IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jfinte/v1y2022i2p13-179d825134.html

The Economics of Consensus in Algorand

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Dimitri

    (Department of Economics and Statistics, University of Siena, Piazza San Francesco 7, 53100 Siena, Italy)

Abstract

In the paper we investigate consensus formation, from an economic perspective, in a Proof-of-Stake (PoS) based platform inspired by the Algorand blockchain. In particular, we consider PoS in relation to governance, focusing on two main issues. First we discuss alternative sampling schemes, which can be adopted to select voting committees and to define the number of votes of committee members. The selection probability is proportional to one’s stake and increases with it. Participation in governance allows users to affect the platform’s decisions as well as to obtain a reward. Then, based on such preliminary analysis, we introduce a microeconomic model to investigate the optimal stake size for a generic user. In the model we conceptualize an optimal stake, for a user, as striking the balance between having Algos immediately available for transactions and setting aside currency units to increase the probability of becoming a committee member. Our main findings suggest that the optimal stake can be quite sensitive to the user’s preferences and to the rules for selecting committees. We believe the findings may support policy decisions in PoS based platforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Dimitri, 2022. "The Economics of Consensus in Algorand," FinTech, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-16, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jfinte:v:1:y:2022:i:2:p:13-179:d:825134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2674-1032/1/2/13/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2674-1032/1/2/13/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicolas Houy, 2014. "It will cost you nothing to "kill" a proof-of-stake crypto-currency," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(2), pages 1038-1044.
    2. Jacob D. Leshno & Philipp Strack, 2020. "Bitcoin: An Axiomatic Approach and an Impossibility Theorem," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 269-286, September.
    3. Ioanid Roşu & Fahad Saleh, 2021. "Evolution of Shares in a Proof-of-Stake Cryptocurrency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 661-672, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abheek Ghosh & Paul W. Goldberg, 2023. "Best-Response Dynamics in Lottery Contests," Papers 2305.10881, arXiv.org.
    2. Hanna Halaburda & Guillaume Haeringer & Joshua Gans & Neil Gandal, 2022. "The Microeconomics of Cryptocurrencies," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 971-1013, September.
    3. Corbet, Shaen & Lucey, Brian & Urquhart, Andrew & Yarovaya, Larisa, 2019. "Cryptocurrencies as a financial asset: A systematic analysis," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 182-199.
    4. Sergey Goncharov & Andrey Nechesov, 2023. "Axiomatization of Blockchain Theory," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Lin William Cong & Ke Tang & Yanxin Wang & Xi Zhao, 2023. "Inclusion and Democratization Through Web3 and DeFi? Initial Evidence from the Ethereum Ecosystem," NBER Working Papers 30949, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Ferreira, Daniel & Li, Jin & Nikolowa, Radoslawa, 2023. "Corporate capture of blockchain governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115618, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Stinner, Jona & Tyrell, Marcel, 2022. "Proof-Of-Work Consensus Under Exogenous Distress: Evidence from Mining Shocks in the Bitcoin Ecosystem," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264115, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Edith Elkind & Abheek Ghosh & Paul W. Goldberg, 2024. "Continuous-Time Best-Response and Related Dynamics in Tullock Contests with Convex Costs," Papers 2402.08541, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    9. Ruofei Ma & Zhebiao Cai & Wenpin Tang & David Yao, 2025. "Optimal Decisions for Liquid Staking: Allocation and Exit Timing," Papers 2507.14810, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2025.
    10. Auer, Raphael & Tercero-Lucas, David, 2022. "Distrust or speculation? The socioeconomic drivers of U.S. cryptocurrency investments," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. Baocheng Wang & Zetao Li & Haibin Li, 2020. "Hybrid Consensus Algorithm Based on Modified Proof-of-Probability and DPoS," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-16, July.
    12. José Parra-Moyano & Gregor Reich & Karl Schmedders, 2024. "A Note on the Non-proportionality of Winning Probabilities in Bitcoin," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 64(3), pages 1697-1714, September.
    13. Wenpin Tang & David D. Yao, 2023. "Transaction fee mechanism for Proof-of-Stake protocol," Papers 2308.13881, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    14. Elendner, Hermann & Trimborn, Simon & Ong, Bobby & Lee, Teik Ming, 2016. "The cross-section of crypto-currencies as financial assets: An overview," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2016-038, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    15. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2016-038 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Joshua S. Gans & Hanna Halaburda, 2023. ""Zero Cost'' Majority Attacks on Permissionless Blockchains," NBER Working Papers 31473, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Nicolas Houy, 2014. "The economics of Bitcoin transaction fees," Working Papers halshs-00951358, HAL.
    18. Jyotir Moy Chatterjee & Le Hoang Son & Srijani Ghatak & Raghvendra Kumar & Manju Khari, 2018. "BitCoin exclusively informational money: a valuable review from 2010 to 2017," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2037-2054, September.
    19. Patel, Ritesh & Migliavacca, Milena & Oriani, Marco E., 2022. "Blockchain in banking and finance: A bibliometric review," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    20. Auer, Raphael & Monnet, Cyril & Shin, Hyun Song, 2025. "Distributed ledgers and the governance of money," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    21. Joshua S. Gans & Richard T. Holden, 2022. "Mechanism Design Approaches to Blockchain Consensus," NBER Working Papers 30189, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jfinte:v:1:y:2022:i:2:p:13-179:d:825134. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.