IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2512.05444.html

Assessment and Prioritization of Renewable Energy Alternatives to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals in Turkiye: Based on Fuzzy AHP Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Emre Akusta
  • Raif Cergibozan

Abstract

The aim of this study is to prioritize renewable energy sources to achieve sustainable development in Turkiye by using fuzzy AHP method. In our study, we used 30 criteria that affect the investment in renewable energy sources. We also calculated the weights of these criteria in investment decisions. In addition, we analyzed the advantageous renewable energy sources according to each criterion. Thus, it was determined which renewable energy source is advantageous according to which criteria. The results show that the most important main criteria for renewable energy investments in Turkiye are economic, political, technical, environmental and social criteria, respectively. The most appropriate renewable energy sources according to economic, political, technical and social criteria are solar, wind, hydroelectric,

Suggested Citation

  • Emre Akusta & Raif Cergibozan, 2025. "Assessment and Prioritization of Renewable Energy Alternatives to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals in Turkiye: Based on Fuzzy AHP Approach," Papers 2512.05444, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2025.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2512.05444
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.05444
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Çelikbilek, Yakup & Tüysüz, Fatih, 2016. "An integrated grey based multi-criteria decision making approach for the evaluation of renewable energy sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 1246-1258.
    2. Yücenur, G. Nilay & Çaylak, Şeyma & Gönül, Gözde & Postalcıoğlu, Melike, 2020. "An integrated solution with SWARA&COPRAS methods in renewable energy production: City selection for biogas facility," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 2587-2597.
    3. Neumayer, Eric, 2001. "The human development index and sustainability -- a constructive proposal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 101-114, October.
    4. Duke, Joshua M. & Aull-Hyde, Rhonda, 2002. "Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 131-145, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Cherp, Aleh & Jewell, Jessica, 2014. "The concept of energy security: Beyond the four As," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 415-421.
    7. repec:eco:journ2:2017-04-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Li, Xiangrong & Zhu, Shaoying & Yüksel, Serhat & Dinçer, Hasan & Ubay, Gözde Gülseven, 2020. "Kano-based mapping of innovation strategies for renewable energy alternatives using hybrid interval type-2 fuzzy decision-making approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    9. Panagiotis Fotis & Michael Polemis, 2018. "Sustainable development, environmental policy and renewable energy use: A dynamic panel data approach," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 726-740, November.
    10. Mourmouris, J.C. & Potolias, C., 2013. "A multi-criteria methodology for energy planning and developing renewable energy sources at a regional level: A case study Thassos, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 522-530.
    11. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    12. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    13. Dongxiao Niu & Hao Zhen & Min Yu & Keke Wang & Lijie Sun & Xiaomin Xu, 2020. "Prioritization of Renewable Energy Alternatives for China by Using a Hybrid FMCDM Methodology with Uncertain Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-26, June.
    14. Abdul, Daud & Wenqi, Jiang & Tanveer, Arsalan, 2022. "Prioritization of renewable energy source for electricity generation through AHP-VIKOR integrated methodology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1018-1032.
    15. Atmaca, Ediz & Basar, Hasan Burak, 2012. "Evaluation of power plants in Turkey using Analytic Network Process (ANP)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 555-563.
    16. Kahraman, Cengiz & Kaya, İhsan & Cebi, Selcuk, 2009. "A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1603-1616.
    17. Esra Karaka & Ozan Veli Y ld ran, 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.
    18. Sofien Tiba & Fateh Belaid, 2021. "Modeling The Nexus Between Sustainable Development And Renewable Energy: The African Perspectives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 307-329, February.
    19. Yi, Sul-Ki & Sin, Hwa-Young & Heo, Eunnyeong, 2011. "Selecting sustainable renewable energy source for energy assistance to North Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 554-563, January.
    20. Assadi, Mohammad Reza & Ataebi, Melikasadat & Ataebi, Elmira sadat & Hasani, Aliakbar, 2022. "Prioritization of renewable energy resources based on sustainable management approach using simultaneous evaluation of criteria and alternatives: A case study on Iran's electricity industry," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 820-832.
    21. Topcu, Y.I & Ulengin, F, 2004. "Energy for the future: An integrated decision aid for the case of Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 137-154.
    22. Ulutaş, Berna Haktanırlar, 2005. "Determination of the appropriate energy policy for Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1146-1161.
    23. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    24. 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.
    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. Karaaslan, Abdulkerim & Gezen, Mesliha, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy resources in Turkey by integer multi-objective selection problem with interval coefficient," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 842-854.
    2. Horasan, Muhammed Bilal & Kilic, Huseyin Selcuk, 2022. "A multi-objective decision-making model for renewable energy planning: The case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 484-504.
    3. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    4. Esra Karaka & Ozan Veli Y ld ran, 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.
    5. Çelikbilek, Yakup & Tüysüz, Fatih, 2016. "An integrated grey based multi-criteria decision making approach for the evaluation of renewable energy sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 1246-1258.
    6. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    7. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    8. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    9. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    10. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2017. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Resources in Turkey using an integrated MCDM approach with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 149-163.
    11. Rahadian Dadan & Firli Anisah & Dinçer Hasan & Yüksel Serhat & Hacıoğlu Ümit & Gherghina Ştefan Cristian & Aksoy Tamer, 2023. "An Evaluation of E7 Countries’ Sustainable Energy Investments: A Decision-Making Approach with Spherical Fuzzy Sets," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Selçuklu, Saltuk Buğra & Coit, D.W. & Felder, F.A., 2023. "Electricity generation portfolio planning and policy implications of Turkish power system considering cost, emission, and uncertainty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    13. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    14. Fatih Tüysüz, 2017. "A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Analysis Approach for the Assessment of Renewable Energy Resources Under Uncertainty," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 5(2), pages 317-328, December.
    15. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    16. Karatas, Mumtaz & Sulukan, Egemen & Karacan, Ilknur, 2018. "Assessment of Turkey's energy management performance via a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 890-912.
    17. Bharath Kumar Sugumar & Norma Anglani, 2025. "A Novel Decision-Support Framework for Supporting Renewable Energy Technology Siting in the Early Design Stage of Microgrids: Considering Geographical Conditions and Focusing on Resilience and SDGs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-29, January.
    18. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    19. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Empirical investigation and validation of sustainability indicators for the assessment of energy sources in India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    20. Rivero-Iglesias, Jose M. & Puente, Javier & Fernandez, Isabel & León, Omar, 2023. "Integrated model for the assessment of power generation alternatives through analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy inference system. Case study of Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 563-581.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:2512.05444. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.