Observes digital financial inclusion in global populations during crises, indicating varied impacts across demographics.
Purpose This study aims to examine how population dynamics affect digital financial inclusion (DFI) during systemic crises − specifically, the Global Financial Crisis (GFC, 2007–2009) and the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2021). DFI is commonly viewed as a mechanism that enhances access and use of financial services. Design/methodology/approach This study uses the panel regression and two-stage least squares estimation methods for a global panel of 200 countries and territories over the combined crisis periods. Findings The findings reveal that during crises, the level of DFI increases in the total population as well as in the rural, older and vulnerable populations. In contrast, the level of digital financial inclusion decreases in a rapidly growing population as well as in urban, youth and non-vulnerable populations during crises. These two results are not contradictory: they operate through distinct mechanisms − population stock (scale-driven digital substitution) versus population flow (demographic capacity constraint). Importantly, the direction of the overall effect differs by crisis type: DFI contracts during the GFC but expands during the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting fundamentally different transmission channels. Institutional quality is a significant and robust determinant of DFI under crisis conditions across all population segments and estimation methods. Practical implications These results suggest that vulnerable populations enjoy greater access and usage of digital financial services during crisis, while the presence of good institutions serves as a necessary enabling condition for more adoption of digital financial services during crises. Originality/value Existing studies have not examined whether population demographic characteristics affect financial inclusion in economies experiencing crises.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ozili et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: