Abstract
Kavram olarak sürdürülebilirlik; birbirleriyle ilişkili ekonomik, sosyal ve çevresel yaklaşımların yanı sıra tedarik zinciri bileşenlerini içerir. Bu kapsamda sürdürülebilir bir tedarik zinciri süreci için en önemli bileşen olan doğru tedarikçi seçimi önemlidir. Yeşil uygulamalara odaklanan tedarikçiler, sürdürülebilirlik için ayrıca önemlidir. Bu noktada en önemli karar destek fırsatını sağlayan çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri de yeşil tedarikçi seçiminde karar vericilere rasyonellik ve kolaylık sağlamaktadır. Bu kapsamda çalışmada öncelikle literatür taraması yapılmış ve üç alt başlıkta ele alınabilecek yeşil tedarikçi seçiminde kullanılan kriterler belirlenmiştir. Bu aşamada; Kaynak Kullanımı ve Yeşil Yetkinlik (K1-Yeşil Depolama, K2-Yeşil Geri Dönüşüm, K3-Yeşil Üretim Kapasitesi, K4-Yeşil Paketleme, K5-Kaynak Tüketimi, K6-Kirlilik Kontrolü), Ekonomik Kriterler (K7-Lojistik Maliyetleri, K8-Ürün Maliyetleri, K9-Teslim Süresi) ve Kalite (K10-Hata Oranı, K11-Garanti ve Haklar Politikaları, K12-Çevresel Yeterlilikler ve Belgeler). Daha sonra belirlenen kriterler ağırlıklandırılmış ve nihayet son yıllarda önemli gelişmeler kaydeden çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri olan COPRAS ve EDAS yöntemleri kullanılarak 7 alternatif tedarikçi arasından en uygun yeşil tedarikçi seçimi yapılmıştır. Her iki yöntem kullanılarak yapılan seçimlere göre yapılan sıralamada farklılık olsa da tedarikçi A2 ilk sırayı alarak öne çıkmıştır. Böylece tekniklerin birbirlerini destekleme durumlarına göre güçlü yönleri belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca olası uygulama hatalarının önüne geçilerek, stratejik düzeyde alınacak bir kararın ilk seferde doğru olmasına katkı sağlanmıştır.
References
- Aguezzoul, A., Rabenasolo, B. and Jolly-Desodt, A.M. (2006). “Multicriteria Decision Aid Tool for Third-Party Logistics Providers’ Selection”, ENSAIT, 9 rue de l'Ermitage, BP 30329, 59056 Roubaix Cedex 01, France.
- Arslan, R. (2018). Comparison and Integration of Multi-Criteria Decision making Methods: An Application on OECD Data, Cumhuriyet University Sosyal Sciences Institude, (Unpublished PhD Thesis), Sivas.
- Demirci, A. (2020). Sağlık Hizmetleri Yönetiminde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Teknikleri, Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.
- Demirci, A. (2018). Health Sciences Research in the Globalizing World. İçinde R. Efe, E. Alexandrova, N.L. Shapekova, B. Ak ve F. Özcanaslan (Eds.). Analytic Hierarcy Process As Example of Establishment Place Selection (ss. 842-853). St. Kliment Ohridski University Press, Sofia, Bulgaria.
- Ghorabaee, M.K., Zavadskas, E.K., Olfat, L. and Turskis, Z. (2015). “Multi-Criteria Inventory Classification Using a New Method of Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS)”, Informatica, Vol: 26, No: 3, 435-451.
- Hashemkhani Zolfani, S. and Bahrami, M. (2014). “Investment Prioritizing in High Tech Industries Based On SWARA-COPRAS Approach”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, Volume: 20 (3), 534-553.
- Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Raslanas, S., Ginevicius, R., Komka, A. and Malinauskas, P. (2006). “Selection of Low-e Windows in Retrofit of Public Buildings by Applying Multiple Criteria Method COPRAS: A Lithuanian Case”, Energy and Buildings 38, 454-462.
- Karabasevic, D., Zavadskas, E.K., Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G. and Brzakovic, M. (2018). “An Approach to Personnel Selection in the IT Industry Based on the EDAS Method”, Transformations in Business & Economics, Vol: 17, No: 2 (44), 54-65.
- Kuo, R.J., Wang, Y.C. and Tien, F.C. (2010). “Integration of Artificial Neural Network and MADA Methods for Green Supplier Selection”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 1161-1170.
- Lee, A.H.I., Kang, H.Y., Hsu, C.F. and Hung, H.C. (2009). “A Green Supplier Selection Model for High-Tech Industry”, Expert Systems with Applications 36, 7917-7927.
- Mousavi-Nasab, S.H. and Sotoudeh-Anvari, A. (2017). “A Comprehensive MCDM-based Approach Using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an Auxiliary Tool for Material Selection Problems”, Material and Design 121, 237-253.
- Özbek, A. (2017). Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods and Problem Solving with Excel, Seçkin Academic and Professional Publications, Ankara.
- Podvezko, V. (2011). “The Comperative Analysis of MDCA Methods SAW and COPRAS”, Inzinerine Ekonomika - Engineering Economics, 22 (2), 134-146.
- Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E.K., Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M. and Turskis, Z. (2017). “An Extension of the EDAS Method Based on the Use of Interval Grey Numbers”, Studies in Informatics and Control, Vol: 26, No: 1, 5-12.
- Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A. and Sarka, V. (1994). “The New Method of Multicriteria Complex Proportional Assessment of Projects”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 1 (3), 131-139.
Abstract
Sustainability as a concept; includes economic, social and environmental approaches in relation to each other and also supply chain components. In this context, the right suppliers were selected, which is the most important component for the integration of a sustainable supply chain process. The right suppliers that focus on green practices are important for sustainability. At this point, multi-criteria decision making techniques, which provide the most important decision support opportunity, also provide rationality and convenience for decision makers in the selection of green suppliers. In this context, firstly a literature search was conducted in the study and the criteria used in the selection of green suppliers, which could be discussed in three sub-headings, were determined. At this stage; Resource Utilization and Green Competence (C1-Green Storage, C2-Green Recycling, C3-Green Production Capacity, C4-Green Packaging, C5-Resource Consumption, C6-Pollution Control), Economic Criteria (C7-Logistics Costs, C8-Product Costs, C9-Delivery Time) and Quality (C10-Error Rate, C11-Warranty and Rights Policies, C12-Environmental Competencies and Documents). Then, the determined criteria were weighted and finally, green suppliers were selected using COPRAS and EDAS, which are the multi-criteria decision making techniques that have made significant improvements in recent years. As a result, the most suitable supplier was selected among the determined 7 alternative suppliers. Although there is a difference in the ranking made according to the selections by using both methods, the supplier A2 took the first places and came to the fore.The reason for choosing two different techniques in the study is that the techniques give similar results with each other and thus the strengths of the techniques are determined. In addition, it is to contribute to the correctness of a decision to be made at the strategic level at the first time, especially by preventing possible mistakes.
References
- Aguezzoul, A., Rabenasolo, B. and Jolly-Desodt, A.M. (2006). “Multicriteria Decision Aid Tool for Third-Party Logistics Providers’ Selection”, ENSAIT, 9 rue de l'Ermitage, BP 30329, 59056 Roubaix Cedex 01, France.
- Arslan, R. (2018). Comparison and Integration of Multi-Criteria Decision making Methods: An Application on OECD Data, Cumhuriyet University Sosyal Sciences Institude, (Unpublished PhD Thesis), Sivas.
- Demirci, A. (2020). Sağlık Hizmetleri Yönetiminde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Teknikleri, Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.
- Demirci, A. (2018). Health Sciences Research in the Globalizing World. İçinde R. Efe, E. Alexandrova, N.L. Shapekova, B. Ak ve F. Özcanaslan (Eds.). Analytic Hierarcy Process As Example of Establishment Place Selection (ss. 842-853). St. Kliment Ohridski University Press, Sofia, Bulgaria.
- Ghorabaee, M.K., Zavadskas, E.K., Olfat, L. and Turskis, Z. (2015). “Multi-Criteria Inventory Classification Using a New Method of Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS)”, Informatica, Vol: 26, No: 3, 435-451.
- Hashemkhani Zolfani, S. and Bahrami, M. (2014). “Investment Prioritizing in High Tech Industries Based On SWARA-COPRAS Approach”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, Volume: 20 (3), 534-553.
- Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Raslanas, S., Ginevicius, R., Komka, A. and Malinauskas, P. (2006). “Selection of Low-e Windows in Retrofit of Public Buildings by Applying Multiple Criteria Method COPRAS: A Lithuanian Case”, Energy and Buildings 38, 454-462.
- Karabasevic, D., Zavadskas, E.K., Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G. and Brzakovic, M. (2018). “An Approach to Personnel Selection in the IT Industry Based on the EDAS Method”, Transformations in Business & Economics, Vol: 17, No: 2 (44), 54-65.
- Kuo, R.J., Wang, Y.C. and Tien, F.C. (2010). “Integration of Artificial Neural Network and MADA Methods for Green Supplier Selection”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 1161-1170.
- Lee, A.H.I., Kang, H.Y., Hsu, C.F. and Hung, H.C. (2009). “A Green Supplier Selection Model for High-Tech Industry”, Expert Systems with Applications 36, 7917-7927.
- Mousavi-Nasab, S.H. and Sotoudeh-Anvari, A. (2017). “A Comprehensive MCDM-based Approach Using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an Auxiliary Tool for Material Selection Problems”, Material and Design 121, 237-253.
- Özbek, A. (2017). Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods and Problem Solving with Excel, Seçkin Academic and Professional Publications, Ankara.
- Podvezko, V. (2011). “The Comperative Analysis of MDCA Methods SAW and COPRAS”, Inzinerine Ekonomika - Engineering Economics, 22 (2), 134-146.
- Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E.K., Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M. and Turskis, Z. (2017). “An Extension of the EDAS Method Based on the Use of Interval Grey Numbers”, Studies in Informatics and Control, Vol: 26, No: 1, 5-12.
- Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A. and Sarka, V. (1994). “The New Method of Multicriteria Complex Proportional Assessment of Projects”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 1 (3), 131-139.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal Section | Makaleler |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | September 23, 2021 |
| Acceptance Date | September 2, 2021 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2021 Volume: 8 Issue: Special Issue on International Symposium of Sustainable Logistics |
