Digital Financial Inclusion and Payment Growth: A Comparative Assessment of Malaysia and Indonesia

Digital financial inclusion has accelerated in Southeast Asia, particularly in Malaysia and Indonesia, where e-wallets and QR-based payments are reshaping financial behaviour and expanding access to digital services. This conceptual study examines the determinants of digital payment growth in both countries by integrating three behavioural theories (TAM, UTAUT, TRI), peer-reviewed literature, national policy frameworks, and Scopus AI–generated thematic and conceptual analyses. The findings show that Malaysia’s adoption is driven mainly by perceived usefulness, security assurance, and regulator-led infrastructure such as DuitNow QR, while Indonesia’s adoption is influenced by technology readiness, merchant compatibility, and the widespread diffusion of QRIS among MSMEs. Persistent challenges include digital literacy gaps, uneven infrastructure, trust and security concerns, and differences in regulatory maturity. Emerging themes which are environmental sustainability, Sharia-compliant digital finance, strengthened legal frameworks, and culturally grounded initiatives further explain variations in adoption behaviour and inclusion outcomes. The study proposes an integrated conceptual framework linking structural, behavioural, and ecosystem-level factors, and highlights differentiated policy priorities to strengthen inclusive, resilient, and sustainable digital financial systems in both countries.

Digital financial inclusion, digital payments, e-wallet adoption

1. Abu-husin, F., Afifah, K., Rusydiana, A. S., Zafar, M. B., Noor, H. M., Nurjanah, S., Mustafa, M., Salleh, M. A., Bogor, K., Sultan, U., Abidin, Z., & Badak, K. G. (2025). Research trend in islamic financial technology and blockchain: a bibliometric analysis. 13(1), 147–163. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Agustin, K. L., Usman, W. W., & Kusno, H. S. (2025). The Effect of Financial Literacy, Ease and Trust on the Decision to Use QRIS. Management and Economics Journal, 9(2), 195–214. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18860/mec-j.v9i2.28831 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Amrullah, F., & Purwanto, I. (2025). Determinants of Adoption of Technology-based Payment Systems among University Students. 7(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Asian Development Bank. (2020). DIGITAL FINANCE INNOVATION ROAD MAP AND ACTION PLAN 2020-2024. https://www.ojk.go.id/id/berita-dan-kegiatan/publikasi/Documents/Pages/Publikasi-Materi-Digital-Finance-Innovation-Road-Map-dan-Action-Plan-2020-2024-serta-Digital-Financial-Literacy/Digital Finance Innovation Road Map dan Action Plan.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bagas, A., Irianto, P., & Chanvarasuth, P. (2025). Drivers and Barriers of Mobile Payment Adoption Among MSMEs : Insights from Indonesia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bajwa, F. A., Fu, J., Bajwa, I. A., Rehman, M., & Abbas, K. (2025). Digital financial inclusion and its dual impact on economic and environmental outcomes in ASEAN countries. 5(February), 53–75. https://doi.org/10.3934/DSFE.2025004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bank Indonesia. (2024). Proof of Concept ( PoC ) Report Wholesale Rupiah Digital Cash Ledger. December. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bank Negara Malaysia. (2022). Financial Sector Blueprint 2022 - 2026. Strategic Communications Department Bank Negara Malaysia. https://www.bnm.gov.my/publications/fsb3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Bank Negara Malaysia. (2024). Financial Stability Review Second Half 2024. : Payment Systems and Digitalization. Bank Negara Malaysia. https://www.bnm.gov.my/documents/20124/17523783/fsr24h2_en_book.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Barroso, M., & Laborda, J. (2022). Digital transformation and the emergence of the Fintech sector: Systematic literature review. Digital Business, 2(2), 100028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2022.100028 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Basmantra, I. N., Paranegara, A. A. N. Y. V., & Candra, S. (2024). The Role of E-Wallet Use and Financial Literacy on Consumptive Behavior in Indonesia. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55911-2_33 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fareed, A., Shukri, M., Leong, T. P., & Abd, A. (2024). The Moderating Role of Structural Assurance in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology ( UTAUT ): A Study of E-wallet Behavioural Intention of Users and Non-users Among Adults in Malaysia. 33, 490–503. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Fono, M. A., Chapman, F., Parter, C., Knight, J., Sherriff, S., Christie, V., Gwynne, K., Apolima, M., Chapman, F., Parter, C., Knight, J., Sherriff, S., Christie, V., & Gwynne, K. (2025). A culturally grounded framework for co-designing policy with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Policy Design and Practice, 8(4), 474–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2025.2514340 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Jamaludin, N. A., Zaki, H. O., & Ramli, R.Md., Suffarruddin, S. H. (2024). Towards a Sustainable Financial Future: Exploring the Influence of E-Wallet Adoption Among Gen Z in Malaysia. Institutions and Economies. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22452/IJIE.vol16no4.4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Kamis, R., Ismail, S. &, & Abd Rahman, N. H. (2023). A Study of Literature and Practical Gaps in e-Wallet Acceptance: The Case of Malaysia. Information Management and Business Review, 15(4 (SI)), 181–190. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v15i4(SI)I.3591 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kamis, R., Ismail, S., Harun, H., Awang, A. H., & Abidin, M. I. (2024). E-Wallets Unplugged: Navigating Benefits and Challenges in a Post-Pandemic World. Information Management and Business Review, 16(4(S)), 1–8. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v16i4(S)I.4266 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kamis, R., Ismail, S., Hayati, N., & Rahman, A. (2024). Cashless Civilization , e-Wallets , and Acceptance : Evidence from Low-Income Group in West Malaysia. ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 8(October), 14–29. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Leong, M. Y., & Kwan, J. H. (2021). Technology readiness and UTAUT2 in e-wallet adoption in a developing country. 1–13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ly, H. T. N., Khuong, N. V., & Son, T. H. (2022). Determinants Affect Mobile Wallet Continuous Usage in Covid 19 Pandemic: Evidence From Vietnam. Cogent Business and Management, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2041792 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Mahusin, M., & Prilliadi, H. (2025). Integrating Digital Payments in ASEAN : Harmonising Regulations and Strengthening Security for Inclusive Growth. 2024, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Muthusamy, G., Awang, A. H., Harun, H., Kamis, R., Bahtar, A. Z., Yazid, Z. A., & Daud, S. (2024). Modeling the technology readiness index (TRI) for the adoption of mobile payment technologies during the Covid-19 pandemic. AIP Conference Proceedings .AIP Publishing., Vol. 2799(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0183139 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. OECD/INFE Toolkit for Measuring Financial Literacy and Financial Inclusion 2022. (2022). OECD/INFE Toolkit for Measuring Financial Literacy and Financial Inclusion 2022. https://doi.org/10.1787/cbc4114f-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI): A Multiple-Item Scale to Measure Readiness to Embrace New Technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2, 307–320. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Purwatiningsih, A. P. (2025). Adoption of QRIS digital payment in Indonesia and Malaysia : A technology acceptance and knowledge perspective. 8(6), 704–713. https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v8i6.9670 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Rafiani, K. M., Yunanda, R. A. Y. U., & Rusmanto, T. (2024). DETERMINANTS OF QRIS USAGE AS A DIGITAL PAYMENT TOOL FOR MSMES. 102(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Rettobjaan, V. F. C., Widnyani, N. M., & Richadinata, K. R. (2023). THE INFLUENCE OF THE QRIS PAYMENT SYSTEM ON BUSINESS PERFORMANCE DENPASAR CITY MSMEs. Journal of Economics and Public Health, 2(4), 155–162. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.37287/jeph.v2i4.2643 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Shahen, A. M., & Sharaf, M. F. (2025). The Role of Digital Payment Technologies in Promoting Financial Inclusion : A Systematic Literature Review. 1–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Shukri, A. F. M., Leong, T. P., Rashid, A. A., & Hanif, A. (2024). The Moderating Role of Structural Assurance in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): A Study of E-wallet Behavioural Intention of Users and Non-users Among Adults in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Consumer and Family Economics, 33(1), 490–503. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.60016/majcafe.v33.18 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Syanova, R., & Fajar, A. N. (2024). Analysis of Factors That Influence Use Behaviour of Using Qris Payments for Umkm in Bekasi. 11(7), 324–341. https://doi.org/10.33168/JLISS.2024.0717 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Teo, S. C., Law, P. L., & Koo, A. C. (2020). FACTORS AFFECTING ADOPTION OF E-WALLETS AMONG YOUTHS IN MALAYSIA. 5(19), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.35631/JISTM.519004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Trianto, B., Azman, N., N.H., &, & Masrizal, M. (2025). E-payment adoption and utilization among micro-entrepreneurs: a comparative analysis between Indonesia and Malaysia. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 16(2), 314–343. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-12-2022-0207 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. UN Trade & Development. (2021). Digital Economy Report 2021. https://unctad.org/page/digital-economy-report-2021 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Van Schoubroeck, S., Chacon, L., Reynolds, A. M., Lavoine, N., Hakovirta, M., Gonzalez, R., Van Passel, S., & Venditti, R. A. (2023). Environmental sustainability perception toward obvious recovered waste content in paper-based packaging: An online and in-person survey best-worst scaling experiment. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 188(March 2022), 106682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106682 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Widyastuti, U., Respati, D. K., Dewi, V. I., & Mukti, A. (2024). The nexus of digital financial inclusion , digital financial literacy and demographic factors : lesson from Indonesia demographic factors : lesson from Indonesia. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2322778 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. World Bank Group. (2023). Malaysia Economic Monitor : Expanding Malaysia’s Digital Frontier. February. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099063502042320186/pdf/P179681008aa910db0bca9057d2dfa76bed.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Financial Technology (Fintech): Current Research at The Cutting Edge
• Reforming Corporate Governance in Malaysia to Address Fraudulent Financial Reporting Cases
• Stock Market Efficiency and Economic Diversification in Nigeria and South Africa
• Financial Stability and Financial Performance of Small and Medium Tiered Deposit Taking Savings and Credit Cooperatives in Kenya.
• Regulator Sandboxes for DeFi: A Comparative Analysis of Policy Effectiveness in the EU, US, and Asia Pacific