IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v97y2016icp559-581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia

Author

Listed:
  • Garbuzova-Schlifter, Maria
  • Madlener, Reinhard

Abstract

Understanding and properly managing risks that could potentially affect the target- and performance-based profits of energy performance contracting (EPC) projects are essential. It is particularly important for the establishment and success of energy service companies (ESCOs) acting in the vulnerable environment of the vast but highly energy-inefficient Russian market. This study systematically explores common risk factors and causes of risk associated with EPC projects executed in three Russian sectors: (1) industrial; (2) housing and communal services; and (3) public. Several interviews with the Russian EPC experts were accomplished and a qualitative risk assessment by using an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach. The data were obtained from a web-based questionnaire survey conducted among Russian EPC project executors. For each focus sector, a specific preference-based ranking of the identified risk factors and causes of risk was derived. The AHP results show that causes of risk related to the financial and regulatory aspects contribute most to the riskiness of EPC projects performed in all three focus sectors in Russia, calling for the special attention of EPC policy- and business-makers. Due to sectorial particularities and different actors involved, we conclude that there is a need for elaboration of sector-specific contractual schemes for EPC projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Garbuzova-Schlifter, Maria & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 559-581.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:97:y:2016:i:c:p:559-581
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516303834
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.024?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    2. Dominic Gastes & Wolfgang Gaul, 2012. "The Consistency Adjustment Problem of AHP Pairwise Comparison Matrices," Springer Books, in: Adamantios Diamantopoulos & Wolfgang Fritz & Lutz Hildebrandt (ed.), Quantitative Marketing and Marketing Management, edition 127, chapter 2, pages 51-62, Springer.
    3. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    4. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    5. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    6. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2005. "Individual Risk Attitudes: New Evidence from a Large, Representative, Experimentally-Validated Survey," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 511, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Parra-Lopez, Carlos & Calatrava-Requena, Javier & de-Haro-Gimenez, Tomas, 2008. "A systemic comparative assessment of the multifunctional performance of alternative olive systems in Spain within an AHP-extended framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 820-834, February.
    8. P. Shim, Jung., 1989. "Bibliographical research on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 161-167.
    9. Maria Garbuzova-Schlifter & Reinhard Madlener, 2017. "Risk Analysis of Energy Performance Contracting Projects in Russia: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach," Operations Research Proceedings, in: Karl Franz Dörner & Ivana Ljubic & Georg Pflug & Gernot Tragler (ed.), Operations Research Proceedings 2015, pages 683-690, Springer.
    10. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    11. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    12. Mills, Evan & Kromer, Steve & Weiss, Gary & Mathew, Paul A., 2006. "From volatility to value: analysing and managing financial and performance risk in energy savings projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 188-199, January.
    13. Wedley, William C., 1990. "Combining qualitative and quantitative factors--an analytic hierarchy approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 57-64.
    14. Fatemeh Zahedi, 1986. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---A Survey of the Method and its Applications," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 96-108, August.
    15. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    16. 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.
    17. Brent, Alan C. & Rogers, David E.C. & Ramabitsa-Siimane, Tsaletseng S.M. & Rohwer, Mark B., 2007. "Application of the analytical hierarchy process to establish health care waste management systems that minimise infection risks in developing countries," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(1), pages 403-424, August.
    18. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    19. Kumo, Kazuhiro, 2012. "Mortality Trends in Russia Revisited-A Survey-," Economic Review, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 63(2), pages 171-187, April.
    20. Jackson, Jerry, 2010. "Promoting energy efficiency investments with risk management decision tools," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 3865-3873, August.
    21. Daji Ergu & Gang Kou & János Fülöp & Yong Shi, 2014. "Further Discussions on Induced Bias Matrix Model for the Pair-Wise Comparison Matrix," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 980-993, June.
    22. Robert P. Taylor & Chandrasekar Govindarajalu & Jeremy Levin & Anke S. Meyer & William A. Ward, 2008. "Financing Energy Efficiency : Lessons from Brazil, China, India, and Beyond," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6349.
    23. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joanna Kurowska-Pysz & Grzegorz Kunikowski, 2021. "The ESCO Formula as Support for Public and Commercial Energy Projects in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Shubham Gupta & Raghav Khanna & Pranay Kohli & Sarthak Agnihotri & Umang Soni & M. Asjad, 2023. "Risk evaluation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure using Fuzzy AHP – a case study in India," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 245-258, March.
    3. Dmitriy Karamov & Pavel Ilyushin & Ilya Minarchenko & Sergey Filippov & Konstantin Suslov, 2023. "The Role of Energy Performance Agreements in the Sustainable Development of Decentralized Energy Systems: Methodology for Determining the Equilibrium Conditions of the Contract," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-12, March.
    4. Fabiana Silvero & Fernanda Rodrigues & Sergio Montelpare, 2019. "A Parametric Study and Performance Evaluation of Energy Retrofit Solutions for Buildings Located in the Hot-Humid Climate of Paraguay—Sensitivity Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-27, January.
    5. Dmitriy N. Karamov & Pavel V. Ilyushin & Konstantin V. Suslov, 2022. "Electrification of Rural Remote Areas Using Renewable Energy Sources: Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-13, August.
    6. Qin, Quande & Liang, Fuqi & Li, Li & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2017. "Selection of energy performance contracting business models: A behavioral decision-making approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 422-433.
    7. Hui Zhang & Li-qi Tian & Shu-jing Long & Ruo-bing Li & Yenchun Jim Wu, 2023. "Tourist Rescue in Natural Disasters," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    8. Shang, Tiancheng & Liu, Peihong & Guo, Junxiong, 2020. "How to allocate energy-saving benefit for guaranteed savings EPC projects? A case of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    9. Iwona Gorzeń-Mitka & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala, 2023. "Mapping the Energy Sector from a Risk Management Research Perspective: A Bibliometric and Scientific Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-32, February.
    10. Jui-Sheng Chou & Pin-Chao Liao & Chung-Da Yeh, 2021. "Risk Analysis and Management of Construction and Operations in Offshore Wind Power Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Justyna Kozłowska & Marco Antônio Benvenga & Irenilza de Alencar Nääs, 2022. "Investment Risk and Energy Security Assessment of European Union Countries Using Multicriteria Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-28, December.
    12. Anna Kurbatova & Hani Ahmed Abu-Qdais, 2020. "Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Select Waste to Energy Technology for a Mega City: The Case of Moscow," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Cong Dong & Xiucheng Dong & Joel Gehman & Lianne Lefsrud, 2017. "Using BP Neural Networks to Prioritize Risk Management Approaches for China’s Unconventional Shale Gas Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, June.
    14. Gao, Jianwei & Guo, Fengjia & Li, Xiangzhen & Huang, Xin & Men, Huijuan, 2021. "Risk assessment of offshore photovoltaic projects under probabilistic linguistic environment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 172-187.
    15. Wang, Zhenfeng & Xu, Guangyin & Lin, Ruojue & Wang, Heng & Ren, Jingzheng, 2019. "Energy performance contracting, risk factors, and policy implications: Identification and analysis of risks based on the best-worst network method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 1-13.

    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. de Luca, Stefano, 2014. "Public engagement in strategic transportation planning: An analytic hierarchy process based approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 110-124.
    2. Höfer, Tim & Sunak, Yasin & Siddique, Hafiz & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Wind farm siting using a spatial Analytic Hierarchy Process approach: A case study of the Städteregion Aachen," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 222-243.
    3. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    4. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    5. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    6. Kang Xu & Jiuping Xu, 2020. "A direct consistency test and improvement method for the analytic hierarchy process," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 359-388, September.
    7. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    8. Michele Bernasconi & Christine Choirat & Raffaello Seri, 2010. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Theory of Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 699-711, April.
    9. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    10. Contreras, Francisco & Hanaki, Keisuke & Aramaki, Toshiya & Connors, Stephen, 2008. "Application of analytical hierarchy process to analyze stakeholders preferences for municipal solid waste management plans, Boston, USA," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 979-991.
    11. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Does AHP help us make a choice? An experimental evaluation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1801-1812, October.
    12. Gomez-Limon, J.A. & Atance, I., 2004. "Identification of public objectives related to agricultural sector support," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(8-9), pages 1045-1071, December.
    13. José A. Gómez-Limón & Ignacio Atance, 2004. "Identification of Public Objectives Related to Agricultural Sector Support," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/57, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    14. Olexandr Nekhay & Manuel Arriaza, 2016. "How Attractive Is Upland Olive Groves Landscape? Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and GIS in Southern Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-16, November.
    15. L. N. Pradeep Kumar Rallabandi & Ravindranath Vandrangi & Subba Rao Rachakonda, 2016. "Improved Consistency Ratio for Pairwise Comparison Matrix in Analytic Hierarchy Processes," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(03), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2008. "A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 1422-1428, June.
    17. Bentes, Alexandre Veronese & Carneiro, Jorge & da Silva, Jorge Ferreira & Kimura, Herbert, 2012. "Multidimensional assessment of organizational performance: Integrating BSC and AHP," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 1790-1799.
    18. Zygmunt Korban & Maja Taraszkiewicz-Łyda, 2022. "The Impact of Time Pressure on the Results of Psychotechnical Tests Based on the Findings of Pilot Studies Conducted on a Group of Students of the Silesian University of Technology—A Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-12, November.
    19. Zhü, Kèyù, 2014. "Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(1), pages 209-217.
    20. Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione & Francesco Amato & Santolo Cozzolino & Giuseppe Russo & Maria Romano & Giovanni Improta, 2022. "A Hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process and Likert Scale Approach for the Quality Assessment of Medical Education Programs," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, April.

    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:eee:enepol:v:97:y:2016:i:c:p:559-581. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.