Announcements

Report a Problem
Back to Persistent MSME Financing Gaps Despite Rising Formal Credit

Sub-problem

Disproportionately Low Formal Credit Share for Women-Owned Enterprises

  • National

Women own a substantial share of India's small enterprises and receive a far smaller share of the credit. Reserve Bank data put women-owned enterprises at 7.09 per cent of outstanding MSME credit as at 31 March 2023, against an estimated 15 million of roughly 63 million MSMEs in women's ownership. IFC's work identifies land and other assets being registered in male family members' names as a barrier to what a woman-owned business can pledge, which is why this sits as a distinct dimension of the credit gap rather than as an instance of it.

This is the most specific entry on this branch of the catalogue. The evidence behind it is below.

Who is responsible

  • Reserve Bank of India · Regulatory bodySource of the credit-share data for women-owned enterprises.
  • Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises · Ministry or DepartmentOwns the schemes directed at women entrepreneurs.

Evidence and sources

  • Reserve Bank of India data on women-owned enterprises' share of MSME credit, via Pahlé India Foundation (October 2025) · Research paper or studyReserve Bank figures reported in a Pahlé India Foundation study of October 2025 put women-owned enterprises at 7.09 per cent of outstanding MSME credit as at 31 March 2023, against an estimated 15 million of roughly 63 million MSMEs in women's ownership. The figure reaches this entry through that study; the underlying Reserve Bank table was not independently confirmed.
  • International Finance Corporation — financing gap for women-led enterprises in India · Research paper or studyIFC estimates total credit demand from women-led MSMEs at about USD 158 billion, a large share of it unmet, and an earlier India-specific IFC study found formal institutions meeting about 27 per cent of demand. These figures come from several IFC publications of different years and reach this entry through secondary reporting rather than the IFC documents themselves; where a finding could not be dated confidently it has been left out of the entry.

Do you support action on this problem?