Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Review
Environmental, social and governance issues in supply chains. A systematic
review for strategic performance
Elisa Truant a, Edoardo Borlatto a, Edoardo Crocco a, *, Nidhi Sahore b
a
b
Università degli Studi di Torino, Torino, 10124, Italy
Birla Institute of Management Technology, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Handling Editor: Jun Bi
We review recent scientific production on the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) framework applied
to supply chain management research. In a world where increasing pressure from stakeholders has led to an
intense level of attention towards sustainable supply chain practices, both scholars and practitioners have
sparked the debate surrounding ESG scores and performance of supply chains. Given the novelty of the topic,
along with its significance for both academia and industry, we performed a systematic literature review with the
goal of synthesizing extant knowledge and providing a structured research agenda to further expand the field. We
found a lively stream of research, notably focused on the need for transparency in supply chain management, the
pivotal role of policymakers in driving the ESG agenda forward and the impact of ESG in the supply chain
performance. In addition to providing a comprehensive, in-depth analysis of the current state of the art, with the
aid of bibliometric data, we provide useful recommendations for future research by developing a structured
research agenda and a theoretical framework, synthesizing extant knowledge and covering notable research
gaps. The work has implications for both theory and practice. Theoretically, the research agenda acts as a starting
point for further research in the field, while simultaneously providing scholars with a comprehensive snapshot of
the current state of the art. From a practical perspective, the review highlights the role of managers and poli­
cymakers in implementing the ESG framework in supply chains, along with its challenges, benefits and potential
drawbacks, thus acting as an informative point of reference for such implementation.
Keywords:
Supply chain
ESG
Systematic literature review
Sustainable development
1. Introduction
Increasing pressure from stakeholders and significant levels of
environmental uncertainty (Tao et al., 2023), have led to a tremendous
increase in attention towards sustainable supply chain practices.
Consequently, scientific production has increasingly applied the prin­
ciples of sustainability to supply chain management (Dhir et al., 2020,
2021; Silva and Pålsson, 2022; Tandon et al., 2023), in order to evaluate
how the economic, environmental and social dimensions of companies
can be deemed sustainable (Koberg & Longoni.,2019; Tachizawa et al.,
2014). In fact, scientific literature has closely followed the rising interest
of practitioners towards sustainable supply chains, as the past decade
has seen a considerable increase in contributions focusing on the matter
(Agoraki et al., 2023a,b; Ozdemir et al., 2022; Ashfaq et al., 2022; Silva
and Ruel, 2022). At the present day, companies cannot afford to be not
sustainable, as the risks connected to lack of sustainability are now of
critical importance.
In the midst of sustainable supply chain literature, the ESG (Envi­
ronmental, Social, and Governance) disclosure and standards have
gained global prominence, posing a set of goals for companies to strive
for and for socially conscious investors to ponder their investments de­
cision upon. Additionally, ESG scores and standards have progressively
become a widely accepted measure for companies to determine and
monitor their sustainability performance (Dai and Tang, 2022). Since its
introduction in a United Nations report in 2006, ESG has become the
most widely accepted measure of firms’ sustainability and governance.
Similarly, supply chain operations are also affected by ESG issues, with
most Fortune 250 firms in the United States establishing various ESG
goals by 2019. Additionally, the UE Directive 2022/2464 named
Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) published the 14th
December 2022 will require, starting from January 2024, large Euro­
pean companies to regularly disclose information about their social and
* Corresponding author. Corso Unione Sovietica, 218 bis, 10134, Torino, TO, Italy.
E-mail addresses: elisa.truant@unito.it (E. Truant), edoardo.borlatto@unito.it (E. Borlatto), edoardo.crocco@unito.it (E. Crocco), nidhi.sahore@bimtech.ac.in
(N. Sahore).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140024
Received 30 May 2023; Received in revised form 2 October 2023; Accepted 28 November 2023
Available online 4 December 2023
0959-6526/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
environmental impact, promoting transparency in ESG matters and
countering greenwashing (Chen and Dagestani, 2023). It applies to all
large European companies, banks, and insurance companies, except for
micro-listed companies. The directive expands the reporting obligation
to include supply chain ESG disclosure, requiring companies to report
their performance by considering their entire value chain, including
suppliers.
Given the increasing importance of expanding the ESG concept to
supply chain management, academic research has grown in parallel to
the practitioners’ rising interest in the matter. Building on such position,
we believe that an effective way to contribute to the evolution of the
field towards a more valuable and future-oriented discourse is to
simultaneously provide clarity in what is currently being a somewhat
granular and scattered field, and encourage future contributions from
scholars by deriving and highlighting directions for further research. As
a result, we agreed on the adoption of a systematic approach to
reviewing extant knowledge on the matter, as to delineate the current
scientific landscape and provide a state-of-the-art that could also serve
as a reference starting point for future research, in a way that has never
been done before. More precisely, while several attempts have been
made to systematically synthesize extant literature on the broader
stream of sustainable supply chain management (Khanra et al., 2020;
Silva and Pålsson, 2022; Koberg and Longoni, 2019; Tachizawa et al.,
2014), at the present time only one attempt has been made to provide a
research agenda on ESG and supply chains specifically (Dai and Tang,
2022). The work of Dai and Tang (2022) is of significant value and in­
terest, yet it focused only on five journals, namely Management Science,
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, Operations
Research, Production and Operations Management, and Service Science,
thus leaving a considerable amount of contributions out of the scope of
their analysis. Similarly, the bibliometric review conducted by Saini
et al. (2022) focuses on sustainable development and non-financial
disclosure, thus providing a different perspective compared to our study.
Considering the relevance of these topics and the gap mentioned
above, our study provides a structured research agenda, as a driver for
future scientific production on ESG in supply chain management. More
specifically, through a cohesive, comprehensive review of extant
knowledge on the topic, an in-depth bibliometric analysis of the current
state of the art is made to highlight future developments. Coherently
with the aim described above, the systematic review protocol was
deemed the most appropriate over other literature review approaches
due to its replicability, transparency and methodological rigor, allowing
research to report extant findings systematically and extensively.
Additionally, such protocol allows for the inductive identification of
major thematic areas, that enables researchers to derive extant knowl­
edge gaps and provide a structured research framework based upon such
limitations. Our study adopts a systematic literature review (SLR)
research design (Khanra et al., 2021; Chauhan et al., 2021; Zhang et al.,
2022), to address the following research questions:
sample, through a rigorous and iterative process of manual content
analysis. The themes provide both a structured overview of existing
literature, and a basis for the identification of gaps that could act as base
for further research and theme-based research questions, which leads to
RQ2 and the development of a structured research agenda. Finally, in
order to address RQ3, we aim to develop a comprehensive framework
based on the findings of the present study, illustrating the complex dy­
namics of ESG amid supply chain management, their implications for
performance and sustainability, along with additional factors impacting
their implementation.
Our SLR provides both theoretical and practical contributions to the
literature. From a theoretical perspective, we provide a structured
research agenda that could provide future researchers with an overview
of the stream, while suggesting areas that could benefit from further
attention from scholars. In addition to our systematic review of existing
literature, we provide a novel framework of ESG and supply chain
management, highlighting their complex structure and how they can be
used to evaluate how sustainable a supply chain is, along with the fac­
tors they help monitor. In fact, past studies have demonstrated that the
SLR protocol can offer robust contributions from both a practical and
theoretical perspective, that goes beyond the mere descriptive synthesis
of a field, and instead sets a structured agenda for future contributions,
thus aiding in the development and enrichment of a specific field. In
other words, the SLR approach grants us versatility in synthesizing
extant literature, and provide an extensive and updated state-of-the-art
of the field, while simultaneously exploring knowledge gaps through a
critical analysis. Additionally, our contribution provides practitioners
with valuable practical insights as well, by highlighting the value in
using ESG scores to evaluate their sustainable supply chains and how
better ESG measures can be incorporated into their performance mea­
surement systems to capture sustainability performance.
The research is organized as follows. Section 2 is dedicated to the
connection between ESG and supply chains, which is the main focus of
this SLR. Section 3 describes the research methodology, along with the
steps taken to find and review the sample. Section 4 and Section 5
present the research profile and thematic areas covered in previous
literature. Section 6 provides a structured research agenda based upon
the findings identified throughout the analysis, while Section 7 features
a theoretical framework, based on the insights gained from our extensive
review of scientific production on ESG and supply chains. Lastly, Section
8 provides the theoretical and practical implications of the paper as well
as its limitations.
2. Conceptual scope
Before delving into the analysis of extant literature, we deem
necessary to set the conceptual boundaries of the present review by
looking at the definitions of the key concepts used. First, ESG is defined
as a set of extra-financial factors affecting a company’s performance or
overall value, either in a positive or negative way. ESG are of interest to
a variety of stakeholders, both internal and external, as rising environ­
mental pressures is gradually forcing companies to actively seek a sus­
tainable path to achieve both moral responsibility and economic or
financial benefit. When looking at the core definition of ESG, it can be
described as a modern dimension of corporate social responsibility
(CSR), albeit with a core focus on environmental impact, social re­
sponsibility (Broccardo et al., 2023), and corporate governance. How­
ever, it is important to note how ESG is not merely a performance
measurement system, as it holds significant strategic value for com­
panies prioritizing sustainable development as their primary strategy.
Scholarly debate has developed around whether it is wise or not for
companies to focus on ESG. Research suggests that ESG is crucial when it
comes to risk management, especially when it comes to financial risk
(Broadstock et al., 2021; El Khoury et al., 2022). Additionally, scholars
have stressed the role of ESG in alleviating financing constraints,
enhancing corporate governance and creating economic value over time
RQ1. What is the current state of scientific production on ESG and
supply chains?
RQ2. What research agenda can be drawn from limitations and gaps
found in extant research?
RQ3. Is it possible to provide a theoretical framework based upon
extant knowledge on the topic?
The use of the SLR method is suggested for research on sustainability
and supply chain, as it allows researchers to gain valuable insights from
extant scientific production and provide a structured agenda to help
develop the literature stream. More specifically, we plan to address RQ1
by assessing the current state of research on ESG and supply chains, as
we establish the most prolific authors, most impactful contributions,
most relevant countries and publication outlets, thus providing scholars
with a clear, comprehensive snapshot of the current state of the art.
Additionally, RQ1 sees us discuss emerging themes drawn from the
2
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
throughout the past decade (Albuquerque et al., 2019; Cheng et al.,
2011). More precisely, Albuquerque et al. (2019) investigated a panel of
U.S.firms from 2003 to 2015 to construct an overall CSR score that took
into account some of the ESG parameters as well.
However, despite the more recent developments of the field, there’s
currently no unanimous agreement on the correlation between ESG and
risk, nor between ESG and profitability (Atan et al., 2018; Landi et al.,
2022). Regardless of the discrepancies mentioned above, we believe it is
safe to adopt the definition of ESG provided by Whitelock (2015),
describing the concept as “a set of activity or processes associated with
an organization’s relationship with its ecological surroundings, its
coexistence and interaction with human organisms and other pop­
ulations, and its corporate system of internal controls and procedures to
direct, administer and manage all the affairs of the organization, in order
to serve the interests of stockholders and other stakeholders”.
After reviewing the theoretical foundations of the ESG, we look at
supply chain literature to define the conceptual boundaries of the topic.
By definition, supply chains are a system of processes across an inter­
organizational network (Yazan et al., 2016). Under specific theoretical
lenses, supply chains can be addressed as systems of inter-related pro­
duction processes from a materials flow perspective (Yazan et al., 2016),
enabled by logistical and technological integration. Over time, the
concept of supply chain has gradually broadened to focus beyond pure
logistics, instead embracing more recent concerns of sustainable pro­
duction and development (Ahi and Searcy, 2013).
When it comes to the integration of ESG in supply chains, major ESG
index providers tend to incorporate supply chains as a metric within the
“S” pillar of ESG, namely the social perspective, yet they would still treat
supply chains separately from other components of said pillar (Dai and
Tang, 2022). Such is the case of the Bloomberg ESG index, treating
supply chains separately from other significant social components, such
as human rights and discrimination (Boffo and Patalano, 2020), thus
potentially misleading the public (Dai, 2020). The importance of
incorporating the supply chain in its entirety is seen in the ExxonMobil
case (Dai and Tang, 2022): while the company claimed a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions, while instead there was an increase in
emissions, as the company was simply shifting dirty operations to supply
chain partners, rather than actively diminishing them.
As evidenced by the conceptual boundaries set above, the integration
of ESG in supply chain management has emerged as a lively field of
research, due to the relevance of supply chains in today’s globalized
economy and a strong interest in sustainability from practitioners.
However, given the newness of the interplay between the two concepts,
the field appears vibrant and with a strong potential for growth.
Consequently, having set the conceptual scope of the review, we now
aim to synthesize extant knowledge on the topic and create a structured
research agenda that could drive both the supply chain and the sus­
tainability fields forward.
3. Research methodology
Our review adopts an SLR approach to capture, synthesize and
analyze extant research on the intersection between ESG and supply
chain management literature. The review identifies the research profile
Fig. 1. Search protocol.
3
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
yearly scientific production. Once the sample was finalized, the authors
proceeded to read and review each record in its entirety, in an attempt to
get a comprehensive understanding of each article. Consequently, we
adopted the use of VOSViewer and RStudio to visualize the sample in
terms of research profile and most common keywords. The results of the
automated analysis included information on the most influential au­
thors, annual scientific production, most relevant sources, and most
prolific countries.
of the topic under investigation, along with its emerging themes, liter­
ature gaps and potential avenues for further research. SLRs are widely
adopted in business and social science literature due to their various
advantages over traditional methods, namely replicability, transparency
and reduction of human bias (Tranfield et al., 2003). Fig. 1 features a
comprehensive overview of the steps taken in order to create the final
sample used in the study, which we will discuss in detail below.
The authors had to find the correct keywords to use for the search. To
do so, we employed a three steps procedure. First, we performed a
search on Google Scholar, meant to identify the most commonly used
search terms in prominent literature. Second, we looked at relevant
scientific outlets in both supply chain and sustainability research, in
order to find reviews that used a similar set of keywords to the one we
intended to use for our own study. Third, we enlisted the help of scholars
and experts to help us refine our search strategy and pick the most
appropriate keywords to use. Ultimately, we opted for a string composed
of “ESG*" OR “Environmental Social Governance” (Tsang et al., 2023)
AND “Supply Chain*” (Cardoso et al., 2023).
The authors then discussed the choice of a database to extract records
from. After much deliberation, Scopus was deemed the most appropriate
choice. Widely regarded as the most comprehensive, Scopus is a pre­
eminent, peer-reviewed journal database (Norris and Oppenheim,
2007). Additionally, researchers often rely on Scopus to perform sys­
tematic analyses (Khan et al., 2021a), and it could allow the authors to
complement previous systematic review attempts in the field (Dagestani
et al., 2022). The primary advantage of Scopus is the accessibility of its
downloadable database, which allows scholars to gather the biblio­
graphic information of a specific research field, encompassing journals,
affiliations, citations, and references. From the process described 86
articles were obtained, from which we excluded those not related to the
business and management field. Additionally, only records published in
peer-reviewed English sources were considered, for the sake of data
homogeneity. As a further exclusion criteria, the authors carefully
examined abstracts, keywords and introductions of each record in order
to compare them with the conceptual scope described in Section 2 and
filter out articles that fell outside the scope. Additionally, chain refer­
encing was performed to refine the sample (Khanra et al., 2020; Khan
et al., 2021b, 2023), along with the exclusion of articles not published in
peer-reviewed ABS ranked journals (Akbari et al., 2022; Mitrega et al.,
2022). The above brought the final sample down to 46 records.
No filters were set in regards to the publication year of the records.
This decision allowed the authors to have a better understanding of how
the topic has evolved over time, both in terms of emerging themes and
4. Research profile
We now provide an overview of the research profile of the sample. By
‘research profile’, we refer to the descriptive statistics that showcase
significant information on the sample, including its yearly scientific
production, the countries with the most citations, the most relevant
sources, as well as the commonly used choices in research design, as
depicted in the paragraphs below. We start by looking at the yearly
scientific production, shown in Fig. 1.
As shown in Fig. 2, a clear increase in scientific output can be
observed over the past two years, with a peak of 22 articles published in
2022. The increase in scientific production can be attributed to the rising
interest from both practitioners and academics to ESG, particularly in
the dawn of COVID-19.
In Fig. 3, we observe the distribution of the articles featured in the
sample, in terms of publication outlets that featured them. Several
journals have published one or more articles about the topic, thus
implying a considerable degree of multidisciplinarity among the topics
being analyzed. More broadly, we notice how the scope of the journals
featured in Fig. 3 somewhat reflects the conceptual boundaries of our
study, as it is positioned at the intersection of supply chain management
literature and sustainability research.
Fig. 4 provides an overview of the geographical distribution of the
sample. The darker the blue, the most prolific the country has been in
terms of publications.
The USA dominates the sample in terms of country specific produc­
tion, albeit it is worth noting how Asian-Pacific countries have been
actively contributing to the literature stream, as well as Europe. The
sample features contributions from both developed and developing
countries, thus suggesting a significant geographical spread in terms of
academic interest. With the above in mind, a deeper comparison be­
tween contributions from developing countries and developed ones,
particularly in regards to topics such as supply chain resilience and ESG
standards in multinational corporate environments.
Fig. 2. Yearly scientific production.
4
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Fig. 3. Most relevant sources.
Fig. 4. Geographic scope of the sample.
Fig. 5 features the distribution of the methodologies used in the
sample of the research. Approximately half of the research featured in
the sample has been conducted through quantitative methods, mean­
while qualitative research is featured in 30% of the articles. Moreover,
12% of articles are conceptual in nature.
Delving deeper into the analysis of the methodologies featured in the
sample, when it comes to quantitative research design, structural
equation modeling is the most common research design (Alkaraan et al.,
2023; Eggert & Hartmann, 2021; Agoraki et al., 2023). In regards to
qualitative research, the most common techniques used are in depth
interviews and case studies (Mele and Colurcio, 2006; Brice et al., 2022;
Silva and Ruel, 2022).
When examining the theoretical underpinnings of the studies
showcased in the sample, as depicted in Fig. 6, the majority of the ar­
ticles were not supported by popular theoretical frameworks. Still, we
observed a clear predominance of the stakeholder theory, most notably,
in articles focused on demonstrating the effects of the correlation be­
tween ESG and supply chain. The other theories utilized are the legiti­
macy theory, specifically linked to ESG disclosure, and the resourcebased view theory (Chand and Tarei, 2021; Whitelock, 2015; Millar
and Searcy, 2020).
We mentioned how the rise of sustainability as a topic in supply
chain literature is partially tied to a growing awareness of the impor­
tance of ESG factors. In an effort to provide a more comprehensive un­
derstanding of how the literature stream has developed over time, the
authors employed the use of VOSViewer, a software meant to create and
visualize conceptual maps based upon bibliometric data. VOSViewer
maps are two-dimensional, and feature the most recurring keywords
found in the sample. The larger the label, the more relevant a keyword
is. Similarly, the closer two keywords are, the more related they are
based on the number of co-occurrences of terms in the corpus file. Two
Fig. 5. Methodology distribution of the sample.
5
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Fig. 6. Theoretical foundations of the sample.
distinct analyses were carried out. The first one was meant to visualize
the keyword clusters, to get a proper understanding of how the literature
stream is shaped in terms of key emerging themes. Subsequently, we
performed a second analysis, meant to highlight the evolution of topics
over time, to visualize what topics have gained more prominence in
recent years.
Fig. 7 presents the co-occurrence analysis of the most frequent key­
words featured in the sample. Grounded in bibliometric data, cooccurrence analysis allows for a clearer understanding of keyword
clusters featured in the sample, thus mapping the field in a coherent,
transparent and replicable manner. More specifically, VOSViewer
identified a blue cluster featuring keywords such as “sustainable
development”, “environmental” and “sustainability”, along with the
words “performance” and “financial performance”, thus demonstrating
a strong correlation between sustainability and performance amid sup­
ply chain literature. Further, the red cluster features more prominent
and recent trends, illustrated by the keywords “covid-19” and “climate
change”. Amid the red cluster, we identified the term “ESG” and noted
the relevance of ESG standards in more recent scientific production and,
more specifically, times of profound uncertainty. The above correlation
is further supported by Fig. 8, as we highlighted the recent growth in
relevance of ESG specific research. Finally, the green cluster highlights
the correlation between environmental concerns and corporate gover­
nance, featuring keywords such as “social disclosure,” “environmental,”
and “corporate governance”.
Researchers used VOSViewer to perform a keyword analysis
featuring the development of keywords over time, displayed in Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. Keywords Evolution over time.
Results highlight how the focus has progressively shifted towards human
and ethics centric topics in recent years. From 2014 to 2018, research
was focused on topics such as “Corporate Governance”, “Environment”
and “Management System”, possibly suggesting a stronger emphasis on
core business and management topics, rather than broader sustainability
literature. In fact, the findings of Shrivastava and Addas (2014) stress
how a more attentive corporate governance fosters higher sustainability
ratings, which consequently heightens the likelihood of businesses
embracing sustainability initiatives. Companies nowadays operate in a
world in which climate change is actively affecting their operations, a
world in which employee health and safety hazards are critical concerns,
potentially leading to disruptions in supply chain and delivery networks,
and erratic and progressively unstable commodity prices (Kovács and
Falagara Sigala, 2021). In such a scenario, corporate governance should
operate with sustainability benchmarks in mind. Additionally, in an
effort to promote environmental awareness, companies should consider
relying on independent board advisors, who have no vested interest in
the firm’s financial profitability, thus warranting unbiased feedback.
More recent academic production shifts the attention towards the rela­
tionship between ESG and financial results, as shown by the presence of
“Finance” as a main keyword in years 2019 onwards. In fact, scholars
agree on how corporate governance is vital when managing and
implementing ESG guidelines (Sancak, 2023). Agoraki et al. (2023a,b)
shows that a low level of ESG reputational risk is directly associated with
an increase in financial performance. Their findings expand upon the
ones of Shrivastava and Addas (2014), as they explore the perspectives
of board advisors having direct stakes in the financial performance of
Fig. 7. Graphical representation of the keyword clusters.
6
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
their company, highlighting how it is in their best interest to directly
monitor the ESG performance of their organization. The most recent
cluster of keywords shows topics related to the recent pandemic, as the
keyword “Covid-19” demonstrates. COVID-19 has highlighted the need
for companies to prioritize sustainability and long-term, sustainable
development. Policy intervention is crucial to establish suitable in­
centives for both demand and supply, thereby further promoting green
securities (Agoraki et al., 2023a,b; Wang et al., 2022). Additionally,
COVID-19 has had an impact on the performance of green investment
funds; in this regard, Selmi et al. (2022) shows that it is imperative for
policymakers to establish incentives to support both the demand and
supply of green securities as a method to recover from the post pandemic
crisis.
making sure all processes needed, whether internal or external,
including those supply chain related, are sustainable. The duty of
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) managers now places greater
emphasis on external pressures rather than internal ones (Chen et al.,
2023; Sancak, 2023).
5.2. The impact of ESG reputational risk on economic performance
We preface the section by illustrating how scholars have generally
investigated the impact of ESG reputational risk on economic perfor­
mance specifically, even though multiple types of performance exist
when it comes to ESG. For instance, ESG performance itself has become a
criterion for measure environment and social responsibility of com­
panies (Zeng et al., 2022). Additionally, operational performance is an
equally significant aspect of ESG adoption, and has been investigated
through the lens of circular economy and Industry 4.0 (Behl et al.,
2023). Yet, the impact of ESG policies on specific outcomes such as
operational efficiency, and customer retention remain partially unex­
plored to this day, thus warranting further exploration in the future.
Scholars generally agree on the fact the risks of not being sustainable
is critical for several clusters of supply chains (Rajesh, 2020). The
research conducted by Imperiale et al. (2023) has established a corre­
lation between ESG reputational risk and decreased performance. ESG
reputational risk is associated with the recent trends of stakeholders
wanting firms to be as transparent as possible when it comes to
responsible accounting and ESG performance (Agoraki et al., 2023a,b).
As such, the ESG reputation is of utmost importance for a modern
company, to the extent that when said reputation is at risk, overall
performance of a company might suffer. The above can be explained
through the theory of asymmetric information of George Akerlof,
Michael Spence, and Joseph Stiglitz, according to which the presence of
ESG reputational risk may lead to asymmetry of information between
stakeholders and management, consequently resulting in the so called
negative selection, causing an increase in the cost of equity, and ulti­
mately leading to poor economic performance (Rosser et al., 2003).
Additionally, the market may perceive ESG exposure as a negative
signal for the company’s reputation. The study conducted by Agoraki
et al. (2023a,b) delves into the correlation between ESG informational
risk and a firm’s economic performance, considering the effects of the
2014/95/EU directive and the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings show
that a company’s economic performance is negatively impacted by ESG
reputational risk, regardless of whether the information asymmetry has
been reduced. Additionally, the study of Shu and Tan (2023) that
examined the effect of ESG factors on corporate financial performance
found that carbon control policy risk has a negative effect on ESG per­
formance. In their analysis, Shu and Tan (2023) stress the importance of
carbon control policy risk management, calling for a joined effort of both
companies to actively work towards said objective, and governments to
financially support their transition towards socially responsible
activities.
Additionally, the implementation of a sustainable supply chain
management (SSCM) system can lead to improved performance and
reduced ESG reputational risk (Tamayo-Torres et al., 2019). Despite
limited research on the role of ESG in evaluating the performance of
green supply chains, financial reports of listed companies worldwide are
increasingly starting to include that type of information (Zeng et al.,
2022). An evaluation model that incorporates ESG factors in the
assessment of green supply chain performance can fill the research gap,
thus offering a new perspective for global supply chain management,
publicly traded companies, and stock markets. Furthermore, collabora­
tion among internal departments, environmental management systems,
and partnerships with suppliers and customers are crucial for the success
of GSCM in small and medium-sized enterprises (Bag et al., 2022). Other
studies have also stressed the importance of managing ESG country risk
for promoting long-term corporate profitability and investment perfor­
mance (Zumente and Bistrova, 2021).
5. Emerging themes in supply chain and ESG literature
In order to make better sense of the sample, we conducted an indepth, qualitative content analysis to extract emerging themes, priori­
tizing those among which scientific debate has focused the most. In
order to accomplish this task, the authors independently read each re­
cord, and performed both open and axial coding to identify antecedents
and outcomes of the ESG integration amid supply chains. Results were
subsequently consolidated by a panel of experts in the field and led to
the identification of the following three thematic foci: (a) transparency
in supply chain management, (b) the impact of ESG reputational risk on
economic performance, (c) the role of policymakers and institutions.
5.1. The role of ESG transparency in supply chain management
While the topic of ESG transparency is complex and involves multi­
ple factors, such as the quality of the ESG data being collected, organi­
zational culture, and monitoring processes, scholars have often focused
on ESG disclosure specifically, interpreted as a sign of increasing
importance governments and regulators put on ESG transparency (Yu
et al., 2018). Literature shows that better ESG disclosure practices can
increase corporate transparency and enhance a company’s reputation,
which can lead to a lower cost of debt and increased financial perfor­
mance (Gao et al., 2022) The strong correlation between financial per­
formance and ESG disclosure has also been shown in the keyword
analysis presented earlier in the manuscript. Scholars have focused on
the interplay between the density of the supply chain, the concentration
of suppliers, the geographical diversity of the supply chain, and the
overall level of transparency within the supply chain (Gualandris et al.,
2021). The above interplay highlights how transparency in a supply
chain is a multi-faceted, complex outcome influenced by the structure of
the supply chain itself. With regards to ESG disclosures, the intricacies of
the relationships between supply chain members can lead to varying
levels of transparency in a supply chain (Gualandris et al., 2021).
Previous research reveals that the geographical diversity of a supply
chain only partially affects its level of transparency. Risk Management
scholars have demonstrated that the complexity of heterogeneous sup­
ply chains can obstruct the achievement of meaningful collective out­
comes, including transparency. Additionally, they demonstrate how the
above is the resultant of the challenges deriving from adapting practices
that are tailored to specific institutional and contextual conditions
(Heckathorn, 1993; Poteete and Ostrom, 2004).
Overall, transparency is becoming increasingly crucial for supply
chains, as more and more companies strive for it instead of relying on
opaque certification labels (Sancak, 2023). ESG disclosure can help
improve transparency and communication between companies towards
sustainable development, adopt a comprehensive approach that tran­
scends simple monitoring, examine beyond just the primary suppliers,
incorporate sustainability into the very foundations of your business
operations and promote transparency throughout the entire supply
chain (Gualandris et al., 2021). In other words, the focus has shifted
from making sure a company’s internal processes are sustainable to
7
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Another cause for improved results could be, in fact, the company’s
ability to execute socially and environmentally responsible supply chain
practices within a well-established system. In other words, organiza­
tional maturity may lead to benefits such as increased returns, financial
rewards, accolades, and recognition (Saini, 2022). Consequently, studies
of sustainability transformation processes highlight the importance of
governance in ESG implementation (Khalid et al., 2022; Whitelock,
2015). A sequential sustainability transformation model (STM) has been
developed by Sancak (2023), with the intent of focusing on the processes
of transforming towards sustainability companies and supply chain,
utilizing the ten-step model of Stouten et al. (2018). Given the
complexity of implementing sustainability practices among organiza­
tions effectively, the model has been established utilizing ten key,
evidence-based steps in managing planned organizational change as a
foundation. The STM categorizes the transformation steps into ESG
factors. ESG factors are the primary considerations in the process of
sustainability transformation (Kotsantonis et al., 2016). Nonetheless,
incorporating ESG factors into planned organizational change can be
unclear for businesses (Sancak, 2023).
6. Research framework and future directions
After performing an extensive literature review on extant knowledge
on ESG and supply chain, we attempt to synthesize said findings in a
conceptual framework that could encapsulate the multifaceted nature of
the topic. Our review highlights the existence of a normative level of
ESG, in which companies align themselves with requests posed by reg­
ulators merely on a legislative basis, and of a business model level, in
which ESG are comprehensively and seemingly embedded in a com­
pany’s supply chain and value creation process. While several factors
and dynamics have been investigated at length by previous work, for
instance transparency in ESG disclosure and supply chain density (Gao
et al., 2022; Gualandris et al., 2021), there are several gaps that might
still require further scientific research to fully explore them. Conse­
quently, we adopt the research framework to comprehensively capture
the nuances of the field and highlight the underlying dynamics uncov­
ered in our SLR. The framework is featured in Fig. 9.
When interpreting the framework we developed above, it is impor­
tant to note that supply chain structures vary greatly from country to
country, from sector to sector. Consequently, it is advisable to keep in
mind that the scenario is complex and multifaceted, thus hard to
generalize. Generally speaking, the structure of a supply chain has been
proven to be affecting ESG performance in a number of different ways.
For instance, supply chain density might have a positive effect on
transparency, whereas supply chain clustering might have a negative
effect on it. In other words, when looking at the impact of ESG on supply
chain design, we note the effects on transparency, density and the
consequent levels of environmental impact (Gao et al., 2022; Gualandris
et al., 2021).
However, further research in this direction can be of great use as a
few contradictions still exist. For instance, best-in-class companies with
low ESG reputational risk might underestimate the need for them to be
as transparent as their peers. Thus, further research could explore the
perspectives of different companies depending on their role in the
market, whether leaders or followers, and investigate potential dissim­
ilarities when it comes to transparency. When looking at the impact on
the company as a whole, we note how ESG disclosure can emphasize
sustainability performance measurement (Dai and Tang, 2022). Addi­
tionally, it might lead to preferring a governance structure that is more
attentive to ESG and sustainable development (Khalid et al., 2022). In
this regard, further research is needed to explore ESG disclosure as a
practice and, more importantly, how policymakers and regulators can
facilitate ESG disclosure to the point companies see competitive and
strategic value in it, rather than a mere inconvenience. For instance,
Reid and Castka (2023) stress the importance of avoiding fragmentation
of efforts and lack of coordination between companies and regulators,
which may lead to opportunistic behavior. Finally, our framework
highlights how the UE Directive 2022/2464, namely CSRD, will require,
starting from January 2024, large European companies to regularly
disclose ESG information. Hence, our framework posits that scholars
must examine the above developments closely, in an effort to investigate
if and how ESG is embedded in companies’ value chains, moving past
the sheer normative level and entering the integrated business model
level. In other words, future research should investigate how ESG
standards get progressively integrated into business models, as regula­
tors seemingly continue to work towards a more geographically exten­
sive implementation of ESG.
5.3. The role of policymakers and institutions
The majority of recent papers are mainly focused on the environ­
mental impact of supply chains, especially those written after the
pandemic period. Additionally, the focus has recently shifted towards
the role played by policymakers and institutions in ESG and supply chain
management. The study conducted by Sancak (2023) sheds light on
ESG-based sustainability change using management language and
showing the requirement for improved metrics to evaluate governance
factors. Consequently, Khalid et al. (2022) argue that governance
structure should be a priority for authorities and policymakers wanting
to achieve sustainable results through ESG disclosure. This will
contribute to achieving sustainable outcomes and increased ESG
disclosure practices (Khalid et al., 2022).
Additionally, COVID-19 has highlighted the need for companies to
prioritize sustainability and long-term, sustainable development. In
order to obtain a more sustainable approach, it is now clear that it may
be required to implement policy intervention in order to establish suit­
able incentives for both demand and supply, thereby further promoting
green securities (Agoraki et al., 2023a,b). As we stated earlier,
COVID-19 has had an impact on the performance of green investment
funds; consequently, Selmi et al. (2022) stress how it is imperative that
policymakers establish incentives to support both the demand and
supply of green securities. Through the use of Industry 4.0 technologies
and circular economy (CE) techniques in sustainable supply chain and
inventory management practices, sustainable performance is achiev­
able, and so is competitive advantage, even amid uncertainty.
Furthermore, the study of Alkaraan et al. (2023) provides validation
for the perspective of Jabbour et al. (2019). Their study presents a
technological blueprint and framework for boardrooms to foster CE
through innovative approaches, strategic thinking, and the advent of
business model transformation. The discussions supporting the findings
of Alkaraan et al. (2023) are relevant to the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) and provide valuable intuition to governance, share­
holders, regulatory agencies, and all the other entity related to the
company regarding the forecasted effect of Sustainable and Strategic
Industry-Driven Material Planning. Nevertheless, the correct execution
of Strategic Industry-Driven Material Planning and the attainment of
green achievements, requires in-depth stakeholder engagement, for
instance, through the evaluation of investment prospects by stake­
holders. This approach will motivate Strategic Industry-Driven Material
Planning driven by stakeholder interests and requirements, leading to an
enhanced environmental innovation solution that supports the SDGs
(Alkaraan et al., 2023).
6.1. ESG and supply chain performance
The sample shows the relationship between supply chain structure,
ESG focus, and company performance, while also highlighting the
impact of human behavior and intention. These findings underscore the
complexity of a company as a system where cause-and-effect links can be
elusive. More specifically, according to the literature, further investi­
gation is needed into the effects that the Total Quality Management
8
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Fig. 9. Conceptual framework.
(TQM) model (Lim et al., 2022), the Theory of Planned Behavior
(Stouten et al., 2018), and the Mitigation Effect (Caiazza et al., 2023)
have on supply chain management and ESG. With regard to the TQM,
there is the need to expand the knowledge through quantitative studies
that involve a significant sample size (Lim et al., 2022). The above is
especially relevant in the context of present literature, as ESG and TQM
are often seen as independent of one another due to the outward focus of
ESG and inward focus of TQM, yet the field would benefit from contri­
butions expanding upon the synergies of the two mechanisms.
Furthermore, the TPB framework (Ajzen, 1991) can be used to
investigate variables that contribute in accepting and implementing
change (Jimmieson et al., 2008). The TPB has demonstrated reliable
results in individual behavioral change, as noted by Hardeman et al.
(2002), and in understanding organizational adjustment such as
implementation of evidence-based practices (Rousseau and Gunia,
2016). It is, therefore, crucial to explore the factors that contribute to the
organization’s ability to implement change in sustainable supply chain
management. Additionally, the mitigation effect is worthy of further
attention when it comes to ESG and supply chain research (Hsueh,
2019). Caiazza et al. (2023) considered the effect on global warming
mitigation resulting from a proper integration of ESG and supply chain
management so significant that they emphasized the need for further
studies to highlight and quantify this phenomenon. As presented by the
study conducted by Wang and Sarkis (2013), in order to obtain effective
methodologies of analysis about the environmental effects of the supply
chain, it will be necessary to use artificial intelligence. In fact, AI tech­
nology could allow us to analyze all the components of this complex
system simultaneously, thus filling many of the current limitations
related to the study of this topic.
interconnections between each of the ESG pillars and supply chain
management, thus leaving room for further contributions to provide a
more comprehensive and synergic look at the matter.
More specifically, previous studies corroborated the importance of
the “S” in ESG, especially in terms of gender equality, cultural diversity,
and supply chain management (Baid and Jayaraman, 2022; Newell,
2023). For instance, future research could expand upon the model
developed by Baid and Jayaraman (2022), and empirically measure
social impact within the supply chain in diverse sets of data. Further­
more, scholars could answer the call made by Newell (2023), and
develop additional levels of metrics for the “S” in ESG. Further research
could also explore the moderating effect of the buying power of the firms
and experience with environmental purchasing and supplier manage­
ment (EPSM) activities and sustainable supply chain collaborations
(Chauhan et al., 2022) to gain a more comprehensive understanding of
the significance of these interactions including social exchanges with
micro-level influencers (Ojha et al., 2023). Here, the buyer-supplier
knowledge transfers and acquisitions, which are important in sustain­
ing social performance improvements (Awan et al., 2020) can also be
explored in greater detail.
In conclusion, there is a need to devise new models that establish the
relationships between key actors in modern research such as digital
transformation, ESG, and supply chain management. Further big data
applications to digitalize the associated processes should also be
explored (Khanra et al., 2020; Talwar et al., 2021). In fact, scholars
generally agree on the immense potential digital transformation has in
terms of driving forward sustainable development in a variety of ways,
for instance by enhancing the monitoring and tracking of the environ­
mental performance of companies and countries alike. As such, there is
ample space for both policymakers and scholars to intervene, possibly
with the intent of bridging the digital divide and ensuring everyone can
benefit from the advancements of digital transformation. Implications
are significant for every aspect of ESG performance. Environmental
wise, digital technologies can enhance monitoring and tracking of the
impact subjects have on the environment. From a social and governance
perspective, digital platforms can provide a better distribution and
accessibility of services, namely access to digital healthcare and edu­
cation, to a larger percentage of the population. Additionally, digital
platforms can also help in terms of transparency and disclosure, as they
have the potential to power and signal boost the diffusion of ESG
6.2. New models and interactions between the E, S and G pillars
A second broad area for future research involves examining the
connection between supply chain and ESG standards, while considering
the latter as made of three distinct and interdependent pillars. Research
that examines the interplay between ESG factors, such as the impact of
environmental factors on social or governance factors and vice versa,
has the potential to provide greater clarity to the field of sustainability
transformation guided by ESG principles (Selmi et al., 2022). Never­
theless, extant research has focused somewhat narrowly on the specific
9
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
performance statements across the globe through the tools of the
Internet.
use of the TQM model (Lim et al., 2022), the Theory of Planned Behavior
(Stouten et al., 2018), and the Mitigation Effect (Caiazza et al., 2023) on
supply chain management (Sharma et al., 2023) and ESG. A further area
of research could delve deeper into the ESG standards, in an attempt to
analyze the interplay between each of the three pillars separately. For
instance, it would be interesting to examine how environmental factors
influence social or governance factors and vice versa (Selmi et al., 2022).
Additionally, informational asymmetry persists among companies that
disclose ESG information, thus being a further area of exploration in the
literature on supply chain management and ESG (Agoraki et al., 2023a,
b).
Finally, we contribute to the literature by providing a comprehensive
conceptual framework featuring several variables and correlations,
meant to better understand the several facets and intricacies of ESG and
supply chain management. The framework has been synthesized from
extant knowledge featured amid the sample and provides a bird’s eye
view of the field, thus indicating areas that are both underdeveloped or
fully unexplored. In our intentions, the framework could act as a base for
further research, thus aiding scholars in designing future contributions
to the field and contributing to theory by providing a bird’s eye view of
the field. Additionally, still in regards to future research, our biblio­
metric analysis provides scholars with a clear snapshot of the current
state of the art in terms of most relevant publications outlets (Bhatt et al.,
2020), thus aiding them in their choice of positioning when it comes to
their scientific production.
6.3. Information asymmetry
Although policymakers have begun to produce regulations, such as
the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) adopted by the
European Commission and produced by the European Financial
Reporting Advisory Group, informational asymmetry persists among
companies that disclose ESG information. This is due to the absence of
strict rules and the flexibility in the level of detail and quality of infor­
mation provided, as noted by Agoraki et al. (2023a,b). Despite the fact
information asymmetry can be lowered with a more significant
commitment to ESG disclosure (Landi et al., 2022), the topic is still
actively debated by scholars attempting to capture the reasons behind its
persistence. For instance, quantitative research might delve deeper into
the impact of ESG practices on information asymmetry, as to determine
whether unveiling voluntary/mandatory non-financial information
equates to a reduction in asymmetry (Saini, 2022). Additionally, future
research may explore the influence of sustainability information that
conforms to guidelines established by organizations such as the Carbon
Disclosure Project, Climate Disclosure Standard Board, Global Reporting
Initiative, International Integrated Reporting Council, and Task Force
for Climate-Related Financial Disclosure on firm valuation, as noted by
Eng et al. (2022). Standardization of sustainability reporting can only be
achieved through the adoption of a universal set of standards. Therefore,
examining the various outcomes associated with different evaluation
methods is critical in the formulation of new legislation or directives.
The above line of research can prove extremely valuable for policy­
makers and practitioners, due to its relevance and practicality.
7.2. Managerial implications
Our review comes with several implications for practitioners. First,
our work emphasizes the importance of corporate governance and pol­
icymakers in achieving sustainable supply chains, through the use of
ESG (Mudulikanta et al., 2020). More specifically, our review has
highlighted the importance of improved metrics that could drive the
change towards sustainable development (Sancak, 2023) and how
governance structure is pivotal when discussing sustainability goals
through ESG disclosure (Khalid et al., 2022). Consequently, we suggest
top management acknowledges the importance of ESG and moves past
the normative level, to instead properly and extensively incorporate ESG
amid their entire business model, in an organic and comprehensive
manner. In other words, ESG should not merely be a set of rules to abide
by for the sheer sake of regulation, rather a strategic and core compo­
nent of the corporate vision.
More specifically, our work addresses the increased attention from
stakeholders and practitioners towards green management practice and
concepts (Khan et al., 2023; Singh et al., 2021). It does so by stressing
the importance of top management support when implementing green
supply chain management practice (Khanra et al., 2020; Mudulikanta
et al., 2020), as their motivation, in conjunction with their scope of
action, is pivotal for a true and extensive implementation of ESG in
supply chains. In other words, the “human” element is vital
(Vázquez-Brust et al., 2022), as a concerted effort from stakeholders,
aided by a more open and attentive attitude from top management is key
for sustainable supply chain practices (Stefanelli et al., 2021).
Further, our review strives to spread awareness on the matter of
transparency and, more specifically, how nuanced, yet significant is the
connection between ESG disclosure, supply chain structure and trans­
parency (Gualandris et al., 2021). Transparency requires the engage­
ment of multiple stakeholders, along with taking social accountability
for, among others, working conditions within suppliers (Silva and Ruel,
2022). Consequently, we recommend supply chain professionals pub­
licly disclose information on their supply chain partners, thus fostering a
transparent environment to benefit from increased scrutiny, albeit they
should still be mindful of the risks connected with excessive disclosure of
sensitive information (Gualandris et al., 2021).
Additionally, in an effort to secure a significant competitive advan­
tage, supply chain professionals should be mindful of the ESG
7. Study implications
7.1. Theoretical implications
Several contributions to theory have been made with the present
review. More precisely, by conducting a systematic review of supply
chain and ESG literature, we provide three distinct theoretical contri­
butions. First, our study contributes to theory by synthesizing and
organizing extant literature on ESG and supply chain into distinct
themes, thus acting as both a snapshot of the current state of the art, and
a starting point for further research. The above can be useful to scholars,
as they can now make more informed decisions as to how and where to
position their research. We have accomplished the above task by both
examining the most relevant keywords through the use of automated
analyses, and we performed qualitative coding to draw main themes
from the sample. Based on our classification of the sample, we find that
ESG can play an important role in fostering supply chain transparency
and communication (Behl et al., 2023), as an increasing number of
companies strive to enhance the effectiveness and transparency of their
communication with both stakeholders and peers (Sancak, 2023).
Additionally, we note how ESG reputational risk may significantly affect
a company’s performance (Tamayo-Torres et al., 2019). In the above
regard, the adoption of sustainable supply chain practices can help
mitigate ESG reputational risk (Saini, 2022), thus improving perfor­
mance. Finally, we highlight the role of policymakers and institutions,
deemed pivotal by several works. Through a more intensified use of ESG
disclosure, policymakers and institutions can potentially prioritize sus­
tainability and long-term, sustainable development for their supply
chain (Khalid et al., 2022), provided their governance prioritizes the
ESG accordingly.
A further theoretical contribution is provided by systematically
uncovering the crucial research gaps found in the literature. Having
developed a structured research agenda can be of great value for theory,
as it could act as a starting point for future research endeavors in the
field. From a theoretical perspective, further research could explore the
10
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
reputational risk connected to disclosure of unreliable information
(Imperiale et al., 2023). Granted that lower ESG reputational risk is a
catalyst for any company’s performance (Agoraki et al., 2023a,b), reg­
ulators should consider pricing ESG correctly to motivate companies to
engage more in ESG disclosure (Shu and Tan, 2023). Currently,
best-in-class companies have little to no incentives to engage in ESG
disclosure due to the lack of perceived reputational risks (Imperiale
et al., 2023). Thus, regulators should consider stepping in, to make sure
ESG disclosures become more effective for companies, along with their
shareholders and stakeholders (Shu and Tan, 2023), possibly by
strengthening their link with the value-generating process of the com­
pany itself.
Finally, our SLR highlights the potential for ESG disclosure to help
eliminate information asymmetry, thus giving managers insight on how
to develop policies on value disclosure systems (Dagestani and Qing,
2022; Saini, 2022). By prioritizing ethical and social components,
managers can contain firm-level risk and promote long-term value cre­
ation, which has become increasingly imperative in recent years, espe­
cially in the dawn of the pandemic (Landi et al., 2022). Even though the
scholarly debate is still very much open at this point, our work en­
courages managers and practitioners to put greater attention on the
matter of information asymmetry, specifically in light of the benefits
they would gain from symmetric disclosure.
stream has developed and evolved over time. Finally, human error
should always be kept in mind when analyzing an SLR. In our case
specifically, we might have missed out on certain records or failed to
highlight certain aspects of the sample others would deem relevant.
Thus, we call for further SLRs to validate or invalidate our analysis of the
literature, and compare our interpretations of the findings with theirs.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgments
Authors have no Acknowledgments to disclose.
References
Agoraki, M.-E.K., Aslanidis, N., Kouretas, G.P., 2023a. How has COVID-19 affected the
performance of green investment funds? J. Int. Money Finance 131 (102792),
102792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2022.102792.
Agoraki, M.-E.K., Giaka, M., Konstantios, D., Patsika, V., 2023b. Firms’ sustainability,
financial performance, and regulatory dynamics: evidence from European firms.
J. Int. Money Finance 131 (102785), 102785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jimonfin.2022.102785.
Ahi, P., Searcy, C., 2013. A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and
sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 52, 329–341. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.02.018. Elsevier BV.
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50
(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t.
Akbari, M., Foroudi, P., Zaman Fashami, R., Mahavarpour, N., Khodayari, M., 2022. Let
us talk about something: the evolution of e-WOM from the past to the future. J. Bus.
Res. 149, 663–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.061. Elsevier BV.
Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., Zhang, C., 2019. Corporate social responsibility and firm
risk: theory and empirical evidence. Manag. Sci. 65 (10), 4451–4469. https://doi.
org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043.
Alkaraan, F., Elmarzouky, M., Hussainey, K., Venkatesh, V.G., 2023. Sustainable
strategic investment decision-making practices in UK companies: the influence of
governance mechanisms on synergy between industry 4.0 and circular economy.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 187 (122187), 122187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
techfore.2022.122187.
Ashfaq, M., Tandon, A., Zhang, Q., Jabeen, F., Dhir, A., 2022. Doing good for society!
How purchasing green technology stimulates consumers toward green behavior: a
structural equation modeling–artificial neural network approach. Bus. Strat.
Environ. 32 (4), 1274–1291. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3188. Wiley.
Atan, R., Alam, Md.M., Said, J., Zamri, M., 2018. The impacts of environmental, social,
and governance factors on firm performance. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 29 (Issue
2), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1108/meq-03-2017-0033. Emerald.
Awan, U., Khattak, A., Rabbani, S., Dhir, A., 2020. Buyer-driven knowledge transfer
activities to enhance organizational sustainability of suppliers. Sustainability 12 (7),
2993. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2993.
Bag, S., Dhamija, P., Bryde, D.J., Singh, R.K., 2022. Effect of eco-innovation on green
supply chain management, circular economy capability, and performance of small
and medium enterprises. J. Bus. Res. 141, 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2021.12.011.
Baid, V., Jayaraman, V., 2022. Amplifying and promoting the “S” in ESG investing: the
case for social responsibility in supply chain financing. Manag. Finance 48 (8),
1279–1297. https://doi.org/10.1108/mf-12-2021-0588. Emerald.
Behl, A., Singh, R., Pereira, V., Laker, B., 2023. Analysis of Industry 4.0 and circular
economy enablers: a step towards resilient sustainable operations management.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 189 (122363), 122363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
techfore.2023.122363.
Bhatt, Y., Ghuman, K., Dhir, A., 2020. Sustainable manufacturing. Bibliometrics and
content analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 260, 120988 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2020.120988. Elsevier BV.
Boffo, R., Patalano, R., 2020. ESG Investing: Practices, Progress and Challenges. Éditions
OCDE, Paris.
Brice, J., Cusworth, G., Lorimer, J., Garnett, T., 2022. Immaterial animals and
financialized forests: asset manager capitalism, ESG integration and the politics of
livestock. Environ. Plann. 54 (8), 1551–1568. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0308518x221121132.
Broadstock, D.C., Chan, K., Cheng, L.T.W., Wang, X., 2021. The role of ESG performance
during times of financial crisis: evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance Res. Lett.
38 (101716), 101716 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716.
8. Conclusion, limitations and future directions
With the present SLR, we set out a goal to critically synthesize extant
knowledge on ESG in supply chain management, thus providing scholars
with both a snapshot of the current state of the art, and a research
agenda that could drive forward the literature stream. While a previous
attempt to systematically review the literature has been made (Dai and
Tang, 2022), ours expands upon the previously published literature re­
view by featuring a broader scope of journals and overall sample. Three
main research questions drove our SLR, to which we answered as dis­
cussed below.
In response to RQ1, we provided scholars with a comprehensive
snapshot of the current state of the art in ESG and supply chain man­
agement. To do so, we both provided a comprehensive research profile
based on bibliographic information, and an in-depth qualitative analysis
meant to highlight emerging trends and themes among the sample.
Consequently, RQ2 saw us delving deeper into the sample and adopting
a more nuanced, critical approach in order to uncover extant gaps and
points of scholar debate. To achieve the above end, we explored the
limitations in the literature and attempted to provide readers with a few
recommendations in regards to possible future research directions. To
answer RQ3, we developed a conceptual framework that could encap­
sulate the nuances of ESG in supply chain management, thus high­
lighting their multiple dimensions and intricacies. In our intentions, the
framework could serve as the basis for future research, thus theoretically
underpinning future development in the field of supply chain and ESG.
SLRs are rigorous, transparent and highly replicable choices in
research design. However, a few caveats should be considered. The first
limitation has to do with the sampling and, more importantly, the de­
cision to exclude articles published in journals not published in peerreviewed ABS ranked journals. While the choice was deemed neces­
sary for the sake of quality and academic soundness of the sample, we
might have failed to review relevant contributions published in non-ABS
ranked journals, conference proceedings or as book chapters. Conse­
quently, future SLRs could amend the above limitation by expanding the
scope of our review and incorporating more sources. Second, we made
use of Scopus only when retrieving the sample. Thus, still for the sake of
broadening the scope of our SLR, future reviews could consider other
databases, which may yield additional records not reviewed in the
present study. Similarly, as the literature on the topic grows, future
studies could adopt a bibliometric approach and review extant knowl­
edge from a broader perspective, thus exploring how the literature
11
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Broccardo, L., Culasso, F., Dhir, A., Truant, E., 2023. Corporate social responsibility: does
it really matter in the luxury context? Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 30 (1),
105–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2341.
Caiazza, S., Galloppo, G., La Rosa, G., 2023. The mitigation role of corporate
sustainability: evidence from the CDS spread. Finance Res. Lett. 52 (103561),
103561 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103561.
Cardoso, B. de F.O., Fontainha, T.C., Leiras, A., 2023. Looking back and forward to
disaster readiness of supply chains: a systematic literature review. Int. J. Logist. Res.
Appl. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2023.2165052. Informa UK
Limited.
Chand, P., Tarei, P.K., 2021. Do the barriers of multi-tier sustainable supply chain
interact? A multi-sector examination using resource-based theory and resourcedependence theory. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 27 (5), 100722 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.pursup.2021.100722.
Chauhan, C., Dhir, A., Akram, M.U., Salo, J., 2021. Food loss and waste in food supply
chains. A systematic literature review and framework development approach.
J. Clean. Prod. 295, 126438.
Chauhan, C., Kaur, P., Arrawatia, R., Ractham, P., Dhir, A., 2022. Supply chain
collaboration and sustainable development goals (SDGs). Teamwork makes
achieving SDGs dream work. J. Bus. Res. 147, 290–307.
Chen, P., Dagestani, A.A., 2023. Greenwashing behavior and firm value – from the
perspective of board characteristics. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 30 (5),
2330–2343. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2488. Wiley.
Chen, P., Dagestani, A.A., Kim, S., 2023. Corporate social responsibility and green
exploratory innovation - the moderating role of three environmental regulations. In:
Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. Informa UK Limited, pp. 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2023.2196585.
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., Serafeim, G., 2011. Corporate social responsibility and access to
finance. SSRN Electron. J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1847085. Elsevier BV.
Dagestani, A.A., Qing, L., 2022. The impact of environmental information disclosure on
Chinese firms’ environmental and economic performance in the 21st century: a
systematic review. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 50 (4), 203–214. https://doi.org/
10.1109/emr.2022.3210465. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
Dagestani, A.A., Qing, L., Abou Houran, M., 2022. What remains unsolved in sub-African
environmental exposure information disclosure: a review. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 15
(10), 487. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15100487. MDPI AG.
Dai, T., 2020. Where Does Your PPE Come from? A Lack of Trans-parency Is Hurting
Americans.
Dai, T., Tang, C., 2022. Frontiers in service science: integrating ESG measures and supply
chain management: research opportunities in the postpandemic era. Serv. Sci. 14 (1),
1–12. https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.2021.0295.
Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Kaur, P., Malibari, A., 2020. Food waste in hospitality and food
services: a systematic literature review and framework development approach.
J. Clean. Prod. 270, 122861 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122861.
Elsevier BV.
Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Sadiq, M., Sakashita, M., Kaur, P., 2021. Green apparel buying
behaviour: a Stimulus–Organism–Behaviour–Consequence (SOBC) perspective on
sustainability-oriented consumption in Japan. Bus. Strat. Environ. 30 (8),
3589–3605. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2821. Wiley.
Eggert, J., Hartmann, J., 2021. Purchasing’s contribution to supply chain emission
reduction. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 27 (2), 100685 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pursup.2021.100685.
El Khoury, R., Nasrallah, N., Atayah, O.F., Dhiaf, M.M., Frederico, G.F., 2022. The impact
of green supply chain management practices on environmental performance during
COVID-19 period: the case of discretionary companies in the G-20 countries.
Benchmark Int. J. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-11-2021-0636.
Eng, L.L., Fikru, M., Vichitsarawong, T., 2022. Comparing the informativeness of
sustainability disclosures versus ESG disclosure ratings. Sustain. Account. Manag.
Pol. J. 13 (2), 494–518. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-03-2021-0095.
Gao, H., He, J., Li, Y., 2022. Media spotlight, corporate sustainability and the cost of
debt. Appl. Econ. 54 (34), 3989–4005. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00036846.2021.2020710.
Gualandris, J., Longoni, A., Luzzini, D., Pagell, M., 2021. The association between supply
chain structure and transparency: a large-scale empirical study. J. Oper. Manag. 67
(7), 803–827. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1150.
Hardeman, W., Johnston, M., Johnston, D., Bonetti, D., Wareham, N., Kinmonth, A.L.,
2002. Application of the theory of planned behaviour in behaviour change
interventions: a systematic review. Psychol. Health 17 (2), 123–158. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08870440290013644a.
Heckathorn, D.D., 1993. Collective action and group heterogeneity: voluntary provision
versus selective incentives. Am. Socio. Rev. 58 (3), 329. https://doi.org/10.2307/
2095904.
Hsueh, L., 2019. Opening up the firm: what explains participation and effort in voluntary
carbon disclosure by global businesses? An analysis of internal firm factors and
dynamics. Bus. Strat. Environ. 28 (Issue 7), 1302–1322. https://doi.org/10.1002/
bse.2317. Wiley.
Imperiale, F., Pizzi, S., Lippolis, S., 2023. Sustainability reporting and ESG performance
in the utilities sector. Util. Pol. 80 (101468), 101468 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jup.2022.101468.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B. L. de S., Sarkis, J., Filho, M.G., 2019. Unlocking the
circular economy through new business models based on large-scale data: an
integrative framework and research agenda. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 144,
546–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.010.
Jimmieson, Nerina L., Peach, M., White, K.M., 2008. Utilizing the theory of planned
behavior to inform change management: an investigation of employee intentions to
support organizational change. J. Appl. Behav. Sci.
Khalid, F., Razzaq, A., Ming, J., Razi, U., 2022. Firm characteristics, governance
mechanisms, and ESG disclosure: how caring about sustainable concerns? Environ.
Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 29 (54), 82064–82077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-02221489-z.
Khan, S.J., Dhir, A., Parida, V., Papa, A., 2021a. Past, present, and future of green
product innovation. Bus. Strat. Environ. 30 (8), 4081–4106. https://doi.org/
10.1002/bse.2858. Wiley.
Khan, S.J., Kaur, P., Jabeen, F., Dhir, A., 2021b. Green process innovation: where we are
and where we are going. Bus. Strat. Environ. 30 (7), 3273–3296. https://doi.org/
10.1002/bse.2802. Wiley.
Khan, S.J., Badghish, S., Kaur, P., Sharma, R., Dhir, A., 2023. What Motivates the
Purchasing of Green Apparel Products? A Systematic Review and Future Research
Agenda. Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3360.
Khanra, S., Dhir, A., Mäntymäki, M., 2020. Big data analytics and enterprises: a
bibliometric synthesis of the literature. Enterprise Inf. Syst. 14 (6), 737–768. https://
doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2020.1734241.
Khanra, S., Kaur, P., Joseph, R.P., Malik, A., Dhir, A., 2021. A resource-based view of
green innovation as a strategic firm resource: Present status and future directions. In:
Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 31. Wiley, pp. 1395–1413. Issue 4. htt
ps://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2961.
Koberg, E., Longoni, A., 2019. A systematic review of sustainable supply chain
management in global supply chains. J. Clean. Prod. 207, 1084–1098. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.033.
Kotsantonis, S., Pinney, C., Serafem, G., 2016. ESG integration in investment
management: myths and realities. Bank Am. J. Appl. Corp. Finance 28 (2).
Kovács, G., Falagara Sigala, I., 2021. Lessons learned from humanitarian logistics to
manage supply chain disruptions. J. Supply Chain Manag. 57 (1), 41–49. https://doi.
org/10.1111/jscm.12253.
Landi, G.C., Iandolo, F., Renzi, A., Rey, A., 2022. Embedding sustainability in risk
management: the impact of environmental, social, and governance ratings on
corporate financial risk. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 29 (4), 1096–1107.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2256. Wiley.
Lim, W.M., Ciasullo, M.V., Douglas, A., Kumar, S., 2022. Environmental Social
Governance (ESG) and Total Quality Management (TQM): a Multi-Study MetaSystematic Review. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, pp. 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2022.2048952.
Mele, C., Colurcio, M., 2006. The evolving path of TQM: towards business excellence and
stakeholder value. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 23 (5), 464–489. https://doi.org/
10.1108/02656710610664569.
Millar, E., Searcy, C., 2020. The presence of citizen science in sustainability reporting.
Sustain. Account. Manag. Pol. J. 11 (1), 31–64. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-012019-0006.
Mitrega, M., Klézl, V., Spáčil, V., 2022. Systematic review on customer citizenship
behavior: clarifying the domain and future research agenda. J. Bus. Res. 140, 25–39.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.029.
Muduli, K., kanta, Luthra, S., Kumar Mangla, S., Jabbour, C.J.C., Aich, S., Guimarães, J.
C.F., 2020. Environmental management and the “soft side” of organisations:
discovering the most relevant behavioural factors in green supply chains. Bus. Strat.
Environ. 29 (4), 1647–1665. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2459. Wiley.
Newell, G., 2023. Real estate insights: the increasing importance of the “S” dimension in
ESG. In: Journal of Property Investment & Finance. Emerald. https://doi.org/
10.1108/jpif-01-2023-0003.
Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., 2007. Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for
coverage of the social sciences? literature. J. Inform. 1 (2), 161–169.
Ojha, D., Dayan, M., Struckell, B., Dhir, A., Pohlen, T., 2023. Social exchange in buyersupplier relationships and innovation speed: the mediating and moderating role of
information sharing and knowledge channels. J. Knowl. Manag. 27 (6), 1509–1533.
Ozdemir, D., Sharma, M., Dhir, A., Daim, T., 2022. Supply chain resilience during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Technol. Soc. 68, 101847 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
techsoc.2021.101847.
Poteete, A.R., Ostrom, E., 2004. Heterogeneity, group size and collective action: the role
of institutions in forest management. Dev. Change 35 (3), 435–461. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-7660.2004.00360.x.
Rajesh, R., 2020. Exploring the sustainability performances of firms using
environmental, social, and governance scores. J. Clean. Prod. 247, 119600 https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119600. Elsevier BV.
Reid, J., Castka, P., 2023. The impact of remote sensing on monitoring and reporting the case of conformance systems. J. Clean. Prod. 393, 136331 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136331. Elsevier BV.
Rosser Jr., J.B., Ahmed, E., Hartmann, G.C., 2003. Volatility via social flaring. J. Econ.
Behav. Organ. 50 (1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-2681(02)00041-0.
Rousseau, D.M., Gunia, B.C., 2016. Evidence-based practice: the psychology of EBP
implementation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 67 (1), 667–692. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annurev-psych-122414-033336.
Saini, N., 2022. Environment-social-governance disclosures nexus between financial
performance: a sustainable value chain approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 186.
Elsevier.
Saini, N., Singhania, M., Hasan, M., Yadav, M.P., Abedin, M.Z., 2022. Non-financial
disclosures and sustainable development: a scientometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod.
381, 135173 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135173. Elsevier BV.
Sancak, I.E., 2023. Change management in sustainability transformation: a model for
business organizations. J. Environ. Manag. 330 (117165), 117165 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117165.
Selmi, R., Makhlouf, F., Kasmaoui, K., Errami, Y., Ben Atta, O., 2022. “There is No
vaccine for climate change” - how well Governments’COVID-19 green stimulus
12
E. Truant et al.
Journal of Cleaner Production 434 (2024) 140024
Tao, M., Dagestani, A.A., Goh, L.T., Zheng, Y., Le, W., 2023. Do China’s anti-corruption
efforts improve corporate productivity? A difference-in-difference exploration of
Chinese listed enterprises. Soc. Econ. Plann. Sci. 87, 101594 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.seps.2023.101594. Elsevier BV.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., Smart, P., 2003. Towards a methodology for developing
evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J.
Manag. 14 (3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375. Wiley.
Tsang, A., Frost, T., Cao, H., 2023. Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG)
disclosure: a literature review. Br. Account. Rev. 55 (1), 101149 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.bar.2022.101149.
Vázquez-Brust, D., Jabbour, C.J.C., Plaza-Úbeda, J.A., Perez-Valls, M., de Sousa
Jabbour, A.B.L., Renwick, D.W.S., 2022. The role of green human resource
management in the translation of greening pressures into environmental protection
practices. In: Business Strategy and the Environment. Wiley. https://doi.org/
10.1002/bse.3319.
Wang, Z., Sarkis, J., 2013. Investigating the relationship of sustainable supply chain
management with corporate financial performance. Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag. 62
(8), 871–888. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijppm-03-2013-0033.
Wang, H., Masi, D., Dhamotharan, L., Day, S., Kumar, A., Li, T., Singh, G., 2022.
Unconventional path dependence: how adopting product take-back and recycling
systems contributes to future eco-innovations. J. Bus. Res. 142, 707–717. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.057. Elsevier BV.
Whitelock, V.G., 2015. Environmental social governance management: a theoretical
perspective for the role of disclosure in the supply chain. Int. J. Bus. Inf. Syst. 18
(Issue 4), 390. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijbis.2015.068477. Inderscience Publishers.
Yazan, D.M., Romano, V.A., Albino, V., 2016. The design of industrial symbiosis: an
input–output approach. J. Clean. Prod. 129, 537–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2016.03.160. Elsevier BV.
Yu, E.P., Guo, C.Q., Luu, B.V., 2018. Environmental, social and governance transparency
and firm value. Bus. Strat. Environ. 27 (7), 987–1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/
bse.2047. Wiley.
Zeng, H., Li, R.Y.M., Zeng, L., 2022. Evaluating green supply chain performance based on
ESG and financial indicators. Front. Environ. Sci. 10 https://doi.org/10.3389/
fenvs.2022.982828.
Zhang, Q., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., 2022. Circular economy and the food sector: a systematic
literature review. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 32, 655–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
spc.2022.05.010.
Zumente, I., Bistrova, J., 2021. ESG importance for long-term shareholder value creation:
literature vs. Practice. J. Open Innovat. Technol. Market Complex. 7 (2), 127.
https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7020127.
announcements contribute to business sustainability? Int. Econ. 171, 1–17. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2022.05.002.
Sharma, M., Dhir, A., AlKatheeri, H., Khan, M., Ajmal, M.M., 2023. Greening of supply
chain to drive performance through logical integration of supply chain resources.
Bus. Strat. Environ. 32 (6), 3833–3847. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3340.
Shrivastava, P., Addas, A., 2014. The impact of corporate governance on sustainability
performance. J. Sustain. Finance Invest. 4 (1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/
20430795.2014.887346.
Shu, H., Tan, W., 2023. Does carbon control policy risk affect corporate ESG
performance? Econ. Modell. 120 (106148), 106148 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
econmod.2022.106148.
Silva, N., Pålsson, H., 2022. Industrial packaging and its impact on sustainability and
circular economy: a systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 333 (130165),
130165 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130165.
Silva, M.E., Ruel, S., 2022. Inclusive purchasing and supply chain resilience capabilities:
lessons for social sustainability. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 28 (5), 100767 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.pursup.2022.100767.
Singh, S.K., Del Giudice, M., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J., Latan, H., Sohal, A.S., 2021.
Stakeholder pressure, green innovation, and performance in small and medium-sized
enterprises: the role of green dynamic capabilities. Bus. Strat. Environ. 31 (1),
500–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2906. Wiley.
Stefanelli, N.O., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J., Liboni Amui, L.B., Caldeira de Oliveira, J.H.,
Latan, H., Paillé, P., Hingley, M., 2021. Unleashing proactive low-carbon strategies
through behavioral factors in biodiversity-intensive sustainable supply chains: mixed
methodology. Bus. Strat. Environ. 30 (5), 2535–2555. https://doi.org/10.1002/
bse.2762. Wiley.
Stouten, J., Rousseau, D.M., De Cremer, D., 2018. Successful organizational change:
integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Acad. Manag. Ann.
12 (2), 752–788. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0095.
Tachizawa, M., E, Yew Wong, C., 2014. Towards a theory of multi-tier sustainable supply
chains: a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Manag.: Int. J. 19 (5/6),
643–663. https://doi.org/10.1108/scm-02-2014-0070. Emerald.
Talwar, S., Kaur, P., Fosso Wamba, S., Dhir, A., 2021. Big Data in operations and supply
chain management: a systematic literature review and future research agenda. Int. J.
Prod. Res. 59 (11), 3509–3534. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1868599.
Tamayo-Torres, I., Gutierrez-Gutierrez, L., Ruiz-Moreno, A., 2019. Boosting
sustainability and financial performance: the role of supply chain controversies. Int.
J. Prod. Res. 57 (11), 3719–3734. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00207543.2018.1562248.
Tandon, A., Sithipolvanichgul, J., Asmi, F., Anwar, M.A., Dhir, A., 2023. Drivers of Green
Apparel Consumption: Digging a Little Deeper into Green Apparel Buying Intentions.
Business Strategy and the Environment. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3350.
13