Central bank digital currency and digital payment instruments: Kazakhstan’s experience between obstacles, threats and opportunities

Samuele Bibi & Islam Yerzhan

Journal of Post Keynesian Economics2025https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2025.2503149article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.41

Abstract

Considering the rapid rise of privately issued cryptocurrencies, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) have been proposed as essential tools for central banks to maintain their relevance within the traditional monetary system and ensure financial stability. In particular, CBDCs are seen as promising instruments for enhancing monetary policy transmission, especially in developing countries with complex national and international financial relationships. However, few studies have examined real-world implementation scenarios, including the associated risks and challenges. This paper explores the case of Kazakhstan, a country at the forefront of digitalization and CBDC experimentation. Kazakhstan’s experience highlights several critical challenges for CBDC design and implementation, including competition from established private digital systems, public perception issues, and the potential for authoritarian misuse of centralized digital payment infrastructures. These insights are valuable for both academics and policymakers.

2 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2025.2503149

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{samuele2025,
  title        = {{Central bank digital currency and digital payment instruments: Kazakhstan’s experience between obstacles, threats and opportunities}},
  author       = {Samuele Bibi & Islam Yerzhan},
  journal      = {Journal of Post Keynesian Economics},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2025.2503149},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Central bank digital currency and digital payment instruments: Kazakhstan’s experience between obstacles, threats and opportunities

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.