VIKOR Method for Ranking Logistic Villages in Turkey

M10

Dr. Emrah Önder
İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Sayısal Yöntemler Anabilim Dalı

Araş. Gör. Bahadır Fatih Yıldırım
İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Sayısal Yöntemler Anabilim Dalı

Abstract

Logistics villages are defined as a specific area of all the activities carried out by a variety of logistics-related businesses. They have specific features including size, distance to city center, accessibility, proximity to road/ airport/ railway/ maritime, office and IT infrastructure etc. Ranking logistic villages is a complicated task due to the fact that various criteria or objectives must be considered in the decision making process. Also in many real world cases the criteria are not equally important for the logistic managers and government authorities. In this study, we proposed a logistic village ranking model considering both Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and VIKOR (Vise Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) methods. Subjective and objective opinions of logistic managers/experts turn into quantitative form with AHP. VIKOR technique is used for calculating the logistic villages’ ranks. The aim of this paper is to rank the 11 logistic villages in Turkey including İstanbul (Halkalı), Balıkesir (Gökköy), Eskişehir (Hasanbey), İzmit (Köseköy), Uşak, Denizli (Kaklık), Samsun (Gelemen), Mersin (Yenice), Kayseri (Boğazköprü ), Konya (Kayacık) and Erzurum (Palandöken).

Keywords: AHP, Logistic Villages, Logistics Management, MCDM, Ranking, VIKOR

Jel Sınıflandırma:

Türkiye'deki Lojistik Köylerin VIKOR Yöntemi İle Sıralandırılması

Özet

Lojistik köyler birçok lojistik ile ilgili aktivitelerin gerçekleştirildiği özellikli alanlar olarak tanımlanabilir. Bu köylerin büyüklüğü, şehir merkezine olan uzaklığı, erişilebilirliği, karayollarına/ havaalanlarına/ demir yollarına / limanlara olan mesafeleri, ofisler ve bilişim altyapısı vb. özellikleri önem arz etmektedir. Lojistik köylerin sıralaması karar verme sürecinde birçok kriter ve amacın dikkate alınması gerektiği için karmaşık bir işlemdir. Ayrıca birçok gerçek hayat vakasında lojistik sektör yöneticileri ve kamu karar vericilerine göre kriterler eşit öneme sahip değildir. Bu çalışmada Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (AHP) ve VIKOR (Vise Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) yöntemleri birlikte kullanılarak lojistik köylerin sıralandırılmasına ilişkin model önerilmektedir. AHP lojistik sektörü yöneticileri/uzmanlarına ait sübjektif ve/veya objektif fikirlerin nicel şekilde gösterilebilmesi için kullanılmıştır. VIKOR yöntemi ise lojistik köylerin sıralandırılmasında kullanılmıştır. Bu analizde amaç Türkiye’deki 11 lojistik köyün (İstanbul-Halkalı, Balıkesir-Gökköy, Eskişehir-Hasanbey, İzmit-Köseköy, Uşak, Denizli-Kaklık, Samsun-Gelemen, Mersin-Yenice, Kayseri-Boğazköprü, Konya-Kayacık ve Erzurum-Palandöken)sıralanmasıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: AHP, VIKOR, ÇKKV

  • Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S.S. and Goyal, S.K., (2011). A multi-criteria decision making approach for location planning for urban distribution centers under uncertainty, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 53, 98–109.
  • Ballis, A. and Mavrotas, G., (2007). Freight village design using the multicriteria method PROMETHEE.Operational Research. An International Journal, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 213-232
  • Bamyaci, M., (2008). “Modern Lojistik Yönetimi: Organize Lojistik Bölgeleri İçin Bir Yer Seçimi Modeli” Istanbul Universitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu, Doktora Tezi, In Turkish.
  • Cavallini, C., Giorgetti, A., Citti, P. and Nicolaie, F., (2013). Integral aided method for material selection based on quality function deployment and comprehensive VIKOR algorithm, Materials and Design 47, 27–34.
  • Cerreno, A. L. C., Shin, H., S., Wieder, A.S. and Theofanis, S., (2008). Feasibility of Freight Villages in the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC) Region, Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation Freight and Maritime Program, 1-23
  • Chen, L.Y. and Wang, T.C., (2009). Optimizing partners‟ choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR, Int. J. Production Economics 120, 233–242
  • Chiu, W. Y., Tzeng, G. H. and Li, H.L., (2013). A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-store business, Knowledge-Based Systems 37, 48–61
  • Cristobal, J.R.S., (2011). Multi-criteria decision- making in the selection of a renewable energy project in spain: The Vikor method, Renewable Energy 36, 498-502
  • Dagdeviren, M., Yavuz, S. and Kilinc, N., (2009). Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 8143-8151
  • Ertuğrul, İ and Karakaşoğlu, N., (2008). Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods for facility location selection, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol.39, no.7, pp.783-795.
  • Girubha, R.J. and Vinodh, S., (2012). Application of fuzzy VIKOR and environmental impact analysis for material selection of an automotive component, Materials and Design 37, 478–486
  • Hsu C.H., Wang, F.K. and Tzeng, G.H., (2012). The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 66, 95– 111.
  • http://ekonomi.haber7.com/ekonomi/haber/466883-turkiyenin-arazisi-en-pahali-ili-hangisi - 27.08.2013
  • http://www.moment-expo.com/turkiyede-lojistik-koyler-kuruluyor - 21.08.2013.
  • http://web.itu.edu.tr/oguts/Avrupada%20ve%20T%FCrkiyede%20lojistik%20k%F6yler.PDF Working Paper: Aydın G. T., Ögüt K. S “Freight villages in Europe and Turkey?” -25.08.2013
  • https://maps.google.com/ -29.08.2013.
  • Jahan, A., Mustapha, F., Ismail, M.Y., Sapuan, S.M. and Bahraminasab, M., (2011). A comprehensive VIKOR method for material selection, Materials and Design 32, 1215–1221.
  • Janic, M. and Reggiani, A., (2002). An Application of the Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Analysis to the Selection of a New Hub Airport, EJTIR, 2, no. 2, pp. 113 – 141.
  • Jaržemskis, A., (2007). Research on Public Logistics Centre as Tool for Cooperation, Transport, Vol XXII, No 1, 50–54
  • Kuo, M.S. and Liang, G.S., (2011). Combining VIKOR with GRA techniques to evaluate service quality of airports under fuzzy environment Expert Systems with Applications 38, 1304–1312
  • Lee, S., Kim, W., Kim, Y.M. and Oh, K.J., (2012). Using AHP to determine intangible priority factors for technology transfer adoption. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 6388-6395.
  • Li, Y., Liu, X. and Chen, Y., (2011). Selection of logistics center location using Axiomatic Fuzzy Set and TOPSIS methodology in logistics management, Expert Systems with Applications 38, 7901–7908
  • Liberatore, M.J. and Nydick, R.L., (1997). Group Decision Making In Higher Education Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 38, No. 5
  • Lindholm, M. and Behrends, S., (2012). Challenges in urban freight transport planning – a review in the Baltic Sea Region, Journal of Transport Geography 22, 129–136
  • Liu, C.H., Tzeng, G.H. and Lee, M.H., (2012). Improving tourism policy implementation: The use of hybrid MCDM models, Tourism Management 33, 413-426
  • Liu, C.H., Tzeng, G.H., Lee, M.H. and Lee, P.Y., (2013). Improving metro–airport connection service for tourism development: Using hybrid MCDM models, Tourism Management Perspectives 6, 95–107
  • Liu, H.C., Mao, L.X., Zhang, Z.Y. and Li, P., (2013). Induced aggregation operators in the VIKOR method and its application in material selection, Applied Mathematical Modelling 37, 6325–6338
  • Opricovic, S., (2011). Fuzzy VIKOR with an application to water resources planning, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 12983–12990
  • Opricovic, S. and Tzeng, G.H., (2002). Multicriteria planning of post-earthquake sustainable reconstruction.The Journal of Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 17 (3), 211–220.
  • Opricovic, S. and Tzeng, G.H., (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 445–455.
  • Opricovic, S. and Tzeng, G.H., (2007). Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods, European Journal of Operational Research, 178, 514–529
  • Saaty, T.L., (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Saaty, T. L. and Vargas Luis L., (2001). Models, Methods, Concepts& Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Saaty, T. L., (2008). Decision Making With the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int. J. Services Sciences, 1 (1), 83.
  • Saaty, T.L., (1990). How To Make Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process, European Journal of Operational Research,North_Holland, 48, 9-26
  • Sanayei, A., Mousavi, S.F. and Yazdankhah, A, (2010). Group decision making process for supplier selection with VIKOR under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications 37, 24–30
  • Shemshadi, A., Shirazi, H., Toreihi, M. and Tarokh, M.J., (2011). A fuzzy VIKOR method for supplier selection based on entropy measure for objective weighting, Expert Systems with Applications 38, 12160–12167
  • Sirikijpanichkul, A. and Ferreira, L., (2006). Solving the Conflicts in Intermodal Freight Hub Location Decisions, BEE Postgraduate Infrastructure Theme Conference, 26th September 2006, Gardens Point Campus, Queensland University of Technology
  • Taniguchi, E., Noritake, M., Yamada, T. and Izumitani, T., (1999). Optimal size and location planning of public logistics terminals, Transportation Research Part E 35, 207-222
  • Tsai, W.H, Chou, W.C. and Leu, J.D., (2011). An effectiveness evaluation model for the web-based marketing of the airline industry, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 15499-15516
  • Tzeng, G.H., Lin, C.W. and Opricovic, S., (2005). Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation, Energy Policy, 33, 1373–1383
  • Tzeng, GH, Teng, MH, Chen, JJ and Opricovic, S, (2002). Multi-criteria selection for a restaurant location in Taipei, International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 21, no: 2, pp. 171-187
  • Wang, Y.L. and Tzeng, G.H., (2012). Brand marketing for creating brand value based on a MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP and VIKOR methods, Expert Systems with Applications 39, 5600–5615
  • Yalçın, N., Bayrakdaroğlu A. and Kahraman, C., (2012). Application of fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methods for financial performance evaluation of Turkish manufacturing industries, Expert Systems with Applications 39, 350–364
  • Yanga, L., Jib, X.,Gaoa, Z. and Li, K., (2007). Logistics distribution centers location problem and algorithm under fuzzy environment, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 208, 303 – 315
  • Yoo, K.E. and Choi, Y.C., (2006). Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach For Identifying Relative Importance Of Factors To Improve Passenger Security Checks At Airports, Journal of Air Transport Management 12, 135–142.
  • Yücenur, G.N. and Demirel, N.Ç., (2012). Group decision making process for insurance company selection problem with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications 39, 3702–3707.
  • Zhang, N. and Wei, G., (2013). Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem based on hesitant fuzzy set. Applied Mathematical Modelling 37, 4938–4947.
  • Apan, M., Öztel, A., & İslamoğlu, M. (2018). Comparative Empirical Analysis of Financial Failures of Enterprises with Altman Z-Score and VIKOR Methods: BIST Food Sector Application. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 12(1), 77-101.
  • Küçükönder, H., & Demirarslan Çelebi, P. (2017). PROMETHEE ve MAUT Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılması Üzerine Bir Çalışma: Karadeniz Bölgesi Örneği. Bartın Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(16), 203-228.

Önder, E., Yıldırım, B. F. (2014). "VIKOR Method for Ranking Logistic Villages in Turkey". Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12 (23), 293-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.11611/JMER236