エンジニアリングバイオロジーにおけるリスクの枠組みに関する専門家の視点：気候変動緩和に関する倫理的議論の予見
Expert perspectives on framing risk in engineering biology: anticipating ethical discourse about climate change mitigation (原題)
Daniele Fulvi, Henry G. W. Dixson, Lucy Carter, Aditi Mankad, Josh Wodak
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
IPCCが不可避とするCDR技術のうち、エンジニアリングバイオロジー（EngBio）を用いた手法について専門家のリスク認識を探ったパイロット研究。EngBio専門家はリスク議論に前向きで技術の急速な進展への信頼も示すが、無条件の受容ではなく「緩和不足のリスク回避のため必要なリスク」と捉える傾向が示された。倫理議論の焦点が従来のリスク対リスク分析から環境責任・倫理的脱炭素へ移行する可能性を指摘する。
English
A pilot study exploring expert perspectives on risk in decision-making around engineering biology (EngBio) applications for carbon dioxide removal. EngBio experts showed moderate-to-high openness to accepting such risks and trust in rapid technological advance, framing risk as integral to environmental responsibility rather than unconditional acceptance. The authors argue ethical debate will shift from traditional risk-risk analysis toward how EngBio-based CDR can enable effective, ethical decarbonisation.
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CDR・ネガティブエミッション技術の社会実装と倫理的受容性に関する議論が緒についたばかりであり、GX推進における技術リスクガバナンスを考える上で参考になる。ただし開示制度や企業実務への直接的接続は弱い。
In the global GX context
As ISSB/CSRD disclosure frameworks increasingly require climate transition planning, the governance of emerging CDR technologies and their perceived risks becomes relevant to how companies justify reliance on removals in net-zero claims. The paper contributes to the ethics-of-removals literature that underpins credible transition finance and greenwashing scrutiny.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:CDR技術のリスク認識・倫理的受容性に関する質的・パイロット研究の出発点として参照できる。
🏢実務担当者:ネットゼロ目標でCDR依存を検討する際、技術リスクと社会的受容性の論点を整理する材料になる。
🏛政策担当者:新興CDR技術のガバナンス設計において、専門家のリスク許容度と倫理的枠組みを考慮する必要性を示す。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract Given the rapid acceleration of the climate crisis, the IPCC has deemed Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies as unavoidable to sufficiently mitigate the crisis. In this context, engineering biology (EngBio) is increasingly gaining traction in CDR research. While the deployment of EngBio is perceived by some as inherently high-risk for society, the economy, and the environment, the risks posed by insufficiently abated climate change are likely to be irreparable. Against this background, a pilot study was conducted, aimed at exploring experts’ perspectives on risk in decision-making regarding the use of advanced EngBio applications to develop CDR technologies. Our results show that EngBio experts are moderately or highly open to discussing, accepting, or taking the risks of using EngBio-based CDR. Our findings also indicate expert trust in the potential of rapid advancements in EngBio-based CDR technologies. While these findings do not entail an unconditional and uncritical acceptance of all risks arising from using EngBio for CDR purposes, they underscore a notion of risk as integral to environmental responsibility, namely as necessary to avoid the higher risk of insufficiently abated climate change. In our view, this notion of risk highlights the epistemic context in which ethical debates on CDR will unfold as the climate crisis intensifies, shifting the focus from traditional risk-risk analysis to how EngBio‑based CDR can contribute to environmental responsibility and to effective and ethical decarbonisation.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-026-05848-8first seen 2026-11-06 04:39:36
🔔 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。