From commitment to routine practice: explaining uneven sustainability implementation in multi-tier value chains

Ramin Behbehani,Demir Kaya
{"title":"From commitment to routine practice: explaining uneven sustainability implementation in multi-tier value chains","authors":"Ramin Behbehani,Demir Kaya","doi":"10.1108/scm-04-2026-0455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study aims to examine why sustainability initiatives in multi-tier value chains often fail to become embedded in routine practice, despite growing investment in traceability systems, reporting routines, digital tools, supplier development and process changes. It focuses on how such initiatives become consequential in practice and develop into uneven implementation trajectories that may stabilise, drift, become diluted, or be redirected across organisational positions. Design/methodology/approach Adopting paradox theory as a sensitising lens, the study uses an abductive, episode-based qualitative design in the petrochemical sector. It identifies 43 sustainability decision episodes and reconstructs 31 of them across linked organisational positions using interviews, follow-up interviews, focus groups or workshops, and documentary and workflow artefacts. Findings Sustainability initiatives became consequential as practical triggers that disrupted existing routines, accountabilities and coordination patterns. Their effects were shaped by how actors interpreted them through concerns about practical mastery, role and accountability, coordination and relational fit, and practical legitimacy. These concerns gave rise to defensive or integrative response patterns, depending partly on the relational conditions under which implementation unfolded. Over time, these responses accumulated into four recurring implementation trajectories: drift, toggling, stabilisation and recalibration. Originality/value The paper explains uneven sustainability implementation as a process through which sustainability initiatives are interpreted and enacted across multiple organisational positions and over time. In doing so, it extends sustainable value chain research beyond structural explanations and offers a process account of why similar initiatives stall, stabilise or are revised in practice.","PeriodicalId":30468,"journal":{"name":"Supply Chain Management Journal","volume":"83 1","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","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-04-2026-0455","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 This study aims to examine why sustainability initiatives in multi-tier value chains often fail to become embedded in routine practice, despite growing investment in traceability systems, reporting routines, digital tools, supplier development and process changes. It focuses on how such initiatives become consequential in practice and develop into uneven implementation trajectories that may stabilise, drift, become diluted, or be redirected across organisational positions. Design/methodology/approach Adopting paradox theory as a sensitising lens, the study uses an abductive, episode-based qualitative design in the petrochemical sector. It identifies 43 sustainability decision episodes and reconstructs 31 of them across linked organisational positions using interviews, follow-up interviews, focus groups or workshops, and documentary and workflow artefacts. Findings Sustainability initiatives became consequential as practical triggers that disrupted existing routines, accountabilities and coordination patterns. Their effects were shaped by how actors interpreted them through concerns about practical mastery, role and accountability, coordination and relational fit, and practical legitimacy. These concerns gave rise to defensive or integrative response patterns, depending partly on the relational conditions under which implementation unfolded. Over time, these responses accumulated into four recurring implementation trajectories: drift, toggling, stabilisation and recalibration. Originality/value The paper explains uneven sustainability implementation as a process through which sustainability initiatives are interpreted and enacted across multiple organisational positions and over time. In doing so, it extends sustainable value chain research beyond structural explanations and offers a process account of why similar initiatives stall, stabilise or are revised in practice.
从承诺到日常实践:解释多层次价值链中可持续性实施的不平衡
本研究旨在探讨为什么尽管在可追溯系统、报告程序、数字工具、供应商开发和流程变更方面的投资不断增加,但多层价值链中的可持续性倡议往往未能融入日常实践。它关注的是这些倡议如何在实践中变得重要,并发展成不平衡的实施轨迹,这些轨迹可能会稳定、漂移、被稀释或在组织职位上被重新定向。本研究采用悖论理论作为敏感透镜,在石化行业采用溯因性的、基于情节的定性设计。它确定了43个可持续发展决策事件,并通过访谈、后续访谈、焦点小组或研讨会、文献和工作流程人工制品,在相关的组织职位上重建了其中的31个。可持续性倡议成为破坏现有惯例、责任和协调模式的实际触发因素。它们的影响取决于参与者如何通过对实际掌握、角色和责任、协调和关系契合以及实际合法性的关注来解释它们。这些关切引起了防御性或综合性的反应模式,这部分取决于执行工作展开时的关系条件。随着时间的推移,这些反应积累成四种反复出现的实施轨迹:漂移、切换、稳定和重新校准。原创性/价值本文将可持续发展实施的不平衡解释为一个过程,通过该过程,可持续发展倡议在多个组织职位和时间上被解释和制定。在此过程中,它将可持续价值链研究扩展到结构解释之外,并提供了一个过程解释,说明为什么类似的举措在实践中停滞、稳定或被修改。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书