6.7 Regulatory Mapping Methodology

Regulatory mapping will be conducted at a decision-oriented, landscape level appropriate for informing go/no-go, further diligence, and local counsel recommendations. It is not intended to replace formal legal advice, and this distinction will be clearly stated in all deliverables.

For each priority region, the regulatory mapping will identify:

• Relevant regulatory bodies and their posture toward blockchain, digital assets, payments, and data

• Applicable licensing, permission, or registration requirements for candidate use cases

• Stablecoin, cryptocurrency, and payment regulatory status

• Data protection, privacy, and public-chain transparency considerations

• Public procurement rules and pathways

• Foreign exchange and capital control implications

• Uncertainty levels and recommended further diligence actions

11. Regulatory Mapping Plan

11.1 Approach

Regulatory mapping will be decision-oriented and proportionate. The objective is to identify the regulatory dependencies and blockers that affect whether a specific use case can proceed in a specific region — not to produce a comprehensive legal review.

The regulatory mapping will not constitute legal advice. Where findings indicate that a legal or regulatory pathway requires specialist review before action, this will be stated explicitly. PRISMA is not a legal advisory organisation, and will not represent regulatory findings with a level of certainty beyond what publicly available evidence and expert interview evidence can support.

11.2 Mapping Dimensions

For each priority region and use case, the regulatory landscape summary will address:

• Relevant Authorities: Identified regulatory bodies with jurisdiction over the use case, with their current posture toward blockchain, digital assets, and payments

• Licensing and Approval Requirements: Known licensing, registration, or approval requirements that apply to the candidate use case

• Stablecoin and Payment Regulations: Applicable regulations governing stablecoin issuance, payment processing, and cross-border transactions

• Data Protection and Privacy: Data localisation requirements, privacy regulations, and public-chain transparency implications

• Public Procurement Rules: Procurement framework requirements relevant to public-sector entry plays

• Uncertainty Classification: A three-tier classification of regulatory certainty — High Certainty (based on enacted legislation or published regulatory guidance), Medium Certainty (based on regulatory posture and expert interpretation), Low Certainty (based on limited information or rapidly changing policy environment)

• Further Diligence Needed: Explicit statement of where local counsel or specialist review is required before action

11.3 Evidence Sources for Regulatory Mapping

Regulatory mapping evidence will be drawn from: published legislation and regulatory guidance; central bank and financial services authority communications; IMF and World Bank fintech regulatory reports; Chainalysis and other blockchain regulatory trackers; expert interviews with policy professionals and former regulators; and local legal counsel where accessible within budget.