Compelled Flexibility? Japan's Energy Security, Legal Infrastructure, and Adaptive Investment Strategy
強制された柔軟性？日本のエネルギー安全保障、法的インフラ、適応的投資戦略 (AI 翻訳)
Ayako Takemi
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
この論文は、日本の地理的・制度的制約が「強制された柔軟性」を生み出し、多様な技術経路を同時追求する投資戦略を強いることを分析する。GX推進法や長期脱炭素電源オークションなどの政策を通じて、「オプション性の制度化」が進む一方で、分散経路からの撤退（エクスノベーション）の困難を指摘。エネルギー安全保障と公正な移行の統合の必要性を論じる。
English
This paper examines how Japan's geographic and systemic constraints create 'compelled flexibility,' forcing simultaneous pursuit of diverse technological pathways for energy security and decarbonization. Analyzing recent policies like the GX Promotion Act and LTDA, it introduces the concept of 'institutionalization of optionality,' which paradoxically leads to a 'lock-in to dispersion' making exit from committed pathways difficult. The study argues for integrating energy security into just transition frameworks and emphasizes governance mechanisms for exnovation.
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
本論文は、日本の地理的制約やGX推進法・長期脱炭素電源オークション等の政策を分析し、エネルギー安全保障と公正な移行の統合的課題を提示。日本が進めるGX戦略において、複数技術経路へのコミットメントと撤退メカニズムの重要性を示しており、政策立案や企業の投資戦略に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
This paper offers a novel framework for understanding energy security constraints in the just transition, using Japan as a case. It contributes to global scholarship on transition governance and path dependency, particularly relevant for energy-importing economies. The concept of 'compelled flexibility' and 'institutionalization of optionality' provides analytical tools for assessing multi-pathway investment strategies and the need for exnovation governance.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a conceptual framework linking energy security, path dependency, and just transition, useful for scholars of energy policy and governance.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights risks of overcommitting to multiple technology pathways without exit strategies; useful for corporate strategy and investment planning.
🏛政策担当者:Emphasizes the need for governance mechanisms to manage technology portfolio dispersion and exnovation, directly relevant to Japanese and other energy-importing country policymakers.
📄 Abstract（原文）
In the wake of the war in Ukraine and escalating tariff regimes, integrating energy security into the Just Energy Transition (JET) framework has become an urgent imperative. This article examines the significance of fundamental structural constraints—specifically geographic and systemic limitations—by analyzing Japan as a critical case of high energy vulnerability characterized by restrictive topography, grid isolation, and resource dependency, as a complement to traditional carbon lock-in analysis. The study argues that these constraints necessitate a "compelled flexibility," forcing the simultaneous pursuit of diverse technological pathways beyond mere industrial preference. Through a process-tracing analysis of recent policy developments, including the Long-term Decarbonized Power Source Auction (LTDA), the Green Transformation (GX) Promotion Act, and the Asia Zero Emission Community (AZEC), the article demonstrates how this flexibility is translated into legal and financial infrastructure, termed here as the "institutionalization of optionality." While intended to secure stability, this approach paradoxically internalizes a "lock-in to dispersion," whereby long-term contractual, fiscal, organizational, and diplomatic commitments across multiple technology pathways accumulate, rendering future convergence and withdrawal politically and economically arduous. The article concludes by emphasizing the necessity of engaging with energy security as a substantive challenge within justice frameworks while at the same time emphasizing criticality of governance mechanisms for "exnovation," to manage the exit from dispersed transition pathways.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6606178first seen 2026-07-24 05:10:25
🔔 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。