@Twan @zube.paul @rlombreglia Thanks for your comments.
About @Twan 's concern, according to my experience and knowledge about administrative law, some corruption may be one sort of infringement of contracts. Especially, the requirement of integrity is a basic principle of government action, which includes entering into contracts, implementing contracts. And it should be done under a disclosure circumstance (While the reality condition confined people’s ability to supervise everything done by civil servants). Of course, not all contracts, those parts involved classified information in a contract should not be unveiled, but most country action should still apply to public supervision, this is also why a country could be deemed as a democratic country. When people have the supervise right, to track, verify and allow people to know that information should be an obligation of the government. The disclosure scope should not be confined in contracts as well, everything the laws require to be unveiled is applicable.
Following the thinking above, I agree with the idea that utilizing blockchain to supervise government on some action, including the conclusion and implementation of contracts in most areas. I want to point out my standpoint that I don’t think smart contracts can replace contracts as they don’t play the same role and have different functions in a transaction. The relevant notion can be found in a paper summarized by @Larry_Bates.
As @rlombreglia said, “running targeted experiments could clearly produce real-world proof of the applicability of “academic” research to the “marketplace.” Before that, I much agree with @zube.paul 's idea. I would love to join this valuable project, I believe it could be a small but crucial step to help the world better. If we can commence that project and if there is anything I can help with, please let me know!