Is the doctrine of consideration adequate to modern business?

Extract

[...] In other words, consideration is determined to be valid when there is a mutual exchange of benefits. For instance, in Harmer v Sideway (1891) 124 NY 538, the court held that the uncle's promise to pay his nephew $5,000.00 for refraining from drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until the nephew turned 21 was not consideration because the uncle received no benefit from the nephew's performance. This case might seem derisory, but it demonstrates clearly how consideration ensures fairness and promotes the principle of quid pro quo, where both parties receive something of value in exchange for the respect of the contract. [...]

[...] For instance, new facilities of payment such as digital transactions (PayPal, Apple Pay?) were created, and might not fit completely into the original framework of consideration, making this latter more and more outdated and inefficient. While the doctrine of consideration has served as a guiding principle in contract law for a long time, its adequacy in modern business is still questionable. Despite its advantages, it seems inadequate to the modern environment, which is flexible and constantly fluctuates, while the doctrine began to be more complex and lacks flexibility. As business practices continue to evolve, it may be necessary to adapt the doctrine to the complexities and dynamics of today's business relationship. [...]

[...] Is the doctrine of consideration adequate to modern business? The doctrine of consideration is one of the most established rules within the common law of contract. It saw the light during the early stages of the English contract law of the Middle Ages. At first, contracts were established under word of honor, but this soon became a problem since there was no proof to ensure that the agreement eventually existed. Dean Henry Winthrop Ballantine has given in his book entitled Contracts, commercial law of the world 8I, the following definition of the notion of consideration: "Consideration is primarily the test of bargain and may be defined as the thing which the promisee gives or promises to give in exchange for the thing promised; not for the promise, as it is usually expressed." In essence, the doctrine of consideration states that for a contract to be legally binding, both parties must provide something of value (consideration) to each other. [...]

[...] As a result, consideration is not always used by judges, who started to explore new alternatives approaches. Likewise, in today's dynamic and flexible business environment, parties often engage in new means of transactions that do not fit the traditional model of consideration. Such as for instance in long-term partnerships, where sometimes consideration might not have been clear enough between the two parties, since they have been contracting together for many years and automatically renew their contracts. Therefore, the doctrine can be seen as outdated, due to its lack of flexibility and adaptability. [...]

[...] Indeed, the doctrine of consideration has grown to be more complex as time passes by. This complexity can be explained by the many exceptions which have been made to it by courts overtime, such as the principle of Promissory Estoppel, the Practical benefit rule, or the statutory exceptions. This is an exhaustive list of the exceptions made to the doctrine of consideration, although there are several others. For the most part, they have been established to address specific situations where enforcing the requirement of consideration would be considered impractical or immoral. [...]