It's 2026 Already, DAOs Should Have Matured by Now

比推2026-01-29 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-01-29 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

By 2026, DAO governance is maturing beyond idealistic experiments. In 2025, major protocols shifted from pure community governance to hybrid models with clearer operational control, as seen with Arbitrum’s OpCo and Uniswap’s DUNI framework. Voting participation declined but became more concentrated among professional delegates, while token value accumulation gained prominence through buybacks, fee switches, and staking mechanisms. Key conflicts, like Gnosis terminating Karpatkey and Aave’s revenue dispute with Aave Labs, highlighted accountability gaps. Looking ahead, DAOs will formalize legal structures, prioritize risk management, and leverage AI for decision-making. Governance tokens must capture economic value to sustain engagement. The evolution reflects a balance between decentralized oversight and operational efficiency, signaling DAO’s maturation into more effective, accountable organizations.

Author: Pink Brains

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Original title: It's 2026 Already, DAOs Should Have Matured by Now

Deep Tide Guide: 2025 was a critical inflection point for decentralized governance (DAO). After years of idealistic experimentation, mainstream protocols began to seriously address core pain points such as power distribution, accountability mechanisms, and sustainability. This article is written by veteran DAO delegate Pink Brains, based on their practical experience of casting 725 votes in top protocols like Aave, Lido, and Gnosis. It provides an in-depth analysis of the shift in DAOs from "community autonomy" to a "hybrid operation" model.

The author points out that governance tokens alone are no longer sustainable. In the future, DAOs will evolve towards economic alignment, legal entity formation, and AI-assisted decision-making. This is not just a review of governance; it's a prophecy book for the evolution of Web3 organizational structures in 2026.

Full text below:

2025 marked a turning point for decentralized governance.

After years of experimentation, major protocols began confronting fundamental questions about power distribution, accountability, and sustainability.

The answers weren't always pleasant, but they were necessary.

What We Achieved in 2025

2025 was also the first year of our operation as an active DAO Delegate.

Casted 725 votes across 18 protocols
Held over 8 million in voting power
Top 10 delegate in Aave and Lido
Top 3 delegate in Velodrome
Top 6 delegate in Gnosis

This perspective, grounded in actual governance work, gave us clear insight into the patterns reshaping DAOs in 2025 and defined their trajectory entering 2026.

Changes in DAOs in 2025

Shift in Operational Model: From Pure Community Governance to Hybrid Control

The most notable change in 2025 was the shift from purely community-based governance towards hybrid models with clearer operational control.

@arbitrum introduced an Operating Company (OpCo), channeling all DAO operations through a unified structure.
@JupiterExchange completely paused governance for nearly six months to reassess its approach.
@Uniswap launched the DUNI framework, centralizing operational authority.
@Gnosis's DAO executed a hard fork amidst reduced community engagement. Scroll transitioned to a CEO-led structure.
@Scroll_ZKP suspended its DAO, shifting focus to centralized governance.
Recently, the Celo Foundation merged with @cLabs into a unified core contributor organization.

The motivation for this shift was DAOs hitting scaling limits. Execution became the bottleneck. Full-community votes were often too slow for operations, too noisy for technical nuances, and too vulnerable for security-sensitive actions.

Consequently, governance power concentrated towards smaller, high-context groups, while the broader community shifted towards oversight functions, as seen in the next section.

Fewer Voters, But More Concentrated Power

In 2025, the number of proposals and participating voters dropped significantly across major DAOs. However, the voting power behind each proposal remained strong.

Lido saw an increase in participation after adopting a dual governance framework.
Arbitrum and Uniswap still had the highest overall participation, but both saw a decrease in the number of voters.

Caption: From DeFiLlama's State of DeFi 2025 Report

This does not signal the failure of governance. Instead, governance became more bundled, more operationally abstract, and less frequent.

Governance influence migrated to a small number of highly active Delegates and heavily capitalized participants.

Value Accrual for Token Holders

"Token buyback," "buyback and burn," and "fee switch" became central themes in 2025.

For years, token utility revolved around voting rights and incentive distribution, but offered minimal economic value to token holders. 2025 changed this equation.

Lido adopted a buyback framework.
Uniswap DAO activated the long-awaited fee switch, pledging to burn nearly $600 million worth of UNI tokens.
Aave implemented a token buyback mechanism. Optimism launched a buyback program.
CoW Protocol increased solver profitability in a way that benefits token holders.

This trend addresses a key challenge in tokenomics. Buybacks and burns reduce circulating supply, making the token more scarce. If demand holds steady, the price strengthens. When token holders can actually benefit from the protocol's success, they are more incentivized to buy, hold, and participate in governance decisions long-term.

Who Really Owns the DAO?

Two major controversies forced DAOs to confront structural flaws.

Gnosis voted to terminate Karpatkey's treasury mandate due to fee disputes, underperformance, and a ~$700k loss related to a liquidity issue.
Tensions between Aave DAO and Aave Labs escalated when it was discovered that ~$10 million annually in swap fees from the CoW Swap integration were flowing to Aave Labs instead of the DAO. A vote on brand ownership failed, and the controversy left a harder question: what does "DAO-owned" really mean when the core team controls development and distribution?

These conflicts forced protocols to fill the gaps in accountability and governance structures.

Legal Infrastructure is Adapting to DAOs

Despite DeFi's growth, most DAOs still lack clear legal structures, creating liability and regulatory risks as protocols scale.

While jurisdictions like Wyoming have introduced DAO LLC frameworks, and Switzerland offers mature legal pathways, most DAOs remain in a legal gray area.

2026 Trend Predictions

Centralized DAOs as a New Practice

Protocols will develop clear frameworks to delineate "community decisions" from "operational decisions," moving beyond the false binary of "fully decentralized" or "fully centralized."

Operational Execution: Will be handled by Labs teams, not foundations.
Community Oversight: DAO delegates and the community will be responsible for treasury strategy, long-term direction, and major structural decisions.

Governance Shifts Towards Risk Management Infrastructure

The DAO of the future will be less like a forum full of chatter. More teams will bifurcate decisions into concave decisions and convex decisions.

Concave problems require:

Pre-approved guardrails and automated execution.
Professional oversight (risk services, auditors, security teams).
Rapid response frameworks for emergencies and market shocks.
Fewer proposals, but each decision carries higher economic impact.

Convex problems (like product direction) require decisive leadership, where the DAO acts as a "brake" or "checkpoint," not a "steering wheel."

By 2026, this will be standard for lending, stablecoins, perps, and any protocol where financial risk can compound quickly.

The End of Governance Tokens? Value Capture is a Must

Continuing into 2026, tokens with only governance functions will struggle to maintain long-term engagement.

Delegates, whales, and strategic holders won't consistently provide protection for the system without seeing a return profile. Protocols will increasingly adopt at least one value accrual path:

Token buyback frameworks.
Fee diversion or revenue sharing.
Staking tied to protocol cash flows.
Treasury strategies aimed at supporting token value.

When holders gain economically from the protocol's success, they are incentivized to stay attentive, participate, and protect the system.

Legal Structures Shift from Optional to Necessary

Regulatory pressure and real-world legal challenges will push DAOs towards formal entity formation, seeking a balance between decentralized governance and legal clarity.

Professional Delegation

As governance complexity increases, token holders will increasingly delegate to full-time professional delegates. While this concentrates voting power, it may improve decision quality. Meanwhile, weaker delegate institutions that cannot financially sustain themselves will fold, as governance work becomes more professional, political, and costly.

Privacy, AI & Futarchy

Public governance is a social game. When every vote is publicly visible, decisions are influenced by reputation, pressure, and alliances, rather than purely the protocol's best interest. Therefore, governance privacy will become more important in the future.

AI will address decision fatigue. It can assist in analyzing proposals and auto-voting on routine upgrades based on user-defined preferences, requiring human intervention only for disputes or high-impact matters.

Futarchy markets will also play a larger role in DAOs. They let market signals predict which option might create value. Gnosis is testing this model, using retail prediction markets to reflect sentiment on proposals.

Crypto is Maturing, and So Are DAOs

The shifts we see in DAO operations, economic alignment, accountability conflicts, and professionalization represent maturation, not the end of DAOs.

DAOs are evolving from ideological experiment to organizational architecture that balances "decentralized oversight" with "proven operational efficiency." We believe DAO governance becomes meaningful if teams can align with community interests: moving fast when action is needed, letting growth benefit token holders, and holding all participants—core teams and delegates alike—accountable.

As Vitalik said: We need more DAOs, but different and better DAOs.

If you believe in the value of DAOs, we can be your voice.

Effective delegation is more than just casting a vote; it means doing the actual work: reading proposals, being active on forums, understanding risks, and voting against bad decisions, even when it's not the popular choice.

This is how we operate as delegates: through clear communication and educational content, helping the protocol grow while staying aligned with community incentives.

Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

BitPush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

BitPush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7607064

İlgili Sorular

QWhat was the most significant shift in DAO operational models in 2025, according to the article?

AThe most significant shift was the transition from pure community governance to hybrid control models with clearer operational authority, as seen with protocols like Arbitrum introducing operational companies (OpCo) and Uniswap launching the DUNI framework.

QHow did the trend of token buybacks and fee switches address a key challenge in tokenomics in 2025?

AIt addressed the challenge of providing minimal economic value to token holders. By implementing buyback frameworks, fee switches, and revenue-sharing mechanisms, protocols made tokens more scarce and valuable, aligning token holder incentives with the protocol's long-term success.

QWhat two major controversies in 2025 forced DAOs to confront structural flaws in accountability?

AThe two major controversies were: 1) Gnosis DAO voting to terminate Karpatkey's treasury mandate due to fee disputes and performance issues, and 2) The conflict between Aave DAO and Aave Labs over the misdirection of approximately $10 million in annual swap fees.

QWhat is the predicted role of AI in DAO governance for 2026, as outlined in the article?

AAI is predicted to help solve decision fatigue by analyzing proposals and automating votes on routine upgrades based on user-defined preferences, requiring human intervention only for contentious issues or decisions with significant impact.

QWhat does the article suggest is the future for governance tokens that only have voting utility?

AThe article suggests that governance tokens with only voting utility will struggle to maintain long-term engagement. They must incorporate value-capture mechanisms like buyback frameworks, fee sharing, or staking tied to protocol cash flows to be sustainable.

İlgili Okumalar

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

Title: As Consensus Forms Faster, What Are Young Investors Betting On? In the rapid evolution of tech investment, a new generation of young investors is navigating a landscape where AI, robotics, commercial aerospace, and quantum computing are advancing simultaneously. Traditional investment logic based on financial models is giving way to a need for deep technical understanding and the ability to act before industry consensus forms. An analysis of trends from the "WAIC FUTURE TECH" list of young investment leaders reveals key shifts in focus. The first major trend is the movement of AI from the digital screen into the physical world. Investment is shifting from large language models and chatbots towards embodied AI, robotics, AI hardware, and edge computing. While demonstrations generate excitement, the real challenge lies in achieving scalable, reliable, and cost-effective delivery in complex real-world environments like factories and logistics. Success depends not just on algorithms but on the integration of sensors, actuators, and control systems. Second, the competitive focus for large models is moving beyond raw capability toward building an "intelligence flywheel." The goal is to create self-reinforcing systems where user interaction generates data, improving the model, which in turn enhances the user experience and attracts more engagement. Companies that successfully embed AI into workflows to create these closed-loop systems can build lasting value that isn't easily erased by the next model upgrade. Third, facing a potential bottleneck in high-quality human-generated data, investors are looking at new underlying technologies. Reinforcement learning and self-play, as demonstrated by AlphaGo Zero, offer paths for AI to generate its own experience. Scientific foundation models, which aim to build general AI capabilities for fields like life sciences and materials discovery, represent a non-consensus direction that could unlock new frontiers of knowledge and data. Finally, in deep-tech areas like quantum computing, commercial aerospace, and space-based infrastructure, patient capital is essential. These fields have long, uncertain development and validation cycles involving complex engineering, supply chains, and regulations. Investment here requires a long-term view, focusing on foundational team capabilities and the eventual emergence of market demand, even if commercial returns are distant. Collectively, these trends illustrate how young investors are adapting to a new era. They are learning to make earlier, technically-informed judgments, balance hype with real-world viability, and provide the patient capital needed to build the deep-tech foundations of the future.

marsbit24 dk önce

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

marsbit24 dk önce

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Foresight News, July 21 – Pump.fun has launched its new "BOOST" mode as the standard launch mechanism for new tokens. The core of BOOST is to address the issue of "dead liquidity." Historically, when a token migrates from its bonding curve to a liquidity pool, roughly 20% of its liquidity becomes permanently locked and unusable, a problem the platform estimates costs over $100 million annually. The new mechanism redirects this 20% of funds, which would have been locked, to instead be used for a 5-minute Time-Weighted Average Price (TWAP) buyback of the token immediately after migration. The purchased tokens are then permanently burned. For example, this means reserving 17.6 SOL for SOL pairs or about $2516 for USDC pairs at migration. This creates a short-term buying pressure and reduces the token's supply. The goal is to improve the immediate post-launch performance of memecoins, potentially increasing trader retention and transaction volume on the platform. However, critics warn this could lower the bar for token launches, encouraging low-quality projects, and that the brief 5-minute buy pressure might lead to sharper price crashes once it ends if followed by large sell-offs.

Foresight News33 dk önce

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Foresight News33 dk önce

What Signals Can Be Read from the Trading Data of India's Largest Asset Manager SBI's IPO?

India's largest asset manager, SBI Funds Management, successfully listed on July 21 with a nearly $10 billion IPO, attracting approximately 42 times subscription. However, the first-day closing price rose only about 6.3%, falling short of the 16% premium anticipated in the grey market. This signals robust demand for core Indian financial assets but also disciplined pricing, indicating the IPO market is selectively open for strong brands with clear growth narratives. The low reported underwriting fees, which led some global banks to reduce participation, highlight a shift in pricing power towards powerful issuers like SBI. Its strong brand, banking parent, and stable cash flows reduced reliance on traditional investment banking sales channels, with local brokers playing a larger role. This fee dynamic may not be replicable for weaker issuers. SBI's performance is seen as a key test for India's IPO pipeline, including potential future large listings like Reliance Jio and NSE. Its success with tempered gains sets a new price anchor: high-quality assets can launch, but excessive valuation premiums are constrained. The true measure of a sustained market reopening will be whether subsequent major offerings can proceed smoothly at reasonable valuations.

marsbit51 dk önce

What Signals Can Be Read from the Trading Data of India's Largest Asset Manager SBI's IPO?

marsbit51 dk önce

Can Japan Buy Growth with AI? Will the Bond Market Believe It?

Japan's cabinet has introduced the 2026 Basic Policy on Economic and Fiscal Management and Reform, shifting its primary fiscal target. The new framework moves away from the traditional annual primary balance goal and instead prioritizes a stable reduction of the debt-to-GDP ratio. This change is tied to a strategy of increased "responsible proactive fiscal" spending, aiming to boost long-term growth through investments in strategic sectors like AI, semiconductors, energy, and robotics. The government estimates total public and private investment in 62 key technologies could exceed 370 trillion yen by 2040. The market reaction has been mixed and cautious. While equity markets may respond to policy signals, bond markets are focused on fiscal credibility. Concerns center on whether the weakening of the clear primary balance anchor could lead to looser fiscal discipline. If investors doubt that these strategic investments will generate sufficient productivity gains, tax revenue, and nominal growth to outpace rising interest costs, they may demand higher yields on Japanese Government Bonds (JGBs). Recent volatility in the yen and JGB yields, with the 10-year yield briefly reaching 2.9%, reflects this skepticism. The success of this new framework hinges on two factors: whether Japan can achieve a nominal growth rate consistently higher than its long-term interest rates, and whether future budgets demonstrate disciplined control over bond issuance. The government's narrative is that strategic investment is essential to break Japan's cycle of low growth, aging, and labor shortages. However, the bond market will continuously assess the credibility of this plan, pricing the risk that it may represent fiscal expansion rather than a viable growth strategy.

marsbit1 saat önce

Can Japan Buy Growth with AI? Will the Bond Market Believe It?

marsbit1 saat önce

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit1 saat önce

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot