Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A decision framework for incorporating the coordination and behavioural issues in sustainable supply chains in digital economy

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Global warming, climate change, and social problems are the worst human-induced sustainability issues that economies across the globe have witnessed. Water pollution, greenhouse effect, poor working conditions, child labour and lack of coordination among channel partners have caused the considerable interruptions in the supply chain network. The purpose of the paper is to identify critical factors affecting behavioural and sustainable supply chain coordination and evaluate strategies for risk reduction in the supply chain coordination in the context of digitization. This study purposes a novel supply chain coordination framework which consists of four themes such as system, actor, objective and action on which the success or the failure of supply chain can be contingent. Our study integrates multi-criteria decision approach using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy-AHP) and Fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (Fuzzy-DEMATEL) to investigate factors that affected the behavioural and sustainable supply chain coordination in the context of digitization. The Fuzzy-AHP method qualified to hierarchically rank the factors based on the relative fuzzy weightage while Fuzzy-DEMATEL established the inter-relationships among the factors and classified them into cause and effect groups. The findings of our study identified the Environmental performance and decarbonization as the most significant factor and the speed to market as the least important factor in developing behavioural and sustainable supply chain coordination in the context of digitization. Our analysis from Fuzzy AHP-DEMATEL approach reveal that the social preferences (power balance, reciprocity, fairness) is a significant causal factor which can effectively abolish the issues plaguing behavioural and sustainable supply chain coordination in the context of digitization. The results from our study aim to facilitate decision makers in cultivating a sustainable supply chain framework that can boost trust among the channel partners environmental performance, social performance and channel efficiency of the supply chain, thereby ensuring sustainability and socio welfare of all the supply chain.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.scmr.com/article/major_supply_chain_initiative_launched.

  2. https://www.forbes.com/sites/edwardsegal/2022/03/15/new-white-house-initiative-seeks-to-ease-supply-chain-congestion/?sh=20cbfe600c1e.

  3. https://www.logisticsmgmt.com/article/unlocking_the_value_of_supply_chain_integration.

  4. https://sustainabilitymag.com/supply-chain-sustainability/kinaxis-provides-sustainable-supply-chain-planning-solutions.

References

  • Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., Ahenkorah, E., Afum, E., Dacosta, E., & Tian, Z. (2020). Green warehousing, logistics optimization, social values and ethics and economic performance: the role of supply chain sustainability. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 31, 549–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang, S., & Slaughter, S. A. (1998). Organizational psychology and performance in IS employment outsourcing and insourcing. In Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Vol. 6, pp. 635–643). IEEE.

  • Angouria-Tsorochidou, E., Teigiserova, D. A., & Thomsen, M. (2022). Environmental and economic assessment of decentralized bioenergy and biorefinery networks treating urban biowaste. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 176, 105898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arif, A., Vu, H. M., Cong, M., Wei, L. H., Islam, M., & Niedbała, G. (2022). Natural resources commodity prices volatility and economic performance: Evaluating the role of green finance. Resources Policy, 76, 102557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asiaei, K., Bontis, N., Alizadeh, R., & Yaghoubi, M. (2022a). Green intellectual capital and environmental management accounting: Natural resource orchestration in favor of environmental performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 76–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asiaei, K., Jusoh, R., Barani, O., & Asiaei, A. (2022b). How does green intellectual capital boost performance? The mediating role of environmental performance measurement systems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(4), 1587–1606.

  • Basiri, Z., & Heydari, J. (2017). A mathematical model for green supply chain coordination with substitutable products. Journal of Cleaner Production, 145, 232–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayus, B. L. (1997). Speed-to-market and new product performance trade-offs. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(6), 485–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cachon, G. P. (2003). Supply chain coordination with contracts. Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, 11, 227–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cachon, G. P. (2004). The allocation of inventory risk in a supply chain: Push, pull, and advance-purchase discount contracts. Management Science, 50(2), 222–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calic, G., & Ghasemaghaei, M. (2021). Big data for social benefits: Innovation as a mediator of the relationship between big data and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Research, 131, 391–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caliskan-Demirag, O., Chen, Y. F., & Li, J. (2010). Channel coordination under fairness concerns and nonlinear demand. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3), 1321–1326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, J., Zhang, X., & Zhou, G. (2016). Supply chain coordination with revenue-sharing contracts considering carbon emissions and governmental policy making. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy, 35(2), 479–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R., & Jennings, M. M. (2002). Social responsibility and supply chain relationships. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 38(1), 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casidy, R., & Yan, L. (2022). The effects of supplier B2B sustainability positioning on buyer performance: The role of trust. Industrial Marketing Management, 102, 311–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, B., Chang, C. W., & Wu, C. H. (2011). Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1850–1858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3), 649–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., Reilly, R. R., & Lynn, G. S. (2005). The impacts of speed-to-market on new product success: The moderating effects of uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(2), 199–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, C., & Yang, M. (2019). Creative process engagement and new product performance: The role of new product development speed and leadership encouragement of creativity. Journal of Business Research, 99, 215–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, H., & Ding, H. (2021). Dynamic game of corporate social responsibility in a supply chain with competition. Journal of Cleaner Production, 317, 128398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clift, R. (2004). Metrics for supply chain sustainability. In S.K. Sikdar, P. Glavič, R. Jain (eds) Technological Choices for Sustainability. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-10270-11510.

  • Collier, Z. A., & Sarkis, J. (2021). The zero trust supply chain: Managing supply chain risk in the absence of trust. International Journal of Production Research, 59(11), 3430–3445. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1884311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsten, D., & Kumar, N. (2003). Profits in the pie of the beholder. Harvard Business Review, 81(5), 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corsten, D., & Kumar, N. (2005). Do suppliers benefit from collaborative relationships with large retailers? An empirical investigation of efficient consumer response adoption. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 80–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, J. C., & Deck, C. A. (2005). On the nature of reciprocal motives. Economic Inquiry, 43(3), 623–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, T. H., Raju, J. S., & Zhang, Z. J. (2007). Fairness and channel coordination. Management Science, 53(8), 1303–1314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai, B., Nu, Y., Xie, X., & Li, J. (2021). Interactions of traceability and reliability optimization in a competitive supply chain with product recall. European Journal of Operational Research, 290(1), 116–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dash, R., McMurtrey, M., Rebman, C., & Kar, U. K. (2019). Application of artificial intelligence in automation of supply chain management. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability, 14(3), 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis-Sramek, B., Hopkins, C. D., Richey, R. G., & Morgan, T. R. (2022). Leveraging supplier relationships for sustainable supply chain management: Insights from social exchange theory. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 25(1), 101–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Díaz-Ramírez, M. C., Blecua-de-Pedro, M., Arnal, A. J., & Post, J. (2022). Acid/base flow battery environmental and economic performance based on its potential service to renewables support. Journal of Cleaner Production, 330, 129529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, H., Liu, Q., & Zheng, L. (2016). Assessing the economic performance of an environmental sustainable supply chain in reducing environmental externalities. European Journal of Operational Research, 255(2), 463–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer–seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubey, R., Altay, N., & Blome, C. (2019). Swift trust and commitment: The missing links for humanitarian supply chain coordination? Annals of Operations Research, 283, 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2676-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duleba, S., Alkharabsheh, A., & Gündoğdu, F. K. (2021). Creating a common priority vector in intuitionistic fuzzy AHP: A comparison of entropy-based and distance-based models. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04491-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (2013). Enter the triple bottom line. In The triple bottom line (pp. 23–38). Routledge.

  • Falcone, E. C., Steelman, Z. R., & Aloysius, J. A. (2021). Understanding managers’ reactions to blockchain technologies in the supply chain: The reliable and unbiased software agent. Journal of Business Logistics, 42(1), 25–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, D., Xiao, C., Zhang, X., & Guo, Y. (2021). Gaining customer satisfaction through sustainable supplier development: The role of firm reputation and marketing communication. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 154, 102453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., Klein, A., & Schmidt, K. M. (2007). Fairness and contract design. Econometrica, 75(1), 121–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreras-Méndez, J. L., Llopis, O., & Alegre, J. (2022). Speeding up new product development through entrepreneurial orientation in SMEs: The moderating role of ambidexterity. Industrial Marketing Management, 102, 240–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fibre2fashion. (2012, May 24). Pollution by textile industry - Pollutants of water, air, land, environmental pollution by textile industry. Retrieved from https://www.fibre2fashion.com/industry-article/6262/various-pollutants-released-into-environmentby-textile-industry.

  • Fuli, G., Foropon, C., & Xin, M. (2020). Reducing carbon emissions in humanitarian supply chain: The role of decision making and coordination. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03671-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gazley, A., & Simmonds, H. (2018). When service providers fail: outsourcing help and consumer attitudes. Journal of Business Strategy, 39, 22–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannakis, M. (2008). Facilitating learning and knowledge transfer through supplier development. Supply Chain Management, 13(1), 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540810850328.

  • Giannoccaro, I., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2004). Supply chain coordination by revenue sharing contracts. International Journal of Production Economics, 89(2), 131–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Martin, G., Villena, V. H., & Wiseman, R. M. (2021). The behavioral agency model: Revised concepts and implications for operations and supply chain research. Decision Sciences, 52(5), 1026–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guajardo, J. A., Cohen, M. A., Kim, S. H., & Netessine, S. (2012). Impact of performance-based contracting on product reliability: An empirical analysis. Management Science, 58(5), 961–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A., Sharma, P., Jain, A., et al. (2019). An integrated DEMATEL Six Sigma hybrid framework for manufacturing process improvement. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03341-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, W., Huang, Y., Hughes, M., & Zhang, M. (2021). The trade-off between trust and distrust in supply chain collaboration. Industrial Marketing Management, 98, 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, T. H., & Su, X. (2009). Peer-induced fairness in games. American Economic Review, 99(5), 2022–2049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, T. H., Su, X., & Wu, Y. (2014). Distributional and peer-induced fairness in supply chain contract design. Production and Operations Management, 23(2), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini-Motlagh, S. M., Jazinaninejad, M., & Nami, N. (2020). Recall management in pharmaceutical industry through supply chain coordination. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03720-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, B. X., Chen, Y. M., & Chen, L. A. L. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and value added in the supply chain: Model and mechanism. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsueh, C. F. (2014). Improving corporate social responsibility in a supply chain through a new revenue sharing contract. International Journal of Production Economics, 151, 214–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsueh, C. F. (2015). A bilevel programming model for corporate social responsibility collaboration in sustainable supply chain management. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 73, 84–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hvam, L., Mortensen, N. H., & Riis, J. (2008). Product customization. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jambulingam, T., Kathuria, R., & Nevin, J. R. (2009). How fairness garners loyalty in the pharmaceutical supply chain: Role of trust in the wholesaler-pharmacy relationship. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing., 3, 305–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jena, S. K., & Ghadge, A. (2020). Product bundling and advertising strategy for a duopoly supply chain: A power-balance perspective. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03861-9.

  • Jiao, J., Ma, Q., & Tseng, M. M. (2003). Towards high value-added products and services: Mass customization and beyond. Technovation, 23(10), 809–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johari, M., & Hosseini-Motlagh, S. M. (2019). Coordination of social welfare, collecting, recycling and pricing decisions in a competitive sustainable closed-loop supply chain: A case for lead-acid battery. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03292-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, L., Gurumurthy, A., Mateen, A., et al. (2020). Improving the coordination in the humanitarian supply chain: Exploring the role of options contract. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03778-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness and the assumptions of economics. Journal of Business, 59, S285–S300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katok, E., & Pavlov, V. (2013). Fairness in supply chain contracts: A laboratory study. Journal of Operations Management, 31(3), 129–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kekre, S., Rao, U., Sarthi, S., et al. (2004). Risk-Based integration of strategic and tactical capacity planning. Annals of Operations Research, 132, 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ANOR.0000045278.94269.1b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khezerlou, H. S., Vahdani, B., & Yazdani, M. (2021). Designing a resilient and reliable biomass-to-biofuel supply chain under risk pooling and congestion effects and fleet management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, 125101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirubakaran, B., & Ilangkumaran, M. (2016). Selection of optimum maintenance strategy based on FAHP integrated with GRA–TOPSIS. Annals of Operations Research, 245, 285–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-014-1775-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konar, S., & Cohen, M. A. (2001). Does the market value environmental performance? Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(2), 281–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouhizadeh, M., Saberi, S., & Sarkis, J. (2021). Blockchain technology and the sustainable supply chain: Theoretically exploring adoption barriers. International Journal of Production Economics, 231, 107831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, P., Baraiya, R., Das, D., Jakhar, S. K., Xu, L., & Mangla, S. K. (2021). Social responsibility and cost-learning in dyadic supply chain coordination. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 156, 102549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, E. K., Lee, C. K. H., & Ouyang, Z. (2022). From traditional warehouses to Physical Internet hubs: A digital twin-based inbound synchronization framework for PI-order management. International Journal of Production Economics, 244, 108353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, M., & Huang, G. Q. (2021). Production-intralogistics synchronization of industry 4.0 flexible assembly lines under graduation intelligent manufacturing system. International Journal of Production Economics, 241, 108272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Q. X., Ji, H. M., & Huang, Y. M. (2022). The information leakage strategies of the supply chain under the block chain technology introduction. Omega, 110, 102616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Diabat, A., & Lu, C. C. (2020). Leagile supplier selection in Chinese textile industries: a DEMATEL approach. Annals of Operations Research, 287, 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03453-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Z. P., Wang, J. J., Perera, S., & Shi, J. J. (2022). Coordination of a supply chain with Nash bargaining fairness concerns. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 159, 102627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Q., Zhao, Z., Liu, Y., & He, Y. (2022). Natural resources commodity prices volatility, economic performance and environment: Evaluating the role of oil rents. Resources Policy, 76, 102548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., Wei, W., Choi, T. M., & Yan, X. (2022). Impacts of leadership on corporate social responsibility management in multi-tier supply chains. European Journal of Operational Research, 299(2), 483–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, J., Ai, X., Yang, W., et al. (2019). Decentralization versus coordination in competing supply chains under retailers’ extended warranties. Annals of Operations Research, 275, 485–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2871-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, P., Wang, H., & Shang, J. (2013). Contract design for two-stage supply chain coordination: Integrating manufacturer-quality and retailer-marketing efforts. International Journal of Production Economics, 146(2), 745–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Q., Mentel, G., Zhao, X., Salahodjaev, R., & Kuldasheva, Z. (2022). Natural resources tax volatility and economic performance: Evaluating the role of digital economy. Resources Policy, 75, 102510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfredi, E., & Capik, P. (2022). A case of trust-building in the supply chain: Emerging economies perspective. Strategic Change, 31(1), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maravelias, C. T., & Sung, C. (2009). Integration of production planning and scheduling: Overview, challenges and opportunities. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 33(12), 1919–1930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A. K., Shrivastava, D., Tarasia, D., et al. (2021). Joint optimization of production scheduling and group preventive maintenance planning in multi-machine systems. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04362-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modi, S. B., & Mabert, V. A. (2007). Supplier development: Improving supplier performance through knowledge transfer. Journal of Operations Management, 25(1), 42–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ni, D., & Li, K. W. (2012). A game-theoretic analysis of social responsibility conduct in two-echelon supply chains. International Journal of Production Economics, 138(2), 303–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ni, D., Li, K. W., & Tang, X. (2010). Social responsibility allocation in two-echelon supply chains: Insights from WSP. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3), 1269–1279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nitsche, B., Straube, F., & Wirth, M. (2021, July). Application areas and antecedents of automation in logistics and supply chain management: a conceptual framework. In Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal (Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 223–239). Taylor & Francis.

  • Ojha, D., Struckell, E., Acharya, C., & Patel, P. C. (2020). Managing environmental turbulence through innovation speed and operational flexibility in B2B service organizations. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 36(9), 1627–1645. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-01-2020-0026.

  • Okpoti, E. S., & Jeong, I. J. (2021). A reactive decentralized coordination algorithm for event-driven production planning and control: A cyber-physical production system prototype case study. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 58, 143–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oluyisola, O. E., Bhalla, S., Sgarbossa, F., & Strandhagen, J. O. (2022). Designing and developing smart production planning and control systems in the industry 4.0 era: a methodology and case study. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 33(1), 311–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Y. H., Qu, T., Wu, N. Q., Khalgui, M., & Huang, G. Q. (2021). Digital twin based real-time production logistics synchronization system in a multi-level computing architecture. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 58, 246–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panda, S. (2014). Coordination of a socially responsible supply chain using revenue sharing contract. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 67, 92–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panda, S., Modak, N. M., & Cárdenas-Barrón, L. E. (2017). Coordinating a socially responsible closed-loop supply chain with product recycling. International Journal of Production Economics, 188, 11–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panda, S., Modak, N. M., Basu, M., & Goyal, S. K. (2015). Channel coordination and profit distribution in a social responsible three-layer supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 168, 224–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedroso, C. B., Tate, W. L., da Silva, A. L., & Carpinetti, L. C. R. (2021). Supplier development adoption: A conceptual model for triple bottom line (TBL) outcomes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 314, 127886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, L., & Saidin, H. (2000). IT and the mass customization of services: The challenge of implementation. International Journal of Information Management, 20(2), 103–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qi, Y., Mao, Z., Zhang, M., & Guo, H. (2020). Manufacturing practices and servitization: The role of mass customization and product innovation capabilities. International Journal of Production Economics, 228, 107747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qu, K., & Liu, Z. (2022). Green innovations, supply chain integration and green information system: A model of moderation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 339, 130557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghunathan, S. (2001). Information sharing in a supply chain: A note on its value when demand is nonstationary. Management Science, 47(4), 605–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, P., & Holt, D. (2005). Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance? International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 25, 898916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren, X., Li, Y., Shahbaz, M., Dong, K., & Lu, Z. (2022). Climate risk and corporate environmental performance: Empirical evidence from China. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 30, 467–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saghiri, S., & Wilding, R. (2021). On the effectiveness of supplier development programs: The role of supply-side moderators. Technovation, 103, 102234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selnes, F., & Gønhaug, K. (2000). Effects of supplier reliability and benevolence in business marketing. Journal of Business Research, 49(3), 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shayganmehr, M., Gupta, S., Laguir, I., Stekelorum, R., & Kumar, A. (2021). Assessing the role of industry 4.0 for enhancing swift trust and coordination in humanitarian supply chain. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04430-4.

  • Singh, R. K., Gunasekaran, A., & Kumar, P. (2018). Third party logistics (3PL) selection for cold chain management: A fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Annals of Operations Research, 267, 531–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2591-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudusinghe, J. I., & Seuring, S. (2020). Social sustainability empowering the economic sustainability in the global apparel supply chain. Sustainability, 12(7), 2595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syed, T. A., Blome, C., & Papadopoulos, T. (2020). Impact of IT ambidexterity on new product development speed: Theory and empirical evidence. Decision Sciences, 51(3), 655–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tai, P. D., Duc, T. T. H., & Buddhakulsomsiri, J. (2022). Value of information sharing in supply chain under promotional competition. International Transactions in Operational Research, 29(4), 2649–2681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tzeng, G. H., & Huang, C. Y. (2012). Combined DEMATEL technique with hybrid MCDM methods for creating the aspired intelligent global manufacturing & logistics systems. Annals of Operations Research, 197, 159–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-010-0829-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Úbeda-García, M., Marco-Lajara, B., Zaragoza-Sáez, P. C., Manresa-Marhuenda, E., & Poveda-Pareja, E. (2022). Green ambidexterity and environmental performance: The role of green human resources. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(1), 32–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V. G., Zhang, A., Deakins, E., et al. (2019). A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approach to supply partner selection in continuous aid humanitarian supply chains. Annals of Operations Research, 283, 1517–1550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2981-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincent, F. Y., Qiu, M., & Gupta, J. N. (2022). Improving supplier capability through training: Evidence from the Chinese Automobile Industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 163, 107825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vishnu, C. R., Das, S. P., Sridharan, R., Ram Kumar, P. N., & Narahari, N. S. (2021). Development of a reliable and flexible supply chain network design model: A genetic algorithm based approach. International Journal of Production Research, 59(20), 6185–6209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viswanadham, N. (2002). The past, present, and future of supply-chain automation. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 9(2), 48–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viswanathan, S., Widiarta, H., & Piplani, R. (2007). Value of information exchange and synchronization in a multi-tier supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 45(21), 5057–5074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, S. M., & Krause, D. R. (2009). Supplier development: Communication approaches, activities and goals. International Journal of Production Research, 47(12), 3161–3177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wamba, S. F., & Queiroz, M. M. (2022). Industry 4.0 and the supply chain digitalisation: a blockchain diffusion perspective. Production Planning & Control, 33(2–3), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., Chen, K., Wang, S., & Cao, X. (2022). Optimal decisions in a closed-loop supply chain: Fairness concerns, corporate social responsibility and information value. Annals of Operations Research, 309(1), 277–304.

  • Wang, W. Y., & Chan, H. K. (2010). Virtual organization for supply chain integration: Two cases in the textile and fashion retailing industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 127(2), 333–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Wang, Y., Tao, F., & Liu, A. (2021). New paradigm of data-driven smart customisation through digital twin. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 58, 270–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, L., Chen, M., Du, S., & Zhang, B. (2022). By-state fairness in selling to the newsvendor. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 159, 102634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, G. D. (2014). Project-based supply chain cooperative incentive based on reciprocity preference. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, 13(1), 102–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, R., & Lin, B. (2022). Environmental regulation and its influence on energy-environmental performance: Evidence on the porter hypothesis from China’s iron and steel industry. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 176, 105954.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, L., Mak, S., & Brintrup, A. (2021). Will bots take over the supply chain? Revisiting agent-based supply chain automation. International Journal of Production Economics, 241, 108279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, X., & Choi, T. M. (2021). Supply chain operations with online platforms under the cap-and-trade regulation: Impacts of using blockchain technology. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 155, 102491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yassine, A., & Souweid, S. (2021). Time-to-market and product performance tradeoff revisited. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3081987.

  • Yousefi, S., & Tosarkani, B. M. (2022). An analytical approach for evaluating the impact of blockchain technology on sustainable supply chain performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 246, 108429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Wang, Z., & Ren, F. (2019). Optimization of humanitarian relief supply chain reliability: A case study of the Ya’an earthquake. Annals of Operations Research, 283, 1551–1572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-03127-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, K., Du, G., & Jiao, R. J. (2022). Personalized service product family design optimization considering crowdsourced service operations. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 166, 107973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., & Yousaf, H. A. U. (2020). Green supply chain coordination considering government intervention, green investment, and customer green preferences in the petroleum industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 246, 118984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, C., Wang, D., Younas, A., et al. (2022). Coordination of closed-loop supply chain considering loss-aversion and remanufactured products quality control. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04619-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, X., Hu, Y., Deng, Y., et al. (2018). A DEMATEL-based completion method for incomplete pairwise comparison matrix in AHP. Annals of Operations Research, 271, 1045–1066. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2769-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Q., Feng, Y., & Choi, S. B. (2017). The role of customer relational governance in environmental and economic performance improvement through green supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 155, 46–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Kandoli Campus, Dehradun, 248007, Uttarakhand, India

    Patanjal Kumar

  2. Research Center for Digital Circular Economy for Sustainable Development Goals (DCE-SDG), Jindal Global Business School, O P Jindal Global University, Haryana, India

    Sachin Kumar Mangla

  3. Yasar University, Logistics Management, Izmir, Turkey

    Yigit Kazancoglu

  4. Surrey Business School, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Ali Emrouznejad

Authors
  1. Patanjal Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sachin Kumar Mangla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yigit Kazancoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ali Emrouznejad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yigit Kazancoglu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, P., Mangla, S.K., Kazancoglu, Y. et al. A decision framework for incorporating the coordination and behavioural issues in sustainable supply chains in digital economy. Ann Oper Res 326, 721–749 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04814-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04814-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation