Mapping of perceived dimensions in
the bitcoin ecosystem in Brazil

Mapemento das
dimensões percebidas no ecossistema de bitcoin no Brasil

Roseane Aparecida Almeida Souza

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2337-8503

Bacharel em Administração. Universidade
Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) – Brasil. [email-masked]

Luis Hernan Contreras
Pinochet

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2088-5283

Pós-doutor
em Administração. Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) – Brasil.
[email-masked]

Marcia Carvalho de Azevedo

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8368-9637

Doutora
em Administração. Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP). Brasil.
[email-masked]

Evandro
Luiz Lopes

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2780-4215

Pós-doutor
[email-masked]

ABSTRACT

Map the dimensions
perceived in the bitcoin ecosystem in Brazil. We identified bitcoin dimensions
according to the systematic review of the literature from bibliometric
analysis. The data collection instrument involved two interview scripts with a
qualitative approach and open responses with the participation of 20
interviewees. Collected data was analyzed through content analysis using
dimensions and subdimensions of the Bitcoin ecosystem. We identified the
dimensions and subdimensions of Brazilian bitcoin network. The dimensions
perceived by the actors were Entrepreneurship, Technology, Regulation, and
Social. A total of 15 subdimensions were defined. We conducted a cluster
analysis of the subdimensions and the interviewees. Results indicated that for
our sample all the dimensions had a similar importance. We did not find any
significant difference also among the subdimensions because they are all
related to each other. We also didn’t find significant difference among
interviewees. Mapping of the main dimensions and subdimensions of bitcoin
network was presented. The study identified that bitcoin as a technology can be
effective for many types of organizations such as financial institutions that
are losing market share to startups and FinTechs.

Keywords: bitcoins; innovation; fintechs; cryptocurrency.

RESUMO

Mapear
as dimensões percebidas no ecossistema de bitcoin no Brasil. Foram
identificadas as dimensões do bitcoin de acordo com a
revisão sistemática da literatura a partir da análise bibliométrica. O
instrumento de coleta de dados envolveu dois roteiros de entrevista com
abordagem qualitativa e respostas abertas com a participação de 20
entrevistados. Os dados coletados foram analisados ​​por meio da
análise de conteúdo em dimensões e subdimensões do
ecossistema Bitcoin. Identificamos as dimensões e subdimensões
da rede bitcoin brasileira. As dimensões percebidas pelos atores foram
Empreendedorismo, Tecnologia, Regulação e Social. Um total de 15 subdimensões foram definidas. Foi realizada uma análise de
cluster das subdimensões e dos entrevistados. Os
resultados indicaram que para a nossa amostra todas as dimensões tiveram importância
semelhante. Não encontramos nenhuma diferença significativa também entre as subdimensões porque todas são relacionadas entre si. Também
não foi encontrada diferença significativa entre os entrevistados. Assim, foi
apresentado o mapeamento das principais dimensões e subdimensões
da rede bitcoin. O estudo identificou que o bitcoin como tecnologia pode ser
efetivo para muitos tipos de organizações como é o caso de instituições
financeiras que estão perdendo market share para startups e FinTechs.

Palavras-chave:
bitcoin; inovação; fintechs; criptomoedas.

Recebido
em 03/04/2021.  Aprovado em 08/06/2021.
Avaliado pelo sistema double blind peer review. Publicado conforme normas da APA.

https://doi.org/10.22279/navus.2021.v11.p01-19.1571

In memory
of Luís Augusto Schiavon Ramos

1 INTRODUCTION

The emergence of new Information and
Communication Technologies (ICTs) propelled society towards an expansion of
network life and consolidated the information age. Today, companies have been
forced to focus on innovation to gain and maintain competitive advantage as the
only way to adapt and survive. The speed and volatility with which changes
occur in the economic environment require an immediate reaction (Feraru, 2017).

From ICT innovations, a new economy emerges,
becoming the economy of information and knowledge. The merger of two areas of
knowledge - technology, and economics - already made possible to present money
in different forms, from magnetic cards to bank transactions via internet; and
the most recent proposal for total virtualization of money is presented with
bitcoin technology, which is intrinsically linked to blockchain technology.

The advent of bitcoin occurred in 2008, and
since then bitcoin code (Nakamoto, 2008) and protocol has boosted innovation in
various sectors of economy. Bitcoin is usually associated with the financial
sector, because of the word itself, with the suffix coin that remits to
currency. But bitcoin is a word that names a type of technology that can be
used in many different ways. One example is that bitcoin can be used as
investment, without depending on financial institutions and government
regulations (Stegaroiu, 2017; Corbet, Lucey, Urqhart, & Yarovaya, 2019).
This new technology works in conjunction with blockchain (Min, 2019), the
ledger where all transactions - whether financial or other types of business -
are recorded, verifiable and their block chains are cryptographically secured
and decentralized (Crosby, Nachiappan, Pattanayak, Verma, & Kalyyanaraman,
2016), something totally disruptive (Larios-Hernández,
2017; Lee, 2019).

One concern of the market is that bitcoin is
highly volatile, and few academic studies seek to explore the dynamics of
bitcoin’s exchange rate (Lyócsa, Molnár,
Plíhal & Širaňová, 2020). In this sense,
the volatility of the bitcoin price can be explained by speculative trade,
being seen as a means of investment also speculative (Blau,
2018), due to the trading that is carried out in different time intervals and
different currencies (Shynkevich, 2020).

Bitcoin technology is increasingly gaining
momentum in applications and the market grows, earning the public's trust, not
only through the benefits that technology brings, but by the new way that
regulators are looking at this trend. However, the number of people using
bitcoin in Brazil is very small compared to current means of payment, financial
transactions, and forms of investment. Even though central banks are following
its development, robust conclusions on the subject are still missing.

For this technology to constantly grow and gain
strength in Brazil, the actors of the bitcoin ecosystem have the mission of
disseminating and raising awareness about the issue, so that society has access
to its benefits. The insecurity that society has about disruptive technologies
is considerable, and this will only be overcome when there is an understanding
of the public regarding bitcoin, knowing concepts and the functionality of this
new technology (Scharding, 2019).

Also, banks, which are still trying to protect
their traditional ways of sending and receiving money, are adapting to the new
scenario. In this sense, studies are needed to verify the practice and
application of bitcoin, both in financial institutions, and in the segment of
the cryptocurrency market.

The theme of bitcoin is increasingly attracting
interest and there is a need for more research on the subject, especially in
Brazilian context, to help bitcoin be disseminated in the country, like what
happened with the advent of personal computer and internet. It is worth
clarifying that this research may offer an insight into the perceptions of
different groups, that observe the national scenario of the dissemination of
bitcoin use as “technology” and as “currency”.

Given all the challenges that surround bitcoin,
the objective of this research is to map the dimensions perceived in the bitcoin
ecosystem in Brazil. Therefore, this study seeks to contribute to the
identification of the main dimensions of the bitcoin ecosystem perceived by key
actors in this ecosystem and to map the ecosystem perceptions of these
dimensions.

2 THEORETICAL REFERENCE FRAMEWORK

2.1 Bitcoin and entrepreneurship

The relationship between bitcoin and
entrepreneurship exists since the advent of the technology (Chen, 2018). Associated
with bitcoin there is a network of entrepreneurs and we can visualize this
network in two ways. The first is that each validation point can be considered
an entrepreneur (peer-to-peer), as the person carries out the work individually
and has gains validating transactions on the blockchain. The second way to
visualize entrepreneurship in the bitcoin ecosystem is the new segment that has
emerged, the so-called exchanges or bitcoin exchange, mining companies, and
technology companies that are based on the blockchain.

Exchanges are online platforms that connect
people who want to buy with those who want to sell bitcoins; that is, it is an
environment that makes it possible to buy and sell crypto currencies. Exchanges
are intermediaries between the two parts and have the role of ensuring that the
negotiation process between these two individuals takes place with the greatest
possible transparency and security, in which the buyer receives the bitcoins,
and the seller receives the money entrusted (Lyócsa
et al., 2020).

Sellers make their bitcoins available for sale
at the price they want them to be sold, and buyers can buy at the price desired
by sellers or place purchase orders looking for offers that meet their price
target. The procedure occurs after the interested party performs the
registration on the website and sends documents to the exchange company for
verification. After the exchange checks and approves the documents, deposits
can be made in the currency selected for the purchase of bitcoin.

Although bitcoin transactions on exchanges are
anonymous, given that each person is only identified by their “wallet” number,
the purchase and sale of bitcoins can be tracked. The user may not even know
who they are buying from or who they will be selling to, but each user needs an
active CPF (individual tax identification number) to register within the
exchange companies. Also, these transactions are made via deposit or bank
transfer, which enables financial institutions to know that the user has traded
with an exchange company in Brazil. The exchanges can be accessed from the
companies' website, or through specific software.

It is important to highlight that these online
platforms do not directly sell or buy for their customers, they only manage
these connections and profit from the commission per transaction charged by
each exchange, that is, the customer just has to search the market looking for
exchanges that charge lower commissions.

People who perform direct purchase and/or sale
are part of the Brazilian bitcoin community network on social networks or
participate in peer-to-peer exchanges. On Facebook, there are several pages
about bitcoin and blockchain with thousands of participants. Among the members,
there are some people who want to learn about the topic and others who take
advantage of the connection between ideas and conversations to carry out buying
and selling via chat. For a transaction to happen an individual needs to send
the public key for the transfer. In order to improve the security of the transaction
the person needs to consider the guidelines given by those who are experienced
in this business, such as, for example, look for references, check the user’s
profile on social networks and in case of a sale, receive the transfer only
from the account holder (Scott, Loonam & Kumar,
2017).

Other means of buying and selling peer-to-peer
are operated and maintained by self-programmable software. The program with the
interactions is not supervised and managed by an online exchange, an
intermediary. The individual pays no commission to anyone; however, the
individual is responsible for the transaction as a whole.

All these forms of buying and selling are a way
for the individual to be more autonomous in transactions with his money. The
importance of entrepreneurship network concerning bitcoin is enormous. This is
noticeable when an individual has doubts about how to transact or wants to seek
information on how to obtain bitcoins and the network is helpful, offering
support to society, through directly or indirectly learning.

Exchanges saw a business opportunity in the
field of education and began to design courses for beginners in this ecosystem,
explaining everything from key concepts to technical insights into bitcoin
technology (Lyócsa et al., 2020). In addition to
exchanges, many educational institutions were created, focused on the
conceptual and financial education of bitcoin.

When society has knowledge about the subject
and ways of transacting, and acquires security of what it is transacting, the
ecosystem strengthens, the market grows and, consequently, technology develops
and tends to become more consolidated. The technology that was used only by a
small number of people can reach billions worldwide (Chen, 2018).

The network composed by entrepreneurs of the
bitcoin ecosystem has a strong influence on the development of technology.
Studies claim that there is an influence of networks in the development of
technological capabilities (Tumelero, Sbragia, Borini & Franco, 2018). It is important to identify the
topic of cooperation among entrepreneurs for the continuous improvement of the
segment and the improvement of decentralized networks management (Lee, 2019).

2.2 Bitcoin and technology

Bitcoin is a form of payment or peer-to-peer
commodity with open source, that is not dependent on any central authority.
Instead, through its dissemination it has created distributed databases with no
central authority responsible – contractually or otherwise – for certifying
transfers (Dwyer, 2015). Among other characteristics of bitcoin, what makes it
unique is the fact that it is a fully decentralized system (Lee, 2019), sharing
information and/or transactions in a unique and universal way for all
participating nodes (users) in the world.

Some disagree that bitcoin is a digital
currency, as currency must be issued by the government and bitcoin is not;
however, the important thing is to be aware that bitcoin is a form of currency,
being able to carry out financial transactions in a more practical, fast and
effective way. So, the application of blockchain technology to things beyond
digital currencies requires new developments in the technology itself (Diedrich,
2016; Chen, 2018).

For Kelly (2013), as a digital currency,
bitcoin presents some specific security challenges. If people are not careful,
they may inadvertently delete or lose their bitcoins. Once the digital file is
lost, money is lost, just like paper cash. Therefore, bitcoin needs
cryptographic resources for its protection (Dwyer, 2015).

Another characteristic of bitcoin is mining,
which corresponds to the process responsible for maintaining the supply of
bitcoin coins, while guaranteeing the integrity and neutrality of the bitcoin
network. In other words, mining means verifying if transactions are valid, and
consequently, whether they should be inserted in a valid block chain. In this
way, the mining concept creates a competitive environment that prevents anyone
from easily adding new blocks consecutively in the blockchain (Min, 2019).

Like all new disruptive technology, bitcoin is
a source for criticism and concerns, especially when there are paradigm
changes, for example, regarding the use of banking services. Society worries
about the security and solidification of the asset; however, bitcoin has revolutionary
advantages, allowing the individuals to make their own choices, at the right
time, and without high fees.

Bitcoin technology development and operation
present advantages and opportunities for specific niches, but it also has
disadvantages and points that must be improved. The dissemination of bitcoin
promotes a discussion that particularly impacts our country, due to the high
interest rates and bank rates in Brazil. It is important to note that there is
no control over assets in bitcoin, which are at the mercy of the arbitrariness
of speculators, given the high volatility of their prices for other currencies.
The determination of the value of the virtual currency may be impaired, as it
does not constitute an organized market with liquidity and wider use. In
addition to exchanges, businesses are being created using the bitcoin protocol
for bitcoin debit cards; online shopping; international P2P loans;
micropayments; digital notaries, donations; among others.

2.3 Bitcoin and regulation

The advent and usability of bitcoin have
presented a major challenge to legal systems not only in Brazil, but worldwide,
since there are countries that have specific regulations for cryptocurrencies,
others that have banned their commercialization, and even governments that have
not specific regulations for cryptocurrencies. This is due to the new paradigms
generated and ways of using this disruptive innovation (Larios-Hernández,
2017).

Bitcoin circulation and trade in Brazilian
territory are legal; however, it does not have a specific regulation like some
countries in the world. Some companies accept bitcoin as a form of payment in
the country, however, there are no normative regulations for this matter, that
is, even if bitcoins are accepted as a means of exchange by institutions and
organizations, there is no particular accounting guidance for these types of
transactions (Andrade, 2017).

Tax authorities and law enforcement agencies
seek to understand the technology and apply existing regulatory models to this
innovation. This application will depend on the territory in which this means
of payment is being used, since some countries recognize it as an asset, other
as currency, commodities, or a form of payment (Corbet et al., 2019).

Despite the lack of regulation for bitcoin,
there are laws and communications from the Brazilian National Central Bank (Bacen) that direct it to future regulation in Brazil, these
being, Bacen Communication nº 25.306 of February
2014, Bill 48/2015 that aims to extinguish cash, Bill No. 2303/2015, and taxes
collection by the Brazilian IRS on the acquired virtual currencies
transactions.

“Electronic currencies” addressed in Law nº
12.865, of October 9, 2013, with its infra legal regulation, are not synonymous
with virtual or encrypted “currencies”, since electronic currencies are the
digital money issued by the Central Bank and the encrypted currency depends on
network users to use an algorithm for its generation, being decentralized (Lee,
2019) and its issue not being defined by politicians (Albuquerque & Callado, 2015).

In addition, Law nº 12.865 (2013), establishes
rules for international payment arrangements, to give support to external
operations, necessary for any increasingly open economy integrated with
international markets. For this reason, there is no need to create additional
specific legal rules to support transactions in electronic media using dollars,
euros, air miles points, or bitcoins. In addition, the law itself establishes
that only payment arrangements that may have systemic importance should be
regulated. As stated earlier, bitcoin is not large enough, or systemically
relevant as a means of payment, to be currently subject to Bacen
regulation.

Another bill that gives evidence that the
number of bitcoin users can increase after its approval, is the bill number
48/2015, that aims to extinguish the production, circulation, and use of cash,
and imposes that financial transactions happen only through the digital system
(Câmara dos Deputados,
2015a).

It is possible that in a future scenario there
will be an increase of use of electronic coins at first; however, with the high
fees and taxes that are also applicable to cash nowadays, users will already
know how to deal with electronic currencies and will be more interested in using
other forms of payment with encrypted currencies such as bitcoin, as these are
more flexible, agile, without taxes on issuance or withdrawal, and
decentralized (Corbet et al., 2019; Lee, 2019).

Bill nº 2303, of 2015, provides the lay out for
the inclusion of virtual currencies and air mileage programs in the definition
of “payment arrangements” under the supervision of the Central Bank (Câmara dos Deputados, 2017). With
the approval of this bill, item I of art. 9 of Law 12.865/2013 will be modified
and § 4 to article 11 of Law 9.613, of March 3, 1998 will be added: “Art. 11
(…) § 4 The operations mentioned in item I include those involving virtual
currencies and air mileage programs”. The status of this bill is in progress
since after approval of the request, it requires a public hearing to discuss
the effects of new technologies, blockchain, and cryptocurrencies, with a bias
towards payments (Câmara dos Deputados,
2015b).

Even if the purchase and sale of products and
services with bitcoin are not taxed (since the currency is not regulated by any
country), the purchase and sale of bitcoin for tax purposes must be declared as
assets in the individual income tax. The emergence of this form of payment has
enabled a new form of enterprise in the country: the exchanges described in the
topic “Bitcoin and Entrepreneurship”. Startups help disseminate knowledge about
bitcoin technology and because they have expertise on the subject, they are
called upon to discuss bills, giving greater credibility to government officials.

In general, financial institutions, faced with
the fast changes that occur in the crypto currency market, need to follow the
needs of their consumers and present efficient solutions. Even with the current
competition between banks and FinTechs, the vast majority of banks already
predicted that these technology companies would impact the financial landscape
and almost a third of them imagined that FinTechs would have a good market
share.

Even with the growth of startups, the
regulation of bitcoin is something that bothers not only users, but the whole
society that does not understand the technology and seeks to study and
comprehend how this means of payment works. The insecurity of the population
when it comes to obtaining and using cryptocurrency means that Brazil is not a
reference for users. The trend is followed by regulators such as the Federal
Revenue Service and the Brazilian National Central Bank, which are positioning
themselves by issuing statements on the legal nature of cryptocurrencies (Roberto,
Horta, Luz & Monteiro, 2017).

As the number of bitcoin users in the country
is small and its spread in the domestic economy is not relevant, Brazilian
National Central Bank declared to be following the growth of the national
market, discussions in international forums mainly regarding its nature,
ownership, and operation. In countries like Germany, United States and
Australia the technology already has some type of regulation. However,
Brazilian actors in bitcoin environment affirm it is not coherent to copy the
regulation from abroad, but it is necessary to make an appropriate regulation
for the reality of Latin America (Deliberative Meeting, PL2303/15).

In the traditional financial system, money is
obtained in exchange for products or services. The same is true in the bitcoin
system. To receive cryptocurrencies, the user must contribute to the completion
of transactions by offering their processing capacity.

Since bitcoin has a restricted reach in the
country, there is no perceived systemic risk for the continued
commercialization and circulation of cryptocurrency in the domestic economy.
However, the topic is much more discussed in the scope of money laundering,
mainly by the country's major banks, which are increasingly adapting to these
technologies and have concerns about illegal international activities.

2.4 Bitcoin and society

Technology has always been transforming society
and since internet was launched the speed of change has increased dramatically,
presenting society with new ways of interaction and communication. With
internet, the user not only started to obtain more access to information, but
began to use new ways for, for example, carry out financial transactions in a
faster, more effective, and less bureaucratic way, which makes life a lot
easier for people in general. People's preference for using credit cards or
making online transactions are examples of an expansion of network life,
consolidating the information age.

The degree of freedom of expression increased
with the advent of the internet, since internet use makes easier for human
beings to express their thoughts and act according to their needs and personal
rules. Even authoritarian and totalitarian states are not able to change these
internet characteristics.

The adoption of bitcoin technology by users in
the country is difficult, as population in general has a lack of understanding
of what bitcoin is and how it works, besides there is a lack of tools that
simplify the understanding, so that older people, for example, can understand
what happens in this decentralized network (Lee, 2019). Most of the time
bitcoin ends up being seen as something illegal, being applied for money
laundering and this view impairs the adoption by potential users.

There are several ways to obtain bitcoins.
Primary production takes place through the mining process, which requires a
high and ceaseless processing power from the miner in the grid made with
electricity. From the point of view of energy expenditure, mining can cause
environmental problems, due to the superpower machines with high hardware
development that are used to carry out the mining process.

Other ways of obtaining bitcoin are through
buying on exchanges, buying directly from another user, and also receiving the
value in bitcoins through a sale of goods or provision of services. In spite of
the increase in the number of digital currency adepts in the country, there are
many users who remain doubtful and skeptical about its application. This is due
to the currency's instability, that suffers a lot of fluctuation in its price
that comes from the supply and demand of currency by users. There is no
long-term forecast of values ​​with bitcoin and, consequently,
using it as an investment medium is indicated for more aggressive investment
profiles, as it is considered a high-risk investment.

The possibility to apply a new technology
worldwide and the potential of a new technology to rise the quality of life are
not common characteristics. One reason to say that bitcoin can improve quality
of life is its deflationary characteristic; so, using a currency that cannot be
inflated by the government, and that tends to maintain its purchasing power, is
already an excellent tool against poverty. Another example would be transfers
of money for donation to NGOs that pay fees in the same way as any other
financial transaction, that is, the donation will never reach the amount that
the donor sent, it will always be less. With bitcoin, the value is fully
received, with no transition fees.

Also, bitcoin has an inclusive power to a
population that is unable to have access to traditional financial institutions
because of the bank fees. From that, bitcoin has the potential to solve
problems of a layer of the poorest population or regions more distant from the metropolises,
where access to the banking system is almost nonexistent or very precarious,
and which currently, is practically on the margin financial and banking
systems. Furthermore, this technology is present not only in financial
transaction services, but also in authentication and patent services (Diedrich,
2016; Min, 2019), among others.

3 METHOD

In this context, a gap was identified, due to
the lack of studies investigating the theme in Brazil - since it is recent and
benefits, opportunities and best practices adopted by other countries are still
being identified. The research had as a method the use of exploratory
bibliometric analysis of publications on the theme of bitcoin.  Bitcoin was created in 2008 and its
commercialization as currency began in middle of 2010, opening space for
scientific publications on the subject. Based on this, we decided to review
articles published from 2011 until the time of data collection. Using the word
“Bitcoin” as a filter we searched papers with peer review, published between
2011 and 2020 in the Web of Science (WoS) database. A
total of 884 papers were found in 25 of the 39 categories of the database, 6 of
these categories were interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary. We read the
titles and identified 4 dimensions that the theme bitcoin is discussed:
business and entrepreneurship, technological aspects, law and regulation and
social environment. The next step was the classification of the 25 categories
and the papers on the 4 dimensions of bitcoin discussion. The classification is
presented in Table 1.

Bitcoin
Dimensions

#
of WoS Categories

#
of Papers

Business
and Entrepreneurship

4

447

Technological
Aspects

11

256

Law
and Regulation

2

26

Social
Environment

2

16

Interdisciplinary
and Multidisciplinary

6

139

Total

25

884

Table
1. Classification of Web of Science
categories of published papers

Source:
Research data (2021).

Most of the papers are published discussing
bitcoin business and also entrepreneurship aspects. It is expected as bitcoin
has a huge impact on established business models of many organizations and
economic segments. It has also attracted the interest of a lot of
entrepreneurs. The second dimension with more papers is related with
technological aspects, as bitcoin is a disruptive and very new technology. Law
and regulation and social environment aspects have also been discussed. There
are less papers discussing these dimensions, but they are extremely important,
since bitcoin and its disruptive characteristics require and need an adequate
legal environment. Social aspects are also central to be addressed due to its
potential in the promotion and support of a more inclusive society.

Content analysis was used with the support of
NVivo Pro. The focus of this study is bitcoin innovation ecosystem from a
business perspective, to address the focus we selected fields of studies
involving “Business”, “Business Finance” and “Management” (Table 2). Papers
were identified, as well as the respective citations, in addition to the most
influential authors. This helped to identify which citations would be
appropriate to be used to support each of the four areas used in this research
as guidelines for the development of the research instrument.

Bitcoin Dimensions

Fields

Business

Business Finance

Management

Business and Entrepreneurship

8

0

7

Technological Aspects

38

34

29

Law and Regulation

20

49

13

Bitcoin and Society

17

5

13

Total

83

88

62

Table 2. Number
of citations per field

Source: Research data (2021).

Web of Science database was used, and some
filters were applied, such as “full text”, document type – “article”, English
language, years “2011-2020”, through the terms “bitcoin business and bitcoin
entrepreneurship” (business and entrepreneurship), “bitcoin technology”
(technological aspects), “bitcoin regulation” (law and regulation), “bitcoin
and society” (social environment) (Table 3).

Dimensions

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Total

Bitcoin
Business and Entrepreneurship

(WoS: “Entrepreneur*” AND “bitcoin”)

Published
articles

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

8

10

Sum
of Time Cited

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

20

52

75

Bitcoin
Technology

(WoS: “Techno*” AND “bitcoin”)

Published
articles

0

0

0

0

3

0

7

14

28

36

88

Sum
of Time Cited

0

0

0

0

2

9

26

64

245

373

719

Bitcoin
Regulation

(WoS: “Regula*” AND “bitcoin”)

Published
articles

0

0

0

2

1

4

7

14

19

28

75

Sum
of Time Cited

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

21

123

271

419

Bitcoin
and Social Environment (WoS: “Social*” AND
“bitcoin”)

Published
articles

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

7

11

10

31

Sum
of Time Cited

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

21

76

106

208

Total

Published
articles

0

0

0

0

0

0

17

37

58

82

204

Sum
of Time Cited

0

0

0

0

0

0

35

109

464

802

1421

Table 3. Number
of published articles and sum of citations in the period

Source:
Research data (2021).

When we analyzed only the articles published in
Web of Science and tried to find relationships between them, we observed (Table
3) that in the dimension “Bitcoin Business and Entrepreneurship”, few articles
published in recent years in the selected fields were identified (n=10). Chen
(2018) is the most cited (n=56) in addition to having greater strength in the
network (n=6), there are other authors, however, the distance from the
relevance of the work that leads the ranking is notorious. When we analyze the
“Bitcoin Technological Aspects” dimension, the article by Dwyer et al. (2015)
is said to be the most cited (n=177), being also the author with greater
strength in reaching the network (n=37). Other authors whose citations stand
out are Chen (2018) (n=56) and Min (2019) (44), as well as Lee (2019) (n=13)
and Chen (2018) (n=12). When analyzing the “Bitcoin Law and Regulation”
dimension, we noticed that the most cited authors (n=99) had also the greater
strength in the network (n=43), they are Corbet et al. (2019). Finally, in the
“Bitcoin and Social Environment” dimension, the authors Scott et al. (2017)
appear first in both classifications with the highest citation (n=35), as well
as greater strength in the network (n=2) in relation to others.

Due to the small number of empirical studies
developed on factors relevant to the mapping of dimensions in the bitcoin
ecosystem, a field research with a qualitative approach was designed, to
identify relevant dimensions in the national bitcoin cryptocurrency market.

The study with a qualitative approach, was
based on the proposed objectives, and obtained information through the use of a
research script. The qualitative research results from the semi-structure
interviews conducted with the use of the script.

The most reliable way to apply a survey to
chains of reference is when you obtain the maximum amount of information from
all members of the network or when you use a random sample of network
participants. However, sometimes this method is not feasible, and the snowball
technique (non-probabilistic) can be more feasible (Vinuto,
2014).

The field research had two stages. In the first
stage, a mapping was carried out in groups of participants in social networks
(where there is a greater concentration of people with expertise in the
subject), to select subjects who could be volunteers to be interviewed.

In the second stage, primary data was collected
with the selected sample (lawyers, administrators, executives, users, and
others). The sample was composed of people who were part of a group on Facebook
called “Bitcoin Brazil” with thousands of members that interact with the main
players in the bitcoin market. The main exchange companies in Brazil were
formed through this group. The relationships in this environment are very direct
(which proves the peer-to-peer relationship) and the players are very helpful
regarding the doubts of newcomers in the segment.

This research sought to understand
relationships between the main actors, compare ideals, and bring together
connected thoughts. The analysis was based on perceptions of respondents and a
software was used to organize the data.

The content analysis is a tool for
understanding the meaning that research subjects externalized in the discourse.
This allowed the researcher to comprehend the individual representations about
his experiences and perceptions. In the next step, the data collected needed to
be organized. The numerical form of data presentation makes possible to conduct
the analyzes with the help of statistical instruments.

For recording the interviews, the Free Video
Call Recorder for Skype software was used, and the transcription was performed
manually. The information was organized by NVivo software.

Cluster analysis were conducted using NVivo to
explore relationships among interviewees and also among subdimensions of
bitcoin ecosystem. The cluster analysis was performed based on Pearson
correlation and the results were represented by a dendrogram.

Instrument for data collection

The data collection instrument used in the
semi-structured interview was developed based on bitcoin dimensions discussed
in several published studies (Table 4).

BITCOIN DIMENSION

QUESTIONS

REFERENCES

Business
and Entrepreneurship

What made
you start a business?

Which
entrepreneurs inspired you?

Was anyone in your family
an entrepreneur?

Was there
a “trigger” event to start the business?

Did you create your
business during college / high school?

How did
you evaluate the opportunity?

Did you have a business
plan? Did you have any kind of planning? Ask for explanations.

What is your formal
education? Was it relevant to the business?

What
previous work experience did you have before opening the business?

What are
your strengths and weaknesses?

Did you
have a partner?

Did your
partners complement your skills to move the business forward?

What resources
(economic/financial) did you need to implement the business?

Where and how did he
obtain these resources?

Andrade (2017)

Feraru (2017)

Filion (1999)

Henderson (1989)

Stegaroiu (2017)

Technological
Aspects

What are the advantages
of Bitcoin protocol technology?

What are Bitcoin's main
technological challenges?

Users
called “miners” are rewarded for their work with newly created bitcoins. What
are the main challenges and future opportunities for this group of
individuals who, based on computational strength, perform transaction
records, and reconciliations?

Can
mining bitcoins cause environmental problems?

How does bitcoin mining
make it possible to maintain Bitcoin's security?

What will be other
opportunities for using the Bitcoin protocol for the market?

Dwyer (2015)

Chen (2018)

Min (2019)

Lee (2019)

Pires (2017)

Law and
Regulation

Can Bitcoin be considered an international “new
currency”? Explain.

Will Bitcoin be able to
reshape the monetary system?

Will there be possible interventions?

Will there be possible regulations?

Will there be taxes?

What are the possible attempts at control?

Bitcoin made possible the
emergence of new businesses like Exchanges, what are the legal requirements
and/or authorizations for this type of company to work? How are these
companies seen by banks?

Regarding the legal
aspects of bitcoin, how does consumer protection occur?

Corbet et al. (2019)

Lee
(2019)

Roberto et al. (2017)

Social
Environment

Should Exchange companies
last in the market, or is there a potential competitor in another sector that
could become a new entrant, thus developing aspects of competition?

What types of businesses
would be doomed to disappear in the coming years with the intense use of
Bitcoin?

What are Bitcoin's
main social challenges?

What is the relationship
between Bitcoin and human freedom?

Can mining bitcoins cause
environmental problems?

What will
be other opportunities for using the Bitcoin protocol for the market?

Recent research shows
that Bitcoin has the potential to improve the quality of life, as a potential
weapon against poverty and oppression. Cite practical examples and
possibilities.

Pires (2017)

Scott et al. (2017)

Tumelero et al. (2018)

Table
4. Dimensions with their respective
questions

Source:
Research data (2021).

Table 5 presents the information of the 20
interviewed that were part of the sample.

Code

Interview (min.)

# of pages

# of words

Age

Company location

Business (company)

Key position

E01

53.03

15

5824

20

São Paulo

Exchange

COO

E02

50.44

16

6520

32

São Paulo

Digital services provider (technology)

CEO

E03

94

21

9522

42

São Paulo

Digital services provider (technology)

Individual Entrepreneur

E04

42.32

12

4616

28

Recife

Payment’s operator

CEO

E05

104.49

30

15609

44

São Paulo

Provider of digital services (technology)

CEO

E06

109.36

29

13179

24

São Paulo

Exchange

CEO

E07

104.24

27

13412

35

Nova York

Digital services provider (technology)

CEO

E08

133.32

41

19838

27

Rio de Janeiro

Educational service provider

Coordinator

E09

85.24

20

9822

36

Macapá

IT professional

Individual Entrepreneur

E10

89.59

13

8057

25

São Paulo

Autonomous

Lawyer

E11

94.95

23

10274

30

São Paulo

Payment’s operator

CEO

E12

60.74

16

6191

32

São Paulo

Exchange

CEO

E13

63.33

17

6686

36

Curitiba

Exchange

CEO

E14

55.54

15

7029

45

Brasília

Public servant

Adm. Bitcoin group

E15

64.08

16

6533

35

Aracaju

Educational service provider

CEO

E16

49.86

13

4504

41

São Paulo

Exchange

CEO

E17

44.04

12

4105

26

Curitiba

News website

CEO

E18

110.34

27

11460

37

São Paulo

Digital services provider (technology)

CEO

E19

45.31

12

5245

42

Recife

Digital services provider (technology)

CEO

E20

34.21

9

3440

35

São Paulo

Autonomous

Economist

Sum

1488.4

384

171866

-

-

-

-

Average

74.42

19.2

8593.3

33.6

-

-

-

Table
5. Sample Information

Source:
Research data (2021).

There was a total of 24.4 hours of interview,
with an average of 74.42 minutes for each interviewee. There was a total of 384
pages with the transcription of all the 20 interviews. The survey kept the
identification of the interviewees anonymous, preserving integrity.

NVivo software

The content of the interviews was grouped using
the NVivo11Pro software. The use of this software was of great importance for
the analysis of our research because it allowed an analysis of the interviews
transcribed in a structured and organized way (Lage & Godoy, 2011). The
software facilitated the organization of interviews and categorization of data
and analyzes. Interviews were coded in the 4 bitcoin dimensions and
sub-dimensions in each dimension were developed based on interview content.
NVivo software was also use to perform cluster analysis based on Pearson
Correlation of the interviewees and bitcoin subdimensions.

Unit of analysis

The sample of 20 interviewees (Table 5) was
obtained using the snowball technique. Initially, the main idea was to analyze
the opinion of key informants of exchange companies in the bitcoin segment.
More and more people are interested in understanding how bitcoin technology
works. The “Bitcoin Brazil” group - despite disagreements between
administrators and members - has a significant number of active members. The CEOs
of each of the main exchanges operating in the national market were contacted
and invited to be part of the sample. Unfortunately, not everyone was available
to give interviews at first.

When starting the interviews, it became clear
that many questions were addressed to other players who had specific knowledge
on the subject, and who could contribute with other perspectives, in addition
to the exchange itself. So, we identified the main segments and other relevant
players in the bitcoin ecosystem, and agents that contribute with the bitcoin
financial market were also included in the sample. Within each segment,
individuals with general knowledge were selected.

Individuals interviewed worked in different
type of business, like exchanges, service providers related to bitcoin
(educational, news, and digital platforms), payment operators. We also interviewed
individuals who do not have a work in a business directly, however, they have
significant knowledge on the subject, such as lawyers, economists, IT
professionals and traders (Table 6).

Companies / Autonomous

# of interviews

Exchange

5

Service providers (Bitcoin in general, digital,
educational and news)

8

Payment operators

2

Others

5

Total

20

Table
6. Sample of people contacted

Source:
Research data (2021).

4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1
Bitcoin dimensions and subdimensions

Dimensions resulted from the analysis of the
published papers related to bitcoin. The 15 subdimensions, on the other hand,
emerged from the analysis of the transcripts of the interviews.

Dimension: Bitcoin Business and Entrepreneurship

This dimension refers to the businessmen and
entrepreneurs interviewed who work in the bitcoin segment. Because bitcoin
technology is disruptive and extremely recent, most of the players operating in
the market are entrepreneurs. Identifying what are the common characteristics
among them and understanding their perspectives on the topic brings us a
broader comprehension of bitcoin business environment (Table 7) (Andrade, 2017;
Feraru, 2017; Filion, 1999;
Henderson, 1989; Stegaroiu, 2017). Interviewees
discussed specific aspects of the dimension, and the analysis of the main
themes gave origin to subdimensions.

Influence

Influence
is the fact that you rely on other experiences to make decisions. One factor
that can indirectly influence the decision to open a company is the existence
of reference models.

Organizational
strategy

Strategy
is, from an emerging perspective, the use of imagination and logic to respond
to the environment in such a way that a competitive advantage for the company
is generated as a result.

Start of
the entrepreneurial process

The
entrepreneurial process involves identifying and evaluating the opportunity,
developing the business plan, determining and raising the necessary resources
and, finally, managing the company created.

Substitute
product

The
threat of substitutes is when different services and products offered by
rival companies satisfy the same needs of customers, but in a different way.
Substitutes impose a limit on a firm's prices, which could lower its
earnings.

Resources

Organizational
Resources are the various means that institutions have to achieve their
objectives. These are the goods or services used in organizational
activities. When it comes to resources, we are not only referring to money,
but we are referring to the raw materials used in production, in the services
provided by organizations, materials, equipment, and employees.

Society

Entrepreneurial
Society is one that professionally carries out an organized economic activity
for the production or circulation of goods or services, constituting a
company element.

Professional
life

It
is, in fact, about studying the path of a person in an organization (or a
series of organizations) and also understanding how that person's characteristics
influence the organization and are, at the same time, influenced by it.

Table 7. Subdimensions of Bitcoin Business and
Entrepreneurship

Source:
Research data (2021).

Dimension: Bitcoin Technological Aspects

This dimension refers to all cryptographic
construction that is behind bitcoin - a form of payment. It is important to
note that bitcoin technology differs from means of payment and/or commodities
since there is a structure that supports bitcoin. Encryption is not a new
technology; it is used in various services of our day-to-day as in the
protection of websites and applications. It guarantees the security of bitcoin,
making it impossible for a user to take possession of another user’s wallet and
prevents the blockchain from being breached and corrupted, ensuring information
integrity and safety (Table 8) (Dwyer, 2015; Chen, 2018; Min, 2019; Lee, 2019;
Pires, 2017). Subdimensions were also developed for this dimension.

Blockchain

Distributed
database, it is online, public and can be updated by any node participating
in the peer-to-peer network (P2P). It is based on the consensus between
participants and ensured by a Proof-of-Work algorithm.

Mining

Mining
is the process responsible for maintaining the supply of bitcoin coins while guaranteeing
the integrity and neutrality of the bitcoin network.

Bitcoin
protocol

Byzantine
consensus protocol based on cryptographic challenges, open-source software,
which is based on a decentralized computer network (peer-to-peer).

Table
8. Subdimensions of Bitcoin
Technological Aspects

Source:
Research data (2021).

Dimension: Bitcoin Law and Regulation

This dimension refers to legal environment of
bitcoin, as well as its circulation and trade in the country. It is known that
in Brazil there is no specific regulation, and because of that the market is
not consolidated enough to institute a legislation that is adequate to deal
with electronic currencies environment. However, the regularization of bitcoin
would be ideal, so that there would no gray legal zones due to the application
of the law when problems happen, like in trade transactions, or even loss of
this commodity (Table 9) (Corbet et al., 2019; Lee, 2019; Roberto et al.,
2017). The dimension was divided in 4 subdimensions.

Exercise
of activity

Refers
to how companies that work in the segment keep up with the legal
requirements, remaining active in the market, and providing services to their
customers.

Legal
issues

Refers
to the development or the existence of legal terms within the scope of the
digital currency.

Monetary
system

Refers
to the change in the financial view that Bitcoin technology causes.

Control
attempts

Refers
to the means or ways of dealing with a specific company (with fees, laws,
among others) that threatens the government.

Table
9. Subdimensions of Law and Regulation

Source:
Research data (2021).

Dimension: Bitcoin and Social Environment

This dimension refers to social aspects in
which bitcoin, as a form of payment and technology, interferes and influences
the digital transformation of postmodern society. There are great challenges to
be faced with the development of this new technology; however, moving towards a
more just and egalitarian society is possible through this innovation. Relating
society to the financial system, the social body is so used by the State
monetary systems to make the connection of a currency with the government, that
the presentation of a decentralized network where the individual is the owner
of his own money, can move it at any time, and is not dependent on third
parties, changes the global financial system in a revolutionary way. Such an
embracing change generates distrust among possible users, which might lead to
the disuse of the technology by conservative profiles, as well as induce the
adoption of the knowledge by more aggressive profiles (Table 10) (Pires, 2017;
Scott et al., 2017; Tumelero et al., 2018). The
Social Environment dimension has 5 subdimensions.

Social
competition in the provision of services

Dispute
between producers of the same good or providers of a specific service that
seek to serve the same target audience, often sharing the same location.

Adoption
of services by the user

Refers
to the usability and knowledge of technology and services in block chains.

Monetary
freedom

Monetary
freedom means freedom of currency choice; it also means freedom of currency
production in an environment of free competition.

Environmental
problems

Refers
to the negative effect that technology development has on the environment.

Quality
of life

Refers
to the benefits generated by technology and bitcoin currency, benefits that
are directly linked to the proposed life improvement (health, poverty, agility,
and less stress).

Table
10. Subdimensions of Bitcoin and Social
Environment

Source:
Research data (2021).

The next step was to investigate the importance
of the different dimensions and subdimension for the interviewees. We
classified the interviews content using all dimensions and subdimensions and
evaluated the amount of contribution of each one in all interviewees.
Dimensions results, presented in Table 11, are very similar, indicating that
our sample discussed all the dimensions with a similar emphasis. We did not
find any significant difference also among the subdimensions.

Dimensions

% of interviewees

content

Bitcoin Business and Entrepreneurship

25.2

Bitcoin Technological Aspects

25.1

Bitcoin and Social Environment

24.9

Bitcoin Law and Regulation

24.7

Total

100.0

Table
11. Group 2 - Interviewees with their
respective activities

Source:
Research data (2021)

Bitcoin
dimensions content

The dimension with a slightest greater
contribution is Business and Entrepreneurship, representing 25.2%. Bitcoin is
seen more than a new financial monetary system, there are several applications
of this technology in the registration market, for example. Difficulties of
competing with the other actors who were in the market and what their
inspirations were, are examples of topics discussed. The current scenario was
also present in this dimension, since the actors that have recently emerged are
in diverse fields, like education in bitcoin, among others.

Technological Aspects dimension contributed
with 25.1% of the content. The concern with technology and its development was
clear, since there are limitations regarding the technology, such as block size
(ledger), processing time and validation of transactions, and amount of coins
issued up to the moment versus the supply and demand of that currency. In
general, the actors presented proposals for improvement and reported a very
active search for the best experiences for the final customer.

Bitcoin and Social Environment dimension
represented 24.9% and the sample talked about diverse aspects of the
relationship between bitcoin and society. Law and Regulation dimension had
24,7% of the total content. The sample expressed concern with legal aspects for
several reasons, among them, the security of being supported in some way by the
government in the face of a problem that may happen, or even the greater
usability of technology in the face of a future regulation of cryptocurrencies.
The sample followed all the communications made by Bacen
and regulations implemented in the outside world.

Cluster analysis diagram

Cluster analysis is an exploratory technique
that allows the visualization of semantic patterns, grouping sources, or
dimensions and subdimensions that share similar words/values/attributes. The
more times the word was mentioned in the analyzed cases, the greater was the
cluster size, the higher was the frequency and it had more visibility. This
type of technique represents data distribution and focuses on data
visualization.

Internal analysis of the dimension and
subdimensions

The codification process created a system of
subdimensions. The coding was based on the common characteristics of interview
content. We conducted a cluster analysis (by NVivo) with subdimensions, and Figure
1 shows the results of the grouping of the subdimensions that emerged from the Pearson
Correlation analysis of the transcripts of the interviews.

Figure 1. Grouping
of subdimensions

Source: Research data (2021).

When looking at Figure 1, it appears that two
large groups were formed: Group 1 has 5 of 7 subdimensions of the Bitcoin
Business and Entrepreneurship Dimension (professional life, society, resources,
influence, and beginning of the entrepreneurial process). The other three
groups were connected between them and were more mixed. Group 2 was composed of
4 subdimensions from 3 different dimensions. Group 3 had 8 subdimensions also
from 3 different dimensions. The last group, Group 4, had only 2 subdimensions
from 2 dimensions.

Coefficients of all groups are high, and this
shows how related the subdimensions are to the actors’ perceptions, in general.
From this, the group that presents the greatest approximation between the
subcategories relating the proximity of words is Group 3 with .961, followed in
decreasing order by Group 1 with .950, Group 2 .938, and finally, Group 4 with
.904. The high similarity of the subdimensions is notorious because, among the
relationships, only two gave a moderate positive (which is the second-highest
measurement according to Pearson’s picture); that is, the measurement among all
related subdimensions is extremely high. This indicates that, in spite of the fact that each dimension relates with a
specific aspect of bitcoin ecosystem, the dimensions are very connected,and with its respective subdimensions being
interconnected.

The next analysis performed was to investigate
the relationship of similarity between the interviewees. We conducted a cluster
analysis, but no relevant groups were formed, indicating that, in spite of the
differences between the interviewees regarding professional profiles, they
share similar perceptions in the bitcoin dimensions and subdimensions.

5 CONCLUSION

This work had as general objective the mapping
of bitcoin dimensions perceived by actors of the value chain of the bitcoin
ecosystem. We also identified the key actors of this ecosystem in the Brazilian
market and the challenges perceived by these actors in relation to the
commercialization of bitcoin.

Even if bitcoin fails and disappears in the
future, the underlying technology will stay with us and will continue to
disrupt existing businesses and create new industries (Chen, 2018). Faced with
this initial scenario of monetary freedom and the transformation of the
monetary system, many countries around the world began to study bitcoin
technology, to seek an understanding of what bitcoin is and the possible
impacts caused if this disruptive innovation is used in a more intense way
(Larios-Hernández, 2017). The market has expanded during the last years,
showing that bitcoin technology, based on the blockchain protocol, can be use
by different kinds of organizations, and not only the ones in the financial
sector. This technology allows the transparency of information of all nodes
(users) that are in this decentralized network (Lee, 2019).

Brazil has several users of the decentralized
network, as well as individuals who bet on this innovation as a means of
investment or form of payment, believing in the growth of bitcoin market in the
country. Also, financial institutions, as well as other commercial
institutions, are looking for ways to apply bitcoin technology to their
businesses.

At the same time, many organizations have
businesses that are threatened by bitcoin technology, as the case of the
notaries and companies that use archaic forms of patents, or even financial
institutions that are losing market share for startups and FinTechs. These
markets segments need to react, that is, get quick answers to their consumers,
before they are eliminated by the competitive advantage of these digital
technology companies.

This research is a preliminary attempt to
advance research on bitcoin in the country, since there are few works, and
articles published on this topic. The interviews, carried out with the most
recognized actors of the bitcoin segment in the country, provided a solid and
reliable contextualization of the Brazilian bitcoin scenario.

The study mapped the main dimensions that
converged within the context of the Brazilian bitcoin scenario: Business and
Entrepreneurship, Technological Aspects, Law and Regulation, and Social
Environment. The mapping of bitcoin dimensions indicated that dimensions have
similar relevance for the main actors of bitcoin network.

It is important to highlight that the sample
interviewed expressed an embracing vision of bitcoin network and a very
proactive behavior regarding information seeking and technology development.
They mentioned main players, challenges and reported on how financial
institutions are trying to adapt to the new technology, a technology that is
disruptive and generates many doubts regarding issues of trust in the data
transaction.

REFERENCES

Albuquerque, B. S. de, & Callado, M. C.
(2015). Understanding Bitcoins:
Facts and Questions. Revista
Brasileira de Economia, 69(1), 03-16.

Andrade, M. D. (2017). Tratamento jurídico das criptomoedas: a dinâmica
dos bitcoins e o crime de lavagem de dinheiro. Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas, 7(3), 44-59.

Blau, B. M. (2018). Price dynamics and speculative trading in
Bitcoin. Research in International Business and Finance, 43(issue C), 15-21.

Câmara dos Deputados (2015a). Projeto de Lei 48/2015. Extingui a produção, circulação e uso do dinheiro
em espécie, e determina que as transações financeiras se realizem apenas
através do sistema digital. Retrieved from http://www.camara.gov.br/proposicoesWeb/prop_mostrarintegra;jsessionid=CD7E7C41D7D07387C79C170C93D385D2.proposicoesWebExterno1?codteor=1296773&filename=PL+48/2015

Câmara dos Deputados (2015b). Projeto de Lei 2303/2015 - Projeto de Lei. Retrieved from http://www.camara.gov.br/proposicoesWeb/fichadetramitacao?idProposicao=1555470

Câmara dos Deputados (2017). Projeto de Lei 2303/10. Inclusão das moedas virtuais e programas de
milhagem aéreas na definição de “arranjos de pagamento” sob a supervisão do
Banco Central. Retrieved from
http://www.camara.gov.br/proposicoesWeb/prop_mostrarintegra;jsessionid=DD5E05FAE78BFD7EB197A4E826A9DFFA.proposicoesWebExterno1?codteor=1358969&filename=PL+2303/20>15

Chen, Y. (2018). Blockchain
tokens and the potential democratization of entrepreneurship and innovation.
Business Horizons, 61(4), 567–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.03.006

Corbet, S., Lucey, B.,
Urquhart, A., & Yarovaya, L. (2019).
Cryptocurrencies as a financial asset: A systematic analysis. International Review of Financial Analysis,
62, 182–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2018.09.003

Diedrich, H. (2016). Ethereum: Blockchains, digital assets, smart
contracts, decentralized autonomous organizations. Middle- town, DE:
Wildfire Publishing.

Dwyer, G. P. (2015). The
economics of Bitcoin and similar private digital currencies. Journal of Financial Stability, 17,
81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2014.11.006

Crosby, M., Nachiappan, Pattanayak, P.,
Verma, S., Kalyyanaraman. (2016). BlockChain
Technology: Beyond Bitcoin. Applied
Innovation Review, 2, 6-19.

Feraru, G. M. (2017). Corporate entrepreneurship as a
mechanism to turn innovation into competitive advantage. Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of
Economics, 1, 213-219.

Filion, L. J. (1999). Diferenças entre sistemas
gerenciais de empreendedores e operadores de pequenos negócios. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 39(4),
6-20.

Henderson, B. D. (1989). The origin of strategy. Harvard Business Review, 67(6), 139-144.

Kelly, M. (2013). Fool Me Once: Bitcoin
Exchange Mt.Gox Falls after Third DDoS Attack This
Month. VentureBeat. Retrieved from
http://venturebeat.com/2013/04/21/mt-gox-ddos/

Lage, M. C. & Godoy, A. S. (2011). Utilização
do software NVivo e na pesquisa qualitativa: uma
experiência em EAD. ETD – Educação Temática Digital, 12(esp.), 198-226.

Larios-Hernández, G. J. (2017). Blockchain entrepreneurship
opportunity in the practices of the unbanked. Business Horizons, 60(6), 865-874.

Lee, J. Y. (2019). A decentralized token
economy: How blockchain and cryptocurrency can revolutionize business. Business Horizons, 62(6), 773-784.

Lyócsa, Š., Molnár,
P., Plíhal, T., & Širaňová,
M. (2020). Impact of macroeconomic news, regulation and hacking exchange
markets on the volatility of bitcoin. Journal
of Economic Dynamics and Control, 119, 103980.

Roberto, E., Horta, L. S. R., Luz, L. F. B.,
& Monteiro, R. L. (2017). A
regulação de ICOs e criptomoedas no Brasil. White paper, 1-15. Retrieved
from http://baptistaluz.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ICOs-e-Bitcoins.pdf

Min, H. (2019). Blockchain technology for
enhancing supply chain resilience. Business
Horizons, 62(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.012

Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer
Electronic Cash System. Bitcoin Org. Retrieved from https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Pires, H. F. (2018). Bitcoin:
a moeda do ciberespaço. Geousp – Espaço e Tempo, 21(2), 407-424.

Scharding, T. (2019). Is Bitcoin Trustworthy? In J. J. Choi, & B. Ozkan (Eds.) Disruptive Innovation in Business and
Finance in the Digital World. International
Finance Review, 20, 151-165.

Scott, B., Loonam,
J., & Kumar, V. (2017). Exploring the rise of blockchain technology: Towards
distributed collaborative organizations. Strategic
Change, 26(5), 423-428.

Shynkevich, A. (2020). Bitcoin Futures, Technical Analysis and
Return Predictability in Bitcoin Prices. Journal
of Forecasting, 40(4), 730-730.

Stegaroiu, C-E. (2017). Bitcoin – The
Currency of a new economy? Annals –
Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University. Faculty of Economy, 2,
114-119.

Tumelero, C., Sbragia, R., Borini, F. M., & Franco, E. C. (2018). The role of networks in technological capability: a
technology-based companies perspective. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship
Research, 8(1), 1-19.

Vinuto, J. (2014). A amostragem em bola de neve na
pesquisa qualitativa: um debate em aberto. Temáticas,
22(44), 201-218.