Merchant Fleet Performance of Türkiye: A CRITIC-based TOPSIS Approach

Year 2024, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 435 - 445, 25.06.2024

Ersin Fırat Akgül , Emrah Akdamar , Maruf Gögebakan

https://doi.org/10.28979/jarnas.1440709

Abstract

The study focuses on assessing the merchant fleet performance of Türkiye, a country surrounded by seas on three sides and holding a pivotal position in global logistics networks. It considers mean age of vessels, total carrying capacity in dead weight tons, and the number of ships as indicators influencing Türkiye’s merchant fleet performance, with the importance weights of these indicators determined using the CRITIC method. Based on the determined weights, Türkiye’s merchant fleet performance for the years 2011-2023 is evaluated using the TOPSIS method. The findings reveal that mean age of vessels emerges as the indicator with the highest importance weight. The analysis indicates an improvement in Türkiye’s fleet performance between 2011 and 2013, followed by a subsequent decline from 2013 onwards. Notably, there is a significant shift observed in 2016 across all three indicators. Given Türkiye’s aging fleet, the study suggests a focus on acquiring young and high-capacity vessels to enhance fleet performance. This strategic approach can help Türkiye optimize its maritime trade capability and maintain competitiveness in the global shipping industry.

Keywords

Merchant fleet performance, Türkiye, CRITIC, TOPSIS

Ethical Statement

All the authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supporting Institution

This research did not receive a grant from any funding agency.

References

• S. Suluk, Colors of the economy: An evaluation of turkey in the context of the sustainable blue economy, Dumlupınar University Journal of Social Sciences (74) (2022) 132–150.
• O. Erdogan, O. Cetin, The effects of maritime transport on the Turkish economy (2021), https://ssrn.com/abstract=3880804, Accessed 10 Feb 2024.
• A. G. Cerit, Maritime transport as an area of competitive advantage in international marketing, International Journal of Maritime Economics 2 (1) (2000) 49–67.
• S. O. Baser, Technology Choice and Productivity in the Turkish merchant fleet in the last two decades, Maritime Policy & Management 25 (4) (1998) 391–396.
• L. Berkoz, D. Tekba, The role of ports in the economic development of Turkey, in: European Regional Science Association (ERSA), Louvain-la-Neuve, Dublin, 1999.
• İ. B. Çetin, E. F. Akgül, E. Koçak, Competitiveness of Turkish coaster merchant fleet: A qualitative analysis by short sea shipping perspective, TransNav 12 (2) (2018) 389–396.
• O. Konur, M. Bayraktar, M. Pamik, B. Kuleyin, M. Nuran, The energy efficiency gap in Turkish maritime transportation, Polish Maritime Research 26 (3) (2019) 98–106.
• B. M. Gardner, S. J. Pettit, H. A. Thanopoulou, Shifting challenges for British maritime policy, Marine Policy 20 (6) (1996) 517–524.
• H. Leggate, J. McConville, Tonnage tax: Is it working?, Maritime Policy & Management 32 (2) (2005) 177–186.
• M. Brownrigg, G. Dawe, M. Mann, P. Weston, Developments in UK shipping: the tonnage tax, Maritime Policy & Management 28 (3) (2001) 213–223.
• R. Morris, De-manning the fleet: federal government reforms and Australia’s shipping debate, Maritime Policy & Management 20 (1) (1993) 67–75.
• P. Coto-millán, Maritime transport policy in Spain (1974–1995), Transport Policy 3 (1-2) (1996) 37–41.
• F. Yercan, Maritime transport policy of Turkey, Transport Policy 5 (4) (1998) 259–266.
• B. B. Damachi, Y. Zhaosheng, The Nigerian shipping industry and indigenous shipping companies, Maritime Policy & Management 32 (1) (2005) 31–38.
• M. G. Chasomeris, South Africa’s maritime policy and transformation of the shipping industry, Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 17 (3) (2006) 269–288.
• O. C. Iheduru, Merchant fleet development by legislation: lessons from West and Central Africa, Maritime Policy & Management 19 (4) (1992) 297–317.
• Z. Sawiczewska, Reconstructing Polish ports and shipping, Maritime Policy & Management 19 (1) (1992) 69–76.
• Y. B. Song, Shipping and shipbuilding policies in PR China, Marine Policy 14 (1) (1990) 53–70.
• R.-H. Chiu, The liberalization of shipping in Taiwan, Marine Policy 31 (3) (2007) 258–265.
• P. Marlow, K. Mitroussi, EU shipping taxation: The comparative position of Greek shipping, Maritime Economics & Logistics 10 (1-2) (2008) 185–207.
• F. Yılmaz, Evaluation of port state control (PSC) performance of Turkish flagged merchant ships in Paris memorandum of understanding (MoU) on PSC, Turkish Journal of Maritime and Marine Sciences 6 (1) (2020) 111–119.
• C. B. Karahan, L. Kırval, Clustering analysis of Turkish maritime transportation sector, Journal of Transportation and Logistics 3 (2) (2018) 63–80.
• C. B. Karahan, L. Kirval, Clustering potential of Istanbul maritime sector, Maritime Business Review 3 (3) (2018) 314–336.
• M. Çiftçi, Global comparative position of Turkish maritime sector as a national wealth, International Journal of Alanya Faculty of Business 4 (3) (2012) 1–9.
• A. Y. Kaya, K.E. Erginer, An analysis of decision-making process of shipowners for implementing energy efficiency measures on existing ships: The case of Turkish maritime industry, Ocean Engineering 241 (2021) 110001.
• A. Erdoğan, G. Kara, Determining the maritime transportation policy of Turkey, International Journal of Maritime Engineering 161 (A4) (2019) 437–448.
• M. Kadioglu, Turkish maritime transport policy (1960-2008), TransNav 4 (2) (2010) 243–250.
• M. Celik, I. Deha Er, A. F. Ozok, Application of fuzzy extended AHP methodology on shipping registry selection: The case of Turkish maritime industry, Expert Systems with Applications 36 (1) (2009) 190–198
• M. Celik, Y. I. Topcu, A decision-making solution to ship flagging out via administrative maritime strategies, Maritime Policy & Management 41 (1) (2014) 112–127.
• M. Celik, A. Kandakoglu, Maritime policy development against ship flagging out dilemma using a fuzzy quantified SWOT analysis, Maritime Policy & Management 39 (4) (2012) 401–421.
• UNCTADStat, UNCTAD Data Centre (2023), https://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/summary.aspx, Accessed 20 Dec 2023.
• D. Diakoulaki, G. Mavrotas, L. Papayannakis, Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method, Computers & Operations Research 22 (7) (1995) 763–770.
• C. -L. Hwang, K. Yoon, Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1981.
• G. -H. Tzeng, J.-J. Huang, Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, CRC Press, New York, 2011.
• UNCTAD, Review of Maritime Transport 2023, 2023. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/rmt2023_en.pdf, Accessed 4 Oct 2023.
• N.K. Tran, HD. Haasis, An empirical study of fleet expansion and growth of ship size in container liner shipping, International Journal of Production Economics 159 (2015) 241–253.
• K. Cullinane, M. Khanna, Economies of scale in large containerships: optimal size and geographical implications, Journal of Transport Geography 8 (3) (2000) 181–195.
• R. F. Mulligan, G. A. Lombardo, Short sea shipping: — Alleviating the environmental impact of economic growth, WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs 5 (2) (2006) 181–194.
• G. Alexandridis, M. G. Kavussanos, C. Y. Kim, D. A. Tsouknidis, I. D. Visvikis, A survey of shipping finance research: Setting the future research agenda, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 115 (2018) 164–212.
• P. Lorange, O. D. Fjeldstad, New Business Models and Strategies in Shipping, in: W. K. Talley (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Maritime Economics, West Sussex, Wiley, 2012, pp. 263–280
• M. Saya, Examination of dynamics upgrading Greek shipping, Dokuz Eylul University Maritime Faculty Journal 15 (1) (2023) 35–51.