IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Multi Criteria Analysis for bioenergy systems assessments

  • Buchholz, Thomas
  • Rametsteiner, Ewald
  • Volk, Timothy A.
  • Luzadis, Valerie A.
Registered author(s):

    Sustainable bioenergy systems are, by definition, embedded in social, economic, and environmental contexts and depend on support of many stakeholders with different perspectives. The resulting complexity constitutes a major barrier to the implementation of bioenergy projects. The goal of this paper is to evaluate the potential of Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) to facilitate the design and implementation of sustainable bioenergy projects. Four MCA tools (Super Decisions, DecideIT, Decision Lab, NAIADE) are reviewed for their suitability to assess sustainability of bioenergy systems with a special focus on multi-stakeholder inclusion. The MCA tools are applied using data from a multi-stakeholder bioenergy case study in Uganda. Although contributing to only a part of a comprehensive decision process, MCA can assist in overcoming implementation barriers by (i) structuring the problem, (ii) assisting in the identification of the least robust and/or most uncertain components in bioenergy systems and (iii) integrating stakeholders into the decision process. Applying the four MCA tools to a Ugandan case study resulted in a large variability in outcomes. However, social criteria were consistently identified by all tools as being decisive in making a bioelectricity project viable.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V2W-4TWSWTH-1/2/8008fb409af4c70a18c2d055f8733239
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Policy.

    Volume (Year): 37 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 2 (February)
    Pages: 484-495

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:2:p:484-495
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Giuseppe Munda & Daniela Russi, 2005. "Energy Policies for Rural Electrification: A Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation Approach," UHE Working papers 2005_01, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    2. Reed, Mark S. & Fraser, Evan D.G. & Dougill, Andrew J., 2006. "An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 406-418, October.
    3. Tiziano Gomiero & Mario Giampietro, 2005. "Graphic tools for data representation in integrated analysis of farming systems," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(3/4), pages 264-301.
    4. 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.
    5. Zahir, Sajjad, 1999. "Clusters in a group: Decision making in the vector space formulation of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 620-634, February.
    6. Cherni, Judith A. & Dyner, Isaac & Henao, Felipe & Jaramillo, Patricia & Smith, Ricardo & Font, Raul Olalde, 2007. "Energy supply for sustainable rural livelihoods. A multi-criteria decision-support system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1493-1504, March.
    7. Verdonk, M. & Dieperink, C. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2007. "Governance of the emerging bio-energy markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 3909-3924, July.
    8. Buchholz, Thomas S. & Volk, Timothy A. & Luzadis, Valerie A., 2007. "A participatory systems approach to modeling social, economic, and ecological components of bioenergy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6084-6094, December.
    9. Upreti, Bishnu Raj, 2004. "Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 785-800, April.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Giampietro, Mario & Mayumi, Kozo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2006. "Integrated assessment and energy analysis: Quality assurance in multi-criteria analysis of sustainability," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 59-86.
    13. 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.
    14. Reijnders, L., 2006. "Conditions for the sustainability of biomass based fuel use," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 863-876, May.
    15. Danielson, Mats, 2005. "Generalized evaluation in decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(2), pages 442-449, April.
    16. Mendoza, Guillermo A. & Prabhu, Ravi, 2006. "Participatory modeling and analysis for sustainable forest management: Overview of soft system dynamics models and applications," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 179-196, November.
    17. Mog, Justin M., 2004. "Struggling with Sustainability--A Comparative Framework for Evaluating Sustainable Development Programs," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 2139-2160, December.
    18. Danielson, Mats & Ekenberg, Love, 2007. "Computing upper and lower bounds in interval decision trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 808-816, September.
    19. Elghali, Lucia & Clift, Roland & Sinclair, Philip & Panoutsou, Calliope & Bauen, Ausilio, 2007. "Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6075-6083, December.
    20. Ghosh, Debyani & D Sagar, Ambuj & Kishore, V.V.N., 2006. "Scaling up biomass gasifier use: an application-specific approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(13), pages 1566-1582, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:2:p:484-495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.