BİTKİSEL SÜT ALTERNATİFLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİRLİĞİ: FUCOM-ARTASI KULLANARAK ÇOK KRİTERLİ BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Abstract

Bu çalışma, bitkisel süt alternatiflerinin (BSA) sürdürülebilirliğini değerlendirmek için, uzman görüşlerinden tutarlı ağırlıklar türeten full consistency method (FUCOM) ile uyarlanabilir standardizasyon ve sıralama sağlayan Alternative ranking technique based on adaptive standardized intervals (ARTASI) yöntemlerini birleştiren çok ölçütlü bir çerçeve sunmaktadır. Türkiye pazarında ticari olarak en yaygın bulunan beş BSA incelenmiştir. Değerlendirme; karbon ve su ayak izi ile arazi kullanımı gibi çevresel göstergeleri, protein, kalsiyum, vitamin B12 ve enerji içeriği gibi besinsel özellikleri ve alerjen ve/veya genetiği değiştirilmiş organizma bulunma ihtimali, antinütrient varlığı ve sağlık açısından yararlı biyoaktif bileşikler içerme durumu gibi sağlık ve güvenlik unsurlarını kapsamaktadır. Gıda bilimi ve teknolojisi alanında uzmanlaşmış üç profesyonel tarafından tanımlanan toplam 11 alt kriter, besleyicilik, çevresel sürdürülebilirlik ve sağlık, güvenlik olmak üzere üç kümede sınıflandırılmıştır. FUCOM sonuçları, ana kriterler arasından çevresel sürdürülebilirliğin en etkili bileşen olduğunu; alt kriter düzeyinde ise protein, karbon ayak izi ve su ayak izinin en yüksek ağırlıklara sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. ARTASI ile elde edilen genel sürdürülebilirlik sıralamasında ise BSA’lar hindistan cevizi > soya > yulaf > badem > pirinç olarak sıralanmıştır. Duyarlılık çalışmaları ve TOPSIS, MABAC, WASPAS, ARAS, GIA gibi yöntemlerle yapılan çapraz karşılaştırmalar, elde edilen sonuçların tekrarlanabilirliğini doğrulamış ve BSA’ların sürdürülebilirlik sıralamasında bir değişim gözlenmemiştir. Bu bulgular, BSA’ların değerlendirilmesi için kapsamlı bir çerçeve sunmakta ve çok kriterli sürdürülebilirlik değerlendirmelerinde FUCOM ile ARTASI’nın birlikte kullanılmasının yararını ortaya koyarak hem üreticileri hem de tüketicileri daha sürdürülebilir seçimlere yönlendiren güçlü bir yaklaşım önermektedir.

Keywords

• Bitkisel süt alternatifleri (BSA)
• sürdürülebilirlik değerlendirmesi
• çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV)

COMPARATIVE SUSTAINABILITY OF PLANT-BASED MILK ALTERNATIVES: A MULTI-CRITERIA ASSESSMENT USING FUCOM-ARTASI

Abstract

This study introduces a multi-criteria framework that integrates full consistency method (FUCOM) for consistent expert weighting and alternative ranking technique based on adaptive standardized intervals (ARTASI) for adaptive standardization and ranking to evaluate the sustainability of plant-based milk analogues (PBMAs). Five of the most commercially available PBMAs in the Turkish market were analyzed. The assessment incorporated environmental factors such as carbon and water footprints and land use, nutritional attributes including protein, calcium, vitamin B12, and energy content, as well as health and safety considerations such as allergen and genetically modified organism presence, antinutrients, and bioactive compounds with health-promoting properties. A panel of three food experts defined 11 sub-criteria grouped into three clusters: nutritional attributes, environmental sustainability, and health, safety. FUCOM results indicated that environmental sustainability was the most influential main criterion, with protein, carbon footprint, and water footprint receiving the highest weights at the sub-criteria level. Using ARTASI, the overall sustainability ranking across all factors was coconut > soy > oat > almond > rice. Sensitivity and cross-method analyses confirmed the robustness of the results, with no rank reversals. These findings provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating PBMAs and demonstrate the utility of combining FUCOM and ARTASI for multi-criteria sustainability assessments, offering a robust approach to guide both producers and consumers toward more sustainable choices.

Keywords

• Plant-based milk alternatives (PBMAs)
• sustainability assessment
• multi-criteria decision making (MCDM)

References

1. Ayçin, E. (2023). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme: Bilgisayar Uygulamalı Çözümler Geliştirilmiş ve Genişletilmiş 3. Baskı. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, Ankara, Türkiye, 512 s. ISBN: 978-605-7846-17-4
2. Berardy, A.J., Rubín-García, M., Sabaté, J. (2022). A scoping review of the environmental impacts and nutrient composition of plant-based milks. Advances in Nutrition, 13(6): 2559-2572, doi: 10.1093/advances/ nmac098.
3. Cegan, J. C., Filion, A. M., Keisler, J. M., Linkov, I. (2017). Trends and applications of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Literature review. Environment Systems and Decisions, 37(2): 123-133, doi: 10.1007/s10669-017-9642-9.
4. Chalupa-Krebzdak, S., Long, C.J., Bohrer, B. M. (2018). Nutrient density and nutritional value of milk and plant-based milk alternatives. International Dairy Journal, 87: 84-92, doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2018.07.018. Clune, S., Crossin, E., Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140(2): 766-783, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.082.
5. DebMandal, M., Mandal, S. (2011). Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.: Arecaceae): in health promotion and disease prevention. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine, 4(3): 241-247, doi: 10.1016/S1995- 7645(11)60078-3.
6. Duranova, H., Kuzelova, L., Fialkova, V., Simora, V., Kovacikova, E., Joanidis, P., Borotova, P., Straka, D., Hoskin, R.T., Moncada, M., Macêdo de Medeiros, F.G., Gabriny, L. (2025). Coconut-sourced MCT oil: its potential health benefits beyond traditional coconut oil. Phytochemistry Reviews, 24: 659-700, doi: 10.1007/s11101-024-09969-1.
7. Ferla, G., Mura, B., Falasco, S., Caputo, P., Matarazzo, A. (2024). Multi- Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for sustainability assessment in food sector. A systematic literature review on methods, indicators and tools. Science of the Total Environment, 946: 174235, doi: 10.1016/j. scitotenv.2024.174235.
8. Gésan-Guiziou, G., Alaphilippe, A., Aubin, J., Bockstaller, C., Boutrou, R., Buche, P., Collet, C., Girard, A., Martinet, V., Membré, J.-M., Sabbadin, R., Thiollet-Scholtus, M., van der Werf, H. M. G. (2020). Diversity and potentiality of multi-criteria decision analysis methods for agri-food research. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 40: 44, doi: 10.1007/s13593-020-00650-3.

9. Haas, R., Schnepps, A., Pichler, A., Meixner, O. (2019). Cow milk versus plant-based milk substitutes: A comparison of product image and motivational structure of consumption. Sustainability, 11(18): 5046, doi: 10.3390/su11185046.
10. Huang, I. B., Keisler, J., Linkov, I. (2011). Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Ten years of applications and trends. Science of the Total Environment, 409(19): 3578-3594, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.022. Ignaszewski, E. (2022). 2021 U.S. retail market insights: Plant-based foods. The Good Food Institute. https://gfi.org/wp-content/ uploads/2022/10/2021-u.s.-retail-market-insights_Plant-based-foods_GFI-1.pdf (Accessed: 2 May 2025).
11. Jeske, S., Zannini, E., Arendt, E.K. (2017). Evaluation of physicochemical and glycaemic properties of commercial plant-based milk substitutes. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 72: 26-33, doi: 10.1007/s11130-016-0583-0.
12. Wang, J., Tang, Y., Chen, W., Chen, H., Zhang, Q., Pei, J., He, T., Chen, W., Zhang, M. (2023). Mechanism for improving coconut milk emulsions viscosity by modifying coconut protein structure and coconut milk properties with monosodium glutamate. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 252: 126139, doi: 10.1016/j. ijbiomac.2023.126139.
13. Kandakoglu, A., Frini, A., Ben Amor, S. (2019). Multicriteria decision making for sustainable development: A systematic review. Journalof Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 26(5-6): 202-251, doi:10.1002/ mcda.1682.
14. Lal, J.J., Sreeranjit Kumar, C.V., Indira, M. (2003). Coconut palm. In: Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition, Caballero, B. (Ed.), 2nd Edition, Academic Press, Oxford, the UK,pp. 1464-1475, doi: 10.1016/B0-12- 227055-X/00263-7. Madoumier, M., Trystram, G., Sébastian, P., Collignan, A. (2019). Towards a holistic approach for multi-objective optimization of food processes: A critical review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 86: 1-15, doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2019.02.002.
15. Mäkinen, O.E., Wanhalinna, V., Zannini, E., Arendt, E.A. (2016). Foods for special dietary needs: Non-dairy plant-based milk substitutes and fermented dairy-type products. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 56(3): 339-349, doi: 10.1080/10408398.2012.761950.
16. McClements, D.J., Grossmann, L. (2021). The science of plant-based foods: Constructing next-generation meat, fish, milk, and egg analogs. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 20(2): 4049-4100, doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12771.
17. Mollakhalili-Meybodi, N., Arab, M., Zare, L. (2022). Harmful compounds of soy milk: characterization and reduction strategies. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 59: 3723 - 3732. doi: 10.1007/ s13197-021-05249-4.
18. Morency, M. E., Birken, C. S., Lebovic, G., Chen, Y., L'Abbe, M., Lee, G. J., Maguire, J.L. (2017). Association between noncow milk beverage consumption and childhood height. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 106(2): 597-602, doi: 10.3945/ajcn.117.156877. Nardi, J., Moras, P. B., Koeppe, C., Dallegrave, E., Leal, M. B., Rossato-Grando, L. G. (2017). Prepubertal subchronic exposure to soy milk and glyphosate leads to endocrine disruption. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 100: 247-252, doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2016.12.030.
19. Olías, R., Delgado-Andrade, C., Padial, M., Marín-Manzano, M., Clemente, A. (2023). An Updated Review of Soy-Derived Beverages: Nutrition, Processing, and Bioactivity. Foods, 12(14): 2665, doi: 10.3390/foods12142665.
20. Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., Sremac, S. (2018). A new model for determining weight coefficients of criteria in MCDM models: Full consistency method (FUCOM). Symmetry, 10(9): 393, doi: 10.3390/ sym10090393
21. Pamučar, D., Simic, V., Görçün, Ö.F., Küçükönder, H. (2024). Selection of the best Big Data platform using COBRAC-ARTASI methodology with adaptive standardized intervals. Expert Systems with Applications, 239: 122312, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2023.122312.
22. Poore, J., Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392): 987-992, doi: 10.1126/science.aaq0216.
23. Poulsen, L.K. (2022). Literature review: Multi-Criteria Assessment of food-based systems (NORSUS Report AR.04.22). Norwegian Institute for Sustainability Research (NORSUS). https://norsus.no/wp-content/ uploads/AR-04.22-Literature-review-MCA-of-food-based-systems. pdf (Accessed: 15 December 2025).
24. Reyes-Jurado, F., Soto-Reyes, N., Dávila-Rodríguez, M., Lorenzo- Leal, A., Jiménez-Munguía, M., Mani-López, E., López-Malo, A. (2021). Plant-Based Milk Alternatives: Types, Processes, Benefits, and Characteristics. Food Reviews International, 39(4): 2320-2351, doi: 10.1080/87559129.2021.1952421.
25. Sethi, S., Tyagi, S.K., Anurag, R.K. (2016). Plant-based milk alternatives an emerging segment of functional beverages: a review. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 53(9): 3408-3423, doi: 10.1007/ s13197-016-2328-3.
26. Tangyu, M., Muller, J., Bolten, C.J., Wittmann, C. (2019). Fermentation of plant-based milk alternatives for improved flavor and nutritional value. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 103(23-24):9263-9275, doi: 10.1007/s00253-019-10175-9.
27. Vergara-Solana, F., Araneda, M.E., Ponce-Díaz, G. (2019). Opportunities for strengthening aquaculture industry through multicriteria decision-making. Reviews in Aquaculture, 11(1): 105-118, doi: 10.1111/raq.12228.
28. Wang, X., Ye, A., Dave, A., Singh, H. (2022). Structural changes in oat milk and an oat milk-bovine skim milk blend during dynamic in vitro gastric digestion. Food Hydrocolloids, 124, Part B: 107311, doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2021.107311.
29. Winans, K.S., Macadam-Somer, I., Kendall, A., Geyer, R., Marvinney, E. (2020). Life cycle assessment of California unsweetened almond milk. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 25: 577-587, doi: 10.1007/s11367-019-01716-5.
30. Yang, W., Wang, W., Agathokleous, E., Bai, Y., Zhang, S., Wang, C., Feng, Y., Liu, J., Yang, Y., Geng, C., Shen, L. (2024). Climatic factors and fertilization rates co-regulate anaerobic methane oxidation driven by multiple electron acceptors in Chinese paddy fields. Journal of Cleaner Production, 436: 140600, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140600. Yılmaz Tuncel, N. (2023). Hayvansal sütler ve bitkisel ''süt''ler. In: Besleyici ve Sağlıklı Gıda: Gıda Endüstrisinden Sofraya, El, S.N. (ed.), 1. Baskı, Türkiye Klinikleri, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 55-67. Zheng, J., Lu, Y., Xu, P., Xie, K., Zhou, C., Li, Y., Geng, H., Wang, Q., Gu, W. (2024). Insights into the Driving Factors of Methane Emission from Double-Season Rice Field Under Different Fertilization Practices in South China. Agronomy, 14(12): 2767, doi: 10.3390/ agronomy14122767.