国际货币基金组织（IMF）：金融科技：金融普惠还是金融排斥 Fintech Financial Inclusion or Exclusion

Fintech:Financial

InclusionorExclusion?

YokeWangTokandDynaHeng

WP/22/80

IMFWorkingPapersdescriberesearchin

progressbytheauthor(s)andarepublishedto

elicitcommentsandtoencouragedebate.

TheviewsexpressedinIMFWorkingPapersare

thoseoftheauthor(s)anddonotnecessarily

representtheviewsoftheIMF,itsExecutiveBoard,

orIMFmanagement.

2022

MAY

*TheauthorswouldliketothankOgawaSumiko,MajidBazarbash,AshleyLannquist,andTaoSunforvaluableinputandfeedbackatvariousstagesoftheresearch.WewouldalsoliketothankMrs.ChantavarnSucharitakul,(AssistantGovernor,BankofThailand),MsPirajitPadmasuta(SeniorDirector,FinancialDevelopmentStrategyDepartment),H.EDr.CheaSerey(AssistantGovernor,NationalBankofCambodia),andMs.JoYeo(DeputyDirector,MonetaryAuthorityofSingapore)formakingthetimetotakepartinourinterviews.WearealsoindebtedtoRaviShankarChaturvediandhisDigitalPlanetresearchteamatTheFletcherSchool,TuftsUniversity,forprovidingtheDigitalIntelligenceIndexdataset,theEdelmanTrustforprovidingtheEdelmanTrustIndex,andMCMforprovidingthedigitalfinancialinclusionmeasures.WealsothankMr.ThitipatChansriniyomforhisexcellentresearchsupport.

©2022InternationalMonetaryFund

WP/22/80

IMFWorkingPaper

InstituteofCapacityDevelopment

Fintech:FinancialInclusionorExclusion?

PreparedbyYokeWangTokandDynaHeng*

AuthorizedfordistributionbyPaulCashin

May2022

IMFWorkingPapersdescriberesearchinprogressbytheauthor(s)andarepublishedtoelicitcommentsandtoencouragedebate.TheviewsexpressedinIMFWorkingPapersarethoseoftheauthor(s)anddonotnecessarilyrepresenttheviewsoftheIMF,itsExecutiveBoard,orIMFmanagement.

ABSTRACT:ThispaperexaminestheroleofFintechinfinancialinclusion.UsingGlobalFindexdataandemergingfintechindicators,wefindthatFintechhasahigherpositivecorrelationwithdigitalfinancialinclusionthantraditionalmeasuresoffinancialinclusion.Inthesecondstageofourempiricalinvestigation,weexaminethekeyfactorsthatarecorrelatedwiththeFletcherSchool’sthreedigitaldivide–genderdivide,class(rich-poor)divideandruraldivide.Theresultsindicatethatgreateruseoffintechissignificantlyassociatedwithanarrowingoftheclassdivideandruraldividebuttherewasnoimpactonthegenderdivide.ThesefindingsimplythatFintechalonemaynotbesufficienttoclosethegendergapinaccesstofinancialservices.Fintechdevelopmentmayneedtobecomplementedwithtargetedpolicyinitiativesaimedataddressingthegendergapdirectly,andatchangingattitudesandsocialnormsacrossdemographics.

RECOMMENDEDCITATION:Tok,YokeWang;Heng,Dyna.Fintech:FinancialInclusionorExclusion?IMFWorkingPaperno.WP/2022/080

JELClassificationNumbers:G2;G3;G16

Keywords:[TypeHere]Fintech,FinancialInclusion,FinancialDevelopment,Inequality.

Author’sE-MailAddress:

ytok@

;dheng@

WORKINGPAPERS

Fintech:FinancialInclusionorExclusion?

PreparedbyYokeWangTokandDynaHeng

IMFWORKINGPAPERS

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND2

Contents

Glossary

3

ExecutiveSummary

4

I.Introduction

5

II.RECENTTRENDSANDLITERATURE

5

III.MindTheGap

10

IV.DataandEmpiricalApproach

13

V.EmpiricalAssessment

17

A.DoesFintechPromoteFinancialInclusion?

17

B.DoesFintechBridgetheGender,ClassandRuralDivides?

19

VI.PolicyImplications

22

VII.Conclusion

23

AppendixA.DataDefinitionsandSource

24

AppendixB:MethodologyUnderlyingtheCompilationoftheIndices

26

References

30

TitleofWP

IMFWORKINGPAPERS

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND3

Glossary

ASEAN

AssociationofSoutheastAsianNations

DAI

DigitalAdoptionIndex

DII

DigitalIntelligenceIndex

EAP

EastAsiaandPacific

IMF

InternationalMonetaryFund

LAC

LatinAmericaandCaribbean

MEA

MiddleEastandNorthAfrica

OECD

TheOrganizationforEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment

SSA

Sub-SaharanAfrica

WB

TheWorldBank

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND4

ExecutiveSummary

ThispaperexaminestheroleofFintechinfinancialinclusion.UsingGlobalFindexdataandemergingfintechindicators,wefindthatFintechhasahigherpositivecorrelationwithdigitalfinancialinclusionthantraditionalmeasuresoffinancialinclusion.Inthesecondstageofourempiricalinvestigation,weexaminethekeyfactorsthatarecorrelatedwiththeFletcherSchool’sthreedigitaldivide–genderdivide,class(rich-poor)divideandruraldivide.Theresultsindicatethatgreateruseoffintechissignificantlyassociatedwithanarrowingoftheclassdivideandruraldividebuttherewasnoimpactonthegenderdivide.ThesefindingsimplythatFintechalonemaynotbesufficienttoclosethegendergapinaccesstofinancialservices.Fintechdevelopmentmayneedtobecomplementedwithtargetedpolicyinitiativesaimedataddressingthegendergapdirectly,andatchangingattitudesandsocialnormsacrossdemographics.

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND5

I.Introduction

Fintechistransformingfinancialservices.Byleveragingtechnologyandcloud-baseddata,financialinstitutionsareofferingproductsbettertailoredtoconsumers’needsatalowercost(Arneretal.,2020;Bootetal.,2020;Philippon,2020;Thakor,2020).Asaresult,manyexpectedthatFintechwouldpromotefinancialinclusionandbenefitdisadvantagedgroups(Demirguc-Kuntetal.,2018;Brezaetal.,2020).However,despitetheplethoraofpapersonthistopic,veryfewhaveprovideddirectempiricalevidenceoftheimpactofFintechonfinancialinclusion.ThisisduetochallengesinmeasuringFintechasitsproductsdiffergreatlyinscopeandscale,andinmeasuringthe“digital”aspectoffinancialinclusion.Thepatchydataandshorttimeserieshavealsocompoundedthechallenge.

Thispaperexaminestworesearchquestions.First,doesFintechimprovedigitalfinancialinclusion?Second,aretheresegmentsofsocietythatarenotincludedbecausetheydonothavethecapacityandmeanstoadoptFintech–suchaswomen,thepoorandpeoplelivinginruralareas?

Traditionalindicatorsoffinancialinclusion,suchasbankaccountsandbranches,cannotcapturetheroleofFintechindigitalfinancialinclusion.Tobetterassessthisrole,weusenewdigitalfinancialinclusionindicatorsandvariousFintechproxiesinthispaper.TheyaretheDigitalFinancialInclusionIndex(Sahayetal.2020),theFletcherSchool’sDigitalIntelligenceIndex(DII),andtheWorldBank’sdigitaladoptionindex(DAI).

Basedonourpanelregression,thepaperdrawsthreeconclusions.First,Fintechhasapositivecorrelationwithfinancialinclusion,withthelargestcorrelationoccurringwhendigitalfinancialinclusionisused.Second,Fintechhasanegativeassociationwiththeclassdivideandrich-poordivide(i.e.ithasthepotentialtomakeitbetter).Third,Fintechhasnoimpactonthegenderdigitalgap.ThesefindingsimplythatFintechalonemaynotbesufficienttoclosethegendergapinaccesstofinancialservices.Fintechdevelopmentmayneedtobecomplementedbytargetedpolicyinitiativesaimedataddressingthegendergapdirectly,andatchangingattitudesandsocialnormsacrossdemographicgroups.

Thepaperisorganizedasfollows:Section2reviewstherecenttrendsandresearchontheroleofFintechinfinancialinclusion;Section3discussesthegender,rural,andrich-poorgap;Section4reviewsthetraditionalandnewindicesofdigitalfinancialinclusionandthemethodologyusedinthispaper;Section5discussestheempiricalanalysis;andSection6describestheresults.Section7setsouttheconclusionsandprovidesvariouspolicyrecommendations.

II.RECENTTRENDSANDLITERATURE

Fintechproductsdiffergreatlyinscopeandscale:cross-borderpayments,peer-to-peerloans,andcreditriskassessments.Overall,theareasthatFintechcoverscanbecategorizedinto:(i)credit,deposits,andcapital-raisingservices;(ii)payments,clearingandsettlementservices,includingdigitalcurrencies;(iii)investmentmanagementservices;and(iv)insurance.Fintechisgrowingrapidlyandatvaryingspeedsacrossregionsandcountries.Forinstance,therehasbeenasignificantincreaseinthenumberofmobileaccountsandusageofmobilemoneyservices(Figure1).

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND6

Digitalfinancialinclusionreferstothedigitalaccessandusageofformalfinancialservicesthroughmobilephonesandcomputers.Theseincludedigitalpayments,digitallending/credit,marketplacelending,mobilemoney,andmobilebanking(Sahayetal.2020).Inmanycountries,digitalfinancialinclusionincreasedbetween2014and2017,evenwheretraditionalfinancialinclusionwasstallingordeclining(WorldBank2018).Fintechisexpectedtofillgapsinbothpaymentsandlending,especiallywherethetraditionaldeliveryoffinancialservicesislessavailable.Demirg¨u¸c-Kuntetal.(2017)providedacomprehensivesurveyonfinancialinclusion.Fusteretal.(2019)andTang(2019)showedthatFintechoftenservesasacomplementto,ratherthanasubstitutefor,traditionalbankingservices.Onthecontrary,Hauetal.(2018),JagtianiandLemieux(2018),Sumitetal.(2019),andFrostetal.(2019)arguedthatFintechandbigtechlendersserveborrowerswhoaretraditionallyunderservedbybanks.

Figure1:Theriseofmobilemoneyaccountsandservices

Adultswithamobilemoneyaccount

80%

(percent)

70%

20142017

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Source:GlobalFindex,2017

GlobalTotalTransactionsThroughMobileMoney

(Billion,USD)

70

UsageofMobileMoneyServices

(Global,percent)

50

40

60

50

40

30

20

10

-

40

30

20

10

0

25

18

6

5

3

1

1

P2PCash-inCash-outBulkBillMerchantAirtimeIR

paymentspaymentspayments

Source:GlobalMobileMoneyDataset,2020

20092010201120122013201420152016201720182019

Source:GlobalMobileMoneyDataset,2020

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND7

DespitetherapidgrowthofFintech,studiesofitsimpactonfinancialinclusionhavebeenlimited.StudiesofhowFintechhasnarrowedthedigitalgapsacrossgender,incomeandruralareasareevenscarcer.ThisislargelyduetothelackofcomprehensivedataonFintechvariablesanddigitalfinancialinclusionindicators.Thetraditionalfinancialinclusionindicatorsfallshortofcapturingdigitalfinancialinclusion,andanalysisoftheeffectofFintechonfinancialinclusioncouldleadtowrongconclusionsifweareunabletomeasurefinancialinclusionproperly.

Fintechcanhavenegativecorrelationswiththetraditionalmeasuresofaccessandusage,suchasthenumberofATMs,bankbranchesandbankaccountpercapita.Forexample,Tashinetal.(2018)foundthatleapfrogging(mobilephoneoverfixedlines)hasnegativecorrelationswiththenumberofdepositsandloanspercapitainmanycountries.However,inthePacificIslands,Tashinetal.(2018)foundleapfroggingtobecomplementarytotraditionalbankingservices.IntheSolomonIslands,mobilebankinghascomplementedtraditionalbankingintheareasofremittances.

Sahayetal.(2020)wentbeyondtheanecdotalevidencetoprovideempiricalsupportthatFintechpromotesfinancialinclusion.Fintechsolutionssuchasmobilemoney,mobile-point-of-saledevicesandcrowdfundinghaveprovidedlow-cost,efficient,andcollateral-lessavenuesforhouseholdsandfirmstopay,obtaincredit,andsupporttheircashmanagement.Theyconstructedanewindicatorofdigitalfinancialinclusionusingdigitalpaymentservicesdataprovidedthroughmobilephonesandtheinternet,andanothertraditionalfinancialinclusionindexforfinancialservicesprovidedbytraditionalfinancialinstitutions.TheirnewmeasuresuggeststhatdigitalfinancialinclusionincreasedsignificantlyintheyearsprecedingtheCOVID-19crisis,particularlyinAfrica.Ineightcountries,includingZimbabwe(wheremobilepaymentshavereplacedcashtransactions),SouthAfricaandNigeria,theimprovementinfinancialinclusionhasbeenentirelydrivenbyFintech.TheyalsoshowedthatFintechhascontributedtoclosinggendergapsinfinancialinclusion.Inotherwords,digitalfinancialinclusiongendergapsareloweronaveragethanthetraditionalfinancialinclusiongendergaps.ThisistrueoverallandspecificallyforcountriesinAfrica,theMiddleEastandCentralAsia.However,forcountriesinAsia-Pacific,LatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,digitalfinancialinclusiongendergapsareactuallyhigherthanthetraditionalfinancialinclusiongendergaps,demonstratingthatthemoreFintechisusedthegreaterthegenderdivide.

Onthecontrary,Chenetal.(2021)usedanindividual-levelsurveydatasetfor28countriesandfoundapersistent“Fintechgendergap”thatcouldposeanobstacletofinancialinclusion.Theyalsofoundthatthegendergapwassmalleramongproductsthatcomplementtraditionalbankingservicesrelativetothosethataresubstitutes.WomenaremorelikelytoadoptFintechproductsthatcomplementfamiliarservices.ThissuggeststhatthegapintheuseofFintechiscloselylinkedtodifferencesinattitudestowardstechnologyandpricesensitivity.Intheirsurvey,morewomenthanmensaidthattheyworryabouttheirsecuritywhendealingwithcompaniesonline.Womenalsoreportedbeingsignificantlylesswillingtoadoptnewfinancialtechnology,forexampledigitalbanks,andlesswillingtouseaFintechproductevenifitwhatitoffersissuperiororbettersuitedtotherespondent’slifestyle.

Similarly,Cheahetal.(2021)lookatthegenderdivideintheASEANpaymentsystem(bothtraditionalanddigital)andfindthatgendergappersistsindigitalmodelslikemobilemoney.Theirresultsshowthatwomenaremorelikelytousetraditionalpaymentmethodslikecashandthatageexacerbatesthegenderdivideintheusageoffinancialinstitutionsforpayment.

TitleofWP

IMFWORKINGPAPERS

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND8

Theliteratureisevolvingastheevidenceremainsscarceandsometimescontradictory.Thispaperlooksattheissuefromadifferentangle–thatofexclusioninsteadofinclusion.Exclusionistheflipsideofinclusion,forinstance,ifthepercentofpopulationmakingdigitalpaymentsis60%,thismeansthat40%donotusedigitalpayments.Bydoingso,wealertpolicymakerstothesegmentsofsocietythathavebeenleftbehindbythepushfordigitalization.Notallgapsneedtobeclosedbecausetherewillalwaysbevoluntaryexclusion,andnotallfirmsandhouseholdsneedfinancialservices(e.g.,farmersinThailand).Itisnotthepolicyobjectivetocloseallgapsbecausetheremaybestructuralreasonswhyagapexists,andtherearerisksandcostsinvolvedinclosingthosegaps.

TheDarkSideofFintech

Fintechhasbeentoutedasaforceforgood.ThebusinessmodelsofFintechstartupsaregearedtowardssolvingreal-lifeproblemssuchaspaymentappsthatmakeitalmostfreeandpainlessformigrantworkerstosendmoneyhometothemostremotevillages.ThesepaymentsandFinTechlendingservicesareseentofillagapwheretraditionaldeliveryoffinancialservicesislacking;forexample,crowdfundedlendingtoSMEsfillsafinancinggapandimprovescashflows(Tok,TanandChansriniyom.(2020)).However,asdigitalfinancialservicesbecomemoreubiquitousandgaingreatertraction,researchersandregulatorsarebecomingmoreawareofthe“darksideofFintech”andtheneedtoaddressiturgently.

Whatdowemeanbythe“darkside”ofFintech?Itisabouttheexclusionofcertaingroupsinsociety:women,theaged,thepoorandminoritygroups.The“darkside”alsoreferstoalgorithmbiasesandpredatorylendingpracticesthathaveanegativeimpactonvulnerablegroups.Asthepandemicacceleratedtheswitchtowardsdigitalfinancialservicesthereisariskthatthe“darkside”hasgrownevenbigger.Forexample,thosewithoutaccesstodigitalpaymentsordepositaccountsareexcludedfromgovernmentsupportthatisdeliveredviagovernment-to-person(G2P)payments.EvenintheUS,wherefinancialinclusionishigh–93%ofadultshaveabankaccount–thereexistsa13percentpointgapbetweenthewealthiesthouseholdsandthepoorest.Financialexclusioncouldarisefromvarioussources,includingthelackofaccesstodigitalinfrastructuresuchasmobilephones,computersortheinternet,financialanddigitalilliteracy,potentialbiasesinalgorithms,and/orlackoftrust.Thefollowingparagraphshighlighttheareaswherefinancialexclusionmightarise.However,ourfocusinthispaperisontheFintechgender,ruralandclassdivideasthiswasdictatedbythedataavailable.

Fintechgendergap:Womeningeneralhavelowerratesofbankaccountownershipthanmen(Demirguc-Kuntetal.,2017),arelesslikelytomanagehouseholdfinances(GuisoandZaccaria,2021)ortoparticipateinthestockmarket(Ke,2020).Sahayetal.(2020)foundthatwhileFintechhascontributedtoclosinggendergapsinfinancialinclusioninmostcountries,thereisaconcernthatthisgendergapmightwideninthepost-COVIDera.ThisfindingissupportedbyinterviewswithstakeholderswhopointedoutthatFintechdoesnotaddressbarrierssuchasculturalorsocialnorms,financialanddigitalliteracy,andsafetyanddisparityinaccesstoresources,andthatsuchbarriersarehigherforwomen.

ArecentpaperbytheBIS1foundthat29%ofmenuseFintechproductsandservicesascomparedto21%ofwomen.2TheFintechgendergap(8percentpoint)waslargerthanthegapinbankaccountownershipbetween

1BISWorkingPaperNo.931.

2Thepaperusedmicro-levelsurveydatafromthe2019ErnstandYoungGlobalFintechAdoptionIndex.Thesurveycoversover27,000adultsfrom28majoreconomies.

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND9

menandwomen3(7percentpoint)4,andexistedinallcountries.Theauthorsfoundthatthegapcouldnottotallybeexplainedbyeithercountry-specificcircumstancesorindividualcharacteristicssuchasage,education,income,andmaritalandemploymentstatus.TheirresultssuggestthatthegapinFintechuseisduetodifferencesinattitudesandpreferencestowardsnewfinancialtechnologybetweengenders.Womenaremoreriskaversethanmenandarelesswillingtoadoptnewfinancialtechnology,irrespectiveofwhetheritisofferedbynewplayersorincumbents.TheauthorspostulatedthatthegendergapcouldnarrowasthesenewFintechproductsbecomemorestandardizedandregulatedovertime.Thisdifferenceinattitudesbetweenmenandwomencouldreflectsocialnorms.Forexample,womenworrymoreaboutprivacyandpersonaldataprotectionthanmen.Itcouldalsoreflectgender-baseddiscrimination,suchaspreviousbadexperienceswithfinancialinstitutions(Bartlettetal,2019).Inaddition,thefintechgendergapcouldbetracedtothelackofaccesstotheinternet.AccordingtotheAllianceforaffordableinternet(2021),only48%ofwomenhasaccesstotheinternetcomparedto55%formenglobally.TheanswercouldalsolieinthedesignofFintechapplicationsthataretoomale-centricanddonotcatertowomen.Furtherresearchisneededinthisarea.

Thefollowingparagraphshighlighttwootheraspectsoffinancialexclusionthatareimportantbutnotcoveredinthispaper.

Agingandfinancialexclusion:TheG20FukuokaPolicyPrioritiesonAgingandFinancialInclusion(2019)5notedtenfactorsthatcouldcontributetofinancialexclusionofelderlypeople.Theyare:lowdigitalcapability;lowfinancialliteracy;cognitivedecline;physicaldecline;socialisolation;livingonafixedincome,pensionorannuity;relianceonfamilymembers;difficultyaccessingfinancialadvice;lackoffinancialproductsforolderpersons;andrelianceonfinancialprofessionals.Thisisanimportantareathatdeservesmoreresearch.Asmanydevelopedanddevelopingeconomiesareagingrapidly,technologycouldbeleveragedtohelptheagedandunderstandthefactorsthatdrivefinancialexclusionforthissegmentofthepopulation.Itwouldalsohelpinthedesignofproductsandpoliciestoaddressthisgap.

Biasesinalgorithmicscoring:Severalpapershaveraisedtheissueoffairnessandaccuracyindataandalgorithmiccreditscoringthatleadtobiasesagainstlowerincomeandminoritygroupsaswellaswomen.Algorithmsusedbybankstopredictcreditcarddebtdefaultstypicallyfavorwealthierwhiteapplicants(Heaven2021).Thisisprimarilyduetothenoiseinthedatathatledtoinaccuratepredictions.Afaireralgorithmwouldnotfixtheproblem.Inanotherstudyofmortgagedata,LauraandBlattner((2021)similarlyconcludedthatdifferencesinmortgageapprovalsbetweenminorityandmajoritygroupswerenotattributedonlytobiasbuttothefactthatminorityandlow-incomegroupshavelessdata,whichinturnleadstolessprecisepredictions.Itisthislackofprecisionandnotjustbiasthatleadstoinequality.Inaddition,evenagender-blindalgorithmcouldendupbiasedagainstwomenaslongasitdrawsonanyinputthathappenstocorrelatewithgender(Abuhamad,2020).Similarly,Gilis(2021)showedthatdiscriminationisalreadyinherentinthedataandexcludingprotectedcharacteristicssuchasracedidnotsolvetheproblem.Assuch,sheadvocatedthatfairlendinglawsshouldshifttoanoutcome-focused,welfare-orientedapproach.

3IMF(2020),ThePromiseofFintech:FinancialInclusioninthePostCovid-19Era.

4Demirguc-Kuntetal.(2018).

5ThereportwaspreparedbyGlobalPartnershipforFinancialInclusion(GPFI)andOECD,2019.

TitleofWP

IMFWORKINGPAPERS

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND10

III.MindTheGap

UsingdatafromWorldBank’sFindexsurvey(2017),weillustratethegendergapasthewhitespacebetweenthefemale(redbar)andthemale(bluebar)below.Themoststrikingmessagefromthechartsisthatthegendergapexistsacrossallregions.Thisfactiswell-documentedintheliterature(BIS2021,IMF2020b).Thegapispersistentlylargestacrossthethreemeasures(accounts,usedinternettopaybills,andmadeorreceiveddigitalpayments)andacrosstheMiddleEastandNorthAfrica(MEA),Sub-SaharanAfrica(SSA),andSouthAsia.Forinstance,inMEAthegendergapasmeasuredbythenumberofaccountsis19percentpoints(Figure2).Ingeneral,thegendergapnarrowswhenwemovefromtheaccountsmeasureofinclusiontothetwodigitalmeasures.Theaveragegendergapacrossallregions,usingtheaccountsmeasure,is11percentpoints.

Figure2:NumberofAccounts

No.ofAccounts(%)

MalevsFemale

160%

EAP

68%

73%

LAC

51%

58%

SSA

37%

48%

MEA

38%

57%

SAS

64%

75%

0%

20%

60%

Female

40%

100%

120%140%

Male

80%

Gap

Figure3:UsedInternettoPayBills

UsedInternettopaybills(%)

MalevsFemale

70%

EAP

28%

32%

LAC

9%12%

SSA

4%7%

MEA

9%15%

SAS

2%4%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

FemaleGapMale

INTERNATIONALMONETARYFUND11

Figure4:DigitalPayments

Madeorreceiveddigitalpayments(%)MalevsFemale

140%

48%

39%

46%

35%

EAP

61%

LAC

SSA

MEA

SAS

55%

43%

30%

29%

20%

0%20%40%60%80%100%120%

FemaleGapMale

Theaveragerich-poorgapis15percentpointsacrossallregions.ThegapbetweentherichandpoorismostpronouncedinLatinAmericaandCarib