Evaluation of GSCM Practices in the Malaysian Automotive Industry

Int. J. Services and Operations Management, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2011 245

Copyright © 2011 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

Evaluation of green supply chain management practices in the Malaysian automotive industry

Ezutah Udoncy Olugu and Kuan Yew Wong* Department of Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Skudai, Malaysia E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author

Abstract: Becoming ‘green’ has become the latest challenge to automobile manufacturers. Greening the supply chain is viewed as an effective strategy towards environmental friendly products. This study used a set of measures and metrics to evaluate the green supply chain practices of the major automotive companies in Malaysia. The evaluation was conducted based on the various echelons involved in each company’s supply chain. Ten major suppliers and 100 customers were selected for the evaluation of each company. The internal operations of the organisations were also assessed. The results were analysed and inferences were drawn based on the results. It was found that green supply chain management in Malaysia has not received adequate attention. The study culminated with recommendations for further studies.

Keywords: green supply chain management; GSCM; automotive industry; Malaysia; supply chain.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Olugu, E.U. and Wong, K.Y. (2011) ‘Evaluation of green supply chain management practices in the Malaysian automotive industry’, Int. J. Services and Operations Management, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.245–258.

Biographical notes: Ezutah Udoncy Olugu is a PhD student at the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM).

Kuan Yew Wong holds a PhD from the University of Birmingham, England. Currently, he heads the Industrial Engineering Laboratory at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). He has been a Visiting Professor at the Faculty of Engineering, Autonomous University of the State of Mexico (UAEM).

1 Introduction

The concern over the environment has drastically increased over the last decade. Manufacturing operations and the ensuing products have been identified as the major contributor towards environmental degradation and imbalance in the ecosystem (Solvang et al., 2006). These have led to the emergence of various laws and policies aimed at checking these manufacturing operations and ensuing products (Ilgin and Gupta, 2010;

246 E.U. Olugu and K.Y. Wong

Schultmann et al., 2006; von Ahsen, 2006). Many organisations have devised strategies in combating anti-environmental practices, and one of these strategies is in the area of environmental supply chain management (Ji, 2008; Zhu et al., 2007), otherwise known as green supply chain management (GSCM) (Beamon, 1999; Hervani et al., 2005; Tsoulfas and Pappis, 2008). It can be defined as the totality of green purchasing, green manufacturing and material management, green distribution and marketing, as well as reverse logistics (Hervani et al., 2005; Handfield et al., 2005; Schonsleben, 2004). GSCM complements the traditional supply chain management concept (Gunasekaran et al., 2001; Handfield and Nichols, 1999; Min and Lambert, 2010; Wong and Wong, 2007, 2008) by addressing environmental issues and closing the loop of the chain. Therefore, it is a crucial strategy towards achieving environmental friendly products. On the other hand, environmental compliant products have the benefits of improving organisational image, profit and ecological efficiency (Beamon, 1999; Goodland, 1991; Rao and Holt, 2005; Hervani et al., 2005; Nunes et al., 2009; Salam, 2009).

GSCM involves changes in an organisation’s manufacturing philosophy. These changes include sourcing and selection of suppliers, assessing suppliers’ environmental performance, process modification and management, reducing packaging and overall waste, developing more eco-friendly products, reducing carbon emission associated with manufacturing and transportation of goods, etc. (Beamon, 1999; Rao, 2002; Vachon and Klassen, 2006; Walker et al., 2008; Olugu et al., 2009a). In order to reveal the extent of GSCM practices and the areas which are still lacking, there is a need to investigate the practices of various companies within the same industry. This is in line with Park et al. (2009)’s and Vonderembse et al. (2006)’s assertions that each product is unique, thus generalisation of supply chain studies is not adequate for an in-depth understanding of a supply chain. The choice of the automobile industry was based on the fact that it is one of the most vibrant in Malaysia. Secondly, companies in this industry are faced with stringent competition from their foreign counterparts. This competition has resulted in the expansion of their market reach. Such an expansion strategy requires that these companies fulfil the requirements of their target markets. It is a known fact that for any company to sell its vehicles in the European Community countries, it must fulfil certain environmental requirements (ECE, 2000; Schultmann et al., 2006; von Ahsen, 2006; Cruz-Rivera and Ertel, 2009). Thus, this study is going to reveal the level of GSCM practices adopted by Malaysian automobile manufacturers.

The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. Section 2 contains a review of previous studies on the Malaysian automotive industry. In Section 3, an overview of the Malaysian automotive industry is presented. Following this, Section 4 discusses the measures and metrics for evaluating GSCM practices. Section 5 explains the research methodology adopted in this study. This is followed by results and discussion in Section 6. The next section describes the implications of the study. Finally, the paper culminates with conclusions and recommendations for future studies.

2 Review of related previous studies

This research was conducted in Malaysia because it is one of the thriving automobile manufacturers in South-East Asia. Several studies have been focused on the Malaysian automotive industry lately, and they are now reviewed to establish the background for

Evaluation of green supply chain management practices 247

this research. For example, Amelia et al. (2009) conducted some interviews in a few selected local automobile and automotive component manufacturers in Malaysia. It was discovered that the reuse of automotive components in newly manufactured vehicles has never been practised by the selected companies. However, the study showed that there is an interest among the respondents in developing automotive components for after-market reuse. Another study was conducted by Wad (2009). He looked at different automobile manufacturing policies and strategies in Malaysia and Thailand. The study explored the level of growth in the context of economic globalisation and emerging regionalisation of the ASEAN automobile market in the 21st century between the two countries. The study believed that Thailand appears to have a higher growth based on the export success of its automobile industry due to the value chains of Japanese and US multi-national companies. It further called for the Malaysian automobile industry to innovate highly exportable brands which could augment the prosperity of this sector.

Rosli and Kari (2008) examined the performance of the Malaysian Government supported supplier programmes by comparing the performance of local and foreign automotive parts suppliers. It was found that foreign suppliers performed better than local ones. This was attributed to the superior technology from abroad as local firms lack firm-specific advantages that foreign multinational suppliers enjoy.

Rosli (2006) looked at the level of performance of the Malaysian automotive industry since its full inception. The study revealed that locally, the industry has faired well. This was attributed to the numerous protections put in place by the government. A further study by Abdullah et al. (2008) investigated the development of suppliers in the Malaysian automotive industry. The results revealed that supplier development programmes implemented by local automobile companies have contributed immensely to the development and continuous performance enhancement of suppliers.

The perspectives of Malaysian automobile manufacturing companies on their level of implementation of various customer relations management schemes were investigated by Ishak et al. (2007). The study used a sampling of two national and ten non-national car companies in Malaysia. It was observed that customer relations management programmes were still lacking in the Malaysian automobile industry. On the other hand, the study revealed that Malaysian automobile makers could use such a programme in identifying potential customers and reaching specific customer segments, besides identifying their various needs.

Ahmed and Humphreys (2008) came up with a framework which offers guidance for the emergence of potential transnational automotive companies in Malaysia from a local company’s point of view. It is believed that the framework will enhance the effective emergence of local national companies towards becoming transnational, and boost global competitiveness.

Based on the various studies reviewed, it has been found that issues which relate to green supply chain management (GSCM) practices in Malaysia have not been addressed. Amelia et al. (2009) further asserted that currently, there is no exact figure available to reveal the number of end-of-life vehicles (ELVs) that have been recycled and recovered in Malaysia. Sequel to these revelations, it becomes eminent to investigate the extent of GSCM practices in Malaysian automotive companies. Secondly, there has never been any study which used a set of measures and metrics to assess the GSCM practices in the Malaysian automotive industry. This is in line with the assertion by Seuring (2009) that despite the fact that GSCM is established as a field of interest for practitioners, there have


been surprisingly very little studies which report on its practices in Asia. Thus, this research acts as a novel study in this area.

3 The Malaysian automotive industry at a glance

The automotive industry in Malaysia is a booming industry which encompasses activities from car manufacturing, assembly, to developing automotive business with foreign countries. It can be considered as one of the most important and strategic industries in the manufacturing sector in Malaysia (Rosli, 2006; MAA, 2008; Amelia et al., 2009). This is in line with the world statistics that the automobile industry is the world’s largest single manufacturing sector (Turnbull et al., 1992; Sangwan and Digalwar, 2008; Lettice et al., 2009). This sector is believed to be the engine of industrial development, provider of technological capability, and generator of inter-industry linkages. In Malaysia, this industry is one of the principal manufacturers and exporters of vehicles, components and accessories, which are widely acceptable in some countries in the world. Foreign countries like Pakistan, Brunei, Singapore, Myanmar, Indonesia, etc., are the major importers of Malaysian cars. A market survey conducted by Business Times revealed that during 2007, the export of Malaysian vehicles reached 4,648 units with an overall growth of 13.8% and this was expected to increase in coming years (MAA, 2008). All these in part justify why the Malaysian automotive industry has been selected in this study.

The Malaysian automobile industry has been in existence for over 50 years. Initially, it started mainly as an assembler of passenger and commercial vehicles aimed at providing employment and reduction in import bills. Lately, with the establishment of two national car companies, Proton and Perodua in 1985 and 1993 respectively, it has transformed Malaysia from a mere vehicle assembler into a manufacturer. To date, there are 28 manufacturing and assembly plants in Malaysia producing passenger and commercial vehicles, composite body sports cars, as well as motorcycles and scooters (MIDA, 2006). These plants have a total installed capacity of approximately 963,300 passenger and commercial vehicles and about one million motorcycles per year. The industry has numerous automotive component manufacturers which produce a wide range of components, such as body panels, brake parts, engine parts, transmission and steering parts, rubber parts, and electrical and electronic parts.

According to the Malaysian Automotive Association (MAA, 2008), examples of automobile manufacturers in Malaysia are such as Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional (Proton), Perusahaan Otomobil Kedua (Perodua), Industri Otomotif Komersial (Inokom), and Malaysian Truck and Bus (MTB). Proton produces passenger and commercial vehicles with the brand names of Saga, Iswara, Wira, Perdana, etc. Perodua manufactures passenger vehicles such as Kancil, Kelisa and Myvi, while its commercial vehicles include Kembara, Rusa, etc. Inokom produces mainly commercial vehicles such as Inokom, Suzuki, etc. Likewise, MTB produces only commercial brands such as Hicom, Musso, etc. Other examples of automobile companies in Malaysia are NAZA Automotive, Asian Automobile Industries, Oriental Assemblers, Tan Chong Motor Assemblies, and Swedish Motor Assemblies.

The largest producers of automobiles in Malaysia are the two national companies, Proton and Perodua. These two companies account for over 75% of the total number of passenger vehicles in Malaysia over the past few years (MIDA, 2006). Proton has two


plants with four production lines, while Perodua has one plant with four production lines. Some of their brands are exported to countries such as Brunei, Singapore, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Pakistan, Fiji, Cyprus, Myanmar, etc.

4 Measures for GSCM practices

The purpose of this study is to investigate the extent of GSCM practices amongst Malaysian vehicle manufacturers. This investigation was conducted based on some sets of measures and metrics listed in Olugu et al. (2009a). Another point worthy of acknowledgement is the fact that the measures were generated based on a conceptual framework developed in Olugu et al. (2009b). This framework divides the green supply chain into a forward and a backward chain. The former deals with the flow of automobiles from suppliers and manufacturers to customers, while the latter is concerned with the flow of ELVs from customers back to manufacturers and suppliers, through the recovery and recycling processes. Thus, the measurement will be carried out in two splits for both the forward and reverse chains of each company. Additionally, the measures are broadly grouped into internal and external measures for each of the chains.

Table 1 Measures and metrics

Forward chain

Measures Metrics

Greening cost Cost associated with environmental compliance, energy consumption cost, environmental friendly material cost, and greening cost per revenue.

Management commitment

Level of management effort to motivate employees, availability of environmental evaluation schemes, availability of environmental auditing systems, availability of mission statements on environmental sustainability, number of environmental management initiatives, level of management effort to enlighten customers on sustainability, availability of environmental reward systems, and level of management effort to motivate suppliers.

Level of process management

Availability of process optimisation for waste reduction, level of spillage, leakage and pollution control, level of waste generated during production, quantity of utilities used, and number of violations of environmental regulations.

Product characteristics

Level of recycled materials in products, level of products to be disposed to land-fills, availability of eco-labelling, level of biodegradable contents in products, level of applications of design-for-assembly in product design, and level of market shares controlled by products.

Supplier commitment

Level of supplier environmental certification, level of supplier performance on sustainability, number of supplier initiatives on environmental management, level of disclosure of environmental initiatives to the public, and level of supplier preprocessing of raw materials.

Customer perspective

Level of customer interest in green products, level of customer satisfaction, and level of customer dissemination of green information.

Source: Adopted from Olugu et al. (2009a, 2009b).


Table 1 Measures and metrics (continued)

Reverse chain Measures Metrics Recycling efficiency

Percentage of decrease in recycling time, availability of recycling standards, availability of standard operating procedures, percentage of decrease in utility usage during recycling, efficiency of shredders and dismantlers, and percentage of reduction in emission and waste generated.

Recycling cost Cost associated with returning ELVs, cost associated with processing recyclables, cost of sorting and segregating recyclables, and cost of disposing hazardous and unprocessed waste.

Management commitment

Level of motivation to customers on returning their ELVs, availability of standard operating procedures for collecting ELVs, availability of collection centres for ELVs, and availability of waste management schemes.

Material features

Level of waste generated, ratio of recycled materials to recyclable materials, and material recovery time.

Customer involvement

Level of customer cooperation in returning their ELVs, level of customer-to-customer dissemination of information, and level of understanding of the greening process by customers.

Supplier commitment

Extent of return delivery from suppliers to manufacturers, number of supplier certification systems in recycling, and number of supplier initiatives in reverse logistics.

Source: Adopted from Olugu et al. (2009a, 2009b).

For the forward chain, the internal measures are greening cost, management commitment, level of process management, and product characteristics. The external ones are supplier commitment and customer perspective. For the backward chain, the internal measures include recycling efficiency, recycling cost, management commitment, and material features, while the external ones are customer involvement and supplier commitment. These measures and their corresponding metrics are presented in Table 1. Since the main focus of this study is on the investigation of environmental practices and issues, conventional performance indicators such as quality, responsiveness, flexibility etc (Wong and Wong, 2008) are not included.

5 Research methodology

This research adopted a survey approach in which three sets of assessment score sheets were developed based on the measures described earlier. The three score sheets were for the three major echelons (suppliers, manufacturers, and customers) involved in the supply chain of automobiles. The distributors were excluded from the investigation because the companies that participated in this study self-distribute their automobiles. The practice of each measure was investigated using a three-point Likert scale attributed to its metrics. The scale was represented as poor, fair and good. Each of these categories was further subdivided into three different classes. For poor, the classes were 1 for highly poor, 2 for moderately poor and 3 for lowly poor. For fair, another three classes were defined which were 4 for lowly fair, 5 for moderately fair and 6 for highly fair. The last three categories were 7 for lowly good, 8 for moderately good and 9 for highly good. After the development of this scale, an appendix was developed which explained the score allocation criteria for each of the metrics. The score sheets were then sent to ten experts


in the automobile GSCM area to verify their inclusiveness and ease of understanding. The comments given were implemented and modifications were made accordingly.

Three automobile companies (denoted as A, B and C) were selected based on their market shares to represent the Malaysian automobile industry. Combined together, they control more than 85% of the overall market share for passenger vehicles in Malaysia. Hence, these three companies signify a good representative sample for investigation. Secondly, companies A and B are from the national automobile companies, and they constitute more than 75% of the passenger automobile market. The third company (C) belongs to the non-national category, and it is used to represent the others. Three hundred customers who are currently using the vehicles from these companies (100 customers for each company) were selected randomly. They were asked to assess the external measures and metrics on customer perspective and involvement. Within each of the companies, five persons who are experts in GSCM were selected to evaluate the practices in their respective organisations. The assessments were performed on all the internal measures and metrics. In addition, ten major suppliers were selected for each of the companies, and five experts from every supplier were used to assess the external measures and metrics pertaining to this echelon.

The response rates were as follows. For the manufacturers and suppliers, a 100% response rate was achieved. This was mainly because the assessments were done in collaboration with the management of the companies and their suppliers. Secondly, the score sheets were given and administered to them in person. On the part of the customers, the response rate was approximately 80%. This was because some of the customers declined to participate due to their lack of knowledge. All the results for each company, under each category, i.e., manufacturers, suppliers and customers were averaged to obtain a mean score for each metric.

6 Results and discussion

The results from the three case study companies are presented in the ensuing paragraphs. Comparison will be made and inferences drawn to establish the level of GSCM practices in the automotive industry in Malaysia.

6.1 Results for the forward chain

The scores for all the metrics were aggregated to obtain the average score for the corresponding measure. The results were first presented for the internal measures of the forward chain which comprise greening cost (GC), level of process management (LPM), product characteristics (PC) and management commitment (MC). As can be seen in Figure 1, the vertical axis shows the average scores while the companies are represented by A, B and C on the horizontal axis. From the results, it can be observed that the non-national company (C) had the best scores in all the internal areas. These were represented by a score of 6.4, 6.51, 7.6 and 7 for GC, LPM, PC and MC respectively. This was followed by the second national company (B), with average scores of 5.2, 6, 6.8, and 6 for GC, LPM, PC and MC respectively. The first national company (A) scored relatively low with an average score of 4.25 (GC), 4.4 (LPM), 5 (PC) and 4.13 (MC). In overall, it can be observed that the first national car manufacturer has a poor performance in the internal measures. The second did considerably better.


Figure 1 Results of the internal measures (forward chain) (see online version for colours)

Figure 2 Results of the external measures (forward chain) (see online version for colours)

Based on the results, it can be seen that each of the companies scored relatively high in terms of product characteristics. This can be attributed to the fact that most of their vehicle component parts are outsourced from other countries. In addition, all the major suppliers are ISO 14001 certified. This is the International Organisation for Standardisation’s Certification which gives the requirements for environmental management systems. Another highly practised area was the level of process management. This could be because almost all of the companies are also ISO 14001 certified, except for one of the two plants owned by the first national car maker (A). This plant is so because its inception dates back to the time when environmental issues were not seriously in the limelight. The non-national company (C) and the second national company (B) scored considerably high in terms of greening cost, since most of their components are outsourced from countries where there are stringent regulations. Thus, indirectly, the greening cost is inherent in their outsourced components. The first national company (A) scored low in this aspect because most of its components are sourced locally and some are produced in-house. In terms of management commitment, it was found that the non-national company (C) scored higher, obviously because it is a part of a

012345678

A B C

Company

Ave

rage

sco

re

GCLPMPCMC


larger firm where decisions and policies are more globalised in nature. The second national company (B) showed a higher management commitment compared to the first. This can be attributed to the strong partnership between the company and some Japanese organisations.

The results of the forward chain’s external measures which include customer perspective (CP) and supplier commitment (SC) are presented in Figure 2. It was found that supplier commitment showed a considerably high score of above five with companies A, B and C having an average score of 5.5, 6.79 and 7.8 respectively. This can also be attributed to the fact that almost all the suppliers are ISO 14001 certified. Another possible reason could be because a majority of the suppliers are from countries where they also serve as suppliers to allied and related companies whose target market goes beyond their respective countries. This is especially true for the non-national company (C).

On the other hand, customer perspective scored relatively low as most of the customers had an inadequate understanding on GSCM. From the assessment conducted on the current customers of all the companies, it was found that over 90% do not know what it means to have an environmental sustainable vehicle. This can be attributed to the low level of awareness on the environment in this part of the world.

6.2 Results for the reverse chain

Figure 3 presents the extent of practice of the internal measures in the reverse chain. It was found that management commitment (MC) scored the highest for all the companies (A – 4.68, B – 5.5 and C – 5.48). Further investigation showed that managers were committed to a certain extent in the reverse chain, partly because they were driven by the government regulations on old vehicles. These regulations are mainly to regulate car plate licences retrieval and cancellation. It was also observed that motivation given by the companies’ management to customers on their old vehicles was mainly to encourage them to buy a new car in order to improve sales. The companies have not adequately mapped out a good recycling and recovery plan for these old cars. This is observed in Amelia et al. (2009) that no formal record exists for recycled ELVs and new cars in Malaysia. Surprisingly, all the other internal measures which are material features (MF), recycling cost (RC), and recycling efficiency (RE), showed a relatively low score. For MF, company A had an average score of 2.8, B - 4.1 and C – 4.06. For RC, company A scored 3.81, B – 3.78 and C – 3.81. Lastly for RE, company A had 1.8, B – 2.85 and C – 1.81. The scores for these measures were mainly based on the informal reuse and refurbishment of vehicle parts by used spare-part dealers. This has in a way contributed to the reduction in the overall waste accruable from ELVs. However, this fraction is considerably low compared to the level at which new cars are entering the market, thus the used spare-part market will soon be saturated.

The external measures considered for the reverse chain were supplier commitment (SC) and customer involvement (CI). As illustrated in Figure 4, these two measures showed relatively poor scores for all the 3 companies. In terms of SC, company A scored an average of 3.18, B – 4 and C – 3, while for CI, company A scored an average of 3.2, B – 3 and C – 1.9. These figures further buttress the fact that reverse logistics in the Malaysian automotive industry has not received adequate attention. The little involvement of the customers is mainly motivated by the cancellation of the vehicle


licences by the government and the rebate provided for the purchase of new cars, especially in the national companies.

Figure 3 Results of the internal measures (reverse chain) (see online version for colours)

Figure 4 Results of the external measures (reverse chain) (see online version for colours)

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

A B C

Company

Ave

rage

sco

re

SC

CI

7 Implications

It has been noted that since the automotive industry in Malaysia is witnessing a tremendous growth locally, an ELVs directive is apparently needed and should be established by the local government (Amelia et al., 2009). For such a policy to survive, there is a need to imbibe the culture of GSCM. It has been shown statistically that the number of vehicles produced in Malaysia is over half a million every year (MIDA, 2006; MAA, 2008). This figure is expected to increase in the coming years, thus creating an


imbalance in the industrial eco-system (Goodland, 1991; Solvang et al., 2006). In this respect, the implementation and practice of GSCM will enhance the reuse and recyclability of ELVs. This calls for a governmental directive on recovery (Amelia et al., 2009), which will in turn boost the greening of the automobile supply chain. Thus, a balance will be struck between the government’s ceaseless effort to restructure its automotive industry market by encouraging the production of a large number of cars to meet the growing demand of consumers (Wad, 2009), and the ensuing debris accruing from ELVs (Amelia et al., 2009). Since most of these locally made automobiles do not have much second hand values outside the country like their foreign counterparts in America, Europe and Japan, recycling them will reduce the imbalanced pressure on the ecosystem within Malaysia. Greening the automobile supply chain will also expand the market reach which is mainly obstructed by tight regulations in certain oversea countries such as those in the European community (Cruz-Rivera and Ertel, 2009; Dyckhoff et al., 2004; Schultmann et al., 2006).

On the other hand, this will boost the economy by creating a formidable market for ELVs. It will also reduce the cost of raw materials and/or components for the manufacturing of new vehicles (Autry, 2005; Koplin et al., 2007; Rao and Holt, 2005). The International Solid Waste Association (ISWA, 2003) highlighted that recycling utilises less energy and produces less pollution in contrast to making things from scratch. It further posited that significant CO2 emission reductions can be achieved through an appropriate solid waste management process such as GSCM. Furthermore, investments in waste management can lead to net emission savings of up to 20%. Thus, an effective and efficient GSCM will reduce the overall carbon footprint in the automobile sector of the economy.

This study should act as an eye opener and cornerstone towards the establishment and practice of GSCM in the Malaysian automotive industry. The low level of customer perspective and consideration in GSCM implies that there is a low level of understanding among Malaysian automobile users on the environmental effect of their automobiles and the effect of their purchasing power on aiding environmental sustainability. It is on that note, that this study calls for the government intercession in ensuring that customers are well informed and given adequate orientation. This will reduce the scenario of sole reliance on regulations as the major driving force towards the environmental sustainability of the automotive industry and its supply chain. This will in turn boost the management of the automobile green supply chain at large. Subsequently, a complete practice of GSCM involving a totality of green purchasing, green manufacturing and material management, green distribution and marketing, as well as reverse logistics could be achieved (Hervani et al., 2005; Rao, 2002).

8 Conclusions and recommendations

In this study, an assessment of the extent of GSCM practices has been conducted in the Malaysian automobile industry using the major automobile companies in the country. This study used a set of measures and metrics to assess both the forward and reverse chains of the companies. The forward chain was assessed based on certain measures which were management commitment, greening cost, product characteristics, level of process management, supplier commitment, and customer perspective. On the other hand,


the reverse chain was evaluated based on management commitment, recycling cost, recycling efficiency, material features, customer involvement, and supplier commitment. It was found that GSCM in the Malaysian automobile industry has not received adequate attention. This study thus calls for the stakeholders and the government to implement laws and regulations which will enhance the implementation of GSCM. In terms of future research, the first recommendation will be to conduct this study in other industries such as electronics, plastics, etc within the Malaysian economy to observe the extent and effectiveness of GSCM. Also recommended is a further study which shall look at the overall carbon footprint within the supply chain of the automobile industry. Finally, a cross comparison of GSCM practices could be conducted in the various automotive industries within and beyond the Asian region.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Higher Education in Malaysia for funding this research and the anonymous reviewers for evaluating this article.

References Abdullah, R., Lall, M.K. and Tatsuo, K. (2008) ‘Supplier development framework in the Malaysian

automotive industry: Proton’s experience’, International Journal of Economics and Management, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.29–58.

Ahmed, Z.U. and Humphreys, J.H. (2008) ‘Conceptual framework for developing-country transnational: Proton Malaysia’, Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp.45–58.

Amelia, L., Wahab, D.A., CheHaron, C.H., Muhamad, H. and Azhari, C.H. (2009) ‘Initiating automotive component reuse in Malaysia’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 17, No. 17, pp.1572–1579.

Autry, C.W. (2005) ‘Formalization of reverse logistics programs: a strategy for managing liberalized returns’, Industrial Marketing and Management, Vol. 34, No. 7, pp.749–757.

Beamon, B.M. (1999) ‘Designing the green supply chain’, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.332–342.

Cruz-Rivera, R. and Ertel, J. (2009) ‘Reverse logistics network design for the collection of end-of-life vehicles in Mexico’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 196, No. 3, pp.930–939.

Dyckhoff, H., Souren, R. and Keilen, J. (2004) ‘The expansion of supply chains to close loop systems: a conceptual framework and the automotive industry’s point of view’, in H. Dyckhoff, R. Lackes and J. Reese (Eds.): Supply Chain Management and Reverse Logistics, pp.13–34, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

ECE (2000) ‘Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehicles’, Official Journal of the European Communities, L269, 21 October 2000, pp.34–42.

Goodland, R. (1991) ‘The case that the world has reached limits’, in R. Goodland, H. Daly and S. El Serafy (Eds.): Environmentally Sustainable Economic Development: Building on Brundtland, World Bank Washington.

Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu, E. (2001) ‘Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain’, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 21, Nos. 1–2, pp.71–87.


Handfield, R.B. and Nichols, E.L. (1999) Introduction to Supply Chain Management, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Handfield, R.B., Sroufe, R. and Walton, S.V. (2005) ‘Integrating environmental management and supply chain strategies’, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.1–19.

Hervani, A.A., Helms, M.M. and Sarkis, J. (2005) ‘Performance measurement for green supply chain management’, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.330–353.

Ilgin, M.A. and Gupta, S.M. (2010) ‘Environmentally conscious manufacturing and product recovery (ECMPRO): a review of the state of the art’, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 91, No. 3, pp.563–591.

Ishak, N.K., Mutum, D., Ghazali, E. and Fan, C.K. (2007) ‘An exploratory study of the implementation of customer relationship management by Malaysian automobile distributors’, Journal for International Business and Entrepreneurship Development, Vol. 3, Nos. 1–2, pp.41–56.

ISWA (2003) ‘Position on R1 and D10 criteria in the EU waste framework directive’, The International Solid Waste Association, available at http://www.iswa.org/c/portal/layout?p_l_id=PUB, (accessed on 18 December 2009).

Ji, Q. (2008) ‘Performance evaluation of complaint management and virtual enterprise in closed-loop supply chains by using exergo-economics and extenics’, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.368–397.

Koplin, J., Seuring, S. and Mesterharm, M. (2007) ‘Incorporating sustainability into supply management in the automotive industry: the case of the Volkswagen AG’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 15, Nos. 11–12, pp.1053–1062.

Lettice, F., Wyatt, C. and Evans, S. (2009) ‘Buyer-supplier partnerships during product design and development in the global automotive sector: who invests, in what and when?’, International Journal of Production Economics, in press.

MAA (2008) ‘Summary of sales and production data’, The Malaysian Automotive Association, available at http://www.maa.org.my/info_summary.htm (accessed on 10 January 2010).

MIDA (2006) ‘The automotive industry in Malaysia’, The Malaysian Industrial Development Authority, http://www.mida.gov.my/en_v2/index.php?page=manufacturing-sector, (accessed on 23 November 2009).

Min, H. and Lambert, T.E. (2010) ‘The utilization of foreign trade zones in the global supply chain: an exploratory study’, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.110–125.

Nunes, K.R.A., Mahler, C.F. and Valle, R.A. (2009) ‘Reverse logistics in the Brazilian construction industry’, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 90, No. 1, pp.3717–3720.

Olugu, E.U., Wong, K.Y. and Shaharoun, A.M. (2009a) ‘Proposed performance measurement areas for an automobile green supply chain’, Proceedings of the 13th IBIMA Conference on Knowledge Management and Innovation in Advancing Economies: Analyses and Solutions, Marrakech, Morocco, pp.130–138.

Olugu, E.U., Wong, K.Y. and Shaharoun, A.M. (2009b) ‘A two-in-one model for evaluating the performance of an automotive closed-loop supply chain’, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Operations and Supply Chain Management, Bujang Valley, Malaysia, pp.1–8.

Park, Y., Ogawa, K., Tatsumoto, H. and Hong, P. (2009) ‘The impact of product architecture on supply chain integration: a case study of Nokia and Texas Instruments’, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 5, No. 6, pp.787–798.

Rao, P. (2002) ‘Greening of the supply chain: a new initiative in South East Asia’, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp.632–655.

Rao, P. and Holt, D. (2005) ‘Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance’, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 25, No. 9, pp.898–916.


Rosli, M. (2006) ‘The automobile industry and the performance of Malaysian auto production’, Journal of Economics Cooperation, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp.89–114.

Rosli, M. and Kari, F. (2008) ‘Malaysia’s national automotive policy and the performance of Proton’s foreign and local vendors’, Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.103–118.

Salam, M.A. (2009) ‘Corporate social responsibility in purchasing and supply chain’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 85, No. 2, pp.355–370.

Sangwan, K.S. and Digalwar, A.K. (2008) ‘Evaluation of world-class manufacturing systems: a case of Indian automotive industries’, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 4, No. 6, pp.687–708.

Schonsleben, P. (2004) Integral Logistics Management: Planning and Control of Comprehensive Supply Chains, St Lucie Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Schultmann, F., Zumkeller, M. and Rentz, O. (2006) ‘Modeling reverse logistic tasks within closed-loop supply chains: an example from the automotive industry‘, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 171, No. 3, pp.1033–1050.

Seuring, S. (2009) ‘Greening the supply chain, a guide for Asian managers’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 17, No. 9, p.886.

Solvang, W.D., Roman, E., Deng, Z. and Solvang, B. (2006) ‘A framework for holistic greening of value chains’, Knowledge Enterprise: Intelligent Strategies in Product Design, Manufacturing, and Management, International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP), Vol. 207, No. 1, pp.350–355.

Tsoulfas, G.T. and Pappis, C.P. (2008) ‘A model for supply chains environmental performance analysis and decision making’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16, No. 15, pp.1647–1657.

Turnbull, P., Oliver, N. and Wilkinson, B. (1992) ‘Buyer–supplier relations in the UK automotive industry: strategic implications of the Japanese manufacturing model’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.159–168.

Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2006) ‘Extending green practices across the supply chain: the impact of upstream and downstream integration’, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 26, No. 7, pp.795–821.

von Ahsen, A. (2006) ‘Environmental management in automotive supply chains: an empirical analysis’, in J. Sarkis (Ed.): Greening the Supply Chain, pp.293–306, Springer-Verlag, London.

Vonderembse, M.A., Uppal, M., Huang, S.H. and Dismukes, J.P. (2006) ‘Designing supply chains: towards theory development’, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 100, No. 2, pp.223–238.

Wad, P. (2009) ‘The automobile industry of Southeast Asia: Malaysia and Thailand’, Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp.172–193.

Walker, H., di Sisto, L. and McBain, D. (2008) ‘Drivers and barrier to environmental supply change management: lessons from the private and public sectors’, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.69–85.

Wong, W.P. and Wong, K.Y. (2007) ‘Supply chain performance measurement system using DEA modeling’, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 107, No. 3, pp.361–381.

Wong, W.P. and Wong, K.Y. (2008) ‘A review on benchmarking of supply chain performance measures’, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.25–51.

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K. (2007) ‘Initiatives and outcomes of green supply chain management implementation by Chinese manufacturers’, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 85, No. 1, pp.179–189.

Documents

Evaluation of GSCM Practices in the Malaysian Automotive Industry