Uncovering effects of supply chain distance on sustainability adoption: empirical evidence from a multi-stakeholder partnership
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To investigate the effects of supply chain (SC) distance on sustainability adoption, this study aims to advance the way prior studies on SC sustainability presume that SC structures are well-developed and stable. Since SC members face structural voids in different regions, we recognize that the information flow is impacted as SC partners often have limited knowledge of their direct partners. Thus, by studying a multi-stakeholder partnership, this article sheds light on the institutional foundation of sustainability adoption issues largely neglected to date. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative case study was used with members of an MSP (i.e. a roundtable), to understand the beef SC located in Brazil. Overall, 18 h of interview recordings and notes from 18 h of meeting observations were gathered, equaling 36 h of primary data. Findings Four dimensions of SC distance (physical, organizational, cultural and institutional) were identified, generating three driving effects on symbolic sustainability adoption and, consequently, a degree of invisibility for beef SC members. The results explain the process of sustainability adoption and highlight that smaller and more upstream suppliers show lower degrees of substantive adoption of SC sustainability practices. Originality/value This study investigates how SC distance affects the alignment of SC members in terms of sustainability adoption. By providing reflections on how institutional distance can hinder suppliers from adopting sustainability requirements they received from the SC, this research contributes to shifting from sustainability discourse to real practice and proactive partner engagement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".