ArticleHeliyon2024
Intelligent management and legal regulation of enterprise green supply chain by fuzzy comprehensive evaluation.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the risk levels of intelligent management in Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) through the application of the Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation (FCE) model. It begins by outlining the structure of the green supply chain (GSC), encompassing various components such as suppliers, manufacturers, and distributors, while incorporating considerations of environmental and sustainability factors. Data is collected from Company Y through a questionnaire survey, and the FCE model is employed to assess the risk levels of intelligent management within GSCM. The study identifies that Company Y faces high-risk factors in supply chain management, including customer demand fluctuations, inadequate supplier capacity, and reliance on exclusive suppliers, with a risk rating of 4. Additionally, moderate-risk factors, such as partnerships, policies, cash flow, technological capabilities, and internal production management, were rated at a risk level of 3. Based on the risk assessment results, the study proposes several recommendations for improvement. These include reinforcing the enforcement of environmental policies, establishing mechanisms for supply chain information transparency, and promoting clean production technologies. These recommendations are intended to assist the company in better adhering to environmental regulations and fostering sustainable supply chain development. The study's innovation lies in the successful integration of the FCE model into the supply chain risk assessment framework, effectively combining subjective evaluations with objective data to improve the accuracy of the assessment. The findings provide scientific evidence for companies to manage risks and formulate strategies, while also offering new insights into the multidimensional nature of supply chain risks, encompassing social, economic, environmental, and technological dimensions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.