The Role of Digital Payment Technologies in Promoting Financial Inclusion: A Systematic Literature Review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we review recent research on how digital payment technologies (DPTs) promote financial inclusion (FI) across the world. Drawing on empirical studies from the past decade, we show that digital payment systems have helped reduce financial exclusion—particularly in developing economies—by expanding access to essential financial services for underserved groups. The paper also highlights the role of demographic factors such as age and gender, with evidence of higher adoption among youth and women. We identify the main indicators used to measure digital payment adoption and FI, providing a foundation for future empirical analysis. To deepen understanding, we call for combining macroeconomic data with rigorous econometric approaches to better capture how DPTs contribute to inclusive financial systems. The paper further discusses how emerging innovations—including blockchain, artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and biometric authentication—are improving the efficiency, security, and accessibility of digital payments. Together, these technologies are likely to accelerate the transition toward fully digital financial ecosystems and expand the potential for inclusive and sustainable growth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it