Ambekar, S; Roy, D; Hiray, A; Prakash, A and Patyal, V S (2022) Barriers to adoption of reverse logistics: A case of construction, real estate, infrastructure and project (crip) sectors. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(7), pp. 2878-2902. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: This study attempts to identify and analyse the barriers to implementing a reverse logistics (RL) system in Indian Construction, Real estate, Infrastructure and Project (CRIP) sectors and present a structured model to identify interdependencies among them. Design/methodology/approach: The barriers to implementing RL in CRIP sectors in India were identified using a Delphi study. The interdependencies were identified using Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM). Further, using the Matriced' Impacts Croisés Multiplication Appliquée à un Classement (MICMAC) analysis, the barriers were classified on the basis of their driving power and interdependencies. Findings: The study has identified ten barriers that can hamper the application of an RL system in CRIP sectors. The finding of the ISM model shows that macro level barriers such as lack of awareness of reverse logistics, insufficient government policies and unavailability of standard codes stimulate each other and also drive all other barriers. The organization-specific barriers operating at the strategic/tactical level, namely, company's rigid mechanism, lack of awareness of economic profits, inadequate company’s organizational policies and lack of training, reluctance from stakeholders, scarcity of resources and finance from company are found at the intermediate level of hierarchy and they can be influenced by the barriers at the lower level and influence the barriers on the and higher levels. The operational level barrier namely “Inadequate Information Technology system” is at the top of the hierarchy and can be driven by all the barriers at the lower level. Research limitations/implications: The present findings are based on the opinions of experts only from Indian CRIP sectors so the results may require to be validated in other contexts. Practical implications: The structural model presenting the interdependencies will be a guide for the CRIP supply chain professionals in understanding and ranking the barriers they may face while implementing the RL system. Originality/value: The study contributes to the existing literature by providing a set of barriers and their interdependencies faced during the implementation of an RL system implementation in CRIP sectors. It is one of the first studies which identifies barriers applicable to the CRIP firms in India and models their inter-dependencies. Additionally Consequently, these firms can make a move forward towards a circular economy by overcoming these interlinked barriers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | barriers; crip sectors; interpretive structural modelling; micmac analysis; reverse logistics |
| Index terms: | face, circular economy, India, interpretive structural modelling, information technology, government policy, Delphi method, implementation, real estate, reverse logistics, methodology, profit |
| Subjects: | Geography, computing systems, sustainable design, supply chain operations, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, psychology, real estate economics, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, public policy, research methods |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Supply Chain Management, Governance, Geographical Context, Procurement, Business Strategy, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here