IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v68y2019ics0038012117300253.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A group MCDA method for aiding decision-making of complex problems in public sector: The case of Belo Monte Dam

Author

Listed:
  • Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme
  • Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua

Abstract

We review the applications of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methods in energy sector and in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), finding a gap on the non-use of specific methods that deal with divergent opinions, such as a group MCDA method. This way we suggest the application of a group MCDA method to demonstrate how it may be used for aiding group decision-making in public sector. Aiming at analyzing the aforementioned problem, we simulate the choosing of the construction alternatives of Belo Monte Dam. The power plant project was marked by several conflicts among stakeholders due to the generation of diversified environmental, social and economic impacts. The results show that a group MCDA method may be used to aid public sector in the analysis of complex problems, by dividing them into several parts, allowing, therefore, a transparent decision-making process, as well as to solve gaps in the EIA methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2019. "A group MCDA method for aiding decision-making of complex problems in public sector: The case of Belo Monte Dam," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:68:y:2019:i:c:s0038012117300253
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2018.04.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012117300253
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2018.04.002?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. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2009. "Multi-criteria decision aid to assess concentrated solar thermal technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1678-1685.
    2. Haralambopoulos, D.A. & Polatidis, H., 2003. "Renewable energy projects: structuring a multi-criteria group decision-making framework," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 961-973.
    3. Catalina, Tiberiu & Virgone, Joseph & Blanco, Eric, 2011. "Multi-source energy systems analysis using a multi-criteria decision aid methodology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2245-2252.
    4. Bottero, Marta & Ferretti, Valentina & Mondini, Giulio & Pomarico, Silvia, 2014. "Enabling Public Participation in Strategic Environmental Assessment: An Application of Multicriteria Analysis," Strategic Behavior and the Environment, now publishers, vol. 4(2), pages 99-130, July.
    5. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    6. F. Hutton Barron & Bruce E. Barrett, 1996. "Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1515-1523, November.
    7. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    8. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1995. "Energy resource allocation incorporating qualitative and quantitative criteria: An integrated model using goal programming and AHP," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 197-218, September.
    9. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    10. Hall, Anthony & Branford, Sue, 2012. "Development, dams and Dilma: the saga of Belo Monte," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 46393, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    12. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2016. "Utility Function for modeling Group Multicriteria Decision Making problems as games," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 21-26.
    13. Ralph L. Keeney, 2013. "Foundations for Group Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 103-120, June.
    14. Dodgson, JS & Spackman, M & Pearman, A & Phillips, LD, 2009. "Multi-criteria analysis: a manual," Economic History Working Papers 12761, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    15. Tahseen, Samiha & Karney, Bryan W., 2017. "Reviewing and critiquing published approaches to the sustainability assessment of hydropower," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 225-234.
    16. Neves, L.P. & Dias, L.C. & Antunes, C.H. & Martins, A.G., 2009. "Structuring an MCDA model using SSM: A case study in energy efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 834-845, December.
    17. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid & Nemery, Philippe, 2016. "Which energy mix for the UK (United Kingdom)? An evolutive descriptive mapping with the integrated GAIA (graphical analysis for interactive aid)–AHP (analytic hierarchy process) visualization tool," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 602-611.
    18. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    19. Fearnside, Philip M., 2016. "Environmental and Social Impacts of Hydroelectric Dams in Brazilian Amazonia: Implications for the Aluminum Industry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 48-65.
    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. Liu, Liyi & Tu, Yan & Zhang, Wen & Shen, Wenjing, 2024. "Supplier selection for emergency material based on group exponential TODIM method considering hesitant fuzzy linguistic set: A case study of China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Mirian Bortoluzzi & Marcelo Furlan & Simone Geitenes Colombo & Tatiele Martins Amaral & Celso Correia de Souza & José Francisco dos Reis Neto & Josimar Fernandes de França, 2021. "Combining Value-Focused Thinking and PROMETHEE Techniques for Selecting a Portfolio of Distributed Energy Generation Projects in the Brazilian Electricity Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-19, October.
    3. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Gomes, Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro, 2021. "Modeling multicriteria group decision making as games from enhanced pairwise comparisons," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    4. Pereira, André Alves & Pereira, Miguel Alves, 2023. "Energy storage strategy analysis based on the Choquet multi-criteria preference aggregation model: The Portuguese case," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    5. Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Passador, João Luiz, 2022. "On the choice of public or private management models in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    6. Zhili Jia & Liyi Liu & Zhaofeng Diao, 2024. "A Group Intuitionistic Fuzzy Exponential TODIM Method Considering Attribute Interactions Applied to Green Building Material Supplier Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-24, September.
    7. Tobias Witt & Matthias Klumpp, 2021. "Multi-Period Multi-Criteria Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Renewable Energy Transition Case from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
    8. Sisto, Roberta & Fernández-Portillo, Luis A. & Yazdani, Morteza & Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Torkayesh, Ali Ebadi, 2022. "Strategic planning of rural areas: Integrating participatory backcasting and multiple criteria decision analysis tools," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PA).

    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. Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Passador, João Luiz, 2022. "On the choice of public or private management models in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    3. Mohamed Ali Elleuch & Marwa Mallek & Ahmed Frikha & Wafik Hachicha & Awad M. Aljuaid & Murad Andejany, 2021. "Solving a Multiple User Energy Source Selection Problem Using a Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Tobias Witt & Matthias Klumpp, 2021. "Multi-Period Multi-Criteria Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Renewable Energy Transition Case from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
    6. Stein, Eric W., 2013. "A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 640-654.
    7. 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.
    8. Doukas, Haris, 2013. "Modelling of linguistic variables in multicriteria energy policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(2), pages 227-238.
    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. Abbas Mardani & Ahmad Jusoh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Zainab Khalifah, 2015. "Sustainable and Renewable Energy: An Overview of the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Techniques and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-38, October.
    11. Alexandre Bevilacqua Leoneti & René Bañares-Alcántara & Eduardo Cleto Pires & Sonia Valle Walter Borges Oliveira, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria and Multi-Agent Framework for supporting complex decision-making processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1025-1050, October.
    12. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    15. Tim H¨ofer & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Reinhard Madlener, 2020. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multicriteria Decision Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 330-355, December.
    16. Dragan Pamučar & Ibrahim Badi & Korica Sanja & Radojko Obradović, 2018. "A Novel Approach for the Selection of Power-Generation Technology Using a Linguistic Neutrosophic CODAS Method: A Case Study in Libya," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-25, September.
    17. Li, Tao & Li, Ang & Guo, Xiaopeng, 2020. "The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry——A comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    18. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    19. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    20. Aliakbar Kamari & Stefan Jensen & Maria Leonhard Christensen & Steffen Petersen & Poul Henning Kirkegaard, 2018. "A hybrid Decision Support System for Generation of Holistic Renovation Scenarios—Cases of Energy Consumption, Investment Cost, and Thermal Indoor Comfort," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, 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:soceps:v:68:y:2019:i:c:s0038012117300253. 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/seps .

    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.