Green supply chain management practices and performance

TLDR

The study examines how proactive and reactive green supply chain practices affect environmental, economic, and intangible performance, considering business strategy. Data from 190 ISO 14001 certified Thai manufacturers were analyzed using factor analysis for construct validity and multivariate linear regression for hypothesis testing. Reactive practices driven by legislation improved environmental, economic, and intangible performance, while low adoption of proactive reverse logistics had no significant effect, and a low‑cost strategy hinders investment in GSCM. The study did not consider organizational culture or interactions with key customers and suppliers.

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the deployment of pro‐active and re‐active practices in the implementation of green supply chain management (GSCM) and analyze their impact on environmental, economic, and intangible performance by considering business strategy as organizational focus. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from a sample of 190 ISO 14001 certified manufacturing companies in Thailand and used to test the research hypotheses. Factor analysis was used to examine the construct validity while multivariate linear regression was used to test criteria validity. Findings The threat of legislation and regulation (re‐active practices) was a consideration that resulted in companies enhancing their environmental, economic, and intangible performance. Reverse logistics practices (pro‐active practices) had low levels of adoption and do not have a significant impact on GSCM performance. Research limitations/implications This study did not consider some aspects of organizational culture interaction between key customers and suppliers in the supply chain. Originality/value The results of this study suggest that organizations need to be aware that pursuing a low‐cost strategy may impact negatively on their ability to invest in GSCM.