Cross-Institution Reweighting of National Green Data Center Indicators: An AHP-Based Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis with Consensus–Divergence Diagnostics

Evaluating green data centers is a multi-attribute decision problem. To enhance the rigor and precision of green data center assessment, this study verifies the weighting of the national green data center evaluation index system using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with the participation of 19 domain experts from various data center sectors. The aim is to gain an in-depth understanding of the perspectives and priorities of different types of institutions regarding evaluation indicators and to investigate the underlying reasons for these perspectives and priorities. Through an analysis of expert sample distribution, this paper reveals the preferences of financial, internet, research, and design, as well as technical consulting service institutions, regarding indicators such as energy-efficient utilization, computational resource utilization, green low-carbon development, scientific layout, and intensive construction. Specifically, financial institutions tend to place a relatively lower emphasis on energy efficiency due to their focus on transaction speed and security. In contrast, internet companies prioritize efficient utilization of computational resources. Research and design institutions consider scientific layout and intensive construction more crucial, while technical consulting service institutions emphasize green and low-carbon development. Meanwhile, we identified substantial discrepancies among experts in determining the weights of specific indicators, suggesting a lack of consensus within the industry about the correlation between these indicators and green data centers. To propel the sustainable development of green data centers, future assessments should refine evaluation dimensions, consider disparities such as data center types and embrace regional differences, actively adopt novel technologies and innovative practices, and establish mechanisms for long-term monitoring and evaluation.