Comparative study of financial inclusion in Uzbekistan and Indonesia

Abstract

This article compares the evolution, structure, and policy drivers of financial inclusion in Uzbekistan and Indonesia by using an IMRaD framework and a comparative secondary-data design. The study is motivated by the fact that both countries have pursued inclusion through digitalization, but they start from different historical, institutional, and market conditions. Indonesia represents a large archipelagic lower-middle-income economy in which financial inclusion has been shaped by agency banking, e-money, QR-based payment interoperability, and national literacy campaigns. Uzbekistan is a post-reform transition economy where banking modernisation, card-based payments, remote banking, and state-led reforms have made it easier for people to get what they need. However, cash use, gender gaps in digital payments, and weak depth of formal savings are still major problems. The article brings together research from around the world, official statistics, policy papers, and comparative indicators from the Global Findex, OJK, Bank Indonesia, IFC, and World Bank. The results show that Indonesia’s ecosystem has become more mature overall, especially when it comes to payment system interoperability and policy coordination. Uzbekistan, on the other hand, has made quick progress from a lower starting point, especially when it comes to increasing account ownership, debit card use, and remote banking. But the two countries show different problems with inclusion. Indonesia’s challenge is not only expanding access but converting nominal inclusion into high-quality and regularly used services with stronger literacy, consumer protection, and productive finance for women and MSMEs. Uzbekistan’s challenge is to move from account expansion toward deeper and more frequent usage, especially for savings, digital merchant payments, and broader access beyond urban and salaried groups. The article contributes by offering a structured cross-country comparison that distinguishes access, usage, quality, and resilience dimensions of financial inclusion, and by proposing a policy matrix tailored to both contexts. The study concludes that sustainable financial inclusion requires more than opening accounts; it requires trusted digital infrastructure, interoperable payment rails, consumer capability, gender-responsive design, and stronger links between payments, savings, credit, insurance, and entrepreneurship.