Multi Criteria Decision Making approaches for. Green supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review

Transcription

1 Multi Criteria Decision Making approaches for Green supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review ABSTRACT The literatures related to supplier evaluation and selections are plentiful, but the works on green supplier evaluation or supplier evaluation that considers environmental factors rather limited. In recent years of supply chain, the performances of the suppliers are mainly evaluated based on green or environmental criteria accompanied with the traditional criteria. This paper reviews the literature of multi criteria decision making approaches which mainly considers the green criteria as major part for supplier selection in this works the articles appeared as international scientific journal in the recent years about green supplier selection are analyzed in the following way for review of green supplier evaluation and selection (i) Application of MCDM tools (ii) focusing on evaluation criteria (iii) sensitivity analysis, this research aids to researchers and decision makers in applying the MCDM tool effectively Keywords: green supplier evaluation, multi criteria decision, green criteria. 1. INTRODUCTION: Supplier selection process is one of the key operational tasks for sustainable supply chain partnership with environmentally socially and economically powerful supplier should enhance the performance of the supply chain. Due to the current awareness in the environmental aspects, the assortment of the supplier has turned their way and made focus on the green criteria base more than habitual way. There has been many multi criteria decision 1

2 making approaches which proposes an hybrid way for the green supplier selection such as data envelopment analysis(dea),analytical network process(anp) fuzzy analytic hierarchy process(fahp) and so on. Only few journal articles review the literature about the green supplier evaluation and selection models. (Genovese et.al. 2010). In this work, the journals are surveyed based on multi criteria green supplier evaluation and selection approaches through an international journal articles from 2000 to Based on the 33 journal articles searched via (Emerald, science direct, IEEE, and Springer etc.) the following issues are examined. (i) application of MCDM tool (ii) focusing on evaluation criteria (iii) sensitivity analysis. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2 describe the individual approaches and integrated approaches critically. Section 3 discusses the most popular evaluating criteria and most prevalently used approaches. Section 4 discusses the result and future work. Section 5 finally draws the conclusion. 2. MCDM TOOLS APPROACHES The green supplier selection has made a glean process and it is mostly based on multi criteria based. Researchers have developed many tools for multi criteria decision making and the mostly fuzzy based. From the analysis of articles, the researches applied the MCDM tools in individual way as well as in integrated way. 2.1 Individual approaches Analytical hierarchy process Six out of (18.2%) journal articles proposes AHP (AHP, FAHP, FEAHP) for green supplier selection process. The application and evaluating criteria used in the approaches are summarized in Appendix 1. 2

3 Lee et al. (2009) applied FAHP with Delphi method to evaluate the supplier initially the author applied Delphi method to differentiate the criteria for evaluating traditional and green supplier. To overcome the deficiencies of conventional AHP, FHAP was used to solve the green supplier selection and it shows the approach is relatively carries less time taking and less computational expenses. This tool was applied with total of 11 main criteria and 41 sub criteria. Noci (1997) proposed the modified version of AHP based method for the assessment of the vendor s environmental efficiency. In auto mobile company the tool was applied with five steps to calculate the priority of each supplier in achieving the goal of high environmental performance; the supplies (or) suppliers that achieve the highest scores must be selected. Handfield et al. (2002) illustrate the case of AHP as a decision support model to help managers understand the trade-offs between environmental dimensions. The author demonstrated how AHP can be used to evaluate the relative importance of various environmental traits and access the relative performance of several suppliers along the traits. Chiou et al. (2008) applied FHAP for selection of green supplied under identification of 6 criteria with 24 sub criteria. The tool was applied to determine the relative importance for selecting green supplier among the American, Japanese and Taiwanese electronics industry in china. Lu et al. (2007) applied AHP to measure a multi objective project to help to evaluate and coordinate green supplier further with this study, to reduce the subjective types in designing a weighting system, buzzy logic process is used to modify the AHP. Grisi et al. (2010) implement a fuzzy AHP for green supplier evaluation with the 7 step approach of AHP, the weights of each individual evaluation criteria s obtained and in 3

4 which fuzzy logic was adopted to overcome the uncertainty arising from human qualitative judgment Analytic network process In this previous four papers (12.1%) proposed ANP to handle the green supplier evaluation and selection. The application and evaluating criteria used in this approaches are summarized in Appendix 2. Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) developed a noval approach based as fuzzy analytic network process with in multi-person decision making schema under incomplete preference relation. The author believes that this method not only makes sufficient evaluation using the provided preference information, but also maintains the consistency level of the evaluation. Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) applied ANP for green supplier selection because of characterization by interdependencies among decision structure components. As per author suggestion ANP case capture both quantitative and qualitative criteria and reflect more realistic results among decision attributes and it offer insights to managers in selecting suppliers systematically Mathematical Programming Six out of (9.1%) journal articles proposes mathematical programing for green supplier selection process. The application and evaluating criteria used in the approaches are summarized in Appendix 3. Yeh and Chuang (2011) develops and optimal mathematical planning model for green partner selection which involves four objectives. They adopted two multi-objective genetic algorithm (MOGA) to find the set of pareto-solution, which utilized the weighted sum approach and compared average number of paerato operational solution and CPU times of two algorithms. 4

5 Chiou et.al. (2011) develops a structural equation modeling for the data analysis used to implement the proposal for green innovation in order to improve the environmental performance and enhance the competitive advantage in the global market of the company. Large and Thomson (2011) developed a Structural Equation Model by degree of green criteria which explains the environmental performance and the purchasing performance. The model was analyzed with smartpls 2.0 software using data collected by survey Other approaches There are twelve (36.3%) papers out of thirty three journals proposes other approaches and their application and evaluating criteria are summarized in Appendix 4. Bai and Sarkis (2010) applied Rough set methodology which utilizes an incomplete information approach which is more realistic in source data poor environments for green supplier development. There also a limitation and practical managerial concerns with this MCDM tool such as the number of rules can become quite large depending on the volume of the data to be analyzed. Vachon and Klassen (2005) applied Chi-Square Test for exploring the operational performance of green partnership in supply chain. In this study, the data from survey was used for testing the linkage between green project partnership and five performance indicators. Zhang and Li (2001) proposed a fussy multi-agent decision making strategy to facilitate supplier. It was used to evaluate the environmental performance of the suppliers and the life cycle environmental impact of the purchased product. Yand and Wu (2007) was constructed the multi-level grey entropy synthetic evaluation model for evaluation of the green supplier. The evaluation process indicates that it was easier to implement the method in enterprises. The main aspect of this model was lower 5

6 hierarchy weight factors was avoided. So the result is more objective than other evaluation methods. Yang and Wu (2008) developed the multi-level extensible synthetic evaluation model based on the grey entropy synthetic evaluation model for green supplier evaluation. This model overcomes the lower weight factor avoidance and the result was more objective than other evaluation methods. Kumar and Jain (2010) proposed a comprehensive approach DEA for green supplier s selection using carbon footprint monitoring, which cuts across a huge variety of supplier base, caters to almost all businesses in environment friendly and robust. The approach encourages suppliers to go green and cut down their carbon foot prints in order to survive the competition. Hong-jun and Bin (2010) applied the factor analysis by using social science statistical software for identification of main factors for green supplier selection. The factor analysis is used to confirm the indices weights of each level where the method can avoid the subjectivity of AHP. There also some limitation of this study such as different indices for different industry and sampling which affect the conclusion. Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010) proposed a multi criteria evaluation model, Choquet Integral approach for supplier performance evaluation by considering various performance criteria. The important feature of this operator is its ability to take into account the criteria dependencies. The proposed method is showed to be more appropriate compared to other methods based on arithmetic mean. Humphreys et al. (2006) proposed the fussy based system for green supplier selection based on the quantitative and qualitative environmental criteria. The major benefits of this system are that in a computationally inexpensive manner the proposed system is capable of implementing a range of user priorities that influence to varying degrees the system output. 6

7 The hierarchical fussy system with scalable fussy membership function employed, imparts user priorities into the system that can gently or strongly influence the supplier selection process. 2.2 Integrated approaches From the review it has been found that only eight papers (24.2%) dealt with the integrated approaches and they are summarized in Appendix 5. Humphreys et al. (2003) implemented Knowledge Based System with subset of Case Based Reasoning which integrates the environmental criteria into the green supplier selection process and provides the guidelines for purchasing managers to select suppliers from environmental view point. Kuo et al. (2010) developed green supplier selection model which integrates Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and Multi Attribute Decision Analysis (MADA); Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Analytical Network Process (AHP). From the study it has been discovered that ANN-MADA has better power of discrimination and noise insensitivity in evaluating green supplier s performance. It also overcomes the DEA draw backs and limitation of data accuracy and decision making units among constraints. Wen and Chi (2010) introduced Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) into the assessment of green supplier selection combined with AHP to establish an integrated model. The advantage of this model was to overcome the limitation of individual approach of traditional tools such as AHP and ANP for evaluation of supplier. In this model DEA distinguishes the efficient candidates of supplier from the entire group. So as to AHP/ANP can proceed further analysis without making effort an unnecessary suppliers. Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) applied an Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) for green supply chain supplier selection process, which allows the decision maker to 7

8 structure complex problems. Added to AHP model, the author proposed the consensus final decision by Artificial Neural Network by minimizing a limitation error set. Li and Zhao (2009) used the integrated approach, the threshold method and grey correlation analysis for assessment of index system for supplier of vehicle components. Author adopts AHP to determine weight of factors as it is the fundamental and importance for comprehensive assessment. The grey relational analysis measures the size of correlation between the two factors. Yan (2009) proposed the integrated approach of adopting genetic algorithm combined with AHP to achieve green supplier optimization evaluation selection. The common way of achieved green supplier selection was to accomplish through matrix with AHP. But the weights are static and lack of dynamic optimization adjustments mechanism. So the author introduces genetic algorithm combined with current weights of supplier to dynamically adjust weights. So the supplier evaluation indicators become more evident and optimized, while the system can adjust dynamically on time for the better supplier evaluation indicator. Chen et al. (2010) applied the hybrid method, fuzzy set theory accompanied with grey relational analysis for the green supplier selection. The fuzzy set theory is a mathematical theory designed to model the fuzziness of human cognitive process. This study involves in uncertainty, the proposed method uses the linguistic preferences for deriving the priorities of different selection alternatives and set up grey numbers in all criteria and alternatives to avoid the negligence of same criteria. Kuo and Lin (2011) proposed a method which integrates analysis network process (ANP) as well as data envelopment analysis (DEA) for green supplier evaluation. As per author opinion the model of DEA and ANP which considers the interdependency between criteria. This also removes the constraints of DEA that users cannot set up their own criteria weight preferences. The proposed evaluation method also solves the limitation of the number 8

9 of decision making units (DMUs). At the same time according to DEA result, suggestions for improvement are provided to supplier. 2.3 Sensitivity Analysis Awasthi et al. (2010) proposed a approach which consist of three steps such as identification of criteria, experts rating and assessment of experts rating through fussy TOPSIS methodology. The results of the methodology was highest scores is chosen as the one with the highest environmental performance. The advantages of using fussy TOPSIS is that it distinguishes between benefit and cost category criteria. From the review it has been found that sensitivity analysis was carried in this paper (3%) to evaluate the influence of criteria weights on the environmental performance evaluation of suppliers. The strength of the proposed approach is its practical applicability and ability to provide solution under partial lack of quantitative information. 3. OBSERVATION AND RECOMMENDATION In this review thirty three journal articles related to green supplier evaluation and selection were collected and analyzed on the base of MCDM tool approach and evaluation criteria. All the papers which were collected dealt with multi criteria decision making approaches including individual and integrated approaches. The following section present the observation made from the analysis Widely used approach Researchers have developed many tools for multi criteria decision making and they are mostly fuzzy based. Due to uncertainty, if the fuzziness arrives in the data decision making, it becomes vague and hard. The primary objective of this paper is to find out the most popular 9

10 approach adopted in the supplier evaluation and selection literature. As described in the previous section, there are twenty five papers (75.75%) used individual approach and eight papers (24.24%) used the integrated approach. The most popular individual approach is AHP followed by ANP, DEA and other tools. As the supplier selection problem involves both qualitative and quantitative criteria, AHP not only can adequately handle the inherent uncertainty and impression of human decision making process, but also can provide the robustness and flexibility needed for decision maker to understand the decision problem. AHP shows the performance of supplier with respect to each sub criteria and main criteria. So it shows the supplier status on each criterion. There are various integrated approaches for supplier selection. From the analysis it was notices that integrated AHP approach is more popular. Due to the simplicity, ease of use and flexibility AHP has been integrated with DEA, ANN, GA, and fussy set theory. The major reason for integration is that the individual techniques possess unique advantages. The consistency verification operation of AHP contributes greatly to prevent inconsistency because it acts as a feedback mechanism for the makers to review and revise the judgment 3.2 Widely used evaluation criterion In most of the recent studies both time-honored and ecological criteria are considered for supplier selection. Many criteria were proposed and they are summarized in Appendix 8. Quantitative environmental criteria articulated in monetary term and qualitative environmental criterion which focuses on the company image is selected for the supplier selection (Humbherys et al. 2003). The major criteria which are considered for supplier development are environmental system and quality (Grisi et al. (2010). Some studies are based on the potential drivers like GSCM capabilities, Strategic level of 10

11 purchasing department, the level of environmental commitment, degree of green supplier assessment and degree of green supplier collaboration (Large & Thomsen 2011).In portfolio based analysis, pollution production, control and prevention is considered as the environmental factors (Zhu, Dou & Sarkis 2010).There is a study in effect of four drivers namely regulation, customer pressure, social responsibility and business benefits on green purchasing (Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011). Chen et al. (2010) states that companies must engross suppliers and purchasers to congregate and even exceed the environmental expectation of their customers and their governments. Many manufacturing concerns organize through the outsourcing and thus the companies are vitally dependent on their supplier. Most of the companies ask their suppliers to implement ISO14001 since the standard becomes a prevalent tool for the environmental aspects (Chen et al. (2010). Buyukuzkan and cifci (2011) considered the environmental factors in the way of sustainable supply chain (social, economic and environmental). Based on the above findings, it was revealed that green knowledge transfer is most widely adopted criterion and supplier selection was based on environmental criteria combined with traditional criteria. 4. RESULTS AND FUTURE WORK From the review it has been found that individual approaches were used more than the integral approaches and environmental criterion not precisely focused in many articles. Also in reality, the weightings of supplier evaluating criteria depend a lot on business priorities and strategies. In case where the weightings are assigned arbitrarily and subjectively, this leads to the supplier selection not up to the company requirements. Many approaches works for selection of the suitable supplier but not recommends the mode of failure to the failed supplier. From the study, it was notices that sensitivity analysis was not carried in many 11

12 literatures. Sensitivity analysis investigates the impacts of criteria weights on the selection of supplier with best environmental performance by changing the weights of the criteria for several experiments. So it has to be carried in future MCDM approaches. 5. CONCLUSION This paper review the multi criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection on literature from 2000 to 2011 and it has been found that many individual and integrated approaches were proposed for supplier selection. The literature review has highlighted that the implementation of green issue within the supplier selection process is limited as relatively lower number of papers published. Besides some recommendation are made for to aid the researchers and decision makers in solving the green supplier selection problem effectively. References Awasthi, A., Chauhan,S. S., & Goyal, S. K., (2010). A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers. International Journal of Production Economics, 126, Bai, C., & Sarkis, J., (2010). Green supplier development: analytical evaluation using rough set theory. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, Bala, A., Paco Muñoz, P., Rieradevall J., & Ysern,P., Experiences with greening suppliers. The Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Journal of Cleaner Production,16 (15), Buyukozkan, G., & CifcI, G., (2011). A novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for sustainable supplier selection with incomplete information. Computers in Industry, 62,

13 Büyüközkan, G., & Çifçi, G., (2010). Evaluation of the green supply chain practices: a fuzzy ANP approach. Production Planning & Control, ifirst, Cao, H., (2011). The study of the suppliers evaluating and choosing strategies based on the green supply chain. Internaltional Conference on BMEI, IEEE, 3 (13-15) May, Chen, C.C., Tseng, M.L., Lin, Y.H., & Lin, Z.S., (2010). Implementation of green supply chain in uncertainty. International Conference on IEEM, IEEE 7-10 Dec, Chiou, T. Y., Chan, H. K., Lettice, F., & Chung, S. H., (2011). The Influence of Greening the Suppliers and Green Innovation on Performance and Competitive Advantage in Taiwan. Transportation Research, Part E, 47, Chiou,C.Y., Hsu, C.W., Hwang, & W.Y., (2008). Comparative investigation on green supplier selection of the American, Japanese and Taiwanese Electronics Industry in China. International Conference on IE&EM, IEEE 8-11 Dec, Chia-Wei, H., & Hu, A.H.,( 2007). Application of analytic network process on supplier selection to hazardous substance in green supply chain. International Conference on IEEM, IEEE 2-4 Dec, Grisi, R. M., Guerra, L., & Naviglio, G., (2010). Supplier Performance Evaluation for Green Supply Chain Management. Business Performance Measurement and Management, Part 4, e ioglu, O., & Büyüközkan, G., (2010). Evaluation of Green Suppliers Considering Decision Criteria Dependencies. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems 1, 634, Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems, Part 2,

14 Handfield, R., Walton, S. V., Sroufe, R.,& Melnyk, S. A., (2002). Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 141, Hsu, C. W., & Allen, H. H., (2009). Applying hazardous substance to supplier selection using analytic network process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, Humphreys, P., McIvor, R., & Chan, F., (2003). Using case-based reasoning to evaluate supplier environmental performance. Expert Systems with Applications, 25, Humphreys, P. K., Wong, Y.K., & Chan, F.T.S., (2003). Integrating environmental criteria into the supplier selection process. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 138 (1-3), Humphreys,P., McCloskey,A., McIvor, R., Maguire, L., & Glackin, C., (2006). Employing dynamic fuzzy membership functions to assess environmental performance in the supplier selection process. International Journal of Production Research 44, (12) Hong-jun, L., & Bin, L., (2010). A Research on Supplier Assessment Indices System of Green Purchasing. International Conference on ICEE, IEEE March, Kumar, A., & Jain, V., (2010). Supplier selection: A green approach with carbon footprint monitoring. International Conference on SCMIS, IEEE 6-9 Oct, 1-9. Kuo, R. J., & Lin, Y. J., (2011). Supplier selection using analytic network process and data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 1 12, ifirst. Kuo, R.J., Wang, Y.C., & Tien, F.C., (2010). Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18 (12),

15 Large, R. O., & Thomsen, C. G., (2011). Drivers of green supply performance: Evidence from Germany. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 17 (3), Lee, A. H. I., Kang, H. Y., Hsu, C. F., & Hung, H. C., (2009). A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, Li, X., & Zhao, C., (2009). Selection of suppliers of vehicle components based on green supply chain. International Conference on IE&EM, IEEE Oct, Lu, L.Y.Y., Wu, C.H., & Kuo, T.C., (2007). principles applicable to green supplier evaluation by using multi-objective decision analysis. International Journal of Production Research 45, (18-19) Noci, G., (1997). Designing green vendor rating s stems for the assessment of a suppliers environmental performance. European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 3 (2), Shang, K. C., Lu, C. S., & Li, S., (2010). Taxonomy of green supply chain capability among electronics-related manufacturing firms in Taiwan. Journal of Management, 91, Thongchattu, C., & Siripokapirom, S.,(2010). Green supplier selection consensus by neural network. International Conference on ICMEE, IEEE 1-3 Aug, Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D., (2006). Green project partnership in the supply chain: the case of the package printing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, Van Der Zee, D.J., Van Der Vorst, J. G. A. J., (2005). A Modeling Framework for Supply Chain Simulation: Opportunities for Improved Decision Making. Decision Sciences, 36 Wen, U.P., & Chi, J.M.,(2010). Developing green supplier selection procedure: A DEA approach. International Conference on IE&EM, IEEE Oct,

16 Yan, G., (2009).Research on Green Suppliers' Evaluation Based on AHP & Genetic Algorithm. International Conference on SPS, IEEE May, Yang, Y., Wu, L., (2007). Grey Entropy Method for Green Supplier Selection. International Conference on WiCom, IEEE Sept, Yang, Y., & Wu, L., (2008). Extension Method for Green Supplier Selection. International Conference on WiCom, IEEE Oct, 1 4. Yeh, W. C., & Chuang, M. C., (2011). Using multi-objective genetic algorithm for partner selection in green supply chain problems. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, Zhang, H.C., Li, J., & Merchant, M. E., (2003). Using Fuzzy Multi-Agent Decision-Making In ly Conscious Supplier Management. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, 52 (1),

17 Appendix 1 Analytical Hierarchy Process - Application and Evaluating Criteria S.N Authors Application o Main Criteria 1 Noci (1997) 2 Handfield et al. (2002) 3 Chiou et al. (2008) Automobile Industry Automotive, Apparel and Paper Manufacture r Electronic Industry Green Competencies Current efficiency Supplier's Green image Net Life cycle cost Product attributes Waste Labeling/certificatio n Packaging/reverse logistics Compliance to Government Regs. Pgms at the supplier s facilities Availability of green technologies 17 Evaluating Criteria Sub Criteria Type of Material used in the supplied component Capacity to respond in time Air Emision Solid Wastes Waste Water Customers purchase retention Cost of the supplied component Type of relationship with stackholders Cost of component disposal Market share related to green customers Depreciation for improvement Supply chain base Cost Quality Delivery schedule Energy consumption Service performance

18 4 Lu et al. (2007) 5 Grisi et al. (2010) Electronics Industry Green competencies systems performance Corporate social responsibilities Risk factor criteria Supply chain stages Green material selection ISO certification Green design Public disclosure of environmental record Government & local rules / regulations Cleaner production technologies Eco-labeling Use of toxic/restricted substances Green image Political stability Reduced green packaging Supplier environmental evaluation Remanufacturing/reus e activities Relationship with stakeholders Suppliers credit Reverse logistics information system Waste Contributions to community Internal system Gaseous residue Materials Energy use Solid residue Liquid residue End of life Premanufacturin g Product manufacture Price Price of goods Shipping costs Quality of Delivery Quality Response to specific requests of the company Increased rate of return of the product Timeliness Increased average waiting time Distribution, packaging Costs of pollution effects Processes for internal audit quality Product use,maintenance Rates and customs taxes Competences Availability of clean technologies ecological materials Ability to respond to reduce the environmental impact 18

19 Management System policies Planning Implementation and operation ISO Green Image Segment of green customers Type of relationship Customers fidelization Current Impact Immission of air pollution Substances discharged into the sewer Solid waste produced Power consumption Quality Quality-related certificates Capability of quality Capability of handling abnormal quality Technology capability Technology level Capability of R&D Capability of design Capability of preventing pollution Total product life cycle cost Cost of component disposal 6 Lee et al. (2009) Electronics Industry Green image Ratio of green customers to total customers Social responsibility Pollution control Air emissions Waste water Solid wastes Energy consumption Use of harmful materials Environment Environmentrelated certificates Continuous monitoring and regulatory compliance Green process planning Internal control process Green product Recycle Green packaging Green competencies Materials used in the supplied components that reduce the impact on natural resources Ability to alter process and product for reducing the impact on natural resources 19

20 Appendix 2 Analytical Network Process - Application and Evaluating Criteria S.No Authors Application 1 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Hsu and Hu (2007) Commercial Industry- White Goods Company in Turkey Electronic Industry Main Criteria Organization Financial Performance Service Quality Technology Social responsibility & competencies Procurement Management R&D Management Process Management Incoming Quality Control Requirement of green purchasing Capability of green design Management for hazardous substances Standard for incoming quality control Evaluating Criteria Sub Criteria Green materials coding and recording Inventory of hazardous substances Prevention of mixed material Test equipment Inventory of substitute material Legalcompliance competency Process auditing Record of incoming quality control Supplier Management Pre-shipment inspection Warehouse Management System Quality control for system for system Hazardous substance for system Information Systems 3 Hsu and Hu (2009) Electronic Industry Procurement Requirement of green purchasing Green materials coding and recording Inventory of substitute material Suppliers 20

21 R&D Process Incoming quality control Capability of green design Management for hazardous substances Standard for incoming quality control Inventory of hazardous substances Prevention of mixed material Test equipment Legalcompliance competency Process auditing Record of incoming quality control Pre-shipment inspection Warehouse Management system Quality system system Hazardous substance system Information Systems Organizational performance dimension Quality Cost Time Flexibility 4 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Manufacturing Industry Green Logistics Dimension Green organizational activities dimension Alternative green supply chain systems, projects,practices, etc. Procurement Production Distribution Reverse L. Packaging Reduce Recycle Remanufacture Reuse Disposal Current system System A System B 21

22 Appendix 3 Mathematical Programing Approaches- Application and Evaluating Criteria S.No Approaches Authors Application Evaluating Criteria Greening the supplier Green product innovation 1 Confirmatory Factory Analysis Chiou et.al. (2011) performance Competitive advantage Survey on Many Green process innovation Industry Green managerial innovation cost 2 MOGA Yeh and Chuang (2011) Electronics Industry Transportation Time Yield Air pollution treatment cost 3 Structural Equation Model Large and Thomsen (2011) Strategic level of purchasing commitment Purchasing s environmental capabilities Green supplier assessment Green collaboration with suppliers performance improvement Purchasing performance 22

23 Appendix 4 Other Approaches- Application and Evaluating Criteria S.No Approaches Authors Application 1 2 Chi Square Test Choquet integral Vachon and Klassen (2005) Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010) Package Printing Industry White Good Producer Main Criteria Manufacturing performance Green projects partnership Contextual variables Evaluating Criteria Sub Criteria Cost Quality Delivery Flexibility Partnership with suppliers Plant size Partnership with customers Parent company size Product Cost Product price Freight cost Product Quality Service Performance Performance Rejection rate of the product Delivery performance competencies costs Increased lead time Technology and RD support Existing environmental systems Reinvestment rate Tariff and custom duties Quality assessment Responsiveness Design for environment Age of presses Remedy for quality problems Ease of communication Production for environment Supplier base Supplier reputation Logistics for environment 3 DEA 4 Extensible Synthetic Model Kumar and Jain (2010) Yang and Wu (2008) Electrical appliances manufacturing Carbon foot print Quality Price Quality system Process capability exponent Total quality Rate of certified product 23

24 Capability of suppliers Supplying capability Level of technique Capability of product development Influence degree in market P/E ratio Service Accurate rate of processing order Rate of delivery Time to solve complaint Degree of information modernized Service manner Environment protection ISO14001 certification Green design of product Validity of clean technique Environment efficiency Management Systems and Credit Standing Enterprise systems Management systems Management ideas Researching and developing direction Enterprise credit standing Supply chain Supply in time Strategic cooperation Quality Credit Financial status of supplier Supply chain Solving problems with suppliers Cost of product Complaint for product Training for employee Culture compatibility between company Supply chain Communication with other companies 5 Factor Analysis Hong-jun and Bin (2010) Manufacturing Industry Eco-design Reuse of package when design Reduction the use of hazard materials when design Rebuild of products when design Reduction of package when design Recycle, reuse and resume of products when design Operation Innovation of technique Productivity ISO9000 certification Outside environmental Waste of water Exhaust gas Recycle system for wastes Dealing with hazard solid waste friendly behavior assessment to second-tier supplier authentication ISO14001cetification Eco-label of products 24

25 - Pollutant Effects Solid Waste Chemical Waste Air Emision Waste water disposal Energy - Improvement Costs Buying new friendly material Buying new environmentaly friendly technology Redesign of product Staff Training Recycling 6 Fuzzy Inference Method Humphreys et al. (2006) Toxic Gas Database Green Image Customer Purchasing retension Green Market Share Stakeholders Relationship Design for Environment Recycle Reuse Re Manufacture Disassembly Disposal Env.Mgmt System Env.Policies Env.Planning Implement and operation ISO14001 Certification Competencies Clean Technology availability Use of Env. Friendly material Pollution reduction capability Returns handling capacity Use environment friendly technology 7 Fuzzy Topsis with Sensitivity Analysis Awasthi et al. (2010) Logistics Us of environmental friendly material Green market share Partnership with green organization Management commitment 25

26 Adherence to environmental policies Green R & D Projects Staff Training Lean Process Planning Design for Environment certification Pollution control initiatives Quality Quality system Process capability exponent Total quality Rate of certified product Price 8 Grey Entropy Synthetic Evaluation Model Yang and Wu (2008) Electrical appliances manufacturing Capability of suppliers Service Environment protection Supplying capability Accurate rate of processing order ISO14001 certification Level of technique Rate of delivery Green design of product Capability of product development Time to solve complaint Validity of clean technique Influence degree in market Degree of information modernized Environment efficiency P/E ratio Service manner Management Systems and Credit Standing Enterprise systems Management systems Management ideas Researching and developing direction Enterprise credit standing 26

27 - Pollutant Effects Solid Waste Chemical Waste Air Emision Waste water disposal Energy - Improvement Costs Buying new friendly material Buying new environmentaly friendly technology Redesign of product Staff Training Recycling 9 Knowledge Based System Humphreys et al (2006) Management Competencies Green Image Senior support Customer Purchasing retension Partners Green Market Share Training Stakeholders Relationship Information Exchange Design for Environment Recycle Reuse Re Manufacture Disassembly Disposal Env.Mgmt System Env.Policies Env.Planning Implement and operation ISO14001 Certification Competencies Clean Technology availability Use of Env. Friendly material Pollution reduction capability Returns handling capacity Green Knowledge Transfer 10 Rough Set Theory Bai and Sarkis (2010) Hypothetical Aplication Investment and Resource transfer Management and organizational practices Profitability attributes 11 Fuzzy Zhang and Cost 27

28 12 Multi Agent Decision Making Model Cross Case Analysis Li (2002) Bala et. Al (2008) University Application Flexibility Quality Environment Recyle Reuse Service 28

29 Appendix 5 Integrated Approaches- Application and Evaluating Criteria S.No Approaches Authors Application AHP and ANN AHP and GA ANN- MADA Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) Yan (2009) Kuo et al. (2010) Digital Camera Manufacturing Company in Taiwan Main Criteria Company Reliability Material Quality MaterialPrice ISO environment quality operational capacity Price level Capacity and Lead time Defect Green Project Performance Evaluation the usage of raw materials product competitiveness rapid response capability transaction costs Evaluating Criteria Sub Criteria labeling the waste recovery disposal delivery punctual rate price level Service level service attitude after service Quality Cost Reject rate Price performance value Management commitment of quality Complaince with sectoral price behaviour Delivery Orer fulfill rate Lead Time Auditing pollution control delivery cycle information sharing Process improvement Transportation cost Order frequency Life Cycle Assessment Warranties and claim policies ISO Certificate Quality assurance 29

30 Service Responsivness Stock Willingness Design capability Environment (Env.) EUP (Ecodesign requiements) ODC- ozone depleting chemicals RoHS - Restriction of hazardous substance ISO certification requirment WEEE- waste electrical electronic equiment Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) The interest and right of employee The rights of stake holder Information disclosure Respect for the policy Organization structure and manufacturing capability Technological capability Manufacturing capability Financial status 4 DEA and ANP Kuo and Lin (2011) High-tech Industry Supplier s implementation capability Quality system Delivery quality Supply quality assurance Delivery schedule Inspection situation of quality control Price Implementation situation of quality control Cooperation Manufacturing process improvement issues administration system system planning Green purchasing Green system 5 DEA with AHP and ANP Wen and Chi (2010) Supplier's green image Green product performance Financial issues Quality Service 30

31 Technology issues Organizational culture & strategy issues Delivery reliability Profitability of supplier Supplier relationship Conformance quality 6 Fuzzy Set Theory and Grey Relational Analysis Chen et al. (2010) Electronics Industry- PCB Firm Flexibility of supplier Internal service quality Green design Green purchasing Life cycle assessment ISO certificates Internal green production plan Management support Cleaner production 31

32 system R&D capability R&D green products Quality Quality Assurance System Product Passing Rate Green Degree in the Process of Product Manufacturing, Use, and Recycling Extent of Information Standardization Technology Product Performance Production Agility Green Degree of Manufacturing Process 7 Grey Correlational Analysis and AHP Li and Zhao (2009) Electronics Company Service Innovation Time Delivery Rate Proportion of Engineers and Technicians Level of Maintenance Service. Proportion of R&D Accounted for Sales Revenue Service Attitude. Green Degree in Innovation Behavior. Security and Compensation Management Compatibility of Strategic objective Compatibility of Organization Compatibility of Management Level Compatibility of Corporate Culture 8 Knowledge based Humphreys et al. (2003) Telecommunication company Environment - Pollutant Geographic Location of Supplier Solid Waste 32 Relationship between Supplier and Community Chemical Waste Position and Reputation of Supplier in the Air Emision Waste water disposal Energy

33 system and Case based reasoning Effects - Improvement Costs Buying new friendly material Buying new environmentaly friendly technology Redesign of product Staff Training Recycling Management Competencies Senior support Partners Training Information Exchange Green Image Customer Purchasing retension Green Market Share Stakeholders Relationship Design for Environment Recycle Reuse Re Manufacture Disassembly Disposal Env.Mgmt System Env.Policies Env.Planning Implement and operation ISO14001 Certification Competencies Clean Technology availability Use of Env. Friendly material Pollution reduction capability Returns handling capacity 33

34 Appendix 6 Summary of Individual Approaches Approaches Analytical Hierarchy Process No. of Articles 6 Authors Noci (1997); Handfield et al. (2002);Chiou et al. (2008);Lu et al. (2007);Grisi et al. (2010);Lee et al. (2009) Analytical Network Process 4 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010); Hsu and Hu (2007); Hsu and Hu (2009); Buyukozkan and Cifi (2011) Chi Square Test 1 Vachon and Klassen (2005) Choquet integral 1 Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010) Confirmatory Factory Analysis 1 Chiou et.al. (2011) DEA 1 Kumar and Jain (2010) Extensible Synthetic Model 1 Yang and Wu (2008) Factor Analysis 1 Hong-jun and Bin (2010) Fuzzy Inference Method 1 Humphreys et al. (2006) Fuzzy Topsis with Sensitivity Analysis 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Grey Entropy Synthetic Evaluation Model 1 Yang and Wu (2008) Knowledge Based System 1 Humphreys et al (2006) MOGA 1 Yeh and Chuang (2011) Rough Set Theory 1 Bai and Sarkis (2010) Structural Equation Model 1 Large and Thomsen (2011) Fuzzy Multi Agent Decision Making Model 1 Zhang and Li (2002) Cross Case Analysis 1 Bala et. Al (2008) Total 25 34

35 Appendix 7 Summary of Individual Approaches Approaches No. of Articles 1 Authors Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) AHP and ANN AHP and GA 1 Yan (2009) ANN-MADA 1 Kuo et al. (2010) DEA and ANP 1 Kuo and Lin (2011) DEA with AHP and ANP 1 Wen and Chi (2010) Fuzzy Set Theory and Grey Relational Analysis 1 Chen et al. (2010) Grey Correlational Analysis and AHP 1 Li and Zhao (2009) Knowledge based system and Case based reasoning Total 8 1 Humphreys et al. (2003) 35

36 Appendix 8 Summary of Evaluating Criteria Criteria No. of articles Author Adherence to environmental policies 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Air pollution treatment cost 1 Yeh and Chuang (2011) Alternative green supply chain systems, projects,practices, etc. 1 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Capability of suppliers 1 Yang and Wu (2008) Carbon foot print 1 Kumar and Jain (2010) Cleaner production 1 Chen et al. (2010) Company Reliability 1 Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) Competitive advantage 1 Chiou et.al. (2011) Compliance to Government Regs. 1 Handfield et al. (2002) Conformance quality 1 Chen et al. (2010) Contextual variables 1 Vachon and Klassen (2005) Corporate social responsibilities 2 Chiou et al. (2008) ;Kuo et al. (2010) cost 3 Yeh and Chuang (2011) ; Kuo et al. (2010) ;Zhang and Li (2002) Current efficiency 2 Noci (1997); Grisi et al. (2010) Delivery 2 Kuo et al. (2010) ;Chen et al. (2010) Design for Environment 3 Awasthi et al. (2010) ;Humphreys et al (2006);Humphreys et al. (2003); Eco-design 1 Hong-jun and Bin (2010) Env.Mgmt System Humphreys et al (2006); Humphreys et al. (2003); Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010); Li and Zhao (2009); Yan (2009) ; Zhang and Li (2002); Kuo et al. (2010) ; Lee et al. (2009);Chen et al. (2010) ;Grisi et al. (2010);Chiou et al. (2008) Environment protection 1 Yang and Wu (2008) authentication 2 Hong-jun and Bin (2010); Awasthi et al. (2010) commitment 1 Large and Thomsen (2011) Competences 3 Grisi et al. (2010); Humphreys et al (2006); Humphreys et al. (2003) criteria 1 Lu et al. (2007) issues 1 Kuo and Lin (2011) performance 3 Chiou et.al. (2011); Chiou et al. (2008); Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010); Large and Thomsen (2011) Pgms at the supplier s facilities 1 Handfield et al. (2002) -Improvement Costs 2 Humphreys et al (2006); Humphreys et al. (2003) Financial issues 1 Wen and Chi (2010) Financial Performance 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Flexibility 2 Zhang and Li (2002); Chen et al. (2010) Green product performance 1 Wen and Chi (2010) Green collaboration with suppliers 1 Large and Thomsen (2011)

37 Green competencies 3 Lee et al. (2009) ;Noci (1997); Chiou et al.(2008) Green design 1 Chen et al. (2010) Green image 4 37 Lee et al. (2009); Humphreys et al (2006) ;Humphreys et al. (2003); Grisi et al. (2010) Green Image 1 Humphreys et al (2006) Green Knowledge Transfer 1 Bai and Sarkis (2010) Green Logistics Dimension 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Green system 1 Wen and Chi (2010) Green managerial innovation 1 Chiou et.al. (2011) Green market share 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Green organizational activities dimension 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Green process innovation 1 Chiou et.al. (2011) Green product 1 Lee et al. (2009) Green product innovation 1 Chiou et.al. (2011) Green projects partnership 1 Vachon and Klassen (2005) Green purchasing 1 Chen et al. (2010) Green R & D Projects 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Green supplier assessment 1 Large and Thomsen (2011) Greening the supplier 1 Chiou et.al. (2011) Incoming quality control 1 Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) Innovation 1 Li and Zhao (2009) Internal green production plan 1 Chen et al. (2010) Internal service quality 1 Chen et al. (2010) Investment and Resource transfer 1 Bai and Sarkis (2010) ISO Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) ;Chen et al. (2010) Labeling/certification 1 Handfield et al. (2002) Lean Process Planning 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Life cycle assessment 1 Chen et al. (2010) Management 1 Li and Zhao (2009) Management and organizational practices 1 Bai and Sarkis (2010) Management commitment 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Management Competencies 2 Humphreys et al (2006) ;Humphreys et al. (2003) Management support 1 Chen et al. (2010) Management system 2 Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) Management System (D5) 2 Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) Management Systems and Credit Standing 1 Yang and Wu (2008) Manufacturing performance 1 Vachon and Klassen (2005) Material Quality 1 Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) MaterialPrice 1 Thangchattu and Siripokapiram (2010) Net Life cycle cost 1 Noci (1997) Operation 1 Hong-jun and Bin (2010) operational capacity 1 Yan (2009) Organization 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Organization structure and manufacturing capability 1 Kuo and Lin (2011)

38 Organizational culture & strategy issues 1 Wen and Chi (2010) Organizational performance dimension 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Outside environmental 1 Hong-jun and Bin (2010) Packaging/reverse logistics 1 Handfield et al. (2002) Partnership with green organization 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Pollution control 1 Lee et al. (2009) Pollution control initiatives 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Price 1 Yang and Wu (2008) Price 3 Yang and Wu (2008); Grisi et al. (2010); Yan (2009) Process 2 Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) Procurement 2 Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) Product attributes 1 Handfield et al. (2002) Product Cost 1 Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010) Product Quality 1 Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010) Profitability attributes 1 Bai and Sarkis (2010) Profitability of supplier 1 Chen et al. (2010) Purchasing performance 1 Large and Thomsen (2011) Purchasing s environmental capabilities 1 Large and Thomsen (2011) Quality 8 38 Kuo et al. (2010);Lee et al. (2009); Yang and Wu (2008); Li and Zhao (2009); Yan (2009); Grisi et al. (2010); Zhang and Li (2002); Wen and Chi (2010) Quality of Delivery 1 Grisi et al. (2010) Quality system 1 Kuo and Lin (2011) R&D capability 1 Chen et al. (2010) R&D green products 1 Chen et al. (2010) R&D 2 Hsu and Hu (2007, 2009) Recyle 1 Bala et. Al (2008) Reuse 1 Bala et. Al (2008) Risk factor 1 Chiou et al. (2008) Service 7 Kuo et al. (2010); Yang and Wu (2008); Wen and Chi (2010); Li and Zhao (2009); Bala et. Al (2008);Yan (2009) ;Feyzioglu and Buyukozkan (2010) Social responsibility & competencies 2 Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011) Staff Training 1 Awasthi et al. (2010) Strategic level of purchasing 1 Large and Thomsen (2011) Supplier relationship 1 Chen et al. (2010) Supplier s implementation capabilit 1 Kuo and Lin (2011) Supplier's green image 2 Wen and Chi (2010) ;Noci (1997) Supply chain base 1 Chiou et al. (2008) Supply chain 1 Hong-jun and Bin (2010) Supply chain stages 1 Lu et al. (2007) Technology 5 Total product life cycle cost 1 Lee et al. (2009) Buyukozkan and Cifi (2010,2011); Li and Zhao (2009); Lee et al. (2009); Wen and Chi (2010)