Aliağa Bölgesi Gemi Söküm Tesislerinin Verimlilik Analizi

Öz

Ekonomik ömürleri dolan gemiler, piyasadaki arz talep dengesini sağlamak için geri dönüşüme yollanmaktadır. Gemi geri dönüşümünün ilk aşaması gemi söküm aşamasıdır. Gemi söküm tesislerindeki söküm sürecinin çevre ve insan sağlığına zarar vermeden etkin ve verimli bir şekilde gerçekleştirilmesi önemlidir. Bu nedenle makalede, Aliağa Bölgesindeki gemi geri dönüşüm bölgesinde bulunan 8 gemi söküm tesisinin 2018-2022 yılları arasında gerçekleşen göreceli verimlilik değerleri ayrı ayrı hesaplanmış olup, bölgedeki tesislerin birbirleri ile bir karşılaştırılması yapılması amaçlanmıştır. Göreceli verimlilik analizi yapmak için hibrit bir yöntem olan entropi yöntemi entegre edilmiş EATWOS yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Tesislerin faaliyet alanı ve kapasiteleri girdi, gemi söküm tonajları ve miktarları çıktı değerleridir. Çalışma sonucunda en iyi üç tesis arasında bulunan bir tesisin, AB listesine başvurup, denetlendiği ve onaylanmadığı; en kötü üç tesis arasından bulunan bir tesisin ise AB tesis listesinde bulunduğu görülmüştür. Ancak yapılan analizde tesislerin yeşil gemi geri dönüşüm süreçlerine uyma durumları dikkate ele alınmamıştır. Makale, Aliağa Bölgesi’ndeki tesislerin karşılaştırılması için göreceli verimlilik analizi yapması bakımdan literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Aliağa
• Gemi
• Söküm
• Entropi
• EATWOS
• Verimlilik

Productivity Analysis of Ship Recycling Facilities in Aliağa Region

Öz

To ensure balance between supply and demand in the market, ships that have reached the end of their economic life are recycled. The first stage of ship recycling is the ship dismantling stage. It is important that the recycling process in ship recycling facilities is carried out effectively and efficiently without harm to the environment and human health. Therefore, in the article, the relative productivity values of 8 ship recycling facilities in the ship recycling zone in Aliağa Region between 2018-2022 were calculated separately and it was aimed a comparison of the facilities in the region with each other. The EATWOS method integrated with the entropy method, which is a hybrid method, was used to analyze relative productivity. The operating area and capacities of the facilities are input values, while the tonnages and quantities of ship dismantling are output values. As a result of the study, it was seen that one facility among the top three facilities applied to the EU list, was audited and not approved, while one facility among the worst three facilities was found to be on the EU facility list. However, the analysis did not take into account the compliance of the facilities with the green ship recycling processes. The article contributes to the literature in terms of relative productivity analysis for the comparison of facilities in Aliağa Region.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Aliağa
• Ship
• Recycling
• Entropy
• EATWOS
• Efficiency

Kaynakça

1. Ahmad M. 2022. Ship recycling in India- environmental stock taking. Indian Law Review, 6(3): 465-478, DOI: 10.1080/24730580.2022.2082100.
2. Akan E, Bayar S. 2021. Türk gemi inşa sektörünün yıllara göre performansının entegre entropi ve eatwos yöntemiyle analizi. In: Proceedings of Başkent International Conference on Multidiciplinary Studies, 23 - 24 Eylül 2021, Ankara, Türkiye, ss: 519-535.
3. Akyürek E. 2017. Türkiye Karadeniz limanları verimlilik analizi. Verimlilik Derg, (4): 29-45.
4. Alnıpak S. 2022. Liman operasyonel verimliliğinin karlılık ile ilişkisi: TCDD Limanları üzerine bir araştırma. Maliye Finans Yazıları, 118: 239-256.
5. Asmare E, Begashaw A. 2018. Review on parametric and nonparametric methods of efficiency analysis. Biostat Bioinform, 2(2): 1-7.
6. Ateş A, Esmer S. 2015. Farklı yöntemler ile Türk konteyner limanlarının verimliliği. Verimlilik Derg, 1: 61-76.
7. Babacan A. 2006. Türkiye’deki üniversitelerde VZA yöntemiyle verimlilik analizi. Doktora Tezi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Sivas, Türkiye, ss: 309.
8. Bansal A, KrSingh R, Issar S, Varkey J. 2014. Evaluation of vendors ranking by EATWOS approach. J Adv Manage Res, 11(3): 290-311.

9. Carvalho IS, Antão P, Soares CG. 2009. Modelling of environmental impacts of ship dismantling. In: Soares CG., Das PK, editors. In Analysis and Design of Marine Structures, CRC Press, London, UK, 1st ed, pp: 557-566.
10. Casu B, Girardone C, Molyneux P. 2004. Productivity change in European banking: A comparison of parametric and non-parametric approaches. J Banking Finance, 28(10): 2521-2540.
11. Chang V, Tovar B. 2014. Efficiency and productivity changes for Peruvian and Chilean ports terminals: A parametric distance functions approach. Transport Policy, 31: 83-94.
12. Çakır S, Perçin S. 2013. AB ülkeleri’nde bütünleşik entropi ağırlık-TOPSIS yöntemiyle ar-ge performansının ölçülmesi. Uludağ Üniv İktisadi İdari Bilim Fak Derg, 32(1): 77-95.
13. Çelik MS, Akyar DA, Ceylan BO. 2024. Navigating environmental sustainability in ship recycling industry: Integrated SWOT-TOWS-ANP approach. Ocean Engin, 295: 116906.
14. Dewan C, Sibilia EA. 2024. Global containments and local leakages: Structural violence and the toxic flows of shipbreaking. Environ Planning C: Politics Space, 42(1): 80-101.
15. Doğan H. 2020. Türkiye ve AB ülkelerinin arge verimliliklerinin entropi-EATWOS yöntemleri ile karşılaştırılması. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilim Derg, 12(23): 515-533.
16. European Commission. 2024. List of ship recycling facilities: first renewals of inclusion for yards located outside the EU. URL: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/list-ship-recycling-facilities-first-renewals-inclusion-yards-located-outside-eu-2023-12-06_en, (accessed date: May 10, 2024).
17. Fariya S, Günbeyaz SA, Kurt RE, Turan O. 2022. Determining the effects of implementing IMO’s Hong Kong Convention’s requirements on the productivity of a ship recycling yard by using discrete event simulation. Ships Offshore Struct, 17(11): 2508-2519.
18. Fariya S, Günbeyaz SA, Kurt RE, Sunaryo S, Djatmiko EB. 2019. Developing sustainable green ship recycling facilities in Indonesia: Investigation of current situation. In Proceeding Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of the Maritme Association of the Mediterranean (IMAM 2019), September 9-11, Varna, Bulgaria, pp: 439.
19. Fun-sang MA, Caprace JD. 2015. Improving ship fleet performance using a non-parametric model. In SNAME Maritime Convention, November 3-7, Rhode Island, USA, pp: D031S008R002.
20. Glinski C. 2022. The public–private governance regime on sustainable ship recycling: An in‐depth analysis. Rev European, Comparat Inter Environ Law, 31(2): 268-281.
21. Görçün ÖF. 2019a. Kentsel lojistikte kullanılan hafif raylı sistem hatlarının entegre entropi ve EATWOS yöntemleri kullanılarak analizi. Gümüşhane Üniv Sosyal Bilim Enstit Elektron Derg, 10(1): 254-267.
22. Görçün ÖF. 2019b. Orta Asya Türk Cumhuriyetlerinin lojistik ve taşımacılık performansları ve verimliliklerinin analizi için hibrid birçok kriterli karar verme modeli. MANAS Sosyal Araş Derg, 8(3): 2775-2798.
23. Görçün ÖF. 2019c. Entegre Entropi ve EATWOS yöntemleri kullanılarak Karadeniz konteyner limanlarının verimlilik analizi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniv İktisadi İdari Bilim Derg, 14(3): 811-830.
24. Görçün ÖF. 2021. Efficiency analysis of Black sea container seaports: application of an integrated MCDM approach. Maritime Pol Manage, 48(5): 672-699.
25. Günbeyaz SA. 2019. Designing efficient and contemporary ship recycling yards through discrete event simulation. PhD Thesis, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. Scotland, pp: 447.
26. Günbeyaz SA, Giagloglou E, Kurt RE, Rogge KG, Alkaner S, McKenna SA, Turan O, Lord R. 2023. Workers' exposure to dust and potentially toxic elements during steel cutting in two ship dismantling cases. Ocean Engin, 270: 113628.
27. Günbeyaz SA, Kurt RE, Turan O. 2018. Designing efficient contemporary ship recycling yards through discrete event simulation. Transport Research Arena (TRA) 2018, April 16-19, Vienna, Austria, pp: 63.
28. Günbeyaz SA, Kurt RE, Turan O. 2022. Investigation of different cutting technologies in a ship recycling yard with simulation approach. Ships Offshore Struct, 17(3): 564-576.
29. Hasanlı YS, Kendirlinan ŞE, Türk M. 2023. Bir gemi söküm işçisi örneği ile iş hijyeninin önemi ve nedensellik ilişkisi kurmanın zorlukları. Sürekli Tıp Eğitimi Derg, 32(3): 238-242.
30. Kocak ST, Helvacioglu IH, Kahyaoglu N. 2023. A Novel Productivity Evaluation Method for Shipyards. In SNAME Maritime Convention, September 27-29, San Diego, CA, USA, pp: D031S003R002.
31. Koga T, Matsubara M, Aoyama K. 2008. Disassembling system of large scaled structure considering safety, environmental impact, and economic efficiency. In International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering, August 3-6, New York, USA, pp: 279-288.
32. Kundakcı N. 2019. A comparative analyze based on EATWOS and OCRA methods for supplier evaluation. Alphanumeric J, 7(1): 103-112.
33. Kwon OS, Lee H. 2004. Productivity improvement in Korean rice farming: parametric and non‐parametric analysis. Australian J Agri Resour Econ, 48(2): 323-346.
34. Li J, Zhang J, Gong L, Miao P. 2015. Research on the total factor productivity and decomposition of Chinese coastal marine economy: based on DEA-Malmquist index. J Coastal Res, (73): 283-289.
35. Mahindrakar AB, Das SK, Asolekar SR, Kura B. 2008. Environmental issues in the ship breaking industry in India. In the proceedings of the A&WMA’s Annual Conference, June 24-26, Portland, Oregon, USA, pp: 54.
36. Marselou OS, Nikitakos N, Papachristos, D. 2019. Environmental impacts of ship dismantling-the case of Aliaga in Turkey. J Multidisciplinary Engin Sci Technol, 6: 11186-11193.
37. Mathew E. 2021. Ship recycling, market imperfections and the relevance of a consortium of ship recycling nations in the Indian subcontinent. J Inter Maritime Safety, Environmental Affairs, and Shipping, 5(2): 23-31, DOI: 10.1080/25725084.2021.1921994.
38. Menteş A, Yiğit M. 2020. Gemi geri dönüşüm tesisleri ve risk değerlendirmesi. GİDB Derg, 18:15-30.
39. Menteş A. 2023. Risk analysis of on-field and on-board activities and resilience investigation of Izmir Aliaga ship recycling facilities. Ocean Engin, 287: 115891.
40. Murillo-Zamorano LR, Vega-Cervera JA. 2001. The use of parametric and non-parametric frontier methods to measure the productive efficiency in the industrial sector: a comparative study. Inter J Product Econ, 69(3): 265-275.
41. Notteboom T, Coeck C, VanDenBroeck J. 2000. Measuring and explaining the relative efficiency of container terminals by means of Bayesian stochastic frontier models. Inter J Maritime Econ, 2:83-106.
42. Osundiran O, Okonta F, Quainoo H. 2021. An examination of the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on the maritime port of Singapore container port productivity using Malmquist Productivity Index. Pomorski Zbornik, 60(1): 85-96.
43. Peters ML, Zelewski S. 2006. Efficiency analysis under consideration of satisficing levels for output quantities. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Production and Operations Management Society – Operations Management in the New World Uncertainties., April 28 to May 1, Boston, USA, pp: 54.
44. Porcelli F. 2009. Measurement of technical efficiency. A brief survey on parametric and non-parametric techniques. University of Warwick, 11(527): 1-27.
45. Sakin E. 2023. Türkiye’de gemi geri dönüşümü sorunlar ve hedefler. NGO Shipbreaking Platform, Brüksel, Belçika, ss:136.
46. Schøyen H, Odeck J. 2017. Comparing the productivity of Norwegian and some Nordic and UK container ports-an application of Malmquist productivity index. Inter J Shipping Transport Logistics, 9(2):234-256.
47. Sezen B, Doğan E. 2005. Askeri bir tersaneye bağlı atölyelerin karşılaştırmalı verimlilik değerlendirmesi: bir veri zarflama yöntemi uygulaması. J Aeronautics Space Technol, 2(2): 77-87.
48. Sezer SI, Camlıyurt G, Aydin M, Akyuz E, Boustras G, Park S. 2024. A holistic risk assessment under the D–S evidential theory and FMECA approach of ship recycling process hazards in the maritime environment. Human Ecol Risk Assess Inter J, 30 (1-2): 201-216.
49. Simar L. 1992. Estimating efficiencies from frontier models with panel data: a comparison of parametric, non-parametric and semi-parametric methods with bootstrapping. J Product Analysis, 3(1): 171-203.
50. Singh R, Cherrie JW, Rao B, Asolekar SR. 2020. Assessment of the future mesothelioma disease burden from past exposure to asbestos in ship recycling yards in India. Inter J Hygiene Environ Health, 225: 113478.
51. Solakivi T, Kiiski T, Kuusinen T, Ojala L. 2021. The European ship recycling regulation and its market implications: Ship-recycling capacity and market potential. J Cleaner Product, 294: 126235.
52. Sunaryo S, Tjitrosoemarto BA. 2022. Integrated ship recycling industrial estate design concept for Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth Environ Sci, 972(1): 012042.
53. TDK. 2024. Türk dil kurumu sözlükleri. URL: http://sozluk.gov.tr (erişim tarihi: 20 Haziran 2024).
54. Uludağ AS. 2020. Measuring the productivity of selected airports in Turkey. Transport Res Part E: Logistics Transport Rev, 141: 102020.
55. UNCTAD. 2023. Review of maritime transport- Towards a green and just transition. United Nations Press, Geneva, Italy, pp: 126.
56. Wang TF, Song DW, Cullinane K. 2003. Container port production efficiency: a comparative study of DEA and FDH approaches. J Eastern Asia Soc Transport Stud, 5: 698713.
57. Wu J, Sun J, Lıang L, Zha Y. 2011. Determination of weights for ultimate cross efficiency using shannon entropy. Expert Syst Applicat, 38(5): 5162- 5165.
58. Yan H, Wu L, Yu J. 2018. The environmental impact analysis of hazardous materials and the development of green technology in the shipbreaking process. Ocean Engin, 161: 187-194.
59. Yeşilada T, Yaylali P. 2016. KKTC'de bankacilik sektöründe şube ve personel sayısndaki gelişmeler ile veri zarflama analizi yöntemi kullanılarak yapılan etkinlik analizi çalışması. EUL J Soc Sci, 7(1): 27-49.
60. Yeşilyurt C. 2009. Türkiye'deki iktisat bölümlerinin göreceli performanslarının veri zarflama analizi yöntemiyle ölçülmesi: KPSS 2007 verilerine dayalı bir uygulama. Atatürk Univ J Econ Administ Sci, 23(4): 135-147.
61. Yüksekyıldız E. 2022. Entropi ve EATWOS yöntemleri ile Türkiye konteyner limanlarının verimlilik analizi. Verimlilik Derg, 2: 3-24.
62. Zhou Q, Du Z, Liu J, Liang J, Jiao Y. 2021a. Factors influencing green ship recycling: A conceptual framework and modeling. J Clean Product, 322: 129155.
63. Zhou Q, Liang J, Du Z, Zhu H, Jiao Y. 2021b. A study on factors affecting workers’ safety during ship recycling. Ocean Engin, 239: 109910.
64. Zolfani SH, Görçün ÖF, Çanakçıoğlu M, Tirkolaee EB. 2023. Efficiency analysis technique with input and output satisficing approach based on type-2 neutrosophic fuzzy sets: A case study of container shipping companies. Expert Systems Applicat, 218: 119596.