SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dijital Çağda İşletmecilik Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1

EVALUATING OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY IN THE CIVIL AVIATION SECTOR USING NETWORK DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS: A TURKEY ANALYSIS DURING THE COVID-19 PERIOD

SİVİL HAVACILIK SEKTÖRÜNDE OPERASYONEL VE FİNANSAL ETKİNLİĞİN AĞ YAPILI VERİ ZARFLAMA ANALİZİ İLE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ: COVID-19 DÖNEMİ TÜRKİYE ANALİZİ

Ebru Tüzemen0009-0000-8843-7984
Pages
81–101
Publication Date
2026-08-31
🏛️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 operational efficiency average (0.886) is higher than financial efficiency (0.681).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study evaluates the operational and financial efficiency of five airline companies in the Turkish civil aviation sector during 2019-2023 using two-stage network data envelopment analysis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results show that operational efficiency average (0.886) is higher than financial efficiency (0.681).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study provides methodological contributions and targeted managerial recommendations for firms.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2019-2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ağ yapılı Veri zarflama analizi · havayolu etkinliği · finansal performans

Abstract

This study evaluates the operational and financial efficiency of five airline companies in the Turkish civil aviation sector during 2019-2023 using two-stage network data envelopment analysis. The first stage measures the efficiency of converting operational inputs into flight production, while the second stage assesses the conversion of operational outputs into financial ratios. Shannon entropy for objective weighting, fuzzy logic for uncertainty modeling, and translation invariance for negative value transformation were employed. Results show that operational efficiency average (0.886) is higher than financial efficiency (0.681). Only 16 percent of decision-making units are fully efficient in both stages. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a 65 percent decrease in financial efficiency in 2020, but the sector exceeded pre-pandemic levels in 2023, demonstrating strong recovery capacity. Friedman test found year differences statistically significant (p=0.003). The study provides methodological contributions and targeted managerial recommendations for firms.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Türkiye sivil havacılık sektöründe faaliyet gösteren beş havayolu firmasının 2019-2023 dönemindeki operasyonel ve finansal etkinliklerini iki aşamalı ağ yapılı veri zarflama analizi ile değerlendirmektedir. İlk aşamada operasyonel girdilerin uçuş üretimine, ikinci aşamada operasyonel çıktıların finansal rasyolara dönüşüm etkinliği hesaplanmıştır. Shannon entropi yöntemiyle objektif ağırlıklandırma, bulanık mantık ile belirsizlik modelleme ve öteleme değişmezliği ile negatif değer dönüşümü uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, operasyonel etkinlik ortalamasının (0.886) finansal etkinlikten (0.681) yüksek olduğunu göstermiştir. Sadece yüzde 16 karar verme birimi her iki aşamada tam etkindir. COVID-19 pandemisi 2020 yılında finansal etkinlikte yüzde 65 azalmaya neden olmuş, ancak sektör 2023 yılında salgın öncesi seviyelerin üzerine çıkarak güçlü toparlanma kapasitesi göstermiştir. Friedman testi yıllar arası farkları anlamlı bulmuştur (p=0.003). Çalışma, metodolojik katkı sağlamakta ve firmalar için hedefe yönelik yönetsel öneriler sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Tüzemen, E. (2026). EVALUATING OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY IN THE CIVIL AVIATION SECTOR USING NETWORK DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS: A TURKEY ANALYSIS DURING THE COVID-19 PERIOD. Dijital Çağda İşletmecilik Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1, 81–101. https://doi.org/10.46238/jobda.1870382

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (62)

  1. Abate, M., Christidis, P., & Purwanto, A. J. (2020). Government support to airlines in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Air Transport Management, 89, 101931.
  2. Asker, V. (2022). Düşük maliyetli havayolu işletmelerinde bulanık veri zarflama analizi ile finansal ve operasyonel etkinlik ölçümü. Dicle Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(23), 1-25.
  3. Aydın, U., Karadayi, M. A., & Ülengin, F. (2020). How efficient airways act as role models and in what dimensions? A superefficiency DEA model enhanced by social network analysis. Journal of Air Transport Management, 82, 101725.
  4. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078-1092.
  5. Barros, C. P., & Peypoch, N. (2009). An evaluation of European airlines' operational performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 122(2), 525-533.
  6. Budd, L., Ison, S., & Adrienne, N. (2020). European airline response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Contraction, consolidation and future considerations for airline business and management. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 37, 100578.
  7. Chang, Y. C., & Yu, M. M. (2014). Measuring production and consumption efficiencies using the slack-based measure network data envelopment analysis approach: The case of low-cost carriers. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 48(1), 15-31.
  8. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444.
  9. Chen, Y., Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2010). Deriving the DEA frontier for two-stage processes. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 138-142.
  10. Chen, Z., Tzeremes, P., & Tzeremes, N. G. (2018). Convergence in the Chinese airline industry: A Malmquist productivity analysis. Journal of Air Transport Management, 73, 77-86.
  11. Cook, W. D., Liang, L., & Zhu, J. (2010). Measuring performance of two-stage network structures by DEA: A review and future perspective. Omega, 38(6), 423-430.
  12. Cui, Q., & Yu, L. T. (2021). A review of data envelopment analysis in airline efficiency: State of the art and prospects. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021, 2931734.
  13. Cui, Q., Li, Y., & Lin, J. L. (2018). Pollution abatement costs change decomposition for airlines: An analysis from a dynamic perspective. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 111, 96-107.
  14. Derici, S., & Uygur, K. (2019). Türkiye'de faaliyet gösteren iki havayolu şirketinin veri zarflama analizi ile etkinlik ölçümü. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(4), 1107-1118.
  15. Doğan, M. A., Doğan, E. M., & Eren, M. (2024). Comparative network efficiency analysis of the airlines in Turkey after deregulation. Bulletin of Economic Theory and Analysis, 9(1), 185-218.
  16. Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2000). Network DEA. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 34(1), 35-49.
  17. Fethi, M. D., Jackson, P. M., & Weyman-Jones, T. G. (2000). Measuring the efficiency of European airlines: An application of DEA and Tobit analysis. University of Leicester Working Paper, 00/15.
  18. Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32(200), 675-701.
  19. Gao, X., Zhao, X., Yu, Q., & Ge, W. (2024). Assessing airline operational efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative study of pre-and post-pandemic performance. CICTP 2024 (pp. 3573-3584).
  20. Greer, M. R. (2006). Are the discount airlines actually more efficient than the legacy carriers?: A data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Transport Economics, 33(1), 37-57.
  21. Gudmundsson, S. V., Cattaneo, M., & Redondi, R. (2021). Forecasting temporal world recovery in air transport markets in the presence of large economic shocks: The case of COVID-19. Journal of Air Transport Management, 91, 102007.
  22. Güner, S., Cebeci, H. I., Antunes, J. J. M., & Wanke, P. F. (2021). Sustainable efficiency drivers in Eurasian airports: Fuzzy NDEA approach based on Shannon's entropy. Journal of Air Transport Management, 92, 102039.
  23. Heydari, C., Omrani, H., & Taghizadeh, R. (2020). A fully fuzzy network DEA-Range Adjusted Measure model for evaluating airlines efficiency: A case of Iran. Journal of Air Transport Management, 89, 101923.
  24. Hwang C.L. ve Yoon K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.
  25. Jenatabadi, H. S., & Ismail, N. A. (2014). Application of structural equation modelling for estimating airline performance. Journal of Air Transport Management, 40, 25-33.
  26. Kao, C. (2013). Dynamic data envelopment analysis: A relational analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 227(2), 325-330.
  27. Kao, C., & Hwang, S. N. (2008). Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. European Journal of Operational Research, 185(1), 418-429.
  28. Kao, C., & Hwang, S. N. (2010). Efficiency measurement for network systems: IT impact on firm performance. Decision Support Systems, 48(3), 437-446.
  29. Keleş, M. K. (2023). Geleneksel havayolu firmalarının pandemi öncesi ve sonrası etkinliğinin veri zarflama analizi ile ölçülmesi. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, 10(3), 1976-1987.
  30. Kottas, A. T., & Madas, M. A. (2018). Comparative efficiency analysis of major international airlines using Data Envelopment Analysis: Exploring effects of alliance membership and other operational efficiency determinants. Journal of Air Transport Management, 70, 1-17.
  31. Lee, B., & Worthington, A. (2010). The relative efficiency of international, domestic, and budget airlines: Nonparametric evidence. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 44(2), 191-208.
  32. Liang, L., Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2008). DEA models for two-stage processes: Game approach and efficiency decomposition. Naval Research Logistics, 55(7), 643-653.
  33. Mallikarjun, S. (2015). Efficiency of US airlines: A strategic operating model. Journal of Air Transport Management, 43, 46-56.
  34. Merkert, R., & Mangia, L. (2014). Efficiency of Italian and Norwegian airports: A matter of management or of the level of competition in remote regions? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 62, 30-38.
  35. Nižetić, S. (2020). Impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on air transport mobility, energy, and environment: A case study. International Journal of Energy Research, 44(13), 10953-10961.
  36. Omrani, H., & Soltanzadeh, E. (2016). Dynamic DEA models with network structure: An application for Iranian airlines. Journal of Air Transport Management, 57, 52-61.
  37. Öztürk, O., & Serin, Z. V. (2025). Financial efficiency in airlines during the COVID-19 pandemic: A DEA approach. Journal of Transportation and Logistics, 10(2), 454-471.
  38. Peoples, J., Abdullah, M. A., & Satar, N. M. (2023). COVID-19 and airline performance in the Asia Pacific region. Emerald Open Research, 1(4), 7.
  39. Pineda, P. J. G., Liou, J. J., Hsu, C. C., & Chuang, Y. C. (2018). An integrated MCDM model for improving airline operational and financial performance. Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, 103-117.
  40. Schefczyk, M. (1993). Operational performance of airlines: An extension of traditional measurement paradigms. Strategic Management Journal, 14(4), 301-317.
  41. Scheraga, C. A. (2004). The relationship between operational efficiency and customer service: A global study of thirty-eight large international airlines. Transportation Journal, 43(3), 48-58.
  42. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379-423.
  43. Shirazi, F., & Mohammadi, E. (2019). Evaluating efficiency of airlines: A new robust DEA approach with undesirable output. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 33, 100467.
  44. Suau-Sanchez, P., Voltes-Dorta, A., & Cugueró-Escofet, N. (2020). An early assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on air transport: Just another crisis or the end of aviation as we know it? Journal of Transport Geography, 86, 102749.
  45. Sun, X., Wandelt, S., & Zhang, A. (2021). On the degree of synchronization between air transport connectivity and COVID-19 cases at worldwide level. Transport Policy, 105, 115-123.
  46. Sun, X., Zheng, C., Fu, X., Dresner, M., Zhang, A., & Wandelt, S. (2026). Global airline productivity analysis for the year 2022. Journal of Air Transport Management, 133, 102955.
  47. Şahin, İ. E. (2019). Türkiye'deki havalimanlarının veri zarflama analizi ve Malmquist toplam faktör verimliliği endeksleri ile finansal etkinliklerinin analizi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 42, 33-47.
  48. Tüzemen, A., & Aslan, E. (Eds.). (2021). Karar vericinin el kitabı: Yöntem – uygulama – örnekler (1. bs.). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  49. Voltes-Dorta, A., Britto, R., & Wilson, B. (2024). Efficiency of global airlines incorporating sustainability objectives: A Malmquist-DEA approach. Journal of Air Transport Management, 119, 102634.
  50. Wang, H. F., Lu, W. M., & Nguyen, T. H. Y. (2025). Investigating the interplay among business strategy, corporate social responsibility, and firm performance in the tourism industry with meta chance-constrained DEA and path analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 32(1), 1-19.
  51. Wang, W. K., Lin, F., Ting, I. W. K., Kweh, Q. L., Lu, W. M., & Chiu, T. Y. (2017). Does asset-light strategy contribute to the dynamic efficiency of global airlines? Journal of Air Transport Management, 62, 99-108.
  52. Wang, Y. M., & Chin, K. S. (2011). Fuzzy data envelopment analysis: A fuzzy expected value approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 11678-11685.
  53. Wu, J., Sun, J., Liang, L., & Zha, Y. (2011). Determination of weights for ultimate cross efficiency using Shannon entropy. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(5), 5162-5165.
  54. Wu, S., Kremantzis, M. D., Tanveer, U., Ishaq, S., O'Dea, X., & Jin, H. (2024). Performance evaluation of the global airline industry under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: A dynamic network data envelopment analysis approach. Journal of Air Transport Management, 118, 102597.
  55. Wu, W. Y., & Liao, Y. K. (2014). A balanced scorecard envelopment approach to assess airlines' performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(1), 123-143.
  56. Xie, Q., Dai, Q., Li, Y., & Jiang, A. (2014). Increasing the discriminatory power of DEA using Shannon's entropy. Entropy, 16(3), 1571-1585.
  57. Yang, Z., Omrani, H., & Imanirad, R. (2024). Assessing airline efficiency with a network DEA model: A Z-number approach with shared resources, undesirable outputs, and negative data. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 96, 102080.
  58. Yıldız, Ç. (2026). Ayakkabı İmalatında Sürdürülebilir Üretim için Endüstriyel Makine Seçimi: SWARA ve Bulanık VIKOR Temelli Bütünleşik Bir Yaklaşım. Trends in Business and Economics, 40(1), 27-41.
  59. Yu, M. M., & Nguyen, M. A. T. (2023). Productivity changes of Asia-Pacific airlines: A Malmquist productivity index approach for a two-stage dynamic system. Omega, 115, 102774.
  60. Yu, M. M., Chen, L. H., & Chiang, H. (2017). The effects of alliances and size on airlines' dynamic operational performance. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 106, 197-214.
  61. Zhou, P., & Ang, B. W. (2009). Comparing MCDA aggregation methods in constructing composite indicators using the Shannon-Spearman measure. Social Indicators Research, 94(1), 83-96.
  62. Zhou, P., Fan, L. W., & Zhou, D. Q. (2010). Data aggregation in constructing composite indicators: A perspective of information loss. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(1), 360-365.