Blockchain-based application at a governmental level: disruption or illusion? The case of Estonia

  1. Semenzin, Silvia 1
  2. Rozas, David 1
  3. Hassan, Samer 12
  1. 1 GRASIA Research Group, Institute of Knowledge Technology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
  2. 2 Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
Revista:
Policy and Society

ISSN: 1449-4035,  1839-3373

Año de publicación: 2022

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1093/POLSOC/PUAC014 GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Policy and Society

Resumen

Blockchain technology enables new kinds of decentralized systems. Thus, it has often been advocated as a “disruptive” technology that could have the potentiality of reshaping political, economic, and social relations, “solving” problems like corruption, power centralization, and distrust toward political institutions. Blockchain has been gradually gaining attention beyond finance and is thus applied by a range of different actors. This includes local, regional, and national governments interested in the potentiality of experimenting with blockchain-supported governance. This article contributes to identifying blockchain as a contested socio-political object prone to contradictory political imaginaries regarding its potentialities, particularly when applied to policy. The article explores some of the most praised of blockchain’s affordances (e.g., decentralization and transparency) in the context of Estonia, one of the most cited examples of blockchain governmental applications. Estonia has received international attention as the alleged first national infrastructure integrating blockchain. However, so far, few have asked: what kind of blockchain-based tools have been built by the Estonian government in practice and why? And to what extent do blockchain-based governmental applications reflect the original promises of disruption of the crypto-community? This article draws on a qualitative approach to explore several blockchain-based socio-technical objects to identify the narratives that have emerged in Estonia. The research shows clear contrasting views between stakeholders and technical experts from inside and outside the institutional sphere. The conflict revolves around two different social imaginaries associated with permissioned vs. public blockchains. The paper concludes with an analysis of the profound political implications of each vision.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

Financiadores

  • european research council erc-2017-stg
    • 759207

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Agarwal, (2021), 10.1109/ispcc53510.2021.9609339
  • Ainsworth, (2016), SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn.2853428
  • Alexopoulos, (2021), International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age, 8, pp. 1, 10.4018/IJPADA.20210101.oa10
  • Allen, (2017), ID 2815255
  • Altheide, (1987), Qualitative Sociology, 10, pp. 65, 10.1007/BF00988269
  • Antonopoulos, (2014), O’Reilly- Radar. 2014
  • Atzori, (2015), SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn.2709713
  • Atzori, (2017), ID 2999715, 10.2139/ssrn.2999715
  • Cagigas, (2021), IEEE Access, 9, pp. 13904, 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3052019
  • Calvaresi, (2018), Advances in Practical Applications of Agents, Multi-Agent Systems, and Complexity: The PAAMS Collection, pp. 110, 10.1007/978-3-319-94580-4_9
  • Catlow, (2017), Artists re: Thinking the blockchain
  • Chowdhury, (2019), IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 7, pp. 167930, 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953729
  • Christensen, (2006), The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23, pp. 39, 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2005.00180.x
  • Cila, (2020), 10.1145/3313831.3376660
  • De Filippi, (2016), 10.14763/2016.3.427
  • Dodd, (2018), Theory, Culture & Society, 35, pp. 35, 10.1177/0263276417746464
  • Drescher, (2017), Blockchain basics: A non-technical introduction in 25 steps. PDF, 10.1007/978-1-4842-2604-9
  • Faqir-Rhazoui, (2021), Journal of Internet Services and Applications, 12, 10.1186/s13174-021-00139-6
  • Filippi, (2016), First Monday, 21, 10.5210/fm.v21i12.7113
  • Fritsch, (2021), Frontiers in Blockchain, 4, 10.3389/fbloc.2021.578721
  • Galen, (2018), Standford University
  • Galend, (2018)
  • Gerard, (2017), Attack of the 50 foot blockchain: Bitcoin, blockchain, ethereum & smart contracts
  • Gikay, (2019), SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn.3379756
  • Golumbia, (2016), The politics of bitcoin: Software as right-wing extremism
  • Hassan, (2020), Scanning the European Ecosystem of Distributed Ledger Technologies for Social and Public Good
  • Hayes, (2016), Banking beyond banks and money, pp. 121, 10.1007/978-3-319-42448-4_7
  • Heller, (2017), The New Yorker
  • Hemalatha, (2021), Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12, pp. 2554, 10.17762/turcomat.v12i2.2213
  • Heuermann, (2015), Governance 2.0: A Hayekian approach to (r)evolutionary self-governance by cryptocurrencies
  • Hileman, (2017), Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, 33, pp. 33
  • Huckle, (2016), Future Internet, 8, 10.3390/fi8040049
  • Husain, (2020), PhD, 10.18174/514268
  • Jasanoff, (2015), Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power, 10.7208/chicago/9780226276663.001.0001
  • Johnston, (2014), Medium. Medium
  • Jun, (2018), Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 4, 10.1186/s40852-018-0086-3
  • Kalvet, (2012), Electronic Government, an International Journal, 9, 10.1504/eg.2012.046266
  • Kalvet, (2012), Electronic Government, an International Journal, 9, 10.1504/eg.2012.046266
  • Karlstrøm, (2014), Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, 15, pp. 23, 10.1080/1600910X.2013.870083
  • Kivimäki, (2018), Nordic Institute for Interoperability Solutions
  • Kivimäki, (2021)
  • Kuo, (2019), Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA, 26, pp. 462, 10.1093/jamia/ocy185
  • Kuperberg, (2019), Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops, pp. 155, 10.1007/978-3-030-20948-3_14
  • Macdonald, (2017), Working Paper, 10.13140/RG.2.2.23274.52164
  • Markham, (2012), Association of Internet Researchers
  • May, (1988)
  • Nagasubramanian, (2020), Neural Computing & Applications, 32, pp. 639, 10.1007/s00521-018-3915-1
  • Nakamoto, (2008)
  • Nguyen, (2016), 10.1109/GTSD.2016.22
  • Nissenbaum, (2009), Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life, 10.1515/9780804772891
  • Novak, (2019), Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 9, pp. 165, 10.1108/JEPP-03-2019-0014
  • O’Dwyer, (2015)
  • Pinch, (1984), Social Studies of Science, 14, pp. 399, 10.1177/030631284014003004
  • Pólvora, (2020), Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 157
  • PWC, (2019)
  • Reijers, (2016), Philosophy & Technology, 31, 10.1007/s13347-016-0239-x
  • Risius, (2017), Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59, pp. 385, 10.1007/s12599-017-0506-0
  • Rozas, (2021), Sage Open, 11, pp. 1, 10.1177/21582440211002526
  • Rozas, (2021), Frontiers in Blockchain, 4, pp. 1
  • Schäfer, (2017), The datafied society: Studying culture through data
  • Schneider, (2019), Journal of Cultural Economy, 12, pp. 265, 10.1080/17530350.2019.1589553
  • Semenzin, (2021), University of Milan, 10.13130/SEMENZIN-SILVIA_PHD2021-05-05
  • Srnicek, (2016), Platform capitalism
  • Sullivan, (2017), Computer Law & Security Review, 33, pp. 470, 10.1016/j.clsr.2017.03.016
  • Swan, (2015), Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy
  • Tammpuu, (2019), Information Systems Frontiers, 21, pp. 621, 10.1007/s10796-019-09908-y
  • Tan, (2020), ANZ Journal of Surgery, 90, pp. 2415, 10.1111/ans.16455
  • Tapscott, (2016), Blockchain revolution: How the technology behind bitcoin is changing money, business, and the world
  • Valiente, (2021), Internet Policy Review, 10, 10.14763/2021.2.1552
  • Vergne, (2020), Organization Theory, 1, 10.1177/2631787720977052
  • World Economic Forum, (2020)
  • Zuboff, (2015), Journal of Information Technology, 30, pp. 75, 10.1057/jit.2015.5
  • Zyskind, (2015), 2015 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops, 10.1109/spw.2015.27