The Technological Dimension of Sustainability: A Conceptual Perspective on Governability and Resilience Under Tech4.0
持続可能性の技術的次元：Tech4.0下での統治可能性とレジリエンスに関する概念的視点 (AI 翻訳)
S. Pimenow, Olena Pimenowa, Piotr Prus, Marek Zieliński
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
この概念論文は、AIやデジタルインフラなどのTech4.0技術がもたらす統治問題を、従来のESGフレームワークでは捉えきれないと指摘。技術的持続可能性（T）を独立した分析軸として導入し、企業の技術的責任（CTR, CDR）の階層を提案する。実証ではなく、今後の研究のための概念的枠組みを提供。
English
This conceptual paper argues that AI-mediated decision systems, digital infrastructures, and cyber-physical environments create governance challenges not fully captured by existing ESG frameworks. It proposes 'Technological Sustainability (T)' as a distinct pillar and outlines a hierarchy of Corporate Technological Responsibility (CTR) and Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR). The paper offers a conceptual research program rather than empirical evidence, setting an agenda for future inquiry into technological accountability under Tech4.0.
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
日本企業はAIやデジタル技術をサステナビリティ報告に活用しつつあるが、本論文は「技術的持続可能性」軸を提案し、SSBJ基準にデジタルガバナンスの視点を補完する可能性がある。統合報告書における技術関連リスクと責任の枠組みとして参考になる。
In the global GX context
Globally, this paper extends the current ESG/ISSB disclosure regime by highlighting the need to account for technological dependencies and risks. It aligns with discussions on digital sustainability and the role of AI in climate transition. The conceptual hierarchy of CTR/CDR provides a pathway for companies to operationalize technological responsibility, relevant to frameworks like the EU's CSRD and SEC's climate rules.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:This paper provides a conceptual foundation for researching technological sustainability as a distinct dimension, useful for scholars in ESG, digital governance, and sustainability accounting.
🏢実務担当者:Corporate sustainability teams can use the CTR/CDR hierarchy to structure their digital responsibility initiatives and enhance technology-related disclosures.
🏛政策担当者:Regulators and standard-setters should consider integrating technological sustainability into disclosure frameworks to address the governance gaps of digital infrastructure.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Technology is increasingly central to sustainability, yet frameworks built around the environmental–social–economic (E–S–Ec) triad and ESG disclosure regimes do not fully capture the governance problems created by interconnected digital and cyber–physical infrastructures. In this conceptual paper, Tech4.0 is used in a deliberately narrow working sense, focusing on AI-mediated decision systems, data/platform/cloud infrastructures, software dependency chains, and cyber–physical control environments in which opacity, infrastructural dependence, interdependence, and cascading failures create distinctive problems of governability and resilience. Against this background, the paper examines whether making the technological dimension explicit adds analytical value within sustainability architecture. It examines the case for treating Technological Sustainability (T) as a distinct analytical dimension/pillar insofar as it foregrounds system properties of the Technosphere that tend to be diluted when distributed across environmental, social, and economic categories. The paper then discusses the hierarchy T → Corporate Technological Responsibility (CTR) → Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) as a possible corporate-level operational pathway and outlines an exploratory measurement agenda structured around exposures, capabilities, and outcomes. Rather than offering empirical proof or a validated reporting architecture, the article provides a conceptual research program for later empirical inquiry into technological accountability under Tech4.0 conditions.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.3390/su18104892first seen 2026-05-20 05:32:08 · last seen 2026-06-15 05:28:00
🔔 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。