scholarly journals Distributed Ledger Technology and the Future of Money and Banking

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Huibers
Keyword(s):  
Peer To Peer ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Financial Industry ◽  
Monetary Reform ◽  
Monetary System ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
Substantial Investment

Abstract Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf outlined an alternative to the current monetary system in which banks are replaced by a peer-to-peer system to issue and transfer digital money: the Bitcoin. While Bitcoin has attracted a substantial investment volume, the system has not achieved the status of a viable alternative monetary system. However, the distributed ledger technology (DLT) underlying the payment system is being applied successfully by financial institutions and is likely to have important implications for the future of money and banking. In this paper we therefore focus on the most advanced distributed ledger application in the financial industry: R3 Corda. This paper is structured as follows. In the first section, we relate the debate about systems of money creation to the rise of Bitcoin. Next, the development of R3 Corda is discussed and the lessons learned for monetary reform. We conclude with an assessment of the scope and likelihood of monetary reform as a consequence of DLT applications by central banks.

scholarly journals Digital and Blockchain-based Legal Regimes: An Eea Case Study Based on Innovative Legislations – Comparison of French and Liechtenstein Domestic Regulations

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Bianca Linis ◽  
Sébastien Praicheux
Keyword(s):  
Business Models ◽  
Financial Industry ◽  
Monetary System ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Extensive Range ◽  
Global Financial System

The financial crisis of 2007/08 had shattered the global financial system and led – besides a flood of regulations – to a wide range of new concepts and business models. One of these new concepts was “Bitcoin”, a private digital monetary system, which is characterized by decentralization, transparency and immutability. To date the underlying Blockchain or Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) has evolved and offers an extensive range of possibilities, particularly in the financial industry. So far, an EU-wide legal basis for Blockchain or DLT applications and services is missing. France and the Principality of Liechtenstein took a step forward and adopted national laws trying to offer legal certainty in this field. This article aims to provide a comparison of the two acts and underline the similarities and differences.

scholarly journals 2286 A CTSA External Reviewer Exchange Consortium: Description and lessons learned

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (S1) ◽  
pp. 2-2
Author(s):  
Margaret Schneider ◽  
Tanya Mathew ◽  
Madeline Gibson ◽  
Christine Zeller ◽  
Hardeep Ranu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Tracking System ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Conference Calls ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Pilot Studies ◽  
External Reviewer ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
Original Objective

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To share the experience gained and lessons learned from a cross CTSA collaborative effort to improve the review process for Pilot Studies awards by exchanging external reviewers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CEREC process is managed by a web-based tracking system that enables all participating members to view at any time the status of reviewer invitations. This online tracking system is supplemented by monthly conference calls during which new calls for proposals are announced and best practices are identified. Each CTSA hub customized the CEREC model based on their individual pilot program needs and review process. Some hubs have supplemented their internal reviews by only posting proposals on CEREC that lack reviewers with significant expertise within their institutions. Other hubs have requested 1–3 external reviewers for each of their proposals or a selection of most promising proposals. In anticipation of potential scoring discrepancies, several hubs added a self-assessment of reviewer expertise and confidence at the end of each review. If a proposal is on the cusp of fundability, then the reviewers’ self-assessment may be taken into account. In addition to the tracking data collected by the online system, a survey of CEREC reviewers was conducted using Qualtrics. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Across the 144 proposals submitted for reviews, CEREC members issued a total of 396 email invitations to potential reviewers. The number of invitations required to yield a reviewer ranged from 1 to 17. A total of 224 invitations were accepted, for a response rate of 56%. An external reviewer was unable to be located for 5 proposals (3%). Ultimately, 196 completed reviews were submitted, for a completion rate of 87%. The most common reasons for non-completion after acceptance of an invitation included reviewer illness and discovery of a conflict of interest. CEREC members found the process extremely useful for locating qualified reviewers who were not in conflict with the proposal being reviewed and for identifying reviewers for proposals related to highly specialized topics. The survey of CEREC reviewers found that they generally found the process easy to navigate and intellectually rewarding. Most would be willing to review additional CEREC proposals in the future. External reviewer comments and scores were generally in agreement with internal reviewer comments and scores. Thus, hubs could factor in external reviewer scores equally to internal reviewer scores, without feeling compelled to calibrate external reviewer scores. Overall, through CEREC external reviewers, mainly due to the stronger matching of scientific expertise and reduction of potential bias, the quality of reviews appear to be higher and more pertinent. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Some aspects of the process emerged that will be addressed in the future to make the system more efficient. One issue that arose was the burden on the system during multiple simultaneous calls for proposals. Future plans call for harmonizing review cycles to avoid these overlaps. Efficiency also will be improved by optimizing the timing of reviewer invitations to minimize the probability of obtaining more reviews than requested. In addition to the original objective of CEREC, the collaboration has led to additional exchange of information regarding methods and processes related to running the Pilot Funding programs. For example, one site developed a method using REDCap to manage their reviewer database; an innovation that is being shared with the other CEREC partners. Another site has a well-developed process for integrating community reviewers into their review process and is sharing their training materials with the remaining CEREC partners.

scholarly journals Block-chain Reaction: Why Development of Blockchain is at the Heart of the Legal Technology of Tomorrow

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (01) ◽  
pp. 58-60
Author(s):  
Kimberley Rust
Keyword(s):  
Peer To Peer ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
Block Chain ◽  
Legal Technology

Blockchain, arguably the most discussed and promising of FinTech trends, has incredible potential to transform legal technology. Infamous as the technology behind cryptocurrencies, distributed ledger technology (DLT) has developed far beyond these origins and may prove far more valuable than the currency it supports. As a form of DLT, blockchain allows for secure decentralisation of peer-to-peer, irreversible exchanges, providing a transparent and irrevocable record as these occur. The technology is already used across the legal industry and a plethora of opportunities to extend its application bubble beneath the surface, under development, waiting to break into the current market.

scholarly journals Consensus Algorithms Blockchain: A comparative study

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-71
Author(s):  
Siham Hattab ◽  
Imad Fakhri Taha Alyaseen
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Peer To Peer ◽  
The State ◽  
Verification And Validation ◽  
Consensus Algorithm ◽  
Consensus Algorithms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
Encrypted Database

A blockchain is a Distributed Ledger Technology that has been defined as a “distributed, shared, encrypted database that serves as an irreversible and incorruptible repository of information. Blockchain can be defined as a peer-to-peer distributed ledger that is cryptographically secure, append-only, immutable and updatable only via consensus or agreement among peers. In blockchain platforms, each transaction in the public ledger is verified by consensus of the majority of the system participants in a transparent and secure way. The consensus algorithm refers to the process of attaining an unified agreement on the state of the network in a decentralized way and to facilitate the verification and validation of information being added to the blockchain. This paper aims at providing a comparison between most of the recent consensus algorithms regarding the scalability of the algorithm; the type of blockchain, node identity, the performance of the algorithm (in terms of throughput & latency) and Adversial Tolerance and to deliver a solid basis for discussions about current statistics. In this research, we also presented a new category of the Blockchain consensus algorithms, which consist of three groups as follows; the proof based on Hardware, the proof based on stake, and the proof based on voting.

scholarly journals Blockchain and Citizenship: Uneasy Bedfellows

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oskar Josef Gstrein ◽  
Dimitry Vladimirovich Kochenov
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Identity Management ◽  
Credit Scoring ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
Traditional Patterns ◽  
Technology Focus ◽  
Political Realities

Distributed Ledger Technology can be an effective tool for resource distribution. As individuals and organisations explore innovations which allow to redefine the rules of access, possession and sharing these developments also become important for the future of self-determination. Demonstrated through credit scoring and ‘social credit systems’, the identity of an individual is intertwined with resource access, possession and transferability. A key pre-requisite for participation is formal legal status, which translates to citizenship. However, many proponents of Distributed Ledger Technology focus predominantly on technological features and capabilities, which might enable the implementation of concepts such as decentralised governance, ‘self-sovereign identity’ management, and trust-less transactions based on ‘zero-knowledge proof’. Nevertheless, such narrow consideration overlooks existing legal and political realities. Considering the lessons learned from citizenship, it becomes questionable whether Blockchain as player in the area of identity management will ultimately increase human dignity, or further manifest traditional patterns of discrimination and inequality.

scholarly journals A Decentralized, Secure, Peer-to-Peer Multi-Voting System on Ethereum Blockchain

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 1354-1359
Author(s):  
Ashmita Pandey
Keyword(s):  
Electoral System ◽  
Peer To Peer ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Smart Contracts ◽  
Time Loss ◽  
Consensus Protocol ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Smart Contract ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
Voting System

Abstract: A decentralised, Secure, Peer-to-Peer Multi-Voting System on Ethereum Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology (DLT) that permits virtual votes to be transacted in a peer-to-peer decentralized network. Those transactions are validated and registered through every node of the network, so creating a transparent and immutable series of registered events whose truthfulness is supplied through a consensus protocol. Smart contract automates the execution of agreement that runs routinely as soon as the conditions are satisfied. Smart contract would not need any third parties consequently prevents time loss. By Eliminating the requirement for third parties, consequently, allows numerous processes to be extra efficient and economical. The system is secure, reliable, and anonymous. Smart contract is enforced for the Ethereum network using the Ethereum wallets and also the Solidity language. Users are capable of submit their votes immediately from their Ethereum wallets, and those transaction requests is handled with the consensus of each single Ethereum node. This creates a transparent environment for evoting. A lot of concerning efficiency of the peer-to-peer decentralized electoral system on Ethereum network along with application and the outcomes of implementation are provided in this paper. Keywords: Blockchain, Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), Consensus Protocol, Smart Contracts, Ethereum, Solidity

scholarly journals How Useful Is a Distributed Ledger for Tracking and Tracing in Supply Chains? A Systems Thinking Approach

Logistics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Christian Straubert ◽  
Eric Sucky
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Case Study Research ◽  
Physical World ◽  
Blockchain Technology ◽  
Distributed Ledger ◽  
Distributed Ledger Technology ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
The Status

Background: The use of blockchain technology for tracking and tracing (T&T) in supply chains is the subject of lively debate in scientific literature. However, distributed ledger technology (DLT) does not have to have the characteristic blockchain structure and often performs better without such a structure. Generalized DLT for T&T in supply chains has rarely been discussed in the existing literature. Methods: This article presents an exploratory case study research of eight companies to identify the main goals, and problems that the companies have when they engage in T&T. This practical perspective is complemented by a theoretical systems thinking perspective. Based on these two foundations, we discuss the usefulness of blockchain technology and, more generally, DLT for T&T in supply chains. Results: Based on our analysis, DLT is only necessary in special cases, e.g., when the owners of the data have an interest in deleting the data, but the data stakeholders do not. In the other cases examined, DLT competes with other technologies, such as conventional, centralized databases in combination with digital signatures. Furthermore, it became evident that DLT can only be useful for supply chain tracing. The technological features of DLT do not provide any benefit for supply chain tracking, i.e., the timely communication of the status of a physical good. Conclusions: Distributed ledgers often have a disadvantage in that they are very complex and, therefore, expensive. DLT should preferably only be used when it is technologically necessary or the simplest/cheapest choice, which is probably not all that often. Finally, the usefulness of distributed ledger technology and its integrated smart contract technology is highly dependent on how easy it is to link the real physical world to a digital record/contract in an error-free and tamper-proof way. Currently, such a definite link exists only in very few cases and is often impossible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document