Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sustainable third-party reverse logistic provider selection with fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy MOORA in plastic industry

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Third-party logistic provider (3PLP) companies play a major role in supply chain management (SCM) by carrying out specialized functions—namely, integrated operation, warehousing, and transportation services. Taking sustainability issues into consideration makes reverse logistics even more significant. In this paper, a combination of sustainability and risk factors was considered for third-party reverse logistic provider (3PRLP) evaluation. Initially, fuzzy step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (Fuzzy SWARA) was applied for weighing the evaluation criteria; then, Fuzzy multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis (Fuzzy MOORA) was utilized for ranking the sustainable third-party reverse logistic providers in the plastic industry in the second step. Findings highlight that quality, recycling, health, and safety were the most important criteria in economic, environmental, and social dimensions of sustainability, respectively. Also, operational risk was found to have the highest weight among risk factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akkaya G, Turanoglu B, Öztas S (2015) An integrated fuzzy AHP and fuzzy MOORA approach to the problem of industrial engineering sector choosing. Expert Syst Appl 42(24):9565–9573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Amin SH, Razmi J (2009) An integrated fuzzy model for supplier management: a case study of ISP selection and evaluation. Expert Syst Appl 36(4):8639–8648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Amin SH, Zhang G (2012) An integrated model for closed-loop supply chain configuration and supplier selection: multi-objective approach. Expert Syst Appl 39(8):6782–6791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Amindoust A, Ahmed S, Saghafinia A, Bahreininejad A (2012) Sustainable supplier selection: a ranking model based on fuzzy inference system. Appl Soft Comput 12(6):1668–1677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Andel T (1997) Reverse logistics: a second chance to profit. Transp Distrib 38(7):61–66

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andersson D, Norrman A (2002) Procurement of logistics services—a minutes work or a multi-year project. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 8(1):3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Anttonen M, Halme M, Houtbeckers E, Nurkka J (2013) The other side of sustainable innovation: is there a demand for innovative services? J Clean Prod 45(1):89–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Aqlan F, Lam S,S (2016) Supply chain optimization under risk and uncertainty: a case study for high-end server manufacturing. Comput Ind Eng 98:78–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Autry C (2005) Formalization of reverse logistics programs: a strategy for managing liberalized returns. Ind Mark Manag 34(7):749–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Azadi M, Farzipoor Saen R (2011) A new chance-constrained data envelopment analysis for selecting third-party reverse logistics providers in the existence of dual-role factors. Expert Syst Appl 38(10):12231–12236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Azadi M, Jafarian M, Farzipoor Saen R, Mirhedayatian SM (2015) A new fuzzy DEA model for evaluation of efficiency and effectiveness of suppliers in sustainable supply chain management context. Comput Oper Res 54:274–285

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Azadnia AH, Samana MZM, Wonga KY, Ghadimi P, Zakuan N (2012) Sustainable supplier selection based on self-organizing map neural network and multi criteria decision making approaches. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences 65:879–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bai C, Sarkis J (2010) Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies. Int J Prod Econ 124(1):252–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Baležentis A, Baležentis T, Brauers WKM (2012) Personnel selection based on computing with words and fuzzy MULTIMOORA. Expert Syst Appl 39(9):7961–7967

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Baskaran V, Nachiappan S, Rahman S (2012) Indian textile suppliers’ sustainability evaluation using the grey approach. Int J Prod Econ 135(2):647–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Blanco, E (2010) Las organizaciones esta’n empezando a escuchar ideas innova doras en sus cadenas de suministro, y eso es consecuencia de mirara trave´ s de la lente de la sostenibilidad. Harvard Deusto Business Review (194) 4–9

  17. Boran FE, Genc S, Kurt M, Akay D (2009) A multi-criteria intuitionist fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method. Expert Syst Appl 36(8):11363–11368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Boukherroub, T., LeBel, L., Ruiz, A., 2015. A framework for sustainable forest resource allocation: a Canadian case study. Omega, In Press

  19. Boyson S, Corsi T, Dresner M, Rabinovich E (1999) Managing third party logistics relationships: what does it take. J Bus Logist 20(1):73–100

    Google Scholar 

  20. Brauers WKM, Zavadskas EK (2006) The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economies. Control Cybern 35(2):445–469

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Büyüközkan G, Çifçi G (2011) A novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for sustainable supplier selection with incomplete information. Comput Ind 62(2):164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Büyüközkan G, Çifçi G (2012) A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. Expert Syst Appl 39(3):3000–3011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cao H (2011) The study of the suppliers evaluating and choosing strategies based on the green supply chain management. In: International Conference on Business Management and Electronic Information IEEE 3:788–791

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chamodrakos I, Batis D, Martakos D (2010) Supplier selection in electronic market places using satisficing and fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst Appl 37(1):490–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95(3):649–655

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Chang B, Hung HF (2010) A study of using RST to create the supplier selection model using and decision-making rules. Expert Syst Appl 37(12):8284–8295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Chang C, Jiménez-Martín J, Maasoumi E, Pérez-Amaral T (2015) A stochastic dominance approach to financial risk management strategies. J Econ 187(2):472–485

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Chen YJ (2011) Structured methodology for supplier selection and evaluation in a supply chain. Inf Sci 181(9):1651–1670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Chiou, C.Y., Hsu, C.W., Hwang, W.Y. (2008) Comparative investigation on green supplier selection of the American, Japanese and Taiwanese electronics industry in China. In: International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEE, pp 1909–1914

  30. Cochran J, Ramanujam B (2006) Carrier-mode logistics optimization of inbound supply chains for electronics manufacturing. Int J Prod Econ 103(2):826–840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Colicchia C, Marchet G, Melacin M, Perotti S (2013) Building environmental sustainability: empirical evidence from logistics service providers. J Clean Prod 59:197–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Darvish M, Yasaei M, Saeedi A (2009) Application of graph theory and matrix methods for contractor ranking. Int J Proj Manag 27(6):610–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. De Brito, M. P. (2004). Managing reverse logistics or reversing logistics management? Erasmus University Rotterdam, PhD thesis

  34. Demir I, Orhan M (2003) Reuse of waste bricks in the production line. Build Environ 38(12):1451–1455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Diabat A, Kannan D, Mathiyazhagan K (2014) Analysis of enablers for implementation of sustainable supply chain management—a textile case. J Clean Prod 83:391–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Dowlatshahi S (2000) Developing a theory of reverse logistics. Interfaces 30(3):143–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Efendigil T, Önüt S, Kongar E (2008) A holistic approach for selecting a third-party reverse logistics provider in the presence of vagueness. Comput Ind Eng 54(2):269–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Eskandarpour M, Dejax P, Miemczyk J, Péton O (2015) Sustainable supply chain network design: an optimization-oriented review. Omega 85:11–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Farzipoor Saen R (2009) A mathematical model for selecting third-party reverse logistics providers. International Journal of Procurement Management 2(2):180–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Farzipoor Saen R (2010) A new model for selecting third-party reverse logistics providers in the presence of multiple dual-role factors. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46(1):405–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Feyzioğlu O, Büyüközkan G (2010) Evaluation of green suppliers considering decision criteria dependencies. Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04045-0_12

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Fleischmann M, Bloemhof-Ruwaard J,M, Dekker R, der Laan E,V, Nunen J,A, Wassenhove L,N (1997) Quantitative models for reverse logistics: a review. Eur J Oper Res 103(1):1–17

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Fleischmann M, Krikke H,R, Dekker R, Flapper S,D,P (2000) A characterisation of logistics networks for product recovery. Omega 28(6):653–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Formentini, M., Taticchi, P (2014) Corporate sustainability approaches and governance mechanisms in sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod. In Press

  45. Frostenson M, Prenkert F (2015) Sustainable supply chain management when focal firms are complex: a network perspective. J Clean Prod 17:85–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Geyer R, Jackson T (2004) Supply loops and their constraints: the industrial ecology of recycling and reuse. Calif Manag Rev 46(2):55–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ghadimi P, Heavey C (2014) Sustainable supplier selection in medical device industry: toward sustainable manufacturing. 21st CIRP Conference on Life Cycle. Engineering 15:165–170

    Google Scholar 

  48. Goebel P, Reuter C, Pibernik R, Sichtmann C (2012) The influence of ethical culture on supplier selection in the context of sustainable sourcing. Int J Prod Econ 140(1):7–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Gold S, Awasthi A (2015) Sustainable global supplier selection extended towards sustainability risks from (1+n)th tier suppliers using fuzzy AHP based approach. 15th IFAC Symposium on Information Control Problems in Manufacturing—INCOM 2015 48(3):966–971

    Google Scholar 

  50. Govindan K, Pokharel S, Kumar P,S (2009) A hybrid approach using ISM and fuzzy TOPSIS for the selection of reverse logistics provider. Resour Conserv Recycl 54(1):28–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Govindan K, Khodaverdi R, Jafarian A (2013) A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. J Clean Prod 47:345–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Govindan K, Rajendran S, Sarkis J, Murugesan P (2015) Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. J Clean Prod 98:66–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Grisi RM, Guerra L, Naviglio G (2010) Supplier performance evaluation for green supply chain management. Business Performance Measurement and Management Part 4:149–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Guarnieri P, Sobreiro V,A, Nagano M,S, Serrano A,L,M (2015) The challenge of selecting and evaluating third-party reverse logistics providers in a multicriteria perspective: a Brazilian case. J Clean Prod 95:209–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Guertler B, Spinler S (2015) When does operational risk cause supply chain enterprises to tip? A simulation of intra-organizational dynamics. Omega 57(Part A):54–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gunasekaran A, Patel C, Tirtiroglu E (2001) Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. Int J Oper Prod Manag 21(1/2):71–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Gunasekaran A, Patel C, McGaughey RE (2004) A framework for supply chain performance measurement. Int J Prod Econ 87(3):333–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Gunasekaran A, Mcgaughy RE, Ngai EWT, Rai BK (2009) E-procurement adoption in the Southcoast SMEs. Int J Prod Res 122(1):161–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Gurel O, Acar AZ, Onden I, Gumus I (2015) Determinants of the green supplier selection. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Leadership, Technology and Innovation Management. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences 181:131–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Ha SH, Krishnan R (2008) A hybrid approach to supplier selection for the maintenance of a competitive supply chain. Expert Syst Appl 34(2):1303–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Hamdan, S., Cheaitou, A (2015) Green supplier selection and order allocation using an integrated Fuzzy TOPSIS, AHP and IP Approach. In: International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, 2015, IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/IEOM.2015.7093826

  62. Handfield R, Walton SV, Sroufe R, Melnyk SA (2002) Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: a study of the application of the analytical hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 141(1):70–87

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  63. Hashemi SH, Karimi A, Tavana M (2015) An integrated green supplier selection approach with analytic network process and improved Grey relational analysis. Int J Prod Econ 159:178–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Hendricks K, Singhal V (2005) Association between supply chain glitches and operation performance. Manag Sci 51(5):695–711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Hsu C-W, Hu AH (2009) Applying hazardous substance management to supplier selection using analytic network process. J Clean Prod 17(2):255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Hussain, M., Awasthi, A., Tiwari, M.K. (2015) An ISM-ANP integrated framework for evaluating alternatives for sustainable supply chain management. Applied Mathematical Modelling, In Press

  67. Jabbour AB, Jabbour C, Govindan K, Kannan D, Arantes AF (2014) Mixed methodology to analyze the relationship between maturity of environmental management and the adoption of green supply chain management in Brazil. Resour Conserv Recycl 92:255–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Kahneman D (2011) Thinking fast and slow, vol Vol. 1. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kannan D, Khodaverdi R, Olfat L, Jafarian A, Diabat A (2013) Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making method and multiobjective programming approach for supplier selection and order allocation in a green supply chain. J Clean Prod 47:355–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Kannan D, Kannan G, Rajendran S (2015) Fuzzy axiomatic design approach based green supplier selection: a case study from Singapore. J Clean Prod 96:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Kersuliene V, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z (2010) Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). J Bus Econ Manag 11(2):243–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Khodakarami M, Shabani A, Farzipoor Saen R, Azadi M (2015) Developing distinctive two-stage data envelopment analysis models: an application in evaluating the sustainability of supply chain management. Measurement 70:62–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Kiani Mavi R (2015) Green supplier selection: a fuzzy AHP and fuzzy ARAS approach. International Journal of Services and Operations Management 22(2):165–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Kiani Mavi R, Shahabi H (2015) Using fuzzy DEMATEL for evaluating supplier selection criteria in manufacturing industries. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management 22(1):15–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Kiani Mavi R, Kazemi S, Fallahian Najafabadi A, Bemani Mousaabadi H (2013) Identification and assessment of logistical factors to evaluate a green supplier using the fuzzy logic DEMATEL method. Pol J Environ Stud 22(2):445–455

    Google Scholar 

  76. Klausner M, Hendrickson C,T (2000) Reverse-logistics strategy for product take-back. Interfaces 30(3):156–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Kuo RJ, Wang YC, Tien FC (2010) Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection. J Clean Prod 18(12):1161–1170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Kwang JK, Jeong IJ, Park JC, Park YJ, Kim CG, Kim TH (2007) The impact of network service performance on customer satisfaction and loyalty: high-speed internet service case in Korea. Expert Syst Appl 32(3):822–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Langley C,J, Allen O,R, Tyndall O,R (2002) Third party logistics study 2002: results and findings of the seventh annual study. Council of Logistics Management Publications, Illinois

    Google Scholar 

  80. Liou, J, J, H., Wang, S, H., Hsu, C, C., Yin, S, L. (2011). A hybrid model for selection of outsourcing provider. Appl Math Model. 35(10), 5121–5133.

  81. Liu HT, Wang WK (2009) An integrated fuzzy approach for provider evaluation and selection in third party logistics. Expert Syst Appl 36(3):4387–4398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Lu Y, Marais B,K, Zhang S (2014) Conceptual modeling of training and organizational risk dynamics. 3rd International Symposium on Aircraft Airworthiness (ISAA 2013) 80:313–328

    Google Scholar 

  83. Mani V, Agarwal R, Sharma V (2014) Supplier selection using social sustainability: AHP based approach in India. International Strategic. Manag Rev 2(2):98–112

    Google Scholar 

  84. Meade L, Sarkis J (2002) A conceptual model for selecting and evaluating third-party reverse logistics providers. Supply Chain Management 7(5):283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Mirhedayatian SM, Azadi M, Farzipoor Saen R (2014) A novel network data envelopment analysis model for evaluating green supply chain management. Int J Prod Econ 147(Part B):544–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Mitra S, Karathanasopoulos A, Sermpinis G, Dunis C, Hood J (2015) Operational risk: emerging markets, sectors and measurement. Eur J Oper Res 241(1):122–132

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  87. Ni J, Chu L, Yen B,P,C (2016) Coordinating operational policy with financial hedging for risk-averse firms. Omega 59(Part B):279–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Orji IJ, Wei S (2015) An innovative integration of fuzzy-logic and systems dynamics in sustainable supplier selection: a case on manufacturing industry. Comput Ind Eng 88:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Prahinski C, Kocabasoglu C (2006) Empirical research opportunities in reverse supply chains. Omega 34(6):519–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Ramos T,R,P, Gomes M,I, Barbosa-Póvoa A,P (2014) Planning a sustainable reverse logistics system: balancing costs with environmental and social concerns. Omega 48:60–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Rogers D,S, Tibben-Lembke R,S (2001) An examination of reverse logistics practices. J Bus Logist 22(2):129–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Rogers, D., Tibben-Limbke, R., (1998) Going backwards: reverse logistics trends and practices. University of Nevada, Reno, NV. Reverse Logistics Executive Council

  93. Santos, F.J.J., Camargo, H.A. (2010). Fuzzy systems for multicriteria decision making. CLEI ELECTRONIC JOURNAL, volume 13, number 3. Paper 4.

  94. Sarkis J (1998) Evaluating environmentally conscious business practices. Eur J Oper Res 107(1):159–174

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  95. Schwartz B (2000) Reverse logistics strengthens supply chain. Transp Distrib 41(5):95–100

    Google Scholar 

  96. Seitz M (2006) A critical assessment of motives for product recovery: the case of engine remanufacturing. J Clean Prod 15(11–12):1147–1157

    Google Scholar 

  97. Senthil S, Srirangacharyulu B, Ramesh A (2014) A robust hybrid multi-criteria decision making methodology for contractor evaluation and selection in third-party reverse logistics. Expert Syst Appl 41(1):50–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Shen L, Olfat L, Govindan K, Khodaverdi R, Diabatd A (2013) A fuzzy multi criteria approach for evaluating green supplier’s performance in green supply chain with linguistic preferences. Resour Conserv Recycl 74:170–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Spicer, A, J., Johnson, M, R. (2004). Third-party demanufacturing as a solution for extended producer responsibility. J Clean Prod, 12(1), 37–45.

  100. Srivastava S (2008) Network design for reverse logistics. Omega 36(4):535–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Stock O,N, Oreis N,P, Kasarda J,D (1998) Logistics strategy and structure a conceptual framework. Int J Oper Prod Manag 18(1):37–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Suyabatmaz A,C, Altekin F,T, Şahinc G (2014) Hybrid simulation-analytical modeling approaches for the reverse logistics network design of a third-party logistics provider. Comput Ind Eng 70:74–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Tavana M, Zareinejad M, Santos-Arteaga F,J, Kaviani M,A (2016) A conceptual analytic network model for evaluating and selecting third-party reverse logistics providers. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. doi:10.1007/s00170-015-8208-6

    Google Scholar 

  104. Tibben-Lembke R,S, Rogers D,S (2002) Differences between forward and reverse logistics in a retail environment. Supply Chain Management 7(5):271–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Tseng M-L (2011) Green supply chain management with linguistic preferences and incomplete information. Appl Soft Comput 11(8):4894–4903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Tsoulfas G,T, Pappis C,P (2008) A model for supply chains environmental performance analysis and decision making. J Clean Prod 16(15):1647–1657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Vatansever, K., & Uluköy, M. (2013). Kurumsal kaynak planlaması sistemlerinin bulanık AHP ve bulanık MOORA yöntemleriyle seçimi: üretim sektöründe bir uygulama. CBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2)

  108. Villanueva-Ponce R, Garcia-Alcaraz JL, Cortes-Robles G, Romero-Gonzalez J, Jiménez-Macías E, Blanco-Fernández J (2015) Impact of suppliers’ green attributes in corporate image and financial profit: case maquiladora industry. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 80(5):1277–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Vrhovec L,R,S, Hovelja T, Vavpotič D, Krisper M (2015) Diagnosing organizational risks in software projects: stakeholder resistance. Int J Proj Manag 33(6):1262–1273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Wang Y, Stein W,W, Shen B, Choi T,M (2015) Service supply chain management: a review of operational models. Eur J Oper Res 247(3):685–698

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  111. Xiangru, M. (2008) Study of evaluation and selection in third party reverse logistics provider. In Proceedings of the international seminar on business and information management pp. 518–521

  112. Yang, Y., Wu, L., 2007. Grey entropy method for green supplier selection. In: International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing. IEEE. 21–25 Sept. 2007, pp. 4682–4685

  113. Yuan L, Xiuwu L (2007) Decision support for risk analysis on dynamic alliance. Decis Support Syst 42(4):2043–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Zareinejad M, Javanmard H (2013) Evaluation and selection of a third-party reverse logistics provider using ANP and IFG-MCDM methodology. Life Science Journal 10(6s):350–355

    Google Scholar 

  115. Zhu Q, Sarkis J (2006) An inter-sectoral comparison of green supply chain management in China: drivers and practices. J Clean Prod 14(5):472–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Zouggari A, Benyoucef L (2012) Simulation based fuzzy TOPSIS approach for group multi-criteria supplier selection problems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 25(3):507–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Innovative Practice, School of Business and Law, Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup, 6027, Australia

    Reza Kiani Mavi

  2. NUS Business School, National University of Singapore, 21 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119077, Singapore

    Mark Goh

  3. Department of Industrial Management, Islamic Azad University (IAU) Qazvin branch, Barajin, Qazvin Province, Iran

    Navid Zarbakhshnia

Authors
  1. Reza Kiani Mavi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Goh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Navid Zarbakhshnia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reza Kiani Mavi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mavi, R.K., Goh, M. & Zarbakhshnia, N. Sustainable third-party reverse logistic provider selection with fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy MOORA in plastic industry. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91, 2401–2418 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9880-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9880-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation