AHPを用いた2035年に向けたセネガルのエネルギー転換経路の多基準意思決定分析
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Energy Transition Pathways in Senegal toward 2035 Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (原題)
Papa Touty Traoré, A. Sow, G. Warren, S. Diakhaté, M. F. Thiam, C. A. Diouf, Z. O. Samia, S. Sene, M. Kebe, T. Gilbert, B. B. C. Khadija, M. R. M. Abdoul, T. B. Amadou, G. Fatima
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文はAHPを用い、2035年に向けたセネガルの4つのエネルギー転換経路（野心的再エネ、ガス・再エネ均衡、国内ガス優先、緩慢移行）を6基準で比較した。コストと系統レジリエンスが最も重視され（各0.284）、均衡型経路が最高スコア（0.296）を得た。単一経路が全基準で最良となるわけではなく、トレードオフの明示化に多基準枠組みが有効と示す。
English
This study applies AHP to compare four Senegal energy-transition pathways toward 2035 across six criteria. Cost and grid resilience were weighted highest (0.284 each), and a balanced gas-and-renewables mix scored best (0.296). No pathway dominates all criteria, showing the value of explicit multi-criteria frameworks for national 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
日本企業にとって直接の規制・開示示唆は乏しいが、新興国でのガス・再エネ均衡型移行は、日本が強みを持つLNG・高効率火力・系統安定化技術の輸出機会や、JCM（二国間クレジット）を通じた脱炭素協力の文脈で参考になる。
In the global GX context
While focused on Senegal, the paper speaks to a global debate on gas as a transition fuel versus ambitious renewables, relevant to transition-finance taxonomies and just-transition planning in emerging markets. It offers a replicable AHP template for national pathway assessment that complements TCFD/ISSB scenario analysis.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:AHPを国家エネルギー経路評価に適用した実証例として、基準設計と重み付け手法の参考になる。
🏢実務担当者:新興国でのガス・再エネ均衡型プロジェクトの事業機会評価や、JCM等の協力案件検討に示唆。
🏛政策担当者:多基準意思決定を政策立案に組み込む手法として、エネルギー計画の透明性向上に資する。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Senegal’s energy system is undergoing a transition shaped by rising electricity demand, energy-security concerns, environmental objectives, and the growing role of domestic natural gas and renewable resources. This study applies the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to compare four energy-transition pathways towards 2035: an ambitious renewable transition, a balanced gas-and-renewables mix, domestic gas dominance, and a slow-transition pathway. Six criteria were considered: total discounted cost, power-system resilience and stability, environmental impact, job creation and local content, energy independence, and resource availability. Pairwise comparisons were undertaken by 11 students specialising in energy together with energy-sector experts, and consistency ratios were reported for the comparison matrices. The analysis demonstrates that the four pathways involve different trade-offs across economic, technical, environmental, social, and resource-related criteria. The criteria weights indicated that cost and resilience were the most influential factors (0.284 each), followed by environmental impact (0.158), employment (0.122), energy independence (0.089), and resource availability (0.063). Based on the final weighted scores, the balanced gas and renewables mix obtained the highest score (0.296), followed by domestic gas dominance (0.250), the ambitious renewable transition (0.242), and the slow transition pathway (0.212). These results indicate that no pathway performs uniformly best across all criteria. Within the study’s stated decision framework, the balanced pathway is presented as a compromise among affordability, system stability, environmental performance, employment considerations, energy independence, and resource availability. The findings illustrate the value of a structured multi-criteria framework for comparing alternative national energy-transition pathways while making the underlying decision criteria explicit.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.9734/cjast/2026/v45i104761first seen 2026-09-27 04:35:24
🔔 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。