The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integrating sustainability and resilience in the supply chain: A systematic literature review and a research agenda
Open accessAbstract
Sustainability has emerged as an important industrial strategic outlook expanding beyond organizational boundaries to include the supply chain. Simultaneously, the industry has also been faced with supply chain resilience concerns. Research on the intersection of supply chain sustainability and resilience is nascent and is a consequence of their observed mutual influences. However, confusion about concepts, implementation methods, and measurements of sustainable and resilient supply chains remains. This study completes a systematic literature review that critically examines several major observations and directions. We find the concept of sustainable supply chains is more established, and general agreement on its theoretical foundations exists. Supply chain resilience is relatively less mature. The nexus and relationships between the two topics are often incoherent: there is confusion on sustainable and resilient supply chains establishment; there is no clarity on what practices could jointly advance both areas. A major conflict exists since sustainability generally focuses on efficiency, while resilience seeks effectiveness. We recommend studies to analyze implementation relationships and impact. We also observe that performance measurement systems should be developed to assess supply chain sustainability and resilience performance taking with explicit consideration time horizons considered in these measures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
WHY COMPANIES GO GREEN: A MODEL OF ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIVENESS.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556363 · Cited by 4,020
Rebitzer, G., Ekvall, T., Frischknecht, R., Hunkeler, D., Norris, G., Rydberg, T., Schmidt, W.-P., Suh, S., Weidema, B. P., & Pennington, D. W. (2004) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2003.11.005 · Cited by 2,753 · cited 1×
“…2007; ISO 14001 (International Organization for Standardization), 2004; Korhonen & Seager, 2008; Maxwell et al., 1997; Ramos & de Melo, 2006; Rebitzer et al., 2004; Sharma & Henriques, 2005; Walton et al., 1998); social sustainability alone (Blair et al., 2004; Erickson & Gowdy, 2007; SA…”
BackgroundDesigning Resilient, Sustainable Systems
Fiksel, J. (2003) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es0344819 · Cited by 831
Theories in sustainable supply chain management: A structured literature review
Touboulic, A., & Walker, H. (2015) · International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management · doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-05-2013-0106 · Cited by 688
Cited by
Khan, S. A. R., Razzaq, A., Yu, Z., & Miller, S. (2021) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2853 · Cited by 404
RetractedChari, A., Niedenzu, D., Despeisse, M., Machado, C. G., Azevedo, J. D., Boavida‐Dias, R., & Johansson, B. (2022) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.3040 · Cited by 259
Alternative Fuel Selection Framework toward Decarbonizing Maritime Deep-Sea Shipping
Moshiul, A. M., Mohammad, R., & Hira, F. A. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15065571 · Cited by 55
Hill, D. T., & Collins, M. B. (2023) · Regulation & Governance · doi:10.1111/rego.12462 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Negri, M., Cagno, E., Colicchia, C., & Sarkis, J.
- Venue
- Business Strategy and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2021-04-10
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2858-2886
- ISSN
- 0964-4733 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0836
- OpenAlex
- W3155910169
- Cited by
- 613
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 13.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.