KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2

İşletmelerde Yeşil Karar Verme: Kriterlerin Sıralanması, Etkileşimlerinin Analizi ve Yeşil Karar Verme Stratejisi Seçimi

Green Decision-Making in Businesses: Ranking of Criteria, Analysis of Their Interactions, and Selection of a Green Decision-Making Strategy

Serkan Derici(Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi)0000-0003-2581-6770
Sayfa
150–177
Yayın Tarihi
2026-09-30
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bulgular, işletmelerin yeşil dönüşüm kararlarını ekonomik, çevresel, teknolojik, kurumsal, sosyo-kültürel ve politik boyutları birlikte dikkate alan bütüncül bir yaklaşımla ele almaları gerektiğini göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu çalışmanın amacı, işletmelerin yeşil karar verme süreçlerini etkileyen kriterleri belirlemek, bu kriterlerin önem düzeylerini ve birbirleriyle olan neden-sonuç ilişkilerini ortaya koymak ve işletmeler açısından en uygun yeşil karar verme stratejisini belirlemektir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu doğrultuda literatür taraması ve uzman görüşleri temel alınarak altı ana kriter ve 24 alt kriterden oluşan bütünleşik bir karar modeli geliştirilmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bulgular, işletmelerin yeşil dönüşüm kararlarını ekonomik, çevresel, teknolojik, kurumsal, sosyo-kültürel ve politik boyutları birlikte dikkate alan bütüncül bir yaklaşımla ele almaları gerektiğini göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Yeşil karar verme · BWM · DEMATEL

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, işletmelerin yeşil karar verme süreçlerini etkileyen kriterleri belirlemek, bu kriterlerin önem düzeylerini ve birbirleriyle olan neden-sonuç ilişkilerini ortaya koymak ve işletmeler açısından en uygun yeşil karar verme stratejisini belirlemektir. Bu doğrultuda literatür taraması ve uzman görüşleri temel alınarak altı ana kriter ve 24 alt kriterden oluşan bütünleşik bir karar modeli geliştirilmiştir. Modelin çözümünde üç farklı çok kriterli karar verme yöntemi birlikte kullanılmıştır. Kriterlerin önem ağırlıklarının belirlenmesinde Best-Worst Method (BWM), kriterler arasındaki karşılıklı etkileşimlerin ve neden-sonuç ilişkilerinin belirlenmesinde DEMATEL ve alternatif stratejilerin sıralanmasında TOPSIS yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Analizler sonucunda kriterlerin yeşil karar verme sistemi içerisinde birbirleriyle yoğun biçimde etkileşim içerisinde olduğu ve bazı kriterlerin diğer kriterleri yönlendiren, bazılarının ise sistemdeki değişimlerden daha fazla etkilenen konumda bulunduğu belirlenmiştir. TOPSIS sonuçlarına göre Proaktif Yeşil Dönüşüm Stratejisi 0,7861 yakınlık katsayısı ile birinci sırada, Dengeli (Hibrit) Yeşil Dönüşüm Stratejisi ise 0,7549 ile ikinci sırada yer almıştır. Monte Carlo simülasyonu ile gerçekleştirilen duyarlılık analizi, kriter ağırlıklarındaki değişimlere rağmen Proaktif Yeşil Dönüşüm Stratejisi'nin üstünlüğünü büyük ölçüde koruduğunu göstermiştir. Bulgular, işletmelerin yeşil dönüşüm kararlarını ekonomik, çevresel, teknolojik, kurumsal, sosyo-kültürel ve politik boyutları birlikte dikkate alan bütüncül bir yaklaşımla ele almaları gerektiğini göstermektedir.

Abstract

This study aims to identify the criteria affecting green decision-making processes in businesses, determine their relative importance and causal relationships, and select the most appropriate green decision-making strategy. Accordingly, an integrated decision model consisting of six main criteria and 24 sub-criteria was developed based on a literature review and expert opinions. Three multi-criteria decision-making methods were integrated into the proposed model. The Best-Worst Method (BWM) was employed to determine the criteria weights, DEMATEL was used to identify the interrelationships and cause-effect structure among the criteria, and TOPSIS was applied to rank alternative green decision-making strategies. The results indicate that the criteria constitute an interconnected decision system in which some factors exert greater influence on other criteria, while others are more strongly affected by changes within the system. According to the TOPSIS results, the Proactive Green Transformation Strategy ranked first with a closeness coefficient of 0.7861, followed by the Balanced (Hybrid) Green Transformation Strategy with a coefficient of 0.7549. The Monte Carlo simulation-based sensitivity analysis further demonstrated that the superiority of the Proactive Green Transformation Strategy remained highly stable under changes in criterion weights. Overall, the findings suggest that businesses should approach green transformation decisions holistically by simultaneously considering economic, environmental, technological, organizational, socio-cultural, and political dimensions.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Derici, S. (2026). İşletmelerde Yeşil Karar Verme: Kriterlerin Sıralanması, Etkileşimlerinin Analizi ve Yeşil Karar Verme Stratejisi Seçimi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 150–177. https://doi.org/10.31200/makuubd.2017746

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (70)

  1. Adamowicz, M. (2022). Green deal, green growth and green economy as a means of support for attaining the sustainable development goals. Sustainability, 14(10), 5901.
  2. Aksakal, E., & Dağdeviren, M. (2010). ANP ve DEMATEL yöntemleri ile personel seçimi problemine bütünleşik bir yaklaşım. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(4).
  3. Banerjee, S. B. (2003). Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature. Organization Studies, 24(1), 143–180.
  4. Bansal, P., & DesJardine, M. R. (2014). Business sustainability: It is about time. Strategic Organization, 12(1), 70–78.
  5. Baumgartner, R. J., & Rauter, R. (2017). Strategic perspectives of corporate sustainability management to develop a sustainable organization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 81–92.
  6. Beki, B. (2022). Otomotiv sektöründe TOPSIS, ORESTE, bulanık TOPSIS ve bulanık ORESTE yöntemleri ile proje seçimi.
  7. Bircan, H. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme problemlerinde kriter ağırlıklandırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
  8. Bonilla, S. H., Silva, H. R., Terra da Silva, M., Franco Gonçalves, R., & Sacomano, J. B. (2018). Industry 4.0 and sustainability implications: A scenario-based analysis of the impacts and challenges. Sustainability, 10(10), 3740.
  9. Busic-Sontic, A., Czap, N. V., & Fuerst, F. (2017). The role of personality traits in green decision-making. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 313–328.
  10. Chen, L., Msigwa, G., Yang, M., Osman, A. I., Fawzy, S., Rooney, D. W., & Yap, P. S. (2022). Strategies to achieve a carbon neutral society: A review. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 20(4), 2277–2310.
  11. Chwialkowska, A., Bhatti, W. A., Bujac, A., & Abid, S. (2024). An interplay of the consumption values and green behavior in developed markets: A sustainable development viewpoint. Sustainable Development, 32(4), 3771–3785.
  12. Çakır, E., & Can, M. (2019). Best-worst yöntemine dayalı ARAS yöntemi ile dış kaynak kullanım tercihinin belirlenmesi: Turizm sektöründe bir uygulama. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 23(3), 1273–1300.
  13. Duong, C. D. (2026). Wiring the green shift: How digital dynamic capabilities shape the circular economy through curvilinear effects of green innovation. Thunderbird International Business Review.
  14. Elsawy, M., & Youssef, M. (2023). Economic sustainability: Meeting needs without compromising future generations. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 15(10), 23–31.
  15. Fontela, E., & Gabus, A. (1974). DEMATEL: Progress achieved. Futures, 6(4), 361–363.
  16. Gallo, H., Khadem, A., & Alzubi, A. (2023). The relationship between big data analytic-artificial intelligence and environmental performance: A moderated mediated model of green supply chain collaboration (GSCC) and top management commitment (TMC). Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2023(1), 4980895.
  17. Guo, X., Huang, S., & Wang, Y. (2020). Influence of agricultural mechanization development on agricultural green transformation in Western China, based on the ML index and spatial panel model. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020(1), 6351802.
  18. Hailiang, Z., Khokhar, M., Islam, T., & Sharma, A. (2023). A model for green-resilient supplier selection: Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(18), 54035–54058.
  19. Hajian, M., & Kashani, S. J. (2021). Evolution of the concept of sustainability: From Brundtland Report to sustainable development goals. In Sustainable resource management (pp. 1–24). Elsevier.
  20. Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.
  21. Heshmati, A. (2014). An empirical survey of the ramifications of a green economy (IZA Discussion Paper No. 8078).
  22. Hosta, M., & Zabkar, V. (2021). Antecedents of environmentally and socially responsible sustainable consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(2), 273–293.
  23. Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
  24. Jain, V., Kumar, S., Kumar, A., & Chandra, C. (2016). An integrated buyer initiated decision-making process for green supplier selection. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 41, 256–265.
  25. Jnr, B. A., Majid, M. A., & Romli, A. (2018). A proposed model for green practice adoption and implementation in information technology based organizations. Problemy Ekorozwoju, 13(1), 95–112.
  26. Jonassen, D. H. (2012). Designing for decision making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(2), 341–359.
  27. Kebe, I. A., Liu, Y., & Kahl, C. (2025). Greener solutions: Green transformational leadership and sustainable environmental outcomes within Sierra Leone's telecom sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 517, 145811.
  28. 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.
  29. Lokuge, S., Sedera, D., Cooper, V., & Burstein, F. (2020). Digital transformation: Environmental friend or foe? Panel discussion at the Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2019. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.12034.
  30. Lucas, R. E. (2002). The industrial revolution: Past and future. Lectures on Economic Growth, 109, 188.
  31. Ma, W., Zhang, R., & Chai, S. (2019). What drives green innovation? A game theoretic analysis of government subsidy and cooperation contract. Sustainability, 11(20), 5584.
  32. Marsh, P. (2012). The new industrial revolution: Consumers, globalization and the end of mass production. Yale University Press.
  33. Medvedieva, M., Yedeliev, R., Reznikova, N., Nanavov, A., & Grydasova, G. (2024). European strategy for achieving climate neutrality and analysis of legal instruments for its implementation. Social and Legal Studios, 2(7), 64–74.
  34. Meijer, A., & De Jong, J. (2020). Managing value conflicts in public innovation: Ostrich, chameleon, and dolphin strategies. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(11), 977–988.
  35. Melnyk, L. H., Kubatko, O. V., Dehtyarova, I. B., Matsenko, O. M., & Rozhko, O. D. (2019). The effect of industrial revolutions on the transformation of social and economic systems.
  36. Mohajan, H. (2019). The second industrial revolution has brought modern social and economic developments.
  37. Monish, P., & Dhanabhakyam, M. (2021). Sustainability strategies for developing SMEs and entrepreneurship. In Handbook of research on sustaining SMEs and entrepreneurial innovation in the post-COVID-19 era (pp. 527–547). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
  38. Nafei, A., Azizi, S. P., Edalatpanah, S. A., & Huang, C. Y. (2024). Smart TOPSIS: A neural network-driven TOPSIS with neutrosophic triplets for green supplier selection in sustainable manufacturing. Expert Systems with Applications, 255, 124744.
  39. Nassar, N., & Strielkowski, W. (2022). Transition towards green financial sector for gaining newly perceived competitiveness by adopting a green management model. Insights into Regional Development, 4(1), 71–88.
  40. Organ, A. (2013). Bulanık DEMATEL yöntemiyle makine seçimini etkileyen kriterlerin değerlendirilmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(1), 157–172.
  41. Podobnik, B. (2006). Global energy shifts. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI).
  42. Pokharel, P. R., AlQahtani, M. S., Lodh, S., & Nandy, M. (2026). Political appointment of executives, green action and firm performance: Evidence from the World Bank Enterprise Survey. Business Strategy and the Environment.
  43. Porter, M. E., & Linde, C. V. D. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.
  44. Rehman, A. (2025). The role of building information modeling (BIM) in risk management for sustainable bridge projects: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sustainable Development and Policy, 1(1), 198–223.
  45. Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49–57.
  46. Rhouiri, M., Bensouda, M., & Meyabe, M. H. (2025). Green decision-making competencies in sustainable development: A systematic review. In Building a green future through essential decision-making competencies (pp. 471–490).
  47. Scholl, G., Rubik, F., Kalimo, H., Biedenkopf, K., & Söebech, Ó. (2010). Policies to promote sustainable consumption: Innovative approaches in Europe. Natural Resources Forum, 34(1), 39–50.
  48. Sharma, A., & Singh, B. J. (2020). Evolution of industrial revolutions: A review. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 9(11), 66–73.
  49. Sharma, K., Aswal, C., & Paul, J. (2023). Factors affecting green purchase behavior: A systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 2078–2092.
  50. Shrivastava, P., & Hart, S. (1995). Creating sustainable corporations. Business Strategy and the Environment, 4(3), 154–165.
  51. Singh, R. L., & Singh, P. K. (2016). Global environmental problems. In Principles and applications of environmental biotechnology for a sustainable future (pp. 13–41). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
  52. Smith, A. D. (2013). Successful green-based initiatives among large corporate entities: A case study from a stakeholder perspective. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 14(1), 95–114.
  53. Srivastava, N., & Mittal, A. (2026). How does green trust mediate the relationship between environmental concern and green brand knowledge during green purchases? Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, 75(3–4), 1654–1671.
  54. Tai, F. M., & Chuang, S. H. (2014). Corporate social responsibility. I-Business, 6(3), 117.
  55. Tangi, M., & Amaranto, A. (2025). Designing integrated and resilient multi-energy systems via multi-objective optimization and scenario analysis. Applied Energy, 382, 125281.
  56. Tetik, S. (2020). Strategic leadership in perspective of Industry 4.0.
  57. Tran, A. V., & Khoa, B. T. (2025). Integrating leadership, identity, and knowledge systems for sustainable performance in the era of digital transformation. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 887.
  58. Truong, D. D., & Lan, B. T. H. (2025). Harnessing digital voices for a greener future: The role of eWOM and information adoption in shaping green investment decisions. Environmental Research Communications, 7(6), 065027.
  59. Tsai, W. H., Chang, J. C., Hsieh, C. L., Tsaur, T. S., & Wang, C. W. (2016). Sustainability concept in decision-making: Carbon tax consideration for joint product mix decision. Sustainability, 8(12), 1232.
  60. Tsai, W. H., Tsaur, T. S., Chou, Y. W., Liu, J. Y., Hsu, J. L., & Hsieh, C. L. (2015). Integrating the activity-based costing system and life-cycle assessment into green decision-making. International Journal of Production Research, 53(2), 451–465.
  61. 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.
  62. Tüyen, Z. (2020). İşletmelerde sürdürülebilirlik kavramı ve sürdürülebilirliği etkileyen etmenler. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(37), 91–117.
  63. Ulucak, R., Yücel, A. G., & Koçak, E. (2019). The process of sustainability: From past to present. In Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) (pp. 37–53). Academic Press.
  64. Wang, S., Liu, L., Wen, J., & Wang, G. (2024). Product pricing and green decision-making considering consumers' multiple preferences under chain-to-chain competition. Kybernetes, 53(1), 152–187.
  65. Wu, P., Zhao, G., & Li, Y. (2022). Green mining strategy selection via an integrated SWOT-PEST analysis and fuzzy AHP-MARCOS approach. Sustainability, 14(13), 7577.
  66. Wu, S., Yao, X., & Wu, G. (2020). Environmental investment decision of green supply chain considering the green uncertainty. Complexity, 2020(1), 8871901.
  67. Wu, W. W., & Lee, Y. T. (2007). Developing global managers' competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(2), 499–507.
  68. Wu, Z., & Pagell, M. (2011). Balancing priorities: Decision-making in sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Operations Management, 29(6), 577–590.
  69. Yalcıner, A. Y., & Çaylak, İ. (2020). Türkiye’de dijital dönüşüme başlangıç için AHP ve TOPSIS yöntemleri ile sektörel sıralama. Academic Platform-Journal of Engineering and Science, 8(2), 258–265.
  70. Zhang, S., Li, Y., & Hong, A. (2025). The impact of green inclusive leadership on green innovation in Chinese SMEs: The mediating roles of green knowledge sharing and green organizational identity. Sustainability, 17(3), 1180.