IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2022i1p465-d1017052.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Assessment of China Rapeseed Supply Chain and Policy Suggestions

Author

Listed:
  • Fujia Li

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Kexin Guo

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Xiaoyong Liao

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

Rapeseed, as the most important oil crop in the world, not only affects national food security but also affects energy security and environmental security. It is very important to conduct a risk assessment of China’s rapeseed supply chain and put forward suggestions to construct a safe, effective, and accessible supply chain. In order to accurately evaluate the safety of the rapeseed supply chain from 2010 to 2020, we applied fuzzy multiconnection theory and analytic hierarchy process model (AHP). A comprehensive risk assessment model for the rapeseed supply chain with two primary indicators and 10 secondary indicators was constructed. By establishing the rapeseed risk evaluation model, we quantitatively analyzed the risk of China’s rapeseed supply chain. The domestic risk of production is still high, and the international risk under the high import dependence is alarming. We put forward risk prevention and countermeasures for China’s rapeseed supply chain. The results show that China has a large demand for rapeseed products, but the increase in China production is limited and the import from other countries is unstable. The proposed suggestions are designed to optimize and enhance the stability of the rapeseed product’s supply chain. It is recommended to continue to consolidate and deepen the cooperation with traditional trading partners such as Germany, Spain, the United States, and Brazil; expand other import sources to build a more diversified and efficient rapeseed product import network and extend the supply chain of rapeseed products. This research can be a basis for making decisions for promoting the sustainable and efficient development of the rapeseed supply chain.

Suggested Citation

  • Fujia Li & Kexin Guo & Xiaoyong Liao, 2022. "Risk Assessment of China Rapeseed Supply Chain and Policy Suggestions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2022:i:1:p:465-:d:1017052
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/465/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/465/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tianming Gao & Vasilii Erokhin & Aleksandr Arskiy, 2019. "Dynamic Optimization of Fuel and Logistics Costs as a Tool in Pursuing Economic Sustainability of a Farm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Catherine Benoit-Norris & Deana Aulisio Cavan & Gregory Norris, 2012. "Identifying Social Impacts in Product Supply Chains:Overview and Application of the Social Hotspot Database," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Bo Yan & Xinni Wang & Ping Shi, 2017. "Risk assessment and control of agricultural supply chains under Internet of Things," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1), pages 1-12, January.
    4. Peyman Zandi & Mohammad Rahmani & Mojtaba Khanian & Amir Mosavi, 2020. "Agricultural Risk Management Using Fuzzy TOPSIS Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, October.
    5. Behzadi, Golnar & O’Sullivan, Michael Justin & Olsen, Tava Lennon & Zhang, Abraham, 2018. "Agribusiness supply chain risk management: A review of quantitative decision models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 21-42.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. El Mehdi, Er Raqabi & Ilyas, Himmich & Nizar, El Hachemi & Issmaïl, El Hallaoui & François, Soumis, 2023. "Incremental LNS framework for integrated production, inventory, and vessel scheduling: Application to a global supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    2. Mahdi Bashiri & Benny Tjahjono & Jordon Lazell & Jennifer Ferreira & Tomy Perdana, 2021. "The Dynamics of Sustainability Risks in the Global Coffee Supply Chain: A Case of Indonesia–UK," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Datu Buyung Agusdinata & Wenjuan Liu & Sinta Sulistyo & Philippe LeBillon & Je'anne Wegner, 2023. "Evaluating sustainability impacts of critical mineral extractions: Integration of life cycle sustainability assessment and SDGs frameworks," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 746-759, June.
    4. Zhinan Li & Qinming Liu & Chunming Ye & Ming Dong & Yihan Zheng, 2022. "Achieving Resilience: Resilient Price and Quality Strategies of Fresh Food Dual-Channel Supply Chain Considering the Disruption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-24, May.
    5. Jianing Wei & Jixiao Cui & Yinan Xu & Jinna Li & Xinyu Lei & Wangsheng Gao & Yuanquan Chen, 2022. "Social Life Cycle Assessment of Major Staple Grain Crops in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, April.
    6. Vibeke Grupe Larsen & Valentina Antoniucci & Nicola Tollin & Peter Andreas Sattrup & Krister Jens & Morten Birkved & Tine Holmboe & Giuliano Marella, 2023. "A Methodological Framework to Foster Social Value Creation in Architectural Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-25, January.
    7. Dániel Fróna & János Szenderák & Mónika Harangi-Rákos, 2019. "The Challenge of Feeding the World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    8. Rafael Tordecilla-Madera & Andrés Polo & Adrián Cañón, 2018. "Vehicles Allocation for Fruit Distribution Considering CO 2 Emissions and Decisions on Subcontracting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Antonio Zavala-Alcívar & María-José Verdecho & Juan-José Alfaro-Saiz, 2020. "A Conceptual Framework to Manage Resilience and Increase Sustainability in the Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-38, August.
    10. Ming Tang & Huchang Liao & Zhengjun Wan & Enrique Herrera-Viedma & Marc A. Rosen, 2018. "Ten Years of Sustainability (2009 to 2018): A Bibliometric Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    11. Anja Hansen & Jörn Budde & Annette Prochnow, 2016. "Resource Usage Strategies and Trade-Offs between Cropland Demand, Fossil Fuel Consumption, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Building Insulation as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-24, June.
    12. Alexander Barke & Walter Cistjakov & Dominik Steckermeier & Christian Thies & Jan‐Linus Popien & Peter Michalowski & Sofia Pinheiro Melo & Felipe Cerdas & Christoph Herrmann & Ulrike Krewer & Arno Kwa, 2023. "Green batteries for clean skies: Sustainability assessment of lithium‐sulfur all‐solid‐state batteries for electric aircraft," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 795-810, June.
    13. Maureen S. Golan & Laura H. Jernegan & Igor Linkov, 2020. "Trends and applications of resilience analytics in supply chain modeling: systematic literature review in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 222-243, June.
    14. Gaëlle Petit & Caroline C. Sablayrolles & Gwenola Yannou-Le Bris, 2018. "Combining eco-social and environmental indicators to assess the sustainability performance of a food value chain: A case study," Post-Print hal-01813496, HAL.
    15. Luo, Na & Olsen, Tava & Liu, Yanping & Zhang, Abraham, 2022. "Reducing food loss and waste in supply chain operations," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    16. Alwin Dsouza & Ashok K. Mishra & Scott Webster, 2023. "Vertical coordination and post‐harvest losses: Implications on food loss," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 460-486, March.
    17. Igor Krejčí & Pavel Moulis & Jana Pitrová & Ivana Tichá & Ladislav Pilař & Jan Rydval, 2019. "Traps and Opportunities of Czech Small-Scale Beef Cattle Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, August.
    18. Moana S. Simas & Laura Golsteijn & Mark A. J. Huijbregts & Richard Wood & Edgar G. Hertwich, 2014. "The “Bad Labor” Footprint: Quantifying the Social Impacts of Globalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-27, October.
    19. Cao, Yu & Yi, Chaoqun & Wan, Guangyu & Hu, Hanli & Li, Qingsong & Wang, Shouyang, 2022. "An analysis on the role of blockchain-based platforms in agricultural supply chains," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    20. Nishat Alam Choudhary & Shalabh Singh & Tobias Schoenherr & M. Ramkumar, 2023. "Risk assessment in supply chains: a state-of-the-art review of methodologies and their applications," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(2), pages 565-607, 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:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2022:i:1:p:465-:d:1017052. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.