Barriers
to implement green supply chain management in automobile industry
using interpretive structural modeling technique: An Indian perspective
Sunil Luthra1,
Vinod
Kumar1,
Sanjay Kumar2,
Abid
Haleem3
1Thapar
University (INDIA); 2C.B.S
Group of Institutions (INDIA);
3Jamia
Millia
Islamia
(INDIA)
Received
September 2010
Accepted
March 2011
Luthra,
S., Kumar, V., Kumar, S., & Haleem,
A. (2011).
Barriers to implement green supply chain management in automobile
industry
using interpretive structural modeling technique: An Indian
perspective. Journal
of Industrial Engineering and
Management, 4(2), 231-257. doi:10.3926/jiem.2011.v4n2.p231-257
---------------------
Abstract:
Purpose:
Green Supply Chain
Management (GSCM) has received growing attention in the last few years.
Most of
the automobile industries are setting up their own manufacturing plants
in
competitive Indian market. Due to public awareness, economic,
environmental or legislative
reasons, the requirement of GSCM has increased.
In this context,
this study aims to develop a
structural model of the barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile
industry.
Design/methodology/approach:
We have identified
various barriers and contextual relationships among the identified
barriers.
Classification of barriers has been carried out based
upon dependence and
driving power with the help of MICMAC analysis. In addition to this, a
structural model of barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile
industry
has also been put forward using Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM)
technique.
Findings:
Eleven numbers of
relevant barriers have been identified from literature and subsequent
discussions with experts from academia and industry. Out of which, five
numbers
of barriers have been identified as dependent variables; three number
of
barriers have been identified as the driver variables and three number
of
barriers have been identified as the linkage variables. No barrier has
been
identified as autonomous variable. Four barriers have been identified
as top
level barriers and one bottom level barrier. Removal of these barriers
has also
been discussed.
Research
limitations/implications:
A
hypothetical model of these barriers has been developed
based upon experts’ opinions. The conclusions so drawn may be
further modified
to apply in real situation problem.
Practical
implications:
Clear understanding of
these barriers will help organizations to prioritize better and manage
their
resources in an efficient and effective way.
Originality/value:
Through
this paper we contribute to identify the barriers to
implement
GSCM in Indian automobile
industry and to prioritize
them. The structured model developed will
help to understand interdependence of the barriers. This paper also
suggests the
removal of these barriers.
Keywords: green
supply chain management, barriers to implement GSCM, interpretive
structural
modeling
---------------------
1 Introduction
Along with the rapid change in global manufacturing scenario, environmental and social issues are becoming more important in managing any business. Green supply Chain Management (GSCM) is an approach to improve performance of the process and products according to the requirements of the environmental regulations (Hsu & Hu, 2008). GSCM has emerged in the last few years and covers all phases of product’s life cycle from design, production and distribution phases to the use of products by the end users and its disposal at the end of product’s life cycle (Borade & Bansod, 2007). GSCM is integrating environmental thinking (Gilbert, 2000) into Supply Chain Management (SCM).Awareness level of customers of Green practices opted by organizations has got raised in India also. So organizations need to focus on the utilization of energy and resources for making environmentally sound supply chain.
The objective of this paper is to identify various barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry, to indentify further the contextual relationship among the identified barriers to implement GSCM, to classify these barriers depending upon their driving and dependence power and finally to develop ISM based model of these barriers. ISM is a well established methodology for identifying relationship among specific item which define problem or an issue (Sage, 1977).
Section 2 consists of literature review of GSCM. Barriers to implement GSCM relevant to Indian automobile industry have been identified and described in section 3. Step wise elaborated procedure of interpretive structural modeling of these barriers to implement in Indian automobile industry follows in section 4. Section 5 will help the readers to deal with these above said barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry efficiently and effectively. Conclusions, limitations of the study and scope of the future work have been discussed in subsequent sections.
2
Green
supply chain management (GSCM): literature review
Green supply chain management (GSCM) involves traditional supply chain management practices integrating environmental criteria or concerns into organizational purchasing decision and long term relationships with suppliers (Gilbert, 2000). A green supply chains aims at confining the wastes within the industrial system in order to conserve energy and prevent the dissipation of dangerous materials into the environment (Torres, Nones, Morques, & Evgenio, 2004). It recognizes the disproportionate environmental impact of supply chain processes within an organization. It recognizes the disproportionate environmental impact of supply chain processes within an organization. GSCM is the summing up of green purchasing, green manufacturing, green packing, green distribution and marketing. GSCM is to eliminate or minimize waste in the form of energy, emission, hazardous, chemical and solid waste (Olugu, Wong, & Shaharoun, 2010).
Concepts and models related to environmental issues have been suggested by different researchers. Some of them have been described. Interpretive structural modeling(ISM) methodology was utilized to understand the mutual influences among the barriers so that those driving barriers, which can aggravate few more barriers and those independent barriers, which are mostly influenced by driving barriers are identified (Ravi & Shankar, 2005) GSCM practices adopted by the electrical and electronic industry in Taiwan were investigated, which was dominated by original equipment manufacturing and original designing and manufacturing. The data was analyzed by using statistical package and the structural equation modeling (Chien & Shih, 2007). Factors influencing to adopt green innovations for logistics service providers were described. The data generated from the questionnaire survey on logistics companies in Taiwan were used for modeling (Yu Lin & Hui Ho, 2008). A proactive GSCM approach was suggested for improving environmental performance of processes and products in accordance with the requirements of environment regulations. This study examined the consistency approaches for factor analysis that determines the adoption and implementation of GSCM (Hsu & Hu, 2008).
An increased attention for developing environmental management (EM) strategies for the supply chain was suggested. This study analyzed the interaction of criteria that was used to select the green suppliers based upon the environmental performance using ISM and Analytic Hierarchy Process (Kannan, Noorul Haq, Sasikumar, & Arrununchchalam, 2008). ISM based model for greening the supply chain in Indian manufacturing industries was explained. Fifteen enablers were identified. A questionnaire based survey was conducted to rank these enablers. They found contextual relationships among enablers and developed hierarchy based model for the enablers by using ISM (Mudgal, Shankar, Talib, & Raj, 2009). ISM based model for modeling the barriers of green supply chain Practices in Indian manufacturing industries was put forward. They suggested green businesses practices are not easy to adopt and implement due to the presence of many barriers. A questionnaire based survey was conducted to analyze and rank these barriers. Fifteen barriers were identified. ISM approach has been used to model and analyze key barriers (Mudgal, Shankar, Talib, & Raj, 2010). Importance of GSCM and factors important to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry was identified and described (Luthra, Manju, Kumar, & Haleem, 2010).
2.1 GSCM vs conventional SCM
GSCM and Conventional SCM differ in various ways. GSCM takes considerations to ecology as well as economy as an objective, while Conventional SCM is usually concentrated on economy as a single objective. GSCM are green, integrated and ecologically optimized, while Conventional SCM does not take into consideration human toxicological effects (Beamon, 1999; Gilbert, 2000; Ho Johnny, Shalishali, Maurice, Tseng, & Ang, 2009). Conventional SCM concentrates more on controlling the final product; no matter harmful its effects are to the environment during production and distribution. Ecological requirements are key criteria for products and productions and at the same time the company must assure its economic sustainability by staying competitive and profitable (Ho Johnny, Shalishali, Maurice, Tseng, & Ang, 2009). Differences between GSCM and SCM are summarized in Table 1.
S. N. |
Characteristics |
Green
Supply Chain
Management |
Conventional
Supply
Chain Management |
Researcher’s |
1 |
Objectives |
Ecological and Economic |
Economic |
Beamon (1999) Gilbert (2000) Ho
Johnny et al. (2009) |
2 |
Ecological
Optimization |
High
Ecological Impacts |
Integrated
Approach Low
ecological impacts |
|
3 |
Supplier
Selection
criteria |
Eco logical
Aspects Long
Term relationship |
Price
Switching
suppliers quickly Short term
relationship |
|
4 |
Cost Pressure
|
High |
Low |
|
5 |
Flexibility |
Low |
High |
|
6 |
Speed |
low |
High |
Table
1. “Difference
between the Green
Supply Chain Management and Conventional Supply Chain
Management”.
3 Barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry
According to world statistics, the automobile industry is world’s largest single manufacturing sector (Lettice, Wyatt, & Evans, 2010).The growth in the world’s population has also heightened the demand for the vehicles (Olugu, Wong, & Shaharoun, 2010). Increasing trend of demand of automobiles such as cars, bikes and commercial vehicles in India has been noticed in last few years, therefore leading international and domestic automobile manufacturers (like Maruti Suzuki, Hyundai, Tata Motors, General Motors, Honda, Fiat, Bajaj Auto, Hero Honda etc.) are either setting up their new manufacturing plants or increasing their production capacity in their existing plants in India.
Environmental issues have become more relevant in India. So companies need to focus on energy and resources for making environmentally sound supply chain. Economics, environmental or legislative reasons have increased the requirement of GSCM in Indian Automobile industry.
We have identified various barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry from the literature reviews and expert opinions. Literature was reviewed to identify barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry. We conducted a workshop, in which different experts from academia and industry were invited. Four were from industry and two were from academia. Brainstorming session was conducted and eleven barriers relevant to Indian automobile industry were identified. These barriers to implementation of GSCM in Indian Automobile industry are: Lack of IT Implementation; Resistance to Technology Advancement Adoption; Lack of Organization Encouragement; Poor Quality of Human Resources; Market Competition and Uncertainty; Lack of Government Support System; Lack of Implementing Green Practices; Lack of Top Management Commitment; Cost Implications; Supplier Reluctance to Change towards GSCM and Unawareness of customers. Again brainstorming session was conducted to reach consensuses about the contextual relationships (pair wise) to form a structural self interaction matrix (elaborated in section 4). The above said identified barriers are explained as:
3.1 Lack of IT implementation
IT systems support collaborative supply chain processes and enhance supply chain performance (Rogers et al., 1998). An efficient information and technology system is very necessary for supporting the GSCM during various stages of product life cycle. It can be very useful for product development programs encompassing the design for the environment, recovery and reuse. Efficient information systems are needed for tracking and tracing the returns of product, linking with the previous sales (Ravi & Shankar, 2005) Information support is necessary for developing linkages to achieve efficient GSCM in automobile industry. It is required to handle information’s flows associated with both forward and backward flow of materials and other resources to manage green SC efficiently (AlKhidir & Zailani, 2009). Also, IT enablement reduces lot of paper usage, which supports GSCM philosophy. So, lack of IT implementation is an important barrier to achieve efficient GSCM.
3.2 Resistance to technology advancement adoption
Technology is a kind of knowledge. An organization with rich experiences in the application and adoption of related technologies will have higher ability in technological innovation (Gant, 1996). An organization will have higher innovative capability when knowledge can be shared more easily within the organization (TSai & Ghoshal, 1999). Technological advancement can be achieved with higher transferability. It is easy to share technological transfer or share technological knowledge with higher explicitness (Cooper, 1994). Innovation and technology incorporate the innovation into corporate culture, encouraging new ideas and processes and solutions by all the employees of the firm (Digalwar & Metri, 2004). Resistance of organizations to technology advancement adoption is the resistance to change. An organizational barrier means difficulty of implementing fundamental change in the organization. This is especially true when there are changes in the core features of organizations like organizational goals, forms of authority, core technology, operational strategy and market strategy (AlKhidir & Zailani, 2009). Therefore, resistance to technology advancement adoption is important barrier to implement GSCM in automobile industry.
3.3 Lack of organizational encouragement
Informal linkages and improved communication help the organizations to adopt Green’s practices (Yu Lin & Hui Ho, 2008). Training and education are the prime requirements for achieving successful implementation of GSCM in any organization (Ravi & Shankar, 2005). Management may encourage employees to learn green information. Organizations may provide rewards for green employees. Employees may be helped when they face green problems and may be provided support to learn green information (Hsu & Hu, 2008).
3.4 Poor quality of human resources
A Company with higher quality of human resources such as better training or education will help in implementing Green Supply Chain Management. Quality human resources can provide new ideas for companies, learn new technologies easily, share knowledge with each other and use new technologies to solve problem (Yu Lin & Hui Ho, 2008).However, due to financial constraint; quality of human resources is barrier. Therefore poor quality of human resources is an important barrier to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.5 Market competition and uncertainty
In today’s scenario market uncertainty is very high due to global competitiveness, and customer’s requirements (Yu Lin, 2007). Research and benchmarked global competitors develop and deploy strategies. The external environment in which a firm conducts its business will also influence the innovative capability as well as intention to adopt innovations (Hosseini, 2007). We assume that market competition and uncertainty is most important barrier to achieve GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.6 Lack of Government support systems
Government regulation can encourage or discourage the adoption of innovation, as Government sets the environmental regulations for industry (Scupola, 2003). Time consuming regulatory requirements, fees or levies may discourage smaller firms. Tax structures that distort incentives can discourage industry to implement GSCM. Government institutions are considered as barriers to development in the environmental management in the sense that institutional process for implementing GSCM are going on but very limited institutional support is given for new ideas to implement GSCM. The tendency of government to encourage old practices is major barrier (AlKhidir & Zailani, 2009).Therefore lack of government support systems is a barrier to implement efficient GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.7 Lack of implementing green practices
Innovative green practices are associated with the explicitness of green practices, accumulation of green related knowledge, organizational encouragement and quality of human resources (Yu Lin & Hui Ho, 2008). Innovative green practices involves hazardous solid waste disposal, energy conservation, reusing and recycling of materials. Innovative green practices promote innovative design, new market opportunities and makes their quality better than others. However, due to market competition and cost implications, organizations try to save cost. Implementing GSCM practices initially involves high investment. Financial constraints also lead to resistance to implementing green practices (Ravi & Shankar, 2005).From the above discussion; we expect that lack of implementation of green practices is the most important barrier to implement efficient GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.8 Lack of top management commitment
Top management support and commitment is necessary for any strategic program success (Hamel & Prahalad, 1989; Zhu & Sarkis, 2007). Top Management support is especially useful for environmental practices such as GSCM. Top management has significant ability to influence, support actual formation and implementation of green initiatives across the organization (Sarkis, 2009).Top management provides continuous support for GSCM in the strategic plans and action plans for successfully implementing them (Ravi & Shankar, 2005). Therefore, we assume that lack of top management commitment is one of the barriers to implement of GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.9 Cost implications
Historically, cost has been used as the prime performance measure. Usually, high cost is a big pressure in GSCM as compared to conventional SCM. The initial investment requirement by green methodologies such as green design, green manufacturing, green labeling of packing etc. are too high. Engaging in environmental management involves two types of costs, direct cost and transaction cost. Both types of costs are likely to constitute significant barrier to implement GSCM (AlKhidir & Zailani, 2009). IT enablement, Technology advancement adoption, hiring good quality of employees, motivating and training of employees towards GSCM will require high initial investment. Therefore, cost implication is a major barrier among the barriers to implement efficient GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.10 Supplier relutance to change towwrds GSCM
Strengthen relationships with suppliers result in lower inventory levels, costs and higher accuracy. Involvement of the suppliers in design process and technology affects overall performance of whole chain (Sarkar & Mohapatra, 2006). Suppliers’ reluctance to change towards GSCM is due to traditional mindset and suppliers’ interests being different from those of the total network (Mudgal et al., 2010). Supplier manufacturer relationships are considered most important for developing competitive advantage for the manufacturer. Large automobile industries have normally 2000 to 3000 suppliers. The manufacturers cannot produce green products unless they work together with suppliers. Suppliers need to meet the requirement of buyers to maintain business relationship. So we can say that Supplier reluctance to change towards GSCM is a very important barrier to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
3.11 Unawareness of customers
A major barrier of GSCM seen in Indian automobile industry is lack of awareness of customers about the benefits of green products. Customer demands become most crucial type of external pressure. Customer’s awareness means if customer demands green products; the company has to change technology and organization for innovative green products. But in Indian automobile market, due to unawareness of customers towards green product benefits, automobile producers are producing non green products. In U.S.A., an estimated 75% of consumers claim that their purchases are influenced by reputation and 80% would be willing to pay more for environment friendly products (Lamming & Hmapson, 1996). Thus, we can say that unawareness of customers is a major barrier to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
Above said barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry have been summarized in Table 2.
4
Interpretive structural
modeling
applied to barriers to implement of GSCM in
Indian automobile
industry
Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) is a methodology used to indentify relationship among specific items, which define a problem or issue; it was firstly developed in 1970’s (Warfield, 1974; Sage, 1977).ISM is interpretive as judgment of the selected group for the study decides whether and how the variables are related. ISM generally has following steps (Ravi & Shankar, 2005):
S.N. |
Barrier
to Implement GSCM |
Description |
Researcher’s |
1 |
Lack of IT
Implementation |
Lack of IT
Implementation means non implementation Information Technology
resources like computers, internet etc. Slow, ineffective and improper
communication is due to lack of IT Implementation. |
Rogers et al. (1998); Wu
et al. (2009); Ravi
et al. (2005); AlKhidir
et al. (2009); Mclaren
et al. (2004). |
2 |
Resistance to
Technology
Advancement Adoption |
Resistance to
Technology
advancement adoption is not doing advancements in machinery and
equipments to improve the products. |
Hosseini
(2007); Cooper (1994);
Hsu et al. (2008); Digalwar
et al. (2004); Gant (1996); TSai
et al. (1999); AlKhidir
et al. (2009). |
3 |
Lack of
Organization
Encouragement |
Lack of
Organization
Encouragement is not motivating the employees towards GSCM. |
Yu Lin
(2007); Yu Lin
et al. (2008); Hsu
et al. (2008); Chien
et al. (2007);
Ravi et al.
(2005). |
4 |
Lack of
Quality of Human
Resources |
Lack of
Quality of human
resources means not recruiting well qualified and professionals. |
Yu Lin
(2007); Yu Lin
et al.
(2008); Hsu
et al. (2008); Chien
et al. (2007). |
5 |
Market
Competition and
Uncertainty |
Market
Competition and
Uncertainty is very high due to global competitiveness, and varying
customer’s requirements |
Hosseini
(2007); Yu Lin (2007); Mudgal et al.
(2010). |
6 |
Lack of
Government
Support systems |
Lack of
Government
support systems means Government not making industry friendly policies
toward GSCM and not giving special benefits to those organizations
implementing GSCM. |
Hosseini
(2007); Yu Lin
et al.
(2008); Hsu
et al. (2008); Mudgal
et al.
(2009); Mudgal
et al. (2010);
Scupola
(2003); Srivastva
(2007). |
7 |
Lack of
Implementing
Green Practices |
Lack of
Innovative Green
Practices means not taking consideration of practices like hazardous
solid waste disposal, energy conservation, reusing and recycling
materials etc. |
Yu Lin
et al.
(2008); Hsu
et al. (2008); Mudgal
et al.
(2009); Ravi
et al. (2005). |
8 |
Lack of Top
Management
Commitment |
Lack of Top
Management
Commitment means that top management not showing interests in green
practices. |
Digalwar et al.
(2004); Hamel
et al. (1989); Sarkis
(2009); Mudgal
et al.
(2009); Mudgal
et al.
(2010); Ravi
V. et al. (2005); Zhu (2007). |
9 |
Cost
Implications |
The high
investment requirement by green Methodologies such as green design,
green manufacturing, green labeling of packing etc. |
Hosseini
(2007); Mudgal
et al.
(2009); Ravi
et al. (2005);
AlKhidir
et al. (2009). |
10 |
Supplier
Reluctance to
change towards GSCM |
Supplier
reluctance to
change towards GSCM means not involvement of the suppliers in design
process and technology, which affects overall performance of whole
chain. |
Hsu et al.
(2008); Kannan
et al.
(2008); Lettice
et al. (2010); Ravi
et al.
(2005); Srivastva
(2007); Sarkar
et al. (2006). |
11 |
Unawareness
of customers |
Unawareness
of Customers
means that customers do not know about green products and their
benefits. |
Lamming et al. (1996); Mudgal
et al.
(2009); Ravi
et al.
(2005); Zhu
et al. (2004);
Zhu et al.
(2007); Zhu et al.
(2008). |
Table 2. “Barrier to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry reported in Literature”.
·
Step
1:- Variables affecting the system are listed; in our research work
barriers to
implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry have been identified as
variables.
·
Step
2:- From the variables identified in step 1, contextual relationship
among the
variables with respect to which pairs of variables are examined.
·
Step
3:- A Structural Self-Interaction Matrix (SSIM) is developed for
variables,
which indicates pair wise relationship among variables of the system
under
consideration.
·
Step
4:- A reachability matrix is developed from the SSIM and the matrix is
checked
for transitivity. The transitivity of the contextual relationships is a
basic
assumption made in ISM. It states that if variable A is related to
variable B
and variable B is related to variable C, then variable A is necessarily
related
to variable C.
·
Step
5:- The reachability matrix obtained in Step 4 is partitioned into
different
levels.
·
Step
6:- Based on the contextual relationships in the reachability matrix, a
directed graph is drawn and the transitive links are removed.
·
Step
7:- The resultant diagraph is converted into an Interpretive Structural
Model
by replacing variable nodes with statements.
4.1 Data gathering methodology and structural self-interaction matrix
As discussed in section 3, experts from industry and the academia were consulted during the workshop conducted to identify the nature of contextual relationships among the barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry. In developing SSIM, following four symbols have been used to denote the direction of relationship between two barriers i and j.
V- Barrier i will lead to barrier j;
A- Barrier j will lead to barrier i;
X- Barrier i and j will lead to each other;
O- Barrier i and j are unrelated
Based on the contextual relationships, the SSIM has been developed (Table 3). Barrier 1 leads to barrier 7 so symbol ‘V’ has been given in the cell (1,7); barrier 2 leads to barrier 8 so symbol ‘A’ has been given in the cell (2, 8); barrier 5 and 7 lead to each other so symbol ‘X’ has been given in the cell (2,8); barrier 3 and 11 do not lead to each other so symbol ‘O’ has been given in the cell (3,11) and so on. The number of pair wise comparison question addressed for developing the SSIM are ((N)* (N-1)/2), where N is the number of barriers.
S.N. |
Barrier
to Implement GSCM |
Barrier
Number |
|||||||||
11 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
||
1 |
Lack of IT
Implementation |
O |
O |
V |
A |
V |
O |
O |
V |
O |
V |
2 |
Resistance to
Technology
Advancement Adoption |
X |
V |
V |
A |
V |
A |
V |
X |
V |
X |
3 |
Lack of
Organization
Encouragement |
O |
V |
V |
A |
V |
A |
V |
V |
X |
|
4 |
Lack of
Quality of Human
Resources |
O |
V |
V |
A |
V |
O |
V |
X |
|
|
5. |
Market
Competition and
Uncertainty |
O |
O |
V |
O |
X |
O |
X |
|
|
|
6 |
Lack of
Government
Support Policies |
V |
V |
V |
V |
V |
X |
|
|
|
|
7 |
Lack of
Implementing
Green Practices |
X |
A |
A |
V |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
Lack of Top
Management
Commitment |
O |
V |
O |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
Cost
Implications |
X |
A |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
Supplier
Reluctance to
change towards GSCM |
O |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
Unawareness
of customers |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 3. “Structured Self Intersection Matrix (SSIM) for Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry”.
4.2 Reachability matrix
The SSIM has been converted in to a binary matrix, named Initial Reachability Matrix by substituting V, A, X, O by 1 or 0 applying following rules:
·
If
(i, j) value in the SSIM is V, (i, j) value in the reachability matrix
will be
1 and (j, i) value will be 0;for V(1,7) in SSIM,
‘1’ has been given in
cell(1,7) and ‘0’ in cell(7,1) in initial
reachability matrix.
·
If
(i, j) value in the SSIM is A, (i, j) value in the reachability matrix
will be
0 and (j, i) value will be 1;for A(2,8) in SSIM,
‘0’ has been given in
cell(2,8) and ‘1’ in cell(8,2) in initial
reachability matrix.
S.N. |
Barrier
to Implement GSCM |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
1 |
Lack of IT
Implementation |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Resistance to
Technology
Advancement Adoption |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
Lack of
Organization
Encouragement |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
Lack of
Quality of Human
Resources |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
5 |
Market
Competition and
Uncertainty |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
6 |
Lack of
Government
Support Policies |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
7 |
Lack of
Implementing
Green Practices |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
8 |
Lack of Top
Management
Commitment |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
9 |
Cost
Implications |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
10 |
Supplier
Reluctance to
change towards GSCM |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
11 |
Unawareness
of customers |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Table 4. “Initial Reachability Matrix for Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry”.
S. N. |
Barrier
to Implement GSCM |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
Driving
power |
1 |
Lack of IT
Implementation |
1 |
1 |
1* |
1 |
1* |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1* |
1* |
09 |
2 |
Resistance to
Technology
Advancement Adoption |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1* |
08 |
3 |
Lack of
Organization
Encouragement |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1* |
08 |
4 |
Lack of
Quality of Human
Resources |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1* |
08 |
5 |
Market
Competition and
Uncertainty |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
04 |
6 |
Lack of
Government
Support Policies |
1* |
1 |
1 |
1* |
1* |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
11 |
7 |
Lack of
Implementing
Green Practices |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1* |
0 |
1 |
04 |
8 |
Lack of Top
Management
Commitment |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1* |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1* |
1 |
1* |
10 |
9 |
Cost
Implications |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1* |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
04 |
10 |
Supplier
Reluctance to
change towards GSCM |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1* |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1* |
1 |
1 |
05 |
11 |
Unawareness
of customers |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1* |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
04 |
Dependence Power |
03 |
06 |
06 |
06 |
11 |
01 |
11 |
02 |
11 |
07 |
11 |
75/75 |
*means value after
applying transitivity
Table 5. “Final Reachablility Matrix for Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry”.
· If (i, j) value in the SSIM is X, (i, j) value in the reachability matrix will be 1 and (j, i) value will also be 1;for X(5,7) in SSIM, ‘1’ has been given in cell(5,7) and ‘1’ in cell(7,5) also in initial reachability matrix.
· If (i, j) value in the SSIM is O, (i, j) value in the reachability matrix will be 0 and (j, i) value will also be 0;for O(3,11) in SSIM, ‘0’ has been given in cell(3,11) and ‘0’ in cell(11,3) also in initial reachability matrix.
By applying these rules, an initial reachability matrix for the barriers to implement GSCM has been obtained (Table 4). The final reachabilty matrix has been obtained by adding transitivity as explained in Step 4 earlier (Table 5).The driving power and the dependence power of each barrier have also been shown in the Table 5.
4.3 Partitioning of levels
Barrier S. N. |
Reachability
Set |
Antecedent
Set |
Intersection |
Level |
1 |
1,2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11 |
1,6,8 |
1 |
|
2 |
2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11 |
1,2,3,4,6,8 |
2,3,4 |
|
3 |
2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11 |
1.2.3.4.6.8 |
2,3,4 |
|
4 |
2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11 |
1,2,3,4,6,8 |
2,3,4 |
|
5. |
5,7,9,11 |
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 |
5,7,9,11 |
1st |
6 |
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 |
6 |
6 |
|
7 |
5,7,9,11 |
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 |
5,7,9,11 |
1st |
8 |
1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,10,11 |
6,8 |
8 |
|
9 |
5,7,9,11 |
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 |
5,7,9,11 |
1st |
10 |
5,7,9,10,11 |
1,2,3,4,6,
8,10 |
10 |
|
11 |
5,7,9,11 |
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 |
5,7,9,11 |
1st |
Table 6. “First Iteration to FIND LEVELS of Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry”.
The reachability and antecedent set (Warfield, 1974) for each barrier have been determined from the final reachability matrix. The reachability set for a barrier consists of the barrier itself and the other barriers, which it influences. The antecedent set consists of the barrier itself and other barriers, which may influence it. Reachability and Antecedent set and Intersection sets are found for the all barriers. Barrier having same reachability set and the intersection set is assigned as top level barrier in the ISM hierarchy or Level 1 is shown in Table 6.After finding Level 1 , it is then discarded for finding further Levels. The iterative procedure is continued until Level of each barrier is found. We have indentified six levels in our study. Market competition and uncertainty; Lack of implementing Green Practices; Cost implications; Unawareness of customers have been identified as top level barriers and Lack of government support systems has been identified as most important Bottom level barrier.
4.4 Barriers classification
Variables are classified in to four clusters (Mandal & Deshmukh, 1994) named autonomous variables, dependent variables, linkage variables and independent variables. Autonomous variables (first cluster) have weak driving power and dependence. These variables can be disconnected from the system. In our study, no barrier lies in this range. The second cluster is named dependent variables. They have weak driving power and strong dependence power. In our study, five barriers named market competition and uncertainty; Lack of implementing green Practices, cost implications, unawareness of customers and supplier reluctance to change towards GSCM (5, 7, 9, 11 and 10) are lying in this range. The third cluster named linkage variables having strong driving power and strong dependence power. In our study, barriers named Resistance to technology advancement adoption, Lack of organization encouragement and Poor quality of human resources (2, 3 and 4) are lying in this range. The fourth cluster named independent variables has strong driving power and weak dependence power. In our study, three barriers named Lack of government support systems, Lack of top management commitment and Lack of IT implementation (6, 8 and 1) are lying in this range. The graph between dependence power and driving power for the barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry is given in Figure1.
Figure
1. “Cluster of Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian
Automobile industry”.
The objective of this study is to analyze the driving power and the dependency power of barriers (Jharkharia & Shankar, 2005).Higher dependence values for a factor means a large number of barriers to be addressed before its removal and high driving value of a barrier means a large number of barriers that could be removed by its removal
4.5 ISM model formultaion
Once all levels are found, these
levels
have
been summarized in the Table 7. Market competition and uncertainty;
Lack of
implementing Green Practices, Cost implications, Unawareness of
customers and
Supplier reluctance to change towards GSCM are dependent variables.
Lack of
government support systems, Lack of top management commitment and Lack
of IT
implementation are the driver variables. Resistance to technology
advancement
adoption, Lack of organization encouragement and Poor quality of human
resources are the linkage variables. No barrier is autonomous variable.
From
the final reachability matrix (Table 4), the structural model is
generated by
vertices and edges (Jharkharia
& Shankar,
2005).This graph is called digraph as shown in Figure 2. After removing
the
transitivity’s as described in the ISM methodology, ISM Model
has been made as
shown in Figure 3. Market competition and uncertainty; Lack of
implementing
Green Practices, Cost implications, Unawareness of customers are found
top
level barriers and Lack of government support systems is found bottom
level
barrier.
Figure
2. “Digraph
of Barriers to Implement
GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry”.
S.
N. |
Level
No. |
Importance of
factors important to implement GSCM |
1 |
1st |
Market Competition and
Uncertainty Lack of Implementing
Green Practices Cost Implications Unawareness of customers |
2 |
2nd |
Supplier Reluctance to
change towards GSCM |
3 |
3rd |
Resistant to Technology
Advancement Adoption Lack of Organization
Encouragement Poor Quality of Human
Resources |
4 |
4th |
Lack of IT Implementation |
5 |
5th |
Lack of Top Management
Commitment |
6 |
6th |
Lack of Government
Support Policies |
Table
7. “Various
Levels of Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile
Industry”.
Figure 3. “ISM BASED Model for Barriers to Implement GSCM in Indian Automobile Industry”.
5
Eliminating
completely or making barriers less intense:
proposed solutions
Green practices should be promoted at international platforms like SAARC, WTO, WHO, CWO etc. effectively. International environment agreements may support Indian government to take initiatives towards green practices. ISO14001:2004 (Environment management system) and ISO26000:2010(Guidance on social responsibility) should be promoted by Indian government. In last few decades, many important steps have been taken to promote green practices. In 11th five year plan (2007-2012) environment and social responsibility is given special importance. There are several ministries (under Government of India) having direct and indirect role in controlling ‘Green’ issues like ministry of environment and forests; ministry of water resources; ministry of earth sciences and ministry of science and technology; ministry of mines and ministry of chemicals and fertilizers etc. these ministries should implement and control green policies and fund allocation more effectively. Indian government may announce some extra benefits to the organizations following green practices. Implementation of government policies towards green practices will lead to more committed top management. IT enablement will reduce a lot of paper work which will further reduce the need of cutting trees. Top management support is required to bear cost implications in IT enablement. IT enablement will also help in fast and effective communication among members of supply chain to achieve competent SCM. Well aware and good quality of human resources should be hired. Initially, top management may find it more costly, ultimately it is going to help in implementing effective green practices. Regular training programs may be conducted to create awareness about green practices which will further help in organizations adoption and encouragement. Similarly top management commitment is required to encourage implement current technological advancements relevant to green practices. Government should take initiatives to make the customers aware about green products and how they are helpful to them. Special ad- campaigns and welfare programs by government departments like welfare ministry should be made to increase awareness level of customers. Organizations should make advertisements towards environment friendly products to create awareness among customers. Aware customers about green products would like to purchase green products, which will increase organization’s reputation and sales volumes. Organizations implementing green practices can compete and export their products in world market. Organizations using improved environmental performance may lower their costs by reducing waste, also reducing their environmental compliance costs and lessening the threats of civil and criminal liability by preventing pollution. Innovative green practices may be motivated with Government support systems, Top management commitment, Technology advancement adoption, Organization encouragement, Quality of human resources and IT enablement. Innovative green practices involve hazardous solid waste disposal, energy conservation, reusing and recycling materials. Innovative green practices promote innovative design, new market opportunities and make their quality better than others. Innovative green practices includes Environment Management System(EMS) Implementation; Innovative Green Product Development Practices Adoption; Design for Environment; End of Life Product Management; Use of New Products and Process Optimization; TQM Practices Implementation; Green Procurement Strategies; Use of Environmental Friendly Transportation; Use of Environmental Friendly Packing and Labeling of the Products; Waste Management and Use of Recyclability Evaluation Methods(REMs); Proper Workplace Management; Use of Lean/Flexible Manufacturing which may help and support GSCM. Environment Management System (EMS) is managing environmental performance of the organizations. Green product development is the consideration of environment-friendly processes and materials at developmental stage. Design for environment is the consideration of recyclable and non harmful materials in design phase. End of life product management is safe disposal of products after successful end of the life. In today’s scenario, product end life management is a major issue. Use and development of new environment-friendly products and process will help in improving environmental performance. Total Quality Management (TQM) is maintaining the quality of products and process from initial stage to final stage of the production. Green procurement strategies will help in purchasing environment-friendly materials and tools for the production. Use of environment-friendly transportation will help in reducing pollutions. Use of environmental friendly packing means use of recyclable or dissolvable materials for packing .Waste management and Recyclability Evaluation Methods (REMs) will help in managing and minimizing waste. Various recyclability methods will help in reduction of waste and improving the environment. Proper workplace management can help in stopping leakages and managing other resources in efficient and effective way. Use of lean or flexible manufacturing will help in continuous improvement and elimination of waste in all forms.
6 Conclusions
Green supply Chain Management (GSCM) has been identified as an approach for improving performance of the processes and products according to the requirements of environmental regulations. Eleven barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry have been identified. Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) methodology has been used for finding contextual relationships among various barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry. A Model has been developed from ISM methodology. Market Competition and Uncertainty; Lack of Implementing Green Practices; Cost Implications; Unawareness of Customers and Supplier Reluctance to Change Towards GSCM have been identified as dependent variables. Lack of Government Support Systems; Lack of Top Management Commitment and Lack of IT Implementation have been identified as the driver variables. Resistance to Technology Advancement Adoption; Lack of Organization Encouragement and Poor Quality of Human Resources have been identified as the linkage variables. No barrier has been identified as autonomous variable. Market Competition and Uncertainty; Lack of Implementing Green Practices; Cost Implications; Unawareness of Customers have been identified as top level barriers and Lack of Government Support Systems as most important bottom level barrier. Removal of these barriers will be help in implementing GSCM in Indian automobile industry.
7 Limitations of the study
We have developed a hypothetical model of barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry based upon experts’ opinions. The model may be tested in real world setting to check that the barriers are complete and their relationship exists as in the literature. The results of model may vary in real world setting. The barriers may be incomplete or their relationships may be different from the derived model.
8 Scope of the future work
We have considered eleven barriers to implement GSCM in Indian automobile industry. In case, a model needs to develop for another/allied industry or country, some barriers may be deleted while suitable ones are included. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) may be used to test the validity of this hypothetical model. We have developed ISM model for the implementation of GSCM in Indian automobile industry. The ISM model for the implementation of GSCM in some other types of industry like electronics and electrical industry may be developed. Industry wise comparison may be made by using some different methodologies like Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Analytical Network Process (ANP).
References
AlKhidir, T., & Zailani,
S. (2009). Going Green in supply chain towards
Environmental Sustainability.
Global Journal
of Environmental Research,
3(3), 246-251.
Beamon,
B.M. (1999). Designing
the Green Supply Chain. Logistics Information
Management,
12(4),
332-342.
Borade,
A.B., &
Bansod,
S.V.
(2007). Domain
of Supply Chain Management –A state of Art. Journal
of Technology Management and Innovation,
2(4), 109-121. ISSN:
0718-2724 (http://www.jotmi.org).
Chien, M.K., & Shih,
L.H. (2007). An empirical
study of the Implementation of Green Supply Chain Management Practices
in the
Electrical and Electronics industries and their relation to
organizational behavior.
International
Journal of Science and
Technology, 4(3), 383-394. ISSN:
1735-1472.
Chien,
M.K., & Shih, L.H.
(2007).
Relationship between Management Practice and Organization Performance
under
European union directives such as ROHS, a case study on the Electrical
and
Electronics industry in Taiwan. African
journal of Environmental Science and Technology,
1(3), 37-48. ISSN:
1996-0786.
Cooper,
J. (1994). Green
logistics, European
logistics: markets, management and strategy.
Oxford: Blackwell Business.
Digalwar, A.K., & Metri,
B.A. (2004). Performance Measurement Framework for
World Class Manufacturing.
International
Journal of Applied
Management and Technology, 3(2),
83-101. ISSN: 1554-4740(www.ijamt.org).
Gant, R.
M. (1996). Prospering
in dynamically-competitive
environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration.
Organizational
Science, 7(4), 375-387.
doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375
Gilbert,
S. (2000). Greening
supply chain:
Enhancing competitiveness through green productivity.
Report of the Top
Forum on Enhancing Competitiveness through Green Productivity held in
the
Republic of China, 25-27 May, 2000. ISBN: 92-833-2290-8.
Hamel,
G., & Prahalad,
C.K (1989). Strategic Intent.
Harvard
Business Review, 67, 63-76.
Ho,
Johnny C., Shalishali,
Maurice K., Tseng T. Liang,
& Ang
David, S. (2009). Opportunities
in Green Supply Chain Management.
The
Coastal Business Journal, 8(1),
18-31. Electronic copy available at: www.coastal.edu/business/cbj/pdfs/art
Hosseini,
A. (2007). Identification of Green Management of system’s
factors: - A
Conceptualized Model. International
Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management,
2(3), 221-228.
ISSN 1746-7233, England, UK.
Hsu,
C.W., & Hu,
A.H. (2008). Green Supply Chain
Management in the Electronic Industry.
International
Journal of Science and Technology,
5(2), 205-216.
ISSN: 1735-1472.
Jharkharia S., & Shankar,
R. (2005). IT
enablement of supply chains: understanding the barriers. Journal
of Enterprise Information Management,
18(1), 11-27.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410390610658432
Kannan,
G., Noorul
Haq,
A., Sasikumar,
P., & Arrununchchalam,
S. (2008). Analysis
and Selection of green suppliers using
interpretive structural modeling and analytic hierarchy process.
International
Journal of Management and
Decision Making, 9(2), 163-182.
doi:10.1504/IJMDM.2008.017198
Lamming,
R., & Hamapson,
J. (1996). The environmental
as a
Supply Chain
Management issue. British
Journal of
Management, 7(March Special
Issue), 45-62.
Lettice,
F., Wyatt, C., & Evan, S. (2010). Buyer-supplier partnerships
during
product design and development in the global automotive sector: who
invests in
what and when? International
journal of
Production Economics, 127(2),
309-319. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.08.007
Luthra, S., Manju,
Kumar S., & Haleem
A. (2010). Suggested
Implementation of
the Green Supply Chain
Management in
Automobile Industry of India: A Review.
Proceedings of National
Conference on ‘Advancements and Futuristic Trends of
Mechanical and Industrial
Engineering, GITM, Bilaspur
(INDIA), 12-13 Nov.,
2010.
Mandal, A., & Deshmukh,
S.G. (1994). Vendor selection using interpretive
structural modeling(ISM).
International
Journal of Operations and
Production Management, 14(6),
52-59.
doi:10.1108/01443579410062086
Mclaren, Tim S., Head, Milena
M., &
Yuan, Yufei
(2004). Supply Chain
Management
Information System
Capabilities: An Exploratory Study of Electronics Manufactures. Information
systems and
E-business management, 2(3),
207-222. doi:10.1007/s10257-004-0035-5
Mudgal, R.K., Shankar, R., Talib,
P., & Raj, T. (2009). Greening the
supply chain practices: an Indian perspective of enablers’
relationship.
Int. Journal of
Advanced Operations
Management, 1(2 and 3), 151-176.
doi:10.1504/IJAOM.2009.030671
Mudgal, R.K., Shankar, R., Talib,
P., & Raj, T. (2010). Modeling the
barriers of green supply chain practices: an Indian perspective. Int.
Journal of Logistics Systems and Management,
7, 1, 81-107. Electronic copy
available at: http://inderscience.metapress.com/link.asp?id=8343t48231372825
Olugu, E.U., Wong, K.Y.,
& Shaharoun,
A.M. (2010). A Comprehensive
Approach in Assessing the
Performance of an Automobile closed loop
Supply Chain.
Sustainability,
2, 871-879.
doi:10.3390/su2040871
Ravi,
V., &
Shankar R. (2005). Analysis of interactions
among the barriers of reverse logistics.
International
Journal of Technological Forecasting & Social change,
72(8), 1011-1029.
Rogers,
D.S., &
R.S. (1998). Tibben- lembke,
Going Backwards: Reverse Logistics Trends and
Practices. Reverse Logistics
Executive Council, Pittsburgh, PA.
Sage,
A. (1977). Interpretive
Structural Modeling:
Methodology for Large scale Systems (pp.
91-164). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sarkar, A., & Mohapatra,
P.K. (2006).
Evaluation of supplier capability and performance: A method for supply
base
reduction. Journal
of Purchase supply
Management, 12, 148-163.
Sarkis,
J. (2009). A
Boundaries and Flows Perspective of Green Supply
Chain Management. GPMI
working papers.
No-7, October 2009.
Scupola,
A. (2003).The adoption of internet commerce by SMEs in the South of
Italy: an
environmental, technological and organizational perspective. Journal of Global Information Technology
Management, 6(1), 52-71.
Srivastva, S. (2007). Green supply
State of the art Literature Review.
International
Journal of Management Review,
9(1), 53-80.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00202.x
Torres, B., Nones, S.,
Morques, S., & Evgenio,
R. (2004). A Theoretical Approach
for Green Supply Chain
Management. Federal University DO
RIO GRANDE, Industrial Engineering Program, NATAL-BRAZIL,
Janaury-2004.
Tsai,
W., & Ghoshal,
S. (1998). Social capital and
value creation:
the role of intra firm networks. Academy
of Management Journal, 41(4),
464-476. Electronic copy available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/257085.
Warfield,
J.W. (1974). Developing
interconnected matrices in Structural
modeling. IEEE Transcript on
Systems, Men and Cybernetics,
4(1), 51-81.
Wu,
G. C., &
Hang, S. Y. (2009). The study of knowledge
transfer and green management performance in green supply chain
management.
African journal
of Business Management,
4(1), 44-48, Accepted 03 November 2009. ISSN: 1993-8233.
Yu Lin,
C. (2007). Adoption
of green supply in Taiwan logistic
industry. Journal of management
study, 90-98. Electronic copy
available at: www.jimsjournal.org/10%2520Chieh-Yu%2
Yu Lin,
C., & Hui
Ho, Y. (2008). An Empirical Study on
Logistics services provider, intention to adopt Green Innovations. Journal of Technology, Management and
Innovation, 3(1), 17-26.
Electronic copy available at: www.redalyc.uaemex.mx/pdf/847/84730103.pdf
Zhu,
Q., & Sarkis,
J. (2004). Relationship
between Operational practices and Performance among Early Adopters of
Green
Supply Chain Management Practices in Chinese Manufacturing Enterprises.
Operations
Management, 22, 265-289.
Electronic copy available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02726963
Zhu,
Q., & Sarkis,
J. (2007). The
moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green supply
chain
practices and performance.
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=973416.
Zhu,
Q., Sarkis,
J. & Lai, K. (2007).
Green Supply
Management: Pressures,
Practices and Performance within the Chinese Automobile Industry. Journal of Cleaner Production,
15(11-12), 1041-1052. Electronic copy available at: www.sciencedirect.com
Zhu,
Q., Sarkis,
J. & Lai, K. (2008).
Green supply chain
management
implications for “closing the loop”. Transport
Research Part E, 44(1), 1-18.
Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 2011 (www.jiem.org)
Article's contents are provided on a Attribution-Non Commercial 3.0 Creative commons license. Readers are allowed to copy, distribute and communicate article's contents, provided the author's and Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management's names are included. It must not be used for commercial purposes. To see the complete license contents, please visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 2008-2024
Online ISSN: 2013-0953; Print ISSN: 2013-8423; Online DL: B-28744-2008
Publisher: OmniaScience