Supply chain sustainability trajectories: learning through sustainability initiatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper explores how organizational capabilities and path dependence affect the implementation of supply chain (SC) sustainability initiatives. Through the lenses of contingency and evolutionary theory, the paper addresses the underexplored supply chain dynamics that enhance or inhibit sustainability trajectories. Design/methodology/approach Using in-depth multi-case studies for theory elaboration, five supply chains were studied through open-ended interviews with SC members, secondary data collection and site visit observation. The design consists of a combination of deductive and inductive approaches to elaborate theory on supply chain dynamics and enhanced sustainability trajectories. Findings The empirical study shows that learning is a fundamental condition for supply chains as they implement sustainability initiatives, and that exploitation capabilities are more frequently used than exploration capabilities. Path dependence plays a role in the outcomes of supply chain sustainability initiatives, which are influenced by both path dependence and contingencies of the contexts in which these systems operate. Research limitations/implications This paper puts forward five propositions that emerge from the literature and from the field study results. Although this is an exploratory research bounded by geographical limitations and the limited number of SC cases, the goal of elaborating theory may open up several promising avenues for future large-scale and longitudinal research studies. Practical implications By enhancing our understanding of the dynamics of supply chain sustainability trajectories, decision-makers, scholars and policy-makers can better understand how supply chains learn, how they employ SC member capabilities and how they deal with stakeholder resistance. Originality/value This paper extends supply chain sustainability theory by addressing the knowledge gap that exists with regard to understanding the dynamics of evolving supply chain sustainability trajectories. This paper sheds additional light on this important topic and contributes in multiple ways to the sustainable supply chain management literature.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".