IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i10p4566-d1657595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multicriteria Decision-Making for Sustainable Mining: Evaluating the Transition to Net-Zero-Carbon Energy Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Oluwaseye Samson Adedoja

    (Department of Chemical, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology, Staatsartillerie Rd, Pretoria West, Pretoria 0183, South Africa
    Institute of Nano Engineering Research (INER), Tshwane University of Technology, Staatsartillerie Rd, Pretoria West, Pretoria 0183, South Africa)

  • Emmanuel Rotimi Sadiku

    (Department of Chemical, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology, Staatsartillerie Rd, Pretoria West, Pretoria 0183, South Africa
    Institute of Nano Engineering Research (INER), Tshwane University of Technology, Staatsartillerie Rd, Pretoria West, Pretoria 0183, South Africa)

  • Yskandar Hamam

    (Department of Electrical Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology, Staatsartillerie Rd, Pretoria West, Pretoria 0183, South Africa
    Ecole Superieure d’Ingenieurs en Electrotechnique et Electronique, 2 Boulevard Blaise Pascal, 93160 Noisy-Le-Grand, France)

Abstract

Transitioning to sustainability is particularly challenging in the mining domain since operations must also be economically viable and meet operational efficiency requirements. Several competing criteria, including stakeholder interests and technological uncertainties, complicate the selection of appropriate sustainable technologies. This study evaluates sustainable mining technologies by using a novel multicriteria decision-making framework. Six alternatives were assessed against ten criteria through expert consultation with eight academic professionals. The research employs three fuzzy methods (TOPSIS, COPRAS, and VIKOR) integrated through a proposed Geometric Inverse Distance Aggregation (GIDA) approach. The results demonstrate that waste heat recovery systems are the optimal solution with the highest GIDA score (0.0319) and agreement (99.99%), followed by solar-powered mining (0.0232, 82.12% agreement). The findings suggest a practical implementation pathway, prioritizing proven technologies while preparing for emerging solutions. This research contributes to the sustainable mining literature by providing a comprehensive evaluation framework and practical implementation guidance for mining companies transitioning to sustainable operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Oluwaseye Samson Adedoja & Emmanuel Rotimi Sadiku & Yskandar Hamam, 2025. "Multicriteria Decision-Making for Sustainable Mining: Evaluating the Transition to Net-Zero-Carbon Energy Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-32, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4566-:d:1657595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4566/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4566/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kemp, Deanna & Worden, Sandy & Owen, John R., 2016. "Differentiated social risk: Rebound dynamics and sustainability performance in mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 19-26.
    2. Igogo, Tsisilile & Awuah-Offei, Kwame & Newman, Alexandra & Lowder, Travis & Engel-Cox, Jill, 2021. "Integrating renewable energy into mining operations: Opportunities, challenges, and enabling approaches," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 300(C).
    3. Espinoza, R. David & Rojo, Javier, 2017. "Towards sustainable mining (Part I): Valuing investment opportunities in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 7-18.
    4. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 2017. "A Practical Approach to Address Uncertainty in Stakeholder Deliberations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 487-501, March.
    5. Mancini, Lucia & Sala, Serenella, 2018. "Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 98-111.
    6. Abbas Mardani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Kannan Govindan & Aslan Amat Senin & Ahmad Jusoh, 2016. "VIKOR Technique: A Systematic Review of the State of the Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-38, January.
    7. Nasirov, Shahriyar & Agostini, Claudio A., 2018. "Mining experts' perspectives on the determinants of solar technologies adoption in the Chilean mining industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 194-202.
    8. Oladapo, Bankole I. & Olawumi, Mattew A. & Olugbade, Temitope Olumide & Ismail, Sikiru O., 2025. "Data analytics driving net zero tracker for renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    9. Betz, Michael R. & Partridge, Mark D. & Farren, Michael & Lobao, Linda, 2015. "Coal mining, economic development, and the natural resources curse," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 105-116.
    10. Katundu Imasiku & Valerie M. Thomas, 2020. "The Mining and Technology Industries as Catalysts for Sustainable Energy Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-13, December.
    11. Liu, Wen & Xu, Jiaqi & Cao, Lei & Li, Fuchang, 2024. "Towards iron ore mining sustainability and low-carbon transformation: Policies and implications," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    12. Osei, Vivian & Bai, Chunguang & Asante-Darko, Disraeli & Quayson, Matthew, 2023. "Evaluating the barriers and drivers of adopting circular economy for improving sustainability in the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PB).
    13. Hunt, Julian David & Nascimento, Andreas & Nascimento, Nazem & Vieira, Lara Werncke & Romero, Oldrich Joel, 2022. "Possible pathways for oil and gas companies in a sustainable future: From the perspective of a hydrogen economy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    14. Olubayo Babatunde & Michael Emezirinwune & John Adebisi & Khadeejah A. Abdulsalam & Busola Akintayo & Oludolapo Olanrewaju, 2024. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Approach for Selecting Sustainable Power Systems Simulation Software in Undergraduate Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-22, October.
    15. Ascough, J.C. & Maier, H.R. & Ravalico, J.K. & Strudley, M.W., 2008. "Future research challenges for incorporation of uncertainty in environmental and ecological decision-making," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 383-399.
    16. Jiskani, Izhar Mithal & Cai, Qingxiang & Zhou, Wei & Lu, Xiang, 2020. "Assessment of risks impeding sustainable mining in Pakistan using fuzzy synthetic evaluation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    17. Mohamad Issa & Adrian Ilinca & Daniel R. Rousse & Loïc Boulon & Philippe Groleau, 2023. "Renewable Energy and Decarbonization in the Canadian Mining Industry: Opportunities and Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-22, October.
    18. Christoph Kern & Andreas Jess, 2021. "Reducing Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions to Meet Climate Targets—A Comprehensive Quantification and Reasonable Options," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-21, August.
    19. Şengül, Ümran & Eren, Miraç & Eslamian Shiraz, Seyedhadi & Gezder, Volkan & Şengül, Ahmet Bilal, 2015. "Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 617-625.
    20. Anthony Bebbington & Leonith Hinojosa & Denise Humphreys Bebbington & Maria Luisa Burneo & Ximena Warnaars, 2008. "Contention and Ambiguity: Mining and the Possibilities of Development," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 5708, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    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. Brereton, David & Flynn, Sharon & Kemp, Deanna, 2024. "An essay on mining and the moral obligation not to harm others," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    2. Ottone Scammacca & Rasool Mehdizadeh & Yann Gunzburger, 2022. "Territorial Mining Scenarios for Sustainable Land-Planning: A Risk-Based Comparison on the Example of Gold Mining in French Guiana," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-25, August.
    3. Berberoglu, Yalcin & Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Kazancoglu, Yigit, 2024. "Towards sustainable mining in an emerging economy: Assessment of sustainability challenges," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Jiskani, Izhar Mithal & Cai, Qingxiang & Zhou, Wei & Ali Shah, Syed Ahsan, 2021. "Green and climate-smart mining: A framework to analyze open-pit mines for cleaner mineral production," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    5. Lèbre, Éléonore & Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna & Valenta, Rick K., 2022. "Complex orebodies and future global metal supply: An introduction," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    7. António Mateus & Luís Martins, 2021. "Building a mineral-based value chain in Europe: the balance between social acceptance and secure supply," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(2), pages 239-261, July.
    8. Julien Bongono & Birol Elevli & Bertrand Laratte, 2020. "Functional Unit for Impact Assessment in the Mining Sector—Part 1," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-12, November.
    9. Vélez-Torres, Irene & Vanegas, Diana, 2022. "Contentious environmental governance in polluted gold mining geographies: The case of La Toma, Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    10. Rajkumar, G. & Saravanan, M. & Marimuthu, P., 2023. "Developing a numerical model to analyze the production process of PMEDM," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    11. Galina Williams & Ruth Nikijuluw, 2020. "The economic and social benefit of coal mining: the case study of regional Queensland," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1113-1132, October.
    12. Gudrun Franken & Philip Schütte, 2022. "Current trends in addressing environmental and social risks in mining and mineral supply chains by regulatory and voluntary approaches," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 35(3), pages 653-671, December.
    13. A. Akofa Amegboleza & M. Ali Ülkü, 2025. "Sustainable Energy Transition for the Mining Industry: A Bibliometric Analysis of Trends and Emerging Research Pathways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-21, March.
    14. Williams, Galina & Nikijuluw, Ruth, 2020. "Economic and social indicators between coal mining LGAs and non-coal mining LGAs in regional Queensland, Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    15. David Oliveros-Sepúlveda & Marc Bascompta-Massanés & Giovanni Franco-Sepúlveda, 2025. "Environmental and Closure Costs in Strategic Mine Planning, Models, Regulations, and Policies," Resources, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-29, February.
    16. Cem Iskender Aydin & Begum Ozkaynak & Beatriz Rodríguez-Labajos & Taylan Yenilmez, 2017. "Network effects in environmental justice struggles: An investigation of conflicts between mining companies and civil society organizations from a network perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, July.
    17. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    18. Mohit Jain & Gunjan Soni & Deepak Verma & Rajendra Baraiya & Bharti Ramtiyal, 2023. "Selection of Technology Acceptance Model for Adoption of Industry 4.0 Technologies in Agri-Fresh Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    19. Endl, Andreas & Tost, Michael & Hitch, Michael & Moser, Peter & Feiel, Susanne, 2021. "Europe's mining innovation trends and their contribution to the sustainable development goals: Blind spots and strong points," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    20. repec:osf:osfxxx:s8ayp_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Hesam Dehghani & Marc Bascompta & Ali Asghar Khajevandi & Kiana Afshar Farnia, 2023. "A Mimic Model Approach for Impact Assessment of Mining Activities on Sustainable Development Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, February.

    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:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4566-:d:1657595. 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.