Promoting Global Climate Change Governance: A Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Analytics for Policy Evaluation

Authors

  • Galip Cihan Yalçın 1) Department of Business, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, OSTIM Technical University, 06374 Ankara, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9348-0709
  • Karahan Kara 2) Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, 35620 İzmir, Türkiye; 3) Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, SIMATS, Chennai, India; 1) Department of Business, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, OSTIM Technical University, 06374 Ankara, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1359-0244
  • Elif Gürdal Limon 4) Department of International Relations, Gumushane University, Gümüşhane, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5110-6524
  • Metin Aksoy 4) Department of International Relations, Gumushane University, Gümüşhane, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0887-7221
  • Ömer Uğur 5) Department Of Political Science and Public Administration, Gumushane University, Gümüşhane, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8463-5403
  • Vladimir Simic 6) University of Belgrade, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, Vojvode Stepe 305, 11010 Belgrade, Serbia; 7) Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Informatics, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea; 8) Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Sunway University, 47500 Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5709-3744
  • Onur Limon 9) Gumushane University Rectorate, Gumushane University, Gümüşhane, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4097-303X
  • Ahmet Görgen 10) Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, İzmir Democracy University, 35140 İzmir, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9647-2691
  • Dragan Pamucar 11) Department of Operations Research and Statistics, Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia; 12) UNEC Applied Artificial Intelligence Research Center, Azerbaijan State University of Economics (UNEC), Baku, Azerbaijan; 13) Yuan Ze University, College of Engineering, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Taoyuan City 320315, Taiwan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2488-9403

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.66972/iscis21202615

Keywords:

Climate Change Governance, Policy Selection, Type-2 Neutrosophic Numbers, Skewness Impact Through Distributional Evaluation Method, Deviation-Based Pairwise Assessment Ratio Technique

Abstract

The increasing emission of greenhouse gases in modern life has motivated individuals and societies to take action to prevent or slow down climate change. International collaborations have also prioritized climate change by incorporating it into their agendas and developing relevant policies. The primary objective of this study is to develop decision analytics for selecting the most appropriate climate change policy among alternative options. This research proposes a multi-criteria decision-making approach based on neutrosophic sets, specifically the type-2 neutrosophic number (T2NN)–Schweizer-Sklar–skewness impact through distributional evaluation (SITDE)–deviation-based pairwise assessment ratio technique (DEPART) model, for the climate change policy selection process. Within neutrosophic multi-criteria decision analytics, the most suitable policy is identified based on expert evaluations of the climate change policy selection criteria. The criterion weighting is performed through the novel T2NN–Schweizer-Sklar–SITDE method. Policy ranking is conducted using the DEPART method. The proposed neutrosophic multi-criteria decision analytics is applied by developing eight alternative climate change policies for the European Union (EU). The results showed that the "sustainability integration" criterion has the highest importance. "Policy proposal – 4 (climate diplomacy and policy based on cultural and normative power)" is determined to be the best policy option. The robustness of the presented neutrosophic multi-criteria decision analytics is verified through sensitivity and comparative analyses. Based on the findings, practical implications and recommendations are provided for EU policymakers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Clark, B., & York, R. (2005). Carbon metabolism: Global capitalism, climate change, and the biospheric rift. Theory and Society, 34, 391-428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-005-1993-4.

[2] Fankhauser, S., Smith, S. M., Allen, M., Axelsson, K., Hale, T., Hepburn, C., et al. (2022). The meaning of net zero and how to get it right. Nature Climate Change, 12(1), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01245-w.

[3] Ostrom, E. (2012). Nested externalities and polycentric institutions: must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales?. Economic Theory, 49, 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-010-0558-6.

[4] Schneider, F., Kallis, G., & Martinez-Alier, J. (2010). Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Introduction to this special issue. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(6), 511-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.01.014.

[5] Voulvoulis, N., Giakoumis, T., Hunt, C., Kioupi, V., Petrou, N., Souliotis, I., & Vaghela, C. J. G. E. C. (2022). Systems thinking as a paradigm shift for sustainability transformation. Global Environmental Change, 75, 102544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102544.

[6] Domorenok, E., & Graziano, P. (2023). Understanding the European Green Deal: A narrative policy framework approach. European Policy Analysis, 9(1), 9-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1168.

[7] Cifuentes-Faura, J. (2022). European Union policies and their role in combating climate change over the years. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 15(8), 1333-1340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-022-01156-5.

[8] Giuliani, A., & Baron, H. (2025). The CAP (Common Agricultural Policy): a short history of crises and major transformations of European agriculture. In Forum for Social Economics, 54(1), 68-94. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/07360932.2023.2259618.

[9] Kulovesi, K., & Oberthür, S. (2020). Assessing the EU’s 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework: Incremental change toward radical transformation?. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 29(2), 151-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12358.

[10] Biesbroek, G. R., Swart, R. J., Carter, T. R., Cowan, C., Henrichs, T., Mela, H., et al. (2010). Europe adapts to climate change: comparing national adaptation strategies. Global Environmental Change, 20(3), 440-450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.03.005.

[11] Hainsch, K., Löffler, K., Burandt, T., Auer, H., Del Granado, P. C., Pisciella, P., & Zwickl-Bernhard, S. (2022). Energy transition scenarios: What policies, societal attitudes, and technology developments will realize the EU Green Deal?. Energy, 239, 122067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.122067.

[12] Wolf, S., Teitge, J., Mielke, J., Schütze, F., & Jaeger, C. (2021). The European Green Deal—more than climate neutrality. Intereconomics, 56, 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-0963-z.

[13] Dobrodolac, M., Bošković, S., Jovčić, S., & Lazarević, D. (2024). Sustainable Delivery Model Selection using AROMAN Approach. Decision Making Advances, 2(1), 73-82. https://doi.org/10.31181/dma21202429.

[14] Parker, C. F., & Karlsson, C. (2010). Climate change and the European Union's leadership moment: an inconvenient truth?. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(4), 923-943. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02080.x.

[15] Gopisetty, Y. B., & Sama, H. R. (2024). Skewness impact through distributional evaluation (SITDE) method: a new method in multi-criteria decision making. Journal of the Operational Research Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2024.2416910.

[16] Yalçın, G. C., Kara, K., Işık, G., Simic, V., & Pamucar, D. (2025). Development of a Decision Support System for Performance Measurement of Social Movements. Cognitive Computation, 17(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-024-10385-y.

[17] Kara, K., Yalçın, G. C., Simic, V., Polat, M., & Pamucar, D. (2024). An integrated neutrosophic Schweizer-Sklar-based model for evaluating economic activities in organized industrial zones. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 130, 107722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2023.107722.

[18] Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antucheviciene, J. (2025). Simulation-Aided Analysis of a Deviation-Based Pairwise Assessment Ratio Technique (DEPART) for MCDM. International Journal of Computers Communications & Control, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2025.3.7038.

[19] Moser, S. C. (2010). Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1(1), 31-53. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.11.

[20] Schlosberg, D., & Collins, L. B. (2014). From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 359-374. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.275.

[21] Dhar, T. K., & Khirfan, L. (2017). A multi-scale and multi-dimensional framework for enhancing the resilience of urban form to climate change. Urban Climate, 19, 72-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2016.12.004.

[22] Bäckstrand, K., & Elgström, O. (2013). The EU's role in climate change negotiations: from leader to ‘leadiator’. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1369-1386. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.781781.

[23] Scheffran, J., & Battaglini, A. (2011). Climate and conflicts: the security risks of global warming. Regional Environmental Change, 11, 27-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-010-0175-8.

[24] Stefanis, C., Stavropoulos, A., Stavropoulou, E., Tsigalou, C., Constantinidis, T. C., & Bezirtzoglou, E. (2024). A spotlight on environmental sustainability in view of the European Green Deal. Sustainability, 16(11), 4654. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114654.

[25] Elkerbout, M. (2020). The changing role of carbon pricing in the EU. National Institute Economic Review, 251, R13-R24. https://doi.org/10.1017/nie.2020.3.

[26] Sabato, S., & Mandelli, M. (2024). Towards an EU framework for a just transition: welfare policies and politics for the socio-ecological transition. European Political Science, 23(1), 14-26.

[27] Joița, D., Panait, M., Dobrotă, C. E., Diniță, A., Neacșa, A., & Naghi, L. E. (2023). The European dilemma—Energy security or green transition. Energies, 16(9), 3849. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16093849.

[28] Filipović, S., Lior, N., & Radovanović, M. (2022). The green deal–just transition and sustainable development goals Nexus. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 168, 112759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112759.

[29] Kilian, B., & Elgström, O. (2010). Still a green leader? The European Union’s role in international climate negotiations. Cooperation and conflict, 45(3), 255-273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836710377392.

[30] Van Schaik, L., & Schunz, S. (2012). Explaining EU activism and impact in global climate politics: is the Union a norm‐or interest‐driven actor?. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 50(1), 169-186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2011.02214.x.

[31] Oberthür, S., & Groen, L. (2017). The European Union and the Paris Agreement: leader, mediator, or bystander?. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 8(1), e445. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.445.

[32] Almeida, D. V., Kolinjivadi, V., Ferrando, T., Roy, B., Herrera, H., Gonçalves, M. V., & Van Hecken, G. (2023). The “greening” of empire: The European Green Deal as the EU first agenda. Political Geography, 105, 102925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2023.102925.

[33] Schunz, S. (2022). The ‘European Green Deal’–a paradigm shift? Transformations in the European Union’s sustainability meta-discourse. Political Research Exchange, 4(1), 2085121. https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736X.2022.2085121.

[34] Barry, D., & Hoyne, S. (2021). Sustainable measurement indicators to assess impacts of climate change: Implications for the New Green Deal Era. Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health, 22, 100259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2021.100259.

[35] Pianta, M., & Lucchese, M. (2020). Rethinking the European Green Deal: An industrial policy for a just transition in Europe. Review of Radical Political Economics, 52(4), 633-641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0486613420938207.

[36] Hereu‐Morales, J., Segarra, A., & Valderrama, C. (2024). The European (Green?) Deal: A systematic analysis of environmental sustainability. Sustainable Development, 32(1), 647-661. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2671.

[37] Veugelers, R., Tagliapietra, S., & Trasi, C. (2024). Green industrial policy in Europe: Past, present, and prospects. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 24(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-024-00418-5.

[38] Fitch-Roy, O., & Bailey, I. (2023). Green growth and competitiveness in EU climate policy: paradigm shift or'plus de la même chose'?. In Handbook on European Union Climate Change Policy and Politics (pp. 173-186). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789906981.00024.

[39] Ciliberto, C., Szopik‐Depczyńska, K., Tarczyńska‐Łuniewska, M., Ruggieri, A., & Ioppolo, G. (2021). Enabling the Circular Economy transition: A sustainable lean manufacturing recipe for Industry 4.0. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(7), 3255-3272. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2801.

[40] Montfort, S., Fesenfeld, L., Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Ingold, K. (2023). Policy sequencing can increase public support for ambitious climate policy. Policy and Society, 42(4), 454-477. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad030.

[41] Ruiz, A. Z., Martín, J. M. M., & Prados-Castillo, J. F. (2023). The European Union facing climate change: A window of opportunity for technological development and entrepreneurship. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 100035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2022.100035.

[42] Oberthür, S., & Dupont, C. (2021). The European Union’s international climate leadership: towards a grand climate strategy?. Journal of European Public Policy, 28(7), 1095-1114. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2021.1918218.

[43] Evro, S., Oni, B. A., & Tomomewo, O. S. (2024). Global strategies for a low-carbon future: lessons from the US, China, and EU's pursuit of carbon neutrality. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142635.

[44] Buzogány, A., Parks, L., & Torney, D. (2025). Democracy and the European Green Deal. Journal of European Integration, 47(2), 135-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2025.2459859.

[45] Oberthür, S., & Kulovesi, K. (2025). Accelerating the EU's climate transformation: The European Green Deal's Fit for 55 Package unpacked. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12596.

[46] Simic, V., Gokasar, I., Deveci, M., & Karakurt, A. (2022). An integrated CRITIC and MABAC based type-2 neutrosophic model for public transportation pricing system selection. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 80, 101157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2021.101157.

[47] Perissi, I., & Jones, A. (2022). Investigating European Union decarbonization strategies: Evaluating the pathway to carbon neutrality by 2050. Sustainability, 14(8), 4728. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084728.

[48] Gaeta, M., Nsangwe Businge, C., & Gelmini, A. (2021). Achieving net zero emissions in Italy by 2050: Challenges and opportunities. Energies, 15(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15010046.

[49] Teixidó, J., Verde, S. F., & Nicolli, F. (2019). The impact of the EU Emissions Trading System on low-carbon technological change: The empirical evidence. Ecological Economics, 164, 106347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.06.002.

[50] Bellora, C., & Fontagné, L. (2023). EU in search of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Energy Economics, 123, 106673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106673.

[51] Asante, D., Ampah, J. D., Afrane, S., Adjei-Darko, P., Asante, B., Fosu, E., et al. (2022). Prioritizing strategies to eliminate barriers to renewable energy adoption and development in Ghana: A CRITIC-fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Renewable Energy, 195, 47-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.06.040.

[52] Qian, S., Qiu, Y., Bouraima, M. B., Badi, I., & Chusi, T. N. (2024). Assessing the Challenges to Leverage Carbon Markets for Renewable Energy in Developing Countries: A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach. Spectrum of Engineering and Management Sciences, 2(1), 151-160. https://doi.org/10.31181/sems21202412s.

[53] Omri, A., & Jabeur, S. B. (2024). Climate policies and legislation for renewable energy transition: The roles of financial sector and political institutions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 203, 123347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123347.

[54] Tutak, M., Brodny, J., & Bindzár, P. (2021). Assessing the level of energy and climate sustainability in the European Union countries in the context of the European green deal strategy and agenda 2030. Energies, 14(6), 1767. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14061767.

[55] Basuri, T., Gazi, K. H., Bhaduri, P., Das, S. G., & Mondal, S. P. (2025). Decision-analytics-based Sustainable Location Problem - Neutrosophic CRITIC-COPRAS Assessment Model. Management Science Advances, 2(1), 19-58. https://doi.org/10.31181/msa2120257.

[56] Chlechowitz, M., Reuter, M., & Eichhammer, W. (2022). How first comes energy efficiency? Assessing the energy efficiency first principle in the EU using a comprehensive indicator-based approach. Energy Efficiency, 15(8), 59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-022-10063-8.

[57] Li, R., Wang, X., & Wang, Q. (2022). Does renewable energy reduce ecological footprint at the expense of economic growth? An empirical analysis of 120 countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 346, 131207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131207.

[58] Jänicke, M. (2012). Dynamic governance of clean-energy markets: how technical innovation could accelerate climate policies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 22(1), 50-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.09.006.

[59] Lamperti, F., Bosetti, V., Roventini, A., Tavoni, M., & Treibich, T. (2021). Three green financial policies to address climate risks. Journal of Financial Stability, 54, 100875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100875.

[60] Stevis, D., & Felli, R. (2015). Global labour unions and just transition to a green economy. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 15, 29-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9266-1.

[61] Bäckstrand, K., Kuyper, J. W., Linnér, B. O., & Lövbrand, E. (2017). Non-state actors in global climate governance: from Copenhagen to Paris and beyond. Environmental Politics, 26(4), 561-579. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1327485.

[62] Paavola, J., & Adger, W. N. (2006). Fair adaptation to climate change. Ecological Economics, 56(4), 594-609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.015.

[63] Corner, A., Markowitz, E., & Pidgeon, N. (2014). Public engagement with climate change: the role of human values. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 411-422. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.269.

[64] Mehmood, K., Tauseef Hassan, S., Qiu, X., & Ali, S. (2024). Comparative analysis of CO 2 emissions and economic performance in the United States and China: Navigating sustainable development in the climate change era. Geoscience Frontiers, 15(5), 101843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2024.101843.

[65] Dennison, S., Loss, R. & Söderström, J. (2021). Europe’s green moment: How to meet the climate challenge.

[66] Bäckstrand, K., Kuyper, J., & Nasiritousi, N. (2021). From collaboration to contestation? Perceptions of legitimacy and effectiveness in post-Paris climate governance. Earth System Governance, 9, 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2021.100115.

[67] Belis, D., Schunz, S., Wang, T., & Jayaram, D. (2018). Climate diplomacy and the rise of ‘multiple bilateralism’between China, India and the EU. Carbon & Climate Law Review, 12(2), 85-97. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26489002.

[68] Von Lucke, F. (2021). Principled pragmatism in climate policy? The EU and changing practices of climate justice. Political Geography, 86, 102355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102355.

[69] Aguiar, F. C., Bentz, J., Silva, J. M., Fonseca, A. L., Swart, R., Santos, F. D., & Penha-Lopes, G. (2018). Adaptation to climate change at local level in Europe: An overview. Environmental Science & Policy, 86, 38-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.04.010.

[70] McCauley, D., Pettigrew, K. A., Todd, I., & Milchram, C. (2023). Leaders and laggards in the pursuit of an EU just transition. Ecological Economics, 205, 107699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107699.

[71] Peeters, M., & Athanasiadou, N. (2020). The continued effort sharing approach in EU climate law: Binding targets, challenging enforcement?. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 29(2), 201-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12356.

[72] Barichella, A. (2017). How Europe can and should become the guardian of the Paris Agreement on climate change. European Issues Fondation Robert Schuman, (450), 1-10.

[73] Von Lucke, F., Diez, T., Aamodt, S., & Ahrens, B. (2021). The EU and global climate justice: normative power caught in normative battles. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003081517.

[74] Akgüç, M., Arabadjieva, K., & Galgóczi, B. (2022). Why the EU’s patchy ‘just transition’framework is not up to meeting its climate ambitions. ETUI Research Paper-Policy Brief. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4220500.

[75] Remling, E. (2018). Depoliticizing adaptation: a critical analysis of EU climate adaptation policy. Environmental Politics, 27(3), 477-497. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1429207.

[76] Potluri, S., & Phani, B. V. (2022). Green entrepreneurship: a disruptive mitigation strategy for climate change. In Handbook of climate change mitigation and adaptation (pp. 3787-3819). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72579-2_165.

[77] Pamucar, D., & Ćirović, G. (2015). The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC). Expert Systems with Applications, 42(6), 3016-3028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.11.057.

[78] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106231.

[79] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138695.

[80] Lai, Y. J., Liu, T. Y., & Hwang, C. L. (1994). Topsis for MODM. European Journal of Operational Research, 76(3), 486-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)90282-8.

[81] 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. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3265818.

[82] Chakraborty, S., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2014). Applications of WASPAS method in manufacturing decision making. Informatica, 25(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2014.01.

[83] Kara, K., Yalçın, G. C., Simic, V., Baysal, Z., & Pamucar, D. (2024). The alternative ranking using two-step logarithmic normalization method for benchmarking the supply chain performance of countries. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 92, 101822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2024.101822.

[84] Rao, R. V., Singh, D., Bleicher, F., & Dorn, C. (2012). Weighted Euclidean distance-based approach as a multiple attribute decision making method for manufacturing situations. International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, 2(3), 225-240. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMCDM.2012.047845.

[85] Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Kazimieras Zavadskas, E., & 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.

[86] Dinçer, H., Eti, S., Yüksel, S., Özdemir, S., Yílmaz, A. E., & Ergün, E. (2023). Integrating data mining and fuzzy decision-making techniques for analyzing the key minimizing factors of carbon emissions. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 45(5), 7317-7333. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-232303.

[87] Puška, A., Štilić, A., Pamučar, D., Božanić, D., & Nedeljković, M. (2024). Introducing a Novel multi-criteria Ranking of Alternatives with Weights of Criterion (RAWEC) model. MethodsX, 102628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2024.102628.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-31

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): International Scientific Spectrum

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Galip Cihan Yalçın, Karahan Kara, Elif Gürdal Limon, Metin Aksoy, Ömer Uğur, Vladimir Simic, Onur Limon, Ahmet Görgen, Dragan Pamucar (Author)

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite

Yalçın, G. C., Kara, K., Limon, E. G., Aksoy, M., Uğur, Ömer, Simic, V., Limon, O., Görgen, A., & Pamucar, D. (2026). Promoting Global Climate Change Governance: A Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Analytics for Policy Evaluation. International Scientific Spectrum, 2(1), 153-191. https://doi.org/10.66972/iscis21202615