What did people take from the 10th EMN Conference?

The two days at the 10^th EMN Conference in Stockholm were very intense and productive. However, since there were many simultaneous debates, attendants could not assist to all of them. Therefore, several opinions are given to show a summary to the whole conference, as well as to know which sessions were more interesting for the assistants and what they take from each of them.

First of all, it will be necessary to highlight the success of the two Jasmine workshops. The first session (25^th of June) under the title “Innovative Technology services provision” was about the European Code of Good Conduct for Microcredit Provision (CGC). This Code is “a pilot project developed in the aftermath of a Communication on microcredit adopted by the Commission in November 2007 and also feeds on work carried out previously on the regulation of microcredit in Europe,” as they described during the session.

“The adoption of the principles of the CGC will be very important in order to access the different European programs during the next 2014-2020 period,” described Karl Dayson, from the University of Salford and member of the Jasmine workshop in the debate, in the per-information details.

Neoklis Stamkos, entrepreneur from KEPA, a Business & Cultural Development Centre (a private company with headquarters in Thessaloniki, Greece), explained that he fulfill his objective during this session because “we met people that we wanted to meet.” They are trying to create an organization and they need help with the paperwork and advice and there was the place where they could find people who help them.

The second session (26^th of June) had as a theme “The European Progress Microfinance Facility Reloaded: How can it work for you?”. Progress Microfinance was an interactive session, involving representatives from the Commission and Evers&Jung and past- and future- beneficiaries of the European Progress Microfinance Facility (EPMF). Positive and negative feedback on the facility were discussed as well as ideas and collaboration between partners.

Here, Meagan Andrews, research assistant from ICF GHK international company, explained that “I thought it provided a lot of different perspectives on ways to overcome the unique challenges for the Microfinancing industry in Europe.” Also, other participant summarized the two workshops as “clear, understandable, excellent introduction and very good materials and panelist.”

In relation to other sessions, Emmanuel Moyart, programme coordinator of Microfinance ACP/EU, gives some feedback for the “Back to the future...the European microfinance in 2033?” session. He explained that “the question looked interesting but later was more entertainment than something useful.”