Role of Fintech Services Providers and Stakeholders as Drivers in

Digital Payment Ecosystems

Ivany Rachmawati

, Marcella Witanto

, Adityo Nugroho

, Peri A. Manaf

Bina Nusantara University, Tangerang, Indonesia

Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: Fintech, E-Money, E-Wallet

Abstract: The development of digital finance (fintech) sector in Indonesia brings demand and potential which is

managed by local fintech startups through various forms of creative services. There are role of providers and

stakeholders in market acceptance. However, their roles in the fintech ecosystems are not documented

systematically. This paper will answer the question about the roles of the provider and stakeholders in

encouraging the use of digital payment services. This paper focuses on the context of their roles and behaviour

in the development of the digital payment environment. This paper is library research compiling previous

studies of fintech models using the example of electronic wallets (e-wallets). Our literature review results

conclude that the Indonesian payment services market has very large opportunities especially for non-cash

payments systems such as e-wallets. In addition, the underlying demographic and economic drivers have also

led to rapid change. Indonesia has experienced a massive development of cashless payments, and we believe

bigger opportunities are available for local fintech companies through their alternative payment platforms.

1 INTRODUCTION

Fintech companies have developed various

financial and transactions services such as electronic

wallets, mobile payment services, and also other

financial services and products (Weichert, 2017). As

Indonesians entering the online society, there is a

global trend of business actors using digital payment

activities (Lewis, 2017). It becomes a challenge for

providers and stakeholders to provide adequate and

safe non-cash payment instruments to gain

community trust (Górka, 2012). The involvement of

finance service providers has changed the digital

payment ecosystem that influences all stakeholders

and their interests such as the central bank, retail

consumers and transportation companies (Liu et al.,

2015). In addition, the development of digital

transactions also raises demand scenarios that need to

be managed by fintech startups producing various

forms of creative services (Oshodin et al., 2017).

However, the information about their roles,

models and best practice schemes are not well defined

or documented. This paper describes the roles and

behavior of finance service providers in relating to

other stakeholders based on the information from the

mainstream financial services. In addition, this paper

will also describe the process of several digital

transaction schemes in recent years including the

feasibility of product acceptance and roles of trusted

third parties. Thus, this paper also describes various

technological features, aspects and the efficiency of

payment services to shape the financial market

infrastructure (FMI) environment.

1.1 Research questions

1. What are the roles of the provider in providing

safe, relevant and innovative payment

instruments that form the digital payment

ecosystem?

2. What are the roles and tendencies of

consumers to accept digital payments for

digital retail payments as a shopping payment

instrument?

468

Rachmawati, I., Witanto, M., Nugroho, A. and A. Manaf, P.

Role of Fintech Services Providers and Stakeholders as Drivers in Digital Payment Ecosystems.

DOI: 10.5220/0008441404680475

In Proceedings of the 4th Sriwijaya Economics, Accounting, and Business Conference (SEABC 2018), pages 468-475

ISBN: 978-989-758-387-2

3. What are the roles of regulators in regulating

digital payment services and standardization

of the payment instruments?

1.2 Significance of the study

Theoretical writing is expected to add insight and

understanding of the operation of business activities

in fintech business models such as payment gateway

providers and e-wallet providers based on Bank

Indonesia Regulation No. 19/8 / PBI / 2017

concerning National Payment Gateway.

This research is beneficial for the community as

well as for students because with this research can

provide insight and contribution of thought regarding

the implementation of business activities in fintech

business models such as payment gateway providers

and e-wallet providers. For this research manager, it

is useful to contribute ideas to answer challenges for

providers and stakeholders to provide adequate and

safe non-cash payment instruments to gain

community trust.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Many studies have looked at the use of digital

retail payment instruments, privacy in digital

payment transactions, the role of providers in system

decentralization and crypto currency (Gomber et al.,

2017; Grimes & Rodima-Taylor, 2017). This section

provides a summary of the role of customers (users)

and their readiness to accept the fintech services.

2.1 Fintech Potential in Indonesia

“Financial technology” or “FinTech” refers to the

use of technology to deliver financial solutions.

FinTech today is often seen as a uniquely recent

marriage of financial services and information

technology.

In the past five years there have been more and

more fintech and non-bank startups entering and

shaking the payment arena (Arner et al., 2015), taking

advantage of new technologies and market conditions

(Brekke & Hagerud, 2017), and utilizing alternative

business models substituting conventional traditional

payment services. which are summarized in Fig. 1.

Figure 1. Global Investment in Fintech

This trend was triggered by the high growth of

investment into the fintech sector (see Fig. 1) which

was dominated primarily by venture capital, private

equity, and angel investors (Gabor & Brooks, 2017).

For comparison with other countries, last year in the

US fintech investment nearly tripled, and the

enthusiasm for such innovations appeared throughout

the world (Arner et al., 2015; Chiu, 2017; Gabor &

Brooks, 2017). London, San Francisco/, Silicon

Valley and New York have established themselves as

a major centers for innovation and are quickly

followed by new innovation centers around the world

(Hodell & Nilsson, 2016; Weichert, 2017).

Amsterdam, Stockholm, Paris, Berlin and Dublin, for

example, have all been identified as key growth areas

in the European fintech ecosystem, and are

complemented by sectors that develop in locations

such as Tel Aviv (Bofondi & Gobbi, 2017; Romānova

et al., 2018).

In Indonesia, there is high growth of e-economic

providers developing their own payment services

(Lapeyre et al., 2015; Leimona et al., 2015). For now,

the most interesting seems to be 'HelloPay' (from

Lazada group, an eCommerce site recently acquired

by Alibaba Group) and Go-Pay (from Go-Jek group,

an online travel group with other eEconomy offers).

Indonesia is following a different payment

development path to other global markets, due to the

low adoption of credit cards (Hidayanto et al., 2015).

Even though most people do not have bank accounts

and credit cards, the population has adopted different

behaviors to use alternative mobile ePayments

besides addressing legacy infrastructure problems.

The users of fintech services are described in Fig. 2.

Figure 2. Fintech users in Indonesia

Role of Fintech Services Providers and Stakeholders as Drivers in Digital Payment Ecosystems

469

The development of the fintech sector has affected

all other non-financial services industries, such as

banking, capital markets, payments, insurance,

wealth management and real estate (Arner et al.,

2015; Weichert, 2017). Such a leap into digital

behavior also impacts industrial systems and

infrastructure platforms in IT manufacturers. Even

though the agglomeration of technology and financial

services is not new in Indonesia, the application of IT

for financial services has been presented and focused

on industrial innovation efforts, technology

infrastructure and system security, stability and

resiliency (SSR). This growth is very important for

effective industrial operations. Thus, more

contemporary fintech companies have released their

creative applications in the past ten years, enabling

the delivery of new and innovative services to support

other industries as new business models (Jang et al.,

2017; Hodell & Nilsson, 2016). The business models,

especially the digital platforms, always involve

electronic money (e-money) and also digital non-

bank accounts to collect and deposit payments. The

development of e-money is explained below.

2.2 E-Money

Digital retail payment instruments (e.g., as e-

money, e-wallets) have become a challenge for both

providers and stakeholders (Masihuddin et al., 2017).

They have to understand the role and key

characteristics of digital money (O’Neill et al., 2017).

Many governments and legislatures try to frame the

potential role of digital money as an exchange and

storage media that allows economic actors to transact

with each other. For the purpose of exchange, digital

money can be like physical money as a payment

instrument between parties. With emerging

cryptocurrency technology, innovation in digital

currency has become more widespread creating

challenges for providers and stakeholders (Fung &

Halaburda, 2016; Raymaekers, 2015). They have to

manage and educate their customer perceptions of the

use of payment and digital product security.

With the existence of digital networks, digital

money can be transferred across all digital networks

and move across industries. In addition, the existence

of the underlying infrastructure for storing and

distributing content applications and services also

influences the context of digital retail payments

(Wandhöfer, 2017; Hasan et al., 2015). To understand

the problem, we provide an exemplary solution from

Europe case study with legal tender Euro banknotes

and a non-interest obligation to the ECB as digital

retail payment instruments. The legalization of Euro

banknotes provides an example about how the

problem of e-money can be resolved through certain

agency directives such as the European E-money

Directive (Dehghan & Haghighi, 2015; Vlasov,

2017)).

Table 1: Characteristics of currency, digital money*,

checks, and debit cards

Characteristics

Digital

money

Currency

Check

Debit

card

Legal tender

Yes

Acceptability

Widespread

Restricted

Marginal cost

per transaction

Low

Medium

High

Medium

Payment

finality face

to-face

transaction

Yes

Payment

finality non-

face-to-face

transaction

Yes

User-

anonymity

Yes

2.3 E-Money as a Cryptocurrency

Platform

E-money has been used as a new platform of

cryptocurrency as a new trend. Electronic currency is

an asset which can change hands from one person to

another and is evidenced by a balance that the owner

of the currency keeps and the transfer is final without

the intervention of a bank (Dwyer, 2015). For

example, when cryptocurrency continues to grow as

indicated by Bitcoin's popularity in 2009, many

providers and stakeholders felt challenged to support

personal crypto currency (Raymaekers, 2015;

Narayanan et al., 2016).

To make cryptocurrency a payment instrument,

there is a need to get support from an authority or a

centralized system. The whole process takes place

peer-to-peer based on computer code where

cryptographic data is guaranteed (Raymaekers,

2015). Data containing information about the money

is exchanged peer-to-peer similar to physical cash. In

addition, national boundaries or a regulatory

framework are important to standardize ubiquitous

payment solutions in order that the cryptocurrency

instrument can move freely in the global digital

ecosystem (Chuen, 2015; Liu et al., 2015).

3 METHODOLOGY

This type of research is library research collecting

a series of studies relating to previous studies about

SEABC 2018 - 4th Sriwijaya Economics, Accounting, and Business Conference

470

fintech. This study also compares the data, models,

and best practice about the fintech users, customers,

and stakeholders. We collect information from

various sources (e.g., books, encyclopedias, scientific

journals, newspapers, magazines, and documents). A

library research or systematic literature review is a

research activity that critically reviews the

knowledge, ideas, or findings contained in the body

of academic-oriented literature. It also formulates its

theoretical and methodological contributions to the

topic of fintech and stakeholder roles. The focus of

this library research is to find out the development of

the fintech industry, e-money, e-wallets and their

development in Indonesia. The nature of this research

is descriptive analysis, which is the regular

decomposition of data that has been obtained, and

then gives understanding and an explanation so that

the reader can understand it well.

4 DISCUSSION

4.1 Fintech Users in Indonesia

The development of the fintech sector in

Indonesian e-commerce is currently similar to the

Chinese market in 2008 (Chuen & Lee, 2017). The

Indonesian fintech market has experienced a high

growth indicated by the high uses of fintech products,

such as GoJek's Go-Pay payment and InnoPay’s

wallet platform.

Unsurprisingly, cash-on-delivery (COD) still

accounts for more than 70% of all transactions that

are processed based on data by ecommerceIQ

(Google Trends, 2017).

Figure 3: Trends of transactions processed through fintech

services

Those who focus on cellphone wallets like True

Money of Thailand struggle to achieve sustainable

"core product values" and reach the masses

(Goswami, 2016). In addition, OVO from Lippo also

collaborated with Grab, enabling the ride-hailing

company to offer GrabPay to its users (Plooij & van

Driel, 2016). Go-Jek also continues to expand its

influence in the field of mobile wallets by acquiring

three companies engaged in financial or fintech

technology (Hoontrakul, 2018; Plooij & van Driel,

2016).

Such cooperation between companies to offer

mobile wallets also drives the success story of mobile

wallet (Dai et al., 2018; Er-Rajy et al., 2017).

However, long-term success will depend on the

readiness of the community to adopt it. Fintech

business seems more promising than their

transportation services (Hoontrakul, 2018; Plooij &

van Driel, 2016). Some observers have suggested that

the benefits of the fintech business are quite large and

the costs and risks are smaller (Bofondi & Gobbi,

2017). There are many examples of such cooperation

in offering mobile financial services such as GrabPay,

Kudo, and Go-Pay. They are explained in the

following paragraphs.

The consumers in Southeast Asia who hitch a ride

from a taxi or personal driver tend to do it through

Grab, the region's answer to Uber or Lyft. But the

irony of the ride-sharing boom is that, in providing a

long-awaited modernization of the way the driver

receives payment, s/he attempts to promote cashless

payments even though the cash option is still in

process (Hoontrakul, 2018; Plooij & van Driel, 2016).

Kudo, a Jakarta-based fintech, brings cash options

to the forefront for those who shop online. Consumers

without a bank account or card can use Kudo to buy

goods or services online, and then make cash

payments to local Kudo agents.

The Kudo network consisting of 4,000 agents

covering 500 cities and regions throughout Indonesia

and has more than 5 million active customers

(Rintamäki, 2017). This is a model similar to Amazon

Cash that was recently announced, as well as older

offers such as PayPal MyCash Card, or PayNearMe.

According Grab’s website, Grab claims

GrabPay's cellular payment service is growing and

Grab has a 95% market share in the rising

transportation industry in Singapore. In acquiring

Kudo as part of the overall "700 Grab for Indonesia"

master plan of 2020, the company is trying to bring

financial inclusion to the forefront through its various

mobile payment offerings.

"Indonesia is one of the most promising and

fastest growing e-commerce and non-cash payment

markets in Asia, but there is a clear need for a more

flexible and customized cash payment solution," said

Ming Maa, president of Grab (Rintamäki, 2017).

About 175 million Indonesians are classified as

middle class, but the majority of people do not have

Role of Fintech Services Providers and Stakeholders as Drivers in Digital Payment Ecosystems

471

bank accounts, especially in non-urban areas, said

Maa. “Kudo has created a truly unique solution to the

challenge of serving this huge and underserved

market.”

At present, Grab users have a wide selection of

online vendors to choose from including GrabTaxi or

GrabCar, or they can have GrabPay on their mobile

with a card or account connected to make payments

at participating retailers. Top-up options such as

GrabPay Credit and a loyalty program called

GrabRewards are available where points are obtained

for each Grab trip.

“GrabPay represents a huge market opportunity,

and that is something we think we are uniquely

positioned to bring to the Indonesian market”

(Schechtner & Hanson, 2017). In all regions, there is

still great potential for payment solutions without

money to increase from their small scale today.

The cooperation between Ovo and Grab has been

running for one month. Ovo and Grab users can make

payments for GrabFood transportation and food

delivery services using Ovo integrated into the Grab

application.

GrabPay and Go-Pay service valuations will

continue to increase. Gojek already officially

inaugurated Go-Pay as a fintech and obtained an

operating license from Bank Indonesia (BI). Now the

move is followed by Grab by inaugurating GrabPay

as a fintech service. GrabPay has officially become a

fintech and has received operating permission from

BI. Grab works with Ovo e-money service providers

for financial transactions. GrabPay is not only used to

pay for Grab services only. Now GrabPay can be used

to pay for parking fees, hospital bills and others that

are integrated with Ovo.

4.2 Fintech Ecosystem in Indonesia

Progress in developing the digital payment

ecosystem depends on all stakeholders working

together so that private and public sector leaders can

align with common interests (de Reuver et al., 2015;

Chuen & Lee, 2017). Since the good practices for the

development of digital payment systems are still

emerging, customers’ needs guidance to support the

process by identifying and explaining component

parts of the inclusive digital payment ecosystem

(IDPE) and ways to address key challenges for its

implementation.

Figure 4: The digital payment ecosystem in Indonesia

Digital financial services provide substantial

opportunities to advance financial inclusion quickly

(Gabor & Brooks, 2017; Chuen & Lee, 2017). Digital

solutions enable safe and cost-effective designs and

the provision of financial services and products.

These business models can sustainably serve

households that are financially underserved and

underserved and small and medium enterprises

(SMEs) (Chuen & Deng, 2017; Rintamäki, 2017).

Payment is usually a point of entry in the use of

financial services, for example, through receipt of

remittances or transfers of social benefits. The initial

use of financial services by groups previously

excluded is often through digital services. Digital

payment systems have the potential to lead people

who do not have bank accounts to access other formal

financial services, as evidenced in the GPFI Market

and Payment System Subgroup Inventory Reports.

Therefore, developing an inclusive digital payment

ecosystem is the key to providing basic banking

services for those who are financially excluded and as

a springboard to provide access to other financial

services.

Supporting universal access to and often using

transactional services is very important in the

realization of the potential of an inclusive digital

payment ecosystem to increase the level of financial

inclusion. The Committee on Payments and Market

Infrastructure and the 2016 World Bank Group

Report Aspects of Payment for Financial Inclusion

(APFI) provide seven guiding principles for

increasing access and use of transaction accounts

(Zottel et al., 2017; Garg & Agarwal, 2014). These

principles are supplemented by several main actions

to support universal access to, and often use,

transaction accounts. The goal of universal access and

frequent use is on four catalysts (product design,

available access points, financial literacy and

awareness, and utilizing large amounts of payments),

supported by three foundations (financial

infrastructure and Information and Communication

Technology (ICT), legal and regulatory framework,

and public and private sector commitments).

SEABC 2018 - 4th Sriwijaya Economics, Accounting, and Business Conference

472

An inclusive digital payment ecosystem consists

of several building blocks and a supportive

environment. Building blocks of such ecosystems

include:

1. Digital payment service providers (banks and

non-bank payment service providers,

including cellular money operators);

2. A payment system that is part of the financial

infrastructure;

3. Distribution systems (or access channels and

lines, including agents and direct digital

access);

4. ICT infrastructure and energy; and

5. An effective user identification system.

A supportive environment consists of a legal and

regulatory framework with central banks that usually

play a key role, combined with a framework that

increases user awareness, financial literacy, and

consumer protection measures, all supported by

commitments from the public and private sectors to

increase the level of financial inclusion (Garg &

Agarwal, 2014). The development of a digital

inclusive payment ecosystem payment system must

directly support this increase.

4.3 The Role of Payment Regulator

The rapid growth of fintech has attracted greater

regulatory scrutiny, which is certainly warranted

given the fundamental role FinTech plays in the

functioning of finance and its infrastructure (Arner et

al., 2015).

There are challenges faced by regulators for

digital retail payment transactions. The regulators

must have system technology development

accompanied by operational and technology

regulations and proposals and implementation of

payment solutions based on e-money models. At the

global level, privacy and security continue to be the

main focus of the Anti-Money-Laundering (AML)

rule. The rule has been making innovation more

difficult since the providers must follow the

regulation (Serhan et al., 2016; Kolhatkar et al.,

2014).

Regulators must be prepared to watch how the

fintech companies follow the banking laws as we get

to know the newly-defined third-party providers

(TPP) (Bowers et al., 2017; Polasik & Piotrowski,

2016). It is permitted by this law to access

information on payment accounts of customers

holding their payment accounts in Account

Assistance Payment Service Providers (AAPSP).

Credit institutions or e-money AAPSP institutions

can also act as TPP services such as for initiation of

payments and account information. They can insert

themselves into a broader digital economy where the

API can be used as a tool to enable account-related

data transfers between AAPSP and third parties. The

opening of a payment account opens the opportunity

to develop new services around payments and the

power to make the bank accounts a central payment

instrument.

The fintech providers must permit the regulators

to provide legal guarantees and consumer protection

through AAPSP and their customers. Currently it is

still an open question regarding the interaction of

PSD2 and EU General Data Protection Regulations4

(GDPR) 2016/679 and 'explicit approval' questions.

Given the fact that under PSD2 customers can

directly provide and withdraw approval for TPP in

terms of each service they provide (Romānova et al.,

2018). There is no formal requirement for either the

customer or TPP to inform AAPSP that according to

AAPSP regulations it will require a legal guarantee

from the European Commission that they will not be

fined under data protection laws if they are

(Romānova et al., 2018).

5 CONCLUSION

As this report clearly illustrates, the opportunities

for non-cash payments in Indonesia are vast.

However, the Indonesian fintech has not entirely

adopted the regulations. Since the Indonesian market

has different demographics and economic drivers, the

fintech must prepare for rapid change from cash-

based payments to digital payments through mobile

devices because the emerging young middle class

embraces new ways to pay.

The Indonesian population seems to be on the

verge of an explosion of cashless payments, and we

believe there are significant opportunities for

companies that want to invest in the alternative

payment platforms. Many of the players set out in this

report have used significant resources to spearhead

new solutions to overcome barriers in low proportion

markets such as lack of infrastructure and other

infrastructure.

6 LIMITATION OF THIS STUDY

This paper focuses on the context of the roles and

behavior in the development of the digital payment

environment. In conducting research, the author has

limitations where the study focused only on one type

Role of Fintech Services Providers and Stakeholders as Drivers in Digital Payment Ecosystems

473

of fintech, namely payment gateway. So, the results

of the research cannot be generalized, because fintech

consists of various type. Besides that, the current

regulations are keep changing and still not binding.

So, for future research, it is better to add more

references about regulations and laws which are the

basis for this fintech payment gateway.

Rapid technological development, making

startups compete to create creative and innovative

financial services. Many forms of fintech such as:

lending, financial planning (personal finance), retail

investment, crowdfunding, remittances, financial

research, and others. So, in future research can focus

on other forms of fintech, because there is still a few

research on fintech, especially in Indonesia.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would also like to show our gratitude to Dr.

Peri A. Manaf, Lecturer of Magister Manajemen at

BINUS University for sharing his pearls of wisdom

with us during the course of this research.

REFERENCES

Arner, D. W., Barberis, J., & Buckley, R. P. (2015). The

evolution of Fintech: A new post-crisis paradigm. Geo.

J. Int'l L., 47, 1271.

Berentsen, A. (1998). Monetary policy implications of

digital money. Kyklos, 51(1), 89-118.

Bofondi, M., & Gobbi, G. (2017). The big promise of

FinTech. European Economy, (2), 107-119.

Bowers, J., Reaves, B., Sherman, I. N., Traynor, P., &

Butler, K. (2017, July). Regulators, Mount Up!

Analysis of Privacy Policies for Mobile Money

Services. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable

Privacy and Security (SOUPS).

Brekke, H., & Hagerud, S. (2017). Online peer-to-peer

lending and its implications for small business credit

financing in Norway. Nydalsveien : BI Norwegian

Business School.

Chiu, I. H. (2017). A new era in fintech payment

innovations? A perspective from the institutions and

regulation of payment systems. Law, Innovation and

Technology, 9(2), 190-234.

Chuen, D. L. K. (Ed.). (2015). Handbook of digital

currency: Bitcoin, innovation, financial instruments,

and big data. Academic Press.

Chuen, D. L. K., & Deng, R. H. (2017). Handbook of

Blockchain, Digital Finance, and Inclusion:

Cryptocurrency, FinTech, InsurTech, Regulation,

ChinaTech, Mobile Security, and Distributed Ledger.

Academic Press.

Chuen, K., & Lee, D. (2017). Decentralization and

Distributed Innovation: Fintech, Bitcoin and ICO's.

Dai, W., Deng, J., Wang, Q., Cui, C., Zou, D., & Jin, H.

(2018). SBLWT: A Secure Blockchain Lightweight

Wallet based on Trustzone. IEEE Access.

de Reuver, M., Verschuur, E., Nikayin, F., Cerpa, N., &

Bouwman, H. (2015). Collective action for mobile

payment platforms: A case study on collaboration

issues between banks and telecom operators. Electronic

Commerce Research and Applications, 14(5), 331-344.

Dehghan, F., & Haghighi, A. (2015). E-money regulation

for consumer protection. International Journal of Law

and Management, 57(6), 610-620.

Fung, B. S., & Halaburda, H. (2016). Central bank digital

currencies: a framework for assessing why and how.

Gabor, D., & Brooks, S. (2017). The digital revolution in

financial inclusion: international development in the

fintech era. New Political Economy, 22(4), 423-436.

Garg, S., & Agarwal, P. (2014). Financial inclusion in

India–a Review of initiatives and achievements. IOSR

Journal of Business and Management, 16(6), 52-61.

Gomber, P., Koch, J.-A., & Sieri, M. (2017). Digital

Finance and Fintech: Current Research and Future

Research Directions. Journal of Business Economics

Volume 87, Issue 5, 537–580

Górka, J. (2016). Transforming payment systems in

Europe. Springer.

Goswami, S. (2016). Mobile technology in microfinance.

Changing Contours of Microfinance in India, 54.

GrabTaxi Holdings Pte. Ltd.. (2017, 2 February). Grab to

invest USD 700 million in ‘Grab 4 Indonesia’ 2020

master plan. Diperoleh 31 Oktober 2018, from

https://www.grab.com/sg/press/business/grab-invest-

usd-700-million-grab-4-indonesia-2020-master-plan/

GrabTaxi Holdings Pte. Ltd.. (2017, 30 August). Grab

Launches Peer-to-Peer Fund Transfer in GrabPay

Mobile Wallet in Singapore. Diperoleh 19 Juni 2012,

from https://www.grab.com/sg/press/others/grab-

launches-peer-to-peer-fund-transfer-in-grabpay-

mobile-wallet-in-singapore/

Grimes, W., & Rodima-Taylor, D. (2017). Bitcoin and

Beyond: Cryptocurrencies, Blockchains, and Global

Governance. Abingdon: Routledge.

Hidayanto, A. N., Hidayat, L. S., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., &

Handayani, P. W. (2015). Examining the relationship of

payment system characteristics and behavioural

intention in e-payment adoption: a case of Indonesia.

International Journal of Business Information Systems,

19(1), 58-86.

Hodell, A., & Nilsson, C. (2016). Digital Disruption–

Exploring Innovation inStockholm based FinTech

companies.

Hoontrakul, P. (2018). Asia’s Digital Economy. In

Economic Transformation and Business Opportunities

in Asia (pp. 269-312). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Jang, M., Zhou, R., Qiu, H., Xie, J., & Paetzold, S. (2017).

Chinese Fintech Companies’ International

Development: Motivations to Pursue International

Expansion.

SEABC 2018 - 4th Sriwijaya Economics, Accounting, and Business Conference

474

Kolhatkar, J. S., Fatnani, S. S., Yao, Y., & Matsumoto, K.

(2014). U.S. Patent No. 8,751,399. Washington, DC:

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Lapeyre, R., Pirard, R., & Leimona, B. (2015). Payments

for environmental services in Indonesia: What if

economic signals were lost in translation?. Land Use

Policy, 46, 283-291.

Latifa, E.-R., Ahemed, E. K., Mohamed, E. G., & Omar, A.

(2017). Blockchain: Bitcoin Wallet Cryptography

Security, Challenges And Countermeasures. Journal of

Internet Banking and Commerce, vol. 22, no. 3.

Leimona, B., Lusiana, B., Noordwijk, M. v., Mulyoutami,

E., Ekadinata, A., & Amaruzaman, S. (2015). Boundary

work: Knowledge co-production for negotiating

payment for watershed services in Indonesia.

Ecosystem Services 15, 45–62.

Lewis, D. (2017). China’s Global Internet Ambitions:

Finding Roots in ASEAN.

Liu, J., Kauffman, R. J., & Ma, D. (2015). Competition,

cooperation, and regulation: Understanding the

evolution of the mobile payments technology

ecosystem. Electronic Commerce Research and

Applications, 14(5), 372-391.

Masihuddin, M., Khan, B. U. I., Mattoo, M. M. U. I., &

Olanrewaju, R. F. (2017). A survey on e-payment

systems: elements, adoption, architecture, challenges

and security concepts. Indian Journal of Science and

Technology, 10(20).

Mobitekno (2018, 20 January). Ini Kata Shopback Soal

Perkembangan E-Commerce Indonesia di Tahun 2018.

Diperoleh 19 Juni 2012, dari

http://mobitekno.com/read/2018/20/01/ini-kata-

shopback-soal-perkembangan-e-commerce-indonesia-

di-tahun-2018/

Mortimer, G., Neale, L., Hasan, S. F., & Dunphy, B. (2015).

Investigating the factors influencing the adoption of m-

banking: a cross cultural study. International Journal of

Bank Marketing, Vol. 33 Iss 4, 545 - 570.

Narayanan, A., Bonneau, J., Felten, E., Miller, A., &

Goldfeder, S. (2016). Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency

Technologies A Comprehensive Introduction. New

Jersey: Princeton University Press.

O’neill, J., Dhareshwar, A., & Muralidhar, S. H. (2017).

Working digital money into a cash economy: The

collaborative work of loan payment. Computer

Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 26(4-6), 733-

768.

Oshodin, O., Molla, A., Karanasios, S., & Ong, C. E.

(2017). Is FinTech a Disruption or a New Eco-system?

An Exploratory Investigation of Banksr Response to

FinTech in Australia. In Proceeding of Australasian

Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1-11).

P.Dwyer, Gerald. (2015). The economics of Bitcoins and

similiar private digital currencies. Journal of Financial

Stability 81-91.

Plooij, M., & van Driel, K. (2016). Assessing the impact of

mobile wallet services from a central bank perspective.

Journal of Digital Banking, 1(3), 213-221.

Polasik, M., & Piotrowski, D. (2016). Payment innovations

in Poland: the role of payment services in the strategies

of commercial banks. Ekonomia i Prawo. Economics

and Law, 15(1), 73-101.

Raymaekers, W. (2015). Cryptocurrency Bitcoin:

Disruption, challenges and opportunities. Journal of

Payments Strategy & Systems, 9(1), 30-46.

Rintamäki, P. (2017). Overcoming the barriers to e-

commerce in Latin America-the internationalization

perspective.

Romānova, I., Grima, S., Spiteri, J., & Kudinska, M.

(2018). The Payment Services Directive 2 and

Competitiveness: The Perspective of European Fintech

Companies. European Research Studies Journal, 21(2),

5-24.

Schechtner, K., & Hanson, M. (2017). Shared Mobility in

Asian Megacities: The Rise of the Apps. In Disrupting

Mobility (pp. 77-88). Springer, Cham.

Serhan, C., Mikhael, S., & El Warrak, S. (2016). Anti-

Money Laundering Rules and the Future of Banking

Secrecy Laws: Evidence from Lebanon. International

Finance and Banking, 3(2), 148.

Vlasov, A. (2017). The Evolution of E-Money. European

Research Studies Journal, 2017, vol. XX, issue 1, 215-

224.

Wandhöfer, R. (2017). The future of digital retail payments

in Europe: A role for central bank issued crypto cash?.

Weichert, M. (2017). The future of payments: How

FinTech players are accelerating customer-driven

innovation in financial services. Journal of Payments

Strategy & Systems, 11(1), 23-33.

Zottel, S., Zia, B., & Khoury, F. (2016). Enhancing

financial capability and inclusion in Sénégal: A

demand-side survey. World Bank.

Role of Fintech Services Providers and Stakeholders as Drivers in Digital Payment Ecosystems

475