Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000

2nd
2nd International
International Conference
Conference on
on Sustainable
Sustainable Materials
Materials Processing
Processing and
and Manufacturing
Manufacturing
(SMPM
(SMPM 2019)
2019)

Drivers
Drivers and
and barriers
barriers to
to competitive
competitive carbon
carbon footprint
footprint reduction
reduction in
in
manufacturing
manufacturing supply
supply chain:
chain: aa brief
brief review
review
a* b c a a b
Olatunji
Olatunji O.
O. O.
O. a*,, Akinlabi
Akinlabi S.
S. A.
A.b,, Ayo
Ayo O
O O.
O. c,, Madushele
Madushele N.
N. a ,, Adedeji
Adedeji P.
P. A
A a ,, Fatoba
Fatoba S.
S. O.
O. b
aa
Mechanical Engineering Science, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
a
Mechanical Engineering Science, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
bb
Mechanical & Industrial Engineering Technology, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
b
Mechanical
cc & Industrial Engineering Technology, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Electrical and Information Engineering, Covenant University, Nigeria
Electrical and Information Engineering, Covenant University, Nigeria
c

Abstract
Abstract
The manufacturing sector has been identified as a major contributor to global carbon emission. The future product demands are
The manufacturing sector has been identified as a major contributor to global carbon emission. The future product demands are
linked to the manufacturing and consumption of goods and services which allow sustainable development and reduction of
linked to the manufacturing and consumption of goods and services which allow sustainable development and reduction of
carbon footprint. While some manufacturing organizations have come to terms with the reality of carbon emission, a large
carbon footprint. While some manufacturing organizations have come to terms with the reality of carbon emission, a large
proportion of organizations are still searching for how to reduce carbon emissions within their delivery process. This article
proportion of organizations are still searching for how to reduce carbon emissions within their delivery process. This article
provides a review of the literature on energy use, carbon emission, supply chain and its management, competitive advantage in
provides a review of the literature on energy use, carbon emission, supply chain and its management, competitive advantage in
the supply chain and how emissions are being reduced. In the overall, this article takes an integrated view into the supply chain of
the supply chain and how emissions are being reduced. In the overall, this article takes an integrated view into the supply chain of
manufacturing sectors in order to highlight the drivers and barriers of carbon-efficient practices.
manufacturing sectors in order to highlight the drivers and barriers of carbon-efficient practices.
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
©© 2019
2019 The
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under the responsibility of the organizing committee of SMPM 2019.
Peer-review under
Peer-review under the
responsibility of the
responsibility organizing
of the committee
organizing of SMPM
committee of SMPM 2019.
2019.
Keywords: Manufacturing Supply Chain; Carbon -footprints; Review;Energy use
Keywords: Manufacturing Supply Chain; Carbon -footprints; Review;Energy use

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
The literature is inundated with lots of information on carbon efficient manufacturing supply chain management
The literature is inundated with lots of information on carbon efficient manufacturing supply chain management
due to its strategic impact on the climate change. Researchers and professionals are advancing the integration of
due to its strategic impact on the climate change. Researchers and professionals are advancing the integration of

2351-9789 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

2351-9789 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SMPM 2019
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SMPM 2019

* Corresponding author.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tunjifemi@gmail.com
E-mail address: tunjifemi@gmail.com

2351-9789 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SMPM 2019.
10.1016/j.promfg.2019.06.047
 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000 993
2 Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

environmentally sound decision in supply chain researches and practices. Most organizations are very pressed to
inculcate carbon footprint reduction strategies into their operations. Some of the motivating factors include;
intensification of regulation [1], corporate image damages [2], evolving environmental criteria as the basis for
competitiveness. Climate mitigation policy and the related responsibilities directed at the organizations are well
covered in the literature [3-9]. Most especially in term of information, support, and capacity building [5]. The
manufacturing sector has been identified as a major contributor to global carbon emission [10]. The future product
demands are linked to the manufacturing and consumption of goods and services, which lead to sustainable
development and reduction of carbon footprint. Also, the global supply chain has moved from compliance to value
creation which cut across all the manufacturing stages [1, 8, 11-27]. Green or Carbon efficient Supply Chain
Management (GrSCM) has been defined as integrated environmental strategies directed at supply chain
management, which include product design, material sourcing and selection, manufacturing processes, delivery of
the final product to the consumers, and well to wheel product management with detailed understanding of industrial
symbiosis [14, 17, 28]. It is generally perceived that Carbon efficient supply chain (CESuC) promotes efficiency
and synergy among business partners and their lead corporations. This helps to enhance environmental performance,
minimize waste and save cost. This synergy is expected to enhance the corporate image, competitive advantage,
quality of the product and market exposure. On the other hand, the use of more environmentally sustainable
products, production processes, management practices often face challenges within an organization. This is because
of the external pressure applied by customers to achieve the requirements of reduced cost and, higher quality, and
faster delivery. This may lead to product greenwashing aimed at enhancing the brand image and customer loyalty
[29, 30].
While some manufacturing organizations have come to terms with the reality of carbon emission, a large
proportion of organization are still under pressure to minimise the carbon emissions that emanate from their
operations because they have not realised the opportunity that abounds across their delivery process. This article
provides a review of the literature on carbon emission reduction, supply chain, and its management, and competitive
advantage. In overall, using a case study based on an interview conducted in an organization, this article takes an
integrated view into the supply chain of manufacturing sectors in order to highlight the barriers and drivers of
carbon efficient practices.

2. A brief review

Based on their recent National Climate Assessment, the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP)
concluded that human influences had been the overriding driver of climate change over the last 50 years, due to
emissions from burning fossil fuels and deforestation [31, 32]. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission is primarily
associated with human since the industrial revolution era of the 19 th century [33, 34]. Separate organizational units
have responsibility to ensure environmental excellence in product development, process design, operations,
logistics, marketing, regulatory compliance and waste management. So, in the earlier attempt at environmental
management, operating managers were involved only at arm’s length. Today, this has changed. It has been
proclaimed that the best practices call for the integration of environmental management with ongoing manufacturing
operations [17, 35]. Considering the antecedent, pressure from customers, business organization support, company
coverage, and size, the financial standing of a manufacturing organization has been observed to significantly affect
the extent of carbon efficiency strategy implementation [35]. Recently, Böttcher and Müller [36] included the term
‘low-carbon operations management practices’, which means the introduction of low-carbon issues, questions, and
decisions concerning carbon efficiency into the planning, execution, and control of business processes to achieve a
sustainable competitive advantage. The practices suggested by Böttcher and Müller are divided into three groups
which are; low carbon products, low carbon process, low carbon logistics [36].
994 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000
Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2016) 000–000 3

2.1. Scopes of Emission

As a metric of carbon emissions measurement, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, developed by World Resources
Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) has set up scopes, which span
different areas of measurements for an organization [37, 38], These scopes include:

• Scope 1 emissions- Emissions measured from the direct activities carried out by the organization.
• Scope 2 emissions- The emissions measured from the indirect activities like electricity bought.
• Scope 3 emissions- Alternative emissions indirectly linked to an organized activity. This often includes emissions
from the other supply chain players. Some examples of scope 3 activities include the extraction and production of
purchased materials; transportation of purchased fuels; and consumption of products and services.
Several authors have investigated the scope of emission along the supply chain of manufacturing
organizations [1, 15-17, 39-42]. The contribution and management of scope three emissions which are directly
linked to supply chain management were discussed in most of these articles. Carbon auditing or footprinting is
seen as the first step to a strategic approach to including carbon emissions reduction in the management of supply
chain as it allows the identification of the area with the most significant emissions and opportunity for a reduction to
which good practices will be applied [43, 44].

2.2. Measures of competitive advantage

The “carbon disclosure project (CDP)” asserts that the supply chain is responsible for more than 50% of an
organization’s emissions [45]. The metrics for the evaluation of corporate competitive advantage of an organization
and manufacturing company in this case consists of eight items which are [46, 47]: low cost compared to other
competitors, better quality of products and services, more innovative R&D department, better managerial capacity,
more profitable business profile, higher growth rate, vantage position in business innovations, more favourable
corporate image [46]. Stabell and Fjeldstad [48] asserted that competitive advantage could not be determined from
assessing a whole company but by evaluating the numerous activities, it carries out during its value creation process.
This explains the reason why researchers have emphasized that competition has shifted from a firm basis to supply
chain basis since that is where the most values are created [17, 21, 23, 49-52]. The measure of competitive
advantage as defined by Li et al. [50] is based on how well an organization can develop a market positioning ahead
of its competitors. In this case, it means a manufacturing organization must develop rare capabilities in order to
attain a vantage position ahead of competitors.

2.3. Input and output of competitive advantage

Shown in Figure 1 are strategic inputs used by organizations to attain a competitive advantage and the outputs
that are often reflected in the competitive advantage achieved. These can be applied in the carbon-constrained
manufacturing environment where organizations will have to watch their carbon impacts while meeting the
customers need. Hofmann [53] proposed an alliance of the supply chain and the competitive strategy to achieve a
competitive advantage or “strategic fit”.
 4 Olatunji
Olatunji O./ O.
et al et al. /Manufacturing
Procedia Procedia Manufacturing
00 (2019) 35 (2019) 992–1000
000–000 995

Figure 1: Strategic factors of competitive advantage [54]

2.4. Barriers to carbon efficient supply chain

Despite the drivers who have been outlined for carbon reduction practices, there are still many barriers. As shown
in Figure 2a, these include; lack of collaboration between the supply chain partners, lack of a standardized approach
to carbon auditing and data inaccuracy. Also, for a manufacturer with local suppliers from small and medium scale
businesses, the most significant barrier is the lack of adequate resources and cash. Jabbour et al. and Renwick et al.
[8, 64, 65] showed the significance of human resources practices for successful environmental management.

2.5. Drivers of carbon efficient supply chain

Most manufacturing organization which are implementing efficient carbon practices are not doing it purely for
the sake of the planet. Most are driven by the realisation of the risk and other factors that are associated with non-
compliance [55-57]. Several researchers have identified various drivers to carbon efficient supply chain as shown in
Figure 2b. These include; risk, consumer awareness, and supply chain collaboration [58], increasing energy prices
on which climate change has an impact, the power position of the focal manufacturing company, cost reduction [59].
The risk driver as outlined by researchers includes; physical risk, supply chain risk [43, 56, 60], Regulatory risk,
competitive risk, litigation risk, reputation and brand value risk [16, 56, 61, 62]. Having understood the need for
collaboration along the supply chain, organizations are becoming more proactive by addressing the emissions out of
their direct control [63]. Therefore, collaborating at the supply chain (SC) level will help to manage risks and
integrate sustainable practices in manufacturing processes.
Opportunities: Power
Regulation Risk
New market Position
Inadequate SC
collaboration

Lack of installation of Lack of Standard Cost Supply chain

relevant systems Barriers approach Reduction
DRIVERS collaboration

Lack of
adequate
resources Cost of late Social
Energy Prices Consumer
adoption responsibility

(a) (b)

Figure 2: (a) Barriers and (b) Drivers of carbon efficient supply chain in the manufacturing industry
996 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000
Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2016) 000–000 5

2.6. Good practices toward carbon emission reduction across the manufacturing supply chain

Many practices are being carried out by organizations in order to reduce carbon emissions and energy use at
various stages of the SC. The good practices which have brought some form of benefits and have delivered a
measurable and significant compensation for manufacturing organizations’ supply chain carbon footprint includes;
carbon efficient procurement and supply, carbon efficient manufacturing, carbon efficient warehousing, carbon
efficient logistics and transport, carbon efficiency at customer end [23, 44, 66, 67]. Also, most organizations today
are registering with schemes like the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EUETS), Carbon Reduction
Commitment (CRC), and Voluntary scheme in the United Kingdom. Other good practices toward carbon emission
reduction are carbon emission trading, Green supply chain management, Redesigning of the supply chain. However,
it has been alleged that the concept of emissions trading could be of disadvantage for energy-intensive companies or
companies operating globally as they could face increased competition where their emissions trading system is
different like in the United States due to the cost of compliance [68]. Emissions trading has overshadowed risk on
the manufacturing of packaging than opportunities based on the cost associated with carbon. These include an
increase in operating cost that would create the financial problems, increase in production time lag and so on [16,
69].

3. A Case Study of Company Alpha

Interview data were collected on the supply chain management actions of a large automobile manufacturing
company which have several plants across the UK and Europe as presented in Table 1 and 2. The results of the
interviews were transcribed as precisely as possible in order to extract detailed information from the notes, audio
and recordings and other documents.

Table 1: Interviews conducted in case study company

Company Interviewees Job role Interview date Duration
α (Alpha) Green logistics manager 28/11/2017 40mins
Sustainable purchase manager 19/11/2017 15mins
Environmental manager 12/11/2017 Email
System manager 12/11/2017 Email
Environmental advisor 27/11/2017 10mins
Environmental advisor 27/11/2017 Email
Environmental advisor 27/11/2017 Email
Carbon reduction advisor 16/12/2017 15mins
Carbon reduction advisor 16/12/2017 Email
Corporate contract office 16/12/2017 Email

Table 2: A brief of Alpha manufacturing company

Themes Company Alpha

Introduction The company resides under two global brand names with different car model. Both global brands as a single brand are driven
by the design of solid products, developing remarkable experiences for their customer and environmental innovation in the
form of exquisite and fast cars. The company integrated corporate social responsibility into its business to determine better
ways to make more sustainable and slicker designs and manufacturing processes. The company takes into consideration the
differences in environmental legislative standards (EUETS, US regulations) when comparing the emerging markets to
established markets and they have managed this by having “dedicated procurement teams in China and India” for
improvement of supplier strengths [70]
Competitive They compete in a market with other automobile manufacturers like Daimler AG (Mercedes Benz), Volkswagen, which are
environment the top brands for providing exquisite cars and engines. They face competition in the market for alternative technology engines
analysis like the hybrid engines; Hydrogen powered engines, Diesel engines, “low emission engines”. In the UK market, there are
 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000 997
6 Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

threats to substitute from consumers who decide to want to save on the energy (fuel) that could have been consumed or
emissions emitted from the use of cars.
Current The group uses the “Environmental Innovation” to advance into a “lower-carbon, sustainable world” throughout the product
practices life-cycle. The company employs multiple approaches to enhance the vehicles performance with a high focus on its end-use
emissions, also called “vehicle tailpipe CO2 emissions”. It emphasizes design, technology and quality and employs a proactive
approach to a sustainable future. Also, the company reduces its emissions from supplier end by setting targets for them to meet
ISO 14001 standard.
Drivers of “Integration into business strategy, centred on environmental innovation which takes into consideration the different
carbon environmental legislative standards, proactive approach, lifecycle approach, setting targets for suppliers, alignment of
efficiency purchasing strategy with environmental innovation goal, incorporation of CO2 emissions in sourcing process, cost is an
internal driver, reputation risk” is an external driver, future projections of pressures of reporting CO2 emissions along supply
chain, collaborative cooperation with suppliers, customers expect this”
Variables of According to the respondent, “In terms of competitiveness, we are not far enough progressed on the journey to be able to
carbon comment on the benefits”; but so far, the company has experienced benefits regarding cost savings. In terms of innovation, the
efficiency. respondent attests to the fact that “quantifying carbon impact gives transparency to the supply chain, which then enables
innovative thinking to define ways to reduce”. Finally, the respondents attest to the fact that “Integrating responsible business
practices into the core of the business and driving continuous improvement on business impacts on the environment protects
our corporate reputation and adds brand value.”
Human factors They identified the significance of human factor to the successful implementation of their carbon efficiency strategies. This is
in carbon in line with the findings of Renwick et al. [65] and Jabbour et al. [8, 64].
efficiency

Table 3: Benefits of carbon efficient practices

Classification Alpha
1 Cost saving “Not many benefits so far.”
2 Customer satisfaction Improved sales reflected by customer satisfaction
3 Innovation “Transparency in the supply chain which allows for innovative thinking.”
4 Brand value Positive brand value

The benefits of implementing efficient carbon- practices in the supply chain were classified and identified as in
Table 3.

3.1. Benefits of carbon efficient supply chain

The benefits of carbon efficient supply chain in manufacturing is outlined below based on the interview
conducted by these authors;
• Carbon efficiency in supply chains improves cost savings whether a company is strategically aligned or not.
• Carbon efficiency in supply chains can improve delivery responsiveness depending on how it is approached.
• Carbon efficiency can improve innovation depending on how it is approached.
• Carbon efficiency can improve the quality of a product depending on how it is approached. With quality being
defined as the elimination of carbon emission as a waste implies that the alternative proposition for quality
improvement is supported.
• Carbon efficiency can improve customer service depending on how it is approached which supports the
alternative propositions for the improvement of customer service.

3.2. Competitive strategies for carbon emission reduction in a manufacturing organization

The research offers the following operational strategies to mitigate the carbon emissions throughout the lifespan
of manufactured products in order to derive maximum benefits and enhance competitive advantage:
• Innovation at all level of product development
• Effective green supply and purchasing policies
998 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000
Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2016) 000–000 7

• Conformance with environmental regulations

• Green packaging and distribution strategies
• Consumer education and awareness strategies
• Acceptable carbon compliance at all manufacturing stages
• Standard compliance indicators and measurement
• Detailed capturing of indirect emission in the supply chain
• The globalisation of carbon emission reportage through IoT
• The collaboration of similar manufacturing organization on carbon footprint reduction
• Deliberate effort to expel non-compliance supplier along the supply chain
• Since human has been identified as a critical stakeholder in carbon footprint reduction, personnel appraisal
should include carbon emission compliance.

4. Conclusions

Sustainability and environmental impact are the key drivers for enhancing the design and management of
contemporary global production networks. The strategic decisions to develop energy efficient supply chain are
critical to reducing carbon footprints. The article reviewed the barriers and driver to a competitive carbon reduction
across the supply chain of a manufacturing company. The good practices were highlighted while the competitive
strategies were outlined.

References

[1] K.-H. Lee, "Carbon accounting for supply chain management in the automobile industry," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 36, pp. 83-
93, 2012.
[2] D. C. Sprengel and T. Busch, "Stakeholder engagement and environmental strategy–the case of climate change," Business Strategy and the
Environment, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 351-364, 2011.
[3] M. Damert and R. J. Baumgartner, "External Pressures or Internal Governance–What Determines the Extent of Corporate Responses to
Climate Change?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 473-488, 2018.
[4] K. Plassmann, "Comparing voluntary sustainability initiatives and product carbon footprinting in the food sector, with a particular focus on
environmental impacts and developing countries," Development Policy Review, 2018.
[5] S.-P. Chuang and S.-J. Huang, "The effect of environmental corporate social responsibility on environmental performance and business
competitiveness: The mediation of green information technology capital," Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 150, no. 4, pp. 991-1009, 2018.
[6] A. Sethi, I. Ahuja, and A. Singla, "Shifts Between Technology Push and Market Pull Strategies for Sustainable Development in
Manufacturing Industries," in Global Value Chains, Flexibility and Sustainability: Springer, 2018, pp. 319-331.
[7] J. González‐Benito and Ó. González‐Benito, "A study of determinant factors of stakeholder environmental pressure perceived by
industrial companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 164-181, 2010.
[8] C. J. C. Jabbour, A. S. Neto, J. A. Gobbo Jr, M. de Souza Ribeiro, and A. B. L. de Sousa Jabbour, "Eco-innovations in more sustainable
supply chains for a low-carbon economy: A multiple case study of human critical success factors in Brazilian leading companies,"
International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 164, pp. 245-257, 2015.
[9] A. B. L. de Sousa Jabbour, C. J. Chiappetta Jabbour, J. Sarkis, A. Gunasekaran, M. W. Furlan Matos Alves, and D. A. Ribeiro,
"Decarbonisation of operations management–looking back, moving forward: a review and implications for the production research
community," International Journal of Production Research, pp. 1-23, 2018.
[10] V. Delgado-Gomes, J. A. Oliveira-Lima, and J. F. Martins, "Energy consumption awareness in manufacturing and production systems,"
International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 84-95, 2017.
[11] T. K. Dasaklis and C. P. Pappis, "Supply chain management in view of climate change: an overview of possible impacts and the road
ahead," Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1124-1138, 2013.
[12] S. Doherty and S. Hoyle, "Supply chain decarbonization," in The role of logistics and transport in reducing supply chain carbon emissions.
Geneva: World Economic Forum and Accenture report. SUPPLY CHAINCARBONIZATION, 2009.
[13] M. Talaei, B. F. Moghaddam, M. S. Pishvaee, A. Bozorgi-Amiri, and S. Gholamnejad, "A robust fuzzy optimization model for carbon-
efficient closed-loop supply chain network design problem: a numerical illustration in electronics industry," Journal of Cleaner Production,
vol. 113, pp. 662-673, 2016.
[14] A. A. Hervani, M. M. Helms, and J. Sarkis, "Performance measurement for green supply chain management," Benchmarking: An
international journal, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 330-353, 2005.
[15] B. Sundarakani, M. Goh, R. de Souza, and C. Shun, "Measuring carbon footprints across the supply chain," 2008.
[16] K.-H. Lee, "Integrating carbon footprint into supply chain management: the case of Hyundai Motor Company (HMC) in the automobile
industry," Journal of cleaner production, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 1216-1223, 2011.
 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000 999
8 Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

[17] S. K. Srivastava, "Green supply‐chain management: a state‐of‐the‐art literature review," International Journal of management
reviews, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 53-80, 2007.
[18] J. Jayaram and B. Avittathur, "Green supply chains: A perspective from an emerging economy," International Journal of Production
Economics, vol. 164, pp. 234-244, 2015.
[19] N. A. A. Seman, N. Zakuan, A. Jusoh, M. S. M. Arif, and M. Z. M. Saman, "Green supply chain management: a review and research
direction," International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1-18, 2012.
[20] T. K. Eltayeb, S. Zailani, and T. Ramayah, "Green supply chain initiatives among certified companies in Malaysia and environmental
sustainability: Investigating the outcomes," Resources, conservation and recycling, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 495-506, 2011.
[21] P. Dadhich, A. Genovese, N. Kumar, and A. Acquaye, "Developing sustainable supply chains in the UK construction industry: A case
study," International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 164, pp. 271-284, 2015.
[22] D. I. ACTION(CDP), "Closing the Gap: Scaling up sustainable supply chains," https://6fefcbb86e61af1b2fc4-
c70d8ead6ced550b4d987d7c03fcdd1d.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/cms/reports/documents/000/003/014/original/CDP_
Supply_Chain_Report_2018.pdf?1518084325 accessed on 22nd August 2018, 2018.
[23] M. K. Tiwari, P.-C. Chang, and A. Choudhary, "Carbon-efficient production, supply chains and logistics," International Journal of
Production Economics, no. 164, pp. 193-196, 2015.
[24] T. Wilkerson, "Can one green deliver another," Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. See http://www. supply chain strategy.
org, 2005.
[25] E. E. Smith and S. Perks, "A perceptual study of the impact of green practice implementation on the business functions," Southern African
Business Review, vol. 14, no. 3, 2010.
[26] N. Silins, "LEED & the safety profession," Professional Safety, vol. 54, no. 3, p. 46, 2009.
[27] Á. Halldórsson and G. Kovács, "The sustainable agenda and energy efficiency: Logistics solutions and supply chains in times of climate
change," International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, vol. 40, no. 1/2, pp. 5-13, 2010.
[28] A. Chaabane, A. Ramudhin, M. Kharoune, and M. Paquet, "Trade-off model for carbon market sensitive green supply chain network
design," International Journal of Operational Research, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 416-441, 2011.
[29] B. Parguel, F. Benoît-Moreau, and F. Larceneux, "How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate
communication," Journal of business ethics, vol. 102, no. 1, p. 15, 2011.
[30] W. S. Laufer, "Social accountability and corporate greenwashing," Journal of business ethics, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 253-261, 2003.
[31] S. T. Waldhoff et al., "Overview of the special issue: a multi-model framework to achieve consistent evaluation of climate change impacts in
the United States," Climatic Change, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 1-20, 2015.
[32] D. Wuebbles, D. Fahey, K. Hibbard, D. Dokken, B. Stewart, and T. Maycock, "US GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM
CLIMATE SCIENCE SPECIAL REPORT (CSSR)," 2017.
[33] A. Jorgenson et al., "Social Science Perspectives on Drivers of and Responses to Global Climate Change," SocArXiv. August, vol. 23, 2018.
[34] J. Coverdale et al., "Climate change: a call to action for the psychiatric profession," ed: Springer, 2018.
[35] P. Sureeyatanapas, P. Poophiukhok, and S. Pathumnakul, "Green initiatives for logistics service providers: An investigation of antecedent
factors and the contributions to corporate goals," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 191, pp. 1-14, 2018.
[36] C. F. Böttcher and M. Müller, "Drivers, practices and outcomes of low‐carbon operations: approaches of German automotive suppliers to
cutting carbon emissions," Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 477-498, 2015.
[37] C. Zengerling, "Action on climate change mitigation in German and Chinese cities–A search for emerging patterns of accountability,"
Habitat International, vol. 75, pp. 147-153, 2018.
[38] G. Protocol, "About the GHG Protocol," The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative: www.ghgprotocol.org accessed on 4th September
2018, 2011.
[39] E. L. Plambeck, "Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through operations and supply chain management," Energy Economics, vol. 34, pp.
S64-S74, 2012.
[40] Q. Zhu and Y. Geng, "Drivers and barriers of extended supply chain practices for energy saving and emission reduction among Chinese
manufacturers," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 40, pp. 6-12, 2013.
[41] Y. A. Huang, C. L. Weber, and H. S. Matthews, "Categorization of scope 3 emissions for streamlined enterprise carbon footprinting," ed:
ACS Publications, 2009.
[42] C.-W. Hsu, T.-C. Kuo, S.-H. Chen, and A. H. Hu, "Using DEMATEL to develop a carbon management model of supplier selection in green
supply chain management," Journal of cleaner production, vol. 56, pp. 164-172, 2013.
[43] J. Lash and F. Wellington, "Competitive advantage on a warming planet," 2007.
[44] Y. Fernando and W. L. Hor, "Impacts of energy management practices on energy efficiency and carbon emissions reduction: A survey of
Malaysian manufacturing firms," Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 126, pp. 62-73, 2017.
[45] A. Kearney, "Carbon Disclosure Project: supply chain report 2010," CDP, London, 2010.
[46] Y.-S. Chen, S.-B. Lai, and C.-T. Wen, "The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan," Journal of
business ethics, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 331-339, 2006.
[47] S. P. Saeidi, S. Sofian, P. Saeidi, S. P. Saeidi, and S. A. Saaeidi, "How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial
performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction," Journal of business research, vol. 68, no.
2, pp. 341-350, 2015.
[48] C. B. Stabell and Ø. D. Fjeldstad, "Configuring value for competitive advantage: on chains, shops, and networks," Strategic management
journal, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 413-437, 1998.
1000 Olatunji O. O. et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019) 992–1000
Olatunji et al / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2016) 000–000 9

[49] G. T. M. Hult, D. J. Ketchen, and M. Arrfelt, "Strategic supply chain management: Improving performance through a culture of
competitiveness and knowledge development," Strategic management journal, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 1035-1052, 2007.
[50] S. Li, B. Ragu-Nathan, T. Ragu-Nathan, and S. S. Rao, "The impact of supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and
organizational performance," Omega, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 107-124, 2006.
[51] D. M. Lambert and M. C. Cooper, "Issues in supply chain management," Industrial marketing management, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 65-83, 2000.
[52] J. B. Rice and R. M. Hoppe, "SUPPLY CHAIN VS. SUPPLY CHAIN: THE HYPE AND THE REALITY," SUPPLY CHAIN
MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V. 5, NO. 5 (SEPT./OCT. 2001), P. 46-54: ILL, 2001.
[53] E. Hofmann, "Supply Chain Management: Strategy, Planning and Operation, S. Chopra, P. Meindl," Journal of Purchasing and Supply
Management, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 212-213, 2013.
[54] I. Antai, "A theory of the competing supply chain: alternatives for development," International Business Research, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 74, 2010.
[55] K. Hyams and T. Fawcett, "The ethics of carbon offsetting," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 91-98,
2013.
[56] M. Agyemang, Q. Zhu, M. Adzanyo, E. Antarciuc, and S. Zhao, "Evaluating barriers to green supply chain redesign and implementation of
related practices in the West Africa cashew industry," Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 136, pp. 209-222, 2018.
[57] K. Petljak, K. Zulauf, I. Štulec, S. Seuring, and R. Wagner, "Green supply chain management in food retailing: survey-based evidence in
Croatia," Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1-15, 2018.
[58] L. Wu and M.-L. Chiu, "Examining supply chain collaboration with determinants and performance impact: Social capital, justice, and
technology use perspectives," International Journal of Information Management, vol. 39, pp. 5-19, 2018.
[59] H. Walker, L. Di Sisto, and D. McBain, "Drivers and barriers to environmental supply chain management practices: Lessons from the public
and private sectors," Journal of purchasing and supply management, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 69-85, 2008.
[60] K. Schultz and P. Williamson, "Gaining Competitive Advantage in a Carbon-constrained World: Strategies for European Business,"
Managing Innovation and Change, p. 9, 2006.
[61] M. J. Epstein, Making sustainability work: Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economic
impacts. Routledge, 2018.
[62] A. J. Hoffman, "The coming market shift: business strategy and climate change," Tang, K and Yeoh, 2007.
[63] Ranconteur, " Low carbon supply chains for a sustainable future," Low Carbon Business. [online] Ranconteur Special Publication. 22nd
July
2014, Available at hhttps://www.raconteur.net/sustainability/low-carbon-supply-chains-for-a-sustainable-future accessed
on 4th September 2018, 2014.
[64] C. J. C. Jabbour, F. C. A. Santos, and M. S. Nagano, "Environmental management system and human resource practices: is there a link
between them in four Brazilian companies?" Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 16, no. 17, pp. 1922-1925, 2008.
[65] D. W. Renwick, T. Redman, and S. Maguire, "Green human resource management: A review and research agenda," International Journal of
Management Reviews, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-14, 2013.
[66] E. Penz and P. Polsa, "How do companies reduce their carbon footprint and how do they communicate these measures to stakeholders?,"
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018.
[67] M. S. Islam, M.-L. Tseng, N. Karia, and C.-H. Lee, "Assessing green supply chain practices in Bangladesh using fuzzy importance and
performance approach," Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 131, pp. 134-145, 2018.
[68] G. Hua, T. Cheng, and S. Wang, "Managing carbon footprints in inventory management," International Journal of Production Economics,
vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 178-185, 2011.
[69] R. Smale, M. Hartley, C. Hepburn, J. Ward, and M. Grubb, "The impact of CO2 emissions trading on firm profits and market prices,"
Climate Policy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 31-48, 2006.
[70] O. J. Cars, "Company analysis report: Jaguar land rover Automotive Ltd."