Assessment of Operational, Environmental and Social Performance of Container Ports in Türkiye

Yıl 2025, Sayı: PRODUCTIVITY FOR LOGISTICS, 45 - 62, 03.02.2025

Esra Yıldırım Söylemez

https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1529374

Öz

ABSTRACT
Purpose: This study aims to reveal the sustainability orientations of container port facilities operating in Turkey through sustainability reports and to evaluate the performance of their operational, environmental and social dimensions both separately and in an integrated manner (Environmental, Social, Operational-ESO).
Methodology: Sustainability orientations of container port facilities were subjected to qualitative assessment through examination of web pages and sustainability reports. The data obtained through document scanning regarding operational, environmental, and social performance indicators revealed by researching the relevant literature were analyzed using the MULTIMOORA method. The Rank Position Method was used in the performance ranking of port facilities.
Findings: The results show that 18% of the container service port facilities publish independent sustainability reports. There are deficiencies in the environmental and especially social performance indicators taken into account in the sustainability reports. Among the port facilities examined, Mersin International Port, which has the highest operational performance, is also ranked as the facility with the lowest integrated performance (ESO). The port facility with the highest integrated performance (ESO) was Socar.
Originality: The study contributes to filling the gap in the literature regarding the evaluation of environmental, social and operational performance of container ports in Turkey with the MULTIMOORA method. More importantly, the integrated examination of relevant performance dimensions represents the originality of this study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Container Ports, Sustainability Report, Operational-Environmental-Social Performance Indicators, MULTIMOORA.

Türkiye’deki Konteyner Limanlarının Operasyonel, Çevresel ve Sosyal Performansının Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada sürdürülebilirlik raporları aracılığıyla Türkiye’de hizmet veren konteyner liman tesislerinin sürdürülebilirlik yönelimlerinin ortaya çıkarılması; operasyonel, çevresel ve sosyal boyutlarının hem ayrı ayrı hem de bütünleşik (Çevresel, Sosyal, Operasyonel-ESO) performanslarının değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmaktadır.
Yöntem: Konteyner liman tesislerinin sürdürülebilirlik yönelimleri, web sayfalarının ve sürdürülebilirlik raporlarının incelenmesi yoluyla nitel değerlendirmeye tabi tutulmuştur. İlgili literatürün taranmasıyla ortaya çıkarılan operasyonel, çevresel ve sosyal performans göstergelerine ilişkin belge tarama yoluyla elde edilen veriler MULTIMOORA yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Liman tesislerinin performans sıralamasında Sıralı Pozisyon Yöntemi kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Sonuçlar, konteyner hizmeti veren liman tesislerinin %18’inin tesis özelinde bağımsız sürdürülebilirlik raporu yayınladığını göstermektedir. Sürdürülebilirlik raporlarında dikkate alınan çevresel ve özellikle sosyal performans göstergelerine ilişkin eksiklikler bulunmaktadır. İncelenen liman tesisleri arasında operasyonel performansı en yüksek olan Mersin Uluslararası Limanı aynı zamanda bütünleşik performansı (ESO) en düşük tesis olarak sıralanmıştır. Bütünleşik performansı (ESO) en yüksek liman tesisi Socar olmuştur.
Özgünlük: Çalışma, Türkiye’deki konteyner limanlarının çevresel, sosyal ve operasyonel performansının MULTIMOORA yöntemi ile değerlendirilmesine ilişkin literatürdeki boşluğun doldurulmasına katkıda bulunmaktadır. Daha önemlisi ilgili performans boyutlarının bütünleştirilerek incelenmesi bu çalışmanın özgünlüğünü temsil etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Konteyner Limanları, Sürdürülebilirlik Raporu, Çevresel-Sosyal-Operasyonel Performans Göstergeleri, MULTIMOORA

Kaynakça

• AAPA (American Association of Port Authorities), (2007). “D-11: Embracing the Concept of Sustainability as a Standard Practice for Ports and the Association”, www.aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/sustainability_resolutions.pdf, (Accessed: 09.06.2024).
• ACCC (Australia Competition and Consumer Commission), (2024). “Environmental and Sustainability Claims”, www.accc.gov.au/business/advertising-and-promotions/environmental-and-sustainability-claims, (Accessed: 20.05.2024).
• Acer, A. and Yangınlar, G. (2017). “The Determination of Turkish Container Ports Performance with TOPSIS Multiple Criteria Decision Making Method”, Journal of Management Marketing and Logistics, 4(2), 67-75.
• Akandere, G. (2021). “Yeşi̇l Serti̇fi̇kali Li̇manlarin Performansinin Entegre ENTROPI-TOPSIS Yöntemleri̇ ile Değerlendirilmesi̇”, Hacettepe University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 39(4), 515-535.
• Akkan, M.M. (2022). “Türkiye’de Denizyolu Taşımacılığının Performansını Etkileyen Faktörlerin Ağırlıklandırılmasına Yönelik Bir Analiz”, Konşimento Dergisi, 1(1), 41-62.
• Asgari, N., Hassani, A., Jones, D. and Nguye, H.H. (2015). “Sustainability Ranking of the UK Major Ports: Methodology and Case Study”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 78, 19-39.
• Ashrafi, M., Acciaro, M., Walker, T.R., Magnan, G.M. and Adams, M. (2019). “Corporate Sustainability in Canadian and US Maritime Ports”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, 386-397.
• Balaban Salı, J. (2018). “Verilerin Toplanması”, Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri, (Editör: A. Şimşek), Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayını, Eskişehir, 134-161.
• Baştuğ, S. (2023). “Port Efficiency Evaluation of Turkish Container Ports Based on DEA-SCOR Model: An Effective Sea Gateways in Türkiye for One Belt and One Road Initiative”, Marine Science and Technology Bulletin, 12(1), 27-38.
• Bergantino, A.S., Musso, E. and Porcelli, F. (2013). “Port Management Performance and Contextual Variables: which Relationship? Methodological and Empirical Issues”, Research in Transportation Business and Management, 8, 39-49.
• Bourne, M., Neely, A., Mills, J. and Platts, K. (2003). “Implementing Performance Measurement Systems: A Literature Review”, International Journal of Business Performance Management, 5(1), 1-24.
• Brauers, W.K. and Zavadskas, E.K. (2013). “Multi-Objective Decision Making with a Large Number of Objectives. An Application for Europe 2020”, International Journal of Operations Research, 10(2), 67-79.
• Çalışkan, A.Ö. (2012). “Sürdürülebilirlik Raporlaması”, Journal of Accounting and Taxation Studies, 5(1), 41-68.
• Çelik, Y. and Yorulmaz, M. (2023). “Türkiye’deki Konteyner Terminallerinin Performans İncelemesi ve Mersin Limanı için Performans Gelişim Önerileri”, Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 7(1), 1531-1549.
• Danladi, C., Tuck, S., Tziogkidis, P., Tang, L. and Okorie, C. (2024). “Efficiency Analysis and Benchmarking of Container Ports Operating in Lower-Middle-Income Countries: A DEA Approach”, Journal of Shipping and Trade, 9(1),7.
• De Souza Barbosa, A., Da Silva, M.C.B.C., Da Silva, L.B., Morioka, S.N. and De Souza, V.F. (2023). “Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria: Their Impacts on Corporate Sustainability Performance”, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-18.
• Ding, J.F. and Chou, C.C. (2011). “A Fuzzy MCDM Model of Service Performance for Container Ports”, Scientific Research and Essays, 6(3), 559-566.
• Dong, G., Zhu, J., Li, J., Wang, H. and Gajpal, Y. (2019). “Evaluating the Environmental Performance and Operational Efficiency of Container Ports: an Application to the Maritime Silk Road”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(12), 2226.
• Dovbischuk, I. (2021). “Sustainable Firm Performance of Logistics Service Providers along Maritime Supply Chain”, Sustainability, 13(14), 8040.
• Duong, N. H. (2022). “Relationship of Social Sustainability, Operational Performance and Economic Performance in Sustainable Supply Chain Management”, Global Business & Finance Review, 27(4), 46.
• ESPO (European Sea Ports Organisation) (2023). “Environmental Report-EcoPortsinSights”, www.espo.be/media/ESPO%20Environmental%20Report%202023.pdf, (Accessed: 08.07.2024).
• Ecoports network (2024). https://www.ecoports.com/network, (Accessed: 08.07.2024). Görçün, Ö.F. (2021). “Efficiency Analysis of Black Sea Container Seaports: Application of an Integrated MCDM Approach”, Maritime Policy and Management, 48(5), 672-699.
• Hafezalkotob, A., Hafezalkotob, A., Liao, H. and Herrera, F. (2019). “An Overview of MULTIMOORA for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making: Theory, Developments, Applications and Challenges”, Information Fusion, 51, 145-177.
• Hossain, T., Adams, M. and Walker, T.R. (2021). “Role of Sustainability in Global Seaports”. Ocean and Coastal Management, 202, 105435.
• Humphreys, R.M. (2023). “Why Ports Matter for the Global Economy”, www.blogs.worldbank.org/en/transport/why-ports-matter-global-economy (Accessed: 20.06.2024).
• Iyer, K.C. and Nanyam, V.P.S.N. (2021a). “A Grounded Theory Approach in the Identification of Enabling and Inhibiting Factors Affecting the Performance of Container Terminals”, Transportation in Developing Economies, 7, 24.
• Iyer, K.C. and Nanyam, V.N. (2021b). “Technical Efficiency Analysis of Container Terminals in India”, The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 37(1), 61-72.
• Karakas, S., Acar, A.Z. and Kirmizi, M. (2020). “Development of a Multidimensional Performance Evaluation Model for Container Terminals at Marmara Sea”, Research in Transportation Business-Management, 37, 100498.
• Karakasnaki, M., Pantouvakis, A. and Vlachos, I. (2023). “Maritime Social Sustainability: Conceptualization and Scale Development”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 121, 103804.
• Karanki, F. and Bilotkach, V. (2023). "Capacity Utilization of U.S. Airports: A Data Envelopment Analysis", Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 177, 103840.
• Kaya, S.K., Kundu, P. and Görçün, Ö.F. (2023). “Evaluation of Container Port Sustainability Using WASPAS Technique Using on Type-2 Neutrosophic Fuzzy Numbers”, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 190, 114849.
• Klassen, R.D. and McLaughlin, C.P. (1996). “The Impact of Environmental Management on Firm Performance”, Management Science, 42(8), 1199-1214.
• Laxe, F.G., Bermúdez, F.M., Palmero, F.M. and Novo-Corti, I. (2017). “Assessment of Port Sustainability Through Synthetic Indexe, Application to the Spanish Case”, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 119(1), 220-225.
• Li, Z., Wang, X., Zheng, R., Na, S. and Liu, C. (2022). “Evaluation Analysis of the Operational Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity of Container Terminals in China”, Sustainability, 14(20).
• Lim, S., Pettit, S., Abouarghoub, W. and Beresford, A. (2019). “Port Sustainability and Performance: A Systematic Literature Review”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 72, 47-64.
• Lirn, T.C., Jim Wu, Y.C. and Chen, Y.J. (2013). “Green Performance Criteria for Sustainable Ports in Asia”, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 43(5/6), 427-451.
• Majidi A., Mirzapour Al-e-Hashem, S.M.J. and Hashemkhani Zolfani, S. (2021). “Sustainability Ranking of the Iranian Major Ports by Using MCDM Methods”, Mathematics, 9(19), 2451.
• Mangla, S.K., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Luthra, S., Bai, C., Jakhar, S. K. and Khan, S. A. (2020). “Operational Excellence for Improving Sustainable Supply Chain Performance”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 162, 105025.
• Nanyam, V.N. and Jha, K.N. (2022). “Operational Performance Model for Indian Container Terminals Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis”, The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 38(4), 197-206.
• Notteboom, T.E., Satta, G., Persico, L., Vottero, B. and Rossi, A. (2023). “Operational Productivity and Financial Performance of Pure Transhipment Hubs versus Gateway Terminals: An Empirical Investigation on Italian Container Ports”, Research in Transportation Business & Management, 47, 1-15.
• Özbek, A. (2019). “Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ve Excel İle Problem Çözümü-Kavram Teori Uygulama”, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
• Piecyk, M.I. and Björklund, M. (2015). “Logistics Service Providers and Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainability Reporting in the Logistics Industry”, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 45(5), 459-485.
• Porter, M.E. (2003). “Corporate Philanthropy: Taking the High Ground”, Foundation Strategy Group. http://earthmind.net/ngo/docs/philanthropy-high-ground.pdf, (Accessed: 02.07.2024)
• Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. (2024). “İşletme İzinli Kıyı Tesislerine İlişkin Bilgiler”, www.tkygm.uab.gov.tr/limanlar-daire-baskanligi, (Accessed: 05.06.2024).
• Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. (2022). “Kıyı Tesislerine İşletme İzni Verilmesine İlişkin Usul Ve Esaslar Hakkında Yönetmelik”, www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/yonetmelik/7.5.40082.pdf, (Accessed: 29.06.2024).
• Roh S., Thai V.V., Jang H. and Yeo G.T. (2021). “The Best Practices of Port Sustainable Development: A Case Study in Korea”, Maritime Policy & Management, 1-27.
• Sheikh, W., Chowdhury, M.M.H. and Mahmud, K.K. (2023). “A Comprehensive Performance Measurement Model for Maritime Logistics: Sustainability and Policy Approach”. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 14, 101097.
• Stanković, J.J., Marjanović, I., Papathanasiou, J. and Drezgić, S. (2021). “Social, Economic and Environmental Sustainability of Port Regions: MCDM Approach in Composite Index Creation”, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9(1), 74.
• TURKLİM (Port Operators Association of Türkiye), (2024). “Türkiye Limancılık Sektörü 2024 Raporu-Limanlarda Dijital Teknolojiler ve Akıllı Limanlar”, www.turklim.org/turklim-sektor-raporu-2024/, (Accessed: 10.06.2024).
• TURKLİM (Port Operators Association of Türkiye), (2013). “Yeşil Liman Raporu/Yeşil Liman Politika, Düzenleme ve Uygulamaları, Türkiye Limancılık Sektörü Raporu”, www.turklim.org/kport/yesil_liman/upload/YesilLiman-Turklim-Raporu.pdf, (Accessed: 21.03.2021).
• Tzeng, G-H. and Huang, J.J. (2011). “Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications” (1st edition), Chapman and Hall/CRC.
• United Nations (UN). (2023). “Review Of Maritime Transport: Towards a Towards a Green and just Green and just Transition”, Geneva, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/rmt2023_en.pdf, (Accessed: 01.07.2024).
• UNCTAD (United Nations Trade and Development). (2024). “Review of Maritime Transport”, https://unctad.org/topic/transport-and-trade-logistics/review-of-maritime-transport, (Accessed: 10.07.2024).
• Utikad (Turkish Forwarding and Logistics Association). (2023). “Denizyolunun Sürdürülebilir Büyümesinde Limanlar Başrolde”, www.utikad.org.tr/Detay/Sektor-Haberleri/35539/denizyolunun-surdurulebilir-buyumesinde-limanlar-basrolde, (Accessed: 18.06.2024).
• Venus Lun, Y.H., Lai, K., Wong, C.W.Y. and Cheng, T.C.E. (2016). “Green Shipping Management”, Springer, London.
• Vrakas, G., Chan, C. and Thai, V. V. (2021). “The Effects of Evolving Port Technology and Process Optimisation on Operational Performance: The Case Study of an Australian Container Terminal Operator”, The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 37(4), 281-290.
• Wang, C., Haralambides, H. and Zhang, L. (2021). “Sustainable Port Development: The Role of Chinese Seaports in the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road”, International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics, 13(1-2), 205-232.
• Wang, Z., Hu, H. and Zhen, L. (2024). “Berth and Quay Cranes Allocation Problem with On-Shore Power Supply Assignment in Container Terminals”, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 188, 109910.
• Woo, SH., Pettit, S. and Beresford, A. (2011). “Port Evolution and Performance in Changing Logistics Environments”, Maritime Economics & Logistics, 13, 250-277.
• Yüksekyıldız, E. (2021). “Entropi ve EATWOS Yöntemleri ile Türkiye Konteyner Limanlarının Verimlilik Analizi”, Verimlilik Dergisi, 2, 3-24.
• Yorulmaz, M. and Baykan, Y. (2023). “Türkiye’de Sürdürülebilir Liman İşletmeciliği ve Yönetimi Literatürünün Değerlendirilmesi”, Journal of Sustainable Environment, 3(1), 1-12.
• Yorulmaz, M. and Patruna, E. (2022). “Sürdürülebilir Yeşil Liman Algısının ve Yönetiminin Değerlendirilmesi”, International Journal of Afro-Eurasian Research, 7(13), 148-168.