SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Oğuzhan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1

A DEMATEL BASED DECISION SUPPORT MODEL FOR GREEN AND SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

YEŞİL VE SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR GİRİŞİMCİLİK İÇİN DEMATEL TABANLI BİR KARAR DESTEK MODELİ

Serkan Derici(Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi)0000-0003-2581-6770
Pages
108–119
Publication Date
2026-07-02
🏛️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)

Results show that Sustainability Orientation/Environmental Awareness (0.098) is the most influential factor, followed by Green Innovation Capacity (0.096) and Technological Capability/Digital Infrastructure (0.092).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study analyzes causal relationships among green and sustainable entrepreneurship criteria using the DEMATEL method.
📊
Key Findings & Data:An integrated framework based on Stakeholder Theory, Resource-Based View, and the Triple/Quintuple Helix Model is applied.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results show that Sustainability Orientation/Environmental Awareness (0.098) is the most influential factor, followed by Green Innovation Capacity (0.096) and Technological Capability/Digital Infrastructure (0.092).
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yeşil Girişimcilik · Sürdürülebilir Girişimcilik · DEMATEL Yöntemi

Abstract

This study analyzes causal relationships among green and sustainable entrepreneurship criteria using the DEMATEL method. Existing literature mostly treats factors in isolation and fails to capture interdependencies. An integrated framework based on Stakeholder Theory, Resource-Based View, and the Triple/Quintuple Helix Model is applied. Twelve criteria were evaluated by ten experts and a direct-relation matrix was constructed. Results show that Sustainability Orientation/Environmental Awareness (0.098) is the most influential factor, followed by Green Innovation Capacity (0.096) and Technological Capability/Digital Infrastructure (0.092). The least influential factors are Risk Perception (0.062), Education Level (0.070), and Access to Finance (0.079). The threshold value is 0.380, and K4 and K6 are the most affected criteria. Findings highlight environmental awareness and digital capability as key driving forces in the system. The study provides a decision-support framework for SMEs and contributes to sustainable entrepreneurship literature.

Özet

Bu çalışma, yeşil ve sürdürülebilir girişimcilikte rol oynayan kriterler arasındaki nedensel ilişkileri DEMATEL yöntemi ile analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Literatürde bu alan çoğunlukla faktörleri parçalı ele almakta ve karşılıklı bağımlılıkları yeterince açıklayamamaktadır. Bu boşluğu gidermek için Paydaş Teorisi, Kaynak Tabanlı Görüş ve Beşli Sarmal Modeli çerçevesinde bütüncül bir yaklaşım benimsenmiştir. 12 kriter on uzman görüşüyle değerlendirilmiş ve doğrudan ilişki matrisi oluşturulmuştur. DEMATEL analizine göre en önemli kriter Sürdürülebilirlik Yönelimi/Çevresel Bilinç (0,098), ardından Yeşil İnovasyon Kapasitesi (0,096) ve Teknolojik Yetenek/Dijital Altyapı (0,092) gelmektedir. En düşük kriterler ise Risk Algısı (0,062), Eğitim Düzeyi (0,070) ve Finansmana Erişim (0,079) olarak belirlenmiştir. Eşik değer 0,380 olup, en çok etkilenen kriterler K4 ve K6’dır. Bulgular, çevresel bilinç ve dijital kapasitenin sistemde kritik ve yönlendirici rol oynadığını göstermektedir. Çalışma, özellikle KOBİ’ler için stratejik karar destek çerçevesi sunarak literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Derici, S. (2026). A DEMATEL BASED DECISION SUPPORT MODEL FOR GREEN AND SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP. Oğuzhan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.55580/oguzhan.1966803

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Aksakal, E., & Dağdeviren, M. (2010). ANP ve DEMATEL yöntemleri ile personel seçimi problemine bütünleşik bir yaklaşim. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(4).
  2. Alameri, S. A. S., AL-Barazanchi, S. J. M., Al-Obaidi, N. K. I., & Salman, R. (2024). Advancements in corporate sustainability practices: A systematic review of strategies aligned with sustainable development goals. The Journal of Modern Project Management, 12(2), 68-81.
  3. Allen, J. C. & Malin, S. (2008). Green entrepreneurship: a method for managing natural resources?. Society & Natural https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920701612917
  4. Anabestani, A., & Jahantigh, H. (2018). Investigating the challenges of lacustrine green entrepreneurship development in Sistan area. Spatial Planning, 8(4), 1-26.
  5. Arya, P., Singh, N., Singhal, S., Dadwal, S., & Kalra, D. (2026). Prioritizing Drivers of Sustainability in Entrepreneurship: A Strategic Perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1).
  6. Ballı, A. (2019). Sürdürülebilirlik, sürdürülebilir girişimcilik ve Türkiye’de sürdürülebilir girişimcilik. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 11(29), 464-483.
  7. Barbieri, N., Ghisetti, C., Gilli, M., Marin, G. & Nicolli, F. (2016). A survey of the literature on environmental innovation based on main path analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys, 30(3), 596–623.
  8. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
  9. Bircan, H. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme problemlerinde kriter ağırlıklandırma yöntemleri (1st ed.). Nobel Yayınevi. ISBN: 978-625-406-589-7
  10. Bull, I., & Willard, G. E. (1993). Towards a theory of entrepreneurship. Journal of business venturing, 8(3), 183-195.
  11. Burak, E. (2025). Çevre Ahlakı Bağlamında Yeşil Girişimcilik: Sürdürülebilirlik için Normatif Bir Çerçeve Önerisi. Kent Akademisi, 18(Uluslararası Girişimcilik Sosyal Bilimler Kongresi Özel Sayısı), 110-127.
  12. Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of business venturing, 22(1), 29-49.
  13. Crals, E., & Vereeck, L. (2004, February). Sustainable entrepreneurship in SMEs: Theory and practice. In 3rd Global Conference in Environmental Justice and Global Citizenship, Copenhagen, Denmark (Vol. 12, No. 14, pp. 1-16).
  14. Dean, T. J., & McMullen, J. S. (2007). Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of business venturing, 22(1), 50-76.
  15. Durukan, T. (2006). Dünden bugüne girişimcilik ve 21. yüzyılda girişimciliğin önemi. Girişimcilik ve Kalkınma Dergisi, 1(2), 25-37.
  16. Eroglu, Y., & Rashid, L. (2022). The impact of perceived support and barriers on the sustainable orientation of Turkish startups. Sustainability, 14(8), 4666.
  17. Fontela, E. ve Gabus, A. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center.
  18. Guerrero, M., Liñán, F., & Cáceres-Carrasco, F. R. (2021). The influence of ecosystems on the entrepreneurship process. Small Business Economics, 57(4), 1733-1759.
  19. Hoogendoorn, B., Van der Zwan, P., & Thurik, R. (2019). Sustainable entrepreneurship: The role of perceived barriers and risk. Journal of business ethics, 157(4), 1133-1154.
  20. Hörisch, J. (2015). The role of sustainable entrepreneurship in sustainability transitions: A conceptual synthesis against the background of the multi-level perspective. Administrative Sciences, 5(4), 286-300.
  21. Kamaludin, M. H., Majid, I. A., Saad, M. S. M., & Aziz, N. A. (2012). Sustainability–Driven Entrepreneurship: The Relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Environmental Sustainability Management of SMEs. Paper Id Title Authors Page Number, 217.
  22. Kapusuz, A. G. & Çavuş, M. F. (2017). Geçmişten yeni bir kavram: Yeşil (eko) girişimcilik. Üçüncü sektör sosyal ekonomi dergisi, 52(ÖZELSAYI), 104–119. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyalekonomi.17.12.810
  23. Khan, S., Fatma, N., Ali, S. S., Dhamija, A., & Naqvi, D. (2024). Analysing the barriers of strategic entrepreneurship: a DEMATEL approach. Sustainability, 16(11), 4599.
  24. Kuhlman, T., & Farrington, J. (2010). What is sustainability?. Sustainability, 2(11), 3436-3448.
  25. Li, C. W., & Tzeng, G. H. (2009). Identification of a threshold value for the DEMATEL method using the maximum mean de-entropy algorithm to find critical services provided by a semiconductor intellectual property mall. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6), 9891-9898.
  26. Makki, A. A., Alidrisi, H., Iqbal, A., & Al-Sasi, B. O. (2020). Barriers to green entrepreneurship: An ISM-based investigation. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(11), 249.
  27. Mondal S, Singh S, & Gupta H. (2025). Analyzing the indicators of green entrepreneurship for the sustainable circular economy: a mixed-method approach. Benchmarking: An International Journal.
  28. Okan T, Sarı S & Peker İ. (2016). Girişimcilik başarı faktörü olarak sosyal sermaye kriterlerinin analitik hiyerarşi süreci (AHS) ile ağırlıklandırılması ve bir ölçek önerisi. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12(1), 177-194.
  29. Organ, A. (2013). Bulanık Dematel yöntemiyle makine seçimini etkileyen kriterlerin değerlendirilmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(1), 157-172.
  30. Pankov, S., Velamuri, V. K., & Schneckenberg, D. (2021). Towards sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: Examining the effect of contextual factors on sustainable entrepreneurial activities in the sharing economy. Small Business Economics, 56(3), 1073-1095.
  31. Pinkse, J., & Groot, K. (2015). Sustainable entrepreneurship and corporate political activity: Overcoming market barriers in the clean energy sector. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(3), 633-654.
  32. Revell, A., Stokes, D., & Chen, H. (2010). Small businesses and the environment: turning over a new leaf?. Business strategy and the environment, 19(5), 273-288.
  33. Ropo, A., & Hunt, J. G. (1995). Entrepreneurial processes as virtuous and vicious spirals in a changing opportunity structure: A paradoxical perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(3), 91-111.
  34. Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business strategy and the environment, 20(4), 222-237.
  35. Schaltegger, S., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Hansen, E. G. (2016). Business models for sustainability: A co-evolutionary analysis of sustainable entrepreneurship, innovation, and transformation. Organization & environment, 29(3), 264-289.
  36. Sethupathy, K. (2025). Exploring the Factors Influencing Green Entrepreneurship Among the Northeast Entrepreneurs—An Approach of Gray-decision Making Trial And Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL). IIMS Journal of Management Science, 16(1), 105-131.
  37. Sevinç, A. (2025). Girişimcilikte Başarıya Etki Eden Kriterlerin Tespiti ve Önem Derecelerinin Belirlenmesi. Verimlilik Dergisi, 59(3), 647-660.
  38. Śledzik, K. (2013). Schumpeter’s view on innovation and entrepreneurship. Management Trends in Theory and Practice,(ed.) Stefan Hittmar, Faculty of Management Science and Informatics, University of Zilina & Institute of Management by University of Zilina.
  39. Tseng, M. L., & Lin, Y. H. (2009). Application of fuzzy DEMATEL to develop a cause and effect model of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 158(1), 519-533.
  40. Tur-Porcar, A., Roig-Tierno, N., & Llorca Mestre, A. (2018). Factors affecting entrepreneurship and business sustainability. Sustainability, 10(2), 452.
  41. Volery, T. (2002). Ecopreneurship: Rationale, current issues and future challenges. In H. F. Klandt, J. Mugler, & K. Hauser (Eds.), Umbruch der Welt – KMU vor Höhenflug oder Absturz? (541-553). Köln: Verlag Josef Eul.
  42. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  43. Wu, W. W., & Lee, Y. T. (2007). Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert systems with applications, 32(2), 499-507.
  44. Yun, J. J., Won, D., & Park, K. (2018). Entrepreneurial cyclical dynamics of open innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 28(5), 1151-1174.