Green supplier selection generic framework: A multi-attribute utility theory approach

International Journal of Sustainable Engineering

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 37-56

  Shaik, Mohammed ^a   Abdul Kader, Walid ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

Author keywords

Decision making; Formulation of criteria and attributes; Green supplier selection; Multiple attribute utility theory

Indexed keywords

DECISION SUPPORTS; FORMULATION OF CRITERIA AND ATTRIBUTES; GENERIC FRAMEWORKS; GREEN SUPPLIER; GREEN SUPPLIER SELECTION; LEADTIME; MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; MULTI-ATTRIBUTE UTILITY THEORY; MULTIPLE ATTRIBUTE UTILITY; MULTIPLE ATTRIBUTE UTILITY THEORY; QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES; SELECTION PROCESS; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES; SOURCING STRATEGIES;

DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

DECISION THEORY;

EID: 79951827992     PISSN: 19397038     EISSN: 19397046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19397038.2010.542836     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Amy, H.I.L., et al., 2009. A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 7917-7927.
2. Barbarosoglu, G. and Yazgac, T., 1997. An application of the analytic hierarchy process to the supplier selection problem. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 38 (1), 14-21.
3. Bayazit, O., 2006. Use of analytic network process in vendor selection decisions. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 13 (5), 566-579.
4. Bharadwaj, N., 2004. Investigating the decision criteria used in electronic components procurement. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 317-323.
5. Bhutta, K.S. and Huq, F., 2002. Supplier selection problem: a comparison of the total cost of ownership and analytical hierarchy process. Supply Chain Management, 7 (3/4), 126-135.
6. Chan, F.T.S., 2003a. Performance measurement in a supply chain. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21, 534-548.
7. Chan, F.T.S., 2003b. Interactive selection model for supplier selection process: an analytical hierarchy process approach. International Journal of Production Research, 41 (15),3549-3579.
8. Chan, F.T.S. and Chan, H.K., 2004. Development of the supplier selection model - a case study in the advanced technology industry. Proceedings of Instrumental and Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 218, 1-18.
9. Chan, F.T.S. and Kumar, N., 2007. Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega, 35, 417-431.
10. Chan, F.T.S., et al., 2007. A decision support system for supplier selection in the airline industry. Proceedings of Instrumental and Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 221, 741-758.
11. Chan, F.T.S., et al., 2008. Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach. International Journal of Production Research, 46 (14), 3825-3857.
12. Chen, C.C., 2005. Incorporating green purchasing into the frame of ISO 14000. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 927-933.
13. De Boer, L., van der Wegen, L., and Telgen, J., 1998. Outranking methods in support of supplier selection. European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 4, 109-118.
14. De Boer, L., Labro, E., and Morlacchi, P., 2001. A review of methods supporting supplier selection. European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 7, 75-89.
15. Dickson, G., 1966. An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. Journal of Purchasing, 2 (1), 5-17.
16. Dyer, J.S., et al., 1992. Multiple criteria decision making, multi attribute utility theory: the next ten years. Management Science, 38 (5), 645-654.
17. Ellram, L.M., 1990. The supplier selection decision in strategic partnerships. Journal of Purchasing Material Management, 26 (4), 8-14.
18. Ellram, L.M., 1995. Total cost of ownership: an analysis approach for purchasing. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 25 (8), 4-23.
19. Ellram, L.M., et al., 2002. The impact of purchasing and supply management activities on corporate success. Journal of Supply Chain Management: A Global Review of Purchasing and Supply, 38 (1), 4-20.
20. En, S., et al., 2008. A framework for defining both qualitative and quantitative supplier selection criteria considering the buyer-supplier integration strategies. International Journal of Production Research, 46 (7), 1825-1845.
21. Enarsson, L., 1998. Evaluation of suppliers: how to consider the environment. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 28 (1), 5-17.
22. Feng, C.X., Wang, J., and Wang, J.S., 2001. An optimization model for concurrent selection of tolerances and suppliers. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 40, 15-33.
23. Ghodsypour, S.H. and O'Brien, C., 1998. A Decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. International Journal of Production Economics, 56-57, 199-212.
24. Ghodsypour, S.H. and O'Brien, C., 2001. The total cost of logistics in supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria and capacity constraint. International Journal of Production Economics, 73 (1), 15-28.
25. Handfield, R., et al., 2002. Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: a study in the application of the analytical hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 141 (1), 70-87.
26. Hsu, C., et al., 2006. Supplier selection construct: instrument development and validation. International Journal of Logistics Management, 17 (2), 213-239.
27. Huang, S.H. and Keskar, H., 2007. Comprehensive and configurable metrics for supplier selection. International Journal of Production Economics, 105, 510-523.
28. Humphreys, P., Mak, K.L., and Yeung, C.M., 1998. A just-intime evaluation strategy for international procurement. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 3-4,175-186.
29. Humphreys, P., McIvor, R., and Chan, F., 2003a. Using casebased reasoning to evaluate supplier environmental management performance. Expert Systems with Applications, 25, 141-153.
30. Humphreys, P.K., Wong, Y.K., and Chan, F.T.S., 2003b. Integrating environmental criteria into the supplier selection process. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 138 (1/3), 349-356.
31. Humphreys, P., et al., 2006. Employing dynamic fuzzy membership functions to assess environmental performance in the supplier selection process. International Journal of Production Research, 44 (12), 2379-2419.
32. Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., and Ulukan, Z., 2003. Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics Information Management, 16 (6), 382-394.
33. Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H., 1993. Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. New York:Wiley.
34. Kongar, E., 2005. A comparative study on multiple criteria heuristic approaches for environmentally benign 3pls selection. Proceedings of the 3rd International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress, Istanbul, Turkey, 23-24.
35. Kontio, J., 1996. A case study in applying a systematic method for COTS selection. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering, March, 201-209.
36. Kumar, M., Vrat, P., and Shankar, R., 2002. A multi-objective interval programming approach for supplier selection problem in a supply chain. Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on E-manufacturing: an emerging need for 21st century world class enterprises, Bhopal, India: IEI, 17-19.
37. Lamming, R. and Hampson, J., 1996. The environment as a supply chain management issue. British Journal of Management, 7 (1), 45-62.
38. Lee, A.H.I., 2009. A fuzzy supplier selection model with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 2879-2893.
39. Lin, C.W.R., and Chen, H.Y.S., 2004. A fuzzy strategic alliance selection framework for supply chain partnering under limited evaluation resources. Computers in Industry, 55, 159-179.
40. Lin, B., Jones, C.A., and Hsieh, C., 2001. Environmental practices and assessment: a process perspective. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 101 (2), 71-79.
41. Liu, F.F. and Hai, H.L., 2005. The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier. International Journal of Production Economics, 97 (3), 308-317.
42. Liu, F., Ding, F.Y., and Lall, V., 2000. Using data envelopment analysis to compare suppliers for supplier selection and performance improvement. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 5 (3), 143-150.
43. Logical Decisions, 2009. Multi-criteria decision support software for evaluating choices. Logical Decisions Co. http://www.logicaldecisions.com.
44. Lu, L.Y.Y., Wu, C.H., and Kuo, T.C., 2007. Environmental principles applicable to green supplier evaluation by using multi-objective decision analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 45 (18/19), 4317-4331.
45. Min, H., 1994. International supplier selection: a multi-attribute utility approach. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 24 (5), 24-33.
46. Motwani, J., et al., 1999. Supplier selection in developing countries: a model development. Integrating Manufacturing Systems, 10 (3), 154-161.
47. Noci, G., 1997. Designing green vendor rating systems for the assessment of a supplier's environmental performance. European Journal of Purchasing Supply Management, 3 (2), 103-114.
48. Ofori, G., 2000. Greening the construction supply chain in Singapore. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Chain Management, 6 (3/4), 195-206.
49. Pan, A.C., 1989. Allocation of order quantity among suppliers. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 25 (3), 36-39.
50. Rao, P., 2002. Greening the supply chain a new initiative in south East Asia. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22 (6), 632-655.
51. Roa, C.P. and Kiser, G.E., 1980. Educational buyer's perception of vendor attributes. Journal of Purchasing Material Management, 16, 25-30.
52. Sarkis, J., Nehaman, G., and Priest, J., 1996. A Systemic evaluations model for environmentally friendly conscious business practices and strategy. Proceeding of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, Dallas, USA, 281-286.
53. Stamm, C.L. and Golhar, D.Y., 1993. JIT purchasing: attribute classification and literature review. Production Planning and Control, 4, 273-282.
54. Talluri, S., Narasimhan, R., and Nair, A., 2006. Vendor performance with supply risk: a chance-constrained DEA approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 100, 212-222.
55. Tam, M.C.Y. and Tummala, V.M.R., 2001. An application of the AHP in vendor selection of a telecommunications system. Omega, 29, 171-182.
56. Vachon, S. and Klassen, R., 2006. Green project partnership in the supply chain: the case of the package printing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 661-671.
57. Verghese, K. and Lewis, H., 2007. Environmental innovation in industrial packaging: a supply chain approach. International Journal of Production Research, 45 (18/19), 4381-4401.
58. Walton, S.V., Handfield, R.B., and Melnyk, S.A., 1998. The green supply chain: integrating suppliers into environmental management processes. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 34 (2), 2-11.
59. Wang, G., Samuel, H.H., and Dismukes, J.P., 2004. Productdriven supply chain selection using integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology. International Journal of Production Economics, 91, 1-15.
60. Weber, C.A. and Current, J.R., 1993. A multi-objective approach to supplier selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 68 (2), 173-184.
61. Weber, C.A., Current, J.R., and Benton, W.C., 1991. Vendor selection criteria and methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 50 (1), 2-18.
62. Weber, C.A., Current, J.R., and Desai, A., 1998. Non-cooperative negotiation strategies for vendor selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 108, 208-223.
63. Yahya, S. and Kingsman, B., 1999. Vendor rating for an entrepreneur development programme: a case study using the analytic hierarchy process method. Journal of Operational research, 50, 916-930.
64. Zhu, Q. and Geng, Y., 2001. Integrating environmental issues into supplier selection and management. Greener Management International, 35, 27-40.