Análisis de las Fintech y su aporte a la inclusión financiera en Colombia

The Digital transformation has permeated all spheres of the economy and the financial sector has been no exception; the constant changes in the habits of financial consumers require that the processes in this field be digitally efficient and in the shortest possible time. This process of evolution from traditional financial entities to Fintech is a consequence of the 2008 global financial crisis, which caused uncertainty and disbelief towards the traditional processes that frame the financial system. Thus, investment and venture companies now find attractive investments in this sector, which in 2019 have invested more than 8,000 million dollars in this type of startups. The Fintech sector is generating different service options for the entire population, both banked and unbanked, as well as companies, and the traditional financial sector is becoming a strategic ally through synergies that allow it to offer a range of services that seek to meet the needs of customers. financial consumers. This article presents the definition and evolution of Fintech and its objective is to determine if its alliance with Colombian financial institutions has been important in the development of financial inclusion. In the end, the challenges are identified to achieve compliance with the sustainable development goals related to financial inclusion. The methodology is based on a documentary exploration from secondary sources and analysis of surveys and reports presented by multilateral organizations related to financial inclusion, Fintech and financial institutions.La transformación digital ha permeado todas las esferas de la economía y el sector financiero no ha sido la excepción; los cambios constantes en los hábitos de los consumidores financieros requieren que los procesos en este campo sean digitalmente eficientes y en el menor tiempo posible. Este proceso de evolución de las entidades financieras tradicionales hacia las Fintech se da como consecuencia de la crisis financiera mundial del 2008, que provocó incertidumbre e incredulidad hacia los procesos tradicionales que enmarca el sistema financiero.  Es así que ahora las compañías de inversión y de riesgo encuentran atractivas inversiones en este sector que en el 2019 se han invertido más de 8.000 millones de dólares en este tipo de startups. El sector Fintech está generando diferentes opciones de servicios para toda la población tanto bancarizada como no bancarizada además de empresas y el sector financiero tradicional se convierte en un aliado estratégico a través de sinergias que permiten ofrecer un abanico de servicios que buscan satisfacer las necesidades de los consumidores financieros. En este artículo se presenta la definición y evolución de las Fintech y tiene como objetivo determinar si ha sido importante su alianza con las instituciones financieras colombianas en el desarrollo de la inclusión financiera. Al final, se identifican cuáles serían los retos para lograr el cumplimiento de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible relacionados con la inclusión financiera. La metodología está basada en una exploración documental a partir de fuentes secundarias y análisis de encuestas e informes presentados por organismos multilaterales relacionados con la inclusión financiera, Fintech e instituciones financieras

Elements to form the industrial cassava value chain in Corozal, Sucre

Elements to form the industrial cassava value chain in Corozal, Sucr

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health