Next Article in Journal
A Study of the Machine Learning Approach and the MGARCH-BEKK Model in Volatility Transmission
Next Article in Special Issue
How Can European Regulation on ESG Impact Business Globally?
Previous Article in Journal
COVID-19 and the Mortgage Market in Luxembourg
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JRFM
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/jrfm15030115
jrfm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Impact of Financial Innovation and Institutional Quality on Financial Development in Emerging Markets

by
Suha Mahmoud Alawi
1,
Wajih Abbassi
2,
Rukhma Saqib
3,* and
Madeeha Sharif
3
1
Finance Department, Faculty of Economics and Administration, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21422, Saudi Arabia
2
College of Business and Economics, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia
3
Bahria Business School, Bahria University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2022, 15(3), 115; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15030115
Submission received: 15 January 2022 / Revised: 16 February 2022 / Accepted: 17 February 2022 / Published: 2 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Sustainable Accounting and Finance)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Financial innovation and institutional quality play a key role in financial development. This study investigates the impact of financial innovation and institutional quality on financial development in an emerging markets setting. We used the sample of 17 emerging markets based on the availability of data from the period 1990–2020. Data were extracted from the World Development Indicator database. In this study, panel unit root, fully modified ordinary least squares and Pedroni Integration tests were applied to analyze the data. We find that financial innovation and institutional quality are significantly and positively related to financial development. Better financial innovation increases financial development, whereas low institutional quality in an emerging market can deteriorate financial development.

1. Introduction

The financial sector plays a central role in economic growth during the distribution of insufficient economic resources. Financial development has been described as policies, factors and institutions that accelerate the effectiveness and efficiency of financial market intermediation (Kutan et al. 2017). Financial development is a method of attaining financial innovation, institutional and organizational improvements in a financial system (Khan et al. 2019a). Many recent studies over the last decade have demonstrated a relationship between financial innovation and economic development (Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli 2019). Financial innovation contributes to economic growth by enabling capital mobilization, effective financial intermediation, capital formation, and generally improved effectiveness in financial institutions. As a result, financial innovation is seen as a key driver of financial development (Laeven et al. 2015). Financial innovation, like other types of innovation, is a constant act of integrating changes in the financial sector by improving and diversifying financial goods and procedures (Ang and Kumar 2014). The introduction of new financial resources and infrastructure into the financial system boosts financial services performance and capital market developments, ultimately enhancing growth in the economy (Nazir et al. 2021).
A growing number of studies have shown that institutional quality improves economic growth. In this regard, Kutan et al. (2017) report the role of institutional quality (IQ) by employing data from 21 Middle East and North African countries, in the context of financial development (FD) and economic growth, and show that FD stimulates economic development only in the presence of IQ. A well-developed IQ often contributes to economic growth because it reflects the momentum of economic growth and development (Wang et al. 2014). Furthermore, technological developments are shown as the most considerable components that influence the growth and development of innovation. A sound financial structure is vital for encouraging a country’s technological advancement and economic growth. Financial innovation needs a valuable financial market for reducing and assigning limited resources and for reducing financial costs (Ullah 2019). Financial innovation and institution quality play a dynamic role in financial development. In recent years, researchers have shown much interest in financial innovation. Several researchers have found that more innovative firms grow faster. Innovation helps the firms to increase their efficiency, grow markets and hold their leadership according to market requirements (Ullah 2019). In terms of institution quality, Law et al. (2014), argue that weak institutions appear to distort financial intermediaries’ ability to effectively channel capital to fund productive activities.
There are limited studies on the impact of financial innovation and institutional quality on financial development, especially in emerging markets. There is a lack of enough support to analyze financial development based on these two factors together in the perspective of emerging markets. Emerging economies are not as advanced as the economies of G7 and EU countries. Compared to G7 and EU countries, the financial development in emerging markets does not have a developed structure (Arouri et al. 2013). However, emerging economies are in a delicate stage of fast development in which institutional integrity is critical in nurturing profitable outcomes from a quickly growing financial industry. As per Law et al. (2014), nations with varying rates of institutional development exhibit different extents of FD, which may be related to their institutional excellence standard limits. However, Le et al. (2016) contend that institutional quality promotes financial intermediation. As a result, due to the sensitive nature of financial innovations, institutional ownership and financial development in developing economies, this research adds to the current domain of research by offering evidence from emerging regions. Thus, the objective of the study is to analyze the impact of financial innovation on financial development and to determine how institutional quality is related to financial development in emerging markets.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides the literature review and develops hypotheses, and Section 3 outlines the methodology. Section 4 presents the results and Section 5 concludes the study.

2. Literature Review

FD is an essential component of economic growth, and a well-functioning financial system contributes to economic prosperity (Malarvizhi et al. 2019). The financial sector is critical in allocating limited financial resources, and the financial initiatives taken in this system contribute to economic growth (Nyasha and Odhiambo 2017; Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli 2019). According to Wang and Tan (2021), financial innovation and institutional advancements in a financial system decrease the amount of information asymmetry, strengthen market conformance, assist intermediaries engaging in monetary operations through (direct or indirect) agreements, streamline operations, and enhance competitiveness. As a result, the scope of FD brings improvements to banking sector services, institutions and enterprises, in addition to the non-banking financial system and equity markets. According to Greenwood et al. (2010), FD permits credit distribution between enterprises, improving investment effectiveness and performance. According to Han and Shen (2015), rapid FD leads to overall factor productivity improvement by eliminating the discrepancies in resource allocation.
A stable and well-functioning financial sector has been a major driving force behind economic development (Ehigiamusoe and Samsurijan 2021). Such a sector creates local savings, which in turn leads to successful local business investments. Consequently, the financial sector has provided the basics for income growth and job creation. According to Tamara et al. (2019), regulation and innovation have a complicated relationship because regulation is the main cause of financial innovation, while innovation is often central to a need for novel guidelines. To be more specific, financial innovation is fueled by technological advancements that alter the financial products, and services and manufacturing processes (Gu et al. 2021). Moreover, businesses enhance financial innovation to increase their competitive advantages.
According to North (1990), institutions are incredibly essential in financial development and have categorized institutions as the norms in a country, comprising institutions and bodies, codes of conduct and behaviors, that are vital for the developmental process. Furthermore, Knack and Keefer (1995) argue that institutional quality boosts the financial system. Some studies, by comparison, show that the democratic control of banks, political economy, and trade openness affect financial development. Furthermore, Arcand et al. (2015) demonstrate that increased financial integration can impede actual economic growth. The effects of foreign investment and trade openness on economic growth are hampered by institutional quality, whereas improvement can reduce the difficulty brought about by trade liberalization to the degree that FDIs resist increasing their spill-over impact (Huynh et al. 2020). A high-quality institutional framework contributes to the growth of the financial system. The quality of governance is critical for a country’s financial sector growth (North 1991). The expansion of financial institutions increases the number of financial services and stimulates economic progress.
The influence of the institutional quality on the financial growth of various areas and nations has been measured by numerous studies. Quality institutions, openness, and transparency, according to Levine and Zervos (1998), are key contributors to financial development. Similarly, Law et al. (2014) discovered that financial sector development and institutional connections are interdependent but in varied contexts. Moreover, Hunjra et al. (2020) recognized that trade and financial integration foster financial growth, whereas low-quality institutions have a detrimental impact on financial development. However, Malarvizhi et al. (2019) discovered that institutional quality has a significant impact on banking sector growth, which in turn boosts financial advancement. Furthermore, Ma and Jalil (2008) discovered a stronger impact of the connection between the deposit ratio and private sector lending on economic development in Pakistan and China. Furthermore, a country’s financial structure encourages technical advancements by providing resources to entrepreneurs, which leads to an increase in growth in the economy (Becker et al. 2012).
In financial prudence, institutional quality is the center of the performance of the financial sector. The literature shows a positive relationship between institutional quality and financial development. In promoting financial development, institutional quality has gained much attention from researchers in different studies. Khan et al. (2019b) find a positive and significant relation between institutional quality and financial development. Further, it is argued that emerging economies are facing challenges in the expansion of institutional and financial environments. Economies differ in terms of the institution and financial capabilities. Due to the following reasons, countries must focus to learn from the rapidly changing and growing economies. Fagbemi and Ajibike (2018) find that institutional quality influences financial development. In the presence of other factors, Khan et al. (2019b) find that financial development is positively and significantly driven by institutional quality. For financial development, high-quality institutions play an important role. Therefore, to establish stabilized reforms, the study imposed pressure on policymakers to deal with risk and uncertainty. Financial institutions and financial markets are the main pillars of the financial sector and need to be equally monitored (Abrar et al. 2021). This study argued that institutional quality is one of the major components to foster FD.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
Institutional quality positively affects financial development.
To identify the relation between financial innovation (FI) and financial development (FD), a large amount of research has been carried out. Financial innovation-led growth, and the elements of expenditure of R&D, financial innovation (FI), transfer of technology, networking and talent, have been recognized as significant factors that promote FI (Zhu et al. 2020). Many empirical investigations have proven that financial services strengthen the economy when seen through the lens of Schumpeterian endogenous growth theory (Dosi et al. 2010). Financial services, according to King and Levine (1993), extend financial activities, raise the pace of wealth generation, and promote financial development; the emergence of new financial services into a financial sector is the primary outcome of financial innovation. Financial innovation plays a vital role in financial development through boosting financial efficiency in financial institutions. Financial innovation promotes financial growth by delivering new financial products, enhancing economic resource mobilization through efficient payment systems, lowering investment risks, and speeding capital creation. As a result, financial innovation is viewed as a financial growth engine in both developed and emerging nations. According to Bayar and Gavriletea (2018) the expansion of the financial sector accelerates cross-country commerce, wealth creation, and accumulation of capital in an economy. Meanwhile, Hunjra et al. (2018) suggest that financial-sector expansion lowers asymmetric information costs and improves resource mobilization, hence enhancing economic growth.
The literature presents four main possibilities to describe the relationship between financial innovation and financial development. First, the supply-leading hypothesis argues that financial innovation may have a favorable impact on the economic growth of the country. This theory proposes that financial innovation promotes economic growth by hastening the processes of wealth creation, increasing the effectiveness of financial firms, strengthening financial products, and making financial intermediation more efficient. Kirch and Terra (2012) discovered that effective financial intermediation has a substantial impact on Nigerian economic development. Second, according to the demand-leading concept, economic expansion leads to financial innovations in a country. According to this hypothesis, the expansion of business activities, the advancement of the real sector, and expanded domestic and global trade place stress on financial systems to boost payment systems, make financial firms more cost effective, and broaden capital instruments to minimize earnings volatility. Third, the feedback hypothesis indicates that financial innovation and economic development are bidirectionally related. Moch (2013), by comparison, found no correlation between financial innovation and economic development.
Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli (2019) found that FI is an important factor for financial development that led to economic growth. Higher financial innovation is associated with higher macro-economic growth. According to Khan et al. (2020), the Chinese government focused on financial innovation using an initiative called “Made in China 2025” to overcome the challenges, develop a strong financial market and foster economic growth. They asserted that technology innovation is a leading factor that encourages financial sector development, and technological invention, which could be more effective because it would subsidize financial sector development. Financial innovation and financial development are positively linked, and their impact increases with the increase in the time horizon. Ozili (2018) indicate a positive effect of financial innovation on financial development in advanced and emerging markets; the expediency of digital finance, and the opportunities it provides to individuals with low and variable income, are often more valuable to them than the higher cost they pay to accomplish receive services from conventional regulated banks. Rajapathirana and Hui (2018) find that financial innovation positively influences FD. Ramanathan et al. (2018) state that FI improves the FD of firms. According to Bekhet and Latif (2018), FI is crucial for balanced growth and FD. Based on the above discussion the following hypothesis is developed.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Financial innovation positively affects financial development.

3. Materials and Methods

We aim to explore the impact of institutional quality and financial innovation on financial development in selected emerging markets. We extracted panel data of 17 emerging market economies (See Appendix A) from the World Development Indicator (WDI) database for the years 1990–2020. We used a set of control variables, i.e., economic growth (EG), trade openness (TO) and foreign direct investment (FDI) based on the extant literature on the topic of financial development. Nyasha and Odhiambo (2017) find a positive and significant relationship between EG and FD. Nieminen (2020) finds that trade openness expands FD. Alsmadi and Oudat (2019) affirmed a positive relationship between FD and FDI in Bahrain. Aibai et al. (2019) show that FDI positively affects financial development and can improve the financial sector’s development including financial markets. The variables’ description is given in Table 1.
( FD ) i , t = α + β 1 ( FINV ) i , t + β 2 ( IQ ) i , t + γ 1 ( EG ) i , t + γ 2 ( TO ) i , t + γ 3 ( FDI ) i , t + μ i , t
where FD is financial development, FI is financial innovation, IQ is institutional quality, EG stands for economic growth, FDI is a foreign direct investment and TO represents trade openness.
We used the panel unit root test in this study to predict the stationarity of data. The use of panel data unit root tests has become widespread among empirical researchers, and is now a generally recognized argument. Panel unit root tests are used to test the null hypothesis of a unit root for each individual in a panel. These are more powerful than standard time-series unit root tests (Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli 2019), and provide numerous compensations for cross-sectional or time-series data. The panel unit root test has cross-sectional measurements, where subscripts represent individuals, corporations, and republics. It raises the number of freedom levels and trust levels in the obtained outcomes (Choi 2001). Panel data models can be investigated as two main groups: dynamic models, where the past values of the variables are involved; and static models, where past values of the variables are not included in the models (Bond 2002).
The Pedroni cointegration test is widely used in panel data regression analysis because it takes care of cross-sectional dependence, especially where the countries have the same outlook (i.e., economic, social, political, etc.). Pedroni suggests numerous tests for cointegration that allow for mixed intercepts and trend coefficients across cross-sections (Pedroni 1999). The test classifies setups where two or more non-stationary time series are integrated in a way that they cannot diverge from the equilibrium in the long term. These tests are used to classify the degree of sensitivity of two variables to the same average price over a definite period. They allow for the prospect of multiple structural breaks both in the level and trend of a cointegrated panel regression (Malarvizhi et al. 2019).
The fully modified least squares (FM-OLS) method provides optimum estimates of cointegration regressions (Phillips and Hansen 1990). This method is used to account for serial correlation impacts. The FM-OLS produces consistent estimation for a small sample size and provides a check for robustness of the results (Kheifets and Phillips 2021). The FMOLS method is used for approximating a single co-integrating relationship that has a grouping of I (1). To attain asymptotic effectiveness, this technique adapts least squares to account for serial correlation and test for the endogeneity in the regressors that result from the presence of co-integrating relationships. We do not run it on I (0), which is a stationary series.

4. Results

We report the results of the unit root test, Pedroni integration test, and fully modified least squares test in this section.
In Table 2, the panel unit root test is applied and the results of the panel unit root test taken from Im et al. (2003) for the level and first-difference series of FD, FI, EG, FDI, TO and IQ are presented. According to the Im et al. (2003) test, for all variables, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected at a 1% significance level. Thus, it is rejected by taking the first-difference level, which at 1% significance for all variables, means their probability value is less than the significance level. As this is the precondition of fully modified least squares (FM-OLS), the stationarity of all variables should be at the first difference. In conclusion, the unit root test for panel analysis rejected the hypothesis at the first difference and shows that stationarity of all variables exists for order one.
In Table 3, to determine the existence of a long-run relationship among variables and after establishing the stationary of these variables, panel Pedroni cointegration techniques were applied because this approach resolves cross-sectional dependencies, especially where the countries have the same outlook (Pedroni 1999). Two models were constructed using panel Pedroni cointegration. We find that variables selected in the models are cointegrated at the significance levels 1% and 5%.
We report the main hypotheses results in Table 4. We find that financial innovation and institutional quality have a significant positive impact on financial development. When financial innovation is carried out in the long run, it complements the emerging markets and gives a boost to the financial development of emerging markets. A positive relationship between financial innovation (proxied via R&D expenditure) and financial development suggests that, the more countries spend on R&D activities, and hence the promotion of financial innovation, the greater the financial development. In addition, institutional quality shows a positive and significant impact on financial development. Moreover, economic growth and FDI also show a positive and significant relationship with financial development. In contrast, trade openness shows an insignificant and negative relation with financial development.

5. Discussion

Our findings support Hypothesis 2 and are aligned with the studies of Akcali and Sismanoglu (2015), Centobelli et al. (2019), and Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli (2019), who also found a favorable impact of R&D spending on economic growth, and thereby on financial development, in both developed and developing nations. They contend that financial innovation fosters economic growth by introducing new financial products, improves business utilization of resources through streamlined financial transactions, and reduces potential losses. It was verified by Zhu et al. (2020) that financial innovation (FI) is driven by R&D spending, the transfer of technology and networking, and talent among the constituents of FI. According to Schumpeterian endogenous growth theory, financial services boost the economy, as shown in several empirical studies (Dosi et al. 2010). As a means of improving the efficiency of financial institutions, financial innovation is critical to the advancement of the financial sector. New financial products, improved payment methods, decreased investment risks, and a faster rate of capital generation are all examples of financial innovation at work. In advanced and developing countries alike, financial innovation is therefore seen as a source of financial growth. Our findings support the supply-leading theory, which asserts that financial innovation may have a beneficial effect on the country’s economic growth. By accelerating the formation of wealth, enhancing the efficacy of financial enterprises, improving financial products, and making financial intermediation more efficient, this theory asserts that financial innovation fosters economic growth.
Although the results suggest that institutional quality has a positive impact on financial development, these results also indicate that the improvement in the quality of institutions in developing countries has a positive impact on financial development and the overall economy. These outcomes are also supported by the studies of Ehigiamusoe and Samsurijan (2021), Hunjra et al. (2021), and Khan et al. (2020), and also supports Hypothesis 1. According to this previous research, institutions are critical for financial development to drive economic growth since institutional structures can alleviate or exacerbate the informational divergences and processing fees that define financial sector development. Quality institutions, fairness, and transparency are crucial factors in financial growth according to these studies. Similar findings were made in the banking sector and institutional interconnections by Law et al. (2014), who found that the two are interconnected, although in different situations. Economic growth is stimulated by a country’s financial system, which makes it easier for entrepreneurs to invest in new technologies and products. Consequently, they assert that institutions are critical to financial growth and have categorized institutions as the country’s governing bodies that are crucial for the development process. They state that the financial system is bolstered by the quality of institutions.
The results tell us that foreign direct investment needs to be increasingly promoted to improve financial development. Economic growth plays a vital role in improving financial development in emerging markets. These results are supported by Aibai et al. (2019) and Hunjra et al. (2021). Increasing trade openness does not positively affect financial development; rather, it can result in emerging markets encountering more risk and burden. This shows that trade openness is not contributing to the financial development of emerging markets although these markets are engaged in greater openness of trade over time. The insignificant outcomes of the relationship between trade openness and financial development are also reported by Thi Thuy and Nguyen Trong (2021). Some studies have shown that democratic oversight of banks, FDI, and trade openness have an impact on financial development. Our results are in line with these findings. Increased financial integration, according to Arcand et al. (2015), can actually inhibit economic progress. Economic development is slowed by poor institutional quality, which may be improved to lessen the difficulties caused by trade liberalization, and hence prevent FDIs from increasing their impact on the economy (Huynh et al. 2020). The expansion of the financial system is facilitated by a strong institutional foundation. Developing a country’s financial industry needs good governance. The rise of financial institutions improves the quantity of financial services available, which in turn boosts the economy.

6. Conclusions

The financial innovation and quality of institutions have an important role in the financial development of emerging markets. The main purpose of the study was to investigate the impact of financial innovation and institutional quality on financial development by considering 17 emerging markets for the period of 1990–2020. Our results show that financial innovation and institutional quality have a positive and significant impact on financial development. Although economic growth and FDI have a positive impact on financial development, trade openness has an insignificant impact on financial development. Institutional quality enhances the long-term welfare of the nation because countries with high institutional quality have better financial development systems. In addition, there is a need for proper management of innovation (technological or financial) decisions because inefficient innovation management can hamper financial development. It is recommended that higher reliance on improvement in the current processes of institutions and innovation in financial development could help emerging economies to meet future needs and to stay competitive in markets. A long-term increase in economic growth can be achieved through encouraging financial innovation and improving institutional quality. Investing in technology and infrastructure to assist financial innovation may be one way to help the financial sector spread and absorb new ideas. Regulators should help foster financial innovation and institutional quality by supporting and articulating institutional and financial policy. Many other indicators of financial development, i.e., the role of environmental quality, CSR, and corporate governance, could be used in future research. Moreover, this study is important from emerging countries’ perspectives. This study may be extended by including developed and BRIC economies, and providing a comparative analysis of developed and emerging economies.

Author Contributions

S.M.A.; methodology, R.S. and W.A.; software and formal analysis R.S., M.S. and S.M.A.; investigation, W.A.; data curation, S.M.A.; writing-original draft preparation, M.S., R.S. and W.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the anonymous referees, managing editor, guest editor and editor in chief for their constructive feedback to improve the quality of our work.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A. List of Sample Countries

List of Sample Countries
1. Argentina 7. Iran 13. Saudi Arabia
2. Brazil 8. Korea (rep) 14. South Africa
3. China 9. Mexico 15. Taiwan
4. Egypt 10. Nigeria 16. Thailand
5. India 11. Poland 17. Turkey
6. Indonesia 12. Russia

References

  1. Abrar, Afsheen, Iftekhar Hasan, and Rezaul Kabir. 2021. Finance-growth nexus and banking efficiency: The impact of microfinance institutions. Journal of Economics and Business 114: 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Aibai, Abuduwali, Xianjing Huang, Yu Luo, and Yuchao Peng. 2019. Foreign Direct Investment, Institutional Quality, and Financial Development along the Belt and Road: An Empirical Investigation. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 55: 3275–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Akcali, Burcay Yasar, and Elcin Sismanoglu. 2015. Innovation and the effect of research and development (R&D) expenditure on growth in some developing and developed countries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 195: 768–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Alsmadi, Ayman Abdalmajeed, and Mohammad Salem Oudat Oudat. 2019. The effect of foreign direct investment on financial development: Empirical evidence from Bahrain. Ekonomski Pregled 70: 22–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ang, James B., and Sanjesh Kumar. 2014. Financial development and barriers to the cross-border diffusion of financial innovation. Journal of Banking & Finance 39: 43–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Arcand, Jean Louis, Enrico Berkes, and Ugo Panizza. 2015. Too much finance? Journal of Economic Growth 20: 105–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Arouri, Mohamed El Hedi, Sabri Boubaker, and Duc Khuong Nguyen, eds. 2013. Emerging Markets and the Global Economy: A Handbook. Cambridge: Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bayar, Yilmaz, and Marius Dan Gavriletea. 2018. Foreign Direct Investment Inflows and Financial Development in Central and Eastern European Union Countries: A Panel Cointegration and Causality. International Journal of Financial Studies 6: 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Becker, Markus C., Thorbjørn Knudsen, and Richard Swedberg. 2012. Schumpeter’s Theory of Economic Development: 100 years of development. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 22: 917–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bekhet, Hussain Ali, and Nurul Wahilah Abdul Latif. 2018. The impact of technological innovation and governance institution quality on Malaysia’s sustainable growth: Evidence from a dynamic relationship. Technology in Society 54: 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bond, Stephen R. 2002. Dynamic panel data models: A guide to micro data methods and practice. Portuguese Economic Journal 1: 141–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Centobelli, Piera, Roberto Cerchione, and Rajwinder Singh. 2019. The impact of leanness and innovativeness on environmental and financial performance: Insights from Indian SMEs. International Journal of Production Economics 212: 111–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Choi, In. 2001. Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance 20: 249–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dosi, Giovanni, Giorgio Fagiolo, and Andrea Roventini. 2010. Schumpeter meeting Keynes: A policy-friendly model of endogenous growth and business cycles. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 34: 1748–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Ehigiamusoe, Kizito Uyi, and Mohamad Shaharudin Samsurijan. 2021. What matters for the finance-growth nexus? A critical survey of macroeconomic stability, institutions, financial and economic development. International Journal of Finance & Economics 26: 5302–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Fagbemi, Fisayo, and John Oluwasegun Ajibike. 2018. Institutional Quality and Financial Sector Development: Empirical Evidence from Nigeria. American Journal of Business and Management 7: 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Greenwood, Jeremy, Juan M. Sanchez, and Cheng Wang. 2010. Financing development: The role of information costs. American Economic Review 100: 1875–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gu, Jianqiang, Kostas Gouliamos, Oana-Ramona Lobonţ, and Moldovan Nicoleta-Claudia. 2021. Is the fourth industrial revolution transforming the relationship between financial development and its determinants in emerging economies? Technological Forecasting and Social Change 165: 120563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Han, Jian, and Yanzhi Shen. 2015. Financial development and total factor productivity growth: Evidence from China. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 51: S261–S274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hunjra, Ahmed Imran, Husnain Mehmood, and Haroon Bakari. 2018. Co-movement between macroeconomic variables and capital flight. Asian Economic and Financial Review 8: 1185–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Hunjra, Ahmed Imran, Murugesh Arunachalam, and Mahnoor Hanif. 2021. Financial Development-Economic Growth Nexus: Theoretical Underpinnings, Empirical Evidence, and Critical Reflections. In Economic Growth and Financial Development. Cham: Springer, pp. 155–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hunjra, Ahmed Imran, Tahar Tayachi, Muhammad Irfan Chani, Peter Verhoeven, and Asad Mehmood. 2020. The moderating effect of institutional quality on the financial development and environmental quality nexus. Sustainability 12: 3805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Huynh, Cong Minh, Vu Hong Thai Nguyen, Hoang Bao Nguyen, and Phuc Canh Nguyen. 2020. One-way effect or multiple-way causality: Foreign direct investment, institutional quality and shadow economy? International Economics and Economic Policy 17: 219–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Im, Kyung So, M. Hashem Pesaran, and Yongcheol Shin. 2003. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics 115: 53–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Khan, Muhammad Asif, Dongmin Kong, Junyi Xiang, and Jian Zhang. 2019a. Impact of Institutional Quality on Financial Development: Cross-Country Evidence based on Emerging and Growth-Leading Economies. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 15: 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Khan, Muhammad Asif, Muhammad Atif Khan, Mohamued Elyas Abdulahi, Idrees Liaqat, and Sayyed Sadaqat Hussain Shah. 2019b. Institutional quality and financial development: The United States perspective. Journal of Multinational Financial Management 49: 67–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Khan, Hayat, Sher Khan, and Fan Zuojun. 2020. Institutional Quality and Financial Development: Evidence from Developing and Emerging Economies. Global Business Review 1: 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kheifets, Igor L., and Peter C. B. Phillips. 2021. Fully modified least squares cointegrating parameter estimation in multicointegrated systems. Journal of Econometrics, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. King, Robert G., and Ross Levine. 1993. Finance and growth: Schumpeter might be right. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 108: 717–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kirch, Guilherme, and Paulo Renato Soares Terra. 2012. Determinants of corporate debt maturity in South America: Do institutional quality and financial development matter? Journal of Corporate Finance 18: 980–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Knack, Stephen, and Philip Keefer. 1995. Institutions and economic performance: Cross-country tests using alternative institutional measures. Economics & Politics 7: 207–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kutan, Ali M., Nahla Samargandi, and Kazi Sohag. 2017. Does Institutional Quality Matter for Financial Development and Growth? Further Evidence from MENA Countries. Australian Economic Papers 56: 228–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Laeven, Luc, Ross Levine, and Stelios Michalopoulos. 2015. Financial innovation and endogenous growth. Journal of Financial Intermediation 24: 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Law, Siong Hook, Hui Boon Tan, and W. N. W. Azman-Saini. 2014. Financial development and income inequality at different levels of institutional quality. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 50: 21–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Le, Thai-Ha, Jungsuk Kim, and Minsoo Lee. 2016. Institutional quality, trade openness, and financial sector development in Asia: An empirical investigation. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 50: 1047–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Levine, Ross, and Sara Zervos. 1998. Stock markets, banks, and economic growth. American Economic Review 88: 537–58. [Google Scholar]
  37. Ma, Ying, and Abdul Jalil. 2008. Financial development, economic growth and adaptive efficiency: A comparison between China and Pakistan. China & World Economy 16: 97–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Malarvizhi, Chinnasamy Agamudai Nambhi, Yashar Zeynali, Abdullah Al Mamun, and Ghazali Bin Ahmad. 2019. Financial development and economic growth in ASEAN-5 countries. Global Business Review 20: 57–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Moch, Nils. 2013. Competition in fragmented markets: New evidence from the German banking industry in the light of the subprime crisis. Journal of Banking and Finance 37: 2908–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mollaahmetoğlu, Ebubekir, and Burçay Yaşar Akçalı. 2019. The Missing-Link between Financial Development and Economic Growth: Financial Innovation. Procedia Computer Science 158: 696–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nazir, Muhammad Rizwan, Yong Tan, and Muhammad Imran Nazir. 2021. Financial innovation and economic growth: Empirical evidence from China, India and Pakistan. International Journal of Finance & Economics 26: 6036–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Nieminen, Mika. 2020. Multidimensional financial development, exporter behavior and export diversification. Economic Modelling 93: 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. North, Douglass C. 1990. A transaction cost theory of politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics 2: 355–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. North, Douglass C. 1991. Institutions, ideology, and economic performance. Cato Journal 11: 477. [Google Scholar]
  45. Nyasha, Sheilla, and Nicholas M. Odhiambo. 2017. Banks, Stock Market Development and Economic Growth in Kenya: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of African Business 18: 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ozili, Peterson K. 2018. Impact of digital finance on financial inclusion and stability. Borsa Istanbul Review 18: 329–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Pedroni, Peter. 1999. Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61: 653–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Phillips, Peter C. B., and Bruce E. Hansen. 1990. Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with i(1) processes. Review of Economic Studies 57: 99–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Rajapathirana, R. P. Jayani, and Yan Hui. 2018. Relationship between innovation capability, innovation type, and firm performance. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge 3: 44–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan, Usha Ramanathan, and Yongmei Bentley. 2018. The debate on flexibility of environmental regulations, innovation capabilities and financial performance—A novel use of DEA. Omega 75: 131–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Tamara, Dewi, Adler H. Manurung, Dezie L. Warganegara, and Toto Rusmanto. 2019. The determinants of financial innovation. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research 8: 1004–09. [Google Scholar]
  52. Thi Thuy, Diem Pham, and Hoai Nguyen Trong. 2021. Impacts of openness on financial development in developing countries: Using a Bayesian model averaging approach. Cogent Economics & Finance 9: 1937848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ullah, Barkat. 2019. Firm innovation in transition economies: The role of formal versus informal finance. Journal of Multinational Financial Management 50: 58–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Wang, Yu, Liwei Cheng, Hao Wang, and Liangyu Li. 2014. Institutional quality, financial development and OFDI. Pacific Science Review 16: 127–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Wang, Rong, and Junlan Tan. 2021. Exploring the coupling and forecasting of financial development, technological innovation, and economic growth. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 163: 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zhu, Xiaoyang, Stylianos Asimakopoulos, and Jaebeom Kim. 2020. Financial development and innovation-led growth: Is too much finance better? Journal of International Money and Finance 100: 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Variable summary.
Table 1. Variable summary.
NameAbbr.ProxiesSupporting ReferencesData Source
Financial DevelopmentFDDomestic credit provided by the financial sector (% of GDP)Khan et al. (2020); Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli (2019)World Development Indicator (WDI)
Institutional QualityIQCPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector rating (1 = low to 6 = high)Khan et al. (2020); Mollaahmetoǧlu and Akcąli (2019)World Development Indicator (WDI)
Financial InnovationFIResearch and development expenditure (% of GDP)Akcali and Sismanoglu (2015); Nazir et al. (2021)World Development Indicator (WDI)
Economic GrowthEGGDP growth (annual %)Alsmadi and Oudat (2019); Aibai et al. (2019) World Development Indicator (WDI)
Trade OpennessTOTrade (% of GDP)Nieminen (2020); Aibai et al. (2019)World Development Indicator (WDI)
Foreign Direct InvestmentFDIForeign direct investment, net (BoP, current US$)Alsmadi and Oudat (2019); Aibai et al. (2019) World Development Indicator (WDI)
Table
Table 2. Panel unit root results.
Table 2. Panel unit root results.
IPS (Im, Pesran, Shin)
VariablesLevel1st DifferenceOrder of Integration
T-Statisticsp-ValueT-Statisticsp-Value
FD10.6421.190−5.2800.000 *I (1)
FI−0.6320.243−5.4090.000 *I (1)
IQ5.2011.000−3.2660.000 *I (1)
EG−0.1100.447−7.3640.000 *I (1)
FDI0.4320.489−8.3300.000 *I (1)
TO−0.1060.462−7.3850.000 *I (1)
Note: * shows significance level at 1%. FD is financial development, FI is financial innovation, IQ is institutional quality, EG is economic growth, FDI is foreign direct investment and TO represents trade openness.
Table
Table 3. Pedroni cointegration results.
Table 3. Pedroni cointegration results.
Dependent Variable: FD
Within DimensionWith No TrendWith Trend and Intercept
T-Statisticsp-ValueT-Statisticsp-Value
Panel v-statistics−3.6870.9671.4890.056 **
Panel PP-statistics0.9360.832−5.2560.000 *
Panel ADF-statistics0.1970.594−4.6670.000 *
Between Dimension
Group PP-statistics0.2080.582−7.2040.000 *
Group ADF-statistics0.4990.691−3.3550.000 *
Note: * and ** show significance levels at 1% and 5% respectively.
Table
Table 4. Fully modified least squares (FM-OLS).
Table 4. Fully modified least squares (FM-OLS).
VariableCoefficientStd. ErrorT-StatisticProb.
FI0.0110.00118.1960.000 *
IQ0.0010.0000250.7850.000 *
EG0.1120.00619.9940.000 **
TO−0.0130.008−1.5870.117
FDI0.0120.00117.6490.000 *
Note: * and ** show significance levels at 1% and 5% respectively. FD is financial development, FI is financial innovation, IQ is institutional quality, EG is economic growth, FDI is foreign direct investment and TO represents trade openness.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alawi, S.M.; Abbassi, W.; Saqib, R.; Sharif, M. Impact of Financial Innovation and Institutional Quality on Financial Development in Emerging Markets. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2022, 15, 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15030115

AMA Style

Alawi SM, Abbassi W, Saqib R, Sharif M. Impact of Financial Innovation and Institutional Quality on Financial Development in Emerging Markets. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2022; 15(3):115. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15030115

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alawi, Suha Mahmoud, Wajih Abbassi, Rukhma Saqib, and Madeeha Sharif. 2022. "Impact of Financial Innovation and Institutional Quality on Financial Development in Emerging Markets" Journal of Risk and Financial Management 15, no. 3: 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15030115

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop