Models of digital government, rule of law, and financial innovation: Comparative evidence across developed, developing, and transition economies, with focal cases of Ukraine, the United States, and Brazil

  • 19 Views
  • 3 Downloads

Creative Commons License DMCA.com Protection Status
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Type of the article: Research Article

Abstract
Global account ownership rose from 51 to 76 percent of adults between 2011 and 2021, much of it through digital channels, yet the depth and innovativeness of national financial systems vary sharply across economies. This study quantifies how the rule of law and the model of digital government relate to two dimensions of financial-sector development, banking-sector depth and digital financial innovation, across developed, developing, and transition economies, and tests whether digital government can substitute for institutional quality. Using a panel of 183 economies over 2000–2021 (estimation window 2003–2021) and a four-wave Global Findex panel, the analysis applies two-way fixed-effects and pooled wave-fixed-effects models with country-clustered standard errors. The rule of law is positively associated with banking-sector depth, but the association is heterogeneous: it is largest and most robust in transition economies (β = 22.17, p = 0.020) and insignificant in developing economies. Digital government, by contrast, is not significantly related to banking-sector depth (p = 0.322) yet is strongly associated with digital financial innovation, where the rule of law also matters; the e-government association is strongest for digital-payment adoption (β = 51.99, p < 0.001). In these cross-country estimates, the rule-of-law × e-government interaction is negative and significant (β = −10.69, p = 0.018), and the marginal association of the rule of law declines by almost half as digital government expands, a pattern consistent with partial substitution. These findings are robust to the 2025 revision of the governance data and to extending the sample through the 2024 Findex wave.

Acknowledgments
This article was prepared based on the results of a study funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine entitled “GovTech for Ukraine: A Digital, Secure, Transparent, and Equitable State in Times of War and Post-War Reconstruction” (registration number: 0126U000544).

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Figure 1. Focal-economy dynamics: banking-sector depth (left) and account ownership (right)
    • Figure 2. Heterogeneous effect of rule of law by economy type, both panels
    • Figure 3. Rule of law and banking-sector depth by economy type, with focal economies
    • Table 1. Descriptive statistics by economy type (raw depth panel, 2000–2021)
    • Table 2. Descriptive statistics by economy type (digital financial innovation panel, 2011–2021)
    • Table 3. Rule of law, digital government and banking-sector depth (Panel 1)
    • Table 4. Rule-of-law coefficient by economy type and outlier treatment
    • Table 5. Rule of law, digital government and digital financial innovation (Panel 2)
    • Table 6. Robustness: alternative dependent variable and institutional indices (Panel 1)
    • Table A1. Economies included in the analysis
    • Table B1. Correlation matrix
    • Table C1. Variance inflation factors
    • Table D1. Leave-one-country-out robustness
    • Table E1. Alternative measures of institutional quality (depth panel)
    • Table F1. Heterogeneity of the rule-of-law effect
    • Table G1. Robustness of the innovation panel under the 2025 WGI revision and the 2024 Findex wave
    • Table H1. Focal cases in the innovation model, 2021 wave
    • Table I1. Alternative temporal constructions of the e-government index
    • Table I2. Leave-one-control-out estimates
    • Conceptualization
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Artsrun Avetikyan, Vladyslav Kutsenko, Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksandr Klymenko, Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Formal Analysis
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Vladyslav Kutsenko, Zhanna Derii, Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Methodology
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Zhanna Derii, Oleksandr Klymenko, Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Software
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Artsrun Avetikyan, Vladyslav Kutsenko
    • Validation
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Artsrun Avetikyan, Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksandr Klymenko, Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Visualization
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Artsrun Avetikyan, Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksandr Klymenko
    • Writing – original draft
      Oleksandr Moskalenko, Artsrun Avetikyan, Vladyslav Kutsenko, Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksandr Klymenko, Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Data curation
      Artsrun Avetikyan, Vladyslav Kutsenko, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksandr Klymenko
    • Resources
      Artsrun Avetikyan, Vladyslav Kutsenko, Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar
    • Investigation
      Vladyslav Kutsenko, Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksandr Klymenko
    • Writing – review & editing
      Zhanna Derii, Bohdan Kachmar, Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Project administration
      Oleksii Zakharkin
    • Supervision
      Oleksii Zakharkin