我们还需要金融中介吗?去中心化金融的案例——DeFi

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Laura Grassi, Davide Lanfranchi, Alessandro Faes, F. Renga
{"title":"我们还需要金融中介吗?去中心化金融的案例——DeFi","authors":"Laura Grassi, Davide Lanfranchi, Alessandro Faes, F. Renga","doi":"10.1108/qram-03-2021-0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nDecentralized finance (DeFi), enabled by blockchain, could bring about a new financial system, where peers will interact directly, with little or no place for traditional intermediation. However, some crucial tasks cannot be left solely to an algorithm and, consequently, most DeFi applications still require human decisions. The aim of this research is to assess the role of intermediation in the light of DeFi, analysing how humans and algorithms will interact.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors based their work on a twofold qualitative methodology, first analysing publicly available secondary data, particularly from white papers and DeFi Pulse (a website providing data on DeFi solutions) and then running two focus group discussions.\n\n\nFindings\nDeFi does not eliminate financial intermediation, but enables it to be performed in new ways, where decentralization means that no single entity can hold too much power or monopoly. DeFi has, however, inherited risks from the underlying technologies that unintentionally facilitate illegal behaviour and can hamper the authorities’ supervision. The complex duality algorithm- vs human-based actions will not be solved indisputably in favour of the former, as DeFi solutions can range from requiring algorithms to play a dominant role, to enabling greater human interaction by actively involving more people.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis research contributes to the emerging debate between algorithm- and human-based intermediation, especially in relation to the standing literature on financial intermediation, where considerations made in the light of the newest theories on blockchain and DeFi are still scarce.\n","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"24","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do we still need financial intermediation? The case of decentralized finance – DeFi\",\"authors\":\"Laura Grassi, Davide Lanfranchi, Alessandro Faes, F. Renga\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/qram-03-2021-0051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nDecentralized finance (DeFi), enabled by blockchain, could bring about a new financial system, where peers will interact directly, with little or no place for traditional intermediation. However, some crucial tasks cannot be left solely to an algorithm and, consequently, most DeFi applications still require human decisions. The aim of this research is to assess the role of intermediation in the light of DeFi, analysing how humans and algorithms will interact.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe authors based their work on a twofold qualitative methodology, first analysing publicly available secondary data, particularly from white papers and DeFi Pulse (a website providing data on DeFi solutions) and then running two focus group discussions.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nDeFi does not eliminate financial intermediation, but enables it to be performed in new ways, where decentralization means that no single entity can hold too much power or monopoly. DeFi has, however, inherited risks from the underlying technologies that unintentionally facilitate illegal behaviour and can hamper the authorities’ supervision. The complex duality algorithm- vs human-based actions will not be solved indisputably in favour of the former, as DeFi solutions can range from requiring algorithms to play a dominant role, to enabling greater human interaction by actively involving more people.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis research contributes to the emerging debate between algorithm- and human-based intermediation, especially in relation to the standing literature on financial intermediation, where considerations made in the light of the newest theories on blockchain and DeFi are still scarce.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"24\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/qram-03-2021-0051\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qram-03-2021-0051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

摘要

目的由区块链支持的去中心化金融(DeFi)可能会带来一个新的金融体系,在这个体系中,同行将直接互动,传统中介的地位很少或根本没有。然而,一些关键任务不能完全由算法来完成,因此,大多数DeFi应用程序仍然需要人工决策。本研究的目的是根据DeFi评估中介的作用,分析人类和算法将如何相互作用。设计/方法/方法作者的工作基于双重定性方法,首先分析公开可用的二手数据,特别是来自白皮书和DeFi Pulse(一个提供DeFi解决方案数据的网站),然后进行两次焦点小组讨论。发现defi并没有消除金融中介,而是使其能够以新的方式进行,其中去中心化意味着任何单一实体都不能拥有过多的权力或垄断。然而,DeFi继承了底层技术的风险,这些技术无意中助长了非法行为,并可能阻碍当局的监管。复杂的二元性算法与基于人类的行为不会无可争议地有利于前者,因为DeFi解决方案的范围可以从要求算法发挥主导作用,到通过积极参与更多的人来实现更大的人类互动。独创性/价值本研究有助于在基于算法的中介和基于人的中介之间进行新的辩论,特别是在关于金融中介的现有文献中,根据区块链和DeFi的最新理论进行的考虑仍然很少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do we still need financial intermediation? The case of decentralized finance – DeFi
Purpose Decentralized finance (DeFi), enabled by blockchain, could bring about a new financial system, where peers will interact directly, with little or no place for traditional intermediation. However, some crucial tasks cannot be left solely to an algorithm and, consequently, most DeFi applications still require human decisions. The aim of this research is to assess the role of intermediation in the light of DeFi, analysing how humans and algorithms will interact. Design/methodology/approach The authors based their work on a twofold qualitative methodology, first analysing publicly available secondary data, particularly from white papers and DeFi Pulse (a website providing data on DeFi solutions) and then running two focus group discussions. Findings DeFi does not eliminate financial intermediation, but enables it to be performed in new ways, where decentralization means that no single entity can hold too much power or monopoly. DeFi has, however, inherited risks from the underlying technologies that unintentionally facilitate illegal behaviour and can hamper the authorities’ supervision. The complex duality algorithm- vs human-based actions will not be solved indisputably in favour of the former, as DeFi solutions can range from requiring algorithms to play a dominant role, to enabling greater human interaction by actively involving more people. Originality/value This research contributes to the emerging debate between algorithm- and human-based intermediation, especially in relation to the standing literature on financial intermediation, where considerations made in the light of the newest theories on blockchain and DeFi are still scarce.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信