AVRUPA VE ORTA ASYA ÜLKELERİNDE BİT GELİŞMİŞLİK DÜZEYİNİN ENTEGRE MPSI-RAPS YÖNTEMİ İLE ÖLÇÜLMESİ

Yıl 2024, , 24 - 53, 28.06.2024

Nazife Şahin Macit

https://doi.org/10.36543/kauiibfd.2024.002

Öz

Bu çalışma, 2023 BİT gelişim endeksi raporunda yer alan 10 göstergeye dayanarak Avrupa ve Orta Asya için seçilmiş 14 ülkenin Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri (BİT) gelişmişlik düzeylerini MPSI- RAPS entegre yöntemiyle objektif bir şekilde ele alarak gelecekteki politika ve stratejiler için temel bilgiler sunmak amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Kriter olarak dikkate alınan göstergelerin ağırlık değerleri MPSI yöntemi ile tespit edilmiş; ülkelerin kriterlere göre gelişmişlik düzeylerinin belirlenip karşılaştırılması ise RAPS yöntemi yapılmıştır. Yapılan analiz sonucunda en önemli kriterin sabit geniş bant internet sepet fiyatı (% GSMH/k.) olduğu; en önemsiz kriterin ise en az 3G mobil ağının kapsadığı nüfus (%) olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Avusturya BİT gelişmişlik düzeyinde en üst sırayı alırken, Azerbaycan en düşük düzeyde olan ülke olarak belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, MPSI-RAPS entegre yöntemi analiziyle elde edilen sıralamalar ile BİT (Bilgi Teknolojileri) gelişmişlik indeksi raporundaki sıralamalar arasında anlamlı ve güçlü bir pozitif ilişki olduğu, Spearman Rho Korelasyon testi sonucunda ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu bulgu, MPSI-RAPS entegre yönteminin ülkelerin BİT gelişmişlik düzeylerini değerlendirmede kullanılabileceğini göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BİT, MPSI Yöntemi, RAPS Yöntemi

MEASURING THE ICT DEVELOPMENT LEVEL IN EUROPEAN AND CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES USING THE INTEGRATED MPSI-RAPS METHOD

Öz

This study was carried out to provide basic information for future policies and strategies by objectively considering the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) development levels of 14 countries selected for Europe and Central Asia with the MPSI-RAPS integrated method, based on the 10 indicators included in the 2023 ICT development index report. . The weight values of indicators considered as criteria were determined by the MPSI method; The RAPS method was used to determine and compare the development levels of countries according to criteria. As a result of the analysis, the most important criterion is fixed broadband internet basket price (% GNP/k.); It turns out that the most important criterion is the population (%) covered by at least 3G mobile network. While Austria ranked highest in ICT development level, Azerbaijan was determined as the country with the lowest level. Additionally, it was revealed as a result of the Spearman Rho Correlation test that there is a significant and strong positive relationship between the rankings obtained by the MPSI-RAPS integrated method analysis and the rankings in the ICT (Information Technologies) development index report. This finding showed that the MPSI-RAPS integrated method can be used to evaluate the ICT development levels of countries.

Anahtar Kelimeler

ICT, MPSI Method, RAPS Method

Kaynakça

• Afshari, A. R., & Kowal, J. (2017). Decision making methods for the selection of ICT project manager. Gospodarka Rynek Edukacja, 18(4).
• Alamoudi, M. H., & Bafail, O. A. (2022). BWM—RAPS approach for evaluating and ranking banking sector companies based on their financial ındicators in the Saudi stock market. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(467). https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15100467
• Al-Zahrani, F. A. (2020). Hesitant-fuzzy sets-based computational approach for evaluating the survivability ımpact of multi-fiber WDM networks: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia perspective. IEEE Access, 8, 212409 – 212422, doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3038798.
• Bafail, O. A., Abdulaal, R. M. S., & Kabli, M. R. (2022). AHP-RAPS approach for evaluating the productivity of engineering departments at a Public University. Systems, 10(107). https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10040107
• Bahnamiri, M. V., Khademabbasi, S., & Valinataj, M. (2015). A multi-criteria decision method using fuzzy TOPSIS technique for ranking countries based on ICT Development Index (IDI). I J A B E R, 13(6), 3851-3869.
• Bahrini, R., & Qaffas, A. A. (2019). Impact of information and communication technology on economic growth: evidence from developing countries. Economies,7(1) 21.
• Becker, J., Becker, A., Sulikowski, P., & Zdziebko, T. (2018). ANP-based analysis of ICT usage in Central European enterprises. Procedia Computer Science, 126, 2173-2183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.07.231
• Bhattacharya, P., & Dash, A. K. (2021). Determinants of blue economy in Asia-Pacifc island countries: A study of tourism and fsheries sectors. Ocean & Coastal Management, 211, 105774.
• Demir, G. (2022). Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojisinin G8 ülkelerindeki gelişiminin değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Business and Communication Studies, 1(2), 165-178.
• Dobrota, M., Martic, M., Bulajic, M., & Jeremic, V. (2015). Two-phased composite I-distance indicator approach for evaluation of countries’ information development. Telecommunications Policy, 39, 406–420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2015.03.003
• Ecemiş, O., & Çoşkun, A. (2022). Türkiye’de bilişim teknolojileri kullanımının ÇKKV yöntemleriyle incelenmesi: 2014 2021 dönemi. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi Özel Sayı 37, 81-89.
• Erkhembaatar, N. (2023). Evaluation of ındicators for ICT Development Index using an ıntegrated Entropy weighting method. ICTFocus, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.58873/sict.v2i1.43
• Ersoy, N. (2021). G7 ülkelerinde BİT gelişiminin değerlendirilmesi için ÇKKV yöntemlerinin karşılaştırmalı bir analizi. KAÜİİBFD, 13(25), 55-73.
• Gerpott, T. J., & Ahmedi, N. (2015). Composite indices for the evaluation of a country's information technology development level: Extensions of the IDI of the ITU. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 98, 174-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.03.012
• Gligoric, M., Gligoric, Z., Lutovac, S., Negovanovic, M., & Langovic, Z. (2022). Novel hybrid MPSI–MARA decision-making model for support system selection in an underground mine. Systems, 10(248). https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10060248
• Gouvea, R., Kapelianis, D., & Kassicieh, S. (2018). Assessing the nexus of sustainability and information & communications technology. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 130, 39–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.023
• Guz, T. (2019). Information and communication technologies development index: Regional analysis of Turkey. Journal of Management, Marketing and Logistics (JMML), 6(3), 128-135. http://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2019.1126
• Herdon, M., & Csordas, A. (2019). Changes in the relationship between ICT use and economic development in Eu Member States 2010-2016. Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce – Apstract, 13(1-2), 91-100.
• Higon, D.A., Gholami, R., & Shirazi, F. (2017). ICT and environmental sustainability: A global perspective. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 85–95.
• Ishida, H. (2015). The effect of ICT development on economic growth and energy consumption in Japan. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 79-88.
• Jocic, K. J., Jocic, G., Karabasevic, D., Popovic, G., Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., & Nguyen, P. T. (2020). A novel ıntegrated PIPRECIA–ınterval-valued triangular fuzzy ARAS model: E-learning course selection. Symmetry, 12(6), 928; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12060928
• Karabasevic, D., Radanov, P., Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G., & Predic, B. (2021). Going green: Strategic evaluation of green ICT adoption in the textile industry by using bipolar fuzzy MULTIMOORA method. Industria Textila, 72(1), doi: 10.35530/IT.072.01.1841.
• Li, S. T., & Chou, W. C. (2014). Power planning in ICT infrastructure: A multi-criteria operational performance evaluation approach. Omega, 49, 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.05.006
• Mahmud, A. J., Olander, E., Eriksén, S., & Haglund, B. J. (2013). Health communication in primary health care-A case study of ICT development for health promotion. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(1), 1-15.
• Maksimović, M. (2018). IOT concept application in educational sector using collaboration. Facta Universitatis, Series: Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education, 1(2), 137–150.
• McCarney, J. (2004). Effective models of staff development in ICT. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(1), 61-72.
• Meng, Q., & Li, M. (2002). New economy and ICT development in China. Information Economics and Policy, 14(2), 275-295.
• Nasri, S. A., Safaie, N., Sarabi, A., Eghbali, A., & Barkhordari, G. (2022). Performance evaluation of ICT companies using hybrid MCDM method in Iran. Hindawi Mathematical Problems in Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5308343
• Nath, H. K., & Liu, L. (2017). Information and communications technology (ICT) and services trade. Information Economics and Policy, 41, 81-87.
• Nthane, T. T., Saunders, F., Gallardo Fernández, G. L., & Raemaekers, S. (2020). Toward sustainability of South African small-scale fsheries leveraging ICT transformation pathways. Sustainability, 12(2), 743.
• Özgür, H., Demirdöven, B., & Kaya, B. (2023). Dijital Bilgi Ve İletişim Teknolojilerine (BİT) dair keşfedici bir çözümleme: Pamukkale Üniversitesi (PAU) Siyaset Bilimi Ve Kamu Yönetimi (SBKY) örneği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(85), 246-273. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1201879
• Öztaş Karlı, R. G. (2021). Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojilerinin kırsal kalkınmadaki rolünün A’WOT analizi ile değerlendirilmesi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 31(2), DOI: 10.29133/yyutbd.788802.
• Pederzoli, D. (2016). ICT and retail: State of the art and prospects. Information and Communication Technologies in Organizations and Society, 329–336.
• Ramkumar, M., & Jenamani, M. (2015). Sustainability in supply chain through e-procurement: An assessment framework based on DANP and liberatore score. IEEE Systems Journal, 9(4), 1554 – 1564. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2014.2336291
• Rençber, Ö. F. (2018). İllerin bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri gelişmişliklerine göre sıralanması: Promethee yöntemi ile örnek uygulama. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 33, 271-285.
• Sarkar, S. (2012). The role of information and communication technology (ICT) in higher education for the 21st century. Science, 1(1), 30-41.
• Skorupinska, A., & Torrent-Sellens, J. (2017). ICT, innovation and productivity: evidence based on eastern European manufacturing companies. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 8(2), 768–788.
• Torkayesh, A. E., & Torkayesh, S. E. (2021). Evaluation of information and communication technology development in G7 countries: An integrated MCDM approach. Technology in Society, 66(101670). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101670
• Urosevic, K., Gligoric, Z., Miljanovic, I., Beljic, C., & Gligoric, M. (2021). Novel methods in multiple criteria decision-making process (MCRAT and RAPS): Application in the Mining Industry. Mathematics, 9(1980). https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161980
• Wu, J., Guo, S., Huang, H., Liu, W., & Xiang, Y. (2018). Information and communications technologies for sustainable development goals: state-of-the-art, needs and perspectives. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 20(3), 2389-2406.
• Yakut, E. (2020). OECD ülkelerinin bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri gelişmişliklerinin MOORA ve WASPAS yöntemiyle değerlendirilerek kullanılan yöntemlerin COPELAND yöntemiyle karşılaştırılması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(3) , 1275-1294.
• Yan, Z., Shi, R., & Yang, Z. (2018). ICT development and sustainable energy consumption: A perspective of energy productivity. Sustainability, 10(7), 1-15.
• Yılmaz, N. (2023). MPSI-MCRAT model for solvıng the bank selectıon problem ın Montenegro. M. Mete & A. Toptaş (Ed.), International studies in economics and administrative sciences (119-132) içinde. Serüven Yayınevi.
• Zolfani, S. H., Sedaghat, M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2012). Performance evaluating of rural ICT centers (telecenters), applying fuzzy AHP, SAW-G and TOPSIS GREY: A case study in Iran. Technological and Economic Development of Economy,18(2), 364–387, doi:10.3846/20294913.2012.685110.
• Zoroja, J., & Bach, M. P. (2016). Editorial: Impact of ınformation and communication technology to the competitiveness of European Countries - cluster analysis approach. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 11(1), doi: 10.4067/S0718-18762016000100001.