Available online at
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=1 Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510
© IAEME Publication
IMPORTANCE OF PACKAGING WASTE
RECYCLING PLANTS IN REVERSE
LOGISTICS AND AN ASSESSMENT OF
PLANT SELECTION USING THE AHP
METHOD IN TURKEY
Assist. Prof. Mustafa Gersil Business Administration Department, Celal Bayar University, Manisa TURKEY
Lecturer Seckin Salvarli, Izmir Vocational School
Dokuz Eylul University, IZMIR, TURKEY
ABSTRACT
Reverse logistics is one of the adopted supply chain processes and becomes more important because of economic and ecological conditions, administrative and social responsibilities, sustainable development, environment protection laws, and the aim of material and resource use. Recycling is a term that means recyclable waste materials are processed with various recycling methods and prepared to use in manufacturing as raw materials. Especially, used materials such as paper, glass, plastics and metals which are called 'packaging waste' are revalued in favour of economic. In most of the countries, local authorities are responsible for waste handling issues such as collection, transportation and disposal. In relation to waste management, the whole cycle of generation of wastes, their storage, collection and transport, and their eventual treatment and disposal are taken into condsideration.
Izmir, the third largest city in Turkey, consists of the metropolitan municipality and thirty district municipalities. According to the proposals and thoughts taken from the authorities of metropolitan municipality and some companies, in the last chapter of this study, an application to choose an appropriate recycling center for packaging waste in Izmir city using the analytic hierarchy process is carried out. The software of Expert Choice which supports AHP has provided data to be analyzed statistically and the results have been given in detail.
Cite this Article: Assist. Prof. Mustafa Gersil. Importance of Packaging Waste Recycling Plants in Reverse Logistics and an Assessment of Plant Selection Using the AHP Method in Turkey. International Journal of Management, 7(1), 2016, pp. 109-122.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=1
1. INTRODUCTION
What is of interest for logistics activities is its inclusion of forward flow of materials in the supply chain. Yet, as reverse logistics picks reverse flow which commences with the users as its topic of interest, its aim is to ensure the re-usability of products. With environmental issues becoming more important lately, the concept of reverse logistics is becoming a focus of attraction. As a result of the damage on and the depletion of natural resources and with the growing interest on environment-consciousness, today, demand for reverse logistics-related matters and recyclable manufacturing systems is also on the rise.
In the process of reverse logistics, the importance of the supply chain will be revealed more clearly with the return and recycle of products carried out in a more planned fashion. In other words, reverse logistics that concerns issues of effective and efficient re-collection and processing of wastes can be handled differently from waste management.
With the growing importance of environment-related issues, the concept of reverse-logistics, and as a result the issue of recycling are making it to the top of agendas. On the other hand, businesses' aspiration to have the competitive upper hand is another important factor in recycling practices. Forward flow of materials in the supply chain is considered among logistics activities whereas the reverse flow that starts from the consumers' end so that the products can be reused concerns reverse logistics. Recycling systems and issues pertaining to reverse logistics will naturally become further points of interest as natural sources are damaged and depleted and environment-awareness increased. As a result, logistics structures to allow product flow must be set up [Nakıboğlu, G., (2007); Yıldız, D.,(2013) ]. As it is known, issues such as product return, re-production, reuse, disposal, repair come under reverse logistics. Product returns account for a considerable portion of organizational costs. In order for an organization to have the competitive advantage, it will have to reduce costs in product returns and related transportation and storage activities. And for that, determination of appropriate recycling locations is important for reverse logistics networks [Gülsün, B., et al., (2008)].
Benefits of reverse logistics, generally, for businesses can be summarized as follows [Dyckhoff, H., et al., (ed)., (2004 ); Nakıboğlu, G., (2007) ; Yıldız, D.,(2013) ].
Recovery of value: This concerns the recovery of the product, with added value during its production, that would perish if not reused.
Maximization of profit: This when raw material, labor, energy etc. costs are reduced thanks to the recovery of the product.
Performance of environmental obligations: All liabilities that are also legally defined are such as waste recycling, management of hazardous materials, etc.
Improvement of management of customer relations: In order to improve customer relations, one must work on issues such as post-sale services and on the provision of customers with return guarantee, etc.
In order for products to be recovered and used as input in the economy, there are three processes that reverse logistics focus on and which also relates closely to waste management. These are: reuse, reproduction and recycling [ Setaputra, R., (2005)]. 2.
REASONS FOR RECYCLING OF PRODUCTS AND REVERSE
LOGISTICS
As stated in the respective literature, there are many reasons behind the inclusion of products that are subject to reverse logistics, in the reverse logistics network. These reasons are grouped, generally, on the basis of the source that returns the product (on the basis of the supply chain hierarchy comprising of the producer, distributor and the consumer). According to this grouping, returns that take place during production are referred to as production returns, distributor returns if the return takes place during the distribution of the product to the consumer and returns by the consumers that are the users of the final product are referred to as consumer returns. In addition to such grouping, there is also producers' recall of the products in cases when an problem with the product is encountered or when the product is being replaced and also
functional returns arising from the re-usability feature of the product [Rogers, D.S., Tibben-Lembke, R., (2001) ; Brito, M.P., et al., ( 2002); Brito, M.P., Dekker, R., ( 2002); Subramaniam, U., et al., (2004)]. Moreover, reasons for the return of products that are subject to reverse logistics are provided in further detail, below:
a. Production Returns
Within this scope, issues such as the product being raw material surplus or being production surplus are specified.
b. Distributor Returns
Here, four sub-headings that a have been specified, namely as wrong or damaged delivery, products that have expired, stock surplus or unsold products and seasonal fluctuations, stock adjustments.
c. Consumer Returns
Reasons in relation to this topic can be listed as return under guarantee, reuse of products after repair, value gains (scrap value and consideration of other recovery options), returns from after-use (such as second hand sales), returns at the end of life-cycle, legal regulations concerning hazardous materials or the customer considering the product as damaged/deficient.
d. Producer's Recall of the Products
This reason is defined as the producer's recall of the product for a deficiency, or a safety or a health related problem in the product.
e. Functional Returns
Packaging materials that are of reusable quality, containers, pallets, packages, boxes are under this title.
Increased practice of reverse logistics also benefits from businesses' becoming aware of the benefits of product returns in addition to product returns, customer satisfaction or legal conditions mentioned above. As stated in the existing literature, these benefits are listed as better relations with customers and partners in the supply
chain, considerable cost savings and gains from replacement of the new product with the used one [(Avitatthur, B., Shah, J., (2004)].
3. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
When classified as per their sources, solid wastes comprise, most generally, substances such as:
- domestic solid wastes - domestic wastes - industrial wastes - industrial solid wastes - dangerous wastes - medical wastes - special solid wastes
In businesses where Environmental Management System is effectively implemented in parallel to environmental awareness, waste management outcomes are successful. As explained in the literature, basic aspects of the Waste management System are specified as follows:
Prevention of wastes especially at the source, Segregation of wastes generated at the source, Bringing recyclable wastes back to economy, Energy recovery,
Reduction of wastes to be stored,
Ensuring the storage of non-recyclable wastes in ways that are not detrimental to the environment and human health.
3.1. Integrated Waste Management System
Volume and composition of wastes are diversified in tandem with fast-increasing population and changing living standards, making control and management of wastes even harder. As explained also by Kemirtlek, the issue of solid waste management will become more important, even more complex, both today and in the future considering pollution from solid wastes and the dimensions of existing as well as potential related risks, diminution of natural resources, economic and other reasons. It is for this reason that one must know very well all aspects of an integrated waste management comprising of all stages from the generation of wastes to final disposal, as well as the their inter-linkages [ Kemirtlek, A., (2007)].
A single approach in this regard might not be sufficient for provision of solutions concerning wastes that are observed to lead to increased problems and impacts on the environment becomes harder. At the end of the day, an effective waste management system can be ensured by way of joining all methods. This approach named 'Integrated Waste management' has been embraced by all countries. All aspects of waste management has been assessed as a whole to develop integrated waste management sustainability of which would be ensured with environmental and economic aspects. So, one cannot expect integrated waste management to relate to only a single type of waste or a single source [Waste management Action Plan, (2008-2012)].
In another research, according to White et al., an effective and efficient waste management system in general shall have the features below [White, P.R., et al., (1995)]:
1) It must be an integrated system
Integrate waste management shall be planned in a way that it includes all substances that make up the composition of all wastes generated in a settlement area and all sources of production.
2) It must be able to create economic value
Economic values to be reaped from the solid waste management system are recoverable materials, compost and biogas that can be obtained (landfill and anaerobic compost) and inputs from similar sources. Revenues to be obtained from these are closely related to market conditions and the cost of the investment that will be made. For this reason, the economic analysis must be carried out aptly during the planning stage.
3) It must be flexible
Integrated waste management system has to be so flexible as to adapt to various changes that can occur in the environment and in waste characteristics that occur in relation to time.
4) Regional planning has to be carried out
Efficiency of planning depends on the amount of waste to be collected. Amount of waste generation, on the other hand, depends on the population. It is for this reason that regional planning has to be carried out in settlement areas other than metropolitan areas. Some researchers recommend that the population linked to an integrated management should not be less than 500.000 [Waste Management Action Plan, (2008-2012)].
As a result, integrated waste management is a concept where the appropriate method needed, technology and management programs are selected and applied in connection with the targets. Integrated waste management covers issues prescribed in the legislation and comprises of the steps below [Waste Management Action Plan, (2008-2012)]:
1. Prevention of wastes 2. Reduction of wastes 3. Re-use
4. Recovery/Recycling
5. Pre-process (including incineration) 6. Final disposal
4. AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SELECTION OF A LOCATION
FOR A PACKAGING WASTE RECYCLING PLANT IN THE
PROVINCE OF IZMIR
4.1. AHP Management
AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) is a model developed by Saaty, a technique used in the solution of a multi-criteria decision making problem [Saaty, T.L., (1980)]. As
such, AHP is a mathematical method that can assist in the improvement of the decision-making process by taking into consideration the priorities of the group or the individual and by evaluating qualitative as well as quantitative variables together. Those that work using this method are expected to make more effective decisions. 4.2. Literature Survey Concerning the Mathematical Modeling of the Problem Concerning the Selection of a Location
As product returns demonstrate uncertainties in reverse logistics depending on the product itself as well as depending on time, the fact that the network that will be established will have a complicated structure is known to researchers. The justification and determination of the location of regional collection centers within the regional network organization that plays an important role within such a complex structure are important [Kara, K., et al., (2013)].
In literature, there are studies making use of mathematical models concerning the establishment of reverse logistics networks for the establishment of collection centers for the inclusion in the reproduction process or for destruction of many expired products, wastes, products returning from the end consumer, product packages and packs as well as concerning the control of product movements within the scope of the reverse supply chain. Majority of these studies are seen to be studies that focus on international and private businesses [For example, Li, R.C., Tee, T.J.C., (2012); Dat, L.Q., et al., (2012)].
The aim is to determine a location by way of handling the issue as to the locality of special collection centers within a mathematical process. With this aim in view, a study to optimize the determination of location for solid waste recycling plants shall be carried out using the AHP model.
4.3. Implementation
In this study, an assessment has been carried out to determine the district that would be the most appropriate for the establishment of a package waste recycling center in the province of İzmir has been carried out with a consideration for the AHP method. There are 30 districts within the remit of the İzmir metropolitan municipality and these districts have been compared and contrasted against different criteria that have been determined in order to decide on the most appropriate location. Accordingly, in line with the solid waste master plan, the province of İzmir has been handled as two regions (North and South - Table 1) and then an aggregation has been performed to evaluate alternative provinces [Waste management Action Plan, (2008 2012)].
Table 1 The Structure of the İzmir Association
Izmir Bayındır Beydağ Çeşme Karaburun Kemalpaşa
Kiraz Menderes Ödemiş Seferihisar Selçuk
South Tire Torbalı Urla
Izmir Aliağa Balçova Bayraklı Bergama Bornova
Buca Çiğli Dikili Foça Gaziemir
North Güzelbahçe Karabağlar Karşıyaka Kınık Konak Menemen Narlıdere
Information available n the literature (Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4) as well as views obtained from respective authorities in public and private bodies including the, firstly, the İzmir metropolitan municipality have been have been widely used in the determination of the criteria that effect the selection of the location of the recycling plant [Waste Management Action Plan, (2008 - 2012); TURKSTAT, (2012a); MoEU, (2014)].
Table 2 Municipal Waste Basic Indicators, 2012
Total Population in Adress based Population Registration System 75 627 384
Total Number of Municipalities 2 950
Total Municipal Population 63 743 047
The Number of Municipalities Surveyed 2 950
Municipal Population Survied 63 743 047
The Number of Municipalities served by Municipal Waste Services 2 894 Population of Municipalities served by Municipal Waste service 63 105 474 Rate of Population served by Municipal Waste Services in Total
Population (%) 83
Rate of Population Served by Municipal Waste Services in Total
Municipal Population (%) 99
Amount of Municipal Waste Collected (Thousad tonnes/Year) 25 845 Amount of Municipal Waste Per Capita (Kg/Capita-day) 1.12 SUMMER SEASON
Amount of Municipal Waste (Thousand tonnes/Summer) 14 615 Amount of Municipal Waste (Thousand tonnes/day) 72 Amount of Municipal Waste Per Capita(Kg/Capita-day) 1.14 WINTER SEASON
Amount of Municipal Waste (Thousand tonnes/Winter) 11 229 Amount of Municipal Waste (Thousand tonnes/day) 68 Amount of Municipal Waste Per Capita(Kg/Capita-day) 1.09 The Medhods of Waste Disposal And Quantities
Metropolitan Municipalty Dump 1 107
Municipalities Dumps 8 217
Other Municipalities Dumps 448
Landfill 15 484
Composting Plant 155
Incineration 105
Pour out of Streams and Lakes 33
Let-in 94
Others 202
Waste Disposal Facilities
Rate of Population Served by Waste Disposal and
Recovery Facilities in Total Municipal Population (%) 64 Rate of Population Served by Waste Disposal and
Recovery Facilities in Total Municipal Population (%)
54
Table 3 Figurative Indicators from the Districts of İzmir Rate of Population Served by Waste Disposal and Recovery Facilities in Total Municipal Population Amount of solids collected by Municipalies and others Amount of solid waste collected per person Total municipal population Total environmental expenditures Waste management service expenditures (%) (ton/yr)
(kg/person-day) (thousand) (mio TRY) (mio TRY)
Aliağa 100 28 706 1,38 77 4,4 Balçova 100 49 870 1,76 78 6,4 Bayındır 100 9 460 1,11 41 1,7 Bayraklı 100 115 650 1,03 309 12,2 Bergama 100 23 278 0,93 101 2,1 Beydağ 100 4 743 2,28 13 0,45 Bornova 100 152 685 1,01 423 15,8 Buca 100 160 346 1,05 446 14 Çeşme 97 37 022 3,52 35 3 Çiğli 100 38 930 0,68 169 15 Dikili 100 19 448 2,43 35 0,8 Foça 100 12 251 0,83 32 0,47 Gaziemir 100 43 276 0,91 128 4,2 Güzelbahçe 100 10 345 1,23 28 0,61 Karabağlar 100 256 276 1,53 466 17,8 Karaburun 100 10 360 4,77 9 1,7 Karşıyaka 100 102 180 0,9 315 18 Kemalpaşa 100 45 990 1,76 95 2,8 Kınık 99 14 843 2,13 28 1,7 Kiraz 100 2 981 0,95 44 1,9 Konak 100 226 865 1,53 391 17,7 Menderes 100 53 600 2,65 75 6,5 Menemen 95 62 554 1,51 138 3,04 Narlıdere 100 17 155 0,65 63 4,7 Ödemiş 100 38 850 1,12 129 20,6 Seferihisar 100 15 717 1,47 31 6,8 Selçuk 95 20 941 2,01 35 4 Tire 100 33 520 1,7 80 7 Torbalı 100 36 500 0,86 138 2,9 Urla 100 26 780 1,62 55 4,3 Source: TURKSTAT, 2012b
Table 4 Distribution of Establishments Licensed/with Permit in İzmir, 2014 Districts Collection-Segregation Businesses Packaging Waste Recovery Businesses Non-hazardous Waste Recovery Businesses Metal-Scrap Processing Businesses Recovery Companies Aliağa - 1 - 2 - Bergama 1 - - - - Bornova 9 7 14 3 143 Buca - - - - 11 Çiğli 3 4 4 - 11 Foça 1 2 1 - Gaziemir 3 1 1 - 5 Karabağlar - - - - 14 Karşıyaka - - - - 16 Kemalpaşa 3 2 2 - 5 Konak - - - - 37 Menderes - 5 7 - 10 Menemen 1 - - - - Torbalı 3 3 6 - - Source: MoEU, 2014
In this way, criteria that are of importance in the selection of the location of the center have been determined as environmental factors, technical and economical factors and socio-cultural factors. With the help of existing data, that the sub-criteria that have an impact on the main criteria specified have been considered to be environmental expenditures, land and development status, proximity to main roads, proximity to existing recovery plants, proximity to transfer/storage facilities, logistics and service costs, amount of collected waste and the average amount of waste per population and per capita; and thus 30 provinces in İzmir have been compared. It is known that in order for waste management to be efficient, the amount of waste to be collected depends on the population. And since administrative, financial and technical capacities become more important in waste recovery activities, districts with a population of 50.000 with low amounts of waste have not been taken into consideration in the selection of the location of the package waste recycling plant [ Waste Management Action Plan ( 2008 - 2012) ]. Districts that have not been included in the study compose 9% and 8% of the total amount of waste that is applicable for İzmir and the population served, respectively. On the other hand, districts Bayraklı , Bornova , Buca , Karabağlar , Karşıyaka and Konak comprise 60% and 59% of the total amount of waste that is applicable for İzmir and the population served, respectively. For this reason, in the study concerning the determination of the package waste recycling plant, districts Bayındır , Beydağ , Çeşme , Dikili , Foça , Güzelbahçe , Karaburun , Kınık , Kiraz , Seferihisar and Selçuk have been excluded from among the alternatives and the selection has been made from among the remaining 19 districts.
The objective, main criteria, sub-criteria and alternatives have been demonstrated in Table 5. Within this framework, Expert Choice 11 package program was used to establish the hierarchical structure.
Table 5 The Hierarchical Structure Established for the Selection of the Location of the Packaging Waste Recycling Plant in the Province of Izmir
Objective Selection of the Location of the Packaging Waste Recycling Plant
Main Criteria Environmental Factors Technical and Economic Factors Socio-cultural Factors
Sub-criteria Environmental
Expenditures
Proximity to the Existing Recovery Companies
Amount of Waste Collected
Land and Development Status
Proximity to Transfer/Storage
Facilities Population
Proximity to Main Roads Logistics and Service Costs
Average Amount of Waste per Capita
Alternatives
Aliağa,Balçova , Bayraklı
, Aliağa,Balçova , Bayraklı ,
Aliağa,Balçova , Bayraklı ,
Bergama , Bornova , Buca Bergama , Bornova , Buca Bergama , Bornova , Buca Çiğli , Gaziemir ,
Karabağlar Çiğli , Gaziemir , Karabağlar
Çiğli , Gaziemir , Karabağlar Karşıyaka , Kemalpaşa ,
Konak Karşıyaka , Kemalpaşa , Konak
Karşıyaka , Kemalpaşa , Konak
Menderes , Menemen Menderes , Menemen Menderes , Menemen Narlıdere , Ödemiş , Tire Narlıdere , Ödemiş , Tire Narlıdere , Ödemiş , Tire
Torbalı , Urla Torbalı , Urla Torbalı , Urla
Diagram 2 Overview of the AHP Analysis Results
In Diagram 1 and Diagram 2, the examples of the general outcomes of paired comparisons that have been carried out between alternative districts on the basis of level of importance of the factors. In Diagram 1 it is seen that the main criteria are as follows: socio-cultural (0.648) factors are the first, technical and economic (0.230) factors second and environmental factors (0.122) third. Then, as a result of the paired comparisons that have been carried out among the sub-criteria of each criteria it was seen that the value of those in relation to environmental factors was as follows:
Land and Development Status (0.540) Proximity to Main Roads (0.297) Environmental Expenditures (0.163)
The value of those in relation to technical and economic factors was as follows: Logistics and Service Costs (0.429)
Proximity to Transfer/Storage Facilities (0.429)
Proximity to the Existing Recovery Companies (0.143)
the value of those in relation to socio-cultural factors was as follows: Population (0.528)
Amount of Waste Collected (0.333)
Average Amount of Waste per Capita (0.140)
And in Diagram 2 the outcomes of the comparison of all districts that have been included in the study as per sub-criteria are given together with their proportional values. Then a comparison of the criteria and on the basis of these criteria a paired comparison of the districts have been carried out.
Later, eigenvector values for environmental, technical and economic and socio-cultural factors and the evaluation of location-selection criteria as a result of running the program has been achieved. (Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Location-selection Alternatives for the Packaging Waste Recycling Plant According to the AHP Method
As it can be seen in Diagram 3, Bornova and Karabağlar are respectively the first and the second most appropriate districts in terms of selection of the location of the packaging waste recycling plant in İzmir; and Narlıdere the third.
5. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Mistakes made in the selection of the location of the packaging waste recycling plant lead to outcomes such as failure to attain the desired environmental, social and economic benefits. The considerable increase of the population density, hence the amount of waste in metropolises is indicative of the fact that the selection of the location of the waste recycling plant for managers and authorities is growing more important recently. Solid wastes the generation of which cannot be prevented as per waste hierarchy and that cannot be re-used have to be recycled and recovered.
Only half of the total of 5.5 - 6 tons of domestic packaging wastes consumed in Turkey can be collected through paper/carton collection bins and street pickers. However, the aim must be to increase the rate of collection of packaging wastes only half of which can be processed by recycling plants to around 70% as is the case in the EU states. It is estimated that in İzmir, only 50% i.e. a mere 150-160 thousand tons of packaging wastes are being collected.
All parties to ensure the sustainability of the recovery system must fulfill their portion of obligations. Within the framework of the sustainable development approach, waste management strategies that aim to transform packaging wastes into economic inputs have to be promoted and disseminated and the best locations for recovery plants have to be determined. For this, the role of metropolitan municipalities is especially important.
When 750 tons of packaging wastes that constitutes 30% of about 2500 tons of domestic wastes collected daily in the province of İzmir are factored out of the equation, municipalities will have transported 750 tons less waste. In other words, municipalities will have a chance to save from transportation and storage costs, as well as from time. On the other hand, packaging wastes fill up landfills quickly, shortening the useful-life of these areas and as they require new landfills they multiply municipalities' disposal costs. When packaging wastes that constitute half of all wastes volume-wise are segregated at the source and recycled, this will almost double the useful-life of landfills, hence significant cost savings for municipalities. It
is for this reason that the rate of segregation of domestic wastes at the source as well as the number of collection/segregation plants must be increased.
In this study, three main criteria (environmental factors, technical and economic factors and socio-cultural factors) have been determined to solve the issue pertaining to the selection of the location of the package waste recycling plant. Following an assessment of existing data and deliberations with and opinions and data collected from authorities at the licensed waste recycling plant operators in the province of İzmir and also at respective departments of the İzmir Metropolitan Municipality, the sub criteria that impact the criteria set forth have been considered as environmental expenditures, land and development status, proximity to main roads, proximity to existing recycling plants, proximity to transfer/storage facilities, logistics and service costs, amount of waste collected, average amount of waste per population and per capita. These have been determined with a consideration for 19 districts among the 30 located in the province of İzmir. The hierarchical structure thus established has been broken broken down using the Expert Choice 11 package program and Bornova, Karabağlar and Narlıdere districts were seen to be the most appropriate three districts according to the study-related diagrams, respectively.
Municipalities have to champion the efficient use of all resources, observance of waste hierarchy so as to ensure the generation of the least possible amount of wastes and their segregation and also raising public awareness on issues pertaining to recycling of wastes. In order for the development of the packaging wastes recycling sector, waste management strategies have to be scaled up in a way to incentivize and encourage the private sector. Researchers to work on similar topics can identify further criteria and extend the scope of the study by reaching out to decision-making authorities.
REFERENCES
[1] Atık Yönetimi Eylem Planı(2008-2012), T.C. Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, Çevre Yönetimi Genel Müdürlüğü , Mayıs - 2008 , Ankara.
[2] Avitatthur, B., Shah, J., (2004), Tapping Product Returns through Efficient Reverse Supply Chains: Opportunities and Issues, IIMB Management Review, V. 16, 4, pp. 84-93.
[3] Brito, M.P. Dekker, R, (2002), Reverse Logistics: A Framework, Econometric Instute Report EI 2002-38.
[4] Brito, M.P. Flapper, S.D.P., Dekker R., (2002), Reverse Logistics: A Review of Case Studies, Econometric Institute Report EI 2002-21.
[5] Dat, L.Q, Linh, D.T.T., Chou, S.Y., Yu, V.F,(2012), Optimizing Reverse Logistic Costs for Recycling End-of-Life Electrical and Electrical Products, Exper Systems With Applications, V.39, pp. 6380-6387.
[6] Dekker, R., Fleischmann,M., Inderfurth, K., Wassenhove, L.N.V., (2004), Reverse Logistics, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
[7] Dyckhoff, H, Lackes,R, Reese, J. (Ed.)., ( 2004), Supply Chain Management and Reverse Logistics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.
[8] Gülsün, B., Tuzkaya, G. Bildik, E.,(2008), Tersine Lojistikte Ağ Tasarımı: Bir Tavlama Benzetimi Yaklaşımı, Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Sigma, 26 , 1, s. 68-80.
[9] Kara, K.Acar, A.Z., Önden, İ., (2013), Tersine Lojistik Süreçlerinde Toplama Merkezi Yerlerinin Matematiksel Modelleme İle Tespit Edilmesi, 12nci Ulusal İşletmecilik Kongresi , Marmaris , s. 911-916.
[10] Kemirtlek, A., (2007), Entegre Katı Atık Yönetimi , İstaç A.Ş., İstanbul, s. 1-15. [11] Li, R.C, Tee, T.J.C., (2012), A Reverse Logistics Model for Recovery Options of
E-Waste Considering the Integration of the Formal and Informal Waste Sector, Procedia-Social and Informal Waste Sectors, V.40, pp. 788-816.
[12] Nakıboğlu, G,(2007), Tersine Lojistik: Önemi ve Dünyadaki Uygulamaları, Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 9/2 , s. 181-196.
[13] Rogers, D.S., Tibben-Lembke, R., (2001), an Examination of Reverse Logistics Practices, Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), pp. 129-148.
[14] Rogers.,D.S., Tibben-Lembke, R.S., (1998), Going Backwards: Reverse Logistics Trends and Practices, University of Nevada, Reno Center for Logistics Management .
[15] Saaty, T.L,(2008), The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Measurement Processes: Applications to Decisions Under Risk”, European Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol 1, No 1, pp. 122-196.
[16] Salvarlı, S.,(2015), Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma için Tersine Lojistikte Ambalaj Atık Geri Dönüşüm Merkezlerinin Önemi Ve Merkez Seçimine İlişkin AHP Yöntemiyle Bir Değerlendirme”, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Celal Bayar Üniversitesi, Manisa
[17] Setaputra, R., (2005), Role of Return Policy in Reverse Logistics: Issues and Optimum Policies, The Doctor of Philosophy Thesis, The University of Wisconsin.
[18] Subramaniam, U., Bhadury, J., Peng, H.S., (2004), Reverse Logistcs Stratagies and Implementation: A Pedagogical Survey, Journal of the Academy of Business and Economics, 4, 1, March, 2004.
[19] Mwafak M. Shakoor. Selection of Retail Store in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). International Journal of Management, 6(3), 2015, pp. 08-15.
[20] White, P.R., Frankie, M., Hindle,P., (1995), Integrated Solid Waste Management, A Lifecycle Inventory, An Aspen Publication, New York.
[21] Yıldız, D., (2013), Tersine Lojistik Yönetiminde Ambalaj Atıklarının Geri Dönüşümü: Eskişehir İlinde Bazı Mahallelerde Bir Araştırma, ÜAS 2013, 25-27 Eylül 2013, s. 917-927.
