Top

Published in:

2021 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

3. Incentives to Engage Blockchain and Ecosystem Actors

Authors : Mohan Tanniru, Jianyu Niu, Chen Feng, Claudio Gottschalg Duque, Chang Lu, Harish Krishnan

Published in: Building Decentralized Trust

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Incentives are stimuli that motivate or influence behaviour. This chapter considers how incentives may influence the adoption of emerging technologies such as blockchain, by focusing on the value or relative advantage of the technology, as well as blockchain system design and consensus mechanisms. The impact of incentives is considered in two distinct but connected ecosystems—that of the developer and administrator, and that of the enterprise user—with the conclusion that both aspects of incentives and both ecosystems need to be considered when designing successful and trusted blockchain ecosystems that are adopted by users. Changing behaviour and securing stakeholders’ trust requires incentives and business models that support resource sharing (including information sharing), and those incentives and models need to be adaptable to changes in each ecosystem, given their interrelation.

Although blockchain systems are technical in nature, they are also socio-informational systems. Incentive design in blockchain-based systems is still an understudied research area given its significance, but there are indications that system design must be adaptable and agile, addressing the needs and concerns of different customers and users. Making the system relevant to stakeholders in each ecosystem, and communicating that relevance, can act as a powerful incentive to successfully assimilate blockchain technology.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter Blockchain Governance: De Facto (x)or Designed?

next chapter Balancing Security: A Moving Target

Agarwal, R., Crowley, P. K., Khuntia, J., & Mithas, S. (2010). The District of Columbia regional health information organization (DC RHIO): Current progress and the road ahead. College Park, MD: Center for Health Information and Decision Systems, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland. Retrieved from https://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/files/Documents/Centers/CHIDS/DCRHIOAssessmentReport.pdf

Aghena, W., De Smet, A., & Weerda, K. (2015). Agility: It rhymes with stability. McKinsey Quarterly, 2015(4), 2–9. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/agility-it-rhymes-with-stability

Alexander, D. (2019). Quadriga founder transferred clients’ cryptocurrency to his own personal accounts, Ernst & Young finds. The Financial Post. Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://business.financialpost.com/technology/blockchain/quadriga-founder-transferred-clients-cryptocurrency-to-his-own-personal-accounts-ernst-young-finds

Allison, I. (2017). Quorum: J.P. Morgan’s Ethereum fork could eat your lunch. International Business Times. Retrieved November 14, from https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/quorum-j-p-morgans-ethereum-fork-could-eat-your-lunch-1625606

Ansari, S., Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2016). The disrupter’s dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem. Strategic Management Journal, 37(9), 1829–1853. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2442.CrossRef

Bag, S., Ruj, S., & Sakurai, K. (2017). Bitcoin block withholding attack: Analysis and mitigation. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 12(8), 1967–1978. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7728010&isnumber=7921660

Bahack, L. (2013). Theoretical Bitcoin attacks with less than half of the computational power (draft). ArXiv Preprint. arXiv:1312.7013

Benchoufi, M., & Ravaud, P. (2017). Blockchain technology for improving clinical research quality. Trials, 18, 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2035-z.CrossRef

Bossert, O., Laartz, J., & Ramsey, T. J. (2014). Running your company at two speeds. McKinsey Quarterly, 2014(4), 12–14. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/mckinsey-digital/our-insights/running-your-company-at-two-speeds

Brandao, O. C., & Duque, C. G. (2011). Comunicação científica contemporânea e de vanguarda. In O. C. Brandao & C. G. Duque (Eds.), Ciência da Informação Estudos e Práticas (pp. 9–33). Brasília: Centro Editorial.

BTC.com. (2019). Top miners by blocks in Bitcoin. Retrieved January 24, 2020, from https://btc.com/stats/pool

Carlsten, M. (2016). The impact of transaction fees on Bitcoin mining strategies (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://www.cs.princeton.edu/research/techreps/TR-983-16

Carlsten, M., Kalodner, H., Weinberg, S. M., & Narayanan, A. (2016). On the instability of Bitcoin without the block reward. In CCS’16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 154–167). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978408.

Carroll, G. R., & Swaminathan, A. (2000). Why the microbrewery movement? Organizational dynamics of resource partitioning in the U.S. brewing industry. American Journal of Sociology, 106(3), 715–762. https://doi.org/10.1086/318962.CrossRef

CB Insights. (2019). FaceCoin: Here’s what Facebook could build in blockchain and cryptocurrency. CBInsights.com. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://www.cbinsights.com/research/facebook-blockchain-cryptocurrency/

Davis, R. (2018). What the Cambridge Analytica revelations signal for future political campaigns. Retrieved February 27, 2020, from https://observer.com/2018/03/cambridge-analytica-revelations-signal-future-political-campaigns

Deephouse, D. L., Bundy, J., Tost, L. P., & Suchman, M. C. (2017). Organizational legitimacy: Six key questions. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 27–70). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eisenmann, T. R., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Opening platforms: How, when and why? In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, markets and innovation (pp. 131–162). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Embleema. (2019). Home. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://www.embleema.com/

Etherscan. (2019). Top 25 miners by blocks in Ethereum. Retrieved January 24 2020, from https://etherscan.io/stat/miner?blocktype=blocks

Eyal, I. (2015). The miner’s dilemma. In SP’15: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (pp. 89–103). San Jose, CA: IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2015.13.

Eyal, I., & Sirer, E. G. (2018). Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. Communications of the ACM, 61(7), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1145/3212998.CrossRef

Feng, C., Li, N., Lu, B., Wong, M., & Zhang, M. (2018). Initial coin offerings, blockchain technology, and white paper disclosures. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3256289.

Garay, J. A., Kiayias, A., & Leonardos, N. (2015). The Bitcoin backbone protocol: Analysis and applications. In E. Oswald & M. Fischlin (Eds.), Advances in cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2015. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 9057, pp. 281–310). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46803-6_10.

Garay, J. A., Kiayias, A., & Leonardos, N. (2017). The Bitcoin backbone protocol with chains of variable difficulty. In J. Katz & H. Shacham (Eds.), Advances in cryptology – CRYPTO 2017. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 10401, pp. 291–323). Cham: Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63688-7_10.

Gerst, M. H., & Bunduchi, R. (2006). Intraorganisational power and the adoption of interorganisational IT innovations: The inside story of Covisint. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 3(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTIP.2007.013038.CrossRef

Gervais, A., Karame, G. O., Capkun, V., & Capkun, S. (2014). Is Bitcoin a decentralized currency? IEEE Security Privacy, 12(3), 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2014.49.CrossRef

Gervais, A., Karame, G. O., Wüst, K., Glykantzis, V., Ritzdorf, H., & Capkun, S. (2016) On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. In CCS’16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 3–16). Vienna: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978341.

Grodal, S. (2018). Field expansion and contraction: How communities shape social and symbolic boundaries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(4), 783–818. https://doi.org/10.1177/F0001839217744555.CrossRef

Hartline, J., & Kleinberg, R. (2012). Badminton and the science of rule making. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://jasonhartline.com/HuffingtonPost-2012-badminton.pdf

Heilman, E. (2014). One weird trick to stop selfish miners: Fresh Bitcoins, a solution for the honest miner. In R. Böhme, M. Brenner, T. Moore, & M. Smith (Eds.), Financial cryptography and data security. FC 2014. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8438, pp. 161–162). Berlin: Springer.

Incentive. (2015). APA dictionary of psychology (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Khuntia, J., Yim, D., Tanniru, M., & Lim, S. (2017). Patient empowerment and engagement with a health infomediary. Health Policy and Technology, 6(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2016.11.003.CrossRef

Kiffer, L., Rajaraman, R., & Shelat, A. (2018). A better method to analyze blockchain consistency. In CCS’18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 729–744). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3243734.3243814.CrossRef

Kress, G. R., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Hodder Education.

Kroll, J. A., Davey, I. C., & Felten, E. W. (2013). The economics of Bitcoin mining, or Bitcoin in the presence of adversaries. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Workshop on the Economics of Information Security (WEIS 2013) (pp. 11–32), Washington, DC, June 11–12, 2013. Retrieved from https://www.econinfosec.org/archive/weis2013/papers/KrollDaveyFeltenWEIS2013.pdf

Kwon, Y., Kim, D., Son, Y., Vasserman, E., & Kim, Y. (2017). Be selfish and avoid dilemmas: Fork after withholding (faw) attacks on Bitcoin. In CCS’17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 195–209). New York: ACM.

Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. The Sociological Review, 47(Suppl 1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03480.x.CrossRef

Leblebici, H., Salancik, G. R., Copay, A., & King, T. (1991). Institutional change and the transformation of interorganizational fields: An organizational history of the U.S. radio broadcasting industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 333–363. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2393200

Lounsbury, M. (2001). Institutional sources of practice variation: Staffing college and university recycling programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(1), 29–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667124.CrossRef

Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. (2015). Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective. MIS Quarterly, 39(1), 155–175.CrossRef

Luu, L., Saha, R., Parameshwaran, I., Saxena, P., & Hobor, A. (2015). On power splitting games in distributed computation: The case of Bitcoin pooled mining. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 28th Computer Security Foundations Symposium (pp. 397–411). Verona: IEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSF.2015.34

Marion, R. (2008). Complexity theory for organizations and organizational leadership. In M. Uhl-Bien & R. Marion (Eds.), Complexity leadership (pp. 1–15). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550.CrossRef

Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Satoshi Nakamoto Institute. Retrieved from https://nakamotoinstitute.org/bitcoin/

nasdaq.com. (2017). IBM and Walmart launch blockchain-based food safety alliance for China. Retrieved November 14, 2019, from https://tinyurl.com/ybu9xff7

Nayak, K., Kumar, S., Miller, A., & Shi, E. (2016). Stubborn mining: Generalizing selfish mining and combining with an eclipse attack. In 2016 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P) (pp. 305–320). Saarbrucken. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSP.2016.32

Nielsen, J. (1999). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: New Riders.

Niu, J., & Feng, C. (2019). Selfish mining in Ethereum. ArXiv Preprint. arXiv:1901.04620

Orlandi, T. R. C., Duque, C. G., Mori, A., & Bernardo, C. G. (2018). A new model of information architecture associated with multimodality for training high performance professionals. Poster presented at the 81st Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vancouver, 10–14 November 2018.

Pass, R., & Shi, E. (2017). Fruitchains: A fair blockchain. In PODC’17: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (pp. 315–324). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3087801.3087809.

Pass, R., Seeman, L., & Shelat, A. (2017). Analysis of the blockchain protocol in asynchronous networks. In J. S. Coron & J. B. Nielsen (Eds.), Advances in cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2017. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 10211, pp. 643–673). Cham: Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56614-6_22.

Patel, V. (2019). A framework for secure and decentralized sharing of medical imaging data via blockchain consensus. Health Informatics Journal, 25(4), 1398–1411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458218769699.CrossRef

Poole, S., Kemp, E., Patterson, L., & Williams, K. (2014). Get your head in the game: Using gamification in business education to connect with generation Y. Journal for Excellence in Business Education, 3(2), 1–9. http://www.jebejournal.org/index.php/jebe/article/view/40

Resmini, A., & Rosati, L. (2011). Pervasive information architecture: Designing cross-channel user experiences. Burlington: Elsevier Science.

Ritz, F., & Zugenmaier, A. (2018). The impact of uncle rewards on selfish mining in Ethereum. In 2018 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (EuroS&PW) (pp. 50–57). London: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSPW.2018.00013.

Rohr, J., & Wright, A. (2017). Blockchain-based token sales, initial coin offerings, and the democratization of public capital markets. Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper, no. 527. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3048104.

Rosenfeld, M. (2011). Analysis of Bitcoin pooled mining reward systems. ArXiv Preprint. arXiv:1112.4980

Saif, S. K., Nawaz, A., Jan, F. A., & Khan, M. I. (2012). Synthesizing the theories of job-satisfaction across the cultural/attitudinal dimensions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 1382–1396.

Sapirshtein, A., Sompolinsky, Y., & Zohar, A. (2017). Optimal selfish mining strategies in Bitcoin. In J. Grossklags & B. Preneel (Eds.), Financial cryptography and data security. FC 2016. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 9603, pp. 515–532). Berlin: Springer.

Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Sine, W. D., & Lee, B. H. (2009). Tilting at windmills? The environmental movement and the emergence of the U.S. wind energy sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 123–155. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.123.CrossRef

Slushpool. (2019). Revenue system. Retrieved January 24, 2020, from https://slushpool.com/help/reward-system/

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1985). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

Spohrer, J., Anderson, L., Pass, N., & Ager, T. (2008). Service science and service-dominant logic. Otago Forum 2 (2008) – Paper no. 2. https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.1.1.32.

Tolbert, P., & Zucker, L. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1), 22–39. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1132&context=articles

Tosh, D. K., Shetty, S., Liang, X., Kamhoua, C. A., Kwiat, K. A., & Njilla, L. (2017). Security implications of blockchain cloud with analysis of block withholding attack. In 2017 17th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGRID), Madrid (pp. 458–467). https://doi.org/10.1109/CCGRID.2017.111

Tschorsch, F., & Scheuermann, B. (2016). Bitcoin and beyond: A technical survey on decentralized digital currencies. IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials, 18(3), 2084–2123. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2016.2535718.CrossRef

Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.002.CrossRef

Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2006). Service-dominant logic: What it is, what it is not, what it might be. In S. L. Vargo & R. F. Lusch (Eds.), The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions (pp. 43–55). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Wang, W., Hoang, D. T., Hu, P., Xiong, Z., Niyato, D., Wang, P, Wen, Y, & Kim, D. I. (2019). A survey on consensus mechanisms and mining management in blockchain networks. ArXiv Preprint, 1–33. arXiv:1805.02707

Werbach, K. (2018). The blockchain and the new architecture of trust. Cambridge, MA: MIT.CrossRef

Wieland, H., Vargo, S., Akaka, M. A., & Barbeau, B. (2018). A unifying perspective for the technological, business model, and market aspects of innovation. In R. F. Lusch & S. L. Vargo (Eds.), Sage handbook on service dominant logic (pp. 508–521). London: Sage.CrossRef

Wilson, R. (2019). The right way to do Blockchain consortiums. coindesk. Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://www.coindesk.com/the-right-way-to-do-blockchain-consortiums

Wood, G. (2018). Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger Byzantium version. Ethereum Project Yellow Paper. Retrieved from https://github.com/ethereum/yellowpaper

Yafimava, D. (2019). Blockchain and logistics: Can the new technology reinvent an outdated system? OpenLedger. Retrieved November 10, 2019, from https://openledger.info/insights/blockchain-logistics/

Zhang, R., & Preneel, B. (2017). Publish or perish: A backward-compatible defense against selfish mining in Bitcoin. In H. Handschuh (Ed.), Topics in cryptology – CT-RSA 2-17: The cryptographers’ track at the RSA conference 2017, San Francisco, CA (pp. 277–292). Cham: Springer. Retrieved from https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/publish-or-perish-a-backward-compatible-defense-against-selfish-/11987450

Title: Incentives to Engage Blockchain and Ecosystem Actors
Authors: Mohan Tanniru
Jianyu Niu
Chen Feng
Claudio Gottschalg Duque
Chang Lu
Harish Krishnan
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: Building Decentralized Trust
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-54413-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-54414-0

Copyright Year: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54414-0_3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner