Bridging the financial divide: a bibliometric analysis on the role of digital financial services within FinTech in enhancing financial inclusion and economic development

The study situates the rapid evolution of FinTech—technology-enabled financial products and services—within the broader goals of financial inclusion and economic development. Despite progress, around 1.7 billion adults remain unbanked, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Digital financial services such as mobile money, digital payments, peer-to-peer lending, and blockchain can overcome barriers of access, cost, and complexity inherent in traditional finance, expanding services to underserved groups. The research specifically focuses on how digital financial services within FinTech enhance financial access and support economic development, extending prior bibliometric work by narrowing scope to inclusion and development impacts, using Scopus (rather than Web of Science), covering 2010–2023, identifying research gaps, and offering policy recommendations. The central objective is to map and synthesize the scholarly landscape—its themes, trends, geographies, and influential contributors—around digital financial services’ role in financial inclusion and economic outcomes.

The review traces FinTech’s evolution from early digitization (e.g., ATMs, electronic trading) to widespread mobile and internet-based services enabling access for underserved populations. Adoption theories such as TAM and UTAUT explain drivers of usage (perceived usefulness, ease of use, and social influence). Measurement frameworks including the Access, Usage, and Quality (AUQ) framework and the Global Findex Index assess inclusion levels. Empirical evidence links digital financial services to improved access and welfare: mobile money in Kenya, Tanzania, and Mozambique increased savings, credit access, and inclusion, especially for women and rural users. Digital financial education programs improved literacy and decision-making in several countries. Studies connect FinTech to economic development via higher productivity, remittance facilitation, lower transaction costs, and entrepreneurship. Regulatory scholarship emphasizes adaptive, supportive frameworks balancing innovation with consumer protection and stability. Literature on resilience shows digital payments’ role in crisis response (e.g., COVID-19 transfers), while also flagging risks such as cybersecurity, fraud, and systemic vulnerabilities. Recent works relate FinTech to energy use and sustainability, behavioral finance, blockchain’s potential, and external shocks (e.g., COVID-19), underscoring the field’s interdisciplinarity. Overall, the literature highlights digital financial services as vehicles for inclusion, with ongoing debates about stability, regulation, and equitable access.

Data source and search: A bibliometric study using Scopus extracted documents on digital financial services and financial inclusion for 2010–2023. The search string combined FinTech- and inclusion-related terms in TITLE-ABS-KEY with filters for publication years (2010–2023), subject areas (Economics, Social Sciences, Business, Computer Science, Environmental Science), document types (articles and conference papers), and language (English). PRISMA procedures guided identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. Workflow and counts: Initial Scopus retrieval yielded 1174 records; after applying parameters 906 remained (English, 2010–2023, target subject areas, articles/conference papers). Further cleaning left 697; 209 were excluded. Two reports lacked abstracts. Ultimately, 695 studies were included. Tools and analyses: Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny and VOSviewer supported descriptive bibliometrics and science mapping, including co-authorship, institutional and country collaboration networks, keyword co-occurrence, bibliographic coupling (documents, sources, authors, organizations, countries), and co-citation (cited references and cited authors). Descriptive dataset (via Biblioshiny): 2010–2023 timespan; 370 sources; 695 documents; annual growth rate 39.67%; average citations per document 12.5; 33,871 references; 1,017 Keywords Plus; 1,699 author keywords; 1,585 authors; 144 single-authored docs; co-authors per doc 2.65; international co-authorship 25.21%.

- Growth and scope: Research output on FinTech-enabled financial inclusion surged notably since 2016, peaking in 2022–2023; 695 documents from 2010–2023 across 370 sources with a 39.67% annual growth rate. Average citations per document were 12.5; international co-authorship was 25.21%. - Leading outlets: Sustainability (Switzerland) led with 43 articles on the topic (top source by volume). Other key journals include Cogent Economics and Finance, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Telecommunications Policy, International Journal of Bank Marketing, International Journal of Social Economics, Finance Research Letters, Enterprise Development and Microfinance, World Development, and Applied Economics Letters. - Source production over time: The top six sources expanded output markedly after 2017; Sustainability accounted for 41.11% of publications within the top-six cohort. - Influential documents globally: Ozili (2018, Borsa Istanbul Review) had 364 total citations (60.67 per year; normalized 11.40). Gabor (2017, New Political Economy) had 261 citations (37.29 per year; normalized 6.93). Other high-impact papers: Zins & Weill (2016) TC=207; Li (2020) TC=183; Munyegera & Matsumoto (2016) TC=164; Chen Y (2020) TC=160; Maurer (2012) TC=156; Leong (2017) TC=155; Allen (2014) TC=118; Farah (2018) TC=116. - Top authors: By productivity, Wang X (9 articles) and Asongu SA (7) lead; Chen Y and Okello C.B.G (6 each); several authors with 4–5. By local impact (H-index): multiple authors at h=4 (e.g., Asongu SA, Chen Y, Okello C.B.G, Ozili PK, Senyo PK) and h=3 for others. By local citations, Ozili PK led with 439 citations. - Collaboration patterns: Strong bilateral collaborations included China–USA and USA–UK (13 each), China–UK (7), India–USA (6), UK–Australia (6). Country-level citations: UK (2247), China (1740), USA (1546) led; UK showed highest total link strength (82), followed by USA (80) and China (43). - Institutional networks: CEPR (UK) and Imperial College London (UK) exhibited strong collaborative link strengths; highly cited institutions included Essex Business School (UK; 364 citations), Bristol Business School (UK; 261), and University of York Social Policy & Social Work (UK; 261). - Keyword themes (co-occurrence): Central terms were “financial inclusion” (309 occurrences), “fintech” (165), “mobile money” (107), “financial literacy” (59), “digital finance” (48), “financial technology” (46), “mobile banking” (40), “digital financial inclusion” (32), with emerging interest in “blockchain” and regional focus such as “China”. Thematic mapping highlighted clusters around finance/financial services and broader financial systems/economic development, with geographic foci (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa, China, India). - Trend topics: Mobile communication (from 2015), telecommunication (from 2016), microfinance (from 2019), money services/remittances (2018–2022), financial services and banking (2018–2021), financial system and inclusion (2020–2022), China (2021–2022), economic development (2020–2022), Africa and empowerment (emerging by 2022–2023). - Bibliographic coupling and co-citation: Highly interconnected sources included Telecommunications Policy and World Development; influential authors by co-citation included Demirgüç-Kunt, Klapper, Beck, Suri, and Singer. Document-level coupling showed strong interconnections for some mid-cited works (e.g., Demir et al., 2022) alongside highly cited anchors (e.g., Ozili, 2018; Gabor & Brooks, 2017).

The analysis demonstrates that digital financial services have become a central pillar in research on financial inclusion and economic development, aligning with the study’s objective to map themes, geographies, and influence structures. The surge in output since 2016 reflects FinTech’s expanding role in overcoming access barriers and lowering costs, while collaboration networks show increasing global engagement led by the UK, USA, and China. Interdisciplinary contributions (economics, finance, IS, development studies, marketing, telecom policy) underscore the complexity of inclusion challenges and the need for cross-domain approaches. The prominence of mobile money, digital payments, financial literacy, and emerging technologies (blockchain) in co-occurrence and trend analyses confirms technology’s central role in expanding access and enhancing welfare. Highly cited foundational works on mobile money’s impacts, inclusion determinants, and FinTech’s development framing provide theoretical and empirical anchor points for the field. The findings support policy directions that balance innovation and consumer protection, promote interoperability and competition, and leverage public–private partnerships to scale inclusion. They also highlight the importance of focusing on vulnerable populations, evaluating alternative finance (P2P, crowdfunding), and addressing risks (cybersecurity, fraud, systemic concerns) to ensure inclusive and sustainable outcomes.

This bibliometric study charts the rapid expansion and interdisciplinary nature of research on digital financial services within FinTech as drivers of financial inclusion and economic development. It identifies influential sources, authors, documents, institutions, and countries; visualizes collaboration networks; and maps core and emerging themes. The evidence underscores digital financial services’ potential to overcome traditional banking constraints, reduce transaction costs, and support welfare and growth. Policy recommendations include fostering enabling, adaptive regulation; encouraging competition and interoperability; strengthening consumer protection; and leveraging public–private partnerships. Future research should deepen understanding of impacts on marginalized groups, assess the effectiveness of alternative financing mechanisms, and explore the roles of emerging technologies (blockchain, AI, big data) and designs (e.g., CBDCs) in advancing inclusion while mitigating risks. Sustained global and interdisciplinary collaboration will be essential to translate FinTech’s promise into equitable, sustainable development.

- Database and language scope: Reliance on Scopus and English-language records may omit relevant studies indexed elsewhere or published in other languages, introducing selection bias. - Document types: Exclusion of books, book chapters, and non–peer-reviewed outputs omits potentially influential work. - Time window and citation dynamics: Newer publications have had less time to accrue citations, affecting impact comparisons; trends reflect the 2010–2023 period only. - Bibliometric method constraints: Co-occurrence, coupling, and co-citation map structures of the literature but do not establish causal relationships or assess study quality in depth. - Inconsistencies in indexing/metadata: Variations in author names, affiliations, and keyword tagging can affect network structures and counts.