从经济、社会和环境方面用多标准决策方法评价经合组织国家

Talip Arsu, Ejder Ayçin
{"title":"从经济、社会和环境方面用多标准决策方法评价经合组织国家","authors":"Talip Arsu, Ejder Ayçin","doi":"10.31181/oresta20402055a","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Exhausted natural resources and deteriorating ecological balance, together with the social privileges that people expect to have, are proof that the development of countries cannot be reduced to economic development alone. In this respect, this study aimed to evaluate the economic, social and environmental aspects of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Within this scope, the countries were firstly divided into two groups by performing cluster analysis in order to create more homogeneous country groups. Then, 12 criteria, consisting of four economic, four social and four environmental criteria, were determined by considering the literature and expert opinions. The criteria importance through intercriteria correlation (CRITIC) method was used to weight the determined criteria and using the calculated criterion weights, the countries in each cluster were then evaluated with the measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) method. As a result, the most successful countries in the first cluster were determined as Switzerland, Denmark and Ireland with 68.8%, 62.7% and 62.5% performance scores, respectively. Whereas, the most unsuccessful countries were USA, Canada and Australia with 49.8%, 50.0% and 50.1% performance scores, respectively. The most successful countries in the second cluster were found as Slovenia, Spain and Portugal with 65.9%, 65.5% and 64.5% performance scores, while the most unsuccessful countries were Turkey, Chile and Colombia with 45.9%, 55.4% and 55.9% performance scores, respectively. Finally, in order to test the sensitivity of the MARCOS method, the solution was repeated with the MAIRCA, WASPAS, MABAC and CoCoSo methods using the weights obtained by the CRITIC method. A high correlation (greater than 80%) was found between the rankings acquired using the other methods and the rankings obtained by the MARCOS method.","PeriodicalId":36055,"journal":{"name":"Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of OECD Countries with Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in terms of Economic, Social and Environmental Aspects\",\"authors\":\"Talip Arsu, Ejder Ayçin\",\"doi\":\"10.31181/oresta20402055a\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Exhausted natural resources and deteriorating ecological balance, together with the social privileges that people expect to have, are proof that the development of countries cannot be reduced to economic development alone. In this respect, this study aimed to evaluate the economic, social and environmental aspects of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Within this scope, the countries were firstly divided into two groups by performing cluster analysis in order to create more homogeneous country groups. Then, 12 criteria, consisting of four economic, four social and four environmental criteria, were determined by considering the literature and expert opinions. The criteria importance through intercriteria correlation (CRITIC) method was used to weight the determined criteria and using the calculated criterion weights, the countries in each cluster were then evaluated with the measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) method. As a result, the most successful countries in the first cluster were determined as Switzerland, Denmark and Ireland with 68.8%, 62.7% and 62.5% performance scores, respectively. Whereas, the most unsuccessful countries were USA, Canada and Australia with 49.8%, 50.0% and 50.1% performance scores, respectively. The most successful countries in the second cluster were found as Slovenia, Spain and Portugal with 65.9%, 65.5% and 64.5% performance scores, while the most unsuccessful countries were Turkey, Chile and Colombia with 45.9%, 55.4% and 55.9% performance scores, respectively. Finally, in order to test the sensitivity of the MARCOS method, the solution was repeated with the MAIRCA, WASPAS, MABAC and CoCoSo methods using the weights obtained by the CRITIC method. A high correlation (greater than 80%) was found between the rankings acquired using the other methods and the rankings obtained by the MARCOS method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta20402055a\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Engineering\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta20402055a","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

枯竭的自然资源和日益恶化的生态平衡,再加上人们期望拥有的社会特权,证明国家的发展不能仅限于经济发展。在这方面,本研究旨在评估经济合作与发展组织(经合组织)国家的经济、社会和环境方面。在这一范围内,首先通过聚类分析将国家分为两组,以创建更同质的国家组。然后,通过文献和专家意见,确定了12个标准,包括4个经济标准、4个社会标准和4个环境标准。通过国家间相关性(CRITIC)方法对确定的标准进行重要性加权,然后使用计算的标准权重,通过衡量备选方案和根据折衷解决方案排序(MARCOS)方法评估每个集群中的国家。因此,第一组中最成功的国家被确定为瑞士、丹麦和爱尔兰,绩效得分分别为68.8%、62.7%和62.5%。而最不成功的国家是美国、加拿大和澳大利亚,绩效得分分别为49.8%、50.0%和50.1%。第二组中最成功的国家是斯洛文尼亚、西班牙和葡萄牙,其绩效得分分别为65.9%、65.5%和64.5%,而最失败的国家是土耳其、智利和哥伦比亚,其绩效分数分别为45.9%、55.4%和55.9%。最后,为了测试MARCOS方法的灵敏度,使用CRITIC方法获得的权重,用MAIRCA、WASPAS、MABAC和CoCoSo方法重复求解。使用其他方法获得的排名与使用MARCOS方法获得的排行之间存在高度相关性(大于80%)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of OECD Countries with Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in terms of Economic, Social and Environmental Aspects
Exhausted natural resources and deteriorating ecological balance, together with the social privileges that people expect to have, are proof that the development of countries cannot be reduced to economic development alone. In this respect, this study aimed to evaluate the economic, social and environmental aspects of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Within this scope, the countries were firstly divided into two groups by performing cluster analysis in order to create more homogeneous country groups. Then, 12 criteria, consisting of four economic, four social and four environmental criteria, were determined by considering the literature and expert opinions. The criteria importance through intercriteria correlation (CRITIC) method was used to weight the determined criteria and using the calculated criterion weights, the countries in each cluster were then evaluated with the measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) method. As a result, the most successful countries in the first cluster were determined as Switzerland, Denmark and Ireland with 68.8%, 62.7% and 62.5% performance scores, respectively. Whereas, the most unsuccessful countries were USA, Canada and Australia with 49.8%, 50.0% and 50.1% performance scores, respectively. The most successful countries in the second cluster were found as Slovenia, Spain and Portugal with 65.9%, 65.5% and 64.5% performance scores, while the most unsuccessful countries were Turkey, Chile and Colombia with 45.9%, 55.4% and 55.9% performance scores, respectively. Finally, in order to test the sensitivity of the MARCOS method, the solution was repeated with the MAIRCA, WASPAS, MABAC and CoCoSo methods using the weights obtained by the CRITIC method. A high correlation (greater than 80%) was found between the rankings acquired using the other methods and the rankings obtained by the MARCOS method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Non-Pharmaceutical Intervention Strategies to Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic: Preference Ranking Method Ranking the Recreational Leadership Factors in the Behavioral Dimension and Selection of the Most Ideal Organizational Citizenship Model A Two-Stage Integrated Model for Supplier Selection and Order Allocation: An Application in Dairy Industry Simulation of Job Sequencing for Stochastic Scheduling with a Genetic Algorithm Optimal Load Scheduling of Home Appliances Considering Operation Conditions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1