A picture fuzzy sets-based decision support model for the holistic assessment of cruise port tourism performance

Abstract

Sustainable tourism performance of cruise ports is a critical determinant of the long-term competitiveness of both ports and destination regions. This study aims to develop and apply a novel picture fuzzy sets (PFSs)-based decision-support system to systematically evaluate cruise ports’ sustainable tourism performance by integrating qualitative expert judgments with quantitative operational data. The proposed framework adopts a multi-attribute group decision-making structure, in which PFSs are employed to explicitly capture uncertainty, hesitation, and neutrality in expert evaluations. Criteria weights are determined using an extended PFS-based weights by envelope and slope (WENSLO) method, while cruise port rankings are obtained through a PFS-integrated multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) approach. The applicability of the proposed PFS–WENSLO–MABAC hybrid model is demonstrated through a case study of major cruise ports in Türkiye. The results indicate that the number of cruise passengers (0.5601) and the number of cruise ships (0.4218) are the most influential determinants of sustainable tourism performance, with Kuşadası Cruise Port (0.9029) achieving the highest overall ranking. Sensitivity and robustness analyses confirm the stability of the ranking outcomes under varying weighting scenarios. The findings provide actionable insights for port authorities and policymakers by identifying priority performance dimensions and offering a reliable analytical tool to support strategic planning and sustainability-oriented decision-making in cruise tourism.

Keywords

Cruise ports / Multi-attributive border approximation area comparison / Picture fuzzy sets / Sustainability performance / Weights by envelope and slope

References

[1] Lyu J, Hu L, Hung K, Mao Z. Assessing servicescape of cruise tourism: the perception of Chinese tourists. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag. 2017; 29(10): 2556-2572. https://www.doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2016-0216

[2] Cerveny LK, Miller A, Gende S. Sustainable cruise tourism in marine world heritage sites. Sustainability. 2020; 12(2): 611. https://www.doi.org/10.3390/su12020611

[3] Santos M, Radicchi E, Zagnoli P. Port’s role as a determinant of cruise destination socio-economic sustainability. Sustainability. 2019; 11(17): 4542. https://www.doi.org/10.3390/su11174542

[4] Dong Y, Xiao L, Wang J, Wang J. A time series attention mechanism based model for tourism demand forecasting. Inf Sci. 2023; 628: 269-290. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2023.01.095

[5] Gui L, Russo AP. Cruise ports: a strategic nexus between regions and global lines-evidence from the Mediterranean. Mar Policy Manag. 2011; 38(2): 129-150. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2011.556678

[6] Lau YY, Yip TL. The Asia cruise tourism industry: current trend and future outlook. Asian J Shipp Logist. 2020; 36(4): 202-213. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2020.03.003

[7] Pino G, Peluso AM. The development of cruise tourism in emerging destinations: evidence from Salento, Italy. Tour Hosp Res. 2018; 18(1): 15-27. https://www.doi.org/10.1177/1467358415619672

[8] Weaver DB, Lawton LJ. The cruise shorescape as contested tourism space: evidence from the warm-water pleasure periphery. Tour Manag Perspect. 2017; 24: 117-125. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.08.003

[9] Pallis AA, Papachristou AA. European cruise ports: challenges since the pre-pandemic era. Transp Rev. 2021; 41(3): 352-373. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2020.1857884

[10] Urbanyi-Popiolek I. Cruise industry in the Baltic Sea Region, the challenges for ports in the context of sustainable logistics and ecological aspects. Transp Res Procedia. 2019; 39: 544-553. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2019.06.056

[11] Liu Y, Dong E, Li S, Jie X. Cruise tourism for sustainability: an exploration of value chain in Shenzhen Shekou Port. Sustainability. 2020; 12(7): 3054. https://www.doi.org/10.3390/su12073054

[12] Nikčević J. Strengthening the role of local government to ensure sustainable development of the cruise sector: the case of Kotor. Mar Policy. 2019; 109: 103693. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103693

[13] Esteve-Perez J, Garcia-Sanchez A. Cruise market: stakeholders and the role of ports and tourist hinterlands. Mar Econ Logist. 2015; 17: 371-388. https://www.doi.org/10.1057/mel.2014.21

[14] Yang LH, Ye FF, Wang YM, Lan YX, Li C. Extended belief rule-based system using bi-level joint optimization for environmental investment forecasting. Appl Soft Comput. 2023; 140: 110275. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110275

[15] Mandal U, Seikh MR. Confidence level-driven Dombi aggregation operators within the p,q-quasirung orthopair fuzzy environment for sustainable supplier evaluation in automotive industry. Decis Mak Adv. 2025; 3(1): 285-309. https://www.doi.org/10.31181/dma312025101

[16] Wang Y, Jung KA, Yeo GT, Chou CC. Selecting a cruise port of call location using the fuzzy-AHP method: a case study in East Asia. Tour Manag. 2014; 42: 262-270. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.11.005

[17] Lin CW, Lee MK, Yang Z, Lee PTW. Performance evaluation of Asian major cruise ports. Ocean Coast Manag. 2022; 221: 106130. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106130

[18] Kara K, Yalçın GC, Simic V, Polat M, Pamucar D. An integrated neutrosophic Schweizer-Sklar-based model for evaluating economic activities in organized industrial zones. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 2024; 130: 107722. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2023.107722

[19] Ravichandran KS. Double Decker Decision Framework with fuzzy data for multi-attribute decision-making. Manag Sci Adv. 2025; 2(1): 214-222. https://www.doi.org/10.31181/msa2120259

[20] Kara K, Yalçın GC, Simic V, Baysal Z, Pamucar D. The alternative ranking using two-step logarithmic normalization method for benchmarking the supply chain performance of countries. Socio-Econ Plan Sci. 2024; 92: 101822. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2024.101822

[21] Kara K, Yalçın GC, Acar AZ, Simic V, Konya S, Pamucar D. The MEREC-AROMAN method for determining sustainable competitiveness levels: a case study for Turkey. Socio-Econ Plan Sci. 2024; 91: 101762. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101762

[22] Yalçın GC, Kara K, Toygar A, Simic V, Pamucar D, Köleoğlu N. An intuitionistic fuzzy-based model for performance evaluation of EcoPorts. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 2023; 126(D): 107192. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2023.107192

[23] Kara K, Yalçın GC, Kaygısız EG, Simic V, Örnek AŞ, Pamucar D. A picture fuzzy CIMAS-ARTASI model for website performance analysis in human resource management. Appl Soft Comput. 2024; 162: 111826. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2024.111826

[24] Yalçın GC, Kara K, Saygıner C, Simic V, Pamucar D. Selecting cloud providers of infrastructure as a service: a picture fuzzy symmetry point of criterion-based expert-driven model. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 2025; 157: 111132. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.111132

[25] Pamucar D, Ecer F, Gligorić Z, Gligorić M, Deveci M. A novel WENSLO and ALWAS multicriteria methodology and its application to green growth performance evaluation. IEEE Trans Eng Manag. 2023; 71: 9510-9525. https://www.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3321697

[26] Pamučar D, Ćirović G. The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using h. Expert Syst Appl. 2015; 42(6): 3016-3028. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.11.057

[27] Gopisetty YB, Sama HR. An integrated MCDM approach using double normalization: introducing the DN-WENSLO and DN-RPEM methods for socio-economic performance evaluation. J Oper Res Soc. 2025; 76(12): 2604-2630. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2025.2486679

[28] Subramanian SP, Pandian P, Sivaprakasam R, Kadarkarai J. A novel machine learning framework for optimized supplier selection using the weights by ENvelope and SLOpe (WENSLO) technique. Appl Oper Anal. 2025; 1(1): 1-10. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/29966892.2025.2474824

[29] Kahreman Y. Investigating the productive capacity performance of E7 countries using the WENSLO-ARTASI model. EKOIST J Econometrics Stat. 2025;(42): 154-174. https://www.doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2025.42.1614814

[30] Pamucar D, Özçalıcı M, Gurler HE. Evaluation of the efficiency of world airports using WENSLO-ARTASI and Monte-Carlo simulation. J Air Transp Manag. 2025; 124: 102749. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2025.102749

[31] Kara K, Ergin EA, Yalçın GC, Çelik T, Deveci M, Kadry S. Sustainable brand logo selection using an AI-supported PF-WENSLO-ARLON hybrid method. Expert Syst Appl. 2025; 260: 125382. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.125382

[32] Jafari M, Naghdi Khanachah S. An integrated multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) method for evaluating resilience and knowledge sharing of suppliers in Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Artif Intell Rev. 2024; 57(9): 227. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s10462-024-10830-2

[33] Kizielewicz B, Więckowski J, Sałabun W. Fuzzy normalization-based multi-attributive border approximation area comparison. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 2025; 141: 109736. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2024.109736

[34] Naz S, Shafiq A, Butt SA, Espitia GP, Pamucar D, Ijaz R. Evaluating blockchain software system for secure transactions using a novel 2-tuple linguistic q-rung picture fuzzy MABAC framework. Expert Syst Appl. 2025; 268: 126162. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.126162

[35] Fan J, Lei T, Wu M. MEREC-MABAC method based on cumulative prospect theory for picture fuzzy sets: applications to wearable health technology devices. Expert Syst Appl. 2024; 255: 124749. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124749

[36] Bi H, Gu Y, Lu F, Mahreen S. Site selection of electric vehicle charging station expansion based on GIS-FAHP-MABAC. J Clean Prod. 2025; 507: 145557. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.145557

[37] Debnath K, Roy SK, Deveci M, Tomášková H. Integrated MADM approach based on extended MABAC method with Aczel-Alsina generalized weighted Bonferroni mean operator. Artif Intell Rev. 2024; 58(1): 27. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s10462-024-10980-3

[38] Soni A, Chakraborty S, Das PK, Saha AK. Selection of sustainable construction material from recycled waste plastics by q-rung orthopair fuzzy SWARA-MABAC approach. Chemosphere. 2024; 364: 143166. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.143166

[39] Gao J, He Y, Huang N, Meng Q, Zhao S, Zhang L. Site selection of medium-deep geothermal resource projects based on intuitionistic fuzzy environment and MABAC method. Renew Energy. 2025; 250: 123253. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2025.123253

[40] Ali Z, Yang MS. Industrialization in development countries based on the MABAC method and Hamacher power aggregation operators for circular spherical fuzzy 2-tuple linguistic information. Complex Intell Syst. 2025; 11(9): 394. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s40747-025-02010-8

[41] Senapati T, Chen G. Picture fuzzy WASPAS technique and its application in multi-criteria decision-making. Soft Comput. 2022; 26(9): 4413-4421. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s00500-022-06835-0

[42] Hussain A, Liu Y, Ullah K, Rashid M, Senapati T, Moslem S. Decision algorithm for picture fuzzy sets and Aczel Alsina aggregation operators based on unknown degree of weights. Heliyon. 2024; 10(6): e27548. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27548

[43] Javeed S, Javed M, Jameel A, Senapati T. A picture fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making approach based on Hamacher Muirhead mean operators. Granular Comput. 2024; 9(3): 64. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s41066-024-00486-2

[44] Asif M, Zeb A, Ishtiaq U, Ahmad W, Hou M. Aczel-Alsina aggregation operators for linear diophantine fuzzy set and their application to multiple-attribute decision making problems. Expert Syst Appl. 2025; 271: 126552. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.126552

[45] Saeed M, Saeed MH, Shafaqat R, Sessa S, Ishtiaq U, Di Martino F. A theoretical development of cubic Pythagorean fuzzy soft set with its application in multi-attribute decision making. Symmetry. 2022; 14(12): 2639. https://www.doi.org/10.3390/sym14122639

[46] Feng H, Lin Q, Zhang X, Lam JSL, Yap WY. Port selection by container ships: a big AIS data analytics approach. Res Transp Bus Manag. 2024; 52: 101066. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2023.101066

[47] Pham TY, Truong NC, Nguyen PH, Kim HS. The fuzzy MCDM for container terminal choice in Vietnam from shipping lines’ perspective based on cumulative prospect theory. Asian J Shipp Logist. 2024;40(3):147-156. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2024.06.003

[48] Pabón-Noguera A, Carrasco-García MG, Ruíz-Aguilar JJ, Rodríguez-García MI, Cerbán-Jimenez M, Domínguez IJT. Multicriteria decision model for port evaluation and ranking: an analysis of container terminals in Latin America and the Caribbean using PCA-TOPSIS methodologies. Appl Sci. 2024; 14(14): 6174. https://www.doi.org/10.3390/app14146174

[49] Yeo I, Roh S, Sohn M, Lai P. Container port selection in the ASEAN region from Korean shipping companies perspectives: connectivity between Southeast Asia and South Korea. Asia Pac Bus Rev. 2025; 1-34. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2025.2540960

[50] Patel H, Chang CT. Beyond throughput: evaluating maritime port competitiveness using MABAC and Bayesian methods. Comput Ind Eng. 2024; 192: 110248. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2024.110248

[51] Ibeh F. Comparative analysis of container ports performance in West Africa. J Shipp Trade. 2025; 10(1): 13. https://www.doi.org/10.1186/s41072-025-00202-6

[52] Ambrin R, Ibrar M, De La Sen M, Rabbi I, Khan A. Extended TOPSIS method for supplier selection under picture hesitant fuzzy environment using linguistic variables. J Math. 2021; 2021: 6652586. https://www.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6652586

[53] Kundra S, Kushwah SS, Kundra N, Nabobo-Baba U, Alam M, Alam MA. Tourist experience at port and town: assessing cruiser satisfaction during self-organized onshore excursions at Lautoka Port, Fiji, in 2018-2019. Heliyon. 2022; 8(5): e09426. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09426

[54] Wang QF, Gan GY, Ye XL, Lee HS. Evaluation of operational performance of Wusongkou Cruise Port through network data envelopment analysis. J Mar Sci Technol. 2023; 31(4): 1. https://www.doi.org/10.51400/2709-6998.2708

[55] Lorenčič V, Twrdy E, Lep M. Cruise port performance evaluation in the context of port authority: an MCDA approach. Sustainability. 2022; 14(7): 4181. https://www.doi.org/10.3390/su14074181

[56] Karamat T, Sarfraz M. Applied multi-attribute decision-making with complex Pythagorean fuzzy data based on prioritized Aczel-Alsina aggregation operators: a case for a software company. Appl Res Adv. 2025; 1(1): 14-27. https://www.doi.org/10.65069/ara1120254

[57] Tseng PH, Yip TL. An evaluation model of cruise ports using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Marit Bus Rev. 2021; 6(1): 22-48. https://www.doi.org/10.1108/MABR-01-2020-0004

[58] Pallis T. Cruise shipping and urban development: state of the art of the industry and cruise ports. International Transport Forum [discussion papers]. OECD Publishing. 2015; 2015/14. https://www.doi.org/10.1787/5jrvzrlw74nv-en

[59] Bayazit S, Sune A, Kirval L. Main factors to select a cruise homeport in the Mediterranean region: a perspective from the cruise industry agents. In: 2015 International Conference on Logistics, Informatics and Service Sciences (LISS). IEEE; 2015: 1-5. https://www.doi.org/10.1109/LISS.2015.7369622

[60] Papachristou AA, Pallis AA, Vaggelas GK. Cruise home-port selection criteria. Res Transp Bus Manag. 2022; 45: 100584. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100584

[61] Carpenter A, Lozano R, Sammalisto K, Astner L. Securing a port’s future through circular economy: experiences from the Port of Gävle in contributing to sustainability. Mar Pollut Bull. 2018; 128: 539-547. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.01.065

[62] Vukojevic V, Tanovic M. Green innovation as a driver of sustainability in the automotive industry. Spectr Eng Manag Sci. 2025; 3(1): 287-295. https://www.doi.org/10.31181/sems31202554v

[63] Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. https://denizcilikistatistikleri.uab.gov.tr/kruvaziyer-istatistikleri. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[64] Alanya Cruise Port. Alanya Cruise Port. http://www.alanyacruiseport.com/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[65] QTerminals Antalya. Cruise Terminal About Us. https://www.qterminals-antalya.com/cruise/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[66] Global Ports Holding. About the Port. https://www.globalportsholding.com/our-ports/bodrum-cruise-port/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[67] Bozcaada Cruise Port. Bozcaada Cruise Port. https://www.bozcaadacruiseport.com/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[68] Port of Canakkale. Port of Canakkale. https://www.portofcanakkale.com/port-services/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[69] Ulusoy Çeşme Port. Ulusoy Çeşme Port. https://www.ulusoycesmeport.com/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[70] Port of Dikili. Port of Dikili. http://www.portofdikili.com/. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[71] Galataport. Cruise Port About the Port. https://galataport.com/en/cruise-port/about-the-port. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[72] TGA. Turkey Tourism Promotion and Development Agency. https://cruising.goturkiye.com/izmir-port. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[73] Kahraman C. A functionwise analysis of the cruise ports in Turkey: the case of Kusadasi. J Adv Res Soc Sci Humanit. 2017; 2(6): 377-385. https://www.doi.org/10.26500/JARSSH-02-2017-0606.

[74] Marmaris Cruise Port. Marmaris Cruise Port. https://www.marmariscruiseport.com/index.php. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.

[75] Samsunport. Samsunport. https://www.samsunport.com.tr/en/homepage. Published 2024. Accessed July 26, 2025.