# Overcoming the Technological Barriers in the Blockchain Supply Chain for Small Carriers
## 3 Methodology and Materials  
The approach comprises the subsequent steps. Initially, we examine both public and private networks with regard to supply chains and small carriers. Next, we address the issue of varying control requirements for different types of supply chains. Finally, we provide an illustrative case study in the last phase. This section presents the differences in control that result from the availability of different technological systems in the supply chain. This is linked to the issue of private and public networks, which has implications for the way in which actors or stakeholders in these networks cooperate together. Therefore, we discuss the differences from the perspective of different data control levels for various stakeholders. The last section presents a case study of measurement in an isothermal vehicle and data verification on a blockchain-based platform. An essential question in the supply chain is whether to prioritise a private or public network [54]. Private and public blockchains differ primarily in their accessibility, governance, and level of decentralisation, which are key factors influencing their use in the supply chain. Regarding accessibility, public blockchains are open and permissionless networks, meaning anyone can participate, transact, and validate transactions without needing approval. Private blockchains are permissioned (a network with restricted access for authorised entities) networks that restrict access and participation to specific entities or members. Governance in public blockchains is typically decentralised, with decisions made through consensus mechanisms involving many participants. Changes to the protocol or network require agreement among most of the network. Governance in private blockchains is centralised or semi-centralised, with a governing authority or a consortium of entities controlling decision-making processes [55]. Changes can be implemented more swiftly and are subject to the rules established by the governing entity or entities. In summary, public blockchains are open and decentralised networks accessible to anyone. In contrast, private blockchains are permissioned, centrally governed networks with restricted access tailored to specific use cases and 'participants' needs. Therefore, a private network is meaningful within a closed chain, where there is no need for the interaction of external stakeholders. Such a private network can set its own rules, representing, for example, the current quality standards of a specific product or process. Therefore, they are more suitable for the supply chain. From this perspective, private companies will find it easier to create private networks with their own rules or standards to follow. Traditional supply chain management (SCM) is based on classical product ordering and control through personal human assistance (see Figure 1). On the other hand, decentralised SCM makes decisions based on data stored in the ledger. In contrast, blockchain technology can save time, increase credibility, and protect data, all automatically, to minimise human intervention in processes such as ordering, issuing a bill of lading, invoicing, etc. Human interaction and intervention will only be kept to a minimum; see Figure 2.  
With the deepening of globalisation, the supply chain of modern enterprises has become fragmented, complicated, and diversified. This also brings great challenges to supply chain management. The most significant example is the food safety problem. Once food pollution occurs, tracing it back to the source takes a week or even longer. Food producers or retailers are likely to pay a heavy price. This situation leads to the opacity of the supply chain, which is more likely to drive up operating costs [56]. If it were possible to create blocks for individual activities in the supply chain that could be checked in real-time, this would make it easier to control and find the culprit of spoilage.