Vol. 14 No. 3 (2026): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal
Articles

Evaluation of decent work and economic growth performance using a hybrid LOPCOW–CRISUS- CoCoSo approach: The case of Türkiye

PDF (Turkish)
  • Gül Dertli
Gül Dertli
Assist. Prof. Dr., Istanbul Topkapı University, Istanbul, Türkiye

Published 2026-09-25

Keywords

  • İnsana Yakışır İş, Ekonomik Büyüme, LOPCOW, CRISUS, CoCoSo
  • Decent Work, Economic Growth, LOPCOW, CRISUS, CoCoSo

How to Cite

Evaluation of decent work and economic growth performance using a hybrid LOPCOW–CRISUS- CoCoSo approach: The case of Türkiye. (2026). Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 14(3), 1851-1873. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v14i3.2853

Copyright (c) 2026 Gül Dertli

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Evaluation of decent work and economic growth performance using a hybrid LOPCOW–CRISUS- CoCoSo approach: The case of Türkiye. (2026). Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 14(3), 1851-1873. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v14i3.2853

Abstract

This study proposes an objective and integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) model to evaluate Türkiye’s performance in terms of decent work and economic growth indicators. The proposed hybrid decision framework combines the Logarithmic Percentage Change-driven Objective Weighting (LOPCOW) and the Criterion Importance Based on Sum of Squares (CRISUS) methods to determine indicator weights within a two-stage objective structure, while the Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method is employed to obtain performance rankings due to its compromise-oriented characteristics. The analytical validity and applicability of the model are examined through a case study using annual data for Türkiye covering the period 2005–2024. The final weighting results indicate that the indicators explaining decent work and economic growth performance do not possess equal importance. In this context, the number of non-fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 workers emerges as the most influential core determinant, whereas the relative importance of domestic fossil fuel consumption per unit of GDP is found to be considerably limited. The ranking results derived from the CoCoSo method reveal that Türkiye's decent work and economic growth performance follows a fluctuating pattern over time, identifying 2014 as the highest-performing year and 2005 as the lowest-performing period. Furthermore, sensitivity and comparative analyses strongly support the robustness of the rankings and the methodological reliability of the proposed model. Overall, the findings provide meaningful and policy-relevant insights for identifying priority intervention areas.

PDF (Turkish)

References

  1. Abdulrahim, H., Gebrail, M., Elhaj, M., & Binsuwadan, J. (2025). Sustainable trends in decent work and economic growth: A comprehensive analysis of GCC countries. Sustainability, 17(19), 8798. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198798
  2. Aca, Z., & Akdamar, E. (2022). Türkiye’de insana yakışır iş: Bağlam, kavramsallaştırma ve değerlendirme: Bir alan araştırması. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 20(1), 271–291.
  3. Adalar, İ., & Işık, Ö. (2025). CRiterion importance based on SUm of Squares (CRISUS): A novel objective weighting method and its implementation in multidimensional sustainability performance measurement. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 59, 205–221. https://doi.org/10.24818/18423264/59.2.25.13
  4. Akbulut, O. Y. (2024). Assessing the environmental sustainability performance of the banking sector: A novel integrated grey multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach. International Journal of Knowledge and Innovation Studies, 2(4), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.56578/ijkis020404
  5. Akbulut, O. Y., & Aydın, Y. (2024). A hybrid multidimensional performance measurement model using the MSD-MPSI-RAWEC model for Turkish banks. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, 11(3), 1157–1183.
  6. Akbulut, O. Y., & Hepşen, A. (2021). Finansal performans ve pay senedi getirileri arasındaki ilişkinin Entropi ve CoCoSo ÇKKV teknikleriyle analiz edilmesi. Ekonomi, Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(3), 681–709.
  7. Atabey, A. O., & Ertürkmen, G. (2025). Türkiye’nin “insana yakışır iş ve ekonomik büyüme” performansı: SDG 8 kapsamında değerlendirmeler. In A. O. Atabey & G. Ertürkmen (Eds.), Makroekonomik perspektiften teorik ve ampirik analizler (pp. 1–26). Ekin Basım Yayın Dağıtım.
  8. Baş, H., Ersin, İ., & Kalkavan, H. (2024). Determining the effect levels of augmented decent work criteria in sustainable economic development with the fuzzy DEMATEL method. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 31(1), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2024.2413302
  9. Bayar, A. A., Günçavdı, Ö., & Levent, H. (2023). Evaluating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on unemployment, income distribution and poverty in Turkey. Economic Systems, 47(1), 101046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2022.101046
  10. Bieszk-Stolorz, B., & Dmytrów, K. (2023). Decent work and economic growth in EU countries—Static and dynamic analyses of Sustainable Development Goal 8. Sustainability, 15(18), 13327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813327
  11. Bošković, S., Švadlenka, L., Jovčić, S., Dobrodolac, M., Simić, V., & Bacanin, N. (2023). An alternative ranking order method accounting for two-step normalization (AROMAN): A case study of the electric vehicle selection problem. IEEE Access, 11, 39496–39507.
  12. Carlsen, L. (2021). Decent work and economic growth in the European Union: A partial order analysis of Eurostat SDG 8 data. Green Finance, 3(4), 483–494.
  13. Çetin, E., Çetin, M. K., & Sekreter, M. S. (2025). İnsana yakışır iş ve ekonomik büyüme perspektifinden CRITIC tabanlı Multi-MOORA yöntemi ile analiz: AB ülkeleri örneği. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review, 6(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1602348
  14. Ecer, F., & Pamucar, D. (2022). A novel LOPCOW-DOBI multi-criteria sustainability performance assessment methodology: An application in developing country banking sector. Omega, 112, 102690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2022.102690
  15. Erceylan, Y. G., & Akpiliç, F. (2015). Türkiye'de işsizliği sabit tutan büyüme oranı (Çalışma Raporu No. 2015-4). T.C. Başbakanlık Hazine Müsteşarlığı. https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/uploads/2018/11/Türkiye'de-İşsizliği-Sabit-Tutan-Büyüme-Oranı.pdf
  16. Erdoğdu, S. (2009). Küresel krizin istihdama etkileri ve kriz karşıtı işgücü piyasası önlemleri. Memleket Siyaset Yönetim, 5(12), 142–167. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/msydergi/issue/75925/1254175
  17. Eurostat. (2013). European statistics on accidents at work (ESAW): Summary methodology (2013 ed.). Publications Office of the European Union.
  18. Firlej, K. A., Firlej, C., & Luty, L. (2023). Economic growth and decent work as a goal of sustainable development in the European Union in the pre-pandemic and pandemic period. International Entrepreneurship Review, 9(1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.15678/IER.2023.0901.05
  19. Ghai, D. (2003). Decent work: Concept and indicators. International Labour Review, 142(2), 113–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2003.tb00256.x
  20. Görçün, Ö. F., Shabir, M., Çalık, A., & Işık, Ö. (2025). Evaluation of the financial performance of the textile and apparel industry in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Applied Soft Computing, 185, 113830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2025.113830
  21. International Labour Organization. (2008). ILO declaration on social justice for a fair globalization. https://www.ilo.org/publications/ilo-declaration-social-justice-fair-globalization
  22. International Labour Organization. (2019). Decent work and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
  23. Işık, Ö., Adalar, İ., & Shabir, M. (2025). Measuring efficiency, productivity and sustainability performance for Islamic banks: A fuzzy expert-based multi-criteria decision support model using spherical fuzzy information. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 18(6), 1482–1519. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMEFM-09-2024-0477
  24. Işık, Ö., Shabir, M., & Moslem, S. (2024). A hybrid MCDM framework for assessing urban competitiveness: A case study of European cities. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 96, 102109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2024.102109
  25. Işık, Ö., Zolfani, S. H., Shabir, M., & Šaparauskas, J. (2025). A grey-based hybrid decision support framework for assessing the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sustainable performance: A case study of BIST-listed banks. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 31(4), 1237–1273. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2025.24359
  26. Işığıçok, Ö. (2018). Çalışma yaşamının kalitesinin arttırılmasında “insana yakışır iş”. Mühendislik Bilimleri ve Tasarım Dergisi, 6, 302–311.
  27. Karabıçak, M., & Özdemir, M. B. (2015). Sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın kavramsal temelleri. Vizyoner Dergisi, 6(13), 44–49.
  28. Karsak, E. E., & Goker, N. (2019). Common weight DEA-based methodology for ranking APEC countries by considering sustainable development goals including decent work, income inequalities, and gender equality. In 2019 3rd International Conference on Data Science and Business Analytics (ICDSBA) (pp. 84–89). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDSBA48748.2019.00028
  29. Koçali, K. (2021). Sosyal Güvenlik Kurumu'nun 2012–2020 yılları arası iş kazaları göstergelerinin standardizasyonu. Akademik Yaklaşımlar Dergisi, 12(2), 302–327. https://doi.org/10.54688/ayd.1012081
  30. Lapinskaitė, I., & Vidžiūnaitė, S. (2020). Assessment of the sustainable economic development goal 8: Decent work and economic growth in G20 countries. Economics and Culture, 17(1), 116–125. https://doi.org/10.2478/jec-2020-0011
  31. Maniya, K., & Bhatt, M. G. (2010). A selection of material using a novel type decision-making method: Preference selection index method. Materials & Design, 31(4), 1785–1789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.11.020
  32. Mufazzal, S., & Muzakkir, S. M. (2018). A new multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) method based on proximity indexed value for minimizing rank reversals. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 119, 427–438.
  33. Nawwas, O. M., Tengku, M. A., Alglilat, M. M., & Latif, A. Z. A. (2017). Could occupational safety and health systems improve employees' performance in Arab nations? The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 4(8), 3789–3792. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsshi/v4i8.15
  34. Nijkamp, P., & Van Delft, A. (1977). Multi-criteria analysis and regional decision-making. Springer.
  35. Obong, M. M., Amadi, C., Ekpenyong, O. E., & Edodi, H. U. (2021). Influence of health and safety training, safety monitoring, and enforcement of compliance on employee efficiency in manufacturing firms. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 27(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2021.1889506
  36. Oktaysoy, O., Topçuoğlu, E., Şahin, Y., & Topçuoğlu, V. (2025). SKA 8 ve SKA 9 amaçları kapsamında Türkiye’nin sürdürülebilir bölgesel kalkınma analizi. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 60(2), 1543–1564.
  37. Öztürk, S. (2021). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği yönetim uygulamalarının çalışanların iş tatmini üzerine etkisi. OHS Academy, 4(3), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.38213/ohsacademy.787382
  38. Puška, A., Stević, Ž., & Pamučar, D. (2022). Evaluation and selection of healthcare waste incinerators using extended sustainability criteria and multi-criteria analysis methods. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01902-2
  39. Rai, S. M., Brown, B. D., & Ruwanpura, K. N. (2019). SDG 8: Decent work and economic growth—A gendered analysis. World Development, 113, 368–380.
  40. Rao, R. V., & Patel, B. K. (2010). A subjective and objective integrated multiple attribute decision making method for material selection. Materials & Design, 31(10), 4738–4747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2010.05.014
  41. Serin, H., & Özdemir, F. (2022). Gaziantep merkez ilçede yer alan orman ürünleri işletmelerinin üst kademe yöneticilerin uyarıcı işaret ve ikaz levhaları konusunda bilgi seviyelerinin belirlenmesi. Turkish Journal of Forest Science, 6(1), 186–195. https://doi.org/10.32328/turkjforsci.1086594
  42. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x
  43. Skvarciany, V., & Astike, K. (2022). Decent work and economic growth: Case of EU. In 12th International Scientific Conference (pp. 184–190). Vilnius Tech. https://doi.org/10.3846/bm.2022.916
  44. Sotoudeh-Anvari, A. (2023). Root assessment method (RAM): A novel multi-criteria decision making method and its applications in sustainability challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 423, 138695.
  45. Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., & Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS). Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140, 106231.
  46. Şahinöz, A. (2019). Sürdürülemeyen “sürdürülebilir kalkınma”. Ufuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15, 77–101.
  47. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı. (2024, 5 Eylül). Cumhurbaşkanı Yardımcısı Cevdet Yılmaz'ın Orta Vadeli Program (2025–2027) sunumu. https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Sayin-Cevdet-Yilmaz-Orta-Vadeli-Program-2025-2027-Sunum-Konusma-Metni.pdf
  48. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2014). İşgücü istatistikleri, Aralık 2014 / Hanehalkı işgücü araştırması (Haber Bülteni No. 16161). https://www.tuik.gov.tr
  49. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2025). Dönemsel gayrisafi yurt içi hasıla, IV. çeyrek: Ekim–Aralık 2024.
  50. Türkiye Odalar ve Borsalar Birliği. (2015). Ekonomik rapor 2014. https://www.tobb.org.tr/Documents/yayinlar/2015/71GK/ekonomikrapor-2014.pdf
  51. United Nations. (2015). Sustainable development goals. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
  52. United Nations Development Programme. (2025). UNDP annual report 2024. https://www.undp.org/turkiye/publications/undp-annual-report-2024
  53. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. (n.d.). UNECE data portal. Retrieved September 25, 2026, from https://w3.unece.org/pxweb/
  54. Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2019). A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision, 57(9), 2501–2519. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2017-0458
  55. Yeldan, E. (2007). Patterns of adjustment under globalization: Türkiye as a case study (Working Paper No. 2007-01). Center for Economic Policy Analysis.
  56. Yolvermez, B. (2025). Türkiye’de insana yakışır iş ve ekonomik büyümenin görünümü. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 27(48), 447–473. https://doi.org/10.18493/kmusekad.1512446
  57. Zehri, C., Bendahmane, M. E. A., Amina, K., Zgarni, I., & Sekrafi, H. (2024). Decent work, financial inclusion, and economic growth: Analysis under SDG 8. Heritage and Sustainable Development, 6(1), 197–218. https://doi.org/10.37868/hsd.v6i1.370
  58. Zhang, X., Wang, C., Li, E., & Xu, C. (2014). Assessment model of ecoenvironmental vulnerability based on improved entropy weight method. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, Article 797814. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/797814