Lijia Ge

Date of Award

2026

Document Type

Thesis - Restricted Access (SIA Only)

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

Department

Art Business

First Advisor

Agnes Berecz

Second Advisor

Leo Krakowsky

Abstract

Since 2021, the Non-Fungible Tokens art market has witnessed explosive growth. The global trading volume of NFTS exceeded 40 billion US dollars in just one year1. Under such circumstances, blockchain technology is endowed with the political imagination of breaking the existing intermediaries. The NFT market is believed to enable creators to have more direct contact with the audience. Artists themselves can control copyright and interests, thereby reshaping the circulation mechanism of artworks. Blockchain technology is regarded as a tool that has the potential to transform the relationship between artists and audiences, the circulation mechanism of artworks, and the landscape of the art market. Some mainstream platforms openly declare their mission as democratizing creativity and emphasize that they will provide every creator with a more direct entry point and more equal participation opportunities, breaking the monopoly of traditional intermediaries such as galleries and auction houses. This kind of narrative reinforces the imagination of the NFT market as technology-neutral, fair, and even anti-establishment structure, further attracting a large number of new artists and collectors to enter the NFT ecosystem. However, this appearance of empowerment often conceals deeper layers of structural inequality. Although the NFT market has, in form, weakened the dominance of traditional intermediaries, it has simultaneously generated new intermediaries and mechanisms of power concentration within the emerging technological and commercial framework. For example, during market peaks, transaction gas fees on the Ethereum network reached hundreds of dollars2. Platforms such as OpenSea charge sales commissions as high as 2.5%, and the dominant pricing system remains tied to the U.S. dollar or dollar-pegged stablecoins. These financial thresholds create significant barriers for artists from economically underdeveloped regions. High minting and transaction costs erode the already modest profits of artists, while currency exchanges through centralized exchanges often incur exchange losses and capital restrictions that can reach up to 30% of an artist’s total budget3. The combination of technological and market mechanisms, therefore, has not automatically produced the justice promised by decentralization; instead, it has reconstructed new forms of implicit exploitation through processes of financialization, dollarization, and platformization. From a market-economic perspective, the NFT art ecosystem exhibits a high degree of concentration. Industry reports indicate that the top 10% of creators account for roughly 90% of total market income4. A small number of creators and projects have gained most of the traffic and revenue, while the majority of creators still cannot change the current situation. This means that the typical "winner-takes-all" logic has been magnified in the NFT ecosystem. The platform controls visibility and traffic through algorithmic mechanisms and other means. These elements directly transform into monetization capabilities, thereby highly concentrating data and capital and further marginalizing those art creators who are already in a disadvantaged position. This makes "decentralization" more of a discourse resource rather than a decentralization of power. From a cultural perspective, the existing algorithmic systems and designs of mainstream NFT platforms are not neutral technical mechanisms but are based on certain pre-determined value judgments. The traffic mechanisms of mainstream platforms often rely on existing data and user behavior samples, but most of these data reflect the aesthetic standards of the Western center. Therefore, artists from the Global South, ethnic minorities and those who use non-mainstream visual vocabularies find it difficult for their works to receive equal exposure. While algorithms determine which works can be seen by the audience, they also participate in shaping what constitutes tradable art. The narrative of "digital democratization" may be interpreted as a new form of cultural colonialism. The visibility system jointly constructed by technology and capital translates cultural differences into measurable market variables, thereby replicating and amplifying the inequality of aesthetic power in the digital context. The ecological dimension is equally important. During the active period of the NFT market, a large number of trading activities are concentrated on high-energy-consuming platforms. The geographical concentration of related infrastructure, node distribution, mining electricity consumption and carbon footprint poses a burden on some countries and regions. The energy consumption issue of blockchain technology has changed at different time points in both academic and industrial circles. For instance, large-scale mining farms are mostly concentrated in countries with low electricity prices. This has led to tight local power supply and demand, intensified ecological and environmental pressure, and disrupted residents' lives5. Meanwhile, although the "carbon neutrality" mechanism has been proposed as a remedial measure, it is difficult to replace a systematic reflection on production methods and technological structures. From the perspective of environmental justice, the expansion of NFTS is not only a technical issue, but also a socio-political issue of global resource allocation, environmental burden transfer and slow violence. Based on the above three dimensions of economy, culture and ecology, this study proposes a comprehensive critical framework, aiming to go beyond the explanations of a single discipline or a single path and explore how NFTS can re-realize the recapitalization of power under the discourse of "decentralization". This article will use the triple theory as a tool for analysis: First, through the Marxist theory of labor alienation, it will analyze the reproduction of creative labor, value and exploitation mechanisms in the NFT environment; Second, by applying the theory of decolonization, it is used to reveal the continuation and variation of the colonial nature of power in the digital context; Thirdly, by applying the theory of environmental justice, energy consumption, climate burden and the art economic system should be connected. By applying these theories, it reveals how NFTS, as a complex of technology, culture and market, interact in different fields and generate new mechanisms of inequality. In terms of research methods, this paper mainly adopts text analysis and combines existing on-chain data, industry reports, and professional materials as supplements. Specifically, in terms of the text, one will carefully read the platform's terms of service, as well as the public statements of artists and relevant institutions. In terms of data, attention will be paid to indicators such as trading models, platform traffic, and exposure, and within the available range, the distribution of energy consumption and mining nodes will be referred to. This article will not take unverified social media rumors as the main basis. All information and data are sourced as much as possible from the official platform, auction house bulletins, industry reports, and academic policy research to ensure that the argumentation process is solid and reliable. The core issue studied in this article is: How can digital art like NFTS reconstruct the ethical shift and value revaluation of the art market?

Download

Share

COinS