Public Policy and Supply Chain Management: Using Shared Foundational Principles to Improve Formulation, Implementation, and Evaluation

Abstract

Public policy and associated governmental regulatory issues play critical roles in shaping the practice of supply chain management (SCM). To date, however, these issues remain largely unexplored by SCM researchers. This article makes the case that such issues are highly relevant to the field of SCM, and that SCM researchers are uniquely positioned to speak to the issues by virtue of the foundational principles and levels of analysis that define our discipline. The discussion provides suggestions and examples of how fruitful research might be conducted in this space.

The Implications of Firm‐Specific Policy Risk, Policy Uncertainty, and Industry Factors for Inventory: A Resource Dependence Perspective

“…Under conditions of high policy uncertainty, there is increased potential for policy changes that could indirectly dampen the availability of critical resources (Harland et al, 2019). Policy uncertainty thus magnifies firms’ vulnerability to government action because there are numerous policies and regulations that could negatively impact their operations (Tokar & Swink, 2019). Recent examples of the many policies and regulations under consideration at any given time include trade negotiations (e.g., Coates, 2018), the electronic logging device mandate (e.g., Miller et al, 2020), emissions requirements (Laarson & Kamal, 2019), and drone regulations (Laarson & Kamal, 2019).…”

From the Editors: Introduction to the Emerging Discourse Incubator on the Topic of Research at the Intersection of Supply Chain Management and Public Policy and Government Regulation

“…Yet, they collectively underscore four themes important to research at the intersection of SCM and PPGR. One clear theme across the articles is that, as Harland, Telgen, Callender, Grimm and Patrucco () states, “gaps in perceptions exist between policymakers, implementers, and targets of policy.” To compound this challenge, as Tokar and Swink () note, SCM researchers are generally not equipped nor expected to emulate economists, political scientists, or policymakers in conducting policy analyses or writing policy briefs. Therefore, theory‐based empirical research has largely ignored research questions that stand at the intersection of PPGRs and SCM.…”

“…This theme of the role of networks accentuates JSCM's first emerging discourse incubator on research where the focal actor in the network is not a for-profit firm (Pagell, Fugate & Flynn, 2018), within which Johnson, Dooley, Hyatt and Hutson (2018) and Gualandris and Klassen (2018) examined networks with an NGO as the focal actor. Similarly, Tokar and Swink (2019) call for SCM researchers to expand the full network of actors in their research to include government and nongovernment organizations, in order to address PPGRs in relation to environmental sustainability and larger societal outcomes.…”

“…Dobrzykowski (2019) provides the impetus for healthcare supply chain research that is properly grounded in the unique institutional and regulatory environment. Finally, Tokar and Swink (2019) provide an extensive array of policy areas to which SCM scholars can contribute.…”

“…Each calls attention to SCM scholars’ expertise in network level conceptualization and analyses (Carter, Rogers & Choi, ) as providing a unique contribution to inform PPGRs. In particular, Tokar and Swink () contend that SCM's focus at the meso‐level (firm‐level networks) fills the gap between microeconomics (individual, firm) and macroeconomics (industry, aggregate economy). They note that SCM researchers’ focus on interdependencies, processes, and systems thinking can provide a stronger understanding of the intended and unintended consequences of PPGRs.…”