Strategic Renewable Energy Source Selection for Turkey with Hesitant Fuzzy MCDM Method
Renewable energy sources (RES) strengthen their hold on emerging economies. Record numbers of newly installed RES capacity are being observed in recent years. In 2016, the addition of renewable resources were more than 60% of new capacity investments globally, surpassing fossil fuel-based investments. The majority of these additions take place in developing countries, indicating the vital importance of selecting the best RES technologies for Turkey, an emerging economy. RES is not only becoming less expensive, they also contribute to employment and environmental protection. Selecting the most appropriate RES strategy among alternatives involves many criteria. This chapter introduces a novel RES evaluation model that can guide investors in identifying the most suitable RES strategy from a sustainability perspective. Complex socio-economic decision problems often make it more difficult for Decision Makers to consider different aspects, and to provide exact numerical values. Considering many, usually conflicting sustainability factors that affect this selection process, the chapter proposes a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) model by implementing hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTS) for an effective RES strategy evaluation problem. Group Decision Making (GDM) is also integrated to the method, as it is capable to offset individual DMs’ bias and partiality. HFLTS enables DMs to accurately provide their linguistic expressions. An integrated HFL SAW method (Simple Additive Weighting) and HFL TOPSIS method (Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution) are employed for this purpose. The criteria priorities are determined with the HFL SAW method and the final RES strategy ranking results are determined with HFL TOPSIS method. The plausibility of the proposed framework is tested in a case study. This combination of MCDM techniques is applied for the first time in the literature for dealing with this problem setting.
The authors express their sincere thanks and gratitude to the industry experts for their invaluable feedback and support in the evaluations. This research was supported by Galatasaray University Research Fund (Projects number: 17.402.004 and 17.402.009).
- Balin, A., & Baraçli, H. (2017). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methodology based upon the interval Type-2 fuzzy sets for evaluating renewable energy alternatives in Turkey. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 23, 742–763. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2015.1056276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Büyüközkan, G., & Güler, M. (2017). Hesitant fuzzy linguistic VIKOR method for e-health technology selection (in Press).Google Scholar
- Chou, S.-Y., Chang, Y.-H., & Shen, C.-Y. (2008). A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes. European Journal of Operational Research, 189, 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.05.006.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- Hsu, C.-C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical assessment, research & evaluation, 12, 1–8.Google Scholar
- Hwang, C., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making. Lecture notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems. http://www.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9.
- International Energy Agency (Ed.). (2015). World energy outlook 2016. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
- Ishizaka, A., Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-criteria decision analysis: Methods and software. Wiley.Google Scholar
- Ishizaka, A., Siraj, S., & Nemery, P. (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, 95, 602–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.12.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- REN 21. (2017). Renewables 2017 Global Status Report. REN 21, Paris, France.Google Scholar
- Rodríguez, R. M., Martı́nez, L., & Herrera, F. (2013). A group decision making model dealing with comparative linguistic expressions based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Information Sciences, 241, 28–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2013.04.006.
- Tapia Garcı´a, J. M., del Moral, M. J., Martínez, M. A., Herrera-Viedma, E. (2012). A consensus model for group decision making problems with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 10022–10030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.008.
- Torra, V., Narukawa, Y. (2009). On hesitant fuzzy sets and decision. In: 2009 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 1378–1382.Google Scholar
- Zhang, Y., Xie, A., & Wu, Y. (2015). A hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making method based on linear programming and TOPSIS**This work was supported by the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education under Project No. 20130009120040. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48, 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.12.165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar