Methodology

The Blockchain Impact Ledger solves the key information deficits facing those working to harness blockchain for social impact: the lack of quality data on where and how blockchain is being used to deliver solutions, and the lack of clarity on whether the benefits from those solutions can scale beyond the hype. The data in the ledger is gathered and vetted by researchers at the Blockchain Trust Accelerator (BTA) at New America. Sources are generally public and include organization websites, white papers, press releases, and news articles. Researchers also conduct interviews with some organizations to gain a deeper understanding of their work. Entries to the Blockchain Impact Ledger are verified by a member of the organization responsible for the project, or are otherwise noted as unverified. The Blockchain Impact Ledger will be updated regularly to incorporate feedback from the blockchain and social impact community and reflect changes within the blockchain and social impact industries. We welcome general comments on the Blockchain Impact Ledger and nominations of specific projects to evaluate for inclusion.

Minimum Viable Product (MVP) Approach

The Blockchain Impact Ledger is intended to be interactive, in part because the space itself is evolving. The launch version in May 2019 is intended to spark community input on how the ledger can evolve into the most useful tool for the space. Our team took a page from “The Lean Startup” methodology approach: We see this first iteration of the Blockchain Impact Ledger as a Minimum Viable Product (MVP)—a bootstrapped solution delivered to begin a feedback loop and product iteration.

The Blockchain Impact Ledger fully embraces iteration and revision. The blockchain space is evolving rapidly, and categorizing projects remains a significant challenge. We plan to launch the next version of the ledger in Fall 2019. As part of our commitment to transparency, we will also share updates on Medium throughout the process.

Criteria for Inclusion

For a project to be considered for inclusion, it must be:

• Active: The project must be an operational technology deployed out of a testnet and being utilized by a target audience.
• Blockchain-based: The project must utilize distributed ledger technology.
• Generating social impact: The project must align with at least one of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals.

In a future iteration of the Blockchain Impact Ledger, we hope to include a repository of blockchain organizations in white paper stages and projects that have been retired, so we can connect early development organizations with experienced groups and learn from their successes and challenges.

Design Decisions

The Blockchain Impact Ledger is designed with user experience at the forefront. To accelerate the development process, we elected to utilize an existing platform as the foundation for an efficient, searchable MVP, even though relying on an existing infrastructure necessitated some tradeoffs. Once we confirmed the format of the Blockchain Impact Ledger, we conducted product scoping interviews to better understand the pain points of our target audiences and how they currently search for blockchain for social impact projects. The results of the interviews informed which data fields can be filtered and searched. For instance, many individuals and organizations exploring or using blockchain search by the industry or “social cause” of the organization, as well as the geography in which the organization operates, and the scale of the project. These became key data fields. Others claimed that they prefer to work with one type of blockchain over another, or with open source projects due to grant requirements. These criteria, along with commonly-searched data fields like the name of the project or the description, were included. Other fields that were less critical for searching and sorting were added to an expandable window for each entry, making the table easier to read and navigate.

Selecting the Data Fields

The data fields we use to describe each blockchain project are also a result of market research and scoping interviews. The BTA evaluated the utility of categories used by other blockchain databases, such as Blockchan.ge and the Stanford Center for Blockchain Research. We also looked at existing industry frameworks and resources used to categorize technology, such as Crunchbase, the Global Impact Investing Network, the TONIIC investment network, the UN, WEF, the WHO, the United States State Department, NIST, ISO, and IEEE to provide continuity with existing classification systems.

After collecting these various frameworks, we asked prospective target audience members about how they categorize blockchain for social impact projects and the types of data that are most interesting to them when conducting research. We used data collected from the interviews and selected the existing frameworks that most closely resembled the data requested by the interviewees. Other data fields not mentioned by the interviewees were collected so the BTA could conduct trend analyses in the future, such as Launch Date and Headquarter Location.

The data fields included in the MVP are not exhaustive, and we will add new fields and consider editing existing fields in subsequent versions of the Blockchain Impact Ledger. Some data points, such as consensus mechanisms, have been recorded in our research but are not included in the MVP due to scoping interview feedback. We invite you to provide feedback on both existing and prospective data points, and explore additional ways to supply meaningful measurements for our audience. A more in-depth explanation of each field is available this link.

Selecting the Projects for Inclusion

The initial projects for inclusion in the Blockchain Impact Ledger were selected as a result of existing resources and constraints we faced in developing the MVP. In January 2019, the Blockchain Trust Accelerator published the Blueprint for Blockchain and Social Innovation, a report designed to advise public sector and nonprofit leadership on exploring blockchain technology to address social challenges and governance inefficiencies. To illustrate potential applications, we wrote a number of case studies on blockchain organizations operating in the social impact space and mentioned additional projects in similar industries. These projects, along with additional projects which have already interfaced with the Blockchain Trust Accelerator and New America, were selected as the initial organizations included in the MVP.

We want to build a diverse representation of the blockchain for social impact community, and encourage organizations to reach out to us for consideration. The Blockchain Impact Ledger MVP includes a link for organizations to submit information about projects they would like BTA to evaluate for inclusion, and we welcome suggestions for additional projects to evaluate.

Gathering the Data

After determining the initial projects, we gathered publicly available information. We contacted each organization for which we could identify contact information and asked them to verify the publicly sourced data. We also emailed a list of precise definitions for each of the data fields to reduce ambiguity in terminology. We provided a short window for response and recognize that it may not have been sufficient in all cases, which likely contributed to the number of “unverified” entries in the MVP. In addition, unknown data that could neither be found through independent research nor furnished by representatives of the organization were indicated as "unknown." Verification requests beyond the MVP will be given more lead time. During the open comment period, we plan to crystallize the set of data points and definitions.

Beyond the MVP, we will also investigate alternative methods to verify the information provided by the candidate organizations. During our product scoping interviews with leaders of blockchain organizations, funders, and broader blockchain for social impact enthusiasts, we discovered that a lack of independently verified information about organizations was a major pain point in conducting research, particularly considering the hype surrounding blockchain technology.

However, in analyzing methods to verify data, we encountered critical challenges that prevented us from including more advanced verification in the MVP. For instance, technical information can be prohibitively difficult to verify without assistance from the candidate organization’s engineering team. Furthermore, asking the candidate to provide references both risks introducing bias and creates a practical bottleneck in terms of verification processes that we could not accommodate in the limited time for the MVP. While we will continue formulating verification mechanisms, we hope that comments and suggestions sourced from the public comment period will also spur innovative solutions to this challenge.

Data Management

Managing and growing the Blockchain Impact Ledger will include adding new projects that meet the stated criteria, “retiring” projects that no longer meet the criteria, and updating information about projects already listed. We plan to release updated versions of the Blockchain Impact Ledger quarterly.