Report on Blockchain Governance Dynamics

Blockchain technology has emerged as a transformative innovation in various sectors, including e-commerce. Effective blockchain governance plays a pivotal role in enhancing user satisfaction by ensuring security, transparency, and efficiency in online transactions. However, despite its growing adoption, many e-commerce platforms face challenges in implementing governance models that fully address user expectations and technological complexities, revealing a significant gap in the literature. This study investigates the impact of blockchain governance models on e-commerce user satisfaction, with a specific focus on mediating variables such as data privacy and system trust, and moderating variables such as user technology readiness. The study employs the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) method using SmartPLS software to analyze relationships between variables. Data was collected through a survey of 135 respondents, consisting of e-commerce users familiar with blockchain technology. The Result reveals that blockchain governance significantly impacts data privacy and system trust, which, in turn, influence perceived ease of use and user satisfaction. Additionally, user technology readiness moderates the relationship between blockchain governance and perceived ease of use, highlighting its importance in adoption. The Novelty of this study lies in its integration of governance frameworks with mediating and moderating variables to holisticallyaddress e-commerce user satisfaction, an area underexplored in prior research. The conclusion emphasizes the need for e-commerce platforms to adopt robust blockchain governance frameworks to improve user satisfaction and gain a competitive advantage. This study contributes to the literature on blockchain applications in e-commerce and provides practical recommendations for enhancing governance and user experience.

Blockchain technology has been used to build next-generation applications taking advantage of its decentralised nature. Nevertheless, there are some serious concerns about the trustworthiness of blockchain due to the vulnerabilities in on-chain algorithmic mechanisms, and tedious disputes and debates in off-chain communities. Accordingly, blockchain governance has received great attention for improving the trustworthiness of all decisions that direct a blockchain platform. However, there is a lack of systematic knowledge to guide practitioners to perform blockchain governance. We have performed a systematic literature review to understand the state-of-the-art of blockchain governance. We identify the lifecycle stages of a blockchain platform, and present 14 architectural patterns for blockchain governance in this study. This pattern language can provide guidance for the effective use of patterns for blockchain governance in practice, and support the architecture design of governance-driven blockchain systems.

Blockchain systems are a novel technology that allow for innovative business models. However, due to the decentralized nature of blockchains, new organizational challenges arise. Blockchains require intricate governance mechanisms to align all interests of the involved stakeholders. A crucial part of blockchain governance is decision-making, i.e., the way how a community of a blockchain system can reach decisions. While blockchain governance has received considerable interest of academia, decision-making in blockchains has not yet been sufficiently addressed. Through an exploratory multiple case study, we establish a framework for analyzing decision-making in blockchain systems and identify two dimensions along which decision-making in blockchains can be classified—namely community-driven vs. institution-driven as well as off-chain vs. on-chain decision-making. Even though blockchains are decentralized systems, we can show that there are often highly centralized elements present. The degree of this centralization varies across blockchains and might be connected to the business cases and origins of the different systems. Furthermore, many factors of decision-making processes in blockchains are still off-chain and only some factors are truly on-chain. We arrived at these insights through a structured approach for decision-making in blockchains. Thus, we provide new tools for researcher and practitioners and pave the way to novel blockchain applications with sound decision-making mechanisms.

Today, more than 100 blockchain projects created to transform government systems are being conducted in more than 30 countries. What leads countries rapidly initiate blockchain projects? I argue that it is because blockchain is a technology directly related to social organization; Unlike other technologies, a consensus mechanism form the core of blockchain. Traditionally, consensus is not the domain of machines but rather humankind. However, blockchain operates through a consensus algorithm with human intervention; once that consensus is made, it cannot be modified or forged. Through utilization of Lawrence Lessig’s proposition that “Code is law,” I suggest that blockchain creates “absolute law” that cannot be violated. This characteristic of blockchain makes it possible to implement social technology that can replace existing social apparatuses including bureaucracy. In addition, there are three close similarities between blockchain and bureaucracy. First, both of them are defined by the rules and execute predetermined rules. Second, both of them work as information processing machines for society. Third, both of them work as trust machines for society. Therefore, I posit that it is possible and moreover unavoidable to replace bureaucracy with blockchain systems. In conclusion, I suggest five principles that should be adhered to when we replace bureaucracy with the blockchain system: 1) introducing Blockchain Statute law; 2) transparent disclosure of data and source code; 3) implementing autonomous executing administration; 4) building a governance system based on direct democracy and 5) making Distributed Autonomous Government(DAG).

PurposeThis paper examines to what extent blockchain creates legitimacy and trust in different modes of public governance. It posits that while blockchain aims for political legitimacy through decentralising, immutable and consensus-based mechanisms, the execution of these mechanisms is limited in legitimating governance, which has knock-on effects on trust. It provides an original contribution by recontextualising and reframing blockchain as a governance mechanism that should, and must, perform a legitimating function in order to engender trust.Design/methodology/approachThe research adopts a comprehensive framework for understanding the legitimacy of blockchain governance, positioning it in terms of co-governance, self-governance and hierarchical governance modes. It systematically analyses blockchain whitepapers, legislation, government documents and other sources in three paradigmatic case studies where blockchain governance failed. These cases are then used to assess blockchain according to three key characteristics of decentralisation, immutability and consensus.FindingsThe research finds that blockchain’s use in governance settings still relies on legitimacy conferred from other sources – namely state – in order to generate trust. Significant limitations in its de facto political decentralisation, immutability and consensus protocols can create failures in co-governance, self-governance and hierarchical-governance applications, thus limiting the legitimation function of blockchain in facilitating political trust.Originality/valueThese findings are significant in highlighting blockchain’s limitations as a decentralised, immutable and consensus-driven legitimating tool, which has knock-on effects on trust in technology and governance more broadly. It also has broader implications in more clearly highlighting the interconnectedness of political trust and legitimacy in governance processes.

Cryptocurrencies, as a part of decentralized financial system and powered by distributed ledger technology is the future of finance. Although no one is responsible for the ledger, no one can control or falsify the claims made through blockchain technology. Cryptocurrencies backed by blockchain are transformative technology and a forerunner of virtual monetary system. Cryptocurrencies are created out of perceived ‘privacy’ need and drive to exit government intermediaries and financial institutions as a regulator of financials. Thus, Government should focus on timely policy planning, implementation and governance of blockchain and virtual currencies so as to prevent halt in data economy.

Blockchain-based technology has been recognized as a potential tool to transform corporate governance. This chapter first discusses the persisting challenges of agency costs, inefficiencies, and the need for improved transparency. It then examines the emergence of blockchain as a potential solution, offering a novel, decentralized approach to corporate governance. The analysis covers the technology's application to share registers, trading, voting, and accounting practices, emphasizing the duality of its promise for increased transparency and emergent privacy concerns. Controversial aspects, such as the threat to existing shareholder activism and the governance of blockchain itself, are critically examined. Solutions like hybrid blockchain models and regulatory nodes are proposed to address these issues. The chapter concludes with a forward-looking perspective on decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) as an innovative alternative to traditional corporate structures, signifying a new paradigm in corporate governance.

Current digital compliance research is often narrow and exclusive. This review proposes a new framework, analysing 12 studies from 2019 to 2025 across AI, compliance, RegTech and blockchain governance. It critiques the dominance of approaches that exclude stakeholder voices and context-specific insights. Using methodological triangulation, the framework interprets current practices to foster trust in AIoT governance and enable scalable, inclusive digital compliance.

Countless enterprise blockchains fail to live up to high expectations, often because the supporting governance structures are insufficiently established or have become stagnant. Based on interviews with 153 blockchain executives and an analysis of publicly documented use cases, this article offers a guide for blockchain scholars and practitioners. Its framework highlights the coordination and control challenges that exist in blockchain governance contexts and presents four generic governance modes to address them: chief, clan, custodian, and consortium. Managers can use these governance modes as a basis for four strategic moves (connecting, isolating, loosening, and tightening) to navigate blockchain governance challenges.

, the book specifies core objects of study (claims, evidence, decision rules, and governance controls), explicit scope boundaries, and a methodological spine spanning uncertainty budgeting, causal identification, trustworthiness evaluation, and lifecycle engineering for reproducible deployment. The central argument is that connected-world systems are durable only when validity and legitimacy are jointly engineered: statistical guarantees and machine learning generalization must be coupled to provenance, audit readiness, and dispute resolution. The resulting research outputs include reusable taxonomies, protocols, evaluation designs, and governance tools adaptable to heterogeneous infrastructures in South Asia, Europe, Africa, and the Americas. The manuscript targets researchers building cumulative theory, practitioners designing scalable platforms, and policymakers regulating behaviors and accountability without over-specifying technology. Keywords HorizonStack, connected-world systems, evidence provenance, uncertainty budgeting, causal inference, interpretable statistics, trustworthy machine learning, federated learning, extended reality interfaces, blockchain governance, photonic computing, scalable analytics, reproducibility, MLOps, critical infrastructure, technology-neutral regulation, data sovereignty, audit readiness

Currently blockchain has been recognized and implemented in cryptocurrency sector, but notfor other industry, especially enterprise. Through this research it is expected to help the adoption process of blockchain. The evaluation was conducted on blockchain through testing using COBIT 5 cascaded from Stakeholder Question to IT Process. 35% of organization goal is applicable with selected stakeholder question, while 65% is applicable with IT related goal. The results of the analysis stated that finding of this study was more applicable for enterprise organizations such as fintech company with some parameters need to be added as the future work due to the enterprise organization had a lot of business and governance processes that were already running. Meanwhile the start-up organization can be audited as well based on this process.

Governance of Smart Contracts in Blockchain Institutions

IntroductionThe decentralised nature of blockchain technology challenges traditional legal frameworks, creating regulatory gaps in asset classification, taxation, and consumer protection. In Europe, divergent approaches, from specialised blockchain laws to adaptations of general financial legislation, hinder cross-border deployment and limit blockchain’s potential. These disparities make compliance difficult for firms and increase the risks for consumers. This study compares blockchain regulations across six European geographies: Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and Malta (blockchain-specialised regulators) versus the European Union (EU), Estonia, and Portugal (generalist regulators) to map key divergences in legal maturity, asset classification, taxation, anti-money laundering/know-your-customer enforcement, and supervisory structures. A secondary objective is to evaluate how these differences impact the scalability of innovation.MethodsThis study compares blockchain regulations across six European jurisdictions through a three-phase analysis. The scoping phase identified five regulatory themes and selected geographies based on maturity, innovation, and economic specialisation. Primary legal texts and policy data (2020–2025) were analysed to map convergences and divergences between blockchain-specialised and generalist regulators.ResultsThe comparison reveals differences: blockchain-specialised geographies have dedicated Distributed Ledger Technology laws, centralised oversight, and crypto-friendly tax regimes; for example, Switzerland exempts private capital gains, and Malta offers Value Added Tax exemptions. In contrast, generalist regulators, such as the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), which theoretically harmonise rules, face inconsistent enforcement across member states. Meanwhile, Portugal’s tax exemptions and Estonia’s rigid capital requirements create opposing market incentives. Only Liechtenstein’s Blockchain Act comprehensively regulates Decentralised Finance, whereas other geographies either adapt existing financial regulations or do not regulate it. NFTs face fragmented treatment, are excluded under MiCA, classified as securities in Estonia, and left to case-by-case analysis in Switzerland, which contributes to market uncertainty.DiscussionThis study reveals a tension in blockchain governance: specialised geographies demonstrate that comprehensive, tailored frameworks foster mature ecosystems. Conversely, generalist approaches struggle with fragmentation, as seen in MiCA’s uneven enforcement and Estonia’s restrictive licensing. Yet, regulatory ambiguity carries paradoxical benefits; Portugal’s minimal rules and the EU’s transitional gaps have also fueled competitive innovation. For policymakers, these results underscore the importance of striking a balance between oversight and flexibility to foster and scale up innovation.

The article substantiates the necessity of applying artificial intelligence (AI) technologies as a digital tool for the project-based approach in local governance. Local self-government plays a critical role in ensuring the functioning of communities, particularly during the current crisis caused by the Russian military invasion. Integrating modern AI-based management approaches enhances process automation, big data analysis, and resource optimization, improving efficiency. The study identifies key directions for AI application in local governance: project planning, control, and timeline management through analytics services; risk analysis and forecasting via machine learning algorithms; task automation for project execution; resource optimization using efficiency indicators; personalized communication with virtual assistants, chatbots, and digital democracy tools; intelligent HR services for team coordination; and informed decision-making based on big data analysis with reduced risks. An algorithm for AI adaptation in local selfgovernment has been proposed, encompassing stages such as task identification, data analysis for decision-making, process automation, resource monitoring, risk management, and personnel training. Examples of AI tools at the local level include «smart city» services for infrastructure monitoring, transportation optimization, and waste management; digital participation tools for public opinion analysis; and intelligent systems for strategic planning and tax procedure simplification. The study highlights the ethical implementation of AI with data protection and its benefits, including time savings, transparency, resource optimization, and enhanced communication. Prospective technologies include machine learning, natural language processing, computer vision, big data analysis, blockchain governance, and smart platforms for digital participation. These tools promote sustainable community development and improve public service delivery, ensuring higher quality of life for residents.

Delegated blockchain governance is the frontier of blockchain design issues that is to improve the scalability of blockchain networks. Delegated proof of stake (DPoS) blockchains such as EOS must select a few super nodes for transaction verification. In particular, the blockchain community has debated recently on whether dividend should be allowed when electing super nodes, which might be considered as unethical or unfair, leading to an open research topic and a new research gap that has theoretical value for both academia and industry. In this paper, we build a theoretical framework to study how dividend affects user decisions and welfare in a DPoS blockchain. Based on game theory, we propose a three-player Hotelling model with two policies to study the behaviors of voters and candidates. We first use a static game analysis to show that the benefits of dividend for voters and for candidates vary with the size of reward and there exists an interval, in which the zero dividend policy would be good for the welfare of both candidates and voters. Then, we use an evolutionary game analysis to examine the process dynamics of super node selection, we find that the campaign strategy of candidates has to do with the size of platform reward given to the candidates by the blockchain platform. Especially in the asymmetric case, we find that higher level of platform reward turns to benefit candidates with large number of votes even more. Our findings are instrumental for designing dividend policies in DPoS blockchains and can stimulate more potential research in blockchain governance.