Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
The challenge of selecting and evaluating third-party reverse logistics providers in a multicriteria perspective: a Brazilian case Patricia Guarnieri a, Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro a, *, Marcelo Seido Nagano b, Luiz Marques Serrano a Andre Management Department, University of Brasília e UnB, Campus Darcy Ribeiro, Brasília, Federal District 70910-900, Brazil ~o Carlos School of Engineering, University of Sa ~o Paulo - USP, Av. Trabalhador Sa ~o carlense 400, Sa ~o Carlos, Sa ~o Production Engineering Department, Sa Paulo 13566-590, Brazil
a
b
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 27 September 2013 Received in revised form 19 February 2014 Accepted 12 May 2014 Available online 23 May 2014
Following recent legislations and public policies on solid waste and product take-back, companies in Brazil are now impelled to incorporate reverse logistics practices in their business processes. The Brazilian National Policy of Solid Waste e NPSW, approved in 2010, obligates companies to implement reverse logistics. Considering this, many companies in Brazil have studied the possibility to outsource these activities by engaging third-party reverse logistics providers e 3PRLP. Considering these demands, it is important to define which systematic approaches can be used to select the most suitable 3PRLP. The objective of this article is to identify the main criteria, the systematic methods that can be used in order to select the most appropriate 3PRLP and also propose a framework based in multicriteria decision aid approach to select 3PRLP. Thus, a Systematic Literature Review was carried out and a conceptual framework for decision making in this context using Multicriteria Decision Aid e MCDA modeling was proposed. Therefore, this paper presents two contributions: i) a SLR covering the past decade based on the MCDA experiences in 3PRLP selection, highlighting the main criteria and systematic approaches used; ii) based on this SLR, a proposal for a conceptual methodological framework to help decision makers and researchers in performing a MCDA in the area of 3PRLP selection. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Reverse logistics MCDA Multi-criteria Decision Aid Third-party reverse logistics providers Selection of providers 3PRLP
1. Introduction Reverse Logistics e RL have an important role in green supply chains by providing customers with the opportunity to return end life products to the manufacturer, thus re-evaluating them and including them again in the production cycle (Efendigil et al., 2008). In 2010, the Brazilian National Policy of Solid Waste e NPSW was approved. It introduced shared responsibility and the obligation of reverse logistics for some sectors of industry (Brazil, 2010a). The purpose of NPSW is to internalize costs and liabilities to manufacturers, retailers and consumers while implementing reverse logistics, which is considered a challenge in Brazil (Jabbour et al., 2014). Thus, the RL based on the 'polluter pays' principle provides a central component of the NPSW (Brazil, 2010a). The law/policy
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses:
[email protected] (P. Guarnieri),
[email protected] (V.A. Sobreiro),
[email protected] (M.S. Nagano),
[email protected] (A.L. Marques Serrano). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.040 0959-6526/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
outlines a variety of options for producers to work together within their sectors to comply with the law/policy, with reverse logistics service providers, as well as with municipal and state governments, in order to manage waste flows and to recapture/collect, recycle; and ultimately; dispose these materials (Brazil, 2010b). Based on this context, many organizations have studied the possibility to outsource their reverse logistics activities by working with third-party logistics providers, thus ensuring efficiency in product-take-back activities (Efendigil et al., 2008). The most important services offered by 3PRLPs and the most important aspects of operational performance were identified by Liu and Lyons (2011). The authors assessed the relationship between service capabilities and performance for 3PLs and also investigated the impacts of the service capabilities of 3 PL providers which correspond to customers' key priorities on financial performance. Moreover, the authors carried out a comparative analysis between Taiwan and the UK and found similarities but also some clear differences in their logistics practices. Decisions regarding selecting of services and products suppliers are, in general, complex due to various conflicting objectives involved and, consequently, various qualitative and quantitative
210
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
criteria (Choy et al., 2005). Taking this into account, the processes of identifying the best suppliers for services and/or products or even evaluating the performance of a former supplier are challenging for decision makers (DM), but essential in business processes (Bozarth and Robert, 2008). Furthermore, growing environmental concerns have motivated businesses to include environmental criteria when selecting services and product suppliers (Efendigil et al., 2008). Returning used products is becoming an important logistics activity due to government legislation and the increasing awareness in society (Kannan et al., 2011). Moreover, in the last decades, some articles have tackled issues related to selecting the most appropriate Third-Party Reverse Logistics Provider e 3PRLP. These articles use different methods, such as: the Two-phase model based on Artificial Neural Networks and fuzzy logic (Efendigil et al., 2008); Mixed-Integer Programming Model e MIP and a genetic algorithm (Min and Ko, 2008); Multi e Criteria Group Decision Making e MCGDM model in a fuzzy environment (Kannan et al., 2011); Analytical Network Process e ANP (Cheng and Lee, 2010); New Chance e Constrained Data Envelopment Analysis e CCDEA approach (Azadi and Saen, 2011) and; Interpretive Structural Modeling e ISM methodology (Govindan et al., 2012). In this context, in the Fig. 1 a graphical abstract aiming to present the scope and the contribution of this research is shown. As shown in Fig. 1, based on the current demand for reverse logistics activities and considering the recent Brazilian legislation on public policy for solid waste generation, companies have basically two options to comply with the law/policy: i) execute reverse logistics activities internally; and ii) outsource reverse logistics activities. This article focuses on the second option and to be able to select the most appropriate 3PRLP, it is proposed a conceptual framework using MCDA modeling is proposed, which has systematized steps with the purpose of support decision makers in these kinds of decisions. The steps assist DMs to structure the decision problem regarding selecting of 3PRLP from the identifying objectives and the set of criteria to defining the most suitable MCDA approach and method, depending on the rationality of the DM. Thus, decisions related to selecting most appropriate 3PRLP are essential and require the definition of proper criteria and models. In order to assist the decision makers in this kind of situation, the
main approaches and set of criteria used must be known, as well as having a systematized model in which the most appropriate 3PRLP can be selected. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to identify the main criteria, the methods that can be used to select the most appropriate 3PRLP by a Systematic Literature Review e SLR, and also based on that, propose a systematized framework to help decision makers in this decision context. In general decisions related to selecting of suppliers and logistics providers have been taken based only on experience, because managers often rely on simplified reasoning to make difficult decisions (Kahneman, 2011). Besides that, many managers make decisions based only on economic factors instead of environmental ones, which can cause errors in evaluation, without considering limitations that are posed by legislation and regulations as well the trends that a company may have to analyze the environmental performance of its activities (Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2008). In addition, this article identified the key criteria, methods and problems approached related to selecting of 3PRLP by a SLR, which is useful to researchers and practitioners by highlighting the existing tools and performance measures that could be applied in this context. Besides that, using the modeling multicriteria decision aid approach makes it possible to present a formal framework for 3PRLP selection considering multiple criteria. The conceptual framework enables that decision-making in this context having well-defined steps and not just based on experience. First of all, a review of the literature on Brazil's NPSW and reverse logistics was conducted. Second, the main concepts of Multi-criteria Decision Aid are shown. Third, the methodological procedures used are described in order to validate the research. Fourth, the discussion of articles on selecting and evaluating of 3PRLP is presented. Fifth, a theoretical model for evaluating and selecting of 3PRLP is proposed and, finally the last section presents the concluding remarks and suggestions for future studies. 2. Reverse logistics e RL The management of return flows has received growing attention throughout the last decades (Fleischmann et al., 1997, 2000). Nowadays, these organizations working on the concept of Supply Chain Management e SCM are now held responsible for the
Fig. 1. Graphical abstract.
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
environmental and social performance of their product and services suppliers. This fact is explained considering that environmental implications of reclamation, reuse, and recycling to save landfill space, fuel, and costs are becoming more important for organizations (Sarkis et al., 2010). Thus, the Reverse Logistics e RL processes have been incorporated in SCM, consequently, its concept should be highlighted. Reverse Logistic is the instrument characterized by a set of actions, procedures and means aimed at economic and social development programs, in order to enable the collect and recover solid waste from the business sector to reuse in their cycle or other production cycles, or other environmentally sound disposal (Brazil, 2010a e Law 12.305/2010, article 3). Besides the planning of product take-back, it is important to point out that the RL includes the same operational activities used in forward logistics as: collection, packaging, storage, sorting, transaction processing, delivery and integration, and/or correct disposal (Meade and Sarkis, 2002). In addition, RL programs can generate environmental and cost advantages, and are also are able to minimize the threat of government regulation and can improve the corporate image of companies (Carter and Ellram, 1998). For strategic reverse production systems infrastructure determination, it is possible to use a Mixed Integer Linear Programming e MILP, characterised by an allocation model with the added structure of material conservation across process tasks (Realff et al., 2000). Moreover, adopting RL is necessary for extend the life of materials, and planning and operating the return of products to the logistics cycle. These aspects are considered critical for reducing environmental impacts from industrial operations, and solving the lez-Torre et al., 2010). problem of scarcity of raw materials (Gonza Moreover, some benefits related to reverse logistics can be pointed out: environmental impact reduction by reusing and recycling returned goods; the reduction in the inventory of raw materials; and savings achieved by recycling/reuse of returned goods, which can outweigh the costs necessary to maintain the reverse logistic system implemented (Silva et al., 2012). The potential for reverse logistics is economically and environmentally important and the inclusion of this strategy in business process improves the structuring and efficiency of these channels (Baenas et al., 2011). Several countries have enforced environmental legislation handing over producers the responsibility for the whole life cycle of their products. Take-back obligations for product categories such as electronics, packaging material, and cars already take place in many countries (Fleischmann et al., 2000). In the Brazilian context, it should be emphasized the recent approbation of the Brazil's NPSW should be emphasized, which alters the Environmental Crimes Law (n . 9605/1998), and provides the principles, objectives, instruments and guidelines for integrated management of solid waste, including hazardous ones (Brazil, 2010a). Another important aspect in the law is the compulsory implementation of reverse logistics, based on the 'polluter pays' principle, which is considered one of the main challenges of NPSW (Jabbour et al., 2014). This obligation provides a central component of the law, especially as it applies to the following categories of residues: i) pesticides and associated packaging; ii) batteries; iii) tires; iv) lubricating oils and associated packaging; v) fluorescent, sodium and mercury vapor bulbs; vi) electronic products and its components; and vii) all kinds of packaging (Brazil, 2010a). Furthermore, the law introduces the principle of ‘shared responsibility’, which means that all members (producer, importer, retailer, government, and final consumer) should participate in waste management (Brazil, 2010a). 3. Reverse logistics outsourcing Nowadays, outsourcing is a popular business strategy and requires close attention to the contract selection process (Almeida,
211
2007). When companies outsource capabilities, they can obtain various benefits, such as: production efficiency; enhanced product and service quality; better process responsiveness and dependability, and greater product variety and process variation (McCarthy et al., 2013). It can be observed that specialized professions have also emerged for the specific logistics activities and traditional logistics service providers have extended their services (Fleischmann et al., 1997). These providers are more prepared to follow the waste legislation and local environmental guidelines (Anttonen et al., 2013). Furthermore, the infrastructure for RL functions management is commonly managed through a third party relationship: reverse logistics providers, cooperatives of waste pickers or municipal organizations (Bai and Sarkis, 2013). Third party reverse logistics providers (3PRLP) should be specialists in managing the reverse flow of returned products and provide key value-added services, such as remanufacturing and refurbishing (Rogers and TibbenLembke, 1998). Due to governmental legislation and an increased awareness among the population related to the environment protection, companies cannot ignore environmental issues (Govindan et al., 2013). Logistics outsourcing can be viewed as motivation to pursue environmental sustainability goals, because 3PRLP can assume a role in supply chain management towards sustainability (Colicchia et al., 2013). On the other hand, some companies analyze whether outsource, depending on the availability of their own resources and with the purpose of minimize or substantially reducing the use of materials in industrial and business processes (Anttonen et al., 2013). In addition, various different aspects have to be considered by the decision-maker concerning outsource activities, such as the cost of the contract and performance of the service (Almeida, 2007). The decision for outsourcing can often be strategic in nature, including gaining novel technologies, accessing local knowledge and markets and acquiring government suasion (McCarthy et al., 2013). Supplier selection, including reverse logistics providers, is considered a key operational task for developing sustainable supply chain. In this context, decision makers must consider environmental, social, and economic dimensions with the purpose of selecting a well-rounded sustainable supplier (Govindan et al., 2013). In addition, trust between the supplier and buyer; information about materials and waste fragments and their efficient use; shared profits or savings contracts are important factors to select new services (Anttonen et al., 2013). In a recent research Anttonen et al. (2013) found that materials and manufacturing technology are part of the core business and thus, parts of them cannot be easily outsourced to external service providers. However, the same authors state that companies commonly search for eco-efficient services externally. Once recycling and reuse are not part of the core business and could be handed over to professional service providers. McCarthy et al. (2013) highlight the possibility of information asymmetry in outsourcing contracts. This makes an outsourcing transaction imbalanced and inefficient for at least one of the parties involved, which can also damage the relationship in the long-run and disturb the performance of the whole supply chain. Furthermore, the outsourcing contracts are assumed to have basic variables related to multiple objectives (Almeida, 2007). Thus, decision makers need elements to select the most appropriate 3PRLPs, which require the definition of proper criteria and systematized methods. McCarthy et al. (2013) pointed out that although some research has focused on decision making frameworks that can be used for outsourcing, it is essential to consider the experience, cognitive abilities of DMs to apply it.
212
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
The Multicriteria Decision Aid e MCDA approach can provide tools to deal with these kinds of decisions. Most of its methods can primarily help the decision maker to understand and structure the decision problem, and then apply the algorithm to indicate the most appropriate solutions for the decision context. It is an appropriate approach for dealing with ill-structured problems and considers the insights of decision makers in the process (Vincke, 1992; Keeney, 1992; Roy, 1996; Brans and Mareschal, 2005). The next section describes the main characteristics of it. 4. Multicriteria decision aid e MCDA The MCDA approach aims to provide decision makers with some tools to allow them to progress in solving decision problems, where several and often contradictory points of view should be taken into consideration. Brans and Mareschal (2005) state that according to our various human aspirations, it makes no sense, and it is often not fair, to select a decision based on one evaluation criterion only. In most cases, at least technological, economic, environmental and social criteria should always be taken into account. In addition, it cannot be said that, in general, one decision (solution, action) is better than another, even if it does not originate from all points of view. Therefore, the concept of optimization is not appropriate in the context of MCDA (Vincke, 1992). Basically, a multi-criteria decision problem consists of a situation, in which there are at least two action alternatives to be chosen from. The selection process occurs as a result of the desire to meet multiple objectives that often have conflicting relationships. These objectives have associated variables that represent them and allow each alternative to be evaluated based on each objective, which may be called criteria, attributes or dimensions (Vincke, 1992; Roy, 1996). Usually, experts in MCDA split methods into three families: i) the multi-attribute utility theory, ii) outranking methods and; iii) interactive methods (Vincke, 1992). On the other hand, Roy (1996) calls them, respectively: i) a single-criterion synthesis approach, which eliminates any incomparability; ii) an outranking approach, which accepts incomparability and; iii) an approach of Interactive Local Trial, which uses trialeerror interactions. The differences among these approaches based on various authors are described in Table 1. In addition, the decision maker can formulate the MCDA problems in four different ways, depending on the problematic involved (Roy, 1996): 1) Choice: To make a simple choice from a set of alternatives; 2) Ranking: To place the actions in order of preference; 3) Sorting: To distribute alternatives into classes or categories; 4)
Description: To describe the actions and consequences of a systematic and formalized way for evaluation by decision makers.
5. Methodological procedures Aiming to identify the main criteria and systematic approaches used in the decision context of evaluating and selecting of 3PRLP, exploratory, descriptive and qualitative research was carried out. Regarding the technical procedure, it was used the Systematic Literature Review e SLR and the multicriteria modeling were used. The SLR is to first summarise the main criteria and multicriteria methods used specifically to select of 3PRLP, based on Science Direct Database and secondly, to base the proposition of a systematized framework to select the most appropriate third party reverse logistics providers. This framework was based on multicriteria decision aid modeling. The structuring of a problem and its goals helps to understand the context of the decision and to define the set of objectives and criteria, in addition to providing the basis for using quantitative modeling (Keeney, 1992). There are, basically, two perspectives of literature reviews: i) Reviews on mature topics, in which there is an accumulated body of research exists that needs analysis and synthesis, which requires a thorough literature review and a conceptual model summarising the findings; and ii) Emerging issues that would benefit from exposure to potential theoretical foundations, which would be shorter and the main contribution is the fresh theoretical foundations proposed in developing a conceptual model (Webster and Watson, 2002). The issue researched in this article fits the second type of review. Regarding the technical procedure, it should be emphasized that there are also two types of literature review: i) The Traditional or narrative literature review and; ii) The Systematic Literature Review (Cronin et al., 2008). The first one critiques and summarizes a body of literature and draws conclusions about the topic in question, it is typically selective in the material it uses, although the criteria for selecting specific sources for review are not always apparent to the reader. On the other hand, the second type, uses a more rigorous and well-defined approach to review the literature in a specific subject area and also uses a well-defined protocol to search and analyze sources (Cronin et al., 2008). In addition, the systematic literature review can be anchored in qualitative or quantitative approaches, depending on the objective of the research. The quantitative approach is usually linked to using metaanalysis (De-la-Torre-Ugarte-Guanilo et al., 2011).
Table 1 Methods from the MCDA approach. Methods
Description
Multi-attribute Utility Theory or Single-Criterion Synthesis Approach.
It derives from the American School of thought, the decision maker's preferences for a particular alternative when evaluated by a set of criteria or indicators which are aggregated into a single utility value and are carried out in an additive manner (with trade-offs), it generates a score for each alternative based on performance criteria, and therefore the best alternatives evaluated are those that obtain the best score. (Almeida, 2011). Among some methods of this approach MAUT, SMART, TOPSIS, and AHP can be cited.
Outranking.
It is derived from the French school of thought, the main objective is the construct of binary relations that represent the decision maker's preferences based on the information available between criteria (without trade-offs) gel and Martel, 2002). Using a pairwise comparison, there is an alternative which is superior in every criterion, (Le establishing a relationship of overcoming the confrontation between two alternatives. The main methods of this families. approach are those from the ELECTRE and PROMETHEE
Interactive Local Trial.
These methods are mainly developed within the MOLP e Multi-Objective Linear Programming, which are gel and Martel, 2002). characterized by having computational steps and being interactive, allowing trade-offs (Le The methods seek an alternative that is clearly superior in all the objectives set (dominant), which results in the aggregation of preferences of decision makers after mathematical calculations, interactive and successive evaluation of these solutions and, the possible change in the preference structure considering the new available information. Some methods of this approach can be cited: STEM, TRIMAP, ICW, and PARETO RACE (Antunes and Alves, 2012).
gel and Martel (2002), Almeida (2011) and Antunes and Alves (2012). Source: Adapted from Le
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
The systematic literature review is used extensively in the field of medicine regarding the clinical trials (De-la-Torre-UgarteGuanilo et al., 2011; Higgins and Green, 2011). In the field of social sciences, these reviews are a relatively new phenomenon (Velamuri et al., 2011). However, some recent research using systematic literature reviews in social sciences areas can be highlighted as: supply chain management (Wong et al., 2005); vendors outsourcing (Khan et al., 2011); software development (Wen et al., 2012). On the other hand, related to the area of forward and reverse logistics, there are only articles based on traditional literature reviews; in this context, some of these can be pointed out: quantitative models for reverse logistics (Fleischmann et al., 1997); design and control of warehouse order picking (Koster et al., 2007); thirdparty logistics (Marasco, 2008); sustainable supply chains (Gupta and Palsule-Desai, 2011; Hassini et al., 2012). De-la-Torre-Ugarte-Guanilo et al. (2011) highlight the methodology proposed in the Cochrane Handbook, which was the first publication to formalize this type of procedure. Higgins and Green (2011) suggest that the steps of this procedure in the clinical interventions are: a) Defining the review question and developing criteria for including studies; b) Searching for studies; c) Selecting studies and collecting data; d) Assessing risk of bias in included studies; e) Analyzing data and undertaking meta-analyses; f) Addressing reporting biases; g) Presenting results and ‘Summary of findings’ tables and; h) Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. Cronin et al. (2008) describe the procedures adapted for other areas: a) Formulate the research question; b) Set inclusion or exclusion criteria; c) Select and access the literature; d) Assess the quality of the literature included in the review; and e) Analyze, synthesize and disseminate the findings. Based on this protocol, for the purpose of this article, the SRL procedure was conducted using the qualitative approach without meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 2. In Fig. 2, the main steps of the systematic literature review are summarised. In the first step, the scope of the research is defined, based on the question: What are the main criteria and systematic approaches used in the evaluating and selecting of third-party reverse logistics providers e 3PRLP, considering the multi-criteria context? In the second step, some inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined. Regarding the period of publication of articles, it was defined to search articles published in the last decade were searched for. It was also decided to conduct a search in the Science Direct database because it has many of the main leading journals in Social
213
Sciences and it is multidisciplinary by nature. It should be emphasized that the theme of ‘selecting of suppliers in a multi-criteria perspective’ can be found in journals from various areas, such as: Decision Analysis; Management; Engineering; Civil Engineering; Information Technology; Economics; Mathematics; among others; thus this basis was considered appropriate due to the articles in journals with high impact factor from all areas cited it includes. Initially, an advanced search toll was conducted with the queries: reverse logistics ‘and’ third-party providers. 529 articles were found with these terms in full texts. However, considering the focus of the research in multi-criteria context, using the tool searching within results, the query multi-criteria was included in order to refine the findings, then the results were reduced to 33 articles. In the third step, the abstracts of 33 articles were analyzed critically, in order to verify whether or not they fit the scope of the research. Therefore only 8 articles fit the queries and 25 were eliminated. In the fourth step, the quality of the remaining articles was analyzed, the data were collected to draw up a report and organize the findings. Table were also made to summarise data collected, linking the findings with the objective of the research. Finally, to enable the depth analysis of the literature review on evaluation and selection of 3PRLP, the findings were interpreted in light of the theory, the main criteria and systematic approaches were identified. The literature analysis proposes conceptual methodological framework to help decision-makers and researchers in performing a MCDA in the area of 3PRLP selection. 6. Systematic literature review: main findings The aim of this section is to summarise the main articles that are concerned with the issue of selecting 3PRLP. Besides that it provides the basis for a proposition of a systematized framework which can aid Decision Makers e DM in order to select the most appropriate 3PRLP, presented in the next section. Selecting 3PRLPs from a large number of possible suppliers with different levels of performance is a complicated and a time-consuming task requiring multiple criteria decision making approaches, and special attention should be given to the selection criteria (Efendigil et al., 2008). Considering this, Colicchia et al. (2013) investigated the institutional drivers who adopted sustainable initiatives by logistics services providers, along with their interactions with performance improvements.
Fig. 2. Research approach.
214
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
Furthermore, carrying out this activity efficiently can reduce market price of the product, hence, it is crucial in maintaining and/ or achieving competitiveness (Efendigil et al., 2008). Frequently, the internal resources and capabilities of companies need to be examined to identify which reverse logistics service requirements could be fulfilled in-house or outsourced (Cheng and Lee, 2010). Thus, decision-makers are able to compare alternative scenarios and thus develop better processes (Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2008). Over the last decades, some articles have dealt with issues related to selecting the most appropriate 3PRLP and, when performing these activities in-house or outsourcing them, using different methods and criteria. In Table 2, the main articles are shown, highlighting the authors, main criteria and methods and, the problems addressed.
As presented in Table 2, some studies have emerged on the selecting and evaluating of 3PRLP, mainly from 2005 to the present, some of them use the MCDA approach to deal with the decision elements and the ANP method can be detached. Some papers use combined methods, aggregating MCDA methods, such as: the Analytic Hierarchy Process e AHP, Analytic Network Process e ANP with Fuzzy methods. Furthermore, methods were found based on Mathematical Programming, such as: MixedInteger Programming Model e MIP, Multi-Objective Linear Programming e MOLP, Data Envelopment Analysis e DEA; and others, as for example, Cluster Analysis, Interpretive Structural Modeling e ISM, Neural Networks and Genetic Algorithms. Therefore, we cannot find any predominance of any methods, based on the articles studied.
Table 2 Articles report on selecting and evaluating of 3PRLP. Authors
Methods
Criteria
Problem
Ravi et al. (2005).
Analytical Network Process e ANP.
Customer perspective: convenience, customer service, green products, customer satisfaction; Internal business perspective: information technology, product recovery options, commitment by top management, new technologies; Innovation & Learning perspective: competitiveness, mentoring of suppliers, formation of strategic alliances, knowledge management; Financial perspective: waste reduction, cost savings, recapturing value.
Analyzing the alternatives to execute reverse logistics programs.
Efendigil et al. (2008).
Two e phase model based on artificial neural networks and fuzzy logic.
On time delivery ratio, confirmed fill rate, service quality level, unit operation cost, capacity usage ratio, total order cycle time, system flexibility index, integration technologies level, increment in market share, research and development ratio, environmental expenditures, customer satisfaction index.
Selecting the most appropriate 3PRLP.
Min and Ko (2008).
Mixed e integer programming model and a genetic algorithm.
Fixed cost of maintaining a warehouse, cost of establishing a warehouse, fixed cost of expanding a warehouse, variable cost of expanding a warehouse, fixed cost of maintaining a repair facility, cost of establishing a repair facility, fixed cost of expanding a repair, variable cost of expanding a repair facility, savings from the use of an existing warehouse as a repair facility, production capacity of the client plant, maximum capacity per warehouse, maximum capacity per repair center, maximum capacity of expansion per warehouse, maximum capacity of expansion per repair facility, maximum period of expansion, demand forecasts for each client's product, return forecasts for each client's product.
Selecting the most appropriate 3PRLP.
Kannan et al. (2009).
Multi e criteria group decision making e MCGDM model in fuzzy environment.
Quality, delivery, reverse logistics cost, rejection rate, technical/engineering capability, inability to meet future requirement, willingness and attitude.
Selecting the most appropriate 3PRLP.
Cheng and Lee (2010).
Analytical Network Process e ANP.
Warehouse management: cross-docking, order processing, customer specific, label printing, warehousing; Transportation management: fleet management, freight forwarding; IT management: info systems management, tracking & tracing, web-based linkage, advanced ship notice; Value e added services: assembly/reassembly; repackaging/re-labeling, remanufacturing, refurbishment, disposal.
Executing RL activities in e house or outsourcing and selecting 3PRLP.
Azadi and Saen (2011).
New chance-constrained data envelopment analysis e CCDEA approach.
Total cost of shipments, revenue from the sale of recyclables, service e quality experience ratings, service e quality credence ratings.
Selecting the most appropriate 3PRLP.
Govindan et al. (2012).
Interpretive Structural Modeling e ISM methodology.
Organizational role, impact of use of third e party logistics, third e party logistics services, user satisfaction, reverse logistics function, information technology applications, organizational performance criteria.
Selecting the most appropriate 3PRLP.
Bai and Sarkis (2013)
Rough set theory (Pawlak)
Disassembly (product mix, volume, equipment flexibility); compaction (product mix, volume, equipment flexibility); network (relationship flexibility, other party flexibility, delivery flexibility); organizational design (organizational flexibility, cultural flexibility).
Selecting and evaluating 3PRLP
Liu and Lyons (2011).
Survey and cluster analysis.
Transportation, Transportation planning and management, Warehousing/inventory, Value-added services, Information technology, Product design and marketing support, Finance, Consulting services, Customs brokerage, Call center operation, after sales service, Management/performance reports, Procurement.
Analysis of 3PRLP performance
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
In some situations, a combination of methods was due to in the a need of incorporating qualitative (soft factors) and quantitative criteria. Methods including fuzzy relations include ambiguous representations and are able to deal with qualitative measures. On the other hand, methods from an MCDA approach deal adequately with a mix of qualitative and quantitative criteria. Nevertheless, methods involving Mathematical Programming only deal with quantitative measures. Adopting approaches will depend on the availability of data and on the preference structure of decision maker. Some of them accept tradeoffs between criteria (additive rationality) and others do not accept them (non-additive rationality), requiring methods from an outranking approach, in which the alternatives are evaluated, based on pair wise comparisons. Additionally, in general, decision problems can be structured in four ways: Choice, Ranking, Sorting and Description problematic, there are appropriate methods to deal with each one. Regarding the main criteria found, it can be highlighted that there is a predominance of criteria aimed at logistics performance, covering issues related to inventory, warehousing, transportation, and information technology as well as criteria regarding financial and capacity aspects. Based on the criteria found in Table 2, these criteria could be categorized in 6 classes, as shown in Table 3: It can be observed in the Table 3 that although reverse logistics is an activity with strong environmental appeal, this category is the one that has fewer factors. The most valued criteria are those related to logistics and financial performance, followed by criteria related to capacity/infrastructure, which are commonly used in the choice of 3PLs in forward logistics. In addition, some criteria was found related to value added to the customer and those related with alliances to suppliers. However, these criteria are not frequently used. The need to include environmental criteria in the analysis of logistics providers as part of supply chains is increasingly recognized (Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2008). This fact is corroborated by Govindan et al. (2012), which state that companies only considered, for many years, the forward supply chain for maximizing their benefit, but did not realize the responsibility for their products after the product life cycle was finished. It was identified in the literature analyzed that there are few articles which address the selection of 3PRLP. Most articles found focus on forward logistics instead of reverse logistics. Moreover, the criteria focusing on environmental issues have not been investigated much, which is an issue that would be considered essential when companies outsource the reverse logistics activities is the certification of correct disposal or destination of residues. This aspect was not found in any article analyzed. In Brazil, for example, the legislation determines the shared responsibility of companies, which means that even when delegating reverse logistics activities for other companies, the producers or retailers, companies still have responsibility for their residues disposal. 7. Proposition of a conceptual framework for evaluation and selection OF 3PRLP The reason for reaching this topic originated from recent demands for specialized reverse logistics providers, in order to comply with Law 12.305/2010, which address NPSW in Brazil. In situations such as these, many companies commonly entre the market considering a new niche. However, considering this context, decision makers face a challenge and the following question arises: How to evaluate and select the most able provider to perform reverse logistics activities and comply with the law? Besides that, the need for conceptual models integrating environmental and social issues into approaches, such as multicriteria decision making or optimization models are considered a key
215
challenge by Seuring and Gold (2013). The same authors acknowledge that there is no much reseach on this topic in developing countries. In this context lies the main contribution of this article, which aims to propose a conceptual framework to evaluate and select 3PRLP based on multicriteria decision aid approach, grounded by a SLR, in this specific Brazilian context. Another contribution is the systematic literature review covering the past decade on the MCDA experiences in 3PRLP selection, which denotes that this research area is still relatively recent and needs more in-depth studies. Identifying the main criteria and systematic approaches used can guide researchers and decision makers to understand the issues related to selecting of 3PRLP. For practitioners, the structuration of the problem through multicriteria decision aid modeling can provide coherence and meaning to the practical context involved. In addition, the decision process can be divided into well-defined steps, which ensure more reliability in the decision making process. Moreover, the framework attempted to cover several essential aspects in order to build sustainable supply chains, which can be denoted by the set of criteria selected. Since Dickson's article (1966), many changes in the process of supplier selection have taken place. The need for holistic thinking can be observed when we analyse the literature related to this scope. These insights can contribute to the development of further studies both by practitioners and researchers in this area. Therefore, this framework intends to integrate issues related to: i) Operational capacity in forward and reverse logistics, as well infrastructure, highlighted by Meade and Sarkis (2002) and lez-Torre et al. (2010); Gonza ii) Environmental issues in research by Carter and Ellram (1998); Fleischmann et al. (2000); Sarkis et al. (2010); Anttonen et al. (2013) and Govindan et al. (2013); iii) Alliances and soft factors related to building up strategic partnerships between suppliers and buyers in supply chains pointed out by Ellram (1990); Simatupang and Sridharan (2002); Anttonen et al. (2013) and Guarnieri (2014); and iv) Financial issues, which have a consensus of utilization, among researchers, since Dickson's work (1966). Typically, decision models that have been applied to this area have focused primarily on the economic and business factors associated with the decisions. Studies including factors related to sustainability in a decision making environment are pressing (Sarkis et al., 2012). This article contributes to setting up specific policies related to outsourcing of reverse logistics activities, both in Brazil and developing countries, due to these aspects: i) The high level of informality of waste collection and recycling infrastructure in developing countries (Bleck and Wettberg, 2012; Sasaki and Araki, 2013); ii) Recent legislations and public policies on solid waste and product take-back around the world (Govindan et al., 2013), and iii) Approbation of the Brazilian National Policy of Solid Waste. These policies should establish the main criteria to select reliable 3PRLP, the certification process and the main responsibilities of contractors and providers. 7.1. Discussion Based on findings from the systematic review of literature presented in the previous section, a general framework is proposed to
216
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
Fig. 3. Framework for decision making.
be used in evaluating and selecting 3PRLP, which could serve as a basis for decision making. In general, many managers make decisions related to this matter based on experience or the evaluating and selecting of 3 PL for forward logistics. However, it should be emphasized that the reverse logistics activities (assembly/reassembly; repackaging/re-labeling, recycling, remanufacturing, refurbishment, after sales service, incineration, disposal) have peculiarities and need a proper set of criteria so that decision making occurs consistently. As it can be observed in Fig. 3, the framework proposed for decision making related to evaluating and selecting of 3PRLP is a systematic approach, with well-defined steps, whose purpose is to assist decision makers providing more practical elements to choose the most appropriate 3PRLP. Selecting of partners' decision is dependent on numerous criteria and, multiple criteria decision making aid tools would be most appropriate in this context (Sarkis et al., 2012). The strategic objective of the decision context related to delegate the reverse logistics activities for a 3PRLP is at the top of Fig. 3: Outsource reverse logistics activities. As fundamental objectives, which means the division of strategic into small ones (Keeney, 1992), which are below the strategic objective at the top of Fig. 3, can be pointed out: i) Ensuring an adequate logistics service; ii) Aggregating take-back, re-processing and disposal activities; iii) Reducing costs; iv) Optimizing the capacity of partners; v) Aggregating environmental value and; vi) Collaborating with suppliers and customers. Defining of objectives are essential to decision making because they show the decision maker's values, which means the defining of what is important to achieve in the decision context. After defining the objectives, MCDA modeling can continue, which consists of the following steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Identifying the set of criteria; Assigning weights to criteria; Identifying the rationality of decision maker; Identifying 3PRLP alternatives; Evaluating and analyzing 3PRLP alternatives, and Finding the most suitable MCDA approach and method.
Each step is associated with an action to the right of the steps in Fig. 3. 7.1.1. Step 1 e identifying the set of criteria Identifying the most used criteria to select the 3PRLP was based on SLR, as well as other articles in the literature review, which highlighted the need for differentiated criteria related to alliances and environmental issues. Then, we proposed a set of criteria to be used in this conceptual framework and divided it into six groups: Forward logistics; reverse logistics; financial; capacity; environmental, and alliances. Identifying an appropriate set of criteria, which will measure the attainment of objectives. Criteria refers to the degree to which goals are achieved according to Keeney (1992). Thus, in this conceptual framework, the criteria proposed were cited in most of articles analysed in SLR in the context of 3PRLP selection. The aim of the six groups was to cover various essential aspects in holistic way to build sustainable supply chains. The Forward logistics groups of Reverse logistics and Capacity cover operational capacity in forward and reverse logistics, as well as infrastructure. The Environmental group includes issues related to green consumption; compliance with laws; reducing negative impacts and environmental protection. The Alliances group includes soft factors related to building up strategic partnerships between suppliers and buyers in supply chains, which are important in mutual relationship involving commitment in an extended period of time. On the other hand regarding the Financial group, there is a consensus among researchers whereby issues related to cost and financial stability are essential to business continuity. The groups and its specific criteria are presented, as follows: Forward logistics: order processing, purchasing, inventory management, transport, warehousing, material handling, information technology and systems, maintenance; Reverse logistics: assembly/reassembly; repackaging/relabeling, recycling, remanufacturing, refurbishment, after sales service, incineration, disposal; Financial: costs of forward and reverse logistics, financial stability of the 3PRLP;
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
217
Table 3 Proposition of categories of criteria to be used in 3PRLP evaluation and selection. Category
Criteria
Logistics
Warehouse management: cross-docking, order processing, customer specific, label printing, warehousing; Transportation management: fleet management, freight forwarding; IT management: info systems management, tracking & tracing, web-based linkage, advanced ship notice; On time delivery ratio; Confirmed fill rate; Service quality level; Total order cycle time; System flexibility index; Integration technologies level; Increment in market share; Research and development ratio; Demand forecasts for each client’ product; Return forecasts for each clients' product; Rejection rate and; Procurement.
Financial
Cost savings, recapturing value, Unit operation cost, Fixed cost of maintaining a warehouse, Cost of establishing a warehouse, Fixed cost of expanding a warehouse, Variable cost of expanding a warehouse Fixed cost of maintaining a repair facility, Cost of establishing a repair facility, Fixed cost of expanding a repair, Variable cost of expanding a repair facility, Savings from the use of an existing warehouse as a repair facility, Reverse logistics cost, Total cost of shipments, and revenue from the sale of recyclables.
Capacity/infrastructure
Capacity usage ratio, Production capacity of the client plant, Maximum capacity per warehouse, Maximum capacity per repair center, Maximum capacity of expansion per warehouse, Maximum capacity of expansion per repair facility, Technical/Engineering Capability, Inability to meet future requirement, and Inability to meet future requirement.
Value added services to customers
Convenience, customer service, green products, customer satisfaction,assembly/reassembly, repackaging/re-labeling, remanufacturing, refurbishment, disposal, Call center operation, after sales service, and Management/performance reports.
Alliances with suppliers
Competitiveness, mentoring of suppliers, formation of strategic alliances, and knowledge management.
Environmental
Product recovery options and green products.
Capacity: infrastructure of forward and reverse logistics; Environmental: green products, reducing emissions, compliance with environmental legislation, environmental license and certification; and Alliances: collaboration with suppliers and customer related to equipment, vehicles, warehouses, information technology, exchange of information, co-development of new services or products, exchange of knowledge. The Table 3 can help decision makers to define which criterion will be in each category. It is important to point out that it seems unlikely that there is one single set of criteria that may cover all the aspects of all companies' functions, especially regarding sustainability issues (Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2008). The set of criteria need to be defined according the context of decision and the goals of the contractor company, therefore in order to propose a broad framework, set of the criteria suggested previously are quite wide. 7.1.2. Step 2 e assigning weights to criteria In addition, in order to evaluate the 3PRLP by a set of defined criteria, it is important to assign weights to criteria, which define the importance of each criterion within the aggregate preferences formed by the criteria. In general, the weights can be distributed on a scale from 0 to 1 or from 0 to 100. These weights can be defined simply by asking the decision maker regarding their preferences related to the set of criteria. 7.1.3. Step 3 e identifying the rationality of the decision maker Another important aspect is to identify the rationality of the decision maker, which is directly related to the way of aggregation of the preference structure. The way of aggregation is related to tradeoffs amongst criteria. If the decision maker agrees that a lower performance in a given criterion can be compensated by a higher performance in another one, the rationality is “compensatory” or “additive”. In contrast, if the decision maker does not agree with this idea, which requires that the alternative to be chosen should be a satisfactory performance in all criteria, the rationality is “noncompensatory” or “non-additive”. Identifying rationality can also be made simply asking the decision maker whether he/she accepts trade-offs. The rationality is additive if he/she accepts and the rationality is non-additive if he/ she does not accept trade-offs. In both cases, proper MCDA methods will be recommended having different algorithms to deal with this information.
7.1.4. Step 4 e identifying 3PRLP alternatives In addition, 3PRLP alternatives in the market are defined, which could be achieved by a market research. 7.1.5. Step 5 e evaluating and analyzing 3PRLP alternatives After that, the evaluating and analysing of the alternatives can be made using a payoff table. The comparison among alternatives considering the criteria will provide the elements to analyze the 3PRLP by a multi-criteria approach. 7.1.6. Step 6 e finding the most suitable MCDA approach and method Finally, depending on the rationality of the decision maker and the set of criteria defined, an appropriate and systematic multicriteria approach can be applied and, consequently, the most suitable method. If the decision maker has a compensatory rationality, there are two options: i) The Single Criterion Synthesis Approach, which covers methods such as: MAUT, SMARTS, TOPSIS and AHP and; ii) The Interactive Local Trial Approach, which covers the methods derived from Multiple Objective Linear Programming e MOLP. On the other hand, if the decision maker has a non-compensatory rationality, it can be used the Outranking Approach can be used, methods. which covers the ELECTRE and PROMETHEE The steps of this conceptual framework are similar to the existing literature on MCDA modeling. However, it differentiates those presented in articles published because it selects 3PRLP and it includes a holistic set of criteria, covering aspects related to environmental and alliances issues instead of only economic and operational ones. 8. Concluding remarks This paper discussed the importance of using systematized methodologies from the MCDA approach to select the most appropriate 3PRLP. Moreover, it presents new demands which have arisen from approbation of environmental legislation of waste management in Brazil, i.e. the NPSW. More specifically, the main criteria and approaches that can be used for this purpose were identified from a SLR. After that, we proposed a conceptual framework to help decision makers and researchers in performing a MCDA in the area of 3PRLP selection.
218
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219
Over the last decade, companies have begun to realize the importance of adopting reverse logistics practices in their supply chain management, mainly because of society and legal pressures. Therefore, the decision of carrying out reverse logistics in-house or outsourcing have become an important issue. Many decisions related to this context have been taken only considering experience from managers, without using systematic approaches (Luo et al., 2009). Thus, identifying the main criteria or indicators used to select and evaluate 3PRLP, and proposing of structured methods to deal with this kind of situation are urgent matters. Considering the Brazilian context, after approbation of NPSW, this kind of decision is essential because companies from sectors included in the law, are obligated to implement reverse logistics activities and, many of them are pondering outsourcing reverse logistics to reverse logistics providers. These concerns are directly related to achieving of efficiency in the business process. Another important aspect should be pointed out, which is when companies delegate process to other business partners they continue to have responsibility in the final destination of residues, so an appropriate selection should be made. The results found show that there is no predominance of any structured approach to select and evaluate 3PRLP. Regarding the main criteria used in the selection process, the most used are related to logistics, financial and capacity aspects and those related to environmental issues are still not widely used. Therefore, based on the results found from SLR and grounded by MCDA modeling, we propose a conceptual and holistic framework that includes criteria related to operational capacity in forward and reverse logistics, as well as infrastructure; environmental matters; alliances and financial issues. Applying a formal framework for supplier selection using the multicriteria approach, the decision making process takes place in a systematic way having well-defined steps and not just based on the experience of managers. This discussion is urgent in Brazil and Latin American countries, which have in common, a high level of informality in activities covered by reverse logistics, and trends related to sustainability issues. In this context, this article demonstrates implications for practitioners, researchers, and government related to establishing policies. For both practitioners and researchers the identifying main criteria and systematic approaches can help to understand the issues related to selecting of 3PRLP. Moreover, practitioners can obtain coherence and meaning to the practical context involved by MCDA modeling of 3PRLP. This article also shows researchers, the need for holistic thinking in studies related to multicriteria context, which should include instead of only financial and economic criteria, those related to environmental and alliances issues. Regarding the implications for governments in Brazil and other developing countries, the findings indicate that policies establishing the main criteria to select reliable 3PRLP, the definition of the certification process and the main responsibilities of contractors and providers are also urgent. Moreover, the main limitations of this article should be emphasized. One of them is related to the extent of literature review to Science Direct, other databases as JStor, SCOPUS, Emerald, Sage online, Springer link, Wiley Online and Web of Science can be used in order to find more articles related to evaluating and selecting of 3PRLP. Another limitation is related to scope of this article, since we studied a specific case of selecting 3PRLP based on a multicriteria perspective, linked with the recent demands arising from the approbation of NPSW in Brazil. We do not consider if this matter is well developed in other countries (develop or developing ones). Moreover, there is a lack of research concerning articles related to 3PRLP, but there are many articles studying aspects
related to forward logistics, which can be explained by the popularity of the topic. It is also important to point out that the conceptual framework is not applied to a specific sector and should be adapted in order to fit the companies' goals and peculiarities. Future studies could approach, more deeply, the identification of criteria considered important for residues' generators, taking place in various sectors. Other could be conducted analyzing whether or not environmental issues are considered important to decision makers. Furthermore, further studies could compare different methodologies from a MCDA perspective, from both rationalities (additive and non-additive), in the decision problem of selecting of 3PRLP. Empirical research related to applying MCDA methods is also needed. Considering the need of research integrating environmental and social issues into multicriteria decision making and the lack of research in developing countries pointed out by Seuring and Gold (2013), the discussion in this article is a matter of urgency. Moreover, it should be emphasized the Brazilian initiatives related to environmental and social inclusion to be provided by NPSW should be emphasized, which can serve as an incentive to create of policies by the governments of other developing countries. Moreover, researchers and practitioners can develop practical studies, using the conceptual framework proposed, related to implementing reverse logistics and considering outsourcing these activities.
References Almeida, A.T., 2007, December. Multicriteria decision model for outsourcing contracts selection based on utility function and ELECTRE method. Comput. Operat. Res. 34 (12), 3569e3574. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2006.01.003. todos multicrite rio de apoio a Almeida, A.T., 2011. O conhecimento e o uso de me ria da UFPE. decis~ ao. Recife: Editora Universita Anttonen, M., Halme, M., Houtbeckers, E., Nurkka, J., 2013, April. The other side of sustainable innovation: is there a demand for innovative services? J. Clean. Prod. 45 (1), 89e103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.12.019. todo interativos e Antunes, C., Alves, M., 2012. Programaç~ ao linear multiobjetivo-me n software. In: Anais do Congresso Latino-Iberoamericano de Investigacio Operativa, pp. 4725e4736. Montevideo. Azadi, M., Saen, R.F., 2011. A new chance-constrained data envelopment analysis for selecting third-party reverse logistics providers in the existence of dual-role factors. Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (10), 12231e12236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.eswa.2011.04.001. Baenas, J.M., Castro, R., Battistelle, R.A., Gobbo Jr., J.A., 2011. A study of reverse logistics flow management in vehicle battery industries in the midwest of the ~o Paulo (Brazil). J. Clean. Prod. 19 (2e3), 168e172. http://dx.doi.org/ state of Sa 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.08.018. Bai, C., Sarkis, J., 2013. Flexibility in reverse logistics: a framework and evaluation approach. J. Clean. Prod. 47 (1), 306e316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro. 2013.01.005. Bleck, D., Wettberg, W., 2012. Waste collection in developing countries e tackling occupational safety and health hazards at their source. Waste Manag. 32 (11), 2009e2017. Bozarth, C.C., Robert, B.H., 2008. Introduction to Operations and Supply Chain Management. Pearson Education Inc, New Jersey. Brans, J.-P., Mareschal, B., 2005. PROMETHEE. In: Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (Eds.), Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. Springer, United States of America, pp. 163e196. Brazil, 2010a. Law n . 12.305, August the 2nd. Retrieved February 13, 2013, from lidos. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ Política Nacional dos Resíduos So ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305.htm. Brazil, 2010b. Decree n . 7.404, December the 23rd 2010. Retrieved February 13, lidos. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ 2013, from Política Nacional dos Resíduos So ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/Decreto/D7404.htm. Carter, C.R., Ellram, L.M., 1998. Reverse logistics: a review of the literature and framework for future investigation. Int. J. Bus. Logist. 19 (1), 85e102. Cheng, Y.-H., Lee, F., 2010. Outsourcing reverse logistics of high-tech manufacturing firms by using a systematic decision-making approach: TFT-LCD sector in Taiwan. Ind. Mark. Manag. 39 (7), 1111e1119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. indmarman.2009.10.004. Choy, K.L., Lee, W.B., Lau, H.C., Choy, L.C., 2005. A knowledge-based supplier intelligence retrieval system for outsource manufacturing. Knowl. Based Syst. 18 (1), 1e17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2004.05.003. Colicchia, C., Marchet, G., Melacin, M., Perotti, S., 2013. Building environmental sustainability: empirical evidence from logistics service providers. J. Clean. Prod., 1e13. Fonte: 0959-6526.
P. Guarnieri et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 96 (2015) 209e219 Cronin, P., Ryan, F., Coughlan, M., 2008. Undertaking a literature review: a step-bystep approach. Br. J. Nurs. 17 (1), 38e43. ~o De-la-Torre-Ugarte-Guanilo, M.C., Takahashi, R.F., Bertolozzi, M.R., 2011. Revisa ~es gerais. Revista da Esc.ola de Enferm.agem da USP 45 (5), sistem atica: noço 1260e1266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0080-62342011000500033. Dickson, G.W., 1966, February. An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. Int. J. Purch. Mater. Manag. 2 (1), 5e17. € Efendigil, T., Onüt, S., Kongar, E., 2008. A holistic approach for selecting a third-party reverse logistics provider in the presence of vagueness. Comput. Ind. Eng. 54 (2), 269e287 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.07.009. Ellram, L.M., 1990. Supply chain management, partnership, and the shipper e third party relationship. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 1 (2), 1e10 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ 95740939080001276. Fleischmann, M., Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J.M., Dekker, R., Laan, E. v., Nunen, J.A., Wassenhove, L.N., 1997. Quantitative models for reverse logistics: a review. Eur. J. Operat. Res. 103 (1), 1e17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00230-0. Fleischmann, M., Krikke, H.R., Dekker, R., Flapper, S.D., 2000, December. A characterisation of logistics networks for product recovery. Omega 28 (6), 653e666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(00)00022-0. lez-Torre, P., Alvarez, Gonza M., Sarkis, J., Adenso-Díaz, B., 2010. Barriers to the implementation of environmentally oriented reverse logistics: evidence from the automotive industry sector. Br. J. Manag. 21 (4), 889e904 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00655.x. Govindan, K., Palaniappan, M., Zhu, Q., Kannan, D., 2012. Analysis of third party reverse logistics provider using interpretive structural modeling. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), 204e211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.043. Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., Murugesan, P., 2013, July. Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. J. Clean. Prod. (in press) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013. 06.046. Guarnieri, P., 2014. Decision making regarding information sharing in collaborative relationships under an MCDA perspective. Int. J. Manag. Decis. Mak. 13 (1), 77e98 http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2014.058469. Gupta, S., Palsule-Desai, O.D., 2011. Sustainable supply chain management: review and research opportunities. IIMB Manag. Rev. 23 (4), 234e245 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2011.09.002. Hassini, E., Surti, C., Searcy, C., 2012. A literature review and a case study of sustainable supply chains with a focus on metrics. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), 69e82 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.042. Higgins, J., Green, S., 2011. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved June 15, 2013, from: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Jabbour, A.B., Jabbour, C.J., Sarkis, J., Govindan, K., 2014, January. Brazil’s new national policy on solid waste: challenges and opportunities. Clean. Technol. Environ. Policy 16 (1), 7e9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10098-013-0600-z. Kahneman, D., 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow, vol. 1. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York. Kannan, G., Murugesan, P., Senthil, P., Haq, A.N., 2009. Multicriteria group decision making for the third party reverse logistics service provider in the supply chain model using fuzzy TOPSIS for transportation services. Int. J. Serv. Technol. Manag. 11 (2), 162e181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJSTM.2009. 022523. Kannan, G., Pokharel, S., Kumar, P.S., 2011, February. A hybrid approach using ISM and fuzzy TOPSIS for the selection of reverse logistics provider. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 55 (4), 659e667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.06.004. Keeney, R., 1992. Value-focused Thinking: a Path to Creative Decision Making. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Khan, S.U., Niazi, M., Ahmad, R., 2011. Barriers in the selection of offshore software development outsourcing vendors: an exploratory study using a systematic literature review. Inform. Softw. Technol. 53 (7), 693e706 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.infsof.2010.08.003. Koster, R., Le-Duc, T., Roodbergen, K.J., 2007. Design and control of warehouse order picking: a literature review. Eur. J. Operat. Res. 182 (2), 481e501 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.07.009.
219
gel, J., Martel, J.-M., 2002. A multicriteria assignment procedure for a nominal Le sorting problematic. Eur. J. Operat. Res. 138 (2), 349e364 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00251-X. Liu, C.-L., Lyons, A.C., 2011. An analysis of third-party logistics performance and service provision. Transp. Res. Part Logist. Transp. Rev. 47 (4), 547e570 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2010.11.012. Luo, X., Wu, C., Rosenberg, D., Barnes, D., 2009, December. Supplier selection in agile supply chains: an information-processing model and an illustration. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 15 (4), 249e262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2009.05.004. Marasco, A., 2008. ). Third-party logistics: a literature review. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 113 (1), 127e147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.05.017. McCarthy, I.P., Silvestre, B.S., Kietzmann, J.H., 2013, AprileMay. Understanding outsourcing contexts through information asymmetry and capability fit. Prod. Plan. Control: Manag. Operat. 24 (4e5), 277e283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 09537287.2011.648765. Meade, L., Sarkis, J., 2002. A conceptual model for selecting and evaluating thirdparty reverse logistics providers. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 7 (5), 283e295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13598540210447728. Min, H., Ko, H.-J., 2008. The dynamic design of a reverse logistics network from the perspective of third-party logistics service providers. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 113 (1), 176e192 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.01.017. Ravi, V., Shankar, R., Tiwari, M.K., 2005. Analyzing alternatives in reverse logistics for end-of-life computers: ANP and balanced scorecard approach. Comput. Ind. Eng. 48 (2), 327e356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2005.01.017. Realff, M.J., Ammons, J.C., Newton, D., 2000, July. Strategic design of reverse production systems. Comput. Chem. Eng. 24 (2e7), 991e996. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/S0098-1354(00)00418-X. Rogers, D.S., Tibben-Lembke, R.S., 1998. Going Backwards: Reverse Logistics Trends and Practices. Reverse Logistics Executive Council. Roy, B., 1996. Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding. Kluver Academic Publishers. Sarkis, J., Helms, M.M., Hervani, A.A., 2010. Reverse logistics and social sustainability. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 17 (6), 337e354 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/csr.220. Sarkis, J., Meade, L.M., Presley, A., 2012. Incorporating sustainability into contractor evaluation and team formation in the built environment. J. Clean. Prod. 31 (1), 40e53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.029. Sasaki, S., Araki, T., 2013. Employereemployee and buyereseller relationships among waste pickers at final disposal site in informal recycling: the case of Bantar Gebang in Indonesia. Habit Int. 40 (1), 51e57. Seuring, S., Gold, S., 2013, October. Sustainability management beyond corporate boundaries: from stakeholders to performance. J. Clean. Prod. 56 (1), 1e6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.033. , G.W., Sevegnani, G., Sevegnani, T.B., Serra Truzzi, O.M., Silva, D.A., Santos Reno 2012, May. Comparison of disposable and returnable packaging: a case study of reverse logistics in Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 47 (1), 377e387. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.057. Simatupang, T.M., Sridharan, R., 2002. The collaborative supply chain. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 13 (1), 15e30 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09574090210806333. Tsoulfas, G.T., Pappis, C.P., 2008, October. A model for supply chains environmental performance analysis and decision making. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (15), 1647e1657. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.018. € slein, K.M., 2011. Hybrid value creation: a systematic Velamuri, V.K., Neyer, A.K., Mo review. J. für Betriebswirtschaft 61 (1), 3e35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11301011-0070-5. Vincke, P., 1992. Multicriteria Decision-aid. John Wiley & Sons. Webster, J., Watson, R.T., 2002, June. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 26 (2), xiiiexxiii. Wen, J., Li, S., Lin, Z., Huang, C., 2012. Systematic literature review of machine learning based software development effort estimation models. Inform. Softw. Technol. 54 (1), 41e59 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2011.09.002. Wong, A., Tjosvold, D., Zhang, P., 2005. Developing relationships in strategic alliances: commitment to quality and cooperative interdependence. Ind. Mark. Manag. 34 (7), 722e731 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.12.007.
