total supply chain management || green supply chain

15

Green supply chain

Introduction

Organizations are facing increasing challenges to balance business perform-ance with environmental issues and these challenges have created a new areaof green supply chain management. Green supply chain refers to the way inwhich organizational innovations and policies in supply chain managementmay be considered in the context of the sustainable environment. If industry isseen as a complex web of buying, making, selling and delivering, then theopportunities for environmental considerations when brought into play in sup-ply chain management could not only provide sustainable environmental meas-ures but also be beneficial to both organizations and individual consumers. Theobjectives of green supply chain management are aimed at a win-win strategy.Environmental regulations are also changing the way supply chains aredesigned and managed. The problem is that the sheer number of regulations,other influences such as changing consumer sentiment, and the complexity ofglobal trade, makes it difficult for companies to decide exactly how they shouldrespond to these pressures.

Not surprisingly, there are instances in recent history where the performanceof manufacturing businesses was drastically affected due to negligence in envi-ronment and safety standards. A failure in product safety which caused deformed‘thalidomide children’ is still haunting the manufacturers. The gas explosion of1984 in Bhopal, India, which killed over 1000 people, permanently damaged thebusiness of the manufacturers. Food poisoning costs to John Farley and Westswere huge. Environmental pollution by chemical companies in New Jerseyresulted in numerous legal battles with consumers and also affected their busi-ness performances. On a global scale industrial pollution is the main contributorto the so-called ‘greenhouse’ effect and global warming.

The greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, CFCs (chlorofluro-carbons) and nitrous oxide. CFCs are produced only in industrial processes.The combustion of fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) is the major source ofmanufactured carbon emissions. Greenhouse gases allow incoming radiationfrom the Sun to pass through the atmosphere of the Earth. The Earth absorbsthe radiation and reflects it back. When this outgoing radiation meets particlesof a greenhouse gas the radiation is absorbed by the particle, and on a largescale all greenhouse gases around the Earth form a sort of warm blanket caus-ing global warming. Some scientists believe that increased emission of green-house gases, particularly carbon dioxide, are causing energy to be trapped,increasing the global temperature.

CFCs are used in aerosols, refrigerator coolants and air conditioners. They area strong contributor to the greenhouse effect but are relatively easy to regulatebecause they only result from the manufacture of refrigeration units and aerosols.Methane and carbon dioxide emissions are linked to a much larger economicinfrastructures and are more difficult to regulate. In 1997, the Kyoto Treaty wasdrawn up in Kyoto, Japan, to implement the United Nations FrameworkConvention for Climate Change. It largely binds industrial nations to reduce theemission of greenhouse gases by an average of 5.2 per cent below their 1992 lev-els over the next decade. When the USA pulled out in March 2001, the treaty wasseverely in disarray. A compromise was reached by 180 nations in July 2001 inRio de Janiro; the US government refused to sign it as it was argued that not onlywould Kyoto be bad for the US economy but it would be ineffective, becausemajor developing nations like India and China were not covered by its provi-sions. Australia also refused to agree to the treaty and more recently (2006)Canada has abandoned the specific emission targets set by the Kyoto agreement.It should be noted that India and China are two of the worlds biggest and mostrapidly growing polluters. Some environmentalists argue that emissions wouldhave to be cut by 60 per cent and the target of Kyoto is not enough. They claimgases can remain in the atmosphere for a century or more. On the other hand, notevery scientist believes that global warming is any thing more than a cyclicalphenomenon and that the temperature of the Earth rises and falls over long peri-ods of time irrespective of greenhouse gases.

Whatever the scientific evidence, or lack of evidence, sufficient number ofpeople (as evidenced by 180 countries signing the Kyoto treaty) mean that noorganization can in the long-term hope to avoid legislation and regulationsdesigned to honour the spirit of the treaty.

Our personal belief is that environment and safety are not just social or politi-cal issues; they are vital ingredients contributing to the performance of an organi-zation. In manufacturing industries, there is much scope for environment andsafety. Accidents do occur and likewise there are many opportunities to preventaccidents. Apart from humanitarian reasons it is a truism that accidents costmoney. Likewise many businesses and organizations are facing declining reservesof natural resources, increased waste-disposal costs, keener interest in theirhuman rights’ records and tighter legislation. These rising environmental pres-sures and social expectations can be turned to commercial advantage if a strategicapproach is taken to develop a ‘green’ supply chain. The strategic approach ofgreen supply chain involves complex longer-term considerations involving notjust industry but environment protection has an important international issue.Industrialized countries, including the US are spending between 0.5 and 1.5 per cent of their gross national product (GNP) on the control of pollution. It is abig subject and any attempt to make a comprehensive analysis of all the issues isbeyond the scope of this book. In this chapter, we aim to review some of the crit-ical issues and initiatives of green supply chain under the following headings:

• What is green supply chain?• Green initiatives by manufacturers and suppliers

246 Total Supply Chain Management

• Green initiatives by governments and non-profit organizations• Green initiatives by retailers• Green initiatives by consumers

What is green supply chain?

‘Green supply chain’ according to Walton et al. (1998) refer to buyer compa-nies requiring a certain level of environmental responsibility in core businesspractices of their suppliers and vendors. Many businesses have internal stan-dards, policies and/or environmental management systems (EMSs) that governtheir own environmental performance and efficiency. And it is becomingincreasingly common for organizations to advertise their standards in theirmarketing. But if their suppliers are not aware of, or do not follow these samestandards, the buying company is likely to be using products that do not meettheir standards, and in some cases could be accused of misleading advertising.

A supply chain can be complex, with environmental issues occurring at thesecond- and third-tier supplier levels.

Green supply chain concepts manage environmental impacts where theyoccur, ideally before they occur. As shown in Figure 15.1, green supply chainrecognizes the disproportionate environmental impact of supply chain processesin an organization and balances the issues arising from both sides to satisfy thestakeholders. The stakeholders in the green supply chain are not just buyers andsuppliers, they also include governments, regulatory bodies, non-profit organiza-tions and above all consumers.

Green supply chain 247

Supply chainmanagement

Environmentalmanagement

Green supply chainmanagement

Managing the flowof materials fromsupplier to end

customer, includingprocurement,transportation,

inventory,management and

production

Recognizes theenvironmental

impact of supplychain processes in

an organization

Managing theenvironmental

impact of operations,including compliance,

emissions andremediation

Figure 15.1 Green supply chain concept.

Green initiatives by manufacturers and suppliers

It is reasonable to state that manufacturing industries are major players in envi-ronment issues. But when the issues relate to safety, whether for products or

workplaces, they apply seriously to both manufacturing and service organiza-tions. Lack of safety in the product or in the workplace will inevitably costmoney. Accidents mean lost production time plus time wasting inspections bygovernment officials and perhaps legal costs as well as the cost of correctingthe situation. It has to be cheaper to do it right first time!

The Advanced Studies Centre of the Massachusetts Institute of Technologyback in 1976 studied the cause and effect of environment factors on the perform-ance of a wide range of companies from different industrial sectors. It found inall cases that those companies which were most advanced in environment protec-tion were also the most profitable. On reflection it is not surprising that an effi-cient (and profitable) company will be safety conscious and environmentallyaware and will be following best practices. It is however surprising that theinvestments for environment protection by manufacturing companies swing to the political pendulum rather than to business objective. A report by USEnvironmental Protection Agency (2000) has concluded that ‘a number of lead-ing US companies are providing increasing proof of the link between impro-ved environmental performance and financial gains’. For example, the GMCorporation reduced disposal costs by $12 million by establishing a reusable-container programme with suppliers; Commonwealth Edison saved $25 millionthrough more-effective resource management. Re-evaluating a company’s sup-ply chain – from purchasing, planning and managing the use of materials to ship-ping and distributing final products – with an emphasis on environmentalperformance leads to savings. However, environmental performance is too oftenforgotten by supply chain managers. What are supply chain managers missing?Many managers are unaware that improved environmental performance meanslower waste-disposal and training costs, fewer environmental-permitting feesand, often, reduced materials costs. In efforts to green their supply chain, somecustomers may expect suppliers to meet standards equivalent to their internalstandards. Others may request that their suppliers implement an EMS or becomecertified to other industry standards. Many environmental standards and modelsare available, from national ecolabel certifications to international standards.One of the better-known environmental standards is put forth by the InternationalOrganization for Standardization (ISO), known as ISO 14001. ‘It is becomingmore common for companies to include ISO 14001 compliance as a minimumstandard in their procurement policies’ (Darnall et al., 2006).

Both customers and their supply chains stand to gain by collaborating onenvironmental and efficiency improvements. Benefits of partnering are:

• The supplier knows the product better than the buyer and can maximize efficiencies and minimize associated wastes.

• Two or more perspectives (or different expertise areas) are better than onewhen it comes to designing greener products and processes.

• Working together strengthens the customer–supplier relationship.• Shared savings and mutual benefits make such efforts even more worth-

while.


Basu and Wright (2005) have established that environment protection relatesto pollution control in two stages. Conventional controls or ‘first generationpollution’ controls are applied to pollution in air, water and of noise created inthe manufacturing process. Such controls are usually regulated by legislation.There is also a ‘second generation pollution’ which relates to the problemscaused by the usage of certain products and chemicals over a long period. Themost widespread example of such ‘second generation pollution’ is the contam-ination of land which permeates ground water.

Causes of pollution

Pollution control engineering has essentially evolved from sanitary engineer-ing and thus the solutions are primarily concerned with effects rather thancauses, and with control rather than prevention. The overall ongoing economicimpact of pollution has been largely neglected and most of the attention ofmanufacturing companies has gone to the cost impact of pollution control.

The contamination of land is mostly caused by the disposal of solid wastesby manufacturing industries. With the introduction in the UK of the ‘land filltax’ the disposal of solid wastes by incineration will be more cost effective andenvironmentally friendly in the future.

The three main gases causing air pollution are carbon dioxide, sulphur diox-ide and nitrogen oxides. For many years the consumption of combustion fossilfuels has been releasing carbon dioxide to the atmosphere faster than it can nat-urally be absorbed by photosynthesis (provided by trees and plants). As theproportion of CO2 in the air increases, it absorbs heat and as a result the atmos-phere warms up. Sulphur dioxide resulting from the combustion of coal and oilor any sulphur burning process is another pollutant of air and one of the sub-stances causing ‘acid rain’. The damage by acid rain to plants and trees is veryevident in parts of Europe. Other acidic gases are the oxides of nitrogen result-ing from high-temperature combustion processes in power plants.

Lead is a serious pollutant (neurotoxin) affecting nerves and brain. Thesources of lead include emission from motor vehicles, lead pipes carryingdrinking water, paint and other industrial processes. The Royal Commission onEnvironmental Pollution recommended in 1983 the benefits of banning the useof lead in petrol. A second pollution bearing metal is cadmium which is usedindustrially in batteries, metal plating and micro electronics. The discharge ofcadmium from local industries in the Severn Estuary in the UK severely dam-aged the local shellfish industry. A third heavy metal is mercury, causing haz-ards to life even today. In the 1950s, the discharge of industrial effluents withhigh levels of mercury in a Japanese bay led to deformity and death for vil-lagers who ate the fish from the bay.

Another harmful mineral is asbestos, causing painful and fatal diseases suchas asbestosis and mesothelioma. Many domestic items such as textured ceiling,ovens, electrical heating equipment in the past contained asbestos. After cam-paigning by environmental pressure groups, asbestos lagging in power stationsand electric sub-stations has been gradually eliminated in the UK.


The noise levels in many ‘metal bashing’ and packaging industries causedlow performance and, more seriously, hearing impairment. Today there areestablished preventive and protective measures of noise control.

Cost of pollution

In addition to the long-term immeasurable damage done to vegetation, birds,animals and human beings by air and water pollution, there are many instancesof huge compensation bills paid by polluting industries.

The notorious case of mercury poisoning in Japan referred to above led todamages of over US $50 million (1971 value) being awarded to 700 peoplewho were crippled and to the estates of 200 people who died.

In 1978, as a result of the wreck of the oil tanker Amoco Cadiz, 200,000tonnes of crude oil was discharged into the English Channel. The FrenchGovernment presented claims amounting to $2 billion.

In 1992, Cambridge Water Company (UK) were awarded damages of £1million in compensation for the pollution of land due to tetrachloroethylene bya local leatherworks company.

Benefits of environmental protection

A sound environment protection policy of a company can earn it an extremelymarketable environment friendly image leading to higher sales and profitability.

There are also several published examples of ‘non-waste technology’ wherea project of environment control turned out to be a profit earner.


Case example: Dow Chemical

One such example is the Dow Chemical Company’s $7.2 million projectfor the re-use of cooling water which produced over 10 per cent returnon investment and considerably reduced the pollution of a neighbouringriver.

Case example: 3M Company

The famous 3P programme (Pollution Prevention Pays) of the 3MCompany brought about major savings including $2 million from theelimination of hydrocarbon wastes from a reactive costing process.When 3M instigated this programme back in 1974 the approach was tocapture and control pollutions and emissions before they could damagethe environment. This approach although effective has been changed toa philosophy of prevention rather than containment. The 3P programmenow aims to prevent pollution at source by using different materials,changing the process, redesigning the plant and equipment, and throughrecycling waste.

Environmental strategies

Royston (1979) suggested an eight-point strategy of environment protectionfor a manufacturing company:

1. Cut down waste by improving efficiency.2. Sell waste to someone else.3. ‘Build on’ extra plant to convert waste into raw materials or products which

are valuable to the company or to someone else.


Case example: Scottish distillery

Another example is a distillery in Scotland. An effluent treatment proj-ect for the control of suspended solids and BOD (biological oxygendemand) produced, with the addition of a drying plant, high quality cat-tle feed.

Case example: Texas Instruments

Texas Instruments saves $8 million each year by reducing its transitpackaging budget for its semiconductor business through source reduc-tion, recycling and use of reusable packaging systems

Case example: Pepsi-cola

Pepsi-cola saved $44 million in 2004 by switching from corrugated toreusable plastic shipping containers for 1 litre and 20 oz bottles, conserv-ing 98,000 tonnes of corrugated materials.

Case example: Dutch flower industry

About 65 per cent of cut flowers in the world are produced inNetherlands where land is limited. Mass cultivation in a confined arearesulted in fertilizers, herbicide and pesticide contamination.

To correct this problem growing was shifted to rock wool and water.Fertilizer in the water is recycled through the system to reduce waste.Water based growth also reduces the risk of installation by weeds andpests, reducing the need for chemical treatments. The new system alsogreatly reduced variations in growth conditions, greatly improving thepredictability of output.

Producers were able to increase output per space and introduce newharvesting methods to reduce costs.

4. Work with self-cleansing and dispersing power of the environment so as topermit maximum discharge or effluent.

5. Negotiate emission standards and subsidies with the authorities and thecommunity.

6. Build a treatment facility needed for residual wastes jointly with anotherenterprise or the local authority.

7. Build the plant using company staff and know how.8. Sell the acquired know how to others with the same problem.

Green initiatives by governments and non-profitorganizations

Environment protection is going in cycles without showing a continuousimprovement. In the 1970s, the environment was a political hot potato but aswe became accustomed to the issues, and without doubt some issues wereoverstated (e.g. it was widely said in the 1970s that oil would run out by 2000,and we all remember the nonsense that was the YK2000). But now since theKyoto Treaty of 1997, influenced by pressure groups such as Friends of theEarth, and well-publicized activities of Greenpeace, environment issues areagain at the forefront. The scientific evidence of global warming produced byscientists (e.g. of the Royal Society) has seriously created a sense of urgency ingovernments, including the State Governments of the USA, and non-profitorganizations worldwide.

One such non-profit organization in the UK is the National Centre forBusiness and Sustainability (NCBS) which is committed to advancing sustain-able policy solutions, and has already shown the way forward through a num-ber of ground-breaking studies. The NCBS is working with a range ofbusinesses and organizations to help integrate the principles of sustainabledevelopment into policies, programmes and decision-making processes. TheCentre does this by taking a practical approach to sustainability, combining theinspiration of the Co-operative Bank’s ethical and ecological policies with a number of practical and applied tools that help put sustainability into a working business context. The NCBS Sustainability Management servicesinclude:

• Sustainable policy generation• Sustainability appraisals• Measuring and monitoring progress• Sustainability reporting• Sustainability visioning and training

Political leaders both in government and in opposition are embedding environ-mental protection and climate change in their political agenda and proposing‘green taxes’ to control carbon emission by industries as well consumers.


A recent UK government sponsored Stern Review (2006) on ‘the economics ofthe climate change’ has concluded:

1. There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if we takestrong actions now.

2. Climate change could have very serious impacts on growth and develop-ment and if no action is taken global average temperature is likely to rise by2°C by 2035.

3. The costs of stabilizing the climate are significant but manageable (e.g. 1 per cent of global GDP) and delay will be much more costly.

4. Action on climate change is required across all countries and it need not capthe aspirations for growth of rich or poor countries.

5. Climate change demands an international response, based on a sharedunderstanding of long-term goals and agreement on framework of actions.

The UK government has set up a government-funded non-profit organizationcalled Envirowise (www.envirowise.gov.uk). Envirowise delivers a valuablegovernment-funded programme of free, confidential advice to UK businesses.This assistance enables companies to increase profitability and reduce environ-mental impact.

Many countries and regions are taking action on environment issues. TheEU, and non-members of Kyoto such as the US, Australia, China and Indiahave said that they will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The UN FrameworkConvention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol provide a basis forinternational co-operation on the climate change initiatives. Countries facingdiverse circumstances will use different approaches to make contribution totackling climate change and these approaches will have both direct and indirectimpact on supply chain management. Key elements of future internationalframeworks could include emissions trading, technology co-operation, actionto reduce deforestation and adaptation of new cleaner technologies in develop-ing countries.

Green initiatives by retailers

Global retail giants Wal-Mart and Carrefour and other supermarkets all overthe world are responding to the pressures on packaging waste reduction andother environmental issues of green supply chain.

The media reports in 2006 are loaded with announcements on ‘greening thesupply chain’ from large retail groups. Wal-Mart a US company and theworld’s largest retailer, unveiled its packaging scorecard to major supplierssuch as Proctor & Gamble, Unilever and Nestle to cut packaging. Wal-Marthopes that the scheme will reduce packaging across its global supply chain by5 per cent by 2013.

UK supermarket Sainsbury’s announced in October 2006 that 500 of itsown-brand goods would be in compostable packaging.


ASDA supermarket, a subsidiary of Wal-Mart in the UK, claimed, as anexample, that by taking pizzas out of cardboard boxes saved 747 tonnes ofcardboard in a year.

‘Friends of the Earth’, a non-profit organization in the UK, gave a cautiouswelcome to Tesco’s new environment fund of $100 million but said the super-market giant still had a very long way to go if it was serious about greening itsoperations. Tesco would need to address a number of key areas if it was seri-ous about reducing its environmental impacts. These include moving awayfrom car-dependent stores, switching from its global supply chain, radicallyimproving energy efficiency in its stores and cleaning up its supply chains.

Even the airlines, the biggest polluters of CO2 emission, have joined thebandwagon. Richard Branson committed the next 10 years of profits for Virgin –around $3 billion – to fighting global warming.

There has been stronger emphasis to introduce organic and bio products.The following case example of ‘Carrefour Bio Coffee’ illustrates that by pro-moting unbranded 500 g/1 kg coffee in bags as ‘organic coffee to support fairtrading’ in 1997 sales increased by 80 per cent in 4 years.


Case example: Carrefour Bio Coffee

Carrefour is a global hypermarket retail chain organization from Francewith a turnover over €100 billion and only second to Wal-Mart, thelargest retail company in the world.

The first shipment of coffee beans were delivered in 10 kg sacks toVitrolles, France, in 1970. The beans were roasted in store and sold in500 g and 1 kg bags. In April 1997 Carrefour launched the ‘organic’ cof-fee brand under the name ‘Carrefour Bio’ to promote organic productsand support fair trading. In 2001 it was decided to establish a ‘green sup-ply chain’ for ‘Carrefour Bio’.

The organic coffee marketed under the name ‘Carrefour Bio’ is notindexed on the world coffee market. The purchase price is approximately30 per cent higher than the average price in Mexico. The supplier is con-tracted to pay a guaranteed minimum price to producers. Producers canobtain up to 60 per cent of the value of the coffee at current internationalrates. Three thousand producers from 37 Mexican communities cultivatecoffee using organic methods. A local infrastructure has been introducedto transport people between towns and villages (a 2-hour bus ride replac-ing what was previously a 2-day walk). A health scheme has been intro-duced providing free medicine and healthcare and a consortium has beenset up to buy basic foodstuffs at cost price.

The coffee is cultivated by small farmers working for Uciri coopera-tive in Mexico using organic method of farming. Such cultivation helpsprevent the land becoming impoverished. The cultivation is carried outin accordance with French Organic Society standards without the use of

Green initiatives by consumers

Consumers have both power and responsibility to enhance the activities andeffectiveness of the green supply chain. It is the consumer who pays for the endproduct or service and it is the consumer who ultimately suffers or benefitsfrom the impact on the environment. The green initiatives from consumerscould be manifested in three ways:

1. Make your home green2. Feedback to retailers3. Reverse supply chain

‘Make you home green’ is becoming a conscious target of many consumers.This is effected in two paths. First consumers are attempting to minimize ‘car-bon emission’ by making houses and household appliances more energy effi-cient and also by moving towards eco-friendly transport. Secondly, encouragedby local authorities, consumers are making good efforts in the recycling ofhousehold wastes.

A recent survey in the UK (The Guardian, 14 November 2006) showed thatthe wasteful packaging from goods bought in the shops accounted for 33 per cent of an average household waste. According to a minister in the UKGovernment consumers should remove offending or excessive packaging andleave them at the checkout. The shoppers are further encouraged to report thestores to the trading standards in an attempt to cut the amount of unnecessaryplastics sent to landfill sites. Under a new reward system of a supermarket chainin the UK loyalty points are offered in return for not taking away plastic bags.The chain claims that it is giving out 10 million fewer carrier bags a week.


organofluoridated fertilizers or chemical pesticides for tropical forestconditions. An organic fertilizer comprising sun-dried hand pickedstoned cherries and animal waste is spread over the plants. This is theonly plant treatment used by the farmers.

Cultivation methods are monitored by an organic certification body.An agricultural education centre has also been established catering fororganic farming, animal breeding and bio culture.

‘Carrefour Bio’ coffee project appears to a win-win initiative forgreen supply chain. For Carrefour sales for the product increased from29.5 tonnes in 1997 to 54 tonnes in 2001. The fertility of the land hasbeen protected. The average income per family of producers increasedfrom €53 per year in 1985 to €1524 per year in 2000. The local commu-nities benefited from the infrastructure and facilities for transport, health-care and education. The consumers are happy with an organic product atan affordable price.

Source: Carrefour Belgium (2002)

A reverse supply chain is a process of getting goods from the customersback to the manufacturers. It is a relatively new trend in supply chain manage-ment that focuses on ‘green manufacturing’ to target recycling, recovery andremanufacturing systems. In these reverse networks consumers bring productsto a retailer or a collection centre. For example, supermarkets in Germany havea bin where customers leave used batteries. Depending on the particular prod-uct, it can be refurbished, remanufactured or recycled; making sure the physi-cal flow is efficient. It is estimated that 63 million personal computers wereobsolete (worldwide) in 2003 and about 10 million electric waste products are dumped per year in Japan. Mobile phones can be returned to the store wherethe new one is purchased. From there, the phones are resold and reused in othercountries where the technology that is being phased out in developed countriesare being introduced. Many other products have the potential for second use,including computers, auto parts, printer cartridges, refillable containers and ahost of other possibilities. In remanufacturing, reverse logistics introducesadditional challenges to planning for a closed loop supply chain. Plan, source,make and delivery of the products are affected by the reverse flow of usedproducts and materials for subsequent consumption in manufacturing of newproducts. Reverse logistics play a key role as retail organizations tend to lookat their reverse supply chains more closely to enhance customer satisfaction,cost/time efficiencies and supplier performance.


Case example: Xerox copier take-back programme

Xerox Corporation is an American document management company,which manufactures and sells a range of colour and black-and-white print-ers, multi-function systems, photo copiers, digital production printingpresses, and related consulting services and supplies. Xerox is headquar-tered in Stamford, Connecticut.

In early 1990s, Xerox launched a new initiative to take back used copiersas a source of materials for new machines. Customers like the programmebecause they no longer worry about machine disposal.

As a result, 70–90 per cent by weight of machines were re-used and72,000 tonnes were diverted from landfills in 2003. Xerox estimates that‘several millions’ were saved per year.

Summary

‘The scientific evidence is now overwhelming: climate change is a seriousglobal threat, and it demands an urgent global response’, concludes NicholasStern (2006).

Note this has been disputed by other scientists but irrespective of what webelieve the pressure is on for industry and nations to adopt a green approach tothe supply chain. In this chapter, we have attempted to present a balanced view

of various initiatives adopted by manufacturers and suppliers, government andnon-government organizations (NGOs), retailers and also consumers. Everystakeholder has a role and responsibility in ‘greening’ the supply chain. Wehave shown that there are commercial benefits in reducing wastes (e.g. exces-sive packaging). Large retailers like Wal-Mart, Carrefour and Tesco are proba-bly facing disproportionate demands from environmental pressure groups andregulatory bodies but nonetheless are showing visible efforts to respond tothese demands. As Saha and Darnton (2005) ask, ‘are companies really greenor are they pretending to be?’


total supply chain management || green supply chain

Documents