DİJİTAL GÖÇEBELERİN DESTİNASYON SEÇİMİ: KÜMELEME TABANLI ÇOK KRİTERLİ KARAR VERME YAKLAŞIMI

Öz

Dijital göçebeler, çevrim içi çalışma hayatlarını sürdürürken yaşadıkları destinasyonları değiştirdikçe, çok kriterli bir karar verme problemiyle karşı karşıya kalmaktadır. Maliyet, güvenlik, teknolojik altyapı, yaşam standartları, vize olanakları gibi çeşitli faktörler ile çok sayıda ülke arasından en uygun seçimin yapılması gerekmektedir. Bu noktada çok kriterli karar verme yaklaşımları dijital göçebeler için bir karar mekanizması sunmaktadır. Bu amaçla, çalışma kapsamında 40 ülkenin dijital göçebeler tarafından tercih edilebilirlikleri altı kriter doğrultusunda değerlendirilmiştir. Ülkeler k-ortalamalar yöntemiyle kümelere ayrılmış, farklı özelliklere sahip kümeler için kararda etkili olacak kriterlerin önem düzeyleri Centroidous yöntemiyle ortaya konulmuştur. Ardından her küme için ülkelerin tercih edilme sıralamaları COBRA yöntemiyle elde edilmiştir. Bulgular, farklı özelliklere sahip kümelerde yer alan destinasyonların tercih edilmelerinde etkili olan karar dinamiklerinin değişkenlik gösterdiğini ve politika önerilerinin bağlama duyarlı şekilde geliştirilmesi gerektiği ortaya koymuştur. Elde edilen bulgular dijital göçebeleri çekmek isteyen ülkeler için uygulanabilir stratejik yol haritaları sunmaktadır. Çalışma, sürdürülebilir kentleşme ve dijital göçebelik alanında çok kriterli karar verme yaklaşımlarının uygulaması olarak literatüre önemli bir katkı sağlayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital göçebe
• Destinasyon seçimi
• Kümeleme
• Çok kriterli karar verme

DESTINATION SELECTION OF DIGITAL NOMADS: A CLUSTER-BASED MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING APPROACH

Öz

As digital nomads continue their online working lives while changing their places of residence, they face a multi-criteria decision-making problem. Among a wide range of countries, they must select the most suitable destination based on various factors such as cost, safety, technological infrastructure, living standards, and visa accessibility. Currently, multi-criteria decision-making approaches offer a systematic decision-support mechanism for digital nomads. Accordingly, this study evaluates the preferability of 40 countries for digital nomads based on six criteria. Countries were first grouped using the k-means clustering algorithm, and for each resulting cluster, the importance levels of the criteria were determined using the Centroidous method. Subsequently, countries were ranked within each cluster using the COBRA method. The findings reveal that the decision dynamics influencing destination preferences vary across clusters with different characteristics and highlight the necessity of developing context-sensitive policy recommendations. The results offer practical strategic roadmaps for countries aiming to attract digital nomads. This study provides a significant contribution to the literature as an application of MCDM approaches in the context of sustainable urbanization and digital nomadism.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital nomad
• Destination selection
• Clustering
• Multi-criteria decision making

Kaynakça

1. Ahmadi Pargo, T., & Hashemkhani Zolfani, S. (2025). Developing an expert system for hardware selection in Internet of Things-based system design: Grey ITARA-COBRA approach (with an example in the agricultural domain). Information, 16(6), 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16060425
2. Ahmed, M., Seraj, R., & Islam, S. M. S. (2020). The k-means algorithm: A comprehensive survey and performance evaluation. Electronics, 9(8), 1295. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9081295
3. Akgiş İlhan, Ö., Günay, S., Ateş, D., Yaşlı Şen, F., & Demir, Ö. (2024). An assessment of the role of safety in digital nomads’ destination selections. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 16(3), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-03-2024-0043
4. Alshamrani, A. M., Zavadskas, E. K., Rani, P., Antucheviciene, J., & Alrasheedi, A. F. (2025). Evaluation and prioritization of software packages for remote education assistance using picture fuzzy comprehensive distance-based ranking approach. Applied Soft Computing, 182, 113606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2025.113606
5. Andrade, T. A., Dias, Á., Patuleia, M., & Pereira, L. (2023). Digital nomads’ willingness to stay – a combined analysis of SEM and fsQCA results. Journal of Tourism and Services, 14(27), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.29036/jots.v14i27.586
6. Asker, V. (2024). Evaluation of financial and operational sustainability with multi-criteria decision-making methods: An application in the US airline market. Studies in Business and Economics, 19(3), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.2478/sbe-2024-0043
7. Avdikos, V., Papageorgiou, A., & Pettas, D. (2025). Exploring the effects of coworking in two European cities: Financialisation flows and consumption patterns in Athens and Berlin. European Urban and Regional Studies, 32(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764241255870
8. Ay, E., & Güzel, M. O. (2024). Digital nomads in destination marketing. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 16(3), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-03-2024-0050

9. Baş, H. (2022). Türkiye’de sanal beyin göçü: Uzaktan yurtdışına çalışanların deneyimleri üzerine nitel bir araştırma. Istanbul Journal of Economics, 72(2), 915–951. https://doi.org/10.26650/istjecon2022-1154780
10. Bednorz, J. (2024). Working from anywhere? Work from here! Approaches to attract digital nomads. Annals of Tourism Research, 105, 103715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2023.103715
11. Bednorz, J., Orel, M., & Solvak, M. (2025). What makes a digital nomad destination? The case of small states. Tourism Geographies. Advance online publication, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2025.2586685
12. Chevtaeva, E., & Denizci-Guillet, B. (2021). Digital nomads’ lifestyles and coworkation. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 21, 100633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2021.100633
13. Christiansen, R. A., Ihalauw, J. J. O. I., Albert Kriestian, N. A. N., & Yenny Purwati, S. E. (2023). Developing digital nomads as a new market segment and their role in the local digital ecosystem. Journal of System and Management Sciences, 13(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.33168/JSMS.2023.0201
14. Cook, D. (2023). What is a digital nomad? Definition and taxonomy in the era of mainstream remote work. World Leisure Journal, 65(2), 256–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2023.2190608
15. Costa, A. P. de A., Choren, R., Pereira, D. A. de M., Terra, A. V., Costa, I. P. de A., Junior, C. de S. R., Santos, M. dos, Gomes, C. F. S., & Moreira, M. Â. L. (2024). Integrating multicriteria decision making and principal component analysis: A systematic literature review. Cogent Engineering, 11(1), 2374944. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2024.2374944
16. Davies, D. L., & Bouldin, D. W. (1979). A cluster separation measure. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 1(2), 224–227. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1979.4766909
17. De Almeida, M. A., Correia, A., Schneider, D., & de Souza, J. M. (2021). COVID-19 as opportunity to test digital nomad lifestyle. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 24th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD) (s.1209–1214). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSCWD49262.2021.9437685
18. De Sousa, B. V., Bastida, M., & Vieira, E. (2025). Unraveling digital nomadism: A comprehensive bibliometric review of emerging research and trends. Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management Research, 13(1), s. 107–132. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-04-2024-0029
19. Digital Nomad Visa Portugal (2025). Digital Nomad Visa Portugal. https://www.portuguese-nationality.com/residency/d8-digital-nomad-visa-portugal.
20. Digital Nomad Visa (2024). https://www.exteriores.gob.es/Consulados/londres/en/ServiciosConsulares/Paginas/Consular/Digital- Nomad-Visa.aspx
21. Doğan, H. (2025). Fındık üretimine LOPCOW-COBRA yöntemleriyle dönemsel bir bakış: Ordu ili örneği. Turkish Studies - Economics, Finance, Politics, 20(2), 693–721. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.80713
22. DNI (2025). Digital Nomad Index. https://www.movingto.io/digital-nomad-index
23. Eban, F. (2025). Dijital göçebelerin destinasyon seçimi ve ortak çalışma alanlarına yönelik görüşleri üzerine bir araştırma. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 67(67), 164–182.
24. Furxhi, N., & Toromani, A. (2025). The experiences of nomad professionals in Albania, as a model: Ecological, geographical, economic, cultural: Case study in Albania. International Journal of Ecosystems & Ecology Sciences, 15(3), 127–136.
25. Genceli, D., Yüksek, G., & Uca, S. (2024). Travel insurance behaviors of digital nomads. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 16(3), 365–374. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-03-2024-0047
26. Gökgöz, F., & Yalçin, E. (2024). Analysing the circular economies and waste management of European countries via decision models. Present Environment and Sustainable Development, 18(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.47743/pesd2024181003
27. Han, J., Kamber, M., & Pei, J. (2011). Data mining: Concepts and techniques (3rd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann.
28. Hermann, I. ve Paris, C. M. (2020). Digital Nomadism: The nexus of remote working and travel mobility, Information Technology and Tourism, 22(3), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-020-00188-w
29. Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer-Verlag.
30. Jain, A. K. (2010). Data Clustering: 50 Years Beyond K-means, Pattern Recognition Letters, 31(8), 651–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2009.09.011
31. Jollife, I. T. ve Cadima, J. (2016). Principal Component Analysis: A review and recent developments, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2065), 20150202. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202
32. Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal component analysis (2nd ed.). Springer.
33. Katrancı, A., Kundakcı, N. ve Pamucar, D. (2025). Financial performance evaluation of firms in BIST 100 Index with ITARA and COBRA methods, Financial Innovation, 11(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-024-00704-5
34. Kocaman, S. (2021). Nomadlıst De Dijital Göçebeler Tarafından 2020’de en fazla tercih edilen destinasyonların destinasyon seçim kriterlerine göre kümelendirilmesi, Türk Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(2), 799–815. https://doi.org/10.26677/tr1010.2021.739
35. Köksalan, M., Wallenius, J., & Zionts, S. (2011). Multiple criteria decision making: From early history to the 21st century. World Scientific.
36. Krstić, M., Agnusdei, G. P., Miglietta, P. P., & Tadić, S. (2022a). Applicability of Industry 4.0 technologies in reverse logistics: A circular economy approach based on comprehensive distance-based ranking (COBRA) method. Sustainability, 14(9), 5632. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095632
37. Krstić, M., Agnusdei, G. P., Miglietta, P. P., & Tadić, S. (2022b). Evaluation of the smart reverse logistics development scenarios using a novel MCDM model. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 7, 100099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2022.100099
38. Lacárcel, F. J. S. (2025). Digital technologies, sustainable lifestyle, and tourism: How digital nomads navigate global mobility? Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 4(2), 100096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2025.100096
39. Lacárcel, F. J. S., Huete, R., & Zerva, K. (2024). Decoding digital nomad destination decisions through user-generated content. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 200, 123098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.123098
40. Lopes, M. C., Pinheiro, E., Guia, A., & Mota, M. (2025). How do digital nomads affect local socio-economic (cultural) development? A literature review. Millenium-Journal of Education, Technologies, and Health, (19e), e41164–e41164.
41. Makimoto, T. ve Manners, D. (1997). Digital Nomad. John Wiley & Sons.
42. Mohamed, M., Abdelmouty, A. M., Mohamed, K., & Smarandache, F. (2025). Superhypersoft-driven evaluation of smart transportation in Centroidous-moosra: Real-world insights for the UAV era. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 78, 149–163.
43. Özgen Çiğdemli, A. Ö., Yayla, Ş., & Çiğdemli, B. S. (2024). The world from the perspective of digital nomads: Exploring sentiments in destination reviews. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 16(3), 303–315. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-03-2024-0044
44. Parreño-Castellano, J., Domínguez-Mujica, J., & Moreno-Medina, C. (2022). Reflections on digital nomadism in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic—Effect of policy and place. Sustainability, 14(23), 16253. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142316253
45. Popović, G., Pucar, Đ., & Smarandache, F. (2022). MEREC-COBRA approach in e-commerce development strategy selection. Journal of Process Management and New Technologies, 10(3–4), 66–74.
46. Poulaki, I., Mavragani, E., Kaziani, A., & Chatzimichali, E. (2023). Digital nomads: Advances in hospitality and destination attractiveness. Tourism and Hospitality, 4(3), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp4030030
47. Rani, P., Mishra, A. R., Tirkolaee, E. B., Alshamrani, A. M., & Alrasheedi, A. F. (2025). Pythagorean fuzzy comprehensive distance-based ranking approach for assessing Industry 4.0 adoption strategies in the automotive manufacturing sector. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 65, 103359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2025.103359
48. Rasoanaivo, R. G. (2025). Decision support system using Centroidous and Cocofiso methods for analyzing resource availability in high schools. Journal of Operations Intelligence, 3(1), 197–226. https://doi.org/10.31181/jopi31202546
49. Republic of Estonia E-residency (2025). Republic of Estonia E-residency. https://www.e-resident.gov.ee
50. Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, s. 53–65.
51. Roy, B. (1968). Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). Revue française d'informatique et de recherche opérationnelle, 2(8), 57–75.
52. Šaffová, I., Matušíková, D., & Vargová, T. D. (2025). Digital nomadism aspects at the current tourism market of Slovakia. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 61(3), 1814–1821.
53. Salah Zaki, H. (2024). Digital nomad tourists at the Egyptian destination: Motivations and challenges. Journal of the Faculty of Tourism and Hotels–University of Sadat City, 8(2), 198–222.
54. Sarkar, A., Mondal, M., Sarma, U. S., Podder, S., & Gayen, S. K. (2024). Tourism suitability assessment in Malbazar Block using principal component analysis and analytical hierarchy process. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05821-w
55. Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234–281.
56. Šímová, T. (2023). A research framework for digital nomadism: A bibliometric study. World Leisure Journal, 65(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2022.2134200
57. Stević, Ž., Miškić, S., Vojinović, D., Huskanović, E., Stanković, M., & Pamučar, D. (2022). Development of a model for evaluating the efficiency of transport companies: PCA–DEA–MCDM model. Axioms, 11(3), 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms11030140
58. Şimşek, A. (2024). URAP verilerine dayalı üniversite sıralamalarında çok kriterli karar verme yaklaşımı: LOPCOW temelli COBRA yöntemi. Premium e-Journal of Social Sciences (PEJOSS), 8(49), 1766–1779.
59. Tadić, S., Krstić, M., Dabić-Miletić, S., & Božić, M. (2023). Smart material handling solutions for city logistics systems. Sustainability, 15(8), 6693. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086693
60. Tan, P.-N., Steinbach, M. ve Kumar, V. (2018). Introduction to Data Mining, Pearson.
61. Taşci, M. Z. (2024). Measuring sustainability performance with SWARA-MEREC-COBRA multi-criteria model: A case study of Anadolu insurance company. Decision Science Letters, 13, 829–844.
62. Tousarvandani, M. K. (2024). Destination Decision-making: A Study of Digital Nomads’ Preferences and Motivations. https://thesis.unipd.it/handle/20.500.12608/83193
63. Uğur, N. (2025). Push and pull factors making Istanbul an attractive destination for digital nomads. In R. Correia, M. Martins, & R. Fontes (Eds.), Transforming remote work and tourism in the digital nomad era (s. 109–138). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-0076-4.ch005
64. Ulutaş, A., Krstić, M., Topal, A., Agnusdei, L., Tadić, S., & Miglietta, P. P. (2024). A novel hybrid gray MCDM model for resilient supplier selection problem. Mathematics, 12(10), 1444. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12101444
65. Vagena, A. (2021). Digital nomads and tourism industry. Academia Letters, Article 765. https://doi.org/10.20935/al765
66. Vinogradova-Zinkevič, I. (2024). Centroidous method for determining objective weights. Mathematics, 12(14), 2269. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12142269
67. Vourdoubas, J. (2023). Possibilities of developing thematic tourism related with digital nomads in the island of Crete, Greece. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(6), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejsocial.2023.3.6.502
68. Wang, T. L., & Azizurrohman, M. (2025). Digital nomads in Bali: Implications for employee experience in tourism-based SMEs. Quality & Quantity, 1–16 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-025-02412-3
69. Yardı, Z., & Yurdakul, Y. E. (2025). Hareketlilik (mobility) teorisi çerçevesinde dijital göçebelik ve turizm: Bibliyometrik bir değerlendirme. Journal of New Tourism Trends, 6(1), 1–18.
70. Zhou, L., Buhalis, D., Fan, D. X. F., Ladkin, A., & Lian, X. (2024). Attracting digital nomads: Smart destination strategies, innovation and competitiveness. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 31, 100850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2023.100850
71. Zorlu, K., Tuncer, M., & Yılmaz, A. (2024). Assessment of resources for geotourism development: Integrated SWARA-COBRA approach under spherical fuzzy environments. Geoheritage, 16(3), 89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-024-00993-3