Journal of Quality and Reliability EngineeringVolume 2014 (2014), Article ID 160957, 5 pageshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/160957

Research Article

Research on the Degree of Ecological Supply Chain Management Practice among Chinese Manufacturing Enterprises

Xiaohua Chen¹ and Guoyi Xiu²

¹College of Management, Harbin University of Science and Technology, China²College of Economics, Harbin University of Science and Technology, China

Received 6 August 2013; Accepted 23 January 2014; Published 6 March 2014

Academic Editor: Sheue Ling Hwang

Copyright © 2014 Xiaohua Chen and Guoyi Xiu. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

Based on the existing literature, this paper proposes two assumptions and designs a set of ecological supply chain performance evaluation indicators system. Because these indicators are interdependence for each other, this paper selects the analytic network process and builds the ANP network model to evaluate the degree of ecological supply chain management practice among Chinese manufacturing enterprises. The evaluation results show that there is different level indeed about the ecological supply chain management level; the better the ecological supply chain management practice degree is, the more quickly the ecological supply chain management performance levels increase.

1. Introduction

Resource and environment problems have been the enormous challenges for human society. Currently, resource depletion, environment degradation, and ecological imbalance and other problems are posing a serious threat to humans’ survival and development. As environment problem is becoming more prominent, ecological research has been put on the agenda. In this context, enterprises must go through an ecological revolution, and those enterprises that take full account of the environment interest can maintain and improve competitiveness. Because the competition among enterprises has evolved into the competition between supply chains, only the supply chain that takes into account the environment interests, in the pursuit of economic interests at the same time, can obtain and maintain a competitive advantage.

Measurement to the degree of the ecological supply chain management practice is achieved by comparing the performance level of ecological supply chain management practice in this paper. This paper assumes that the enterprises implementing ecological supply chain management can be divided into three types: leading enterprise, start-up enterprise, and backward enterprise. There is a set of evaluation indicators system in this paper. Using the analytic network process, this paper constructs a model of ANP and uses the Super Decisions 1.6.0 software to calculate the weight of indicators. The study result proves the correct of the prior assumptions. This study can provide a reference for manufacturing enterprises to evaluate the degree of ecological supply chain management practice. Therefore, there is some practical significance of this study.

2. Literature Review and Hypothesis

2.1. Literature Review

Carter et al. [1, 2] thought the broad sustainability should include the improvement of economic, social, and environmental performance from a broad point of view, and the literatures related to sustainability are increasing in recent years. Linton [3] and Preuss [4] thought that the core of the sustainability research was the level of environmental performance, while the focus of environmental management was reflected in the level of the supply chain management. Seuring [5] gave a definition about the environmental supply chain management in 2004. He thought green supply chain management was the integrated management of logistics and information low, and it could meet customers’ demand for green products and green services. Vachon [6] proposed that supply chain could maintain internal health and sustainability based on the external environment information and their own regulatory function. The enterprises in the supply chain realized that customers increasingly inclined to products and services which did no harm to the environment, so more and more enterprises supported the implementation of the green supply chain management. Sen [7], Barratt and Oke [8], and Handfield et al. [9] thought that implementing environmental sustainability and green supply chain management timely could make the enterprises in the supply chain gain a competitive advantage. Jorgensen and Wilcoxen [10] did quantitative analysis about pollution cost control of goods and services in the US economy. Jaffe et al. [11] asserted that there is little evidence to prove that the environmental regulation did harm to the competitive. Therefore, we needed more empirical research to prove environmentally sustainable regulation had an important impact on the competitiveness of enterprises. Zhu et al. [12], Vachon and Klassen [13], and Wee and Quazi [14] had done some preliminary study about the indicators and the evaluation scale of environmental sustainability.

2.2. Research Methods

In order to study the level of ecological supply chain management implementation among Chinese manufacturing enterprises, the paper designs a questionnaire, which can assess the performance level of the ecological supply chain management implementation.

In this paper, the research process consists of four steps. (1) Problem description, the potential performance improvement brought by ecological supply chain management is studied based on relevant literature and proposes the hypothesis; (2) questionnaire development, firstly, the questions in the questionnaire are designed, and then consulting from the academic and business experts to modify and improve the questionnaire, finally the questions are obtained; (3) data collection and analysis, inviting relevant experts to score the questions in the questionnaire and using the Super Decisions software to analyze the reliability and consistency of the data; those date which cannot pass the consistency test need rescoring and then continue to analyze the reliability and consistency of the data, until passing the test; (4) evaluation results, using Super Decisions software to evaluate the level of ecological supply chain management implementation and then obtaining the level of performance improvement.

In order to research the change of enterprises performance level after implementing the ecological supply chain management, 24 questions are be designed in this paper, which are environmental performance, operational performance, economic performance, and organizational performance. There are five degrees for the answers to these questions: (1) does not reflect the ecological degree, (2) less reflects the ecological degree, (3) in part reflects the ecological degree, (4) clearly reflects the ecological degree, and (5) very clearly reflects the ecological degree.

In order to focus the research objective and avoid error as much as possible, we invited experts from four typical industries: thermal power plants, chemical/petrochemical industry, electrical/electronics industry, and the automotive industry. We first revised and improved the questionnaire in the seminar held in Harbin University of Science and Technology. According to the opinions from 10 professors and 20 experts from four typical industries, the questionnaire was to be modified slightly. Finally, 900 questionnaires were sent, and 117 available questionnaires were recovered, including thermal power plant (35, 30%), chemical/petrochemical enterprises (38, 32%), electrical/electronic enterprises, (15, 13%), and auto companies (29, 25%).

2.3. Hypothesis

There are two hypotheses in this paper:

Hypotheses 1. There is different level about the ecological supply chain management practice level. The enterprises practicing ecological supply chain management can be divided into three categories: leading enterprise, start-up enterprise, and backward enterprise. Leading enterprise does best in ecological supply chain management practices, start-up enterprise follows the leading enterprise, and the backward enterprise does worst.

Hypotheses 2. The better the ecological supply chain management practice degree, the more quickly the ecological supply chain management performance levels increase.

3. Model Based on ANP and Calculation

Ecological supply chain performance evaluation is a multi-objective decision problem about the limited program. Because the evaluation indicators are not entirely dependent, and there are many independent and influence relations between the indicators, the choice of the evaluation method will affect the results of the evaluation to a large extent. This paper chooses the analytic network process and the decisions 1.6.0 software to finish the evaluation. The implementation steps are as follows.

3.1. Design of the Indicators System

The choice of indicators will have a direct impact on the results of the evaluation. Zhu Qinghua, Geng Yong, Kenneth Green, Pamela Zelbst, Jeramy Meacham, and Vikram Bhadauria did some study about the indicators of the green supply chain management practices performance appraisal. Zhu and Geng [15] analyzed the green supply chain practice performance evaluation indicators system based on the factor analysis method and extracted three evaluation factors which were environmental performance, operational performance, and economic performance. Green et al. [16] supplement their research and increased another factor, organizational performance. At this point, the evaluation of green supply chain management practice performance can be made from four factors: environmental performance, operational performance, economic performance, and organizational performance. On the basis of these scholars, this paper builds up ecological supply chain management performance appraisal indicator system, which is as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: The appraisal indicators system of ecological supply chain management performance.

Target layer
Level indicators
Secondary indicators
Object

Ecological supply chain management performance evaluation
Economic performance (ENP)
X₁ Reduction of air emissions
(1) Leadingenterprise(A₁)  (2) Start-upenterprise(A₂)  (3) Backwardenterprise(A₃)

X₂ Reduction of effluent waste

X₃ Reduction of solid wastes

X₄ Decrease in consumption for hazardous/harmful/toxic materials

X₅ Decrease in frequency for environmental accidents

X₆ Improvement in an enterprise’s environmental situation

Operational performance (OPP)
X₇ Increase in the amount of goods delivered on time

X₈ Decrease in inventory levels

X₉ Decrease in scrap rate

X₁₀ Increase in product quality

X₁₁ Increase in product line

X₁₂ Improved capacity utilization

Economic performance (ECP)
X13 Decrease in cost of materials purchasing

X₁₄ Decrease in cost for energy consumption

X₁₅ Decrease in fee for waste treatment

X₁₆ Decrease in fee for waste discharge

X₁₇ Decrease in fine for environmental accidents

Operational performance (ORP)
X₁₈ Average return on investment over the past three years

X₁₉ Average profit over the past three years

X₂₀ Profit growth over the past three years

X₂₁ Average return on sales over the past three years

X₂₂ Average market share growth over the past three years

X₂₃ Average sales volume growth over the past three years

X₂₄ Average sales (in dollars) growth over the past three years

Using the indicator system and the Super Decisions software, this paper proposes the ecological supply chain management performance appraisal model, which is as shown in Figure 1. There are feedback and dependency relationship in the ANP model, so it can describe the most realistic decision-making problem. The model is universal and has a certain representation for the ecological supply chain performance evaluation among enterprises. The interaction of the factors in the network diagram is represented by arrows, and the direction of an arrow indicates the dominant role of an element (elements set) to another element (element set).

Figure 1: The ANP network model.

3.2. Construct of Judgment Matrix

Construct of Judgment Matrix. The process of establishing judgment matrix is comparing every two decision-making elements in the elements sets and then using the Eigen values to show the impact between the elements.

The process uses the scaling method of 1–9 and its inverse crested by Saaty. This paper must build a lot of judgment matrix and take one of judgment matrix for example, which is as shown in Figure 2. The value of CR is 0.075 by Super Decisions software, less than 0.1, and it passes the consistency test. The establishment and test of the other matrix are similar to this. During the process of the consistency checking, if the CR value is greater than 0.1, then we believe there are obvious mistakes about the values. And those matrixes which do not pass the consistency test require the rescoring from the experts. And then the value of CR must be tested until they pass the consistency test.

Figure 2: Comparisons wrt “G” node in “ENP” cluster.

3.3. Calculation Process and Results

(1)Calculation of the unweighted supermatrix: in this model, there is only one objective criterion in the control layer. After all matrixes are built and pass the consistency test, we can use the software to compute the unweighted supermatrix, and the result is as shown in Table 2.(2)Calculation of the weighted super-matrix: the partial weight value of each sub-criterion is multiplied by the weight of the corresponding standard, so we can obtain a weighted supermatrix, and the result is as shown in Table 3.(3)Calculation of the limit super-matrix: by normalization the weighted super matrix, we can obtain the limit super matrix. Because the relationship are dependent and the feedback between elements, the normalization process is an iterative and gradually stabilization process. The result of the weight supermatrix is as shown in Table 4.(4)The rank of the three types of enterprise: we get the results of the three types of enterprise’ final performance appraisal. The result is as shown in Table 5. The leading enterprise’s score is the highest, the start-up enterprise follows The leading enterprise, and the backward enterprise is the lowest.

Table 2: The unweighted supermatrix of ecological supply chain management performance evaluation.

X₁
X₂
X₃
X₄
X₅
X₆
X₇
X₈

A₁
0.0280
0.0253
0.0249
0.0225
0.0258
0.0349
0.2319
0.1238

A₂
0.0107
0.0143
0.0132
0.0124
0.0135
0.0200
0.1160
0.0697

A₃
0.0041
0.0032
0.0047
0.0034
0.0035
0.0076
0.0387
0.0157

X₉
X₁₀
X₁₁
X₁₂
X₁₃
X₁₄
X₁₅
X₁₆

A₁
0.1229
0.12167
0.09663
0.08770
0.06365
0.08845
0.06431
0.07209

A2₂
0.0677
0.06464
0.04589
0.05020
0.03382
0.05063
0.03539
0.02876

A₃
0.0186
0.02290
0.01453
0.01915
0.01198
0.01932
0.00974
0.00860

X₁₇
X₁₈
X₁₉
X₂₀
X₂₁
X₂₂
X₂₃
X₂₄

A₁
0.06365
0.03280
0.03277
0.03209
0.03381
0.03334
0.03220
0.03251

A₂
0.03382
0.01963
0.01741
0.01877
0.01690
0.01878
0.01610
0.01927

A₃
0.01198
0.00392
0.00617
0.00549
0.00564
0.00423
0.00805
0.00457

Table 3: The weighted supermatrix of ecological supply chain management performance evaluation.

X₁
X₂
X₃
X₄
X₅
X₆
X₇
X₈

A₁
0.02804
0.02534
0.02490
0.02250
0.02581
0.03493
0.23190
0.12380

A₂
0.01070
0.01427
0.01323
0.01238
0.01349
0.01999
0.11595
0.06971

A₃
0.00408
0.00321
0.00469
0.00341
0.00353
0.00763
0.03865
0.01570

X₉
X₁₀
X₁₁
X₁₂
X₁₃
X₁₄
X₁₅
X₁₆

A₁
0.12294
0.12167
0.09663
0.08770
0.06365
0.08845
0.06431
0.07209

A₂
0.06766
0.06464
0.04589
0.05020
0.03382
0.05063
0.03539
0.02876

A₃
0.01862
0.02290
0.01453
0.01915
0.01198
0.01932
0.00974
0.00860

X₁₇
X₁₈
X₁₉
X₂₀
X₂₁
X₂₂
X₂₃
X₂₄

A₁
0.06365
0.03280
0.03277
0.03209
0.03381
0.03334
0.03220
0.03251

A₂
0.03382
0.01963
0.01741
0.01877
0.01690
0.01878
0.01610
0.01927

A₃
0.01198
0.00392
0.00617
0.00549
0.00564
0.00423
0.00805
0.00457

Table 4: The weight supermatrix of ecological supply chain management performance evaluation.

X₁
X₂
X₃
X₄
X₅
X₆
X₇
X₈

A₁
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660

A₂
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498

A₃
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791

X₉
X₁₀
X₁₁
X₁₂
X₁₃
X₁₄
X₁₅
X₁₆

A₁
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660

A₂
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498

A₃
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791

X₁₇
X₁₈
X₁₉
X₂₀
X₂₁
X₂₂
X₂₃
X₂₄

A₁
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660
0.04660

A₂
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498
0.02498

A₃
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791
0.00791

Table 5: The rank of the three types of enterprise.

Object
Unweighted result
Weighted
Weight supermatrix result
Ranking

Leading enterprise (A₁)
1.000000
0.586213
0.046600
1

Start-up enterprise (A₂)
0.536040
0.314233
0.024980
2

Backward enterprise (A₃)
0.169826
0.099554
0.007914
3

4. Conclusions

This paper uses the analytic network process and the Super Decision 1.6.0 software to construct ANP network model of ecological supply chain management. The model can evaluate the level of the ecological supply chain performance management among Chinese manufacturing enterprises. The result proves the accuracy of the initial hypothesis and the conclusions are as follows: there is different level indeed about the ecological supply chain management level; the better the ecological supply chain management practice degree, the more quickly the ecological supply chain management performance levels increase.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a Grant from Hei-longjiang Province Natural Science Fund Project (G201108), and Xiaohua Chen thanks her teacher Professor Xiu very much, because he gave her much advice in the writing process, and she also thanks her husband very much, because he gave her much support in the writing process.

References

C. R. Carter and P. L. Easton, “Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future directions,” International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 46–62, 2011.

C. R. Carter and D. S. Rogers, “A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory,” International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 360–387, 2008.

J. D. Linton, R. Klassen, and V. Jayaraman, “Sustainable supply chains: an introduction,” Journal of Operations Management, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1075–1082, 2007.

L. L. Preuss, “Green light for greener supply,” Business Ethics, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 308–317, 2002.

S. Seuring, “Industrial ecology, life cycles, supply chains: differences and interrelations,” Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 306–319, 2004.

S. Vachon, “Green supply chain practices and the selection of environmental technologies,” International Journal of Production Research, vol. 45, no. 18-19, pp. 4357–4379, 2007.

S. Sen, “Linking green supply chain management and shareholder value creation,” The IUP Journal of Supply Chain Management, vol. 7, no. 3-4, pp. 95–109, 2009.

M. Barratt and A. Oke, “Antecedents of supply chain visibility in retail supply chains: a resource-based theory perspective,” Journal of Operations Management, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1217–1233, 2007.

R. B. Handfield, S. V. Walton, L. K. Seegers, and S. A. Melnyk, “Green' value chain practices in the furniture industry,” Journal of Operations Management, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 293–315, 1997.

D. W. Jorgensen and P. J. Wilcoxen, “Environmental regulation and US economic growth,” The Rand Journal of Economics, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 314–340, 1990.

A. B. Jaffe, S. Peterson, P. Portney, and R. Stavins, “Environmental regulation and the competitiveness of US manufacturing: what does the evidence tell us?” Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 132–163, 1995.

Q. Zhu, J. Sarkis, and K.-H. Lai, “Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain management practices implementation,” International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 261–273, 2008.

S. Vachon and R. D. Klassen, “Extending green practices across the supply chain: the impact of upstream and downstream integration,” International Journal of Operations and Production Management, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 795–821, 2006.

Y. S. Wee and H. A. Quazi, “Development and validation of critical factors of environmental management,” Industrial Management and Data Systems, vol. 105, no. 1, pp. 96–114, 2005.

Q.-h. Zhu and Y. Geng, “Statistics analysis on Chinese manufacturers based on practice of green supply chain management and their performance,” Application of Statistics and Management, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 392–398, 2006.

K. W. Green Jr., P. J. Zelbst, J. Meacham, and V. S. Bhadauria, “Green supply chain management practices: Impact on performance,” Supply Chain Management, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 290–305, 2012.