The DOI matches its Crossref record; 150 of the 150 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A supply chain sustainability innovation framework and evaluation methodology
Abstract
Sustainability is hinged on innovation. The importance of sustainable innovation management in sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) cannot be underestimated. Studies on SSCM have emphasised the need for sustainable innovation in achieving sustainability but none provide deep insights into sustainable innovation management in SSCM implementation. This lack of research depth stimulates this study to identify and investigate criteria for sustainable supply chain management innovation advancement. This paper proposes a sustainable innovation criteria framework for investigating sustainable supply chains in manufacturing companies. To exemplify the applicability and efficiency of the proposed framework, a sample of five Indian manufacturing companies are used to evaluate and prioritise the sustainable innovation management criteria, using the ‘best–worst’ multi-criteria decision-making (BW-MCDM) model. The criteria weights for all companies from BWM are aggregated, averaged and used for ranking. The respondent managers viewed ‘financial availability for innovation’ as the most important sustainable innovation sub-criteria. The results of the study will inform industrial managers, practitioners and decision-makers on which criteria to focus on during the implementation stage, to increase sustainability in manufacturing supply chains, and further advance corporate and supply chain sustainable development. The framework may also serve as a theoretical construct for a future empirical study on sustainable supply chain innovation in the manufacturing sector. This paper sets the stage for further research in sustainable innovation practices in the manufacturing sector and its supply chains.
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
An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.
Loasby, B. J., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1983) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232409 · Cited by 21,366
An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change
Berkowitz, M. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1983) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/1058233 · Cited by 10,549
Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method
Rezaei, J. (2015) · Omega · doi:10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009 · Cited by 4,333
A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory
Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008) · International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management · doi:10.1108/09600030810882816 · Cited by 4,085
Redefining innovation — eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics
Rennings, K. (2000) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/s0921-8009(99)00112-3 · Cited by 3,226
Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2004) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2004.01.005 · Cited by 2,761
Self-citationWorld Applied Sciences Journal
(2024) · World Applied Sciences Journal · doi:10.5829/idosi.wasj · Cited by 2,601
Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance?
Rao, P., & Holt, D. (2005) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/01443570510613956 · Cited by 2,453
Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review
Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009 · Cited by 2,184
Green supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis
Fahimnia, B., Sarkis, J., & Davarzani, H. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003 · Cited by 2,131
Self-citation
Cited by
Denicolai, S., Zucchella, A., & Magnani, G. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120650 · Cited by 503
Agyemang, M., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Khan, S. A., Mani, V., Rehman, S. T., & Kusi-Sarpong, H. (2019) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-11-2018-1178 · Cited by 394
Self-citationSocial sustainable supplier evaluation and selection: a group decision-support approach
Bai, C., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Badri Ahmadi, H., & Sarkis, J. (2019) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1574042 · Cited by 292
Self-citationHosseini Dehshiri, S. J., & Amiri, M. (2024) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121123 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Kusi-Sarpong, S., Gupta, H., & Sarkis, J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Production Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-09-08
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1990-2008
- ISSN
- 0020-7543 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-588X
- OpenAlex
- W2892302508
- Cited by
- 406
- References
- 150
- FWCI
- 69.14
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A supply chain sustainability innovation framework and evaluation methodology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00207543.2018.1518607
- The paper
- Kusi-Sarpong, S., Gupta, H., & Sarkis, J. (2019). A supply chain sustainability innovation framework and evaluation methodology. International Journal of Production Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1518607
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.