IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijofsd/346649.html

An Experimental Factor Analysis Study Using SAW and TOPSIS to Select and Rank Organic Agriculture Cities in Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Cal, Murat
  • Sahin, Ramazan

Abstract

The agriculture sector supports Turkey’s GDP portfolio economically and helps establish a sustainable labor force. Turkey has certain competitive advantages in terms of the organic production of agricultural goods like figs and hazelnuts. We conduct a factor analysis using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods combined with a 3-level set (export volume, export value, and adequacy rate) to rank 32 candidate cities of Turkey where organic agriculture activities should be given more emphasis to support overall production and export rates. 18 different sets of importance values were used for this purpose and their combinatorial effects on candidate cities were analyzed. The factor analysis results show that the cities Izmir, Aydin, Adiyaman, Gaziantep, Agri, Mus, and Van have the highest potentials among all Turkish cities in both methods, while Sanliurfa also shows high potential for organic agriculture in the TOPSIS method.

Suggested Citation

  • Cal, Murat & Sahin, Ramazan, 2021. "An Experimental Factor Analysis Study Using SAW and TOPSIS to Select and Rank Organic Agriculture Cities in Turkey," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 12(02), June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijofsd:346649
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.346649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/346649/files/AN%20EXPERIMENTAL%20FACTOR%20ANALYSIS%20STUDY%20USING.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.346649?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. West Churchman & Russell L. Ackoff, 1954. "An Approximate Measure of Value," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 172-187, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aytekin, Ahmet & Korucuk, Selçuk & Görçün, Ömer Faruk, 2024. "Determining the factors affecting transportation demand management and selecting the best strategy: A case study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 150-166.
    2. Dorota Górecka & Ewa Roszkowska & Tomasz Wachowicz, 2016. "The MARS Approach in the Verbal and Holistic Evaluation of the Negotiation Template," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 1097-1136, November.
    3. Fishburn, Peter C. & LaValle, Irving H., 1996. "Binary interactions and subset choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 182-192, July.
    4. Willem K. M. Brauers, 2012. "Project Management for a Country with Multiple Objectives," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 6(1), pages 80-101, March.
    5. C. Veeramani & R. Venugopal & S. Muruganandan, 2023. "An Exploration of the Fuzzy Inference System for the Daily Trading Decision and Its Performance Analysis Based on Fuzzy MCDM Methods," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 62(3), pages 1313-1340, October.
    6. Willem Karel M. Brauers & Romualdas Ginevičius, 2009. "Robustness in regional development studies. The case of Lithuania," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 121-140, February.
    7. Tomasz Szul & Krzysztof Nęcka & Stanisław Lis, 2021. "Application of the Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Modeling to Forecast Energy Efficiency in Real Buildings Undergoing Thermal Improvement," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Alireza Valipour & Hadi Sarvari & Jolanta Tamošaitiene, 2018. "Risk Assessment in PPP Projects by Applying Different MCDM Methods and Comparative Results Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-17, December.
    9. Gokhan Ozkaya & Mehpare Timor & Ceren Erdin, 2021. "Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Indicators and Comparisons of Countries through a Hybrid Model of Data Mining and MCDM Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-49, January.
    10. Martin Kügemann & Heracles Polatidis, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Road Transportation Fuels and Vehicles: A Systematic Review and Classification of the Literature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Barak, Sasan & Javanmard, Shima, 2020. "Outsourcing modelling using a novel interval-valued fuzzy quantitative strategic planning matrix (QSPM) and multiple criteria decision-making (MCDMs)," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    12. Ewa Roszkowska & Marzena Filipowicz-Chomko, 2021. "Measuring Sustainable Development Using an Extended Hellwig Method: A Case Study of Education," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 299-322, January.
    13. Claudia Margarita Acuña-Soto & Vicente Liern & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2020. "Multiple criteria performance evaluation of YouTube mathematical educational videos by IS-TOPSIS," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 2017-2039, December.
    14. Paulius Spudys & Deimante Jarmalaviciute & Egle Klumbyte, 2025. "Embodied carbon meets payback: Stakeholder-driven MCDM for selecting renovation scenarios," Transformations and Sustainability, Centre for Productivity and Sustainability Analysis, vol. 1(3), pages 212-224.
    15. RogerS, Martin & Bruen, Michael, 1998. "A new system for weighting environmental criteria for use within ELECTRE III," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 552-563, June.
    16. Barak, Sasan & Dahooei, Jalil Heidary, 2018. "A novel hybrid fuzzy DEA-Fuzzy MADM method for airlines safety evaluation," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 134-149.
    17. Mohammad Ali Hatefi & Seyyed Abdollah Razavi & Vahid Abiri, 2023. "A Novel Multi-attribute Model to Select Appropriate Weighting Method in Decision Making, an Empirical Application in Petroleum Industry," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1351-1390, December.
    18. Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2022. "Multiobjective dynamic programming in bipolar multistage method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 1259-1279, April.
    19. Dariusz Kacprzak, 2024. "A new extension of the EDAS method in a fuzzy environment for group decision-making," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 51(3), pages 263-277, September.
    20. Willem Brauers, 2013. "Multi-objective seaport planning by MOORA decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 39-58, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ijofsd:346649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/centmde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.