Governance in Blockchain Technologies & Social Contract Theories
Open accessAbstract
This paper is placed in the context of a growing number of social and political critiques of blockchain technologies. We focus on the supposed potential of blockchain technologies to transform political institutions that are central to contemporary human societies, such as money, property rights regimes, and systems of democratic governance. Our aim is to examine the way blockchain technologies canbring about - and justify - new models of governance. To do so, we draw on the philosophical works of Hobbes, Rousseau, and Rawls, analyzing blockchain governance in terms of contrasting social contract theories. We begin by comparing the justifications of blockchain governance offered by members of the blockchain developers’ community with the justifications of governance presented within social contract theories. We then examine the extent to which the model of governance offered by blockchain technologies reflects key governance themes and assumptions located within social contract theories, focusing on the notions of sovereignty, the initial situation, decentralization and distributive justice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Reijers et al. argue that self-sovereignty in the blockchain context can be understood as a guiding governance principle in the design of original blockchain protocols, reminiscent of politico-philosophical theorising.
“As Reijers et al. (2016) argue, self-sovereignty in this context can be understood as a guiding governance principle in the design of original blockchain protocols, reminiscent of arguments found in some of the traditions of politico-philosophical theorising.”
From Sovereignty, privacy, and ethics in blockchain-based identity management systems (2021) · cites this paper as Reijers et al. 2016
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 27 · Cited by 167
- Authors
- Reijers, W., O'Brolcháin, F., & Haynes, P.
- Affiliations
- Dublin City University (IE)
- University of London (GB)
- Venue
- Ledger
- Published
- 2016-12-21
- Volume
- 1
- Pages
- 134-151
- ISSN
- 2379-5980 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2563649753
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 8
- FWCI
- 32.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Ledger (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Science Foundation Ireland (Grant 13/RC/2106, 13/RC/2106)
- European Regional Development Fund (13/RC/2106)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- blockchain governance, social contract theory, Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Rawls, sovereignty, decentralization, distributive justice, money, property rights, democratic governance
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
