Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/clscn

Performance evaluation of green logistics: Paving the way towards circular

economy
E.D. de Souza ⇑, J.C. Kerber, M. Bouzon, C.M.T. Rodriguez
Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Department of Production and Systems Engineering, Logistics Performance Laboratory (LDL), Florianopolis 88040-970, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keyword: The linear flow of production causes several problems, mainly concerning the environmental pillar of sustain-
Green logistics ability. In logistics, a more circular and green production system is linked to the implementation of Green
Green supply chain Logistics (GL), which aims to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, the use of fossil energy sources and
Circular economy the return of materials after their end‐of‐life. Given the need to reduce the environmental damage of plastic
Sustainability
packaging used in the production system, the present study uses a tool to evaluate the performance of GL in
Performance evaluation
the plastic sector to help improve environmental performance within organizations and reduce negative envi-
ronmental impact. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method was used with specialists to rank 27 green
practices and indicators of the developed tool. Subsequently, the indicators were normalized to create a unified
index of the GL in organizations. The tool was applied in two companies of the plastic packaging chain. Results
show that some areas of green logistics are being overlooked when companies approach environmental sustain-
ability, thus compromising the progress towards GL. In contrast, the green transportation category presents the
worst results, followed by green stocking, green packaging and reverse logistics. Discussions and suggestions
for future research on the subject are also drawn. This study presents a practical tool that will help practitioners
easily evaluate companies' GL using a unified index.

1. Introduction 2018). Therefore, the CE emphasizes the use of resources from recy-
cling and reuse, seeking to minimize the amount of waste (Shogren
The increasing concern about environmental issues directly affects et al., 2019) and seeking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such
business management and social practices. The pressure to minimize as CO2 (Rodríguez et al., 2019). Thus, this new production model is
environmental damage, such as climate change, natural resource expected to reduce environmental impacts and promote economic
depletion, and pollution, is the primary driver to greening supply growth (Kalmykova et al., 2018). Moreover, the CE enables a transi-
chains (Younis et al., 2016), aiming at sustainable development and tion to a more sustainable system since its concept was considered a
the transition to a more circular model (Korhonen et al., 2018; success factor to achieve the UN's sustainable development goals in
Bressanelli et al., 2020; Changwichan and Gheewala, 2020). Firms 2019 (Changwichan and Gheewala, 2020).
are facing internal and external pressure to implement green innova- According to Mumtaz et al. (Mumtaz et al., 2018), industrialization
tion practices (El‐Kassar and Singh, 2019). Therefore, the search for is the leading actor of planet damage, and encouraging activities that
green, low‐carbon development has become the global community's reuse and eventually recycle materials helps in the transition to the CE
focus (He et al., 2017). In both developed and emerging economies (Changwichan and Gheewala, 2020). However, the environmental
(Geng et al., 2017), manufacturers are driven to improve their produc- impact also comes from other production process areas, such as logis-
tivity using sustainable and efficient resources to eliminate environ- tics (Graham et al., 2018). Logistics plays a vital role in a country's eco-
mental damage (Simão et al., 2016) and close the supply chain loop. nomic growth and increases air pollution considerably, including
In this matter, this research is related to the Circular Economy (CE) greenhouse gases, such as CO2 (Khan and Qianli, 2017). Transporta-
guidelines, a new economic model based on the circularity of the nat- tion, one of the most known and valued activities in logistics, corre-
ural environment (Korhonen et al., 2018). Its primary purpose is to sponds to 23% of the world’s CO2 emission (World Bank, 2017). In
create a cycle to preserve resources and energy (Korhonen et al., this context, Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) reaches the

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (E.D. de Souza).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clscn.2021.100019
Received 2 September 2021; Revised 24 November 2021; Accepted 12 December 2021

2772-3909/© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

environmental pillar of sustainability within this new circular para- Hence, the elaborated tool represents a complement to that report
digm. In fact, in order to achieve a CE model that emphasizes environ- (Pblv, 2018) and proposes an index to map and analyze green initia-
mental protection and resource conservation, it is necessary to tives in the organizations. Despite the PBLV guidelines and articles
implement GSCM (Seroka‐Stolka and Ociepa‐Kubicka, 2019). Besides, approached in the literature, there is difficulty quantifying indicators
GSCM can increase competitive advantages and market share while and formulating goals, especially to build up a unified index employ-
meeting community concerns and complying with regulations ing data normalization. The present study differs from previous litera-
(Abdel‐Baset et al., 2019). Within the GSCM concept, the practice of ture since it develops a global, unified index to measure the maturity
Green Logistics (GL) is the main trend of modern logistics and a of each GL practice, using a simple, mutable, and easy‐to‐apply tool. As
cornerstone system for the development of the CE since Reverse Logis- far as the authors know, no previous work in this topical area has pro-
tics (RL) is the basis for closing the cycle and reducing emissions posed a similar tool.
(Seroka‐Stolka and Ociepa‐Kubicka, 2019). This paper is organized as follows: (i) the material and methods
Green, low‐carbon development models are widely accepted and section, which describes the procedures carried out for making the
implemented in logistics operations (He et al., 2017). However, previ- tool, encompassing the method of evaluating green logistics to achieve
ous research on Green Logistics focusing on packaging issues is scarce a CE, and the AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method, (ii) the theory
despite its importance and impact on the environment. According to section that presents the theoretical basis on the theme, (iii) the results
research conducted by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statis- from the application of the developed tool in two companies to capture
tics (IBGE, Portuguese acronym) in cooperation with Getúlio Vargas the greenness of their logistics activities, (vi) the discussion of the
Foundation (FGV, Portuguese acronym) for the Packaging Brazilian results with practical implications, and (vii) the conclusion of the
Association (ABRE, Portuguese acronym) (ABRE/FGV., 2017), the pro- research with suggestions for future work.
duction of packaging occurs quantitatively in the following order: (I)
paper and cardboard, with 40.5% of representativeness, (II) plastic,
with 35%, (III) metal, with 15.1%, (IV) glass, with 8%, and (V) wood, 2. Methodological procedures
corresponding to only 1.4% of the total. Besides, MacArthur Founda-
tion (MacArthur, 2017) states that plastic and its derivatives, such as The research procedures are summarized in Fig. 1 and explained in
packaging, are one of the priority issues for CE. Plastics are an essential detail in the sequence.
material to the economy, even though they can cause significant harm This work began with a review of literature based on a structured
to the environment. For example, plastic corresponds to about 90% of process addressed by Govindan and Bouzon (Govindan and Bouzon,
the floating waste on the ocean, and it is estimated that 99% of sea 2018), Seuring and Muller (Seuring and Müller, 2008), and Srivastava
birds will have ingested plastic by 2050 (ONU, 2017). (Srivastava, 2007) – Step 1 in Fig. 1. Hence, it starts with a correspond-
A variety of circular models were developed to reuse non‐organic ing material collection to the research string involving GL and “perfor-
materials and reduce negative impacts caused by the manufacturing mance evaluation,” using boolean operators to combine both terms.
industry (Nascimento et al., 2019). However, there is still a demand Thus, the research chain was (“green logistic*” OR “environmental
to develop models that enable a transition from supply chains to a logistic*” OR “green supply chain” OR “closed‐loop supply chain”
more circular one (Guarnieri et al., 2020), mainly focusing on plastics OR “reverse logistic*”) AND (“performance evaluation” OR “perfor-
flows. Considering the aforementioned context, the research question mance” OR “measure*” OR “evaluat*” OR “indicator” OR “evaluation”
addressed by this paper is “how to measure green logistics perfor- OR “index”), which gathered 3,871 articles for analysis. The search
mance in the supply chain in order to cope with the CE model?” In this addresses only the title, abstract, and keywords in the following data-
sense, this study aims to present a tool to measure the greenness of bases: SCOPUS, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect. Only scientific arti-
logistics activities in the CE context. This tool aims to develop a unified cles in Portuguese were considered to compose the sample.
GL index capable of measuring the implementation of green practices These 3,871 articles were submitted to three selection steps: (i)
in a supply chain to identify alternatives to reduce the impact caused reading of titles and abstracts in which we selected those that
by the logistics in this sector. addressed environmental logistics and closing the cycle with a
The proposed tool fills the gap of one of the primary current neces- research focus; (ii) dynamic reading of the articles selected in step 1
sities: a green development and greenhouse gas emission‐focused to identify if there is a mapping of green practices as well as perfor-
model (He et al., 2017). The tool differs from others found in the liter- mance indicators; (iii) full reading of the articles for the final selection.
ature because it does not use hypothesis validation and questionnaires Both three steps sought to select the surveys with green logistics
(Younis et al., 2016; Mumtaz et al., 2018; Graham et al., 2018; Garza‐ focused on results and presented some form of measurement through
Reyes et al., 2018; Abareshi and Molla, 2013; Lorentz et al., 2011), indicators. Thus, the final portfolio is composed of 59 articles aligned
generalizing the studied sector without focusing on the industry. with the theme.
Another difference is that the evaluation system encompasses low‐ This material allowed finding essential GL indicators, Step 2 in
carbon logistics, energy consumption, and continuous improvement Fig. 1. The selection of indicators took place through the entire reading
of the general logistics activities as a whole instead of focusing on of the selected articles and the mapping of practices and, consequently,
them separately (He et al., 2017; Xiao et al., 2015; Alonso et al., the forms of performance measurement each. The GL practices were
2017). Finally, the tool aims at eliminating the main barriers to a com- mapped, and the main ones were subsequently selected through the
pany's green operations. According to Mathiyazhagan et al. frequency and relevance of the citation number of each analyzed arti-
(Mathiyazhagan et al., 2013), these barriers are (I) misalignment of cle. Most of the indicators found in the literature did not present an
the environmental indicators with the organizational strategies, (II) associated metric; thus, the metrics were created (Step 3) and corrob-
inefficient and high‐complexity environmental metrics, and (III) diffi- orated by six specialists (Step 4) via semi‐structured interviews and
culties in merging the chain links towards a common objective. The discussions. The experts are described in Table 1 of this article, and
advantages of the proposed tool can be used in small, medium, and the results of this step are presented in Table A1.
large companies, enabling its implementation by all the players in a Afterwards, a set of indicators was developed to integrate the GL
supply chain. Moreover, by evaluating green practices, such as GL, performance evaluation tool with the aid of the Excel® software, as
and their performances, it is possible to prospect a competitive supply shown in Step 5 of Fig. 1. The AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) was
chain advantage (Abdel‐Baset et al., 2019). used in Step 6 to identify the relevance and rank the practices accord-
The development of this tool and the unified index meets the Green ing to ten experts in GL and the plastic sector. Multicriteria decision‐
Logistics Brazilian Programm (PBLV, Portuguese acronym) requisites. making is used to solve problems involving selecting a finite number

2
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Fig. 1. Research method.

Table 1
Description of the experts.

Specialists A B C D E F G H I

Academic experience in the area of logistics X X X X X X X X X

Academic experience in the environmental and circular economy area X X X X X X
Professional experience in the field of logistics X X X X
Professional experience in the area of environmental and circular economy X
Performing applied activities (projects, consulting) X X X X X X X

of alternatives (Senthil et al., 2018). Therefore, AHP is one of the tools indicators as independent variables, making it possible to rank the
used in multicriteria decision‐making environments to deal with the most relevant alternatives for the construction of the performance
definition of numerous problems during decision‐making (Bouzon evaluation, disregarding the influence between the criteria.
et al., 2016). The application of AHP in the decision‐making process Step 7 concerns the building of the index. Firstly, the normalization
builds up ranks, thus, prioritizing the alternatives to the decision‐ of indicators was performed, considering that they use different metric
maker (Saaty, 2008). units to create the GL index. This step aims to standardize (normalize)
AHP is one of the most used tools for evaluating the performance of scales and intervals (Mayer, 2008), introducing the possibility to use
GL and GSCM, and according to Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., different metrics and units in one single indicator. The method of Sal-
2015), AHP has recurring applications in selection processes using ing et al. (Saling et al., 2002) was used for most indicators and is rep-
environmental criteria, such as the selection of green suppliers. Sari resented in Equation (1). The maximal values are represented by the
(Sari, 2017) uses the AHP tool to rank the weights for each criterion highest value of the analyzed category.
used to develop his model. This tool also helps in decision making in xij
cases with multiple criteria and is currently one of the most used meth- r ij ¼
; comi ¼ 1;    ; m; j ¼ 1;    ; n ð1Þ
max xj
ods in academia (Vaidya and Kumar, 2006). The AHP still treats the

3
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

However, three indicators related to the emission of greenhouse tion, green packaging, and green stocking. Hence, AHP uses these
gases were calculated according to the historical method of Zhou activities to structure the hierarchies. Afterwards, matrices were built
et al. (Zhou et al., 2012) since their comparison is made based on his- according to the application steps of the model proposed by Thanki
torical data or the company's goal. The method classifies indicators et al. (Thanki et al., 2016) to criteria and subcriteria, summing a total
based on the impact they cause, i.e., if an indicator is classified as of of six pairwise comparison matrices. Lastly, pairwise analysis of indi-
positive impact ( Ii,j + ), it means that the higher its result is, the better cators was performed. The elements were compared in pairs over their
for the environment. Nevertheless, if it is classified as negative ( Ii,j‐ ), maximal influence on the activities (i.e., purchase, end‐of‐life prac-
the lower the result, the better, according to Azevedo et al. (Azevedo tices, green transportation, green packaging, and green stocking).
et al., 2016). The equations are transcribed as the division of In,ijt, This step enables the rank of the elements, shown in Fig. 3, where
i.e., the normalized indicator I with positive (+) or negative (−) Value 1 indicates that both judged criteria contribute equally to
impact, by the indicator value on the year t with the average value achieving the goal, whereas Value 9 expresses that one criterion has
of the previous years. the higher possible position concerning the other criterion (Saaty,
The normalizing process allows indicators to be compared, 2008). The even numbers are considered intermediate values between
enabling the development of a unified indicator using the sum‐up of the adjacent values. To evaluate the indicators, ten specialists in Logis-
each set of indicators. This index construction method is based on tics, both academics and practitioners, were consulted.
Tokos et al. (Tokos et al., 2012), cited 43 times by articles similar to The next step involved the AHP model calculation when the indica-
that one. According to Google Scholar, the method is also based on tors were weighted. The elements of this matrix represent the paired
the article by Esty et al. (Esty et al., 2009), cited 971 times. Finally, comparison of the elements (sub‐criterion). The present study consid-
the last step of this study is applying the constructed tool. ered one comparison matrix to each GL category since it was consid-
With data normalization, the tool was ready to be applied in a real ered that all categories have the same relevance, i.e., each practice
case in the plastic packaging sector, and the results were discussed has the same importance in structuring GL, and only criteria and
accordingly (Steps 8 and 9 in Fig. 1). Finally, contributions to scientific sub‐criteria have distinct weights. After constructing the comparison
research on processes that assist in the circularity of supply chains matrix, the second step was the normalization of the values, as indi-
were drawn (Step 10 in Fig. 1). The following section presents the cated by Saaty (Saaty, 2008). These steps are displayed in Table 2.
details of the AHP method used in the tool. The following step was to calculate the eigenvalue and eigenvector.
The eigenvector (W) is considered the arithmetic average of the crite-
ria values of the matrix. It has the objective to determine the share of
2.1. AHP method
each criterion in the goal's total value, showing the relative weight to
the analyzed criterion and sub‐criterion. The equations also present
The adaptation of the AHP method for the present article and its
the eigenvector's consistency calculus, where Wi is an eigenvector of
construction and application corresponds to Step 6 of Fig. 1. In order
the given matrix, and λmax is the largest eigenvalue of the pairwise
to clarify its execution, this topic aims to explain the method and its
comparison matrix. Hence, the λmax is the sum of the product of each
application. Fig. 2 shows the AHP method step by step.
element of W with the total of the respective column of the original
The first step is structuring the decision hierarchy to aid in the deci-
matrix. The fourth step is verifying the consistency, given by two math
sion based on criteria and sub‐criteria, i.e., determining the relevance
formulas: consistency index (CI) and consistency rate (CR). Both
of the indicators. Firstly, the criteria presented in this study follow the
should be lower than 10% to prove consistency. These formulas are
same structure found in the literature about GL practices, which cate-
presented in Equations (2) to (5).
gorize indicators as purchase, end‐of‐life practices, green transporta-

Fig. 2. Steps of the AHP method.

4
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Fig. 3. Objective, Criterion, Sub-criterion AHP.

Table 2
Matrix AHP from Saaty (Saaty, 2008).

Comparison Matrix Normalization Matrix

Elements CV1 CV2 CV3 Elements CV1 CV2 CV3

CV1 1 A12 A13
CV2 A21 1 A23 CV1 1/S1 A12/S2 A13/S3
CV3 A31 A32 1 CV2 A21/S1 1/S2 A23/S3
Total S1 S2 S3 CV3 A31/S1 A32/S2 1/S3

n
∑i¼1 aij current literature, the AHP method was applied, as presented in Sec-
wi ¼ ð2Þ
n tion 2 – Methodological Procedures. The aim is to give weight to each
indicator and then present the results in percentage weights of each
w0 1 w0 2 w0 n indicator to structure a composed index of each category to measure
λmax ¼ þ þ  þ ð3Þ
w1 w2 wn a unified index to GL, as shown in Table 4.
This way, after applying the AHP steps, it was possible to rank each
λn set of indicators by category and give their respective weights. These
CI ¼ ð4Þ
n1 weights come from the AHP's result in which the specialist ranks each
indicator giving grades against pairwise comparisons. These individual
CI results are transformed into a single result using averages and must
CR ¼ ð5Þ
RI total 100%, so each indicator receives a portion of this 100%, totalling
its weight.
2.2 Proposed tool The indicator C1 has the highest weight in the category Green Pur-
chase. This indicator refers to acquiring materials from suppliers that
Green practices are the insertion of environmental concepts in the show environmental concern through legislation compliance, certifi-
daily practices of organizations, i.e., participation in activities carried cates, and search for green materials and processes. The indicators
out within the institutions that focus on reducing environmental C2 and C3 sum up 53% of the final result in this category, purchasing
impacts. Table 3 shows the green categories found in the literature reused, recycled, and remanufactured materials more prominent than
within the greater scope of GSCM. Thus, it was possible to point out purchasing raw materials from an ecologic source. This last indicator
the most cited practices and, if necessary, narrow them down to the takes into consideration acquisition to promote greener manufacturing
context of GL. and ecodesign practices.
This study used a generic supply chain with a focus firm (a com- In the category “End‐of‐life Practices”, indicator PF1 stood out with
pany focused on logistics), its supplier, and its direct customer 29% and PF2 with 25%, which means that to produce the final indica-
(Fig. 4). This figure intends only to present practices along the logistics tor of this category, PF1 contributed with 29% and is responsible for
chain, but the tool considers only those involving GL directly. The pre- measuring which products fit into the 3R concept (remanufacturing,
sent study focused on areas directly related to GL, namely: transport, recycling, and reuse). PF4 referred to the collection of the product
packaging, storage, and purchasing; typical logistical activities packaging and was the indicator that presented the lowest weight.
(Ballou, 2007). In addition, this study also included the end‐of‐life The third category is Green Transportation, and its most prominent
practices due to their relationship with post‐consumer RL, an essential indicator is T1, which corresponds to the use of eco‐friendly fuels, such
practice for the circularity proposed by CE. as biodiesel and biofuels. Indicators T2, T3, and T4 have the same
After identifying and mapping practices, indicators were searched weight, which means that the composed index should be measured
in the literature. Due to the struggle to find metrics for the indicators, by the emission (T2) and mileage (T3) of the chosen transportation
those were elaborated to measure each practice in Table 3. The calcu- type and also by the vehicle efficiency (T4). Indicator T6 presented
lation was based on the same articles that propose the practices. The the lowest participation percentage in the final composed indicator,
fact that these practices should be simple and of easy application possibly meaning that experts believe that this practice does not
was taken into consideration (Neely et al., 1995) in order to stimulate strongly influence the performance of GL compared to the other
organizations to use the tool. After identifying the indicators in the practices.

5
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Table 3
Green categories.

Green categories Authors

Green Supplier Younis et al. (Younis et al., 2016); Geng et al. (Geng et al., 2017); Graham et al. (Graham et al., 2018); Khan and Qianli (Khan and Qianli, 2017);
Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); Yang (Yang, 2018); Sari (Sari, 2017); Zaman and Shamsuddin (Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017); Uygun and Dede
(Uygun and Dede, 2016); Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong et al., 2016); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2015); Chin et al. (Chin et al., 2015),
Rostamzadeh et al. (Rostamzadeh et al., 2015); Aich and Tripathy (Aich and Tripathy, 2014), Mutingi et al. (Mutingi et al., 2014); Tseng et al.
(Tseng et al., 2019); Santos et al. (Santos et al., 2019Mutingi et al., 2014; Santos et al., 2019); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2020)
Green Consumer Geng et al. (Geng et al., 2017); Graham et al. (Graham et al., 2018); Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); El-Kassar and Singh (El-Kassar and Singh,
2019)
Eco-design Younis et al. (Younis et al., 2016); Geng et al. (Geng et al., 2017); Mumtaz et al. (Mumtaz et al., 2018); Khan and Qianli (Khan and Qianli, 2017);
Sari (Sari, 2017); Uygun and Dede (Uygun and Dede, 2016); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2015); Rostamzadeh et al. (Rostamzadeh et al.,
2015); Aich and Tripathy (Aich and Tripathy, 2014); Folinas et al. (Folinas et al., 2014); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Santos et al. (Santos
et al., 2019); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2020); Khan and Yu (Khan and Yu, 2020); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)
Reverse Logistics Younis et al. (Younis et al., 2016); Geng et al. (Geng et al., 2017); Sari (Sari, 2017); Zaman and Shamsuddin (Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017);
Uygun and Dede (Uygun and Dede, 2016); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2015); Kushwaha and Sharma (Kushwaha and Sharma, 2016);
Mutingi et al. (Mutingi et al., 2014); Nascimento et al. (Nascimento et al., 2019); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Abdel-Baset et al. (Abdel-Baset
et al., 2019); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)
Green Packaging Khan and Qianli (Khan and Qianli, 2017); Lorentz et al. (Lorentz et al., 2011); Alonso et al. (Alonso et al., 2017); Uygun and Dede (Uygun and
Dede, 2016), Rostamzadeh et al. (Rostamzadeh et al., 2015); Mutingi et al. (Mutingi et al., 2014); Folinas et al. (Folinas et al., 2014); Tseng et al.
(Tseng et al., 2019); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2020)
Green Purchasing Younis et al. (Younis et al., 2016); Lorentz et al. (Lorentz et al., 2011); Zaman and Shamsuddin (Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017); Govindan et al.
(Govindan et al., 2015); Chin et al. (Chin et al., 2015), Aich and Tripathy (Aich and Tripathy, 2014); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Abdel-Baset
et al. (Abdel-Baset et al., 2019)
Green Distribution and Yang (Yang, 2018); Sari (Sari, 2017); Zaman and Shamsuddin (Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017); Chin et al. (Chin et al., 2015); Rostamzadeh et al.
Transportation (Rostamzadeh et al., 2015); Aich and Tripathy (Aich and Tripathy, 2014); Mutingi et al. (Mutingi et al., 2014); Lorentz et al. (Lorentz et al.,
2011); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2020); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020); Khan and Yu (Khan and Yu, 2020);
Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)
Green customer collaboration Younis et al. (Younis et al., 2016); Khan and Qianli (Khan and Qianli, 2017); Yang (Yang, 2018); Govindan et al (Govindan et al., 2015); Folinas
et al. (Folinas et al., 2014); Nascimento et al. (Nascimento et al., 2019); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Abdel-Baset et al. (Abdel-Baset et al.,
2019); Julianelli et al. (Julianelli et al., 2020)
Green information system Khan and Qianli (Khan and Qianli, 2017); Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong et al., 2016); Nascimento et al. (Nascimento et al., 2019); Tseng et al.
(Tseng et al., 2019); Julianelli et al. (Julianelli et al., 2020); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020); Khan and You (Khan and
Yu, 2020); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)
Environmental Management He et al. (He et al., 2017); Graham et al. (Graham et al., 2018); Garza-Reyes et al. (Garza-Reyes et al., 2018); Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong
et al., 2016); Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2015); Aich and Tripathy (Aich and Tripathy, 2014); Bai et al. (Bai et al., 2017); Machado et al.
(Machado et al., 2017); De Sousa Jabbour et al. (De Sousa Jabbour et al., 2015); Dey and Cheffi (Dey and Cheffi, 2013); Diabat et al. (Diabat
et al., 2013); De Giovanni and Vinzi (De Giovanni and Vinzi, 2012); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Abdel-Baset et al. (Abdel-Baset et al., 2019);
Santos et al. (Santos et al., 2019); Khan and You (Khan and Yu, 2020)
Eco-Innovation Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong et al., 2016); Kushwaha and Sharma (Kushwaha and Sharma, 2016); El-Kassar and Singh (El-Kassar and Singh,
2019); Nascimento et al. (Nascimento et al., 2019); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019)
End of Life Practices Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong et al., 2016); Nascimento et al. (Nascimento et al., 2019)
Green Marketing Kushwaha and Sharma (Kushwaha and Sharma, 2016); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Santos et al. (Santos et al., 2019); Agyabeng-Mensah
et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)
Carbon management Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2015); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Abdel-Baset et al. (Abdel-Baset et al., 2019); Santos et al. (Santos et al.,
2019); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)
ISO 14001 Govindan et al. (Govindan et al., 2015); Tseng et al. (Tseng et al., 2019); Agyabeng-Mensah et al. (Agyabeng-Mensah et al., 2020)

Fig. 4. Logistics chain.

The most relevant indicator in the category Green Packaging is E1, Green Stocking, energy consumption corresponds to 60% of the com-
representing 49% of the total, i.e., specialists considered that using posing indicator.
returnable, recyclable or reusable packaging is more important than Finally, the category that encompasses the Sectional indicators, i.e.,
giving an appropriate end to the waste, using renewable energy, and the ones that influence all company areas, has TR1 as the most rele-
the energy consumption during the packaging process. However, for vant indicator. This indicator demonstrates that the specialists believe

6
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Table 4 the software Excel®. The tool automatized the calculation process,
Weight of each indicator in the unified index. resulting in the final index of the GL implementation of the company.
Abbreviation Practice Weight
(%)

Category: Green Purchase

3. Theory
C1 Purchase from green suppliers 47%
C2 3R’s materials purchase 28% GL is one of the steps to achieve CE and sustainability in logistics
C3 Eco-friendly raw material purchase 25% operations, as shown in Fig. 5. GL arises to reduce environmental
Category: End-of-life Practices
impacts caused by logistics, using an approach of environmental
PF 1 Proportion of products’ waste that is treated with one of 29%
the 3R preservation (Ćirović et al., 2014). It goes beyond traditional logistics,
PF 2 Reusing products 25% supplying green products and services to clients and providing the sup-
PF 3 Recycling material 19% ply chain with RL (Zhang et al., 2015). Following Zaman and Sham-
PF 4 Packaging collection 13%
suddin, GL encompasses product acquisition, production,
PF 5 Partner suppliers 14%
Category: Green Transportation
distribution, consumption, after‐use collection, and recycling. This
T1 Use of eco-friendly fuels 20% way, GL focuses on the constant search for practices to reduce CO2
T2 Use of cleaner means of transportation (CO2 emission 18% emission and energy consumption (He et al., 2017). The main goal is
based on the amount of fuel consumed) to decrease environmental impacts, minimize production costs, and
T3 Use of cleaner means of transportation (CO2 emission 18%
improve product value (Lorentz et al., 2011). Besides, GL aims to
based on mileage)
T4 Transportation efficiency 18% reduce logistics costs and enhance profits to keep sustainable develop-
T5 Unloaded trips 15% ment (Alshubiri, 2017).
T6 Payload capacity of the vehicle 11% The implementation of GL appears as an improvement mechanism
Category: Green Packaging for the company’s environmental management, cost reduction, and
E1 Use of returnable, reusable, and recycled packages 49%
E2 Responsible destination of waste from the distribution 28%
more integration of the chain links (Graham et al., 2018). One of the
process ways to put GL into practice is by solving transportation problems con-
E3 Use of renewable energy during the packaging process 14% cerning alternative energy sources; electric vehicles, smart transporta-
E4 Energy consumption during the packaging process 9% tion systems, green transports, and other environmentally friendly
Category: Green Stocking
infrastructures (Lin et al., 2014). GL activities include measuring the
A1 Energy consumption during stocking 60%
A2 Use of renewable energy during stocking 40% impacts caused by transportation with ISO 14,001 and reducing
Category: Sectional energy and material consumption.
TR1 Environmental certificate (ISO 14001) 41% GL is one of the critical components of green supply chain manage-
TR2 Environmental monitoring and audit 20% ment (Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017). To Zhang et al. (Zaman and
TR3 Reduction of greenhouse gas emission 19%
TR4 Use of clean technologies 20%
Shamsuddin, 2017), green activities and operations of GL are divided
Category: Reverse Logistics into three main areas: design, production, and RL. Due to difficulties in
RL1 Collection of post-consumption products 54% separating activities of RL and GL, there is a need to classify these prac-
RL2 Client collaboration 24% tices. According to Rogers and Tibben‐Lembke (Rogers and Tibben‐
RL3 Legislation compliance 21%
Lembke, 2001), RL and GL overlap in the areas of recycling, remanu-
facturing, and packaging reuse, whereas packaging reduction and
emissions and impact minimization are only parts of GL.
Engaging in RL is one of the GL management practices listed by
there is a need for environmental certification. The remaining indica- Agyabeng‐Mensah et al. (Agyabeng‐Mensah et al., 2020), along with
tors presented similar results. using sustainable transportation, product packaging, distribution,
Post‐consumption RL has already been included in the category and green information systems. These authors also pointed out that
End‐of‐life Practices since this practice has, as the primary goal, giving implementing such practices positively influences the organization’s
the product the correct destination after its use by reusing, recycling, performance (Agyabeng‐Mensah et al., 2020). In Brazil, companies
or remanufacturing (Milios et al., 2019; Ramírez et al., 2020). How- are looking for solutions to make supply chains more sustainable, as
ever, not all RL indicators can be classified into this category. For this shown by an evaluation performance conducted by Santos et al.
reason, there is an exclusive category for the RL, addressing the treat- (Santos et al., 2019). Evaluating the performance of supply chains is
ment of the organization's external RL: customer and product collec-
tion. Finally, the legislation of the sector was addressed in this
category of Reverse Logistics. Thus, RL1 is the indicator with the most
representativeness in the category of RL and ranks the collection of
post‐consumption products at the top, followed by client collaboration
and legislation compliance, consecutively. Specialists state that legisla-
tion compliance is not a proactive action; hence, it should be lower
than the other indicators.
The proposed indicators were normalized by the method suggested
by Saling et al. (Saling et al., 2002), considering that the values range
from 0 to 1, the last being the maximum value of each category. On the
other hand, emission indicators, i.e., T2, T3, and TR3, follow the
method of Zhou et al. (Zhou et al., 2012). These normalized indicators
are named sub‐indices. The sub‐indices are calculated using Equation
(3), in which each normalized indicator is multiplied by its respective
weight given by the AHP tool. After this multiplication, an arithmetic
average is calculated, resulting in the company's final index of the GL
implementation. Hence, the indicators' weights resulted from the Fig. 5. Reverse Logistics to Circular Logistics. Source: adapted from PBLV
application of AHP, and their normalization values were included in (Pblv, 2018).

7
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

necessary to portray a general view of the company's system (Zhang not considered high enough by the organization or the market. There-
et al., 2015). In this context, environmental performance is crucial to fore, an action plan is necessary to improve specific categories. The
minimize adverse environmental impacts caused by supply chain oper- categories with high scores are End‐of‐life Practices (83%), Green
ations (Zhang et al., 2015). Stocking (60%), RL (58%), and Green Packaging (58%). The results
Scientific studies on GL performance are primarily focused on are shown in Fig. 6.
applying questionnaires, such as the papers from Graham et al. This index displays to companies which category they need to
(Graham et al., 2018), Garza‐Reyes et al. (Garza‐Reyes et al., 2018), invest in and enables benchmarking with other organizations. For
Mumtaz et al. (Mumtaz et al., 2018), Yang (Yang, 2018), Younis Company B to achieve the status of having GL, there should be an
et al. (Younis et al., 2016), Abareshi and Molla (Abareshi and Molla, investment and focus on the Sectional, Green transportation, and
2013), and Lorentz et al. (Lorentz et al., 2011). These papers also Green Purchase categories.
use significantly hypotheses tests, i.e., hypothesis definition following Meanwhile, the final result for Company A is displayed in Fig. 7.
the literature and their validation by sampling to verify if an organiza- Company A presented a GL final index of 71%, and the highlighted
tion's action impacts organizational, environmental, and financial per- categories are Sectional, Green Purchase, and End‐of‐life Practices,
formance. The articles found in the literature address models and case with a score higher than 70% each. The category with the lowest score
studies on GL that work with low carbon logistics (He et al., 2017), is Green Transportation (53%), which means that this category should
mathematical models with the junction of GL with energy (Xiao receive investments to improve the GL index. The areas of RL and
et al., 2015; Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017), the performance index Green Packaging displayed similar scores since the primary barrier
of logistics with green operations (Khan et al., 2017; Khan and of both is the return of most packaging from clients and partners.
Qianli, 2017), logistics and green practices (Simão et al., 2016), focus
on warehouses (Mirzapour Al‐E‐Hashem and Rekik, 2014), and GL
5. Discussion
with human performance (Tsai and Wang, 2019).

In order to develop the GL unified index tool, a thorough literature

4. Results review was conducted. Thirty‐four green practices were identified
throughout the supply chain, despite nomenclature issues faced during
This section aims to legitimate the tool through a case study and the review. When linked to environmental management, practices con-
then make improvements in it if necessary. The authors contacted ducted in traditional areas in the organizations become green practices
two companies from the plastic industry sector. The first one is a large (Folinas et al., 2014; Mumtaz et al., 2018), which sometimes causes
company with more than 12,000 employees and has branches all over overlapping nomenclature and misunderstanding definitions. More-
the country. This company preferred to disclose only the GL index and over, there is a noticeable lack of concern in the literature regarding
to give improvement suggestions. Then, due to confidentiality issues, quantitative indicators and a variety of generic studies or ones that
this company will be called Company A. The second company is a identify if firms are concerned with the application of green practices.
medium‐scale firm in the plastic sector with around 400 employees However, choosing ideal indicators is a complex and essential process
and is a supplier for Company B. Also, for confidentiality reasons, this (Searcy, 2016) and directly influences organizations’ performance.
company is called Company B. Data were collected in interviews with Developing tools such as the one proposed in the study enhance the
managers responsible for each company's logistics, CE and environ- greening process of the supply chain (Younis et al., 2016) because it
mental areas. The companies passed on the data, and the unified indi- helps to see the areas that cause the most impact, which boosts the
cator was elaborated. search for materials that impact less the environment, for eco‐
Company B is a medium scale business located in the region of Flo- friendly packaging, and for ways to reduce fossil fuels usage
rianopolis city and works with manufacturing plastic packaging for (Mirzapour Al‐E‐Hashem and Rekik, 2014). The proposed tool con-
industries in cosmetics, food, and pharmaceuticals. The company has tributes to fulfilling crucial gaps and current necessities, which are
social and environmental values as directives and has operated since having a model of green development and caring for greenhouse gases
2002. The index of each GL category is the sum‐up of the positive emissions (He et al., 2017). The tool differs from others proposed by
and negative impacts multiplied by the weight resulting from AHP. the literature since it does not use hypotheses validation and question-
The average of these categories resulted in a final GL index of 54%. naires (Younis et al., 2016; Mumtaz et al., 2018; Graham et al., 2018;
Although the index achieved by Company B is higher than 50%, it is Garza‐Reyes et al., 2018; Abareshi and Molla, 2013) that generalizes
GL without focusing on the industry sector. Another difference consists

Fig. 6. Green Logistics Index – Company B. Fig. 7. Green Logistics index – Company A.

8
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

of the holistic approach of the tool since it encompasses practices that ical of environmental management and are cited in the most analyzed
were treated separately in the literature, such as low carbon logistics articles (Graham et al., 2018; Islam et al., 2018; Yang, 2018). Surpris-
(He et al., 2017), energy consumption focus (Xiao et al., 2015) and ingly; the specialists consider certifications more critical than reducing
continuous improvement of general logistics activities (Alonso et al., greenhouse gases since certificates, such as ISO 14001, approach req-
2017). Furthermore, the tool attends to the need to eliminate the main uisites to the Environmental Management System that encourage com-
barriers of logistics operations in firms cited by Mathiyazhagan et al. panies to seek the minimization of these impacts (ISO, 2018).
(Mathiyazhagan et al., 2013). However; certifications have guidelines such as applying tools towards
Furthermore, concerning the tool's categories, Green purchase is continuous improvement, environmental goals and objectives linked
considered by the experts more relevant to have an environmentally to emissions, which are the focus of one of the main gaps pointed
friendly supplier than purchasing raw material, which favours the out by the literature (He et al., 2017).
3Rs, which contradicts the GSCM literature since the review showed The category “End‐of‐life practices” displayed a positive result,
eco‐design as one of the most cited practices (Geng et al., 2017; except for the PF5 indicator (Partner suppliers), thus proving to be a
Khan and Qianli, 2017; Mumtaz et al., 2018; Sari, 2017). That is, barrier that still exists in the green supply chain (Majumdar and
eco‐design is one of the leading practices in manufacturing environ- Sinha, 2019). Therefore, there is a practical reinforcement from the
mentally friendly products and encompasses activities that influence PBLV (Pblv, 2018) method pointing out that RL is the first step to
material purchasing, manufacturing, distribution, use, and final desti- achieving GL. However, the RL category presented a barrier from
nation, affecting RL (Hammes et al., 2020). The category of end‐of‐life the client collaboration on returning post‐consumption material and
practices had the lowest score among the others, even though end‐of‐ a high complexity with the 3R process.
life practices are correlated to reverse logistics practices, which had This study adds to the literature because it provides an index to
the highest score. This result indicates a necessity to raise awareness manage the GL performance of companies. The existing articles
that packaging makes part of the final product and should receive focused on GL only addressed areas related to transportation, emission
the same attention. Moreover, regarding awareness, a lack of under- reduction, energy efficiency, and fuels (Graham et al., 2018; He et al.,
standing of the difference between reverse logistics, green logistics, 2017; Khan et al., 2017; Zaman and Shamsuddin, 2017). In addition,
and sustainability was noteworthy when the tool was applied in the the GL index indeed refers to GL practices complementing the previous
plastics companies, which reinforces the need to build environmental idea (Lorentz et al., 2011) of PBLV. Thus, the tool allows us to mea-
awareness. sure, manage and compare accounting performance in different com-
Regarding the categories traditionally linked to logistics, trans- panies. In addition, companies considered GL to be the same concept
portation, packaging, and stocking, indicators found in the literature as post‐consumer RL due to the lack of knowledge of the terms RL
are related to modals, fuels, and efficiency, which the experts corrob- and GL (Majumdar and Sinha, 2019). Thus, this article contributes
orate. Lastly, sectional indicators usual in environmental management to the literature in two ways, the first through an easy‐to‐use tool for
were the most cited in the literature review. The specialists considered companies and the second by differentiating the terms RL and GL, clar-
certifications as more critical than reducing greenhouse gas emissions. ifying the difference in practice.
Indeed, certifications such as ISO 14,001 stimulate environmental
management that aims at reducing impacts (ISO, 2018). However; this
reduction might not be necessarily related to lowering greenhouse gas 6. Conclusions
emissions, which is one of the main gaps pointed out in the literature
(He et al., 2017). The unified index proposed in this study aims to expose the envi-
Company A presented a result that differs from the importance ronmental performance of logistics, which enables companies to take
given by the experts. The C3 indicator (Eco‐friendly raw material pur- strategic decisions to reduce environmental impacts and adopt more
chase) received the lowest score by logistics specialists, but the best circular and sustainable logistics. Thus, the index also helps prevent
result in practice demonstrates that companies are concerned about new environmental impacts caused by logistics, pathing ways to apply
the materials used in their products and seek eco‐design (Mumtaz environmental guidelines in the supply chain. Combining the unified
et al., 2018). According to the manager, the material purchase aims index with the tool fulfils one of the main gaps of GL, which is the dif-
to facilitate the production processes, justifying C3 having the most ficulty of measuring and controlling its development. Furthermore,
significant result; besides, C2 (3R's materials purchase) does not neces- this study makes GL closer to managers by creating objective and
sarily contribute directly to the organization. C1 indicator (Purchase straightforward metrics through a universal tool for different sectors.
from green suppliers), constantly cited in the literature, presents a It presented theoretical contributions regarding the differences
financial return to the company, as explained by Company A's between RL and GL concepts and added to the scientific communities
managers. with a unified index to measure GL in companies. The tool and unified
Despite the focus of this work on plastic packaging and its harm to index proposed here are essential to enhance GL's implementation,
the environment, the indicator of packaging collection has the lowest control, evaluation, and continuous improvement and create new ways
weight given by the specialists in the category of End‐of‐life Practices. to promote market competitiveness circularly.
Hence, it is an expanding market that does not already focus on green- Due to the scope definition, this article presents some limitations.
ing its processes. This category is aligned with RL, which presented the The first limitation is the identification of indicators from the literature
collection of post‐consumption products as the most representative since the research scope considered neither sustainability reports nor
indicator. Therefore, it is noteworthy the need for awareness about indicators already used in the industry. Another limitation is the neces-
giving the same treatment for product packaging since companies sity of studying GL from a supply chain perspective since most green
intend to follow a more circular path, and one of the ways is through practices encompass macro rather than micro operations. Limitations
recycling/reuse of waste (Shogren et al., 2019) as packaging, which on the construction of the tool are related to its generic aspect that
demonstrates the relevance of this topic and an existing barrier to analyzes the general GL but does not consider organizational or pro-
achieve more circular GL. duct singularities. The tool was also delimited to the environmental
Among the well‐known logistics activities, such as transportation, area and did not encompass financial or social aspects. Lastly, some
packaging, and stocking, it is notable that transportation stands out results provided by the tool were not possible to be calculated because
from the others in terms of focus among specialists since companies of a lack of available data at the time of the tool application; therefore,
are looking forward to using alternative fuels and less polluting trucks the study was limited to the period to conduct it and the company's
(Baah et al., 2020) for instance. Lastly; the Sectional indicators are typ- data availability.

9
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

These limitations and the research opportunities found during the • Comparing the developed index from companies that share the
research process of this article allowed the creation and identification same market. Hence, it would be possible to map the GL status in
of gaps and suggestions for future research. Some of these suggestions the plastic packaging sector.
for future work are the following:

• Developing metrics and indicators focused on each category, for

Funding
example, transportation. This category involves many types of
modals in different quantities; hence, it is suggested a more in‐
Scholarships granted by the National Council for Scientific and
depth evaluation of each category in order to become easier to
Technological Development (CNPq).
apply the tool and closer to the market’s reality;
• Identifying GL barriers in the organizations;
• Applying the unified index in more than one company and even
among other sectors, company’s dimensions, types of product, Declaration of Competing Interest
and positions in the supply chain;
• Developing a maturity model that would aid managers to increase The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
the GL level and achieving the status of having a GL; interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
• Extending the tool approach to financial and social aspects, provid- ence the work reported in this paper.
ing a sustainable evaluation;
• Broadening the studies on the plastic sector and its impacts on the
environment;
Appendix
• Comparing the index of different categories using ANP since AHP
does not allow confronting results from different categories;
Table A1

Table A1
Indicators metrics and classification.

CATEGORY INDICATOR ABBREVIATION METRICS HIERARCHY AUTHOR

Green Purchase Purchase from green suppliers C1 (n. of raw materials from green Operational Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); Yang
suppliers/n. of raw material in (Yang, 2018)
total) *100
Green Purchase 3R’s materials purchase C2 (n. of materials from a 3R source/n. Operational Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); Yang
of materials in total)*100 (Yang, 2018)
Green Purchase Eco-friendly raw material C3 (n. of purchased material that eases Operational Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); Yang
purchase 3R processes/n. of material in total) (Yang, 2018)
*100
End-of-life Practices Proportion of products’ waste PF 1 (n. of material destined to 3R/n. of Operational He et al. (He et al., 2017)
that is treated with one of the 3R products that could be destined to
3R) * 100
End-of-life Practices Reusing products PF 2 (n. of reused products/n. of Tactic Sari (Sari, 2017)
products in total)*100
End-of-life Practices Recycling material PF3 (n. of recycled products/n. of Tactic Yang (Yang, 2018); Sari (Sari, 2017)
products in total) * 100
End-of-life Practices Packaging collection PF4 (n. of returned packaging/n. of Tactic Sari (Sari, 2017)
packaging in totals) *100
End-of-life Practices Partner suppliers PF5 (n. of suppliers that actively Operational Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong et al.,
participate in the reverse flow/n. of 2016)
suppliers in total) * 100
Green Transportation Use of eco-friendly fuels T1 (n° of means of transportation that Tactic Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); Yang
do not use fossil fuels/n. of means (Yang, 2018)
of transportation in total) *100
Green Transportation Use of cleaner means of T2 Equivalent CO2 emission factor * Operational Graham et al. (Graham et al., 2018);
transportation (CO2 emission liters of fuel PBLV (Pblv, 2018)
based on the amount of fuel
consumed)
Green Transportation Use of cleaner means of T3 (liters of fuel/tons of emission) * Operational Graham et al. (Graham et al., 2018);
transportation (CO2 emission traveled km PBLV (Pblv, 2018)
based on mileage)
Green Tansportation Transportation efficiency T4 process’ useful output (t-km)/ Tactic He et al. (He et al., 2017); Yang (Yang,
process’ energy input 2018)
Green Transportation Unloaded trips T5 (n. of unloaded trips/n. of trips in Tactic He et al. (He et al., 2017); Sari (Sari,
total) *100 2017)
Green Transportation Payload capacity of the vehicle T6 (current transported Tactic Sari (Sari, 2017)
payload/payload capacity)*100
Green Packaging Use of returnable, reusable, and E1 (n. of packaging of a 3R source/m. Operational He et al. (He et al., 2017); Graham et al.
recycled packages of packaging in total) * 100 (Graham et al., 2018); Islam et al.
(Islam et al., 2018); Sari (Sari, 2017)
Green Packaging Responsible destination of waste E2 (n. of packaging used in logistics Operational Graham et al. (Graham et al., 2018)
from the distribution process with a responsible discard/n. of
packaging in total) * 100
Green Packaging Use of renewable energy during E3 (Total of renewable energy Operational Suggested by specialists
the packaging process used/total of energy used) * 100
Green Packaging Energy consumption during the E4 (sector's energy expenses/total of Operational He et al. (He et al., 2017)

10
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Table A1 (continued)
CATEGORY INDICATOR ABBREVIATION METRICS HIERARCHY AUTHOR

packaging process packaging produced) * 100

Green Stocking Energy consumption during A1 (sector’s energy expenses/stocked Operational He et al. (He et al., 2017)
stocking volume) * 100
Green Stocking Use of renewable energy during A2 (total of renewable energy Operational Suggested by specialists
stocking used//total of energy used) *100
Sectional Environmental certificate (ISO TR1 Does the company have Strategic Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018); Yang
14001) certification? (Yang, 2018)
Sectional Environmental monitoring and TR2 Does the company have monitoring Strategic Islam et al. (Islam et al., 2018)
audit or audit?
Sectional Reduction of greenhouse gas TR3 (current greenhouse gas emission/ Strategic Yang; Folinas et al. (Folinas et al., 2014)
emission previous greenhouse gas emission)
*100
Sectional Use of clean technologies TR4 Does the company use cleaner Strategic Kusi-Sarpong et al. (Kusi-Sarpong et al.,
technologies? 2016)
Reverse Logistics Collection of post-consumption RL1 (n. of collected products/n. sold Tactic Suggested by specialists
products products in total)*100
Reverse Logistics Client collaboration RL2 (n. of clients that contribute to RL/n Tactic Suggested by specialists
° of clients in total)*100
Reverse Logistics Legislation compliance RL3 Does the company respect the Tactic Suggested by specialists
current legislation?

References Rogers, D.S., Tibben-Lembke, R., 2001. An examination of reverse logistics practices. J.
Bus. Logist. 22 (2), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2001.tb00007.
x.
Younis, H., Sundarakani, B., Vel, P., 2016. The impact of implementing green supply
MacArthur, E., 2017. Beyond plastic waste. Science, 358, 843-843. http://dx.doi.org/
chain management practices on corporate performance. Compet. Rev. 26 (3),
10.1126/science.aao6749.
216–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-04-2015-0024.
ABRE/FGV, 2017. (accessed: 25 jul. 2018).
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., Seppälä, J., 2018. Circular economy: the concept and its
ONU BR., 2017. ONU launches campaign against ocean pollution caused by plastic
limitations. Ecol. Econ. 143, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
consumption. Available at: <https://nacoesunidas.org/onu-lanca-campanha-elhan-
ecolecon.2017.06.041.
poluicao-dos-oceanos-provocada-por-consumo-de-plastico/>. Accessed on: 07 jul.
Bressanelli, G., Saccani, N., Pigosso, D.C., Perona, M., 2020. Circular economy in the
2018
WEEE industry: a systematic literature review and a research agenda. Sustain. Prod.
Nascimento, D.L.M., Alencastro, V., Quelhas, O.L.G., Caiado, R.G.G., Garza-Reyes, J.A.,
Consum. 23, 174–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.05.007.
Rocha-Lona, L., Tortorella, G., 2019. Exploring Industry 4.0 technologies to enable
Changwichan, K., Gheewala, S.H., 2020. Choice of materials for takeaway beverage cups
circular economy practices in a manufacturing context. J. Manuf. Technol. Manage.
towards a circular economy. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 22, 34–44. https://doi.org/
30, 607–662. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmtm-03-2018-0071.
10.1016/j.spc.2020.02.004.
Guarnieri, P., Cerqueira-Streit, J.A., Batista, L.C., 2020. Reverse logistics and the sectoral
El-Kassar, A.N., Singh, S.K., 2019. Green innovation and organizational performance:
agreement of packaging industry in Brazil towards a transition to circular economy.
the influence of big data and the moderating role of management commitment and
Resour. Conserv. Recy. 153,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104541
HR practices. Technol. Forecast Soc. 144, 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
104541.
techfore.2017.12.016.
Garza-Reyes, J.A., Yu, M., Kumar, V., Upadhyay, A., 2018. Total quality environmental
He, Z., Chen, P., Liu, H., Guo, Z., 2017. Performance measurement system and strategies
management: Adoption status in the Chinese manufacturing sector. TQM J. 30 (1),
for developing low-carbon logistics: a case study in China. J. Clean. Prod. 156,
2–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-05-2017-0052.
395–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.071.
Abareshi, A., Molla, A., 2013. Greening logistics and its impact on environmental
Geng, R., Mansouri, S.A., Aktas, E., 2017. The relationship between green supply chain
performance: an absorptive capacity perspective. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 16 (3),
management and performance: a meta-analysis of empirical evidences in Asian
209–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2013.812193.
emerging economies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 183, 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Lorentz, H., Shi, Y., Hilmola, O.P., Srai, J.S., Lau, K.H., 2011. Benchmarking green
ijpe.2016.10.008.
logistics performance with a composite index. Benchmarking Int. J. 18 (6),
Simão, L.E., Gonçalves, M.B., Rodriguez, C.M.T., 2016. An approach to assess logistics
873–896. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635771111180743.
and ecological supply chain performance using postponement strategies. Ecol. Ind.
Xiao, F., Hu, Z.H., Wang, K.X., Fu, P.H., 2015. Spatial distribution of energy
63, 398–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.10.048.
consumption and carbon emission of regional logistics. Sustainability-basel 7 (7),
Shogren, R., Wood, D., Orts, W., Glenn, G., 2019. Plant-based materials and
9140–9159. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7079140.
transitioning to a circular economy. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 19, 194–215. https://
Alonso, L., Rubio, E.M., de Agustina, B., Domingo, R., 2017. Latest clean manufacturing
doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2019.04.007.
trends applied to a world class manufacturing management for improving logistics
Rodríguez, P.D., Bastias, F.A., Arena, A.P., 2019. Modeling and environmental
and environmental performance. Proced. Manuf. 13, 1151–1158. https://doi.org/
evaluation of a system linking a fishmeal facility with a microalgae plant within a
10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.177.
circular economy context. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 20, 356–364. https://doi.org/
Mathiyazhagan, K., Govindan, K., NoorulHaq, A., Geng, Y., 2013. An ISM approach for
10.1016/j.spc.2019.08.007.
the barrier analysis in implementing green supply chain management. J. Clean.
Kalmykova, Y., Sadagopan, M., Rosado, L., 2018. Circular economy–From review of
Prod. 47, 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.042.
theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resour. Conserv.
PBLV, 2018. Green Brazil Logistics Program: application manual. São Paulo: Brazilian
Recy. 135, 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.034.
Institute for Sustainable Transport (IBTS)
Seroka-Stolka, O., Ociepa-Kubicka, A., 2019. Green logistics and circular economy.
Govindan, K., Bouzon, M., 2018. From a literature review to a multi-perspective
Transp. Res. Proc. 39, 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2019.06.049.
framework for reverse logistics barriers and drivers. J. Clean. Prod. 187, 318–337.
Mumtaz, U., Ali, Y., Petrillo, A., 2018. A linear regression approach to evaluate the green
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.040.
supply chain management impact on industrial organizational performance. Sci.
Seuring, S., Müller, M., 2008. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for
Total Environ. 624, 162–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.089.
sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (15), 1699–1710. https://
Graham, S., Graham, B., Holt, D., 2018. The relationship between downstream
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020.
environmental logistics practices and performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 196,
Srivastava, S.K., 2007. Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art literature
356–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.12.011.
review. Int. J. Manage. Rev. 9 (1), 53–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
Khan, S.A.R., Qianli, D., 2017. Does national scale economic and environmental
2370.2007.00202.x.
indicators spur logistics performance? Evidence from UK. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R 24
Senthil, S., Murugananthan, K., Ramesh, A., 2018. Analysis and prioritization of risks in
(34), 26692–26705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0222-9.
a reverse logistics network using hybrid multicriteria decision making methods. J.
World Bank, 2017. Annual Report. Available: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/
Clean. Prod. 179, 716–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.095.
bitstream/handle/10986/27986/211119EN.pdf?sequence=9&isAllowed=y
Bouzon, M., Govindan, K., Rodriguez, C.M.T., Campos, L.M., 2016. Identification and
Abdel-Baset, M., Chang, V., Gamal, A., 2019. Evaluation of the green supply chain
analysis of reverse logistics barriers using fuzzy Delphi method and AHP. Resour.
management practices: a novel neutrosophic approach. Comput Ind 108, 210–220.
Conserv. Recy. 108, 182–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2019.02.013.

11
E.D. de Souza et al. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3 (2022) 100019

Saaty, T.L., 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 1 Khan, S.A.R., Yu, Z., 2020. Assessing the eco-environmental performance: an PLS-SEM
(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590. approach with practice-based view. Int. J. Logist. – Res. App. 24 (3), 303–321.
Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., Murugesan, P., 2015. Multi criteria decision https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2020.1754773.
making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., Afum, E., Agnikpe, C., Cai, J., Ahenkorah, E., Dacosta, E., 2020.
J. Clean. Prod. 98, 66–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046. Exploring the mediating influences of total quality management and just in time
Vaidya, O.S., Kumar, S., 2006. Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. between green supply chain practices and performance. J. Manuf. Technol. Manage.
Eur. J. Oper. Res. 169 (1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028. 32 (1), 156–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmtm-03-2020-0086.
Mayer, A.L., 2008. Strengths and weaknesses of common sustainability indices for Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., Afum, E., Ahenkorah, E., 2020. Exploring financial performance
multidimensional systems. Environ. Int. 34 (2), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/ and green logistics management practices: examining the mediating influences of
j.envint.2007.09.004. market, environmental and social performances. J. Clean Prod. 258, 1–13. https://
Saling, P., Kicherer, A., Dittrich-Krämer, B., Wittlinger, R., Zombik, W., Schmidt, I., doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120613.
Schmidt, S., 2002. Eco-efficiency analysis by BASF: the method. Int. J. Life Cycle Julianelli, V., Caiado, R.G.G., Scavarda, L.F., Cruz, S.P.M.F., 2020. Interplay between
Ass. 7 (4), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978875. reverse logistics and circular economy: critical success factors-based taxonomy and
Zhou, L., Tokos, H., Krajnc, D., Yang, Y., 2012. Sustainability performance evaluation in framework. Resour. Conser. Recy. 158, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
industry by composite sustainability index. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 14 (5), resconrec.2020.104784.
789–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-012-0454-9. Bai, C., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Sarkis, J., 2017. An implementation path for green information
Azevedo, S.G., Carvalho, H., Ferreira, L.M., Matias, J.C., 2016. A proposed framework to technology systems in the Ghanaian mining industry. J. Clean. Prod. 164,
assess upstream supply chain sustainability. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 19 (6), 1105–1123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.151.
2253–2273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-016-9853-0. Machado, C.G., de Lima, E.P., da Costa, S.E.G., Angelis, J.J., Mattioda, R.A., 2017.
Tokos, H., Pintarič, Z.N., Krajnc, D., 2012. An integrated sustainability performance Framing maturity based on sustainable operations management principles. Int. J.
assessment and benchmarking of breweries. Clean Technol. Environ. 14 (2), Prod. Econ. 190, 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.01.020.
173–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-011-0390-0. De Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L., de Oliveira Frascareli, F.C., Jabbour, C.J.C., 2015. Green supply
Esty, D.C., Levy, M., Srebotnjak, T., De Sherbinin, A., 2009. Environmental sustainability chain management and firms’ performance: understanding potential relationships
index: Benchmarking national environmental stewardship. and the role of green sourcing and some other green practices. Resour. Conserv. Recy.
Thanki, S., Govindan, K., Thakkar, J., 2016. An investigation on lean-green 104, 366–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.07.017.
implementation practices in Indian SMEs using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) Dey, P.K., Cheffi, W., 2013. Green supply chain performance measurement using the
approach. J. Clean Prod. 135, 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. analytic hierarchy process: a comparative analysis of manufacturing organizations.
jclepro.2016.06.105. Prod. Plan. Control 24 (8–9), 702–720. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Islam, M.S., Tseng, M.L., Karia, N., Lee, C.H., 2018. Assessing green supply chain 09537287.2012.666859.
practices in Bangladesh using fuzzy importance and performance approach. Resour. Diabat, A., Khodaverdi, R., Olfat, L., 2013. An exploration of green supply chain
Conserv. Recy. 131, 134–145. practices and performances in an automotive industry. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
ISO, 2018. Environmental management system - 2018. https://www.iso.org (accessed 68 (1–4), 949–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-4955-4.
on: 20 december 2018). De Giovanni, P., Vinzi, V.E., 2012. Covariance versus component-based estimations of
Yang, C.S., 2018. An analysis of institutional pressures, green supply chain management, performance in green supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 135 (2),
and green performance in the container shipping context. Transport. Res. D – Tr E. 907–916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.11.001.
61, 246–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.07.005. Ballou, R.H., 2007. The evolution and future of logistics and supply chain management.
Sari, K., 2017. A novel multicriteria decision framework for evaluating green supply Eur. Bus. Rev. 19 (4), 332–348. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340710760152.
chain management practices. Comput. Ind. Eng. 105, 338–347. https://doi.org/ Neely, A., Gregory, M., Platts, K., 1995. Performance measurement system design: a
10.1016/j.cie.2017.01.016. literature review and research agenda. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Man. 25 (12), 1228–1263.
Zaman, K., Shamsuddin, S., 2017. Green logistics and national scale economic https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579510083622.
indicators: evidence from a panel of selected European countries. J. Clean Prod. Milios, L., Beqiri, B., Whalen, K.A., Jelonek, S.H., 2019. Sailing towards a circular
143, 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.150. economy: conditions for increased reuse and remanufacturing in the Scandinavian
Uygun, Ö., Dede, A., 2016. Performance evaluation of green supply chain management maritime sector. J. Clean. Prod. 225, 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
using integrated fuzzy multicriteria decision making techniques. Comput. Ind. Eng. jclepro.2019.03.330.
102, 502–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.02.020. Ramírez, F.J., Aledo, J.A., Gamez, J.A., Pham, D.T., 2020. Economic modelling of
Kusi-Sarpong, S., Sarkis, J., Wang, X., 2016. Assessing green supply chain practices in robotic disassembly in end-of-life product recovery for remanufacturing. Comput.
the Ghanaian mining industry: a framework and evaluation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 181, Ind. Eng. 142,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106339 106339.
325–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.04.002. Ćirović, G., Pamučar, D., Božanić, D., 2014. Green logistic vehicle routing problem:
Govindan, K., Khodaverdi, R., Vafadarnikjoo, A., 2015. Intuitionistic fuzzy based routing light delivery vehicles in urban areas using a neuro-fuzzy model. Expert.
DEMATEL method for developing green practices and performances in a green Syst. App. 41 (9), 4245–4258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.01.005.
supply chain. Expert Syst. Appl. 42 (20), 7207–7220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Zhang, S., Lee, C.K., Chan, H.K., Choy, K.L., Wu, Z., 2015. Swarm intelligence applied in
eswa.2015.04.030. Green Logistics: a literature review. Artif. Intell. Eng. Appl. 37, 154–169. https://
Chin, T.A., Tat, H.H., Sulaiman, Z., 2015. Green supply chain management, doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2014.09.007.
environmental collaboration and sustainability performance. Proc CIRP 26, Alshubiri, F., 2017. The impact of green logistics-based activities on the sustainable
695–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.07.035. monetary expansion indicators of Oman. J. Ind. Eng. Manage. 10 (2), 388–405.
Rostamzadeh, R., Govindan, K., Esmaeili, A., Sabaghi, M., 2015. Application of fuzzy https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2173.
VIKOR for evaluation of green supply chain management practices. Ecol. Ind. 49, Lin, C., Choy, K.L., Ho, G.T., Chung, S.H., Lam, H.Y., 2014. Survey of green vehicle
188–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.045. routing problem: past and future trends. Expert Syst. App. 41 (4), 1118–1138.
Aich, S., Tripathy, S., 2014. An interpretive structural model of green supply chain https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.107.
management in Indian computer and its peripheral industries. Int. J. Procure Khan, S.A.R., Qianli, D., SongBo, W., Zaman, K., Zhang, Y., 2017. Environmental
Manage. 7(3), 239-256. 10.1504/IJPM.2014.06077 logistics performance indicators affecting per capita income and sectoral growth:
Kushwaha, G.S., Sharma, N.K., 2016. Green initiatives: a step towards sustainable evidence from a panel of selected global ranked logistics countries. Environ. Sci.
development and firm's performance in the automobile industry. J. Clean Prod. 121, Pollut. Res. 24 (2), 1518–1531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7916-2.
116–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.072. Mirzapour Al-E-Hashem, S.M.J., Rekik, Y., 2014. Multi-product multi-period Inventory
Mutingi, M., Mapfaira, H., Monageng, R., 2014. Developing performance management Routing Problem with a transshipment option: a green approach. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
systems for the green supply chain. J. Remanuf. 4 (1), 2014. https://doi.org/ 157, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.09.005.
10.1186/s13243-014-0006-z. Tsai, S.B., Wang, K., 2019. Using a novel method to evaluate the performance of human
Tseng, M.L., Islam, M.S., Karia, N., Fauzi, F.A., Afrin, S., 2019. A literature review on resources in green logistics enterprises. Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 26 (4), 629–640. https://
green supply chain management: trends and future challenges. Resour. Conserv. doi.org/10.1515/eces-2019-0045.
Recy. 141, 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.009. Searcy, C., 2016. Measuring enterprise sustainability. Bus Strateg Environ, 25(2), 120-
Santos, B.M., Godoy, L.P., Campos, L.M.S., 2019. Performance evaluation of green 133. 10.1002/bse.1861
suppliers using entropy-TOPSIS-F. J. Clean. Prod. 207, 498–509. https://doi.org/ Hammes, G., Souza, E.D., Rodriguez, C.M.T., Millan, R.H.R., Herazo, J.C.M., 2020.
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.235. Evaluation of the reverse logistics performance in civil construction. J. Clean Prod.
Govindan, K., Mina, H., Esmaeili, A., Gholami-Zanjani, S.M., 2020. An integrated hybrid 248, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119212.
approach for circular supplier selection and closed loop supply chain network Baah, C., Jin, Z., Tang, L., 2020. Organizational and regulatory stakeholder pressures,
design under uncertainty. J. Clean. Prod. 242, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. friends or foes, to green logistics practices and financial performance: investigating
jclepro.2019.118317. corporate reputation as a missing link. J. Clean Prod. 247,. https://doi.org/
Folinas, D., Aidonis, D., Malindretos, G., Voulgarakis, N., Triantafillou, D., 2014. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119125 119125.
Greening the agrifood supply chain with lean thinking practices. Int. J. Agric. Majumdar, A., Sinha, S.K., 2019. Analyzing the barriers of green textile supply chain
Resour. Gov. Ecol. 10 (2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1504/ management in Southeast Asia using interpretive structural modeling. Sustain.
IJARGE.2014.063580. Prod. Consum. 17, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2018.10.005.

12