IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/polsoc/v41y2022i3p328-342..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of blockchain by international organizations: effectiveness and legitimacy
[The governance of blockchain dispute resolution]

Author

Listed:
  • Georgios Dimitropoulos

Abstract

Blockchain is a new general-purpose technology that poses significant challenges to policymaking, law, and society. Blockchain is even more distinctive than other transformative technologies, as it is by nature a global technology; moreover, it operates based on a set of rules and principles that have a law-like quality—the lex cryptographia. The global nature of blockchain has led to its adoption by international organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank. However, the law-like nature of the technology makes some of its uses by international organizations questionable from an international law and foreign affairs perspective. In this light, the article examines the effectiveness and legitimacy of the use of blockchain for international policymaking.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgios Dimitropoulos, 2022. "The use of blockchain by international organizations: effectiveness and legitimacy [The governance of blockchain dispute resolution]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 328-342.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:41:y:2022:i:3:p:328-342.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/polsoc/puab021
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    2. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2004. "Legitimationskonzepte jenseits des Nationalstaats," MPIfG Working Paper 04/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Alastair Berg & Brendan Markey-Towler & Mikayla Novak, 2020. "Blockchains: Less Government, More Market," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 2(Summer 20), pages 1-21.
    4. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    5. Yusuf Karacaoglu & Stela Mocan & Rachel Alexandra Halsema, 2018. "The World Bank Group's Technology and Innovation Lab, from Concept to Development: A Case Study in Leveraging an IT Department to Support Digital Transformation," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 12(1-2), pages 18-28, Summer-Fa.
    6. De Filippi, Primavera, 2014. "Bitcoin: a regulatory nightmare to a libertarian dream," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 3(2), pages 1-11.
    7. Francesco Montanaro & Federica Violi, 2020. "The Remains of the Day: The International Economic Order in the Era of Disintegration," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 299-322.
    8. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    9. Hurd, Ian, 1999. "Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 379-408, April.
    10. Jonas Tallberg & Michael Zürn, 2019. "The legitimacy and legitimation of international organizations: introduction and framework," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 581-606, December.
    11. Aisha Bin Bishr, 2019. "Dubai: A City Powered by Blockchain," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 12(3-4), pages 4-8, Winter-Sp.
    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. Judith Clifton & Leslie A Pal, 2022. "The policy dilemmas of blockchain [Blockchain technology and decentralized governance: Is the state still necessary?]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 321-327.

    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. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.
    2. Daniel L. Nielson & Susan D. Hyde & Judith Kelley, 2019. "The elusive sources of legitimacy beliefs: Civil society views of international election observers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 685-715, December.
    3. Jasper Krommendijk, 2015. "The domestic effectiveness of international human rights monitoring in established democracies. The case of the UN human rights treaty bodies," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 489-512, December.
    4. Axel Dreher & Katharina Michaelowa, 2008. "The political economy of international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 331-334, December.
    5. Terrence L. Chapman, 2007. "International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and Institutional Legitimacy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 134-166, February.
    6. Sherrie Steiner, 2011. "Religious Soft Power as Accountability Mechanism for Power in World Politics," SAGE Open, , vol. 1(3), pages 21582440114, October.
    7. Marecki, Krzysztof & Wójcik-Czerniawska, Agnieszka, 2020. "e. The use of blockchain technology to improve the food supply chain," Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department 308135, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    8. Jonas Tallberg & Michael Zürn, 2019. "The legitimacy and legitimation of international organizations: introduction and framework," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 581-606, December.
    9. Mende, Janne, 2020. "Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-103, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    10. Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt, 2018. "Self-legitimation in the face of politicization: Why international organizations centralized public communication," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 519-546, December.
    11. M. Rodwan Abouharb & David Cingranelli & Mikhail Filippov, 2019. "Too Many Cooks: Multiple International Principals Can Spoil the Quality of Governance," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-22, May.
    12. Jacob D. Petersen-Perlman & Itay Fischhendler, 2018. "The weakness of the strong: re-examining power in transboundary water dynamics," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 275-294, April.
    13. Marecki, Krzysztof & Wójcik-Czerniawska, Agnieszka, 2020. "e. The use of blockchain technology to improve the food supply chain," Agri-Tech Economics Papers 308135, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    14. Terrence L Chapman & Johannes Urpelainen & Scott Wolford, 2013. "International bargaining, endogenous domestic constraints, and democratic accountability," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 25(2), pages 260-283, April.
    15. Krzysztof Marecki & Agnieszka Wójcik-Czerniawska, 2021. "Defi (Decentralized Finance) Will Lead To A Revolution In The World Of Financial Services," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 15(1), pages 284-290.
    16. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2007. "Neue Autoritäten? Ein kommunikationstheoretischer Blick auf die Deutungsmacht inter- und transnationaler Akteure in der Darfurkrise [New Authorities? A Communication-Theoretical View of the Symboli," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2007-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Mende, Janne, 2022. "Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-103r, WZB Berlin Social Science Center, revised 2022.
    18. Alan Richardson & Burkard Eberlein, 2011. "Legitimating Transnational Standard-Setting: The Case of the International Accounting Standards Board," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 98(2), pages 217-245, January.
    19. von Haldenwang, Christian, 2016. "Measuring legitimacy: new trends, old shortcomings?," IDOS Discussion Papers 18/2016, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    20. Krzysztof Marecki & Agnieszka Wójcik-Czerniawska, 2020. "Cryptocurrency Market Of Bitcoin And Payment Acceptability In E-Commerce," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 14(1), pages 257-267.

    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:oup:polsoc:v:41:y:2022:i:3:p:328-342.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .

    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.