Journals / Business and Economics Research Journal / 2022 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 2

Evaluating the Solution of Negative Externalities with the WINGS Method

Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
257–270
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

As a result of this evaluation, it was concluded that public solutions are more effective than market solutions among the solutions of negative externalities.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to evaluate market and public solution proposals by comparing them in the internalization of negative externalities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this framework, ten different criteria recommended in the studies conducted in the relevant field were discussed, and the examinations on these criteria were carried out by academicians working in one of the departments of fiscal theory or fiscal economics.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of this evaluation, it was concluded that public solutions are more effective than market solutions among the solutions of negative externalities.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate market and public solution proposals by comparing them in the internalization of negative externalities. In this framework, ten different criteria recommended in the studies conducted in the relevant field were discussed, and the examinations on these criteria were carried out by academicians working in one of the departments of fiscal theory or fiscal economics. For qualitative views to be converted into quantitative ones, to examine whether criteria are related to each other or not, and to reveal the existing relationships between criteria, WINGS, one of the multi-criteria decision-making techniques, was used as a method. In addition to the WINGS method results, the individual evaluation results of the academicians were given and compared. In this comparison, findings that were compatible and incompatible with the academicians' individual evaluation views were also found. These similarities and differences were discussed in the study, and their possible reasons were revealed. Moreover, within the framework of the effects of criteria on each other, the affecting and affected groups' differentiation were discussed. As a result of this evaluation, it was concluded that public solutions are more effective than market solutions among the solutions of negative externalities. It has been determined that taxes and regulations are the most effective solutions.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, negatif dışsallıkların içselleştirilmesinde önerilen piyasa ve kamusal çözüm önerilerinin karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu çerçevede, ilgili alanda yapılan çalışmalarda yaygın olarak önerilen on farklı kriter ele alınmış, bu kriterlerin değerlendirilmeleri, maliye teorisi veya mali iktisat anabilim dallarından birinde görev yapan akademisyenler tarafından yapılmıştır. Nitel görüşlerin nicel hale getirilebilmesi, birbiri ile ilişkili olan veya olmayan kriterlerin incelenebilmesi ve kriterler arasındaki ilişkilerin ortaya konulabilmesi için çok kriterli karar verme tekniklerinden biri olan WINGS yöntemi kullanılmıştır. WINGS yöntemi sonuçları ile akademisyenlerin tekil değerlendirme sonuçları verilmiş ve bu sonuçlar karşılaştırılmıştır. Yapılan karşılaştırmada akademisyen tekil değerlendirme görüşlerine paralel olan sonuçlar da elde edilmiş, bu görüşlerle uyuşmayan bulgulara da ulaşılmıştır. Bu benzerlikler ve farklılıklar çalışmada ele alınmış, olası nedenleri ile birlikte ortaya konmuştur. Ayrıca kriterlerin birbirileri üzerindeki etkilerine göre, etkileyen grup ve etkilenen grup olarak farklılaşması da incelenmiştir. Yapılan değerlendirme sonucunda negatif dışsallıkların çözüm yolları arasından kamusal çözümlerin, piyasa çözümlerine göre daha etkili olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Vergi ve regülasyonların en etkili çözüm yolları olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BOZATLI, O., COŞKUN, I. T. (2022). Evaluating the Solution of Negative Externalities with the WINGS Method. Business and Economics Research Journal, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 2, 257–270. https://ajindex.com/articles/469819

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Akça, H. (2011). Devlet müdahalesinin başarısızlığı üzerine bir değerlendirme. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 20(3), 179-190.
  2. Akkaya, Ş., & Hepsag, A. (2021). Does fuel tax decrease carbon dioxide emissions in Turkey? Evidence from an asymmetric nonlinear cointegration test and error correction model. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-8.
  3. Aydın, M. (2020). Impacts of environmental taxes on environmental pollution in selected OECD countries: Evidence from causality test with structural breaks. International Journal of Economics and Administrative Studies, (28), 137- 154. Banaś, D., & Michnik, J. (2019). Evaluation of the impact of strategic offers on the financial and strategic health of the company: A soft system Dynamics approach. Mathematics, 7(2), 208. Bashir, M. F., Ma, B., Shahbaz, M., & Jiao, Z. (2020). The nexus between environmental tax and carbon emissions with the roles of environmental technology and financial development. Plos One, 15(11), e0242412. Bator, F.M. (1958). The anatomy of market failure. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 72(3), 351-379.
  4. Baumol, W. J. (1972). On taxation and the control of externalities. The American Economic Review, 62(3), 307-322.
  5. Baumol, W. J., & Oates, W. E. (1971). The use of standards and prices for protection of the environment. The Swedish Journal of Economics, 73(1), 42-54.
  6. Blackman, A., Li, Z., & Liu, A. A. (2018). Efficacy of command-and-control and market-based environmental regulation in developing countries. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 10, 381-404.
  7. Brauers, W. K. M., & Ginevičius, R. (2010). The economy of the Belgian regions tested with multimoora. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 173-209.
  8. Buchanan, J. M., & Stubblebine, W. C. (1962). Externality. Economica, 29(116), 371-384.
  9. Cheng, Z., Li, L., & Liu, J. (2017). The emissions reduction effect and technical progress effect of environmental regulation policy tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 149, 191-205.
  10. Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of socialcost. Journal of Lawand Economics, 3, 1-44. Delgado-Galván, X., Pérez-García, R., Izquierdo, J., & Mora-Rodríguez, J. (2010). An analytic hierarchy process for assessing externalities in water leakage management. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(7-8), 1194- 1202. Dinçer, H., Yüksel, S., & Martinez, L. (2019). Intervaltype 2-based hybrid fuzzy evaluation of financial services in E7 economies with dematel-anp and moora methods. Applie