The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Supply chain re-engineering using blockchain technology: A case of smart contract based tracking process
Abstract
Abstract The emergence of blockchain technology has created a number of potential innovations in handling business activities across various industries. However, few studies discuss the potential influence of blockchain technology from a business process re-engineering perspective. This study focuses on the feasibility and inceptive application of supply chain processes. We proposed a blockchain-based framework along with the use of an affiliated technology, i.e., smart contracts, to derive the feasible benefits of the supply chain process design. Through the illustrative design of an integrated process, we provide an achievable use case of the disintermediation of business processes via a conceptual, shared information ledger. This ledger not only facilitates the sharing of tracking information but also promotes a network for multilateral collaboration among supply chain members. The pursuit of transparency and accountability across supply chain processes can potentially influence decentralization and automation. A comparative analysis of the current and proposed frameworks is conducted to support the core reasoning of this study. Additionally, future implications on managerial practice and academic research are explored to provide pervasive suggestions for similar attempts in different sectors. We conclude with an evaluation of the potential influence of blockchain technology on supply chain management.
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
Blockchains and smart contracts for the internet of things
Christidis, K., & Devetsikiotis, M. (2016) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2016.2566339 · Cited by 4,552
Blockchain challenges and opportunities: a survey
Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H. N., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2018) · International Journal of Web and Grid Services · doi:10.1504/ijwgs.2018.095647 · Cited by 3,651
MedRec: Using Blockchain for Medical Data Access and Permission Management
Azaria, A., Ekblaw, A., Vieira, T., & Lippman, A. (2016) · 2016 2nd International Conference on Open and Big Data (OBD) · doi:10.1109/obd.2016.11 · Cited by 2,526
1 Blockchain’s roles in meeting key supply chain management objectives
Kshetri, N. (2018) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.12.005 · Cited by 2,149
Blockchain technology: principles and applications
Pilkington, M. (2016) · Research Handbook on Digital Transformations · doi:10.4337/9781784717766.00019 · Cited by 1,627
Big data, knowledge co-creation and decision making in fashion industry
Acharya, A., Singh, S. K., Pereira, V., & Singh, P. (2018) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.06.008 · Cited by 221
Validation and Verification of Smart Contracts: A Research Agenda
Magazzeni, D., McBurney, P., & Nash, W. (2017) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2017.3571045 · Cited by 184
Cited by
Dutta, P., Choi, T.-M., Somani, S., & Butala, R. (2020) · Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review · doi:10.1016/j.tre.2020.102067 · Cited by 1,545
Blockchain technology for bridging trust, traceability and transparency in circular supply chain
Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., Vecchio, P. D., Oropallo, E., & Secundo, G. (2022) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2021.103508 · Cited by 820
Feng, H., Wang, X., Duan, Y., Zhang, J., & Zhang, X. (2020) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121031 · Cited by 788
Lim, M. K., Li, Y., Wang, C., & Tseng, M.-L. (2021) · Computers & Industrial Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.cie.2021.107133 · Cited by 382
Friedman, N., & Ormiston, J. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121403 · Cited by 365
Metadata
- Authors
- Chang, S. E., Chen, Y.-C., & Lu, M.-F.
- Venue
- Technological Forecasting and Social Change
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 144
- Pages
- 1-11
- ISSN
- 0040-1625 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2939663913
- Cited by
- 637
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 92.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
