SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 11 Issue: 2

Comparative Performance Measurement in the Full Electric Vehicle Market

Üzeyir Aydın(Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi)0000-0003-2777-6450
Mert Ural(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-3252-846X
Erhan Demireli(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-3457-0699
Pages
—
Publication Date
2024-06-30
🏛️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)

In the study, it was concluded that the top three criteria with the highest weights were power (HP), fast charging time and battery capacity, while the top three highest performing electric cars were TOGG T10X V2 Long Range, Volvo XC40 RWD (Single Motor) and Tesla Y Long Range RWD (4x2).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, Entropy, WASPAS and MOORA methods, which are multi-criteria decision-making techniques, are used to measure the performance of the best-selling full electric cars in Türkiye as of October 2023 by the Automotive Distributors and Mobility Association using 12 different criteria.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Then, the electric cars were ranked by evaluating their performance with the WASPAS and MOORA-based methods.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the study, it was concluded that the top three criteria with the highest weights were power (HP), fast charging time and battery capacity, while the top three highest performing electric cars were TOGG T10X V2 Long Range, Volvo XC40 RWD (Single Motor) and Tesla Y Long Range RWD (4x2).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Full Electric Car · Electric Vehicle (EV) · Entropy Method

Abstract

In this study, Entropy, WASPAS and MOORA methods, which are multi-criteria decision-making techniques, are used to measure the performance of the best-selling full electric cars in Türkiye as of October 2023 by the Automotive Distributors and Mobility Association using 12 different criteria. The weights of the criteria were calculated with the Entropy method. Then, the electric cars were ranked by evaluating their performance with the WASPAS and MOORA-based methods. In the study, it was concluded that the top three criteria with the highest weights were power (HP), fast charging time and battery capacity, while the top three highest performing electric cars were TOGG T10X V2 Long Range, Volvo XC40 RWD (Single Motor) and Tesla Y Long Range RWD (4x2).

🔖

Cite This Article

Aydın, Ü., Ural, M., Demireli, E. (2024). Comparative Performance Measurement in the Full Electric Vehicle Market. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume: 11 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.1407992

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (46)

  1. Aksoy, E., Ömürbek, N. & Karaatlı, M. (2015). AHP temelli multimoora ve copras yöntemi ile türkiye kömür işletmeleri’nin performans değerlendirmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(4), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.17065/huiibf.10920
  2. Alakaş, H. M., Yazıcı, E., Cebeci, S., Yılmaz, E.E. & Eren, T. (2021). Toplu ulaşım sistemlerinde araç tipi seçimi: Kırıkkale kampüs hattı örneği. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 269-287.
  3. Altın, H. (2022). MOORA yöntemiyle küçük, orta ve büyük ölçekli şirketlerin finansal analizi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi. 37(2). 368-386. https://doi.org/10.24988/ije.877270
  4. Aydın, Ü. (2024). Measuring the performance of electric buses developed for the public transportation system using entropy and WASPAS methods. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 79, 345-359; https://doi.org/10.51290/dpusbe.1397300
  5. Aydın, Ü., Ural, M. & Demireli, E., (2018). Türk bankacılık sektöründe entropi ve WASPAS yöntemleri ile finansal performans ölçümü, Uluslararası Katılımlı 22. Finans Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı. 10 -13 Ekim 2018 – Mersin, 1123-1138
  6. Aytekin, A. (2016). Hastaların hastane tercihinde etkili kriterler ve hastanelerin multimoora ile sıralanması: Eskişehir örneği. İşletme ve İktisat Çalışmaları Dergisi, 4(4), 134-143.
  7. Babacan, A. (2020). Türkiye’de orta gelir grubuna yönelik otomobil seçimi: çok kriterli karar verme yöntemi olarak vikor yöntemi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 21(1), 293-307. https://doi.org/10.37880/cumuiibf.625927
  8. Baležentis, A., Baležentis, T., & Brauers, W. K. (2012). Personnel selection based on computing with words and fuzzy MULTIMOORA. Expert Systems with applications, 39(9), 7961-7967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.01.100
  9. Bauers, W.K.M. & Zavadskas, E.K. (2006). The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy. Control and Cybernetics, 35(2), 445-469.
  10. Biswas, T. K. & Das, M.C. (2019). Selection of commercially available electric vehicle using fuzzy AHP-MABAC. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, 100(3), 531-537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-018-0481-3
  11. Brauers, W. K. M. & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010). Project management by multimoora as an instrument for transition economies. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.01
  12. Brauers, W.K.M. & Zavadskas, E.K. (2012) Robustness of multi- moora: a method for multi-objective optimization. Informatica, 23(1): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2012.346
  13. Chakraborty, S. & Zavadskas, E.K. (2014), Applications of WASPAS method in manufacturing decision making, Informatica, 25(1): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2014.01
  14. Çoşkun, İ.T. (2022a). Çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri ile elektrikli otomobil seçimi: SD-MULTIMOORA yaklaşımı, Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 57(1), 68-82. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.22.01.1735
  15. Çoşkun, İ.T. (2022b). Subjektif ve objektif karar verme teknikleri ile elektrikli araç seçiminde etkili olan kriterlerin değerlendirilmesi, Çukurova Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 26(2), 173-190. https://doi.org/10.51945/cuiibfd.1215799
  16. Demircioğlu, M. & Çoşkun, İ.T. (2018). Critic-moosra yöntemi ve UPS seçimi üzerine bir uygulama. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 27(1), 183-195.
  17. Ecer, F. (2021). A consolidated MCDM framework for performance assessment of battery electric vehicles based on ranking strategies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 143, 110916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110916
  18. European Environment Agency (2022). New registrations of electric vehicles in Europe (europa.eu) Accessed at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/ims/new-registrations-of-electricvehicles. Access Date: 1 July 2022.
  19. Gavcar, E. & Kara, N. (2020). Elektrikli otomobil seçiminde entropi ve topsis yöntemlerinin uygulanması. İş ve İnsan Dergisi, 7(2), 351-359. https://doi.org/10.18394/iid.695702
  20. Gökgöz, F. & Yalçın, E., (2022), Electric vehicle selection with Multi-Criteria decision-making approach in european market, 6th International Conference on Advanced Research in Social Sciences & Humanities, 14-16 October 2022, Prague, Czech Republic, www.icarsh.org. Access Date: 11.12.2023.
  21. Işık, Ö., & Koşaroğlu, M. (2020). Analysis of the financial performance of Turkish listed oil companies through the application of SD and MAUT methods. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 55(3), 1395-1411. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.20.06.1378
  22. Khan, F., Ali, Y. & Khan, A. U. (2020). Sustainable hybrid electric vehicle selection in the context of a developing country. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 13(4), 489-499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00812-y
  23. Kılıç, O., & Çerçioğlu, H. (2016). TCDD iltisak hatları projelerinin değerlendirilmesinde uzlaşık çok ölçütlü karar verme yöntemleri uygulaması. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(1). https://doi.org/10.17341/gummfd.15002
  24. King, N. (2023), EVs forecast to account for two thirds of global light-vehicle sales in 2035, https://www.ev-volumes.com/, Access Date: 11.12.2023.
  25. Koşaroğlu, Ş. M. (2020). Bist’te işlem gören bankaların performanslarının SD ve EDAS yöntemleriyle değerlendirilmesi. Finans Ekonomi ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(3), 406-417. https://doi.org/10.29106/fesa.758281
  26. Maheshwari, N., Choudhary, J., Rath, A., Shinde, D., & Kalita, K. (2021). Finite element analysis and multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM)-based optimal design parameter selection of solid ventilated brake disc, Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, 102(2), 349-359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-020-00650-y
  27. Ömürbek, N., & Aksoy, E. (2017) Ulusal verimlilik istatistiklerine göre imalat sektörlerinin performansının değerlendirmesinde Multi-Moora yönteminin uygulanması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 1-19.
  28. Onat, N. C., Gumus, S., Kucukvar, M. & Tatari, O. (2016). Application of the topsis and Intuitionistic fuzzy set approaches for ranking the life cycle sustainability performance of alternative vehicle technologies, Sustainable Production and Consumption, (6), 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2015.12.003
  29. Otomotiv Distribütörleri & Mobilite Derneği (ODMD), Otomobil ve hafif ticari araç pazarı basın bülteni, (4 Aralık 2023), https://www.odmd.org.tr/folders/2837/categorial1docs/4560/ODMD%20Bas%c4%b1n%20Bulteni%204%20Aral%c4%b1k%202023.pdf, Access Date: 11.12.2023.
  30. Öztaysi, B., Onar, S. C. & Kahraman, C. (2021). Electric vehicle selection by using fuzzy KEMIRA. Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic & Soft Computing, 37, 437-461.
  31. Prakash, A., Mohanty, R. P. (2017). DEA and Monte Carlo simulation approach towards green car selection. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24(5), 1234-1252. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-11-2015-0112
  32. Rani, P., Mishra, A. R., Krishankumar, R., Ravichandran, K. S., & Kar, S. (2021). Multi-criteria food waste treatment method selection using single-valued neutrosophic-criticmultimoora framework. Applied Soft Computing, 111, 107657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107657
  33. Smadi, S. & Hussein, M. (2020). Electric bus in Mena. policy paper, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and Centre For Transport Excellence (CTE. November 2020, Https://Library.Fes.De/Pdf-Files/Bueros/Amman/17182.Pdf (Access Date: 15.11.2023).
  34. Sonar, H. C., & Kulkarni, S. D. (2021). An integrated AHP-MABAC approach for electric vehicle selection. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 41, 100665, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100665
  35. Stanujkic, D., Magdalinovic, N. Jovanovic, R. & Stojanovic, S. (2012). An objective Multi-Criteria approach to optimization using MOORA method and interval grey numbers. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18(2), 331–363. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2012.676996
  36. Taş, A., Yılmaz, L., & Ergör, Z. B. (2021), Logistics location selection in migration management: an analysis of aegean region. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 56(2), 682-697. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.21.04.1549
  37. The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association - ACEA, (2023). Economic and market report: global and EU auto industry – First three quarters 2023, https://www.acea.auto/publication/economic-and-market-report-global-and-eu-auto-industry-first-three-quarters-2023/, Access Date: 11.12.2023.
  38. Türkiye Elektrikli & Hibrid Araçlar Derneği (TEHAD), https://www.tehad.org/2023/01/10/2022-yili-elektrikli-ve-hibrid-otomobil-satis-rakamlari-belli-oldu/, Access Date: 11.12.2023.
  39. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK), (2023), Motorlu kara taşıtları, Ekim 2023, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Motorlu-Kara-Tasitlari-Ekim-2023-49430#:~:text=T%C3%9C%C4%B0K%20Kurumsal&text=Ekim%20ay%C4%B1nda%20trafi%C4%9Fe%20kayd%C4%B1%20yap%C4%B1lan,ini%20%C3%B6zel%20ama%C3%A7l%C4%B1%20ta%C5%9F%C4%B1tlar%20olu%C5%9Fturdu., Access Date: 11.12.2023.
  40. Ulutaş, A., & Karaköy, Ç. (2019). G-20 ülkelerinin lojistik performans endeksinin çok kriterli karar verme modeli ile ölçümü. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 20(2), 71- 84.
  41. Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J., Saparauskas, J. And Turskis, Z. (2013). MCDM methods WASPAS and MULTIMOORA: verification of robustness of methods when assessing alternative solutions. Economic Computation & Economic Cybernetics Studies & Research, 47(2), 1-5
  42. Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J. And Zakarevicius, A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Electronics And Electrical Engineering, 122(6), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810
  43. Zhang, W.G., Lui, Y.J. & Xu, W.J. (2012). A possibilistic mean-semivariance-entropy model for multi-period portfolio selection with transaction costs, European Journal of Operational Research, 222(2), 341-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.04.023
  44. Zhou,R., Cai, R ve Tong, G. (2013). Applications of entropy in finance: a review, Entropy, 15(11), 4909-4931. https://doi.org/10.3390/e15114909
  45. Ziemba, P. (2021). Selection of electric vehicles for the needs of sustainable transport under conditions of uncertainty—a comparative study on fuzzy MCDA methods. Energies, 14(22), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14227786
  46. The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association - ACEA, (2023). Economic and market report: global and EU auto industry – First three quarters 2023, https://www.acea.auto/publication/economic-and-market-report-global-and-eu-auto-industry-first-three-quarters-2023/, Access Date: 11.12.2023.