2019 (16), №2

Post-Institutional Theory of Blockchain

9

DOI:

10.31063/2073-6517/2019.16-2.8

For citation: 

Frolov, D. P. (2019). Post-Institutional Theory of Blockchain. Zhurnal Economicheskoj Teorii [Russian Journal of Economic Theory], 16(2), 262-278

Abstract:

The article demonstrates the possibilities of post-institutionalism in the context of blockchain — a new generation of institutional methodologies and theories, alternative to the new institutional economics. Based on the theory of transaction value, it has been proved that radical reduction of transaction costs by blockchain technologies will not lead to the elimination of intermediaries, but will redirect them to the improvement of transactions quality and the expansion of the offer of additional (including hyperrelevant) transaction services. Using the theory of institutional assemblages, it is argued that it is impossible to form a homogeneous system of blockchain institutions based solely on the principles of decentralization, transparency, and openness. The institutional system of blockchain will be organically hybrid, combining elements of opposing institutional logics: regulatory and algorithmic law, Ricardian and smart contracts, private and public systems, uncontrollability and arbitration. Thus, the conclusions of the neoinstitutional theory of blockchain (Davidson et al., 2018) are refuted from a post-institutional standpoint.

PDF full
Downloaded: 46

Daniil Petrovich Frolov — Doctor of Economics, Professor at the Department of World Economy and Economic Theory, Volgograd State Technical University; Researcher for the Project of the Russian Science Foundation No. 18–78– 10075, Volgograd State University (Volgograd, Russian Federation; e-mail: ecodev@mail.ru).

  1. Delanda, M. (2018). Novaya filosofiya obshchestva: teoriya assamblyazhey i sotsial’naya slozhnost’ [New social philosophy: theory of assemblages and social difficulty]. Perm’, Russia: Gile Press, 170. (In Russ.)
  2. Kapelyushnikov, R. I. (2018). Gipnoz Vebera (zametki o “Protestantskoy etike i dukhe kapitalizma”) [Weber’s hypnosis (notes on “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”]. Moscow, Russia: HSE Publ. House, 76. (In Russ.)
  3. Latur, B. (2014). Peresborka sotsial’nogo: vvedenie v aktorno-setevuyu teoriyu [Reassembling the social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory]. Moscow, Russia: HSE Publ. House, 384. (In Russ.)
  4. Lo, Dzh. (2015). Posle metoda: besporyadok i sotsial’naya nauka [After Method: Mess in Social Science Research]. Moscow, Russia: Gaidar Institute Publ., 352. (In Russ.)
  5. Notov, A. A. (2016). Psevdotsiklicheskie skhodstva i strukturnaya evolyutsiya modul’nykh organizmov [Pseudo- cyclical similarities and structural evolution of modular organisms]. Izvestiya RAN. Seriya biologicheskaya [Bulletin of RAS. Biological series], 3, 276–285. (In Russ.)
  6. Popov, E. V. (2018). Ekonotronika [Econotronics]. Ekonomika regiona [Economy of region], 14(1), 13–28. (In Russ.)
  7. Frolov, D., & Polyntsev, I. (2017). Krizis nanoindustrii i ee budushchee [Crisis of nanoindustry and its future]. Ekonomist [Economist], 5, 27–37. (In Russ.)
  8. Frolov, D. P. (2018). Postinstitutsionalizm: za predelami institutsional’nogo meynstrima [Post-institutionalism: beyond institutional mainstream] (MPRA Paper No. 90287). Munich University Library, 26. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/90287/. (In Russ.)
  9. Kharman, G. (2017). Seti i assamblyazhi: vozrozhdenie veshchey u Latura i Delanda [Networks and assemblages: revival of things by Latour and DeLanda]. Logos [Logos], 27(3), 1–34. (In Russ.)
  10. Eggertsson, T. (2001). Ekonomicheskoe povedenie i instituty [Economic behaviour and institutes]. Moscow, Russia: Delo, 408. (In Russ.)
  11. Aoki, M. (2011). Institutions as cognitive media between strategic interactions and individual beliefs. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 79(1–2), 20–34.
  12. Atzori, M. (2015). Blockchain technology and decentralized governance: is the state still necessary? SSRN, 37. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2709713.
  13. Bekar, C., Carlaw, K., & Lipsey, R. (2018). General purpose technologies in theory, application and controversy: a re- view. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 28(5), 1005–1033.
  14. Bhatt, S. (2017). How Digital Communication Technology Shapes Markets: Redefining Competition, Building Cooperation. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 151.
  15. The Deloitte Center for Financial Services. (2017). Blockchain in commercial real estate: The future is here!,
  16. CPA Canada, AICPA. (2017). Blockchain Technology and Its Potential Impact on the Audit and Assurance Profession, PwC. (2017). Blockchain, a catalyst for new approaches in insurance, 39.
  17. Buchanan, I. (2017). Assemblage Theory, or, the Future of an Illusion. Deleuze and Guattari Studies, 11(3), 457–474. McKinsey & Co. (2017). Capital Markets Infrastructure: An Industry Reinventing Itself,
  18. Carson, B., Romanelli, G., Walsh, P., & Zhumaev, A. (2018). Blockchain beyond the hype: What is the strategic business value? McKinsey & Co., 13.
  19. Catalini, C., & Gans, J. S. (2016). Some simple economics of the blockchain (NBER Working Paper No. 22952). National Bureau of Economic Research, 31.
  20. Clune, J., Mouret, J. B., & Lipson, H. (2013). The evolutionary origins of modularity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences (Vol. 280, No. 1755, pp. 2012–2863).
  21. Davidson, S., De Filippi, P., & Potts, J. (2018). Blockchains and the economic institutions of capitalism. Journal of Institutional Economics, 14(4), 639–658.
  22. De Filippi, P., & Hassan, S. (2016). Blockchain Technology as a Regulatory Technology: From Code is Law to Law is Code. First Monday, 21(12). Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/ view/7113/5657.
  23. De Filippi, P., & Wright, A. (2018). Blockchain and the Law: The Rule of Code. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 312.
  24. DeLanda, M. (2016). Assemblage Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 216.
  25. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2005). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 612.
  26. Deleuze, G., & Parnet, C. (2006). Dialogues II. London; New York: Continuum, 136.
  27. Drahokoupil, J., & Piasna, A. (2017). Work in the Platform Economy: Beyond Lower Transaction Costs. Intereconomics, 52(6), 335–340.
  28. Evans, D. (2003). The Antitrust Economics of Multi-Sided Platform Markets. Yale Journal on Regulation, 20(2), 325–381. Evans, P. C., & Gawer, A. (2016). The Rise of the Platform Enterprise: A Global Survey. The Emerging Platform Economy
  29. Series No. 1. New York: The Center for Global Enterprise, 30.
  30. Gatteschi, V., Lamberti, F., Demartini, C., Pranteda, C., & Santamaría, V. (2018). Blockchain and Smart Contracts for Insurance: Is the Technology Mature Enough? Future Internet, 10(2), 1–16.
  31. Hazard, J., Sclavounis, O., & Stieber, H. (2016). Are Transaction Costs Drivers of Financial Institutions? Contracts Made in Heaven, Hell, and the Cloud in Between. In P. Tasca, T. Aste, L. Pelizzon & N. Perony (Eds.), Banking Beyond Banks and Money: A Guide to Banking Services in the Twenty-First Century (pp. 213–237). Cham: Springer.
  32. Kamalipour, H., & Peimani, N. (2015). Assemblage Thinking and the City: Implications for Urban Studies. Current Urban Studies, 3(4), 402–408.
  33. Kane, E. (2017). Is Blockchain a General Purpose Technology? SSRN, 27. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://ssrn. com/abstract=2932585.
  34. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2005). Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make Competition Irrelevant. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 256.
  35. Kritikos, M. (2018). What if blockchain were to be truly decentralised? European Parliamentary Research Service, Retrieved January 18, 2019, from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2018/624248/EPRS_ ATA(2018)624248_EN.pdf.
  36. Lanzara, G. F. (2009). Building digital institutions: ICT and the rise of assemblages in government. In F. Contini & G. F. Lanzara (Eds.), ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector: Technology, Work and Globalization. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 9–48.
  37. Leonardi, P. M. (2010). Digital materiality? How artifacts without matter, matter. First Monday, 15(6). Retrieved from January 18, 2019, from https://firstmonday.org/article/view/3036/2567.
  38. Liu, Z., Ming, X., Song, W., Qiu, S., & Qu, Y. (2018). A perspective on value co-creation-oriented framework for smart product-service system. Procedia CIRP, 73, 155–160.
  39. MacDonald, T. J., Allen, D. W. E., & Potts, J. (2016). Blockchains and the Boundaries of Self-Organized Economies: Predictions for the Future of Banking. In P. Tasca, T. Aste, L. Pelizzon & N. Perony (Eds.), Banking Beyond Banks and Money: A Guide to Banking Services in the Twenty-First Century (pp. 279–296). Cham: Springer.
  40. Mardon, R., & Belk, R. (2018). Materializing digital collecting: An extended view of digital materiality. Marketing Theory, 18(4), 543–570.
  41. Martens, B. (2016). An Economic Policy Perspective on Online Platforms. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Digital Economy Working Paper 2016/05. European Union, 60.
  42. McMillan, J. (2014). The End of Banking: Money, Credit, and the Digital Revolution. Zurich: Zero/One Economics, 246. Molnár, J. (2018). What does financial intermediation theory tell us about fintechs? Vezetéstudomány — Budapest Management Review, 49(5), 38–46.
  43. Morabito, V. (2017). Business Innovation Through Blockchain: The B³ Perspective. Cham: Springer, 173.
  44. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press, 159.
  45. (2016). OECD Business and Finance Outlook 2016. Paris: OECD Publishing, 253.
  46. Pilkington, M. (2016). Blockchain technology: Principles and applications. In F. Olleros & M. Zhegu (Eds.), Research Handbook on Digital Transformations (pp. 225–253). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  47. Querbes, A. (2018). Banned from the sharing economy: an agent-based model of a peer-to-peer marketplace for con- sumer goods and services. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 28(3), 633–665.
  48. (2017). Report of Investigation Pursuant to Section 21(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: The DAO (Release No. 81207), 18.
  49. Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform Competition in Two-sided Markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029.
  50. Song, W. (2019). Customization-Oriented Design of Product-Service System. Singapore: Springer, 202.
  51. Tremblay, R. L., Ackerman, J. D., Zimmerman, J. K., & Calvo, R. N. (2005). Variation in sexual reproduction in orchids and its evolutionary consequences: a spasmodic journey to diversification. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 84(1), 1–54.
  52. Wallis, J. J., & North, D. C. (1986). Measuring the Transaction Sector in the American Economy, 1870–1970. In S. L. Engerman & R. E. Gallman (Eds.), Long Term Factors in American Economic Growth (pp. 95–148). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  53. Walport, M. (2016). Distributed Ledger Technology: beyond block chain. A report by the UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser. London: Government Office for Science, 87.
  54. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York: Free Press, 450.
  55. Wollah, R., Barton, R., Ishikawa, M., & Quiring, K. (2017). Put Your Trust in Hyper-Relevance: Global Consumer Pulse research 2017. Accenture, 13.
  56. Zajac, E. J., & Olsen, C. P. (1993). From Transaction Costs to Transactional Value Analysis: Implications for the Study of Interorganizational Strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 30(1), 131–145.

Tags: