Sustainability 12 03987

sustainability
Review
Mapping Research on Sustainable
Supply-Chain Management
Andrzej Lis 1 , Agata Sudolska 2, * and Mateusz Tomanek 1
1 Department of Business Excellence, Faculty of Economic Sciences and Management,
Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Torun, Poland; andrzejlis@econ.umk.pl (A.L.);
mtomanek@umk.pl (M.T.)
2 Department of Enterprise Management, Faculty of Economic Sciences and Management,
Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Torun, Poland
* Correspondence: aga@econ.umk.pl; Tel.: +48-56-6114890

Received: 1 April 2020; Accepted: 11 May 2020; Published: 13 May 2020
Abstract: The aim of the paper is to map the thematic landscape of the sustainable supply-chain
management (SSCM) research field and contribute to exploring “relationships among specific
constructs” in the field. The use of bibliometric methodology and the focus given to relationships
among topics categorized into thematic clusters within the field are the features which differ the
study from other reviews in the research field. The operational objectives of the study are as follows:
(1) to profile the development of the SSCM research field and its scientific output, (2) to identify
leading thematic areas in the field and explore their composition and relationships among them, (3) to
identify ‘hot’, emerging topics in the field. The analysis of change in the number of publications and
citations related to the SSCM concept supports the study of research productivity in the field. General
publication profiling focuses on the identification of subject areas and leading contributors to the
research field, i.e., countries, research institutions, source titles and authors. Keywords co-occurrence
analysis is employed to identify and explore leading and emerging topics. The study points out
that the main thematic areas in the SSCM research field are: (1) economy and management in the
context of the environment, (2) supply chain in the context of sustainability, (3) sustainable supply
chains—process approach, (4) decision making for SSCM, (5) the practice context of supply-chain
management, and (6) competition and social responsibility (SR) issues. The most up-to-date topics of
scientific inquiry in the field focus around the following issues: (1) human aspects, (2) sustainable
supplier selection, (3) manufacturing, (4) circular economy, (5) efficiency, (6) sustainable practices,
(7) commerce, (8) costs, (9) environmental impact, and (10) the textile industry.
Keywords: sustainable supply-chain management; bibliometrics; research profiling; science network

mapping; keywords co-occurrence analysis; Scopus; VOSviewer
1. Introduction
A key challenge for modern companies is to strike a balance between achieving competitive
advantage and acting sustainably while fulfilling their various stakeholders’ expectations in order to
preserve reputation, legitimation, and credibility [1]. For the last two decades, sustainability issues have
been gaining prominence in several research areas. Among others, sustainability creates a major concern
for organizations’ practice of placing increased emphasis on the implementation of sustainability
policies along their supply chains [1]. Organization’s orientation towards sustainability means taking
an attitude characterized by the anticipation of future consequences resulting from its decisions and
activities. Such an organization perceives sustainability as a means to improve its financial results and
strengthen competitiveness rather than a temporary trend or a fashion. Conceptually, sustainability
Sustainability 2020, 12, 3987; doi:10.3390/su12103987 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 3987 2 of 26
refers to economic, social and environmental challenges and goals common to society as a whole
and the planet [2]. Organizations focused on sustainability strive for maintaining a balance between
meeting both coherent and conflicting interests of owners and other stakeholders, such as suppliers,
business partners, customers, etc. [3]. Nowadays, supply-chain management has to go beyond pure
economic issues. Instead it has to incorporate economic, social and environmental dimensions [4,5].
A supply chain includes all activities related to the flow of goods from the raw materials stage through
production to end users, as well as information flows. The aim of supply-chain management is
to fuse these activities to achieve organization’s sustainable competitive advantages [6]. However,
in recent research sustainable supply-chain management has become a significant issue. Sustainable
supply-chain management integrates the concepts of supply-chain management and sustainability,
and implies all activities of companies to enhance sustainability of their supply chains [7]. Sustainable
supply-chain management is defined as the management of material, information and capital flows
and cooperation among firms along a supply chain while taking into account goals from all three
dimensions of sustainable development, i.e., economic, social, and environmental, which are driven by
customer and stakeholder requirements [4]. Sustainability deficits along a supply chain may result in a
decrease in firm’s financial performance or a loss of its competitiveness [8]. Therefore, research on
sustainable supply chains constitutes the field that has attracted high attention from both researchers
and practitioners in recent years. This has led to an increasing amount of works in the field, covering
a variety of subthemes such as: environmental management and performance, decision making
following the triple bottom line approach, sustainable supplier evaluation and selection, sustainable
supply-chain management risks, reverse logistics, supply-chain management for sustainable products,
etc. [9–12].
The issues regarding various aspects of sustainable supply-chain management attract numerous
scholars what results in the dynamic development of the research field. Scanning research productivity
indexed within Scopus and Web of Sciences databases confirms the growing interest of academia in
examining the issues related to the sustainable supply-chain concept and managing such supply chains.
As of 27 December 2019, the search in titles, keywords and abstracts of Scopus-indexed publications,
identified 1863 records for the phrase ‘sustainable supply chain’ (SSC), and 839 records for the phrase
‘sustainable supply-chain management’ (SSCM). The same query in the Web of Science Core Collection
resulted respectively in 1182 (SSC) and 636 (SSCM) items. It is worth noticing that a significant part of
this output has been amassed in recent years. Therefore, the role of mapping the science landscape
within the research field becomes more and more important.
There are two methodological approaches to explore scientific outputs i.e.: (1) literature
reviews [13,14] including meta-analysis studies [15] and (2) bibliometric studies based on the research
profiling method [16] and science network mapping methods [17]. Literature reviews are very often
used in the SSCM research field. As of 19 April 2020, we identified 132 publications indexed in Scopus
including the conjunction of phrases ‘sustainable supply-chain management’ and ‘literature review’ in
their titles, keywords and abstracts. For the phrase ‘sustainable supply chain’, 223 publications were
found. Among them, there are classical works published in the days of the SSCM concept emergence
such as the studies by: Seuring and Müller [4], Carter and Rogers [18], or Carter and Easton [2].
However, new literature reviews are added as well to the body of knowledge, to mention among
them the ‘review of reviews’ study by Carter and Washispack [19] or a few examples published very
recently such as: Panigrahi, Bahinipati and Jain [20], Patel and Desai [21], Koberg and Longoni [22].
Although Carter and Washispack [19] claim that the SSCM research field has been saturated with
systematic literature reviews (SLRs), and there is no need, with the exception of periodical updates, for
new reviews, they identify two gaps related to: (1) exploring “relationships among specific constructs”
and using reviews for “theory development”, and improving “methodological rigor of future SSCM
SLRs” [19] (pp. 242). Bibliometric methods, characterized by such rigor, seem to be a natural solution to
support traditional literature reviews. In particular, science network mapping methods, e.g., co-word
analysis [23], show potential to identify and explore the relationships among the concepts, approaches
and constructs manifested through author keywords and keywords assigned to publications during
indexation by databases.
Nevertheless, the growing SSCM research field has not been yet mapped with the use of the
bibliometric methods. The search for the conjunction of phrases ‘sustainable supply chain’ and
‘bibliometric’ in the titles, keywords and abstracts of publications retrieves 11 records indexed in
Scopus and six of them in Web of Science. After removing duplicates, there are found 13 publications
meeting the searching criteria. However, while studied in a detailed way, none of them appears to map
the research field of sustainable supply-chain management.
The first category among the retrieved publications provides bibliometric analysis of scientific
output dealing with such issues as sustainable development [24], eco-innovation and circular
economy [25], reverse logistics [26] or international logistics [27], which are related to the concept
of sustainable supply-chain management. The second group of publications employs bibliometric
methodology in order to profile and map the research fields of supply-chain management [28] and
service supply-chain management [29], i.e., concepts much wider than sustainable supply chain
management, which do not focus their attention on sustainable aspects of supply chains. Thirdly,
among the retrieved items, there are two papers exploring the research field of green supply-chain
management [30,31]. Although the concepts of green supply-chain management (GSCM) and
sustainable supply-chain management (SSCM) share many similarities, the former is a narrower
concept than the latter. This opinion is confirmed by the study by Ahi and Searcy [32] (pp. 329), who
indicate that “definitions for GSCM [are] generally more narrowly focused than those for SSCM and
[have] an emphasis on the characteristics of environmental, flow and coordination focuses. Although
some definitions of SSCM show considerable overlap with definitions of GSCM, it is argued that
SSCM is essentially an extension of GSCM”. Finally, the other publications combining the interest in
sustainable supply chains and employing a bibliometric approach focus their attention on sustainable
supply chains in particular sectors e.g., dairy and fruits [33] or energy [34], in the context of a
particular country, e.g., Brazil [35] or they analyze the field from the perspective of a given topic, e.g.,
digitalization [36] or decision support tools and performance management [37]. The aforementioned
findings confirm that the research field of sustainable supply-chain management has not been mapped
yet with the use of bibliometric methods, which opens a gap to support traditional literature reviews
with rigorous co-word analysis.
The aim of the paper is to map the thematic landscape of the sustainable supply-chain management
research field and contribute to exploring “relationships among specific constructs” in the field. The use
of bibliometric methodology and the focus given to relationships among thematic clusters within
the field and the items within the clusters are the features which differentiate our study from other
reviews in the research field. The operational objectives of the study are as follows: (1) to profile
the development of the SSCM research field and its scientific output, (2) to identify leading thematic
areas in the field and explore their composition and relationships among them, (3) to identify ‘hot’,
emerging topics in the field. The research process is guided through the following research questions:
(1) how has research productivity evolved in the field?, (2) what are the subject areas and leading
countries, research institutions, source titles, authors contributing to the amassing research output in
the field?, (3) what are the leading topics attracting the attention of academia? (4) what are the emerging
topics of interest in the research field? The aforementioned research questions and the findings from
benchmarking of some other publications employing the keywords co-occurrence method to map
research fields [38–40] determined the process of designing the study and influenced the structure
of the paper. The remainder of the manuscript is structured as follows. First of all, the methodology
of the study is presented, including research sampling, as well as research methods and instruments.
Secondly, research productivity in the field and main contributors are analyzed. Thirdly, high-frequency
keywords are clustered in order to identify and then explore the leading topics in the field. Fourthly,
emerging research topics are recognized. Finally, the findings of the study are discussed.
2. Method of Study
2.1. Research Sample

Scopus was used as the source of bibliometric data for research sampling. Launched in 2004,
Scopus is considered to be a world-leading and dynamically developing bibliometric database [41].
Regardless of new entrants in the field of research databases, such as Dimensions [42], Scopus and
Web of Science are the leading sources of bibliographic data. Being direct competitors, these two
databases have been often compared and contrasted by the scientometrics community and found to be
sources of quality bibliometric data, in spite of some limitations [43–47]. As of January 2020, Scopus
covers 77.8 million records and over 25,100 titles issued by more than 5000 publishers [48]. Taking into
account the number of publications, developed countries, e.g., the United States (Rank 1) and the
United Kingdom (Rank 3) are the leading contributors. Nevertheless, an increasing role of some
developing nations is worth noticing, especially China (Rank 2) and India (Rank 9). Of paramount
importance for our study, the research by Zhu and Liu [44] shows an increasing interest of scholars in
using Scopus, in line with Web of Science, for academic research, which may be a confirmation of its
relevance for bibliometric analysis.
As of 27 December 2019, we searched for the phrase ‘sustainable supply-chain management’ in
titles, keywords and abstracts (topic search) of the publications indexed in Scopus. There were no
limitations in regard to a subject area or a time span of searched publications, in order to include all
relevant works, provide a comprehensive picture of the research field and its multidimensionality,
and illustrate its evolution over time. As a result of the sampling process, 839 bibliometric records
(i.e., publications) were retrieved. Among them, articles and conference papers are the most numerous
types of documents. The sample almost entirely consists of the publications written in English (99%).
All publications written in languages other than English constitute only 1%. The detailed bibliometric
description of the research sample is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Parameters of the research sample.
Category Items (N)

Article (591); Conference Paper (113); Review (63); Book Chapter (50); Editorial (7);
Document type
Conference Review (5); Erratum (1); Short Survey (1); Undefined (3)
English (830); Chinese (3); Portuguese (3); German (1); Polish (1); Romanian (1);
Language
Spanish (1)
Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the Scopus database (27 December 2019).
Moreover, in order to study the evolution of the research field, we extracted two sub-samples
consisting of publications issued before and including 2010 (N = 57) and 2015 (N = 291).
2.2. Research Methods and Instruments

In our study, bibliometric methods are used to achieve the aim of the study. Literature reviews,
which represent a traditional approach to analyze and synthesize research outputs, are considered
to be biased and lacking rigor [13], and providing an incomplete picture due to a limited number
of publications taken for qualitative analysis [16]. Therefore, more and more often bibliometric
methods are recommended to supplement traditional literature reviews in exploration of research
fields. Having revised the variety of definitions of bibliometrics, Broadus [49] (p. 376) characterizes it
as “the quantitative study of physical published units, or of bibliographic units”. As observed by Zupic
and Čater [17] (p. 430) “[b]ibliometric methods employ a quantitative approach for the description,
evaluation, and monitoring of published research. These methods have the potential to introduce a
systematic, transparent, and reproducible review process and thus improve the quality of reviews”.
Scientific production in a research field may be explored through bibliometric studies based on the
research profiling method [16] and science network mapping methods [17].
In our paper, the analysis of the change in the number of publications and citations related to
the concept of sustainable supply-chain management supports the study of research productivity
in the field. Moreover, some elements of the research profiling method [16] are included into the
research toolbox. Research profiling, based on the number of indexed publications, points out the
leading contributors in a research field, as well as subject areas and thematic areas within a field.
This methodological approach is found to be used to explore research fields related to sustainable
supply-chain management e.g., responsible and sustainable innovations [50]. Among the three main
components of research profiling, i.e., general publication profiling, subject area profiling and topic
profiling, cf. [51–53], we employ general publication profiling focused on the identification of subject
areas and leading contributors to the research field, i.e., countries, research institutions, source titles
and authors.
The methods of science network mapping include: citation analysis, co-citation analysis,
bibliographic coupling, co-author analysis, and co-word analysis [17,54]. In our study, we employ
keywords co-occurrence analysis (which is a kind of co-word analysis) to identify and explore
leading and emerging topics. Co-word analysis is “a content analysis technique that uses patterns
of co-occurrence of pairs of items (i.e., words or noun phrases) in a corpus of texts to identify the
relationships between ideas within the subject areas presented in these texts. Indexes based on the
co-occurrence frequency of items, such as an inclusion index and a proximity index, are used to measure
the strength of relationships between items. Based on these indexes, items are clustered into groups
and displayed in network maps” [55] (p. 134). This kind of methodology has been used among others
to map the research fields related to the concept of sustainable supply-chain management focused on
the issues such as: sustainability [40] or sustainable enterprises and sustainable organizations [56].
VOSviewer software [57,58] is used to support clustering and visualizing the outcomes of
high-frequency keywords co-occurrence analysis [59]. The publications comprising the sample provide
3599 keywords. Among them, 2630 are the keywords which occurred only once. Therefore, the number
of high-frequency keywords to be selected for co-occurrence analysis, calculated in accordance with
the formula provided by Donohue [60], cited by Guo et al. [40] (p. 7), is 72, which means the keywords
with at least 13 occurrences should be taken into account. In the sample, there are 82 keywords
meeting this threshold. Among them, we excluded 15 expressions referring to the research process
such as: ‘literature reviews’ (with 27 occurrences), ‘literature review’ (36), ‘article’ (23), ‘research’ (20),
‘surveys’ (16), ‘data envelopment analysis’ (21), ‘sensitivity analysis’ (18), ‘conceptual frameworks’ (17),
‘conceptual framework’ (19), ‘fuzzy sets’ (16), ‘systematic literature review’ (20), ‘interpretive structural
modelling’ (15), ‘factor analysis’ (13), ‘case study’ (17), ‘content analysis’ (13). In total 67 expressions
were selected for co-occurrence analysis. The parameters of VOSviewer software used for analysis are
provided in Table 2.
Bibliometric keywords co-occurrence analysis aimed at mapping leading research topics in the
field is supported with core references/topic profiling [16,52], which is one of the sub-components of
the research profiling method used in order to identify the most recognized publications in each of the
thematic areas. These core references are then studied in accordance with the guidelines for systematic
literature review [61].
Table 2. VOSviewer parameters used for analysis.
Item Characteristic/Value
Type of analysis Co-occurrence analysis
Unit of analysis All keywords
Counting method Full counting
Method of normalization of strength of the links between items Association strength method
Layout
Attraction 2 (default setting)
Repulsion 0 (default setting)
Clustering
Resolution parameter (detail of clustering) 1 (default setting)
Minimum cluster size [N] 1 (default setting)
Merging small clusters Switched on
Visualization
item density visualization—1.20
Scale
network and overlay visualizations—1.00
Weights occurrences
Labels size 0.50
Maximum number of lines 500
main 2019 sample—67
High frequency keywords used for analysis [N] 2015 sub-sample—49
2010 sub-sample—17
main 2019 sample—13
Minimum occurrences of a keyword used for analysis [N] 2015 sub-sample—7
2010 sub-sample—3
Source: Own study based on data retrieved from VOSviewer (27 December 2019).
3. Research Productivity in the Field

Czakon [61] claims that the dynamics of change in the number of publications may be a
manifestation of a stage in the research field life cycle. Therefore, analyzing these trends contributes to
better understanding of the field evolution. Among 839 publications included in the research sample,
the earliest one dates back to 2001. Nevertheless, until 2007, only one or two publications were issued
per year, which could have been recognized as weak signals of the upcoming interest of academia
in researching the issues related to sustainable supply-chain management. Between 2008 and 2015,
the number of publications per year increased from several to almost 70. This period can be considered
as the emergence phase of the research field. Then, in the second half of the 2010s, dynamic growth
in research productivity has been observed as the number of publications increased from the level
of around 100 in 2016 to 165 in 2019. Graphical illustration of the growing trend in the number of
publications in the research field is presented in Figure 1. The dynamics of the increase in research
productivity focused on sustainable supply-chain management is even more visible when the number
of citations is taken into account (cf. Figure 2). Very limited in the 2000s, this measure increased by ten
times between 2010 and 2015. In the second half of the 2010s, the growing trend has been maintained,
and the measure attained almost 8000 citations in 2019.
from the level of around 100 in 2016 to 165 in 2019. Graphical illustration of the growing trend in the
number of publications in the research field is presented in Figure 1. The dynamics of the increase in
research productivity focused on sustainable supply-chain management is even more visible when
the number of citations is taken into account (cf. Figure 2). Very limited in the 2000s, this measure
increased by
Sustainability ten
2020, 12,times
3987 between 2010 and 2015. In the second half of the 2010s, the growing trend has
7 of 26
been maintained, and the measure attained almost 8000 citations in 2019.
180
165
160 160
140
120
114
100 101
80
65 67
60
47
40
31
20 22 23
16
11
0 1 1 1 1 0 2 2
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Figure
Figure 1. Scientific
1. Scientific productivity
productivity of research
of research on sustainable
on sustainable supply-chain
supply-chain management
management (SSCM)(SSCM)
measured
by the number of publications.measured by the
Source: Own number
study ofon
based publications.
data retrieved from the Scopus database
(27 December
Sustainability 2020, 12,2019).
x 7 of 25
8000 7934
7000
6349
6000
5000
4332
4000
3000 2872
2000 1951
1359
1000
819
589
85 184 260
0 0 0 5 2 3 6 13 29
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Figure
Figure 2. Scientific
2. Scientific productivity
productivity of research
of research on sustainable
on sustainable supply-chain
supply-chain management
management (SSCM)(SSCM)
measured
by the number of citations. Source: Ownby
measured study based onofdata
the number retrieved from the Scopus database
citations.
(27 December 2019).
Research related to sustainable supply-chain management is distributed over 20 subject areas,
categorized by related
Research Scopus. to
The majority ofsupply-chain
sustainable publications is indexed within
management the areas: Business,
is distributed Management
over 20 subject areas,
and Accounting
categorized by (500 publications),
Scopus. Engineering
The majority (323) and is
of publications Environmental
indexed withinScience
the (248).
areas:Among the
Business,
top ten most productive
Management nations,
and Accounting (500there are both developed
publications), Engineering and developing
(323) nations. The
and Environmental former
Science are
(248).
mainly
Among represented by Anglo-Saxon
the top ten most countries
productive nations, (theare
there United Kingdom, the
both developed andUnited States,
developing Australia,
nations. The
former are mainly represented by Anglo-Saxon countries (the United Kingdom, the United States,
Australia, and Canada) and some continental European countries (Germany, Italy). The latter are
Asian nations such as: China, India, Iran and Malaysia. Universität Kassel from Germany, which
contributed with 38 publications, is found to be the most productive research institution in the field.
Other highly productive universities are mainly the representatives of the countries identified as
leading contributors in the field, e.g., the United Kingdom (two institutions), Iran (two), the United
and Canada) and some continental European countries (Germany, Italy). The latter are Asian nations
such as: China, India, Iran and Malaysia. Universität Kassel from Germany, which contributed with
38 publications, is found to be the most productive research institution in the field. Other highly
productive universities are mainly the representatives of the countries identified as leading contributors
in the field, e.g., the United Kingdom (two institutions), Iran (two), the United States (one), Canada
(one). Moreover, Danish Syddansk Universitet and Dutch Delft University of Technology are among
the top ten contributing institutions. Journal of Cleaner Production and Sustainability Switzerland are
found to be leading source titles publishing research focused on the issues related to sustainable
supply-chain management. Seuring from Universität Kassel, Germany, and Sarkis from Worcester
Polytechnic Institute, United States, are worth mentioning as the most prolific authors in the field.
The analysis of the number of publications written by the most productive authors shows that research
in the leading universities is concentrated around a relatively small group of core scholars. The detailed
data supporting general publication profiling of the sustainable supply-chain management research
field are provided in Table 3.
Table 3. General publication profiling of the sustainable supply-chain management (SSCM)

research field.
Category Top Ten Items (Number of Publications)

Business, Management and Accounting (500); Engineering (323);
Environmental Science (248); Decision Sciences (186); Social Sciences (174);
Subject area
Energy (171); Computer Science (155); Economics, Econometrics and Finance
(136); Mathematics (38); Arts and Humanities (18)
United Kingdom (118); United States (110); Germany (93); China (88); India (82);
Country
Iran (55); Australia (45); Canada (40); Italy (37); Malaysia (35)
Universität Kassel, Germany (38); Islamic Azad University, Iran (15); Worcester
Polytechnic Institute, United States (14); Syddansk Universitet, Denmark (13);
Research Institution Cardiff University, United Kingdom (11); University of Teheran, Iran (10);
University of Plymouth, United Kingdom (10); Delft University of Technology,
the Netherlands (9); Ryerson University, Canada (9)
Journal of Cleaner Production (91); Sustainability Switzerland (42); Supply
Chain Management (26); International Journal of Production Economies (24);
Resources Conservation and Recycling (20); Journal of Supply Chain
Source Title Management (19); International Journal of Production Research (17); Business
Strategy and the Environment (16); International Journal of Physical
Distribution and Logistics Management (16); International Journal of
Operations and Production Management (12)
Seuring, S., Universität Kassel, Germany (32); Sarkis, J., Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, United States (17); Brandenburg, M., Universität Kassel, Germany (8);
Govidan, K., Syddansk Universitet, Denmark (8); Razaei, J., Delft University of
Author Technology, the Netherlands (8); Saen, R.F., Islamic Azad University, Iran (8);
Searcy, C., Ryerson University, Canada (8); Tseng, M.L., Asia University, Taiwan
(8); Walker, H., Cardiff University, United Kingdom (8); Beske, P., Leuphana
Universität Lüneburg, Germany (7)
4. Identifying Leading Research Topics
4.1. High-Frequency Keywords Clustering

The study by Zhang and associates [62] confirms that author keywords and keywords added in
the process of publications’ indexation in databases are equally effective for bibliometric analysis aimed
at exploring the structures of research fields. Therefore, we employed both categories of keywords for
the co-occurrence analysis within the research field related to sustainable supply-chain management.
In total, 839 publications included in the research sample provide 3599 keywords. Among them, those
which occur the most often are: ‘supply-chain management’ (510), ‘sustainable development’ (349),
4.1. High-Frequency Keywords Clustering
The study by Zhang and associates [62] confirms that author keywords and keywords added in
the process of publications’ indexation in databases are equally effective for bibliometric analysis
aimed at exploring the structures of research fields. Therefore, we employed both categories of
keywords2020,
Sustainability for the co-occurrence analysis within the research field related to sustainable supply-chain
12, 3987 9 of 26
management. In total, 839 publications included in the research sample provide 3599 keywords.
Among them, those which occur the most often are: ‘supply-chain management’ (510), ‘sustainable
‘sustainable
development’ supply
(349),chains’ (341), ‘sustainable
‘sustainable supply chains’supply-chain management’
(341), ‘sustainable (315), ‘sustainability’
supply-chain (263),
management’ (315),
‘decision
‘sustainability’ (263), ‘decision making’ (101). The prominence of the aforementioned expressions the
making’ (101). The prominence of the aforementioned expressions is easier to observe with is
item density visualization of high-frequency keywords in the sustainable supply-chain
easier to observe with the item density visualization of high-frequency keywords in the sustainable management
research field (cf.
supply-chain Figure 3). research field (cf. Figure 3).
management
Figure
Figure 3. 3. Itemdensity
Item densityvisualization
visualization of
of high-frequency
high-frequencykeywords
keywordsininthe sustainable
the supply-chain
sustainable supply-chain
management (SSCM) research field.
management (SSCM) research field. Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the Scopus
database and analyzed with the use of the VOSviewer application (27 December 2019).
As already mentioned, the SSCM research field has been growing dynamically in the 2010s.
In order to observe how much research interests have been changing over this decade, we identified
the top ten high-frequency keywords in the research field at the beginning (2010), in the middle (2015)
and the end (2019) of the period under analysis (cf. Table 4).
Table 4. The top 10 high-frequency keywords in the sustainable supply-chain management (SSCM)
research field (ranked by the number of occurrences).
2010 2015 2019

Rank
Keywords N Keywords N Keywords N
1. supply-chain management 31 supply-chain management 178 supply-chain management 510
2. sustainable development 24 sustainable development 129 sustainable development 349
3. sustainability 18 sustainable supply chains 122 sustainable supply chains 341
4. sustainable supply chains 12 sustainability 95 315
management
sustainable supply-chain sustainable supply-chain
5. 11 91 sustainability 263
management management
environmental
6. supply chains 9 36 decision making 101
management
corporate social environmental
7. 6 decision making 27 68
responsibility management
8. case studies 5 supply chains 27 sustainable supply chain 64
environmental
9. 5 chains 23 supply chain 52
management
10. logistics 4 supply chain 18 supply chains 44
Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the Scopus database and analyzed with the use of the VOSviewer
application (27 December 2019).
Taking into account the number of occurrences of the top ten high-frequency keywords, we observe
stability of study interests in the process of the research field evolution. In all three samples, similar
expressions manifesting leading research topics are found. In our opinion, two minor but interesting
differences are worth noticing. In the 2010 sample, unlike in two other samples, the expressions
‘corporate social responsibility’ and ‘logistics’ are listed among the top 10 high-frequency keywords
(Ranks 7 and 10 respectively). We assume that, in the early days of the research field, authors more
often referenced to corporate social responsibility and logistics, which could be considered as the
‘parent concepts’, which SSCM derives from. For instance, as of 2019, both keywords ‘corporate social
responsibility’ and ‘logistics’ achieved 33 occurrences which ranked them in positions 16-18 ex aequo.
In regard to methodologies employed in exploring the SSCM field, as of 2010, case studies played a
significant role, which is confirmed by including this expression among the top ten high-frequency
keywords. Later on, although case study methodology was often used as well, its position was
not so prominent. As of 2019, the keyword ‘case study’ is mentioned 17 times (Rank 59), and ‘case
studies’ 13 times (Rank 76). Simultaneously, following the development of the field, ‘literature reviews’
(28 occurrences, Rank 23), and ‘systematic literature reviews’ (21 occurrences, Rank 41) have gained
importance among research methodologies employed by scholars cultivating the field.
In order to identify the leading thematic areas within the research field, we conducted the network
analysis. The outcome of this operation is the map of clusters including high-frequency keywords
grouped into the categories
Sustainability 2020, 12,showing
x relatedness and co-occurrence (cf. Figure 4). In the map, distance 10 of 25
between the items is the measure of their relatedness (i.e. the closer the items are to each other, the more
relatednesslines
theybetween
show), whilethe items. The sizesco-occurrences
the strongest of the framesarecorrespond withthe
marked with thelines
weights (prominences)
between the of
keywords measured by the number of occurrences.
items. The sizes of the frames correspond with the weights (prominences) of keywords measured by
the number of occurrences.
Figure 4. Clusters of Clusters

Figure 4. high-frequency keywords in
of high-frequency the sustainable
keywords supply-chain
in the sustainable management
supply-chain (SSCM) (SSCM)
management
research field. Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the
research field. Scopus database and analyzed
with the use of the VOSviewer application (27 December 2019).
Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the Scopus database and analyzed with the use of the
The network analysis of co-occurrence of high-frequency keywords related to research on
VOSviewer application (27 December 2019).
sustainable supply-chain management indicates the six following thematic areas within the research
field: (1) economy
Theand management
network analysisin of
theco-occurrence
context of the of
environment, (2) supply
high-frequency chain in
keywords the context
related to research on
of sustainability, (3) sustainable supply chains—process approach, (4) decision making for SSCM,
sustainable supply-chain management indicates the six following thematic areas within the research
field: (1) economy and management in the context of the environment, (2) supply chain in the context
of sustainability, (3) sustainable supply chains – process approach, (4) decision making for SSCM, (5)
practice context of supply chain management, (6) competition and social responsibility (SR) issues.
The detailed composition of the clusters identified above is presented in Table 5. The number of
occurrences for high-frequency keywords included into the analysis ranges from 13 (in the case of
(5) practice context of supply chain management, (6) competition and social responsibility (SR) issues.
The detailed composition of the clusters identified above is presented in Table 5. The number of
occurrences for high-frequency keywords included into the analysis ranges from 13 (in the case of ten
items) to 510 (‘supply chain management’). The minimum value of total link strength is 52 (‘SSCM’),
the maximum of 2324 (‘supply chain management’). The most prominent keywords, i.e., those with
the highest numbers of occurrences, links and total link strengths are shown in bold.
Table 5. Composition of high-frequency keywords clusters in the sustainable supply-chain management

(SSCM) research field.
Cluster
Items (N) Keywords (Occurrences; Links; Total Link Strength)
Number/Label/Color
circular economy (13; 23; 70); commerce (19; 37; 116); costs (19;
35; 120); developing countries (22; 42; 142); economic and
social effects (31; 55; 242); economics (16; 42; 118);
C1/economy and environmental impact (31; 48; 194); environmental
management in the management (68; 60; 419); environmental performance (27; 45;
18
context of the 174); environmental sustainability (34; 43; 179); food supply
environment/red (17; 33; 100); industrial economics (20; 40; 140); industrial
research (15; 35; 113); life cycle (24; 41; 153); manufacture (39;
52; 258); product design (19; 41; 136); sales (17; 42; 110); waste
management (13; 34; 99)
corporate social responsibility (33; 35; 114); environment (16;
31; 84); environmental economics (18; 27; 87); environmental
protection (14; 38; 85); human (25; 46; 149); innovation (19; 23;
C2/supply chain in the
62); management practice (13; 25; 72); manufacturing (17; 26;
context of 14
79); performance assessment (15; 27; 79); performance
sustainability/green
measurement (16; 25; 57); stakeholder (19; 28; 96); supply
chain management (510; 66; 2324); sustainability (262; 66;
960); sustainable supply chain (64; 53; 272)
chains (27; 46; 179); green supply chain management (38; 48;
201); information management (19; 35; 117); integration (13; 29;
C3/sustainable supply 72); logistics (33; 44; 179); planning (26; 40; 166); supply chain
chains—process 12 (52; 47; 202); supply chain managements (13; 28; 84); supply
approach /blue chains (44; 53; 259); sustainable development (349; 66; 1857);
sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) (32; 34; 124);
sustainable supply chains (341; 66; 1837)
decision making (101; 61; 609); decision support systems (16;
32; 108); decision theory (13; 26; 79); efficiency (18; 24; 94);
C4/decision making for optimization (23; 31; 122); social aspects (23; 37; 156);
10
SSCM/yellow sustainable supplier selection (21; 27; 102); sustainable
supplier selections (19; 26; 110); textile industry (13; 29; 71);
triple bottom line (31; 41; 145)
social sustainability (19; 34; 101); SSCM (21; 20; 52); supplier
C5/practice context of
selection (30; 30; 127); sustainability performance (16; 30; 88);
supply chain 7
sustainability practices (17; 35; 106); sustainable practices (17;
management /violet
30; 82); sustainable supply chain management (315; 65; 1060)
competition (24; 46; 163); industry (19; 35; 108); management
C6/competition and SR
6 (13; 30; 78); resource based view (13; 23; 56); social
issues /light blue
responsibility (25; 29; 86); sustainability issues (13; 35; 81)
Cluster 1 (marked in red in Figure 4) comprises 18 keywords. The location of the cluster extends
mainly from the western part to the northern part of the map creating a total of 748 links with
2883 total link strength. The cluster is placed between Clusters 3 and 4, and fills also the space
between Clusters 2 and 4. The most important expressions that are the main nodes of this cluster
are: ‘environmental management’, ‘manufacture’, ‘environmental sustainability’, ‘economic and social
effects’, ‘environmental impact’, ‘environmental performance’, and ‘developing countries’. This cluster
is labeled as ‘economy and management in the context of the environment’.
Cluster 2 (marked in green in Figure 4) comprises 14 keywords. The location of the cluster can be
defined as north-eastern and eastern with a tendency to overlap the central part of the map. The central
node is ‘supply chain management’ with 510 occurrences and 66 links whose total link strength is 2324.
The other main expressions that make up this cluster are ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable supply chain’.
Altogether this cluster creates 516 links, whose total link strength is 4520. The keywords that make
up this cluster are also major words defining this subject of research, hence the cluster is defined as
‘supply chain in the context of sustainability’.
Cluster 3 (marked in blue in Figure 4) comprises 12 keywords. The location of the cluster can be
described as southern and south-west, however the key nodes, i.e., ‘sustainable development’ and
‘sustainable supply chains’ are located in the central area of the map with a total of 690 occurrences,
and the total link strength of these two nodes is 3694. Other expressions that make up this cluster
include: ‘supply chain’, ‘supply chains’, ‘green supply chain management’, and ‘logistics’. This cluster
together creates 536 connections, whose total link strength is 5277. The keywords that are grouped
in this cluster focus on ‘sustainable’ and ‘supply chains’. Hence, it is labeled as ‘sustainable supply
chains—process approach’.
Cluster 4 (marked in yellow in Figure 4) comprises ten keywords, creating 334 links with a total
link strength of 1596. Although the nodes are not distributed close together, it can be said that the
cluster mainly occupies the north-western part of the map, but its elements can be found also in the
other parts of the map of the research field, which indicates a relatively weak strength of relationships
between them. The dominating node of the cluster is ‘decision-making’, and other elements include:
‘triple bottom line’, ‘optimization’, ‘social aspects’, and ‘sustainable supplier selection’. The keywords
contained in this cluster designated the cluster as ‘decision-making for SSCM’.
Cluster 5 (marked in violet in Figure 4) comprises seven keywords, creating 244 links with a
total link strength of 1616. ‘Sustainable supply chain management’, located in the eastern part of
the map center, is the most prominent expression in this cluster. An interesting phenomenon in this
cluster is that the keywords such as ‘sustainable supply chain management’, ‘supplier selection’,
‘social sustainability’, and ‘sustainable practices’ are often connected with the nodes of the neighboring
clusters, i.e., with Cluster 2 located in the northeast and Cluster 3 in the southern areas of the map.
Cluster 5 has is branded as the ‘practice context of supply chain management’.
Cluster 6 (marked in light blue in Figure 4) comprises five keywords. The keywords that make up
this cluster have a smaller impact than the previous groups, since they have a total of 198 bonds with a
total link strength of 572. The name of this cluster (‘competition and social responsibility issues’) is
derived from the following strongest keywords: ‘social responsibility’, ‘competition’, and ‘sustainability
issues’. This cluster is located primarily on the southern edges of the map, where distances from
neighboring elements are far from each other, which may indicate a weak strength of relations
between them.
Clustering shown in Figure 4 and Table 5 provides an overview of the SSCM research field structure.
Based on the analysis of high-frequency keywords, it allows us to distinguish several subfields in
the SSCM field. The visualization of clusters of high-frequency keywords in the field presented in
Figure 4, combined with the analysis of core references in the distinguished clusters, confirms that there
are many connections between the identified clusters (clusters are inter-connected), which suggests
that they cover the dependent bodies of literature. The visualization presented in Figure 4 indicates
several relations between keywords belonging to different clusters. For example, some connections
between keywords from Cluster 2 (green) and Cluster 5 (violet) are observed. This is due to the
fact that the keywords that make up both clusters relate to complementary issues. The keywords
forming Cluster 2 refer to such issues as ‘environmental protection’, ‘manufacturing’, ‘management
practice’, or ‘corporate social responsibility’. The aforesaid expressions relate to the issues described
by the keywords constituting Cluster 5, such as ‘supplier selection’, ‘sustainable practices’ or simply
‘sustainable supply chain management’. There are also several links between the keywords forming
Cluster 1 (red) and Cluster 3 (blue). In this case, we notice some connections between such aspects as
‘sustainable development’, ‘planning’, ‘green supply chain management’ or ‘integration’ appearing as
the keywords in Cluster 3 with the issues regarding ‘manufacturing’, ‘environmental performance
and impact’, ‘environmental management’, ‘circular economy’, ‘economic and social effects’, ‘costs’ or
‘developing countries’. Abovementioned relations reflect multidimensionality and complexity of the
SSCM research field. On the other hand, the visualization presented in Figure 4 confirms that Cluster 4
(yellow) and Cluster 6 (light blue) cover relatively independent bodies of literature.
4.2. Core References/Thematic Clusters Profiling

Among the publications within the SSCM research field receiving the highest number of citations
are the works by: Seuring and Müller [4], Carter and Rogers [18], Pagell and Wu [7], Carter and
Easton [2], and Brandenburg, Govindan, Sarkis, and Seuring [63]. As pointed out in Table 2, Seuring
from Universität Kassel, Germany, and Sarkis from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, United States,
are the most prolific authors in the field. Profiling of core references within the thematic clusters is
employed in order to explore the research status in the field. For each cluster, five the most cited
publications had been selected, and then all remaining clusters were searched whether they included
these items. The outcomes of the analysis are presented in Table 6. While analyzing the presented data,
co-sharing of many references by thematic clusters may be observed. This is particularly prominent in
the case of Clusters 2 and 3.
Table 6. Core references in the clusters of high-frequency keywords in the sustainable supply-chain
management (SSCM) research field (ranked by the number of citations).
Reference Citations (N) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6

Seuring and Müller [4] 2310 - 1 1 1 - 1
Carter and Rogers [18] 1392 - 2 - - - 2
Pagell and Wu [7] 697 - 3 - - - -
Carter and Easton [2] 627 1 4 - - - 3
Brandenburg, Govindan,
520 2 5 2 2 - -
Sarkis and Seuring [63]
Hassini, Surti and Searcy [64] 489 3 6 3 - - -
Seuring [5] 488 - 7 4 - - -
Ahi and Searcy [32] 465 - 8 5 - - -
Govindan, Khodaverdi and
421 4 9 6 3 1 -
Jafarian [65]
Gold, Seuring and Beske [66] 391 - - 7 - 2 4
Wu and Pagell [9] 361 5 10 8 4 - -
Ashby, Leat and
332 6 11 9 - 3 -
Hudson-Smith [67]
Tate, Ellram and Kirchoff [68] 310 - 12 10 - 4 -
Pagell and Shevchenko [69] 281 - 13 - - 5 -
Büyüközkan and Çifçi [10] 270 - 15 11 5 6 -
Beske, Land and Seuring [70] 254 8 17 12 - 7 5
The core references in Cluster 1, labeled as ‘economy and management in the context of the
environment’, are the works by Carter and Easton [2], Brandenburg, Govindan, Sarkis and Seuring [63],
Hassini, Surti and Searcy [64], Govindan, Khodaverdi and Jafarian [65], and Wu and Pagell [9].
Carter and Easton [2] notice that the SSCM field evolved from the perspective of social and environmental
research, then through the concept of corporate social responsibility, up to the “perspectives of
sustainability as the triple bottom line and the emergence of SSCM as a theoretical framework” [2]
(pp. 46). Brandenburg, Govindan, Sarkis and Seuring [63] describe the quantitative review of SSCM
models for the purposes of identifying current gaps but also for determining future research perspectives
based on the SSCM model. Similarly to Kannegiesser and Günther [71], the authors claim that SSCM
model research can develop the inter-organizational perspective of supply chain management and
extend it to the level of industry sectors. According to them, further SSCM research is also needed
to integrate model-based methods with empirical research that focuses on ecological efficiency and
environmental aspects. Hassini, Surti and Searcy [64] use a different approach to literature review in
order to study two systems: one for managing sustainable supply chains and the other for developing
performance measures for sustainable supply chains, finally presenting a case study illustrating the
experience of a power company in determining performance indicators. Govindan, Khodaverdi
and Jafarian [65] focus on management of food supply chains (FSCs), including the development of
a sustainable SCM model for perishable food that takes into account the cost of carbon emissions.
Wu and Pagell [9] analyze case studies in order to contribute to building theory and answering to
the question: “how do organizations balance short-term profitability and long-term environmental
sustainability when making supply chain decisions under conditions of uncertainty?” [9] (p. 577).
Cluster 2, labeled as the ‘supply chain in the context of sustainability’, includes the most cited core
references in the whole research field. Suering and Müller [4] review 191 articles on sustainable supply
chain management, published between 1994 and 2007. When creating the conceptual framework,
the authors propose two separate strategies: (1) supplier management for risks and performance and
(2) supply chain management for sustainable products. They also note that sustainable supply chain
management is characterized by explicit integration of environmental or social objectives which extend
the economic dimension to the triple-bottom-line (TBL). Hence, the article by Seuring and Müller is
included in Clusters 2, 3, 4 and 5. The second most frequently cited article is the work by Carter and
Rogers [18], which is categorized in Clusters 2 and 6. In their publication, the authors present the
concept of sustainable development in regard to supply chain management. To achieve this, the authors
study the concept of sustainable development focusing also on integration of economic, social and
environmental criteria, the aim of which is to be able to achieve long-term economic viability. They also
believe that vertical coordination is required to manage a supply chain as a whole. Pagell and Wu [7]
notice that organizational ability to introduce innovation is the beginning of successful management of
a sustainable supply chain, and that the precursor of sustainable supply chain management should
have a managerial orientation. The list of top five core references in Cluster 2 is supplemented by the
works of Carter and Easton [2] and Brandenburg and associates [63], already discussed in Cluster 1.
Cluster 3, labeled as ‘sustainable supply chains—process approach’, share the most cited core
references with Clusters 1 and 2 [4,63,64]. For instance, Hassini, Surti and Searcy [64] refer to the serving
system “or the development of performance measures for sustainable supply chains” [64] (pp. 69).
Among other papers, Seuring [5] notes that over the past 15 years, during which over 300 articles on
green or sustainable supply chains had been published, only 36 had applied quantitative models as
research methodology. The environmental dimension clearly dominated in these studies, while social
aspects were omitted or misinterpreted. Ahi and Searcy [32] also deal with green and sustainable
supply chain management and analyze the definitions of GSCM and SSCM (which has a broader scope
than GSCM).
‘Decision-making for SSCM’ is a thematic area covered by publications categorized in Cluster
4. It shares the majority of its core references [4,9,63,65] with the already studied clusters. Last but
not least, Büyüközkan and Çifçi [10] analyze the problem of identifying an effective model based on
sustainability principles for supplier selection operations in supply chains, noting that suppliers play a
significant role at the beginning of a sustainable supply chain. Interestingly, the proposed solution for
the assessment and selection of sustainable suppliers is further illustrated by the example of one of the
largest producers of the Turkish household appliances industry.
Cluster 5, marked as the ‘practice context of supply chain management’, centers around the use
of, among others, case studies, such as in the articles by Govindan, Khodaverdi and Jafarian [65],
Büyüközkan and Çifçi [10] or by Beske, Land and Seuring [70]. Among other publications, Tate,
Ellram and Kirchoff [68] analyze 100 selected CSR reports of enterprises in order to study supply chain
management. They accomplish this by categorizing information into ten types of relationships with
SCM: (1) ‘supply chain’, (2) ‘institutional pressure’, (3) ‘community focus’, (4) ‘consumer orientation’,
(5) ‘external environment ‘, (6) ‘risk management’, (7) ‘measures’, (8) ‘energy’, (9) ‘healthcare’,
(10) ‘green building’.
Cluster 6, labeled as ‘competition and social responsibility issues’, shares its leading core
references [2,4,18] with other clusters. Giving the particular emphasis to competition and social
responsibility, Gold, Seuring and Beske [66] notice that valuable and rare resources and opportunities
resulting from cooperation in the entire supply chain can become a source of sustainable competitive
advantage for cooperating enterprises. This ‘collaborative paradigm’ in supply chain management
treats strategic cooperation as a key source of competitive advantage built for the needs of the product’s
total life-cycle basis. Beske, Land and Seuring [70], in their research conducted in the food industry,
find it is important to implement dynamic capabilities as an aspect that allows achieving competitive
advantages when applying SSCM practices.
The relations between the distinguished clusters, mentioned in the previous section, have been
confirmed by the analysis of core references assigned to the clusters, shown in Table 6. The conducted
analysis proves several links between Cluster 1, Cluster 2 and Cluster 3. They share more than one
third of core references mentioned in Table 6 with one another that refer to such issues as developing
performance measures for SSCM or striving for obtaining balance between short-term profitability
and long-term environmental sustainability. Additionally, the links between Cluster 2 and Cluster 5,
observed in the visualization presented in Figure 4, have been proved by the analysis of core references
shared by the distinguished clusters. Data in Table 6 indicate that there are more than one third of
core references shared by Cluster 2 and Cluster 5. They mainly refer to sustainable supplier selection,
sustainable manufacturing practices, a process approach to SSC, environmental protection as well as
measuring performance in accordance with the TBL concept.
5. Identifying Emerging Research Topics

The overlay visualization function of the VOSviewer application is employed in order to present
emerging topics in the research field related to sustainable supply chain management. In the process
of analysis, scores corresponding to the year of publications are assigned to the items, then the
average year of publication is calculated and presented by VOSviewer. In the map (cf. Figure 5),
the colors ranging from blue (the earliest publications) to yellow (the latest ones) may be used to find
how the research interest in particular topics has been changing [58]. The following ten keywords
in the sustainable supply chain management research field are found to have the most up-to-date
average publication date: ‘human’ (2018.16)’, ‘sustainable supplier selection’ (2017.32), ‘manufacturing’
(2017.29), ‘circular economy’ (2017.15), ‘efficiency’ (2017.06); ‘sustainable practices’ (2017.00), ‘commerce’
(2016.95), ‘costs’ (2016.95), ‘environmental impact’ (2016.94), ‘textile industry’ (2016.92). The obtained
findings demonstrate a growing interest of researchers in the key aspects having influence on achieving
sustainability while managing all activities related to the flow of goods from the raw materials stage
through operations to the end user as well as the flow of information that constitute a supply chain.
(2017.00), ‘commerce’ (2016.95), ‘costs’ (2016.95), ‘environmental impact’ (2016.94), ‘textile industry’
(2016.92). The obtained findings demonstrate a growing interest of researchers in the key aspects
having influence on achieving sustainability while managing all activities related to the flow of goods
from the raw materials stage through operations to the end user as well as the flow of information
that constitute a supply chain.
Figure
Figure 5. 5. Overlayvisualization
Overlay visualization of
of high-frequency
high-frequency keywords
keywordsinin thethe
management (SSCM) research field.
management (SSCM) research field. Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the Scopus
database and analyzed with the use of the VOSviewer application (27 December 2019).
Source: Own study based on data retrieved from the Scopus database and analyzed with the use of the
Similarly
VOSviewer to the analysis
application of leading
(27 December 2019). thematic areas, we made an attempt to identify what topics
were considered by scholars as ‘hot’ in various phases of the research field development. Due to a very
Similarly
limited numbertoofthe analysis of comprising
publications leading thematic areas,
the 2010 we made(N
sub-sample an=attempt
57), weto identify
focused ourwhat topics
attention
on comparing and contrasting the status in the field as of 2015 and 2019. Table 7 presents the to
were considered by scholars as ‘hot’ in various phases of the research field development. Due topa
very limited number of publications comprising the 2010 sub-sample (N = 57), we focused
high-frequency keywords in the research field, ranked by the average date of publication, in 2015 our
attention
and 2019. on comparing and contrasting the status in the field as of 2015 and 2019. Table 7 presents
the top high-frequency keywords in the research field, ranked by the average date of publication, in
2015Table 7. The top high-frequency keywords in the sustainable supply-chain management (SSCM)
and 2019.
research field (ranked by the average date of publication—ADP).
2015 2019
Rank
Keywords ADP Keywords ADP
1. sustainability practices 2014.43 human 2018.16
2. chains 2014.00 sustainable supplier selection 2017.32
3. global warming 2014.00 manufacturing 2017.29
4. innovation 2014.00 circular economy 2017.15
5. sustainable supply chain management 2014.00 efficiency 2017.06
6. environmental impact 2013.86 sustainable practices 2017.00
7. performance measurement 2013.86 commerce 2016.95
8. environmental sustainability 2013.77 costs 2016.95
9. product design 2013.75 environmental impact 2016.94
10. environmental performance 2013.57 textile industry 2016.92
Considering the top ten latest high-frequency keywords in the SSCM field, we observe a significant
change in topics that can be considered as new and ‘hot’ in the given periods. In both analyzed
samples, some similar expressions displaying new research topics are found, e.g., ‘sustainable
practices’ or ‘environmental impact’. However, based on the data presented in Table 7 the evolution
of researchers’ interests in the area of SSCM field is visible. Topics related to such keyword as
‘performance measurement’, ‘chains’ or ‘sustainable supply chain management’ listed in 2015 have
evolved into issues referring to such keywords as ‘efficiency’, ‘sustainable supplier selection’ or
‘manufacturing’. What seems interesting is that in 2015 authors concentrating on SSCM more often
referenced ‘innovations’ and ‘product design’ in their studies. Instead of these issues, four years later,
the topics focused on ‘circular economy’ appeared, which in fact covers the issues related to ‘efficiency’,
‘innovation’, ‘product design’, ‘performance measurement’, ‘commerce’, etc. As circular economy
refers to an economic system aimed at eliminating waste and the continual use of resources, it requires
keeping products, equipment and infrastructure in use for longer through improving the resources
productivity. Therefore, we assume that the keyword ‘circular economy’, which appeared among
the top ten up-to-date high-frequency keywords in the SSCM research field in 2019, is an ‘umbrella’
covering a number of some smaller topics in the studied area. Another interesting observation is the
fact that in the 2015 sample, unlike in the other one, the expression ‘global warming’ is listed among the
top ten up-to-date high-frequency keywords. We suspect that the issue of global warming has in time
become one of the elements of the research area concerning the broadly understood impact of business
on the natural environment which is associated with the keyword ‘environmental impact’. On the
other hand, in the 2019 sample the phrases ‘human’ as well as the ‘textile industry’ appear among the
top ten up-to-date high-frequency keywords. The expression ‘human’ refers to several social issues
related to SSCM. In turn, the appearance of the emerging topic labeled as the ‘textile industry’ results
from the fact that in the contemporary economy, textile supply chains are becoming increasingly global.
Therefore, the rising level of outsourcing to developing countries has placed an increasing focus on
sustainability. In consequence, the need to understand how to integrate sustainability into globally
fragmented supply chains is highly important and thus this area attracts many researchers in the field.
6. Discussion
The analysis of literature on sustainable supply chain management allows us to identify and
explore the leading thematic areas in the field, which include: (1) economy and management in the
context of the environment, (2) supply chain in the context of sustainability, (3) sustainable supply
chains—process approach, (4) decision making for SSCM, (5) the practice context of supply chain
management, and (6) competition and social responsibility (SR) issues. Mapping of the scientific
landscape in the research field is supported with the identification of emerging topics. The most
up-to-date topics of scientific inquiry in the field focus around the following issues: (1) human aspects,
(2) sustainable supplier selection, (3) manufacturing, (4) circular economy, (5) efficiency, (6) sustainable
practices, (7) commerce, (8) costs, (9) environmental impact, and (10) the textile industry.
Nowadays, considerable attention of the researchers interested in SSCM is placed on building
sustainable supply chains by combining economic, social and environmental dimensions in accordance
with the triple bottom line concept (TBL) referring to the balance between the economy, the society
and the natural environment. According to the TBL concept, business entities should focus on three
different so-called bottom lines. The first bottom line refers to the traditional economic (financial)
dimension of a company, which is called ‘Profit’. The second bottom line is called ‘People’ and it regards
the degree of social responsibility in all their activities. Finally, the third bottom line is labeled as ‘Planet’
and refers to the degree of business’s environmental responsibility. TBL idea strives to ensure that the
company’s social and environmental activities are taken into account in the same way as its financial
results [72]. Today, there is considerable agreement among scholars and practitioners on the view
that if a company aspires to achieve a particular level of sustainability, it has to make much efforts to
incorporate three components of the TBL concept along its whole supply chain [2,4,18,29,32,70,73–75].
Moreover, the economic, social, environmental dimensions of the triple bottom line approach are
complementary and connected to each other, having some common drivers, enablers, and barriers
within a supply chain [64,76]. Taking the above into consideration, it is impossible to separate economic
issues from social or environmental ones.
The knowledge domain of sustainable supply chain management is developing fast. In academia,
more and more attention is paid to discussing sustainable supply chain management by building on
the TBL approach, integrating economic, social, and environmental dimensions into supply chains. It is
worth noticing that these fundamental aspects are still very appreciated by the scholars cultivating in
the field. Emerging topics identified in our study (e.g., ‘manufacturing’, ‘supplier selection’, ‘efficiency’,
‘costs’, ‘human’ aspects, ‘sustainable practices’, ‘environmental impact’, and ‘circular economy’)
directly invoke to the TBL concept dimensions proposed by Elkington [72]. All aforementioned
aspects are interrelated. Effective sustainable supply chain management requires a particular strategy
towards supplier assessment and selection, manufacturing technologies and practices that mitigate
influence on the natural environment. Nowadays, researchers spend much effort on explaining the
relationships between sourcing and supplier selection, optimization of several business areas, such
as manufacturing or transport, etc. and environmental impacts of business. Incorporating all these
aspects into sustainable supply chain management is perceived as fundamental not only for resource
saving and eliminating waste, but also for improving productivity [31,77].
We assume that the increasing researchers’ interest in the ways of incorporating the TBL idea
into companies’ strategies and operations implies the leading topics in the field of SSCM referring
to ‘economy and management in the context of the environment’ and ‘supply chain in the context
of sustainability’. Furthermore, while discussing the leading topics in the field of sustainable
supply-chain management, an important issue refers to the process approach to managing sustainable
supply chains [64,70]. Since recent growing pressure from several groups of stakeholders has prompted
the manufacturing industry to integrate sustainability-conscious practices into their entire supply
chains, the companies need to shift from optimization at the firm level to the entire supply chain.
Then the aforesaid issues reflect the economic aspects associated with the TBL concept. However,
a shift from optimization at the firm level to the entire supply chain is very complex. A supply
chain involves management of product flows from the initial sources of raw material to the end-user
customers in both forward and reverse directions, thus incorporating sustainability into supply chain
requires a process approach [64,78].
The process approach to sustainable supply chain management refers to the aspects regarding
decision making. This area is another leading topic identified in the conducted study. Decision making
for sustainable supply chain management is closely related to supplier selection and assessment,
found among emerging topics. Supplier selection attracts particularly the interest of Büyüközkan
and Çifçi [10]. The aforesaid authors identify and discuss an effective model based on sustainability
principles for supplier selection operations in supply chains. While describing their framework,
they highlight the importance of suppliers who constitute the first element of a sustainable supply
chain. Similarly, Reefke, Ahmed and Sundaram [11] highlight that supply chains are complex systems,
and decision making and support processes for the development and management of such multifaceted
entities are quite challenging. They underlie the fact that that current supply chain practices are often
ad hoc and lack end-to-end support for the gradual transformation towards supply chain sustainability.
Given this, the aforementioned authors propose a model for sustainable business transformation.
Moreover, while considering decision-making issues, it should be noted that sustainable supply-chain
management, due to its inherent complexity, requires continuous analysis of the internal and external
situation of a company. Moreover, it is always loaded with particular risks resulting from the choice of
strategy and resource allocation. Hence, while considering decision-making processes, supply chain
management should be supported by a variety of instruments to streamline organizational structures
and processes [12].
The issue of decision making for creating sustainable supply chains is also the focus of Wu and
Pagell [9]. These researchers address the problem referring to obtaining balance between short-term
profitability and long-term environmental sustainability under conditions of uncertainty. The aforesaid
aspect is directly associated with one of the identified leading topics focused on the practical context
of supply chain management. The practical context of supply chain management refers to the issues
related to supplier selection, sourcing, environmental-oriented technological processes implementation,
sustainability performance, etc. [31,77,79]. Focusing on these issues leads to the aspects regarding
SSCM through the lens of business impact on the natural environment which is one of the TBL concept
components [9]. Nowadays, there is a considerable agreement among researchers and practitioners on
the fact that environmental changes are upon us. Environment pollution and depletion of resources
have been troubling both human common life as well as business over the last two decades. Therefore,
all strategies and practices aimed at preventing environmental degradation become a point of interest
for the researchers from different disciplines [31].
Social responsibility and human aspects constitute another leading thematic area in the field.
As argued by Zorzini et al. [76], a company aimed at successful managing its supply chain in line with
sustainability priorities has to focus not only on profits and its impact on the natural environment,
but also on the social well-being of employees and a wider community what is the third pillar of the
TBL concept. Despite the fact that importance of being aware of social practices amongst supply chain
partners and business environmental impacts are hard to dispute, there are many intrinsic challenges to
incorporating social and environmental concerns into decisions regarding supply chain management
in practice. Therefore, it is not surprising that, as a challenging issue for many business entities and
their suppliers, the practical aspects of sustainable supply chain management constitute an area of
researchers’ interest.
Building the company’s sustainable supply chain on the TBL idea draws researchers’ attention to
the aspects of employees’ well-being as well as social benefits related to SSCM. We assume that this
trend of academia’s interest results in the fact that among the most visible emerging topics one can
find the issues related to widely understood social issues (which in our study is manifested by one of
the emerging topics labeled ‘human’) encompassing such aspects as compliance with human rights,
discrimination, child labor, long working hours, occupational health and safety, forced compulsory labor,
security practices, freedom of employees’ association and collective bargaining, unfair competition,
etc. Therefore, sustainability aspects, considered through the lens of above mentioned problems, are
sometimes perceived as constituting a new idea of humanity. It is worth noting that the research stream
corresponding with human aspects of sustainable supply chain management and gaining an increasing
interest in academia is socially responsible sourcing, that focuses on the upstream management of the
supply chain [76].
The last emerging topic identified in this study has been labeled as the ‘textile industry’.
This phenomenon seems to result from the fact that nowadays companies operating in the textile
sector are increasingly under the spotlight for their involvement in social and environmental issues.
As noted by several authors, the issue of sustainable supply chain management in the textile industry
becomes increasingly important [1,12,73]. This is caused by the fact that companies operating in the
textile industry are strongly exposed to the occurrence of social and environmental problems, both in
the production phase and the entire supply chain [12]. As far as the social dimension of TBL idea is
concerned, it needs to be highlighted that the aspects related to sustainable supply chain management
and the textile sector refer to such issues as labor intensiveness and its outsourcing activities to
developing countries with usually high corruption rates. Thus, transparency of suppliers, social
risks related to child labor or extensive work hours and the environmental impacts, following global
initiatives like Global Compact or international standards and principles, such as AA1000, EMAS,
ISO 14000, ISO 19011, etc., are vital areas of interest for the researchers analyzing the textile sector.
While considering the impact of the textile industry on the environment, it is of great significance to
note that environmental issues arise at all stages of the textile supply chain. As highlighted by Oelze [1]
as well as Zimon and Domingues [12], the expansion of textile production and consumption resulted
in increasing pollution, water shortages, fossil fuel and raw material depletion, and climate change.
In addition, the problems regarding achieving sustainable supply chain management in the textile
industry involve strong dispersion of individual links in the supply chain resulting from the efforts to
minimize labor and production costs, widespread use of outsourcing of finished products far away
from sales markets or problems with managing the return of post-seasonal clothes [12].
Our findings related to the leading thematic areas and emerging topics in the field of sustainable
supply chain management are aligned with the evidence found in the relevant literature. The issues
regarding incorporating economic, social and environmental dimensions of business activities in
line with the TBL approach are discussed by many researchers in the field [4,5,18,70,75]. Among the
publications focusing on social aspects in relation to sustainable supply chain management it is
worth pointing out the works of Walker and Jones [80], Zorzini, Hendry, Huq, and Stevenson [76],
Freise and Seuring [81], Köksal, Strähle, Müller and Freise [73]. The studies of Zorzini et al. [76] as
well as Köksal et al. [73] present findings of two extended literature reviews on the social dimension
of sustainable supply chain management. Additionally, the issues considering the environmental
impact in relation to sustainable supply chain management are discussed by many authors in the
field. For instance, Ahi and Searcy [32] or Shan and Wang [31] emphasize integrating environmental
considerations into supply chain management research and practice. Finally, the findings regarding
the identified emerging topic that was labeled as the ‘textile industry’ are consistent with the literature
review, too. As noticed by Oelze [1], sustainability constitutes a major concern for textile companies’
practice of placing increased emphasis on the implementation of sustainability policies along their
supply chains. This phenomenon implies several problems to be studied both by the researchers and
practitioners, such as transparency of suppliers influencing supplier assessment and selection, social
risks resulting from child labor problems, work conditions, extensive work hours or environmental
impacts. This results in the increasing interest of academics in the field, e.g., the works regarding
sustainability in the textile sector, apart from Oelze [1], are provided by Freise and Seuring [81],
Zorzini et al. [76], Giannakis and Papadopoulos [82], Köksal et al. [73] or Sudolska, Drabkowska-Skarba,
Łapińska, Kadzielawski
˛ and Dziuba [83]. The aforementioned authors examine several aspects related
to integrating the triple bottom line approach along the supply chain in the textile sector. However, all of
them highlight the growing focus of the sector on developing sustainable supply chain management
models. Thus, we assume that this will be really a fast developing topic within the studied field.
7. Conclusions
Summing up, the conducted literature analysis allows us to answer the research questions that
have been addressed. The study has: (1) discovered the trends in research productivity in the field,
(2) identified the main subject areas and leading contributors (countries, research institutions, source
titles, authors) to the amassing research output in the field, (3) identified the leading and emerging
topics of scientific inquiry (4) discussed the research status in the field.
Addressing the first research question we referred to the evolution of research productivity in
the SSCM field. Investigation of research productivity indicates three phases in the development of
the SSCM research field. Firstly, in 2001-7, weak signals of the upcoming interest of academia were
noticed. The period 2008-15 can be considered as the emergence phase. Since 2016, the growth phase
of the research field life cycle has been observed, which has resulted in amassing the scientific output.
The second research question posed in the paper was aimed at identifying subject areas and leading
countries, research institutions, source titles, and authors contributing to the amassing research output
in the field. Answering this question, we have found out that the publications related to SSCM refer to
over 20 subject areas; however, most of the works are indexed in the areas of Business, Management
and Accounting, Engineering as well as Environmental Science. Among the most productive nations
in the research field, there are both developed (Anglo-Saxon and European continental) countries
as well developing nations (mainly from Asia). Universität Kassel from Germany is found to be the
most productive research institution in the field, with Journal of Cleaner Production and Sustainability
Switzerland being the leading source titles. Raising the third research question we consulted an issue of
the leading topics attracting the attention of researchers in the field. Based on the conducted study we
recognize that the main topic areas in the SSCM research field are: (1) economy and management in
the context of the environment, (2) supply chain in the context of sustainability, (3) sustainable supply
chains—process approach, (4) decision making for SSCM, (5) the practice context of supply chain
management, and (6) competition and social responsibility (SR) issues. Finally, answering the fourth
research question, we found out that the most up-to-date topics of scientific inquiry in the field focus
around the following issues: (1) human aspects, (2) sustainable supplier selection, (3) manufacturing,
(4) circular economy, (5) efficiency, (6) sustainable practices, (7) commerce, (8) costs, (9) environmental
impact, and (10) the textile industry.
The study builds up the added value for the research practice and management theory through
a comprehensive mapping of the sustainable supply chain management research field. Discovering
research productivity trends and the most productive countries describes the development patterns of
the research field. Identification of leading contributors indicates potential partners (universities and
scholars) for further research collaboration. Finding the most attractive source titles shows publishing
opportunities. Discovering leading thematic areas and emerging topics provides guidelines for scholars
and identifies research gaps to be explored. The originality of the study derives from employing
bibliometric methodology to support the research process and provide valuable, quantitative evidence
for analysis and discussion.
Due to the conceptual character of the paper, it contributes first and foremost to the development
of management theory. Nevertheless, some implications for business practice should be mentioned as
well. As observed by Lis [39], in his bibliometric study of the learning organization concept, co-word
analysis aimed at discovering and exploring leading and emerging topics in research fields enables
managers to increase their awareness of the most important aspects related to the studied concepts
and encourages them to identify potential gaps between theory and practice to be submitted for
further research in academia. In our subjective opinion, this paper shows such a potential for bridging
management theory and business practice related to sustainable supply chain management.
Understanding the context of the study requires unveiling limitations of the research process.
Finding these weaknesses may be also a starting point for further research. Firstly, research profiling
and science mapping are quantitative approaches, which analyze a wide body of publications and
provide a large and comprehensive picture of the research field, but they may lack of a ‘deep dive’ into
the thematic areas under the study. Moreover, we should consider the weaknesses of the methodology
of co-word analysis (keywords co-occurrence analysis in the case of our study). They result from the fact
that some publications do not include keywords, some types of publications may be underrepresented
in bibliometric databases, and quality of co-word analysis depends on quality of indexing processes,
which is out of control of the authors cf. [17,55,84]. Consequently, it is recommended to employ
an eclectic and ambidextrous approach combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies and
consider the findings of our analysis in conjunction with studies based on other methodological
approaches such as qualitative literature reviews and meta-analysis studies. Secondly, in the sampling
process we used the Scopus database only. Although Scopus is a well-recognized source of bibliometric
data indexing high quality publications, it shows biases e.g., towards pieces of research work published
in English [45,85]. As of 24 April 2020, English language items make 86% of all documents indexed in
Scopus. Therefore, replicating the study with the use of other bibliometric databases, especially those
including more publications written in languages other than English, is recommended. Thirdly, while
identifying leading and emerging topics with keywords co-occurrence analysis, the whole research field
was the unit of analysis. This means that differences between subject areas have not been considered.
Thus, subsequent studies focused on topical profiling of scientific output within leading subject areas
(e.g., Business, Management and Accounting, Engineering or Environmental Science) seem to be an
interesting line of research.
Providing recommendations for further research is an important outcome of any literature review
or a bibliometric study. The field of research focused on sustainable supply chain management is
very complex and progressive. In addition, supply chains are dynamic systems that evolve over
time towards more sustainable practices. Hence, supply chain sustainability trajectories reflecting
the holistic view on sustainable supply chain management, comprising economic, social as well as
environmental dimensions appear as a promising future research direction. To gain broader views,
the TBL approach encompassing economic, social and environmental aspects should be applied to
evaluation of sustainable supply chain performance. In particular, the metrics associated with the
economic, environmental and social performance of supply chains seem to be a highly interesting
and important research area. Furthermore, the conducted study may inspire for in-depth research
on the ways social issues are incorporated in supply chain management. Combining the observation
that most studies on sustainability in supply chains focus mainly on environmental and economic
dimensions with the fact that one of the emerging topics identified in our study refers to a human
dimension of sustainable supply-chain management, we perceive a detailed study addressing social
and human issues in the discussion on supply sustainability as necessary to enrich the understanding
of sustainable supply-chain management. Taking into account that the aspects of the social/human
dimension of SSCM are becoming more important in the modern world and are still more and more
often exposed both by various organizations standing on human rights and responsible business,
but also by numerous researchers, we assume that this will be an avenue for further research. As the
pathways to advance human well-being ultimately require cooperation and dialogue between multiple
actors within the supply chain as well as employ many levels of change, we perceive a detailed
study addressing these issues as necessary to enrich the understanding of sustainable supply chain
management. Furthermore, among the topics not widely discussed in the SSCM literature yet, we
notice smart and digital performance management systems for SSCM as well as big data analytics
impact on supply chain sustainability. Due to their novelty, these areas are just beginning to be
explored by the researchers in the SSCM field, so they create a promising avenue for further research.
Additionally, considering the last months’ COVID-19 pandemic causing significant disruption to global
supply chains, we perceive the issues referring to the COVID-19 outbreak impact on SSCM as an
extremely interesting research area. At the moment businesses must respond on multiple fronts at
once: at the same time that they work to protect their workers’ safety, they must also safeguard their
operational viability, now increasingly under strain from a historic supply-chain shock. It is already
suspected that companies with superior supply chain management practices may better hold their
value in market downswings. Taking the perspective of SSCM, the research focus on supply chain
transparency—meaning that focal companies are aware of what is happening across their supply
chains beyond the first tier —as well as smart SSCM systems seem very promising for further research.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.L.; methodology, A.L.; data retrieval, A.L.; formal analysis, A.L.,
A.S., and M.T.; discussion, A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, A.L., A.S. and M.T.; writing—review and
editing, A.L. and A.S.; visualization, A.L.; supervision, A.L.; project administration, A.L., A.S. and M.T.; funding
acquisition, M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded with statutory research budget by the Faculty of Economic Sciences and
Management, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish the results.
References
1. Oelze, N. Sustainable supply chain management implementation—Enablers and barriers in the textile
industry. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1435. [CrossRef]
2. Carter, C.R.; Easton, P.L. Sustainable supply chain management: Evolution and future directions. Int. J. Phys.
Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2011, 41, 46–62. [CrossRef]
3. Noorman, M.; Swierstra, T.; Zandbergen, D. Questioning the Normative Core of RI: The Challenges Posed to
Stakeholder Engagement in a Corporate Setting. In Responsible Innovation 3: A European Agenda? Asveld, R.,
van Dam-Mieras, R., Swierstra, T., Lavrijssen, S., Linse, K., van den Hoven, J., Eds.; Springer International
Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 231–249. ISBN 9783319648347.
4. Seuring, S.; Müller, M. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain
management. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1699–1710. [CrossRef]
5. Seuring, S. A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management. Decis. Support. Syst.
2013, 54, 1513–1520. [CrossRef]
6. Handfield, R.B.; Nichols, E.L. Introduction to Supply Chain Management; Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River,
NJ, USA, 1999; ISBN 9780136216162.
7. Pagell, M.; Wu, Z. Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case
studies of 10 exemplars. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2009, 45, 37–56. [CrossRef]
8. Sajjad, A.; Eweje, G.; Tappin, D. Sustainable supply chain management: Motivators and barriers.
Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2015, 24, 643–655. [CrossRef]
9. Wu, Z.; Pagell, M. Balancing priorities: Decision-making in sustainable supply chain management.
J. Oper. Manag. 2011, 29, 577–590. [CrossRef]
10. Büyüközkan, G.; Çifçi, G. A novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for sustainable supplier selection
with incomplete information. Comput. Ind. 2011, 62, 164–174. [CrossRef]
11. Reefke, H.; Ahmed, M.D.; Sundaram, D. Sustainable supply chain management—Decision making and
support: The SSCM maturity model and system. Glob. Bus. Rev. 2014, 15, 1S–12S. [CrossRef]
12. Zimon, D.; Domingues, P. Proposal of a concept for improving the sustainable management of supply chains
in the textile industry. Fibres Text. East. Eur. 2018, 26, 8–12. [CrossRef]
13. Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management
knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222. [CrossRef]
14. Cook, D.J.; Mulrow, C.D.; Haynes, R.B. Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions.
Ann. Intern. Med. 1997, 126, 376–380. [CrossRef]
15. Glass, G.V. Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educ. Res. 1976, 5, 3–8. [CrossRef]
16. Porter, A.L.; Kongthon, A.; Lu, J.C.C. Research profiling: Improving the literature review. Scientometrics 2002,
53, 351–370. [CrossRef]
17. Zupic, I.; Čater, T. Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organ. Res. Methods 2015, 18,
429–472. [CrossRef]
18. Carter, C.R.; Rogers, D.S. A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new
theory. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2008, 38, 360–387. [CrossRef]
19. Carter, C.R.; Washispack, S. Mapping the path forward for sustainable supply chain management: A review
of reviews. J. Bus. Logist. 2018, 39, 242–247. [CrossRef]
20. Panigrahi, S.S.; Bahinipati, B.; Jain, V. Sustainable supply chain management: A review of literature and
implications for future research. Manag. Environ. Qual. An. Int. J. 2019, 30, 1001–1049. [CrossRef]
21. Patel, A.B.; Desai, T.N. A systematic review and meta-analysis of recent developments in sustainable supply
chain management. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2019, 22, 349–370. [CrossRef]
22. Koberg, E.; Longoni, A. A systematic review of sustainable supply chain management in global supply
chains. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 207, 1084–1098. [CrossRef]
23. Callon, M.; Courtial, J.P.; Laville, F. Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions
between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics 1991, 22, 155–205.
[CrossRef]
24. Wichaisri, S.; Sopadang, A. Trends and future directions in sustainable development. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 26,
1–17. [CrossRef]
25. De Jesus, A.; Antunes, P.; Ferreira dos Santos, R.; Mendonça, S. Eco-innovation in the transition to a circular
economy: An analytical literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 172, 2999–3018. [CrossRef]
26. Bensalem, A.; Kin, V. A bibliometric analysis of reverse logistics from 1992 to 2017. Supply Chain Forum 2019,
20, 15–28. [CrossRef]
27. Lis, J.P.; Rodriguez, G.P.A.; Gaitan, M.; Viloria, A.; Vega-Riano, P. Current trends in international logistics
research. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2017, 12, 2910–2914. [CrossRef]
28. Ye, Y. A bibliometric analysis of supply chain management research from the perspective of social network.
Sci. Technol. Libr. 2019, 38, 224–242. [CrossRef]
29. Joshi, S.; Sharma, M.; Rathi, S. Forecasting in service supply chain systems: A state-of-the-art review using
latent semantic analysis. Adv. Bus. Manag. Forecast. 2017, 12, 181–212. [CrossRef]
30. Gong, R.; Xue, J.; Zhao, L.; Zolotova, O.; Ji, X.; Xu, Y. A bibliometric analysis of green supply chain
management based on the Web of Science (WOS) platform. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3459. [CrossRef]
31. Shan, W.; Wang, J. Mapping the landscape and evolutions of green supply chain management. Sustainability
2018, 10, 597. [CrossRef]
32. Ahi, P.; Searcy, C. A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and sustainable supply chain
management. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 52, 329–341. [CrossRef]
33. Boboc, D.; Constantin, F.; Diaconeasa, M.C. The use of sustainability concept regarding dairy and fruits in
the Web of Science papers. Qual. Access Success 2019, 20, 82–89.
34. Ahi, P.; Searcy, C.; Jaber, M.Y. Energy-related performance measures employed in sustainable supply chains:
A bibliometric analysis. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2016, 7, 1–15. [CrossRef]
35. Ferreira Alves, P.A.; Schultz, G.; Dutra De Barcellos, M. Understanding sustainable supply chain coordination:
A review of publications in Brazilian journals. J. Adm. Sci. 2018, 24, 1–17. [CrossRef]
36. Muñoz-Villamizar, A.; Solano, E.; Quintero-Araujo, C.; Santos, J. Sustainability and digitalization in supply
chains: A bibliometric analysis. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag. 2019, 7, 703–712. [CrossRef]
37. Taticchi, P.; Garengo, P.; Nudurupati, S.S.; Tonelli, F.; Pasqualino, R. A review of decision-support tools and
performance measurement and sustainable supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2015, 53, 6473–6494.
[CrossRef]
38. Lis, A. Managing Organization Development: Identifying Research Patterns and Mapping the Research
Field. In Contemporary Challenges in Cooperation and Coopetition in the Age of Industry 4.0; Springer Proceedings
in Business and Economics; Zakrzewska-Bielawska, A., Staniec, I., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020;
pp. 375–396. ISBN 9783030305482.
39. Lis, A. Mapping Leading and Emerging Topics of Research on the Learning Organization Concept.
In Organizations in the Face of Growing Competition in the Market; Ujwary-Gil, A., Potoczek, N., Eds.; Instytut
Nauk Ekonomicznych Polskiej Akademii Nauk: Warsaw, Poland, 2019; pp. 57–84. ISBN 9788361597605.
40. Guo, D.; Chen, H.; Long, R.; Lu, H.; Long, Q. A co-word analysis of organizational constraints for maintaining
sustainability. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1928. [CrossRef]
41. Schotten, M.; El Aisati, M.; Meester, W.J.N.; Steiginga, S.; Ross, C.A. A Brief History of Scopus: The World’s
Largest Abstract and Citation Database of Scientific Literature. In Research Analytics: Boosting University
Productivity and Competitiveness through Scientometrics; Cantú-Ortiz, F.J., Ed.; Auerbach Publications: New
York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 31–58.
42. Thelwall, M. Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science? J. Informetr. 2018, 12, 430–435.
[CrossRef]
43. Falagas, M.E.; Pitsouni, E.I.; Malietzis, G.A.; Pappas, G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science,
and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 2008, 22, 338–342. [CrossRef]
44. Zhu, J.; Liu, W. A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers.
Scientometrics 2020, 123, 321–335. [CrossRef]
45. Mongeon, P.; Paul-Hus, A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis.
46. Harzing, A.W.; Alakangas, S. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and
cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics 2016, 106, 787–804. [CrossRef]
47. Aghaei Chadegani, A.; Salehi, H.; Md Yunus, M.M.; Farhadi, H.; Fooladi, M.; Farhadi, M.; Ale Ebrahim, N.
A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases.
Asian Soc. Sci. 2013, 9, 18–26. [CrossRef]
48. Scopus Content Coverage Guide 2020. Available online: https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/
0007/69451/Scopus_ContentCoverage_Guide_WEB.pdf. (accessed on 26 April 2020).
49. Broadus, R.N. Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”. Scientometrics 1987, 12, 373–379. [CrossRef]
50. Sudolska, A.; Lis, A.; Chodorek, M. Research profiling for responsible and sustainable innovations.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6553. [CrossRef]
51. Choi, D.G.; Lee, H.; Sung, T.K. Research profiling for “standardization and innovation”. Scientometrics 2011,
88, 259–278. [CrossRef]
52. Martinez, H.; Jaime, A.; Camacho, J. Relative absorptive capacity: A research profiling. Scientometrics 2012,
92, 657–674. [CrossRef]
53. Sudolska, A.; Lis, A.; Błaś, R. Cloud computing research profiling: Mapping scholarly community and
identifying thematic boundaries of the field. Soc. Sci. 2019, 8, 112. [CrossRef]
54. Klincewicz, K.; Żemigała, M.; Mijal, M. Bibliometria w Zarzadzaniu˛ Technologiami i Badaniami Naukowymi;
Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego: Warshaw, Poland, 2012.
55. He, Q. Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Libr. Trends 1999, 48, 133–159.
56. Lis, A. Keywords co-occurrence analysis of research on sustainable enterprise and sustainable organisation.
J. Corp. Responsib. Leadersh. 2018, 5, 47–66. [CrossRef]
57. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping.
58. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. VOSviewer Manual; Universiteit Leiden: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2018.
59. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and
Practice; Ding, Y., Rousseau, R., Wolfram, D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland,
2014; pp. 285–320. ISBN 9783319103778.
60. Donohue, J.C. Understanding Scientific Literature: A Bibliometric Approach; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA,
1974; ISBN 9780262040396.
61. Czakon, W. Metodyka systematycznego przegladu ˛ literatury. Przeglad
˛ Organ. 2011, 57–61. [CrossRef]
62. Zhang, J.; Yu, Q.; Zheng, F.; Long, C.; Lu, Z.; Duan, Z. Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author
keywords: A case study of patient adherence research. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2016, 67, 967–972. [CrossRef]
63. Brandenburg, M.; Govindan, K.; Sarkis, J.; Seuring, S. Quantitative models for sustainable supply chain
management: Developments and directions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2014, 233, 299–312. [CrossRef]
64. Hassini, E.; Surti, C.; Searcy, C. A literature review and a case study of sustainable supply chains with a focus
on metrics. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140, 69–82. [CrossRef]
65. Govindan, K.; Khodaverdi, R.; Jafarian, A. A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability
performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 345–354. [CrossRef]
66. Gold, S.; Seuring, S.; Beske, P. Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organizational resources: A
literature review. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2010, 17, 230–245. [CrossRef]
67. Ashby, A.; Leat, M.; Hudson-Smith, M. Making connections: A review of supply chain management and
sustainability literature. Supply Chain Manag. 2012, 17, 497–516. [CrossRef]
68. Tate, W.L.; Ellram, L.M.; Kirchoff, J.F. Corporate social responsibility reports: A thematic analysis related to
supply chain management. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2010, 46, 19–44. [CrossRef]
69. Pagell, M.; Shevchenko, A. Why research in sustainable supply chain management should have no future.
J. Supply Chain Manag. 2014, 50, 44–55. [CrossRef]
70. Beske, P.; Land, A.; Seuring, S. Sustainable supply chain management practices and dynamic capabilities in
the food industry: A critical analysis of the literature. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 152, 131–143. [CrossRef]
71. Kannegiesser, M.; Günther, H.O. Sustainable development of global supply chains—Part 1: Sustainability
optimization framework. Flex. Serv. Manuf. J. 2014, 26, 24–47. [CrossRef]
72. Elkington, J. Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business.
Environ. Qual. Manag. 1998, 8, 37–51. [CrossRef]
73. Köksal, D.; Strähle, J.; Müller, M.; Freise, M. Social sustainable supply chain management in the textile and
apparel industry—A literature review. Sustainability 2017, 9, 100. [CrossRef]
74. Sancha, C.; Gimenez, C.; Sierra, V.; Kazeminia, A. Does implementing social supplier development practices
pay off? Supply Chain Manag. 2015, 20, 389–403. [CrossRef]
75. Alhaddi, H. Triple bottom line and sustainability: A literature review. Bus. Manag. Stud. 2015, 1, 6–10.
[CrossRef]
76. Zorzini, M.; Hendry, L.C.; Huq, F.A.; Stevenson, M. Socially responsible sourcing: Reviewing the literature
and its use of theory. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2015, 35, 60–109. [CrossRef]
77. Kannan, D.; Khodaverdi, R.; Olfat, L.; Jafarian, A.; Diabat, A. Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making
method and multiobjective programming approach for supplier selection and order allocation in a green
supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 355–367. [CrossRef]
78. González-Benito, J.; González-Benito, Ó. The role of stakeholder pressure and managerial values in the
implementation of environmental logistics practices. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2006, 44, 1353–1373. [CrossRef]
79. Carter, C.R.; Kale, R.; Grimm, C.M. Environmental purchasing and firm performance: An empirical
investigation. Transp. Res. Part. E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2000, 36, 219–228. [CrossRef]
80. Walker, H.; Jones, N. Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector. Supply Chain Manag.
2012, 17, 15–28. [CrossRef]
81. Freise, M.; Seuring, S. Social and environmental risk management in supply chains: A survey in the clothing
industry. Logist. Res. 2015, 8, 2. [CrossRef]
82. Giannakis, M.; Papadopoulos, T. Supply chain sustainability: A risk management approach. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
2016, 171, 455–470. [CrossRef]
83. Sudolska, A.; Drabkowska-Skarba, M.; Łapińska, J.; Kadzielawski,
˛ G.; Dziuba, K. Exploring corporate social
responsibility practices in the clothing industry: The case of Polish and British companies. Fibres Text.
East. Eur. 2020, 28, 14–19. [CrossRef]
84. Whittaker, J. Creativity and conformity in science: Titles, keywords and co-word analysis. Soc. Stud. Sci.
1989, 19, 473–496. [CrossRef]
85. Vera-Baceta, M.A.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K. Web of Science and Scopus language coverage. Scientometrics
2019, 121, 1803–1813. [CrossRef]
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Sustainability 12 03987

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 12 03987

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 12 03987

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Keywords: sustainable supply-chain management; bibliometrics; research profiling; science network

Sustainability 2020, 12, 3987; doi:10.3390/su12103987 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2.1. Research Sample

Table 1. Parameters of the research sample.

Category Items (N)

2.2. Research Methods and Instruments

Table 2. VOSviewer parameters used for analysis.

3. Research Productivity in the Field

Table 3. General publication profiling of the sustainable supply-chain management (SSCM)

Category Top Ten Items (Number of Publications)

4. Identifying Leading Research Topics

4.1. High-Frequency Keywords Clustering

2010 2015 2019

Figure 4. Clusters of Clusters

Table 5. Composition of high-frequency keywords clusters in the sustainable supply-chain management

4.2. Core References/Thematic Clusters Profiling

Reference Citations (N) C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6

5. Identifying Emerging Research Topics

You might also like