Content uploaded by Shahbaz Khan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Shahbaz Khan on Aug 30, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Prioritising the risks in Halal food
supply chain: an MCDM approach
Shahbaz Khan,Mohd Imran Khan,Abid Haleem and
Abdur Rahman Jami
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology,
Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India
Abstract
Purpose –Risk in the Halal food supply chain is considered as the failure to deliver the product which
complies with Halal standards. The purpose of this paper is to identify the risk elements associated with Halal
food supply chains andprioritise them appropriately towards better management.
Design/methodology/approach –This research used a systematic literature review to identify various
risk elements in the Halal food supply chain and consolidate them with the expertise of professionals and
academicians. Further, the fuzzy analytic hierarchical process (fuzzy AHP) is applied to prioritise the
identified risk elements.
Findings –The findings of the research suggest that “supply-related risks”are the most prominent risk.
Raw material integrity issue is a vital element in the Halal food supply chain. The failure of the supplier to
deliver material that complies with Halal standards reduces the industrial economic advantage. This study
recommends that the integration of internal processes and outsourcing elements can mitigate the risk of the
Halal food supply chain by having a holistic view of the processing and delivery of Halal foods.
Research limitations/implications –Systematic literature review and experts’opinion are used to
identify and consolidate risks. For the literature review, only the SCOPUS database is used; thus, there is a
chance to overlook some risk elements. Additionally, the fuzzy AHP analysis depends on relative preference
weight. Therefore, care should be taken while constructing a pairwise comparison matrixfor risk elements.
Practical implications –The findings of the study can help the managers who have a holistic view on
risk mitigation of the Halal food supply chain. This study may assist managers to share information about the
processing of Halal food fromtop to bottom to manage risk.
Originality/value –This study may act as a baseline for undertaking future research in the area of risk
management of the Halal food supply chain.
Keywords Risks, Halal, Halal food supply chain, Sensitivity analysis, Fuzzy AHP
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
With increasing awareness about Halal food consumption and increasing demand for safe
and nutritious food, the Halal concept has obtained considerable attention. The demand for
Halal products is continuously growing and the related market is expanding. The global
market size of Halal food and lifestyle products is anticipated to reach USD 2.6 tn by 2020
(Khan et al., 2018a). However, globalisation has made the operation of the Halal supply chain
challenging. Product variety, product complexity, overseas supplier, intertwined business
relationships, processes among suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, retailers and
customers make the situation more complicated (Tieman 2017a;Ali et al.,2014).
Halal supply chain management defined as “controlling and administering the flow of
material, information and capital; through strategic coordination and collaboration of
stakeholders, as to create value to improve the performance of the supply chain, in such a
Prioritising the
risks
Received 29 October2018
Revised 5 April 2019
28 April 2019
Accepted 15 May 2019
Journal of Islamic Marketing
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1759-0833
DOI 10.1108/JIMA-10-2018-0206
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1759-0833.htm
way that Halal and Toyyib is extended from farm to fork”(Khan et al., 2018a). The integrity
risk becomes prominent as the Halal food supply chain (HFSC) adopted the farm-to-fork
approach. Food industries run various quality frameworks to reduce the food integrity risk
in the supply chain, but these mechanisms alone are not effective in the long run (Ahmad
et al.,2018). Further, the concept of risk management in a supply chain dealing with Halal
food is still in the developing phase. It has been observed that researchers and practitioners
have paid less attention to risk management in the HFSC. Moreover, organisation or
stakeholders in the supply chain may try to cut corners to increase their profit. Such trade-
off between the product cost and its quality may further increase the integrity risk in the
HFSC.
In this research, the endeavour is to identify risks in the HFSC. In the context of the Halal
supply chain, a literature-based approach provides a limited view of the risks, and most of
the authors follow the same. The risk-identification exercise adopted in this study obtains
the necessary information through the available literature; further, experts’opinions are
incorporated to consolidate risk elements for a multi-cultural society, where Muslims are in
the minority. Management of the HFSC needs understanding about the risk elements. This
study uses the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) technique appropriately to prioritise
the associated risk and its elements, thereby making it easy for the managers to ensure their
mitigation. Accordingly, the primary objectives of this paper are as follows:
conducting a systematic literature review to identify various risk elements in the
HFSC;
Consolidation of identified elements of risks with the expertise of professionals and
academician; and
Analysis of consolidated elements of risk using fuzzy analytic hierarchical process
(fuzzy AHP).
In cases of multi-criteria decision-making, AHP is the most widely used technique for
ranking. In the present study, we have collected the linguistic data through different experts,
and these data have subjectivity, vagueness and inaccuracies which made it challenging to
analyse with conventional AHP (Wang et al.,2012). Therefore, we have integrated fuzzy set
theory with the AHP named as “fuzzy AHP”to overcome vagueness and uncertainty
present in the experts’input.
2. Background of the study
This section deals with the concept of the Halal along with its related terms such as Toyyib.
Further, we developed the understanding of risk in the context of the Halal supply chain.
2.1 Halal: a brief overview
The term “Halal”is borrowed from the Arabic language and means permitted, allowed or
lawful. Moreover, the crux is that every consumable is considered Halal, until and unless
explicitly restricted by Shariah (Wilson, 2012;Khan et al., 2019a). Halal signifies that the
product is sourced, manufactured/processed, transported, handled and delivered as per the
regulation set by Shariah requirements. Malaysian Halal Standard (MS2400:2010) defines
Halal as “things or activities which are permitted or lawful in Islam, which conveys basic
meaning and defines the standard of acceptability in accordance to Shariah requirements.”
Halal covers all aspects of life that need to be adhered to by its followers, including food
consumption. The Islamic dietary law states that all foods are permitted to be consumed or
traded, under normal circumstances, except for foods that are mentioned explicitly in the
JIMA
Holy Quran and the Hadith. The foods which are forbidden or prohibited are referred to as
Haram.
In the context of the Halal food, “Toyyib”is used as an associated term which means
“wholesome”. The Toyyib aspect of Halal consumption enriches societies with spiritual,
moral and human values, as well as food safety regulations (Arif and Sidek, 2015). Halal
focuses on Shariah compliances, as well as it is broad-based and should not be just for a
certain faith of population because the Quranic verse has commanded every mankind to
consume Halal and Toyyib products which are translated as “O mankind, eat from whatever
is on earth [that is] lawful and wholesome (Quran, 2:168).”Halal has been confined
mistakenly to the domain that the consumables are free from alcohol, contain no pork or its
derivatives and the animal is slaughtered ritually. Toyyib refers that the Halal product
should be wholesome along with safe, nutritious, non-poisonous, non-intoxicating and non-
hazardous to health (Alzeer and Abou Hadeed, 2016;Neio Demirci et al.,2016;Tieman,
2011). Toyyib aspects also demand that all the stakeholders in the Halal supply chain need
to be engaged in fair trade practices, ethical business practices, humane animal husbandry,
sustainability and corporate social responsibility.
2.2 Risk and Halal food supply chain
The “concept of risk”has a long history of about 2,400 years when Athenians used their
capability to detect and evaluate the risks before making decisions (Bernstein, 1996). In the
modern era, the concept of risk is studied systematically from several perspectives such as
strategy, production, finance, marketing and management. These different perspectives
have different definitions and understanding of the risks. The general understanding of the
risk is the unexpectedness and uncertainty associated with the occurrence of any event
(Gurnani et al.,2012). From the managerial perspective “risk is a threat that something
might happen to disturb typical and normal activities or stop things happening as intended”
(Waters, 2007).
The interdependency among the food supply chain partners is high, which increases the
complexities in the supply chain. With globalisation and high-level innovation, the food
supply chain is facing significant risks and challenges (Kamalahmadi and Parast, 2016;
Sufiyan, et al.,2019). Moreover, the multifaceted nature of the food supply chain makes it
more vulnerable to risks and disruptions (Manning et al.,2005,2006;Tan et al.,2017).
Similar to the food supply chain, the HFSC is also facing many challenges owing to a high
level of interdependency among the Halal supply chain partners, global network and
credence quality attributes of the Halal products (Ab Talib et al., 2015;Ahmad et al.,2017).
An HFSC has a high level of interconnections among the manufacturer, suppliers, Halal
certification bodies and consumers (Haleem et al.,2018;Chaudry and Riaz, 2014). The
complex structure of the HFSC makes it more vulnerable in the global business environment
(Tieman 2017b;Tieman, 2018).
The risk associated with Halal in the supply chain depends on the types of products
(Tieman and Che Ghazali, 2014). The risk in the HFSC is the failure to deliver the product
which complies with Halal standards. The credence quality attribute of Halal food products
makes it difficult for the consumer to ascertain its integrity even after consuming it (Abd
Rahman et al.,2017). Also, Halal manufacturing units need to comply with the Toyyib
attribute which requires that the Halal product should be of good quality, nutritious,
ethically delivered and free from toxicants (Khan et al., 2018a;Alzeer et al.,2018;
Haleem and Khan, 2017;Neio Demirci et al.,2016). These attributes make risk management
in the HFSC very difficult. The overseas locations of suppliers and unavailability of
professionals at all stages in the supply chain resonate with Halal integrity issues (Ali and
Prioritising the
risks
Suleiman, 2016;Tieman et al., 2012). Globally many regulations and standards have been
developed to regulate Halal food processing and Halal supply chain practices, but research
on its adherent risks is still low.
Consumers of Halal products want assurance that the food they consume has been
brought following Halal principles from farm to fork. However, some cases such as swine’s
DNA detection in coffee, Halal-certified butter and Halal-certified chocolates (Ali and
Suleiman, 2018;Regenstein et al.,2003) make the consumer more concerned about the
integrity of the Halal food products. Thus, there is a need for the Halal industry to develop a
model and practices to create trust in Halal consumers. Further, risk identification and
mitigation system will help to ensure the integrity of Halal products and build trust in
consumers.
3. Methodology
In this study, the two-phase methodology is used for the evaluation of the relative
importance of risk elements in the Halal supply chain. In the first phase, risk elements are
identified using the systematic literature review and discussion with experts. The second
phase deals with analysing the risk elements using the fuzzy AHP approach. Further, the
sensitivity analysis carried out to evaluatethe robustness of the adopted methodology.
AHP is a multi-criteria decision-making method which allows factors/variables to be
weighted in terms of importance (Khan et al., 2018c). Several studies use AHP to produce
robust results in different applications for the prioritisation of factor/criteria and risks in a
different context. Sharma and Bhat (2012) have identified the risk through literature review
and ranked these conventional supply chain risks using the AHP. Luthra et al. (2013) ranked
the strategies to implement green supply chain management using AHP; Mangla et al. (2015)
applied AHP to prioritise the green supply chain management risks in the Indian context;
and Mangla et al. (2016) integrated the fault-tree analysis with AHP to assess the green
supply chain risks. AHP uses the pairwise comparison matrix filled by the decision-makers
using the linguistic scale. Because of the subjectivity in the nature of the linguistic scale, the
conventional AHP is not adequate. In this regard, the integration of fuzzy concepts is
preferred with the conventional AHP, popularly named as fuzzy AHP. Therefore, in this
study, fuzzy AHP is selected for the analysis of the risks which is capable of dealing with the
subjective assessments. Figure 1 shows the adopted research methodology.
3.1 Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process
Fuzzy AHP is used here for determining the importance of each risk and risk elements.
Further, the overall ranking of the risk and risk elements is determined. The steps of the
fuzzy AHP are as follows.
3.1.1 Step 1: Define the objective of the research. The primary objective of this research is
to prioritise the risk elements of the HFSC.
3.1.2 Step 2: Creating a hierarchical structure. The decision problem is decomposed into
a hierarchy. In this hierarchy, the first level (top level) represents the main aim of the
decision problem and the intermediate levels represent the factors (i.e. risk categories) and
sub-factors (risk elements) that affect the decision (Figure 2).
3.1.3 Step 3: Obtaining the experts’assessment. Linguistic statements are used to collect
experts’judgement; therefore, fuzzy scores are used to transform the linguistic statements
into fuzzy numbers. Table I shows the rules used for calculating the fuzzy score. This table
can be illustrated as follows: suppose risk iis xtime more important than risk j, then the
corresponding fuzzy score/triangular fuzzy number (TFN) is (x–1, x,xþ1). Similarly, if risk
jis xtimes less important than risk i, then the corresponding TFN is (1/(xþ1), 1/x, 1/(x–1)).
JIMA
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of the
adopted methodology
Goal: Analysing the Risk elements in Halal food Supply Chain
Identification of the risk elements in Halal food supply chain
Finalised and categorised the risk elements
Construct hierarchical structure
Obtaining the linguistic expert’s judgement to construct the
pairwise comparison matrix
Transform the linguistic assessment into fuzzy numbers
Calculate local and global weights for the identified risk
elements
Prioritise the risk elements based on the weights
Perform the sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of the
adopted methodology
Analyse the result and discuss the findings
Literature
review
Expert’s
input
Phase I
Phase II
Figure 2.
Hierarchical structure
of risks in the HFSC
Prioritising the
risks
3.1.4 Step 3: Developing a fuzzy pairwise assessment matrix. The relative preference weight
of the decision factor (in this case risks) at each level of the hierarchy is calculated using
pairwise comparisons. These pairwise comparisons are made using the TFNs for each pair
of risks (S, D, P, O, G) at the same level. In the same manner, the pairwise comparison matrix
is developed for each risk element. Please note that the diagonal elements of the fuzzy
pairwise matrix are (1, 1, 1).
3.1.5 Step 4: Determine the significance of weights. Chang’s extent analysis method is
applied for the evaluation of the risk through the fuzzy assessment matrix. Further, this
helps in calculating the weights of significant risk and provided the steps of Chang’s extent
analysis method in the literature (Chang, 1996;Chan et al.,2008;Venkatesh et al.,2018).
4. Data analysis and results
A two-phase solution methodology is implemented to determine the risk of the HFSC. The
analysis and associated results are provided with details in the following subsection.
4.1 Identification of risk in Halal supply chain
Risk elements regarding the HFSC are identified using the systematic literature review and
experts’input. For the literature review, “food supply chain”and “risk,”“Halal supply
chain”and “risk”and “Halal”and “challenges”were searched in the Scopus database. The
Scopus database was chosen because it is the most extensive database of peer-reviewed
articles, academic journals, conference proceedings and book chapters. There might be a
possibility of not cpturing some research articles in this study while selecting the research
article for risk identification. Initially, 326documents were identified, and after removing the
duplicate documents, 289 documents were selected for the next step. On the basis of the
relevance of the study, we identified 102 documents. After investigating the abstract,
we finalised 67 documents for the identification of the risks in the HFSC. A comprehensive
review of literature fetched us 22 risk elements in the HFSC.
To validate elements of risk, a brainstorming session was carried out with the experts’
group. The experts’group consisted of eight members comprising professionals and
academia. The selected professionals were having more than ten years of experience in the
area of HFSC management. The experts’panel consisted of six professionals and two
academia. Among the six professionals, five professionals were working with the Halal food
producing firms located in North India. These professionals had managerial experience in
different departments such as procurement, production, quality, risk management and
inspection. One professional expert belonged to the Halal Certification body which is
established in the National Capital Region (NCR), Delhi, India. Remaining two academic
experts were the professor and research scholar in a central university, India, who were
working in the area of Halal supply chain management.
Table I.
Fuzzy linguistic scale
Uncertain judgements Fuzzy score
Approximately equal 1/2, 1, 2
Approximately xtimes more significant x1, x,xþ1
Approximately xtimes less significant 1/xþ1, 1/x,1/x1
Between yand ztimes more significant y,(yþz)/2, z
Between yand ztimes less significant 1/z, 2/(yþz), 1/y
Note: The value of xranges from 2, 3, ..., 9, whereas the values of yand zcan be 1, 2, ..., 9 and y<z
JIMA
Before collecting data, the objective of the study was explained to the experts by one of the
authors. After the discussion with the experts, we dropped five risks and added two more.
Therefore, a total of 19 risk elements were finalised for further analysis. Based on the
characteristics of the finalised risk elements, these risk elements were grouped into five
categories, namely, supply-related risks, demand-related risks, production-related risks,
outsourcing-related risks and governmental and organisational risks. Table II shows the
risk and risk elementsof the HFSC.
Supply-related risks refer to the uncertainty related to the procurement of the material
and associated activities such as the failure of supplier and integrity of the raw materials.
These types of risks are present outside the firms but within the supply chain. The next
category is the demand-related risks that signify the risks owing to the demand fluctuation
of the Halal product and volatilely of the market. The major risks that appear in this
category are related to the consumers and their attitude towards the product. Additionally,
production-related risks refer to the uncertainty related to the internal production of the
Halal product such as processing equipment failure during operation, unavailability of the
skilled personnel and inefficient design of the production system. These risks are present
within firms and are controllable by the firms. Some activities such as marketing and
transportation are outsourced by the focal firm for the efficient operation of the supply
chain. Risks related to these outsourced activities are categorised under the outsourcing
risks. The major outsourcing risks are contamination with the non-Halal product during
transportation and lack of focused marketing strategies. Some risks in the HFSC
management are owing to the interference of the government and inefficient organisational
strategies. These types of risks are categorised into governmental and organisational risks.
The significant risks in this category are weak regulatory laws for the HFSC and Halal
certification-related issues.
4.2 Prioritisation of risks using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process
In this step, analysis is performed on identified risks to evaluate their priority. This
prioritisation of the risks is done through experts’input using fuzzy AHP methodology. The
steps of the fuzzy AHP are provided as follows.
4.2.1 Develop the hierarchical structure. Figure 2 shows a hierarchal structure as
developed based on the ideas generated through literature reviews and interactions with the
experts’panel. The hierarchy consists of three levels with the primary objective being at
level I, the identified categories of risk at level II and the associated risk elements at level III.
4.2.2 Construction of the fuzzy pairwise comparison matrix. The experts’assessment is
used to develop the pairwise assessment matrices using the linguistic scale (Table I)
suggested by Wang and Wei (2007). The scale contains a linguistic expression for assessing
interaction among risk elements. The pairwise comparisons among the risk categories and
risk elements are done through the questionnaire which contains the pairwise comparison
matrix. This questionnaire was put in front of the experts’panel and ask them to provide
their responses by comparing the risk categories. Based on the experts’opinion (the majority
of the experts) pairwise assessment matrices were finalised. Further, TFNs are used to
transform the experts’linguistic opinion into fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices. Table III
shows the developed fuzzy pairwise comparison matrix for the identified categories of risk.
4.2.3 Calculations for determining risks preference weights. Preferred weights for each
identified category of risks and associated risk elements were calculated using Chang’s
extent analysis method provided in Tables IV and Table V, respectively. To illustrate the
procedure of the Chang’s extent analysis method, the weight of the main risk is determined
as follows.
Prioritising the
risks
S.
no. Risks Description References
ASupply-related risks (S)
Raw material costs risks (S1) Procurement of Halal raw material increases costs,
and so the performance of the supply chain may be
affected
Ali et al. (2014);Ali et al. (2017b);Soon et al. (2017),
Ermis (2017)
Supplier failures (S2) Failure of suppliers to deliver Halal raw material
and ingredients
Wang et al. (2012),Lubis et al. (2016)
Raw material integrity issue (S3) Problems in the integrity of Halal raw material may
lead to the failure of the HFSC
Ali and Suleiman (2018);Ali et al. (2017a);Al-
Mazeedi et al. (2013),Alzeer and Abou Hadeed
(2016)
BDemand related risks (D)
Bullwhip effect risks (D1) Bullwhip effect makes it difficult to forecast the
demand for Halal foods, leading to the poor
performance of the supply chain
Ali (2017); Wang and Disney (2016)
Halal market (D2) Risk of low demand for Halal foods in multi-cultural
society results in reduced revenue
Wilson and Liu, (2011),Tieman (2015);Tieman
(2017a);Wibowo and Ahmad (2016)
Willingness to pay (D3) Risk of consumer reluctance to pay a high cost for
Halal food products
Wilson and Liu (2010); Ab Talib et al. (2015),Abdul
Latiff et al. (2013)
Obstruction of Halal product in the
market (D4)
Failure of Halal food products to gain prominent
shelf space in supermarkets owing to poor
marketing strategy
Abdul Latiff et al. (2013);Ab Talib et al. (2016b)
CProduction-related risks (P)
Processing equipment failure (P1) Halal-dedicated equipment’s failure can interrupt
the HFSC processes
Wang et al. (2012); Mangala et al. (2015)
Process design risks (P2) A flaw in designing of the Halal process may lead to
the mismanagement of operations of HFSC
management
Ma et al. (2012);Khan et al. (2018a)
Unavailability of skilled human
resource (P3)
Unavailability of human resources adversely affects
the performance of the Halal food production
Ma et al. (2012),Tieman and Darun (2017)
Halal understanding level (P4) Level of understanding about Halal at the
managerial level affects the HFSC
Khan et al. (2019a);Ab Talib et al. (2016a)
(continued)
Table II.
HFSC-related risks
JIMA
S.
no. Risks Description References
D Outsourcing related risks (O)
Transportation risk (O1) Contamination can occur in transport vessel and in
non-Halal consignment during transportation of
Halal products
Ngah and Thurasamy (2018),Tieman (2011)
Halal warehousing (O2) Storing Halal with non-Halal products and poor
cleanliness of the warehouse is a threat to the
integrity of Halal foods
Ngah et al. (2017),Ngah et al. (2015);Zulfakar et al.
(2014),Zailani et al. (2017)
Packaging issues (O3) Risk of having non-Halal and toxic material in the
packaging of Halal foods
Industrial Expert Opinion
Marketing (O4) Unclear and inappropriate the marketing strategy
for Halal foods
Wibowo and Ahmad (2016),Din and Daud (2014)
EGovernmental and organisational risks (G)
Halal policy failures (G1) Risk of management policies to gauge performance
measures of HFSC
Mangala et al. (2015); Tieman (2017a,2017b);
Tieman (2015),Bakar et al. (2014);Tieman and
Hassan (2015)
Regulatory risk of Halal product (G2) Weak regulatory laws and compliance to control the
practices of HFSC
Industrial experts’opinion
The issue of information flow along
with HFSC members (G3)
Risk of traceability systems unavailability/failure
can disturb the information flow across HFSC
members
Haleem et al. (2019);Khan et al. (2018b); Ali et al.
(2017b); Leung (2010)
Halal certification risk (G4) Unharmonised/non-uniform Halal standards lead to
a dubious product at the fork
Shariff and Lah (2014),Rajagopal et al. (2011);Khan
and Haleem (2016),Latif et al. (2014)
Table II.
Prioritising the
risks
The fuzzy synthetic extent value “S
i
”concerning the ith criterion is calculated. Thus, to
determine the value of “S
i
,”the summation of the row and column (pairwise) judgement
matrix is required. Table IV shows the calculations of row and column summations:
S1¼4:66;7;10
ðÞ
24;34:18;46:33
ðÞ
1¼0:1;0:2;0:42
ðÞ
S2¼4:99;5:9;7:5
ðÞ
24;34:18;46:33
ðÞ
1¼0:12;0:17;0:31
ðÞ
S3¼6025;9:29;12:33
ðÞ
24;34:18;46:33
ðÞ
1¼0:13;0:27;0:51
ðÞ
S4¼4:5;6:16;8
ðÞ
24;34:18;46:33
ðÞ
1¼0:10;0:18;0:33
ðÞ
S5¼3:58;5:83;8:5
ðÞ
24;34:18;46:33
ðÞ
1¼0:08;0:17;0:35
ðÞ
From Chang’s synthetic extent values, the non-fuzzy values that represent the relative
preferences or weights of one risk category over other categories will be approximated. Each
Table III.
TFN-based pairwise
judgement matrix for
risk category
Risk category P O S D G
P 1,1,1 1,2,3 0.33,0.5,1 2,3,4 0.33,0.5,1
O 0.33,0.5,1 1,1,1 3,3.5,4 0.33,0.4,0.5 0.33,0.5,1
S 1,2,3 0.25,0.29,0.33 1,1,1 2,3,4 2,3,4
D 0.25,0.33,0.5 2,2.5,3 0.25,0.33,0.5 1,1,1 1,2,3
G 1,2,3 1,2,3 0.25,0.33,0.5 0.33,0.5,1 1,1,1
Table IV.
Sums of the
horizontal and
vertical directions
Risk category Row sums Column sums
P (4.66, 7, 10) (3.58, 5.38, 8.5)
O (4.99, 5.9, 7.5 (5.25, 8.29, 10.33)
S (6.25, 9.29, 12.33) (4.83, 5.66, 7)
D (4.5, 6.16, 8) (5.66, 7.9, 10.5)
G (3.58, 5.38, 8.5) (4.66, 7, 10)
Summation of row sum/column sum (24, 34.18, 46.33)
Table V.
The fuzzy synthetic
extent of criterion
Risk category Fuzzy synthetic extent value (Si)
P (0.10, 0.20, 0.42)
O (0.12, 0.17, 0.31)
S (0.13, 0.27, 0.51)
D (0.10, 0.18, 0.33)
G (0.08, 0.17, 0.35)
JIMA
of them is the degree of possibility computed as follows (only the weight of S
1
criterion over
others is shown):
VS
1S2
ðÞ
¼1
VS1S3
ðÞ
¼0:13 0:42
ðÞ
0:20:42
ðÞ
0:27 0:13
ðÞ
¼0:80
VS
1S4
ðÞ
¼1
VS
1S5
ðÞ
¼1
Further, the minimum weight vectors for each fuzzy number are calculated as:
w0C1
ðÞ
¼VS
1S2;...;S5
ðÞ
¼min 1;0:80;1;1
ðÞ
¼0:80
Here w0(C
1
) represents the relative weight of the first risk (i.e. production risks: w0(C
P
)). The
relative weights of other risks (i.e. w0(C
O
), w0(C
S
), w0(C
D
) and w0(C
G
)) are computed and
normalised and shown in Table VI.
From the weights of risk criteria, the “supply-related risks (0.2631)”has the highest
weight followed by the “production-related risks (0.2105),”“governmental and
organisational risks (0.1816),”“demand-related risk (0.1763)”and “outsourcing-related risk
(0.1684).”Similarly, for each risk elements, the relative preference weights and relative
rankings are calculated which is shown in the third and fourth columns of Table VII. In the
next step, the preference weights of risk elements for each recognised category of risks are
calculated and given in Tables VII.
5. Sensitivity analysis
The ranking of the risk is highly dependent on the experts’subjective judgements. Hence,
the stability of the ranking under varying risk weights had better be tested (Asjad and
Khan, 2016). Sensitivity analysis is performed to test the stability of the ranking of the risks
and risk elements.
The results of the analysis show that the supply-related risks receive the highest priority
weight (shown in italic in Table VIII). This risk would influence the other risks of the HFSC. For
this reason, the supply-related risk (S) is varied from 0.1 to 0.9. Table VIII shows the result of the
Table VI.
The normalised
weight values of each
criterion
Risk category Relative weight (w0(C
i
))
Normalised weight
w(Ci)= w0Ci
ðÞ
Pw0Ci
ðÞ Ranking
P 0.80 0.2105 2
O 0.64 0.1684 5
S 1 0.2631 1
D 0.67 0.1763 4
G 0.69 0.1816 3
Sum of relative weight (Pw0Ci
ðÞ
) 3.8
Prioritising the
risks
sensitivity analysis. The result shows that the maximum relative change occurred in production
category risks (P)(Table VIII).
Further, because of variations in risk category weights, the risk element weights and
their final ranking also varied (Table IX). In the analysis, we observe that value of supply
category risk as 0.1, D2 acquires Fs the first rank, whereas O3 acquires the last. The rank of
D2 remains the same until it acquires the normal value (i.e. 0.2631). Further, we observe that
from values 0.3 to 0.9, the first rank is acquired by S3. The ranks of other risk elements vary
in the same manner (Figure 3). We conclude from the sensitivity analysis that by varying
the weight of supply-related risk, the ranks of other risk elements vary in a particular
manner. Hence, the supply category risk is very important and needs greater managerial
concern for effective and efficient HFSC management.
6. Discussion
The results of the analysis are discussed with the experts for a deeper insight. The results
show that supply-related risk (S) has the highest weight (0.2631) and ranked first among the
Table VII.
Final ranking for risk
elements
Risk
category
Risk
elements
Relative preference
weights
Relative
ranking
Global preference
weights
Global
ranking
P P1 0.32 1 0.067360 3
P2 0.09 4 0.018945 17
P3 0.29 2 0.061045 5
P4 0.28 3 0.058940 6
O O1 0.18 3 0.030312 16
O2 0.41 1 0.069044 2
O3 0.09 4 0.015156 19
O4 0.33 2 0.555720 8
S S1 0.29 3 0.048836 11
S2 0.31 2 0.052204 10
S3 0.39 1 0.065676 4
D D1 0.18 3 0.031248 15
D2 0.41 1 0.071176 1
D3 0.09 4 0.015624 18
D4 0.33 2 0.057288 7
G G1 0.21 4 0.038136 14
G2 0.29 1 0.052664 9
G3 0.24 3 0.043584 13
G4 0.26 2 0.047216 12
Table VIII.
Risk category values
when increasing
operational category
risk
Risk category Values of preference weights for listed risk category
P 0.2105 0.2571 0.2285 0.1999 0.1714 0.1428 0.1142 0.0857 0.0571 0.0285
O 0.1684 0.2057 0.1828 0.1599 0.1371 0.1143 0.0914 0.0686 0.0457 0.0229
S0.2631 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
D 0.1763 0.2153 0.1914 0.1675 0.1435 0.1196 0.0957 0.0717 0.0478 0.0239
G 0.1816 0.2218 0.1971 0.1725 0.1478 0.1232 0.0985 0.0739 0.0492 0.0246
Total 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Note: italic values shows the normal values
JIMA
identified risks. Supply of an appropriate Halal raw material/ingredient from the supplier is
a vital element in the Halal supply chain, as any failure in the supply of these raw materials
can be a threat on the Halal supply chain (Ali and Suleiman, 2018). Under the category of
supply-related risks, supplier quality issues (S3) hold the highest priority. The failure of
quality raw material supply at the supplier’s end produces disruption in the HFSC. The next
Table IX.
Ranking for specific
risks by sensitivity
analysis when
operational risk
changes from 0.1 to
0.9
Risk elements Operational risk category values in performing the sensitivity analysis test
0.1 0.2 Normal (0.2631) 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
P1 3 4 36666666
P2 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
P3 4 5 57777777
P4 5 6 68888888
O1 14 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
O2 2 3 25555555
O3 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
O4 7 9 810 10 10 10 10 10 10
S1 16 10 11 3333333
S2 15 8 10 2222222
S3 12 2 41111111
D1 13 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
D2 1 1 14444444
D3 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
D4 6 7 79999999
G1 11 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14
G2 8 11 911 11 11 11 11 11 11
G3 10 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
G4 9 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
Note: Italic values shows the highest priority weight
Figure 3.
Sensitivity analysis
chart
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
P2 P3 P4 O1 O2 O3 O4 S1 S2 S3 D1 D2 D3 D4 G1 G2 G3 G4
Risks in Halal food supply chain
Sensitivity analysis
0.1
0.2
Normal (0.2631)
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Prioritising the
risks
significant risk in this category is “supplier failure (S2).”Therefore, to manage and mitigate
this issue, organisations should follow the policy of multiple suppliers. The third priority in
this category is “raw material cost risks (S1).”The supplier has a perception about the cost
of the Halal raw material is higher than the costs of non-Halal materials, and this issue may
be a hindrance to the supplier to provide the Halal raw material at the same cost. The
organisation should run Halal awareness programmes, policies and reward systems to
attract suppliers towards Halal business. The organisation may initiate some policies and
reward systems to encourage the supplier towards their Halal commitment. These
incentives can be helpful in overcoming uncertainties faced during procurement, as well as
reducing purchasing cost risk.
The production-related risk (P) holds the second rank under the category of risk. It is
defined as the loss, resulting from the failure of internal HFSC processes such as processing,
methodology and workforce. Therefore, an adequate focus is required by the manager for
this category of risk. In these types of risks, the “processing equipment failure (P1)”has the
highest weight which affects the production schedule. This delay in the production can
disturb the flow of the product and finally lead to the loss of the sales volume. The second
highest weight in this category risk is “unavailability of the skilled human resource (P3).”
There is a scarcity of the skilled worker who have additional knowledge of the Halal
concept. This risk can be mitigated through training and awareness programmes. The next
important risk in this category is “Halal understanding level (P4).”There is a lack of
understanding of the Halal among the top management level, especially in multi-cultural
societies; therefore, there is a need to have a clear understanding of the Halal concept and
Halal norms at the management and operational levels. The “process design risks (P2),”the
lowest weight among this category, can also be interpreted as the imprecision or flaws in
designing of the Halal process which cannot support the Halal practices. To overcome this
risk, an effective designing of Halal operations, process and methods are adopted.
Governmental and organisational risks (G) hold third place in the ranking list. They
include poor regulation, uncertainties associated with the management of different levels in
the HFSC, etc. In this category, the regulatory risk of Halal products (G2) holds the top
priority. The poor regulation to manage the Halal production and related issues is a major
hindrance to the adoption of the HFSC. Thus, the regulating authority should provide proper
guidelines and supportive Halal policies for industries to reduce the Halal-related risk. Halal
certification risk (G4) holds the second rank in this category. Various Halal certification
bodies are available around the globe and have separate Halal standards. Thus, there is a
risk of the acceptability of the Halal-certified products which are certified by other Halal
certification bodies. To overcome this risk, there is a need to establish a unified/harmonised
Halal certification body. This suggestion was also recommended by the Potluri and Potluri
(2018) and Khan et al. (2019b). Next in line under this category is the “issue of information
flow cross HFSC members (G3)”. A mismanaged or failed information and communication
technology network can disrupt the HFSC activities in unexpected ways and lead to a
reduction in the efficiency of the HFSC (Soon et al., 2017). Therefore, the traceability system
and information and communication technology network needs to be set up carefully. This
recommendation is also in line with the study of Haleem et al. (2019). The Halal policy
failures (G1) is at last in this category of risk. The policies regarding Halal production and
marketing can be failed at the top level.
The next significant risk is “demand-related risks (D)”based on the priority list. Demand
is recognised by the pull-based strategy in the supply chain (Waters, 2007); hence, a large
fluctuation in demand for Halal food will affect the effectiveness of the HFSC. In this
category, “Halal market (D2),”having the highest weight and ranked first. In multi-cultural
JIMA
societies such as India where Muslims are in the minority, there is a risk regarding the
market of the Halal products. People are less aware of the concept of the Halal product and
relate it to the specific product such as meat product. The “obstruction of Halal product in
the market (D4)”is ranked second. Many obstacles arise in the marketing of the Halal food
products, such as consumer mindset regarding the price, rumours about the Halal brand and
false certification. These obstacles can be reduced through extensive consumer awareness
regarding the Halal brand. The next risk element in this category is the “bullwhip effect risk
(D1)”; it represents the demand of information distortion in the supply chain (Wang and
Disney, 2016). Under this situation, it is difficult for the organisation to predict the demand.
Therefore, managers need to develop a more robust demand-forecasting method. Improved
several advanced information and communication technology networks within an
organisation can be one of the steps to tackle this issue. Willingness to pay (D3) is the last
rank in demand-related risk. At the small scale, there is a chance of higher price for Halal
food products than non-Halal food products. Thus, there is an uncertainty in the willingness
to pay for the Halal product by the consumers.
Outsourcing practices hold the last rank in this category of risk. Organisations usually
outsource different activities to gain an economic advantage. An organisation keeps the core
process to itself and outsources minor processes. Besides having the economic advantage of
outsourcing, it may increase Halal integrity risk as the process control is no longer in the
organisation’s reach. In this category,“warehousing (O2)”is top on the list. There is a chance
of contamination with the other non-Halal raw materials in the warehouse (Ab Talib and
Bakar Abdul Hamid, 2014). To mitigate this issue, there is a requirement to develop and
increase the capacity of the Halal-certified warehouse. The next risk is the marketing (O4) of
the Halal food. Marketing companies do not have distinct marketing strategies for the Halal
product. Transportation failure (O1) is another type of risk which has a high impact on the
HFSC. Transportation failures lead to poor food quality and ultimately damage the brand
image. The last risk is the “packaging risk (O3).”The packaging should be done in such a
way that it could not be contaminated with the other product. Additionally, packaged
materials do not contain non-Halal material.
7. Implications of the research
The findings of the research consolidate and prioritise risk elements along with different
activities of the HFSC. Collaboration among different departments and setting up of the
Halal committee will be highly effective in reducing risks of the HFSC and in developing
the mitigation strategy. It can help the managers involved who have a holistic view of the
operation of the supply chain. Findings of the study suggest that managers share
information about the processing of Halal food from top to bottom. Collaborating with the
Halal committee in designing processes and equipment can help in mitigating
production-related risks. This study also recommends managers, traders and Halal
producers to consider the supplier’s capability to deliver raw material which complies
with Halal guidelines, and this may avoid emergency sourcing. Managers need to provide
training to the human resource involved as a higher understanding of Halal practices
which may help to reduce the risk associated with the human error. In terms of academic
implication, this research may act as a baseline for risk management in the area of the
HFSC.
This study also provides some useful insights for the policy planners/government
towards the reduction of risks in the Halal supply chain. Some policies related to the
mitigation of the Halal supply chain risks can be formulated at the national level. The
government can control and monitor the Halal food-producing organisations and Halal
Prioritising the
risks
certification bodies that may lead to the reduction of fake certification/logos. Further, the
government can act towards the development of a centralised Halal certification system.
8. Conclusion, limitation and future scope
Several activities in the HFSC are encountering different types of risks. This study aims to
understand and prioritise the risk elements along the HFSC so that risks can be minimised.
In total, 19 risk elements have been finalised using the systematic literature review
complimented with experts’input. Further, these risks are classified into five main
categories, namely,: supply-related risks, demand-related risks, production-related risk,
outsourcing-related risks, and governmental and organisational risks. These finalised risk
elements are prioritised using the fuzzy AHP technique for deeper insights. After
performing the analysis, the order of priority for the identified risk categories is obtained as
S>P>G>D>O. The global ranking of each risk elements is also obtained based on their
preference weight. Subsequently, sensitivity analysis is performed by the varying value of
supply-related risk between 0.1 and 0.9 to check for the consistency of ranks. The research
finding shows that the supply-related risks had a higher priority and required more
attention to the supply chain partners to develop a robust risk mitigation strategy. This
research finding would be helpful for managers and organisations while analysing the
HFSC risks to develop strategies to reduce its consequences.
Similar to other studies, this study also has some limitations which can provide the scope
for future research. This study uses the SCOPUS database for the literature review, and few
research publications are in local languages; thus, there is a chance to overlook some HFSC-
related risks. Further, some additional risk elements can be identified by including the food
supply chain and other supply chain risks along with incorporating articles from other
databases. The assessment of the experts may be biased towards their area of the expertise
and working level. Moreover, in fuzzy AHP, risk analysis is done using relative preference
weight. So, care should be taken while constructing a pairwise comparison matrix for risk
elements. In future studies, more exhaustive risks should be taken through different
perspectives. This study only focuses on Halal food; other types of Halal products such as
pharmaceutical and cosmetic can be evaluated in future studies. The other MCDM methods
such as Best Worst Method (BWM), Analytical Network Process (ANP) and Technique for
Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) can be used for the evaluation
of the risks. This study is based on the experts’input and can be validated using the case
study or statistical work in future studies.
References
Ab Talib, M., Abdul Hamid, A. and Ai Chin, T. (2015), “Motivations and limitations in implementing
halal food certification: a pareto analysis”,British Food Journal, Vol. 117No. 11, pp. 2664-2705.
Ab Talib, M., Abdul Hamid, A. and Chin, T. (2016a), “Can halal certification influence logistics
performance?”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 461-475.
Ab Talib, M. and Bakar Abdul Hamid, A. (2014), “Halal logistics in Malaysia: a SWOT analysis”,
Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 322-343.
Ab Talib, M., Md. Sawari, S., Abdul Hamid, A. and Ai Chin, T. (2016b), “Emerging halal food market:
an institutional theory of halal certificate implementation”,Management Research Review,
Vol. 39 No. 9, pp. 987-997.
Abd Rahman, A., Singhry, H., Hanafiah, M. and Abdul, M. (2017), “Influence of perceived benefits and
traceability system on the readiness for halal assurance system implementation among food
manufacturers”,Food Control, Vol. 73, pp. 1318-1326.
JIMA
Abdul Latiff, Z.A., Mohamed, Z.A., Rezai, G. and Kamaruzzaman, N.H. (2013), “The impact of food
labelling on purchasing behaviour among non-Muslim consumers in klang valley”,Australian
Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 124-128.
Ahmad, A., Abdul Rahman, R., Othman, M. and Ungku Zainal Abidin, U. (2017), “Critical success
factors affecting the implementation of halal food management systems: perspective of halal
executives, consultants and auditors”,Food Control, Vol. 74, pp. 70-78.
Ahmad, A., Ungku Zainal Abidin, U., Othman, M. and Abdul Rahman, R. (2018), “Overview of the halal
food control system in Malaysia”,Food Control, Vol. 90, pp. 352-363.
Ali, M. (2017), “The traction of lean production on halal food integrity”,MOJ Food Processing and
Technology, Vol. 5 No. 4, doi: 10.15406/mojfpt.2017.05.00136.
Ali, M. and Suleiman, N. (2016), “Sustainable food production: insights of Malaysian halal small and
medium-sized enterprises”,International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 181, pp. 303-314.
Ali, M. and Suleiman, N. (2018), “Eleven shades of food integrity: a halal supply chain perspective”,
Trends in Food Science and Technology, Vol. 71, pp. 216-224.
Ali, M., Tan, K. and Ismail, M. (2017b), “A supply chain integrity framework for halal food”,British
Food Journal, Vol. 119 No.1, pp. 20-38.
Ali, M., Tan, K., Pawar, K. and Makhbul, Z. (2014), “Extenuating food integrity risk through supply
chain integration: the case of halal food”,Industrial Engineering and Management Systems,
Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 154-162.
Ali, M., Zhan, Y., Alam, S., Tse, Y. and Tan, K. (2017a), “Food supply chain integrity: the need to go
beyond certification”,Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 117 No.8, pp. 1589-1611.
Al-Mazeedi, H.M., Regenstein, J.M. and Riaz, M.N. (2013), “The issue of undeclared ingredients in halal
and kosher food production: a focus on processing aids”,Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science
and Food Safety, Vol. 12 No.2, pp. 228-233.
Alzeer, J. and Abou Hadeed, K. (2016), “Ethanol and its halal status in food industries”,Trends in Food
Science and Technology, Vol. 58, pp. 14-20.
Alzeer, J., Rieder, U. and Hadeed, K. (2018), “Rational and practical aspects of halal and tayyib in the
context of food safety”,Trends in Food Science and Technology, Vol. 71, pp. 264-267.
Arif, S. and Sidek, S. (2015), “Application of halalan tayyiban in the standard reference for determining
Malaysian halal food”,Asian Social Science, Vol. 11 No. 17, doi:10.5539/ass.v11n17p116.
Asjad, M. and Khan, S. (2016), “Analysis of maintenance cost for an asset using the genetic algorithm”,
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 445-457.
Bakar, S., Sulaiman, M. and Osman, I. (2014), “Exploring the relationship between business factors and
performance in the Malaysian halal biotechnology SMEs context”,Procedia –Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 121, pp. 243-252.
Bernstein, P.L. (1996), Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Chan, F., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M., Lau, H. and Choy, K. (2008), “Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP
approach”,International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 46 No. 14, pp. 3825-3857.
Chang, D. (1996), “Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP”,European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 649-655.
Chaudry, M. and Riaz, M. (2014), “Safety of food and beverages: halal food requirements”,Encyclopedia
of Food Safety, pp. 486-491.
Din, R. and Daud, S. (2014), “Critical success factors of MS1500:2009 implementation”,Procedia –Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 121, pp. 96-103.
Ermis, E. (2017), “Halal status of enzymes used in the food industry”,Trends in Food Science and
Technology, Vol. 64, pp. 69-73.
Gurnani, H., Mehrotra, A. and Ray, S. (2012), Supply Chain Disruptions: theory and Practice of
Managing Risk, Springer, London/Dordrecht/Heidelberg/New York, NY.
Prioritising the
risks
Haleem, A. and Khan, M.I. (2017), “Towards successful adoption of halal logistics and its’implications
for the stakeholders”,British Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 7.
Haleem, A., Khan, S. and Khan, M. (2019), “Traceability implementation in food supply chain: a grey-
DEMATEL approach”,Information Processing in Agriculture,doi:10.1016/j.inpa.2019.01.003.
Haleem, A. Imran Khan, M. Khan, S. and Hafaz Ngah, A. (2018), “Assessing barriers to adopting and
implementing halal practices in logistics operations”, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science
and Engineering, available at: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/404/1/012012
(accessed 18 October 2018).
Kamalahmadi, M. and Parast, M. (2016), “A review of the literature on the principles of enterprise and
supply chain resilience: major findings and directions for future research”,International Journal
of Production Economics, Vol. 171, pp. 116-133.
Khan, M.I. and Haleem, A. (2016), “Understanding ‘halal’and ‘halal certification and accreditation
system’–a brief review”,Saudi Journal of Business and Management Studies, Vol. 1 No. 1,
pp. 32-42.
Khan, M.I., Haleem, A. and Khan, S. (2018a), “Defining halal supply chain management”,Supply Chain
Forum: An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2, p. 122-131.
Khan, S., Haleem, A., Khan, M.I., Abidi, M. and Al-Ahmari, A. (2018b), “Implementing traceability
systems in specific supply chain management (SCM) through critical success factors (CSFs)”,
Sustainability, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 204.
Khan, S., Imran Khan, M., Haleem, A. and Shuaib, M. (2018c), “Selection of traceable technology
in food supply chain”,IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering,
Vol. 404, p. 012010.
Khan, M., Khan, S. and Haleem, A. (2019b), “Using integrated weighted IRP-fuzzy TISM approach
towards evaluation of initiatives to harmonise halal standards”,Benchmarking: An
International Journal, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 434-451.
Khan, S., Khan, M. and Haleem, A. (2019a), “Evaluation of barriers in the adoption of halal certification:
a fuzzy DEMATEL approach”,Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 153-174,
doi: 10.1108/jm2-03-2018-0031.
Latif, I., Mohamed, Z., Sharifuddin, J., Abdullah, A. and Ismail, M. (2014), “A comparative analysis of global
halal certification requirements”,Journal of Food Products Marketing, Vol. 20 No. sup1, pp. 85-101.
Leung, G. (2010), “Understanding halal food supply chain”,Nutrition Bulletin,Vol.35No.4,
pp. 371-372.
Lubis, H., Mohd-Naim, N., Alizul, N. and Ahmed, M. (2016), “From market to food plate: current trusted
technology and innovations in halal food analysis”,Trends in Food Science and Technology,
Vol. 58, pp. 55-68.
Luthra, S., Garg, D. and Haleem, A. (2013), “Identifying and ranking of strategies to implement
green supply chain management in indian manufacturing industry using analytical
hierarchy process”,Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management,Vol.6No.4,doi:
10.3926/jiem.693.
Ma, R., Yao, L. and Huang, R. (2012), “The green supply chain management risk analysis”,Advanced
Materials Research, Vol. 573-574, pp. 734-739.
Mangla, S., Kumar, P. and Barua, M. (2015), “Risk analysis in green supply chain using fuzzy AHP
approach: a case study”,Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 104, pp. 375-390.
Mangla, S., Kumar, P. and Barua, M. (2016), “An integrated methodology of FTA and fuzzy AHP
for risk assessment in green supply chain”,International Journal of Operational Research,
Vol.25No.1,p.77.
Manning, L., Baines, R. and Chadd, S. (2005), “Deliberate contamination of the food supply chain”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 4, pp. 225-245.
JIMA
Manning, L., Baines, R. and Chadd, S. (2006), “Quality assurance models in the food supply chain”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 2, pp. 91-104.
MS2400: 2010 Halalan-Toyyiban Assurance Pipeline: (Department of Standards Malaysia) (2010), Part
1: Management System Requirements for Transportation of Goods and/or Cargo Chain Service
Part 2: Management System Requirements for Warehousing and Related Activities.
Neio Demirci, M., Soon, J.M. and Wallace, C.A. (2016), “Positioning food safety in halal assurance”,Food
Control, Vol. 70, pp. 257-270.
Ngah, A. and Thurasamy, R. (2018), “Modelling the intention to adopt halal transportation among halal
pharmaceutical and cosmetic manufacturers in Malaysia”,Advanced Science Letters, Vol. 24
No. 1, pp. 205-207.
Ngah, A., Zainuddin, Y. and Thurasamy, R. (2015), “Barriers and enablers in adopting
ofHalalwarehousing”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 354-376.
Ngah, A., Zainuddin, Y. and Thurasamy, R. (2017), “Applying the TOE framework in the halal
warehouse adoption study”,Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 8 No. 2,
pp. 161-181.
Potluri, R. and Potluri, L. (2018), “Halal packaging and certification in India: issues and challenges”,
International Journal of Islamic Marketing and Branding, Vol. 3 No. 1, p. 35.
Rajagopal, S., Ramanan, S., Visvanathan, R. and Satapathy, S. (2011), “Halal certification: implication
for marketers in UAE”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 138-153.
Regenstein, J.M., Chaudry, M.M. and Regenstein, C.E. (2003), “The kosher and halal food laws”,
Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 111-129.
Shariff, S. and Lah, N. (2014), “Halal certification on chocolate products: a case study”,Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 121, pp. 104-112.
Sharma, S. and Bhat, A. (2012), “Identification and assessment of supply chain risk: development of
AHP model for supply chain risk prioritisation”,International Journal of Agile Systems and
Management, Vol. 5 No. 4, p. 350.
Soon, J., Chandia, M. and Regenstein, J. (2017), “Halal integrity in the food supply chain”,British Food
Journal, Vol. 119 No. 1, pp. 39-51.
Sufiyan, M., Haleem, A., Khan, S. and Khan, M. (2019), “Analysing Attributes of Food Supply Chain
Management: A Comparative Study”,Springer Reference Medizin, pp. 515-523.
Tan, K., Ali, M., Makhbul, Z. and Ismail, A. (2017), “The impact of external integration on halal food
integrity”,Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 186-199.
Tieman, M. (2011), “The application of halal in supply chain management: in-depth interviews”,Journal
of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 186-195.
Tieman, M. (2015), “Halal clusters”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 2-21.
Tieman, M. (2017a), “Halal Europe: a premium halal –tayyib brand?”,Islam and Civilisational Renewal,
Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 260-263.
Tieman, M. (2017b), “Halal risk management: combining robustness and resilience”,Journal of Islamic
Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 461-475.
Tieman, M. (2018), “Halal supply chain certification: the next frontier in halal certification?”,Islam and
Civilisational Renewal, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 233-236.
Tieman, M. and Che Ghazali, M. (2014), “Halal control activities and assurance activities in halal food
logistics”,Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 121, pp. 44-57, (September 2012).
Tieman, M. and Darun, M. (2017), “Leveraging blockchain technology for halal supply chains”,Islam
and Civilisational Renewal, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 547-550.
Tieman, M. and Hassan, F. (2015), “Convergence of food systems: Kosher, Christian and Halal”,British
Food Journal, Vol. 117 No.9, pp. 2313-2327.
Prioritising the
risks
Tieman, M., van der Vorst, J.G.A.J. and Ghazali, M. (2012), “Principles in halal supply chain
management”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 217-243.
Venkatesh, V., Zhang, A., Deakins, E., Luthra, S. and Mangla, S. (2018), “A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS
approach to supply partner selection in continuous aid humanitarian supply chains”,Annals of
Operations Research, doi: 10.1007/s10479-018-2981-1.
Wang, X., Chan, H., Yee, R. and Diaz-Rainey, I. (2012), “A two-stage fuzzy-AHP model for risk
assessment of implementing green initiatives in the fashion supply chain”,International Journal
of Production Economics, Vol. 135 No. 2, pp. 595-606.
Wang, X. and Disney, S. (2016), “The bullwhip effect: progress, trends and directions”,European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 250 No. 3, pp. 691-701.
Wang, E. and Wei, H. (2007), “Interorganizational governance value creation: coordinating for
information visibility and flexibility in supply chains*”,Decision Sciences, Vol. 38 No. 4,
pp. 647-674.
Waters, D. (2007), Supply Chain Risk Management: vulnerability and Resilience in Logistics, Kogan page,
London.
Wibowo, M. and Ahmad, F. (2016), “Non-Muslim consumers’halal food product acceptance model”,
Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 37, pp. 276-283.
Wilson, J.A.J. (2012), “The new wave of transformational Islamic marketing reflections and definitions”,
Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 5-11.
Wilson, J.A.J. and Liu, J. (2010), “Shaping the halal into a brand?”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 1
No. 2, pp. 107-123.
Wilson, J.A.J. and Liu, J. (2011), “The challenges of Islamic branding: navigating emotions and halal”,
Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 28-42.
Zailani, S., Iranmanesh, M., Aziz, A. and Kanapathy, K. (2017), “Halal logistics opportunities and
challenges”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 127-139.
Zulfakar, M., Anuar, M. and Talib, M. (2014), “Conceptual framework on halal food supply chain
integrity enhancement”,Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 121, pp. 58-67.
Further reading
Haleem, A., Khan, M.I. and Khan, S. (2019), “Halal certification, the inadequacy of its adoption,
modelling and strategising the efforts”,Journal of Islamic Marketing, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/
JIMA-05-2017-0062.
Khan, M., Khan, S. and Haleem, A. (2019), “Analysing barriers towards management of Halal supply
chain: a BWM approach”,Journal of Islamic Marketing,doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-09-
2018-0178.
About the authors
Shahbaz Khan is currently a Research Scholar in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty
of Engineering and Technology, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India. He obtained an MTech with
specialisation in Industrial and Production Engineering from Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. His
research interests are risk management in Halal supply chain, Halal certification and standards,
traceability systems and risk management in Halal supply chain. He has published papers in the area
of management of Halal in various refereed international journals.
Mohd Imran Khan is currently a Research Scholar in the Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. He earned an MTech with specialisation in Industrial and
Production Engineering from Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. His research interests are in the field of
Halal supply chain management, Halal certification and accreditation systems, corporate social
responsibility, Halal logistics, fair trade and allied areas of industrial engineering and operations
management. He has published papers in the area of management of Halal in various refereed
international journals.
JIMA
Abid Haleem is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering in Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi,
India. He has published more than 230 research papers in refereed international and national
journals such as Resources Policy,Benchmarking: An International Journal,Production
Planning and Control,International Journal of Logistic Systems and Management,Journal of
Enterprise Information Management,Journal of Cleaner Production,International Journal of
Business Excellence,Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management and Renewable and
Sustainable Energy and Energy Review. He has more than 30 years of teaching, consulting and
R&D experience in varied areas such as supply chain management and its related areas:
innovation, sustainability, systems management, technology management, TF/TA,
information management and allied areas of industrial engineering. Abid Haleem is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: ahaleem@jmi.ac.in
Abdur Rahman Jami is a student of MTech in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty
of Engineering and Technology, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. His research interests are Halal
supply chain management, bibliometric analysis and risk management. He has published papers in
international conference proceedings.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Prioritising the
risks
