Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2022, , 261 - 292, 16.01.2023
https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966

Öz

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

Yok

Teşekkür

Yok

Kaynakça

  • Acar, E., Kılıç, M., & Güner, M. (2015). Measurement of sustainability performance in textile industry by using a multi-criteria decision-making method. Textile andApparel, 25, (1), 3-9. google scholar
  • Aksoylu, S., & Taşdemir, B. (2020). Kurumsal Sürdürülebilirlik Performans Değerlendirmesi: BİST Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksinde Bir Araştırma [Corporate sustainability performance evaluation: a research in BIST sustainability index]. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13, (1), 95-106. google scholar
  • Alaca, S. (2020). Corporate sustainability approaches and practices in Turkey: an investigation of the companies listed in BIST sustainability index. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Manisa Celal Bayar University. (In Turkish) google scholar
  • Alp, İ., Öztel, A., & Köse, M.S. (2015). Entropi tabanlı MAUT yöntemi ile kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performansı ölçümü: bir vaka çalışması [Corporate sustainability performance measuring wıth entropy based MAUT method: a case study]. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, (11) 2, 65-81. google scholar
  • Bilge, P., Badurdeen, F., Seliger, G., & Jawahir, I.S. (2014). Model-based approach for assessing value creation to enhance sustainability in manufacturing. Procedia CIRP, 17, 106-111. google scholar
  • Bork, C.A., de Souza, J.F., de Oliveira Gomes, J., Canhete, V.V., & De Barba, D.J. (2016). Methodological tools for assessing the sustainability index (SI) of industrial production processes. Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, 87, 1313-1325. google scholar
  • Bozaykut Bük, T. (2020). Corporate sustainability reporting practices in Turkey. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 39, 369-377. google scholar
  • Briassoulis, H. (2001). Sustainable development and its indicators: through a (planner’s) glass darkly. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 44, (3), 409-427. google scholar
  • Brockett, A.M., & Rezaee, Z. (2012). Corporate Sustainability: Integrating Performance & Reporting. Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc. google scholar
  • Butnariu, A., & Avasilcai, S. (2015). The Assessment of the Companies’ Sustainable Development Performance. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 1233-1238. google scholar
  • Büyüközkan, G., & Karabulut, Y. (2018). Sustainability performance evaluation: literature review and future directions. Environmental Management, 217, 253-267. google scholar
  • Cagno, E., Neri, A., Howard, M., Brenna, G., & Trianni, A. (2019). Industrial sustainability performance measurement systems: a novel framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, 1354-1375. google scholar
  • Chen, D., Thiede, S., Schudeleit, T., & Herrmann, C. (2014). A holistic and rapid sustainability assessment tool for manufacturing SMEs. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technologies, 63, 437-440. google scholar
  • Ciegis, R., Ramanauskiene, J., & Martinkus, B. (2009). The concept of sustainable development and its use sustainability scenarios. Engineering Economics, 62 (2), 28-37. google scholar
  • Deloitte & Touch (1992). Business strategy for sustainable development: leadership and accountability for the 90’s. Book. IISD & WBCSD. google scholar
  • Docekalova, M.P., & Kocmanova, A. (2016). Composite indicator for measuring corporate sustainability. Ecological Indicators, 61, 612-623. google scholar
  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford, UK: Capstone. google scholar
  • Epstein, M.J., Buhovac, A.R., & Yuthas, K. (2015). Managing social, environmental, and financial performance simultaneously. Long Range Planning, 48, 35-45. google scholar
  • Ergüden, E., & Çatlıoğlu, E. (2016). Sustainability reporting practices in energy companies with TOPSIS method. Journal of Accounting and Finance, 71, 201-222. google scholar
  • Ertan, Y. (2018). Türkiye’de sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması (2005-2017). [Sustainability reporting in Turkey (20052017)]. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 11 (3), 463-478. google scholar
  • Feil, A.A., Schreiber, D., Haetinger, C., Strasburg, V.J., & Barkert, C.L. (2019). Sustainability indicators for industrial organizations: systematic review of literature. Journal of Sustainability, 11 (3), 854. google scholar
  • Feng, S.C., Joung, Che B., & Li, G. (2010a). Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Hefei, China. google scholar
  • Feng, S.C., Joung, Che B., & Li, G. (2010b). Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Hefei, China. google scholar
  • Gan, X., Fernandez, I.C., Guo, J., Wilson, M., Zhao, Y., Zhou, B., & Wu, J. (2017). When to use what: methods for weighting and aggregating sustainability indicators. Ecological Indicators, 81, 491-502. google scholar
  • Gümrah, A., & Büyükipekçi, S. (2019). Türkiye’de sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması: 2008-2017 yılları arası yayınlanmış sürdürülebilirlik raporlarının incelenmesi [Sustainability reporting in Turkey: a study on the investigation of published sustainability reports between 2008 - 2017]. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 21 (2), 305-323. google scholar
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., Gülençer, İ., & Tünel, R.K. (2018). Yeşil yaklaşımlar ve sürdürülebilirliğin yükselişi: işletmeler sürdürülebilirlik raporlarına neden önem veriyor? [Green approaches and the rise of sustainability: why does enterprises give importance to sustainability reports]? Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 17 (UİK Özel Sayısı), 229-244. google scholar
  • Harik, R., El Hachem, W., Medini, K., & Bernard, A. (2015). Towards a holistic sustainability index for measuring sustainability of manufacturing companies. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 4117-4139. google scholar
  • Helleno, A.L., De Moraes, A.J.I., & Simon, A.T. (2017). Integrating sustainability indicators and lean manufacturing to assess manufacturing processes: application case studies in Brazilian industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 153, 405-416. google scholar
  • Joung, C.B., Carrell, J., Sarkar, P., & Feng, S.C. (2012). Categorization of indicators for sustainable manufacturing. Ecological Indicators, 24, 148-157. google scholar
  • Kandakoğlu, A., Frini, A., & Amor, S.B. (2019). Multi-criteria decision making for sustainable development: a systematic review. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 26, 202-251. google scholar
  • KMPG (2020). The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020. Retrieved from: https://assets.kpmg/content/ dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf. google scholar
  • Krajnc, D., & Glavic, P. (2003). Indicators of sustainable production. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 5, 279-288. google scholar
  • Krajnc, D., & Glavic, P. (2005). A model for integrated assessment of sustainable development. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 43, 189-208. google scholar
  • Labuschagne, Brent, A.C., & van Erk, R.P.G, (2005). Assessing the sustainability performances of industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 373-385. google scholar
  • Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology 28, 563-575. google scholar
  • Lee, K.H., & Saen, R.F. (2012). Measuring corporate sustainability management: a data envelopment analysis approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 140, 219-226. google scholar
  • Linke, B.S., Corman, G.J., Dornfeld, D.A., & Tönissen, S. (2013). Sustainability indicators for discrete manufacturing processes applied to grinding technology. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 32, 556-563. google scholar
  • Lozano, R., & Huisingh, D. (2011). Inter-linking issues and dimensions in sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 99-107. google scholar
  • Madanchi, N, Thiede, S., Sohdi, M., & Herrmann, C. (2019). Development of a Sustainability Assessment Tool for Manufacturing Companies. In S. Thiede & C.Herrmann (eds), Eco-Factories of the Future, Sustainable Production, Life Cycle Engineering and Management, (pp.41-68). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. google scholar
  • Medel-Gonzalez, F., Garcia-Avila, L., Acosta-Beltran, A., & Hernandez, C. (2013). Measuring and evaluating business sustainability: development and application of corporate index of sustainability performance. In M. G. Erechtchoukova, P.A.Khaiter & P. Golinska (eds), Sustainability Appraisal: Quantitative Methods and Mathematical Techniques for Environmental Performance Evaluation, (pp.33-61). Berlin, Germany: Springer. google scholar
  • Mısırdalı Yangil, F. (2015). Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik kapsamında sürdürülebilirlik raporlarına yönelik içerik analizi: Türkiye’deki en büyük 100 sanayi işletmesi [The Content Analysis of Sustainability Reports on the Context of Corporate Sustainability: Top 100 Industrial Enterprises in Turkey]. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7 (3), 356-376. google scholar
  • Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., & Giovannini, E. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. google scholar
  • Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., & Olsson, L. (2007). Categorizing tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics 60, 498-508. google scholar
  • Niemeijer, D. (2002). Developing indicators for environmental policy: data-driven and theory driven approaches examined by example. Environmental Science & Policy, 5 (2), 91-103. google scholar
  • Niemeijer, D., & Groot, R.S. (2008). A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecological Indicators 8, 14-25. google scholar
  • Özdağoğlu, A. (2013). Çok ölçütlü karar verme modellerinde normalizasyon tekniklerinin sonuçlara etkisi: COPRAS örneği [The Effect of Normalization Techniques to Results in Multi Criteria Decision Making Models: COPRAS Example]. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 8 (2), 229-252. google scholar
  • Öztel, A., Köse, M.S., & Aytekin, İ. (2012). Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performansının ölçümü için çok kriterli bir çerçeve: Henkel örneği [A multi-criteria framework for measuring corporate sustainability performance: the case of Henkel]. Tarih, Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1 (4), 32-44. google scholar
  • Saaty, T.L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2007). Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry. Ecological Indicators, 7, 565-588. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2009). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 9 (2), 189-212. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2012). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 15 (1), 281-299. google scholar
  • Tokos, H., Pintaric, Z.N., & Krajnc, D. (2012). An integrated sustainability performance assessment and benchmarking of breweries. Clean Technologies & Environmental Policy 14, 173-193. google scholar
  • UNCSD (2012). RIO 2012 Issues Briefs. Retrieved from: http://www.uncsd2012.org/index. php?page=view&type =400 &nr=218&menu=45. google scholar
  • Vafaei N., Ribeiro R.A., & Camarinha-Matos L.M. (2016) Normalization techniques for multi-criteria decision making: analytical hierarchy process case study. In: Camarinha-Matos L.M., Falcâo A.J., Vafaei N., Najdi S. (eds) Technological Innovation for Cyber-Physical Systems. DoCEIS 2016. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 470, 261-269. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. google scholar
  • Veleva, V., & Ellenbecker, M.J. (2001). Indicators of sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production 9, 447-452 google scholar
  • Yeşilyurt, S., & Çapraz, C. (2018). Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışmalarında Kullanılan Kapsam Geçerliği İçin Bir Yol Haritası [A road map for the content validity used in scale development studies]. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20 (1), 251-264. google scholar
  • Zang, L., Xu, Y., Yeh, C-H., Liu, Y., & Zhou, D. (2016). City sustainability evaluation using MCDM with objective weights of interdependent criteria. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 491-499. google scholar
  • Zhou, L., Tokos, H., Krajnc, D., & Yang, Y. (2012). Sustainability performance evaluation in industry by composite sustainability index. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 14, 789-803. google scholar
  • Zijp, M.C., Waaijers-Van der Loop, S.L., Heijungs, R., Broeren, M.L.M., Peeters, L., Van Nieuwenhuijzen, A., Shen, L., Heugens, E.H.W., & Posthuma, L. (2017). Method selection for sustainability assessment: the case of recovery resources from waste water. Journal of Environmental Management, 197, 221-230. google scholar

Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index

Yıl 2022, , 261 - 292, 16.01.2023
https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966

Öz

The number of studies on sustainability assessment tools and models has increased in the last two decades. Composite Indexes (CIs) have become popular as a useful tool for assessing business level sustainability to compare the companies operating in the same sector. Limited studies have covered all three dimensions (economic, environmental, and social) of the sustainability assessment in an integrated manner in Turkey. This paper aims to measure and evaluate the Corporate Sustainability (CS) performances of ten manufacturing companies operating in the Istanbul Stock Exchange Market. For this purpose, a new integrated sustainability composite index was developed by using previous composite indexes in the literature. The developed assessment model provides a practical tool for the organizations in the manufacturing sector in Turkey by measuring and evaluating their sustainability performances in a holistic way. By using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), the levels of the sustainability performances of ten manufacturing organizations were assessed in a short time. The index allows managers to make comparisons among companies within the same sector. The results further indicated that the economic dimension score of the analyzed organizations had a weighty and salient effect on the total corporate sustainability performance score. This finding contributes to the literature that economic performance is predominantly effective in the sustainability performance of businesses.

Proje Numarası

Yok

Kaynakça

  • Acar, E., Kılıç, M., & Güner, M. (2015). Measurement of sustainability performance in textile industry by using a multi-criteria decision-making method. Textile andApparel, 25, (1), 3-9. google scholar
  • Aksoylu, S., & Taşdemir, B. (2020). Kurumsal Sürdürülebilirlik Performans Değerlendirmesi: BİST Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksinde Bir Araştırma [Corporate sustainability performance evaluation: a research in BIST sustainability index]. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13, (1), 95-106. google scholar
  • Alaca, S. (2020). Corporate sustainability approaches and practices in Turkey: an investigation of the companies listed in BIST sustainability index. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Manisa Celal Bayar University. (In Turkish) google scholar
  • Alp, İ., Öztel, A., & Köse, M.S. (2015). Entropi tabanlı MAUT yöntemi ile kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performansı ölçümü: bir vaka çalışması [Corporate sustainability performance measuring wıth entropy based MAUT method: a case study]. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, (11) 2, 65-81. google scholar
  • Bilge, P., Badurdeen, F., Seliger, G., & Jawahir, I.S. (2014). Model-based approach for assessing value creation to enhance sustainability in manufacturing. Procedia CIRP, 17, 106-111. google scholar
  • Bork, C.A., de Souza, J.F., de Oliveira Gomes, J., Canhete, V.V., & De Barba, D.J. (2016). Methodological tools for assessing the sustainability index (SI) of industrial production processes. Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, 87, 1313-1325. google scholar
  • Bozaykut Bük, T. (2020). Corporate sustainability reporting practices in Turkey. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 39, 369-377. google scholar
  • Briassoulis, H. (2001). Sustainable development and its indicators: through a (planner’s) glass darkly. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 44, (3), 409-427. google scholar
  • Brockett, A.M., & Rezaee, Z. (2012). Corporate Sustainability: Integrating Performance & Reporting. Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc. google scholar
  • Butnariu, A., & Avasilcai, S. (2015). The Assessment of the Companies’ Sustainable Development Performance. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 1233-1238. google scholar
  • Büyüközkan, G., & Karabulut, Y. (2018). Sustainability performance evaluation: literature review and future directions. Environmental Management, 217, 253-267. google scholar
  • Cagno, E., Neri, A., Howard, M., Brenna, G., & Trianni, A. (2019). Industrial sustainability performance measurement systems: a novel framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, 1354-1375. google scholar
  • Chen, D., Thiede, S., Schudeleit, T., & Herrmann, C. (2014). A holistic and rapid sustainability assessment tool for manufacturing SMEs. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technologies, 63, 437-440. google scholar
  • Ciegis, R., Ramanauskiene, J., & Martinkus, B. (2009). The concept of sustainable development and its use sustainability scenarios. Engineering Economics, 62 (2), 28-37. google scholar
  • Deloitte & Touch (1992). Business strategy for sustainable development: leadership and accountability for the 90’s. Book. IISD & WBCSD. google scholar
  • Docekalova, M.P., & Kocmanova, A. (2016). Composite indicator for measuring corporate sustainability. Ecological Indicators, 61, 612-623. google scholar
  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford, UK: Capstone. google scholar
  • Epstein, M.J., Buhovac, A.R., & Yuthas, K. (2015). Managing social, environmental, and financial performance simultaneously. Long Range Planning, 48, 35-45. google scholar
  • Ergüden, E., & Çatlıoğlu, E. (2016). Sustainability reporting practices in energy companies with TOPSIS method. Journal of Accounting and Finance, 71, 201-222. google scholar
  • Ertan, Y. (2018). Türkiye’de sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması (2005-2017). [Sustainability reporting in Turkey (20052017)]. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 11 (3), 463-478. google scholar
  • Feil, A.A., Schreiber, D., Haetinger, C., Strasburg, V.J., & Barkert, C.L. (2019). Sustainability indicators for industrial organizations: systematic review of literature. Journal of Sustainability, 11 (3), 854. google scholar
  • Feng, S.C., Joung, Che B., & Li, G. (2010a). Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Hefei, China. google scholar
  • Feng, S.C., Joung, Che B., & Li, G. (2010b). Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Hefei, China. google scholar
  • Gan, X., Fernandez, I.C., Guo, J., Wilson, M., Zhao, Y., Zhou, B., & Wu, J. (2017). When to use what: methods for weighting and aggregating sustainability indicators. Ecological Indicators, 81, 491-502. google scholar
  • Gümrah, A., & Büyükipekçi, S. (2019). Türkiye’de sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması: 2008-2017 yılları arası yayınlanmış sürdürülebilirlik raporlarının incelenmesi [Sustainability reporting in Turkey: a study on the investigation of published sustainability reports between 2008 - 2017]. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 21 (2), 305-323. google scholar
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., Gülençer, İ., & Tünel, R.K. (2018). Yeşil yaklaşımlar ve sürdürülebilirliğin yükselişi: işletmeler sürdürülebilirlik raporlarına neden önem veriyor? [Green approaches and the rise of sustainability: why does enterprises give importance to sustainability reports]? Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 17 (UİK Özel Sayısı), 229-244. google scholar
  • Harik, R., El Hachem, W., Medini, K., & Bernard, A. (2015). Towards a holistic sustainability index for measuring sustainability of manufacturing companies. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 4117-4139. google scholar
  • Helleno, A.L., De Moraes, A.J.I., & Simon, A.T. (2017). Integrating sustainability indicators and lean manufacturing to assess manufacturing processes: application case studies in Brazilian industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 153, 405-416. google scholar
  • Joung, C.B., Carrell, J., Sarkar, P., & Feng, S.C. (2012). Categorization of indicators for sustainable manufacturing. Ecological Indicators, 24, 148-157. google scholar
  • Kandakoğlu, A., Frini, A., & Amor, S.B. (2019). Multi-criteria decision making for sustainable development: a systematic review. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 26, 202-251. google scholar
  • KMPG (2020). The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020. Retrieved from: https://assets.kpmg/content/ dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf. google scholar
  • Krajnc, D., & Glavic, P. (2003). Indicators of sustainable production. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 5, 279-288. google scholar
  • Krajnc, D., & Glavic, P. (2005). A model for integrated assessment of sustainable development. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 43, 189-208. google scholar
  • Labuschagne, Brent, A.C., & van Erk, R.P.G, (2005). Assessing the sustainability performances of industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 373-385. google scholar
  • Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology 28, 563-575. google scholar
  • Lee, K.H., & Saen, R.F. (2012). Measuring corporate sustainability management: a data envelopment analysis approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 140, 219-226. google scholar
  • Linke, B.S., Corman, G.J., Dornfeld, D.A., & Tönissen, S. (2013). Sustainability indicators for discrete manufacturing processes applied to grinding technology. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 32, 556-563. google scholar
  • Lozano, R., & Huisingh, D. (2011). Inter-linking issues and dimensions in sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 99-107. google scholar
  • Madanchi, N, Thiede, S., Sohdi, M., & Herrmann, C. (2019). Development of a Sustainability Assessment Tool for Manufacturing Companies. In S. Thiede & C.Herrmann (eds), Eco-Factories of the Future, Sustainable Production, Life Cycle Engineering and Management, (pp.41-68). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. google scholar
  • Medel-Gonzalez, F., Garcia-Avila, L., Acosta-Beltran, A., & Hernandez, C. (2013). Measuring and evaluating business sustainability: development and application of corporate index of sustainability performance. In M. G. Erechtchoukova, P.A.Khaiter & P. Golinska (eds), Sustainability Appraisal: Quantitative Methods and Mathematical Techniques for Environmental Performance Evaluation, (pp.33-61). Berlin, Germany: Springer. google scholar
  • Mısırdalı Yangil, F. (2015). Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik kapsamında sürdürülebilirlik raporlarına yönelik içerik analizi: Türkiye’deki en büyük 100 sanayi işletmesi [The Content Analysis of Sustainability Reports on the Context of Corporate Sustainability: Top 100 Industrial Enterprises in Turkey]. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7 (3), 356-376. google scholar
  • Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., & Giovannini, E. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. google scholar
  • Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., & Olsson, L. (2007). Categorizing tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics 60, 498-508. google scholar
  • Niemeijer, D. (2002). Developing indicators for environmental policy: data-driven and theory driven approaches examined by example. Environmental Science & Policy, 5 (2), 91-103. google scholar
  • Niemeijer, D., & Groot, R.S. (2008). A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecological Indicators 8, 14-25. google scholar
  • Özdağoğlu, A. (2013). Çok ölçütlü karar verme modellerinde normalizasyon tekniklerinin sonuçlara etkisi: COPRAS örneği [The Effect of Normalization Techniques to Results in Multi Criteria Decision Making Models: COPRAS Example]. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 8 (2), 229-252. google scholar
  • Öztel, A., Köse, M.S., & Aytekin, İ. (2012). Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performansının ölçümü için çok kriterli bir çerçeve: Henkel örneği [A multi-criteria framework for measuring corporate sustainability performance: the case of Henkel]. Tarih, Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1 (4), 32-44. google scholar
  • Saaty, T.L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2007). Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry. Ecological Indicators, 7, 565-588. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2009). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 9 (2), 189-212. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2012). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 15 (1), 281-299. google scholar
  • Tokos, H., Pintaric, Z.N., & Krajnc, D. (2012). An integrated sustainability performance assessment and benchmarking of breweries. Clean Technologies & Environmental Policy 14, 173-193. google scholar
  • UNCSD (2012). RIO 2012 Issues Briefs. Retrieved from: http://www.uncsd2012.org/index. php?page=view&type =400 &nr=218&menu=45. google scholar
  • Vafaei N., Ribeiro R.A., & Camarinha-Matos L.M. (2016) Normalization techniques for multi-criteria decision making: analytical hierarchy process case study. In: Camarinha-Matos L.M., Falcâo A.J., Vafaei N., Najdi S. (eds) Technological Innovation for Cyber-Physical Systems. DoCEIS 2016. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 470, 261-269. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. google scholar
  • Veleva, V., & Ellenbecker, M.J. (2001). Indicators of sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production 9, 447-452 google scholar
  • Yeşilyurt, S., & Çapraz, C. (2018). Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışmalarında Kullanılan Kapsam Geçerliği İçin Bir Yol Haritası [A road map for the content validity used in scale development studies]. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20 (1), 251-264. google scholar
  • Zang, L., Xu, Y., Yeh, C-H., Liu, Y., & Zhou, D. (2016). City sustainability evaluation using MCDM with objective weights of interdependent criteria. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 491-499. google scholar
  • Zhou, L., Tokos, H., Krajnc, D., & Yang, Y. (2012). Sustainability performance evaluation in industry by composite sustainability index. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 14, 789-803. google scholar
  • Zijp, M.C., Waaijers-Van der Loop, S.L., Heijungs, R., Broeren, M.L.M., Peeters, L., Van Nieuwenhuijzen, A., Shen, L., Heugens, E.H.W., & Posthuma, L. (2017). Method selection for sustainability assessment: the case of recovery resources from waste water. Journal of Environmental Management, 197, 221-230. google scholar
Toplam 59 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Ekonomi
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Soner Alaca 0000-0003-4005-302X

Mustafa Tepeci 0000-0001-9311-1532

Proje Numarası Yok
Yayımlanma Tarihi 16 Ocak 2023
Gönderilme Tarihi 15 Kasım 2021
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022

Kaynak Göster

APA Alaca, S., & Tepeci, M. (2023). Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society(66), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966
AMA Alaca S, Tepeci M. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. Ocak 2023;(66):261-292. doi:10.26650/JECS2021-1023966
Chicago Alaca, Soner, ve Mustafa Tepeci. “Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, sy. 66 (Ocak 2023): 261-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966.
EndNote Alaca S, Tepeci M (01 Ocak 2023) Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 66 261–292.
IEEE S. Alaca ve M. Tepeci, “Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index”, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, sy. 66, ss. 261–292, Ocak 2023, doi: 10.26650/JECS2021-1023966.
ISNAD Alaca, Soner - Tepeci, Mustafa. “Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 66 (Ocak 2023), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966.
JAMA Alaca S, Tepeci M. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2023;:261–292.
MLA Alaca, Soner ve Mustafa Tepeci. “Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, sy. 66, 2023, ss. 261-92, doi:10.26650/JECS2021-1023966.
Vancouver Alaca S, Tepeci M. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2023(66):261-92.