IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i24p6548-d460768.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Bartłomiej Kizielewicz

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Jarosław Wątróbski

    (Institute of Management, University of Szczecin, Cukrowa 8, 71-004 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Wojciech Sałabun

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

Abstract

The paper undertakes the problem of proper structuring of multi-criteria decision support models. To achieve that, a methodological framework is proposed. The authors’ framework is the basis for the relevance analysis of individual criteria in any considered decision model. The formal foundations of the authors’ approach provide a reference set of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methods (TOPSIS, VIKOR, COMET) along with their similarity coefficients (Spearman correlation coefficients and WS coefficient). In the empirical research, a practical MCDA-based wind farm location problem was studied. Reference rankings of the decision variants were obtained, followed by a set of rankings in which particular criteria were excluded. This was the basis for testing the similarity of the obtained solutions sets, as well as for recommendations in terms of both indicating the high significance and the possible elimination of individual criteria in the original model. When carrying out the analyzes, both the positions in the final rankings, as well as the corresponding values of utility functions of the decision variants were studied. As a result of the detailed analysis of the obtained results, recommendations were presented in the field of reference criteria set for the considered decision problem, thus demonstrating the practical usefulness of the authors’ proposed approach. It should be pointed out that the presented study of criteria relevance is an important factor for objectification of the multi-criteria decision support processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:24:p:6548-:d:460768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/24/6548/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/24/6548/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu, Qing & Liu, Kezhong & Chang, Chia-Hsun & Yang, Zaili, 2020. "Realising advanced risk assessment of vessel traffic flows near offshore wind farms," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    2. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    3. Yuehong Lu & Zafar A. Khan & Manuel S. Alvarez-Alvarado & Yang Zhang & Zhijia Huang & Muhammad Imran, 2020. "A Critical Review of Sustainable Energy Policies for the Promotion of Renewable Energy Sources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-31, June.
    4. Konstantinos, Ioannou & Georgios, Tsantopoulos & Garyfalos, Arabatzis, 2019. "A Decision Support System methodology for selecting wind farm installation locations using AHP and TOPSIS: Case study in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace region, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 232-246.
    5. Maienza, C. & Avossa, A.M. & Ricciardelli, F. & Coiro, D. & Troise, G. & Georgakis, C.T., 2020. "A life cycle cost model for floating offshore wind farms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    6. Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh & Firozjaei, Mohammad Karimi & Nematollahi, Omid & Firozjaei, Hamzeh Karimi & Jelokhani-Niaraki, Mohammadreza, 2019. "A risk-based multi-criteria spatial decision analysis for solar power plant site selection in different climates: A case study in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 958-973.
    7. Vo, Duc Hong & Vo, Anh The & Ho, Chi Minh & Nguyen, Ha Minh, 2020. "The role of renewable energy, alternative and nuclear energy in mitigating carbon emissions in the CPTPP countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 278-292.
    8. Gnatowska, Renata & Moryń-Kucharczyk, Elżbieta, 2019. "Current status of wind energy policy in Poland," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 232-237.
    9. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2007. "Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 514-529, April.
    10. Deveci, Muhammet & Cali, Umit & Kucuksari, Sadik & Erdogan, Nuh, 2020. "Interval type-2 fuzzy sets based multi-criteria decision-making model for offshore wind farm development in Ireland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    11. Yilan, Gülşah & Kadirgan, M.A. Neşet & Çiftçioğlu, Gökçen A., 2020. "Analysis of electricity generation options for sustainable energy decision making: The case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 519-529.
    12. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    13. Shao, Meng & Han, Zhixin & Sun, Jinwei & Xiao, Chengsi & Zhang, Shulei & Zhao, Yuanxu, 2020. "A review of multi-criteria decision making applications for renewable energy site selection," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 377-403.
    14. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    15. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    16. Abbas Mardani & Ahmad Jusoh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Zainab Khalifah, 2015. "Sustainable and Renewable Energy: An Overview of the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Techniques and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-38, October.
    17. Campos-Guzmán, Verónica & García-Cáscales, M. Socorro & Espinosa, Nieves & Urbina, Antonio, 2019. "Life Cycle Analysis with Multi-Criteria Decision Making: A review of approaches for the sustainability evaluation of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 343-366.
    18. Paweł Ziemba & Jarosław Wątróbski & Magdalena Zioło & Artur Karczmarczyk, 2017. "Using the PROSA Method in Offshore Wind Farm Location Problems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    19. Robertson Munro, Fiona & Cairney, Paul, 2020. "A systematic review of energy systems: The role of policymaking in sustainable transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    20. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Mustufa Haider Abidi & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Selecting Wind Energy Power Plant Locations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-20, November.
    21. Yasir Ahmed Solangi & Qingmei Tan & Muhammad Waris Ali Khan & Nayyar Hussain Mirjat & Ifzal Ahmed, 2018. "The Selection of Wind Power Project Location in the Southeastern Corridor of Pakistan: A Factor Analysis, AHP, and Fuzzy-TOPSIS Application," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-26, July.
    22. Mousseau, Vincent & Figueira, Jose & Dias, Luis & Gomes da Silva, Carlos & Climaco, Joao, 2003. "Resolving inconsistencies among constraints on the parameters of an MCDA model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 72-93, May.
    23. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    24. Wu, Yunna & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Ting, 2018. "Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: A case in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1227-1239.
    25. Sánchez-Lozano, J.M. & García-Cascales, M.S. & Lamata, M.T., 2016. "GIS-based onshore wind farm site selection using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making methods. Evaluating the case of Southeastern Spain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 86-102.
    26. Akbari, Negar & Jones, Dylan & Treloar, Richard, 2020. "A cross-European efficiency assessment of offshore wind farms: A DEA approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1186-1195.
    27. Gao, Jianwei & Guo, Fengjia & Ma, Zeyang & Huang, Xin & Li, Xiangzhen, 2020. "Multi-criteria group decision-making framework for offshore wind farm site selection based on the intuitionistic linguistic aggregation operators," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    28. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Towards Strong Sustainability Management—A Generalized PROSA Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-29, March.
    29. Wojciech Sałabun & Krzysztof Palczewski & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2019. "Multicriteria Approach to Sustainable Transport Evaluation under Incomplete Knowledge: Electric Bikes Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, June.
    30. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    31. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) for the Assessment of Renewable Energy Technologies in a Household: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, March.
    32. Jeffrey C. Cegan & Ashley M. Filion & Jeffrey M. Keisler & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: literature review," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 123-133, June.
    33. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    34. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Suyeon Kim & Sang-Woo Lee & Se-Rin Park & Yeeun Shin & Kyungjin An, 2021. "Socioeconomic Risks and Their Impacts on Ecological River Health in South Korea: An Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Zhaoyu Cao & Yucheng Zou & Xu Zhao & Kairong Hong & Yanwei Zhang, 2021. "Multidimensional Fairness Equilibrium Evaluation of Urban Housing Expropriation Compensation Based on VIKOR," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-26, February.
    3. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Bączkiewicz, Aleksandra & Sałabun, Wojciech, 2022. "New multi-criteria method for evaluation of sustainable RES management," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    4. Chia-Nan Wang & Yih-Tzoo Chen & Chun-Chun Tung, 2021. "Evaluation of Wave Energy Location by Using an Integrated MCDM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Aleksandra Bączkiewicz & Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Andrii Shekhovtsov & Mykhailo Yelmikheiev & Volodymyr Kozlov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2021. "Comparative Analysis of Solar Panels with Determination of Local Significance Levels of Criteria Using the MCDM Methods Resistant to the Rank Reversal Phenomenon," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, September.
    6. Zhao, Huiru & Li, Bingkang & Lu, Hao & Wang, Xuejie & Li, Hongze & Guo, Sen & Xue, Wanlei & Wang, Yuwei, 2022. "Economy-environment-energy performance evaluation of CCHP microgrid system: A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    7. Mohsen Ramezanzade & Hossein Karimi & Khalid Almutairi & Hoa Ao Xuan & Javad Saebi & Ali Mostafaeipour & Kuaanan Techato, 2021. "Implementing MCDM Techniques for Ranking Renewable Energy Projects under Fuzzy Environment: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-38, November.
    8. Mohammed Al Awadh, 2022. "Utilizing Multi-Criteria Decision Making to Evaluate the Quality of Healthcare Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-21, October.

    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. Shao, Meng & Zhao, Yuanxu & Sun, Jinwei & Han, Zhixin & Shao, Zhuxiao, 2023. "A decision framework for tidal current power plant site selection based on GIS-MCDM: A case study in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(PB).
    2. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    3. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Bączkiewicz, Aleksandra & Sałabun, Wojciech, 2022. "New multi-criteria method for evaluation of sustainable RES management," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    4. Muhammad Riaz & Wojciech Sałabun & Hafiz Muhammad Athar Farid & Nawazish Ali & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2020. "A Robust q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Information Aggregation Using Einstein Operations with Application to Sustainable Energy Planning Decision Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-39, May.
    5. Ziemba, Paweł, 2022. "Uncertain Multi-Criteria analysis of offshore wind farms projects investments – Case study of the Polish Economic Zone of the Baltic Sea," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    6. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    8. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    9. José Carlos Romero & Pedro Linares, 2021. "Multiple Criteria Decision-Making as an Operational Conceptualization of Energy Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    10. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    11. Magdalena Krysiak & Aldona Kluczek, 2021. "A Multifaceted Challenge to Enhance Multicriteria Decision Support for Energy Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.
    12. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Inter-Criteria Dependencies-Based Decision Support in the Sustainable wind Energy Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, February.
    13. Elkadeem, Mohamed R. & Younes, Ali & Mazzeo, Domenico & Jurasz, Jakub & Elia Campana, Pietro & Sharshir, Swellam W. & Alaam, Mohamed A., 2022. "Geospatial-assisted multi-criterion analysis of solar and wind power geographical-technical-economic potential assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    14. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Asadi, Meysam & Ramezanzade, Mohsen & Pourhossein, Kazem, 2023. "A global evaluation model applied to wind power plant site selection," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    16. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    17. Andrii Shekhovtsov & Volodymyr Kozlov & Viktor Nosov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Efficiency of Methods for Determining the Relevance of Criteria in Sustainable Transport Problems: A Comparative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.
    18. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Towards Strong Sustainability Management—A Generalized PROSA Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-29, March.
    19. Panos Xidonas & Ilias Lekkos & Charis Giannakidis & Christos Staikouras, 2023. "Multicriteria security evaluation: does it cost to be traditional?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 323(1), pages 301-330, April.
    20. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:24:p:6548-:d:460768. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.