戦争・エネルギーシステム・生態学的劣化：現代紛争における環境持続可能性の再考
War, Energy Systems and Ecological Degradation: Rethinking Environmental Sustainability in Contemporary Conflicts (原題)
Mradul Ranawat, Pragya Mishra
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、パイプラインや発電所など高依存度のエネルギーインフラが現代紛争の標的かつ手段となる実態を、ロシア・ウクライナ戦争、ガザ紛争、イラク戦争の事例で分析する。Capitalocene論や「スロー・バイオレンス」概念を用い、戦争が化石燃料依存を強め、排出・土壌水質汚染・生物多様性喪失・エネルギー不安を深刻化させることを示す。環境劣化は偶発的被害ではなく地政学的エネルギー経済に構造的に埋め込まれていると論じ、紛争後の分散型再生可能エネルギー再建の実現可能性と国際人道ガバナンスにおける環境説明責任の強化を提言する。
English
This article examines how strategic energy infrastructure—pipelines, refineries, power stations—becomes both a target and instrument of modern warfare, drawing on the Russia–Ukraine War, the Gaza conflict, and the Iraq War. Using Capitalocene theory, slow violence, and environmental justice, it shows that conflict intensifies fossil fuel dependency, emissions, soil and water contamination, biodiversity loss, and energy insecurity. It argues such degradation is structurally embedded in geopolitical energy economies, and calls for stronger environmental accountability in humanitarian governance and conflict-sensitive energy planning.
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
日本はエネルギー輸入依存度が高く、地政学リスクと脱炭素の両立が政策課題である。本論文は紛争下でのエネルギー安全保障と環境劣化の連関を論じ、日本のエネルギー政策・企業の調達リスク管理に示唆を与えるが、SSBJや有報開示との直接接続は弱い。
In the global GX context
While not a disclosure paper, it speaks to the global GX agenda by linking geopolitical energy shocks to emissions and environmental harm, a dimension often absent from TCFD/ISSB climate-risk framing. It supports conflict-sensitive transition finance and humanitarian environmental accountability discussions.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:紛争とエネルギー・環境の連関を環境正義と政治経済学の枠組みで捉える視点を提供する。
🏢実務担当者:紛争・地政学リスクがエネルギー調達やサプライチェーンに与える影響を評価する際の概念的枠組みとして参考になる。
🏛政策担当者:紛争後のエネルギー再建や人道ガバナンスに環境説明責任を組み込む必要性を示唆する。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Contemporary warfare increasingly disrupts global energy systems, producing environmental consequences that extend far beyond active conflict zones. This article examines how strategic energy infrastructure—defined here as high-dependency energy assets such as pipelines, refineries, power stations, and fuel transport networks essential to civilian and industrial continuity—becomes both a target and instrument of modern conflict. Drawing on case studies of the Russia–Ukraine War, the Gaza conflict, and the Iraq War, the study adopts an interdisciplinary framework combining Capitalocene theory, Rob Nixon’s concept of slow violence, and environmental justice perspectives to analyse the war–energy–environment nexus. The findings demonstrate that warfare intensifies fossil fuel dependency, generates significant atmospheric emissions, contaminates soil and water systems, disrupts biodiversity, and exacerbates energy insecurity among vulnerable populations. By situating warfare within Jason W. Moore’s critique of capitalist resource extraction and “cheap nature,” the paper argues that environmental degradation in conflict is not merely collateral damage but structurally embedded within geopolitical energy economies. The analysis also examines the temporal and spatial diffusion of ecological harm, highlighting how pollution and infrastructure damage persist long after direct hostilities cease. Rather than proposing idealized transitions, the study critically evaluates the feasibility of resilient post-conflict energy reconstruction, including decentralized renewable systems where contextually viable. The article concludes by advocating stronger environmental accountability in international humanitarian governance and more conflict-sensitive sustainable energy planning.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.53365/nrfhh.283first seen 2026-09-21 05:14:11
🔔 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。