Evaluation of the environmental sustainability performance of Eastern European countries with integrated MCDM methods

Year 2024, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 378 - 391, 27.06.2024

Gül Senir

https://doi.org/10.31015/jaefs.2024.2.13

Abstract

Especially in recent years, the environmental problems of countries have been increasing due to the acceleration of industrialization, increasing population, continuous increase in the consumption and energy requirements of the society and the development of technology. In order to eliminate these problems, countries take many measures and precautions. This study aims to compare Eastern European countries by evaluating their positions in the environmental sustainability performance index (EPI). For this purpose, the importance levels of the criteria were found with ENTROPY, which is in the objective category of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods, and then the ranking of the countries in the environmental sustainability performance index was determined with Complex Proportional Assessmnet (COPRAS) and Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS) methods. The data used in the evaluation of the environmental sustainability performance index “The 2022 Environmental Performance Index (EPI)” ranking of Eastern European countries is the data prepared by Yale University and obtained from the relevant web address. According to the results obtained, the ranking of the criteria in terms of their importance levels were ranked as water resources, waste management and agriculture, and the rankings obtained according to COPRAS and WASPAS methods differed in the environmental sustainability performance ranking of the countries, and it was determined that the WASPAS method gave more consistent results.

Keywords

Environmental Performance Index (EPI), ENTROPY, COPRAS, WASPAS

References

• Ab-rahim, Rossazana (2015). Environmental performance of ASEAN countries: A data envelopment analysis. Journal of Economic Policy and Research, 10 (1), 98-108.
• Akandere, G. (2021). Kuşak yol ülkelerinin lojistik ve çevresel performansının analizi. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 20(4), 1893-1915 (in Turkish).
• Akandere, G. ve Zerenler, M. (2022). Doğu avrupa ülkelerinin çevresel ve ekonomik performansının bütünleşik CRITIC-TOPSIS yöntemiyle değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 25(Özel Sayı), 524-535 (in Turkish).
• Aksu, E. Ö. ve Gencer, C. T. (2018). Veri zarflama analizi ile OECD ülkelerinin çevre performansının incelenmesi. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, (18. EYİ Özel Sayısı), 191-206 (in Turkish).
• Alkaya, Ö. Ü. A. (2022). OECD ülkelerinin çevresel performans etkinliklerinin veri zarflama analizi ile değerlendirilmesi. Ekonomi, Finans ve İktisadi Bilimler Alanında Akademik Çalışmalar-I. Artikel Akademi: 220, 9-30 (in Turkish).
• Altıntasa, F. F. (2021). Ülkelerin çevre performanslarının CODAS ve TOPSIS yöntemleri ile ölçülmesi: G7 grubu ülkeleri örneği. Ulakbilge Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(59), 544-559 (in Turkish).
• Altıntaşb, F. F. (2021). Çevre performanslarının ENTROPİ tabanlı ROV, ARAS ve COPRAS yöntemleri ile ölçülmesi: G20 grubu ülkeleri örneği. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 10(1), 55-78 (in Turkish).
• Altuntaş, C. ve Kaya, F. (2024). Seçili Avrupa Birliği üyesi ülkelerin sürdürülebilirlik düzeyleri ile kurumsal sürdürülebilirliklerinin analizi. EURO Politika, (19), 42-62.
• Ave, P., and Babolsar, I. (2010). Environmental performance ındex and economic growth: Evidence from some developing countries. Australian journal of basic and applied sciences, 4(8), 3098-3102.
• Ayçin, E. (2019), Çok kriterli karar verme: Bilgisayar uygulamalı çözümler. Nobel Akademi Yayıncılık, 1. Basım, Ankara.
• Ayçin, E. ve Çakın, E. (2019). Ülkelerin çevresel performanslarının çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ve bulanık mantık tabanlı bir yaklaşım ile bütünleşik olarak değerlendirilmesi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 14(3), 631-656 (in Turkish).
• Baloch, Z. A., Tan, Q., Iqbal, N., Mohsin, M., Abbas, Q., and Iqbal, W. (2020). Trilemma assessment of energy ıntensity, efficiency, and environmental ındex: Evidence from BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 34337–34347.
• Bek, N. (2019). Çevresel performans endeksi ve sürdürülebilir yönetişim göstergeleri kapsamında ülke karşılaştırması: Türkiye ve İsviçre örneği. International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Social Sciences, 3(2), 36-45 (in Turkish).
• Bilbao-Terol, A., Arenas-Parra, M., Cañal-Fernández, V., and Antomil-Ibias, J. (2014). Using TOPSIS for assessing the sustainability of government bond funds. Omega, 49, 1-17.
• Botetzagias, I., Tsagkari, M., and Malesios, C. (2018). Is the “Troika” bad for the environment? An analysis of EU countries environmental performance in times of economic downturn and austerity memoranda. Ecological Economics, 150, 34-51.
• Bucher, S. (2016). Measuring of environmental performance ındex in Europe. Rocznik Ochrona Środowiska, 18, 46-64.
• Chandrasekharan, I., Kumar, R. S., Raghunathan, S., and Chandrasekaran, S. (2013). Construction of environmental performance ındex and ranking of states. Current Science,104(4), 435-439.
• Chandrasekharan, I. C. B., and Srinivasan, D. S. (2020). Environmental performance ındex 2020 and ranking states of India. Paper submitted to IJEPDM. (http://erccon.com/reports/Final%20EPI%202020%20IJEDM%205-10-20.pdf).
• Chowdhury, T., and Islam, S. (2017). Environmental performance ındex and GDP growth rate: Evidence from BRICS countries. Environmental Economics, 8(4), 31-36.
• Ding, D. K. and Beh, S. E. (2022). Climate change and sustaiınability in ASEAN countries. Sustainability, 14(999), 1-17.
• Djoundourian, Salpie (2012), Environmental performance of developing countries: A comparative study, Topics in Middle Eastern and African Economies, 14, 265-277.
• Doğan, H. (2022). Seçilmiş ülkelerin çevresel performanslarının bütünleşik CRITIC-MABAC yöntemleriyle ölçülmesi. Journal of Emerging Economies & Policy, 7(2), 433-448.
• Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., and Hernandez-Sancho, F. (2004). Environmental performance: An ındex number approach. Resource and Energy economics, 26(4), 343-352.
• García-Sánchez, Isabel Maria; Almeida, Thiago Alexandre das Neves; Camara, R .P. B. (2015). A proposal for A composite ındex of environmental performance (CIEP) for countries, Ecological Indicators, 48, 171–188.
• Ha, L. T., Huong, T. T. L., and Thang, T. T. (2022). Is digitalization a driver to enhance environmental performance? An empirical investigation of european countries. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 32, 230-247.
• Ismail, W. K. W., and Abdullah, L. (2012). A new environmental performance ındex using analytic hierarchy process: A case of ASEAN countries. Environmental Skeptics and Critics, 1(3), 39.
• Karaman, Y. E. (2018). Çevre performans endeksi kapsamında Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye’nin karşılaştırılması. Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, 10(1), 76-85 (in Turkish).
• Liu, P., Zhu, B., and Wang, P. (2021). A Weighting Model Based on Best–Worst method and its application for environmental performance evaluation. Applied Soft Computing, 103, 107168.
• Matsumoto, K. I., Makridou, G., and Doumpos, M. (2020). Evaluating environmental performance using data envelopment analysis: The case of European countries. Journal of cleaner production, 272, 1-13.
• Nguyen, T. T., Tran, C. T., Ly, T. B., and Nguyen, T. T. (2022). Developing a provincial environmental performance index for the environmental health of Vietnam. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25, 622-647.
• Olafsson, Snjolfur; Cook, David; Davidsdottir, B.; Johannsdottir, L. (2014). Measuring countries' environmental sustainability performance – A review and case study of Iceland, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 934–948.
• Özkan, M., ve Özcan, A. (2018). Veri zarflama analizi (VZA) ile seçilmiş çevresel göstergeler üzerinden bir değerlendirme: OECD Performans İncelemesi. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(32), 485-508 (in Turkish).
• Pimonenko, T. V., Liulov, O. V., and Chyhryn, O. Y. (2018). Environmental performance index: relation between social and economic welfare of the countries. 9(3), 7-16. (https://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/bitstream-download/123456789/80443/1/Pimonenko_damage_paper.pdf).
• Roggea, N. (2012). Undesirable specialization in the construction of composite policy indicators: The environmental performance index. Ecological Indicators, 23, 143-154.
• Savaş, H. (2012). Tüketim toplumu çevre performans indeksi ve Türkiye’nin çevre performansının indekse göre değerlendirilmesi. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 1(4), 132-148 (in Turkish).
• Sima, V., and Gheorghe, I. G. (2014). Analyze of environmental performance in Romania based on environmental performance index. Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu. Economy Series, 3, 101-104.
• Signes, A. P., Royo, R. C., and Ona, M. S. (2022). Can a country’s environmental sustainability exert influence on its economic and financial situation? The relationship between environmental performance indicators and country risk. Journal of Cleaner Production, 375, 1-10.
• Sözen, A., Karık, F., ve Çiftçi, E. (2016, November). Türkiye’nin çevresel performansının OECD ve BRICS ülkeleri ile karşılaştırılması. In 3rd International Symposium on Environment and Morality, 4(6), 201-209 (in Turkish).
• Topal, M. H. & Hayaloğlu, P. (2017). Farklı gelişmişlik düzeylerinde kurumsal kalitenin çevre performansı üzerindeki etkisi: ampirik bir analiz. Sosyoekonomi, 25(32), 189-212.
• Tunçarslan, N. (2018). BRICS ülkelerinin iklim ve çevre politikaları: Karşılaştırmalı bir analiz. Beykent Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2), 36-50.
• Uca, S. ve Yüncü, H. R. (2020). Akdeniz turizm destinasyonlarının çevresel performans endeksine (2020) göre ekolojik performansları: Çok boyutlu ölçekleme analizi ile bir değerlendirme. Journal of Gastronomy Hospitality and Travel, 3(2), 299-310 (in Turkish).
• Yiğit, S. (2020). Küreselleşmenin ulusların çevresel performansı üzerindeki etkisi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (64), 162-174 (in Turkish).
• Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., & Zakarevicius, A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektronika Ir Elektrotechnika, 122(6), 3-6.
• Zhou, P., Poh, K. L., and Ang, B. W. (2007). A Non-radial DEA approach to measuring environmental performance. European journal of operational research, 178(1), 1-9.
• Zuo, X., Hua, H., Dong, Z., and Hao, C. (2017). Environmental performance index at the provincial level for China 2006–2011. Ecological Indicators, 75, 48-56.
• Environmental Performance Index 2022. Retrieved in February, 28, 2023 from https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2022/component/epi,