Fictions and frictions: Promises, transaction costs and the innovation of network technologies

Pesch, Udo; Ishmaev, Georgy

doi:10.1177/0306312719838339

Cited by 18 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A lot of other concepts have been used to explore Fin-Tech. Transaction costs (Pesch and Ishamaev, 2019), network effects (Zachariadis and Ozcan, 2017), and information asymmetries (Sangwan et al, 2019) in FinTech are studied in relation to DPE and on their own. Shim and Shin (2016) use Actor Network Theory, highlighting the role of non-human actors.…”

Section: Theoretical Approaches To Fintechmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Geography I: Exploring FinTech – Maps and concepts

Wójcik

2020

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the first of two reports on FinTech, I review definitions, roots and taxonomies of FinTech, survey studies charting FinTech development, and theoretical approaches to FinTech. Emerging empirical research shows a dynamic growth of FinTech characterized by heterogeneity and diversity. Ecosystems, financial ecologies, and digital platform economies are the most popular approaches to FinTech, and I argue that they can be used fruitfully in combination with more established concepts, such as networks and agglomeration. Overall, I show that FinTech research is in a state of flux concerning concepts and empirics, and highlight the potential of geography to tame the beast.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Approaches To Fintechmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Geography I: Exploring FinTech – Maps and concepts

Wójcik

2020

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the XRP Ledger is not only an interoperability layer between payment systems: it is itself a payment system, with its standards, requirements, and rules. Frictionlessness decentralization and seamless circulation remain promises rather than realities: the logistical space is fraught with frictions, fictions, and conflicts (Pesch andIshmaev 2019, Schneider 2019). Ripple's research team understood this paradox when it realized that 'the world will never agree on one Ledger', yet the XRP Ledger is itself a ledger (Thomas 2016, p. 13).…”

Section: ) Define Lets and Time Banks Thuslymentioning

confidence: 99%

Steps towards an ecology of money infrastructures: materiality and cultures of Ripple

Rella

2020

Journal of Cultural Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Money's materiality produces an ontological conundrum for social theory: should the analysis of money foreground the objects used as money, or the abstract relations that underpin it? Provoked by the emergence of cryptocurrencies, this paper develops a conceptualization of money as a technological and social infrastructure which directly addresses this theoretical impasse. Cryptocurrencies' sole form of material existence coincides with their underpinning infrastructure of records, accounting and payments. In the past decade, cryptocurrencies have skyrocketed in number, and they have been applied to a host of use cases. This paper focuses on cross-border payments through the example of the fintech company Ripple, the cryptocurrency XRP, and the design of the XRP Ledger. Combining literatures from the social theory of money, science and technology studies and new materialisms, this article develops steps towards an ecological conceptualization of money infrastructures. Infrastructures, understood ecologically, include devices, active forms, and imaginaries in seamless webs of mutual relations of co-evolution. These ecologies are always potentially prone to slippage, dissolution, disassembling, reassembling and reappropriation, dependence, and competition.

show abstract

“…In order to assess transaction costs, some researchers have identified their contents with opportunity costs (see e.g., Bigelow et al 2019;Jouan et al 2019). Other methodological problems include transaction costs, such as loss of reputation, loss of trust in a supplier, and others that are difficult to express in monetary terms (see e.g., Meinlschmidt et al 2018;Pesch and Ishmaev 2019).…”

Section: Transaction Costs Of Actors Of Reorganized Universitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership and Effective Institutional Economics Design in the Context of Education Reforms

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, the most typical reforms in higher education are conducted through the reorganization of universities either in the form of a merger, acquisition, or new status attainment. As a result, universities which educate local leaders for their respective national economies and have a profound impact on the regional economic development, as well as the composition of the labor market and intellectual potential, often encounter negative economic outcomes. The reforms that are imposed by the policymakers “from above” often hamper the development of universities and prevent them from fulfilling their roles described above. The process of reforming higher education in Russia is in many ways similar to the changes in the higher education systems of other European countries, in particular in post-Communist transition economies. Firstly, this process went through the integration into the global market of educational services. Secondly, it proceeded with the rethinking of the role of the university as a self-sustainable business organization. Thirdly, it was concluded by an increase in the demand and accessibility of education using the advancements offered by the digital technologies. Our paper argues that focused and well-balanced economic institutional design might be required for the sustainable development of reorganized leading universities. The project perspective implies that it is necessary to develop an institutional design in relation to what the organization seeks to achieve (either as its regulator or reformer) and how it intends to achieve these goals. In connection with the foregoing, we propose the following principles of designing effective institutions for the sustainable development of reorganized universities: (i) preservation of education as a “mixed” good (i.e., one that has the features of both public and private goods); (ii) transparency of decision making; (iii) complementarity of institutional change; and last but not least (iv) reduction in transaction costs.

show abstract

Fictions and frictions: Promises, transaction costs and the innovation of network technologies

Cited by 18 publications

References 45 publications

Financial Geography I: Exploring FinTech – Maps and concepts

Financial Geography I: Exploring FinTech – Maps and concepts

Steps towards an ecology of money infrastructures: materiality and cultures of Ripple

Leadership and Effective Institutional Economics Design in the Context of Education Reforms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About