Sürdürülebilir Tarımsal Pazarlama İçin Tarım Politikasına Etki Eden Kriterlerin Değerlendirilmesinde Bwm Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemi Uygulaması

Öz

Rekabetçi bir ekonomide tarım politikası, tarımsal üretimde üreticiyi destekleyerek dengeli bir şekilde sürdürülebilirlik yaklaşımıyla uygulanması gerekir. Son yıllarda küresel iklim değişikliğinin, yerel/uluslararası pazarlama dinamiklerinin ve yerel/uluslararası tarım politikası değişikliklerinin tarım sektörünü daha fazla etkilediği tartışılmaktadır. Hükümetler ve uluslararası kuruluşlar, Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Hedeflerine yönelik ilerlemeyi hızlandırmak amacıyla tarım sektöründe sürdürülebilir politikalar geliştirmek için yoğun bir çaba sarfetmektedirler. Tarımda yeni uygulamaların ve yeni stratejilerin benimsenmesine yönelik araştırmalar büyümeye ve gelişmeye devam ederken; tarım politikası uygulamaları tarımsal pazarlamaya ilişkin yeni fırsatlar sunmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, sürdürülebilir tarımsal pazarlama için tarım politikasına etki eden kriterlerin önem düzeyi ağırlıklarını belirlemek ve sıralamaktır. Kriter Ağırlıklarının belirlenmesinde çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) yöntemlerinden Best Worst yöntemi (BWM) tercih edilmiştir. Araştırma, belirsizlik ortamında ilgili paydaşların dahil olduğu çok kriterli karar vermenin birleşik yaklaşımı yoluyla tarım politikası strateji seçimi için uygun kriterlerin ağırlıklarını belirlemek için bir çerçeve önermektedir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre proje maliyetleri karar vericiler için en önemli kriter olarak tespit edilmiştir. Bunu sırasıyla sosyal faydalar ve istihdam olanakları kriterleri takip etmiştir. Sürdürülebilir tarım pazarlama için tarım politikası stratejileri belirlenirken, ekonomik, sosyal ve çevresel kriterler politika yapıcılar ve paydaşların değerlendirmesini etkileyebilecektir. Bu nedenle tarım politikasında stratejiler belirlenirken tüm bu faktörler de dikkate alınarak sürdürülebilirlik yaklaşımlarına daha çok önem verilmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Pazarlama
• Tarımsal Pazarlama
• Tarım Politikası
• Tarım Ekonomisi
• Sürdürülebilirlik

Application of Bwm Multi-Criteria Decision Making Method in the Evaluation of Criteria Affecting Agricultural Policy for Sustainable Agricultural Marketing

Öz

In a competitive economy, agricultural policy must be implemented with a balanced sustainability approach by supporting producers in agricultural production. In recent years, it has been argued that global climate change, local/international marketing dynamics and local/international agricultural policy changes have more impact on the agricultural sector. Governments and international organizations are making intense efforts to develop sustainable policies in the agricultural sector to accelerate progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While research on the adoption of new practices and new strategies in agriculture continues to grow and develop; Agricultural policy practices offer new opportunities for agricultural marketing. The main purpose of this study is to determine and rank the importance level weights of the criteria affecting agricultural policy for sustainable agricultural marketing. In determining the criteria weights, the Best Worst method (BWM) from the multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods was preferred. The research proposes a framework for determining the weights of the appropriate criteria for agricultural policy strategy selection through a combined approach of multi-criteria decision making involving relevant stakeholders in an environment of uncertainty. According to the research results, project costs were determined to be the most important criterion for decision makers. This was followed by social benefits and employment opportunities criteria, respectively. When determining agricultural policy strategies for sustainable agricultural marketing, economic, social and environmental criteria may influence the evaluation of policy makers and stakeholders. Therefore, when determining strategies in agricultural policy, more importance should be given to sustainability approaches, taking into account all these factors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Marketing
• Agricultural Marketing
• Agricultural Policy
• Agricultural Economics
• Sustainability

Kaynakça

1. Acharya, S. S. (2006). Agricultural marketing and rural credit for strengthening Indian agriculture.
2. Adanacıoğlu, H. (2015). Sürdürülebilir Tarımsal Pazarlama Girişimleri. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 3(7), 595-603.
3. Akram-Lodhi, A. H., & Kay, C. (2010). Surveying the agrarian question (part 1): unearthing foundations, exploring diversity. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 37(1), 177-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150903498838
4. Amiri, M., Hashemi-Tabatabaei, M., Ghahremanloo, M., Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Banaitis, A. (2021). A new fuzzy BWM approach for evaluating and selecting a sustainable supplier in supply chain management. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 28(2), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2020.1793424
5. Arsu, T., & Uğuz Arsu, Ş. (2021). Personel seçim sürecinde kullanılan kriterlerin best-worst metodu (BWM) ile değerlendirilmesi.
6. Atlı, H. F. (2023). Sustainable Agricultural Marketing. The Essentials of Today's Marketing-3, 151-165. Efe Academy.
7. Atlı, H. F. (2024). Safety of agricultural machinery and tractor maintenance planning with fuzzy logic and MCDM for agricultural productivity. International Journal of Agriculture Environment and Food Sciences, 8(1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.31015/jaefs.2024.1.4
8. Atlı, H. F., & Senir, G. (2024). Green Supplier Selection Using IMF SWARA and Fuzzy WASPAS Techniques for the Supply of Agricultural Pesticides. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 7(4), 377-390. https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1463382

9. Aydin, H., Eser, Z., & Korkmaz, S. (2018). The psychological effects of fast food consumption on body image emotions. British Food Journal, 120(10), 2236-2249. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-11-2017-0634
10. Bisen, J., & Kumar, R. (2018). Agricultural marketing reforms and e-national agricultural market (e-NAM) in India: a review. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 31(conf), 167-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-0279.2018.00032.0
11. Bórawski, P., Guth, M., Truszkowski, W., Zuzek, D., Beldycka-Borawska, A., Mickiewicz, B., ... & Dunn, J. W. (2020). Milk price changes in Poland in the context of the Common Agricultural Policy. Agricultural Economics/Zemědělská Ekonomika, 66(1). https://doi.org/10.17221/178/2019-AGRICECON
12. BWM (2024). https://bestworstmethod.com/software/
13. Can, M., Sayılı, M., Yılmazçoban, M., & Bilici, İ. (2014). Tarım işletmelerinin pazarlama kabiliyetlerini geliştirmek için verilen hibelerden yararlanma durumu. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(1), 109-132.
14. Ceballos, B., Lamata, M. T., & Pelta, D. A. (2016). A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods. Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 5, 315-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13748-016-0093-1
15. Chand, R. (2012). Development policies and agricultural markets. Economic and Political Weekly, 53-63.
16. Ciaian, P., & Swinnen, J. F. (2006). Land market imperfections and agricultural policy impacts in the new EU member states: a partial equilibrium analysis. American journal of agricultural economics, 88(4), 799-815. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8276.2006.00899.x
17. Cooksey, B. (2011). Marketing reform? The rise and fall of agricultural liberalisation in Tanzania. Development Policy Review, 29, s57-s81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2011.00520.x
18. Council of the European Union, (2017). The New European Consensus on Develpoment. Joint Statement by the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States Meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission. Brussels.
19. Czyżewski, B., Matuszczak, A., & Miśkiewicz, R. (2019). Public goods versus the farm price-cost squeeze: shaping the sustainability of the EU’s common agricultural policy. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 25(1), 82-102. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2019.7449
20. Dasgupta, P., Morton, J., Dodman, D., Karapinar, B., Meza, F., Rivera-Ferre, M. G., ... & Vincent, K. E. (2014). Rural areas.
21. De Gorter, H., & Just, D. R. (2010). The social costs and benefits of biofuels: The intersection of environmental, energy and agricultural policy. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 32(1), 4-32. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppp010
22. Demir, G., & Bircan, H. (2020). Kriter ağirliklandirma yöntemlerinden bwm ve fucom yöntemlerinin karşilaştirilmasi ve bir uygulama. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 21(2), 170-185.
23. Demirgüneş, B. K., & Özsaçmacı, B. (2016). Exploring the effect of consumers’ food-related decision making styles on national brand vs. store brand choice. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 9(1), 46-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v9n1p46
24. Denktaş Şakar, G., Yildirim, E., & Mansuroglu, E. (2018). Value creation in project cargo logistics: a Delphi study. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 6(3), 255-274. https://dx.doi.org/10.5505/jems.2018.48343
25. Dimara, E., Petrou, A., & Skuras, D. (2004). Agricultural policy for quality and producers’ evaluations of quality marketing indicators: a Greek case study. Food policy, 29(5), 485-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2004.06.001
26. Donald, P. F., Pisano, G., Rayment, M. D., & Pain, D. J. (2002). The Common Agricultural Policy, EU enlargement and the conservation of Europe's farmland birds. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 89(3), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00244-4
27. DPT (2006). Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı VIII. BYKP - 2005 Yılı Programı, Tarımsal Gelişme: Genel Tarım Politikaları, T.C. Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı Yayınları, Ankara
28. Dwivedi, R., Prasad, K., Mandal, N., Singh, S., Vardhan, M., & Pamucar, D. (2021). Performance evaluation of an insurance company using an integrated Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and Best-Worst Method (BWM). Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(1), 33-50. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame2104033d
29. Eakin, H., Perales, H., Appendini, K., & Sweeney, S. (2014). Selling maize in Mexico: The persistence of peasant farming in an era of global markets. Development and Change, 45(1), 133-155. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12074
30. Eakin, H., Sweeney, S., Lerner, A. M., Appendini, K., Perales, H., Steigerwald, D. G., ... & Bausch, J. C. (2018). Agricultural change and resilience: Agricultural policy, climate trends and market integration in the Mexican maize system. Anthropocene, 23, 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2018.08.002
31. Ecer, F., & Pamucar, D. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection: A novel integrated fuzzy best worst method (F-BWM) and fuzzy CoCoSo with Bonferroni (CoCoSo’B) multi-criteria model. Journal of cleaner production, 266, 121981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121981
32. Ellis, F. (1992). Agricultural policies in developing countries. Cambridge university press.
33. Fennell, R. (1997). The common agricultural policy: Continuity and change. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198288572.001.0001
34. Foley, J. A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K. A., Cassidy, E. S., Gerber, J. S., Johnston, M., ... & Zaks, D. P. (2011). Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature, 478(7369), 337-342. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10452
35. Gedik, Y. (2023). Tarımsal pazarlama: Faydaları, zorlukları ve stratejileri üzerine kavramsal bir çerçeve. Turizm Ekonomi ve İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 134-147.
36. Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., ... & Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. science, 327(5967), 812-818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185383
37. Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., & Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Journal of cleaner production, 98, 66-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046
38. Grant, W. (1997). The common agricultural policy. Bloomsbury Publishing.
39. Grant, W. (2010). Policy instruments in the common agricultural policy. West European Politics, 33(1), 22-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380903354049
40. Gray, J. (2000). The Common Agricultural Policy and the re‐invention of the rural in the European Community. Sociologia ruralis, 40(1), 30-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00130
41. Guo, S., & Zhao, H. (2017). Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowledge-based systems, 121, 23-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.01.010
42. Gupta, H. (2018). Assessing organizations performance on the basis of GHRM practices using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Journal of environmental management, 226, 201-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.005
43. Gupta, H., & Barua, M. K. (2017). Supplier selection among SMEs on the basis of their green innovation ability using BWM and fuzzy TOPSIS. Journal of cleaner production, 152, 242-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.125
44. Gupta, H., & Barua, M. K. (2018). A framework to overcome barriers to green innovation in SMEs using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Science of the Total Environment, 633, 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.173
45. Haskaraca, G., Arslan, Y., Ayhan, Z. (2022). Evaluation of factors affecting consumers' poultry meat consumption habits and perceptions and poultry breeding processes. GIDA (2022) 47 (6) 1014-1031 doi: 10.15237/ gida.GD22080
46. Hennessy, T. C., & Rehman, T. (2008). Assessing the impact of the ‘decoupling’reform of the common agricultural policy on Irish farmers’ off‐farm labour market participation decisions. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(1), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00140.x
47. Javad, M. O. M., Darvishi, M., & Javad, A. O. M. (2020). Green supplier selection for the steel industry using BWM and fuzzy TOPSIS: A case study of Khouzestan steel company. Sustainable Futures, 2, 100012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2020.100012
48. Kayabasi, A., & Mtetwa, T. (2016). Impact of marketing effectiveness and capabilities, and export market orientation on export performance: Evidence from Turkey. European Business Review, 28(5), 532-559. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2014-0084
49. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2016). A new combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) method for multi-criteria decision-making.
50. Khosravi, K., Shahabi, H., Pham, B. T., Adamowski, J., Shirzadi, A., Pradhan, B., ... & Prakash, I. (2019). A comparative assessment of flood susceptibility modeling using multi-criteria decision-making analysis and machine learning methods. Journal of Hydrology, 573, 311-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.03.073
51. Kızılaslan, H., & Gönültaş, H. (2011). Bilişim teknolojisinin tarım ürünlerinin pazarlamasındaki konum ve önemi (e-pazarlama). Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpaşa University (JAFAG), 2011(1), 1-11.
52. Kızılaslan, N., & Ünal, T. (2015). Tarımsal pazarlamada alternatif pazarlama ağı olan elektronik ticaretin (e-ticaret) SWOT analizi ile değerlendirilmesi. Turkish Journal Of Agriculture-Food Science And Technology, 3(7), 537-544.
53. Kohls, R. L., & Uhl, J. N. (2002). Marketing of agricultural products (No. Ed. 9). Prentice-Hall Inc..
54. Kou, G., Peng, Y., & Wang, G. (2014). Evaluation of clustering algorithms for financial risk analysis using MCDM methods. Information sciences, 275, 1-12.
55. Kumar, A., Sah, B., Singh, A. R., Deng, Y., He, X., Kumar, P., & Bansal, R. C. (2017). A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 69, 596-609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.191
56. Kurtuluş, S., Karapinar, E., & Özkan, E. (2019). Organik ürün tüketicilerinin tipolojisi: gönüllü sadelik, çevre bilinci ve değerler açısından pazar bölümlerinin incelenmesi. Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 107-142
57. Lele, U., & Goswami, S. (2020). Agricultural policy reforms: Roles of markets and states in China and India. Global food security, 26, 100371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100371
58. Liao, H., Xu, Z., & Zeng, X. J. (2014). Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making. Information Sciences, 271, 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.02.125
59. Lipper, L., Thornton, P., Campbell, B. M., Baedeker, T., Braimoh, A., Bwalya, M., ... & Torquebiau, E. F. (2014). Climate-smart agriculture for food security. Nature climate change, 4(12), 1068-1072. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2586
60. Lu, W. C. (2002). Effects of agricultural market policy on crop production in China. Food Policy, 27(5-6), 561-573. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(02)00066-0
61. Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications–Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert systems with Applications, 42(8), 4126-4148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.003
62. Matthews, A. (2018). The EU’s Common Agricultural Policy post 2020: Directions of change and potential trade and market effects. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).
63. Morton, J. F. (2007). The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 104(50), 19680-19685. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701855104
64. Mulliner, E., Malys, N., & Maliene, V. (2016). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega, 59, 146-156.
65. Olwande, J., Smale, M., Mathenge, M. K., Place, F., & Mithöfer, D. (2015). Agricultural marketing by smallholders in Kenya: A comparison of maize, kale and dairy. Food policy, 52, 22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.02.002
66. Once, S., & Turan, N. (2019). Auditing in agricultural sales cooperatives and unions. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(5), 166-174. https://dx.doi.org/10.26500/JARSSH-04-2019-0503
67. Onurlubaş, E., & Öztürk, D. (2023). Tüketici Perspektifinden Makarna: Alışkanlıklar, Tercihler ve Seçimleri Etkileyen Faktörler. Gaziosmanpaşa Bilimsel Araştırma Dergisi, 12(3), 140-159.
68. Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., & Sremac, S. (2018). A new model for determining weight coefficients of criteria in mcdm models: Full consistency method (fucom). symmetry, 10(9), 393.
69. Pannell, D., & Zilberman, D. (2020). Understanding adoption of innovations and behavior change to improve agricultural policy. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 42(1), 3-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13013
70. Pernechele, V., Balié, J., & Ghins, L. (2018). Agricultural policy incentives in sub-Saharan Africa in the last decade (2005–2016). Monitoring and Analysing Food and Agricultural Policies (MAFAP) synthesis study.
71. Petrick, M., & Zier, P. (2011). Regional employment impacts of Common Agricultural Policy measures in Eastern Germany: a difference‐in‐differences approach. Agricultural Economics, 42(2), 183-193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2010.00509.x
72. Pingali, P. L. (2012). Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path ahead. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 109(31), 12302-12308. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912953109
73. Pingali, P. (2015). Agricultural policy and nutrition outcomes–getting beyond the preoccupation with staple grains. Food security, 7, 583-591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0461-x
74. Pinstrup-Andersen, P. (2002). Food and agricultural policy for a globalizing world: Preparing for the future. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84(5), 1201-1214.
75. Rahimi, S., Hafezalkotob, A., Monavari, S. M., Hafezalkotob, A., & Rahimi, R. (2020). Sustainable landfill site selection for municipal solid waste based on a hybrid decision-making approach: Fuzzy group BWM-MULTIMOORA-GIS. Journal of Cleaner Production, 248, 119186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119186
76. Ren, P., Xu, Z., & Gou, X. (2016). Pythagorean fuzzy TODIM approach to multi-criteria decision making. Applied soft computing, 42, 246-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.12.020
77. Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009
78. Rezaei, J. (2016). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega, 64, 126-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.001
79. Rezaei, J., Kothadiya, O., Tavasszy, L., & Kroesen, M. (2018). Quality assessment of airline baggage handling systems using SERVQUAL and BWM. Tourism Management, 66, 85-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.11.009
80. Rigg, J., Salamanca, A., & Thompson, E. C. (2016). The puzzle of East and Southeast Asia's persistent smallholder. Journal of Rural Studies, 43, 118-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.11.003
81. Russo, C., Goodhue, R. E., & Sexton, R. J. (2011). Agricultural support policies in imperfectly competitive markets: Why market power matters in policy design. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(5), 1328-1340. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aar050
82. Sadoulet, E., De Janvry, A., & Davis, B. (2001). Cash transfer programs with income multipliers: PROCAMPO in Mexico. World development, 29(6), 1043-1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00018-3
83. Sahin, O., & Nasir, S. (2022). The effects of status consumption and conspicuous consumption on perceived symbolic status. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 30(1), 68-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2021.1888649
84. Schmitz, A., Moss, C. B., Schmitz, T. G., van Kooten, G. C., & Schmitz, H. C. (2022). Agricultural policy, agribusiness, and rent-seeking behaviour. University of Toronto Press.
85. Schmook, B., & Vance, C. (2009). Agricultural policy, market barriers, and deforestation: the case of Mexico’s southern Yucatán. World Development, 37(5), 1015-1025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.09.006
86. Selvaraj, M., & Ibrahim, M. S. (2012). Indian agricultural marketing-A review. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2(1), 69-75.
87. Shang, Z., Yang, X., Barnes, D., & Wu, C. (2022). Supplier selection in sustainable supply chains: Using the integrated BWM, fuzzy Shannon entropy, and fuzzy MULTIMOORA methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 195, 116567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.116567
88. Sterne, J. A., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., ... & Higgins, J. P. (2019). RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. bmj, 366. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898
89. Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., & Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement of alternatives and ranking according to COmpromise solution (MARCOS). Computers & industrial engineering, 140, 106231.
90. Stević, Ž., Ulutaş, A., Korucuk, S., Memiş, S., Demir, E., Topal, A., & Karamaşa, Ç. (2023). Supply Chain Management (SCM) Breakdowns and SCM Strategy Selection during the COVID‐19 Pandemic Using the Novel Rough MCDM Model. Complexity, 2023(1), 3478719. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/3478719
91. Sumner, D. A., Alston, J. M., & Glauber, J. W. (2010). Evolution of the economics of agricultural policy. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 92(2), 403-423. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aaq015
92. Suweis, S., Carr, J. A., Maritan, A., Rinaldo, A., & D’Odorico, P. (2015). Resilience and reactivity of global food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(22), 6902-6907. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1507366112
93. Swinnen, J. F. (Ed.). (2008). The perfect storm: The political economy of the Fischler reforms of the common agricultural policy. CEPS.
94. Thokala, P., Devlin, N., Marsh, K., Baltussen, R., Boysen, M., Kalo, Z., ... & Ijzerman, M. (2016). Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making—an introduction: report 1 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value in health, 19(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2015.12.003
95. Ünal, S., Deveci, F. G., & Yildiz, T. (2019). Do we know organic food consumers? The personal and social determinants of organic food consumption. Istanbul Business Research (IBR), 48(1), 1-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2019.48.0019
96. Van Zanten, B. T., Verburg, P. H., Espinosa, M., Gomez-y-Paloma, S., Galimberti, G., Kantelhardt, J., ... & Viaggi, D. (2014). European agricultural landscapes, common agricultural policy and ecosystem services: a review. Agronomy for sustainable development, 34, 309-325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-013-0183-4
97. Yalçınkaya, N., Yalçınkaya, M. H., & Çılbant, Ç. (2006). Avrupa Birliği’ne yönelik düzenlemeler çerçevesinde Türk tarım politikaları ve sektörün geleceği üzerine etkisi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 13(2), 97-118.
98. Yıldırım, S., & Kantarcı, T. (2022). A review on sustainability policies of businesses: Recycling and waste reduction. Journal of Recycling Economy & Sustainability Policy, 1(1), 1-9.
99. Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technological and economic development of economy, 20(1), 165-179.
100. Zhang, S., Sun, Z., Ma, W., & Valentinov, V. (2020). The effect of cooperative membership on agricultural technology adoption in Sichuan, China. China Economic Review, 62, 101334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2019.101334
101. Zhang, X., & Xu, Z. (2014). Extension of TOPSIS to multiple criteria decision making with Pythagorean fuzzy sets. International journal of intelligent systems, 29(12), 1061-1078. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21676