Affordances-in-practice: unravelling blockchain-for-good in sustainable investment

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to make a distinction between actualized and claimed affordances of blockchain by examining how a specified user group interprets and translates the actualized affordances from a known use context into their existing practices. This allows us to develop and advance the concept of affordances-in-practice as an enactment of action possibilities through practices in a specified use context.Design/methodology/approachWe focus on the field of sustainable investment (SI) and its relation to emerging blockchain technologies in the pursuit of sustainable development goals (SDGs). We used a field study involving 29 interviews with SI practitioners and blockchain entrepreneurs in South Africa, supplemented with an analysis of 91 practitioner and industry documents.FindingsOur findings show that when there is a lack of actual use cases in the field of SI, the claimed affordances of blockchain are subject to a sensemaking process, which considers how action possibilities can be enacted and transformed through practices and how institutional constraints and socio-cognitive barriers can determine the available action possibilities.Research limitations/implicationsA notable limitation relates to the relative novelty and emerging status of blockchain. As affordances are based on available information and experience, this leaves room for claimed affordances. We discuss the implications of the interplay of the actualized and claimed affordances in blockchain applications in the field of SI.Practical implicationsWe discuss the practical implications of addressing claimed affordances and field opacity in the SI field.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to examine blockchain affordances for good in the context of achieving SDGs through SI. Our affordances-in-practice framework holds theoretical promise to pinpoint and explain how practices can shape action possibilities despite having difficulties in evaluating the underlying technological potentialities.