Summary
Summary All artciles Sustainable Supply Management
- Course
- Institution
Summary of all exam related articles of Sustainable Supply Management (SSM) (-M-6).
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
jbarendrecht16
Reviews received
Content preview
Table of ContentsArticles 1st lecture .............................................................................................................2
Montabon, F., Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2016). Making sustainability sustainable .............................................2
Kim, S., & Chae, S. (2022). Shareholder value effects of ethical sourcing: Comparing reactive and
proactive initiatives. (Read up to hypothesis 1.) ............................................................................................6
Articles 2nd lecture ............................................................................................................7
Busse, C., Schleper, M. C., Niu, M., & Wagner, S. M. (2016). Supplier development for sustainability:
Contextual barriers in global supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, 46(5), 442-468.........................................................................................................................7
Articles 3rd lecture ...........................................................................................................13
Koberg, E., & Longoni, A. (2019). A systematic review of sustainable supply chain management in global
supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 1084-1098. ..................................................................13
Articles 4th lecture ...........................................................................................................20
Villena, V. H., & Gioia, D. A. (2020). A more sustainable supply chain. Harvard Business Review, 98(2), 84-
93 ..................................................................................................................................................................20
Articles 5th lecture ...........................................................................................................23
Keller, A., Lumineau, F., Mellewigt, T. & Ariño, A (2021). Alliance governance mechanisms in the face of
disruption. Organization Science, 32(6), 1542-1570. ...................................................................................23
Roehrich, J.K., Selviaridis, K., Kalra, J., Van der Valk, W., & Fang, F. (2020). Inter- organizational
governance: a review, conceptualisation and extension. Production Planning & Control, 31(6), 453-469.
......................................................................................................................................................................25
Articles 6th lecture ...........................................................................................................33
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. The circular economy in detail. 2022. ..........................................................33
Bocken, N.M., De Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & Van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design and business model
strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33(5), 308-320. ......36
Article 7th lecture ...........................................................................................................40
Miemczyk, J., Johnsen, T.E., & Macquet, M. (2012). Sustainable purchasing and supply management: a
structured literature review of definitions and measures at the dyad, chain and network levels. Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(5), 478-496. ..................................................................40
Tate, W.L., Ellram, L.M., & Gölgeci, I. (2013). Diffusion of environmental business practices: A network
approach. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 19(4), 264-275. ..............................................41
Article 8th lecture ...........................................................................................................45
Carter, C.R. (2000). Ethical issues in international buyer-supplier relationships: A dyadic examination.
Journal of Operations Management, 8(2), 191-208. ....................................................................................45
Tate, W.L., Ellram, L.M., & Dooley, K.J. (2012). Environmental purchasing and supplier management
(EPSM): Theory and practice. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 18(3), 173-188. ...............47
Article 9th lecture ............................................................................................................48
Dong, L. (2021). Toward resilient agriculture value chains: Challenges and opportunities. Production and
Operations Management, 30(3), 666-675....................................................................................................48
Article 10th lecture ..........................................................................................................52
Lee, H. L. (2004). The triple-A supply chain. Harvard Business Review, 82(10), 102-113. ...........................52
De Vries, H., Jahre, M., Selviaridis, K., van Oorschot, K. E., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2021). Short of
drugs? Call upon operations and supply chain management. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 41(10), 1569-1578. .............................................................................................53
,Articles 1st lecture
Montabon, F., Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2016). Making sustainability sustainable
Introduction
This conceptual study seeks to move the field from:
- How can firms merely diminish environmental or social problems → how supply
chains can become truly sustainable.
Major weaknesses in previous logics are reviewed and Ecologically Dominant logic is
developed.
Relationship of interest in these reviews are:
- Tests of an instrumental logic where one construct, becoming more environmentally
or socially sustainable, influences another.
Instrumental logic:
- Key: Economic performance is the goal, not sustainability.
In the paper an alternative logic is offered called Ecologically Dominant (ED), that arguably
can lead to truly sustainable supply chains.
Ecologically dominant logic
- Economic/ social issues nestled inside environmental
issues.
- Tradeoffs: protect environment, then society then consider
profits
THE NEED FOR A NEW LOGIC
Consideration in building new way of thinking:
- Culture
- Logic
o Occurs at institutional level.
o Refers to framework that guide research/ practice in
SSCM.
- Cognition
o Driven by logic.
o Refers to individual/ organizational decisions made within SC.
Sustainability as a (potentially) integrated Logic
Triple Bottom Line (TBL): dominant concept in sustainability research
- Accounting framework that incorporates three dimensions of performance
o Social
o Environmental
o Financial
- However, in practice not all three elements are treated equally. Managers intend to
maximize profit as much as possible.
Win-Win Perspectives
Win-win perspective
- Attractive: suggestions (demand on SC to be socially/ environmentally responsible)
are opportunities to improve profit
- However, creating truly sustainable SC result in win-win outcomes/ forces trade-offs
Thus, TBL and win-win perspectives are fine in theory, but not in practice.
,DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW LOGIC
Definition sustainability good starting point developing new logic:
- Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet their own needs.
- Updated definition: development that meets needs of the present while
safeguarding Earth’s life-support system.
Thus, environment central constraint of proposed Ecologically Dominant logic.
Second constraint is the social aspect of sustainability:
- Need to be supported by the environment, environmental issues have social
consequences.
- Social system is dependent on the environmental system.
Third constrain is economic aspect.
- Economic system is subservient (ondergeschikt) to social system.
- Ecologically Dominant logic is clear that protection of social systems, increasing
quality of life are the real goals.
For example, making more money for businesses or a country's economy can help protect
or improve society, but it is not the only way. Gains that damage society are not sustainable
in the long run.
Differences between current sustainability logic and proposed Ecologically Dominant Logic
In summary, sustainability is often only seen as a way to make money instead of looking at
the environmental and social benefits. This leads to companies not being responsible with
their decisions. The Ecologically Dominant logic makes sure that profits are not the most
important thing and encourages research that looks at the environmental and social
benefits.
, RESEARCH PROPOSITIONS
Framework of Ecologically Dominant sustainable supply chain management compared with
Instrumental Logic
Propositions 1 to 3 concern the Ecologically Dominant logic:
- Propositions underline how new logic leads to questions/ accounts for wider range
of stakeholders.
Propositions 4 to 6:
- Posit how Ecologically Dominant logic will impact managerial conditions, why SC
outcomes will change.
Proposition 1: When trade-offs exist, the instrumental logic favors supply chain economic
outcomes while the Ecologically Dominant logic favors ecology first, society next and supply
chain economic outcomes last.
Ecologically Dominant logic in essence says:
- Make as much money after you satisfied ecological/ societal stakeholders.
Instrumental logic (inside-out logic)
- Where, is it good for the firm?, is asked prior to asking about impacts on other
stakeholders
Proposition 2: the Ecologically Dominant logic will account for a wider range of stakeholders
and outcomes than the instrumental logic of sustainability.
Reframing the discussion around the Ecologically Dominant logic is an explicit attempt to
shift norms and values to change the institutional logic of managers and researchers. For
instance, Food supply chains have a clear societal role in sustaining human life. Workers in
food supply chains are often illegal immigrants, poorly paid and/or exposed to significant
safety and health risks. Supply chain research rarely recognizes these stakeholders; when it
does it is from the perspective of how these stakeholders are related to the focal (main)
firm's profits.
Proposition 3: The instrumental logic emphasizes satisfying customers’ demands while doing
the minimal amount of harm. The Ecologically Dominant logic emphasizes first satisfying
environmental and social constraints and then attempting to meet customer demands.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller jbarendrecht16. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.94. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
53340 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now