IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i1p80-d87252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation Method for Autonomous Decision-Making Performance in Energy and Environmental Innovations: A Case Study of an Indonesian Community

Author

Listed:
  • Niken Prilandita

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

  • Benjamin McLellan

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

  • Tetsuo Tezuka

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

Abstract

This paper develops an evaluation method for assessing autonomous decision-making performance and demonstrates it using a case study. Focusing on community decision-making practice in energy-environmental innovation projects, a decision-making model is developed using Petri-net. This empirical model is then expanded to be able to accommodate autonomous properties and more pathways to reach various decision-making outcomes. The autonomous decision-making performance evaluation is employed by simulating the impact of various levels of autonomous conditions using the expanded model stochastically. Those results are further divided into six categories, based on the conditions (autonomous, semi-autonomous, and non-autonomous) and decision outcomes (fully successful, moderately successful, and failed). For each category, the specific stakeholders’ properties are analysed and explained. The categorised conditions are useful for estimating the outcomes of the particular community decision-making practice based on the stakeholders’ properties. The model can be modified in order to pre-evaluate other energy and environmental related decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Niken Prilandita & Benjamin McLellan & Tetsuo Tezuka, 2017. "Evaluation Method for Autonomous Decision-Making Performance in Energy and Environmental Innovations: A Case Study of an Indonesian Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:1:p:80-:d:87252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/1/80/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/1/80/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2008. "Energy sustainable communities: Environmental psychological investigations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4126-4135, November.
    2. Niken Prilandita & Benjamin McLellan & Tetsuo Tezuka, 2016. "Modeling Autonomous Decision-Making on Energy and Environmental Management Using Petri-Net: The Case Study of a Community in Bandung, Indonesia," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, April.
    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. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    2. Čábelková, Inna & Strielkowski, Wadim & Streimikiene, Dalia & Cavallaro, Fausto & Streimikis, Justas, 2021. "The social acceptance of nuclear fusion for decision making towards carbon free circular economy: Evidence from Czech Republic," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    3. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Lode, M.L. & te Boveldt, G. & Coosemans, T. & Ramirez Camargo, L., 2022. "A transition perspective on Energy Communities: A systematic literature review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    5. Yuan, Xueliang & Zuo, Jian & Ma, Chunyuan, 2011. "Social acceptance of solar energy technologies in China--End users' perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1031-1036, March.
    6. Knemeyer, Ann-Katrin & Ehrenstein, Ulrike & Becker, Daniela & Hildebrand, Jan & Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2021. "The meaning of participative implementation processes for local energy balancing in a systemic approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    7. Schriever, Marlene & Halstrup, Dominik, 2018. "Exploring the adoption in transitioning markets: Empirical findings and implications on energy storage solutions-acceptance in the German manufacturing industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 460-468.
    8. Kortsch, Timo & Hildebrand, Jan & Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2015. "Acceptance of biomass plants – Results of a longitudinal study in the bioenergy-region Altmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 690-697.
    9. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    10. Schmid, Eva & Knopf, Brigitte, 2015. "Quantifying the long-term economic benefits of European electricity system integration," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 260-269.
    11. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    12. Li, Na & Hakvoort, Rudi A. & Lukszo, Zofia, 2021. "Cost allocation in integrated community energy systems - A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    13. von Wirth, Timo & Gislason, Linda & Seidl, Roman, 2018. "Distributed energy systems on a neighborhood scale: Reviewing drivers of and barriers to social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2618-2628.
    14. Hecher, Maria & Vilsmaier, Ulli & Akhavan, Roya & Binder, Claudia R., 2016. "An integrative analysis of energy transitions in energy regions: A case study of ökoEnergieland in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 40-53.
    15. Brummer, Vasco, 2018. "Community energy – benefits and barriers: A comparative literature review of Community Energy in the UK, Germany and the USA, the benefits it provides for society and the barriers it faces," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 187-196.
    16. Dobers, Geesche M., 2019. "Acceptance of biogas plants taking into account space and place," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    17. Antonietta Di Giulio & Corinne Ruesch Schweizer & Rico Defila & Philipp Hirsch & Patricia Burkhardt-Holm, 2019. "“These Grandmas Drove Me Mad. It Was Brilliant!”—Promising Starting Points to Support Citizen Competence for Sustainable Consumption in Adults," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-36, January.
    18. Javanshir Fouladvand & Niek Mouter & Amineh Ghorbani & Paulien Herder, 2020. "Formation and Continuation of Thermal Energy Community Systems: An Explorative Agent-Based Model for the Netherlands," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, June.
    19. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Ziefle, M., 2021. "What drives public acceptance of sustainable CO2-derived building materials? A conjoint-analysis of eco-benefits vs. health concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    20. Yanine, Franco F. & Sauma, Enzo E., 2013. "Review of grid-tie micro-generation systems without energy storage: Towards a new approach to sustainable hybrid energy systems linked to energy efficiency," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 60-95.

    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:9:y:2017:i:1:p:80-:d:87252. 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.