Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future directions

Abstract

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to conduct a systematic review of the sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) literature in the principal logistics and supply chain management journals, across a 20-year time frame. Design/methodology/approach-The authors use a systematic literature review methodology. This methodology allows for the minimization of researcher bias and the maximization of reliability and replicability. The study's empirical validity is further enhanced by demonstrating high levels of inter-coder reliability across families of codes. Findings-The field of SSCM has evolved from a perspective and investigation of standalone research in social and environmental areas; through a corporate social responsibility perspective; to the beginnings of the convergence of perspectives of sustainability as the triple bottom line and the emergence of SSCM as a theoretical framework. While the SSCM research has become more theoretically rich and methodologically rigorous, there are numerous opportunities for further advancing theory, methodology, and the managerial relevance of future inquiries. Research limitations/implications-The trends and gaps identified through our analysis allow us to develop a cogent agenda to guide future SSCM research. Practical implications-The current perspectives of SSCM hold important implications for managers, by directing limited resources toward projects which intersect environmental and/or social performance, and economic performance. Originality/value-The paper provides a systematic, rigorous, and methodologically valid review of the evolution of empirical SSCM research across a 20-year time period.

Environmental practices as offerings and requirements on the logistics market

“…One important aspect of the research for this paper is that for all data collection methods, both the LSPs and the shippers have been studied. This way of addressing the problem is rare, but pointed out as important for improving supply chain environmental performance [9,54].…”

Corporate Social Responsibility in Buyer-Supplier Relationships: Is it Beneficial for Top-Tier Suppliers to Market their Capability to Ensure a Responsible Supply Chain?

“…Hence, we follow the concept of the triple bottom line (Elkington 1998), which highlights the need for managers and their firms to focus concurrently on the social, environmental, and economic impact of corporate activity (Henriques and Rich-ardson 2004;Van Tulder and Van der Zwart 2006). The triple bottom line appears in the research disciplines of marketing (e.g., Closs, Speier, and Meacham 2011;Hult 2011;Hunt 2011) and SCM (e.g., Carter and Easton 2011;Pagell and Wu 2009;Tate, Ellram, and Kirchoff 2010) as a widely used concept among managers and scholars. Thus, in this paper we use the term CSR synonymously for similar concepts such as sustainability (cf., Hult 2011) or corporate responsibility (cf., Campbell 2007).…”

“…Nevertheless, research that combines the purchasing and the marketing perspective against the background of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been sparse. Scholars have therefore only recently called for more CSR research that combines marketing with SCM (e.g., Carter and Easton 2011;Closs, Speier, and Meacham 2011). In order to develop theory on the integration of purchasing and marketing practices in the context of CSR, as well as on the effects of these practices on reputation, the framework of Sheth, Sharma, and Iyer (2009) is extended and modified to our research scope.…”

Ethical Sourcing: An Analysis of the Literature and Implications for Future Research

“…First, most previous reviews are largely focused on generic sustainable supply chain management (e.g. Seuring and Müller 2008;Carter and Easton 2011;Winter and Knemeyer 2013). This narrow focus calls for research into other aspects (e.g.…”