Blockchain Adoption in a Supply Chain with Manufacturer Market Power
References
- (2020) OM forum-distributed ledgers and operations: What operations management researchers should know about blockchain technology. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 22(2):223–240.Link, Google Scholar
- (2019) The blockchain folk theorem. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1662–1715.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023) Advances in blockchain and crypto economics. Management Sci. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
- (2023) Decentralized finance: Protocols, risks, and governance. Foundations Trends Privacy Security 5(3):144–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2007) Risk aversion in inventory management. Oper. Res. 55(5):828–842.Link, Google Scholar
- (2019) Supplier diversification under buyer risk. Management Sci. 65(7):3150–3173.Link, Google Scholar
- (2020) On the financing benefits of supply chain transparency and blockchain adoption. Management Sci. 66(10):4359–4919.Google Scholar
- (2021) Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation. Rev. Financial Stud. 34(3):1105–1155.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023a) Supply chain transparency and blockchain design. Management Sci. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
- (2023b) Value and design of traceability-driven blockchains. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 25(3):1099–1116.Link, Google Scholar
- (2023) Impact of traceability technology adoption in food supply chain networks. Management Sci. 69(3):1518–1535.Link, Google Scholar
- (2019) From mining to markets: The evolution of bitcoin transaction fees. J. Financial Econom. 134(1):91–109.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Inventory, speculators, and initial coin offerings. Management Sci. 67:914–931.Link, Google Scholar
- (2004) Coordination of supply chains with risk-averse agents. Production Oper. Management 13(2):135–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1991) How to time-stamp a digital document. J. Cryptology 3(2):99–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023) The need for fees at a dex: How increases in fees can increase dex trading volume. Working paper, New York University, New York.Google Scholar
- (2022) Bitcoin’s limited adoption problem. J. Financial Econom. 144(2):347–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Monopoly without a monopolist: An economic analysis of the bitcoin payment system. Rev. Econom. Stud. 88(6):3011–3040.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023) Economics of permissioned blockchain adoption. Management Sci. 69(6):3415–3436.Link, Google Scholar
- (2023a) Smart contracts and decentalized finance. Annu. Rev. Financial Econom. Forthcoming.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Bitcoin and beyond. Annu. Rev. Financial Econom. 14:95–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023b) Equilibrium staking levels in a proof-of-stake blockchain. Working paper, New York University, New York.Google Scholar
- (2023) Blockchains, smart contracts, and supply chain efficiency. Working paper, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
- (2022) Token-based platforms and speculators. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
- (2008) Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Accessed October 19, 2023, https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.Google Scholar
- (2022) Decentralizing money: Bitcoin prices and blockchain security. Rev. Financial Stud. 35(2):866–907.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023) Equilibrium in a defi lending market. Working paper, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC.Google Scholar
- (2021) Evolution of shares in a proof-of-stake cryptocurrency. Management Sci. 67:661–672.Link, Google Scholar
- (2021) Blockchain without waste: Proof-of-stake. Rev. Financial Stud. 34:1156–1190.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2006) On the value of mitigation and contingency strategies for managing supply chain disruption risks. Management Sci. 52(5):639–657.Link, Google Scholar

