Home / Current Issue / Paper 1718229
Blockchain Platforms for Asset Management in India: Hyperledger vs Ethereum, Implementation Costs, and Scalability Barriers
Subject area: Science,Engineering and Technology · Area of research: Blockchain and Asset Management
DOI: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I11-1718229
Abstract
India's asset management systems, especially land records, property registries and ownership documents, face major challenges such as fraud, ownership disputes, slow manual verification and fragmented documentation. These issues affect citizens, government departments, financial institutions and real-estate stakeholders. Blockchain technology provides an opportunity to improve asset management by creating tamper-resistant records, transparent transaction history and automated workflows through smart contracts. This paper studies the use of blockchain platforms for asset management in India with a comparative focus on Hyperledger Fabric and Ethereum. The study analyzes technical architecture, performance, privacy, cost, scalability and implementation barriers. It also considers Indian use cases such as Telangana land parcel initiatives, Karnataka Bhoomi-related digital land record modernization and national-level blockchain adoption efforts. The findings show that Hyperledger Fabric is more suitable for regulated government asset systems because it provides permissioned access, privacy channels, higher transaction throughput and lower operational cost. Ethereum is useful for public transparency and open applications, but its public-chain gas cost, lower throughput and regulatory challenges reduce suitability for high-volume government asset records. The paper concludes that a permissioned blockchain model with proper standards, legacy-system integration, legal recognition and rural digital infrastructure can support scalable blockchain-based asset management in India.
Keywords
Blockchain, Asset Management, Hyperledger Fabric, Ethereum, Land Records, Smart Contracts, India, Scalability, Cost Analysis, Digital Governance.
References
[1] NITI Aayog. (2020). "Blockchain: The India Strategy - Part I", Government of India, Policy Report, pp. 1-60.
[2] Olatoye, F. O., Elufioye, O. A., Okoye, C. C., Nwankwo, E. E. and Oladapo, J. O. (2024). "Blockchain in Asset Management: An Extensive Review of Opportunities and Challenges", International Journal of Science and Research Archive, Vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 2111-2119.
[3] Raji, I. O. et al. (2024). "Performance and Scalability Analysis of Ethereum, Hyperledger Fabric and IOTA", International Journal of Engineering Research in Computer Science and Engineering, Vol. 11, Issue 12.
[4] Khan, M. M. et al. (2025). "Scalability and Efficiency Analysis of Hyperledger Fabric and Private Ethereum", Computers, Vol. 14, Issue 4, Article 132.
[5] Androulaki, E. et al. (2018). "Hyperledger Fabric: A Distributed Operating System for Permissioned Blockchains", Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference, Article 30, pp. 1-15.
[6] Wood, G. (2014). "Ethereum: A Secure Decentralised Generalised Transaction Ledger", Ethereum Project Yellow Paper, pp. 1-32.
[7] Christidis, K. and Devetsikiotis, M. (2016). "Blockchains and Smart Contracts for the Internet of Things", IEEE Access, Vol. 4, pp. 2292-2303.
[8] Casino, F., Dasaklis, T. K. and Patsakis, C. (2019). "A Systematic Literature Review of Blockchain-Based Applications", Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 36, pp. 55-81.
[9] Yaga, D., Mell, P., Roby, N. and Scarfone, K. (2018). "Blockchain Technology Overview", National Institute of Standards and Technology, NISTIR 8202, pp. 1-66.
[10] Treleaven, P., Brown, R. G. and Yang, D. (2017). "Blockchain Technology in Finance", Computer, Vol. 50, Issue 9, pp. 14-17.
[11] Tapscott, D. and Tapscott, A. (2016). "Blockchain Revolution: How the Technology Behind Bitcoin is Changing Money, Business, and the World", Portfolio/Penguin, First Edition.
How to cite this paper
@article{1718229,
author = {Tanmay Khodankar, Ashwini Garkhedkar},
title = {Blockchain Platforms for Asset Management in India: Hyperledger vs Ethereum, Implementation Costs, and Scalability Barriers},
journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
year = {2026},
volume = {9},
number = {11},
pages = {3896-3903},
issn = {2456-8880},
url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1718229.pdf},
abstract = {India's asset management systems, especially land records, property registries and ownership documents, face major challenges such as fraud, ownership disputes, slow manual verification and fragmented documentation. These issues affect citizens, government departments, financial institutions and real-estate stakeholders. Blockchain technology provides an opportunity to improve asset management by creating tamper-resistant records, transparent transaction history and automated workflows through smart contracts. This paper studies the use of blockchain platforms for asset management in India with a comparative focus on Hyperledger Fabric and Ethereum. The study analyzes technical architecture, performance, privacy, cost, scalability and implementation barriers. It also considers Indian use cases such as Telangana land parcel initiatives, Karnataka Bhoomi-related digital land record modernization and national-level blockchain adoption efforts. The findings show that Hyperledger Fabric is more suitable for regulated government asset systems because it provides permissioned access, privacy channels, higher transaction throughput and lower operational cost. Ethereum is useful for public transparency and open applications, but its public-chain gas cost, lower throughput and regulatory challenges reduce suitability for high-volume government asset records. The paper concludes that a permissioned blockchain model with proper standards, legacy-system integration, legal recognition and rural digital infrastructure can support scalable blockchain-based asset management in India.},
keywords = {Blockchain, Asset Management, Hyperledger Fabric, Ethereum, Land Records, Smart Contracts, India, Scalability, Cost Analysis, Digital Governance.},
month = {May},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I11-1718229}
}