Green supply chain performance measurement using the analytic hierarchy process:a comparative analysis of manufacturing organisations

The main purpose of this research is to develop and deploy an analytical framework for measuring the environmental performance of manufacturing supply chains. This work's theoretical bases combine and reconcile three major areas: supply chain management, environmental management and performance measurement. Researchers have suggested many empirical criteria for green supply chain (GSC) performance measurement and proposed both qualitative and quantitative frameworks. However, these are mainly operational in nature and specific to the focal company. This research develops an innovative GSC performance measurement framework by integrating supply chain processes (supplier relationship management, internal supply chain management and customer relationship management) with organisational decision levels (both strategic and operational). Environmental planning, environmental auditing, management commitment, environmental performance, economic performance and operational performance are the key level constructs. The proposed framework is then applied to three selected manufacturing organisations in the UK. Their GSC performance is measured and benchmarked by using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a multiple-attribute decision-making technique. The AHP-based framework offers an effective way to measure and benchmark organisations’ GSC performance. This study has both theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically it contributes holistic constructs for designing a GSC and managing it for sustainability; and practically it helps industry practitioners to measure and improve the environmental performance of their supply chain. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. CORRIGENDUM DOI 10.1080/09537287.2012.751186 In the article ‘Green supply chain performance measurement using the analytic hierarchy process: a comparative analysis of manufacturing organisations’ by Prasanta Kumar Dey and Walid Cheffi, Production Planning & Control, 10.1080/09537287.2012.666859, a third author is added which was not included in the paper as it originally appeared. The third author is Breno Nunes.

Uses of frontier efficiency methodologies and multi-criteria decision making for performance measurement in the energy sector

Guest editorial Ali Emrouznejad is a Senior Lecturer at the Aston Business School in Birmingham, UK. His areas of research interest include performance measurement and management, efficiency and productivity analysis as well as data mining. He has published widely in various international journals. He is an Associate Editor of IMA Journal of Management Mathematics and Guest Editor to several special issues of journals including Journal of Operational Research Society, Annals of Operations Research, Journal of Medical Systems, and International Journal of Energy Management Sector. He is in the editorial board of several international journals and co-founder of Performance Improvement Management Software. William Ho is a Senior Lecturer at the Aston University Business School. Before joining Aston in 2005, he had worked as a Research Associate in the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. His research interests include supply chain management, production and operations management, and operations research. He has published extensively in various international journals like Computers & Operations Research, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, European Journal of Operational Research, Expert Systems with Applications, International Journal of Production Economics, International Journal of Production Research, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, and so on. His first authored book was published in 2006. He is an Editorial Board member of the International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology and an Associate Editor of the OR Insight Journal. Currently, he is a Scholar of the Advanced Institute of Management Research. Uses of frontier efficiency methodologies and multi-criteria decision making for performance measurement in the energy sector This special issue aims to focus on holistic, applied research on performance measurement in energy sector management and for publication of relevant applied research to bridge the gap between industry and academia. After a rigorous refereeing process, seven papers were included in this special issue. The volume opens with five data envelopment analysis (DEA)-based papers. Wu et al. apply the DEA-based Malmquist index to evaluate the changes in relative efficiency and the total factor productivity of coal-fired electricity generation of 30 Chinese administrative regions from 1999 to 2007. Factors considered in the model include fuel consumption, labor, capital, sulphur dioxide emissions, and electricity generated. The authors reveal that the east provinces were relatively and technically more efficient, whereas the west provinces had the highest growth rate in the period studied. Ioannis E. Tsolas applies the DEA approach to assess the performance of Greek fossil fuel-fired power stations taking undesirable outputs into consideration, such as carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide emissions. In addition, the bootstrapping approach is deployed to address the uncertainty surrounding DEA point estimates, and provide bias-corrected estimations and confidence intervals for the point estimates. The author revealed from the sample that the non-lignite-fired stations are on an average more efficient than the lignite-fired stations. Maethee Mekaroonreung and Andrew L. Johnson compare the relative performance of three DEA-based measures, which estimate production frontiers and evaluate the relative efficiency of 113 US petroleum refineries while considering undesirable outputs. Three inputs (capital, energy consumption, and crude oil consumption), two desirable outputs (gasoline and distillate generation), and an undesirable output (toxic release) are considered in the DEA models. The authors discover that refineries in the Rocky Mountain region performed the best, and about 60 percent of oil refineries in the sample could improve their efficiencies further. H. Omrani, A. Azadeh, S. F. Ghaderi, and S. Abdollahzadeh presented an integrated approach, combining DEA, corrected ordinary least squares (COLS), and principal component analysis (PCA) methods, to calculate the relative efficiency scores of 26 Iranian electricity distribution units from 2003 to 2006. Specifically, both DEA and COLS are used to check three internal consistency conditions, whereas PCA is used to verify and validate the final ranking results of either DEA (consistency) or DEA-COLS (non-consistency). Three inputs (network length, transformer capacity, and number of employees) and two outputs (number of customers and total electricity sales) are considered in the model. Virendra Ajodhia applied three DEA-based models to evaluate the relative performance of 20 electricity distribution firms from the UK and the Netherlands. The first model is a traditional DEA model for analyzing cost-only efficiency. The second model includes (inverse) quality by modelling total customer minutes lost as an input data. The third model is based on the idea of using total social costs, including the firm’s private costs and the interruption costs incurred by consumers, as an input. Both energy-delivered and number of consumers are treated as the outputs in the models. After five DEA papers, Stelios Grafakos, Alexandros Flamos, Vlasis Oikonomou, and D. Zevgolis presented a multiple criteria analysis weighting approach to evaluate the energy and climate policy. The proposed approach is akin to the analytic hierarchy process, which consists of pairwise comparisons, consistency verification, and criteria prioritization. In the approach, stakeholders and experts in the energy policy field are incorporated in the evaluation process by providing an interactive mean with verbal, numerical, and visual representation of their preferences. A total of 14 evaluation criteria were considered and classified into four objectives, such as climate change mitigation, energy effectiveness, socioeconomic, and competitiveness and technology. Finally, Borge Hess applied the stochastic frontier analysis approach to analyze the impact of various business strategies, including acquisition, holding structures, and joint ventures, on a firm’s efficiency within a sample of 47 natural gas transmission pipelines in the USA from 1996 to 2005. The author finds that there were no significant changes in the firm’s efficiency by an acquisition, and there is a weak evidence for efficiency improvements caused by the new shareholder. Besides, the author discovers that parent companies appear not to influence a subsidiary’s efficiency positively. In addition, the analysis shows a negative impact of a joint venture on technical efficiency of the pipeline company. To conclude, we are grateful to all the authors for their contribution, and all the reviewers for their constructive comments, which made this special issue possible. We hope that this issue would contribute significantly to performance improvement of the energy sector.

What are tests for? The implications of stuttering steps along the patient pathway

This article explores the implications of how US family physicians make decisions about ordering diagnostic tests for their patients. Data is based on a study of 256 physicians interviewed after viewing a video vignette of a presenting patient. The qualitative analysis of 778 statements relating to trustworthiness of evidence for their decision making, the use of any kind of technology and diagnostic testing suggests a range of internal and external constraints on physician decision making. Test-ordering for family physicians in the United States is significantly influenced by both hidden cognitive processes related to the physician's calculation of patient resources and a health insurance system that requires certain types of evidence in order to permit further tests or particular interventions. The consequence of the need for physicians to meet multiple forms of proof that may not always relate to relevant treatment delays a diagnosis and treatment plan agreed not only by the physician and patient but also the insurance company. This results in a patient journey that is made up of stuttering steps to a confirmed diagnosis and treatment undermining patient-centred practice, compromising patient care, constraining physician autonomy and creating additional expense. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

Randomised masked clinical trial of the MGDRx eyebag for the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction-related evaporative dry eye

Background/aims To investigate the efficacy and safety of the MGDRx EyeBag (The Eyebag Company, Halifax, UK) eyelid warming device. Methods Twenty-five patients with confirmed meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD)-related evaporative dry eye were enrolled into a randomised, single masked, contralateral clinical trial. Test eyes received a heated device; control eyes a non-heated device for 5 min twice a day for 2 weeks. Efficacy (ocular symptomology, noninvasive break-up time, lipid layer thickness, osmolarity, meibomian gland dropout and function) and safety (visual acuity, corneal topography, conjunctival hyperaemia and staining) measurements were taken at baseline and follow-up. Subsequent patient device usage and ocular comfort was ascertained at 6 months. Results Differences between test and control eyes at baseline were not statistically signi ficant for all measurements ( p>0.05). After 2 weeks, statistically significant improvements occurred in all efficacy measurements in test eyes ( p<0.05). Visual acuity and corneal topography were unaffected (p>0.05). All patients maintained higher ocular comfort after 6 months ( p<0.05), although the bene fit was greater in those who continued usage 1-8 times a month (p<0.001). Conclusions The MGDRx EyeBag is a safe and effective device for the treatment of MGD-related evaporative dry eye. Subjective benefit lasts at least 6 months, aided by occasional retreatment. Trial registration number NCT01870180.

Interactive data in financial reporting:the construction of the non-professional investor

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States and in particular its immediately past chairman, Christopher Cox, has been actively promoting an upgrade of the EDGAR system of disseminating filings. The new generation of information provision has been dubbed by Chairman Cox, "Interactive Data" (SEC, 2006). In October this year the Office of Interactive Disclosure was created(http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-213.htm). The focus of this paper is to examine the way in which the non-professional investor has been constructed by various actors. We examine the manner in which Interactive Data has been sold as the panacea for financial market 'irregularities' by the SEC and others. The academic literature shows almost no evidence of researching non-professional investors in any real sense (Young, 2006). Both this literature and the behaviour of representatives of institutions such as the SEC and FSA appears to find it convenient to construct this class of investor in a particular form and to speak for them. We theorise the activities of the SEC and its chairman in particular over a period of about three years, both following and prior to the 'credit crunch'. Our approach is to examine a selection of the policy documents released by the SEC and other interested parties and the statements made by some of the policy makers and regulators central to the programme to advance the socio-technical project that is constituted by Interactive Data. We adopt insights from ANT and more particularly the sociology of translation (Callon, 1986; Latour, 1987, 2005; Law, 1996, 2002; Law & Singleton, 2005) to show how individuals and regulators have acted as spokespersons for this malleable class of investor. We theorise the processes of accountability to investors and others and in so doing reveal the regulatory bodies taking the regulated for granted. The possible implications of technological developments in digital reporting have been identified also by the CEO's of the six biggest audit firms in a discussion document on the role of accounting information and audit in the future of global capital markets (DiPiazza et al., 2006). The potential for digital reporting enabled through XBRL to "revolutionize the entire company reporting model" (p.16) is discussed and they conclude that the new model "should be driven by the wants of investors and other users of company information,..." (p.17; emphasis in the original). Here rather than examine the somewhat illusive and vexing question of whether adding interactive functionality to 'traditional' reports can achieve the benefits claimed for nonprofessional investors we wish to consider the rhetorical and discursive moves in which the SEC and others have engaged to present such developments as providing clearer reporting and accountability standards and serving the interests of this constructed and largely unknown group - the non-professional investor.