サウジのエネルギー産業リーダーシップ言説：アラムコ2024年サステナビリティ報告書におけるメタファー・主体性・正当性の批判的談話分析
Saudi energy-industrial leadership rhetoric: A critical discourse analysis of metaphor, agency, and legitimacy in Aramco's 2024 sustainability reports (原題)
Khalid Abdullah Alotaibi, Safaa Sayed Mahmoud, Rami Abdulatif Sa'di, Neelofar Hussain Wani
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究はアラムコのアラビア語サステナビリティ報告書2024と年次報告書の一部を対象に、批判的メタファー分析と他動性・社会行為者分析、正当化理論を組み合わせて分析した。リーダーシップは旅・成長・建築・ビジョン・序列のメタファーで構築され、投資や削減の主体としてアラムコが前景化する一方、エネルギー需要や技術変化は自律的圧力として描かれる。正当化は国家・国際枠組みへの権威づけと、信頼性・affordability・秩序ある変化への合理化の二層で機能し、運用改善の責任は受容しつつ構造転換の速度と境界を市場・技術・政府・需要へ再配分する較正された物語となっている。
English
This study analyzes Aramco's Arabic 2024 Sustainability Report and Annual Report sections using critical metaphor analysis, transitivity, social-actor analysis, and legitimation theory. Leadership is built through journey, growth, architecture, vision, and rank metaphors, with Aramco foregrounded as agent of investment and reduction while demand and technology appear as autonomous pressures. Legitimation operates via authorization to national/international frameworks and rationalization linking hydrocarbon continuity to reliability and orderly change—a calibrated narrative accepting operational accountability while redistributing the pace of structural change.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
国営石油企業による脱炭素言説の正当化構造を可視化する分析枠組みは、日本企業の統合報告書やSSBJ開示における「移行」ナラティブの検証に応用可能。特に主体性の帰属と責任配分の言語的技法は、国内GX開示の批判的読解に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/CSRD disclosure expands to cover transition plans, this paper offers a transferable method for auditing how corporate narratives distribute agency and accountability—directly relevant to greenwashing scrutiny and assurance debates in global climate disclosure.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:批判的談話分析と正当化理論を組み合わせ、企業の移行ナラティブを実証的に解体する手法を提供する。
🏢実務担当者:自社のサステナビリティ報告書における主体性・責任の語り方が、投資家や規制当局にどう読まれ得るかを内省する材料になる。
🏛政策担当者:移行計画開示の規制設計において、ナラティブの正当化技法をどう検証・監督するかの論点を提示する。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Saudi Aramco's Arabic sustainability communication occupies a difficult rhetorical position. It must present continued hydrocarbon production as economically and socially necessary while also presenting the company as a credible participant in a lower-emissions future. This article examines how that position is made persuasive in the company's official Arabic Sustainability Report 2024 and selected leadership, strategy, and governance sections of its Arabic Annual Report 2024. The study combines critical metaphor analysis with transitivity, social-actor analysis, and van Leeuwen's account of legitimation. The page-bounded corpus contains 20,185 raw tokens and 18,262 cleaned tokens distributed across 187 layout-defined prose blocks and 687 clause units. Lexical scans guided, but did not replace, close reading. The analysis finds that leadership is constructed through an interlocking repertoire of journey, growth, architecture, vision, and rank metaphors. Aramco repeatedly appears as the named agent of investment, development, reduction, and protection, whereas energy demand, technological change, and the transition itself often appear as autonomous pressures. Legitimation consequently works on two levels: authorization aligns corporate conduct with national and international frameworks, while rationalization links hydrocarbon continuity to reliability, affordability, and orderly change. Moral evaluation adds the vocabulary of responsibility, citizenship, safety, and care. The result is not a simple denial of environmental strain. It is a calibrated leadership narrative in which accountability for operational improvement is accepted, but the pace and boundaries of structural change are discursively redistributed across markets, technologies, governments, and global demand.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://royalliteglobal.com/advanced-humanities/article/view/2879first seen 2026-10-04 04:50:33
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。