IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v71y2022ics0160791x22002871.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposing a new LSGDM framework based on BWM with hesitant fuzzy information for prioritizing blockchain adoption barriers in supply chain

Author

Listed:
  • Heidary-Dahooie, Jalil
  • Rafiee, Mostafa
  • Mohammadi, Mehdi
  • Meidute-Kavaliauskienė, Ieva

Abstract

Due to the vast advantages of Blockchain technology, especially transparency of information and the ability to track transactions, this technology has been considered in several areas, including supply chain management (SCM). However, due to the emergence of this technology, numerous barriers and limitations have hindered its use. Due to the special conditions of developing countries (such as Iran), there is still a need for independent research to localize these barriers in these countries. On the other hand, most of the research has focused more on identifying barriers and less on prioritizing them. Examining the specific features of the Blockchain technology field shows that there is a need to provide a decision-making framework based on large-scale group decision-making methods (LSGDM), which, in addition to simultaneously paying attention to the advantages of previous approaches (including the participation of different groups of stakeholders; the consensus reaching process (CRP) as well as the uncertainty and doubt of the stakeholders in the evaluations), can increase the applicability of the method by reducing the number of pairwise comparisons. Therefore, while identifying and localizing the list of barriers in Iran, the LSGDM method along with the proposed consensus framework can be used to aggregate the opinions between the experts in a network and create a relative consensus between them. The use of hesitant fuzzy (HF) sets has made it possible to model the uncertainty and hesitancy in the opinions of experts. Also, using the Best-Worst method (BWM) instead of the pairwise comparison approach between all criteria, has reduced the number of pairwise comparisons and provided other advantages such as reduced inconsistency and higher reliability. The results of applying this framework in Iran showed that lack of awareness and customer orientation, scalability and lack of management participation and support are the main barriers to the implementation of the blockchain for SCM in this developing country. The results can help decision makers and policy makers in this area to plan more accurately.

Suggested Citation

  • Heidary-Dahooie, Jalil & Rafiee, Mostafa & Mohammadi, Mehdi & Meidute-Kavaliauskienė, Ieva, 2022. "Proposing a new LSGDM framework based on BWM with hesitant fuzzy information for prioritizing blockchain adoption barriers in supply chain," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:71:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x22002871
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X22002871
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102146?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nir Kshetri, 2017. "Will blockchain emerge as a tool to break the poverty chain in the Global South?," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(8), pages 1710-1732, August.
    2. Sara Saberi & Mahtab Kouhizadeh & Joseph Sarkis & Lejia Shen, 2019. "Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(7), pages 2117-2135, April.
    3. Pei Wang & Xuanhua Xu & Shuai Huang, 2019. "An Improved Consensus-Based Model for Large Group Decision Making Problems Considering Experts with Linguistic Weighted Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 619-640, June.
    4. Wu, Zhibin & Xu, Jiuping, 2016. "Managing consistency and consensus in group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 28-40.
    5. ., 2021. "Introduction to Sustainable Consumption, Production and Supply Chain Management," Chapters, in: Sustainable Consumption, Production and Supply Chain Management, chapter 1, pages 1-6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Xuanhua Xu & Yanxia Huang & Ke Chen, 2019. "Method for large group emergency decision making with complex preferences based on emergency similarity and interval consistency," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(1), pages 45-64, May.
    7. Kshetri, Nir, 2021. "Blockchain and sustainable supply chain management in developing countries," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    8. Simonov Kusi-Sarpong & Himanshu Gupta & Joseph Sarkis, 2019. "A supply chain sustainability innovation framework and evaluation methodology," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(7), pages 1990-2008, April.
    9. Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F. & Chiclana, F. & Luque, M., 2004. "Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 98-109, April.
    10. David Yermack, 2017. "Corporate Governance and Blockchains," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 21(1), pages 7-31.
    11. Kshetri, Nir, 2018. "1 Blockchain’s roles in meeting key supply chain management objectives," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 80-89.
    12. Rezaei, Jafar & van Roekel, Wilco S. & Tavasszy, Lori, 2018. "Measuring the relative importance of the logistics performance index indicators using Best Worst Method," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 158-169.
    13. Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Multi-attribute large-scale group decision making with data mining and subgroup leaders: An application to the development of the circular economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    14. Queiroz, Maciel M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2019. "Blockchain adoption challenges in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in India and the USA," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 70-82.
    15. Cui, Yongfeng & Liu, Wei & Rani, Pratibha & Alrasheedi, Melfi, 2021. "Internet of Things (IoT) adoption barriers for the circular economy using Pythagorean fuzzy SWARA-CoCoSo decision-making approach in the manufacturing sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    16. Xiang, Liu, 2017. "Energy network dispatch optimization under emergency of local energy shortage with web tool for automatic large group decision-making," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 740-750.
    17. Badri Ahmadi, Hadi & Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Rezaei, Jafar, 2017. "Assessing the social sustainability of supply chains using Best Worst Method," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 99-106.
    18. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    19. Gunasekaran, A. & Patel, C. & McGaughey, Ronald E., 2004. "A framework for supply chain performance measurement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 333-347, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kumar, Sourabh & Barua, Mukesh Kumar, 2023. "Exploring the hyperledger blockchain technology disruption and barriers of blockchain adoption in petroleum supply chain," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Atanu Chaudhuri & Manjot Singh Bhatia & Yasanur Kayikci & Kiran J. Fernandes & Samuel Fosso-Wamba, 2023. "Improving social sustainability and reducing supply chain risks through blockchain implementation: role of outcome and behavioural mechanisms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 327(1), pages 401-433, August.
    2. Chen, R. & Chen, K. & Ou, Carol, 2023. "Facilitating interorganizational trust in strategic alliances by leveraging blockchain-based systems: Case studies of two eastern banks," Other publications TiSEM 85ecf99c-76f0-416e-9604-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Sharfuddin Ahmed Khan & Muhammad Shujaat Mubarik & Simonov Kusi‐Sarpong & Himanshu Gupta & Syed Imran Zaman & Mobashar Mubarik, 2022. "Blockchain technologies as enablers of supply chain mapping for sustainable supply chains," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(8), pages 3742-3756, December.
    4. Qingyu Zhang & Salman Khan & Safeer Ullah Khan & Ikram Ullah Khan, 2023. "Understanding Blockchain Technology Adoption in Operation and Supply Chain Management of Pakistan: Extending UTAUT Model With Technology Readiness, Technology Affinity and Trust," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, October.
    5. Yousefi, Samuel & Mohamadpour Tosarkani, Babak, 2022. "An analytical approach for evaluating the impact of blockchain technology on sustainable supply chain performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    6. Teck Ming Tan & Jari Salo, 2023. "Ethical Marketing in the Blockchain-Based Sharing Economy: Theoretical Integration and Guiding Insights," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 1113-1140, April.
    7. Ulpan Tokkozhina & Ana Lucia Martins & Joao C. Ferreira, 2023. "Uncovering dimensions of the impact of blockchain technology in supply chain management," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 99-125, March.
    8. Kirti Nayal & Rakesh D. Raut & Balkrishna E. Narkhede & Pragati Priyadarshinee & Gajanan B. Panchal & Vidyadhar V. Gedam, 2023. "Antecedents for blockchain technology-enabled sustainable agriculture supply chain," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 327(1), pages 293-337, August.
    9. Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "From conventional group decision making to large-scale group decision making: What are the challenges and how to meet them in big data era? A state-of-the-art survey," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    10. Zhang, Tianyu & Dong, Peiwu & Chen, Xiangfeng & Gong, Yu, 2023. "The impacts of blockchain adoption on a dual-channel supply chain with risk-averse members," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    11. Sahebi, Iman Ghasemian & Mosayebi, Alireza & Masoomi, Behzad & Marandi, Fatemeh, 2022. "Modeling the enablers for blockchain technology adoption in renewable energy supply chain," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Archana A Mukherjee & Rajesh Kumar Singh & Ruchi Mishra & Surajit Bag, 2022. "Application of blockchain technology for sustainability development in agricultural supply chain: justification framework," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 46-61, June.
    13. Agi, Maher A.N. & Jha, Ashish Kumar, 2022. "Blockchain technology in the supply chain: An integrated theoretical perspective of organizational adoption," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    14. Mohammadi, Majid & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Bayesian best-worst method: A probabilistic group decision making model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Sachin S. Kamble & Angappa Gunasekaran & Nachiappan Subramanian & Abhijeet Ghadge & Amine Belhadi & Mani Venkatesh, 2023. "Blockchain technology’s impact on supply chain integration and sustainable supply chain performance: evidence from the automotive industry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 327(1), pages 575-600, August.
    16. Giuliano Sansone & Flavio Santalucia & Davide Viglialoro & Paolo Landoni, 2023. "Blockchain for social good and stakeholder engagement: Evidence from a case study," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 2182-2193, September.
    17. Soumyadeb Chowdhury & Oscar Rodriguez-Espindola & Prasanta Dey & Pawan Budhwar, 2023. "Blockchain technology adoption for managing risks in operations and supply chain management: evidence from the UK," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 327(1), pages 539-574, August.
    18. Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Balakrishnan, Janarthanan & Das, Ronnie & Dutot, Vincent, 2023. "Resistance to innovation: A dynamic capability model based enquiry into retailers’ resistance to blockchain adaptation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    19. Zhang, Jian & Zhang, Xuanjian & Liu, Wei & Ji, Ming & Mishra, Arunodaya Raj, 2022. "Critical success factors of blockchain technology to implement the sustainable supply chain using an extended decision-making approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    20. Mehdi Rajabi Asadabadi & Hadi Badri Ahmadi & Himanshu Gupta & James J. H. Liou, 2023. "Supplier selection to support environmental sustainability: the stratified BWM TOPSIS method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(1), pages 321-344, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:71:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x22002871. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.