Content uploaded by Franklin Enrique Reyes-Soriano Docente
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Franklin Enrique Reyes-Soriano Docente on Nov 23, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Reyes-Soriano, F.E.;
Muyulema-Allaica, J.C.;
Menéndez-Zaruma, C.M.;
Lucin-Borbor, J.M.; Balón-Ramos,
I.D.R.; Herrera-Brunett, G.A.
Bibliometric Analysis on Sustainable
Supply Chains. Sustainability 2022,14,
13039. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su142013039
Academic Editor: Wu-Jang Huang
Received: 17 August 2022
Accepted: 8 October 2022
Published: 12 October 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
sustainability
Article
Bibliometric Analysis on Sustainable Supply Chains
Franklin Enrique Reyes-Soriano 1, Juan Carlos Muyulema-Allaica 1, 2, * , Christina Michelle Menéndez-Zaruma 1,
Jorge Manuel Lucin-Borbor 1, Isabel Del RocióBalón-Ramos 1and Gerardo Antonio Herrera-Brunett 1
1Industrial Engineering Research and Innovation Center, State University Santa Elena Peninsula,
La Libertad 240204, Ecuador
2INGEPRO Research Group, Department of Transport and Projects and Processes Technology,
University of Cantabria, 39005 Santander, Spain
*Correspondence: jmuyulema@upse.edu.ec
Abstract:
In recent years, efforts have been expanded to create and adopt tools that contribute to miti-
gating the environmental impact caused by industrial development. In this sense, the objective of this
article is twofold: (i) to identify the countries worldwide that have generated and disseminated the
most information on sustainable supply chains (SSCs) and (ii) to recognize the organizations that have
interacted most with each other to generate greater scientific contributions on SSCs. Methodologically,
the starting point was a bibliometric scan, and a systematic review of the literature focusing on SSCs
was carried out. The search engine used was the Dimensions platform, limited only to the years 2020,
2021 and 2022, and the articles had to belong to the categories of engineering and economics. For
the network visualization, VOSviewer was used, as it allows the connections to be visualized in a
network graph. The findings of this paper show the existing links between organizations worldwide
whose purpose is the study and scientific dissemination of SSCs. The countries that have generated
the greatest scientific contribution in the last three years with respect to SSCs were China, the United
Kingdom, the United States, Italy and the Netherlands. In addition, the organizations that have
interacted the most belong to the European Union.
Keywords:
supply chains; environmental impact; engineering; sustainability; industrial development
1. Introduction
A supply chain is defined as a set of companies comprising suppliers, manufacturers
and distributors. In this context, traditional supply chains have only one direction, i.e.,
they transform the raw material and the sale of the finished product ends at the end of the
supply chain.
While a sustainable supply chain (SSC), like traditional supply chains, seeks to use
resources efficiently and to ensure the satisfaction of customer needs, SSCs also implement
an environmentally friendly philosophy and tools in an attempt to reduce the environ-
mental impact as much as possible in all their links. The importance of adopting SSCs
is to generate environmental awareness in a company’s production systems as well as in
transportation, in such a way that competitive advantages are obtained in the supply chain
in the environmental field [1–3].
A relevant strategic driver (a tool that allows the elevation of a process, decision
making or the implementation of methodologies and philosophies) for companies, that
which also causes a positive impact on their economy, and in turn develops competitiveness,
having as a priority the improvement of their practices in order to generate the least
environmental impact, is the adoption of an SSC.
Not long ago, it was thought that the remains of industrial processes, be they fluids or
solids, were materials that could no longer be used. This led to an increased demand for
raw materials from non-renewable natural resources, thus driving the increase of waste
and the generation of carbon emissions into the environment [
4
]. However, since the
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013039 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 2 of 13
definition of practices related to the circular economy (CE), waste from industrial processes
is considered raw material for the development of other activities [
5
,
6
]. Following with
the concept of the CE, Mogale et al. [
7
] pointed out that the term refers to the creation
of value for recovered materials (used products). In this context, Ref. [
8
] highlights the
relevance given to the implementation of secondary resources as part of the raw material
used in production processes, which has been a key point as a driver of the CE and in the
sustainability agenda within the framework of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs). In this context, SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production) focuses on
waste reduction by 2030.
In order to progress towards a sustainable, clean and CE, the European Union (EU)
aims to contribute to the protection of the environment, preserving biodiversity and reduc-
ing carbon emissions [9,10].
It should be noted that the largest percentage of the environmental impact that a
company generates comes from its logistics system [
11
]. In this context, the implementation
of SSCs aims to direct the processes of the acquisition and transformation of raw materials,
inventories, storage and transportation systems in environmentally friendly models, thus
reducing excess gas emissions and waste of non-renewable resources and generating a
lower impact on the economy, as well as on the social environment [
12
,
13
]. In the same
vein, Geng et al. [
14
] stated that Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) includes
the application of internal environmental practices, green procurement, supplier selection,
investment recovery, implementation of green designs and cooperation with customers.
Implementing SSCM in the industrial context results in obtaining several gains, such as:
maximizing environmental performance, waste reduction, cost savings which translate to
increased profits and market share objectives [15].
Putting SSCs or green supply chains into practice has led academia and supply chain
professionals to show greater interest and conduct studies on this topic [
16
]. For Moreno-
Miranda and Dries [
17
], the coordination between partners and traders is relevant in the
social, economic and environmental spheres in the links of supply chains, which is why they
suggest expanding research on the relationship between coordination and sustainability.
For Xu et al. [
18
], the purpose of coordination between each individual interacting in the
links of the supply chain is to promote initiatives in the management of supply chains,
which will lead to a win-win situation throughout the supply chain. Schultz et al. [
19
]
agree that in order to implement SSCs and circular supply chains, the participation of
both NGOs and academia is important, since by collaborating with more organizations the
line of sustainability can be covered, and by having more information it will be possible
to implement new tools that will contribute to making the actions of companies more
sustainable throughout their supply chain.
SSCM and greening imply the importance of the resilience of the supplier to an ecological
production, this being a multidimensional ability in which company and supplier have to
collaborate and improve their capacity to respond to environmental policies that may be
implemented in order to reduce the environmental impact generated by their production
systems. In this context, Martin-Breen and Anderies [
20
] define resilience as the capacity to
redirect, recover and resist in the face of problems and changes, thus adopting improvement
responses. However, managing an SSC also involves the flow of revenue costs [21].
A study of the relationship between SSC management practices and environmental
performance by Geng et al. [
14
] shows that there is a strong correlation between eco-design,
supplier integration and customer cooperation. Collaboration between the company and
suppliers almost always proves to be a great advantage. In the field of sustainability, this
collaboration is key to the development of new ideas and environmental tools; an example
of this statement is the design and development of sustainable packaging and products. The
collaboration of both parties in this process guarantees the connection between the parties,
as well as work with favorable results, because both parties know what the objective is and
that the success that the product obtains in the market will be translated into economic
benefits and boost the competitiveness of the company [22].
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 3 of 13
This is why there is a need for collaboration between researchers and practitioners
with expertise in SSC development, implementation and modeling. It is also important
to collaborate with companies that have implemented SSCs by providing relevant and
replicable data and information.
This study seeks to answer the following questions: Which countries worldwide
have generated the greatest scientific contribution with respect to SSCs in the last three
years? Which are the institutions that most interact with each other in the dissemination of
information related to SSCs? Additionally, as a product of this research, it was possible to
determine the continent that has made the greatest scientific contribution in the last three
years with respect to SSCs.
In this sense, highlighting the countries that have contributed the most with informa-
tion on SSCs will allow more interested parties to know in which countries the development
of the data, application and study of SSCs has been exploited in order to identify where to
direct the search for antecedents that allow maximum exploitation. This line of research,
along with the information provided through this bibliometric analysis, will allow inter-
ested organizations to determine which organizations to generate interactions with in order
to demonstrate how the adoption of SSCs transcends in different environments at a global
level. In the same way, the interaction of more institutions can generate the evaluation of
drivers and barriers of SSCs.
2. Materials and Methods
Methodologically, use was made of the systematic literature review (SLR) approach,
which has been adopted by different authors [
23
–
25
]. This method was initially used to
identify the orientations of existing articles and the information content they provided.
Subsequently, a bibliometric scanning approach was adopted by different authors [
26
–
28
]
in order to delineate the elements of the article and the scope of the publication. This review
focused on the area of SSCs, for which Dimensions was considered as the search engine,
considering that this platform has a much broader and more complete data infrastructure
that allows users to investigate links between a wide range of research data. For a more
detailed search, the following filters were implemented: first, we filtered the documents
that had titles or abstracts related to SSCs; the next filter was the selection of only open
access articles (transparency and access of scientific material to the public without any
type of economic barrier); the research was limited only to the years 2020, 2021 and 2022;
and finally these articles had to belong to the categories of engineering and economics.
VOSviewer was used for the network visualization, as it allows the connections to be
visualized in a network graph.
Methodologically, exclusion and inclusion criteria were used, developed in a line
of action that consisted of three phases: (i) planning of the review, which consisted of a
previous review of issues related to industry and the CE, selection and study of the tool that
would be applied for the development of the research and review of information related
to sustainable supply chains, with the purpose of organizing and directing the study;
(ii) execution of the review, for which information analysis was carried out in different
search engines, using keywords such as “circular economy”, “sustainable supply chains”
and “tools and barriers for sustainable supply chains”; and (iii) bibliometric analysis, which
involved selecting a search engine compatible with software for building bibliometric
networks, filtering information (articles) according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,
analysis of the modeling results and description of the findings (Figure 1).
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 4 of 13
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13
Figure 1. Line of action of the methodology.
3. Results
3.1. Countries and Their Number of SSC-Related Publications
The network diagram shows the distribution of publications of the 51 main produc-
ing countries during the period 2020–2022 (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Network diagram of co-authorship–countries relationship.
The larger bubbles represent the countries with the highest number of article publi-
cations, with China being the country that has published the most articles (94); the largest
yellow bubble represents the United Kingdom, which is one of the countries with the
highest scientific contribution to SSCs, with a total of 83 publications in the last 3 years.
Figure 1. Line of action of the methodology.
3. Results
3.1. Countries and Their Number of SSC-Related Publications
The network diagram shows the distribution of publications of the 51 main producing
countries during the period 2020–2022 (Figure 2).
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13
Figure 1. Line of action of the methodology.
3. Results
3.1. Countries and Their Number of SSC-Related Publications
The network diagram shows the distribution of publications of the 51 main produc-
ing countries during the period 2020–2022 (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Network diagram of co-authorship–countries relationship.
The larger bubbles represent the countries with the highest number of article publi-
cations, with China being the country that has published the most articles (94); the largest
yellow bubble represents the United Kingdom, which is one of the countries with the
highest scientific contribution to SSCs, with a total of 83 publications in the last 3 years.
Figure 2. Network diagram of co-authorship–countries relationship.
The larger bubbles represent the countries with the highest number of article publica-
tions, with China being the country that has published the most articles (94); the largest
yellow bubble represents the United Kingdom, which is one of the countries with the
highest scientific contribution to SSCs, with a total of 83 publications in the last 3 years. The
United States is represented in the graph by a medium-sized yellow bubble, representing a
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 5 of 13
total of 63 articles published by the North American country, followed by Italy, represented
by a medium-sized red bubble, with a total of 41 publications, then by the Netherlands,
with 39 published articles. The medium-sized yellow bubbles represent Germany with
37 publications and Spain with 29 published articles. India, with 36, is represented by a
small red bubble.
Five groups (clusters) of countries are evident, each represented by a different color
(Figure 2). The size of a country’s label and circle is determined by the number of publica-
tions in the country and the weight of the article. The higher the number of posts a country
has and the weight of an article, the larger the country label and circle will be. Graphically
representing the network makes it easy to visualize the interactions between the five groups.
Each group is determined by the size of the sphere and a characteristic color that interact
depending on the level of collaboration. The larger the sphere, the greater the collaboration
and number of publications in each of the countries taken for analysis. However, when
one interacts with other countries belonging to other clusters, the proximity between the
countries does not represent their geographical proximity, but instead the collaboration
between them (Figure 3).
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13
The United States is represented in the graph by a medium-sized yellow bubble, repre-
senting a total of 63 articles published by the North American country, followed by Italy,
represented by a medium-sized red bubble, with a total of 41 publications, then by the
Netherlands, with 39 published articles. The medium-sized yellow bubbles represent Ger-
many with 37 publications and Spain with 29 published articles. India, with 36, is repre-
sented by a small red bubble.
Five groups (clusters) of countries are evident, each represented by a different color
(Figure 2). The size of a country’s label and circle is determined by the number of publi-
cations in the country and the weight of the article. The higher the number of posts a
country has and the weight of an article, the larger the country label and circle will be.
Graphically representing the network makes it easy to visualize the interactions between
the five groups. Each group is determined by the size of the sphere and a characteristic
color that interact depending on the level of collaboration. The larger the sphere, the
greater the collaboration and number of publications in each of the countries taken for
analysis. However, when one interacts with other countries belonging to other clusters,
the proximity between the countries does not represent their geographical proximity, but
instead the collaboration between them (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Network diagram analysis of the co-authorship–country relationship; a. red cluster; b.
green cluster; c. blue cluster; d. yellow cluster; e. cluster violet.
In cluster 1 (red), there are fourteen countries: Bangladesh, Egypt, Greece, Hungary,
India, Italy, Malaysia, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and
Vietnam, whose main research focus is related to SSCs in agribusiness and the COVID-19
pandemic, including emergencies in SCs due to the COVID-19 pandemic (Figure 3a).
In cluster 2 (green), there are ten countries: Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Den-
mark, France, Iran, Ireland, the Netherlands and Portugal, whose research is in the field
Figure 3.
Network diagram analysis of the co-authorship–country relationship; (
a
) red cluster;
(b) green cluster; (c) blue cluster; (d) yellow cluster; (e) cluster violet.
In cluster 1 (red), there are fourteen countries: Bangladesh, Egypt, Greece, Hungary,
India, Italy, Malaysia, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and
Vietnam, whose main research focus is related to SSCs in agribusiness and the COVID-19
pandemic, including emergencies in SCs due to the COVID-19 pandemic (Figure 3a).
In cluster 2 (green), there are ten countries: Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark,
France, Iran, Ireland, the Netherlands and Portugal, whose research is in the field of
competitive strategies of SSCs and the resilience versus sustainability of SSCs (Figure 3b).
In cluster 3 (blue), there are nine countries: Australia, Austria, China, Indonesia, Japan,
Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates, characterized by the fact
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 6 of 13
that its research line focuses on issues related to SSC risk mitigation strategies, strategies to
promote SSCs and SSC agility strategies (Figure 3c).
In cluster 4 (yellow), there are nine countries: Belgium, Germany, Mexico, Qatar, South
Africa, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, countries whose
main research focus is related to the application of Industry 4.0, the circular economy in
SCs, drivers of SSCs and the barriers faced by SSCs (Figure 3d).
In cluster 5 (violet), there are seven countries: Czechia, Finland, Poland, Russia,
Sweden, Turkey and Ukraine, whose research field is related to improvements in SSC
performance, global changes in SCs and prioritization of strategies in SSCs (Figure 3e).
3.2. Co-Authorship–Countries
Table 1shows the list of the top 51 countries with respect to SSC-related scientific
dissemination, the number of publications per country, the total number of citations they
have had and the total relevance of the links. The countries are listed in descending order
with respect to the number of articles published.
Table 1. Related publication data in the top 51 countries.
Number Country Number of
Items Citations Total Link
Strength
1 China 94 972 79
2 United Kingdom 83 1412 117
3 United States 63 774 74
4 Italy 41 328 42
5 Netherlands 39 774 60
6 Germany 37 328 40
7 India 36 603 46
8 Spain 29 216 46
9 Australia 29 583 35
10 Iran 20 272 30
11 Sweden 20 534 27
12 France 19 145 32
13 Poland 19 241 31
14 Indonesia 18 200 13
15 Malaysia 16 202 27
16 Finland 15 33 32
17 Taiwan 15 417 31
18 Denmark 14 108 25
19 Turkey 14 144 21
20 Belgium 13 143 31
21 Canada 13 261 21
22 Brazil 13 118 17
23 Japan 12 368 14
24 Switzerland 12 101 12
25 Portugal 11 191 25
26 Saudi Arabia 11 60 20
27 Norway 11 69 17
28 Austria 11 129 13
29 Greece 10 160 18
30 Ireland 9 162 21
31 Ukraine 9 28 1
32 Pakistan 8 156 13
33 United Arab Hemispheres 8 189 113
34 Russia 8 30 10
35 South Korea 7 92 19
36 Vietnam 7 46 18
37 Thailand 7 20 15
38 Bangladesh 7 136 12
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 7 of 13
Table 1. Cont.
Number Country Number of
Items Citations Total Link
Strength
39 South Africa 6 26 13
40 Czech Republic 6 48 10
41 Mexico 6 26 9
42 Colombia 6 84 7
43 Hungary 5 35 12
44 Serbia 5 15 11
45 Egypt 5 49 10
46 Chile 5 22 7
47 New Zealand 5 179 6
48 Morocco 5 14 4
49 Qatar 5 90 4
50 Bulgaria 5 1 0
51 Romania 5 8 0
Based on the data provided by VOSviewer through a bibliometric analysis, the seven
countries with the highest number of citations are: the United Kingdom with 1412 ci-
tations, China with 972 citations, the United States with 774 citations, the Netherlands
with 603 citations, India with 583 citations, Australia with 534 citations and Malaysia with
417 citations.
There are two countries with a link strength above 100: the United Kingdom and the
United Arab Emirates.
3.3. Co-Authorship–Organizations
Figure 4shows the main institutions that have the greatest inter-collaboration with
respect to scientific dissemination related to the sustainability of supply chains. These
institutions, which have co-authorship among them, are as follows: the University of
Southampton, University of Leiden, University of Twente, University of Utrecht, Vienna
University of Economics and University of London. The University of Sydney and Sydney
University of Technology belong to Oceania.
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13
31
Ukraine
9
28
1
32
Pakistan
8
156
13
33
United Arab Hemispheres
8
189
113
34
Russia
8
30
10
35
South Korea
7
92
19
36
Vietnam
7
46
18
37
Thailand
7
20
15
38
Bangladesh
7
136
12
39
South Africa
6
26
13
40
Czech Republic
6
48
10
41
Mexico
6
26
9
42
Colombia
6
84
7
43
Hungary
5
35
12
44
Serbia
5
15
11
45
Egypt
5
49
10
46
Chile
5
22
7
47
New Zealand
5
179
6
48
Morocco
5
14
4
49
Qatar
5
90
4
50
Bulgaria
5
1
0
51
Romania
5
8
0
Based on the data provided by VOSviewer through a bibliometric analysis, the seven
countries with the highest number of citations are: the United Kingdom with 1412 cita-
tions, China with 972 citations, the United States with 774 citations, the Netherlands with
603 citations, India with 583 citations, Australia with 534 citations and Malaysia with 417
citations.
There are two countries with a link strength above 100: the United Kingdom and the
United Arab Emirates.
3.3. Co-Authorship–Organizations
Figure 4 shows the main institutions that have the greatest inter-collaboration with
respect to scientific dissemination related to the sustainability of supply chains. These in-
stitutions, which have co-authorship among them, are as follows: the University of South-
ampton, University of Leiden, University of Twente, University of Utrecht, Vienna Uni-
versity of Economics and University of London. The University of Sydney and Sydney
University of Technology belong to Oceania.
All of these universities are from the European continent, demonstrating that there
is greater scientific collaboration on SSCs among European institutions.
Figure 4. Co-authorship relationship organizations.
Figure 4. Co-authorship relationship organizations.
All of these universities are from the European continent, demonstrating that there is
greater scientific collaboration on SSCs among European institutions.
3.4. Most Cited Institutions
Table 2shows the 21 most productive institutions according to their publications,
which are organized in descending order of number of publications.
The five most productive institutions are in Europe. The institutions ranked fifth,
fourth and third, respectively, are: Utrecht University, Sydney University of Technology
and Leiden University, having published six papers each. Wageningen University and
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 8 of 13
Research is in second place with 8 published papers, while the University of Sheffield is
the leading institution with a total of 12 published papers.
Table 2. List of the twenty-one most productive institutions.
Number Organization Number of
Items Citations Total Link
Strength
1 University of Sheffield 12 301 4
2 Wageningen University and Research 8 40 1
3 Leiden University 6 94 7
4 University of Technology Sydney 6 180 5
5 Utrecht University 6 148 2
6 Eth Zurich 6 32 1
7 Imperial College London 6 78 1
8 University of Southampton 6 150 1
9 University of Groningen 6 34 0
10 Delft University of Technology 5 138 5
11 University of Vienna 5 91 5
12 Cranfield University 5 24 4
13 University of Sydney 5 101 4
14 Coventry University 5 175 3
15 National University of Malaysia 5 353 3
16 University of Twente 5 98 3
17 University of Oxford 5 55 2
18 UNSW Sydney 5 20 2
19 University of Manchester 5 14 1
20 Ghent University 5 80 0
21 University of Tehran 5 40 0
The citations of an article show its academic contribution. The more citations an article
receives, the more relevant it is, and the institutions that publish them acquire a greater
weight in the field of research, which allows the academic level of these institutions to be
evaluated and classified.
Table 2shows the number of citations of the 21 most productive institutions with
respect to SSC research. The seven institutions with the highest number of citations are: the
National University of Malaysia (353 citations), University of Sheffield (301 citations), Syd-
ney University of Technology (180 citations), Coventry University (175 citations), University
of Southampton (150 citations), Utrecht University (148 citations) and Delft University of
Technology (138 citations).
Leiden University has a bond strength equal to 7, while the University of Technology
Sydney, Delft University of Technology and University of Vienna have a bond strength
equal to 5.
4. Discussion
The adoption of SSCs is currently a challenge that is developing more and more.
Researchers, academia and companies are facing this challenge, with the aim of improving
their practices, developing systems, generating tools and disseminating information on
the sustainability of supply chains in such a way that they are extremely environmentally
friendly. Although the level of adoption of sustainability in supply chains has increased
in recent years, it is necessary for more companies to join the practice, as it is much easier
to demonstrate the ecological and social relationship throughout supply chains. This is
congruent with what has been demonstrated by [29].
Nowadays, industries have to promote and contribute to environmental sustainability
from their productive activities, as carbon dioxide (CO
2
) emissions, global warming and
ozone layer degradation are clear evidence of how environmentally unfriendly industrial
practices are directly affecting the quality of life and ecosystems around the world. The use
of energy from non-renewable sources results in harmful CO
2
emissions, causing damage
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 9 of 13
to the environment, and in turn the presence of CO
2
in the environment is causing climate
change [
30
]. This is why many companies have decided to relate the environmental impact
they generate with their social and economic impact [31].
Business resilience in the face of green production systems is very limited, due to
the lack of initiative and information that organizations have on this issue. However,
there are studies such as the one by Joshi [
32
] which mention agile supply chains, green
supply chains, robust supply chains, flexible supply chains, environmentally friendly
supply chains and collaborative supply chains as elements of resilience and sustainability.
Similarly, Moshood et al. [
33
] highlight that today’s supply chains need to be agile and
flexible to respond positively to changes. For a supply chain to be agile, the application of the
following drivers is relevant: proper integration of supply chain flows and the willingness
to share information between supply chain partners [
34
]. For Liu et al. [
23
], the existence of
strong supplier flexibility would be a driver to ensure supplier flexibility in the face of the
adoption of environmental tools and policies that customers propose as requirements.
Encouraging the application of SSCs generates a great enhancement for the com-
pany that implements it, since this leads to its growth, a search for information and the
adaptation and creation of new circular logistics systems, thus generating innovation in
supply chains. Nilsson and Göransson [
35
] highlight influential factors in the creation of
innovation for supply chains, thus providing information to move from a linear supply
chain to a sustainable one. Ref. [
36
] points out that, in order to generate greater impact on
business systems, more information and studies on the Theory of Ecological Modernization
(TEM), which, when developed together with other theories, can generate innovation in
supply chain management industries, must be influenced and carried out. Bearing in
mind these references, it should be noted that the generation of more information related
to environmental sustainability in supply chains worldwide allows the companies that
implement these practices to stand out and increase their benefits.
It is important that there are more studies related to companies that have decided
to implement sustainable logistics systems, models, tools and theories that contribute to
the sustainability of supply chains. Chauhan et al. [
37
] also refer to the scarcity of studies
related to the selection of collaborative partners in supply chains, the implementation
of collaborative transportation, logistics and the role of technology in SSCs. Other orga-
nizations that have not yet decided to implement SSC models should propose to do so,
based on scientific evidence, which, together with the experiences of companies that have
decided to generate sustainable logistics, should provide accurate information and generate
more innovation initiatives. Even Assumpção et al. [
38
] emphasize that there is a lack of
information to perform SSC modeling, which leads to the use of simulated data to carry out
the modeling; this generates a gap at the time of application in a real environment, since it
is obvious that when applying the modeling it will generate variability.
The main limitations to the application of SSCs are: the lack of information exchange
between organizations, transparency and visibility; another limiting factor for the appli-
cation of sustainability in supply chains is the lack of product traceability, and the lack of
interest on the part of partners in implementing sustainability practices in their compa-
nies [
39
]. Similarly, Ayati et al. [
40
] emphasize the existence of obstacles when trying to
implement SSCs: a lack of technology; lack of information, data or studies related to the
subject; lack of knowledge; and lack of skills development for the implementation of envi-
ronmental tools. Other limitations include the absence of economic and financial elements,
challenges that must be faced to find a market that implements recovered materials in its
production processes and the absence of support and governmental regulations regarding
sustainable practices.
The adoption of environmentally friendly production, design and logistics systems
reduces the environmental impact generated by these practices; moreover, the implementa-
tion of an environmentally friendly philosophy not only benefits the ecosystem, but also
generates economic and competitive growth for companies [
41
]. In order to carry out the
adoption of SSCs, some alternatives are proposed:
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 10 of 13
1. Carbon tax: at this point, emphasis is placed on the application of standards that
require payment according to the environmental footprint generated.
2. Incentives for green certification: motivating organizations to direct their practices
towards sustainability could be achieved through the granting of incentives for companies
that have a sustainability certification.
3. Programs in which employees are trained towards sustainability: this alterna-
tive promotes that workers obtain information related to sustainability, so that they are
transmitters of this knowledge and thus achieve a social impact regarding sustainability.
4. Implement training for the organization’s managers and directors: this initiative
is intended to generate interest and instruct senior management on the benefits of imple-
menting sustainable practices, and at the same time generate social responsibility within
the company.
5. Promote environmental awareness through campaigns: attracting customer interest
through the dissemination of information on sustainability using different mechanisms
and spaces will generate customer interest in sustainable products and organizations that
develop environmentally friendly practices in their processes.
6. Process management with technology of things (IT): To plan strategies and obtain
information in real time, IT is important when implementing SS.
7. Implement environmental management systems: this refers to the adoption of
environmental management programs that govern the environment, such as ISO 14001.
8. Generate fair trade practices: this refers to motivating trade from raw material
producers to wholesalers and retailers of the finished product.
9. Incorporate worker safety programs: this is intended to emphasize that worker
health and safety is relevant throughout the supply chain.
10. Provide incentives for collaboration in sustainability: it is important to emphasize
that collaboration in supply chains contributes to reducing the whip effect, thereby ensuring
customer satisfaction. For this reason, the implementation of contribution incentives would
lead to benefits such as economic sustainability (circular economy) [42].
While it is true that the lack of information on SSCs is a limiting factor for more
companies to decide to innovate in logistics, this study contributes with information on
the countries that have developed the most SSC-related studies. This study contributes
by providing information on the countries that have developed the most studies related
to SSCs. The information shown in this study was obtained with the application of a
bibliometric analysis, in which the filtration of scientific articles was performed only in the
years 2020, 2021 and 2022, from the Dimensions digital platform, in such a way that it is
possible to demonstrate that, despite the restrictions that the whole world had in the face
of the COVID-19 pandemic, more information and business resilience continues to emerge
in the face of sustainability practices in the supply chain.
Knowing the incidence of SSCs in the development of research directed to the subject
shows the impact they have generated. Despite the barriers faced by companies for the
implementation of SSCs, the intent of this study was to show which countries and organi-
zations have decided to invest resources in the generation of information on the subject.
Under this environment, the present study sought to contribute with updated information
that refers to an interrelated network showing the relationship between the countries that
have most studied and developed topics related to SSCs; additionally, the organizations
where these studies were carried out were established, to serve as a consultation instru-
ment in order to determine which countries are at the vanguard regarding SSCs, in such
a way that those who are interested in the subject know the organizations with which
collaborations can be carried out for investigative purposes.
The literature review presented can be used for future research in which the drivers
and barriers that SSCs have and how these affect the adoption of SSCs in different scenarios
are evidenced.
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 11 of 13
5. Conclusions
In this study, a bibliometric analysis was used to identify which countries and institutions
have generated and disseminated information related to sustainable supply chains.
As a result of the research, it was determined that China is the country that has generated
the greatest contribution, followed by the United Kingdom and the United States.
When comparing the countries with the highest number of citations for their articles,
we found that the top three were the United Kingdom, China and the United States.
When comparing the correlation between institutions, it was found that 21 institutions
were the most productive in terms of publications on sustainable supply chains: Sheffield
University, Wageningen University and Research, Leiden University, University of Tech-
nology Sydney, Utrecht University, Eth Zurich, Imperial College London, University of
Southampton, University of Groningen, Delft University of Technology, University of Vi-
enna, Cranfield University, University of Sydney, Coventry University, National University
of Malaysia, University of Twente, University of Oxford, UNSW Sydney, University of
Manchester, Ghent University, University of Tehran.
In this regard, according to the number of publications they have generated, European
universities lead the list.
However, in the present study it was possible to identify that the countries at the top of
the list with the highest scientific contribution and the institutions with a strong correlation
link are located in the European continent.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization: F.E.R.-S. Data c ration: J.M.L.-B. and G.A.H.-B. Formal
analysis: I.D.R.B.-R. Funding acquisition: F.E.R.-S. Investigation: J.C.M.-A. Methodology: C.M.M.-Z.
Project administration: J.M.L.-B. Software: C.M.M.-Z. Supervision: J.C.M.-A. Validation: C.M.M.-Z.
Visualization: G.A.H.-B. Writing—original draft: C.M.M.-Z. Writing—review & editing: J.C.M.-A. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Jamshidi, R.; Ghomi, S.F.; Karimi, B. Multi-objective green supply chain optimization with a new hybrid memetic algorithm using
the Taguchi method. Sci. Iran. 2012,19, 1876–1886. [CrossRef]
2.
Geng, R.; Lam, H.K.S.; Stevenson, M. Addressing modern slavery in supply chains: An awareness-motivation-capability
perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022,42, 331–356. [CrossRef]
3. Chen, C.-C.; Shih, H.-S.; Shyur, H.-J.; Wu, K.-S. A business strategy selection of green supply chain management via an analytic
network process. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012,64, 2544–2557. [CrossRef]
4.
Menon, R.R.; Ravi, V. Analysis of barriers of sustainable supply chain management in electronics industry: An interpretive
structural modelling approach. Clean. Responsible Consum. 2021,3, e100026. [CrossRef]
5. Stahel, W. The circular economy. Nature 2016,531, 435–438. [CrossRef]
6.
Tedesco, S.; Montacchini, E. From Textile Waste to Resource: A Methodological Approach of Research and Experimentation.
Sustainability 2020,12, 10667. [CrossRef]
7.
Mogale, D.; De, A.; Ghadge, A.; Aktas, E. Multi-objective modelling of sustainable closed-loop supply chain network with
price-sensitive demand and consumer’s incentives. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2022,168, 108105. [CrossRef]
8.
Yamamoto, T.; Merciai, S.; Mogollón, J.M.; Tukker, A. The role of recycling in alleviating supply chain risk–Insights from a
stock-flow perspective using a hybrid input-output database. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022,185, 106474. [CrossRef]
9.
Cifuentes-Faura, J. European Union policies and their role in combating climate change over the years. Air Qual. Atmosphere
Health 2022,15, 1333–1340. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
10.
Rizos, V.; Elkerbout, M.; Egenhofer, C. Circular economy for climate neutrality: Setting the priorities for the EU. CEPS Place du
Congrès, 22 November 2019. Available online: www.ceps.eu (accessed on 2 August 2022).
11.
de Souza, E.; Kerber, J.; Bouzon, M.; Rodriguez, C. Performance evaluation of green logistics: Paving the way towards circular
economy. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain 2022,3, 100019. [CrossRef]
12.
Becerra, P.; Mula, J.; Sanchis, R. Green supply chain quantitative models for sustainable inventory management: A review.
J. Clean. Prod. 2021,328, 129544. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 12 of 13
13.
Younis, H.; Sundarakani, B.; O’Mahony, B. Investigating the relationship between green supply chain management and corporate
performance using a mixed method approach: Developing a roadmap for future research. IIMB Manag. Rev.
2019
,32, 305–324.
[CrossRef]
14.
Geng, R.; Mansouri, S.A.; Aktas, E. The relationship between green supply chain management and performance: A meta-analysis
of empirical evidences in Asian emerging economies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017,183, 245–258. [CrossRef]
15.
Gandhi, S.; Mangla, S.K.; Kumar, P.; Kumar, D. Evaluating factors in implementation of successful green supply chain management
using DEMATEL: A case study. Int. Strateg. Manag. Rev. 2015,3, 96–109. [CrossRef]
16.
Gonzalez, C.; Agrawal, V.; Johansen, D.; Hooker, R. Green supply chain practices: The role of institutional pressure, market
orientation, and managerial commitment. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain 2022,5, 100067. [CrossRef]
17.
Moreno-Miranda, C.; Dries, L. Integrating coordination mechanisms in the sustainability assessment of agri-food chains: From a
structured literature review to a comprehensive framework. Ecol. Econ. 2022,192, 107265. [CrossRef]
18.
Xu, S.; Tang, H.; Lin, Z.; Lu, J. Pricing and sales-effort analysis of dual-channel supply chain with channel preference, cross-channel
return and free riding behavior based on revenue-sharing contract. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022,249, 108506. [CrossRef]
19.
Schultz, F.C.; Everding, S.; Pies, I. Circular supply chain governance: A qualitative-empirical study of the European polyurethane
industry to facilitate functional circular supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,317, 128445. [CrossRef]
20.
Martin-Breen, P.; Anderies, J.M. Resilience: A Literature Review. The Bellagio Initiative: The Future of Philanthropy and
Development in the Pursuit of Human Wellbeing. 2011. Available online: http://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/123456
789/3692 (accessed on 5 August 2022).
21.
Tseng, M.-L.; Lin, Y.-H.; Tan, K.H.; Chen, R.-H.; Chen, Y.-H. Using TODIM to evaluate green supply chain practices under
uncertainty. Appl. Math. Model. 2014,38, 2983–2995. [CrossRef]
22.
Castiglione, C.; Alfieri, A. Economic sustainability under supply chain and eco-industrial park concurrent design. Procedia CIRP
2020,90, 19–24. [CrossRef]
23.
Franchina, L.; Calabrese, A.; Inzerilli, G.; Scatto, E.; Brutti, G.; Bonanni, M.V.d.L. Thinking green: The role of smart technologies in
transforming cities’ waste and supply Chain’s flow. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2021,2, 100077. [CrossRef]
24.
Rad, F.F.; Oghazi, P.; Palmié, M.; Chirumalla, K.; Pashkevich, N.; Patel, P.C.; Sattari, S. Industry 4.0 and supply chain performance:
A systematic literature review of the benefits, challenges, and critical success factors of 11 core technologies. Ind. Mark. Manag.
2022,105, 268–293. [CrossRef]
25.
Muyulema-Allaica, J.C.; Ruiz-Puente, M.C. Framework proposal for the design of lean circular production systems based on case
studies. DYNA 2022,97, 515–521. [CrossRef]
26.
Anugerah, A.R.; Muttaqin, P.S.; Trinarningsih, W. Social Network Analysis in Business and Management Research: A Bibliometric
Analysis of the Research Trend and Performance from 2001 to 2020. Heliyon 2022,8, e09270. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27.
Monteiro, J.; Barata, J. Artificial Intelligence in Extended Agri-Food Supply Chain: A Short Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis.
Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021,192, 3020–3029. [CrossRef]
28.
Malacina, I.; Teplov, R. Supply chain innovation research: A bibliometric network analysis and literature review. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
2022,251, 108540. [CrossRef]
29.
Govindan, K.; Hasanagic, M. A systematic review on drivers, barriers, and practices towards circular economy: A supply chain
perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018,56, 278–311. [CrossRef]
30.
Karthick, B.; Uthayakumar, R. Impact of carbon emission reduction on supply chain model with manufacturing decisions and
dynamic lead time under uncertain demand. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain 2022,4, 100037. [CrossRef]
31.
Menon, R.R.; Ravi, V. Analysis of enablers of sustainable supply chain management in electronics industries: The Indian context.
Clean. Eng. Technol. 2021,5, 100302. [CrossRef]
32.
Joshi, S. A review on sustainable supply chain network design: Dimensions, paradigms, concepts, framework and future
directions. Sustain. Oper. Comput. 2022,3, 136–148. [CrossRef]
33.
Moshood, T.D.; Nawanir, G.; Mahmud, F.; Sorooshian, S.; Adeleke, A. Green and low carbon matters: A systematic review of the
past, today, and future on sustainability supply chain management practices among manufacturing industry. Clean. Eng. Technol.
2021,4, 100144. [CrossRef]
34.
Oliveira-Dias, D.; Maqueira-Marín, J.M.; Moyano-Fuentes, J. The link between information and digital technologies of industry
4.0 and agile supply chain: Mapping current research and establishing new research avenues. Comput. Ind. Eng.
2022
,167, 108000.
[CrossRef]
35.
Nilsson, F.; Göransson, M. Critical factors for the realization of sustainable supply chain innovations—Model development based
on a systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,296, 126471. [CrossRef]
36.
Assumpção, J.J.; Campos, L.M.; Plaza-Úbeda, J.A.; Sehnem, S.; Vazquez-Brust, D.A. Green Supply Chain Management and
business innovation. J. Clean. Prod. 2022,367, 132877. [CrossRef]
37.
Chauhan, C.; Kaur, P.; Arrawatia, R.; Ractham, P.; Dhir, A. Supply chain collaboration and sustainable development goals (SDGs).
Teamwork makes achieving SDGs dream work. J. Bus. Res. 2022,147, 290–307. [CrossRef]
38.
Tavana, M.; Kian, H.; Nasr, A.K.; Govindan, K.; Mina, H. A comprehensive framework for sustainable closed-loop supply chain
network design. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,332, 129777. [CrossRef]
39.
Roy, T.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, A.; Agrawal, R. Redesigning traditional linear supply chains into circular supply
chains–A study into its challenges. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022,31, 113–126. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022,14, 13039 13 of 13
40.
Ayati, S.M.; Shekarian, E.; Majava, J.; Wæhrens, B.V. Toward a circular supply chain: Understanding barriers from the perspective
of recovery approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 2022,359, 611–621. [CrossRef]
41.
Alzubi, E.; Akkerman, R. Sustainable supply chain management practices in developing countries: An empirical study of
Jordanian manufacturing companies. Clean. Prod. Lett. 2022,2, 100005. [CrossRef]
42.
Hussain, M.; Awasthi, A.; Tiwari, M.K. Interpretive structural modeling-analytic network process integrated framework for
evaluating sustainable supply chain management alternatives. Appl. Math. Model. 2016,40, 3671–3687. [CrossRef]
