Skip to main content

The microeconomics of mobile payments

NETNOMICS: Economic Research and Electronic Networking volume 20, pages 129–151 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

In this paper, a Kranzberg [32] - Lancaster [34] approach is employed to investigate the microeconomics of mobile payment methods. The adoption of these technical innovations depends, among others, on the acceptance by consumers that can be analyzed with a Lancaster characteristics demand. With a Kranzberg technology matrix, the technical and institutional details of payments can be transformed into salient characteristics of payment instruments that are relevant for Lancaster demand of payment methods. While cash and card-based payments are mostly Kranzberg-complete technologies, novel forms and means of mobile payments lack certain features, i.e., they are Kranzberg-incomplete innovations. Mobile payments are incomplete concerning technical, institutional and regulatory details. As a consequence, this incompleteness may result in a lack of acceptance on the side of consumers since certain salient characteristics of payment methods are not fully developed. In particular, mobile payments are neither widely accepted by merchants, nor are consumers’ data and privacy protected. Kranzberg-completion of novel mobile payments is required to make them universally successful.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. Of course, there are exceptions. For instance, in China, Japan, South Korea [41] mobile payments are widely used for certain kinds of payment. In addition, also in Kenya such payments are used, see [25]. However, because of their very different problems, in particular with infrastructure, developing countries are not considered here. – Moreover, Sweden intends to become the first country worldwide that abolishes cash as early as 2023 (Meissl Årebro [40]). A further step in the same direction is the so-called ‘e-Krona’ (electronic central bank money) project of the Swedish Riksbank (Sveriges Riksbank [55]). In contrast, as reported by Bech et al. [6], the demand for cash has been increasing worldwide, but its role is changing.

  2. Of course, there are countries where even cash payment methods and systems are Kranzberg-incomplete. However, the analysis of these methods and systems is not the topic of this paper.

  3. There are at least three comprehensive literature reviews on mobile payments research: [16, 17, 19].

  4. See [7] for the details of data collection. – In addition, note that the characteristics “mobility, reachability, compatibility and convenience” of [30] may be easily incorporated into the characteristics applied here. Moreover, the number of salient characteristics can be enlarged without difficulties, if necessary.

  5. Own translation of the following German notions in [20]: “Sicherheit vor finanziellem Verlust“, “Guter Überblick über Ausgaben“, “Einfache Nutzung“und “Vertrautheit“. For details of the empirical methods of data collection and the respective values of these items see the quoted source.

  6. For a complete table of variables and their meaning see the Appendix.

  7. Note that the relative price of mobile payments and cash payments consists mainly in the non-monetary costs of the (in)convenience of use. While cash, for instance, is ubiquitously accepted, mobile payment is not.

  8. As demonstrated by Dybvig and Spatt [21], in a static environment the government may induce agents to adopt a new technology – payment method –, by supplying a kind of insurance scheme for the case that not enough agents adopt the new technology. However, the government must know at least the preference distribution of agents concerning the technologies.

References

  1. Arvidsson, N. (2014). Consumer attitudes on mobile payment services – Results from a proof of concept test. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 32(2), 150–170.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Au, Y. A., & Kauffman, R. J. (2008). The economics of mobile payments: Understanding stakeholder issues for emerging financial technology application. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 141–144.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Azariadis, C. (1993). Intertemporal macroeconomics. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Oxford. UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balasubramanian, K., & Drake, D. F. (2015). Mobile Money: The Effect of Service Quality and Competition on Demand. Harvard Business School working paper 15-059.

  5. Basu, A., Mazumdar, T., & Raj, S. P. (2003). Indirect network externality effects on product attributes. Marketing Science, 22(2), 209–221.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bech, M., Umar, F., Ougaard, F., & Picillo, C. (2018). Payments are a-changin’ but cash still rules. BIS Quarterly Review, March, 67–80.

  7. Beutin, N., & Schadbach, D. (2017). Mobile payment report 2017. Düsseldorf: PricewaterhouseCoopers.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bleyen, V.-A., van Hove, L., & Hartmann, M. (2010). Classifying payment instruments: A matryoshka approach. Communications and Strategies, 79(9), 73–94.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Blumenstock, J. E., Callen, M., Ghani, T., & Koepke, L. (2015). Promises and pitfalls of mobile money in Afghanistan: Evidence from a randomized control trial. ICTD ‘15, May 15–18, 2015, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1145/2737856.2738031.

  10. Bounie, D., François, A., & van Hove, L. (2016). Merchant acceptance of payment cards: “Must take” or “wanna take”? Review of Network Economics, 15(3), 117–146.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bounie, D., François, A., & van Hove, L. (2017). Consumer payment preferences, network externalities, and merchant card acceptance: An empirical investigation. Review of Industrial Organization, 51(3), 257–290.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brito, J., & Castillo, A. (2013). Bitcoin. A primer for policymakers. Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

  13. Busch, P. (1998). Orthogonality and disjointness in spaces of measures. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 44, 215–224.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chaturvedi, V. (2014). Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication – The future of Mobile payments. Oracle white paper; Redwood Shores, CA, USA.

  15. Chintagunta, P. K., & Nair, H. S. (2011). Discrete-choice models of consumer demand in marketing. Management Science, 30(6), 977–996.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dahlberg, T., Guo, J., & Ondrus, J. (2015). A critical review of mobile payment research. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 14, 265–284.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N., Ondrus, J., & Zmijewska, A. (2008). Past, present and future of mobile payment research: A literature review. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 165–181.

    Google Scholar 

  18. de Kerviler, G., Demoulin, N. T. M., & Zidda, P. (2016). Adoption of in-store mobile payment: Are perceived risk and convenience the only drivers? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 334–344.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dennehy, D., & Sammon, D. (2015). Trends in mobile payments research: A literature review. Journal of Innovation Management, 3(1), 49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Deutsche Bundesbank. (2018). Zahlungsverhalten in Deutschland 2017. Frankfurt am Main: Deutsche Bundesbank.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dybvig, P. H., & Spatt, C. S. (1983). Adoption externalities as public goods. Journal of Public Economics, 20, 231–247.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Guo, J., & Bouwman, H. (2016). An analytical framework for an m-payment ecosystem: A merchants’ perspective. Telecommunications Policy, 40, 147–167.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Haneman, W. M. (1984). Discrete / continuous models of consumer demand. Econometrica, 52(3), 541–561.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hayashi, F. (2012). Mobile payments: What’s in it for consumers? Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Review, First Quarter 2012, 35–66.

  25. Jack, W., & Suri, T. (2011). Mobile money: The economics of M-PESA. MIT Sloan working paper of January, 2011.

  26. Jones, W. P., & Furnas, G. W. (1987). Pictures of relevance: A geometric analysis of similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38(6), 420–442.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Katz, M., & Shapiro, C. (1986). Network externalities, competition and compatibility. American Economic Review, 75, 424–440.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Katz, M., & Shapiro, C. (1992). Product introduction with network externalities. Journal of Industrial Economics, 40, 55–84.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kim, J., Allenby, G. M., & Rossi, P. E. (2002). Modeling consumer demand for variety. Marketing Science, 21(3), 229–250.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kim, C., Mirusmonov, M., & Lee, I. (2010). An empirical examination of factors influencing the intention to use mobile payment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 310–322.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Klein, D. J. (1995). Similarity and dissimilarity in posets. Journal of Mathematical Chemistry, 18, 321–348.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kranzberg, M. (1986). Technology and history: “Kranzberg’s laws”. Technology and Culture, 27(3), 544–560.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Koulayev, S., Rysman, M., Schuh, S., & Stavins, J. (2016). Explaining adoption and use of payment instruments by US consumers. RAND Journal of Economics, 47(2), 293–325.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lancaster, K. (1971). Consumer demand: A new approach. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Leibbrandt, J. G. (2004). Payment systems and network effects. Proefschrift: Universiteit Maastricht.

  36. Liébana-Cabanillas, F., & Lara-Rubio, J. (2017). Predictive and exploratory modeling regarding adoption of mobile payment systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 120, 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Liu, Z., Ben, S., & Zhang, R. (2019). Factors affecting consumers‘ mobile payment behavior: A meta-analysis. Electronic Commerce Research, 19, 575–601.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lu, Y., Yang, S., Chau, P. Y. K., & Cao, Y. (2011). Dynamics between the trust transfer process and intention to use mobile payment services: A cross-environment perspective. Information & Management, 48, 393–403.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mallat, N. (2007). Exploring consumer adoption of mobile payments – A qualitative study. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16, 413–432.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Meissl Årebro, I. (2019). In Schweden ist das Ende des Bargelds noch näher als anderswo. Internet URL: https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/schweden-cash-ist-nicht-mehr-koenig-ld.1504526 [October 17, 2019].

  41. Miao, M., & Jayakar, K. (2016). Mobile payments in Japan, South Korea and China: Cross-border convergence or divergence of business models? Telecommunications Policy, 40, 182–196.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Oliveira, T., Thomas, M., Baptista, G., & Campos, F. (2016). Mobile payment: Understanding the determinants of consumer adoption and intention to recommend the technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 404–414.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ozcan, P., & Santos, F. M. (2015). The market that never was: Turf wars and failed alliances in mobile payments. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1486–1512.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Pousttchi, K., Schiessler, M., & Wiedemann, D. G. (2009). Proposing a comprehensive framework for analysis and engineering of mobile payment business models. Information Systems & e-Business Management, 7, 363–393.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Prinz, A. (1999). Money in the real and the virtual world: E-money, c-money and the demand for cb-money. Netnomics, 1, 11–35.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Qasim, H., & Abu-Shanab, E. (2016). Drivers of mobile payment acceptance: The impact of network externalities. Information Systems Frontiers, 18, 1021–1034.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ratchford, B. T. (1978). Operationalizing economic models of demand for product characteristics. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(1), 76–85.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ruch, E., Schranner, R., & Seligman, T. H. (1978). The mixing distance. Journal of Chemical Physics, 69(1), 386–392.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Rysman, M., & Wright, J. (2015). The economics of payment cards. Review of Network Economics, 13(3), 303–353.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Schierz, P. G., Schilke, O., & and Wirtz, B. W. (2010). Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: An empirical analysis. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9, 209–216.

  51. Schuh, S., & Stavins, J. (2013). How consumers pay: Adoption and use of payments. Accounting and Finance Research, 2(2), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Schuh, S., & Stavins, J. (2016). How do speed and security influence consumers’ payment behavior? Contemporary Economic Policy, 34(4), 595–613.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Shy, O. (1996). Technology revolutions in the presence of network externalities. International Journal of Industrial Economics, 14, 785–800.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Shy, O. (2001). The economics of network industries. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press.

  55. Sveriges Riksbank (2017). The Riksbank’s e-krona project. Stockholm.

  56. Van Hove, L. (1999). Electronic money and the network externalities theory: Lessons for real life. Netnomics, 1, 137–171.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. G. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Whitehead, A. N. (1925/1950). Science in the modern world. Lowell lectures 1925. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Yang, S., Lu, Y., Gupta, S., Cao, Y., & and Zhang, R. (2012). Mobile payment services adoption across time: An empirical study of the effects of behavioral beliefs, social influences, and personal traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 129–142.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Extensive and very useful comments on three earlier versions of this paper from four anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowleged. In addition, I thank Steffen Bollacke for support with text editing. The usual disclaimer applies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Public Economics, Muenster School of Business and Economics, University of Muenster, Wilmergasse 6-8, 48143, Muenster, Germany

    Aloys Prinz

Authors
  1. Aloys Prinz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aloys Prinz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 1 Table of variables
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prinz, A. The microeconomics of mobile payments. Netnomics 20, 129–151 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11066-019-09137-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11066-019-09137-0

Keywords

  • Payment methods and systems
  • Salient characteristics
  • Vector similarity
  • Kranzberg’s laws
  • Kranzberg-complete technology packages
  • Network externalities

JEL classification

  • D02
  • D04
  • D10
  • D62
  • O32
  • O33