MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413282840 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18080458

Banking in the Age of Blockchain and FinTech: A Hybrid Efficiency Framework for Emerging Economies

2025· article· en· W4413282840 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vladimir Ristanović, Dinko Primorac, Ana Mulović Trgovac

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainEmerging marketsBusinessFinancial systemDistributed ledgerEconomicsCommerceComputer scienceFinanceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present era where digitalization, FinTech, and blockchain technologies are reshaping the global financial landscape, traditional measures of bank performance need to evolve. This paper introduces a hybrid approach that combines multi-criteria efficiency assessment and econometric modeling to evaluate bank performance within the context of digital transformation in emerging economies. Focusing on a panel of banks across selected emerging markets, this study first applies a multi-criteria decision-making technique (Data Envelopment Analysis) to assess operational efficiency using both conventional indicators and digitalization-driven metrics, such as mobile banking penetration and blockchain adoption. We then employ a panel econometric model to investigate the factors that shape efficiency outcomes, with special attention to FinTech and blockchain innovations as potential drivers. The results reveal a nuanced picture of how digital technologies can influence bank performance, highlighting both opportunities and constraints for financial institutions in less developed markets. The findings offer actionable insights for bank managers, regulators, and policymakers striving to balance traditional operational priorities with the demands of digital transformation. By linking efficiency measurement with an examination of the digitalization process, this paper provides a timely contribution to the literature on banking and financial innovation, serving as a foundation for future research and strategic decision-making in the FinTech and blockchain era.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207