4.7 Article

A modeling framework of green practices to explore their interrelations as a conduit to policy

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 335, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130301

关键词

Green practices; Green information system; Modified total interpretive structural model; (TISM-P); Oil and gas

资金

  1. Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), IIT Roorkee (India) [IITR/DoMS/17918019]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Environment management is becoming increasingly important for businesses to achieve sustainable development, and companies are facing pressure to adopt green practices in their supply chain. This research identifies green practices in the petroleum industry and develops a contextual interrelationships framework to explore the reasons for the lack of green supply chain management.
Environment management is gaining awareness among businesses worldwide to achieve sustainable development, and companies are under pressure to adopt green practices in their supply chain. This research aims to determine the green practices and develop a contextual interrelationships framework to explore the reason behind the lack of green supply chain management (GSCM). The study consist of qualitative and quantitative research methods. The research followed several rounds of discussion (Delphi method) with industry experts to determine and finalize the green practices in the petroleum industry. A novel modeling technique, a modified total interpretive structural model (TISM-P), explores the contextual relationship between the green practices. The research suggests that green information systems are an independent practice that drives the other practices (green procurement, green production, green distribution, and investment recovery). The study also describes practices internal environment management and co-operation with customers have high driving and high dependence power. The study is also novel in identifying the green practices in the petroleum industry.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据