Well-optimized decision-making is a prerequisite for effective energy planning, and this requires several criteria to be considered. The multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods underpin this decision-making process through different techniques. A MCDA method can provide a reliable methodology that helps to organize the most optimized result in the presence of many different opportunities, parameters, and constraints. The selection of an effective MCDA method in the energy sector is challenging. Particularly, sustainability assessment of the electricity generation sector using a MCDA method is difficult as it is necessary to consider at least three different criteria (economic, environmental, and social) with many indicators. This work compares the robustness, with respect to criteria weight change, of seven MCDA methods that are employed to assess the sustainability of electricity generation technologies through a case study. This case study underpins conducting an effective comparison between the employed methods and conclusions drawn. Robustness is defined cumulatively, counting the number of ranking changes while varying the criteria weights by 5%, 15% and 50%. The methods considered are Weighted Sum Method (WSM), Weighted Product Method (WPM), VIKOR, Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solutions (TOPSIS), Performance Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE), Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), and COmplex PRoportional ASsessment (COPRAS). The analysis revealed that COPRAS is the most robust MCDA method, followed by WPM. The least robust one is found to be TOPSIS. Both AHP and WSM ranked third in the robustness measure.

良好优化的决策是有效能源规划的先决条件，这需要考虑几个标准。多标准决策分析 (MCDA) 方法通过不同的技术支持这一决策过程。MCDA 方法可以提供一种可靠的方法，有助于在存在许多不同机会、参数和约束的情况下组织最优化的结果。在能源领域选择有效的 MCDA 方法具有挑战性。特别是，使用 MCDA 方法对发电部门的可持续性评估是困难的，因为需要考虑至少三个不同的标准（经济、环境和社会）和许多指标。这项工作比较了关于标准权重变化的稳健性，通过案例研究评估发电技术可持续性的七种 MCDA 方法。本案例研究支持对所采用的方法和得出的结论进行有效的比较。稳健性是累积定义的，计算排名变化的次数，同时将标准权重改变 5%、15% 和 50%。考虑的方法是加权总和法 (WSM)、加权乘积法 (WPM)、VIKOR、通过与理想解决方案相似的顺序偏好技术 (TOPSIS)、用于丰富评估的绩效排名组织方法 (PROMETHEE)、层次分析法 (AHP) ) 和复杂的比例评估 (COPRAS)。分析表明，COPRAS 是最稳健的 MCDA 方法，其次是 WPM。发现最不稳健的一种是 TOPSIS。