The use of a preference disaggregation method in energy analysis and policy making

University of Crete, Retimo, Crete, Greece
Energy (Impact Factor: 4.16). 02/1999; 24(2):157-166. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-5442(98)00081-4

ABSTRACT Following the oil crisis, most developed countries have increasingly implemented measures for energy conservation and fuels substitution aimed at decreasing the energy intensities of their economies. These efforts have been further augmented during the eighties due to growing awareness of adverse effects of energy use on the environment. The measures and their effectiveness differ greatly from country to country, without clear identification of the relevant cause–effect relations. We examine this issue by using a multicriteria decision aid (MCDA) method based on preference disaggregation analysis. The method used is the UTADIS (UTilités Additives DIScriminantes) method that has already been widely applied for financial management. The problem examined in this paper has been formulated following the segmentation approach where a number of countries are grouped into a set of predefined classes according to their energy intensities. The UTADIS method proceeds to the estimation of a set of additive utility functions referring to various indices characterizing the economic and energy structure of each country. The analysis is performed at 3 distinct points in time in order to check for consistency of results and investigate time-dependent phenomena. The results show to what extent each of the examined characteristics influences the countries' energy effectiveness and may be further exploited in energy-policy making. They confirm that the UTADIS method is a powerful tool for examination of a wide range of real decision situations.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Security, environment, and economic concerns are commonly identified as three major objectives of energy policy. State and federal governments have set aggressive targets for carbon emissions reductions and for alternative fuel use and increased vehicle efficiency to reduce petroleum consumption. Moreover, jobs creation and GDP growth are often cited as key drivers for energy policies. Previous studies on energy policy decision-making have examined the process for developing and evaluating options using multi-criteria decision analysis tools. In addition, energy opinion polls have either elicited preferences between two goals or whether the public supports a specific policy action. In this article, we report results from a survey of 884 members of professional membership organizations on how the U.S. should prioritize energy policy across the goals of energy supply security, environment and climate, and economics and job creation. The majority favor policymaking that is balanced across all three. Security and economic concerns increase with age for male respondents, whereas environment is the highest priority for females regardless of age. Unlike previous surveys that target the general public and focus on a particular objective or technology, these results provide an example of eliciting a portfolio allocation across multiple energy policy goals from targeted constituents.
    Energy Policy 09/2013; 60. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.061 · 2.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The book is aiming to present methodological approaches and perspectives of the customer satisfaction problem. It consists of 9 chapters, the first one devoted to the problem statement including a short historical review. Chapter 2 presents alternative approaches and related consumer behavioral models. In the third chapter quality-based approaches for the satisfaction measurement and analysis are described. Chapter 4 is devoted to the development of the multicriteria method MUSA aiming at measuring and analysing customer satisfaction. Extensions of this method are presented in Chapter 5 whereas Chapter 6 refers to advanced topics of the MUSA method. Chapter 7 is devoted to customer satisfaction surveys and barometers. Chapter 8 presents applications of the MUSA method in the real-world customer satisfaction surveys. In Chapter 9 applications of information technologies for solving the customer satisfaction problem are presented . All the chapters contain illustrating graphics and references to the related works.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Climate change and security of energy supply are main sustainability issues today and an energy systems shift towards renewable energy sources is therefore urgent. However, unless environmental impacts of such a shift are carefully taken into account, imposed resource and land use changes may counteract other sustainability goals, such as preserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) provides a comprehensive framework for assessment of policies and plans where a full range of environmental issues are addressed. The aim of this article was to find possibilities for comprehensive sustainability assessment among published energy–environment models and the linking of renewable energy analysis to landscape and biodiversity issues through land use concerns. Based on the review of relevant energy, environmental and linking models, a survey on publications and a case study on the EU Energy Roadmap 2050, the results show that existing energy models and research have low concerns on land use, landscapes and biodiversity. Consequently, it would be difficult to provide comprehensive decision support by using only these tools. However, suitable energy models, ecological assessment models and multi-criteria approaches exist with great potential for inter-linking. The development of energy models could thus have new orientations, connecting them to involve renewable energy options with land use, landscape and biodiversity concerns, which could be advanced into powerful SEA tools for integrated policy assessment. This will enable the development of more comprehensive decision support tools for assessing future energy scenarios, integrating main policy concerns when assessing renewable energy options.
    Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 05/2014; 33:353–362. DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.005 · 5.51 Impact Factor