Financial Inclusion: A Meta-analytic Evidence from Global Research

How robust is the empirical evidence on the determinants of financial inclusion, and why do reported effects differ across studies? We provide the first systematic meta-analysis of this literature, synthesizing 5,172 estimates from 100 studies published between 2013 and 2024. We standardize reported estimates using partial correlation coefficients corrected with the UWLS+3 procedure and examine publication selection using precision-weighted FAT-PET regressions. We employ Bayesian model averaging to identify sources of heterogeneity. Publication selection is substantial but differs markedly across determinant categories. In our main specification, significant effects beyond publication bias remain for macroeconomic conditions, banking and financial depth, technology and infrastructure, and the persistence of financial inclusion, whereas evidence for demographic, income, education and human capital, and institutional determinants is weaker. Except for persistence, the corrected associations are generally modest. Technology and infrastructure provide the most consistent evidence among actionable determinants, while the effect attributed to banking and financial depth is substantially smaller than the unadjusted literature suggests. We find no systematic evidence of p-hacking. Differences in measurement, estimation methods, sample characteristics, and economic context explain much of the remaining heterogeneity. Overall, the literature contains economically relevant regularities, but conventional estimates often overstate their magnitude and generality.