Mitigating sustainability risk in supplier populations: an agent-based simulation study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Many modern firms strive to become sustainable. To this end, they are required to improve not only their own environmental and social performance but also the performance of their suppliers. Building on population ecology theory, we explore how buyers' exposure to supplier sustainability risk and their subsequent risk management strategies at the buyer–supplier dyad level can lead to adherence to sustainability by the supplier populations. Design/methodology/approach We rely on a bottom-up research design, in which the actions of buyers within buyer–supplier dyads lead to population-wide changes on the supplier side. Specifically, we use experimental data on managing sustainability risk to build an agent-based simulation model and assess the effect of evolutionary processes on the presence of sustainable/unsustainable business practices in the supplier population. Findings Our findings suggest that buyers' cumulative actions in managing sustainability risk do not necessarily result in effective population-wide improvements (i.e. at a high rate and to a high degree). For example, in high risk impact conditions, the buyer population is usually able to decrease the population level risk in a long run, but they would need both power and resources for quickly achieving such improved outcomes. Importantly, this positive change, in most cases, is due to the fact that the buyer population selects out the suppliers with high probability of misconduct (i.e. decreased supplier population density). Originality/value Drawing on the organizational population ecology theory, we explore when, to what degree and how quickly the buyers' cumulative efforts can lead to population-wide changes in the level of supplier sustainability risk, as well as the composition and density of supplier population. Methodologically, this paper is one of the first studies which use a combination of experimental data and agent-based modeling to offer more valuable insights on supply networks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".