SUSTAINABLE SUPPLIER SELECTION WITH SWARA AND ARAS METHODS: AN APPLICATION IN THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR

Öz

The fact that businesses have focused more on sustainability in recent years has caused sustainability factors to be taken into consideration in supplier selection. Based on this, the purpose of this research is to determine supplier selection criteria by considering sustainability criteria in a textile business and to select the most suitable sustainable supplier for the business where the application is made. The SWARA method was used to determine the importance of the criteria used in sustainable supplier selection, and the ARAS method was used to select the supplier with the highest performance according to the determined criteria weights. The results were compared using the WASPAS method. According to the analysis results, environmental factors ranked first with 38%, social factors ranked second with 26%, economic factors ranked third with 25% and ethical factors ranked last with 11% among sustainable supplier selection criteria. This result shows that the business attaches more importance to environmental and social factors than other factors in supplier selection, and does not ignore economic factors. As a result of the analyses conducted by considering four criteria, the most suitable supplier in terms of sustainability was determined as “Supplier 1”. It is thought that the obtained results will contribute to the formation of evaluation criteria to be used in sustainable supplier selection. Future studies conducted in different sectors with different analysis methods can make significant contributions to the literature

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Supplier Selection
• Sustainability
• SWARA
• ARAS

SWARA VE ARAS YÖNTEMLERİ İLE SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR TEDARİKÇİ SEÇİMİ: İMALAT SEKTÖRÜNDE BİR UYGULAMA

Öz

İşletmelerin son yıllarda sürdürülebilirlik konusunda daha fazla odaklanmaları tedarikçi seçiminde de sürdürülebilirlik faktörlerinin dikkate alınmasına sebep olmaktadır. Buradan hareketle bu araştırmanın amacını bir tekstil işletmesinde sürdürülebilirlik kriterleri dikkate alınarak, tedarikçi seçim kriterlerinin belirlenmesi ve uygulamanın yapıldığı işletme açısından en uygun sürdürülebilir tedarikçinin seçiminin yapılması oluşturmaktadır. Sürdürülebilir tedarikçi seçiminde kullanılan kriterlerin önemlerinin belirlenmesinde SWARA yöntemi, belirlenen kriter ağılıklarına göre performansı en yüksek tedarikçinin seçiminde ise ARAS yöntemi kullanılmıştır. WASPAS yöntemi kullanılarak sonuçlar karşılaştırılmıştır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, sürdürülebilir tedarikçi seçim kriterlerinden çevresel faktörler %38 ile birinci sırada, sosyal faktörler %26 ile ikinci sırada, ekonomik faktörler %25 ile üçüncü sırada ve etik faktörler %11 ile son sırada yer aldığı belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuç işletmenin tedarikçi seçiminde çevresel ve sosyal faktörlere diğer faktörlere göre daha fazla önem verdiğini bununla birlikte ekonomik faktörleri de göz ardı etmediğini göstermektedir. Dört kriter dikkate alınarak yapılan analizler sonucunda sürdürülebilirlik açısından en uygun tedarikçi “Tedarikçi 1” olarak belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçların sürdürülebilir tedarikçi seçiminde kullanılacak değerlendirme kriterlerinin oluşmasına katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir. Gelecek çalışmalarda farklı sektörlerde, farklı analiz yöntemleriyle yapılacak araştırmalar literatüre önemli katkılar sağlayabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tedarikçi Seçimi
• Sürdürülebilirlik
• SWARA
• ARAS

Teşekkür

Emeğiniz ve katkılarınız için teşekkür eder, saygılar sunarım..

Kaynakça

1. Agarwal, S., Kant, R. ve Shankar, R. (2020). Evaluating solutions to overcome humanitarian supply chain management barriers: A hybrid fuzzy SWARA – Fuzzy WASPAS approach. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 51. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101838.
2. Akpınar, M. E. (2021). An Application on The Most Suitable Supplier Selection with FUZZY TOPSIS and FUZZY VIKOR Methods. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 23(2), 627-640. doi:10.16953/deusosbil.843914.
3. Alrasheedi, M., Mardani, A., Mishra, A. R., Rani, P. ve Loganathan, N. (2022). An extended framework to evaluate sustainable suppliers in manufacturing companies using a new Pythagorean fuzzy entropy-SWARA-WASPAS decision-making approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 35(2), 333-357. doi:10.1108/JEIM-07-2020-0263.
4. Amindoust, A., Ahmed, S., Saghafinia, A. ve Bahreininejad, A. (2012). Sustainable supplier selection: A ranking model based on fuzzy inference system. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 12(6), 1668-1677. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2012.01.023.
5. Awasthi, A., Govindan, K. ve Gold, S. (2018). Multi-tier sustainable global supplier selection using a fuzzy AHP-VIKOR based approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 195, 106-117. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.10.013.
6. Awaysheh, A. ve Klassen, R. D. (2010). The impact of supply chain structure on the use of supplier socially responsible practices. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 30(12), 1246-1268. doi:10.1108/01443571011094253.
7. Balali, A., Moehler, R. C. ve Valipour, A. (2022). Ranking cost overrun factors in the mega hospital construction projects using Delphi-SWARA method: an Iranian case study. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(13), 2577-2585. doi:10.1080/15623599.2020.1811465.
8. Cao, Q., Esangbedo, M. O., Bai, S. ve Esangbedo, C. O. (2019). Grey SWARA-FUCOM weighting method for contractor selection MCDM problem: A case study of floating solar panel energy system installation. Energies, 12(13). doi:10.3390/en12132481.

9. Chai, N., Zhou, W. ve Jiang, Z. (2023a). Sustainable supplier selection using an intuitionistic and interval-valued fuzzy MCDM approach based on cumulative prospect theory. Information Sciences, 626, 710-737. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2023.01.070.
10. Chai, N., Zhou, W. ve Jiang, Z. (2023b). Sustainable supplier selection using an intuitionistic and interval-valued fuzzy MCDM approach based on cumulative prospect theory. Information Sciences, 626, 710-737. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2023.01.070.
11. Chen, Z., Ming, X., Zhou, T. ve Chang, Y. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection for smart supply chain considering internal and external uncertainty: An integrated rough-fuzzy approach. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 87. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2019.106004.
12. Ciliberti, F., Pontrandolfo, P. ve Scozzi, B. (2008). Investigating corporate social responsibility in supply chains: a SME perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1579-1588. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.016.
13. Çekiç, C., Gül, N. N. ve Güner, A. F. (2022). Managing supplier selection problem with integrated fuzzy AHP and fuzzy VIKOR: A manufacturing company case. Journal of Advances in Manufacturing Engineering. doi:10.14744/ytu.jame.2022.00001.
14. Çiçek, T., Yildiz, S., Durak, İ., Öğrencisi, D., Üniversitesi, D. ve Enstitüsü, S. B. (2020). AHP, TOPSIS ve ELECTRE Yöntemleriyle Sürdürülebilir Tedarik Zincirinde En Uygun Tedarikçi Seçimi. doi:10.17740/eas.stat.2020-V16-01.
15. De Boer, L., Labro, E. ve Morlacchi, P. (2001). A review of methods supporting supplier selection. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 7(2), 75-89. doi.org/10.1016/S0969-7012(00)00028-9.
16. Debnath, B., Bari, A. B. M. M., Haq, Md. M., de Jesus Pacheco, D. A. ve Khan, M. A. (2023). An integrated stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis and weighted aggregated sum product assessment framework for sustainable supplier selection in the healthcare supply chains. Supply Chain Analytics, 1, 100001. doi:10.1016/j.sca.2022.100001.
17. Ecer, F. (2021). Sürdürülebilir Tedarikçi Seçimi: FUCOM Sübjektif Ağırlıklandırma Yöntemi Temelli Maırca Yaklaşımı. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 26-48. doi:10.30798/makuiibf.691693.
18. Fu, Y. K. (2019). An integrated approach to catering supplier selection using AHP-ARAS-MCGP methodology. Journal of Air Transport Management, 75, 164-169. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.01.011.
19. Govindan, K., Mina, H., Esmaeili, A. ve Gholami-Zanjani, S. M. (2020). An Integrated Hybrid Approach for Circular supplier selection and Closed loop Supply Chain Network Design under Uncertainty. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118317.
20. Gökler, S. H. ve Boran, S. (2023). A novel resilient and sustainable supplier selection model based on D-AHP and DEMATEL methods. Journal of Engineering Research. doi:10.1016/j.jer.2023.07.015.
21. Grimm, J. H., Hofstetter, J. S. ve Sarkis, J. (2014). Critical factors for sub-supplier management: A sustainable food supply chains perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 152, 159-173. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.12.011.
22. Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Aghdaie, M. H., Derakhti, A., Zavadskas, E. K., ve Morshed Varzandeh, M. H. (2013). Decision making on business issues with foresight perspective; an application of new hybrid MCDM model in shopping mall locating. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(17), 7111–7121. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2013.06.040.
23. Heidarzade, A., Mahdavi, I. ve Mahdavi-Amiri, N. (2016). Supplier selection using a clustering method based on a new distance for interval type-2 fuzzy sets: A case study. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 38, 213-231. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.09.029.
24. Ho, W., Xu, X. ve Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009.
25. Jain, N. ve Singh, A. R. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection under must-be criteria through Fuzzy inference system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 248. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119275.
26. Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Turskis, Z. (2010). Racionalaus ginču̧ sprendimo būdo nustatymas taikant nauja̧ kriteriju̧ svoriu̧ nustatymo metoda̧, pagri̧sta̧ nuosekliu laipsnišku poriniu kriteriju̧ santykinės svarbos lyginimu. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 243-258. doi:10.3846/jbem.2010.12.
27. Kumar, R., Padhi, S. S. ve Sarkar, A. (2019). Supplier selection of an Indian heavy locomotive manufacturer: An integrated approach using Taguchi loss function, TOPSIS, and AHP. IIMB Management Review, 31(1), 78-90. doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2018.08.008.
28. Kumar, V., Kalita, K., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Chakraborty, S. (2022). A SWARA-CoCoSo-Based Approach for Spray Painting Robot Selection. Informatica (Netherlands), 33(1), 35-54. doi:10.15388/21-INFOR466.
29. Kuo, R. J., Wang, Y. C. ve Tien, F. C. (2010). Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(12), 1161-1170. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.03.020.
30. Liao, C. N. ve Kao, H. P. (2011). An integrated fuzzy TOPSIS and MCGP approach to supplier selection in supply chain management. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 10803-10811. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.02.031.
31. Liu, P., Gao, H. ve Fujita, H. (2021). The new extension of the MULTIMOORA method for sustainable supplier selection with intuitionistic linguistic rough numbers. Applied Soft Computing, 99. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106893.
32. Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kannan, D., Mangla, S. K. ve Garg, C. P. (2017). An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1686-1698. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.078.
33. Magableh, G. M. ve Mistarihi, M. Z. (2022). Applications of MCDM approach (ANP-TOPSIS) to evaluate supply chain solutions in the context of COVID-19. Heliyon, 8(3). doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09062.
34. Manik, M. H. (2023). Addressing the supplier selection problem by using the analytical hierarchy process. Heliyon, 9(7). doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17997.
35. Mavi, R. K., Goh, M. ve Mavi, N. K. (2016). Supplier Selection with Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS in the Context of Supply Chain Risk Management. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 216-225. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.017.
36. Mccabe, D. L. ve Trevino, L. K. (1993). Academic Dishonesty: Honor Codes and Other Contextual Influences. Source: The Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 522-538. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2959991.pdf?refreqid=fastlydefault%3A0ea5c0479ea3a92bbed 66b4e00276bed&ab_segments=&origin=&initiator=&acceptTC=1 adresinden erişildi.
37. Memari, A., Dargi, A., Akbari Jokar, M. R., Ahmad, R. ve Abdul Rahim, A. R. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection: A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 50, 9-24. doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2018.11.002.
38. Menon, R. R. ve Ravi, V. (2022). Using AHP-TOPSIS methodologies in the selection of sustainable suppliers in an electronics supply chain. Cleaner Materials, 5. doi:10.1016/j.clema.2022.100130.
39. Miç, P., ve Antmen, Z. F. (2021). A Decision-Making Model Based on TOPSIS, WASPAS, and MULTIMOORA Methods for University Location Selection Problem. SAGE Open, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211040115.
40. Mohammed, A., Harris, I. ve Govindan, K. (2019). A hybrid MCDM-FMOO approach for sustainable supplier selection and order allocation. International Journal of Production Economics, 217, 171-184. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.02.003.
41. Nayeri, S., Khoei, M. A., Rouhani-Tazangi, M. R., GhanavatiNejad, M., Rahmani, M. ve Tirkolaee, E. B. (2023). A data-driven model for sustainable and resilient supplier selection and order allocation problem in a responsive supply chain: A case study of healthcare system. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 124. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2023.106511.
42. Naz, S., Shafiq, A., Butt, S. A. ve Ijaz, R. (2023). A new approach to sentiment analysis algorithms: Extended SWARA-MABAC method with 2-tuple linguistic q-rung orthopair fuzzy information. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 126. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2023.106943.
43. Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Tavakoli, M., Govindan, K. ve Mousakhani, S. (2023). A hybrid approach using Z-number DEA model and Artificial Neural Network for Resilient supplier Selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 222. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2023.119746.
44. Nithyanandham, D. ve Augustin, F. (2023). A bipolar fuzzy p-competition graph based ARAS technique for prioritizing COVID-19 vaccines [Formula presented]. Applied Soft Computing, 146. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110632.
45. Öztürk, B. A. ve Özçelik, F. (2014). Sustainable Supplier Selection with A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making Method Based on Triple Bottom Line. Business and Economics Research Journal, 5, 129-147. www.berjournal.com adresinden erişildi.
46. Patel, A., Jana, S. ve Mahanta, J. (2023). Intuitionistic fuzzy EM-SWARA-TOPSIS approach based on new distance measure to assess the medical waste treatment techniques. Applied Soft Computing, 144. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110521.
47. Peng, J. J., Tian, C., Zhang, W. Y., Zhang, S. ve Wang, J. Q. (2020). An integrated multi-criteria decision-making framework for sustainable supplier selection under picture fuzzy environment. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 26(3), 573-598. doi:10.3846/tede.2020.12110.
48. Rabieh, M., Rafsanjani, A. F., Babaei, L. ve Esmaeili, M. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection and order allocation: An integrated delphi method, fuzzy topsis, and multi-objective programming model. Scientia Iranica, 26(4E), 2524-2540. doi:10.24200/sci.2018.5254.1176.
49. Rani, P., Mishra, A. R., Krishankumar, R., Mardani, A., Cavallaro, F., Ravichandran, K. S. ve Balasubramanian, K. (2020). Hesitant fuzzy SWARA-complex proportional assessment approach for sustainable supplier selection (HF-SWARA-COPRAS). Symmetry, 12(7). doi:10.3390/sym12071152.
50. Rashidi, K. ve Cullinane, K. (2019). A comparison of fuzzy DEA and fuzzy TOPSIS in sustainable supplier selection: Implications for sourcing strategy. Expert Systems with Applications, 121, 266-281. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.12.025.
51. Reuter, C., Goebel, P. ve Foerstl, K. (2012). The impact of stakeholder orientation on sustainability and cost prevalence in supplier selection decisions. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 18(4), 270-281. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2012.06.004.
52. Sarkar, S., Paramanik, A. R. ve Mahanty, B. (2024). A Z-Number Slacks-Based Measure DEA model-based framework for sustainable supplier selection with imprecise information. Journal of Cleaner Production, 436. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140563.
53. Sarkis, J., Gonzalez-Torre, P. ve Adenso-Diaz, B. (2010). Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of environmental practices: The mediating effect of training. Journal of Operations Management, 28(2), 163-176. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2009.10.001.
54. Sharma, R., Kannan, D., Darbari, J. D. ve Jha, P. C. (2024). Group Decision Making Model for Selection of Performance Indicators for Sustainable Supplier Evaluation in Agro-Food Supply Chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 109353. doi:10.1016/J.IJPE.2024.109353.
55. Sivageerthi, T., Bathrinath, S., Uthayakumar, M. ve Bhalaji, R. K. A. (2021). A SWARA method to analyze the risks in coal supply chain management. Materials Today: Proceedings içinde (C. 50, ss. 935-940). Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2021.06.338.
56. Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A. ve 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 and Industrial Engineering, 140. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2019.106231.
57. Tavana, M., Shaabani, A., Di Caprio, D. ve Amiri, M. (2021). An integrated and comprehensive fuzzy multicriteria model for supplier selection in digital supply chains. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 2, 149-169. doi:10.1016/j.susoc.2021.07.008.
58. Tseng, M. L. (2011). Green supply chain management with linguistic preferences and incomplete information. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 11(8), 4894-4903. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2011.06.010.
59. Varchandi, S., Memari, A. ve Jokar, M. R. A. (2024). An integrated best–worst method and fuzzy TOPSIS for resilient-sustainable supplier selection. Decision Analytics Journal, 11. doi:10.1016/j.dajour.2024.100488.
60. Wang, C. N., Pan, C. F., Nguyen, V. T. ve Husain, S. T. (2022). Sustainable supplier selection model in supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers, Materials and Continua, 70(2), 3005-3019. doi:10.32604/cmc.2022.020206.
61. Wood, D. A. (2016). Supplier selection for development of petroleum industry facilities, applying multi-criteria decision making techniques including fuzzy and intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS with flexible entropy weighting. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 28, 594-612. doi:10.1016/j.jngse.2015.12.021.
62. Xu, Z., Qin, J., Liu, J. ve Martínez, L. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection based on AHPSort II in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Information Sciences, 483, 273-293. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2019.01.013.
63. Yu, C., Shao, Y., Wang, K. ve Zhang, L. (2019). A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 121, 1-17. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.12.010.
64. Yücenur, G. N. ve Maden, A. (2025). Location selection for a photovoltaic agricultural with f-PIPRECIA and WASPAS methods: A case study. Energy, 314, 134179. doi:10.1016/J.ENERGY.2024.134179.
65. Zavadskas, E. K. ve Turskis, Z. (2010). A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision-making. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), 159-172. doi:10.3846/tede.2010.10.
66. Zavadskas E. K., Turskis Z., Antucheviciene J., ve Zakarevicius A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektronika Ir Elektrotechnika, 122(6), 3–6. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810.
67. Zavadskas, E. K., Krishankumar, R., Ravichandran, K. S., Vilkonis, A., ve Antucheviciene, J. (2025). Hyperbolic fuzzy set decision framework for construction contracts integrating CRITIC and WASPAS for dispute mitigation. Automation in Construction, 174, 106137. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AUTCON.2025.106137.
68. Zhu, Q., Liu, A., Li, Z., Yang, Y. ve Miao, J. (2022). Sustainable Supplier Selection and Evaluation for the Effective Supply Chain Management System. doi:10.3390/systems.
69. Zouggari, A. ve Benyoucef, L. (2012). Simulation based fuzzy TOPSIS approach for group multi-criteria supplier selection problem. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 25(3), 507-519. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2011.10.012.