GREEN SUPPLIER SELECTION BY USING ISO 14001:2015 CRITERIA

Öz

Due to climate change and the necessity of achieving net-zero targets by 2050, sustainability is becoming increasingly important across various sectors. Globally, attention to the environmental sustainability of healthcare institutions is growing exponentially, particularly due to their impact on carbon footprints. ISO 14001 certification stands out as a potent indicator of environmental prowess, influencing the selection of suppliers with a commitment to green practices. Companies holding this certification often enjoy preference in green procurement processes. Conventional ISO 14001 audits predominantly focus on verifying a company's adherence to standard criteria, leaving unaddressed the dimension of "how well" each criterion is satisfied or the relative "importance" of individual criteria. The aim of this study is to develop an integrated approach to evaluate the green procurement performance of four companies operating in the healthcare sector and to select the best supplier, taking into account the ISO 14001:2015 criteria. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to prioritize the criteria defined in the ISO 14001:2015 standard, and the Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluations (PROMETHEE) was applied to rank the companies based on their compliance with these prioritized criteria. According to the research findings, the most important criteria in the environmental management system are “leadership” and “planning.” The most significant sub-criteria were identified as “leadership and commitment” and “actions to address risks and opportunities.” It is evident that companies that consider the weighted importance of ISO criteria will gain environmental benefits in terms of quality, cost, and delivery, both for themselves and for the world.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Analytic hierarchy process (AHP)
• environmental management system
• green supplier selection
• ISO 14001
• preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE)

ISO 14001:2015 KRİTERLERİNİ KULLANARAK YEŞİL TEDARİKÇİ SEÇİMİ

Öz

İklim değişikliğine ve 2050 yılına kadar net sıfır hedeflerine ulaşma ihtiyacı nedeniyle sürdürülebilirlik sektörler arasında giderek daha fazla önemli hale gelmektedir. Küresel olarak, sağlık kuruluşlarının çevresel sürdürülebilirliğine yönelik dikkat, özellikle karbon ayak izine etkileri nedeniyle katlanarak artmaktadır. ISO 14001 sertifikası, yeşil uygulamalara bağlılık gösteren tedarikçilerin seçimini etkileyen, çevresel yeteneğin güçlü bir göstergesi olarak öne çıkıyor. Bu sertifikaya sahip şirketler genellikle yeşil tedarikçilerin satın alınmasında tercih edilmektedir. Geleneksel ISO 14001 denetimleri ağırlıklı olarak bir şirketin standart kriterlere bağlılığını doğrulamaya odaklanır ve her bir kriterin "ne kadar iyi" karşılandığı boyutunu veya bireysel kriterlerin göreceli "önemini" ele almaz. Bu çalışmanın amacı, ISO 14001:2015 kriterlerini dikkate alarak sağlık sektöründe faaliyet gösteren 4 şirketin yeşil tedarik performanslarını değerlendirmek ve en iyi tedarikçiyi seçmek için entegre bir yaklaşım geliştirmektir. ISO 14001:2015 standardında belirtilen kriterleri önceliklendirmek için Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) yöntemini ve şirketleri bu önceliklendirilmiş kriterlere uygunluklarına göre sıralamak için Tercih Sıralaması Organizasyon Yöntemi Zenginleştirme Değerlendirmesi (PROMETHEE) yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, çevre yönetim sisteminde en önemli kriter “liderlik” ve “planlama”dır. En önemli alt kriterler ise “liderlik ve bağlılık” ve “risk ve fırsatları ele almak için eylemler” olarak belirlenmiştir. ISO kriterlerinin önem ağırlıklarını dikkate alan şirketlerin, hem kendileri hem de dünya için kalite, maliyet ve teslimat gibi çevresel faydalar elde edecekleri açıktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• ISO 14001
• Çevre Yönetim Sistemi
• Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP)
• Zenginleştirme Değerlendirmesi için Tercih Sıralaması Organizasyon Yöntemi (PROMETHEE)
• Yeşil Tedarikçi Seçimi.

Kaynakça

1. Acar, A. Z., Onden, I. and Gürel, O. (2016). Evaluation of the parameters of the green supplier selection decision in textile industry. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe, 5 (119), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.5604/12303666.1215520.
2. Adams, W. and Saaty R. (2003). Super decisions software guide. Super Decision, 9(43).
3. Alnavis, N.B., Martono, D.N. and Hamzah, U.S. (2021). Recommendations for improving the ISO:14001 certification based on the companys perception analysis of the certification obstacles and benefits. Jurnal Kesehatan Lingkungan, 13 (3). 132. https://doi.org/10.20473/jkl.v13i3.2021.132-141.
4. Arbor, A. (1996). Environmental Management Systems: An implementation guide for small and medium sized organizations. NSF International, Michigan, 1996.
5. Balan, S. and Conlon, S. (2018). Text analysis of green supply chain practices in healthcare. J. Comput. Inf. Systems, 58 (1).
6. Bentahar, O., Benzidia, S. and Bourlakis, M. (2023). A green supply chain taxonomy in healthcare: critical factors for a proactive approach. Int. J. Logist. Managements, 34 (1), 60–83. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-04-2021-0240.
7. Benzidia, S., Makaoui, N. and Bentahar, O. (2021). The impact of big data analytics and artificial intelligence on green supply chain process integration and hospital environmental performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120557.
8. Brans, J-P. and Mareschal, B. (1994). The PROMCALC & GAIA decision support system for multicriteria decision aid. Decision Support Systems, 12(4), 297–310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(94)90048-5.

9. Cenani, S., and Can, G. (2025). Multi-criteria ranking of LEED healthcare criteria for designing green hospitals. Journal of Building Engineering, 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2025.112443.
10. Chowdhury, M., Prajogo, D. and Jayaram, J. (2018). Comparing symbolic and substantive implementation of international standards – The case of ISO 14001 certification. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 25 (3), 339-361. https://doi.org/10.1080/14486563.2018.1451402.
11. Costa, A.J., Curi, D., Bandeira, A.M., Ferreira, A., Tom, B., Joaquim, C., et al. (2022). Literature review and theoretical framework of the evolution and interconnectedness of corporate sustainability constructs. Sustainability, 14(8), 4413. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su14084413.
12. Dos Santos, B.M., Godoy, L.P. and Campos, L.M.S. (2019). Performance evaluation of green suppliers using entropy-TOPSIS-F. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 498-509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.235.
13. Debnath, B., Siraj, M.T., Rashid, K., Bari, A.M., Karmaker, C.L. and Aziz, R.A. (2023). Analyzing the critical success factors to implement green supply chain management in the apparel manufacturing industry: implications for sustainable development goals in the emerging economies, Sustain. Manuf. Serv. Economy, 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smse.2023.100013.
14. Ekşi, G. and Ömürgönülşen, M. (2020). Temiz üretim uygulamaları: Antalya organize sanayi bölgesinde ISO 14001 ÇYS uygulayan firmalar üzerine bir araştırma, Verimlilik Dergisi, 2, 7-44.
15. Gao, H., Ju, Y., Santibanez Gonzalez, E.D.R. and Zhang, W. (2020). Green supplier selection in electronics manufacturing: An approach based on consensus decision making. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118781.
16. Gao, H., Ju, Y., Santibanez-Gonzalez, E.D., Zeng, X., Dong, P. and Wang, A. (2021). Identifying critical causal criteria of green supplier evaluation using heterogeneous judgements: an integrated approach based on cloud model and DEMATEL. Applied Soft Computing, 113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107882.
17. Gartner Research (2022). Healthcare supply chain: management and resilience strategy. Gartner Research, Stamford, CT, USA.
18. Glavinović, R. and Vukić, L. (2023). The Promethee method and its applications in the maritime industry: a review of studies from the Hrčak database. Transportation Research Procedia, 73, 94-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2023.11.896.
19. Gupta, S., Chen, H., Hazen, B.T., Kaur, S. and Gonzalez, E.D.S., (2019). Circular economy and big data analytics: a stakeholder perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.030, 466-47.
20. Guo, Z., Liu, H., Zhang, D., and Yang, J. (2017). Green supplier evaluation and selection in apparel manufacturing using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach. Sustainability, 9 (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040650.
21. Hamdan, S. and Cheaitou, A. (2017). Supplier selection and order allocation with green criteria: An MCDM and multi-objective optimization approach. Computers & Operations Research, 81, 282-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2016.11.005.
22. International Organization for Standardization (2015). Introduction to ISO 14001:2015.
23. International Organization for Standardization (2015). Environmental Management Systems.
24. Iyengar, K.P., Vaishya, R., Bahl, S. and Vaish, A. (2020). Impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the supply chain in healthcare. Br. J. Healthc. Management, 26 (6), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjhc.2020.0047.
25. Kara, K., Acar, A.Z., Polat, M., Önden, İ. and Yalçın,G.C. (2024) Developing a hybrid methodology for green-based supplier selection: Application in the automotive industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 249B. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.123668.
26. Kumar, A., Jain, V. and Kumar, S. (2014). A comprehensive environment friendly approach for supplier selection. Omega, 42 (1). http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.omega.2013.04.003.
27. Malbila, E., Koungwe, A.G.L. and Toguyeni, D.Y.K. (2024). Multicriteria analysis of the components of ecological paving stones made from plastic and glass waste and granular reinforcements. Open Ceramics, 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceram.2024.100604.
28. Malik, M.M., Abdallah, S. and Hussain, M. (2016). Assessing supplier environmental performance: applying analytical hierarchical process in the United Arab Emirates healthcare chain. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 55, 1313–1321. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.004.
29. Messmann, L., Köhler, S., Antimisaris, K., Fieber, R., Thorenz, A. and Tuma, A. (2024). Indicator-based environmental and social sustainability assessment of hospitals: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 466, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142721.
30. Miles, M. and Covin, J. (2000). Environmental marketing: A source of reputational competitive and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006214509281.
31. Mohd, S.R., Liew, L.T., Senik, R. and Yusri, Y. (2020). Environmental disclosure quality of ISO:14001 companies and differences in companies characteristics. International Journal of Modern Trends in Business Research (IJMTBR), 3 (12), 48-61.
32. Moneva, J. M. and Ortas, E. (2010). Corporate environmental and financial performance: A multivariate approach. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 110 (2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635571011020304.
33. Norouzi, D., Vahdat, S. and Hesam, S. (2019). Identification and prioritization of Green Hospital criteria in Fars province with DEMATEL combined approach and analytic network process (DANP). Arch. Pharm. Pract., 10, 1–20. (Access Link).
34. Orsini, L.P., Landi, S., Leardini, C. and Veronesi, G. (2024). Towards greener hospitals: The effect of green organisational practices on climate change mitigation performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142720.
35. Nazari-Shirkouhi, S. and Samadi, S. (2025). Enhancing healthcare supply chains: A comprehensive evaluation of lean, agile, resilient and green paradigms. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.110204.
36. Özdemir, Y., Tüysüz, T. and Başlıgil, H. (2016). Weighting The Risks For Nuclear Power Plants Using AHP and ANP Methodologies. Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 7 (2), 207–217.
37. Pan-European Commission on Health and Sustainable Development, (2021). Drawing light from the pandemic: a new strategy for health and sustainable development. (Access Link).
38. Patil, S.C., Schulze-Netzer, C. and Korpås, M. (2024). Current and emerging waste-to-energy technologies: A comparative study with multi-criteria decision analysis. Smart Energy, 16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segy.2024.100157.
39. Rattan, T.K., Joshi, M., Vesty, G. and Sharma, S. (2022). Sustainability indicators in public healthcare: a factor analysis approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133253.
40. Rodríguez-González, C.G., Sarobe-González, C., Durán-García, M.E., Mur-Mur, A., Sánchez-Fresneda, M.N., Pañero-Taberna, M.M., Pla-Mestre, R., Herranz-Alonso, A. and Sanjurjo-Sáez, M. (2020) Use of the EFQM excellence model to improve hospital pharmacy performance. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 16 (5), 710-716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2019.08.030.
41. Saaty, R.W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process-What it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9 (3–5), 161–176.
42. Salas, R.N., Maibach, E., Pencheon, D., Watts, N. and Frumkin, H. (2020). A pathway to net zero emissions for healthcare. Br. Med. Journal, 371. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.
43. Saputro, T.E., Figueira, G. and Almada-Lobo, B. (2020). Integrating supplier selection with inventory management under supply disruptions. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1866223.
44. Saputro, T.E., Rosiani, T.Y., Mubin, A., Dewi, S.K. and Baroto, T. (2024) Green supplier selection under supply risks using novel integrated fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Journal of Cleaner Production, 449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141788.
45. Seyed Haeri, S.A. and Rezaei, J. (2019). A grey-based green supplier selection model for uncertain environments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 221, 768-784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.193.
46. Sorooshian, S. and Ting, K.C. (2018). Reasons for implementing ISO 14001 in Malaysia. Environmental Qual. Management. 27, 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.21561.
47. Tepedelen, F. and Özdemir, M. (2003). ISO 14001 çevre yönetim sisteminin işletmelere sağladığı kazançlar. Sakarya University Journal of Science, 7 (1), 157-162. https://doi.org/10.16984/saufbed.40611.
48. Tsai, S.B., Saito, R., Lin, Y.C., Chen, Q. And Zhou, J. (2015). Discussing measurement criteria and competitive strategies of green suppliers from a green law perspective. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 229(S1), 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405414558740.
49. Qu, G., Zhang, Z., Qu, W. and Xu, Z. (2020). Green supplier selection based on green practices evaluated using fuzzy approaches of TOPSIS and ELECTRE with a case study in a chinese internet company. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093268.
50. Walker, H. and Brammer, S. (2012). The relationship between sustainable procurement and e-procurement in the public sector. Int. J. Prod. Econ.,140, 256–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.008.
51. Wang, X., Li, X., Liang, X. and Zhu, C. (2024). An improved WINGS-ISM approach with consensus model in group decision-making for addressing critical success factors of collaborative emergency management. Expert Syst. Appl., 248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.123217.
52. Wei, G., Wei, C., and Guo, Y. (2021). EDAS method for probabilistic linguistic multiple attribute group decision making and their application to green supplier selection. Soft Computing, 25(14), 9045–9053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-05842-x.
53. Verdonck, P. and Verniers, I. (2025). Environmental sustainability in healthcare: Managerial concerns and solutions. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2025.03.006.
54. Yan, X., Bao, X., Zhao, R. and Li, F. (2022). Performance measurement for green supplier selection based on data envelopment analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(30), 45960–45970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17897-2.
55. Yaralıoğlu, K. (2001). Performans değerlendirmede analitik hiyerarşi prosesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 16 (1), 129–142.
56. Yazdani, M., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E.K. and Zolfani, S.H. (2017) Integrated QFD-MCDM framework for green supplier selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142 (4), 3728-3740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.095.
57. Zhu, C. and Wang, X. (2024). A novel integrated approach based on best-worst and VIKOR methods for green supplier selection under multi-granularity extended probabilistic linguistic environment. Complex Intell. Systems, 10, 2029–2046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01251-9.
58. Zhu, C., Zhu, N., Zheng, S., Zou, L. and Wang, X. (2025). Analyzing critical success factors for green supplier selection: A combined DEMATEL-ISM approach and convolutional neural network-based consensus model. Applied Soft Computing, 171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2025.112760.
59. Zorlu, K. and Dede, V. (2023). Evaluation of nature-based tourism potential in protected and sensitive areas by CRITIC and PROMETHEE-GAIA methods. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks, 11(3), 349-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgeop.2023.05.004.