Beyond the Hype: Why Blockchain Adoption Remains Limited in India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66635/d37jqh78Keywords:
Blockchain Adoption, Perceived Risk, Perceived Value, Adoption Intention, Emerging EconomiesAbstract
The paper analyses the determinants of blockchain adoption intentions among Indian individual investors, significantly considering the influence of perceived risk and perceived value. The study defines perceived adoption risk as a multidimensional concept which consists of financial, privacy, regulatory and psychological risk. A structured questionnaire was used to collect primary data on 282 individual investors in the Delhi NCR region. Two-step analysis was used, which involved exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modelling. The results indicate that perceived risk is multidimensional, and financial performance risk is turning out to be the most influential factor. The findings also suggest that perceived adoption risk positively and significantly affects the adoption intentions, implying that investors are speculative. In addition, perceived value is found to partially mediate the relationship between perceived adoption risk and adoption intention, highlighting the importance of benefit–cost evaluation in decision-making. The research adds to the literature by offering a behavioural approach to blockchain adoption in the context of an emerging economy. The results provide valuable information that can be applied by policymakers and practitioners to drive the adoption of blockchain by overcoming regulatory ambiguity, enhancing awareness among investors, and solidifying the perceived benefits of blockchain applications.
References
1.Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. In Proceedings of the 43rd National Conference of the American Marketing Assocation, June 15, 16, 17, Chicago, Illinois, 1960. American Marketing Association.
2.Chiu, C. M., Wang, E. T., Fang, Y. H., & Huang, H. Y. (2014). Understanding customers' repeat purchase intentions in B2C e‐commerce: the roles of utilitarian value, hedonic value and perceived risk. Information systems journal, 24(1), 85-114.
3.Cox, D. F., & Rich, S. U. (1964). Perceived risk and consumer decision-making—the case of telephone shopping. Journal of marketing research, 1(4), 32-39.
4.Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective. International journal of human-computer studies, 59(4), 451-474.
5.Kahneman, D. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47, 278.
6.Kim, H. W., Chan, H. C., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based adoption of mobile internet: an empirical investigation. Decision support systems, 43(1), 111-126.
7.Li, Z., & Bai, X. (2010). Influences of perceived risk and system usability on the adoption of mobile banking service. In International symposium on computer science and computational technology (ISCSCT) (Vol. 3, pp. 051-054).
8.Lim, N. (2003). Consumers’ perceived risk: sources versus consequences. Electronic commerce research and applications, 2(3), 216-228.
9.Malaquias, R. F., & Hwang, Y. (2016). An empirical study on trust in mobile banking: A developing country perspective. Computers in human behavior, 54, 453-461.
10.Mann, B. J. S., & Sahni, S. K. (2013). Role of trust and customer loyalty in reducing perceived urity risk in internet banking. International Journal of Electronic Business, 10(4), 331-354.
11.Mitchell, V. W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: conceptualisations and models. European Journal of marketing, 33(1/2), 163-195.
12.Filippi, D. (2016). The invisible politics of Bitcoin: governance crisis of a decentralised infrastructure. Internet policy review, 5(3).
13.De Filippi, P. (2016). The interplay between decentralization and privacy: the case of blockchain technologies. Journal of Peer Production, 7.
14.Morgan, R. (2016). It's All About the BLOCKCHAIN. American Bankers Association. ABA Banking Journal, 108(2), 51.
15.Yeoh P (2017), "Regulatory issues in blockchain technology". Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Vol. 25 No. 2 pp. 196–208, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRC-08-2016-0068
16.Wood, C. M. (1996). Incorporating perceived risk into models of consumer deal assessment and purchase intent.
17.Casino, F., Dasaklis, T. K., & Patsakis, C. (2019). A systematic literature review of blockchain-based applications: Current status, classification and open issues. Telematics and informatics, 36, 55-81.
18.Kshetri, N. (2021). Blockchain and sustainable supply chain management in developing countries. International journal of information management, 60, 102376.
19.Lima e Silva, A. (2025). Blockchain Technology in Accounting and Auditing: Enhancing Transparency, Efficiency, and Trust in Financial Reporting. Efficiency, and Trust in Financial Reporting (October 21, 2025).
20.Mujawar, S. N., & Shinde, S. (2025). Impact of RBI’s Digital Rupee on the Traditional Banking System in India. International Journal for Novel Research in Economics, Finance and Management, 3(2), 299-314.
21.Treiblmaier, H. (2018). The impact of the blockchain on the supply chain: a theory-based research framework and a call for action. Supply chain management: an international journal, 23(6), 545-559.
22.Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one, 11(10), e0163477.
23.Tapscott, D., & Tapscott, A. (2016). Blockchain revolution: how the technology behind bitcoin is changing money, business, and the world. Penguin.
