Erratum: Mechanisms for Dealing With the Unexpected in Small-Scale Contracting Using Smart Contracts

Year 2025, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 19 - 39, 22.07.2025

Mathew Fukuzawa , Michael Kay , Brandon Mcconnell , Kristin Thoney-barletta Donald Warsing

The original article was published on June 30, 2025. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tcsa/issue/92149/1653102

Erratum Note

This article has been corrected at the request of the authors. The following amendments have been made to the version originally published: ORCID Placement: The ORCID identifiers initially appeared with departmental affiliations. These have been correctly reassigned to individual authors, as each author has multiple affiliations. ORCIDs now appear next to the relevant names. Affiliation Numbering: The original manuscript listed two affiliation labels as “c.” This duplication has been corrected in the revised version. Author Affiliations: Donald P. Warsing has been updated to reflect correct institutional affiliations. He is now listed with the Department of Business Management and the Center for Additive Manufacturing and Logistics, and no longer affiliated with the Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering. Kristin Thoney-Barletta has been updated to be affiliated solely with the Department of Textile and Apparel, Technology & Management, and no longer with the Department of Business Management. Citation Update: All in-text references to “Fukuzawa et al. (2024)” have been updated to reflect the forthcoming TCSA publication (2025), where applicable. Formatting and Editorial Corrections: Page 20: “RQ3” was embedded under “RQ2.” It now appears as a separate, clearly defined section, consistent with other research questions. Page 21, Section 3.1: Corrected spelling of “accompanied.” Page 24, Section 3.3: Updated phrasing: “stake philosophy employed in the previous chapter” changed to “stake philosophy employed by Fukuzawa et al. (2024)” or to the pending TCSA reference. Removed excess space in the term “game-theoretic.” Page 25, Figure 1: Caption updated to “Base design process (adapted from Fukuzawa et al. (2024)).” Page 26: Corrected spelling of “conversion” under the “Oracles” section. Page 28: Section 4.2.2: Changed “T = 0” to “k = 0.” Section 4.2.3: Bolded the term “value” in the paragraph beneath Table 1. Section 4.2.3: Italicized both instances of “i” in the paragraph beginning with “Payments...” Figure 10(c): Caption revised to “PC balance after CTR receives half refund; only CTR stake remains.” Page 30: Added missing period to sentence ending in “...and the project terminates.” Applied code formatting to the term “dispute(true).” Page 32: Italicized the terms “true” and “false” in the paragraph beneath Figure 17. Page 36: Fixed excess spacing in “Conditions” bullet. Reference formatting improved for URLs and titles (e.g., AAA, Bannon, Bieber, Bingham, Buchwald, etc.). Replaced “ahead-of-print” in the Chen reference with the finalized volume and page numbers: 31(11), 4281–4307. Corrected URL formatting issues (e.g., missing underscores, broken lines) in several references (e.g., Goldfeder, Viktorov, Wallace Pierce Law, etc.). Corrected typographic elements (e.g., moved diaeresis in Sonmez). Separated Schwartz (2012) reference properly from the previous citation. Updated titles to match proper casing conventions across all references.

Abstract

We demonstrate proof-of-concept for an expanded blockchain smart contract based small-scale contracting process that includes an internally managed arbitration service to manage disputes. Using Ethereum smart contracts, we model a small-scale general contracting scenario with disruptions. Execution is demonstrated with the Remix Integrated Development Environment (IDE). We show the feasibility of managing general contracting disputes with an internal arbitration service, completely encompassed within blockchain smart contracts. This research continues an original effort to model the small-scale general contracting scenario on a blockchain network. Further work is required to expand the scope of dispute management and account for additional external factors. Also, full-scale decentralized application is not explored here. This process expands the scope of current practices and tools, such as Angi, in a decentralized manner with blockchain. Full-scale adoption at the small scale is likely difficult due to disbelief in technology, cost, and resistance to change.

Keywords

blockchain, smart contract, arbitration

Ethical Statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

• AAA (2023), ‘Costs of Arbitration’, American Arbitration Association. https://www.adr.org/sites/ default/files/document repository/AAA228-Costs of Arbitration.pdf (accessed 15 August 2023).
• Ahlemann, F., El Arbi, F., Kaiser, M. G. and Heck, A. (2013), ‘A process framework for theoretically grounded prescriptive research in the project management field’, International Journal of Project Management, 31(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.03.008.
• Ahmadisheykhsarmast, S. and Sonmez, R. (2020), ‘A smart contract system for security of payment of construction contracts’, Automation in Construction 120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103401.
• Alair (2019), ‘Homeowners don’t trust contractors and we deserve it’, Alair Homes. https://www.alairhomes.com/scottsdale/blog/homeowners-dont-trust-contractors-and-we-deserve-it/.
• Angi (2021). https://www.legal.angi.com/ (accessed 20 February 2024).
• Angi (2024). https://www.angi.com/ (accessed 20 February 2024).
• Aouidef, Y., Ast, F. and Deffains, B. (2021), ‘Decentralized Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Blockchain Online Dispute Resolution Projects’, Frontiers in Blockchain 4, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2021.564551.
• Asgaonkar, A. and Krishnamachari, B. (2019), Solving the Buyer and Seller’s Dilemma: A Dual-Deposit Escrow Smart Contract for Provably Cheat-Proof Delivery and Payment for a Digital Good without a Trusted Mediator, in ‘2019 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC)’, IEEE, pp. 262–267. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8751482.
• Bademosi, F. and Issa, R. R. A. (2021), ‘Factors Influencing Adoption and Integration of Construction Robotics and Automation Technology in the US’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 147(8), 13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002103.
• Bannon, P. J., Califano, A. S., Mooney, M. C. and Ayers-Mann, J. (2021), ‘Do Employment Arbitration Programs Reduce Legal Costs?’. https://www.seyfarth.com/news-insights/do-employment-arbitration-programs-reduce-legal-costs.html (accessed 16 February 2024).
• Bieber, C. (2023a), ‘How Much Do Lawyers Cost? 2023 Guide’. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/ how-much-lawyers-cost/ (accessed 15 August 2023).
• Bieber, C. (2023b), ‘You’ll Never Guess How Many Americans Own Their Own Homes’, The Ascent. https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/mortgages/articles/youll-never-guess-how-many-americans-own-their-own-homes/, (accessed 20 March 2024).
• Bingham, L. B. (1997), ‘Employment arbitration: The repeat player effect’, Employee Rights and Employ- ment Policy Journal 1, 189. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1324411.
• Bland, P. and Ocamb, K. (2021), ‘Glenda Perez: ‘No one should have to go through what I went through’ with discriminatory forced arbitration’, Public Justice. https://public-justice.medium.com/ glenda-perez-no-one-should-have-to-go-through-what-i-went-through-with-discriminatory-forced-f9e90e6667db (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Boyle, J. (1991), ‘Gordon Sel-Way v. Spence Bros’.https://casetext.com/case/gordon-sel-way-v-spence-bros 438 Mich. 488 (Mich. 1991) 475 N.W.2d 704 (accessed 20 January 2024).
• Buchwald, M. (2019), ‘Smart contract dispute resolution: The inescapable flaws of blockchain-based arbi- tration’, Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Review 168(5), 1369–1423. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/pennlawreview/vol168/iss5/3.
• Building for the Future (2021), Construction Sector Accord. https://www.constructionaccord.nz/ assets/Construction-Accord/files/building-for-the-future.pdf New Zealand Ministry of Busi- ness, Innovation, & Employment (accessed 29 February 2024).
• CFPB (2015), ‘Arbitration Study: Report to Congress, pursuant to Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act § 1028(a)’, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. https://www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/research-reports/arbitration-study-report-to-congress-2015/ (accessed 13 January 2024).
• Chandrasekher, A. C. and Horton, D. (2019), ‘Arbitration Nation: Data from Four Providers’, California Law Review 107(1), 1–66. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z384F1MJ54.
• Chen, X., Chang-Richards, A. Y., Yiu, T. W., Ling, F. Y. Y., Pelosi, A. and Yang, N. (2023), ‘A multivariate regression analysis of barriers to digital technologies adoption in the construction industry’, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-11-2022-1051.
• Cheung, K. (2019), ‘Escrowmyether’, EscrowMyEther. http://escrowmyether.com/#readme (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Cheung, S. O., Yiu, K. T. and Suen, H. (2004), ‘Construction Negotiation Online’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(6), 844–852. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130:6(844). Cianci, M., Longo, A. J., Ward, D. V. and Iwry, J. (2024), ‘Litigation, Professional Perspective – Benefits & Risks of Decentralized Dispute Resolution’.
• https://www.bloomberglaw.com/external/document/XA9GE5VS000000/litigation-professional-perspective-benefits-risks-of-decentrali (accessed 13 January 2024).
• Colvin, A. J. (2011), ‘An Empirical Study of Employment Arbitration: Case Outcomes and Processes’, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 8(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2010.01200.x.
• Colvin, A. J. and Gough, M. D. (2023), ‘Mandatory Employment Arbitration’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science 19(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120822-112007.
• Cong, L. W., Hui, X., Tucker, C. and Zhou, L. (2023), ‘Scaling Smart Contracts via Layer-2 Technologies: Some Empirical Evidence’, Management Science 69(12), 7306–7316. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.00281.
• Corkery, M. and Colvin, S. (2016), ‘Wells Fargo Killing Sham Account Suits by Using Arbitration’, New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/business/dealbook/wells-fargo-killing-sham-account-suits-by-using-arbitration.html (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Cowley, S. (2017), ‘Now Wells Fargo up to 3.5 million fraudulent accounts’, San Francisco Chronicle. https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Now-Wells-Fargo-up-to-3-5-million-fraudulent-12165170.php (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Cutler, A. C. and Lark, D. (2022), ‘The hidden costs of law in the governance of global supply chains: the turn to arbitration’, Review of International Political Economy 29(3), 719–748. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09692290.2020.1821748.
• Das, M., Luo, H. and Cheng, J. C. (2020), ‘Securing interim payments in construction projects through a blockchain-based framework’, Automation in Construction 118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103284. Eaglesham, J. (2024), ‘Insurers Are Spying on Your Home From the Sky’. https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/home-insurance-aerial-images-37a18b16 (accessed 8 April 2024).
• EPI (2017), ‘The average consumer in arbitration with Wells Fargo is ordered to pay the bank nearly $11,000’, Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/press/the-average-consumer-in-arbitration-with-wells-fargo-is-ordered-to-pay-the-bank-nearly-11000/ (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Farmer, M. B. (2012), ‘Mandatory and Fair? A Better System of Mandatory Arbitration’, Yale Law Journal, 121(8), 2346. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41510479.
• Federal Reserve (2022), ‘Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households (SHED)’, Federal Reserve Board of Governors. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2022-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-2021-housing.htm, (accessed 20 March 2024).
• Fotohabadi, M. (2023), ‘How Much Does Arbitration Cost?’. https://www.adrtimes.com/how-much-does-arbitration-cost/ (accessed 16 February 2024).
• Fukuzawa, M. B. (2024), Applications of Smart Contracts in Competitive and Cooperative Environments, PhD dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/ 1840.20/41663.
• Fukuzawa, M. B., McConnell, B. M., Kay, M. G., Thoney-Barletta, K. A. and Warsing, D. P. (2024), ‘Implementing a letter of credit style business process for small-scale contracting using smart contracts’. Working paper in peer review. https://doi.org/10.31224/3847.
• Ghodoosi, F. and Sharif, M. M. (2021), ‘Justice in arbitration: the consumer perspective’, International Journal of Conflict Management 32(4), 626–647. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-10-2019-0203.
• Ghodoosi, F. and Sharif, M. M. (2023), ‘Arbitration Effect’, American Business Law Journal 60(2), 235–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/ablj.12222.
• Goharshady, A. K. (2021), Irrationality, Extortion, or Trusted Third-Parties: Why it is Impossible to Buy and Sell Physical Goods Securely on the Blockchain, in ‘2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain)’, IEEE, pp. 73–81. 10.1109/Blockchain53845.2021.00021.
• Goldenfein, J. and Leiter, A. (2018), ‘Legal Engineering on the Blockchain: ‘Smart contracts’ as Legal Conduct’, Law and Critique 29(2), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-018-9224-0.
• Goldfeder, S., Bonneau, J., Gennaro, R. and Narayanan, A. (2017), Escrow protocols for cryptocurrencies: How to buy physical goods using bitcoin, in A. Kiayias, ed., ‘Financial Cryptography and Data Security: 21st International Conference, FC 2017, Sliema, Malta, April 3-7, 2017, Revised Selected Papers 21’, Springer, pp. 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70972-7 18.
• Hayes, A. (2022), ‘Signing Away Your Rights: Forced Arbitration—Overcoming Corporate “Get Out Jail Free Cards” and Finding Avenues for Justice’, The [F]law. https://theflaw.org/articles/ signing-away-your-rights-forced-arbitration-overcoming-get-out-of-jail-free-cards-and-finding-avenues-for-justice/ (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Hershkoff, H. and Norris, L. (2023), ‘The Oligarchic Courthouse: Jurisdiction, Corporate Power, and Democratic Decline’, Michigan Law Review 122(1), 1–54. https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.122.1.oligarchic.
• Hiltzik, M. (2017), ‘No surprise: Wells Fargo is leveraging its arbitration clause to win an advantageous scandal settlements’, Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-wells-settlement-20170331-story.html (accessed 21 July 2023).
• JAMS (2023), ‘Arbitration Defined: What is Arbitration?’, JAMS Arbitration Services. https://www.jamsadr.com/arbitration-defined/ (accessed 15 August 2023).
• Johnston, J. S. and Zywicki, T. (2016), ‘The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Arbitration Study: A Summary and Critique’, Banking & Financial Services Policy Report 35(5), 9–33.
• https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/consumer-financial-protection-bureaus-arbitration/docview/1791368655/se-2.
• Kerzner, H. (2017), Project Management - A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling (12th Edition), John Wiley & Sons. https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpPMASAPSC/project-management-systems/project-management-systems.
• Kleros (2024), ‘The Justice Protocol’. https://kleros.io/ (accessed 13 January 2024).
• Koren, J. R. (2017), ‘Wells Fargo’s $110-million settlement is still not enough, lawyers say’, Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-settlement-opponents-20170329-story.html (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Level Playing Field (2017), ‘Wells Fargo and forced consumer arbitration’. http://fairarbitrationnow.org/wp-content/uploads/LPF-Wells-Fargo-Report-September-2017-Update.pdf (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Li, W., Duan, P. and Su, J. (2021), ‘The effectiveness of project management construction with data mining and blockchain consensus’, Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing pp. 1–10. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-02668-7.
• Liu, K.-C. (2023), ‘Guaranteeing the Right to a Fair Trial in IP-Related Arbitration–In Germany Perhaps? And Elsewhere?’, IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 54(8), 1244–1260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01316-9.
• LocalCryptos (2023). https://localcryptos.com/ (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Lu, L. (2023), ‘Evaluation on the application mode of blockchain technology in water transportation engineer- ing project management’, Water Supply 23(10), 4272–4285. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2023.255.
• Mahony, D. M., Klaas, B. S., McClendon, J. A. and Varma, A. (2005), ‘The Effects of Mandatory Employment Arbitration Systems on Applicants’ Attraction to Organizations’, Human Resource Management 44(4), 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20084.
• McGregor, P.J. (1974), ‘Maraldo Asphalt v. Osgood Co.’. https://casetext.com/case/maraldo-asphalt-v-osgood-co 53 Mich. App. 324, 220 N.W.2d 50, Mich. Ct. App. 1974 (accessed 20 January 2024).
• Meng, H., Bian, E. and Tang, C. (2019), Themis: Towards Decentralized Escrow of Cryptocurrencies without Trusted Third Parties, in ‘2019 Sixth International Conference on Software Defined Systems (SDS)’, IEEE, pp. 266–271. 10.1109/SDS.2019.8768704.
• Meng, Q. and Sun, R. (2021), ‘Towards Secure and Efficient Scientific Research Project Management Using Consortium Blockchain’, Journal of Signal Processing Systems 93, 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11265-020-01529-y.
• NCJB (2023a), ‘Arbitration and Mediation’, North Carolina Judicial Branch. https://www.nccourts.gov/ help-topics/lawsuits-and-small-claims/arbitration-and-mediation (accessed 15 August 2023).
• NCJB (2023b), ‘Small Claims’, North Carolina Judicial Branch. https://www.nccourts.gov/help-topics/ lawsuits-and-small-claims/small-claims (accessed 15 August 2023).
• NCLBGC (2023), ‘FAQ for Consumers’, North Carolina Licensing Board for General Contractors. https:// nclbgc.org/faq-consumers/, Accessed 22 March 2024.
• Ojiako, U., Chipulu, M., Marshall, A. and Williams, T. (2018), ‘An examination of the ‘rule of law’ and ‘justice’ implications in online dispute resolution in construction projects’, International Journal of Project Management 36(2), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.10.002.
• Ortolani, P. (2019), ‘The impact of blockchain technologies and smart contracts on dispute resolution: arbitration and court litigation at the crossroads’, Uniform Law Review 24(2), 430–448. https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unz017.
• Renz, A., Solas, M. Z., Rodrigues de Almeida, P., Bu¨hler, M., Gerbert, P., Castagnino, S. and Rothballer, C. (2016), ‘Shaping the Future of Construction: A Breakthrough in Mindset and Technology’. https://www.weforum.org/publications/shaping-the-future-of-construction-a-breakthrough-in-mindset-and-technology/ (accessed 29 February 2024).
• Saygili, M., Mert, I. E. and Tokdemir, O. B. (2022), ‘A decentralized structure to reduce and resolve construction disputes in a hybrid blockchain network’, Automation in Construction 134, 104056. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.104056.
• Schwartz, D. S. (2008), ‘Mandatory Arbitration and Fairness’, Notre Dame Law Review 84(3), 1247–1341.
• Schwartz, D. S. (2012), ‘Claim-Suppressing Arbitration: The New Rules’, Indiana Law Journal 87(1), 239–270. https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol87/iss1/15/.
• Schwartzbach, N. I. (2021), An Incentive-Compatible Smart Contract for Decentralized Commerce, in ‘2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC)’, IEEE, pp. 1–3. 10.1109/ ICBC51069.2021.9461077.
• Semuels, A. (2024), ‘The Rooftop Solar Industry Could Be on the Verge of Collapse’, Time. https:// time.com/6565415/rooftop-solar-industry-collapse/ (accessed 29 February 2024).
• Sharma, V., Oyebode, O. J., Uniyal, V., Rajyalaxmi, M., Al-Taee, M. and Alazzam, M. B. (2023), Technical use of Smart Contracts in Blockchain-Based Project Management, in ‘2023 3rd International Conference on Advance Computing and Innovative Technologies in Engineering (ICACITE)’, IEEE, pp. 272–276. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACITE57410.2023.10182588.
• Sherwyn, D., Estreicher, S. and Heise, M. (2005), ‘Assessing the Case for Employment Arbitration: A New Path for Empirical Research’, Stanford Law Review 57(5), 1557–1591. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 40040226.
• Shierholz, H. (2017a), ‘Correcting the record: Consumers fare better under class actions than arbitration’, Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/correcting-the-record-consumers-fare-better-under-class-actions-than-arbitration/ (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Shierholz, H. (2017b), ‘Forced arbitration is bad for consumers’, Economic Policy Institute. https:// www.epi.org/publication/forced-arbitration-is-bad-for-consumers/ (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Sonmez, R., S¨onmez, F. O¨. and Ahmadisheykhsarmast, S. (2021), ‘Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision framework’, Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing 14(7), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-021-03610-1.
• Staszak, S. (2019), ‘In the Shadow of Litigation: Arbitration and Medical Malpractice Reform’, Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 44(2), 267–301. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-7277380.
• Stipanovich, T. J. (1988), ‘Rethinking American Arbitration’, Indiana Law Journal 63(3), 425–487. https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir= 1&article=1115&context=ilj.
• Stone, K. and Colvin, A. (2015), ‘The arbitration epidemic: Mandatory arbitration deprives workers and consumers of their rights’, Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/ the-arbitration-epidemic/# ref66 (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Stuart James (2019), ‘3 Things to Know About Becoming a Kleros Juror’. https://blog.kleros.io/ become-a-juror-blockchain-dispute-resolution-on-ethereum/ (accessed 13 January 2024).
• Thumbtack (2024). https://www.thumbtack.com/ (accessed 22 March 2024).
• University of Missouri (2015), ‘How much does arbitration cost? And, Who pays for it?’, University of Missouri School of Law. https://law.missouri.edu/arbitrationinfo/2015/10/11/how-much-does-arbitration-cost/ (accessed 15 August 2023).
• Ustun, E. S. and Yuce, M. (2022), Smart Legal Contracts & Smarter Dispute Resolution, in ‘2022 IEEE 24th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI)’, Vol. 2, IEEE, pp. 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1109/ CBI54897.2022.10056.
• Viktorov, K. and Hollands, K. (2018), ‘White Paper for project EscrowBlock’, EscrowBlock. https:// escrowblock.net/assets/docs/EscrowBlock White Paper EN.pdf (accessed 21 July 2023).
• Wallace Pierce Law (2017), ‘Different Types of Attorney’s Fees in North Carolina’. https:// www.wallacepierce.com/firm-news/2017/february/different-types-of-attorney-s-fees-in-north-caro/ (accessed 16 February 2024).
• White, A. M. and Mansfield, C. L. (2002), ‘Literacy and contract’, Stanford Law & Policy Review 13(2), 233. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/stanlp13&div=26&id=&page=.
• Xue, J. H. and Holz, R. (2019), Applying smart contracts in online dispute resolutions on a large scale and its regulatory implications, in M. Ragnedda and G. Destefanis, eds, ‘Blockchain and Web 3.0: Social, Economic, and Technological Challenges’, Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 177–191. https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9780429029530-12.
• Zhao, R., Chen, Z. and Xue, F. (2023), ‘A blockchain 3.0 paradigm for digital twins in construction project management’, Automation in Construction 145, 104645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104645.