IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v72y2023ics0160791x22002846.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which type of ecosystem for distributed ledger technology?

Author

Listed:
  • Papanikolaou, Efstathios
  • Angelis, Jannis
  • Moustakis, Vassilis

Abstract

Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), or the blockchain, enables new ways of inter-firm interaction in a networked environment. The economic community consisted of organizations, that although independent, are connected and interact through this seminal technology form the DLT ecosystem. DLT may be applicable in many ecosystem types. However, little research has been done on how DLT works in the ecosystem types. We acknowledge specific ecosystem characteristics in a DLT network of actors and argue that there are similarities between various ecosystem types. Our study extends DLT and ecosystem literature by answering the question “How do ecosystem types make fit to DLT?“. We build upon the software, technological, digital, innovation, product and service ecosystem literature and examine how do they match to DLT ecosystem. We find that these ecosystems can be part or subset of the DLT ecosystem, but it is the business ecosystem type that fits better to DLT ecosystem conceptualization. We further analyse the characteristics, definitions and enablers of business ecosystem and identify the analogies between these two structures. In this way we provide academics and practitioners alike insight into what characteristics shape DLT business ecosystems and what features it adopts from other ecosystem types.

Suggested Citation

  • Papanikolaou, Efstathios & Angelis, Jannis & Moustakis, Vassilis, 2023. "Which type of ecosystem for distributed ledger technology?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:72:y:2023:i:c:s0160791x22002846
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X22002846
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102143?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. Ron Boschma, 2015. "Towards an Evolutionary Perspective on Regional Resilience," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 733-751, May.
    2. FOX, Sarah Jane, 2019. "Policing - The technological revolution: Opportunities & challenges!," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 69-78.
    3. Stephen L. Vargo & Robert F. Lusch, 2016. "Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 5-23, January.
    4. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    5. M. Wright, 2012. "Academic Entrepreneurship, Technology Transfer and Society: Where Next?," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/801, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    6. Hopster, Jeroen, 2021. "What are socially disruptive technologies?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. De Filippi, Primavera & Mannan, Morshed & Reijers, Wessel, 2020. "Blockchain as a confidence machine: The problem of trust & challenges of governance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    8. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    9. Deborah Dougherty & Danielle D. Dunne, 2011. "Organizing Ecologies of Complex Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1214-1223, October.
    10. Siripitakchai, Naparat & Miyazaki, Kumiko & Ho, Jonathan C., 2015. "Partnership ecosystem of IC design service companies: The case of Taiwan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 199-208.
    11. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, 1996. "Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 136-150, April.
    12. Zhai, Huayun & Yang, Min & Chan, Kam C., 2022. "Does digital transformation enhance a firm's performance? Evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    13. Heister, Stanton & Yuthas, Kristi, 2020. "The blockchain and how it can influence conceptions of the self," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Trunina, Anna & Ashourizadeh, Shayegheh, 2021. "Business model-network interactions: Comparative case studies from Zhongguancun and Silicon Valley," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    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. He, Yubing & Lin, Ting & Zhang, Si, 2023. "Does complementary technology within an ecosystem affect disruptive innovation? Evidence from Chinese electric vehicle listed firms," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    2. Coccia, Mario, 2023. "New Perspectives in Innovation Failure Analysis: A taxonomy of general errors and strategic management for reducing risks," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(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. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    2. Benjamin Cole & Preeta Banerjee, 2013. "Morally Contentious Technology-Field Intersections: The Case of Biotechnology in the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 555-574, July.
    3. Christopher S. Hayter, 2016. "A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 633-656, October.
    4. Takey, Silvia Mayumi & Carvalho, Marly M., 2016. "Fuzzy front end of systemic innovations: A conceptual framework based on a systematic literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 97-109.
    5. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    6. 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).
    7. Suvi Nenonen & Kaj Storbacka & Charlotta Windahl, 2019. "Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating increased value creation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 617-639, July.
    8. Gening Yang, 2024. "Knowledge Element Relationship and Value Co-Creation in the Innovation Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-24, May.
    9. Hartman, Paul & Ogden, Jeff & Jackson, Ross, 2020. "Contract duration: Barrier or bridge to successful public-private partnerships?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    10. Rahul Kapoor & Nathan R. Furr, 2015. "Complementarities and competition: Unpacking the drivers of entrants' technology choices in the solar photovoltaic industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 416-436, March.
    11. Yingying Zhang-Zhang & Sylvia Rohlfer & Jay Rajasekera, 2020. "An Eco-Systematic View of Cross-Sector Fintech: The Case of Alibaba and Tencent," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    12. Helveston, John P. & Wang, Yanmin & Karplus, Valerie J. & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2019. "Institutional complementarities: The origins of experimentation in China’s plug-in electric vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 206-222.
    13. Marcon, Arthur & Ribeiro, José Luis Duarte & Olteanu, Yasmin & Fichter, Klaus, 2024. "How the interplay between innovation ecosystems and market contingency factors impacts startup innovation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    14. Janna Alvedalen & Ron Boschma, 2017. "A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: towards a future research agenda," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 887-903, June.
    15. Padmanathan Kasinathan & Rishi Pugazhendhi & Rajvikram Madurai Elavarasan & Vigna Kumaran Ramachandaramurthy & Vinoth Ramanathan & Senthilkumar Subramanian & Sachin Kumar & Kamalakannan Nandhagopal & , 2022. "Realization of Sustainable Development Goals with Disruptive Technologies by Integrating Industry 5.0, Society 5.0, Smart Cities and Villages," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-31, November.
    16. Bo Liu & Yun-Fei Shao & Guowei Liu & Debing Ni, 2022. "An Evolutionary Analysis of Relational Governance in an Innovation Ecosystem," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, April.
    17. Chaohong Na & Xue Chen & Xiaojun Li & Yuting Li & Xiaolan Wang, 2022. "Digital Transformation of Value Chains and CSR Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-24, August.
    18. Alar Kolk & Mait Rungi, 2012. "Total Exploitation Orientation in Capability Development: The Cross-case of Google, Ericsson, Microsoft and Nokia," Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, Tallinn School of Economics and Business Administration, Tallinn University of Technology, vol. 4(2).
    19. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2016. "Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: Re-examining technology S-curves," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 625-648, April.
    20. Asplund, Fredrik & Björk, Jennie & Magnusson, Mats & Patrick, Adam J, 2021. "The genesis of public-private innovation ecosystems: Bias and challenges✰," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).

    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:72:y:2023:i:c:s0160791x22002846. 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.