Minelle Enéas da Silva
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
E-mail: minele-silva@hotmail.com
Luis Felipe Nascimento
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
E-mail: nascimentolf@gmail.com
Submission: 02/01/2015
Revision: 14/01/2015
Accept: 23/01/2015
ABSTRACT
From
sustainability perspective, the supply chain management strategy can use
different indicators related to Triple Bottom Line to improve its practices.
Some studies on the topic have focused only environmental issues; however in
some cases the social issues should be considered as a core of the sustainable
strategies. Considering this view, the paper aims to highlight the relevance of
social issues in the Brazilian context toward sustainable supply chain.
Therefore, a theoretical essay was conducted using the literature about
sustainable supply chain in relation to the Brazilian perspective to understand
how it is possible to use new approaches seeking an emphasis on social issues.
The discussions indicate that to re-conceptualize the social relations in
supply chains, it's necessary to use corporate social responsibility and social
capital approaches to create a better discussion about sustainable supply
chain. This study starts a discussion in the Brazilian context to stimulate new
scholars to research this topic.
Keywords:
Sustainability; Supply Chain Management;
Social Issues; Brazil; Corporate Social Responsibility; Social Capital.
1. INTRODUCTION
From discussion
regarding new practices and behaviors in the society, studies emerged on
sustainable development. This concept is understood as “a process of change in
which the exploration of resources, the
direction of investments, the orientation of technological development and
institutional change are all in harmony” as well as indicates that human needs
can be met now and in the future (WORLD COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT [WCDE], 1987, p.43). This topic aims a harmony among three dimensions
practiced by different social actors, namely: economic, environmental, and
social (SACHS, 2007).
There
are a lot of research trying to understand the sustainability dimensions, which
can be focusing: urban sustainability, sustainable management, environmental
sustainability, weak and strong sustainability, or just ‘sustainability’, even
so we still have a great demand in relation to Triple Bottom Line as a whole (VALLENCE
et al., 2011). However, as presented by Vallence et al. (2011) the scholars are
presenting low concerns with organizational and operational aspects on social
sustainability, for example. Thus, mostly talking about needs and aspirations
in emerging economies it would be impossible to forget the social dimension of
sustainability.
Considering
this view, it is clear that business has a relevant contribution in new discussions
and can influence directly for a transformation in relationships with other
stakeholders. Therefore, Halldórsson et al. (2009, p.89) reflects in relation
to current theoretical approaches and practices in supply chain management
(SCM): “how can sustainability be integrated in the SCM approach? Is
sustainability coherent, complementary or contradictory to the traditional SCM
approach?” Actually we don’t have responses, but it is noticeable that with new
roles among different stakeholders the sustainable management can be easier.
Previous
studies between environmental and organizational performance in developing
countries have not been extensive (ZHU; SARKIS, 2007, p.4334), which present
themselves even more limited in relation to social issues. Thus, this paper
aims to highlight the relevance of social issues in the Brazilian context toward
sustainable supply chain. The argument is based on the idea that the sustainability
concept needs to be rethought in relation to the “local” level that can be
inserted in the discussion as a whole. Up to here we consider the sustainable
supply chain management (SSCM) as a main concept studied, but we can increase
the discussion and try deepens the perspective when discussing emerging
economies.
The
sustainability perspective is being introduced in the research mainstream in
supply chain management (BESKE; SEURING, 2014), but few studies consider an
effective approach between the core of the themes (ASHBY et al., 2012; CARTER;
ROGERS, 2008; CARTER; EASTON, 2011; SEURING; MÜLLER, 2008b). Thus, seeking to
demonstrate the originality of our theoretical discussion, we understand that
in some cases the social dimension should be considered as the core of the
sustainable strategies, so that on a second stage the development of
environmental strategies becomes possible, mostly related to some features of
the context.
Therefore,
methodologically, this study is a theoretical essay, because it is not
restricted to analyzing what the literature shows, but is set up as a
reflective writing that seeks to establish relationships and proposes
discussions that enrich the debate about sustainable consumption (MENEGHETTI,
2011). To clarify the purpose, this paper is divided into four distinct parts.
After this introduction, the next section presents the theoretical view about
sustainability and SCM. In the third section, we indicate the discussion about
the social issues in SSCM. After that, in the next sections, we bring some discussions
and conclusions, showing the Brazilian perspective on the topic.
2. SUSTAINABILITY AND SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
Debates
on the changes around the world are being conducted over three decades and
their agendas are always the relation between the human being and the
environment in which mutual interaction is observed. In this new context,
emerge the sustainable development that indicates to be necessary to search the
transformation rather than maintaining the status quo (HOPWOOD et al., 2005). According
to Schumacher (2001), based on the sustainable development model these changes
can be aligned both to the reduction of goods productions and services, which
generate a large environmental impact and a huge consumption rate in the society.
The
Agenda 21 report (1992) shows different actions which stakeholders can use to
make decisions in developing their activities. The business role in this
context demonstrates that it is necessary to incorporate the Triple Bottom Line
perspective among other things, with more relationships along its value chain
focusing on the dynamic’s market (ELKINGTON, 2002). For Peattie (2007), this
idea can be corroborated because the businesses are within an economic and
social system. Moreover, they need to direct their opportunities and practices
according to a set of guidelines for sustainability. One opportunity in this
way is the inter-organizational relationships.
There
are many inter-organizational relationships, which can be highlighted: Alliances,
Joint Ventures, Vertical Relationships, Franchising, Cross-sector Partnerships,
and Networks (PARMIGIANI; RIVERA-SANTOS, 2011). Among these relationships, the
focus for this paper is on the vertical relationship, specifically in the
supply chain. According to Parmigiani and Rivera-Santos (2011), some
traditional scholars indicate that an inter-organizational relationship
facilitates achieving greater efficiency and valuable resources. From another
perspective watching the partnerships that are created, it is emphasized that
the activities are more effective and that the inter-organizational and
interpersonal relationships are reinforced.
According
to Burgess et al. (2006), there is little consensus on the supply chain concept,
which is understood as a discipline that is still very fragmented (GIUNIPERO et
al., 2008). It is assumed that the supply chain is “a set of three or more
entities (organizations or individuals) directly involved in the upstream and
downstream flows of products, services, finances and/or information from a
source to a consumer” (MENTZER et al., 2001, p.4). With this perspective, a
network of multiple businesses and relationships, the supply chain needs to be
managed is understood, emerging the supply chain management (SCM) concept (CHEN;
PAULRAJ, 2004; LAMBERT; COOPER, 2000). Thus, SCM is defined as:
The systemic, strategic
coordination of the traditional business functions and the tactics across these
business functions within a particular company and across businesses within the
supply chain, for the purposes of improving the long-term performance of the
individual companies and the supply chain as a whole (MENTZER
et al., 2001, p.18).
For
Burgess et al. (2006) this can be considered as a clearer definition for the topic.
According to these authors, due to the lack of consistency in relation to the
existing theoretical concept itself, one should seek to overcome the obstacle
in relation to operations, which receives the greater focus on research on the
topic, and try to adequate other views such as those related to strategic and
organizational studies. In contrast, Giunipero et al. (2008) argue that the
strategy issue got a jump research at the beginning of this century, thus
requiring other insights. It is noteworthy that the term SCM is well
established in theory, what is missing is greater consistency in its
theoretical discussion (BURGESS et al., 2006).
At
the current discussions on the relationship between supply chain and
sustainability, the SSCM concept is more widespread. As presented by Ashby et
al. (2012) the initial discussions under this perspective point out to the year
2003, but only in 2008 a wider range of articles was being published about the
concept. This perspective is reaffirmed by Touboulic and Walker (2015) in its
literature review. According to Carter and Easton (2011), this discussion has
grown larger, because sustainability after becoming a big buzzword in the
business world can be seen as a business license for the 21st century. Despite
this purely economic and limited vision, it is not seen as the most widespread
among the researchers of the subject.
In its
literature review, Carter and Easton (2011) demonstrate that between 1991 and 2000
no item has been worked on sustainability; between 2001 and 2010 that he began
to work with CSR (18.75%); and between 2001 and 2010 only 25% of the articles
analyzed properly used sustainability. This view was also presented by Carter
and Rogers (2008) when they argue that most definitions of sustainability
incorporates economic and environmental concerns as well as conceptualizations
of CSR seeking to align social and environmental issues. From this view, in Table
1 are presented the main frameworks published to analyze the SSCM topic.
As can
be seen in the Table we identify some existing frameworks, but have some
weaknesses especially to understand which the main features that facilitate the
better integration between sustainability and SCM are. The perspective
emphasized in these frameworks considers sustainability as a moderator in the
relations of the supply chain, leaving no clear contribution and better
alignment between the topics. From this view, against the current
configuration, it is understood that the discussion should create a deepen
perspective, because the processes are rarely considered. Currently the most
widespread concept on SSCM is:
[…] as the management of
material, information and capital flows as well as cooperation among companies
along the supply chain while taking goals from all three dimensions of
sustainable development, i.e., economic, environmental and social, into account
which are derived from customer and stakeholder requirements (SEURING; MÜLLER,
2008b, p. 1700).
Table
1: Main frameworks on SSCM
Authors |
Frameworks Outline |
Carter and Rogers
(2008) |
Have the dimensions of sustainability possible paths to follow,
however so widely that it is not known at what time the rapprochement between
the themes can be practiced or even encouraged in other chains that are not
sustainable. |
Seuring and Müller
(2008b) |
Demonstrate which the strategies to be implemented (1) management of
suppliers for risk assessment and performance, and (2) management of the
supply chain for sustainable products, however, do not know what the limit
relations among the subjects. |
Pagell and Wu (2009) |
It is highlighted as possible features for a more sustainable supply
chain: (1) existence of best practices, (2) re-conceptualization of the
entire chain, and (3) integration between chain links. Despite this
perspective, there seems to be a greater focus on discussion of the
environmental dimension of sustainability in the definition. |
Wolf (2011) |
Presents a possibility to observe as tangible the internal sustainable
aspects of focal firm and its interaction with the other participants in the
supply chain, a framework that is quite a direct and clear vision of what can
be studied. |
Source: Own, based on Carter and Rogers (2008); Seuring and Müller
(2008b); Pagell and Wu (2009); Wolf (2011).
As
shown in the academic literature, other authors studying supply chain
management has understood sustainability from the concept of the Triple Bottom
Line (ASHBY et al., 2012; CARTER; ROGERS, 2008; FABBE-COSTES et al., 2011; GLOVER
et al., 2014; PAGELL; WU, 2009; SEURING; MÜLLER, 2008a, 2008b), which searches
through the appropriation of the idea of sustainable development to the
business context, seeking a greater contribution from business for a change
following the idea of shared collective value. Nevertheless, the issues are
still not completing fully; it still needs deeper literature on the subject.
According
to Ahi and Searcy (2013), at least twelve definitions can be observed in papers
of SSCM. However, it is clear that there is some theoretical lack regarding how
to integrate social and environmental sustainability in the context, since much
has been on specific dimensions, primarily the environmental, but there are few
papers with the integrated perspective, even suggesting the prospect of dealing
with TBL (CARTER; EASTON, 2011; FABBE-COSTES et al., 2011; PAGELL; WU, 2009;
SEURING; MÜLLER, 2008B; SVENSSON, 2007; WOLF, 2011). This is clear and receives
greater emphasis mainly with regard to the social dimension, which is forgotten
at the beginning of the discussions.
Focusing
in this essay the social issues, we understand social sustainability as a set
of 'human' elements geared towards total sustainability. Therefore, Vallence et
al. (2011) propose as targeting approaches to study this dimension in relation
to others: Development sustainability (addressing basic needs, the creation of
social capital, justice and so on); Bridge sustainability (Concerning changes
in behavior so as to achieve the bio-physical environmental goals); Sustainability
and Maintenance (referring to the preservation, or what can be sustained, of
socio-cultural characteristics in the face of change). The discussion considers
even beyond the individual actions, but in the supply chain as a whole.
In
the Brazilian context there are still few researches that assume the SSCM
concept in its entirety (BRITO; BERARDI, 2010; CARVALHO; BARBIERI, 2013;
GONÇALVES-DIAS et al., 2012; SILVA et al., 2013), seeking to create a national logic
about the topic. These authors work with the perspective of the TBL as well as
the interaction of different actors (multi-stakeholder) as influencing the
structure of the supply chain. There are other authors who intend to study with
the theme, but that make confusion between concepts and research in reverse
logistics, environmental management and green supply chain management as
synonyms of SSCM, which is not possible.
This perspective
was evident in the research by Silva et al. (2013), which from a literature
review in major Brazilian journals and conferences identified a limited number
of articles that consider the matter at its completion. Moreover, according to
these authors should be major concerns with translation and adjustments made, which
can potentially affect the continuation of studies on the subject. Thus,
Brazilian researches have not focused on supply chain and relationships as a
whole, only on specific aspects of operations (BRITO; BERARDI, 2010; GONÇALVES-DIAS
et al., 2012). Despite these limitations, it is clear that the issue has
gradually been deepening in Brazil in order to understand the motivators for
the inclusion of sustainable strategies along the supply chains.
3. SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY CHAIN: AN EMPHASIS ON SOCIAL ISSUES
For a
better relationship between sustainability and supply chain management (SCM),
Halldórsson et al. (2009, p.90) discuss the existence of three approaches: (1)
an integrated strategy, where sustainability is consistent with SCM; (2) an
alignment strategy, where sustainability is complementary to the traditional
SCM, in relation to cost and services, and (3) a replacement strategy, where
the traditional SCM concept is replaced by an alternative approach in relation
to social and environmental aspects. According to these points of view, it is
noticed that a great part of the research focuses on the second approach, and
only a few on the first (Figure 1), and it was still not possible to observe
the third.
Figure
1: The integrated strategy to SSCM
Source:
Own, based on Halldórsson et al. (2009)
This
proposal indicates that for better integration toward SSCM it is necessary to
seek for a balance between the dimensions of sustainability, as well as closer
ties with the strategy of supply chain is necessary. Therefore, as the social
issues must be well studied, it gets highlighted. For a clearer discussion on
the theoretical proposal, in relation to the study about SSCM, with a bigger
focus on the social dimension of sustainability and its interaction with other
dimensions, we did an overview on what has been published and discussed on the
theme. There was not our focus a literature review, but it is necessary to know
about social sustainability in relation to its integration with the supply
chain management studies.
Among
the many themes, we identified some aspects that can contribute to have
equilibrium in the concept: Socially responsible purchasing (EHRGOTT et al.,
2011; LEIRE; MONT, 2010); Social sustainability in supplier selection (CILIBERTI
et al., 2008; EHRGOTT et al., 2011; HUTCHINS; SUTHERLAND, 2008); Social Life
Cycle Analysis - SLCA (HUTCHINS; SUTHERLAND, 2008); Human rights (SHARMA; RUUD,
2003); Social reports (LEIRE; MONT, 2010) and; Corporate Social Responsibility
– CSR (CILIBERTI et al., 2008). These are the main topics discussed in the
literature. The majority of them have a focus in social issues only in the
business, but it is clear that societal issues should to be practiced to have a
great contribution for the sustainability.
As
can be seen in these themes, when social dimension of sustainability are
discussed, few studies are focusing in sustainable supply chain. This occurs
mostly because the focus has been on the changes of social practices and
process in individual businesses. According to Leire and Mont (2010), social
issues studied in this form have high internal legitimacy in organizations,
which is related to routines and everyday decisions, though it is necessary to
observe such questions in the supply chain as a whole. This occurs as discussed
by Clift (2003), about sustainability, since what is internal in the
organizations is not normally observed in all the supply chain. A tendency for
corporate social responsibility is observed is these studies, which is not
equivalent to sustainability concept.
When
discussing corporate social responsibility (CSR), in order to encourage better
alignment between sustainability and supply chain strategy, the main demand is
related to suppliers (LEIRE; MONT, 2010). However, it is necessary to expand
the impact of the social dimension and its interaction with other basic dimensions.
As pointed out by Hutchins and Sutherland (2008), this is an issue that until
recently has not been well defined. For these authors, the companies seek
initially in their practices to remedy basic needs of employees and sometimes
of community; however macro actions must also be considered. This idea differs from
the sustainable practices in developing countries (MONT et al., 2010).
In
the same way, Sharma and Ruud (2003) indicate that one should observe the
aspect of social problems (with poverty reduction) and the minimization of
environmental impacts, as in building networks and sustainable communities in
developing countries, to consider the adequacy of country conditions, such as
the set of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that may be involved in the
procurement process. Such a type of company needs a different view. For
Ciliberti et al. (2008), from the perspective of CSR, this usually focuses on
labor issues, considering the low labor costs and the perception that other
countries have about the possibility of using this as an economic benefit for
the business.
As an
example, Ehrgott et al. (2011) research can be highlighted, on the social
sustainability in suppliers' selection from a developed country perspective. As
one seeks to change the interaction with another context, one should also
modify their actions. According to the authors, the suppliers' selection was
carried out in developing countries, leaving dubious understanding of the
intentions of this process, if it has the approach of seeking to develop the
best suppliers to provide a dynamic on sustainability in SCM, or if the idea is
just reducing costs so in relation to what is known about the locality. The
impacts of these practices are questionable, both in relation to the supply
chain and for the development of the locality.
Other
topic that can emerge as an emphasis on social issues, is dealing with the idea
of social capital in the supply chain. According to Ketchen and Hult (2007),
discussing social capital within a traditional view of supply chains is to seek
to understand the conflicting loyalties between the company and the
relationship. According to them, it is necessary to consider improved
performance and the elaboration of common goals, values and experiences. For Min
et al. (2008), the study of social capital is related to the discussion of
social identity, which attempts to minimize loyalties that have conflicts among
contexts.
With
this view, we discuss a transposition of aspects that are individual to the
business context as possible, seeking to consider other elements. According to
Coleman (1988), capital can be understood as a resource available to facilitate
the construction of a social structure conducive to the joint market proposed
by Granovetter (1985). For Coleman (1988), social capital has a focus on
individual contribution to the relationship between social actors. In other
words it is directed for social relations. There are many definitions on this
topic, whether internal or external to the organizations, but as Adler and Kwon
(2002) present, there are a number of issues that confront these fields. For
Putnam (1996), the ability of cooperation between groups and organizations is
referred.
Under
the supply chain perspective, one may consider the concept as a set of features
that not only focuses on the relationship, but the interactions between the
actors in such a relationship (MIN et al., 2008). This view however, brings
much more of an economical than a social character, so when the idea of sustainability is discussed in
the supply chain, one must deal with the social capital also as a resource, but
one that can facilitate greater level of cooperation, collective action and
strengthen relationships that encourage local development (ANDRADE et al.,
2012). It is noteworthy that for the discussion made here, this development
goes beyond the economic, influencing in the process of local change.
Therefore,
it is understood that there necessarily be an interaction of relationships and
social structures considered with an institutionalization process of practices
for sustainability, which can be well observed with respect to corporate social
responsibility and the development of actions and practices that influence the
community in different areas such as education, for example (CILIBERTI et al.,
2008). Thus, according to Hutchins and Sutherland (2008), one should consider
the identification of the borders surrounding social impact assessment
resulting from the interaction between companies and their suppliers, among
other actions. It would help if there was a narrowing between social relations,
facilitating the sustainability.
There
are different ways of dealing with this approach. For Ketchen and Hult (2007),
this can be facilitated by the inclusion of discussions of organizational
theories in the field of operations and supply chains. According to the
authors, there are many discussions that may be performed even if the use of
these theories is still at an early stage. For Gold et al. (2010), research
that relate to organizational theories can contribute to a better understanding
of inter-organizational processes. Thus, the Institutional Theory (IT) stands
out. According to Zsidisin et al. (2005), institutional theory emphasizes the
idea of homogeneity, which considers both the focus of internal and
contextual practices, encouraging a convergence between the intra- and inter-organizational
practices.
Some
papers are published approaching institutional theory in discussions of
sustainability and SCM; however mainly focused in the environmental dimension
of sustainability (GROB; BENN, 2014; GLOVER et al., 2014; SARKIS et al., 2011; ZHU;
SARKIS, 2007). According to Moxham and Kauppi (2014), using IT is possible to
achieve the social issues in sustainable supply chain. For them, the way for
that can be to use the fair trade perspective seeking to legitimate the use of
social dimension in the topic. In relation to social issues, it is also
possible to apply institutional theory to study CSR and Social Capital. From
the discussion conducted, it is clear that the social issues can be the core of
the strategies and contribute directly for sustainable supply chain in
different perspective. Next section highlights the Brazilian context.
4. DISCUSSION
As
presented in our arguments until here, the social issues can be considered a
strategic pillar toward sustainable supply chain. This is a necessity around
world, but mostly in emerging economic, since the social issues require more
attention in the society. We bring the Brazilian perspective to discuss about a
demand that is clear in our daily operations, but this debate is also necessary
considering the last cases of slave labor that some company are presenting.
Moreover, child labor and lack of human right are latent aspects that are
observed as result of a low concern of companies in their practices and in
certificate or auditee its suppliers.
Therefore,
Griesse (2007) argues that the Brazil is considered as a multifaceted country, in
which it should consider to create a better set of interactions between
organizations in the market: the geographical diversity, inequalities in
socioeconomic issues, and current trends in policy and economy, which tend to
adjust to the practices that are developed in the supply chains depending on
the characteristics that surround them. From this reflection, it is necessary to
thought about an inquiry conducted by Sharma and Ruud (2003), would
sustainability in supply chains be conditioned to groups or networks of
organizations in the same geographic region, therefore fragmenting the global
chains?
Considering
this point of view, as shown by Griesse (2007), among other aspects
geographical diversity has great influence on the process of building
strategies. In order to do this, we need to re-conceptualize the chain as a
whole, bringing other actors to the new integration (PAGELL; WU, 2009). This
different logic was presented by the idea of social capital, which is related
to different social relations in society. According to our arguments, if more
social issues are introduced in the company strategy (i.e. corporate social
responsibility and social capital), a sustainable supply chain emerges as
possible.
According
to Gonçalves-Dias et al. (2012, p.529) “it is necessary to emphasize the
reality of the country, to highlight genuine Brazilian innovations, [...] and
on practical initiatives not yet systematized by the academy”. This perspective
opens a research field which can demonstrate, from a critical point of view,
their own point of view coming from their specificities. Thus, it is clear that
the current setting on the topic is interesting in the sense of being
stimulated by research throughout the world, but there are many advances needed
on the global research agenda. Moreover, a new agenda should to emerge in the
Brazilian context since to demonstrate that the social issues are an important
topic to contribute for the sustainability.
5. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The
challenge is to advance the sustainable supply chain concept and consider the
social aspects towards the central condition in a more sustainable management, mostly
in emerging economies. This is important in these economies, mainly because
different necessities emerge as relevant toward to a transformation for
sustainability. Considering this perspective, this view creates a logic of
greater integration between the dimensions of sustainability, being that if the
social is highlighted by local needs, this creates a direct influence on the
environment and consequently in the dynamic business of the country.
We
should rethink what is the supply chain, whether it is a linear sequence of boxes
that influence in a certain way, or the relationship between a set of actors
that interact, relate and meet a desired collective goal. Using the idea of
alternative ways of looking at this social structure, demonstrates the
possibility of new features. Therefore, we can also rethink the role received
for the sustainability incorporated into organizations. Its discussion goes
beyond the competitive advantage and concern to the environment; it is assumed a
change in values. Thus, emerge the following propositions in this context:
·
Proposition
1: In order to stimulate a more sustainable supply chain in the Brazilian
context, the CSR and social capital approaches should to be inserted in the
company strategies;
·
Proposition
2: Considering Brazil as a multifaceted country and with latent cases involving
negative aspects in this theme, Brazilian studies can focus more on social
issues to understand SSCM;
·
Proposition
3: To create a research field in sustainable supply chain in Brazil, scholars
need to introduce more social aspects to analyze companies and develop studies on
the topic.
From
these discussions, it is clear that it is possible that from the empirical
phase new aspects can be raised and different contributions will be introduced
to adapt the concept to the context of the locality. For instance, to identify
what is the topic studied in relation to the proposal and bring new inputs in
both theoretical perspective and practical implications. Therefore, the main
contribution of this theoretical discussion it is the social as an emergent
topic in studies on sustainable supply chain, mostly in emerging economies
including Brazil; and identifies that the social issues (i.e. CSR and Social
Capital) should be approximated of sustainability discussions in the supply
chain strategy.
REFERENCES
ADLER, P. S.;
KWON, S-W. (2002). Social Capital: Prospects for a new concept, Academy of Management, v. 27, n. 1, p. 17-40.
AGENDA 21.
(1992). United Nations Conference on
Environment & Development, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf,
Accessed: February 2014.
AHI, P.; SEARCY,
C. (2013). A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and
sustainable supply chain management, Journal
of Cleaner Production, n. 52.
ANDRADE, E. O.; GOMES, F. S. L.; CÂNDIDO, G. A.
(2012). Capital Social como mecanismo para melhorias nas formas de atuação de cooperativas de produtores
rurais, Revista Brasileira de Gestão e
Desenvolvimento Regional, v. 8, n. 2.
ASHBY, A.; LEAT,
M.; HUDSON-SMITH, M. (2012). Making connections: a review of supply chain
management and sustainability literature, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, v. 17, n. 5, p. 497-516.
BESKE, P.;
SEURING, S. (2014). Putting sustainability into supply chain management, Supply Chain Management: an international
journal, v. 19, n. 3.
BRITO, R. P.; BERARDI, P. C. (2010). Vantagem
Competitiva na Gestão Sustentável da Cadeia de Suprimentos: um metaestudo. Revista de Administração Eletrônica –
RAE, v. 50, n.
2, p. 155-169, abr./jun.
BURGESS, K.;
SINGH, P. J.; KOROGLU, R. (2006). Supply chain management: a structured
literature review and implications for future research, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, v.
26, n. 7, p. 703-729.
CARTER, C. R.;
EASTON, P. L. (2011). Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future
directions. International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, v. 41, n. 1, p. 46-62.
CARTER, C. R.;
ROGERS, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management:
moving toward new theory. International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. v. 38, n. 5,
p. 360-387.
CARVALHO, A. P.; BARBIERI, J. C. (2013). Inovações
Socioambientais em cadeias de suprimentos: um estudo de caso sobre o papel da
empresa focal, RAI – Revista de
Administração e Inovação, v. 10, n. 1, p. 232-256.
CHEN, I. J.; PAULRAJ, A. (2004). Towards a theory of
supply chain management: the constructs and measurements, Journal of Operation Management, n. 22, p. 119-150.
CILIBERTI, F.; PONTRANDOLFO, P.; SCOZZI, B. (2008). Investigating
corporate social responsibility in supply chains: a SME perspective, Journal of Cleaner Production.
CLIFT, R. (2003). Metrics for supply chain
sustainability, Clean Technology
Environmental Policy, v. 5, p. 240-247. 2003.
COLEMAN, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the creation
of human capital, American Journal of
Sociology, n. 94, p. 95-120.
EHRGOTT, M.; REIMANN, F.; KAUFMANN, L.; CARTER, C. R.
(2011). Social sustainability in selecting emerging economy suppliers, Journal of Business Ethics, n. 98, p. 99-119.
ELKINGTON, J. (2002). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom
line of 21st century business [reprint]. Oxford: Capstone.
FABBE-COSTES, N.; ROUSSAT, C.; COLIN, J. (2011).
Future sustainable supply chains: what should companies scan? International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, v. 41, n. 3, p. 228-252.
GIUNIPERO, L. C.; HOOKER, R. E.; JOSEPH-MATTHEWS, S.;
YOON, T. E.; BRUDVIG, S. (2008). A decade of SCM literature: past, present and
future implications, Journal of Supply
Chain Management, v. 44, n. 4, p. 66-86.
GLOVER, J. L.;
CHAMPION, D.; DANIELS, K. J.; DAINTY, A. J. (2014). An Institutional Theory
perspective on sustainable practices across the dairy supply chain, International Journal of Production
Economics, n. 152, p. 102-111.
GOLD, S.; SEURING, S.; BESKE, P. (2010). Sustainable
Supply Chain Management and Inter-Organizational Resources: a Literature
Review. Corporate Social Responsibility
and Environmental Management, v. 17, n. 4, p. 230–245.
GONÇALVES-DIAS, S. L. F.; LABEGALINI, L.; CSILLAG, J. M. (2012). Sustentabilidade e cadeia de
suprimentos: uma perspectiva comparada de publicações nacionais e
internacionais, Produção, v. 22, n. 3,
p. 517-533.
GRANOVETTER, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social
Structure: the problem of embeddedness, The
American Journal of Sociology, v. 91, n. 3, p. 481-510.
GRIESSE, M. A. (2007). The geographic, political, and
economic context for Corporate Social Responsibility in Brazil, Journal of Business Ethics, n. 73, p. 21-37.
GROB, S.; BENN,
S. (2014). Conceptualising the adoption of sustainable procurement: an
institutional theory perspective, Autralasian
Journal of Environmental Management, v. 21, n. 1, p. 11-21.
HALLDÓRSSON, Á.; KOTZAB, H.; SKJOTT-LARSEN, T. (2009)
Supply chain management on the crossroad to sustainability: a blessing or a
curse? Logistics Research, p. 83-94.
HOPWOOD, B.;
MELLOR, M.; O’BRIEN, G. (2005). Sustainable Development: Mapping Different
Approaches, Sustainable Development,
n. 13, pp. 38-52.
HUTCHINS, M. J.;
SUTHERLAND, J. W. (2008). An exploration of measures of social sustainability
and their application to supply chain decisions, Journal of Cleaner Production, p. 1688-1698.
KETCHEN JR., D.
J.; HULT, G. T. M. (2007). Bridging organization theory and supply chain
management: the case of best value supply chains, Journal of Operations Management, n. 25, p. 573-580.
LAMBERT, D. M.;
COOPER, M. C. (2000). Issues in Supply Chain Management, Industrial Marketing Management, n. 29, p. 65-83. 2000.
LEIRE, C.; MONT,
O. (2010) The implementation of Socially Responsible Purchasing, Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, n. 17, p. 27-39.
MENEGHETTI, F. K. (2011). O que é um ensaio teórico? Revista de Administração Contemporânea –
RAC, v. 15, n. 2, p. 320-332.
MENTZER, J.T.;
DEWITT, W.; KEEBLER, J. S.; MIN, S.; NIX, N. W.; SMITH, C. D.; ZACHARIA,
Z. G. (2001). Defining Supply Chain Management, Journal of Business Logistics, v. 22, n. 2, p. 1-25.
MIN, S.; KIM, S.
K.; CHEN, H. (2008). Developing social identity and social capital for supply
chain management, Journal of Business
Logistics, v. 29, n. 1.
MONT, O.; KOOG,
B.; LEIRE, C. (2010). Sustainable
businesses practices in supply chains: experiences from Swedish companies.
Presented in: The 14th European Roundtable on Sustainable Production
and Consumption (ERSPC) and The 6th Environmental Management for
Sustainable Universities (EMSU), ERSPC-EMSU conference. The Netherland. 2010.
MOXHAM, C.;
KAUPPI, K. (2014). Using organizational theories to further our understanding
of socially sustainable supply chains: the case of fair trade, Supply Chain Management: an International
Journal, v. 19, n. 4, p. 413-420.
PAGELL, M.; WU,
Z. (2009). Building a More Complete Theory of Sustainable Supply Chain
Management Using Case Studies of 10 Exemplars. Journal of Supply Chain Management.
PARMIGIANI, A.; RIVERA-SANTOS, M. (2011). Clearing
a path through the forest: a meta-review of inter-organizational relationships,
Journal of Management, v. 37, n. 4.
PEATTIE, K.
(2007). Toward sustainable organizations
for the 21st century. 21st Century Management: A Reference Handbook. SAGE
Publications.
PUTNAM, R. D.
(1996). Comunidade e Democracia: a experiência
da Itália Moderna.
Rio de Janeiro: FGV.
SACHS, I. (2007). Rumo à ecossocioeconomia: Teoria e prática do desenvolvimento. São Paulo:
Cortez.
SARKIS, J.; ZHU, Q.; LAI, K-H. (2011).
An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature,
International Journal of Production
Economics, p. 1-15.
SCHUMACHER, E. F. (2001). Lo pequeño es hermoso. 3ed. España: Tursen S.A.
SEURING,
S.; MÜLLER, M. (2008a). Core issues in Sustainable Supply
Management – a Delphi study, Business
Strategy and the Environment, n. 17, p.
455-466.
SEURING, S.;
MÜLLER, M. (2008b). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for
sustainable supply chain management. Journal
of Cleaner Production, n. 16, p. 1699-1710.
SHARMA,
S.; RUUD, A. (2003). On the path to sustainability: Integrating social
dimensions into the research and practice of environmental management, Business Strategy and the Environment,
Editorial, n. 12, p. 205-214.
SILVA, M. E.; NEUTZLING, D. M.; ALVES, A. P. F.; DIAS,
P.; SANTOS, C. A. F.; NASCIMENTO, L. F. M. (2013). Gestão da Cadeia
de
Suprimentos
Sustentável: entendendo o discurso brasileiro. Presented in: XXXVII
Encontro da ANPAD.
Rio de Janeiro: RJ, Brazil.
SVENSSON, G. (2007). Aspects of sustainable supply
chain management (SSCM): conceptual framework and empirical example, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, v. 12, n. 4, p. 262-266.
TOUBOULIC, A.;
WALKER, H. (2015). Theories in sustainable supply chain management: a
structured literature review, International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, v. 45, n. 1/2.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-05-2013-0106.
VALLANCE, S.;
PERKINS, H. C.; DIXON, J. E. (2011). What is social sustainability? A
clarification of concepts, Geoforum,
n. 42, p. 342-348.
WORLD COMMISSION
ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT (WCED). (1987). Report Our common future, http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm,
Accessed: May 2013.
WOLF, J. (2011).
Sustainable Supply Chain Management Integration: A Qualitative Analysis of the
German Manufacturing Industry, Journal
of Business Ethics, v. 102, p. 221-235.
ZHU, Q.; SARKIS,
J. (2007). The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green
supply chain practices and performance, International
Journal of Production Research, v. 45, n. 18/19, p. 4333-4355.
ZSIDISIN, G. A.;
MELNYK, S. A.; RAGATZ, G. L. (2005). An institutional theory perspective of
business continuity planning for purchasing and supply management, International Journal of Production
Research, v. 43, n. 16.