Financial technologies are understood as ICT-based financial innovations and business entities based on these innovations (Lai & Samers, 2021; Langley & Leyshon, 2021; Wójcik, 2021b). Like other technological innovations, Fintech not only influences technical parameters of products and services, but also transforms the economic organization of firms and industries (Baldwin, 2020; Sanchez & Mahoney, 2013). ICT solutions in the financial sector complement the existing services (e.g., payment platforms), substitute human work and tangible assets (e.g., robo-advisers), and generate new solutions (e.g., mobile wallets). Furthermore, Fintech transcends borders and geographical frontiers, as exemplified by crowdfunding in financial centers accessible to start-ups and growth firms from peripheral locations (Bonini & Capizzi, 2019; Spigel, 2022). However, the ongoing digital transformation of financial services has a strong spatial and multiscalar dimension and takes various forms and outcomes, depending on the socioeconomic and institutional specifics (Leyshon, 2020; Baranauskas, 2021; Coe, 2021). The financial sector has recently been conceptualized as a financial ecosystem to reflect its exposition to dynamics and occasional disruptive change (Leyshon, 2020). Within a broadly defined financial ecosystem, two interrelated structures can be identified according to spatial characteristics (Gancarczyk, Łasak, & Gancarczyk, 2022; Lai, 2020). The first comprises global networks of financial centers and large investment banks, that is, global financial networks (GFNs), largely spanning over the borders of countries and regions (Coe, Lai, & Wójcik, 2014; Coe, 2021). The other forms are financial ecologies as segments of the financial ecosystem that are delimited by particular territories (Lai, 2016; Leyshon et al., 2004; Leyshon et al., 2006; Langley & Leyshon, 2020). Being subunits of the financial ecosystem, FEs represent interrelated financial intermediaries and other economic agents, focused on the provision and access to financial services in particular territories (Beaverstock et al., 2013; DawnBurton, 2020; Lai, 2016; Leyshon et al., 2004; Leyshon, 2020). In this vein, FEs can be considered as governance modes comprising private and public entities, such as banks, Fintech, BigTech, public agencies, enterprises, and customers, and relationships among these entities. The actors and relationships are delimited by a given location, such as a region or city (Langley, 2016; DawnBurton, 2020; Chen & Hassink, 2021; Appleyard, 2020). The relevance of the FE concept is based on the disproportionate outcomes that small ecologies may raise for comprehensive systems, as evidenced by the subprime market failure in the USA, affecting the subsequent financial and economic crisis of 2007-2009 (Leyshon, 2020), with relevant effects on many economies such as the European economy (Rodil-Marzábal & Menezes-Ferreira-Junior, 2016). Therefore, investigating small but critical points within the larger financial ecosystem is crucial for policy. It is also theoretically justified since the financial ecosystem has been predominantly studied as a general abstraction of the financial sector. Subsystems remain less explored, especially in the granularity of the spatial context. Since FEs are context-specific and undergo co-evolutionary dynamics with this context, they also transform as a phenomenon and a concept (Lai, 2020; Wójcik, 2021a). One of the main influences comes from the recent technological developments raised by Fintech. The growing empirical evidence in this area calls for understanding consequences for the FE construct (Welch, Rumyantseva, & Hewerdine, 2016) and adequate policy responses. Resonating with the said research gaps and an early stage of the development of the FE idea, this article aims to identify how Fintech frames FEs and propose the related conceptual and policy implications. To frame the FE concept, we use the methodological lens of construct clarity principles (Suddaby, 2010; Simsek et al., 2017) and concept reconstruction (Welch et al., 2016). The method includes a systematic literature review, which represents a unique approach, since the existing theorizing of FEs has been either in the form of conceptual papers or narrative reviews (Lund et al., 2016). Our findings raise conceptual and policy-related contributions. First, the article conceptually reframes the understanding of FE as financial services governance enhanced by technological advancements and focused on territorial projects and communities. Second, the concept of FE was clarified according to its main elements and its relationships with other adjacent ideas of spatial networking for socioeconomic development. Third, research propositions and areas for further investigation were proposed. In the following, we present the literature review to justify our aim and research questions. The methodology section presents the conceptual lens for our discussion of the FE as a construct shaped by Fintech; it also specifies the method of a systematic literature review. Results, discussion, and conclusion proceed in the next sections. CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS Financial ecosystems were institutionally introduced to the policy framework and gained widespread recognition in research since the Federal Reserve Bank of New York conference in 2006 (Leyshon, 2020). FEs have become a new theoretical abstraction of the financial services sector as an alternative to the neoclassical equilibrium-based doctrine (Leyshon, 2020). The main difference was in acknowledging radical dynamics within the sector treated as an ecosystem with a diverse and flexible set of financial intermediaries, institutional investors and supporting entities, such as exchanges, data providers, and regulators (Bose, Dong, & Simpson, 2019). The abstraction of complex adaptive systems has often been recalled as a broad framework to understand the functioning and change in the financial sector. Consequently, theoretical perspectives of evolution and coevolution, and in particular, the network governance concept to cope with complex coordination issues, demonstrate explanatory power in studying FEs (Chen & Hassink, 2021; Ponte & Sturgeon, 2014; Chen & Hassink, 2021, 2020; Coe & Yeung, 2019). The lens of the financial ecosystem was intended to provide concepts and methods that would address environmental and regulatory shocks and prepare for future breakthrough changes to the financial system (Leyshon, 2020; Fasnacht, 2018). Furthermore, within this idea, the classical goals set for the financial sector, such as optimizing capital allocation, matching savers and investors, and signaling scarcity and abundance, were expanded by sustainability and social responsibility goals that go beyond purely economizing (Bose et al., 2019; Fasnacht, 2018). The focus on the financial ecosystem as a model or abstraction of the financial sector predominated over what is the core of ecosystems, the interrelated actors embedded in particular socio-economic and institutional environments (Strumeyer & Swammy, 2017; Bose et al., 2019; Lai, 2020; Wojcik, 2021). Although the legal frameworks of financial ecosystems are intensely studied, the remaining context, such as socioeconomic environment and informal institutions, remain much less explored (Gancarczyk et al., 2022). These contextual factors are specific to individual territories within the financial ecosystem (Ponte & Sturgeon, 2014; Chen & Hassink, 2021, 2020; Coe & Yeung, 2019). Since the systemic approach assumes interrelations and mutual influences among its parts, changes or weaknesses in a subsystem affect the whole. A painful recognition for this gap happened just after the indicated 2006 turn to the financial sector as an ecosystem, with the shock of the 2007-2009 crisis. The latter originated in the smaller subunit of the ecosystem of the US subprime market. The following pandemic and political breakthroughs, as well as technological developments, raised new challenges, adaptations, and structural changes to the financial ecosystem (Leyshon, 2020). However, they were implemented differently in different spatial contexts, which stimulated a more granular approach of the financial ecosystem as a collection of place-based subsystems, that is, financial ecologies (Lai, 2016). Another justification for the more place-based perspective is that localized supply chains might require localized financial systems or ecologies (Sarawut & Sangkaew, 2022). Wójcik and Iannou (2020) argue that local and regional financial centers are expected to lose their position, and that the territories outside the core regions and financial centers will have to rely on retail banking and the public sector to fund investment and sustainable development. These smaller ecologies will coexist with global financial networks, which are worldwide networks of financial centers and investment banks (Lai, 2020). The concept of FE originated in the field of economic geography to reflect the spatial specifics and uneven distribution of financial ecosystems, and to address the crucial issues in financing for the particular territorial populations, such as inclusion, financialization, surveillance, and over-indebtedness (DawnBurton, 2020). Consequently, the FE concept recasts the financial system as a coalition of smaller constitutive ecologies, such that distinctive groups of financial knowledge and practices emerge in different places with uneven connectivity and material outcomes (Lai, 2016). The relevance of the FE phenomenon and concept consists of a more fine-grained approach to understanding uneven access to financial services and uneven connectedness to the financial system (DawnBurton, 2020; Leyshon, 2020). Furthermore, research on FEs signals weak and strong points in subsystems that can affect the efficiency of the entire financial system. FEs represent interrelated financial intermediaries and other economic agents focused on the provision of and access to financial services in particular territories (Leyshon, 2020). As systemic phenomena, they comprise both actors and their relationships, in which actors form various configurations of private and public entities, such as banks, public agencies, enterprises, and customers. The actors and relationships are delimited by a given location that forms a spatial context, that is, a set socioeconomic conditions of a territory, be it a region, city, or a country, and acknowledging multiscalar contexts (Langley, 2016; DawnBurton, 2020; Chen & Hassink, 2021; Appleyard, 2020). The context of a particular ecology should also be considered in a wider, multiscalar perspective. Multiscalarity of the context is an idea that advocates a multilevel analysis of a spatial unit (Chen & Hassink, 2021). The example of this approach is a regional financial ecology that should be analyzed in the context of the region, country, and relevant international environments. Due to the multiscalar perspective, spatially focused FEs do not lose a broader framework of the financial system in larger units and globally (Chen & Hassink, 2020). Taking into account the nature of the FE presented above, the main elements of this construct include actors, relationships among actors, outcomes, and contexts. While the scope of actors and contexts has been outlined above, the systemic relationships and outcomes of the FE require further explanation. The FE relationships are often captured as governance, whereby governance represents the sets of institutions (rules, norms) that affect the functioning of a particular socioeconomic system and its efficiency (Colombo, Dagnino, Lehmann, & Salmador, 2019; Ostrom, 1986; Williamson, 2000). In this vein, governance can be described according to the rules of collaboration and competition, and power relations (Lai, 2018). Types of governance range from the firm to hybrids, such as networks, and to markets (Gereffi, Humphrey, & Sturgeon, 2005; Williamson, 2000). The outcomes of FE represent the terms of and access to financing, with a more general effect on financial inclusion or exclusion and on the overall territorial development. With the wider financial systems, FEs share such constitutive elements as actors and their relationships centered around financial services supply and demand (Bose et al., 2019; Fasnacht, 2018; Lai, 2020). Moreover, they similarly focus on the coordination of the system through the lens of governance (DawnBurton, 2020; Langley & Leyshon, 2021). However, FEs also demonstrate some unique characteristics in relation to wider financial ecosystems, such as clear delimitation of a territorial space, be it a city, region, or country, and acknowledgment of an associated socioeconomic and institutional context (DawnBurton, 2020; Leyshon et al., 2004). The focus on a particular territory does not ignore the systemic nature of economic relationships in the globalized world, since FEs are considered in a multiscalar context (Chen & Hassink, 2020; Leyshon, 2020). Connectivity of given populations to a broader financial system becomes one of the major issues to ensure the infusion of external sources (Coe et al., 2014). The focus on relationships between commercial banks and retail customers, as well as underserved and unbanked individuals or enterprises, differentiates FEs from GFNs (Beaverstock et al., 2013; Coe et al., 2014; DawnBurton, 2020). The latter consider global networks of investment banks and financial centers liaising over peripheral and noncore territories (Coe et al., 2014; DawnBurton, 2020; Lai, 2018). This global perspective is also related to the governance approach in the framework of global value chains, which extends to financial activity (Milberg, 2008; Coe et al., 2014; Seabrooke & Wigan, 2017). The emphasis on socioeconomic effects for disadvantaged market segments and particular industries and projects represents an additional feature of FEs as outcome-oriented systems. While financial ecosystems are primarily targeted at economic efficiency and stability of the system itself, FEs emphasize territorial target groups and projects (Langley, 2016; Langley & Leyshon, 2017). Regarding governance, the focus of FEs has been on network governance of a complex and multi-actor adaptive system (Leyshon, 2020). Network governance is considered not only from the perspective of power relations and resource allocation, but also from learning and financial practices (Lai, 2016). As evolutionary and dynamic phenomena, financial ecosystems and FE undergo substantive and conceptual developments. One of the ongoing breakthrough transformations stems from Fintech. Financial ecosystems are increasingly reconceptualized as the ultimate mode of financial services governance transformed by financial technologies (Wójcik & Ioannou, 2020; Łasak & Gancarczyk, 2022; Gancarczyk et al., 2022). Similarly, the intensive development of FEs is closely related to technological changes that enable a flexible establishment of new forms of cooperation between economic entities (Arsanian & Fischer, 2019). Fintech increase efficiency and availability of existing and launch of new financial products (Hill, 2018; Livesey, 2018; Nicoletti et al., 2017; Sabatini, Cucculelli, & Gregori, 2022; Scardovi, 2017). However, negative effects are also reported, such as over-indebtedness of risky customers, Fintech surveillance, and exclusion of some customers due to computer illiteracy (Kong & Loubere, 2021; Łasak & Gancarczyk, 2021; Brooks, 2021). The economic and social outcomes of the emerging FEs transformed by Fintech have not been fully understood and systemized (Langley & Leyshon, 2021; Wójcik, 2021b). Given technological influences, the FE undergoes developments in its core elements, i.e., actors, governance, and outcomes, acknowledging spatial contexts. Despite the increasing stock of empirical findings that describe the impact of Fintech on the functioning of FEs, we lack a synthesis reflection to reconsider FEs from this perspective. Therefore, we formulate the following research questions: RQ1) How does Fintech affect the FE phenomenon in the area of its actors, governance, and outcomes in various spatial contexts? RQ2) What are the conceptual and policy-related implications of Fintech influencing FEs?

This handbook is a comprehensive and up to date work of reference that offers a survey of the state of financial geography. With Brexit, a global recession triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as new financial technology threatening and promising to revolutionize finance, the map of the financial world is in a state of transformation, with major implications for development. With these developments in the background, this handbook builds on this unprecedented momentum and responds to these epochal challenges, offering a comprehensive guide to financial geography. Financial geography is concerned with the study of money and finance in space and time, and their impacts on economy, society and nature. The book consists of 29 chapters organized in six sections: theoretical perspectives on financial geography, financial assets and markets, investors, intermediation, regulation and governance, and finance, development and the environment. Each chapter provides a balanced overview of current knowledge, identifying issues and discussing relevant debates. Written in an analytical and engaging style by authors based on six continents from a wide range of disciplines, the work also offers reflections on where the research agenda is likely to advance in the future. The book’s key audience will primarily be students and researchers in geography, urban studies, global studies and planning, more or less familiar with financial geography, who seek access to a state-of-the art survey of this area. It will also be useful for students and researchers in other disciplines, such as finance and economics, history, sociology, anthropology, politics, business studies, environmental studies and other social sciences, who seek convenient access to financial geography as a new and relatively unfamiliar area. Finally, it will be a valuable resource for practitioners in the public and private sector, including business consultants and policy-makers, who look for alternative approaches to understanding money and finance.

The book provides deep insight into the processes of digital transformation of banking according to economic, institutional, and social dimensions. Together with the transformation of incumbent banks, the processes result in changes in the scope of existing banking services. Moreover, new entities (FinTech firms) partner with incumbent banks and reshape the banking sector and its financial environment. The far-reaching transformation of banks and the banking sectors is accompanied by some institutional and socioeconomic processes. Regarding institutional processes, the book provides insight into the digitalization of the banking sector from a legal point of view. Traditionally, banking is strongly regulated by norms and rules and this status should be maintained when new entities are entering the sector and/or when new technological solutions contribute to the provision of banking services. Regarding socioeconomic processes, it must be highlighted that digitalization is exerting a powerful impact on societies. One significant example, among others, is the increase in the financial inclusion of disadvantaged groups (especially customers either underserved by the traditional financial sector or unbanked). The socioeconomic aspect, however, has a much greater dimension and its selected aspects are described in this book. The principal audience of the book will be scholars in the fields of banking and finance, but also other related disciplines in the social sciences that are of particular relevance to the banking sector’s digital transformation. This includes legal science, management, and psychology. The book also targets professionals in the financial industry interested in the impact of new financial technologies on banking sectors and bank services, particularly with a main focus on legal and socioeconomic dimensions.

FinTech and the Remaking of Financial Institutions explores the transformative potential of new entrants and innovations on business models. In its survey and analysis of FinTech, the book addresses current and future states of money and banking. It provides broad contexts for understanding financial services, products, technology, regulations and social considerations. The book shows how FinTech has evolved and will drive the future of financial services, while other FinTech books concentrate on particular solutions and adopt perspectives of individual users, companies and investors. It sheds new light on disruption, innovation and opportunity by placing the financial technology revolution in larger contexts. - Presents case studies that depict the problems, solutions and opportunities associated with FinTech - Provides global coverage of FinTech ventures and regulatory guidelines - Analyzes FinTech's social aspects and its potential for spreading to new areas in banking - Sheds new light on disruption, innovation and opportunity by placing the financial technology revolution in larger contexts

Running a business today is becoming more complex than two or three decades ago. The world is becoming increasingly open and globalized, and the production processes of goods and provision of services are inscribed in global supply and value-added chains. Large corporations are doing well in such a market, but small and medium-sized enterprises often find it increasingly difficult to function. In addition, apart from the processes exerting pressure on enterprises operating in the real economy, as a result of financial globalization, the scope of financial entities (banks, investment funds, stock exchanges) was also increasing (Knox-Hayes & Wójcik, 2020). However, this is a phase of the past. Currently, not only crossing borders but, above all, far-reaching digitalization and the development of modern technologies set the main direction for the development of enterprises (Florek-Paszkowska et al., 2021). In order to cope with these changes, both individual companies and entire sectors, public administration, and society, as well as national economies, have to make so-called digital transformation (Gajewski et al., 2016). More profound changes are triggered by sustainability, ecology, and human-oriented goals, leading towards industry 5.0. All these processes exert pressure both on big companies as well as on small- and medium-size enterprises. The ongoing changes related to the digitalization process mean not only incorporating modern technologies into existing entities and structures but are much more critical. They are spiritus movens, leading to the transformation of entire sectors of the real economy and the financial markets (Marszk & Lechman, 2021). We can observe the emergence of ecologies and ecosystems (Gancarczyk & Rodil-Marzábal, 2022; Piątkowski & Urbaniec, 2023), mechanisms leading to the development of sharing economies (Szpringer, 2020), as well as the increasing rooting and linking of traditional financial services with services leading to meeting the needs of society. Financial services are embedded in products and become inseparable from these products, and the traditional division into sectors is gradually disappearing. This is possible thanks to the creation of platforms which connect many market participants (Sironi, 2021). In the context of the abovementioned far-reaching processes, many business entities operate according to traditional principles. The key for them are sales, profit and liquidity, which define the crucial financial performance. Among important aspects are also such issues as maintaining the security of business operations and obtaining the desired market indicators in stock companies. For enterprises from developing countries, the basic problem is access to finance, the market, and advanced technologies (Jalil et al., 2022; Łasak, 2022). In developed countries, enterprises also encounter many challenges related to the traditional corporate finance dimension despite a better situation. The current Issue published in the Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (Volume 19, Issue 4, 2023) is aimed at considering the nexus of topics related to the various aspects of the functioning of financial and non-financial enterprises. The main purpose of the articles is to focus on selected problems related to the financial aspects of business activity. The considered problems were presented in the context of contemporary processes taking place in the environment of enterprises. These include, on the one hand, far-reaching digitalization and the use of advanced technologies and, on the other hand, processes belonging to the Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) area. A description of the situation faced by many enterprises, including financial institutions, undergoing digital transformation is presented in the article written by Łasak and Wyciślak (2023). Digitalization processes not only lead to far-reaching digitization of enterprises and related dilemmas regarding corporate governance but also the transformation of entire sectors of the industry. The banking sector is the best example of this. The question arises what is the pattern of behavior of digital platform partners in the situation of transformation of this sector and platformization of banking services? The paper aims to present the dynamic pattern of behavior among partners stemming from the tensions between governance costs and co-created value within platforms in banking services. The study provides a taxonomy of digital platforms in banking, highlights the values of the most typical platforms, namely blockchain-based and cloud-based platforms, and discusses the potential implications of the platformization of banking services. One of the key contemporary perspectives of business activity is looking through the prism of the need for a responsible and sustainable approach. This is the perspective embodied in the approach referred to by the term ESG. Sustainable business models, considering the ESG principles in the company’s operation, are based on financial and non-financial reasons. The paper written by Zioło, Szaruga, and Spoz (2023) aims to examine the relationship between financial and non-financial factors in enterprises and indicate for which groups of enterprises the relationship of ESG financial performance is most visible in the context of building sustainable business models and the ability to adapt to sustainability. It was found that large enterprises with a solid financial position simultaneously get better non-financial results. In each of the analyzed aspects, large enterprises with an excellent financial standing did better. The conclusion presented by Zioło, Szaruga, and Spoz (2023) does not change the fact that small and medium-sized enterprises play a key role in the economic growth of emerging economies. The paper by Amoa-Gyarteng and Dhliwayo (2023) examines the impact of capital structure and profitability on the short-term solvency of nascent SMSs in Ghana, building on the liability of the newness framework. The study demonstrates that financing decisions and financial performance are crucial mitigating factors for the potential risks of default and failure faced by nascent SMEs. Notably, the study finds that an appropriate balance between debt and equity financing raises the working capital ratio and thus reduces the liability of newness, which is a major challenge faced by nascent SMEs. The analysis also identifies that return on equity (ROE) is a crucial driver of short-term solvency for nascent SMEs. Declining profitability is manifested by a decrease in operating profits and cash flows. The resulting cash flow shortages can cause the company to fall behind on payments and obligations, leading to short-term insolvency, with all the adverse consequences. All these conclusions might be valuable for enterprises in other developing countries. Operational and financial market performance is a crucial determinant not only for SMEs but also for larger companies. Such type of businesses is presented in the paper by Yaşar and Gerede (2023). The article shows how complex are the processes accompanying the functioning of such enterprises as airlines. This paper refers to the competitiveness of such airline companies and the conditions determining their favorable market position and long-term competitive advantage. The market position of such companies is influenced by such factors like firm maturity, its size, financial resources and some technical dimensions (number of flights, fleet homogeneity). This means that despite the processes taking place today, the business performance of such entities as airlines still depends on the classic factors described in the literature of corporate finance. The contemporary opportunities resulting from the dynamic development of information technology contribute to the development of new forms of financing business activity. One such form is crowdfunding. The paper by Nose and Hosomi (2023) is dedicated to the equity crowdfunding (ECF) issue in the Japanese context. The research provides an answer to the question of what makes equity crowdfunding successful. The “Signaling Hypothesis” and “Lack of Financial Literacy Hypothesis” were tested. Despite the research is focusing more on investors’ side, it also sends an important signal to the business considering crowdfunding as a source of funding. The conclusions can be helpful for start-ups planning ECF campaigns in the future. The company’s position on the market may also depend on factors other than financial performance, and recently, it has depended to an increasing extent on environmental, social, and governance performance (defining corporate sustainability performance). In this context very important research thread is the relationship between corporate sustainability performance and stability of dividend payouts. This topic is presented in the paper by Matuszewska-Pierzynka, Mrzygłód, and Pieloch-Babiarz (2023). The research verifies many detailed interdependencies between the ESG performance of an enterprise and the propensity to pay stable dividends to the enterprise. The possibility of financing business activity is determined by the situation in the banking sector. The conditions of financing provided by banks are of particular importance in the case of developing countries, where other forms of raising capital by enterprises are often limited. Shaikh, Tunio, and Dagar (2023) paper discusses the relationship between banks funding liquidity, capital funds and bankers’ lending activity in emerging markets. This research firstly provides insight into the activity of financial companies in emerging markets, and secondly, informs the public, and especially the business, about the lending practices of the banking sector, and in consequence, on the financing opportunities in these economies. These unique studies presented in this Issue enrich our knowledge about contemporary business activity. The papers contribute to understanding the nature of business performance and link corporate finance issues with other, mainly technological and social aspects. Particular attention, however, is paid to the traditional conditions of operation and financing of enterprises. At the same time, however, efforts were made to combine new business conditions, including digitization. The issues raised also concern processes ensuring sustainable development. We want to express the hope that the papers presented here will be of interest to readers, scholars, and researchers worldwide. They provide theoretical concepts, and quantitative analyses, and indicate pathways for further research. Many of the presented areas require further, in-depth analysis.

This book analyzes the set of forces driving the global financial system toward a period of radical transformation and explores the transformational challenges that lie ahead for global and regional or local banks and other financial intermediaries. It is explained how these challenges derive from the newly emerging post-crisis structure of the market and from shadow and digital players across all banking operations. Detailed attention is focused on the impacts of digitalization on the main functions of the financial system, and particularly the banking sector. The author elaborates how an alternative model of banking will enable banks to predict, understand, navigate, and change the external ecosystem in which they compete. The five critical components of this model are data and information mastering; effective use of applied analytics; interconnectivity and “junction playing”; development of new business solutions; and trust and credibility assurance. The analysis is supported by a number of informative case studies. The book will be of interest especially to top and middle managers and employees of banks and financial institutions but also to FinTech players and their advisers and others.