My supervisor calls them “institutions of hope” but most academics use fancier acronyms like ROSCAs and ASCAs, or terms like merry-go-round, saving clubs, business associations or insurance networks. Kenyans just use the word “chama” to define “groups” or “associations” that people voluntarily create to pull resources, help each other or find common “rules of the game” in areas where there is little legal enforcement.
Yesterday, during one of the awesome Kariobangi lunchtime conversations (that’s when the best observations always come out!), my table companions and I realized that it would be impossible to understand the dynamics of local markets without considering chamas. They are an “infrastructure” of regulation and financial support that shapes the way businesses function. Though, there are huge differences within the local market in Kariobangi/Korogocho: my impression is that the more businesses operate informally, the more they depend on chamas, the more business are formalized, the lower is their reliance on these social networks–we’ll see what the data says.
The best statements that came out during lunch:
- The informal economy would not exist without chamas.
- If the government effectively outlawed chamas, the informal economy would disappear (let’s hope that no politician is listening to us!).
- Chamas are more relevant today than they used to be for our parents.
- Everybody uses chamas, also the rich people.