MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210588746 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15020062

Lessons from Remarkable FinTech Companies for the Financial Inclusion in Peru

2022· article· en· W4210588746 on OpenAlex
Patricia Vilcanqui Velazquez, Vito Bobek, Romana Korez Vide, Tatjana Horvat

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial inclusionMicrofinanceFinancial servicesBusinessPopulationInclusion (mineral)General partnershipFinancial institutionFinanceFinTechMobile paymentMobile bankingFinancial systemEconomic growthEconomicsMarketingPayment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Financial inclusion, defined as the adequate access and usage of formal financial services to improve people’s lives, is a crucial area for the economic development of a country through its various angles. This paper analyzes the impact of selected FinTech companies on financial inclusion in their respective countries to obtain lessons of their business models and country environments that can help Peruvian financial inclusion. The selected FinTechs are M-PESA in Kenya, Nubank in Brazil, GCASH in the Philippines, and Easypaisa in Pakistan, which revolutionized the financial sector in their respective countries. However, a comparative study of their impact on financial inclusion in their respective country has not been conducted yet; therefore, the lessons obtained are helpful for the Peruvian situation due to their practical implications and because they raise possible areas for further and deeper research. The approach of this study considered a qualitative and quantitative method (to find a Pearson correlation between the percentage of the population of Country (A) that are users of FinTech (a) and the six selected demand-side indicators per country retrieved from the Global Findex Database) analysis to understand the results obtained. The results obtained indicate that M-PESA and GCASH, companies specialized in providing basic mobile money transactions such as remittances and withdrawals, did not impact the provision of other financial services such as savings or credit cards. In Easypaisa’s case, this company positively impacts the studied indicators, probably due to its original partnership with a microfinance institution. Regarding Nubank, despite its remarkable growth in the last years, the company does not affect financial inclusion in Brazil yet. Nonetheless, after its recent expansion to provide more financial services, future research could assess the impact of this company on Brazilian financial inclusion.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it