Recommendations for metaverse governance based on technical standards

The paper addresses how to create and implement governance for the metaverse based on technical standards. It situates the metaverse as the next evolutionary phase of the internet, enabled by technologies such as blockchain, extended/virtual reality, 5G, cloud computing, AI, and digital twins. Given the metaverse’s dependence on shared technological infrastructure and the integration of economic, social, identity, and content-creation systems, it relies heavily on complex technical standards (e.g., identity, social relations, digital assets, APIs) beyond traditional network standards like TD-LTE and TCP/IP. The study aims to clarify metaverse governance based on technical standards by developing a technical standards-based metaverse governance (TS-MG) framework, drawing on the economics of standards and network theory, and to provide phased governance implications and policy guidance.

The review highlights how digitalisation transforms trade, global value chains, and regulatory approaches. Digital trade liberalisation improves consumer welfare and firm efficiency, but data localisation and fragmented rules threaten openness and interoperability. Harmonised technical standards influence trade interests in GVCs and can mitigate fragmentation, yet can also be sources of conflict (e.g., standard wars). The WTO facilitates international regulatory cooperation, but countries increasingly restrict data flows; coordinated standards for privacy, consumer protection, and digital security are needed. Digital industries’ characteristics introduce anticompetitive risks, challenging the balance between liberalisation and legitimate public objectives. For the metaverse, immersive technologies promise new virtual commerce and experiences but introduce privacy and security vulnerabilities and scalability/interoperability challenges. Overall, deriving benefits while managing risks is central, and the metaverse’s stronger dependence on technical standards elevates the need to ensure both compatibility and security to avoid data localisation and fragmentation.

The study conducts a literature-based inquiry to develop a theoretical framework for technical standards-based metaverse governance (TS-MG). It applies the economics of standards and the theory of networks to construct a conceptual model and combines theoretical reasoning with multi-case insights from metaverse-related practices and standards activities. The approach includes: (1) theoretical framework construction at technical and institutional levels; (2) analysis of governance policies via combined theoretical and case-based discussion; and (3) examination of phased governance implications based on technical standards.

• TS-MG consists of three core elements: formulation, compatibility, and security of technical standards.
• Formulation: Pre-market standards setting is pivotal; first-mover strategies confer advantages to standard-setting organisations, governments, and enterprises by accumulating technical experience, creating artificial scarcity/diversity in meta-resources, and shaping rules to capture early investment benefits, while recognising the Collingridge dilemma.
• Compatibility: Interoperability across tools, services, formats, protocols, and engines is essential to connect sub-universes and realise metaverse value via network effects. Compatibility fosters knowledge/innovation diffusion and integration of physical and digital worlds (IoT, digital twins). Without compatibility, isolated sub-universes do not form a true metaverse.
• Security: Risks span data, networks, and AI (e.g., Poly Network hack). Cross-border data governance requires internationally unified or conflict-coordinating standards for data protection and jurisdiction, with careful, limited intervention by international bodies where public interests or national security are implicated.
• Phased governance model: Across development stages, governance must balance compatibility and security (depicted in Fig. 1). • Initial stage: Low compatibility and security; small-scale platforms; first-mover advantages in setting standards; need foundational security and future-oriented compatibility to avoid stagnation or monopoly risks. • Growth stage: Trade-offs intensify; two modes emerge—cellular (low compatibility, high security) and hierarchical (high compatibility, lower security). Policies should either promote international cooperation to raise compatibility (cellular mode) or strengthen antimonopoly and risk controls (hierarchical mode). • Mature stage: High compatibility and high security; fully interoperable standards, free data flows, dense network externalities; unified, harmonised technical standards supported by close governmental cooperation.
• Current status: The metaverse is at an initial stage with low standardisation maturity; stakeholders are exploring standards, compatibility, and security across layers (experience, discovery, creator economy, spatial computing, decentralisation, HMI, infrastructure). Open standards (e.g., OpenXR, WebXR, WASM, IPFS) and protocols (e.g., NFTs) are evolving but fragmented.
• Governance problems: (1) Lack of unified standards across security, assets, social protocols, NFTs/trading; (2) Uncertain trade-offs between compatibility and security; (3) Limited international cooperation on cross-platform interoperability and compliance.
• Policy timelines: 2022–2025 emphasises participation in standardisation bodies and technical upgrades (5G/6G, XR, cloud gaming); 2025–2035 introduces interventions against rent-seeking, establishes community autonomy standards, expands virtual economy (digital currencies, NFTs) with growing network externalities; 2035–2050 forms interoperable sub-universes via unified interfaces, entering maturity with advanced core technologies and continued openness/compatibility.

The findings address the core question of how to govern the metaverse via technical standards by laying out a structured framework—formulation, compatibility, and security—and showing how these dimensions must be balanced across development phases. Early, pre-market standards formulation can shape market trajectories and unlock technological and economic dividends, but must account for the Collingridge dilemma and avoid capture by narrow interests. Compatibility underpins network externalities, innovation diffusion, and real/virtual integration, yet unchecked compatibility risks monopolistic dominance; security standards mitigate data, privacy, and systemic risks but may, if overemphasised, lead to data localisation and fragmentation. The phased TS-MG model (initial, growth with cellular/hierarchical modes, mature) demonstrates how governance choices about compatibility and security determine market structure, interoperability, and risk exposure over time. International cooperation among governments, standard-setting organisations, and enterprises is essential to harmonise data protection and jurisdiction, promote interoperable standards, and coordinate antimonopoly and risk management policies. This framework provides practical guidance for policymakers and practitioners to design interventions that maximise positive network effects while safeguarding security and competition, thereby supporting sustainable metaverse development.

The study contributes a theoretical framework for technical standards-based metaverse governance (TS-MG) grounded in the economics of standards and network theory. It identifies three essential elements—standards formulation, compatibility, and security—and articulates phased governance paths (initial, growth with cellular/hierarchical modes, mature) and their policy trade-offs. Policy suggestions include: (1) develop strategies and phased roadmaps for metaverse standards, combining mandatory and voluntary standards, strengthening blockchain and compatibility coordination, and establishing security standards aligned with application scenarios; (2) enhance international cooperation and top-level design by incorporating compatibility and security issues into trade/technology agreements and supporting transparent, coordinated standardisation across organisations and countries; and (3) tailor industry- and enterprise-level policies to prevent monopolies, encourage alliances, ensure fair procedures, and promote participation in international standard setting. Future governance should steer toward continuous openness and compatibility, leveraging positive network externalities while managing security and competition risks.

The research is limited in its analysis of how technical standards specifically affect breakthrough technologies (AI, digital twins), two-way connections between the physical world and VR, national interests, and ethics. It suggests future research on: (1) how cultural conflicts influence metaverse governance goals and methods; and (2) whether compatibility and security decisions in technical standards reflect countries’ cultural characteristics. As the metaverse is not yet realised, theoretical model analyses may be especially suitable for future work.