IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v59y2019ics0160791x1930082x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blockchain innovation and framing in the Netherlands: How a technological object turns into a ‘hyperobject’

Author

Listed:
  • Lagendijk, Arnoud
  • Hillebrand, Bas
  • Kalmar, Eva
  • van Marion, Ingrid
  • van der Sanden, Maarten

Abstract

Blockchain emerged as a well-defined technological object with limited applicability applications (e.g. Bitcoin). Embraced by more and more ‘stakeholders’, Blockchain has turned into a bounty of possibilities and promises. This raises the question whether Blockchain is turning into an overextending, affective ‘hyperobject’. Adopting a post-ANT topological perspective, and using mixed-methods analysis, this paper traces Blockchain's recent developments in the Netherlands. A media analysis of newspaper items shows a telling divide between stakeholders (including incumbents) stressing Blockchain's radicalising prospects and those (notably involved knowledge and policy workers) warning of its overhyping and lack of governance capacities. A detailed analysis of strategies and operations of the key enabler, the Dutch Blockchain Coalition, reveals how much effort has gone into face-to-face encounters and communication to frame and script the object. Yet, this also causes Blockchain to proliferate in all kinds of directions, turning into a hyperobject beyond the reach of intellectual and practical grasp.

Suggested Citation

  • Lagendijk, Arnoud & Hillebrand, Bas & Kalmar, Eva & van Marion, Ingrid & van der Sanden, Maarten, 2019. "Blockchain innovation and framing in the Netherlands: How a technological object turns into a ‘hyperobject’," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:59:y:2019:i:c:s0160791x1930082x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X1930082X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101175?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Callon, Michel, 2009. "Civilizing markets: Carbon trading between in vitro and in vivo experiments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 535-548, April.
    2. Walid Al-Saqaf & Nicolas Seidler, 2017. "Blockchain technology for social impact: opportunities and challenges ahead," Journal of Cyber Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(3), pages 338-354, September.
    3. Marsal-Llacuna, Maria-Lluïsa, 2018. "Future living framework: Is blockchain the next enabling network?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 226-234.
    4. C. Baek & M. Elbeck, 2015. "Bitcoins as an investment or speculative vehicle? A first look," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 30-34, January.
    5. Henk-Jan Kooij & Arnoud Lagendijk & Marieke Oteman, 2018. "Who Beats the Dutch Tax Department? Tracing 20 Years of Niche–Regime Interactions on Collective Solar PV Production in The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Brilliantova, Vlada & Thurner, Thomas Wolfgang, 2019. "Blockchain and the future of energy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 38-45.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chand Bhatt, Priyanka & Kumar, Vimal & Lu, Tzu-Chuen & Daim, Tugrul, 2021. "Technology convergence assessment: Case of blockchain within the IR 4.0 platform," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Domingo, Ribeiro-Soriano & Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & Ángeles López-Cabarcos, M., 2020. "What factors drive returns on initial coin offerings?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    2. Chhatwani, Malvika & Parija, Arpit Kumar, 2023. "Who invests in cryptocurrency? The role of overconfidence among American investors," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    3. Afees A. Salisu & Aviral Kumar Tiwari & Ibrahim D. Raheem, 2018. "Analysing the distribution properties of Bitcoin returns," Working Papers 058, Centre for Econometric and Allied Research, University of Ibadan.
    4. Tironi, Martín & Rivera Lisboa, Diego Ignacio, 2023. "Artificial intelligence in the new forms of environmental governance in the Chilean State: Towards an eco-algorithmic governance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    5. Lulwah AlSuwaidan & Nuha Almegren, 2020. "Validating the Adoption of Heterogeneous Internet of Things with Blockchain," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Kaidonis, Mary & Moerman, Lee & Rudkin, Kathy, 2009. "Paradigm, paradox, paralysis: An epistemic process," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 285-289.
    7. Parthajit Kayal & Purnima Rohilla, 2021. "Bitcoin in the economics and finance literature: a survey," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(7), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Syed Zwick, Hélène & Syed, Sarfaraz Ali Shah, 2019. "Bitcoin and gold prices: A fledging long-term relationship," MPRA Paper 92512, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Jiang, Yonghong & Wu, Lanxin & Tian, Gengyu & Nie, He, 2021. "Do cryptocurrencies hedge against EPU and the equity market volatility during COVID-19? – New evidence from quantile coherency analysis," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. Corbet, Shaen & Katsiampa, Paraskevi & Lau, Chi Keung Marco, 2020. "Measuring quantile dependence and testing directional predictability between Bitcoin, altcoins and traditional financial assets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    11. Bouri, Elie & Gupta, Rangan & Lahiani, Amine & Shahbaz, Muhammad, 2018. "Testing for asymmetric nonlinear short- and long-run relationships between bitcoin, aggregate commodity and gold prices," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 224-235.
    12. Matkovskyy, Roman & Jalan, Akanksha, 2019. "From financial markets to Bitcoin markets: A fresh look at the contagion effect," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 93-97.
    13. Schinckus, Christophe, 2022. "A Nuanced perspective on blockchain technology and healthcare," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Vidal-Tomás, David & Ibañez, Ana, 2018. "Semi-strong efficiency of Bitcoin," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 259-265.
    15. Aurelio F. Bariviera & Ignasi Merediz‐Solà, 2021. "Where Do We Stand In Cryptocurrencies Economic Research? A Survey Based On Hybrid Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 377-407, April.
    16. Tomasi, Silvia, 2022. "The (Non) impact of the Spanish “Tax on the Sun” on photovoltaics prosumers uptake," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Weisskopf, Jean-Philippe, 2020. "Breaking bad: An investment in cannabis," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(C).
    18. Liu, Weiyi, 2019. "Portfolio diversification across cryptocurrencies," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 200-205.
    19. Frank Hartmann & Paolo Perego & Anna Young, 2013. "Carbon Accounting: Challenges for Research in Management Control and Performance Measurement," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 49(4), pages 539-563, December.
    20. Yue Dai & Nan Li & Rongrong Gu & Xiaodong Zhu, 2018. "Can China’s Carbon Emissions Trading Rights Mechanism Transform its Manufacturing Industry? Based on the Perspective of Enterprise Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:59:y:2019:i:c:s0160791x1930082x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.