Conclusion

In Indonesia, the form of money circulating within the payment apps is referred to as e-money. E- money distinguishes itself from other forms of digital money, such as that used with plastic cards or phone credits, in that it is money issued as a digital credit that can typically be accessed through a smartphone app. E-money can be issued by bank and non-bank actors alike, through which customers purchase the credits with cash. The point then is that this type of money allows users to convert money into a digital form, through which they can then make cashless payments. For users, it appears as a credit balance within the app interface, through which it can be used to make payments to those merchants that are associated with the respective platform.

This system is premised on a familiar mechanism in Indonesia, by which users can ‘top-up’ or refill accounts, electricity meters, or phone airtime credits by paying in advance for what they will use, and then refilling, as necessary. Distinguishing itself from other peer-to-peer (P2P) payment systems that enabled feature phone users to make digital transactions, these new digital wallets rely on users having access to a smartphone. Though the use of mobile phones far exceeds the members of the population with access to a bank account in Indonesia smartphones are less common. Smartphones are becoming more common, but it is important to keep in mind that this

103

is in part due to the emergence of cheaper smartphone brands from Chinese companies, which means that these models often have limited storage space for multiple apps. As the ecosystem of the digital economy continues to expand, some users may find that they must prioritise between not only payment apps, but also payment apps and for instance social media apps. In practice, access to the digital economy is not just divided between feature phone and smartphone users.

Existing inequalities lead to the emergence of digital hierarchies in terms of who can access and take the most advantage of these new technologies. Having to choose between which platform to download, the companies are greatly incentivised to capture customers to their platforms first, with the hopes that they will remain as the systems continue to grow.

These inequalities of access have the potential to be exacerbated due to the requirement of internet access to use digital payment apps. Where use of the internet in Indonesia was spread in large part due to activist initiatives to increase access to information during a politically important time, most Indonesian internet users today access it with their phones, and typically in relation to using social media which is technically free to use in terms of data consumption. Doing so requires either purchasing data packages or accessing public Wi-Fi in hotspots such as at minimarkets, malls, or cafés and restaurants such as Starbucks. These are often spaces that are excluding to people of lower income or people who are perceived as being lower-class, once again leading to disparities of access and contributing to the further hierarchisation of internet access, and thus digital payment users, while also re-entrenching existing socio-economic inequalities. This hierarchisation is evidenced in part in media portrayals of who is considered members of the modern and digitally networked nation, through which feature phone users are portrayed as being a more backward, less modern type of citizen.

This entanglement with ideas about modernity and being digitally networked is also pervasive in recent political discourse, in which the digitalisation of industry is seen by some as a cornerstone of continuing economic growth. Increasing emphasis on cashless payments is seen as a critical component to the growth of Indonesian e-commerce, as well as a tool for financial inclusion. The argument being that this technology will allow the poor and socio-economically marginalised to gain access to the digital economy, and thus pull themselves out of poverty. In practice, some of these policies have led to increased exclusions. For instance, by making access to toll roads available only to those with digital money, you create a public space from which some members of the public are structurally excluded, relegated to spending time in the traffic jams that the toll roads were supposed to circumvent.

In a context where the vast majority of the population still rely on cash for day-to-day transaction, the ATM functions as critical financial infrastructure, enabling users to withdraw money, but also

104

to make digital payments directly from the machine interface, or make deposits. It is a fundamental enabler of the digital economy; in that it allows people to transition their money flexibly between digital and tangible forms. Despite its seeming immobility, the ATM was perceived by some as a more flexible infrastructure for digital payments than the apps on their portable smartphones. The ATMs were reliable, and the money stored there could be used for anything, unlike the money trapped within the respective transactional communities of the digital payment apps. It did not rely on having internet access to work. Particularly for those travelling between regions, where the infrastructural dynamics of the network providers means that data, they have paid for may not be available for use, having to rely on an app requiring the internet to access your money comes with certain risks. Once again, those who can afford better, and more reliable internet are better positioned to take advantage of these new technologies and are perhaps less reliant on the ability to re-materialise money that has been converted into digital form.

The two largest digital payment platforms in Indonesia, GoPay and OVO both gained prominence as being the integrated payment mechanism of a ride-hailing platform, Gojek and Grab respectively, both of which are modelled on similar Western apps such as Uber and Lyft. Thus, they had the unique advantage over other e-money issuers, that they had access to an extensive fleet of exchange agents through their driver-partners. The importance of drivers to the business model of these apps is emphasised repeatedly by the companies that speak about them and their work in almost noble terms. Through the drivers, customers can exchange their cash for digital credits, and in that way, access and pay for the services within the apps. Thus, these drivers, operating under conditions familiar to the gig economy, become an extension of the app itself, by providing a critical access point to the digital economy.

Meanwhile, both Gojek and Grab have been evolving from being a transport app with an integrated payment mechanism, to being increasingly focused not just on digital payments, but on providing broader financial services, such as P2P lending. So much so that the familiar image of a motorcycle driver was removed from the Gojek company logo. Where the ride-hailing app was intended to provide a seemingly neutral connection point for service users and service providers, the needs of the customer is becoming increasingly central to the vision of the app. Across his many public talks, Gojek founder Nadiem Makarim reveals a particular type of user envisioned by the app, one that is not unlike himself. He describes how the app enables people to avoid doing things ‘they don’t wanna do’ because, through the app, they can order someone else to do it for them. He configures the customers as consumer-cyborgs. For the consumer-cyborg, the app and the bodies of the driver-partners are just an extension of self in service of meeting your needs, be they

105 transportation, food delivery, or digital money.

Despite the existing inequalities of access to digital payments as mediated through smartphones, these companies often leverage arguments about contributing to financial inclusion with their technology. Indeed, the argument is raised also by their international investors, such as Facebook.

These technologies, they claim, can contribute to improving the livelihoods of people simply by providing an access point to the digital economy. Meanwhile, in the competition to bring more users into your specific ecosystem, targeting those considered outside of the formal financial system can also be a strategy for growing your customer base and ensuring the dominance of your particular platform. For companies such as Facebook, which are already a dominating part of the Indonesian internet experience through social media use, collaboration with these emerging financial services providers is also a strategy for connecting their services to digital payments. In the next chapter, I explore these arguments about financial inclusion and cashless payments, and the way driver-partners are mobilised in service of the digital economy through the app infrastructure.

106

107