Davide Luzzini

Supply chain management research predominantly examines sustainability from the perspective of buying firms, analyzing how procurement strategies, supplier governance, and compliance mechanisms can reduce negative environmental and social outcomes associated with their supply chains. While this approach has advanced our understanding of firm‐level practices, it suffers from a fundamental unit‐of‐analysis problem: Socio‐ecological footprints emerge from the interaction of multiple supply chains and other actors within specific localities, yet research often treats the supply chains of individual buying firms as independent units. Consequently, interventions that appear successful for individual firms may leave harm in place or merely displace it rather than resolve underlying causes. We introduce the footprint perspective as a complementary approach to sustainable supply chain management research. While the buying firm perspective usually traces supply chains from the buying firm to its suppliers, the footprint perspective begins its investigation in the localities where supply chain activities are entangled with socio‐ecological systems. This perspective treats localities as the unit of analysis, examining how interdependencies among supply chains, locality actors, and ecosystems jointly produce socio‐ecological footprints. We compare the assumptions of these two perspectives and outline an empirical playbook for putting this conceptual shift into practice.

The global climate crisis is pushing firms toward sustainable supply chain practices, with digital technology offering a vital pathway to track greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This research investigates the factors influencing the adoption of digital traceability systems for managing these emissions, focusing on implementation scope and supply chain complexity (SCC). Drawing on Institutional Theory and Transaction Cost Economics, we conducted a choice‐based conjoint experiment with managers in manufacturing sectors to capture the trade‐offs in their decision‐making process. Our results show that firms are more likely to consider technology solutions when (a) those solutions cover Scope 1, 2, and 3 GHG emissions, and (b) there is greater SCC due to ‘detail‐numerousness’ (number of elements in a system) and ‘detail‐variety’ (heterogeneity of these elements). However, dynamic complexity (changing nature of elements) has an ambiguous impact on technology adoption. “Detail‐numerousness” (e.g., number of products produced) is the most critical attribute for internal operations, while “detail‐variety” (e.g., geographical dispersion and supplier heterogeneity) has the greatest impact on upstream supply chains. This research extends the supply chain technology adoption literature by providing a nuanced empirical understanding of how distinct dimensions of SCC at both internal and upstream levels shape the adoption of digital traceability.

Supply chain management is grounded on the assumption that endless economic growth is compatible with environmental and social sustainability. Yet scholars from ecological economics question this assumption due to ever increasing evidence showing how hard it is to decouple growth from negative environmental and social externalities. In response, pressure from social movements is mounting, and the agendas of several countries already consider alternatives to growth. Therefore, this article presents a critical thought experiment for the supply chain management discipline: What are the implications of moving from the current endless growth paradigm to a post‐growth paradigm for businesses and their supply chains? Using the umbrella term “post‐growth,” this article identifies three key post‐growth principles—(i) socio‐ecological wellbeing, (ii) selective downscaling, and (iii) systems thinking—and then examines their implications for supply chain management research and practice.

Supply chains often match the supply of labour to uncertain demand by using precarious workprecarious workers. This increases flexibility and lowers costs for the supply chain by shifting risk to the workers and costs to society. Supply chains are maximizing profits, often literally, on the backs of their workers by creating serious negative externalities for society. We address this issue using a powerpower perspective because powerpower is asymmetrically oriented against workers in many supply chain contexts. This allows us to identify examples of how to reverse this trend and shift powerpower back to workers. The goal is to get to where stakeholders understand the costs and limited benefits of precarity, where we can separate the notion of flexibility from low costs, and where through a combination of incentives, policy, social norms of ethical behaviour, and consumer action, we can get to a better place than where we are now.

Purpose: This paper aims to provide a starting point to discuss how social enterprises can drive systemic change in terms of social impact through operations and supply chain management.Design/methodology/approach: This paper reviews existing literature and the four papers in this special issue and develops a conceptual framework of how social enterprises and their supply chains create social impact and further enable systematic change.Findings: Our paper finds that social impact and systemic change can be shaped by social enterprises at three different levels of analysis (organization, supply chain and context) and through three enablers (cognitive shift, stakeholder collaboration and scalability). Such dimensions are used to position current literature and to highlight new research directions.Originality/value: This paper proposes a novel understanding of operations and supply chain management in social enterprises intended as catalysts for systemic change. Based on this premise we distinguish different practices and stakeholders to be considered when studying social impact at different levels. The conceptual framework introduced in the paper provides a new pathway for future research and debate by scholars engaged at the intersection of social impact, sustainable operations and supply chain management.

The escalating complexity of supply networks is undeniable, and organizations grapple with myriad globally dispersed suppliers spanning diverse industries and operating amid volatility and uncertainty while having multifaceted interactions. In line with this, scholars have been investigating supply network complexity (SNC) for over two decades, yet the domain is not converging; definitions and operationalizations are varied, a multiplicity of theoretical perspectives exists, performance implications are inconclusive, and supply chain managers are certainly still struggling with the complexity of their supply networks. To address this critical gap, we conducted a rigorous systematic review of 116 articles and synthesized the extant research in a comprehensive nomological network of SNC. Our synthesis encompasses the following key aspects: (i) defining (sub)dimensions of SNC by reconciling diverse conceptualizations, (ii) elaborating on the direct and contingent effects of SNC by highlighting underlying mechanisms and relevant theories, (iii) identifying antecedents of SNC, and (iv) introducing a detailed categorization of SNC management practices and illustrating SNC management capability as an antecedent of such practices. We conclude by presenting an extensive research agenda illustrating the gaps in the literature and charting a path forward in relation to different themes, theories, and methods.

This chapter summarizes the main results of a qualitative study conducted in collaboration with Ashoka Spain regarding systemic change and the mechanisms to achieve it. This is part of a larger study that will be conducted over the next few months. This qualitative study compares the characteristics of systemic change in for-profit and nonprofit social enterprises with the goal of understanding the specific mechanisms put in place by the two types of organizations to achieve such deep and sustainable change.