What is Blockchain Accounting? A Critical Examination in Relation to Organizing, Governance, and Trust
Open accessAbstract
Across industry and academia, there is currently much discussion about the implications of blockchain for accounting. We contribute to these ongoing discussions by critically investigating the claim that blockchain exists as a novel and foundational accounting technology. We do so by examining the central imaginaries associated with blockchain and investigating their incomplete crystallisations in the application of Bitcoin. This leads us to highlight three central features of blockchain accounting related to the changes in modes of organization, governance and trust, which we contextualize in relation to theoretical and empirical work. By doing so, we gain a nuanced understanding of the complex ways in which blockchain accounting and the processes and professional tasks commonly associated with accounting coexist and may interact.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Blockchain technology has transformative potential in enhancing transparency and accountability in traditional accounting processes and practices.
“Pflueger et al. (2022) provide a pioneering inquiry into the economic effects of blockchain technology on traditional accounting processes and practices, underscoring the transformative potential of blockchain in enhancing transparency and accountability”
From Sustaining the Crypto Commons: A Configurational Systems Perspective on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Governance (2024) · cites this paper as Pflueger et al. (2022)
Section 6.4 (page unavailable) says blockchain accounting may change forms of organisation, governance and trust beyond incremental improvements to existing accounting tasks. But the paper does not establish that blockchain enhances transparency and accountability in traditional accounting practices: section 5.1 presents transparent ledgers as a claim in blockchain white papers, while section 2.2 calls proposed improvements to existing processes largely hypothetical. The paper is a critical inquiry, not an assessment of measured economic effects. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990) · Economy and Society · doi:10.1080/03085149000000001 · Cited by 2,877 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Studies of accounting change highlight that these themes associated with accounting always exists as a dialogue between the discursive and material, and between the ‘eternally opti-mistic’ (Miller & Rose, 1990) and ‘congenitally failing’ (Miller, 1998).”
Toward Blockchain-Based Accounting and Assurance
Dai, J., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2017) · Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.2308/isys-51804 · Cited by 881 · see citing works
The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust
Werbach, K. (2018) · MIT Press · doi:10.7551/mitpress/11449.001.0001 · Cited by 512 · cited 5× · see citing works
“In contrast to a centralized system, there is no one master copy of the ledger and/or agent responsible for maintaining it (Werbach, 2018a).”
InfluentialMiller, P., & Napier, C. (1993) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/0361-3682(93)90047-a · Cited by 506 · see citing works
Blockchain as a confidence machine: The problem of trust & challenges of governance
De Filippi, P., Mannan, M., & Reijers, W. (2020) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101284 · Cited by 406 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Its accounting becomes part and product of the emergence of ‘trustless trust’ (e.g., De Filippi et al., 2020; Werbach, 2018a).”
Evaluative infrastructures: Accounting for platform organization
Kornberger, M., Pflueger, D., & Mouritsen, J. (2017) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2017.05.002 · Cited by 349 · cited 3× · see citing works
“…these same accounting techniques both shaped and encumbered the movement of organizational forms towards more horizontal patterns of relationships in joint ventures, platforms and networks (Dechow & Mouritsen, 2005; Håkansson & Lind, 2004; Hopwood, 1996; Kornberger et al., 2017; Seal et al., 1999).”
Self-citationAccounting and network coordination
Håkansson, H., & Lind, J. (2004) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/s0361-3682(02)00058-2 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
Disembedding the supply chain: institutionalized reflexivity and inter-firm accounting
Seal, W., Berry, A., & Cullen, J. (2004) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/s0361-3682(02)00055-7 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Algorithmic Authority: The Case of Bitcoin
Lustig, C., & Nardi, B. (2015) · 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2015.95 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Distributed e-health wide-world accounting ledger via blockchain
Casado-Vara, R., & Corchado, J. (2019) · Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · doi:10.3233/jifs-169949 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 62
- Antonopoulos, A. M. (2017). Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the open blockchain. O'Reilly Media, Inc.
- Arnaboldi, M., Busco, C., & Cuganesan, S. (2017). Accounting, accountability, social media and big data: Revolution or hype? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 30(4): 762-776.
- Basu, S., Kirk, M., & Waymire, G. (2009). Memory, transaction records, and The Wealth of Nations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(8), 895-917.
- Bhimani, A., & Willcocks, L. (2014). Digitisation, 'Big Data' and the transformation of accounting information. Accounting and Business Research, 44(4), 469-490.
- Bryer, R. A. (2000a). The history of accounting and the transition to capitalism in England. Part one: Theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25(2), 131-162.
- Bryer, R. A. (2000b). The history of accounting and the transition to capitalism in England. Part two: Evidence. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25(4-5), 327-381.
- Burchell, S., Clubb, C., & Hopwood, A. G. (1985). Accounting in its social context: Towards a history of value added in the United Kingdom. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(4), 381-413.
- Carlin, T. (2019). Blockchain and the journey beyond double entry. Australian Accounting Review, 29(2), 305-311.
- Carruthers, B. G., & Espeland, W. N. (1991). Accounting for rationality: Double-entry bookkeeping and the rhetoric of economic rationality. American Journal of Sociology, 97(1), 31-69.
- Chandler Jr., A. D., & Daems, H. (1979). Administrative coordination, allocation and monitoring: A comparative analysis of the emergence of accounting and organization in the USA and Europe. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 4(1-2), 3-20.
- Chiapello, E. (2007). Accounting and the birth of the notion of capitalism. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18(3), 263-296.
- Dechow, N., & Mouritsen, J. (2005). Enterprise resource planning systems, management control and the quest for integration. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(7-8), 691-733.
- Dodd, N. (2018). The social life of Bitcoin. Theory, Culture & Society, 35(3), 35-56.
- Dourish, P. (2016). Algorithms and their others: Algorithmic culture in context. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 2053951716665128.
- Campbell- Verduyn, E. (Ed.). Routeledge: London.
- Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American journal of sociology, 113(1), 1-40.
- Fanning, K., & Centers, D. P. (2016). Blockchain and its coming impact on financial services. Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 27(5), 53-57
- Fourcade, M., & Healy, K. (2013). Classification situations: Life-chances in the neoliberal era. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(8), 559-572.
- Free, C. (2008). Walking the talk? Supply chain accounting and trust among UK supermarkets and suppliers. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(6), 629-662.
- Hayes, A. (2019). The socio-technological lives of bitcoin. Theory, Culture & Society, 36(4), 49-72.
- Hopwood, A. G. (1987). The archeology of accounting systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(3), 207-234.
- Hopwood, A. G. (1996). Looking across rather than up and down: On the need to explore the lateral processing of information. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(6), 589-590.
- Jeacle, I., & Carter, C. (2011). In TripAdvisor we trust: Rankings, calculative regimes and abstract systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(4-5), 293-309.
- Johnson, H. T. (1978). Management accounting in an early multidivisional organization: General Motors in the 1920s. Business History Review, 52(4), 490-517.
- Karajovic, M., Kim, H. M., & Laskowski, M. (2019). Thinking outside the block: Projected phases of blockchain integration in the accounting industry. Australian Accounting Review, 29(2), 319-330.
- Kiviat, T. I. (2015). Beyond bitcoin: Issues in regulating blockchain tranactions. Duke Law Journal, 65, 569.
- Kokina, J., Mancha, R., & Pachamanova, D. (2017). Blockchain: Emergent industry adoption and implications for accounting. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 14(2), 91-100.
- Kow, Y. M., & Lustig, C. 2018. Imaginaries and crystallization processes in bitcoin infrastructuring. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 27(2), 209-232.
- Kwilinski, A. (2019). Implementation of blockchain technology in accounting sphere. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 23, 1-6.
- Liu, M., Wu, K., & Xu, J. (2019). How will blockchain technology impact auditing and accounting: Permissionless vs. permissioned blockchain. Current Issues in Auditing. 13(2): A19-A29.
- MacKenzie, D. (2019). Pick a nonce and try a hash. London Review of Books, 41(8), 35-38.
- Maurer, WM. (2017). Blockchains are a diamond's best friend: Zelizer for the Bitcoin moment. In Money talks: Explaining how money really works (pp. 215-230). UC Irvine. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/22w2n6c8
- Miller, P. (1998). The margins of accounting. European Accounting Review, 7(4), 605-621.
- Miller, P., & O'Leary, T. (1987). Accounting and the construction of the governable person. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(3), 235-265.
- Miller, P., & O'Leary, T. (1993). Accounting expertise and the politics of the product: Economic citizenship and modes of corporate governance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18(2-3), 187-206.
- Miller, P., Hopper, T., & Laughlin, R. (1991). The new accounting history: An introduction. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(5-6), 395-403.
- Mouritsen, J., & Thrane, S. (2006). Accounting, network complementarities and the development of inter- organisational relations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(3), 241-275.
- Neumann, L. J., & Star, S. L. (1996). Making infrastructure: The dream of a common language. In PDC (pp. 231-240).
- O'Dwyer, R. (2016). Blockchains and their pitfalls. In T. Scholz (Eds.), Ours to hack and to own. New School, OR Books.
- Peters, G. W., & Panayi, E. (2016). Understanding modern banking ledgers through blockchain technologies: Future of transaction processing and smart contracts on the internet of money. In Banking beyond banks and money (pp. 239-278). Springer.
- Pimentel, E., & Boulianne, E. (2020). Blockchain in accounting research and practice: Current trends and future opportunities. Accounting Perspectives, 19(4), 325-361.
- Popper, N. (2015). Digital gold: The untold story of Bitcoin. Penguin UK.
- Porter, T. M. (1992). Quantification and the accounting ideal in science. Social Studies of Science, 22(4), 633-651.
- Porter, T. M. (1995). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press.
- Power, M. (1995). Auditing, expertise and the sociology of technique. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 6(4), 317-339.
- Power, M. (2003). Auditing and the production of legitimacy. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(4), 379-394.
- Quattrone, P., & Hopper, T. (2006). What is IT? SAP, accounting and visibility in a multinational organisation. Information and Organization, 16(3), 212-250.
- Schmitz, J., & Leoni, G. (2019). Accounting and auditing at the time of blockchain technology: A research agenda. Australian Accounting Review. 29(2): 331-342
- Scott, S. V., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2012). Reconfiguring relations of accountability: Materialization of social media in the travel sector. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(1), 26-40.
- Seal, W., Cullen, J., Dunlop, A., Berry, T., & Ahmed, M. (1999). Enacting a European supply chain: A case study on the role of management accounting. Management Accounting Research, 10(3), 303- 322.
- Stark, D., & Pais, I. (2020). Algorithmic management in the platform economy. Sociologica, 14(3), 47- 72.
- Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy. O'Reilly Media, Inc.
- Tan, B. S., & Low, K. Y. (2019). Blockchain as the database engine in the accounting system. Australian Accounting Review. 29(2), 312-318.
- Vallas, S., & Schor, J. (2019). Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology.
- Van der Meer-Kooistra, J., & Vosselman, E. G. (2000). Management control of interfirm transactional relationships: The case of industrial renovation and maintenance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25(1), 51-77.
- Velasco, P. R. (2017). Computing ledgers and the political ontology of the blockchain. Metaphilosophy, 48(5), 712-726.
- Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. MIT Press.
- Vosselman, E., & Van der Meer-Kooistra, J. (2009). Accounting for control and trust building in interfirm transactional relationships. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(2), 267-283.
- Wang, Y., & Kogan, A. (2018). Designing confidentiality-preserving blockchain-based transaction processing systems. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 30, 1-18.
- Werbach, K. (2018a). Trust, but verify: Why the blockchain needs the law. Berkeley Tech. Law Journal, 33, 487.
- Yermack, D. (2017). Corporate governance and blockchains. Review of Finance, 21(1), 7-31.
- Yu, T., Lin, Z., & Tang, Q. (2018). Blockchain: The introduction and its application in financial accounting. Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 29(4), 37-47.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ciriello, R., Mindel, V., & Mathiassen, L. (2024) · Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.24251/hicss.2024.607 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Pflueger, D., Kornberger, M., & Mouritsen, J.
- Affiliations
- HEC Paris (FR)
- Vienna University of Economics and Business (AT)
- Copenhagen Business School (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Pflueger, Dane
- Venue
- European Accounting Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2022-12-15
- Pages
- 1-26
- ISSN
- 0963-8180 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4497
- OpenAlex
- W4311764692
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 6.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.cbs.dk
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- European Accounting Review (publishedVersion)
- CBS Research Portal (Copenhagen Business School) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- WU Research (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Accounting and Organizational Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting Theory and Financial Reporting
- Keywords
- blockchain accounting, Bitcoin, information technology in accounting, organizational change, governance, trust, imaginary, accounting profession
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
