エネルギー転換鉱物・気候知識・想像されたサプライチェーン：「必要不可欠な採掘」の生産的パラドックスを脱する
Energy transition materials, climate knowledge, and the imagined supply chain: Escaping the productive paradox of necessary mining (原題)
Ian Morse, Julie Michelle Klinger, Gwendolyn K. Murphy
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
2013〜2025年の査読論文99本をレビューし、エネルギー転換鉱物（ETM）言説が「採掘から気候緩和へ」という想像上のサプライチェーンに依拠していると指摘。気候知識の脱物質化と再物質化を三つのスペクトラムで整理し、緊急性・規模・犠牲をめぐる価値交渉を描く。ETM言説は三つの物語的境界に囲まれ、非抽出的な代替可能性を閉ざしていると論じる。
English
Reviewing 99 peer-reviewed articles (2013-2025), this paper argues that energy transition material (ETM) discourse relies on an imagined supply chain from mining to climate mitigation that no mechanism guarantees. It charts the dematerialization of climate knowledge into value negotiations (urgency, scale, sacrifice) and its rematerialization in extractive rationales, identifying three narrative boundaries that foreclose non-extractive futures. It calls for centering mining's materiality over supply-chain abstractions.
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
日本はEV・蓄電池・半導体向けの重要鉱物をほぼ全量輸入に依存し、経済安全保障とGX政策が交差する。本稿は「採掘＝気候緩和」という前提を問い直し、資源調達リスクとサプライチェーン開示（Scope 3・人権DD）を考える日本の実務家に批判的視座を提供する。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/CSRD push Scope 3 and supply-chain due diligence into mandatory disclosure, this paper questions the assumed causal chain linking extracted materials to climate benefit. It adds a critical, discourse-level counterpoint to global transition-finance and critical-minerals scholarship, useful for interrogating the 'green' framing of mining in corporate climate claims.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:エネルギー転換・重要鉱物研究と気候知識政治学を接続する批判的枠組みとして、言説分析の方法論的参照点になる。
🏢実務担当者:重要鉱物調達やScope 3開示において「採掘＝気候貢献」という前提を安易に採用しないための批判的チェックリストとして使える。
🏛政策担当者:重要鉱物政策と気候政策の連関を自明視せず、非抽出的な代替生計や物質性を政策設計に組み込む視点を提供する。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Much scholarship, public discourse, and policymaking on ‘energy transition materials’ (ETMs) imagines a supply chain from material production to climate mitigation, despite the absence of any mechanism ensuring that mined materials will become an electrification technology, let alone replace fossil fuels or avoid warming impacts. Scholarship about energy transition material (ETM) discourse, including criticism, largely neglects this material-discursive contradiction and truncates final analyses to paradoxes productive toward extractive futures. Leveraging a review of 99 peer-reviewed articles published between 2013-2025, this article brings mining scholarship into conversation with climate knowledge politics. It charts the dematerialization of climate knowledge from warming impacts to values negotiated along three spectra (urgency, scale, and sacrifice) and rematerialization reflected in extractive rationales (developmental, Indigenous rights, nature, and futures). Most ETM discourse is enclosed in three narrative boundaries, which lean on the imagined supply chain and foreclose non-extractive possibilities: (1) The contingencies that link climate policy and mining, such as materials science, technological manufacturing and use, are taken for granted; (2) Scalar formulations separate and compare anthropogenic climate change and mining impacts; and (3) ETMs wield climate knowledge itself as a supply chain, dialectically illustrating a problem to its own solution. Pathways to overcome the boundaries can center the materiality of mining and climate change over the abstractions of supply chains and imagined climate benefits, critically reflect on the relationships between material production and technopolitical knowledge, and take seriously actually occurring alternative livelihoods.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2026.102048first seen 2026-10-02 04:38:29
🔔 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。