IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i1p73-d62113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Air Quality in Turkey: A Proposed, Air Quality Index

Author

Listed:
  • Tayfun Büke

    (Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla 48000, Turkey)

  • Aylin Çiğdem Köne

    (Department of Economics, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla 48000, Turkey)

Abstract

The annual air quality indices are aimed at better taking into account of long-term exposure to air pollution. This type of indices offer decision-makers condensed environmental information for performance monitoring, policy progress evaluation, benchmarking comparisons, and decision-making. This paper evaluates the air quality of eight Turkish cities in view of the European Union (EU) norms. The proposed index aggregates concentrations of three air pollutants, namely sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter and it is built by using 2014 data from 20 air quality monitoring stations. According to the results obtained from the calculation, the EU standards were exceeded at 14 stations, while at six stations the situation is better than the norms. These results indicate that Turkey has failed in fulfilling the European air quality standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Tayfun Büke & Aylin Çiğdem Köne, 2016. "Assessing Air Quality in Turkey: A Proposed, Air Quality Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:73-:d:62113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/1/73/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/1/73/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giuseppe Munda, 2005. "“Measuring Sustainability”: A Multi-Criterion Framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 117-134, January.
    2. Shahid Rasheed & ChangFeng Wang & Bruno Lucena, 2015. "Risk Leveling in Program Environments—A Structured Approach for Program Risk Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-24, May.
    3. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2004. "Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 270-283, March.
    4. Meløn, Mønica García & Aragonés Beltran, Pablo & Carmen González Cruz, M., 2008. "An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects: A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 754-765, October.
    5. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Comparing aggregating methods for constructing the composite environmental index: An objective measure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 305-311, September.
    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. Hatefi, S.M. & Torabi, S.A., 2010. "A common weight MCDA-DEA approach to construct composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 114-120, November.
    2. Miller, Harvey J. & Witlox, Frank & Tribby, Calvin P., 2013. "Developing context-sensitive livability indicators for transportation planning: a measurement framework," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 51-64.
    3. P. Zhou & B. Ang, 2009. "Comparing MCDA Aggregation Methods in Constructing Composite Indicators Using the Shannon-Spearman Measure," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 83-96, October.
    4. Ju, Keyi & Su, Bin & Zhou, Dequn & Zhou, P. & Zhang, Yuqiang, 2015. "Oil price crisis response: Capability assessment and key indicator identification," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P2), pages 1353-1360.
    5. P. Zhou & B. Ang & D. Zhou, 2010. "Weighting and Aggregation in Composite Indicator Construction: a Multiplicative Optimization Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 169-181, March.
    6. Milica Maricic & Jose A. Egea & Veljko Jeremic, 2019. "A Hybrid Enhanced Scatter Search—Composite I-Distance Indicator (eSS-CIDI) Optimization Approach for Determining Weights Within Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 497-537, July.
    7. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2007. "A mathematical programming approach to constructing composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 291-297, April.
    8. Vijaya Krishnan, 2015. "Development of a Multidimensional Living Conditions Index (LCI)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 120(2), pages 455-481, January.
    9. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Comparing aggregating methods for constructing the composite environmental index: An objective measure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 305-311, September.
    10. Heidi K. Edmonds & Julie E. Lovell & C. A. Knox Lovell, 2017. "A New Composite Index for Greenhouse Gases: Climate Science Meets Social Science," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, October.
    11. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    12. Zhou, P. & Delmas, M.A. & Kohli, A., 2017. "Constructing meaningful environmental indices: A nonparametric frontier approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 21-34.
    13. repec:qeh:ophiwp:ophiwp042 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Sanchez-Fernandez, Gabriela, 2010. "Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1062-1075, March.
    15. Francisco J. Blancas-Peral & Ignacio Contreras & José M. Ramírez-Hurtado, 2014. "Choosing a travel agency franchise by mean of a global composite indicator: an application in Spain," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 153-173, February.
    16. Emma Norman & Gemma Dunn & Karen Bakker & Diana Allen & Rafael Cavalcanti de Albuquerque, 2013. "Water Security Assessment: Integrating Governance and Freshwater Indicators," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(2), pages 535-551, January.
    17. Van den Bossche, Filip & Rogge, Nicky & Devooght, Kurt & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom, 2010. "Robust Corporate Social Responsibility investment screening," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1159-1169, March.
    18. Riccardo Natoli & Segu Zuhair, 2011. "Measuring Progress: A Comparison of the GDP, HDI, GS and the RIE," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 33-56, August.
    19. Ji, Qiang & Zhang, Hai-Ying & Zhang, Dayong, 2019. "The impact of OPEC on East Asian oil import security: A multidimensional analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 99-107.
    20. Mukherjee, Sacchidananda & Chakraborty, Debashis, 2009. "Is there any relationship between Environmental Quality Index, Human Development Index and Economic Growth? Evidences from Indian States," MPRA Paper 17207, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Claudia Seidel & Thomas Heckelei & Sebastian Lakner, 2019. "Conventionalization of Organic Farms in Germany: An Empirical Investigation Based on a Composite Indicator Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.

    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:8:y:2016:i:1:p:73-:d:62113. 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.