EVALUATION OF COUNTRIES' SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCES USING HYBRID LOPCOW-PIV TECHNIQUES

Abstract

With the changing world conditions, many environmental and social risks have preceded economic risks. Accordingly, many economic variables have begun to be evaluated together with the concept of sustainability. Undoubtedly, the most important and inclusive of these is sustainable development. It has emerged as a necessity to evaluate the concepts of development and growth for economies and whether they are sustainable. The aim of this study is to analyze the sustainable development performance of countries. For the present purpose, performance evaluation was made on a total of eight criteria, including environmental, social, governance, financial and economic, which are thought to be effective on the sustainability performance of countries. 167 countries whose data can be accessed for the year 2020 were included in the analysis. In the study, the LOPCOW (Logarithmic Percentage Change-driven Objective Weighting) method was used to determine the importance levels of the eight criteria. PIV (Proximity Indexed Value) method was used to rank the sustainable development performances of the countries. The results revealed that Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Ireland are the countries with the best sustainable development performance. It has been deduced that besides economic indicators, other factors such as environmental, social, and management performances are important in measuring the sustainable development performance of countries.

Keywords

• Sustainability
• Sustainable development
• Multi-criteria decision-making methods

References

1. Alptekin, N. (2015) ‘‘Ranking of EU Countries and Turkey in Terms of Sustainable Development Indicators: An Integrated Approach Using Entropy and TOPSIS Methods’’, in the 9th International Days of Statistics and Economics, Prague, Czech Republic: 22-23.
2. Antanasijević, D., Pocajt, V., Ristić, M. and Perić-Grujić, A. (2017) “A Differential Multi-Criteria Analysis for the Assessment of Sustainability Performance of European Countries: Beyond Country Ranking”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 165: 213-220.
3. Aras, G. and Crowther, D. (2008) “Governance and Sustainability: An Investigation into the Relationship between Corporate Governance and Corporate Sustainability”, Management Decision, 46(3): 433-448. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810863870
4. Aras, G. and Yıldırım, F. M. (2020a) “Is There a Relationship between Environmental Social Performance and GDP Per Capita? Evidence from the G-20 Countries”, Öneri Dergisi, 15(54): 463-479. https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.771661
5. Aras, G. and Yıldırım, F. M. (2020b) “Sosyo-Ekonomik Refah Düzeyinin Belirlenmesinde Alternatif bir Endeks Çalışması: ARAS Yöntemi ile G-20 Ülkeleri Uygulaması”, Business and Economics Research Journal, 11(3): 735-751. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2020.279
6. Aras, G., Tezcan, N. and Furtuna, Ö. K. (2018a) “Çok Boyutlu Kurumsal Sürdürülebilirlik Yaklaşımı ile Türk Bankacılık Sektörünün Değerlemesi: Kamu-Özel Banka Farklılaşması”, Ege Akademik Bakış, 18(1): 47-61. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.2018131895
7. Aras, G., Tezcan, N. and Furtuna, Ö. K. (2018b) “Multidimensional Comprehensive Corporate Sustainability Performance Evaluation Model: Evidence from an Emerging Market Banking Sector”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 185: 600-60.
8. Balešentis, T., Balešentis, A. ve Brauers, W. K. M. (2011) “Multi–Objective Optimization of Well–Being in the European Union Member States”, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 24(4): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2011.11517485

9. Brundtland, G.H. (1987) ‘‘Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development’’, Geneva, UN-Dokument A/42/427.
10. Çakın, E. and Ayçin, E. (2019) “Ülkelerin Çevresel Performanslarının Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ve Bulanık Mantık Tabanlı Bir Yaklaşım ile Bütünleşik Olarak Değerlendirilmesi”, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 14(3): 631-656. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.476373
11. Candice, S. (2005) “Measuring Sustainable Development”, OECD Statistics Brief, No.10 https://www.oecd.org/sdd/35407580.pdf (Accessed 05 May 2023).
12. Ecer, F. and Pamucar, D. (2022) “A Novel LOPCOW-DOBI Multi Criteria Sustainability Performance Assessment Methodology: An Application in Developing Country Banking Sector”, Omega, 112, 112690: 1-17.
13. Garcia-Johnson, R. (2000) “Exporting Environmentalism: US Multinational Chemical Corporations in Brazil and Mexico”, Cambridge: MIT Press.
14. Hsu, M., Luo, X., and Chao, G. H. (2008) “The Fog of OECD and Non-OECD Country Efficiency: A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach”, The Journal of Developing Areas, 42(1): 81–93. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40376195
15. Işık, Ö., Shabir, M. and Belke, M. (2023) “Is There a Causal Relationship Between Financial Performance and Premium Production? Evidence from Turkish Insurance Industry”, Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10 (2): 1388-1412. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.1220299
16. Kearney, C. (2012) “Emerging Markets Research: Trends, Issues and Future Directions”, Emerging Markets Review, 13(2): 159-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2012.01.003
17. Khan, N. Z., Ansari, T. S. A., Siddiquee, A. N., and Khan, Z. A. (2019) “Selection of E-Learning Websites Using a Novel Proximity Indexed Value (PIV) MCDM Method”, Journal of Computers in Education, 6(2): 241-256.
18. Koca, E. B. and Tunca, M. Z. (2019) “G20 Ülkelerinin Ekonomik Performanslarının Gri İlişkisel Analiz Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi”, Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(28): 348-357. https://doi.org/10.20875/makusobed.541005
19. Mufazzal, S., and Muzakkir, S. M. (2018) “A New Multi-Criterion Decision Making (MCDM) Method based on Proximity Indexed Value for Minimizing Rank Reversals”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 119: 427–438.
20. Özkan Aksu E. and Temel Gencer C. (2018) “Veri Zarflama Analizi ile OECD Ülkelerinin Çevre Performansının İncelenmesi”, Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 18: 191-206.
21. Pop, D. S. (2013) “Emerging Economies and Sustainable Development”, SEA: Practical Application of Science, 1(2): 232-241.
22. Türe, H. (2019) “OECD Ülkeleri için Refah Ölçümü: Gri Ilişkisel Analiz Uygulaması”, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(2): 310-327. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ahbvuibfd/issue/48208/568310
23. United Nations (1992) ‘‘Conference on Environment and Development’’, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf