Digital Payment and Its Discontents: Street Shops and the Indian Government's Push for Cashless Transactions
Abstract
In November 2016, the Government of India banned the vast majority of the nation's banknotes in a move referred to as 'demonetization', with the stated goals of fighting corruption, terrorism, and eventually expanding digital transactions. In this study of 200 shop-keepers in Mumbai and Bengaluru, we found that cash shortage increased digital payment adoption but that digital payments fell after new banknotes became available. Digital payment adoption depended on the nature and scope of transactions, type of product sold, as well as personal factors specific to business owners such as comfort and familiarity with other digital technologies and online transactions. Using theoretical work on market and information behavior, we examined environmental pushes for technology adoption against prevalent transactional practices, trust, and control. We propose that the move toward digital payments must be framed within a larger undertaking of technology-driven modernity that drives these initiatives, rather than just the efficiency or productivity gains digital payments present.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Digital banking has several benefits for marginalized populations.
“HCI and CSCW research has found that digital banking has several benefits for marginalized populations [22,40,44,52].”
From Advocacy as Access Work: How People with Visual Impairments Gain Access to Digital Banking in India (2023) · cites this paper as [52]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 61
- Authors
- Pal, J., Chandra, P., Kameswaran, V., Parameshwar, A., Joshi, S., & Johri, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- George Mason University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2018-04-21
- Pages
- 1-13
- OpenAlex
- W2796158690
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 18.70
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- NSF (IIS 1733634, IIS 1734014)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
- Keywords
- digital payments, demonetization, underfunding, technology adoption, small retailers, informal retail, trust, information behavior, market behavior, India
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review