Blockchain Papers

Denis Dupré, Jean-François Ponsot, Jean‐Michel Servet

International audience

Gabrielle Durana

Échapper aux banques : une utopie qui a retrouvé de sa vigueur au lendemain de la crise des subprime et a donné naissance au « bitcoin », une monnaie numérique sur laquelle ont très vite commencé les spéculations, financières et autres. Mais quelle est la portée réelle de cette invention ?

Bennett T. McCallum

The likelihood of the Bitcoin system replacing the Federal Reserve as the main provider of money in the United States and the desirability of such a transformation are the topics of this article. (1) With respect to the first of these topics, one needs to consider how far the so-called Bitcoin Revolution has progressed by estimating the average volume of transactions conducted per time period by means of Bitcoin payments, and then compare recent values of that magnitude with the total volume per period of dollar payments in the United States. (2) Francois Velde of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago has estimated that, as of late 2013, the average volume of bitcoin transactions per minute totaled less than four-tenths of 1 percent of average dollar transactions per minute--actually, not total dollar transactions but only the subset conducted by means of Visa credit card payments (Velde 2013). In the months since the publication of Velde's article the volume of bitcoin payments has been growing rapidly, but their quantitative extent is still negligible from a macroeconomic perspective. In fact, this 0.004 magnitude is quite close to the ratio implied by magnitudes of Bitcoin and Visa daily transactions averaged over the most recent 12 months as reported on August 7, 2014, by the coinometrics.com web site. These magnitudes are $57.3 million and $16,518 million, so the implied ratio is 0.00345. Alternatively, in terms of stocks, rather than transactions, the Ml measure of the U.S. money supply (currency plus demand deposits) is currently about $2,835 billion (as of August 7, 2014) with bitcoins worth $7.7 billion, for a ratio of 0.00272- again, of the same order of magnitude. Another way to express the point that Bitcoin is not at this time a quantitatively important money is to reflect on the economist's standard definition of money--namely, an entity that serves as a of exchange, store of value, and of account. (3) Doing so, one recognizes that some clarification in this common description is necessary to make it analytically coherent. First, traditional money is typically a tangible object (e.g., metallic coins, government issued currency, or legal claims to such coins or currency) and thus is not itself a of which is intangible. Indeed, careful terminology would replace unit of account with medium of account, a specified amount of which serves as the of account. (4) Also, it is necessary to recognize that in developed economies tangible money does not rank highly as a store of value. For example, in the United States, during the first quarter of 2014, aggregate assets of households and nonprofit organizations together totaled $95,549 billion whereas checkable deposits and currency holdings by these units came to only $1,096 billion (roughly 1/100 of their assets). (3) Much larger components of household plus nonprofit-organization wealth include the reported monetary value of houses, furniture, automobiles, etc. Some major categories are real estate ($22,820 billion), corporate equities ($13,502 billion), corporate and foreign bonds ($2,626 billion), and pension entitlements ($19,766 billion). Accordingly, it is the medium-of-exchange role that is the primary attribute that serves to define money. (6) But an important qualifier often made explicit is that money is a generally acceptable of exchange. By that standard bitcoins do not qualify as money. Indeed, for most members of the U.S. population there are very few, if any, of their basic payments that could be made using bitcoins. None of the foregoing arguments rule out the possibility that Bitcoin will become a major--or even the main--medium of exchange in the future. (7) But as of today it seems likely that for law-abiding U.S. citizens the practical attractions of Bitcoin are primarily as a financial investment with very high volatility and as a means of participating in an intellectually fascinating, avant-garde, and potentially revolutionary, social experiment. …

Charles Cuvelliez, Olivier Markowitch

info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Ashley S. Harrison, M. Scott Niederjohn, J. R. Clark

Economists define money as anything that is generally accepted in payment for goods and services or in the repayment of debts.1 Paper money and coins clearly fit this definition, but deposits in checking accounts are so widely accepted that they are also considered in the narrowest definition of money used by the Federal Reserve, called “M1.” M1 is the sum of all currency, checkable deposits, and travelers checks. How about savings accounts? These amounts are so quickly convertible into M1 that many economists consider them money too, part of a larger total called M2 that includes all of M1 plus all small denomination time deposits (bank CDs), savings accounts, and money market account balances. M2 then represents a form of money that is less “liquid” (less easily converted and spent) than M1. In addition to this definition, money is expected to satisfy three functions: serve as a medium of exchange, a store of value, and a unit of account. In this article, we will explore what Bitcoin is and why it has been so prevalent in the news of late. Further, we will apply the three functions of money to Bitcoin and discuss whether it should be considered a form of money. Some of the benefits and problems associated with Bitcoin will be discussed along with its future potential.

Zoë Thomas

Argentines are turning to virtual currency transactions to circumvent the government-imposed foreign exchange rate

Denis Dupré, Jean-François Ponsot, Jean‐Michel Servet

Le bitcoin est un element emblematique du developpement des crypto-monnaies. Nous montrons qu'il ne peut etre considere comme un commun contrairement a la propagande que sa promotion necessite. Nous nous interrogerons sur le fait qu'il puisse etre considere comme une monnaie avant de souligner que cet instrument financier contribuerait plutot a participer a detruire les communs ou au moins a ne jamais les servir

Gabrielle Durana

Doing without banks is a recurring utopia which found new life after the subprime crisis and gave birth to the « bitcoin », a digital currency which rapidly created speculation. But what is the real importance of this invention ?

Boon Seng Tan, Kin‐Yew Low

There is yet any official guidance on the financial reporting of Bitcoin transaction from the standard setters as the crypto-currency become increasingly popular and tax accounting guidance begin to appear in 2014. Designed as a decentralized currency, Bitcoin will not become a reporting currency and will instead complement fiat money. We argue that the accounting principle of faithful representation requires interpreting the economic substance for financial reporting that varies with reporting entity: trading firms recognize Bitcoin like a foreign currency and measure the revenue, or expense, at the equivalent amount of the reporting currency; digital currency exchanges recognize Bitcoin as goods in line with tax accounting treatment. An Economica paper by Radford (1945) describing cigarette being used as commodity money in a POW camp has alluded to this economic basis. This paper applies accounting principle to a practical issue and contributes to the thinking process which may help standard setter issue an interpretation.

David G. Birch

No abstract is available for this record.

Filipe Drebes Scarinci

Os mais diversos sistemas monetários foram experimentados pela socidade até chegarmos no modelo atual e há poucos indícios de que este deva ser o último e definitivo. Existe uma insatisfação com o sistema vigente e com o grande poder que as autoridades monetárias adquiriram nos últimos anos. Novos modelos vêm surgindo nas mais diversas áreas, e uma das alternativas que se desenha para o arranjo financeiro é o Bitcoin, um sistema monetário completamente descentralizado, que se utiliza da tecnologia pessoa-a-pessoa para transformar o modo como os indivíduos se relacionam. O trabalho se propõe a analisar a origem, as características, o funcionamento e as inovações trazidas pelo sistema Bitcoin, comparando a criptomoeda às outras moedas tradicionais estudadas na literatura econômica. Em especial, trata de analisar a factibilidade do Bitcoin enquanto moeda.

Odile Lakomski-Laguerre, Ludovic Desmedt

Depuis quelques années, nous assistons à l’émergence de monnaies d’un genre nouveau, reposant sur des procédés cryptographiques, gérées en pair à pair selon un consensus distribué. La plus représentative d’entre elles, le Bitcoin, est lancée après la crise financière de 2008 et vient contester un ordre monétaire fondé sur le crédit et le pouvoir bancaire. Ces crypto-monnaies viennent heurter la conception traditionnelle de la monnaie : unitaire, souveraine, territoriale et centralisée. Par conséquent, elles interrogent la théorie et renouvellent le débat sur la nature de la monnaie. Dans ce papier, nous proposons d’analyser le Bitcoin au filtre d’une théorie institutionnaliste de la monnaie. En tant qu’institution sociale, la monnaie est plus qu’une technologie, car elle participe à la construction d’un espace marchand s’articulant avec un ordre socio-économique. C’est pourquoi nous mettons en évidence les arguments de la contestation et les racines idéologiques qui sous-tendent le système Bitcoin : décentralisation, anti-étatisme (cryptage) et naturalisation de la monnaie (minage). En mettant en avant la notion centrale de confiance, nous nous intéressons ensuite à la capacité du projet Bitcoin à construire un ordre monétaire, certes alternatif, mais stable.

Thibault Darcillon

This article focuses on the impact of the process of financialization on two central labor market institutions, workers' bargaining power and employment protection legislation, in 16 OECD countries from 1970 to 2009. Financialization is described as a finance-led regime of accumulation and as the emergence of a shareholder value maximization strategy. Using various mechanisms at the micro and macro levels, empirical work has investigated the relationship between the type of financial relations and the agents' capacities of maintaining strong encompassing labor market institutions. I argue that the process of financialization will exert strong pressures on labor markets toward more eroded/decentralized bargaining institutions and more flexible employment relations. This article proposes an updated indicator of workers' bargaining power and various measures of financialization. Using panel data models, our main results point out that increased financialization is clearly associated with a reduction in workers' bargaining power and in the strictness of employment protection.

Rafael Ramos da Luz

Despite the predominance of liberal ideology in the United States since its formation as an independent nation, the US has consistently expanded its capacity to finance and support the efforts of the private sector to create and commercialize new technologies in strategic sectors. As such, this study aims to identify and describe the characteristics of interventions by the American state to foster economic development. It also seeks to analyze how these characteristics fit within the different typologies of the Developmental State. A case study was conducted on the nanotechnology sector in the US, complemented by mini case studies on the computation, semiconductor, and biotechnology sectors. The empirical findings were compared to the ideal types of the Regulatory State, the Developmental Bureaucratic State, and the Developmental Network State. These ideal types were constructed using the Weberian model using concepts from the literature pertaining to the Developmental State. This study concludes that the American Developmental State has adopted a model that is closely related to the Developmental Network State, acting in a fragmented and decentralized manner, dedicated to promoting collaboration and joint action with the private sector. This is in line with the triple helix model (industry, academia, and government) with the intention of fostering development and growth of high-technology sectors, which are considered economically, scientifically, or militarily strategic. Furthermore, the State also carries out various actions designed to facilitate transforming technological innovations into commercialized products, with the idea of ensuring the country's scientific and technological leadership, its international competitiveness, the vitality of its domestic industry, and the dynamism of the national economy.

Nancy Neslund

This paper explores the recent development of digital currencies—currencies which are creatures of the Internet, self-authenticating, and usable worldwide by members of the general public to engage in the same types of direct, one-to-one transactions that daily occur using government-issued currencies. At present, the most developed digital currency measured by market capitalization is Bitcoin, which will be used as a proxy for the general phenomenon. Not surprisingly, as Bitcoin’s circulation and visibility has increased, so have the number of practical and legal issues surrounding its use. Some of these will be explored in this paper, with a view to considering the utility and viability of such currencies for widespread, global use.

Jean-Paul Delahaye

No abstract is available for this record.

Joseph G. Haubrich, Ashley Orr

You can’t hold a bitcoin in your hand, but you can spend one. Bitcoins are digital representations of value, a fiat currency based on cryptography—the use of encryption to store and transfer value securely. Transactions using bitcoins are decentralized in that they are validated and certified through a network of users rather than one central administrative site.

Martin Chevalier, Benjamin Vignolles

Article disponible en ligne à l'adresse https://shs.cairn

Frederik The

No abstract is available for this record.

Ludovic Desmedt

Bicoin, Cryto-monnaies

C. P. Chandrasekhar

Conceptual discussions on development alternatives often tend to swing between extremes. This is true, for example, when the discussion centers on inward versus outward oriented strategies, open versus regulated capital accounts or centralized versus decentralized decision-making. Such ‘extremism’ affects actual decision-making as well. But more often than not, ground realities and/or pragmatism induced by circumstances forces policy to lag behind advocates of change when economic transitions occur. Moreover, institutions and policy instruments that are seen as typical of one kind of regime often persist, even if in differentiated or changed form and serving different objectives, when the policy environment varies or changes. But the element of similarity or continuity is substantially different across geographies and time. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Ashima Goyal

After experiencing stagnation for much of the post-independence period, India has shown considerable dynamism in processes and outcomes since the mid-eighties. The post-reform Indian Economy has defied established economic patterns and in the process created a few paradoxes. This book aims to identify policies, institutions and incentives that have worked, and constraints that have emerged in India's growth prospects. More than underdevelopment, the book analyses the bottlenecks that emerge as change occurs, to minimize the chances of being trapped into the dated habits of thought. It takes opportunity from rapidly transforming Indian economy to analyse out-of-equilibrium behaviour and understand the dynamics of non-conventional growth path. Contributors to this volume - Aradhna Aggarwal is Senior Fellow, National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi; Rukmini Banerjee is at ASER Centre and Pratham, New Delhi, India; Sanjay Banerji is Professor at University of Nottingham, United Kingdom; Laveesh Bhandari is Head of Indicus Analytics; Rekha Bhangaonkar is Research Associate at School of Management, IIT-Bombay; Rajesh Chakrabarti is Professor, Indian School of Business, Mohali Campus, India; Romar Correa is Reserve Bank of India Professor of Monetary Economics at the University of Mumbai; Ashwini Deshpande is Professor, Delhi School of Economics, Delhi; Mahendra Dev is Director (Vice Chancellor) at Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research; Meghna Dutta is a doctoral research scholar in economics at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta; Krishna Gangopadhyay is a freelance economist based in Delhi; Ashima Goyal is Professor at IGIDR, has published widely on institutional and open economy macroeconomics, international finance and governance and has participated in research projects with ADB, DEA-GOI, GDN, RBI, UN ESCAP and WB; Raghabendra Jha (PhD Columbia, FWIF) is Rajiv Gandhi Chair Professor of Economics and Executive Director at Australia South Asia Research Centre, Australian National University; Shikha Jha is Principal Economist at Asian Development Bank, Philippines; Pram Jit is lecturer at Delhi School of Economics, Delhi, India; K.J. Joseph is at Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram, India; Kale Sumita is Chief Economist at Indicus Analytics, New Delhi; K. Kanagasabapathy is Director, EPW Research Foundation, Mumbai; Saibal Kar is Faculty of Economics at the Centre for Studies in Social; Renu Kohli is Lead Economist, DEA-ICRIER Research Programme on G20, New Delhi; Kiran Kumar is ICSSR Doctoral Fellow, Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India; Nagesh Kumar is Chief Economist of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia; Sushanta Mallick is Professor at Queen Mary University of London, London; Sriit Mishra is Associate Professor at IGIDR; Arup Mitra is Professor of Economics at the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi; Deepak Mohanty is Executive Director, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai, India; Rahul Mukherji is Associate Professor in the South Asian Studies Programme at the National University of Singapore; Rupayan Pal is Associate Professor, IGIDR, Mumbai, India; Shruti Pandey is Research Officer with EPW Research Foundation, Mumbai; Vijaylaxmi Pandey is Associate Professor at Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research; Abhay Pethe is Chair Professor at the Vibhooti Shukla Centre of Urban Economics and Regional Development, Department of Economics, University of Mumbai, Mumbai; Rohit Prasad is Associate Professor of Economics at MDI Gurgaon; T.R. Raghunandan currently advises state governments, international organizations, NGOs, and research institutions on decentralized public governance and anti-corruption; A.V. Raja is Professor at University of Hyderabad, India; T.T. Rammohan is Professor of Finance and Economics at IIM Ahmedabad; Bandi Ram Prasad is President, Financial Technologies Knowledge Management Company Limited, Mumbai, India; Francis X. Rathinam is Senior Fellow at Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi, India; Bibhas Saha is Senior Lecturer at the University of East Anglia, England; Jayati Sarkar is Professor at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India. She is the editor of the Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics; Subrata Sarkar is Professor at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR), Mumbai, India; Gita Sen is Professor of Public Policy at the Indian Institute of Management Bangalore; Anurag Sharma is Senior Research Fellow in Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Australia; Parthasarathi Shome is Adviser to the Finance Minister of India; Soumyen Sikdar is currently Professor of Economics at IIM Calcutta; Ram Singh is Professor, Delhi School of Economics, Delhi, India; Siddharth Sinha is Professor, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India; P.V. Srinivasan is Evaluation Specialist at the Asian Development Bank; S. Sriraman is Walchand Hirachand Professor of Transport Economics, Department of Economics, University of Mumbai; Vaidehi Tandel is a PhD scholar at the Department of Economics, University of Mumbai; Wilima Wadhwa is at ASER Centre, New Delhi, India and University of California, Irvine.

Kevin Dowd

No abstract is available for this record.

Paolo Tasca, Calebe de Roure

No abstract is available for this record.