Information Technology for Development

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/titd20

Blockchain for development: a guiding framework

Paulo Rupino da Cunha, Piotr Soja & Marinos Themistocleous

To cite this article: Paulo Rupino da Cunha, Piotr Soja & Marinos Themistocleous (2021)
Blockchain for development: a guiding framework, Information Technology for Development, 27:3,
417-438, DOI: 10.1080/02681102.2021.1935453

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2021.1935453

Published online: 21 Jun 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1601

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=titd20
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT
2021, VOL. 27, NO. 3, 417–438
https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2021.1935453

Blockchain for development: a guiding framework

a b c,d
Paulo Rupino da Cunha , Piotr Soja and Marinos Themistocleous
a
Department of Informatics Engineering, University of Coimbra, CISUC, DEI, Coimbra, Portugal; bDepartment of
Informatics, Cracow University of Economics, Krakow, Poland; cDepartment of Digital Innovation, School of
Business, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus; dDepartment of Digital Systems, School of Information
Communication Technology, University of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
To understand opportunities Blockchain offers for development, we Blockchain; development;
propose a novel framework that considers Business-, Society-, Economy cryptocurrencies
& Finance-, Technology-, and Policy-related factors. It illustrates the
complex and multifaceted role of Blockchain in development and is
useful in guiding research efforts, formulating actionable advice, and
promoting development. We created it methodically, drawing from
systematic literature reviews and the authors’ experience with
Blockchain and development. Adequately designed and deployed
Blockchain systems are relevant contributions that can help address
problems that afflict our society, making it more inclusive, fair, and
resilient. Solutions that many countries have already adopted in various
sectors (e.g. public, financial, business, technology, education)
demonstrate the importance of Blockchain to advance development.
Further, less developed countries have a window of opportunity to
avoid the typical lag in the adoption of Information and
Communication Technologies and make quantum leaps that will put
them on par with more developed counterparts.

1. Introduction
Blockchain, the technology underlying cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, has been receiving increasing
attention in recent years. The same mechanisms that enable trustable transactions among complete
strangers on the Internet seem promising for various other use cases. Basically, any desired infor-
mation (transactions, in the case of Bitcoin) is registered on a synchronized, shared, append-only
database (ledger), replicated across a distributed network of peers, who only add new records to
the existing ones after agreement using a consensus protocol. The use of timestamps and crypto-
graphic mechanisms render the ledger virtually immutable. This approach enables transparency
(as to what and when is written), auditability (since previously written information cannot be
deleted or modified), and resilience (due to the distribution of the copies across various peers).
Additionally, more recent blockchains can store and enforce smart contracts, which are pieces of
machine-readable code that execute automatically once predetermined conditions are met (Swan,
2015). With this addition, blockchains further reduce uncertainty and promote confidence among
stakeholders that would not normally trust each other. Blockchains are, thus, a good fit for situations
where distributed parties need trusted record-keeping, without involving a central authority but
instead sharing control over a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network, especially when it is crucial to maintain
the full history of the data (Christodoulou et al., 2020; Yaga et al., 2019). Blockchain has been

CONTACT Paulo Rupino da Cunha rupino@dei.uc.pt

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
© 2021 Commonwealth Secretariat
418 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

implemented in many high-profile areas, such as financial services, insurance, healthcare, value
chains, shipping and logistics, intellectual property rights licensing, and crowdfunding.
This technology has come a long way since its role in supporting Bitcoin. Swan (2015) made one
of the first attempts to describe its evolution in three different waves. We share her views on the first
two but have a different perspective for the third and introduce a fourth one. We suggest that Block-
chain has evolved through four main waves:

. Blockchain 1.0 – Cryptocurrencies: Blockchain 1.0 was introduced in 2009 and focused on solving
the double-spending problem by introducing cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Soon after the Bitcoin
launch, other cryptocurrencies (alternative coins) emerged and joined this first wave.
. Blockchain 2.0 – Smart Contracts: 2015 marked the beginning of a new era in Blockchain with the
introduction of smart contracts and the concept of general-purpose programable blockchains, of
which Ethereum is a prime example. Hyperledger and Corda also support this concept.
. Blockchain 3.0 – Decentralized Applications (DApps): In 2017, a new generation of Blockchain
applications appeared. Dapps have their backend code running on a Blockchain (a decentralized
network of computers) where storage and communications can also be decentralized.
. Blockchain 4.0 – Interoperability and scalability: Since 2019, considerable work has been done to
(a) improve scalability, (b) increase interoperability among different blockchains, (c) integrate
Blockchain applications with existing business solutions and IT infrastructures, (d) integrate Block-
chain technology with other advanced technologies (e.g. Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things).
All these seek to spread and speed up the adoption of Blockchain technology. Additionally, two
emerging trends deserve close attention: the discussions and experiments with Central Bank
Digital Currencies (CBDCs) (Auer et al., 2020) and Decentralized Finance (DeFi). The former
speaks to the efforts to complement or replace traditional physical money with digital equivalents
issued by the central banks of countries or economic areas (e.g. European Central Bank, US
Federal Reserve, Bank of China, among others). These currencies aim to retain the advantages
of cryptos, like Bitcoin, while providing traditional fiat money security (Sebastião et al., 2021).
The latter – DeFI – is a form of finance that does not rely on traditional institutions but instead
on Blockchain and smart contracts.

Blockchain holds potential for development in general and for emerging economies in particular,
where Blockchain-based alternatives can replace dysfunctional, weak, or inefficient institutions and
processes. Such systems will be more open, democratic, and trustable by virtue of the technology’s
characteristics described above. For example, Blockchain can support secure and lean digital identifi-
cation (ID) mechanisms (Pisa, 2018). It can increase inclusion and reduce the number of unbanked by
enabling efficient digital financial instruments with reduced commissions on emigrants’ remittances
and viable microfinancing (e.g. Hernandez, 2017; Mukkamala et al., 2018). It can be used to make
humanitarian aid funding more efficient by controlling donations and charity initiatives (e.g.
Zwitter & Boisse-Despiaux, 2018). The resilience and inalterability of Blockchain can also be used
to improve government management of public benefits and ensure the integrity of public
records such as land registries, voting data, and tax-related records. Increasing transparency and
raising trust help fight off corruption, as mentioned in Pilkington et al. (2017) and Themistocleous
(2018).
The papers published in this special issue present additional interesting examples. In the past, we
have seen emerging economies lag in the adoption of ICT compared with developed counterparts.
However, with Blockchain, the opportunity exists for them to implement the technology simul-
taneously to address afflicting areas and even leapfrog established solutions in others.
However, we must be careful to avoid the misinformed adoption of Blockchain that sometimes
happens (Yaga et al., 2019) as risks and limitations exist. For instance, its key strengths can be chal-
lenged if a coalition of malicious actors manages to control more than 50% of the peers; care must be
taken to ensure that data to be recorded reflects actual world events (what is known as the oracle
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 419

problem); mechanisms must exist to ensure that the system and smart contract code does not
contain unintended loopholes and defects. Other problems related to resources exist, namely if
the Proof-of-Work(PoW) consensus algorithm is used. By design, PoW requires considerable proces-
sing power, which, in turn, draws a significant amount of electricity from the public grid. Appropriate
governance mechanisms must also be set up for these shared information systems. Last but not
least, we should be mindful of unpredicted ethical challenges as Blockchain disrupts the status
quo (Tang et al., 2019). For these reasons, rigorous and extensive research needs to be conducted
on Blockchain in general and its use for development (Risius & Spohrer, 2017).
This editorial is organized as follows: In Section 2, we discuss the understanding of development
in the Blockchain for Development field. In Section 3, we present a systematization of motivations,
opportunities, and challenges for Blockchain adoption. In Section 4, we present our proposed frame-
work for Blockchain-supported Development, highlighting how factors in Business, Society,
Economy and Finance, Technology, and Policy categories influence each other and development
when using Blockchain. In Section 5, we describe the papers included in this special issue, their
primary contributions, and how they fit with the previously introduced framework. This work
leads us to a series of possible directions for future research that we consolidate in Section 6. We
resume and discuss the contributions to development in Section 7, just before closing with the
conclusions.

2. Understanding of development in the Blockchain for Development (B4D) field

In our previous work, we reviewed existing research on Blockchain for Development (Cunha et al.,
2020). The data showed that many countries across regions such as Africa, Caribbean islands,
Asia, Middle East, and Latin America are considering using the technology. Additionally, numerous
Blockchain-related initiatives from countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region were
studied. It is worth noting that a global leader (United Arab Emirates) in Blockchain adoption comes
from the MENA region. Interestingly, according to the World Bank categorization, countries from the
regions mentioned above are almost equally split between low plus lower-middle income and
upper-middle plus high-income economies. This seems to support the idea that the traditional
lag in ICT adoption by developing and emerging economies may not be occurring with Blockchain
adoption. The opportunity exists for them to address afflicting areas and even leapfrog established
solutions effectively. The development goals for which Blockchain is being leveraged vary a lot,
though, ranging from access to capital to political participation.
The concept of socioeconomic development has been referred to in much previous research in
the ICT for Development (ICT4D) field. However, it has not always been clearly defined, and, as
suggested by Roztocki and Weistroffer (2016), there seems to be a lack of a general framework to
handle this concept. Therefore, to address this shortcoming, Roztocki and Weistroffer (2016) pro-
posed a conceptual framework of ICT-supported socioeconomic development. The nature of socio-
economic development is, somewhat by definition, multidimensional and requires considering
various aspects related to society and economy. As highlighted by Avgerou (2010), development
should be understood as a change of socioeconomic conditions rather than economic growth.
The multidimensional nature of socioeconomic development is recognized by the United Nations’
Human Development Index (HDI), which is composed of three indicators: life expectancy, education
index, and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita (UNDP, 2019). The multifaceted understanding
of socioeconomic development also appears to be prevailing in prior research employing clear con-
ceptualizations of this term (e.g. Ashraf et al., 2017; Madon, 2000; Tibben, 2015). Overall, the concep-
tualizations of socioeconomic development employed by extant research include first and foremost
aspects related to the country’s economic standing and, to a lesser extent, social considerations and
opportunities.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, a major issue with extant studies in Blockchain for Devel-
opment is that they often do not clearly define development. In particular, in the majority of prior
420 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

works, the conceptualization can only be inferred from the studies’ content. For instance, among 35
papers analyzed in our systematic literature review (Cunha et al., 2020), 16 provided clear definitions
of development, while four did not include any conceptualizations of development. The studies pro-
viding a clear definition of development tend to focus on economic aspects of development (e.g.
Kinai et al., 2017; Mukkamala et al., 2018; Pisa & Juden, 2017; Savelyev, 2018; Zharova & Lloyd,
2018). Nevertheless, some sparse studies define development through social considerations (e.g.
Tse et al., 2017). The main aspects of development present in prior B4D studies have been summar-
ized in Table 1.
In general, the review of extant studies in the B4D field revealed that the dominant understanding
of development relates to the economic aspects, as it happens in the more general ICT4D field. The
economic aspects of development are present in virtually all papers discussing the concept of devel-
opment in the B4D field, while social aspects of development were less prevalent among prior
studies. Regarding the former, the general understanding of economic development appears to
prevail among prior works in the B4D field, which is followed mainly by growth and access to
capital. Social aspects of development focused on ideas associated with people’s well-being,
legal, political, and environmental issues, but to a limited extent.
It is worth noting that several aspects of socioeconomic development, summarized in Table 1,
appear to be emphasized by B4D researchers. These include, first and foremost, economic growth
and personal security, which is mainly associated with fraud and corruption prevention. Such an
understanding of personal security appears typical or even unique to the B4D field.
The aspects of development that appear uniquely emphasized by B4D studies also include access
to capital and simplified and cheap transfer of money. These are facets that can be analyzed from
both social and economic perspectives. From a social standpoint, access to capital and easy transfer
of money can be perceived as different aspects of empowerment, which, in turn, is not clearly
emphasized by B4D studies. On the other hand, from an economic perspective, access to capital

Table 1. Understanding of development in the B4D field.

Development
category Development aspect References
Economic Economic considerations Global Investor (2017); Interfax (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018);
development Nguyen (2016); Pisa and Juden (2017); PRNewswire (2018a);
PRNewswire (2018b); Savelyev (2018); van der Westhuizen
(2016); Zharova and Lloyd (2018)
Growth Chinaka (2016); Interfax (2017); Mitchell (2018); Pantielieieva
et al. (2018); PRNewswire (2017b); Savelyev (2018); Shin
(2017); Themistocleous (2018)
Access to capital Kinai et al. (2017); PR Newswire (2017a); Thomason et al.
(2018); PRNewswire (2017c); Koh et al. (2018)
Business opportunities Gupta and Knight (2017); Parino et al. (2018); Tuomisto and
Saeed (2018)
Easy transfer of money Economist (2018); Kshetri (2017); Pisa and Juden (2017)
Government participation in building Bank for International Settlements (2020); McLellan (2018);
financial infrastructure / cryptocurrency PRNewswire (2018b)
Wealth Gupta and Knight (2017); Mukkamala et al. (2018); Thomason
et al. (2018)
Employment Pantielieieva et al. (2018)
Social Well-being Pantielieieva et al. (2018); Pisa (2018); Tse et al. (2017)
development Freedom Malaya and Lazebnyk (2018); Pisa (2018); Shin (2017)
Fraud prevention Crosman (2018); Kshetri (2017); Themistocleous (2018)
Health Kamau et al. (2018); Pisa (2018); Thomason et al. (2018)
Corruption prevention Kshetri (2017); Themistocleous (2018)
Education Shin (2017); Themistocleous et al. (2020)
Political participation Chaieb et al. (2019); Shin (2017)
Poverty alleviation Pilkington et al. (2017); Schmidt (2017)
Environmental considerations Marke and Sylvester (2018)
Peace Irwin and Milad (2016)
Social development Nguyen (2016)
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 421

and simplified and cheap transfer of money are associated with business competitiveness, which is
emphasized to a certain extent by B4D studies.
Another aspect of development specific to the B4D field is government participation in building a
financial infrastructure or cryptocurrency. This aspect falls within the broader concept of infrastruc-
tural advancement, which, as explained earlier, can be associated with both economic and social per-
spectives of development. At the same time, there are aspects of development that are emphasized
to a lesser extent by B4D studies. These include employment, environmental considerations, and
peace.
Regarding the multifaceted conceptualization of development, it should be noted that the single
perspective understanding of development appears prevailing in the B4D field. The multifaceted
understanding of development is present only in sparse works (Kshetri, 2017; Nguyen, 2016; Pantie-
lieieva et al., 2018; Parino et al., 2018; Shin, 2017; Thomason et al., 2018). However, except for the
Parino et al. (2018) study, the conceptualization of development in these works is not explicitly pre-
sented and can only be inferred from the papers’ content. Also, except for the study by Pantielieieva
et al. (2018), conducted in Ukraine, most of the works mentioned above discuss studies conducted in
multiple countries. In this respect, Parino et al. (2018) conducted a data analysis at the international
level.

3. Motivations, opportunities, and challenges for Blockchain adoption

Not only is the extant literature on B4D unclear about definitions of development, but it is also fre-
quently unclear about the motivations for the use of Blockchain technology. Several papers either
omit or are vague in explaining exactly how specific characteristics of Blockchain technology
support the reported motivation (e.g. “increase security” or “reduce costs”). Motivations are also pre-
sented at different levels of abstraction, ranging from lower-level operational issues (e.g. “decentra-
lization”) to higher-level end uses (e.g. “public administration and economy at large”). That said, we
can identify the trust fostered by the technology as the most significant driver for adoption. The
second most important category of motivations is associated with technical and architectural con-
siderations of Blockchain, mainly emphasizing expected gains in efficiency of operation and decen-
tralization. The following analysis draws upon a systematic literature review in Cunha et al. (2020).
The main motivations for the use of Blockchain for Development have been summarized in Table 2.
Our overview of the field enabled us to synthesize opportunities and challenges in the use of
Blockchain for Development, which we present in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. Column 1 of Table
3 lists the opportunity category, column 2 the subcategory, and column 3 concrete opportunities.
This clustering is not definitive nor orthogonal, as some opportunities can be grouped under
several categories and subcategories (e.g. financial services for the unbanked can be classified
under Inclusion and Financial categories). Nevertheless, in the case of such items spanning across
several categories, we classified them under the category capturing the issues’ predominant
meaning. This synthesis is illustrated in Table 3 below:
Financial applications are still the most popular category among the reported opportunities.
However, the landscape has changed. We can now see new cryptocurrency-based services that
offer cheaper and faster remittances to emigrants and enable more democratic access to fundraising.
Examples are crowdsourcing, Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), or Decentralized Finance, which do not
rely on traditional financial actors but rather enables distributed lending and borrowing. Some of
these new services are notable for their role in inclusion, as they are available to the previously
unbanked. The traditional financial system excludes significant portions of the population for
reasons such as the inability to keep minimum balances or even provide a government-issued ID
compliant with existing Know Your Customer (KYC) regulations. In some countries, women are
not allowed to own a traditional bank account. These new services empower those individuals,
enabling them to overcome discrimination and gain financial access. In other countries, Bitcoin
garners considerable interest due to distrust in centralized financial systems and traditional forms
422 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

Table 2. Motivations for Blockchain adoption.

Motivation category Subcategory
Technological trust Ensure privacy
Increase security
Increase transparency
Increase trust
Technical / Decentralization
Architectural Enable peer-to-peer
transactions
Fault tolerance and
disaster recovery
Increase efficiency
Sharing data
Renew / Create Financial infrastructure
infrastructure
Refresh legacy (banks)
Support for Fintech
Economic / Business Enhancing trade
Reduce costs
Legal / Public Public administration
administration Economy at large
Public infrastructure (land
registry)
Regulatory framework
Societal Food safety
Women empowerment
References
Crosman (2018); Kamau et al. (2018)
Crosman (2018); Gupta and Knight (2017); Kamau et al. (2018); Kinai et al.
(2017); Kshetri (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018); Pantielieieva et al.
(2018); PR Newswire (2017a); PRNewswire (2017d); Thomason et al.
(2018)
Kshetri (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018); Marke and Sylvester (2018);
Nguyen, 2016; Pantielieieva et al. (2018); Thomason et al. (2018)
Gupta and Knight (2017); Kamau et al. (2018); Kshetri (2017); Kshetri and
Voas (2018); Thomason et al. (2018)
Kamau et al. (2018); Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018)
PRNewswire (2017c); PRNewswire (2017d); Thomason et al. (2018)
Kamau et al. (2018)
Nguyen, 2016; Pantielieieva et al. (2018); PR Newswire (2017a);
PRNewswire (2017d); Thomason et al. (2018)
Kamau et al. (2018)
Global Investor (2017); McLellan (2018); PRNewswire (2017c);
PRNewswire (2018b); van der Westhuizen (2016)
Economist (2018); PR Newswire (2017a); Zharova and Lloyd (2018)
Pantielieieva et al. (2018); PRNewswire (2017c); PRNewswire (2018a)
Mitchell (2018); PRNewswire (2017b)
Economist (2018); Kshetri (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018); Nguyen (2016);
Pantielieieva et al. (2018); PR Newswire (2017a); PRNewswire (2017d)
Wei and Pokrovskaia (2017)
Interfax (2017)
Kshetri and Voas (2018)
Savelyev (2018)
Tse et al. (2017)
Shin (2017)

of investment. Nigeria, for instance, is third in the world in trading volume mainly because the cryp-
tocurrency is being used as an investment tool to hedge against the devaluation of the official cur-
rency and increasing inflation. It is also seen as a means to sidestep foreign currency restrictions (BBC,
2021). Russia prohibits domestic payments in any other currency than the ruble (be it Bitcoin or
foreign money, such as the euro) and is generally wary of the unsupervised and volatile nature of
Bitcoin. Authorities are currently debating alternative regulatory paths (Zharova & Lloyd, 2018).
Meanwhile, as the country ranks second globally in Bitcoin trading volume, Russia’s anti-money laun-
dering agency is starting to monitor bitcoin-to-fiat transactions (Baydakova, 2021).
Another interesting category of opportunities for Blockchain use is associated with public admin-
istration. We might find here applications in the areas of property management (Dubai Land Depart-
ment, 2021; Themistocleous, 2018), social security, public finance management (Chantanusornsiri,
2020), and e-voting (Chaieb et al., 2019). A related category of opportunities includes legal and regu-
latory aspects, where Blockchain’s most promising uses focus on fraud and corruption detection,
money-laundering prevention, and reducing tax avoidance (Mukkamala et al., 2018).
There are also interesting opportunities associated with utilities and environmental issues.
Worthy of note here are applications in water management and trading, carbon trading and
climate finance flows, and Blockchain-based solutions for off-grid solar power (Themistocleous
et al., 2019). There is also a significant push towards using Blockchain to facilitate trade, namely in
making supply chain operations and financing more efficient, with a particular emphasis on cross-
border commerce. Finally, significant opportunities from an ICT4D standpoint relate to transforma-
tive power of Blockchain with its disruptive potential being emphasized together with its promising
capacities for developing economies.There are also significant challenges to the adoption of Block-
chain technology. These are listed in Table 4.
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 423

Table 3. Blockchain opportunities for development.

Opportunity Opportunity Blockchain opportunities
category subcategory for development References
Environment Climate trading Water trading Thomason et al. (2018)
and finance Carbon trading Thomason et al. (2018)
Climate finance flows Marke and Sylvester (2018)
Financial Payments Mobile payments Cao et al. (2017); Gupta and Knight (2017);
PRNewswire (2017c)
P2P payments Cao et al. (2017); Kshetri (2017)
Online payments Cao et al. (2017); Kshetri (2017); PR Newswire (2017a);
PRNewswire (2017c); PRNewswire (2018a);
PRNewswire (2018c)
Money transfer Facilitating money transfer Malaya and Lazebnyk (2018); PR Newswire (2017a);
PRNewswire (2017d); PRNewswire (2018c); Shin
(2017); Thomason et al. (2018)
Faster and cheaper Economist (2018); Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al.
remittances (2018)
Financial transparency Thomason et al. (2018)
Fundraising Lending to SMEs Crosman (2018); Kinai et al. (2017)
Fundraising through Thomason et al. (2018)
cryptocurrencies and DeFi
Management Blockchain public finance Kshetri (2017); Pantielieieva et al. (2018)
management
Blockchain and traditional Cao et al. (2017); Kshetri (2017); PR Newswire (2017a);
finance Cao et al. (2017); Kshetri (2017); PR Newswire (2017a)
Healthcare Document Health records Kamau et al. (2018); Thomason et al. (2018)
management
Inclusion Financial Financial services for the Chinaka (2016); PRNewswire (2017c); Thomason et al.
unbanked (2018)
Microfinancing Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018)
Microinsurance Kshetri (2017)
Empowerment Women empowerment Shin (2017)
e-Identity Kshetri (2017); PRNewswire (2018a); PRNewswire
(2018b); PRNewswire (2018c); Thomason et al. (2018)
Legal and Security Fraud detection Crosman (2018); Kshetri and Voas (2018)
Regulatory Money laundering Cao et al. (2017); Irwin and Milad (2016); Kshetri (2017);
prevention Mukkamala et al. (2018); PRNewswire (2018a);
PRNewswire (2018b); PRNewswire (2018c)
Tracking donations and aid Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018)
Financial Prevention of tax avoidance Mukkamala et al. (2018)
Corruption prevention Kshetri (2017); Mukkamala et al. (2018);
Themistocleous (2018)
Public Property Land registry Kshetri (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018); Shin (2017);
Administration management Thomason et al. (2018); Zharova and Lloyd (2018)
Finance Public finance management Gupta and Knight (2017); Pantielieieva et al. (2018)
Social services Social security Kshetri (2017)
Democracy e-voting Kshetri (2017)
empowerment
Trade Cross border trade Expediting cross-border Kshetri (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018); Mitchell (2018);
trade PRNewswire (2017b); Tuomisto and Saeed (2018)
Logistics Supply chain management Cao et al. (2017); Kshetri (2017); PRNewswire (2017b);
Thomason et al. (2018); Tse et al. (2017); Tuomisto
and Saeed (2018)
Transformation Disruption Blockchain potential for Gautham (2017); Gupta and Knight (2017); Interfax
developing economies (2017); Kshetri and Voas (2018); Pantielieieva et al.
(2018); Tuomisto and Saeed (2018)
Blockchain disruption Nguyen (2016)
Utilities Water Water management Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018)
Energy Renewable energy Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018)

A very relevant challenge is that of regulation. Legal frameworks are required to seize some
opportunities, such as smart contracts adoption and acceptance, which requires changes to the
existing contract law. The same can be said for the mainstream use of cryptocurrencies, which nowa-
days evade traditional controls, facilitating illegal uses (e.g. money laundering and financing
424 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

Table 4. Blockchain challenges for development.

Challenge Challenge
category subcategory Challenges References
Adoption Awareness Lack of awareness of Blockchain among key Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018)
stakeholders
Negative perceptions of Blockchain due to Kshetri (2017)
its association with Bitcoin
Diffusion Costs of setting up and running systems Thomason et al. (2018)
Not enough investment in the Blockchain Kshetri (2017)
field
Lack of absorptive capacity to benefit from Kshetri (2017)
Blockchain
Resistance to Resistance from those that benefit from lack Thomason et al. (2018)
change of transparency
Resistance from middlemen that will be Thomason et al. (2018)
disintermediated
Technical skills Required technical competencies Tuomisto and Saeed (2018)
Global shortage of Blockchain developers Thomason et al. (2018)
Legal and Regulation Regulatory aspects Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018);
regulatory Tuomisto and Saeed (2018)
Dark side of Bitcoin Irwin & Milad, 2016; PRNewswire
(2018a); PRNewswire (2018b)
Regulation of cryptocurrencies Malaya and Lazebnyk (2018); Zharova
and Lloyd (2018)
Governance of personal data Thomason et al. (2018)
Operational Technical Infrastructure barriers Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018);
Tuomisto and Saeed (2018)
Operational barriers Kshetri (2017); Thomason et al. (2018);
Tuomisto and Saeed (2018)
Congestion of the Bitcoin network Kshetri (2017)
Interoperability and standardization Kshetri (2017)

terrorism). Although the extant literature review mentions the dark side of Bitcoin in money launder-
ing, in reality, many other cryptos are involved in the process. Interestingly, many countries and
economic zones have learned from existing cryptocurrencies and are making strides to release
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), also called digital fiat currency (Sebastião et al., 2021).
Both at the individual and country levels, diverse technical and operational issues can significantly
impact diffusion, demanding case-by-case strategies. Increased awareness of key stakeholders (e.g.
decision-makers) about Blockchain’s possibilities is required, including deconstructing the negative
perceptions caused by its association with the dark side of Bitcoin. Resistance to change also needs
attention since the increased transparency and disintermediation, typical of Blockchain-based
systems, can run counter established interests.

4. Proposed framework for Blockchain-supported development

Drawing from the data collected in our previous studies, part of which is a systematic literature
review published in (Cunha et al., 2020), we drafted the framework for Blockchain-supported
socioeconomic development. The framework has been further supplemented by several relation-
ships that appear missing or overlooked in prior studies but, in our understanding, present inter-
esting associations for future considerations. In addition, we augmented the framework with
several relationships illustrated by the papers in this special issue. This framework is depicted
in Figure 1.
In building the framework, we departed from factors used in strategic and macro-environment
analyses to organize the influences of Blockchain on socioeconomic development. These factors
are categorized around various groups associated with political, economic, social, technological,
legal, cultural, and ecological considerations (Morrison, 2011; Wach, 2014). Depending on the
number and scope of categories used, the approaches to strategic analysis are defined by such
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 425

acronyms as PEST (Political, Economic, Social, Technological), PESTEL (Political, Economic, Social,
Technological, Environmental, Legal), or PLESCET (Political, Legal, Economic, Social, Cultural, Ecologi-
cal, Technological) (Johnson & Scholes, 1999; Morrison, 2011; Yüksel, 2012). During our analysis of
the B4D field, we arrived at slightly different categorization than those in the strategic analysis
approaches mentioned above. We believe that our categorization, presented in Figure 1, better
reflects the intricacies of Blockchain technology and its impacts on development at various levels.
Subsection 4.1 describes the categories and factors, which are detailed in Table 5.

4.1. Categories in the framework

The category “Policy” is related to various policy-related factors at different levels, mainly national
and international. As such, it includes several political and legal considerations. In particular, we
included factors associated with the dark side of Blockchain (e.g. citizens invigilation, enabling crim-
inal activities), the role of government (e.g. improvement and digitization of government, replace-
ment of legacy institutions, enhancing land registration), international considerations (e.g.
circumventing international sanctions, improving the external image of a country, cross-border
cooperation between central banks), legal considerations (e.g. improving enforcement of laws
and regulations, legal challenges, need for regulation, and recognition of smart contracts), preven-
tion of fraud and corruption, and increasing transparency.
The category “Economy & Finance” includes economic and financial considerations at the country
or international level. In our framework, the issues in this category generally focus on the transfor-
mative potential of Blockchain. The particular factors include economy digitalization with a special
focus on Central Bank Digital Currency, introducing new financial instruments such as DeFi, reducing
the informal economy, and transforming the financial industry with a particular emphasis on the
revival of the financial sector and facilitating international payments. In this category, we can also
include the banks’ intention to provide services that support the cryptocurrency holders and
crypto community. Although low at the moment, we see new developments in the area from
other new organizations (e.g. Kraken, a United States-based cryptocurrency exchange and bank
(Kraken, 2021)) that attempt to cover this gap. Thus, it is expected that sooner or later, traditional
banks will respond to this need, or they will be forced to provide services in this domain due to
increased competition.
The category “Business” refers to various business-related considerations at the level of local
businesses and industries. The particular factors include improving business operations/conditions,

Figure 1. Framework for Blockchain-supported development.

426 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

Table 5. Definition of categories and factors in the framework.

Category Factor Definition/Operationalization
Business Business-related considerations at the level of local businesses and industries.
Business operations/ Considerations improving business operations / conditions, including
conditions reduction in fraud, lowering costs of money, processes and transactions
across the supply chain.
Disruption Radical change of business models and practices. Innovations that make
previous alternatives obsolete.
Enablement of business Possibilities such as new markets, new job opportunities, disintermediation,
opportunities platforms for international trade, enabling automated and agile contracts.
Innovative business models Novel approaches to doing business, including dispensing with third parties
and ensuring fairer trade.
Economy & Economic and financial considerations at the country or international level.
Finance
Economy digitalization Opportunities for development of digital economy such as the introduction of
Central Bank Digital Currencies and FinTech solutions.
New financial instruments New financial products, assets, and services such as ICOs, Initial Exchange
Offerings (IEOs), Security Token Offerings (STOs), cryptocurrencies, crypto-
assets, and Decentralized Finance.
Reduction of informal Extending financial services to a broader segment of the population and
economy reducing tax evasion.
Transformation of financial Modernizing systems and services in the traditional financial industry.
industry Facilitating international payments.
Policy Policy-related factors at different levels, mainly national and international.
Dark side Taking advantage of anonymity in cryptocurrencies to conduct illegal activities
(e.g. money laundering, funding of terrorism).
Government Increase in the efficiency of public administration including digitization of
government services and replacement of legacy institutions.
International considerations Cross-border aspects such cooperation between central banks and averting
international sanctions.
Legal considerations Updating laws and regulations including recognition of smart contracts and
digital evidence.
Prevention of fraud and Lowering the level of fraud and corruption in various organizations including
corruption charities and NGOs.
Transparency Increasing the dissemination and availability of relevant information such as
public records.
Society Societal considerations at various levels, i.e. individual-, family- community-
related, and national
Empowerment of the Providing new opportunities to the disadvantaged including women
disadvantaged empowerment and children education, introducing digital identity, and
improving efficiency of humanitarian aid funding.
Financial inclusion Facilitating access to financial products and services to both individuals and
businesses (e.g. introducing microfinancing).
Reinforcement of Strengthening democratic mechanisms including political empowerment and
democracy greater political freedom.
Safety Increasing traceability in supply chains mainly related to food production.
Technology Blockchain technology-related considerations.
Blockchain characteristics Blockchain technology attributes or components such as transaction
anonymity or pseudo anonymity, immutability of the ledger, smart contracts
and consensus.
Governance Controls, rules, processes, and structures used to ensure desired functioning of
the Blockchain-based solutions.
Improved systems Trustable and streamlined IT solutions.
Infrastructure Improved technical infrastructures, namely for interoperation in areas such as
healthcare and finance.

business disruption caused by Blockchain, enablement of business opportunities, and innovative

business models. Improvement of business operations/conditions relates mainly to simpler, more
efficient, and cheaper processes. Enablement of business opportunities boils down to Blockchain
use in situations where, traditionally, third parties are needed, providing platforms for international
trade, enabling automated and agile contracts between national and international companies, and
fostering more business activities. Finally, innovative business models mainly refer to dispensing
with third parties and ensuring fairer trade.
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 427

The category “Society” includes societal considerations at various levels, i.e. individual-, family-,
community-related, and national. The factors within this category are empowerment of the disad-
vantaged, financial inclusion, safety, and reinforcement of democracy. Empowerment of the dis-
advantaged boils down to women empowerment, children education, introducing digital
identity, and improving the efficiency of humanitarian aid funding. Financial inclusion applies
to individuals and businesses and easier access to credit, for instance, by introducing microfinan-
cing (e.g. lending very small amounts of money). Reinforcement of democracy refers to political
empowerment and greater political freedom. Finally, safety-related factors mainly boil down to
food safety.
The category “Technology” includes Blockchain technology-related considerations. The particular
factors include technology characteristics, governance, improved systems, and infrastructure. The
first refers to Blockchain particularities that are central to the solutions. Governance refers to con-
trols, rules, processes, and structures used to ensure the desired functioning of Blockchain-based sol-
utions. Improved systems apply to building trustable and streamlined solutions. Infrastructure
mainly refers to building digital financial infrastructure and building and improving healthcare
infrastructure.
The category “Development” plays the role of a dependent variable in our framework and
includes various socioeconomic aspects of development. The particular items include human devel-
opment, healthcare improvement, ability to leapfrog developed economies, wealth, and growth.

4.2. Relationships in the framework

The thickness of the lines in the figure expresses the strength of the identified relationships that we
found among the framework components and their contribution to development. For example,
technological issues appear to strongly influence policy-related factors, while the impact of
business-related considerations on societal considerations is limited, as prior studies suggest. The
relationships in the framework have been explained in the following paragraphs starting from
those directly influencing development, which is the dependent variable in the framework.
The “Economy & Finance” category appears to have the most significant direct impact on socio-
economic development. It can be realized by reducing the informal economy (Kinai et al., 2017) and
supporting the development of the digital economy (Zharova & Lloyd, 2018). Blockchain can also
bring new development to the traditional financial industry, as in the case of the Caribbean, by trans-
forming the traditional tax-avoidance offshore finance to Blockchain digital finance, which meets the
development demand of the time (PRNewswire, 2018a). Blockchain-enabled Bitcoin transactions can
positively impact human development (Qureshi & Xiong, 2018, 2019).
The second most important category having a direct impact on development is “Technology.”
Blockchain enables leaner, less complex systems than the legacy ones present in developed
countries, which may help leapfrog them (Gupta & Knight, 2017). Blockchain can also enhance
healthcare by improving the interoperability and security of electronic medical records (Kamau
et al. 2018), resulting in significant advances in the quality of patient care.
The business-related considerations, grouped within the category “Business” can also directly
influence development. In this context, Blockchain technology may be used to provide new
answers to old problems, such as dispensing with third parties (Gupta & Knight, 2017). By so
doing, nations can leapfrog countries with established, rigid, legacy systems. Adopting Blockchain
technology may lower transaction costs and increase economic activity, which, in turn, should
result in opening world markets and an increase in GDP (Gupta & Knight, 2017; Shin, 2017).
There is also some influence of policy-related aspects on development. In particular, Blockchain
technology can be employed to handle land registration, supporting entrepreneurship and
countries’ economic development (Kshetri & Voas, 2018).
Technological considerations strongly influence the factors within the “Policy” category. On the
one hand, characteristics such as the anonymity of cryptocurrency transactions make them attractive
428 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

for criminal ends and funding of terrorist activities (Irwin & Milad, 2016; PRNewswire, 2018b). On the
other hand, Blockchain properties such as write by consensus and immutability enable creating
more trustable and secure systems which are more transparent and resilient to corruption and
fraud (Gupta & Knight, 2017; Pisa & Juden, 2017). In the same vein, increased communication
between banks and better tracking of digital assets supported by Blockchain technology may
reduce fraud in invoice financing while improving privacy (Crosman, 2018).
The impact of the category “Economy & Finance” on the category “Policy” mainly boils down to
the role of state-issued cryptocurrencies, which may bring various benefits depending on the
country. Some less developed economies look for cryptocurrencies to promote higher financial
inclusion, even if others see it as a means to circumvent international sanctions and imposing
greater control on citizens. Advanced economies (e.g. Sweden), in turn, consider cryptocurrencies
because they are more efficient than coins and banknotes (McLellan, 2018). There is also an
impact of policy-related considerations on the category “Economy & Finance.” This can be illustrated
by the cooperation between central banks, which may impact the transformation of financial indus-
try and the economy at large.
It is interesting to note that the relationship between “Policy” and “Business” appears bidir-
ectional. On the one hand, dispensing with third parties may render some institutions obsolete
and result in the replacement of poor-quality ones with more efficient organizations, which illus-
trates the impact of business-related issues on policy considerations (Kshetri, 2017). On the
other hand, making Blockchain-based operations valid from a legal standpoint may result in
more efficient processes replacing old institutions, thus reducing operational costs (Tuomisto
& Saeed, 2018). In the same vein, recognition of smart contracts as a legal instrument
enables automated and more agile contracts between national and international companies.
Further, cross-border cooperation between central banks may have an impact on business oper-
ations and conditions.
The category “Business,” similar to the category “Policy,” plays a pivotal role in the framework,
being both impacted by other categories and exerting an influence on other items. The relationship
between “Business” and “Society” appears bidirectional. The impact of societal issues on business
can be illustrated when a greater financial inclusion (e.g. of women in some countries) enabled
by Blockchain-based financial infrastructures results in more economic activity (Shin, 2017). In a
similar vein, greater financial inclusion caused by better access to credit can make cross-border
trade faster and cheaper (Mitchell, 2018). Also, greater women empowerment results in greater
job participation (Shin, 2017). On the other hand, better access to lending for SMEs results in their
greater financial inclusion (Kinai et al., 2017), which illustrates the impact of business-related
aspects on societal issues.
The business-related aspects are strongly influenced by issues from the category “Economy &
Finance.” A simpler Blockchain-enabled financial infrastructure enables more efficient interconnec-
tion of processes and lower costs (Economist, 2018). By the same token, connecting Blockchain
with existing payment protocols reduces processing times and costs in a transparent and secure
manner (PRNewswire, 2017a). Further, state-issued cryptocurrencies enable more efficient
financial transactions (McLellan, 2018). Finally, introducing ICOs as a financial instrument results in
enabling new business opportunities and innovative business models.
The impact of technological factors on business-related considerations is mainly illustrated by the
role of the Blockchain-enabled digital and payment infrastructures. Such infrastructures help build a
platform for and enable international trade (PRNewswire, 2018a, 2018b). In general, access to Block-
chain-based financial infrastructure and cryptocurrency use create greater business opportunities
(Malaya & Lazebnyk, 2018) and foster innovative business models (Qureshi & Xiong, 2018, 2019). Ana-
lyzing the impact of Blockchain at the more general level of the national economy, which is captured
by the category “Economy & Finance” in the framework, we might emphasize the transformation of
the financial industry by facilitating international payments (Pisa & Juden, 2017). In addition to the
four areas of disruption suggested in Pisa and Juden (2017), we observe overall ten disruptions of
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 429

Blockchain in digital banking and payments like (a) cryptocurrencies as a new form of money, (b)
cross border transactions, (c) interbank transactions, (d) smart contracts enforcement, (e) crypto-
banking and cryptocurrency financial management services, (f) record sharing and storage, (g)
Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and KYC, (h) serving the unbanked, (i) bonds issuance through block-
chain and (j) DeFi.
Interestingly, the category “Society” is the only group of factors that do not directly influence
development, as prior studies suggest. However, it plays a pivotal role among the relationships
being both impacted by all other categories except “Policy” and exerting an influence on
business-related considerations.
The technological impact on society is mainly associated with financial inclusion, safety, and
empowerment of the disadvantaged. Particularly, greater financial inclusion can be achieved by
building new Blockchain-based financial infrastructures (Shin, 2017) and platforms for the derivatives
market (Global Investor, 2017), facilitating digital identity (Pisa & Juden, 2017), and introducing
microfinancing (Mukkamala et al., 2018). Safety can be achieved by tracking, monitoring, and audit-
ing the food supply chain, enabled by Blockchain-based systems and their properties such as trace-
ability and immutability (Tse et al., 2017). By the same token, Blockchain-based solutions may
influence people’s political empowerment and political freedom. Furthermore, the governance
structure of Blockchain may impact the adoption level and thus have an influence on financial
inclusion and empowering the disadvantaged. Empowerment of the disadvantaged can also be
enhanced by improving the efficiency of humanitarian aid funding with the help of smart contracts
(Zwitter & Boisse-Despiaux, 2018).
The impact of the category “Economy & Finance” on societal issues can be exemplified by an
increased financial inclusion, thanks to new financial infrastructures that are alternative to and
more inclusive than traditional ones (Chinaka, 2016). Another illustration applies to reducing the
cost of remittances due to the deployment of improved cross-border interbank payment systems
(Economist, 2018).

5. Papers in this special issue

In our special issue, after a double-blind review process involving at least two reviewers, we finally
accepted nine papers that examine various aspects of socioeconomic development. The research
settings represent various geographical regions such as Africa, Asia, Europe, Middle East, and
South America. They also represent diverse economic settings, including developing countries,
emerging economies, and highly industrialized countries. Further, as shown in Table 6, the papers
illustrate how, through Blockchain use, different areas of socioeconomic development (listed in
rows) impact others (listed in columns). For example, Ning et al. provide an example of how the
characteristics of Blockchain technology enable its use by the government in efforts of poverty alle-
viation, highlighting impacts of Technology on Policy and Society. Noticeably, no special issue
papers report cases in which the use of Blockchain promoted impacts originating from Business
or Society on other categories. Also, similarly to other papers analyzed in our study, no special
issue papers report impacts on the technology itself.
The first paper, titled “Analyzing the sustainability of 28 “Blockchain for Good” projects via affor-
dances and constraints,” is authored by Bill Tomlinson, Jens Boberg, Jocelyn Cranefield, David John-
stone, Markus Luczak-Roesch, Donald J. Patterson, and Shreya Kapoor. It is exploratory in nature and
assesses the sustainability of 28 Blockchain projects in the development context that aim to use cryp-
tocurrencies or tokens for “Good.” The authors evaluated and classified the selected projects into 12
categories, namely: useful mining, rewards and loyalty programs, tokenized impact, energy trading,
land registry, health records, transparent charity, supply chain tracking, financial inclusion and remit-
tances, voting, and open organizations, labor contracts and funding social good. The article contrib-
utes to understanding the broader impacts of Blockchain on society and provides an innovative way
to conceptualize its research. Therefore, the paper highlights the relationship between technology
430 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

Table 6. Impacts across areas of development enabled by Blockchain in the special issue papers.
Impacted dimension
Economy &
Business Society Finance Policy Development
Economy & Cappa and Pinelli;
Finance Coffie et al.
Technology Correa Tavares et al.; Diniz et al.; Ning Correa Tavares et al.; Correa Tavares
Papadaki and et al.; Pawar et al.; Ning et al.; Papadaki et al.;
Karamitsos; Pawar Singh et al.; and Karamitsos; Pawar Tomlinson et al.
et al.; Tomlinson Tomlinson et al. et al.; Tomlinson et al.
et al.
Policy Correa Tavares et al.; Papadaki Correa Tavares
Papadaki and and et al.
Karamitsos Karamitsos
Note: Follow the row for a dimension to find out which papers describe impacts on other dimensions (represented in columns).

and society in our framework. In addition, it also illustrates the influence of technology-related con-
siderations on business and policy.
The second paper is written by Rohan Sanjay Pawar, Sarah Ashok Sonje, and Shekhar Shukla.
It introduces a Blockchain-supported food subsidy distribution system to offer a rigorous sol-
ution to conventional approaches’ problems. The paper is entitled “Food subsidy distribution
system through Blockchain technology: a value-focused thinking approach for prototype devel-
opment.” It investigates research gaps in food subsidy distribution systems by reviewing the lit-
erature and conducting interviews with key stakeholders in India. The paper extends the body
of knowledge by identifying strategic and fundamental objectives to achieve transparent and
trusted food subsidies by developing a Blockchain prototype. With reference to our framework,
the paper illustrates the impact of technology on various societal, business- and policy-related
considerations.
In the third paper, Sandeep Singh, Mamata Jenamani, Diptiman Dasgupta, and Suman Das focus
on food security and propose a model that aims to eliminate inefficiencies and increase trust in a
public distribution system by using Blockchain. The paper is entitled “A conceptual model for
Indian public distribution system using consortium blockchain with on-chain and off-chain trusted
data” and it also introduces a model for off-chain big data and analytics to assist decision making.
The authors employed a design science methodology to test their conceptual model. Their work
contributes to both theory and practice. The paper highlights the impact of technology on societal
issues within our framework.
Eduardo Diniz, Adrian Cernev, Denis Rodrigues, and Fabio Daneluzzi are the authors of the fourth
paper, entitled “Solidarity cryptocurrencies as digital community platforms.” Solidarity cryptocurren-
cies support the principles of solidarity finance and its orientation towards cooperative values, local
and human development, and inclusive policies (Singer, 2002, p. 128; Neiva et al., 2013). This paper
analyses and classifies 20 solidarity digital currencies from different countries by using criteria such
as scale, price, and territorial scope. The proposed classification assists in capturing specific charac-
teristics that help in describing solidarity cryptocurrencies. The paper comes out with important
findings like the alignment of architecture and governance in terms of solidarity cryptocurrencies.
With reference to our framework, the paper mainly illustrates the impact of Blockchain governance
on financial inclusion and empowering the disadvantaged, which highlights the relationship
between the categories Technology and Society.
The fifth paper – “Determinants of FinTech payment services diffusion by SMEs in Sub-Saharan
Africa: evidence from Ghana” – is authored by Cephas Coffie, Zhao Hongjiang, Isaac Mensah,
Rebecca Kiconco, and Abraham Simon. It defines three research hypotheses and proposes a concep-
tual model on FinTech diffusion. The authors tested the model using a survey of 407 SMEs and con-
cluded that the combined effects of human, business, and technology actors drive the diffusion of
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 431

FinTech payment systems in SMEs. Their results highlight the impact of economy digitalization on
business conditions, thus illustrating the relationship between Economy & Finance and Business cat-
egories within our framework.
Francesco Cappa and Michele Pinelli are the authors of the sixth paper: “Collecting money
through blockchain technologies: first insights on the determinants of the return on Initial Coin
Offerings.” Their study investigates 234 crypto tokens issued between 2017 and 2018 through
various Initial Coin Offerings. The paper helps us to better understand and analyze the ICO phenom-
enon by paying attention to the investors’ return from their investment. With reference to our frame-
work, the paper highlights the impact of new financial instruments on innovative business models
and enabling business opportunities, thus illustrating the relationship between Economy & Finance
and Business categories.
The seventh paper of this special issue, written by Edson Corrêa Tavares, Fernando de Souza Meir-
elles, Eduardo Corrêa Tavares, Maria Alexandra Cunha, and Leandro Marcilio Schunk, is entitled
“Blockchain in the Amazon: creating public value and promoting sustainability.” The paper explores
how Blockchain technology can be used for the negotiation of environmental investments. It uses a
case study to attempt to understand the relationship between Blockchain applications and public
value theory. The paper has two main contributions as it: (a) provides insights on how to use Block-
chain in the public sector to promote sustainability, and (b) proposes a framework that explains how
Blockchain contributes to creating public value. Concerning our framework, the paper mainly illus-
trates the impact of technology on development and various business- and policy-related consider-
ations. It also highlights the impact of policy-related factors on development and business-related
considerations.
The eighth paper, written by Xue Ning, Ronald Ramirez, and Jiban Khuntia, “Blockchain-Enabled
Government Efficiency and Impartiality: Using Blockchain for Targeted Poverty Alleviation in a City in
China” accounts for Blockchain use in government-led social development focusing on poverty alle-
viation. The authors identify advantages in terms of efficiency, impartiality, coordination, accuracy,
trust and transparency of the government processes. With regard to our framework, this paper dis-
cusses the use of Blockchain by the government, illustrating the link between Technology and Policy.
The specific use for poverty alleviation also exemplifies the relationship between Technology and
Society.
We conclude the special issue with a View from Practice paper written by Maria Papadaki and
Ioannis Karamitsos entitled “Blockchain Technology in the Middle East and North Africa Region”.
The paper initially reviews the literature and develops a bibliometric map that provides an overview
based on the keyword “Blockchain AND Developing Countries.” It extends the body of literature by
reporting Blockchain activities from 18 countries of the Middle East and Northern Africa region. In
doing so, it sheds light on an area with limited literature. Additionally, based on the authors’ experi-
ence, two use cases from United Arab Emirates (UAE) are presented. The first one is about the land
registry and the use of Blockchain technology and smart contracts in UAE, and the second one refers
to Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) and cross-border payments between the Central Bank of the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Central Bank of UAE. The paper highlights the impact of technol-
ogy on various societal, policy- and business-related considerations. At the same time, it nicely illus-
trates how cross-border cooperation between Central Banks may impact the transformation of the
financial industry, thus introducing a new relationship into our framework: the one between Policy
and Economy & Finance.

6. Directions for future research

The progress and evolution of Information and Communication Technologies is rapid, with many
of its outcomes causing exponential effects like the Internet or Blockchain technologies. We can
clearly define three important stages in ICT evolution, namely: (a) on-disk, (b) on-line, and (c) on-
chain (Reddit.com, 2021). We moved from disconnected personal computers to the network, and
432 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

we learned to share information, do business, or govern on-line. Now, we are moving to the
next stage; to share critical information through networks of trust and value. To share infor-
mation, do business, and govern on-chain. Some compare the current moment to that of the
introduction of the World Wide Web. Then, as now, few could predict the extension of the dis-
ruptions that the new technology would cause (Mougayar, 2016). The Blockchain field will be
different in five, ten, or twenty years from now. We will have blockchains that will be more
efficient and effective, and we are confident that Blockchain technology is here to stay. The
World Economic Forum includes Blockchain in the list of six Megatrends that will shape the
world in the next decade (World Economic Forum, 2015). Developing countries face similar chal-
lenges in this ecosystem compared to the developed ones. These challenges include but are not
limited to the following:

. Scalability: The current transaction processing speed is low. On average, Bitcoin processes 4.6
Transaction Per Second (TPS), Ethereum 15–45 TPS, and Visa 1700 TPS with a maximum capacity
of 25,000 TPS. Scalability limitations result in high fees and latency problems; thus, many organ-
izations and communities are working on this issue. New approaches such as Lighting Network or
Sharding have been proposed and seem promising but need to be tested in practice. The chal-
lenge of scalability in Blockchain and the necessity for further work in this area is also discussed
in the third article of this special issue, authored by Singh et al.
. Interoperability: Interoperability is another challenge, as there is an increasing need for different
blockchains to talk to each other. This demand will be amplified in the near future with the adop-
tion of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). The View from Practice paper presented in this
special issue, written by Papadaki and Karamitsos, presents one of the first attempts for cross-
border payments using CBDCs and highlights the demand for future research on this topic. Mul-
tiple initiatives are on the way to address interoperability, like the Interledger open protocol by
Ripple, Cosmos, Polkadot, Wanchain, and others. Regardless of how interesting these networks
are, they have to be evaluated in practice. We should also investigate their impact on security,
privacy, efficiency, flexibility, and platform complexity.
. Convergence: To increase the performance and applicability of Blockchain, we need to focus
on its integration with other technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT) and Artificial Intelli-
gence (AI). This is also supported by the second paper of our special issue, authored by Pawar
et al., which highlights the need for further research on AI, IoT, and Blockchain convergence.
Early implementations that bridge these technologies provide increased performance and
lead to disruptive innovation (e.g. in machine-to-machine commerce) (Themistocleous et al.,
2018).
. Regulation: Although many countries have attempted to modernize their regulations, these
efforts are mostly in their infancy. There is much work to be done in this area, and the sooner,
the better. The lack of regulation harms the adoption of Blockchain technology. On the one
hand, it prevents many organizations from investing in this technology as they consider that
the lack of regulation or inefficient regulation increases the risk. Many organizations believe
that it is difficult to invest in Blockchain and cryptocurrencies, since the absence of regulation
creates a gray area with high risks. There are examples where organizations initiated a Blockchain
or crypto activity that was later banned by national authorities. Besides, we observe cases where
countries like India issued a national strategy on Blockchain but, simultaneously, there is a debate
to ban the use of cryptocurrencies. Also, the absence of regulation and the gray areas may allow
malicious entities (people or organizations) to take advantage and perform illegal activities. Regu-
lation is also discussed in a couple of papers of this special issue, like those written by Cappa and
Binelli, Papadaki and Karamitsos, and Tomlinson et al.
. Central Bank Digital Currency: It is estimated that around 80% of central banks worldwide
have been involved in discussions for the development of CBDCs, with some of them imple-
menting their own national digital currency. It is worth noting that the first movers in this
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 433

area are developing countries. For example, the first CBDC ever issued is the “Sand Dollar”,
by the Bahamas’ central bank. China is at the final stages of its Digital Currency Electronic
Payment (DCEP) pilot. This reality demonstrates that, sooner or later, many countries will
issue their national CBDCs, and these are expected to alter many parameters of the existing
financial system (e.g. increase financial inclusion, serve the unbanked, affect monetary policy).
The View from Practice paper presented in this special issue adds to the agenda the need for
further research on this topic, especially to investigate cross-border CBDC transactions.
. Crypto as an asset class: Recently, there is an increasing trend to invest part of an organization’s
treasury in cryptocurrencies. For example, in August and September 2020, the US company
Microstrategy invested $425 million in Bitcoin, and in October 2020, it claimed that it had a
profit of $41 million. Also, Tesla invested $1.5 billion in Bitcoin on February 8th, 2021. Micro-
strategy followed Tesla’s investment with an additional $1.041 billion at the end of February
2021, raising its Bitcoin stake to more than $4.5 billion. Other companies have adopted
similar strategies (e.g. Square, Stone Ridge Holdings) to cope with the US dollar’s devaluation
and extremely low interest rates. In these cases, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have been
seen as a reliable store of value. This trend may have an impact on the investments of national
treasuries too.
. New players influence the market: The developments of multiple new players shake up the eco-
system and speed up the evolution and innovation in Blockchain. For instance, Facebook’s Libra
(recently renamed Diem) announcement resulted in speeding up the introduction of new Block-
chain regulations and accelerating central banks’ efforts to create CBDCs. Similar effects may
result from the announcement of Mastercard’s launch of a platform for the testing and issuing
CBDCs, or by PayPal’s strategy to allow its customers to sell and buy cryptos through its platform.
It will be interesting to see what the impact of Mastercard’s platform would be on the issuance of
CBDCs by developing countries that are incapable of doing it on their own. Also, PayPal may be of
great help for the unbanked.
. Decentralized Finance has introduced a new way of doing business that removes financial inter-
mediaries like banks and exchanges to offer monetary contracts between different parties
(financial instruments). Instead of using intermediaries, DeFi employs smart contracts that run
on blockchains like Ethereum. In doing so, DeFi allows a range of financial activities such as cryp-
tocurrency trading, lending and borrowing fund. DeFi has recently attracted much attention, and
hundreds of billions of US dollars have been invested in it.
. Adoption: To achieve mass adoption of Blockchain, we should emphasize three different sets of
parameters. The first includes awareness, education, training, certification, and sourcing. The
second includes regulation, competition, and innovation. Finally, simplicity, user-centered
approaches, standards, and operability complete the requirements. For mass adoption, we will
need people who are Blockchain-educated and understand the technology. We will need
countries that can build on their national regulations. We will need organizations that will
implement and support solutions; that will innovate, compete and rest on legal and regulatory
frameworks. Organizations will need skillful and knowledgeable employees to develop their sol-
utions, but sourcing comes with education, training, and certification. These organizations will
develop applications that will solve users’ problems, use standards and common protocols, are
interoperable, and easy to use.

7. Contributions to development
Our research and special issue papers’ main contribution is illustrating the complex and multifaceted
role of Blockchain in socioeconomic development. We propose a framework presenting develop-
ment as a dependent variable and five main categories of variables touching upon various societal,
technological, business, and policy-related considerations. The presented concepts are
434 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

interconnected with suggested causal relationships, presenting several interesting paths leading to
development and suggesting promising future research avenues. We believe that our framework
might help structure and guide future research efforts in the Blockchain for Development field
and formulate clear and actionable advice to key stakeholders such as executives, policy- and
decision-makers.
Among the suggested relationships in the framework, however, it appears that some links are not
well-researched and, thus, might present promising avenues for future investigations. A good
example is the impact of policy-related considerations on the economy and finance, which generally
appears under-researched in extant studies. However, as exemplified by one of the papers in our
special issue, authored by Papadaki and Karamitsos, this relationship can be nicely illustrated by
the influence of cross-border cooperation between Central Banks on transforming the financial
industry.
Papers in our special issue also suggest a novel understanding of the reasonably well-researched
and popular links between concepts. This applies, in particular, to the relationship between technol-
ogy and society and the related impact of the governance structure of Blockchain on financial
inclusion and empowering the disadvantaged, as discussed in a paper by Diniz et al., Another
novel understanding of a well-known relationship, illustrated by papers in our special issue,
applies to the link between economy and finance and the category business. In this respect,
Cappa and Pinelli suggest that introducing new financial instruments such as ICOs results in enabling
new business opportunities and innovative business models.
Interestingly, and somewhat surprisingly, our research suggests that societal aspects impact
development only through business-related considerations, with the direct link missing in the frame-
work. In fact, the category society is the only category that does not reveal an evident, direct
influence on development. However, such a relationship appears potentially significant and suggests
an interesting topic for future investigations. Another link of this type, worthy of investigation by
future studies, is the direct impact of technology on the economy and finance.
An important contribution of our research is the proposition of an array of interesting and prom-
ising avenues for future research, as summarized in the previous section. The described various tech-
nological, economic, and policy-related considerations, in our opinion, present a fruitful ground for
future investigations and describe the main challenges to the use of Blockchain in socioeconomic
development. Addressing these considerations should have a positive effect on using Blockchain’s
potential for development.

8. Conclusion
This paper aims to introduce the reader to the special issue on Blockchain for Development. In doing
so, we review the normative literature, examine the challenges and opportunities in the area,
propose a guiding framework for Blockchain for Development, summarize the papers in this issue
and draw connections between them and the proposed framework. The guiding framework for
Blockchain for Development considers Business, Society, Economy & Finance, Technology, and
Policy-related factors. Variations of these are frequently used in strategic and macro-environment
analyses and, in our case, are used to frame influences of Blockchain on development. In designing
Blockchain-based systems, the framework can help identify areas where the impact on development
is expected to be stronger and where less evidence of returns exists. Of course, this is a dynamic arti-
fact that we encourage other authors to use, but also to update and extend, as new effective uses for
Blockchain are uncovered. Several directions for future research are suggested.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Philip Musa, Narcyz Roztocki, Heinz Roland Weistroffer, and Jason Xiong for their valuable com-
ments on a preliminary version of this editorial. We would also like to thank Sajda Qureshi, ITD Editor-in-Chief, for her
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 435

guidance throughout the process and making this special issue possible. Finally, we would like to express our sincere
thanks to all the authors and to the reviewers that contributed their time and expertise in helping select the papers
included in this special issue.

Funding
This research was partially funded by (a) national funds through the FCT – Foundation for Science and Technology, I.P.,
within the scope of the project CISUC – UID/CEC/00326/2020 and by European Social Fund, through the Regional Oper-
ational Program Centro 2020, Portugal; (b) the project financed by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education
within “Regional Initiative of Excellence” Programme for 2019–2022. Project no.: 021/RID/2018/19. Total financing: 11
897 131,40 PLN; (c) the PARITY project, funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement Number 864319
through the Horizon 2020 and by the Blockpool project, funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement
number 828888 through the Horizon 2020.

Notes on contributors
Paulo Rupino da Cunha is Associate Professor of Information Systems with Habilitation at the Department of Infor-
matics Engineering of the University of Coimbra, Portugal. He has been Adjunct Associate Teaching Professor in the
School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon, USA, from May 2009 to Dec 2012, and Visiting Associate at Brunel Uni-
versity, UK, from 2008 to 2010. He has been the Vice-President of the Board of Instituto Pedro Nunes and of IPN-Incu-
badora - the recipient of the 2010 Word’s Best Science-Based Incubator Award. Paulo serves in the editorial board of
various journals and has published in outlets such as ICIS, ECIS, AMCIS, HICSS, Requirements Engineering, Information
Systems Development, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, and Information Technology for Development,
among others. Has been involved in information systems and software engineering projects for several private and
public organisations and regularly participates in the evaluation of R&D projects and start-up pitches. Presently
focused on Blockchain, cloud, service systems and business models.
Piotr Soja is associate professor in the Department of Informatics at the Cracow University of Economics (CUE), Poland.
He holds a postdoctoral degree (habilitation) and Ph.D. in economics from CUE. Piotr also holds an M.B.A. from the
School of Entrepreneurship and Management at CUE in association with the University of Teeside, UK. He has experi-
ence in industry as an ERP consultant, system analyst and software developer. His research interests include ICT for
development, enterprise systems, and ICT for active and healthy ageing. Piotr has published in Enterprise Information
Systems, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Information Systems Management, Information Technology for Devel-
opment, and Journal of Enterprise Information Systems among many other journals, as well as in numerous conference
proceedings such as AMCIS, HICSS, ICEIS, and ISD. He is currently member of the Editorial Board of AIS Transactions on
Enterprise Systems, Frontiers in Blockchain, Information Technology for Development, Journal of Accounting and Manage-
ment Information Systems, and Journal of Enterprise Information Systems. He has acted as Program/Organizational Com-
mittee member in numerous international conferences, including AMCIS, ECIME, EMCIS, EuroSymposium, and ICTM.
Currently, Piotr serves as president elect of the Polish Chapter of AIS (PLAIS).
Prof. Marinos Themistocleous is the Associate Dean of School of Business, Director at the Institute For Future (IFF) and
the scientific coordinator of the world leading Blockchain and Digital Currency MSc programme at University of Nicosia.
He also serves as a professor at the Department of Digital Systems of University of Piraeus, Greece. He is a member of
the Parallel Parliament of Cyprus and president of the Digital Economy and Digital Government Committee of the Par-
allel Parliament. Marinos has collaborated with many organisations including the Greek Ministry of Finance, Bank of
Greece, Greek Standardization body, Greek Federation of SMEs, ORACLE UK, B3-Blockchain Business Board UK,
Intelen US, BTO Italy and Cyprus National Betting Authority. He retains close relationships with industry and serves
as consultant in the areas of blockchain, ebusiness, ehealth, eGovernement and information systems integration. He
has authored more than 175 refereed journal and conference articles, several teaching textbooks and has received cita-
tions and awards of excellence. His research has attracted funding from various organizations. Marinos is on the edi-
torial board of academic journals as well as on the board of prestigious international conferences. In the past, he
served as the managing editor of the European Journal of Information Systems (EJIS).

ORCID
Paulo Rupino da Cunha http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2701-5248
Piotr Soja http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7274-3327
Marinos Themistocleous http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6904-9692
436 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

References
Ashraf, M., Grunfeld, H., Hoque, M. R., & Alam, K. (2017). An extended conceptual framework to understand information
and communication technology enabled socio-economic development at community level in Bangladesh.
Information Technology & People, 30(4), 736–752. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-03-2016-0067
Auer, R., Cornelli, G., & Frost, J. (2020). Rise of the central bank digital currencies: Drivers, approaches and technologies. BIS
Working Papers No 880. https://www.bis.org/publ/work880.pdf
Avgerou, C. (2010). Discourses on ICT and Development. Information Technologies & International Development, 6(3), 1–18.
https://itidjournal.org/index.php/itid/article/view/560.html
Bank for International Settlements. (2020). Central bank digital currencies. ISBN: 978-92-9259-427-5 (online).
Baydakova, A. (2021, March 24). Russia to track bitcoin cash-outs: Report. https://www.coindesk.com/russia-ttrack-
bitcoin-cash-outs
BBC. (2021, February 2). Cryptocurrencies: Why Nigeria is a global leader in Bitcoin trade. https://www.bbc.com/news/
world-africa-56169917?fbclid=IwAR07Rxk21m5XYfWkYkeN0z35A1rvBwP68Fz647eAjGQHWQkKgFZ-YjTDfnU
Cao, S., Cao, Y., Wang, X., & Lu, Y. (2017). A review of researches on Blockchain. In The 16th Wuhan International
Conference on E-Business (WHICEB 2017), pp. 108–117.
Chaieb, M., Yousfi, S., Lafourcade, P., & Robbana, R. (2019). Verify-your-vote: A verifiable Blockchain-KOKKI online voting
protocol. In M. Themistocleous & P. Rupino da Cunha (Eds.), Information systems, lecture notes in business information
processing (Vol. 341, pp. 16–30). Springer International Publishing.
Chantanusornsiri, W. (2020). PDMO launching cheap bonds via Blockchain. https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/
1935408/pdmo-launching-cheap-bonds-via-blockchain
Chinaka, M. (2016). Blockchain technology – applications in improving financial inclusion in developing economies : Case
study for small scale agriculture in Africa. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Christodoulou, K., Iosif, E., Inglezakis, A., & Themistocleous, M. (2020). Consensus crash testing: Exploring ripple’s decen-
tralization degree in adversarial environments. Future Internet, 12(3), 53, pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi12030053
Crosman, P. (2018, March 4). Anti-fraud Blockchain for invoice financing goes live. American Banker. https://www.
americanbanker.com/news/anti-fraud-blockchain-for-invoice-financing-goes-live
Cunha, P. R., Soja, P., & Themistocleous, M. (2020). Blockchain for Development: Preliminary insights from a literature
review. In Americas Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
Dubai Land Department. (2021). Dubai real estate Blockchain. https://eres.ae/DubaiRealEstateBlockchain.aspx
Economist. (2018, May 5). Not to the swift. Economist. Supplement Special Report, pp. 7–8.
Gautham. (2017). Indian retail giant future group to support Blockchain startups. News BTC. https://www.newsbtc.com/
news/indian-retail-giant-future-group-support-blockchain-startups/
Global Investor. (2017, June 3). Blockchain start-up equichain eyes derivatives market. Global Investor, 09513604.
Gupta, V., & Knight, R. (2017, May 17). How Blockchain could help emerging markets leap ahead. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2017/05/how-blockchain-could-help-emerging-markets-leap-ahead
Hernandez, K. (2017). Blockchain for Development–hope or hype?. Institute for development studies. Rapid Response
Briefing, 17, 1–4. https://www.ids.ac.uk/publications/blockchain-for-development-hopeor- hype/
Interfax. (2017, June 3). Medvedev asks ministries to explore use of Blockchain technology in digital economy program
(Part 2). Interfax, Russia & CIS Business & Financial Newswire.
Irwin, A. S. M., & Milad, G. (2016). The use of crypto-currencies in funding violent jihad. Journal of Money Laundering
Control, 19(4), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMLC-01-2016-0003
Johnson, G., & Scholes, K. (1999). Exploring Corporate Strategy. Prentice Hall Europe.
Kamau, G., Boore, C., Maina, E., & Njenga, S. (2018). Blockchain technology: Is this the solution to EMR interoperability
and security issues in developing countries? In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.), IST-Africa 2018 Conference
Proceedings (pp. 1–8). IIMC International Information Management Corporation.
Kinai, A., Markus, I., Oduor, E., & Diriye, A. (2017). Asset-based lending via a secure distributed platform. In: ICTD’17:
Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and
Development, Lahore, Pakistan, pp. 1–4.
Koh, F., Phoon, K. F., & Ha, C. D. (2018). Chapter 15: Digital financial inclusion in South East Asia. In D. L. K. Chuen & R.
Deng (Eds.), Handbook of Blockchain, Digital Finance, and Inclusion, Volume 2 (pp. 387–403). Academic Press.
Kraken. (2021, March 23). Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Exchange. Bitcoin Trading Platform. Kraken. https://www.kraken.
com
Kshetri, N. (2017). Will Blockchain emerge as a tool to break the poverty chain in the Global South? Third World Quarterly,
38(8), 1710–1732. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2017.1298438
Kshetri, N., & Voas, J. (2018). Blockchain in developing countries. IT Professional, 20(2), 11–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/
MITP.2018.021921645
Madon, S. (2000). The Internet and socio-economic development: Exploring the interaction. Information Technology &
People, 13(2), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840010339835
Malaya, A., & Lazebnyk, O. (2018). Belarus: Belarus makes a leap forward: Legalises cryptocurrency and provides incen-
tives for related income. International Tax Review, 09587594.
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT 437

Marke, A., & Sylvester, B. (2018). Chapter 4 - Decoding the Current Global Climate Finance Architecture. In A. Marke (Ed.),
Transforming climate finance and green investment with Blockchains (pp. 35–59). Academic Press.
McLellan, L. (2018, March 19). Sovereign cryptocurrencies on the rise. GlobalCapital, 20552165. https://www.
globalcapital.com/article/b174ldpz718rym/sovereign-cryptocurrencies-on-the-rise
Mitchell, J. (2018). Fintechs develop trade financing tools. LatinFinance, 1048535X. https://www.latinfinance.com/
magazine/2018/january-february-2018/fintechs-develop-trade-financing-tools
Morrison, J. (2011). The global business environment: Meeting the challenges (3rd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
Mougayar, W. (2016). The business Blockchain: Promise, practice, and application of the next internet technology. John
Wiley Sons.
Mukkamala, R. R., Vatrapu, R., Ray, P. K., Sengupta, G., & Halder, S. (2018). Converging Blockchain and social business for
socio-economic development. In The 2018 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, pp. 3039–3048.
Neiva, C. A., Braz, J., Tsukumo, D. J., & Melo, J. (2013). Solidarity finance and public policy: The Brazilian experience of com-
munity development banks. Working paper May, The United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service.
Nguyen, Q. K. (2016). Blockchain - A financial technology for future sustainable development. In 2016 3rd International
Conference on Green Technology and Sustainable Development, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, pp. 51–54.
Pantielieieva, N., Krynytsia, S., Zhezherun, Y., Rebryk, M., & Potapenko, L. (2018). Digitization of the economy of ukraine:
Strategic challenges and implementation technologies. In The 9th IEEE International Conference on Dependable
Systems, Services and Technologies, DESSERT’2018, Kyiv, Ukraine, pp. 508–515.
Parino, F., Beiró, M. G., & Gauvin, L. (2018). Analysis of the bitcoin Blockchain: Socio-economic factors behind the adop-
tion. EPJ Data Science, 7(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-018-0170-8
Pilkington, M., Crudu, R., & Grant, L. G. (2017). Blockchain and bitcoin as a way to lift a country out of poverty-tourism 2.0
and e-governance in the Republic of Moldova. International Journal of Internet Technology and Secured Transactions, 7
(2), 115–143. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJITST.2017.087132
Pisa, M. (2018). Reassessing expectations for blockchain and development. Innovations: Technology, Governance.
Globalization, 12(1-2), 80–88.
Pisa, M., & Juden, M. (2017). Blockchain and economic development: Hype vs. reality. Center for Global Development
Policy Paper 107, July.
PRNewswire. (2017a). MonetaGo successfully demonstrates the effectiveness of Blockchain technology in collaboration
with Indian banking authorities and major. PR Newswire US, 01/06/2017.
PRNewswire. (2017b). bext360 launches to transform the global coffee supply chain. PR Newswire US, 04/11/2017.
PRNewswire. (2017c). Blockchain based banking app humaniq reschedules its ICO in solidarity with Chinese investors.
PR Newswire US, 03/03/2017.
PRNewswire. (2017d). Blockchain technology market - Global industry analysis, size, share, growth, trends, and forecast
2016–2024, PR Newswire US, 07/17/2017.
PRNewswire. (2018a). Blockchain milestone – CariNet to introduce national nodes. PR Newswire US, 05/31/2018. Item:
201805310546PR.NEWS.USPR.CN11249.
PRNewswire. (2018b). Blockchain milestone: CariNet will introduce national nodes. PR Newswire US, 05/11/2018. Item:
201805110557PR.NEWS.USPR.CN93407
PRNewswire (2018c). CariNet worked with 15 countries to build blockchain infrastructure. PR Newswire US, 04/19/2018.
Qureshi, S., & Xiong, J. (2018). Global financial inclusion and human development: The bitcoin effect. In Proceedings
Annual Workshop of the AIS Special Interest Group for ICT in Global Development. Paper 8, https://aisel.aisnet.
org/globdev2018/8/
Qureshi, S., & Xiong, J. (2019). The effect of bitcoin transactions on human development: Emerging business models.
Proceedings of 25th Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2019. https://aisel.aisnet.org/
amcis2019/global_dev/global_dev/10/
Reddit.com. (2021). The three most complex pieces of software are operating systems, web browsers, and Blockchains. https://
www.reddit.com/r/programmingcirclejerk/comments/j9dlgn/the_three_most_complex_pieces_of_software_are/
Risius, M., & Spohrer, K. (2017). A Blockchain Research Framework. What we (don’t) know, where we go from here, and
how we will get there. Business Information Systems Engineering, 59(6), 385–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-
0506-0
Roztocki, N., & Weistroffer, H. R. (2016). Conceptualizing and researching the adoption of ICT and the impact on socioe-
conomic development. Information Technology for Development, 22(4), 541–549. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.
2016.1196097
Savelyev, A. (2018). Some risks of tokenization and Blockchainizaition of private law. Computer Law & Security Review, 34
(4), 863–869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2018.05.010
Schmidt, K. (2017). Solving development challenges in underdeveloped countries. An analysis of Blockchain-based
applications. https://www.grin.com/document/374053
Sebastião, H., Cunha, P. R., & Godinho, P. (2021). Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain: Overview and future perspectives.
International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 21(3), 305–342. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEBR.2021.114400
Shin, L. (2017, July 31). Blockchain summit asks, how can bitcoin and Blockchain technology empower women?
Forbes.com.
438 P. R. DA CUNHA ET AL.

Singer, P. (2002). Introdução à economia solidária (1ª ed.). Editora Fundação Perseu Abramo.
Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain. Blueprint for a new economy. O’Reilly Media.
Tang, Y., Xiong, J., Becerril-Arreola, R., & Iyer, L. (2019). Ethics of Blockchain: A framework of technology, applications,
impacts, and research directions. Information Technology & People, 33(2), 602–632. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-10-
2018-0491
Themistocleous, M. (2018). Blockchain Technology and Land Registry. The Cyprus Review, 30(2), 199–206.
Themistocleous, M., Christodoulou, K., Iosif, E., Louca, S., & Tseas, D. (2020, January 7–10). Blockchain in Academia: Where
do we stand and where do we go? In the Proceedings of the Fifty-third Annual Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences, (HICSS 53). Maui, Hawaii, USA, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, California, USA.
Themistocleous, M., Stefanou, K., & Iosif, E. (2018). Blockchain in solar energy. The Cyprus Review, 30(2), 207–214.
Themistocleous, M., Stefanou, K., Megapanos, C., & Iosif, E. (2019, October 4–5). To chain or not to chain? A Blockchain
case from energy sector. In 15th European, Mediterranean, and Middle Eastern Conference, EMCIS 2018, Limassol,
Cyprus. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing Vol 341, pp. 29–35, Springer.
Thomason, J., Ahmad, M., Bronder, P., Hoyt, E., Pocock, S., Bouteloupe, J., Donaghy, K., Huysman, D., Willenberg, T.,
Joakim, B., Joseph, L., Martin, D., & Shrier, D. (2018). Chapter 10 - Blockchain—Powering and Empowering the
Poor in Developing Countries. In A. Marke (Ed.), Transforming Climate Finance and Green Investment with
Blockchains (pp. 137–152). Academic Press.
Tibben, W. J. (2015). Theory building for ICT4D: Systemizing case study research using theory triangulation. Information
Technology for Development, 21(4), 628–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2014.910635
Tse, D., Zhang, B., Yang, Y., Cheng, C., & Mu, H. (2017). Blockchain application in food supply information security. In 2017
IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), pp. 1357–1361.
Tuomisto, V., & Saeed, M. (2018). Unblocking cross-border trade. Forum, 1, 34–35.
UNDP. (2019). Human development report 2019. http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/2019-report
van der Westhuizen, B. (2016). Corporate actions and the need for market efficiency. Journal of Securities Operations &
Custody, 8(4), 306–310.
Wach, K. (2014). Theoretical framework of the firm-level internationalisation in business studies. In A. Durendez & K.
Wach (Eds.), Patterns of Business Internationalisation in Visegrad Countries – in Search for Regional Specifics (pp. 13–
30). Universidad Politecnica de Cartagena.
Wei, F., & Pokrovskaia, N. N. (2017). Digitizing of regulative mechanisms on the masterchain platform for the individua-
lized competence portfolio. In 2017 IEEE VI Forum Strategic Partnership of Universities and Enterprises of Hi-Tech
Branches (Science. Education. Innovations) (SPUE), St. Petersburg, Russia, pp. 73-76.
World Economic Forum. (2015). Deep shift technology tipping points and societal impact. Survey report. https://www.
weforum.org/reports/deep-shifttechnology-tipping-points-and-societal-impact
Yaga, D., Mell, P., Roby, N., & Scarfone, K. (2019). Blockchain technology overview. ArXiv Preprint, arXiv: 1906.11078.
Retrieved February 23, 2020, from https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.11078
Yüksel, I. (2012). Developing a Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for PESTEL Analysis. International Journal of Business
and Management, 7(24), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v7n24p52
Zharova, A., & Lloyd, I. (2018). An examination of the experience of cryptocurrency use in Russia. In search of better
practice. Computer Law & Security Review, 34(6), 1300–1313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2018.09.004
Zwitter, A., & Boisse-Despiaux, M. (2018). Blockchain for humanitarian action and development aid. Journal of
International Humanitarian Action, 3(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41018-018-0044-5