On-Chain Governance
A governance model where protocol decisions are proposed, voted on, and executed directly by smart contracts on the blockchain, creating transparent and enforceable governance.
On-chain governance is decision-making executed directly by smart contracts. Proposals, votes, and execution happen on-chain, so results are transparent and enforceable. Example: Uniswap governance lets UNI holders vote to change protocol parameters. If proposal passes, it executes automatically after timelock. On-chain governance reduces ambiguity and backroom deals. But it creates new risks: voter apathy, whale dominance, and governance attacks. Understanding on-chain governance is critical for DAO participation.
How On-Chain Governance Works
Typical flow:
Proposal Creation: Token holder submits proposal (requires minimum token threshold).
Discussion: Community debates proposal in forums.
Voting: Token holders vote on-chain. Votes weighted by token holdings.
Quorum: Proposal needs minimum participation to pass.
Execution: If passed, smart contract executes change after timelock.
On-chain governance is transparent and automated.
Voting Mechanisms
Common models:
Token-Weighted Voting: One token = one vote.
Quadratic Voting: Voting power = $\sqrt{tokens}$, reducing whale power.
Delegated Voting: Holders delegate votes to representatives.
Time-Locked Voting: Tokens must be locked to vote (prevents flash loan voting).
Snapshot Voting: Off-chain signaling, then on-chain execution.
Different mechanisms balance fairness and efficiency.
Pros and Cons
Benefits:
Transparency: All votes and proposals are public.
Enforceability: Execution is automatic once passed.
Legitimacy: Community decision-making builds trust.
Global Participation: Anyone with tokens can participate.
Tradeoffs:
Voter Apathy: Low participation weakens legitimacy.
Whale Dominance: Large holders can control outcomes.
Governance Attacks: Flash loans or bribery can manipulate votes.
Slow Process: Governance can be slow, which is risky in emergencies.
Governance Attacks
Threats:
Flash Loan Voting: Borrow tokens to gain temporary voting power.
Bribery Markets: Pay voters to support proposals.
Quorum Manipulation: Attackers suppress quorum to block proposals.
Malicious Proposals: Attackers propose harmful changes.
Safeguards are critical.
Safeguards and Controls
Best practices:
Timelocks: Delay between approval and execution.
Guardian Veto: Multisig veto power for emergencies.
Minimum Quorum: Prevents low-participation decisions.
Delegation: Increase informed participation.
Progressive Decentralization: Gradually reduce admin control as protocol matures.
Safeguards reduce risk.
Real-World Examples
Protocols:
MakerDAO: On-chain governance for collateral types and risk parameters.
Uniswap: Community votes on fee and treasury changes.
Aave: On-chain governance for risk settings and upgrades.
Compound: Token-weighted governance with timelocks.
On-chain governance widely adopted.
Career Opportunities
Governance roles:
Governance Researchers earn $120,000-$300,000+.
DAO Operations roles earn $90,000-$220,000+.
Protocol Designers earn $130,000-$320,000+.
Community Managers earn $80,000-$200,000+.
Best Practices
Participating in governance:
Stay Informed: Read proposals and forums.
Delegate Wisely: Choose informed delegates.
Think Long-Term: Avoid short-term incentives.
Monitor Security: Support safeguards like timelocks.
The Future of On-Chain Governance
Trends:
Better Delegation: More professional delegates.
Identity Systems: Combining token voting with reputation.
AI Assistance: Tools summarizing proposals.
Composable Governance: Inter-protocol governance coordination.
Enforce Decisions Transparently
On-chain governance makes decisions transparent and enforceable. It’s powerful but risky. If you’re interested in governance, explore governance careers at DAOs and protocol foundations.
Find On-Chain Governance Jobs
Explore positions at companies working with On-Chain Governance technology
Browse open roles