The impact assessment study of Pink Bus in Patna, Muzaffarpur, and Gaya examines women’s mobility, safety, affordability, and access to education and employment. It finds that 93% of women respondents choose the “pink bus” primarily for safety, while 78% use it for education or work. The study also identifies priorities for strengthening gender-responsive public transport in Bihar. MSC is proud to be a knowledge partner to the Government of Bihar in advancing sustainable and gender-responsive transport initiatives.
Blog
Beyond the construction of toilets: The missing innovation layer in India’s sanitation sector
“Access to safe water and sanitation is not a privilege, but a fundamental human right.”
Ban Ki-moon
India has transformed access to sanitation through unprecedented investments, but can these gains be sustained over the long term? As sanitation infrastructure continues to expand, the focus must extend beyond construction to the systems that keep assets functional, efficient, and financially sustainable.
Over the past decade, India has implemented one of the world’s largest sanitation infrastructure programs. Between 2014 and 2021, the Government of India allocated a cumulative budget of INR 620 billion (USD 7.2 billion) to the Swachh Bharat Mission – Urban (SBM-U). The program supported the construction of 6.4 million individual household toilets and 637,000 community and public toilets. According to the latest data from the SBM-Urban portal, 4,692 of India’s 6,166 urban local bodies (ULBs) have achieved the Open Defecation Free (ODF) status.
The Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) and AMRUT 2.0 have complemented these efforts by strengthening urban water and sewerage infrastructure. Together, these programs have approved 583 sewerage projects and enabled nearly 15 million household sewer connections, including 6.5 million under AMRUT 2.0. Collectively, SBM-U and AMRUT represent India’s largest public investment in urban water and sanitation. India’s sanitation programs have delivered impressive infrastructure outputs. They have exceeded construction targets and expanded ODF coverage. The next challenge is to ensure that this infrastructure consistently delivers better health, higher productivity, and stronger economic returns. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that every dollar invested in sanitation generates USD 5.5 in economic returns through better health, higher productivity, and lower mortality.
Despite exceeding the sanitation infrastructure targets, inadequate sanitation continues to cost India an estimated 6.4% of its gross domestic product (GDP) each year. This gap highlights that India now needs enabling conditions for private sector innovation rather than additional public investment alone.
India has demonstrated its ability to build sanitation infrastructure at scale. The next phase requires these investments to deliver safe, reliable, and sustainable sanitation services over the long term.
Figure 1: From sanitation infrastructure creation to sustained service delivery
Figure 1 shows that India’s next sanitation opportunity lies in unlocking greater value from existing infrastructure. Three interconnected priorities can accelerate this transition: stronger monitoring and information systems, modernized operations and maintenance (O&M), and sustainable financing models. Together, they can help sanitation assets deliver reliable services, healthier communities, and stronger economic outcomes throughout their lifecycle.
This transition also creates a significant opportunity for the private sector. The shift from asset construction to performance optimization can create new markets for technology, service delivery, resource recovery, and innovative finance. Demand for wastewater treatment, water reuse, and circular resource recovery will continue to grow. These markets can generate recurring revenue streams while improving sanitation outcomes. For example, the volume of treated wastewater available for reuse is projected to triple between 2021 and 2050. If India had effectively reused the 2021 wastewater volumes, it alone could have generated an estimated USD 11.1 billion in agricultural value. This estimate demonstrates the commercial potential of improved sanitation services.
Enhancing monitoring to build a data-driven sanitation services market
India has developed robust systems to track sanitation infrastructure, expenditure, and mission-level outputs. The next opportunity is to extend these systems beyond construction to monitor asset performance throughout its lifecycle. Operational data remains fragmented across water supply, sanitation, and municipal systems, limiting cities’ ability to identify deteriorating assets, prioritize maintenance, and link financing to measurable service outcomes. As a result, many ULBs respond only after assets fail or service quality declines, increasing costs and reducing the infrastructure’s service life.
Digital monitoring systems can address this gap by shifting sanitation management from reactive to preventive, performance-based service delivery. Technologies such as IoT sensors, GPS tracking, Geographic Information System (GIS) platforms, digital asset management systems, satellite imagery, and AI analytics provide real-time visibility into asset condition, service delivery, and maintenance needs. These technologies enable municipalities to plan interventions before failures occur.
Telangana’s Pattana Pragathi Toilet Monitoring System (PPTMS) demonstrates how structured and parameter-based monitoring can deliver asset-level visibility within existing institutional frameworks. Such models create an opportunity for private-sectorn innovation in monitoring tools, analytics platforms, and data services that municipalities can procure.
Modernizing O&M from reactive repairs to preventive service delivery
India’s investment in sanitation infrastructure has not always translated into equivalent investment in maintenance across the full asset lifecycle. These assets require regular maintenance, timely repairs, skilled personnel, mechanized operations, and eventual replacement. Construction budgets do not typically cover these costs. Programs such as AMRUT 2.0 include provisions for O&M. However, this funding remains a small fraction of capital expenditure. ULBs often reduce it first when budgets come under pressure.
As a result, many ULBs lack the technical capacity, asset management systems, and operational resources needed to maintain infrastructure effectively. This gap results in declining asset performance over time. It also creates opportunities for private sector innovation through mechanized services, digital asset management, predictive maintenance, and performance-based service delivery models. These solutions can improve efficiency, extend the life of the infrastructure, and reduce the operational burden on ULBs.
Genrobotics pioneered robotic manhole and sewer cleaning with its Bandicoot system, eliminating the need for human entry into sewers. Deployed across more than 100 Indian cities, it shows how technology procured as a service can embed preventive maintenance into routine municipal operations while removing a major occupational hazard.
Financing sanitation services beyond capital expenditure
India’s sanitation sector presents a growing opportunity for innovative financing and circular economy business models. Public programs have successfully mobilized capital for sanitation infrastructure. However, financing for operations, preventive maintenance, repairs, and asset replacement remains constrained and unpredictable. This imbalance directs capital expenditure toward the construction of sanitation assets.
Addressing this gap requires financing models that link resources to asset performance and service outcomes. These models include predictable operational budgets, performance-based contracts, blended finance, and stronger municipal revenue models. Resources across the sanitation value chain, such as treated wastewater, fecal sludge, nutrients, and biogas, can generate economic value, offset operating costs, and improve financial sustainability.
Beyond municipal systems, private capital is also beginning to reach household-level WASH access. Water.org’s WaterCredit model illustrates this potential. Water.org channels private capital through microfinance institutions rather than lending directly, which extends small loans to households for water connections and toilets. Across multiple countries, this model has disbursed 20.4 million loans worth USD 8.2 billion, demonstrating that private financial institutions can profitably serve the WASH market at scale.
Creating an enabling ecosystem for innovation
An enabling ecosystem underpins all three priorities. Policies, regulations, standards, institutional arrangements, and procurement mechanisms can embed proven solutions within mainstream sanitation systems. Clear frameworks for treatment, reuse, and resource recovery across the sanitation value chain are particularly important for circular sanitation models to achieve scale.
Private-sector innovation is growing, with startups developing solutions for greywater treatment, sensor-based monitoring, and fecal sludge management. However, procurement, regulatory, and financing constraints continue to limit scale. Impact investors, such as WaterEquity, Incofin, and Navaka Social Business Fund, formerly Yunus Social Business, have begun to address this financing gap in India. For example, discussions around a digital public infrastructure (DPI) for water seek to create open and interoperable data layers for the water sector. These shared data layers could lower barriers to private-sector entry because individual companies would no longer need to build them independently.
Figure 2: Innovation case studies and service outcomes
Shifting from infrastructure delivery to sustained service delivery
India has demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to build sanitation infrastructure at scale; the next phase requires delivering safe, reliable, and financially sustainable sanitation services.
The country has built the foundation. Unlocking its full returns depends less on additional public investment and more on conditions that enable private-sector innovation to flourish across monitoring technologies, O&M services, circular economy models, and financing. This innovation layer remains the missing piece in India’s sanitation sector.
The opportunity now is to embed innovation across every stage of the sanitation value chain, from monitoring and maintenance to financing and resource recovery. This shift will help ensure that India’s sanitation infrastructure continues to deliver value long after construction ends.
Aqua connect turning local fisheries into engines of jobs and growth
This report highlights progress in strengthening Africa’s fisheries economy by expanding opportunities for women and youth. It examines increased cross-border fisheries trade, youth employment and self-employment, value-added enterprises, financial literacy, and access to markets. The report also covers efforts to strengthen sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) systems, digital trade, and safeguarding across Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania. It shows how skills, finance, market linkages, and stronger systems support more inclusive and sustainable fisheries livelihoods through stories and experiences from the field.
Unlocking capital for the WASH sector at scale
The water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) sector has no shortage of need but lacks proof. Until investors can clearly see where their capital goes, how it performs, and the outcomes it delivers, private finance will remain far below the scale needed to close the global WASH gap. And this gap today is massive. As per the WHO–UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (2025), 2.1 billion people still lack access to safe drinking water. Another 3.4 billion lack basic sanitation, while 1.7 billion lack basic hygiene. Closing these gaps by 2030 will require almost three times the current investment. Public budgets cannot provide the additional USD 100 billion each year.
The funding shortfall is structural. Developing countries spend nearly USD 165 billion each year on water infrastructure. Public finance accounts for 91% of this amount, while private investment accounts for less than 2%. Tariffs, taxes, transfers, and official development aid provide the rest. Governments cannot increase public spending due to competing fiscal priorities, high debt, and the long payback periods of WASH investments. WASH also receives limited climate finance.
Of the USD 1.9 trillion tracked in 2023, only USD 49 billion was allocated to water and wastewater management. Private capital has therefore become essential. Mobilizing private capital is therefore a necessity, not a convenience.
The sector has reached an inflection point. Impact investment in WASH grew by 33% between 2015 and 2019, which made it the fastest-growing sector tracked by the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN). Development finance institutions, such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC), FMO-Entrepreneurial Development Bank, and DEG, now co-invest with private partners across Asia and Africa. Yet, capital flows remain modest. The constraint is not in appetite but in the evidence generated.
How fragmented reporting holds back WASH investments
Credible impact measurement is essential to attract private capital to WASH. Investors and development finance institutions rely on standardized metrics to assess portfolio performance, compare investments, and show results to stakeholders.
The lack of a harmonized measurement framework creates fragmented reporting requirements. Financial service providers (FSPs) must satisfy multiple reporting standards. This duplication increases reporting fatigue and limits comparability across portfolios and geographies. Existing WASH frameworks measure service access and public expenditure well. However, they do not meet investor needs or assess investment performance effectively. A review of existing monitoring tools identified four major gaps that continue to constrain private capital in the WASH sector:
- The tools track service-level and policy indicators but capture limited data on private finance flows and loan performance to be useful for capital allocation decisions.
- They require FSPs to track and report on indicators that sit outside their existing management information systems (MIS), which creates a reporting burden.
- They measure outputs at the institutional or portfolio level, but lack the granularity to attribute health, income, or service outcomes to individual clients or loans.
- They allow each investor or framework to define their own indicators and methodology, which leaves no common measurement language to compare investments across portfolios and sectors.
Other sectors demonstrate the value of harmonized reporting. The Green Bond Principles helped expand the green finance market from less than USD 1 billion in 2012 to more than USD 500 billion annually within a decade. Standardized reporting also accelerated microfinance growth. WASH now needs the same foundation. A common measurement language can give investors the confidence to commit capital at scale.
Closing the evidence gap through the e-MFP WASH action group impact indicator framework
The European Microfinance Platform (e-MFP) WASH Action Group impact indicator framework was developed to address the gaps identified above. It provides a practical method aligned with global standards for institutions that work in resource-constrained environments. The framework has three goals:
- Reduce reporting burdens on FSPs;
- Improve data comparability across portfolios;
- Strengthen the link between finance deployed and outcomes generated.
The framework draws on internationally recognized standards, including the WHO–UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program, UNICEF’s Global Framework for Urban Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene, and WHO’s guidance on water, sanitation, and hygiene. It provides a consistent basis for measuring WASH investments across geographies.
The framework includes 11 core indicators across four dimensions: Financial, social, climate, and service levels. Financial indicators show how capital performs. The remaining dimensions measure the changes that investment creates on the ground. Together, they provide the evidence base that responsible investors need.
Each core indicator includes sub-indicators that allow disaggregation by borrower segment, enterprise size, gender, geography, WASH subsector, loan characteristics, climate contribution, and service levels. This level of detail helps financial institutions understand how much capital they should deploy, who receives it, how it performs, and what outcomes it achieves.
From design to reality
The framework evolved through three phases. During Phase 1 (2022-2023), e-MFP and Aqua for All commissioned the financial advisory firm Rebel to develop the WASH handbook and a draft indicator framework. This work established the conceptual foundation for standardized WASH impact measurement. During Phase 2 (2024), MSC (MicroSave Consulting) evaluated the draft with asset managers, financial institutions, and WASH SMEs. The assessment examined its practicality and alignment with existing measurement practices.
Phase 3 refined and operationalized the framework. FSPs across Asia and Africa, along with data platforms, tested the framework. The pilot assessed whether institutions could embed it within existing systems without creating an unsustainable reporting burden. The exercise mapped institutional data, reviewed MIS systems, and assessed data granularity. It also identified gaps in reporting capacity and in WASH-related information.
Rather than introducing parallel reporting systems, the pilot incorporated missing data fields into existing MIS wherever possible. Where FSPs lacked WASH or climate classifications, the pilot introduced tagging mechanisms and targeted system modifications that institutions could integrate into routine reporting.
Figure 1: Classification of indicators by reporting effort and data collection method
The pilot also refined the original 16 indicators into 11 core indicators. It retained, redefined, merged, or removed indicators based on operational feasibility and analytical relevance. The project developed a suite of practical tools to support implementation. These include an operational manual with standardized indicator definitions and reporting guidance. They also include standardized MIS templates for portfolio and financial indicators, as well as structured survey instruments and digital data-collection tools for outcome indicators that MIS cannot capture.
The framework classifies indicators as MIS-based or survey-based. It also groups them by reporting effort: Low for MIS-derived indicators, moderate for survey-based indicators, and high for indicators that require retrospective classification. This approach supports phased adoption based on institutional readiness. Together, these tools help institutions integrate the framework into existing reporting systems and promote consistent and comparable WASH reporting.
Figure 2: Phases in the development of the WASH action group framework
The road from framework to ecosystem adoption
The e-MFP WASH Action Group has developed the data architecture, tools, and guidance needed for credible, comparable, and decision-useful WASH impact measurement. The pilot confirmed an important lesson: Impact measurement creates value only when investment decisions incorporate it from the outset. It should not become a compliance exercise.
Figure 3: Scaling adoption of the framework
The next step is ecosystem-wide adoption. Investors, FSPs, asset managers, and data platforms should converge around a common reporting approach. Institutions should adopt the framework in phases. They should first integrate indicators into existing MIS and later expand into survey-based outcome measurement. They should also establish baseline values for social, climate, and service-level indicators to support meaningful impact assessment over time. Regular evaluations and framework reviews can strengthen comparability, improve investment decisions, and mobilize more private capital for the WASH sector. The framework is ready. The sector now has an opportunity to adopt it collectively and put it into practice.
For the sanitation entrepreneur who seeks capital to serve more households, better impact measurement may seem far removed from day-to-day operations. Yet, it can determine whether investors have the confidence to commit capital in the first place. A common measurement language can help the sector show results more credibly, compare investments more consistently, and mobilize private capital at a scale that matches the challenge. Ultimately, unlocking capital for WASH is not only a financing challenge. It is an evidence challenge. The framework offers a path to address both.
Priority sector lending in Kenya: A practical pathway to inclusive and productivity-led growth
Introduction
Kenya’s financial system is among the most advanced in Africa. It is supported by a strong digital infrastructure, widespread mobile money usage, and a dynamic banking sector. Yet, despite this progress, credit allocation remains uneven, especially for agriculture, micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs), women- and youth-led enterprises, green sectors, and early-stage innovators.
Agriculture contributes to around a fifth of Kenya’s gross domestic product (GDP). The sector employs more than 40% of the total population and approximately 60% of the rural population. However, credit from commercial banks to the sector remains disproportionately low. Credit issues also plague MSMEs, which contribute to 40% of GDP and form the backbone of Kenya’s economy. They continue to face chronic credit rationing due to limited collateral, limited financial histories, and high perceived credit risk.
At the same time, Kenya’s national development agenda, which includes “big four” priorities, the Bottom-Up Economic Transformation Agenda (BETA), climate-resilient agriculture, and affordable housing, requires structured credit expansion into underserved but high-impact sectors.
The PSL framework for Kenya as a case for priority sector lending
Priority sector lending (PSL) provides a structured approach to addressing systemic credit gaps in the sector. PSL is a policy instrument designed to channel an adequate flow of credit to sectors critical for economic growth. These include agriculture, MSMEs, social infrastructure, affordable housing, and energy projects that conventional banking institutions often overlook. These focus sectors may evolve or change as per the respective central bank’s periodic review, undertaken to align them with the country’s stage and state of economic development. PSL significantly advances equitable growth, financial inclusion, and long-term economic stability.
Key benefits of the PSL framework include:
- Inflation-safe stimulus: Studies have shown that well-implemented targeted sector credit under PSL promotes supply-side growth and reduces consumption-driven inflation. PSL channels credit to productive, supply-side sectors, such as agriculture, MSMEs, logistics, renewable energy, and affordable housing, which increase output capacity and reduce supply bottlenecks.
- Liquidity reallocation: A PSL system that offers cash reserve ratio (CRR) rebates for lending to designated priority sectors will help convert locked-up or non-earning reserves to productive credit. This system helps release liquidity into the system. Historical data of select countries states that total credit to productive sectors increased proportionally with an increase in the credit target. This step could help increase the flow of credit in the system without necessarily expanding the money supply.
- Growth despite restrictive policy: With PSL, financial institutions (FIs) and banks would have clear instructions for lending to agriculture, MSMEs, and other economically weaker sectors. FIs can more confidently lend to sectors that may otherwise seem too risky through risk-sharing mechanisms, such as the Credit Guarantee Scheme (CGS).
Based on global experience across countries, including India, Indonesia, Brazil, and Tanzania, the PSL framework has proven effective. Kenya can adapt this model that guides banks to systematically direct a share of their lending toward strategically essential sectors. These international examples show that when PSL is well-designed, supported by digital infrastructure, credit guarantees, risk-sharing mechanisms, and flexible compliance pathways, it can expand credit access without destabilizing the financial system.
In Kenya’s case, PSL could channel financing into agriculture value chains, micro and small enterprises, green energy and climate-smart sectors, affordable housing, and businesses owned by youth or women. This approach will stimulate broader economic transformation across the country.
Furthermore, a Kenyan version of the PSL framework can be designed to complement rather than dilute the Central Bank of Kenya’s prudential and Basel-aligned capital framework. While CBK’s prudential guidelines require banks to maintain minimum capital adequacy ratios and adopt risk-based capital management consistent with Basel principles, PSL could assist in allocating credit to sectors deemed nationally important. While banks can continue to assess credit risks, make provisions, and maintain adequate capital buffers in line with Basel norms against their respective PSL exposures, the inclusion of provisions such as lower risk weights could help improve the risk-return profile for PSL. This can ensure that the banking sector’s policy/development objectives are achieved without compromising economic stability.
Research by MSC (MicroSave Consulting) shows that directed credit programs worldwide succeed when they align lending incentives with national development goals. These programs offer risk mitigation for lenders and integrate strong monitoring systems to ensure that credit flows are sustainable and impactful.
Kenya’s PSL-ready ecosystem: Converting existing programs into a coherent framework
Kenya already has several foundational elements of a PSL ecosystem, but these mechanisms are not structured under a single formal PSL framework. In the past decade, the government and the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) have repeatedly directed credit to underserved sectors through targeted instruments. These instruments include the CGS for MSMEs, the Agriculture Credit Guarantee Scheme, the Women Enterprise Fund, the Youth Enterprise Development Fund, and the Hustler Fund. Meanwhile, the Agricultural Finance Corporation and Kenya Development Corporation implement value chain financing programs. Additionally, Kenya’s Financial Sector Development Plan (FSDP) outlines clear goals to expand inclusive credit to MSMEs, climate-resilient agriculture, low-cost housing, and green sectors. These sectoral priorities align with global PSL programs.
A Kenyan PSL framework would not need to replicate India’s quota-driven model. However, it can pivot toward a more modified PSL approach, as with Indonesia and Tanzania, where banks follow guided targets supported by incentives, guarantees, concessional refinancing, and digital compliance systems, rather than strict mandates. Indonesia’s model shows how credit expansion can be driven through policy incentives, partial credit guarantees, and digital financial infrastructure, which include real-time credit tracking platforms and government-backed guarantee institutions. These institutions include the Indonesian Credit Guarantee Public Company (PT Jamkrindo and PT Persero) and Indonesian Credit Insurance (PT Askrindo).
These institutions allow banks to meet inclusive finance goals without destabilizing the sector. Tanzania’s experience similarly shows how policy-driven and market-based lending mechanisms can expand agricultural and SME credit without rigid quotas, which is supported by wholesale lending through the Tanzania Agricultural Development Bank.
Kenya already operates along these lines. The CGS for MSME reflects Indonesia’s and Brazil’s guarantee-led models by de-risking banks and encouraging lending to MSMEs. The Access to Government Procurement Opportunities (AGPO) program and dedicated women and youth enterprise program create steady borrower pipelines. India’s targeted PSL categories and Indonesia’s UMi and KUR programs achieve this through focus on women, microentrepreneurs, and informal enterprises. Kenya’s own agriculture guarantee and refinancing arrangements reflect Brazil’s structured rural credit system, where concessional facilities, refinance windows, and first-loss guarantees enable directed lending. These similarities indicate that the conceptual building blocks of PSL are already embedded across Kenya’s financial and policy ecosystem.
The formalization of these existing elements under a single, coherent PSL framework would enable Kenya to align bank lending with its high-priority national goals systematically. A Kenyan PSL model could glean lessons from PSL frameworks, such as tiered targets, risk-sharing facilities, co-lending pathways, credit guarantee integration, digital monitoring, and flexible compliance. Based on these lessons, the PSL model could strategically channel finance into agriculture value chains, MSMEs, green and climate-smart sectors, affordable housing, women- and youth-owned enterprises, and the broader digital economy. It shows that directed credit programs succeed when they align incentives with development goals, incorporate credit guarantees, reward high-quality portfolios, and maintain strong monitoring systems to ensure sustainable, impactful credit flow.
Toward a phased and digitally enabled PSL architecture for Kenya
The first step is to unify existing credit programs and guarantees into a coordinated national framework to operationalize PSL in Kenya. Clear sector definitions, eligibility criteria, and reporting obligations support this framework. All successful PSL systems, which include India’s quota-driven model, Indonesia’s incentive-based MSME framework, Brazil’s directed credit system, and Tanzania’s policy-driven approach, rely on centralized, well-defined sectoral guidelines and periodic reviews. Based on this, the CBK could issue a foundational PSL policy note that recognizes Kenya’s ongoing directed-credit programs and outlines sector-based lending expectations. In the initial stage, these expectations can remain indicative rather than mandatory and reflect Indonesia and Tanzania’s gradual implementation pathways that balance flexibility with developmental intent.
Kenya already has foundational strengths, which include digital rails, strong e-KYC capabilities, national ID systems, and mobile-enabled credit scoring. These strengths can reduce the cost and friction of credit extension to priority sectors. The integration of Savings and Credit Cooperative Organizations (SACCOs), microfinance institutions (MFIs), mobile lenders, and commercial banks into a unified, real-time credit information–sharing ecosystem would reflect the digital compliance platforms used in Indonesia and India. The centralized dashboards of these platforms track loan disbursements, borrower history, and PSL performance.
Further, the risk mitigation will be central to a viable Kenyan PSL system. MSC’s study on PSL shows that credit guarantees, concessional refinancing, and structured risk-sharing mechanisms substantially reduce delinquency risks and crowd-in bank lending to underserved sectors. Kenya’s existing CGS reflects this global architecture. The framework can be strengthened through wider agricultural coverage and a shift from individual loan guarantees to portfolio-based guarantees similar to Indonesia’s Jamkrindo and Askrindo models. These models introduce differentiated guarantee coverage for women, youth, climate-linked enterprises, and underserved regions.
Additionally, to combine climate or weather insurance with agricultural loans would align Kenya with Brazil’s ABC+ sustainable agriculture financing, where integrated risk-mitigation instruments stabilize loan portfolios. Kenya’s strong value chains in tea, coffee, dairy, horticulture, and fisheries can also adopt upstream and downstream financing channels. This reflects the diversified lending models followed across the globe, where banks fund value-chain actors through cooperatives, processors, MFIs, and digital marketplaces.
A staged rollout will be the most suitable path for Kenya. During the first two years, PSL can serve as a soft-guidance framework that consolidates existing programs, harmonises reporting systems, and strengthens guarantee facilities similar to Tanzania’s gradualist approach and Indonesia’s phased MSME expansions. As the ecosystem matures, Kenya can transition to a more structured regime with formal targets, supported by a market for tradable market instruments, such as priority sector lending certificates (PSLCs), based on India’s successful PSLC system, which incentivizes over-performance and enables market-driven compliance.
In the final phase, the PSL framework can be broadened to encompass green and climate-resilient finance, innovation-led enterprises, digital economy firms, and affordable housing value chains. This approach is consistent with global practices, such as Brazil’s green taxonomy, Indonesia’s sustainable MSME finance, India’s evolving sectoral definitions, and Kenya’s Vision 2030 and FSDP priorities.
A phased implementation ensures credibility, stability, and alignment with Kenya’s institutional realities. Kenya can develop a PSL system that starts with flexible guidance, evolves into formal targets, and ultimately uses digital monitoring, guarantee-backed risk mitigation, and tradable compliance instruments. This approach channels structured, sustainable, and monitored credit flows into high-impact sectors while preserving financial sector stability.
A woman’s name on the property title is only the beginning
When a woman’s name appears on a property title, what does it really signify? Does it reflect genuine ownership, control over assets, and financial agency, or does it simply indicate formal inclusion? India has made significant progress in expanding women’s participation in the workforce, property ownership, and formal housing finance through legal reforms, public policy, and lender initiatives. Yet, formal inclusion does not automatically translate into economic agency. The challenge now is to ensure that inclusion translates into meaningful participation as earners, borrowers, asset owners, and financial decision-makers. Housing lies at the heart of this challenge because, for most households, a home is their largest asset and an important source of long-term financial security.
A secure home offers far more than shelter. It provides privacy, stability, dignity, and safety, while also supporting work, generating income, and offering protection during periods of financial distress. For decades, women have played a central role in building and sustaining households, yet their contribution has rarely translated into property ownership or access to formal housing finance. Women’s growing contribution to household income, together with supportive policies and lender initiatives, is creating stronger pathways to home ownership and housing finance.
In 2023-24, the labor force participation rate among women aged 15 and above rose to 41.7%, up from 23.3% in 2017-18, while the share of women in employment increased from 22% to 40.3%. The redesigned Periodic Labor Force Survey (PLFS) for 2025, the first survey under the new format also points to continued momentum, with rural women’s participation rising further up to 45.9%. Yet, higher workforce participation does not necessarily mean women have stable or well-paying jobs, as much of their employment remains informal, self-employed, or linked to family enterprises. These trends suggest that, despite rising labor force participation, important gaps in the quality of employment and meaningful economic participation remain. At the same time, they show that women’s contribution to household income is becoming increasingly visible and harder for financial institutions to overlook. This growing economic visibility has also coincided with an increase in women’s recorded ownership of housing, although much of this ownership remains joint rather than independent.
UNFPA’s analysis of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS)-4 and NFHS-5 data shows that the share of women aged 15-49 who owned a house, independently or jointly, increased to 42.3% in 2020-21 from about 37.1% in 2015-16.
This progress has been supported by legal reforms, government housing programs, state-level incentives, and initiatives by financial institutions. Together, these measures have created stronger pathways for women to own property and access housing finance. At the national level, the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, gave daughters in Hindu joint families the same coparcenary rights as sons. Government housing programs then created direct pathways to ownership. Under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana–Urban 2.0, houses receiving central assistance are generally required to be registered in the name of the female head of the household or jointly in the names of both spouses, subject to specified exceptions. About 8.9 million PMAY-U houses stood in women’s sole or joint names by August 2024. By January 2026, the government reported that it had sanctioned 9.0 million houses to women. Under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana Gramin (PMAY-G), around 19.5 million of the 26.8 million houses completed by December 2024 were registered solely in a woman’s name or jointly in the names of both spouses. This represents about 73% of completed houses under the program. The program now aspires to achieve 100% women’s ownership.
State governments have reinforced these measures by reducing the upfront cost of property registration for women. In Delhi, stamp and transfer duty stands at 4% for women purchasers, compared with 6% for men. Financial institutions also introduced incentives, such as lower interest rates for women owners or co-owners and higher loan eligibility when they included a woman’s income in household assessments. In 2023, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) committed up to USD 100 million to IIFL Home Finance, with half the funding earmarked for women’s housing finance. Women-focused portfolios have become more than an inclusion objective. They are also emerging as an important funding and business strategy for financial institutions. These policies and market interventions are increasingly reflected in women’s participation in housing finance and their performance as borrowers.
Over the five years through December 2025, the number of women borrowers registered a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.2%, compared with 8.2% for men. Women represented 32.2% of outstanding housing-loan portfolios, and their repayment performance was also marginally stronger, with 2.2% of women’s home-loan balances being overdue by 31 to 180 days, compared with 2.5% for men. Even after accounting for the smaller base, the data indicate that women are emerging as a comparatively resilient borrower segment, with repayment performance that is marginally better than that of men.
MSC’s (MicroSave Consulting) recent research on affordable housing across selected geographies revealed strong demand for self-construction, renovation, reconstruction, and incremental expansion. Women accounted for more than two-fifths of the study participants. They expressed a desire to build on existing plots, add rooms or floors, repair aging structures, and move out of rented or inadequate homes. Although women did not always interact directly with lenders, their preferences shaped key household decisions. Affordability, privacy, sanitation, ventilation, children’s space, and household safety consistently influenced those decisions. Women often served as co-decision-makers during housing decisions. They also shaped what households considered affordable equated monthly installments (EMIs) and acceptable financial risk. Lenders should therefore assess women’s housing demand beyond the number of primary female applicants. Women often influence the purpose, affordability, and repayment of housing loans even when a man submits the application.
As India has made strong progress in recording women as owners and borrowers. The next challenge is to give that formal visibility economic meaning. Affordable housing finance can translate women’s growing presence in property and credit records into meaningful economic empowerment. Property ownership can strengthen women’s financial security, resilience, and influence over household decisions. Lenders must now move beyond traditional products for women and adopt women-centric approaches that offer a broader range of services. A woman’s presence on a loan document should reflect her role in the decision rather than satisfy a procedural requirement. Lenders must recognize informal and home-based income more systematically, involve women directly in loan counseling, and ensure they understand repayment obligations, fees, insurance, and the risks associated with mortgaging property. The first phase of inclusion brought women onto property titles and loan documents. The next phase must recognize them as income earners, informed borrowers, and decision-makers. It must also give them a meaningful voice in how their assets are financed, used, and managed.
