A DECISION MODEL FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY RISKS OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Abstract

The automotive industry is increasing its competitive power by undergoing more and more technological and digital changes every day. Along with this competitiveness, the concepts of sustainability, ethics, and reputation come to the fore. Sustainability includes social, economic, and environmental issues that meet all the needs of future generations and use limited resources efficiently. In this study, the environmental and sustainable supply chain risks of the automotive industry are examined through automotive industry reports, expert opinions, and a literature review. After nine risks were identified, 14 alternatives were developed to prevent them. In the study, a multi-level risk assessment method using Failure Modes and Effects Analysis and Entropy-based EDAS method was introduced and an application was carried out in the automotive sector. According to the entropy-based EDAS method, the most important alternative has been “The top management's determination of sustainability commitments and targets.

Keywords

• Supply chain
• Sustainability
• Risk Analysis
• FMEA
• EDAS
• Multi-Criteria Decision Making

References

1. Ak, S. K. and Türedi, H. (2022) “Evaluation of Corporate Sustainability Reports: Sustainability Research in the Turkish Banking Sector”, Journal of Management and Economics Research, 20(4): 82-98.
2. Akın, B. Vedat, E. and Çetin, C. (1998) “Toplam Kalite Yönetimi ve ISO 9000 Kalite Güvence Sistemi”, 342s. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım AŞ.
3. Alioğulları, E. and Tüysüz, F. (2020) “EDAS ve CODAS Yöntemiyle İstanbul İlinin Dış Ticaret Kapasitesinin İncelenmesi”, Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, Özel Sayı, 240-248.
4. Amabile, T. M. (1979) “Effects of External Evaluation on Artistic Creativity”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 37(2).
5. Awasthi, A. Govindan, K. and Gold, S. (2018) “Multi-tier Sustainable Global Supplier Selection Using a Fuzzy AHP-VIKOR Based Approach”, International Journal of Production Economics, 195: 106-117.
6. Barauskas, A. Mateckis, K. J. Palevičius, V. and Antuchevičienė, J. (2018) “Ranking Conceptual Locations for A Park-and-Ride Parking Lot Using EDAS Method”, Građevınar, 70(11), 975-983.
7. Bathrinath, S. Dhanasekar, M. Dhanorvignesh, B. Kamaldeen, Z. Santhi, B. Bhalaji, R. K. A. and Koppiahraj, K. (2022) “Modeling Sustainability Risks in Sugar Industry Using AHP-BWM”, Materials Today: Proceedings, 50: 1397-1404.
8. Bai, L. Li, Y. Du. and Q. Xu, Y. (2017) “A Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Model for Sustainability Risk Evaluation of PPP Projects”, Sustainability, 9(10): 1890.

9. Bailey, D. and Solomon, G. (2004) “Pollution Prevention at Ports: Clearing the Air”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review”, 24(7-8): 749-774.
10. Blackburn, W.R. (2007) “The Sustainability Handbook: The Complete Management Guide to Achieving Social, Economic and Environmental Responsibility”, Earthscan, London.
11. Brundtland, G. H. Khalid, M. Agnelli, S. Al-Athel, S. A. Chidzero, B. J. N. Y. Fadika, L. M. and Singh, N. (1987) “Our Common Future; By World Commission on Environment and Development”, Oxford University Press, 284-287.
12. Çamlıca, Z. and Akar, G. S. (2014) “Lojistik Sektöründe Sürdürülebilirlik Uygulamaları”, Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Elektronik Dergisi, 5(11).
13. Domínguez, C. R. Guadian, J. E. R. Lona, J. G. and Mares, J. I. P. (2023) “Hazard Identification for Risk Assessment Using the PRA Technique in the Automotive Industry”, Safety Science, 160, 106041.