Aneel Karnani, in a recent article on microfinance published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, writes:

"Overall, governments, businesses, and civil society would be well advised to reallocate their resources and energies away from microfinance and into supporting larger enterprises in labor intensive industries. ...they should provide basic services that improve the employability and productivity of the poor. Otherwise, they will miss the mark of lifting people out of poverty."

Underlying this statement is the fundamental question: who decides for the poor? Microfinance has gained a lot of global attention in recent years as an effective tool used to help the "have-nots." How microfinance works: small loans are given to those who are not able to borrow money from traditional lending institutions at reasonable interest rates. These small loans are used by poor people to start microenterprises. Proponents of microfinance say that it gives power and choice to the poor. Karnani, however, suggests that instead of giving small loans to individuals, it is better to give larger loans to select savvy entrepreneurs who are better equipped to start larger, scalable enterprises that can employ hundreds. Karnani also exhorts governments to get involved in providing basic goods and services for the poor, such as water and forms of healthcare.

On one end of the spectrum, the poor are looked at as individuals who are able to make choices. On the other end of the spectrum, the poor are viewed as individuals in need and to be provided for. Taken to another level, the debate becomes free markets verses strong government.

The debate will go on: articles written, books sold, and lectures presented. One thing that I do know, however, is the following: The world is going to have to stop talking about the poor from arms-length, including myself. I do a lot of research on the poor. I study their issues. I read articles. I discuss with other "thinkers and doers" from Stanford to Harvard to DC. I’ve taken short trips to Vietnam, Indonesia, Kenya, and China – having seen with my own eyes the conditions of the poor.

But I do not know first-hand the experience of the poor. At a summit in Pakistan on housing and finance in 2005, a local stood up to question a business leader, stating, "I wonder if you ever even talk to the poor Pakistanis!" The statement was biting. But that doesn't change the fact that the poor are living on less that $2 a day, part of the informal economy.

So who decides for the poor? I think it’s a balance (as with anything) between free market capitalism (the people) and the government (corporate). The poor shouldn't be told what to do, but on the other hand, they may not know how to make informed decisions and need help. But what is absolutely critical is listening to the voices of the very people we are trying to help. It means "being on the ground" and understanding, helping, and embracing the people. Whether it’s a microlending institution or a government run agency (or even the church!), decisions can't be made at an arm's length. They need to be made with an on-the-ground understanding of people.

From a biblical perspective, I love it how God almighty came down in the form of a human being to dwell amongst men. He came down and entered "into the fire" to save. He could have totally done it at arm's length. But he chose to humble himself to be with the very people he wanted to save.

[Jesus Christ],who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross! (Philippians2:6-8).

I have much to learn about what it means to serve the poor.