To define green logistics and position the thesis in that field, 10 literature reviews on green logistics have been identified, though not all of them focus solely on green logistics. In fact, some extend their scope of environmental issues to sustainability, which is defined in terms of social, environmental, and economic areas and often referred to as the triple bottom line (TBL), a concept that promotes balance among economic, environmental, and social aims (Elkington, 1998). As a result, environmental aspects receive attention in the reviews, thereby allowing the reviews to position the environment aspects within the broader perspective of sustainability.
19
Furthermore, all 10 reviews adopt a scope of SCM instead of logistics; however, logistics and SCM are related concepts (cf. Lummus et al., 2001), meaning that findings of either are valuable to the logistics perspective. Table 2.2 summarises the focus and findings of the 10 reviews.
Table 2.2 Literature reviews on green logistics
Author(s) Scope and findings
Srivastava (2007)
Having reviewed literature that analyses the importance of green supply chain management (GSCM), green design, and green operations, the author construct a
timeline of how research on the topic has developed.
Seuring and Müller (2008)
Having devised a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) with the help of a literature review with three focuses—namely, triggers for SSCM, supplier management of risks and performance, and supply chain management (SCM) for sustainable products—the authors show that research is dominated by green
and environmental issues.
Carter and Rogers (2008)
Having engaged conceptual theory building for SSCM with the help of a literature review, the authors generate proposals for the relationship among the integration of
sustainability, SCM, and long-term economic success.
Sarkis et al.
(2010)
Having categorised and reviewed GSCM-related literature in terms of nine broad organisational theories, the authors demonstrate that researchers of GSCM have begun
to apply numerous organisational theories.
Carter and Easton (2011)
Having analysed literature in terms of topic, industry, theoretical lens, methodology, and analysis, the authors reveal that SSCM has developed from research in social and environmental fields, ranges in perspective from corporate social responsibility to the
triple bottom line (TBL), and has emerged as a theoretical framework.
Dey et al.
(2011)
Having explored the current state of sustainability-oriented efforts in SCM, specifically in supply chain logistics operations, the authors show that logistics is an important part of any sustainable strategy, given the magnitude of costs involved and opportunities to
reduce inefficiency and carbon footprints.
Winter and Knemeyer
(2013)
Having examined the integration of sustainability and SCM in journal articles on operations and production, society and the environment, and logistics and SCM, it is pointed out that research focused on a single aspect of TBL (i.e., environmental, social, or economic) is more common than research focused on multiple aspects, as well as that
qualitative designs are the most prevalent in either kind of research.
Ahi and Searcy (2013)
Having identified and analysed definitions of GSCM (i.e., 22 definitions) and SSCM (i.e., 12 definitions), the authors identify several differences among the definitions,
particularly regarding their views on and inclusion of aspects related to the environment, efficiency, and performance.
Touboulic et al. (2015)
Having investigated theoretical perspectives in SSCM, the authors find that theory building in SSCM is rare and that theories applied most commonly use a few imported
macro theories (e.g., a resource-based view, stakeholder theory, and institutional theory). The authors thus propose developing theory for the field—for example, by testing theories from various disciplines other than those frequently used at present—
and moving beyond the exploration of drivers and barriers to instead focus on the implementation of SCM.
Fahimnia et al. (2015)
Having conducted a bibliometric network analysis of GSCM-related literature to identify influential works, authors, and emergent areas, a concentration of influential
studies are identified among a few scholars and that the field continues to mature as authors expand it in various ways. Five major research clusters are identified: theory
development, measurement and evaluation, barriers to practical applications, mathematical modelling and optimisation, and hypothesis, theory, and factor testing.
20
In what follows, a definition of green logistics is presented, and the thesis is positioned within the field of green logistics in relation to the results of the literature reviews.
2.2.1 Definition of green logistics
Interest in green logistics, as well as in GSCM and SSCM, has increased in recent years, and most up-to-date literature reviews indicate an upward trend in publications on the topic (Fahimnia et al., 2015; Touboulic et al., 2015). For instance, Touboulic et al. (2015) identify 308 papers in 15 peer-reviewed journals, and Fahimnia et al. (2015) identify 884 papers from the database Scopus. That the field is growing implies that a range of definitions for green logistics and its related concepts are available. Indeed, Ahi and Searcy (2013) literature review lists 22 definitions of GSCM and 12 definitions of SSCM, with clear differences, particularly regarding their views on and inclusion of aspects related to the environment, efficiency, and performance. Accordingly, they conclude that it is crucial for researchers to clearly identify views on green logistics and their position of research in the field. For instance, in this thesis, McKinnon et al. (2015) definition of green logistics is used: ‘The study of the environmental effects of all the activities involved in the transport, storage and handling of physical products as they move through the supply chains in both forward and reverse directions. It assesses the nature and scale of these effects and examines the various ways in which they can be reduced’
(p. 4). That definition aligns well with the thesis, since it addresses several concepts of the thesis that are important to define, including environmental effect (i.e., environmental impact), logistics activities, supply chain (i.e., what stages of supply chains are studied), the nature of supply chain effects (i.e., which RQ2a and RQ3a address), and ways to reduce those effects (i.e., as RQ2b and RQ3b address).
2.2.2 Position in the field
To position the present research among earlier studies addressing green logistics, in what follows three aspects of the definition of green logistics are described (McKinnon et al., 2015):
type of environmental impact, actors in the supply chain, and logistics activities. Considering that green logistics is here studied in the context of food, the following also addresses how the reviews have examined product types, if at all.
Logistics: Literature reviews have tended to not address logistics activities or similar terms such as logistics functions. Srivastava (2007) divides research on GSCM by topic, including the importance of GSCM, green design (e.g., life cycle assessment, or LCA), and green operations. Although the research of this thesis would be positioned within green operations according to that delineation, that topic covers a wide spread of work with varying perspectives.
Therefore, it is difficult to position this thesis in relation to previous research on green logistics in terms of its focus on logistics.
Actors: In addressing how actors have been studied in research on SSCM, Carter and Easton (2011) show that the most common unit of analysis is a firm (62%) or, to a far lesser extent, an individual (21%), whereas studies of dyads or more than two actors in supply chains account for only 4% of the papers. That finding is arguably surprising, given that many of the papers aspire to contribute to SCM. Although the primary perspective of this thesis is that of individual firms, namely in terms of individual actors in FSCs, since literature regarding food waste
21
stresses the importance of applying a supply chain perspective (Lindbom et al., 2013; Mena et al., 2011), its scope is also extended to supply chains to answer RQ3 about food waste.
Types of environmental impact: Of the nine reviews summarised in Table 2.2, six take the broader perspective of sustainability (Carter and Rogers, 2008; Carter and Easton, 2011; Dey et al., 2011; Seuring and Müller, 2008; Touboulic et al., 2015; Winter and Knemeyer, 2013), whereas three limit their scope to environmental issues (Fahimnia et al., 2015; Sarkis et al., 2010; Srivastava, 2007); no review focuses solely on economic or social issues. Results in the literature reviews, however, are quite dissimilar; four reviews show that many papers focus on environmental concerns, but that few include more than two aspects of the TBL (Carter and Easton, 2011; Seuring and Müller, 2008; Touboulic et al., 2015; Winter and Knemeyer, 2013).
By contrast, the reviews rarely discuss what kinds of environmental impact are addressed in reviewed papers. Fahimnia et al. (2015) summarise the most commonly used terms in 884 paper titles—for instance, life cycle (50 papers), energy (50 papers), carbon (40 papers), water (25 papers), and closed loop (23 papers)—which can help to distinguish types of environmental impact studied. However, since the terms green (249 papers) and environmental (151 papers) are even more common, arguably many titles do not mention types of environmental impact studied, meaning that probably more papers address the different types of environmental impact than their titles indicate. In this thesis, two types of environmental impact are addressed. First, the impact on climate is common to address within green logistics. Second, it addresses food waste, and for this environmental impact no references to that topic appear in the literature reviews, given its association with only one broad product type. Taken together, the thesis thus examines one commonly addressed environmental impact and one that is more novel within green logistics.
Types of food products: Two reviews address which kinds of industry have been studied in relation to green logistics. First, concerning SSCM, Carter and Easton (2011) show that the most common trend is to apply a multi-industry perspective (49%), although among specific industries, transport (21%) and consumer products (14%) are the most common, whereas the food and beverages industry accounts for only 3% of the papers. In relation to research on specific industries, they state that ‘researchers should carefully select individual industries with the goals of identifying specific types of sustainability activities that are germane to those industries’ (p. 55). Second, Fahimnia et al. (2015) indicate a similar interest in food in their summary of the most commonly used words in 884 paper titles, among which food is mentioned in 44, or 5%, of the titles. That trend implies that papers have treated food products in relation to green logistics, though the reviews do not indicate the extent of the focus on food characteristics in particular.
In sum, this thesis follows earlier research in some aspects—for example, by addressing the impact on climate and focusing on single actors. By contrast, its novelty lies in incorporating a perspective on food products, in including food waste as a type of environmental impact, and addressing several stages in supply chains is critical in relation to food waste.