4.6 Article

Evaluation Model for Investment in Solar Photovoltaic Power Generation Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 11, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su11102905

Keywords

solar PV; financial investment; evaluation indicators; stakeholder; fuzzy AHP

Funding

  1. Human Resources Development program of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) - Korea government Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy [20194010201860]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Owing to rapid growth in the Asian solar photovoltaic (PV) power market, decision-making models are required to develop efficient investment strategies. Previous studies have largely focused on technological conditions and macroeconomic indicators, but not on the increasing needs of the financial sector. In this study, we developed an evaluation model of solar PV investment and financial factors at the project level. The model applies the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and selects appropriate evaluation indicators for investment by emphasizing financial factors such as access to finance and exit strategies after the initial investment. Furthermore, we derived the relative importance of the indicators for each stakeholder. Stakeholder analysis enables comparison by quantifying the risks of each market participant. Economic factors (71.57%) were selected as the most important evaluation factors, followed by policy factors (16.26%), and technical factors (12.17%). Higher weights were assigned to indicators that directly affect profitability. Stakeholders showed significant differences in policy factors. Power generation companies showed higher weight values in policy factors than other groups. Quantification of differences in perceptions provides basic data for establishing effective investment strategies and developing policies. Therefore, the proposed model will contribute to more efficient solar PV project development.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available