Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 257 - 270 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.20409/berj.2022.372 İndeks Tarihi: 21-07-2022

Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi

Öz:
Bu çalışmada, negatif dışsallıkların içselleştirilmesinde önerilen piyasa ve kamusal çözüm önerilerinin karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu çerçevede, ilgili alanda yapılan çalışmalarda yaygın olarak önerilen on farklı kriter ele alınmış, bu kriterlerin değerlendirilmeleri, maliye teorisi veya mali iktisat anabilim dallarından birinde görev yapan akademisyenler tarafından yapılmıştır. Nitel görüşlerin nicel hale getirilebilmesi, birbiri ile ilişkili olan veya olmayan kriterlerin incelenebilmesi ve kriterler arasındaki ilişkilerin ortaya konulabilmesi için çok kriterli karar verme tekniklerinden biri olan WINGS yöntemi kullanılmıştır. WINGS yöntemi sonuçları ile akademisyenlerin tekil değerlendirme sonuçları verilmiş ve bu sonuçlar karşılaştırılmıştır. Yapılan karşılaştırmada akademisyen tekil değerlendirme görüşlerine paralel olan sonuçlar da elde edilmiş, bu görüşlerle uyuşmayan bulgulara da ulaşılmıştır. Bu benzerlikler ve farklılıklar çalışmada ele alınmış, olası nedenleri ile birlikte ortaya konmuştur. Ayrıca kriterlerin birbirileri üzerindeki etkilerine göre, etkileyen grup ve etkilenen grup olarak farklılaşması da incelenmiştir. Yapılan değerlendirme sonucunda negatif dışsallıkların çözüm yolları arasından kamusal çözümlerin, piyasa çözümlerine göre daha etkili olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Vergi ve regülasyonların en etkili çözüm yolları olduğu tespit edilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Evaluating the Solution of Negative Externalities with the WINGS Method

Öz:
This study aims to evaluate market and public solution proposals by comparing them in the internalization of negative externalities. In this framework, ten different criteria recommended in the studies conducted in the relevant field were discussed, and the examinations on these criteria were carried out by academicians working in one of the departments of fiscal theory or fiscal economics. For qualitative views to be converted into quantitative ones, to examine whether criteria are related to each other or not, and to reveal the existing relationships between criteria, WINGS, one of the multi-criteria decision-making techniques, was used as a method. In addition to the WINGS method results, the individual evaluation results of the academicians were given and compared. In this comparison, findings that were compatible and incompatible with the academicians' individual evaluation views were also found. These similarities and differences were discussed in the study, and their possible reasons were revealed. Moreover, within the framework of the effects of criteria on each other, the affecting and affected groups' differentiation were discussed. As a result of this evaluation, it was concluded that public solutions are more effective than market solutions among the solutions of negative externalities. It has been determined that taxes and regulations are the most effective solutions.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Akça, H. (2011). Devlet müdahalesinin başarısızlığı üzerine bir değerlendirme. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 20(3), 179-190.
  • Akkaya, Ş., & Hepsag, A. (2021). Does fuel tax decrease carbon dioxide emissions in Turkey? Evidence from an asymmetric nonlinear cointegration test and error correction model. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-8.
  • Aydın, M. (2020). Impacts of environmental taxes on environmental pollution in selected OECD countries: Evidence from causality test with structural breaks. International Journal of Economics and Administrative Studies, (28), 137- 154.
  • Banaś, D., & Michnik, J. (2019). Evaluation of the impact of strategic offers on the financial and strategic health of the company: A soft system Dynamics approach. Mathematics, 7(2), 208.
  • Bashir, M. F., Ma, B., Shahbaz, M., & Jiao, Z. (2020). The nexus between environmental tax and carbon emissions with the roles of environmental technology and financial development. Plos One, 15(11), e0242412.
  • Bator, F.M. (1958). The anatomy of market failure. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 72(3), 351-379.
  • Baumol, W. J. (1972). On taxation and the control of externalities. The American Economic Review, 62(3), 307-322.
  • Baumol, W. J., & Oates, W. E. (1971). The use of standards and prices for protection of the environment. The Swedish Journal of Economics, 73(1), 42-54.
  • Blackman, A., Li, Z., & Liu, A. A. (2018). Efficacy of command-and-control and market-based environmental regulation in developing countries. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 10, 381-404.
  • Brauers, W. K. M., & Ginevičius, R. (2010). The economy of the Belgian regions tested with multimoora. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 173-209.
  • Buchanan, J. M., & Stubblebine, W. C. (1962). Externality. Economica, 29(116), 371-384.
  • Cheng, Z., Li, L., & Liu, J. (2017). The emissions reduction effect and technical progress effect of environmental regulation policy tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 149, 191-205.
  • Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of socialcost. Journal of Lawand Economics, 3, 1-44.
  • Delgado-Galván, X., Pérez-García, R., Izquierdo, J., & Mora-Rodríguez, J. (2010). An analytic hierarchy process for assessing externalities in water leakage management. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(7-8), 1194- 1202.
  • Dinçer, H., Yüksel, S., & Martinez, L. (2019). Intervaltype 2-based hybrid fuzzy evaluation of financial services in E7 economies with dematel-anp and moora methods. Applied Soft Computing, 79, 186-202.
  • Dökmen, G., Pekkaya, M., & Saymaz, N. (2019). Sigara bağımlılığı ve devletin sigara tüketimi ile mücadele yöntemleri arasındaki ilişki. Maliye Dergisi, (176), 599-623.
  • Garcia-Bernabeu, A., Mayor-Vitoria, F., & Mas-Verdu, F. (2015). A MCDM approach for project finance selection: An application in the renewable energy sector. Revista Electrónica de Comunicaciones y Trabajos de ASEPUMA Rect@, 16(1), 13-26.
  • Gruber, J. (2016).Public finance and public policy. New York: Worth Publishers.
  • Guo, X., Fu, L., & Sun, X. (2021). Can environmental regulations promote greenhouse gas abatement in OECD countries? Command-and-control vs. market-based policies. Sustainability, 13(12), 6913.
  • Jin, W., Zhang, H. Q., Liu, S. S., & Zhang, H. B. (2019). Technological innovation, environmental regulation, and green total factor efficiency of industrial water resources. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 61-69.
  • Karaca, C., Ulutaş, A., & Eşgünoğlu, M. (2017). Türkiye’de optimal yenilenebilir enerji kaynağının COPRAS yöntemiyle tespiti ve yenilenebilir enerji yatırımlarının istihdam artırıcı etkisi. Maliye Dergisi, (172), 111-132.
  • Kargı, V., & Yüksel, C. (2010). Çevresel dışsallıklarda kamu ekonomisi çözümleri. Maliye Dergisi, 159, 183-202.
  • Kashi, K. (2016, September). Proposal of employee training and development system in a middle size automotive company by utilizing competency model and AHP and WINGS methods. Location: Prague, CZECH REPUBLIC: The 10th International Days of Statistics and Economics.
  • Kashi, K., & Franek, J. (2014). Applying group decision making and multiple attribute decision making methods in business processes. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 693, 237-242.
  • Kaviani, M. A., Tavana, M., Kumar, A., Michnik, J., Niknam, R., & de Campos, E. A. R. (2020). An integrated framework for evaluating the barriers to successful implementation of reverse logistics in the automotive industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 272(122714), 1-16.
  • King, M., Tarbush, B., & Teytelboym, A. (2019). Targeted carbon tax reforms. European Economic Review, 119, 526-547.
  • Maqbool, A., Khan, S., Haleem, A., & Khan, M.I. (2020). Investigation of drivers towards adoption of circular economy: A dematel approach. (Eds.) H. Kumar & P. Jain, Recent advances in mechanical engineering (pp. 147-160). Singapore: Springer.
  • Meade, J. E. (1952). External economies and diseconomies in a competitive situation. The Economic Journal, 62(245), 54-67.
  • Meireles, M., Robaina, M., & Magueta, D. (2021). The effectiveness of environmental taxes in reducing CO2 emissions in passenger vehicles: The case of Mediterranean countries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), 5442.
  • Michnik, J., & Adamus-Matuszyńska, A. (2015). Structural analysis of problems in public relations. Multiple Criteria Decision Making, (10), 105-123.
  • Michnik, J., & Grabowski, A. (2020). Modeling uncertainty in the wings method using interval arithmetic. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 19(01), 221-240.
  • Michnik, J. (2013). Weighted influence non-linear gauge system (WINGS): An analysis method for the systems of interrelated components. European Journal of Operational Research, 228(3), 536-544.
  • Michnik, J. (2014). Multiple criteria choice of R&D organization with the aid of structural methods. Multiple Criteria Decision Making, (9), 72-83.
  • Michnik, J. (2018). The wings method with multiple networks and its application to innovation projects selection. International Journal of Applied Management Science, 10(2), 105-126.
  • Morley, B. (2012). Empirical evidence on the effectiveness of environmental taxes. Applied Economics Letters, 19(18), 1817-1820.
  • Musgrave, R., & Musgrave, P. (1989). Public finance in the oryand practice. Singapore: McGraw-HillBook. Nath, S. K. (1973). Perspective of welfare economics. London: Macmillan.
  • Niemira, M. P., & Saaty, T. L. (2004). An analytic network process model for financial-crisis forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting, 20(4), 573-587.
  • Pigou, A. C. (1920), The economics of welfare. London:Macmillan.
  • Radziszewska-Zielina, E., & Śladowski, G. (2017). Supporting the selection of a variant of the adaptation of a historical building with the use of fuzzy modelling and structural analysis. Journal of Cultural Heritage, (26), 53-63.
  • Rosen, H. S. & Gayer, T. (2014). Public finance. New York: McGraw-Hill HigherEducation.
  • Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2013). Forecasting the Resurgence of the US economy in 2001: An expert judgment approach. (Eds.) T. L. Saaty & L.G. Vargas, Decision making with the analytic network process (pp. 41-73). Boston, MA: Springer.
  • Sallum, F. S. V., Gomes, L. F. A. M., & Machado, M. A. S. (2018). A dematel-topsis-wings approach to the classification of multi market investment funds. Independent Journal of Management & Production, 9(4), 1203-1234. Savaşan, F. (2019). Kamu ekonomisi. Bursa: Dora Basım-Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Scrimgeour, F., Oxley, L., & Fatai, K. (2005). Reducing carbon emissions? The relative effectiveness of different types of environmental tax: The case of New Zealand. Environmental Modelling & Software, 20(11), 1439-1448.
  • Shahzad, U. (2020). Environmental taxes, energy consumption, and environmental quality: Theoretical survey with policy implications. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(20), 24848-24862.
  • Silajdzic, S., & Mehić, E. (2018). Do environmental taxes pay off? The impact of energy and transport taxes on CO2 emissions in transition economies. The South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 13(2), 126-143.
  • Staňková, Š. (2016). Utilization of dematel and wings method in field of corporate social responsibility. Ekonomika a Management, (3).
  • Stavins, R. N. (1998). Market-based environmental policies. Public policies for environmental protection, 2, 31-76.
  • Stiglitz, J. E., & Rosengard, J. K. (2015). Economics of the public sector. New York: WW Norton & Company.
  • Turcksin, L., Bernardini, A., & Macharis, C. (2011). A combined AHP-PROMETHEE approach for selecting the most appropriate policy scenario to stimulate a clean vehicle fleet. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 954- 965.
  • Wang, W., Tian, Z., Xi, W., Tan, Y. R., & Deng, Y. (2021). The influencing factors of China's green building development: An analysis using rbf-wings method. Building and Environment, 188, 107425.
  • Wenbo, G., & Yan, C. (2018). Assessing the efficiency of China’s environmental regulation on carbon emissions based on Tapio decoupling models and GMM models. Energy Reports, 4, 713-723.
  • Wolde-Rufael, Y., & Mulat-Weldemeskel, E. (2021). Do environmental taxes and environmental stringency policies reduce CO 2 emissions? Evidence from 7 emerging economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(18), 22392-22408.
  • Zhao, G. Q., Guo, S., Li, H. Z., & Qi, J. X. (2012). Evaluation on economic externality of wind power project based on ANPGCDM. Journal of North China Electric Power University (Natural Science Edition), 4, 59-64.
  • Zhao, X., Yin, H., & Zhao, Y. (2015). Impact of environmental regulations on the efficiency and CO2 emissions of power plants in China. Applied Energy, 149, 238-247.
  • Zhao, X., Zhao, Y., Zeng, S., & Zhang, S. (2015). Corporate behavior and competitiveness: Impact of environmental regulation on Chinese firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86, 311-322.
  • Zhao, Y., Liang, C., & Zhang, X. (2021). Positive or negative externalities? Exploring the spatial spillover and industrial agglomeration threshold effects of environmental regulation on haze pollution in China. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(8), 11335-11356.
APA ÇOŞKUN İ, Bozatlı O (2022). Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. , 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
Chicago ÇOŞKUN İbrahim Tolga,Bozatlı Oğuzhan Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. (2022): 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
MLA ÇOŞKUN İbrahim Tolga,Bozatlı Oğuzhan Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. , 2022, ss.257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
AMA ÇOŞKUN İ,Bozatlı O Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. . 2022; 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
Vancouver ÇOŞKUN İ,Bozatlı O Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. . 2022; 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
IEEE ÇOŞKUN İ,Bozatlı O "Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi." , ss.257 - 270, 2022. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
ISNAD ÇOŞKUN, İbrahim Tolga - Bozatlı, Oğuzhan. "Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi". (2022), 257-270. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2022.372
APA ÇOŞKUN İ, Bozatlı O (2022). Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. Business and Economics Research Journal, 13(2), 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
Chicago ÇOŞKUN İbrahim Tolga,Bozatlı Oğuzhan Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. Business and Economics Research Journal 13, no.2 (2022): 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
MLA ÇOŞKUN İbrahim Tolga,Bozatlı Oğuzhan Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. Business and Economics Research Journal, vol.13, no.2, 2022, ss.257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
AMA ÇOŞKUN İ,Bozatlı O Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. Business and Economics Research Journal. 2022; 13(2): 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
Vancouver ÇOŞKUN İ,Bozatlı O Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. Business and Economics Research Journal. 2022; 13(2): 257 - 270. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
IEEE ÇOŞKUN İ,Bozatlı O "Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi." Business and Economics Research Journal, 13, ss.257 - 270, 2022. 10.20409/berj.2022.372
ISNAD ÇOŞKUN, İbrahim Tolga - Bozatlı, Oğuzhan. "Negatif Dışsallıkların Çözüm Yollarının WINGS Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi". Business and Economics Research Journal 13/2 (2022), 257-270. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2022.372