Application of multi-criteria decision-making to risk prioritisation in tidal energy developments

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper presents an analytical multi-criterion analysis for the prioritisation of risks for the development of tidal energy projects. After a basic identification of risks throughout the project and relevant stakeholders in the UK, classified through a political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental analysis, relevant questionnaires provided scores to each risk and corresponding weights for each of the different sectors. Employing an extended technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution as well as the weighted sum method based on the data obtained, the risks identified are ranked based on their criticality, drawing attention of the industry in mitigating the ones scoring higher. Both methods were modified to take averages at different stages of the analysis in order to observe the effects on the final risk ranking. A sensitivity analysis of the results was also carried out with regard to the weighting factors given to the perceived expertise of participants, with different results being obtained whether a linear, squared or square root regression is used. Results of the study show that academics and industry have conflicting opinions with regard to the perception of the most critical risks.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)59-74
Number of pages16
JournalInternational Journal of Sustainable Energy
Volume35
Issue number1
Early online date27 Jan 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2016

Fingerprint

Decision making
Sensitivity analysis
Industry
Economics

Keywords

  • MCDM
  • risk prioritisation
  • tidal energy

Cite this

@article{d5e9f4c0c7264997abfb61150465dfb3,
title = "Application of multi-criteria decision-making to risk prioritisation in tidal energy developments",
abstract = "This paper presents an analytical multi-criterion analysis for the prioritisation of risks for the development of tidal energy projects. After a basic identification of risks throughout the project and relevant stakeholders in the UK, classified through a political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental analysis, relevant questionnaires provided scores to each risk and corresponding weights for each of the different sectors. Employing an extended technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution as well as the weighted sum method based on the data obtained, the risks identified are ranked based on their criticality, drawing attention of the industry in mitigating the ones scoring higher. Both methods were modified to take averages at different stages of the analysis in order to observe the effects on the final risk ranking. A sensitivity analysis of the results was also carried out with regard to the weighting factors given to the perceived expertise of participants, with different results being obtained whether a linear, squared or square root regression is used. Results of the study show that academics and industry have conflicting opinions with regard to the perception of the most critical risks.",
keywords = "MCDM, risk prioritisation, tidal energy",
author = "Athanasios Kolios and George Read and Anastasia Ioannou",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/14786451.2014.880438",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "59--74",
journal = "International Journal of Sustainable Energy",
issn = "1478-6451",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Application of multi-criteria decision-making to risk prioritisation in tidal energy developments

AU - Kolios, Athanasios

AU - Read, George

AU - Ioannou, Anastasia

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - This paper presents an analytical multi-criterion analysis for the prioritisation of risks for the development of tidal energy projects. After a basic identification of risks throughout the project and relevant stakeholders in the UK, classified through a political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental analysis, relevant questionnaires provided scores to each risk and corresponding weights for each of the different sectors. Employing an extended technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution as well as the weighted sum method based on the data obtained, the risks identified are ranked based on their criticality, drawing attention of the industry in mitigating the ones scoring higher. Both methods were modified to take averages at different stages of the analysis in order to observe the effects on the final risk ranking. A sensitivity analysis of the results was also carried out with regard to the weighting factors given to the perceived expertise of participants, with different results being obtained whether a linear, squared or square root regression is used. Results of the study show that academics and industry have conflicting opinions with regard to the perception of the most critical risks.

AB - This paper presents an analytical multi-criterion analysis for the prioritisation of risks for the development of tidal energy projects. After a basic identification of risks throughout the project and relevant stakeholders in the UK, classified through a political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental analysis, relevant questionnaires provided scores to each risk and corresponding weights for each of the different sectors. Employing an extended technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution as well as the weighted sum method based on the data obtained, the risks identified are ranked based on their criticality, drawing attention of the industry in mitigating the ones scoring higher. Both methods were modified to take averages at different stages of the analysis in order to observe the effects on the final risk ranking. A sensitivity analysis of the results was also carried out with regard to the weighting factors given to the perceived expertise of participants, with different results being obtained whether a linear, squared or square root regression is used. Results of the study show that academics and industry have conflicting opinions with regard to the perception of the most critical risks.

KW - MCDM

KW - risk prioritisation

KW - tidal energy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942195793&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/14786451.2014.880438

DO - 10.1080/14786451.2014.880438

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84942195793

VL - 35

SP - 59

EP - 74

JO - International Journal of Sustainable Energy

JF - International Journal of Sustainable Energy

SN - 1478-6451

IS - 1

ER -