家庭用低炭素技術における責任あるグリーン・データ化：信頼、正当性、消費者の受容
Responsible Green Datafication in Household Low‐Carbon Technologies: Trust, Legitimacy, and Consumer Adoption (原題)
Van Kien Pham, Le Na
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
家庭用デジタル低炭素技術におけるデータ化のリスクとガバナンス手がかりが、責任あるデータ信頼とグリーンデータの正当性を介して採用意図にどう結びつくかを、ベトナム成人620名の2×2ビネット実験とSEMで検証。透明性・ユーザー制御・説明可能性・提供者信頼性は信頼を高め、プライバシー懸念・監視リスクは低下させる。信頼は正当性を介して採用意図とパイロット受容に正に関連し、外部保証と明確な開示が主要成果に正の主効果を持つ。
English
A 2×2 vignette experiment with 620 Vietnamese adults plus SEM tests how governance cues and datafication risks shape adoption of household low-carbon technologies via responsible data trust and green-data legitimacy. Transparency, user control, algorithmic explainability, and provider credibility raise trust, while privacy concern and surveillance risk lower it. Trust drives legitimacy, which in turn predicts adoption intention and pilot acceptance; richer disclosure and external assurance show positive main effects with no interaction.
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
家庭部門の脱炭素とデータガバナンスの交差点は、SSBJや統合報告書が扱う非財務情報の信頼性・正当性議論と通底する。日本企業がHEMSや需要応答サービスを展開する際の消費者同意設計や外部保証の位置づけを考える材料になる。
In the global GX context
The paper links consumer data governance to the legitimacy of green claims, resonating with ISSB/CSRD debates on assurance and disclosure credibility. It offers a consumer-side complement to corporate disclosure scholarship, showing that external assurance and transparent governance build trust in data-intensive low-carbon offerings.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:データ信頼とグリーン正当性を区別する枠組みと、ガバナンス手がかりの実験的効果を提供する。
🏢実務担当者:HEMSや低炭素サービスの同意設計・外部保証・説明可能性の整備が採用意図に効くことを示す。
🏛政策担当者:家庭部門のデータ活用政策において、明確な開示と第三者保証の組み合わせが受容を高める示唆。
📄 Abstract（原文）
ABSTRACT Household digital low‐carbon technologies can support sustainable consumption while expanding the collection and algorithmic use of domestic data, creating a tension between environmental benefits and the legitimacy of data‐intensive consumer systems. Drawing on privacy‐calculus, digital‐trust, institutional‐legitimacy, responsible‐innovation, and sustainable‐consumption perspectives, this study examines how governance cues and datafication risks relate to consumer adoption through responsible data trust and perceived green‐data legitimacy. A survey‐based 2 × 2 vignette experiment with 620 Vietnamese adults manipulated a bundled governance‐disclosure package (clear versus vague) and assurance source (external versus private), while covariance‐based structural equation modeling tested associations among measured perceptions. Meaningful data transparency, perceived user control, algorithmic explainability, and provider credibility were positively associated with responsible data trust, whereas privacy concern and surveillance risk were negatively associated with it. Responsible data trust was positively associated with green‐data legitimacy, which in turn was associated with adoption intention and pilot acceptance. Digital literacy strengthened two of the three proposed governance‐cue relationships; institutional trust strengthened the provider‐credibility relationship, and environmental concern strengthened the legitimacy–adoption relationships. Randomized factorial tests showed positive main effects of richer governance disclosure and external assurance on all four focal outcomes, with no significant interaction. The study contributes by distinguishing relational trust in data handling from the broader legitimacy of using household data for low‐carbon purposes and by specifying conditions under which this trust–legitimacy explanation appears more or less applicable. Practically, the findings support intelligible and controllable data governance and credible external assurance while cautioning against attributing the bundled disclosure effect to any single governance component or describing the two experimental cues as synergistic.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70278first seen 2026-11-07 04:53:14
🔔 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。