AN ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS APPLICATION: DETERMINING THE MOST IMPORTANT BOARD TYPE OF TURKEY REGARDING EXPORTATION IN RECENT YEARS

Öz

In this paper, the board industry of Turkey which occupies an important place in Turkish forest product industry was accepted as the research subject. Turkey exports various forest products and the boards have a great importance among them. Therefore, regarding export: determining the most important of these products in recent years was aimed. So, the purpose of the study was turned into a decision-making problem, for the decision-making analyses, criteria are needed. Thus, some criteria were derived from different export related data.

            According to the conducted research, the latest and most up to date statistical data were found at The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Statistical Database (FAOSTAT) and which are from 2015. So, the data were taken from FAOSTAT. For solving this decision-making problem, one of the multi-criteria decision-making methods: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used.

            The chosen board types are fibreboard (hardboard, MDF and HDF), particle board (particle board and OSB) and plywood. These products were selected because of their wide range of industrial uses, market share and the ease of finding statistical data about their production amount, export amount and export value. The results of the AHP analysis are as follows: Fibreboard is the most important product among the boards while particle board takes second place and the plywood is the last one. At the discussion part, the possible causes of this results were discussed and some suggestions were made.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Export,Turkey,Board,AHP,Decision-making

Kaynakça

1. Bertolini, M., Braglia, M., & Carmignani, G. (2006). Application of the AHP methodology in making a proposal for a public work contract. International Journal of Project Management, 24(5), 422–430. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.01.005
2. Russo, R. D. F. S. M., & Camanho, R. (2015). Criteria in AHP: A Systematic Review of Literature. Procedia Computer Science, 55, 1123–1132. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.081
3. Ho, W., & Ma, X. (2018). The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 267(2), 399–414. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.09.007
4. Ossadnik, W., & Lange, O. (1999). AHP-based evaluation of AHP-Software. European Journal of Operational Research, 118(3), 578–588. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00321-X
5. Vargas, L. G., & Dougherty, J. J. (1982). The Analytic Hierarchy Process and Multicriterion Decision Making. American Journal of Mathematical and Management Sciences, 2(1), 59–92. doi:10.1080/01966324.1982.10737086
6. Wind, Y., & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 26(7), 641–658. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2630699