IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijofsd/346649.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experimental Factor Analysis Study Using SAW and TOPSIS to Select and Rank Organic Agriculture Cities in Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Cal, Murat
  • Sahin, Ramazan

Abstract

The agriculture sector supports Turkey’s GDP portfolio economically and helps establish a sustainable labor force. Turkey has certain competitive advantages in terms of the organic production of agricultural goods like figs and hazelnuts. We conduct a factor analysis using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods combined with a 3-level set (export volume, export value, and adequacy rate) to rank 32 candidate cities of Turkey where organic agriculture activities should be given more emphasis to support overall production and export rates. 18 different sets of importance values were used for this purpose and their combinatorial effects on candidate cities were analyzed. The factor analysis results show that the cities Izmir, Aydin, Adiyaman, Gaziantep, Agri, Mus, and Van have the highest potentials among all Turkish cities in both methods, while Sanliurfa also shows high potential for organic agriculture in the TOPSIS method.

Suggested Citation

  • Cal, Murat & Sahin, Ramazan, 2021. "An Experimental Factor Analysis Study Using SAW and TOPSIS to Select and Rank Organic Agriculture Cities in Turkey," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 12(02), June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijofsd:346649
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.346649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/346649/files/AN%20EXPERIMENTAL%20FACTOR%20ANALYSIS%20STUDY%20USING.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.346649?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. West Churchman & Russell L. Ackoff, 1954. "An Approximate Measure of Value," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 172-187, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Willem Karel M. Brauers & Romualdas Ginevičius, 2009. "Robustness in regional development studies. The case of Lithuania," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 121-140, February.
    2. Tomasz Szul & Krzysztof Nęcka & Stanisław Lis, 2021. "Application of the Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Modeling to Forecast Energy Efficiency in Real Buildings Undergoing Thermal Improvement," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Willem Brauers, 2013. "Multi-objective seaport planning by MOORA decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 39-58, July.
    4. Kuo, Ting, 2017. "A modified TOPSIS with a different ranking index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 152-160.
    5. Lin, Yi-Kuei & Yeh, Cheng-Ta, 2012. "Multi-objective optimization for stochastic computer networks using NSGA-II and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(3), pages 735-746.
    6. Michal Nowakowski, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Information Usefulness Evaluation Methods on Business Internet Services," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 2), pages 292-306.
    7. Ozan Çakır & İbrahim Gürler & Bora Gündüzyeli, 2022. "Analysis of a Non-Discriminating Criterion in Simple Additive Weighting Deep Hierarchy," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(17), pages 1-22, September.
    8. James S. Dyer & James E. Smith, 2021. "Innovations in the Science and Practice of Decision Analysis: The Role of Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5364-5378, September.
    9. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    10. Ting Kuo & Ming-Hui Chen, 2022. "On Indeterminacy of Interval Multiplicative Pairwise Comparison Matrix," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, February.
    11. Beck, Patrick & Hofmann, Erik, 2012. "Multiple criteria decision making in supply chain management – Currently available methods and possibilities for future research," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(2), pages 180-213.
    12. Sha Fan & Hengjie Zhang & Huali Tang, 2019. "A Linguistic Hierarchy Model with Self-Confidence Preference Relations and Its Application in Co-Regulation of Food Safety in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Kaveh Madani & Majid Sheikhmohammady & Soroush Mokhtari & Mojtaba Moradi & Petros Xanthopoulos, 2014. "Social Planner’s Solution for the Caspian Sea Conflict," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 579-596, May.
    14. Ewa Roszkowska, 2020. "The extention rank ordering criteria weighting methods in fuzzy enviroment," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 91-114.
    15. Radojko LUKIC, 2021. "Application Of Electre Method In Performance Analysis Of Food Retailers In Serbia," Business Excellence and Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 11(3), pages 84-102, September.
    16. Romualdas GINEVICIUS & Katarzyna SZCZEPANSKAWOSZCZYNA & Marek SZARUCKI & Andrius STASIUKYNAS, 2021. "Assessing Alternatives To The Development Of Administrativeeconomic Units Applying The Fare-M Method," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2021(36), pages 6-24, June.
    17. Małgorzata Trojanowska & Krzysztof Nęcka, 2020. "Selection of the Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Method for Evaluation of Sustainable Energy Development: A Case Study of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, November.
    18. Ziwei Shu & Ramón Alberto Carrasco & Javier Portela García-Miguel & Manuel Sánchez-Montañés, 2022. "Multiple Scenarios of Quality of Life Index Using Fuzzy Linguistic Quantifiers: The Case of 85 Countries in Numbeo," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-28, June.
    19. Mar Llorente-Marrón & Montserrat Díaz-Fernández & Paz Méndez-Rodríguez, 2022. "Ranking fertility predictors in Spain: a multicriteria decision approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 771-798, April.
    20. Ewa Roszkowska & Marzena Filipowicz-Chomko, 2020. "Measuring sustainable development in the education area using multi-criteria methods: a case study," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(4), pages 1219-1241, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ijofsd:346649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/centmde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.