Supply chain stakeholders may perceive security risks differently and thereby misalign mitigation strategies. Hence, causing weak spots in supply chains and thereby disruptions…
Abstract
Purpose
Supply chain stakeholders may perceive security risks differently and thereby misalign mitigation strategies. Hence, causing weak spots in supply chains and thereby disruptions. The purpose of this paper is to determine whether supply chain companies actually perceive security risks and effectiveness of mitigation strategies differently.
Design/methodology/approach
Two survey studies measuring perception of security risks and effectiveness of measures have been developed and used to collect data from European and Latin American companies, grouped as cargo owners and logistics companies.
Findings
The findings of the surveys unveil that only two (out of six) security risks, namely, violation of customs non-fiscal regulations and illegal immigration, show significant differences between the two groups of companies. In addition, the surveys show that companies perceive equally the effectiveness of security measures. This study concludes that supply chains seem to have good visibility over the security risks of their partners. Hence, in terms of security, supply chain companies seem to have achieved a common understanding of risks and furthermore are able to act jointly to secure assets and operations.
Originality/value
Previous research claim supply chain stakeholders may perceive risks differently and thereby may fail to correctly align mitigation strategies. Yet, to the authors knowledge, previous research has not empirically demonstrated these differences in perceptions of risks and mitigation strategies.
Details
Keywords
Luca Urciuoli, Sangeeta Mohanty, Juha Hintsa and Else Gerine Boekesteijn
The purpose of this paper is to enhance the understanding about how energy supply chains work to build resilience against exogenous security threats and thereafter what support…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to enhance the understanding about how energy supply chains work to build resilience against exogenous security threats and thereafter what support mechanisms should be introduced or improved by the European Union.
Design/methodology/approach
Five case studies and data collection from multiple sources is used to understand what exogenous security threats could lead to the disruption of oil and gas flows to Europe, how energy companies, from a supply chain perspective, are working to manage these threats and finally, how the EU may coordinate the security of the energy sector in collaboration with supply chain companies.
Findings
Results show that today, oil and gas supply chains have in place a good combination of disruption strategies, including portfolio diversification, flexible contracts, transport capacity planning and safety stocks. The most relevant security threats the companies fear, include hijacking of vessels (sea piracy), but also terrorism, and wars. Finally, the study highlights that the European Union has built a comprehensive portfolio of strategies to deal with scarcity of oil and gas resources. However, these approaches are not often synchronized with supply chain strategies.
Practical implications
The paper provides guidance for supply chain managers dealing with critical suppliers located in conflict environments. The paper recommends that supply chain managers fine tune their strategies in coordination with governmental actions in foreign politics, dependence reduction and crisis management. This may be achieved by closer communication with governments and potentially through the creation of a pan-European sector alliance.
Originality/value
Previous research discusses the topic of supply chain resilience and supply chain risk management. However, none of these studies report on exogenous security threats and disruption strategies of oil and gas supply chains. At the same time, previous research lacks detailed studies describing the interaction between governments and energy supply chains.
Details
Keywords
Ari‐Pekka Hameri and Juha Hintsa
This paper aims to systematically document drivers of change and the implications they will have on international supply chain management in the coming two decades.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to systematically document drivers of change and the implications they will have on international supply chain management in the coming two decades.
Design/methodology/approach
This study was commissioned by the World Customs Organization (WCO) at the end of June 2006. Because of increased trade volumes, emerging complex supply networks and heightened security concerns, the WCO saw the need to assess future trends and drivers in supply chain management. The Delphi method was applied to identify a set of foreseeable drivers of change and to assess their predicted impact on global supply chain management in the coming ten to 20 years. Based on a literature review of 150 recent publications and interviews among 33 industry, academic and customs experts, a survey was designed and conducted to collect current and potential change drivers in global supply chains. These drivers were compiled and prioritized by an eclectic team of 12 specialists.
Findings
The main results of the study are strongly connected to strategic and operational supply chain planning for the next ten to 20 years. They are related to increased off‐shoring of operations through truly global manufacturing, characterized by its intercontinental supply of materials; increased product complexity with shorter product life cycles; increased importance of business‐to‐government networking for operational and security efficiency; introduction of new supply chain services integrating financial, physical and information flows leading to further consolidation in the logistics markets; and the overall increase in risks and vulnerabilities in international supply chains.
Originality/value
This paper provides a 360 degree view of the future of international supply chain management and the challenges companies will face to compete in the twenty‐first century business environment.