IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v8y2015i10p11641-11666d57238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping and Measuring European Local Governments’ Priorities for a Sustainable and Low-Carbon Energy Future

Author

Listed:
  • Stelios Grafakos

    (Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, Rotterdam 3062PA, The Netherlands)

  • Elena Marie Enseñado

    (Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, Rotterdam 3062PA, The Netherlands)

  • Alexandros Flamos

    (Department of Industrial Management and Technology, University of Piraeus, Karaoli and Dimitriou 80,18534 Piraeus, Greece)

  • Jan Rotmans

    (Dutch Research Institute for Transitions (DRIFT), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, Rotterdam 3062PA, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The main objective of this article is to assess the priorities of local governments (LGs) in Europe regarding climate change mitigation technologies evaluation in the electricity sector and to provide important insights for energy policy design. The study applies a hybrid weighting methodology to elicit LGs’ preferences in a constructive and iterative way regarding the evaluation criteria of low-carbon energy technologies. Furthermore, the study employs three data collection and preference elicitation methods, namely: survey, workshop, and webinar. The study was conducted across thirty one (31) European LGs that were categorized according to three variables: population size, geographical region and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita . The analysis shows that “CO 2 emissions” is the most important criterion among European LGs, followed by “mortality and morbidity” and “ecosystem damages”. The results illustrate the potential synergies of climate and energy policies for addressing both CO 2 emissions and air pollution. It was also found, based on a correlation analysis, that LGs with higher GDP per capita tend to provide higher weights to criteria related to security of energy supply and technological innovation. The current study provides insights on the actual LGs’ priorities that are important to consider during low-carbon energy technologies evaluation and energy policy design. Interestingly, the results of the European LGs’ preferences clearly show that the EU climate policy objectives have reached different levels of governance—and at this particular case, the local level. Furthermore, the developed methodology could be applied at different geographical regions to map other regions’ LG priorities, but also at a group decision making context to elicit relevant stakeholders’ preferences regarding low-carbon energy technologies and policy objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Stelios Grafakos & Elena Marie Enseñado & Alexandros Flamos & Jan Rotmans, 2015. "Mapping and Measuring European Local Governments’ Priorities for a Sustainable and Low-Carbon Energy Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-26, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:8:y:2015:i:10:p:11641-11666:d:57238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/8/10/11641/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/8/10/11641/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D. Reckien & J. Flacke & R. Dawson & O. Heidrich & M. Olazabal & A. Foley & J. Hamann & H. Orru & M. Salvia & S. Gregorio Hurtado & D. Geneletti & F. Pietrapertosa, 2014. "Climate change response in Europe: what’s the reality? Analysis of adaptation and mitigation plans from 200 urban areas in 11 countries," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 331-340, January.
    2. Oikonomou, V. & Flamos, A. & Gargiulo, M. & Giannakidis, G. & Kanudia, A. & Spijker, E. & Grafakos, S., 2011. "Linking least-cost energy system costs models with MCA: An assessment of the EU renewable energy targets and supporting policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2786-2799, May.
    3. Burgherr, Peter & Hirschberg, Stefan, 2008. "Severe accident risks in fossil energy chains: A comparative analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 538-553.
    4. Molyneaux, Lynette & Wagner, Liam & Froome, Craig & Foster, John, 2012. "Resilience and electricity systems: A comparative analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 188-201.
    5. Streimikiene, Dalia, 2010. "Comparative assessment of future power generation technologies based on carbon price development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 1283-1292, May.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Castellano, Nuria Novas & Gázquez Parra, José Antonio & Valls-Guirado, Juan & Manzano-Agugliaro, Francisco, 2015. "Optimal displacement of photovoltaic array’s rows using a novel shading model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-9.
    9. Bell, Michelle L. & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Ellis, Hugh, 2003. "The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in the integrated assessment of climate change: implications for IA practitioners," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 289-316, December.
    10. Shen, Yung-Chi & Lin, Grace T.R. & Li, Kuang-Pin & Yuan, Benjamin J.C., 2010. "An assessment of exploiting renewable energy sources with concerns of policy and technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4604-4616, August.
    11. Stelios Grafakos & Alexandros Flamos & Elena Marie Enseñado, 2015. "Preferences Matter: A Constructive Approach to Incorporating Local Stakeholders’ Preferences in the Sustainability Evaluation of Energy Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-39, August.
    12. O'Brien, Geoff & Hope, Alex, 2010. "Localism and energy: Negotiating approaches to embedding resilience in energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7550-7558, December.
    13. Blesl, Markus & Kober, Tom & Bruchof, David & Kuder, Ralf, 2010. "Effects of climate and energy policy related measures and targets on the future structure of the European energy system in 2020 and beyond," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6278-6292, October.
    14. Ralph L. Keeney & Robin S. Gregory, 2005. "Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-11, February.
    15. Dowling, Paul, 2013. "The impact of climate change on the European energy system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 406-417.
    16. Henry H. Willis & Michael L. DeKay & M. Granger Morgan & H. Keith Florig & Paul S. Fischbeck, 2004. "Ecological Risk Ranking: Development and Evaluation of a Method for Improving Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 363-378, April.
    17. Gallego Carrera, Diana & Mack, Alexander, 2010. "Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: Results of a survey among European energy experts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 1030-1039, February.
    18. Lee, Seong Kon & Yoon, Yong Jin & Kim, Jong Wook, 2007. "A study on making a long-term improvement in the national energy efficiency and GHG control plans by the AHP approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2862-2868, May.
    19. 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.
    20. Kaldellis, J.K. & Kapsali, M. & Kaldelli, El. & Katsanou, Ev., 2013. "Comparing recent views of public attitude on wind energy, photovoltaic and small hydro applications," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 197-208.
    21. Thomas Hoppe & Antonia Graf & Beau Warbroek & Imke Lammers & Isabella Lepping, 2015. "Local Governments Supporting Local Energy Initiatives: Lessons from the Best Practices of Saerbeck (Germany) and Lochem (The Netherlands)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-32, February.
    22. Burton, Jonathan & Hubacek, Klaus, 2007. "Is small beautiful? A multicriteria assessment of small-scale energy technology applications in local governments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6402-6412, December.
    23. del Río, Pablo & Burguillo, Mercedes, 2008. "Assessing the impact of renewable energy deployment on local sustainability: Towards a theoretical framework," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 1325-1344, June.
    24. Jane Ebinger & Walter Vergara, 2011. "Climate Impacts on Energy Systems : Key Issues for Energy Sector Adaptation," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2271, December.
    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. Mauro Villarini & Vera Marcantonio & Andrea Colantoni & Enrico Bocci, 2019. "Sensitivity Analysis of Different Parameters on the Performance of a CHP Internal Combustion Engine System Fed by a Biomass Waste Gasifier," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Stelios Grafakos & Alberto Gianoli & Alexandra Tsatsou, 2016. "Towards the Development of an Integrated Sustainability and Resilience Benefits Assessment Framework of Urban Green Growth Interventions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-33, May.
    3. Niki-Artemis Spyridaki & Nikos Kleanthis & Dimitra Tzani & Mia Dragović Matosović & Alexandros Flamos, 2020. "A City Capability Assessment Framework Focusing on Planning, Financing, and Implementing Sustainable Energy Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Carmen Antuña-Rozado & Justo García-Navarro & Francesco Reda & Pekka Tuominen, 2016. "Methodologies Developed for EcoCity Related Projects: New Borg El Arab, an Egyptian Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-22, August.

    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. Stelios Grafakos & Alexandros Flamos & Elena Marie Enseñado, 2015. "Preferences Matter: A Constructive Approach to Incorporating Local Stakeholders’ Preferences in the Sustainability Evaluation of Energy Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-39, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Jamal, Taskin & Urmee, Tania & Shafiullah, G.M., 2020. "Planning of off-grid power supply systems in remote areas using multi-criteria decision analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur, 2017. "Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 549-560.
    6. 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.
    7. Shen, Yung-Chi & Lin, Grace T.R. & Li, Kuang-Pin & Yuan, Benjamin J.C., 2010. "An assessment of exploiting renewable energy sources with concerns of policy and technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4604-4616, August.
    8. Kahraman, Cengiz & Kaya, İhsan & Cebi, Selcuk, 2009. "A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1603-1616.
    9. Valentin Bertsch & Wolf Fichtner, 2016. "A participatory multi-criteria approach for power generation and transmission planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 177-207, October.
    10. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    11. Jan Macháč & Lenka Zaňková, 2020. "Renewables—To Build or Not? Czech Approach to Impact Assessment of Renewable Energy Sources with an Emphasis on Municipality Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    12. Cartelle Barros, Juan José & Lara Coira, Manuel & de la Cruz López, María Pilar & del Caño Gochi, Alfredo, 2015. "Assessing the global sustainability of different electricity generation systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 473-489.
    13. Firozjaei, Mohammad Karimi & Nematollahi, Omid & Mijani, Naeim & Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh & Firozjaei, Hamzeh Karimi & Toomanian, Ara, 2019. "An integrated GIS-based Ordered Weighted Averaging analysis for solar energy evaluation in Iran: Current conditions and future planning," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1130-1146.
    14. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    15. Tobias Witt & Matthias Klumpp, 2021. "Multi-Period Multi-Criteria Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Renewable Energy Transition Case from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
    16. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2011. "The inclusion of social aspects in power planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4361-4369.
    17. Spyridaki, Niki-Artemis & Banaka, Stefania & Flamos, Alexandros, 2016. "Evaluating public policy instruments in the Greek building sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 528-543.
    18. 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).
    19. 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.
    20. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Participatory selection of sustainability criteria and indicators for bioenergy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 92-102.

    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:8:y:2015:i:10:p:11641-11666:d:57238. 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.