DAO Research Trends: Reflections and Learnings from the First European DAO Workshop (DAWO)

Abstract

Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) represent a transformative shift in organizational structures, combining decentralized governance with blockchain-based smart contracts. While DAOs present significant opportunities for innovation, they are confronted with several unresolved challenges, such as the centralization of power, the design of effective governance mechanisms, and the legal uncertainties surrounding their operation. Drawing on insights from recent studies and discussions presented in July 2024 at DAWO24, the first European DAO Workshop, this article explores these issues. The purpose of this article is to identify and analyze the critical research streams in DAO studies, particularly in governance mechanisms, technical frameworks, value assessment, and legal dimensions. A systematic approach, following the PRISMA methodology, was employed to analyze contributions from 14 extended abstracts and 11 full papers presented at DAWO24. The findings highlight the need for more equitable governance structures, secure and scalable technical frameworks, standardized tools for assessing DAOs’ value, and coherent legal frameworks to support decentralized operations. The article concludes by outlining future research directions, urging interdisciplinary collaboration to address current gaps and optimize DAO design, operation, and regulation.

1. Introduction

Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) have emerged as a novel form of organizational structure, but their definition remains fluid in the literature. Initial attempts to define DAOs, such as Vitalik Buterin’s [1] description of a DAO “as an entity that lives on the internet and exists autonomously, but also relies heavily on individuals to take on certain tasks that the autonomous entity cannot do itself”, emphasize their autonomous operation on the internet, supplemented by human intervention for tasks beyond automation. Early research into DAOs has explored their potential as alternative governance institutions, distinct from markets, hierarchies, and relational contracts, as framed by Williamson’s [2] new institutional economics. Davidson et al. [3] (p. 654) characterize DAOs as “self-governing organizations with the coordination properties of a market, the governance properties of a commons, and the constitutional, legal, and monetary properties of a nation-state”. Scholars, such as Catalini and Gans [4] and Lumineau et al. [5], emphasize how blockchain technology can reduce transaction costs, including those related to searching, networking, monitoring, verification, and enforcement. Additionally, studies by Beck et al. [6] and Zhao et al. [7] underscore the governance capabilities of DAOs in coordinating decentralized communities, offering an efficient alternative to traditional organizational structures.

Over time, scholars like Hassan and De Filippi [8] and Santana and Albareda [9] further refined the concept, emphasizing DAOs’ reliance on blockchain-based, self-executing rules, decentralized governance, and open communities. More recent interpretations, such as those from the World Economic Forum [10] and the Ethereum community [11], underscore the transparency, community-oriented governance, and the role of smart contracts in ensuring that decisions and operations are visible and collectively controlled.

Overall, DAOs are recognized for their transformative organizational models, harnessing decentralized decision-making and governance tokens to manage organizational functions [12]. By eliminating centralized control and enabling collective decision-making, DAOs offer a more democratic, transparent, and efficient alternative to traditional hierarchical structures [13]. Uniswap exemplifies this decentralized governance in practice, overseeing a decentralized exchange protocol (DEX) through a token-based governance model. Anonymous UNI token holders propose and vote on protocol changes, with decisions executed via smart contracts to ensure transparency and automation. While Uniswap has no formal legal entity, the UniSwap Foundation supports governance initiatives. Uniswap’s economic model relies on liquidity provider fees, a community treasury, and potential protocol fee allocations. Despite its decentralized structure, challenges, such as token concentration, voter apathy, and regulatory uncertainty, remain key considerations for its governance model.

Further examples illustrate the diversity of DAO applications. Sky (formerly MakerDAO) governs the USDS (formerly DAI) stablecoin, allowing members to use its SKY governance tokens to ensure its efficiency, transparency and stability. MolochDAO is an example of a mission-driven DAO, pooling members’ contributions to fund blockchain infrastructure as a digital public good. Hopr further demonstrates how DAOs can govern digital infrastructure, as its token holders collectively manage the HOPR protocol, a privacy-focused communication network, and vote on its development and maintenance. By focusing on NFTs, Flamingo DAO aims to explore emerging investment opportunities for ownable, blockchain-based assets that include digital art, collectibles, and in-game assets. Bridging the digital and physical worlds, Cabin goes a step further, using blockchain-based governance to manage real estate, such as land and homes, while facilitating real-life gatherings to strengthen local communities. These examples highlight the versatility of DAOs in addressing different use cases, from digital asset management to real-world applications, such as property governance. All of these DAOs leverage the collective intelligence of participants, aiming to minimize the need for central authority and promote equitable governance [14]. It is precisely these DAO features that prompt important questions concerning the compatibility with current economic and regulatory frameworks [15], the fairness and inclusivity of contemporary decision-making processes [16,17], and the feasibility of implementing such structures for communities using the current technical toolset [18,19].

DAOs confront significant challenges and unresolved questions that are pivotal for their adaptation and their further development as alternative organizational structures. In a recent effort by several prominent DAO researchers, these challenges have been compiled, highlighting the need for interdisciplinary collaboration [20]. DAWO24, the first European DAO Workshop, represents a concrete response to this call for more interdisciplinary research, as outlined by Tan et al. [20] in their paper on “Open problems in DAOs”. At DAWO24 in July 2024 at the ZHAW School of Management and Law, Winterthur, Switzerland (https://dawo24.org/, accessed on 10 March 2025), this interdisciplinarity was fostered by giving researchers a platform to present their current research to an international audience of DAO scholars, coming from different research fields, ranging from legal, philosophical, political science, economic, computer science, finance, and communication. DAWO24 provided an opportunity to collaboratively delve into workshop sessions, offering a critical forum for exploring the complex nature of DAOs and blockchain governance. Discussions at the workshop spanned a wide range of topics related to DAOs, enabling new research opportunities to be explored and to match common research interests. Given the interdisciplinary nature of DAWO24 and the curated selection of peer-reviewed contributions, this workshop serves as a valuable dataset for capturing the most recent and pressing challenges in DAO research. By focusing on these contributions, we provide a structured synthesis of current discussions among leading DAO scholars, ensuring an up-to-date reflection of the state of the field.

The objective of this paper is to systematically analyze and synthesizes the critical topics and research questions in recent studies on DAOs presented and discussed at the DAWO24 with the aim to provide a structured overview of the critical challenges DAOs face and to identify promising avenues for future research. Specifically, it seeks to address the following research question: What are the key unresolved challenges and emerging research directions in the field of DAOs, as identified through interdisciplinary discussions at DAWO24?

To ensure a structured and replicable approach, we followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology [21]. By adopting this meta-analysis methodology, we ensure transparency and rigor in our approach, offering measurable and replicable results for researchers and practitioners alike. Specifically, we analyzed the contributions of the first European DAO Workshop, which included 14 extended abstracts and 11 full papers. These contributions were systematically summarized and evaluated to extract their key findings. Following the PRISMA framework, we then analyzed the content to filter out the main findings, grouping them into thematic clusters based on commonalities. This grouping was conducted through an iterative coding process, where we first identified recurring keywords and concepts across the contributions. These were then categorized into preliminary themes, which were refined through discussions among the authors to ensure coherence and relevance. Through this process, four dominant themes emerged, each representing a key research challenge or direction in DAO research. These themes were selected based on their prominence in the analyzed contributions and their alignment with the overarching discussions at DAWO24. Each cluster was further synthesized to distill its main insights, which form the core contributions of this article. These findings not only highlight the critical topics in DAO research, but also provide a foundation for future inquiries in this field.

By highlighting aspects, such as governance structures, stakeholder influence, technical infrastructure, and legal implications, this article seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current questions DAOs impose and gives recommendations on which topics future research should focus on. Addressing these issues is essential for optimizing the design and implementation of DAOs, thereby advancing the field towards more effective and equitable digital organizations. Hence, in Section 2, we will discuss different authors analyzing governance mechanisms, in Section 3 we will look at various scholars developing tools and frameworks to better understand DAOs. Section 4 will examine researchers focusing on the value of DAOs, while Section 5 will explore studies concerned with the legal and regulatory aspects of DAOs. Following the discussion of findings and further research directions in Section 6, the final Section will conclude by emphasizing the importance of continued interdisciplinary research to overcome the current challenges and realize the full potential of DAOs.

2. Analyzing Governance Mechanisms in DAOs

Understanding governance in DAOs requires a comprehensive analysis of how various stakeholders influence decision-making processes and the overall effectiveness of these mechanisms [7,22]. Central to this investigation is the influence of early investors, team members, and venture capitalists [23]. The concentration of governance tokens among a few influential individuals often undermines the decentralized ethos of DAOs, leading to a disparity in decision-making power [24]. These evolving governance structures of DAOs present a complex and multifaceted landscape, as highlighted by several researchers presenting at DAWO24.

For example, Saggese et al. [25] emphasize the need to understand how different contributors and stakeholders influence voting outcomes across various proposal categories, which is essential for developing more equitable governance structures and achieving the true spirit of decentralization. To advance this understanding, it is important to explore how to prevent power centralization, ensure fair voting power distribution, balance stakeholder influence, and evaluate alternative governance models like quadratic voting. However, implementing quadratic voting in digital governance is challenging, particularly in token-based systems where wealth disparities can skew voting results. To overcome this, Srinivasan et al. [26] propose ConVo, an enhanced quadratic voting system that incorporates Sybil resistance through biometrics-based Proof-of-Personhood and adjusts vote weight based on how long participants hold their convictions, possibly creating a fairer and more manipulation-resistant voting process.

In parallel, Gorzny [27] explores the intersection of DAOs with open-source software (OSS) development, highlighting that while both fields value transparency and decentralization, DAOs could provide unique advantages for OSS projects. DAO principles, such as decentralized decision-making and incentivized participation, could enhance OSS governance, leading to more resilient and collaborative development environments. Examining the effectiveness of DAO governance in OSS, the challenges of integrating DAO practices, and the impact on innovation and scalability could provide valuable insights for improving OSS governance.

Addressing the vulnerabilities inherent in DAOs, Feichtinger et al. [28] categorize risks, such as bribery, coalition attacks, and code weaknesses, which are often overlooked in traditional audits. Addressing these overlooked vulnerabilities is essential for ensuring the viability of DAOs. Furthermore, voting mechanisms in DAOs are susceptible to attacks like Sybil attacks. Lenzi’s [29] proposed voting mechanism aims to counter these vulnerabilities using Bayesian design to prevent unfair advantages and maximize collective utility. Suggestions for additional critical research include validating the effectiveness of this mechanism across various DAO contexts, exploring its integration with other security measures, and balancing decision-making efficiency with security. Further, the author suggests applying principles from behavioral economics to create more resilient governance structures within DAOs.

The classification and categorization of DAO proposals present another important challenge that needs to be addressed. Therefore, Ziegler et al. [30] have developed a framework using Large Language Models (LLMs) to categorize proposals with high accuracy. This framework enables automated analysis and large-scale studies of governance trends. However, refining this categorization framework, improving its granularity, and incorporating contextual factors that may affect the success or failure of proposals could optimize proposal design, enhance decision-making processes, and positively influence governance outcomes as well as community engagement within DAOs.

Further, strategic voting in DAOs, where participants vote based on anticipated outcomes rather than personal preferences, undermines the ideal of decentralization, as Rossello [31] reveals. Influential blockholders and majority voters can centralize power and manipulate outcomes, raising questions about the true nature of decentralization in DAOs. According to Rossello [31], a blockholder in a DAO is a token holder with significant voting power who can strategically influence outcomes, often by casting decisive votes at critical moments. To counteract this, it is vital to examine how blockholders and other centralizing forces compromise decentralization, explore mechanisms to discourage strategic voting, and assess the effects of such voting on the financial stability and community trust within DAOs. To deepen this approach, the study suggests exploring the development of incentive structures that reward honest voting and to consider alternative voting methods to maintain balanced influence among participants.

Boss [32] provides a broader perspective by examining the heterogeneity in governance structures among DAOs, focusing on the degrees of decentralization, autonomous functioning, and organizational structure. The findings reveal that while some centralizing mechanisms can increase efficiency, they often undermine the democratic principles of DAOs and require safeguards. The study concludes that DAOs should be viewed as a diverse landscape rather than a singular organizational model, while further research could conduct large-scale studies to explore the dynamics of decentralization and autonomous functioning across different DAO models to refine their definitions and governance frameworks. Finally, Allen et al. [33] address the challenge of signaling quality in a pseudonymous, global environment through the application of costly signaling theory. Effective signaling mechanisms are crucial for attracting resources and talent, and distinguishing high-quality DAOs from less credible ones. The development of robust signaling strategies requires collective action and may involve new protocols or regulatory frameworks. They imply upcoming research to focus on identifying the most effective signaling mechanisms for various types of DAOs, exploring the impact of public regulation on signaling processes, and understanding how unique data and environmental factors specific to Web3 might be leveraged to enhance signaling.

3. Developing Tools and Frameworks for DAOs

The advancement of DAOs relies heavily on the development of tools and frameworks that facilitate effective governance, transparency, and scalability [19]. This Section presents several key areas of research featured at DAWO24 in this area and structures the different directions into a cohesive discussion, highlighting both the progress made and the questions that remain.

Central to the success of DAOs is the development of democratic collaboration tools to enhance decision-making and document creation within DAOs, as highlighted by Finanser and Talmon [34], who explore methods like metric spaces, iterative voting, and coalition formation. These approaches are designed to improve the collaborative capabilities of DAOs, ensuring that diverse perspectives are effectively represented. As DAOs continue to grow, it is critical to identify the most effective collaboration tools that support transparency and inclusivity across large and diverse organizations, while balancing consensus-building with efficiency and scalability. Further, it is also important to explore new voting methods to increase consensus without causing delays or deadlocks. The technical infrastructure that supports the deployment of Ethereum-based decentralized applications (DApps) within DAOs also demands attention. For this, Fernández-Blanco et al. [35] present an open-source framework designed to automate and accelerate the deployment of Ethereum-based decentralized applications (DApps), particularly for scenarios requiring customized test environments like DAOs. The framework leverages Docker and bash scripts to create networks of Ethereum and IPFS nodes, simplifying the deployment process to a single command, thereby addressing inefficiencies in current methods. The study concludes that this tool significantly reduces the complexity and time required to set up realistic test environments for DApps. Expanding the framework’s adaptability to a broader range of use cases, applying it in resource-constrained environments, and further enhancing its scalability and integration with other decentralized technologies are important directions to pursue.

Measuring autonomy within DAOs presents another significant challenge. Sahm and Giaglis [36] have introduced the Autonomy Level Indicator (ALI), a standardized metric designed to provide a clear and consistent measure of autonomy. This advancement aims to help researchers and practitioners evaluate and compare different DAO designs. However, the complexity and inconsistent definitions of autonomy require further investigation into the most critical aspects to measure and how to quantify them effectively. Additionally, it is necessary to explore whether ALI can be standardized across the industry and to understand the impact of different levels of autonomy on governance outcomes.

Integrating complexity science into DAO frameworks offers a promising approach to addressing inefficiencies and centralization issues. Ballandies et al. [37] suggest that complexity science can provide new perspectives on decentralization and emergent properties, potentially leading to more effective and decentralized systems. Future research should explore how principles of collective intelligence and self-organization can be applied to DAO design, and critically analyze the potential benefits and limitations of novel mechanisms like futarchies and idea markets. Understanding how these principles affect DAO governance and comparing their effectiveness to traditional hierarchical models will be critical for advancing the field. Evaluating the distribution of control within DAOs is another crucial aspect of governance. Papangelou et al. [38] propose a probabilistic framework that incorporates complexity and entropy analyses to refine decentralization metrics. This approach aims to offer a more precise measure of decentralization, but it requires further refinement and validation, particularly for large-scale DAOs. Enhancing these metrics to account for the complexities of extensive DAOs and understanding their relationship with governance outcomes, as well as their ability to predict the success or failure of governance models, are key areas for further exploration.

Finally, assessing the business value and organizational structures of DAOs is crucial for understanding their potential in different sectors. Küng and Giaglis [39] offer a framework for evaluating the business value of DAOs from an open systems perspective, highlighting the challenges and opportunities associated with different DAO structures. To ensure the long-term viability of DAO business structures in real-world applications, it will be crucial to investigate the factors that influence stakeholder participation and collaboration in DAOs, categorize different DAO business models, assess their impact on business outcomes, and address challenges related to scalability, governance, and community engagement.

4. Assessing the Value of DAOs

The emergence of DAOs has introduced transformative potential and significant challenges within various sectors, including the creative and cultural industries [40], cyber–physical systems (CPS) [41], and blockchain startups [42]. This Section integrates key insights from recent research on DAOs’ impact and potential on value creation, while highlighting critical areas for future exploration.

The research by Tenorio-Fornés and Lupova-Henry [43] emphasizes that in the context of creative and cultural industries, DAOs not only offer a promising solution to address the precarious employment conditions faced by creative professionals but also, they have the potential to promote economic democracy and mitigate the issues of centralized control that are prevalent in traditional platforms. Their advocacy for value-sensitive design approaches suggests that aligning DAO design with the values of creative communities could enhance fairness and inclusivity. However, open research questions persist regarding how DAOs can be effectively designed to meet the specific needs of creative communities, which economic models best support fair compensation, and how DAOs can mitigate the precarious nature of work in traditional platforms. Additionally, understanding how DAOs can foster meaningful community engagement and ensure significant participation in governance and decision-making remains an important area for further study.

Similarly, in the realm of cyber–physical systems (CPS), Nabben et al. [44] explore the challenges of implementing decentralized governance where physical processes intersect with digital control systems. Their research highlights the complexities of integrating blockchain technology with CPS, particularly regarding real-time data processing, autonomous decision-making, and the alignment with legal and regulatory frameworks. Future research should address how to develop governance models that can adapt to the dynamic requirements of CPS, improve resilience and reliability, and ensure effective decentralized identity management and access control. Additionally, ethical considerations concerning the autonomy and accountability of AI-driven CPS require further exploration, especially as these systems become integral to critical infrastructure and public services. Key questions include identifying the most effective decentralized governance frameworks for managing scalability, security, and real-time processing in CPS.

Shapiro [45] extends the potential of DAOs into the realm of global digital governance, proposing a grassroots architecture aimed at replacing centralized digital platforms with a decentralized global democracy. The proposed architecture includes a blocklace-based protocol stack that supports grassroots platforms, enabling local communities to form digital economies and exercise sovereign democratic governance. According to Shapiro [45] ‘blocklace’ is a generalization of the blockchain, designed as a partially-ordered data structure where each block can have multiple signed hash pointers to preceding blocks, unlike the linear and sequential nature of a traditional blockchain. The study concludes that this architecture offers a scalable foundation for a global digital democracy, which could significantly alter the current digital landscape dominated by centralized platforms. Future research should explore the practical implementation of this architecture, assess its scalability, and investigate its impact on global digital governance.

In the startup ecosystem, Merk [46] examines the trend of startups transitioning to DAOs, revealing motivations driven by financial and stewardship objectives. Startups view DAO structures as a way to improve ownership and governance while preserving existing rights, thereby balancing innovation with control. This transition is influenced by internal goals and external factors, such as market conditions, legal frameworks, and social norms. Future research should investigate the long-term effects of transitioning to DAOs on individual startups and the broader DAO ecosystem. This includes examining changes in governance dynamics, the role of community involvement, and the impact on investment and talent attraction. Additionally, understanding the legal and regulatory challenges associated with these transitions will be essential to ensure that moving to a DAO is both sustainable and beneficial.

Finally, Oarda [47] introduces the concept of Optimal Smart Contracts as a solution to the principal–agent problem in economic transactions, utilizing AI-driven Oracles and blockchain technology within DAOs. This approach promises to increase transparency and trust, potentially leading to Pareto optimality across industries. However, the feasibility and broader adoption of these contracts in real-world scenarios require further validation, particularly in how DAOs can facilitate their widespread use.

5. Exploring Legal and Regulatory Dimensions of DAOs

The legal status and recognition of DAOs remains a significant challenge, as jurisdictions around the world struggle to establish appropriate regulations for these entities [12]. This lack of clear legal frameworks complicates the operation of DAOs, especially when they function across different countries [48,49].

The aspect of legal recognition of DAOs is subject to many studies and discussions and there are several approaches. The evolving landscape of legal frameworks for DAOs has garnered significant attention across various jurisdictions, as highlighted by Pietrowska et al. [50] in their comprehensive analysis of legal structures in Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and the UAE. Their research reveals that each jurisdiction offers distinct advantages and challenges, providing specific recommendations for legal entities, such as Associations, Cooperatives, and Foundations based on DAO objectives. Understanding these frameworks is critical for ensuring compliance and operational success in a decentralized environment. There is a need to expand this analysis to other regions and assess the long-term implications of legal choices on the development of DAOs.

In Turkey, the lack of specific DAO regulations has led Karadeniz [51] to propose the application of general partnership rules under Turkish law, while also suggesting that the Association could serve as a temporary solution until more suitable regulations are established. Similarly, Schillig [52] argues for the creation of a new legal theory tailored specifically to DAOs, one that builds on existing corporate law but addresses the unique characteristics of these organizations. These results show that there is a critical discussion about whether new legal forms are necessary for the recognition of DAOs or if the existing legal structures suffice. The current legal framework surrounding DAOs is still evolving, particularly regarding liability. Traditional liability mechanisms may not fully address the complexities inherent in DAOs, such as decentralized governance, participant anonymity, and automated decision-making through smart contracts. Napieralska and Kępczyński [53] have examined how these traditional mechanisms might be adapted to fit the decentralized nature of DAOs. They emphasize the importance of identifying authority and control in DAOs to assign responsibility and determine liability. However, this might be complex, and the area is still evolving. Their research underscores the need for new legal frameworks capable of handling these complexities while protecting both DAO participants and external parties.

Furthermore, there is a need to address criminal and administrative responsibilities within these frameworks. In addition to liability concerns, blockchain-based dispute resolution (BBDR) platforms also face regulatory challenges, and Kamalova’s [54] research emphasizes the importance of aligning BBDR platforms with existing legal standards to boost user confidence and ensure enforceability. Designing legal frameworks that integrate these platforms into established systems is crucial, with key areas for exploration, including the impact of legal structures on DAO governance, adapting legal theories to accommodate DAOs, and ensuring BBDR platforms meet regulatory requirements.

6. Discussion and Future Directions

Based on the papers and discussions presented at DAWO24 we could identify (i) Analyzing Governance Mechanisms, (ii) Developing Tools and Frameworks, (iii) Assessing the Value and (iv) Exploring Legal and Regulatory Dimensions as the four main trends in DAO research. As summarized in Figure 1 each trend has a unique research focus and comes with specific future research directions.

By examining the research around the emerging trend of Analyzing Governance Mechanism we can identify work on more equitable and decentralized decision-making processes [25,31,32], the integration of innovative voting mechanisms [26,29], and the exploration of how DAOs can enhance collaborative efforts in diverse areas, such as open-source development [27]. In addition, there is a growing focus on developing strategies to strengthen the integrity and transparency of DAOs [30,33], ensuring that they remain true to their decentralized principles while effectively addressing challenges, such as concentration of power and security risks [25,28]. In respect to future research directions, we can advocate that there is a growing need on exploring new mechanisms to prevent power concentration and enhance security. This involves developing advanced voting systems that ensure fairness and inclusivity, allowing all participants to have an equitable say in decision-making processes. Additionally, researchers should focus on identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities, such as bribery and coalition attacks, to safeguard the integrity of these decentralized systems. By addressing these critical areas, the goal is to create more robust and resilient DAOs that uphold their decentralized principles while effectively managing potential risks.

The second current trend in the DAO research about Developing Tools and Frameworks emphasizes enhancing collaborative decision-making processes [34], automating key functions [35], and establishing standardized metrics to better evaluate DAO performance and autonomy [36,38]. Additionally, there is a growing interest in integrating complexity science [37] and assessing the business value of DAOs to ensure they can effectively operate and scale in diverse real-world applications [39]. For the future direction, we recommend a concentrated effort on developing tools and frameworks that are capable of handling growth and increased complexity. This includes designing intuitive interfaces and processes to improve accessibility and usability for DAO members, ensuring that participation is straightforward and user-friendly. Additionally, researchers should investigate new tools and frameworks to further automate and streamline DAO functions, aiming to enhance efficiency and scalability. By addressing these areas, the objective is to create more robust and user-centric DAOs that can effectively manage their evolving needs and challenges.

The research on Assessing the Value of DAO analyzed in this article highlights the transformative potential of DAOs across various sectors, from creative industries [43] to cyber–physical systems [44] and startups [46], while also underscoring the need for optimized governance frameworks, the integration of blockchain technology with existing systems, and the exploration of new economic models that align with decentralized principles [45,47]. Future research is essential to address these challenges, focusing on the practical implementation of DAOs, their impact on industry dynamics, and the legal and regulatory implications of their widespread adoption. For further development of DAOs it will be crucial to create tailored designs that address the unique requirements of different industries. This involves ensuring that DAOs can integrate effectively with existing and complex organizational systems, facilitating seamless collaboration and functionality. Additionally, there is a focus on developing mechanisms that promote equitable value distribution and sustainable economics, ensuring that all participants benefit fairly from the DAO’s operations. By addressing these aspects, the aim is to design DAOs that are adaptable, efficient, and capable of meeting the diverse needs of various sectors.

In summarizing the research trend of Exploring Legal and Regulatory Dimensions, it becomes evident that the legal status of DAOs continues to be a significant challenge for jurisdictions around the world [50,51,52,53,54]. The complexity of DAO operations, especially across borders, highlights the urgent need for tailored legal frameworks that address the unique characteristics of decentralized governance, participant anonymity, and smart contract automation [52,53]. Research underscores the importance of developing legal structures that ensure compliance, protect stakeholders, and integrate innovative dispute resolution mechanisms, all while accommodating the evolving nature of DAOs within the global legal landscape [51,54]. In the future, it will remain essential to research cohesive legal structures for DAOs that address their unique characteristics. This includes exploring mechanisms to ensure DAOs are recognized and operate consistently across different regions, facilitating smoother cross-border interactions. Additionally, there is a need to collaborate with policymakers and legal experts to navigate and resolve ambiguities, ensuring that DAOs can function within clear and supportive legal frameworks. By focusing on these areas, the goal is to create a stable and legally sound environment for DAOs to thrive globally.

7. Conclusions

The first European DAO Workshop 2024 has been important in advancing our understanding of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations and highlighting current trends in DAO research. The discussions at DAWO24 identified several key areas critical to the continued evolution of DAOs, revealing both significant progress and important gaps that require further attention from the research community. Through systematic meta-analysis of the workshop contributions, we identified four critical research streams that are shaping the future of DAOs: governance mechanisms, technical frameworks, value assessment, and legal dimensions.

One of the central themes at DAWO24 was the analysis of governance mechanisms within DAOs. The workshop emphasized the need for robust governance frameworks that balance power, ensure transparency, and effectively resolve conflicts, thereby maintaining inclusivity and fairness within DAOs. Furthermore, participants at DAWO24 underscored the need for scalable, secure, and user-friendly technical frameworks that support the deployment of decentralized applications (DApps) and improve the overall functionality and sustainability of DAOs. The evaluation of the value that DAOs bring to both participants and society at large was also a critical topic of discussion. Current research shows promising applications across various sectors, from creative industries to cyber–physical systems, though standardized evaluation methods remain underdeveloped. Finally, the workshop explored the legal and regulatory dimensions of DAOs. DAWO24 participants delved into the potential for legal recognition of DAOs and discussed how regulatory frameworks could be adapted to foster innovation while ensuring stakeholder protection.

While the workshop provided valuable insights, it is important to acknowledge certain limitations in its scope. The conference primarily focused on organizational structures, which, while valuable, meant that certain crucial aspects of the DAO ecosystem received less attention. Technical aspects of DAO implementation and development were not extensively covered, and discussions around financial implications, such as the disruption of traditional finance systems and emerging financial models, were limited. Additionally, this review is limited in scope as it exclusively synthesizes research presented at DAWO24, rather than incorporating a broader systematic review of DAO literature. As a result, relevant themes and debates from outside this workshop may not be fully captured, such as the role of DAOs in regulatory compliance, case studies of failed DAOs, the intersection of artificial intelligence with DAO governance, or comparative analyses with traditional cooperative models. These limitations reflect the natural constraints of any focused academic gathering, but also highlight opportunities for future workshops to broaden their scope.

Looking forward, our review points to several crucial research directions that require immediate attention. Future research must focus on developing governance mechanisms that can effectively scale while maintaining decentralization principles, alongside creating standardized frameworks for measuring DAO performance and societal impact. Additionally, researchers need to investigate technical solutions that balance security with accessibility, while working toward the establishment of comprehensive legal frameworks for cross-jurisdictional DAO operations. These interconnected challenges highlight the complexity of advancing DAO research and underscore the need for coordinated efforts across multiple disciplines. Furthermore, the findings of this review provide a foundation for future work that can address practical implications for policymakers, industry leaders, and developers, contributing to a deeper understanding of how DAOs can influence policy, industry practices, and development strategies.

In summary, the discussions at DAWO24 underscored the need for further research and innovation in DAO-related areas, particularly emphasizing the importance of interdisciplinary research. Given that DAOs are inherently interdisciplinary, the European DAO Workshop 2024 and this article aimed to promote cross-disciplinary collaboration to advance DAO research. For the future direction of DAO research, interdisciplinary collaboration is crucial to address the complex challenges DAOs face.