Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Supply chain network design considering carbon footprint, water footprint, supplier’s social risk, solid waste, and service level under the uncertain condition

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Supply chain network design (SCND) plays a crucial role in transforming a supply chain sustainable. Recently, various SCND models have been developed especially focusing on carbon footprint reduction. The current study argues that emphasizing only on carbon footprint cannot entirely transform a supply chain sustainable. There are other dimensions (water footprint, solid waste, and social factor), which need to be taken care of for implementing sustainability. Till now, most of the sustainable SCND models have been developed in deterministic conditions, and very few models have been reported in a stochastic environment. To fill the gaps of existing literature, the current study proposes a multi-product and multi-echelon SCND model by addressing carbon footprint, water footprint, solid waste, social sustainability, service level, different transportation modes and inventories in stochastic condition. The study intends to minimize the total cost and estimate the flow of materials across the various echelons of the supply chain. The model considers the demand and capacity as stochastic variables. Further, chance-constrained programming has been used to model the uncertainty of parameters. In the current research, an individual-level chance constraint with right-hand side uncertainty has been adopted. The applicability of the proposed model has been demonstrated with a numerical example and sensitivity analyses have been conducted by changing model parameters, like probability, carbon footprint, water footprint, solid waste, service level, and social factor. The suggested model facilitates decision-maker to estimate the optimum flow of material across the supply chain for delivering materials of predetermined carbon footprint, water footprint, solid waste, social sustainability, and service level. The model helps the manager to implement the sustainability holistically across the supply chain.

Graphic abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.ecocostsvalue.com/EVR/model/theory/2-emissions.html.

References

  • Abdallah T, Farhat A, Diabat A, Kennedy S (2012) Green supply chains with carbon trading and environmental sourcing: formulation and life cycle assessment. Appl Math Model 36(9):4271–4285

    Google Scholar 

  • Aggarwal R, Singh SP (2015) Chance constraint-based multi-objective stochastic model for supplier selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 79(9–12):1707–1719

    Google Scholar 

  • Aivazidou E, Vlachos D (2017) Sustainable supply chain network design with water footprint consideration: a strategic optimisation model. In: 6th international conference on environmental management, engineering, planning and economics (CEMEPE) and SECOTOX conference, 25th–30th June 2017, Thessaloniki, Greece, pp 897–911

  • Aivazidou E, Tsolakis N, Vlachos D, Iakovou E (2018) A water footprint management framework for supply chains under green market behavior. J Clean Prod 197:592–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amid A, Ghodsypour SH, O’Brien C (2006) Fuzzy multi objective linear model for supplier selection in a supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 104:394–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Amirbagheri K, Núñez-Carballosa A, Guitart-Tarrés L, Merigó J (2019) Research on green supply chain: a bibliometric analysis. Clean Technol Environ Policy 21(1):3–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Arampantzi C, Minis I (2017) A new model for designing sustainable supply chain networks and its application to a global manufacturer. J Clean Prod 156:276–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Aviso KB, Tan RR, Culaba AB, Cruz JB (2011) Fuzzy input–output model for optimizing eco-industrial supply chains under water footprint constraints. J Clean Prod 19(2–3):187–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Baghalian A, Rezapour S, Farahani RZ (2013) Robust supply chain network design with service level against disruptions and demand uncertainties: a real-life case. Eur J Oper Res 227(1):199–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzinpour F, Taki P (2018) A dual-channel network design model in a green supply chain considering pricing and transportation mode choice. J Intell Manuf 29(7):1465–1483

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Tal A, El Ghaoui L, Nemirovski A (2009) Robust optimization. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi A, Giarola S, Bezzo F (2013) Spatially explicit multiobjective optimization for the strategic design of first and second generation biorefineries including carbon and water footprints. Ind Eng Chem Res 52(22):7170–7180

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya CB, Sen S (2004) Doing better at doing good: when, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. Calif Manag Rev 47(1):9–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloemhof-Ruwaard JM, Van-Wassenhove LN, Gabel HL, Weaver PM (1996) An environmental life cycle optimization model for the European pulp and paper industry. Omega 20:615–629

    Google Scholar 

  • Boukherroub T, Ruiz A, Guinet A, Fondrevelle J (2015) An integrated approach for sustainable supply chain planning. Comput Oper Res 54:180–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandenburg M, Govindan K, Sarkis J, Seuring S (2014) Quantitative models for sustainable supply chain management: developments and directions. Eur J Oper Res 233:299–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaabane A, Ramudhin A, Paquet M (2011) Designing supply chains with sustainability considerations. Prod Plan Control 22(8):727–741

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW (1959) Chance-constrained programming. Manag Sci 6:73–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Sim M, Sun J, Teo C-P (2010) From CVaR to uncertainty set: implications in joint chance constrained optimization. Oper Res 58:470–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Chopra S, Sodhi MS (2004) Managing risk to avoid supply-chain breakdown. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 46(1):53

    Google Scholar 

  • Colicchia C, Creazza A, Dallari F, Melacini M (2015) Eco-efficient supply chain networks: development of a design framework and application to a real case study. Prod Plan Control. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1090030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das R, Shaw K (2017) Uncertain supply chain network design considering carbon footprint and social factors using two-stage approach. Clean Technol Environ Policy 19:2491–2519

    Google Scholar 

  • Daskin MS (1995) Network and discrete location: models, algorithms, and applications. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Devika K, Jafarian A, Nourbakhsh V (2014) Designing a sustainable closed-loop supply chain network based on triple bottom line approach: a comparison of metaheuristics hybridization techniques. Eur J Oper Res 235(3):594–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubey R, Gunasekaran A, Ali SS (2015) Exploring the relationship between leadership, operational practices, institutional pressures and environmental performance: a framework for green supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 160:120–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Elçi Ö, Noyan N, Bülbül K (2018) Chance-constrained stochastic programming under variable reliability levels with an application to humanitarian relief network design. Comput Oper Res 96:91–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskandarpour M, Dejax P, Miemczyk J, Péton O (2015) Sustainable supply chain network design: an optimization-oriented review. Omega 54:11–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Foerstl K, Reuter C, Hartmann E, Blome C (2010) Managing supplier sustainability risks in a dynamically changing environment—sustainable supplier management in the chemical industry. J Purch Supply Manag 16(2):118–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich J, Damassa T (2014) The history of carbon dioxide emissions. http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/05/history-carbon-dioxide-emissions. Accessed 21 May 2019

  • Gao N, Ryan S (2014) Robust design of a closed-loop supply chain network for uncertain carbon regulations and random product flows. EURO J Transp Logist 3:5–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Golpîra H, Najafi E, Zandieh M, Sadi-Nezhad S (2017) Robust bi-level optimization for green opportunistic supply chain network design problem against uncertainty and environmental risk. Comput Ind Eng 107:301–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindan K, Cheng TCE (2018) Advances in stochastic programming and robust optimization for supply chain planning. Comput Oper Res 100:262–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindan K, Soleimani H, Kannan D (2015) Reverse logistics and closed-loop supply chain: a comprehensive review to explore the future. Eur J Oper Res 240:603–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindan K, Fattahi M, Keyvanshokooh E (2017) Supply chain network design under uncertainty: a comprehensive review and future research directions. Eur J Oper Res 263(1):108–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunasekaran A, Dubey R, Singh SP (2016) Flexible sustainable supply chain network design: current trends opportunities and future. Global J Flex Syst Manag 17(2):109–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanifan GL, Sharma AE, Mehta P (2012) Why a sustainable supply chain is good business. https://www.accenture.com/t20150522T061611__w__/ph-en/_acnmedia/Accenture/Conversion-Assets/Outlook/Documents/1/Accenture-Outlook-Why-Sustainable-Supply-Chain-is-Good-Business.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2019

  • Holt D, Ghobadian A (2009) An empirical study of green supply chain management practices amongst UK manufacturers. J Manuf Technol Manag 20(7):933–956

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong LJ, Yang Y, Zhang L (2011) Sequential convex approximations to joint chance constrained programs: a Monte Carlo approach. Oper Res 59:617–630

    Google Scholar 

  • Inuiguchi M, Ramík J (2000) Possibilistic linear programming: a brief review of fuzzy mathematical programming and a comparison with stochastic programming in portfolio selection problem. Fuzzy Sets Syst 111:3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamshidi R, Fatemi Ghomi S, Karimi B (2012) Multi-objective green supply chain optimization with a new hybrid memetic algorithm using the taguchi method. Scientia Iranica 19(6):1876–1886

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin M, Granda-Marulanda NA, Down I (2014) The impact of carbon policies on supply chain design and logistics of a major retailer. J Clean Prod 85:453–461

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson E (2008) Disagreement over carbon footprints: a comparison of electric and LPG forklifts. Energy Policy 36:1569–1573

    Google Scholar 

  • Keshteli HM, Fard AM (2018) Sustainable closed-loop supply chain network design with discount supposition. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3369-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klibi W, Martel A, Guitouni A (2010) The design of robust value-creating supply chain networks: a critical review. Eur J Oper Res 203(2):283–293

    Google Scholar 

  • Klose A, Drexl A (2005) Facility location models for distribution system design. Eur J Oper Res 162(1):4–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Koberg E, Longoni A (2019) A systematic review of sustainable supply chain management in global supply chains. J Clean Prod 207:1084–1098

    Google Scholar 

  • Kothyari A, Singh SP, Kaur H (2017) Fuzzy modeling for low-carbon dynamic procurement problem. Int J Fuzzy Syst 19(4):1238–1248

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo TC, Tseng ML, Chen HM, Chen PS, Chang PC (2018) Design and analysis of supply chain networks with low carbon emissions. Comput Econ 52(4):1353–1374

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamba K, Singh SP, Mishra N (2019) Integrated decisions for supplier selection and lot-sizing considering different carbon emission regulations in Big Data environment. Comput Ind Eng 128:1052–1062

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavigne BB, Agard B, Penz B (2014) Environmental constraints in joint product and supply chain design optimization. Comput Ind Eng 76:16–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Le TPN, Lee TR (2013) Model selection with considering the CO2 emission alone the global supply chain. J Intell Manuf 24(4):653–672

    Google Scholar 

  • Li P, Garcia HA, Wozny G (2008) Chance constrained programming approach to process optimization under uncertainty. Comput Chem Eng 32:25–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Limpert E, Stahel WA (2011) Problems with using the normal distribution–and ways to improve quality and efficiency of data analysis. PLoS ONE 6(7):e21403

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Loaiza PRE, Olivares-Benitez E, Miranda PA, Guerrero A, Martinez JL (2017) Supply chain network design with efficiency, location, and inventory policy using a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm. Int Trans Oper Res 24:251–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Maditati DR, Munim ZH, Schramm HJ, Kummer S (2018) A review of green supply chain management: from bibliometric analysis to a conceptual framework and future research directions. Resour Conserv Recycl 139:150–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Mani V, Agarwal R, Gunasekaran A, Papadopoulos T, Dubey R, Childe SJ (2016) Social sustainability in the supply chain: construct development and measurement validation. Ecol Ind 71:270–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Mani V, Gunasekaran A, Delgado C (2018) Enhancing supply chain performance through supplier social sustainability: an emerging economy perspective. Int J Prod Econ 195:259–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall D, McCarthy L, McGrath P, Claudy M (2015) Going above and beyond: how sustainability culture and entrepreneurial orientation drive social sustainability supply chain practice adoption. Supply Chain Manag Int J 20(4):434–454

    Google Scholar 

  • Mata TM, Martins AA, Sikdar SK, Costa CAV (2011) Sustainability considerations of biodiesel based on supply chain analysis. Clean Technol Environ Policy 13:655–671

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey and Company (2009) The global corporate footprint—risks, opportunities and management options. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/dotcom/client_service/Sustainability/PDFs/Report_Large_Water_Users.aspx. Accessed 30 Apr 2019

  • Melnyk SA, Narasimhan R, DeCampos HA (2014) Supply chain design: issues, challenges, frameworks and solutions. Int J Prod Res 52(7):1887–1896

    Google Scholar 

  • Melo MT, Nickel S, Saldanha-da-Gama F (2009) Facility location and supply chain management—a review. Eur J Oper Res 196(2):401–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Memari A, Ahmad R, Rahim ARA, Jokar MRA (2018) An optimization study of a palm oil-based regional bio-energy supply chain under carbon pricing and trading policies. Clean Technol Environ Policy 20(1):113–125

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miles MP, Munilla LS (2004) The potential impact of social accountability certification on marketing: a short note. J Bus Ethics 50(1):1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra S, Singh SP (2019) An environmentally sustainable manufacturing network model under an international ecosystem. Clean Technol Environ Policy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01704-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi M, Jämsä-Jounela SL, Harjunkoski I (2018) Sustainable supply chain network design for the optimal utilization of municipal solid waste. AIChE J 65(7):1–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed F, Selim SZ, Hassan A, Syed MN (2017) Multi-period planning of closed-loop supply chain with carbon policies under uncertainty. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 51:146–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss J, Lambert CG, Rennie AEW (2008) SME application of LCA-based carbon footprints. Int J Sustain Eng 1(2):132–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Nazemi A, Tahmasbi N (2013) A high performance neural network model for solving chance constrained optimization problems. Neurocomputing 121:540–550

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemirovski A, Shapiro A (2006) Convex approximations of chance constrained programs. SIAM J Optim 17:969–996

    Google Scholar 

  • Noya I, Aldea X, Gasol CM, González-García S, José Amores S, Colón J, Ponsá S, Roman I, Rubio MA, Casas E, Moreira MT, Boschmonart-Rives J (2016) Carbon and water footprint of pork supply chain in Catalonia: from feed to final products. J Environ Manag 171:133–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurjanni K, Carvalho M, Costa L (2017) Green supply chain: a mathematical modelling approach based on a multi-objective optimization model. Int J Prod Econ 183(2):421–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen SH, Daskin MS (1998) Strategic facility location: a review. Eur J Oper Res 111(3):423–447

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagnoncelli BK, Ahmed S, Shapiro A (2009) Sample average approximation method for chance constrained programming: theory and applications. J Optim Theory Appl 142:399–416

    Google Scholar 

  • Peidro D, Mula J, Poler R, Lario FC (2009) Quantitative models for supply chain planning under uncertainty: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 43(3):400–420

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahmani D, Mahoodian V (2017) Strategic and operational supply chain network design to reduce carbon emission considering reliability and robustness. J Clean Prod 149:607–620

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramudhin A, Chaabane A, Paquet M (2010) Carbon market sensitive sustainable supply chain network design. Int J Manag Sci Eng Manag 5(1):30–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaee A, Dehghanian F, Fahimnia B, Beamon B (2017) Green supply chain network design with stochastic demand and carbon price. Ann Oper Res 250(2):463–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Sancha C, Giminez C, Sierra V (2016) Achieving a socially responsible supply chain through assessment and collaboration. J Clean Prod 112:1934–1947

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta JK (1970) A generalization of Some distribution aspects of chance constrained linear programming. Int Econ Rev 11(2):287–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Seuring S (2013) A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management. Decis Support Syst 54(4):1513–1520

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw K, Shankar R, Yadav SS, Thakur LS (2013) Modeling a low-carbon garment supply chain. Prod Plan Control 24(8–9):851–865

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw K, Irfan M, Shankar R, Yadav SS (2016) Low carbon chance constrained supply chain network design problem: a benders decomposition based approach. Comput Ind Eng 98:483–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen Z (2007) Integrated supply chain design models: a survey and future research directions. J Ind Manag Optim 3(1):1–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Sikdar SK (2003) Sustainable development and sustainability metrics. AIChE J 49(8):1928–1932

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sikdar S (2007) Sustainability and recycle–reuse in process systems. Clean Technol Environ Policy 9(3):167–174

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sikdar SK, Sengupta D, Mukherjee R (2017) Measuring progress towards sustainability: a treatise for engineers. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisman B (2012) Supply chain network design considering customer service level. In: Proceeding of the international conference on industrial engineering and operations management, Istanbul, 3–6 July 2012, pp 2250–2258

  • Sun Z, Liu C, Xu X, Li Q, Wang X, Wang S, Chen X (2019) Comparative carbon and water footprint analysis and optimization of Organic Rankine Cycle. Appl Therm Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.113769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsao YC (2015) Design of a carbon-efficient supply-chain network under trade credits. Int J Syst Sci Oper Logist 2(3):177–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsao YC, Linh VT, Lu JC (2018) A supply chain network with product remanufacturing and carbon emission considerations: a two-phase design. J Intell Manuf 29(3):693–705

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng ML, Islam MS, Karia N, Fauzi FA, Afrin S (2019) A literature review on green supply chain management: trends and future challenges. Resour Conserv Recycl 141:145–162

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2009) The United Nations World Water Development Report 3: Water in a Changing World. Earthscan, Paris and London

    Google Scholar 

  • Varsei M, Polyakovskiy S (2017) Sustainable supply chain network design: a case of the wine industry in Australia. Omega 66:236–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltho C, Elhedhli S, Gzara F (2019) Green supply chain network design: a review focused on policy adoption and emission quantification. Int J Prod Econ 208:305–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Z, Jia XP, Shi L (2010) Optimization of multi-product batch plant design under uncertainty with environmental considerations. Clean Technol Environ Policy 12(3):273–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang F, Lai X, Shi N (2011) A multi-objective optimization for green supply chain network design. Decis Support Syst 51(2):262–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann T, Minx J (2008) The definition of a carbon footprint. In: Pertsova CC (ed) Ecological economics research trends. Nova Science Publishers, New York, pp 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler H, Kaluza B (2006) Sustainable supply chain networks—a new approach for effective waste management. In: Popov V, Kungolos AG, Brebbia CA, Itoh H (eds) Waste management and the environment III. WIT Press, Southampton, pp 501–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright LA, Kemp S, Williams I (2011) ‘Carbon footprinting’: towards a universally accepted definition carbon management. Carbon Manag 2(1):61–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao T, Yang D (2008) Price and service competition of supply chains with risk-averse retailers under demand uncertainty. Int J Prod Econ 114:187–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Yawar S, Seuring S (2018) The role of supplier development in managing social and societal issues in supply chains. J Clean Prod 182:227–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhai Y, Tan X, Ma X, An M, Zhao Q, Shen X, Hong J (2019) Water footprint analysis of wheat production. Ecol Ind 102:95–102

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Y, Gong DC, Huang B, Peters BA (2017) The impacts of carbon tariff on green supply chain design. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 14:1542–1555

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu M, Taylor DB, Sarin SC, Kramer RA (1994) Chance constrained programming models for risk-based economic and policy analysis of soil conservation. Agric Resource Econ Rev 23:58–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Q, Sarkis J, Geng Y (2005) Green supply chain management in China: pressures, practices and performance. Int J Oper Prod Manag 2(5):449–468

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor of CTEP, Prof. Subhas K Sikdar, and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which have helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad, Dhanbad, 826004, India

    Rakhi Das, Krishnendu Shaw & Mohd. Irfan

Authors
  1. Rakhi Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Krishnendu Shaw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohd. Irfan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Krishnendu Shaw.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 126 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Das, R., Shaw, K. & Irfan, M. Supply chain network design considering carbon footprint, water footprint, supplier’s social risk, solid waste, and service level under the uncertain condition. Clean Techn Environ Policy 22, 337–370 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01785-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01785-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation