Research Article


DOI :10.26650/JECS2021-1023966   IUP :10.26650/JECS2021-1023966    Full Text (PDF)

Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index

Soner AlacaMustafa Tepeci

The number of studies on sustainability assessment tools and models has increased in the last two decades. Composite Indexes (CIs) have become popular as a useful tool for assessing business level sustainability to compare the companies operating in the same sector. Limited studies have covered all three dimensions (economic, environmental, and social) of the sustainability assessment in an integrated manner in Turkey. This paper aims to measure and evaluate the Corporate Sustainability (CS) performances of ten manufacturing companies operating in the Istanbul Stock Exchange Market. For this purpose, a new integrated sustainability composite index was developed by using previous composite indexes in the literature. The developed assessment model provides a practical tool for the organizations in the manufacturing sector in Turkey by measuring and evaluating their sustainability performances in a holistic way. By using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), the levels of the sustainability performances of ten manufacturing organizations were assessed in a short time. The index allows managers to make comparisons among companies within the same sector. The results further indicated that the economic dimension score of the analyzed organizations had a weighty and salient effect on the total corporate sustainability performance score. This finding contributes to the literature that economic performance is predominantly effective in the sustainability performance of businesses.


PDF View

References

  • Acar, E., Kılıç, M., & Güner, M. (2015). Measurement of sustainability performance in textile industry by using a multi-criteria decision-making method. Textile andApparel, 25, (1), 3-9. google scholar
  • Aksoylu, S., & Taşdemir, B. (2020). Kurumsal Sürdürülebilirlik Performans Değerlendirmesi: BİST Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksinde Bir Araştırma [Corporate sustainability performance evaluation: a research in BIST sustainability index]. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13, (1), 95-106. google scholar
  • Alaca, S. (2020). Corporate sustainability approaches and practices in Turkey: an investigation of the companies listed in BIST sustainability index. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Manisa Celal Bayar University. (In Turkish) google scholar
  • Alp, İ., Öztel, A., & Köse, M.S. (2015). Entropi tabanlı MAUT yöntemi ile kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performansı ölçümü: bir vaka çalışması [Corporate sustainability performance measuring wıth entropy based MAUT method: a case study]. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, (11) 2, 65-81. google scholar
  • Bilge, P., Badurdeen, F., Seliger, G., & Jawahir, I.S. (2014). Model-based approach for assessing value creation to enhance sustainability in manufacturing. Procedia CIRP, 17, 106-111. google scholar
  • Bork, C.A., de Souza, J.F., de Oliveira Gomes, J., Canhete, V.V., & De Barba, D.J. (2016). Methodological tools for assessing the sustainability index (SI) of industrial production processes. Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, 87, 1313-1325. google scholar
  • Bozaykut Bük, T. (2020). Corporate sustainability reporting practices in Turkey. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 39, 369-377. google scholar
  • Briassoulis, H. (2001). Sustainable development and its indicators: through a (planner’s) glass darkly. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 44, (3), 409-427. google scholar
  • Brockett, A.M., & Rezaee, Z. (2012). Corporate Sustainability: Integrating Performance & Reporting. Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc. google scholar
  • Butnariu, A., & Avasilcai, S. (2015). The Assessment of the Companies’ Sustainable Development Performance. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 1233-1238. google scholar
  • Büyüközkan, G., & Karabulut, Y. (2018). Sustainability performance evaluation: literature review and future directions. Environmental Management, 217, 253-267. google scholar
  • Cagno, E., Neri, A., Howard, M., Brenna, G., & Trianni, A. (2019). Industrial sustainability performance measurement systems: a novel framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, 1354-1375. google scholar
  • Chen, D., Thiede, S., Schudeleit, T., & Herrmann, C. (2014). A holistic and rapid sustainability assessment tool for manufacturing SMEs. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technologies, 63, 437-440. google scholar
  • Ciegis, R., Ramanauskiene, J., & Martinkus, B. (2009). The concept of sustainable development and its use sustainability scenarios. Engineering Economics, 62 (2), 28-37. google scholar
  • Deloitte & Touch (1992). Business strategy for sustainable development: leadership and accountability for the 90’s. Book. IISD & WBCSD. google scholar
  • Docekalova, M.P., & Kocmanova, A. (2016). Composite indicator for measuring corporate sustainability. Ecological Indicators, 61, 612-623. google scholar
  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford, UK: Capstone. google scholar
  • Epstein, M.J., Buhovac, A.R., & Yuthas, K. (2015). Managing social, environmental, and financial performance simultaneously. Long Range Planning, 48, 35-45. google scholar
  • Ergüden, E., & Çatlıoğlu, E. (2016). Sustainability reporting practices in energy companies with TOPSIS method. Journal of Accounting and Finance, 71, 201-222. google scholar
  • Ertan, Y. (2018). Türkiye’de sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması (2005-2017). [Sustainability reporting in Turkey (20052017)]. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 11 (3), 463-478. google scholar
  • Feil, A.A., Schreiber, D., Haetinger, C., Strasburg, V.J., & Barkert, C.L. (2019). Sustainability indicators for industrial organizations: systematic review of literature. Journal of Sustainability, 11 (3), 854. google scholar
  • Feng, S.C., Joung, Che B., & Li, G. (2010a). Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Hefei, China. google scholar
  • Feng, S.C., Joung, Che B., & Li, G. (2010b). Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. Proceedings of the 17th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Hefei, China. google scholar
  • Gan, X., Fernandez, I.C., Guo, J., Wilson, M., Zhao, Y., Zhou, B., & Wu, J. (2017). When to use what: methods for weighting and aggregating sustainability indicators. Ecological Indicators, 81, 491-502. google scholar
  • Gümrah, A., & Büyükipekçi, S. (2019). Türkiye’de sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması: 2008-2017 yılları arası yayınlanmış sürdürülebilirlik raporlarının incelenmesi [Sustainability reporting in Turkey: a study on the investigation of published sustainability reports between 2008 - 2017]. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 21 (2), 305-323. google scholar
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., Gülençer, İ., & Tünel, R.K. (2018). Yeşil yaklaşımlar ve sürdürülebilirliğin yükselişi: işletmeler sürdürülebilirlik raporlarına neden önem veriyor? [Green approaches and the rise of sustainability: why does enterprises give importance to sustainability reports]? Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 17 (UİK Özel Sayısı), 229-244. google scholar
  • Harik, R., El Hachem, W., Medini, K., & Bernard, A. (2015). Towards a holistic sustainability index for measuring sustainability of manufacturing companies. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 4117-4139. google scholar
  • Helleno, A.L., De Moraes, A.J.I., & Simon, A.T. (2017). Integrating sustainability indicators and lean manufacturing to assess manufacturing processes: application case studies in Brazilian industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 153, 405-416. google scholar
  • Joung, C.B., Carrell, J., Sarkar, P., & Feng, S.C. (2012). Categorization of indicators for sustainable manufacturing. Ecological Indicators, 24, 148-157. google scholar
  • Kandakoğlu, A., Frini, A., & Amor, S.B. (2019). Multi-criteria decision making for sustainable development: a systematic review. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 26, 202-251. google scholar
  • KMPG (2020). The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020. Retrieved from: https://assets.kpmg/content/ dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf. google scholar
  • Krajnc, D., & Glavic, P. (2003). Indicators of sustainable production. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 5, 279-288. google scholar
  • Krajnc, D., & Glavic, P. (2005). A model for integrated assessment of sustainable development. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 43, 189-208. google scholar
  • Labuschagne, Brent, A.C., & van Erk, R.P.G, (2005). Assessing the sustainability performances of industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 373-385. google scholar
  • Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology 28, 563-575. google scholar
  • Lee, K.H., & Saen, R.F. (2012). Measuring corporate sustainability management: a data envelopment analysis approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 140, 219-226. google scholar
  • Linke, B.S., Corman, G.J., Dornfeld, D.A., & Tönissen, S. (2013). Sustainability indicators for discrete manufacturing processes applied to grinding technology. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 32, 556-563. google scholar
  • Lozano, R., & Huisingh, D. (2011). Inter-linking issues and dimensions in sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 99-107. google scholar
  • Madanchi, N, Thiede, S., Sohdi, M., & Herrmann, C. (2019). Development of a Sustainability Assessment Tool for Manufacturing Companies. In S. Thiede & C.Herrmann (eds), Eco-Factories of the Future, Sustainable Production, Life Cycle Engineering and Management, (pp.41-68). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. google scholar
  • Medel-Gonzalez, F., Garcia-Avila, L., Acosta-Beltran, A., & Hernandez, C. (2013). Measuring and evaluating business sustainability: development and application of corporate index of sustainability performance. In M. G. Erechtchoukova, P.A.Khaiter & P. Golinska (eds), Sustainability Appraisal: Quantitative Methods and Mathematical Techniques for Environmental Performance Evaluation, (pp.33-61). Berlin, Germany: Springer. google scholar
  • Mısırdalı Yangil, F. (2015). Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik kapsamında sürdürülebilirlik raporlarına yönelik içerik analizi: Türkiye’deki en büyük 100 sanayi işletmesi [The Content Analysis of Sustainability Reports on the Context of Corporate Sustainability: Top 100 Industrial Enterprises in Turkey]. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7 (3), 356-376. google scholar
  • Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., & Giovannini, E. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. google scholar
  • Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., & Olsson, L. (2007). Categorizing tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics 60, 498-508. google scholar
  • Niemeijer, D. (2002). Developing indicators for environmental policy: data-driven and theory driven approaches examined by example. Environmental Science & Policy, 5 (2), 91-103. google scholar
  • Niemeijer, D., & Groot, R.S. (2008). A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecological Indicators 8, 14-25. google scholar
  • Özdağoğlu, A. (2013). Çok ölçütlü karar verme modellerinde normalizasyon tekniklerinin sonuçlara etkisi: COPRAS örneği [The Effect of Normalization Techniques to Results in Multi Criteria Decision Making Models: COPRAS Example]. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 8 (2), 229-252. google scholar
  • Öztel, A., Köse, M.S., & Aytekin, İ. (2012). Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performansının ölçümü için çok kriterli bir çerçeve: Henkel örneği [A multi-criteria framework for measuring corporate sustainability performance: the case of Henkel]. Tarih, Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1 (4), 32-44. google scholar
  • Saaty, T.L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2007). Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry. Ecological Indicators, 7, 565-588. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2009). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 9 (2), 189-212. google scholar
  • Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., & Dikshit, A.K. (2012). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 15 (1), 281-299. google scholar
  • Tokos, H., Pintaric, Z.N., & Krajnc, D. (2012). An integrated sustainability performance assessment and benchmarking of breweries. Clean Technologies & Environmental Policy 14, 173-193. google scholar
  • UNCSD (2012). RIO 2012 Issues Briefs. Retrieved from: http://www.uncsd2012.org/index. php?page=view&type =400 &nr=218&menu=45. google scholar
  • Vafaei N., Ribeiro R.A., & Camarinha-Matos L.M. (2016) Normalization techniques for multi-criteria decision making: analytical hierarchy process case study. In: Camarinha-Matos L.M., Falcâo A.J., Vafaei N., Najdi S. (eds) Technological Innovation for Cyber-Physical Systems. DoCEIS 2016. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 470, 261-269. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. google scholar
  • Veleva, V., & Ellenbecker, M.J. (2001). Indicators of sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production 9, 447-452 google scholar
  • Yeşilyurt, S., & Çapraz, C. (2018). Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışmalarında Kullanılan Kapsam Geçerliği İçin Bir Yol Haritası [A road map for the content validity used in scale development studies]. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20 (1), 251-264. google scholar
  • Zang, L., Xu, Y., Yeh, C-H., Liu, Y., & Zhou, D. (2016). City sustainability evaluation using MCDM with objective weights of interdependent criteria. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 491-499. google scholar
  • Zhou, L., Tokos, H., Krajnc, D., & Yang, Y. (2012). Sustainability performance evaluation in industry by composite sustainability index. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 14, 789-803. google scholar
  • Zijp, M.C., Waaijers-Van der Loop, S.L., Heijungs, R., Broeren, M.L.M., Peeters, L., Van Nieuwenhuijzen, A., Shen, L., Heugens, E.H.W., & Posthuma, L. (2017). Method selection for sustainability assessment: the case of recovery resources from waste water. Journal of Environmental Management, 197, 221-230. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Alaca, S., & Tepeci, M. (2019). Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(0), -. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


AMA

Alaca S, Tepeci M. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2019;0(0):-. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


ABNT

Alaca, S.; Tepeci, M. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 0, p. -, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Alaca, Soner, and Mustafa Tepeci. 2019. “Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 0: -. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


Chicago: Humanities Style

Alaca, Soner, and Mustafa Tepeci. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 0 (Dec. 2022): -. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


Harvard: Australian Style

Alaca, S & Tepeci, M 2019, 'Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index', Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 0, pp. -, viewed 4 Dec. 2022, https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Alaca, S. and Tepeci, M. (2019) ‘Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index’, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(0), pp. -. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966 (4 Dec. 2022).


MLA

Alaca, Soner, and Mustafa Tepeci. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 0, 2019, pp. -. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


Vancouver

Alaca S, Tepeci M. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index. Journal of Economy Culture and Society [Internet]. 4 Dec. 2022 [cited 4 Dec. 2022];0(0):-. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966 doi: 10.26650/JECS2021-1023966


ISNAD

Alaca, Soner - Tepeci, Mustafa. Development of a New Composite Index for Measuring the Sustainability Performance of Manufacturing Companies Operating in the BIST Sustainability Index”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0/0 (Dec. 2022): -. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-1023966



TIMELINE


Submitted15.11.2021
Accepted17.04.2022
Published Online21.09.2022

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.