Special Issue "FinTech and the Future of Finance"

A special issue of Journal of Risk and Financial Management (ISSN 1911-8074). This special issue belongs to the section "Financial Technology and Innovation".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 October 2021).

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Jakub Górka
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Management, University of Warsaw, 00-927 Warszawa, Poland
Interests: payment systems; FinTech; industrial organisation; banking; network and monetary economics
Prof. Dr. Malte Krueger
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Economics and Law, University of Applied Sciences Aschaffenburg, Aschaffenburg, Germany
Interests: international economics; macroeconomics; payment systems; banking; FinTech

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue is devoted entirely to different aspects of technology-enabled innovation in financial services (FinTech). At the heart of FinTech lies a better value proposition delivered to customers, be they consumers or businesses. Fintechs, bigtechs, and incumbent financial institutions innovate, compete, and collaborate at the same time, forming a complex ecosystem–network economy characterized by complicated relations.

Open banking based on interfaces (APIs) gains traction in different parts of the world triggered by regulation and market forces. It gives rise to various innovative financial services in all areas: from payments and lending to financial data management. A next step seems to be extending open banking to open finance or, further, to open data-driven economy where data become an impressive driver of revenues.

A rich set of key words reflects the nature of the papers which are welcome to be submitted for publication in this Special Issue. However, even such a rich collection of key words does not exhaust the topic of FinTech and the future of finance. Additionally, the future landscape of finance will likely not only be shaped by technological developments in new fields (e.g., mobile payments, tokenized cards), but competition with long-established products (e.g., cash) also has its role to play.

Therefore, all theoretical, empirical, conceptual, and practice-oriented articles representing economics and finance as well as management sciences relating to the main theme are encouraged for submission as contributions for this Special Issue of JRFM.

Prof. Dr. Jakub Górka
Prof. Dr. Malte Krueger
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Risk and Financial Management is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • FinTech 
  • Open banking and open finance 
  • API 
  • Digital identity 
  • Data portability 
  • Cloud services 
  • Innovation hub 
  • COVID-19 
  • Blockchain and DLT 
  • AI 
  • Roboadvisory 
  • Sharing economy 
  • Crowdfunding and ICOs 
  • Tokenized assets 
  • Stable coins 
  • Social lending 
  • Networks 
  • Scale effects 
  • Platforms 
  • Two-sided markets 
  • Business model 
  • Interchange fee 
  • Mobile payments 
  • Cash 
  • Cards 
  • Digital wallet 
  • Standards 
  • Interoperability 
  • Competition 
  • Regulatory framework 
  • Value chain and value building 
  • Strategic management

Published Papers (9 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Article
FinTechs, BigTechs and Banks—When Cooperation and When Competition?
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(12), 614; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14120614 - 18 Dec 2021
Viewed by 503
Abstract
While there is a fast-growing number of studies on FinTech, the relationships between technology companies and banks have received only limited attention in the research literature. Most of the studies on FinTech-bank interactions conducted so far address the questions: why banks collaborate with [...] Read more.
While there is a fast-growing number of studies on FinTech, the relationships between technology companies and banks have received only limited attention in the research literature. Most of the studies on FinTech-bank interactions conducted so far address the questions: why banks collaborate with FinTechs (reasons) and how they do it (forms of cooperation), whereas this paper aims at clarifying when the most likely form of their interaction is cooperation and when competition. To cover this cognitive gap, the conceptual framework to help explain which factors affect the type of interactions between technology companies and banks is presented in this paper. Based on extensive literature review and using the market-based approach, the external factors of the market position of banks and technology companies were examined. It was found that this position and therefore the basic type of interaction depends on the adoption level of FinTechs and BigTechs in individual countries/regions. The adoption of FinTechs and BigTechs turned out to be higher in EMDEs and lower in AEs, which makes it more likely that in the first group of countries tech companies would tend to serve as banks’ competitors, whereas in the second group they would rather collaborate with banks or choose the coopetition strategy. When analyzing internal factors, the resource-based approach and a slightly modified IO theory were applied. In this part, the strategic tool which enables the assessment of the extent to which assets, skills, and features of FinTechs, BigTechs and banks are complementary (which gives the rationale for cooperation) or substitutable (which gives the rationale for competition) was proposed. This study is a critical analysis based on desk research, that contributes to the existing literature by (1) providing a narrow definition of FinTech representing the subjective/institutional approach, (2) considering separately FinTechs and BigTechs, and (3) proposing the strategic tool which helps to assess comparative advantages of banks, FinTechs and BigTechs, and thus makes it easier to choose the most appropriate type of their interaction. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
FinTech: Ecosystem, Opportunities and Challenges in Saudi Arabia
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(10), 460; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14100460 - 29 Sep 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 820
Abstract
FinTech is a disruptive international phenomenon that is expected to shape the future of the financial sector. This study describes the features and characteristics of the current Saudi Arabian FinTech landscape and ecosystem. Examples of innovative financial startups in Saudi Arabia, including online [...] Read more.
FinTech is a disruptive international phenomenon that is expected to shape the future of the financial sector. This study describes the features and characteristics of the current Saudi Arabian FinTech landscape and ecosystem. Examples of innovative financial startups in Saudi Arabia, including online banking, transfer and payment services, crowdfunding platforms, peer-to-peer lending, and blockchain initiatives, are discussed. Several changes have occurred within the ecosystem in the last five years; for example, Saudi banks are taking a more cautious approach. However, FinTech initiatives are also being internally developed, encouraging technology companies and startups to focus their efforts on innovations aimed at improving current processes rather than novelty. The government directs its effort mainly toward initiatives related to regulations and laws. Customers are interested in new products that are convenient and easy to use. We compare the Saudi FinTech ecosystem to the United Arab Emirates’ FinTech ecosystem and conclude with recommendations for the different stakeholders. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Poland–Turkey Comparison of Mobile Payments Quality in Pandemic Time
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(9), 426; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14090426 - 06 Sep 2021
Viewed by 596
Abstract
The main objective of this article is to identify and analyze the use of mobile payments in two countries, Poland and Turkey. The data for the study were collected with the application of the CAWI method in March 2021. The survey covered nearly [...] Read more.
The main objective of this article is to identify and analyze the use of mobile payments in two countries, Poland and Turkey. The data for the study were collected with the application of the CAWI method in March 2021. The survey covered nearly 650 respondents in total. The basis for comparisons was populations from two culturally distinct countries, Poland and Turkey, which are at a similar level of development as regards the use of the Internet. The studies were carried out simultaneously in both countries and examined the group of young people aged 18–25. The research surveyed the population, which included the most active Internet users who are taking full advantage of the benefits of globalization, which is facilitated by the development of the Internet worldwide. The survey was translated into the respondents’ native languages, initially validated during the pilot studies and then distributed and circulated among the study participants. The obtained findings were subject to comparison, and the differences between the samples were analyzed and commented on to verify the hypotheses formulated in the study. The main limitation of the conducted study was the selection of a random group—the research sample consisted only of members of the academic community. The study presented in the article fills the research gap regarding international comparisons of the use of m-payments in the period of the COVID-19 pandemic. The obtained results indicate the undoubted fact of increased interest in the use of m-payments in e-commerce and e-banking, and even more importantly, differences concerning 40% of the criteria/attributes applied to assess the use of m-payments in both countries. The findings can be used by business practitioners dealing with the development of m-payments. Another potential application is to attempt to bridge the gaps between countries, which may be supported by globalization processes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
The Determinants of PayTech’s Success in the Mobile Payment Market—The Case of BLIK
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(9), 422; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14090422 - 04 Sep 2021
Viewed by 601
Abstract
FinTech and its interaction with banking is widely discussed today as a new phenomenon notwithstanding the relationship between technology and financial services is not a new topic. Most of the research focuses on innovations and determinants of their adoptions including among other innovations [...] Read more.
FinTech and its interaction with banking is widely discussed today as a new phenomenon notwithstanding the relationship between technology and financial services is not a new topic. Most of the research focuses on innovations and determinants of their adoptions including among other innovations in the payment system. The studies dedicated directly to PayTechs as a special kind of a FinTech entity and its market activity are a relatively new field of research. This paper aims to fill this gap. The multidimensional character of this exploratory research causes the necessity to apply various research methods, including both inductive and deductive methods, together with comparative analysis. The theoretical analysis conducted in the paper for defining PayTechs from the perspective of business model and market behavior was based on an in-depth literature review. In this section, the inductive method and comparative analysis were mostly applied. The empirical part of the paper includes the analysis of quantitative data published by the National Bank of Poland (NBP), Central Statistical Office (GUS), and Bank for International Settlements (BIS). The subject of the case is the Polish Payment Standard referred to as BLIK implemented in Poland in 2015 for mobile payments. The BLIK diffusion is measured by the number of entrants and acceptants as well as the scope of transactions while the adoption by the number of customers using BLIK in everyday transactions. The results present the market behavior of BLIK as an open business model and the key success factors of BLIK adoption and diffusion and the determinants for further open payment innovations’ development. The newly developed definition of PayTechs, the identification of the major components of the PayTech open business model, as well as the indication of the key success factors of adoption and diffusion of m-payments, constitute the original contribution of the paper. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
On Prices of Privacy Coins and Bitcoin
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(8), 361; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14080361 - 06 Aug 2021
Viewed by 860
Abstract
Since the inauguration of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin has been under pressure from competing tokens. As Bitcoin is a public open ledger blockchain coin, it has its weaknesses in privacy and anonymity. In the recent decade numerous coins have been initiated as privacy coins, which [...] Read more.
Since the inauguration of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin has been under pressure from competing tokens. As Bitcoin is a public open ledger blockchain coin, it has its weaknesses in privacy and anonymity. In the recent decade numerous coins have been initiated as privacy coins, which try to tackle these weaknesses. This research compares mostly mature privacy coins to Bitcoin, and comparison is made from a price perspective. It seems that Bitcoin is leading privacy coins in price terms, and correlation is typically high and positive. From the earlier crypto market peak of 2017–18, only a very small number of coins are showing positive returns in 2021. It is typical that many privacy coins have lost substantial amounts of their value (ranging 80–90%) or that they do not exist anymore at all. Only Horizen and Monero have shown long-term sustainability in their value; however, their price changes follow that of Bitcoin very closely. The role of privacy coins in the future remains as an open issue. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Legal Aspects of “White-Label” Banking in the European, Polish and German Law
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(6), 280; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14060280 - 21 Jun 2021
Viewed by 1021
Abstract
Offering “White-label” products and services is a well-developed business sector in the European market. At present, this market concept is also increasingly being applied to financial services, as part of a bank–FinTech cooperation. A question arises, however, as to the proper place for [...] Read more.
Offering “White-label” products and services is a well-developed business sector in the European market. At present, this market concept is also increasingly being applied to financial services, as part of a bank–FinTech cooperation. A question arises, however, as to the proper place for such models within the complex system of European financial law. This article reviews the “White-label” frameworks currently operating in the banking sector and the corresponding regulations of the European Union law, based on their application in German and Polish legal system. Purposive, grammatical, and comparative law methods were used to study the content of legal acts. As a result, the principles of two primary models of White-label banking were established. The first model is based on a bank acting only as an outsourcing service provider. In the second model, a bank also operates on the basis of a license it was granted. Both models have a common legal origin in European Union law, but local variations exist depending on the legal system of a given Member State. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Digital Transformation of Public-Private Partnership Tools
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(3), 121; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14030121 - 13 Mar 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 925
Abstract
The need for modern infrastructure as a prerequisite for sustainable development, poverty alleviation, and improvement of the quality of life of the population is a global problem that requires searching for and attracting large amounts of long-term investments. The presence of this problem [...] Read more.
The need for modern infrastructure as a prerequisite for sustainable development, poverty alleviation, and improvement of the quality of life of the population is a global problem that requires searching for and attracting large amounts of long-term investments. The presence of this problem in recent decades has led to the increasing implementation of complex and costly infrastructure projects through the public-private partnership (PPP) mechanism with high potential for attracting investment. This mechanism, in conditions of limited financial opportunities, allows one to combine the financial resources of the public and private parties for the implementation of major infrastructure projects. The limited use of existing tools at different stages of PPP projects and the increasing need for additional resources make it necessary to consider the possibility of using digital tools that complement traditional ones. For this purpose, the authors analyze existing financing tools, revealing their advantages and disadvantages, and identify and justify the possibility of using digital tools in the implementation of PPP projects. However, digitalization includes not only financing tools but also the development of infrastructure, including digital platforms needed to conduct such operations in the digital environment. As a result, a combined financing toolkit can be formed for each phase of project realization, including traditional and digital tools. The results of this study will become a basis for revealing the directions of the digital transformation of the PPP mechanism. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Exploring Risks in the Adoption of Business Intelligence in SMEs Using the TOE Framework
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021, 14(2), 58; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14020058 - 02 Feb 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1320
Abstract
The business success of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) increasingly relies on the adoption of various technological innovations. For today’s unpredictable business operations, business intelligence systems (BISs) represent one of the most prominent tools with a significant impact on business performance. However, different [...] Read more.
The business success of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) increasingly relies on the adoption of various technological innovations. For today’s unpredictable business operations, business intelligence systems (BISs) represent one of the most prominent tools with a significant impact on business performance. However, different internal and external risks may influence BIS adoption. The goal of this paper is to investigate the risks that impact BIS adoption in SMEs, using the Technology, Organization, and Environment (TOE) framework. For that purpose, we develop the logistic regression model, using data collected by a questionnaire survey using a sample of 100 Croatian SMEs. The results indicate the applicability of the TOE theoretical framework for examining BIS adoption in SMEs. Given the results obtained, the sampled SMEs should take into account the internal risks related to the organizational dimension and external risks related to the environmental dimension. Our research did not reveal the significant impact of technological risks that encompass characteristics of considered technological innovation related to the technology dimension. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Article
Barriers to Financial Innovation—Corporate Finance Perspective
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2020, 13(11), 273; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13110273 - 08 Nov 2020
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1455
Abstract
This paper addresses the application of financial innovations from the corporate finance perspective. The objective is to identify and prioritize the main types of barriers to the implementation of financial innovations by nonfinancial firms. The motivation behind the study lies in the importance [...] Read more.
This paper addresses the application of financial innovations from the corporate finance perspective. The objective is to identify and prioritize the main types of barriers to the implementation of financial innovations by nonfinancial firms. The motivation behind the study lies in the importance of financial innovations for the firms’ ability to create value. As proven by the extensive literature review, comprehensive studies on financial innovation applications by nonfinancial firms are relatively rare. To cover this cognitive gap, the theoretical argumentation followed by the discussion of results of the empirical research are presented in this paper. The paper provides the results of two-stage survey research, aiming to find opinions of financial managers (end-users) and experts (creators of innovation) on the main barriers to financial innovations in Poland. According to managers, the most important are exogenous barriers, including: (1) Unclear tax and accounting regulations, (2) complex construction of financial innovations, and (3) transaction costs related to their application. On the other side, the experts from financial institutions recognized the greater importance of endogenous factors such as: (1) Lack of sufficient knowledge about financial innovations and (2) the reluctance to change observable in many firms. This study contributes to the ongoing debate on financial innovations by adding the perspective of corporate financial strategy. It also offers insights into the potential actions (at the institutional and individual level) aiming to reduce the barriers and support the implementation of financial innovations by nonfinancial firms. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue FinTech and the Future of Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop