Paper Number
ECIS2026-1553
Paper Type
CRP
Abstract
Decentralised infrastructures are expected to facilitate coordination, but how such expectations translate into organisational practice remains insufficiently examined and undertheorized. To address that gap, we examine how decentralisation is interpreted and enacted within emerging scientific initiatives associated with the Decentralised Science (DeSci) movement. Drawing on interviews and archival material, we use sociotechnical imaginaries as contextual framing, and the repertoire model of institutionally embedded affordances as our primary analytic lens. The analysis identifies three repertoires of enactment—epistemic, governance, and financial—through which actors selectively translate decentralisation into practice. Rather than converging on a shared model, these repertoires reveal decentralisation as fragmented, contested, and unevenly realised across domains. Our work offers a grounded account of decentralised governance within an experimental ecosystem, thereby enhancing theoretical understanding of how decentralised coordination functions as an institutional project shaped by multiple and evolving logics.
Recommended Citation
Konstantopoulou, Zoyia; Mikalef, Patrick; and Angelopoulos, Spyros, "Repertoires In Decentralised Science: From Imaginary To Enacted Practice" (2026). ECIS 2026 Proceedings. 5.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2026/conf_theme/conf_theme/5
Repertoires In Decentralised Science: From Imaginary To Enacted Practice
Decentralised infrastructures are expected to facilitate coordination, but how such expectations translate into organisational practice remains insufficiently examined and undertheorized. To address that gap, we examine how decentralisation is interpreted and enacted within emerging scientific initiatives associated with the Decentralised Science (DeSci) movement. Drawing on interviews and archival material, we use sociotechnical imaginaries as contextual framing, and the repertoire model of institutionally embedded affordances as our primary analytic lens. The analysis identifies three repertoires of enactment—epistemic, governance, and financial—through which actors selectively translate decentralisation into practice. Rather than converging on a shared model, these repertoires reveal decentralisation as fragmented, contested, and unevenly realised across domains. Our work offers a grounded account of decentralised governance within an experimental ecosystem, thereby enhancing theoretical understanding of how decentralised coordination functions as an institutional project shaped by multiple and evolving logics.
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.