A decision-making framework integrating energy efficiency and climate resilience: evidence from ASEAN economies
エネルギー効率と気候レジリエンスを統合する意思決定フレームワーク：ASEAN経済からのエビデンス (AI 翻訳)
Tri Dung Dang, Hoang‐Kha Nguyen
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、ASEAN10カ国を対象に、CRITIC法とCRADIS法を組み合わせた統合的意思決定支援フレームワークを開発した。分析の結果、フィリピンが最も高い総合性能を示し、ブルネイ、マレーシア、ラオスが理想との乖離が大きいことが分かった。気候リスク、政策準備状況、再生可能エネルギー移行、効率関連投資が主要な差別化要因である。政策提言として、再生可能エネルギー拡大、グリッド近代化、気候リスク評価等の重要性を指摘している。
English
This study develops an integrated decision-support framework combining CRITIC and CRADIS methods to assess energy efficiency and climate resilience across 10 ASEAN economies. Results show heterogeneity: Philippines leads, while Brunei, Malaysia, and Laos lag. Key factors include climate risk, policy readiness, and renewable energy transition. The framework offers a data-driven tool for prioritizing country-level interventions.
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ASEAN地域に焦点を当てているが、エネルギー効率と気候レジリエンスのバランスを評価する枠組みは、日本のエネルギー政策やアジアエネルギー移行イニシアチブ（AETI）を通じた国際協力にも示唆を与える。日本企業がASEANで事業展開する際のリスク評価にも活用可能である。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to global GX literature by providing a replicable multi-criteria framework that integrates climate resilience into energy efficiency assessment. It fills a gap in empirical studies for ASEAN, a region critical for global energy transition, and its methodology can be adapted for other regions.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:This offers a novel framework (CRITIC-CRADIS) for integrating climate resilience into energy efficiency evaluation, with potential for adaptation to other regions.
🏢実務担当者:Companies or consultants can use this framework for country-level risk assessment and prioritization of investments in ASEAN energy projects.
🏛政策担当者:Provides evidence-based insights for prioritizing energy policies, green finance, and regional coordination in ASEAN.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Enhancing energy efficiency while strengthening climate resilience has become a pivotal challenge for ASEAN economies exposed to rising energy demand and intensifying climate risks. Although previous studies have examined energy efficiency, renewable energy transition, and climate vulnerability, limited research has jointly integrated energy efficiency and climate resilience within a unified decision-making framework for ASEAN economies. This study addresses this gap by developing an integrated decision-support framework that combines the CRITIC objective weighting method and the CRADIS multi-criteria ranking approach. By tracking 10 ASEAN economies across various energy and environmental dimensions, this model provides insight into balancing short-term economic benefits with the long-term resilience of the energy system. The results reveal pronounced heterogeneity across countries. The Philippines achieves the highest integrated performance, followed by Myanmar and Singapore, while Brunei, Malaysia, and Laos show wider gaps from the ideal benchmark. The CRITIC results indicate that climate risk, policy readiness, renewable energy transition, and efficiency-related investment are key factors differentiating ASEAN economies. Sensitivity analysis using alternative MCDM models, including VIKOR, TOPSIS, WASPAS, and ARAS, supports the robustness of the CRITIC-CRADIS framework. The findings contribute theoretically by embedding climate resilience into energy-efficiency assessment and empirically by offering a transparent, replicable, and data-driven tool for country-level prioritization. From a policy perspective, the results suggest that ASEAN economies should adopt differentiated strategies, including renewable energy expansion, grid modernization, energy-efficiency standards, climate-risk screening, green finance, and regional coordination to support climate-resilient energy transitions.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-57671-3first seen 2026-07-05 04:50:41
🔔 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。