IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i16p12110-d1212674.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance Analysis of Manufacturing Waste Using SWARA and VIKOR Methods: Evaluation of Turkey within the Scope of the Circular Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Alaeddin Koska

    (Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, 46000 Kahramanmaras, Turkey)

  • Mehri Banu Erdem

    (Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, 46000 Kahramanmaras, Turkey)

Abstract

The increasing population and industrial developments driven by growing needs and expectations have led to an increase in consumption. The rise in consumption, in turn, results in more waste generation. The management of waste has become a global issue concerning human and environmental health. As a solution to climate change, waste, and biodiversity loss, the concept of the circular economy has emerged, which involves a global effort. Zero waste, which is one of the key elements of the circular economy, is regulated by waste management legislation in the European Union in accordance with the waste management hierarchy. Therefore, waste management is an important and urgent issue that requires significant planning, especially for countries with trade relations with the European Union. This study aims to evaluate the performance of waste management in Turkey’s manufacturing industry within the scope of the circular economy. The SWARA (Step-wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis) and VIKOR (VIseKriterijumsa Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) multi-criteria decision-making methods were used in the research. The examination of manufacturing waste in conjunction with the waste hierarchy and within the scope of the circular economy using multi-criteria decision-making methods sets this study apart from other research on the subject. The analysis results indicate that Turkey, particularly in the preference for the option of selling, has shown an increasing trend in waste reduction, reuse, and recycling indicators, while showing a decreasing trend in disposal. In this context, it can be said that Turkey will not face difficulties in the process of aligning with the European Green Deal, and positive environmental developments have been observed.

Suggested Citation

  • Alaeddin Koska & Mehri Banu Erdem, 2023. "Performance Analysis of Manufacturing Waste Using SWARA and VIKOR Methods: Evaluation of Turkey within the Scope of the Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-17, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:16:p:12110-:d:1212674
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12110/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12110/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sue Ellen Taelman & Davide Tonini & Alexander Wandl & Jo Dewulf, 2018. "A Holistic Sustainability Framework for Waste Management in European Cities: Concept Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-33, June.
    2. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    3. Johan Hultman & Hervé Corvellec, 2012. "The European Waste Hierarchy: From the Sociomateriality of Waste to a Politics of Consumption," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(10), pages 2413-2427, October.
    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. Yongming Song & Jun Hu, 2017. "Vector similarity measures of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    3. Zheng, Guozhong & Wang, Xiao, 2020. "The comprehensive evaluation of renewable energy system schemes in tourist resorts based on VIKOR method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    4. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Milad Zamanifar & Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseyni, 2017. "Recovery planning model for roadways network after natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 699-716, June.
    6. Pedro Ponce & Citlaly Pérez & Aminah Robinson Fayek & Arturo Molina, 2022. "Solar Energy Implementation in Manufacturing Industry Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Fuzzy TOPSIS and S4 Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Mohit Jain & Gunjan Soni & Deepak Verma & Rajendra Baraiya & Bharti Ramtiyal, 2023. "Selection of Technology Acceptance Model for Adoption of Industry 4.0 Technologies in Agri-Fresh Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Chen, Lisa Y. & Wang, Tien-Chin, 2009. "Optimizing partners' choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 233-242, July.
    9. Jones, R.E. & Speight, R.E. & Blinco, J.L. & O'Hara, I.M., 2022. "Biorefining within food loss and waste frameworks: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    10. Wenyao Niu & Yuan Rong & Liying Yu & Lu Huang, 2022. "A Novel Hybrid Group Decision Making Approach Based on EDAS and Regret Theory under a Fermatean Cubic Fuzzy Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(17), pages 1-30, August.
    11. Deb, Madhujit & Debbarma, Bishop & Majumder, Arindam & Banerjee, Rahul, 2016. "Performance –emission optimization of a diesel-hydrogen dual fuel operation: A NSGA II coupled TOPSIS MADM approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P1), pages 281-290.
    12. Kuang-Hua Hu & Wei Jianguo & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2017. "Risk Factor Assessment Improvement for China’s Cloud Computing Auditing Using a New Hybrid MADM Model," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 737-777, May.
    13. Fernando Rojas & Peter Wanke & Víctor Leiva & Mauricio Huerta & Carlos Martin-Barreiro, 2022. "Modeling Inventory Cost Savings and Supply Chain Success Factors: A Hybrid Robust Compromise Multi-Criteria Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(16), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Maghsoodi, Abtin Ijadi, 2023. "Cryptocurrency portfolio allocation using a novel hybrid and predictive big data decision support system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. Hisham Alidrisi, 2021. "An Innovative Job Evaluation Approach Using the VIKOR Algorithm," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Büsing, Christina & Goetzmann, Kai-Simon & Matuschke, Jannik & Stiller, Sebastian, 2017. "Reference points and approximation algorithms in multicriteria discrete optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(3), pages 829-840.
    17. Abbas Keramati & Fatemeh Shapouri, 2016. "Multidimensional appraisal of customer relationship management: integrating balanced scorecard and multi criteria decision making approaches," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 217-251, May.
    18. Xiaodong Li & Haibo Kuang & Yan Hu, 2019. "Carbon Mitigation Strategies of Port Selection and Multimodal Transport Operations—A Case Study of Northeast China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    19. Serafim Opricovic, 2009. "A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(8), pages 1549-1561, June.
    20. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Ruan, Da, 2008. "Evaluation of software development projects using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 77(5), pages 464-475.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:16:p:12110-:d:1212674. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.