For years, general-purpose blockchains have been positioned as platforms capable of supporting almost any application. But as adoption moves beyond experiments and into real industries, cracks are beginning to show. In practice, so-called “universal” blockchains are increasingly struggling to meet the specific operational and regulatory demands of real-world use cases.
Rather than proving their versatility, many generalized chains are revealing a mismatch between their original design goals and the problems businesses actually need solved.
When Blockchain Meets Reality
Industries often turn to blockchain technology hoping it will resolve long-standing operational disputes. Yet in many cases, popular Layer-1 networks such as Ethereum or Solana are ill-equipped for the job.
Take construction, for example. Disputes frequently arise over verbal approvals, last-minute changes to work orders, or undocumented instructions. These disagreements regularly escalate into expensive legal battles. Similarly, in equipment leasing and logistics, companies may lose revenue when customers challenge sensor data — especially when those readings could have been manipulated before being recorded onchain.
In these scenarios, the core problem isn’t decentralization or token settlement. It’s the absence of a trusted, immutable record of events. What businesses really need is a reliable way to prove who said what, and when.
EDITORIAL | Why Circle, Stripe, and the Next Wave of Fintech Giants Want Their Own Blockchains
Why General-Purpose Chains Fall Short
Generalized blockchains were built to do many things well enough, not a few things extremely well. They rely on complex virtual machines, identity systems, cryptographic verification, and smart contract execution — all of which add cost and latency.
But many real-world applications don’t require that complexity. For dispute resolution and operational auditing, a simple, tamper-proof, time-ordered record is often sufficient. When chains are forced to support features they don’t need, efficiency suffers.
This is where specialized Layer-1 blockchains are gaining traction. By focusing on stateless message recording rather than full smart-contract execution, these networks can process data in parallel, reduce overhead, and still provide strong guarantees of immutability.
[EXPLAINER] Understanding the Difference Between Layer 1 and Layer 2 Chains
The Rise of Purpose-Built Blockchains
Instead of universal design, many industries are now favoring blockchains optimized for narrow use cases. These purpose-built networks strip out unnecessary features and focus on doing one job extremely well — whether that’s audit trails, machine data logging, or dispute resolution.
By avoiding general-purpose virtual machines and heavy cryptographic workloads, such chains can operate faster and more efficiently while remaining secure. This design approach aligns more closely with real operational needs than the “one-chain-for-everything” philosophy.
M-PESA Africa Reportedly Signs MoU with ADI Layer 2 Chain, Specifically Designed for Emerging Markets
Regulation Changes the Equation
The shortcomings of universal blockchains become even more apparent in financial services. As tokenized assets, fiat currencies, and securities move onchain, regulatory requirements become unavoidable.
Financial systems must support KYC, AML, sanctions compliance, account freezing, and transaction reversibility. These features are not native to most public blockchains and are difficult — if not impossible — to implement cleanly at the application layer.
As a result, banks and regulated institutions are increasingly building or adopting permissioned blockchains designed specifically for compliance. These systems embed regulatory controls directly into the protocol, rather than attempting to retrofit them onto public networks.
Examples include institutional settlement networks and payment rails built explicitly for regulated environments, where legal accountability matters as much as decentralization.
INTRODUCING | Global Fintech Giant, Stripe, Launches Tempo, a Payments-Focussed Blockchain for Stablecoins
Where Universal Blockchains Still Fit
None of this means that general-purpose blockchains are obsolete. Large networks like Bitcoin and Ethereum still provide unmatched security guarantees due to their scale, decentralization, and economic weight.
Instead of handling every task directly, these networks may increasingly act as security anchors. Smaller, specialized chains can periodically commit checkpoints to major Layer-1s, inheriting their security while operating independently for day-to-day activity.
2025 RECAP | The Stealth Takeover – How Wall Street Quietly Started Building Digital Rails on Ethereum
A Multi-Chain Future Takes Shape
The emerging picture is not one dominant blockchain, but an ecosystem of many. Purpose-built blockchains will handle specific industrial and regulatory needs, while generalized networks provide shared security and global settlement layers.
As blockchain technology matures, flexibility is giving way to specialization – and universal blockchains are learning that real-world demands require more than a one-size-fits-all approach.
This post is adapted from an original post written by Steven Pu, co-founder of Taraxa.
‘Institutions Don’t Want to Live on Competitors’ Rails,’ Says Chief Innovation Officer, SWIFT
Stay tuned to BitKE on blockchain developments globally.
Join our WhatsApp channel here.
Follow us on X for the latest posts and updates
Join and interact with our Telegram community
___________________________________________
