YEŞİL SERTİFİKALI LİMANLARIN PERFORMANSININ ENTEGRE ENTROPİ-TOPSIS YÖNTEMLERİ İLE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Küresel deniz ticaretinin önemli bir lojistik düğüm noktası olan limanlar, artan çevre kirliliğinin ve enerji tüketiminin ana kaynaklarından biri haline gelmiştir. Bu nedenle limanların çevresel ve operasyonel olarak performanslarının değerlendirilmesi konusu oldukça önemlidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, entegre Entropy-TOPSIS yöntemini kullanarak yeşil sertifikalı limanların performansını çevresel ve operasyonel kriterlerle değerlendirmektir. Bu amaçla, Entropi-TOPSIS yöntemi ile yeşil sertifikalı limanların sıralaması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, operasyonel süreçlerde elektrik ve LNG gibi çevre dostu enerji kullanımı sonucunda düşük emisyon üreten limanların performans değerlendirmesinde daha başarılı olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca terminal sahası ve sahip oldukları elleçleme ekipmanı sayısı açısından daha fazla konteyner elleçleyen limanların daha başarılı olduğu görülmüştür. Hükümet ve idari organların destek ve teşvikleri, liman alanının doğal çevresinin kalitesinin artırılması, geri dönüşüm ve yeniden kullanma gibi sürdürülebilir kalkınma sağlayabilecek uygulamalar, gemilerin limanla bağlantı kurması sırasında Alternatif Deniz Gücü (AMP) teknolojisi kullanılması, çevreci enerjiyle çalışan taşıma araçları, gemi ve sahil vinçleri kullanılması limanların performansını artıracaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yeşil Liman
• TOPSİS Yöntemi
• Performans

EVALUATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF GREEN CERTIFIED PORTS WITH INTEGRATED ENTROPY-TOPSIS METHODS

Öz

Ports, an important logistic node of global maritime trade, have become one of the main sources of increasing environmental pollution and energy consumption. For this reason, it is very important to evaluate the environmental and operational performance of ports. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of green certified ports with environmental and operational criteria using the integrated Entropy-TOPSIS method. Green certified ports were ranked using the Entropy-TOPSIS method. Findings show that ports that generate low emissions as a result of environmentally friendly energy use such as electricity and LNG in operational processes are more successful in performance evaluation. In addition, it has been observed that ports that handle more containers in terms of the terminal area and the number of handling equipment they have are more successful. Support and incentives of the government and administrative bodies, practices that can provide sustainable development such as increasing the quality of the natural environment of the port area, recycling and reuse, use of Alternative Marine Power (AMP) technology during the connection of ships with the port, environmentally-powered transport vehicles, ships and shore cranes its use will increase the performance of the ports.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Green Port
• TOPSIS
• entropy
• performance
• Green Port, TOPSIS, entropy, performance

Kaynakça

1. Antão, P., M. Calderón, M. Puig, A. Michail, C. Wooldridge, R. M. Darbra (2016), “Identification of Occupational Health, Safety, Security (OHSS) and Environmental Performance Indicators In Port Areas”, Safety Science, 85, 266–275.
2. Asgari, N., A. Hassani, D. Jones, H. H. Nguye (2015), “Sustainability Ranking Of The UK Major Ports: Methodology And Case Study”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 78, 19-39.
3. Asyaport (2015), Asyaport Sosyal Sorumluluk Raporu 2015, https://www.asyaport.com/tr-TR, E.T.: 10.01.2021.
4. Asyaport (2016), Asyaport Sosyal Sorumluluk Raporu 2016, https://www.asyaport.com/tr-TR, E.T.: 10.01.2021.
5. Asyaport (2017), Asyaport Sosyal Sorumluluk Raporu 2017, https://www.asyaport.com/tr-TR, E.T.: 10.01.2021.
6. Asyaport (2018), Asyaport Sosyal Sorumluluk Raporu 2018, https://www.asyaport.com/tr-TR, E.T.: 10.01.2021.
7. Asyaport (2020), Çevre ve Sosyal Sorumluluk, http://www.asyaport.com/tr-TR/cevre-ve-sosyal- sorumluluk/627903, E. T.: 10.01.2021.
8. Borusan (2015), Borusan Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2015, https://www.borusanport.com/tr, E.T.: 15.01.2021.

9. Borusan (2016), Borusan Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2016, https://www.borusanport.com/tr, E.T.: 15.01.2021.
10. Borusan (2017), Borusan Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2017, https://www.borusanport.com/tr, E.T.: 15.01.2021.
11. Borusan (2018), Borusan Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2018, https://www.borusanport.com/tr, E.T.: 15.01.2021.
12. Cai, L. N. (2010), “Green Port Development In Foreign Countries, in: Proceeding of Annual Conference on Ship Pollution Prevention”, 4, 487–491.
13. Chang, C. C., C. M. Wang (2012), “Evaluating The E Ects of Green Port Policy: Case Study of Kaohsiung Harbor In Taiwan”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(3), 185-189.
14. Chen, S. L. (2009), “Port Administrative Structure Change Worldwide: Its İmplication For Restructuring Port Authorities In Taiwan”, Transport Reviews, 29(2), 163-181.
15. Chiu, R. H., L. H. Lin, S. C. Ting (2014), “Evaluation of Green Port Factors And Performance: A Fuzzy AHP Analysis”, Mathematical Problems In Engineering, 1-12.
16. Clarke, R. (2006), An Automated Terminal is a Green Terminal, American Association of Port Authorities. http://www.aapa-ports.org, E.T.: 10.01.2021.
17. Çakır, S., S. Perçin (2013), “AB Ülkeleri’nde Bütünleşik Entropi Ağırlık-Topsis Yöntemiyle ArGe Performansının Ölçülmesi”, Uludağ Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(1), 77-95.
18. Deng, H., C. H. Yeh, R. J. Willis (2000), “Inter-Company Comparison Using Modified TOPSIS With Objective Weights”, Computers and Operations Research, 27, 963–973.
19. Denizhaber (2013), Lined Up To Be Green Port. http://www.denizhaber.com.tr/yesil-liman-olmak-icin-siraya-girdiler-haber-48808.htm, E.T.: 03.01.2021.
20. DiMaggio, P., W. W. Powell (1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Collective Rationality And İnstitutional Isomorphism In Organizational Fields”, American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
21. Deniz Ticaret Odası (DTO) (2013), İklim Degisikligi ve Emilsiyonlar. http://www.denizticaretodasi.org.tr/Sayfalar/iklimdegisikligi.aspx, E.T.: 05.01.2021.
22. EcoPorts (2021), The Story of EcoPorts Building a Worldwide Network for Sharing Experience in Port Environmental Management. https://www.ecoports.com/assets/files/common/brochures/The_Story_of_EcoPorts-v8-with_pictures.pdf, E.T.: 21.03.2021.
23. European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO), 2020, Enviromental Report 2020, https://www.espo.be/media/Environmental%20Report-WEB-FINAL.pdf, E.T.: 22.03.2021.
24. Gök-Kısa A.C., P. Çelik, I. Peker (2021), “Performance Evaluation of Privatized Ports by Entropy Based TOPSIS and ARAS Approach”, Benchmarking: An International Journal.
25. Ha, M. H., Z., Yang (2017), “Comparative Analysis Of Port Performance Indicators: Independency And Interdependency”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 103, 264-278.
26. Ha, M. H., Z. Yang, M. W. Heo (2017), “A New Hybrid Decision Making Framework for Prioritising Port Performance Improvement Strategies”, The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 33(3), 105–116.
27. He, Z., P. Chen, H. Liu, Z. Guo (2017), “Performance Measurement System And Strategies For Developing Low-Carbon Logistics: A Case Study In China”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 156, 395-405.
28. Hiranandani, V., (2014), “Sustainable Development In Seaports: A Multi-Case Study”, WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 13 (1), 127–172.
29. Hock V, R.I. Erasmus (2000), “From Reversed Logistics To Green Supply Chain”, Logistics Solutions, 2, 28–33.
30. Hsu, C. C., K., Choon Tan, S. Hanim Mohamad Zailani, V. Jayaraman (2013), “Supply Chain Drivers That Foster The Development of Green Initiatives In An Emerging Economy”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(6), 656–688.
31. Hwang, C. L., K. Yoon (1981), Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications, Berlin: Springer.
32. Jasmi, M. F. A., Y. Fernando (2018), “Drivers of Maritime Green Supply Chain Management”, Sustainable Cities And Society, 43, 366-383.
33. Kluge, B. (2012), “Green Logistics In Inland Ports. Federal Association of German Inland Ports”, 2nd German-Chinese Conference on the Implementation of the Action Plan Green Logistics, Berlin.
34. Ko, T.T., Y.C. Chang (2010), “Integrated Marine Pollution Management: A New Model of Marine Pollution Prevention And Control In Kaohsiung”, Taiwan Ocean Coastal Management, 53(10), 624–635.
35. Korucuk, S., S. Memiş (2019), "Yeşil Liman Uygulamaları Performans Kriterlerinin Dematel Yöntemi ile Önceliklendirilmesi: İstanbul Örneği", AVRASYA Uluslararası Araştırmalar Dergisi,7(16), 134-148.
36. Koşar Danışman, İ, G. Özalp (2016)”, Karbon Ayak İzinin Azaltılmasında Yeşil Liman Uygulamasının Rolü: Marport Örneği”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 99-166.
37. Kotrikla, A.M., T. Lilas, N., Nikitakos (2017), “Abatement of Air Pollution At An Aegean Island Port Utilizing Shore Side Electricity And Renewable Energy”, Marine Policy, 75, 238–248.
38. Köseoğlu, M., M., Solmaz (2020), "Türkiye ve Dünya Yeşil Liman Ölçütlerinin Karşılaştırmalı Bir Değerlendirmesi", Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 12, 33-58. Kumport (2015), Kumport Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu, https://www.kumport.com.tr/, E.T.: 12.01.2021.
39. Kumport (2016), Kumport Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu , https://www.kumport.com.tr/, E.T.: 12.01.2021.
40. Kumport (2017), Kumport Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu, https://www.kumport.com.tr/, E.T.: 12.01.2021.
41. Kumport (2017), Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu, https://www.kumport.com.tr/resources/files/documents/surdurulebilirlik_raporu_v2.pdf, E.T.: 12.01.2021.
42. Kumport (2018), Kumport Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2018, https://www.kumport.com.tr/, E.T: 12.01.2021.
43. Lam, J.S.L. (2016), “Strategy of A Transhipment Hub: The Case of Port of Singapore”, Dynamic Shipping And Port Development In The Globalized Economy, 12-38.
44. Lim, S., S. Pettit, W. Abouarghoub, A. Beresford (2019), “Port Sustainability And Performance: A Systematic Literature Review”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 72, 47-64.
45. Limakport (2015), Limak Şirketler Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2015, http://www.limakports.com.tr/tr, E.T.: 18.01.2021.
46. Limakport (2016), Limak Şirketler Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2016, http://www.limakports.com.tr/tr, E.T.: 18.01.2021.
47. Limakport (2017), Limak Şirketler Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2017, http://www.limakports.com.tr/tr, E.T.: 18.01.2021.
48. Limakport (2018), Limak Şirketler Grubu Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu 2018, http://www.limakports.com.tr/tr, E.T.: 18.01.2021.
49. Mahmoodzadeh, S., J. Shahrabi, M. Pariazar, M. S. Zaeri (2007), “Project Selection By Using Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Technique”, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 30(1), 333-338.
50. Markandya, A., K. Halsnaes (2004), “11 Developing Countries And Climate Change”, The Economics of Climate Change, 3, 239.
51. Marport (2015), Marport Sera Gazı Envanter Raporu, http://www.marport.com.tr/marport_online.html, E.T.: 25.01.2021.
52. Marport (2016), Marport Sera Gazı Envanter Raporu, http://www.marport.com.tr/marport_online.html, E.T.: 25.01.2021.
53. Marport (2017), Marport Sera Gazı Envanter Raporu, http://www.marport.com.tr/marport_online.html, E.T.: 25.01.2021.
54. Marport (2018), Marport Sera Gazı Envanter Raporu, http://www.marport.com.tr/marport_online.html, E.T.: 25.01.2021.
55. Moon, S.H., J.K. Woo (2014), “The Impact of Port Operations on Efficient Ship Operation From Both Economic And Environmental Perspectives”, Maritime Policy Management, 41(5), 444–461.
56. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD, (2014), Shipping Emissions in Ports, https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/dp201420.pdf, E.T.: 20.01.2021.
57. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD, (2021), Ekonomik Kalkınma ve İş birliği Örgütü (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), https://www.oecd.org/, E.T.: 20.01.2021.
58. Ömürbek, N., E. R. E. N. Hande, D. A. Ğ. Okan (2017), “Entropi-Aras ve Entropi-Moosra Yöntemleri ile Yaşam Kalitesi Açısından AB Ülkelerinin Değerlendirilmesi”, Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 29-48.
59. Özispa, N. (2021), “How Ports Can Improve Their Sustainability Performance: Triple Bottom Line Approach”, Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 9(1), 41-50.
60. Pedrick, D. (2006), Green Terminal Design, www.fasterfreightcleaner air.com. E.T.: 20.01.2021.
61. Port of Long Beach, (2005), Green Port Annual Report, https://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/EnvironmentalAwards/2005/2005_EnviroAward_Long%20Beach.pdf, E.T.: 15.01.2021.
62. Puig, M., A. Michail, C. Wooldridge, R. M. Darbra (2017), “Benchmark Dynamics In The Environmental Performance of Ports”, Marine Pollution Bulletin,121(1-2), 111–119.
63. Puig, M., C. Wooldridge, R. M. Darbra (2014), “Identification and Selection of Environmental Performance Indicators For Sustainable Port Development”, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 81(1), 124–130.
64. Rao, R. V. (2008), “Evaluation of Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing Programs Using Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 222(3), 441-451.
65. Roos E. C., F. J. Kliemann Neto (2017), “Tools For Evaluating Environmental Performance At Brazilian Public Ports: Analysis And Proposal”, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 115(1), 211-216.
66. Seguí, X., M. Puig, E. Quintieri, C. Wooldridge, R. M. Darbra (2016), “New Environmental Performance Baseline For Inland Ports: A Benchmark For The European Inland Port Sector”, Environmental Science & Policy, 58, 29-40.
67. Shannon C. E. (1948), “A Mathematical Theory of Communications”, Bell Systems Technical Journal, 27(3), 379-423.
68. Shao, C. F., M. T. Ju, J. L. Yu, C. J. Hu, C. L. Chu (2009), “The Strategies And Proposals For Ecological Port Construction In China”, Journal of US-China Public Administration, 6(7), 23-33.
69. Teerawattana, R., Y. C. Yang (2019), “Environmental Performance Indicators For Green Port Policy Evaluation: Case Study of Laem Chabang Port”, The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 35(1), 63-69. Türkiye Liman İşletmecileri Derneği (Türklim) (2019), Türkiye Liman İşletmecileri Derneği 2019 Raporu, http://www.turklim.org/, E.T.: 21.03.2021.
70. Türkiye Liman İşletmecileri Derneği (Türklim) (2013). Yeşil Liman Raporu/Yeşil Liman Politika, Düzenleme ve Uygulamaları, Türkiye Limancılık Sektörü Raporu. http://www.turklim.org/kport/yesil_liman/upload/Yesil-Liman-Turklim-Raporu.pdf, E.T.: 21.03.2021.
71. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2020), Review of Maritime Transport, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/rmt2020_en.pdf, E.T.: 14.01.2021.
72. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2021), https://unctad.org/, E.T.: 24.03.2021.
73. Uluslararası Taşımacılık ve Lojistik Hizmet Üretenleri Derneği (UTİKAD) (2020), UTİKAD Lojistik Sektör Raporu 2020, https://www.utikad.org.tr/images/HizmetRapor/utikadlojistiksektoruraporu2020-53923.pdf, E.T.: 24.03.2021.
74. Uluslararası Taşımacılık ve Lojistik Hizmet Üretenleri Derneği (UTİKAD) (2021), https://www.utikad.org.tr/UTIKAD-Hakkinda, E.T.: 24.03.2021.
75. Verhoeven, P. (2010), “A Review of Port Authority Functions: Towards A Renaissance?”, Maritime Policy & Management, 37(3), 247–270.
76. Wikipedia (2021), TEU https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yirmi_ayak_e%C5%9Fde%C4%9Fer_birimi, E.T.: 24.03.2021.
77. Woo, J. K., D. S. Moon, J. S. L. Lam (2018), “The Impact of Environmental Policy on Ports and the Associated Economic Opportunities”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 110, 234-242.
78. World Bank (2020), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.SHP.GOOD.TU?most_recent_value_desc=true, E.T.: 10.01.2021.
79. Yang, Y. C., W. M. Chang (2013), “Impacts of Electric Rubber-Tired Gantries on Green Port Performance”, Research in Transportation Business & Management, 8, 67-76.
80. Yang, Y. C., C. L. Lin (2013), “Performance Analysis of Cargo-Handling Equipment From A Green Container Terminal Perspective”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 23, 9-11.
81. Yang, Y.C. (2015), “Determinants of Container Terminal Operation From Green Port Perspective”, International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics, 7(3), 319-346.
82. Yılmaz, F. (2019), “Yeşil-Eko Liman Yaklaşımının Deniz Ticareti ve Lojistik Sektörüne Katkıları: Türkiye ve AB'deki Uygulamaların Karşılaştırması”, Journal of Transportation and Logistics, 4(2), 65-78.
83. Zhong, Y. F. (2011), “Current Status of Green Port Development For Kaohsiung Port”, Taiwan International Ports Corporation. (Online) Available at http://www.twport.com.tw,. E.T.: 13.01.2021.
84. Zhu, Q., J., Sarkis, K. H Lai (2007), “Green Supply Chain Management: Pressures, Practices And Performance Within The Chinese Automobile Industry”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(11), 1041–1052.