The German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act: impacts on sustainable supply chain management from a stakeholder perspective

Livia Buttke, Sebastian Schötteler, Stefan Seuring, Frank Ebinger
{"title":"The German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act: impacts on sustainable supply chain management from a stakeholder perspective","authors":"Livia Buttke, Sebastian Schötteler, Stefan Seuring, Frank Ebinger","doi":"10.1108/scm-01-2024-0058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (GSCDDA), as a comprehensive regulation for due diligence in supply chains, will exert profound pressure on companies’ sustainable supply chain management (SSCM). This study aims to examine the affected stakeholders’ polarizing expectations stemming from the GSCDDA, the resulting impacts on SSCM and how these findings compare with theoretical SSCM developments.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>From 5,490 GSCDDA posts on X (formerly “Twitter”), the authors extracted 556 qualitative posts illustrating the GSCDDA discourse and analyzed them from a stakeholder perspective. The posts were classified according to the dimensions of stakeholder groups and expectations (i.e. challenges and opportunities). The authors then synthesized the posts across these dimensions and compared the identified expectations with the SSCM literature.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Seven stakeholder groups were identified, along with nine challenges (e.g. legal flaws) and four opportunities (e.g. increased transparency). The synthesis of both components revealed highly discussed and conflicting expectations. The theoretical SSCM developments partly differ from the discourse, indicating discernible gaps between theory and practice</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Identifying key stakeholder groups supports building synergies between GSCDDA implementers and stakeholders to tackle their challenges and reinforce opportunities.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Due to the growing prevalence of supply chain due diligence regulations, it is essential to consider the legal implications for SSCM. This study explores the link between due diligence concepts and SSCM, and to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to analyze how legal pressure shapes stakeholders’ expectations on companies’ SSCM.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":30468,"journal":{"name":"Supply Chain Management Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supply Chain Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/scm-01-2024-0058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (GSCDDA), as a comprehensive regulation for due diligence in supply chains, will exert profound pressure on companies’ sustainable supply chain management (SSCM). This study aims to examine the affected stakeholders’ polarizing expectations stemming from the GSCDDA, the resulting impacts on SSCM and how these findings compare with theoretical SSCM developments.

Design/methodology/approach

From 5,490 GSCDDA posts on X (formerly “Twitter”), the authors extracted 556 qualitative posts illustrating the GSCDDA discourse and analyzed them from a stakeholder perspective. The posts were classified according to the dimensions of stakeholder groups and expectations (i.e. challenges and opportunities). The authors then synthesized the posts across these dimensions and compared the identified expectations with the SSCM literature.

Findings

Seven stakeholder groups were identified, along with nine challenges (e.g. legal flaws) and four opportunities (e.g. increased transparency). The synthesis of both components revealed highly discussed and conflicting expectations. The theoretical SSCM developments partly differ from the discourse, indicating discernible gaps between theory and practice

Practical implications

Identifying key stakeholder groups supports building synergies between GSCDDA implementers and stakeholders to tackle their challenges and reinforce opportunities.

Originality/value

Due to the growing prevalence of supply chain due diligence regulations, it is essential to consider the legal implications for SSCM. This study explores the link between due diligence concepts and SSCM, and to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to analyze how legal pressure shapes stakeholders’ expectations on companies’ SSCM.

德国供应链尽职调查法:从利益相关者角度看对可持续供应链管理的影响
目的《德国供应链尽职调查法》(GSCDDA)作为供应链尽职调查的综合法规,将对企业的可持续供应链管理(SSCM)产生深远的压力。本研究旨在探讨受影响的利益相关者对 GSCDDA 的两极化预期、由此对 SSCM 产生的影响,以及这些研究结果与 SSCM 理论发展的比较。这些帖子按照利益相关者群体和期望(即挑战和机遇)的维度进行了分类。然后,作者综合了这些维度的帖子,并将确定的期望与 SSCM 文献进行了比较。研究结果确定了七个利益相关者群体,以及九个挑战(如法律缺陷)和四个机遇(如提高透明度)。对这两部分内容的综合分析表明,人们的期望既有高度讨论,也有相互冲突之处。由于供应链尽职调查法规日益普及,考虑 SSCM 的法律影响至关重要。本研究探讨了尽职调查概念与 SSCM 之间的联系,据作者所知,这是第一项分析法律压力如何影响利益相关者对公司 SSCM 的期望的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信