IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v17y2024i8p324-d1443712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulations and Fintech: A Comparative Study of the Developed and Developing Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Preethi Vijayagopal

    (Amrita School of Business, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore 641112, India)

  • Bhawana Jain

    (Amrita School of Business, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore 641112, India)

  • Shyam Ayinippully Viswanathan

    (Amrita School of Business, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore 641112, India)

Abstract

Financial technology (Fintech) has influenced business by helping create better services for consumers and businesses. Fintech, however, brings new challenges for regulators, who struggle to keep pace with the constant evolution of technology and the resulting disruption. The progress of technology and regulations in the Fintech industry has been uneven across developed and developing countries, resulting in numerous opportunities and challenges. Considerable progress has recently been made in the adoption of Fintech and the subsequent development and implementation of regulations in the US, the UK, and India. While the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) are global leaders in Fintech innovation, India has shown fast-paced growth in adopting and utilizing Fintech services. This paper examines the growth and evolution of Fintech in the US, the UK, and India and also explores how the regulatory agencies across these countries have responded to the evolution of Fintech. This paper finds that economies should work towards improving digital infrastructure, financial inclusion, and financial literacy and enhance the collaboration among regulators, Fintech firms, and other stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Preethi Vijayagopal & Bhawana Jain & Shyam Ayinippully Viswanathan, 2024. "Regulations and Fintech: A Comparative Study of the Developed and Developing Countries," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:17:y:2024:i:8:p:324-:d:1443712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/17/8/324/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/17/8/324/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dominik Paprotny, 2021. "Convergence Between Developed and Developing Countries: A Centennial Perspective," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 193-225, January.
    2. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    3. Bojan Srbinoski & Klime Poposki & Patricia Born & Karel Van Hulle, 2022. "Regulatory examinations and life insurance development," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 30(5), pages 525-552, March.
    4. Armour, John & Awrey, Dan & Davies, Paul & Enriques, Luca & Gordon, Jeffrey N. & Mayer, Colin & Payne, Jennifer, 2016. "Principles of Financial Regulation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198786474, Decembrie.
    5. Oliver Werth & Davinia Rodríguez Cardona & Albert Torno & Michael H. Breitner & Jan Muntermann, 2023. "What determines FinTech success?—A taxonomy-based analysis of FinTech success factors," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    2. Rodrigo M. S. Moita & Claudio Paiva, 2013. "Political Price Cycles in Regulated Industries: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 94-121, February.
    3. Scott Gehlbach & Konstantin Sonin & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "Businessman Candidates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 718-736, July.
    4. Francesco Caselli & Nicola Gennaioli, 2008. "Economics and Politics of Alternative Institutional Reforms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(3), pages 1197-1250.
    5. Hahn Robert, 2010. "Designing Smarter Regulation with Improved Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Bommer, Rolf, 1995. "Environmental policy and industrial competitiveness: The pollution haven hypothesis reconsidered," Discussion Papers, Series II 262, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    7. Mustafa Raza Rabbani & Shahnawaz Khan & Eleftherios I. Thalassinos, 2020. "FinTech, Blockchain and Islamic Finance: An Extensive Literature Review," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(2), pages 65-86.
    8. Thomas Wyrick & Roger Arnold, 1989. "Earmarking as a deterrent to rent-seeking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 283-291, March.
    9. Pavel Ciaian & Ján Pokrivčák & Dušan Drabik, 2008. "Prečo sú niektoré sektory v tranzitívnych ekonomikách menej reformované ako ostatné? prípad výskumu a vzdelávania v oblasti ekonómie [Why some sectors of transition economies are less reformed than," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2008(6), pages 819-836.
    10. Kris James Mitchener & Matthew Jaremski, 2014. "The Evolution of Bank Supervision: Evidence from U.S. States," NBER Working Papers 20603, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Masciandaro, D. & Nieto, M. & Prast, H.M., 2007. "Financial Governance of Banking Supervision," Other publications TiSEM 65d7ff26-dca3-4da3-86ff-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Matthias Dahm & Nicolás Porteiro, 2008. "Informational lobbying under the shadow of political pressure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(4), pages 531-559, May.
    13. J. Mark Ramseyer & Eric Rasmusen, 2013. "Lowering the Bar to Raise the Bar: Licensing Difficulty and Attorney Quality in Japan," Working Papers 2013-12, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    14. Ronelle Burger & Canh Thien Dang & Trudy Owens, 2017. "Better performing NGOs do report more accurately: Evidence from investigating Ugandan NGO financial accounts," Discussion Papers 2017-10, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    15. Grant H. Lewis, 2017. "Effects of federal socioeconomic contracting preferences," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 763-783, December.
    16. Nishida, Mitsukuni & Gil, Ricard, 2014. "Regulation, enforcement, and entry: Evidence from the Spanish local TV industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 11-23.
    17. Kwan, Simon H., 2003. "Impact of deposit rate deregulation in Hong Kong on the market value of commercial banks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(12), pages 2231-2248, December.
    18. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Maxwell, John W & Lyon, Thomas P & Hackett, Steven C, 2000. "Self-Regulation and Social Welfare: The Political Economy of Corporate Environmentalism," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(2), pages 583-617, October.
    20. Rausser, Gordon C. & de Janvry, Alain & Schmitz, Andrew & Zilberman, David D., 1980. "Principal issues in the evaluation of public research in agriculture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt74v9m7dh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:17:y:2024:i:8:p:324-:d:1443712. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.