IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/34df5.html

Voting over a Distributed Ledger: An interdisciplinary perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Dhillon, Amrita
  • Kotsialou, Grammateia
  • McBurney, Peter
  • Riley, Luke

Abstract

This work discusses the potential of a blockchain based infrastructure for a decentralised online voting platform. When compared to paper based voting, online voting can vastly increase the speed that votes can be counted, expand the overall accessibility of the election system and decrease the cost of turnout. Yet despite these advantages, online voting for political office is subject to fraud at various levels due to its centralised nature. In this paper, we describe a general architecture of a centralised online voting system and detail which areas of such a system are vulnerable to electoral fraud. We then proceed to introduce the key ideas underlying blockchain technology as a decentralised mechanism that can address these problems. We discuss the advantages and weaknesses of the blockchain technology, the protocols the technology uses and what criteria a good blockchain protocol should satisfy (depending on the voting application). We argue that the decentralisation inherent in the blockchain technology could increase the public's trust in national elections, as well as eliminate voter impersonation and double voting. We conclude with a discussion regarding how economists and social scientists can collaborate with the blockchain community in a research agenda on the design of efficient blockchain protocols and new voting systems such as liquid democracy.

Suggested Citation

  • Dhillon, Amrita & Kotsialou, Grammateia & McBurney, Peter & Riley, Luke, 2020. "Voting over a Distributed Ledger: An interdisciplinary perspective," SocArXiv 34df5, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:34df5
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/34df5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5f4b836fe23f3e00588ea16f/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/34df5?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric Budish, 2018. "The Economic Limits of Bitcoin and the Blockchain," NBER Working Papers 24717, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Michel Balinski & Rida Laraki, 2011. "Majority Judgment: Measuring, Ranking, and Electing," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262015137, December.
    3. Yusuf Neggers, 2018. "Enfranchising Your Own? Experimental Evidence on Bureaucrat Diversity and Election Bias in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1288-1321, June.
    4. Nicolaus Tideman, 1995. "The Single Transferable Vote," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 27-38, Winter.
    5. Thomas Fujiwara, 2015. "Voting Technology, Political Responsiveness, and Infant Health: Evidence From Brazil," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 423-464, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Philémon Poux, 2022. "Representation and Intensity of Preferences: A Public Economics Analysis of Liquid Democracy," Working Papers hal-04066595, HAL.

    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. repec:osf:socarx:34df5_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Aleksei Y. Kondratev & Alexander S. Nesterov, 2020. "Measuring majority power and veto power of voting rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(1), pages 187-210, April.
    3. Amrita Dhillon & Grammateia Kotsialou & Peter McBurney & Luke Riley, 2021. "Voting Over a Distributed Ledger: An Interdisciplinary Perspective," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 12(3), pages 200-268, September.
    4. Germán Bet & Cecilia Peluffo, 2023. "Democracy, commodity price booms, and infant mortality," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 153-193, January.
    5. Gustavo J. Bobonis & Paul J. Gertler & Marco Gonzalez-Navarro & Simeon Nichter, 2022. "Vulnerability and Clientelism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3627-3659, November.
    6. Hitoshi Matsushima & Shunya Noda, 2020. "Mechanism Design with Blockchain Enforcement," DSSR Discussion Papers 111, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Tohoku University.
    7. Stefano Vannucci, 2022. "Agenda manipulation-proofness, stalemates, and redundant elicitation in preference aggregation. Exposing the bright side of Arrow's theorem," Papers 2210.03200, arXiv.org.
    8. Mariella Gonzales & Gianmarco León-Ciliotta & Luis R. Martínez, 2022. "How Effective Are Monetary Incentives to Vote? Evidence from a Nationwide Policy," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 293-326, January.
    9. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/7p9a2ge1op95oao5se2oc4ann7 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. 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.
    11. Raphael Auer, 2019. "Embedded supervision: how to build regulation into blockchain finance," BIS Working Papers 811, Bank for International Settlements.
    12. Grácio, Matilde & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Information, get-out-the-vote messages, and peer influence: Causal effects on political behavior in Mozambique," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    13. Paul Pelzl & Steven Poelhekke, 2023. "Democratization, leader education and growth: firm-level evidence from Indonesia," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 571-600, December.
    14. Rauh, Christopher, 2017. "Voting, education, and the Great Gatsby Curve," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 1-14.
    15. Lin William Cong & Zhiguo He & Jiasun Li & Wei Jiang, 2021. "Decentralized Mining in Centralized Pools [Concentrating on the fall of the labor share]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(3), pages 1191-1235.
    16. Klien, Michael & Melki, Mickael & Pickering, Andrew, 2021. "Voter turnout and intergenerational redistribution," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 603-626.
    17. Mohajan, Haradhan, 2011. "Single transferable vote in local and national elections," MPRA Paper 50861, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Mar 2012.
    18. Joseph Abadi & Markus Brunnermeier, 2018. "Blockchain Economics," NBER Working Papers 25407, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Nicolaus Tideman & Daniel Richardson, 2000. "Better Voting Methods Through Technology: The Refinement-Manageability Trade-Off in the Single Transferable Vote," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 13-34, April.
    20. Nikhil Malik & Manmohan Aseri & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2022. "Why Bitcoin Will Fail to Scale?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(10), pages 7323-7349, October.
    21. Diloá Athias & Rodrigo Schneider, 2021. "The impact of political representation on the provision of public goods and services," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 367-381, June.
    22. Benjamin Marx & Vincent Pons & Tavneet Suri, 2021. "Diversity and Team Performance in a Kenyan Organization," NBER Working Papers 28655, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:34df5. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.