IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in spain: The Vikor method


  • San Cristóbal, J.R.


One of the characteristics of the Spanish energy system is its high degree of dependence on imports. In 2005, the Spanish government approved the new Renewable Energy Plan in the following sectors: Windpower, Hydroelectric, Solar Thermal, Solar Thermo-electric, Photovoltaic, Biomass, Biogas and Biofuels. The aim of the Plan is to make it possible to reach the target of 12% of primary energy being met from renewable sources by 2010. When selecting one from various Renewable Energy investment projects different groups of decision-makers become involved in the process. Decision-making has to take into consideration several conflicting objectives because of the increasingly complex social, economic, technological, and environmental factors that are present. Traditional single-criterion decision-making is no longer able to handle these problems. The Compromise Ranking method, also known as the VIKOR method, introduces the Multi-criteria ranking index based on the particular measure of “closeness” to the “ideal” solution. In this paper, we apply the method in the selection of a Renewable Energy project corresponding to the Renewable Energy Plan launched by the Spanish Government. The method is combined with the Analytical Hierarchy Process method for weighting the importance of the different criteria, which allows decision-makers to assign these values based on their preferences. The results show that the Biomass plant option (Co-combustion in a conventional power plant) is the best choice, followed by the Wind power and Solar Thermo-electric alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • San Cristóbal, J.R., 2011. "Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in spain: The Vikor method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 498-502.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:36:y:2011:i:2:p:498-502
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2010.07.031

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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

    1. Mladineo, N. & Margeta, J. & Brans, J.P. & Mareschal, B., 1987. "Multicriteria ranking of alternative locations for small scale hydro plants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 215-222, August.
    2. Iniyan, S & Sumathy, K, 2000. "An optimal renewable energy model for various end-uses," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 563-575.
    3. Kamal Golabi & Craig W. Kirkwood & Alan Sicherman, 1981. "Selecting a Portfolio of Solar Energy Projects Using Multiattribute Preference Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 174-189, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Goumas, M. & Lygerou, V., 2000. "An extension of the PROMETHEE method for decision making in fuzzy environment: Ranking of alternative energy exploitation projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 606-613, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Mamlook, Rustom & Akash, Bilal A & Mohsen, Mousa S, 2001. "A neuro-fuzzy program approach for evaluating electric power generation systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 619-632.
    8. 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.
    9. P. L. Yu, 1973. "A Class of Solutions for Group Decision Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(8), pages 936-946, April.
    10. Aras, Haydar & Erdoğmuş, Şenol & Koç, Eylem, 2004. "Multi-criteria selection for a wind observation station location using analytic hierarchy process," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1383-1392.
    11. Lee, Amy H.I. & Chen, Hsing Hung & Kang, He-Yau, 2009. "Multi-criteria decision making on strategic selection of wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 120-126.
    12. Suganthi, L. & Williams, A., 2000. "Renewable energy in India -- a modelling study for 2020-2021," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(15), pages 1095-1109, December.
    13. Iniyan, S & Suganthi, L & Jagadeesan, T.R & Samuel, Anand A, 2000. "Reliability based socio economic optimal renewable energy model for India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 291-297.
    14. Cormio, C. & Dicorato, M. & Minoia, A. & Trovato, M., 2003. "A regional energy planning methodology including renewable energy sources and environmental constraints," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 99-130, April.
    15. Nobre, Ana & Pacheco, Miguel & Jorge, Raquel & Lopes, M.F.P. & Gato, L.M.C., 2009. "Geo-spatial multi-criteria analysis for wave energy conversion system deployment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 97-111.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Borges, Ana Rosa & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler, 2003. "A fuzzy multiple objective decision support model for energy-economy planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 304-316, March.
    20. 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.
    21. Pohekar, S.D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Multi-criteria evaluation of cooking energy alternatives for promoting parabolic solar cooker in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1449-1460.
    22. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Clodnițchi Roxana & Chinie Alexandra Cătălina, 2015. "Factors of impact on the evolution of electricity markets from renewable energy sources: a comparison between Romania and Germany," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 34-52, June.
    2. Papapostolou, Aikaterini & Karakosta, Charikleia & Nikas, Alexandros & Psarras, John, 2017. "Exploring opportunities and risks for RES-E deployment under Cooperation Mechanisms between EU and Western Balkans: A multi-criteria assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 519-530.
    3. Cannemi, Marco & García-Melón, Mónica & Aragonés-Beltrán, Pablo & Gómez-Navarro, Tomás, 2014. "Modeling decision making as a support tool for policy making on renewable energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 127-137.
    4. Rahman, Md. Mizanur & Paatero, Jukka V. & Lahdelma, Risto, 2013. "Evaluation of choices for sustainable rural electrification in developing countries: A multicriteria approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 589-599.
    5. He-Yau Kang & Meng-Chan Hung & W. L. Pearn & Amy H. I. Lee & Mei-Sung Kang, 2011. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for Evaluating Wind Farm Performance," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(11), pages 1-25, November.
    6. Pinilla, Manuel & Martinez, Sergio, 2012. "Optimal design of permanent-magnet direct-drive generator for wind energy considering the cost uncertainty in raw materials," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 267-276.
    7. Chithambaranathan, P. & Subramanian, Nachiappan & Gunasekaran, Angappa & Palaniappan, PL.K., 2015. "Service supply chain environmental performance evaluation using grey based hybrid MCDM approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 163-176.
    8. Ozgur Demirta, 2013. "Evaluating the Best Renewable Energy Technology for Sustainable Energy Plannin," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(Special), pages 23-33.
    9. 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.
    10. 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, Open Access Journal, vol. 7(8), pages 1-39, August.
    11. Stein, Eric W., 2013. "A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 640-654.
    12. Streimikiene, Dalia & Balezentis, Tomas & Krisciukaitienė, Irena & Balezentis, Alvydas, 2012. "Prioritizing sustainable electricity production technologies: MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 3302-3311.
    13. Rosso, M. & Bottero, M. & Pomarico, S. & La Ferlita, S. & Comino, E., 2014. "Integrating multicriteria evaluation and stakeholders analysis for assessing hydropower projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 870-881.
    14. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Inter-Criteria Dependencies-Based Decision Support in the Sustainable wind Energy Management," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, February.
    15. Zhang, Ling & Zhou, Peng & Newton, Sidney & Fang, Jian-xin & Zhou, De-qun & Zhang, Lu-ping, 2015. "Evaluating clean energy alternatives for Jiangsu, China: An improved multi-criteria decision making method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 90(P1), pages 953-964.
    16. Blanca Ceballos & David A. Pelta & María T. Lamata, 2018. "Rank Reversal and the VIKOR Method: An Empirical Evaluation," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(02), pages 513-525, March.
    17. Ozorhon, Beliz & Batmaz, Arda & Caglayan, Semih, 2018. "Generating a framework to facilitate decision making in renewable energy investments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 217-226.
    18. Esra Karakaþ & Ozan Veli Yýldýran, 2019. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Alternatives for Turkey via Modified Fuzzy AHP," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(2), pages 31-39.


    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:renene:v:36:y:2011:i:2:p:498-502. 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: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.