| Annotation: | Methods. An interdisciplinary approach was used, combining cryptocurrencies, blockchain, decentralized governance, and research into ways of financing the development of inclusive tourism infrastructure in Ukraine. A comparative analysis method (case study) was used to study historical precedents for the use of cryptocurrency and blockchain tools to finance socially beneficial projects, benchmarking to systematize and objectively compare the projects under consideration, and a quantitative analysis method to identify key success factors and reveal the antagonism between donor compensation and social return. Results. An analytical framework and scoring system based on six criteria (compensation, accountability, governance, efficiency, effectiveness, tokenomics) were developed. Empirical analysis revealed a key antagonism: there is a negative correlation between projects that offer donors tangible value in exchange for their contributions and those that achieve real socially beneficial results. However, some of the projects considered deviate from this pattern. The Klima DAO project demonstrates a positive precedent for tokenizing a valuable asset and providing both value from token usage and the ability to make contributions that are closer in nature to traditional irrevocable donations. The Gitcoin project demonstrates a precedent for separating donor participants and administrator participants, whose activities are regulated through DAOs and smart contracts. Based on the empirical analysis, recommendations are made for the implementation of socially useful projects using crypto tools, in particular: ensuring the transparency of value flows; decentralizing governance by including stakeholders, for whose benefit the project is being implemented, in decision-making processes; ensuring endogenous value flows that can support the long-term success of the project. Novelty. A system for evaluating and comparing cryptocurrency and blockchain projects in the context of their use for financing projects aimed at achieving socially useful goals has been developed. An antagonism between donor compensation and the achievement of stated goals has been identified, and ways to mitigate this antagonism and promote the emergent effects have been suggested. Practical value. The recommendations developed can be applied in organizing financing for projects aimed at developing inclusive tourism infrastructure in Ukraine using cryptocurrency and blockchain tools. |
| Literature: | - 1. Antoniadis, I., Spinthiropoulos, K., & Kontsas, S. (2020). Blockchain applications in tourism and tourism marketing: A short review. Strategic Innovative Marketing and Tourism.
- 2. Chen, J., & Zhou, W. (2025). Less- excludable Mechanism for DAOs in Public Good Auctions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.11854.
- 3. Benedetti, H., Caceres, C., & Abarzúa, L. Á. (2023). Utility tokens. The Emerald Handbook on Digital Media, Cryptocurrencies, and Blockchain.
- 4. Ekal, H.H., & Abdul-Wahab, S.N. (2022). DeFi governance and decision-making on blockchain. Mesopotamian Journal of Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.58496/mjcsc/2022/003
- 5. Arslanian, H. (2022). Utility Tokens and Social Tokens. The Book of Crypto: The Complete Guide to Investing in Cryptocurrencies.
- 6. Lomazzo, C., & Hydary, M. (2020, December 23). The UNICEF CryptoFund. UNICEF. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/innovation/stories/unicef-cryptofund
- 7. Ballesteros-Rodríguez, A., De-Lucio, J., & Sicilia, M. -A. (2024). Tokenized carbon credits in voluntary carbon markets: the case of KlimaDAO. Frontiers in Blockchain. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2024.1474540
- 8. Choetkiertikul, M., Puengmongkolchaikit, A., Chandra, P., Ragkitwetsakul, C., Maipradit, R., Hata, H., Gaikovina Kula, R., & Matsumoto, K. (2023). Studying the association between Gitcoin’s issues and resolving outcomes. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8313155
- 9. Cervone, C. (2024, February 21). A longitudinal assessment of Gitcoin Grants impact on open source developer activity. Open Source Observer. Retrieved from https://docs.opensource.observer/blog/gitcoin-grants-impact/
- 10. Rowbottom, M. (2022, December 2). Save the Kids Token (KIDS). BINANCE Square. Retrieved from https://www.binance.com/en/square/post/17008522760257
- 11. Aidcoin. (n.d.). Crunchbase. June 7, 2025. Retrieved from https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/aidcoin
- 12. Tan, J., & Tan, Y. (2022). The Effect of Crypto Rewards in Fundraising: From a Quasi- Experiment to a Dictator Game.
- 13. Ahmed, I., Fumimoto, K., Nakano, T., & Tran, T. (2023). Blockchain-Empowered Decentralized Philanthropic Charity for Social Good. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010210
- 14. Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation. (n.d.). Crypto fuels record donation to brain tumor lab. September 13, 2025. Retrieved from https://www.supportchildrenscolorado.org/news/crypto-fuels-record-donation-to-brain-tumor-lab
- 15. Kim, M., & Chung, J. (2018). Sustainable Growth and Token Economy Design: The Case of Steemit. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11010167
|
Archive