MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7120628249

FinTech as a tool for financial inclusion: a perspective of South African financiers on SME development

2025· other· en· W7120628249 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thapelo Gabriel Mokwena

Notice bibliographique

RevueOpen University of Cape Town (University of Cape Town) · 2025
Typeother
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOvertimeGovernment (linguistics)Financial servicesUnemploymentPerspective (graphical)Quarter (Canadian coin)Access to financeJob creation
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

According to Statistics South Africa, SMEs play the significant role of creating employment opportunities for more than 25% of South Africans. In addition, this not only increases chances but ensures that many have access to means of production, and it also increases the (GDP) and overtime improves the standard of living in many communities. It has been noted that the high unemployment rate of almost 32.9% at the first quarter of 2023 can be significantly reduced by ensuring that sectors such as SMEs are viable and well-funded. It has been reported that nearly 75% failure rate of most SMEs is attributed to limited financial access. Even if financial institutions make efforts to provide SMEs with financial assistance so that their operations run smoothly and they remain profitable going concerns, SMEs still struggle to get financial access which makes it difficult to sustain operations and create job opportunities. Moreover, it was reinforced that for c s to be effective there is need to ensure that they are well developed and have access to financial services. It is therefore justified to undertake this study to explore the role played by FinTech in enhancing financial access to SMEs in South Africa. The study employed the thematic qualitative analytical approach to analyse primary data which was collected from twelve (12) professional bankers, development finance institutions personnel and South African government agencies. These participants were relevant, suitable and credible because they provide various support and services to SMEs including providing transactional services such as tailored current accounts to help manage daily transactions and make payments. In addition, some equally assist in providing financial advice such as identifying financing options, risk management services such as insurance and credit guarantee scheme. The findings indicated that FinTech has significantly contributed to ensuring that SMEs are not financially excluded by assisting them to make use of automated systems which often helps them to improve service delivery. This occasionally helps to foster collaborations among institutions for instance, DFIs partnering with government agencies to work on incubation programmes for SMEs. Moreso, strategic partnerships among businesses are established as businesses have the opportunity to network on platforms such the South African Innovation Summit (SAIS). Although FinTech was assumed to have significantly improved operations and the productive capacity of SMEs some challenges have also been highlighted, and these include failure to comply with stipulated regulations particularly in government institutions who are expected to adhere to PFMA. The other challenge which was identified was the reluctance to use FinTech as people still prefer face to face contact with financial service providers. It was also established that some participants were not technologically savvy therefore, relevant skills development programmes had to be implemented. The other challenge was that government agencies and some (DFIs) were found to be lagging behind with 4IR and AI whilst banks level of readiness was advanced. For instance, it was noted that while it is convenient and effective to provide mechanisms useful in ensuring financial inclusion of SMEs like banking applications (Apps) and other various online systems like the bridge portal, simplyBiz, finfinder, SAP, CRM, and sefalas; the sad reality is that these platforms may either not be sufficiently provided or not fully utilized. Such a setback not only excludes SMEs from accessing financial services such as loans and online banking it reduces their growth rate. On the other hand, some barriers to financial access by SMEs were found to be bureaucracy, collateral and lack of business skills. Therefore, it is recommended that government and DFIs should fully adopt and implement FinTech as it is a tool for financial inclusion of SMEs.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,014
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,041

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0140,009
Communication savante0,0090,005
Science ouverte0,0010,007
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,224
Écart entre enseignants0,211 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOpen University of Cape Town (University of Cape Town)Travaux en français237 207