An analysis of the logistics performance index of EU countries with an integrated MCDM model

Adalı, E. A., & Işık, A. T. (2017). Bir Tedarikçi Seçim Problemi Için SWARA ve WASPAS Yöntemlerine Dayanan Karar Verme Yaklaşımı. International Review of Economics and Management, 5(4), 56-77. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.18825/iremjournal.33540810.18825/iremjournal.335408Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Alimardani, M., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Aghdaie, M. H., & Tamošaitiene, J. (2013). A novel hybrid SWARA and VIKOR methodology for supplier selection in an agile environment. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19(3), 533-548. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2013.81460610.3846/20294913.2013.814606Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Brauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2011). Multimoora optimization used to decide on a bank loan to buy property. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(1), 174-188. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/13928619.2011.56063210.3846/13928619.2011.560632Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Çakır, S. (2017). Measuring logistics performance of OECD countries via fuzzy linear regression. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 24(3-4), 177-186. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.160110.1002/mcda.1601Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Çakır, S., & Perçin, S. (2013). Performance measurement of logistics firms with multi-criteria decision making methods. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 13(4), 449-459.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, W., Goh, M., & Zou, Y. (2018). Logistics provider selection for omni-channel environment with fuzzy axiomatic design and extended regret theory. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 71, 353-363. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.07.01910.1016/j.asoc.2018.07.019Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

D’Aleo, V. (2015). The mediator role of Logistic Performance Index: A comparative study. Journal of International Trade, Logistics and Law, 1(1), 1-7.Search in Google Scholar

Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., & Papayannakis, L. (1995). Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method. Computers and Operations Research, 22(7), 763-770. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-H10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ecer, F. (2018). Third-party logistics (3PLs) provider selection via fuzzy AHP and EDAS integrated model. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(2), 615-634. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2016.121320710.3846/20294913.2016.1213207Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Heidary Dahooie, J., Beheshti Jazan Abadi, E., Vanaki, A. S., & Firoozfar, H. R. (2018). Competency-based IT personnel selection using a hybrid SWARA and ARAS-G methodology. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 28(1), 5-16. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.2071310.1002/hfm.20713Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Jahan, A., Mustapha, F., Sapuan, S. M., Ismail, M. Y., & Bahraminasab, M. (2012). A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 58(1-4), 411-420. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3366-710.1007/s00170-011-3366-7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Karbassi Yazdi, A., Hanne, T., Osorio Gómez, J. C., & García Alcaraz, J. L. (2018). Finding the best third-party logistics in the automobile industry: A hybrid approach. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2018. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/525126110.1155/2018/5251261Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kawa, A., & Anholcer, M. (2019). Intangible assets as a source of competitive advantage for logistics service providers. Transport Economics and Logistics, 78, 29-41. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.26881/etil.2018.78.0310.26881/etil.2018.78.03Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 243-258. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.1210.3846/jbem.2010.12Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2017). Assessment of third-party logistics providers using a CRITIC–WASPAS approach with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Transport, 32(1), 66-78. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2017.128238110.3846/16484142.2017.1282381Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Khan, N. Z., Ansari, T. S. A., Siddiquee, A. N., & Khan, Z. A. (2019). Selection of E-learning websites using a novel Proximity Indexed Value (PIV) MCDM method. Journal of Computers in Education, 6(2), 241-256. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00135-710.1007/s40692-019-00135-7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Madić, M., & Radovanović, M. (2015). Ranking of some most commonly used non-traditional machining processes using ROV and CRITIC methods. U.P.B. Sci. Bull., Series D, 77(2), 193-204.Search in Google Scholar

Martí, L., Martín, J. C., & Puertas, R. (2017). A DEA-logistics performance index. Journal of Applied Economics, 20(1), 169-192. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/S1514-0326(17)30008-910.1016/S1514-0326(17)30008-9Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Martí, L., Puertas, R., & García, L. (2014). The importance of the Logistics Performance Index in international trade. Applied Economics, 46(24), 2982-2992. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.91639410.1080/00036846.2014.916394Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mufazzal, S., & Muzakkir, S. M. (2018). A new multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) method based on proximity indexed value for minimizing rank reversals. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 119, 427-438. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.03.04510.1016/j.cie.2018.03.045Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Pamucar, D., Chatterjee, K., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2019). Assessment of third-party logistics provider using multi-criteria decision-making approach based on interval rough numbers. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 127, 383-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.10.02310.1016/j.cie.2018.10.023Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Perçin, S. (2019). An integrated fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy AD approach for outsourcing provider selection. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 30(2), 531-552. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2018-024710.1108/JMTM-08-2018-0247Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Rezaei, J., Van Roekel, W. S., & Tavasszy, L. (2018). Measuring the relative importance of the logistics performance index indicators using Best Worst Method. Transport Policy, 68, 158-169. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.05.00710.1016/j.tranpol.2018.05.007Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Singh, R. K., Gunasekaran, A., & Kumar, P. (2018). Third party logistics (3PL) selection for cold chain management: a fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Annals of Operations Research, 267(1-2), 531-553. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2591-310.1007/s10479-017-2591-3Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Sremac, S., Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Arsić, M., & Matić, B. (2018). Evaluation of a Third-Party Logistics (3PL) provider using a rough SWARA–WASPAS model based on a New Rough Dombi Agregator. Symmetry, 10(8), 305. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/sym1008030510.3390/sym10080305Search in Google Scholar

Stanujkic, D., Karabasevic, D., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). A framework for the selection of a packaging design based on the SWARA method. Engineering Economics, 26(2), 181-187. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.26.2.882010.5755/j01.ee.26.2.8820Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ulutaş, A. (2019). Entropi Tabanlı EDAS Yöntemi İle Lojistik Firmalarının Performans Analizi. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, (23), 53-66. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.45875410.18092/ulikidince.458754Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ulutaş, A., & Karaköy, Ç. (2019). CRITIC ve ROV Yöntemleri İle Bir Kargo Firmasının 2011-2017 Yılları Sırasındaki Performansının Analiz Edilmesi. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(1/1), 223-230. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.45864310.33206/mjss.458643Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Vujicic, M., Papic, M., & Blagojevic, M. (2017). Comparative analysis of objective techniques for criteria weighing in two MCDM methods on example of an air conditioner selection. Tehnika, 72(3), 422-429. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5937/tehnika1703422v10.5937/tehnika1703422vOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

World Bank. (2019). Retrieved May 10, 2019 from https://lpi.worldbank.org/Search in Google Scholar

Yahya, S. M., Asjad, M., & Khan, Z. A. (2019). Multi-response optimization of TiO2/EG-water nano-coolant using entropy based preference indexed value (PIV) method. Materials Research Express, 6(8). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab23bb10.1088/2053-1591/ab23bbOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Yildirim, B. F., & Mercangoz, B. A. (2019). Evaluating the logistics performance of OECD countries by using fuzzy AHP and ARAS-G. Eurasian Economic Review. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s40822-019-00131-310.1007/s40822-019-00131-3Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Zavadskas, E. K., & Podvezko, V. (2016). Integrated determination of objective criteria weights in MCDM. International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, 15(2), 267-283. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1142/S021962201650003610.1142/S0219622016500036Open DOISearch in Google Scholar