Access to household decarbonization: inequality of opportunity in mitigation policy design in China and the United States
家庭の脱炭素化へのアクセス：中国と米国における緩和政策設計の機会不平等 (AI 翻訳)
Zhipeng Zhang, Jie Tang, Dong Wang
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、中国と米国における家庭向け緩和政策の設計を比較し、アクセス摩擦指数を用いて、住宅所有、税負担、インフラ制約などが低炭素選択肢へのアクセスをどのように制限するかを分析。両国とも高所得・持家世帯に恩恵が集中し、賃貸人や移民などが不利になる制度的パターンを明らかにした。
English
This paper compares household mitigation policy design in China and the US using an Access Friction Index. It finds that in both countries, access to low-carbon options is shaped by institutional frictions such as housing tenure, tax liability, and infrastructure, leading to inequality favoring higher-income homeowners over renters and migrants.
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
日本でも家庭部門の脱炭素化（ZEH補助、EV補助など）が進む中、本論文の「アクセス摩擦」の視点は、政策設計における公平性評価に示唆を与える。日本の補助制度が持家・高所得層に偏っていないか、制度設計の点検に活用できる。
In the global GX context
This paper offers a novel institutional lens for global GX scholarship by shifting focus from outcomes to policy design features that create access inequalities. It provides a comparative framework applicable to other countries, including Japan, where household decarbonization policies may inadvertently favor certain groups.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a cross-national framework (Access Friction Index) to analyze inequality in household mitigation policy design, applicable to other countries.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights how eligibility rules and administrative requirements in subsidy programs can exclude vulnerable groups, informing more inclusive policy design.
🏛政策担当者:Demonstrates that even contrasting governance systems produce similar access inequalities, urging attention to institutional frictions in policy design.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This paper examines how access to household decarbonization is institutionally structured in China and the United States. Using an inequality of opportunity perspective, we focus on the design of household-facing mitigation instruments and shift attention away from mitigation outcomes and individual preferences. We construct a cross-national registry of nationally salient, national-level policies across four household mitigation pathways and evaluate their design features using a twelve-item Access Friction Index that captures eligibility rules, administrative requirements, financial conditions, and delivery and infrastructure constraints. The comparative study indicates that, despite contrasting governance systems, mitigation opportunities in both countries are shaped by dense, policy-embedded access frictions. In China, access is most visibly conditioned by housing tenure, local infrastructure, and place-based implementation capacity. In the United States, it is more strongly gated by income, tax liability, and liquidity, reflecting reliance on tax-based incentives. These institutional patterns are consistent with early mitigation being concentrated among higher-income home-owning households, while renters, migrants, and infrastructure-constrained communities face systematically narrower low-carbon choice sets. Overall, the analysis underscores that household decarbonization operates as an access-structured process and clarifies how institutional design shapes the distribution of feasible low-carbon opportunities across social groups.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2026.1802063first seen 2026-05-05 19:12:29
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。