IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v22y2026ip-_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The past, present, and future of polycentric legal order: a comparative institutional analysis of lex mercatoria and blockchain

Author

Listed:
  • Murtazashvili, Ilia
  • Palida, Ali
  • Madison, Michael J.

Abstract

Medieval lex mercatoria refers to the customary commercial law developed by merchants to govern cross-border trade, operating alongside and sometimes independently of territorial legal systems. This paper compares that historical form of autonomous ordering with contemporary blockchain governance. Both create institutional frameworks that facilitate exchange among diverse actors and provide mechanisms that function, to varying degrees, outside traditional state authority. The key difference lies in how rules are generated and enforced: medieval merchant law relied on flexible norms interpreted by merchant courts and other human adjudicators, whereas blockchain systems seek to reduce ambiguity by encoding rules ex ante in smart contracts and automating enforcement. Decentralized decision-making and emerging forms of on-chain adjudication further reimagine dispute resolution without centralized judicial power. The central claim is that both represent polycentric legal orders whose significance ultimately depends on how they interact with, complement, or challenge formal governmental institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Murtazashvili, Ilia & Palida, Ali & Madison, Michael J., 2026. "The past, present, and future of polycentric legal order: a comparative institutional analysis of lex mercatoria and blockchain," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:22:y:2026:i::p:-_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137425100386/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:22:y:2026:i::p:-_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.