Agri-food systems face increasing pressures from climate change, resource scarcity, geopolitical disruptions, and socio-economic inequalities, making the integrated assessment of sustainability and resilience essential. However, these dimensions are often examined separately in the literature. This study proposes a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) framework to comparatively evaluate the sustainability and resilience performance of agri-food systems in six representative European countries: Türkiye, Greece, Italy, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. Seven criteria aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals—import dependency, household food waste, food-system greenhouse gas emissions, agricultural water withdrawal, food insecurity, climate resilience, and logistics capacity—are analyzed using data from internationally recognized sources. Criterion weights are determined using the Entropy and CRITIC methods, while country rankings are obtained through TOPSIS, VIKOR, and COPRAS. Spearman rank correlation is employed to test inter-method consistency. The results show strong agreement among the ranking methods, confirming the robustness of the framework. France consistently ranks highest due to a balanced performance across cost and benefit criteria, whereas Türkiye ranks last because of cumulative disadvantages in food insecurity, emissions, water use, and import dependency. Variations in the rankings of Germany and the Netherlands reveal structural trade-offs between environmental pressures and resilience-related capacities. Overall, the study demonstrates that integrated, multi-method MCDM approaches provide more nuanced and policy-relevant insights than single-dimensional assessments.
Akıf et al. (Wed,) studied this question.