Why is mobile money adoption higher in developing countries than developed ones?

No legacy.

In most of the developing countries, there was no legacy attachment to a financial system. It was like a great equalizer. When the storm front came for mobile penetration, it did not discriminate after a few years (because the cost of the device fell). There wasn't a physical network one had to build (like bank branches, etc.), newer models and methods of creating employment, and a vast network of agents was never thought before.

Simply put, the mobile money front did not care if you were developed or developing. What was the great catalyst was the thirst or hunger for a financial solution that the masses could use. In North America and Europe, card and bank accounts were plenty. The payments network was rolled out and mature. Mobile money had to compete.

In rural Pakistan or Bangladesh or Tanzania etc. there was no other option. The playing field was void of any players. The first-mover advantage had a tsunami effect. Adoption and traction could not have come faster. This is why developing countries won the mobile money race in many cases.

Just to cite an example, in Kenya, more than 44% of Kenya’s GDP rides on mPesa. Think about that.