Understanding Supply Chain 4.0 and its potential impact on global value chains

Author(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 4151
Author(s):  
Amit Arora ◽  
Anshu Arora ◽  
Julius Anyu ◽  
John McIntyre

This research examines supply chain collaboration effects on organizational performance in global value chain (GVC) infrastructure by focusing on GVC disaggregation, market turbulence, inequality, market globalization, product diversity, exploitation, and technological breakthroughs. The research strives to develop a better understanding of global value chains through relational view, behavioral, and contingency theories along with institutional and stakeholder theories of supply chains. Based on conflicting insights from these theories, this research investigates how relationships and operational outcomes of collaboration fare when market turbulence is present. Data is obtained and analyzed from focal firms that are engaged in doing business in emerging markets (e.g., India), and headquartered in the United States. We investigate relational outcomes (e.g., trust, credibility, mutual respect, and relationship commitment) among supply chain partners, and found that these relational outcomes result in better operational outcomes (e.g., profitability, market share increase, revenue generation, etc.). From managerial standpoint, supply chain managers should focus on relational outcomes that can strengthen operational outcomes in GVCs resulting in stronger organizational performance. The research offers valuable insights for theory and practice of global value chains by focusing on the GVC disaggregation through the measurement of market turbulence, playing a key role in the success of collaborative buyer–supplier relationships (with a focus on US companies doing business in India) leading to an overall improved firm performance.


2021 ◽  
pp. 105-122
Author(s):  
Ramesh Krishnan ◽  
Phi Yen Phan ◽  
Arshinder Kaur ◽  
Sanjoy Kumar Paul

2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja Dänzer

AbstractAlthough many people seem to share the intuition that multinational companies (MNEs) carry a responsibility for the working conditions in their supply chains, the justification offered for this assumption is usually rather unclear. This article explores a promising strategy for grounding the relevant intuition and for rendering its content more precise. It applies the criteria of David Miller's connection theory of remedial responsibility to different forms of supply chain governance as characterized by the Global Value Chains (GVC) framework. The analysis suggests that the criteria for identifying MNEs as remedially responsible for bad working conditions in their direct suppliers are fulfilled in many cases, even though differentiations are required with regard to the different supply chain governance structures. MNEs thus have a duty to make sure currently bad working conditions in their suppliers are changed for the better. Moreover, since production in supply chains for structural reasons continuously generates remedial responsibility of MNEs for bad working conditions in their suppliers, it puts the prospective responsibility on them to make sure that their suppliers offer acceptable working conditions. Further, it is suggested that the remedial responsibility of MNEs might require them to make financial compensation to victims of bad working conditions and in grave cases initiate or support programs to mitigate disastrous effects suffered by them.


Author(s):  
Edward Kafeero

This paper analyses the conceptual and legal development of the Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) paradigm over the past three decades. Compliance management, supply chain security and trade facilitation are found to be the underlying objectives behind AEO programs. The paper examines the dynamics of global value chains (GVCs) and concludes that AEO programs are beneficial to GVCs. The Revised Kyoto Convention, The SAFE Framework of Standards and the Trade Facilitation Agreement are identified as the basic international legal (and regulatory) framework that guides AEO programs. Key words: Authorized Economic Operator;  Global Value Chains;  Supply Chain Security; Trade Facilitation; Customs Compliance Management.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Preetam Basu ◽  
Partha Ray

Purpose China has emerged as an undisputed leader of global business and as a preferred hub for global value chains. However, recent threats of the trade war, the allegation of violation of intellectual property rights and more recently the COVID-19 pandemic seemed to have dampened China’s attractiveness. Multinational corporations may be contemplating diversifying their dependence on China – a strategy known as “China-Plus-One”. What could be possible destinations in Asia for such a diversification strategy? Design/methodology/approach Towards understanding the “China-Plus-One” phenomenon, the authors use a methodology of arriving at an aggregate ranking of the major economies of emerging Asia. This is built on a few standard indices such as World Bank's Logistic Performance Index; World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Indicator; World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index; Economic Complexity Index of the Harvard University; Economist Magazine’s Country Rating of Financial Strength; and Corruption Perception Index compiled by the Transparency International. Accordingly, the authors rank seven countries (namely, Thailand, Malaysia, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and Bangladesh) next to China as possible destinations for selecting the “Plus one” country. Findings In the aggregate ranking, China ranks first followed by Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, India, Indonesia, Vietnam and then Bangladesh. This sequence gives some pointers on the possible shifts from China as potential hubs of global value chains. The authors observe the following: first, it is challenging to move away from China in the short run; second, corporations could pursue a “China-plus-One” strategy, whereby they may move marginally from China and relocate part of their supply chain elsewhere; third, in looking for alternative locations, corporations may look for the following countries in emerging Asia, namely, Thailand, Malaysia, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines and Bangladesh. Originality/value The aggregate ranking method applied in this paper is one of the first applications in the context of ranking developing Asian economies based on economic, logistics, supply chain, financial and corruption metrics. It is one of the first conceptual works in the domain of identifying possible diversification options for the “China-Plus-One” strategy that can be extended to include many context-specific rankings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document