Request a copy

Full Text

• Mohassel, R.R., Fung, A., Mohammadi, F., Raahemifar, K., A survey on advanced metering infrastructure. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 63 (2014), 473–484.
• Luthra, S., Kumar, S., Kharb, R., Ansari, M.F., Shimmi, S., Adoption of smart grid technologies: An analysis of interactions among barriers. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 33 (2014), 554–565.
• Fang, X., Misra, S., Xue, G., Yang, D., Smart grid — The new and improved power grid: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 14:4 (2012), 944–980.
• Mihaylov, M., Jurado, S., Van Moffaert, K., Avellana, N., Nowe, A., NRG-X-Change: A novel mechanism for trading of renewable energy in smart grids. Helfert, M., Krempels, K.-H., Donnellan, B., (eds.) 3rd International Conference on Smart Grids and Green IT Systems, 2014, Scite Press, 101–106.
• Mollah, M.B., Zhao, J., Niyato, D., Lam, K.-Y., Zhang, X., Ghias, A.M.Y.M., Koh, L.H., Yang, L., Blockchain for future smart grid: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 8:1 (2021), 18–43.
• Andoni, M., Robu, V., Flynn, D., Abram, S., Geach, D., Jenkins, D., McCallum, P., Peacock, A., Blockchain technology in the energy sector: A systematic review of challenges and opportunities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 100 (2019), 143–174.
• Gordijn, J., Akkermans, H., Business models for distributed generation in a liberalized market environment. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 77:9 (2007), 1178–1188.
• Nordling, A., Pädam, S., af Burén, C., Jörgensen, P., Social Costs and Benefits of Smart Grid Technologies: Tech. rep., 2018, IEA-International Smart Grid Action Network URL https://www.iea-isgan.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Task-4.5-Deliverable-1-SWE_IEA-Annex3_Social_Cost_and_Benefits_of_Smart_Grid_Technologies.pdf. Date last accessed 06-08-2021.
• Giordano, V., Onyeji, I., Fulli, G., Jimenez, M.S., Filiou, C., Guidelines for Conducting a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Smart Grid Projects: Tech. rep., 2012, Publications Office of the European Union URL https://ses.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/reports/guidelines-conducting-cost-benefit-analysis-smart-grid-projects. Date last accessed 06-08-2021.
• Léonard, C., Chartres, S., Chiappini, F., Drouineau, M., Nekrassov, A., Hadjsaïd, N., Methodology, results and key success factors of smart grid assessment in France. 2016 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, PESGM, 2016, IEEE, 1–5.
• Niesten, E., Alkemade, F., How is value created and captured in smart grids? A review of the literature and an analysis of pilot projects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53 (2016), 629–638.
• Razo-Zapata, I.S., Shrestha, A., Proper, E., On valuation of smart grid architectures: An enterprise engineering perspective. Reinhartz-Berger, I., Gulden, J., Nurcan, S., Guédria, W., Bera, P., (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling: 18th Int. Conf., BPMDS 2017, 22nd Int. Conf. EMMSAD 2017, Held At CAiSE 2017, Proceedings, 2017, Springer, Cham, 346–353.
• Kaczmarek-Heß, M., de Kinderen, S., Ma, Q., Razo-Zapata, I.S., Modeling in support of multi-perspective valuation of smart grid initiatives. 2018 12th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science, RCIS, 2018, IEEE, 1–12.
• EPRI, M., Methodological Approach for Estimating the Benefits and Costs of Smart Grid Demonstration Projects: Tech. rep., 2010, US EPRI URL https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/10/f33/Methodological_Approach_for_Estimating_Benefits_Costs_Smart_Jan_2010_0.pdf. Date last accessed 06-08-2021.
• Mylopoulos, J., Conceptual modelling and telos. Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R., (eds.) Conceptual Modelling, Databases, and CASE: An Integrated View of Information System Development, 1992, John Wiley & Sons, 49–68.
• Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., et al. Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28:1 (2004), 75–105.
• Österle, H., Becker, J., Frank, U., Hess, T., Karagiannis, D., Krcmar, H., Loos, P., Mertens, P., Oberweis, A., Sinz, E.J., Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 20:1 (2011), 7–10.
• Wieringa, R.J., Design Science Methodology for Information Systems and Software Engineering. 2014, Springer.
• Horngren, C.T., Cost Accounting: A Managerial Emphasis. 13th ed., 2009, Pearson.
• Koller, T., Goedhart, M., Wessels, D., et al. Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies. fifth ed., 2010, John Wiley & Sons.
• Benninga, S., Sarig, O., Corporate Finance: A Valuation Approach. 1996, McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
• Johansson, P.-O., Kristroem, B., Cost-Benefit Analysis Elements in Public Economics, 2018, Cambridge University Press.
• Boardman, A.E., Greenberg, D.H., Vining, A.R., Weimer, D.L., Cost-Benefit Analysis : Concepts and Practice. fourth ed., reissued, 2018, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Kitchenham, B., Charters, S., Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering: Tech. rep. EBSE 2007-001., 2007, Keele University and Durham University Joint Report URL http://www.dur.ac.uk/ebse/resources/Systematic-reviews-5-8.pdf.
• Kitchenham, B., Pretorius, R., Budgen, D., Pearl Brereton, O., Turner, M., Niazi, M., Linkman, S., Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - a tertiary study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 52:8 (2010), 792–805.
• Okoli, C., A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2015, 37.
• Falagas, M.E., Pitsouni, E.I., Malietzis, G.A., Pappas, G., Comparison of PubMed, scopus, web of science, and google scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 22:2 (2008), 338–342.
• F. Chiappini, State of the art and lessons learnt from the costbenefit analysis methods of distributed resources integration in Europe, in: 2011 2nd IEEE PES International Conference and Exhibition on Innovative Smart Grid Technologies, 2011, pp. 1–8.
• Moretti, M., Djomo, S.N., Azadi, H., May, K., De Vos, K., Van Passel, S., Witters, N., A systematic review of environmental and economic impacts of smart grids. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 68 (2017), 888–898, 10.1016/j.rser.2016.03.039.
• V. Venizelou, S. Theocharides, G. Makrides, P. Georgiou, N. Ayiomamitis, V. Efthymiou, G.E. Georghiou, Smart Metering and time-varying pricing deployment Cost-Benefit Analysis from a real pilot-implementation, in: 2018 IEEE 7th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, WCPEC a Joint Conference of 45th IEEE PVSC, 28th PVSEC 34th EU PVSEC, 2018, pp. 2430–2434.
• Zhou, L., Li, F., Gu, C., Hu, Z., Le Blond, S., Cost/benefit assessment of a smart distribution system with intelligent electric vehicle charging. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 5:2 (2013), 839–847.
• Marnay, C., Liu, L., Yu, J., Zhang, D., Mauzy, J., Shaffer, B., Dong, X., Agate, W., Vitiello, S., Liu, X., et al. Benefits Analysis of Smart Grid Projects: Tech. Rep., 2016, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory URL https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1398436. Date last accessed 06-08-2021.
• C. Chardonnet, B. de Boissezon, GDF SUEZ — GreenLys WP2: Estimating the benefits and costs of a smart electrical system in French Urban areas in 2020–2030, in: 2013 IEEE Grenoble Conference, 2013, pp. 1–6.
• McGranaghan, M., EPRI smart grid demonstration initiative-integrating DER with T&D operations. CIRED 2009-the 20th International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution-Part 2, 2009, IET, 1–14.
• Livieratos, S., Vogiatzaki, V.-E., Cottis, P.G., A generic framework for the evaluation of the benefits expected from the smart grid. Energies 6:2 (2013), 988–1008.
• Alaqeel, T., Suryanarayanan, S., A comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the penetration of smart grid technologies in the Saudi Arabian electricity infrastructure. Util. Policy, 60, 2019, 100933.
• Bossart, S., Bean, J., Metrics and benefits analysis and challenges for smart grid field projects. IEEE 2011 EnergyTech, 2011, IEEE, 1–5.
• Karali, N., Zhang, D., Ren, G., Shaffer, B., Clampitt, K., Yu, J., Yinger, R., Marnay, C., Benefits analysis of smart grid demonstration projects. 2016 China International Conference on Electricity Distribution, CICED, 2016, IEEE, 1–5.
• Sun, Q., Ge, X., Liu, L., Xu, X., Zhang, Y., Niu, R., Zeng, Y., Review of smart grid comprehensive assessment systems. Energy Procedia 12 (2011), 219–229.
• Pilo, F., Troncia, M., Combined MC-CBA Methodology for Decision Making on Smart Grid: Tech. Rep., 2018, IEA-International Smart Grid Action Network URL https://www.iea-isgan.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Task-4.5-Deliverable-3-ITA-DIEE_Combined_MC-CBA_methodology_for_decision_making_on_Smart_Grid.pdf. Date last accessed 06-08-2021.
• Troncia, M., Chowdhury, N., Pilo, F., Gianinoni, I.M., A joint multi criteria - cost benefit analysis for project selection on smart grids. 2018 AEIT International Annual Conference, 2018, IEEE, 1–6.
• Good, N., Ceseña, E.A.M., Heltorp, C., Mancarella, P., A transactive energy modelling and assessment framework for demand response business cases in smart distributed multi-energy systems. Energy 184 (2019), 165–179, 10.1016/j.energy.2018.02.089.
• Gómez, I., Riaño, S., Madina, C., Rossi, M., Kuusela, P., Koponen, P., Aghaie, H., Migliavacca, G., Rivero, E., Xu, H., et al. Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Selected National Cases: D 4. 3: Tech. Rep., 2019, The SmartNet H2020 project consortium URL https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/id/eprint/68899. Date last accessed 28-01-2020.
• Kartseva, V., Soetendal, J., Gordijn, J., Distributed Generation Business Modelling: Tech. Rep., 2004, VU University Amsterdam URL http://research.e3value.com/docs/misc/VUA_DGB_WP05_01_01.pdf. Date last accessed 06-08-2021.
• Horkoff, J., Yu, E., Comparison and evaluation of goal-oriented satisfaction analysis techniques. Requir. Eng. 18:3 (2013), 199–222.
• Kaczmarek-Heß, M., De Kinderen, S., A multilevel model of IT platforms for the needs of enterprise IT landscape analyses. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 59:5 (2017), 315–329.
• Goepel, K.D., Implementation of an online software tool for the analytic hierarchy process (AHP-OS). Int. J. Anal. Hierarchy Process, 10(3), 2018.
• Frank, U., Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: Foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges. SoSyM 13:3 (2014), 941–962.
• Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S., A design science research methodology for information systems research. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 24:3 (2007), 45–77.
• Malavolta, I., Lago, P., Muccini, H., Pelliccione, P., Tang, A., What industry needs from architectural languages: A survey. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39:6 (2013), 869–891.
• SGAM, I., Smart Grid Reference Architecture: Tech. Rep., 2012, CEN-CENELEC-ETSI Smart Grid Coordination Group URL https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/xpert_group1_reference_architecture.pdf. Date last accessed 11-02-2020.
• Gottschalk, M., Uslar, M., Delfs, C., The Use Case and Smart Grid Architecture Model Approach: The IEC 62559-2 Use Case Template and the SGAM Applied in Various Domains. first ed., 2017, Springer.
• R. Santodomingo, M. Uslar, A. Goring, M. Gottschalk, L. Nordstrom, A. Saleem, M. Chenine, SGAM-based methodology to analyse Smart Grid solutions, in: Energy Conference (ENERGYCON), 2014 IEEE International, 2014, pp. 751–758.
• Gottschalk, M., Uslar, M., Delfs, C., Future applications of the results from the EU mandate M/490. The Use Case and Smart Grid Architecture Model Approach: The IEC 62559-2 Use Case Template and the SGAM Applied in Various Domains, 2017, Springer, 85–90.
• Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., Wißotzki, M., Enterprise Modeling: Tackling Business Challenges with the 4EM Method. 2014, Springer, Berlin.
• The Open Group, K., ArchiMate 2.1 Specification: Open Group Standard The Open Group Series, 2013, Van Haren, Zaltbommel.
• SoftwareAG, K., ARIS method manual v.10. 2017 Software AG.
• Lankhorst, M., Enterprise Architecture At Work: Modeling, Communication and Analysis. third ed., 2013, Springer.
• Iacob, M.-E., Meertens, L.O., Jonkers, H., Quartel, D.A., Nieuwenhuis, L.J., van Sinderen, M.J., From enterprise architecture to business models and back. SOSYM 13:3 (2014), 1059–1083.
• Caetano, A., Antunes, G., Pombinho, J., Bakhshandeh, M., Granjo, J., Borbinha, J.L., da Silva, M.M., Representation and analysis of enterprise models with semantic techniques: an application to ArchiMate, e3value and business model canvas. KAIS 50:1 (2017), 315–346, 10.1007/s10115-016-0933-0.
• de Kinderen, S., Gaaloul, K., Proper, H.A., Bridging value modelling to ArchiMate via transaction modelling. Softw. Syst. Model. 13:3 (2014), 1043–1057.
• Quartel, D., Steen, M.W., Lankhorst, M., IT portfolio valuation-using enterprise architecture and business requirements modeling. 14th Int. Conf. EDOC, 2010, IEEE, 3–13.
• Overbeek, S., Frank, U., Köhling, C., A language for multi-perspective goal modelling: Challenges, requirements and solutions. CSI 38 (2015), 1–16, 10.1016/j.csi.2014.08.001.
• Heise, D., Unternehmensmodell-Basiertes IT-Kostenmanagement Als Bestandteil Eines Integrativen IT-Controllings. 2013, Logos, Berlin.
• de Kinderen, S., Kaczmarek-Heß, M., Enterprise modeling in support of SOA migration analysis. EMISA 13:1 (2018), 1–36.
• Gordijn, J., Yu, E., van der Raadt, B., E-service design using i* and e3value modeling. IEEE Softw. 23:3 (2006), 26–33.
• Geerts, G.L., McCarthy, W.E., An ontological analysis of the economic primitives of the extended-REA enterprise information architecture. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 3:1 (2002), 1–16, 10.1016/S1467-0895(01)00020-3.
• Johnson, P., Iacob, M.E., Välja, M., van Sinderen, M., Magnusson, C., Ladhe, T., A method for predicting the probability of business network profitability. Inf. Syst. E-Bus. Manag. 12:4 (2014), 567–593.
• Razo-Zapata, I.S., Gordijn, J., de Leenheer, P., Wieringa, R., e3service: A critical reflection and future research. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 57:1 (2015), 51–59.
• Hruby, P., Model-Driven Design using Business Patterns. 2006, Springer.
• Gordijn, J., Akkermans, J., e3-value: Design and evaluation of e-business models. IEEE Intell. Syst. 16 (2001), 11–17 https://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/5254.941353.
• Pijpers, V., de Leenheer, P., Gordijn, J., Akkermans, H., Using conceptual models to explore business-ICT alignment in networked value constellations. RE 17:3 (2012), 203–226.
• E. Yu, Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering, in: Requirements Engineering, 1997., Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Symposium on, 1997, pp. 226–235.
• Amyot, D., Ghanavati, S., Horkoff, J., Mussbacher, G., Peyton, L., Yu, E., Evaluating goal models within the goal-oriented requirement language. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25:8 (2010), 841–877.
• Bresciani, P., Perini, A., Giorgini, P., Giunchiglia, F., Mylopoulos, J., Tropos: An agent-oriented software development methodology. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 8:3 (2004), 203–236.
• Horkoff, J., Aydemir, F.B., Cardoso, E., Li, T., Maté, A., Paja, E., Salnitri, M., Piras, L., Mylopoulos, J., Giorgini, P., Goal-oriented requirements engineering: an extended systematic mapping study. Requir. Eng. 24:2 (2019), 133–160, 10.1007/s00766-017-0280-z.
• ITU-T, J., User requirements notation (URN)–language definition. 2008 http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Z.151/en. Date last accessed 11-02-2020.
• Goldkuhl, G., Karlsson, F., Method engineering as design science. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 21(5), 2020, 4.
• Henderson-Sellers, B., Ralyté, J., Situational method engineering: state-of-the-art review. J. UCS 16:3 (2010), 424–478.