Environmental performance assessment of manufacturing sectors

Abstract

This study addresses to rank the environmental performance of manufacturing sectors using Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE) method which is a widely used multi-criteria decision making method for environmental management. The study focuses on 24 manufacturing sectors and 5 criteria—water usage, environmental expenditure, environmental employment, waste recover and waste density—to rank the environmental performance of the manufacturing sectors. Rankings of the manufacturing sectors are made using PROMETHEE II, which is a developed version of PROMETHEE, with three scenarios (base scenario, environmental scenario, economic scenario) obtained by different weightings of the criteria. In the analysis stage, manufacturing sectors are ranked and then environmental performance of the sectors is compared in terms of four technology levels (low technology, medium–low technology, medium–high technology and high technology) proposed by OECD. According to the results, manufacture of tobacco products is the best performing sector and manufacture of chemicals and chemical products is the worst performing sector in each scenario. Furthermore, high-technology and medium–high-technology sectors have better environmental performance than medium–low-technology and low-technology sectors in each scenario. After that, Geometrical Analysis for Interactive Aid planes were used to understand the weak and strong points of the manufacturing sectors. Better performing sectors are good at water usage, waste recover and waste density criteria, but bad at environmental expenditure and environmental employment criteria. This study closes the gap as the first study on the environmental performance of Turkish manufacturing sectors using a multi-criteria decision making method, and we hope that this study will be beneficial for the researchers in this area.

Graphic abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Andreopoulou Z, Koliouska C, Galariotis E, Zopounidis C (2018) Renewable energy sources: using PROMETHEE II for ranking websites to support market opportunities. Technol Forecast Soc Change 131:31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Behzadian M, Kazemzadeh RB, Albadvi A, Aghdasi M (2010) PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res 200:198–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Brans JP, Vincke PH (1985) A preference ranking organization method: the PROMETHEE method for MCDM. Manag Sci 31:641–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Camioto FC, Mariano EB, Nascimento Rebelatto DA (2014) Efficiency in Brazil’s industrial sectors in terms of energy and sustainable development. Environ Sci Policy 37:50–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chang YT, Zhang N, Danao D, Zhang N (2013) Environmental efficiency analysis of transportation system in China: a non-radial DEA approach. Energy Policy 58:277–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen SJ, Hwang CL, Hwang FP (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making, methods and applications. In: Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, vol 375. Springer, Berlin

  7. Egilmez G, Kucukvar M, Tatari O (2013) Sustainability assessment of U.S. manufacturing sectors: an economic input output-based frontier approach. J Clean Prod 53:91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fan Y, Bai B, Qiao Q, Kang P, Zhang Y, Guo J (2017) Study on eco-efficiency of industrial parks in China based on data envelopment analysis. J Environ Manag 192:107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Frantisek Z (2017) Environmental evaluation of v4 steel industries under uncertainty. In: 12th international conference on strategic management and its support by information systems (SMSIS), May 25–26. Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic

  10. Gómez T, Gémar G, Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R, Caballero R (2018) Measuring the eco-efficiency of wastewater treatment plants under data uncertainty. J Environ Manage 226:484–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gong Z, Chen X (2017) Analysis of interval data envelopment efficiency model considering different distribution characteristics based on environmental performance evaluation of the manufacturing industry. Sustainability 9(12):2080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goto M, Otsuka A, Sueyoshi T (2014) DEA assessment of operational and environmental efficiencies on Japanese regional industries. Energy 66:535–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gumus S, Egilmez G, Kucukvar M, Park YS (2016) Integrating expert weighting and multi-criteria decision making into eco-efficiency analysis: the case of US manufacturing. J Oper Res Soc 67(4):616–628. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2015.88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hatzichronoglou T (1997) Revision of the high-technology sector and product classification. OECD science, technology and industry working papers. No. 1997/02. OECD publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/134337307632

  15. Hermann BG, Kroeze C, Jawjit W (2007) Assessing environmental performance by combining life cycle assessment, multi-criteria analysis and environmental performance indicators. J Clean Prod 15:1787–1796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hu X, Liu C (2017) Slacks-based data envelopment analysis for eco-efficiency assessment in the Australian construction industry. Constr Manag Econ 35:11–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hua Z, Bian Y, Liang L (2007) Eco-efficiency analysis of paper mills along the Huai River: an extended DEA approach. Omega 35:578–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Koutroumanidis T, Iliadis L, Arabatzis G (2004) Evaluation and forecasting of the financial performance of the unions of rural cooperatives by a decision support system. Jpn J Rural Econ 6:31–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lahouel BB (2016) Eco-efficiency analysis of French firms: a data envelopment analysis approach. Environ Econ Policy Stud 8:395–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee S, Noh DW, Oh D (2018) Characterizing the difference between indirect and direct CO2 emissions: evidence from Korean manufacturing industries, 2004–2010. Sustainability 10:2711. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082711

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lopes APF, Muñoz MM, Alarcón-Urbistondo P (2018) Regional tourism competitiveness using the PROMETHEE approach. Ann Tour Res 73:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Oggioni G, Riccardi R, Toninelli R (2011) Eco-efficiency of the world cement industry: a data envelopment analysis. Energy Policy 39:2842–2854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Oliveira M, Fontes DBMM, Pereira T (2018) Evaluating vehicle painting plans in an automobile assembly plant using an integrated AHP-PROMETHEE approach. Int Trans Oper Res 25:1383–1406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pardo C (2013) An analysis of eco-efficiency in energy use and CO2 emissions in the Swedish service industries. Socio Econ Plan Sci 47:120–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pérez K, Araya MCG, Iriarte A (2017) Energy and GHG emission efficiency in the Chilean manufacturing industry: sectoral and regional analysis by DEA and Malmquist indexes. Energy Econ 66:290–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M (2004) Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 8:365–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ranjan R, Chatterjee P, Chakraborty S (2016) Performance evaluation of Indian states in tourism using an integrated PROMETHEE-GAIA approach. Opsearch 53(1):63–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Riccardi R, Oggioni G, Toninelli R (2012) Efficiency analysis of world cement industry in presence of undesirable output: application of data envelopment analysis and directional distance function. Energy Policy 44:140–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Shao L, Yu X, Feng C (2019) Evaluating the eco-efficiency of China’s industrial sectors: a two-stage network data envelopment analysis. J Environ Manag 247:551–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Song M, An Q, Zhang W, Wang Z, Wu J (2012) Environmental efficiency evaluation based on data envelopment analysis: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16:4465–4469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Suh Y, Seol H, Bae H, Park Y (2014) Eco-efficiency based on social performance and its relationship with financial performance: a cross-industry analysis of South Korea. J Ind Ecol 18:909–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang D, Li S, Sueyoshi T (2014) DEA environmental assessment on US industrial sectors: investment for improvement in operational and environmental performance to attain corporate sustainability. Energy Econ 45:254–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang X, Ding H, Liu L (2019) Eco-efficiency measurement of industrial sectors in China: a hybrid super-efficiency DEA analysis. J Clean Prod 229:53–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yu Y, Zhu W, Shi Q, Zhang Q (2016) Network-like DEA approach for environmental assessment: evidence from U.S. manufacturing sectors. J Clean Prod 139:277–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhang B, Bi J, Fan Z, Yuan Z, Ge J (2008) Eco-efficiency analysis of industrial system in China: a data envelopment analysis approach. Ecol Econ 68:306–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang J, Chang Y, Wang C, Zhang L (2018) The green efficiency of industrial sectors in China: a comparative analysis based on sectoral and supply-chain quantifications. Resour Conserv Recycl 132:269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Zhou Y, Liang D, Xing X (2013) Environmental efficiency of industrial sectors in China: an improved weighted SBM model. Math Comput Model 58:990–999

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Onder Belgin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Belgin, O., Balkan, D. Environmental performance assessment of manufacturing sectors. Clean Techn Environ Policy (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01880-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Environmental performance
  • Multi-criteria decision making
  • Manufacturing sectors
  • Performance measurement
  • PROMETHEE
  • GAIA plane