count at a financial institution and reported sending or receiving a remittance through a financial institution or has a mobile money account and reported sending or receiving a remittance through a mobile phone.

FIGURE 2.11 <!-- Start of picture text --> Payment channels for domestic remittances<br>Adults sending or receiving remittances in the past year,<br>by method (as % of all adults), 2014 48<br>In cash only<br>Digital<br>28 payment channels<br>28<br>24<br>Through an<br>OTC transaction<br>17 17 18<br>Through an<br>12 account<br>10<br>8<br>4 5<br>East Asia Europe Latin Middle South Sub-Saharan<br>& Pacific & Central America & East Asia Africa<br>Asia Caribbean<br>Source: Global Findex database.<br><!-- End of picture text --> But many financial institutions and mobile money service providers also offer OTC remittance payments. Payments are classified as OTC if senders and receivers did not use their own accounts but instead transacted in cash at the service provider, which transferred the money electronically on their behalf. Remittance payments are therefore considered to have been sent or received through an OTC transaction if they were transmitted through a financial institution but the respondent does not have a financial institution account or if they were transmitted through a mobile phone but the respondent does not have a mobile money account. All remittance payments through a money transfer operator are by definition also OTC transactions.

Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest share of adults using an account for domestic remittance payments, both among all adults and among those sending or receiving domestic remittances: 37 percent of those who reported sending or receiving domestic remittances—18 percent of all adults—reported doing so through an account.<sup>10</sup> Another 22 percent of those sending or receiving domestic remittances reported using an OTC transaction to do so, while the rest reported using only cash. In Latin America and the Caribbean 26 percent of those sending or receiving domestic remittances reported doing so through an OTC transaction, a slightly higher share than in Sub-Saharan Africa. Overall in these two regions, almost 60 percent of those sending or receiving domestic remittances reported doing so digitally—through an account or an OTC transaction—rather than only in cash. In all other regions the share was about 40 percent or less.

Unsurprisingly, among those sending or receiving domestic remittances, the banked are more likely than the unbanked to do so digitally, using either their account or an OTC transaction (figure 2.12). But only in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean did a majority of adults with an account report sending or receiving domestic remittances digitally. Among the unbanked, typically less than 30 percent of those sending or receiving domestic remittances reported doing so digitally using an OTC transaction. The exception is Latin America and the Caribbean, where the share was 44 percent.

FIGURE 2.12 Payment channels used by banked and unbanked for domestic remittances <!-- Start of picture text --> Adults sending or receiving remittances in the past year, by method (%), 2014<br>Banked Unbanked<br>100<br>In cash only<br>75 Digital<br>payment channels<br>50 Through an<br>OTC transaction<br>25 Through an<br>account<br>East Asia Europe Latin Middle South Sub-Saharan<br>& Pacific & Central America & East Asia Africa<br>Asia Caribbean<br>Source: Global Findex database.<br><!-- End of picture text --> 36 THE GLOBAL FINDEX DATABASE