Analyzing critical success factors for sustainable green supply chain management

Abstract

Green supply chain management (GSCM) plays the primary and a very important role for attaining the mission of sustainable development. Sustainability through GSCM is an evolving practice generic from the synthesis of two pertinent contemporary regenerative strategies. They are economic development and environmental protection. Accordingly, the concept of Sustainable Green Supply Chain Management (SGSCM) can be well understood as a corporate strategy for enhancing productivity and eco-efficiency. This paper aims to analyse the critical success factors (CSFs) for effective adoption of SGSCM practices in the Indian brass manufacturing industry—an important sector of the economy. Nine CSFs were selected from an extensive literature search that is validated through an exploratory survey of a sample of 189 management professionals. The analyses have been carried out by applications of AHP, TOPSIS and DEMATEL methods. This research showed general agreement with the existing literature on the factors that contribute to the successful implementation of SGSCM. However, although leadership is frequently mentioned in the literature, no guidance could be found on prioritization of success factors. It is established that top management commitment is the most important critical success factor, and reverse logistics management happens to be the most important cause for the effective adoption of SGSCM practices.

Full text

Vol.:(0123456789)
Environment, Development and Sustainability
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02396-2
1 3
Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green
supply chain management
VivekAgrawal1 · RajendraP.Mohanty2· SuchetaAgarwal1· JitendraKumarDixit1·
AnandM.Agrawal3
Received: 24 August 2021 / Accepted: 21 April 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022
Abstract
Green supply chain management (GSCM) plays the primary and a very important role
for attaining the mission of sustainable development. Sustainability through GSCM is an
evolving practice generic from the synthesis of two pertinent contemporary regenerative
strategies. They are economic development and environmental protection. Accordingly, the
concept of Sustainable Green Supply Chain Management (SGSCM) can be well under-
stood as a corporate strategy for enhancing productivity and eco-efficiency. This paper aims
to analyse the critical success factors (CSFs) for effective adoption of SGSCM practices in
the Indian brass manufacturing industry—an important sector of the economy. Nine CSFs
were selected from an extensive literature search that is validated through an exploratory
survey of a sample of 189 management professionals. The analyses have been carried out
by applications of AHP, TOPSIS and DEMATEL methods. This research showed general
agreement with the existing literature on the factors that contribute to the successful imple-
mentation of SGSCM. However, although leadership is frequently mentioned in the lit-
erature, no guidance could be found on prioritization of success factors. It is established
that top management commitment is the most important critical success factor, and reverse
logistics management happens to be the most important cause for the effective adoption of
SGSCM practices.
Keywords Sustainability· Green supply chain management· Critical success factors·
Brass industry· MCDM· AHP· TOPSIS· DEMATEL
1 Introduction
Sustainable supply chain management as a field of study is currently evolving and empha-
sising the importance about the long-term strategic visioning as well as the short-term
action planning and implementation (Mohanty & Prakash, 2017). Supply chains that are
controlled to meet the evolving requirements put on them can be considered sustainable,
now and in the future, without environmental degradation. Just how can supply chains be
* Vivek Agrawal
vivek.agrawal@gla.ac.in
Extended author information available on the last page of the article

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
viable because we cannot look with any degree of confidence at the future of our industry
and business practices? We may not even know for sure what all the consequences of our
present actions will be. What future generations of people or cultures may want or value,
we do not know. Nevertheless, when formulating strategies, policies and programmes for
managing our industries, we also need to understand what we think they would be. These
plans, programmes, and policies, if successful, should assist us in meeting not just our pre-
sent needs and goals, but also those of future generations.
Recently, there has been a considerable amount of research on the sustainability of
supply chains. Industrial enterprises have contributed to the achievement of the sustain-
able development goals (SDGs) through strategic planning and tactical implementation of
corporate social responsibility, circular economy, and environmental activities (Rashed &
Shah, 2021). Patagonia—The American apparel company, is well-known for its environ-
mentally sustainable green supply chains and environmental campaigning. Nearly, 70% of
the brand’s products are currently created from recycled materials, and the cotton used in
their products is organic, certified, and farmed using regenerative processes. Patagonia’s
dedication to ensuring that products are made in safe, fair, legal, and humane working con-
ditions throughout their supply chain is an important aspect of their long-term supply chain
management strategy. The brand collaborates with factories that have a good environmen-
tal and human rights track record. Patagonia’s Worn Wear project encourages customers
to recycle and repair their items to extend the life of their purchases. In 2013, Fairphone
changed the game by creating a movement for more equitable electronics. With the use of
fair materials such as fairtrade certified gold and their ongoing efforts to enhance the work-
ing conditions of manufacturing employees, the Fairphone is well titled. When a buyer
makes a purchase, it signifies much more than just obtaining a new phone; he or she is also
supporting socially and environmentally responsible activities, as their campaign claims,
"the phone that cared for people and earth".
The fact that sustainability is a function of multiple economic, environmental, ecologi-
cal, social, and physical elements has been established by both public and private sectors
(Jabareen, 2008); Chatterjee and Mohanty (2022) have conducted an elaborate bibliomet-
ric study to explain the multidimensionality aspects of sustainability. The rise of concerns
for climate change as well as changing biodiversity has brought people from diverse areas
including policymakers, academicians of multiple disciplines, practitioners in business and
government, and social activists and others together to propose ways to attain sustainabil-
ity. We often observe that unplanned, irrational and irresponsible actions by industries and
corporate and lack of empathy by some opportunistic bureaucracy to administer rigorously
the standards and regulations are potential threats to sustainability. Therefore, to attain
sustainable development goals, contemporary organizations need to play a vital role and
need to be concerned about the external environment bringing compatibility with internal
policies and practices. Furthermore, we could observe from the literature, the supply chain
as an important branch of management, and it has a significant impact on the environ-
ment including emissions, pollution, the health hazard of community, etc. Organizations
are now trying to minimize environmental impact by integrating environmental concern
into their supply chain operations. The integration of environmental concerns into supply
chain management practices is referred to as ‘green supply chain management’ (GSCM)
and enriching the knowledge on sustainability. The research on GSCM has been expanding
for the last several years, and we need further expansion both vertically and horizontally
covering the entire meta-structure. We believe that significant growth and opportunities to
understand the field of sustainability exist at the intersection of GSCM/Green Productivity/
Lean systems of these important environmental-based organizational research fields. They

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
can only be resolved through a consensus-based decision-making process comprising of all
interested and impacted stakeholders, most notably the managers, who are the trustees in
charge of managing business processes. These trustees are responsible and must make an
effort to consider the expected preferences of individuals who will not be able to partici-
pate in this decision-making process, particularly those who will live in the future and will
be affected by current resource management decisions. To define a collection of important
behaviours that drive social sustainability performance in manufacturing organizations,
Awan (2019; 2018c) focuses on safety practices, environmental cooperation practices, and
sustainable manufacturing. Due to the complexities involved in the decision making for the
sustainability of the supply chains, professionals need to think strategically about greening
of its supply chain, leading to the emerging sustainability concepts (Ahi & Searcy, 2013;
Diabat & Govindan, 2011).
Green and sustainable are often used interchangeably; however, they are not the same
thing. The basic goal of green supply chain management is to include environmentally
friendly aspects of operations into a standard supply chain. GSCM incorporates envi-
ronmental procedures throughout the supply chain, from product design to raw material
sourcing to manufacturing processes to end-of-life product management (Kalpande &
Toke, 2020). Not only does this help to reduce the environmental impact of the supply
chain, but it also helps to reduce the environmental impact of the entire organization’s pro-
cesses. While becoming green is solely concerned with the environment, being sustainable
requires taking into account the product’s social, economic, and environmental implica-
tions. In today’s world, the old way of controlling a supply chain is no longer effective.
Supply chain management is crucial to a company’s success. Sustainable supply chain
management encompasses the environmental, social, and economic ramifications of sup-
ply chain operations and is a considerably broader concept than GSCM. The triple bottom
line, in which the bottom lines include social, financial, and environmental aspects, and
the metrics to be measured are earnings, people engagement, and influence on the world,
is a measure of sustainability. SSCM assists businesses in addressing challenging issues
such as raw material procurement, employee involvement and relationship management,
and community employment opportunities. Better late than never, companies are looking
at designing inclusive supply chains with the goal of using them to create a better, more
environmentally sound, and ultimately pluralistic society as well as a more profitable com-
pany. Therefore, with increased demand from stakeholders’ like customers and activists,
it is incumbent on businesses to operate in a green and sustainable manner (Badwe etal.,
2022).
We postulate here that the principles of GSCM and SSCM complement each other
for a better, safer, and more environmentally friendly business, and their combination
referred as sustainable green supply chain management (SGSCM). A major initiative
to improve ecological benefits and foster sustainability was recognized in the SGSCM
approach (Jawaad & Zafar, 2020; Kazancoglu etal., 2018; Zhu etal., 2011). SGSCM
research has attracted strong global interest over recent years, and this has over the last
few years been increasing in India (Mohanty & Prakash, 2014a, 2014b; Singh etal.,
2019).There are several different parameters, such as the government regulations (Dia-
bat & Govindan, 2011); the formation of a brand identity (Mangla etal., 2014b); con-
sumer expectations (Rao & Holt, 2005) and the introduction of emerging green tech-
nology (Mangla et al., 2014a), stakeholder pressure and the adoption of sustainable
supply chain techniques, as well as their impact on sustainability performance (Awan
etal., 2017, 2018b), implementation of social sustainable practices in manufacturing
(Awan et al., 2018a). These are very significant considerations and may play a major

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
role in the adoption of SGSCM (Luthra etal., 2015). Therefore, it is imperative for
the successful adoption and implementation of sustainability practices, to recognize
and evaluate the critical success factors (CSFs), because if the CSFs are not efficiently
managed, they become barriers to the attainment of sustainable development objec-
tives (Govindan etal., 2014; Mohanty & Prakash, 2017; Muduli etal., 2013).
While SGSCM practices in most developed countries have already achieved some
level of maturity (Rahman etal., 2020), but for most Indian companies, they remain
relatively very recent. Increasing economic, environmental and social pressures and
challenges have forced them to reflect upon and to initiate the implementation of
SGSCM. Brass industry sector in India is regarded as a major contributor to eco-
nomic growth and employment generator. But this sector also significantly contributes
to environmental pollution and an area of concern, which demands for more efficient
SGSCM practices.
Based on the above back ground, rationale and significance, our motivation in this
paper is to evaluate the CSFs relevant to the successful implementation of SGSCM ini-
tiatives in brass manufacturing sector in India.
The specific research tasks to be taken are as follows:
1. To understand the factors responsible for implementation of SGSCM and identify the
CSFs; that are those factors significantly responsible to achieve the mission of sustain-
ability through a review of the current literature and an exploratory survey of current
professional practices.
2. To establish the priority ranking of CSFs affecting implementation of SGSCM by using
Analytical Hierarchic Process (AHP).
3. To make rank order comparison of manufacturing units as sample using Technique for
Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
4. To identify the cause-effect chain interdependent relationships of SGSCM factors using
Decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL). DEMATEL is proposed
as a useful tool for identifying cause-and-effect chain components in a complicated
industrial system. We’re looking at examining interdependent interactions between
components and identifying the most important ones using a visual structural model.
Because many real-world systems contain imprecise and uncertain information, DEMA-
TEL has been extended for better decision making in many situations.
5. Nevertheless, as green policies are implemented, diverse views can be expressed in vari-
ous industries (Zhu & Sarkis, 2006). Thus, the numerous CSFs associated with SGSCM
implementation were initially defined to achieve these tasks. A number of brass produc-
tion units in India have been studied for identifying the most widely approved CSFs
for SGSCM adoption. This research uses the conjunctive implementation of MCDM
approaches like AHP, TOPSIS and DEMATEL.
2 Literature review
The analysis by Huang etal. (2017) describes the internal and external factors motivat-
ing firms to adopt GSCM in Taiwan and finds that operational stresses including regula-
tory, consumer recognition and competitive pressure (GSCM adoption by competitors) are
pushing firms to adopt GSCM. There has already been research that a company may be
hampered and promoted by the impact of powerful factors in adopting GSCM activities

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
and attaining target output targets such as its technical capacities; the size of the com-
pany; the cooperation from supply chain partners; the top management commitment; the
employees’ education and training as well as external factors including the dependence
relationship with supply chain partners; and knowledge and information sharing with sup-
ply chain partners. Nonetheless, a deeper understanding is also needed of the effect that
these important isolating variables have on the company’s performance in applying GSCM
activities jointly. For particular, conditions distinct from those studied in the past need to
be addressed and have thus historically been largely unexplored.
A strategic review has focus of an assessment of sustainable development in the green
supply chain domain. Sustainability issues are becoming a significant source of worry, as
corporations face real-time pressure from stakeholders to achieve more than just finan-
cial gains. At the organizational and supply chain levels, they should also address social
and environmental concerns. Realizing stakeholder perspectives on sustainability that can
boost a company’s bottom line through cost savings, increased market share, and stronger
brand image; a rising number of companies have begun to use “greening” projects as stra-
tegic weapons (Mathiyazhaga etal., 2014). Stakeholder pressure on supply chain sustain-
ability has recently resulted in increased sustainability awareness, adoption of sustain-
ability goals, and/or adoption of sustainability practices (Awan, 2019). Many businesses
have promoted social responsibility that is not limited to the environment. According to
Awan etal. (2018c), private supply chain regulation has emerged in the form of rules and
standards produced and administered by businesses and non-governmental organizations
(NGOs). Such rules are put in place to protect a company’s reputation, especially in the
area of social responsibility. As a result, businesses are increasingly concerned about sus-
tainability, and it is clear that many companies are intentionally incorporating environmen-
tal and social programmes in their supply chains to demonstrate their commitment to not
only stakeholders but also other supply chain actors (Diabat & Govindan, 2011). The over-
all goal of SGSCM is to include environmental issues and concerns into SCM in order to
improve SC operations’ environmental performance while satisfying economic and organ-
isational goals (Zhu & Sarkis, 2004, 2007). The main argument for implementing these
SGSCM rules is that if businesses can successfully address environmental issues, they will
be able to generate greater market profits than their competitors (Mohanty & Deshmukh,
1998). GSCM encompasses a wide range of operations, from green sourcing through green
distribution, as well as the reverse supply chain, which "closes the loop" between suppli-
ers, manufacturers, and end customers (Rao & Holt, 2005). The introduction of SGSCM
provides a number of advantages. SGSCM’s economic and environmental efficiency has
been bolstered by increasing pressure from several angles (Zhu et al., 2006; Ninlawan
etal., 2010; Rahman etal., 2020). The implementation of SGSCM would allow producers
to consider not just the economic rewards, but also the need for "environmentally friendly
items" (Berardi, 2013).
Based on previous studies (Ali etal., 2020; Anand etal., 2020; Mathiyazhagan etal.,
2014, etc.) and the principle of flexibility establishes a methodological structure for
GSCM that takes into account the impact of the dominant influences on the application
of GSCM activities and the associated performance effects. Eighty-seven per cent of
consumers, if their manufacturers are environmentally negligent, will accuse the distrib-
utor of environmental neglect (Hanna etal., 2000). The manufacturer can also require
the implementation of an Environment Management System (EMS) by its manufactur-
ers and/or receive ISO 14001 certification (Zhu & Sarkis, 2004). The packaging, trans-
portation, transport and delivery operations must also be planned in an environmentally

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
sustainable way. Packaging materials should be small and lightweight and should have
no adverse effects on the atmosphere (Rao, 2002).
Green design and production are related positively to a competitive advantage (Chan
etal., 2012). In the case of the SGSCM literature, numerous researchers and experts
have identified specific CSFs in relation to supply chain greening; which include envi-
ronmental policy regulation, reverse logistics, waste disposal, vendor participation,
recycling, management dedication, employee involvement, green design, green pro-
curement, customer sensitization, corporate identity and competitiveness (Dashore &
Sohani, 2013; Luthra etal., 2015). Toke etal. (2012) also identified a number of CSFs
in the context of SGSCM implementation. Financial benefits, supplier and stakeholder
participation, environmental issues, and customer redundancy were all evaluated by
Mangla etal. (2014a) when it came to the development and commencement of green
enterprises in the supply chain. In addition, the customer’s role in the supply chain’s
greening has been noted (Muduli etal., 2013).
Different approaches have been applied for evaluating the different factors in context
of SGSCM. DEMATEL has been applied by Gandhi et al. (2016) to evaluate the suc-
cess factors of SGSCM implementation, whereas Toke etal. (2012) applied AHP for
assessing the success factors for implementation of SGSCM; Mangla etal. (2014b) to
examined the attributes in SGSCM for performance improvement; Falatoonitoosi etal.
(2013) evaluated the supplier selection in SGSCM and Wu etal. (2011) evaluated the
drivers of uncertainty in SGSCM. AHP has been applied by Govindan etal. (2014) and
Mathiyazhagan etal. (2014) to evaluate the constraints in implementation of SGSCM;
and Luthra etal. (2015) to evaluate and to rank the factors required for SGSCM imple-
mentation. ISM was applied by Mangla etal. (2013); Luthra etal. (2011); Diabat and
Govindan (2011); Mudgal etal. (2009) to explore the important variables in implemen-
tation of SGSCM; factors affecting product recovery in SGSCM; assessment of barri-
ers in SGSCM adoption; success drivers of SGSCM implementation; and enablers in
implementation of SGSCM, respectively. Kumar etal. (2014) applied exploratory fac-
tors analysis (EFA); Mitra and Dutta (2014) applied EFA and confirmatory factor analy-
sis (CFA) to analyze the CSF of SGSCM and SGSCM practices, respectively.
In Indian context, some studies are reported on SGSCM in different industries.
Luthra et al. (2015); Govindan et al. (2014); Malviya and Kant (2014); Luthra et al.
(2011) studied the several CSFs of SGSCM in automobile industries; Mangla et al.
(2015) analyze the risk in SGSCM in plastic manufacturing industries; Mangla etal.
(2014b) revealed the CSFs of SGSCM in paper mill industries. SGSCM practices in
manufacturing industries also assessed and analyzed by Mathiyazhagan etal. (2014);
Anand and Prathiban (2014); Mitra and Dutta (20,114) and Mohanty and Prakash
(2014b). Muduli etal. (2013) examined the barriers in implementation of SGSCM by
applying graph theory approach in Indian mining industries. By using variance analysis,
Xu etal. (2013) conducted a comparative study in power, chemical, electrical, electron-
ics industries. Singh etal. (2019) analyse the drivers for adoption of SGSCM in ferti-
lizer industry in India.
It is admitted that the literature must provide an adequate interpretation of the green
practices (Mohanty & Prakash, 2014b). Nevertheless, in developing countries like India,
very little work has been done (Mitra and Dutta 2014). All of the above considerations sug-
gest that additional emphasis on industry-specific research on long-term supply chain man-
agement should be given. However, such studies are very limited. Therefore, we attempt
here to study a very important industry sector such as brass industry.

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
3 Indian brass industry
India is known for the brass industry as a traditional sector in making a variety of elegant
and exquisite decorative products and utility articles used in many industries and house-
holds. The sector is labour intensive and provides considerable scope for employment to
the unemployed rural population. The products have good export potentials and hence
earn a considerable amount of foreign exchange. The manufacturing process consists of a
series of technical activities such as pattern making, moulding, casting, sheet metal work-
ing, soldering, scrapping, engraving, and polishing. Indian brass industry is using very age
old techniques of processing and has not been modernized yet. The production process is
typically carried out in private residences. With the exception of the wet season, Brassware
is manufactured throughout the year. The workforce is made up of both hired and family
workers who are paid on a weighted basis.
The traditional method to safeguarding workplace health, safety, and the environment
relies primarily on law and workplace inspections to assure compliance with health, safety,
and environmental standards. Since the Industrial Revolution, this method has been effec-
tive in controlling many specific occupational hazards; but it has not been as effective in
underdeveloped countries. The industrial revolution, as well as the immense economic suc-
cess that preceded it, claimed the lives of a wide range of people. Factory employment dif-
fers significantly from other sorts of job. The factory system’s implementation has a severe
impact on workers’ living conditions as well as the environment. The poor and working
classes were frequently subjected to deplorable working conditions and living situations.
The labour market’s socioeconomic conditions are deplorable. The majority of the artisans’
relatives are illiterate. The craftspeople’ access to health and medical care appears to be
quite limited. The prevalence of diseases like tuberculosis and asthma is particularly high
among craftspeople. This is a particularly delicate issue for the Brassware business, and it
can only be addressed with correct methods and SGSCM.
In India, there are many producing centres across the vast geographic regions. We have
focussed our study in Jamnagar, which is a major producer of multiple brassware products.
Approximately, 5000 brass manufacturing facilities of different scales are operating here,
ranging from a small team of 5 workers to a massive operation with over 400 workers
working under one roof, employing over 200 thousand people directly or indirectly (Pan-
dya & Ghumra, 2016). India’s brass sector produces 80% of the country’s brass from Jam-
nagar. The sector has an annual revenue of around INR, 300 crore and employs nearly
250,000 people directly and indirectly. Every year, the brass components industry in Jam-
nagar consumes about 100,000 tonnes of brass (Financial Express 2018). Brass is sold in
more than 149 countries. India exported Brass worth 122.37million USD in the fiscal year
2020–2021. The current economic recession is severely affecting the brass industry sector.
The sector is having its unique importance not only from economic point of view, but also
from environmental perspective. The lack of proper environmental practices creates several
hazards. It was a felt need that for the survival of this sector, implementation of SGSCM
Practices is to be given top priority and urgent attention. Therefore, this study primarily
focuses upon identification and analyses of CSF.
Furthermore, India has ranked in Environmental Performance Index (EPI), 168th
position out of 180 countries in the year 2020 (www. finan ciale xpress. com), according
to researchers of Yale University. In all five important environmental health, sanitation,
drinking water, air quality, heavy metals, and waste management categories, India was
the lowest performer in the region. So, this needs an improvement and immediate action

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
for reduction in pollution and this can be reduced by proper implementation of SGSCM
practices (Mohanty & Prakash, 2014b). However, there is a shortage of expertise in Indian
enterprises when it comes to implementing SGSCM in their business processes.
4 Research methodology
The semi-qualitative methods are used in present study because of multi-criterion. Differ-
ent methods are available like Linear Additive Models (LAM) (Sullivan, 1986); Analytical
Hierarchal Process (AHP) (Agrawal etal., 2018; Saaty, 1980); DEMATEL (Agrawal etal.,
2020a, 2020b; Kumar & Dash, 2016); Multicriteria Q Analysis II (MCQ II) (Wymore &
Duckstein, 1989); TOPSIS (Hwang & Yoon, 1981).
In present study, integrated AHP-TOPSIS and DEMATEL approach is used to address
the desired objected. The methodology and research process adopted in present study are
presented in Fig.1. An effort is made to study and record the understanding and applica-
bility of MCDM tools and techniques and a compilation of these methods are provided in
Table1. As can be seen in Table1, a large number of researchers advocated for the use of
MCDM approaches because they combine the benefits of both qualitative and quantitative
techniques and thus appear to be the best fit for the current problem of ranking and deter-
mining relationships between a set of factors. With the importance and uses of the above
tools and techniques in mind, the current study is an attempt to use all three methods inte-
grated semi-qualitative tools; integrated AHP-TOPSIS and DEMATEL approaches.
A three-phase methodology is used in this study as shown in Fig.1.
5 Phase 1: identication ofCSFs
From the literature, different CSFs responsible for adopting green supply chain in manufac-
turing industry were documented. A questionnaire is prepared considering all the factors
explored from the literature using 5-point Likert scale (1-no significant to 5-highly signifi-
cant). Questionnaire was circulated to 253 respondents. Professionals from brass manufac-
turing companies are considered for this study. Finally, 189 responses (with a response rate
of 74.70%) were received in the decided time (February to April 2021). According to Shi-
bin etal. (2016), these responses are sufficient for extending the analysis. Only those CSFs
of SGSCM were taken into consideration whose mean score was more than or equal to 4.
On the basis of the responses and selection criterion of mean (more than 4), finally, nine
CSFs are taken into consideration for further analysis. The details and descriptive statistics
of nine identified CSFs in context of SGSCM adoption are presented in Table2.
6 Phase 2: experts’ prole andtheir responses
On these 9 CSFs, a questionnaire was prepared into three sections. First section is needed for
data required for AHP analysis; second section is required for collecting data for TOPSIS anal-
ysis; and third section includes the questions for collecting the data for DEMATEL analysis.

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
This questionnaire was circulated to 17 experts working in their domain of expertise for the
last 10years or more. The profiles of such participants are shown in Table3.
7 Phase 3: applications ofAHP‑TOPSIS andDEMATEL
Analytic hierarchy (AHP) process is a problem-solving system and a measurement
theory. It was proposed to compare complex multi-attribute alternatives among one or
more decision-makers as a methodology for decision analysis (Agrawal etal., 2020b;
Initial matrix by factors
Allot final rank
Check consistency
Decide the number of factors and
eigen value
Find priority weights
Find normalized matrix
Select alternative and Criterion
Ranking of alternative
Relative closeness
Positive and negative ideal solution
Weighted normalized matrix
Normalized matrix
Decision matrix
Find cause and effect relationship
Set a threshold values
Calculate total relation matrix
Calculate normalized initial direct
relationship matrix
Compute average matrix
Review of Literature
Green Supply chain management
Questionnaire Development on 5 point
Likert Scale
Statistical Analysis on 189 responses
Factors Identification for GSCM Scale
Phase 1
AHP DEMATEL
TOPSIS
Interpretation of Findings
Conclusion, Discussionsand Implications
DATA ANALYSIS
Circulated to 17 Experts
Data Collection
Pair wise comparison questionnaire based on
MCDM methods
Phase 2
Phase3
Fig. 1 Research process flow chart (Modified from Agrawal, 2020b)

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
Table 1 Description of tools used
Tool Description Context Authors (Year)
AHP Analytic Hierarchy (AHP) process is a problem-
solving system and a measurement theory. It was
proposed to compare complex multi-attribute
alternatives among one or more decision-makers
as a methodology for decision analysis
Supplier selection, Project selection, quality
management, IT outsourcing, recourse allocation,
marketing, manufacturing, supply chain
Koul and Verma (2011); Vinodh etal., (2012);
Agrawal etal.,( 2018)); Mangla etal.,( 2015); Sasi
& Digalwar, (2015)
TOPSIS TOPSIS is based on a simple and straightforward
concept; it provides for transparent and com-
prehensive calculations based on the choice of
the best option for the farthest distance from the
negative ideal and the nearest distance from the
positive ideal solution
Supplier selection, ABC analysis, site selection,
supply chain, agile manufacturing, third party
logistics, agile manufacturing,
Chu and Lin (2009); Zeydan etal. (2011); Sasi &
Digalwar,( 2015)
DEMATEL DEMATEL is a structured technique for determin-
ing the cause-and-effect relationship in a diagram.
It indicates the influence degree and relationship
based on their mutual dependence
supply chain management, social responsibility,
green manufacturing, solid waste management,
marketing strategies, e-marketplace
Agrawal etal., (2020b); Kumar & Dash, (2016);
Anand etal.,(2014)

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
Table 2 Description and descriptive statistics of CSFs
SN CSFs Description Average
1 Top Management Commitment (F1) The decisions made by the top management team (Evans & Johnson, 2005) enable the firm to cope with
rapid and discontinuous changes in demand, competitors, technology and regulations. For SGSCM
activities, the top management team often shapes a board or management committee dedicated to resolv-
ing environmental concerns is a practice that shows top management’s dedication to stewardship. Hence,
environmental commitment (Handfield etal., 2005) from top management is likely to influence the
organization to acquire capacities such as Green Product Design and Green Manufacturing
4.0847
2 Adoption of New Technology and Processes (F2) Adopting new methods and technologies would contribute to improved organization’s productivity and
growth. The introduction of SGSCM is the organizations need the time (Luthra etal., 2011)
4.0952
3 Customer Requirements (F3) The demand for green products has increased due to the increased awareness among the customers. The
environmental awareness of the property of goods and services must meet consumer requirements in
order to achieve the most appropriate solution (Mohanty & Prakash, 2014a)
4.0159
4 Employee Involvement (F4) Employee participation contributes greatly to the organizations’ performance in terms of both market
and climate. In addition, green policy impacts the environmental policies of the organization, as well as
mutual partners in the green supply chain and green procurement (Evans & Johnson, 2005)
4.0582
5 Brand Image Building (F5) Greening organizational policies will aid industries in developing their brand on the market 4.0423
6 Government Regulations and Standards (F6) One of the main motivations for organizations to undertake green projects is because of laws and schemes
implemented by the federal and state governments (Mohanty & Prakash, 2014a, 2014b; Rahman &
Subramanian, 2012)
4.0635
7 Training (F7) Training helps organizations strengthen their SGSCM in the sense of more efficient HRM and sustainable
management practices (Luthra etal., 2011) as well as develop employee skills, which enables a company
to potentially reduce costs and thus increase corporate credibility (Boyse`re and Beard 2006)
4.0794
8 Reverse logistic management (F8) A part of SGSCM is reverse logistics. Companies will make more money by applying the reverse logistics
process and in a way that will support resource management (Luthra etal., 2015; Manglaet al., 2014a)
4.0000
9 Sustainability (F9) Sustainability (Ali etal., 2020) issues within the corporate supply chain help to achieve eco-economic
gains. The term "green supply chain" means "supply chain that is environmentally friendly." The
concept of introducing environmentally sustainable procedures within the traditional supply chain is
referred to as sustainability
4.0106

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
Koul & Verma, 2011). TOPSIS is based on a simple and straightforward concept; it
provides for transparent and comprehensive calculations based on the choice of the best
option for the farthest distance from the negative ideal and the nearest distance from the
positive ideal solution (Agrawal etal., 2020b; Chu & Lin, 2009). DEMATEL is a struc-
tured technique for determining the cause and effect relationship in a diagram. It indi-
cates the influence degree and relationship based on their mutual dependence (Agrawal
etal., 2020a; Kumar & Dash, 2016).
7.1 AHP
AHP was developed by Saaty (1980, 1990, 2008). It is a methodology based on a pair-
wise comparison among different criteria in order to obtain a prioritized rating show-
ing the cumulative value for each of the options for decision (Agrawal etal., 2018;
Dey etal., 2006). AHP has been extended to a number of applications, owing to its
Table 3 Experts’ profile
SN Profession and position Organization Qualification Experi-
ence
(Years)
Age (Years)
1 Education–professor Private PhD 16 47
2 Education–Professor Government PhD 18 49
3 Senior Manager–Logistics Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
B.Tech, MBA 11 34
4 Quality Inspector Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
M.Tech 11 41
5 Education–Professor Government PhD 21 61
6 Manager Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
M.Tech 16 43
7 General Manager Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
PhD 25 65
8 Entrepreneur Brass manufacturing unit B.Tech 30 67
9 Education–Professor Private PhD 15 46
10 Manager–Operations Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
MBA 16 51
11 Senior Manager-Quality Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
M.Tech 13 43
12 Entrepreneur Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
M.Com 27 59
13 Entrepreneur Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
MBA 12 41
14 Education–Associate Profes-
sor
Government PhD 21 53
15 Entrepreneur Brass supplier MBA 11 34
16 Manager–Logistics Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
B.Tech, MBA 16 49
17 Entrepreneur Private—brass manufactur-
ing unit
MBA 19 57

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
simplicity and functional prudentiality. It equally applies to quantitative and qualita-
tive attributes both.
The steps used for AHP are as follows:
• To determine the relevance of one CSF on another, a pair-wise comparison matrix
is created using Saaty’s nine-point scale (see Table 4). For this, a pair-wise type
questionnaire is prepared.
• Pair-wise normalized comparison matrix is prepared using
Calculate sum for each column using
∑
i
C
ij
and divide each corresponding number
using
X
ij =
C
ij
∑
iC
ij
, find the row average for each row and relative weights are identified
using
R
i
=∑
i
X
ij
and Weights by
W
i=
Ri
N
.
• By using
CI
=
𝛿
average
−n
n−1
, Consistency Index (CI) is calculated. Where n is number of
CSFs, and
𝛿average
is eigenvalue.
• Consistency ratio (CR) is calculated by
• using
CR
=
CI
RI
, where Random index (RI) value varies as shown in Table5, which
depend on the number of factors (Saaty, 1980).
7.2 TOPSIS
Hwang and Yoon (1981) first developed a technique for order preference by similarity
to ideal solution (TOPSIS). TOPSIS has gained substantial interest from scholars and
Table 4 Rating scale for
preparing comparison matrices Criterion Empirical value
Equally important 1
Moderately more important 3
Strongly more important 5
Very strongly more important 7
Extremely more important 9
Immediate values 2, 4, 6, 8
Table 5 RI values based on number of factors
N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
RI 0 0 0.58 0.9 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.49 1.52 1.54

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
professionals in the evaluation, assessment and classification of alternatives across dif-
ferent industries (Behzadianet al., 2012). TOPSIS is an important method commonly
used in engineering and management fields to fix unstructured problems with numerous
and possibly overlapping targets (Sasi & Digalwar, 2015). TOPSIS is employed because
it has a strong logic that replicates human decision-making, a scalar value that accounts
for both the better and worse options, and a simple calculation process that can be suc-
cessfully encoded into a table. The procedure of TOPSIS is as follows:
• Geometric mean is calculated on the responses collected from experts.
• Normalized decision matrix is constructed using
For weights, priority scores are considered calculated through AHP.
Using vij = wjrij , weighted normalized matrix is prepared
• Positive and negative ideal solution is calculated.
for calculating positive ideal solution
and for negative ideal solution
• Calculate closeness coefficient (CC) using
The distance from the ideal alternative is:
Similarly, the distance from the negative ideal alternative is:
7.3 DEMATEL
The reason for using DEMATEL because it provides:
• Multiple directional relationship (Zhu etal., 2011);
• Flexibility and possibility to produce results with less data (Bouzonet al., 2018).
r
ij =xij∕(Sx
2
ij
)for i =1, …,m;j=1, …,
n
A
∗=
{
v
∗
1
,…,v
∗
n}
, where, v
∗
j
={max
(
v
ij)
if j ∋J; min
(
v
ij)
ifj ∋J
�}
A
�
=
{
v
�
1
,…,v
�
n}
, where, v
�
={min
(
v
ij)
if j ∋J; max
(
v
ij)
if j ∋J
�}
D
∗
i=
[
S
(
v∗
j−vij
)
2
]1
∕
2
i=1, …,
m
D
�
i=
[
S
(
v�
j−vij
)
2
]1
∕
2
i=1, …,
m
CC∗
i
=D
�
i
∕
(
D
∗
i
+D
�
i)
,0<CC
∗
i
<
1

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
Battelle Memorial Institute’s Geneva research centre developed this method to find
cause-effect links among various CSFs in a complicated system (Agrawal et al., 2020b).
The steps for DEMATEL are:
• An average matrix A is created on basis of experts’ opinion. In matrix A, the entry Mij
indicates the degree of influence of the CSF, Fi on CSF Fj.
Step 2: Normalization of Matrix A and create matrix N.
Where
𝛽
=
1
max
∑
n
j=1
M
ij
.
Step 3: Calculate the relative intensity matrix T:
Step 4: following values are also calculated in matrix:
R = the sum of row entries.
C = the sum of column entries.
R + C: Advantage Vector (superior).
It represents that more of the value of the CSF, the more of interaction with other CSF.
R–C: the relationship vector.
It represents the final value of influence of each CSF on other CSF in problem.
Setup the threshold value using
𝛼
=
∑n
i=1tij
∑n
j=1tij
N
, and cause and effect diagram (network
relationship map) is prepared as shown in Fig.2.
A=
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎣
M11 M12 ⋯M1n
⋯⋯⋯
Mn1Mn2⋯Mnn
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎦
N=𝛽.A
T=Nx(
1
−N)−1
Fig. 2 Network relationship map (NRM) of CSFs of SGSCM

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
8 Results anddiscussion
Consumers expect greater reliability and product quality as environmental consciousness
has grown in recent times. This type of competition provides business opportunities in the
form of environmental qualities and supply chain obligations (Paquette, 2005). Environ-
mental friendly companies are becoming more appealing to the stakeholders. In all occa-
sions, the human element plays a major role (Hanna etal., 2000). Therefore, customer
requirements are also affecting the adoption of GSCM. Employee participation and train-
ing have helped to develop the safe GSCM processes and aim to do so directly in terms of
employee’s involvement in decision-making on these programmes. Existence of a sustain-
able mindset significantly strengthens GSCM activities with strong workplace engagement.
These finding would help the policy makers in brass manufacturing companies to under-
stand, to take advantage and to be focussed towards the factors of successful implementa-
tion of GSCM. This can help in strategy formulation also.
Through the collected data from 17 experts, first, the AHP method is applied and geo-
metric mean is used for aggregation of data. The priority score (Table6) is calculated by
following the procedure as discussed in previous section. Further, for testing the consist-
ency of result, the consistency ratio was calculated. For this initially, eigen values (Table6)
are computed and average eigen value was 9.709, and then, CR = 0.0607 (CI = 0.0887,
RI = 1.46) was computed, which authenticate that the results are consistent (less than 0.10).
Finally, on the basis of priority score, the ranks were assigned.
On the basis of their prioritized score, top management commitment (PV = 0.3299) is
the most influencing CSF for adopting the SGSCM followed by adoption of new technol-
ogy and process (PV = 0.1775), employee involvement (PV = 0.1551), customer require-
ment (PV = 0.1190), government regulations and standards (0.0739), brand image building
(PV = 0.0518), training (PV = 0.0445), sustainability (PV = 0.0259), and reverse logistics
management (PV = 0.0224). Top Management Commitment towards greening policy is
very essential it affects; “Effective Advertising and Marketing Campaign for Green Organi-
zation Efforts”; “IT Enabling and Effective Communication”; “Environment-Friendly Dis-
tribution”; “Effective Customer Training Program”; “Green Labeling and Use of Green
Packaging Material”; and “Recycling and Reuse Organization Efforts” (Kumar et al.,
2013).
These findings might help the policy makers in brass manufacturing companies to
understand, to take advantage and to be focussed towards the CSFs of successful adoption
of SGSCM.
The priority score obtained in Table7 was used for TOPSIS analysis to make a compar-
ative analysis of four different brass manufacturing units considered under study. Initially,
geometric mean (Table7) was calculated by taking response from 17 experts. The results
(Table8) indicate that unit 1 is the outstanding one on adopting SGSCM.
On the basis of closeness coefficient, companies are ranked as unit 1 > unit 4 > unit
2 > unit 3, considering all the nine CSFs responsible for adoption of SGSCM.
Further, importance of the SGSCM CSFs and cause–effect relationship (Table 9)
among them is also analyzed using DEMATEL. Based on cause–effect relationship
and r + c values, training is the most important CSF with the highest value (7.6690) of
r + c, whereas sustainability is observed as least important CSFs of SGSCM with
least r + c value (6.0708). Considering the r + c values the priority is training > brand
image building > top management commitment > customer requirement > reverse

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
Table 6 Calculation for AHP
N = 9, Average Lambda = 9.709, CI = 0.0887, RI = 1.46, CR = 0.0607
Reachability matrix Prioritised
Vector (PV)
Weighted Vector Eigen Value Rank
CSFs F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9
Top Management Commitment 1.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 5.00 9.00 7.00 0.3299 3.4283 10.391 1
Adoption of New Technology and Processes 0.33 1.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 7.00 5.00 0.1775 1.8022 10.156 2
Customer Requirements 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 0.1190 1.1866 9.974 4
Employee Involvement 0.20 0.50 1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 7.00 0.1551 1.5664 10.101 3
Brand Image Building 0.17 0.25 0.33 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 0.0518 0.4937 9.527 6
Government Regulations and Standards 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.20 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 7.00 0.0739 0.6831 9.244 5
Training 0.20 0.33 0.33 0.20 1.00 0.33 1.00 2.00 2.00 0.0445 0.4122 9.253 7
Reverse logistic management 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.0224 0.2116 9.461 9
Sustainability 0.14 0.20 0.33 0.14 0.33 0.14 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.0259 0.2407 9.276 8

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
logistics management > adoption of new technologies > government regulations and stand-
ards > employee involvement > sustainability.
Threshold value is α = 0.3737, and using this, cause-effect diagram (network relation-
ship map) is prepared as shown in Fig.2. The bold values in Table9 are showing the val-
ues having more than α.
The analysis shows that on their cause–effect relationship brass manufacturing com-
panies should be more focussed towards government regulations and standards which are
more affecting CSFs. The nine CSFs further categorized into two groups; cause group and
effect group. If the r–c value is positive, then such CSFs are considered as cause group
CSFs and effect the others CSFs those are in effect group having negative r–c values. The
higher values of r–c have higher impact on others. Top management commitment, cus-
tomer requirements, brand image building, and reverse logistics management are catego-
rized in cause group with 0.0519, 0.1328, 0.2983, and 1.2887 r–c values. It indicates that
reverse logistics is the most important cause CSF followed by brand image building, cus-
tomer requirements and top management commitment.
The CSFs having negative value of r–c value, categorized in effect group. Adoption of
new technology and processes, employee involvement, government regulations and stand-
ards, training, sustainability with −0.1204, − 0.1250, −0.6866, −0.4094, and − 0.4304
r–c values, respectively, are in effect group.
Considering the network relationship map (Fig. 2 and Table 9), CSFs brand image
building and reverse logistics management affecting all other CSFs of SGSCM in brass
manufacturing companies, the followed by training, customer requirement, top manage-
ment commitment, employee involvement, adoption of new technologies, and government
regulations and standards. The companies should focus on such CSFs those are highly
impacting others and make the strategies accordingly. This research can assist brass manu-
facturers and other decision-makers in determining their objectives and allocating fund-
ing accordingly. They can adopt the process of SGSCM effectively if they understand the
importance of each CSF in different aspects affecting the implementation of SGSCM in
Table 7 Geometric mean matrix
Unit 1 Manufacturing unit 1; Unit 2 Manufacturing unit 2; Unit 3 Manufacturing unit 3; Unit 4 manufactur-
ing unit 4
Unit/CSFs F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9
Unit 1 6.9207 8.5858 7.2774 7.3305 7.5289 7.9498 7.5289 7.9498 8.5858
Unit 2 6.9425 6.9207 7.3305 6.9425 7.7647 7.1599 7.5289 6.7595 6.7875
Unit 3 7.5601 6.0000 7.3841 5.2614 5.7059 6.8922 7.3608 7.3004 7.1080
Unit 4 7.1080 8.1649 7.2774 7.7403 7.3537 8.1649 7.2774 7.5053 6.7875
Table 8 TOPSIS Index (CC) Unit NIS Index PIS Index NIS + PIS Topsis Index (CC) Rank
Unit 1 0.0396 0.0156 0.0551 0.7177 1
Unit 2 0.0232 0.0267 0.0498 0.4647 3
Unit 3 0.0148 0.0427 0.0575 0.2580 4
Unit 4 0.0391 0.0122 0.0513 0.7628 2

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
Table 9 Relative intensity matrix, the sum of given and received
CSFs F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 RT CT R + C R–C Rank(R–C) Cause and effect
F1 0.3202 0.3837 0.4227 0.3675 0.4541 0.4025 0.4774 0.3023 0.3853 3.5157 3.4638 6.9795 0.0519 6 Cause
F2 0.3634 0.2653 0.3862 0.3496 0.3328 0.3685 0.4416 0.2919 0.3237 3.1231 3.2435 6.3666 − 0.1204 5 Effect
F3 0.4505 0.3793 0.3039 0.3909 0.4088 0.3984 0.4457 0.3045 0.3950 3.4771 3.3443 6.8213 0.1328 7 Cause
F4 0.3918 0.3387 0.3117 0.2568 0.3648 0.3995 0.4244 0.2553 0.3377 3.0806 3.2056 6.2862 − 0.1250 4 Effect
F5 0.4552 0.4198 0.4512 0.4020 0.3576 0.4331 0.5263 0.3802 0.4148 3.8401 3.5418 7.3819 0.2983 8 Cause
F6 0.3441 0.3209 0.3292 0.2952 0.3425 0.2616 0.3852 0.2756 0.2842 2.8384 3.5250 6.3635 − 0.6866 1 Effect
F7 0.4068 0.3982 0.3863 0.4169 0.4546 0.4704 0.3821 0.2959 0.4186 3.6298 4.0392 7.6690 − 0.4094 3 Effect
F8 0.4347 0.4483 0.4518 0.4108 0.4785 0.4497 0.5444 0.2743 0.4504 3.9429 2.6542 6.5971 1.2887 9 Cause
F9 0.2970 0.2892 0.3012 0.3160 0.3482 0.3414 0.4121 0.2741 0.2410 2.8202 3.2506 6.0708 − 0.4304 2 Effect

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
their manufacturing units. They will be more causes towards the causing CSFs and analyze
their effect on other CSFs.
9 Concluding remarks
Brass can be recycled an unlimited number of times, providing considerable environmental
and financial benefits. Brass is a copper-based alloy with no chemical or physical qualities
that deteriorate during recycling. When compared to aluminium and steel, the recycling
process for brass uses less energy and leaves a smaller carbon imprint. The capacity to
repurpose brass from discarded materials is a testament to an industry that is environmen-
tally conscientious in its resource consumption. Until around thirty years ago, brassware
was created by self-employed artisans to meet national demand. However, with the advent
of export and industrialization, large production units now cater to the needs of interna-
tional merchants and retailers. Manufacturing units are unable to implement the SGSCM
due to the adoption of incorrect practices, which has a negative impact on worker health
and the environment, as well as the economy, directly or indirectly.
This study provides a unique approach for analyzing and understanding the importance
of different factors those are important in successful implementation of GSCM. Without
interacting with the professionals working in brass manufacturing companies, it was dif-
ficult to analyze the importance of the factors. Once the factors are prioritized and catego-
rized, it becomes very convenient for adopting GSCM. This study gives a clear and new
insight to know the influencing factors and the cause–effect relationship among the GCSM
factors. Ranking of the brass manufacturing units is possible on the basis of factors respon-
sible for adopting GSCM using TOPSIS.
Insights taken from the literature and on the basis of 189 responses collected through
questionnaire, nine factors responsible for successful implementation of GSCM were iden-
tified. These factors are: Top Management Commitment (Dashore & Sohani, 2013); Adop-
tion of New Technology and Processes (Mathiyazhagan etal., 2014); Customer Require-
ments (Mangla etal., 2014a); Employee Involvement (Dashore & Sohani, 2013); Brand
Image Building (Duber-Smith, 2005; Mangla etal., 2014a); Government Regulations and
Standards (Zhu & Sarkis, 2006); Training (Mathiyazhagan etal., 2014); Reverse logistic
management (Bouzon etal., 2018); Sustainability (Mangla etal., 2013). Among these fac-
tors, no evidence of multicollinearity is observed.
The identified nine factors were prioritized using AHP on the basis of their prioritized
score, and top management commitment is the most influencing factor for adopting the
GSCM followed by adoption of new technology and process, employee involvement, cus-
tomer requirement, government regulations and standards, brand image building, training,
sustainability, and reverse logistics management. Top Management Commitment towards
greening policy is very essential it affects; “Effective Advertising and Marketing Campaign
for Green Organization Efforts”; “IT Enabling and Effective Communication”; “Environ-
ment-Friendly Distribution”; “Effective Customer Training Program”; “Green Labeling
and Use of Green Packaging Material”; and “Recycling and Reuse Organization Efforts”
(Kumar etal., 2013).
The integration of supply chain activities (Agrawal etal., 2020a) and the technologies to
accomplish it have become competitive necessities in most industries. Adopting new tech-
nology advancements by the manufacturing companies will help in order to protect market
share and market penetration in order to fulfil the customer’s requirements towards green.

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
The current research study highlighted the trends and possibilities in research address-
ing the SGCSM. With a growing awareness of the need of ’going green’, people are
increasingly preferring to buy green items that are free of toxins, produced with a low level
of pollution-linked pollutants, and pose no environmental or ecological risks. The paper
has gone into great detail about various emerging concepts and operational strategies, as
well as their relationships, for the successful implementation of a sustainable green sup-
ply chain that could be used as a powerful management tool, aiming at both corporate and
product branding of green products for the long-term development of the environment.
10 Future scope andimplications ofthestudy
The present study provides several unique managerial and theoretical implications for
adopting the successful SGSCM in brass manufacturing companies, especially in the
Indian context. The study concludes that top management commitment is the most impor-
tant priority CSF which is playing an important role in implementation of SGSCM in brass
manufacturing units. The study suggests that the professionals need to be more focussed
towards the causal group CSFs consisting of top management commitment, customer
requirement, brand image building, and reverse logistics management. Through causal
group CSFs, effect group CSFs can be controlled and desired outcomes can be materialized
by the companies while implementing SGSCM successfully.
The practitioners and researchers can conduct similar studies in other manufacturing
and service sectors. Strategic decision can be taken by the professionals and practition-
ers by taking the result of this study into consideration. Companies can use this as regular
monitoring tool to know the priority of the CSFs and causal group CSFs.
Green supply chain effects on organizational decisions will affect not just the organiza-
tion making the decisions, but also its consumers, suppliers, and other stakeholders.
In this study, there are some limitations:
• 17 experts were approached for providing responses on the identified CSFs for success-
ful implementation of SGSCM. Reliability of the study can be improved by increasing
the number of experts and by use of proven statistical techniques (Saaty and Varges,
1994 and Agrawal etal., 2018).
• Uncertainty and vagueness can be eliminated in this analysis by the implementation
of Fuzzy MCDM (Fuzzy AHP, Fuzzy TOPSIS, and Fuzzy DEMATEL) techniques for
improved outcomes in further studies.
In summary, we point out that this study is primarily based on the literature review of
SGSCM practices as well as field observations and data collection from professionals.
Thus, it is a cost -effective and easy to implement analytical /empirical findings. The adop-
tion of SGSCM practices in brass industry has a lot of barriers, primarily the lack of aware-
ness. If and only if, top management is educated and trained, the overall green practices
in India will move to the next level. However, contemporary green initiatives taken by the
authors will lead to a creation of awareness by the stakeholders to realize the significance
of SGSCM. This is the first research study of SGSCM practices in Indian brass industry. It
is hoped that this study may be the benchmark of further research for improving sustaina-
bility of brass industry sector. As we move into the future, such an initiative will gain rapid
momentum. Towards this end, our message here is that this study is a pioneering attempt

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
in the Indian context to advance the frontiers of knowledge in the domain of GSCM. How-
ever, in terms of finality in refinements in modelling and analysis, the scope exists for more
innovations towards building a generalized theory of sustainability.
Although this paper is a study on brass industry sector in India, but we postulate here
that this paper can serve as a good foundation for those seeking to develop theories and
broaden research agenda on sustainability. The ideas and ideals presented in this study
are transferable to industries of similar in characteristics such as process industry supply
chains. Furthermore, in order to fulfil the objectives of Sustainable Development, perhaps
the greatest challenge and opportunity for future researchers are to plan manufacturing sys-
tems not merely for economic gains, but they must be compatible with human ecology.
This calls for us as researchers and community of practitioners need to be knowledgeable
and enrich ourselves with meta-systems approach. It may be noted here that the success of
our sustainable future is proving that industrial productivity and environmental efficiency
are not conflicting objectives; rather, they are the same super-ordinate objective encom-
passing people, planet and profit.
Finally, although we have used MCDM methods, but in terms of finality in their refine-
ments, we make no claim as the scope exists towards expansion in depth and breadth.
Acknowledgements We express our gratitude to the Editor as well as the distinguished reviewers for their
useful and enriching comments to make this paper more value adding and strongly implicative to academia
and the community of practitioners.
References
Agrawal, V., Tripathi, V., & Seth, N. (2018). B-school selection by fuzzy TOPSIS and AHP. In Mehdi
Khosrow-Pour (Eds.), Intelligent systems: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 929–
955). IGI Global.
Agrawal, V., Mohanty, R. P., & Agrawal, A. M. (2020a). Identification and analysis of enablers of SCM by
using MCDM approach. Benchmarking: An International Journal.
Agrawal, V., Seth, N., & Dixit, J. K. (2020b). A combined AHP–TOPSIS–DEMATEL approach for evaluat-
ing success factors of e-service quality: an experience from Indian banking industry. Electronic Com-
merce Research, 1–33. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10660- 020- 09430-3
Ahi, P., & Searcy, C. (2013). A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and sustainable sup-
ply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 52, 329–341.
Ali, S. S., Kaur, R., Ersöz, F., Altaf, B., Basu, A., & Weber, G. W. (2020). Measuring carbon performance
for sustainable green supply chain practices: A developing country scenario. Central European Jour-
nal of Operations Research, 28(4), 1389–1416.
Anand, K. R., & Parthiban, P. (2014). Evaluation of green supply chain factors using DEMATEL. In Bal-
asubramanian, K.R, Sivapirakasam, S.P., & Anand, R. (Eds.), Applied mechanics and materials (Vol.
592, pp. 2619–2627). Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Anand, A., Brøns Kringelum, L., Øland Madsen, C., & Selivanovskikh, L. (2021). Interorganizational learn-
ing: a bibliometric review and research agenda. The Learning Organization, 16(2), 111–136.
Awan, U. (2019). Impact of social supply chain practices on social sustainability performance in manufac-
turing firms. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 13(2), 198–219.
Awan, U., Kraslawski, A., & Huiskonen, J. (2017). Understanding the relationship between stakeholder
pressure and sustainability performance in manufacturing firms in Pakistan. Procedia Manufacturing,
11, 768–777.
Awan, U., Kraslawski, A., & Huiskonen, J. (2018a). Understanding influential factors on implementing
social sustainability practices in manufacturing firms: An interpretive structural modelling (ISM) anal-
ysis. Procedia Manufacturing, 17, 1039–1048.
Awan, U., Kraslawski, A., & Huiskonen, J. (2018b). Buyer-supplier relationship on social sustainability:
Moderation analysis of cultural intelligence. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1429346.

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
Awan, U., Kraslawski, A., & Huiskonen, J. (2018c). The impact of relational governance on performance
improvement in export manufacturing firms. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management,
11(3), 349–370.
Badwe, R., Shrivastav, R. L., & Mohanty, R. P. (2022). An in-depth literature review of end-of-life vehi-
cle management. International Journal of Environment and Waste Management. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1504/ IJEWM. 2022. 10042 089
Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of the-art survey of TOP-
SIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 13051–13069.
Berardi, U. (2013). Sustainability assessment of urban communities through rating systems. Environ-
ment, Development and Sustainability, 15(6), 1573–1591.
Bouzon, M., Govindan, K., & Rodriguez, C. M. T. (2018). Evaluating barriers for reverse logistics
implementation under a multiple stakeholders’ perspective analysis using grey decision making
approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 128, 315–335.
De Boysère, J., & Beard, A. (2006). Halogen‐free laminates: worldwide trends, driving forces and cur-
rent status. Circuit World.
Chan, H. K., He, H., & Wang, W. Y. (2012). Green marketing and its impact on supply chain manage-
ment in industrial markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(4), 557–562.
Chatterjee, S., & Mohanty R. P. (2022), A bibliographic study of sustainability research: exploring mul-
tidimensionality; International Journal of Industrial & Systems Engineering (Forthcomming).
Chu, T. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2009). An interval arithmetic based fuzzy TOPSIS model. Expert Systems with
Applications, 36(8), 10870–10876.
Das, P. (2012). Sustainable supply chains: eco-friendly packaging and the Indian challenges.
Dashore, K., & Sohani, N. (2013). Green supply chain management-barriers & drivers: A review. Inter-
national Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, 2(4), 2021–2030.
Dey, P. K., Hariharan, S., & Clegg, B. T. (2006). Measuring the operational performance of intensive
care units using the analytic hierarchy process approach. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 26(8), 849–865.
Diabat, A., & Govindan, K. (2011). An analysis of the drivers affecting the implementation of green sup-
ply chain management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(6), 659–667.
Duber-Smith, D.C. (2005). The Green Imperative. Soap, Perfumery and Cosmetics, 78(8), 24–26
Evans, H., & Johnson, J. (2005). 10 Steps toward RoHS directive compliance. Circuits Assembly, 16(2),
68–70.
Falatoonitoosi, E., Leman, Z., & Sorooshian, S. (2013). Modeling for green supply chain evaluation.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2013, 1–9.
Gandhi, S., Mangla, S. K., Kumar, P., & Kumar, D. (2016). A combined approach using AHP and
DEMATEL for evaluating success factors in implementation of green supply chain management
in Indian manufacturing industries. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications,
19(6), 537–561.
Govindan, K., Kaliyan, M., Kannan, D., & Haq, A. N. (2014). Barriers analysis for green supply chain
management implementation in Indian industries using analytic hierarchy process. International
Journal of Production Economics, 147, 555–568.
Handfield, R., Sroufe, R., & Walton, S. (2005). Integrating environmental management and supply chain
strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14(1), 1–19.
Hanna, M. D., Newman, W. R., & Johnson, P. (2000). Linking operational and environmental
improvement through employee involvement. International journal of operations & production
management.
https:// www. finan ciale xpress. com/ indus try/ rupee- fall- hits- indias- large st- brass- parts- market/ 12345 20/
https:// www. finan ciale xpress. com/ opini on/ india- fares- poorly- on- epi- 2020- index- time- to- act- towar ds-
envir onment- prote ction/ 19865 92/
https:// conne ct2in dia. com/ global/ Brass- export- from- india/1
Huang, Y.-C., Huang, C.-H., & Yang, M.-L. (2017). Drivers of green supply chain initiatives and perfor-
mance: Evidence from the electrical and electronics industries in Taiwan. International Journal of
Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 47(9), 796–819.
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple attribute
decision making (pp. 58–191). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Jabareen, Y. (2008). A new conceptual framework for sustainable development. Environment, Develop-
ment and Sustainability, 10(2), 179–192.
Jawaad, M., & Zafar, S. (2020). Improving sustainable development and firm performance in emerging
economies by implementing green supply chain activities. Sustainable Development, 28(1), 25–38.

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
Kalpande, S. D., & Toke, L. K. (2020). Assessment of green supply chain management practices, per-
formance, pressure and barriers amongst Indian manufacturer to achieve sustainable development.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
Kazancoglu, Y., Kazancoglu, I., & Sagnak, M. (2018). A new holistic conceptual framework for green
supply chain management performance assessment based on circular economy. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 195, 1282–1299.
Koul, S., & Verma, R. (2011). Dynamic vendor selection based on fuzzy AHP. Journal of Manufactur-
ing Technology Management, 22(8), 963–971.
Kumar, A., & Dash, M. K. (2016). Using DEMATEL to construct influential network relation map of
consumer decision-making in e-marketplace. International Journal of Business Information Sys-
tems, 21(1), 48–72.
Kumar, S., Luthra, S., & Haleem, A. (2013). Customer involvement in greening the supply chain: An
interpretive structural modeling methodology. Journal of Industrial Engineering International,
9(1), 1–13.
Kumar, S., Luthra, S., & Haleem, A. (2014). Critical success factors of customer involvement in green-
ing the supply chain: An empirical study. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Manage-
ment, 19(3), 283–310.
Luthra, S., Garg, D., & Haleem, A. (2015). An analysis of interactions among critical success fac-
tors to implement green supply chain management towards sustainability: An Indian perspective.
Resources Policy, 46, 37–50.
Luthra, S., Kumar, V., Kumar, S., & Haleem, A. (2011). Barriers to implement green supply chain man-
agement in automobile industry using interpretive structural modeling technique: An Indian per-
spective. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management (JIEM), 4(2), 231–257.
Malviya, R. K., & Kant, R. (2014). Identifying critical success factors for green supply chain manage-
ment implementation using fuzzy DEMATEL method. Industrial engineering and engineering man-
agement (IEEM), 2014 IEEE international conference, Los Angeles, (pp. 15–17).
Mangla, S. K., Kumar, P., & Barua, M. K. (2014a). Flexible decision approach for analysing perfor-
mance of sustainable supply chains under risks/uncertainty. Global Journal of Flexible Systems
Management, 15(2), 113–130.
Mangla, S., Kumar, P., & Barua, M. K. (2014b). An evaluation of attribute for improving the green sup-
ply chain performance via DEMATEL method. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering
& Robotics Research, 1(1), 30–35.
Mangla, S. K., Kumar, P., & Barua, M. K. (2015). Risk analysis in green supply chain using fuzzy AHP
approach: A case study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 104, 375–390.
Mangla, S., Madaan, J., & Chan, F. T. (2013). Analysis of flexible decision strategies for sustainabil-
ity-focused green product recovery system. International Journal of Production Research, 51(11),
3428–3442.
Mangla, S., Madaan, J., Sarma, P. R. S., & Gupta, M. P. (2014c). Multi-objective decision modelling
using interpretive structural modelling for green supply chains. International Journal of Logistics
Systems and Management, 17(2), 125–142.
Mathiyazhagan, K., Govindan, K., & Noorul Haq, A. (2014). Pressure analysis for green supply chain
management implementation in Indian industries using analytic hierarchy process. International
Journal of Production Research, 52(1), 188–202.
Mitra, S., & Datta, P. P. (2014). Adoption of green supply chain management practices and their impact
on performance: An exploratory study of Indian manufacturing firms. International Journal of Pro-
duction Research, 52(7), 2085–2107.
Mohanty, R. P., & Deshmukh, S. G. (1998). Managing green productivity: Some strategic directions.
Production Planning & Control, 9(7), 624–633.
Mohanty, R. P., & Prakash, A. (2014a). Green supply chain management practices in India: A confirma-
tory empirical study. Production & Manufacturing Research, 2(1), 438–456.
Mohanty, R. P., & Prakash, A. (2014b). Green supply chain management practices in India: An empiri-
cal study. Production Planning & Control, 25(16), 1322–1337.
Mohanty, R. P., & Prakash, A. (2017). Searching for definitions and boundaries in sustainable produc-
tion system. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 27(1), 122–143.
Mudgal, R. K., Shankar, R., Talib, P., & Raj, T. (2009). Greening the supply chain practices: An Indian
perspective of enablers’ relationships. International Journal of Advanced Operations Management,
1(2–3), 151–176.
Muduli, K., Govindan, K., Barve, A., & Geng, Y. (2013). Barriers to green supply chain management in
Indian mining industries: A graph theoretic approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 335–344.

Analyzing critical success factors forsustainable green supply…
1 3
Ninlawan, C., Seksan, P., Tossapol, K., & Pilada, W. (2010). The implementation of green supply chain
management practices in electronics industry. In World congress on engineering 2012. London,
UK. (Vol. 2182, pp. 1563–1568). International Association of Engineers.
Pandya, D. H., & Ghumra, J. (2016). Recent and Futuristic Ayurveda Science.
Paquette, J. (2005), The supply chain response to Environmental Pressures Discussion, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology; Accessed 12 April 2020. http:// hdl. handle. net/ 1721.1/ 34530
Rahman, S., & Subramanian, N. (2012). Factors for implementing end-of-life computer recycling opera-
tions in reverse supply chains. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 239–248.
Rahman, T., Ali, S. M., Moktadir, M. A., & Kusi-Sarpong, S. (2020). Evaluating barriers to implement-
ing green supply chain management: An example from an emerging economy. Production Planning
& Control, 31(8), 673–698.
Rao, P., & Holt, D. (2005). Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance?
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(9), 898–916.
Rashed, A. H., & Shah, A. (2021). The role of private sector in the implementation of sustainable devel-
opment goals. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(3), 2931–2948.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. Mcgraw-Hill International.
Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Oper-
ational Research, 48(1), 9–26.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Ser-
vices Sciences, 1(1), 83–98.
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (1994). Decision making in economic, political, social, and technological
environments with the analytic hierarchy process. RWS publications.
Sasi, J. C., & Digalwar, A. K. (2015). Application of AHP and TOPSIS method for supplier selection
between India & China in textile industry. International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology, 2(4), 1730–1738.
Shibin, K. T., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Dubey, R., Singh, M., & Wamba, S. F. (2016). Ena-
blers and barriers of flexible green supply chain management: A total interpretive structural mod-
eling approach. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 17(2), 171–188.
Singh, M., Jawalkar, C. S., & Kant, S. (2019). Analysis of drivers for green supply chain management
adaptation in a fertilizer industry of Punjab (India). International Journal of Environmental Science
and Technology, 16(7), 2915–2926.
Sullivan, W. G. (1986). Models IES can use to include strategic, nonmonetary factors in automation
decisions. Industrial Engineering, 18(3), 42–50.
Toke, L. K., Gupta, R. C., & Dandekar, M. (2012). An empirical study of green supply chain manage-
ment in Indian perspective. International Journal of Applied Sciences and Engineering Research,
1(2), 372–383.
Vinodh, S., Kumar, V. U., & Girubha, R. J. (2012). Thirty-criteria-based agility assessment: a case study
in an Indian pump manufacturing organisation. The International Journal of Advanced Manufac-
turing Technology, 63(9), 915–929.
Wu, K. J., Tseng, M. L., & Vy, T. (2011). Evaluation the drivers of green supply chain management
practices in uncertainty. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 25, 384–397.
Wymore, M. L., & Duckstein, L. (1989). Prioritizing of factory automation investments with multi cri-
terion Q-analysis. Multiple Criteria Decision Making: Applications in Industry and Service, Asian
Institute of Technology, Bangkok, 317–331.
Xu, L., Mathiyazhagan, K., Govindan, K., Haq, A. N., Ramachandran, N. V., & Ashokkumar, A. (2013).
Multiple comparative studies of green supply chain management: Pressures analysis. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 78, 26–35.
Zeydan, M., Çolpan, C., & Çobanoğlu, C. (2011). A combined methodology for supplier selection and per-
formance evaluation. Expert systems with applications, 38(3), 2741–2751.
Zhu, Q., Geng, Y., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K. H. (2011). Evaluating green supply chain management among Chi-
nese manufacturers from the ecological modernization perspective. Transportation Research Part e:
Logistics and Transportation Review, 47(6), 808–821.
Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2004). Relationships between operational practices and performance among early
adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises. Journal of
Operations Management, 22(3), 265–289.
Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2006). An inter-sectoral comparison of green supply chain management in China:
Drivers and practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(5), 472–486.
Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2007). The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green sup-
ply chain practices and performance. International Journal of Production Research, 45(18–19),
4333–4355.

V.Agrawal et al.
1 3
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
Authors and Aliations
VivekAgrawal1 · RajendraP.Mohanty2· SuchetaAgarwal1· JitendraKumarDixit1·
AnandM.Agrawal3
Rajendra P. Mohanty
rpmohanty@gmail.com
Sucheta Agarwal
Sucheta.agrawal@gla.ac.in
Jitendra Kumar Dixit
jitendra.dixit@gla.ac.in
Anand M. Agrawal
anand.agrawal@uniteduniversity.edu.in
1 GLA University, Mathura, India
2 SOA University, Bhubaneswar, India
3 Present Address: United University, Allahabad, India