The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Risk and resilience in agri‐food supply chains: the case of the ASDA PorkLink supply chain in Scotland
Abstract
Purpose: The paper examines one of Scotland's major pork supply chains and seeks to identify the key risks and challenges involved in developing a resilient agri‐food supply system, particularly with regard to primary product supply, and to show how risk management and collaboration amongst stakeholders can increase chain resilience. Design/methodology/approach: The case study involved in‐depth interviews with seven people involved in the chain and its management. Findings: Reduced supply chain vulnerability to risks arose through horizontal collaboration amongst producers, and vertical collaboration with the processor and retailer. Producers improved market and price security, and pig performance. For the processor and retailer the collaboration generated greater security of supply of an assured quality, improved communication with suppliers, and reduced demand risk as they could assure consumers on quality, animal welfare and product provenance. Research limitations/implications: The study's findings are based on the analysis of a particular supply chain, but the cooperative concerned currently produces over half of Scotland's weekly pig production. Practical implications: The findings are highly transferable to other agri‐food supply chains. Producers' successful efforts to deal with different risks and the role of collaboration in enhancing chain resilience are illustrated. Originality/value: The case is interesting because pigmeat supply profitability has been under constant pressure. It discusses the risks faced by all chain participants and the collective development of a chain which is relatively resilient to variations in price, production and supply.
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
Reconceptualizing the Determinants of Risk Behavior
Sitkin, S. B., & Pablo, A. L. (1992) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258646 · Cited by 2,057
Designing Resilient, Sustainable Systems
Fiksel, J. (2003) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es0344819 · Cited by 831
Cited by
Supply chain resilience: a systematic literature review and typological framework
Kochan, C. G., & Nowicki, D. R. (2018) · International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management · doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-02-2017-0099 · Cited by 319
Shekarian, M., & Mellat Parast, M. (2021) · International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications · doi:10.1080/13675567.2020.1763935 · Cited by 303
The Evolution and Cultural Framing of Food Safety Management Systems—Where From and Where Next?
Manning, L., Luning, P. A., & Wallace, C. A. (2019) · Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety · doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12484 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Leat, P., & Revoredo‐Giha, C.
- Venue
- Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2013-03-07
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 219-231
- ISSN
- 1359-8546 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2095811314
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 34.82
- 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: Risk and resilience in agri‐food supply chains: the case of the ASDA PorkLink supply chain in Scotland. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/13598541311318845
- The paper
- Leat, P., & Revoredo‐Giha, C. (2013). Risk and resilience in agri‐food supply chains: the case of the ASDA PorkLink supply chain in Scotland. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541311318845
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.