ARTICLE IN PRESS

1478-4092/$ - se

doi:10.1016/j.pu

�CorrespondE-mail addr

to@ubs.com (L1Tel.: +44 202Tel.: +44 11

Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85

www.elsevier.com/locate/pursup

Drivers and barriers to environmental supply chain managementpractices: Lessons from the public and private sectors

Helen Walkera,�, Lucio Di Sistob,1, Darian McBainc,2

aCentre for Research in Strategic Purchasing and Supply, School of Management, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, UKbUBS, 100 Liverpool Street, London EC2M 2RH, UK

cNHS PASA, Premier House, 60 Caversham Road, Reading RG1 7EB, UK

Received 25 July 2007; received in revised form 21 January 2008; accepted 23 January 2008

Abstract

This study explores the factors that drive or hinder organisations to implement green supply chain management initiatives. A literature

review identifies the main categories of internal and external drivers of green supply chain management practices, including

organisational factors, regulation, customers, competitors and society, but there is little indication of suppliers as drivers for green supply

chain management. Internal barriers include cost and lack of legitimacy, whereas external barriers include regulation, poor supplier

commitment and industry specific barriers. An explorative study is conducted based on interviews from seven different private and public

sector organisations. Encouragingly, across the organisations, more drivers than barriers to environmental supply chain management are

identified. Organisations seem to be more influenced by external rather than internal drivers. The barriers to environmental supply chain

management experienced by organisations tend to be both internal and external.

r 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Sustainable; Environmental; Green; Supply chain; Public; Private

1. Introduction

Today as never before people are concerned with theenvironment and climate change (Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change, 2007). In the field of business andmanagement, there is an increasing onus on the role oforganisations in society (McWilliams and Siegel, 2000;Strandberg, 2002), and their responsibilities to minimiseimpacts upon the environment (Hart, 1995; Henriques andSadorsky, 1999). One aspect of this is green supply chainmanagement issues, and how organisations can maximisethe potential of their suppliers to adopt green supply chainmanagement practices (Srivastava, 2007; Zhu et al., 2005).Examples of green supply chain management practices

e front matter r 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

rsup.2008.01.007

ing author. Tel.: +441225 383151; fax: +44 1225 383223.

esses: H.L.Walker@bath.ac.uk (H. Walker), Lucio.DiSis-

. Di Sisto), Darian.McBain@pasa.nhs.uk (D. McBain).

7568 9389; fax: +44 20 7567 2425.

8 980 8600; fax: +44 118 980 8653.

could include reducing packaging and waste, assessingvendors on their environmental performance, developingmore eco-friendly products and reducing carbon emissionsassociated with transport of goods. In some instances,improving environmental supply has been seen as beneficialas it can reduce costs and improve organisationalperformance (Carter et al., 2000; Hervani and Helms,2005), or enhance a firm’s reputation (Wycherley, 1999).Others have viewed environmental supply initiatives withmore scepticism, as reactive to government environmentalregulation such as cutting down on waste (Porter and Vande Linde, 1995), or as simple a ‘greenwash’ or PR exercise(Greer and Bruno, 1996). This study aims to look beyondthe rhetoric and investigate the real as opposed to espousedreasons for organisations engaging in green supply chainmanagement practices.The majority of studies of environmental supply chain

management initiatives have been conducted in the privatesector. This is unfortunate, as the public sector may, byvirtue of its being concerned with societal development and

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8570

‘well-being’, be a setting conducive to environmentalsupply projects. It is difficult to interpret whether thepreference for private sector studies indicates a lack ofenvironmental supply practices in the public sector, or thatthe public sector is simply being under-researched. Rarely,studies attempt to include both private and public sectorviews of greening the supply chain (New et al., 2002), andthis study adopts such an approach. This study contributesto environmental supply literature and seeks to answer theresearch questions:

�

What drives public and private sector organisations tointegrate environmentally friendly practices in theirsupply chains? � What are the barriers to environmentally friendly

practices in the supply chain?

This paper seeks to make the following contributions tothe green supply chain management literature. It seeks toinvestigate whether organisations are influenced more byinternal or external factors when they embark on environ-mental supply projects. It also investigates whetherorganisations perceive more drivers or barriers to environ-mental supply projects.

The paper is structured as follows. A literature reviewfollows that identifies and groups drivers and barriers togreen supply chain management practices. The methodol-ogy for the study is then presented. The next sectionoutlines the findings of the study. Identified drivers andbarriers to green supply chain management are thendiscussed in the context of the literature. Finally, conclu-sions are drawn, including limitations of the research andfuture research directions.

2. Literature review

This literature review considers in turn drivers andbarriers to environmental supply chain management. Theliterature on drivers for greening purchasing and supplypractices is reviewed in the next section, and grouped intointernal and external drivers. Internal drivers are describedhere as organisational factors, and the external driversinclude regulation, customers, competition, and society.

2.1. Drivers of environmental supply chain management

Table 1 summarises the main drivers for green supplychain management identified through the existing body ofliterature and groups them into five major categories. Italso distinguishes between whether the studies wereconducted in the public or private sector, and the methodof investigation. A striking feature that the table reveals isthe relative lack of empirical research identifying theinfluence of suppliers as driving force for green supplychain management projects.

2.2. Internal drivers

2.2.1. Organisational factors

There is a range of different organisation-related greensupply chain management drivers. Personal commitment ofindividuals (including founder and owner) has been foundto be positively related to green supply chain management(New et al., 2000). Having analysed a leading organisationin the environmental field, Wycherley (1999) found that theenvironmental activities undertaken at the site were seen asa ‘way of life’. The personal and ethical values of thefounder of the company filtered through the wholeorganisation. Interestingly, not top management butmiddle management’s support is positively related toenvironmental purchasing (Carter et al., 1998). Opera-tional and environmental improvement has been found tobe positively related to employee involvement (Hanna etal., 2000).To successfully drive green supply chain management

practices, personal commitment and impetus have notnecessarily resided at top-management level (Drumwright,1994). In fact, often the so-called policy entrepreneurs orvalue champions were in staff positions. The existence of asingle policy entrepreneur is a necessary but insufficientcondition for the deployment of environmentally friendlypractices across a wider range of value chain activities(Handfield et al., 1997). The personal motivation of skilfulpolicy entrepreneurs ranges from intrinsic reward (Drum-wright, 1994) to improving their position within theircompany (New et al., 2000).The desire to reduce costs represents a common driving

force for environmental supply projects (Carter andDresner, 2001; Green et al., 1996; Handfield et al., 1997).Throughout a product’s life cycle, pollution reflects hiddencosts in the form of wasted resources and effort (Porter andVan de Linde, 1995). By embracing the concept ofpollution prevention, which uses such methods as materialsubstitution and closed-loop processes, pollution and thuscosts can be prevented. In Handfield et al.’s (1997) study,the company that excelled in various green supply chainmanagement activities was driven neither by environmentalcompliance nor by a policy entrepreneur. The initiativeswere often not even immediately apparent to customers.Instead, these initiatives were driven by a focus on costreduction, waste elimination, and quality improvement.Environmental performance has been found to drivesuperior quality (Pil and Rothenberg, 2003). An increasedpressure from investors has also been observed in thedevelopment of environmental policies (Green et al., 1996;Trowbridge, 2001). Although investors may not be purelyinternal to the firm, they are often not entirely externaleither, which is why they are discussed here as part ofinternal drivers.In sum, an organisation’s internal drivers towards

environmental supply chain management practices includethe personal commitment of leaders, middle management,‘policy entrepreneurs’, and investors. Internal organisa-

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1

Literature review of drivers of green supply chain management

Drivers for green supply chain management Reference Priv. Publ. Research methodology

Internal

Organisation-related

Skillful policy entrepreneurs Drumwright (1994) � � Qualitative/interviews

Desire to reduce costs, pressure from investors, manage economic risk Green et al. (1996) � Case study/interviews

Desire to reduce costs, improve quality, values of the founder Handfield et al. (1997) � Case study/interviews

Extension of founder’s value Wycherley (1999) � Case study/interviews

Values of owner, managers improving position in company New et al. (2000) � � Case study/participation

Employee involvement Hanna et al. (2000) � Survey/questionnaire

Desire to reduce costs Carter and Dresner (2001) � Case study/interviews

Investor pressure Trowbridge (2001) � Case study

Improve quality Pil and Rothenberg (2003) � Survey/questionnaire

External

Regulatory

Legislative and regulatory compliance Green et al. (1996) � Case study/interviews

Legislative and regulatory compliance Walton et al. (1998) � Case study/interviews

Legislative and regulatory compliance Beamon (1999) � Literature review

Legislative and regulatory compliance Hall (2001) � Case study/interviews

Legislative and regulatory compliance Min and Galle (2001) � Survey/questionnaire

Proactive action pre-regulation Carter and Dresner (2001) � Case study/interviews

Proactive action pre-regulation Bowen et al. (2001a, b) � Interviews/questionnaire

ISO 14000 certification Montabon et al. (2000) � Survey/questionnaire

Regulatory compliance Zhu and Sarkis (2006) � Survey/questionnaire

Customers

Pressure by customers to green supply chain Lamming and Hampson (1996) � Qualitative/interviews

Pressure by customers to green supply chain Green et al. (1996) � Case study/interviews

Pressure by customers to green supply chain Handfield et al. (1997) � Case study/interviews

Pressure by customers to green supply chain Walton et al. (1998) � Case study/interviews

Pressure by customers to green supply chain New et al. (2000) � � Case study/participation

Pressure by customers to green supply chain Hall (2001) � Case study/interviews

Customer demand Carter and Dresner (2001) � Case study/interviews

Collaborate with customers Klassen and Vachon (2003) � Survey/questionnaire

E-logistics and environment Sarkis, 2003 � Case study/interviews

Marketing pressures Zhu and Sarkis (2006) � Survey/questionnaire

Competition

Gaining competitive advantage Lamming and Hampson (1996) � Qualitative/interviews

Gaining competitive advantage Sharma and Vredenburg (1998) � Case study/survey

Gaining competitive advantage New et al. (2000) � � Case study/participation

Gaining competitive advantage Sarkis (2003) � Survey/questionnaire

Gaining competitive advantage Noori and Chen (2003) � Case study/interviews

Gaining competitive advantage Zhu and Sarkis (2006) � Survey/questionnaire

Gaining competitive advantage Ferguson and Toktay (2006) � Modelling

Improve firm performance Porter and Van de Linde, 1995 Industry analysis

Improve firm performance Carter et al. (2000) � Survey/questionnaire

Improve firm performance Melnyk et al. (2003) � Survey/questionnaire

Improve firm performance Gonzalez-Benito (2005) � Industry analysis

Improve firm performance Chen (2005) � Literature review

Improve firm performance Rao and Holt (2005) � Survey/questionnaire

Society

Stakeholders can encourage environmental strategy Sharma and Vredenburg (1998) � Survey/questionnaire

Potential for receiving publicity Wycherley (1999) � Case study/interviews

Public pressure Beamon (1999) � Literature review

Reduce risk of consumer criticism New et al. (2000) � � Case study/participation

Non-economic stakeholders Delmas (2001) � Survey/questionnaire

Pressure by environmental advocacy groups Hall (2001) � Case study/interviews

Suppliers

Collaborate with suppliers Klassen and Vachon (2003) � Survey/questionnaire

Supply integration Vachon and Klassen (2006) � Survey/questionnaire

H. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 71

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8572

tional drivers include focusing on cost reduction throughminimising waste and pollution, often leading to qualityimprovements.

2.3. External drivers

2.3.1. Regulation

A significant body of research indicates that governmentregulation and legislation is a major driver for companies’environmental efforts (Beamon, 1999; Green et al., 1996;Handfield et al., 1997; Walton et al., 1998; Zhu et al.,2005). A buying firm’s involvement in green purchasing ispositively related to their perception of the importance ofenvironmental compliance (Min and Galle, 2001). How-ever, compliance with environmental legislation is noguarantee for improved environmental performance (Bo-wen et al., 2001a; Carter and Carter, 1998) Compliance-driven companies, which were in a reactive mode, ‘‘did notappear to have integrated environmental concerns intotheir value chain processes as thoroughly as companieswhich were initially motivated to do so.’’ (Handfield et al.,1997, p.306).

Proactive efforts towards environmental regulation aremore likely to be drivers of successful green supply chainmanagement projects (Bowen et al., 2001a; Carter andDresner, 2001). Environmental regulations can be seen as amotivator to innovate and reduce the environmentalimpact at low cost, rather than a cause for litigation(Porter and Van de Linde, 1995). They argued that a viewof ‘ecology versus economy’ is wrong, because the requiredinnovation for meeting regulation sparks offsets, such asmore effective material usage, better production creation orimproved product yields. Conversely it has been arguedthat win-win situations exist, but are very rare and ‘‘willlikely be overshadowed by the total cost of a company’senvironmental program.’’ (Walley and Whitehead, 1994, p.46). Win-win situations may be becoming progressively lessapparent for many companies, which implies a conflictbetween profitability and environmental performance(Hussain, 1999).

In sum, external regulation and legislation appears to bea strong driver for environmental supply chain projects,particularly if companies are proactive and innovative intheir approach to regulatory compliance.

2.3.2. Customers

The literature points to several interesting issues regard-ing customers as a driving force for green supply chainmanagement practices. In investigating the role of purchas-ing in environmental management, it was found thatcustomer demands that take a long-term supply chainperspective have a more positive influence on environ-mental management in contrast to customer requests whichinvolve an unreasonable timeframe (Carter and Dresner,2001).

The ways in which customers drive green supply chainmanagement projects varies significantly. In a study of the

furniture industry, customers (manufacturers of furniture)encouraged suppliers to improve their environmentalperformance (Handfield et al., 1997). These customerswere in turn driven by end-consumers requesting moregreen products. Similarly, vehicle manufacturers encour-aged strategic suppliers to obtain accreditation, such as theEco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) (Lammingand Hampson, 1996).Customers exert pressure on organisations to engage in

environmental supply chain practices (Green et al., 1996;New et al., 2000). Small companies are especially underpressure from their customers (Hall, 2001). Hall’s researchof supermarkets in the UK illustrated that being a largeretailer is a both a blessing and a curse. On one hand,supermarkets are in the position to influence control overtheir suppliers. On the other hand, they must takeresponsibility for their suppliers’ actions, as they are morelikely to draw media attention. Non-organisational stake-holder groups can and do leverage on this fact byrequesting and pressuring supermarkets to address envir-onmental concerns, rather than going after thousands ofindependent suppliers (Hall, 2001). High-profile firms areoften under considerable pressure from a range ofstakeholder groups. The amount of pressure firms experi-ence on environmental issues can partially be explained bytheir environmental visibility (Bowen, 2000).In sum, a further external driver is the customer,

influenced in turn by the end-consumer. Small companiesare under particular pressure from their customers.

2.3.3. Competitors

Several authors identified competition as a driver forgreen supply chain management practices. Competitors, aspotential environmental technology leaders, may be able toset industry norms and/or legal mandates and thus clearlyhave the ability to drive environmental innovation(Henriques and Sadorsky, 1999). A proactive environmen-tal strategy can help a firm to gain competitive advantagethrough the development of supply management capabil-ities (Ferguson and Toktay, 2006; Sarkis, 2003; Sharmaand Vredenburg, 1998). A policy of environmentalpurchasing may not be undertaken because of a desire to‘save the world’, but because it reflects a way to gaincompetitive advantage, improving the financial perfor-mance of the firm (Gonzalez-Benito and Gonzalez-Benito,2005; Porter and Van de Linde, 1995; Rao and Holt, 2005).In sum, external competitors can also act as a driver forgreen supply chain management projects, for firms seekingcompetitive advantage and to improve their performance.

2.3.4. Society

The deterioration of the environment over recentdecades has drastically increased the public’s awarenessof environmental issues. The public is increasingly influ-enced by a company’s reputation with respect to theenvironment when making purchasing decisions (Drum-wright, 1994). They demand more environmentally friendly

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 73

products (Handfield et al., 1997) and are more sociallyconscious, for example the public now takes into accountwhat firms buy and from who they buy (New et al., 2000).Marketing pressures have also been found to influencegreen supply chain management (Zhu et al., 2005).

Public pressure and stakeholders are causing firms toreview their environmental supply practices (Beamon,1999; Delmas, 2001; Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998) andis most visible from activist campaigners, non-governmen-tal organisations (NGOs) or green pressure groups (Hall,2001; Trowbridge, 2001). These groups cannot be ignoredanymore, as they have the influence to seriously embarrassorganisations (Gabriel et al., 2000).

The threat of increased environmental awareness alsocreates an opportunity for companies to win newcustomers by dealing in an exemplary way with environ-mental issues. In fact, it can be a way to increase publicity(Wycherley, 1999). However, such an approach can berisky, as all a company’s actions and transactions areviewed under a magnifying glass, and the so-calledenvironmentally friendly policies can easily be misinter-preted as corporate greenwash (Greer and Bruno, 1996) orsimply as paying green lip service.

In sum, external societal drivers include increasing publicawareness, consumer demand for environmentally friendlyperformance, and the influence of NGOs concerned withcorporate greenwash.

2.3.5. Suppliers

There was a lack of previous research that identifiedsuppliers as a key driver of environmental supply chainmanagement practices. It has been suggested that supplierscan help to provide valuable ideas used in the implementa-tion of environmental projects, but they generally do notact as a direct driving force (Carter and Dresner, 2001).The lack of previous empirical research may be becausethis driver has yet to be investigated, or because supplierssimply do not hold much sway with environmentalsupply practices. However, whilst suppliers may not bethe drivers, integration and cooperation in supply chainscan support more effective management of environmentalissues (Klassen and Vachon, 2003; Theyel, 2001; Vachonand Klassen, 2006). A collaborative paradigm has beenused to explore green supply chain management practicesin manufacturing plants (Vachon and Klassen, 2006). Itwas found that greater supply chain integration can benefitenvironment management in operations. As the supplybase was reduced, the extent of environmental collabora-tion with primary suppliers increased.

2.4. Barriers to green supply chain management

In addition to identifying drivers of green supply chainmanagement practices, the literature review gave anopportunity to identify barriers, which are summarised inTable 2.

One observation from Table 2 is that there seem to besignificantly fewer studies of barriers compared to thenumber investigating drivers listed in Table 1. The reasonfor this is unclear; it may be that green supply chainresearch simply tends to unearth more drivers thanbarriers. It could be because writers in the field prefer thepositive onus of researching and reporting drivers ratherthan the barriers to green supply chain management.Alternatively, there may be social desirability bias in thisfield of investigation, with organisational participants inresearch preferring to emphasise drivers rather thanbarriers.A further observation is that some of the drivers

identified can also act as barriers. For example,regulation can help or hinder green supply chainmanagement (Porter and Van de Linde, 1995), acting asa catalyst for proactive firms or perceived as a restraint byothers.What stands out from comparing the literature in Tables 1

and 2 is that the majority of barriers to green supply chainmanagement identified in Table 2 tend to be internal ratherthan external, whereas in Table 1, more external than internaldrivers are identified. The literature on internal and externalbarriers is reviewed below.

2.5. Internal barriers

2.5.1. Costs

Consumer desire for lower prices may inhibit greensupply chain management (Orsato, 2006). An investigationof green purchasing practices in US firms revealed that costconcerns are the most serious obstacle for taking environ-mental factors into account in the purchasing process (Minand Galle, 2001).Incurring costs are even more significant for SMEs

which have generally less resources available and thus aremore vulnerable (Hervani and Helms, 2005; Wycherley,1999). Costs can function as a barrier especially if peopleact with the fixed trade-off in mind of ecology versuseconomy (Porter and Van de Linde, 1995).To change the mindset, training has been recommended

by many researchers as an effective antidote against‘environmental illiteracy’ (Bowen et al., 2001b; Carterand Dresner, 2001). One study found that purchasingmanagers are unsure of how to incorporate ethical issues intheir buying (Cooper et al., 2000). In terms of socialresponsible buying, it has been observed that:

Even when they recognize the relevance of corporatesocial responsibility, many purchasing managers do notknow how to concretely and systematically includesocial issues into purchasing decisions. They are used totackl(ing) mainly efficiency and governance issues intheir interactions with suppliers, and have little experi-ence with broader, social demands. (Maignan et al.,2002, p. 642)

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 2

Literature review of barriers of green supply chain management

Barriers to green supply chain management Reference Priv. Publ. Research methodology

Internal

Costs

Cost concern hinders Wycherley (1999) � Case study/interviews

Lack of understanding of how to incorporate green into buying Cooper et al. (2000) � Survey/questionnaire

Focus on cost reductions at expense of green practices, lack of

management commitment, lack of buyer awareness

Min and Galle (2001) � Survey/questionnaire

Lack of training Bowen et al.

(2001a, b)

� Interviews/questionnaire

Lack of training and commitment Carter and Dresner

(2001)

� Case study/interviews

Costs hinder greening in forest industry Caro et al. (2003) � Survey/modelling

Accounting methods limit green reporting Rao and Holt (2005) � Survey/questionnaire

Costs especially for SMEs Hervani and Helms

(2005)

� Survey

Pressure for lower prices Orsato (2006) � Case studies

Lack of legitimacy

PR exercise as greenwash Greer and Bruno

(1996)

� Literature review

External

Regulation

Inhibits innovation Porter and van de

Linde (1995)

� Case studies

Poor supplier commitment

Unwilling to exchange information Wycherley (1999) � Case study/interviews

Industry specific barriers

Different sectors have different challenges Zhu and Sarkis

(2006)

� Case study/interviews

H. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8574

2.5.2. Lack of legitimacy

One view of green supply chain management is thatcompanies do not change practice but merely advertise thatthey do, creating a greenwash (Greer and Bruno, 1996).Some people have a very unimpassioned view aboutenvironmental issues (Fineman, 1997), and there is oftena problem with management commitment (Min and Galle,2001). A way to overcome this internal lack of legitimacyof the issue is to make other people sympathetic to theproject and thus establish buy-in (Carter and Dresner,2001).

2.6. External barriers

2.6.1. Regulation

One of the drivers of environmental supply chainmanagement can also act as a barrier. Environmentallegislation and regulation can inhibit innovation byprescribing best available techniques and setting unreason-able deadlines (Porter and Van de Linde, 1995).

2.6.2. Poor supplier commitment

In analysing relationships between one customer andtwenty suppliers it was found that confidentiality was a

major difficulty in green supply chains (Wycherley, 1999).Companies are often unwilling to exchange information ongreen supply for fear of exposing weaknesses or givingother companies competitive advantage.Several authors advocated adopting cooperative custo-

mer–supplier relationships, underlining the resulting en-hanced organisations’ abilities in managing environmentalissues more effectively (Klassen and Vachon, 2003; Noci,1997; Theyel, 2001; Vachon and Klassen, 2006). In anenvironmental study based on chemical firms in the US, itwas found that firms whose environmental strategycomprises close supply chain relations are likely to beleaders in waste reduction and environmental innovation(Theyel, 2001).

2.6.3. Industry specific barriers

It has been found that companies in different industrieshave differing drivers, barriers and practices (Zhu andSarkis, 2006). These can influence how reactive orproactive firms in a particular sector are to environmentalsupply.Having reviewed and grouped the literature into the

main drivers and barriers of the integration of ‘green’ intothe supply chain, our study goes on to conduct an empirical

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 75

investigation of barriers and enablers to environmentalsupply chain management. The next section describes theresearch methods employed.

3. Method and analysis

In this study, an explorative study was conducted basedon interviews from seven different organisations, to explorebarriers and drivers to green supply chain managementpractices. Seven organisations agreed to participate, havingbeen approached through consultation with two experts ingreen supply chain management, to include large publicand private sector organisations that might be particularlyinformative on green supply chain management issues, andthat the experts had existing links with to facilitate access.Company names were anonymised to encourage opennessof response. All organisations were from the UK.

The unit of analysis for the study was green supply chainmanagement projects or initiatives that the organisationengaged in. Participants were given the example:

In this context green supply chain management practicesare understood as supply management activities thatattempt to improve the environmental performance ofpurchased inputs, or of the suppliers that provide them.Projects might entail source reductions activities such as(1) recycling, reuse, input material purification, low-densitypackaging design; (2) environmental data gathering aboutvendors, products or processes; (3) waste eliminationefforts such as biodegrading, non-toxic incineration.

An interview protocol was developed on the basis of thereviewed literature and discussions with the two greensupply chain management experts, to explore barriers anddrivers to green supply chain management practices. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with at least onesenior manager in each organisation. Respondents weresenior purchasing managers and sustainable procurementadvisers. A total of eleven informants were interviewedface-to-face across the seven organisations, with eachinterview lasting for about one hour. All interviews weretaped and transcribed. Secondary data were collected suchas annual environmental and financial reports, environ-mental policies, supplier evaluation questionnaires andinternal newsletters. The interview format covered thefollowing areas (full interview questions are listed inAppendix A):

�

Organisation background � Objectives and attitude towards environmental issues � Green supply chain management project description � Contextual situation � Main drivers behind project � Support by management and other departments � Inhibitors and techniques to overcome them � Ways of measuring the impact of the green supply chain

management project

� Lessons learnt

The transcripts were coded using themes identified in theliterature and from actual terms used by interviewees. Twoof the authors independently coded and compared theircoding structures to ensure similar themes were emerging.To enhance comparability, a pre-structured outline wasemployed, which functioned as a ‘shell’ for the gathereddata (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Quotes which bestexplained a particular situation were chosen to illustratekey points. Matrices were developed to summarise thefindings, to enable comparison across the data and castlight on possible patterns that could emerge from thefindings. The analysis was conducted iteratively throughthe course of data collection. Findings were triangulatedacross data sources and feedback was sought frominformants.

4. Findings

Seven organisations were investigated in the study. Table3 presents some basic information about the sevenorganisations with respect to their size, contextual situa-tion, environmental policies and activities. All seveninvestigated organisations turnover at least £350m peryear or operate with an annual budget of at least £775million. The number of suppliers that provide goods andservices to these organisations varies from 250 to severalthousand.Brief vignettes follow of the organisations and their

projects.

4.1. NHS trust alpha

NHS trust Alpha employs 6500 people and has aturnover of £350 million per year. The supplier basecomprises 2500 suppliers, many of which are very smallsuppliers. In fact, 100 suppliers account for approximately80% of the expenditure. There is a growing awareness atthe trust of the need to play a more proactive role in thenotion of responsible corporate citizenship. The effort ofseeking the accreditation according to the ISO 14001standard underpins this movement. Furthermore, trustAlpha holds an annual general meeting with the public toinform different stakeholders about the monitored resultsand the impact that the trust is having on the environment.The environmental improvement programme at trust

Alpha is a UK pilot scheme which was initiated in a jointco-operation between CoGov, EnergyChar and CityPart-nership, and supported by RegionalAgency. CoGov is anindependent company funded by the Government, with amission to help the UK move to a low carbon economy.EnergyChar is a company limited by guarantee which hasgained charitable status. The corporate goal is to driveforward the climate change agenda within city Alpha andto offer a platform for partnership across different sectorswithin that city. RegionalAgency is a regional developmentagency.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 3

Descriptive information about case organisations

NHS Trust

Alpha

NHS HC Beta GovPA PublicB Jojoba Electroment FoodRet

Public or private org. Public Public Public Public Private Private Private

Annual turnover £350m £775m budget £8 bn budget £800m budget £700m £41 bn £4.6 bn

Number of employees 6500 10,000 6000 10,000 6000 140,000 56,000

Number of suppliers 2500 3000 Thousands 3600 250 410,000 Thousands

Environmental policy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

EMS accreditation ISO 14001 in

progress

No ISO 14001 in

progress

ISO 14001 (EMAS in

progress)

No (though in line

with ISO 14001)

ISO 14001 No

Publication

environmental

performance

Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes

H. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8576

The objective of the project is to improve the relation-ship between suppliers and trust Alpha, as well as to fulfiljoint goals in productivity and environmental performance.Furthermore, it is envisaged that as a result of the project,ten companies will obtain accreditation of their Environ-mental Management System (EMS) by standards such asISO 14001. The project functions also as an educationscheme, increasing awareness of the companies aboutcurrent environmental legislations and available servicesthat could help them to improve their performance inenvironmental and financial terms.

4.2. County healthcare community Beta

County healthcare community Beta is an agglomerationof five NHS trusts in county Beta. The healthcarecommunity employs over 10,000 people and operates withan approximate countywide annual budget of £775 million.In any year, over 3000 suppliers provide goods and servicesto the five NHS trusts. Despite considerable effortstowards implementing green supply practices healthcarecommunity Beta has not adopted a formal EMS. This ismainly due to the relative small size of each trust and thelimited resources that are available to them. Each of thefive trusts within the health community has an environ-mental policy in place (one in draft) and reports on theirenvironmental efforts through annual reports and generalmeetings to public and other stakeholders, as well as via thepress and awareness events. These reports and events entaildescriptions of activities and projects that are beingundertaken, rather than reporting a set of environmentalperformance measures.

The sustainable food procurement programme is aninitiative committed to local procurement and thusinvestment in the local economy. The basic idea is thatby buying local food, the health of the local community ispositively influenced through a number of factors. Firstly,environmental damage can be minimised through reducedtransport (food miles) and packaging. Secondly, the largeamounts spent by the healthcare provider on foodprocurement can help to regenerate local areas by creating

jobs and thus boosting the local economy. The stimulationof the local economy has a significant impact on the healthstatus of the local community, as it is recognised thatunemployment rates are inversely correlated with thehealth status of the population. Finally, the provision ofnourishing local meals helps patients recover faster andkeeps staff healthy.

4.3. GovPA

GovPA is a government authority procurement agencywith an annual budget of roughly £8 billion and aworkforce of approximately 6000 people. Even though avast majority of its business is conducted with one primecontractor, the agency has thousands of suppliers. GovPAhas an environmental policy in place and is workingtowards ISO 14001 accreditation. However, the considera-tion of environmental criteria in the procurement process isrelatively new for GovPA. The agency does not publiciseits environmental performance at the moment and theattitude towards environmental reporting may be describedas reactive.The project concerns part of the procurement process for

a very expensive product. The procurement of Item A is anextensive, multimillion pound contract. Only a very limitednumber of suppliers have the capability to deliver Item Aaccording to the requirement specifications. The complexnature of Item A is evident from the manufacturingprocess, which requires approximately 7 years.For the initial tender several consortia bid in response to

the invitation. Environmental impact assessments were notincluded in the requirement specification document.Eventually, a partnership comprising two major supplierswas selected under influence of political reasons. When thecontract was placed, the GovPA project team includedspecific environmental requirements for the consortium toconsider and requested information concerning severalenvironmental issues. The people involved in the projectconsidered running a pilot, as it was a novelty for GovPA.At that time, the climate in the organisation was notreceptive towards pilot initiatives, as it had undergone a

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 77

high number of change management initiatives and pilotprogrammes. Hence, the project team decided against it, asthey did not want to associate the project with a pilot. Asthe sustainable procurement manager stated, ‘‘therefore weimmediately went for a live rollout, which we later refined’’.

4.4. PublicB

PublicB is a government agency and leading body forprotecting and improving the environment in England andWales. The agency operates with an annual budget ofapproximately £800 million and employs over 10,000people. The EMS at PublicB is accredited by ISO 14001and the agency is also striving to obtain the EMASaccreditation. PublicB has 3600 suppliers and the results ofthe agency’s operations are published annually.

The project undertaken at PublicB is an effort to greenits supply chain and to ensure that its high environmentalvalues are cascaded throughout its supply chain. Eventhough the environmental procurement process project wasinitiated several years ago, the auditing only started lastyear. Seventeen key suppliers to PublicB were audited.Suppliers selected for the environmental audit project arechosen on the basis of two criteria. Firstly, they suppliedgoods and services to PublicB for a significant amount ofmoney. Secondly, their business was perceived to beenvironmentally high risk.

The execution of the audit was partially tailored tosuppliers’ existing environmental policies and managementsystems. The experience with regards to environmentalissues such as EMSs, environmental legislation, etc. variedquite dramatically among the audited companies. Somefirms had exemplary environmental processes and manage-ment systems in place whereas others could be described as‘environmental novices’.

The audits resulted in clear recommendations tosuppliers in how to improve their environmental perfor-mance. For example some companies were advised onactions to undertake in order to achieve the ISO 14001accreditation. Other firms were advised to take someactions to comply with environmental legislation.

4.5. Jojoba

Jojoba is a public limited company, which manufacturesand retails cosmetics. The company has an annual salesturnover of approximately £700 million and employs about6000 people worldwide. The cosmetics manufacturer andretailer maintains a very high public image of environ-mental and ethical probity, and has been committed to itsethical values since its inception. The company’s goal is tobe socially, economically and ecologically sustainable. Inorder to inform the different stakeholders regarding theethical management of their activities, Jojoba publicisesannually the results of their operations, including extensivevalues reports, such as impact on employees, environmentand suppliers.

Jojoba’s supplier base encompasses 250 suppliers, 23 ofwhich supply stock keeping units. The company is notcommitted to a certified EMS standard, nor does it requireits suppliers to do so. However, the EMS of Jojoba isdeveloped in line with ISO 14001. The manufacturingfacility of Jojoba has achieved EMAS certification in thepast but due to a lack of resources, Jojoba does not pursuethe certification of its operations according to the EMASstandard anymore.To ensure that ethical considerations (protecting the

environment is one of them) are taken into account inpurchasing decisions, Jojoba employs a vendor assessmenttool. Suppliers to Jojoba are required to complete aquestionnaire, which entails questions about environmen-tal and labour standards. The environmental section of thequestionnaire assesses the code of conduct of suppliers’operations, for example verifying compliance with theForest Stewardship Certified (FSC) convention. Thelabour part of the questionnaire comprises questions aboutsocial and health and safety conduct. Questions regardingsocial conduct are based on the International LabourOrganisation (ILO) convention.In cases where suppliers’ self-assessed conduct fails to

meet the cosmetics manufacturer and retailer’s ethicalstandards, Jojoba will work with the willing suppliers toprogress them to full compliance. If suppliers’ assessmentsdo comply with Jojoba’s policies and ethical standards,Jojoba proceeds in two ways. In cases where it is a criticalsupplier, Jojoba will verify the supplier’s self-assessedconduct. In contrast, if it is not a critical supplier, thepurchasing decision will be approved without any addi-tional verification activities. To maintain Jojoba’s stan-dards, vendors’ performances are assessed annually.

4.6. Electroment

Electroment is an electronic equipment manufacturer.The company has an annual sales turnover of about £49billion and employs more than 140,000 people worldwide.More than 10,000 suppliers provide Electroment withmaterials and components for their products. In theelectronic industry, Electroment is regarded as being aforerunner in embracing environmental and social respon-sible practices. The fact that Electroment was one of thefirst global businesses to obtain a single, global ISO 14001certification for its worldwide manufacturing operationsunderpins the perception within the industry. This proac-tive approach is fostered and promoted by the CEO of thecompany. As the interviewee noted, ‘‘your CEO comesquite regularly with a letter or a statement saying I want tosee Electroment as a leader in terms of environmentalissues and sustainable development’’. Electroment pub-lishes annually the results of their operations in globalcitizenship reports and has extensive policies regardingcorporate social responsible behaviour.The Suppliers’ Social and Environmental Responsibility

(SER) programme was undertaken to ensure that suppliers

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8578

operate in a socially and environmentally responsiblemanner. In the context of this programme, suppliers areasked to sign an agreement by which they agree to adhereto the code of conduct set out by Electroment. The code ofconduct entails the minimum requirements with regards toenvironmental, employment, labour, and health and safetypractices that all suppliers must meet in their businessdealings with Electroment.

In 2003, Electroment initiated the project with 50suppliers that accounts for approximately 70% of procure-ment expenditures. The objective that Electroment setthemselves is to engage with 500 suppliers in the improve-ment of the environmental and social conditions of theirmanufacturing facilities by 2006. After having signed theSER programme agreement, suppliers are asked to fill outannual self-assessments of their operations. To verifysuppliers’ assessments, Electroment has a process in placecomprising reviews and on-site visits. In cases wheresuppliers breach compliance, Electroment demands im-provement plans and in some cases formal correctiveaction plans.

4.7. FoodRet

FoodRet is a high street food retailer with an annualsales turnover of approximately £4.6 billion and about56,000 employees. The high street retailer communicates itsenvironmental policies and actions and addresses its role asa responsible corporate citizen through the publishing ofreports for its shareholders and the wider community.Thousands of suppliers provide goods and services toFoodRet. The company is not committed to a certifiedEMS standard.

FoodRet has a trailer fleet comprising roughly 1500 unitsand together with tractors and rigids, they consumeroughly £20 million fuel per year.

The emphasis of the fuel saving trailer project is onreducing fuel consumption by an enhanced design of thetrailers that operate FoodRet’s distribution network. Thenew trailers incorporate two decks for dry freight, thussignificantly increasing the number of cages that can betransported per trip. This modification reduces the amountof trips that drivers have to undertake in order to distributethe goods. Furthermore, to address the negative impact ofthe increased trailer height, the cab and the front of thetrailer were re-styled. As a result of the redesign, theaerodynamic characteristics of the trailer were considerablyenhanced.

The introduction of the changes in the construction ofthe trailers did not require any additional capital invest-ment. The interviewee noted that this fact certainlyfacilitated the implementation of the project. The numberof trailers that operate with the redesigned units is growingrapidly. In fact, the success of the trailer has led the projectteam to extend this concept further to include refrigeratingtrailers.

4.8. Drivers in case organisations

The main drivers encountered in the exploration of greensupply chain management projects were identified, shownin Table 4. A feature which all investigated projects share isthat regulatory compliance seems to underpin the differentinitiatives, and is the context for other observed drivers.Other common drivers were pressure or encouragement bycustomers, environmental risk minimisation and monitor-ing environmental performance. The findings presented inTable 4 are discussed below, and later in the discussionsection the findings are compared with the literaturesummarised in Tables 1 and 2, to see how our empiricalinvestigation tallies with existing literature.

4.9. Internal drivers

4.9.1. Organisational factors

In the cases of Jojoba and PublicB the notion ofenvironmental values is relatively unproblematic due tothe culture and nature of their businesses. However, forJojoba and PublicB green supply chain managementincorporates considerable risks. The potential for reputa-tional risk and public embarrassment from failures in theirsourcing strategies can seriously hamper their credibility.Credibility, reputation risk and public embarrassment areviewed as internal factors experienced by the organisation,whilst acknowledging that they all concern how theorganisation is perceived externally. Several intervieweespointed out that because their organisation is well known,they are under considerable pressure and scrutiny fromdifferent stakeholders to address environmental concernsthat arise from their suppliers’ operations. This is especiallyapplicable to the private sector organisations in thisresearch. Interviewees were aware of the threat thatsuppliers’ poor environmental performance poses to themand the associated risk that such performance could haveon their own businesses. For the public sector organisa-tions explored in this research, public embarrassment wasthe main risk attributed to suppliers’ poor environmentalperformance. To minimise the risk four out of the seveninvestigated organisations embarked on programmes thatassessed suppliers’ environmental impact on the environ-ment.At GovPA, several project team members were the

primary driving force for taking environmental concernsinto account in the specification of a large procurementprogramme. This finding highlights the power and effec-tiveness with which value champions can promote theintegration of environmental concerns in the buyingprocess of organisations.At FoodRet the main motivation to implement the green

supply chain management initiative was the desire toreduce costs. FoodRet recognised that pollution reflectshidden costs; by implementing the fuel saving trailerinitiative the project team at FoodRet prevented unneces-

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 4

Encountered drivers for green supply chain management projects

NHS Trust Alpha NHS HC Beta GovPA PublicB Jojoba Electroment FoodRet

Internal

Organisation’s values � �

Value champions �

Costs reduction �

External

Access to environmental information �

Regulatory compliance � � � � � � �

Environmental risk minimisation � � � �

Monitor environmental performance � � � �

Pressure/encouragement by customers � � � � �

Regeneration of local areas �

Gaining competitive advantage �

H. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 79

sary pollution and thus decreased the costs of purchasingfuel significantly.

4.10. External drivers

4.10.1. Regulation

The impression received from the interviewees in thisstudy was that although environmental legislation un-doubtedly played an important role in the implementationof the projects, it was not the triggering factor. Environ-mental values are so deeply embedded in Jojoba’s andPublicB’s operations that their undertakings bring themsignificantly beyond legislative compliance. Meeting legis-lative requirements represents the absolute minimum goalfor these two organisations.

None of the projects were undertaken as a directresponse to environmental legislation. However, in eachcase environmental legislation was intrinsically linked withother drivers such as value champions’ endeavours (to meetthe legislation) or risk minimisation efforts (to comply withthe legislation). Environmental legislation underpinnedeach of the green supply chain management projects, andprovided the context for other observed drivers.

The investigated public and private sector organisationswere not found to deal in a significantly different way withenvironmental legislation. In both sectors, dedicated staffwere in charge of scanning environmental legislation andcommunicating relevant directives to the respective depart-ments and people in charge.

4.10.2. Customers

NHS Trust Alpha, Public B, Jojoba and Electromentencouraged suppliers to improve their environmentalperformance. At Jojoba and Electroment, suppliers wereexpected to participate in the assessment of their environ-mental footprint. These two companies expected suppliersto co-operate and improve their environmental perfor-mance if necessary.

At healthcare community Beta, the patients triggeredand drove the local food procurement programme. This

finding shows that even in the public sector end-consumerscan drive environmentally friendly initiatives.

4.10.3. Competition

Gaining competitive advantage is a clear driver forElectroment in assessing its suppliers’ social and environ-mental conduct. Competitive advantage does result fromthis project in a number of different ways. The enhancedcorporate responsibility profile can help to boost Electro-ment’s sales. Furthermore, the company benefits from theproject through faster access to suppliers’ environmentalinformation, which is necessary for responding to tenders.Competition and/or gaining competitive advantage does

not seem to be a driver for implementing green supplychain management practices in the public sector. Thisfinding seems logical in the light of restricted competitionwithin the public sector.

4.10.4. Society

PublicB has not come under direct attack from environ-mental pressure groups but is aware about the repercus-sions that a shallow sourcing strategy could have on itsimage and business conduct. The supplier environmentalaudit project was, amongst other reasons, driven with thepurpose to minimise the risk of coming under crossfirefrom environmental advocacy groups. The same riskminimisation effort led Electroment to embark on a similarvendor assessment programme.

4.10.5. Suppliers

None of the organisations participating in the researchidentified suppliers as a driver for environmental supplychain management projects.

4.2. Barriers in case organisations

The study identified barriers encountered by theorganisations in the implementation of green supply chainmanagement practices. These are presented in Table 5.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 5

Encountered barriers in green supply projects

NHS Trust alpha NHS HC Beta GovPA PublicB Jojoba Electroment FoodRet

Internal

Costs � �

Local nature of project �

Lack of resources �

External

Exposing poor environmental performance �

Lack of information �

Confidentiality �

Fragmented industry �

Small number of suppliers (poor competition) �

Scale of supply chain �

Lack of industry-wide consistent environmental criteria �

Procurement legislation �

Clinical preference �

Food culture �

Inertia by project stakeholders �

Supplier’s (manufacturer) reluctance to change �

H. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8580

4.3. Internal barriers

4.3.1. Costs

Cost concerns were a major barrier in two out of theseven investigated projects. Incurring costs are even moresignificant for SMEs, which have generally less resourcesavailable and thus are more vulnerable. Healthcarecommunity Beta has encountered this problem, as manyof its suppliers are relatively small. In an effort to introducebiodegradable packaging, some of the small producerswere unable to comply as they lack the required capital toinvest into the packaging facility. Therefore, the approachhas been made from the healthcare community’s side topurchase the machinery on behalf of the producers. Theproject officer at healthcare community Beta underlinedthat to develop a supply partnership, lateral thinking andopenness is required.

GovPA’s case highlighted that even when top manage-ment is supportive, the integration of environmentalrequirements in the purchasing process can be difficult ifmiddle management is resistant. The sustainable procure-ment manager at GovPA not only advocated for trainingof the organisation’s staff, but extended the notion tosuppliers’ staff, underlining the decreased inefficiencies thatwould result from it.

4.3.2. Lack of legitimacy

The lack of legitimacy of environmental supply issuescan act as a major obstacle. The environment adviser atJojoba pointed out that, ‘‘yif you explain to other peoplewhy they need to do more for the environment, they go theextra mile’’. By the same token, the project officer athealthcare community Beta described how useful abusiness case can be in showing the benefits derived froman environmentally friendly project and thus explaining to

people why they should participate and commit themselvesto the initiative. Overcoming the manufacturer’s reluctanceto change was relatively easy at FoodRet. Once themanufacturer was made aware of the projected salesfigures and the potential profit that could be gained fromthe project, the support was instantaneous.

4.4. External barriers

4.4.1. Regulation

In the public sector purchasing decisions are clearlycircumscribed by European law, which prescribes thatcontracts above a certain level be advertised in the OfficialJournal of the European Union. At healthcare communityBeta, procurement legislation was almost perceived as athreat to green supply chain management. Considerableefforts were undertaken to research the relevant legislationin order to gain a better understanding. These efforts seemto have paid off, as the supplies manager stated, ‘‘Now weare more aware of how to work within the boundaries(y of the EU regulations)’’. Healthcare community Betarecognises that small, local suppliers do not look at theEuropean Journal, and use alternative methods to makelocal suppliers aware of public sector opportunities.

4.4.2. Poor supplier commitment

Several obstacles like lack of information, confidentialityconcerns or fear of poor environmental performanceexposure stem from factors such as poor suppliers’commitment or low level of trust between customers andsuppliers, indicating suboptimal relationships. Trust is forinstance extremely important when customers audit sup-pliers like in the cases of Jojoba, healthcare communityBeta, Electroment and PublicB. In some situations,suppliers feared that their poor environmental perfor-

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 81

mances could be publicly exposed and thus decided not toparticipate in the project.

The project officer at healthcare community Betaclaimed that the substantial progress that they have madewith the inclusion of environmental and social factors inthe purchasing process is largely due to the partnershipapproach with their suppliers and the increased level oftrust between them.

4.4.3. Industry specific barriers

Several case organisations encountered barriers thatrepresent phenomena confined to a specific industry. Someof them appear very difficult to overcome. For example, inNHS Trust Alpha, purchasing decisions are influencedstrongly by the doctors’ preferred choice of products fortreating patients, with environmental issues being of lowerimportance.

GovPA operates in an oligopolistic industry and undersuch circumstances, GovPA is less likely to substitute orthreaten to substitute suppliers that do not fulfil environ-mental requirements.

Conversely, healthcare community Beta faces a frag-mented industry comprising a myriad of small suppliers.This situation embodies the problem of communicatingand collaborating with the high number of suppliers. Tocombat this, some suppliers are joining together to formcooperatives to supply healthcare community Beta.

5. Discussion

In this section the main drivers and barriers identified inthe exploration of green supply chain management projectsare reflected upon in the light of the literature. The findingspresented in Tables 4 and 5 are compared with theliterature summarised in Tables 1 and 2, to contrast ourempirical findings with previous research.

5.1. What drives public and private sector organisations to

integrate environmentally friendly practices in their supply

chains?

The literature summarised in Table 1 gives an impressionthat there are more studies identifying external as opposedto internal drivers. Our findings confirmed this view, andlooking at Table 4 there also seem to be more external asopposed to internal drivers to environmental supply chainprojects across the cases. The internal and external driversare discussed below.

5.1.1. Internal drivers

5.1.1.1. Organisational factors. Some organisations in-troduce green supply chain management practices moreeasily (New et al., 2000), such as for Jojoba and PublicB,yet it incorporates considerable risks as failures in theirsourcing strategies can harm their credibility. The fact thatlarge public and private sector organisations which operatein different industries have to take responsibility for their

suppliers activities, further supports Hall’s (2001) findingsand suggests that his insight is not restricted to the foodretailing industry.Policy entrepreneurs or value champions can act as

drivers (Drumwright, 1994), as appeared to be the case atGovPA. At FoodRet the main motivation to implementthe green supply chain management initiative was thedesire to reduce costs, confirming findings elsewhere(Carter and Dresner, 2001; Handfield et al., 1997).

5.1.2. External drivers

5.1.2.1. Regulation. Regulation has been found to be amajor driver of green supply chain management (Carterand Dresner, 2001; Zhu et al., 2005), and Jojoba andPublicB go beyond legislative compliance. In each caseenvironmental legislation provided the backdrop for otherdrivers such as value champions’ endeavours or riskminimisation efforts.The investigated public and private sector organisations

were not found to deal in a significantly different way withenvironmental legislation.

5.1.2.2. Customers. The body of literature reports two‘types’ of customers that drive green supply chain manage-ment projects. Often in asymmetric relationships, largecustomers such as food retailers or manufacturers offurniture, automobiles, electronic devices, drive smallersuppliers to improve their environmental performance(Hall, 2001; New et al., 2000; Walton et al., 1998). NHSTrust Alpha, Public B, Jojoba and Electroment acted as thelarge company that encouraged suppliers to improve theirenvironmental performance.Alternatively, end-consumers request green products or

the implementation of environmentally friendly practices(Trowbridge, 2001). At healthcare community Beta, thepatients triggered the local food procurement programme.This finding shows that even in the public sector end-consumers can drive environmentally friendly initiatives.

5.1.2.3. Competition. Gaining competitive advantage is aclear driver for Electroment in assessing its suppliers’ socialand environmental conduct, corresponding with argumentsin the literature (Porter and Van de Linde, 1995).Competition does not seem to be a driver for implementinggreen supply chain management practices in the publicsector. In the future, however, an element of competitionmay emerge in the UK public sector, as organisations thatperform well financially are given greater independence.End consumers will be encouraged to choose which publicsector organisation they would prefer to provide a service.

5.1.2.4. Society. Environmental NGOs have increasedpressure on organisations to review their supply practices(Beamon, 2005; Hall, 2001). Both PublicB and Electromentsought to minimise the risk of coming under fire fromenvironmental advocacy groups, embarking on similar

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8582

vendor assessment programmes. The other five organisa-tions did not specifically mention NGOs.

5.2. What are the barriers to environmentally friendly

practices in the supply chain?

The barriers encountered in the projects are discussed inthe section below. The barriers to green supply chainmanagement practice seem from the literature to bepredominantly internal barriers. In contrast, our researchfound a mix of internal and external barriers, with a lack ofcommonality of perceived barriers across the organisations.

5.2.1. Internal barriers

5.2.1.1. Costs. Cost concerns were a major barrier inGovPA and NHS Trust Alpha. This coincides withprevious studies finding that cost concerns are the mostserious obstacle for taking environmental factors intoaccount in the purchasing process (Min and Galle, 2001;Orsato, 2006).

Training has been advocated to change the mindset ofpurchasing managers on environmental issues (Bowenet al., 2001b; Carter and Dresner, 2001). GovPA not onlyadvocated for training of the organisation’s staff, butextended the notion to suppliers’ staff.

5.2.1.2. Lack of legitimacy. Previous research has identi-fied that green supply issues lack legitimacy internally (Minand Galle, 2001). Jojoba, healthcare community Beta andFoodRet all worked to increase stakeholder commitment,in line with previous research identifying the need toestablish buy-in to legitimise green supply issues (Carterand Dresner, 2001).

5.2.2. External barriers

5.2.2.1. Regulation. As well as acting as an enabler,environmental legislation and regulation can inhibitenvironmental supply practices (Porter and Van de Linde,1995). Legislation appeared to be a barrier at healthcarecommunity Beta, as they felt that adherence to EU rulesprioritises open competition across the EU, which runscounter to reducing carbon emissions by buying from localsuppliers.

5.2.2.2. Poor supplier commitment. In the cases of Jojoba,healthcare community Beta, Electroment and PublicB,suppliers feared that their poor environmental performancecould be publicly exposed.

This aligns with findings from previous research that thatsome suppliers do not want to share information on greensupply issues (Wycherley, 1999).

Healthcare community Beta reported that a partnershipapproach helped increase commitment with their suppliers,in line with previous research that advocates adoptingcooperative customer–supplier relationships (Klassenand Vachon, 2003; Noci, 1997; Theyel, 2001; Vachon andKlassen, 2006).

5.2.2.3. Industry specific barriers. It has been found thatcompanies in different industries have differing drivers andpractices (Zhu and Sarkis, 2006). The public sectororganisations had problems of competing procurementpriorities, such as patient safety coming before environ-mental concerns for NHS Trust Alpha. Extremes in marketstructures were also apparent with too few suppliers toGovPA meaning it is less likely to substitute suppliers thatdo not fulfil environmental requirements. A fragmentedmarket for healthcare community Beta prevented themfrom engaging small suppliers in the green agenda. Thesespecific situations presented barriers to green supply chainmanagement.In sum, the discussion has reviewed the findings from the

case studies in the light of the literature. Support was foundfor the drivers and barriers of green supply chain manage-ment practices identified in the literature and presented inTables 1 and 2.

8. Conclusion

Organisations appear to have a variety of drivers andbarriers to green supply chain management practices. Aliterature review revealed that there have been more studiesidentifying drivers than barriers, possibly due to the desireto focus on the positive aspects of green supply chainmanagement research. In our explorative study we foundboth drivers and barriers, with more drivers such asregulation that were common across organisations, com-pared to a variety of barriers. This study identified thatdrivers and barriers could be both internal and external tothe organisation.More external drivers were identified than internal

drivers, in both the literature and the empirical research.Purchasing managers considering green supply chainmanagement issues may benefit from being mindful ofthe external influences of customers, competitors, regula-tion and society more broadly.The literature review identified more studies of internal

barriers, yet our exploratory study found a mix of bothinternal and external barriers experienced by organisations.If some of the resistance to green supply chain managementpractices resides within organisations, one positive inter-pretation might be that it is within the sphere of influenceof organisations to tackle and overcome such barriers.This study explored large private and public sector

organisations and found, consistent with the lack ofprevious research, that suppliers are not a significant driverof green supply chain management projects. However, it isprobable that large organisations such as those sampled inthe current study are likely to hold the power balance inrelationships with suppliers, and influence the suppliers torespond to the environmental agenda. A collaborativeapproach with suppliers may be appropriate. Furthermore,it would be overreaching to interpret the findings asrelevant for small and medium organisations.

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 83

The study has several limitations. The researcherswere aware that for many of the sampled organisationsthe ‘PR’ aspect of the green supply chain managementinitiatives was paramount. It is inevitably very difficult tovalidate the honest reasons and dynamics within theprojects and separate aspiration from actuality. Theresearchers endeavoured to discover the actual reasonsfor engaging in green supply chain management projects bycareful deconstruction and triangulation, and to reduceresponse bias and guarantee confidentiality data weredisguised.

Organisations engaged in green supply chain manage-ment projects were sought for this study, which does notshine light on the barriers facing those organisations thatare not pursuing green supply chain management practices.More research could be conducted amongst those organi-sations lagging behind, although the PR aspects of greensupply chain management might make identification ofsuch organisations difficult.

As regards future research, public sector organisationshave scarcely been at the centre of green supply chainmanagement studies. Therefore, future research shouldgive more weight to the public sector and also explore thedifferences that exist between public and private sector.Future research could focus on the trend of giving endconsumers greater choice over which public organisationprovides a service, and explore the effect it has on drivers ofgreen supply chain management in the public sector. Thevast majority of research studies in the field of green supplychain management are biased towards large organisations.This study is not an exception. Therefore, further workshould be conducted to understand the role that small andmedium organisations play in this field.

This research makes a novel contribution by synthesisingexisting literature and identifying internal and externaldrivers and barriers to green supply chain management,subsequently explored through interviews with sevencompanies.

Appendix A. Interview questions

Organisation

1. How many employees work within your organisation?What is the annual sales revenue per year? How manysupplier do you have?

2. How would you describe the general attitude of yourorganisation towards green supply chain managementpractices? Are you certified by ISO 14001, EMAS, etc.?

3. Who is responsible for environmental issues within yourorganisation? (e.g. Specific department)

4. What is your organisation’s overall objective in thehandling of environmental issues?

5. Does your organisation publicise or market yourenvironmental performances? If so how?

6. How would you describe the attitude of yourorganisation towards environmental legislation?

Project: General

7. Can you briefly describe the project?8. What was your role within the green supply chain

management project?9. What was the time-scale of the project? When did it

start?10. Were other organisations within the supply chain

involved in the project? If so how?11. Was the project piloted within a particular area of the

organisation or introduced throughout the entireorganisation from the beginning?

Project: Drivers

12. What was the main purpose of the project?13. What were the driving forces behind the project? (e.g.

legislative compliance, costs, reputation, marketexpectations, move towards sustainability, etc.)

14. In terms of management level (top, middle, lower,purchasing) who initiated and who supported theproject?

15. What was the perception of the top-management aboutthe project?

16. What other departments (functional) areas wereinvolved?

17. How did other departments (functional areas) help youto implement the green supply chain managementpractice?

Project: Barriers

18. What were the barriers that you encountered in thisproject?

19. How did you overcome these barriers?20. Who helped you to overcome these barriers? and how?

Project: Success

21. What are the tangible and intangible benefits of thisproject that made you perceive it as successful?

22. How periodically do you measure environmentalperformance? What does the measure entail? (do youalso include suppliers performance?)

23. In hindsight what are the lessons learnt and whatwould you do differently?

24. Is there anything else you would like to say about theproject or your organisation?

References

Beamon, B.M., 1999. Designing the green supply chain. Logistics

Information Management 12 (4), 332–342.

Beamon, B.M., 2005. Environmental and sustainability ethics in

supply chain management. Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2),

221–234.

Bowen, F., 2000. Environmental visibility: a trigger for organisational

response? Business Strategy and the Environment 9, 92–107.

Bowen, F., Cousins, P., Lamming, R., Faruk, A., 2001a. Horses for

courses: explaining the gap between the theory and practice of

green supply. Greener Management International 35 (Autumn),

41–60.

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–8584

Bowen, F., Cousins, P., Lamming, R., Faruk, A., 2001b. The role of

supply management capabilities in green supply. Production and

Operations Management 10 (2), 174–189.

Caro, F., Andalaft, R., Silva, X., Weintraub, A., Sapunar, P., Cabello, M.,

2003. Evaluating the economic costs of environmental measures in

plantation harvesting through the use of mathematical models.

Production and Operations Management 12 (3), 290–306.

Chen, C.C., 2005. Incorporating green purchasing into the frame of ISO

14000. Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (9), 927–933.

Carter, C.R., Carter, J.R., 1998. Inter-organizational determinants of

environmental purchasing: initial evidence from the consumer

products industries. Decision Sciences 29 (3), 659–684.

Carter, C.R., Dresner, M., 2001. Purchasing’s role in environmental

management: cross-functional development of grounded theory.

Supply Chain Management 37 (3), 12–26.

Carter, C.R., Ellram, L.M., Ready, K., 1998. Environmental purchasing:

benchmarking our German counterparts. International Journal of

Purchasing and Materials Management 34 (4), 28–38.

Carter, C.R., Kale, R., Grimm, C.M., 2000. Environmental purchasing

and firm performance: an empirical investigation. Transportation

Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 36 (3),

219–228.

Cooper, R., Frank, G., Kemp, R., 2000. A multinational comparison of

key ethical issues, helps and challenges in the purchasing and supply

management profession: the key implications for business and the

professions. Journal of Business Ethics 23, 83–100.

Delmas, M., 2001. Stakeholders and competitive advantage: the case of

ISO 14001, Production & Operations Management, vol. 10. Produc-

tion Operations Management Society, pp. 343–358.

Drumwright, M., 1994. Socially responsible organisational buying:

environmental concern as a non-economic buying criteria. Journal of

Marketing 58 (July), 1–19.

Ferguson, M.E., Toktay, L.B., 2006. The effect of competition on

recovery strategies. Production & Operations Management 15 (3),

351–368.

Fineman, S., 1997. Constructing the green manager. In: McDonagh, P.,

Prothero, A. (Eds.), Green Management: A Reader. Dryden Press,

London.

Gabriel, Y., Fineman, S., Sims, D., 2000. Organizing and Organizations.

Sage, London.

Gonzalez-Benito, J., Gonzalez-Benito, O., 2005. Environmental proactiv-

ity and business performance: an empirical analysis. Omega Interna-

tional Journal of Management Science 33 (1), 1–15.

Greer, J., Bruno, K., 1996. Greenwash: The reality Behind Corporate

Environmentalism. Apex Press, New York.

Green, K., Morton, B., New, S., 1996. Purchasing and environmental

management: interactions, policies and opportunities. Business Strat-

egy and the Environment 5, 188–197.

Hall, J., 2001. Environmental supply chain innovation. Greener Manage-

ment International 35, 105–119.

Handfield, R., Walton, S.V., Seegers, L.K., Melnyk, S.A., 1997. Green

value chain practices in the furniture industry. Journal of Operations

Management 15 (4), 293–315.

Hanna, M.D., Newman, W.R., Johnson, P., 2000. Linking operational

and environmental improvement through employee involvement.

International Journal of Operations & Production Management 20

(2), 148–165.

Hart, S.L., 1995. A natural-resource based view of the firm. Academy of

Management Review 20 (4), 986–1014.

Henriques, I., Sadorsky, P., 1999. The relationship between environmental

commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance.

Academy of Management Journal 42 (1), 87–99.

Hervani, A., Helms, M., 2005. Performance measurement for green supply

chain management. Benchmarking: An International Journal 12 (4),

330–353.

Hussain, S., 1999. The ethics of going green: the corporate social

responsibility debate. Business Strategy and the Environment 8 (4),

203–210.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007. Climate Change

2007: Synthesis Report. Summary for Policy Makers. IPCC,

Geneva.

Klassen, R.D., Vachon, S., 2003. Collaboration and evaluation in the

supply chain: the impact on plant-level environmental investment.

Production & Operations Management 12 (3), 336–352.

Lamming, R., Hampson, J., 1996. The environment as a supply chain

management issue. British Journal of Management 7 (Special issue),

S45–S62.

Maignan, I., Hillebrand, B., McAlister, D., 2002. Managing socially-

responsible buying: how to integrate noneconomic criteria into the

purchasing process. European Management Journal 20 (6),

641–648.

McWilliams, A., Siegel, D., 2000. Corporate social responsibility and

financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic

Management Journal 21 (5), 603–609.

Melnyk, S.A., Sroufe, R.P., Calantone, R., 2003. Assessing the impact of

environmental management systems on corporate and environmental

performance. Journal of Operations Management 21 (3), 329.

Miles, M., Huberman, A., 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded

Sourcebook, second ed. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Min, H., Galle, W.P., 2001. Green purchasing practices of US firms.

International Journal of Operations & Production Management 21 (9),

1222–1238.

Montabon, F., Meinyk, S.A., Stroofe, R., Calantone, R.J., 2000. ISO

14000: assessing its perceived impact on corporate performance. The

Journal of Supply Chain Management, 4–16.

New, S., Green, K., Morton, B., 2000. Buying the environment: the

multiple meanings of green supply. In: Fineman, S. (Ed.), The Business

of Greening. Routledge, London, pp. 33–53.

New, S., Green, K., Morton, B., 2002. An analysis of private versus public

sector responses to environmental challenges of the supply chain.

Journal of Public Procurement 2 (1), 93–105.

Noci, G., 1997. Designing ‘green’ vendor rating systems for the assessment

of a supplier’s environmental performance. European Journal of

Purchasing & Supply Management 3 (2), 103–114.

Noori, H., Chen, C., 2003. Applying scenario-driven strategy to integrate

environmental management and product design. Production and

Operations Management 12 (3), 353–368.

Orsato, R., 2006. Competitive environmental strategies: when does it pay

to be green? California Management Review 48 (2), 127–143.

Pil, F.K., Rothenberg, S., 2003. Environmental performance as a driver of

superior quality. Production & Operations Management 12 (3),

404–415.

Porter, M.E., Van de Linde, C., 1995. Green and competitive. Harvard

Business Review September–October, 120–134.

Rao, P., Holt, D., 2005. Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness

and economic performance? International Journal of Operations &

Production Management 25 (9–10), 898–916.

Sarkis, J., 2003. A strategic decision framework for green supply chain

management. Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (4), 397–409.

Sharma, S., Vredenburg, H., 1998. Proactive corporate environmental

strategy and the development of competitively valuable organisational

capabilities. Strategic Management Journal 19, 729–753.

Srivastava, S.K., 2007. Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art

literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews 9 (1),

53–80.

Strandberg, C., 2002. The Future of Corporate Social Responsibility.

VanCity Credit Union, Vancouver.

Theyel, G., 2001. Customer and supplier relations for environmental

performance. Greener Management International 35, 61–69.

Trowbridge, P., 2001. A case study of green supply chain management at

advanced micro devices. Greener Management International 35

(Autumn), 121–135.

Vachon, S., Klassen, R., 2006. Extending green practices across the supply

chain: the impact of upstream and downstream integration. Interna-

tional Journal of Operations & Production Management 26 (7),

795–821.

ARTICLE IN PRESSH. Walker et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 14 (2008) 69–85 85

Walley, N., Whitehead, B., 1994. It’s not easy being green. Harvard

Business Review 72 (3), 46–52.

Walton, S., Handfield, R., Melnyk, S., 1998. The green supply chain:

integrating suppliers into environmental management processes. Interna-

tional Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management 3 (2), 2–11.

Wycherley, I., 1999. Greening supply chains: the case of the Body Shop

International. Business Strategy and the Environment 8, 120–127.

Zhu, Q.H., Sarkis, J., 2006. An inter-sectoral comparison of green supply

chain management in China: drivers and practices. Journal of Cleaner

Production 14 (5), 472–486.

Zhu, Q.H., Sarkis, J., Geng, Y., 2005. Green supply chain manage-

ment in China: pressures, practices and performance. International

Journal of Operations & Production Management 25 (5-6),

449–468.