_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Report Information from ProQuest

14 March 2014 03:56 _______________________________________________________________

14 March 2014

ProQuest

Table of contents
1. Making connections: a review of supply chain management and sustainability literature............................ 1

14 March 2014

ii

ProQuest

Document 1 of 1

Making connections: a review of supply chain management and sustainability literature

Author: Ashby, Alison; Leat, Mike; Hudson-Smith, Melanie ProQuest document link Abstract: Purpose - The objective of this paper is to investigate systematically the discipline of supply chain management (SCM) within the context of sustainability. The two concepts are increasingly aligned, and sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) represents an evolving field where they explicitly interact. Given their complex and holistic nature, breaking down the literature to understand its structures, processes, connections and limitations can provide an objective view of the status of research in these highly important fields, identifying key areas for future research/theory development. Design/methodology/approach - A systematic review of current SCM literature is carried out, specifically in relation to the social and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Findings - SSCM and the integration of sustainability into supply chains is a significant but evolving field evidenced by a current bias in the literature towards theory development and highly qualitative research methods. The environmental dimension is significantly better represented in the literature through specific processes at all stages of the supply chain. The social dimension is recognised, but receives less emphasis than expected given SCM's focus on interaction, relationships and communication. These two dimensions are treated separately in the literature with limited insight on how to integrate them and current SCM and sustainability research provides limited practical outputs. Research limitations/implications - The review focuses on environmental and social sustainability within supply chains without explicit consideration of the economic dimension. Practical implications - The review highlights the key themes and issues for supply chain managers faced with implementing sustainability. It also illustrates a number of areas for future research, along with the need for researchers to develop more practical tools for implementing SSCM. Originality/value Indicates the extent to which sustainability is integrated within SCM and where the research emphasis currently lies. The environmental dimension is significantly more defined and developed in the literature. SCM literature emphasises the importance of long-term supplier relationships, but this "people-focused" approach does not appear to translate into socially responsible supply chains. It suggests that the more process-driven nature of environmental sustainability makes it easier to put into supply chain practice. There is also limited research or evidence on how the two dimensions can be integrated despite recognition of their inter-relationship. Full text: Building theory in supply chain management through "systematic reviews" of the literature part 2 Edited by Richard Wilding and Beverly Wagner Introduction There is increasing consumer and stakeholder expectation for firms to be fully responsible for their business operations, and to clearly demonstrate their environmental and ethical behaviour. Most organisations are a part of at least one supply chain ([74] Samaranayake, 2005) and in today's global market competition is increasingly based on "supply chain vs supply chain" ([47] Gold et al. , 2009; [83] Soler et al. , 2010). Therefore, the expected line of responsibility needs to extend along the full extent of a firm's supply chains into its products, processes and relationships. Globalisation and recent economic trends have created highly complex supply chains ([26] Varma et al. , 2006) and the design, organisation, interactions, competences, capabilities and management of these supply chains have become key issues ([47] Gold et al. , 2009). Supply chain management (SCM) is therefore highly relevant both to successfully competing in today's market and in addressing responsible behaviour at all stages of the supply chain. It represents a potentially important discipline for establishing how to integrate environmental and social considerations and practices, to achieve the goal of sustainability. The development of SCM has been largely practitioner-led ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006) and represents an 14 March 2014 Page 1 of 29 ProQuest

evolutionary step beyond logistics ([74] Samaranayake, 2005). It extends logistics thought by integrating the management of co-operations with that of material and information flows ([13] Handfield and Nichols, 1999). The prime driver for the rapid development of SCM has been economic sustainability, based on the premise that an integrated and efficient supply chain helps to minimise monetary risks and increase profits ([44] Fawcett

et al. , 2008).
However in 1983 the World Commission on the Environment and Development (WCED) was established and the result of their work formalised in the 1987 Brundtland Report "Our Common Future". It defined sustainability as "development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" ([27] WCED, 1987, p. 43). A total of 25 years later this remains the most often quoted definition of this concept and its two central tenets are: "the concept of 'needs', in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given;" and "the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organisation on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs" ([27] WCED, 1987, p. 43). This has led, slowly, to social and environmental sustainability becoming additional drivers for SCM, with sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) now a rapidly evolving field that requires a broadened approach to SCM, incorporating the ecological and social aspects of business, as well as economic sustainability, in line with the Brundtland definition ([87] Svensson, 2007). It is, therefore, "the strategic, transparent integration and achievement of an organisation's social, environmental and economic goals in the systemic coordination of key inter-organisational business processes for improving the long term economic performance of the individual company and its supply chains" ([38] Carter and Rogers, 2008, p. 368). While there is clearly academic recognition of the need to integrate economic, environmental and social sustainability, given the broad nature of these fields there is a tangible need to develop a better and more focused understanding of sustainability specifically in relation to supply chains. How sustainable supply chains are defined, interpreted, researched and practiced are key to this improved understanding and a review of relevant literature provides the most appropriate means to achieve this and guide future research in SSCM. Sustainability and SCM represent growing and highly important areas for research, but there have been few literature reviews to date that examine the two fields together and even fewer systematic reviews. Given the complexity of both research areas the process of breaking down the literature systematically and understanding its structures, processes, connections and limitations can provide a more objective view of the status of research in these two important fields. Through the use of a systematic review this paper will address the following research questions: How has sustainability been represented in supply chain research to date? - What are the key similarities and differences in focus and findings/outputs? - What methodologies have been used, which dominate and why? This structured process will enable key gaps in the literature to be identified and directions and approaches for future research/theory development to be proposed. The following section will detail the methodology used for the systematic review and is followed by a presentation of the findings. The findings are structured to discuss the broad discipline of Supply Chain Management in relation to sustainability and then focus more specifically on how the environmental and social dimensions are represented in the literature to date. These findings are then compared against other relevant structured literature reviews and the contribution of this paper detailed. Identified gaps in SCM and sustainability research are discussed and finally the impact of these findings on future Sustainable Supply Chain Management research is considered. Methodology For a systematic literature review it is important to define clear boundaries to delimitate the research ([78] Seuring and Muller, 2008a) and establish a protocol for identifying, selecting and reviewing literature relevant to 14 March 2014 Page 2 of 29 ProQuest

the specific question ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006). This form of review typically has the three defined stages of Planning, where the research need and question is identified; conducting which includes the search for relevant literature and its analysis; and reporting where the findings are formalised and recommendations made ([23] Tranfield et al. , 2003). Structured literature reviews within the Operations Management discipline ([79] Seuring and Muller, 2008b; [35] Burgess et al. , 2006) illustrate the objective nature of this approach in establishing key themes or dimensions, and the benefits that can be provided to improve future research ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006). As well as reviewing content as in a standard literature review process, this approach investigates the underlying structure of the selected papers to identify differences and similarities in methods used and potential issues that result from each. Through this process methodological strengths are tested and key gaps in knowledge identified. Once it was established that a systematic and objective review of Supply Chain Management (SCM) and sustainability literature was to be undertaken a set of search criteria was applied to identify the most relevant papers. The literature search was limited to peer-reviewed journals produced in English and for quality purposes the initial proposal was to limit searches to journals rated from 2-4* in the ABS journal rankings (2010). However, recognising the interdisciplinary nature of the subject areas, along with the fact that sustainability and SCM are both rapidly evolving concepts, it was deemed important to include relevant journals which fell outside this scope, to ensure that all the most current and relevant research was included. Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] indicates the ABS ranking for each of the accessed journals. Important publications that did not fit within the specified range include the Journal of Cleaner Production and

Greener Management International . These journals are not currently ABS ranked but are explicitly focused on
cutting edge research in the field of sustainability with a strong emphasis on the operational context, and respectively contributed 10 and 12 relevant papers for review. As the subject of sustainability is expansive, the search was focused on sustainability in relation to supply chains and SCM. Sustainability is considered "an important conceptual framework" for aligning economic, environmental and social dimensions ([10] Dempsey et al. , 2009) and these three "pillars" are pervasive within sustainability literature ([21] Springett, 2003; [91] Vachon and Mao, 2008; [56] Hutchins and Sutherland, 2008). However, while the importance of the economic dimension is recognised it was considered to be outside the scope of this review and therefore excluded from the literature search as a keyword/phrase. Search criteria The idea of sustainability was verbalised by Schumacher as early as 1972, as "permanence", where "nothing makes economic sense unless its continuance for a long time can be projected without running into absurdities" (Grinde and Khare, 2008), and was acknowledged in key works such as "Limits to Growth" (Meadows et al. , 1972) which modelled the consequences of a rapidly growing world population and finite natural resources. However it was not until the WCED was established that the environmental and social dimensions of sustainability were more explicitly formalised. Therefore only publications from 1983 to present day were included in the literature search to ensure these two key dimensions were represented. It also indicates how recent the multi-dimensional concept of sustainability is in academic literature and how it has paralleled SCM, which has only been formally recognised as a discipline since the early 1980s ([88] Svensson and Baath, 2008). Figure 1 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows the spread of the reviewed papers from 1983 and illustrates the growing research interest in the fields of sustainability and SCM, with the most substantial growth occurring from 2001 onwards. This review intends to inform sustainability research within SCM. The literature search was restricted to peerreviewed publications within the broad definition of business, management and economics applied by the chosen search databases, recognising the cross-disciplinary nature of both fields. The literature search simultaneously employed the three databases of Science Direct, EBSCO and Emerald Fulltext. While this relatively small number of databases could be considered as a limitation they provided collective access to over 14 March 2014 Page 3 of 29 ProQuest

4,500 academic publications including all key operations and supply chain journals. They therefore provided a significant hit rate for relevant SCM and sustainability literature across multiple disciplines, which was a key consideration for this review. However it also created some duplication, so it was necessary to cross-check the search results from each database to ensure that the correct numbers of hits were recorded. An initial search was made using the term sustainable supply chain management in all search fields and this produced a combined results list of 11,020 hits. The same term was then restricted to article title or keyword and substantially reduced the number of hits to just 70. Allowing for duplication of hits and calls for papers across the three databases and identifying those papers which specifically related to sustainable supply chain management this number was reduced to 14 articles from quality peer reviewed journals. A search for sustainability and supply chain management in all fields produced 8,156 results, while a focus on title and/or keywords reduced it to 35 hits. This smaller number allowed for the abstract of each paper to be reviewed to establish its relevance to the research question and provided a further six papers to the overall review. A standard approach to selecting papers for a literature review is to apply a statistical sampling method to a large number of results ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006), but the above process highlights how sustainability in SCM is a developing field with a limited number of articles that deal explicitly with this subject. Therefore the use of title and/or keywords as the search criteria enabled the number of articles to be reduced to the extent that it was possible to evaluate the relevance of the papers individually. However the 26 papers resulting from the above process were considered insufficient for an effective review and a further set of search terms were utilised to capture papers that did not sit explicitly within sustainable supply chain management, but that were still relevant to sustainability in the context of supply chains. Therefore this was not a random search process, but one that was progressively refined by the use of specific search terms and ensured that appropriate and high quality papers were retrieved for review. Sustainability is an expansive, multi-faceted and heavily debated concept ([92] Wilkinson et al. , 2001), and a search on this single term yielded 74,642 results in all fields and more than 6,000 if restricted to a keyword, so it was important to ensure that the chosen literature dealt specifically with the concept in relation to supply chains and supply chain management. The terms of Sustainability and Sustainable Development are frequently used interchangeably ([1] Aras and Crowther, 2009), so the latter term was added to the literature search and used in conjunction with the keywords of supply chains and/or supply chain management. There was significant overlap with the prior search using the term sustainability, but it did yield a further five papers for review. "Green supply chains" as a search term used in both title and keyword produced 122 combined results across the three databases. Using quality criteria of peer reviewed journals and key recognised authors in the field, removing calls for papers and duplications across the three databases plus papers that had already been identified this number was reduced to 35 papers. This represented the largest group of papers across all the search terms, as indicated in Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. This process was repeated with other key search terms that related to the whole supply chain and which align with sustainability (see Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). All search terms were used in conjunction with the additional terms of supply chains and supply chain management for both title and keyword. Through this process and the restricted search criteria a total of 134 articles were selected for review. While these articles represent a significant proportion of the relevant literature on sustainability and SCM it was recognised that the chosen methodology and specific search criteria would inevitably exclude some work in the field. Analysis and findings Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] lists the journals that were accessed for the review and the number of papers acquired from each. While there is a strong emphasis on operations and supply chain management journals as would be expected, it also illustrates the multi-disciplinary approach required in a systematic review ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006; [23] Tranfield et al. , 2003) with journals crossing business management, strategy and sustainability. This recognises the need for considering cross-disciplinary perspectives in systematic 14 March 2014 Page 4 of 29 ProQuest

reviews and shows the different ways the research topic has been approached ([23] Tranfield et al. , 2003; [35] Burgess et al. , 2006). To minimise any potential bias the search process was conducted using keywords across a series of research databases and not at individual journal level. However it is pertinent to note how many of the accessed journals in Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] relate specifically to the environmental dimension, and the high proportion of papers which they provided. As previously outlined ABS ranked 2-4* journals represented the largest percentage of reviewed publications. However given the growing importance and contemporary nature of sustainability within the supply chain management discipline, the most up to date material is often found in newer and/or lower ranking journals as they typically have shorter publication lead times. Therefore, journals that were deemed highly relevant, but which fell outside the 2-4* scope were still included to ensure the most current research was represented. The range of papers reviewed illustrates the holistic nature of supply chain management (SCM) and sustainability and highlights the need for an inter-disciplinary approach to capture the most relevant literature ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006). Consequently a range of research philosophies and methods were represented (see Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]), rather than a focus on one type of study or form of data ([2] Armitage and Keeble-Allen, 2008). Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] indicates how substantial the research interest is in sustainability within supply chains and the extent to which it is discussed in academic literature. However it also illustrates a lack of systematic literature reviews (only 4 of the 17 literature reviews apply a systematic approach) in comparison to other methods and emphasises the need for a systematic review of these fields. The majority of the reviewed literature was academic research papers - 108 in total with four of these explicitly referenced as conceptual papers. A total of 28 of the reviewed items were classified as articles and these were largely more report based rather than dealing with an explicit research question. There were also four introductions to special issues on sustainability with two specific to sustainable supply chain management (SSCM). The diversity in the literature illustrates the contemporary nature of the subject and that it is broadly discussed and reported as well being heavily researched across multiple areas of business and management. Research methodologies Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] illustrates the highly qualitative nature of the current literature as less than 25 per cent of the reviewed papers used quantitative data collection methods or analysis. Case studies represented the dominant research methodology in relation to supply chains and sustainability. Over 50 per cent of the case studies were conducted with just one or two firms with the greater proportion being with single firms and investigating their whole supply chain. Only one case study used more than five firms and focused on ten exemplar organisations that employ socially responsible buying ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009). Very few of the reviewed papers applied a pure deductive approach to "test" pre-established theory, indicating how new the integration of sustainability into SCM is, and how the theory related to this area is still developing. This may explain the dominance of inductive research methods such as case studies, which are better at gaining insight and understanding of complex, contemporary "real world" phenomena ([28] Yin, 2009) in this review. There were ten instances of interviews being used as the method of data collection and the majority of these interviews were semi-structured where questions may be adjusted or adapted in response to any new or interesting facets that arise during the interview process ([73] Reuter et al. , 2010). This indicates an emphasis in current research on acquiring more qualitative, rich and descriptive information. The survey and questionnaire methods also focused on acquiring qualitative rather than quantitative data although these methods lend themselves to either form. Two Delphi studies were undertaken with experts/practitioners in the supply chain field and were more quantitative in their approach ([77] Seuring, 2008; [53] Handfield et al. , 2002). The former applied a Likert scale and statistical analysis to inform understanding of SSCM while the other applied a ranking 14 March 2014 Page 5 of 29 ProQuest

approach to key environmental criteria to develop a potential decision support model. This latter study provided one of the few tangible outputs within the reviewed literature - eight models and 16 conceptual frameworks were developed with 6 of these frameworks appearing in Supply Chain Management:

an International Journal (SCMIJ ). The largest number of models/frameworks focused on the concept of
sustainable supply chain management, followed closely by environmental management, and the emphasis for both of these themes was on supply chain strategy and decision making. Two socially responsible purchasing models were developed ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010; [37] Carter and Jennings, 2002), perhaps reflecting the more measurable nature of this supply chain stage as it deals with tangible materials. Four models focused on social responsibility/CSR ([30] Aguilera et al. , 2007; [50] Hahn et al. , 2010; [64] McElroy et al. , 2007; [65] McWilliams and Siegel, 2001) while only one output explicitly addressed the more holistic concept of "closed loop" supply chains ([41] Defee et al. , 2009). This lack of outputs further highlights that current research is focused on understanding the emergent phenomenon of sustainable supply chains and developing theory. SCM is fundamentally a practical discipline which focuses on products and processes and the links/relationships that facilitate these. While the different research methods exhibited in Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] are largely grounded in understanding "real world" situations current sustainable supply chain research is not informing practice significantly. This supports a recognised lack of impact of research on management practice ([11] Ghoshal, 2005), and the difficulties in addressing the more "human" elements of sustainability. While the reviewed literature may not currently provide a significant number of tangible outputs it does reveal a research bias toward operational processes, assessments and procedures, i.e. practical measures as the means to address sustainability in supply chains. A total of 46 per cent of the reviewed papers focused on the "greening" of products, processes and performance and yet both SCM and sustainability are concepts that implicitly require an integrated, holistic approach. This could be considered a key limitation of current sustainability and SCM research and highlights the highly complex and challenging nature of these fields. Sustainability dimensions Table IV [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] illustrates the high proportion of articles relating specifically to the environmental dimension of sustainability, with "green" supply chains representing a particularly strong area of research. This aligns with the higher number of articles coming from environmentally focused journals (see Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). To examine this observed difference in emphasis, during the review process it was recorded whether an article referred to the key dimensions of society and environment individually and/or collectively. A total of 106 papers in total explicitly discussed one or more of the dimensions while the remaining 28 papers made no substantial reference to either dimension, discussing SCM and sustainability in a broader context. This process enabled the current research status of each aspect to be established and to gain an indication of how integrated the dimensions are within supply chains. The environmental dimension is substantially better represented than the social dimension in the literature and, even where both were discussed, the emphasis was on environmental, rather than social practices/principles. Papers that dealt specifically with the social dimension tended to focus on one specific area or practice, for example Fairtrade rather than taking a fully holistic view. The environment seemed more fully aligned with supply chain performance as it can provide measurable benefits, whereas social sustainability was considered more ambiguous ([3] Banerjee, 2010). In addition, its inter-relationship with the environmental dimension received limited explicit discussion within the literature, and those papers that referred to both dimensions treated them as separate entities. Key themes Having systematically identified the most relevant literature the process of research synthesis was undertaken, which collectively relates to the summarizing and integrating of different studies on the chosen topic ([23] Tranfield et al. , 2003). As well as identifying key similarities it was important to apply a critical approach when 14 March 2014 Page 6 of 29 ProQuest

reviewing the text to identify and assess both heterogeneity between the papers and their individual quality ([2] Armitage and Keeble-Allen, 2008). This interpretative, "meta-synthesis" approach allows the important similarities and differences to be considered ([23] Tranfield et al. , 2003; [35] Burgess et al. , 2006) and looks for explanations to gain a deep understanding of the studied area ([22] Strauss and Corbin, 1998). The use of coding schemes ([22] Strauss and Corbin, 1998; [16] Miles, 1979; [7] Charmaz, 2006) and cross-comparison with the other papers enabled the identification of a series of key themes and categories within sustainability and Supply Chain Management literature to date. Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] presents the key themes that were identified through the above analysis process and lists all the papers that had content associated with each theme, together with an overall count which is ranked to indicate the themes that have received the most research attention to date. The reference numbers cross reference to those allocated to each of the reviewed papers in the Appendix. These key themes are discussed and reported in the following sections, firstly in relation to the discipline of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) and then specifically to the environmental and social dimensions of sustainability. Where appropriate the reference numbers for specific papers within a theme are cited. (Sustainable) supply chain management There were 29 papers relating to supply chain management (SCM) as evidenced in Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] and while sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) is an explicit evolvement of this discipline it is currently less well represented in the literature, with only 14 reviewed papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) dealing explicitly with this subject. The earliest publication date on SSCM was 2003, compared to the reviewed SCM papers which started in 1996. While this shows that SSCM is an emergent field the majority of SCM papers featured in the review were published after 2005 and showed a growth in line with the SSCM literature. The dominant research method utilised in both fields is the literature review, followed by case studies. Four of the literature reviews employed a systematic method (12, 14, 109, 129) with three being published in 2011 and only 1 paper in either of the studied fields used a statistical/quantitative research method (89). The initial, more traditional view of SCM was that it could be used to leverage suppliers to achieve lowest purchase prices and/or to assure supplies. However, the paradigm that has evolved views it as a process for designing, developing, optimising and managing internal and external components of the supply chain ([20] Spekman et al. , 1998). Despite this, some authors see a tendency for SCM to be framed in terms of processes and hard, quantifiable elements ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006). Consequently SCM can be seen as "a corporate function of increasing economic importance, but one that is not pulling its weight in environmental protection" ([69] Preuss, 2005b, p. 133). While definitions of SCM may vary the key commonalities represented in the literature are co-operation, coordination, integration and collaboration together with a recognition of its cross-disciplinary nature ([45] Frankel et al. , 2008) - these features were referred to in 42 separate papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). [20] Spekman et al. (1998) consider co-operation as the threshold level of interaction where firms exchange some essential information and engage some suppliers in long-term relationships, while in coordination workflow and information is exchanged to allow more seamless linkages. The latter stage of collaboration represents the optimum level and occurs when two or more independent firms work together in partnership to plan and execute supply chain operations with greater success than if they acted in isolation ([67] Nyaga et al. , 2010). There is significant recognition in the reviewed literature that supply chain integration extends beyond traditionally defined functional boundaries ([45] Frankel et al. , 2008). SCM is considered a boundary-spanning activity ([44] Fawcett et al. , 2008) and there is growing acceptance that a firm's impact extends beyond any single, core process to the complete product life cycle ([80] Sharfman et al. , 2009) with focal firms being responsible for their products "from cradle to grave" ([15] Lippman, 2001, [59] Kleindorfer et al. , 2005) i.e. from 14 March 2014 Page 7 of 29 ProQuest

product design to product disposal. Reverse logistics (RL), where a manufacturer accepts previously shipped products or parts for recycling, remanufacturing or disposal ([26] Varma et al. , 2006) extends this responsibility from "cradle to cradle" and underpins the concept of SSCM which recognises sustainability at all supply chain stages. Acknowledging the end of the product lifecycle is increasingly seen as a competitive necessity ([26] Varma et al. , 2006) and has significant relevance to addressing the environmental dimension successfully ([8] Crandall, 2006; [49] Hagelaar and van der Vorst, 2002). Waste and emissions caused by supply chains are considered the main sources of serious environmental problems and a focus on waste prevention/control is one of the most effective ways to tackle these problems ([66] Min and Galle, 1997). Resource reduction through recycling, re-use and waste elimination is the goal of RL ([95] Carter and Ellram, 1998) and can lead to cost savings and enhanced competitiveness ([72] Rao and Holt, 2005). Specific issues that need to be addressed in SSCM include co-operation and communication between supply chain members to achieve a proactive sustainability approach; risk management to identify environmental and social problems before they are exposed publicly; and the total life cycle of a product ([77] Seuring, 2008; [49] Hagelaar and van der Vorst, 2002). This extends to the re-conceptualisation of the supply chain by changing what it does, moving toward the closed loop systems created through the use of RL and reconceptualising who is in the supply chain ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009). Forward and reverse supply chains form a "closed loop" when managed in a coordinated way and can foster sustainability ([59] Kleindorfer et al. , 2005). However [87] Svensson (2007) argues that this still restricts SCM to point of origin and end boundaries and needs to recognise the inherent horizontal interconnections in and between supply chains. The environmental dimension The "green" or environmental dimension was well represented in the literature as evidenced in Table IV [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] and the search term of "green supply chains" returned the highest number of papers for this review, suggesting this is currently the most developed interaction between supply chain management (SCM) and sustainability. "Green" was the dominant term used in discussion of this dimension, featuring in 40 papers with almost 50 per cent of these explicitly relating to the field of green supply chain management (GSCM) - see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. A "green" supply chain is where a focal firm works with their suppliers to improve the environmental performance of products and manufacturing processes ([82] Simpson and Power, 2005; [93] Zhu et al. , 2005). It requires a paradigm shift from the conventional association of success around financial parameters, and a holistic environment concern ([26] Varma et al. , 2006). Supply chain relationships have traditionally been dominated by cost, quality and delivery, and the environment is rarely seen as critical when compared with these objectives ([82] Simpson and Power, 2005). The reviewed literature acknowledged that supply chain relationships can be a key avenue for firms to influence their environmental performance, but as highlighted the current focus of SCM and sustainability research is on the more tangible elements of product, process and performance. Green supply chain management (GSCM) integrates environmental issues into SCM processes by identifying costs, benefits and risks, along with opportunities ([94] Zhu et al. , 2008) to manage and reduce waste with the ultimate aim of waste elimination ([54] Handfield et al. , 2005). It also has the potential to reduce the direct and indirect environmental impacts of an organisation's final product ([39] Darnall et al. , 2008). However the reviewed literature recognises that firms adopting GSCM may only evaluate first tier suppliers ([39] Darnall et al. , 2008), whereas the SCM function has an impact far along the supply chain to second and third tier suppliers, and potentially beyond ([69] Preuss, 2005b; [68] Pagell and Wu, 2009). The term environmental supply chain management (ESCM) is also utilised to describe the set of supply chain management policies held, actions taken, and relationships formed in response to concerns related to the natural environment ([49] Hagelaar and van der Vorst, 2002). In comparison to GSCM it is the lesser used term 14 March 2014 Page 8 of 29 ProQuest

with only five instances in the reviewed papers against 19 of GSCM (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). Despite this difference in terminology the literature emphasises the growing attention to this specific field, which has largely developed in the last ten years. All the reviewed papers relating to these specific themes were published between 2001 and present, and the field's importance is further evidenced in Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] by the number of papers focusing on green, or environmental, supply chains. Research methods used in the papers had a qualitative emphasis and the most common data collection method was surveys or questionnaires followed by case studies/interviews. Only three papers offered practical outputs in the form of models for strategic decisionmaking and measurement in GSCM and ways to integrate the environment into SCM (50, 94, 134). Environmental management A total of 12 of the reviewed papers dealt explicitly with the themes of environmental management (EM) and environmental management systems (EMS) (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). Five of these reviewed specific literature from the field while the remaining papers evenly employed case study, interview and survey research methods. Eight of the papers (24, 30, 35, 45, 47, 50, 100, 105) looked at the interaction of EM with SCM or sustainability with 50 per cent positioning EM within the context of supply chains. One paper (41) discussed EMS specifically in relation to purchasing and another focused on the relationship between EM and the social dimension of sustainability (106). Three defined approaches to environmental management were represented in the reviewed literature. Reactive characterised by "end of pipe" pollution control; proactive where firms recycle and re-use products/materials within their supply chains and pre-empt new environmental legislation; and value-seeking where environmental behaviour is integrated into the business strategy with a supply network wide responsibility ([25] van Hoek, 1999). Most current EM investment tends to be in "end-of-pipe" technologies, i.e. a reactive approach ([24] Vachon and Klassen, 2006) as this means that production processes and products can remain unchanged. Environmental management systems are often limited to organisational boundaries rather than greening the entire supply chain, and firms can market themselves as being environmentally proactive simply by having an EMS ([39] Darnall et al. , 2008). An EMS can provide the means to measure environmental performance ([17] New and Westbrook, 2004) and allow external stakeholders to verify whether environmental improvements actually occur at firm and supply chain level ([39] Darnall et al. , 2008). However the literature largely considered compliance as a sub-optimal approach ([69] Preuss, 2005b), with attainment of regulated standards easily determined, while life cycle oriented approaches require more unstructured and non-routine processes than are generally the norm ([80] Sharfman et al. , 2009). Life cycle analysis (LCA) is a means to evaluate environmental impacts at every supply chain stage, but only three of the reviewed papers (59, 100, 101) dealt with this more holistic approach. The environmental effects of a product during its lifecycle can be integrally assessed, but there are questions in the literature over its usefulness, representativeness and legitimacy which [49] Hagelaar and van der Vorst (2001) try to explicitly address. To truly gain from LCA strong supply chain partnerships are needed ([58] Kjaerheim, 2005), but despite SCM's expected emphasis on relationships the literature focuses more on the "greening" of specific supply chain processes. This may explain the current lack of LCA literature, highlighting this as a potential gap as well as a need for a more holistic, relational view to be applied to sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) research.

Design for the environment . Design for the environment (DfE) represents both the design and development of
new products and processes ([89] Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2006). It provides an avenue for the firm to address the natural environment ([69] Preuss, 2005b), and to design and develop recoverable products which are durable, repeatedly usable, harmlessly recoverable and environmentally compatible in disposal ([89] Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2006). Environmental innovation can be realised as a new product, process, or technology which reduces environmental impact ([52] Hall, 2001). 14 March 2014 Page 9 of 29 ProQuest

Nine papers referred to DfE (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) with life cycle analysis (LCA) recognised as a planning tool that contributed to this practice, and the majority of the reviewed literature discussed DfE in relation to the physical product. A number of difficulties were associated with DfE, namely designers' unfamiliarity with the process and its lack of integration with other design tools ([31] Albino et al. , 2009) which in turn lead to issues in coordinating the process with manufacturing. It was seen as an emerging tool which requires refinement to be effective and none of the papers explicitly dealt with how DfE can be used in practice. Further recognised dimensions of integrating environmental concern include design for recycling (DfR) and design for disassembly (DfD) ([48] Gupta, 1995). These approaches are complementary allowing for more efficient and profitable reuse/disposal of product components, and can extend to designing for easier remanufacturing and reuse of a whole product. However these tools were significantly underrepresented in the literature with one reference made to DfR (44) and one paper discussing the features of DfD (93).

Product stewardship . Product stewardship is representative of the cradle to grave (or cradle) responsibility for
the lifecycle of a product ([32] Angell and Klassen, 1999). It is focused on "product-based green supply" ([77] Seuring, 2008) and is therefore linked to DfE, which draws on data to design products with a reduced impact in the environment ([32] Angell and Klassen, 1999). The goal is to keep all materials within the life cycle and therefore minimise any flow into the external environment (Sarkis, 1995). The principle of product stewardship is to extend the environmental perspective to the entire value chain to include other internal and external stakeholders such as R&D, designers and suppliers ([19] Rusinko, 2007). Examples include redesigning products and processes, using renewable resources and working with suppliers to prevent pollution ([19] Rusinko, 2007). The key advantage to be gained from this approach is competitive preemption through establishing a reputation as a "green" company ([55] Hart, 1995). Product stewardship was better represented in the literature than other components of environmental management (EM) with 23 papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) referring to this principle, perhaps due to the opportunities it offers in different supply chain areas rather than just the design stage. Eight of these papers recognised product stewardship as a component of green supply chain management (GSCM) or EM (3, 24, 30, 54, 80, 123, 124, 133) and discussed it in relation to other green supply chain practices, and four papers (5, 47, 60, 93) explicitly referred to this principle as a key factor in closed loop supply chains. Only four of the 23 papers (3, 24, 52, 93) discussed product stewardship in any detail and there was an emphasis on its strategic role and the benefits it can provide, as well as recognition for the need to integrate LCA. One paper provided industry examples of product stewardship and a diagnostic tool (3), while [55] Hart (1995) tested a series of hypotheses to produce suggestions for how to successfully build this approach into operational strategies.

Green purchasing . Purchasing is considered to have the most potential to address sustainability within supply
chain management (SCM) because it is grounded in non-altruistic market principles ([51] Hall, 2000), i.e. innovating SCM and purchasing in the context of the environment makes good business sense and is more readily practicable than other approaches. A total of 24 of the reviewed papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) discussed green purchasing to different extents and recognised authors in this field are Zhu and Sarkis. In their five reviewed papers they position purchasing as one of a series of green supply chain management (GSCM) practices (130, 131, 132, 133, 134) and the literature as a whole saw green purchasing as a growing practice. Zhu and Sarkis' research is quantitative, testing propositions and statistically analysing green purchasing practice in different industries and countries. This suggests that this area is currently more developed than some other aspects of environmental sustainability, perhaps because of its focus on a single process. The role of strategic purchasing is to direct activities towards opportunities that will enable a firm to achieve its long-term goals ([6] Carr and Smeltzer, 1999) and achieve an optimal purchasing strategy in a supply network 14 March 2014 Page 10 of 29 ProQuest

environment ([86] Svahn and Westerlund, 2009). In addition it emphasises the importance of building relationships with suppliers and can be positively linked to greening the supply process ([47] Gold et al. , 2009). A total of 50 per cent of the 24 papers emphasised the importance of green purchasing as a means to meet the strategic needs of an organisation and discussed the benefits, barriers and drivers for this practice (5, 20, 41, 77, 88, 89,94, 104, 115, 116, 123, 124).

Reverse logistics . Traditional logistics manages the supply of goods from the producer to the end consumer
([15] Lippman, 2001), while reverse logistics (RL) relates to products returned by the customer to the focal company. It has the purpose of recovering and potentially generating value ([5] Blumberg, 2005) or properly disposing of these products ([15] Lippman, 2001), and increasingly requires as much focus as forward chain processes ([8] Crandall, 2006). It is a "process whereby companies can become more environmentally efficient through recycling, reusing and reducing the amount of materials used" ([95] Carter and Ellram, 1998, p. 85). The typical industry practice of disposal of parts, materials and assemblies can represent a major cost contributor ([5] Blumberg, 2005), while RL provides the maximum utilisation of used products, where every output is returned to natural systems or becomes an input for manufacturing another product ([89] Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2006). Products, parts, subassemblies and materials represent growing values and economic opportunities at the end of the direct supply chain ([5] Blumberg, 2005), and reverse distribution actively aims to reduce materials/resources in the forward system so that fewer materials flow back, reuse is possible and recycling facilitated ([95] Carter and Ellram, 1998). The 25 papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) that featured RL discussed it in terms of existing practices and processes and were largely descriptive in nature, outlining key issues and strategic benefits. There were four literature reviews of the field (15, 95, 96, 111), with one specifically focused on RL rather than the broader field of green supply chain management (GSCM) (15). A total of 12 papers positioned RL as a key part of green supply chain practice/GSCM with eight recognising its intrinsic role in closed loop supply chains (23, 26, 37, 78, 81, 87, 94, 133) and 4 linking its practice to remanufacturing and waste management (49, 60, 111, 124).

Recycling, reuse and remanufacturing . RL begins when a customer returns the product and the company has
recovered the maximum value ([59] Kleindorfer et al. , 2005). Convenience returns are those where customers return an unwanted product, which can either be re-sold or used to replace products returned under warranty; later in the lifecycle product returns can be remanufactured and remarketed through secondary channels and at the end of the life cycle used as a source of spare parts ([59] Kleindorfer et al. , 2005). The minimal treatment of a material is more closely associated with product reuse, while a material that requires a large amount is more associated with recycling (Sarkis, 1995). Waste products and emissions can be recycled as a raw material for use in the same or different production process, processed to be reused, and used for a different useful application ([48] Gupta, 1995). Recycling requires the disassembly of the waste or returned product, separation of parts and then material reprocessing, while remanufacturing replaces worn, broken or obsolete parts from a product, returning it to new or better than new condition ([71] Pun, 2006). Of the different approaches outlined recycling was the most strongly represented in the reviewed literature featuring in 53 separate papers, followed by reuse (23 papers) and then remanufacturing (16 papers) - see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. The social dimension The environmental dimension was substantially represented in the reviewed literature (see Table IV [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) with the processes and practices within green supply chain management (GSCM) providing the key focus. While the Brundtland definition specifies both environmental and social sustainability, SCM literature specific to the latter dimension was more limited. Unlike the "green" dimension which had many supply chain related terms there was no equivalent use of the social element, e.g. social supply chains, social management systems etc. despite the fact the "human" element in terms of labour, skills and the forming of 14 March 2014 Page 11 of 29 ProQuest

relationships should represent a key element of SCM. Given the "human" nature of this dimension of sustainability the research methods used in the reviewed papers were understandably biased towards qualitative data collection. Case studies were the dominant research method followed by review and discussion of the literature in the field. The literature broke down into the 3 key themes of defining/understanding the social dimension, how it is practised and how it should be integrated to achieve "true" sustainability and are discussed in the following sections. Definitions and components of social sustainability While there was no single definition of social sustainability used in the reviewed literature it was recognised that profit is only one element in the long-term success of companies, and the future of people (internal and external) and the planet are new legitimacy concerns ([59] Kleindorfer et al. , 2005). Sustainability should be an ethical code for human survival and progress ([81] Sharma and Ruud, 2003) and achieved in "an inclusive, connected, equitable, prudent and secure manner" ([46] Gladwin et al. , 1995, p. 878). The first three elements of this definition link strongly with the social dimension ([76] Schaefer, 2004) and how it can be enacted through supply chains by reducing unemployment, protecting employee health and safety, ensuring equal treatment and preventing social exclusion ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010). While environmental sustainability emphasises the management of natural resources, social sustainability is concerned with the management of social resources, including people's skills and abilities, institutions, relationships and social values ([75] Sarkis et al. , 2010). At the business level this requires companies and their suppliers to add value by increasing the human capital of individuals, and the societal capital of communities ([43] Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002). Social sustainability can be formed into the four main categories of internal human resources, which includes practices related to employment stability and health and safety; external population which encompasses human, productive and community capital; stakeholder participation which includes information provision and stakeholder influence issues; and macro social performance issues of socio-economic and socio-environmental performance (Labuschagne et al. in ([75] Sarkis et al. , 2010)). Social equity is a key component of social sustainability and requires that all members of society have equal access to resources and opportunities ([33] Bansal, 2005), extending to the fair and equitable treatment of employees ([60] Krause et al. , 2009). It is concerned with poverty, injustice and human rights, and from a supply chain perspective considers the welfare of all employees globally ([60] Krause et al. , 2009). Socially, supply chain management (SCM) is expected to enforce a firm's values and standards with its suppliers (Tate

et al. , 2010) and emphasises the importance of long-term relationships, communication and supplier
development ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010). A total of 12 papers referred to the issue of social equity (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]), but only four dealt with it in any detail (6, 37, 53, 125) and only one used it as its research focus (6), so while there may be an expectation for SCM to address this important component there is limited academic evidence to support this. Corporate social responsibility Social sustainability is strongly linked to corporate social responsibility (CSR) which comprises actions not required by law, but furthering social good, beyond the explicit, transactional interests of a firm ([75] Sarkis et al. , 2010). CSR requires firms to embrace economic, legal, ethical and discretionary expectations of stakeholders ([33] Bansal, 2005), with the understanding that avoidance of a firm's social responsibility will lead to the erosion of social power ([9] Davis, 1967). CSR represents how firms satisfy the needs of society and the environment while meeting their economic goals ([41] Defee et al. , 2009). SCM requires greater strategic elevation of CSR in order to facilitate coordination across purchasing, manufacturing, distribution and marketing functions ([57] Keating et al. , 2008). To this end, [54] Handfield et al. (2005) suggest that firms with a formal system to monitor and report on CSR issues in their supply chain will enjoy performance advantages and greater commitment from internal and external 14 March 2014 Page 12 of 29 ProQuest

stakeholders ([57] Keating et al. , 2008). Closed-loop supply chains may also provide firms with a means to leverage CSR ([41] Defee et al. , 2009). Of the 27 papers which explicitly discussed the social dimension (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) 30 per cent dealt with CSR, and the majority came from the British Journal of Management and

Business Strategy and the Environment . Three of these papers positioned CSR specifically within the context
of SCM (4, 55, 118) and the research methods used were evenly balanced across case studies, modelling, reviews and theory development., This suggests that CSR is a more well developed field - as a concept it has been in existence since the 1960s ([43] Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002) - and it has received an increased interest and profile in the last decade. Its relevance to and overlap with social sustainability makes CSR a key means to develop this field of research further. Social sustainability practice In contrast to the range of processes and practices discussed within the environmental dimension there were only a few explicitly defined social practices in the reviewed papers and many of these practices have associated certifications and accreditations, e.g. Fairtrade. Social sustainability certifications and standards were discussed in over 30 per cent of the papers that were related to the social dimension. The issue of fair and equitable treatment within supply chains is largely addressed through common standards applied by NGOs. For example, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has a set of principles, which include the aspects of human rights, child and forced labour, employment, wages and training ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010). Certification through such bodies is seen as one of the few areas in research literature where social issues such as child labour and unsafe working conditions are addressed explicitly ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009) and can be used to establish a set of social criteria to be applied to the supply chain, with suppliers monitored to ensure compliance ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010). Fairtrade is a well-developed social practice that as well as seeking fairer relationships with suppliers, aims to establish more direct relationships between groups of producers and consumers ([4] Barratt Brown, 1993). It provides an alternative model of international trade based on better trading conditions and price, as well as educating consumers about the negative effects of traditional trade ([40] Davies and Crane, 2010). It has the underlying "people" principles of good working standards and conditions for workers at all stages of the supply chain, but also acknowledges the need to preserve resources, assess environmental impacts and co-operate where resources are trans-boundary ([85] Strong, 1997). A total of 13 of the papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) that dealt with the social dimension discussed Fairtrade with three using it as their research focus (25, 40, 113). Socially responsible purchasing (SRP) can be defined as the inclusion in purchasing of social issues advocated by organisational stakeholders ([63] Maignan et al. , 2002) and the utilisation of purchasing power to acquire products that have a positive social impact ([42] Drumwright, 1994). SRP aligns with the principles of "green" purchasing, however, the latter is currently more developed in both research and practice ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010). This was evidenced by just six papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) referring to the practice in comparison to 26 in green purchasing, and only two of these focused specifically on this aspect of the social dimension (16, 68) with the latter providing a process model for implementing and maintaining SRP. SRP attempts to bring about positive social change through its purchasing behaviour ([42] Drumwright, 1994) and can address a range of issues, mainly human rights, safety, diversity and community ([62] Leire and Mont, 2010), which all represent non-economic buying criteria ([42] Drumwright, 1994). However, while they recognise their relevance many purchasing managers do not know how to concretely and systematically integrate social issues into purchasing decisions ([63] Maignan et al. , 2002). Integrating social sustainability The "people" element of "people, profit, planet" ([70] Pullman et al. , 2009) can align sustainability goals with employees and community pressure for firms to improve environmental performance ([59] Kleindorfer et al. , 14 March 2014 Page 13 of 29 ProQuest

2005). Product stewardship which featured heavily within the review of the environmental dimension can have the benefit of training employees in sustainability ([19] Rusinko, 2007), and products can be considered socially responsible on a number of dimensions including what they are made from, where they come from or who supplies them ([42] Drumwright, 1994). Reverse logistics (RL), through its promotion of recycling, reuse and resource conservation, addresses various aspects of social sustainability and could provide a means for promoting socially responsible behaviour in supply chains ([75] Sarkis et al. , 2010). These implied overlaps between environmental and social sustainability practices and the close alignment of SRP with green purchasing highlighted above hints at some of the potential for interaction between these two important dimensions of sustainability. However such references were limited in the reviewed literature, and while they indicated that environmentally motivated behaviour could inform and potentially synergise with social sustainability there was no explicit discussion on how this could be achieved at key areas of the supply chain, e.g. manufacturing where social issues are of greater importance. An appreciation of the "local" level of sustainability extends to achieving balanced social development within local eco-systems. It requires the integration of a firm's environmental and social efforts in co-operation with suppliers and other social actors to create regional and local sustainability ([76] Schaefer, 2004). This emphasises the role of relationships and communication within supply chains, as well as acknowledging the impact of external stakeholders ([63] Maignan et al. , 2002). It could take the form of integrating environmental and social policies which would apply across the supply chain, and result in joint environmental and social reports to communicate progress to stakeholders ([76] Schaefer, 2004). The supply management function can play an important role in the creation of social capital ([20] Spekman et al. , 1998). Social capital comprises of human capital in terms of people's skills, motivation and loyalty, and societal capital which includes education and culture ([43] Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002). The relational embeddedness of social capital derived through on-going interactions with suppliers could be a critical antecedent to firm performance ([34] Bernardes, 2010). Sustainable supply chains can invest in human capital, e.g. through HR practices which seek to improve employee well-being and commitment and build a culture that values people and the environment ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009). A total of 11 of the reviewed papers (see Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) referred to social capital with just three discussing this component of social sustainability in any detail (8, 28, 74). It is seen as one of three different types of capital, the others being economic and natural capital ([43] Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002) which align with the three recognised dimensions or pillars of sustainability. However while there appears to be an understanding in the literature as to what social capital is there was limited explanation of how to address it in practice and only 1 of the papers discussed social capital in relation to supply chains and relationships (8). Comparison with other structured literature reviews This paper is intended to contribute to the evolving field of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) by aligning sustainability literature with supply chain and SCM literature. It therefore takes a broad, holistic and multi-disciplinary approach and reviews the relevant literature in both fields. Other literature reviews have applied a systematic process to the more specific areas of SCM ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006) and SSCM ([36] Carter and Easton, 2011). Both of these papers focus their review to conventional operations management literature, with the latter narrowing its search to seven logistics and SCM journals. In contrast this paper recognises that sustainability is an evolving concept that is researched and discussed in many relevant journals and disciplines that may fall outside but still legitimately inform SCM and operations management (OM) research. [35] Burgess et al. 's (2006) structured review focuses on SCM literature and was part of the literature reviewed, but it also informed this paper's methodology which builds on their systematic framework and integrates relevant sustainability research. These authors recognise that while SCM is a new but growing field there have been few structured reviews to date and that the OM discipline is too narrow and functional to address the 14 March 2014 Page 14 of 29 ProQuest

emergent issues in SCM, emphasising the need for a broader, more holistic view. There was a lack of definitional consensus, which echoes the many varied definitions of sustainability that currently exist and suggests that SCM and sustainability are both in "development mode" and have not yet reached maturity. This paper has indicated the highly qualitative nature of SCM and sustainability literature and the dominance of inductive rather than deductive "theory testing" methodologies, which supports the view of a developing field. It also updates Burgess at al's review with the considerable number of developments and new papers in this field since 2006. While [36] Carter and Easton's (2011) findings result from a narrower review and are presented in a more statistical form their analysis by subject supports a key finding from this paper. They recognise that the environmental dimension has dominated in sustainable supply chain research - 42.5 per cent of the reviewed articles focused on this in the last 20 years with the more social focused subjects of CSR and Human Rights receiving 11.25 per cent and 6.25 per cent respectively. Case studies were also seen as a common methodology in SSCM research, but at 60 per cent the use of surveys was much higher in their review than this paper's findings (15 per cent), perhaps reflecting the more operational nature of the reviewed literature. Both papers recognised the limited numbers of structured or systematic literature reviews in this field. [84] Soni and Kodali (2011) undertake a systematic review of empirical research in SCM, searching the exact phrase of "supply chain" in four management science databases and then classifying the resulting papers under nine classes. Again the review focuses specifically on SCM with no review of sustainability literature, but their findings support the significant growth in SCM research in recent years and that there has been an emphasis on theory building, in line with the findings of this paper. While SCM in principle should apply a network approach both [84] Soni and Kodali (2011) and [35] Burgess et al. (2006) show that research has tended to focus on one part of the system or specific processes and emphasises the need for a more holistic approach. Through its broader review of relevant SCM and sustainability literature this paper intends to address this key gap and inform future research so that it can apply a more integrated view. Discussion The significant growth in the number of papers on supply chain management (SCM) and sustainability indicates the importance and contemporaneous nature of these two fields for further, informed research. While SCM literature is potentially better developed due to its evolvement from established operations research and supply chain practice it is clear from the reviewed literature that environmental and social sustainability have both relevance and a growing presence within the SCM field. The review has indicated that SCM and sustainability are evolving and developing fields of research, evidenced by the lack of any universally accepted definition for either. This extended to the components of each field, especially in relation to the environment where a multitude of terms were used to describe identical or similar concepts/practices, e.g. green supply chain management (GSCM) and environmental supply chain management (ESCM). sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) which incorporates both social and environmental sustainability into supply chain practice and management is the newest field of all with the reviewed literature commencing in 2003. While only 14 papers dealt explicitly with SSCM it is clear that this is a key area for future research and a means to progress GSCM beyond its current environmental focus. It has the potential to encapsulate and consolidate the environmental and social supply chain literature, and provide an integrated approach to sustainability, but this potential is still to be realised. The qualitative and theory developing nature of the research to date emphasises how these research fields are at an early stage, with case studies and qualitative surveys/questionnaires forming the primary methods of data collection. While practice and especially environmental practices are discussed heavily in the reviewed literature there are few explicit practical outputs from the research such as models or tools that would indicate a more mature field. While the nature of sustainability strongly supports an inductive methodology it is important to recognise that SCM is fundamentally a practical discipline and while most of the research methods are based 14 March 2014 Page 15 of 29 ProQuest

around "real world" supply chain situations, this is a field where research explicitly needs to inform practice. The research bias towards the "hard" quantifiable practices and processes of SCM identified in the review suggests that there is uncertainty on how to address the more holistic aspects of SCM and sustainability, and yet these are considered key to achieving a fully integrated approach in SSCM. The relationship element of SCM and its potential impact on sustainability is underexplored in the reviewed literature and yet could hold the key to moving beyond the current reactive approach ([24] Vachon and Klassen, 2006) and join isolated processes into a "closed loop". There was limited research into how supply chain relationships can be harnessed to achieve sustainability, especially within the environmental domain. While social sustainability literature was more limited greater reference was made to relationships, perhaps due to the more "human" focused nature of this field. The relative wealth of literature on "green" supply chains (see Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]) indicates the extent to which the environmental dimension has been incorporated into SCM research to date. There is recognition that firms have made strong progress in the environmental dimension of sustainability ([60] Krause et al. , 2009; [75] Sarkis et al. , 2010) and the literature review has illustrated a range of environmental practices within supply chains. However, significant development in societal and cultural issues is considered lacking ([60] Krause et al. , 2009) and research literature to date has been limited in the social component of sustainability ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009; [76] Schaefer, 2004; [81] Sharma and Ruud, 2003). This oversight may be because the social elements of sustainability are particularly difficult to attain or less tangible/measurable than environmental sustainability, or they may not even represent an appropriate goal for business ([76] Schaefer, 2004; [61] Lamming and Hampson, 1996). [81] Sharma and Ruud (2003) also suggest that addressing the social dimension and achieving "true" sustainability is only possible in supply chains that operate within definable geographic regions and are not "globally fragmented", therefore challenging the role that SCM can play in achieving social sustainability across the highly globalised supply chains that currently dominate in practice. The literature agrees that a supply chain's performance should be measured not just by profits, but also by its impact on environmental and social systems ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009). If a sustainable supply chain is one that performs well across all three dimensions then the field of SSCM needs to represent the actions taken to achieve this goal ([68] Pagell and Wu, 2009) and involve the inter-connection and interaction between components and interfaces across supply chains ([87] Svensson, 2007). While the small body of SSCM literature recognises these three dimensions there is limited explicit research into how they can be integrated. Conclusions and implications for future research This systematic review of supply chain management (SCM) and sustainability literature has identified key themes and issues, and outlined the role that this discipline could play in the achievement of sustainability in supply chains. In today's global marketplace if a firm is part of a supply chain it cannot ignore its suppliers' practices and needs to be acutely aware of stakeholder expectations and pressures ([54] Handfield et al. , 2005; [80] Sharfman et al. , 2009; [15] Lippman, 2001; [33] Bansal, 2005). Such expectations are increasingly focused on environmentally and socially responsible principles and practice, and these dimensions represented a key focus of the review. SCM has been largely practitioner-led ([35] Burgess et al. , 2006), and offers substantial potential for translating sustainability theory into practice. The literature review revealed a significant and persistent gap between the diffusion of sustainability discourse and its practical application ([12] Hamdouch and Zuindeau, 2010), as well as an acknowledged lack of impact of management research on management practice ([11] Ghoshal, 2005). However, while the SCM literature advocates the importance and benefits of co-operation and sharing of information, it still has had a tendency to focus on supply chain processes and hard, quantifiable elements. The systematic review of the literature has provided a number of useful insights into the current status of research into SCM and sustainability, how it is defined and conceptualised and the key research methodologies 14 March 2014 Page 16 of 29 ProQuest

employed to date. The emphasis on qualitative data/methods and theory development across the literature illustrates the new, evolving nature of this field and the need for it to be developed further in a focused way. Greater and more practical insights into sustainability in supply chains could be gained by using the findings of this review to inform and direct research from the current narrow, somewhat disconnected approaches towards a more "rounded" and holistic view of the field. A challenge for researchers is to develop appropriate methods and tools to capture the evolving field of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) and move from the current dominance of case studies and surveys. A key research direction for progressing SSCM would be the role of supply chain relationships in achieving sustainability. This could move the environmental dimension beyond just the "greening" of supply chain processes, which received the most emphasis in the reviewed literature. Life cycle analysis (LCA) and closed loop concepts could also provide a much more appropriate focus for environmental sustainability research as they apply a more connected and holistic view of supply chains, especially as the literature review has shown that these approaches have been underexplored to date. SCM extends organisational boundaries ([45] Frankel et al. , 2008), and the "cradle to grave" concept ([59] Kleindorfer et al. , 2005; [15] Lippman, 2001) that evolves from this aligns strongly with the key principles of sustainability. It requires responsibility for the full life cycle of a product, and closed loop supply chains should enable this concept to be realised. They are recognised as a key means to address the environmental dimension ([8] Crandall, 2006), and yet the closed loop literature was extremely limited with only four papers explicitly dealing with this approach. In comparison "green" supply chains featured in more than 30 papers and "greening" was a prevailing metaphor ([18] Preuss, 2005a), implying this is currently the accepted face of environmental sustainability within supply chains. While the research of closed loop and LCA could provide a more connected view of sustainability in supply chains there is still a bias towards the environment in these research areas. To fully understand sustainable supply chains there also needs to be closer analysis of the relational aspects of SCM and how they can be used to address both environmental and social sustainability. SCM literature places emphasis on supplier relationships, but there was limited discussion in the reviewed papers on how these can be harnessed to achieve sustainability. This represents a key area for future research - its lack of focus to date suggests the challenge of researching the field from a more holistic and relational viewpoint, but it also offers the greatest potential for progressing SSCM from "greening" to a "virtuous circle" that addresses sustainability at all stages and interactions. Finally, very few of the reviewed papers provided tangible outputs such as an explicit framework or model to inform the implementation of sustainability and sustainable supply chains were discussed largely in theoretical terms. This may be due to the new and evolving nature of the research field, but does represent a significant gap. The reviewed literature explains in part why collaboration and relationships are strategically important to SCM, but it offers limited "real life" insights or guidance into how they can be achieved and their contribution to sustainability. Given the inherently "practical" nature of the SCM discipline translating the theory developed through more focused approaches into actual supply chain practice should be a key priority. Received 28 August 2010Revised 16 March 201130 June 20118 October 201121 December 2011Accepted 23 December 2011 References 1. Aras, G. and Crowther, D. (2009), "Making sustainable development sustainable", Management Decision, Vol. 47, pp. 975-88. 2. Armitage, A. and Keeble-Allen, D. (2008), "Undertaking a structured literature review or structuring a literature review: tales from the field", Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, Vol. 6, pp. 103-14. 3. Banerjee, S.B. (2010), "Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature", Organization Studies, Vol. 24, pp. 143-80. 14 March 2014 Page 17 of 29 ProQuest

4. Barratt Brown, M. (1993), Fair Trade, Zed Books, London. 5. Blumberg, D.F. (2005), Introduction to Management of Reverse Logistics and Closed Loop Supply Chain Processes, Taylor &Francis, London. 6. Carr, A.S. and Smeltzer, L.R. (1999), "The relationship of strategic purchasing to supply chain management", European Journal of Purchasing &Supply Management, Vol. 5, pp. 43-51. 7. Charmaz, K. (2006), Constructing Grounded Theory, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. 8. Crandall, R.E. (2006), "How green are your supply chains?", Industrial Management, Vol. 48, pp. 6-11. 9. Davis, K. (1967), "Understanding the social responsibility puzzle", Business Horizons, Vol. 10, p. 45. 10. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S. and Brown, C. (2009), "The social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban sustainability", Sustainable Development, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 289-300. 11. Ghoshal, S. (2005), "Bad management theories are destroying good management practices", Academy of Management Learning &Education, Vol. 4, pp. 75-91. 12. Hamdouch, A. and Zuindeau, B. (2010), "Sustainable development, 20 years on: methodological innovations, practices and open issues", Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol. 53, pp. 42738. 13. Handfield, R. and Nichols, E.L. (1999), Introduction to Supply Chain Management, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 15. Lippman, S. (2001), "Supply chain environmental management", Environmental Quality Management, Winter, pp. 11-14. 16. Miles, M.B. (1979), "Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance: the problem of analysis", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24, pp. 590-601. 17. New, S. and Westbrook, R. (2004), Understanding Supply Chains: Concepts, Critiques and Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford. 18. Preuss, L. (2005a), The Green Multiplier: A Study of Environmental Protection and the Supply Chain, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY. 19. Rusinko, C.A. (2007), "Green manufacturing: an evaluation of envrironmentally sustainable manufacturing practices and their impact on competitive outcomes", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 54, pp. 445-54. 20. Spekman, R.E., Kamauff, J.W. Jr and Myhr, N. (1998), "An empirical investigation into supply chain management: a perspective on partnerships", Supply Chain Management, Vol. 3, pp. 53-67. 21. Springett, D. (2003), "Business conceptions of sustainable development: a perspective from critical theory", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 12, pp. 71-86. 22. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. 23. Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), "Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review", British Journal of Management, Vol. 14, pp. 207-22. 24. Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2006), "Green project partnership in the supply chain: the case of the package printing industry", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14, pp. 661-71. 25. van Hoek, R.I. (1999), "From reversed logistics to green supply chains", Supply Chain Management, Vol. 4, pp. 129-34. 26. Varma, S., Wadhwa, S. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2006), "Implementing supply chain management in a firm: issues and remedies", Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 18, pp. 223-43. 27. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford. 28. Yin, R.K. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. 30. Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A. and Ganapathi, J. (2007), "Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, 14 March 2014 Page 18 of 29 ProQuest

pp. 836-63. 31. Albino, V., Balice, A. and Dangelico, R.M. (2009), "Environmental strategies and green product development: an overview on sustainability-driven companies", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 18, pp. 83-96. 32. Angell, L.C. and Klassen, R.D. (1999), "Integrating environmental issues into the mainstream: an agenda for research in operations management", Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17, pp. 575-98. 33. Bansal, P. (2005), "Evolving sustainability: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26, pp. 197-218. 34. Bernardes, E.S. (2010), "The effect of supply management on aspects of social capital and the impact on performance: a social network perspective", Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 46, pp. 45-56. 35. Burgess, K., Singh, P.J. and Koroglu, R. (2006), "Supply chain management: a structured literature review and implications for future research", International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 26, pp. 703-29. 36. Carter, C.R. and Easton, P.L. (2011), "Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future directions", International Journal of Physical Distribution &Logistics Management, Vol. 41, pp. 46-62. 37. Carter, C.R. and Jennings, M.M. (2002), "Social responsibility and supply chain relationships", Transportation Research Part E, Vol. 38, pp. 37-52. 38. Carter, C.R. and Rogers, D.S. (2008), "A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory", International Journal of Physical Distribution &Logistics Management, Vol. 38, pp. 360-87. 39. Darnall, N., Jolley, G.J. and Handfield, R.B. (2008), "Environmental management systems and green supply chain management: complements for sustainability?", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 18, pp. 3045. 40. Davies, I.A. and Crane, A. (2010), "Corporate social responsibility in small- and medium-sized enterprises: investigating employee engagement in fair trade companies", Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 19, pp. 126-39. 41. Defee, C.C., Esper, T. and Mollenkopf, D. (2009), "Leveraging closed-loop orientation and leadership for environmental sustainability", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14, pp. 87-98. 42. Drumwright, M.E. (1994), "Socially responsible organizational buying: environmental concern as a noneconomic buying criterion", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 1-19. 43. Dyllick, T. and Hockerts, K. (2002), "Beyond the business case for sustainability", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 11, pp. 130-41. 44. Fawcett, S.E., Magnan, G.M. and McCarter, M.W. (2008), "Benefits, barriers, and bridges to effective supply chain management", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13, pp. 35-48. 45. Frankel, R., Bolumole, Y.A., Eltantawy, R.A., Paulraj, A. and Gundlach, G.T. (2008), "The domain and scope of SCM's foundational disciplines - insights and issues to advance research", Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 29, pp. 1-30. 46. Gladwin, T.N., Kennelly, J.J. and Krause, T.-S. (1995), "Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: implications for management theory and research", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, pp. 874-907. 47. Gold, S., Seuring, S. and Beske, P. (2009), "Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organisational resources: a literature review", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 230-45. 48. Gupta, M.C. (1995), "Environmental management and its impact on the operations function", International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 15, pp. 34-51. 49. Hagelaar, G.J.L.F. and van der Vorst, J.G.A.J. (2002), "Environmental supply chain management: using life cycle assessment to structure supply chains", International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, Vol. 4, pp. 399-412. 14 March 2014 Page 19 of 29 ProQuest

50. Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J. and Preuss, L. (2010), "Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 19, pp. 217-29. 51. Hall, J. (2000), "Environmental supply chain dynamics", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 8, pp. 455-71. 52. Hall, J. (2001), "Environmental supply-chain innovation", Greener Management International, Vol. 35, pp. 105-19. 53. Handfield, R., Walton, S., Sroufe, R.P. and Melnyk, S.A. (2002), "Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: a study in the application of the analytical hierarchy process", European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 141, pp. 70-87. 54. Handfield, R.B., Sroufe, R.P. and Walton, S. (2005), "Integrating environmental management and supply chain strategies", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 14, pp. 1-19. 55. Hart, S.L. (1995), "A natural-resource-based view of the firm", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, pp. 986-1014. 56. Hutchins, M.J. and Sutherland, J.W. (2008), "An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16, pp. 1688-98. 57. Keating, B., Quazi, A., Kriz, A. and Coltman, T. (2008), "In pursuit of a sustainable supply chain: insights from Westpac Banking Corporation", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13, pp. 175-9. 58. Kjaerheim, R. (2005), "Cleaner production and sustainability", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13, pp. 329-39. 59. Kleindorfer, P.R., Singhal, K. and van Wassenhove, L.N. (2005), "Sustainable operations management", Production and Operations Management, Vol. 14, pp. 482-92. 60. Krause, D.R., Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2009), "Special topic forum on sustainable supply chain management: introduction and reflection on the role of purchasing management", Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 45, pp. 18-25. 61. Lamming, R. and Hampson, J. (1996), "The environment as a supply chain management issue", British Journal of Management, Vol. 7, pp. S45-S52. 62. Leire, C. and Mont, O. (2010), "The implementation of socially responsible purchasing", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 17, pp. 27-39. 63. Maignan, I., Hillebrand, B. and McAlister, D. (2002), "Managing socially responsible buying: how to integrate non-economic criteria into the purchasing process", European Management Journal, Vol. 20, pp. 641-8. 64. McElroy, M.W., Jorna, R. and van Engelen, J. (2007), "Sustainability quotients and the social footprint", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 15, pp. 223-34. 65. McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. (2001), "Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26, pp. 117-27. 66. Min, H. and Galle, W. (1997), "Green purchasing strategies: trends and implications", International Journal of Purchasing and Materials, Summer, pp. 10-17. 67. Nyaga, G.N., Whipple, J.M. and Lynch, D.F. (2010), "Examining supply chain relationships: do buyer and supplier perspectives on collaborative relationships differ?", Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 28, pp. 101-14. 68. Pagell, M. and Wu, Z. (2009), "Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars", Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 45, pp. 37-56. 69. Preuss, L. (2005b), "Rhetoric and reality of corporate greening: a view from the supply chain management function", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 14, pp. 123-39. 70. Pullman, M.E., Maloni, M.J. and Carter, C.R. (2009), "Food for thought: social versus environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes", Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 45, pp. 38-54. 71. Pun, K.F. (2006), "Determinants of environmentally responsible operations: a review", International Journal of Quality &Reliability Management, Vol. 23, pp. 279-97. 14 March 2014 Page 20 of 29 ProQuest

72. Rao, P. and Holt, D. (2005), "Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance?", International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 25, pp. 898-916. 73. Reuter, C., Foerstl, K., Hartmann, E. and Blome, C. (2010), "Sustainable global supplier management: the role of dynamic capabilities in achieving competitive advantage", Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 46, pp. 45-63. 74. Samaranayake, P. (2005), "A conceptual framework for supply chain management: a structural integration", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 47-59. 75. Sarkis, J., Helms, M.M. and Hervani, A.A. (2010), "Reverse logistics and social sustainability", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 17, pp. 337-54. 76. Schaefer, A. (2004), "Corporate sustainability - integrating environmental and social concerns?", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 11, pp. 179-87. 77. Seuring, S. (2008), "Assessing the rigor of case study research in supply chain management", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13, pp. 128-37. 78. Seuring, S. and Muller, M. (2008a), "Core issues in sustainable supply chain management: a Delphi study", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 17, pp. 455-66. 79. Seuring, S. and Muller, M. (2008b), "From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16, pp. 1699-710. 80. Sharfman, M.P., Shaft, T.M. and Anex, R.P. Jr (2009), "The road to co-operative supply-chain environmental management: trust and uncertainty among pro-active firms", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 18, pp. 1-13. 81. Sharma, S. and Ruud, A. (2003), "On the path to sustainability: integrating social dimensions into the research and practice of environmental management", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 12, pp. 205-14. 82. Simpson, D.F. and Power, D. (2005), "Use the supply relationship to develop lean and green suppliers", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 60-8. 83. Soler, C., Bergstrom, K. and Shanahan, H. (2010), "Green supply chains and the missing link between environmental information and practice", Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 19, pp. 14-25. 84. Soni, G. and Kodali, R. (2011), "A critical analysis of supply chain management content in empirical research", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 238-66. 85. Strong, C. (1997), "The role of fair trade principles within sustainable development", Sustainable Development, Vol. 5, pp. 1-10. 86. Svahn, S. and Westerlund, M. (2009), "Purchasing strategies in supply relationships", Journal of Business &Industrial Marketing, Vol. 24, pp. 173-81. 87. Svensson, G. (2007), "Aspects of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM): conceptual framework and empirical example", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 262-6. 88. Svensson, G. and Baath, H. (2008), "Supply chain management ethics: conceptual framework and illustration", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13, pp. 398-405. 89. Tsoulfas, G.T. and Pappis, C.P. (2006), "Environmental principles applicable to supply chains design and operation", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14, pp. 1593-602. 91. Vachon, S. and Mao, Z. (2008), "Linking supply chain strength to sustainable development: a country level analysis", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16, pp. 1552-60. 92. Wilkinson, A., Hill, M. and Gollan, P. (2001), "The sustainability debate", International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 21, pp. 1492-502. 93. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Geng, Y. (2005), "Green supply chain management: pressures, practices and performance", International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 25, pp. 449-68. 94. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K.-H. (2008), "Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain 14 March 2014 Page 21 of 29 ProQuest

management practices implementation", International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 111, pp. 261-73. 95. Carter, C.R. and Ellram, L.M. (1998), "Reverse logistics: a review of the literature and framework for future investigation", Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 19, pp. 85-102. Appendix Appendix. Reviewed papers Ageron, B., Gunasekaran, A., Spalanzani, A. (2011), "Sustainable supply management: an empirical study",

International Journal of Production Economics , DOI:

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092552731100171X Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A., Ganapathi, J. (2007), "Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations", Academy of Management Review , Vol. 32, pp. 836-863. Albino, V., Balice, A., Dangelico, R.M. (2009), "Environmental strategies and green product development: an overview on sustainability-driven companies", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 18, pp. 83-96. Andersen, M., Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2009), "Corporate social responsibility in global supply chains", Supply Chain

Management: An International Journal , Vol. 14, pp. 75-86.

Angell, L.C., Klassen, R.D. (1999), "Integrating environmental issues into the mainstream: an agenda for research in operations management", Journal of Operations Management , Vol. 17, pp. 575-598. Bansal, P. (2005), "Evolving sustainability: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development",

Strategic Management Journal , Vol. 26, pp. 197-218.

Bansal, P., Roth, K. (2000), "Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness", Academy of

Management Journal , Vol. 43, pp. 717-736.

Bernardes, E.S. (2010), "The effect of supply management on aspects of social capital and the impact on performance: a social network perspective", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 46, pp. 45-56. Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J.M., van Beek, P., Hordijk, L., van Wassenhove, L.N. (1995), "Interactions between operational research and environmental management", European Journal of Operational Research , Vol. 85, pp. 229-243. Bowen, F.E., Cousins, P.D., Lamming, R., Faruk, A.C. (2001), "The role of supply management capabilities in green supply", Production and Operations Management , Vol. 10, pp. 174-189. Bowen, F.E., Cousins, P.D., Lamming, R.C., Faruk, A.C. (2001), "Horses for courses: explaining the gap between the theory and practice of green supply", Greener Management International , Vol. 35, pp. 41-60. Burgess, K., Singh, P.J., Koroglu, R. (2006), "Supply chain management: a structured literature review and implications for future research", International Journal of Operations &Production Management , Vol. 26, pp. 703-729. Campbell, J.L. (2007), "Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility", Academy of Management Review , Vol. 32, pp. 946-967. Carter, C.R., Easton, P.L. (2011), "Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future directions",

International Journal of Physical Distribution &Logistics Management , Vol. 41, pp. 46-62.
Carter, C.R., Ellram, L.M. (1998), "Reverse logistics: a review of the literature and framework for future investigation", Journal of Business Logistics , Vol. 19, pp. 85-102. Carter, C.R., Jennings, M.M. (2002), "Social responsibility and supply chain relationships", Transportation

Research Part E , Vol. 38, pp. 37-52.

Carter, C.R., Rogers, D.S. (2008), "A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory", International Journal of Physical Distribution &Logistics Management , Vol. 38, pp. 360-387. Chen, I.J., Paulraj, A. (2004), "Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs and measurements", Journal of Operations Management , Vol. 22, pp. 119-150. Clarkson, M.E. (1995), "A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance", 14 March 2014 Page 22 of 29 ProQuest

Academy of Management Review , Vol. 20, pp. 92-117.

Corbett, C.J., Klassen, R.D. (2006), "Extending the horizons: environmental excellence as key to improving operations", Manufacturing &Service Operations Management , Vol. 8, pp. 5-22. Courville, S. (2003), "Use of indicators to compare supply chains in the coffee industry", Greener Management

International , Vol. 43, pp. 93-105.

Cox, A. (2004), "Power, value and supply chain management", Supply Chain Management: An International

Journal , Vol. 4, pp. 167-175.

Dao, V., Langella, I., Carbo, J. (2011), "From green to sustainability: information technology and an integrated sustainability framework", Journal of Strategic Information Systems , Vol. 20, pp. 63-79. Darnall, N., Jolley, G.J., Handfield, R.B. (2008), "Environmental management systems and green supply chain management: complements for sustainability?", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 18, pp. 30-45. Davies, I.A., Crane, A. (2010), "Corporate social responsibility in small- and medium-sized enterprises: investigating employee engagement in fair trade companies", Business Ethics: A European Review , Vol. 19, pp. 126-139. Defee, C.C., Esper, T., Mollenkopf, D. (2009), "Leveraging closed-loop orientation and leadership for environmental sustainability", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 14, pp. 87-98. Drumwright, M.E. (1994), "Socially responsible organizational buying: environmental concern as a noneconomic buying criterion", Journal of Marketing , Vol. 58(3, pp. 1-19. Dyllick, T., Hockerts, K. (2002), "Beyond the business case for sustainability", Business Strategy and the

Environment , Vol. 11, pp. 130-141.

Fabbe-Costes, N., Roussat, C., Colin, J. (2011), "Future sustainable supply chains: what should companies scan?", International Journal of Physical Distribution &Logistics Management , Vol. 41, pp. 228-252. Faruk, A.C., Lamming, R., Cousins, P.D., Bowen, F.E. (2002), "Analyzing, mapping, and managing environmental impacts along supply chains", Journal of Industrial Ecology , Vol. 5, pp. 13-36. Fawcett, S.E., Magnan, G.M., McCarter, M.W. (2008), "Benefits, barriers, and bridges to effective supply chain management", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 13, pp. 35-48. Field, J.M., Sroufe, R.P. (2007), "The use of recycled materials in manufacturing: implications for supply chain management and operations strategy", International Journal of Production Research , Vol. 45, pp. 4439-4463. Florida, R. (1996), "Lean and green: the move to environmentally conscious manufacturing", California

Management Review , Vol. 39, pp. 80-105.

Foerstl, K., Reuter, C., Hartmann, E., Blome, C. (2010), "Managing supplier sustainability risks in a dynamically changing environment - sustainable supplier management in the chemical industry", Journal of Purchasing

&Supply Management , Vol. 16, pp. 118-130.

Forman, M., Sogaard Jorgensen, M. (2004), "Organising environmental supply chain management", Greener

Management International , Vol. 45, pp. 43-62.

Frankel, R., Bolumole, Y.A., Eltantawy, R.A., Paulraj, A., Gundlach, G.T. (2008), "The domain and scope of SCM's foundational disciplines - insights and issues to advance research", Journal of Business Logistics , Vol. 29, pp. 1-30. Gladwin, T.N., Kennelly, J.J., Krause, T.-S. (1995), "Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research", Academy of Management Review , Vol. 20, pp. 874-907. Gold, S., Seuring, S., Beske, P. (2009), "Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organisational resources: a literature review", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management , Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 230-245. Goldbach, M., Back, S., Seuring, S. (2003), "Co-ordinating sustainable cotton chains for the mass market: the case of the German mail-order business OTTO", Greener Management International , Vol. 43, pp. 65-78. Goworek, H. (2011), "Social and environmental sustainability in the clothing industry: a case study of a fair trade 14 March 2014 Page 23 of 29 ProQuest

retailer", Social Responsibility Journal , Vol. 7, pp. 74-86. Green, K., Morton, B., New, S. (1996), "Purchasing and environmental management: interactions, policies and opportunities", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 5, pp. 188-197. Guide, V.D.R. Jr, van Wassenhove, L.N. (2002), "The reverse supply chain", Harvard Business Review , Vol. 80, pp. 25-26. Gunasekaran, A., Ngai, E.W.T. (2005), "Build-to-order supply chain management: a literature review and framework for development", Journal of Operations Management , Vol. 23, pp. 423-451. Gupta, M.C. (1995), "Environmental management and its impact on the operations function", International

Journal of Operations &Production Management , Vol. 15, pp. 34-51.

Hagelaar, G.J.L.F., van der Vorst, J.G.A.J. (2002), "Environmental supply chain management: using life cycle assessment to structure supply chains", International Food and Agribusiness Management Review , Vol. 4, pp. 399-412. Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L. (2010), "Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 19, pp. 217-229. Hall, J. (2000), "Environmental supply chain dynamics", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 8, pp. 455-471. Hall, J. (2001), "Environmental supply-chain innovation", Greener Management International , Vol. 35, pp. 105119. Handfield, R., Walton, S., Sroufe, R.P., Melnyk, S.A. (2002), "Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: a study in the application of the analytical hierarchy process", European Journal of Operational

Research , Vol. 141, pp. 70-87.

Handfield, R.B., Sroufe, R.P., Walton, S. (2005), "Integrating environmental management and supply chain strategies", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 14, pp. 1-19. Harland, C.M. (1996), "Supply chain management: relationships, chains and networks", British Journal of

Management , Vol. 7, pp. S63-S80.

Hart, S.L. (1995), "A natural-resource-based view of the firm", Academy of Management Review , Vol. 20, pp. 986-1014. Hartman, C.L., Hofman, P.S., Stafford, E.R. (1999), "Partnerships: a path to sustainability", Business Strategy

and the Environment , Vol. 8, pp. 255-266.

Holt, D., Ghobadian, A. (2009), "An empirical study of green supply chain management practices amongst UK manufacturers", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management , Vol. 20, pp. 933-956. Hutchins, M.J., Sutherland, J.W. (2008), "An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 16, pp. 1688-1698. Kauffman, R.G. (2002), "Supply management - what's in a name? Or do we know who we are?", The Journal of

Supply Chain Management , Fall, pp. 46-50.

Keating, B., Quazi, A., Kriz, A., Coltman, T. (2008), "In pursuit of a sustainable supply chain: insights from Westpac Banking Corporation", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 13, pp. 175-179. Khoo, H.H., Bainbridge, I., Spedding, T.A., Taplin, D.M.R. (2001), "Creating a green supply chain", Greener

Management International , Vol. 35, pp. 71-88.

Kjaerheim, R. (2005), "Cleaner production and sustainability", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 13, pp. 329339. Kleindorfer, P.R., Singhal, K., van Wassenhove, L.N. (2005), "Sustainable operations management",

Production and Operations Management , Vol. 14, pp. 482-492.

Kogg, B. (2003), "Greening a cotton-textile supply chain", Greener Management International , Vol. 43, pp. 5364. Korhonen, J. (2004), "Industrial ecology in the strategic sustainable development model: strategic applications of industrial ecology", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 12, pp. 809-823. 14 March 2014 Page 24 of 29 ProQuest

Kraljic, P. (1983), "Purchasing must become supply management", Harvard Business Review , Vol. 61, pp. 109117. Krause, D.R., Vachon, S., Klassen, R.D. (2009), "Special topic forum on sustainable supply chain management: introduction and reflection on the role of purchasing management", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 45, pp. 18-25. Lamming, R., Hampson, J. (1996), "The environment as a supply chain management issue", British Journal of

Management , Vol. 7, pp. S45-S52.

Landry, J.T. (1998), "Supply chain management", Harvard Business Review , Vol. 76, pp. 18-19. Larson, P.D., Halldorsson, A. (2002), "What is SCM? And, where is It?", The Journal of Supply Chain

Management , Fall, pp. 36-44.

Leire, C., Mont, O. (2010), "The implementation of socially responsible purchasing", Corporate Social

Responsibility and Environmental Management , Vol. 17, pp. 27-39.

Linton, J.D., Klassen, R.D., Jayaraman, V. (2007), "Sustainable supply chains: an introduction", Journal of

Operations Management , Vol. 25, pp. 1075-1082.

Liyanage, J. (2007), "Operations and maintenance performance in production and manufacturing assets: the sustainability perspective", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management , Vol. 18, pp. 304-314. Lo, S.M., Power, D. (2010), "An empirical investigation of the relationship between product nature and supply chain strategy", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 15, pp. 139-153. Mahler, D. (2007), "The sustainable supply chain", Supply Chain Management Review , 11, pp. 59-60. Maignan, I., Hillebrand, B., McAlister, D. (2002), "Managing socially responsible buying: how to integrate noneconomic criteria into the purchasing process", European Management Journal , Vol. 20, pp. 641-648. McElroy, M.W., Jorna, R., van Engelen, J. (2007), "Sustainability quotients and the social footprint", Corporate

Social Responsibility and Environmental Management , Vol. 15, pp. 223-234.

McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. (2001), "Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective", Academy of

Management Review , Vol. 26, pp. 117-127.

Mentzer, J.T., Dewitt, W., Keebler, J.S., Soonhoong, M., Nix, N.W., Smith, C.D., Zacharia, Z.G. (2001), "Defining supply chain management", Journal of Business Logistics , Vol. 22, pp. 1-25. Min, H., Galle, W. (1997), "Green purchasing strategies: trends and implications", International Journal of

Purchasing and Materials , Summer, pp. 10-17.

Mondragon, A.E.C., Lalwani, C. (2011), "Measures for auditing performance and integration in closed-loop supply chains", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 16, pp. 43-56. Nyaga, G.N., Whipple, J.M., Lynch, D.F. (2010), "Examining supply chain relationships: do buyer and supplier perspectives on collaborative relationships differ?", Journal of Operations Management , Vol. 28, pp. 101-114. Oktem, U., Lewis, P., Donovan, D., Hagan, J.R., Pace, T. (2004), "EMS and sustainable development",

Greener Management International , Vol. 46, pp. 11-28.

Pagell, M., Wu, Z. (2009), "Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 45, pp. 37-56. Pagell, M., Wu, Z., Wasserman, M.E. (2010), "Thinking differently about purchasing portfolios: an assessment of sustainable sourcing", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 46, pp. 57-73. Pedersen, A.K. (2009), "A more sustainable global supply chain", Supply Chain Management Review , Vol. 13, pp. 6-7. Power, D. (2005), "Supply chain management integration and implementation: a literature review", Supply

Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 10, pp. 252-263.

Preuss, L. (2005), "Rhetoric and reality of corporate greening: a view from the supply chain management function", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 14, pp. 123-139. Pullman, M.E., Dillard, J. (2010), "Values based supply chain management and emergent organizational 14 March 2014 Page 25 of 29 ProQuest

structures", International Journal of Operations &Production Management , Vol. 30, pp. 744-771. Pullman, M.E., Maloni, M.J., Carter, C.R. (2009), "Food for thought: social versus environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 45, pp. 38-54. Pun, K.F. (2006), "Determinants of environmentally responsible operations: a review", International Journal of

Quality &Reliability Management , Vol. 23, pp. 279-297.

Rao, P., Holt, D. (2005), "Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance?",

International Journal of Operations &Production Management , Vol. 25, pp. 898-916.

Reuter, C., Foerstl, K., Hartmann, E., Blome, C. (2010), "Sustainable global supplier management: the role of dynamic capabilities in achieving competitive advantage", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 46, pp. 45-63. Robinson, D.R., Wilcox, S. (2008), "The greening of supply chains", Supply Chain Management Review , Vol. 12, pp. S61-S66. Samaranayake, P. (2005), "A conceptual framework for supply chain management: a structural integration",

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 10, pp. 47-59.

Sarkis, J. (2001), "Manufacturing's role in corporate environmental sustainability", International Journal of

Operations &Production Management , Vol. 21, p. 666.

Sarkis, J. (2003), "A strategic decision framework for green supply chain management", Journal of Cleaner

Production , Vol. 11, pp. 397-409.

Sarkis, J., Helms, M.M., Hervani, A.A. (2010), "Reverse logistics and social sustainability", Corporate Social

Responsibility and Environmental Management , Vol. 17, pp. 337-354.

Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., Lai, K.-H. (2011), "An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature", International Journal of Production Economics , Vol. 130, pp. 1-15. Schaefer, A. (2004), "Corporate sustainability - integrating environmental and social concerns?", Corporate

Social Responsibility and Environmental Management , Vol. 11, pp. 179-187.

Seuring, S. (2001), "Green supply chain costing: joint cost management in the polyester linings supply chain",

Greener Management International , Vol. 33, pp. 71-80.

Seuring, S. (2004), "Emerging issues in life-cycle management", Greener Management International , Vol. 45, pp. 3-8. Seuring, S. (2004), "Industrial ecology, life cycles, supply chains: differences and interrelations", Business

Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 13, pp. 306-319.

Seuring, S. (2004), "Integrated chain management and supply chain management: comparative analysis and illustrative cases", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 12, pp. 1059-1071. Seuring, S. (2008), "Assessing the rigor of case study research in supply chain management", Supply Chain

Management: An International Journal , Vol. 13, pp. 128-137.

Seuring, S., Muller, M. (2008a), "Core issues in sustainable supply chain management: a Delphi study",

Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 17, pp. 455-466.

Seuring, S., Muller, M. (2008b), "From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 16, pp. 1699-1710. Sharfman, M.P., Shaft, T.M., Anex, R.P. Jr (2009), "The road to co-operative supply-chain environmental management: trust and uncertainty among pro-active firms", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 18, pp. 1-13. Sharma, S., Ruud, A. (2003), "On the path to sustainability: integrating social dimensions into the research and practice of environmental management", Business Strategy and the Environment , 12, pp. 205-214. Simpson, D.F., Power, D. (2005), "Use the supply relationship to develop lean and green suppliers", Supply

Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 10, pp. 60-68.

Soler, C., Bergstrom, K., Shanahan, H. (2010), "Green supply chains and the missing link between 14 March 2014 Page 26 of 29 ProQuest

environmental information and practice", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 19, pp. 14-25. Soni, G., Kodali, R. (2011), "A critical analysis of supply chain management content in empirical research",

Business Process Management Journal , Vol. 17, pp. 238-266.

Sridharan, U.V., Caines, W.R., Patterson, C.C. (2005), "Implementation of supply chain management and its impact on the value of firms", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 10, pp. 313-318. Srivastava, S.K. (2007), "Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art literature review", International

Journal of Management Reviews , Vol. 9, pp. 53-80.

Stokes, S., Tohamy, N. (2009), "7 traits of a green supply chain", Supply Chain Management Review , October. Strong, C. (1997), "The role of fair trade principles within sustainable development", Sustainable Development , Vol. 5, pp. 1-10. Svahn, S., Westerlund, M. (2009), "Purchasing strategies in supply relationships", Journal of Business

&Industrial Marketing , Vol. 24, pp. 173-181.

Svensson, G. (2007), "Aspects of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM): conceptual framework and empirical example", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 12, pp. 262-266. Svensson, G. (2009), "The transparency of SCM ethics: conceptual framework and empirical illustrations",

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 14, pp. 259-269.

Svensson, G., Baath, H. (2008), "Supply chain management ethics: conceptual framework and illustration",

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , Vol. 13, pp. 398-405.

Tate, W.L., Ellram, L.M., Kirchoff, J.F. (2010), "Corporate social responsibility reports: a thematic analysis related to supply chain management", Journal of Supply Chain Management , Vol. 46, pp. 19-44. Testa, F., Iraldo, F. (2010), "Shadows and lights of GSCM: determinants and effects of these practices based on a multi-national study", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 18, pp. 953-962. Thun, J.-H., Muller, A. (2010), "An empirical analysis of green supply chain management in the German automotive industry", Business Strategy and the Environment , Vol. 19, pp. 119-132. Tohamy, N. (2009), "Green journey needs a roadmap", Supply Chain Management Review , Vol. 13, pp. 10-11. Tsoulfas, G.T., Pappis, C.P. (2006), "Environmental principles applicable to supply chains design and operation", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 14, pp. 1593-1602. Vachon, S. (2007), "Green supply chain practices and the selection of environmental technologies",

International Journal of Production Research , Vol. 45, pp. 4357-4379.

Vachon, S., Klassen, R.D. (2006), "Extending green practices across the supply chain: the impact of upstream and downstream integration", International Journal of Operations &Production Management , Vol. 26, pp. 795821. Vachon, S., Mao, Z. (2008), "Linking supply chain strength to sustainable development: a country level analysis", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 16, pp. 1552-1560. van Bommel, H.W.M. (2011), "A conceptual framework for analyzing sustainability strategies in industrial supply networks from an innovation perspective", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 19, pp. 895-904. Vermeulen, W.J.V., Seuring, S. (2009), "Sustainability through the market - the impacts of sustainable supply chain management", Sustainable Development , Vol. 17, pp. 269-273. Wilkinson, A., Hill, M., Gollan, P. (2001), "The sustainability debate", International Journal of Operations

&Production Management , Vol. 21, pp. 1492-1502.

Wittstruck, D., Teuteberg, F. (2011), "Understanding the success factors of sustainable supply chain management: empirical evidence from the electrics and electronics industry", Corporate Social Responsibility

and Environmental Management , Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 141-158.

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. (2004), "Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises", Journal of Operations

Management , Vol. 22, pp. 265-289.

14 March 2014 Page 27 of 29 ProQuest

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. (2006), "An inter-sectoral comparison of green supply chain management in China: drivers and practice", Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 14, pp. 472-486. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. (2007), "The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green supply chain practices and performance", International Journal of Production Research , Vol. 45, pp. 4333-4355. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Geng, Y. (2005), "Green supply chain management: pressures, practices and performance",

International Journal of Operations &Production Management , Vol. 25, pp. 449-468.

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K.-H. (2008), "Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain management practices implementation", International Journal of Production Economics , Vol. 111, pp. 261-273. Corresponding author Alison Ashby can be contacted at: alison.ashby@plymouth.ac.uk AuthorAffiliation Alison Ashby, School of Business Management, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK Mike Leat, School of Business Management, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK Melanie Hudson-Smith, School of Business Management, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK Illustration Figure 1: Number of reviewed papers per year Table I: Reviewed journals Table II: Search terms Table III: Methodologies of reviewed papers Table IV: Occurrences of environmental and social dimensions in the reviewed literature Table V: Referenced papers for each theme Subject: Supply chains; Theory; Operations management; Discipline; Supply chain management; Sustainable development; Studies; Classification: 9130: Experimental/theoretical; 5160: Transportation management Publication title: Supply Chain Management Volume: 17 Issue: 5 Pages: 497-516 Publication year: 2012 Publication date: 2012 Year: 2012 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing, Limited Place of publication: Bradford Country of publication: United Kingdom Publication subject: Business And Economics--Management ISSN: 13598546 Source type: Scholarly Journals Language of publication: English Document type: Feature

14 March 2014

Page 28 of 29

ProQuest

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13598541211258573 ProQuest document ID: 1352727740 Document URL: http://search.proquest.com/docview/1352727740?accountid=46437 Copyright: Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2012 Last updated: 2013-09-10 Database: ABI/INFORM Complete

_______________________________________________________________
Contact ProQuest

Copyright 2014 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms and Conditions

14 March 2014

Page 29 of 29

ProQuest