Economics, Politics and Regional Development ISSN 2576-2060 (Print) ISSN 2576-2052 (Online) Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Original Paper Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and Traditional Banking: A Convergence or Collision Abdulgaffar Muhammad1, Aisha Ahmad Ishaq2, Micah Ezekiel Elton Mike3, Taiwo Ibitomi4, Nura Ahmad Ishaq5 & Maryam Isyaku6 1 Department of Business Administration, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria 2 Department of Business Administration, Kano State Polytechnic 3 Department of Business Administration, Airforce Institute of Technology 4 Department of Business Administration, Achievers University 5 FIRS Headquaters, Nigeria 6 Department of Business Administration and Management, Bayero University Kano Received: January 7, 2024 doi:10.22158/eprd.v5n1p1 Accepted: January 29, 2024 Online Published: April 1, 2024 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/eprd.v5n1p1 Abstract The intricate interplay between the realm of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and the well-established domain of traditional banking constitutes a captivating narrative of convergence, divergence, and potential collaboration. This paper embarks on a comprehensive exploration of the multifaceted interactions between these two financial landscapes, seeking to decipher whether they are destined for convergence or if their collision is inevitable. Decentralized Finance, or DeFi, represents a paradigm shift in the financial sector. Empowered by blockchain technology and smart contracts, DeFi platforms offer innovative solutions for lending, borrowing, trading, and more. Meanwhile, traditional banking, with its longstanding institutional framework, has served as the cornerstone of financial services. However, the emergence of DeFi has challenged the established norms, questioning the necessity of intermediaries and centralization. The convergence hypothesis suggests a future where DeFi and traditional banking coalesce, fusing the innovation and accessibility of DeFi with the stability and regulatory oversight of traditional banking. This path envisions traditional financial institutions adopting DeFi technologies to streamline operations and enhance efficiency, ultimately benefiting consumers with faster, cheaper, and more inclusive services. Conversely, the collision theory posits that the inherent differences between DeFi and traditional banking—decentralization vs. centralization, innovation vs. regulation—will lead to clashes that hinder harmonious integration. Regulatory challenges, legal uncertainties surrounding smart contracts, and the potential for market disruptions 1 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 loom as potential roadblocks to a seamless union. Amid these dynamics, the concept of a symbiotic relationship emerges—a scenario where DeFi and traditional banking coexist while maintaining their distinct attributes. This balance allows for innovation to thrive within the parameters of regulatory compliance, offering consumers a spectrum of financial services catering to diverse preferences. In conclusion, the relationship between DeFi and traditional banking is neither singularly convergent nor inevitably divergent. Rather, it navigates a spectrum of possibilities, shaped by regulatory developments, technological advancements, and market demands. As the financial landscape continues to evolve, this exploration aims to shed light on the potential trajectories of these two worlds and the nuanced interactions that will shape the future of finance. Keywords Decentralized Finance, DeFi, traditional banking, convergence, collision, symbiotic relationship 1. Introduction Decentralized Finance (DeFi) represents a rapidly expanding sector within the cryptocurrency and blockchain industry, poised to transform conventional financial systems by fostering innovation and modernization. It challenges the longstanding dominance of centralized banks regulated by governments, offering an all-encompassing financial system accessible to individuals worldwide, irrespective of race, origin, or geographical location (John et al., 2023). This research paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current DeFi landscape, encompassing its historical evolution, key players, and applications. Additionally, it seeks to delve into the potential DeFi holds and the challenges impeding its broader societal acceptance, an issue particularly pertinent due to prevalent skepticism towards DeFi. The significance of the coexistence of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and Traditional Banking holds paramount importance in shaping the future of financial services (Buterin, 2014). DeFi’s emergence signifies a fundamental shift towards decentralized and borderless financial ecosystems, challenging the centralized nature of Traditional Banking systems (World Bank, 2017). Traditional Banking, with its established infrastructure and regulatory framework, has long been pivotal in financial intermediation, providing stability and trust for individuals and businesses. However, it faces limitations such as high fees, geographical constraints, and lengthy transaction processes, thereby fueling the demand for more efficient alternatives like DeFi. The dynamic interplay between DeFi’s innovation and Traditional Banking’s infrastructure introduces opportunities for collaboration, convergence, or potential collision (Mougayar, 2016). This article aims to elucidate this interplay, analyzing their distinct features, advantages, challenges, and potential impacts on the broader financial ecosystem. Moreover, this paper seeks to offer a comprehensive understanding of both DeFi and Traditional Banking systems, uncovering the motivations behind DeFi’s rise and acknowledging the crucial role of Traditional Banking in global financial stability. It aims to explore potential points of convergence and 2 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 collision, fostering informed discussions about their coexistence and implications for the future of finance. 2. Understanding Decentralized Finance (DeFi) 2.1 Definition and Core Principles of DeFi Decentralized Finance (DeFi) is a transformative financial ecosystem that operates on blockchain technology, aiming to revolutionize traditional financial services by eliminating intermediaries and enabling direct peer-to-peer transactions (Nakamoto, 2008). In the context of the rapid growth of DeFi, it’s important to highlight the valuable insights from a recent study conducted by Bestas in 2023. This study delves into the concept of decentralized finance, shedding light on the key distinctions from traditional finance. Decentralized finance, powered by blockchain technology, is growing day by day, managing approximately $70 billion in assets. The study meticulously discusses how DeFi differs from traditional finance and emphasizes the critical aspect of compliance with legal regulations and the requirements to ensure such compliance. Moreover, Bestas’ study provides a comprehensive evaluation of the financial services offered by the decentralized finance field, encompassing its utilization of the stock market and stablecoins as essential tools. The economic effects, security, and privacy dimensions of DeFi are thoroughly examined, offering valuable insights into its operation and impact. In this study, the differences between centralized and decentralized finance are systematically analyzed, covering legal, economic, security, privacy, and market manipulation aspects. Additionally, the study presents a structured methodology for distinguishing between centralized and decentralized financial services (Bestas, 2023). The core principles of DeFi are firmly rooted in openness, transparency, and accessibility. DeFi protocols operate on public blockchains, ensuring complete transparency and enabling users to independently verify transactions and contracts (Mougayar, 2016). Furthermore, DeFi platforms are open-source, fostering collaborative development and community-driven innovation. This open nature empowers developers to create new financial instruments and decentralized applications (DApps) that can seamlessly integrate into the DeFi ecosystem, enhancing its functionality and diversity. Moreover, DeFi places a significant emphasis on financial inclusivity, providing access to financial services for individuals worldwide, irrespective of traditional identification or credit checks. This commitment extends to unbanked and underbanked populations, bridging the divide between traditional banking systems and individuals who have been excluded from formal financial services (World Bank, 2017). 3 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 The decentralized nature of DeFi platforms ensures that users maintain control over their assets. Instead of relying on a central authority to manage funds, users hold their private keys and access financial services directly through non-custodial wallets. This control enhances security, as users are less susceptible to hacks or mismanagement of funds through third-party intermediaries. Overall, the principles of decentralization, transparency, accessibility, and financial inclusivity underpin the foundation of DeFi. As this rapidly evolving landscape continues to expand, the potential for DeFi to disrupt traditional banking and shape the future of finance becomes increasingly apparent. 2.2 Key Components of DeFi Ecosystem The DeFi ecosystem encompasses a diverse range of interconnected components that collectively redefine the landscape of financial services. Operating on blockchain technology and powered by smart contracts, these components introduce decentralization and transparency to traditional finance (Nakamoto, 2008). Central to the DeFi landscape are Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs), platforms that facilitate direct peer-to-peer trading of digital assets without intermediaries. DEXs utilize smart contracts to automate trading processes and ensure secure custody, granting users greater control over their assets (Uniswap, 2021). Decentralized lending and borrowing protocols constitute another crucial aspect of DeFi. These protocols enable individuals to lend or borrow digital assets in a trustless environment. Smart contracts govern lending terms and automate collateral management, revolutionizing credit markets and enhancing financial inclusion (Aave, 2023). Automated Market Makers (AMMs) play a pivotal role in maintaining liquidity within DeFi platforms. These algorithmic systems automatically determine asset prices based on supply and demand, encouraging users to provide liquidity to decentralized pools (Narayanan et al., 2016). Stablecoins, pegged to real-world assets or algorithmically stabilized, address the volatility of cryptocurrencies. Stablecoins serve as a bridge between traditional financial systems and the digital world, offering stability in a volatile market (USD Coin, 2018). DeFi’s reliance on decentralized identity solutions and oracles further strengthens its infrastructure. Decentralized identity technologies provide users with control over their personal information, promoting privacy in transactions. Oracles serve as data sources, allowing smart contracts to interact with external information accurately (Chainlink, 2023). Additionally, the concept of yield farming and liquidity mining has gained traction within the DeFi ecosystem. These mechanisms encourage users to provide liquidity to various DeFi platforms, earning rewards in return. Such strategies enhance user engagement and token distribution (Synthetix, 2023). The synergy between these components fosters a vibrant DeFi ecosystem that redefines financial services, ushering in a new era of decentralized finance. 4 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 2.3 Advantages and Challenges of DeFi The emergence of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) has introduced a transformative paradigm to the financial sector, bringing with it both distinct advantages and significant challenges. On the advantages front, DeFi showcases its potential to foster financial inclusion on a global scale. DeFi platforms extend financial services to previously marginalized individuals, enabling participation in activities such as lending, borrowing, and trading. This aligns with broader efforts to enhance financial access and empower underserved populations (World Bank, 2017). A cornerstone advantage of DeFi is the removal of intermediaries from financial transactions. The implementation of smart contracts eliminates the need for middlemen, expediting processes and reducing costs. This streamlined approach enhances the efficiency and accessibility of financial services, offering users greater control over their funds (Mougayar, 2016). Transparency and openness emerge as inherent benefits of the DeFi ecosystem. Utilizing public blockchains, DeFi transactions are recorded on an immutable ledger accessible to all participants. This transparency not only fosters trust but also holds the potential to address concerns related to fraud and non-compliance (Buterin, 2015). Furthermore, DeFi’s modularity facilitates innovation and composability. Developers can build upon existing protocols to create new and tailored financial solutions. This flexibility encourages rapid iteration and the development of innovative products to meet evolving market demands (Narayanan et al., 2016). However, DeFi is not immune to challenges. Smart contract security remains a critical concern. Vulnerabilities in smart contracts can lead to substantial financial losses, as past incidents have highlighted. Rigorous auditing and robust coding practices are crucial to mitigate these risks and enhance the security of DeFi platforms (Chainlink, 2023). Navigating the intricate web of regulatory uncertainty poses another significant challenge. The decentralized nature of DeFi often clashes with traditional regulatory frameworks, resulting in ambiguity and legal complexities. Striking a balance between innovation and compliance is imperative to ensure sustainable growth (Nakamoto, 2008). Scalability represents an ongoing hurdle for DeFi’s widespread adoption. High network congestion on popular blockchains can result in slow transaction processing and high fees. Solutions like layer-two scaling are explored to address these limitations and support broader DeFi ecosystem growth (Synthetix, 2023). In summary, DeFi offers substantial advantages including financial inclusion, intermediary elimination, transparency, and innovation. These, however, are coupled with challenges like smart contract security, regulatory ambiguity, and scalability. Navigating these complexities will be instrumental in determining DeFi’s transformative potential in reshaping the financial landscape. 5 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 3. Methodology The methodology employed in this study involves a qualitative approach centered on an extensive literature review and a conceptual framework development. As this research primarily focuses on presenting a comprehensive analysis of the intricate dynamics between Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and Traditional Banking, no original data collection or empirical analysis is required. 3.1 Conceptual Framework Development Based on the insights gathered from the literature review, a conceptual framework is constructed. This framework aims to provide a structured and holistic understanding of the multifaceted relationships between DeFi and Traditional Banking. It will be informed by established theories in finance, economics, and technology and will be customized to reflect the unique dynamics of these financial domains. The qualitative analysis and synthesis of existing knowledge through the literature review will serve as the basis for drawing conceptual insights and conclusions regarding the potential trajectories of DeFi and its relationship with Traditional Banking. The methodology will contribute to a profound exploration of the convergence or collision scenarios between these two financial worlds, facilitating a more nuanced understanding of their future dynamics. 3.2 Exploring Traditional Banking 3.2.1 Overview of Traditional Banking System The traditional banking system, a longstanding pillar of the global financial framework, contrasts with the dynamic landscape of decentralized finance (DeFi). Modern banks trace their origins back to ancient civilizations, where rudimentary institutions emerged to facilitate currency storage and lending. Over time, these early concepts evolved into complex financial establishments that play vital roles in economic development, wealth management, and capital allocation (Calomiris & Haber, 2014). At its core, the traditional banking system performs a range of crucial functions within economies. 3.2.2 Roles and Functions of Traditional Banks Traditional banks play a multifaceted and integral role within economies, serving as the cornerstone of financial systems and facilitating a diverse range of functions crucial to individuals, businesses, and governments. Central to their function, traditional banks act as deposit-takers, providing individuals and businesses with a secure avenue to store their funds. Depositors receive interest on their deposits, while banks use these funds to fuel loans and investments (Beck, Demirgüç-Kunt & Merrouche, 2013). An equally vital role of traditional banks is their function as intermediaries in the credit market. By assessing borrowers’ creditworthiness, they offer loans for various purposes, from personal needs to entrepreneurial pursuits. This intermediary function ensures efficient capital allocation, stimulating economic growth (Aslie et al., 2012). Traditional banks offer fundamental payment and settlement services, enabling seamless financial transactions. Individuals and businesses rely on these services to transfer funds, both domestically and across borders, forming the bedrock of economic interactions (La Porta et al., 1997). Beyond these functions, traditional banks extend into wealth management activities, 6 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 providing clients with a range of financial services such as investment advisory, retirement planning, and portfolio management, catering to individuals’ long-term financial goals and aspirations (Gennaioli, Shleifer & Vishny, 2012). Acting as intermediaries, traditional banks bridge the gap between savers and borrowers. Their role in financial intermediation involves assessing risk, setting interest rates, and directing capital to various sectors, thereby contributing to economic stability and growth (Levine, 1997). Traditional banks operate within a regulatory framework that mandates capital adequacy, risk management, and consumer protection, ensuring financial stability and safeguarding clients’ interests (Demirgüç-Kunt & Huizinga, 2010). In summary, traditional banks encompass functions ranging from deposit-taking and credit intermediation to payment services, wealth management, financial intermediation, and regulatory compliance, collectively contributing to economic growth, stability, and the seamless flow of financial activities. 3.2.3 Pros and Cons of Traditional Banking in the Digital Age In the midst of the digital age, traditional banks find themselves grappling with an array of advantages and challenges brought about by the evolving technological landscape. One of the notable advantages of traditional banking in the digital age is the physical presence that brick-and-mortar branches offer, providing customers with opportunities for face-to-face transactions and personal interactions (Degryse & Ongena, 2005). Traditional banks have established a reputation for trustworthiness and reliability, reassuring customers who prioritize stability and security, especially when dealing with sensitive financial matters (Boot, 2000). Moreover, traditional banks offer a comprehensive array of financial services under one roof, catering to diverse financial needs, from savings and checking accounts to mortgages and investment advice (DeYoung & Rice, 2004). However, the digital age also presents challenges for traditional banks, including issues related to the digital divide, which limits accessibility to online banking services for certain segments of the population (Agarwal et al., 2013). The ascent of fintech and digital banking solutions introduces a competitive landscape that traditional banks must confront, potentially diverting tech-savvy customers to alternative platforms (Barba Navaretti et al., 2018). In summary, traditional banks in the digital age enjoy advantages rooted in their physical presence, trust, and comprehensive services but must address challenges related to the digital divide and competition from fintech disruptors. Balancing traditional values with technological adaptation remains a central consideration for their continued relevance. 7 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Convergence and Synergies between DeFi and Traditional Banking 4.1.1 Overlapping Features and Objectives The realms of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and traditional banking exhibit an array of overlapping features and shared objectives. While distinct in their operational mechanisms, these two financial paradigms converge in certain areas, reflecting common goals within the broader financial ecosystem. Both DeFi and traditional banking systems share the fundamental objective of financial inclusion. While traditional banking aims to provide access to financial services for the underserved and unbanked populations, DeFi strives to extend financial access globally through blockchain technology and decentralized networks. Furthermore, the efficiency of transactions unites both DeFi and traditional banking. Traditional banks seek efficient processing of payments and fund transfers, while DeFi platforms leverage blockchain’s speed and transparency to enhance transaction efficiency. Another shared objective is security and trust. Traditional banks implement security measures to protect customer data and transactions. Similarly, DeFi platforms prioritize secure smart contracts and decentralized protocols to ensure user trust and data integrity. Risk management is a common focus for both systems. Traditional banks employ risk assessment and mitigation strategies for loan portfolios, while DeFi platforms integrate risk management protocols to safeguard assets and minimize vulnerabilities. Finally, innovation and adaptation are mutual goals. Traditional banking institutions aim to embrace technology to improve customer experiences, and DeFi platforms continuously innovate to enhance decentralized financial services. In essence, while DeFi and traditional banking differ in execution, their shared objectives encompass financial inclusion, transaction efficiency, security, risk management, and innovation. Acknowledging these commonalities can foster a greater understanding of their potential convergence or divergence. 4.2 Case Studies: Successful Integration of DeFi and Traditional Banking Several instances of successful integration between Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and traditional banking have emerged, highlighting the potential for collaboration and convergence between these two distinct financial domains. While these case studies represent specific examples, they underscore the broader trend of exploring synergies between DeFi and traditional banking. 4.2.1 Case Study 1: JPMorgan Chase and Onyx In a noteworthy example, JPMorgan Chase, a prominent traditional banking institution, launched Onyx, a blockchain-based platform. Onyx aims to streamline and enhance the efficiency of the bank’s operations, particularly in the realm of wholesale payments. By harnessing blockchain technology, JPMorgan Chase seeks to expedite transactions, reduce errors, and improve the overall payment experience for its clients. This case exemplifies how a traditional bank can leverage decentralized technology to augment its existing infrastructure (JPMorgan Chase, 2020). 8 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 4.2.2 Case Study 2: Celsius Network Celsius Network presents an example of a platform that bridges the gap between DeFi and traditional banking by offering services such as lending and borrowing, but with a focus on incorporating traditional financial practices. Celsius Network employs decentralized principles to provide users with interest income on their crypto holdings and offers loans secured by cryptocurrency collateral. This integration of traditional financial services with decentralized technology showcases the potential for collaboration between the two sectors (Celsius Network, 2023). 4.2.3 Case Study 3: AllianceBlock AllianceBlock exemplifies the fusion of DeFi and traditional banking through a decentralized capital market platform. By integrating traditional financial instruments like structured products and derivatives with blockchain technology, AllianceBlock aims to provide efficient access to global financial markets for both institutional and retail investors. This case highlights the potential for decentralized platforms to facilitate traditional financial services in a more accessible and inclusive manner (AllianceBlock, 2023). These case studies illuminate the evolving landscape where DeFi and traditional banking intersect. They underscore the feasibility of incorporating decentralized principles within traditional financial systems and emphasize the transformative potential of collaboration between these two spheres. While these examples showcase successful integration, the dynamic relationship between DeFi and traditional banking continues to evolve, offering opportunities for innovation and convergence. 4.3 Potential Benefits of Collaboration and Interoperability The convergence of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and traditional banking systems offers a promising landscape of potential benefits, driven by collaboration and interoperability between these seemingly distinct financial realms. These benefits underscore the synergies that can arise when the strengths of each system are harnessed collectively. 4.3.1 Enhanced Financial Inclusion Collaboration between DeFi and traditional banking can amplify efforts towards financial inclusion. DeFi’s decentralized nature can extend financial services to populations traditionally underserved by conventional banking, while traditional banks can provide the infrastructure and accessibility necessary for a broader reach (World Bank, 2018). 4.3.2 Efficient Cross-Border Transactions By leveraging blockchain technology, the integration of DeFi and traditional banking can lead to more efficient cross-border transactions. The inherent transparency and speed of blockchain networks can reduce the complexities and timeframes associated with international money transfers (BIS, 2020). 4.3.3 Comprehensive Financial Services The collaboration can yield a harmonious blend of comprehensive financial services. Traditional banks can offer a wide array of financial products, complemented by DeFi’s agility in creating customized solutions. This synergy provides consumers with a holistic suite of options tailored to their diverse 9 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 needs (European Central Bank, 2020). 4.3.4 Innovation and Technological Advancement The convergence can fuel innovation and technological advancement. DeFi’s agile and experimental nature can inspire traditional banks to embrace new technologies and enhance their offerings. Conversely, traditional banks’ infrastructure can provide a stable foundation for DeFi projects seeking scalability and mainstream adoption (ECB, 2019). In summary, collaboration and interoperability between DeFi and traditional banking hold the potential to generate enhanced financial inclusion, efficient cross-border transactions, comprehensive financial services, improved risk management and compliance, as well as accelerated innovation. The fusion of their strengths can drive the evolution of the financial landscape toward a more inclusive, efficient, and technologically advanced future. 5. Conclusion The convergence of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and traditional banking unveils a clash between centralization and decentralization philosophies, reflecting divergent approaches to financial systems and governance. Traditional banking emphasizes stability, regulatory oversight, and institutional control, employing stringent measures like Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) compliance (Bordo & Levin, 2017; FATF, 2017). In contrast, DeFi prioritizes empowerment, technological innovation, and financial privacy through decentralized platforms and smart contracts (Swan, 2015; Narayanan et al., 2016). The clash of these philosophies presents both challenges and opportunities. The hybridization of centralized stability and decentralized innovation could lead to a balanced and synergistic financial ecosystem, fostering inclusivity and compliance. However, regulatory hurdles and legal uncertainties arise as DeFi’s decentralized nature challenges established norms, requiring a delicate balance between innovation and risk mitigation. Addressing the legal intricacies posed by smart contracts and determining liability in unforeseen or malicious scenarios becomes a pressing concern. Collaborative efforts, such as regulatory sandboxes and international alliances, emerge as potential solutions to navigate the evolving regulatory landscape. The delicate task of harmonizing innovation with consumer protection is underscored, as the surge of DeFi innovation challenges traditional banking’s regulatory structures. Adaptive regulation, responsive to innovation while guarding against risks, and consumer empowerment through education are crucial in achieving equilibrium. In summary, the convergence of DeFi and traditional banking necessitates recalibration of regulatory frameworks, transparent interpretation of decentralized technologies within legal bounds, and a collaborative ethos (Böhme et al., 2015; Santander, 2023). Striking a balance between innovation and consumer protection becomes central in shaping the future relationship between these two realms. Looking ahead, predictions suggest increasing collaboration, with a focus on balancing innovation and 10 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 regulatory compliance in this transformative paradigm shift. References AAVE. (2023). AAVE LIQUIDITY PROTOCOL. Retrieved from https://aave.com/ Agarwal, S., Driscoll, J. C., Gabaix, X., & Laibson, D. I. (2013, April 24). Learning in the credit card market [Working Paper No. 1091623]. Social Science Research Network. AllianceBlock. (2023.). About Us. Retrieved from https://allianceblock.io/ Bank for International Settlements. (2020). Impending Arrival: A Sequel to the Survey on Fintech. Retrieved from https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap107.htm Barba, N. G., Calzolari, G., Mansilla-Fernandez, J. M., & Pozzolo, A. F. (2018, January 10). Fintech and Banking. Friends or Foes? Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3099337 Beck, T., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Merrouche, O. (2013). Islamic vs. conventional banking: Business model, efficiency, and stability. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(2), 433-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.09.016 Berger, A. N., & Roman, R. A. (2017). Bank liquidity creation, monetary policy, and financial crises. Journal of Financial Stability, 30, 139-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2017.05.001 Beştaş, M. (2023). Decentralized Finance (DeFi). International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research (JSHSR), 10(91), 124-141. Böhme, R., Christin, N., Edelman, B., & Moore, T. (2015). Bitcoin: Economics, technology, and governance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(2), 213-238. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.2.213 Boot, A. W. (2000). Relationship Banking: What Do We Know? Journal of Financial Intermediation, 9(1), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfin.2000.0282 Bordo, M. D., & Levin, A. T. (2017). Central bank digital currency and the future of monetary policy. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23711 Calomiris, C. W., & Haber, S. H. (2014). Fragile by design: The political origins of banking crises and scarce credit. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400849925 Coinbase and Circle. (2018). Coinbase and Circle announce the launch of USDC—A Digital Dollar. Retrieved from https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbase-and-circle-announce-the-launch-of-usdc-a-digital-dollar Degryse, H., & Ongena, S. (2005). Distance, Lending Relationships, and Competition. Journal of Finance, 60(1), 231-266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00729.x Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Huizinga, H. (2010). Bank activity and funding strategies: The impact on risk and returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 98(3), 626-650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.06.004 Demirgüç-Kunt, A., Feyen, E. H. B., & Levine, R. (2012). The Evolving Importance of Banks and Securities Markets (April 7, 2012). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2083622 11 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 Demirgüç-Kunt, A., Klapper, L., Singer, D., Ansar, S., & Hess, J. (2018). The Global Findex Database 2017: Measuring Financial Inclusion and the Fintech Revolution. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1259-0 DeYoung, R., & Rice, T. (2004). Noninterest Income and Financial Performance at U.S. Commercial Banks. Financial Review, 39(1), 101-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0732-8516.2004.00069.x European Central Bank. (2019). Crypto-Assets: Implications for financial stability, monetary policy, and payments and market Retrieved infrastructures. from https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops/ecb.op223~3ce14e986c.en.pdf Exploring Crypto Lender’s Collapse. (2023). Coin Central. Retrieved from https://coincentral.com/celsius-network-review/ Gennaioli, N., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (2012). Neglected risks, financial innovation, and financial fragility. Journal of Financial Economics, 104(3), 452-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.05.005 John, F., Yadav, K., & Soni, M. (2023). Decentralized Finance: A Review of the Current Landscape and Future Opportunities. International Journal for Science Technology and Engineering, 11(4), 3231-3236. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2023.50743 JPMorgan Chase. (2020). JPMorgan’s Onyx Takes Blockchain to the Next Level. Retrieved from https://www.jpmorgan.com/technology/news/blockchain-in-space La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). Trust in large organizations. The Journal of Political Economy, 125(5), 1380-1418. https://doi.org/10.3386/w5864 Levine, R. (1997). Financial development and economic growth: Views and agenda. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(2), 688-726. Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risks. (2023). Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Retrieved from https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/Methodsandtrends/Ml-tf-risks.htm Mougayar, W. (2016). The Business Blockchain: Promise, Practice, and Application of the Next Internet Technology. Wiley. Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Retrieved from https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf Nakamoto, W. S., & Buterin, V. (2015). A Next Generation Smart Contract & Decentralized Application Platform. In Ethereum White Paper,@ inproceedings (pp. 1-36). Narayanan, A., Bonneau, J., Felten, E., Miller, A., & Goldfeder, S. (2016). Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies: A Comprehensive Introduction. Princeton University Press. Santander Launches the First End-to-End Blockchain Bond. (2023). Santander. Retrieved from https://www.santander.com/en/press-room/press-releases/santander-launches-the-first-end-to-endblockchain-bond Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy. O’Reilly Media. The Liquidity Layer of DeFi. (2023). Synthetix. Retrieved from https://synthetix.io/ 12 Published by SCHOLINK INC. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eprd Economics, Politics and Regional Development Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024 Uniswap v3 Core. (2021). Retrieved from https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf What Is a Blockchain Oracle? (2023). Chainlink. Retrieved from https://chain.link/education/blockchain-oracles World Bank. (2017). Global Findex Database 2017: Measuring Financial Inclusion and the Fintech Revolution. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/ed800062-e062-5a05-acdd-90429d8a5a 07 13 Published by SCHOLINK INC.