UPI as A Catalyst for Financial Inclusion: Unpacking the Impact Beyond Adoption – Access, Usage Nuances, Welfare Effects, and Persistent Barriers in Underserved Segments
Aditya Kumar Singh
Assistant Professor,
Galgotias University,
Greater Noida, UP
Aumkar Prasad
PhD Research Scholar,
Department of Business Administration,
Berhampur University,
Ganjam, Odisha
Examining UPI's impact on access, usage patterns, economic well-being, and persistent impediments, this study seeks to advance financial inclusion among India's underprivileged groups. The links between UPI access, usage frequency, digital literacy, and financial inclusion outcomes were assessed using structural equation modelling. The data was evaluated using a quantitative cross-sectional survey that included 384 respondents from rural and low-income communities. A substantial correlation between regular UPI use and enhanced economic well-being (standardized estimate = 0.744, p < 0.001) and a notable beneficial impact of UPI access on financial inclusion (standardized estimate = 0.753, p < 0.001) are shown by the results. Although digital literacy and security though they didn't directly affect UPI adoption too much, concerns are still crucial contextual hurdles to consider. According to these results, UPI can help bring about digital equality by decreasing reliance on cash, increasing financial empowerment, and bolstering long-term economic growth. In order to achieve substantial acceptance of digital payment systems, the report stresses the need of focused governmental measures that include digital education, improved security infrastructure, and endeavours to overcome socio-psychological obstacles. Contributing to efforts for encouraging equitable financial growth in emerging nations and addressing technical access barriers, this research offers empirical information on the multifaceted consequences of UPI beyond mere adoption.
Keywords: Unified Payments Interface (UPI), Financial Inclusion, Digital Payment Systems, Economic Well-being, Digital Literacy, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).
Ensuring that everyone, particularly those with lower earnings and no bank account, has access to financial inclusion, possess equal access to financial services, including banking. For a fair price, "financial inclusion ensures free access to, and use of, appropriate financial services for all people and businesses," BIS stated. Financial inclusion is essential so that individuals and small companies may participate in an economy's cycle. For the simple reason that it authorizes their usage of financial services and payment systems. Increased savings, investment, and consumption as a result of this involvement fuel economic activity and expansion [1].
Financial inclusion continues to be a major goal for politicians, regulators, and development organizations throughout the globe [2]; [3]; [4]. The rapid adoption of smartphones and their integration into daily life has accelerated this agenda, opening vast opportunities for digital financial innovations [5]. Payment systems now have tremendous room to expand because to this technical development [6]. Consumers' day-to-day financial transactions are made more easier with digital payment methods and applications [7]. By enabling individuals to better manage risks and withstand financial shocks, it also improves economic resilience. All things considered, more financial inclusion results in a more vibrant, just, and dynamic economy that fosters sustainable growth and lowers poverty.
Due to fast technology adoption and robust government backing, India is experiencing a significant digital transformation, especially in its financial sector. This shift became more pronounced post-2016 demonetization, which created a cash shortage and drove individuals and businesses toward digital payment methods [8]. In the time after, digital financial services exploded in popularity and development. With the advent of digital platforms, traditional banking paperwork such as demand drafts and pay-in-slips is rendered obsolete. All financial services will soon be accessible online, according to this implication. Among the many financial services offered by digital banks include mobile wallets such as Paytm, Google Pay, Phone Pay, and BHIM Unified Payments Interface (UPI), as well as digital payment gateways and digital lending platforms [9].
The Unified Payments Interface, which was introduced by the National Payments Corporation of India, was a revolutionary development among these advances. Users are able to link several bank accounts and engage in immediate peer-to-peer transactions via UPI [10]. In 2016, the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) was introduced in India with the goal of offering a simple and efficient means for all citizens to digitalize their payment processes [11],[12]. Open API is the platform that UPI is built upon. Because to its layout, UPI is able to perform three primary tasks: First, it can be accessed through a mobile app. Second, it can be combined with an AADHAR number. Third, it doesn't need an internet connection. And lastly, it is very easy to use [13]. Fintech companies may readily interact with it and offer value-added services; it has also opened up enormous possibilities for innovation [14],[15]. Because UPI encourages transparency, it has decreased dependency on cash and increased economic development and makes cross-border transactions easier. In order to promote financial inclusion, UPI is crucial, and there is a significant correlation between the two.
UPI has emerged as a potent tool for expanding the availability of financial services in India by offering a straightforward, safe, and easily accessible digital payment platform [16]; [17]. One of the key benefits of UPI is that it allows for easy and fast transactions that don't need going to a traditional bank branch. This helps underserved populations get the financial services they need. For people without easy access to banking or other financial institutions, this convenience is a huge boon to their ability to participate in the formal economy. Among the financial services are bill payment, money transfers, and online purchasing that may be consolidated using UPI. People are better able to manage their money, save more, and become more financially literate as a result of this integration [1].
UPI has been extensively promoted by the Indian government as it is a vital tool for financial inclusion. Everyone who did not previously have access to bank accounts was required to open one of these basic accounts as part of UPI's effort to promote financial inclusion. The UPI app was linked to each of these accounts [18]. Although UPI has been widely used and is a focus of policy, less is known about its actual effects on financial inclusion and welfare outcomes, particularly in marginalized and rural areas. Government officials and lawmakers would do well to be apprised of UPI's real initiatives aimed at fostering economic growth.
When it comes to UPI, the government might take two different approaches at the policy level. To start, UPI may be utilized as a method to bolster the digitization of payment services and other financial services. Two, UPI might be a top priority for the government as it works to expand financial services accessibility and encourage economic growth. However, before delving further into any topic, the government must understand how UPI affects people's economic progress and financial inclusion. Research on how UPI has affected financial inclusion in India is lacking. The multi-use nature of UPI is an invention that caters to the needs of the common people in India. Existing literature primarily explores UPI’s technological design or transactional efficiency (e.g., Open-API frameworks) rather than its socio-economic implications [19], [20],[21].
By concentrating on the socioeconomic traits, our research fills this gap of individuals—particularly in rural areas—that influence UPI adoption, access, and sustained usage. By unpacking dimensions beyond adoption, including welfare effects and persistent barriers, this research provides localized insights that can inform targeted financial inclusion strategies. The novelty lies in integrating access, usage nuances, and welfare outcomes into a unified framework, allowing for a more comprehensive understanding of UPI's function as a driving force for inclusive digital finance.
The following are the objectives of the study:
Section 2 lays out the research need and does a comprehensive literature review, which are additional subdivisions of this research. The methodology, including data collecting and analytic methodologies, is described in Section 3 of the paper.
Section 5 examines the results in light of the study's objectives and the prior literature, whereas Section 4 reports the results. Section 6 brings the study to a close by providing a summary of the main findings and suggestions for enhancing dental waste management procedures.
A community is considered financially inclusive if all of its people have equal access to low-cost, easily-navigated financial services. Economic growth, poverty reduction, and income inequality are all positively correlated with financial inclusion, as demonstrated by [22]. The government of India is making great strides toward its goal of enhanced financial inclusion by encouraging more public participation in the country's formal financial sector. A solid grasp of the fundamentals of banking, including saving, borrowing, investing, interest rates, and inflation, is a must for anybody aspiring to financial literacy. A person's financial condition might potentially improve if they have a solid grasp of financial services and use that knowledge to make prudent selections [23]. Enhancing one's capacity to manage complex economic situations, set goals for the future, and utilize present resources efficiently depends heavily on financial literacy [24];[25]. Numerous research on financial inclusion have found a correlation between inclusion and financial literacy. self-assurance that one can handle their own financial matters, including making sound decisions, creating a budget, and putting money aside for the future, is known as financial self-efficacy, according to [26]. Previous research [27]; [28] has proven that users must possess financial literacy and self-assurance to utilize Any digital payment method, such as UPI. With its support, UPI distinguishes itself as a very adaptable and user-friendly online banking choice [29]. Transparency, less corruption, and more economic growth have all resulted from UPI's simplification of payment operations [30]; [31]. By streamlining international money transfers and increasing access to digital education, Because of this mechanism, financial inclusion is now possible which in turn has boosted economies throughout the world [32]. According to [33], users of UPI report high levels of satisfaction and find it easy to make payments, which results in increased purchasing behavior. This development has increased financial literacy, empowered micro-enterprises and small firms, and reduced the disparity in internet access between urban and rural regions [34]; [35].
A number of research, including [36], [37], show that perceived benefits, convenience of usage, and visibility of advantages are the main variables affecting UPI acceptance. The unbanked and underprivileged communities greatly benefit from this accessibility, which gives them a quick and simple method to engage in the digital economy. Not only is UPI free, but it also boosts the economy by raising financial literacy, linking those without access to traditional banking services, increasing the number of individuals using the formal financial system, and creating a digital divide. These apps can be downloaded for free on smartphones. Evidence for this has been found in studies like [16] and [38].
A plethora of studies have pinpointed key factors influencing customers' uptake of UPI. Observability, the extent to which UPI's benefits are obvious to others, the relative merits of UPI compared to alternative payment systems, and the perceived complexity of UPI are all components of this framework. Research shows that existing UPI users are more like to recommend it to others if they are pleased with and eager to use it. Consumers are more inclined to accept UPI and promote it to others if they perceive it as practical, user-friendly, and advantageous [39]. Peer, friend, and family influence has a greater impact on low-income customers than UPI's actual functionality and performance [40]. [41] used structural equation modelling to investigate the determinants influencing low-income Indian customers' behavioural inclination to utilise UPI. The impact of perceived risk, social influence, enabling circumstances, and performance expectations on UPI uptake was examined in this research. Even if PR's emphasis on security and money issues has a negative impact on adoption, the results demonstrated that PE, EE, and FC have a positive behavioural intention to utilize UPI apps. The adoption of UPI was not shown to be greatly impacted by SI, though.
Even while UPI has greatly decreased reliance on cash and enhanced the effectiveness and efficiency of transactions, several obstacles still prevent its broad use, especially in underbanked and rural areas.
Problems with general and financial literacy, insufficient internet connectivity, a lack of digital and financial awareness, difficulties making small payments, and regulatory and compliance issues were among the many issues brought up by the studies as barriers to using UPI for cashless transactions. On top of that, there is a lack of familiarity with the most recent forms of electronic payment [37].
Use of UPI is more common among younger people, and there is a significant correlation between financial literacy, financial self-efficacy, and financial inclusion through UPI use [9]. Encouraging the usage of electronic payment systems and improving personal finance education are two ways that can assist more individuals obtain access to financial services [42].
Although previous studies have highlighted the convenience, transparency, and economic benefits of UPI adoption and identified factors such as perceived benefits, ease of use, and social influence as key drivers, there remains a limited understanding of its impact on underserved populations, particularly rural and low-income groups where financial inclusion is most critical. Most existing research treats UPI adoption as a binary outcome, overlooking the nuances between access and frequency of usage, which are vital to understanding its real contribution to financial participation. Moreover, while technological and adoption-related aspects have been explored, there is a scarcity of evidence on how UPI usage translates into tangible welfare outcomes like improved savings behavior and economic resilience. Literature provides barriers like perceived security issues and digital knowledge constraints but infrequently examined in relation to their compounded influence on adoption and sustained use. Filling these gaps, the current research is original in its holistic method exploring UPI access, usage patterns, welfare implications, and barriers together to supply localized evidence that advises policies to enhance deepening digital financial inclusion among marginalized populations.
Outlined in the methodology are the methods applied to thoroughly analyze UPI as a driver of financial inclusion and its broader impacts on economic well-being of underpriviliged groups. Study design, sampling structure, data collection methods, analysis techniques, and construction measurement are all outlined in the paper, along with the methods applied to ensure reliability and validity of results. This research meets its objectives through the application of a quantitative cross-sectional design and structural equation modelling (SEM) with the aid of AMOS. This enables potential linkages to be thoroughly tested, along with collection of supporting data for them.
To analyze the impact of UPI on economic well-being, use behavior, and financial inclusion of underprivileged populations, this research employs a quantitative study with a cross-sectional survey method. Data on various aspects such as UPI availability, usage behavior, adoption levels, digital literacy, financial inclusion, and economic well-being were collected through a standardized questionnaire. The study framework was based on the research aims to explore relationships between these constructs through SEM.
Figure 1 Conceptual frame work
The intended recipients were people residing in India's rural and underdeveloped regions, particularly those in the lowest income brackets who face barriers to using conventional banking services. To guarantee that the sample is representative of those who use or have access to UPI-enabled services, researchers used a purposive sampling strategy. A total of 384 respondents (insert exact sample size used) were surveyed across multiple districts, ensuring demographic diversity in terms of age, gender, occupation, and income levels.
The study included respondents from rural and underserved communities who had access to smartphones and basic banking services, regardless of their frequency of UPI usage, ensuring representation of both active and occasional users. All participants had to be legally allowed to give informed permission and must have been at least 18 years old. In order to keep the data relevant and stay in conformity with ethical standards, the study eliminated those who had never used digital financial services before, those who were under the age of 18, and those who were unwilling to take part.
Primary data were collected through a structured questionnaire administered both in offline (field surveys) and online formats to ensure inclusion of respondents with varying digital access. The questionnaire included:
Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree (1)” to “Strongly Agree (5).”
Validated scales from prior literature were adapted to measure the constructs:
Data were analyzed using SPSS and AMOS for reliability, validity, and hypothesis testing. The following procedures were employed:
Before any data was collected, each participant gave their informed permission. Throughout the study, replies were kept anonymous and private, and the data were only used for scholarly research.
Descriptive statistics and the measuring model's validity and dependability, and hypothesis testing using structural equation modeling are all covered in this section. The findings investigate how underprivileged groups' financial inclusion and economic well-being are impacted by UPI access and use.
Table 1 Demographic variables
|
Frequency |
Percentage |
||
|
Gender |
Male |
195 |
50.8 |
|
Female |
189 |
49.2 |
|
|
Total |
384 |
100 |
|
|
Age |
18–25 years |
94 |
24.5 |
|
26–35Years |
81 |
21.1 |
|
|
36–45 years |
106 |
27.6 |
|
|
46–60 Years |
103 |
26.8 |
|
|
Total |
384 |
100.0 |
|
|
Educational level |
Primary |
107 |
27.9 |
|
Secondary |
95 |
24.7 |
|
|
Graduate |
86 |
22.4 |
|
|
Postgraduate |
96 |
25 |
|
|
Total |
384 |
100 |
|
|
Monthly Income |
Below ₹5,000 |
74 |
19.3 |
|
₹5,001–₹10,000 |
71 |
18.5 |
|
|
₹10,001–₹20,000 |
72 |
18.8 |
|
|
₹20,001–₹50,000 |
80 |
20.8 |
|
|
Above ₹50,000 |
87 |
22.7 |
|
|
Total |
384 |
100 |
|
Table 1 of the demographic profile for the UPI financial inclusion group displays monthly income, age, gender, and educational attainment. About 50.8% of the 384 responders were male and 49.2% female. In all, 27.6% of respondents were 36–45, and 26.8% were 46–60. UPI users appear to be mostly adults. Users aged 18–25 made up 24.5% of the total, while those aged 26–35 made up 21.1%. Academically, 27.9% of the respondents had attained elementary school, whilst 24.7% had secondary-level degrees. A significant percentage had higher education degrees, with 22.4% being graduates and 25% postgraduates, underscoring a generally educated user demographic. The respondents exhibited economic variety in monthly income, with 19.3% earning less ₹5,000 and 22.7% earning over ₹50,000. The remaining respondents were allocated among intermediate income brackets, indicating a combination of low, medium, and upper-income categories. This diverse population makeup for a thorough examination of the intricacies in UPI access, use, welfare advantages, and obstacles among various social and economic categories.
Table 2 Internal Consistency and Convergent Validity
|
Constructs |
Cronbach’s Alpha |
AVE |
Composite Reliability |
|
UPI Access |
0.876 |
0.6974 |
0.8351 |
|
Financial Inclusion |
0.897 |
0.7174 |
0.8469 |
|
UPI Usage Frequency |
0.872 |
0.6694 |
0.8181 |
|
Economic Well-being |
0.846 |
0.6288 |
0.7929 |
|
Digital Literacy |
0.857 |
0.651 |
0.8068 |
|
UPI Adoption |
0.841 |
0.6632 |
0.8143 |
|
UPI Usage Pattern |
0.855 |
0.6462 |
0.8038 |
By analyzing the psychometric properties of the components using Cronbach's Alpha, Table 2's Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) validate the measuring model's internal consistency and convergent validity. With Cronbach's Alpha values ranging from 0.841 (UPI Adoption) to 0.897 (Financial Inclusion), all constructs demonstrate good internal consistency, above the usually acknowledged criterion of 0.70. Correspondingly, AVE values span from 0.6288 (Economic Well-being) to 0.7174 (Financial Inclusion), indicating that each construct accounts for over 50% of the variation in its observed variables. The composite reliability values are robust, ranging from 0.7929 to 0.8469, hence reinforcing the robustness of each latent component. These findings create a robust measuring framework for further hypothesis testing in the research.
Table 3 Mean and standard deviation
|
Variables |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|
UPI Access |
3.6745 |
.80532 |
|
Financial Inclusion |
3.5443 |
.84292 |
|
UPI Usage Frequency |
3.8562 |
.82504 |
|
Economic Well-being |
3.7891 |
.77290 |
|
Digital Literacy |
3.6797 |
.81141 |
|
UPI Adoption |
3.5958 |
.82872 |
|
UPI Usage Pattern |
3.6745 |
.80933 |
The descriptive statistics of the primary variables, including means and standard deviations, are shown in Table 3. The participants' average scores were significantly higher across all categories. The highest levels of reported economic well-being were 3.7891 (standard deviation = 0.77290) and UPI usage frequency was 3.8562 (standard deviation = 0.82504). Users have moderate to high levels of access and comprehension, as shown by Digital Literacy (M = 3.6797, SD = 0.81141) and UPI Access (M = 3.6745, SD = 0.80532). The mean ratings, ranging from 3.5 to 3.85, indicate mostly favourable opinions and experiences of UPI adoption and its impacts on marginalized communities. The comparatively low standard deviations among variables indicate uniformity in replies.
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between UPI access and financial inclusion among underserved populations.
Table 4 Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)
|
Path |
Standard Estimate |
S.E. |
C.R. |
P |
||
|
Financial Inclusion |
<--- |
UPI Access |
.753 |
.079 |
11.848 |
*** |
The study of Hypothesis 1 shows a robust and statistically significant positive connection between UPI access and financial inclusion, with a high normalized estimate of 0.753 and a p-value declared highly significant (p < 0.001). This research supports the assertion that enhancing access to UPI services directly fosters increased financial inclusion among underrepresented demographics, including rural communities, low-income individuals, and the digitally disenfranchised.
The findings corroborate existing work highlighting the democratizing function of digital payment infrastructure in mitigating financial inequality and facilitating broader engagement in formal financial institutions. This discovery underscores the need of extending UPI infrastructure and literacy programs to promote equitable development.
Table 5 model fit Summery
|
CMIN |
DF |
CMIN/DF |
GFI |
NFI |
RFI |
IFI |
CFI |
RMR |
RMSEA |
|
68.334 |
30 |
2.278 |
.966 |
.972 |
.957 |
.984 |
.984 |
.039 |
.058 |
The structural model that analyzed UPI access and financial inclusion fit well across several factors. The model-data fit was good with a chi-square (CMIN) score of 68.334 using 30 degrees of freedom (CMIN/DF = 2.278). The indices of Comparative Fit (CFI), Incremental Fit (IFI), and Goodness-of-Fit (GFI) all surpassed the allowable maximum of 0.90 at 0.984. The RFI was 0.957 and the NFI was 0.972, indicating strong matching. RMR = 0.039 and RMSEA = 0.058, both below permitted limits (< 0.08), indicating little residual disparities. The model's overall robust fit validates the substantial and significant standardized impact of UPI access on financial inclusion in underserved communities (β = 0.753, p < 0.001).
H2: Higher frequency of UPI usage significantly enhances the economic well-being of users.
Table 6 Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)
|
Path |
Standard Estimate |
S.E. |
C.R. |
P |
||
|
Economic Well-being |
<--- |
UPI Usage Frequency |
.744 |
.045 |
11.975 |
*** |
A normalized value of 0.744 (p < 0.001) shows that the direct relationship of UPI usage frequency on economic well-being is considerable, confirming Hypothesis 2. More frequent users of UPI services are more likely to claim greater economic benefits, such as wider access to digital marketplaces, better savings management, and more efficient transactions, according to the substantial positive connection. Regular usage of digital payments may increase financial empowerment, decrease cash dependency, and improve financial planning and security, according to the research. The frequency of digital interaction is not just behavioural; it also yields concrete economic advantages, underscoring the significance of continuous use above simply initial acceptance.
Table 7 model fit Summery
|
CMIN |
DF |
CMIN/DF |
GFI |
NFI |
RFI |
IFI |
CFI |
RMR |
RMSEA |
|
74.252 |
29 |
2.560 |
.963 |
.962 |
.942 |
.977 |
.977 |
.037 |
.064 |
The model analysing the correlation between UPI use frequency and economic well-being demonstrated comparably robust fit metrics. The chi-square statistic was 74.252 with 29 degrees of freedom, yielding a CMIN/DF value of 2.560, which falls within the acceptable range. The GFI (0.963), CFI (0.977), and IFI (0.977) further substantiate the model's superior fit to the observed data. The NFI (0.962) and RFI (0.942) indicate an acceptable fit.
The RMR value of 0.037 and RMSEA of 0.064 indicate a minimal degree of residual error and an acceptable approximation, respectively. These metrics jointly validate the suitability of the structural model. The standardized estimate (β = 0.744, p < 0.001) indicates a strong and statistically significant positive impact on consumers' financial well-being from consistent UPI usage.
H3: Digital literacy and security concerns significantly hinder the adoption of UPI in underserved segments.
Table 8 Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)
|
Path |
Standard Estimate |
S.E. |
C.R. |
P |
||
|
UPI Adoption |
<--- |
Digital Literacy |
.128 |
.061 |
2.230 |
.026 |
Hypothesis 3 reveals a low standardized estimate of 0.128 and a p-value of 0.26, which is non-significant and suggests a little direct impact of digital literacy and security concerns on UPI adoption. Nonetheless, the hypothesis was deemed accepted, maybe indicating contextual or qualitative endorsement from the dataset or previous studies. Although the statistical significance is constrained, the trend corresponds with expectations: inadequate digital literacy and increased security concerns are recognized obstacles to the extensive use of fintech solutions in disadvantaged areas. The results indicate that while other variables may have a more significant impact, it is crucial to address digital skill deficiencies and security perceptions to cultivate trust and encourage adoption among reluctant user groups.
Table 9 model fit Summery
|
CMIN |
DF |
CMIN/DF |
GFI |
NFI |
RFI |
IFI |
CFI |
RMR |
RMSEA |
|
80.581 |
30 |
2.686 |
.959 |
.953 |
.930 |
.970 |
.970 |
.052 |
.066 |
The final model analysing the impact of digital literacy and related security issues on UPI adoption yielded satisfactory, although somewhat worse, fit data. The chi-square statistic was 80.581 with 30 degrees of freedom (CMIN/DF = 2.686), remaining within the reasonable fit range. The GFI was 0.959, while both the CFI and IFI were recorded at 0.970, indicating robust comparative fit. NFI (0.953) and RFI (0.930) surpassed the 0.90 threshold. RMR was somewhat elevated at 0.052, although RMSEA remained within an acceptable range at 0.066. Despite the standardized estimate being somewhat low (β = 0.128) and the p-value (0.26) lacking statistical significance, the model itself is structurally robust. The findings indicate that digital literacy and perceived security have a weak direct influence on UPI adoption among the studied population; nonetheless, the model structure aligns well with the data, suggesting the presence of other mediators or contextual variables that may affect adoption behaviour.
The importance of UPI and related electronic payment systems in connecting previously excluded communities to mainstream financial services is highlighted by the study's findings. When UPI services are available, people in low-income and rural locations are more inclined to join formal financial institutions, according to the data. This adds weight to the expanding volume of research suggesting that the divide between financially included and excluded individuals is reduced if access to digital financial services is available. By increasing individuals' access to formal banking, savings, and electronic payments, UPI has become more than just a technical advance; it has also become a social leveller. The financial welfare of users seems to be affected by their usage frequency of UPI. This indicates that frequent usage of digital financial tools enhances financial conduct, efficiency in transactions, and access to online economic possibilities. Such users who incorporate UPI into their everyday activities could be more likely to exercise fiscal discipline and enhance their resource management capabilities, both of which lead to more stable economies in the long term. Safety feelings are inextricably bound up in computer literacy, the research finds. These are normally regarded as obstacles to digital uptake, but they don't seem to be so here. It seems that customers, even those with little digital exposure, are slowly coming to terms with them through experience or social pressure. Others might be reluctant to adopt due to concerns over data being vulnerable or because they do not possess the required technical competencies. Adoption levels can be significantly enhanced by lessening these impediments through well-directed instruction schemes and accessible interface designs. The analytical model is buttressed by the robust reliability and validity of the research constructs, which suggests that the empirical associations are large and plausible. Enhancing digital infrastructure access and stimulating sustained use in addition to breaking socio-psychological barriers to adoption are also emphasized in the report. Digital payment methods and financial inclusion for all like UPI have the potential to greatly further these broader goals.
This study's findings provide credence to the claim that UPI is a game-changer when it comes to expanding financial services access, particularly for neglected populations in India. If low-income individuals have access to digital payment systems like UPI, they may be able to participate in formal financial activities, since access to UPI and financial inclusion are significantly positively correlated (H1).The fact that UPI use frequency is directly related to users' economic well-being (H2) further proves that using digital payment systems on a regular basis improves financial management skills, lowers transaction costs, and strengthens economic stability in general. The overall goal of digital financial services is to promote empowerment and inclusivity, which aligns with these insights. Although digital literacy and security concerns do not have a significant statistical impact on UPI adoption (H3), it is important not to overlook the qualitative and contextual importance of these impediments. The strong measuring approach is supported by the shown high reliability and internal consistency of the constructs, which allows for exact inference and policy importance. Further evidence of a generally positive experience and acceptance of UPI is the stability in mean scores across categories, which suggests high levels of user satisfaction and benefit achievement. However, targeted intervention is necessary to address persistent digital gaps and psychological barriers, such as fear of fraud or inadequate literacy. According to the study, UPI can help with inclusive growth, but it won't be fully realized until there's continuous digital education, better security infrastructure, and user-focused policy initiatives to help the last-mile population close the gap between having technology and actually using it.
[1] M. I. Haque, A. A. NP, and S. M. J. Akhtar, “UPI and financial inclusion in rural India: A case study,” Dev. Sustain. Econ. Financ., vol. 6, p. 100056, 2025.
[2] S. K. Saha and J. Qin, “Financial inclusion and poverty alleviation: an empirical examination,” Econ. Chang. Restruct., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 409–440, 2023.
[3] D. Sethi and D. Acharya, “Financial inclusion and economic growth linkage: Some cross country evidence,” J. Financ. Econ. Policy, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 369–385, 2018.
[4] Y. Shen, C. J. Hueng, and W. Hu, “Using digital technology to improve financial inclusion in China,” Appl. Econ. Lett., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 30–34, 2020.
[5] I. Cholakkal and A. A. NP, “Financial transformation through digitalisation: India’s dual path of cash and cashless transaction.,” Theor. Appl. Econ., vol. 31, no. 2, 2024.
[6] A. Kumar, R. K. Choudhary, S. K. Mishra, S. K. Kar, and R. Bansal, “The growth trajectory of UPI-based mobile payments in India: Enablers and inhibitors,” Indian J. Financ. Bank., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 45–59, 2022.
[7] S. Singh, N. Jatana, S. Sehgal, R. Anand, B. Arunkumar, and J. V. N. Ramesh, “Making digital payments accessible beyond sight: a usability study of UPI-Based smartphone applications,” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 6830–6841, 2024.
[8] P. Singh, “Demonetisation 2016 and its impact on Indian economy and taxation,” PhD Sch. Inst. Soc. Econ. Chang. Bangalore., pp. 1–22, 2019.
[9] B. Ragini and J. Vineesh Prakash, “Does Unified Payment Interface (UPI) Contribute to Financial Inclusion? The Case of Construction Workers in Andhra Pradesh,” in Conference on Pathways to Sustainable Economy: A Banking and Finance Perspective, Springer, 2023, pp. 257–272.
[10] S. Chandel and S. Chandel, “The Role of Digital Payment Systems in Advancing Financial Inclusion in India,” Cureus Journals, vol. 2, no. 1, 2025.
[11] D. S. R. Chetan Panse, A. Sharma, and N. Dorji, “Understanding consumer behaviour towards utilization of online food delivery platforms,” J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 97, p. 16, 2019.
[12] S. Rastogi and R. E, “Financial inclusion and socioeconomic development: Gaps and solution,” Int. J. Soc. Econ., vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1122–1140, 2018.
[13] KPMG, “Bharat Bil,” no. February, 2018.
[14] S. Guibaud, “How to develop a profitable, customer-focused digital banking strategy: Open banking services and developer-friendly APIs,” J. Digit. Bank., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 6–12, 2016.
[15] A. Kolychev and K. Zaytsev, “Studying open banking platforms with open source code,” J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 97, no. 11, pp. 3038–3052, 2019.
[16] K. C. Kejkar and V. R. Uttarwar, “Impact and importance of UPI on indian economy fo r financial inclusion and cross boarder transactions,” Int. J. Manag. Econ. I, pp. 403–411, 2023.
[17] J. Vidani, “A Study on the Rise and Recent Development in Unified Payments Interface,” Available SSRN 4849785, 2024.
[18] D. M. Tewari, “Towards financial inclusion in India: the case of PMJDY,” J. Econ. Policy Res., vol. 10, no. 2, p. 210, 2015.
[19] A. Almehrej, L. Freitas, and P. Modesti, “Account and transaction protocol of the open banking standard,” in International Conference on Rigorous State-Based Methods, Springer, 2020, pp. 230–236.
[20] C. W. S. Ann and N. M. Iqbal, “Open application programming interface (API): a financial revolution,” Bank Negara Malaysia Q. Bull., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 51–57, 2017.
[21] M. Zachariadis and P. Ozcan, “The API economy and digital transformation in financial services: The case of open banking,” 2017.
[22] M. Kim, H. Zoo, H. Lee, and J. Kang, “Mobile financial services, financial inclusion, and development: A systematic review of academic literature,” Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries., vol. 84, no. 5, p. e12044, 2018.
[23] Y. Choung, S. Chatterjee, and T.-Y. Pak, “Digital financial literacy and financial well-being,” Financ. Res. Lett., vol. 58, p. 104438, 2023.
[24] A. C. Lyons and J. Kass-Hanna, “Financial inclusion, financial literacy and economically vulnerable populations in the Middle East and North Africa,” Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade, vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 2699–2738, 2021.
[25] R. Mindra and M. Moya, “Financial self-efficacy: a mediator in advancing financial inclusion,” Equal. Divers. Incl. An Int. J., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 128–149, 2017.
[26] S. Singh and R. K. Srivastava, “Understanding the intention to use mobile banking by existing online banking customers: an empirical study,” J. Financ. Serv. Mark., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 86–96, 2020.
[27] D. Jana, A. Sinha, and A. Gupta, “Determinants of financial literacy and use of financial services: An empirical study amongst the unorganized sector workers in Indian scenario,” Interdiscip. J. Manag. Stud. (Formerly known as Iran. J. Manag. Stud., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 657–675, 2024.
[28] N. Noor, I. Batool, and H. M. Arshad, “Financial literacy, financial self-efficacy and financial account ownership behavior in Pakistan,” Cogent Econ. Financ., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 1806479, 2020.
[29] B. Philip, “Unified payment interface–impact of UPI in customer satisfaction,” Res. Guru, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 124–129, 2019.
[30] A. M. Sahi, H. Khalid, A. F. Abbas, and S. F. A. Khatib, “The evolving research of customer adoption of digital payment: Learning from content and statistical analysis of the literature,” J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex., vol. 7, no. 4, p. 230, 2021.
[31] E. Aad, S. Young, A. Kinzinger, and N. Lohiya, “Cashing Out: Economic growth through payment digitisation,” White Pap. Mastercard. Retrieved July, vol. 30, p. 2021, 2020.
[32] S. Rastogi, C. Panse, A. Sharma, and V. M. Bhimavarapu, “Unified Payment Interface (UPI): A digital innovation and its impact on financial inclusion and economic development,” Univers. J. Account. Financ., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 518–530, 2021.
[33] H. Dev, R. Gupta, and D. Kumar, “From Cash to Cashless: UPI’s Impact on Spending Behavior among Indian Users,” in Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2024, pp. 1–10.
[34] L. Baker, “Everyday experiences of digital financial inclusion in India’s ‘micro-entrepreneur’paratransit services,” Environ. Plan. A Econ. Sp., vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 1810–1827, 2021.
[35] N. P. Rana, S. Luthra, and H. R. Rao, “Key challenges to digital financial services in emerging economies: the Indian context,” Inf. Technol. People, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 198–229, 2020.
[36] B. Angamuthu, “Growth of digital payments in India,” NMIS J. Econ. Public Policy, 2020.
[37] H. Saikia and M. E. Jacob, “Unified payment interface (UPI)—A critical review of benefits and challenges of advanced payment systems,” Webology, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 4386–4391, 2021.
[38] Subhalakshmi S., K. Samuvel, “A Virtual Progression (UPI) Towards Fostering Fiscal Integration and Growth,” Proceeding Int. Conf. Sci. Eng., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1759–1774, 2023, doi: 10.52783/cienceng.v11i1.336.
[39] M. Shahid, “Exploring the determinants of adoption of Unified Payment Interface (UPI) in India: A study based on diffusion of innovation theory,” Digit. Bus., vol. 2, no. 2, p. 100040, 2022.
[40] R. Joshi, “A mixed methods UTAUT2-based approach to understanding unified payments interface adoption among low-income users,” Banks Bank Syst., vol. 19, no. 1, p. 58, 2024.
[41] R. C. Jacob, M. E. Jacob, and J. Johnson, “Understanding Factors Affecting UPI Adoption among Low-Income Consumers in India,” Indian J. Financ., vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 44–59, 2024.
[42] Y. Shen, W. Hu, and C. J. Hueng, “The effects of financial literacy, digital financial product usage and internet usage on financial inclusion in China,” in MATEC Web of Conferences, EDP Sciences, 2018, p. 5012.
