Fintech Era Research Articles

Is mobile payment still relevant in the fintech era?

Abstract Mobile phones have provided such an enormous opportunity for financial development, and are anticipated to become a common tool for carrying out various financial transactions. Hundreds of mobile payment services have been introduced across the globe. Strikingly, many of these efforts have failed. This study analyzes whether mobile payment is still relevant in the fintech era. I compare three mobile payment projects – Oi Paggo in Brazil, TCASH in Indonesia, and M-PESA in Kenya – as case studies. I argue that mobile payment systems currently operate in such complex and multidimensional networks with shared common infrastructures and compete for producing and providing value to the customers on the basis of these infrastructures. Three attributes of industry and network structure are immediately of interest: (1) cutting the vertical supply chain more finely may encourage large players to extend their domination, (2) the basic platform continues to be governed by multinational operators (MNOs) – telecom firms, and (3) openness may be decreasing or increasing even as the number of independent parties in the supply chain drops.

Financial return crowdfunding: literature review and bibliometric analysis

In the FinTech era, other technological enterprises different from traditional banking are offering financial services (Zalan and Toufaily Zalan et al. Contemporary Economics, 11(4), 2017). Crowdfunding is a materialization of the evolution of entrepreneurial finance, permitting the raising of funds from a crowd of investors through online platforms. Crowdfunding is a rather new phenomenon, so literature is still incipient. This research aims to study crowdfunding as a financial instrument. For this reason, we will focus specifically on crowdfunding that generates a financial return- i.e., peer-to-peer lending (P2P) and equity crowdfunding (EC). This article looks into the documents published in the Tomson Reuters Web of Science on the field of financial return crowdfunding. Conclusions are drawn in terms of relevance of this burgeoning topic and suggestions for future research are put forward.

Mobile Payments Platform: An Interview With Kyung-tae Ha

This interview provides insights into the mobile payments business and its international aspects in the Fin-Tech era. It discusses the transformation in business models of the company from desktop-...

Consumer Lending Discrimination in the FinTech Era

Discrimination in lending can occur either in face-to-face decisions or in algorithmic scoring. We provide a workable interpretation of the courts’ legitimate-business-necessity defense of statistical discrimination. We then estimate the extent of racial/ethnic discrimination in the largest consumer-lending market using an identification afforded by the pricing of mortgage credit risk by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We find that lenders charge Latinx/African-American borrowers 7.9 and 3.6 basis points more for purchase and refinance mortgages respectively, costing them $765M in aggregate per year in extra interest. FinTech algorithms also discriminate, but 40% less than face-to-face lenders. These results are consistent with both FinTech and non-FinTech lenders extracting monopoly rents in weaker competitive environments or profiling borrowers on low-shopping behavior. Such strategic pricing is not illegal per se, but under the law, it cannot result in discrimination. The lower levels of price discrimination by algorithms suggests that removing face-to-face interactions can reduce discrimination. Further silver linings emerge in the FinTech era: (1) Discrimination is declining; algorithmic lending may have increased competition or encouraged more shopping with the ease of platform applications. (2) We find that 0.74-1.3 million minority applications were rejected between 2009 and 2015 due to discrimination; however, FinTechs do not discriminate in loan approval.

The digital revolution in financial inclusion: international development in the fintech era

ABSTRACTThis paper examines the growing importance of digital-based financial inclusion as a form of organising development interventions through networks of state institutions, international development organisations, philanthropic investment and fintech companies. The fintech–philanthropy–development complex generates digital ecosystems that map, expand and monetise digital footprints. Its ‘know thy (irrational) customer’ vision combines behavioural economics with predictive algorithms to accelerate access to, and monitor engagement with, finance. The digital revolution adds new layers to the material cultures of financial(ised) inclusion, offering the state new ways of expanding the inclusion of the ‘legible’, and global finance new forms of ‘profiling’ poor households into generators of financial assets.

The Evolution of Fintech: A New Post-Crisis Paradigm?

“FinTech”, a contraction of “Financial technology”, refers to technology enabled financial solutions. It is often seen today as the new marriage of financial services and information technology. However, the interlinkage of finance and technology has a long history and has evolved over three distinct eras, during which finance and technology have evolved together: first in the analogue context then with a process of digitalization of finance from the late twentieth century onwards. Since 2008, a new era of FinTech has emerged in both the developed and developing world. This era is defined not by the financial products or services delivered but by who delivers them and the application of rapidly developing technology at the retail and wholesale levels. This latest evolution of FinTech, led by start-ups, poses challenges for regulators and market participants alike, particularly in balancing the potential benefits of innovation with the possible risks of new approaches. We analyse the evolution of FinTech over the past 150 years, and on the basis of this analysis, argue against its too-early or rigid regulation at this juncture.