green supply chain management research proposal

Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal

Introduction.

At a certain point in time, an organization might start considering the environmental impact it makes along with it suppliers. The starting point for such consideration can be seen when such factors are important to the strategy of the company. In the last decade, the strategy of the company regarding environmental awareness is influenced more and more with the pressure of the society on adopting green practices, which significantly increased over the last decade (Vachon, 2007). Nevertheless, the costs of the adoption of such practices and the needed resources can be seen as an important factor to consider by organizations (Thun and Müller, 2010).

One area of such environmental management is concerned with supply chain, i.e. green supply chain management (Gr SCM). Such area is gaining an increasing interest among researchers and practitioners, mainly due to the deterioration of the environment, e.g. diminishing raw material resources, overflowing waste, sites and increasing levels of pollution” (Srivastava, 2007). Considering the need for resources to implement such practices, the identification of the priority of such practices in the way they are implemented along with their importance might be required. With the majority of literature is management and suppliers driven in terms of green supply-chain, it is proposed to investigate the perception of consumers of the green initiatives of a company. The focus of the proposed research will be based on cosmetics companies and cosmetics products, considering the recent trend in focusing on natural products

Statement of the Problem

In terms of cosmetics the emphasis on the use of natural products can be seen related only to a single element of the supply chain, which is the purchase of raw materials and the way they are manufactured. Accordingly, translated into information for consumers such element does not mean that the programs on controlling and improving environmental practices are implemented across the whole supply chain. Supply chain consists of other processes as well, each of which can be redesigned to reduce the environmental impact (Lu et al., 2007). The latter include such areas as inbound and outbound logistics, waste management, and others. In that regard, not all corporations can implement environmental policies in their supply chains, due to the economic risks with such implementation. At the same time, changes in consumers’ perceptions and behaviour regarding the green processes are yet to be understood, especially those changes that might not be directly related to the quality of the product. The selection of consumers as a driving force for evaluation is supported in Thun and Müller (2010), which study of ecological initiatives outlined consumers as the main drivers for adopting such initiatives (Thun and Müller, 2010). It can be stated that the study is atheoretical, where the theoretical propositions in sustainable supply chain management emphasize that the connection between customers and companies is investigated through hypotheses focusing on benchmarks (Seuring, 2010). A review of literature did not identify frameworks dealing with such problem, although in in Solér, Bergström, and Shanahan (2010), the study focused similarly on information exchanged between retail customers and suppliers. Information and perceptions regarding the need for and use of environmental information was only a part of the study, in which customers where large purchasers, rather than individual users. The study outlined the use of individual interviews as a suitable method for data collection. Accoridngly, there is

The Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to explore the perceptions of consumers regarding different green initiatives in the supply chain, and the way they might influence the purchasing behaviour in the consumer industry. The philosophical paradigm taken in the present research is that of constructivist-interpretive paradigm (Belk, 2006), for which a qualitative research method will be chosen. In that regard, the following objectives are established for the research:

• To explain consumers’ view of green in cosmetics products.
• To identify the elements of supply chain that might change the behaviour of consumers, e.g. change brand preference, switch product, etc.
• To identify the green innovations in the supply chain which will not change the behaviour of consumers.
• To describe information on the supply chain that creates an environmental awareness.

Achieving the aforementioned objectives will be helpful in setting the priority for companies on the elements of the supply chain to which green practices should be extended in the first place, in order to reduce economic risks. With the main domain s in the objective being related to comprehension and knowledge, the main objective is to gain an understanding, which will be achieved through a qualitative research design. The specific research design and the data collection method for the study is focus group. A detailed explanation of such design and the rationale for its selection is explained in details in the methodology section of this proposal.

Literature Review

One of the aspects that can be used to guide the proposed research is related to the way the environmental awareness of the company can be linked to the satisfaction of customers and in turn to profits for the company. In that regard, the commitment of the company to greening initiatives in their operations is merely represented through information about such initiatives. In Solér, Bergström, and Shanahan (2010), the use of environmental information was investigated, along with its perception along the various supply chain actors. The findings of such investigation indicate that the implementation of environmental information is performed purely on financial ground. Such findings might indicate the emphasis on profit maximization as a driving force in implementing environmental practices in the supply chain.

A summary of such practices can be found in literature. In that regard, such practices are stated to include internal and external activities (Vachon and Klassen, 2006). Additionally, such practices are comprised of two sets of environmental activities, which are environmental collaboration and environmental monitoring (Vachon, 2007). Connecting such sets to internalization and externalization of supply chain activities, it is stated that internalization, i.e. integrating environment managing activities, is related to environmental collaboration, while externalization, i.e. employing market-based mechanism, is related to monitoring activities (Vachon, 2007). Specifying such activities, they might include suppliers’ voluntary compliance with a code of practice, imposing environmental specifications, certification, conducting questionnaires and audits on the compliance of suppliers to environmental standards (Vachon, 2007). Other more specific practices can be extracted from literature, from which one of the research questions can be derived, what is the environmental innovations in the supply chain that might change/form the perception of a company as green.

The connection of the environmental protection initiatives of a company with their customers are argued to be linked mainly through reputation. The latter can b translated into an environmental pressure which the consumers’ exercise on manufacturers, so that they minimize their emissions, produce environmentally friendly products, and/or sound recycling network systems (Cruz and Matsypura, 2009). Thus, poor environmental performance damages the reputation of the company. Thus, aside from corporate scandals and explicit violations, the way the environmental performance of the company can be evaluated as good or bad from the perspective of the consumer, the party responsible for environmental pressure, might need evaluation. Accordingly, the research question that can be derived will state: what consumers perceive as a green/environmentally friendly company?

The answer to such question can be important in that the evaluation of environmental performance might be based on criteria, which are not known or easily known by consumers. An example of the latter can be seen through the environmental criteria developed in Lu, Wu, and Kuo (2007), which include the percentage of components, for which suppliers has incorporated environmental management system, the percentage of those suppliers published in the environmental report, if existed, the use of recycled material in manufacturing, the type of packaging used, waste management, etc (Lu et al., 2007). Accordingly, exploring the effect of changes in such criteria on the perception of consumers on the company, and accordingly, on purchasing decision might be important. In that regard, the questions that might be derived in such aspects might state: what information on supply chain operations that might change the perception about a company, and subsequent consumer behaviour? What information will not affect such perception or decision?

The role of information can be seen important as well, where it was found in Solér, Bergström, and Shanahan (2010) that moving downstream in the supply chain and getting closer to the end consumers, lead to that the trade-off between economic and environmental goals is “a matter of consumers’ understanding of environmental problems” (Solér et al., 2010). The acknowledgement of such information and the way consumers use them, is an important aspect to identify, in that matter. The question that can be derived in that matter is: What information consumers use to identify the environmental performance of a company? Which elements of a supply chain are contained in such information?

The research designs implemented in studying supply chains can be divided between case studies, actions researches, and literature reviews (Seuring, 2010). The contribution of such research design can be seen focused on outlining the practices of green supply chains and their impact on the performance of organization. In that regard, such efforts emphasize positivistic perception of theory, which might show the lack of constructivist perspectives, which the proposed research is trying to achieve.

Research Questions

The research questions that the study will attempt to answer can be summarized as follows:

• What consumers perceive as a green/environmentally friendly company?
• What information consumers use to identify the environmental performance of a company?
• Which elements of a supply chain are contained in such information?
• What information on supply chain operations that might change the perception about a company, and subsequent consumer behaviour?
• What information will not affect such perception or decision?

Methodology

The main focus of the research is to acknowledge the perception of the consumers of green supply chain, its practices, and priorities for purchase behaviour. Thus, with such aim being revolved around acquiring a better understanding of the way consumer construct their preferences and perceptions of the green initiatives, qualitative research methods are proposed to be used. The appropriateness of such method can be seen through its main characteristics such as the emphasis on understanding, the focus on understanding from the respondents’ point of view, interpretation, and explorative orientation (Ghauri and Grinhaug, 2005). The qualitative method that will be used, which is at the same time the method of data collection, will be focus group interview.

The use of such method can be justified by its simplicity and flexibility, the small number of participants required, and the dynamic quality of the interactions that might occur within the group (Smith, 2008, Kitzinger, 1995). The researcher will act as a moderator for the group, where the research questions will act as guidelines for initiating discussions. Accordingly, the dynamic nature of focus groups will allow capturing the differences in the perceptions of participants allowing a better understanding. The data will be audio taped through during the discussion, for further transcription and analysis. The number of the participants will be established in accordance to the common practices in such interviews, taking the minimum amount for convenience. The common practices imply six to ten participants per group, and three to five group s per project. Taking the minimal number will result in three groups with six participants each (Morgan, 1997).

The method of sampling used is convenience sampling, where the participants will be recruited near local cosmetics store among those willing to participate. It can be assumed that the composition of the group will be composed mostly of women with specific characteristics related to cosmetics consumer. Nevertheless, considering that the main criteria for the participants, according to the objectives of the research, are being a consumer of cosmetics products, such composition will be appropriate in the present context.

The data will be transcribed and analysed for common themes and patterns. The data will be analysed through content analysis, where small chunks of data will be created and coded from the discussion transcripts. Each chunk of data will be coded and provided with a rich description, so that not only the frequency of such code is accounted for in the analysis. The Ethnograph application will be used as a tool that will aid in processing the qualitative data in the analysis (Qualis Research, 2010).

Time Schedule

Significance of Study

The significance of the study can be seen through the addition to the knowledge on green supply chain management from the perspective of consumers. Such knowledge can be beneficial for small to medium companies, for which the priorities of the green practices can be essential in terms of resources. The exploratory nature of the research implies for the need for empirical support, in which the identified patterns should be studied in a quantitative or mixed design study in the future. The emphasis on environmental awareness continues to increase with more and more pressure in the society. Nevertheless, extending green practices throughout the whole supply chain can be a difficult matter, which requires cooperation on many levels of the supply chain.

BELK, R. W. 2006. Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing, Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA, Edward Elgar.

CRUZ, J. M. & MATSYPURA, D. 2009. Supply chain networks with corporate social responsibility through integrated environmental decision-making. International Journal of Production Research, 47 , 621-648.

GHAURI, P. N. & GRINHAUG, K. 2005. Research methods in business studies : a practical guide, Harlow, England ; New York, Financial Times Prentice Hall.

KITZINGER, J. 1995. Introducing Focus Groups. British Medical Journal, 311 , 299-302.

LU, L. Y. Y., WU, C. H. & KUO, T. C. 2007. Environmental principles applicable to green supplier evaluation by using multi-objective decision analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 45 , 4317-4331.

MORGAN, D. L. 1997. Focus groups as qualitative research / David L. Morgan, Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage Publications.

QUALIS RESEARCH. 2010. Ethnograph 6.0. Web.

SEURING, S. 2010. Supply chain management for sustainable products – insights from research applying mixed methodologies. Business Strategy and the Environment , n/a-n/a.

SMITH, J. A. 2008. Qualitative psychology : a practical guide to research methods, Los Angeles, Calif., SAGE Publications.

SOLÉR, C., BERGSTRÖM, K. & SHANAHAN, H. 2010. Green supply chains and the missing link between environmental information and practice. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19 , 14-25.

SRIVASTAVA, S. K. 2007. Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9 , 53-80.

THUN, J.-H. & MÜLLER, A. 2010. An empirical analysis of green supply chain management in the German automotive industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19 , 119-132.

VACHON, S. 2007. Green supply chain practices and the selection of environmental technologies. International Journal of Production Research, 45 , 4357-4379.

VACHON, S. & KLASSEN, R. D. 2006. Extending green practices across the supply chain. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26 , 795-821.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, January 2). Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal. https://studycorgi.com/green-supply-chain-management-research-proposal/

"Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal." StudyCorgi , 2 Jan. 2022, studycorgi.com/green-supply-chain-management-research-proposal/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal'. 2 January.

1. StudyCorgi . "Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal." January 2, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/green-supply-chain-management-research-proposal/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal." January 2, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/green-supply-chain-management-research-proposal/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal." January 2, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/green-supply-chain-management-research-proposal/.

This paper, “Green Supply Chain Management Research Proposal”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: January 2, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, green supply chain management (gscm): a structured literature review and research implications.

Benchmarking: An International Journal

ISSN : 1463-5771

Article publication date: 5 October 2015

The purpose of this paper is to examine the status of green supply chain management (GSCM) research in terms of how the field is represented along a number of dimensions including journal, year, country, university, publishing house, authors, research design, research methods, data analysis techniques, multi criteria decision-making methods, research topics/issues and major industries actively involved.

Design/methodology/approach

A range of online databases from 1998 to August 2013 were searched containing the word “green supply chain” in their title and in the phrases to provide a comprehensive listing of journal articles on GSCM. Based on this a total of 177 articles were found and the information on a series of variables was gathered. Each of these articles was further reviewed and classified. The review and classification process was independently verified. All papers were allocated to the main and sub-categories based on the major focus.

The major findings shows that survey research holds greater credibility and the trend in survey research is moving from exploratory to model building and testing. GSCM research related to organizational practices, environmental issues, process, performance and sustainability were found to be most widely published topics within the GSCM domain.

Research limitations/implications

This paper is limited in reviewing those articles which contains the word “green supply chain” in the title and the phrases of the articles.

Originality/value

The present review will provide increased understanding of the current state of research and what still needs to be investigated in the GSCM discipline.

• Literature review
• Green supply chain management
• Research implications

Malviya, R.K. and Kant, R. (2015), "Green supply chain management (GSCM): a structured literature review and research implications", Benchmarking: An International Journal , Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 1360-1394. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-01-2014-0001

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2015, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Linking green supply chain management practices and environmental performance in the manufacturing industry: a hybrid SEM-ANN approach

• Research Article
• Published: 24 January 2024
• Volume 31 , pages 13925–13940, ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Rashed Al Karim 1 ,
• Mohammad Rokibul Kabir 1 , 3 ,
• Md Karim Rabiul   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7535-1612 2 ,
• Sakia Kawser 1 &
• Abdus Salam 1  

263 Accesses

Explore all metrics

This research determines the influence of green supply chain management practices (GSCM) on environmental performance. It also investigates the moderating role of supply chain environmental cooperation on GSCM practices and environmental performance relationships. A total of 370 employees of several Bangladeshi manufacturing companies were conveniently chosen as respondents. To verify the data validity and reliability and to test the hypotheses, we used SmartPLS. Finally, we employed an artificial neural network (ANN) to examine the relationship. Green design and green manufacturing have significant positive impacts on environmental performance, while green procurement and green distribution do not. Moreover, environmental cooperation moderates the relationships of green design and green distribution with environmental performance. The moderating effect of supply chain environmental cooperation in the relationship between GSCM practices and environmental performance in the manufacturing industry adds knowledge to the existing literature by incorporating a hybrid model combining PLS-SEM and ANN. Our study adds to the current body of knowledge by delving into the literature on GSCM from the perspective of Bangladesh’s industrial sector. This study fills a knowledge gap by shedding light on the interactions of GSCM and environmental performance. Indeed, this study represents a step forward from classic linear regression–based models to an ANN-based nonlinear model. It also demonstrates new contributions to the literature on green supply chain management and environmental performance.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Artificial intelligence-driven innovation for enhancing supply chain resilience and performance under the effect of supply chain dynamism: an empirical investigation

Artificial intelligence and big data analytics for supply chain resilience: a systematic literature review

Data science and big data analytics: a systematic review of methodologies used in the supply chain and logistics research

Data availability.

Data is available on request.

Abdallah AB, Al-Ghwayeen WS (2020) Green supply chain management and business performance: The mediating roles of environmental and operational performances. Bus Process Manag J 26(2):489–512

Article   Google Scholar  

Afum E, Agyabeng-Mensah Y, Owusu JA (2020a) Translating environmental management practices into improved environmental performance via green organizational culture: insight from Ghanaian manufacturing SMEs. J Supply Chain Manage Syst 9(1):31

Google Scholar  

Afum E, Osei-Ahenkan VY, Agyabeng-Mensah Y, Amponsah Owusu J, Kusi LY, Ankomah J (2020b) Green manufacturing practices and sustainable performance among Ghanaian manufacturing SMEs: the explanatory link of green supply chain integration. Manag Environ Qual 31(6):1457–1475

Agyabeng-Mensah Y, Ahenkorah E, Afum E, Nana Agyemang A, Agnikpe C, Rogers F (2020) Examining the influence of internal green supply chain practices, green human resource management and supply chain environmental cooperation on firm performance. Supply Chain Manag: An Int J 25(5):585–599

Ahmed W, Najmi A, Khan F (2020) Examining the impact of institutional pressures and green supply chain management practices on firm performance. Manag Environ Qual 31(5):1261–1283

Alam MZ, Hu W, Kaium MA, Hoque MR, Alam MMD (2020) Understanding the determinants of mHealth apps adoption in Bangladesh: A SEM-Neural network approach. Technol Soc 61:101255

Al-Emran M, Abbasi GA, Mezhuyev V (2021) Evaluating the impact of knowledge management factors on M-learning adoption: A deep learning-based hybrid SEM-ANN approach. Recent advances in technology acceptance models and theories. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 159–172

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Al-Ghwayeen QS, Abdallah AB (2018) Green supply chain management and export performance: The mediating role of environmental performance. J Manuf Technol Manag 29(7):1233–1252

Banik A, Taqi HMM, Ali SM, Ahmed S, Garshasbi M, Kabir G (2022) Critical success factors for implementing green supply chain management in the electronics industry: an emerging economy case. Int J Log Res Appl 25(4–5):493–520

Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

Bresciani S, Rehman SU, Alam GM, Ashfaq K, Usman M (2022) Environmental MCS package, perceived environmental uncertainty and green performance: in green dynamic capabilities and investment in environmental management perspectives. Rev Int Bus Strat 33(1):105–126

Chen X, Wang X, Zhou M (2019) Firms’ green R&D cooperation behaviour in a supply chain: Technological spillover, power and coordination. Int J Prod Econ 218:118–134

Cherrafi A, El Fezazi S, Govindan K, Garza-Reyes JA, Mokhlis A, Benhida K (2017) A framework for the integration of Green and Lean Six Sigma for superior sustainability performance. Int J Prod Res 55(15):4481–4515

Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods Bus Res 295(2):295–336

Choi D, Hwang T (2015) The impact of green supply chain management practices on firm performance: the role of collaborative capability. Oper Manag Res 8:69–83

Darwish S, Shah S, Ahmed U (2021) The role of green supply chain management practices on environmental performance in the hydrocarbon industry of Bahrain: Testing the moderation of green innovation. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag 9(2):265–276

Das S, Hassan HK (2022) Impact of sustainable supply chain management and customer relationship management on organizational performance. Int J Product Perform Manag 71(6):2140–2160

Das TK, Sheikh W, Islam N, Siddik AB (2021) Conceptual Framework of Green Supply Chain Management in Manufacturing Firms of Bangladesh. Int J Supply Chain Manag 10:52–66

Esfahbodi A, Zhang Y, Watson G (2016) Sustainable supply chain management in emerging economies: Trade-offs between environmental and cost performance. Int J Prod Econ 181:350–366

Gandhi NS, Thanki SJ, Thakkar JJ (2018) Ranking of drivers for integrated lean-green manufacturing for Indian manufacturing SMEs. J Clean Prod 171:675–689

Green KW Jr, Zelbst PJ, Meacham J, Bhadauria VS (2012) Green supply chain management practices: impact on performance. Supply Chain Manag: An Int J 17(3):290–305

Gunasekaran A, Papadopoulos T, Dubey R, Wamba SF, Childe SJ, Hazen B, Akter S (2017) Big data and predictive analytics for supply chain and organizational performance. J Bus Res 70:308–317

Habib MA, Bao Y, Ilmudeen A (2020) The impact of green entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation and green supply chain management practices on sustainable firm performance. Cogent Bus Manag 7(1):1–26

Habib MA, Bao Y, Nabi N, Dulal M, Asha AA, Islam M (2021) Impact of strategic orientations on the implementation of green supply chain management practices and sustainable firm performance. Sustainability 13(1):340

Hair JF Jr, Howard MC, Nitzl C (2020) Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. J Bus Res 109:101–110

Hamdy OMM, Elsayed KK, Elahmady B (2018) Impact of sustainable supply chain management practices on Egyptian companies’ performance. Eur J Sustain Dev 7(4):119–130

Han Z, Huo B (2020) The impact of green supply chain integration on sustainable performance. Ind Manag Data Syst 120(4):657–674

Hart SL (1995) A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Acad Manag Rev 20(4):986–1014

Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, 1st edn. Guilford Press, New York

Henseler J, Hubona G, Ray PA (2016) Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Ind Manag Data Syst 116(1):2–20

Hofman PS, Blome C, Schleper MC, Subramanian N (2020) Supply chain collaboration and eco-innovations: An institutional perspective from China. Bus Strateg Environ 29:2734–2754

Islam MS, Tseng ML, Karia N, Lee CH (2018) Assessing green supply chain practices in Bangladesh using fuzzy importance and performance approach. Resour Conserv Recycl 131:134–145

Kalyar MN, Shoukat A, Shafique I (2020) Enhancing firms’ environmental performance and financial performance through green supply chain management practices and institutional pressures. Sustain Acc Manag Policy J 11(2):451–476

Karim RA (2019) Inevitability of Environmental CSR in Dire Environmental Difficulties and its Ways-Out: Bangladesh Perspective. Int J Bus Technopreneurship 9(1):67–78

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Karim RA, Kasim A (2018a) Environmental externalities and reality of CSR practices (environmental) in Bangladesh. Int J Environ Pollut Res 6(2):1–15

CAS   Google Scholar  

Karim RA, Kasim A (2018b) Urgent Need for CSR in Bangladesh with an Emphasis on Environmental Urgent Need for CSR in Bangladesh with an Emphasis on Environmental Issues. In Knowledge Manag Int Conf (KMICe), Miri Sarawak (25–27)

Kasim A, Karim RA (2017) Challenges of implementing the socio-economic dimension of CSR in a less developed country: Bangladesh context. Int J Econ Res 14(16):185–197

Kim M, Chai S (2017) Implementing environmental practices for accomplishing sustainable green supply chain management. Sustainability 9(7):1192

Kirchoff JF, Tate WL, Mollenkopf DA (2016) The impact of strategic organizational orientations on green supply chain management and firm performance. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 46(3):269–292

Kock N, Lynn GS (2012) Lateral Collinearity and Misleading Results in Variance-Based SEM: An Illustration and Recommendations. J Assoc Inf Syst 13(7):546–580

Kuo F, Fang W, LePage BA (2021) Proactive environmental strategies in the hotel industry: Eco-innovation, green competitive advantage, and green core competence. J Sustain Tour 30(6):1240–1261

Karim RA, Rabiul MK, Kawser S (2023) Linking green supply chain management practices and behavioural intentions: the mediating role of customer satisfaction. J Hosp Tour Insights https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-04-2023-0241

Le T (2020) The effect of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance in Vietnamese construction materials manufacturing enterprises. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag 8(1):43–54

Leong LY, Hew TS, Ooi KB, Lin B (2019) Do electronic word-of-mouth and elaboration likelihood model influence hotel booking? J Comput Inf Syst 59(2):146–160

ADS   Google Scholar  

Liébana-Cabanillas F, Marinkovic V, De Luna IR, Kalinic Z (2018) Predicting the determinants of mobile payment acceptance: A hybrid SEM-neural network approach. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 129:117–130

Liu J, Feng Y, Zhu Q, Sarkis J (2018) Green supply chain management and the circular economy: Reviewing theory for advancement of both fields. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 48(8):794–817

Mamun AMA (2021) Assessing the Impact of Green Supply Chain Management on Environmental Performance of Bangladeshi Manufacturing Firms. Saudi J Bus Manag Stud 6(6):187–198

Migdadi YKAA (2023) Identifying the best practices in hotel green supply chain management strategy: A global study. J Qual Assur Hosp Tour 24(4):504–544

Ooi KB, Lee VH, Tan GWH, Hew TS, Hew JJ (2018) Cloud computing in manufacturing: The next industrial revolution in Malaysia? Expert Syst Appl 93:376–394

Pan X, Pan X, Song M, Guo R (2020) The influence of green supply chain management on manufacturing enterprise performance: moderating effect of collaborative communication. Prod Plan Control 31(2–3):245–258

Podsakoff PM, Organ DW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J Manag 12(4):531–544

Rahman T, Ali SM, Moktadir MA, Kusi-Sarpong S (2019) Evaluating barriers to implementing green supply chain management: An example from an emerging economy. Prod Plan Control 31(8):673–698

Rasit ZA, Zakaria M, Hashim M, Ramli A, Mohamed M (2019) Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) practices for sustainability performance: An empirical evidence of Malaysian SMEs. Int J Financ Res 10(3):371–379

Rehman SU, Bhatti A, Kraus S, Ferreira JJ (2021) The role of environmental management control systems for ecological sustainability and sustainable performance. Manag Decis 59(9):2217–2237

Rehman SU, Elrehail H, Poulin M, Shamout MD, Alzoubi HM (2023) Green managerial practices and green performance: a serial mediation model. Int J Innov Stud 7(3):196–207

Rehman Khan SA, Yu Z (2021) Assessing the eco-environmental performance: an PLS-SEM approach with practice-based view. Int J Log Res Appl 24(3):303–321

Ricardianto P, Kholdun A, Fachrey K, Nofrisel N, Agusinta L, Setiawan E, Endri E (2022) Building green supply chain management in pharmaceutical companies in Indonesia. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag 10(2):453–462

Rupa RA, Saif ANM (2022) Impact of Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) on Business Performance and Environmental Sustainability: Case of a Developing Country. Bus Perspect Res 10(1):140–163

Sahoo S, Vijayvargy L (2021) Green supply chain management practices and its impact on organizational performance: evidence from Indian manufacturers. J Manuf Technol Manag 32(4):862–886

Sohaib O, Hussain W, Asif M, Ahmad M, Mazzara M (2019) A PLS-SEM neural network approach for understanding cryptocurrency adoption. Ieee Access 8:13138–13150

Suki NM, Suki NM, Sharif A, Afshan S, Rexhepi G (2023) Importance of green innovation for business sustainability: Identifying the key role of green intellectual capital and green SCM. Bus Strateg Environ 32(4):1542–1558

Tseng ML, Islam MS, Karia N, Fauzi FA, Afrin S (2019) A literature review on green supply chain management: Trends and future challenges. Resour Conserv Recycl 141:145–162

Uddin M (2021) Exploring Environmental Performance and the Competitive Advantage of Manufacturing Firms: A Green Supply Chain Management Perspective. Int J Econ Manag 15(2):219–239

Uddin M, Hoque N, Mowla MM, Uddin MN, Mamun A (2022) Challenges and pathways to green supply chain management: Evidence from manufacturing sectors in an emerging economy. Int Soc Sci J 72(245):655–679

Wang S, Wang J, Li J, Yang F (2020) Do motivations contribute to local residents’ engagement in pro-environmental behaviors? Resident-destination relationship and pro-environmental climate perspective. J Sustain Tour 28(6):834–852

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Wibowo MA, Handayani NU, Mustikasari A (2018) Factors for implementing green supply chain management in the construction industry. J Ind Eng Manag 11(4):651–679

Wibowo MA, Handayani NU, Mustikasari A, Wardani SA, Tjahjono B (2022) Reverse Logistics Performance Indicators for the Construction Sector: A Building Project Case. Sustainability 14(2):963

Xu F, Huang L, Whitmarsh L (2020) Home and away: Cross-contextual consistency in tourists’ pro-environmental behavior. J Sustain Tour 28(10):1443–1459

Yang MGM, Roh JJ, Kang M (2019) The role of strategic environmental orientation in environmental design practices. Manag Decis 59(2):341–357

Yen YX (2018) Buyer–supplier collaboration in green practices: The driving effects from stakeholders. Bus Strateg Environ 27(8):1666–1678

Yildiz Çankaya SY, Sezen B (2019) Effects of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance. J Manuf Technol Manag 30:98–121

Younis H, Sundarakani B, Vel P (2016) The impact of implementing green supply chain management practices on corporate performance. Compet Rev 26(3):216–245

Yu Y, Zhang M, Huo B (2019) The impact of supply chain quality integration on green supply chain management and environmental performance. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 30(9–10):1110–1125

Zhang W, Zhang X, Zhou Q (2021) How does knowledge seeking and knowledge generation promote green supply chainmanagement? An empirical study from China. Int J Logist Res Appl 26(1):37–57

Zhu Q, Geng Y, Fujita T, Hashimoto S (2010) Green supply chain management in leading manufacturers: case studies in Japanese large companies. Manag Res Rev 33(4):380–392

Zhu Q, Sarkis J, Lai KH (2013) Institutional-based antecedents and performance outcomes of internal and external green supply chain management practices. J Purch Supply Manag 19(2):106–117

Zhu Q, Sarkis J, Kee-hung L (2019) Choosing the right approach to green your supply chains. Modern Supply Chain Res Appl 1(1):54–67

Download references

Acknowledgements

We greatly acknowledge all participants of the present study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Business Administration, East Delta University, Chattogram, Bangladesh

Rashed Al Karim, Mohammad Rokibul Kabir, Sakia Kawser & Abdus Salam

Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism, Prince of Songkla University, Phuket, Thailand

Md Karim Rabiul

School of Business and Entrepreneurship, Daffodil International University, Ashulia, Bangladesh

Mohammad Rokibul Kabir

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Rashed Al Karim generated the idea, wrote the introduction, and contributed to some literature review and partial analysis. Mohammad Rokibul Kabir contributed to developing hypotheses, research, and discussion. Md Karim Rabiul has guided analysis, partially shaped the manuscript and written method, and edited contributions. Sakia Kawser has collected data and written a literature review and method partly. Abdus Salam has collected data and contributed to discussion, implication, and analysis.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md Karim Rabiul .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

We have provided an agreement to participants to ensure their identity and participants ticked the ethical approval section.

Consent to participate

All participants were willingly participated in the survey and authors also provided them consent form to sign.

Consent to publication

We are giving permission to ESPR to publish paper in the current format.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Arshian Sharif

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Al Karim, R., Kabir, M.R., Rabiul, M.K. et al. Linking green supply chain management practices and environmental performance in the manufacturing industry: a hybrid SEM-ANN approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 31 , 13925–13940 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32098-3

Download citation

Received : 26 September 2023

Accepted : 16 January 2024

Published : 24 January 2024

Issue Date : February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32098-3

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

• Green procurement
• Green design
• Green manufacturing
• Green distribution
• Supply chain environmental cooperation
• Environmental performance
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, exploration of the impact of green supply chain management practices on manufacturing firms’ performance through a mediated-moderated model.

• 1 School of Economics and Management, Chang’an University, Chang’an, China
• 2 Faculty of Management Sciences, University of Kotli, Kotli, Pakistan
• 3 Department of Economics, University of Kotli, Kotli, Pakistan

This study aimed to examine the impact of green supply chain management (GSCM) practices on the performance of manufacturing firms. It explored the mediating role of green innovation (GI) and the moderating role of information sharing (IS) and information technology innovation (ITI) on the relationship between GSCM practices and manufacturing firms’ performance. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire from employees working in manufacturing firms in Pakistan. Random sampling was used to select the participants. The hypotheses were tested using partial least squares (PLS) analysis. The study revealed that GSCM practices significantly positively impacted manufacturing firms’ performance. It highlighted the mediating role of green innovation, suggesting that GSCM practices fostered innovation and improved firm performance. The study also uncovered the moderating role of information sharing and IT innovation, indicating that the effectiveness of GSCM practices in driving performance varied based on the extent of information sharing and IT innovation within the industry. The findings of this study had practical implications for industry practitioners and policymakers. Implementing effective GSCM practices and promoting green innovation could enhance firm performance in the manufacturing sector. Recognizing the importance of information sharing and IT innovation was crucial, as they significantly enhanced the effectiveness and efficiency of GSCM practices. This study contributed to the existing literature by examining the relationships among GSCM practices, green innovation, information sharing, IT innovation, and manufacturing firm performance. It provided insights into the mechanisms through which GSCM practices impacted firm performance, offering a comprehensive understanding of the role of green innovation and the moderating effects of information sharing and IT innovation.

1 Introduction

Resource depletion and environmental degradation have put businesses in a more difficult situation. The massive use of resources and energy has made the manufacturing sector a significant contributor to global environmental changes. It is Pakistan’s biggest and most vibrant economic sector. While certain green supply chain methods are employed in South East Asian countries such as the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Singapore ( Wang et al., 2020 ), there is little research on GSCM in developing countries. According to ( Zhang, 2023 ), China and India have just begun implementing environmental policies. GSCM is “the integration of environmental, sociological, and economic considerations in a supply chain that functions as connected activities starting from sourcing raw materials to post-consumption activities of products or services by the consumers” ( Ali et al., 2017 ). Developing hardware or software innovations that support environmentally friendly goods and procedures, such as improvements in energy efficiency, pollution avoidance, trash recycling, environmentally friendly product designs and corporate environmental management, is the emphasis of green innovation ( Sheng et al., 2023 ). Sharing information with supply chain partners involves exchanging important and private information. It enhances the durability and dependability of connections, which is important for supply chain management ( Soda and Aggarwal, 2022 ).

Prior research has delved into the impact of GSCM on diverse domains, encompassing organizational performance ( Abdallah and Al-Ghwayeen, 2020 ), firm performance ( Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020 ), environmental efficacy ( Le, 2020 ), environmental consciousness ( Sheng et al., 2023 ), as well as the challenges related to closed-loop and reverse supply chain processes ( Piprani et al., 2023 ) and sustainable outcome ( Alhamali, 2019 ). Recent scholarly literature has also examined the changing trends and forthcoming challenges in the domain of GSCM ( Alhamali, 2019 ). Moreover, many studies in this field have focused on the challenges hindering GSCM adoption across different industries and within developed nations ( Yu et al., 2021 ). It is worth noting that although there has been a surge in recent research on GSCM conducted in several countries like China, Vietnam, Uganda, Europe, and America, there’s a noticeable scarcity of studies about the South-Asian context. The previous study demonstrates that GSCM is frequently applied to enhance an organization’s environmental performance and competitive advantage. In the past, studies by ( Soda and Aggarwal, 2022 ) and others have looked at how GSCM affects business performance, firm performance, environmental performance, environmental awareness, closed-loop and reverse supply chain issues, and sustainable performance ( Foo et al., 2018 ). There are not enough in-depth studies examining how green supply chain management practices encourage green innovation within the manufacturing industry and how this mediates the relationship between GSCM and industry performance ( Khan et al., 2023 ). Information sharing and IT innovation’s moderating effects on GSCM and industry performance in the manufacturing industry are not well explored. More investigation is required to comprehend the effects of green innovation, knowledge sharing, and IT innovation on the efficacy of GSCM methods and what motivates performance enhancements. Insights and recommendations surrounding GSCM, green innovation, information exchange, and IT innovation will need further research to be industry-specific.

This study aimed to investigate the influence of GSCM practices on the performance of manufacturing firms. Additionally, the study sought to analyze the mediating effect of GI and the moderating effects of IS and ITI in the relationship between GSCM practices and the performance of manufacturing firms.

Resource-based View (RBV) highlights that GSCM is a valuable resource that can enhance environmental sustainability and supply chain efficiency, leading to superior performance for manufacturing firms ( Chatterjee et al., 2023 ). Innovation Diffusion Theory suggests that green innovation mediates the relationship between GSCM and firm performance. Green innovation involving eco-friendly products and processes is expected to reduce environmental impacts and attract environmentally conscious customers, enhancing manufacturing firms’ performance ( Qader et al., 2023 ). Contingency theory emphasizes that management practices’ effectiveness depends on external and internal factors. Effective IT innovation and information sharing can amplify the positive impact of GSCM on performance by improving communication, coordination, and decision-making processes ( Zhou et al., 2023 ).

Implementing GSCM innovations poses challenges in seamlessly integrating new technologies and sustainable practices throughout the supply chain. The initial significant investment required for these innovations may challenge short-term ROI justification. Keeping up with rapid technological advancements and ensuring alignment with sustainability objectives is crucial. Bridging the skill and knowledge gap through training is essential for successful GSCM implementation. Additionally, complying with evolving global environmental regulations is a continual challenge, necessitating ongoing process monitoring and adjustment ( Zhang, 2023 ). GSCM innovations drive sustainable competitive advantage by highlighting a company’s commitment to environmental responsibility, appealing to consumers and investors. Despite the initial high investment, GSCM innovations yield long-term cost savings through reduced waste, optimized resource usage, and streamlined processes. Embracing sustainability fosters market expansion by attracting a broader customer base valuing Eco-conscious products. GSCM encourages collaborative partnerships within the supply chain for joint development and implementation of sustainable solutions. Furthermore, GSCM cultivates a culture of innovation, enhancing brand image and corporate reputation as a sustainability pioneer ( Zhang, 2023 ).

Environmental impact assessments are crucial for studying the knowledge gap in GSCM’s impact on the performance of manufacturing enterprises for several reasons. First, we may better comprehend the connection between GSCM and the success of manufacturing organizations by studying in this area. Through examining the mediating and moderating roles of green innovation, information sharing, and IT innovation, it is possible to fill the research gap and add new knowledge and insights to existing literature. Second, looking into the research gap may have applications for businesses that make products. Companies may embrace and apply sustainable practices in their supply chains with more knowledge of how GSCM methods affect performance, possibly improving overall business results and environmental performance. Third, research in this field may educate regulators and policymakers about how well GSCM techniques work to achieve environmental objectives. It can offer fact-based information to help create laws and policies that motivate and incentive manufacturers to adopt sustainable practices. Fourth, recognizing the research gap in the performance of the manufacturing industry and GSCM enables the area to progress further. It offers a chance to investigate fresh theories, approaches, and models for measuring and assessing how GSCM activities affect environmental performance. This may help the establishment of industry benchmarks and best practices.

2 Literature review and supportive theories

Adopting green practices, including supply chain planning activities, had a favorable impact on operational performance, resulting in increased effectiveness and environmental sustainability. According to ( Gao et al., 2022 ), green supply chain strategies assess the electronics industry’s sustainable performance. According to their research, green supply chain planning and other green practices favorably impact sustainability, especially in the environmental, financial, and social spheres. Studies show that GSCP activities have a beneficial effect on the productivity of manufacturing companies. They illustrate possible advantages of incorporating environmentally friendly methods into supply chain planning procedures, such as improved operational performance, firm performance, and higher sustainability. The link between GSCP and environmental performance in the manufacturing business was investigated by ( Asghar, 2023 ). According to the study, businesses that adopted GSCP practices saw a considerable improvement in environmental performance measures, such as lower energy use, waste creation, and emissions (C.-C. Lee et al., 2016 ), study looked at the effects of GSCP on operational effectiveness and cost-cutting in the electronics sector. Luthra et al. (2017) concentrated on the contribution of GSCP to improving stakeholder integration and collaboration in the manufacturing sector. Chen et al. (2022) investigated how the GSCP affected regulatory compliance and risk management in the manufacturing industry. Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H1a. Green supply chain planning positively influences manufacturing firms’ performance.

Adomako and Tran. (2022) environmental or green purchasing refers to incorporating environmental considerations into purchasing policies, initiatives, and practices. Others have put forth more purchasing-focused definitions, contending that the term “green supply activities” refers to the purchasing process’s role in facilitating internally driven environmental activities like recycling, reuse, and source reduction ( Thahir et al., 2022 ). To improve supply chain performance, research into shifting production objectives from customers to suppliers has grown over the past 15 years. Supply chain managers may find “green supply” useful for improving their company’s record on corporate social responsibility, lowering reputational risks, cutting waste, and enhancing flexibility in response to changing environmental legislation. Green et al. (2012) , investigating the effects of green procurement practices on corporate competitiveness in the manufacturing industry in China, the study found that green procurement positively influenced corporate. These studies show that Green Procurement (GP) procedures improve the efficiency of the electronic manufacturing sector. Mollenkopf et al. (2022) examined the connection between general practitioners’ practices and environmental performance in the electronics sector. According to the survey, businesses implementing GP activities, such as employing environmentally friendly suppliers and sustainable products, saw a noticeable increase in their environmental performance. Klassen and Vereecke. (2012) examined how GP affected supplier cooperation and innovation in the electronics sector. The function of GP in risk management and resilience in the electronics manufacturing industry was the main topic of study ( Luthra et al., 2015 ). According to the survey, GP procedures like supplier selection based on environmental performance and sustainability activities benefit businesses. Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H1b. Green procurement positively influences manufacturing firms’ performance.

Integrating a green supply chain into manufacturing operations is necessary to link internal environmental management practices with suppliers and customers. This will ensure inter-firm cooperation, encourage mutual GSCM, and affect the company’s sustainable success ( Zhou et al., 2023 ). According to Kim and Chai (2017) , businesses participate in green supply chain activities to benefit from cheaper costs, greater revenues, and retained stakeholder values, which offer a sustainable competitive advantage. Shevchenko et al. (2023) , examined how operational efficiency in the electronics sector relates to green supply chain strategies. According to their research, green supply chain execution (GSCE) methods, such as waste management and energy conservation, favor operational performance, including cost savings, quality enhancements, and lead time reduction. These studies prove that GSCE procedures have an advantageous effect on the performance of the industrial sector. Shevchenko et al. (2022) examined the connection between GSCE and operational success in the industrial sector. Mathivathanan et al. (2018) , focused on how GSCE may improve supply chain integration and collaboration in the manufacturing sector. The effect of the GSCE on environmental performance in the electronics manufacturing sector was examined by ( Shang et al., 2019 ). According to the survey, businesses adopting GSCE procedures saw a considerable increase in environmental performance. Shaharudin et al. (2019) investigated how the GSCE affected consumer happiness and brand reputation in electronics. Based on these, we develop the following hypothesis:

H1c. Green supply chain execution positively influences manufacturing firms’ performance.

Fahim and Mahadi. (2022) , suggests using a strategic decision-making framework to manage a green supply chain. He says more companies are considering incorporating environmental practices into their short- and long-term objectives. Businesses have been encouraged to use more environmentally friendly practices through many initiatives. Organizations also carry out an increasing number of optional environmental activities and certain required programs governed by regulations. Reverse distribution network design principles and methods were reviewed ( Sant, 2022 ). Additionally, it has been said that companies must possess and use specific abilities to undertake green projects ( Ali et al., 2022 ). Zhou et al. (2023) reviewed green supply chain management techniques in the high-tech industry, including manufacturing. They emphasized the importance of ecologically friendly methods, including green manufacturing, packaging, and design. Luthra and Mangla. (2018) looked at the variables affecting the adoption of green supply chain strategies in the electronics manufacturing sector. In their research, they discovered several factors that influence the adoption of green practices in the supply chain, including stakeholder pressure, environmental rules, and supplier engagement. The link between GSCM procedures and organizational performance in the manufacturing business was explored ( Parkhomenko et al., 2023 ). They concluded that green efforts, such as converting the supply chain to greener procedures, can enhance organizational performance. Pagell et al. (2010) explore the effects of green supply chain migration on the financial performance of businesses in the manufacturing sector. The study’s findings show a link between green supply chain practices and improved financial performance for businesses, proving the benefits of sustainable sourcing. Therefore, we develop following hypothesis:

H1d. Green supply chain migration positively influences manufacturing firms’ performance.

Zhu et al. (2008) proposed several measures to assess GSCM regarding benchmarking, implementation, and ongoing progress. Greening a company’s supply chain may have several benefits, from cost savings to including suppliers in participatory decision-making and encouraging environmental innovation ( Awatara et al., 2020 ). Creating corporate-wide environmental initiatives and purchasing eco-friendly products from international markets are common business practices ( Fahim and Mahadi, 2022 ). According to research, industries do not think environmental protection is their duty. There was not enough information on environmental regulations and standards and the benefits of making things more environmentally friendly. Changing present investments, information systems, and attitudes would be too expensive ( Soda and Aggarwal, 2022 ). According to Walker et al. (2008) , there are more external barriers than internal restraints. In addition, Chen et al. (2022) assert that GSCM attempts to improve environmental management through environmental collaboration or by resolving common concerns that reduce the environmental hazards in supply chains. Sajan et al. (2017) investigated the function of ongoing development in green supply chain management in the industrial sector. Their study underscored the need to include green practices in current continuous improvement programs. A study on green supply chain management strategies was carried out by ( Govindan et al., 2016a ). They emphasized the value of ongoing endeavors to improve environmental sustainability and operational excellence in electronic manufacturing. According to research, teamwork and information sharing are key elements in encouraging creativity ( Li et al., 2018 ). Companies may foster a climate that supports green innovation by embracing GSCCI principles that promote open communication and cooperation. Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H1e. Green supply chain continuous improvement positively influences manufacturing firms’ performance.

According to D. Li et al. (2018) , “green innovation” refers to hardware or software advancements in technology that are connected to environmentally friendly goods or procedures. Such advancements include energy-saving techniques, trash recycling, environmentally friendly product designs, and corporate environmental management. In green supply chain management, the growing significance of green innovation is emerging as a potential area where businesses may minimize the direct and indirect environmental effects of an organization’s final product ( Lee and Kim, 2011 ). To help manufacturers create new goods, the green innovation concept may assist the implementation of GSCM by supplying them with fresh concepts, methods, or technologies. According to Zailani et al. (2011) , green innovation entails continuously looking for methods to innovate at every level of the supply chain to obtain a competitive edge and lessen environmental issues in business. As a result, it can be said that the notion of green innovation underpins the GSCM processes. Lee et al. (2012) , who asserted that the core innovation underpinning supplier commitment to green product development to boost competitive advantage and environmental performance, corroborate this argument. Sustainable supply chain methods in several industries were examined by ( Pagell and Wu, 2009 ). According to the report, efficient green supply chain planning is significant in driving green innovation, including incorporating environmental factors into product design, purchasing, and logistics choices. According to Zhu and Wu. (2022) , they have examined manufacturing companies’ green supply chain collaboration and sustainability performance. The study stressed that green supply chain planning, as a team effort, promotes the interchange of information, tools, and ideas required for developing novel solutions. The effect of GSCM procedures on supplier selection was examined ( Saturnino Neto et al., 2014 ). According to the report, green supply chain planning fosters green innovation, including environmental considerations in supplier selection decisions. Companies might promote green innovation across the supply chain by partnering with suppliers committed to the environment and providing eco-friendly goods or services. Therefore, we develop following hypothesis:

H2a. Green supply chain planning positively influences green innovation.

Environmentally conscious organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) were compared to green procurement practices ( Boiral, 2009 ). Employees’ voluntary efforts that enhance organizational effectiveness are included in OCBs. The study discovered that green procurement methods were favorably related to environmental OCBs, such as the invention of fresh concepts and procedures. Sant (2022) , looked at how green buying strategies affected environmental performance in the industrial sector. The study discovered that businesses with green procurement policies had greater rates of green innovation. Businesses are more likely to provide creative solutions and products with low environmental effects when they use environmentally friendly purchasing methods, such as choosing suppliers based on their environmental performance or buying eco-friendly materials ( Karim et al., 2023 ). According to J. Liu et al. (2018) , green procurement positively impacts innovation performance, showing that businesses are more inclined to pursue green innovation if they prioritize environmentally friendly buying strategies. The study also emphasized the mediating function of environmental management systems, suggesting that these systems aid in converting environmentally friendly purchasing patterns into creative results. Calza et al. (2021) , investigated the link between manufacturing companies’ green product creation and environmental policies, such as green buying. According to the study, green procurement businesses were more likely to finance and create ecologically friendly products. Therefore, we develop following hypothesis:

H2b. Green procurement positively influences on green innovation.

According to Shevchenko et al. (2023) , green supply chain execution, which entails putting green policies and procedures in place throughout the supply chain, fosters an innovative culture. Rexhepi et al. (2023) provided empirical data to encourage firms to adopt green innovation to enhance environmental performance and boost their market competitiveness. This study discovered that GSCM methods favorably impact green managerial, green process, and green product innovation. To investigate the impact of green innovation in more depth, this research also recommended extending to additional GSCM techniques. An investigation of the incorporation of green innovation into logistic services as GSCM practice was done in Malaysia ( Zailani et al., 2011 ). Studies have examined the connection between innovation and GSCM (Y. Chen et al., 2022 ; Sarkis et al., 2011 ). The study stressed how Green Supply Chain Execution, a crucial element of GSCM, fosters innovation by facilitating the adoption of green technology, procedures, and behaviors. The relationship between green supply chain practices, innovation dissemination, and organizational improvement was examined ( Negri et al., 2021 ). According to the report, using green supply chains helps green practices spread throughout firms, spurring creativity and better environmental performance. An investigation was conducted on the effects of supply chain integration on environmental performance ( Hajmohammad et al., 2023 ). The study underlined how integrating suppliers and customers into an efficient green supply chain might lead to innovations in environmental practices. Therefore, we develop following hypothesis:

H2c. Green supply chain execution positively influences green innovation.

Innovation can be aided by “green supply chain migration,” which entails moving environmentally friendly industrial processes and supply chain activities ( Hajmohammad et al., 2023 ). Businesses may foster innovation and better environmental performance by shifting to greener suppliers, implementing sustainable practices, and embracing cleaner technology. The study examined the connection between the sustainable performance of manufacturing companies and green supply chain integration ( Vachon and Klassen, 2008 ; Pinto, 2020 ). As a component of green supply chain integration, green supply chain migration entails rearranging supply chain operations to improve environmental performance (Y. Chen et al., 2022 ). The link between environmental collaboration and innovation performance was studied ( Bals and Tate, 2018 ). According to the research, green supply chain migration can promote green innovation by allowing supply chain participants to work together on environmental issues. Even though little research has directly examined the connection between green supply chain migration and green innovation, these findings show that green supply chain migration may favor promoting innovation. The acceptance and innovation of green supply chain management were the subjects of research ( Tung and Baird, 2023 ). The researchers discovered that businesses were more likely to participate in green innovation activities when they embraced green supply chain management methods. Studies in several industries in China concluded that companies with more environmentally friendly supply chain processes are more likely to engage in environmental innovation (Feng et al., 2022. Zhu et al., 2007). Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H2d. Green supply chain migration positively influences green innovation.

A study compared manufacturing businesses’ performance ( Sant, 2022 ) to see how GSCM procedures affected performance. The study discovered that GSCCI fostered creativity. The application of green buying methods in the electrical and electronic industries were found effective ( Yalcin et al., 2020 ). According to the study, green procurement’s ongoing development has a favorable impact on creating novel procedures and goods. The development of greener goods and processes within the sector was sparked by enterprises actively searching out more environmentally friendly materials, suppliers, and methods. According to Kannan et al. (2014) , businesses were more likely to engage in green innovation if they integrated GSCCI methods into their supplier selection process. According to Sarkis and Zhu. (2018) , green innovation is favorably impacted by GSCM practices that are continuously improved, such as the use of greener technology, waste reduction efforts, and the installation of environmental management systems. Businesses encouraged the creation of novel solutions in line with sustainability objectives by continuously improving environmental performance and looking for chances for improvement across the supply chain. M. Wang et al. (2020) examined the connection between environmentally friendly supply chain management techniques and green innovation in the electronics sector. Researchers discovered that businesses were more likely to create and apply green innovations if they continuously developed their green supply chain strategies. Linton et al. (2007) indicated that continuous improvement programs in sustainable supply chains foster innovation by enticing businesses to investigate novel technologies, procedures, and collaborations that lessen their negative effects on the environment. Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H2e. Green supply chain continuous improvement positively influences green innovation.

Green innovation has a beneficial impact on cost-effectiveness as found by Shin and Cho. (2022) , they indicated that manufacturers could save money by using less energy, creating less trash, and using fewer raw materials. Zheng et al. (2018) , demonstrated that green innovation significantly promoted product innovation, creating environmentally friendly electronic equipment. Stakeholder perception and financial performance are enhanced through green innovation provided evidence that stakeholders, such as clients, shareholders, and workers, viewed businesses that adopted sustainable practices more favorably ( Yu et al., 2017 ; Sarkis and Zhu, 2018 ). This favorable view may increase client loyalty, sales, and superior financial performance. Collaboration in the supply chain and efficiency improvements are encouraged through green innovation. According to Mehta et al. (2019) , cooperative ties between manufacturers and their suppliers made sharing environmental best practices, resources, and information easier. These partnerships promoted innovation, efficiency improvements and competitive advantage. Therefore, we develop following hypothesis:

H3. Green innovation positively influences manufacturing firms’ performance.

Green innovation in the industrial sector aids businesses in adhering to environmental standards and reducing related risks. According to ( Cao et al., 2018 ), companies that actively implemented green practices had a lower chance of environmental breaches and the resulting fines. ( Fiorini et al., 2022 ), The study examined the connection between green innovation, GSCM practices, and manufacturing company performance. According to this study, green innovation is positively influenced by GSCM methods, which improve firm performance. From the resource-based view (RBV) standpoint ( Luthra et al., 2017 ), the research looked at the mediating influence of green innovation in another study. According to the RBV, businesses with distinctive assets and skills have an edge over rivals. A crucial tool for enabling the conversion of GSCM practices into improved performance results was identified as green innovation. Within the environmental collaboration framework ( Zhu et al., 2017 ), research concentrated on the mediating role of green innovation in the link between GSCM and business performance. According to the study, GSCM positively impacted environmental cooperation, encouraging green innovation. In their investigation of the link between GSCM and company performance ( Bai et al., 2017 ), they looked at the mediating function of environmental technological innovation. The results showed that GSCM had a favorable impact on environmental technology innovation, which benefited company performance. Therefore, we develop following hypothesis:

H4. Green innovation mediates the relationship between green supply chain management practices and manufacturing firms’ performance.

Tian et al. (2014) , investigated the connection between GSCM, information sharing, and manufacturing business performance. The findings showed that the association between GSCM and company performance was mitigated by information sharing. Specifically, the beneficial effect of GSCM on business performance was amplified when information sharing was substantial ( Shaharudin et al., 2019 ). This shows that efficient information exchange improves GSCM procedures’ performance results, research concentrated on the moderating role of supply chain integration in the link between GSCM and business performance, including information sharing ( Thahir et al., 2022 ). The research discovered that this link was positively reduced by supply chain integration. The beneficial effect of GSCM on company performance was bolstered when information exchange and collaboration among supply chain partners were strong ( Chatterjee et al., 2023 ). This emphasizes how crucial information exchange is to the whole supply chain integration process. Govindan et al. (2015) examined the moderating impact of information sharing in the link between GSCM and green product innovation, a crucial component of sustainable company performance. The moderating role of information sharing in the link between GSCM and environmental collaboration ( Seuring et al., 2022 ). The study discovered that this association was positively controlled by knowledge sharing. The benefits of GSCM on environmental collaboration were boosted when businesses adopted efficient information-sharing procedures. These studies show that the link between GSCM and the performance of manufacturing organizations is moderated by information sharing. Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H5. Information sharing moderates the relationship between green supply chain management practices and manufacturing firms’ performance.

IT innovation increases businesses’ productivity and market share by introducing new goods and services, client orientation, response to market changes, and innovation for enhanced company performance ( Almehairbi et al., 2022 ). However, Brynjolfsson and Saunders. (2010) argue that organizational structures and work processes must also be improved to successfully implement IT innovation. According to Misuraca et al. (2017) , IT innovation is the development of new methods, theories, or products for the IT industry while considering social, political or ecological settings. By offering new goods, services, solutions, and working methods, IT innovation is essential for improving a company’s value chain ( Revilla et al., 2020 ). Furthermore, research has demonstrated that IT innovation moderates the link between GSCM and business performance, demonstrating that higher levels of IT innovation led to increased performance from GSCM practices ( Kuo and Smith, 2018 ). According to research on the importance of IT in GSCM practices, IT is essential for integrating and coordinating different green supply chain activities, improving both environmental and overall business performance ( Montabon et al., 2016 ). According to Y. Liu et al. (2019) investigated the link between IT, GSCM, and business performance. According to the findings, GSCM practices supported by IT benefit business performance, and IT skills play a moderating role in this connection. Innovation in IT improves the efficiency of GSCM procedures and boosts the productivity of manufacturing companies. The research results, which highlight the significance of IT innovation in fostering the advantages of green supply chain practices, show that IT competence greatly improves the favorable impact of GSCM on company performance ( Hu et al., 2019 ). Therefore, we develop the following hypothesis:

H6. Information technology innovation moderate the relationship between green supply chain management practices and manufacturing firms’ performance.

2.1 Supportive theories

The Resource-Based View (RBV) theory underscores the strategic utilization of organizational resources and capabilities to gain a competitive edge by identifying strengths and weaknesses through resource and skill analysis. In the context of this study, embracing eco-friendly practices and innovations expands the resource base within the framework of GSCM, ultimately augmenting performance and competitiveness within the manufacturing sector (S. S. Ali et al., 2021). The Diffusion of Innovation Theory delves into the dissemination of novel concepts or technologies within a social system, providing critical insights into the integration of ideas like green and IT technologies in businesses and diverse sectors ( Menzli et al., 2022 ). Understanding and adopting this theory is essential for implementing and diffusing such innovations in supply chain activities and GSCM. Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) theory explores the impacts of internal and external transactions on governance. In this study, they recognize the significance of collaborative efforts and knowledge sharing among stakeholder’s aids in analyzing how information sharing and IT innovation moderate the relationship between GSCM practices and cost reduction, thereby optimizing green supply chain practices and boosting productivity ( Ali and Kaur, 2021 ). The Social Exchange Theory underscores the importance of balanced partnerships, considering costs and rewards. This aligns with the study’s exploration of how information sharing among supply chain partners facilitates knowledge exchange and cooperative partnerships, portraying green innovation as a means to enhance organizational performance and gain a competitive advantage ( Davis-Sramek et al., 2022 ). Resource Dependence Theory accentuates the necessity of effectively managing ties with resource suppliers for organizational survival and success. In this study, the theory aids in comprehending the dynamics and effects of implementing green and IT innovations into GSCM, shedding light on how manufacturing businesses strive to reduce their dependency on non-renewable resources and manage associated risks linked to environmental legislation ( Ali et al., 2022 ). Lastly, Institutional Theory explores organizational responses to external environmental pressures and challenges. This study can be employed to examine how manufacturing companies respond to institutional pressure to implement green supply chain practices. Information sharing and IT innovation are pivotal in ensuring compliance with institutional standards and improving environmental performance ( Nureen et al., 2022 ).

Based on study hypotheses and literature analysis, researchers developed a theoretical framework given below in Figure 1 .

FIGURE 1 . Proposed theoretical framework.

3 Methodology

A systematic collection of questions focusing on GSCM practices and their effect on the performance of manufacturing organizations are created for questionnaire research, with the mediating and moderating roles of green innovation, information sharing, and information technology innovation. In a research study, applying a questionnaire involves defining objectives, identifying the target audience, designing the questionnaire, addressing ethical considerations, distributing and administering it, verifying data completeness and accuracy, analyzing the data statistically, reporting findings, and gathering feedback for future refinement. Questionnaires are issued to gather opinions, attitudes, and impressions from the appropriate participants, such as supply chain managers, business experts, and other stakeholders. A web link to the survey questionnaire is distributed to participating companies. Data were collected between January to May 2023.

The researcher contacted the HR departments of manufacturing companies to learn about interesting participants, using online platforms dedicated to the manufacturing sector for data collection. In this study, random sampling was employed to select participants from the target population, which comprised employees working in manufacturing firms in Pakistan, by distributing questionnaires to 300 manufacturing companies. 267 questionnaires from the intended audience were received, which indicates a remarkable degree of involvement in these surveys. Out of these, 18 were deemed incomplete and thus excluded, leaving us with 248 valid questionnaires; nine contained outlier responses among the 18 excluded questionnaires. These outliers were specifically found within the incomplete or improperly filled questionnaires and were excluded because these incomplete questionnaires constituted more than 5% of the missing data.

Consequently, our final dataset consists of 248 questionnaires that were fully completed and deemed accurate. After the initial invitation to complete the survey, the researcher sends two additional email reminders to encourage participation. Respondents are assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. They are not required to disclose any personal information.

Using random sampling in the study enhances representativeness, reduces bias, ensures statistical validity, and enhances external validity. It enables researchers to make reliable inferences about the association between GSCM practices and manufacturing industry performance, allowing for broader applicability of the findings.

An analysis using a t -test revealed no statistically significant difference ( p < 0.05) in the responses based on industry, indicating that industry type did not have a notable impact. Additionally, employing the methodology outlined by ( Shaharudin et al., 2019 ), we found no significant difference between early and late respondents, suggesting the absence of systematic non-response bias. To mitigate social desirability response bias, we ensured anonymity in the questionnaires to encourage candid responses. The questions were impartial and non-leading, and confidentiality was guaranteed. The study refrained from discussing socially desirable answers and conducted pilot testing to address potential bias issues. We utilized the Harman single-factor test that Podsakoff and Organ (1986) outlined to evaluate the potential common method variance. The results of this test demonstrated that no single factor was the predominant source of variance in the variables. This finding suggests that substantial bias of this nature was not a notable concern.

Furthermore, we conducted assessments to address multicollinearity, adhering to the criteria outlined ( Sheng et al., 2023 ). The results demonstrated that the model was free from multicollinearity, as all variance inflation factor (VIF) values were below the threshold of 3.3, as shown in Table 9 .

When the entire response rate in manufacturing companies is considered, it is 83%. Within the context of the manufacturing business, this response rate is comparatively high, demonstrating a high level of interest in participating and contributing their perspectives among the targeted participants. Table 1 provides the demographic responses from the respondents and companies.

TABLE 1 . Demographic profile of respondents and companies.

Before doing more complicated statistical analysis, descriptive statistics give a foundational understanding of the variables. They support the selection of statistical tests and models by researchers and the calculation of the necessary sample sizes for upcoming investigations. Descriptive statistics give baseline information, examine data features, make it easier to compare variables, evaluate data quality, and assist data-driven decision-making. Table 2 displays the descriptive statistics of the variables.

TABLE 2 . Descriptive statistics of variables.

For this investigation, the survey tool was a regular questionnaire. There were three sections in the questionnaire. While the second half sought to obtain demographic information about the participants’ jobs, the first piece concentrated on learning more about the participants’ backgrounds. The final portion evaluated ideas concerning GSCM practices, green innovation, information sharing IT innovation and the performance of manufacturing companies. A five-point Likert scale, from strongly disagreeing to strongly agreeing, was used to rate each item on the survey. Partial least squares (PLS) analysis was used to evaluate the gathered data. Table 3 contains information on the sources of the measurement devices.

TABLE 3 . Measurement instruments’ source.

4 Results interpretations

With a focus primarily on prediction, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) enables the simultaneous study of several correlations between variables. In this method, measurement and structural models are created and analyzed to assess the model’s goodness of fit. PLS-SEM investigates the alignment between the model obtained from population data and the presumed theoretical model through a series of studies ( Sarstedt et al., 2022b ). Using the Smart PLS 4 program, PLS-SEM was carried out in the current investigation ( Sarstedt et al., 2022a ). The study was carried out in two separate processes, the first of which included analyzing the measurement model and the second of which involved testing the structural model.

4.1 Measurement model (outer model)

For researchers, the measuring model is crucial because it directs the choice and assessment of measures, assures the reliability and validity of the constructs, and facilitates hypothesis testing. To evaluate the trustworthiness of the results, we use statistical tests.

4.1.1 Composite reliability, Cronbach’s alpha and AVE

It is considered reliable if an indicator’s loading factor exceeds 0.7 and its average variance extracted (AVE) exceeds 0.5. Cronbach’s alpha, which must be greater than 0.7, and composite reliability (CR), which must also be greater than 0.7, are used to assess reliability. According to the PLS analysis results, all indicators are within the permissible range of values, verifying the whole inquiry. Table 4 presents the outcomes.

TABLE 4 . Reliability and validity measures.

4.1.2 Discriminate validity

Using the Fornell-Larcker and the HTMT criterion, discriminant validity was examined, which assesses the validity of components related to other constructs within the model. Examining the correlations between the constructs, these criteria help determine if they are distinct. The square roots of the average variance extracted for each construct are compared to the correlations across constructs using the Fornell-Larcker criteria. Table 5 shows that every value in each associated column is less than the square roots of the AVE values in that column. These results suggest that the Fornell-Larcker criteria are completely met.

TABLE 5 . Correlations and discriminate validity.

We assumed that the correlation criteria accurately measured the HTMT coefficients. If a construct’s HTMT value is less than 0.90, its discriminant validity is deemed good ( Henseler et al., 2015 ). It is clear from Table 6 that the HTMT criteria values are below the suggested cutoff point of 0.90. We also did a bootstrap analysis to evaluate the confidence intervals for HTMT. The findings showed that the value of 1 was not included in the confidence intervals. These findings support the constructs’ discriminant validity.

TABLE 6 . HTMT analysis.

4.1.3 Cross-loading

Cross-loading occurs when an item loads significantly on multiple factors, causing interpretation complexity in the underlying factor structure. The assessment involves checking if observed variables load notably on more than one latent factor. Items with substantial loadings on multiple factors are deemed to have cross-loading. Analyzing cross-loading entails reviewing the factor loading matrix from factor analysis or SEM. Table 7 displays cross-loading between observed variables (items) and their intended latent factors.

TABLE 7 . Cross loading.

4.1.4 Model fit results

The evaluated model fit indices demonstrate a robust fit. According to ( Henseler and Sarstedt, 2013 ), the Goodness-of-Fit (GoF) value of 0.54 significantly exceeds the recommended threshold of 0.36, confirming a solid fit. Moreover, the R 2 values for MFP and GI, measuring 0.413 and 0.512, respectively, surpass the suggested lower limit of 0.1, as proposed by ( Akossou and Palm, 2013 ). Additionally, the Q2 values for the mentioned parameters are all greater than 0, aligning with established criteria. Specifically, the Q2 values for MFP and GI are 0.245 and 0.330, respectively. The Normed Fit Index (NFI) score of 0.908 exceeds the recommended threshold 0.9 specified by ( Kenny, 2015 ), indicating a good fit. Furthermore, the Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR) value of 0.035 is notably below the 0.08 cutoff set by ( Ramayah et al., 2017 ). These comprehensive results affirm that the model adheres to the existing literature’s high standards, underlining its strong predictive power. The results of the Model fit are shown in table 8 .

TABLE 8 . Results of model fit.

4.2 Structural model

The relationships between the model’s constructs are shown in the structural model. These links align with the theoretical model’s hypotheses ( Figures 2 , 3 ). Using the PLS technique and bootstrapping, the structural model was evaluated. Initial evaluation of the VIF values for the structural model’s collinearity revealed no issues with collinearity. The VIF values for each indicator in the model are shown in Table 9 . The VIF values in the table often stay below 5, indicating that multicollinearity between the variables is not very prevalent. It is important to remember that a VIF score of 5 or higher is a regularly used threshold for recognizing considerable multicollinearity. In this instance, the highest VIF value in the table is 2.505, which is connected to the variable IS2 and denotes reasonably low multicollinearity.

FIGURE 2 . The Structural Model (Direct Relation).

FIGURE 3 . The Structural Model (mediation and moderation).

TABLE 9 . Collinearity—VIF analysis.

The study model and the analysis results based on Smart PLS software of direct relation are shown in Figure 2 .

The hypotheses in the structural model were evaluated using path analysis, as presented in Tables 10 , 11 . The analysis confirmed that all the direct effects examined in the model were statistically significant. Table 10 revealed significant relation among GSCP and MFP ( β = 0.43, t = 2.267 p < 0.001), GP and MFP ( β = 0.29, t = 2.3.931, p < 0.001), GSCE and MFP ( β = 0.46, t = 4.941, p < 0.001), GSCM and MFP ( β = 0.61, t = 5.603, p < 0.001), GSCCI and MFP (β = 0.58,t = 1.927, p < 0.001), GSCP and GI ( β = 0.27, t = 5.050 p < 0.001), GP and GI ( β = 0.31, t = 2.699, p < 0.001), GSCE and GI ( β = 0.31, t = 1.611 p < 0.001), GSCM and GI ( β = 0.69, t = 2.527 p < 0.001), GSCCI and GI ( β = 0.44, t = 3.860, p < 0.001) hence H1a, H1b, H1c H1d, H1e and H2a, H2b, H2c H2d, H2e are accepted.

TABLE 10 . Path coefficients—direct effects.

TABLE 11 . Mediation effect results.

The study model and the analysis results based on Smart PLS software of mediation and moderation relation are shown in Figure 3 .

The findings reveal a direct effect of GI and MFP ( β = 0.55, t = 5.135 p < 0.001) proved to be a significant and statistically significant indirect effect of green supply chain management practices on manufacturing firms’ performance through the mediating role of green innovation ( β = 0.45, t = 7.089, p < 0.001). Thus, H3 and H4 are accepted. The mediation and moderation analysis results can be found in Tables 11 , 12 below.

TABLE 12 . Moderation effect results.

The findings reveal a moderating effect of information sharing and information technology innovation on the relationship between green supply chain management practices and manufacturing firms ( β = 0.59, t = 0.293 p < 0.001) and ( β = 0.47, t = 2.267, t = 2.000 p < 0.001) respectively, thus H5 and H6 are accepted.

5 Discussions and results

This study investigates how GSCM practices affect manufacturing companies’ performance. It examines the link between GSCM practices and manufacturing businesses’ performance, the mediating function of GI, and the moderating impact of information exchange and information technology innovation. The findings of this study are divided into two groups according to two different hypotheses: direct impacts and mediation and moderation effects.

Through increased productivity, cost reductions, and resource efficiency, GSCP has a favorable impact on MFP. Significant association exists between GSCP and MFP ( β = 0.43, p < 0.001). Adoption of the GSCP enhances long-term sustainability, stakeholder perception, and financial performance. To gain a competitive edge, RBV uses special resources to boost GSCP’s beneficial effect on MFP ( Sodiq et al., 2022 ). The institutional theory further supports this link, as organizations adopt sustainability standards to be accepted and legitimated, enhancing performance.

With a statistically significant association of ( β = 0.29, p < 0.001), GP favorably increases MFP. The institutional theory supports this connection, as businesses follow evolving sustainability norms to obtain acceptability and legitimacy. Manufacturing companies may improve their reputation and performance by using GP practices ( Negri et al., 2021 ).

GSCE significantly correlates with MFP in a good direction ( β = 0.46, p < 0.001). According to the RBV hypothesis, organizations with distinctive and priceless resources, like GSCE practices, obtain a competitive edge. Manufacturing firms may increase resource efficiency, save costs, and create capacities for higher performance by integrating eco-friendly processes and technology ( Shevchenko et al., 2022 ; Rexhepi et al., 2023 ).

GSCM positively impacts MFP ( β = 0.61, p < 0.001). The institutional theory supports this connection, as businesses adhere to sustainability standards to achieve recognition and legitimacy. Manufacturing companies improve their reputation by switching to a green supply chain, which benefits performance. The adoption of GSCM boosts productivity, cost savings, and market competitiveness by enhancing efficiency, supplier relationships, and brand reputation ( Sarkis and Zhu, 2018 ).

GSCCI favorably impacts GI ( β = 0.58, p < 0.001). This connection is supported by the RBV, which shows that organizations with a continuous improvement culture centered on sustainability have a competitive edge. Companies may boost their resources and capacities, which increases their potential for green innovation and improves overall performance by investing in GSCCI programs ( Yalcin et al., 2020 ; Chatterjee et al., 2023 ).

GSCP significantly affects GI favorably ( β = 0.27, p < 0.001). The GSCP encourages cooperation and information sharing among supply chain participants, creating a knowledge-sharing culture that supports GI. According to the Institutional Theory, businesses must adhere to sustainability standards to be accepted as legitimate ( Shevchenko et al., 2023 ).

GP significantly correlates with GI in a good direction ( β = 0.31, p < 0.001). Through supply chain coordination, the desire for green solutions, and a focus on resource efficiency, GP promotes innovation, which enhances the creation of environmentally friendly products and operational performance. Green innovation, market competitiveness, and environmental performance are expected to improve for businesses prioritizing green buying ( Sant, 2022 ; Sheng et al., 2023 ).

GSCE significantly correlates with GI in a good direction ( β = 0.22, p < 0.001). Collaboration, continuous improvement, and tracking of environmental performance are encouraged by GSCE, which results in the creation of environmentally friendly products and operational enhancements. Improved Green Innovation, market competitiveness, and overall environmental performance result from placing a higher priority on GSCE (Y.-S. Chen, 2008 ).

GSCM significantly affects GI favorably ( β = 0.69, p < 0.001). The institutional hypothesis supports this connection, as businesses adhere to sustainability standards to achieve recognition and legitimacy. Adopting GSCM encourages an innovative culture that supports green innovation and improves performance ( Hao et al., 2022 ).

GGSCC significantly affects GI favorably ( β = 0.44, p < 0.001). GSCCI promotes a learning and environmental awareness culture by exchanging best practices and knowledge across the supply chain. This results in more GI projects and ideas, enhancing sustainability and competitive advantage ( Awan et al., 2019 ). The GSCCI improves firms’ resources and capacities for better GI and overall performance, which is supported by the RBV theory.

GI significantly impacts MFP in a good way ( β = 0.55, p < 0.001). Businesses get a competitive edge and draw eco-aware clients by providing environmentally friendly goods and services, which boosts productivity in the manufacturing sector ( Chiou et al., 2011 ; Sarkis and Zhu, 2018 ).

GSCM and MFP are related, and GI partially mediates this link with a significant mediation effect ( β = 0.45, p < 0.001). By supporting GI, GSCM indirectly has a good impact on MFP. Businesses that implement sustainable practices across the whole supply chain develop cutting-edge concepts and technology that enhance overall performance in the manufacturing sector ( Zailani et al., 2012 ).

IS and GSCM have a statistically significant interaction impact ( β = 0.59, p < 0.001). Data-driven decisions with a positive performance impact are made possible by timely and accurate information. As a result, GSCM efficiency, manufacturing processes, and overall performance are improved. SI on environmental performance, supply chain operations, and consumer preferences help connect plans with sustainability objectives ( Green et al., 2012 ).

IITI and GSCM have a statistically significant interaction impact ( β = 0.47, p < 0.001). Data about green practices and supply chains may be processed and analyzed thanks to IT developments like data analytics and sophisticated software. Utilizing IT to get insights enhances GSCM implementation, which results in improved MFP ( Zhu et al., 2005 ; Wang and Sarkis, 2017 ; Revilla et al., 2020 ).

Integrating environmentally friendly production procedures and sustainable purchasing policies into GSCM processes is essential. This approach helps in reducing waste, emissions, and environmental degradation. Proper disposal and recycling procedures further contribute to the eco-friendly approach, aligning with sustainability objectives. Moreover, fostering a culture of GI within the organization is crucial ( Tian et al., 2014 ). Establishing cross-functional green innovation teams enhances cooperation, information sharing, and the development of creative sustainability solutions, placing sustainability at the core of the company’s ethos. Technologies not only optimize supply chain processes but also support sustainability efforts. Investing in research and development (R&D) for eco-friendly solutions in electronic manufacturing showcases a commitment to innovation and environmentally responsible practices ( Wang et al., 2020 ). Furthermore, transparency, information exchange, and joint problem-solving are essential to such collaborations. Leveraging information-sharing platforms and technology facilitates real-time communication and cooperation, enhancing supply chain visibility and efficiency ( Zhang, 2023 ).

Efficient green supply chain planning leads to cost savings, resource optimization, and improved performance for manufacturing firms ( Govindan et al., 2016b ). Green procurement practices enhance company performance by reducing costs, enhancing reputation, and meeting regulatory requirements ( Pagell et al., 2010 ). Effective execution of a green supply chain, including sustainable production processes and logistics, results in enhanced performance through reduced waste and increased efficiency ( Do et al., 2020 ). Transitioning to a green supply chain, involving eco-friendly processes and technologies, is associated with improved performance due to reduced environmental impact and cost savings ( Lee et al., 2014 ). Continuous improvement in the green supply chain enhances performance by promoting innovation, reducing waste, and increasing efficiency, contributing to a competitive advantage ( Zaid et al., 2018 ). Green supply chain planning, integrating environmental considerations, stimulates green innovation by fostering creativity and sustainable practices ( Govindan et al., 2016b ). Green procurement practices encourage innovation by fostering collaboration and knowledge sharing with suppliers to develop environmentally friendly products and processes ( Pagell et al., 2010 ). Implementing a green supply chain involves deploying innovative technologies and practices that encourage green innovation, improving a firm’s environmental performance ( Zaid et al., 2018 ). Transitioning to a green supply chain often necessitates innovation in processes, products, and technologies, fostering an environment conducive to further green innovation ( Pagell et al., 2010 ). Continuous improvement in the green supply chain supports a culture of innovation, driving the development of new sustainable solutions and practices ( Do et al., 2020 ). Green innovation positively impacts a firm’s performance by creating market differentiation, reducing costs through sustainable practices, and meeting consumer demand for environmentally friendly products ( Govindan et al., 2016b ). Green innovation acts as a mediator between green supply chain practices and firm performance, enabling effective implementation and integration of sustainable strategies ( Zaid et al., 2018 ). Information technology innovation can moderate the relationship between green supply chain practices and firm performance by enhancing data analytics, supply chain visibility, and decision-making for better sustainability outcomes ( Do et al., 2020 ).

5.1 Conclusion

The favorable effect of GSCM on the performance of manufacturing businesses implies that incorporating ecologically sound supply chain strategies might enhance performance results for manufacturing enterprises. This result is consistent with the rising awareness of the significance of sustainability in corporate operations ( Sarkis et al., 2011 ). According to the mediated function of GI, GSCM favorably affects the performance of manufacturing enterprises through GI This shows enhancing the benefits of GSCM on performance outcomes through developing and adopting novel green practices and technology ( Zhu et al., 2008 ). Additionally, the regulated influence of information sharing and IT innovation implies that when there is efficient information exchange and the adoption of IT innovations, the favorable impact of GSCM on manufacturing sector performance is reinforced. Considering this, it is clear how crucial information management and technology development are to enabling and optimizing the advantages of GSCM deployment.

5.2 Theoretical implications

The study adds to the knowledge about how GI mediates the relationship between GSCM and MIP. Study underlines the need to integrate sustainable practices and eco-friendly technologies throughout the supply chain by demonstrating the beneficial effects of green innovation ( Ali and Kaur, 2021 ) This integration explains the processes through which GSCM practices can result in better performance results. By illuminating the moderating roles of information exchange and IT innovation in the link between GSCM and MIP, the study also adds to the theoretical body of research. To maximize the influence of GSCM practices on performance outcomes, it emphasizes the significance of efficient information exchange systems ( Ali et al., 2022 ). This finding emphasizes the importance of collaboration, openness, and knowledge sharing among supply chain partners and stakeholders to maximize GSCM initiatives’ benefits. Moreover, incorporating IT innovations can improve the efficacy and efficiency of GSCM implementation, ultimately resulting in better performance outcomes ( Ali et al., 2023 ). By including GSCM, GI, IS, and IT innovation in the context of MIP, the study contributes to the theoretical creation of a comprehensive framework. This paradigm thoroughly explains how various components interact with one another and how they all affect performance results. From a theoretical standpoint, sustainable practices are influenced by institutional pressures: coercive/regulative forces from formal regulations, normative forces from prevailing norms and international standards, and mimetic/cognitive forces in response to competitive and stakeholder uncertainties ( Nezakati et al., 2016 ). These pressures, including governmental regulations, institutional norms, global environmental standards, and stakeholder expectations, drive the adoption and implementation of sustainable practices ( Ali and Kaur, 2021 ).

5.3 Practical implications

Companies may increase their overall performance and operational efficiency by applying sustainable practices across the supply chain, such as cutting waste, maximizing energy use, and introducing eco-friendly technology. Businesses are more likely to produce better performance outcomes if they actively pursue environmentally friendly activities and concentrate on creating sustainable goods, processes, and technology. Manufacturing companies may gain a competitive edge and fulfill the rising demand for sustainable solutions by encouraging and supporting green innovation. According to the report, GSCM and the success of manufacturing enterprises are related to information sharing and IT innovation. The impact of GSCM practices on performance outcomes may be increased through exchanging environmental data, best practices, and expertise relevant to sustainable supply chain management. Supply chain partners, industry stakeholders, and appropriate authorities should collaborate and communicate openly to increase performance and sustainability across the manufacturing sector. Adopting modern IT technologies, such as data analytics, cloud computing, and digital platforms, can facilitate the integration and administration of sustainable practices in the supply chain. Utilizing IT innovation may boost green supply chain operations’ efficiency, transparency, and traceability, improving overall performance and sustainability results.

5.4 Limitations and future research

The study’s conclusions are context-specific due to unique qualities that can impact the relationships between GSCM, green innovation, and performance. Caution should be exercised when applying the findings to different areas, nations, or sectors. The study identifies various moderators and a mediator in the link between GSCM practices and performance, but the precise causal directions have not been extensively studied. To advance understanding, industry-specific best practices and strategies can be established through cross-sector data comparison. Long-term research can be conducted to capture the dynamic nature of these interactions over time and understand causation better. Additionally, investigating how GSCM practices, green innovation, and performance in the electronic manufacturing industry relate to external factors like legislative frameworks, market conditions, and customer preferences can provide valuable insights. Comparative studies across nations or regions can also inform policy recommendations at the national or regional level, considering cultural, legal, and institutional influences.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusion of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author contributions

LZ: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing–review and editing. SN: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing–original draft. IH: Supervision, Visualization, Writing–review and editing. SM: Data curation, Formal Analysis, Software, Writing–review and editing. ZN: Data curation, Formal Analysis, Writing–review and editing.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Abdallah, A. B., and Al-Ghwayeen, W. S. (2020). Green supply chain management and business performance: the mediating roles of environmental and operational performances. Bus. Process Manag. J. 26 (2), 489–512. doi:10.1108/bpmj-03-2018-0091

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Adomako, S., and Tran, M. D. (2022). Environmental collaboration, responsible innovation, and firm performance: the moderating role of stakeholder pressure. Bus. Strategy Environ. 31 (4), 1695–1704. doi:10.1002/bse.2977

Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., Ahenkorah, E., Afum, E., Agyemang, A. N., Agnikpe, C., and Rogers, F. (2020). Examining the influence of internal green supply chain practices, green human resource management and supply chain environmental cooperation on firm performance. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 25 (5), 585–599. doi:10.1108/scm-11-2019-0405

Akossou, A., and Palm, R. (2013). Impact of data structure on the estimators R-square and adjusted R-square in linear regression. Int. J. Math. Comput. 20 (3), 84–93.

Google Scholar

Alhamali, R. M. (2019). Critical success factors for green supply chain management practices: an empirical study on data collected from food processing companies in Saudi Arabia. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 13 (5), 160–167. doi:10.5897/ajbm2018.8709

Ali, A., Bentley, Y., Cao, G., and Habib, F. (2017). Green supply chain management–food for thought? Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 20 (1), 22–38. doi:10.1080/13675567.2016.1226788

Ali, S., Amjad, H., Nisar, Q. A., Tariq, I., and Haq, A. U. (2022a). Impact of Green Supply Chain Management practices and environmental management system on corporate performances and the Moderating role of institutional pressures. J. Public Value Adm. Insight 5 (1), 12–23. doi:10.31580/jpvai.v5i1.2421

Ali, S. S., and Kaur, R. (2021). Effectiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in implementation of social sustainability in warehousing of developing countries: a hybrid approach. J. Clean. Prod. 324, 129154. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129154

Ali, S. S., Kaur, R., and Khan, S. (2022b). Evaluating sustainability initiatives in warehouse for measuring sustainability performance: an emerging economy perspective. Ann. Operations Res. 324, 461–500. doi:10.1007/s10479-021-04454-w

Ali, S. S., Kaur, R., and Khan, S. (2023). Identification of innovative technology enablers and drone technology determinants adoption: a graph theory matrix analysis framework. Operations Manag. Res. 16, 830–852. doi:10.1007/s12063-023-00346-3

Almehairbi, K. M. S. S., Jano, Z., and Mosali, N. A. (2022). Structural relationship of technology adoption and performance factors in UAE manufacturing industry. Int. J. Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol. 13 (4), 320–337. doi:10.30880/ijscet.2022.13.04.028

Asghar, M. M. (2023). Green supply chain management and organizational performance in automotive industry: a case study from Pakistan. South Asian J. Operations Logist. 2 (2), 18–40. doi:10.57044/sajol.2023.2.2.2308

Awan, U., Sroufe, R., and Kraslawski, A. (2019). Creativity enables sustainable development: supplier engagement as a boundary condition for the positive effect on green innovation. J. Clean. Prod. 226, 172–185. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.308

Awatara, I. G. P. D., Hamdani, A., Susila, L. N., and Saryanti, E. (2020). The role of marketing capability, operations capability, management practices and environmental investment on agro-industrial environmental performance. Int. J. Appl. Bus. Int. Manag. (IJABIM) 5 (3), 30–34. doi:10.32535/ijabim.v5i3.978

Bai, C., Kusi-Sarpong, S., and Sarkis, J. (2017). An implementation path for green information technology systems in the Ghanaian mining industry. J. Clean. Prod. 164, 1105–1123. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.151

Bals, L., and Tate, W. L. (2018). Sustainable supply chain design in social businesses: advancing the theory of supply chain. J. Bus. Logist. 39 (1), 57–79. doi:10.1111/jbl.12172

Boiral, O. (2009). Greening the corporation through organizational citizenship behaviors. J. Bus. Ethics 87, 221–236. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9881-2

Brynjolfsson, E., and Saunders, A. (2010). Wired for innovation. How Information technology in reshaping the economy . USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology .

Calza, F., Parmentola, A., and Tutore, I. (2021). For green or not for green? The effect of cooperation goals and type on environmental performance. Bus. Strategy Environ. 30 (1), 267–281. doi:10.1002/bse.2620

Cao, J., Zhang, X., Hu, L., Xu, J., Zhao, Y., Zhou, G., et al. (2018). EPR regulation and reverse supply chain strategy on remanufacturing. Comput. Industrial Eng. 125, 279–297. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.08.034

Carter, C. R., and Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory. Int. J. Phys. Distribution Logist. Manag. 38 (5), 360–387. doi:10.1108/09600030810882816

Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., Vrontis, D., and Thrassou, A. (2023). Revisiting the resource-based view (RBV) theory: from cross-functional capabilities perspective in post COVID-19 period. J. Strategic Mark. 1–16. doi:10.1080/0965254x.2023.2182447

Chen, Y., Zhu, Q., and Sarkis, J. (2022). Green supply chain management practice adoption sequence: a cumulative capability perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 61, 5918–5933. doi:10.1080/00207543.2022.2118891

Chen, Y.-S. (2008). The driver of green innovation and green image–green core competence. J. Bus. Ethics 81, 531–543. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9522-1

Chiou, T.-Y., Chan, H. K., Lettice, F., and Chung, S. H. (2011). The influence of greening the suppliers and green innovation on environmental performance and competitive advantage in Taiwan. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 47 (6), 822–836. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2011.05.016

Davis-Sramek, B., Hopkins, C. D., Richey, R. G., and Morgan, T. R. (2022). Leveraging supplier relationships for sustainable supply chain management: insights from social exchange theory. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 25 (1), 101–118. doi:10.1080/13675567.2020.1797654

Do, A., Nguyen, Q., Nguyen, D., Le, Q., and Trinh, D. (2020). Green supply chain management practices and destination image: evidence from Vietnam tourism industry. Uncertain. Supply Chain Manag. 8 (2), 371–378. doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2019.11.003

Fahim, F., and Mahadi, B. (2022). Green supply chain management/green finance: a bibliometric analysis of the last twenty years by using the Scopus database. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29 (56), 84714–84740. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-21764-z

Fiorini, P. C., Jabbour, C. J. C., Latan, H., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., and Mariano, E. B. (2022). Green emerging digital technologies, green supply chains, and the performance of environmentally friendly firms: the underpinning role of human resources . IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management .

Foo, P.-Y., Lee, V.-H., Tan, G. W.-H., and Ooi, K.-B. (2018). A gateway to realising sustainability performance via green supply chain management practices: a PLS–ANN approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 107, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.04.013

Gao, S., Lim, M. K., Qiao, R., Shen, C., Li, C., and Xia, L. (2022). Identifying critical failure factors of green supply chain management in China’s SMEs with a hierarchical cause–effect model. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 24, 5641–5666. doi:10.1007/s10668-021-01675-8

Govindan, K., Muduli, K., Devika, K., and Barve, A. (2016a). Investigation of the influential strength of factors on adoption of green supply chain management practices: an Indian mining scenario. Resour. Conservation Recycl. 107, 185–194. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.022

Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., and Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 98, 66–83. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046

Govindan, K., Seuring, S., Zhu, Q., and Azevedo, S. G. (2016b). Accelerating the transition towards sustainability dynamics into supply chain relationship management and governance structures. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 1813–1823. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.084

Green, K. W., Zelbst, P. J., Meacham, J., and Bhadauria, V. S. (2012). Green supply chain management practices: impact on performance. Supply Chain Manag. An Int. J. 17 (3), 290–305. doi:10.1108/13598541211227126

Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Dubey, R., Wamba, S. F., Childe, S. J., Hazen, B., et al. (2017). Big data and predictive analytics for supply chain and organizational performance. J. Bus. Res. 70, 308–317. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.004

Hajmohammad, S., Klassen, R. D., and Vachon, S. (2023). Managing supplier sustainability risk: an experimental study. Supply Chain Manag. An Int. J. doi:10.1108/scm-02-2023-0106

Hao, X., Chen, F., and Chen, Z. (2022). Does green innovation increase enterprise value? Bus. Strategy Environ. 31 (3), 1232–1247. doi:10.1002/bse.2952

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 43, 115–135. doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Henseler, J., and Sarstedt, M. (2013). Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Comput. Stat. 28, 565–580. doi:10.1007/s00180-012-0317-1

Hu, J., Liu, Y.-L., Yuen, T. W. W., Lim, M. K., and Hu, J. (2019). Do green practices really attract customers? The sharing economy from the sustainable supply chain management perspective. Resour. Conservation Recycl. 149, 177–187. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.05.042

Kannan, D., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., and Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014). Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company. Eur. J. Operational Res. 233 (2), 432–447. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.07.023

Karim, R. A., Rabiul, M. K., and Kawser, S. (2023). Linking green supply chain management practices and behavioural intentions: the mediating role of customer satisfaction. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights . doi:10.1108/jhti-04-2023-0241

Kenny, D. A. (2015). Measuring model fit. In.

Khan, M., Ajmal, M. M., Jabeen, F., Talwar, S., and Dhir, A. (2023). Green supply chain management in manufacturing firms: a resource-based viewpoint. Bus. Strategy Environ. 32 (4), 1603–1618. doi:10.1002/bse.3207

Kim, M., and Chai, S. (2017). The impact of supplier innovativeness, information sharing and strategic sourcing on improving supply chain agility: global supply chain perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 187, 42–52. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.02.007

Klassen, R. D., and Vereecke, A. (2012). Social issues in supply chains: capabilities link responsibility, risk (opportunity), and performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), 103–115. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.021

Kuo, T.-C., and Smith, S. (2018). A systematic review of technologies involving eco-innovation for enterprises moving towards sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 192, 207–220. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.212

Le, T. (2020). The effect of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance in Vietnamese construction materials manufacturing enterprises. Uncertain. Supply Chain Manag. 8 (1), 43–54. doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2019.8.007

Lee, C.-C., Hung, C., Cheung, C., Yang, P.-F., Kao, C.-L., Chen, D.-L., et al. (2016). “An overview of the development of a GPU with integrated HBM on silicon interposer,” in Paper presented at the 2016 IEEE 66th Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC) , Las Vegas, NV, USA , 31 May 2016 - 03 June .

Lee, K. H., and Kim, J. W. (2011). Integrating suppliers into green product innovation development: an empirical case study in the semiconductor industry. Bus. Strategy Environ. 20 (8), 527–538. doi:10.1002/bse.714

Lee, S. M., Kim, S. T., and Choi, D. (2012). Green supply chain management and organizational performance. Industrial Manag. Data Syst. 112 (8), 1148–1180. doi:10.1108/02635571211264609

Lee, V.-H., Ooi, K.-B., Chong, A. Y.-L., and Seow, C. (2014). Creating technological innovation via green supply chain management: an empirical analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 41 (16), 6983–6994. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2014.05.022

Li, D., Huang, M., Ren, S., Chen, X., and Ning, L. (2018). Environmental legitimacy, green innovation, and corporate carbon disclosure: evidence from CDP China 100. J. Bus. Ethics 150, 1089–1104. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3187-6

Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T., and Rao, S. S. (2006). The impact of supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance. Omega 34 (2), 107–124. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.08.002

Linton, J. D., Klassen, R., and Jayaraman, V. (2007). Sustainable supply chains: an introduction. J. Operations Manag. 25 (6), 1075–1082. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2007.01.012

Liu, J., Feng, Y., Zhu, Q., and Sarkis, J. (2018). Green supply chain management and the circular economy: reviewing theory for advancement of both fields. Int. J. Phys. Distribution Logist. Manag. 48 (8), 794–817. doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-01-2017-0049

Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Batista, L., and Rong, K. (2019). Green operations: what's the role of supply chain flexibility? Int. J. Prod. Econ. 214, 30–43. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.03.026

Luthra, S., Garg, D., and Haleem, A. (2015). An analysis of interactions among critical success factors to implement green supply chain management towards sustainability: an Indian perspective. Resour. Policy 46, 37–50. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2014.12.006

Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kannan, D., Mangla, S. K., and Garg, C. P. (2017). An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. J. Clean. Prod. 140, 1686–1698. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.078

Luthra, S., and Mangla, S. K. (2018). Evaluating challenges to Industry 4.0 initiatives for supply chain sustainability in emerging economies. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 117, 168–179. doi:10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.018

Mathivathanan, D., Kannan, D., and Haq, A. N. (2018). Sustainable supply chain management practices in Indian automotive industry: a multi-stakeholder view. Resour. Conservation Recycl. 128, 284–305. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.01.003

Mehta, K., Sharma, R., and Vyas, V. (2019). Efficiency and ranking of sustainability index of India using DEA-TOPSIS. J. Indian Bus. Res. 11 (2), 179–199. doi:10.1108/jibr-02-2018-0057

Menzli, L. J., Smirani, L. K., Boulahia, J. A., and Hadjouni, M. (2022). Investigation of open educational resources adoption in higher education using Rogers’ diffusion of innovation theory. Heliyon 8 (7), e09885. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09885

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Misuraca, G., Pasi, G., Abadie, F., Kucsera, C., and Virginillo, M. (2017). “Exploring the role of ICT-enabled social innovation to support the modernisation of EU social protection systems,” in Joint research centre ( Seville ). Available at https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en .

Mollenkopf, D. A., Peinkofer, S. T., and Chu, Y. (2022). Supply chain transparency: consumer reactions to incongruent signals. J. Operations Manag. 68 (4), 306–327. doi:10.1002/joom.1180

Montabon, F., Pagell, M., and Wu, Z. (2016). Making sustainability sustainable. J. Supply Chain Manag. 52 (2), 11–27. doi:10.1111/jscm.12103

Narasimhan, R., and Das, A. (2001). The impact of purchasing integration and practices on manufacturing performance. J. Operations Manag. 19 (5), 593–609. doi:10.1016/s0272-6963(01)00055-9

Negri, M., Cagno, E., Colicchia, C., and Sarkis, J. (2021). Integrating sustainability and resilience in the supply chain: a systematic literature review and a research agenda. Bus. Strategy Environ. 30 (7), 2858–2886. doi:10.1002/bse.2776

Nezakati, H., Fereidouni, M. A., and Abd Rahman, A. (2016). An evaluation of government role in green supply chain management through theories. Int. J. Econ. Financial Issues 6 (6), 76–79.

Nureen, N., Liu, D., Ahmad, B., and Irfan, M. (2022). Exploring the technical and behavioral dimensions of green supply chain management: a roadmap toward environmental sustainability. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29 (42), 63444–63457. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-20352-5

Pagell, M., and Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. J. Supply Chain Manag. 45 (2), 37–56. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2009.03162.x

Pagell, M., Wu, Z., and Wasserman, M. E. (2010). Thinking differently about purchasing portfolios: an assessment of sustainable sourcing. J. Supply Chain Manag. 46 (1), 57–73. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2009.03186.x

Parkhomenko, Y. K., and Slobodianiuk, А. (2023). The role of logistics in ensuring the sustainable development of enterprises . ВНТУ .

Pinto, L. (2020). Green supply chain practices and company performance in Portuguese manufacturing sector. Bus. Strategy Environ. 29(5), 1832–1849. doi:10.1002/bse.2471

Piprani, A. Z., Khan, S. A. R., Salim, R., and Khalilur Rahman, M. (2023). Unlocking sustainable supply chain performance through dynamic data analytics: a multiple mediation model of sustainable innovation and supply chain resilience. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30 (39), 90615–90638. doi:10.1007/s11356-023-28507-8

Qader, G., Shahid, Z. A., Junaid, M., Shaikh, I. M., and Qureshi, M. A. (2023). The role of diffusion of innovation theory towards the adoption of halal meat supply chain. J. Islamic Mark. 14 (5), 1211–1228. doi:10.1108/jima-01-2021-0032

Ramayah, T., Yeap, J., Ahmad, N. H., Halim, H. A., and Rahman, S. A. (2017). Testing a confirmatory model of Facebook usage in SmartPLS using consistent PLS. Int. J. Bus. Innovation 3 (2), 1–14.

Revilla, E., Rodriguez-Prado, B., and Simón, C. (2020). The influence of organizational context on the managerial turnover–performance relationship. Hum. Resour. Manag. 59 (5), 423–443. doi:10.1002/hrm.22003

Rexhepi, G., Abazi-Alili, H., Abduli, S., Ibraimi, S., and Zuferi, R. (2023). “Green entrepreneurship and firm performance: the case of Albania,” in Entrepreneurship development in the balkans: perspective from diverse contexts ( Emerald Publishing Limited ), 69–80.

Sajan, M., Shalij, P., Ramesh, A., and P., B. A. (2017). Lean manufacturing practices in Indian manufacturing SMEs and their effect on sustainability performance. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 28 (6), 772–793. doi:10.1108/jmtm-12-2016-0188

Sant, T. G. (2022). Distribution channel coordination in green supply chain management in the presence of price premium effects. Int. J. Serv. Operations Manag. 41 (1-2), 142–162. doi:10.1504/ijsom.2022.121725

Sarkis, J., and Zhu, Q. (2018). Environmental sustainability and production: taking the road less travelled. Int. J. Prod. Res. 56 (1-2), 743–759. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1365182

Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., and Lai, K.-h. (2011). An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 130 (1), 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.11.010

Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Pick, M., Liengaard, B. D., Radomir, L., and Ringle, C. M. (2022a). Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychol. Mark. 39 (5), 1035–1064. doi:10.1002/mar.21640

Sarstedt, M., Radomir, L., Moisescu, O. I., and Ringle, C. M. (2022b). Latent class analysis in PLS-SEM: a review and recommendations for future applications. J. Bus. Res. 138, 398–407. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.051

Saturnino Neto, A., José Chiappetta Jabbour, C., and Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A. (2014). Green training supporting eco-innovation in three Brazilian companies: practices and levels of integration. Industrial Commer. Train. 46 (7), 387–392. doi:10.1108/ict-02-2014-0010

Seuring, S., Aman, S., Hettiarachchi, B. D., de Lima, F. A., Schilling, L., and Sudusinghe, J. I. (2022). Reflecting on theory development in sustainable supply chain management. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain 3, 100016. doi:10.1016/j.clscn.2021.100016

Shaharudin, M. R., Tan, K. C., Kannan, V., and Zailani, S. (2019). The mediating effects of product returns on the relationship between green capabilities and closed-loop supply chain adoption. J. Clean. Prod. 211, 233–246. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.035

Shang, C., Wu, T., Huang, G., and Wu, J. (2019). Weak sustainability is not sustainable: socioeconomic and environmental assessment of Inner Mongolia for the past three decades. Resour. Conservation Recycl. 141, 243–252. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.032

Sheng, X., Chen, L., Yuan, X., Tang, Y., Yuan, Q., Chen, R., et al. (2023). Green supply chain management for a more sustainable manufacturing industry in China: a critical review. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 25 (2), 1151–1183. doi:10.1007/s10668-022-02109-9

Shevchenko, A., Hajmohammad, S., and Pagell, M. (2023). Operations of cost-effective charities: a qualitative study. Int. J. Operations Prod. Manag. doi:10.1108/ijopm-11-2022-0755

Shevchenko, A., Montabon, F., Pagell, M., and Wu, Z. (2022). 19. Sustainability in supply chain management. Handb. Res. Methods Supply Chain Manag. 352.

Shin, S., and Cho, M. (2022). Green supply chain management implemented by suppliers as drivers for smes environmental growth with a focus on the restaurant industry. Sustainability 14 (6), 3515. doi:10.3390/su14063515

Soda, S., and Aggarwal, V. (2022). Green supply chain management: practices and performances in power industry. Int. J. Logist. Syst. Manag. 43 (3), 395–417. doi:10.1504/ijlsm.2022.127086

Sodiq, A., Abdullatif, Y., Aissa, B., Ostovar, A., Nassar, N., El-Naas, M., et al. (2022). A review on progress made in direct air capture of CO2. Environ. Technol. Innovation 29, 102991. doi:10.1016/j.eti.2022.102991

Thahir, H., Hadi, S., Zahra, F., Arif, I., and Rombe, E. (2022). Strengthening effects of managerial innovativeness in promoting sustainable supply chain management in tourism business. Uncertain. Supply Chain Manag. 10 (3), 923–932. doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2022.3.002

Tian, Y., Govindan, K., and Zhu, Q. (2014). A system dynamics model based on evolutionary game theory for green supply chain management diffusion among Chinese manufacturers. J. Clean. Prod. 80, 96–105. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.076

Tung, A., and Baird, K. (2023). The role of technological innovation in responding to environmental concerns. Australas. J. Environ. Manag. 1–22. doi:10.1080/14486563.2023.2238666

Vachon, S., and Klassen, R. D. (2008). Environmental management and manufacturing performance: the role of collaboration in the supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 111 (2), 299–315. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.11.030

Walker, H., Di Sisto, L., and McBain, D. (2008). Drivers and barriers to environmental supply chain management practices: lessons from the public and private sectors. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 14 (1), 69–85. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2008.01.007

Wang, M., Wu, Y., Chen, B., and Evans, M. (2020). Blockchain and supply chain management: a new paradigm for supply chain integration and collaboration. Operations Supply Chain Manag. An Int. J. 14 (1), 111–122. doi:10.31387/oscm0440290

Wang, Z., and Sarkis, J. (2017). Corporate social responsibility governance, outcomes, and financial performance. J. Clean. Prod. 162, 1607–1616. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.142

Yalcin, H., Shi, W., and Rahman, Z. (2020). A review and scientometric analysis of supply chain management (SCM). Operations Supply Chain Manag. An Int. J. 13 (2), 123–133. doi:10.31387/oscm0410257

Yu, Y., Wang, X., Zhong, R. Y., and Huang, G. Q. (2017). E-commerce logistics in supply chain management. Industrial Manag. Data Syst. 117 (10), 2263–2286. doi:10.1108/IMDS-09-2016-0398

Yu, Y., Zhang, M., and Huo, B. (2021). The impact of relational capital on green supply chain management and financial performance. Prod. Plan. Control 32 (10), 861–874. doi:10.1080/09537287.2020.1774675

Zaid, A. A., Jaaron, A. A., and Bon, A. T. (2018). The impact of green human resource management and green supply chain management practices on sustainable performance: an empirical study. J. Clean. Prod. 204, 965–979. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.062

Zailani, S., Amran, A., and Jumadi, H. (2011). Green innovation adoption among logistics service providers in Malaysia: an exploratory study on the managers’ perceptions. Int. Bus. Manag. 5 (3), 104–113. doi:10.3923/ibm.2011.104.113

Zailani, S., Jeyaraman, K., Vengadasan, G., and Premkumar, R. (2012). Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) in Malaysia: a survey. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), 330–340. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.02.008

Zhang, D. (2023). Environmental sustainability and global value chains: challenges and opportunities for green supply chain management. Front. Bus. Econ. Manag. 10 (2), 155–160. doi:10.54097/fbem.v10i2.10898

Zheng, B., Tong, D., Li, M., Liu, F., Hong, C., Geng, G., et al. (2018). Trends in China's anthropogenic emissions since 2010 as the consequence of clean air actions. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 18 (19), 14095–14111. doi:10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018

Zhou, C., He, J., Li, Y., Chen, W., Zhang, Y., Zhang, H., et al. (2023). Green independent innovation or green imitation innovation? Supply chain decision-making in the operation stage of construction and demolition waste recycling public-private partnership projects. Systems 11 (2), 94. doi:10.3390/systems11020094

Zhu, Q., Qu, Y., Geng, Y., and Fujita, T. (2017). A comparison of regulatory awareness and green supply chain management practices among Chinese and Japanese manufacturers. Bus. Strategy Environ. 26 (1), 18–30. doi:10.1002/bse.1888

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., and Geng, Y. (2005). Green supply chain management in China: pressures, practices and performance. Int. J. Operations Prod. Manag. 25 (5), 449–468. doi:10.1108/01443570510593148

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K. h., and Geng, Y. (2008). The role of organizational size in the adoption of green supply chain management practices in China. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 15 (6), 322–337. doi:10.1002/csr.173

Zhu, X., and Wu, Y. J. (2022). How does supply chain resilience affect supply chain performance? The mediating effect of sustainability. Sustainability 14 (21), 14626. doi:10.3390/su142114626

Keywords: green supply chain management, green innovation, information sharing, information technology innovation, manufacturing industry

Citation: Zhaolei L, Nazir S, Hussain I, Mehmood S and Nazir Z (2023) Exploration of the impact of green supply chain management practices on manufacturing firms’ performance through a mediated-moderated model. Front. Environ. Sci. 11:1291688. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2023.1291688

Received: 10 September 2023; Accepted: 07 December 2023; Published: 22 December 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Zhaolei, Nazir, Hussain, Mehmood and Nazir. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Samera Nazir, [email protected]