SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Verimlilik Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 60 Sayı: 2

A Group Decision-Making–Based Spherical Fuzzy VIKOR Model for Prioritizing Effective Factors in Combating Climate Change

İklim Değişikliğiyle Mücadelede Etkili Faktörlerin Önceliklendirilmesi için Grup Karar Vermeye Dayalı Küresel Bulanık VIKOR Tabanlı Bir Model

Müslüm Öztürk(KİLİS 7 ARALIK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1941-3115
Pages
647–676
Publication Date
2026-04-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It addresses multi-criteria decision-making in a holistic manner by modeling uncertainty and provides a reliable decision-support framework for policymakers.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: Combating climate change leads to complex decision problems involving uncertainty.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methodology: In the study, 10 criteria under four dimensions were used to evaluate climate policies, and 6 alternative scenarios were analyzed based on 8 experts’ opinions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It addresses multi-criteria decision-making in a holistic manner by modeling uncertainty and provides a reliable decision-support framework for policymakers.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Küresel Bulanık VIKOR · Karar Verme · İklim Politikaları

Abstract

Purpose: Combating climate change leads to complex decision problems involving uncertainty. This study proposes a group decision-making-based Spherical Fuzzy VIKOR (SF VIKOR) model to prioritize effective factors and rank policy alternatives by considering stakeholder opinions and criterion uncertainty. The model addresses multidimensional criteria such as sustainability, economic impact, and social acceptance in a holistic manner. Methodology: In the study, 10 criteria under four dimensions were used to evaluate climate policies, and 6 alternative scenarios were analyzed based on 8 experts’ opinions. The alternatives were assessed using the SF VIKOR method in a spherical fuzzy environment, with criterion weights determined through group decision-making and uncertainty modeled by spherical fuzzy numbers. Findings: According to the analysis, A4 (Electric transportation and clean mobility systems) and A5 (Carbon capture and storage technologies) showed the highest performance, while A1, A3, A2, and A6 exhibited moderate to lower performance. Sensitivity analysis confirmed that A4 and A5 remained the most stable alternatives under varying conditions. Originality: This study provides a novel contribution by applying a group decision-making-based SF VIKOR approach to the prioritization of climate policies. It addresses multi-criteria decision-making in a holistic manner by modeling uncertainty and provides a reliable decision-support framework for policymakers.

Özet

Amaç: İklim değişikliğiyle mücadele, belirsizlik içeren karmaşık karar problemlerini beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu çalışma, paydaş görüşleri ve kriter belirsizliklerini dikkate alarak, etkili faktörleri önceliklendirmek ve politika alternatiflerini sıralamak amacıyla grup karar vermeye dayalı Küresel Bulanık VIKOR (SF VIKOR) modelini önermektedir. Model, sürdürülebilirlik, ekonomik etki ve sosyal kabul gibi çok boyutlu kriterleri bütüncül bir yaklaşımla ele almaktadır. Yöntem: Çalışmada, iklim politikalarını değerlendirmek amacıyla 10 kriter dört boyut altında ele alınmış, 8 uzmanın görüşleri doğrultusunda 6 alternatif politika senaryosu analiz edilmiştir. Alternatifler, küresel bulanık ortamda SF VIKOR yöntemi ile değerlendirilmiş; kriter ağırlıkları grup karar verme yaklaşımıyla belirlenmiş ve belirsizlik küresel bulanık sayılarla modellenmiştir. Bulgular: Analiz sonuçlara göre A4 (Elektrikli ulaşım ve temiz taşıma sistemleri) ve A5 (Karbon yakalama ve depolama teknolojileri) en yüksek performansı göstererek en etkili alternatifler olarak öne çıkmıştır. A1 (Yenilenebilir enerji yatırımlarının artırılması) ve A3 (Karbon vergisi ve emisyon ticaret sistemleri) orta düzeyde katkı sağlarken, A2 (Enerji verimliliği ve talep yönetimi politikaları) ve A6 (Ormanlaştırma ve doğa temelli çözümler) daha düşük performans sergilemiştir. Duyarlılık analizi, A4 ve A5’in farklı koşullarda da en kararlı alternatifler olduğunu ve modelin güvenilir sonuçlar ürettiğini göstermiştir. Özgünlük: Bu çalışma, iklim politikalarının önceliklendirilmesinde grup karar vermeye dayalı SF VIKOR yaklaşımıyla literatüre yenilikçi katkı sunmakta, belirsizliği modelleyerek çok kriterli karar verme sürecini bütüncül ele almakta ve politika yapıcılar için güvenilir bir karar destek çerçevesi sağlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Öztürk, M. (2026). A Group Decision-Making–Based Spherical Fuzzy VIKOR Model for Prioritizing Effective Factors in Combating Climate Change. Verimlilik Dergisi, Cilt: 60 Sayı: 2, 647–676. https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1884575

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (68)

  1. Abdullah, L. ve Otheman, A. (2017). "Multi-Criteria Decision Making Method Based on Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Sets for Supplier Selection", Journal of Informatics and Mathematical Sciences, 9(1), 45-56.
  2. Ahmed, F.D. ve Majid, M.A. (2019). "Towards Agent-Based Petri Net Decision Making Modelling for Cloud Service Composition: A Literature Survey", Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 130, 14-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2018.12.001
  3. Ahmed, W., Tan, Q., Shaikh, G.M., Waqas, H., Kanasro, N.A., Ali, S. ve Solangi, Y.A. (2020). "Assessing and Prioritizing the Climate Change Policy Objectives for Sustainable Development in Pakistan", Symmetry, 12(8), 1203.
  4. Aktas Potur, E., Aktas, A. ve Kabak, M. (2025). "A Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques in Disaster Management and Transportation in Emergencies: Towards Sustainable Solutions", Sustainability, 17(6), 2644. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17062644
  5. Akusta, E. ve Cergibozan, R. (2025). "Assessment and Prioritization of Renewable Energy Alternatives to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals in Turkiye: Based on Fuzzy AHP Approach", arXiv Preprint arXiv:2512.05444. https://doi.org/10.58559/ijes.1494256
  6. Alpdoğan, H. (2023). "OECD Ülkelerinde Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Politikalarının ARAS Metodu ile Performans Analizi", Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 11(3), 1079-1103. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v11i3.2285
  7. Altan, A.D. ve Sağbaş, A. (2020). "Türkiye’nin Enerji Verimliliği ve İklim Değişikliği Performansı: Mevcut Durum ve Gelecek Projeksiyonu", Verimlilik Dergisi, (1), 7-26.
  8. Atlı, H.F. (2024). "Sürdürülebilir Tarımsal Pazarlama İçin Tarım Politikasına Etki Eden Kriterlerin Değerlendirilmesinde BWM Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemi Uygulaması", Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 23(92). https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1499384
  9. Avrupa Çevre Ajansı (EEA). (2024). "Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Europe", European Environment Agency. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/climate-change-impacts-and-adaptation, (Erişim Tarihi: 29.01.2026).
  10. Awad, M., Abouhawwash, M. ve Agiza, H.N. (2024). "Assessment and Ranking Ecological and Water Resources of Climate Change Under Fuzzy Decision Making Model", Climate Change Reports, 1, 70–78. https://doi.org/10.61356/j.ccr.2024.1221
  11. Bashir, M.F. ve Jamaani, F. (2025). "Revisiting the Relationship Between Climate Change, Renewable Energy Investments, Climate Mitigation Technologies and Environmental Fiscal Policies: A Comprehensive Analysis Using Structural Learning-Based Bayesian Neural Network", Energy Strategy Reviews, 60, 101811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2025.101811
  12. Büyüközkan, G. ve Çifçi, G. (2012). "A Novel Hybrid MCDM Approach Based on Fuzzy DEMATEL, Fuzzy ANP and Fuzzy TOPSIS to Evaluate Green Suppliers", Expert Systems With Applications, 39(3), 3000-3011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.162
  13. Büyüközkan, G. ve Güleryüz, S. (2016). "Lojistik Firma Web Sitelerinin Performanslarının Çok Kriterli Değerlendirilmesi", Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(4). https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.278444
  14. Büyüközkan, G., Göçer, F. ve Feyzioğlu, O. (2018). "Cloud Computing Technology Selection Based on Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy MCDM Methods", Soft Computing-A Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies & Applications, 22(15).
  15. Çalık, A. (2020). "A Comparative Perspective in Sustainable Supplier Selection by Integrated MCDM Techniques", Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 38(2), 835-852.
  16. Demir, G. ve Arslan, R. (2022). "Sensitivity Analysis in Multi-Criterion Decision-Making Problems", Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(3), 1025-1056. https://doi.org/10.26745/ahbvuibfd.1103531
  17. Doukas, H., & Nikas, A. (2020). Decision support models in climate policy. European Journal of Operational Research, 280(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.01.017
  18. Dymova, L., Kaczmarek, K., Sevastjanov, P. ve Kulawik, J. (2021). "A Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making Approach With a Complete User Friendly Computer Implementation", Entropy, 23(2), 203. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23020203
  19. Edjossan-Sossou, A.M., Galvez, D., Deck, O., Al Heib, M., Verdel, T., Dupont, L. ve Morel, L. (2020). "Sustainable Risk Management Strategy Selection Using a Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Approach", International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 45, 101474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101474
  20. Ekmekcioğlu, Ö., Koc, K., Dabanli, I. ve Deniz, A. (2022). "Prioritizing Urban Water Scarcity Mitigation Strategies Based on Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Approach Under Fuzzy Environment", Sustainable Cities and Society, 87, 104195.
  21. Ersoy, N. ve Keleş, N. (2023). "Analyzing Climate Change Performance Over the Last Five Years of G20 Countries Using a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Framework", Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2), 13-34. https://doi.org/10.24889/ifede.1284974
  22. Fullbrook, L. ve Vince, J. (2026). Policy fit: lessons from ocean governance in Australia. Policy Sciences, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-026-09602-2
  23. Gündoğdu, H.G. ve Aytekin, A. (2022). "İklim Değişikliği, Sürdürülebilir Şehirler ve Topluluklar Bağlamında Çok Kriterli Bir Değerlendirme", İnsan ve İnsan, 9(33), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.29224/insanveinsan.1104121
  24. IPCC. (2019). "Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems", Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/, (Erişim Tarihi: 26.01.2026)
  25. Irawan, A.P. ve Surendro, K. (2024). "Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods in Determining REDD+ Project Location", International Journal of Social Service and Research, 4(8). https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v4i8.879
  26. Jahangir, J. ve Aman-Ullah, A. (2024). "Climate Change Mitigation via Green Investment and Energy Consumption: The Mediating Role of Energy Efficiency", International Journal of Business and Technopreneurship (IJBT), 14(1), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.58915/ijbt.v14i1.310
  27. Kahraman, C., Onar, S.C. ve Oztaysi, B. (2015). "Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision-Making: A Literature Review", International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 8(4), 637-666. https://doi.org/10.1080/18756891.2015.1046325
  28. Kahraman, C., Öztayşi, B., Uçal Sarı, İ. ve Turanoğlu, E. (2014). "Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process with Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Sets", Knowledge-Based Systems, 59, 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2014.01.006
  29. Kanmaz, A. K. (2025). "Küresel Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Yenilenebilir Enerji Kaynaklarının Değerlendirilmesi", Doktora Tezi, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Denizli, Türkiye.
  30. Kim, J.Y., Park, C.Y., Huh, J.Y., Hyun, J.H. ve Lee, D.K. (2023). "Prioritizing Climate Change Adaptation Options: Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) With Stakeholder Participation in Water Resources Management", Journal of Climate Change Research, 14(3), 219–239. https://doi.org/10.15531/KSCCR.2023.14.3.219
  31. Köçer, M.S. (2025). "İklim Değişikliği Risk Algısını Etkileyen Faktörlerin İncelenmesi: Sistematik Bir Literatür Taraması ve Çıkarımlar", IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (19), 42-56. https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.1645431
  32. Kutlu Gündoğdu, F. ve Kahraman, C. (2019a). "Spherical Fuzzy Sets and Spherical Fuzzy TOPSIS Method", Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 36(1), 337-352. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-181401
  33. Kutlu Gündoğdu, F. ve Kahraman, C. (2019b). "A Novel VIKOR Method Using Spherical Fuzzy Sets and Its Application to Warehouse Site Selection", Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 37(1), 1197-1211. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-182651
  34. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Rosenthal, S., Cutler, M. ve Kotcher, J. (2024). "Climate Change in the Indonesian Mind", Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
  35. Lu, C. ve Wang, K. (2023). "Natural Resource Conservation Outpaces and Climate Change: Roles of Reforestration, Mineral Extraction, and Natural Resources Depletion", Resources Policy, 86, 104159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104159
  36. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.078
  37. Mianabadi, H. ve Afshar, A. (2008). "A New Method to Evaluate Weights of Decision Makers and Its Application in Water Resource Management", Proceedings of the 13th IWRA World Water Congress, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.3416.7367
  38. Nordhaus, W.D. (2017). "Revisiting the Social Cost of Carbon", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(7), 1518-1523. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1609244114
  39. Opricovic, S. ve Tzeng, G. H. (2004). "Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS", European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1
  40. Opricovic, S. ve Tzeng, G.H. (2007). "Extended VIKOR Method in Comparison With Outranking Methods", European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020
  41. Özdemir, S. ve Elmacıoğlu, N. (2025). "Türkiye'nin Çevresel Dirençliliğinin Değerlendirilmesi: İklim Adaptasyonu ve Sürdürülebilirlik Üzerine Çok Kriterli Analiz", Verimlilik Dergisi, 59(2), 417-432. https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1572483
  42. Öztürk, M. (2025). "A Hybrid Approach for Battery Selection Based on Green Criteria in Electric Vehicles: DEMATEL-QFD-Interval Type-2 Fuzzy VIKOR", Sustainability, 17(14), 6277. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17146277
  43. Öztürk, M. (2026a). "Efficiency Analysis of Agricultural Irrigation Systems Using the Interval Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach", Verimlilik Dergisi, 60(1), 39-60. https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1716178
  44. Öztürk, M. (2026b). "Equipment Supplier Selection for Sustainable Hydrogen Production: A Group Decision-Making Supported Spherical Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach", Sustainability, 18(4), Article 1737. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18041737
  45. Öztürk, M. (2026). Yeşil hidrojen tedarik zinciri lojistik merkezi seçimi: Yeni bir aralık Tip-2 bulanık BWM–RANCOM–ELECTRE III hibrit yaklaşımı. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(1), 445-462. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1774149
  46. Pérez-Pérez, J.F., Gómez, P.I., Bonet, I., Sánchez-Pinzón, M.S., Caraffini, F. ve Lochmuller, C. (2024). "Assessing Climate Transition Risks in the Colombian Processed Food Sector: A Fuzzy Logic and Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach", arXiv Preprint arXiv:2404.16055. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2404.16055
  47. Psistaki, K., Tsantopoulos, G. ve Paschalidou, A.K. (2024). "An Overview of the Role of Forests in Climate Change Mitigation", Sustainability, 16(14), 6089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121784
  48. Qiu, Y.J., Bouraima, M.B., Badi, I., Stević, Ž. ve Simic, V. (2024). "A Decision-Making Model for Prioritizing Low-Carbon Policies in Climate Change Mitigation", Challenges in Sustainability, 12(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.56578/cis120101
  49. Rachman, A.P., Ichwania, C., Mangkuto, R.A., Pradipta, J., Koerniawan, M.D. ve Sarwono, J. (2024). "Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Selection of Optimum Passive Design Strategy", Energy and Buildings, 314, 114285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.114285
  50. Rasool, M.H. ve Hashmi, S.A.M. (2025). "Carbon Capture and Storage: An Evidence-Based Review of Its Limitations and Missed Promises", Petroleum Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptlrs.2025.09.005
  51. Ščasný, M., Zvěřinová, I., Czajkowski, M., Kyselá, E. ve Zagórska, K. (2017). "Public Acceptability of Climate Change Mitigation Policies: A Discrete Choice Experiment", Climate Policy, 17(sup1), S111-S130. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1248888
  52. Shang, H., Su, F., Yüksel, S. ve Dinçer, H. (2021). "Identifying the Strategic Priorities of the Technical Factors for the Sustainable Low Carbon Industry Based on Macroeconomic Conditions", Sage Open, 11(2), 21582440211016345. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211016345
  53. Soam, S.K., N., S.R., B.S., Y., Balasani, R., S.R, Marwaha S,, Kumar, P. ve Agrawal, R.C. (2023). "AHP Analyser: A Decision-Making Tool for Prioritizing Climate Change Mitigation Options and Forest Management", Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 1099996. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1099996
  54. Soimu, O., Borges, C.E., Ferrón, L.M. ve Mugarra, A. (2025). "Towards Holistic Environmental Policy Assessment. Multi-Criteria Frameworks and Recommendations for Modelers", npj Climate Action, 4(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-025-00274-x
  55. Tan, E.E. (2023). "İklim Değişikliği ve Sosyal Politika: Adil Bir Gelecek İçin Yol Haritası", Ulisa: Uluslararası Çalışmalar Dergisi, 7(2), 114-122.
  56. Teng, M., Zhang, F., Gong, Z., & Park, J. H. (2025). Evaluating climate adaptation strategies for coastal resilience using multi-criteria decision-making framework. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 217, 118060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.118060
  57. T.C. Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı. (2023). "Türkiye’nin İklim Değişikliği Yedinci Ulusal Bildirimi", T.C. Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı. https://www.mgm.gov.tr/files/iklim/ikibes-ulusal-bildirimi.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 20.01.2026)
  58. T.C. Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı. (2024). "İklim Değişikliği Azaltım Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı (2024–2030)", T.C. Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı, https://iklim.gov.tr/db/turkce/icerikler/files/%C4%B0klim%20De%C4%9Fi%C5%9Fikli%C4%9Fi%20Azalt%C4%B1m%20Stratejisi%20ve%20Eylem%20Plan%C4%B1%20%282024-2030%29.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 20.01.2026)
  59. T.C. Enerji ve Tabii Kaynaklar Bakanlığı. (2024). "Türkiye’nin Enerji Verimliliği 2030 Stratejisi ve II. Ulusal Enerji Verimliliği Eylem Planı", T.C. Enerji ve Tabii Kaynaklar Bakanlığı, https://enerji.gov.tr/Media/Dizin/BHIM/tr/Duyurular/T%C3%BCrkiyeninEnerjiVerimlili%C4%9Fi2030StratejisiveIIUlusalEnerjiVerimlili%C4%9FiEylemPlan%C4%B1_202401161407.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 22.01.2026)
  60. UNFCC. (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change). (1992/2014). "Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) Framework", UNFCCC. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-convention/action-for-climate-empowerment, (Erişim Tarihi: 22.01.2026)
  61. Vural, D. (2026). "Evaluation of Carbon Footprint Reduction Strategies in Sustainable Tourism: A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach", GSI Journals Serie A: Advancements in Tourism Recreation and Sports Sciences, 9(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.53353/atrss.1657114
  62. Wang, J.J., Jing, Y.Y., Zhang, C.F. ve Zhao, J.H. (2016). "Review on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Aid in Sustainable Energy Decision-Making", Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(9), 2263–2278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.06.021
  63. Xu, L. ve Yang, J. (2024). "Carbon Pricing Policies and Renewable Energy Development: Analysis Based on Cross-Country Panel Data", Journal of Environmental Management, 366, 121784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121784
  64. Yengil Bülbül, B. ve Baydar, M.B. (2025). "Decarbonizing Transportation: Cross-Country Evidence on Electric Vehicle Sales and Carbon Dioxide Emissions", World Electric Vehicle Journal, 16(12), 660. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj16120660
  65. Yüksel, S., Dinçer, H. ve Eti, S. (2025). "A Machine Learning–Based Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Prioritizing Climate Change Policy Strategies Under Spherical Fuzzy Environment", International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 14(6), 337–344. https://doi.org/10.14419/s2d6w261
  66. Zadeh, L.A. (1965). "Fuzzy Sets", Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
  67. Zahid, K. ve Akram, M. (2023). "Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making for Energy Production From Municipal Solid Waste in Iran Based on Spherical Fuzzy Sets", Granular Computing, 8(6), 1299-1323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41066-023-00419-5
  68. Zimmermann, H.J. (2011). "Fuzzy Set Theory—and Its Applications" (4th ed.), Springer Science & Business Media.