The DOI matches its Crossref record.
CBDC Governance: Programmability, Privacy and Policies
Open accessAbstract
• Central banks are exploring, developing and implementing a new form of money: central bank digital currency (CBDC). In short, it is a digital version of a country’s currency issued by its central bank. • While significant research has focused on the economic and technological aspects, the governance perspective has not received enough consideration. This paper focuses on the topics of programmability and surveillance — from a governance perspective. • Two concepts of programmability are discussed: programmable payments that automatically transfer funds based on predetermined conditions; and programmable money that refers to restrictions on usage. These new technological options can support social policies; however, they also raise questions about the authorities’ influence and control, and how to ensure there is no abuse of power. • Regarding surveillance, privacy is considered the most significant challenge in CBDC design. Meeting anti-money laundering (AML)/combatting the financing of terrorism (CFT) requirements while offering cash-like anonymity seems incompatible. Authorities’ access to citizens’ data could lead to state‑level surveillance, threatening civil liberties and human rights. Even if safeguards are put in place, CBDC infrastructure could be changed and initial safeguards overridden, rendering this risk a time-consistency problem. • This paper also discusses whether CBDC is needed and suggests that if it is, then legal protection for cash should be considered. Issues of centrality, pace and public involvement are compared with another new technology — artificial intelligence (AI). • Eleven policy recommendations are suggested on privacy and data rights, accessibility, public participation and oversight, prohibiting programmable money, legislation protecting cash and more. Ultimately, democratic institutions uphold trust in CBDCs.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Achieving strong privacy, comprehensive compliance, and technological efficiency simultaneously appears implausible, necessitating the prioritisation of specific goals”
From From Legal Tender to Prohibition: Competing Paradigms in Central Bank Digital Currency Law (2025) · cites this paper as Freiman, 2025, pp. 1-22
In the citing paper
“The U.S. legislative approach reflects a negative determination at the risk management dimension: the privacy-AML/CFT trilemma was judged unresolvable within constitutional constraints, rendering the question of operational resilience moot (Freiman, 2025, pp. 1-22).”
From From Legal Tender to Prohibition: Competing Paradigms in Central Bank Digital Currency Law (2025) · cites this paper as Freiman, 2025, pp. 1-22
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
From Legal Tender to Prohibition: Competing Paradigms in Central Bank Digital Currency Law
Zatti, F. (2025) · Strani pravni život · doi:10.56461/spz_25402kj
Metadata
- Authors
- Freiman, O.
- Affiliations
- McMaster University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Freiman, Ori
- ORCID
- Freiman, Ori
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4407010751
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
- Keywords
- central bank digital currency, programmable money, surveillance, privacy, anti-money laundering, counter-terrorism financing, data rights, citizen participation, oversight, abuse of power, time consistency, artificial intelligence comparison
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CBDC Governance: Programmability, Privacy and Policies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2139/ssrn.5118025
- The paper
- Freiman, O. (2025). CBDC Governance: Programmability, Privacy and Policies. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5118025