Economics of Permissioned Blockchain Adoption
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.Google Scholar
- (2019) The blockchain folk theorem. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1662–1715.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2001) Consumer attitudes to genetically modified organisms in food in the UK. Eur. Rev. Agricultural Econom. 28(4):479–498.Google Scholar
- (2003) Supply chain coordination with contracts. Handbook Oper. Res. Management Sci. 11:227–339.Google Scholar
- (1999) Capacity choice and allocation: Strategic behavior and supply chain performance. Management Sci. 45(8):1091–1108.Link, Google Scholar
- (2019) Financial reporting and blockchains: Audit pricing, misstatements, and regulation. Working paper, Georgia State University, Atlanta.Google Scholar
- (2020) Blockchain architecture for auditing automation and trust building in public markets. Computer 53(7):20–28.Google Scholar
- (2019) Initial coin offerings and the value of crypto tokens. NBER Working Paper No. 24418, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- (2022) Blockchain without crypto? linking on-chain data growth to firm fundamentals and stock returns. Working paper, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.Google Scholar
- (2003) Information sharing and supply chain coordination. Handbook Oper. Res. Management Sci. 11:341–421.Google Scholar
- (2021) A theory of ICOs: Diversification, agency, and information asymmetry. Management Sci. 67(10):5969–5989.Link, Google Scholar
- (2020) On the financing benefits of supply chain transparency and blockchain adoption. Management Sci. 66(10):4359–4919.Google Scholar
- (2019) Blockchain disruption and smart contracts. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1754–1797.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation. Rev. Financial Stud. 34(3):1105–1155.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022a) Supply chain transparency and blockchain design. Working paper, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Google Scholar
- (2022b) Value and design of traceability-driven blockchains. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management Forthcoming.Google Scholar
- (2019) From mining to markets: The evolution of bitcoin transaction fees. J. Financial Econom. 134(1):91–109.Google Scholar
- (2019) Sex, drugs, and bitcoin: How much illegal activity is financed through cryptocurrencies? Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1798–1853.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Inventory, speculators, and initial coin offerings. Management Sci. 67:914–931.Link, Google Scholar
- (2022) Financing platforms with cryptocurrency: Token retention, sales commission, and ICO caps. SMU Cox School of Business Research Paper No. 21-03, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
- (2020) Is bitcoin really untethered? J. Finance 75(4):1913–1964.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Bitcoin’s limited adoption problem. J. Financial Econom. 144(2):347–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2020) Initial coin offerings: Financing growth with cryptocurrency token sales. Rev. Financial Stud. 33(9):3925–3974.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Monopoly without a monopolist: An economic analysis of the bitcoin payment system. Rev. Econom. Stud. 88(6):3011–3040.Google Scholar
- (2022) The public blockchain ecosystem: An empirical analysis. Working paper, NYU Stern School of Business, New York.Google Scholar
- (2022) Blockchain adoption in a supply chain with market power. Working paper, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
- (2022a) Bitcoin and beyond. Annu. Rev. Financial Econom., vol. 14.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022b) Economic implications of scaling blockchains: Why the consensus protocol matters. Working paper, New York University, New York.Google Scholar
- (2022c) Equilibrium staking levels in a proof-of-stake blockchain. Working paper, New York University, New York.Google Scholar
- (2022) Miner collusion and the bitcoin protocol. Working paper, University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
- (2020) Digital tokens and platform building. Working paper, Emory University, Atlanta.Google Scholar
- (2022) Initial coin offering (ICO) success and post-ICO performance. Management Sci., ePub ahead of print February 14, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4312.Link, Google Scholar
- (2018) Tokenomics: When tokens beat equity. Working paper, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
- (2022) Token-based platforms and speculators. Working paper, HEC Paris, Jouy-en-Josas, France.Google Scholar
- (2011) Consumer preferences for fruit and vegetables with credence-based attributes: A review. Internat. Food Agribusiness Management Rev. 14(1030-2016-82774):121–142.Google Scholar
- (2008) Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Accessed October 22, 2022, https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.Google Scholar
- (2019) Design of trusted b2b market platforms using permissioned blockchains and game theory. Proc. IEEE Internat. Conf. on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC) (IEEE), 385–393.Google Scholar
- (1996) Consumer awareness of citrus fruit attributes. British Food J. 1(98):23–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2018) Blockchain adoption for combating deceptive counterfeits. Production Oper. Management 30(4):864–882.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
- (2018) ‘Smart’ contracts and external financing. Working paper.Google Scholar
- (1999) Modeling supply chain contracts: A review. Quantitative Models for Supply Chain Management (Springer, New York), 299–336.Google Scholar
- (1995) Coordination in operations: A taxonomy. J. Oper. Management 12(3-4):413–422.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) Is bitcoin a real currency? An economic appraisal. Handbook of Digital Currency (Academic Press, Cambridge, MA), 31–43.Google Scholar
- (2005) Comparison of consumer perceptions and preference toward organic vs. conventionally produced foods: A review and update of the literature. Renewable Agriculture Food Systems 20(4):193–205.Crossref, Google Scholar

