Creating Value in Metaverse-Driven Global Value Chains: Blockchain Integration and the Evolution of International Business
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Limitations of the Extant Literature
- Under-specified governance and policy context. Rapidly evolving regulation (data localization, crypto-asset licensing, virtual-goods taxation) is often acknowledged only in passing, yet fundamentally conditions adoption decisions and cross-border scalability [1].
1.2. Purpose and Contributions of This Study
- Mapped the thematic landscape and identified where current research clusters (e.g., NFT provenance, digital twins, DeFi logistics) interact and do not interact.
- Identified five research gaps that persist after a decade of digital supply chain scholarship, ranging from token-based micro-monetization to cross-chain governance.
- Derived a testable agenda using five research questions (RQ1–RQ5) that link technological affordances to internalization choices, supply chain coordination, new monetization logic, cross-chain participation, and international standards.
- Advanced theory by revisiting transaction cost theory, the resource-based view, and network perspectives through a blockchain–metaverse lens, specifying how new digital capabilities (e.g., tokenized assets, immersive co-design) reconfigure classic IB constructs.
- Offered actionable insight for practitioners via comparative regulatory analysis and documented enterprise cases demonstrating measurable efficiency and resilience gains.
1.3. Article Structure
2. Literature Review
2.1. Blockchain and Value Creation in GVCs
2.2. Blockchain in the Metaverse
2.3. Challenges in Blockchain and Metaverse and GVC Integration
2.4. Research Questions (RQs)
3. Methodology
3.1. Search Strategy
- Blockchain in GVCs: “Blockchain” AND “Global Value Chains”, “Distributed Ledger Technology” AND “Value Chain Management”, and “Blockchain Technology”. Blockchain has been identified as a transformative force in value chains [29].
- Metaverse in GVCs: “Metaverse” AND “Global Value Chains”, “Virtual Reality” AND “Value Chain Networks”, and “Immersive Virtual Environments” AND “International Value Chains”. Recent studies suggest that the metaverse could revolutionize how value chains are modeled, monitored, and optimized through immersive environments [4].
- Integration Blockchain and Metaverse: “Blockchain” AND “Metaverse” AND “Global Value Chains”, “Distributed Ledger Technology” AND “Virtual Reality” AND “Value Chain Management”. This aligns with emerging discussions on how these two technologies can synergize to enhance both the virtual representation of physical supply chains and the management of digital assets [30].
- “Blockchain” AND “Metaverse” AND “Sustainability” AND “Global Value Chains”. Blockchain’s ability to ensure transparency can significantly contribute to sustainability efforts in GVCs [26].
- “Blockchain” AND “Metaverse” AND “Efficiency” AND “Global Value Chains”. The combination of blockchain’s traceability and the metaverse’s immersive data environments is expected to enhance operational efficiency [27].
3.2. Filtering Process
3.3. Data Analysis
4. Discussion
4.1. The Metaverse and the Future of Global Value Chains (RQ1)
4.2. Metaverse Commerce and Value Creation (RQ2)
4.2.1. Microtransactions as the New Normal
4.2.2. Barter and Countertrade in Virtual Worlds
- European Union—licence first, then scale. The Markets in Crypto-assets Regulation (MiCA) entered its final phase on 30 December 2024, requiring every crypto-asset service provider—including in-world marketplaces—to obtain a CASP licence and publish detailed white papers before passporting services across 30 states. Parallel obligations under the Digital Services Act (DSA) expose “very large online platforms” to algorithm-audit and systemic-risk requirements, with fines up to 6% of global turnover for non-compliance. Together, MiCA and the DSA make the EU the world’s strictest jurisdiction for metaverse infrastructure [49].
- United States—enforcement first, clarity later. The SEC continues to classify many in-world utility or governance tokens as securities, while Form 1099-DA obliges brokers to report every disposal of a digital asset—no de-minimis threshold—from 1 January 2025. That shift converts even USD 0.99 micro-sales of virtual goods into taxable events and raises the audit risk for U.S.-facing platforms [50].
- China—industrial metaverse, real-name rules. Provincial “metaverse action plans” promote virtual-twin applications in manufacturing, but NFTs must sit on state-approved chains and all users undergo real-name verification, effectively fencing off public-chain commerce.
- Singapore—sandbox friendliness, stablecoin discipline. The Monetary Authority of Singapore’s 2024 framework demands that any MAS-regulated single-currency stablecoin (SCS) be 100% reserve-backed and redeemable at par within five business days; vendors exceeding SGD 100 k annual turnover must charge 9% GST on B2C virtual goods from 2025.
- India—revenue-grab on micro-spends. From 1 October 2023, all deposits into online gaming or metaverse pay-to-play platforms attract a 28% GST, plus 30% income tax on net winnings, making India the costliest mainstream market for virtual goods.
- United Arab Emirates (Dubai)—tiered licensing and advertising rules. Dubai’s Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA) now issues activity-specific rulebooks covering issuance, custody, brokerage and marketing; all metaverse platforms reaching UAE residents must hold a VARA licence and comply with strict marketing disclosures.
4.3. Blockchain as the Backbone for Trust, Security, and Interoperability (RQ3)
- Asset Tokenization: Blockchain allows both fungible tokens (e.g., ERC-20) and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) (e.g., ERC-721, ERC-1155) to represent digital or physical assets. In a GVC context, these tokens can range from supply chain documents (bills of lading, certificates of origin) to virtual real estate in the metaverse, enabling verifiable ownership and traceability. Tokenization ensures that items—goods, services, or even rights and privileges—can be transferred and traded securely across multiple parties without relying on a single centralized authority [51,52].
- Decentralized Finance (DeFi): Using cryptocurrencies and decentralized financial applications, GVC stakeholders can engage in near-instant cross-border payments, peer-to-peer lending, and automated settlement processes. DeFi solutions eliminate many friction points associated with traditional banking for metaverse-based commerce, such as slow clearance times or high remittance fees. This speed and cost-effectiveness can be especially valuable in fast-moving global supply chains, reducing payment bottlenecks and enabling smaller suppliers or micro-multinationals to participate more easily in international trade [53].
- Smart Contracts: Smart contracts are self-executing programs encoded on the blockchain that trigger specific actions (e.g., payment release, goods shipment) when predefined conditions are met. By removing the need for intermediaries—such as brokers, escrow services, or specific legal checks—smart contracts reduce transaction costs and the risk of opportunistic behavior. In GVC operations, these contracts can automate tasks such as B2B supply chain coordination (e.g., automatically updating inventory, enforcing quality checks, or verifying delivery milestones). This level of automation bolsters trust between partners because the contract’s code enforces the rules transparently and consistently for all parties involved.
- Connecting Digital Twins to Multiple Blockchains: A digital twin is a real-time virtual replica of a physical asset or system, such as a port, factory, or supply network. By linking digital twins to several supply chain blockchains simultaneously, enterprises can monitor and synchronize operational data—like sensor readings, shipping manifests, and production metrics—in a unified, secure manner. For example, the Port of Rotterdam might use cross-chain bridges to aggregate IoT data from its local blockchain solution with global shipping information stored on partner blockchains. This end-to-end visibility helps enterprises forecast disruptions, optimize shipping routes, and manage inventory more effectively.
- Enhancing GVC Data Convergence Across Borders: Cross-chain interoperability ensures that data originating in one country or on one blockchain can be verified, shared, and acted upon by stakeholders on an entirely different chain or in a different jurisdiction. Such convergence minimizes the complexities of dealing with varying regulatory frameworks and data standards across countries, making it easier for multinational enterprises (MNEs) to coordinate, track, and audit global goods or assets. This streamlined flow of verified data supports the creation of unified records, preventing data silos that often lead to errors or fraud.
- Fostering Network Effects for MNEs and SMEs: By linking user bases and provider bases across multiple platforms [46], cross-chain protocols enable MNEs and digital-first SMEs to expand their reach and participate in broader networks of partners, customers, and suppliers. Network effects arise when each new participant in the metaverse ecosystem amplifies its overall value—imagine a global marketplace where suppliers, logistics providers, and customers can seamlessly transact or collaborate, regardless of the underlying blockchain. Such an integrated environment allows firms of all sizes to scale globally faster while sharing resources, knowledge, and data without the barriers imposed by incompatible systems.
4.4. Revisiting IB Theories in a Metaverse World (RQ4)
- Reduced Traditional Costs: In the metaverse, digital platforms and smart contracts can streamline interactions that once required physical intermediaries. For instance, rather than hiring export agents or third-party logistics providers, an MNE could connect directly with foreign customers or suppliers via decentralized applications (dApps), where smart contracts automatically enforce agreed-upon terms (e.g., payment upon delivery or quality checks). This reduction in dependency on intermediaries lowers search and negotiation costs—one of the core areas of concern in TCT. Information asymmetry also decreases because blockchain-based ledgers and immersive digital twins can offer real-time data transparency, making it easier for all parties to verify product quality, shipping times, or contract fulfillment status [54].
- New Cost Centers: Although the metaverse reduces some traditional frictional costs, firms inevitably encounter new expenditure forms. For example, to partake in virtual marketplaces or 3D immersive meetings, firms might require AR/VR hardware—headsets, haptic devices, or high-performance computers—for employees or key partners. Additionally, there can be platform usage fees on popular metaverse platforms or cross-chain transaction fees if the business leverages multiple blockchains (e.g., Ethereum, Polygon, Solana) for asset transfers or payments [39]. Firms must also navigate an evolving digital tax environment, where microtransactions, barter transactions, and cryptocurrency-based payments may incur new or region-specific regulations. These compliance obligations can introduce fresh complexities and costs for MNEs.
- Emergence of Digital Capabilities: Skills in data analytics, AI-driven personalization, and VR/AR software development can be pivotal resources that enable firms to engage global customers in immersive, highly interactive ways. Mastering metaverse-related technologies (e.g., creating 3D content, using blockchain-based security protocols, integrating IoT data for real-time digital twins) can become a distinct firm-specific advantage (FSA), particularly in rapidly digitizing industries like retail, entertainment, manufacturing, or logistics [35,55]. For instance, a firm with robust AI models recommending products in a virtual showroom may outperform competitors lacking such capabilities.
- Continuing Relevance of Traditional Strengths: While cutting-edge digital competencies are increasingly indispensable, they do not negate the need for traditional capabilities, especially in markets with limited internet infrastructure or slower technology adoption. Physical production expertise, well-established logistics networks, and culturally attuned local relationships can still differentiate an MNE—even in the metaverse—by ensuring products and services are delivered efficiently to those regions where immersive digital tools are not yet mainstream. This reality underscores the need for dual-capability orchestration: Successful international firms must integrate digital assets (for markets and segments that are ready) alongside traditional competencies (for regions still reliant on physical channels).
- Born-Digital Firms and Mini-MNEs: Born-digital start-ups and other technology-forward SMEs can rapidly become “mini-MNEs”, expanding to serve customers worldwide without making significant investments in physical infrastructure. They capitalize on network effects as virtual communities, platform subscribers, or game users quickly adapt their products or services—potentially scaling up in months rather than years. For example, an indie game developer whose VR product gains traction on a central metaverse platform can sell globally from day one, leveraging direct user feedback and digital word-of-mouth to refine offerings and penetrate new foreign markets.
- Ecosystem Coherence for Large MNEs: Established multinational enterprises face a different challenge: maintaining a coherent ecosystem across multiple markets, each with potentially different technology standards, consumer preferences, and regulatory policies. They might partner with local VR content creators, digital marketing agencies, or software developers to localize immersive metaverse experiences, ensuring those experiences resonate with foreign consumers [57]. Achieving alignment among these ecosystem partners—who may be both complementary and potential competitors—requires deliberate co-governance of platform rules (e.g., revenue-sharing contracts, data privacy norms, or brand guidelines).
4.5. The Need for Standardization (RQ5)
- Collaborative Ecosystem Growth: Developers and businesses can seamlessly build on each other’s work, driving faster experimentation and the creation of more sophisticated metaverse use cases.
- Reliable User Experiences: With consistent interfaces and data standards, end-users can move across platforms without facing technical barriers or inconsistent product features.
- Global Scalability: As solutions are built on shared standards from the outset, scaling across regions and markets becomes far more straightforward, accelerating the pace at which metaverse platforms can achieve critical mass.
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Angelopoulos, J.; Panopoulos, N. Blockchain Integration in the Era of Industrial Metaverse. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kshetri, N. Blockchain’s Role in Enhancing Quality and Safety and Promoting Sustainability in the Food and Beverage Indus-try. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnston, A. Blockchain and the Metaverse, Part 1: Opportunities. S&P Global Market Intelligence. 2023. Available online: https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/blockchain-and-the-metaverse-part-1-opportunities-65618767 (accessed on 1 March 2023).
- Dwivedi, Y.K.; Hughes, L.; Baabdullah, A.M.; Ribeiro-Navarrete, S.; Giannakis, M.; Al-Debei, M.M.; Dennehy, D.; Metri, B.; Buhalis, D.; Cheung, C.M.; et al. Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportu-nities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022, 66, 102542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikolakis, W.; John, L.; Krishnan, H. How Blockchain Can Shape Sustainable Global Value Chains: An Evidence, Verifiability, and Enforceability (EVE) Framework. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.; Guo, W. The Potential Impact of ChatGPT on Education: Using History as a Rearview Mirror. ECNU Rev. Educ. 2023, 8, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukherjee, A.A.; Singh, R.K.; Mishra, R.; Bag, S. Application of blockchain technology for sustainability development in agri-cultural supply chain: Justification framework. Oper. Manag. Res. 2021, 15, 46–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calandra, D.; Oppioli, M.; Sadraei, R.; Jafari-Sadeghi, V.; Biancone, P.P. Metaverse meets digital entrepreneurship: A practi-tioner-based qualitative synthesis. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2023, 30, 666–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ediriweera, A.; Wiewiora, A. Barriers and enablers of technology adoption in the mining industry. Resour. Policy 2021, 73, 102188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacob, N.R.; Thomas, N.M.; Agarwal, S.; Saini, N.; Vasa, L. What Facilitates and Impedes the Adoption of Sustainability in Global Value Chains? A Grey-DEMATEL Analysis. In Environment, Development and Sustainability; Springer: Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2023; pp. 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Huang, H.; Xiong, Z.; Kang, J.; Zheng, Z. Fusing Blockchain and AI With Metaverse: A Survey. IEEE Open J. Comput. Soc. 2022, 3, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egwuonwu, A.; Mordi, C.; Egwuonwu, A.; Uadiale, O. The influence of blockchains and internet of things on global value chain. Strateg. Change 2022, 31, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agi, M.A.N.; Jha, A.K. Blockchain technology in the supply chain: An integrated theoretical perspective of organizational adoption. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 247, 108458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, C.; Wojewska, A.N.; Persson, U.M.; Bager, S.L. Coffee producers’ perspectives of blockchain technology in the context of sustainable global value chains. Front. Blockchain 2022, 5, 955463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menon, S.; Jain, K. Blockchain Technology for Transparency in Agri-Food Supply Chain: Use Cases, Limitations, and Future Directions. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2024, 71, 106–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voas, J.; Kshetri, N. Adapting to Generative Artificial Intelligence: Approaches in Higher Education Institutions. Computer 2024, 57, 128–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohamed, S.K.; Haddad, S.; Barakat, M. Does blockchain adoption engender environmental sustainability? The mediating role of customer integration. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2024, 30, 558–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, B.B.; Gaurav, A.; Albeshri, A.A.; Alsalman, D. New paradigms of sustainable entrepreneurship in metaverse: A mi-cro-level perspective. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2023, 19, 1449–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reyes, P.M.; Gravier, M.J.; Jaska, P.; Visich, J.K. Blockchain Impacts on Global Supply Chain Operational and Managerial Business Value Processes. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 2022, 50, 123–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, R.; Rathore, B.; Biswas, B.; Jaiswal, M.; Singh, R.K. Are we ready for metaverse adoption in the service industry? Theoretically exploring the barriers to successful adoption. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2024, 79, 103882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 99–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latino, M.E.; De Lorenzi, M.C.; Corallo, A.; Petruzzelli, A.M. The impact of metaverse for business model innovation: A re-view, novel insights and research directions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2024, 206, 123571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abumalloh, R.A.; Nilashi, M.; Ooi, K.B.; Wei-Han, G.; Cham, T.-H.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Hughes, L. The adoption of metaverse in the retail industry and its impact on sustainable competitive advantage: Moderating impact of sustainability commitment. Ann. Oper. Res. 2023, 342, 5–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Dinter, R.; Tekinerdogan, B.; Catal, C. Automation of systematic literature reviews: A systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2021, 136, 106589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2021, 134, 178–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saberi, S.; Kouhizadeh, M.; Sarkis, J.; Shen, L. Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain man-agement. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 2117–2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Queiroz, M.M.; Telles, R.; Bonilla, S.H. Blockchain and supply chain management integration: A systematic review of the lit-erature. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2020, 25, 241–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, M.K.; Tseng, M.L.; Tan, K.H.; Bui, T.D. Knowledge management in sustainable supply chain management: Improving performance through an integration of information systems and supply chain management. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2021, 24, 147–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.; Lim, C.; Yoon, J.; Kim, K.; Kim, M.S. The role of blockchain in the metaverse: A conceptual model and future research directions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitchenham, B.; Brereton, P.; Budgen, D.; Turner, M.; Bailey, J.; Linkman, S. Systematic literature reviews in software engineer-ing—A systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2009, 51, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flick, U. An Introduction to Qualitative Research, 6th ed.; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Buckley, P.J.; Casson, M.C. The internalisation theory of the multinational enterprise: A review of the progress of a research agenda after 30 years. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2009, 40, 1563–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nambisan, S.; Zahra, S.A.; Luo, Y. Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2019, 50, 1464–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brouthers, K.D.; Chen, L.; Li, S.; Shaheer, N. Charting new courses to enter foreign markets: Conceptualization, theoretical framework, and research directions on non-traditional entry modes. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2022, 53, 2088–2115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hennart, J.-F. How much is new in Brouthers et al.’s new foreign entry modes, and do they challenge the transaction cost theo-ry of entry mode choice? J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2022, 53, 2116–2132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Queiroz, M.M.; Wamba, S.F.; Pereira, S.C.F.; Jabbour, C.J.C. The mateaverse as a breakthrough for operations and supply chain management: Implications and call for action. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2023, 43, 1539–1553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Kim, T.; Lee, H.; Park, S.-H. A study on development direction of metaverse and six issues to promote metaverse. J. Inf. Technol. Serv. 2022, 21, 41–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Büchel, H.; Spinler, S. The impact of the metaverse on e-commerce business models–A delphi-based scenario study. Technol. Soc. 2024, 76, 102465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teece, D.J. Big Tech and Strategic Management: How Management Scholars Can Inform Competition Policy. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2023, 37, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rugman, A.M. Inside the Multinationals: The Economics of Internal Markets; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Narula, R.; Verbeke, A. Making internalization theory good for practice: The essence of Alan Rugman’s contributions to in-ternational business. J. World Bus. 2015, 50, 612–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kano, L.; Tsang, E.W.K.; Yeung, H.W.-C. Global value chains: A review of the multi-disciplinary literature. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2020, 51, 577–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stephens, M.; Mathana; Morrow, M.J.; McBride, K.; Mangina, E.; Havens, J.C.; Vashishtha, H.; Hajeri, S.A. The Emerging “Metaverse” and Its Implications for International Business. AIB Insights 2024, 24, 118572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Port of Rotterdam. The Digital Port. 2024. Available online: https://www.portofrotterdam.com/en/to-do-port/futureland/the-digital-port (accessed on 26 October 2024).
- Stallkamp, M.; Schotter, A.P. Platforms without borders? The international strategies of digital platform firms. Glob. Strategy J. 2021, 11, 58–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- L’Atelier BNP Paribas. The Virtual Economy. 2024. Available online: https://atelier.net/virtual-economy/ (accessed on 26 October 2024).
- Uyan, O. Barter as an alternative trading and financing tool and its importance for businesses in times of economic crisis. J. Econ. Financ. Account. 2017, 4, 282–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Union. Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on Markets in Crypto-Assets, and Amending Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010 and Directives 2013/36/EU and (EU) 2014/65/EU (MiCA). Off. J. Eur. Union 2023, 150, 40–205. Available online: https://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1114/oj (accessed on 26 October 2024).
- Internal Revenue Service. Instructions for Form 1099-DA Digital Asset Proceeds from Broker Transactions. 2025. Available online: https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1099da?utm_source=chatgpt.com (accessed on 26 October 2024).
- Huynh-The, T.; Gadekallu, T.R.; Wang, W.; Yenduri, G.; Ranaweera, P.; Pham, Q.-V.; da Costa, D.B.; Liyanage, M. Blockchain for the metaverse: A Review. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2023, 143, 401–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadini, M.; Laura, A.; Flavio, D.G.; Mauro, M.; Luca, M.; Andrea, B. Mapping the NFT revolution: Market trends, trade net-works, and visual features. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 20902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ante, L. Smart contracts on the blockchain—A bibliometric analysis and review. Telemat. Inform. 2021, 57, 101519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kshetri, N.; Dwivedi, Y.K. How can virtual and augmented reality facilitate international business? Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 2024, 66, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahi, A.A.; Sinkovics, N.; Shildibekov, Y.; Sinkovics, R.R.; Mehandjiev, N. Advanced technologies and international business: A multidisciplinary analysis of the litersature. Int. Bus. Rev. 2022, 31, 101967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coviello, N.; Kano, L.; Liesch, P.W. Adapting the Uppsala model to a modern world: Macro-context and microfoundations. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2017, 48, 1151–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Shaheer, N.; Yi, J.; Li, S. The international penetration of ibusiness firms: Network effects, liabilities of outsidership and country clout. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2019, 50, 172–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozturk Ayse Tamer, C.S.; Cem, O.O. Consumption convergence across countries: Measurement, antecedents, and consequences. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2021, 52, 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hyun, W. Study on standardization for interoperable metaverse. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), IEEE, Pyeongchang, Republic of Korea, 19–22 February 2023; pp. 319–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, Y.; Zahra, S.A. Industry 4.0 in international business research. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2023, 54, 403–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mohr, A.; Batsakis, G.; Stone, Z. Explaining the effect of rapid internationalization on horizontal foreign divestment in the retail sector: An extended Penrosean perspective. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2018, 49, 779–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nambisan, S. Digital Entrepreneurship: Toward a Digital Technology Perspective of Entrepreneurship. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2017, 41, 1029–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Primary Journals | Main Themes | Leading Authors |
---|---|---|
International Journal of Information Management | Metaverse; Virtual World; Augmented Reality; Extended Reality; Second Life | [4] |
Journal of International Business Studies | Global Production Networks; New IB Landscape; Digitalization; Platform Ecosystems | [33,34,35] |
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal | Blockchain; Supply Chain Management; Digital Technologies | [27,36] |
International Journal of Operations & Production Management | Metaverse; Supply Chain Management; Disruptive Technologies | |
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management | Blockchain; Technology Adoption; Value Chains; Technological innovation | [15,19] |
Technological Forecasting & Social Change | Metaverse; Virtual Technologies; Augmented Reality; Value Creation | [22] |
Sustainability | Blockchain; Global Value Chains; Sustainability; Smart Contracts | [17,37] |
Technology in Society | Metaverse; E-Commerce Business Models; Digital Products | [38] |
The Academy of Management Perspectives | Big Tech; Competitive Economy; Strategic Management | [39] |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mirzaye Shirkoohi, S.; Mohiuddin, M. Creating Value in Metaverse-Driven Global Value Chains: Blockchain Integration and the Evolution of International Business. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2025, 20, 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer20020126
Mirzaye Shirkoohi S, Mohiuddin M. Creating Value in Metaverse-Driven Global Value Chains: Blockchain Integration and the Evolution of International Business. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research. 2025; 20(2):126. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer20020126
Chicago/Turabian StyleMirzaye Shirkoohi, Sina, and Muhammad Mohiuddin. 2025. "Creating Value in Metaverse-Driven Global Value Chains: Blockchain Integration and the Evolution of International Business" Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 20, no. 2: 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer20020126
APA StyleMirzaye Shirkoohi, S., & Mohiuddin, M. (2025). Creating Value in Metaverse-Driven Global Value Chains: Blockchain Integration and the Evolution of International Business. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 20(2), 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer20020126