Bridging the Trust Gap in Crowdfunding: A Novel Expert-Based Evaluation Mechanism

Crowdfunding has emerged as a vital alternative funding source, transforming how creative projects and startups secure financing by directly connecting creators to backers. However, persistent trust issues and information asymmetry between creators and backers significantly hinder its growth and development. Existing trust-enhancement mechanisms, such as third-party endorsements and basic expert validation often lack objectivity and robustness, leaving backers vulnerable to biased signals and project failures. This paper addresses these limitations by introducing a novel trust-enhancement mechanism, referred to as Double-Score Voting. This approach refines expert validation systems by integrating two critical dimensions: firstly, a granular score-based vote from experts on a project's potential, moving beyond simple binary approval; and secondly, a weighted score representing the expert's credibility and level of expertise. This dual-layered evaluation provides a more nuanced, objective, and reliable assessment of project viability. The mechanism is formalised mathematically, and its practical implementation is demonstrated through CertiFund, a prototype crowdfunding platform developed to test and validate the concept. The findings of this study demonstrate that the Double-Score Voting mechanism can significantly mitigate information asymmetry, thereby increasing the credibility of projects and fostering a more trustworthy ecosystem for both creators and backers.