Journals / TİSK Akademi / 2010 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 9

Constructing sustainable development score for Turkey

Türkiye için sürdürülebilir kalkınma Skoru Geliştirilmesi

Pages
44–63
DOI
—
🏛️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 this study, Turkey’s sustainable development index for 1990-2007 were constructed by using sustainable development indicators by means of one of the indicators aggregation method which is principal component analysis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The concept of sustainable development has arisen with the deplation of natural resources and a set of measures and policies were began to build.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To produce policy in high quality for decision makers, it is important to provide brief and accurate information to help them in their decision process.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, Turkey’s sustainable development index for 1990-2007 were constructed by using sustainable development indicators by means of one of the indicators aggregation method which is principal component analysis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The concept of sustainable development has arisen with the deplation of natural resources and a set of measures and policies were began to build. As the concept of sustainable development developed, traditional indicators such as GDP had became inefficient and many different indicators were proposed. As this indicator sets grow, their structure became complicated and bulky. To produce policy in high quality for decision makers, it is important to provide brief and accurate information to help them in their decision process. For that reason, those indicators became important decision support system and various methods were developed to provide brief information to policy and decision makers. In this study, Turkey’s sustainable development index for 1990-2007 were constructed by using sustainable development indicators by means of one of the indicators aggregation method which is principal component analysis.

Özet

Sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramı, doğal kaynakların tükenmeye başlamasıyla birlikte ortaya çıkmış ve bir takım önlemler alınmaya ve politikalar oluşturulmaya başlanmıştır. Sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramı geliştikçe, GSYH gibi geleneksel göstergeler yetersiz kalmış ve ortaya farklı göstergeler çıkmış ve bu gösterge setleri geliştikçe GSYH ağır ve hantal bir yapıya dönüşmüştür. Kaliteli politikalar üretebilmek için karar vericilere karar alma sürecinde yardımcı olmak amacıyla doğru ve özet bilginin sağlanması önemlidir. Bu yüzden göstergeler, sürdürülebilir kalkınma politikaları için önemli karar destek sistemi haline gelmiş ve karar vericilere ve politika yapıcılara bu göstergelerden özet bilgi sağlamak için çeşitli metodlar geliştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, sürdürülebilir kalkınma göstergeleri kullanılarak, gösterge toplulaştırma metodlarından biri olan temel bileşenler analizi yardımıyla, Türkiye için 1990-2007 dönemini kapsayan sürdürülebilir kalkınma endeksi oluşturulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

TATLIDİL, H., ÜNAL, E. (2010). Constructing sustainable development score for Turkey. TİSK Akademi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 9, 44–63. https://ajindex.com/articles/364575

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Alfsen, K. H. ve Saebo, H. V. (1993). Environmental Quality Indicators: Background, Principles and Examples from Norway. Environmental and Resource Economics. 3, 415-435
  2. Atabek A. (2005). A Composite Leading Indicator for The Turkish Economic Activity. Central Bank of The Republic of Turkey. 13, 10 Eylül 2009 tarihinde http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/ yeni/ evds/ yayin/ kitaplar/kitapcikistatistik.pdf adresinden ziyaret edildi. Avrupa Komisyonu (2005). Avrupa Konseyi Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Stratejisi. Avrupa Topluluğu Resmi Basım Ofisi. Brüksel Boisevert, V., Holec, N. ve Vivien, D. (1998). Valuation for Sustainable Development: Methods and Policy Indicators. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Bradbury, R. (1996). Are Indicators Yesterday's News? Proceedings of the Fenner Conference Tracking Progress: Linking Environment and Economy Through Indicators and Accounting Systems. Sydney: University of New South Wales Callens, I. ve Tyteca, D. (1999). Towards Indicators of Sustainable Development for Firms. Ecological Economics. 28(1), 41-53
  3. European Comission (2004). EU Member State Experiences with Sustainable Development Indicators. Brussel: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities Farsari, Y., Prastacos, P. (2002). Sustainable Development Indicators: An Overview, in Citizens. Sustainable Development, Environment, Foundation for Mediterranean Cooperation. Athens, Greece Gustafsson, K., Longeran S., Ruitenbeek H.J. (1999). Selection and Modelling of Sustainable Development Indicators: A Case Study of the Fraser River Basin. Ecological Economics. 28(1), 117-132
  4. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. L., Tatham, R. L., Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Hardi, P., Barg, S. (1997). Measuring Sustainable Development: Review of Current Practice, International Institute for Sustainable Development. Ontarino: Industry Canada Heycox, J. (1999). Integrating Data for Sustainable Development: Introducing the Distribution of Resources Framework, Novartis Foundation Symposium 220: Environmental Statistics -Analysing Data For Environmental Policy. London: John Wiley & Sons Jollife, I.T. (1986). Principle Component Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag Karpuz, S. (2002). Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmanın Zaman Yolculuğu. İktisat İşletme ve Finans. 198, 9-12
  5. Lohani, B. ve Todino, G. (1984). Water Quality Index for Chao Phraya River. Journal of Environmental Engineering. 110, 1163–1176
  6. Luxem, M. ve Bryld, B. (1997). Introductory Box: the CSD W