SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1

Sustainable Supplier Selection with a Circular Economy Focus Using a Hybrid BWM-MARCOS Approach: Multi-Scenario Optimization Analysis in the Textile Industry

Hibrit BWM-MARCOS Yaklaşımı ile Döngüsel Ekonomi Odaklı Sürdürülebilir Tedarikçi Seçimi: Tekstil Endüstrisinde Çok Senaryolu Optimizasyon Analizi

Burçin Özdamar(IZMIR UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS, FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT)0000-0003-0378-8043
Çağdaş Yildiz(OSMANIYE KORKUT ATA UNIVERSITY)0009-0006-8384-2466
Pages
324–361
Publication Date
2026-06-29
🏛️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 raising the weight of circular economy criteria from 4.5% to 39.7% increases total cost by just 7.77%, while improving capacity utilization by 12.2% and reducing the number of suppliers by 25%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In sustainable supplier selection, the integration of circular economy principles remains limited, and comprehensive methodological models are rarely used.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study addresses that gap by examining supplier selection in the textile industry through a circular economy lens, enhancing strategic decision-making.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results show that raising the weight of circular economy criteria from 4.5% to 39.7% increases total cost by just 7.77%, while improving capacity utilization by 12.2% and reducing the number of suppliers by 25%.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir tedarikçi seçimi · En İyi En Kötü Yöntem · MARCOS

Abstract

In sustainable supplier selection, the integration of circular economy principles remains limited, and comprehensive methodological models are rarely used. This study addresses that gap by examining supplier selection in the textile industry through a circular economy lens, enhancing strategic decision-making. A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model combining the Best-Worst Method (BWM) and the MARCOS method is proposed. Applied to real data from a medium-sized textile firm in Türkiye, the model evaluates supplier performance across three scenarios: cost-oriented, balanced, and circular economy-oriented. Mathematical programming incorporates operational constraints, ensuring practical outcomes. Results show that raising the weight of circular economy criteria from 4.5% to 39.7% increases total cost by just 7.77%, while improving capacity utilization by 12.2% and reducing the number of suppliers by 25%. The proposed scenario framework offers a roadmap for firms moving toward sustainability. A balanced approach is recommended in the short term, with increased circularity and optimized supplier portfolios prioritized in the medium term. Long-term goals should focus on a full transition to circularity. Owing to the consistency of BWM and the stable, reliable rankings produced by MARCOS, the proposed scalable model can be adapted to manufacturing sectors with comparable supply structures and material flows, although its cross-sectoral validity warrants further investigation.

Özet

Sürdürülebilir tedarikçi seçimi süreçlerinde, döngüsel ekonomi ilkelerinin sistematik biçimde entegre edilmediği ve bütünleşik yöntemsel modellere sınırlı düzeyde yer verildiği gözlemlenmektedir. Bu çalışma, bu boşluğu gidermeyi hedefleyerek tekstil endüstrisinde sürdürülebilir tedarikçi seçimini döngüsel ekonomi perspektifiyle ele almakta ve karar destek sürecine alternatifler sunmaktadır. Bu amaçla, En İyi-En Kötü Yöntem (BWM) ve MARCOS yöntemini birleştiren hibrit birçok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) modeli geliştirilmiştir. Model, Türkiye’de faaliyet gösteren orta ölçekli bir tekstil firmasında uygulanmış, maliyet odaklı, dengeli ve döngüsel ekonomi odaklı olmak üzere üç senaryo çerçevesinde analiz gerçekleştirilmiştir. Matematiksel programlama uygulaması sayesinde operasyonel sınırlamalar dikkate alınarak gerçekçi ve uygulanabilir kararlar elde edilmiştir. Bulgular, döngüsel ekonomi kriter ağırlığının %4,5’ten %39,7’ye çıkarılmasının toplam maliyette yalnızca %7,77’lik bir artışa yol açtığını, ancak %12,2 kapasite kullanım iyileştirmesi ve %25 tedarikçi sayısı optimizasyonu sağladığını göstermektedir. Çalışmada uygulanan sistematik senaryo farklılaştırması, işletmelerin sürdürülebilirlik geçişinde izleyebileceği pratik bir yol haritası sunmaktadır. İlk aşamada dengeli bir yaklaşım benimsemek, orta vadede kısıtlamaları artırmak ve uzun vadede tam döngüsel yapıya geçmek, stratejik geçiş için önerilmektedir. Geliştirilen esnek ve ölçeklenebilir hibrit model, benzer tedarik yapısına ve malzeme akışına sahip imalat sektörlerine de uyarlanabilecek bir çerçeve sunmaktadır, ancak modelin sektörler arası geçerliliği, çok firmalı ve karşılaştırmalı uygulamalarla doğrulanmayı gerektirmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdamar, B., Yildiz, Ç., *, B. Ö. (2026). Sustainable Supplier Selection with a Circular Economy Focus Using a Hybrid BWM-MARCOS Approach: Multi-Scenario Optimization Analysis in the Textile Industry. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1, 324–361. https://doi.org/10.48145/gopsbad.1750519

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (54)

  1. Aissaoui, N., Haouari, M., & Hassini, E. (2007). Supplier selection and order lot sizing modeling: A review. Computers & Operations Research, 34(12), 3516-3540.
  2. Alavi, B., Tavana, M., & Mina, H. (2021). A dynamic decision support system for sustainable supplier selection in circular economy. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 905-920.
  3. Alves, G. A., Tavares, R., Amorim, P., & Camargo, V. C. B. (2025). A systematic review of mathematical programming models and solution approaches for the textile supply chain. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 110937.
  4. Avrupa Birliği. (2023). Regulation (EU) 2023/956 establishing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Official Journal of the European Union. Erişim tarihi: 02 Mayıs 2025 https://www.ab.gov.tr/53747_en.html
  5. Avrupa Komisyonu. (2022). EU strategy for sustainable and circular textiles. European Commission, Environment. Erişim tarihi: 01 Haziran 2025, https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/textiles-strategy_en
  6. Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S. S., & Goyal, S. K. (2010). A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers. International Journal of Production Economics, 126(2), 370-378.
  7. Azadnia, A. H., Saman, M. Z. M., & Wong, K. Y. (2015). Sustainable supplier selection and order lot-sizing: An integrated multi-objective decision-making process. International Journal of Production Research, 53(2), 383-408.
  8. Beamon, B. M. (1998). Supply chain design and analysis: Models and methods. International Journal of Production Economics, 55(3), 281-294.
  9. Büyüközkan, G., & 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.
  10. Carter, C. R., & Liane Easton, P. (2011). Sustainable supply chain management: Evolution and future directions. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41(1), 46-62.
  11. Chai, J., Liu, J. N., & Ngai, E. W. (2013). Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), 3872-3885.
  12. Chen, X., Memon, H. A., Wang, Y., Marriam, I., & Tebyetekerwa, M. (2021). Circular economy and sustainability of the clothing and textile industry. Materials Circular Economy, 3(1), 12.
  13. De Felice, F., Fareed, A. G., Zahid, A., Nenni, M. E., & Petrillo, A. (2024). Circular economy practices in the textile industry for sustainable future: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 144547.
  14. Desore, A., & Narula, S. A. (2018). An overview on corporate response towards sustainability issues in textile industry. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 20(4), 1439-1459.
  15. Dos Santos, B. M., Godoy, L. P., & Campos, L. M. (2019). Performance evaluation of green suppliers using entropy-TOPSIS-F. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 498-509.
  16. Dziubaniuk, O., Ivanova-Gongne, M., Kaipainen, J., & Nyholm, M. (2024). Exploring the heuristics behind the transition to a circular economy in the textile industry. Management Decision, 62(11), 3404-3428.
  17. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). A new textiles economy: Redesigning fashion’s future. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/a-new-textiles-economy
  18. Genovese, A., Acquaye, A. A., Figueroa, A., & Koh, S. L. (2017). Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: Evidence and some applications. Omega, 66, 344-357.
  19. Global Climate Initiatives. (2025). The carbon impact of the textile industry: Assessment and sustainable solutions. Erişim tarihi: 20 Haziran 2025, https://globalclimateinitiatives.com/en/limpact-de-lindustrie-du-textile-bilan-et-solution-durable/
  20. Govindan, K., Khodaverdi, R., & Jafarian, A. (2013). A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 345-354.
  21. Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., & Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 66-83.
  22. Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Chatterjee, P., & Yazdani, M. (2019). A structured framework for sustainable supplier selection using a combined BWM-CoCoSo model.
  23. Hemmati, M., & Pasandideh, S. H. R. (2021). A bi-objective supplier location, supplier selection and order allocation problem with green constraints: Scenario-based approach. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 12(8), 8205-8228.
  24. Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24.
  25. Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications—A State-of-the-Art Survey (pp. 58-191). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
  26. ILO - International Labour Organization. (2020). Measuring carbon emissions in the garment sector in Asia (ILO Working Paper No. 53). https://webapps.ilo.org/static/english/intserv/working-papers/wp053/index.html
  27. Jia, F., Yin, S., Chen, L., & Chen, X. (2020). The circular economy in the textile and apparel industry: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259, 120728.
  28. Kannan, D., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., & Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014). Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: Using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company. European Journal of Operational Research, 233(2), 432-447.
  29. Kannan, D., Mina, H., Nosrati-Abarghooee, S., & Khosrojerdi, G. (2020). Sustainable circular supplier selection: A novel hybrid approach. Science of the Total Environment, 722, 137936.
  30. Kazancoglu, I., Kazancoglu, Y., Kahraman, A., Yarimoglu, E., & Soni, G. (2020). Investigating barriers to circular supply chain in the textile industry from stakeholders' perspective. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 25(4-5), 521-548.
  31. Kendall, M. G. (1948). Rank Correlation Methods. Charles Griffin & Company.
  32. KGK (Kamu Gözetimi, Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu). (2023). Türkiye Sürdürülebilirlik Raporlama Standartları (TSRS 1 ve TSRS 2). Resmî Gazete, 29 Aralık 2023, Sayı 32414. (Madde 1).
  33. Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., & Seppälä, J. (2018). Circular economy: The concept and its limitations. Ecological Economics, 143, 37-46.
  34. Kramer, M. R., & Porter, M. (2011). Creating Shared Value (Vol. 17). Boston, MA, USA: FSG.
  35. Leal Filho, W., Perry, P., Heim, H., Dinis, M. A. P., Moda, H., Ebhuoma, E., & Paço, A. (2022). An overview of the contribution of the textiles sector to climate change. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 973102.
  36. Liang, F., Brunelli, M., & Rezaei, J. (2020). Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds. Omega, 96, 102175.
  37. Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 37-56.
  38. Pishvaee, M. S., Rabbani, M., & Torabi, S. A. (2011). A robust optimization approach to closed-loop supply chain network design under uncertainty. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 35(2), 637-649.
  39. Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49-57.
  40. Rezaei, J. (2016). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega, 64, 126-130.
  41. Saaty, T. L. (2013). Analytic hierarchy process. In Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science (pp. 52-64). Springer, Boston, MA.
  42. Saccani, N., Bressanelli, G., & Visintin, F. (2023). Circular supply chain orchestration to overcome Circular Economy challenges: An empirical investigation in the textile and fashion industries. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 35, 469-482.
  43. Saha, K., Dey, P. K., & Kumar, V. (2024). A comprehensive review of circular economy research in the textile and clothing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 444, 141252.
  44. Saha, K., Dey, P. K., & Papagiannaki, E. (2021). Implementing circular economy in the textile and clothing industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(4), 1497-1530.
  45. Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699-1710.
  46. Silva, W. D. O., & Morais, D. C. (2022). Impacts and insights of circular business models’ outsourcing decisions on textile and fashion waste management: A multi-criteria decision model for sorting circular strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 370, 133551.
  47. Srivastava, A., Vyas, V., & Gurtu, A. (2022). Supply chain management and the United Nations sustainable development goals. Operations and Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 15(4), 505-515.
  48. Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., & Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement of alternatives and ranking according to COmpromise solution (MARCOS). Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140, 106231.
  49. Toledo, M. B., Torres Torres, C., Llivisaca, J. C., Peña, M., Siguenza-Guzman, L., & Veintimilla-Reyes, J. (2022). Optimization models used in the textile sector: A systematic review. In International Conference on Applied Technologies (pp. 202-213). Springer, Cham.
  50. Tushar, Z. N., Bari, A. M., & Khan, M. A. (2022). Circular supplier selection in the construction industry: A sustainability perspective for the emerging economies. Sustainable Manufacturing and Service Economics, 1, 100005.
  51. Urbinati, A., Rosa, P., Sassanelli, C., Chiaroni, D., & Terzi, S. (2020). Circular business models in the European manufacturing industry: A multiple case study analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 274, 122964.
  52. Wang, C. N., Huang, Y. F., Chai, Y. C., & Nguyen, V. T. (2020). A multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) for renewable energy plants location selection in Vietnam under a fuzzy environment. Applied Sciences, 8(11), 2069.
  53. Xie, Z., Tian, G., & Tao, Y. (2022). A multi-criteria decision-making framework for sustainable supplier selection in the circular economy and Industry 4.0 era. Sustainability, 14(24), 16809.
  54. Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M., & Schultmann, F. (2016). Sustainable supplier management–A review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. International Journal of Production Research, 54(5), 1412-1442.