COMMUNICATIONS

PUBLICATIONS

EVENTS

MISC

  • Research Report – Blockchain Constitutionalism: The Role Of Legitimacy In Polycentric SystemsNews, Polycentrism, ReportsResearch Report – Blockchain Constitutionalism: The Role Of Legitimacy In Polycentric SystemsResearch Report – Blockchain Constitutionalism: The Role Of Legitimacy In Polycentric Systems Primavera de Filippi, Morshed Mannan, Kelsie Nabben, Jamilya Kamalova, Sofia Cossar, Tara Merk, Silke Noa, Marco Crepaldi, Joshua Dávila. Between 5 and 7 June 2023, BlockchainGov organized a conference on “Blockchain Constitutionalism: The Role of Legitimacy in Polycentric Systems” at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute in Florence, Italy.  Blockchain networks and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) have seen a surge in adoption in recent years. To fulfill their promise of widespread structural innovation and change meaningfully, they require governance that maintains legitimacy for internal and external stakeholders. As permissionless, globe-spanning technologies with significant effects on the general public, there has been a growing interest in viewing these blockchain-based systems in constitutional terms. Early analysis regarded the rules expressed through software code as a form of ‘on-chain constitution.’ At the same time, more recently, these have been supplemented with written documents that articulate additional rules and principles regarding the governance of the blockchain-based system (‘off-chain constitutions’). The common thread among the various examples of blockchain “constitutions” seems to be that they define aspects of a system’s decision-making process and make them relatively difficult to change. However, both blockchain practitioners and legal scholars do not agree on whether we should consider these as ‘constitutions’ or ‘constitutionalization’ processes in a strict sense, nor to what extent these efforts can render blockchain systems more legitimate. The EUI Conference brought together experts, academics, and practitioners to explore this intersection. You can read the full report here.  [...]
    October 26, 2023
  • Blog Posts 2022-2023​Blog postsBlog Posts 2022-2023​Blog Posts 2022-2023 Our researchers’ network is publishing its work not only in academic journals but all around the Web. Here you can find a list of the most relevant blog posts from the last two years  ·       2023: ·       Lotti, L., Houde, N., Merk, T. (2033) “Web3 Work research report: The DAO contributor’s perspective” in Other Internet Substack. ·       De Filippi, P., Schingler, J.K, (2023) “Coordi-nations: a new institutional structure for Global Cooperation” in the Berkman-Klein Center blog, at Harvard. ·       Hubbard, S., Merk, T., Douglas, T. (2023) “DAO Harvard Event Recap” in Harvard Belfer Center Blog. ·       Lotti, L., Houde, N., Merk, T. (2033) “Making DAOs Work” in Other Internet Substack. ·       Merk, T., Lotti, L., Houde, N. (2023) “Introducing Web3 Work” in Other Internet Substack. ·       Merk, T. (2023) “Rewards Systems Galore: a gateway drug to fundamental discussions” in The DAOist Blog. ·       Merk, T. (2023) “Wild, wilder, what? – a structured way to exploring your wildest ideas in DAOs” in The DAOist Blog. ·       2022: ·       De Filippi, P. (2022) “Blockchain technology as a means to create Virtual Property in the Metaverse” in OECD Forum Network. ·       Balazs, Bodo, De Filippi, P. (2022) “’Trust in Context: The Impact of Regulation on Blockchain and DeFi” in Oxford Business Law Blog (OBLB) ·       Merk, T., & Mam, J. (2022). “Introducing the DADA Exit to Community” in Dada.art.  ·       Merk, T., Rennie, E., Miller, L. (2022) “Introduction and Documentation of the Telescope Bot” in The Metagovernance Project   [...]
    October 26, 2023
  • September 2023 Papers UpdateArticles, Books, News, PublicationsSeptember 2023 Papers UpdateSeptember 2023 Papers Update Our team has been keeping busy with a variety of research projects, focus groups, and initiatives, analyzing from different perspectives the evolution of the blockchain space! It’s been a while since we last updated our website with these exciting developments, so we wanted to share some of the latest happenings with you. Here you can find the list of our most recent papers and book chapters. Papers Von Blomberg, M., Reijers, W. (2023) “Who Deserves Credit? Banks for the Virtuous in Rural China” in Journal of Contemporary China. Taylor & Francis. Bühler, M.M.; Calzada, I.; Cane, I.; Jelinek, T.; Kapoor, A.; Mannan, M.; Mehta, S.; Mookerje, V.; Nübel, K.; Pentland, A.; Scholz, T.; Siddharth, D.; Tait, J.; Vaitla, B.; Zhu, J. (2023) “Unlocking the Power of Digital Commons: Data Cooperatives as a Pathway for Data Sovereign, Innovative and Equitable Digital Communities”. Digital 2023, 3, 146–171. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital3030011 Merk, T., Tan, J., Hubbard, S., Oak, E. (2023) “Open Problems in DAOs”, website publication (and under process for submission) De Filippi, P., Santolini, M. (2023) “Extitutional Theory: Modeling Structured Social Dynamics Beyond Institutions” in Ephemera: Theory in Politics and Organisation  Mannan, M., Pek, S. & Scholz, T. (2023) “Platform Cooperatives and Poverty Eradication: Building on the Legacy of Johnston Birchall”, in Journal of Entrepreneurial & Organizational Diversity (accepted, forthcoming) Mannan, M. & Pek, S. (2023) “Platform Cooperatives and the Dilemmas of Labor-Member Participation”, in New Technology, Work and Employment.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12273. De Filippi, P., Enguehard, C., Fayon, D., Gagnebien, A., Vidal, G. (2023) “Quelques enjeux de sécurité, juridiques, économiques, et énergétiques des blockchains” in Terminal. https://doi.org/10.4000/terminal.8995   Special Issues De Filippi, P., Enguehard C., Fayon D., Gagnebien A., Vidal G. (eds) (2023) special edition on “Blockchains : enjeux de sécurité, juridiques, économiques, et coûts énergétiques” for Terminal. [...]
    September 11, 2023
  • BlockchainGov Observations on PoH DAO GovernanceNews, Publications, Reports, researchBlockchainGov Observations on PoH DAO GovernanceJamilya Kamalova, Sofia Cossar, Tara Merk. In early 2021, the first Sybil-resistant registry of humans was launched. The Proof of Humanity (PoH) registry and the PoH DAO is the first decentralized autonomous organization democratically governed running on the Ethereum network. To help us conduct this research, we relied on academic articles from a lot of different disciplines, such as political science, digital ethnography,  democratic theory (especially literature conceptualizing Western liberal democracies to make sense of our empirical observations and findings), but also studies on blockchain systems and blockchain-based governance. The problem of this research is: What governance dynamics led to the Proof of Humanity DAO’s crisis and decision to fork? Our theory was that such a decision came from a persistent governance crisis caused by the absence of strong democratic elements, procedures, regulations, and institutions that could have supported the coexistence of its diverse community rather than leading to its growing and ultimately irreparable division. So we conducted this ethnographic study involving online observation, interviews, events, and institutional analysis. Participants signed community consent forms under BlockchainGov’s research ethics, approved by EUI/CERSA, and agreed to the use and publication of data collected about the PoH DAO community for this research project. Read the paper to discover more about our findings! This document is available in English and Spanish. Ethnographic Research of Proof of Humanity DAO – Full Document of Findings Investigación Etnográfica de Proof of Humanity DAO Documento Completo de Hallazgos Finally, feel free to express any feedback by filling up this document. [...]
    February 3, 2023
  • New Academic Papers Alert!Articles, Books, News, Publications, ReportsNew Academic Papers Alert!New Academic Papers Alert ! De Filippi, P, Mannan, M. presentation of “The BlockchainGov Report on Trust and Confidence in Blockchain Technology”, in the framework of the EUI Tech Cluster research seminar series. European University Institute. 18 May 2022. Florence. Italy     Our team is involved in a variety of research projects, focus groups and initiatives that aim to explore challenges of the blockchain technology. Here are some of the recently published selected papers authored by our members, advisors and affiliates:   1. De Filippi, P., Poux, P., Deffains, B. (2022) “MEV ou la tragédie des blockchains en tant que communs, in Terminal. (forthcoming) 2. Rennie, E., Zargham, M., Tan, J., Miller, L., Abbott, J., Nabben, K., De Filippi, P. (2022) “Towards a participatory digital ethnography of blockchain governance.” 3. Reijers, W., Orgad, L., De Filippi, P. (2022) “The Rise of Cybernetic Citizenship” in Citizenship Studies, Special Issue on “Digital Citizenship in the Post-Pandemic Urban Realm. 4. De Filippi, P., Mannan, M., Reijers, W. (2022) “The Alegality of Blockchain Technology”, in Policy & Society, special issue: “The Policy Dilemmas of Blockchain”. 5. De Filippi, P., Leiter, A. (2021) “Blockchain in Outer Space” in American Journal of International Law (AJIL) Unbound, special issue: “The Global Governance Implications of Blockchain”   [...]
    August 6, 2022
  • 1st Meeting of ERC BlockchainGov ProjectBlog posts, Publications1st Meeting of ERC BlockchainGov ProjectAfter introductions, the agenda included sessions on Legitimacy, Outreach & Policy, OpEds, a potential documentary, PhD Consultancy, and multiple sessions on theory concerning the following topics: Blockchain, Coercion & Legitimacy: Dyzenhaus, David. 1997. “Legality and Legitimacy: Refractions from Weimar” Decentralized/Polycentric governance: Aligica, Paul D., and Vlad Tarko. 2012. “Polycentricity: From Polanyi to Ostrom, and Beyond.” Blockchain and Commons-based governance: Grisel, Florian. 2021. “How Migrations Affect Private Orders: Norms and Practices in the Fishery of Marseille“ Constitutional guarantees in blockchain tech: Suzor, Nicolas. 2018. “Digital Constitutionalism: Using the Rule of Law to Evaluate the Legitimacy of Governance by Platforms.” Stay tuned to learn more about our new scholars! From left to right: Primavera De Filippi, Morshed Mannan, Tara Merk, Philemon Poux, Vashti Maharaj (virtual), Sofia Cossar (virtual), Jamilya Kamalova (virtual), Nathan Vandy, Yann Aouidef, Simona Ramos, Wessel Reijers. [...]
    December 6, 2021
  • Introduction to Extitutional TheoryBlog posts, PublicationsIntroduction to Extitutional TheorySchingler, J. K., De Filippi, P. (2021) “Introduction to Extitutional Theory”. Berkman-Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. “Extitutional theory is an emerging field of scholarship that provides a set of conceptual tools to describe and analyse the underlying social dynamics of a variety of social arrangements, such as communities, companies, organisations, or any other types of institutions. Extitutional theory posits that the institutional framework is just one specific lens through which we can make sense of social behaviour. Social dynamics that are not part of an institution are not unstructured, just differently structured. Specifically, institutions focus on the static and inert elements of social structures — the aspects that persist over time — whereas extitutions focus on the dynamic and mutating elements of social structures — the aspects that continuously evolve over time. Both serve as filters to observe different aspects of the underlying social arrangements. This means that if we look at structured social dynamics only and exclusively through an institutional lens, we are only seeing one part of the larger picture. Extitutional theory provides an alternative lens — and the choice to use it is a normative decision to look at another part of the picture.” Read the following of the blogpost here. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • A meta-proposal for Twitter’s bluesky projectPublications, ReportsA meta-proposal for Twitter’s bluesky projectEsber, J., Sender, B., Zuckerman, E., Lee, C., Nwachukwu, N., Ly, O., Suber, P., De Filippi, P., Massachi, S., Klein, S., Zick, T. (2021). A meta-proposal for Twitter’s bluesky project (March 31, 2021). [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Model Law for DAOsPublications, ReportsModel Law for DAOsThere are ongoing debates surrounding the legal status of DAOs, their participants and procedures. For example, how can an organization that is inherently transnational in nature, benefit from affordances such as legal personality and limited liability without incorporation in a single jurisdiction? Or conversely, how can legal requirements like “registration” & “reporting” be translated to an organization made of bits? This legal insecurity has significantly hampered the development and broader adoption of this new form of social organization.  The DAO Model Law is a multistakeholder effort led by COALA (Coalition of Legal Automated Applications) to provide legal certainty for DAOs and their participants, and unlike other regulatory frameworks, accommodate flexibility for their unique features and further innovation. The Model Law seeks to strike a balance between the importance of innovation and experimental freedom in technological development, and the importance of legal protections and a sound regulatory framework in encouraging broader societal engagement with this new organizational structure. Who is the DAO Model Law aimed for? For policy-makers who wish to support the formation and management of DAOs, the DAO Model Law provides a harmonized model for legislation that still harnesses the unique properties of DAOs that make them alegal, or not currently seen by the legal system, in the first place. For instance, rather than seeking to draw DAOs within a territorial legal order, the Model Law emphasizes recognition by states, rather than registration in states, to accommodate the transnational nature of DAOs. It also combines extensive party autonomy for DAO members and separate legal personality for the DAO in order to facilitate, rather than hinder, pseudonymous participation and recognize that human-to-machine or machine-to-machine interactions can carry out valid legal acts. For participants in DAOs, the Model Law provides the benefits of legal personality, legal capacity and limited liability. Although no governmental authority could directly enforce the Model Law provisions onto a DAO, these benefits offer ample incentive to comply with the Model Law. The recognition of legal personhood for DAOs entails many rights and protections—such as the right to own assets, enter into contractual relationships, sue or be sued, and potentially benefit from a limited liability regime. Some will forgo legal recognition, preferring instead autonomy in their operation and governance. DAOs that seek legal personality and limited liability of its members might need to implement specific features and technological guarantees that accommodate important policy objectives, such as publicity about the formation and governance of business organizations.  How does the DAO Model law work? The Model Law task force studied the provisions of corporate law, aiming for a light-touch approach to regulation based on the principles of functional and regulatory equivalence.  Functional equivalences work as a pathway to establish the equivalence of an object that is already contemplated by legal rule and another that is not. Such equivalences broaden the means by which a regulated activity can be considered legally compliant. A well-known precedent is the UNCITRAL Model Law for Electronic Commerce, which establishes functional equivalence between a paper-based document and an electronic document. For the regulation of DAOs, the Model Law aims to establish functional equivalence between the transfer of corporate shares on the official company share registers and the use of blockchain-based infrastructure to achieve the same function.   Regulatory equivalences work with a similar logic, identifying the policy objective behind any given regulation and how this same goal can be achieved through different means, in this case through the affordances of blockchain technology. To establish regulatory equivalence the Model Law holds that the publication of certain information on a publicly-accessible blockchain meets the publicity objective of corporate registration. Using these conceptual frameworks, the Model Law addresses the following points: Identification of legal corporate rules that can be fulfilled through technological guarantees in the blockchain space (e.g. smart-contract-based separation of funds, blockchain-enforced “corporate veil”, real-time audits and reporting, agency problem, etc. ) Discussions on the specificities of blockchain-based organisations that must be accounted for from a legal perspective(e.g. forking, protocol changes, etc.) and elaboration of techno-legal solutions to address these specificities.  Identification of legal corporate rules that do not have a technical equivalent solution (e.g., KYC identification of all participants) and elaboration of techno-legal alternatives that better account for the technical guarantees of blockchain technology. Establishing the legal foundations of ‘regulatory equivalence’ — collecting previous examples of “functional equivalence” (e.g.  the UNCITRAL electronic contracts) and “regulatory equivalence” (e.g. EU ‘principle-based’ regulatory approaches). The DAO Model Law draws on lessons from model laws for flexible business organizations (e.g., OAS Model Law for the Simplified Stock Corporation) to pursue specific objectives like the uniform treatment of DAOs across States—particularly with respect to recognizing the legal personality and/or limited liability of its members. It also considers a series of new scenarios that are not encountered during the ordinary operations of more traditional organisations, by setting out procedures for hard forking decisions and remedying technical bugs or exploits that would otherwise render the DAO unoperational. It stipulates a series of governance rules for handling exceptional events such as TheDAO attack and other contentious forks, thereby mitigating both public policy concerns regarding unaccountability and participant concerns about potential joint and several liability. What’s next? The task force has already identified ways to extend the Model Law moving forward. Through a series of case studies looking at current DAO governance models and their stakeholders, the Model Law might address common problems in corporate governance, such as agency problems and conflicts of interest among multiple stakeholders, by examining how blockchain addresses these issues that would otherwise be addressed by legal means. The Model Law might also identify functional equivalence between existing corporate governance requirements and the governance procedures of DAOs and their internal controls for decision-making, participation and funds management. In the coming months the task force hopes to engage a broad audience of people and diverse stakeholders in order to raise awareness on the topics addressed, foster discussions and collaborate on the model’s continuous evolution. With this first iteration, the goal was to convene legal scholars in blockchain to bridge the gap between a variety of existing and potential activities of DAOs and the various regulatory frameworks currently or yet to be implemented in different jurisdictions. But this is only the beginning of a much longer journey: the DAO Model Law will depend on ongoing exchanges between lawyers, technologists and eventually policy makers to thoughtfully address the fast-moving landscape of blockchain-based systems and achieve broad and participatory adoption.  Read the DAO Model Law in full here. Please do not hesitate to reach out to us at info@coala.global if you would like to learn more or contribute to the DAO Model Law project. Choi, C., De Filippi, P., Dudley, R., Elrifai, S., Fannizadeh, F., Guillaume, F., Leiter, A., Mannan, M., McMullen, G., Riva, S., Shimony O. (2021) [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Financial Inclusion through Fintech: Building Confidence and Encouraging Adoption of Emerging Technologies in BangladeshPublications, ReportsFinancial Inclusion through Fintech: Building Confidence and Encouraging Adoption of Emerging Technologies in BangladeshMannan, M. & Kamal, S. (2021) In Holla, N. & Kathura, V. (eds.) Regulating Cyberspace: Perspectives from the Private Sector in Asia. ORF and Konrad-Adenauer Stiftung, New Delhi. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Peer Governance in Online CommunitiesBooks, PublicationsPeer Governance in Online CommunitiesDe Filippi, P., Schneider, N. (eds.) (2021) Peer Governance in Online Communities. Frontiers in Blockchain. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Glossary of Distributed TechnologiesBooks, PublicationsGlossary of Distributed TechnologiesBodo, B.,  De Filippi, P., Scheuermann, B., Hassan, S., Fischer, A., Palmirani, M. (eds.) (2021) Glossary of Distributed Technologies. Internet Policy Review The glossary is a project of the Blockchain and Society Policy Research Lab at University of Amsterdam, in collaboration with the P2P Models project at Complutense University, the Weizenbaum Institute in Berlin, and the The Future of Distributed Governance project at CNRS. It is supported financially thanks to European Research Council grants. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Blockchains: enjeux de sécurité, juridiques, économiques, et coûts énergétiquesBooks, PublicationsBlockchains: enjeux de sécurité, juridiques, économiques, et coûts énergétiquesDe Filippi, P., Enguehard C., Fayon D., Gagnebien A., Vidal G. (eds) (2021) special edition on “Blockchains : enjeux de sécurité, juridiques, économiques, et coûts énergétiques” for Terminal. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Cryptoart: The Paradox of Digital ScarcityBooks, PublicationsCryptoart: The Paradox of Digital ScarcityDe Filippi, P. (eds) (2021) Special Issue on “Cryptoart: The Paradox of Digital Scarcity” in Technoetic Arts: A journal of speculative research [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Prolegomenon to Contemporary Ethics of Machine TranslationBooks, PublicationsProlegomenon to Contemporary Ethics of Machine TranslationReijers, W., Dupont, Q. (2023) Prolegomenon to Contemporary Ethics of Machine Translation. In Escartin, C. and Moniz, H. Towards Responsible Machine Translation. Machine Translation: Technologies and Applications, vol 4. Heidelberg: Springer. Abstract Globalisation has triggered a proliferation of translation practises, many of which are mediated by machines. This development raises fundamental philosophical questions about language, writing, meaning, reference, and representation. This chapter builds a bridge between the ethics of machine translation and philosophy of technology. It starts by considering the activity of translation as such and argues that this is an inherently ethical activity because it involves sacrifice, establishes commonality between foreign elements, and invokes certain professional virtues. Consequently, the chapter asks what machines ‘do’ to translation practises, arguing that they fundamentally transform the activity of translation into the transcription of notations. This raises the philosophical questions of logocentrism, the extent to which machines translate the ‘presence’ of lived experience, and phonocentrism, the extent to which machines transcribe the spoken word. Based on this analysis, the chapter turns to three ethical questions that pertain to machine translation. The first is about responsibility: while machines rely on retrospective responsibility, can they deal with prospective responsibility in translation? The second is about hospitality: can machines adapt to foreign worlds without having the lived experience attached to these worlds? And the third is about virtue: can the exchangeability inherent to machine translation cohere with the incommensurability of the work of translation? More information here. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Solidarity in the Sharing Economy: The Role of Platform Cooperatives at the Base of the PyramidBooks, PublicationsSolidarity in the Sharing Economy: The Role of Platform Cooperatives at the Base of the PyramidMannan, M., Pek, S. (2021) “Solidarity in the Sharing Economy: The Role of Platform Cooperatives at the Base of the Pyramid.” In: Qureshi I., Bhatt B., Shukla D.M. (eds) Sharing Economy at the Base of the Pyramid: Opportunities and Challenges. Springer, Singapore. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Cooperatives: Local Businesses, Global LawsBooks, PublicationsCooperatives: Local Businesses, Global LawsMannan, M. (2021) “Cooperatives: Local Businesses, Global Laws.” In: Lee S. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Public International Law in Asia (3 vols.). Brill, Leiden [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Digital Assets, Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain TechnologyBooks, PublicationsDigital Assets, Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain TechnologyDe Filippi, P. (2021) “Digital Assets, Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain Technology” in “Fintech & Law”, FGV Direito São Paulo. (forthcoming) [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Le ​Ius artificiale​ entre intériorité et boîte noire: Le droit de l’IA est-il soluble dans le droit?Books, PublicationsLe ​Ius artificiale​ entre intériorité et boîte noire: Le droit de l’IA est-il soluble dans le droit?Aidan, G., De Filippi, P. (2022) “Le ​Ius artificiale​ entre intériorité et boîte noire : Le droit de l’IA est-il soluble dans le droit? » in Gentelet, K. (Ed.) “Social Justice & AI”, Laval University Press (forthcoming). [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Compliance with FATF Recommendation 15: Prospects and Challenges of Adopting Emerging Technologies in BangladeshBooks, PublicationsCompliance with FATF Recommendation 15: Prospects and Challenges of Adopting Emerging Technologies in BangladeshMannan, M., Gazi, S. (2022) “Compliance with FATF Recommendation 15: Prospects and Challenges of Adopting Emerging Technologies in Bangladesh” in Azinge-Egbiri, Esoimeme & Ryder (eds.) Global Anti-Money Laundering Standards: Errors in Transplantation and Unintended Consequences for Developing Countries, Oxford University Press (forthcoming) [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • The Alegality of Blockchain TechnologyArticles, PublicationsThe Alegality of Blockchain TechnologyDe Filippi, P., Mannan, M., Reijers, W. (2021) “The Alegality of Blockchain Technology”, in Policy & Society, special issue: “The Policy Dilemmas of Blockchain” (forthcoming) [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Blockchain in Outer SpaceArticles, PublicationsBlockchain in Outer SpaceDe Filippi, P., Leiter, A. (2021) “Blockchain in Outer Space” in American Journal of International Law (AJIL) Unbound, special issue: “The Global Governance Implications of Blockchain”  Extract “Blockchain technology has spurred the emergence of powerful narratives to promote new ways of governing outer space. The list of proposed uses for blockchain applications in outer space is endless—from property registries for asteroid mining, to supply chain management systems, or interplanetary cryptocurrencies for the space economy—along with Elon Musk claiming that “SpaceX is going to put a literal Dogecoin on the literal moon.” Yet, thus far, none of these projects have gone beyond simple declarations or white papers, mostly due to the inherent limitations on the effective enforcement of blockchain-based rules outside of their own technical framework. In this essay, we argue that blockchain technology is relevant for outer space because it fosters novel narratives advancing possible futures characterized by new modes of governance. The strongest and most prominent of these narratives is the crypto-libertarian one, which draws heavily on the absence of a state, the sanctity of property, and the primacy of private ordering through decentralized markets. But there are other narratives proposed by relevant actors in the blockchain space that are dedicated to other modes of governance. By focusing on alternative narratives for blockchain technology, we illustrate how the possible applications of blockchain technology in outer space may extend beyond the current libertarian dreams, to support a more commons-based approach to outer space governance.” Read the following here. [...]
    November 15, 2021
  • Extitutional Theory: Modeling Structured Social Dynamics Beyond InstitutionsArticles, PublicationsExtitutional Theory: Modeling Structured Social Dynamics Beyond InstitutionsDe Filippi, P., Santolini, M. (2021) “Extitutional Theory: Modeling Structured Social Dynamics Beyond Institutions” in Ephemera: Theory in Politics and Organisation (forthcoming). [...]
    November 15, 2021