実践における計算ツールの政治学：エドモントンの気候予算
The politics of calculative tools in practice: Climate budgeting in Edmonton (原題)
Taylor Davey
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、北米初の自治体気候予算であるエドモントン市2022年炭素予算を分析する。炭素指標を従来の財政形式に翻訳する試みは方法論的限界に直面し、多くの投資が定量化できず、間接・長期効果も除外された。結果として透明性や合意形成を高めるどころか、自治体の責任や気候支出の正当性をめぐる対立を深めた。オスロとの比較から、気候予算の効果は技術設計よりも政治的権威・行政能力・制度的関係に依存すると論じる。
English
This article examines Edmonton's 2022 Carbon Budget, the first municipal climate budget in North America, tracing how carbon metrics were developed, applied, and interpreted. It finds that translating climate impacts into fiscal formats hit methodological limits—most investments were unquantifiable and long-term effects excluded—intensifying rather than resolving political disagreement over municipal responsibility and climate spending. Comparison with Oslo shows climate budgeting's effects depend more on political authority and administrative capacity than technical design.
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
日本ではSSBJ基準や有報での気候関連開示が進む一方、自治体レベルの気候予算はまだ黎明期にある。本論文は、炭素会計を予算プロセスに組み込む際の方法論的・政治的課題を示し、地方自治体の気候ガバナンスや統合報告の設計に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
As global disclosure frameworks (TCFD, ISSB, CSRD) push climate accounting into financial reporting, this study shows that calculative tools are not neutral but reshape political contestation. It offers a cautionary tale for cities and jurisdictions adopting climate budgeting, emphasizing institutional context over technical design.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:気候予算や炭素会計の実践が政治的にどう機能するかを理解するための詳細な事例研究。
🏢実務担当者:自治体や企業のサステナビリティ担当者が、炭素指標を予算・財務プロセスに統合する際の限界と政治的影響を認識するのに役立つ。
🏛政策担当者:気候予算の導入を検討する政策担当者に対し、技術設計だけでなく政治的権威や行政能力の重要性を示唆。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Climate budgeting aims to integrate carbon accounting into municipal financial budgeting, promising to align annual spending decisions with long-term emissions targets. Yet limited attention has been given to how this calculative framework operates within existing administrative practices and contested political contexts. This article examines the City of Edmonton’s 2022 Carbon Budget, the first municipal climate budget implemented in North America. Drawing on interviews, policy documents, and observations of public budget deliberations, it traces how carbon metrics were developed, applied to budget profiles, and interpreted by administrators and councillors. The analysis finds that efforts to translate climate impacts into conventional fiscal formats encountered substantial methodological limits. Most investments could not be quantified, indirect and longer-term effects remained excluded, and aggregated results suggested proposed climate investments would have little effect on Edmonton’s emissions pathway. Rather than increasing transparency or building consensus, the project intensified disagreements over municipal responsibilities, public support, and the justification of climate spending. Comparison with Oslo demonstrates that climate budgeting’s effects may depend less on technical design than on the political authority, administrative capacity, and institutional relationships within which it operates. Climate budgeting should be understood not as a transferable accounting solution, but as a situated deliberative framework that makes some climate impacts visible while reorganizing, rather than resolving, political contestation.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980261492432first seen 2026-11-05 04:55:30 · last seen 2026-11-06 04:36:51
🔔 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。