Jeffrey is a former member of the CFI communications team.
Please contact Ezra Mannix at emannix@accion.org for inquiries related to the CFI Inclusions blog and/or our social media presence. You may also contact Virginia Moore at vmoore@accion.org to arrange an interview or discuss communications/event opportunities.

Former Senior Communications Specialist

Jeffrey Riecke

CFI bids a fond farewell and good luck to Jeff Riecke, former editor of the CFI Blog, as he takes up residence as a USC graduate student. Here he reflects on his tenure and the evolution of the CFI Blog.

Blog Post

<img class="wp-image-25640 alignleft" src="https://content.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/06/20180524_182546-low-pass.jpg?w=697" alt="Jeff Riecke photo" width="150" height="221" />

This is my last CFI Blog post. Well, hopefully not. But it is my last post as its manager, a position I’ve held for roughly half a decade.

I’ll miss it! Well, not everything about it… I won’t long for the unyielding daily hustle to produce posts. But I’ll miss many things about managing the CFI Blog, perhaps most of all, I’ll miss connecting with all of you, and being the point person for many individuals and organizations in the financial inclusion community to share new insights and industry developments. It was truly a privilege to get to work with so many passionate individuals around the world on how to best tell their stories.
If you’re reading this post that likely means you have some affinity for the Blog, too. Why it is that you enjoy the Blog is surely different from my reasons, but I’m sure we have some overlap.

One of the qualities of the CFI Blog that I think is particularly distinct is – forgive the pun – how inclusive it is. The CFI Blog is unique and all the more valuable to the industry in how open it is to different types of posts from authors ranging from <a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/03/28/simple-can-i-have-my-money-back-please/">industry pioneers</a> to <a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2012/09/18/financial-inclusion-and-the-indian-middle-class/">pioneering leaders</a>. The primary question through which we strive to consider all posts is does this contribute to the greater financial inclusion conversation?

CFI’s mission is to challenge and engage the financial inclusion community to better serve, protect and empower clients. The CFI Blog strives to be a reliable, regular source of news and opinion for the industry—a place to share ideas that move our community forward. As the financial inclusion sector has grown over the years, so too has its blogging landscape. And that’s only a good thing for financial inclusion. However, with more and more being written about financial inclusion all the time, the more the CFI Blog can serve as a (constructive) critic by and for the industry, the better. The Blog is only as strong as its contributions from all of us working toward our common goals.

Here are a few of posts that I think demonstrate what the CFI Blog is all about: challenging dominant narratives; debating disputed issues; introducing novel ideas; and serving as a forum for the industry.
<ul>
 	<li><a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2018/05/31/financial-inclusion-hype-vs-reality-deconstructing-the-2017-findex-results/">Financial Inclusion Hype vs. Reality: Deconstructing the 2017 Findex Results</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2015/08/10/new-fi2020-e-magazine-three-essential-debates/">New FI2020 E-Magazine: Three Essential Debates</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2014/03/11/microfinance-industry-needs-an-infrastructure-fix/">The Microfinance Industry Needs an Infrastructure Fix</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/09/mental-health-matters-for-microfinance/">Mental Health Matters for Microfinance</a></li>
 	<li><a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2012/11/02/more-on-monique/">More on Monique</a></li>
</ul>
I trust the CFI Blog will continue to be a resource for the industry for many years to come. Thanks for all your support during my time at the helm!
&nbsp;

Giving Up the Keys to the Car, Or Rather, the CFI Blog

General Data Protection Regulation has gone into effect in the European Union

Never before have issues of data privacy and security been more top of mind. In the United States this attention was on <a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2018/04/11/financial-inclusion-responds-to-the-zuckerberg-moment/">full display</a> a few weeks ago when every media outlet was glued to Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg as he fielded questions from Congress on how his company handles, and has mishandled, user data.

Europe begins a new era for data protection today as the General Data Protection Regulation (<a href="https://gdpr-info.eu/">GDPR</a>) goes into effect, following its passage roughly two years ago. The law is being celebrated widely for its robust customer-centricity. The degree to which it succeeds, in Europe and globally, in enforcing a business environment that provides adequate safeguards for consumer data management remains to be seen. One thing is certain, however: it has the potential to change the way we all interact with businesses, from internet platforms to banks.

First, a quick overview of the law.

The regulation <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6wwBqfSk-o">tightens rules</a> on what companies can and can’t do with customers’ personal data. Data qualifies as “personal” if it can identify the user, which includes names, phone numbers, usernames, and even GPS data and IP addresses.

The law strives to put customers in control of their data. It requires providers to attain explicit consent from users on data that will be gathered and how it will be used. Instead of users automatically opting in to data sharing, providers must configure their systems with no pre-checked boxes. Users must actively opt in. Providers are compelled to use simple, accessible language communicating what’s in their user data agreements.

The regulation significantly strengthens individuals’ abilities to access their data, and even to erase it. An individual can ask a company for the data in their personal file and the company must comply within a month. If the user believes that a company should correct data, or delete data altogether, the company must comply in most cases.

Punishment for noncompliance is steep, with delinquent companies facing fines up to €20 million or 4 percent of the company’s total revenues, whichever is higher. It’s <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/24/17388206/microsoft-expand-data-privacy-tools-gdpr-eu">reported</a> that Microsoft has had more than 1,600 engineers working on GDPR-related projects.

Even though the regulation only pertains to citizens of the European Union and companies operating there, in today’s global business landscape, where there is no shortage of cross-border business, we’re likely to see providers all over the world adopting stricter data practices to ensure compliance with the GDPR.

What does the new regulation mean for financial services?

We’re likely to see providers throughout the financial services ecosystem reconfiguring their digital products and the related data systems to align with the new standards. For example, a bank might only do 2 percent of its total global business in the EU, but if it fails to comply with the GDPR, it could still be subject to penalties – a strong incentive, indeed. Not all financial services providers will be affected equally. Larger institutions that have had the resources over the past two years to allot product designers, compliance lawyers, and the like to GDPR are better positioned than startups and small providers to take these regulatory changes in stride. Moreover, not all financial services providers use data in the same way. Institutions that use “alternative” data sources to underwrite credit decisions might be faced with a bigger barrier than financers whose business models aren’t contingent on customers opting to share personal information.

Of course, there’s a difference between the letter of the law and business practices. As Richard Waters of The Financial Times <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/bbbce328-5f64-11e8-9334-2218e7146b04">put it</a>, “The principles behind the regulation are laudable, but it is likely to take an onslaught of official complaints from privacy activists to test the parameters of this new regime.”

We’ll be curious to see the degree to which the new law improves users’ engagement with their data. When many of us are faced with a new user agreement, we just click and carry on. Would the requirement to click opt in boxes make a difference in whether we actually read the agreements? Will we take the time to sort out what data we are willing to share and with whom? Perhaps not, but the GDPR works to offer every opportunity for us to do so.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/04/07/internet-data-and-banking-data-should-the-same-rules-apply/">Internet Data and Banking Data - Should the Same Rules Apply?</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/07/addressing-customer-needs-off-to-the-data-mines/">Addressing Customer Needs? Off to the Data Mines</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/05/01/how-secure-is-data-used-in-digital-credit/">How Secure Is Data Used in Digital Credit?</a>

&nbsp;

How Will Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation Affect Us?

<a href="https://www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/consumer-complaints/"><img class="wp-image-25519 alignright" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/cfpb1.png" alt="" width="615" height="379" /></a>Last week, Mick Mulvaney, interim director of the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/business/cfpb-complaints-database-mulvaney.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fyour-money">said</a> in reference to the CFPB’s consumer complaints database, “I don’t see anything in [the Dodd-Frank Act] that says I have to run a Yelp for financial services sponsored by the federal government. I don’t see anything in here that says that I have to make all of those [complaints] public.”

Mulvaney’s comments refer to the complaints database CFPB has been running for several years, which allows anyone to view, sort, and filter complaints submitted by customers regarding their treatment by their financial service provider. Since the database was created, roughly <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CFPB-2018-0014-0001">1.5 million complaints</a> have been logged. This database has functioned as a tremendous resource for prospective customers who want to check out financial institutions, for analysts of consumer risks in the U.S. financial system, and for financial institutions who want to see how they stack up against others. Its publication may also induce financial service providers to be more vigilant in avoiding bad practices and handling customer complaints well.

I share this because Mulvaney has put forth a <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CFPB-2018-0014-0001">call for comments and information</a> from interested parties on how the CFPB handles consumer complaints. CFPB is required by law to collect, investigate, and respond to consumer complaints regarding financial products and services. But it isn’t legally required to make these comments public.

What do you think? Should the CFPB do away with the public side of the database? Mulvaney’s comment has sparked fierce debate in the country, including vehement opposition from consumer protection advocates.
<h3>How the Consumer Complaints Database Works</h3>
When a consumer lodges a complaint into the system, before the complaint is published, the CFPB verifies the relationship between the consumer and the financial service provider, and routes the complaint directly to the provider. The provider then has 15 days to respond to the complaint. The complaint is published once the provider responds, or after 15 days, whichever comes first. The consumer is invited to review and comment on the provider response and indicate whether their concern has been alleviated. This system is meant to allow both provider and customer to have a voice.

In addition to public uses of the database, CFPB uses it to identify patterns of bad behavior. It has prompted action against student loan services, debt collectors, mortgage lenders, and credit card companies, among others. For example, it <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/30/mick-mulvaney-consumer-protection-507460">helped</a> the CFPB identify the systemic fraudulent activity of Wells Fargo employees opening bank accounts without consumer permission.

It’s estimated that <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/2018/05/01/As-Others-See-It-Let-consumer-complaints-see-the-light-of-day/stories/201805010043">97 percent</a> of consumer complaints receive a timely response and 80 percent are resolved to the customer’s satisfaction. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/business/cfpb-complaints-database-mulvaney.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fyour-money">Over 185,000 complaints</a> have resulted in some form of compensation or relief for the consumer complaint, including through monetary relief and the changing of the financial institution’s practices.

Use of the consumer complaints database is robust, with consumers submitting more than <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CFPB-2018-0014-0001">320,000 complaints</a> in 2017. Each week CFPB sends <a href="https://www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/consumer-complaints/">thousands of consumer complaints</a> about financial products and services to companies for response.
<h3>The Case for Revoking Publication </h3>
Opponents of publishing the database cite several concerns. The first question is whether the consumer complaints are substantiated. The CFPB might be able to verify that the consumer is a client of the institution, but it does not verify that the consumer’s complaint is valid before publishing. Even though the financial institution has the opportunity to respond before the complaint is published, publishing unsubstantiated complaints can create undeserved negative attention for the provider.

Another issue is that the database does not allow the frequency of complaints to be <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/2018/05/01/As-Others-See-It-Let-consumer-complaints-see-the-light-of-day/stories/201805010043">adjusted for the size of the institution</a>. The biggest financial institutions in the country appear frequently in the database simply because they have so many more customers. It is not possible to determine the rate of complaints per customer.

Finally, some opponents question the need for complaint resolution channels beyond those financial services providers are already required to have. They argue that little is gained by using public funding for an additional level of complaints, and would prefer to see customers depend on privately managed online tools for consumers to rate financial institutions and products. Shouldn’t these be enough?
<h3>The Case for Keeping It Public (Our View)</h3>
“Daylight is a great disinfectant. And, you know, the American people have a right to know when tens of thousands of their fellow citizens are complaining about a financial institution,” <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/30/mick-mulvaney-consumer-protection-507460">said</a> Karl Frisch of consumer advocacy group Allied Progress. Although it is not required by law, taking down the public database might reduce incentives for providers to behave fairly and respond adequately to complaints. Proponents of publication assert that the current approach helps to hold these institutions accountable.

Regulators around the world, as well as consumer protection organizations including <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/">the Smart Campaign</a>, generally create and support two tiers of grievance redressal, with primarily responsibility lying with providers, but appeals available from an independent ombudsman, either at a provider association level or at the regulatory level or both.

In regards to the concern about the proportionality of complaints to clients, this could be ameliorated with the inclusion on the platform of relevant ratios. Adding such information to the current site would not be difficult.

A <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4449153-Breach-of-Trust-Equifax-Report.html">new report</a> by Senate Banking Committee members Elizabeth Warren, Robert Menendez, and Brian Schatz illustrated that complaints about Equifax to the CFPB nearly doubled after the data breach was announced in September. There were roughly 12,000 complaints in the six months preceding the company’s announcement, and in the six months thereafter the CFPB has received more than 7,000 complaints about Equifax’s improper use of credit reports, 7,000 complaints regarding incorrect information on credit reports, 3,000 complaints about Equifax’s measures taken to resolve issues related to the breach, and 1,500 complaints regarding Equifax’s identity theft protections. For example, we’re able to know that even though the CFPB has received over 20,000 complaints on the breach, it hasn’t yet taken public action against Equifax.

As to the argument that Yelp and other review sites are sufficient, we have reviewed the information on such sites, and we find often confusing and <a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/11/20/choosing-a-payday-lender-can-online-reviews-help/">disappointing</a>. Moreover, many of those sites are paid for by the very companies that are reviewed.

“Hiding this information from the public would directly harm consumers and allow financial institutions to shield even widespread scams from public view,” the three Senate Banking Committee members <a href="https://www.americanbanker.com/news/equifax-breach-shows-need-for-public-cfpb-complaints-dem-senators">assert</a>. We tend to agree.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2018/02/02/exchanging-cash-for-freedom-predatory-bail-bonds-in-the-u-s-criminal-justice-system/">Exchanging Cash for Freedom: Predatory Bail Bonds in the U.S. Criminal Justice System</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/01/19/what-a-repeal-of-the-affordable-care-act-would-mean-for-financial-inclusion-in-the-u-s/">What a Repeal of the Affordable Care Act Would Mean for Financial Inclusion in the U.S.</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/02/09/the-u-s-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-and-the-smart-campaign/">The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Smart Campaign</a>

&nbsp;

Should the CFPB Run a Yelp for Financial Services Providers?

Allyse McGrath

A look at why #FinHealthMatters in the region

This year on Financial Health Matters Day, we at the Center for Financial Inclusion at Accion are taking a look at the new <a href="http://globalfindex.worldbank.org/">Global Findex data</a> and what it says about the financial health of respondents around the world. Because of our recent work on financial health in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, we decided to take a closer look at the Findex numbers from the region.

The 2017 Global Findex shows a substantial increase in account ownership between 2014 and 2017, from 62 percent to 69 percent of adults. However, one indicator that has decreased across this same period is the Findex’s proxy for financial health – the resilience question. This metric measures a person’s ability to come up with emergency funds in the amount of 1/20 GNI per capita in the next month (for reference, this is a little less than $3,000 in the U.S. context, and a little less than 700 dinar in Serbia). Isolating Eastern Europe and Central Asia, the percentage of people who said they could come up with this amount actually decreased slightly from 64 percent in 2014 to 61 percent in 2017.

This data echoes some of the findings presented in the new brief from CFI and the Microfinance Centre (MFC) in Warsaw, <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/publications-a-resources/browse-publications/986-toward-a-financial-health-tool-for-consumers">Toward a Financial Health Tool for Customers – Test Results from Eastern Europe and Central Asia</a>. As its title suggests, the brief shares findings from a financial health quiz that was tested in late 2017 among the clients and staff of organizations partnering with MFC on its Borrow Wisely Campaign. CFI and MFC are working together to build a smartphone-based tool to assist customers with gauging and improving their financial health, starting with the financial health quiz.

The quiz measured financial health across three categories – day-to-day management, resilience, and longer-term planning. Overall, customers scored highest on questions related to their day-to-day management of finances and lowest in questions related to their financial resilience. Our quiz also asked the same resilience question as the Findex. Respondents scored an average of 63 points out of 100, quite in line with Findex results.

Our test of the financial health quiz in the region revealed that people want help with many facets of their financial lives, from short term money management to longer term planning. As noted in our brief, “They also want to know how to plan in unstable economic conditions; they want a blueprint for steps to take when a financial crisis hits; and they want help setting and sticking to spending limits and reducing or consolidating debts. Several people wanted to know how to talk with their families and involve their children in good financial behavior.”

Despite the desire for better habits that respondents expressed during our financial health testing, the Findex shows savings rates in the region are lower than global averages, with 14 percent of adults saving at a financial institution, compared to 27 percent globally and 37 percent saving in any form, compared to 48 percent globally.

Most of the Global Findex is focused on account access, and the resilience question is not a headline in the narrative released by the World Bank. But all of those working in financial inclusion need to think about how to ensure that financial services are making a meaningful difference in the financial health of customers.

CFI and the Microfinance Centre will continue to use insights like those encapsulated in the brief and the Findex to explore how digital channels may be used to help improve customers’ financial health. We look forward to sharing more lessons learned in our finhealth app <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/programs-a-projects/financial-capability#BldgFinCapProject">project</a> along the way.

<a href="https://cfsinnovation.org/news/finhealth-matters-day-2/">Financial Health Matters Day</a> (#FinHealthMatters) is an initiative of the Center for Financial Services Innovation (CFSI). This year CFSI is directing particular attention to student financial health. CFSI finds that although 57 percent of Americans struggle with their overall financial health, 75 percent of students aren’t sure if they’d be able to come up with $1,000 in the next month. Learn more and explore ways to get involved in Financial Health Matters Day <a href="https://cfsinnovation.org/news/finhealth-matters-day-2/">here</a>.

Image credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/worldbank/4248402729/in/album-72157631291110788/">Brigitte Brefort / The World Bank</a>

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/06/01/seeking-happiness-and-financial-health-in-bhutan/">Seeking Happiness and Financial Health in Bhutan</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/03/29/dollar-by-dollar-or-goat-by-goat-how-financial-health-translates-across-oceans/">Dollar by Dollar or Goat by Goat: How Financial Health Translates Across Oceans</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2015/06/09/considerations-for-the-pursuit-of-financial-inclusion/">Considerations for the Pursuit of Financial Inclusion – Beyond Account Access</a>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Findex and Financial Health in Eastern Europe and Central Asia

A breakdown on gender diversity in the digital currency industry

Is cryptocurrency a household word now? How about blockchain or Bitcoin? You don’t have to be immersed in financial services to regularly hear about the <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/10/in-the-world-of-cryptocurrency-buzz-blockchain-is-the-real-winner.html">soaring values</a> of digital currencies, the launch of new products and systems, and other industry developments. Just last week, for example, the Government of Venezuela announced that it was launching a national cryptocurrency backed by its petrol supply. Switzerland is doing the same. And they’re only two of a <a href="https://mashable.com/2018/01/08/cryptocurrency-bitcoin-governments/#2p4BhpujcaqI">growing list</a> of countries actively exploring alternative digital currencies.

This week I came across <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/25/business/cryptocurrency-women-blockchain-bros.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbusiness">an article</a> that punctuated the flow of hype, an eye-opening piece from Nellie Bowles for The New York Times on what probably won’t come as much of a surprise: the cryptocurrency industry is incredibly male-dominated.

Bowles shares a collection of industry statistics and anecdotes that range from the vanishingly small representation of women in the industry to sexist marketing tactics. For example, studies indicate that only roughly 5 percent of investors in blockchain are women. And at the North American Bitcoin Conference held in January, there were only three female speakers to 84 that were male. Even harder to believe, the official conference party was held at a Miami strip club. I wish I was kidding.

Given how new cryptocurrencies and blockchain are, it’s not surprising that beyond what’s shared in Bowles’ article, there aren’t many statistics on gender diversity in the sector. Through heavy Googling I was able to dig up the following:
<ul>
 	<li>Figures on women cryptocurrency users vary across surveys, though they hover at roughly <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/lamjackie/2017/12/10/where-are-the-women-in-the-blockchain-network/#3805ddf6530a">5 percent</a> of all users.</li>
 	<li>In 2017, those who invested in Bitcoin experienced wealth creation of roughly <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/lamjackie/2017/12/10/where-are-the-women-in-the-blockchain-network/#3805ddf6530a">$85 billion</a>, and only $5 billion of that went to women.</li>
 	<li><a href="http://fortune.com/2017/12/12/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-women/">Four out of the 30 largest</a> ICOs (<a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/initial-coin-offering-ico.asp">Initial Coin Offerings</a>) in 2017 were organizations with women founders or co-founders.</li>
 	<li>Digital Currency Group, a venture capital company focused on digital currencies, has an investment portfolio of 67 companies. Women make up only <a href="http://fortune.com/2017/12/12/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-women/">17 percent</a> of those companies’ staff. One-third of these investees have no women staff at all.</li>
</ul>
It’s no secret that today’s tech industry is far from gender-balanced. <a href="http://www.pionline.com/article/20171206/ONLINE/171209897/ctw-investment-group-calls-on-amazon-to-improve-gender-diversity">Amazon</a>, <a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/apple-struggles-to-live-up-to-its-own-values-of-gender-diversity/article/2627362">Apple</a>, <a href="http://fortune.com/2017/06/29/google-2017-diversity-report/">Google</a>, and <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2017/08/02/facebooks-diversity-report-shows-gains-for-women-but-workforce-remains-very-white/#47e1b3d34375">Facebook</a> have all come under fire for lack of gender diversity in recent years. Why should the nascent world of cryptocurrency be any different, especially in considering that it hasn’t yet rose to the level of scrutiny of the “Big Four” tech companies?

Regardless of how we got to this point, it doesn’t have to be this way. In fact, it hasn’t always been this way. In 1984, nearly <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/519426/how-did-tech-become-so-male-dominated/">40 percent</a> of computer science majors were women. Nowadays, about one-quarter of computing jobs are held by women.

However, there are bright spots. Collective Future was <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/25/business/cryptocurrency-women-blockchain-bros.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbusiness">recently formed</a> by two venture capitalists, with the goal of advocating for gender diversity in the blockchain industry and creating a diversity pledge for companies to sign as a gesture of commitment. One of the U.S. industry’s largest digital currency exchanges, Coinbase, reports that <a href="http://fortune.com/2017/12/12/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-women/">46 percent</a> of its hires in 2017 were women or racially diverse. And lastly, perhaps most encouragingly, cryptocurrencies and blockchain are becoming <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/technology/cryptocurrencies-come-to-campus.html">increasingly popular</a> class topics at graduate schools throughout the United States.

Stay tuned for International Women’s Day next week when we’ll spotlight some of the ways in which financial services are becoming more inclusive for women.

Featured image credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/155621829@N02/27908153579/">Casino Lobby</a> 

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/08/08/icici-bank-and-stellar-using-blockchain-to-reach-the-base-of-the-pyramid-in-india/">ICICI Bank and Stellar: Using Blockchain to Reach the Base of the Pyramid in India</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/04/04/what-happens-if-the-blockchain-breaks/">What Happens If the Blockchain Breaks?</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2018/01/18/how-technology-is-propelling-inclusive-insurance/">How Technology Is Propelling Inclusive Insurance</a>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Jeffrey Riecke

Latest by Jeffrey Riecke

Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter.