エネルギー・交通インフラは利用者に応えられていない
Energy and transport infrastructure is failing the people it serves (原題)
Marissa Bergman, Stephanie A. Hirmer, Julia Tomei, Geoffrey Morgan, Seema Gaikwad, Beatrice Stockport, Gerald Arhin
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
低炭素移行は「何を建設したか」で評価されがちだが、エネルギー・交通システムは人口の多くにとって利用不能・不安全なまま残りうる。本Perspectiveは、研究・政策・計画・金融がジェンダー平等と社会的包摂（GESI）を周辺的に扱うと、インフラは「紙の上では整備済み、実態では機能不全」という選択的機能性に陥ると論じる。排除は生産性低下・財政非効率・気候脆弱性増大という三つのリスクに帰結し、地政学的分断と援助縮小がこれを増幅すると指摘。GESIを計画の中核プロセスとすべきと結論づける。
English
Low-carbon transitions are often judged by what gets built, yet energy and transport systems can remain unusable or unsafe for many. This Perspective argues that treating Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) as peripheral produces 'selectively functional' infrastructure—delivered on paper but failing in practice—undermining sustainable development. Exclusion translates into reduced productivity, fiscal inefficiency, and greater climate vulnerability, risks amplified by geopolitical fragmentation and shrinking aid. The authors call for GESI as a core planning process.
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
日本では再エネ導入や交通インフラ整備が進む一方、包摂性の視点は統合報告書や人的資本開示でようやく注目され始めた段階。SSBJ開示やサステナビリティ経営において、社会的包摂をリスク要因として位置づける視座を提供する。
In the global GX context
For global disclosure scholarship, this links social inclusion (GESI) to transition credibility—relevant to CSRD's social standards (ESRS S1-S4), just transition debates, and ISSB's growing attention to social factors. It reframes inclusion not as ESG optics but as a material driver of infrastructure performance and resilience.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:包摂性を移行の実効性・気候脆弱性と結びつける研究課題を提示する。
🏢実務担当者:インフラ・エネルギー事業者は、包摂性を計画段階のリスク管理に組み込む根拠として活用できる。
🏛政策担当者:開発援助縮小下でも包摂を政策・金融の中心に据えるべき根拠を提供する。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract Low-carbon transitions are often judged by what gets built, but energy and transport systems can remain unusable or unsafe for large parts of the population. This Perspective argues that when research, policy, planning, and finance treat Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) as peripheral, infrastructure becomes selectively functional – delivered on paper but failing in practice – thereby undercutting sustainable development. We outline how exclusion predictably translates into three material risks: reduced national productivity, fiscal inefficiency, and increased climate vulnerability. We then argue that these risks are amplified in today’s political economy, as geopolitical fragmentation and shrinking development aid increase incentives to deprioritise inclusion even as resilience needs intensify. We conclude that GESI must be treated as a core planning process and identify future research priorities for making infrastructure delivery reliably translate into access. We write as a cross-sector group of researchers, policymakers, financiers, and practitioners because this is not a niche academic concern: the success of the energy and transport transition depends on renewable infrastructure being used, which depends on infrastructure being inclusive.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/aeb71ffirst seen 2026-11-08 04:45:19 · last seen 2026-11-13 04:52:34
🔔 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。