Before You Rely on a Corporate Climate Transition Plan: Governing Handoffs Across Organizational Boundaries
企業の気候移行計画を鵜呑みにする前に：組織境界を越えた引き継ぎのガバナンス (AI 翻訳)
Bell, Peter
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本ワーキングペーパーは、企業の気候移行計画が自社の管理外の組織（サプライヤー、インフラ事業者、顧客等）に依存する点に着目し、それらの外部主体のコミットメントや調整・監視の枠組みを非スコアリングで評価する実践的フレームワークを提示する。ドイツ鉄鋼業の直接還元鉄生産への移行を事例に適用し、投資家や政策立案者が企業の野心と実際の調整実行を区別する手法を提供する。
English
This working paper presents a practical, non-scoring framework for assessing corporate climate transition plans that depend on external organizations beyond the company's control. It uses the German steel industry's shift to direct-reduction production as an illustrative case. The framework helps investors and policymakers distinguish corporate ambition from coordinated delivery by examining external commitments, coordination mechanisms, and progress monitoring.
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基準に基づく移行計画の開示が検討されており、本論文が示す外部主体との調整やガバナンスの枠組みは、実効性ある移行計画の評価に示唆を与える。特にサプライチェーン全体での調整は日本企業のScope3対応にも直結する。
In the global GX context
Globally, as transition plan disclosure gains traction under TCFD/ISSB frameworks, this paper offers a governance-focused lens to assess the credibility of plans that rely on external actors. It bridges corporate disclosure and collaborative governance, relevant for investors and regulators seeking to distinguish ambition from operational reality.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a conceptual framework connecting transition plan credibility with organizational and governance theory; useful for empirical research on plan implementation.
🏢実務担当者:Offers a checklist of questions to assess external dependencies in a company's transition plan, aiding due diligence for supply chain and investment decisions.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights the need for policies that support coordination across organizational boundaries in industrial transitions, relevant for designing sectoral transition pathways.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Corporate climate transition plans often depend on organizations that the company does not control. Suppliers, infrastructure providers, customers, financiers, governments, workers, and communities may all need to act on compatible timelines. A plan can therefore appear credible within the company while leaving important external commitments unresolved. This working paper connects corporate transition-plan assessment with organizational change, institutional economics, and collaborative governance. It presents a practical, non-scoring framework for examining what other parties must deliver, what evidence supports their commitments, how responsibilities are coordinated, how progress can be monitored, and what happens when delivery is delayed or incomplete. The transition of the German steel industry toward direct-reduction production provides an illustration of the approach. The framework is intended to help investors, lenders, policymakers, and other readers distinguish corporate ambition from coordinated delivery. It does not predict whether a plan will succeed, identify an optimal governance arrangement, or treat missing public information as evidence of failure. Questions of lawful authority, consent, justice, legitimacy, labour participation, and public purpose remain separate judgments for the people and institutions responsible for them.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- Zenodo https://zenodo.org/records/21382630first seen 2026-07-16 04:14:09
🔔 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。