Abstract
Even though the ESG-financial performance relationship is well addressed with the ambiguous results, the literature lacks to determine the relative importance of individual ESG criteria regarding sustainability. To fill this gap, the study aims to determine the relative weights of ESG criteria for the banking industry from the perspective of scholars. To reach the aim of the paper, we employ Interval Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Best Worst Method and reveal that Governance (C3) is the most significant criteria among the main criteria, followed by Social (C2) and Environment (C1) criteria. Regarding sub-criteria, Management (G1), Shareholders (G2) and Workforce (S1) are the most significant sub-criteria whereas Product responsibility (S4), Resource Use (E1) and Emissions (E2) are the least significant sub-criteria, respectively. These results do not fully represent real weights because of the subjective judgments of decision makers but it gives banking sector practitioners to comparable reference to allocate their scarce resources.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
WCED: Our Common Future, Brundtland Report. Oxford University Press (1987)
Whelan, T., Atz, U., Van Holt, T., Clark, C.: ESG and financial performance. Uncovering the Relationship by Aggregating Evidence from 1, 2015–2020 (2021)
El Khoury, R., Nasrallah, N., Alareeni, B.: ESG and financial performance of banks in the MENAT region: concavity–convexity patterns. J. Sustai. Fin. Invest. 1–25 (2021)
Aras, G., Tezcan, N., Furtuna, O.K.: Multidimensional comprehensive corporate sustainability performance evaluation model: evidence from an emerging market banking sector. J. Clean. Prod. 185, 600–609 (2018)
Rezaei, J., Nispeling, T., Sarkis, J., Tavasszy, L.: A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method. J. Clean. Prod. 135, 577–588 (2016)
Büyüközkan, G., Havle, C.A., Feyzioğlu, O.: A new digital service quality model and its strategic analysis in aviation industry using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP. J. Air Trans. Man. 86, 101817 (2020)
Seyfi-Shishavan, S.A., Gündoğdu, F.K., Farrokhizadeh, E.: An assessment of the banking industry performance based on Intuitionistic fuzzy Best-Worst Method and fuzzy inference system. Appl. Soft Comp. 113, 107990 (2021)
Ecer, F.: Özel sermayeli bankaların kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik performanslarının değerlendirilmesine yönelik çok kriterli bir yaklaşım: Entropi-ARAS bütünleşik modeli. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İ.İ.B. Dergisi 14(2), 365–390 (2019)
Akin, A., Yilmaz, I.: Drivers of corporate social responsibility disclosures: evidence from Turkish banking sector. Proc. Econ. Fin. 38, 2–7 (2016)
Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53, 49–57 (2015)
Ecer, F.: Sustainability assessment of existing onshore wind plants in the context of triple bottom line: a best-worst method (BWM) based MCDM framework. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28(16), 19677–19693 (2021)
Mohammadi, S.S., Azar, A., Ghatari, A.R., Alimohammadlou, M.: A model for selecting green suppliers through interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy multi criteria decision making models. J. Man. Analy. 9, 1–26 (2021)
Liu, H.C., Quan, M.Y., Li, Z., Wang, Z.L.: A new integrated MCDM model for sustainable supplier selection under interval-valued intuitionistic uncertain linguistic environment. Inf. Sci. 486, 254–270 (2019)
Govindan, K., Nasr, A.K., Karimi, F., Mina, H.: Circular economy adoption barriers: An extended fuzzy best–worst method using fuzzy DEMATEL and Supermatrix structure. Bus. Strat. Environ. 31, 1566–1586 (2022)
Alkan, N., Kahraman, C.: Prioritization of factors affecting the digitalization of quality management using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy Best-Worst method. In: Kahraman, C., Cebi, S., Cevik Onar, S., Oztaysi, B., Tolga, A.C., Sari, I.U. (eds.) INFUS 2021. LNNS, vol. 308, pp. 28–39. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85577-2_4
Wang, J., Ma, Q., Liu, H.C.: A meta-evaluation model on science and technology project review experts using IVIF-BWM and MULTIMOORA. Exp. Syst. with App. 168, 114236 (2021)
Li, J., Wang, J.-Q., Hu, J.-H.: Multi-criteria decision-making method based on dominance degree and BWM with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. 10(7), 1671–1685 (2018)
Onar, S.C., Oztaysi, B., Otay, İ, Kahraman, C.: Multi-expert wind energy technology selection using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Energy 90, 274–285 (2015)
Karaşan, A., Kaya, İ, Erdoğan, M.: Location selection of electric vehicles charging stations by using a fuzzy MCDM method: a case study in Turkey. Neural Comput. Appl. 32(9), 4553–4574 (2018)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Simsek Yagli, B., Dogan, N.O., Yagli, I. (2022). Weighting ESG Criteria of Banks by Using Interval Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Best Worst Method. In: Kahraman, C., Tolga, A.C., Cevik Onar, S., Cebi, S., Oztaysi, B., Sari, I.U. (eds) Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems. INFUS 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 504. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09173-5_69
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09173-5_69
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-09172-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-09173-5
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)