Avrupa Birliği ülkelerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma performanslarının MEREC tabanlı WEDBA yöntemi ile analizi

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1, 117 - 137, 08.03.2024

Furkan Fahri Altıntaş

https://doi.org/10.48146/odusobiad.1253850

Cited By: 1

Öz

Ülkelerin sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya önem vermesiyle çevrenin iyileşmesi ve sınırlı kaynakların kontrol altına alınması sağlanarak ekonomilerin gelişmesi sağlanabilir. Özellikle Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma ile ilgili politikaları küresel ekonomiyi etkileyebildiğinden dolayı Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma performanslarının ölçülmesi önem arz etmektedir. Bu bağlamda araştırmada, Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinin en son ve güncel olan Dönüşüm Performansı Endeksi (Transaction Performance Index - TPI) bileşenlerine ait değerler üzerinden söz konusu ülkelerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansları MEREC tabanlı WEDBA yöntemi ile ölçülmüştür. Bulgulara göre ilk olarak MEREC yöntemi ile ülkelere göre en önemli TPI bileşeninin ‘‘çevresel dönüşüm’’ olduğu tespit edilmiştir. İkinci olarak ise MEREC tabanlı WEDBA yöntemine göre en fazla sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansına sahip ilk üç ülkenin Danimarka, İrlanda ve Malta, buna karşın en az performansa sahip ilk üç ülkenin ise GKRK, Finlandiya ve Estonya olduğu gözlenmiştir. Araştırmada ayrıca MEREC tabanlı WEDBA yöntemi kapsamında ülkelerin ortalama sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansları hesaplanmış ve ortalama performans değerinden az performansa sahip olan ülkelerin küresel ekonomiye katkılarının daha fazla olması için sürdürülebilir kalkınma performanslarını artırmaları gerektiği değerlendirilmiştir. Son olarak yöntem açısından duyarlılık ve ayırım uzaklığı analizlere göre ülkelerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansları TPI kapsamında MEREC tabanlı WEDBA yöntemi ile ölçülebileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sürdürülebilir kalkınma, Sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansı, Dönüşüm performansı endeksi, MEREC, MEREC tabanlı WEDBA

Analysis of Sustainable Development Performances with MEREC-based WEDBA Method: Example of European Union Countries

Öz

With the emphasis of countries on sustainable development, the improvement of the environment and the control of limited resources can be achieved and the development of economies can be achieved. It is important to measure the sustainable development performances of European Union countries, especially since the policies of the European Union countries related to sustainable development can affect the global economy. In this context, the sustainable development performances of the European Union countries were measured with the MEREC-based WEDBA method over the values of the Transaction Performance Index (TPI) components of the European Union countries, which are the latest and current. According to the findings, firstly, it was determined that the most important TPI component according to the countries was "environmental transformation" with the MEREC method. Secondly, according to the MEREC-based WEDBA method, it was observed that the first three countries with the highest sustainable development performance were Denmark, Ireland and Malta, while the first three countries with the lowest performance were Southern Cyprus, Finland and Estonia. In the study, the average sustainable development performance of the countries was calculated within the scope of the MEREC-based WEDBA method and it was evaluated that the countries with less than the average performance value should increase their sustainable development performance in order to contribute more to the global economy. Finally, according to the sensitivity and separation distance analyzes in terms of method, it has been concluded that the sustainable development performances of the countries can be measured with the MEREC-based WEDBA method within the scope of TPI.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sustainable development, Sustainable development performance, Transformation performance index, MEREC-based WEDBA

Kaynakça

• Abbasi, K. R., Hussain, K., Redulescu, M., & Öztürk, İ. (2021). Does Natural Resources Depletion and Economic Growth Achieve The Carbon Neutrality Target of The UK? A Way Forward Towards Sustainable Development. Resources Policy, 74, 1-12.
• Ahmad, S., Ali , M., Khan, Z. A., & Asjad, M. (2022). Investigating The Effect of Input Variables on The Performance of FMS Followed by Multi-Response Optimization: A Simulation Study. Materials Today: Proceedings, 64, 1500–1503.
• Al-Hawari, T., Naji, A., Alshraideh, H., & Bataineh, O. (2019). Extending The WEDBA to The Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Environment. Int. J. Computer Applications in Technology, 59(4), 330-346.
• Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M. B. (2016). Application of TOPSIS Method for Analysis of Application of TOPSIS Method for Analysis of Countries. The 10th International Days of Statistics and Economics (pp. 82-92.). Prague: Institute of Economic Research.
• Beg, N., Morlot, J. C., Davidson, O., Afrane-Okesse, Y., Tyani, L., Denton, F., et al. (2002). Linkages Between Climate Change And Sustainable Development. Climate Policy, 2, 129–144.
• Blewitt, J. (2008). Understanding Sustainable Development. London: Earthscan.
• Bozloğan, R. (2002). Sürdürülebilir Gelişme Düşüncesine Giriş. Çağdaş Yerel Yönetimler, 11(1), 56-72.
• Castro, C., & Lopes, C. (2022). Digital Government and Sustainable Development. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 13, 880–903.
• Çağrı, T., & Başar, M. (2022). The Assessment Of A Smart System In Hydroponic Vertical Farming via Fuzzy MCDM Methods. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 42(1), 1-12.
• Damtoft, J. S., Lukasik, J., Herfort, D., Sorrentino, D., & Gartner, E. M. (2008). Sustainable Development And Climate Change Initiatives. Cement and Concrete Research, 38, 115–127.
• Dhahri, S., & Omri, A. (2018). Entrepreneurship Contribution to The Three Pillars of Sustainable development: What Does The Evidence Really Say? World Development, 106, 64–77.
• Ding, L., Shao, Z., Zhang, H., Xu, C., & Wu, D. (2016). A Comprehensive Evaluation of Urban Sustainable Development in China Based on the TOPSIS-Entropy Method. Sustainability, 8, 1-23.
• Dwivedi, P. P., & Sharma, D. K. (2022). Application of Shannon Entropy and COCOSO Techniques to Analyze Performance of Sustainable Development Goals: The Case of the Indian. Results in Engineering, 14, 1-9.
• Ecemiş, O., & Coşkun, A. (2022). Türkiye’de Bilişim Teknolojileri Kullanımının ÇKKV Yöntemleriyle İncelenmesi: 2014 2021 Dönemi. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi (Özel Sayı 37), 81-89.
• Ecer, F., & Hashemkhani Zolfani, S. (2022). Evaluating Economic Freedom via A Multi-Criteria MEREC-DNMA Model-Based Composite System: Case of OPEC Countries. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 28(4), 1158–1181.
• Fischer, J. M., & Amekudzi, A. (2011). Quality of Life, Sustainable Civil Infrastructure, and Sustainable Development: Strategically Expanding Choice. Journal of Urban Planning And Development, 137, 39-48.
• Garg, R. (2017). Optimal Selection of E-Learning Websites Using Multiattribute Decision Making Approaches. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Optimization, Learning and, Decision Support, 24(3-4), 187-196.
• Gedik, Y. (2020). Sosyal, Ekonomik ve Çevresel Boyutlarla Sürdürülebilirlik ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma. International Journal of Economics, Politics, Humanities & Social Sciences, 3(3), 196-215.
• Gigovic, L., Pamucar, D., Bajic, Z., & Milicevic, M. (2016). The Combination of Expert Judgment and GIS-MAIRCA Analysis for the Selection of Sites for Ammunition Depots. Sustainability, 8, 1-30.
• Goswami, S. S., Mohanty, S. K., & Behera, D. K. (2022). Selection of A Green Renewable Energy Source in India with The Help of MEREC Integrated PIV MCDM Tool. Materials Today: Proceedings, 52, 1153–1160.
• Gupta, A. K., & Gupta, N. (2020). Effect of Corporate Environmental Sustainability on Dimensions of Firm Performance-Towards Sustainable Development: Evidence from India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 1-14.
• Gupta, A., Gupta, N., & Garg, K. R. (2018). Implementing Weighted Entropy-Distance Based Approach for The Selection of Software Reliability Growth Models. Int. J. Computer Applications in Technology, 57(3), 255-266.
• Hall, J. K., Daneke, G., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable Development and Entrepreneurship: Past Contributions and Future Directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 439–448.
• Harris, J. M. (2000). Basic Principles of Sustainable Development - Working Paper 00-04. Medford: Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts University.
• Hezam, I. M., Mishra, A. R., Rani, P., Cavallaro, F., Saha, A., Ali, J., et al. (2022). A Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy-MEREC-RS-DNMA Method for Assessing the Alternative Fuel Vehicles with Sustainability Perspectives. Sustainability, 14, 1-33.
• Hu, D., Huang, Y., & Zhong, C. (2021). Does Environmental Information Disclosure Affect the Sustainable Development of Enterprises: The Role of Green Innovation. Sustainability, 13, 1-22.
• Jabareen, Y. (2008). A New Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Development. Environ. Dev. Sustain, 10, 179–192.
• Jain, V., & Ajmera, P. (2019). Application of MCDM Methods as MOORA and WEDBA for Ranking of FMS Flexibility. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 3, 119–136.
• Jeremy, H., & Vredenburg, H. (2003). The Challenges of Innovating for Sustainable Development. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(1), 61-68.
• Johnson, M. P., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). Entrepreneurship for Sustainable Development: A Review and Multilevel Causal Mechanism Framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(6), 1141–1173.
• Kardos, M. (2012). The Relationship between Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Sustainable Development. Research on European Union Countries. Procedia Economics and Finance, 3, 1030–1035.
• Kayapınar Kaya, S. (2020). Evaluation of the Effect of COVID-19 on Countries’ Sustainable Development Level: A Comparative MCMD Framework. Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications, 3(3), 101-122.
• Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2021). Determination of ObjectiveWeights Using a New Method Based on the Removal Effects of Criteria (MEREC). Symmetry, 13, 1-20.
• Khan, M. K., Trinh, H. H., Khan, I. U., & Ullah, S. (2022). Sustainable Economic Activities, Climate Change, and Carbon Risk: An International Evidence. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24, 9642–9664.
• Khan, N. Z., Ansari, T., Siddiquee, A. N., & Khan, Z. A. (2019). Selection of E learning Websites Using A Novel Proximity Indexed Value (PIV) MCDM method. J. Comput. Educ. , 6(2), 241–256.
• Komisyonu, A. (2022). Transitions Performance Index 2021 – Towards fair and prosperous sustainability. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• Kurniawan, R., & Managi, S. (2018). Economic Growth and Sustainable Development in Indonesia: An Assessment. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 54(3), 339-361.
• Lyeonov, S., Pimonenko, T., Bilan, Y., Štreimikiene, D., & Mentel, G. (2019). Assessment of Green Investments’ Impact on Sustainable Development: Linking Gross Domestic Product Per Capita, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Renewable Energy. Energies, 12, 1-12.
• Mateusz, P., Milaszewicz, D., Latuszynska, M., Borawski, M., & Nermend, K. (2018). TOPSIS and VIKOR methods in study of sustainable development in the EU Countries. Procedia Computer Science, 126, 1683–1692.
• Méndez-Picazoa, M.-T., Galindo-Martín, M.-A., & Castano-Martínez, M.-S. (2021). Effects of Sociocultural and Economic Factors on Socialentrepreneurship and Sustainable Development. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6, 69–77.
• Mujtaba, G., & Shahzad, S. (2021). Air Pollutants, Economic Growth and Public Health: Implications for Sustainable Development in OECD Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 12686–12698.
• Nguyen, H.-Q., Nguyen, V.-T., Phan, D.-P., Tran, Q.-H., & Vu, N.-P. (2022). Multi-Criteria Decision Making in the PMEDM Process by Using MARCOS, TOPSIS, and MAIRCA Methods. Appl. Sci., 12, 1-11.
• Nicolalde, J. F., Cabrera, M., Martínez-Gomez, J., Salazar, R. B., & Reyes, E. (2022). Selection of a Phase Change Material for Energy Storage By Multi-Criteria Decision Method Regarding The Thermal Comfort in A Vehicle. Journal of Energy Storage, 51, 1-14.
• Pezzey, J. (1992). Sustainable Development Concepts. Washington,: The World Bank.
• Rao, R., & Singh, D. (2011). Evaluating Flexible Manufacturing Systems Using Euclidean Distance-Based Integrated Approach. Int. J. Decision Sciences, Risk and Management, 3(1/2), 32-53.
• Sachs, J. D., Lafortune, G., Kroll, C., Fuller, G., & Woelm, F. (2022). Sustainable Development Report. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
• Sapkota, G., Das, S., Sharma, A., & Ghadai, R. K. (2022). Comparison of Various Multi-Criteria Decision Methods for The Selection of Quality Hole Produced By Ultrasonic Machining Process. Materials Today: Proceedings, 58, 702–708.
• Saygın, H. (2004). Sürdürülebilir Gelişme Gündeminde Nükleer Enerjinin Sorunları. Elektrik Mühendisleri Odası Dergisi, 42(423), 32–40.
• Shanmugasundar, G., Sapkota, G., Cep, R., & Kalita, K. (2022). Application of MEREC in Multi-Criteria Selection of Optimal Spray-Painting Robot. Processes 2022, 10, 1-16.
• Simic, V., Ivanovic, I., Đoric, V., & Torkayesh, A. E. (2022). Adapting Urban Transport Planning to the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Integrated Fermatean Fuzzy Model. Sustainable Cities and Society, 79, 1-26.
• Soubbotina, T. P. (2004). Beyond Economic Growth. Washington: The International Bank for Reconstruction/The World Bank.
• Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G., Zavadskas, E. K., Karabasevic, D., & Binkyte-Veliene, A. (2020). Assessment of Progress towards Achieving Sustainable Development Goals of the “Agenda 2030” by Using the CoCoSo and the Shannon Entropy Methods: The Case of the EU Countries. Sustainability, 12, 1-16.
• Su, C.-W., Xie, Y., Shahab, S., Faisal, C., Hafeez, M., & Qamri, G. M. (2021). Towards Achieving Sustainable Development: Role of Technology Innovation, Technology Adoption and CO2 Emission for BRICS. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 1-13.
• Sultana, N., Rahman, M. M., & Khanam, R. (2022). The Effect of The Informal Sector On Sustainable Development: Evidence from Developing Countries. Business Strategy and Development , s. 1-15. DOI: 10.1002/bsd2.217.
• Swart, R., Robinson, J., & Cohen, S. (2003). Climate Change and Sustainable Development: Expanding The Option. Climate Policy, 3, 19-40.
• Toslak, M., Aktürk, B., & Ulutaş, A. (2022). MEREC ve WEDBA Yöntemleri ile Bir Lojistik Firmasının Yıllara Göre Performansının Değerlendirilmesi. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi(33), 363-372.
• Türkoglu, H. (2015). Sustainable Development and Quality of Urban Life. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 202, 10–14.
• Ulutaş, A. (2020). Stacker selection with PSI and WEDBA Methods. International Journal of Contemporary Economics and Administrative Sciences, 10(2), 493-504.
• Ulutaş, A., Stanujkic, D., Karabasevic, D., Popovic, G., & Novaković, S. (2020). Pallet Truck Selection with MEREC and WISP-S Methods. Strategic Management, DOI: 10.5937/StraMan2200013U.
• Vardopoulos, I. (2019). Critical Sustainable Development Factors in The Adaptive Reuse of Urban industrial buildings. A Fuzzy DEMATEL Approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 50, s1-12.
• WCED. (1987). Our Common Future-The World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Włodarczyk, B., Firoiu, D., Ionescu, G., Ghiocel, F., Szturo, M., & Markowski, L. (2021). Assessing the Sustainable Development and Renewable Energy Sources Relationship in EU Countries. Energies, 14, 1-16.
• Yeni, O. (2014). Sürdürülebilirlik ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma: Bir Yazın Taraması. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(3), 181-208.
• Yumashev, A., Slusarczyk, B., Kondrashev, S., & Mikhaylov, A. (2020). Global Indicators of Sustainable Development:Evaluation of the Influence of the Human Development Index on Consumption and Quality of Energy. Energies, 13, 1-13.
• Zelenika, I., & Pearce, J. M. (2012). The Internet and Other ICTs as Tools And Catalysts for Sustainable Development: Innovation for 21st Century. Information Development, 1–16. DOI: 10.1177/0266666912465742.