1. bookVolume 7 (2017): Issue 2 (October 2017)
Journal Details
First Published
18 Jun 2013
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
access type Open Access

Smart Contracting: A Multidisciplinary and Proactive Approach for the EU Digital Single Market

Published Online: 10 Nov 2017
Volume & Issue: Volume 7 (2017) - Issue 2 (October 2017)
Page range: 208 - 246
Journal Details
First Published
18 Jun 2013
Publication timeframe
2 times per year

Smart contracting (SC) is a proactive proposal to operationalize the relational contract theory for the upgrade and improvement of legally relevant exchange. The dynamic institutional environment of the European Union (EU) is a suitable framework for this proposal. SC addresses the interests of the business management, law and information technology practices with a perspective of influence in digital exchange, communication processes and other human and human-machine interactions. This position paper restates the advantages of the concept by highlighting the practical transition pathway SC offers to moderate the growing haste towards the embeddedness of exchange in automated and distributed models. This theoretical contribution supports the systematization of the proactive and legal design research field, and explains the characterization, operationalization and specification of the SC concept.


Ahmadjian, C. L. (2016), ‘Comparative institutional analysis and institutional complexity,’ Journal of Management Studies, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.1217810.1111/joms.12178Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Argyres, N. & Mayer, J. (2007), ‘Contract design as a firm capability: An integration of learning and transaction cost perspectives,’ Academy of Management Review, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1060–1077. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.2658573910.5465/AMR.2007.26585739Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ayres, I. & Braithwaite, J. (1992), Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bagley, C. E. (2005), Winning legally: How legally astute management teams can use the law to create and capture value, Division of Research, Harvard Business School.Search in Google Scholar

Baldwin, R. & Black, J. (2008), ‘Really responsive regulation,’ The Modern Law Review, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 59–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2008.00681.x10.1111/j.1468-2230.2008.00681.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Barnett, R. E. (1986), ‘A consent theory of contract,’ Columbia L. Rev., vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 269–321. https://doi.org/10.2307/112270510.2307/1122705Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Barnett, R. E. (1992), ‘Conflicting visions: a critique of Ian Macneil’s relational theory of contract,’ Va. L. Rev., vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 1175–1206. https://doi.org/10.2307/107339510.2307/1073395Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Barocas, S. & Selbst, A. D. (2016), ‘Big data’s disparate impact,’ Cal. L. Rev., vol. 104, no. 3, p. 671. http://doi.org/10.15779/Z38BG3110.15779/Z38BG31Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Berger-Walliser, G.; Barton, T. D. & Haapio, H. (2017), ‘From visualization to legal design: A collaborative and creative process,’ Am. Bus. Law J., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 347–392. http://doi.org/10.1111/ablj.1210110.1111/ablj.12101Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Bilz, K. & Nadler, J. (2013), ‘Law, moral attitudes, and behavioral change,’ in E. Zamir & D. Teichman (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics & the Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945474.013.001010.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945474.013.0010Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Braithwaite, J. (2011), ‘The essence of responsive regulation,’ University of British Columbia L. Rev., vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 475–520.Search in Google Scholar

Bridoux, F. & Stoelhorst, J. W. (2014), ‘Microfoundations for stakeholder theory: Managing stakeholders with heterogeneous motives,’ Strategic Management Journal, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.208910.1002/smj.2089Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Böhme, R. & Köpsell, S. (2010). ‘Trained to accept?: a field experiment on consent dialogs,’ in Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Atlanta: ACM, pp. 2403–2406. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.175368910.1145/1753326.1753689Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Cafaggi, F. (2007), ‘Self-regulation in European Contract Law,’ European Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 163–218.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, D. (2004), Ian Macneil and the relational theory of contract, Center for Legal Dynamics of Advanced Market Societies (CDAMS) Discussion Paper, Kobe University.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, D. (2004), ‘The incompleteness of our understanding of the law and economics of relational contract,’ Wis. L. Rev., no. 2, pp. 645–678.Search in Google Scholar

Christidis, K. & Devetsikiotis, M. (2016), ‘Blockchains and smart contracts for the internet of things,’ IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp. 2292–2303. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.256633910.1109/ACCESS.2016.2566339Search in Google Scholar

Clack, C. D.; Bakshi, V. A. & Braine, L. (2016), ‘Smart Contract Templates: essential requirements and design options,’ arXiv e-print, arXiv:1612.04496.Search in Google Scholar

Commonwealth of Australia (2000), Industry Self-Regulation in Consumer Markets, Report commissioned by the Australian Ministry of Finances and Regulation, August 2000. Retrieved from https://archive.treasury.gov.au/documents/1131/HTML/docshell.asp?URL=02_chap1.asp [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, EU Regulatory Fitness, COM/2012/746 final, Strasbourg, 12.12.2012. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/better_regulation/documents/com_2013_en.pdf [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Communication from the Commission. Action plan ‘Simplifying and improving the regulatory environment’, COM/2002/0278 final. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52002DC0278 [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Cortés, P., ed. (2016), The New Regulatory Framework for Consumer Dispute Resolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198766353.001.000110.1093/acprof:oso/9780198766353.001.0001Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Crawford, K. & Calo, R. (2016), ‘There is a blind spot in AI research,’ Nature, vol. 538, pp. 311–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/53831110.1038/538311Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Cruz, C. O. & Marques, R. C. (2013), ‘Flexible contracts to cope with uncertainty in public–private partnerships,’ International Journal of Project Management, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.09.00610.1016/j.ijproman.2012.09.006Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Dalhuisen, J. H. (2013), Dalhuisen on Transnational Comparative, Commercial, Financial and Trade Law Volume 2: Contract and Movable Property Law, London & New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

De Cremer, D.; Nguyen, B. & Simkin, L. (2016), ‘The integrity challenge of the Internet-of-Things (IoT): on understanding its dark side,’ Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 32, nos. 1–2, pp. 1–14. http://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2016.124751710.1080/0267257X.2016.1247517Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

De Matos, E.; Amaral, L. A. & Hessel, F. (2017), ‘Context-aware systems: technologies and challenges in Internet of Everything environments,’ in J. Batalla, G. Mastorakis, C. Mavromoustakis & E. Pallis (eds.) Beyond the Internet of Things, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50758-3_110.1007/978-3-319-50758-3_1Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

DiMaggio, P. & Powell, W. (1983), ‘The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields,’ American Sociological Review, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/209510110.2307/2095101Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

DiMatteo, L. A. (2010), ‘Strategic contracting: Contract law as a source of competitive advantage,’ American Business Law Journal, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 727–794. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1714.2010.01108.x10.1111/j.1744-1714.2010.01108.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’), 17.07.2000. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0031:en:HTML [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Ebersold, K. & Glass, R. (2016), ‘The Internet of Things: a cause for ethnical concern,’ Issues in Information Systems, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 145–151.Search in Google Scholar

EESC (2017), ‘EU Digital Market: consumer protection must be top priority,’ European Economic and Social Committee. Retrieved from http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.press-releases.41899 [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

European Commission (2001), ‘Mandelkern Group on Better Regulation,’ Final Report. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/better_regulation/documents/mandelkern_report.pdf [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

European Commission (2015a), Review of EU Consumer Law (Fitness Check), Consumers. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/consumer_rights/review/index_en.htm [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

European Commission (2015b), ‘Shaping the Digital Single Market,’ Digital Single Market Strategy, 25.03.2015. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-single-market [accessed Oct 2015]Search in Google Scholar

European Commission (2016), ‘Alternative and online dispute resolution (ADR/ODR),’ Consumers. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/solving_consumer_disputes/non-judicial_redress/adr-odr/index_en.htm [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

European Commission (2017), Results of the Fitness Check of consumer and marketing law and of the evaluation of the Consumer Rights Directive, Justice and Consumers, 29.05.2017. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=59332 [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Fairfield, J. (2014), ‘Smart contracts, Bitcoin bots, and consumer protection,’ Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 35–299.Search in Google Scholar

Feigenson, N. (2014), ‘The visual in law: Some problems for legal theory,’ Law, Culture and the Humanities, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/174387211142112610.1177/1743872111421126Search in Google Scholar

Foss, N. J. & Klein, P. G. (2016), ‘Reflections on the 2016 Nobel Memorial Prize for contract theory,’ Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 167–180. https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v9i2.23410.23941/ejpe.v9i2.234Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Freeman, R. E. (1994), ‘The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions,’ Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 409–421. https://doi.org/10.2307/385734010.2307/3857340Search in Google Scholar

Goodin, R. E. (1998), The Theory of Institutional Design, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gunningham, N.; Grabosky, P. & Sinclair, D. (1998), Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gunningham, N. & Sinclair, D. (1999), ‘Designing smart regulation,’ in Economic Aspects of Environmental Compliance Assurance, OECD Global Forum on Sustainable Development.Search in Google Scholar

Hesselink, M. W. (2015), ‘Democratic contract law,’ European Review of Contract Law, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 81–126. https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2015-000610.1515/ercl-2015-0006Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hollander-Blumoff, R. (2016), ‘Fairness beyond the adversary system: procedural justice norms for legal negotiation,’ Fordham L. Rev., vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 2081–2095.Search in Google Scholar

Hussain, F. (2017), ‘Internet of Everything,’ in Internet of Things: Building Blocks and Business Models, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55405-1_110.1007/978-3-319-55405-1_1Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

IACCM (n.d.), International Association for Contract & Commercial Management [Home page]. Retrieved from http://www.iaccm.com/ [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Ivens, B. S. (2002), ‘Governance norms in relational exchange: What we do know and what we do not know,’ in Proceedings of the 18th Annual IMP Conference, vol. 5, no. 7, Dijon: IMP.Search in Google Scholar

Izmalkov, S. & Sonin, K. (2017), ‘Basics of contract theory,’ Voprosy ekonomiki, no. 1.Search in Google Scholar

Jaakkola, K. (2004), ‘A way to successful and strategic contract management,’ Nordnet-International Project Management Conference, Finland.Search in Google Scholar

Jackson, D. (2016), ‘Human-centered legal tech: integrating design in legal education,’ The Law Teacher, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 82–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2016.114646810.1080/03069400.2016.1146468Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kähler, L. (2013), ‘Contract-management duties as a new regulatory device,’ Law & Contemp. Probs., vol. 76, pp. 89–103. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.228568910.2139/ssrn.2285689Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kar, R. B. (2016), ‘Contract as empowerment,’ The University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 82, pp. 759–834.Search in Google Scholar

Kerikmäe, T.; Hamulak, O. & Chochia, A. (2016), ‘A historical study of contemporary human rights: deviation or extinction?’ Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 98−115. https://doi.org/10.11590/abhps.2016.2.0610.11590/abhps.2016.2.06Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kerikmäe, T. & Rull, A., eds. (2016), The Future of Law and eTechnologies, Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26896-510.1007/978-3-319-26896-5Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kerikmäe, T. & Särav, S. (2015), ‘Legal impediments in the EU to new technologies on the example of e-residency, Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 71–90.Search in Google Scholar

Keskitalo, P. (2006), Contracts+Risks+Management=Contractual Risk Management? PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø, Norway.Search in Google Scholar

Koulu, R. (2016), ‘Blockchains and online dispute resolution: smart contracts as an alternative to enforcement,’ Scripted: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society, vol. 13, no. 1. http://doi.org/10.2966/scrip.130116.4010.2966/scrip.130116.40Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Lumineau, F. & Malhotra, D. (2011), ‘Shadow of the contract: How contract structure shapes interfirm dispute resolution,’ Strategic Management Journal, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 532–555. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.89010.1002/smj.890Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Macaulay, S. (1963), ‘Non-contractual relations in business: A preliminary study,’ American Sociological Review, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 55–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/209045810.2307/2090458Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Macher, J. T. & Richman, B. D. (2008), ‘Transaction cost economics: An assessment of empirical research in the social sciences,’ Business and Politics, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–63. https://doi.org/10.2202/1469-3569.121010.2202/1469-3569.1210Search in Google Scholar

Mack, E. (1981), ‘In defense of ‘Unbridled’ freedom of contract,’ American Journal of Economics and Sociology, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01366.x10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01366.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Macneil, I. R. (1980), The New Social Contract: An Inquiry into Modern Contractual Relations, New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.10.2307/1288310Search in Google Scholar

Macneil, I. R. (1983), ‘Values in contract: internal and external,’ Nw. UL Rev., vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 340–418.Search in Google Scholar

Macneil, I. R. (1999), ‘Relational contract theory: challenges and queries,’ Nw. UL Rev., vol. 94, no. 3, pp. 877–907.Search in Google Scholar

Malerba, F. (2002), ‘Sectoral systems of innovation and production,’ Research Policy, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00139-110.1016/S0048-7333(01)00139-1Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Marshall, K.; Picou, S. & Schlichtmann, J. R. (2004), ‘Technological disasters, litigation stress, and the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms,’ Law & Policy, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 289–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0265-8240.2004.00013.x10.1111/j.0265-8240.2004.00013.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

McLaughlin, J.; McLaughlin, J. & Elaydi, R. (2014), ‘Ian Macneil and relational contract theory: evidence of impact. Journal of Management History,’ vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMH-05-2012-004210.1108/JMH-05-2012-0042Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Menkel-Meadow, C. (2013), ‘Crisis in legal education or the other things law students should be learning and doing,’ McGeorge L. Rev., vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 133–160.Search in Google Scholar

Menkel-Meadow, C. (2017), Dispute Processing and Conflict Resolution: Theory, Practice and Policy, Ashgate: Routledge.10.4324/9781315257600Search in Google Scholar

Norton Rose Fulbright (2016), ‘Norton Rose Fulbright releases 2016 Litigation Trends Annual Survey’, 15 September. Retrieved from http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/news/142350/norton-rose-fulbright-releases-2016-litigation-trends-annual-survey [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Nylén, D. & Holmström, J. (2015), ‘Digital innovation strategy: A framework for diagnosing and improving digital product and service innovation,’ Business Horizons, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.09.00110.1016/j.bushor.2014.09.001Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Nyman-Metcalf, K. & Täks, E. (2013), ‘Simplifying the law—can ICT help us?’ International Journal of Law and Information Technology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 239–268. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eat00310.1093/ijlit/eat003Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The proactive law approach: a further step towards better regulation at EU level,’ 2009/C 175/05, 28.7.2009. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52008IE1905 [accessed Oct 2017]Search in Google Scholar

Passera, S. (2012), ‘Enhancing contract usability and user experience through visualization—an experimental evaluation,’ in Information visualisation (iv): 2012 16th international conference on Information Visualisation, IEEE, pp. 376–382. https://doi.org/10.1109/IV.2012.6910.1109/IV.2012.69Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Passera, S. & Haapio, H. (2013), ‘Transforming contracts from legal rules to usercentered communication tools: a human-information interaction challenge,’ Communication Design Quarterly Review, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1145/2466489.246649810.1145/2466489.2466498Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Poppo, L. & Zenger, T. (2002), ‘Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements?’ Strategic Management Journal, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 707–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.24910.1002/smj.249Search in Google Scholar

Posner, R. A. (2005), ‘The law and economics of contract interpretation,’ Tex. L. Rev., vol. 83, pp. 1581–2185.Search in Google Scholar

Rindova, V. P. & Kotha, S. (2001), ‘Continuous “morphing”: Competing through dynamic capabilities, form, and function,’ Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1263–1280. https://doi.org/10.2307/306940010.2307/3069400Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Roach, M. (2016), ‘Toward a new language of legal drafting,’ J. High Tech. L., vol. 17, pp. 43–177.Search in Google Scholar

Romzek, B. S. & Johnston, J. M. (2002), ‘Effective contract implementation and management: A preliminary model,’ Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 423–453. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a00354110.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003541Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Rouvroy, A. & Stiegler, B. (2016), ‘The digital regime of truth: from the algorithmic governmentality to a new rule of law,’ transl. by A. Nony & B. Dillet, La Deleuziana: Online Journal of Philosophy, vol. 3, pp. 6–27.Search in Google Scholar

Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2006), ‘Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will?’ Journal of Personality, vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 1557–1586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x17083658Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Schulte-Nölke, H. (2015), ‘The brave new world of EU consumer law—without consumers, or even without law?’ Journal of European Consumer and Market Law, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 135–139. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.265707110.2139/ssrn.2657071Search in Google Scholar

Schwartz, A. & Scott, R. E. (2010), ‘Contract interpretation redux,’ The Yale Law Journal, vol. 109, no. 5, pp. 926–964.Search in Google Scholar

Solarte-Vasquez, M. C.; Järv, N. & Nyman-Metcalf, K. (2016), ‘Usability factors in transactional design and smart contracting,’ in The Future of Law and eTechnologies, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 149–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26896-5_810.1007/978-3-319-26896-5_8Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Solarte-Vasquez, M. C. & Rungi, M. (2017, forthcoming), ‘Perceptions on collaboration affecting the viability of the Smart Contracting approach,’ Journal of Management and Change.Search in Google Scholar

Stephenson, P. (2013), ‘Twenty years of multi-level governance: “Where does it come from? What is it? Where is it going?”,’ Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 817–837. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.78181810.1080/13501763.2013.781818Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Stinchcombe, A. L. (1985), ‘Contracts as hierarchical documents,’ in A. Stinchcombe & C. Heimer (eds.) Organization Theory and Project Management, Oslo: N.U. Press.Search in Google Scholar

Stoker, G. (1998), ‘Governance as theory: five propositions,’ International Social Science Journal, vol. 50, no. 155, pp. 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451.0010610.1111/1468-2451.00106Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Susskind, R. & Susskind, D. (2015), The Future of the Professions: How Technology will Transform the Work of Human Experts, Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198713395.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Szabo, N. (1997), ‘The idea of smart contracts,’ Nick Szabo’s Papers and Concise Tutorials, 6.Search in Google Scholar

Teece, D. J. (2007), ‘Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance,’ Strategic Management Journal, vol. 28, no. 13, pp. 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.64010.1002/smj.640Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Termeer, C. J.; Dewulf, A.; Breeman, G. & Stiller, S. J. (2015), ‘Governance capabilities for dealing wisely with wicked problems,’ Administration & Society, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 680–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539971246919510.1177/0095399712469195Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Tufte, E. R. & Graves-Morris, P. R. (1983), The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, vol. 2, no. 9, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Search in Google Scholar

Van Ham, P. (2013), European Integration and the Postmodern Condition: Governance, Democracy, Identity, Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203453193Search in Google Scholar

Van Marrewijk, M. (2003), ‘Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion,’ Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:102333121224710.1023/A:1023331212247Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Van Oosterhout, J. H.; Heugens, P. P. & Kaptein, M. (2006), ‘The internal morality of contracting: Advancing the contractualist endeavor in business ethics,’ Academy of Management Review, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 521–539. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.2131891510.5465/AMR.2006.21318915Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Voss, J. P.; Bauknecht, D. & Kemp, R., eds. (2006), Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/978184720026610.4337/9781847200266Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Voß, J. P., & Bornemann, B. (2011), ‘The politics of reflexive governance: challenges for designing adaptive management and transition management,’ Ecology and Society, vol. 16, no. 2. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04051-16020910.5751/ES-04051-160209Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Wagner, B. (2016), Draft Report on the Human Rights Dimensions of Algorithms. Committee of Experts on Internet Intermediaries, Council of Europe, MSINET (2016)06.Search in Google Scholar

Wilhelmsson, T. (2004), ‘Varieties of welfarism in European contract law,’ European Law Journal, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 712–733. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2004.00240.x10.1111/j.1468-0386.2004.00240.xSearch in Google Scholar

Williamson, O. E. (1979), ‘Transaction-cost economics: the governance of contractual relations,’ The Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 233–261. https://doi.org/10.1086/46694210.1086/466942Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Williamson, O. E. (1981), ‘The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach,’ American Journal of Sociology, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 548–577. https://doi.org/10.1086/22749610.1086/227496Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Zahra, S. A. & George, G. (2002), ‘The net-enabled business innovation cycle and the evolution of dynamic capabilities,’ Information Systems Research, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 147–150. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre. DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ziefle, M. (2002), ‘The influence of user expertise and phone complexity on performance, ease of use and learnability of different mobile phones,’ Behaviour & Information Technology, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/014492902100004853810.1080/0144929021000048538Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo