A multi-actor multi-criteria decision analysis framework for siting a biomass pyrolysis facility in Trabzon
Biomass and Bioenergy, vol.217, 2027 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Publication Type: Article / Article
- Volume: 217
- Publication Date: 2027
- Doi Number: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2026.110010
- Journal Name: Biomass and Bioenergy
- Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, Compendex, Environment Index, Geobase, INSPEC, Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Engineering Source (EBSCO)
- Keywords: Best-worst method, Biochar, Biomass siting, Multi-actor multicriteria analysis, Multi-attribute value theory, Pyrolysis
- İstanbul Ticaret University Affiliated: Yes
Abstract
Selecting a biomass pyrolysis facility location requires reconciling site conditions with the priorities of affected stakeholders. This study develops an integrated Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) framework combining the Pivot-Linked Elicitation Best-Worst Method (PILE-BWM) and Multi-Attribute Value Theory (MAVT) to evaluate four organized industrial zones for a tea- and hazelnut-residue bioenergy and biochar hub in Trabzon, Türkiye. A common nine-criterion performance matrix was constructed from documented regional sources, historical district-level information, and transparent screening assumptions, while separate consensus weights were elicited for farmers, residents, public-sector representatives, and private-sector actors. Farmers and the private sector assigned the greatest importance to resource and supply, whereas residents and the public sector emphasized environmental and accessibility considerations. Arsin ranked first for farmers and the private sector, while Akçaabat-Şinik ranked first for residents and the public sector. Although biomass-weighted inbound haul distance received the public sector's largest criterion weight, it favoured Arsin; Akçaabat-Şinik's narrow public-sector lead was driven by its settlement-separation advantage. The four rankings showed relatively high descriptive concordance (Kendall's W = 0.78), and minimax regret identified Akçaabat-Şinik as the compromise alternative (maximum regret = 0.47). Extended sensitivity analyses showed stable winners for farmers, residents, and the private sector, whereas the public-sector winner changed under selected circuity-factor and reference-anchor scenarios. The findings show that preserving stakeholder-specific preferences reveals trade-offs that would be obscured by aggregated weighting.