Looking for someone is very specific with information and gives great detail within their writing. Need good quality work. No plagiarism, honesty, and A++ work. Someone who will take their time to understand and follow given instructions carefully. Deliver work ahead of time and not have me asking and looking for expected assignment. If you have any questions about the assignment or unsure about something please ask. Instructions attached.
I have provided the sources that need to be used in the attached PDF files. Please use those sources. If you have any questions, please ask. I’ve also included a sample of how the work is to be done.
Assignment Instructions
Instructions: Submit an Annotated Bibliography of 5 sources. First, put the source in the correct citation format for your particular curricular division, and then write a brief annotation of that source. The annotation should describe the main ideas covered in the source as well as an evaluation by you for the source’s usefulness for your project.
The Project is a Research Paper. The topic is Value of Reverse Logistics.
Remember that an online source can be a number of things. It can be a book, journal article, blog, podcast script, website, government report, newspaper article or editorial, or something else. Be sure to analyze each source carefully and follow the style guide in presenting the needed info. One goal in your annotation is to help your readers find the source if they want more information, so make it easy for them to do so.
APA Style Guide
Sample Annotation.
Sally Student
COLL 300
Date
Annotated Bibliography- MLA
Calkins, Lucy. Raising Lifelong Learners: A Parent’s Guide. Reading: Addison-Wesley
Longman. 1997. Print.
Lucy Calkins is a noted teacher and researcher in reading and writing. Her book is a guide for parents, helping them to work with their children’s schools to create a positive learning environment and a lifelong love of learning in their children. Topics covered include fostering learning and curiosity in mathematics, science, social studies, reading, and writing. Calkins’ work also offers advice on school curriculum and testing. By providing specific examples of parental involvement, this book will help support my assertion that parents need to play a strong role in their children’s education.
Reverse logistics disposition
decision-making
Developing a decision framework
via content analysis
Benjamin T. Hazen, Dianne J. Hall and Joe B. Hanna
Department of Supply Chain and Information System Management,
College of Business, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to identify the critical components of the reverse logistics
(RL) disposition decision-making process and suggest a decision framework that may guide future
investigation and practice.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors utilized a problem-driven content analysis
methodology. RL literature from 2000 through 2010 was content analyzed to determine which
components may impact a firm’s RL disposition decision.
Findings – The authors extrapolated seven RL disposition decision components from a compilation
of 60 variables identified in the literature. Practical implications and suggestions for future research
are offered, and a RL disposition decision-making framework is presented.
Research limitations/implications – Although methodological techniques were carefully
followed, the nature of a content analysis may be subject to author bias. Future investigation and
use of the framework presented will verify the findings presented here.
Practical implications – This study identifies seven components that should be considered when
deciding which RL disposition alternative should be adopted and integrates these components into a
decision-making framework. Supply chain professionals who refer to this framework during the decision
process will benefit from a more comprehensive analysis of potential RL disposition alternatives.
Originality/value – Congruent with recent assertions suggesting that RL research is evolving from
an operational-level focus to a holistic business process approach for maximizing value recovery, this
study synthesizes operational-level research to develop a practical framework for RL disposition
decision-making.
Keywords Reverse logistics, Returns, Disposition, Content analysis, Decision making
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Managing return product flow is becoming increasingly important to the success of
supply chain firms, particularly as the volume of return flow substantially increases
(Guide Jr et al., 2006). Because $100 billion worth of products are returned in the USA
each year (Stock et al., 2002), the returns management process can be an integral part of
a firm’s supply chain (Rogers et al., 2002). Accordingly, returned product disposition
should not only happen quickly (Blackburn et al., 2004), but disposition
decision-makers must consider a variety of decision parameters to ensure that the
chosen disposition policy is the most advantageous for the organization. To date, no
study has investigated what components comprise the disposition decision-making
process. Thus, the purpose of this study is to identify relevant decision parameters
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm
IJPDLM
42,3
244
Received 14 October 2010
Revised 9 March 2011,
16 August 2011,
22 October 2011
Accepted 24 October 2011
International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management
Vol. 42 No. 3, 2012
pp. 244-274
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0960-0035
DOI 10.1108/09600031211225954
and create a framework that will help guide business decisions-makers and future
research regarding which disposition option to choose.
Much of the extant reverse logistics (RL) disposition literature seeks to optimize
operational processes. For example, much of the literature discusses various aspects of
managing returns for remanufacturing (Atasu and Cetinkaya, 2006; Inderfurth, 2005;
Lu and Bostel, 2007; Teunter et al., 2006; Webster and Mitra, 2007). However, Guide Jr and
Van Wassenhove (2009) posit that research in closed-loop supply chains (CLSCs) is
evolving from a technical focus on operational-level activities to a holistic business
process approach for maximizing value recovery. Additional research has noted the
importance of understanding the factors involved in carefully examining the impact of
the disposition decision on the rest of the firm (Blumberg, 1999). However, the literature
is sparse in the area of RL disposition decision-making and is therefore an area in need of
further study (Stock and Mulki, 2009). The current study capitalizes on the abundance of
operational-level research to lay the groundwork for future decision-making research.
Background
Literature on RL and the nature of decisions regarding RL processes is becoming more
abundant as the area matures from primarily a step-retracing supply chain process to
one that stands on its own as a necessary process to which management should pay close
attention. While some research begins to investigate considerations for pursuing returns
management activities in general (Rogers et al., 2002), a comprehensive understanding
of the elements inherent in the disposition decision has not been developed. Without
such an understanding, practitioners struggle to develop best practices and researchers
cannot provide support to them. Research is needed to adequately provide an
understanding of this area. The current study provides the foundation for that
understanding by identifying the key components of the RL disposition decision and
providing a framework for practice and future research.
We define the RL disposition decision as leading to the establishment of an
organizational policy regarding which recovery option to pursue for a specific product
or line of products. Because this decision should be made in accordance with a firm’s
current policies, market position and objectives, we propose that the RL disposition
decision requires great consideration. RL is comprised of all functions that begin with
acquiring a returned product and end when the owning firm has extracted all possible
value from the item through proper disposition. This disposition process includes
options ranging from simply reusing the product to properly disposing of the product.
Much literature has been devoted to identifying and describing the actual disposition
alternatives, such as reuse, recycling, and remanufacturing (Blackburn et al., 2004;
Carter and Ellram, 1998; Krikke et al., 2004; Thierry et al., 1995). Some of this research
has also addressed a variety of design considerations for reverse channels, such as
investigating the tradeoff between efficient and responsive reverse supply chains
(Blackburn et al., 2004) and modularity (Krikke et al., 2004). However, research regarding
which RL disposition alternative should be employed by a given firm for a given product
line is markedly absent in the literature. When determining a policy regarding how to
handle returns, it would behoove decision-makers to follow an established
decision-making process that takes into account all relevant considerations. To date,
no study has assimilated all of these considerations or attempted to create such a
decision-making framework. This lack of understanding makes it difficult to fully
RL disposition
decision-making
245
comprehend which issues are important when making these increasingly important RL
decisions. To determine a foundation for such an understanding, this research uses
content analysis of RL literature to identify RL disposition decision criteria.
The remainder of this article is structured as follows. First, we briefly
review foundational RL literature, where we describe how numerous factors
have been acknowledged in extant literature to affect the RL process. We then offer
a brief background of the four disposition alternatives that are generally described in
the literature. The methodology of the content analysis is then described, followed by a
discussion of the findings. Next we present a validity check of our findings, where
components derived from our analysis are compared with factors addressed in existing
RL frameworks. We then offer a discussion of the practical implications of our results,
which also describes ideas for future research in RL decision-making. Finally, we
integrate our findings with extant decision-making literature to create a RL disposition
decision-making framework.
RL defined
A review of supply chain management (SCM) literature reveals that some terms often
encompass numerous definitions. Notably, the terms “logistics” and “SCM” lack
universal definitions as multiple conceptual perspectives exist (Larson et al., 2007;
Stock and Boyer, 2009). Similarly, there is not a consensus in the literature regarding
the terms used to describe the reverse processes within the supply chain (Lambert,
2008). Therefore, the term “RL” will be used in this research to encompass all returns
processes and is synonymous with terms such as “closed-loop supply chain” or
“returns management”kopic. For the purpose of this paper, we adopt Stock’s (1998,
pp. 20-1) comprehensive definition of RL:
[. . .] from a business logistics perspective, the term refers to the role of logistics in product
returns, source reduction, recycling, materials substitution, reuse of materials, waste disposal,
and refurbishing, repair, and remanufacturing; from an engineering logistics perspective, it is
referred to as reverse logistics management (RLM) and is a systematic business model that
applies best logistics engineering and management methodologies across the enterprise in
order to profitably close the loop on the supply chain.
Foundational literature
A variety of internal and external forces affect a firm’s RL processes. Building upon
previous marketing research (Achrol et al., 1983; Stern and Reve, 1980) and their review
of the logistics literature that specifically addresses external marketing factors
(Barry et al., 1993; Bronstad and Evans-Correia, 1992; Cairncross, 1992; Kopicki et al.,
1993; Livingstone and Sparks, 1994; Murphy et al., 1995; Pohlen and Farris II, 1992;
Stock, 1992), Carter and Ellram (1998) developed a framework that describes the forces
that affect RL. Their framework posits that the task environment consists of four
distinct organizational entities that affect the firm’s RL operations. They are:
(1) suppliers (input);
(2) buyers (output);
(3) government (regulatory); and
(4) competitors (competitive).
IJPDLM
42,3
246
The task environment is embedded within the overall market environment consisting
of legal, economic, political, and social variables.
Carter and Ellram’s (1998) conceptual model is widely regarded as the first
comprehensive RL framework. It takes into account factors that are beyond the normal
scope of logisticians and illustrates the holistic nature of RL. Their work provided the
foundation for further investigation, as demonstrated by Knemeyer et al. (2002) when
they updated the model to account for factors recognized in more current research.
Considering the theory-building work of Dowlatshahi (2000) and a review of the
contemporary literature at the time, Knemeyer et al.’s (2002) model accounts for concerns
at multiple levels of an organization. Similarly, Skinner et al.’s (2008) research suggests
that cross-functional integration is critical to the continued success of the returns
management process. Additionally, Jayaraman and Luo (2007) recognized the
system-level effects of a firm’s RL policies. Their framework describes the
interdisciplinary nature of the RL disposition decision and demonstrates how a firm
may derive value from its returned products, thus promoting the idea that all of a firm’s
activities should seek to increase profits.
Considerations regarding RL encompass issues beyond that of many other
business processes. For example, De Brito and Dekker’s (2003) model emphasizes
corporate citizenship, legislation, and economics as the driving forces behind RL
practices. Furthermore, Rogers and Tibben-Lembke (2001) highlight the overlapping
considerations between green logistics and RL, suggesting the impact that green
principles may have on RL decision-making. Specifically, they describe the
activities of recycling, remanufacturing, and use of reusable packing as overlapping
between green logistics and RL. Conversely, Wolf and Seuring (2010) suggest that,
although environmental concerns are often considered when organizations contract
with third party logistics providers, those concerns are given cursory examination at
best. Research also suggests that understanding customer needs regarding returns may
enable organizations to develop better product placement strategies (Ofek et al., 2011).
In that same vein, Jack et al. (2010) found that RL may be examined from both the
viewpoint of front-end customer relationship strategies and back-end RL processes.
Their research suggests that back-end processes have a positive impact on RL
capabilities, which in turn increases cost savings.
The above research highlights the dynamic nature of RL and underscores the
importance of identifying factors that impact the general RL process. Not specifically
addressed, however, is the disposition decision. Whether or not to implement RL
processes is not an issue; RL will endeavor to exist for organizations that produce or
move materials through the forward supply chain. While there is some need to align
the RL process with the rest of the organization’s supply chain objectives, only the
disposition decision has the ability to add value to the organization when the decision
is based on appropriate information (Tan and Kumar, 2006). The research reviewed
thus far describes the nature of RL. Our focus now turns to describing the common RL
disposition alternatives that a firm may employ.
RL disposition alternatives
In this paper, the term disposition alternative is synonymous with what some authors
have referred to as recovery option (Krikke et al., 2004). Deciding upon the most
advantageous disposition alternative can bolster a firm’s success (Croxton et al., 2001).
RL disposition
decision-making
247
However, not only do decision-makers need to understand the laws and regulations
that govern proper material handling and disposal, they must also be able to recognize
potential financial gains that may be realized by capitalizing on opportunities to reuse
operational products, recondition damaged or used products, or recover valuable
materials from products that are beyond their useful life.
Early work in regard to disposition decision models sought to identify and
stratify disposition alternatives (Kopicki et al., 1993; Stock, 1992). Thierry et al.’s (1995)
integrated supply chain model depicts a standard return process. Their model illustrates
three separate disposition alternatives. First, a firm may employ direct reuse, which
entails reusing or reselling the returned product in an as-is condition. Next, a firm may
employ product recovery management, which entails processes such as repairing,
refurbishing, remanufacturing, cannibalizing useable materials, and recycling materials
of value. Finally, a firm may employ waste management, which entails incinerating
waste or land filling.
Since the work of Thierry et al. (1995), others such as Carter and Ellram (1998),
Krikke et al. (2004) and Rogers et al. (2002) have modified and stratified possible
disposition alternatives. Although each study emphasized slightly differing alternatives
and definitions, four common RL disposition categories seemingly emerge as
comprising the core taxonomy in recent literature. In consideration of the work cited
above, we propose that the following four disposition alternatives encompass the
recovery options available for RL. In hierarchical order in regard to the potential residual
value that can be recovered by a firm, the four alternatives are:
(1) reuse;
(2) product upgrade;
(3) material recovery; and
(4) waste management.
Reuse allows for the most value to be recovered while waste management allows for
the least amount of value recovery. Although some decompose these four alternatives
even further (Krikke et al., 2004), this general hierarchy is often utilized in the current
literature (Blackburn et al., 2004; Prahinski and Kocabasoglu, 2006; Rogers et al., 2002;
Staikos and Rahimifard, 2007). The following briefly defines each alternative and gives
an example of research within each area.
Reuse. Direct reuse is an option that presents itself when a customer returns an
unused product back to the place of purchase, thus inserting the product back into the
supply chain for use. At the retailer level, once the product is no longer serviceable or
requires some sort of upgrade (e.g. cleaning, replacing accessories, remanufacturing,
repackaging, etc.) direct reuse is no longer an option. Generally, this option exists only
if the location in which the product resides in the supply chain possesses the capability
to return the product to retail condition. This process includes products that are
completely unused and products that are returned after such light use that upgrade is
not required in order to return the product to new status.
Assuming that the returned product is in new condition, a variety of options exist.
The product can be again offered for sale by the retailer, shipped laterally to another
retailer, shipped back to the distributor, or shipped to any other place within the forward
or reverse supply chain where stock levels require such an item. Logisticians and retail
IJPDLM
42,3
248
managers are primarily concerned with accounting for the quantity and quality of these
returns. These unknown quantities provide even more variability to a process that is
already susceptible to forecasting error. This additional variability increases the
bullwhip effect within the supply chain and can lead to increased inventory (Vlachos and
Dekker, 2003). If returns can be adequately forecasted and properly managed, the
returns that are available for direct reuse can reduce transportation, procurement, and
storage costs while improving productivity as each item returned to the end of the
supply chain offsets the need for another item to be pulled through the forward supply
chain (Giuntini and Andel, 1995b; Mollenkopf and Closs, 2005).
Product upgrade. The product upgrade alternative is concerned with repairing,
refurbishing, or remanufacturing an item in order to extend the life of and derive value
from the original core unit (Krikke et al., 2004). Product upgrade becomes an option
when the possibility of direct reuse is either no longer available (e.g. the product is in
used condition) or not economical (e.g. there is no longer a market requirement for the
product). If executed properly, product upgrade can create profitable business
opportunities through recapturing value that would otherwise have been lost
(Clendenin, 1997; Giuntini and Andel, 1995a). The term “upgrade” implies improving
the product from its end-of-life condition to that of a condition acceptable for future use
or sale. The condition and quality of upgraded products can vary greatly, depending
on the upgrade technique chosen and the purpose of the upgrade.
The definitions of repair, refurbish, and remanufacture are debatable and the usage
of such terms differs within the literature. However, Majumder and Groenevelt (2001)
suggest that remanufacturing is the primary means of product upgrade and is the term
usually assigned to any upgrade function. Remanufacturing is defined as:
[. . .] the process of disassembling used items, inspecting and repairing/reworking the
components, and using these in a new product manufacture. A product is considered
remanufactured if its primary components come from a used product (Majumder and
Groenevelt, 2001, p. 125).
The current study adopts this definition.
Material recovery. Material recovery involves recovering any portion of a returned
product that may contain value. Material recovery can entail cannibalizing entire pieces
not requiring upgrade that can be reused (Krikke et al., 2004), recovering parts or pieces
that may be reused (Blackburn et al., 2004), or extracting recyclable materials for reuse or
to sell as a commodity. Early RL literature often focused on recycling (Guiltinan and
Nwokoye, 1975; Pohlen and Farris II, 1992); thus, some scholars posit that RL has been
most closely associated with recycling and environmental matters (Daugherty et al.,
2002). Although the topic of sustainability is becoming popular in recent literature,
determine how to extract value from returned products and ensure regulatory
compliance are still prominent topics in this area (Roy et al., 2006).
Waste management. Once a firm has decided that it is no longer of value to reuse,
upgrade, or recover materials from a specific product, the product then becomes waste.
Lyons (2005, p. 71) defines waste as:
[. . .] something that is perceived to have either no inherent value to its owner, or the amount
of effort required to access that value is greater than the expected return [. . .] waste is a
residual that is discarded.
RL disposition
decision-making
249
In regard to the disposition decision, relegating a product to waste entails deriving no
more value from that product. Subsequently, this alternative is the least desirable
disposition alternative as the business implications end at this juncture. However, waste
management has become an important topic in recent years as economic and
environmental forces demand environmentally-friendly and cost-effective handling
of waste.
The preceding four disposition alternatives and their operational definitions
assimilate the extant literature in this area for the purpose of bringing understanding
to the options available to a firm when making the disposition decision. As noted
above, the exact terminology and definitions of the alternatives differ within the
literature. Readers interested in the disposition alternatives (or recovery options) are
encouraged to Blackburn et al. (2004), Carter and Ellram (1998), Kopicki et al. (1993),
Krikke et al. (2004), Prahinski and Kocabasoglu (2006), Rogers et al. (2002), Staikos and
Rahimifard (2007), Stock (1992) and Thierry et al. (1995).
While much literature exists in the general area of RL, and a literature base is being
built in disposition alternatives, no comprehensive analysis of extant literature for the
purposes of extracting or deriving decision considerations or creating a disposition
decision-making framework has been conducted. Because of the relative lack of
literature specifically in the area of dispositions, our study analyzes literature in RL
that addresses decision-making in general to determine those variables that
appear throughout the literature. Then, we synthesize those findings into higher-level,
decision-making components, which are applied to the disposition decision. The method
used for identifying and assimilating these components is described next.
Methodology
The purpose of this study is to identify the components of the RL disposition decision
and suggest a decision-making framework. To serve this purpose, the authors required a
method that would uncover the variables considered in extant RL decision-making
literature. In short, we needed to derive meaningful content to address our specific
purpose from a large amount of textual literature. Berelson (1952) suggests that
revealing the focus of attention is one of the primary uses of content analysis. In addition,
Neuman (2006) asserts that content analysis is useful for three primary types of research
problems:
(1) problems involving a large amount of text;
(2) problems that must be studied from afar because of either necessity or to attain
the proper scope; and
(3) problems where casual observation may not reveal the proper solution.
In the case of this research, we needed to assimilate a large amount of text to
thoroughly investigate relevant variables. When viewed from afar and via conscious
examination, this text may reveal a solution to our problem. Accordingly, a content
analysis method was adopted for this study.
Content analysis is “a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences
from texts (or other meaningful matter) to the contexts of their use” (Krippendorff, 2004,
p. 18). Content analysis can be strictly quantitative when used to objectively and
systematically count and record symbolic content from text. Content analysis can also
IJPDLM
42,3
250
be utilized for qualitative purposes to interpret meaning from text. Indeed, many content
analysis procedures employ both qualitative and quantitative elements (Holsti, 1968).
As with many research methods, content analysis encompasses a wide variety of
procedures and techniques that may be employed for use in a variety of settings to
solve a multitude of problems. As such, there is no one systematic checklist to follow
when conducting content analysis. This lack of standardization requires that great care
be taken to develop a specific method that will yield appropriate results to answer the
given research question at hand. Regardless of the specific procedure employed, the
techniques must result in findings that are replicable in order to attain sufficient levels
of reliability. In addition, measures must be taken to enhance validity whenever
possible. Although discussion of the many ways in which to bolster reliability and
validity are beyond the scope of this manuscript, we will discuss the specific
techniques we employed in our research later in this article.
In this research, we adapted procedures for problem-driven content analysis
suggested by Krippendorff (2004) to locate relevant materials for analysis, define the
units of analysis, develop recording procedures, present the findings, infer results, and
demonstrate empirical validity. These steps were carefully chosen and meticulously
performed to efficaciously derive meaning from the textual content while enhancing
reliability and validity to the fullest extent. The procedures and outcomes of each of
these steps will be discussed throughout the remainder of this article in the order in
which they were completed.
Relevant materials
As discussed previously, the vast majority of extant RL literature addresses
operational-level concerns of an organization. With a focus on optimizing specific
operational efficiencies, much of this research is aimed toward clarifying various
aspects of decisions that pertain to RL. As an example, Bhattacharya et al.’s (2006)
research develops a mathematical model to determine optimal order quantities;
Ferguson and Toktay’s (2006) research aims toward facilitating remanufacturing
decisions. As such, this literature represents a rich body of content that is relevant to
our problem, and thus useful for our analysis.
The scope of the literature search was limited to articles that designed, developed,
tested, or otherwise utilized a decision support system (DSS) or simulation in regard to
facilitating a decision within RL. Authors of these articles go to great lengths to
identify and describe any possible variable or consideration that may be used in regard
to their specific RL problem in order to enhance the relevance and validity of their
research. To find articles that meet our criteria, the literature from the top eight
journals in SCM, management information systems (MIS), and operations management
(OM), as identified by Menachof et al. (2007, p. 151), Rainer and Miller (2005) and
Gorman and Kanet (2005), respectively, was first considered. In alphabetical order by
discipline, these journals are shown in Table I.
These journal listings yielded a total of 21 unique journals because of the
interdisciplinary nature of both Management Science and Harvard Business Review.
Logistics research spans a multitude of disciplines (Stock, 1997). However, the three
selected disciplines encompass the vast majority of literature on the specific topic of RL
decision-making and are therefore thought to appropriately limit the scope of the
search. Although searching only the top journals in a field may not render exhaustive
RL disposition
decision-making
251
results (Webster and Watson, 2002), a comprehensive interdisciplinary analysis of this
nature requires a limited scope in the preliminary search of literature. Furthermore,
this listing served more as a beginning reference than as a definitive boundary.
Investigation into the literature revealed additional journal titles that pertained to this
topic and were subsequently explored.
This review examined all applicable literature from 2000 through 2010. In their
review of RL literature, Carter and Ellram (1998) propose that the first academic work
in the field was not published until the early 1990s (Kopicki et al., 1993; Stock, 1992).
Their review also notes that the majority of literature throughout the 1990s was
exploratory in nature, offering little theoretical grounding. Accordingly, the vast
majority of RL literature is published after the year 2000, thus presenting a logical limit
to the scope of this review. The authors’ objective was to determine which variables are
currently being utilized in the literature. This dictated that the review reach back far
enough to provide an appropriate number of articles, but not so far as to lose
contemporary relevance. The year 2010 was chosen as an upper limit so as to facilitate
a comprehensive search of a selected period, thus limiting the possibility of
inadvertently omitting newly published literature within the stated scope of the review.
All selected journals are searchable via electronic format and were thus accessed
electronically. Broad keyword …
Strategic orientations,
sustainable supply chain
initiatives, and reverse logistics
Empirical evidence from an emerging market
Chin-Chun Hsu and Keah-Choon Tan
Lee Business School, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, and
Suhaiza Hanim Mohamad Zailani
University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Abstract
Purpose – Global outsourcing shifts manufacturing jobs to emerging countries, which provides new
opportunities for improving their economic development. The authors develop and test a theoretical
model to predict first, how sustainable supply chain initiatives might influence reverse logistics
outcomes and second, the impact of eco-reputation and eco-innovation orientation strategies on the
deployment of sustainable supply chain initiatives. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
Design/methodology/approach – The proposed new model of antecedents and outcomes of
sustainable supply chain initiatives underwent a rigorous empirical test through structural equation
modeling with samples from an emerging market.
Findings – The results show that firms that implement sustainable supply chain initiatives can realize
positive reverse logistics outcomes; the study also provides new insights into eco-innovation and
eco-reputation strategic orientations as theoretically important antecedents of sustainable supply
chain initiatives.
Research limitations/implications – Though the authors identify three components of sustainable
supply chain initiatives, other components could exist, and ongoing research should investigate them.
Practical implications – The findings have important implications for managers in emerging
markets seeking to initiate ecologically friendly business practices. The authors offer strong evidence of
the benefits obtained from reverse logistics in sustainable supply chain initiatives. Policy makers and
firms attempting to nurture sustainable supply chain initiatives should not overlook the important role of
eco-reputation and eco-innovation strategic orientations, which the results identify as important enablers.
Originality/value – This study offers evidence of the critical role of eco-reputation and
eco-innovation strategic orientations in deploying sustainable supply chain initiative programs, as well
as of their mutual effects. This study also offers empirical evidence that implementing sustainable
supply chain initiatives leads to reverse logistics, creating value, and a new source of competitive
advantages.
Keywords Eco-innovation, Emerging market, Strategic orientation, Eco-reputation,
Reverse logistics, Sustainable supply chain initiatives
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Outsourcing trends since the early 1990s have transformed emerging countries into
significant players in the global economy. Global outsourcing thus has reshaped global
supply chain systems in significant ways, such that the globalized manufacturing
network has shifted manufacturing jobs to emerging countries, which providing
new opportunities for improving the economic development of emerging markets. But a
globalized manufacturing network also poses significant risks to individual health
and safety, national economies, and local, regional, and global environments
International Journal of Operations
& Production Management
Vol. 36 No. 1, 2016
pp. 86-110
©EmeraldGroup Publishing Limited
0144-3577
DOI 10.1108/IJOPM-06-2014-0252
Received 20 July 2014
Revised 10 December 2014
29 January 2015
24 February 2015
Accepted 26 February 2015
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0144-3577.htm
86
IJOPM
36,1
(O’Rourke, 2005). Thus the question of whether manufacturing firms in emerging
countries can manage their profit growth and environmental sustainability goals
effectively has important implications at both national and global levels.
Sustainable business practices can help create wealth for firms and raise the standard
of living in emerging markets; unsustainable economic activities lead to environmental
degradation that can threaten an emerging country’s long-term prosperity and economic
competiveness (Schmidheiny, 1992). Firms in emerging countries might adapt ecologically
friendly strategies and guidelines from their business clients or competitors in more
advanced economies, though rapid business development and continuous environmental
deterioration also have increased the emphasis on environmental sustainability.
In particular, environmental concerns have prompted the governments of some
emerging economies to regulate business practices and set broad environmental
improvement objectives (Child and Tsai, 2005). On the flip side, profit pressures and weak
ecological traditions can decrease firms’ incentives to address the broader range of
stakeholder interests associated with sustainable practices.
In this context, we note three pertinent knowledge gaps. First, many studies have
focussed on green business approaches in advanced economies, but much less research
has addressed the antecedents or outcomes of ecologically friendly business practices in
emerging markets (Blome et al., 2014; Fabbe-Costes et al., 2014). Second, despite the
ongoing debate about the potential outcomes of ecologically friendly supply chain
activities (Prajogo et al., 2014), the benefits or outcomes of sustainable supply
chain initiatives are poorly understood (Roehrich et al., 2014), though outcome measures
are essential for managing and navigating competitive global markets. In a related sense,
surprisingly few empirical studies examine the impacts on reverse logistics (Aitken and
Harrison, 2013), despite their promise for creating new value and providing competitive
advantages ( Jayaraman and Luo, 2007). Third, even when ecologically friendly supply
chain commitments make sense, managers lack guidelines for how to start greening their
firms’ supply chain efforts. A few prior studies identify external “enablers,” derived from
institutional or stakeholder theory (Zailani et al., 2012), but relatively few cite strategically
relevant factors. That is, research into sustainable supply chain initiatives tends to
pertain to organizational capabilities, not the strategic orientation antecedents that
precede the adoption of sustainable supply chain initiatives. By focussing on
sustainability practices, definitions, and decision frameworks, these studies ignore the
need for insights into how to develop sustainability strategies from an organizational
perspective (Zhu and Sarkis, 2007). The fragmented, incomplete knowledge in this area
thus fails to address adequately which key strategic orientation forces will drive
sustainable supply chain initiatives.
In attempting to fill these knowledge gaps, this study makes three primary
contributions. First, we study emerging economies. Some manufacturing firms identify
and target segments of ecologically conscious buyers, in an effort to position themselves
as favorable green suppliers, but most companies refuse to abandon their existing
operations and production processes, regardless of the growing interest in sustainability
(Größler et al., 2013). Thus, manufacturing firms in emerging countries must find ways to
execute existing supply chain strategies through sustainable initiatives that implement
more ecologically friendly programs than appeared in their past supply chain efforts.
In particular, we study Malaysia, which is a member of Association of Southeastern
Asian Nations and an integral part of the global economy; Malaysian suppliers have
critical roles in global supply chains. The country represents an important
manufacturing hub for global firms that seek to outsource the manufacture of
87
Sustainable
supply chain
initiatives
component parts. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
reports that foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows to Malaysia increased from
US$9.1 billion in 2010 to US$11.9 billion in 2011, an increase of 30.8 percent
(World Investment Report, 2013), which also raised Malaysia’s rank to 13 from 16 in the
list of Top Prospective Host Economies for 2013-2015 (World Investment Report, 2013).
Thus, the UNCTAD report affirms Malaysia’s attractiveness as a FDI destination. In this
emerging economy, sustainable development remains at an early stage, whereas profit
maximization is the priority for most manufacturing firms.
Second, we examine the reverse logistic effects of ecologically friendly purchasing,
manufacturing, and packaging programs (De Leeuw et al., 2013; Hsu et al., 2013).
Sustainable supply chain initiatives can deliver reverse logistic benefits; our empirical
evidence even shows that firms can create competitive advantages for new value
creation (Chavez et al., 2013). Reverse logistics refers to returns of products or
packaging, after their use, for reuse, recycling, or reclamation of materials
(Kapetanopoulou and Tagaras, 2011). By engaging in reverse logistics, firms can
recycle remanufactured parts or components, as well as dispose properly of those
components that cannot undergo remanufacturing or recycling (Lo, 2014). In turn, they
constitute a substantial cost-driving area and may result in greater profitability and
customer satisfaction, as well as benefitting the environment (Hsu et al., 2013).
Third, this study considers specific strategic orientation drivers that engender
success in sustainable supply chain initiatives. Specifically, we identify and empirically
examine two new strategic orientation factors that have been overlooked:
eco-reputation and eco-innovation, both of which integrate environmental concerns
into the firm’s business strategies. This study thus offers evidence of the critical role of
eco-reputation and eco-innovation strategic orientations in deploying sustainable
supply chain initiative programs, as well as of their mutual effects. Both antecedents
may be important for understanding how firms respond to ecological challenges and
derive sustainable supply chain initiatives, but neither has been the subject of prior
research. We show that firms wishing to sustain their firm’s supply chain initiatives
should develop their eco-reputation and eco-innovation strategic orientations first.
In the next section, we present a theoretical framework for the strategic orientation
antecedents and reverse logistics outcomes of sustainable supply chain initiatives.
Our research hypotheses reflect input from a wide array of literature. We discuss the
research methodology and the results of the data analyses. Finally, this paper
concludes by delineating the findings, their managerial implications, and limitations.
2. Literature review
2.1 Strategic orientations
Strategic orientation originally stemmed from the market orientation notion, which
was a popular means to measure firm performance. According to Manu and Sriram
(1996, p. 79), strategic orientation refers to “how an organization uses strategy to adapt
and/or change aspects of its environment for a more favorable alignment.” Extended
versions focus on customer or technology orientations, and Narver and Slater (1990)
argue that strategic orientation is an critical component of profitability for both
manufacturing and service businesses, such that an orientation influences business
decisions through its effects on business profitability (Schniederjans and Cao, 2009).
According to strategic choice theory (Child, 1972), strategic decisions also have a
determining role in a firm’s business survival, and the fundamental issue is the strategic
orientation, with a foundational assumption that firms can enact and actively shape their
88
IJOPM
36,1
environments. Strategic choice theory centers on decision making in organizations
designed to achieve well-defined goals. Thus, managerial discretion, interpretation,
and perspective have great influence in strategic decision making, over the span of
shared organizational actions. To achieve organizational effectiveness, firms must
make appropriate strategic choices that “represent the competitive strategy implemented
by a firm to create continuing performance improvements” (Morgan and Strong, 1998,
p. 1055). Ultimately a strategic orientation is a firm’s overall direction and objectives,
oriented toward an external business environment and driven by top management
(Voss and Voss, 2000). Strategic choice theory focusses on managers’ strategic choices
when their firms face external challenges (Child, 1972). If they have a strategic orientation,
firms choose to leverage their strategy to adapt or change aspects of their external
environment to ensure more favorable alignment. It also helps explain why firms take
proactive and committed actions to address urgent issues such as sustainability.
Firms do not interact with their operating environments in identical ways. For
example, in the same industry, some firms focus on a narrow, limited, product-market
domains, in an effort to protect their market share. Others search continuously for new
market opportunities through innovation and new product development. Responses to
the operating environment reflect firms’ strategic orientations; strategic orientations
largely their choices, establish their strategic positioning, affect their performance,
involve multiple functions, are highly complex and ambiguous, and demand
substantial resource commitments. In addition, a strategic orientation choice refers
to the process of choosing one course of action rather than another. Thus a strategic
orientation offers a means to comprehend the actions that firms take to enhance their
profitability and competitive advantage. This pattern of past, or intended, decisions
guides a firm’s ongoing alignment with its external environment and shapes strategic
policies and procedures (Hill and Cuthbertson, 2011; Minarro-Viseras et al., 2005).
From a sustainable supply chain perspective, firms’ strategic orientations are
critical, because sustainable business practices demand substantial firm resources and
are technically complex, such that they require diverse skills contributed by technical
experts, organizational experts, and top management (Saeed et al., 2014). From a
strategic choice theory perspective, Sharma (2000) examines how firms use freedom of
choice (discretion, interpretation, and perspective) to create strategies that influence
firms’ orientation toward adopting sustainability initiatives. Ketchen and Hult (2011)
cite strategic choice theory as appropriate for studying strategic supply chain
management. With its focus on the best value, strategic choice theory seeks to identify
supply chain models that can affect organizational outcomes and enact the
environment. Strategic choice theory centers on the intra-organizational level and the
provision of certain strategic capabilities (Ketchen and Hult, 2011). It also seeks to
answers questions and challenges in extant supply chain management research.
Finally, a strategic orientation toward sustainable business practices is influenced by
various external agents, including suppliers, governments, regulatory organizations,
green social groups, and rapidly changing technology (Shrivastava and Grant, 1985).
We examine two particular ecological strategic orientations: eco-reputation and
eco-innovation. An eco-reputation is a stakeholder’s overall perception of a company’s
efforts on environmental protection over time. This evaluation reflects each
stakeholder’s experience of the ecological commitment of the company, as well as
images based on the company’s actions, beyond simple compliance with government
regulations (e.g. Chen, 2010). This definition is consistent with Banerjee (2001),
Banerjee et al. (2003) and Esty and Winston (2009). Eco-innovation instead refers to the
89
Sustainable
supply chain
initiatives
development of products and processes that explicitly account for concerns about
the natural environment in pursuit of the goal of sustainable development and
ecological improvements (e.g. Menon et al., 1999). Thus eco-innovation constitutes a
firm’s strategic resources, from ecologically friendly technological advances to socially
acceptable innovative paths, consistent with the view that product development and
process improvement can be designed and executed in ways that are less harmful to the
natural environment (Fussler and James, 1996; Segarra-Oña et al., 2014).
Hong et al. (2009) define an ecological strategic orientation as a firm’s long-term
commitment to producing environmentally sound products and services by
implementing environmental improvement goals. Environmentally sound products
can promote a firm’s overall economic performance, through internal integration and
external coordination with both major stakeholders, such as customers and suppliers.
Moreover, to ensure a sustainable orientation for the supply chain, the firm must
maintain its successful past practices while promoting and encouraging the
implementation of consistent environmental innovative initiatives that reinforce its
long-term sustainability (Hong et al., 2009; Awaysheh and Klassen, 2010). The adoption
of sustainable supply chain initiatives depends on the firm’s strategic orientation
(Baines et al., 2005). An ecological strategic orientation, such as eco-reputation or
eco-innovation, influences strategic choices, such that each ecological strategic
orientation can influence the impact of the firm’s decision makers on the adoption of
sustainable business practices throughout the firm (Chiang et al., 2012).
2.2 Sustainable supply chain management
Supply chain management encompasses “a set of three or more entities directly
involved in the upstream or downstream flows of products, services, finances, and/or
information from a source to a customer” (Mentzer et al., 2001, p. 4). This definition sets
the boundaries of the supply chain with the final customer. Traditional supply chains
also are based on the production paradigm (Doran et al., 2007). In contrast, sustainable
supply chains is an inter-disciplinary, cross-cutting issue. The 2005 world summit on
social development (www.un.org/ga/59/hl60_plenarymeeting.html) identified three
pillars of sustainability: economic development (profit), social development (people),
and environmental protection (plant). These pillars are not mutually exclusive but can
be mutually reinforcing. In the contemporary accounting framework, the triple bottom
line provides the measure of business sustainability, in terms of financial, social, and
environmental performance. In addition, Peter Senge, in an interview by Harvard
Business Review, identifies sustainable supply chains as the core enablers of the next
industrial revolution (Prokesch, 2010). The United Nations Global Compact recently
launched a guide for advancing sustainability in global supply chains in four key areas:
human rights, labor, environment, and anti-corruption (www.unglobalcompact.org).
With this study, we focus on the environmental perspective of sustainable supply
chain practices. Specifically, firms must to partner with members throughout their
supply chains to improve energy efficiency while reducing natural resource usage,
waste, and adverse environmental impacts, which together lead to a stronger bottom
line. Sustainable supply chains account for the environmental impacts of products and
services as they flow throughout the supply chain. These environmentally friendly
extensions of traditional supply chains include activities to minimize the negative
environmental impacts of a product or service throughout its entire life cycle.
Sustainable supply chains deal with environmental issues in both forward and reverse
versions (Rao and Holt, 2005). A sustainable forward supply chain would address
90
IJOPM
36,1
www.un.org/ga/59/hl60_plenarymeeting.html
www.unglobalcompact.org
environmental issues both upstream and downstream (Geyer and Jackson, 2004).
Upstream, sustainable supply chains can have significant effects in terms of improving
suppliers’ environmental performance (Sarkis, 2006). Downstream, these sustainable
supply chains focus on reducing the environmental impacts of the products produced
during their use and disposal. Such reductions often offer significant environmental
benefits, because products generate most of their environmental emissions and waste
during their use, such that these detrimental impacts may exceed those generated during
the manufacturing stage. Through these outcomes, sustainable supply chains provide
both economic and environmental benefits (Carter et al., 2000; Rao and Holt, 2005).
2.3 Sustainable supply chain initiatives
Supply chains encompass all activities associated with the process flow for
transforming raw materials into goods for end users. The process cycle begins with
purchasing, including raw material purchasing activities by suppliers. Manufacturing
activities follow, after which the product must be distributed to customers or retailers
(Hill et al., 2012). According to sustainability literature, the potential green elements in
this cycle include vendor assessments, environmental purchasing policies, green
production policies, waste management, training, cross-functional integration, effective
coordination between companies and suppliers, performance evaluation processes,
the selection of suppliers, and leveraging relationships between suppliers and
customers (Giovanni, 2012). We therefore conceptualize sustainable supply chain
initiatives as those designed to accomplish the firm’s strategic supply chain functions –
purchasing, manufacturing, and packaging – in ways that minimize their negative
impacts on the natural environment. This conceptualization is line with prior
definitions of sustainable supply chains (e.g. Hsu et al., 2013).
Green purchasing refers to an ecologically conscious purchasing initiative that aims
to ensure procured materials or components meet the firm’s eco-friendly goals. The
purchasing process can manifest the firm’s environmental preferences if it includes
green purchasing criteria (Saghiri and Hill, 2014). Carter and Ellram (1998) argue
that green purchasing also should reflect efforts to reduce, reuse, and recycle materials.
Thus, purchasing decisions have significant influences on the sustainable supply chain
(Yang et al., 2013) through the procurement of raw materials and components.
Green manufacturing entails the environmentally conscious production of a
product, with the goal of minimizing its negative environmental impacts throughout its
entire life cycle, as well as promoting positive ecological business operation practices,
such as recycling and reusing products (Dam and Petkova, 2014). That is, green
manufacturing considers environmental impacts in every stage of the product lifecycle
(Giovanni, 2012), in an effort to minimize the environmental impacts of manufacturing
processes, generate minimum waste, and reduce environmental pollution. Pursuing
green manufacturing also helps firms lower their raw material costs, gain production
efficiency, reduce environmental and occupational safety expenses, and improve their
corporate image (Zhu and Sarkis, 2007). Thus, green manufacturing helps firms
achieve profit growth and increase their market share.
Finally, green packaging is environmentally conscious packaging of a product, to
minimize the associated negative environmental impacts. Packaging contributes directly
to product success in supply chains, because it can enable the efficient distribution of
products, as well as lower environmental impacts due to spoilage or waste. Increased
attention to global climate change has made green packaging a primary focus area, to
reduce waste and improve air quality, because different packaging characteristics
91
Sustainable
supply chain
initiatives
(e.g. size, shape, materials) have different impacts. Hsu et al. (2013) indicate that green
packaging includes considerations of cost (materials and shipping), performance
(adequate protection of the product), convenience (easy to use), compliance (with legal
requirements), and environmental impact (Liu et al., 2013; Lin et al., 2013).
2.4 Reverse logistics and competitive advantage
Dowlatshahi (2000) define reverse logistics as activities by which a producer retrieves
products and components to recycle, rebuild, or dispose of them properly. Reverse
logistics also might refer to the actual process of return or take-back, after the
consumer has used the product or packaging, to reuse, recycle, or reclaim materials,
or else provide safe refills (Carter and Ellram, 1998). Using reverse logistics as a supply
chain performance measure suggests how companies can obtain competitive
advantages by quantifying the efficiency and effectiveness of their actions (Lehtinen
and Ahola, 2010). Thus reverse logistics differentiate a firm, leading to a market
advantage and opportunities to build competitive advantages.
Specifically, reverse logistics create tangible and intangible value by helping firms
first, extract value from used/returned goods instead of wasting manpower, time, and
to procure more raw materials, second, create additional value through increasing
product life cycles, third, improve customer satisfaction and loyalty by paying more
attention to faulty goods and merchandise repairs, and fourth, obtain feedback to
suggest improvements and enhance understanding of the real reasons for product
returns, which should lead to future product improvements or new product designs
(Aitken and Harrison, 2013). Through reverse logistics, manufacturing firms not only
receive products back from the consumer but also collect unsold merchandise for the
manufacturer to take apart, sort, reassemble, or recycle (Yu et al., 2012). Alternatively,
the returned product might be re-sold in secondary channels and thus generate
revenue (Aitken and Harrison, 2013). Reverse logistics also might enhance customer
loyalty, because customers respond positively to environmentally responsible
actions by the firm, so goodwill generated by reverse logistics could be a source of
firm competitiveness.
3. Hypotheses development
We depict the key study constructs in Figure 1. The two strategic orientation
antecedents, eco-innovation, and eco-reputation, precede sustainable supply chain
initiatives. Sustainable supply chain initiatives then relate to the firm’s reverse logistics.
3.1 Relationship of eco-reputation and eco-innovation strategic orientations
According to strategic orientation literature and strategic choice theory, a firm’s
strategic orientations are critical, because they involve the commitment of a large
amount of firm resources (De Toni and Tonchia, 2003). They also tend to be
technically complex, demanding diverse skills gathered from technical experts,
organizational experts, and top management. Furthermore, strategic orientations
depend on external agents, such as suppliers, organized labor unions, and rapidly
changing technology (Shrivastava and Grant, 1985). Strategic orientation choice
involves a process of choosing a particular course of action, which helps explicate the
actions that firms take to achieve enhanced profitability and competitive advantage.
Because a strategic orientation is a pattern of past or intended decisions, guiding
the firm’s ongoing alignment with its external environment and shaping internal
92
IJOPM
36,1
procedures and policies, a firm may apply multiple orientation decisions at the same
time to fulfill its strategic goals.
Testa and Iraldo (2010) introduce two strategic orientations that favor the adoption
of green supply chain management practices by firms. We consider an eco-reputation
strategic orientation, a strategy designed to make all stakeholders (customers,
suppliers, society) aware of the firm’s efforts to implement eco-friendly systems
and thus enhance its corporate image. We also note an eco-innovation strategic
orientation, a strategy that guides companies to develop innovative products and
operational processes that can improve their environmental performance. Companies
that are frontrunners in developing eco-friendly product and process innovations have
an opportunity to strengthen their leadership and differentiate themselves more from
their competitors.
An organization’s ecologically friendly strategic orientation thus comprises all
positioning strategies associated with a particular issue, such that greater integration
Strategic Orientations
(SO)
Eco-reputation SO
Eco-innovation SO
Sustainable Supply Chain
(SC)
Upstream SC
Green Purchasing
Downstream SC
Green Manufacturing
Green Packaging
Outcome
Reverse SC
Reverse Logistics
Strategic Choice Theory
• Firms have freedom of choice when formulating and implementing strategies.
• Strategic orientation focusses on firms’ strategic choices when facing external challenges.
• Strategic choice theory centers on the intra-organizational level and the provision of certain strategic capabilities.
• Firms use freedom of choice to influence firms’ orientation toward adopting sustainability initiatives.
• Ecological strategic orientation can influence the adoption of sustainable business practices.
Sustainable SCM Literature
• Sustainable SCs account for the environmental impacts
of products /services as they flow throughout the SC.
• Using reverse logistics as a SC business/environment
performance measure.
• Reverse logistics create tangible and intangible …
lable at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production 129 (2016) 608e621
Contents lists avai
Journal of Cleaner Production
journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ jc lepro
Critical success factors for reverse logistics in Indian industries: a
structural model
Sachin Kumar Mangla a, Kannan Govindan b, *, Sunil Luthra c
a Department of Mechanical Engineering, Graphic Era University, Dehradun, India
b Center for Sustainable Engineering Operations Management, Department of Technology and Innovation, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
c Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government Polytechnic, Jhajjar, Haryana, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 22 February 2015
Received in revised form
22 February 2016
Accepted 16 March 2016
Available online 12 April 2016
Keywords:
Reverse logistics (RL)
Critical success factors (CSFs)
Sustainability
AHP
DEMATEL
Indian manufacturing industries
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Govindan).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.124
0959-6526/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
a b s t r a c t
Industries face significant pressures to enact eco-friendly practices in their supply chain due to the
constraints of natural resources and growing ecological awareness among customers. Reverse logistics
(RL) has been considered as a systematic approach for industries to improve their environmental impacts
and to ensure sustainability in business. Industries are enthusiastic to adopt RL activities in their busi-
nesses, but they also face challenges such as insufficient knowledge and resources regarding RL imple-
mentation. Therefore, we seek to evaluate the critical success factors (CSFs) linked to the implementation
of RL in manufacturing industries in India. In this work, a structural model is proposed by using
Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)
methods to evaluate the CSFs in RL adoption. The AHP methodology assists in establishing the priorities
of the CSFs, while the DEMATEL approach categorizes the causal relationships among them. The findings
of this work shows that the Global competitiveness main factor is highly prioritized, and thus, needs to
be focused greatly in order to increase the effectiveness of RL adoption in business. The relative priority
of the remaining main factors through AHP analysis is given as Regulatory factors – HR and organizational
factors -Economic factors – Strategic factors. The findings also indicate that Global competitiveness;
Regulatory; HR and organizational main factors are classified under cause group, while Economic and
Strategic main factors belong to effect group. This model will help business analysts and supply chain
managers formulate both short-term and long-term, flexible decision strategies for successfully man-
aging and implementing RL adoption in the supply chain scenarios.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Conservation of the environment has taken a prime position
among areas of concern for managers and practitioners all across
the globe. Likewise, customers are more environmentally
conscious, which creates a demand for industries to adopt clean,
green, eco-friendly processes for their businesses (Millet, 2011;
Sarkis et al., 2011; Almeida et al., 2013; Seuring and Gold, 2013;
Luthra et al., 2014a, 2015a; Gandhi et al., 2015). Growing
competitive and financial pressures, diminishing product life cy-
cles, and stringent environmental rules have increased the
attention paid to green and Reverse Logistics (RL) activities that
industries embrace to improve their environmental impacts
(Subramoniam et al., 2009; Chan et al., 2012; Mangla et al., 2013;
Zhu and Geng, 2013). RL comprises all operations related to the
recovery and reuse of products and materials, and proves to be a
rational instrument for industries to improve their firms’ sus-
tainability in terms of ecological, economic, and social gains
(Schwartz, 2000; Sarkis, 2003, 2010; Zhang et al., 2011; Nikolaou
et al., 2013; Abdulrahman et al., 2014). In addition, RL opera-
tions and its related practices are also proven to be crucial in
reducing operational expenses (PricewaterhouseCoopers’ report,
2008). RL has gained attention among business organizations as
an effective, strategic approach to improving profitability, product
lifecycles, supply chain complexity, consumer preferences, and
reducing environmental impact (Thierry et al., 1995; Fleischmann
et al., 1997; Carter and Ellram, 1998; Van Hoek, 1999; Stock, 1998,
2001; Toffel, 2003; Neto et al., 2008; Tsai et al., 2009; Hu and
Bidanda, 2009; Gunasekaran and Spalanzani, 2012; Govindan
et al., 2015).
Delta:1_given name
Delta:1_surname
Delta:1_given name
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.124&domain=pdf
mailto:[email protected]
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.124&domain=pdf
www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09596526
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.124
S.K. Mangla et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 129 (2016) 608e621 609
However, the adoption and implementation of RL practices is
relatively difficult from industrial viewpoints. Many industries are
comparatively less familiar with how to initiate RL and what ben-
efits could be realized through implementing RL practices (Chan
and Kai Chan, 2008). To deal with this uncertainty, scholars and
practitioners have tried to isolate the important determinants of
initiation and implementation of RL among industries (Vijayan
et al., 2014).
Several factors are vital to the successful implementation of RL
in business, such as management commitment, globalization, reg-
ulations, consumer requirements, financial resources, competi-
tiveness, and benchmarking (Jindal and Sangwan, 2011; Chio et al.,
2012; Mangla et al., 2013). Given that these factors are critical for
industries in order to adopt RL efficiently (Chio et al., 2012), we
need to identify and evaluate the various Critical Success Factors
(CSFs) required for the implementation of RL practices in the in-
dustrial supply chain.
The goal of this work is to evaluate the CSFs related to initiation
and implementation of RL on tactical (or operational) and strategic
levels in business. It is no surprise that different industries may
exhibit different perceptions in adopting RL practices in their
respective businesses (Srivastava and Srivastava, 2006). To
acknowledge these considerations and to achieve the above
formulated objectives, a two phase-methodology is introduced and
used in this work. In the first phase, various CSFs that assist in the
implementation of RL from the industrial viewpoint are deter-
mined. For this phase, several different industries operational in the
western region of India were examined. A literature survey and
discussions from industrial experts resulted in a collection of the
most commonly accepted RL implementation CSFs. In the second
phase, the finalized common RL implementation CSFs were sub-
jected to evaluation, using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and
Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)
methods, through the input of industry and field experts. The AHP
method (Saaty, 1980) helps to prioritize or to identify the essential
RL implementation CSFs. On the other hand, the DEMATEL method
(Gabus and Fontela, 1972) is used to study the interrelationships
between the RL implementation CSFs with the help of a causal map.
It assists practicing managers and policy makers to prepare both
short-term and long-term flexible decision strategies that will
prove beneficial for performance improvements of RL imple-
mentation from an industrial perspective.
The remainder of the paper is arranged as follows. Literature
relevant to this work is discussed in Section 2. Section 3 provides
detail on the proposed research methods. The proposed research
framework is given in Section 4, and its application to Indian
manufacturing industries is presented in Section 5. Next, Section 6
identifies results obtained from the research and their implications.
Finally, research conclusions are presented in Section 7, along with
limitations and scope for future work.
2. Relevant literature
The present section includes the literature on RL implementa-
tion in industries in Indian context, RL implementation factors, and
draws the research gaps for this study.
2.1. Industrial RL implementation in India
RL can be expressed as the process of planning, implementing,
and regulating the efficient and cost effective flow of rawmaterials,
in-process inventory, finished goods, and related information from
the point of consumption to the point of origin for the purpose of
recapturing value or proper disposal (Rogers and Tibben-Lembke,
2001; De Brito and Dekker, 2004; Blumberg, 2005; Meade et al.,
2007; Wadhwa et al., 2009). With regard to the adoption and
implementation of RL initiatives, Abdulrahman et al. (2014) argued
that RL literature in developing countries context is still in its in-
fancy state. India accounts for approximately 17.5% of the world’s
population. Due to industrialization, manufacturing industries are
growing at a rapid pace, leading to the generation of a huge amount
of hazardous and non-hazardous waste. According to Comptroller
and Auditor- General’s (CAG) report, over 7.2 MT of industrial or
hazardous waste was generated in India in 2000, out of which 1.4
million tonswas recyclable, 0.1 million tons was incinerateable, and
5.2 million tons was destined for disposal on land (MoEF, 2000). In
addition, India Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB, 2000)
documented that some 41,523 industries in the country generate
about 7.90 million tons of hazardous/industrial waste every year, of
which recyclable hazardous waste is 3.98 million tons (50.38%),
landfill waste is 3.32 million tons (42.02%), and incinerateable
waste is 0.60 million tons (7.60%). The waste sector in India has
evolved greatly in last 15 years (from 2000 onwards) and waste is
generated in several forms such as industrial waste, e-waste, and
bio medical waste, municipal waste. According to the report of
Novonous waste management market in India is expected to be
worth US$ 13.62 billion by 2025. It is expected that. E-waste
management market is likely to grow at a compound annual
growth rate (CAGR) of 10.03% by 2025. Bio medical waste man-
agement market may grow at a CAGR of 8.41% (Novonous, 2014). In
addition, the generation andmanagement of Municipal SolidWaste
(MSW) is also becoming a serious problem for India. Indian MSW
management market is likely to grow at a CAGR of 7.14% by 2025.
Based on the latest report of CPCB (CPCB, 2014) 1, 27,486 Tons per
day (TPD) of MSW was generated in India in 2011e12. Of which,
only 15,881 TPD (12.50%) was processed for eco-friendly disposal
(MoEF, 2012e13). Recently, Kannan et al. (2016) suggested that
formal recycling of e-waste could contribute to sustainable society.
From these numbers, we can conclude that there is a substantial
scope of RL implementation within Indian industries that, if
implemented, would be crucial not only in reducing the amount of
waste but also in improving organizational, ecological, financial,
and competitive performance levels (MoEF, 2012e13).
RL is distinguished as a crucial means to lower the waste gen-
eration and to prevent pollution by managing the environmental
burden of products after their end-of-life (Ravi, 2012). However, the
concept of RL is not as popular among Indian business organiza-
tions (Ravi et al., 2005; Hung Lau and Wang, 2009; Sharma et al.,
2011). In India, this hesitance may be due to lack of support from
top management and other business partners; these decision
makers are often not ready to spend more money to implement RL
solutions after investing large amounts of capital to set up the fa-
cility and infrastructure (Ravi et al., 2005). Also, governmental
support has an influence on the strategic decision of RL imple-
mentation for any organization. Analyzing some RL studies relevant
to Indian contexts, Jindal and Sangwan (2011) listed and analyzed
sixteen barriers to the implementation of RL through their litera-
ture studies. They find that RL practices can play an important role
in achieving sustainability in Indian business contexts. In their
study, Sharma et al. (2011) analyzed barriers in context to Indian
industries for RL implementation and segregated factors into
driving factors and driven factors. Srivastava and Srivastava (2006)
examined several categories of products in order to make a sys-
tematic understanding of the possibility of implementing RL in
Indian context. Ravi et al. (2005) described the management of RL
operations by investigating a paper industry. Pati et al. (2008)
presented a mixed integer goal programming model to help in
the appropriate management of the RL system through paper
recycling in India. Govindan et al. (2012) analyzed third party RL
providers with the help of interpretive structural modeling by
S.K. Mangla et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 129 (2016) 608e621610
taking a case study from a tire company. Diabat et al. (2013)
examined the interaction among major barriers hindering the
implementation of third-party logistics in Indian manufacturing
industries. Lack of qualification for employees in third-party lo-
gistics provider and fear of employees of the firm have been found
as the most hindering barriers in implementation of third-party
logistics. Mangla et al. (2013) recognized and analyzed fourteen
variables related to the handling and returning of products by
closing the loop of a green focused supply chain in paper mill in-
dustries in an Indian perspective. Researchers have determined
that the different variables associated with the initiation and or
implementation of product recovery activities (i.e., RL initiatives)
are important to distinguish, and their subsequent analysis may
help the decision makers to achieve higher ecological-economic
benefits (Mangla et al., 2012).
In addition, in the 12th Five Years Plan (2012e2017), it appears
that RL is being practiced in India, but it is still in unorganized
sectors and not much consideration is given to improving envi-
ronmental performances. Under these considerations, Critical
Success Factors (CSFs) of RL implementation need to be identified
and analyzed more rigorously. This step would help industries in
India to implement RL in their respective businesses, and to
approach RL in a more organized chain. It will further assist Indian
industries to improve their economical, social, and environmental
performances, and it should strengthen sustainability in business
(Jindal and Sangwan, 2011).
2.2. RL implementation factors
Gonz�alez-Benito and Gonz�alez-Benito (2006) confirmed that
pressure from stakeholders and the values and beliefs endorsed by
the manager’s environmental awareness leads more quickly to the
implementation of eco-friendly practices in logistics operations. It
also reveals the fact that the organizations with environmentally
aware managers tend not to follow a reactive approach; instead,
they are more proactive towards eco-friendly requirements. How-
ever, in accordance with the study conducted by Chio et al. (2012),
the successful implementation of RL leads to improvisation in the
organization’s performance, financial position, and competitive
advantage. In the same work, these authors also insist that a suc-
cessful implementation of RL is only possiblewith topmanagement
support and commitments. The foremost requirement of all is the
integration of every function for a smooth flow of material in both
(forward and reverse) directions.
Nevertheless, there are several external and internal factors
governing the effective and efficient implementation of RL prac-
tices in the supply chain. Some of the external and internal factors
suggested by researchers are government regulations, customer
demand, policy entrepreneurs, support of top management,
stakeholder commitment, incentive systems, quality of inputs, and
vertical integration (Srivastava, 2008; Hung Lau and Wang, 2009;
Tsai et al., 2009; Rahman and Subramanian, 2012; Dowlatshahi,
2012). Ho et al. (2012) concluded that internal and external fac-
tors significantly influence RL. They suggest that financial and hu-
man resources play an important role in companies’
implementation of RL, whereas tangible resources do not have
much influence on the practice. They also declare that companies
with excellent collaboration and relationship with other business
partners can make use of RL more effectively and efficiently (Ho
et al., 2012). Rogers and Tibben-Lembke (1999) identified several
key RL management elements, including asset recovery, compact-
ing disposition cycle time, centralized return centers, gate keeping,
zero returns, negotiation, RL information systems, remanufacture
and refurbishment, financial management, and outsourcing. Carter
and Ellram (1998) listed some critical RL implementation factors
given as regulations, customer demand, policy entrepreneurs, and
so forth.
It has been stated that the critical (key) success factor theory
enables managers to know the importance of process improvement
for their company (Grimm et al., 2014). The theory of critical suc-
cess factors is primarily based on strategy research, which recog-
nizes the functions, activities, and measures to improve a
company’s competitive advantage from an organizational supply
chain context (Dinter, 2013; Vasconcellos and S�a, 1988). Hence, it is
important to align Critical Success Factors (CSFs) with the firm’s
desired outcome. However, constant supervision is required to
recognize CSF and its relevant activities to support decision making
and to develop high performance management systems, especially
in supply chains (Bai and Sarkis, 2012). Therefore, the identification
of CSF in terms of both how and why is important steps in adopting
and implementing RL initiatives from a supply chain context.
2.3. Research gaps
The benefits of RL implementation are not yet fully realized in
some of the world’s emerging economies. The adoption and
implementation of RL practices is also relatively difficult frommany
industrial viewpoints (Prakash and Brua, 2015). While a lot of
attention has been paid to the implementation of RL practices in
developed countries, there is still a lot to do in a developing country
like India (Jindal and Sangwan, 2011; Sharma et al., 2011;
Subramanian et al., 2014). Govindan et al. (2015) suggested in
their research that multi objective decision making is still a gap in
different studies as compared to single objective analyses in the
area of RL/CLSC. As real world problems are rarely single objective
only, it is necessary for researchers to pay more attention to multi
objective functions instead of single objective ones (Govindan et al.,
2015).
From the extensive literature, we observed that several enablers
and barriers exist to implement RL activities in the business (Jindal
and Sangwan, 2011; Chio et al., 2012; Bouzon et al., 2016). To the
best of our knowledge, the specific consideration of CSFs in the
implementation of reverse logistics to maximize sustainable ad-
vantages is not covered in the literature. Business organizations face
many complexities and challenges in implementing RL activities.
Thus, this work aims to identify the RL implementation CSFs to
provide a theoretical ground for the managers by showing the role
of identified CSFs in RL implementation initiatives. The identified
CSFs can help in understanding the realistic issues to adopting RL
practices from an organizational supply chain perspective. Hence,
within the framework and understanding of the theory of CSFs, the
present research seeks to identify and analyze CSFs to contribute to
successful implementation of reverse logistics from the Indian
manufacturing industry perspective. Tomeet the above highlighted
research gap, the AHP and DEMATEL methods have been used;
other details about the application of AHP and DEMATEL are given
in next section.
3. Research methods
This section presents the description of the proposed and uti-
lized research methods. The AHP method has been used to rank
factors according to their significance on the basis of industry ex-
perts’ opinion. However, there is a need to determine the causal
interactions between factors useful for managers in framing short-
term decision making strategies (Najmi and Makui, 2010). DEMA-
TEL is recognized as a powerful tool in dealing with the issue; it
portrays a basic concept of contextual relation among the elements
S.K. Mangla et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 129 (2016) 608e621 611
of the system. The DEMATEL method can evaluate decision ele-
ments by signifying the interdependence between them, which
may help policy makers to frame long-term decision strategies
(Chio et al., 2012). Thus, the AHP and the DEMATEL methods when
applied together will give a clearer illustration of use for industries
to plan both the tactical or operational and the strategic decision
strategies. However, the details of the research methods are given
in the following sub-sections.
3.1. AHP method
AHP, first introduced by Thomas L. Saaty (1980), is a flexible
multi criteria decision analysis technique, designed to solve un-
structured decision problems. The AHP technique is based on the
fundamentals of the decomposition of the problem, of the pair-
wise assessments, and finally of the generation and synthesis of
priority vector (Ho, 2008; Sarmiento and Thomas, 2010; Luthra
et al., 2015b). In contrast to the analytic network process (ANP),
AHP is a linear evaluation technique. On the other hand, it needs to
develop several pair-wise assessment matrices in ANP, and in
addition, it involves a complex survey process for non-expert’s
viewpoint (Harputlugil et al., 2011). The methodology of AHP en-
ables the managers to analyze the complicated system more easily
(Vaidya and Kumar 2006; Talib et al., 2011; Govindan et al., 2014;
Mani et al., 2014; Kumar et al., 2015; Mangla et al., 2015c). How-
ever, AHP has several limitations as well, given as (Ishizaka and
Labib, 2009):
� Rank reversal (i.e. changes in the importance ratings whenever
criteria or alternatives are added-to or deleted-from the initial
set of criteria or alternatives compared).
� The assumption of criteria independence.
� The use of judgment scales whilemaking pair-wise comparisons
may involve ambiguity and human bias.
The steps involved in employing the AHP methodology (Chang
et al., 2007; Madaan and Mangla, 2015) for this research are
described as below:
Step 1: To define the goal: The goal of this research, i.e. to
evaluate the success factors in implementation of RL, is defined.
Based on this, the factors and sub-factors are established that
help in structuring a decision hierarchy. The sources of literature
and expert judgments will be crucial for this.
Step 2: To collect data and form the pair-wise evaluations: In
this step, data is collected to frame the pair-wise evaluations
among factors. A judgment matrix (designated as ‘A’) is formed
which is used for calculating factor priorities. Let A1, A2 … An, be
the set of stimuli. The computed judgments on a pair of stimuli
Ai, Aj, are denoted as,
A ¼ �aij
�
where; i; j ¼ 1;2;&;n: (1)
The survey instrument in terms of questioners’ evaluation can
be used to collect data. Based on the data collected, the rating or
pair-wise evaluations among the factors are acquired by means of a
nine rating Saaty’s scale, which assists to achieve numerical
quantities representing the values of aij (elements of the pair-wise
comparison matrix) transformed from verbal judgments.
Step 3: To attain the Eigen values and Eigen vectors: In this step,
the framed pair-wise evaluation matrices were operated in or-
der to obtain the importance weights of the factors. Based on
obtained importance weights, the priority for the respective
factor is attained.
3.2. DEMATEL method
DEMATEL approach was developed by Science and Human Af-
fairs Program of the Battelle Memorial Institute of Geneva some-
where in 1972 and 1976 (Gandhi et al., 2015). This method relies on
graph theory, and enables an analysis of complicated problems by
means of visualization techniques (Lin, 2013). Compared to inter-
pretive structural modeling (ISM), the methodology of DEMATEL, on
the other hand, assists in capturing the contextual relations be-
tween elements in the system and defining the strength of their
interrelationships, as well (Wu, 2008). The procedural steps of
DEMATEL methodology (Tzeng and Huang, 2011; Jia et al., 2015)
with regard to this work is given as follows:
Step 1: To define the goal and factors to be evaluated: In this
step, a critical review of literature is required to explore and
gather relevant data. The expert’s judgment is also crucial in this
step for discussion on the issue to achieve the goal. The probable
factors associated with the effective implementation of RL are
selected and finalized as factors to be evaluated from the in-
formation gathered and expert judgments.
Step 2: To form the initial direct relation matrix and average
matrix (M): An initial relation matrix is formulated based on the
direct influence between any two factors and is obtained
through the expert’s judgment by asking them to score the
factor on the basis of scale given as, 0e ‘No influence’; 1e ‘Little
influence’; 2 e ‘High influence’; 3 e ‘Very high influence’.
If ‘n’ be the number of factors and ‘k’ be the number of re-
spondents with 1 � k � H, then for each respondent (n � n) non-
negative matrices can be established as Xk ¼ [xkij]. The notation
‘xij’ indicates the degree to which the expert conceives that factor i
affects factor j. Based on this, it can be possible to construct X1, X2,
X3 …, XH matrices given by H respondents respectively (H repre-
sents the number of experts). To incorporate all opinions from H
respondents, the average matrix or the average direct relation
matrix A ¼ [aij] is constructed by means of Eq. as follows:
mij ¼
1
H
XH
K¼1
xkij: (2)
Step 3: To compute the normalized direct-relation matrix (D):
The average matrix (M) is transformed into a normalized direct-
relation matrix by using the Eq. given below,
D ¼ M � S (3)
where, S ¼ min
2
6664
1
max
Pn
j¼1jmijj
; 1
max
Pn
i¼1jmijj
3
7775 .
Step 4: To attain the total relation matrix (T): The total relation
matrix (T) is computed by using the Eq. given below:
T ¼ DðI � DÞ�1 (4)
where ‘I’ is the identity matrix, after attaining the Matrix
T ¼ [tij]n�n, the summation of all the rows and columns are
calculated.
Let [ri]n�1 and [cj]1�n be the vectors representing the sum of
rows and sum of columns of the total relationmatrix respectively. ri
S.K. Mangla et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 129 (2016) 608e621612
summarizes both direct and indirect effects imparted by factor ‘i’ to
the other factors, whereas, cj depicts both direct and indirect effects
received by factor ‘j’ from the other factors. Sum (ri þ cj) known as
‘Prominence’ demonstrates the total effects given and received by
factor ‘i’, whereas the difference (ri – cj) known as ‘Relation’ dem-
onstrates the net effect through which factor ‘i’ impacts the system.
Specifically, if the value (ri – cj) is positive, factor ‘i’ is in the net
cause group, while factor ‘i’ will be in the net receiver group if the
value (ri – cj) is negative (Tzeng et al., 2007).
4. Proposed research framework
The research framework for evaluating the CSFs in effective
adoption and implementation of RL practices, based on the AHP
and DEMATEL methods, consists of three phases. Phase 1: identi-
fication of the most common RL implementation CSFs from litera-
ture resources and from industrial and field expert inputs. Phase 2:
prioritizing the CSFs to develop the short-term, flexible decision
plans in order to adopt RL practices using the AHPmethod. Phase 3:
analyzing the causal interactions among CSFs to formulate the
long-term, flexible decision strategies in order to adopt RL practices
using the DEMATEL method. The research framework for evalu-
ating the CSFs in implementation of RL in Indian manufacturing
industries is shown in Fig. 1.
5. An application example of the proposed model to
manufacturing industries in India
5.1. Data collection
The main source of the data collection is manufacturing com-
panies operational in the western region of India. A total of 50
manufacturing companies were targeted for the data collection.
These companies were covered under convenience sampling, not
Fig. 1. Proposed Rese
random sampling. Companies were selected on the basis of prior
experience and using personal contacts. There is no formula for
taking sample size in convenience sampling. It all depends upon
the on cost and resources needed for data analysis and time limits
to complete the project. Due to cost and resources and time con-
straints, it is assumed that the considered sample size would be
sufficient and representative of the population under analysis.
Further, after frequent phone calls, e-mails and meetings, 42
companies agreed …
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Resources, Conservation & Recycling
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec
Reverse logistics and closed-loop supply chain of Waste Electrical and
Electronic Equipment (WEEE)/E-waste: A comprehensive literature review
Md Tasbirul Islam⁎, Nazmul Huda⁎
School of Engineering, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia
A R T I C L E I N F O
Keywords:
Reverse logistics (RL)
Closed-loop supply chain (CLSC)
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
(WEEE)
E-waste management
Literature review
Sustainability
Circular economy
A B S T R A C T
Reverse logistics (RL) and the closed-loop supply chain (CLSC) are integral parts of the holistic waste man-
agement process. One of the important end-of-life (EOL) products considered in the RL/CLSC is Waste Electrical
and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)/E-waste. Numerous research papers were published in the RL and CLSC
disciplines focusing WEEE separately. However, there is no single review article found on the product-specific
issues. To bridge this gap, a total of 157 papers published between 1999 and May 2017 were selected, cate-
gorized, analyzed using content analysis method. The method involves four steps: material collection, de-
scriptive analysis, category selection and material evaluation. For the systematic literature review, the steps
were followed and four main types of research in the field of RL and CLSC of E-waste, namely designing and
planning of reverse distribution, decision making and performance evaluation, conceptual framework, and
qualitative studies were identified and reviewed. Research gaps in literature were diagnosed to suggest future
research opportunities. The review first of its kind that may provide a useful reference for academicians, re-
searchers and industry practitioners for a better understanding of WEEE focused RL/CLSC activities and re-
search.
1. Introduction
Due to growing environmental regulations, potential recovery of
valuable material resources for the secondary market, and sustainable
business practices, over the last twenty years, the concept of reverse
logistics (RL) has been accepted and widely practiced in manufacturing
industries all over the world. The definition of RL according to Stock
(1992) refers to “… the term often used for the role of logistics in re-
cycling, waste disposal and management of hazardous materials; a
broader perspective includes all issues relating to logistics activities
carried out in source reduction, recycling, substitution, reuse of mate-
rials and disposal”. This definition links directly RL activities in a waste
management scenario that provides a more holistic approach to re-
source conservation and recycling of end-of-life (EOL) products. As
waste generation by various industries is increasing at a skyrocketing
pace, many governments across the globe compel the producer/man-
ufacturer to implement the extended producer responsibility (EPR)
principle. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD), ‘’EPR is a policy approach under which
producers are given a significant responsibility – financial and/or
physical – for the treatment or disposal of post-consumer products’’
(OECD, 2017). With this instrument, manufacturers now have to
develop a sustainable reverse supply chain (RSC) besides the conven-
tional forward logistics (FL) system. According to Stevens (1989), a
forward supply chain (FSC) is’ ’a system consisting of material sup-
pliers, production facilities, distribution services, and customers who
are all linked together via the downstream feed-forward flow of mate-
rials (deliveries) and the upstream feedback flow of information (or-
ders)’’. On the other hand, when the FSC and RSC systems are con-
sidered in an integrated manner, the concept of the closed-loop supply
chain (CLSC) evolved. It considers efficient product return management
and conducts value recovery activities so that secondary materials can
be used as input for ‘’new’’ customer product. Rather considering legal,
social responsibilities, or even operational and technical details of the
FSC and RSC, the CLSC focuses explicitly on business perspectives of the
supply chains. According to Guide and Van Wassenhove (2009), ‘’CLSC
management is the design, control, and operation of a system to max-
imize value creation over the entire life cycle of a product with dynamic
recovery of value from different types and volumes of returns over
time’’. From the sustainability viewpoint in all three dimensions – so-
cial, economic and environmental – in conjunction with the circular
economy, RL/CLSC is an emerging area of research that attracts both
academic and industry practitioners. According to Geissdoerfer et al.
(2017), ‘’ A circular economy is a regenerative system in which resource
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.05.026
Received 20 November 2017; Received in revised form 21 March 2018; Accepted 24 May 2018
⁎ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M.T. Islam), [email protected] (N. Huda).
Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
Available online 01 June 2018
0921-3449/ © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
T
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09213449
https://www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.05.026
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.05.026
mailto:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.05.026
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.05.026&domain=pdf
input and waste, emission, and energy leakage are minimized by
slowing, closing, and narrowing the material and energy loops. This can
be achieved through long-lasting design, maintenance, repair, reuse,
remanufacturing, refurbishing, and recycling’’ and sustainability is de-
fined as the balanced integration of economic performance, social in-
clusiveness, and environmental resilience, to the benefit of current and
future generations. Based on the above definition of RL/CLSC, the
generic diagram can be illustrated as in Fig. 1.
Among the various EOL products identified in RL and CLSC re-
search, E-waste is found as a significant one. The question is how dif-
ferent is the RL and CLSC systems from a generic form when WEEE is
considered. A lot of previously published papers have not clearly spe-
cified the difference which is a drawback of some of the earlier studies.
E-waste possesses some special characteristics and features that
make its RL and CLSC systems unique from general RL and CLSC sys-
tems. WEEE is one of the fastest-growing streams at present due to a
shorter product lifecycle (PLC) and rapidly changing customer attitudes
towards disposing of them (Islam et al., 2016; Nnorom and Osibanjo,
2008). According to “Global E-waste Monitor Report 2017” published
by United Nations University (UNU), in the year 2016, 44.7 million
tonnes (Mt) of e-waste was generated in the world and only 20% was
recycled through proper channels (Baldé et al., 2017). This generation
volume is significant compared to other EOL items. For example, every
year, only 8 to 9 million tonnes of end-of-life vehicle (ELV) is generated
(Eurostat, 2018) which is 5 times less than the WEEE generation.
Globally, to tackle the emerging waste stream under comprehensive
WEEE management policies, several countries implemented regulations
towards minimizing the negative environmental impact and prioritizing
valuable resource recovery. To bind all the stakeholders legally in
managing E-waste, European Union (EU) is at the forefront. On 13th
August, 2012, the EU WEEE DIRECTIVE 2012/19/EU came into force
by which member countries in the EU are obliged to follow the recovery
and recycling target implementing EPR policy. According to the Di-
rective, E-waste is divided into ten different categories (until 15 August
2018) (Directive, 2012). Table 1 shows WEEE product categories with
target recovery and recycling rate.
In principle, complex processes of RL and CLSC start with the dis-
posal of EOL electrical and electronic equipment (EEE). However, in
WEEE’s return management, multiple factors along with a higher de-
gree of uncertainties such as quality, quantity and time are involved
(Chen and He, 2010). First, the huge amount of generation is coming
from three distinct sources: households, government and institutions,
and businesses (Li et al., 2006). Households dispose of a range of
equipment starting from large household equipment like refrigerators,
washing machines to small consumer electronics, mobile phone;
whereas information and communication technology (ICT) equipment
is largely discarded by organizations. On the other hand, for the same
equipment, average lifespan varies significantly. Second, the method of
E-waste collection from the sources varies substantially in terms of
collection points (e.g. municipality collection points, retailers, product
manufacturers, EEE repairs, third party recycling service provider
companies etc.) involved in a EOL-WEEE recovery process (Iacovidou
et al., 2017). For instance, households can discard their E-waste in a
number of ways: 1) at the municipal collection points, 2) leave it to
their kerbside, 3) drop it off at special events, 4) return back to re-
tailers/ point of purchase, and 5) return back to manufacturers/re-
cyclers appointed by manufacturer. For business and other organiza-
tions, leasing became increasingly popular and in this process, leasing
companies are responsible for EOL dispositions which further involve
RL service providers for transportation, local recyclers and small busi-
nesses that deal with reuse of EEE items. Disposing E-waste to perma-
nent drop-off locations is also practiced by institutions. Third, collected
quantities then transported to treatment facilities where WEEE goes
through testing, inspection, and sorting and dissembled according to
specific product categories before transferred for processing. An opti-
mized network design plays a crucial role in efficient and successful RL
processes. For example, in Switzerland, three take-back systems,
SWICO, SENS, Swiss Lighting Recycling Foundation (SLRS) together
established 6000 collection points by which 95% of the E-waste is
collected and recycled (SWICO, 2017). Fourth, depending upon the
material content and value proposition (i.e. quality of waste), five dif-
ferent disposition alternatives (e.g. reuse, repair, remanufacture and
Fig. 1. Generic diagram of CLSC including forward and reverse flow, adapted from Chopra and Meindl (2007).
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
49
recycling) exist which is often problematic selecting the best available
alternative. Top management of computer hardware industries strug-
gles to evaluate the ultimate fate of EOL-computers (Ravi et al., 2005a,
2005b). Large quantities of E-waste is also disposed of in landfills.
Compared to other EOL products, E-waste has a complex material
structure containing both environmentally hazardous substances (i.e.
mercury, cadmium, lead, chromium, poly/brominated flame re-
tardants, ozone-depleting chemicals such as CFC etc.) and valuable
critical raw materials (CRM), such as copper and gold (Kumar et al.,
2017). Physical and mechanical processing supply secondary materials
recovered from WEEE to the EEE and other industries (Işıldar et al.,
2017). Thus, RL and CLSC of E-waste are very unique in terms of as-
sociated collection and EOL options involved. Fig. 2 shows the CLSC
diagram of E-waste.
The number of international peer-reviewed articles published on
RL/CLSC issues focusing on WEEE is increasing considerably. However,
no single review has yet been conducted to summarize all the relevant
articles with a product-specific focus. To the best of the authors’
knowledge, this is the first attempt at reviewing RL/CLSC articles fo-
cused on WEEE. As the body of literature is growing considerably, this
review aims to provide a complete picture of the field, by categorizing
the content of the literature and reviewing it into four distinct research
types: designing and planning of reverse distribution, decision making
and performance evaluation, conceptual framework and qualitative
studies. After reviewing the articles, research gaps were identified and a
number of future research directions have been identified so that future
researchers can work in line with the research gaps in the field. The
paper is organized as follows: Section 2 discusses the research metho-
dology of the study. Section 3 provides a detailed analysis of the arti-
cles. Research gaps are analyzed and future research directions are
addressed in Section 4, and Section 5 reaches a conclusion.
2. Research methodology
A literature review plays a critical role in scholarship as well as it
helps to explore and structure thoroughly a particular research area
(Easterby-Smith et al., 2012; Vom Brocke et al., 2009). With a valid
literature review, knowledge on the concerning area can be further
advanced by identifying key conceptual contents that works as a path to
new theory development and new scope of investigation (Machi and
McEvoy, 2016; Meredith, 1993). For a systematic literature review, this
study implemented four steps processes as prescribed by Mayring
(2001) under the qualitative content analysis method: material collec-
tion, descriptive analysis, category selection and finally, material eva-
luation. Fig. 3 shows four steps process model for content analysis
method. An extensive description of the method can be found in
Mayring’s recent publication (Mayring, 2014). The application of the
method for reviewing supply chain management literature can be found
in papers by Seuring and Gold (2012) and Seuring et al. (2005). Several
of the previous review articles (non EOL product focused) in the RL/
CLSC field (e.g. Seuring and Gold (2012), Gold et al. (2010), Govindan
et al. (2015), Agrawal et al. (2015)) have implemented this metho-
dology.
2.1. Material collection
In this literature review material collection and unit of analysis is
the first step. A single journal article/conference paper/book chapter
was defined as unit of analysis. In this study, a two-phase process was
initiated. In the first phase, keywords such as ‘’reverse logistics’’ and
‘’closed-loop supply chain’’ along with ‘’WEEE or E-waste’’ were used in
title, abstract and keywords to carry article search. This keywords were
used in the Scopus (www.scopus.com), and Web of Science (WoS) da-
tabases with an option that search only the papers those written in
English. After analyzing title and abstract, further search of literature
were inductively connected with the categorization of RL/CLSC i.e.Ta
bl
e
1
W
EE
E
pr
od
uc
t
ca
te
go
ri
es
w
it
h
ta
rg
et
s
of
EU
W
EE
E
D
ir
ec
ti
ve
20
12
/1
9/
EU
,a
da
pt
ed
fr
om
Pé
re
z-
Be
lis
et
al
.(
20
15
)
C
at
eg
or
ie
s
un
ti
l
14
A
ug
us
t
20
18
Ta
rg
et
s
un
ti
l
14
A
ug
us
t
20
15
Ta
rg
et
s
fr
om
15
A
ug
us
t
20
15
C
at
eg
or
ie
s
fr
om
15
A
ug
us
t
20
18
Ta
rg
et
s
fr
om
15
A
ug
us
t
20
18
R
ec
ov
er
ed
(%
)
R
ec
yc
le
d
(%
)
R
ec
ov
er
ed
(%
)
Pr
ep
ar
ed
fo
r
re
-u
se
or
re
cy
cl
ed
(%
)
R
ec
ov
er
ed
(%
)
Pr
ep
ar
ed
fo
r
re
-u
se
or
re
cy
cl
ed
(%
)
1
La
rg
e
ho
us
eh
ol
d
ap
pl
ia
nc
es
80
75
80
80
1
Te
m
pe
ra
tu
re
ex
ch
an
ge
eq
ui
pm
en
t
85
80
2
Sm
al
l
ho
us
eh
ol
d
ap
pl
ia
nc
es
70
50
75
55
2
Sc
re
en
s,
m
on
it
or
s,
eq
ui
p.
w
it
h
su
rf
ac
e
sc
re
en
s>
10
0
cm
2
80
70
3
IT
an
d
te
le
co
m
m
un
ic
at
io
ns
eq
ui
pm
en
t
75
65
80
70
3
La
m
ps
–
80
4
El
ec
tr
on
ic
an
d
co
ns
um
er
eq
ui
pm
en
t
75
65
80
70
4
La
rg
e
eq
ui
pm
en
t
85
80
5
Li
gh
ti
ng
eq
ui
pm
en
t
70
50
75
55
5
Sm
al
l
eq
ui
pm
en
t
75
55
6
El
ec
tr
ic
al
an
d
el
ec
tr
on
ic
to
ol
s
70
50
75
55
6
Sm
al
l
IT
an
d
te
le
co
m
m
un
ic
at
io
n
eq
ui
pm
en
t
75
55
7
To
ys
,l
ei
su
re
an
d
sp
or
ts
eq
ui
pm
en
t
70
50
75
55
8
M
ed
ic
al
de
vi
ce
s
70
50
75
55
9
M
on
it
or
in
g
an
d
co
nt
ro
l
in
st
ru
m
en
ts
70
50
75
55
10
A
ut
om
at
ic
di
sp
en
se
rs
80
75
85
80
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
50
http://www.scopus.com
designing and planning of reverse distribution, decision making and
performance evaluation, conceptual framework and qualitative studies
(e.g. survey, interview etc.). In this case, some of the essential key
words were utilized, for instance, ‘’open-loop network design’’, closed-
loop network design’’, ‘’third-party reverse logistics provider’’, ‘’vehicle
routing’’, ‘’product recovery’’, ‘’organization and business perspective’’,
product return’’ and ‘’reverse logistics processes’’; along with the
mandatory search term ‘’reverse logistics’’, ‘’closed-loop supply chain’’
and ‘’WEEE/E-waste’’. Besides, those studies that have considered waste
battery and printer cartridges were also included in this study. Total
258 papers were retrieved and all collected papers were taken into
consideration for a fast check of relevancy and final content for the
literature review. Articles those found most relevant to the above
mention categorization were considered for this study. Finally, total
157 papers were selected, reviewed and analyzed in detail. Besides,
journal articles, in the final collection 26 conference papers and 3 book
chapters are included. The selection of the papers for this state-of-the-
art review seems sufficient because of concentration (e.g. RL/CLSC of
WEEE) on particular issues.
2.2. Descriptive analysis
To understand the broad range of concepts, motivation, modeling
approach to a specific problem, papers were arranged from more than
sixty journals. Fig. 2 shows the articles published by numerous outlets.
From Fig. 4, it is found that most of the papers were published in re-
nowned journals such as International Journal of Production Research,
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Waste Management, International
Journal of Production Economics and Production and Operations Manage-
ment.
Annual distribution of the number of papers published from the year
1999 to 2017 in both RL and CLSC is shown in Fig. 5. Most of the papers
were selected from recent publications. 20 papers out of 157 papers
were published before the year 2006, whereas rest of the articles (135)
were selected from the year 2006 and afterward. The highest number of
papers were published in the year 2010. From this trend, it is clear that
the number of published papers is growing considerably in the last few
years due to the increasing interest of WEEE centric RL/CLSC analysis.
Fig. 2. Closed-loop supply chain of E-waste.
Fig. 3. Summary of the steps involved in qualitative content analysis citied in Seuring et al. (2005).
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
51
2.3. Category selection
The main categorization of the content of this study and research
framework is presented in the Fig. 6. As mentioned in the material
collection section, the literature is classified into 4 major research
types/categories. These four categories are (1) Designing and planning
of reverse distribution (DPRD); (2) Decision making and performance
evaluation; (3) conceptual framework based studies; (4) Qualitative
studies. Distribution of research articles for 4 different categories is
shown in Fig. 7. DPRD has the highest percentage (55%) of publications
whereas other categories possess less percentage which depicts the
necessity for future exploration of these areas under the broad RL/CLSC
of WEEE research field.
Open-loop network design (OLND), closed-loop network design
(CLND), third-party reverse logistics provider (3PRLP) selection and
vehicle routing (VR) related papers fall broadly under the category of
DPRD. The highest number of papers (51 papers) were published in the
OLND sub-category. Fig. 8 shows the trend of published papers in the
DPRD research area. The papers in the main field of research were
further sub-categorized into specific issues (that evolved during
Fig. 4. Number of papers published in journals, conferences and book chapters.
Fig. 5. Annual distribution of the published papers (157 papers: 1999-2017).
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
52
material collection and category selection stages) which are shown in
Fig. 9.
2.4. Material evaluation
The last and final stage of the content analysis process is the ma-
terial evaluation. Rigor in validity is attained by validation test per-
formed by two researchers using the deductive and inductive ap-
proaches simultaneously. Reliability of the content was measured by
both intra-rater reliability and inter-rater reliability. After material
collection, all necessary information extracted from the selected articles
were input in spreadsheet software conducted by the researchers by
which repetition error by the researchers was minimized. With the
same keywords used to search the articles were utilized in the google
scholar database, and two researchers found the similar results in
identifying correct articles and coding their content in a spreadsheet
application. With this reliability was established. Through searching
and cross-checking the publications independently, sufficiency, as well
as the validity of the correct content of the collected paper, was ac-
cepted.
3. In-depth analyses of the literature
3.1. Analyzing papers on DPRD
The primary concern of DPRD is to design collection and
Fig. 6. Categorization and research framework of the studies.
Fig. 7. Distribution of research articles for different categories.
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
53
transportation network and vehicle route for EOL product acquisition.
This specific task also signifies the planning, functions and logistics
capability of stakeholders/actors engaged in the networks and how FSC
and RSC could be integrated from CLSC perspective. According to
Fleischmann et al. (1997), the performance of a reverse distribution
channel mainly depends on three major issues: 1) actors involved in the
reverse distribution channel, 2) locations and functions carried out in
the channel and 3) relation between FSC and RSC. As mentioned ear-
lier, a considerable number of papers have been published with this
issue in four major sub-categories which are 1) Open-loop network
Fig. 8. Number of articles published on DPRD.
Fig. 9. Issues of the main research fields of RL/CLSC of WEEE.
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
54
Ta
bl
e
2
Su
m
m
ar
y
of
th
e
W
EE
E/
E-
w
as
te
O
LN
D
st
ud
ie
s
R
ef
er
en
ce
M
od
el
fo
cu
s
O
bj
ec
ti
ve
fu
nc
ti
on
s
U
nc
er
ta
in
ti
es
/
co
ns
tr
ai
nt
s
co
ns
id
er
ed
in
th
e
m
od
el
U
ti
liz
ed
m
od
el
in
g
ap
pr
oa
ch
So
lv
ed
by
Su
st
ai
na
bi
lit
y
di
m
en
si
on
co
ns
id
er
ed
C
ou
nt
ry
Sh
ok
ou
hy
ar
an
d
A
al
ir
ez
ae
i
(2
01
7)
Fa
ci
lit
y
lo
ca
ti
on
–
–
M
at
he
m
at
ic
al
m
od
el
in
g
G
A
So
ci
al
,E
co
no
m
ic
an
d
En
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
Ir
an
Q
ia
ng
an
d
Zh
ou
(2
01
6)
N
et
w
or
k
de
si
gn
an
d
op
ti
m
iz
at
io
n
M
in
im
um
co
st
of
ne
tw
or
k
op
er
at
io
n
Q
ua
nt
it
y
of
re
cy
cl
ed
,r
eu
se
d
an
d
di
sp
os
ed
W
EE
E
M
IL
P
Si
m
ul
at
io
n
–
LI
N
G
O
Ec
on
om
ic
C
hi
na
Y
u
an
d
So
lv
an
g
(2
01
6)
D
es
ig
ni
ng
an
d
pl
an
ni
ng
of
a
ge
ne
ri
c
m
ul
ti
-s
ou
rc
e,
m
ul
ti
-e
ch
el
on
R
L
sy
st
em
C
os
t
an
d
ca
rb
on
em
is
si
on
G
en
er
at
io
n
of
W
EE
E,
pr
ic
e
of
re
cy
cl
ed
pr
od
uc
ts
,
pr
ic
e
of
re
cy
cl
ed
m
at
er
ia
ls
,
di
ff
er
en
t
so
ur
ce
s
of
W
EE
E
an
d
th
e
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
in
fl
ue
nc
e
St
oc
ha
st
ic
–
m
ix
ed
-i
nt
eg
er
pr
og
ra
m
m
in
g
(M
IP
)
Sa
m
pl
e
av
er
ag
e
ap
pr
ox
im
at
io
n
m
et
ho
d
Ec
on
om
ic
an
d
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
N
or
w
ay
A
yv
az
et
al
.(
20
15
)
O
pt
im
um
lo
ca
ti
on
s
fo
r
co
lle
ct
in
g,
so
rt
in
g
an
d
re
cy
cl
in
g
ce
nt
er
s
Pr
ofi
t
m
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
R
et
ur
n
qu
an
ti
ty
,s
or
ti
ng
ra
ti
o
(q
ua
lit
y)
,
an
d
tr
an
sp
or
ta
ti
on
co
st
St
oc
ha
st
ic
pr
og
ra
m
m
in
g
Sa
m
pl
e
av
er
ag
e
ap
pr
ox
im
at
io
n
m
et
ho
d
Ec
on
om
ic
Tu
rk
ey
El
ba
dr
aw
y
et
al
.(
20
15
)
Fa
ci
lit
y
lo
ca
ti
on
an
d
m
at
er
ia
l
fl
ow
To
ta
l
C
os
t
m
in
im
iz
at
io
n
–
M
at
he
m
at
ic
al
m
od
el
in
g
G
A
Ec
on
om
ic
Eg
yp
t
K
ili
c
et
al
.(
20
15
)
Fa
ci
lit
y
lo
ca
ti
on
an
d
m
at
er
ia
l
fl
ow
Pr
ofi
t
m
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
w
it
h
m
in
im
um
po
llu
ti
on
R
et
ur
ne
d
pr
od
uc
t
qu
an
ti
ty
St
oc
ha
st
ic
-M
IL
P
–
Ec
on
om
ic
an
d
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
Tu
rk
ey
C
ho
ng
et
al
.(
20
14
)
Fa
ci
lit
y
lo
ca
ti
on
de
si
gn
Pr
ofi
t
fr
om
re
se
lli
ng
of
re
fu
rb
is
he
d
co
m
pu
te
rs
–
M
at
he
m
at
ic
al
m
od
el
in
g
–
Ec
on
om
ic
M
al
ay
si
a
A
yv
az
an
d
Bo
la
t
(2
01
4)
W
ho
le
ne
tw
or
k
de
si
gn
C
os
t
m
in
im
iz
at
io
n
R
et
ur
ne
d
pr
od
uc
t
qu
an
ti
ty
an
d
qu
al
it
y
St
oc
ha
st
ic
pr
og
ra
m
m
in
g
C
PL
EX
Ec
on
om
ic
Tu
rk
ey
Li
u
et
al
.(
20
14
)
Ev
al
ua
ti
on
of
en
te
rp
ri
se
lo
gi
st
ic
s
ca
pa
bi
lit
y
st
an
da
rd
C
os
t
m
in
im
iz
at
io
n
an
d
pr
ofi
t
m
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
Q
ua
lit
y
of
re
cy
cl
in
g
pr
od
uc
ts
,
re
co
ve
ry
ti
m
e
M
ul
ti
–
ob
je
ct
iv
e
pr
og
ra
m
us
in
g
LI
N
D
O
,
Th
eo
ry
of
co
ns
tr
ai
nt
s
W
IT
N
ES
S
Ec
on
om
ic
C
hi
na
Sh
ok
oh
ya
r
an
d
M
an
so
ur
(2
01
3)
D
es
ig
ni
ng
an
d
op
ti
m
iz
at
io
n
of
co
lle
ct
io
n
ce
nt
er
lo
ca
ti
on
s
an
d
re
cy
cl
in
g
pl
an
ts
M
ax
im
um
of
pr
ofi
t
an
d
so
ci
al
be
ne
fi
ts
w
it
h
m
in
im
um
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
im
pa
ct
W
EE
E
ge
ne
ra
ti
on
ra
te
M
IP
an
d
si
m
ul
at
io
n
A
na
ly
ti
c
hi
er
ar
ch
y
pr
oc
es
s
(A
H
P)
an
d
A
re
na
so
ft
w
ar
e
So
ci
al
,e
co
no
m
ic
an
d
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
Ir
an
Y
u
an
d
So
lv
an
g
(2
01
3)
W
ho
le
R
L
ne
tw
or
k
de
si
gn
M
in
im
iz
at
io
n
of
co
st
an
d
gr
ee
nh
ou
se
ga
s
em
is
si
on
–
Bi
-o
bj
ec
ti
ve
M
IP
Ec
on
om
ic
an
d
so
ci
al
N
or
w
ay
X
ie
et
al
.(
20
13
)
O
pt
im
iz
at
io
n
of
re
us
e
R
L
ne
tw
or
k
–
–
–
EC
A
Ec
on
om
ic
C
hi
na
A
ch
ill
as
et
al
.(
20
12
)
N
et
w
or
k
de
si
gn
an
d
op
ti
m
iz
at
io
n
w
it
h
tr
an
sp
or
ta
ti
on
m
ed
ia
fo
cu
s
C
os
t
an
d
em
is
si
on
m
in
im
iz
at
io
n
–
M
ul
ti
-o
bj
ec
ti
ve
s
LP
–
Ec
on
om
ic
an
d
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
G
re
ec
e
D
at
et
al
.(
20
12
)
O
pt
im
al
fa
ci
lit
y
lo
ca
ti
on
s
an
d
m
at
er
ia
l
fl
ow
s
M
in
im
iz
in
g
to
ta
l
pr
oc
es
si
ng
co
st
–
A
M
at
he
m
at
ic
al
Pr
og
ra
m
m
in
g
La
ng
ua
ge
(A
M
PL
)
C
PL
EX
Ec
on
om
ic
Ta
iw
an
A
ss
av
ap
ok
ee
an
d
W
on
gt
ha
ts
an
ek
or
n
(2
01
2)
D
ev
el
op
m
en
t
of
R
L
in
fr
as
tr
uc
tu
re
–
–
M
IP
an
d
si
m
ul
at
io
n
St
at
is
ti
ca
l
an
al
ys
es
Ec
on
om
ic
U
SA
Pi
pl
an
i
an
d
Sa
ra
sw
at
(2
01
2)
D
es
ig
n
an
d
op
ti
m
iz
at
io
n
of
se
rv
ic
e
ne
tw
or
k
M
in
im
iz
at
io
n
of
th
e
to
ta
lc
os
t
N
um
be
r
of
re
tu
rn
ed
pr
od
uc
ts
,
pe
rc
en
t
of
fa
ul
ty
pr
od
uc
ts
an
d
w
ar
ra
nt
y
fr
ac
ti
on
M
IL
P
C
PL
EX
Ec
on
om
ic
Si
ng
ap
or
e
C
ao
an
d
Zh
an
g
(2
01
1)
O
pt
im
al
fl
ow
di
st
ri
bu
ti
on
of
W
EE
E
in
an
R
L
ne
tw
or
k
M
ax
im
iz
at
io
n
of
to
ta
l
pr
ofi
t
–
Ev
ol
ut
io
na
ry
al
go
ri
th
m
–
(n
on
-d
om
in
at
ed
so
rt
in
g
ge
ne
ti
c
al
go
ri
th
m
–
N
SG
A
)
Th
e
Te
ch
ni
qu
e
fo
r
O
rd
er
of
Pr
ef
er
en
ce
by
Si
m
ila
ri
ty
to
Id
ea
l
So
lu
ti
on
(T
O
PS
IS
)
Ec
on
om
ic
an
d
En
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
l
C
hi
na
W
an
g
et
al
.(
20
11
)
Fa
ci
lit
y
lo
ca
ti
on
O
pt
im
um
nu
m
be
r
of
lo
ca
ti
on
s,
ca
pa
ci
ti
es
of
co
lle
ct
io
n
sp
ot
s
an
d
di
sp
os
al
st
at
io
ns
at
m
in
im
um
di
su
ti
lit
y
of
co
ns
um
er
.
–
M
ul
ti
-o
bj
ec
ti
ve
in
te
ge
r
pr
og
ra
m
m
in
g
(I
P)
So
ci
al
an
d
Ec
on
om
ic
C
hi
na
Be
re
ke
tl
i
et
al
.(
20
11
)
W
EE
E
tr
ea
tm
en
t
st
ra
te
gy
–
–
M
ul
ti
-a
tt
ri
bu
te
gr
ou
p
de
ci
si
on
m
ak
in
g
m
od
el
Fu
zz
y
lin
ea
r
pr
og
ra
m
m
in
g
te
ch
ni
qu
e
fo
r
m
ul
ti
di
m
en
si
on
al
an
al
ys
is
of
pr
ef
er
en
ce
(L
IN
M
A
P)
So
ci
al
an
d
Ec
on
om
ic
Tu
rk
ey
G
om
es
et
al
.(
20
11
)
W
EE
E
re
co
ve
ry
ne
tw
or
k
M
in
im
iz
e
to
ta
l
ne
tw
or
k
co
st
–
M
IP
an
d
G
en
er
al
A
lg
eb
ra
ic
M
od
el
in
g
Sy
st
em
(G
A
M
S)
C
PL
EX
Ec
on
om
ic
Po
rt
ug
al
(c
on
tin
ue
d
on
ne
xt
pa
ge
)
M.T. Islam, N. Huda Resources, Conservation & Recycling 137 (2018) 48–75
55
Ta
bl
e
2
(c
on
tin
ue
d)
R
ef
er
en
ce
M
od
el
fo
cu
s
O
bj
ec
ti
ve
fu
nc
ti
on
s
U
nc
er
ta
in
ti
es
/
co
ns
tr
ai
nt
s
co
ns
id
er
ed
in
th
e
m
od
el
U
ti
liz
ed
m
od
el
in
g
ap
pr
oa
ch
So
…
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reverse logistics in e-business: Optimal price and return policy
Mukhopadhyay, Samar K;Setoputro, Robert
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management; 2004; 34, 1/2; ProQuest
pg. 70
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.