Shamraiz Ahmad and Kuan Yew Wong
The purpose of this paper is to review and analyze the recent sustainability assessment studies in the manufacturing industry from the triple-bottom-line (TBL) perspective. This…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to review and analyze the recent sustainability assessment studies in the manufacturing industry from the triple-bottom-line (TBL) perspective. This paper aims to depict the status quo of practical sustainability assessment, summarize the different levels and boundaries of evaluation, and highlight the difficulties and further improvements needed to make the assessment more effective in the manufacturing industry.
Design/methodology/approach
Four keywords, namely, sustainability assessment, sustainable manufacturing, TBL and green production, were used to explore and find the relevant articles. First, this paper systematically reviewed the studies and analyzed the different levels and boundaries of sustainability assessment. Following this, the reviewed studies were critically discussed along with their merits and shortcomings.
Findings
The review showed that most of the sustainability assessment studies were conducted on product, company and process levels in the manufacturing industry. Nevertheless, there is still a need to focus more on plant and process level assessments to achieve the TBL objectives. Environmental assessment is comparatively matured in manufacturing industries. However, from the economic and social viewpoints, only cost analysis and workers’ safety, respectively, were considered in most of the studies. The economic and social indicators need to be more inclusive and should be validated and standardized for manufacturing industries.
Originality/value
Unlike previous sustainability assessment reviews in manufacturing industries which were mostly based on life cycle assessment, this paper has included environmental, social and economic aspects in one comprehensive review and focused on recent studies published from 2010 to 2017. This paper has explored the recent sustainability assessment trends and provided insights into the development of sustainability assessment in the manufacturing sector.
Details
Keywords
Shamraiz Ahmad, Kuan Yew Wong and Srithar Rajoo
The purpose of this paper was to review the indicators for the three aspects (environment, economy and society) of sustainability (the triple-bottom line (TBL) perspective) for…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper was to review the indicators for the three aspects (environment, economy and society) of sustainability (the triple-bottom line (TBL) perspective) for manufacturing sectors. In addition, this paper aimed to: document the sustainability indicators for manufacturing sectors; perform an analysis of these indicators to show their evolutional progress and maturity in terms of their consistent, repeated and standardized usage; and highlight the further work needed to make them mature and more standardized.
Design/methodology/approach
The following keywords were used to explore and find the relevant articles: sustainable manufacturing evaluation, sustainability indicators, life cycle assessment, tools for sustainability assessment, and economic and social evaluation in industries. To find articles within this sample, the major focus remained on the terms “indicators,” “metrics,” and “performance measures.” This paper systematically reviewed the studies and analyzed the different sustainability indicators from the TBL viewpoint. Following this, the documented indicators were critically discussed along with their evolutional progress and maturity level.
Findings
The results showed that solid waste was the least used and immature aspect in the environmental category, whereas the more frequently used and developed indicators were related to material used, energy used and air emissions. Economic assessment was most of the time limited to cost-based indicators. From a social viewpoint, most of the reviewed studies were based on workers and local community and society related indicators rather than consumers-based indicators. From a sectoral viewpoint, comparatively, studies for metal manufacturing industries were more focused on all three dimensions of sustainability. On an overall basis, of the 144 discussed indicators, almost 34 percent (49) were used just once. Comparatively, the usage of indicators was more mature in manufacturing activities of developed countries than developing ones. Moreover, the usage of indicators was more common at the product level than at the other levels.
Originality/value
Unlike previous sustainability indicator sets which were generally long lists of proposed indicators rather than applicable and measurable ones, this paper reported the indicator sets based on studies for manufacturing sectors. Moreover, in contrast to previous reviews on indicators which were mostly based on the environmental dimension, this paper included all three dimensions of sustainability in one comprehensive review while focusing on recent studies published from 2007 to 2017. This paper has explored the recent evolutional progress and maturity of sustainability indicators, and provided insights into their development in manufacturing sectors.
Details
Keywords
Wai-Peng Wong, Kim Hua Tan, Stephanie Hui-Wen Chuah, Ming-Lang Tseng, Kuan Yew Wong and Shamraiz Ahmad
This study investigates information quality, information security technology and information sharing with moderation by information security culture and information leakage and…
Abstract
Purpose
This study investigates information quality, information security technology and information sharing with moderation by information security culture and information leakage and how they all play out to influence supply chain performance for contract suppliers (Contract), noncontract suppliers (Noncontract) and pooled suppliers (Contract and Noncontract combined).
Design/methodology/approach
Multigroup analysis was deployed to compare the impact on Contract and Noncontract.
Findings
The finding on pooled suppliers confirmed the hypothesis that, in the multigroup analysis, information security culture negatively impacted the information quality–information sharing relationship of Contract.
Practical implications
The practical learning point is that Noncontract could still share information and perform and in some instances better than Contract. Noncontract suppliers are still workable.
Originality/value
Information security culture motivated Noncontract to share and perform better than Contract. This result presents a dilemma.