Novel approach of Principal Component Analysis method to assess the national energy performance via Energy Trilemma Index

被引:214
作者
Al Asbahi, Ahmed Abdulwali Mohammed Haidar [1 ]
Gang, Feng Zhi [1 ]
Iqbal, Wasim [2 ]
Abass, Qaiser [3 ]
Mohsin, Muhammad [4 ,5 ]
Iram, Robina [1 ]
机构
[1] Nanjing Univ Aeronaut & Astronaut, Coll Econ & Management, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] Yanshan Univ China, Coll Econ & Management, Qinhuangdao, Hebei, Peoples R China
[3] Ghazi Univ, Fac Econ, Dg Khan, Pakistan
[4] Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Univ, Sch Business Adm, Shaheed Benazirabad 67450, Pakistan
[5] Jiangsu Univ, Sch Finance & Econ, Zhenjiang 212013, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
关键词
Energy performance; Environmental sustainability; Energy Trilemma Index (ETI); Principal Component Analysis (PCA); SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT; CO2; EMISSIONS; SECURITY; SYSTEMS; CONSUMPTION; INDICATORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.egyr.2019.06.009
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
The World Energy Council releases the Energy Trilemma Index (ETI) report annually primarily to assess the energy performance of countries worldwide. Nevertheless, the varying preferences of the dimensions in the ETI between the countries are debatable. The objective of this study is weight allocation therefore this study presents two-fold contribution to comprehensively formulate all possible preferences under the interval assessment outcomes by employing the interval decision matrix followed by the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to assess the national energy performance of top ten countries for the year 2015. Unlike the conventional methods, the significant advantage of PCA for index construction is that it does not allocate ad-hoc and subjective weights to different indicators. The obtained results were demonstrated by measurement of top ten countries energy performance based on ETI of 2015. Through the development of Energy Development Index, Norway was determined as the highest performing country among the top ten countries. This does not coincide with 2015's ETI which regarded Switzerland as the best performing country. Hence, the ranks are arguable. Further results reveals that there are considerable differences in the values of indicators among all countries. The obtained outcome is expected to aid the policy makers to understand the contribution of different indicators. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:704 / 713
页数:10
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]  
ANASTACIO R, 2017, INT J ENERGY EC POLI, V7, DOI DOI 10.1038/S41598-017-11245-6
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2016, I ENERGY EC FINANC A
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2016, ECOL ECON, V29, P303
[4]   Brand power index - using principal component analysis [J].
Bei, Lien-Ti ;
Cheng, Tsung-Chi .
APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2013, 45 (20) :2954-2960
[5]   Untangling the complexity of the direct and indirect determinants of the residential energy consumption in France: Quantitative analysis using a structural equation modeling approach [J].
Belaid, Fateh .
ENERGY POLICY, 2017, 110 :246-256
[6]  
Bhowmik C., 2018, ENERGY
[7]  
Cameron C, 2016, NAT ENERGY, V1, DOI [10.1038/NENERGY.2015.10, 10.1038/nenergy.2015.10]
[8]   ARBITRAGE, FACTOR STRUCTURE, AND MEAN-VARIANCE ANALYSIS ON LARGE ASSET MARKETS [J].
CHAMBERLAIN, G ;
ROTHSCHILD, M .
ECONOMETRICA, 1983, 51 (05) :1281-1304
[9]   Measuring countries' environmental sustainability performance-The development of a nation-specific indicator set [J].
Cook, David ;
Saviolidis, Nina Maria ;
Davidsdottir, Brynhildur ;
Johannsdottir, Lara ;
Olafsson, Snjolfur .
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, 2017, 74 :463-478
[10]   Indicators for assessing socioeconomic sustainability of bioenergy systems: A short list of practical measures [J].
Dale, Virginia H. ;
Efroymson, Rebecca A. ;
Kline, Keith L. ;
Langholtz, Matthew H. ;
Leiby, Paul N. ;
Oladosu, Gbadebo A. ;
Davis, Maggie R. ;
Downing, Mark E. ;
Hilliard, Michael R. .
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, 2013, 26 :87-102