SCIENCEBRING   /   HAMBURG, GERMANY
Login Register
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research SCIENTIFIC IDEAS. INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES.
ISSN 2750-1396 12 issues per year · Monthly
Crossref DOI: 10.37547/ijasr
Submit Manuscript ↗

Search the Journal
Articles Published:

Sustainable and Responsible Supply Chain Architectures: Integrating Technology, Ethics, and Multi-Criteria Decision Frameworks for Resilient Healthcare and Industrial Supply Networks

Vol. 5 No. 11 (2025): Volume 05 Issue 11 Pages 145-158
Authors
  • Dr. Lucas Herrera
    University of Toronto
RESEARCH OVERVIEW

Abstract

Background: Contemporary supply chains operate within intensifying pressures: environmental sustainability, social responsibility, regulatory compliance, and the need for technological integration. The literature reveals convergent themes—traceability, ethical sourcing, multi-criteria decision support, and emergent digital infrastructures (RFID, IoT, blockchain)—yet exhibits fragmentation in methods and practical integration across sectors such as healthcare, pharmaceuticals, fashion, renewable energy, and food systems (Tan & Sidhu, 2022; Teh et al., 2019; Mejías et al., 2019; Mastrocinque et al., 2020).

Objective: This study synthesizes theoretical constructs and methodological approaches from the provided literature to propose an integrative framework for sustainable, ethically accountable, and technologically enabled supply chains. The framework unifies traceability systems, corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting, rights-based implementations, and multi-criteria decision support methods (e.g., AHP, fuzzy AHP, TOPSIS) for supplier selection and risk management.

Methods: A rigorous conceptual meta-analysis was conducted across the supplied references to extract design principles, performance metrics, decision criteria, and technology architectures. The methodological approach maps CSR themes to technical enablers (RFID/IoT, blockchain) and to decision tools (AHP variants, TOPSIS, grey-based methods), producing a layered framework with governance, technological, and analytical strata (Tate et al., 2010; Tan & Sidhu, 2022; Chowdhury, 2025; Gupta et al., 2015).

Results: The integrated model highlights five principal dimensions: (1) Governance & Compliance (regulatory GMP, CSR reporting), (2) Traceability & Transparency (RFID, IoT, blockchain), (3) Environmental & Occupational Health (HVAC energy strategies, lifecycle externalities), (4) Ethical & Human Rights Considerations (seafood and labor rights), and (5) Decision Analytics (AHP, fuzzy AHP, TOPSIS). Mapping evidence indicates complementarities—e.g., blockchain enhances immutable traceability supporting CSR disclosures; AHP-based methods effectively prioritize sustainability criteria when enriched by sensor data streams (Vaittinen, 2016; Tan & Sidhu, 2022; Chowdhury, 2025; Gupta et al., 2015).

Conclusion: The proposed architecture provides a theoretically grounded, practically actionable synthesis for organizations seeking sustainable, socially responsible, and technologically resilient supply chains. Implementation requires careful alignment with sectoral regulatory regimes, investment in capacity building, and an iterative approach to decision model calibration. Future empirical validation in multiple sectors is essential to quantify performance gains and identify socio-technical barriers.

Keywords

  • sustainable supply chains
  • RFID
  • IoT
  • blockchain
  • multi-criteria decision analysis
  • corporate social responsibility
  • human rights
  • traceability
SOURCES & CITATIONS

References

1. Tan, W.C., & Sidhu, M.S. (2022). Review of RFID and IoT integration in supply chain management. Operations Research Perspectives, 9, 100229.
2. Tate, W.L., Ellram, L.M., & Kirchoff, J.F. (2010). Corporate social responsibility reports: a thematic analysis related to supply chain management. Journal Of Supply Chain Management, 46(1), 19-44.
3. Teh, L.C., Caddell, R., Allison, E.H., Finkbeiner, E.M., Kittinger, J.N., Nakamura, K., & Ota, Y. (2019). The role of human rights in implementing socially responsible seafood. PloS One, 14(1), e0210241.
4. Chowdhury, W. A. (2025). Blockchain for Sustainable Supply Chain Management: Reducing Waste Through Transparent Resource Tracking. Journal of Procurement and Supply Chain Management, 4(2), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.58425/jpscm.v4i2.435
5. Turcsanyi, J., & Sisaye, S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and its link to financial performance: Application to Johnson & Johnson, a pharmaceutical company. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 10(1), 4-18.
6. Vaittinen, S. (2016). Supply chain management in a highly regulated environment–a Case study of supplier GMP-compliance management in the pharmaceutical industry.
7. Vakiloroaya, V., Samali, B., Fakhar, A., & Pishghadam, K. (2014). A review of different strategies for HVAC energy saving. Energy Conversion and Management, 77, 738-754.
8. Varadarajan, R. (2017). Innovating for sustainability: A framework for sustainable innovations and a model of sustainable innovations orientation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 14-36.
9. Vatovec, C., Senier, L., & Bell, M. (2013). An ecological perspective on medical care: environmental, occupational, and public health impacts of medical supply and pharmaceutical chains. EcoHealth, 10, 257-267.
10. Völker, S., & Kistemann, T. (2011). The impact of blue space on human health and well-being–Salutogenetic health effects of inland surface waters: A review. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 214(6), 449-460.
11. Yusuf, Y., Hawkins, A., Musa, A., El-Berishy, N., Schulze, M., & Abubakar, T. (2014). Ethical supply chains: analysis, practices and performance measures. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 17(4), 472-497.
12. Gupta, S.; Dangayach, G.S.; Singh, A.K.; Rao, P.N. (2015). Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Model for Evaluating Sustainable Manufacturing Practices in Indian Electrical Panel Industries. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 189, 208–216.
13. Shankar, K.; Kumar, P.; Kannan, D. (2016). Analyzing the Drivers of Advanced Sustainable Manufacturing System Using AHP Approach. Sustainability, 8, 824.
14. Mangla, S.K.; Kumar, P.; Barua, M.K. (2015). Risk analysis in green supply chain using fuzzy AHP approach: A case study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 104, 375–390.
15. Sharma, Y.K.; Yadav, A.K.; Mangla, S.K.; Patil, P.P. (2018). Ranking the Success Factors to Improve Safety and Security in Sustainable Food Supply Chain Management Using Fuzzy AHP. Materials Today: Proceedings, 5, 12187–12196.
16. Kumar, D.; Garg, C.P. (2017). Evaluating sustainable supply chain indicators using fuzzy AHP. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24, 1742–1766.
17. Mejías, A.M.; Bellas, R.; Pardo, J.E.; Paz, E. (2019). Traceability management systems and capacity building as new approaches for improving sustainability in the fashion multi-tier supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 217, 143–158.
18. Mastrocinque, E.; Ramírez, F.J.; Honrubia-Escribano, A.; Pham, D.T. (2020). An AHP-based multi-criteria model for sustainable supply chain development in the renewable energy sector. Expert Systems with Applications, 150, 113321.
19. Li, J.; Fang, H.; Song, W. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection based on SSCM practices: A rough cloud TOPSIS approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 222, 606–621.
20. Bai, C.; Sarkis, J. (2018). Integrating Sustainability into Supplier Selection: A Grey-Based TOPSIS Analysis. Technology, Economics and Development of Economy, 24, 2202–2224.
21. Shen, L.; Olfat, L.; Govindan, K.; Khodaverdi, R.; Diabat, A. (2013). A fuzzy multi-criteria approach for evaluating green supplier’s performance in green supply chain with linguistic preferences. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 74, 170–179.
22. Xu, X.; He, Y.; Ji, Q. (2021). Collaborative Logistics Network: A New Business Mode in the Platform Economy. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications.
23. Xu, C.; Wang, S. (2021). Industrial Three-Division Network System in China: Efficiencies and Their Impact Factors. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(34), 47375–47394.
24. Xue, J.; Li, G.; Li, N. (2021). Does Green and Sustainable Engagement Benefit Online Platforms in Supply Chains? The Role of Green and Public Concern. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications.
25. Yi, X. J.; Sheng, K.; Yu, T.; Wang, Y. Y.; Wang, S. H. (2020). R&D Investment and Financing Efficiency in Chinese Environmental Protection Enterprises: Perspectives of Covid-19 and Supply Chain Financial Regulation. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications.
26. Yu, M.; Cao, E. (2020). Information Sharing Format and Carbon Emission Abatement in a Supply Chain with Competition. International Journal of Production Research, 58(22), 6775–6790.
27. Zailani, S.; Jeyaraman, K.; Vengadasan, G.; Premkumar, R. (2012). Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) in Malaysia: A Survey. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 330–340.
28. Zhang, X.; Liu, S. (2021). Action Mechanism and Model of Cross-Border E-Commerce Green Supply Chain Based on Customer Behavior. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2021, 6670308.
DISCOVER RELATED RESEARCH

Similar Articles

Continue exploring the collection ↗
1-10 of 595