Digital finance has emerged as a transformative force at the intersection of technology and financial services, reshaping how individuals and institutions access, manage, and exchange value. As digital innovation accelerates globally, academic interest in digital finance has surged. This article synthesizes international research trends using Citespace knowledge mapping and qualitative analysis to present a comprehensive overview of current scholarship, identify key disparities between domestic and international studies, and project future research directions.
Current State of Digital Finance Research: A Global Overview
The evolution of digital finance reflects decades of technological advancement, from early applications of telegraph systems in global banking to the advent of ATMs in 1967—widely considered the starting point of modern fintech. However, it was not until the post-2008 financial crisis era that digital finance entered a phase of explosive growth, driven by regulatory reforms and rapid advancements in blockchain, artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and big data analytics.
In China, the rise of digital finance gained momentum after 2010, with 2013 often cited as the "year zero" due to the launch of Yu’e Bao. According to the Peking University Digital Inclusive Finance Index (Guo et al., 2020), China experienced sustained and rapid growth in digital financial development between 2011 and 2018. Mobile accessibility, cost efficiency, and user convenience have fueled widespread adoption across payments, credit, insurance, and investment platforms.
👉 Discover how blockchain is transforming financial ecosystems worldwide.
Research Trends Over Time
A bibliometric analysis using Citespace on SSCI and CSSCI journals from 2013 to April 2020 reveals two distinct phases in digital finance research:
- Growth Phase (2013–2017): During this period, both domestic and international publications increased steadily. International output rose from 31 papers in 2013 to 127 in 2017; Chinese scholarly contributions grew from 5 to around 50 over the same span.
- Explosion Phase (2017 onward): Post-2017 marked a surge in academic engagement. International publications grew at an average annual rate of 124% in 2018–2019, while China saw nearly 71% growth. By 2019, SSCI journals published 633 articles on digital finance compared to 146 in CSSCI.
Despite lower volume, Chinese research shows strong potential for expansion. The delayed but accelerating trajectory suggests increasing institutional support and real-world applicability driving scholarly inquiry.
Geographic Distribution and Academic Influence
Globally, scholars from 74 countries have contributed to digital finance research. The most frequent contributors—by keyword frequency—are:
- United States (378)
- China (276)
- United Kingdom (193)
However, centrality metrics reveal leadership in network influence: the U.S. (0.31), UK (0.28), Spain (0.24), France (0.22), and Australia (0.11) act as intellectual hubs connecting diverse research streams. While China ranks second in publication volume, its network centrality is relatively low (0.06), indicating room for greater global impact.
This gap highlights an opportunity: Chinese researchers produce significant work but remain less integrated into global academic discourse. Enhancing international collaboration could elevate China’s role in shaping theoretical frameworks.
Key Scholars and Institutional Collaboration
Leading Chinese scholars include Huang Yiping, Liao Li, Yang Dong, Su Qin, Yao Qian, and Hu Jinyan—affiliated with elite institutions such as Peking University, Tsinghua University, and the People's Bank of China. However, domestic collaborations tend to be limited in scope and frequency.
In contrast, international research networks are more interconnected. Prominent figures like Elie Bouri, David Roubaud, Brian Lucey, Shaen Corbet, Walid Mensi, and Rangan Gupta represent a geographically diverse yet tightly linked community spanning Lebanon, France, Ireland, Oman, and South Africa.
Core Research Themes in Digital Finance
Analysis of high-frequency keywords identifies three dominant research domains: network financing, digital currency, and digital financial regulation.
Network Financing: Bridging Borrowers and Lenders Online
Network financing eliminates traditional intermediaries through peer-to-peer (P2P) lending, crowdfunding, and microloans. Research focuses on three dimensions:
- Theoretical Mechanisms: Scholars explore platform design, incentive structures, and market dynamics. Western literature emphasizes crowdfunding models—including equity and donation-based—while Chinese research centers on P2P lending due to structural differences in capital markets.
- Investor Behavior: Studies examine factors influencing funding success and investor decision-making. Soft signals—such as borrower appearance (Duarte et al., 2012), narrative quality (Li et al., 2014), and social networks (Lin et al., 2013)—significantly affect outcomes despite information asymmetry.
- Economic Impact: Evidence suggests network financing enhances financial inclusion (Berger & Gleisner, 2009) and pressures traditional banks to innovate (Shen & Guo, 2015). However, risks such as default and fraud remain critical concerns.
Digital Currency: From Bitcoin to Central Bank Digital Currencies
Digital currencies exist in two forms: private cryptocurrencies (e.g., Bitcoin) and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).
Bitcoin, introduced by Nakamoto (2008), sparked extensive debate over its technical design, market behavior, and monetary properties. Key findings include:
- High volatility and speculative nature (Urquhart, 2016)
- Limited use as a transaction medium but potential as a hedge asset (Bouri et al., 2017)
- Privacy issues and illicit use risks (Meiklejohn et al., 2013)
In response to private innovation, central banks are exploring CBDCs. China leads with its DCEP (Digital Currency Electronic Payment) system—tested since 2019—featuring a “one coin, two wallets, three centers” framework (Yao & Tang, 2017). Other nations—including Sweden (eKrona) and Canada (CAD-coin)—are conducting feasibility studies.
Research on CBDCs remains nascent but focuses on:
- Motivations: improving payment efficiency and monetary policy transmission
- Design challenges: token vs account models, interest-bearing features
- Systemic implications: effects on financial stability and disintermediation
👉 Explore the future of decentralized payment systems powered by blockchain technology.
Digital Financial Regulation: Adapting Oversight to Innovation
As digital finance disrupts traditional models, regulators face new challenges:
- Risk Exposure: Innovations amplify operational, technological, and systemic risks (Yang Dong, 2018). P2P platforms pose credit risk; cryptocurrencies enable money laundering.
- Regulatory Lag: Legacy frameworks struggle with decentralized architectures and cross-border operations (Philippon, 2016).
- Innovative Solutions: Regulatory sandboxes, AI-driven monitoring ("RegTech"), and real-time data analytics offer paths forward (Zetzsche et al., 2017a).
There is growing consensus that regulation must balance innovation promotion with consumer protection and financial stability.
Gaps and Challenges in Existing Literature
Despite progress, several limitations persist:
Narrow Thematic Focus
Most studies concentrate on P2P lending, cryptocurrencies, and regulation—driven by:
- Early market maturity in these areas
- Data availability from platforms like Lending Club or blockchain ledgers
- High visibility of associated risks
Emerging areas such as AI-driven credit scoring or DeFi applications remain understudied due to data constraints or regulatory uncertainty.
Divergent Research Priorities Across Regions
- China: Focuses on network financing due to large consumer bases and robust e-commerce ecosystems.
- West: Prioritizes cryptocurrency research owing to earlier technological adoption and legal debates.
These differences reflect distinct developmental paths: Western fintech often supports existing institutions ("tech for finance"), whereas Chinese models frequently create new financial paradigms ("finance via tech").
Future Research Directions in Digital Finance
To advance understanding and policy relevance, future scholarship should expand into four key domains:
1. Demand-Side Impacts
How does digital finance reshape individual and institutional behavior?
- Does it alter household savings and investment patterns?
- Can it reduce SME financing constraints?
- What are its effects on cross-border trade settlement efficiency?
2. Supply-Side Transformation
How do digital platforms interact with traditional financial institutions?
- Is the relationship substitutive, complementary, or disruptive?
- How does fintech influence monetary policy transmission mechanisms?
3. Payment System Evolution
What role will CBDCs play in modern economies?
- Are they merely digital versions of cash or tools for macroeconomic management?
- Can they enhance capital flow monitoring and combat illicit outflows?
4. Regulatory Framework Design
How should oversight evolve?
- Should digital finance be treated as infrastructure or a standalone sector?
- How can regulatory boundaries adapt to hybrid financial-technology entities?
China’s shift from bottom-up innovation to top-down design—with DCEP testing beginning in 2020—signals a new phase requiring coherent regulatory philosophy.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: What is the difference between fintech and digital finance?
A: Fintech emphasizes technological innovation within finance, while digital finance is a broader term encompassing all digitally enabled financial services—including those provided by non-tech firms.
Q: Why does China focus more on P2P lending than cryptocurrencies?
A: Regulatory restrictions limit private crypto use in China. Meanwhile, vast unmet credit demand among SMEs and rural populations has made online lending highly relevant.
Q: Is Bitcoin considered real money by economists?
A: Most studies conclude Bitcoin lacks full monetary functions—it's highly volatile and rarely used for daily transactions—but it may serve as a speculative or hedging asset.
Q: How does Citespace help analyze research trends?
A: Citespace visualizes citation networks and keyword co-occurrence to identify hotspots, emerging themes, and influential authors across large academic datasets.
Q: What is RegTech?
A: RegTech refers to technologies—like AI and big data analytics—that improve compliance efficiency and regulatory oversight in financial markets.
Q: Can CBDCs replace physical cash completely?
A: While possible technically, full replacement depends on public trust, privacy safeguards, and infrastructure resilience—especially during crises.
👉 Learn how next-generation blockchain platforms are redefining secure digital transactions.
Conclusion
Digital finance represents one of the most dynamic frontiers in economics and technology. While current research offers valuable insights into network financing, cryptocurrencies, and regulatory adaptation, significant gaps remain—particularly regarding cross-border comparisons and long-term socioeconomic impacts.
China’s unique position—as both a leader in digital adoption and a cautious regulator—provides fertile ground for future inquiry. Leveraging its vast data resources through academia-industry partnerships can drive globally relevant findings. As digital finance evolves from disruption to integration, interdisciplinary research will be essential to guide sustainable innovation.
Core Keywords: digital finance, fintech, blockchain, CBDC, P2P lending, RegTech, digital currency, financial inclusion