Blog post by Linyi Xu, PhD Candidate at CREATe, University of Glasgow
The 2025 International Conference on Future Communication Networks (FCN 2025 sponsored by IEEE) was held in Belgrade, Serbia, from 18–22 August 2025. As a flagship venue for research in communication technologies, the conference provided a global platform for academics, policymakers, and industry stakeholders to engage with advances in next-generation networks and their broader socio-technical implications. The programme featured seven keynote lectures, ten parallel sessions, two thematic workshops, and a high-level roundtable.
The opening ceremony was led by Dr. Chih-Lin I (Chief Scientist, Chairman of the 5G/6G SIG of FuTURE FORUM, IEEE Life Fellow), Prof. Dejan Vukobratovic (University of Novi Sad), and Prof. Jun Zheng (Southeast University). Distinguished keynote speakers included Prof. Bennis Mehdi (IEEE Fellow, University of Oulu), Prof. Geoffrey Li (Fellow of Royal Academy of Engineering (FREng), IEEE Fellow, IET Fellow, Imperial College London), Prof. Latif Ladid (IPv6 Forum), Dr. William Lehr (Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)), Prof. Tara Javidi (IEEE Fellow, UC San Diego), Prof. Shugong Xu (IEEE Fellow, Associate Vice-President, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University), and Prof. Konstantinos Stylianou (University of Glasgow).
Photo by Official FCN Conference
The workshop opened with introductory remarks from Dr. Zihao Li (University of Glasgow), who reflected on the rationale and objectives underpinning the event. He situated the workshop within the broader transformation brought about by emerging technologies such as blockchain, distributed ledger systems, and Web3.0, which are reshaping not only economic activity but also modes of governance and institutional design. Dr. Li outlined the structure of the workshop and introduced the participating speakers, emphasising that its aim was to foster interdisciplinary dialogue across law, technology, economics, and cultural domains. In doing so, he underscored the importance of examining how decentralisation disrupts established regulatory frameworks while simultaneously opening new pathways for institutional innovation.
Prof. Konstantinos Stylianou (University of Glasgow) opened the workshop with a keynote on antitrust in decentralised economies. His talk examined the paradox of decentralisation: although blockchain and Web3 are premised on disintermediation and the distribution of power, market concentration, manipulation and fraud persist. The collapse of FTX exemplifies how, even in the absence of traditional intermediaries, power can consolidate in the hands of a few. Prof. Stylianou argued that antitrust law remains indispensable in this domain, curbing monopolisation, scrutinising mergers, and deterring collusion. Yet decentralised systems complicate conventional categories, since governance may operate through token-based community processes, production may be shaped by open collaboration, and degrees of re-centralisation differ across technical and governance layers. These features, he suggested, necessitate recalibrating the definitions of market actors, competitive conduct, and abuse of dominance. The enduring objective remains to safeguard fairness and prevent market failure, but legal frameworks must evolve to respond to novel institutional logics.
Linyi Xu (University of Glasgow) addressed interoperability between Web 3.0 and the EU Data Act. Her presentation highlighted a conceptual mismatch between technological and legal perspectives. On the technical side, interoperability is realised through cross-chain protocols, smart contracts, and decentralised applications, enabling system and application-level integration. By contrast, the Data Act confines itself to data portability and sharing, raising the risk that data may flow while systems remain fragmented. Xu proposed that legal frameworks should extend to higher-order interoperability, while soft law instruments and standardisation mechanisms could offer flexible tools to bridge regulatory objectives with technical design. Such an approach, she argued, is essential to prevent systemic disjunctions and to enable Web 3.0 to achieve its innovative potential.
Dr. Yinuo Liu (Shanghai Customs University) turned to the governance of cross-border data flows in digital trade. She noted that the digitalisation of trade has greatly amplified efficiency but simultaneously generated heightened risks in terms of jurisdictional misalignment, authorisation gaps for value-added data, and limited regulatory capacity for dynamic oversight. To address these issues, Dr. Liu proposed a dual-pillar framework consisting of a Secure Data Enclave model, which employs Trusted Execution Environments to enable compliant yet secure processing of data, and a Self-Attested Trust mechanism, which uses Verifiable Credentials and Distributed Ledger Technology to ensure provenance and integrity. Together, these measures aim to establish a transparent, secure, and efficient ecosystem for global trade data, balancing regulatory supervision with trade facilitation.
Dr. Zhen Gao (Tianjin University) introduced a blockchain-based cooperative communication scheme for Symbiotic Radio Networks, a promising model for future wireless infrastructures. Traditional networks face persistent challenges such as interference, inefficient spectrum allocation, and fragile trust mechanisms. Gao’s scheme embeds blockchain as a trust and coordination layer, using smart contracts to automate spectrum sharing and task distribution, while consensus mechanisms guarantee transparent and tamper-resistant transactions. This design enhances efficiency, reliability, and security, positioning it as a significant contribution to the development of a trustworthy 6G ecosystems and the Internet of Things.
Dr. Jiabin Lai (Jinan University) examined the regulation of cryptoassets and their contested legal status. Central to his inquiry was the question of whether cryptoassets can be considered money. He approached the issue from three perspectives: functional theory, which assesses whether cryptoassets fulfil the classical functions of money; legal tender theory, which highlights contrasting national approaches, from El Salvador’s recognition of Bitcoin to China’s prohibition; and social acceptance, which survey evidence shows remains limited in terms of payment usage. Lai concluded that cryptoassets pose challenges for contract, property, and financial regulation alike. Effective regulation, he suggested, must strike a balance between technological innovation and systemic stability, recognising cryptoassets’ socio-economic functions while mitigating risks to financial order.
Dr. Hao Xu (Tongji University) addressed the ontological and regulatory challenge of defining digital existence. As data becomes a core economic asset, the question arises of when a digital object should qualify as a network entity. Dr. Xu proposed a decision-tree framework built on five computable criteria: unique identifiability, self-containedness, persistence with traceability, connectivity, and multi-source validation. This framework categorises digital objects into four tiers of existence, enabling structured assessment of both operational functionality and ontological status. Dr. Xu tested the model across blockchain ledgers, software repositories, and archival metadata, demonstrating adaptability and consistency. Applications include digital governance, automated compliance, and asset valuation, providing new instruments for regulating the digital economy.
In its concluding session, the workshop opened into a free discussion, where participants from diverse disciplinary backgrounds exchanged perspectives on the intersections of blockchain and policy. By situating technical debates within legal and policy contexts, the workshop provided not only a platform for presenting cutting-edge research but also a space for critical reflection on how to construct equitable and sustainable futures in a decentralising world. A consensus emerged that the rapid evolution of decentralised technologies is reshaping the global legal and policy landscape. Distributed ledger systems may pave the way for governance structures that are more transparent, efficient, and trustworthy, but they also introduce unprecedented challenges for regulatory models and institutional design. The enduring question remains how to strike a dynamic balance between innovation and regulation, a challenge that will define the next stage of research and policy experimentation.
Photo Credits: Dr. Zihao Li and Linyi Xu