Successful transfer of environmentally sound technologies for greenhouse gas mitigation: a framework for matching the needs of developing countries

Abstract Transferring appropriate environmentally sound technologies (EST) and ensuring their effective implementation can help arrest the sharp growth in the greenhouse gas emissions from developing countries (DC). However, past experiences indicate that, to be successful, the technologies being transferred have to match certain requirements of the DC. For example, the technologies should be relevant to the local needs of the DC, and sufficient expertise should be made available in the local market to maintain the technology. Thus the matching process has to consider multiple criteria and the opinions of several stakeholders. Key stakeholders in DC and important criteria are discussed briefly in the paper. We then propose a multi-criteria model, based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), for the matching process. The model is explained using an illustration, describing in detail the processes of elicitation of the opinions of stakeholders and aggregation of the opinions of several stakeholders.

[1]  F. Lootsma.  A model for the relative importance of the criteria in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART , 1996 .

[2]  David Pearce,et al.  Environmental Policy Benefits: Monetary Valuation , 1989 .

[3]  R. Ramanathan,et al.  Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages , 1994 .

[4]  N. H. Ravindranath,et al.  Climate change mitigation in the energy and forestry sectors of developing countries , 1998 .

[5]  Patrick T. Harker,et al.  The Analytic hierarchy process : applications and studies , 1989 .

[6]  Bruce L. Golden,et al.  Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Categorized, Annotated Bibliography , 1989 .

[7]  F. Lootsma.  Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis via Ratio and Difference Judgement , 1999 .

[9]  Luis G. Vargas.  An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications , 1990 .

[10]  F. Lootsma.  SCALE SENSITIVITY IN THE MULTIPLICATIVE AHP AND SMART , 1993 .

[11]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation , 1990 .

[12]  G. Crawford,et al.  A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices , 1985 .

[13]  R. Moss,et al.  Climate change 1995 - impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change : scientific-technical analyses , 1997 .

[14]  D. Diakoulaki,et al.  Multicriteria analysis vs. externalities assessment for the comparative evaluation of electricity generation systems , 1997 .

[15]  Arthur H. Rosenfeld,et al.  ENGINEERING-ECONOMIC STUDIES OF ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Opportunities and Challenges , 1998 .

[16]  Technology Transfer, Adaptation and Generation: A Framework for Evaluation , 1990 .

[17]  Manas Chatterji,et al.  Technology transfer in the developing countries , 1990 .

[18]  R. Ramanathan,et al.  Selection of appropriate greenhouse gas mitigation options , 1999 .

[19]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Technological choice in the less developed countries: An analytic hierarchy approach , 1981 .

[20]  H. Gholam-Nezhad.  Oil price scenarios: 1989 and 1995 , 1987 .

[21]  Valerie Belton,et al.  On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies , 1983 .

[22]  R. Ramanathan.  A multicriteria methodology for global negotiations on climate change , 1998, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C.

[23]  R. Pachauri,et al.  Climate change in Asia and Brazil : the role of technology transfer , 1994 .

[24]  M. R. Bhagavan,et al.  New generic technologies in developing countries , 1997 .