SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE1

A Systematic Review of Blockchain Literature: A Consumer/User Perspective

Name

Institution

Course

Instructor

Date
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE2

Abstract

This SLR sought to examine the consumer perspective towards blockchain technology (BCT)

within the retail sector. This research utilised existing research as the basis for evidence

collection. Using peer-review articles from different regions, the researcher ascertained that

consumers within the retail industry have a positive outlook towards BCT. This technology is

associated with higher efficiency and speed of business management, as noted in the

reviewed literature. In addition, sampled evidence shows that online transactions within the

retail sector are easier and more efficient with BCT as opposed to manual transactions. The

researcher, however, noted that there exist multiple gaps in the assembled data pool. For

instance, most of the conducted majorly focused on the general benefits and challenges of

BCT as opposed to industry-specific adoption and utilisation of BCT. It is thus proposed that

future studies be more specific in addressing the adoption of BCT within a specific industry

or at a given level within the industry.

Keywords: blockchain, BCT, retail sector.

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE3

Table of Contents

Abstract......................................................................................................................................2

Chapter 1: Introduction..............................................................................................................5

1.1 Background Information..................................................................................................5

1.2 Rationale for the Study.....................................................................................................6

1.3 Research Objectives and Questions..................................................................................7

1.3.1. Research Objective...................................................................................................7

1.3.2 Research Question.....................................................................................................7

Chapter 2: Methodology............................................................................................................8

2.1 Phase 1: Identifying and Grouping Articles through Relevant Blockchain Literature........8

2.1.1 Keyword Research Process........................................................................................9

2.1.2 Criteria for Exclusion and Inclusion........................................................................10

2.1.3 Justification for Criteria...........................................................................................10

2.2 Phase 2: Analysing the Nature of the BCT Phenomenon and Metatheoretical

Assumptions in the Literature Fields....................................................................................12

2.3 Phase 3: Discussion and Analysis of the Findings.........................................................12

2.3.1 Repetition.................................................................................................................12

2.3.2. Number of Articles.................................................................................................13

2.3.3 CABS Ranking........................................................................................................14

Chapter 3: Findings and Discussions.......................................................................................16

3.1 Findings..........................................................................................................................16

3.1.1 The Applicability and UTILISATIOn of Blockchain within the Contemporary

Retail Sector......................................................................................................................16

3.1.2 Benefits and Challenges Associated with Blockchain in the Retail Sector.............17

3.1.3 Consumer perspective towards BCT for different sectors.......................................20

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE4

3.2 Discussions.....................................................................................................................22

3.3 Gaps in the Literature.....................................................................................................26

Chapter 4: Conclusions and Recommendations.......................................................................29

4.1 Conclusions....................................................................................................................29

4.2 Recommendations..........................................................................................................29

References................................................................................................................................32

Appendices...............................................................................................................................50
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE5

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background Information

Blockchain technology is a radical approach, and technological advancement in

information technology was initially invested in 2009 as the foundation of Bitcoin (Raddatz

et al., 2021). However, since then, the advancement of blockchain technology has moved

beyond cryptocurrencies to many industries and areas, including education, the Internet of

Things, supply chain management, healthcare, and agriculture, among others (Qin et al.,

2020). Blockchain is a distributed database recording transactions or digital events in a public

ledger and shared among the participating parties (Glaser, 2017; Rusisu & Spohrer, 2017). Its

nature involves every transaction carried out stored within the distributed ledger while also

being verified through a consensus of the majority of the parties within the system (Qin et al.,

2020). As a result, any verified information entered into the distributed ledger can never be

erased.

The features of blockchain make it a secure, transparent and efficient approach to

reducing transactions and ensuring the security of digital interactions (Raddatz et al., 2021).

In agreement, Du et al. (2019) list the features of blockchain which differentiate it from other

digital applications, such as immutability, trust, decentralisation and security. Satoshi

Nakamoto introduced one of the most popular applications of blockchain technology,

introducing Bitcoin, known as the first decentralised peer-to-peer digital currency

(Nakamoto, 2008). Blockchain is a decentralised distributed ledger with transactions recorded

and logged in chronological order to develop permanent records that cannot be tampered with

(Quieroz & Wamba, 2019). In agreement, Vial (2019) indicated that it is decentralised. It

does not exist in only one computer or server but is mirrored and distributed across many

systems and is heavily encrypted, promoting security (Ventre & Kolbe, 2020). In using

Bitcoin, blockchain technology formulates the basic undelaying infrastructure that supports
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE6

its use in financial transactions within the decentralised distribution with no intermediaries

required (Ebrahaimi, 2017). In addition to Bitcoin, blockchain technology has also developed

other cryptocurrencies such as Zero cash, Monero, Ethereum and Litecoin (Dhaliwal & Malik

2021). However, as Waldo (2018) and Du et al. (2019) argued, blockchain technology has

evolved whereby its applications are in a wide range of sectors. Blockchain has enabled

businesses to perform more efficiently through its various features.

1.2 Rationale for the Study

While blockchain is the most known for its application in cryptocurrency, evidence

points to its use in other areas and applications where the work is based on a decentralised

platform (Kim & Laskowski, 2018). For instance, the Internet of Things involves a peer-to-

peer topology and the various devices enabled by the Internet of Things. As a result, the use

of blockchain on the Internet of Things devices and approaches allows all the devices to be

automated efficiently and the synchronisation of data to be carried out at a much faster and

more efficient rate (Conoscenti et al., 2016). For instance, Telstra utilises smart IoT

blockchain-enabled to improve home security with biometrics and voice recognition features.

At the same time, blockchain technology has been employed in supply chain management

systems as it enables the augmentation of procedures transparency, making tracking of poor

ducts and ownership more efficient (Ali et al., 2016; Abeyratne & Monnfared, 2016).

Additionally, blockchain enables and supports identity management and provides support for

public key infrastructure (Ebrahimi, 2017; Raddatz et al., 2021). As such, blockchain is a

powerful technology that can change the future of business transactions and help improve

customer satisfaction as it allows features such as traceability.

While there is an increasing number of scholars and researchers focusing on the

applications of blockchain technology in various sectors, including the retail industry, little

consideration is made to consumers' perspectives on the use of blockchain, including

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE7

consideration of behaviour modification (Dong et al., 2021). From this standpoint, this

dissertation proposes exploring the impact of blockchain technology in the retail industry

from the consumer perspective through three different research papers outlined in the

proposed research phases below. The proposed research will help understand the

potentialities of employing blockchain in the retail industry by acquiring perspectives from

consumers in the luxury market in KSA and the UK organic market.

1.3 Research Objectives and Questions

1.3.1. Research Objective

 To examine the retail sector and ascertain the influence of blockchain within the

industry from the consumer perspective.

1.3.2 Research Question

1. What is the impact of blockchain in the retail industry from the consumer

perspective?
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE8

Chapter 2: Methodology

Designing an integrative view focusing on the consumer's perspective of the impact of

BCT on the retail industry requires organising scattered literature in the form of groups and

conducting an analysis of their compatibility (Oztemel & Gursev, 2018). This analysis

focused on three phases:

 A systematic literature review research with keywords focused on BCT and retail

experience.

 Organising the papers as per the inclusion and exclusion criteria described.

 Forming an integrated view based on the papers that were selected.

2.1 Phase 1: Identifying and Grouping Articles through Relevant Blockchain Literature

In this phase, a systematic review was conducted to select the relevant articles on

BCT in the retail industry. The systematic literature enables the overcoming of biases

compared to the traditional reviews as it explicitly utilises the criteria and procedures for

selecting and including the articles in the sample. Since there has been limited research about

BCT and its impact on the retail industry from per consumer perspective, there were

obstacles to choosing the right keyword for the research. For instance, the search criteria

required specificity to help the researcher attain the most appropriate papers for review.

Moreover, a limited number of databases have reputable sources for literature review

regarding BCT's impact on the retail industry. For this reason, the SCOPUS database was

selected after thorough research, as it has a reputation for hosting quality literature and

rigorous peer review of articles.

The researcher started with the literature fields – retail industry research, BCT in

retail, e-commerce, payments and supply chain area. For the study aims, it selected the

following search terms: "Blockchain, Nonfungible token, Cryptocurrency, Customer,

Consumer, Buyer, Distributed ledger, and Ethereum". In addition to these terms, the
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE9

researcher utilised Boolean operators, including AND and OR, to formulate more concise

phrases for the search. Some of the formulated phrases included; blockchain AND consumer

OR buyer behaviours, cryptocurrency AND its influence on the These terms used together on

the Scopus database. The research took place in August 2022 using the SCOPUS database.

The systematic literature review selected relevant articles focused on consumers' perspectives

of BCT. A systematic literature review allows for an approach that overcomes biases

compared to traditional reviews since these use explicit criteria and procedures to select and

include articles in the sample (Valverde-Berrocoso et al., 2020). Four thousand five hundred

sixteen articles were identified initially and then subjected to the rigorous process of

inclusion/exclusion. The search focused on articles written in English since 2008 because the

first cryptocurrency was introduced in that year.

2.1.1 Keyword Research Process

The first search performed on the SCOPUS database crossed "Blockchain OR

"Blockchain" and "nonfungible token*" OR "nonfungible token" AND "Consumer or

consumers or user* or Customer* or Buyer or Buyers or consumption." The Bolon operator

"AND" was used to ensure that all three items were included in the search, and "OR" was

used to ensure that all variations of terms like "customer," "cryptocurrency," and "buyer"

were included. The truncation symbol (" ") was used in the research to guarantee the

inclusion of terms with the exact origin. In addition, the symbol (∗) was used to include both

singular and plural forms.

Through the initial search on SCOPUS and CABS, 4855 articles were identified by

using the keywords, as shown in the table below.

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE10

Table 1.

The results of the initial search on SCOPUS and CABS

Database Search String

CABS & SCOPUS blockchain OR "blockchain" OR "non-

fungible token*" OR "non-fungible token*"

OR" smart contract"OR bitcoin OR

cryptocurrency* OR crypto OR cryptos

AND consumer OR consumers OR user*

OR customer* OR buyer OR buyers OR

consumption * OR Digital Ledger * OR

Ethereum * OR Shop * OR consumer * OR

buyers

2.1.2 Criteria for Exclusion and Inclusion

The inclusion criteria for the present research included; the paper must be published

between 2008 and 2022; the articles must be written in English; the articles must have BCT

included as a main theme; the articles must be peer-reviewed, and the articles should be

published in CABS. The exclusion criteria included all non-English articles, articles not using

BCT as the main theme, articles with no consumer perspective, articles focused on finance,

technology, government or medicine and reports that are not peer-reviewed journal articles.

2.1.3 Justification for Criteria

The reason for choosing peer-reviewed articles published since 2008 is that the first

cryptocurrency introduced to the world was in 2008. Bitcoin first originated in a white paper

that was published under the pseudonym "Satoshi Nakamoto." The article was published
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE11

through a mailing list for cryptography and had a similar appearance to an academic paper.

Due to the introduction of the first cryptocurrency in 2008, this research was limited to

starting that year. In their pioneering research, the inclusion criteria also included peer-

reviewed articles since Crossan and Paydian (2010) and Qiu et al. (2022) stated that the

central core to validating new knowledge is to limit the search to peer-reviewed English

language journal articles. For this reason, other sources such as books, book chapters,

conference papers, thesis, and dissertations were excluded from the search. The search was

also limited to journals published on CABS, wherein a guide for a wide range of subject

matter is available. Moreover, these journal articles have high quality and focus on business

and management academics, thereby being relevant to the research. The latest guide of the

CABS comprises 1,703 articles.

After we limited the search to journals on CABS, we ended up with 546 articles

(Appendix 1). An exclusion criterion was thereon built to narrow the vision for academic

literature. The exclusion criteria excluded documents that did not focus on BCT or did not

have a consumer perspective. This step was crucial in this research because these keywords

form the core of our analysis. In addition, any document purely focused on finance,

technology, government, or medicine was excluded. In these articles, wherein the focus was

not on the consumer perspective, the purpose of the study was not served. This research

focuses solely on the consumer perspective, and thereby the exclusion criteria have been

essential. The consumer perspective is considered as there is little focus on it currently. From

the consumers' perspective, BCT can lead to increased interaction with the brand; therefore,

the role of BCT from the customers' perspective is also imperative. Articles that focused on

COVID-19 were excluded from the research because these do not serve the purpose of the

research. Furthermore, articles that focused on applications and functions of cryptocurrency

were also excluded from the research.

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE12

2.2 Phase 2: Analysing the Nature of the BCT Phenomenon and Metatheoretical

Assumptions in the Literature Fields

Following the arguments by Okhuysen and Bonardi (2011), this research analysed

eleven literature fields in terms of the focal phenomenon addressed and the ontological,

epistemological and methodological assumptions adopted. By situating the eleven literature

fields in the theoretical map, the researcher was able to navigate across these studies to

develop a conclusion regarding their compatibility. By using the above search strings, the

final initial research ended at 4855 articles. Based on the exclusion criteria in which the

research was limited to articles published on CABS, the article number was 1703. Also, the

articles that were not in a time frame and not from Peer Reviewed Journal were excluded

resulting in 546 articles. After this, full-text articles were excluded with reasons (Any article

that talked about Covid-19, which is something that does not usually happen. Papers which

talked about BCT in a general way, such as those papers that introduced BCT and how it

works) that did not add value in this research were also excluded resulting in total 335

articles.

2.3 Phase 3: Discussion and Analysis of the Findings

2.3.1 Repetition

The number of literature found for a systematic review to analyse the impacts of

Block Chain Technology on the retail industry was 4516 articles collected from the SCOPUS

database. In addition, 1703 articles published in CABS Academic Journal Guide were found

relevant to BCT in the retail sector. After performing inclusion and exclusion (shown in the

Prisma Framework) of the articles based on selected criteria, a sample of 214 articles was

analysed. It was found that the highest proportion of articles in the selection was from 2021,

which counted for 97 articles. While 50 articles mentioned in the sample were written in

2020, 46 were from 2022, and 15 articles from 2019 were found relevant to the topic. Only
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE13

four papers were included in 2018. The minor share of articles was from 2017 and 2015,

which counted as only 1. Although the sample was designed to analyse literature from 2008

when the first article related to the blockchain was written, the process of inclusion and

exclusion filtered the data, and any article from 2008 to 2014 and 2016 was not found

relevant to the topic, hence not included in the study.

2.3.2. Number of Articles

Reviewed articles were a mix of all four types of methodology, whether it be

conceptual, quantitative, qualitative or mixed method approach. Although, articles forming

their results on the Quantitative method remain the most significant part of the sample, which

was 34% (74 articles). Most quantitative articles fell under the B2C category (49), while only

13 quantitative studies fell within the B2B category. 13 of the quantitative articles were

uncategorised. None of the mixed and qualitative studies fell within the C2C category.

Articles with a Mix Method approach comprised the tiniest portion of the sample, only 15%

(19 articles). Twelve of the mixed methods articles fell in the B2C category, with 2, 3 and 2

articles using mixed methods falling within the uncategorised B2B and B2B & B2C groups,

respectively. In comparison, the share of Conceptual and Qualitative articles remained

similar, that was 21.6% (27 articles) for both (Figure 1). The majority of the qualitative

studies (11) were B2C oriented, while eight qualitative articles were B2B. 6 studies were

uncategorised. This number would be key in providing adequate qualitative and quantitative

data for discussion. The diversity in this data would also allow for an in-depth analysis of the

topic in question.
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE14

Figure 1.

Graph showing articles as per their research methodologies

Chart Title
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
B2B B2C C2C N/A B2B & B2C NUMBER OF
ARTICLE2

QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE MIX METHODS

2.3.3 CABS Ranking

Part of the CABS ranking shows the quality of literature reviewed and published in

the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS Academic Journal Guide). Journals of

high quality related to Block Chain Technology are ranked as 4*, whilst the number of ranks

keeps reducing with the quality of journals. Selected literature included three articles from the

high-quality rank 4*, 13 articles from the journals ranked 4, 75 articles from the third rank

and 78 articles from rank 2. The number of articles related to rank 1 was 45, with this ranking

also registering 72 counts of source titles (Figure 2). Journal ranks 2 and 3 registered 26 and

35 counts of source titles. These statistics show that as the article rank reduced, the number of

titles on an article increased. A higher portion (57.48%) of literature was selected from the

next to last rank, whilst the high-quality articles remained a minimum (7.47%) of the total

count. Such statistics point out that, on average, the information attained in this study would

have low credibility, limiting its global application.

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE15

Table 2.

Summarised the number of articles as per the CABS ranking

journal rank on CABS Count Number Of %

of articles Total

Source

title

4* 3 3 1.40%

4 6 13 6.07%

3 26 75 35.05%

2 35 78 36.45%

1 72 45 21.03%
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE16

Chapter 3: Findings and Discussions

3.1 Findings

3.1.1 The Applicability and Utilisation of Blockchain within the Contemporary Retail

Sector

Research on blockchain technology by several authors, including Budak and Çoban

(2021), Casino et al. (2020) and Chowdhury et al. (2022), reveals several impacts of

blockchain and some aspects of its implementation. Sampled evidence on the impact of

blockchain on the business environment indicates that BCT has transformed several

industries through its provision of transparency, traceability, innovation, decreased

transaction costs, and improved security (de Boissieu et al., 2021; Kizildag et al., 2019;

Menon & Jain, 2021; Purusottama et al., 2022). On the other hand, Xu et al. (2022) recently

reviewed blockchain within the supply sector and found that blockchain also offers data

integrity, anonymity, data security, and trust in the data without relying on central third-party

organisations. Through its reliance on a protocol of cryptographic guidelines and techniques

employed in processing transactions, such as hashing, consensus mechanism, asymmetric

encryption through public and private keys, and timestamping (Choi et al., 2020). These

features make this facet an integral part of the retail sector. Given the ability to be utilised for

various advantages, as aforementioned, blockchain has become a major role player within

contemporary retail sectors.

Scholars, including Li et al. (2021), Li et al. (2019), Rijanto (2021) and Salcedo and

Gupta (2021), further assert that due to its innovative features, blockchain has been able to

launch a new paradigm in the performance of transactions and the exchange of information.

As a result, it is critical to understand how it manifests in the organisation, including its

adoption by users. On the other hand, Sander et al. (2018) conducted a study to examine

traceability and transparency with their mixed results, arguing that traceability is a significant
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE17

aspect of blockchain applications whereby consumers can identify and trace the history,

location and distribution of goods and services. Through blockchain, systems can record and

follow information trails of products from suppliers throughout the supply chain network,

easing management and follow-ups (Behnke & Janssen, 2019; Hastig & Sodhi, 2020; Shew

et al., 2021; Shin & Hwang, 2020). The economic, environmental and societal impacts of

BTC products and services have continually become a critical issue for consumers (Bai et al.,

2021; Brookbanks & Parry, 2022; Chaudhuri et al., 2021; Hong et al., 2021). Through

blockchain, Hong et al. (2021) note that consumers can trace the products and services they

consume, benefiting from the transparency and accountability of the system.

However, there are several limitations to the traceability feature of blockchain. First,

Dehghani et al. (2021), Ghode et al. (2020), and Liu and Ye (2021) note that there is a higher

cost to inputting a system allowing traceability because of the complexity of the supply chain

network that involves numerous transactions and the high costs of maintaining such a system.

Further, the decentralised nature of verification is complex and can result in bottleneck

development, particularly in the supply chain, which involves thousands of products daily

(Sundarakani et al., 2021). Other limitations noted in several studies include human error,

technology integration, security, and the fact that it is still evolving and adapting (Choi, 2020;

Danese et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2022; Trabucchi et al., 2020; van Hoek, 2019; Zavolokina

et al., 2021). These are issues that need to be considered when considering the employment of

blockchain concerning the users' perspectives.

3.1.2 Benefits and Challenges Associated with Blockchain in the Retail Sector

This review provided key insights into the recent literature about blockchain

technology. One of the core intentions of conducting the review was to analyse the

advantages and disadvantages of Block Chain technology. The paper investigated both gains

and drawbacks connected to blockchain and tried to identify factors that are important for
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE18

both the promulgation of this technology and the value that market participants like

managers, producers, investors, suppliers and consumers confer on it. A review of the

importance of blockchain within the logistics sector by Kuperberg (2019) further adds to the

arguments by Jain et al. (2020), affirming that the Block chain-enabled agent-based workflow

management guarantees data reliability and truthfulness, making workflow transparent for

customers to know the detailed schedules of operations and simplifying the system

integration process. Ideally, blockchain facilitates information sharing among different actors

in the food industry, such as farmers, food suppliers and investors (Kuperberg, 2019; Lin et

al., 2022; Mnif et al., 2021a; Choi et al., 2020). This technology enables an operative

decision-making process where the information about goods is traceable without any inborn

risk. A different outlook on the advantages posed by blockchain was found in Muzumdar et

al.'s (2022) study that sought to examine the applicability of these features within the trading

system. As per these authors, blockchain is an emerging technology; its use in the food

industry needs to be explored from different angles, such as organisations' policies, adoption

strategies and potential technology innovations which could positively impact business

processes (Westerlund et al., 2021). Although as proposed in this section, blockchain offers

retail stakeholders multiple advantages, it is important to note that effective and dynamic

management approaches are required to maximise this technology towards fulfilling

consumer demands.

As noted by Aghaei et al., 2021; Rashideh (2020), BCT can be useful for the tourism

sector by enhancing the process of booking flights and hotels and making the use of other

commodities easy for travelling. These researchers further assert that the applications of

Blockchain technology and its implementation in hospitality and tourism firms create value

by tokenising to move toward a circular economy (Aghaei et al., 2021; Rashideh, 2020). In

agreement with these assertions, Hoxha & Sadiku, 2019; Oprea & Bâra (2021) also note that
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE19

the use of digital payment networks would expand with the use of Bitcoin and other

cryptocurrencies as the primary mode of payment. This feature would allow for faster, more

reliable, and even more safe transactions for tourists compared to the use of several

convertible currencies (Grover et al., 2019). A more recent study by Yang et al. (2020)

examined consumer outlook and user behaviour towards a blockchain-based framework with

study outcomes pointing out that the Blockchain technique is expected to significantly

promote the development of energy local networks (ELNs) with its features of

decentralisation, smart contract, security and cooperative autonomy. The study results further

infer that BCT has the potential to bring about cheaper transaction costs, improved liquidity,

and market transparency in business operations. It can also raise the value of investment

assets (Yadav et al., 2021). In agreement with the sentiments of Yadav et al. (2021), Wu et al.

(2021) study argue that BCT can increase the speed of international payments for a meagre

cost. It can thus be inferred that blockchain promotes greater transparency and efficiency

within supply chains, which builds consumer trust and improves brand revenue.

Although BCT offers consumers and other stakeholders various advantages,

researchers including Oprea and Bâra (2021) and Mendoza-Tello et al. (2019) agree that

some of the main disadvantages of the blockchain are its high energy dependence, the

complicated process of integration and the high cost of implementation. High energy

dependence plays a major role in increasing the costs of production for the stakeholders. As

per Lin et al.'s (2022) research on BCT and its application within the traceability and demand

of US beef within China, BCT has proven to be less secure as some of the nodes could be

easily compromised. No incentives are yet to be developed for nodes to compete. As per the

above argument, it can be noted that Blockchain technology is often discussed in the context

of trust and referred to as a trust-free or trustworthy technology; therefore, researchers must

design trust-supporting design elements to foster consumer end-user trust within a

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE20

Blockchain platform (Barenji et al., 2019; Gourisetti et al., 2020; Jain et al., 2020; Lin et al.,

2022). A different opinion is offered by Benzidia et al. (2021) who note that in most cases,

BCT's implication is often complicated and requires improved technological quality and

enhanced user trust. These researchers argue that adding blockchain technology is possible in

practice, but scenarios exist where poor processes and primitive technologies exist among

different stakeholders (Benzidia et al., 2021). In these scenarios, major technology upgrades

and process standardisation will likely be required before the implementation of BCT.

3.1.3 Consumer perspective towards BCT for different sectors

A large part of the reviewed literature indicates the consumer perception of

blockchain, its impact on purchase intentions, and how it enhances product quality. Most of

the articles, including Benzidia et al. (2021), Jain et al. (2020) and Mnif et al. (2021b),

focused on analysing consumer behavioural responses to Blockchain technology, such as

their perceived usefulness, perceived ease of using it, perceived joyfulness, trust and other

emotions, along with the articles determining factors influencing their perception or decision-

making and the factors behind their adoption or restraining from the blockchain. For instance,

as per the study by Benzidia et al. (2021), usefulness and ease of use for consumers lowered

the perceived risk and increased the intention to use BCT. These results insinuate that

consumers that perceive BCT to be highly secure are more likely to rely on this technology.

In addition, these consumers are also likely to refer other potential users.

In addition to the aforementioned security associated with BCT, an examination of

BCT within the food industry by Bumblauskas et al. (2020) found that social norms also

decreased perceived risk factors and increased intention to adopt it. This study argues that a

consumer residing within a social setup with a negative outlook of BCT is likelier to develop

such outlooks than those residing in societies with positive BCT outlooks. In comparison, the

results from various studies on consumer perception, including Hoxha and Sadiku (2019) and
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE21

Mnif et al. (2021a), suggested that perceived efficiency, transparency, standardisation,

platform development and traceability factors positively influence consumer's intention to use

it (ITU). Ideally, BCT would suffer from a poor consumer perspective.

The consumer perception towards BCT is diverse within the various sectors. For the

E-commerce industry, Raddatz et al. (2021) note that BCT benefits companies by improving

their innovation capacity and helps enhance trust, transparency, and accountability. In

agreement with Raddatz et al. (2021), Rainero and Modarelli (2021) add that BCT increases

positive consumer perspectives by improving cross-border transactions by providing practical

implications for international e-commerce. It can increase the profit for online platforms and

improves the profits of the supplier, the third-party logistics provider, and the buyer (Rainero

& Modarelli, 2021). Besides these benefits, it also prevents fraudulent behaviour in the

process of returns and exchanges with Smart contracts. Such benefits show a positive

correlation with desirable consumer perspective and behaviour towards BCT (Rainero &

Modarelli, 2021; Sciarelli et al., 2021; Wu et al., 2021). This correlation is a core promoter of

BCT use within these sectors. For instance, consumers with a positive outlook towards BCT

promote its use among their peers and competitors due to the desirable outcomes associated

with blockchain.

The reviewed literature finds that BCT assists retailers, customers and managers. For

instance, some articles discuss the suitable conditions for retailers to adopt blockchain and

how consumers can profit from using it (Dionysis et al., 2022; Jonker, 2019; Kamble et al.,

2019). This literature argued that adopting blockchain benefits customers in terms of

precision, reliability and usability, and they can profit from its quick payment and enhanced

relationship with their seller (Dionysis et al., 2022; Jonker, 2019; Kamble et al., 2019).

Furthermore, support for the above arguments is afforded by Grover et al. (2019) who note

that its multi-attribute decision-support method helps consumers choose a suitable payment
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE22

program and allows users to transfer information, share, exchange and store data in digital

form without any intermediary. Consumers that consistently and effectively benefit from the

above features of BCT develop a positive perspective towards this technology. As

aforementioned, this perspective is critical in marketing BCT to other potential users.

Some parts of the literature, such as Niu et al. (2021), indicate that BCT is critical in

maintaining quality. Further findings from Dionysis et al. (2022), in support of Niu et al.

(2021), show that blockchain labels are a signalling mechanism in food supply chains and

help reinforce consumers' perceived quality of food products that, subsequently, increase

their purchase intention. The analysis also showed consumers' insufficient knowledge and

perceptions of the blockchain system, the low usage level and the higher acquiring tendency

for traceable foodstuffs that generate bi-directional/dimensional value, considering that

consumption habits could change through security and certainty antecedents and induced

knowledge provided by the external technological intervention (Dionysis et al., 2022; Niu et

al., 2021). For stakeholders in the food supply chain, Kumar et al. (2022) add that BCT

provides traceability and transparency, helps build better relationships with their customers,

increases efficiency, and reduces the risk and cost of food recalls, fraud, and product loss.

Such working environments as a result of BCT are essential in improving consumer-to-BCT

perception. A positive perception means that more consumers are likely to continue using

BCT and also promote its use among peers.

3.2 Discussions

Several impacts of blockchain technology have been identified in this research. For

instance, evidence shows that blockchain is a technology associated with an innovative

approach to developing and maintaining customer relationships (Lee et al., 2021; Liu &

Dong, 2021; Liu et al., 2022). This strategy is realised through sharing information with

consumers, such as data on their purchases and how it is stored, and providing them with
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE23

improved data control (Bauer et al., 2019; Leal et al., 2020; Stafford & Treiblmaier, 2020).

Other benefits that consumers benefit from blockchain technology include improvements in

products and service quality, tailored solutions to their problems and needs, convenience and

trust in interaction with firms and innovation in operations leading to improved satisfaction

(Wang et al., 2019; Zavolokina et al., 2019; Zavolokina et al., 2020). Research from wider

literature, such as Glaser (2017), further points out similar arguments, asserting that

blockchain benefits firms through enhanced operations and reduction of transaction costs.

Reviewed literature also shows that the consumer outlook on BTC is positive, owing to more

transparency enabling relationship management with stakeholders and improved performance

due to innovation and order management (Azzi et al., 2019; Laforet & Bilek, 2021; Martinez

et al., 2019; Tian et al., 2020). Thus, the benefits of blockchain are varied for both

organisations and consumers. These results help achieve the study objective by pointing out

consumers' desirable perspectives towards BTC.

In response to the research objective, it is crucial to understand the challenges and

problems that need to be overcome as part of BTC utilisation. The sampled evidence focuses

on three major challenges that must be solved; technical, institutional, and human (Kshetri,

2022; Marikyan et al., 2022). First, blockchain technology is illustrated as a complex process

that poses various challenges to user-friendliness (Mnif et al., 2021b; Shao et al., 2022). In

agreement with this argument, outside research by Du et al. (2019) notes that user-

friendliness is a critical aspect for users and in the adoption of technology. Secondly,

blockchain technology faces institutional challenges, such as government restrictions on

using the application in some instances, such as the major sectors like tourism (Treiblmaier et

al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2021). This aspect limits the expansion of the use of blockchain

technology. Finally, blockchain faces a human challenge, particularly with the users. Users

must adopt blockchain technology to benefit from its advantages, including easier payments
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE24

and supply chain visibility (Huberman et al., 2021; Nazifi et al., 2021; Rogerson & Parry,

2020). However, BCT technology has faced multiple challenges in its adoption, particularly

among consumers, including the lack of trust in BCT users (Utz et al., 2022; Völter et al.,

2021). Although outside literature by Raddatz et al. (2021) acknowledges the presence of the

above-stated limitations, the authors recognise the role of firms and users in limiting these

challenges. This point calls for organisations to implement applications that will be easily

accepted and adopted.

As per Su et al. (2022) study that examines the BCT-human interaction, one of the

major setbacks of blockchain is that nothing can be changed, and thus, once a mistake is

made, it is stored forever. This assertion would mean that the consumer perspective this study

sought to examine heavily relies on the experience these users have when employing BTC.

Human-related challenges also include security risks that can have wide-ranging

repercussions and damaging consequences for an organisation (Rashideh, 2020; Woo & Yoo,

2022). In agreement with the need to critique BTC from a consumer perspective and solve the

users' major issues, Vial (2019) and Ventre and Kolbe (2020) posit that security risks are

issues that a firm must consider while implementing and employing blockchain in its

operations. It is thus imperative to understand consumers' perspectives on its use in the retail

industry.

The research obtained the key objective, finding that a positive consumer perspective

exists within the retail sector towards BTC. The positive outlook consumers have towards

BCT was noted to affect the utilisation of this technology across various sectors. For instance,

Maity et al. (2021) argue that block Chain can potentially improve information-sharing

networks and policy-making process and provides useful guidelines for developing future e-

government services based on this technology. As per several authors, BCT mitigates the

asymmetric information between buyers and sellers. Furthermore, its sufficient and verifiable
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE25

information system, appropriate levels of usability, and unobstructed data access can increase

customer loyalty (Maity et al., 2021; Niu et al., 2021; Pranto et al., 2021). The diversity and

applicability of BCT increase consumer preference, further promoting its use. In agreement

with the above results, broader literature from studies such as Ebrahaimi (2017) and Waldo

(2018) points out that consumers within this sector are increasingly applying BCT. Although

there still exists challenges associated with BCT, the merits associated with this technology

overly surpass the demerits.

Reviewed literature such as Hoxha and Sadiku (2019) and Leal et al. (2021), indicates

some of the disadvantages or risk scenarios related to blockchain technology including risks

in managerial adoption, problems related to technical infrastructure, vulnerabilities related to

changing regulations and business situations and the consumer's hesitation in adapting to this

emerging technology. Outside literature by Kim and Laskowski (2018) argues that BTC's

biggest hindrances are its expensiveness, complicated modification and adjustment methods.

All these factors, along with a lack of trust and the user's perceived privacy and

confidentiality risks, influence the promptness of its acceptance (Hoxha & Sadiku, 2019; Leal

et al., 2021). It is also suggested by authors such as Niu et al. (2021) informs that

implementation of the blockchain requires a regulatory framework and appropriate

governance rules. In light of these regulations, the consumers are likely to have a positive

view of BTC, further evidence for the research objective.

Ben Amor and Ben Yahia (2021) studied the implication of BCT on transactions

within online platforms. Further, they pointed to the desirable consumer perception of BCT,

arguments that confirm the research objective and answer the research question for this SLR.

As per these authors, the high-security features associated with BCT are a core trait most

users look for (Ben Amor & Ben Yahia, 2021). In such cases, the higher security in BCT is

likely to attract more consumers within the coming years. In addition to security, the ease in
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE26

management of operations is also a key indicator of positive consumer perception, additional

evidence that this SLR achieved its research objective. Such sentiments are shared by outside

literature, including Conoscenti et al. (2016) and Ali et al. (2016), who argue that Block

Chain technology remains effective in improving the quality of products or services and

provides help in achieving business goals. It assists managers in managing business

operations, Information flow and logistics management (Faizan et al., 2019; Jonker, 2019;

Lakkakula et al., 2021; Marella et al., 2020). Given the competitiveness of contemporary

markets, the ease of operation management gives these users a competitive advantage. Such

benefits would mean that these businesses increase their productivity and profitability, further

creating a positive outlook towards BCT.

3.3 Gaps in the Literature

This study analysed the selected sample of articles to find the gaps in the existing

blockchain literature. There are many gaps in articles related to their methodology, data

sampling, and module implications to determine the acceptance of this technology. For

instance, the results reveal that most literature does not focus on implementing or using

blockchain in any specific region or country. Most of the reviewed articles formed their basis

on the general and overall use of blockchain or mainly focused on its use in developed

countries like the USA, UK, France, Taiwan and Korea, where it has been accepted well (Agi

& Jha, 2022; Kumar et al., 2022; Lakkakula et al., 2021). This generalisation means that

specific markets cannot benefit from this data to design specialised adoption and utilisation of

BCT. It was also observed that cost-related implications of blockchain adoption in supply

chain and other industries are also not much focused; consequently, this created a gap that

can be addressed through more research tailored towards this issue.

Additionally, as the implementation process of BCT is time-consuming, the studies

have yet to conduct real-time implementations and form their results on assumptions.
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE27

Researchers such as Kamble et al. (2019) only focused on its adoption from a general

perspective. Literature on cryptocurrency use, challenges and benefits, particularly Ethereum,

is available in sufficient amounts (Faizan et al., 2019). However, other types of BCTs still

need to be studied, as different blockchain technologies are currently in use those developers

of different industries are continually adapting with. The articles selected for the review

focused on a limited period and region. Long-term experience of using blockchain or

consumer perception of using it for a long time has yet to be available in the literature.

On the other hand, some of the region-specific article's findings, such as Kamble et al.

(2019), cannot be applied to other regions as they are based on homogenous or exploratory

data samples. That indicates the need for a confirmatory approach and research with different

geographical regions. Also, a gap is noted in region-specific literature where respondents

have a vast difference in culture within the region, limiting the research outcomes from

implication to the whole region/country (Hoxha & Sadiku, 2019; Kamble et al., 2019; Lin et

al., 2022). Some articles, such as Zhang et al. (2019), have limited text data and a single data

selection platform that needs explicit text content features and information source credibility.

All these aspects influence the credibility of the results.

While there has been much consideration of the technological and cryptographic

perspectives by authors such as Yang et al. (2020), studies on the economic aspects,

especially its use as a payment mechanism in e-commerce, are rare. The review further

indicated that a large part of the literature is informed about the use, user experience,

challenges and benefits of public blockchain (Dionysis et al., 2022; Grima et al., 2020;

Grover et al., 2019; Jang & Han, 2022; Marella et al., 2020; Raddatz et al., 2021; Wang et al.,

2021; Zhou et al., 2022). In contrast, the private blockchain that shares several uses in large

companies is ignored or focused on a trim level. Similarly, hybrid and consortium blockchain

shares a minimal amount of number in literature and requires more focus to predict their
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE28

implications in different fields in future. It was found that a thorough study of the overall

cost-related impact of blockchain adoption has yet to be conducted, which provides insights

into the cost of its implementation or the reduced costs and returns on investments due to its

adoption. Besides, most reviewed articles were experimental and lacked an in-depth

understanding of consumers' need to adapt to the technology.

This systematic literature review effectively contributes to the understanding of

available literature on Blockchain technology as it addresses a general review of quality

articles from CABS. However, the final results of the systematic review indicate that the

literature review has several gaps and limits. While categorising their overall level of analysis

(for all country, industry, firm and individual perspectives), their theoretical approach and

determining their performance for internal or external organisations were termed as N/A.

Some articles remain uncategorised even for their format, hypothesis development, and data

collection method. At the same time, there was a lack of developing understanding to

categorise the unit of analysis articles discussed. Therefore, this study does not present a

detailed review and remains limited to addressing the kind of available literature about

Blockchain technology (particularly its use and impacts in different countries). Also, there is

a need for research with a more expanded sample size and good categories to determine

Blockchain adoption, consumption and its positive/negative impacts on the retail industry in

respect of different regions.

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE29

Chapter 4: Conclusions and Recommendations

4.1 Conclusions

This review sought to examine the role and impact of BCT on the retail sector. In so

doing, the researcher compared the implications of BCT to the retail sector and other

industries. Key findings from the sampled articles indicate that BCT has had various benefits,

limitations and challenges. However, most of the findings point to a positive outlook of BCT

within this sector. Some of the articles about supply-chain revealed the factors influencing

consumers' adoption of blockchain technology (BCT). Perceived security and privacy were

identified as crucial factors that affect perceived usefulness, ease of use, and trust towards

blockchain technology in the retail supply chain. It was further found that BCT Improves

supply chain transparency, reduces signalling costs, and combats copycats efficiently. Some

articles revealed that BCT could improve the supply chain's security, speed and quality. In

addition, it can be used against counterfeits with its traceability and product tracking features.

In addition, this review points out that consumers are in support of continued BCT use

within the retail sector. Comparisons with other sectors also show that the benefits supersede

common challenges, such as security risks. Moreover, blockchain technology is integrated to

record service provision contracts automatically. It was found that its usefulness and ease of

use for consumers lowered the perceived risk and increased the intention to use BCT. Social

norms also decreased perceived risk factors and increased intention to adopt them. In

comparison, the results from various studies on consumer perception suggested that perceived

efficiency, transparency, standardisation, platform development and traceability factors

positively influence consumers' intention to use it (ITU).

4.2 Recommendations

Several recommendations are made in light of the attained results and identified gaps.

The study points to the need for further investigation to understand BCT users better and
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE30

address the need to understand the perspective of users' usability and security issues and the

trade-off between these. It was observed from the review that the economic benefits of

blockchain had been widely studied in previous research. To make it work for individual

businesses, it is crucial to research blockchain technology's positive and negative effects on

the organisational structure, mode of operation, and business management model.

Furthermore, it is also essential to determine in future studies; whether blockchain can

resolve the market failures resulting from information asymmetry and whether it increases

market efficiency or brings social welfare while considering the market as a whole. Though

blockchain transactions are anonymous and encrypted, there is still a risk of the data being

hacked. In the security sector, there is a view that absolute security can never be guaranteed

wherever physical contact exists. Consequently, the question of how to share transaction data

while protecting personal data privacy is particularly vital for both academic and social

practice. It is also recommended for future studies find an answer to this question.

As per the gaps identified in the literature, future research can be held with a focus on

the implementation or usage of blockchain in any specific region or country, its performance

in a particular market sector and barriers in its way of adaptation in a particular society

(considering their specific culture, consumer behaviour or economic status). Also, future

researchers are suggested to conduct research in a specific region and for a specific industry,

with theoretical and conceptual support, to increase their understanding. Additionally, future

research should investigate the responses for blockchain traceability systems to increase the

Awareness of consumers less familiar with the technology. This review also recommends

future research to study how the online platform should motivate its sellers to deploy

blockchain ways to reduce risk elements from an online platform for both seller and

consumer. There is a vast opportunity to conduct research with data collected from multiple

sources, online surveys, reviews and customer points to analyse the user perspective while
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE31

utilising BCT and to determine factors restricting people from using it. Besides, to check its

effectiveness there, future studies must conduct implementation practices of BCT in the

urban logistics and retail sector in developing countries or regions other than developed

countries.
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE32

References

Aghaei, H., Naderibeni, N., & Karimi, A. (2021). Designing a tourism business model on

block chain platform. Tourism Management Perspectives, 39, 100845.

[Link]

Agi, M. A. N., & Jha, A. K. (2022). Blockchain technology for supply chain management:

An integrated theoretical perspective of organisational adoption. International

Journal of Production Economics, 247, 108458.

[Link]

Alshamsi, A., & Andras, Prof. P. (2019). User perception of Bitcoin usability and security

across novice users. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 126, 94–110.

[Link]

Azzi, R., Chamoun, R. K., & Sokhn, M. (2019). The power of a blockchain-based supply

chain. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 135, 582–592.

[Link]

Bai, C., Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2021). Joint blockchain service vendor-platform selection

using social network relationships: A multi-provider multi-user decision perspective.

International Journal of Production Economics, 238, 108165.

[Link]

Barenji, A., Li, Z., Wang, W. M., Huang, G. Q., & Guerra-Zubiaga, D. A. (2019).

Blockchain-based ubiquitous manufacturing: A secure and reliable cyber-physical

system. International Journal of Production Research, 58(7), 2200–2221.

[Link]

Bauer, I., Zavolokina, L., & Schwabe, G. (2019). Is there a market for trusted car data?

Electronic Markets, 30(2), 211–225. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE33

Behnke, K., & Janssen, M. F. W. H. A. (2019). Boundary conditions for traceability in food

supply chains using blockchain technology. International Journal of Information

Management, 52, 1-10. [Link]

Ben Amor, N., & Ben Yahia, I. (2021). Investigating blockchain technology effects on online

platforms transactions: Do risk aversion and technophilia matter? Journal of Internet

Commerce, 21(3), 271-296. [Link]

Benzidia, S., Makaoui, N., & Subramanian, N. (2021). Impact of ambidexterity of blockchain

technology and social factors on new product development: A supply chain and

Industry 4.0 perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 169, 120819.

[Link]

Bolici, F., Acciarini, C., Marchegiani, L., & Pirolo, L. (2020). Innovation diffusion in

tourism: how information about blockchain is exchanged and characterised on twitter.

The TQM Journal, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). [Link]

2020-0016

Brookbanks, M., & Parry, G. (2022). The impact of a blockchain platform on trust in

established relationships: a case study of wine supply chains. Supply Chain

Management: An International Journal, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print).

[Link]

Budak, A., & Çoban, V. (2021). Evaluation of the impact of blockchain technology on supply

chain using cognitive maps. Expert Systems with Applications, 184, 115455.

[Link]

Bumblauskas, D., Mann, A., Dugan, B., & Rittmer, J. (2020). A blockchain use case in food

distribution: Do you know where your food has been? International Journal of

Information Management, 52, 102008.

[Link]
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE34

Büyüközkan, G., Tüfekçi, G., & Uztürk, D. (2021). Evaluating blockchain requirements for

effective digital supply chain management. International Journal of Production

Economics, 242, 108309. [Link]

Carvalho, A. (2021). Bringing transparency and trustworthiness to loot boxes with blockchain

and smart contracts. Decision Support Systems, 144, 113508.

[Link]

Casino, F., Kanakaris, V., Dasaklis, T. K., Moschuris, S., Stachtiaris, S., Pagoni, M., &

Rachaniotis, N. P. (2021). Blockchain-based food supply chain traceability: A case

study in the dairy sector. International Journal of Production Research, 59(19), 5758-

5770.. [Link]

Chaudhuri, A., Bhatia, M. S., Kayikci, Y., Fernandes, K. J., & Fosso-Wamba, S. (2021).

Improving social sustainability and reducing supply chain risks through blockchain

implementation: role of outcome and behavioural mechanisms. Annals of Operations

Research, 2021, 1-13. [Link]

Choi, T.-M. (2020). Creating all-win by blockchain technology in supply chains: Impacts of

agents' risk attitudes towards cryptocurrency. Journal of the Operational Research

Society, 72(11), 1–16. [Link]

Choi, T.-M., Guo, S., Liu, N., & Shi, X. (2020). Optimal pricing in on-demand-service-

platform-operations with hired agents and risk-sensitive customers in the blockchain

era. European Journal of Operational Research, 284(3), 1031–1042.

[Link]

Chowdhury, S., Rodriguez-Espindola, O., Dey, P., & Budhwar, P. (2022). Blockchain

technology adoption for managing risks in operations and supply chain management:

Evidence from the UK. Annals of Operations Research, 2022, 1-36.

[Link]
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE35

Danese, P., Mocellin, R., & Romano, P. (2021). Designing blockchain systems to prevent

counterfeiting in wine supply chains: A multiple-case study. International Journal of

Operations & Production Management, 41(13), 1–33. [Link]

12-2019-0781

de Boissieu, E., Kondrateva, G., Baudier, P., & Ammi, C. (2021). The use of blockchain in

the luxury industry: Supply chains and the traceability of goods. Journal of

Enterprise Information Management, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print).

[Link]

Dehghani, M., Popova, A., & Gheitanchi, S. (2022). Factors impacting digital

transformations of the food industry by adoption of blockchain technology. Journal of

Business & Industrial Marketing, 37(9), 1818-1834.. [Link]

2020-0540

Dionysis, S., Chesney, T., & McAuley, D. (2022). Examining the influential factors of

consumer purchase intentions for blockchain traceable coffee using the theory of

planned behaviour. British Food Journal, 124(12), 4304-4322..

[Link]

Faizan, M., Brenner, T., Foerster, F., Wittwer, C., & Koch, B. (2019). Decentralised bottom-

up energy trading using Ethereum as a platform. Journal of Energy Markets, 12(2),

19–48. [Link]

Ghode, D. J., Yadav, V., Jain, R., & Soni, G. (2020). Blockchain adoption in the supply

chain: An appraisal on challenges. Journal of Manufacturing Technology

Management, 32(1), 42-62. [Link]

Gourisetti, S. N. G., Mylrea, M., & Patangia, H. (2020). Evaluation and demonstration of

blockchain applicability framework. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,

67(4), 1142–1156. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE36

Grima, S., Spiteri, J., & Romānova, I. (2020). A STEEP framework analysis of the key

factors impacting the use of blockchain technology in the insurance industry. The

Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance-Issues and Practice, 45, 398-425.

[Link]

Grover, P., Kar, A. K., Janssen, M., & Ilavarasan, P. V. (2019). Perceived usefulness, ease of

use and user acceptance of blockchain technology for digital transactions–insights

from user-generated content on Twitter. Enterprise Information Systems, 13(6), 771-

800. [Link]

Guo, S., Sun, X., & Lam, H. K. S. (2020). Applications of blockchain technology in

sustainable fashion supply chains: Operational transparency and environmental

efforts. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(4), 1–17.

[Link]

Hastig, G. M., & Sodhi, M. S. (2020). Blockchain for supply chain traceability: Business

requirements and critical success factors. Production and Operations Management,

29(4), 935–954. [Link]

Hong, W., Mao, J., Wu, L., & Pu, X. (2021). Public cognition of the application of

blockchain in food safety management—Data from China's Zhihu platform. Journal

of Cleaner Production, 303, 127044. [Link]

Hoxha, V., & Sadiku, S. (2019). Study of factors influencing the decision to adopt the

blockchain technology in real estate transactions in Kosovo. Property Management,

37(5), 684-700. [Link]

Huang, C.-K., Lee, N. C.-A., & Chen, W.-C. (2022). Dilemmatic dual-factor determinants of

discontinuous intention in cryptocurrency usage. Information Technology & People,

(ahead-of-print). [Link]
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE37

Huberman, G., Leshno, J. D., & Moallemi, C. (2021). Monopoly without a monopolist: An

economic analysis of the bitcoin payment system. The Review of Economic

Studies, 88(6), 3011-3040. [Link]

Jain, G., Singh, H., Chaturvedi, K. R., & Rakesh, S. (2020). Blockchain in logistics industry:

In fizz customer trust or not. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 33(3),

541–558. [Link]

Jang, H., & Han, S. H. (2022). User experience framework for understanding user experience

in blockchain services. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 158,

102733. [Link]

Jonker, N. (2019). What drives the adoption of crypto-payments by online retailers?

Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 35, 100848.

[Link]

Kamble, S., Gunasekaran, A., & Arha, H. (2018). Understanding the Blockchain technology

adoption in supply chains-Indian context. International Journal of Production

Research, 57(7), 2009–2033. [Link]

Kizildag, M., Dogru, T., Zhang, T. (Christina), Mody, M. A., Altin, M., Ozturk, A. B., &

Ozdemir, O. (2019). Blockchain: A paradigm shift in business practices. International

Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(3), 953-975.

[Link]

Kshetri, N. (2022). Blockchain systems and ethical sourcing in the mineral and metal

industry: A multiple case study. The International Journal of Logistics Management,

33(1), 1–27. [Link]

Kumar, N., Upreti, K., & Mohan, D. (2022). Blockchain adoption for provenance and

traceability in the retail food supply chain. International Journal of E-Business

Research, 18(2), 1–17. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE38

Kuperberg, M. (2019). Blockchain-based identity management: A survey from the enterprise

and ecosystem perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(4),

1008-1027. [Link]

Kusi-Sarpong, S., Mubarik, M. S., Khan, S. A., Brown, S., & Mubarak, M. F. (2021).

Intellectual capital, blockchain-driven supply chain and sustainable production: Role

of supply chain mapping. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175,

121331. [Link]

Laforet, L., & Bilek, G. (2021, July). Blockchain: an inter-organisational innovation likely to

transform supply chain. In Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 22(3),

240-249. [Link]

Lakkakula, P., Bullock, D. W., & Wilson, W. W. (2021). Asymmetric information and

blockchains in soybean commodity markets. Applied Economic Perspectives and

Policy, 44(1), 273–298. [Link]

Leal, F., Chis, A. E., & González–Vélez, H. (2021). Multi-service model for blockchain

networks. Information Processing & Management, 58(3), 102525.

[Link]

Leal, F., Malheiro, B., Veloso, B., & Burguillo, J. C. (2020). Responsible processing of

crowdsourced tourism data. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(5), 774-794.

[Link]

Lee, M., Frank, L., & IJsselsteijn, W. (2021). Brokerbot: A cryptocurrency chatbot in the

social-technical gap of trust. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 30(1),

79–117. [Link]

Li, G., Fan, Z.-P., & Wu, X.-Y. (2021). The choice strategy of authentication technology for

luxury e-commerce platforms in the blockchain era. IEEE Transactions on

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE39

Engineering Management, 70(3), 1239 - 1252.

[Link]

Li, M., Shen, L., & Huang, G. Q. (2019). Blockchain-enabled workflow operating system for

logistics resources sharing in E-commerce logistics real estate service. Computers &

Industrial Engineering, 135, 950–969. [Link]

Lin, W., Ortega, D. L., Ufer, D., Caputo, V., & Awokuse, T. (2022). Blockchain‐based

traceability and demand for US beef in China. Applied Economic Perspectives and

Policy, 44(1), 253-272. [Link]

Liu, C.-H. S., & Dong, T.-P. (2021). Discovering the relationship among knowledge

management, sustainability marketing and service improvement: The moderating role

of consumer interest. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality

Management, 33(8), 2799–2816. [Link]

Liu, N., & Ye, Z. (2021). Empirical research on the blockchain adoption–based on

TAM. Applied Economics, 53(37), 4263-4275.

[Link]

Liu, Z., Li, Y., Min, Q., & Chang, M. (2022). User incentive mechanism in blockchain-based

online community: An empirical study of steemit. Information & Management, 59(7),

103596. [Link]

Lu, W., Wu, L., & Xue, F. (2022). Blockchain technology for projects: A multicriteria

decision matrix. Project Management Journal, 53(1), 84-99.

[Link]

Maity, M., Tolooie, A., Sinha, A. K., & Tiwari, M. K. (2021). Stochastic batch dispersion

model to optimise traceability and enhance transparency using blockchain. Computers

& Industrial Engineering, 154, 107134. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE40

Marella, V., Upreti, B., Merikivi, J., & Tuunainen, V. K. (2020). Understanding the creation

of trust in cryptocurrencies: the case of Bitcoin. Electronic Markets, 30(2), 259-271.

[Link]

Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., Rana, O. F., & Ranjan, R. (2022). Blockchain adoption: A

study of cognitive factors underpinning decision making. Computers in Human

Behavior, 131, 107207. [Link]

Martinez, V., Zhao, M., Blujdea, C., Han, X., Neely, A., & Albores, P. (2019). Blockchain-

driven customer order management. International Journal of Operations &

Production Management, 39(6/7/8), 993–1022. [Link]

2019-0100

Mendoza-Tello, J. C., Mora, H., Pujol-López, F. A., & Lytras, M. D. (2019). Disruptive

innovation of cryptocurrencies in consumer acceptance and trust. Information Systems

and E-Business Management, 17(2-4), 195–222. [Link]

00415-w

Menon, S., & Jain, K. (2021). Blockchain technology for transparency in agri-food supply

chain: Use cases, limitations, and future directions. IEEE Transactions on

Engineering Management, 1–15. [Link]

Mnif, E., Lacombe, I., & Jarboui, A. (2021). Users' perception toward Bitcoin Green with big

data analytics. Society and Business Review, 16(4), 592-615.

[Link]

Mnif, E., Mouakhar, K., & Jarboui, A. (2021). Blockchain technology awareness on social

media: Insights from twitter analytics. The Journal of High Technology Management

Research, 32(2), 100416. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE41

Muzumdar, A., Modi, C., & Vyjayanthi, C. (2022). A permissioned blockchain enabled

trustworthy and incentivised emission trading system. Journal of Cleaner Production,

349, 131274. [Link]

Nazifi, A., Murdy, S., Marder, B., Gäthke, J., & Shabani, B. (2021). A Bit(coin) of happiness

after a failure: An empirical examination of the effectiveness of cryptocurrencies as

an innovative recovery tool. Journal of Business Research, 124, 494–505.

[Link]

Niu, B., Dong, J., & Liu, Y. (2021). Incentive alignment for blockchain adoption in medicine

supply chains. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review,

152, 102276. [Link]

Niu, B., Mu, Z., Cao, B., & Gao, J. (2021). Should multinational firms implement blockchain

to provide quality verification? Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and

Transportation Review, 145, 102121. [Link]

Nuseir, M. T. (2020). Potential impacts of blockchain technology on business practices of

bricks and mortar (B&M) grocery stores. Business Process Management Journal,

27(4), 1256-1274. [Link]

Oprea, S.-V., & Bâra, A. (2021). Devising a trading mechanism with a joint price adjustment

for local electricity markets using blockchain. Insights for policy makers. Energy

Policy, 152, 112237. [Link]

Petri, I., Barati, M., Rezgui, Y., & Rana, O. F. (2020). Blockchain for energy sharing and

trading in distributed prosumer communities. Computers in Industry, 123, 103282.

[Link]

Polasik, M., Piotrowska, A. I., Wisniewski, T. P., Kotkowski, R., & Lightfoot, G. (2015).

Price fluctuations and the use of bitcoin: An empirical inquiry. International Journal
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE42

of Electronic Commerce, 20(1), 9–49.

[Link]

Pranto, T. H., Noman, A. A., Rahaman, M., Haque, A. K. M. B., Islam, A. K. M. N., &

Rahman, R. M. (2021). A blockchain, smart contract and data mining based approach

toward the betterment of e-commerce. Cybernetics and Systems, 53(5), 443–467.

[Link]

Pun, H., Swaminathan, J. M., & Hou, P. (2021). Blockchain adoption for combating

deceptive counterfeits. Production and Operations Management, 30(4), 864-882.

[Link]

Purusottama, A., Simatupang, T. M., & Sunitiyoso, Y. (2022). The spectrum of blockchain

adoption for developing business model innovation. Business Process Management

Journal, 28(3), 834-855. [Link]

Qi, S., Li, Y., Wei, W., Li, Q., Qiao, K., & Qi, Y. (2022). Truth: A Blockchain-Aided Secure

Reputation System With Genuine Feedbacks. IEEE Transactions on Engineering

Management, 1–15. [Link]

Raddatz, N., Coyne, J., Menard, P., & Crossler, R. E. (2021). Becoming a blockchain user:

Understanding consumers' benefits realisation to use blockchain-based applications.

European Journal of Information Systems, 1–26.

[Link]

Rainero, C., & Modarelli, G. (2021). Food tracking and blockchain-induced knowledge: A

corporate social responsibility tool for sustainable decision-making. British Food

Journal, 123(12), 4284-4308. [Link]

Raj, P. V. R. P., Jauhar, S. K., Ramkumar, M., & Pratap, S. (2022). Procurement, traceability

and advance cash credit payment transactions in supply chain using blockchain smart
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE43

contracts. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 167, 108038.

[Link]

Rashideh, W. (2020). Blockchain technology framework: Current and future perspectives for

the tourism industry. Tourism Management, 80, 104125.

[Link]

Rijanto, A. (2021). Blockchain technology adoption in supply chain finance. Journal of

Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(7), 3078–3098.

[Link]

Rogerson, M., & Parry, G. C. (2020). Blockchain: case studies in food supply chain

visibility. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 25(5), 601-614.

[Link]

Salcedo, E., & Gupta, M. (2021). The effects of individual-level espoused national cultural

values on the willingness to use Bitcoin-like blockchain currencies. International

Journal of Information Management, 60, 102388.

[Link]

Sander, F., Semeijn, J., & Mahr, D. (2018). The acceptance of blockchain technology in meat

traceability and transparency. British Food Journal, 120(9), 2066–2079.

[Link]

Schneider, S., Leyer, M., & Tate, M. (2020). The transformational impact of blockchain

technology on business models and ecosystems: A symbiosis of human and

technology agents. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(4), 1184-

1195. [Link]

Sciarelli, M., Prisco, A., Gheith, M. H., & Muto, V. (2022). Factors affecting the adoption of

blockchain technology in innovative Italian companies: an extended TAM

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE44

approach. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(3), 495-507.

[Link]

Shao, Z., Zhang, L., Brown, S. A., & Zhao, T. (2022). Understanding users' trust transfer

mechanism in a blockchain-enabled platform: A mixed methods study. Decision

Support Systems, 155, 113716. [Link]

Sharma, M. G. (2023). Supply chain, geographical indicator and blockchain: provenance

model for commodity. International Journal of Productivity and Performance

Management, 72(1), 92-108. [Link]

Shen, B., Dong, C., & Minner, S. (2022). Combating copycats in the supply chain with

permissioned blockchain technology. Production and Operations Management, 31(1),

138-154. [Link]

Shen, B., Xu, X., & Yuan, Q. (2020). Selling secondhand products through an online

platform with blockchain. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and

Transportation Review, 142, 102066. [Link]

Shew, A. M., Snell, H. A., Nayga Jr, R. M., & Lacity, M. C. (2022). Consumer valuation of

blockchain traceability for beef in the United States. Applied Economic Perspectives

and Policy, 44(1), 299-323. [Link]

Shin, D., & Hwang, Y. (2020). The effects of security and traceability of blockchain on

digital affordance. Online Information Review, 44(4), 913–932.

[Link]

Stafford, T. F., & Treiblmaier, H. (2020). Characteristics of a blockchain ecosystem for

secure and sharable electronic medical records. IEEE Transactions on Engineering

Management, 67(4), 1340–1362. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE45

Su, K.-W., Chiu, P.-C., & Lin, T.-H. (2022). Establishing a blockchain online travel agency

with a human–computer interaction perspective. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

Technology, 13(3), 559-572. [Link]

Sundarakani, B., Ajaykumar, A., & Gunasekaran, A. (2021). Big data driven supply chain

design and applications for blockchain: An action research using case study approach.

Omega, 102, 102452. [Link]

Tao, F., Wang, Y.-Y., & Zhu, S.-H. (2022). Impact of blockchain technology on the optimal

pricing and quality decisions of platform supply chains. International Journal of

Production Research, 1–15. [Link]

Tian, Z., Zhong, R. Y., Vatankhah Barenji, A., Wang, Y. T., Li, Z., & Rong, Y. (2020). A

blockchain-based evaluation approach for customer delivery satisfaction in

sustainable urban logistics. International Journal of Production Research, 59(7),

2229–2249. [Link]

Tozanlı, Ö., Kongar, E., & Gupta, S. M. (2020). Trade-in-to-upgrade as a marketing strategy

in disassembly-to-order systems at the edge of blockchain technology. International

Journal of Production Research, 58(23), 7183–7200.

[Link]

Trabucchi, D., Moretto, A., Buganza, T., & MacCormack, A. (2020). Disrupting the

disruptors or enhancing them? How blockchain reshapes two‐sided

platforms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 37(6), 552-574.

[Link]

Treiblmaier, H., & Garaus, M. (2023). Using blockchain to signal quality in the food supply

chain: The impact on consumer purchase intentions and the moderating effect of

brand familiarity. International Journal of Information Management, 68, 102514.

[Link]
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE46

Treiblmaier, H., Leung, D., Kwok, A. O., & Tham, A. (2021). Cryptocurrency adoption in

travel and tourism–An exploratory study of Asia Pacific travellers. Current Issues in

Tourism, 24(22), 3165-3181. [Link]

Tsoukalas, G., & Falk, B. H. (2020). Token-weighted crowdsourcing. Management Science,

66(9), 3843–3859. [Link]

Utz, M., Johanning, S., Roth, T., Bruckner, T., & Strüker, J. (2022). From ambivalence to

trust: Using blockchain in customer loyalty programs. International Journal of

Information Management, 68, 102496.

[Link]

van Hoek, R. (2019). Developing a framework for considering blockchain pilots in the supply

chain – lessons from early industry adopters. Supply Chain Management: An

International Journal, 25(1), 115–121. [Link]

Veuger, J. (2018). Trust in a viable real estate economy with disruption and blockchain.

Facilities, 36(1/2), 103–120. [Link]

Völter, F., Urbach, N., & Padget, J. (2021). Trusting the trust machine: Evaluating trust

signals of blockchain applications. International Journal of Information Management,

102429. [Link]

Wang, B., Wang, P., & Tu, Y. (2021). Customer satisfaction service match and service

quality-based blockchain cloud manufacturing. International Journal of Production

Economics, 240, 108220. [Link]

Wang, L., Luo, X. (Robert), & Lee, F. (2019). Unveiling the interplay between blockchain

and loyalty program participation: A qualitative approach based on Bubichain.

International Journal of Information Management, 49, 397–410.

[Link]
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE47

Wang, L., Luo, X. R., Lee, F., & Benitez, J. (2021). Value creation in blockchain-driven

supply chain finance value creation in blockchain-driven supply chain finance.

Information & Management, 59(7), 103510. [Link]

Wang, Z., Li, M., Lu, J., & Cheng, X. (2022). Business innovation based on artificial

intelligence and blockchain technology. Information Processing & Management,

59(1), 102759. [Link]

Westerlund, M., Nene, S., Leminen, S., & Rajahonka, M. (2021). An exploration of

blockchain-based traceability in food supply chains: On the benefits of distributed

digital records from farm to fork. Technology Innovation Management Review, 11(6),

6–18. [Link]

Woo, C., & Yoo, J. (2023). Exploring the determinants of blockchain acceptance for research

data management. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 63(1), 216-227..

[Link]

Wu, X.-Y., Fan, Z.-P., & Cao, B.-B. (2021). An analysis of strategies for adopting blockchain

technology in the fresh product supply chain. International Journal of Production

Research, 1–18. [Link]

Xu, X., & Choi, T.-M. (2021). Supply chain operations with online platforms under the cap-

and-trade regulation: Impacts of using blockchain technology. Transportation

Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 155, 102491.

[Link]

Xu, X., Tatge, L., Xu, X., & Liu, Y. (2022). Blockchain applications in the supply chain

management in German automotive industry. Production Planning & Control, 1–15.

[Link]

Yadav, J., Misra, M., Rana, N. P., Singh, K., & Goundar, S. (2022). Netizens' behavior

towards a blockchain-based esports framework: a TPB and machine learning

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE48

integrated approach. International Journal of Sports Marketing and

Sponsorship, 23(4), 665-683. [Link]

Yang, X., Wang, G., He, H., Lu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Automated demand response

framework in ELNs: Decentralised scheduling and smart contract. IEEE Transactions

on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 50(1), 58–72.

[Link]

Zavolokina, L., Miscione, G., & Schwabe, G. (2019). Buyers of 'lemons': How can a

blockchain platform address buyers' needs in the market for 'lemons'?. Electronic

Markets, 30, 227-239. [Link]

Zavolokina, L., Schlegel, M., & Schwabe, G. (2021). How can we reduce information

asymmetries and enhance trust in 'The Market for Lemons'?. Information Systems and

e-Business Management, 19, 883-908. [Link]

Zavolokina, L., Zani, N., & Schwabe, G. (2020b). Designing for trust in blockchain

platforms. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(3), 849 - 863.

[Link]

Zhang, T., Li, P., & Wang, N. (2021). Multi-period price competition of blockchain-

technology-supported and traditional platforms under network effect. International

Journal of Production Research, 1–15.

[Link]

Zhang, Y., Zhang, P., Tao, F., Liu, Y., & Zuo, Y. (2019). Consensus aware manufacturing

service collaboration optimisation under blockchain based Industrial Internet

platform. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 135, 1025–1035.

[Link]

Zhao, Z., Hao, Z., Wang, G., Mao, D., Zhang, B., Zuo, M., Yen, J., & Tu, G. (2021).

Sentiment analysis of review data using blockchain and lstm to improve regulation for
 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE49

a sustainable market. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce

Research, 17(1), 1–19. [Link]

Zhou, Z., Wang, M., Ni, Z., Xia, Z., & Gupta, B. B. (2022). Reliable and sustainable product

evaluation management system based on blockchain. IEEE Transactions on

Engineering Management, 1–13. [Link]

 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF BLOCKCHAIN LITERATURE50

Appendices

Appendix 1: PRISMA chart

Identification Records identified through database searching

(n = 4855)
SCOPUS
Records
excluded that
were not from
CABS
Screening (n = 3152)

Records screened
(n = 1703)

Full-text articles excluded

that were not in the time
frame and not from Peer
Reviewed Journal

(n = 1154)
Eligibility
Full-text articles assessed for
eligibility
(n =549)

Full-text articles excluded, with

reasons (Any article that talked
about Covid-19, which is
something not usually
happened. and papers which
talked about BCT in a general
Included Studies included in the synthesis way, such as what is it)
(n =125) (n =424)

Quantitative (79)

Qualitative (27)

Mixed Method (19)