Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal

1308-7215

Istanbul University

ARALIK TİP 2 BULANIK TOPSIS YÖNTEMİ İLE YATIRIM YERİ KARAR ANALİZİ

Investment Location Decision Analysis with Interval Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS Method

Candan

Gökçe

SAKARYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ Cengiz Toklu

Merve

SAKARYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ

11 30 2017

27 16 28 10 17 2017 11 15 2017

2005

Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal

Kararverme problemlerinde,  birden fazlakriter birlikte değerlendirilirken, mümkün çözümlerden en uygun alternatifi seçmek hedeflenmektedir.  Günümüz şartlarında büyük boyutta kararlaralmak isteyen yatırımcılar, hedef pazarda varlıklarını devam ettirebilmek vemaksimum faydayı sağlamak için birden fazla faktörü birlikte değerlendirerek eniyi seçimi yapmak zorundadırlar. Bu karar yatırım bölgesi seçimi içinalınıyorsa yatırımcı, yatırım dönemi boyunca firmaya maksimum fayda sağlayacakbölgeyi seçmek zorundadır. Çok kriterli karar verme olarak adlandırılan bu tipproblemler çok fazla sayıda farklı teknikle çözülebilmekte ve karar vericilerebüyük faydalar sağlamaktadır.Buçalışmada; imalat sektöründe yatırım yapacak olan bir firmada yatırım bölgesikararı verilirken, aralık tip 2 bulanık TOPSIS yöntemi kullanılarak, en doğruseçim kararını almak hedeflenmiştir. Buna ulaşmak için belirlenen kriterler,yatırımcının gerçekte karşılaşabileceği ekonomik, teknik, kültürel ve sosyaltüm faktörler birlikte ele alınarak oluşturulmuştur. Belirlenen on adet kriterüç farklı yatırım bölgesi için değerlendirilip yatırım için en doğru bölgeninMarmara bölgesi olduğuna karar verilmiştir.

In decision making problems, when multiple criteriaare evaluated together, it is aimed to choose the most suitable alternativefrom possible solutions. Investors who want to make big-scale decisions intoday's conditions have to make the best choice by evaluating more than onefactor together to maintain their assets in the target market and to providemaximum benefit. If this decision is taken for facility location selection, theinvestor must choose the region that will provide maximum benefit to thecompany during the investment period. These types of problems, calledmulti-criteria decision making, can be solved with a large number of differenttechniques and provide great benefits to decision makers.In this study; it is aimed to make the right decisionfor facility location selection by using the interval type 2 fuzzy TOPSISmethod for a firm that will invest in the manufacturing sector. In order toachieve this, the criteria set out are taken together with all the economic,technical, cultural and social factors that the investor might actuallyencounter. Specified ten criteria are evaluated for three different investmentregions and it is decided that the most appropriate region for investment isthe Marmara region.

Interval Type 2 Fuzzy TOPSIS facility location selection multi-criteria decision making

Aralık tip 2 bulanık TOPSIS yatırım yeri seçimi çok kriterli karar verme

Anbar, A., Alper, D. (2015). Yatırım Projeleri Analizi. Ekin Yayınları, Bursa.

Aliasghary M. (2013). Aralık Değerli Tip 2 Bulanık Mantık Sistemleri için Genel Çıkarımlar ve bir Tasarım Yöntemi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Doktora Tezi.

Ashtiani, B., Haghighirad, F., Makui, A., Ali Montazer, G., (2009). Extension of fuzzy TOPSIS method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Applied Soft Computing, 9 (2), 457-461.

Baykasoglu, A., Gölcük, İ. (2017). Development of an interval type-2 fuzzy sets based hierarchical MADM model by combining DEMATEL and TOPSIS. Expert Systems With Applications 70 (37–51).

Chen, C.-T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1

Chen, C.-T., Lin, C.-T., Huang, S.-F. (2006). A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. International Journal of Production Economics, 102(2), 289–301. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.03.009

Chen, S. M., Lee, L. W. (2010). Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the interval type-2 TOPSIS method. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(4), 2790–2798. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.09.012

Chen, S.M., Lee, L.W. (2010). Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the interval type-2 TOPSIS method. Expert Syst. Appl. 37 (4), 2790-2798.

Chen, S., and Hwang, C.L. (1992). Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications. Springer Verlag.

Choudhary, D. Shankar, R. (2012). An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India. Energy, 42 510-521.

Chu, T.C. (2002). Facility location selection using fuzzy TOPSIS under group decisions. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowlege-Based Systems, 10 (6), 687-701.

Çalık, A. Paksoy, T. (2017). Aralık Tip-2 Bulanık AHP Yöntemi ile Üçüncü Parti Tersine Lojistik (3PTL) Firma Seçimi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 20-1.

Çebi, F., Otay, İ. (2015). Multi-Criteria and Multi-Stage Facility Location Selection under Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Environment: A Case Study for a Cement Factory. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, Vol. 8, No. 2 330-344.

Deveci, M. Demirel, N. Ç., Ahmetoğlu E. ( 2017). Airline new route selection based on interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM: A case study of new route between Turkey- North American region destinations. Journal of Air Transport Management 59, 83-99.

Dymova, L., Sevastjanov, P., Tikhonenko, A. (2015). An interval type-2 fuzzy extension of the TOPSIS method using alpha cuts. Knowledge-Based Syst. 83, 116-127.

Erdoğan, M. ve Kaya, İ. (2015). An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methodology Based on Type-2 Fuzzy Sets for Selection Among Energy Alternatives in Turkey. Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 12 (1), 1-25.

Erkayman, B.; Gundogar, E.; Akkaya, G.; Ipek, M. (2011). A Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach For Logistics Center Location Selection. Journal of Business Case Studies. 7: 3; 49-54.

Ertuğrul, I., Karakaşoğlu, N. (2008). Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods for facility location selection. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 39(7-8):783- 95.

Hwang, C. L., Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Jacquet-Lagrèze E. (1990). Interactive Assessment of Preferences Using Holistic Judgments the Prefcalc System. In: Bana e Costa C.A. Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Kahraman, C. Onar, S. C., Öztayşi, B. (2015). Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision-Making: A Literature Review. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, Vol. 8, No. 4637-666.

Kılıç, M., Kaya, I. (2015). Investment project evaluation by a decision making methodology based on type-2 fuzzy sets. Applied Soft Computing, 27, 399-410.

Lee, L.-W., Chen, S.-M. (2008). A new method for fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the arithmetic operations of interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 2008 International Conference on, 6(July), 3084–3089. http://doi.org/10.1109/ICMLC.2008.4620938

Lee, L.W., Chen, S.M., (2008). Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the extension of TOPSIS method and interval type-2 fuzzy sets. International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, IEEE,Vol 6:3260-3265.

Liao, T.W. (2015). Two interval type 2 fuzzy TOPSIS material selection methods. Mater. Des. 88, 1088-1099.

Mendel, J.M. (2001). Uncertain Rule-Based Fuzzy Logic Systems: Introduction and New Directions. Vol.2, Prentice Hall.

Özek, M. B., Akpolat, Z. H. (2010). Bulanık Mantık için Yeni bir Yaklaşım: Tip 2 Bulanık Mantık, Engineering Sciences, Vol: 5- 3.

Sağır, H., Doğanalp, B.( 2016). Bulanık Çok-Kriterli Karar Verme Perspektifinden Türkiye İçin Enerji Kaynakları Değerlendirmesi. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11.

Yong, D. (2006). Plant location selection based on fuzzy TOPSIS. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 28: 839–844

Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338–353. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X