Summary of literature on sustainable CLSCs
| Economic KPIs class | Environmental KPIs class | Social KPIs class | Level of decision- making class | Products | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author and year | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| Soleimani (2021) | a | F | e | b | Mining decorative stone quarries | ||||||
| Zhalechian et al. (2016) | a | c, f, g | d | b | b | f | Not specified | ||||
| Sahebjamnia et al. (2018) | a | b | d | c | b, d | tires | |||||
| Rezaei and Kheirkhah (2018) | a, b, c, d | b | d | c | a, b | a, b | a, f | Not specified | |||
| Hajiaghaei-Keshteli and Fathollahi Fard (2018) | a, b, c, d | b | d | b | f | glass | |||||
| Alinezhad et al. (2022) | a, b, c, d | g | e | b | f | dairy | |||||
| Tirkolaee et al. (2022) | a, b, c, d | b | c | b | a, d, e | Face masks | |||||
| Rafigh et al. (2021) | a, b, c, d | g | d | a, c | b | b | f | Medical ventilators | |||
| Tehrani and Gupta (2021) | a | g | d | a, b | d | tires | |||||
| Pourmehdi et al. (2020) | a | f, g | d | a | f | Steel industry | |||||
| Nayeri et al. (2020) | a, b, c, d | g | d | c | d, e | Water tank | |||||
| Soleimani et al. (2022) | a | f | d | a, b | b | f | Not specified | ||||
| Shahidzadeh and Shokouhyar (2022) | a | b | c | e | Electronics and automotive companies | ||||||
| Mirzagoltabar et al. (2021) | a, b, c, d | b | d | a, b | a | b, f | Lighting industry | ||||
| Mondal et al. (2022) | a | b | b | b | Not specified | ||||||
| Elfarouk et al. (2022) | a, b, c, d | b, g | d | c | a | b, f | Not specified | ||||
| Tavana et al. (2022) | a, b, c, d | g | d | a, b, d | f | Not specified | |||||
| Shahedi et al. (2022) | a | b | d | b | a | f | Automotive industry | ||||
| Emamian et al. (2021) | a, b, c | c, g | b | d | c | a | f | Not specified | |||
| Fathollahi-Fard et al. (2020) | a, b, c, d | c, g | d | c | a, b | Waste water | |||||
| Mirzaei et al. (2022) | a, b, c, d | g | d | b | f | Rice supply chain | |||||
| Devika et al. (2014) | a, b, c, d | a | b, c | d | c | a, b, c | a, b | b, f | Glass | ||
| Economic | Environmental | Social | Level of decision- | Products | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author and year | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| a | F | e | b | Mining decorative stone quarries | |||||||
| a | c, f, g | d | b | b | f | Not specified | |||||
| a | b | d | c | b, d | tires | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | b | d | c | a, b | a, b | a, f | Not specified | ||||
| a, b, c, d | b | d | b | f | glass | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | g | e | b | f | dairy | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | b | c | b | a, d, e | Face masks | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | g | d | a, c | b | b | f | Medical ventilators | ||||
| a | g | d | a, b | d | tires | ||||||
| a | f, g | d | a | f | Steel industry | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | g | d | c | d, e | Water tank | ||||||
| a | f | d | a, b | b | f | Not specified | |||||
| a | b | c | e | Electronics and automotive companies | |||||||
| a, b, c, d | b | d | a, b | a | b, f | Lighting industry | |||||
| a | b | b | b | Not specified | |||||||
| a, b, c, d | b, g | d | c | a | b, f | Not specified | |||||
| a, b, c, d | g | d | a, b, d | f | Not specified | ||||||
| a | b | d | b | a | f | Automotive industry | |||||
| a, b, c | c, g | b | d | c | a | f | Not specified | ||||
| a, b, c, d | c, g | d | c | a, b | Waste water | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | g | d | b | f | Rice supply chain | ||||||
| a, b, c, d | a | b, c | d | c | a, b, c | a, b | b, f | Glass | |||
Note(s): ****The coding and lettering of the environmental, social and economic KPIs is obtained from Figure 5, where for the environmental dimension, class 1 represents supply chain costs, class 2, profits and class 3 supply chain structure. Similarly, class 1 for the social dimension represents social status, class 2, service issues and class 3, work environment. The environmental dimension only has one class. The letters each represent a KPI from a specific class investigated by each publication. Devika et al. (2014) investigated the job opportunities created as a measure of social sustainability. For the level of decision-making, the class is obtained from Table 3, where strategic decisions are labelled as class 1, tactical class 2 and operational class 3. The lettering of decisions addressed is obtained from Table 3. Devika et al. (2014) investigated dynamic pricing and the routing of vehicles under operational decisions
Source(s): Author’s own creation/work
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.