Blockchain in supply chains: a promise still unfolding

Blockchain technology has been acclaimed as a groundbreaking innovation capable of resolving persistent challenges in supply chain management, financial services, and data governance. Its foundational attributes; decentralization, transparency, immutability, and robust security; have led both practitioners and scholars to anticipate transformative outcomes, ranging from streamlined transaction processes to ethically and environmentally responsible sourcing. Despite this early enthusiasm and over 15 years of conceptual development, blockchain’s real-world impact has been uneven, with many high-profile initiatives failing to deliver the expected results. This chapter provides a descriptive, fact-based analysis of blockchain’s current standing and prospects. First, it revisits the theoretical frameworks: Principal-Agent Theory, Transaction Cost Theory, Resource-Based View, and Institutional Theory; that underscore blockchain’s potential contributions, particularly in sustainable supply chain applications. Second, it surveys the actual conditions on the ground, highlighting illustrative successes alongside various stalled or abandoned projects. These contrasting narratives reveal that blockchain’s trajectory has been not only marked by promising pilot efforts but also by systemic technical, organizational, and regulatory hindrances. Subsequently, the chapter offers possible insights as to why blockchain has frequently fallen short, distinguishing between technology-centric barriers scalability, interoperability, and security risks and organizational or external factors (e.g., cultural resistance, regulatory confusion, and misaligned incentives). While acknowledging blockchain’s shortcomings, the discussion also highlights the technology’s potential if implemented with realistic expectations and supportive governance structures. Finally, the chapter concludes by suggesting a pragmatic way forward, focusing on incremental improvements, collaborative R&D, and constructive regulatory guidance.