Symbolic wins as stepping stones toward material gains: Lessons from Sweden’s fossil fuel production ban
物質的利益への足がかりとしての象徴的勝利：スウェーデンの化石燃料生産禁止から得られる教訓 (AI 翻訳)
Lukas Slothuus
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
スウェーデンは2022年、非産油国でありながら化石燃料の探査・採掘を禁止した。本論文は17件のエリートインタビューに基づき、禁止が成立した政治的要因を分析。気候変動推進派の政治的資本投入、化石燃料産業の抵抗欠如、過去のウラン採掘禁止が道筋を作ったことを示す。禁止は象徴的・物質的・国際的次元を組み合わせた「足がかり」と位置づけられる。
English
Sweden implemented a fossil fuel production ban in 2022 despite being a non-producing state. Based on 17 elite interviews, this paper analyzes the political dynamics behind the ban, highlighting the role of a key pro-climate driver, lack of organized resistance, and a prior uranium mining ban. The ban is framed as a stepping stone combining symbolic, material, and international dimensions.
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
日本は化石燃料生産国ではないが、エネルギー転換政策の政治的実現可能性を考える上で示唆に富む。特に、非産油国が供給側対策として生産禁止を採用する戦略的意義は、日本のGX政策立案にも参考となる。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to global GX discourse by examining supply-side climate policy in a non-producing country. It offers insights for policymakers in similar contexts (e.g., Japan) on how symbolic bans can pave the way for more ambitious climate action, relevant to transition finance and policy sequencing debates.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a political economy framework for analyzing fossil fuel production bans, useful for scholars of climate policy and energy transitions.
🏢実務担当者:Offers strategic lessons for sustainability advocates on leveraging symbolic wins to advance material decarbonization goals.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights the conditions under which supply-side bans can succeed, informing policy design in non-producing countries.
📄 Abstract（原文）
• Sweden successfully implemented a ban on fossil fuel exploration and extraction. • The ban was driven by a combination of symbolic, material, and international motivations. • Proponents conceived of the ban as a stepping stone on the path to more ambitious climate and energy policy. How and why do some countries without ongoing fossil fuel exploration and extraction decide to unilaterally ban such activities? As part of a global momentum toward focusing on the supply-side of fossil fuels, Sweden implemented a fossil fuel production ban in 2022 despite being a non-producing state. Utilising a fossil fuel systems power analysis framework and drawing on data from 17 elite interviews with key stakeholders, I analyse the political dynamics of Sweden’s ban. I focus on the how and why , showing that the ban succeeded due to the efforts of a key pro-climate driver expending significant political capital, the lack of organised pro-fossil fuel incumbent resistance, and a pre-established path to prohibition from a prior uranium mining ban. Although disagreeing on the merits of each, the proponents and opponents agreed on the three key terrains of debate: the ban’s direct symbolic value, indirect material consequences, and global implications. I argue that the Swedish ban constitutes a stepping stone toward more ambitious climate and energy policy and combines both symbolic, material, and international dimensions. To be successful, proponents of fossil fuel production bans in other countries should therefore develop strategies to bolster the strength and counter the opposition along all three of these dimensions.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2026.101929first seen 2026-05-05 19:11:46
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。