No abstract

The wide use of mobile phones increases low-income individuals' access to a large range of services. One of these services is mobile banking (m-banking). Today, m-banking represents a key vector of financial inclusion in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, especially Senegal. Based on technology adoption theories applied to households in developing countries, this paper studies the determinants of the adoption and use of m-banking. We distinguish between possession or adoption and actual use of m-banking and examine the interdependence between these two decisions by using the Heckman sample selection model, through a sample of 1,052 individuals in the suburbs of Dakar. Our main results are that the two decisions (adoption and use) are not independent of each other. Individual characteristics, such as education, possession of a bank account, and family network effects, are determinants of the adoption, and age, gender, and being a member of a tontine are determinants of the use. A major result of this study concerns women's low propensity to adopt m-banking because of their low levels of education. However, compared with men, when women adopt m-banking, they have a stronger propensity to use it.

The objective of this paper is to assess the mitigating role of remittances during the adverse COVID-19 employment shock on Nigeria's food insecurity. Based on pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 surveys, we use a difference-in-difference approach while controlling for the time and household fixed effects. Results indicate that remittances are mitigating the negative consequences of COVID-19 employment shocks, especially in the short run. We find that 100% of the deterioration in food insecurity, owing to the shock, is offset by the remittances received. While the adverse effects of the shock persist over time, the mitigation effect of remittances appears to be effective only at the early stages of the pandemic, however. Furthermore, the mitigation effect of remittances seems heterogeneous regarding the origin of remittances, residence area, and poverty status. The mitigation effect of remittances is higher for remittances from abroad than for Domestic ones. We also find a higher mitigating effect of remittances in rural areas and for non-poor households. Finally, our results shed light on the capital channel as a crucial mechanism explaining the mitigation effect of remittances. Notably, findings suggest that formal financial inclusion, capital ownership like livestock or rental earnings, amplifies the attenuating effect of remittances.