14.10.2016 Views

in the 21st Century

hTOE305aYVW

hTOE305aYVW

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The Digitisation of F<strong>in</strong>ancial Services 165<br />

Rural versus urban differences<br />

To understand this growth <strong>in</strong> access fur<strong>the</strong>r, we restrict attention to certa<strong>in</strong><br />

strata. To start, we calculate <strong>the</strong> distributions of access for rural and urban<br />

populations separately. The 2009 distributions are presented <strong>in</strong> Figure 8 –<br />

<strong>the</strong> median probability of us<strong>in</strong>g M-PESA amongst urban residents was about<br />

50%, while it was only 15% <strong>in</strong> rural areas.<br />

Figure 8: Rural-urban divide <strong>in</strong> 2009<br />

1<br />

0.9<br />

Probability of us<strong>in</strong>g M-PESA<br />

0.8<br />

0.7<br />

0.6<br />

0.5<br />

0.4<br />

0.3<br />

0.2<br />

Median urban likelihood = 49%<br />

Urban<br />

Rural<br />

0.1<br />

Median rural likelihood = 15%<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100<br />

Percentile rank<br />

Figures 9 and 10 depict <strong>the</strong> changes <strong>in</strong> rural and urban usage between 2009<br />

and 2013. The distribution <strong>in</strong> rural areas <strong>in</strong> 2013, ρ̂R2013<br />

(r), closely matches<br />

that of urban areas <strong>in</strong> 2009, ρ̂U2009<br />

(r), but <strong>the</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ued deepen<strong>in</strong>g of access<br />

<strong>in</strong> urban areas meant that rural residents were not able to catch up.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!