Sürdürülebilir Turizmde Karbon Ayak İzi Azaltma Stratejilerinin Değerlendirilmesi: Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yaklaşımı

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1, 23 - 35

Danışment Vural

https://doi.org/10.53353/atrss.1657114

Öz

Bu çalışma, sürdürülebilir turizmde karbon ayak izi azaltma stratejilerini çok kriterli karar verme (MCDM) yaklaşımlarıyla değerlendirmektedir ve özellikle orta ve büyük ölçekli turizm tesislerine odaklanmaktadır. Turizm sektörü, enerji yoğun faaliyetler (ulaşım ve konaklama gibi) nedeniyle küresel sera gazı emisyonlarının yaklaşık %8-10'unu oluşturmaktadır. Bu durumu ele alan çalışma, Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) ve İdeal Çözüme Benzerlik ile Tercih Sıralaması Tekniği (TOPSIS) yöntemlerini birleştiren bütünleşmiş bir MCDM modeli önermektedir. AHP yöntemiyle kriterlerin ağırlıkları belirlenirken, TOPSIS yöntemiyle alternatif stratejilerin ideal çözüme yakınlıklarına göre sıralaması yapılmıştır. Bu model, çevresel, ekonomik ve sosyal kriterlere dayalı olarak stratejileri sıralamaktadır. Sonuçlar, yenilenebilir enerji kullanımı, enerji verimliliği iyileştirmeleri ve atık yönetiminin en etkili stratejiler olduğunu göstermektedir. "Yenilenebilir enerji kullanımının artırılması" en yüksek sırada yer almakta, ardından "Enerji verimli teknolojilerin yaygınlaştırılması" ve "Sürdürülebilir ulaşım modellerinin teşvik edilmesi" gelmektedir. Bu çalışma, önceki araştırmaların genellikle izole stratejilere odaklanmasındaki sınırlamaları ele alarak, kapsamlı birçok boyutlu bir çerçeve sunarak mevcut literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır. Bulgular, sürdürülebilirlik için bütünsel bir yaklaşımın önemini vurgulayarak, politika yapıcılar ve turizm işletmelerine uygulanabilir içgörüler sunmaktadır. Gelecek araştırmalar, bu çerçeveyi diğer bölgelere genişleterek uzun vadeli etkileri değerlendirebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sürdürülebilir Turizm , Karbon Ayak İzi , Çok Kriterli Karar Verme , AHP , TOPSIS

Etik Beyan

Çalışma TR Dizin Etik Kurul izni gerektiren çalışma türleri arasında yer almamaktadır.

Evaluation of Carbon Footprint Reduction Strategies in Sustainable Tourism: A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach

Öz

This study evaluates carbon footprint reduction strategies in sustainable tourism using multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches, focusing on medium to large-scale tourism facilities. The tourism sector accounts for about 8–10% of global greenhouse gas emissions due to energy-intensive activities like transport and accommodation. To address this, an integrated MCDM model combining the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is proposed. AHP determines the weights of criteria, while TOPSIS ranks strategies based on proximity to the ideal solution. The model assesses alternatives under environmental, economic, and social dimensions. Results indicate that renewable energy use, energy efficiency improvements, and waste management are the most effective strategies. “Increasing renewable energy use” ranks highest, followed by “Expanding energy-efficient technologies” and “Promoting sustainable transport models.” The study contributes a comprehensive, multidimensional framework, addressing prior research limitations focused on isolated strategies, and offers actionable insights for policymakers and tourism operators. Future research may extend this framework to other regions and evaluate long-term impacts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sustainable Tourism , Carbon Footprint , Multi-Criteria Decision-Making , AHP , TOPSIS

Etik Beyan

This study is not included in the study group that requires TR Index Ethics Committee Approval.

Kaynakça

• Abdelhafez, A., Hewedi, M. M., Abdelhakim, A. S., & Gaber, A. M. (2025). Stakeholders’ Barriers Analysis in Reducing Carbon Footprint in Hurghada Hotels. International Journal of Heritage, Tourism and Hospitality, 19(1), 21-37. https://doi.org/10.21608/ijhth.2025.363209.1064
• Abdulvahitoğlu, A., Vural, D. & Abdulvahitoğlu, A. (2023). Optimising traffic safety–locating traffic gendarmes based on multi-criteria decision making. Promet-Traffic & Transportation, 35(6), 800-813.
• Becken, S. & Hay, J. E. (2007). Tourism and climate change: Risks and opportunities, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• Becken, S. & Patterson, M. (2006). Measuring national carbon dioxide emissions from tourism as a key step towards achieving sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(4), 323-338. https://doi.org/10.2167/jost547.0
• Bohdanowicz, P. (2006). Environmental awareness and initiatives in the swedish and polish hotel industries — survey results. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 25(4), 662-682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2005.06.006
• Dodds, R. & Graci, S. (2012). Sustainable tourism in island destinations. London: Routledge.
• Dolnicar, S. & Leisch, F. (2008). An investigation of tourists' patterns of obligation to protect the environment. Journal of Travel Research, 46(4), 381-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507308330
• Gössling, S. & Scott, D. (2018). The decarbonisation impasse: Global tourism leaders’ views on climate change mitigation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(12), 2071-2086.
• Gössling, S. & Hall, C. M. (2008). Swedish tourism and climate change mitigation: An emerging conflict? Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 8(2), 141-158.
• Gössling, S., Hall, C. M. & Weaver, D. B. J. (2012). Sustainable tourism futures. London: Routledge.
• Erkan, T. E. & Elsharida, W. M. (2020). Combining AHP and ROC with GIS for airport site selection: a case study in Libya. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(5), 312.
• Grizane, T., & Blumberga, D. (2025). Measuring the climate and environmental impacts of sustainable tourism development: the case of latvia. Rigas Tehniskas Universitates Zinatniskie Raksti, 29(1), 114-127.
• Hateftabar, F. & Hall, C. M. (2023). Energizing tourism sustainably: A harmonious symphony of tourists’ and locals’ acceptance of renewable energy. Journal of Environmental Management, 345, 118863.
• Ho, W. (2008). Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications—A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(1), 211-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.004
• Hwang, C. L. & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. M. Beckman & H. P. Künzi (Ed.), “in” Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications, lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, vol 186 (pp. 58-191), Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3
• Kang, D., Manirathinam, T., Sandra, M., Pragathi, S., Narayanamoorthy, S., Yazid Bajuri, M., Tiziana, C. & Ahmadian, A. (2024). Measuring priorities of sustainable post-pandemic tourism policy factors using novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 32(11), 2286-2303.
• Kenar, G. (2025). Ensuring environmental sustainability with HRM practices in hospitality and tourism: a systematic literature review. GSI Journals Serie A: Advancements in Tourism Recreation and Sports Sciences, 8(2), 764-782. https://doi.org/10.53353/atrss.1718663
• Kurt Konakoglu, S. S., Hełdak, M., Kurdoglu, B. C. & Wysmułek, J. (2019). Evaluation of sustainable development of tourism in selected cities in Turkey and Poland. Sustainability, 11(9), 2552.
• Lenzen, M., Sun, Y. Y., Faturay, F., Ting, Y. P., Geschke, A. & Malik, A. (2018). The carbon footprint of global tourism. Nature climate change, 8(6), 522-528.
• Miller, G., Rathouse, K., Scarles, C., Holmes, K. & Tribe, J. (2012). Public understanding of sustainable tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 627-645.
• Phoochinda, W., & Vongchan, P. (2024). Personnel development of green hotel under carbon neutrality in samui island and phuket. Srinakharinwirot Research and Development Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 16(32).
• Piya, S., Shamsuzzoha, A., Azizuddin, M., Al-Hinai, N. & Erdebilli, B. (2022). Integrated fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method to analyze green management practice in hospitality industry in the sultanate of oman. Sustainability, 14(3), 1118. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41(11), 1073-1076.
• Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
• Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
• Salehipour, M., Kazemi, N., Jokar Arsanjani, J. & Karimi Firozjaei, M. (2025). Developing a multi-criteria decision model to unlock sustainable heritage tourism potential. Sustainability, 17(8), 3703.
• Scott, D., Gössling, S. & Hall, C. M. (2010). Tourism and climate change: Impacts, adaptation and mitigation. London: Routledge.
• Sun, Y., Duru, O. A., Razzaq, A. & Dinca, M. S. (2021). The asymmetric effect eco-innovation and tourism towards carbon neutrality target in Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management, 299, 113653.
• Sun, Y. Y., Faturay, F., Lenzen, M., Gössling, S. & Higham, J. (2024). Drivers of global tourism carbon emissions. Nature Communications, 15(1), 1-10.
• Tajer, E. & Demir, S. (2023). Multi-criteria decision-making methods in sustainable tourism. Scientific approaches in Landscape Architecture, 185.
• World Tourism Organization. (2024). International tourism highlights, 2024 edition. UN Tourism. https://doi.org/10.18111/9789284425808
• Yeşiltaş, M., Gürlek, M., & Kenar, G. (2022). Organizational green culture and green employee behavior: Differences between green and non-green hotels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131051