IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p14215-d959112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review of the Delphi–AHP Method in Analyzing Challenges to Public-Sector Project Procurement and the Supply Chain: A Developing Country’s Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan

    (Department of Agribusiness and Marketing, Faculty of Agricultural, Economics and Rural Sociology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh 2202, Bangladesh)

  • Mohammad Jahangir Alam

    (Department of Agribusiness and Marketing, Faculty of Agricultural, Economics and Rural Sociology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh 2202, Bangladesh)

  • Nazia Tabassum

    (Department of Agribusiness and Marketing, Faculty of Agricultural, Economics and Rural Sociology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh 2202, Bangladesh)

  • Niaz Ahmed Khan

    (Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh)

Abstract

The effectiveness of public-sector agricultural development projects in developing countries lies not only in their contributions to agricultural sector growth but also in their contributions to environmental and socioeconomic system growth. As a result, the challenges associated with project procurement and supply chain management need to be carefully analyzed and evaluated. Although there has been reasonable literature on procurement and supply chain management, the limitations include the following: The literature, especially focusing on the analytical methodology, is scarce, as is the case with the developing country public-sector project context. This study, in its own modest way, contributes to this gap. Thus, the goal of this paper is to critically examine the Delphi and/or analytical hierarchy process (AHP), as well as their application and appropriateness in analyzing the challenges in the Bangladesh context, from relevant literature published between 2000 and 2019. A systematic review was carried out using the ABI/Inform, EBSCO, Google Scholar, and Science Direct databases for the study. The review of 2071 articles yielded 37 articles for the study. The Delphi and/or AHP were the most applied tools found in the review. Finally, the study examined 18 articles that applied Delphi and/or AHP methods. The review findings contribute to the literature by providing academics and practitioners with an understanding of the appropriateness of the Delphi-based AHP research framework for analyzing challenges to procurement and supply chain management in public-sector agriculture projects. Following that, a novel best-practice research framework based on the Delphi–AHP method is presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Nazia Tabassum & Niaz Ahmed Khan, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Delphi–AHP Method in Analyzing Challenges to Public-Sector Project Procurement and the Supply Chain: A Developing Country’s Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14215-:d:959112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14215/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14215/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Md. Maruf Hossan Chowdhury & Nusrat Jusy Umme & Md. Nuruzzaman, 2018. "Strategies for Mitigating Supply-Side Barriers in the Apparel Supply Chain: A Study on the Apparel Industry of Bangladesh," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 19(1), pages 41-52, March.
    2. Bouzon, Marina & Govindan, Kannan & Rodriguez, Carlos M.Taboada & Campos, Lucila M.S., 2016. "Identification and analysis of reverse logistics barriers using fuzzy Delphi method and AHP," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 182-197.
    3. Luay Jum’a & Dominik Zimon & Muhammad Ikram, 2021. "A Relationship between Supply Chain Practices, Environmental Sustainability and Financial Performance: Evidence from Manufacturing Companies in Jordan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Kateryna Lysenko-Ryba & Dominik Zimon, 2021. "Customer Behavioral Reactions to Negative Experiences during the Product Return," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    5. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    6. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "An orders-of-magnitude AHP supply chain risk assessment framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 144-156.
    7. Govindan, Kannan & Kaliyan, Mathiyazhagan & Kannan, Devika & Haq, A.N., 2014. "Barriers analysis for green supply chain management implementation in Indian industries using analytic hierarchy process," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PB), pages 555-568.
    8. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    9. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    10. Paul Winters & Alessandro Maffioli & Lina Salazar, 2011. "Introduction to the Special Feature: Evaluating the Impact of Agricultural Projects in Developing Countries," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(2), pages 393-402, June.
    11. Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Kumar, Pradeep & Barua, Mukesh Kumar, 2015. "Risk analysis in green supply chain using fuzzy AHP approach: A case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 104(PB), pages 375-390.
    12. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    13. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2003. "The use of Analytic Hierarchy Process to incorporate stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 13-26, January.
    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. Prin Boonkanit & Kridchai Suthiluck, 2023. "Developing a Decision-Making Support System for a Smart Construction and Demolition Waste Transition to a Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-27, June.
    2. Mohammed Abdul-Rahman & Wale Alade & Shahnawaz Anwer, 2023. "A Composite Resilience Index (CRI) for Developing Resilience and Sustainability in University Towns," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, February.

    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. Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan & Nazia Tabassum & Niaz Ahmed Khan & Mohammad Jahangir Alam, 2022. "Procurement challenges in public-sector agricultural development projects in Bangladesh," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Rashmi Ranjan Swain & Swagatika Mishra & S. S. Mahapatra, 2024. "An integrated BWM–SWARA approach to identify barriers in implementing reverse logistics for an effective supply chain management: a critical study of five bottle manufacturing companies in Odisha (Ind," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 15(9), pages 4495-4511, September.
    3. Feng, Jianghong & Guo, Ping & Xu, Guangyi & Xu, Gangyan & Ning, Yu, 2024. "An integrated decision framework for resilient sustainable waste electric vehicle battery recycling transfer station site selection," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 373(C).
    4. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    6. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "Better decisions with less cognitive load: The Parsimonious BWM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    7. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    8. Puppala, Harish & Peddinti, Pranav R.T. & Tamvada, Jagannadha Pawan & Ahuja, Jaya & Kim, Byungmin, 2023. "Barriers to the adoption of new technologies in rural areas: The case of unmanned aerial vehicles for precision agriculture in India," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Vivek Agrawal & Rajendra P. Mohanty & Sucheta Agarwal & Jitendra Kumar Dixit & Anand M. Agrawal, 2023. "Analyzing critical success factors for sustainable green supply chain management," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8233-8258, August.
    10. Ghuge, Sagar & Akarte, Milind, 2024. "Additive manufacturing service bureau selection: A Bayesian network integrated framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    11. K. Mathiyazhagan & Srijit Krishnan & Uma Bharathi & Andrea Appolloni, 2021. "Pathways towards reverse logistics adoption in Indian educational institutes: a challenging factors analysis," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 58(3), pages 661-689, September.
    12. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Chun-Chieh Tseng & Jun-Yi Zeng & Min-Liang Hsieh & Chih-Hung Hsu, 2022. "Analysis of Innovation Drivers of New and Old Kinetic Energy Conversion Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Chinese Case," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(20), pages 1-25, October.
    14. Qigan Shao & Sung-Shun Weng & James J.H. Liou & Huai-Wei Lo & Hongbo Jiang, 2019. "Developing A Sustainable Urban-Environmental Quality Evaluation System in China Based on A Hybrid Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-25, April.
    15. Chong Li & He Huang & Ya Luo, 2022. "An Integrated Two-Dimension Linguistic Intuitionistic Fuzzy Decision-Making Approach for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Supplier Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-24, September.
    16. Vineet Kaushik & Ashwani Kumar & Himanshu Gupta & Gaurav Dixit, 2022. "Modelling and prioritizing the factors for online apparel return using BWM approach," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 843-873, September.
    17. Sarbast Moslem & Muhammet Gul & Danish Farooq & Erkan Celik & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2020. "An Integrated Approach of Best-Worst Method (BWM) and Triangular Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating Driver Behavior Factors Related to Road Safety," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.
    18. Yiğit Kazançoğlu & Muhittin Sağnak & Çisem Lafcı & Sunil Luthra & Anil Kumar & Caner Taçoğlu, 2021. "Big Data-Enabled Solutions Framework to Overcoming the Barriers to Circular Economy Initiatives in Healthcare Sector," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-21, July.
    19. Yu-Yu Ma & Jwu-Jenq Chen & Chia-Liang Lin, 2022. "Research on the Priority of Service Quality Index for Online English Teaching during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Dual Perspective," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-24, October.
    20. Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Patrik Juhász & Sergii V. Kadenko & Vitaliy Tsyganok, 2023. "Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices based on graphs with average degree approximately 3," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 783-807, July.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14215-:d:959112. 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.