Multi-criteria decision analysis methods for energy sector's sustainability assessment: Robustness analysis through criteria weight change

Abstract

Well-optimized decision-making is a prerequisite for effective energy planning, and this requires several criteria to be considered. The multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods underpin this decision-making process through different techniques. A MCDA method can provide a reliable methodology that helps to organize the most optimized result in the presence of many different opportunities, parameters, and constraints. The selection of an effective MCDA method in the energy sector is challenging. Particularly, sustainability assessment of the electricity generation sector using a MCDA method is difficult as it is necessary to consider at least three different criteria (economic, environmental, and social) with many indicators. This work compares the robustness, with respect to criteria weight change, of seven MCDA methods that are employed to assess the sustainability of electricity generation technologies through a case study. This case study underpins conducting an effective comparison between the employed methods and conclusions drawn. Robustness is defined cumulatively, counting the number of ranking changes while varying the criteria weights by 5%, 15% and 50%. The methods considered are Weighted Sum Method (WSM), Weighted Product Method (WPM), VIKOR, Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solutions (TOPSIS), Performance Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE), Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), and COmplex PRoportional ASsessment (COPRAS). The analysis revealed that COPRAS is the most robust MCDA method, followed by WPM. The least robust one is found to be TOPSIS. Both AHP and WSM ranked third in the robustness measure.