Makes progress, sustainability, and equity explicit dimensions of regional choices.
The question
AI infrastructure occupies places and draws on finite resources. How should a region weigh technical and economic expansion against environmental demands and the distribution of benefits?
The approach
The article develops a conceptual triad, drawing illustratively on earlier work, a previously coded corpus of 10,068 public comments, and regional examples. It distinguishes deliberate choices from outcomes produced by market power or institutional inertia.
What remains open
Applying the framework is a further research task. A comparative study would need explicit units, consistent indicators, a case-selection rationale, and attention to who has the power to make each trade-off. A visually balanced triangle cannot decide what a community should value.
What this work can establish
An interpretive framework, not a causal test or proof of an unavoidable mathematical trilemma.
READING ACROSS THE ATLAS
A connection, with a distinction.
Read alongside the electric-grid conversation: the paper asks how regions choose; the interview opens a view into an infrastructure system. Neither substitutes for local records of what a specific project costs, promises, or delivers.
THE EVIDENCE TRAIL
Sources & authorship
Equal contributions, as recorded by the publisher.
- Article and publisher record Version of record · 23 May 2026
- The Frontier State introduction Publication introduction · 2 June 2026; includes a working-paper link
Carvão, P., & Kanade, T. (2026). The AI infrastructure triad in regional governance: how regions balance progress, sustainability, and equity. AI & SOCIETY. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-026-03105-7
Reading record prepared 23 September 2026. Summary and critical reading notes were prepared with AI assistance from the linked public sources. They are distinct from the original author's work. How to read this evidence →