IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/fcnwpa/2019_006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Participatory Stakeholder Process for Evaluating Sustainable Energy Transition Scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Höfer, Tim

    (E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN))

  • Madlener, Reinhard

    (E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN))

Abstract

This paper presents an evaluation of four energy transition scenarios under consideration of multiple stakeholder opinions. We construct a multi-criteria group decision model that applies Value-Focused Thinking to construct a holistic objective system and Multi-Attribute Utility Theory to evaluate the energy transition scenarios. Although the individual scenario evaluations show that the opinions of the stakeholders towards a sustainable energy transition differ largely, we are able to derive three main strands of opinions among the considered stakeholders. For this, we apply a clustering technique to identify and bundle the stakeholders into three groups. This bundling of stakeholder interests enables the identification of the most important policy recommendations for a sustainable energy transition. For the case of Germany, these are to reduce GHG and pollutant emissions and at the same time enable citizens’ participation, limit the visual impact on landscapes, and ensuring internationally comparable energy-related political frameworks for the economy. For the case of a sustainable energy transition in Germany, we find that the stakeholders considered prefer either the highly ambitious climate protection scenario (Scenario B) or the Pan-European scenario (Scenario C). The reference scenario, which was developed by the German Transmission System Operators (TSOs), turns out to be relatively unpopular.

Suggested Citation

  • Höfer, Tim & Madlener, Reinhard, 2019. "A Participatory Stakeholder Process for Evaluating Sustainable Energy Transition Scenarios," FCN Working Papers 6/2019, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:fcnwpa:2019_006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.fcn.eonerc.rwth-aachen.de/global/show_document.asp?id=aaaaaaaaaispdpv
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. van der Horst, Dan, 2007. "NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2705-2714, May.
    3. Nock, Destenie & Baker, Erin, 2019. "Holistic multi-criteria decision analysis evaluation of sustainable electric generation portfolios: New England case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 655-673.
    4. 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.
    5. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, September.
    6. Ralph L. Keeney, 1982. "Feature Article—Decision Analysis: An Overview," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 803-838, October.
    7. Kruyt, Bert & van Vuuren, D.P. & de Vries, H.J.M. & Groenenberg, H., 2009. "Indicators for energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2166-2181, June.
    8. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Flues, Florens & Löschel, Andreas & Pothen, Frank & Wölfing, Nikolas, 2012. "Indikatoren für die energiepolitische Zielerreichung," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 110560, September.
    12. Höfer, Tim & von Nitzsch, Rüdiger & Madlener, Reinhard, 2019. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," FCN Working Papers 4/2019, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    13. 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.
    14. Danae Diakoulaki & Carlos Henggeler Antunes & António Gomes Martins, 2005. "MCDA and Energy Planning," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 859-890, Springer.
    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. Tim H¨ofer & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Reinhard Madlener, 2020. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multicriteria Decision Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 330-355, December.
    2. Höfer, Tim & von Nitzsch, Rüdiger & Madlener, Reinhard, 2019. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," FCN Working Papers 4/2019, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    3. 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.
    4. Ifaei, Pouya & Tayerani Charmchi, Amir Saman & Loy-Benitez, Jorge & Yang, Rebecca Jing & Yoo, ChangKyoo, 2022. "A data-driven analytical roadmap to a sustainable 2030 in South Korea based on optimal renewable microgrids," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    7. Vögele, Stefan & Teja Josyabhatla, Vishnu & Ball, Christopher & Rhoden, Imke & Grajewski, Matthias & Rübbelke, Dirk & Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm, 2023. "Robust assessment of energy scenarios from stakeholders' perspectives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    8. Doukas, Haris, 2013. "Modelling of linguistic variables in multicriteria energy policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(2), pages 227-238.
    9. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    10. Siskos, Eleftherios & Burgherr, Peter, 2022. "Multicriteria decision support for the evaluation of electricity supply resilience: Exploration of interacting criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(2), pages 611-626.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. Harrison Mutikanga & Saroj Sharma & Kalanithy Vairavamoorthy, 2011. "Multi-criteria Decision Analysis: A Strategic Planning Tool for Water Loss Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(14), pages 3947-3969, November.
    14. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2011. "Supporting energy initiatives in small communities by linking visions with energy scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7884-7895.
    15. Long, Yilu & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2022. "Renewable energy source technology selection considering the empathetic preferences of experts in a cognitive fuzzy social participatory allocation network," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    16. Bortoluzzi, Mirian & Correia de Souza, Celso & Furlan, Marcelo, 2021. "Bibliometric analysis of renewable energy types using key performance indicators and multicriteria decision models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Diakoulaki, D. & Karangelis, F., 2007. "Multi-criteria decision analysis and cost-benefit analysis of alternative scenarios for the power generation sector in Greece," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 716-727, May.
    20. Jong Hwan Suh, 2018. "Generating Future-Oriented Energy Policies and Technologies from the Multidisciplinary Group Discussions by Text-Mining-Based Identification of Topics and Experts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-33, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Value-Focused Thinking; Group Decision Making; MAUT; Energy Scenarios;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ris:fcnwpa:2019_006. 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: Hendrik Schmitz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fceonde.html .

    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.