Advertisement

Environment Systems and Decisions

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 426–430 | Cite as

Cryptocurrency: governance for what was meant to be ungovernable

  • Benjamin D. TrumpEmail author
  • Emily Wells
  • Joshua Trump
  • Igor LinkovEmail author
Article

Abstract

Cryptocurrencies have the potential to revolutionize the exchange of information and money through blockchain and distributed ledger technologies. Despite the promise of such underlying technologies, their reliance upon distributed consensus processes to approve software updates raises the potential for governance failures to destabilize a given cryptocurrency. These governance failures, known as ‘hard forks,’ can separate a cryptocurrency into two rival camps. Where such events can destabilize a given cryptocurrency’s value, and instill distrust in the capacity of a cryptocurrency to survive as a reliable vehicle of exchange, it is imperative for the cryptocurrency community to improve their governance processes and limit the potential for hard forks to occur. While the distributed nature of cryptocurrency governance makes any traditional governing process unlikely to succeed, anticipatory approaches that establish thresholds and metrics to determine when software reform is necessary may help alleviate the governance failures presented by many hard forks.

Keywords

Cryptocurrency Anticipatory governance Distributed ledger technologies Bitcoin Blockchain 

References

  1. Baldwin J (2018) In digital we trust: Bitcoin discourse, digital currencies, and decentralized network fetishism. Palgrave Commun 4(1):14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barben D, Fisher E, Selin C, Guston DH (2008) 38 Anticipatory governance of nanotechnology: foresight, engagement, and integration. In: The handbook of science and technology studies, p 979Google Scholar
  3. Bitcoin Exchange Guide (2018) Bitcoin blockchain forks history—list of all BTC hard and soft forks. https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/bitcoin-blockchain-forks-history/
  4. Cointelegraph Media Partners (2018) Map of coins. http://mapofcoins.com/
  5. Herrera-Joancomartí J, Pérez-Solà C (2016) Privacy in Bitcoin transactions: new challenges from blockchain scalability solutions. In: Modeling decisions for artificial intelligence. Springer, Cham, pp 26–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kharif O (2018) Bitcoin may split 50 times in 2018 as forking craze mounts. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-23/bitcoin-may-split-50-times-in-2018-as-forking-craze-accelerates
  7. Kornilov D, Zaitsev D, Evdokimov N, Raitsyn M, Babaev A, Generalova D (2018) Monthly cryptocurrency and ICO market analysis. Coinspeaker. https://www.coinspeaker.com/2018/02/06/monthly-cryptocurrency-ico-market-analysis-january-2018/
  8. Linkov I, Trump BD, Poinsatte-Jones K, Florin MV (2018a) Governance strategies for a sustainable digital world. Sustainability 10(2):440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Linkov I, Trump BD, Anklam E, Berube D, Boisseasu P, Cummings C et al (2018b) Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies. Environ Syst Decis 38:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Quay R (2010) Anticipatory governance: a tool for climate change adaptation. J Am Plan Assoc 76(4):496–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.US Army Engineer Research and Development CenterConcordUSA

Personalised recommendations