IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i5p4299-d1083108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy Analysis of Low-Carbon Energy Transition in Senegal Using a Multi-Criteria Decision Approach Based on Principal Component Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Herve Tevenim Mewenemesse

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China)

  • Qiang Yan

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China)

  • Prince Foli Acouetey

    (Faculté des Sciences & Technologies de Nancy-France, Mathematics Department, Université de Lorraine, 54000 Nancy, France)

Abstract

Senegal has been investing in the development of its energy sector for decades. By using a novel multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) based on the principal component analysis (PCA) method, this paper develops an approach to determine the effectiveness of Senegal’s policies in supporting low-carbon development. This was determined using six criteria (C1 to C6) and 17 policies selected from the review of Senegal’s energy system. In order to determine the optimal weighting of the six criteria, a PCA is performed. In our approach, the best weighted factor is the normalized version of the best linear combination of the initial criteria with the maximum summarized information. Proper weighted factors are determined through the percentage of the information provided by the six criteria kept by the principal components. The percentage of information is statistically a fit of goodness of a principal component. The higher it is, the more statistically important the corresponding principal component is. Among the six principal components obtained, the first principal component (comp1) best summarizes the values of criteria C1 to C6 for each policy. It contains 81.15% of the information on energy policies presented by the six criteria and was used to rank the policies. Future research should take into account that when the number of criteria is high, the share of information explained by the first principal component could be lower (less than 50% of the total variance). In this case, the use of a single principal component would be detrimental to the analysis. For such cases, we recommend a higher dimensional visualization (using two or three components), or a new PCA should be performed on the principal components. This approach presented in our study can serve as an important benchmark for energy projects and policy evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Herve Tevenim Mewenemesse & Qiang Yan & Prince Foli Acouetey, 2023. "Policy Analysis of Low-Carbon Energy Transition in Senegal Using a Multi-Criteria Decision Approach Based on Principal Component Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:5:p:4299-:d:1083108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/5/4299/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/5/4299/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Thai Hoang Tuyet Nhi & Chia-Nan Wang & Nguyen Van Thanh, 2022. "Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Application in Geothermal Power Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-14, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Shem, Caitlin & Simsek, Yeliz & Hutfilter, Ursula Fuentes & Urmee, Tania, 2019. "Potentials and opportunities for low carbon energy transition in Vietnam: A policy analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    5. Volkart, Kathrin & Weidmann, Nicolas & Bauer, Christian & Hirschberg, Stefan, 2017. "Multi-criteria decision analysis of energy system transformation pathways: A case study for Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 155-168.
    6. Chong, Cheng Tung & Fan, Yee Van & Lee, Chew Tin & Klemeš, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Post COVID-19 ENERGY sustainability and carbon emissions neutrality," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Bhowmik, Chiranjib & Bhowmik, Sumit & Ray, Amitava, 2018. "Social acceptance of green energy determinants using principal component analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1030-1046.
    9. Bridge, Gavin & Bouzarovski, Stefan & Bradshaw, Michael & Eyre, Nick, 2013. "Geographies of energy transition: Space, place and the low-carbon economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 331-340.
    10. Tian, Jinfang & Yu, Longguang & Xue, Rui & Zhuang, Shan & Shan, Yuli, 2022. "Global low-carbon energy transition in the post-COVID-19 era," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    5. Leanda C. Garvie & David J. Lee & Biljana Kulišić, 2024. "Towards a Bioeconomy: Supplying Forest Residues for the Australian Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Ali Mostafaeipour & Seyyed Jalaladdin Hosseini Dehshiri & Seyyed Shahabaddin Hosseini Dehshiri & Mehdi Jahangiri & Kuaanan Techato, 2020. "A Thorough Analysis of Potential Geothermal Project Locations in Afghanistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    8. Abdel-Basset, Mohamed & Gamal, Abduallah & Chakrabortty, Ripon K. & Ryan, Michael J., 2021. "Evaluation approach for sustainable renewable energy systems under uncertain environment: A case study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 1073-1095.
    9. Dranka, Géremi Gilson & Ferreira, Paula & Vaz, A. Ismael F., 2021. "A review of co-optimization approaches for operational and planning problems in the energy sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    10. 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).
    11. Oner, Oytun & Khalilpour, Kaveh, 2022. "Evaluation of green hydrogen carriers: A multi-criteria decision analysis tool," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Tao, Hu & Zhuang, Shan & Xue, Rui & Cao, Wei & Tian, Jinfang & Shan, Yuli, 2022. "Environmental Finance: An Interdisciplinary Review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    14. Tobias Naegler & Lisa Becker & Jens Buchgeister & Wolfgang Hauser & Heidi Hottenroth & Tobias Junne & Ulrike Lehr & Oliver Scheel & Ricarda Schmidt-Scheele & Sonja Simon & Claudia Sutardhio & Ingela T, 2021. "Integrated Multidimensional Sustainability Assessment of Energy System Transformation Pathways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-28, May.
    15. Ball, Christopher Stephen & Vögele, Stefan & Grajewski, Matthias & Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm, 2021. "E-mobility from a multi-actor point of view: Uncertainties and their impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    16. Aloini, Davide & Dulmin, Riccardo & Mininno, Valeria & Pellegrini, Luisa & Farina, Giulia, 2018. "Technology assessment with IF-TOPSIS: An application in the advanced underwater system sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 38-48.
    17. Yan Nie & Guoxing Zhang, 2020. "Indicator system to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of China clean power systems," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 1381-1401, October.
    18. Kulisic, Biljana & Dimitriou, Ioannis & Mola-Yudego, Blas, 2021. "From preferences to concerted policy on mandated share for renewable energy in transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Simsek, Yeliz & Watts, David & Escobar, Rodrigo, 2018. "Sustainability evaluation of Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) projects under Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) by using Multi Criteria Decision Method (MCDM)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 421-438.

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:5:p:4299-:d:1083108. 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.