IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v197y2009i3p1063-1074.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kowalski, Katharina
  • Stagl, Sigrid
  • Madlener, Reinhard
  • Omann, Ines

Abstract

This paper analyses the combined use of scenario building and participatory multi-criteria analysis (PMCA) in the context of renewable energy from a methodological point of view. Scenarios have been applied increasingly in decision-making about long-term consequences by projecting different possible pathways into the future. Scenario analysis accounts for a higher degree of complexity inherent in systems than the study of individual projects or technologies. MCA is a widely used appraisal method, which assesses options on the basis of a multi-dimensional criteria framework and calculates rankings of options. In our study, five renewable energy scenarios for Austria for 2020 were appraised against 17 sustainability criteria. A similar process was undertaken on the local level, where four renewable energy scenarios were developed and evaluated against 15 criteria. On both levels, the scenario development consisted of two stages: first an exploratory stage with stakeholder engagement and second a modelling stage with forecasting-type scenarios. Thus, the scenarios consist of a narrative part (storyline) and a modeled quantitative part. The preferences of national and local energy stakeholders were included in the form of criteria weights derived from interviews and participatory group processes, respectively. Especially in the case of renewable energy promotion in Austria, the paper systematically analyses the potentials and limitations of the methodology (1) for capturing the complexity of decision-making about the long-term consequences of changes in socio-economic and biophysical systems and (2) for appraising energy futures. The paper concludes that assessing scenarios with PMCA is resource intense, but this methodology captures successfully the context of technology deployment and allows decision-making based on a robust and democratic process, which addresses uncertainties, acknowledges multiple legitimate perspectives and encourages social learning.

Suggested Citation

  • Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid & Madlener, Reinhard & Omann, Ines, 2009. "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1063-1074, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:197:y:2009:i:3:p:1063-1074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(08)00277-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fausto Cavallaro & University of Molise, 2005. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria System to Assess Sustainable Energy Options: An Application of the Promethee Method," Working Papers 2005.22, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. Renn, Ortwin, 2003. "Social assessment of waste energy utilization scenarios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 1345-1357.
    3. Madlener, Reinhard & Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid, 2007. "New ways for the integrated appraisal of national energy scenarios: The case of renewable energy use in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6060-6074, December.
    4. Hobbs, Benjamin F & Horn, Graham TF, 1997. "Building public confidence in energy planning: a multimethod MCDM approach to demand-side planning at BC gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 357-375, February.
    5. Kablan, M. M., 2004. "Decision support for energy conservation promotion:: an analytic hierarchy process approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1151-1158, July.
    6. Ghanadan, Rebecca & Koomey, Jonathan G., 2005. "Using energy scenarios to explore alternative energy pathways in California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1117-1142, June.
    7. Oniszk-Poplawska, A. & Rogulska, M. & Wisniewski, G., 2003. "Renewable-energy developments in Poland to 2020," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(1-3), pages 101-110, September.
    8. Haralambopoulos, D.A. & Polatidis, H., 2003. "Renewable energy projects: structuring a multi-criteria group decision-making framework," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 961-973.
    9. Cavallaro, Fausto & Ciraolo, Luigi, 2005. "A multicriteria approach to evaluate wind energy plants on an Italian island," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 235-244, January.
    10. Goumas, M. G. & Lygerou, V. A. & Papayannakis, L. E., 1999. "Computational methods for planning and evaluating geothermal energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 147-154, March.
    11. Kurt Kratena & Stefan Schleicher, 2001. "Energieszenarien bis 2020," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 20938, Juni.
    12. Georgopoulou, E. & Lalas, D. & Papagiannakis, L., 1997. "A multicriteria decision aid approach for energy planning problems: The case of renewable energy option," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 38-54, November.
    13. Bunn, Derek W. & Salo, Ahti A., 1993. "Forecasting with scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 291-303, August.
    14. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    15. Madlener, Reinhard & Stagl, Sigrid, 2005. "Sustainability-guided promotion of renewable electricity generation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 147-167, April.
    16. Gamboa, Gonzalo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2007. "The problem of windfarm location: A social multi-criteria evaluation framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1564-1583, March.
    17. Lootsma, F. A. & Boonekamp, P. G. M. & Cooke, R. M. & Van Oostvoorn, F., 1990. "Choice of a long-term strategy for the national electricity supply via scenario analysis and multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 189-203, September.
    18. Nigim, K. & Munier, N. & Green, J., 2004. "Pre-feasibility MCDM tools to aid communities in prioritizing local viable renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1775-1791.
    19. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    20. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    21. Enzensberger, N. & Wietschel, M. & Rentz, O., 2002. "Policy instruments fostering wind energy projects--a multi-perspective evaluation approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 793-801, July.
    22. Figueira, Jose & Roy, Bernard, 2002. "Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos' procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 317-326, June.
    23. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    24. Georgopoulou, E. & Sarafidis, Y. & Diakoulaki, D., 1998. "Design and implementation of a group DSS for sustaining renewable energies exploitation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 483-500, September.
    25. Greening, Lorna A. & Bernow, Steve, 2004. "Design of coordinated energy and environmental policies: use of multi-criteria decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 721-735, April.
    26. Mirasgedis, S. & Diakoulaki, D., 1997. "Multicriteria analysis vs. externalities assessment for the comparative evaluation of electricity generation systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 364-379, October.
    27. Beccali, M. & Cellura, M. & Mistretta, M., 2003. "Decision-making in energy planning. Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 2063-2087.
    28. Afgan, Naim H. & Carvalho, Maria G., 2002. "Multi-criteria assessment of new and renewable energy power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 739-755.
    29. Diakoulaki, D. & Zopounidis, C. & Mavrotas, G. & Doumpos, M., 1999. "The use of a preference disaggregation method in energy analysis and policy making," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 157-166.
    30. Stewart, William Jr & Horowitz, Evan R., 1991. "Environmental factor weighting at the federal energy regulatory commission," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 123-132.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    2. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    3. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    4. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    5. Løken, Espen, 2007. "Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(7), pages 1584-1595, September.
    6. Madlener, Reinhard & Stagl, Sigrid, 2005. "Sustainability-guided promotion of renewable electricity generation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 147-167, April.
    7. Szántó, Richárd, 2012. "Több szempontú részvételi döntések a fenntarthatósági értékelésekben. A legnépszerűbb módszerek összehasonlítása [Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis. A comparison of methodologies]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1336-1355.
    8. Kayakutlu, Gulgun & Daim, Tugrul & Kunt, Meltem & Altay, Ayca & Suharto, Yulianto, 2017. "Scenarios for regional waste management," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1323-1335.
    9. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2010. "A comparative assessment of thin-film photovoltaic production processes using the ELECTRE III method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 463-474, January.
    10. Troldborg, Mads & Heslop, Simon & Hough, Rupert L., 2014. "Assessing the sustainability of renewable energy technologies using multi-criteria analysis: Suitability of approach for national-scale assessments and associated uncertainties," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1173-1184.
    11. Patlitzianas, Konstantinos D. & Pappa, Anna & Psarras, John, 2008. "An information decision support system towards the formulation of a modern energy companies' environment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 790-806, April.
    12. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2009. "Multi-criteria decision aid to assess concentrated solar thermal technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1678-1685.
    13. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos & Livanos, Georgios A., 2017. "Evaluation of future sustainable electricity generation alternatives: The case of a Greek island," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 775-787.
    14. Shmelev, Stanislav E. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2016. "Optimal diversity of renewable energy alternatives under multiple criteria: An application to the UK," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 679-691.
    15. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    16. Doukas, Haris, 2013. "Modelling of linguistic variables in multicriteria energy policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(2), pages 227-238.
    17. Mourmouris, J.C. & Potolias, C., 2013. "A multi-criteria methodology for energy planning and developing renewable energy sources at a regional level: A case study Thassos, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 522-530.
    18. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    19. Hottenroth, H. & Sutardhio, C. & Weidlich, A. & Tietze, I. & Simon, S. & Hauser, W. & Naegler, T. & Becker, L. & Buchgeister, J. & Junne, T. & Lehr, U. & Scheel, O. & Schmidt-Scheele, R. & Ulrich, P. , 2022. "Beyond climate change. Multi-attribute decision making for a sustainability assessment of energy system transformation pathways," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    20. Alanne, Kari & Saari, Arto, 2004. "Sustainable small-scale CHP technologies for buildings: the basis for multi-perspective decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 401-431, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:197:y:2009:i:3:p:1063-1074. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.