Conference PaperPDF Available

eGov-DAO: a Better Government using Blockchain based Decentralized Autonomous Organization

eGov-DAO: a Better Government using Blockchain
based Decentralized Autonomous Organization
Nour Diallo, Weidong Shi, Lei Xu, Zhimin Gao, Lin Chen, Yang Lu,
Nolan Shah, Larry Carranco, Ton-Chanh Le, Abraham Bez Surez, Glenn Turner,,,,,,,,,,
Computer Science Department, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, 77004
Abstract—E-government system has greatly improved the ef-
ficiency and transparency of daily operations of a government.
However, most of existing e-government services are provided in
a centralized manner and heavily rely on human individuals to
control. The highly centralized IT infrastructure is more vulner-
able to outside attacks. Also, it is relatively easy to compromise
the data integrity by inside rogue users. Furthermore, relying
on individuals to monitor and control some of the working flows
makes the system error-prone and leaves room for corruption.
To address these challenges, we propose to use the blockchain
technology and decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) to
improve the e-government system. The blockchain-based DAO
system works in a fully decentralized way and is immune to
both outside and inside attacks. At the same time, operations
of such system is only controlled by pre-defined rules; thus, the
uncertainty and errors caused by human processes are greatly
reduced. We provide a concrete use case to demonstrate the usage
of DAO e-government and evaluate its effectiveness.
Index Terms—blockchain, DAO, e-government, transparency,
Nowadays, most countries in the world have been providing
e-services, in which the governmental public services are
implemented by information and communication technologies,
to serve its citizens better. Initially, developing an e-service
may be challenging, due to the complexity of government
policies or the disinterest of its citizens in new technologies.
However, there are still opportunities to attract more interest
and collaboration for the e-governance by providing a secure,
rigorous, autonomous, and transparent digital system for its
services. Such system e.g voting registration, driver licence
processing, usually improves the government’s productivity
and efficiency on collecting, securing, and sharing information.
Therefore, it will be more likely to be received by the
citizens because of its speed and transparency. For instance,
the digitalization of government’s services helps to replace
costly in-person or postal communication by the use of mobile
phones and emails.
However, despite numerous efforts in improving the gov-
ernment system e.g voting system, it is still not sufficiently
secure and transparent. The system is usually built on a
highly centralized IT infrastructure, which is more vulnerable
to outside attacks. In addition, the system is heavily con-
trolled by human individuals, which makes it error-prone and
leaves room for corruption. For example, inside rogue users
can easily compromise the data integrity of the system. In
this paper, we address these challenges of the e-government
system by leveraging the emerging decentralized blockchain
technology [1] to bring security, immutability, reliability, and
transparency to the system. While the blockchain technology
can be applied to a wide range of government services,
this paper focuses on utilizing a blockchain feature called
Distributed Autonomous Organization (DAO) for a concrete
use case of the government contracting service [2].
Government contracting is a service that allocates public
contracts to given vendors. The allocation process is inefficient
since it requires multiple inter-agency interaction and involves
many human labors [3]. In order to provide a simple and
convenient interface, the government allocates both human and
financial resources, but it results in a minimal transparency
in governance. In this scenario, blockchain technology would
increase transparency and trust, reduce costs, and simplify the
The blockchain framework introduced in this paper is generic
and can be apply to any policy for government contracting. In
this paper, we consider the policy of the U.S. Small Business
Administration as a case study [4]. First, we describe the
general application of blockchain for the U.S contracting and
introduce several regulations of allocating contracts required
by the U.S. Small Business Administration policies. Next,
we implement a DAO framework which summarizes these
requirements to regulate the allocation process. Moreover, the
framework also defines the parties of the system and their
activities, and models the main process of contract selection
following the policies. Finally, we provide a set of enforcement
rules to validate the process.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: In
Section II we briefly introduce the background technology
including blockchain, smart contract, and DAO. Section III
describes the detailed design of the government DAO archi-
tecture. In Section IV we analyze and evaluate the proposed
solution. We conclude the paper in Section V.
In this section, we briefly review the background of
blockchain technologies.
A. Blockchain and Smart Contract
A blockchain, or a distributed ledger, is a system involving
multiple participants who achieve consensus over a data set
and maintain the data locally. Blockchain systems are devel-
oped under different trust models with different consensus
protocols, e.g., proof-of-work [5] and proof-of-stake [6]. A
permissioned block chain usually has an identity manage-
ment mechanism to control who can participate the block
construction. Authorized users can run different Byzantine
fault tolerant protocol to determine whether a block should
be accepted and added to the block chain. In this paper, we
only consider public block chain constructed using proof-of-
work as it has received intensive studies.
The idea of a smart contract was first introduced by Szabo
[7], which is described in Definition 1.
Definition 1: A smart contract is a set of promises, specified
in a digital form, including protocols within which the parties
perform on these promises [8].
Block chain provides an ideal platform for smart contracts
to be executed in a decentralized way. Roughly speaking, a
smart contract is a piece of program that consists of a set of
rules and corresponding operations of related accounts. On a
high level, the life cycle of a smart contract in a public block
chain system can be summarized as follows:
1) Creation. Users involved in the contract work together
to build a smart contract and use digital signatures to
guarantee its authenticity. The smart contract is then
submitted to the system.
2) Acceptance. Users who have received the smart contract
first check its validity and then do mining to include it
in a new block. The new block is then broadcast to the
block chain.
3) Execution. Users in the system who have accepted a
new block containing the smart contract will execute
it locally according to its instructions, and obtain the
result. Users then do mining to build a new block to
hold the result and broadcast it to the system.
4) Result confirmation. Users who have received a block
containing the result of the smart contract will verify its
correctness to determine whether to accept it. In most
cases, the verification is done by re-computing the smart
contract and comparing the result with the one that is
B. Decentralized Autonomous Organization
The concept of blockchain based smart contract can be fur-
ther extended to Distributed Autonomous Organization (DAO).
A DAO functions with a set computer programs, in this case
smart contracts, which define in advance the rules governing
an organization [9]. Like an organization, a DAO behaves with
objectives and expectations to achieve a set of goals. In theory,
a DAO can be set for any reasons or goals [10].
Usually, a traditional organization is owned by an individ-
ual or stakeholders and registered in a centralized system,
e.g. government. This type of organization is managed in a
hierarchical structures. Directors in the organization decide
the future actions and the remaining members just follow the
decision. For example, in a company, the board has the power
to decide how to deal with the funds and to set a goal; other
employees will be assigned with tasks to complete the goal.
In contrast, all participants in a DAO have the same rights to
make decisions. It means that no one has special privileges in
operating the organization.
Autonomy is the major feature of DAO. A DAO requires
an automated program to ensure that the decisions can be
executed without any manual intervention [11]. For a smart
contract, if a set of events in the contract is triggered, it
will be executed automatically by the decentralized system.
For instance, if a contractor receives enough votes from the
members of DAO, funds will be released for him or her.
Typically, DAO also involves the following features:
DAO comprises all data/requirements (resources) needed
to complete a task/process.
DAO can enforce partnerships between compa-
nies/organizations without any physical interaction
because a smart contract runs automatically on nodes in
the network and does not require any human interaction.
DAO can be set up as easy as creating a company. It is a
global organization open to anyone, regulated by a smart
contract and operated using computer codes/coding.
DAO will transform organizational processes and create
a new platform (distributed system) that impacts our
In this section, we adopt smart contracts and DAO to
build an automated blockchain based e-government system,
or government-DAO (eGov-DAO) for short. We first describe
the high level architecture of the government-DAO and then
provide its detailed design.
A. High Level Architecture
Participants of the eGov-DAO is divided into two groups,
the DAO maintainer and the users, as depicted in Fig. 1.
Blockchain maintainer. As we consider public blockchain
constructed using proof-of-work, any one with com-
putation/storage resources can connect to the system
and contribute to block construction [12]. Some of the
blockchain maintainers may not be honest, e.g., they
could try to alter or remove transaction data stored in
the blockchain system or provide wrong results of a
smart contract. However, we assume that the majority of
them are honest maintainers so that those malicious ones
cannot compromise the blockchain infrastructure;
Blockchain Maintainers
Government Agencies
Transport Company Material Supplier
Identity Management
Fig. 1. Two types of participants in the eGov-DAO system: the blockchain
maintainers and users including government agencies, auditors, and other
vendors that work for the government. The identity management component
supports identity control and does not participate in daily operations of the
Bidding and
Blockchain Maintainers
Fig. 2. An overview of the work flow of the government-DAO.
User: The eGov-DAO has a variety of users, from
government agencies who manage government projects,
project auditors, to all types of vendors. They can submit
different types of transaction records to the eGov-DAO,
which will be verified by blockchain maintainers before
accepted to be included in the blockchain. According to
the rules defined in the eGov-DAO, an authority party
may need to approve one transaction before it can be
Fig. 2 gives an overview on the work flow of the proposed
government-DAO. For a government contract, the eGov-DAO
tracks each step of it during its whole life cycle.
B. Detailed Design
There are various forms of government contracts. For ex-
ample, fixed price where vendor can compete and go through
a bidding system, and cost reimbursement in which the price
is negotiable. All of them can be implemented using the DAO
concept. Initially, the general requirements of the contract are
implemented in smart contract, which will be used as the basic
rules to control execution of the contract.
All users, e.g., vendor, company, and regulators, are gov-
erned under these initial requirements. According to the US
Department of Defense, there are at least eleven steps to
cont ract is suer's signat ure
a new co ntract
Bidd ing keep biddi ng unt il selec ted
Audi ting
iss uer's can celatio n
no sat isfied const ractor
cont ractor 's sig nature
Execut ing
execut ion res ult
Prepari ng
Conver t to sm art
cont racts
Submi tting
cons istency
Fig. 3. The life cycle of a government-DAO. Usually, an eGov-DAO requires
contract issuers, regulators, contractors, executors, and auditors to participate
acquire a government contract. The steps can be grouped into
four categories: contract preparation and submission, bidding
and selection, contract execution monitoring, and auditing. At
each stages of the execution, the system checks and validates
that all the parties meet the requirements before moving to the
next stage of the execution.
The eGov-DAO automatically executes all the transactions
and the results are available to the public including all users.
The system first verifies that contract preparation is submitted,
validates and adds it to the blockchain, then moves to the bid-
ding step. Fig. 3 demonstrates the life cycle of a government
contract in the eGov-DAO system.
User registration. Unlike the blockchain maintainer, to be-
come a user of the eGov-DAO, an entity has to go through
a registration procedure before he/she can participate in. For
example, a D-U-N-S Number, like the social security number
for a company, provides a unique form of identification and
records all the information about the company [13]. This
number can help others like lender and business partner to have
an idea about the company. When the entity registers, it has
to provide such information to an authority and the authority
will issue a certificate to it as its identity in the eGov-DAO.
In most cases, the certificate is a public/private key pair where
the public key is embedded in a digital certificate [14], [15].
The rules to use and manage the certificate are also embedded
in a smart contract, and no human needs to be involved.
Contract preparation and submission. A traditional govern-
ment contract needs to be converted to the form of a smart
contract, i.e., all clauses in the contract need to be written in
the language supported by the eGov-DAO [16]. Algorithm 1
gives an example of an eGov-DAO contract. After generation
of the contract, the contract issuer digitally signs the contract
and shares it with other regulators. Each regulator or actor
checks whether the contract is consistent with related rules
and generates a digital signature using his/her private key.
After all these procedures are finished, the contract and related
signatures are sent to the eGov-DAO and available to the
Note that contract contents include both detailed require-
ments/description of the project and contractor selection cri-
teria. The contract also includes a set of milestones where the
contractor should submit information to the eGov-DAO. All
the information is encoded into corresponding smart contracts.
Bidding and selection. After the contract is confirmed on the
blockchain of the eGov-DAO, the bidding procedure starts.
Fig. 4 shows a sequential diagram of this procedure. More
specifically, all contractors who are interested can prepare a
proposal, generate a signature of the proposal, and submit
to the eGov-DAO. Each submitted bidding will be checked
by participants of the eGov-DAO, and only those that satisfy
the pre-defined criteria will be accepted and recorded in the
blockchain. Then participants run the procedure embedded
in the smart contract to select the winning contractor [17].
Information of the selected contractor is also embedded in
a block and stored on the blockchain. When this block is
confirmed, the selected contractor should follow the require-
ments/description of the project.
Note that the bidding information usually needs to be kept
in secret before the selection procedure. As the blockchain
is publicly available, a protection mechanism is required. A
cryptographic commitment scheme can be used to address this
problem. The scheme allows one to commit a chosen statement
while keeping it hidden from others, with the ability to reveal
the committed statement later [18]. For the eGov-DAO, each
contractor puts his/her bidding information into a commitment
and submits to the blockchain, which prevents others from
learning the bidding. At the selection step, each contractor can
open his/her commitment and the binding property prevents
one from modifying the committed statement.
Algorithm 1 provides an example pseudo code for the smart
contract to manage bidding procedure.
Monitoring contract execution. When the selected contractor
meets one milestone defined in the contractor, he/she submits
required information of the milestone to the eGov-DAO. A
third party such as the project supervisor can also provide
information for the milestone. Participants of the eGov-DAO
checks whether submitted information meets the requirements
defined in the contract to determine if the contractor can
proceed to the next step. The decision is also recorded in a
block and appended to the blockchain [19].
From Fig. 5, we learn that smart contracts are executed by
the available nodes in the network, and the execution result
will be submitted to the blockchain for others to verify. Once
the system reaches consensus on the result, it will be added
to the blockchain of which existing participants preserve a
complete copy.
Auditing. Because of the immutability property of blockchain,
the eGov-DAO provides a good support for auditing. All
contract related information, e.g., project requirements, re-
ceived bidding information, and contract execution/inspection
records, is stored on the blockchain and difficult to modify. An
auditor can easily trace back each step to see whether there is
a violation.
Algorithm 1 A smart contract manages bidding in the
1: Input:
2: chairperson:address address of chairperson
3: voters:array list of voters
4: proposals:array list of proposals
6: function VOTE(proposal i,voter a)
7: if voter a.voted then return false
8: if proposal i proposals.length then return false
9: voter a.voted true
10: voter proposal i
11: proposals[proposal i].voteCount
voter a.weight return true
13: function WINNINGPROP OS AL
14: win c 0
15: for prop 0,prop < proposals.length,prop++ do
16: if proposals[prop].voteCount > win c then
17: win c proposals[prop].voteCount
18: winningP r oposal prop
return winningP roposal
20: Comments:
21: The goal of function “winningProposal” is to find out a
proposal which receives maximum votes.
In this section, we analyze and evaluate the proposed
government-DAO from security and performance perspectives.
A. Security of the Government-DAO
There two major types of threats to the government-DAO
system (eGov-DAO):
Data integrity. Data is the foundation for all functions
provided by the eGov-DAO. If an attacker can alter/delete
existing data or insert new data to the historical data, it
may cause serious consequences. The blockchain struc-
ture can avoid all these risks to protect the integrity
of the data. In order to compromise data stored in the
blockchain, an attacker has to compete with all the honest
users who maintain the blockchain system on producing
new blocks. It is a big challenge for both proof-of-work
and proof-of-stake, and the probability of success is very
low [6], [20].
Rule integrity. In the eGov-DAO system, rules are logics
embedded in smart contracts. Rule integrity means that
an attacker cannot influence the execution of a smart
contract to get preferred results. Rules (smart contracts)
are embedded in blocks before they are executed so
the attacker cannot modify them directly. According to
the smart contract execution model, everyone will run a
contract to see the results rather than simply accepting
one. Therefore, as long as the majority of users of the
Email Alert
[avai lable] new
Fig. 4. Multiple contractors start to bid for the contract and the selected one will be notified by DAO and blockchain.
Trigger &
Node1 Node2
Node1 Node2
Blockchain Blockchain
Fig. 5. Smart contract execution can be triggered by an event internally or
externally; the execution of a contract would produce a result on which all
participants agree.
system are honest, an attacker cannot compromise the
rule integrity by providing a wrong execution result as it
will be rejected by the majority.
Another potential security concern is data confidentiality
stored on the blockchain that the eGov-DAO relies on. Because
we are using public blockchain, everyone can access data
stored there. In most cases this is not a problem because the
government has to make such information public eventually.
In case the data is sensitive, all parties involved can negotiate
a data protection key and encrypt everything before submiting
to the eGov-DAO. This mechanism can protect the data from
unauthorized accesses but also reduces the transparency of the
government. Therefore, data that needs to be protected should
be defined in the eGov-DAO in advance to make sure that this
function will not be abused.
B. Performance of the Government-DAO
Modern governments are becoming increasingly complex
and the eGov-DAO has to handle a large amount of workload.
A good thing is that most of these works do not have a high
requirement on latency. For example, in the process of bidding
and selection, a latency in several days is still acceptable to
have the final result. The performance of the eGov-DAO is
heavily affected by the underlying blockchain infrastructure,
and various methods have been developed to improve its
throughput, latency, and scalability [5], [21], [22]. All these
techniques can be applied to improve the performance of the
eGov-DAO so that it will have the capability to process an
increasing amount of work.
Today, e-government services, e.g., the contracting service,
do not have a fully automated and efficient system that can
both integrate all the participants and provide transparency.
In this paper, we propose the blockchain-based government-
DAO (eGov-DAO), which is the first system allowing real-
time monitoring and analysis of an e-government service. The
system provides transparency, accountability, immutability,
and more importantly, a better national resource management
to the service. This system reserves all records for auditing,
thus limiting litigation between parties involved and increasing
the speed of allocation and execution of contracts. Our design
makes the system user-friendly, which requires minimum
training for the users. Finally, we believe that the decentralize
nature of the eGov-DAO makes it attractive to both public
users and business community, given their huge amount of
interest in blockchain technology recently.
For the last couple of years, both governmental and business
services have been hacked several times, from ransomwares to
denial-of-service attacks. The blockchain-based government-
DAO definitely solves these security problems while still
reduces costs of building and maintaining complex IT infras-
tructures. This solution helps a government to save unlimited
amount of resources, manage more efficiently government
business, and reduce the risk of giving contracts to companies
that lack the capacity to fulfill them by implementing a
transparent and secure e-government system with a minimum
[1] V. Buterin et al., “A next-generation smart contract and decentralized
application platform,” white paper, 2014.
[2] M. Del Castillo, “Ethereum executes blockchain hard fork to return dao
funds,” 2016.
[3] M. Duggan, “Does contracting out increase the efficiency of government
programs? evidence from medicaid hmos,” Journal of Public Economics,
vol. 88, no. 12, pp. 2549–2572, 2004.
[4] T. A. Denes, “Do small business set-asides increase the cost of govern-
ment contracting?” Public Administration Review, pp. 441–444, 1997.
[5] M. Vukoli´
c, “The quest for scalable blockchain fabric: Proof-of-work
vs. bft replication,” in International Workshop on Open Problems in
Network Security. Springer, 2015, pp. 112–125.
[6] S. King and S. Nadal, “Ppcoin: Peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof-
of-stake,” self-published paper, August, vol. 19, 2012.
[7] N. Szabo, “Formalizing and securing relationships on public networks,
First Monday, vol. 2, no. 9, 1997.
[8] M. Giancaspro, “Is a smart contractreally a smart idea? insights from a
legal perspective,Computer Law & Security Review, 2017.
[9] W. Dilger, “Decentralized autonomous organization of the intelligent
home according to the principle of the immune system,” in Systems,
Man, and Cybernetics, 1997. Computational Cybernetics and Simula-
tion., 1997 IEEE International Conference on, vol. 1. IEEE, 1997, pp.
[10] M. Swan, “Blockchain thinking: The brain as a dac (decentralized
autonomous organization),” in Texas Bitcoin Conference, 2015, pp. 27–
[11] C. Jentzsch, “Decentralized autonomous organization to automate
governance,Online-Publikation: https://download. slock.
it/public/DAO/WhitePaper. pdf.(Stand: 23.06. 2016), 2016.
[12] S. Barber, X. Boyen, E. Shi, and E. Uzun, “Bitter to betterhow to make
bitcoin a better currency,” in International Conference on Financial
Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 2012, pp. 399–414.
[13] D. Neumark, J. Zhang, and B. Wall, “Where the jobs are: Business
dynamics and employment growth,The Academy of Management
Perspectives, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 79–94, 2006.
[14] A. Slagell, R. Bonilla, and W. Yurcik, “A survey of PKI components
and scalability issues,” in 25th IEEE International on Performance,
Computing, and Communications Conference - IPCCC 2006. IEEE,
2006, pp. 475 – 484.
[15] C. Adams and S. Lloyd, Understanding PKI: Concepts, Standards, and
Deployment Considerations. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2003.
[16] R. M. McNab and F. Melese, “Implementing the gpra: Examining the
prospects for performance budgeting in the federal government,Public
budgeting & finance, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 73–95, 2003.
[17] M. Bayati, D. Shah, and M. Sharma, “A simpler max-product maximum
weight matching algorithm and the auction algorithm,” in Information
Theory, 2006 IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 2006, pp. 557–
[18] M. Bellare and B. Yee, “Forward-security in private-key cryptography,”
in CT-RSA, vol. 2612. Springer, 2003, pp. 1–18.
[19] F. Idelberger, G. Governatori, R. Riveret, and G. Sartor, “Evaluation
of logic-based smart contracts for blockchain systems,” in International
Symposium on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web.
Springer, 2016, pp. 167–183.
[20] S. Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” 2008.
[21] I. Eyal, A. E. Gencer, E. G. Sirer, and R. Van Renesse, “Bitcoin-
ng: A scalable blockchain protocol,” in 13th USENIX Symposium on
Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 16), 2016, pp.
[22] Z. Gao, L. Xu, L. Chen, N. Shah, Y. Lu, and W. Shi, “Scalable
blockchain based smart contract execution,” in Parallel and Distributed
Systems (ICPADS), 2017 IEEE 18th International Conference on. IEEE,
... The former advocates blockchain's potential to subvert government institutions, while the latter advocates its potential to strengthen those institutions through government-led blockchain projects (Semenzin et al., 2022). Under the latter imaginary, it has been argued that features of blockchain such as decentralisation, data quality and data integrity, transparency and immutability could play a central role in the fight against fraud and corruption in the public sector (Batubara et al., 2018;Ølnes et al., 2017) while decreasing costs (Alexopoulos et al., 2019) and maximizing performance (Diallo et al., 2018). However, the potential of blockchain in the government field is just beginning to be explored. ...
... DAOs have been proposed as candidates to improve the contracting service of an egovernment system. DAO-enhanced e-government systems or government-DAOs (eGov-DAOs) rely on a public blockchain and allow real-time monitoring, providing transparency, accountability, immutability and improving the national resource management of the service while solving security problems (Diallo et al., 2018). Proposals incorporating blockchain into e-government systems have not been limited to institution-citizen interactions but also encompassed government-to-government (G2G) services. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Past energy transitions have been characterised by strategic geopolitical and socio-economic drivers that rarely considered issues of social justice or community cohesion. This is interesting given the profound systemic reconfigurations that took place. The current transition to low-carbon energy has seen a departure of sorts, particularly in terms of the complex, intersecting drivers involved. Consequently, there has been a widening of the roles citizens are expected to take, particularly in terms of participation and engaging with the energy system. However, differing interpretations of how these roles are to be expressed, and the degree of power to be assigned those roles, has resulted in contradicting responses from local people. The rollout of what appear to be broadly popular renewable energy technologies has met with strong resistance at the local level. Place attachment – especially in terms of belonging, identity, relationships, and acceptance – has come to define localised responses to recent (inter)national energy and climate-related policy. Understanding how place attachment affects the (re)negotiating of local understandings of place is therefore important, as is its role in sustaining narratives of resistance to locally unpopular strategic energy projects. This paper will present findings from the SEAI-funded project, EnergyPolities and cognate work, which explored how governance structures intersect with socio-economic and key socio-cultural factors to influence the social acceptability or otherwise of current energy transition pathways. It will also examine recent responses from powerful actors challenged by emerging citizen participation and engagement roles, and discusses the tactics used to limit the diversity of voices and perspectives in the energy transition.
... The former advocates blockchain's potential to subvert government institutions, while the latter advocates its potential to strengthen those institutions through government-led blockchain projects (Semenzin et al., 2022). Under the latter imaginary, it has been argued that features of blockchain such as decentralisation, data quality and data integrity, transparency and immutability could play a central role in the fight against fraud and corruption in the public sector (Batubara et al., 2018;Ølnes et al., 2017) while decreasing costs (Alexopoulos et al., 2019) and maximizing performance (Diallo et al., 2018). However, the potential of blockchain in the government field is just beginning to be explored. ...
... DAOs have been proposed as candidates to improve the contracting service of an egovernment system. DAO-enhanced e-government systems or government-DAOs (eGov-DAOs) rely on a public blockchain and allow real-time monitoring, providing transparency, accountability, immutability and improving the national resource management of the service while solving security problems (Diallo et al., 2018). Proposals incorporating blockchain into e-government systems have not been limited to institution-citizen interactions but also encompassed government-to-government (G2G) services. ...
Full-text available
The Covid-19 pandemic accelerated digitalization processes in the field of social work. While some areas, such as IT infrastructure, improved, others remained the same or even worsened, such as the lack of co-determination in selecting, implementing, and evaluating digital tools. Against this background, we discuss participation opportunities for social workers in their organizations. We ask how they can actively participate in developing digitalization strategies or accompany other processes in this regard. The focus is on our method of participatory online idea labs, which enables the development of recommendations for action from practice for practice. We present the method’s goals and structure in detail before we evaluate its advantages, such as empowering employees, and challenges, such as reaching out to techno-skeptic people. At the end of this paper, we discuss individual recommendations for action, which refer to the possibilities for employees to participate in the digitalization of their working environment and which are also presented in a toolbox.
... The emerging of a new generation of Dapps via DAO in various sectors, e.g, supply chain, finance accounting, IoT, healthcare, and transportation [51] has demonstrated the innovation and the need for DAO in current technology trends. Especially, DAO is also investigated that it could be promising for E-government systems in improving the efficiency and transparency of government operations [52]. ...
Full-text available
Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) is an organization constructed by automatically executed rules such as via smart contracts, holding features of the permissionless committee, transparent proposals, and fair contribution by stakeholders. As of Nov 2022, DAO has impacted over \$11.2B market caps. However, there are no substantial studies focused on this emerging field. To fill the gap, we start from the ground truth by empirically studying the breadth and depth of the DAO markets in mainstream public chain ecosystems in this paper. We dive into the most widely adoptable DAO launchpad, \textit{Snapshot}, which covers 95\% in the wild DAO projects for data collection and analysis. By integrating extensive enrolled DAOs and corresponding data measurements, we explore statistical data from Snapshot and try to demystify its undiscovered truths by delivering a series of summarised insights. We also present DAO status, patterns, distribution, and trends. To our knowledge, this is the first empirical study putting concentration on DAO spaces.
... Every link in the supply chain can be tracked, and the sources of insecurity can be easily identified. Knowing the public availability of blockchain, it can be deduced that it could easily be used to effectively track down recalled products more efficiently than the current process that companies use when a product appears to be prone to virus problems [10] [19]. If a product is released and it is later discovered that it is vulnerable to malware attacks, having the blockchain as part of your supply chain allows The following system elements were identified for this purpose: a person's intention to commit cybercrime; human actions for committing cybercrime; influencing factors for increasing or decreasing cybercrime; data recording in the Blockchain. ...
Full-text available
This study looks into the current, and potential uses of Blockchain technology in business, specifically in security system of enterprise. The goal of this study is to use modern blockchain technology to address the problem of enhancing the degree of cybersecurity in huge corporations. Enterprises that have seen examples of cyber fraud perpetrated not only by hackers but also by business personnel have evaluated the urgency of the matter. The authors have developed a blockchain-based system dynamic model of the company's cybersecurity system. The use of this modeling tool enables the creation of a computer model of a complicated cybersecurity system, which can then be used to design the suggested update more effectively. We show how Blockchain affects auditing in a variety of ways that will fundamentally alter the profession. We also believe that blockchain technology should be integrated into other parts of cybersecurity, including auditing and general accounting operations. The findings have allowed researchers to draw conclusions about the increased system response in cases of employee fraud in the context of a company's automated information system that uses blockchain technology.
... Diallo et al. [25] suggested a Government DAO (eGov-DAO) built on blockchain technology, the first system to allow for real-time monitoring of e-government services. By setting up an affordable, transparent, and secure e-government system, this solution reduces the danger of giving contracts to businesses that are unable to fulfil them. ...
Information and communication technologies are used by e-Government to deliver governmental services to people and companies instantly, effectively, and efficiently. The majority of current e-government systems are centrally located on redundant servers and databases that may have single points of failure, rendering the systems susceptible to cyber-attacks. Blockchain technology makes it possible to build a decentralised, incredibly secure system without the need for a central authority to monitor transactions. Blockchain technology, which encrypts data and distributes it over the network, improves information security and privacy and gives governments new chances to increase transparency, stop fraud, and foster citizen confidence. In this paper, we primarily cover the overview of blockchain technology, architecture of blockchain, consensus models and the blockchain use cases in e-Government
... Based on the blockchain solution and transparency of government information, the model [17] can analyse information interaction between the government and users. In addition, the blockchain-based DAO system [18] is resilient to both external and internal threats. The system's operations are also pre-defined, reducing the unpredictability and errors generated by human processes. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Identity documents are vital credentials to the people, which assists to fulfil their demands and conserve their rights. Besides the benefits of the amplification of modern technologies, the tendency of forging IDs is becoming a profitable business for criminals. They utilise the technology to make counterfeit ID cards for non-native people (refugees) by taking advantage of their physical or cultural similarities. The aim of this paper is to propose a blockchain-based security model which will ensure the authenticity of identity documents and conserve fundamental rights for refugees. In the construction of the model, a secure environment for identification is demonstrated, where the authorized controller, the third party's data request, reviewing and assisting refugees functions. The detailed proposal of the aid request and donation on the Aid Management (AM) System is presented to complete peer-to-peer transactions between the hosting country (HC) and the refugee upon the request of the refugee and donation of a third party (TP). This model will certainly have a major impact as a wider cyber-defense framework for refugees' identification and basic rights, preventing forged IDs and criminal activities.
... For example, a proposal will be adopted if it receives enough votes. The following autonomy attributes [6] must be met by the DAO: ...
Full-text available
Architectural design contexts contain a set of factors that influence software application development. Among them, \textit{\textbf{organizational}} design contexts consist of high-level company concerns and how it is structured, for example, stakeholders and development schedule, heavily impacting design considerations. Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO), as a vital concept in the Web3 space, is an organization constructed by automatically executed rules such as via smart contracts, holding features of the permissionless committee, transparent proposals, and fair contribution by stakeholders. In this work, we conduct a systematic literature review to summarize how DAO is structured as well as explore its benefits\&challenges in Web3 applications.
Blockchain technology facilitates a way to organize business activities, commercial transactions, minimizes costs and time incurred because of intermediaries, and increases trust of the complete ecosystem. Blockchain is a decentralized transaction technology that was first developed for the cryptocurrency known as bitcoin. Since the concept was first proposed in 2008, there has been a growing interest in blockchain technology. The primary traits of blockchain are as follows: provide security, data integrity and anonymity without the involvement of any third‐party organization for tracking the transactions, which drives interest in this technology and opens up new research areas, particularly in solving several technical challenges. A systematic review is conducted to present all relevant fundamental concepts on blockchain technology in this study. Our goal is to gain a technical understanding of current research issues, challenges, and future directions in blockchain technology. The focus of this research work is in providing a high‐level overview of blockchain from the context of its categories and various use cases. Researchers interested in this area would gain a better understanding of this technology with this article.
Full-text available
Swift developments in the emerging field of blockchain technology have facilitated the birth of ‘smart contracts’: computerised transaction protocols which autonomously execute the terms of a contract. Smart contracts are disintermediated and generally transparent in nature, offering the promise of increased commercial efficiency, lower transaction and legal costs, and anonymous transacting. The business world is actively investigating the use of blockchain technology for various commercial purposes. Whilst questions surround the security and reliability of this technology, and the negative impact it may have upon traditional intermediaries, there are equally significant concerns that smart contracts will encounter considerable difficulty adapting to current legal frameworks regulating contracts across jurisdictions. This article considers the potential issues with legal and practical enforceability that arise from the use of smart contracts within both civil and common law jurisdictions.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
While procedural languages are commonly used to program smart contracts in blockchain systems, logic-based languages may be interesting alternatives. In this paper, we inspect what are the possible legal and technical (dis)advantages of logic-based smart contracts in light of common activities featuring ordinary contracts, then we provide insights on how to use such logic-based smart contracts in combination with blockchain systems. These insights lead us to emphasize a fundamental challenge-algorithms for logic approaches have to be efficient, but they also need to be literally cheap as measured within the environment where they are deployed and according to its economic rules. We illustrate this with different algorithms from defeasible logic-based frameworks.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Cryptocurrencies, based on and led by Bitcoin, have shown promise as infrastructure for pseudonymous online payments, cheap remittance, trustless digital asset exchange, and smart contracts. However, Bitcoin-derived blockchain protocols have inherent scalability limits that trade-off between throughput and latency and withhold the realization of this potential. This paper presents Bitcoin-NG, a new blockchain protocol designed to scale. Based on Bitcoin's blockchain protocol, Bitcoin-NG is Byzantine fault tolerant, is robust to extreme churn, and shares the same trust model obviating qualitative changes to the ecosystem. In addition to Bitcoin-NG, we introduce several novel metrics of interest in quantifying the security and efficiency of Bitcoin-like blockchain protocols. We implement Bitcoin-NG and perform large-scale experiments at 15% the size of the operational Bitcoin system, using unchanged clients of both protocols. These experiments demonstrate that Bitcoin-NG scales optimally, with bandwidth limited only by the capacity of the individual nodes and latency limited only by the propagation time of the network.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Bitcoin is a distributed digital currency which has attracted a substan- tial number of users. We perform an in-depth investigation to understand what made Bitcoin so successful, while decades of research on cryptographic e-cash has not lead to a large-scale deployment. We ask also how Bitcoin could become a good candidate for a long-lived stable currency. In doing so, we identify several issues and attacks of Bitcoin, and we propose novel techniques to address them.
Conference Paper
Bitcoin cryptocurrency demonstrated the utility of global consensus across thousands of nodes, changing the world of digital transactions forever. In the early days of Bitcoin, the performance of its probabilistic proof-of-work (PoW) based consensus fabric, also known as blockchain, was not a major issue. Bitcoin became a success story, despite its consensus latencies on the order of an hour and the theoretical peak throughput of only up to 7 transactions per second. The situation today is radically different and the poor performance scalability of early PoW blockchains no longer makes sense. Specifically, the trend of modern cryptocurrency platforms, such as Ethereum, is to support execution of arbitrary distributed applications on blockchain fabric, needing much better performance. This approach, however, makes cryptocurrency platforms step away from their original purpose and enter the domain of database-replication protocols, notably, the classical state-machine replication, and in particular its Byzantine fault-tolerant (BFT) variants. In this paper, we contrast PoW-based blockchains to those based on BFT state machine replication, focusing on their scalability limits. We also discuss recent proposals to overcoming these scalability limits and outline key outstanding open problems in the quest for the “ultimate” blockchain fabric(s).
Jobs are created by births of new businesses, expansions of existing ones, and relocations of businesses into an economy. Conversely, jobs are destroyed by deaths and contractions of existing businesses, and outward relocations. To the extent that state and local policymakers directly address job creation and job destruction, they focus to a large extent on relocation - engaging in efforts to attract new businesses to a state or locality, and attempting to encourage existing businesses contemplating leaving to stay. However, the empirical evidence underlying this focus on relocation is virtually non-existent, as there has been no systematic evidence on the role of business relocation in job creation and destruction. This paper presents new evidence on the importance of each of these processes - births and deaths, expansions and contractions, and in- and out-migration - to employment growth (and decline). We use data from the National Establishment Time Series for California. The evidence indicates that births of new business establishments and especially new firms, and expansions of existing ones, coupled with their counterparts of deaths and contractions of existing establishments, are the prime determinants of employment growth. In contrast to the high profile accorded it by policymakers, business relocation plays a negligible role. The gross job flows (both positive and negative) from births, deaths, expansions, and contractions far outweigh those due to relocation. Moreover, in most years the net difference between expansions and contractions of existing businesses contribute by far the most to job growth.
The encouragement of small businesses is an important goal of modern governments. In the United States, a major piece of legislation, the Small Business Act of 1953, sets aside a certain number of federal contracts for businesses "that are independently owned and operated; are not dominant in their field of operation; and meet a specified size criterion." This article explores whether small business set-asides raise the cost of contracting, using as a case study the federal procurement of dredging services. No evidence was found to support the hypothesis that set-asides increase costs. In all but one instance, there was no significant difference between the bids submitted for set-asides and the bids submitted on unrestricted solicitations. In the single case in which a statistically significant difference was found (pipeline dredges only), the restricted bids were actually lower than the comparable unrestricted bids. One possible reason that set-asides produced either no change or a lower bid price than unrestricted dredging is that more firms bid on them. On average, 3.6 firms bid on the set-asides while only 3.1 firms bid on the unrestricted solicitations. This study showed that small business set-asides do not lead to higher cost of contracted services as long as the pool of bidders is not reduced.
A peer-to-peer crypto-currency design derived from Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin. Proof-of-stake replaces proof-of-work to provide most of the network security. Under this hybrid design proof-of-work mainly provides initial minting and is largely non-essential in the long run. Security level of the network is not dependent on energy consumption in the long term thus providing an energy-efficient and more cost-competitive peer-to-peer crypto-currency. Proof-of-stake is based on coin age and generated by each node via a hashing scheme bearing similarity to Bitcoin's but over limited search space. Block chain history and transaction settlement are further protected by a centrally broadcasted checkpoint mechanism.