A comprehensive review of fuzzy multi criteria decision making methodologies for energy policy making

İ̇hsan Kaya · Murat Çolak · Fulya Terzi

369 citations0/0 files storedEnergy Strategy Reviews

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Multi-Criteria Decision Making Evaluation Methods in Various Fields Energy and Environmental Sustainability

Abstract

Energy policy making is one of the most significant issues for countries and it can be evaluated by using multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods. The energy decision and policy-making problems include selecting among energy alternatives, evaluating energy supply technologies, determining energy policy and energy planning. There is a wide range of studies about energy decision-making problems in the literature and different types of energy alternatives are considered in these studies. The MCDM methods are used as effective tools in order to solve energy decision-making problems since they evaluate alternatives with different perspectives in terms of several conflicting criteria. In this context, the fuzzy set theory (FST) that expresses uncertainties in human opinions, can be successfully used together with the MCDM methods to get more sensitive, concrete and realistic results. This paper aims to present a comprehensive review and bring together existing literature and the most recent advances to lead researchers about the methodologies and applications of fuzzy MCDM in the energy field. For this aim, a large number of papers that use fuzzy MCDM methods to solve energy policy and decision making problems have been analyzed with respect to some characteristics such as types of fuzzy sets, year, journal, fuzzy MCDM method, country and document type. The results of this study indicate that fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), as an individual tool or by integrating with another MCDM method, is the most applied MCDM method and type-1 fuzzy sets are the most preferred type of fuzzy sets. Additionally, Turkey and China are countries which have the highest number of publications related to fuzzy MCDM methods in energy-related problems.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 369 citations exist upstream.

References

1965Fuzzy sets 1996Fuzzy sets 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement 1986Intuitionistic fuzzy sets 2007Decision Making in a Fuzzy Environment 1975The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—II 2011Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications

Cited by

2020A novel hybrid MCDM model for machine tool selection using fuzzy DEMATEL, entropy weighting and later defuzzification VIKOR 2020Revisiting Fuzzy and Linguistic Decision Making: Scenarios and Challenges for Making Wiser Decisions in a Better Way 2023A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods 2020Renewable energy investment risk assessment in belt and road initiative countries under uncertainty conditions 2021Fermatean Fuzzy CRITIC-COPRAS Method for Evaluating the Challenges to Industry 4.0 Adoption for a Sustainable Digital Transformation

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.