# APOLLO-Live: A multi-criteria-based webtool for synchronous group decision making and consensus reaching in energy and climate policy deliberations

## TL;DR

APOLLO-Live is a webtool that helps groups reach consensus during climate and energy policy discussions by using live voting and decision-making methods.

## Contribution

Introduces APOLLO-Live, a novel webtool for live group decision making and consensus building in energy and climate policy.

## Key findings

- APOLLO-Live uses linguistic variables and 2-tuple TOPSIS to prioritize community needs and solutions.
- The tool improves consensus through multiple voting rounds and live discussions in workshops.
- Two use cases demonstrate its effectiveness in capturing youth preferences for climate actions and investments.

## Abstract

Pursuing a just, equitable, and desirable sustainable transition requires stakeholders from a diverse set of backgrounds and varying viewpoints to actively engage in deliberations to co-design their future. Facilitating stakeholder engagement activities has so far relied on either qualitative frameworks and processes or simplified quantitative approaches such as surveys, which render eliciting tangible and actionable outcomes challenging. Although group decision making and consensus reaching can leverage the capacity of multi-criteria decision aid to address this gap, tools implementing such processes remain scarce.

Here, we present APOLLO-Live, a stakeholder engagement webtool that can be used live in workshops to facilitate deliberations in energy and climate policy. The tool relies on linguistic variables, which are easily comprehensible by the participants, and employs the 2-tuple TOPSIS group decision making method to prioritise needs faced by different communities, as well as solutions that can be implemented to advance the energy transition. It also fleshes out differences in the voting patterns of different groups of voters and calculates a consensus metric to shed light on conflicts arising. Through tips and suggestions provided within the tool and based on multiple rounds of voting, supplemented by live discussions during the workshop, the tool can improve consensus and synthesise multiple perspectives in the produced outcomes, assisting towards bridging the conflicts and producing solutions that are widely accepted.

We highlight the functionalities of the webtool, including how it can be used to advance stakeholder dialogues, in two use cases targeting the preferences of the youth in terms of (a) actions to advance climate action and (b) investments to be prioritised. Finally, although the development and use principles followed focused on the energy and climate policy domain, the tool can be used in any application where multi-criteria decision aid and group decision making can potentially be employed.

Climate change is a serious threat to humanity. However, not all people agree on the best way to address it, since neither the impacts of climate change nor the potential benefits of the green transition are evenly and fairly distributed. As such, it is important that all people become an active part of the discussions and debates. Here, we present APOLLO-Live, an online tool that can be used live in workshops to assist such discussions. For example, it can be used to assist voters in highlighting the most important challenges they face in their communities, as well as indicate solutions, such as investments, that should be urgently implemented. The tool aims to improve the agreement between participants, based on multiple rounds of voting, discussions, and displayed suggestions. A core component of the tool lies in understanding how the opinions of different groups of people differ (e.g., citizens compared to academics or policymakers). The methodologies employed offer a seamless use of the tool by both the participants and potential organisers of workshops. We also present two use case examples focusing on understanding the preferences of young people in questions related to climate action, explaining how the tool can be used, and discussing what types of results can be produced. Despite our focus on themes related to climate change, the tool can be used in various domains and decision-making in the context of conflicting viewpoints.