums of money for the purpose of sustaining life and employment, the repayment of which is supported by local communities alongside the individual(s) who received the loan;


2.ESTABLISHES “The Microcredit Bazaar”, which will set up chapters in all interested member nations for the purpose of educating citizens in said member nations on microcredit and of securing, presenting, and overseeing reputable organizations by which those citizens can trade microcredit with the impoverished;


3.CHARGES “The Microcredit Bazaar” with verifying reputable microcredit organizations, managing queries for a 'Bazaar' chapter, ensuring just and honest distribution of loaned money, ensuring repayment of loans, ensuring the reimbursement of unpaid loans, facilitating educational literature concerning microcredit to member nations, as well as the distribution of that literature as arranged with individual national governments;


4.EMPOWERS “The Microcredit Bazaar” with the authority to negotiate with national governments the location, length of stay, and extensiveness in presentation of 'Bazaar' chapters within member nations;


5.ENCOURAGES UN citizens everywhere to invest in the impoverished through microcredit, and, specifically, to attend local 'Bazaar' chapters;


6.EXPRESSES its utmost gratitude to any who contribute to the abolition of poverty, be it through microcredit, at one of “The Microcredit Bazaar” chapters, or otherwise.


Votes For: 7,474
Votes Against: 4,889
Implemented: Sat Aug 13 2005


Gameplay Impacts

This resolution had no significant impacts on changing the way NationStates is played. However, like the Mitigation of Large Reservoirs resolution, a poll asking nations if they voted yes, no, or abstained was attached to the official resolution debate. With 164 responses by the time debate had closed it is possible to compare the results of the UN forum poll to the official vote totals to address the question: "How representative is the UN forum of UN votes?"

Res117Votes.gif

Nations participating in the UN forum debates were asked to disclose their vote: yes, no, or abstain as part of an official survey. The raw UN forum poll results of this survey are presented above. On the UN forum, 84 nations voted for the resolution, 66 against, and 14 nations abstained. The abstentions are not included in calculating the percentage of votes.

The final overall UN ("official") vote was 60% of the votes cast being in favour, while the UN forum vote was 56% of the votes cast (for or against) being in favour. In this particular case it appears that the UN forum debate and poll were reasonably representative (within 4%) of the entire UN vote.


Additional Materials