EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION ON HEALTH EXPENDITURES IN TÜRKİYE USING AHP AND TOPSIS METHODS

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 38 Sayı: 3, 728 - 749, 30.09.2024

Onur Çetin , Nadide Sevil Tülüce

https://doi.org/10.48070/erciyesakademi.1538737

Öz

This study aims to comprehensively analyze the effects of fossil fuel consumption, fossil fuel subsidies, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and fossil fuel-related CO2 emissions on healthcare expenditures in Türkiye. Türkiye's fossil fuel consumption and its environmental impacts have been associated with healthcare expenditures through the financial burden they impose on the healthcare system, and in this context, the long-term effects of fossil fuels have been evaluated. By utilizing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and TOPSIS methods, a ranking of the impact of fossil fuels on healthcare expenditures for the period 2010-2022 has been established. The criteria determined by the AHP method were prioritized based on their impact on healthcare expenditures, and subsequently, the yearly impact of fossil fuels on healthcare expenditures was examined using the TOPSIS method. According to the AHP results, fossil fuel consumption was identified as the criterion with the highest priority in terms of its impact on healthcare expenditures. The criterion with the second highest priority was identified as GDP. The TOPSIS results indicated that the year 2017 had the most significant impact of fossil fuels on healthcare expenditures. Following this, the years with the highest impact of fossil fuels on healthcare expenditures were determined to be 2018 and 2016, respectively. These findings clearly highlight the adverse effects of fossil fuel use on healthcare expenditures in Türkiye, emphasizing the need for the adoption of sustainable energy policies. The study underscores the importance of policymakers developing strategies to enhance energy efficiency and reduce fossil fuel consumption.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fossil fuels, Healthcare expenditures, AHP, TOPSIS, Türkiye

TÜRKİYE’DE FOSİL YAKIT TÜKETİMİNİN SAĞLIK HARCAMALARI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİLERİNİN AHP-TOPSIS YÖNTEMLERİ İLE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de fosil yakıt tüketimi, fosil yakıt teşvikleri, Gayri Safi Yurt İçi Hasıla (GSYİH) ve fosil yakıt kaynaklı CO2 emisyonlarının sağlık harcamaları üzerindeki etkilerini kapsamlı bir şekilde analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Türkiye'nin fosil yakıt tüketimi ve çevresel etkileri, sağlık sistemi üzerinde oluşturduğu mali yük aracılığıyla sağlık harcamaları ile ilişkilendirilmiş, bu bağlamda fosil yakıtların uzun vadeli etkileri değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırmada Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) ve TOPSIS yöntemlerinden yararlanılarak, 2010-2022 dönemi verilerden hareketle fosil yakıtların sağlık harcamaları üzerindeki etkilerine yönelik sıralama elde edilmiştir. AHP yöntemi ile belirlenen kriterler sağlık harcamalarına olan etkilerine göre önceliklendirilmiş, ardından TOPSIS yöntemi ile yıllar bazında fosil yakıtların sağlık harcamalarına olan etkisi incelenmiştir. AHP sonuçlarına göre, fosil yakıt tüketiminin sağlık harcamaları üzerinde en yüksek önceliğe sahip kriter olduğunu belirlenmiştir. İkinci önceliğe sahip kriter ise GSYİH olarak belirlenmiştir. TOPSIS sonuçlarına göre ise 2017 yılının fosil yakıtların sağlık harcamaları üzerinde en fazla etkiye sahip olduğu yıl olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Daha sonra fosil yakıtların sağlık harcamaları üzerinde en fazla etkiye sahip olduğu yıllar sırasıyla 2018 ve 2016 olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu bulgular, Türkiye'de fosil yakıt kullanımının sağlık harcamaları üzerindeki olumsuz etkilerini net bir şekilde ortaya koyarak, sürdürülebilir enerji politikalarının benimsenmesi gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır. Çalışma, politika yapıcıların enerji verimliliğini artıracak ve fosil yakıt kullanımını azaltacak stratejiler geliştirmelerinin önemini ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fosil yakıtlar, Sağlık harcamaları, AHP, TOPSIS, Türkiye

Etik Beyan

Bu makale, etik kurul izni gerektiren bir çalışma grubunda yer almamaktadır.

Kaynakça

• Acar, S., Challe, S., Christopoulos, S., & Christo, G. (2014). Fossil fuel subsidies as a lose-lose: Fiscal and environmental burdens in Turkey. New Perspectives on Turkey, 58, 93-124.
• Ahmad, S., Nadeem, A., Akhanova, G., Houghton, T., & Muhammad-Sukki, F. (2017). Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable and nuclear resources for electricity generation in Kazakhstan. Energy, 141, 1880-1891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.102
• Aplak, H. S., & Sogut, M. Z. (2013). Game theory approach in decisional process of energy management for industrial sector. Energy Conversion and Management, 74, 70-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.03.027
• Aryanpur, V., Atabaki, M. S., Marzband, M., Siano, P., & Ghayoumi, K. (2019). An overview of energy planning in Iran and transition pathways towards sustainable electricity supply sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 112, 58-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.047
• Baysal, M. E., & Çetin, N. C. (2018). Priority ranking for energy resources in Turkey and investment planning for renewable energy resources. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 4(2), 261-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-018- 0075-y
• Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 13051-13069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056
• Chatzimouratidis, A. I., & Pilavachi, P. A. (2008). Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy, 36(3), 1074-1089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.11.028
• Cohen, A. J., Brauer, M., Burnett, R., Anderson, H. R., Frostad, J., Estep, K., Balakrishnan, K., Brunekreef, B., Dandona, L., Dandona, R., Feigin, V., Freedman, G., Hubbell, B., Jobling, A., Kan, H., Knibbs, L., Liu, Y., Martin, R., Morawska, L., … & Forouzanfar, M. H. (2017). Estimates and 25-year trends of the global burden of disease attributable to ambient air pollution: An analysis of data from the Global Burden of Diseases Study 2015. The Lancet, 389(10082), 1907- 1918.
• Çetin, O. (2022). Türkiye’nin sağlık turizmi performansının TOPSIS yöntemi ile değerlendirilmesi (2004-2019). Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(4), 638-655. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/nevsosbilen/article/978142
• Dağdeviren, M., Akay, D., & Kurt, M. (2004). İş değerlendirme sürecinde analitik hiyerarşi prosesi ve uygulaması. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 131-138.
• Dünya Bankası (2024). World Development Indicators. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world- development-indicators
• Enerji Enstitüsü (2024). Resources and data downloads. https://www.energyinst.org/statistical- review/resources-and-data-downloads
• Esmaeili, H., Almassi, M., & Ghahderijani, M. (2024). DPSIR framework to evaluate and analyze Iran’s energy security. Discover Applied Sciences, 6(25), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-024-05678-8
• FossilFuelSubsidyTracker (2024). Track fossil-fuel subsidies and other support measures with our interactive database. https://fossilfuelsubsidytracker.org/
• Güzel, Ş., & Özer, P. (2022). Türkiye’de hava kirliliği ve sağlık harcamaları. Sağlık ve Sosyal Refah Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 186-202.
• Haines, A., Kovats, R. S., Campbell-Lendrum, D., & Corvalán, C. (2006). Climate change and human health: Impacts, vulnerability, and public health. Public Health, 120(7), 585-596.
• Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer-Verlag.
• Ishizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336-14345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143
• Lelieveld, J., Klingmüller, K., Pozzer, A., Burnett, R. T., Haines, A., & Ramanathan, V. (2019). Effects of fossil fuel and total anthropogenic emission removal on public health and climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(15), 7192-7197.
• Lin, S.-W., Lo, H.-W., & Gul, M. (2023). An assessment model for national sustainable development based on the hybrid DEA and modified TOPSIS techniques. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 9(5449-5466), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01034-2
• Narayanamoorthy, S., Ramya, L., Kalaiselvan, S., Kureethara, J. V., & Kang, D. (2021). Use of DEMATEL and COPRAS method to select best alternative fuel for control of impact of greenhouse gas emissions. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 76,100996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100996
• Newhouse, J. P. (1977). Medical care expenditure: A cross-national survey. Journal of Human Resources, 12(1), 115-125. https://doi.org/10.2307/145602
• Pachauri, R. K., Allen, M. R., Barros, V. R., Broome, J., Cramer, W., Christ, R., ... & van Ypserle, J. P. (2014). Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. İçinde R.K. Pachauri & L.A. Meyer (Eds.), Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC.
• Raihan, A., Farhana, S., Muhtasim, D. A., Hasan, M. A. U., Paul, A., & Faruk, O. (2022). The nexus between carbon emission, energy use, and health expenditure: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Carbon Research, 1(30), 1- 11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44246-022-00030-4
• Rehman, S., Rehman, E., Mumtaz, A., & Jianglin, Z. (2022). A multicriteria decision-making approach in exploring the nexus between wind and solar energy generation, economic development, fossil fuel consumption, and CO2 emissions. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 9, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.819384
• Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill.
• Saini, V., Gupta, R. P., & Arora, M. K. (2016). Environmental impact studies in coalfields in India: A case study from Jharia coal-field. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53, 1222-1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.072
• Saini, V., Li, J., Yang, Y., & Li, J. (2021). Evaluating environmental quality in Rujigou coalfield, China, using analytic hierarchy process. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 1841-1853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356- 022-22340-1
• Shindell, D., et al. (2018). The social cost of atmospheric release. Nature, 562, 228-231.
• Shukla, A., Agarwal, P., Rana, R., & Purohit, R. (2017). Applications of TOPSIS algorithm on various manufacturing processes: A review. Materials today: Proceedings, 4(7), 5320-5329. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATPR.2017.05.042
• Sial, M. H., Arshed, N., Amjad, M. A., & Khan, Y. A. (2022). Nexus between fossil fuel consumption and infant mortality rate: A non-linear analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 58378-58387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-19975-5
• Sliogeriene, J., Turskis, Z., & Streimikiene, D. (2012). Analysis and choice of energy generation technologies: The multiple criteria assessment on the case study of Lithuania. Energy Procedia, 32, 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2013.05.003
• Solangi, Y. A., Longsheng, C., Shah, S. A. A., Alsanad, A., Ahmad, M., Akbar, M. A., Gumaei, A., & Ali, S. (2020). Analyzing renewable energy sources of a developing country for sustainable development: An integrated fuzzy based-decision methodology. Processes, 8(7), 825. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8070825
• Toossi, A., Camci, F., & Varga, L. (2013). Developing an AHP based decision model for energy systems policy making. IEEE Conference on Systems, 1456-1460. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6505886
• Uygurtürk, H., & Korkmaz, T. (2012). Finansal performansın TOPSIS çok kriterli karar verme yöntemi ile belirlenmesi: Ana metal sanayi işletmeleri üzerine bir uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 7(2), 95-115.
• Ünal, A. (2011). Türkiye’deki kamu kurumlarında AHP yöntemiyle risk yönetimi ve performans değerlendirme uygulaması. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(3), 75-94.
• Yontar, E. (2023). Selection of suitable renewable energy sources for Turkey: SEM–COPRAS method integrated solution. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 20, 6131-6146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-023-04943-4