journal article·2025-01-28Open access

Biodiversity Protection Practices in Supply Chain Management: A Novel Hybrid Grey Best–Worst Method/Axial Distance-Based Aggregated Measurement Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model

Mladen Krstić, Snežana Tadić, Pier Paolo Miglietta, Donatella Porrini

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 3

Abstract

Biodiversity, from genes to entire ecosystems, is crucial for a healthy planet. However, human activities, including business practices, are causing rapid biodiversity loss. This study focuses on selecting and integrating biodiversity protection practices into the supply chain, offering a chance to make positive changes for the environment and future generations. A new hybrid grey multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model is proposed in this paper, which combines the grey Best–Worst Method (BWM) for obtaining criteria weights and the grey Axial Distance-based Aggregated Measurement (ADAM) method for ranking alternatives (practices). The applicability of the proposed model for solving the defined problem was demonstrated by ranking nine practices according to seven criteria. The most effective supply chain management practices in the context of biodiversity conservation were supply chain policies (with a score of 0.044), biodiversity goal setting, monitoring, reporting, and transparency (0.039), and education and awareness raising (0.037). These practices are the best because they combine clear frameworks, measurable goals, and long-term cultural change for effective biodiversity conservation. The lowest ranked practice is compliance with legislation (0.006) since it represents a baseline, reactive approach rather than a proactive or innovative strategy for biodiversity conservation. This study provides a comprehensive framework and hybrid MCDM model that enhances theoretical knowledge and can serve as a basis for developing a practical tool for integrating, assessing, and prioritizing biodiversity-focused practices in supply chains. The main novelties of this paper are the extension of the ADAM method in the grey environment, the development of a new hybrid MCDM model that combines the grey BWM and grey ADAM method, the identification of biodiversity-oriented business strategies in supply chains and the criteria for their evaluation, and a framework for practice evaluation and selection.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Sustainable Supply Chain Management · Multi-Criteria Decision Making · Environmental Quality and Pollution

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Economic Sciences, University of Salento, Via Monteroni snc, 73100 Lecce, Italy

Logistics Department, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, University of Belgrade, Vojvode Stepe 305, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

National Biodiversity Future Center (NBFC), 90133 Palermo, Italy

Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technologies, University of Salento, Via Monteroni snc, 73100 Lecce, Italy

Funding

National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) · European Union—Next Generation EU · Italian Ministry of University and Research

References (71)

Show source-provided references
1. Getting the measure of biodiversity10.1038/35012221 ↗
2. Understanding changes in business strategies regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.10.013 ↗
3. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in supply chain management in the global forest industry10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.006 ↗
4. The Significant Effects of Agricultural Systems on the Environment10.58344/jws.v2i6.291 ↗
5. Kumar, P., Kumar, A., Patil, M., Hussain, S., Sharma, S., Singh, S., Yadav, R., Tokas, D., and Singh, A.N. (2022). Biodiversity Resources and Ecosystem Services in the Context of the Industrialized World. Biodiversity, CRC Press.10.1201/9781003220398-3 ↗
6. Oves, M., Zain Khan, M., and Ismail, M.I.I. (2018). Chemical contaminants for soil, air and aquatic ecosystem. Modern Age Environmental Problems and Their Remediation, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-64501-8 ↗
7. The environmental price of fast fashion10.1038/s43017-020-0039-9 ↗
8. Biodiversity management: A supply chain practice view
9. Corporate responsibility reporting of biodiversity in the supply chain
10. The concept of biodiversity and its relevance to mankind: A short review
11. The dynamics of European Union biodiversity policy: Interactive, functional and institutional logics10.1080/09644010412331308264 ↗
12. Area-based conservation and the Sustainable Development Goals: A review10.1080/14888386.2022.2150313 ↗
13. Assessing and monitoring the effects of land cover changes in biodiversity. Case study: Mediterranean coastal region, Sousse, Tunisia
14. Loss of terrestrial biodiversity in Australia: Magnitude, causation, and response10.1126/science.adg7870 ↗
15. Ramdas, S. (2023). Wildlife, Climate Change, Habitat, and Invasive Species. Farm Animal Welfare Law, CRC Press.10.1201/9781003137733-15 ↗
16. Accorsi, R., and Bhat, R. (2023). Sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services with agricultural production. Sustainable Development and Pathways for Food Ecosystems, Academic Press.
17. Banerjee, A., Jhariya, M.K., Bargali, S.S., and Debnath Palit, D. (2023). Forest Biodiversity Conservation and Restoration: Policies, Plan, and Approaches. Ecorestoration for Sustainability, Scrivener Publishing.10.1002/9781119879954 ↗
18. A perspective on green, blue, and grey spaces, biodiversity, microbiota, and human health10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164772 ↗
19. Business, biodiversity and ecosystem services: Evidence from large-scale survey data10.1002/bse.3141 ↗
20. Economic factors underlying biodiversity loss10.1098/rstb.2022.0197 ↗
21. Monitoring the fabric of nature: Using allometric trophic network models and observations to assess policy effects on biodiversity10.1098/rstb.2022.0189 ↗
22. Exploring sustainable logistics practices toward a circular economy: A value creation perspective10.1002/bse.3170 ↗
23. Business and biodiversity: Achieving the 2050 vision for biodiversity conservation through transformative business practices
24. The uncomfortable relationship between business and biodiversity: Advancing research on business strategies for biodiversity protection10.1002/bse.3139 ↗
25. Linking large extractive industries to sustainable development of rural communities at mining sites in Africa: Challenges and pathways10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103322 ↗
26. Exploring the potential of circular economy to mitigate pressures on biodiversity10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102625 ↗
27. The incorporated environmental policies and regulations into bioenergy supply chain management: A literature review10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153202 ↗
28. Company engagement with supply chains to protect biodiversity and rare, threatened, and endangered species10.1002/tqem.21663 ↗
29. Corazza, M.V. (2024). A Comprehensive Research Agenda for Integrating Ecological Principles into the Transportation Sector. Sustainability, 16.10.3390/su16167081 ↗
30. Massarelli, C. (2024). Eveloping a Calculation Workflow for Designing and Monitoring Urban Ecological Corridors: A Case Study. Urban Sci., 8.10.3390/urbansci8040169 ↗
31. Buenk, R., Grobbelaar, S.S., and Meyer, I. (2019). A framework for the sustainability assessment of (Micro) transit systems. Sustainability, 11.10.3390/su11215929 ↗
32. Optimizing ecological corridors for urban sustainability by using remote sensing and decision modeling
33. Antecedents for circular bioeconomy practices towards sustainability of supply chain10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131329 ↗
34. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009 ↗
35. Mishra, A., and Kumar, R. (2024). Ranking of Cloud Services by applying BWM-TOPSIS, BWM-ARAS, and BWM-COPRAS Hybrid MCDM Methods. Res. Sq., Preprint.10.21203/rs.3.rs-4094143/v1 ↗
36. A review of selected weighing methods in MCDM with a case study10.1007/s13198-020-01033-3 ↗
37. Grey best-worst method for multiple experts multiple criteria decision making under uncertainty10.15388/20-INFOR409 ↗
38. Prioritization of factors and selection of best business practice from bio-medical waste generated using best–worst method10.1108/BIJ-11-2021-0698 ↗
39. Barasin, A.M., Alqahtani, A.Y., and Makki, A.A. (2024). Performance Evaluation of Retail Warehouses: A Combined MCDM Approach Using G-BWM and RATMI. Logistics, 8.10.3390/logistics8010010 ↗
40. Evaluation of sustainable energy systems in smart cities using a Multi-Expert Pythagorean fuzzy BWM & TOPSIS methodology10.1016/j.eswa.2024.123874 ↗
41. Krstić, M., Agnusdei, G.P., Tadić, S., Kovač, M., and Miglietta, P.P. (2023). A novel axial-distance-based aggregated measurement (ADAM) method for the evaluation of agri-food circular-economy-based business models. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11061334 ↗
42. Supplier selection to support environmental sustainability: The stratified BWM TOPSIS method10.1007/s10479-022-04878-y ↗
43. Hwang, C.L., and Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9 ↗
44. Opricovic, S. (1998). Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems, Faculty of Civil Engineering.
45. Krstić, M., Agnusdei, G.P., Miglietta, P.P., Tadić, S., and Roso, V. (2022). Applicability of industry 4.0 technologies in the reverse logistics: A circular economy approach based on comprehensive distance based ranking (COBRA) method. Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su14095632 ↗
46. Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill International.10.21236/ADA214804 ↗
47. Saaty, T.L. (1996). Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications.
48. Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new stepulien weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA)10.3846/jbem.2010.12 ↗
49. Andrejić, M., Pajić, V., and Kilibarda, M. (2023). Distribution channel selection using FUCOM-ADAM: A novel approach. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su151914527 ↗
50. Prioritization of e-traceability drivers in the agri-food supply chains10.1186/s40100-023-00284-5 ↗
51. Selection of tourism accommodation facilities for development: An ADAM-based approach
52. Comprehensive multistage approach for measuring the efficiency of logistics processes in the presence of a mismatch between sales and logistics10.1016/j.aej.2024.05.093 ↗
53. Popovic, G., Fedajev, A., Mitic, P., and Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I. (Manag. Decis., 2024). An ADAM-based approach to unveiling entrepreneurial ecosystems in selected European countries, Manag. Decis., ahead of print.10.1108/MD-12-2023-2420 ↗
54. Pajić, V., Andrejić, M., Jolović, M., and Kilibarda, M. (2024). Strategic warehouse location selection in business logistics: A novel approach using imf SWARA–MARCOS—A case study of a Serbian logistics service provider. Mathematics, 12.10.3390/math12050776 ↗
55. Kovač, M., Tadić, S., Krstić, M., and Veljović, M. (2023). A methodology for planning city logistics concepts based on city-dry port micro-consolidation centres. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11153347 ↗
56. Digitalization as driver to achieve circularity in the agroindustry: A SWOT-ANP-ADAM approach10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163441 ↗
57. Grey set sand greyness10.1016/j.ins.2011.09.029 ↗
58. How economic contexts shape calculations of yield in biodiversity offsetting10.1111/cobi.12917 ↗
59. Integrating biodiversity conservation in wider landscape management: Necessity, implementation and evaluation10.1016/bs.aecr.2020.08.004 ↗
60. Ensuring effective implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity targets10.1038/s41559-020-01375-y ↗
61. Are corporate biodiversity commitments consistent with delivering ‘nature-positive’ outcomes? A review of ‘nature-positive’ definitions, company progress and challenges10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134798 ↗
62. The role of education in biodiversity conservation: Can knowledge and understanding alter locals’ views and attitudes towards ecosystem services?10.1080/13504622.2022.2117796 ↗
63. Beck-O’Brien, M., and Bringezu, S. (2021). Biodiversity monitoring in long-distance food supply chains: Tools, gaps and needs to meet business requirements and sustainability goals. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su13158536 ↗
64. Managing biodiversity through stakeholder involvement: Why, who, and for what initiatives?10.1007/s10551-015-2668-3 ↗
65. Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation?10.1016/j.biocon.2012.08.018 ↗
66. Agri-food4.0: A survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture10.1016/j.compind.2020.103187 ↗
67. Digitalization to achieve sustainable development goals: Steps towards a Smart Green Planet10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148539 ↗
68. Fostering sustainable logistics businesses: The role of innovation ecosystems and institutional contexts for logistics firms in China10.1108/APJML-06-2021-0412 ↗
69. Synchronized barriers for circular supply chains in industry 3.5/industry 4.0 transition for sustainable resource management10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104986 ↗
70. Have food supply chain policies improved forest conservation and rural livelihoods? A systematic review10.1088/1748-9326/abe0ed ↗
71. Designing effective and equitable zero-deforestation supply chain policies10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102357 ↗