IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i19p8860-d1764590.html

Investigation of Corporate Sustainability Performance Data and Developing an Innovation-Oriented Novel Analysis Method with Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Huseyin Haliloglu

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Pure and Applied Sciences, Marmara University, Istanbul 34722, Türkiye)

  • Ahmet Feyzioglu

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Pure and Applied Sciences, Marmara University, Istanbul 34722, Türkiye)

  • Leonardo Piccinetti

    (Sustainable Innovation Technology Services Ltd., Ducart Suite, V94 Y6FD Limerick, Ireland)

  • Trevor Omoruyi

    (Chester Business School, University of Chester, Chester CH1 4BJ, UK)

  • Muzeyyen Burcu Hidimoglu

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Pure and Applied Sciences, Marmara University, Istanbul 34722, Türkiye)

  • Akin Emrecan Gok

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa, Istanbul 34320, Türkiye)

Abstract

This study addresses the growing importance of integrating innovation into corporate sustainability strategies by examining the financial and environmental performance of ten firms listed on the Borsa Istanbul Sustainability Index over a five-year period. The main objective is to develop and test a novel, data-driven analytical framework that reduces reliance on subjective expert judgments while providing actionable insights for sustainability-oriented decision-making. Within this framework, the entropy method from the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach is first applied to calculate the objective weights of sustainability criteria, ensuring that the analysis is grounded in real performance data. Building on these weights, an innovative reverse Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) model, implemented through a custom artificial neural network-based software, is introduced to estimate direct influence matrices and reveal the causal relationships among criteria. This methodological advance makes it possible to explore how environmental and financial factors interact with R&D expenditures and to simulate their systemic interdependencies. The findings demonstrate that R&D serves as a central driver of both environmental and financial sustainability, highlighting its dual role in fostering corporate innovation and long-term resilience. By positioning R&D as both an enabler and outcome of sustainability dynamics, the proposed framework contributes a novel tool for aligning innovation with strategic sustainability goals, offering broader implications for corporate managers, policymakers, and researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Huseyin Haliloglu & Ahmet Feyzioglu & Leonardo Piccinetti & Trevor Omoruyi & Muzeyyen Burcu Hidimoglu & Akin Emrecan Gok, 2025. "Investigation of Corporate Sustainability Performance Data and Developing an Innovation-Oriented Novel Analysis Method with Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-58, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8860-:d:1764590
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8860/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8860/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodrigo Lozano, 2015. "A Holistic Perspective on Corporate Sustainability Drivers," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 32-44, January.
    2. Qun Zhao & Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Jin-Long Wang, 2019. "Improving Financial Service Innovation Strategies for Enhancing China’s Banking Industry Competitive Advantage during the Fintech Revolution: A Hybrid MCDM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-29, March.
    3. Ibrahim Mutambik, 2024. "The Sustainability of Smart Cities: Improving Evaluation by Combining MCDA and PROMETHEE," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-28, September.
    4. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Evaluation of energy alternatives for sustainable development of energy sector in India: An integrated Shannon’s entropy fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 58-74.
    5. Jameel, Toqeer & Riaz, Muhammad & Aslam, Muhammad & Pamucar, Dragan, 2024. "Sustainable renewable energy systems with entropy based step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis and combined compromise solution," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    6. Vu Hong Son Pham & Minh Nhut Tran & Thuy Dung Dau, 2025. "An Investigation of Criteria Influencing Green Supply Chain Development Strategy in Construction Companies Using DEMATEL-Based Multi-Criteria Analysis Approach," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 1-29, September.
    7. Chunguang Bai & Joseph Sarkis & Fengfu Yin & Yijie Dou, 2020. "Sustainable supply chain flexibility and its relationship to circular economy-target performance," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(19), pages 5893-5910, October.
    8. Thi-Ly Nguyen & Phi-Hung Nguyen & Hong-Anh Pham & Thi-Giang Nguyen & Duc-Thinh Nguyen & Thi-Hoai Tran & Hong-Cham Le & Huong-Thuy Phung, 2022. "A Novel Integrating Data Envelopment Analysis and Spherical Fuzzy MCDM Approach for Sustainable Supplier Selection in Steel Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-28, June.
    9. Zhang, Guoqiang & Eddy Patuwo, B. & Y. Hu, Michael, 1998. "Forecasting with artificial neural networks:: The state of the art," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 35-62, March.
    10. Kahraman, Cengiz & Kaya, İhsan & Cebi, Selcuk, 2009. "A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1603-1616.
    11. Khai Wah Khaw & Mark Camilleri & Victor Tiberius & Alhamzah Alnoor & Ali Shakir Zaidan, 2024. "Benchmarking electric power companies’ sustainability and circular economy behaviors: using a hybrid PLS-SEM and MCDM approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 6561-6599, March.
    12. Ali Tighnavard Balasbaneh & Silvio Aldrovandi & Willy Sher, 2025. "A Systematic Review of Implementing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Approaches for the Circular Economy and Cost Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-24, May.
    13. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    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. Najafi, Fatemeh & Kazemi, Mostafa & Mostafaeipour, Ali & Mishra, Phoolenrda, 2025. "Prioritizing industrial wastes and technologies for bioenergy production: Case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    2. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    3. Punia Sindhu, Sonal & Nehra, Vijay & Luthra, Sunil, 2016. "Recognition and prioritization of challenges in growth of solar energy using analytical hierarchy process: Indian outlook," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 332-348.
    4. Nasrollahi, Sadaf & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Jahangir, Mohammad-Hossein & Aryaee, Sara, 2023. "Selecting suitable wave energy technology for sustainable development, an MCDM approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 756-772.
    5. Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Chih-Jou Chen & Ho-Chin Yang, 2021. "Using Porter’s Diamond Model to Assess the Competitiveness of Taiwan’s Solar Photovoltaic Industry," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    6. Karunathilake, Hirushie & Hewage, Kasun & Mérida, Walter & Sadiq, Rehan, 2019. "Renewable energy selection for net-zero energy communities: Life cycle based decision making under uncertainty," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 558-573.
    7. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Empirical investigation and validation of sustainability indicators for the assessment of energy sources in India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    8. Doukas, Haris, 2013. "Modelling of linguistic variables in multicriteria energy policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(2), pages 227-238.
    9. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur & Mukul, Esin, 2018. "A novel renewable energy selection model for United Nations' sustainable development goals," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PA), pages 290-302.
    10. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    11. Firozjaei, Mohammad Karimi & Nematollahi, Omid & Mijani, Naeim & Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh & Firozjaei, Hamzeh Karimi & Toomanian, Ara, 2019. "An integrated GIS-based Ordered Weighted Averaging analysis for solar energy evaluation in Iran: Current conditions and future planning," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1130-1146.
    12. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    13. Wang, Q. & Poh, K.L., 2014. "A survey of integrated decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 691-702.
    14. Esra Karaka & Ozan Veli Y ld ran, 2019. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Alternatives for Turkey via Modified Fuzzy AHP," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(2), pages 31-39.
    15. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2017. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Resources in Turkey using an integrated MCDM approach with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 149-163.
    16. Zhang, Ling & Zhou, Peng & Newton, Sidney & Fang, Jian-xin & Zhou, De-qun & Zhang, Lu-ping, 2015. "Evaluating clean energy alternatives for Jiangsu, China: An improved multi-criteria decision making method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 90(P1), pages 953-964.
    17. Ahmad, Salman & Nadeem, Abid & Akhanova, Gulzhanat & Houghton, Tom & Muhammad-Sukki, Firdaus, 2017. "Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable and nuclear resources for electricity generation in Kazakhstan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1880-1891.
    18. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    19. Nixon, J.D. & Dey, P.K. & Ghosh, S.K. & Davies, P.A., 2013. "Evaluation of options for energy recovery from municipal solid waste in India using the hierarchical analytical network process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 215-223.
    20. Pratibha Rani & Jabir Ali & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "An Integrated Single-Valued Neutrosophic Combined Compromise Solution Methodology for Renewable Energy Resource Selection Problem," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, 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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8860-:d:1764590. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.