1

Article

3

Blockchain: An Assessment of its Potential and
Challenges in Addressing Sustainability Issues

4

Maximiliano Romo 1,*, Rob Melnick 2, Dragan Boscovic 3 and Andrew Maynard 4

2

5
6
7
8
9
10

1

11

Received: date; Accepted: date; Published: date

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Abstract: Blockchain, the technology behind the worldwide-known cryptocurrency Bitcoin, offers a
new set of potential advantages and opportunities that various industries and institutions could use
to enhance their processes. Although most research and development on blockchain has focused on
applications for cryptocurrencies and the finance industry, relatively few analyses and assessments
have been conducted on how it could provide tools to address social and environmental issues. This
research, using interviews, literature review and examples of blockchain applications, explores how
this technology can be employed to address sustainability issues under the framework of three UN
Sustainable Development Goals: 2. Zero Hunger, 7. Affordable and Clean Energy, and 14. Life
Below Water. The analysis shows that blockchain has the potential to support solutions to
sustainability problems that need efficient traceability, trust, a unique ID, transparency, or a highly
secure payment system. However, the technology should not be mistaken for a panacea for
addressing sustainability issues in its current state because it is not yet mature and has not been
sufficiently tested. Expansion of blockchain as an effective tool for helping solve sustainability
challenges will require a greater understanding of the governance of blockchain, its scalability and
its potential unintended consequences for the technology to become properly integrated into the
decision-making progress.

28
29
30

Keywords: sustainability; blockchain; SDGs; Bitcoin; commonalities; challenges

School of Sustainability, Arizona State University; mromomar@asu.edu
School of Sustainability, Arizona State University; Rob.Melnick@asu.edu
3 School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering, Arizona State University;
dboscovi@asu.edu
4 School for the Future of Innovation in Society, Arizona State University; amaynar2@asu.edu
* Correspondence: mromomar@asu.edu
2

31

1. Introduction

32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Blockchain refers to the algorithm created to support a digital currency called Bitcoin which
offers a way to trade without needing banks as an intermediary [1]. There is some consensus that one
of the reasons behind the creation of Bitcoin and its decentralized nature, was the financial crisis of
2008 and the consequent distrust in banks as institutions [2,3]. Nevertheless, reducing the use of
blockchain to Bitcoin’s origin and incentives hinders society’s capacity to assess the technology and
propose new uses for it. As the first of Melvin Kranzberg’s “laws of technology” proposes,
“Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral”[4]. Even though primary motives to develop
a technology vary in every case, the innovation itself is morally and ethically instantiated [5]. And
blockchain is no exception. Beyond the initial reasons for the development of blockchain, the
technology is being developed for use in a range of industries around the world [6,7], opening the
window to look at it from different perspectives. Reijers and Coeckelbergh [8] go even further and
suggest that “[e]merging blockchain-based decentralized applications have the potential to transform
our financial system, our bureaucracies and models of governance.”
Sustainability 2019, 11, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW

www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

2 of 18

45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61

When Satoshi Nakamoto developed blockchain technology to create the cryptocurrency known
as Bitcoin [9,10], probably he- she or they- didn’t anticipate the worldwide attention it would get
almost a decade later. The purpose of blockchain, at its origin, was to support the operation of the
cryptocurrency Bitcoin without the presence of an intermediary [11]. Even though during its early
years, the existence of Bitcoin was mostly known by cryptographic enthusiasts, the cryptocurrency
has more recently caught a wider audience [12]. This increase in the popularity of Bitcoin has opened
the space to analyze its different challenges and opportunities [13–15]. Among the principal
discussion topics around Bitcoin are the significant carbon footprint of its operation [16], its
association with illegal activities [17], and its real potential to become an accepted payment method
[18,19].
Certainly, technology will play a crucial role in making progress toward addressing several of
the sustainability issues we are currently facing. Even though Bitcoin, and other cryptocurrencies,
have the potential to provide tools to address some social or environmental issues [20,21], they are
just one of the different applications of blockchain [22,23]. Thus, research focused on blockchain could
identify a more extensive set of advantages that could be used to face sustainability issues. In order
to explore the characteristics of blockchain that can provide novel alternatives to address
sustainability challenges, first, it is necessary to understand how it works.

62

1.1 Blockchain’s operation

63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70

In straightforward terms, blockchain is a new technology that enables users to handle
information securely. The technology is based on a distributed network (Figure 1) to increase its
safety. This represents a shift from regular ways of a centralized style of information storage, which
usually relies on a single server -with backup copies in some cases. Blockchain stores information not
on just a single, centralized server but, instead, on every computer participating in the network [24].
With this move from traditional methods of storing data, the likelihood of successful tampering or
hacking of information decreases [13].

71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83

Figure 1. A graphic description of the differences between a centralized, and a distributed network.

Once a piece of information is written in the blockchain, it is almost impossible to change [25].
All the information is saved in blocks and the number of records stored in every block varies among
blockchains. For example, let’s assume that only one record is stored in a block. Then, if we want to
save a new record, we will create a new block that is linked to the previous one. If we want to repeat
the process, a new block will be born, being connected to the last. Thus, we start to build a chain of
blocks, or in other words, a blockchain. But how are those blocks connected? Figure 2, which
represent a simplified version of blockchain, shows that every block will have the data inputted, a
timestamp, a unique code called hash, and the code of the previous block [9,25]. The hash is a
cryptographic code generated in function of the previous hash and all the data of the new block. For
example, in the case of Bitcoin, the data stored in the blocks are the transactions of the cryptocurrency

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

84
85
86
87

88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130

3 of 18

that have happened on the network. This structure adds a new layer of security to the technology.
Any attempt to change the data of “Block # 1” of Figure 2 would affect its hash and the hash of “Block
#2” and every block after it since they are all interconnected.

Figure 2. Creation of blocks of information: Every new block will have a timestamp, the data stored, the
previous and a new hash. The new hash is a function of all the information in the block.

The process to determine the creation of a new block, and its respective hash, is through the
consensus mechanism of the network. But reaching that consensus is not easy. Zheng, Xie, Dai, Chen,
and Wang [26] present several common approaches of consensus mechanism dealing with the
Byzantine General Problem [27] which addresses the challenge of reaching consensus in a distributed
network. While in a centralized ecosystem there is always a central participant who validates the
information and could add a new block to the chain, the Byzantine General Problem states that in a
distributed version, the lack of the aforementioned actor hampers this process. For example, the
blockchain version of Bitcoin uses a consensus method called “Proof of Work” [9] which relies on a
race based on computing power among all the participants of the network to calculate the new hash.
The first participant that calculates the correct hash, -which is validated by the rest of the network-,
earns Bitcoins as a reward, and a new block is created. This method, currently known as “mining”,
requires the consumption of a considerable amount of energy which impacts on the carbon footprint
of this cryptocurrency [16]. But, other versions of consensus protocols used by different
cryptocurrencies don’t rely on this mining process. This can considerably reduce their energy
consumption and, hence, their environmental impact as is the case of the cryptocurrencies Ripple and
Stellar.
Finally, it is interesting to highlight that there is no official definition of what blockchain is.
Different sources define the technology in different ways, highlighting or excluding features of
blockchain [28]. For example, there is an ongoing debate about the possibility of developing private
blockchains. While Bitcoin’s version of blockchain is public, meaning it is open to everyone who
wants to participate in it, a private, or permissioned, blockchain has an access control layer that
manages who can join the network, add blocks, request information, and who can participate in the
consensus process. Some argue that a private application of the technology is just a shared database,
thus, losing the characteristics of blockchain, while others support the idea that a private version of
the technology is still considered a blockchain [29]. While most of the cryptocurrencies use public
versions of blockchain allowing anyone to participate in the operation, the rest of the applications
usually relies on some version of permissioned platform to protect the information contained.
Despite the lack of a formal definition, the principal attributes of blockchain technology are its
high-security levels based on the encryption of the information, the distributed nature of the
database, and the trust around the systems due to the almost full immutability of the information
registered in the ledgers. And, as some have argued before, it is the blockchain’s ability to operate
when normal trust architectures are not enough that makes it an interesting tool to analyze.
The concept of “trust” is a very important aspect of blockchain technology, one that has garnered
increasing attention. Werbach identifies four types of trust architectures [30]. The first one, called
peer-to-peer trust, is the one operating between people when they trust each other. The second one,
Leviathan or institutional trust, exists when an institution allows trust among parties due to the
government system’s capacity to resolve any dispute. The third one, named intermediary trust,
operates when the parties do not trust each other, but they do trust an intermediary organization –
as is the case of the credit cards. Finally, Werbach states that there is a new trust architecture called

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

4 of 18

131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143

distributed trust, which works when the users trust a decentralized system such as blockchain,
without needing to trust neither an intermediary nor the other parties.
Because of these features, the technology can be applied to achieve outcomes on a wide variety
of topics and systems. Even so, most blockchain applications have mainly focused on finance and
cryptocurrencies [31], recent new developments and research have started to evaluate the use of
blockchain to introduce novel solutions to existing areas. For instance, Chen, Xu, Lu, and Chen [32]
explored potential applications of blockchain to solve diverse education challenges. Dagher, Mohler,
Milojkovic, and Marella [33], in the health area, proposed a blockchain-based framework that
preserves the privacy of patients’ sensitive information while offering secure, interoperable, and
efficient access to medical records by patients, providers, and third parties. Marsal-Llacuna [34]
analyzed, using the UN’s New Urban Agenda, the advantages blockchain could provide to the
urbanization field.

144

1.3 Sustainability and Blockchain Research

145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181

While there are many definitions of the concept of sustainability, the objective proposed by the
National Research Council’s Our Common Journey report [35] is a broadly used way to approach the
topic [36–38]. In the document, the NRC declares a need for a sustainability transition that “should
be able to meet the needs of a much larger but stabilizing human population, to sustain the life
support systems of the planet, and to substantially reduce hunger and poverty”[35] This call to action,
later known under the concept of “sustainable development” [36], created an unprecedented
challenge [39]. Since that time, different organizations and initiatives around the world have tried to
address sustainability issues. However, with some exceptions, such as ozone depletion, many
“wicked” sustainability issues remain at dangerous levels [40,41].
In 2012, with the objective of unifying efforts and producing a set of goals that would address
urgent environmental, economic and social challenges, the UN decided to start working on what is
now known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). By 2015, the U.N. had identified 17 goals
aimed to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity for all. This latest approach is similar
to the goal established in the NRC report, recognizing the global importance of social and ecological
objectives of sustainability; that is, the well-being of present and future generations depends upon
the ecosystem services provided by the planet, which are being heavily impacted by human activity
[40]. This perspective of sustainability bounds the understanding of sustainability issues as actions
or situations that threaten either the human population’s needs, life support systems, or both.
Heretofore, little research exists about blockchain’s connection with and value for addressing
sustainability topics such as environmental protection or social issues. In their study, Giungato, Rana,
Tarabella, and Tricase, [14] analyzed current trends in social, environmental and economic topics of
Bitcoin and blockchain. They suggest that the technology may overcome criticism and drive social
change. Chapron [25] proposed that the technology that supports cryptographic currencies provides
an opportunity to support sustainability. He explains that the unique characteristics of blockchain
could increase trust, empower citizens and avoid corruption. Similarly, Kewell, Adams, and Parry
[5], through affordance theory, offered a series of real-life applications showing how blockchain can
contribute to the sustainability agenda. Recently, an increasing number of authors have shown how
blockchain could be used to address different sustainability topics. It could be shaped to improve
conservation, easing and simplifying transparent fundraising donations [42]. Its advantages can
increase food security, through traceability of contaminated food [43]. Finally, the energy supply
could be enhanced by decentralized energy systems, where peer-to-peer energy exchanges are
possible using this new technology [44].
In order to advance understanding of how blockchain can provide new tools to develop
sustainability solutions and identify its main challenges, an analysis of the sustainable issues that
blockchain is already helping to address was carried out. A literature review, interviews, and
examples of real-life applications were conducted to explain what intrinsic characteristics of
blockchain, that are not present in other technologies, have been crucial to developing tools that have

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

5 of 18

182
183
184
185
186

successfully addressed sustainability issues. Also, from the same sources, it was expected to clarify
what commons needs and difficulties those sustainability issues had, and how blockchain’s
characteristics could help or actually resolve them.

187
188
189
190
191
192
193

•

194

2. Materials and Methods

195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232

For the literature review of this study, Google Scholar and Web of Science were used to search
articles with the terms “blockchain” and (“sustaina*” or “environment*” or “social”) in their titles,
abstracts, and subjects to add literature. Due to the novelty of the topic and the fact that most of its
development has been outside of the academic community, non-traditional/grey sources were added
to the analysis, with the objective of collecting a robust amount of literature to support the research.
These non-traditional sources were obtained through interviews, newspapers and discussions with
academic and non-academic experts interested in the subject.
Until 2016, there were few publications about blockchain, with most of them dedicated to Bitcoin
and finance [31]. However, a search in Web of Science showed that in 2017 almost 200 articles were
written with “blockchain” in the title or as the topic, a substantial increase compared to 40
publications in 2016. In addition to the increasing number of publications, a shift from the financialoriented research was noted, with more new applications of blockchain being covered by studies in
recent years.
With a topic as new as blockchain, interviews as data sources must play a crucial role to
develop the research. As Rubin & Rubin [45] note “[q]ualitative interviewing projects are especially
good at describing social […] processes, that is, how and why things change.” They also affirm that
the credibility of using interviews as a research methodology is enhanced in the recruitment process
by ensuring that interviewees are knowledgeable, have different perspectives, and support the
testing of emerging theories [45]. Nonetheless, these desired characteristics of the research method
have to be adjusted with a pragmatic approach which includes limitations of time and funding [45].
In this study, eleven interviews were conducted (See appendix 1 for the list of the interviewees)
from five different fields: technology (n=3), NGOs (n=2), finance/business (n=2), governance (n=2),
and academia (n=2). These fields were chosen to elicit different perspectives since each of them
approaches innovation, challenges and opportunities from a particular angle [46]. The selection of
the interviewees was based on expertise in their respective fields, knowledge about blockchain, and
upon recommendation from professional advisors to this study.
The semi-structured interviews that were conducted allowed open responses from the
participants [47] and the possibility of spontaneously adapting questions based on the interviewee’s
responses [48]. The questions were adapted throughout the process to pursue emerging ideas based
on previous interviews [45]. The main topics tackled during the interviews, following a constructivist
style, were a) the unique characteristics of blockchain, b) how it can be used to address sustainability
issues, and c) what are the future challenges of the technology? Transcriptions of the interviews were
analyzed using descriptive and “in vivo” coding [49] looking for patterns and emerging concepts.
To complement the methods mentioned above, and considering the pragmatic approach of the
research, the use of real-life applications of blockchain was necessary to exemplify the circumstances
in which the technology is providing a new tool to address sustainability issues. The literature review
and the interviews provided a set of blockchain applications to start the analysis. The selection of the
applications was based on the opportunities blockchain offers for addressing sustainability issues

This research addressed the following research questions:

•
•
•

Can blockchain technology be used to help achieve the United Nations’ sustainable
development objectives (SDGs), a globally accepted framework for understanding crucial
sustainability issues?
What are the unique characteristics of blockchain that make this possible?
What do the sustainability issues that blockchain can help solve have in common?
What challenges lay ahead for blockchain in terms of its adoption and scalability?

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

6 of 18

233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259

differently (e.g., faster, better, more efficiently, etc.) or resolve situations that were unmanageable
prior the application of the technology (e.g., what blockchain offers that was not present before).
To structure the results of the research, the framework established by the United Nations’
Sustainable Development Goals was used, organizing and applying interviewees’ perspectives,
literature review and real-life applications to three of the SDGs. To keep the analysis focused, the use
of blockchain technology was assessed in relationship to just three of the SDGs. This enabled an indepth consideration of the technology’s use in this context that would have been hard to achieve if
all 17 SDGs were considered. Whereas further research can target other specific SDGs, the sample
chosen for this study relies on the conviction that the findings are extendable to the 17 goals to one
degree or another and that the SDGs are interconnected [50]. This means that by addressing a
particular goal, the study can advance knowledge applicable to all SDGs related to it.
The selection of SDG 2 Zero Hunger, SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy, and SDG 14 Life
Under Water was based on the expertise, insights and background of the interviewees, the literature
found, and the real-life applications analyzed. Additionally, the choice of these goals aimed to include
all three concepts of the “Triple Bottom Line”—a framing which became popular after publication of
Elkington’s ”Cannibals With Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st-Century Business” [51]. The
framework looked for expanding the initial focus on financial/economic results in organizations,
adding two new performance areas to the table: social and environmental aspects. In this study, SDG
2 (Zero Hunger) could be defined as a social objective. The economic component could be associated
with SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy). Finally, the SDG 14 (Life Under Water) could refer to the
concept of an environmental issue. With the possibility of classifying the rest of the SDGs as social,
environmental, economic or mixed goals, it is viable to expand the analysis and results of this study
to them.
The three SDGs are described below, with examples of how blockchain is already addressing
some of their objectives. These are followed by a discussion focusing on showing the commonalities
found among the sustainability issues and the solutions cited, and the challenges of the technology
to increase its use around SDGs.

260

3. Blockchain Applications addressing the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals

261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270

As Pablo Prieto, CEO of the Peruvian technological firm TIVIT Peru, suggested in his interview
“Although so far, this emerging technology has its main development lines linked to the financial
sector […], its application to solving environmental, social, public and governmental issues is an
obligatory step.“ Based on consensus among all the interviewees, the use of blockchain to address
sustainability issues is possible and desirable. According to them, it is offering new advantages that
were not present before, hence, making it possible to solve challenges that until today were hard to
address. Along these lines, the United Nations Development Programme states that blockchain has
the potential to tackle different sustainability issues “accelerating development progress that truly
leave no one behind.” [52] To structure the study, applications, literature and quotes from the
interviewees are presented grouped into three SDGs.

271

3.1 Sustainability Goal number 2: Zero Hunger

272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282

The second goal of the United Nations is to “End hunger, achieve food security and improved
nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture” [53]. As the UN states, currently, if it is done right,
agriculture, fishery, and forestry can provide food for everybody in the world. Thus, the challenge is
to rethink the way we produce and distribute food. More than 800 million people are
undernourished, with most of them located in developing countries, which causes half of the deaths
of children under five [54]. Also, agriculture is the most significant employer in the world, meaning
a substantial amount of people rely on it to survive economically. Indeed, solving world hunger is
not an easy task and, as Ban-Ki moon expressed, its achievement depends upon delivery on all SDGs
[55].
The eight targets established for the goal are oriented to two main topics: Hunger and Food
Security. Regarding the second subject —Food Security— blockchain is providing technological

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

7 of 18

283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311

solutions due to its capacity of allocating a digital identifier to food products enabling the traceability
of food in supply chains with its respective information (expiry date, origin, etc.). Under this
perspective, the interviewee Sara Eckhouse, Executive Director of the NGO FoodShot, adds “I know
there's a lot of interest in blockchain in terms of supply chain traceability and verification”. Along the
same lines, Yarime Masaru, Associate Professor at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,
explains, “Normally, it's very difficult to see […] where are the things that are produced or transferred
and, potentially, the blockchain can be used to monitor and trace all of these”. As Yamire Masaru
states, before blockchain, the traceability of assets through complex supply chains where many
parties were involved was challenging.
In 2016, Walmart, in collaboration with IBM started to test the integration of blockchain in its
supply chain, to reduce food waste [56]. Walmart developed the Wal-Mart Food Safety Collaboration
Center in China, whose objective is to “help accelerate the development and adoption of food safety
solutions that can be openly shared and scaled throughout the supply chain” [57]. The first pilot was
developed in China, with the objective of creating traceability of pork from farm-to-table. The project
did allow to digitally track individual pork products in minutes, knowing the origin, the factory, the
batch number, storage temperature and shipping details. Also, the technology allows to know if the
product is authentic and safe, and when it expires. If a food contamination issue arises at the farm or
factory, it would be known which products to recall, and which may be left on the shelves. In this
case, the transparency and the traceability provided by blockchain increased food security at the retail
level; that is, in Walmart stores.
The recall of only contaminated products instead of the entire production -which is usually the
solution provided in those cases- could help to reduce food waste, helping to lessen, for example, the
more than 30% of food waste per year (133 billion pounds) that currently happens in the United States
[58]. Recently, a number of E. coli outbreaks hit the United States, leading to the disposition of tons
of products (such as romaine lettuces) for the lack of capacity of clearly identifying the origin and
location of the affected products. The FDA, to enhance food safety and reduce food waste, is
analyzing the implementation of blockchain to enhance the traceability of food in the country [59].
The advantages that blockchain offers to improve supply chains, and traceability in general, can
increase food security and reduce food waste.

312

3.2 Sustainability Goal number 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333

SDG 7 is to “ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” [53].
The goal looks for international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy- research and
technology- and promotes investment in energy infrastructure [60] since, according to the UN, energy
is central to almost every major sustainability challenge and opportunity. With one in five people still
lacking access to electricity, 3 billion people relying on wood, coal or animal waste for cooking and
heating, and energy being the most significant contributor to climate change [53], there is no doubt
that energy is a critical sustainability challenge.
Most of the power grids around the world are centralized. Nevertheless, those usually big and
centralized systems —with multiple barriers to entering the network— often don’t have the capacity
to efficiently deal with the volatility of renewable energy sources such as solar energy [61]. With a
solar industry growing at a record pace, and considering that a big segment is led by residential
photovoltaic systems [62], the lack of proper energy grid systems could obstruct the expansion of
renewable energy sources. Professor Yarime Masaru states that with blockchain “you can […]
potentially exchange electricity between different households, so that can really facilitate a
distributed energy system.” Blockchain offers the opportunity to develop small or micro grids,
managing the generation and consumption of energy competently [63]. Furthermore, small grids can
reduce the long distance transportation of energy which is associated with losses of energy [64].
The blockchain-based, distributed energy grids proposed are possible thanks to a new concept
called “Smart Contacts” that was developed a few years ago [65]. In simple terms, Smart Contracts
are contracts that are coded -in other words, a program- that run on blockchain technology [66]. On
this program, it is possible to define rules and penalties around an agreement in the same way that a

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

8 of 18

334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366

traditional contract, but the enforcing of those obligations is done automatically and with no need of
a notary or a lawyer. SunContract and Dexentralize are two projects that operate blockchain
platforms that allow trading of energy in small grids. Using smart contracts, they enable a network
where the surplus of renewable energy from the “prosumers” -consumers of energy that also have
the ability to generate it- is safely and automatically sent to those consumers that need it. All the
transactions can be verified by anyone at any moment, increasing the transparency and trust in the
system.
Apart from easing the spread of renewable energy, small grids could be applied in cases where
power generation systems are available but there is a lack of or there are problems with the
transmission lines. This is the case of Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria, where close to 80% of the
transmission lines were damaged [67]. In the transition to restore the energy around the island, micro
or small grids can be established, granting access and distribution of energy from those available
sources to the nearest consumers without the need for a central authority regulating and validating
transactions [68].
Another suite of blockchain applications to address this SDG in the energy sector comes from
the cryptocurrency side. As previously mentioned, while some cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin have
a significant environmental footprint [14], many others don’t work with a consensus protocol based
on races, thus considerably decreasing or almost eliminating the energy consumption of its operation.
Using these eco-friendlier cryptocurrencies to promote sustainability activities can be an option. One
of these initiatives was developed by The SolarCoin Foundation. It created “SolarCoin” which
promotes the generation of clean energy by rewarding owners of solar panels with digital coins; that
is, one SolarCoin per one megawatt hour (MWh) of solar energy produced. In this case, blockchain is
a technology that provides the tools to an efficient, automatic and transparent management of the
allocation of the rewards presented by SolarCoin. Being a decentralized currency, it allows The
SolarCoin Foundation to distribute the payments to anywhere in the world, without the transaction
costs associated with intermediaries. A project with a similar objective is The Sun Exchange which
looks for funds for solar projects around the world (mainly in Africa). The funders provide money
and receive rental income through a blockchain-based payment system.
Blockchain technology can play a role in the achievement of SDGs by offering tools that didn’t
exist before. Ideas like SolarCoin and The Sun Exchange could promote the adoption of clean energy,
offering additional benefits or facilities to the generation using renewal sources. Moreover,
SunContract and Dexentralize contribute to the access to affordable, reliable, efficient and modern
energy services.

367

3.3 Sustainability Goal number 14: Life Below Water

368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384

The 14th of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals focus is--“Conserve and sustainably use the
ocean, seas, and marine resources”[53]. With oceans covering 75% of the world’s surface, 3 billion
people directly depend on marine and coastal biodiversity to survive. And, since oceans play a crucial
role in regulating environmental systems around the world, there is no doubt that the protection of
oceans and their biodiversity is essential for the present well-being and future of the planet. Under
this context, the UN established ten targets for this goal which can be summarized in three categories:
ocean health, biodiversity protection, and economic development.
Some of the most known applications of blockchain technology to protect biodiversity are the
ones related to improvement in supply chains. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) launched a
project to stop illegal fishing and slavery in the tuna industry in the Pacific’s Islands. By using
blockchain technology, “a simple scan of tuna packaging using a smartphone app will reveal where
and when the fish was caught, by which vessel and fishing method” [69]. The objective of the
initiative, created with the help of WWF (New Zealand, Fiji, and Australia), ConsenSys, TraSeable,
and Sea Quest, is to include a verification in the tuna packages certifying that the product was legally
caught with no slave labor involved. Therefore, with consumers who are nowadays very aware of
the social and environmental impacts of the products they buy [70], this project should decrease the
consumption of products associated with illegal fishing or poor human rights conditions.

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

9 of 18

385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408

Concerning ocean health objectives, decrease the pollution of the seas is crucial. With only 9%
of plastic being recycled, it is expected that by 2050 12,000 million metric tons of plastic waste will be
in landfills or the environment [71]. The Plastic Bank, through the program Social Plastic, is globally
recognized as one of the most innovative solutions to shrink the presence of plastic in the oceans. By
promoting recycling, the Plastic Bank is trying to stop the flow of plastic into an ocean using
blockchain technology [72]. The organization is setting up collection centers in third world countries,
from where a big portion of the plastic debris in the oceans come [73]. There, people could, at first,
offer used plastic in exchange for money or goods. However, the project was facing the difficulty of
people being mugged after they got their money from the plastic they delivered. To address this
issue, working with Cognition Foundry and IBM, the Plastic Bank set up a new reward system where
people now can get tokens -a pre mined cryptocurrency with almost no environmental impact- in
exchange for the plastic they offer. The system offers two types of tokens. The first one can be
exchanged by the owners as a regular cryptocurrency with other people or for fiat currency at the
non-profit’s stores. The second type of token can be exchanged for goods from Plastic Bank where
items such as school supplies, hygiene products and even smartphones (for token management and
internet access) are available.
Plastic collected through The Plastic Bank is recycled and sold at a premium as Social Plastic.
The project, which is operating in Haiti, Indonesia, and the Philippines (with a future expansion to
other countries), expect to reduce the presence of plastic in the ocean and help people who live in
poverty.
The approach used by WWF that relies on its transparency and traceability could be used in
different ocean-related products, where supply chains could be improved by the security that
blockchain offer. The use of tokens, as in the Plastic Bank example, is a novel way to reduce the
ocean’s pollution and, at the same time, improve the life-quality of people in developing countries.

409

3.4 Architecture of trust and SDGs

410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434

In the three SDGs analyzed, and via their respective sustainability issues, different levels of trust
were shown not to be operating properly. In SDG 2, there is a lack of trust in the institutions and
intermediaries that distribute food, causing food insecurity and waste. With companies not being
able to properly identify what products are contaminated and where they are in the supply chain, for
example, the government must request the discard of an entire production in order to prevent a
health issue. If companies participating in supply chains are able to prove to government actors that
a blockchain application can precisely determine where assets are at all times, food security would
increase, and food waste and potential food illnesses should decline.
For SDG 7, in the case of the token applications of blockchain, the technology is addressing the
lack of intermediary trust. SolarCoin provides the platform that enables trust between those who
donate money to promote solar generation and those who generate the energy. Regarding microenergy grids managed through smart contracts, blockchain offers a means to address the arrival of
non-traditional energy sources. With different actors participating in the energy transition to greener
energy technologies, blockchain enables distributed trust for those who want, for example, to
generate solar energy, but don’t want to wait until the respective institutions define and establish the
infrastructure.
Finally, on SDG 14, on one side, Leviathan trust is not present in the tuna industry. With
institutions that should be able to ensure socially and environmentally responsible practices in the
fishing sector, the example of WWF described how blockchain’s capacity of tracing tuna can bring
trust to the ecosystem, letting costumers buy with more confidence different products. On the other
side, the Plastic Bank is dealing with the distrust in intermediaries by giving tokens using a
cryptocurrency wallet. With banks not giving access to accounts to some people, the distributed trust
present in a blockchain-based wallet allows Plastic Bank’s initiative to operate in a complex context
where it has to deal additionally with deficient peer-to-peer trust (with people stealing payments
others get from the plastic they were recycling.)

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

10 of 18

435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442

This section, structured around three SDGs, showed solutions in private, government, and nonprofit sectors, under diverse contexts, and at different scales already addressing sustainable issues.
For UN’s goal called “Zero Hunger”, applications of blockchain offering new ways to face food
security and food waste were reviewed. Solutions to promote clean energy and energy services were
presented around SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy. Finally, blockchain’s applications to reduce
ocean’s contamination and to protect sea life were shown to address the SDG “Life Below Water”.
Next, in the discussion section, the commonalities of these issues and solutions, and the challenges
to use blockchain to address sustainability issues are presented.

443

4. Discussion

444

4.1 Commonalities

445
446
447
448

After exploring blockchain innovations that could potentially be applied in the context of
sustainability, it is possible to identify commonalities among solutions to sustainability problems that
blockchain could address, which are summarized in Figure 3.

449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474

Figure 3. Intersection of advantages of blockchain and characteristics of the sustainability issues
reviewed.

From the examples of WWF and Walmart, it could be concluded that supply chains can be
improved by applying blockchain. Upgrading the traceability of products—their dereviations and
the logistics supporting their delivery-to-market—can make transparent any asset around the world
which may include sustainability-sensitive products based on animals or environmental resources.
Effective and efficient traceability can increase food security and reduce food waste or reduce illegal
activities such as violations of human rights or biodiversity destruction. Sara Eckhouse points out
that “… I've seen blockchain focusing on food safety or traceability or […] fighting human trafficking
or […] kind of poor labor practices.” For example, another application of blockchain to improve
traceability is used by The TrustChain Initiative. The project traces diamonds from mines to retails
stores to verify that the product is not a “Blood Diamond”, a mineral brought to market through
inhumane labor practices [74].
Some argue that we are living a crisis of trust [75] that could hinder sustainability solutions [25].
Blockchain may help to reduce distrust [76]. The project of WWF and the Sun Exchange initiative
offer an example of how blockchain applications display high transparency operating in
environments of mistrust. Sasa Pesic, Researcher and Consultant, Ira A. Fulton Schools of
Engineering, Arizona State University, states that blockchain “[a]s a mean to enforcing trust in an
environment where trust does not naturally exist - it came to stay.” The immutability of the
information stored, its distributed nature, and the possibility of enabling a permissioned blockchain
(so the general public can see information saved there) reduce the likelihood of fraud, increasing the
general trust about the systems. As L. Walker from the World Economic Forum argues [77], the
improved transparency of blockchain could be applied to regulate the carbon credits and greenhouse
gas emissions around the world. Other issues that blockchain’s transparency can improve are the

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

11 of 18

475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514

raising of funds for different initiatives [42]. GiveTrack and BitHope manage donations in
blockchains that can be checked by everybody, guaranteeing that the funds reach the intended
projects and reducing the possibility of frauds. Smart Contracts, like the ones reviewed on the
SunContract and Dexentralize examples, can work to provide the necessary trust to some complex
systems such as energy grids.
In all the examples reviewed, the systems work with an ID. For example, this ID allows
identifying every tuna, pork product, MWh generated, fund donated, etc. As previously stated,
blockchain provides an effective tool to manage the identification of both physical and virtual assets.
This means that when there is a sustainability issue related to IDs, the technology offers the tool to
solve it. While mostly an unknown issue, 1.5 billion people have no proper legal identification, and
50 million children are born every year without a birth certificate and legal identity [78]. Darren Tapp,
Researcher at Dash, mentions “I can envision one application would be Identity Management […] so
you could basically register an identity on the chain and have a public key associated with that
identity”. The WISeID project looks for providing to every person on the planet a legal digital
identity, aligned with the UN´s SDG 16 “Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions” that aims to “by 2030,
provide a legal identity for all, including birth registration” [53]. It could be used to help refugees or
migrants who usually lack of proper identification [79]. The World Food Programme, for example,
gave Syrian refugees the ability to pay for food using an iris scan via a blockchain application. The
iris scan is recorded in blockchain, creating an ID without sharing personal information [80]. One
more use for blockchain could be in developing countries, where the management of land rights is
complicated and is prone to fraud [81]. In some of these countries, the registration and control of
lands is done using books to keep the records, easing the process in case somebody wants to make
unauthorized changes to the information. Currently, several countries are developing projects to
store and manage land rights using blockchain networks, reducing frauds [82].
Finally, knowing that the first and currently most famous applications of blockchain are the
cryptocurrencies, it is important to understand how digital currencies and tokens could be used to
solve sustainability issues. As Dierksmeier and Seele, [83] propose, it could be possible to promote
ethical goals using cryptocurrencies. The Plastic Bank and the Solar Coin projects exemplify
situations where some form of tokens or cryptocurrencies are given to people who engage in
sustainable practices. RecycleToCoin is another project that, like Plastic Bank, aims to increase the
recycling of plastic in Europe [84]. Cryptocurrencies also allow providing bank services to people
who usually would be outside of the financial world. While making a transfer would have been a
solution to the initial thief-related issues of The Plastic Bank initiative, almost none of the people who
participated in the project had a bank account. According to data from the World Bank [85] “around
2 billion people don’t use formal financial services, and more than 50% of adults in the poorest
households are unbanked”. Blockchain allows people to have a digital wallet to store currencies or
tokens, reducing the likelihood of being robbed for example. “I believe that places where there's no
or an insufficient banking infrastructure, cryptocurrencies can be used to empower individuals to
basically have access to a wider financial network” suggests Darren Tapp, proposing that financial
inclusion could grow with the use of blockchain.

515

4.2 Challenges

516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525

As an emerging technology, blockchain has plenty of challenges to overcome before it will be
widely adopted. In the first place, according to the Gartner Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies
[86], blockchain is currently at the peak of inflated expectations. It is not difficult to find news and
articles that declare that blockchain will change the planet in the same way the Internet did [87]. Todd
Taylor argues “I think one of the biggest mistakes people are making, in addition to just the
technology needing to mature, is that they just try to shove blockchain in places where it doesn't
belong.” Similarly, Ward Hendon adds “it's also a very frustrating time because there is this hype
cycle […] so it's really important to have as many perspectives as you can because, like most new
things and new technologies, is sort of a shiny new object, and corporations are jumping on to see if
they can incorporate tech and create competitive, you know, differentiation.” Currently, it seems that

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577

12 of 18

blockchain is being offered as the answer to everything, but realistically the technology still has a
long path to cover to reach its full capacity [86]. From a sustainability standpoint, there is the risk of
using blockchain-based applications to address social or environmental issues when the technology
is not necessarily needed. Pablo Prieto, regarding the perception of blockchain just as a trend, adds
“I think it is not a passing fad, even though its application is through technology, it is based on a new
paradigm that is aligned with the trends of a globalized world where the social networks are our
communication and relationship channels, that allows us to tear apart the geographic barriers, bring
cultures together, teaching and dis-educating with the diversity of the information we produce,
distribute and consume in our condition of active users of distributed data.”
Also, it is necessary to address the risks associated with blockchain. As with many other new
technologies, there is uncertainty about its future and the unexpected uses that blockchain may have.
Patricia Burnett, attorney at Weiss Brown, reflects “… let's be thoughtful in these designs [blockchain
applications] so that we don't, down the road, realize that there were unintended consequences…”
For example, one advantage of blockchain is at the same time one of its disadvantages: once
information is stored in blockchain, it cannot be erased. With some sensible or risky information such
as personal IDs or medical records, the decision of which data should be added is complex. If used
to address sustainability issues, the development of blockchain-related tools must be done in
consideration of potential unexpected impacts different applications may have, taking into account
previous experiences and inviting different stakeholders to the decision-making process. Another
risk of the technology is to blindly believe in the information stored in blockchain. Although once the
information is stored in blockchain, it is immutable, the process whereby the data is added to the
system should always be monitored. As Sara Eckhouse explicates “[…] if you can't trust the original
source… there still needs to be some kind of a way to say ‘yes, what this person is saying is true’ and
I don't think the blockchain actually solves that.” The advantages that are offered by blockchain don’t
resolve the issues related to the source of the information, creating the requisite of auditing the origin
to fully trust in the data that is stored and shared.
A distributed network is meant to be integrated by different actors. And the scalability of the
technology depends on how widespread its use among institutions. Currently the adoption of
blockchain and the participation of organizations in shared ecosystems is voluntary, leaving the
question of how to incentivize them to adhere to it to enhance the data they manage. Todd Taylor
elaborates “the reality of building ecosystem level applications is that it's very difficult because it
requires all of the members to participate. So, how do you create an incentive structure such that you
can attract all of the members of a given network to participate?”. As it was showed in the case of the
WWF’s application of blockchain to trace tuna, more companies could adhere to the network, creating
an ecosystem where all tuna products are social and environmentally certified. But what is needed to
have more organizations use these systems? “We need collaboration […] and say, ‘what is it that
could incentivize you?’…” explains Hanieh Sadat, Managing Partner of GenesysOne Capital as an
answer that she then summarized as “economic incentives model, that's what we need to figure out.”
Nevertheless, in the distributed and unstandardized reality of blockchain, it is complicated to
determine who should find and offer those incentives. At this time, based on applications reviewed
for this study, the incentives offered are determined case by case, usually pushed by either the
technology companies introducing the solution or the organizations looking for support.
A possible answer to the scalability of the technology could come from standardization. But
there is no agreed-upon formal definition of blockchain. A consensus about what blockchain is (and
what blockchain isn’t) could improve the adoption curve by simplifying the understanding of the
technology. Regulation could bring not only consensus around blockchain but also address other
challenges of the technology. Ward Hendon argues “I believe, and this is putting my lawyer
regulatory hat on, that we're not going to have mainstream adoption of this until we have clearer
regulations […] in countries where there is oversized influence like the United States, we need to
have crisper cleaner regulation before more capital is going to be comfortable coming into the
market.” This approach is similar to the perspective of Professor Yarime Masaru, who however thinks
that blockchain may still need more time before regulation is applied: “So, at this moment, as I said,

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

13 of 18

578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600

there are many companies and many standards, and they are somehow competing with each other,
and nobody knows which will be the best or which won't be the most appropriate in the end. […]
Initially I think, just let them compete, let them invent whatever they think is important. But then,
probably at a certain stage, I guess the public authority could intervene or working together between
industry and the government or public sector so that in the end that we need to have a kind of
standardization, so that we can facilitate all these exchange interactions having the same standard.”
This call for regulation, which would need some form of governance, is not shared for
everybody. Some blockchain experts, especially those linked to the cryptocurrency aspect, don’t
agree. Sasa Pesic thinks that some form of centralized governance “is against the core principles of
the blockchain technology.” In spite of that view against centralization, many regulations efforts are
being conducted around the world [88]. In the cryptocurrency realm, some countries have established
regulations, mostly related to taxes, trading and legality [89]. In the world of permissioned or private
blockchain where not much has been achieved, there are many parallel initiatives pursuing
standardization. One of the most famous is Hyperledger started by the Linux Foundation in 2015
whose objective is to advance cross-industry blockchain technologies.
Finally, it is necessary to note that blockchain is a means and not an end. As reviewed in this
study, blockchain offers a new tool to address some sustainability issues in novel ways. However, as
a technology, it is likely not enough by itself to solve these problems. This expanded perspective
should ease and enhance the analysis around the institutions related to the sustainability issue. For
instance, while in the case of SDG 2, the use of technology to face food contamination will probably
bring numerous actors to collaborate on solutions, by contrast, the distributed micro-energy grids
may not find the same help from all those participating since traditional, large-scale energy
companies, as an example, could see them as their competition.

601

5. Conclusion

602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628

With what seems to be the ending of the buzz around Bitcoin, blockchain emerges as a
technology that promises to offer advantages never seen before. From a sustainability standpoint,
this study found four commonalities about some of those advantages in the context of characteristics
of three, representative UN SDGs: traceability, transparency, identification and tokenization. This list
is by no means definitive, and its objective is to provide a glance of opportunities created by
blockchain. Further research could extend the analysis to the other 14 SDGs not covered by this study,
as well as increase the number of perspectives and applications examined to find more attributes of
the technology that can be used to address sustainability issues. The rapid expansion of blockchain,
with new applications and approaches being constantly created, demands continuous assessment of
its interface with the SDGs.
The potential opportunities offered by blockchain should be contrasted with the challenges it
faces as an emergent, powerful technology, all of them being complex. Beyond the peak of high
expectations around this technological innovation, which at some point will pass, the risks associated
with its use must be considered. The temptation and novelty of applying blockchain as a tool can be
at the expense of not thinking about the potential unintended consequences it could cause. Also, it is
necessary to identify where trust in blockchain starts and ends. The processes used to add
information to blockchain systems and what happens after data are taken from it are open to mistakes
and misuses. Thus, it must be planned how to enhance security and trust around those steps.
Scalability is a typical challenge for emerging technologies. And blockchain is no exception. So
far, we have still not seen a global, multi-stakeholders, working solution of blockchain being applied
to a sustainability issue. While it has its own technical challenges to expand its use, the integration of
new actors to a blockchain ecosystem is still necessary to increase its adoption. But, the lack of
standardization may be a factor hindering this process. To promote these standards, some form of
regulation or governance could be appropriated. However, it is still not clear who should push for
such regulation, since the spirit of the technology is, precisely, decentralization, thus leaving space
for further research to understand the pros and cons of governance of this important, new technology.

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

14 of 18

629
630

Author Contributions: For research articles with several authors, a short paragraph specifying their individual
contributions must be provided.

631

Funding: If I get funding to publish it.

632
633

Acknowledgments: This work was done thanks to the CONICYT PFCHA/MAGISTER BECAS CHILE/2017 –
72180000.

634

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

635

Appendix A

636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651

List of interviewees:
1. Darren Tapp, Researcher, Dash, USA.
2. Pablo Prieto, CEO, TIVIT Perú, Peru.
3. Yarime Masaru, Associate Professor, Division of Public Policy, Hong Kong University of Science
and Technology, Hong Kong.
4. Ward Hendon, Adjunct Professor, Anderson Business School, University of California-Los
Angeles, USA.
5. Todd Taylor, Professor of Practice, Thunderbird School of Global Management, Arizona State
University, USA.
6. Sasa Pesic, Researcher and Consultant, Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State
University.
7. Hanieh Sadat, Managing Partner, GenesysOne Capital, USA.
8. Sara Eckhouse, Executive Director, FoodShot Global, USA.
9. Patricia Burnett, Attorney, Weiss Brown, USA.
10. Miguel Angel Calisto, Congressman, Chile.
11. Rhayza Margarita Rodríguez Sandoval, Digital Pre-sales, Telefónica, Chile.

652
653

References

654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673

1.

Iansiti, M.; Lakhani, K.R. The Truth About Blockchain. 2017, 11.

2.

Davis, J. The crypto-currency. New Yorker 2011, 87, 62–70.

3.

Maurer, B.; Nelms, T.C.; Swartz, L. “When perhaps the real problem is money itself!”: the
practical materiality of Bitcoin. Soc. Semiot. 2013, 23, 261–277.

4.

Kranzberg, M. Technology and History:" Kranzberg’s Laws". Technol. Cult. 1986, 27, 544–560.

5.

Kewell, B.; Adams, R.; Parry, G. Blockchain for good? Strateg. Change 2017, 26, 429–437.

6.

Crosby, M. BlockChain Technology: Beyond Bitcoin. 2016, 16.

7.

Underwood, S. Blockchain beyond bitcoin. Commun. ACM 2016, 59, 15–17.

8.

Reijers, W.; Coeckelbergh, M. The Blockchain as a Narrative Technology: Investigating the
Social Ontology and Normative Configurations of Cryptocurrencies. Philos. Technol. 2018, 31,
103–130.

9.

Nakamoto, S. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. 2018, 9.

10.

Reijers, W.; O’Brolcháin, F.; Haynes, P. Governance in Blockchain Technologies & Social
Contract Theories. Ledger 2016, 1, 134–151.

11.

Bitcoins

Maybe;

Blockchains

Likely

Available

online:

https://www.americanscientist.org/article/bitcoins-maybe-blockchains-likely (accessed on Jan
14, 2019).
12.

Schiller, B.; Schiller, B. 2018 Is Going To Be A Massive Year For Blockchains, The Tech Behind
Bitcoins Available online: https://www.fastcompany.com/40502720/2018-is-going-to-be-amassive-year-for-the-blockchain-the-tech-behind-bitcoins (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716

15 of 18

13.

Extance, A. The future of cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin and beyond. Nat. News 2015, 526, 21.

14.

Giungato, P.; Rana, R.; Tarabella, A.; Tricase, C. Current Trends in Sustainability of Bitcoins and
Related Blockchain Technology. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2214.

15.

Vranken, H. Sustainability of bitcoin and blockchains. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2017, 28, 1–
9.

16.

Foteinis, S. Bitcoin’s alarming carbon footprint. Nature 2018, 554, 169.

17.

Grinberg, R. Bitcoin: An innovative alternative digital currency. Hastings Sci Tech LJ 2012, 4, 159.

18.

Athey, S.; Parashkevov, I.; Sarukkai, V.; Xia, J. Bitcoin pricing, adoption, and usage: Theory and
evidence. 2016.

19.

Baur, A.W.; Bühler, J.; Bick, M.; Bonorden, C.S. Cryptocurrencies as a disruption? empirical
findings on user adoption and future potential of bitcoin and co.; Springer, 2015; pp. 63–80.

20.

Brito, J.; Castillo, A. Bitcoin: A primer for policymakers; Mercatus Center at George Mason
University, 2013;

21.

Pilkington, M.; Crudu, R.; Grant, L.G. Blockchain and bitcoin as a way to lift a country out of
poverty-tourism 2.0 and e-governance in the Republic of Moldova. Int. J. Internet Technol. Secur.
Trans. 2017, 7, 115–143.

22.

Beck, R. Beyond Bitcoin: The Rise of Blockchain World. Computer 2018, 51, 54–58.

23.

Kiviat, T.I. Beyond bitcoin: Issues in regulating blockchain transactions. Duke LJ 2015, 65, 569.

24.

Tapscott, D.; Tapscott, A. How blockchain will change organizations. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev.
2017, 58, 10.

25.

Chapron, G. The environment needs cryptogovernance. Nature 2017, 545, 403–405.

26.

Zheng, Z.; Xie, S.; Dai, H.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. An Overview of Blockchain Technology:
Architecture, Consensus, and Future Trends. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International
Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress); 2017; pp. 557–564.

27.

Lamport, L.; Shostak, R.; Pease, M. The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang.
Syst. TOPLAS 1982, 4, 382–401.

28.

Jeffries,

A.

‘Blockchain’

is

meaningless

Available

online:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/7/17091766/blockchain-bitcoin-ethereum-cryptocurrencymeaning (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).
29.

Greenspan, G. Private Blockchains are More Than ‘Just’Shared Databases. 2015.

30.

Werbach, K. The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust; Mit Press, 2018; ISBN 0-262-038935.

31.

Yli-Huumo, J.; Ko, D.; Choi, S.; Park, S.; Smolander, K. Where is current research on blockchain
technology?—a systematic review. PloS One 2016, 11, e0163477.

32.

Chen, G.; Xu, B.; Lu, M.; Chen, N.-S. Exploring blockchain technology and its potential
applications for education. Smart Learn. Environ. 2018, 5.

33.

Dagher, G.G.; Mohler, J.; Milojkovic, M.; Marella, P.B. Ancile: Privacy-preserving framework
for access control and interoperability of electronic health records using blockchain technology.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 39, 283–297.

34.

Marsal-Llacuna, M.-L. Future living framework: Is blockchain the next enabling network?
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 128, 226–234.

35.

National Research Council Our common journey: a transition toward sustainability; National
Academies Press, 1999; ISBN 0-309-08638-8.

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759

36.

16 of 18

Bettencourt, L.M.; Kaur, J. Evolution and structure of sustainability science. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
2011, 108, 19540–19545.

37.

Clark, W.C. Sustainability science: a room of its own. 2007.

38.

Miller, T.R. Constructing sustainability science: emerging perspectives and research
trajectories. Sustain. Sci. 2013, 8, 279–293.

39.

Sachs, J.D. From millennium development goals to sustainable development goals. The Lancet
2012, 379, 2206–2211.

40.

Rockström, J.; Steffen, W.; Noone, K.; Persson, Å.; Chapin III, F.S.; Lambin, E.; Lenton, T.M.;
Scheffer, M.; Folke, C.; Schellnhuber, H.J. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating
space for humanity. Ecol. Soc. 2009, 14.

41.

Raworth, K. A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the doughnut. Oxfam Policy
Pract. Clim. Change Resil. 2012, 8, 1–26.

42.

Baynham-Herd, Z. Technology: Enlist blockchain to boost conservation. Nature 2017, 548, 523.

43.

Ahmed, S.; ten Broek, N. Food supply: Blockchain could boost food security. Nature 2017, 550,
43.

44.

Andoni, M.; Robu, V.; Flynn, D. Blockchains: Crypto-control your own energy supply. Nature
2017, 548, 158.

45.

Rubin, H.J.; Rubin, I.S. Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data; Sage, 2011; ISBN 1-45228586-1.

46.

Rapley, T. Interviews ‘in Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, JF and Silverman. Qual. Res. Pract. 2004.

47.

Longhurst, R. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Key Methods Geogr. 2003, 117–132.

48.

Given, L.M. The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods; Sage Publications, 2008; ISBN 14522-6589-5.

49.

Saldaña, J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers; Sage, 2015; ISBN 1-4739-4359-0.

50.

Le Blanc, D. Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network of
targets. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 23, 176–187.

51.

Elkington, J. Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century
business. Environ. Qual. Manag. 1998, 8, 37–51.

52.

United

Nation

Development

Programme

Beyond

bitcoin

Available

online:

https://feature.undp.org/beyond-bitcoin/ (accessed on Feb 16, 2019).
53.

United

Nations

Sustainable

Development

Goals

Available

online:

https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ (accessed on Jan 21, 2019).
54.

McGuire, S. The state of food insecurity in the world 2015: meeting the 2015 international
hunger targets: taking stock of uneven progress. Adv Nutr 2015, 2015, 623–624.

55.

Achieving Zero Hunger Depends upon Delivery on All Sustainable Development Goals,
Secretary-General Says in Message to World Food Programme Executive Board | Meetings
Coverage

and

Press

Releases

Available

online:

https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sgsm17519.doc.htm (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).
56.

Kshetri, N. 1 Blockchain’s roles in meeting key supply chain management objectives. Int. J. Inf.
Manag. 2018, 39, 80–89.

57.

Seattle, F.S.N. 1012 F.A.F.F.; Washington 98104-1008 A new era of food transparency with WalMart center in China Available online: https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2017/03/a-new-eraof-food-transparency-with-wal-mart-center-in-china/ (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802

58.

17 of 18

Buzby, J.; Farah-Wells, H.; Hyman, J. The estimated amount, value, and calories of postharvest
food losses at the retail and consumer levels in the United States. 2014.

59.

Emem, M. U.S. FDA Eyes Blockchain to Enhance Food Safety in the Wake of E. coli Outbreak
Available

online:

https://www.ccn.com/u-s-fda-eyes-blockchain-to-enhance-food-safety-in-

the-wake-of-e-coli-outbreak (accessed on Feb 4, 2019).
60.

Gielen, D.; Boshell, F.; Saygin, D. Climate and energy challenges for materials science. Nat.
Mater. 2016, 15, 117.

61.

Monacchi, A.; Elmenreich, W. Assisted energy management in smart microgrids. J. Ambient
Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2016, 7, 901–913.

62.

Solar Industry Research Data Available online: /solar-industry-research-data (accessed on Feb
4, 2019).

63.

Mengelkamp, E.; Gärttner, J.; Rock, K.; Kessler, S.; Orsini, L.; Weinhardt, C. Designing
microgrid energy markets: A case study: The Brooklyn Microgrid. Appl. Energy 2018, 210, 870–
880.

64.

Architecture of a microgrid energy management system - Jimeno - 2011 - European
Transactions

on

Electrical

Power

-

Wiley

Online

Library

Available

online:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/etep.443 (accessed on Feb 4, 2019).
65.

Kosba, A.; Miller, A.; Shi, E.; Wen, Z.; Papamanthou, C. Hawk: The Blockchain Model of
Cryptography and Privacy-Preserving Smart Contracts. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE
Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP); IEEE: San Jose, CA, 2016; pp. 839–858.

66.

Christidis, K.; Devetsikiotis, M. Blockchains and Smart Contracts for the Internet of Things.
IEEE Access 2016, 4, 2292–2303.

67.

Glanz, J.; Robles, F. How Storms, Missteps and an Ailing Grid Left Puerto Rico in the Dark. N.
Y. Times 2018.

68.

Fuentes, J. Restoring Power to Puerto Rico Using the Blockchain. Medium 2017.

69.

How blockchain & a smartphone can stamp out illegal fishing and slavery in the tuna industry
Available

online:

https://www.wwf.org.au/news/news/2018/how-blockchain-and-a-

smartphone-can-stamp-out-illegal-fishing-and-slavery-in-the-tuna-industry (accessed on Jan
14, 2019).
70.

The

Sustainability

Imperative

Available

http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2015/the-sustainability-imperative

online:
(accessed

on Jan 14, 2019).
71.

Geyer, R.; Jambeck, J.R.; Law, K.L. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci. Adv.
2017, 3, e1700782.

72.

Cleaning our Oceans of Plastic | Haiti | UNFCCC Available online: https://unfccc.int/climateaction/momentum-for-change/planetary-health/cleaning-our-oceans-of-plastic-haiti (accessed
on Feb 7, 2019).

73.

Schmidt, C.; Krauth, T.; Wagner, S. Export of plastic debris by rivers into the sea. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2017, 51, 12246–12253.

74.

IBM Is Tackling Blood Diamonds With Blockchain 2018.

75.

Intelligence, E. Edelman Trust Barometer: 2017 annual global study. Exec. Summ. 2017.

76.

Shackelford, S.J.; Myers, S. Block-by-block: leveraging the power of blockchain technology to
build trust and promote cyber peace. Yale JL Tech 2017, 19, 334.

Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW

803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834

18 of 18

77.

Walker, L. This new carbon currency could make us more climate friendly.; 2017; Vol. 19.

78.

WISeKey Unveils its Digital Identity BlockChain Platform CertifyID in NYC; State-of-the-Art
Technology is in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals to Provide Every Person on
the

Planet

with

a

Legal

Digital

Identity

by

2030

Available

online:

https://www.wisekey.com/investors_press-release/wisekey-unveils-its-digital-identityblockchain-platform-certifyid-in-nyc-state-of-the-art-technology-is-in-line-with-the-unsustainable-development-goals-to-provide-every-person-on-the-planet (accessed on Jan 14,
2019).
79.

Can blockchain help us better assist refugees and migrants in transit? Available online:
http://www.eurasia.undp.org/content/rbec/en/home/blog/2017/11/3/Can-blockchain-help-usbetter-assist-refugees-and-migrants-in-transit-.html (accessed on Feb 16, 2019).

80.

Programme, W.F. What is ‘blockchain’ and how is it connected to fighting hunger? Available
online:

https://insight.wfp.org/what-is-blockchain-and-how-is-it-connected-to-fighting-

hunger-7f1b42da9fe (accessed on Feb 16, 2019).
81.

Anand, A.; McKibbin, M.; Pichel, F. Colored coins: Bitcoin, blockchain, and land
administration.; 2016.

82.

African startups bet on blockchain to tackle land fraud. Reuters 2018.

83.

Dierksmeier, C.; Seele, P. Cryptocurrencies and business ethics. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 152, 1–14.

84.

BCDC World’s First “Global” Plastic-Offset Scheme Launched by BCDC Available online:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/worlds-first-global-plastic-offset-schemelaunched-by-bcdc-657453753.html (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).

85.

The

World

Bank

Financial

Inclusion

Available

online:

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/financialinclusion/overview (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).
86.

Top Trends in the Gartner Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies, 2017 Available online:
https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/top-trends-in-the-gartner-hype-cycle-foremerging-technologies-2017/ (accessed on Jan 14, 2019).

87.

Blockchain: the internet’s second generation. Dir. Mag. 2016.

88.

Council, G.B.B. Global Blockchain Business Council (GBBC) Announces Release of Annual
Report 2019. 2018.

89.

Staff, G.L.R.D. Regulation of Cryptocurrency Around the World Available online:
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/cryptocurrency/world-survey.php (accessed on Feb 8, 2019).

© 2019 by the authors. Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms
and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

835