METİNSEL VERİ MADENCİLİĞİ İLE TÜRKİYE’DEKİ ÜNİVERSİTELERİN SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİRLİK RAPORLARININ DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’deki üniversitelerin 2024 yılı sürdürülebilirlik raporlarındaki stratejik eğilimleri ve öncelik alanlarını, metin madenciliği teknikleri kullanarak nicel verilerle ortaya koymaktır. Çalışma, yapılandırılmamış metinsel verilerin analizi yoluyla yükseköğretimdeki sürdürülebilirlik söylemini objektif bir şekilde ölçmeyi hedeflemektedir. Araştırma kapsamında, 65 üniversiteye ait Türkçe sürdürülebilirlik raporları incelenmiş, 2024 yılında 26 üniversite tarafından yayımlanan sürdürülebilirlik raporları veri seti olarak belirlenmiştir. PDF formatındaki dokümanların, metin ön işleme ve tematik kodlama aşamaları MAXQDA ile yapılmış; terim frekansı ve TF-IDF hesaplamaları ise Python (pandas, scikit-learn) ile doğrulanmıştır. Çalışma, durak kelime (stop-word) temizliği ve normalizasyon işlemlerinin ardından Terim Frekans (TF) ve Kod Eş-Oluşum (Co-occurrence) analizlerine tabi tutulmuştur. Elde edilen veriler, Çevresel, Sosyal ve Yönetişim (ESG) kriterlerine dayalı bir sözlük (dictionary) yaklaşımıyla sınıflandırılmıştır. Toplam 19.446 adet anlamsal terimin analizi sonucunda, Türk üniversitelerinin sürdürülebilirlik yaklaşımının literatürdeki genel beklentinin aksine Sosyal (%45,71) > Çevresel (%39,39) > Yönetişim (%14,90) hiyerarşisinde şekillendiği tespit edilmiştir. "Enerji" (n=1.597) ve "Atık" (n=875) terimleri operasyonel odaklanmayı gösterirken; "Eğitim" ve "Sürdürülebilirlik" kavramları arasındaki güçlü ilişki (n=151), üniversitelerin ana misyonlarını sürdürülebilirlik hedefleriyle bütünleştirdiğini kanıtlamaktadır. Buna karşın, yönetişim boyutundaki zayıflık, sürecin henüz stratejik planlama seviyesine tam entegre edilemediğini göstermektedir. Elde edilen bulgular, üniversitelerin sürdürülebilirliği sadece "Yeşil Kampüs" olarak değil, eğitim ve toplumsal katkı odaklı hibrit bir model olarak benimsediğini ortaya koymuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• metin madenciliği
• sürdürülebilirlik raporları
• ui greenmetric
• yapılandırılmamış veri analizi
• yükseköğretim.

Evaluating Sustainability Reports of Universities in Turkey Using Textual Data Mining

Öz

The purpose of this study is to quantitatively reveal the strategic tendencies and priority areas in the 2024 sustainability reports of Turkish universities using text mining techniques. The study aims to objectively measure the sustainability discourse in higher education by analyzing unstructured textual data. Within the scope of the research, Turkish sustainability reports from 65 universities were examined, and the sustainability reports published by 26 universities in 2024 were selected as the dataset. Text preprocessing and thematic coding for PDF documents were carried out using MAXQDA; term frequency and TF-IDF calculations were verified using Python (pandas, scikit-learn). Following stop-word cleaning and normalization, the study was subjected to Term Frequency (TF) and Code Co-occurrence analyses. The resulting data were classified using a dictionary approach based on Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria. Analysis of 19,446 semantic terms revealed that the sustainability approach of Turkish universities is structured in the hierarchy Social (45.71%) > Environmental (39.39%) > Governance (14.90%), contrary to the general expectation in the literature. The terms "Energy" (n=1,597) and "Waste" (n=875) indicate an operational focus, while the strong relationship between "Education" and "Sustainability" (n=151) shows that universities are integrating their core missions with sustainability goals. In contrast, the weakness in the governance dimension indicates that the process has not yet been fully integrated into the strategic planning level. The findings reveal that universities adopt sustainability not only as a "Green Campus" but as a hybrid model focused on education and societal contribution.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• text mining
• sustainability reports
• ui greenmetric
• unstructured data analysis
• higher education.

Kaynakça

1. Adnan, K. ve Akbar, R. (2019). An analytical study of information extraction from unstructured and multidimensional big data. Journal of Big Data, 6, Article 91. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40537-019-0254-8
2. Basheer, N., Ahmed, V., Bahroun, Z., & Anane, C. (2024). Exploring sustainability assessment practices in higher education: A comprehensive review through content and bibliometric analyses. Sustainability, 16(13), Article 5799. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135799
3. Caeiro, S., Hamón, L., Martins, R., & Aldaz, C. (2020). Sustainability assessment and benchmarking in higher education institutions—A critical reflection. Sustainability, 12(2), Article 543. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020543
4. Demir, S., & Topcu, B. (2022). Graph-based Turkish text normalization and its impact on noisy text processing. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 35, Article 101192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2022.101192
5. Di Tullio, P., & Rea, M. (2025). Institutionalisation of sustainability in universities: Insights from strategic planning and sustainability reporting practices in Italian universities. Meditari Accountancy Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-05-2024-2467
6. Filho, W. L., Coronado-Marín, A., Sálvia, A. L., Silva, F. M., Wolf, F., LeVasseur, T., Kirrane, M., Doni, F., Paço, A., Blicharska, M., Schmitz, M., Grahl, A., & Moggi, S. (2022). International trends and practices on sustainability reporting in higher education institutions. Sustainability, 14(19), Article 12238. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912238
7. Kalpokas, N., & Radivojevic, I. (2021). Bridging the gap between methodology and qualitative data analysis software: A practical guide for educators and qualitative researchers. Sociological Research Online, 27(2), 313–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/13607804211003579
8. Kraus, M., & Feuerriegel, S. (2017). Decision support from financial disclosures with deep neural networks and transfer learning. Decision Support Systems, 104, 38–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.10.001

9. Lakhno, M. (2024). Green or green-washed? Examining sustainability reporting in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12513
10. Lewis, C., & Young, S. (2019). Fad or future? Automated analysis of financial text and its implications for corporate reporting. Accounting and Business Research, 49(5), 587– 615. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2019.1611730
11. Maher, C., Hadfield, M., Hutchings, M., & De Eyto, A. (2018). Ensuring rigor in qualitative data analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17, Article 1609406918786362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918786362
12. Mo, F., & Wang, D. (2023). Emerging ESG reporting of higher education institutions in China. Heliyon, 9(11), Article e22527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22527
13. Mohammed, Y., Fadel, M., Abdalhamed, M., & Khudhair, A. (2025). Advancing SDGs: Towards effective sustainability reporting for green universities via XBRL and its impact on green auditing quality. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 5(3), Article e05920. https://doi.org/10.47172/2965-730x.sdgsreview.v5.n03.pe05920
14. Oflazer, K. (2014). Turkish and its challenges for language processing. Language Resources and Evaluation, 48(4), 639–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-014-9267-2
15. Ong, K., Mao, R., Satapathy, R., Filho, R., Cambria, E., Sulaeman, J., & Mengaldo, G. (2024). Explainable natural language processing for corporate sustainability analysis. Information Fusion, 103, Article 102726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102726
16. Paulus, T., & Marone, V. (2024). “In minutes instead of weeks”: Discursive constructions of generative AI and qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Inquiry, 31(4), 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004241250065
17. Saillard, E. (2011). Systematic versus interpretive analysis with two CAQDAS packages: NVivo and MAXQDA. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-12.1.1518
18. Sak, H., Güngör, T., & Saraçlar, M. (2011). Resources for Turkish morphological processing. Language Resources and Evaluation, 45(2), 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-010-9128-6
19. Sepasi, S., Braendle, U., & Rahdari, A. (2019). Comprehensive sustainability reporting in higher education institutions. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(2), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-01-2018-0009
20. Star, J., Ringaert, L., & Larcombe, L. (2025). Qualitative methods case study: Using MAXQDA in Indigenous HIV journey mapping research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251356667
21. Stuckrath, C., Rosales-Carreón, J., & Worrell, E. (2025). Conceptualisation of Campus Living Labs for the sustainability transition: An integrative literature review. Environmental Development. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2025.101143.
22. Tohma, K., & Kutlu, Y. (2021). Challenges encountered in Turkish natural language processing studies. Natural and Engineering Sciences, 6(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.28978/nesciences.833188
23. Toraman, C., Yılmaz, E., Şahinuç, F., & Özçelik, O. (2022). Impact of tokenization on language models: An analysis for Turkish. ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing, 22(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3578707
24. Woods, M., Paulus, T., Atkins, D., & Macklin, R. (2016). Advancing qualitative research using qualitative data analysis software (QDAS)? Reviewing potential versus practice in published studies using ATLAS.ti and NVivo, 1994–2013. Social Science Computer Review, 34(5), 597–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315596311
25. Yáñez, S., Uruburu, Á., Moreno, A., & Lumbreras, J. (2019). The sustainability report as an essential tool for the holistic and strategic vision of higher education institutions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.171
26. Zennaro, G., Corazza, G., & Zanin, F. (2024). The effects of integrated reporting quality: a meta-analytic review. Meditari Accountancy Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-09-2023-2175. Kurumsal / İnternet Kaynakları Global Reporting Initiative. (2025). Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB). https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/global-sustainability-standards-board/
27. Times Higher Education. (2025). Impact rankings. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/impactrankings
28. UI GreenMetric. (2025). Overall rankings. https://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/rankings/overallrankings- 2025
29. World Sustainable Development Goals Platform. (2025). Küresel Amaçlar. https://www.kureselamaclar.org/
30. Yükseköğretim Kurulu. (2025). YÖK resmi web sitesi. https://www.yok.gov.tr/tr