There is a broad theoretical and empirical literature that sees financial inclusion as a tool with the potential to expand individuals' capacity to increase their well-being (Barajas and others., Firstly, sparse population density, compounded by low income levels, offer very low margins to compensate for the high operating costs of incorporating excluded populations, especially through traditional business schemes. Secondly, the users' limited financial capacities restrict demand, while those of the financial service providers constrain effective supply in the absence of products suited to the needs and conditions of small rural producers. This is compounded by the persistence of perverse incentives for non-payment, associated with clientelism in public-policy actions (Campos, 2017), the vulnerability of the rural environment to risks of various kinds (Argumedo, 2017, ECLAC/FAO/ IICA 2015), low rates of formal property ownership which reduce the range of collateral-eligible assets (Valenzuela and Cruz, 2017), and limitations in terms of both the coverage and the quality of the available infrastructure (Reyes Luna, 2017).