SCM 12

sustainability
Article
Green Supply Chain Management Practices of Firms with
Competitive Strategic Alliances—A Study of the
Automobile Industry
Hassan Abbas * and Shu Tong *
Business School, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China

* Correspondence: hassanabbas@hnu.edu.cn (H.A.); shutong@hnu.edu.cn (S.T.); Tel.: +92-3122206660 (H.A.)
Abstract: Supply chain management is described as a business strategy that provides operative man-
agement of financial, material, and other information flows to ensure harmonization in distributed
organizational structures. The predefined aim of this study was to describe the effects of green supply
chain management practices on competitive strategic alliances using automobile firms in China. The
study aimed to demonstrate different factors that aid strategic alliances, which automobile firms must
acknowledge to improve their performance. Fifty automobile firms were used as the study popula-
tion. The respondents were senior managers of five active areas in each automobile firm. There were
a total of 420 respondents, among whom 320 respondents were selected by the convenience sampling
method. The study was quantitative, while the data source was primary; the data were obtained
using a closed-ended questionnaire as the major instrument for data collection. This closed-ended
questionnaire was sent to the intended respondents via email and WeChat simultaneously. Five
active areas were included, and Cronbach’s alpha values were measured for each area. The values
obtained ranged from 0.8 to 0.9, revealing the data’s consistency and reliability. The primary data
obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics for demographic data and inferential structural
equation modeling (SEM) for multivariate data. Considering the outcomes of the research analysis, it
was concluded that forming competitive strategic alliances in firms to manage green supply chains
could bring several benefits.
Keywords: supply chain management; green supply chain management; firm performance
Citation: Abbas, H.; Tong, S. Green

Supply Chain Management Practices
of Firms with Competitive Strategic 1. Introduction
Alliances—A Study of the
A supply chain management system covers six key aspects of an enterprise’s oper-
Automobile Industry. Sustainability
2023, 15, 2156. https://doi.org/
ation: production, supply, location, inventory, transportation, and information [1]. The
10.3390/su15032156
primary focus of the supply chain management system is on building trust and advanced
collaboration among different supply chain partners [2,3]. The advent of supply chain
Received: 8 September 2022 management has significantly reduced the costs of storing insurance stocks and improved
Revised: 26 October 2022
the quality of products supplied, from raw materials to end users [4,5]. At the same time,
Accepted: 9 November 2022
the requirements for the accuracy of data entered into the system have increased, and the
Published: 23 January 2023
risks for businesses with regard to mistakes by operators and managers have increased
significantly [6].
Green supply chain management (GSCM) is not only considered a means of envi-
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
ronmental protection but also a valuable and potential way to gain advancements and
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. competitive advantages as well as bring performance improvements to an organization [7].
This article is an open access article Companies need to find modern, strategic approaches to achieve sustainable organizational
distributed under the terms and benefits and a competitive advantage in an increasingly competitive world market [8]. The
conditions of the Creative Commons GSCM concept is related to the extensive integration of environmental safety approaches
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// for supply chain management. That is why GSCM is effective for the overall environmen-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ tal influence of organizations that participate in activities in the supply chain [9]. More
4.0/). importantly, GSCM can contribute to improved sustainability [10].
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2156. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032156 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2023, 15, 2156 2 of 21
Intercompany alliances are often viewed as a recent phenomenon, and many rela-
tionships between organizations have existed since the companies were founded [11].
Companies competing in a modern business environment can not only create new alliances
but also gain access to resources and technologies as well as new markets, procedures,
and intellectual resources to create synergistic connections [12] and long-term competitive
advantages. Strategic alliances are often used to gather knowledge from outside the com-
pany [12,13]. It is believed that close relationships between customers and suppliers and
other business relations have numerous technical, financial, and strategic advantages [14].
Presently, strategic alliances are considered a crucial part of a modern business strategy. In
the context of an international business environment, which requires concentration and
flexibility, strategic alliances act as a driving force behind operational efficiency [15]. To
achieve differentiated products with high efficiency, speed, and quality in this more com-
plex environment, companies must focus on their core competencies and external resources
in order to gain additional resources, technical capabilities, and training [16]. The GSCM
practices considered by researchers demonstrate the characteristics of outsourcing, lean
practices, sharing of quality information, customer relationships, and strategic supplier
partnerships [17]. GSCM practices are significant for the management of the sustainable
performance of firms [18]. Cases where companies were accused of not following sustain-
able SCM practices have revealed the importance of following GSCM practices to enhance
performance and ensure the development of a good brand image [19].
Despite the extensive literature on this subject, the theoretical understanding of how
such intercompany and intracompany alliances affect working dynamics and job content is
far from complete [20]. Some authors have pointed out that this may be partly due to early
research that focused more on the motivations for and results of forming effective alliances
than on how alliances influence the management style, working atmosphere, and culture of
the organization [21]. The best way to study alliances is not only to consider them from the
perspective of front-facing processes but also to consider the continuous activities required
to maintain them and the reduced energy during their life cycle [22]. This view means that
the nature of the company’s internal work depends directly on what is required to maintain
alliance activities and productivity as well as the need to coordinate the use of knowledge
and other resources [2].
This study proposes to define a strategic alliance as a voluntary agreement based on
trust and dedication between interdependent partners, sharing resources in a way that
disrupts the opportunistic behavior of any individual partner and offers added value
for all partners [23]. According to this definition, the agreement can differ in the degree
of formality, which can be vertical or horizontal [24]. Shared resources can be based
on physical elements or knowledge. However, when the frequency of alliance formation
increases, the creation of such intercompany connections is often accompanied by instability,
poor performance, and unexpected early termination.
Given their growing influence on the changing nature of business environments and
the probability of frequent failure, accurately identifying and understanding the events
or factors that influence the dynamics and outcomes of strategic alliances has become
paramount [25]. Thus, this study fills the gap by examining the influence of green supply
chain management practices (as events or factors) on strategic alliances using five key
factors (manufacturing, eco-design, reverse logistics, procurement, and transportation) as
measures of strategic alliances. This is because the authors believe that these factors are
pertinent for the actualization of strategic alliances, especially among automobile firms.
Furthermore, these factors constitute a key instrument for understanding firms’ working
dynamics and job content [19]. However, no single theory can fully describe and explain
the nature of strategic alliance outcomes.
Sustainability 2023, 15,
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2156
x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 3of
of 22
21
1.1. Study Model

1.1. Study Model
Green
Green Supply
Supply Chain
Chain Management
Management Practices
Practices (Figure
(Figure 1).
1).
Figure 1. Study Model of Green Supply Chain Management Practices. Source: Researcher,
Researcher, 2022.
2022.
1.2. Aims and Objectives

1.2. Aims and Objectives
The predefined aim of this study was to describe the effects of green supply chain
The predefined aim of this study was to describe the effects of green supply chain
management practices on competitive strategic alliances using automobile firms in China.
management practices on competitive strategic alliances using automobile firms in China.
The objectives are as follows:
The objectives are as follows:
i. To ascertain the influence of green supply chain performance management on
i. To ascertain the influence of green supply chain performance management on man-
manufacturing in automobile firms.
ufacturing in automobile firms.
ii. To demonstrate the impact of green supply chain performance management on
ii. To demonstrate the impact of green supply chain performance management on pro-
procurement in automobile firms.
curement in automobile firms.
iii. To evaluate the influence of green supply chain performance management on
iii. Toreverse
evaluate the influence
logistics of greenfirms.
in automobile supply chain performance management on reverse
iv. logistics in automobile firms.
To establish the influence of green supply chain performance management on
iv. Toeco-design
establish the influence offirms.
in automobile green supply chain performance management on eco-
v. design in automobile firms.
To determine the influence of green supply chain performance management on
v. Totransportation
determine the influence of green
in automobile supply chain performance management on trans-
firms.
portation in automobile firms.
1.3. Research Questions
1.3. Research
i. WhatQuestions
is the correlation between green supply chain performance management and
i. What is the correlation
manufacturing between firms?
in automobile green supply chain performance management and
ii. manufacturing
What is the in automobilebetween
relationship firms? green supply chain performance management
ii. What
andisprocurement
the relationship between green
in automobile supply chain performance management and
firms?
iii. procurement
What is theincorrelation
automobile firms? green supply chain performance management and
between
iii. reverse
What is thelogistics in automobile
correlation firms?supply chain performance management and
between green
iv. Whatlogistics
reverse is the correlation between
in automobile green supply chain performance management and
firms?
iv. eco-design in automobile firms?
What is the correlation between green supply chain performance management and
v. What is in
eco-design theautomobile
correlation firms?
between green supply chain performance management and
v. transportation
What in automobile
is the correlation betweenfirms?
green supply chain performance management and
transportation in automobile firms?
1.4. Research Hypotheses
1.4. Research Hypotheses
Hypothesis (H1). There
Hypothesis 11 (H1). There is
is no
no significant
significant correlation
correlation between
between green
green supply
supply chain
chain performance
performance
management and manufacturing in automobile firms.
management and manufacturing in automobile firms.
Hypothesis 2 (H2). There is no relationship between green supply chain performance manage-
Hypothesis 2 (H2). There is no relationship between green supply chain performance management
ment and procurement in automobile firms.
and procurement in automobile firms.
Hypothesis 3 (H3). There is no significant correlation between green supply chain performance
management and reverse logistics in automobile firms.
management and reverse logistics in automobile firms.
management and eco-design in automobile firms.
Hypothesis 45 (H4).
Hypothesis (H5). There
There is
is no
no significant
significant correlation
correlation between
between green
green supply
supply chain
chain performance
performance
management and transportation in automobile
management and eco-design in automobile firms. firms.
management and transportation in automobile firms.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Supply Chain Management
The phrase “supply chain management” (SCM) has been widely used in the West for
more than 15 years, but there is no consensus among logistics and general management
professionals on the definition of this concept [1,26]. Many consider SCM from an opera-
tional point of view, referring to material flows, while others see SCM as a management
concept or use SCM to introduce the concept in the enterprise [1–3,26,27]. The most popular
definition of SCM is that it is a collection of different approaches that help in effectively inte-
grating suppliers, distributors, manufacturers, and retailers [4]. Supply chain management
describes the process of establishing and managing a distribution network associated with
delivering desired products to desired locations over a certain period of time [28]. Consid-
ered in another way, supply chain management is presented as an organizational structure
in which products are transferred from producers to consumers, which covers the entire
process, starting with the purchase of raw materials and delivery of goods and ending with
the final product being provided to customers [29]. Supply chain management is a special
management strategy that can be used to synchronize the links in a chain to optimize the
time and cost of delivering goods [27,30]. It refers to managing and controlling processes
primarily related to the production, transportation, distribution, and purchase of products
throughout the supply chain [27,31]. Currently, supply chain management is described as
one of the most profitable and effective ways to increase profits and market share, and it is
actively being introduced into the economies of industrialized countries [4–6,32]. Several
big companies have adopted SCM principles as a new business ideology.
However, if the supply chain comprises the best network structure, it is usually imperative
to change the logistics network structure to add value to the organization [7,9,10,33]. The need
to change the structure can be caused by changes in strategic decisions in the supply chain
and by various internal and external factors, such as changes in legislation or in the type
of demand, or limited opportunities for suppliers. All of these factors can result in the re-
engineering of the logistics network. This is a complex organizational task that can be solved
by applying strategic supply chain management and advanced technologies [12,14,34,35].
Companies that participate in the same supply chain cannot work in isolation from each
other. Instead, they have to work closely together in an integrated manner; in this way,
they can solve a broader range of tasks. If each company starts with its own goal, this can
lead to unnecessary boundaries between the companies, reducing the efficiency of the flow
process and increasing costs [17–21].
Responsibility/Processes of Supply Chain Management

Supply chain management is accomplished through order, delivery, inventory, and
production planning [1]. The main responsibility of supply chain management is to com-
bine these structural units into one system to solve problems related to different stages of
order processing, goods delivery, export, and import [2]. SCM processes comprise supply
chain planning (SCP) and supply chain execution (SCE). Through these processes, the im-
plementation of orders and the synchronization of the entire supply chain can be monitored
as a single system [7–9]. An information system is used to manage inventory, ensure good
workflow, and generate shipping documents for shipment. Using the information system
can achieve highly optimized operations in the supply chain, while reducing the time and
costs of order processing [15]. Information technology can integrate and synchronize the
entire supply chain at a higher level to minimize the consumption of resources. Supply
chain management practices focus on internal planning and resource optimization, which
is crucial for establishing future-oriented relationships with supply chain participants [17].
2.2. Green Supply Chain Management

In working toward an environmentally sustainable SCM strategy, organizations can
implement green supply chain management, which focuses on environmental sustain-
ability in the supply chain. Green supply chain management (GSCM) is a development
of SCM, which uses the same traditional concept but adds an environmental component
to increase the environmental performance of products and services as firms strive for
sustainability. GSCM has several definitions [36]. It can involve green purchases for an
integrated supply chain for suppliers, manufacturers, and customers. GSCM enables a
supply chain that values economic and environmental issues by designing a strategy that
combines environmental standards, such as ISO 14000, and modern theories, such as lean.
In this way, organizations can address environmental issues without additional costs. By in-
troducing a GSCM strategy early, organizations can be more competitive in the market [37].
Supply chain operators can also contribute to a better association between parties related
to the supply chain on environmental issues. Analyzing the influence of supply chain
management practices on performance and operational efficiency can provide information
on the effect of such practices on effectiveness and efficiency measures. Such management
practices include information sharing, customer integration, and the use of IT to increase
the efficiency and effectiveness of the supply chain performance. Integrating management
practices for the supply chain, such as information sharing, the use of IT, and internal
integration, can have a significant impact on supply chain performance [38]. Examining
the practices of supply chain management used by different companies is a good approach,
as this can indicate the effectiveness and efficiency of the supply chain. These practices
can bring improvements in supply chain efficiency and therefore improve the company’s
profitability.
The studied GSCM practices demonstrated the characteristics of outsourcing, lean
practices, sharing of quality information, customer relationships, and strategic supplier
partnerships.
2.2.1. Green Supply Chain Management for Effective Firm Performance

An organization’s performance is mainly measured by financial and operational vari-
ables associated with performance [39]. A study titled “The practical implementation
of practices for supply chain management” examined the association between organiza-
tional performance and supply chain management practices. The outcomes of the study
demonstrated that different GSCM practices had an intensive effect on the effectiveness and
efficiency of supply chain management and firm performance [40]. It was further concluded
that organizations implement management practices for the supply chain not only to ensure
the supply chain’s success but also to improve its performance and profitability [41,42].
Several studies were carried out to determine the impact of green supply chain man-
agement on firm performance based on different components of supply chain manage-
ment [43,44]. They revealed that green supply chain management has a positive and
significant relationship with firm performance [45,46]. Furthermore, knowledge manage-
ment, workflow structure, control and planning, and management methods have a notable
influence on green supply chain management, which affects firm profitability. Green supply
chain management is also affected by other components and practices, and among them,
behavioral and managerial factors are important to consider [47].
Another study on supply chain management showed that sustainable supply chain
management can be considered appropriate for attracting the attention of consumers [48,49].
The results revealed that collaborating with suppliers could lead to positive outcomes, as
GSCM practice can increase economic performance and create a competitive advantage
for firms [50]. Comparing outcomes to those in other developing countries has shown that
adopting GSCM practices would improve the sustainability and performance of firms as
well as provide a competitive edge [51]. GSCM practices and competitive advantage can
positively affect firm performance [52]. The use of GSCM practices along with sustainability
management is effective in improving firm performance. Studies carried out to demonstrate
the significance of lean management, sustainability, and GSCM practices in improving

overall firm performance [47,53,54] revealed that lean management, sustainability, and
GSCM practices are effective in the management of the performance and operational
efficiency of the supply chain. In this context, the performance and management practices
of firms would be effective in increasing profits and goodwill.
As demonstrated by researchers, increased industrial development is associated with
increased economic growth. Therefore, it is imperative to implement management practices
for green supply chains to bring improvements to supply chain performance. Besides
improving ecological performance, the use of management practices for green supply
chains has been shown to be effective in improving the overall efficiency of firms [47,55,56].
Within SCM practices, the competitiveness and commitment of top management are two
important drivers in managing supply chains and ensuring benefits [57,58].
Operational and financial performance are influenced by the effective implementation
of GSCM practices and information systems. Empirical study findings have demonstrated
that different dimensions of information systems and GSCM practices affect the perfor-
mance of firms. It is important to consider these dimensions to ensure the sustainable
development of firms. The studies further revealed that emerging countries must focus
on GSCM and information management practices in order to improve [50]. Another study
on the potential effects of traditional SCM practices and advanced GSCM practices re-
vealed that both are associated with significant improvements in the performance and
sustainability management of firms. Practices for a green supply chain, such as total quality
management (TQM) and supplier relationship management (SRM), significantly affect the
performance of firms [51]. Studies have shown that different supply chain management
practices can have a tremendous effect on the performance of the supply chain [59,60].
The impact of certain products can lead to various proactive approaches to managing
green supply chains and increased awareness of Chinese industrial regulations for their
effective management. China’s traditional manufacturing companies know very little about
the policies and regulations of green supply chain management; thus, such techniques
are not used. Managing green supply chains is effective, but it is important to follow the
rules and policies to ensure the effective implementation of supply chain management
practices [52].
2.2.2. Green Supply Chain Management Application, Sustainability, and Collaboration

Service and production departments use different supply chain management tech-
niques. The differences in methods used by these departments vary in terms of logistics
management, inventory management, and technology deployment. The level of supply
chain management practices varies from department to department. There are few green
procurement management practices in the hotel industry, and the banking industry’s sup-
ply chain management practices are stringent. Implementing supply chain management
techniques in a detailed and strategic manner is important [61]. Empirical studies have
shown that the strategic implementation of these methods is effective in the service sector.
Using management practices for a cleaner supply to increase the organization’s level of com-
petitiveness is important [37]. Sustainability is a diverse field, and only a few researchers
have attempted to evaluate the management practices for a cleaner supply chain to ensure
improved supply chain performance [60].
The GSCM framework for performance and practices indicates that different manage-
ment practices for a cleaner supply chain are effective for the performance and management
of different supply chain stages. Therefore, management practices for cleaner supply chain
management must be integrated into the organizational procedures for creating a competi-
tive advantage and ensuring effective management [51].
A sustainable plan, sustainable operational process control, and communities for
sustainability are some of the supply chain elements that can be implemented for the
selection of suppliers and management of the supply chain [60,62].
Organizations can meet the needs and requirements of their customers while spread-
ing awareness of the social, ecological, and economic aspects, three important aspects
of sustainability that can inform the production and delivery of services [36]. In other
words, GSCM practice is designed to help companies maintain processes and have strong
control over the supply chain. Moreover, it helps in gaining a competitive advantage by
integrating dynamic skills. Sustainable development practices related to the supply chain
are important to improve tracking and traceability while simultaneously meeting the needs
and requirements of customers at a broad level [37]. These practices lead to the complexity
of the supply chain process and increase the number of risks. Companies coordinate their
efforts to manage these complexities as the supply chain becomes increasingly integrated.
In this respect, integration is one of the most effective ways to manage the supply chain
and achieve optimal performance [38]. The effectiveness of green supply chain manage-
ment within supply chain management suggests that green supply chain management
techniques are effective as indicators of internal and external pressure in different supply
chains. Providing training courses on implementing GSCM practices will effectively ensure
that such implementation increases an organization’s competitive advantage in terms of
effective supply management [39].
In supply chain management, a collaborative relationship is an effective way to pro-
mote the supply chain’s presence. The critical review of the research studies revealed
that supplier collaboration is a vital approach for the management of different operations
of the supply chain [62]. Empirical testing has demonstrated that supplier collaboration
can improve elements of the supply chain such as risks, rewards, and knowledge sharing
as well as supply chain management. The use of collaboration in the supply chain is
imperative for small- and medium-sized organizations [52].
IT can assist companies in exchanging information effectively with their partners
and integrating customer relationship management, and ERP applications can ensure
supply chain management [63]. Currently, supply chain management has a significant
role in managing and meeting customers’ demands and ensuring that global competition
is satisfied. With the evolution of technology, technological techniques and practices are
the prime factors that can ensure the integration of the supply chain with the company’s
value system [64]. Integrating techniques and practices related to IT can result in effec-
tive supply chain management, which can improve the effectiveness and profitability of
firms. In addition, investing in integrating IT into supply chain management can lead to
positive outcomes, including competitive advantages. The development of technology
and advancement in the already present technological aspects has led to competition. The
competitive landscape has prompted organizations to gain a competitive advantage by
operating efficiently and increasing their production in different areas [65]. Faster develop-
ments in technology have led to significant global competition. In this regard, the efficiency
and competitive benefits of organizations depend on increased productivity and operating
efficiency, and for this purpose, integrating technology is imperative [36,66,67].
The use of IT is effective for fostering relationships among different operational activi-
ties in the organization and ensuring effective communication to improve the performance
of the supply chain [47]. The implementation of supply chain management strategies
involving the use of IT can lead to significant positive outcomes [50]. Competition be-
tween the supply chains of different organizations has increased the value of supply chain
improvements. In this regard, approaches are considered for the effective management
of supply chain performance to improve the performance of firms [52]. The sharing of
information is a collaborative endeavor, and it occurs with other management practices so
that the supply chain can bring improvements in the process.
2.2.3. Green Supply Chain Management for Effective Integration of Strategic Alliances
The motivation for forming strategic alliances positively affects the degree of partners’
integration with them [61]. It has been suggested that companies are more likely to be
more flexible and less restrictive, such as by forming strategic alliances, in the face of
new challenges in global competition, rapidly changing technologies, and increasingly

uncertain business conditions. Companies that do not have a broad range of skills and
resources can create alliances with companies that have additional resources and skills
to compete effectively in changing markets [62]. Researchers have argued that when it
is harder to predict changes in the environment, companies are more likely to attract
external knowledge because they are not sure how to develop knowledge themselves or
whether their market is necessary. When environmental conditions are more complex,
companies are more likely to acquire knowledge from outside to cope with more intense
competition [68]. When the environmental conditions are more generous, the motivation
to develop internal sources of knowledge is reduced, since it is then easy to obtain key
sources from the external environment.
The environment facilitates the relationship between the acquisition of resources and
the integration of strategic alliances [69]. A specific aspect of this transaction as an asset
is that its value in a given transaction exceeds the value in other transactions. Studies
point out that when investments in specific transactions increase, bilateral relationships
arise because sellers become less attractive due to how their products are sold. Buyers
are blocked because buying from other nonprofessional sources becomes too expensive.
Strategic alliances backed by assets with high levels of specificity can be stable and solid
relationships because these non-reimbursable investments promote trust and participation
among associated companies [70]. A higher level of commitment reflects higher conversion
costs because the strategic alliance partners seek more positive results from the cooperation
agreement.
The specific characteristics of assets are positively related to the degree of integration
among the partners in a strategic alliance. The acceptance of the TCT is that the reason is
limited and people can be opportunistic. Partners disliking investments in specific assets
indicates that the company is susceptible and that another party may show opportunistic
behavior. A rational company will try to solve this problem by signing a contractual
agreement with a partner, but such an agreement is imperfect. The specificity of the assets
is inversely proportional to the perception of opportunistic behavior by the strategic alliance
partners [59,71–75]. The concept of participation is considered an important element in
the social interaction literature. Without commitment, business relationships are often
fragile. Previous studies focused on the impact of trust and communication in adhering
to interorganizational relationships but did not fully explore their interactions [75]. We
believe that in strategic alliances, communication, trust, and commitment are not built
in a one-sided manner but rather communication, trust, and participation are positively
related [60]. If we consider that trust, communication, and dedication are determinants of a
company’s missions, goals, and interests in the alliance, it can be concluded that the most
reliable, socially responsible, and focused companies will achieve successful outcomes [76].
Researchers have studied three models separately. Business-to-business trust is an
important factor in partner satisfaction and is directly related to productivity [77]. Frequent
interactions increase reciprocity between partners and the reliability of cooperation [78–80].
Likewise, communication in successful alliances is crucial in determining the future inten-
tions of partner companies and the level of supplier expectations. Information exchange
and trust between buyers or suppliers have a direct positive impact on the effectiveness of
strategic alliances in terms of customers [81]. The level of integration as a single structure
affecting the performance of a strategic alliance and the degree of integration between
partners has a positive effect on the outcome of the strategic alliance [82].
In this regard, the present research study was carried out to demonstrate the concept of
green supply chain management and the benefits of competitive strategic alliances among
organizations to implement green supply chain management practices [82]. The outcomes
of strategic alliances in green supply chain management can be determined by evaluating
and measuring performance [83,84]. The purpose of performance measurement is to
evaluate the effectiveness of strategic alliances and assist decision makers in monitoring
the progress and performance of alliances, improve communication, and evaluate related
challenges [85]. In green supply chain management, an SCM logistic scorecard (LSC) is
used, which is based on assessing the impact of any corporate strategy in terms of alignment,
logistic performance, capability of planning or execution, and implementation [86–88]. It is
a simple and effective tool used in several countries. The impact of competitive strategic
alliances on firm performance is measured using financial indicators [89], including return
on assets and cash-to-cash cycle time.
3. Methodology
The green supply chain performance measurement model (GSPM) model was used to
evaluate the effectiveness of competitive strategic alliances in the performance of selected
firms. This model was designed to integrate green supply chain management practices,
balanced scorecards, and LSC using five factors for measurement: manufacturing, procure-
ment, reverse logistics, eco-design, and transportation. These factors are key instruments
in competitive strategies, so a five-level rating was used for evaluation as these five factors
represent best practices.
A standard design process was followed to rule out bias and confirm validity. Auto-
mobile companies were used as the study population. Automobile companies are a main
industrial sector in many nations, and they play a primary role in economic development.
Among the automobile companies in China, 50 were selected as they were considered to
be involved in inter- or intrafirm alliances to implement green supply chain management
practices in order to gain a competitive advantage. The respondents were senior managers
of five active areas in each automobile firm who were believed to have vast knowledge of
the study problem. The sample size for this study was initially 420 respondents, and 320 re-
spondents were selected by convenience sampling. The convenience sampling method
gives researchers the liberty to use their discretion in choosing a sample size that would be
manageable to work with.
This study is quantitative, while the data source is primary. Quantitative data obtained
from automobile firms involved in intra- or interfirm alliances were considered to evaluate
the impact of green supply chain management practices on competitive strategic alliances.
Primary data were collected from the responses of senior managers of 50 major automobile
firms across the provinces of China with the aid of a closed-ended questionnaire as the
major instrument for data collection. The human resource departments of these firms sent
an introductory letter stating the study’s title and purpose and requesting the intended
respondents’ contact information. The letter also assured them of strict confidentiality
with regard to any information provided. It took strenuous author effort to convince the
management of these firms to participate due to fear of espionage. After frequent visits,
elaboration, and feedback, the contact information of the intended respondents was given.
After that, the closed-ended questionnaire and directions were sent simultaneously via
email and WeChat to these respondents. Another limitation experienced at this point
was the unenthusiastic nature of the respondents and their bias based on their differences
(values, understanding, beliefs, and religion). However, suitable responses were obtained
after assuring them of confidentiality.
Five active areas were used, and the value of Cronbach’s alpha was measured for each
area. The value obtained ranged from 0.8 to 0.9, which revealed the data’s consistency and
reliability. The primary data obtained by the use of a questionnaire were analyzed using
descriptive statistics for demographic data and inferential structural equation modeling
(SEM) for multivariate data.
4. Results
A total of 320 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents. All 320 were duly
filled and returned, representing a 100% response rate. All responses were measured on a
five-level rating, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. The demographic
profile of respondents is given in Table 1. The analysis of respondents’ ages revealed that
113 respondents (35.3%) were in the 31- to 35-year-old age group (highest number), and
31 of the respondents (9.7%) were in the 40 years and above group (lowest number). Age
signifies maturity, and it is common logic that mature individuals possess more cognitive
capacity. The analysis of respondents’ provinces indicated that 85 respondents (26.6%)
were from Guangdong (highest number), while only 8 respondents (2.5%) were from
either Chongqing, Shandong, or Jiangsu (lowest number). It is common logic that more
industrious provinces produce competent individuals. The analysis of the respondents’
current employment status revealed that 92 respondents (28.8%) were managers of eco-
design and 79 (24.7%) were transportation managers. In comparison, 36 respondents
(11.3%) were production managers. It is common logic that specialists or managers in these
areas are competent respondents.
Table 1. Demographic profile of respondents.
Variable Classification Frequency Percentage (%)

Age 20–25 33 10.3
26–30 62 19.4
31–35 113 35.3
36–40 81 25.3
40 and above 31 9.7
Province of Guangdong 85 26.6
Jilin 47 14.7
Shanghai 43 13.4
Hubei 33 10.3
Guangxi 12 3.8
Beijing 16 5.0
Chongqing 8 2.5
Anhui 16 5.0
Shandong 8 2.5
Hebei 16 5.0
Tianjin 12 3.8
Zhejiang 16 5.0
Jiangsu 8 2.5
Experience 1–4 31 9.7
5–8 110 34.4
9–12 133 41.6
13 and above 46 14.4
Status Procurement manager 49 15.3
Reverse logistics manager 64 20.0
Eco-design manager 92 28.8
Transport manager 79 24.7
Production manager 36 11.3
Source: SPSS output (2022).
4.1. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

This section assesses the influence of the proxies of the predictor variable, green supply
chain management practices, on the measures of the criterion variable, competitive strategic
alliance. Five null hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) to
ascertain the influences and goodness of fit. The decision to support or not support
the hypotheses was based on the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA),
comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and normed fit index (NFI). The
following criteria determined acceptable goodness of fit: RMSEA ≤ 0.06, CFI ≥ 0.95, TLI ≥
0.95, and NFI ≥ 0.95 [40]. Standardized factor loadings of at least 0.5 defined salient factor
loadings [14].
4.1.1. Measurement Model of Green Supply Chain Performance Management (Figure 2)

Table 2 lists the measurement model analysis results for green supply chain perfor-
mance management to determine a good fit. According to the result, chi-square had a
value of 5.86, the normed fit index (NFI) had a value of 0.96, and the Tucker–Lewis index
(TLI) had a value of 0.95. Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) had a value
of 0.043, and the standardized factor loading estimate was 0.67. This confirms that the
variable is a good indicator.
This section assesses the influence of the proxies of the predictor variable, green sup-
ply chain management practices, on the measures of the criterion variable, competitive
strategic alliance. Five null hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling
(SEM) to ascertain the influences and goodness of fit. The decision to support or not sup-
port the hypotheses was based on the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA),
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2156 comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and normed fit index (NFI). 11 The
of 21
following criteria determined acceptable goodness of fit: RMSEA ≤ 0.06, CFI ≥ 0.95, TLI ≥
0.95, and NFI ≥ 0.95 [40]. Standardized factor loadings of at least 0.5 defined salient factor
loadings
Table 2. [14].
Measurement model analysis of green supply chain performance management.
4.1.1. Standardized (Figure 2)

Chi-Square (df),Measurement Model of Green Supply Chain Performance Management
Model NFI TLI CFI RMSEA Variable Factor Loading Error VAR
Significance
Estimate chain perfor-
Table 2 lists the measurement model analysis results for green supply
Green supply chain mance management to determine a good fit. According to the result, chi-square had a
(5 df)
performance 0.96 0.95 0.98 0.043 GSCPM1 0.67 0.34
5.86, p > 0.000
management value of 5.86, the normed fit index (NFI) had a value of 0.96, and the Tucker–Lewis index
GSCPM2 0.89 0.44
(TLI) had a value of 0.95. Root mean square error of approximation
GSCPM3
(RMSEA)
0.74
had a value
0.41
of 0.043, and the standardized factor loading estimateGSCPM4 was 0.67. This 0.72
confirms that0.38
the
variable is a good
Source: Amos indicator.
24.0 output on research data, 2022.
Figure
Figure 2. 2. Measurement
Measurement Model
Model ofof Green
Green SupplyChain
Supply ChainPerformance
PerformanceManagement.
Management.
Table
4.1.2.2.Measurement
Measurement model
Modelanalysis
of Areaofof
green supply chain (Figure
Manufacturing performance
3) management.
Chi-Square Table 3 lists the measurement model analysis results for Standardized manufacturing to determine
Model (df), Signifi- goodnessNFIof fit. According
TLI to
CFI the results,
RMSEA chi-square had
Variable a value of 225,
Factor NFI had aError
Loading value of
1.05, and TLI had a value of 0.96. RMSEA had a value of 0.060, and the VAR
standardized factor
cance Estimate
loading estimate was 0.76. Model analysis confirms that the variable is reliable enough as a
Green supply
(5 df) factor for the measurement of competitive strategic alliances.
chain performance 0.96 0.95 0.98 0.043 GSCPM1 0.67 0.34
5.86, p > 0.000
management Table 3. Measurement model analysis of manufacturing.
GSCPM2 0.89 0.44
Chi-Square (df), GSCPM3 0.74
Standardized 0.41
Significance
GSCPM4 0.72
Estimate 0.38
Manufacturing
(67 df) Source: Amos
1.05
24.0 output
0.96
on research data, 2022.0.06
0.95 AoM1 0.76 0.54
255, p > 0.000
AoM2 0.77 0.25
4.1.2.
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW Measurement Model of Area of Manufacturing (Figure
AoM3 3) 0.74 0.46
12 of 22
AoM4 0.89 0.38
Table 3 lists the measurement model analysis results for manufacturing to determine
Source: Amos 24.0 output on research data, 2022.
goodness of fit. According to the results, chi-square had a value of 225, NFI had a value
of 1.05, and TLI had a value of 0.96. RMSEA had a value of 0.060, and the standardized
factor loading estimate was 0.76. Model analysis confirms that the variable is reliable
enough as a factor for the measurement of competitive strategic alliances.
Figure
Figure 3. Measurement
3. Measurement model
model of Area
of Area of manufacturing.
of manufacturing.
Table 3. Measurement model analysis of manufacturing.
Standardized Fac-
Chi-Square (df), Error
Model NFI TLI CFI RMSEA Variable tor Loading Esti-
Significance VAR
mate
Figure 3. Measurement model of Area of manufacturing.
Table 3. Measurement model analysis of manufacturing.
Standardized Fac-
Model 4.1.3. Measurement
NFI TLIModelCFI
of Area of Transportation
RMSEA Variable(Figuretor
4) Loading Esti-
Significance VAR
Table 4 lists the measurement model analysis results to determinemate goodness of fit in
(67 df)the measurement model in the transportation area. According to the results, chi-square
Manufacturing 1.05 0.96 0.95 0.06 AoM1 0.76 0.54
had a value of 60.5, NFI had a value of 0.98, TLI had a value of 1.04, RMSEA had a value of
255, p > 0.000
0.054, and the standardized factor loading estimate
AoM2was 0.83. The0.77 model analysis0.25shows
that the variable is a reliable factor for measuring
AoM3competitive strategic
0.74 alliances. 0.46
AoM4 0.89 0.38
Table 4. Measurement model analysis of transportation.
Chi-Square (df), Standardized Factor
Model NFI TLI CFI RMSEA Variable Error VAR
Significance 4.1.3. Measurement Model of Area of Transportation (FigureLoading
4) Estimate
(49 df)
Transportation
60.5, p > 0.000
Table
0.98 4 lists the
1.04 measurement
1.00 model
0.054 analysis
ARLresults
1 to determine
0.83 goodness of0.44fit in
the measurement model in the transportation area. ARL 2 According to0.81
the results, chi-square
0.56
ARL 3 0.72 0.09
had a value of 60.5, NFI had a value of 0.98, TLIARL had4 a value of 1.04,
0.69 RMSEA had a value
0.51
of 0.054, and the standardized factor loading
Source: Amos 24.0 output on research data, 2022. estimate was 0.83. The model analysis shows
that the variable is a reliable factor for measuring competitive strategic alliances.
Figure
Figure4.4.Measurement
MeasurementModel
ModelofofArea
Areaof
ofTransportation.
Transportation.
4.1.4. Measurement Model of Area of Reverse Logistics (Figure 5)

Table 5 lists the measurement model analysis results for reverse logistics to determine
a good fit in the measurement model. According to the results, chi-square had a value of
356, NFI had a value of 1.02, TLI had a value of 0.97, RMSEA had a value of 0.038, and the
standardized factor loading estimate was 0.84. The analysis confirms that reverse logistics
is reliable for measuring competitive strategic alliances.
Table 5. Measurement model analysis of reverse logistics.
Chi-Square (df), Standardized Factor

Significance Loading Estimate
Reverse (89 df)
1.02 0.97 0.99 0.038 ARl1 0.84 0.22
logistics 356, p > 0.000
ARL 2 0.72 0.25
ARL 3 0.68 0.47
ARL 4 0.67 0.29
4.1.4. Measurement Model of Area of Reverse Logistics (Figure 5)
Table 5 lists the measurement model analysis results for reverse logistics to determine
a good fit in the measurement model. According to the results, chi-square had a value of
356, NFI had a value of 1.02, TLI had a value of 0.97, RMSEA had a value of 0.038, and the
standardized factor loading estimate was 0.84. The analysis confirms that reverse logistics
is reliable for measuring competitive strategic alliances.
Figure 5. Measurement Model of Area of Reverse Logistics.

Figure 5. Measurement Model of Area of Reverse Logistics.
4.1.5. Measurement Model of Area of Eco-Design (Figure 6)
Table 5. Measurement
Table model
6 lists the analysis of reverse
measurement model logistics.
analysis results for eco-design to determine
the goodness of fit. According to the outcome, chi-square had a value of 541, NFI had a
Standardized
Chi-Square (df),value of 1.04, TLI had a value of 1.06, RMSEA had a value of 0.036, and the standardized
Significance factor loading estimate was 0.89. This confirms that eco-design is a reliable factor for the
Estimate
measurement of competitive strategic alliances.
Reverse logis- (89 df)
1.02 0.97 0.99 0.038 ARl1 0.84 0.22
tics 356, p > 0.000 Table 6. Measurement model analysis of eco-design.
ARL 2 0.72 0.25
Chi-Square (df), ARL 3 Standardized
0.68 Factor 0.47
Significance Loading Estimate
(78 df)
ARL 4 0.67 0.29
Eco-design 1.04 1.06 1.01 0.036 AED 1 0.89 0.55
541, p > 0.000 Source: Amos 24.0 output on research data, 2022.
AED 2 0.74 0.56
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW AED 3 0.71 14
0.29of 22
4.1.5. Measurement Model of Area of Eco-DesignAED
(Figure
4 6) 0.78 0.33
Source: Amos
Table 24.0 output
6 lists on research data,model
the measurement 2022.
analysis results for eco-design to determine the
goodness of fit. According to the outcome, chi-square had a value of 541, NFI had a value
of 1.04, TLI had a value of 1.06, RMSEA had a value of 0.036, and the standardized factor
loading estimate was 0.89. This confirms that eco-design is a reliable factor for the meas-
urement of competitive strategic alliances.
Figure
Figure6.6.Measurement
MeasurementModel
ModelofofArea
AreaofofEco-Design.
Eco-Design.
Table
4.1.6.6.Structural
Measurement model analysis
Covariance Modelofofeco-design.
Green Supply Chain Performance Management and
Measures of Competitive Strategic Alliances (Transportation, Manufacturing, Reverse
Logistics, Procurement, and Eco-Design) (Figure 7) Standardized Fac-
Model NFI TLI CFI RMSEA Variable tor Loading Esti-
Significance Table 7 lists the Structural Covariance Model of Green Supply Chain Performance
VAR
mate
Management and Measures of Competitive Strategic Alliances (Transportation, Manufac-
(78 df)
Eco-design 1.04 1.06 1.01 0.036 AED 1 0.89 0.55
541, p > 0.000
AED 2 0.74 0.56
AED 3 0.71 0.29
turing, Reverse Logistics, Procurement, and Eco-Design). The test of hypothesis 1, there
is a significant correlation between green supply chain performance management and
manufacturing. The recorded values of β = 87 and CR = 1.99 (p < 0.05) indicate that green
supply chain performance management can explain 87% of the variation in manufacturing.
the test of hypothesis 2 indicate that there is a significant correlation between green supply
chain performance management and transportation. The recorded values of β = 77 and
CR = 3.11 (p < 0.05) indicate that green supply chain performance management can explain
77% of the difference in the area of transportation. The recorded values of β = 78 and
CR = 3.08 (p < 0.05) indicate that green supply chain performance management can explain
78% of the difference in the area of reverse logistics. Hypothesis 4 show that eco-design as
a measure of competitive strategic alliances is related to green supply chain performance
management, with values of β = 96 and CR = 2.18 (p < 0.05). This result indicates that
green supply chain management can explain 96% of the variance in the area of eco-design.
Test of hypothesis 5 show that procurement as a measure of competitive strategic alliances
is related to green supply chain performance management, with values of β = 85 and
CR = 2.21 (p < 0.05). This indicates that green supply chain management can explain 85%
of the variance in procurement.
Table 7. Result of standardized and unstandardized regression estimate of the model.
S/N Mediation Stage Relationship Std. Beta Actual Beta SE CR P

X→Y Green supply chain performance
1. 0.87 0.75 0.13 1.99 0.000
(Hypothesis 1) management and manufacturing
2. 0.77 0.79 0.36 3.11 0.000
(Hypothesis 2) management and transportation
3. 0.78 0.85 0.34 3.08 0.000
(Hypothesis 3) management and reverse logistics
4. 0.96 0.68 0.21 2.18 0.000
(Hypothesis 4) management and eco-design
5. 0.85 0.86 0.19 2.21 0.000
(Hypothesis 5) management and procurement
Sustainability
Sustainability 2023,
2023, 15, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
2156 15 of 15
21 of 22
FigureFigure 7. Structural
7. Structural Covariance
Covariance Model.Model.
Table 7. Result of standardized and unstandardized regression estimate of the model.

5. Discussion
Business decisions are frequently
Std. made
Actualin the face of uncertainty and risk [90]. One
S/N Mediation Stage
prominentRelationship
issue that firms, particularly manufacturingSE firms,CR P
face is managing their pro-
Beta Beta
cesses Green
and products in
supply chaina way that not only ensures their competitive advantage and
X→Y superior performance
performance but also mitigates the risks and uncertainties imposed by environ-
manage-
1. 0.87
mental hazards. Most of the previous 0.75 proposed
studies 0.13 models1.99 0.000 the role of
that examined
(Hypothesis 1) ment and manufactur-
different factors or green practices in a firm’s environmental performance or in mitigating
ing
environment-related risks and uncertainties [90–92]. This study was carried out to examine
Green supply chain
the influence of green supply chain management practices on competitive strategic alliances.
X→Y The overall
performance
results manage-
indicate that0.77
green supply
2. 0.79 chain0.36
management3.11 practices
0.000have a signifi-
(Hypothesiscant
2) andment and transporta-
positive effect on the competitive strategic alliances of automobile firms, using the
tion
areas of manufacturing, transportation, reverse logistics, eco-design, and procurement as
X→Y measures. Green supply chain
3. 0.78 0.85 0.34 3.08 0.000
(Hypothesis 3) performance
According to the findings of the test of hypothesis 1, there is a significant correlation

between green supply chain performance management and manufacturing. The recorded
values of β = 87 and CR = 1.99 (p < 0.05) indicate that green supply chain performance
management can explain 87% of the variation in manufacturing. This finding is consistent
with the findings of earlier studies that firms can perform significantly better by implement-
ing green initiatives such as green hiring, manufacturing processes, and logistics [93,94].
This finding implies that with green supply chain performance management in place,
manufacturing will experience a significant boost in terms of total quality, waste reduc-
tion, high productivity, etc., which will in turn enhance firm performance. Thus, these
findings answer research question 1, what is the correlation between green supply chain
performance management and manufacturing?
The findings of the test of hypothesis 2 indicate that there is a significant correlation
between green supply chain performance management and transportation. The recorded
values of β = 77 and CR = 3.11 (p < 0.05) indicate that green supply chain performance
management can explain 77% of the difference in the area of transportation. This finding
supports the argument that implies that with green supply chain performance management
in place, there is better movement of goods, binding together of the supply chain, logistic
convenience, etc. [94]. This can enhance competitive strategic alliances, which can lead to
better firm performance. These findings answer research question 2, what is the correlation
between green supply chain performance management and transportation?
The findings of the test of hypothesis 3 revealed that there is a significant relation-
ship between green supply chain performance management and reverse logistics as a
measure of competitive strategic alliances. The recorded values of β = 78 and CR = 3.08
(p < 0.05) indicate that green supply chain performance management can explain 78% of the
difference in the area of reverse logistics. This finding augments previous studies [95,96]
reporting that with green supply chain performance management in place, the upstream
movement of products and materials is optimal and there is better recycling, reclamation
of raw materials, and facilitation of product reuse. In turn, competitive strategic alliances
can be enhanced, which can then lead to better firm performance. These findings answer
research question 3, what is the correlation between green supply chain performance
management and reverse logistics?
The findings of the test of hypothesis 4 show that eco-design as a measure of compet-
itive strategic alliances is related to green supply chain performance management, with
values of β = 96 and CR = 2.18 (p < 0.05). This result indicates that green supply chain
management can explain 96% of the variance in the area of eco-design. This finding corrob-
orates the findings of previous studies that green supply chain performance management
practices allow firms to achieve their sustainable goals, reduce ecological risks, and improve
environmental efficiency throughout the supply chain [19,97–99]. These findings imply that
with green supply chain performance management in place, the design of products and
services is based on special considerations, there are environmental impacts on a product’s
life cycle and promotion of waste-free circuits, and ecological sustainability is beneficial
for competitive strategies and alliance enhancement. These findings answer research ques-
tion 4, what is the correlation between green supply chain performance management and
eco-design?
The findings of the test of hypothesis 5 show that procurement as a measure of
competitive strategic alliances is related to green supply chain performance management,
with values of β = 85 and CR = 2.21 (p < 0.05). This indicates that green supply chain
management can explain 85% of the variance in procurement. This finding supports the
claim that with green supply chain performance management in place, there is a better
transactional process, supply chain enhancement, product identification, sourcing, and
strategic vetting, which can foster competitive strategic alliances [94,96]. These findings
answer research question 5, what is the correlation between green supply chain performance
management and procurement?
6. Managerial Implications
This study can enable the managers of automobile firms and other related firms to
prioritize the implementation of green supply chain management. This can facilitate the
achievement of sustainable goals and the minimization of effluent wastes and hazardous
chemicals, thereby improving environmental efficiency all through the supply chain [19].
This can also involve better transactional processes, supply chain enhancement, designing
of services and products based on special considerations, waste-free circuit enhancement,
better recycling, reclamation of raw materials, and facilitation of reused products.
This study can also enable managers to build strategic alliances in order to promote
effective firm performance such that they appreciate the critical role of green supply chain
management. This supports the view that collaborating with suppliers can lead to positive
outcomes, as GSCM practices can increase economic performance and create a competitive
advantage for firms [50].
Additionally, the study makes it clear that practitioners need to incorporate green sup-
ply chain management as a critical catalyst of firm performance. This is in agreement with
the claim that supply chains are important for improving tracking and traceability while
simultaneously meeting the needs and requirements of customers on a broad level [37].
This is also in line with the views of Boon-itt and Wong, who asserted that customer satis-
faction should be of the utmost importance to organizations as they engage in identifying,
understanding, and utilizing customer requirements with the objectives of producing
customer-defined goods/products and increasing benefits to the organization [100].
7. Conclusions
The serious risks that environmental uncertainty presents are making the general
public and the business community more aware of environmental issues. Businesses, espe-
cially those in the manufacturing industry, have been pressured to adopt environmentally
friendly processes and products in order to keep up their strategic competitiveness. In
addition to offering protection against environmental uncertainty, GSCM can also enhance
firm performance, which is why it is becoming more well liked among academics and
practitioners. While previous studies mostly examined the role of GSCM in improving a
firm’s environmental performance, this study was conducted to inform policy makers and
other relevant stakeholders about the role of green supply chain management practices in
competitive strategic alliances as a way to ascertain performance levels in automobile firms.
A sample size of 320 was used for this purpose. The outcomes of the analyses revealed
that green supply chain management practices influence the competitive strategic alliances
of firms, thereby predicting the level of performance they can attain. Green supply chain
management, a proxy for green supply chain management practices, correlates with various
factors used to measure competitive strategic alliances. Green supply chain performance
management ensures the reuse and recycling of raw materials, purchase of raw materials,
optimal upstream movement of products and materials, total quality, waste reduction, high
productivity, binding together of the supply chain, product identification, better sourc-
ing, and vetting of strategic sources. It also enhances environmental sustainability and
management.
Based on the same outcomes, it was further concluded that competitive strategic
alliances of firms promote management of the green supply chain, resulting in better per-
formance. Firms are now pursuing sustainability goals and have made strategic alliances
to implement management practices for green supply chains. There are a few recommenda-
tions related to this research, one of which is to consider different types of strategic alliances
to compare their outcomes.
Author Contributions: All authors contributed to study conception and design. The first draft of the
manuscript was written by H.A., and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: The data will be available from the corresponding author upon a
reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declared no conflict of interest.
References
1. Muduli, K.; Govindan, K.; Barve, A.; Kannan, D.; Geng, Y. Role of Behavioural Factors in Green Supply Chain Management
Implementation in Indian Mining Industries. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2013, 76, 50–60. [CrossRef]
2. Diabat, A.; Govindan, K. An Analysis of the Drivers Affecting the Implementation of Green Supply Chain Management. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 659–667. [CrossRef]
3. Cabral, I.; Grilo, A.; Cruz-Machado, V. A Decision-Making Model for Lean, Agile, Resilient and Green Supply Chain Management.
Int. J. Prod. Res. 2012, 50, 4830–4845. [CrossRef]
4. Ageron, B.; Gunasekaran, A.; Spalanzani, A. Sustainable Supply Management: An Empirical Study. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140,
168–182. [CrossRef]
5. Arimura, T.H.; Darnall, N.; Katayama, H. Is ISO 14001 a Gateway to More Advanced Voluntary Action? The Case of Green
Supply Chain Management. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2011, 61, 170–182. [CrossRef]
6. Azevedo, S.G.; Carvalho, H.; Duarte, S.; Cruz-Machado, V. Influence of Green and Lean Upstream Supply Chain Management
Practices on Business Sustainability. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2012, 59, 753–765. [CrossRef]
7. Yang, C.S.; Lu, C.S.; Haider, J.J.; Marlow, P.B. The Effect of Green Supply Chain Management on Green Performance and Firm
Competitiveness in the Context of Container Shipping in Taiwan. Transp. Res. Part E: Logist. Transp. Rev. 2013, 55, 55–73.
[CrossRef]
8. Barve, A.; Muduli, K. Modelling the Challenges of Green Supply Chain Management Practices in Indian Mining Industries. J.
Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2013, 24, 1102–1122. [CrossRef]
9. Beske, P.; Land, A.; Seuring, S. Sustainable Supply Chain Management Practices and Dynamic Capabilities in the Food Industry:
A Critical Analysis of the Literature. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 152, 131–143. [CrossRef]
10. Brandenburg, M.; Govindan, K.; Sarkis, J.; Seuring, S. Quantitative Models for Sustainable Supply Chain Management: Develop-
ments and Directions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2014, 233, 299–312. [CrossRef]
11. Nkakleu, R.; Biboum, A.D. Governance and Performance of Strategic Alliances in Africa: The Role of Institutions. J. Afr. Bus.
2019, 20, 242–258. [CrossRef]
12. Büyüközkan, G.; Çifçi, G. Evaluation of the Green Supply Chain Management Practices: A Fuzzy ANP Approach. Prod. Plan.
Control 2012, 23, 405–418. [CrossRef]
13. Carvalho, H.; Cruz-Machado, V. Integrating Lean, Agile, Resilience and Green Paradigms in Supply Chain Management
(LARG_SCM). In Supply Chain Management; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2011; ISBN 978-953-307-184-8.
14. Chan, H.K.; He, H.; Wang, W.Y.C. Green Marketing and Its Impact on Supply Chain Management in Industrial Markets. Ind.
Mark. Manag. 2012, 41, 557–562. [CrossRef]
15. Chan, R.Y.K.; He, H.; Chan, H.K.; Wang, W.Y.C. Environmental Orientation and Corporate Performance: The Mediation
Mechanism of Green Supply Chain Management and Moderating Effect of Competitive Intensity. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2012, 41,
16. Chardine-Baumann, E.; Botta-Genoulaz, V. A Framework for Sustainable Performance Assessment of Supply Chain Management
Practices. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2014, 76, 138–147. [CrossRef]
17. Azevedo, S.G.; Carvalho, H.; Cruz Machado, V. The Influence of Green Practices on Supply Chain Performance: A Case Study
Approach. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2011, 47, 850–871. [CrossRef]
18. Chen, C.C.; Shih, H.S.; Shyur, H.J.; Wu, K.S. A Business Strategy Selection of Green Supply Chain Management via an Analytic
Network Process. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64, 2544–2557. [CrossRef]
19. Chin, T.A.; Tat, H.H.; Sulaiman, Z. Green Supply Chain Management, Environmental Collaboration and Sustainability Perfor-
mance. In Proceedings of the Procedia CIRP; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; Volume 26, pp. 695–699.
20. De Giovanni, P.; Esposito Vinzi, V. Covariance versus Component-Based Estimations of Performance in Green Supply Chain
Management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 135, 907–916. [CrossRef]
21. Ahi, P.; Searcy, C. A Comparative Literature Analysis of Definitions for Green and Sustainable Supply Chain Management. J.
Clean. Prod. 2013, 52, 329–341. [CrossRef]
22. De Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Latan, H.; Teixeira, A.A.; de Oliveira, J.H.C. Quality Management, Environmental
Management Maturity, Green Supply Chain Practices and Green Performance of Brazilian Companies with ISO 14001 Certification:
Direct and Indirect Effects. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2014, 67, 39–51. [CrossRef]
23. Eltayeb, T.K.; Zailani, S.; Ramayah, T. Green Supply Chain Initiatives among Certified Companies in Malaysia and Environmental
Sustainability: Investigating the Outcomes. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 495–506. [CrossRef]
24. Fahimnia, B.; Sarkis, J.; Davarzani, H. Green Supply Chain Management: A Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
2015, 162, 101–114. [CrossRef]
25. Gold, S.; Seuring, S.; Beske, P. Sustainable Supply Chain Management and Inter-Organizational Resources: A Literature Review.
Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2010, 17, 230–245. [CrossRef]
26. Perotti, S.; Zorzini, M.; Cagno, E.; Micheli, G.J.L. Green Supply Chain Practices and Company Performance: The Case of 3PLs in
Italy. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2012, 42, 640–672. [CrossRef]
27. Rostamzadeh, R.; Govindan, K.; Esmaeili, A.; Sabaghi, M. Application of Fuzzy VIKOR for Evaluation of Green Supply Chain
Management Practices. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 49, 188–203. [CrossRef]
28. Govindan, K.; Kaliyan, M.; Kannan, D.; Haq, A.N. Barriers Analysis for Green Supply Chain Management Implementation in
Indian Industries Using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 147, 555–568. [CrossRef]
29. Govindan, K.; Kannan, D.; Mathiyazhagan, K.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Jabbour, C.J.C. Analysing Green Supply Chain
Management Practices in Brazil’s Electrical/Electronics Industry Using Interpretive Structural Modelling. Int. J. Environ. Stud.
2013, 70, 477–493. [CrossRef]
30. Purba, H.H.; Fitra, A.; Nindiani, A. Control and Integration of Milk-Run Operation in Japanese Automotive Company in
Indonesia. Manag. Prod. Eng. Rev. 2019, 10, 79–88. [CrossRef]
31. Sharma, R.; Shishodia, A.; Kamble, S.; Gunasekaran, A.; Belhadi, A. Agriculture Supply Chain Risks and COVID-19: Mitigation
Strategies and Implications for the Practitioners. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2020, 1–27. [CrossRef]
32. De Giovanni, P. Leveraging the Circular Economy with a Closed-Loop Supply Chain and a Reverse Omnichannel Using
Blockchain Technology and Incentives. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2022, 42, 959–994. [CrossRef]
33. Lim, J.; Norman, B.A.; Rajgopal, J. Redesign of Vaccine Distribution Networks. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 2022, 29, 200–225. [CrossRef]
34. Moshood, T.D.; Nawanir, G.; Sorooshian, S.; Okfalisa, O. Digital Twins Driven Supply Chain Visibility within Logistics: A New
Paradigm for Future Logistics. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2021, 4, 29. [CrossRef]
35. Xue, X.; Dou, J.; Shang, Y. Blockchain-Driven Supply Chain Decentralized Operations—Information Sharing Perspective. Bus.
Process Manag. J. 2021, 27, 184–203. [CrossRef]
36. Jabbour, C.J.C.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. Green Human Resource Management and Green Supply Chain Management: Linking
Two Emerging Agendas. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 1824–1833. [CrossRef]
37. Laosirihongthong, T.; Adebanjo, D.; Choon Tan, K. Green Supply Chain Management Practices and Performance. Ind. Manag.
Data Syst. 2013, 113, 1088–1109. [CrossRef]
38. Shi, V.G.; Koh, S.C.L.; Baldwin, J.; Cucchiella, F. Natural Resource Based Green Supply Chain Management. Supply Chain Manag.
2012, 17, 54–67. [CrossRef]
39. Lee, S.M.; Kim, S.T.; Choi, D. Green Supply Chain Management and Organizational Performance. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2012,
112, 1148–1180. [CrossRef]
40. Lin, R.J. Using Fuzzy DEMATEL to Evaluate the Green Supply Chain Management Practices. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 40, 32–39.
[CrossRef]
41. Zimon, D.; Tyan, J.; Sroufe, R. Implementing Sustainable Supply Chain Management: Reactive, Cooperative, and Dynamic
Models. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7227. [CrossRef]
42. Bag, S.; Wood, L.C.; Xu, L.; Dhamija, P.; Kayikci, Y. Big Data Analytics as an Operational Excellence Approach to Enhance
Sustainable Supply Chain Performance. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 153, 104559. [CrossRef]
43. Murniati, S.; Harjuno, H.A.C.; Mambuhu, N.; Jenni Indriakati, A.; Murniati STIE Wira Bhakti Makassar, S.; Alfabetian Harjuno
Condro Haditomo, I. Analyzing Mediation Effect of Competitive Advantage on Firm Performance as Measured by Total Quality
Management and Supply Chain Management. J. Apl. Manaj. 2022, 20, 66–74. [CrossRef]
44. Khokhar, M.; Hou, Y.; Rafique, M.A.; Iqbal, W. Evaluating the Social Sustainability Criteria of Supply Chain Management in
Manufacturing Industries: A Role of BWM in MCDM. Probl. Ekorozw. 2020, 15, 185–194. [CrossRef]
45. Al-Ghwayeen, W.S.; Abdallah, A.B. Green Supply Chain Management and Export Performance: The Mediating Role of Environ-
mental Performance. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2018, 29, 1233–1252. [CrossRef]
46. Li, G.; Li, L.; Choi, T.M.; Sethi, S.P. Green Supply Chain Management in Chinese Firms: Innovative Measures and the Moderating
Role of Quick Response Technology. J. Oper. Manag. 2020, 66, 958–988. [CrossRef]
47. Hazen, B.T.; Cegielski, C.; Hanna, J.B. Diffusion of Green Supply Chain Management: Examining Perceived Quality of Green
Reverse Logistics. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2011, 22, 373–389. [CrossRef]
48. Zhang, Z.; Yu, L. Research on Optimal Pricing Decisions of the Service Supply Chain Oriented to Strategic Consumers. J. Ind.
Manag. Optim. 2022, 2022, 1–25. [CrossRef]
49. Guo, J.; Xi, M. Greening, Pricing and Marketing Coordination for a Complex Three-Level Supply Chain Under the Carbon Tax in
China. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 76895–76905. [CrossRef]
50. Liu, X.; Yang, J.; Qu, S.; Wang, L.; Shishime, T.; Bao, C. Sustainable Production: Practices and Determinant Factors of Green
Supply Chain Management of Chinese Companies. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2012, 21, 1–16. [CrossRef]
51. Luthra, S.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, S.; Haleem, A.; Luthra, S.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, S.; Haleem, A. Barriers to Implement Green Supply
Chain Management in Automobile Industry Using Interpretive Structural Modeling Technique: An Indian Perspective. J. Ind.
Eng. Manag. 2011, 4, 231–257. [CrossRef]
52. Mathiyazhagan, K.; Govindan, K.; NoorulHaq, A.; Geng, Y. An ISM Approach for the Barrier Analysis in Implementing Green
Supply Chain Management. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 283–297. [CrossRef]
53. Negri, M.; Cagno, E.; Colicchia, C.; Sarkis, J. Integrating Sustainability and Resilience in the Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature
Review and a Research Agenda. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 2858–2886. [CrossRef]
54. Sutduean, J.; Singsa, A.; Sriyakul, T.; Jermsittiparsert, K. Supply Chain Integration, Enterprise Resource Planning, and Organiza-
tional Performance: The Enterprise Resource Planning Implementation Approach. J. Comput. Theor. Nanosci. 2019, 16, 2975–2981.
[CrossRef]
55. Singh, J.; Singh, H.; Kumar, A. Impact of Lean Practices on Organizational Sustainability through Green Supply Chain
Management—An Empirical Investigation. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma 2020, 11, 1049–1082. [CrossRef]
56. Sahoo, S.; Vijayvargy, L. Green Supply Chain Management Practices and Its Impact on Organizational Performance: Evidence
from Indian Manufacturers. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2020, 32, 862–886. [CrossRef]
57. Jum’a, L.; Ikram, M.; Alkalha, Z.; Alaraj, M. Factors Affecting Managers’ Intention to Adopt Green Supply Chain Management
Practices: Evidence from Manufacturing Firms in Jordan. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 29, 5605–5621. [CrossRef]
58. Sajjad, A.; Eweje, G.; Tappin, D. Managerial Perspectives on Drivers for and Barriers to Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Implementation: Evidence from New Zealand. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2020, 29, 592–604. [CrossRef]
59. Tukamuhabwa, B.; Mutebi, H.; Kyomuhendo, R. Competitive Advantage in SMEs: Effect of Supply Chain Management Practices,
Logistics Capabilities and Logistics Integration in a Developing Country. J. Bus. Socio-Econ. Dev. 2021. ahead of the print.
[CrossRef]
60. Walker, H.; Jones, N. Sustainable Supply Chain Management across the UK Private Sector. Supply Chain Manag. 2012, 17, 15–28.
[CrossRef]
61. Mitra, S.; Datta, P.P. Adoption of Green Supply Chain Management Practices and Their Impact on Performance: An Exploratory
Study of Indian Manufacturing Firms. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2014, 52, 2085–2107. [CrossRef]
62. Mohanty, R.P.; Prakash, A. Green Supply Chain Management Practices in India: A Confirmatory Empirical Study. Prod. Manuf.
Res. 2014, 2, 438–456. [CrossRef]
63. Hsu, C.W.; Kuo, T.C.; Chen, S.H.; Hu, A.H. Using DEMATEL to Develop a Carbon Management Model of Supplier Selection in
Green Supply Chain Management. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 56, 164–172. [CrossRef]
64. Hu, A.H.; Hsu, C.W. Critical Factors for Implementing Green Supply Chain Management Practice: An Empirical Study of
Electrical and Electronics Industries in Taiwan. Manag. Res. Rev. 2010, 33, 586–608. [CrossRef]
65. Kumar, A.; Mangla, S.K.; Luthra, S.; Ishizaka, A. Evaluating the Human Resource Related Soft Dimensions in Green Supply
Chain Management Implementation. Prod. Plan. Control 2019, 30, 699–715. [CrossRef]
66. Ferraris, A.; Mazzoleni, A.; Devalle, A.; Couturier, J. Big Data Analytics Capabilities and Knowledge Management: Impact on
Firm Performance. Manag. Decis. 2019, 57, 1923–1936. [CrossRef]
67. Sima, V.; Gheorghe, I.G.; Subić, J.; Nancu, D. Influences of the Industry 4.0 Revolution on the Human Capital Development and
Consumer Behavior: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4035. [CrossRef]
68. Tate, W.L.; Ellram, L.M.; Kirchoff, J.F. Corporate Social Responsibility Reports: A Thematic Analysis Related to Supply Chain
Management. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2010, 46, 19–44. [CrossRef]
69. Muduli, K.; Govindan, K.; Barve, A.; Geng, Y. Barriers to Green Supply Chain Management in Indian Mining Industries: A Graph
Theoretic Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 335–344. [CrossRef]
70. Sarkis, J.; Zhu, Q.; Lai, K.H. An Organizational Theoretic Review of Green Supply Chain Management Literature. Int. J. Prod.
Econ. 2011, 130, 1–15. [CrossRef]
71. Cuypers, I.R.P.; Hennart, J.F.; Silverman, B.S.; Ertug, G. Transaction Cost Theory: Past Progress, Current Challenges, and
Suggestions for the Future. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2021, 15, 111–150. [CrossRef]
72. Lee, K.H. Integrating Carbon Footprint into Supply Chain Management: The Case of Hyundai Motor Company (HMC) in the
Automobile Industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2011, 19, 1216–1223. [CrossRef]
73. Tseng, M.L. Green Supply Chain Management with Linguistic Preferences and Incomplete Information. Appl. Soft Comput. 2011,
11, 4894–4903. [CrossRef]
74. Tukamuhabwa, B.; Mutebi, H.; Isabirye, D. Supplier Performance in the Public Healthcare: Internal Social Capital, Logistics
Capabilities and Supply Chain Risk Management Capabilities as Antecedents in a Developing Economy. J. Bus. Socio-Econ. Dev.
2021. ahead of print. [CrossRef]
75. Tseng, M.L.; Chiu, A.S.F. Evaluating Firm’s Green Supply Chain Management in Linguistic Preferences. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 40,
22–31. [CrossRef]
76. Sheu, J.B.; Talley, W.K. Green Supply Chain Management: Trends, Challenges, and Solutions. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp.
Rev. 2011, 47, 791–792. [CrossRef]
77. Wang, Y.F.; Chen, S.P.; Lee, Y.C.; Tsai, C.T. (Simon) Developing Green Management Standards for Restaurants: An Application of
Green Supply Chain Management. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2013, 34, 263–273. [CrossRef]
78. Wu, G.-C.; Cheng, Y.; Huang, S.-Y. The Study of Knowledge Transfer and Green Management Performance in Green Supply
Chain Management. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2010, 4, 44–48.
79. Wu, J.; Dunn, S.; Forman, H. A Study on Green Supply Chain Management Practices among Large Global Corporations. J. Supply
Chain Oper. Manag. 2012, 10, 182–194.
80. Wu, K.J.; Tseng, M.L.; Vy, T. Evaluation the Drivers of Green Supply Chain Management Practices in Uncertainty. In Proceedings
of the Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2011; Volume 25, pp. 384–397.
81. Wu, Z.; Pagell, M. Balancing Priorities: Decision-Making in Sustainable Supply Chain Management. J. Oper. Manag. 2011, 29,
82. Zailani, S.; Jeyaraman, K.; Vengadasan, G.; Premkumar, R. Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) in Malaysia: A Survey.
Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140, 330–340. [CrossRef]
83. Zhu, Q.; Geng, Y.; Sarkis, J.; Lai, K. hung Evaluating Green Supply Chain Management among Chinese Manufacturers from the
Ecological Modernization Perspective. Transp. Res. Part E: Logist. Transp. Rev. 2011, 47, 808–821. [CrossRef]
84. Zhu, Q.; Geng, Y.; Fujita, T.; Hashimoto, S. Green Supply Chain Management in Leading Manufacturers: Case Studies in Japanese
Large Companies. Manag. Res. Rev. 2010, 33, 380–392. [CrossRef]
85. Zhu, Q.; Sarkis, J.; Lai, K.H. Examining the Effects of Green Supply Chain Management Practices and Their Mediations on
Performance Improvements. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2012, 50, 1377–1394. [CrossRef]
86. Zhu, Q.; Sarkis, J.; Lai, K.H. Green Supply Chain Management Innovation Diffusion and Its Relationship to Organizational
Improvement: An Ecological Modernization Perspective. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 2012, 29, 168–185. [CrossRef]
87. Zhu, Q.; Sarkis, J.; Lai, K. hung Institutional-Based Antecedents and Performance Outcomes of Internal and External Green
Supply Chain Management Practices. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2013, 19, 106–117. [CrossRef]
88. Zhu, Q.; Tian, Y.; Sarkis, J. Diffusion of Selected Green Supply Chain Management Practices: An Assessment of Chinese
Enterprises. Prod. Plan. Control 2012, 23, 837–850. [CrossRef]
89. Bose, I.; Pal, R. Do Green Supply Chain Management Initiatives Impact Stock Prices of Firms? Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 52,
90. Ji, Y.; Li, H.; Zhang, H. Risk-Averse Two-Stage Stochastic Minimum Cost Consensus Models with Asymmetric Adjustment Cost.
Group Decis. Negot. 2022, 31, 261–291. [CrossRef]
91. Qu, S.; Li, Y.; Ji, Y. The Mixed Integer Robust Maximum Expert Consensus Models for Large-Scale GDM under Uncertainty
Circumstances. Appl. Soft Comput. 2021, 107, 107369. [CrossRef]
92. Qu, S.; Xu, L.; Mangla, S.K.; Chan, F.T.S.; Zhu, J.; Arisian, S. Matchmaking in Reward-Based Crowdfunding Platforms: A Hybrid
Machine Learning Approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2022, 1–21. [CrossRef]
93. Green, K.W.; Zelbst, P.J.; Meacham, J.; Bhadauria, V.S. Green Supply Chain Management Practices: Impact on Performance.
Supply Chain Manag. 2012, 17, 290–305. [CrossRef]
94. Jawaad, M.; Hasan, T.; Amir, A.; Imam, H. Exploring the Impact of Green Human Resource Management on Firm Sustainable
Performance: Roles of Green Supply Chain Management and Firm Size. J. Manag. Organ. 2022, 1–23. [CrossRef]
95. Rao, P. Greening the Supply Chain: A New Initiative in South East Asia. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2002, 22, 632–655. [CrossRef]
96. Vachon, S.; Klassen, R.D. Extending Green Practices across the Supply Chain: The Impact of Upstream and Downstream
Integration. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2006, 26, 795–821. [CrossRef]
97. Aggerholm, H.K.; Andersen, S.E.; Thomsen, C. Conceptualising Employer Branding in Sustainable Organisations. Corp. Commun.
2011, 16, 105–123. [CrossRef]
98. Zhang, B.; Wu, D.; Liang, L.; Olson, D.L. Supply Chain Loss Averse Newsboy Model with Capital Constraint. IEEE Trans. Syst.
Man Cybern. Syst. 2016, 46, 646–658. [CrossRef]
99. Luo, Z.; Chen, X.; Chen, J.; Wang, X. Optimal Pricing Policies for Differentiated Brands under Different Supply Chain Power
Structures. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 259, 437–451. [CrossRef]
100. Boon-itt, S.; Wong, C.Y. The Moderating Effects of Technological and Demand Uncertainties on the Relationship between Supply
Chain Integration and Customer Delivery Performance. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2011, 41, 253–276. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

SCM 12

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

SCM 12

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCM 12

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Business School, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China

Citation: Abbas, H.; Tong, S. Green

Sustainability 2023, 15, 2156. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032156 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

1.1. Study Model

1.2. Aims and Objectives

Responsibility/Processes of Supply Chain Management

2.2. Green Supply Chain Management

2.2.1. Green Supply Chain Management for Effective Firm Performance

the significance of lean management, sustainability, and GSCM practices in improving

2.2.2. Green Supply Chain Management Application, Sustainability, and Collaboration

new challenges in global competition, rapidly changing technologies, and increasingly

Table 1. Demographic profile of respondents.

Variable Classification Frequency Percentage (%)

4.1. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

4.1.1. Measurement Model of Green Supply Chain Performance Management (Figure 2)

4.1.1. Standardized (Figure 2)

Table 3. Measurement model analysis of manufacturing.

4.1.4. Measurement Model of Area of Reverse Logistics (Figure 5)

Table 5. Measurement model analysis of reverse logistics.

Chi-Square (df), Standardized Factor

Figure 5. Measurement Model of Area of Reverse Logistics.

Table 7. Result of standardized and unstandardized regression estimate of the model.

S/N Mediation Stage Relationship Std. Beta Actual Beta SE CR P

Table 7. Result of standardized and unstandardized regression estimate of the model.

According to the findings of the test of hypothesis 1, there is a significant correlation

You might also like