Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.003
Title: More priorities, more problems? Decision-making with multiple energy, development and climate objectives
Authors: Ankit Bhardwaj
Madhura Joshi
Radhika Khosla
Dubash, Navroz Kersi 
Keywords: Development
Climate change
Multiple objectives
Co-benefits
Issue Date: 1-Mar-2019
Publisher: Elsevier
Citation: Ankit Bhardwaj, Madhura Joshi, Radhika Khosla, Dubash, Navroz Kersi (2019-03-01). More priorities, more problems? Decision-making with multiple energy, development and climate objectives. Energy Research & Social Science 49 : 143–157. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.003
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement pose new conceptual challenges for energy decision makers by compelling them to consider the implications of their choices for development and climate mitigation objectives. This is a nontrivial exercise as it requires pragmatic consideration of the interconnections between energy systems and their social and environmental contexts and working with a plurality of actors and values. There are an increasing number of indices, frameworks and academic studies that capture these inter-connections, yet policy makers have relatively few ex-ante tools to pragmatically aid decision-making. This paper, based on a collation of 167 studies, reviews how multi-criteria decision approaches (MCDA) are used in energy policy decisions to explicitly consider multiple social and environmental objectives, and the conceptual usefulness of doing so. First, MCDA can be used to distil a finite set of objectives from those of a large number of actors. This process is often political and objectives identified are aligned with vested interests or institutional incentives. Second, MCDA can be used to build evidence that is both qualitative and quantitative in nature to capture the implications of energy choices across economic, environmental, social and political metrics. Third, MCDA can be used to explore synergies and trade-offs between energy, social and environmental objectives, and in turn, make explicit the political implications of choices for actors. The studies reviewed in this paper demonstrate that the use of MCDA is so far mainly academic and for problems in the Global North. We argue for a mainstreaming of such a multi-criteria and deliberative approaches for energy policy decisions in developing countries where trade-offs between energy, development and climate mitigation are more contentious while recognizing the data, capacity and transparency requirements of the process.
Source Title: Energy Research & Social Science
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/224787
ISSN: 2214-6296
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.003
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
More priorities, more problems_ Decisionmaking with multiple energy, development and climate objectives _ Elsevier Enhanced Reader.pdf11.31 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.