Küresel Risk Yönetim İndeksi Değerlendirmesi: Gri Tabanlı TOPSİS Yöntemi Uygulaması

Öz

Avrupa Komisyonu’nun iş birliği doğrultusunda oluşturulan Küresel Risk Yönetim İndeksi (INFORM), insani krizler ve afetlerle ilgili karar alma süreçlerini desteklemek üzere analitik bulgular geliştirerek ülkeler için afet yönetim döngüsü aşamalarında karar vermeye yardımcı olmaktadır. Ülkelerin afet yönetiminde başarılı olmasına destek olabilecek bu indeks, sınırlı sayıda çalışmada ele alınmış ve ampirik olarak yeterli düzeyde test edilmemiştir. Bu çalışma, INFORM metodolojisinin geliştirilmesi için zaman boyutunu dikkate alan bir Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemi (ÇKKV) ile yeni bir sıralama oluşturmayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada, 19 ülke değerlendirme kapsamına alınmıştır. Bu ülkelere ait veri seti, Avrupa Komisyonu’nun 2015-2023 yıllarında yayınladığı INFORM raporlarından elde edilmiştir. Çalışmada önerilen model ile 9 yıllık risk yönetim performansı analiz edilmiştir. Ayrıca zaman boyutunun değerlendirme aşamalarına dahil edilmesi sonucunda ülkelere ait yeni bir risk yönetim performansı sıralaması oluşturulmuştur. TOPSIS-G yaklaşımıyla elde edilen ülke sıralamalarıyla INFORM sıralamaları, Spearman ve Kendall Tau-b non-parametrik korelasyonları kullanılarak karşılaştırılmıştır. Sonuçlar iki sıralama arasında yüksek korelasyon olduğunu göstermektedir. Risk yönetim performansı sıralamasına göre çalışmada ele alınan ülkeler için afet yönetim aşamalarında iyileştirme yapması gereken alanlara dikkat çekilmiş ve önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Afet Yönetimi
• İnsani Yardım Lojistiği
• INFORM
• TOPSIS-G Yaklaşımı
• Non-Parametrik Korelasyon

Global Risk Management Index Assessment: Application of Grey-Based TOPSIS Method

Öz

The Global Risk Management Index (INFORM), created in cooperation with the European Commission, develops analytical findings to support decision-making processes related to humanitarian crises and disasters, helping countries make decisions at the stages of the disaster management cycle. This index, which can support the success of countries in disaster management, has been discussed in a limited number of studies and needs to be adequately tested empirically. This study aims to establish a new ranking with a Multi-Criteria Decision Making Method (MCDM) that considers the time dimension for developing the INFORM methodology. In the study, 19 countries were included in the evaluation. The data set for these countries was obtained from the INFORM reports published by the European Commission in 2015-2023. The 9-year risk management performance was analyzed with the model proposed in the study. In addition, due to the inclusion of the time dimension in the evaluation stages, a new risk management performance ranking of the countries was created. Country rankings obtained with the TOPSIS-G approach and INFORM orders were compared using Spearman and Kendall Tau-b non-parametric correlations. The results show a high correlation between the two rankings. According to the risk management performance ranking, the areas that need to be improved in the disaster management stages for the countries covered in the study were drawn to attention and suggestions were made.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disaster Management
• Humanitarian Aid Logistics
• INFORM
• TOPSIS-G Approach
• Non-Parametric Correlation

Kaynakça

1. [1] United Nations, “Disaster risk reduction: 2007”, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, Geneva, (2007).
2. [2] Maon, F., Lindgreen, A. ve Vanhamme, J., “Developing supply chains in disaster relief operations through cross-sector socially oriented collaborations: a theoretical model”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14(2), 149-164, (2009).
3. [3] Sahebi, I.G., Arap, A. ve Moghadam,M.R.S., “Analyzing the barriers to humanitarian supply chain management: A case study of the Tehran Red Crescent Societies”, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 24: 232-241, (2017).
4. [4] UNDRR “Human cost of dissaters”. https://www.undrr.org/news/drrday-un-report-charts-huge-rise-climate-disasters, erişim tarihi: 26.10.2022, (2020).
5. [5] Reuters, (2023). https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-earthquake-damage-set-exceed-100-bln-un-agency-2023-03-07/, (erişim tarihi:13.03.2023).
6. [6] Tercan, B. “Biyolojik Afetler ve COVID-19”, Paramedik ve Acil Sağlık Hizmetleri Dergisi, 1(1),41-50, (2020).
7. [7] WHO, “WHO coronavirus (COVID-19) dashboard”, https://covid19.who.int/, erişim tarihi: 17.04.2023, 2023.
8. [8] UNDRR (2022). https://www.undrr.org/explainer/the-invisible-toll-of-disasters-2022, erişim tarihi: 29.03.2023.

9. [9] Oloruntoba, R., Sridharan, R. ve Davison, G., “A Proposed Framework Of Key Activities And Processes in The Preparedness and Recovery Phases Of Disaster Management”, Disasters, 42(3), 541−570, (2017).
10. [10] Özdemir, A., Erol, I., Ar, I.M., Peker,I., Asgary,A., Medeni, T.D. ve Medeni,I.T., “The Role Of Blockchain in Reducing The Impact of Barriers to Humanitarian Supply Chain Management”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, 32(2),454-478, (2021).
11. [11] Kovacs, G. ve Spens, K. “Identifying challenges in humanitarian logistics”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39(69), 506-528, (2009).
12. [12] Bastos, M.A.G., Campos, V.B., R de Mello Bandeira, R.A. 8. “Logistic processes in a post-disaster relief operation”, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 111: 1175 – 1184, (2014).
13. [13] Wassenhove, V., “Humanitarian Aid Logistics: Supply Chain Management in High Gear.” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(59), 475–489, (2006).
14. [14] Eygü, H., ve Karabacak, E., “Afet Lojistik Yönetimi Temelinde Risk Yönetim Endeksi Verileriyle Türkiye ile AB Üye Ülkelerinin Karşılaştırması”, Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 31(3),627-648, (2017).
15. [15] European Commission. “INFORM Annual Report”. European Union, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.2760/08333, (2022).
16. [16] Oran, F.Ç. “İnform risk endeksine göre Türkiye ve komşularının incelenmesi”, Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25(47):205-220, (2022).
17. [17] Oran, F.Ç. “Belirsizlikten Kaçınma ve Uzun Döneme Odaklanma Perspektifinden INFORM Risk Endeksinin İncelenmesi”, Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25:24-54, (2022).
18. [18] Kara, M. ve Eren, T. “Hasar Tespit Çalışmalarında Görevlendirilebilecek Dronların Bulanık Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Değerlendirilmesi” Politeknik Dergisi, 1-1. (2023).
19. [19] Daldır, İ., ve Tosun, Ö. “Bulanık Waspas ile Yeşil Tedarikçi Seçimi”. Uludağ Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(4), 193-208. (2018).
20. [20] Bai C. and Sarkis, J., "Integrating sustainability into supplier selection: A grey-based topsis analysis", Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(6): 2202–2224, (2018).
21. [21] United Nations, “Glossary: Internationally Agreed Glossary of Basic Terms Related to Disaster Management”, UN International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, Geneva, (1992).
22. [22] Carter W.N., "Disaster management a disaster manager’s handbook", Asian Development Bank, (2008), ISBN 978-971-561-006-3.
23. [23] Damoah, IS., “Exploring Critical Success Factors cf Humanitarian Supply Chain Management in Flood Disaster Management”, Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 12(1), 129-153, (2022).
24. [24] Altay N. and Green W.G., “OR/MS research in disaster operations management”, European Journal of Operational Research, 175(1): 475–493, (2006).
25. [25] Stenchion, P., “Development and Disaster Management”, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 40-44.doi/10.3316/ielapa.397086657696665, (1997).
26. [26] Alexander D., "Principles of Emergency Planning and Management", Terra Publishing, Harpenden, ISBN: 1-903544-10-6 (2002).
27. [27] Kimberly A., "Disaster Preparedness in Virginia Hospital Center-Arlington after Sept 11, 2001" Disaster Management and Response 1(3), 80-86, (2003).
28. [28] Ergünay, O., "Afet Yönetimi Nedir? Nasıl Olmalıdır? Erzincan ve Dinar Deneyimleri Işığında Türkiye’nin Deprem Sorunlarına Çözüm Arayışları". TÜBİTAK Deprem Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı, (1996).
29. [29] Kunz, N. ve Reiner, G. “A Meta-Analysis of Humanitarian Logistics Research”, Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 2(2),116-147, (2012).
30. [30] Howden, M., “How Humanitarian Logistics Information Systems Can Improve Humanitarian Supply Chains: A View from the Field”, Proceedings of the 6th International ISCRAM Conference – Gothenburg, Sweden, May 2009 J. Landgren and S. Jul, eds. .(2009).
31. [31] Coppola D.P., "Introduction to international disaster management", Butterworth-Heinemann is an Imprint of Elsevier, ISBN: 978-0-12-801477-6 USA. (2015).
32. [32] Adnan A., Ramli M.Z., and Abd Razak S.K.M., "Disaster Management and Mitigation for Earthquakes: Are We Ready?", In 9th Asia Pacific Structural Engineering and Construction Conference (APSEC2015), Malaysia, 34–44, (2015).
33. [33] Thomas, A., “Why logistics?”, Forced Migration Review, 18:4, (2003).
34. [34] Goldschmidt, K.H. ve Kumar, S., “Humanitarian Operations and Crisis/Disaster Management: A Retrospective Review of The Literature And Framework For Development”, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 20: 1–13, (2016).
35. [35] EM-DAT (2023) https://www.emdat.be/, (erişim tarihi: 01.03.2023).
36. [36] Kovacs, G. ve Spens, K.M., “Trends and Developments in Humanitarian Logistics – A Gap Analysis”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41(1), 32-45, (2011).
37. [37] Kovacs, G. ve Spens, K.M., “Humanitarian Logistics in Disaster Relief Operations”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(2),99-114, (2007).
38. [38] Kunz, N. ve Reiner, G. “A Meta-Analysis of Humanitarian Logistics Research”, Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 2(2),116-147, (2012).
39. [39] Altay N., Prasad, S. and Sounderpandian J., “Strategic planning for disaster relief logistics: lessons from supply chain management”, International Journal Services Sciences, 2(2),142-161, (2009).
40. [40] Tomasini, R. M. ve Van Wassenhove, L. N., “From Preparedness To Partnerships: Case Study Research on Humanitarian Logistics” International Federation of Operational Research Societies,16(5),549–559, (2009).
41. [41] Dubey,R. ve Gunasekaran,A., “The Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chain Design: Agility, Adaptability and Alignment”, International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 19(1), 62-82, (2015).
42. [42] Özdemir, A., Erol, I., Ar, I.M., Peker,I., Asgary,A., Medeni, T.D. ve Medeni,I.T., “The Role Of Blockchain in Reducing The Impact of Barriers to Humanitarian Supply Chain Management”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, 32(2),454-478, (2021).
43. [43] Sahay, B. S., Gupta, S., & Menon, V. C., “Managing Humanitarian Logistics”, Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Doi:10.1007/978-81-322-2416-7, (2016).
44. [44] Çelik M., Ergun Ö., Johnson B., Keskinocak P., Lorca A., Pekgün P. and Swann J., "Humanitarian logistics. tutorials in operations research", 18-49, (2012).
45. [45] De Groeve T., Poljansek Ka. and Vernaccini L., "INFORM Index for Risk Management Cencept and Methodology Versiyon 2015", EUR 26894. Luxembourg (Luxembourg): Publications Office of the European Union, (2014).
46. [46] Kızılay (2021). https://yillik.kizilayakademi.org.tr/, erişim tarihi: 31.03.2023.
47. [47] Marin-Ferrer, M., Vernaccini, L., & Poljansek, K., “Index for Risk Management INFORM Concept and Methodology Report - Version 2017”. Eur 28655 En. https://doi.org/10.2760/0, (2017).
48. [48] De Groeve, T., Poljansek, Ka., & Vernaccini, L. “INFORM Index for Risk Management Cencept and Methodology Versiyon 2015”, EUR 28655 EN. Luxembourg (Luxembourg): Publications Office of the European Union, (2014).
49. [49] Chen P., "Effects of the entropy weight on TOPSIS", Expert Systems with Applications, 168,1-13, (2021).
50. [50] Qureshi, M. N., Kumar, D., & Kumar, P., “Selection of potential 3PL services providers using TOPSIS with interval data”, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 1512-1516, (2007).
51. [51] Ersoy, M., “Mermer Blokların AHP Destekli TOPSIS ve GİA Yöntemleri ile Sınıflandırılması”, Journal of Polytechnic, 22(2), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.428979, (2018).
52. [52] Uysal, F., & Tosun, Ö., Fuzzy TOPSIS-based computerized maintenance management system selection. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(2), 212–228, (2012).
53. [53] Özcan, N. A., Bulut, M., Özcan, E. C., ve Eren, T. “Enerji Üretim Yatırım Alternatiflerinin Değerlendirilmesinde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinin İstatistiksel ve Analitik Olarak Karşılaştırması: Türkiye Örneği”. Politeknik Dergisi, 1-1, (2023).
54. [54] Chen T.Y. and Tsao C.Y., "The interval-valued fuzzy TOPSIS method and experimental analysis", Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 159(11): 1410–1428, (2008).
55. [55] Julong, D., “Introduction to Grey System Theory”, The Journal of Grey System, 1, 1–24, (1989).
56. [56] Li, G. D., Yamaguchi, D., & Nagai, M., “A grey-based decision-making approach to the supplier selection problem”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(3–4), 573–581, (2007).
57. [57] Kuzu, S. & Yildirim, B. F., “The Evaluation of Competitiveness Performance For Developing Eight Countries by Grey TOPSIS”, Kırklareli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(2), 70–79, (2019).
58. [58] Özçalici, M., Kaya, A., ve Gürler, H. E., “Long-term performance evaluation of deposit banks with multi-criteria decision making tools: The case of Turkey”, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (50), 87-114, (2022).
59. [59] Adhianto L., Banerjee S., Fagan M., Krentel M., Marin G., Mellor-Crummey,J., and Tallent N. R., "HPCTOOLKIT: Tools for performance analysis of optimized parallel programs", Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 22(6),685–701, (2010).
60. [60] Yildirim, B. F., & Adiguzel Mercangoz, B., “Evaluating the logistics performance of OECD countries by using fuzzy AHP and ARAS-G”, Eurasian Economic Review, 10(1), 27–45, (2020).
61. [61] Vavrek, R., “Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique”, International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, 18(6), 1821–1843, (2019).
62. [62] Xiao, C., Ye, J., Esteves, R. M., & Rong, C. “Using Spearman's correlation coefficients for exploratory data analysis on big dataset”. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 28(14), 3866-3878, (2016).
63. [63] Rahim, A. A. A., Ramesh, S., & Musa, S. N. (2023, January). Selection of composite material based on compromise MCDM method. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2643, No. 1, p. 050013). AIP Publishing LLC. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0111228
64. [64] Yuniwati, I. “Correlation test application of supplier’s ranking using TOPSIS and AHP-TOPSIS method”. CAUCHY: Jurnal Matematika Murni dan Aplikasi, 4(2), 65-73, (2016).
65. [65] Veeramani, C., Venugopal, R., & Muruganandan, S. “An Exploration of the Fuzzy Inference System for the Daily Trading Decision and Its Performance Analysis Based on Fuzzy MCDM Methods”. Computational Economics, 1-28, (2022).
66. [66] Güngör, S. K., “Öğretmenlerin Örgütsel Destek Algıları İle Örgütsel Bağlılıkları Arasındaki İlişkinin Analizi”, Ahi Evran Universitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 962–977, (2018).
67. [67] IMF, (2023). https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD, erişim tarihi: 13.04.2023.