Evaluating the impact of Industry 4.0 on circular supply chain key performance indicators: A comparative multi-criteria decision-making analysis

Öz

Context—With the emergence of Industry 4.0 (I4.0), supply chains have rapidly begun to digitize with technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), big data, artificial intelligence, blockchain, and digital twins. However, the need for sustainability, efficient use of resources, sustainable development goals (SDGs), and waste reduction strategies has created a demand to transition from linear to circular supply chains (CSC).

Objective—Research on the key performance indicators (KPIs) required to measure the success of these interrelated innovations is limited. This study aims to prioritize I4.0 technologies by weighting the performance indicators used in CSCs using an integrated decision-support approach.

Method—In expert evaluations, the Logarithmic Percentage Change-Focused Objective Weighting (LOPCOW) method was used to weight the criteria related to temporal, operational, social, environmental, and economic aspects. Technologies introduced with I4.0 and increasingly used in supply chains in recent years have been defined as alternatives. To rank these technologies, the Measurement of Alternatives Ranking and Compromise Solution (MARCOS), Grey Relational Analysis (GRA), and Multi-Attribute Ideal-Actual Comparative Analysis (MAIRCA) methods were used. The selection of decision-making methods, such as LOPCOW for objective weighting and MARCOS, GRA, and MAIRCA for ranking, provides a robust triangular verification to evaluate the results. It minimizes the inherent subjectivity of expert assessments while enabling a multidimensional evaluation of circular economy performance metrics. Also, to assess the reliability and validity of the results, five different scenario analyses were applied to all alternative evaluation methods.

Results—The results revealed that automation and smart production systems, cloud computing, robotics, and artificial intelligence technologies will enhance circular supply chain performance. The multi-criteria analysis results indicate that 'Automation and Smart Production Systems' consistently placed first across nearly all evaluation techniques. The sensitivity analysis results for each alternative evaluation method also demonstrated that the overall evaluation was consistent and valid.

Conclusion—The study underscores the strategic significance of 'Automation and Smart Production Systems' for operational efficiency and sustainability in circular supply chains, providing a validated framework for prioritizing digital investments in the circular economy. Finally, the proposed integrated decision-making framework provides a roadmap for practitioners and policymakers on which digital investments should be prioritized in line with circular economy principles. This approach ensures that industrial revolutions in supply chains are not only technologically advanced but also environmentally and economically viable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Circular Supply Chain
• Industry 4.0
• key performance indicator
• Multi-criteria decision making

Endüstri 4.0'ın döngüsel tedarik zinciri temel performans göstergeleri üzerindeki etkisinin değerlendirilmesi: Karşılaştırmalı çok kriterli karar verme analizi

Öz

Arka Plan—Endüstri 4.0’ın (I4.0) ortaya çıkmasıyla birlikte, tedarik zincirleri Nesnelerin İnterneti (IoT), büyük veri, yapay zekâ, blok zinciri ve dijital ikizler gibi teknolojilerle hızla dijitalleşmeye başlamıştır. Ancak sürdürülebilirlik, kaynakların verimli kullanımı, Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Hedefleri (SKH’ler) ve atık azaltma stratejilerine duyulan ihtiyaç, doğrusal tedarik zincirlerinden döngüsel tedarik zincirlerine (CSC) geçiş talebini doğurmuştur.

Amaç—Bu birbiriyle ilişkili yeniliklerin başarısını ölçmek için gerekli olan temel performans göstergeleri (KPI’lar) üzerine yapılan araştırmalar sınırlıdır. Bu çalışma, entegre bir karar destek yaklaşımı kullanarak CSC’lerde kullanılan performans göstergelerini ağırlıklandırarak I4.0 teknolojilerini öncelik sırasına koymayı amaçlamaktadır.

Yöntem—Uzman değerlendirmelerinde, zamansal, operasyonel, sosyal, çevresel ve ekonomik boyutlarla ilgili kriterleri ağırlıklandırmak için Logaritmik Yüzde Değişime Odaklı Nesnel Ağırlıklandırma (LOPCOW) yöntemi kullanılmıştır. I4.0 ile birlikte ortaya çıkan ve son yıllarda tedarik zincirlerinde giderek daha fazla kullanılan teknolojiler, alternatifler olarak tanımlanmıştır. Bu teknolojileri sıralamak için Alternatiflerin Ölçülmesi, Sıralaması ve Uzlaşma Çözümü (MARCOS), Gri İlişkisel Analiz (GRA) ve Çok Özniteliği İdeal-Gerçek Karşılaştırmalı Analiz (MAIRCA) yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Objektif ağırlıklandırma için LOPCOW ve sıralama için MARCOS, GRA ve MAIRCA gibi karar verme yöntemlerinin seçilmesi, sonuçları değerlendirmek için üçgen bir doğrulama sağlamıştır. Bu, döngüsel ekonomi performans göstergelerinin çok boyutlu bir değerlendirmesini mümkün kılarken, uzman değerlendirmelerinin doğasında var olan öznelliği en aza indirmiştir. Ayrıca, sonuçların güvenilirliğini ve geçerliliğini değerlendirmek için tüm alternatif değerlendirme yöntemlerine beş farklı senaryo analizi uygulanmıştır.

Bulgular—Sonuçlar, otomasyon ve akıllı üretim sistemleri, bulut bilişim, robotik ve yapay zekâ teknolojilerinin döngüsel tedarik zincirinin performansını artıracağını ortaya koymuştur. Çok kriterli analiz sonuçları, “Otomasyon ve Akıllı Üretim Sistemleri”nin neredeyse tüm değerlendirme tekniklerinde tutarlı bir şekilde birinci sırada yer aldığını göstermektedir. Her bir alternatif değerlendirme yöntemi için yapılan duyarlılık analizi sonuçları da genel değerlendirmenin tutarlı ve geçerli olduğunu göstermiştir.

Sonuç—Bu çalışma, döngüsel tedarik zincirlerinde operasyonel verimlilik ve sürdürülebilirlik açısından “Otomasyon ve Akıllı Üretim Sistemleri”nin stratejik önemini vurgulamakta ve döngüsel ekonomide dijital yatırımlara öncelik verilmesi için geçerliliği kanıtlanmış bir çerçeve sunmaktadır. Son olarak, önerilen entegre karar verme çerçevesi, uygulayıcılara ve politika yapıcılara, döngüsel ekonomi ilkeleri doğrultusunda hangi dijital yatırımlara öncelik verilmesi gerektiğine dair bir yol haritası sunmaktadır. Bu yaklaşım, tedarik zincirlerindeki endüstriyel devrimlerin sadece teknolojik açıdan gelişmiş değil, aynı zamanda çevresel ve ekonomik açıdan da uygulanabilir olmasını sağlamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Endüstri 4.0
• Döngüsel Tedarik Zinciri
• çok kriterli karar verme
• temel performans göstergesi

Kaynakça

1. H. Kagermann, W. Wahlster, J. Helbig, “Securing the future of German manufacturing industry: Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative Industrie 4.0”, Acatech— National Academy of Science and Engineering, Frankfurt, Germany, Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group, 2013, https://www.din.de/resource/blob/76902/e8cac883f42bf28536e7e8165993f1fd/recommendations-for-implementing-industry-4-0-data.pdf.
2. J. Mula, M. Bogataj, “OR in the industrial engineering of Industry 4.0: experiences from the Iberian Peninsula mirrored in CJOR,” Central European Journal of Operations Research, 29, 1163–1184, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-021-00740-x.
3. M. Gabriel, E. Pessl, “Industry 4.0 and sustainability impacts: Critical discussion of sustainability aspects with a special focus on future of work and ecological consequences”, Annals of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara-International Journal of Engineering, 14(2), 131-136, 2016, https://www.proquest.com/openview/1150ebdb5a42a699c7f77b433a236a43/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=616472.
4. Y. Lu, “Industry 4.0: A survey on technologies, applications and open research issues”, Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 6, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2017.04.005.
5. R. Y. Zhong, X. Xu, E. Klotz, S. T. Newman, “Intelligent Manufacturing in the Context of Industry 4.0: A Review”, Engineering, 3(5), 616–630, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2017.05.015.
6. T. Stock, G. Seliger, “Opportunities of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry 4.0”, Procedia CIRP, 40, 536–541, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.01.129.
7. A. G. Frank, L. S. Dalenogare, N. F. Ayala, “Industry 4.0 technologies: Implementation patterns in manufacturing companies”, International Journal of Production Economics, 210, 15–26, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.01.004.
8. T. Zheng, M. Ardolino, A. Bacchetti, M. Perona, “The applications of Industry 4.0 technologies in manufacturing context: a systematic literature review”, International Journal of Production Research, 59(6), 1922–1954, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1824085.

9. D. Vegter, J. van Hillegersberg, M. Olthaar, “Performance measurement system for circular supply chain management”, Sustainable Production and Consumption, 36, 171–183, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2023.01.003.
10. M. Geissdoerfer, P. Savaget, N. Bocken, E. J. Hultink, “The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757–768, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.
11. A. Kounani, A. Pavloudi, S. Aggelopoulos, “Performance indicators of circular economy in the agriculture and food industry”, Environment Systems & Decisions, 44(2), 380–397, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-023-09942-x.
12. Y. D. Ozkan-Ozen, Y. Kazancoglu, S. K. Mangla, “Synchronized barriers for circular supply chains in industry 3.5/industry 4.0 transition for sustainable resource management”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 161, 104986, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104986.
13. F. E. Garcia-Muiña, R. González-Sánchez, A. M. Ferrari, D. Settembre-Blundo, “The Paradigms of Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy as Enabling Drivers for the Competitiveness of Businesses and Territories: The Case of an Italian Ceramic Tiles Manufacturing Company”, Social Sciences, 7(12), 255, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7120255.
14. M.-L. Tseng, R. R. Tan, A. S. F. Chiu, C. -F. Chien, T. C. Kuo, “Circular economy meets industry 4.0: Can big data drive industrial symbiosis?”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 131, 146–147, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.12.028.
15. N. Fares, J. Lloret, V. Kumar, G. F. Frederico, M. A. Moktadir, “From concept to practice: understanding divergent views on circular economy barriers”, International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, pp. 1–23, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIEOM-06-2025-0108.
16. L. F. Huang, L. Zhen, J. B. Wang, X. Zhang, “Blockchain implementation for circular supply chain management: Evaluating critical success factors”, Industrial Marketing Management, 102, 451–464, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.02.009.
17. A. Eisenreich, J. Füller, M. Stuchtey, D. Gimenez-Jimenez, “Toward a circular value chain: Impact of the circular economy on a company’s value chain processes”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 378, 134375, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134375.
18. Y. S. Ozdemir, “A Spherical Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Industry 4.0 Performance Measurement”, Axioms, 11(7), 325, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms11070325.
19. F. Khan, Y. Ali, “Implementation of the circular supply chain management in the pharmaceutical industry”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(12), 13705–13731, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-02007-6.
20. Y. Kazancoglu, Y. D. Ozkan-Ozen, M. Sagnak, I. Kazancoglu, M. Dora, “Framework for a sustainable supply chain to overcome risks in transition to a circular economy through Industry 4.0”, Production Planning & Control, 34(10), 902–917, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2021.1980910.
21. A. Paul, N. Shukla, S. K. Paul, A. Trianni, “Sustainable Supply Chain Management and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Systematic Review,” Sustainability, 13(13), 7104, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137104.
22. C. Shang, P. Saeidi, C. F. Goh, “Evaluation of circular supply chains barriers in the era of Industry 4.0 transition using an extended decision-making approach”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 35(4–5), 1100–1128, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-09-2021-0396.
23. J. Llivisaca, D. Jadan, R. Guamán, R. Arcentales-Carrión, M. Peña, L. Siguenza-Guzma, “Key Performance Indicators for the Supply Chain in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises based on Balance Score Card”, Test Engineering & Management, 83, 25933–25945, 2020, https://rest-dspace.ucuenca.edu.ec/server/api/core/bitstreams/4b8816ff-26f9-40eb-abf9-a76f26d1a3b8/content.
24. S. Bag, J. H. C. Pretorius, “Relationships between industry 4.0, sustainable manufacturing and circular economy: proposal of a research framework”, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 30(4), 864–898, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-04-2020-2120.
25. M. Kara, “BIST sürdürlebilirlik endeksinde yer alan ve endüstri 4.0’ı benimsemiş firmaların finansal performanslarının araştırılması: bir gri ilişki analizi”, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bartın Üniversitesi Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Bartın, Türkiye, 2020.
26. S. Luthra, S. K. Mangla, “Evaluating challenges to Industry 4.0 initiatives for supply chain sustainability in emerging economies”, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 117, 168–179, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.018.
27. K. N. Alfina, R. M. C. Ratnayake, D. Wibisono, M. H. Basri, N. B. Mulyono, “Prioritizing Performance Indicators for the Circular Economy Transition in Healthcare Supply Chains”, Circular Economy and Sustainability, 5, 231–276, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-024-00436-9.
28. A. H. Dolatabad, H. A. Mahdiraji, A. Z. Babgohari, J. A. Garza-Reyes, A. Ai, “Analyzing the key performance indicators of circular supply chains by hybrid fuzzy cognitive mapping and Fuzzy DEMATEL: evidence from healthcare sector”, Environment, Development & Sustainability, 27(10), 23345–23371, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02535-9.
29. R. Primadasa, D. Tauhida, E. Kusrini, A. Mansur, I. Masudin, “Integrating BWM, ISM, and MICMAC: Key Performance Indicators for Circular-Ambidexterity Supply Chain Management in Palm Oil Industry”, Process Integration and Optimization for Sustainability, 9(4), 1253–1275, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-025-00508-9.
30. E. Couzineau-Zegwaard, O. Meier, “Circular Supply Chain and Efficiency”, Efficiency and Optimization in Business Practice-Management for Professionals, C. B. González-Tejero, S. G. Escobar, A. R. Orellana, D. E. Ribeiro-Soriano, Eds., Cham, Switzerland, Springer, 2025, Ch. 4, 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-97641-4_4.
31. H. E. Özbek, E. K. Özekenci, “Investigation of Digital Logistics Market Performance in Developing Countries with Hybrid MCDM Methods”, JOEEP: Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 8(2), 559–576, 2023. https://izlik.org/JA52PC33ML
32. K. Govindan, D. Kannan, T. B. Jørgensen, T. S. Nielsen, “Supply Chain 4.0 performance measurement: A systematic literature review, framework development, and empirical evidence”, Transportation Research Part E- Logistics and Transportation Review, 164, 102725, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2022.102725.
33. A. Belhadi, S. Kamble, C. J. C. Jabbour, A. Gunasekaran, N. O. Ndubisi, M. Venkatesh, “Manufacturing and service supply chain resilience to the COVID-19 outbreak: Lessons learned from the automobile and airline industries”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163, 120447, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120447.
34. D. Kritchanchai, S. Hoeur, P. Engelseth, “Develop a strategy for improving healthcare logistics performance”, Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 19(1), 55–69, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2017.1416876.
35. A. Munoz, M. Dunbar, “On the quantification of operational supply chain resilience”, International Journal of Production Research, 53(22), 6736–6751, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1057296.
36. R. Mehra, M. K. Sharma, “Measures of Sustainability in Healthcare”, Sustainability Analytics and Modeling, 1, 100001, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.samod.2021.100001.
37. G. Lechner, “Supplier Relationship Management: Small, Non-Replaceable Suppliers and Close Customer-Supplier Relationships”, Open Journal of Business and Management, 7(3), 1451–1459, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2019.73099.
38. I. Ali, S. Nagalingam, B. Gurd, “Building resilience in SMEs of perishable product supply chains: enablers, barriers and risks”, Production Planning and Control, 28(15), 1236–1250, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1362487.
39. A. Burlea-Schiopoiu, K. Ferhati, “The Managerial Implications of the Key Performance Indicators in Healthcare Sector: A Cluster Analysis”, Healthcare, 9(1), 19, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9010019.
40. D. Guzzo, M. M. Carvalho, R. Balkenende, J. Mascarenhas, “Circular business models in the medical device industry: paths towards sustainable healthcare”, Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, 160, 104904, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104904.
41. K. Ashton, “That ‘Internet of Things’ Thing”, RFID Journal, 2009, [Online], https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/that-internet-of-things-thing/73881/ (15.09.2025)
42. A. Al-Fuqaha, M. Guizani, M. Mohammadi, M. Aledhari, M. Ayyash, “Internet of Things: A Survey on Enabling Technologies, Protocols, and Applications”, IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 17(4), 2347–2376, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2015.2444095.
43. P. Bellavista, G. Cardone, A. Corradi, L. Foschini, “Convergence of MANET and WSN in IoT urban scenarios”, IEEE Sensors Journal, 13(10), 3558–3567, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2013.2272099.
44. R. Buyya, C. S. Yeo, S. Venugopal, J. Broberg, I. Brandic, “Cloud computing and emerging IT platforms: Vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility”, Future Generation Computer Systems-The International Journal of Escience, 25(6), 599–616, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2008.12.001.
45. Q. Zhang, L. Cheng, R. Boutaba, “Cloud computing: State-of-the-art and research challenges”, Journal of Internet Services and Applications, 1, 7–18, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13174-010-0007-6.
46. G. Wang, A. Gunasekaran, E. W. T. Ngai, T. Papadopoulos, “Big data analytics in logistics and supply chain management: Certain investigations for research and applications”, International Journal of Production Economics, 176, 98–110, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.03.014.
47. E. Oztemel, S. Gursev, “Literature review of Industry 4.0 and related technologies”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 31, 127–182, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10845-018-1433-8.
48. Y. Pan, L. M. Zhang, “Roles of artificial intelligence in construction engineering and management: A critical review and future trends”, Automation in Construction, 122, 103517, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103517.
49. S. Fahle, C. Prinz, B. Kuhlenkötter, “Systematic review on machine learning (ML) methods for manufacturing processes – Identifying artificial intelligence (AI) methods for field application”, Procedia CIRP, 93, 413–418, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.04.109.
50. M. Soori, B. Arezoo, R. Dastres, “Artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning in advanced robotics, a review”, Cognitive Robotics, 3, 54–70, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogr.2023.04.001.
51. S. Li, “Structure, Processing and Properties of 3D Printable Metallic Materials”, Materials Technology, 31(2), 65-65, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/10667857.2016.1163019.
52. C. Y. Feng, M. Zhang, B. Bhandari, “Materials Properties of Printable Edible Inks and Printing Parameters Optimization during 3D Printing: a review”, Critical Review Food Science Nutrition, 59(19), 3074–3081, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2018.1481823.
53. S. Kökhan, U. Özcan, “3D Yazıcıların Eğitimde Kullanımı”, Bilim Eğitim Sanat ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 2(1), 80–85, 2018. https://izlik.org/JA25RB22BG.
54. A. Soylu, “Endüstri 4.0 ve Girişimcilikte Yeni Yaklaşımlar”, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 32, 43–57, 2018. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.424955.
55. J. M. Bradley, E. M. Atkins, “Optimization and Control of Cyber-Physical Vehicle Systems”, Sensors, 15(9), 23020-23049, 15(9), 23020–23049, 2015. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150923020.
56. J. Lee, B. Bagheri, H. A. Kao, “A Cyber-Physical Systems architecture for Industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems”, Manufacturing Letters, 3, 18–23, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2014.12.001.
57. E. Bağcı, “Endüstri 4.0: Yeni Üretim Tarzını Anlamak”, Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(24), 122–146, 2018. https://izlik.org/JA76JK74AR.
58. A. Duman, S. Karğın, “Akıllı üretimin işletme performansına etkisi: Vaka analizi yaklaşımı”, Muhasebe ve Finans İncelemeleri Dergisi, 4(2), 91–109, 2021. https://doi.org/10.32951/mufider.930504.
59. A. Radziwon, A. Bilberg, M. Bogers, E. S. Madsen, “The Smart Factory: Exploring Adaptive and Flexible Manufacturing Solutions”, Procedia Engineering, 69, 1184–1190, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.03.108.
60. F. Tao, H. Zhang, A. Liu, A. Y. C. Nee, “Digital Twin in Industry: State-of-the-Art”, IEEE Transaction Industrial Informatics, 15(4), 2405–2415, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2018.2873186.
61. S. Singh, M. Weeber, K. P. Birke, “Advancing digital twin implementation: a toolbox for modelling and simulation”, Procedia CIRP, 99, 567–572, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.03.078.
62. W. Kritzinger, M. Karner, G. Traar, J. Henjes, W. Sihn, “Digital Twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification”, IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(11), 1016–1022, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.474.
63. M. P. Papazoglou, “Service -oriented computing: Concepts, characteristics and directions”, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE 2003), Rome, Italy, 10-12 December 2003, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/WISE.2003.1254461.
64. C. Schroth, T. Janner, “Web 2.0 and SOA: Converging concepts enabling the internet of services”, IT Professional, 9(3), 36–41, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2007.60.
65. S. Kaya, M. Turğut, “Blockchain Technology in Supply Chain”, The Journal of International Scientific Researches, 4(2), 121–134, 2019. https://doi.org/10.23834/isrjournal.542536.
66. M. Yavuz, “Ekonomide Dijital Dönüşüm: Blockchaın Teknolojisi ve Uygulama Alanları Üzerine Bir İnceleme”, Finans Ekonomi ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(1), 15–29, 2019. https://doi.org/10.29106/fesa.498053.
67. F. Ecer, D. Pamucar, “A novel LOPCOW‐DOBI multi‐criteria sustainability performance assessment methodology: An application in developing country banking sector”, Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 112, 102690, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2022.102690.
68. Ž. Stević, D. Pamučar, A. Puška, P. Chatterjee, “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, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106231.
69. R. Deng, J. Z. Wang, “Study of ore blending limited in ‘DCG’ by computer”, Yu Se Chin Shu/Nonferrous Metals, 41(1), 1-10, 1989, https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0024611321?inward
70. A. I. Ozdemir, M. Deste, “Gri ilişkisel analiz ile çok kriterli tedarikçi seçimi: Otomotiv sektöründe bir uygulama”, İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 38(2), 147–156, 2008. https://izlik.org/JA24HD49LM.
71. L. J. Gigović, D. Pamuĉar, Z. Bajić, M. Milićević, “The Combination of Expert Judgment and GIS-MAIRCA Analysis for the Selection of Sites for Ammunition Depots”, Sustainability, 8(4), 372, 2016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040372.
72. Q. Wang, D. Zhang, H. Hu, “Grey Relational Analysis Method of Linguistic Information and Its Application in Group Decision”, Advances in Grey Systems Research, S. Liu J. Y. -L. Forrest, Eds., Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2010, Ch. 38, 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13938-3_39.
73. M. Ivanco, G. Hou, J. Michaeli, “Sensitivity analysis method to address user disparities in the analytic hierarchy process”, Expert Systems with Applications, 90, 111–126, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.08.003.
74. D. Maletič, M. Maletič, V. Lovrenčić, B. Al-Najjar, B. Gomišček, “An Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Sensitivity Analysis for Maintenance Policy Selection”, Organizacija, 47(3), 177–188, 2014. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2014-0016.
75. S. Tadić, M. Krstić, D. Savić, L. Vasov, “Assessing the Applicability of Industry 4.0 Technologies in Optimizing Air Cargo Terminal Operations”, Journal of Organizations, Technology and Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 97–112, 2024. https://doi.org/10.56578/jote020203.
76. D. Vegter, J. van Hillegersberg, M. Olthaar, “Performance Measurement Systems for Circular Supply Chain Management: Current State of Development”, Sustainability, 13(21), 12082, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112082.
77. H. Movaffaghi, I. Yitmen, “Framework for Dynamic Circular Economy in the Building Industry: Integration of Blockchain Technology and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach”, Sustainability, 15(22), 15914, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215914.
78. F. M. Abdullah, A. M. Al-Ahmari, S. Anwar, “A Hybrid Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Evaluating the Influence of Industry 4.0 Technologies on Manufacturing Strategies”, Machines , 11(2), 310, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines11020310.
79. A. Patidar, M. Sharma, R. Agrawal, K. S. Sangwan, “Supply chain resilience and its key performance indicators: an evaluation under Industry 4.0 and sustainability perspective”, Management of Environmental Quality, 34(4), 962–980, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2022-0091.
80. E. Mastrocinque, F. J. Ramírez, A. Honrubia-Escribano, D. T. Pham, “Industry 4.0 enabling sustainable supply chain development in the renewable energy sector: A multi-criteria intelligent approach”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 182, 121813, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121813.
81. M. Godinho Filho, L. Monteiro, R. de Oliveira Mota, J. D. S. L. Gonella, L. M. de Souza Campos, “The Relationship between Circular Economy, Industry 4.0 and Supply Chain Performance: A Combined ISM/Fuzzy MICMAC Approach”, Sustainability, 14(5), 2772, 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052772.
82. Y. Kayikci, N. Gozacan-Chase, A. Rejeb, K. Mathiyazhagan, “Critical success factors for implementing blockchain-based circular supply chain”, Business Strategy and The Environment, 31(7), 3595–3615, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3110.
83. H. Arslanhan, “Ulaştırma modu seçimi problemlerinin bütünleşik çok kriterli karar verme yöntemi ile çözümlenmesi ve bir uygulama,” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Antalya, Türkiye, 2019.