This systematic review examines bitcoin's status as money, speculating on its regulatory future and allure.
This systematic review article analyzes that a feature missing in the common economic conditions for money is the “allure†or “appreciation†of it, with specific application to the history of money, the rise of bitcoins, their technological advancement, the potential of future regulation, and the overall future possibilities of money. Are bitcoins a commodity, an investment, a speculative asset, a fiat currency, or all of the above? A substantial literature review is first conducted, to scrutinize what is the general scholarly consensus, and whether bitcoins are better suited for such speculation or investment by managers and citizens. These conceptual questions are then thoroughly surveyed through additional research, using: descriptive statistics; bitcoins’ celebrity endorsements; and an analysis of bitcoins’ technological requirements, such as its energy usage, as well as its ability for record keeping, all while considering regulations and future currency development. The article generally finds, from consensus, and from its own analysis, that due to allure, but also due to traditional standards, that the future economy will use more technological forms and features of money, and that the definition of money itself will become even more complex.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Todd J. Barry (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: