IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/iprjir/214022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The invisible politics of Bitcoin: governance crisis of a decentralised infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • De Filippi, Primavera
  • Loveluck, Benjamin

Abstract

Bitcoin is a decentralised currency and payment system that seeks to eliminate the need for trusted authorities. It relies on a peer-to-peer network and cryptographic protocols to perform the functions of traditional financial intermediaries, such as verifying transactions and preserving the integrity of the system. This article examines the political economy of Bitcoin, in light of a recent dispute that divided the Bitcoin community with regard to a seemingly simple technical issue: whether or not to increase the block size of the Bitcoin blockchain. By looking at the socio-technical constructs of Bitcoin, the article distinguishes between two distinct coordination mechanisms: governance by the infrastructure (achieved via the Bitcoin protocol) and governance of the infrastructure (managed by the community of developers and other stakeholders). It then analyses the invisible politics inherent in these two mechanisms, which together display a highly technocratic power structure. On the one hand, as an attempt to be self-governing and self-sustaining, the Bitcoin network exhibits a strong market-driven approach to social trust and coordination, which has been embedded directly into the technical protocol. On the other hand, despite being an open source project, the development and maintenance of the Bitcoin code ultimately relies on a small core of highly skilled developers who play a key role in the design of the platform.

Suggested Citation

  • De Filippi, Primavera & Loveluck, Benjamin, 2016. "The invisible politics of Bitcoin: governance crisis of a decentralised infrastructure," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 5(3), pages 1-28.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iprjir:214022
    DOI: 10.14763/2016.3.427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/214022/1/IntPolRev-2016-3-427.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.14763/2016.3.427?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. B. Demil & X. Lecocq, 2006. "Neither Market nor Hierarchy nor Network: The Emergence of Bazaar Governance," Post-Print hal-00185026, HAL.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10771 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Brousseau,Eric & Marzouki,Meryem & Méadel,Cécile (ed.), 2012. "Governance, Regulation and Powers on the Internet," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107013421, January.
    4. De Filippi, Primavera, 2014. "Bitcoin: a regulatory nightmare to a libertarian dream," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 3(2), pages 1-11.
    5. Nigel Dodd, 2014. "The Social Life of Money," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10319.
    6. Brousseau,Eric & Marzouki,Meryem & Méadel,Cécile (ed.), 2015. "Governance, Regulation and Powers on the Internet," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107502611, January.
    7. Paul Laat, 2007. "Governance of open source software: state of the art," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 11(2), pages 165-177, May.
    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. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. van den Broek, Tijs & van Veenstra, Anne Fleur, 2018. "Governance of big data collaborations: How to balance regulatory compliance and disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 330-338.
    3. Natalya Yu. VLASOVA & Elena L. MOLOKOVA, 2019. "Mechanisms for coordinating stakeholders of the higher education market: Theoretical approaches to identification," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 21-30, May.
    4. Alary, Pierre & Desmedt, Ludovic, 2019. "Les divers courants de l’institutionnalisme monétaire : un état des lieux. Introduction au dossier « Autour de l’institutionnalisme monétaire »," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 26.
    5. Nicolas Curien, 2013. "Net Neutrality is Imperfect and Should Remain So!," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 22, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    6. Michael Demmler & Amilcar Orlian Fernández Domínguez, 2021. "Bitcoin and the South Sea Company: A comparative analysis," Revista Finanzas y Politica Economica, Universidad Católica de Colombia, vol. 13(1), pages 197-224, March.
    7. Aniruddha Dutta & Saket Kumar & Meheli Basu, 2020. "A Gated Recurrent Unit Approach to Bitcoin Price Prediction," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    8. Georgios Dimitropoulos, 2022. "The use of blockchain by international organizations: effectiveness and legitimacy [The governance of blockchain dispute resolution]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 328-342.
    9. Lingyan Meng & Md Qamruzzaman & Anass Hamad Elneel Adow, 2021. "Technological Adaption and Open Innovation in SMEs: An Strategic Assessment for Women-Owned SMEs Sustainability in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Bjorn Remneland Wikhamn & Alexander Styhre, 2019. "Open Innovation Groundwork," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(02), pages 1-29, January.
    11. repec:grz:wpsses:2017-04 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Gkagkelis Vaggelis, 2021. "A critical analysis of anarchist critiques of the Field of “Solidarity and Cooperative Economy” in Greece," Social Change Review, Sciendo, vol. 19(1), pages 81-119, December.
    13. Marina V. Evseeva, 2020. "Comparative effectiveness of high-tech and medium-tech business models: Key indicators and value sustainability," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 11(3), pages 59-71, July.
    14. Jolink, Albert & Niesten, Eva, 2012. "Recent qualitative advances on hybrid organizations: Taking stock, looking ahead," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 149-161.
    15. Amel Charleux & Anne Mione, 2018. "Open source editing business models; the case of software [Les business models de l’édition open source ; Le cas des logiciels]," Post-Print hal-01988127, HAL.
    16. Larue, Louis & Meyer, Camille & Hudon, Marek & Sandberg, Joakim, 2022. "The Ethics of Alternative Currencies," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 299-321, April.
    17. Teppo Felin & Bruno S. Frey & Roger Lüthi & Margit Osterloh, 2012. "Community Enterprises—An Institutional Innovation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5-6), pages 427-439, July.
    18. Carlo Gola & Valentina Cappa & Patrizio Fiorenza & Paolo Granata & Federica Laurino & Lorenzo Lesina & Francesco Lorizzo & Gabriele Marcelli, 2023. "The governance of blockchains and system based on distributed ledger technology," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 773, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    19. Luigi Doria & Luca Fantacci, 2018. "Evaluating complementary currencies: from the assessment of multiple social qualities to the discovery of a unique monetary sociality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 1291-1314, May.
    20. Assen Slim, 2021. "Will the BRICS Be the Leaders in Central Bank Digital Currencies?," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 3-16.
    21. Abigail Devereaux & Roger Koppl & Stuart Kauffman, 2024. "Creative evolution in economics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 489-514, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bitcoin; Blockchain; Peer-to-peer (P2P);
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    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:zbw:iprjir:214022. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://policyreview.info/ .

    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.