IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Prioritizing objectives to evaluate the environmental, economic and social impacts of biofuel in Spain


  • Fernadez-Tirado, Francisca
  • Parra-Lopez, Carlos


A variety of opinions either in favour or against development of biofuels has risen in the last years related to the environmental, economic and social impacts that its diffusion could entail compared to petroleum. Although the EU, in general, and Spain, in particular, are strongly supporting the development of biofuels they highlight that energy planning must be based on a sound analysis of the impacts of the diverse alternatives. This poster is a preliminary approach to this analysis. The main aim is to prioritize a set of environmental, economic and social objectives to identify the most relevant issues that would allow evaluating the impacts of the biofuel production and consumption in Spain. Analytic Network Process (ANP) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) are the multicriteria decision-making methodologies implemented to deal with the problem based on experts’ knowledge. The superiority of ANP versus AHP is discussed and the former is recommended. Results indicate that the most important objectives for a sustainable development of biofuels in Spain are conservation of non-renewable resources, within the environmental issues, the ease to be technically implemented in production, storage, distribution, and consumption, within the economic issues, and the direct employment in the agro-energy system, within the social issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernadez-Tirado, Francisca & Parra-Lopez, Carlos, 2008. "Prioritizing objectives to evaluate the environmental, economic and social impacts of biofuel in Spain," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44117, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44117

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Bottomley, Paul A. & Doyle, John R., 2001. "A comparison of three weight elicitation methods: good, better, and best," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 553-560, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Biofuel; sustainability; ANP; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ags:eaae08:44117. 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: (AgEcon Search). 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.