THE SUSTAINABILITY INSIGHT SYSTEM
THESIS, created and developed by TSC, is a performance assessment system that guides retailers and suppliers to benchmark, quantify, and take action on critical sustainability issues within their consumer product supply chains.
Science-Based Insights
Eliminates Survey Fatigue
Established Assessments
Data-Backed Decision Making
THESIS For Retailers and Suppliers
For Retailers:
C urrent retailers:
Ahold delhaize usa, costco, dollar tree, family dollar, kroger, sam’s club, staples, tractor supply company, walgreens, walgreens boots alliance (wba), walmart, woolworths..
For Suppliers :
In 2023, tsc will introduce a common reporting period for all suppliers on thesis to current retail customers. this common reporting period is designed to support supplier engagement with thesis and minimize survey fatigue .
Learn more about THESIS
Where did thesis come from .
THESIS was originally created by TSC starting in 2009 and launched as The Sustainability Index in 2014. In 2019, TSC partnered with SupplyShift to create our current iteration of THESIS, powered by SupplyShift’s cutting edge platform and informed by TSC’s deep roots in higher education, including ASU and Wageningen University + Research. THESIS currently has more retail users than ever before.
Every spring, TSC staff work with TSC members to revise and update THESIS for the upcoming fall campaign.
Who is SupplyShift ?
THESIS is powered by SupplyShift , TSC’s partner who is committed to helping businesses create more transparent, responsible, and resilient supply chains. Learn more about SupplyShift and visit THESIS on their platform .
What is the Science Behind THESIS?
THESIS is rooted in TSC’s university-based, scientific methodology. THESIS is based in LCA methodology and was developed in a pre-competitive way using TSC’s stakeholder engagement expertise that brings the CPG industry, NGOs, and higher education together for greater impact. It is this combination of stakeholders that sets THESIS apart from other consultant-led performance assessment platforms.
TSC methodology is based on creating and evolving strict, LCA-based key performance indicators using relevant sources and evidence for hotspots.
THESIS 2022 at a Glance
TSC Impact Report
Summary of 2021 THESIS Scores — From 2016 to 2021, the THESIS assessments of product manufacturers have improved (relatively):
From 32.5% to 48.4% (where 100% equals the maximum score)..
This is an indication that the systems and processes put in place to respond to THESIS KPIs are creating positive changes in the manufacturer’s practices and its supply chain, leading to an overall improvement in scores. Scores improved from 2020 to 2021 at about the same pace they have annually over all six years.
THESIS Industry Insight Reports
HOUSEHOLD CHEMICALS
PACKAGING INSIGHTS
TRENDS IN TEXTILES
The Difference: University-Based Research
TSC and THESIS originate from our founding university, Arizona State University , with contributions from our partnership with Wageningen University + Research.
Get Started with THESIS Today
Amy Scoville-Weaver
Director, Retail
Assessing the State of Supply Chain Sustainability
- Sustainability
Supply chain sustainability has increased in importance for companies of all sizes, public and private, across a wide range of industries. While there has been increased excitement in tandem with proclamations of lofty goals around the topic of supply chain sustainability, it has proven challenging to operationalize sustainability when many companies focus on short-term financial goals or lack science-and context-based sustainability targets. The focus of this research is to understand current and future supply chain sustainability practices from the perspective of frontline professionals, across industries, geographies, cultures, and regulatory environments in 2019. This research gathered insights and data through a survey distributed to frontline supply chain professionals, executive interviews, and additional research sources. Results confirm increased corporate interest in supply chain sustainability. However, misalignment may exist between executives who set overarching corporate goals and strategies and frontline professionals who are tasked with the tactical implementation of these strategies. Companies struggle to implement sustainability initiatives under constrained resources with conflicting priorities. Results also indicate that companies may be overstating social and environmental goal commitments, as overall investment levels are lower than goal commitment levels.
To better understand these issues and how companies are adopting supply chain sustainability, this research project was commissioned by the MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics and the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. To set the stage for future State of Supply Chain Sustainability reports, we will reveal the results of our research on supply chain sustainability in 2019 with an added focus on what the events of 2019-2020, such as the global COVID-19 pandemic that is still unfolding at this writing, could mean for supply chain sustainability in coming years.
Advertisement
Toward a framework for selecting indicators of measuring sustainability and circular economy in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review
- LIFE CYCLE SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT
- Published: 02 March 2022
Cite this article
- Cecilia Silvestri ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2528-601X 1 ,
- Luca Silvestri ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6754-899X 2 ,
- Michela Piccarozzi ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9717-9462 1 &
- Alessandro Ruggieri 1
2851 Accesses
11 Citations
9 Altmetric
Explore all metrics
A Correction to this article was published on 24 March 2022
This article has been updated
The implementation of sustainability and circular economy (CE) models in agri-food production can promote resource efficiency, reduce environmental burdens, and ensure improved and socially responsible systems. In this context, indicators for the measurement of sustainability play a crucial role. Indicators can measure CE strategies aimed to preserve functions, products, components, materials, or embodied energy. Although there is broad literature describing sustainability and CE indicators, no study offers such a comprehensive framework of indicators for measuring sustainability and CE in the agri-food sector.
Starting from this central research gap, a systematic literature review has been developed to measure the sustainability in the agri-food sector and, based on these findings, to understand how indicators are used and for which specific purposes.
The analysis of the results allowed us to classify the sample of articles in three main clusters (“Assessment-LCA,” “Best practice,” and “Decision-making”) and has shown increasing attention to the three pillars of sustainability (triple bottom line). In this context, an integrated approach of indicators (environmental, social, and economic) offers the best solution to ensure an easier transition to sustainability.
Conclusions
The sample analysis facilitated the identification of new categories of impact that deserve attention, such as the cooperation among stakeholders in the supply chain and eco-innovation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this article
Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Rent this article via DeepDyve
Institutional subscriptions
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the temporal distribution of the articles under analysis
Source: Authors’ elaborations. Notes: The graph shows the time distribution of articles from the three major journals
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the composition of the sample according to the three clusters identified by the analysis
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution of articles over time by cluster
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the network visualization
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the overlay visualization
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the classification of articles by scientific field
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: Article classification based on their cluster to which they belong and scientific field
Source: Authors’ elaboration
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution of items over time based on TBL
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the Pareto diagram highlighting the most used indicators in literature for measuring sustainability in the agri-food sector
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution over time of articles divided into conceptual and empirical
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the classification of articles, divided into conceptual and empirical, in-depth analysis
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the geographical distribution of the authors
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution of authors according to the continent from which they originate
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the time distribution of publication of authors according to the continent from which they originate
Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: Sustainability measurement indicators and impact categories of LCA, S-LCA, and LCC tools should be integrated in order to provide stakeholders with best practices as guidelines and tools to support both decision-making and measurement, according to the circular economy approach
Similar content being viewed by others
Common Methods and Sustainability Indicators
Transition heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions
Hamid El Bilali
Research on agro-food sustainability transitions: where are food security and nutrition?
Change history, 24 march 2022.
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02038-9
Acero AP, Rodriguez C, Ciroth A (2017) LCIA methods: impact assessment methods in life cycle assessment and their impact categories. Version 1.5.6. Green Delta 1–23
Accorsi R, Versari L, Manzini R (2015) Glass vs. plastic: Life cycle assessment of extra-virgin olive oil bottles across global supply chains. Sustain 7:2818–2840. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7032818
Adjei-Bamfo P, Maloreh-Nyamekye T, Ahenkan A (2019) The role of e-government in sustainable public procurement in developing countries: a systematic literature review. Resour Conserv Recycl 142:189–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.12.001
Article Google Scholar
Aivazidou E, Tsolakis N, Vlachos D, Iakovou E (2015) Water footprint management policies for agrifood supply chains: a critical taxonomy and a system dynamics modelling approach. Chem Eng Trans 43:115–120. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1543020
Alhaddi H (2015) Triple bottom line and sustainability: a literature review. Bus Manag Stud 1:6–10
Allaoui H, Guo Y, Sarkis J (2019) Decision support for collaboration planning in sustainable supply chains. J Clean Prod 229:761–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.367
Alshqaqeeq F, Amin Esmaeili M, Overcash M, Twomey J (2020) Quantifying hospital services by carbon footprint: a systematic literature review of patient care alternatives. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104560
Anwar F, Chaudhry FN, Nazeer S et al (2016) Causes of ozone layer depletion and its effects on human: review. Atmos Clim Sci 06:129–134. https://doi.org/10.4236/acs.2016.61011
Aquilani B, Silvestri C, Ruggieri A (2016). A Systematic Literature Review on Total Quality Management Critical Success Factors and the Identification of New Avenues of Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2016-0003
Aramyan L, Hoste R, Van Den Broek W et al (2011) Towards sustainable food production: a scenario study of the European pork sector. J Chain Netw Sci 11:177–189. https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2011.Qpork8
Arfini F, Antonioli F, Cozzi E et al (2019) Sustainability, innovation and rural development: the case of Parmigiano-Reggiano PDO. Sustain 11:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184978
Assembly UG (2005) Resolution adopted by the general assembly. New York, NY
Avilés-Palacios C, Rodríguez-Olalla A (2021) The sustainability of waste management models in circular economies. Sustain 13:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137105
Azevedo SG, Silva ME, Matias JCO, Dias GP (2018) The influence of collaboration initiatives on the sustainability of the cashew supply chain. Sustain 10:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062075
Bajaj S, Garg R, Sethi M (2016) Total quality management: a critical literature review using Pareto analysis. Int J Product Perform Manag 67:128–154
Banasik A, Kanellopoulos A, Bloemhof-Ruwaard JM, Claassen GDH (2019) Accounting for uncertainty in eco-efficient agri-food supply chains: a case study for mushroom production planning. J Clean Prod 216:249–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.153
Barth H, Ulvenblad PO, Ulvenblad P (2017) Towards a conceptual framework of sustainable business model innovation in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review. Sustain 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091620
Bastas A, Liyanage K (2018) Sustainable supply chain quality management: a systematic review
Beckerman W (1992) Economic growth and the environment: whose growth? Whose environment? World Dev 20:481–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(92)90038-W
Belaud JP, Prioux N, Vialle C, Sablayrolles C (2019) Big data for agri-food 4.0: application to sustainability management for by-products supply chain. Comput Ind 111:41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2019.06.006
Bele B, Norderhaug A, Sickel H (2018) Localized agri-food systems and biodiversity. Agric 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8020022
Bilali H El, Calabrese G, Iannetta M et al (2020) Environmental sustainability of typical agro-food products: a scientifically sound and user friendly approach. New Medit 19:69–83. https://doi.org/10.30682/nm2002e
Blanc S, Massaglia S, Brun F et al (2019) Use of bio-based plastics in the fruit supply chain: an integrated approach to assess environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Sustain 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092475
Bloemhof JM, van der Vorst JGAJ, Bastl M, Allaoui H (2015) Sustainability assessment of food chain logistics. Int J Logist Res Appl 18:101–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2015.1015508
Bonisoli L, Galdeano-Gómez E, Piedra-Muñoz L (2018) Deconstructing criteria and assessment tools to build agri-sustainability indicators and support farmers’ decision-making process. J Clean Prod 182:1080–1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.055
Bonisoli L, Galdeano-Gómez E, Piedra-Muñoz L, Pérez-Mesa JC (2019) Benchmarking agri-food sustainability certifications: evidences from applying SAFA in the Ecuadorian banana agri-system. J Clean Prod 236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.07.054
Bornmann L, Haunschild R, Hug SE (2018) Visualizing the context of citations referencing papers published by Eugene Garfield: a new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis. Scientometrics 114:427–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2591-8
Boulding KE (1966) The economics of the coming spaceship earth. New York, 1-17
Bracquené E, Dewulf W, Duflou JR (2020) Measuring the performance of more circular complex product supply chains. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104608
Burck J, Hagen U, Bals C et al (2021) Climate Change Performance Index
Calisto Friant M, Vermeulen WJV, Salomone R (2020) A typology of circular economy discourses: navigating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm. Resour Conserv Recycl 161:104917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104917
Campbell BM, Beare DJ, Bennett EM et al (2017) Agriculture production as a major driver of the earth system exceeding planetary boundaries. Ecol Soc 22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09595-220408
Capitanio F, Coppola A, Pascucci S (2010) Product and process innovation in the Italian food industry. Agribusiness 26:503–518. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.20239
Caputo P, Zagarella F, Cusenza MA et al (2020) Energy-environmental assessment of the UIA-OpenAgri case study as urban regeneration project through agriculture. Sci Total Environ 729:138819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138819
Article CAS Google Scholar
Chabowski BR, Mena JA, Gonzalez-Padron TL (2011) The structure of sustainability research in marketing, 1958–2008: a basis for future research opportunities. J Acad Mark Sci 39:55–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0212-7
Chadegani AA, Salehi H, Yunus M et al (2017) A comparison between two main academic literature collections : Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Soc Sci 9:18–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
Chams N, Guesmi B, Gil JM (2020) Beyond scientific contribution: assessment of the societal impact of research and innovation to build a sustainable agri-food sector. J Environ Manage 264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110455
Chandrakumar C, McLaren SJ, Jayamaha NP, Ramilan T (2019) Absolute sustainability-based life cycle assessment (ASLCA): a benchmarking approach to operate agri-food systems within the 2°C global carbon budget. J Ind Ecol 23:906–917. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12830
Chaparro-Africano AM (2019) Toward generating sustainability indicators for agroecological markets. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 43:40–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2019.1566192
Colicchia C, Strozzi F (2012) Supply chain risk management: a new methodology for a systematic literature review
Conca L, Manta F, Morrone D, Toma P (2021) The impact of direct environmental, social, and governance reporting: empirical evidence in European-listed companies in the agri-food sector. Bus Strateg Environ 30:1080–1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2672
Coppola A, Ianuario S, Romano S, Viccaro M (2020) Corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms: the relationship between CSR actions and firm’s performance. AIMS Environ Sci 7:542–558. https://doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2020034
Corona B, Shen L, Reike D et al (2019) Towards sustainable development through the circular economy—a review and critical assessment on current circularity metrics. Resour Conserv Recycl 151:104498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104498
Correia MS (2019) Sustainability: An overview of the triple bottom line and sustainability implementation. Int J Strateg Eng 2:29–38. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJoSE.2019010103
Coteur I, Marchand F, Debruyne L, Lauwers L (2019) Structuring the myriad of sustainability assessments in agri-food systems: a case in Flanders. J Clean Prod 209:472–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.066
CREA (2020) L’agricoltura italiana conta 2019
Crenna E, Sala S, Polce C, Collina E (2017) Pollinators in life cycle assessment: towards a framework for impact assessment. J Clean Prod 140:525–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.058
D’Eusanio M, Serreli M, Zamagni A, Petti L (2018) Assessment of social dimension of a jar of honey: a methodological outline. J Clean Prod 199:503–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.157
Dania WAP, Xing K, Amer Y (2018) Collaboration behavioural factors for sustainable agri-food supply chains: a systematic review. J Clean Prod 186:851–864
De Pascale A, Arbolino R, Szopik-Depczyńska K et al (2021) A systematic review for measuring circular economy: the 61 indicators. J Clean Prod 281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124942
De Schoenmakere M, Gillabel J (2017) Circular by design: products in the circular economy
Del Borghi A, Gallo M, Strazza C, Del Borghi M (2014) An evaluation of environmental sustainability in the food industry through life cycle assessment: the case study of tomato products supply chain. J Clean Prod 78:121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.083
Del Borghi A, Strazza C, Magrassi F et al (2018) Life cycle assessment for eco-design of product–package systems in the food industry—the case of legumes. Sustain Prod Consum 13:24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2017.11.001
Denyer D, Tranfield D (2009) Producing a systematic review. In: Buchanan B (ed) The sage handbook of organization research methods. Sage Publications Ltd, Cornwall, pp 671–689
Google Scholar
Dietz T, Grabs J, Chong AE (2019) Mainstreamed voluntary sustainability standards and their effectiveness: evidence from the Honduran coffee sector. Regul Gov. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12239
Dixon-Woods M (2011) Using framework-based synthesis for conducting reviews of qualitative studies. BMC Med 9:9–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-39
do Canto NR, Bossle MB, Marques L, Dutra M, (2020) Supply chain collaboration for sustainability: a qualitative investigation of food supply chains in Brazil. Manag Environ Qual an Int J. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2019-0275
dos Santos RR, Guarnieri P (2020) Social gains for artisanal agroindustrial producers induced by cooperation and collaboration in agri-food supply chain. Soc Responsib J. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2019-0323
Doukidis GI, Matopoulos A, Vlachopoulou M, Manthou V, Manos B (2007) A conceptual framework for supply chain collaboration: empirical evidence from the agri‐food industry. Supply Chain Manag an Int Journal 12:177–186. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540710742491
Durach CF, Kembro J, Wieland A (2017) A new paradigm for systematic literature reviews in supply chain management. J Supply Chain Manag 53:67–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12145
Durán-Sánchez A, Álvarez-García J, Río-Rama D, De la Cruz M (2018) Sustainable water resources management: a bibliometric overview. Water 10:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10091191
Duru M, Therond O (2015) Livestock system sustainability and resilience in intensive production zones: which form of ecological modernization? Reg Environ Chang 15:1651–1665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0722-9
Edison Fondazione (2019) Le eccellenze agricole italiane. I primati europei e mondiali dell’Italia nei prodotti vegetali. Milan (IT)
Ehrenfeld JR (2005) The roots of sustainability. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 46(2)46:23–25
Elia V, Gnoni MG, Tornese F (2017) Measuring circular economy strategies through index methods: a critical analysis. J Clean Prod 142:2741–2751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.196
Elkington J (1997) Cannibals with forks : the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone, Oxford
Esposito B, Sessa MR, Sica D, Malandrino O (2020) Towards circular economy in the agri-food sector. A systematic literature review. Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12187401
European Commission (2018) Agri-food trade in 2018
European Commission (2019) Monitoring EU agri-food trade: development until September 2019
Eurostat (2018) Small and large farms in the EU - statistics from the farm structure survey
FAO (2011) Biodiversity for food and agriculture. Italy, Rome
FAO (2012) Energy-smart food at FAO: an overview. Italy, Rome
FAO (2014) Food wastage footprint: fool cost-accounting
FAO (2016) The state of food and agriculture climate change, agriculture and food security. Italy, Rome
FAO (2017) The future of food and agriculture: trends and challenges. Italy, Rome
FAO (2020) The state of food security and nutrition in the world. Transforming Food Systems for Affordable Healthy Diets. Rome, Italy
Fassio F, Tecco N (2019) Circular economy for food: a systemic interpretation of 40 case histories in the food system in their relationships with SDGs. Systems 7:43. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems7030043
Fathollahi A, Coupe SJ (2021) Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) of road drainage systems for sustainability evaluation: quantifying the contribution of different life cycle phases. Sci Total Environ 776:145937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145937
Ferreira VJ, Arnal ÁJ, Royo P et al (2019) Energy and resource efficiency of electroporation-assisted extraction as an emerging technology towards a sustainable bio-economy in the agri-food sector. J Clean Prod 233:1123–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.030
Fiksel J (2006) A framework for sustainable remediation. JOM 8:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1021/es202595w
Flick U (2014) An introduction to qualitative research
Franciosi C, Voisin A, Miranda S et al (2020) Measuring maintenance impacts on sustainability of manufacturing industries : from a systematic literature review to a framework proposal. J Clean Prod 260:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121065
Gaitán-Cremaschi D, Meuwissen MPM, Oude AGJML (2017) Total factor productivity: a framework for measuring agri-food supply chain performance towards sustainability. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 39:259–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppw008
Galdeano-Gómez E, Zepeda-Zepeda JA, Piedra-Muñoz L, Vega-López LL (2017) Family farm’s features influencing socio-economic sustainability: an analysis of the agri-food sector in southeast Spain. New Medit 16:50–61
Gallopín G, Herrero LMJ, Rocuts A (2014) Conceptual frameworks and visual interpretations of sustainability. Int J Sustain Dev 17:298–326. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2014.064183
Gallopín GC (2003) Sostenibilidad y desarrollo sostenible: un enfoque sistémico. Cepal, LATIN AMERICA
Garnett T (2013) Food sustainability: problems, perspectives and solutions. Proc Nutr Soc 72:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665112002947
Garofalo P, D’Andrea L, Tomaiuolo M et al (2017) Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains in Italy: the case of the whole-peeled tomato production under life cycle assessment methodology. J Food Eng 200:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2016.12.007
Gava O, Bartolini F, Venturi F et al (2018) A reflection of the use of the life cycle assessment tool for agri-food sustainability. Sustain 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010071
Gazzola P, Querci E (2017) The connection between the quality of life and sustainable ecological development. Eur Sci J 7881:1857–7431
Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken N, Hultink EJ (2017) The circular economy – a new sustainability paradigm ? The circular economy – a new sustainability paradigm ? J Clean Prod 143:757–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
Georgescu-Roegen N (1971) The entropy low and the economic process. Harward University Press, Cambridge Mass
Book Google Scholar
Gerbens-Leenes PW, Moll HC, Schoot Uiterkamp AJM (2003) Design and development of a measuring method for environmental sustainability in food production systems. Ecol Econ 46:231–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00140-X
Gésan-Guiziou G, Alaphilippe A, Aubin J et al (2020) Diversity and potentiality of multi-criteria decision analysis methods for agri-food research. Agron Sustain Dev 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00650-3
Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S (2016) A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J Clean Prod 114:11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007
Godoy-Durán Á, Galdeano- Gómez E, Pérez-Mesa JC, Piedra-Muñoz L (2017) Assessing eco-efficiency and the determinants of horticultural family-farming in southeast Spain. J Environ Manage 204:594–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.09.037
Gold S, Kunz N, Reiner G (2017) Sustainable global agrifood supply chains: exploring the barriers. J Ind Ecol 21:249–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12440
Goucher L, Bruce R, Cameron DD et al (2017) The environmental impact of fertilizer embodied in a wheat-to-bread supply chain. Nat Plants 3:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.12
Green A, Nemecek T, Chaudhary A, Mathys A (2020) Assessing nutritional, health, and environmental sustainability dimensions of agri-food production. Glob Food Sec 26:100406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100406
Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G et al (2011) Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future †. Environ Sci Technol 45:90–96. https://doi.org/10.1021/es101316v
Guiomar N, Godinho S, Pinto-Correia T et al (2018) Typology and distribution of small farms in Europe: towards a better picture. Land Use Policy 75:784–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.012
Gunasekaran A, Patel C, McGaughey RE (2004) A framework for supply chain performance measurement. Int J Prod Econ 87:333–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2003.08.003
Gunasekaran A, Patel C, Tirtiroglu E (2001) Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. Int J Oper Prod Manag 21:71–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570110358468
Hamam M, Chinnici G, Di Vita G et al (2021) Circular economy models in agro-food systems: a review. Sustain 13
Harun SN, Hanafiah MM, Aziz NIHA (2021) An LCA-based environmental performance of rice production for developing a sustainable agri-food system in Malaysia. Environ Manage 67:146–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01365-7
Harvey M, Pilgrim S (2011) The new competition for land: food, energy, and climate change. Food Policy 36:S40–S51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.11.009
Hawkes C, Ruel MT (2006) Understanding the links between agriculture and health. DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, USA
Hellweg S, Milà i Canals L (2014) Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science (80)344:1109LP–1113. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1248361
Higgins V, Dibden J, Cocklin C (2015) Private agri-food governance and greenhouse gas abatement: constructing a corporate carbon economy. Geoforum 66:75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.09.012
Hill T (1995) Manufacturing strategy: text and cases., Macmillan
Hjeresen DD, Gonzales R (2020) Green chemistry promote sustainable agriculture?The rewards are higher yields and less environmental contamination. Environemental Sci Techonology 103–107
Horne R, Grant T, Verghese K (2009) Life cycle assessment: principles, practice, and prospects. Csiro Publishing, Collingwood, Australia
Horton P, Koh L, Guang VS (2016) An integrated theoretical framework to enhance resource efficiency, sustainability and human health in agri-food systems. J Clean Prod 120:164–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.092
Hospido A, Davis J, Berlin J, Sonesson U (2010) A review of methodological issues affecting LCA of novel food products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:44–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0130-4
Huffman T, Liu J, Green M et al (2015) Improving and evaluating the soil cover indicator for agricultural land in Canada. Ecol Indic 48:272–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.008
Ilbery B, Maye D (2005) Food supply chains and sustainability: evidence from specialist food producers in the Scottish/English borders. Land Use Policy 22:331–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.06.002
Ingrao C, Faccilongo N, Valenti F et al (2019) Tomato puree in the Mediterranean region: an environmental life cycle assessment, based upon data surveyed at the supply chain level. J Clean Prod 233:292–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.056
Iocola I, Angevin F, Bockstaller C et al (2020) An actor-oriented multi-criteria assessment framework to support a transition towards sustainable agricultural systems based on crop diversification. Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135434
Irabien A, Darton RC (2016) Energy–water–food nexus in the Spanish greenhouse tomato production. Clean Technol Environ Policy 18:1307–1316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-1076-9
ISO 14040:2006 (2006) Environmental management — life cycle assessment — principles and framework
ISO 14044:2006 (2006) Environmental management — life cycle assessment — requirements and guidelines
ISO 15392:2008 (2008) Sustainability in building construction–general principles
Istat (2019) Andamento dell’economia agricola
Jaakkola E (2020) Designing conceptual articles : four approaches. AMS Rev 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0
Jin R, Yuan H, Chen Q (2019) Science mapping approach to assisting the review of construction and demolition waste management research published between 2009 and 2018. Resour Conserv Recycl 140:175–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.029
Johnston P, Everard M, Santillo D, Robèrt KH (2007) Reclaiming the definition of sustainability. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 14:60–66. https://doi.org/10.1065/espr2007.01.375
Jorgensen SE, Burkhard B, Müller F (2013) Twenty volumes of ecological indicators-an accounting short review. Ecol Indic 28:4–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.12.018
Joshi S, Sharma M, Kler R (2020) Modeling circular economy dimensions in agri-tourism clusters: sustainable performance and future research directions. Int J Math Eng Manag Sci 5:1046–1061. https://doi.org/10.33889/IJMEMS.2020.5.6.080
Kamilaris A, Gao F, Prenafeta-Boldu FX, Ali MI (2017) Agri-IoT: a semantic framework for Internet of Things-enabled smart farming applications. In: 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things, WF-IoT 2016. pp 442–447
Karuppusami G, Gandhinathan R (2006) Pareto analysis of critical success factors of total quality management: a literature review and analysis. TQM Mag 18:372–385. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780610671048
Kates RW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 47:8–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2005.10524444
Khounani Z, Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha H, Moustakas K et al (2021) Environmental life cycle assessment of different biorefinery platforms valorizing olive wastes to biofuel, phosphate salts, natural antioxidant, and an oxygenated fuel additive (triacetin). J Clean Prod 278:123916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123916
Kitchenham B, Charters S (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering version 2.3. Engineering 45. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500
Korhonen J, Nuur C, Feldmann A, Birkie SE (2018) Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. J Clean Prod 175:544–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111
Kuisma M, Kahiluoto H (2017) Biotic resource loss beyond food waste: agriculture leaks worst. Resour Conserv Recycl 124:129–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.04.008
Laso J, Hoehn D, Margallo M et al (2018) Assessing energy and environmental efficiency of the Spanish agri-food system using the LCA/DEA methodology. Energies 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11123395
Lee KM (2007) So What is the “triple bottom line”? Int J Divers Organ Communities Nations Annu Rev 6:67–72. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9532/cgp/v06i06/39283
Lehmann RJ, Hermansen JE, Fritz M et al (2011) Information services for European pork chains - closing gaps in information infrastructures. Comput Electron Agric 79:125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2011.09.002
León-Bravo V, Caniato F, Caridi M, Johnsen T (2017) Collaboration for sustainability in the food supply chain: a multi-stage study in Italy. Sustainability 9:1253
Lepage A (2009) The quality of life as attribute of sustainability. TQM J 21:105–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542730910938119
Li CZ, Zhao Y, Xiao B et al (2020) Research trend of the application of information technologies in construction and demolition waste management. J Clean Prod 263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121458
Lo Giudice A, Mbohwa C, Clasadonte MT, Ingrao C (2014) Life cycle assessment interpretation and improvement of the Sicilian artichokes production. Int J Environ Res 8:305–316. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijer.2014.721
Lueddeckens S, Saling P, Guenther E (2020) Temporal issues in life cycle assessment—a systematic review. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:1385–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01757-1
Luo J, Ji C, Qiu C, Jia F (2018) Agri-food supply chain management: bibliometric and content analyses. Sustain 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051573
Lynch J, Donnellan T, Finn JA et al (2019) Potential development of Irish agricultural sustainability indicators for current and future policy evaluation needs. J Environ Manage 230:434–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.070
MacArthur E (2013) Towards the circular economy. J Ind Ecol 2:23–44
MacArthur E (2017) Delivering the circular economy a toolkit for policymakers, The Ellen MacArthur Foundation
MacInnis DJ (2011) A framework for conceptual. J Mark 75:136–154. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.136
Mangla SK, Luthra S, Rich N et al (2018) Enablers to implement sustainable initiatives in agri-food supply chains. Int J Prod Econ 203:379–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.012
Marotta G, Nazzaro C, Stanco M (2017) How the social responsibility creates value: models of innovation in Italian pasta industry. Int J Glob Small Bus 9:144–167. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGSB.2017.088923
Martucci O, Arcese G, Montauti C, Acampora A (2019) Social aspects in the wine sector: comparison between social life cycle assessment and VIVA sustainable wine project indicators. Resources 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8020069
Mayring P (2004) Forum : Qualitative social research Sozialforschung 2. History of content analysis. A Companion to Qual Res 1:159–176
McKelvey B (2002) Managing coevolutionary dynamics. In: 18th EGOS Conference. Barcelona, Spain, pp 1–21
McMichael AJ, Butler CD, Folke C (2003) New visions for addressing sustainability. Science (80- ) 302:1191–1920
Mehmood A, Ahmed S, Viza E et al (2021) Drivers and barriers towards circular economy in agri-food supply chain: a review. Bus Strateg Dev 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.171
Mella P, Gazzola P (2011) Sustainability and quality of life: the development model. In: Kapounek S (ed) Enterprise and competitive environment. Mendel University: Brno, Czechia. 542–551
Merli R, Preziosi M, Acampora A (2018) How do scholars approach the circular economy ? A systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 178:703–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.112
Merli R, Preziosi M, Acampora A et al (2020) Recycled fibers in reinforced concrete: a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 248:119207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119207
Miglietta PP, Morrone D (2018) Managing water sustainability: virtual water flows and economic water productivity assessment of the wine trade between Italy and the Balkans. Sustain 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020543
Mitchell MGE, Chan KMA, Newlands NK, Ramankutty N (2020) Spatial correlations don’t predict changes in agricultural ecosystem services: a Canada-wide case study. Front Sustain Food Syst 4:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.539892
Moraga G, Huysveld S, Mathieux F et al (2019) Circular economy indicators: what do they measure?. Resour Conserv Recycl 146:452–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.045
Morrissey JE, Dunphy NP (2015) Towards sustainable agri-food systems: the role of integrated sustainability and value assessment across the supply-chain. Int J Soc Ecol Sustain Dev 6:41–58. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSESD.2015070104
Moser G (2009) Quality of life and sustainability: toward person-environment congruity. J Environ Psychol 29:351–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.02.002
Muijs D (2010) Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London
Muller MF, Esmanioto F, Huber N, Loures ER (2019) A systematic literature review of interoperability in the green Building Information Modeling lifecycle. J Clean Prod 223:397–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.114
Muradin M, Joachimiak-Lechman K, Foltynowicz Z (2018) Evaluation of eco-efficiency of two alternative agricultural biogas plants. Appl Sci 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/app8112083
Naseer MA, ur R, Ashfaq M, Hassan S, et al (2019) Critical issues at the upstream level in sustainable supply chain management of agri-food industries: evidence from Pakistan’s citrus industry. Sustain 11:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051326
Nattassha R, Handayati Y, Simatupang TM, Siallagan M (2020) Understanding circular economy implementation in the agri-food supply chain: the case of an Indonesian organic fertiliser producer. Agric Food Secur 9:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-020-00264-8
Nazari-Sharabian M, Ahmad S, Karakouzian M (2018) Climate change and eutrophication: a short review. Eng Technol Appl Sci Res 8:3668–3672. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2532694
Nazir N (2017) Understanding life cycle thinking and its practical application to agri-food system. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol 7:1861–1870. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.7.5.3578
Negra C, Remans R, Attwood S et al (2020) Sustainable agri-food investments require multi-sector co-development of decision tools. Ecol Indic 110:105851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105851
Newsham KK, Robinson SA (2009) Responses of plants in polar regions to UVB exposure: a meta-analysis. Glob Chang Biol 15:2574–2589. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01944.x
Niemeijer D, de Groot RS (2008) A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecol Indic 8:14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2006.11.012
Niero M, Kalbar PP (2019) Coupling material circularity indicators and life cycle based indicators: a proposal to advance the assessment of circular economy strategies at the product level. Resour Conserv Recycl 140:305–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.002
Nikolaou IE, Tsagarakis KP (2021) An introduction to circular economy and sustainability: some existing lessons and future directions. Sustain Prod Consum 28:600–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.017
Notarnicola B, Hayashi K, Curran MA, Huisingh D (2012) Progress in working towards a more sustainable agri-food industry. J Clean Prod 28:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.007
Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Renzulli PA, Monforti F (2017) Energy flows and greenhouses gases of EU (European Union) national breads using an LCA (life cycle assessment) approach. J Clean Prod 140:455–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.150
Opferkuch K, Caeiro S, Salomone R, Ramos TB (2021) Circular economy in corporate sustainability reporting: a review of organisational approaches. Bus Strateg Environ 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2854
Padilla-Rivera A, do Carmo BBT, Arcese G, Merveille N, (2021) Social circular economy indicators: selection through fuzzy delphi method. Sustain Prod Consum 26:101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.015
Pagotto M, Halog A (2016) Towards a circular economy in Australian agri-food industry: an application of input-output oriented approaches for analyzing resource efficiency and competitiveness potential. J Ind Ecol 20:1176–1186. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12373
Parent G, Lavallée S (2011) LCA potentials and limits within a sustainable agri-food statutory framework. Global food insecurity. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 161–171
Chapter Google Scholar
Pattey E, Qiu G (2012) Trends in primary particulate matter emissions from Canadian agriculture. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 62:737–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2012.672058
Pauliuk S (2018) Critical appraisal of the circular economy standard BS 8001:2017 and a dashboard of quantitative system indicators for its implementation in organizations. Resour Conserv Recycl 129:81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.019
Peano C, Migliorini P, Sottile F (2014) A methodology for the sustainability assessment of agri-food systems: an application to the slow food presidia project. Ecol Soc 19. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06972-190424
Peano C, Tecco N, Dansero E et al (2015) Evaluating the sustainability in complex agri-food systems: the SAEMETH framework. Sustain 7:6721–6741. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7066721
Pearce DW, Turner RK (1990) Economics of natural resources and the environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, Herts
Pelletier N (2018) Social sustainability assessment of Canadian egg production facilities: methods, analysis, and recommendations. Sustain 10:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051601
Peña C, Civit B, Gallego-Schmid A et al (2021) Using life cycle assessment to achieve a circular economy. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26:215–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01856-z
Perez Neira D (2016) Energy sustainability of Ecuadorian cacao export and its contribution to climate change. A case study through product life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 112:2560–2568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.003
Pérez-Neira D, Grollmus-Venegas A (2018) Life-cycle energy assessment and carbon footprint of peri-urban horticulture. A comparative case study of local food systems in Spain. Landsc Urban Plan 172:60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.01.001
Pérez-Pons ME, Plaza-Hernández M, Alonso RS et al (2021) Increasing profitability and monitoring environmental performance: a case study in the agri-food industry through an edge-iot platform. Sustain 13:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010283
Petti L, Serreli M, Di Cesare S (2018) Systematic literature review in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:422–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1135-4
Pieroni MPP, McAloone TC, Pigosso DCA (2019) Business model innovation for circular economy and sustainability: a review of approaches. J Clean Prod 215:198–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.036
Polit DF, Beck CT (2004) Nursing research: principles and methods. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA
Porkka M, Gerten D, Schaphoff S et al (2016) Causes and trends of water scarcity in food production. Environ Res Lett 11:015001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/1/015001
Prajapati H, Kant R, Shankar R (2019) Bequeath life to death: state-of-art review on reverse logistics. J Clean Prod 211:503–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.187
Priyadarshini P, Abhilash PC (2020) Policy recommendations for enabling transition towards sustainable agriculture in India. Land Use Policy 96:104718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104718
Pronti A, Coccia M (2020) Multicriteria analysis of the sustainability performance between agroecological and conventional coffee farms in the East Region of Minas Gerais (Brazil). Renew Agric Food Syst. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170520000332
Rabadán A, González-Moreno A, Sáez-Martínez FJ (2019) Improving firms’ performance and sustainability: the case of eco-innovation in the agri-food industry. Sustain 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205590
Raut RD, Luthra S, Narkhede BE et al (2019) Examining the performance oriented indicators for implementing green management practices in the Indian agro sector. J Clean Prod 215:926–943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.139
Recanati F, Marveggio D, Dotelli G (2018) From beans to bar: a life cycle assessment towards sustainable chocolate supply chain. Sci Total Environ 613–614:1013–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.187
Redclift M (2005) Sustainable development (1987–2005): an oxymoron comes of age. Sustain Dev 13:212–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.281
Rezaei M, Soheilifard F, Keshvari A (2021) Impact of agrochemical emission models on the environmental assessment of paddy rice production using life cycle assessment approach. Energy Sources. Part A Recover Util Environ Eff 1–16
Rigamonti L, Mancini E (2021) Life cycle assessment and circularity indicators. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01966-2
Risku-Norja H, Mäenpää I (2007) MFA model to assess economic and environmental consequences of food production and consumption. Ecol Econ 60:700–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.001
Ritzén S, Sandström GÖ (2017) Barriers to the circular economy – integration of perspectives and domains. Procedia CIRP 64:7–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.005
Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K et al (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a
Roos Lindgreen E, Mondello G, Salomone R et al (2021) Exploring the effectiveness of grey literature indicators and life cycle assessment in assessing circular economy at the micro level: a comparative analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01972-4
Roselli L, Casieri A, De Gennaro BC et al (2020) Environmental and economic sustainability of table grape production in Italy. Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093670
Ross RB, Pandey V, Ross KL (2015) Sustainability and strategy in U.S. agri-food firms: an assessment of current practices. Int Food Agribus Manag Rev 18:17–48
Royo P, Ferreira VJ, López-Sabirón AM, Ferreira G. (2016) Hybrid diagnosis to characterise the energy and environmental enhancement of photovoltaic modules using smart materials. Energy 101:174–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.01.101
Ruggerio CA (2021) Sustainability and sustainable development: a review of principles and definitions. Sci Total Environ 786:147481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481
Ruiz-Almeida A, Rivera-Ferre MG (2019) Internationally-based indicators to measure agri-food systems sustainability using food sovereignty as a conceptual framework. Food Secur 11:1321–1337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00964-5
Ryan M, Hennessy T, Buckley C et al (2016) Developing farm-level sustainability indicators for Ireland using the Teagasc National Farm Survey. Irish J Agric Food Res 55:112–125. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijafr-2016-0011
Saade MRM, Yahia A, Amor B (2020) How has LCA been applied to 3D printing ? A systematic literature review and recommendations for future studies. J Clean Prod 244:118803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118803
Saitone TL, Sexton RJ (2017) Agri-food supply chain: evolution and performance with conflicting consumer and societal demands. Eur Rev Agric Econ 44:634–657. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbx003
Salim N, Ab Rahman MN, Abd Wahab D (2019) A systematic literature review of internal capabilities for enhancing eco-innovation performance of manufacturing firms. J Clean Prod 209:1445–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.105
Salimi N (2021) Circular economy in agri-food systems BT - strategic decision making for sustainable management of industrial networks. In: International S (ed) Rezaei J. Publishing, Cham, pp 57–70
Salomone R, Ioppolo G (2012) Environmental impacts of olive oil production: a life cycle assessment case study in the province of Messina (Sicily). J Clean Prod 28:88–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.004
Sánchez AD, Río DMDLC, García JÁ (2017) Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. Eur Res Manag Bus Econ 23:8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2016.02.001
Saputri VHL, Sutopo W, Hisjam M, Ma’aram A (2019) Sustainable agri-food supply chain performance measurement model for GMO and non-GMO using data envelopment analysis method. Appl Sci 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9061199
Sassanelli C, Rosa P, Rocca R, Terzi S (2019) Circular economy performance assessment methods : a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 229:440–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.019
Schiefer S, Gonzalez C, Flanigan S (2015) More than just a factor in transition processes? The role of collaboration in agriculture. In: Sutherland LA, Darnhofer I, Wilson GA, Zagata L (eds) Transition pathways towards sustainability in agriculture: case studies from Europe, CPI Group. Croydon, UK, pp. 83
Seuring S, Muller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16:1699–1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020
Silvestri C, Silvestri L, Forcina A, et al (2021) Green chemistry contribution towards more equitable global sustainability and greater circular economy: A systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126137
Smetana S, Schmitt E, Mathys A (2019) Sustainable use of Hermetia illucens insect biomass for feed and food: attributional and consequential life cycle assessment. Resour Conserv Recycl 144:285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.01.042
Sonesson U, Berlin J, Ziegler F (2010) Environmental assessment and management in the food industry: life cycle assessment and related approaches. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge
Soussana JF (2014) Research priorities for sustainable agri-food systems and life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 73:19–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.061
Soylu A, Oruç C, Turkay M et al (2006) Synergy analysis of collaborative supply chain management in energy systems using multi-period MILP. Eur J Oper Res 174:387–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.02.042
Spaiser V, Ranganathan S, Swain RB, Sumpter DJ (2017) The sustainable development oxymoron: quantifying and modelling the incompatibility of sustainable development goals. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 24:457–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2016.1235624
Stewart R, Niero M (2018) Circular economy in corporate sustainability strategies: a review of corporate sustainability reports in the fast-moving consumer goods sector. Bus Strateg Environ 27:1005–1022. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2048
Stillitano T, Spada E, Iofrida N et al (2021) Sustainable agri-food processes and circular economy pathways in a life cycle perspective: state of the art of applicative research. Sustain 13:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052472
Stone J, Rahimifard S (2018) Resilience in agri-food supply chains: a critical analysis of the literature and synthesis of a novel framework. Supply Chain Manag 23:207–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2017-0201
Strazza C, Del Borghi A, Gallo M, Del Borghi M (2011) Resource productivity enhancement as means for promoting cleaner production: analysis of co-incineration in cement plants through a life cycle approach. J Clean Prod 19:1615–1621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.05.014
Su B, Heshmati A, Geng Y, Yu X (2013) A review of the circular economy in China: moving from rhetoric to implementation. J Clean Prod 42:215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.020
Suárez-Eiroa B, Fernández E, Méndez-Martínez G, Soto-Oñate D (2019) Operational principles of circular economy for sustainable development: linking theory and practice. J Clean Prod 214:952–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.271
Svensson G, Wagner B (2015) Implementing and managing economic, social and environmental efforts of business sustainability. Manag Environ Qual an Int Journal 26:195–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-09-2013-0099
Tasca AL, Nessi S, Rigamonti L (2017) Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains: an LCA comparison between two alternative forms of production and distribution of endive in northern Italy. J Clean Prod 140:725–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.170
Tassielli G, Notarnicola B, Renzulli PA, Arcese G (2018) Environmental life cycle assessment of fresh and processed sweet cherries in southern Italy. J Clean Prod 171:184–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.227
Teixeira R, Pax S (2011) A survey of life cycle assessment practitioners with a focus on the agri-food sector. J Ind Ecol 15:817–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00421.x
Tobergte DR, Curtis S (2013) ILCD Handbook. J Chem Info Model. https://doi.org/10.278/33030
Tortorella MM, Di Leo S, Cosmi C et al (2020) A methodological integrated approach to analyse climate change effects in agri-food sector: the TIMES water-energy-food module. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217703
Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidenceinformed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br J Manag 14:207–222
Trivellas P, Malindretos G, Reklitis P (2020) Implications of green logistics management on sustainable business and supply chain performance: evidence from a survey in the greek agri-food sector. Sustain 12:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410515
Tsangas M, Gavriel I, Doula M et al (2020) Life cycle analysis in the framework of agricultural strategic development planning in the Balkan region. Sustain 12:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051813
Ülgen VS, Björklund M, Simm N (2019) Inter-organizational supply chain interaction for sustainability : a systematic literature review.
UNEP S (2020) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products and organizations 2020.
UNEP/SETAC (2009) United Nations Environment Programme-society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. France
United Nations (2011) Guiding principles on business and human rights. Implementing the United Nations “protect, respect and remedy” framework
United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. sustainabledevelopment.un.org
Van Asselt ED, Van Bussel LGJ, Van Der Voet H et al (2014) A protocol for evaluating the sustainability of agri-food production systems - a case study on potato production in peri-urban agriculture in the Netherlands. Ecol Indic 43:315–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.027
Van der Ploeg JD (2014) Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty. J Peasant Stud 41:999–1030. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.876997
van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84:523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2019) Manual for VOSviwer version 1.6.10. CWTS Meaningful metrics 1–53
Vasa L, Angeloska A, Trendov NM (2017) Comparative analysis of circular agriculture development in selected Western Balkan countries based on sustainable performance indicators. Econ Ann 168:44–47. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V168-09
Verdecho MJ, Alarcón-Valero F, Pérez-Perales D et al (2020) A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains. Cent Eur J Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-019-00668-3
Vergine P, Salerno C, Libutti A et al (2017) Closing the water cycle in the agro-industrial sector by reusing treated wastewater for irrigation. J Clean Prod 164:587–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.239
WCED (1987) Our common future - call for action
Webster K (2013) What might we say about a circular economy? Some temptations to avoid if possible. World Futures 69:542–554
Wheaton E, Kulshreshtha S (2013) Agriculture and climate change: implications for environmental sustainability indicators. WIT Trans Ecol Environ 175:99–110. https://doi.org/10.2495/ECO130091
Wijewickrama MKCS, Chileshe N, Rameezdeen R, Ochoa JJ (2021) Information sharing in reverse logistics supply chain of demolition waste: a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 280:124359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124359
Woodhouse A, Davis J, Pénicaud C, Östergren K (2018) Sustainability checklist in support of the design of food processing. Sustain Prod Consum 16:110–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2018.06.008
Wu R, Yang D, Chen J (2014) Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited Sustain 6:4200–4226. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6074200
Yadav S, Luthra S, Garg D (2021) Modelling Internet of things (IoT)-driven global sustainability in multi-tier agri-food supply chain under natural epidemic outbreaks. Environ Sci Pollut Res 16633–16654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11676-1
Yee FM, Shaharudin MR, Ma G et al (2021) Green purchasing capabilities and practices towards Firm’s triple bottom line in Malaysia. J Clean Prod 307:127268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127268
Yigitcanlar T (2010) Rethinking sustainable development: urban management, engineering, and design. IGI Global
Zamagni A, Amerighi O, Buttol P (2011) Strengths or bias in social LCA? Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:596–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0309-3
Download references
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Department of Economy, Engineering, Society and Business Organization, University of “Tuscia, ” Via del Paradiso 47, 01100, Viterbo, VT, Italy
Cecilia Silvestri, Michela Piccarozzi & Alessandro Ruggieri
Department of Engineering, University of Rome “Niccolò Cusano, ” Via Don Carlo Gnocchi, 3, 00166, Rome, Italy
Luca Silvestri
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Cecilia Silvestri .
Ethics declarations
Competing interests.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Monia Niero
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The original online version of this article was revised: a number of ill-placed paragraph headings were removed and the source indication "Authors' elaborations" was added to Tables 1-3.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary file1 (DOCX 31 KB)
Rights and permissions.
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Silvestri, C., Silvestri, L., Piccarozzi, M. et al. Toward a framework for selecting indicators of measuring sustainability and circular economy in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review. Int J Life Cycle Assess (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02032-1
Download citation
Received : 15 June 2021
Accepted : 16 February 2022
Published : 02 March 2022
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02032-1
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Agri-food sector
- Sustainability
- Circular economy
- Triple bottom line
- Life cycle assessment
- Find a journal
- Publish with us
- Track your research
Explore our brand new website! We hope you like the improvements we've made. We'd love to hear your feedback and please let us know if you find something that requires our attention – Website feedback .
Supply Chain Management Thesis
26 Feb 2024 - 23 Feb 2025
MNGT501 or MNMGT581
MSYS593 or MGSYS593
An externally examined piece of written work that reports on the findings of supervised research.
Teaching Periods and Locations
If your paper outline is not linked below, try the previous year's version of this paper .
A Learning Agreement must be signed by the supervisor, student and Dissertation and Thesis Convenor prior to full enrolment in this paper.
Indicative Fees
You will be sent an enrolment agreement which will confirm your fees. Tuition fees shown are indicative only and may change. There are additional fees and charges related to enrolment - please see the Table of Fees and Charges for more information.
Available subjects
Supply chain management, additional information.
Subject regulations
- Paper details current as of 29 Jan 2024 10:28am
- Indicative fees current as of 9 Apr 2024 01:30am
You’re viewing this website as a domestic student
You’re currently viewing the website as a domestic student, you might want to change to international.
You're a domestic student if you are:
- A citizen of New Zealand or Australia
- A New Zealand permanent resident
You're an International student if you are:
- Intending to study on a student visa
- Not a citizen of New Zealand or Australia
Learn how to drive supply chain and procurement sustainability with these 14 training resources
Develop and implement strategies for embedding sustainability into your supply chain and procurement practices with these 14 training options.
By Trish Kenlon
April 4, 2024
Source: Shutterstock/chayanuphol
Editor’s note: This is part of a series on closing the sustainability skills gap with the resources we have available right now. Read the previous articles in this series, which cover training on climate literacy , scaling corporate climate literacy , corporate sustainability strategy , measuring and managing GHG emissions , climate and net-zero strategy , regenerative agriculture , circular economy , professional certifications , creating a sustainability upskilling strategy for your company and free training .
The supply chain is an area of incredible opportunity for improving the sustainability performance of most organizations. According to CDP, on average, an organization’s supply chain emissions are 11.4 times higher than its operational emissions, but Scope 3 targets make up only 15 percent of all new corporate emissions reductions goals. If we are serious about reducing overall emissions, we need to make decarbonizing global supply chains a much higher priority; fortunately, the 14 training offerings below are designed to help you learn how to develop and implement strategies for doing exactly that.
Two things to consider before you dive into this list:
- The programs listed here primarily address environmental concerns such as emissions reductions and resiliency, but supply chains are also a significant source of human rights violations and other social sustainability challenges. Several courses specifically address topics such as eliminating forced labor, fair labor practices, worker welfare and community engagement; so be sure that any training you pursue covers all of the aspects of supply chain sustainability that are important to you and your organization.
- Supply chain and procurement are generally considered to be distinct disciplines; however, many of the organizations below use the terms "supply chain," "procurement" and "purchasing" interchangeably, so you’ll need to read each course description carefully to determine if the course will meet your personal needs.
As is often the case with these types of lists, I’m sure I've missed some. If your favorite offering isn’t included here, I warmly invite you to join the conversation on LinkedIn to tell me and your fellow readers about it. Thanks in advance for your help with bringing these resources out into the open so that more people can get to work on advancing sustainable business practices.
On-demand training
These on-demand courses are organized by price, starting with the most affordable options.
Embedding Sustainable Procurement from The Supply Chain Sustainability School
While the primary intended audience for the Supply Chain Sustainability School is professionals within the built environment industry and related supply chains, most of the course content delivered in topics such as sustainable procurement , sustainability strategy and energy and carbon is directly applicable to other industries. For example, the Embedding Sustainable Procurement course offers a great overview of ISO 20400 , the international standard for sustainable procurement, which would be helpful to professionals in any industry. ISO 20400 guidance encompasses environmental considerations such as product life cycles, resource efficiency, pollution prevention, and climate change mitigation and adaptation, and social considerations such as respect for human rights, fair business practices, worker well-being and community engagement and development.
- Time to complete: 60 minutes
- Training format: On-demand e-learning
- Key topics covered: What sustainable procurement is; how sustainable procurement benefits businesses; an overview of ISO 20400
Sustainable Supply Chain Management from MITx
This course is taught by the professors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is designed to teach learners how to transform their organization’s climate pledges into actionable strategies through better supply chain management. While the live online course is not currently running, the course materials are available to access and watch for free on edX.
- Time to complete: 10 weeks, 8 to 12 hours per week
- Training format: On-demand videos, reading, exercises
- Key topics covered: Estimating the carbon footprint and identifying hot spots in the supply chain; accounting for environmental estimations in supply chain and logistics decisions; balancing sustainability strategies with business performance metrics; designing a circular supply chain for your company; leveraging consumers' preferences and demands into sustainable supply chain strategies
Introduction to Supply Chain Sustainability from the UnSchool of Disruptive Design
This course from the circular economy experts at the UnSchool teaches learners to bring a systems mindset to reducing the ethical and environmental impacts of an organization’s supply chain. This is one of many offerings from the UnSchool at the intersection of sustainability, design and the circular economy.
- Time to complete: 5 to 7 hours
- Training format: On-demand videos, reading
- Key topics covered: Managing supply chain impacts; supply chain mapping; product life cycle assessment & certification
Sustainable Supply Chains Pathway from Sustainability Unlocked
This pathway is designed for individuals interested in understanding the complexities of sustainable supply chains and the importance of promoting sustainability within them. These videos are part of a collection of 1,000-plus modules on the Sustainability Unlocked learning platform , which covers a wide variety of corporate sustainability topics.
- Cost: Free with 30-day trial or included with paid subscription to Sustainability Unlocked, $150/year
- Time to complete: 54 minutes
- Training format: On-demand videos, optional test
- Key topics covered: Introduction to sustainable supply chains; the challenges for supply chains; global initiatives to enhance supply chain sustainability; sustainable supply chains best practice
Sustainable Procurement for Professionals from the Sustainable Procurement Institute
This course is designed to teach purchasing professionals how to lead procurement initiatives that further major organizational strategic goals relating to sustainability. The Sustainable Procurement Institute also offers a shorter course, Sustainable Procurement Essentials, that teaches these concepts at a higher level for busy contract management, project management and functional managers who are supporting these initiatives.
- Time to complete: 11 hours
- Key topics covered: How to justify, plan and implement a sustainable procurement program; how to grow your program over time; how to structure your organization and purchasing documents for financial, environmental and social responsibility; working with suppliers and performance measurement; software tools for productivity; evaluating and mitigating risk in the supply chain
Online Diploma on Sustainable Supply Chain Management from the Sustainability Academy
This online diploma program enables professionals to start a sustainable supply chain strategy, comply with key ESG ratings and reporting standards requirements, support transparency in their supply chains and understand important topics such as the circular economy and sustainable packaging. This is one of almost a dozen offerings in ESG and sustainability training from the Sustainability Academy .
- Time to complete: 20 hours
- Training format : On-demand videos, final quiz
- Key topics covered: Sustainable supply chain strategy; tools and frameworks including the CSRD, SEC, ISO 20400 and EcoVadis; transparency and corporate sustainability reporting; fostering circularity; Net Zero and Scope 3 emissions
Sustainable Procurement Course from Procurement Tactics
This course is designed to help procurement and sourcing professionals in transitioning their portfolio and business toward sustainability while maintaining high profitability. The four modules provide a step-by-step action plan for the development of a personalized sustainable procurement strategy.
- Time to complete: 32 to 40 hours
- Training format: On-demand e-learning, reading, templates
- Key topics covered: Policies and strategies including supply chain analysis and risk assessments; procurement governance, human rights, labor practices, the environment, consumer issues and community involvement; building a sustainable procurement strategy including integrating sustainability in specifications and identifying and assessing suppliers
Certified Sustainable Supply Chain Professional from the International Supply Chain Education Alliance
This program comprises three courses designed to prepare students for successful completion of the Certified Sustainable Supply Chain Professional (CSSCP) exam. Students learn how to add sustainable practices to existing supply chains or develop strategies for rebuilding current supply chains with sustainability in mind. You can take all three courses and the exam as a single training experience through the ISCEA site , or you can audit one or more of the individual courses on edX for free. This is one of many supply chain-related offerings from the ISCEA .
- Cost: $1,600
- Time to complete: 28 hours
- Training format: On-demand videos, reading, certification exam
- Key topics covered: Sustainable supply chains and circularity; sustainable supply chain planning, sourcing and procurement; sustainable supply chain operations and technology
Integrating Corporate Citizenship Through Your Supply Chain from the Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship
This course is an elective within the Certificate in Corporate Citizenship Practice and was designed to help corporate citizenship professionals develop or refresh their company’s corporate social responsibility strategy. Participants learn how to connect with partners throughout the value chain to increase participation in voluntary and reporting programs and improve environmental impacts.
- Cost : $1,710 for members, $2,050 for nonmembers
- Time to complete: 12 to 15 hours
- Training format: On-demand videos, exercises
- Key topics covered: Environmental, social and economic risks and opportunities throughout the supply chain; evaluating supply partners using materiality assessments, risk evaluation and incentives; tools for determining scope, encouraging transparency and demonstrating accountability; service vs. product-based supply chains; creating programs that allow the capture of key metrics; the role of third-party certifications
Live online training
These courses include live lectures, workshops or assignments that have specific due dates, adding a time-sensitive element to the learning experience. They are arranged in order of their start dates.
Building Sustainable Supply Chains Workshop from the Association for Supply Chain Management
This workshop teaches enrollees how to interpret and apply the ASCM Supply Chain Sustainability Standards , which cover ethical considerations such as anti-corruption, antitrust, codes of conduct, confidentiality, human rights and labor practices and environmental considerations such as circular economy, climate strategy, energy, water, waste, and product life cycle stewardship. This is part of ASCM’s larger training catalog that includes programs such as the Supply Chain Resilience Certificate , which also incorporates sustainability principles. Workshops are available online or in-person in cities around the world.
- Next start date: Started April 1
- Cost: $1,997
- Time to complete: 3 weeks, 8 hours per week
- Training format: Live online classes or in-person classes
- Key topics covered: Regulations and governance for supply chain disclosures; how to apply the ASCM Enterprise Standards for Sustainability; identifying gaps for supply chain continuous improvement; avoiding greenwashing
PECB Certified ISO 20400 Lead Manager from Abilene Academy
This course teaches professionals how to integrate the sustainable procurement guidelines of ISO 20400 at their organization and prepares them for successful completion of the PECB Certified Lead Sustainable Procurement Manager exam, one of several certifications from PECB related to ISO sustainability standards .
- Next start date: April 22
- Cost: $3,750
- Time to complete: 5 days
- Training format : Live online classes, exercises, certification exam
- Key topics covered: Introduction to ISO 20400; understanding the relationship between ISO 20400, ISO 26000 and ISO 14001; planning and integrating sustainability into the procurement process; contract management, measurement and continual improvement
Sustainable Supply Chain Management from the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership
This logistics-focused course uses creative business models, integrated supply chain analytics, key performance indicator (KPI) formulations and the latest technology to teach students how to enact meaningful changes in their organizations.
- Next start date: May 1
- Cost: $2,987
- Time to complete: 8 weeks, 6 to 10 hours per week
- Training format: On-demand videos, assignments, live online tutoring available
- Key topics covered: Essentials of supply chain management; designing efficient, resilient supply chain; supply chain analytics; innovation and supply chain technology; supply chain collaboration and partnerships; rewiring your supply chain
Supply Chain Decarbonization from Terra.do
This course teaches learners how to make supply chains climate-resilient, implement sustainable procurement practices and engage cooperatively with stakeholders. The four weekly assignments culminate in a climate action roadmap for an example company’s supply chain.
- Next start date: Sept. 10
- Time to complete: 4 weeks, 1.5 hours per week
- Training format: Live online classes, assignments
- Key topics covered: Stakeholder mapping and engagement; risk and climate impact assessment for supply chains; sustainable procurement guidelines; climate action roadmaps
Climate Foundations from the Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council
This comprehensive virtual training and coaching program is designed to equip procurement, supply chain and sustainability professionals with the knowledge, tools and strategic approach they need to develop and reach meaningful greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. The coaching work supports participants in prioritizing and strategizing action on highly relevant categories and suppliers and culminates in the completion of a Strategic Climate Plan and Supplier Engagement Plan for your organization. While the next full version of the signature course won’t start again until February, a compact edition will be available Oct. 2.
- Oct. 2 for the compact edition
- February for the full course
- $575 to $1,200 for the compact edition
- $790 to $1,650 for the full course
- 2 months, 1 to 1.5 hours per week for the compact edition
- 6 months, 1 to 1.5 hours per week for the full course
- Training format: Live online workshops and classes; on-demand videos; peer-to-peer interaction and support
- Key topics covered: Developing a vision, prioritized strategies and goals for your climate plan; GHG protocol-based data management and reporting; engaging suppliers; understanding and setting SBTIs; evaluating and purchasing credible offsets; low-carbon concrete; optional demos of CDP, EcoVadis, Cority – Greenstone +, Salesforce – Net Zero Cloud, Persefoni and U.S. EPA – Simplified GHG Emission Calculator
Join the conversation
I hope this article has helped you find at least one great new resource to help you incorporate more sustainable supply chain and procurement practices. Remember, if I’ve missed one of your favorites or if you want to tell me about a resource that could be relevant to a future article, please join the conversation on LinkedIn . Until next time!
View the discussion thread.
- Education & Training
- Supply Chain
- Procurement
- Social Impact
Share this article
Trish Kenlon
More by this author.
5 steps to create a sustainability upskilling strategy for your company
Which of these 46 sustainability certifications is right for you?
35+ easy, free ways to level up your sustainability expertise over the holidays
14 training resources for designing circularity into business models and products
14 training resources for regenerating the land through agriculture
Get articles like this delivered to your inbox
- Circularity 24
Join the community of 2,000+ visionaries and practitioners advancing the circular economy at Circularity 24 (May 22-24, Chicago, IL).
- Climate Tech
- Circularity
- ESG/Finance
- Sustainability Strategy
- UPCOMING EVENTS:
- GreenFin 24
- GreenBiz 25
More From Forbes
Triple win: cutting costs, enhancing resilience and promoting sustainability in the supply chain.
- Share to Facebook
- Share to Twitter
- Share to Linkedin
Ben Eachus, cofounder and CEO, Flowspace .
Headlines about supply chain issues have ballooned in recent years, and so too have the roles of supply chain leaders. Companies now face growing consumer demands around fulfillment speed while also battling rising costs, labor shortages, disruptions and the impacts of climate change. The complexity is challenging supply chain leaders to respond quickly and remain prepared for the next disruption.
Fortunately, organizations can address these issues simultaneously through synergy with the right strategy and a flexible fulfillment network. By focusing on a “triple bottom” line of cost, resiliency and sustainability, supply chain leaders can align their decision-making across the entire organization.
The Perfect Storm: Climate Change, Disruption And Rising Expenses
The growing costs of labor, transportation, leasing and operating fulfillment centers are weighing heavily on companies’ financial health. The most recent State of Logistics Report by the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals found U.S. logistics costs are increasing and recently reached $2.3 trillion, representing more than 9% of the national gross domestic product.
Supply chain leaders must also consider their company’s potential contributions to climate change. There’s growing pressure from the government, the private sector and consumers to reduce Scope 3 emissions . More than 90% of an organization’s greenhouse gas emissions and between 50% and 70% of operating costs are attributable to supply chains, according to EY .
See Shooting Stars From Halley s Comet As Top Meteor Shower Peaks
Ukrolancet drones blitz russian air defenses, fallout review amazon prime video i have some good news.
Climate change, extreme weather events and global disruptions have thrown many supply chain leaders off guard. The length and complexity of today’s supply chains also mean that upstream and lateral disruptions can create ripple effects across the entire system. An unexpected snowstorm in Texas, wildfires in the Pacific Northwest or holdups at the Suez Canal can impact production lines, slow distribution and throw off inventory estimates. As there is no more “normal” in supply chains, leaders need to be able to make informed, up-to-the-minute decisions.
The Triple Bottom Line Of Cost, Care And Continuity
As supply chain leaders are tasked with delivering on a “triple bottom line” of reducing costs, increasing resiliency and improving sustainability, many organizations can address these challenges with the right strategy, real-time visibility and a flexible fulfillment network.
Boosting The Balance Sheet
Supply chain leaders are currently facing lean budgets and mandates to cut costs. Many VC-backed brands, for example, are trying to rapidly scale with a lean supply chain team that may only have a couple of members. With supply chain costs accounting for up to 20% of business expenditures, it can be challenging to scale without skyrocketing costs.
One way to boost the balance sheet is to outsource aspects of the supply chain to partners, thereby creating an extension of your team. Strategic partnerships can also alleviate long-term leases, which can be a drain on a brand’s profits.
A flexible network model can allow companies to transform fixed supply chain costs like labor and warehousing into consumption-based variable costs where they only pay for what they use. This can not only help you save money on long-term contracts, unused assets and inefficiency costs but also scale up and down more easily as needed.
When looking for partners, due diligence is critical. Your ideal partner should be one who not only understands your company's specific needs but also demonstrates their capability to meet them effectively. Tailor your Request for Proposal (RFP) documents to reflect your business' unique requirements and emphasize the importance of performance metrics. It’s also important to ensure a partner's software will integrate with your existing technology stack—the key to maximizing efficiency and optimization. Beware of red flags such as vague answers or an unwillingness to provide detailed operational insights, as these responses might indicate gaps in a potential partner's capabilities.
Benefiting The Environment
Sustainability is no longer an option but a mandate that impacts cost, profit and brand image. In many ways, the public now demands sustainability more than regulators. McKinsey & Company notes that consumers are increasingly shifting their purchases to brands with products and business models that make ESG-related claims.
At the same time, supply chains account for approximately 60% of all global emissions, according to Accenture . Route optimization makes a big impact, but until entire fleets of delivery vehicles become fuel-efficient, reducing transportation distances is the most effective way to reduce emissions.
Leveraging a distributed network to store and fulfill products closer to end customers can not only reduce carbon emissions but also delivery times and costs. For example, we had a CPG client that optimized its fulfillment network by going from a single optimized location to three optimized locations. This reduced total shipping distances by 80%, saving an average of 1,500 miles and reducing carbon emissions by 83% per shipment. According to EPA calculations , that's the equivalent of taking nearly 15,000 vehicles off the road for a year.
Building Business Continuity
At the end of the day, a supply chain leader’s duty is to keep inventory flowing, no matter the disruption. Business continuity starts with having better visibility so supply chain leaders can make better decisions that impact all areas and quickly change course when issues arise. A smart fulfillment network, which leverages tools like digital twins (a virtual model of a physical object) and machine learning, can offer decision-makers a clear view of real-time inventory levels and the movement and status of goods.
This real-time information, combined with the capabilities of a flexible fulfillment network, helps build resiliency by limiting the impact of disruptions and supporting faster recovery when incidents occur. For example, with advanced analytics and digital twins, supply chain leaders can run scenarios to simulate the outcomes of different options. If a critical distribution center is suddenly knocked offline in Texas, the organization can quickly identify the next best optimal location, considering cost, transit time and demand.
The only certainty in today’s supply chain is change and disruption. By aligning flexible solutions, strategy and technology, organizations can meet customer expectations and boost their triple bottom line.
Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
- Editorial Standards
- Reprints & Permissions
Main Navigation
- Accept offer and enrol
- Current Students
Personalise your experience
Did you mean..., diploma of arts and social sciences, art/science collaboration wins waterhouse natural science art prize, unit of study hotl6008 leading food and beverage supply chains (2025).
Future students: T: 1800 626 481 E: Email your enquiry here
Current students: Contact: Educational Partnerships Board
Students studying at an education collaboration: Please contact your relevant institution
updated - DO NOT REMOVE THIS LINE 6:05 AM on Fri, 12 April
Show me unit information for year
Unit snapshot.
PG Coursework Unit
Credit points
Faculty & college.
Educational Partnerships Board
Unit description
Considers the issues surrounding the development and management of sustainable food and beverage supply chains. Students will examine supply chains’ processes and structures, menu and operational design, food and beverage sustainability and quality, and challenges in managing quality associated with food and beverage.
Unit content
There are 6 topics in this unit:
- Understanding food and beverage supply chains
- Menu and operational design
- Developing a quality approach
- Sustainability in supply chains
- Inventory management
- Challenges in managing quality in the supply chain
Availabilities
Learning outcomes.
Unit Learning Outcomes express learning achievement in terms of what a student should know, understand and be able to do on completion of a unit. These outcomes are aligned with the graduate attributes . The unit learning outcomes and graduate attributes are also the basis of evaluating prior learning.
On completion of this unit, students should be able to:
Identify and evaluate the core principles and processes of food and beverage supply chain management
Analyse contemporary food and beverage supply chain management practices
Demonstrate the ability to work collaboratively within a team through the planning and implementation of a group project
Design a sustainable supply chain for a food and beverage provider
Teaching and assessment
Brisbane - the hotel school (term), melbourne - the hotel school (term), sydney - the hotel school (term), prescribed learning resources.
- Prescribed text information is not currently available.
- Prescribed resources/equipment information is not currently available.
Prescribed Learning Resources may change in future Teaching Periods.
Fee information
Commonwealth Supported courses For information regarding Student Contribution Amounts please visit the Student Contribution Amounts .
Fee paying courses For postgraduate or undergraduate full-fee paying courses please check Domestic Postgraduate Fees OR Domestic Undergraduate Fees .
International
Please check the international course and fee list to determine the relevant fees.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
THESIS was originally created by TSC starting in 2009 and launched as The Sustainability Index in 2014. In 2019, TSC partnered with SupplyShift to create our current iteration of THESIS, powered by SupplyShift's cutting edge platform and informed by TSC's deep roots in higher education, including ASU and Wageningen University + Research.
Sustainability and the supply chain. SSCM is grounded in a sustainability value proposition within an integrated business model that takes in stakeholder engagement, collaboration, and a network view that denotes a new paradigm in managing supply chains (Seuring and Müller Citation 2008, Ahi and Searcy Citation 2013, Boons and Ludeke-Freund Citation 2013, Beske and Seuring Citation 2014).
The emphasis on sustainability within supply chains across industries has increased in recent years. Today, companies across the globe report on sustainability efforts and progress each year and set goals to reach ambitious environmental and social sustainability targets. This increased focus has prompted questions regarding how sustainability ...
Evidently, design and management of supply chain activities is a primary factor in promoting environmental sustainability. In this paper, we review the current state of academic research in designing and managing sustainable supply chains, and provide a discussion of future directions and research opportunities in this rapidly evolving field.
Sustainable supply chain management - drivers, practices and strategies on ensuring sustainable supply chain Master's thesis 2021 93 pages, 7 figures, 7 tables and 1 appendice Examiners: Professor Anni-Kaisa Kähkönen and Junior researcher Kati Marttinen Keywords: Sustainable supply chain management, SSCM, sustainability, supply chain,
of sustainable supply chains may not be evident, a proposition has been developed in this research so that long-term benefits can be accrued, providing 'win-win' opportunities for both environmental protection and economic benefit. Keywords: Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM); Manufacturing firms;
The benefits of sustainable supply chain management practices to supply chain risk management Master's thesis 2023 95 pages, 1 figure and 6 tables Examiners: Professor Anni-Kaisa Kähkönen and junior researcher Aleksi Harju Keywords: sustainability, sustainable supply chain management, supply chain risk management
Sustainable supply chain management: An integrated model for optimising supply chain network design. May 2016; Thesis for: PhD; ... *Award: The Best Doctoral Dissertation Award, 2016 - Australian ...
We determined that supply chain sustainability on an aggregate level has continued to grow in 2021. Businesses doubled down on the issues most impacted by COVID-19: significant growth was seen in employee welfare and safety, human rights protection, and renewable energies. The fear of a sustainability retraction due to COVID-19 was unjustified.
the supply chain among suppliers and buyers. However, to successfully implement the themes in supplier contracts will require testing, education, and constant revision to continue to meet the needs of the supply chain. Before work on the thesis began, there was some notion that driving sustainability in the utility industry would be difficult.
In an era where environmental and social pressures on companies are increasing, sustainable supply chain management is essential for the efficient operation and survivability of the organizations (members of the chain). Digital transformation and the adoption of new technologies could support the development of sustainable strategies, as they support supply chain processes, decrease ...
start applying new management principles by considering sustainability on all sustainable dimensions. In this thesis, 82 academic papers are reviewed and analyzed. The authors identified the contributions of traceability to sustainable supply chain management by identifying effects on ... 6.2 Sustainable supply chain and four supporting facets ...
1 INTRODUCTION. Green supply chain management (GSCM) practices are a crucial issue in environmental development (Cahyono et al., 2020).Over the decades, businesses have adopted several strategies to improve society and environmental performance (EP) (Abbas et al., 2021; Wiredu, Yang, Labaran, & Kwasi, 2023).As a result of the speedy rising environmental alertness, businesses are eager to ...
i Master Thesis Degree Project in Business Administration Title: Measuring Sustainability in Supply Chain with Key Performance Indicators Authors: Himanen Laura & Martikainen Julia Tutor: Caroline Teh Date: 20.05.2019 Key terms: Sustainability, Supply Chain, Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Finland, Manufacturing
Supply chain sustainability has increased in importance for companies of all sizes, public and private, across a wide range of industries. While there has been increased excitement in tandem with proclamations of lofty goals around the topic of supply chain sustainability, it has proven challenging to operationalize sustainability when many companies focus on short-term financial goals or lack ...
This research is part of a thesis work, which aims to study sustainable performance in circular supply chains, grouping economic, management and industrial engineering aspects. ... (Circular Economy, Circular Supply Chain, Sustainability and Performance Evaluation) was considered. In the case of CSC, it was noted that some elements could be ...
Sustainable supply chains: Making value the priority 2014] found that 76% of 500 supply chain executives identified sustainability as an important aspect of their supply chain. The results highlight the importance of achieving consistency between customer expectations, in terms of cost and service level, and supply
Sustainable Supply Chain Management - Towards Sustainable Supplier Selection and Sustainable Sourcing Submitted by: Michaela Schöll Alte Jakobstrasse 81 10179 Berlin 1st Supervisor: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Henke 2nd Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Kai Förstl Submission Date: 31 July 2017
Creating Sustainable Supply Chains: Influencing Sustainable Practices in the Supply Chain. Graduate Theses and Dissertations Retrieved from https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2396 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK.
Rogers, 2008, p. 361). This statement held true for supply chain related fields as well. Seuring and Muller (2008) defined sustainable supply chain management "as the management of material, information and capital flows, as well as cooperation among companies along the supply chain while taking goals from all three dimensions of
This research aims to explore the complex interplay between supply chain resilience (SCR), digital supply chain (DSC), and sustainability, focusing on the moderating influence of supply chain dynamism. The goal is to understand how these elements interact within the framework of contemporary supply chain management and how they collectively contribute to enhancing sustainability outcomes. The ...
Sustainable supplier development practices: drivers and enablers in a global environment Figure 1. Research model 53 Achieving a socially responsible supply chain through assessment and collaboration Figure 1. Conceptual model 89 Figure 2. Model (after exploratory factor analysis) 97 Does implementing social supplier development practices pay off?
Finally, Aramyan et al. presented a study on the European supply chain in sustainable production. 5.2.2 Best practice. The second cluster consists of 33 articles published from 2007 to 2020. The articles' objective is to outline guidelines for agri-food system actors and policymakers to achieve global sustainability. The cluster is ...
The University of Waikato is driving innovation for societal progress and global sustainability, linking knowledge with industry for a better world. Go to this section . Research institutes, centres and groups . Research institutes; ... Supply Chain Management Thesis. 2024. Change year. 2023; 2022; 2021; 2020; 2019; 2018; 90. 500. 26 Feb 2024 ...
While the primary intended audience for the Supply Chain Sustainability School is professionals within the built environment industry and related supply chains, most of the course content delivered in topics such as sustainable procurement, sustainability strategy and energy and carbon is directly applicable to other industries.
The most recent State of Logistics Report by the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals found U.S. logistics costs are increasing and recently reached $2.3 trillion, representing more ...
Considers the issues surrounding the development and management of sustainable food and beverage supply chains. Students will examine supply chains' processes and structures, menu and operational design, food and beverage sustainability and quality, and challenges in managing quality associated with food and beverage.
Innovative supply chain leaders will connect strategies and investments between multiple trends to help deliver on their mission-critical goals this year." The top trends in supply chain technology for 2024 are: Cyber Extortion Cyber criminals are highly successful at executing ransomware attacks to extort funds from supply chain organizations.