Donna Marshall

Purpose: Just transition is a fundamental concept for supply chain management but neither discipline pays attention to the other and little is known about how supply chains can be orchestrated as socioecological systems to manage these transitions. Building from a wide range of just transition examples, this paper explores just transition to understand how to move beyond instrumental supply chain practices to supply chains functioning in harmony with the planet and its people.Design/methodology/approach: Building from a systematic review of 72 papers, the paper identifies just transition examples while interpreting them through the theoretical lens of supply chain management, providing valuable insights to help research and practice understand how to achieve low-carbon economies through supply chain management in environmentally and socially just ways.Findings: The paper defines, elaborates, and extends the just transition construct by developing a transition taxonomy with two key dimensions. The purpose dimension (profit or shared outcomes) and the governance dimension (government-/industry-led versus civil society-involved), generating four transition archetypes. Most transitions projects are framed around the Euro- and US-centric, capitalist standards of development, leading to coloniality as well as economic and cultural depletion of communities. Framing just transition in accordance with context-specific plural values, the paper provides an alternative perspective to the extractive transition concept. This can guide supply chain management to decarbonise economies and societies by considering the rights of nature, communities and individuals.Originality/value: Introducing just transition into the supply chain management domain, this paper unifies the various conceptualisations of just transition into a holistic understanding, providing a new foundation for supply chain management research.

Framing is a powerful tool shaping innovation success, failure, and transformation. However, innovation framing is not recognized as a unified domain of research and the extant literature is theoretically fragmented across diverse fields. Inconsistencies in definition and operationalization of constructs stall theoretical advancement of innovation framing theory and practice. Importantly, an understanding of the underlying mechanisms enabling framing to mediate innovation outcomes has been missing. Using a systematic literature review (SLR), we integrate diverse theoretical perspectives. Stemming from this, we develop a unified conceptual framework of innovation framing. In so doing we make three vital contributions to the field. First, we develop a typology of construct categories of innovation framing, defining these framing concepts and identifying their theoretical basis. Next, we emphasize the importance of key mechanisms (sensemaking, interpretive flexibility, consensus) in explaining innovation outcomes. Our third contribution identifies innovation stage‐specific differences in the role of framing processes, frame types and characteristics, and the temporal elements of these. Finally, we discuss the implications of our research for innovation practitioners, while concluding with a detailed agenda for future innovation framing research.

Purpose: This article explores how companies in multiple controversial industries report their controversial issues. For the first time, the authors use a new conceptualization of controversial industries, focused on harm and solutions, to investigate the reports of 28 companies in seven controversial industries: Agricultural Chemicals, Alcohol, Armaments, Coal, Gambling, Oil and Tobacco.Design/methodology/approach: The authors thematically analyzed company reports to determine if companies in controversial industries discuss their controversial issues in their reporting, if and how they communicate the harm caused by their products or services, and what solutions they provide.Findings: From this study data the authors introduce a new legitimacy reporting method in the controversial industries literature: the solutions companies offer for the harm caused by their products and services. The authors find three solution reporting methods: no solution, misleading solution and less-harmful solution. The authors also develop a new typology of reporting strategies used by companies in controversial industries based on how they report their key controversial issue and the harm caused by their products or services, and the solutions they offer. The authors identify seven reporting strategies: Ignore, Deny, Decoy, Dazzle, Distort, Deflect and Adapt.Research limitations/implications: Further research can test the typology and identify strategies used by companies in different institutional or regulatory settings, across different controversial industries or in larger populations.Practical implications: Investors, consumers, managers, activists and other stakeholders of controversial companies can use this typology to identify the strategies that companies use to report controversial issues. They can assess if reports admit to the controversial issue and the harm caused by a company's products and services and if they provide solutions to that harm.Originality/value: This paper develops a new typology of reporting strategies by companies in controversial industries and adds to the theory and discourse on social and environmental reporting (SER) as well as the literature on controversial industries.

Purpose: This impact pathways paper proposes that operations and supply chain management (OSCM) can help to ensure that the transition from a high-carbon to low-carbon fashion industry takes place in a just, inclusive and fair way. By immersion in fashion brands, suppliers and workers' realities across multiple supply chains, the authors identify challenges and issues related to just transitions, whilst proposing research pathways to inspire future OSCM research and collaboration using innovative and creative methods to answer complex questions related to just transition.Design/methodology/approach: The research the authors introduce used a multi-level field research approach to investigate multiple fashion supply chains in transition.Findings: The authors uncovered that in the pursuit of lowering carbon emissions, fast-fashion giants work with industrial associations to create top-down governance tools, leading to severe problems in supply chain data and paradoxical demands. These demands are cascaded onto the workers in these supply chains. The goals and tools dictated by the fashion giants exclude workers, whilst the physiological and psychological effects on the workers are routinely ignored. These issues impede a just transition to a low-carbon fashion industry.Originality/value: The authors introduce concepts largely missing from OSCM literature and ensure representation of the most marginalised group, supply chain workers, in a novel setting in a call for research in this emerging area.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand how supply chain actors in an Italian cashmere supply chain reacted to dependence and power use during the Covid-19 crisis and how this affected their perceptions of justice.Design/methodology/approach: The research took a case study approach exploring issues of dependence, power and justice in a multi-tier luxury cashmere supply chain.Findings: The authors found two types of dependence: Craftmanship-induced buyer dependence and Market-position-induced supplier dependence. The authors also identified four key archetypes emerging from the dynamics of dependence, power and justice during Covid-19. In the repressive archetype, buying firms perceive their suppliers as dependent and use mediated power through coercive tactics, leading the suppliers to perceive interactional, procedural and distributive injustice and use reciprocal coercive tactics against the buying firms in the form of coopetition. In the restrictive archetype, buying firms that are aware of their dependence on their suppliers use mediated power through contracts, with suppliers perceiving distributive injustice and developing ways to circumvent the brands. In the relational archetype, the awareness of craftmanship-induced buyer dependence leads buying firms to use non-mediated power through collaboration, but suppliers still do not perceive distributive justice, as there is no business security or future orders. In the resilient archetype, buying firms are aware of their own craftmanship-induced dependence and combine mediated and non-mediated power by giving the suppliers sustainable orders, which leads suppliers to perceive each justice type positively.Originality/value: This paper shows how the actors in a specific supply chain react to and cope with one of the worst health crises in living memory, thereby providing advice for supply chain management in future crises.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to compile a set of articles tackling supply chain issues in BOP contexts that address both demand and supply. Solutions are needed for global sustainability problems from medical aid and food availability to the ability to participate in supply chains for the global poor. Design/methodology/approach: The accepted articles in the special issue used a range of qualitative and quantitative methodologies to answer research questions in a variety of base of the pyramid (BOP) contexts. These approaches and results distinguish between demand (BOP market) and supply, or base of the chain (BOC), perspectives. Findings: The findings in the eight accepted marticles are interesting and applicable across different BOP contexts. Compilation of the articles into the special issue and the accompanying editorial led to a comprehensive future research agenda that addresses demand-side issues by investigating the customers in BOP markets, and supply-side issues focusing on the suppliers and intermediaries (BOC) who supply BOP markets. Future research ideas include a focus on supply chain design issues situated at the intersection of the demand (BOP) and the supply (BOC) concerns that address the needs of the world’s poorest populations. Research limitations/implications: All of the selected articleshave societal implications related to addressing the needs of BOP populations. Many of these articles also have economic and environmental implications, the other two pillars of the triple bottom line. The detailed future research agenda developed in this editorial presents implications for researchers working in emerging and BOP communities to push research forward and further develop the foundational literature in the BOP context. Practical implications: From a practical standpoint, each of the eight articles presents ideas for businesses that help address the needs of the global poor while enhancing global sustainability performance. The editorial summarizes these implications and provides new directions and examples of success in the BOP context. Managers are provided with techniques to address the supply and demand side of these growing markets. Originality/value: The overall conceptual framework and positioning of the final papers into the BOP market, BOC suppliers and a combination of the two is novel and helps provide guidance to both scholars and managers.

Purpose: Socially sustainable supply chain (SSSC) practices address pressing social issues and may provide operational benefits as well as positive impacts on society. However, due to gaps in the current knowledge, it is difficult to know what practices will provide benefits and what management orientations can maximize the impact of these practices on operational performance. The purpose of this paper is to advance the knowledge on the effect of social sustainability orientation on operational performance by examining the mediating roles of basic and advanced SSSC practices and the moderating role of long-term orientation (LTO).Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected through a survey of US-based companies about their relationships with key suppliers. Confirmatory factor analysis and multiple regression were used to test the proposed moderated mediation model.Findings: Surprisingly, sustainability orientation predicts operational performance through advanced but not basic SSSC practices. Results also indicate that the effect of sustainability orientation on operational performance is significantly moderated by LTO.Research limitations/implications: Results are limited by the US context, the cross-sectional nature of the research, the use of a single-respondent survey instrument and the challenges of measuring LTO.Practical implications: Managers and policymakers should be aware of the limitations of adopting basic SSSC practices on the performance of their operations. Advanced practices provide a more robust business case and significantly and positively impact operational performance. In addition, the interaction of a sustainability orientation and LTO can lead to even greater improvements in firms’ operational performance. Firms with the highest levels of social sustainability and LTOs attain superior operational performance.Originality/value: This study contributes to the growing literature on sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) and extends this literature by focusing on social sustainability practices, identifying specific practices that impact and the orientations that maximize operational performance. The authors contribute to the growing literature on the importance of manager’s temporal orientation and provide nuance to emerging SSCM theory by exposing the interplay of these orientations and the impact of SSSC practice adoption.

Purpose: Billions of entrepreneurs at the Base of the Pyramid (BoP) operate as small-scale producers within multi-tiered supply chain networks. Unfortunately, a majority of these entrepreneurs are simply unable to derive sufficient value from the network and are vulnerable to disasters and poverty. The purpose of this paper is to develop a typology that examines dynamic and triadic power relationships in order to create value chains for BoP producers. Design/methodology/approach: This paper builds upon the available literature and a relevant historical case study to develop a typology. The validity of the typology is ascertained by examining and comparing two current BoP silk weaver communities in India. Findings: The typology captures essential environmental variables and relates them to mediated and non-mediated forms of power which, in turn, shape the value derived from the supply chain network. Practical implications: The typology provides specific recommendations for BoP producers, such as the formation of cooperatives, engaging in political unionization and ensuring that their social networks expand beyond local communities. Originality/value: The typology brings together structuration theory and power and provides a framework for understanding supply value. This typology is generalizable to dynamic multi-tiered supply chain networks.