Written by: Huabai Blockchain | Date: August 29, 2025
In the single-chain era, governance is often simplified to on-chain voting: users holding tokens can vote on proposals, decide parameters, allocate funds, or approve upgrades. However, as the ecosystem evolves into a multi-Rollup architecture, this logic clearly fails to meet the complex coordination needs. Different Rollups have differentiated technical routes, economic models, and user groups. If governance remains limited to single-point DAOs, the results will either be inefficient or cause imbalance or even conflict between chains. Caldera attempts to turn governance into a 'social experiment' in the design of Metalayer, with $ERA serving as the value anchor.
The governance design of Caldera is, first and foremost, cross-domain. Metalayer introduces key decisions from different Rollups into a unified governance framework, allowing ERA holders to vote on local chain proposals as well as participate in cross-chain issues. For example, when it comes to standards for cross-chain communication delays, the choice of data availability patterns, or the cross-domain allocation of ecological funds, voting is not determined solely by the community of any single chain, but rather through a collective vote of the entire ERA holder group. This shifts governance from 'single-chain autonomy' to 'multi-chain co-governance', with ERA becoming the universal currency and power carrier for cross-chain governance.
Secondly, Caldera's governance mechanism introduces responsibility constraints. Validators must stake ERA to participate in governance execution, meaning they not only have voting rights but also must be responsible for the implementation of governance results. If validators refuse to execute or act maliciously during execution, their stakes will be forfeited. This institutional design moves governance beyond the superficial 'voting is complete' to a genuine 'voting is responsibility' phase. Here, ERA is not just a symbol of voting rights but also an embodiment of economic responsibility and obligations.
Interestingly, Caldera employs a layered voting model in governance. Adjustments to high-risk system parameters (such as liquidation penalty ratios or cross-chain funding call permissions) must undergo dual or even triple votes: approval from the community, validators, and foundation levels; while low-risk issues (such as partial UI optimizations or small ecological subsidies) can be quickly passed by a single level. This differentiated governance logic ensures the rigor of key decisions while retaining the flexibility for ecological innovation. @Caldera Official demonstrates the advantage of #caldera in governance: it is not about pursuing 'formal decentralization', but about establishing 'institutionalized trustworthy governance'.
I believe this governance design is a form of social experiment. It is not just a coordination tool within the blockchain, but more like a prototype of a 'decentralized nation'. The role of ERA in this context is akin to a combination of taxes and ballots: it empowers holders while also requiring them to take responsibility. In this model, governance is no longer a hollow act of voting, but a combination of rights and obligations. This design makes governance more meaningful in practice and ties the value of ERA closely to the overall stability of the system, rather than merely being determined by market supply and demand.
From an advantage perspective, Caldera's cross-chain governance system brings at least three innovations. First, the cross-domain nature of governance prevents multiple Rollups from fighting alone and achieves unified coordination institutionally; second, the responsibility constraints of ERA combine governance with economic incentives, avoiding voting apathy and the phenomenon of 'hollow governance'; third, the layered voting mechanism enhances the flexibility and efficiency of governance, allowing the ecosystem to achieve a balance between security and innovation.
My impression is that Caldera truly embodies foresight in governance. Many people treat blockchain governance as an auxiliary module, but Caldera designs it as the core of the institution. ERA here is not merely a token but a combination of governance, responsibility, and trust. In the future, as more Rollups connect to Metalayer, this governance model may evolve into a 'cross-chain constitution', becoming a set of rules that the entire ecosystem adheres to. I believe this is the advantage of Caldera: it not only addresses immediate technical and efficiency issues but also provides a sustainable governance prototype for the multi-chain world at the institutional level.
