-
-
My research topic & initial work is uploaded for reference. The assessment instructions are mentioned below.,
“The thesis for this course will summarize the research findings from the chosen research project, along with appropriate discussion for these research findings.
Criteria for assessment include:
report structure and organisation
completeness of scope and context, and
degree of critical analysis and reflection.”
-
| Subject | Report Writing | Pages | 33 | Style | APA |
|---|
Answer
Abstract
This study aimed at investigating factors perceived by organizations for sustainable procurement (SP). Quantitative research method was adopted for the study and questionnaire technique was employed in gathering data. The results showed that top management support, regulations, perceived benefits, cost, organizational commitment, and expertise are some of the factors perceived for sustainability by organizations within the plastic sector. Top management support was the most perceived factor for sustainable procurement by organizations within the plastic sector having been backed by 27 participants (32%). Organizational commitment, expertise, cost, perceived benefits, and regulations were supported by 21 participants (25%), 17 participants (20%), 11 participants (13%), 6 participants (7%), and 3 participants (3%) respectively. Moreover, the study results showed that regulations are the least perceived factor for SP by organizations within the plastic industry having being stated by 31 participants (36%). Top management, organizational commitment, expertise, cost, and perceived benefits were mentioned by 3 participants (4%), 4 participants (5%), 9 participants (11%), 15 participants (17%), and 23 participants (27%) respectively. The study recommends organizations within the plastic sector that have not embraced sustainable procurement to consider these factors when it comes to effective implementation of SP.
Contents
1.1 Background of the Study. 5
2.2 Factors Perceived for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations. 9
3.2 Participants and Participant Selection. 16
4.2 Whether Organization Practices Sustainable Procurement 18
4.3 Whether Employee Aware of What Sustainable Procurement Entails. 19
4.4 Factors that Organizations Perceive for Sustainable Procurement 20
4.4.1 Top Management Support 20
4.4.2 Commitment from Senior Management 21
4.4.7 The Most Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations. 27
4.4.8 The Least Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations. 29
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
Recent years have witnessed widespread calls for the embracement of sustainability in all procurement activities owing to the increasing threats of global warming and negative impacts of procurement practices on the environment, health, and social conditions. According to Grob and Benn (2014), sustainable procurement aims at integrating the social and environmental considerations into the process of procurement, with the goal of minimizing adverse effects on the environment, health, and social conditions. Procurement of plastics happens to be among the major procurement processes or activities that continue to attract immense backlash from environmental groups and other agencies associated with health issues and social welfare (Faure et al., 2015). Enormous volumes of plastic waste are discarded to the environment from sources at sea and on land, thereby generating substantial environmental and economic damage (Comanita et al., 2015). According to European Commission (2018), between 5 and 13 million tonnes of plastic wastes, which account for between 1.5 and 4 percent of the global plastic generation, are discarded in oceans each year. Moreover, it has been established that plastic waste accounts for over 80 percent of marine litter (Lindahl et al., 2014; European Commission, 2018). The plastic litters discarded in large water bodies such as oceans are transported over long distances by marine currents (Haward, 2018). Such wastes are washed up on land, degraded into micro-plastics, or establish dense regions of marine litter stuck in ocean gyers (European Commission, 2018; Jambeck et al., 2015).
According to Lindahl et al. (2014) and Erisken et al. (2014), the damage that by plastic litters impact on marine settings is estimated to exceed $ 8 billion every year across the world. In relation to this, sustainable procurement is considered a suitable remedy for reducing endless quantities of plastic waste and improving the recyclability associated with plastics. As such, governments and environmental agencies are continue to call for the employment of buying power in preventing waste plastics and supporting plastic recycling. To respond to such calls, many companies or firms within the plastic industry have been moving towards the adoption of sustainable procurement, with the aim of minimizing negative impacts of plastic litters on the environment. By embracing SP many organizations within the continue to look beyond the conventional economic aspects and making plastic procurement judgements based on the entire life cost, measures of success, associated risks, and implications for the environment and society (American Chemistry Council, 2016). When it comes to effective adoption of sustainable procurement, appropriate perception of SP factors is significant (Hasselbach et al., 2012; Grobb & Benn, 2014; Nadeem et al., 2017; Mehan &Bryde, 2011). This study investigated the factors perceived for sustainable procurement by firms within the plastic industry with the aim of enlightening organizations that still experience problems perceiving the appropriate factors for sustainable procurement.
1.2 Problem Statement
Effective implementation of sustainable procurement calls for appropriate perceptions of factors that should be embraced for sustainable procurement process. However, some organizations within the plastic industry experience problems perceiving the appropriate factors for sustainable procurement, which greatly hinders their ability to implement SP in their procurement processes in an effective manner (Mavi et al., 2017; Watkins, E., & Schweitzer, 2015). As such, this study investigated factors perceived for sustainable procurement by firms within the plastic sector, with a goal of illuminating companies in this industry that still experience problems implementing sustainable procurement.
1.3 Research Question
The study aimed to address the following research question:
What factors do organizations perceive for sustainable procurement in plastic industry?
The study focused on the attainment of the following objective:
- To investigate the factors that organizations perceive for sustainable development in the plastic industry
1.4 Scope of Research
The scope of this study is limited to sustainability procurement within the plastic sector. The area addressed by the study in relation to sustainability procurement is sustainable procurement factors perceived by organizations within the plastic industry.
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Literature Review
2.1 Sustainable Procurement
Ghadge et al. (2019) define Sustainable procurement as the process whereby firms meet their requirements or needs for services, goods, utilities, and works in a manner that accomplishes value for money on an entire or whole life basis. The value for money is accomplished in terms of producing benefits to the organization, society, and economy, while limiting adverse impacts to the environment. According to Gelderman et al. (2015), whole life basis takes into consideration the economic, social, and environmental consequences associated with design, production and manufacture methods, renewable material use, service delivery, logistics disposal, recycling options, and suppliers potentials to address impacts throughout the supply chain.
The process of sustainable procurement does not differ significantly from the conventional process of procurement. Ruparathna and Hewage (2015a) assert that sustainable procurement integrates an initial stage targeted at determining the procurement action’s impact in relation to a desired result that is both socially and environmentally benign. SP also incorporates an additional phase at the process’ end, which serves to monitor and evaluate, as well as adjust the net impact of the intended outcome (Ruparathna & Hewage, 2015b; Testa et al., 2016). Other sustainable procedures are integrated throughout different phases of the procurement process. SP takes into consideration four factors. The first factor is the value for money aspects such as functionality, availability, prices, and quality. The second factor is the products’ whole life cycle. The third factor is environmental elements such as impacts of assets, services and supplies on the environment over the entire lifecycle. The fourth factor is social aspects such as impacts on issues like poverty elimination, inequality within the distribution of resources, fair trade, human rights, and labor conditions. The fifth aspect is recycled or sustainable products or materials.
Ghadimi et al. (2016) and Kipkorir and Wanyoike (2015) highlight the benefits of SP including long-term efficiency savings, encouraging innovation, more effective and efficient employment of natural resources, reduction of the harmful effect of waste and pollution, and encouraging innovation. Other benefits are provision of robust signals to the market of sustainable products, reduction of the effect of toxic substances on the environment and human health, and practical demonstration of organizational devotion to sustainable development. The subsequent section explores the findings of the existing body of literature on the perceived factors for sustainability.
2.2 Factors Perceived for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
Studies have made significant efforts in investigating the factors perceived for sustainable development (Grandia et al., 2013; Grandia et al., 2015; Ghadge et al., 2015; Joanne & David, 2015; Nasiche & Ngugi, 2014; Buniamin et al., 2014; Adham & Siwar, 2017; Testa et al., 2012; Butler & Keaveney, 2014; Wong et al., 2016; McMurray et al., 2014; Ramakrishnan et al., 2015). Grandia et al. (2013) examined the degree of sustainable procurement from the perspective of organisations. The authors established that three factors including expertise, top management support, and commitment should be perceived for sustainable procurement. In relation to the aspect of expertise, the authors argue that sustainable procurement happens to be a complex, always-contested concept that calls for the availability of specific knowledge and skills. The absence of expertise negatively impacts the efforts and resources directed toward sustainable procurement. Lacking a comprehension of what SP constitutes limits the ability of organisations to perceive its potential such as the realisation of economic benefits. The authors established that expertise can be sought from various professionals including lawyers, engineers, technicians, and procurement policy advisors. When it comes to the support of senior management, Grandia et al. (2013) argue that top management is a key facilitator of SP. Support from the top management is considered significant in incorporating SP in procurement procedures and processes, as well as organisational procurement policy. The success of sustainable procurement often commences at the organisational level with the support of senior management after which it experienced at the project level, which is influenced by individual actors among other factors. In relation to commitment, the authors argue that commitment bears a robust association with the success of SP implementation. The authors established normative commitment is associated with the lowest level of SP, whereas affective commitment is associated with the highest magnitude of SP. As such, the authors concluded that the nature of commitment plays a vital role when it comes to the implementation of SP.
Grandia et al. (2015) conducted a study focused on increasing the behaviour of sustainable procurement. The authors accomplished this goal by examining how the commitment or devotion to adopt sustainable procurement increases the behaviour of sustainable procurement, as well as factors that determine this devotion to adopt sustainable procurement. The study outcomes revealed that affective commitment to adopt sustainable procurement along with procedural justice increase the culture of sustainable procurement. Moreover, these findings showed that the devotion to change serves as a mechanism between procedural justice, ecological sustainability attitude, fit with vision and sustainable procurement mannerism. Therefore, it can be noted that these outcomes emphasize the findings of Grandia et al. (2013) that commitment plays a vital role in the implementation of sustainable procurement.
Joanne and David (2015) conducted a field-level investigation of the implementation of sustainable procurement within the sector social housing. The authors accomplished this goal by exploring the role of procurement consortia and regulation in sustainable procurement. The study outcomes delineated activities of sustainable procurement into three factors including local socially inclined supply, direct setting, and supplier-centric assurance. These outcomes revealed that commitment plays a vital role in the success of SP implementation, which is in line with the outcomes of studies executed by Grandia et al. (2015) and Grandia et al. (2013).
In a different study conducted by Nasiche and Ngugi (2014), the authors established that organisational sustainable capacity, pressures, and incentives are the major determinants of sustainable procurement adoption. Factors such as cost of sustainable products and sustainable supply capacity were not established to be significant. The authors concluded that the success of sustainable procurement depends heavily on the enhancement of internal organisational capacity. The authors added that the findings of their study bear significant policy and managerial implications including taking sustainable procurement to the next level and a robust need for organisations to depend on competence, knowhow, and awareness of its personnel. As such, the outcomes of this study are in line with those of Grandia et al. (2013) that consider expertise as a factor to be perceived for sustainable procurement. Buniamin et al. (2014) investigated the determinants of the implementation of green government procurement within in Malaysian public enterprises. Data was acquired using questionnaire disseminated directly to procurement officers within the respective organisations. The study outcomes showed that organisational initiatives, perceived benefits, and cost efficiencies determine the implementation of GGP within Malaysian public enterprises. These outcomes are supported by the findings of Young et al. (2015), which highlighted the dominance of cost or price when it comes to making decisions associated with sustainable procurement. As such, these findings contradict those of Nasiche and Ngugi (2014), which did not establish any association between cost and the implementation of sustainable procurement.
Adham and Siwar (2017) investigated factors influencing sustainable procurement practices. The study outcomes revealed that sustainable procurement bears a positive relationship with environmental knowledge, perceived business benefits and cost efficiency, environmental concern, perceived supplier and product availability, organisational pressures and incentives, regulations and policies and perceived benefits associated with the implementation competency and implementation tools. As such, it can be noted that the outcomes of this study emphasise the findings of Buniamin et al. (2014), Young et al. (2015) and Nasiche and Ngugi (2014) that organisational pressures, cost efficiency and perceived benefits influence the adoption of sustainable procurement.
Testa et al. (2012) investigated the factors influencing the uptake of sustainable public procurement. The outcomes of the study revealed four primary issues. First, the available awareness on sustainable public procurement practices, regulation, and tools enhance the development of sustainable public procurement strategies by public authorities. Second, the existence of expertise needed for purchasing function supports the adoption of SP strategies. Third, the existence of ISO standards, especially ISO 14001 contributes significantly to the implementation of SP strategies. Fourth, public authority’s dimension influences the adoption of SP practices. As such, it can be noted that these findings emphasise the significance of expertise in the implementation of SP as highlighted by the findings of Nasiche and Ngugi (2014) and Grandia et al. (2013).
Butler and Keaveney (2014) analysed the drivers and barriers to sustainable public procurement in accomplishing a more sustainable construction sector. The study outcomes revealed that the key hindrances to the adoption of sustainable procurement by organisations are the perceptions that sustainable or green services and products are more expensive, lack of training, lack of resources, and absence of support from senior or higher authorities. These outcomes are in line with the findings of Nasiche and Ngugi (2014), Testa et al. (2012), Grandia et al. (2013) and Young et al. (2015) and Nasiche and Ngugi (2014) that emphasise the role of cost, expertise, and support from senior management in enhancing the implementation of SP practices or strategies.
Wong et al. (2016) conducted a study to investigate the mechanisms or of factors for facilitating the implementation of sustainable procurement in construction projects. The study findings revealed that standards and regulations associated with sustainable procurement is the most significant. This factor is followed by considerations of life cycle, green construction technology, and requirements and commitments of executive management respectively. Moreover, the study outcomes showed that initiatives or efforts embraced by the government and community on sustainable procurement such as awards or competitions, incentive schemes, and management’s sustainable procurement and needs are considered significant in the process of green procurement. Therefore, this outcome is in line with the outcomes of the study executed by Butler and Keaveney (2014) Grandia et al. (2015), and Grandia et al. (2013), which highlighted the role of organizational commitment in adoption of sustainable procurement.
In another study McMurray et al. (2014) investigated sustainable procurement within Malaysian companies by focusing on opportunities, barriers, and practices. The study findings showed that the absence of awareness presented the most significant hindrance to the adoption of sustainable procurement. This finding matches those of Butler and Keaveney (2014), Grandia et al. (2013), and Testa et al. (2012), which emphasise the significance of expertise in effective implementation of SP strategies. McMurray et al. (2014) also established that improved working conditions, organisational image, transparency, and organisational efficiency offered optimum opportunities for the adoption of SP. Ramakrishnan et al. (2015) also investigated factors influencing the adoption of sustainable procurement, but with a focus on the medium and small enterprises. The authors proposed a model supported by the stakeholder theory. The model comprised sustainable procurement as a dependent variable, whereas customer pressures, government regulations, supplier relationships, perceived benefits, and top management support were independent variables. Corporate social responsibility served as a moderating variable. The study outcomes revealed that customer pressure, perceived benefits, and government regulations bear a positive association with sustainable procurement for small and medium enterprises. These outcomes are in line with those of Ramakrishnan et al. (2015), Testa et al. (2012), Adham and Siwar (2017), and Buniamin et al. (2014) that established the significance of regulations and perceived benefits in influencing the implementation of SP in organisations. In a different study Mwangi (2018) focused on the investigation of factors influencing the adoption of sustainable procurement in county governments. The outcomes of the study showed that buyer perceptions of SP and knowledge gap bear a positive impact on the implementation of SP with knowledge gap being the major factor. The author recommended the provision of compulsory training to county government staff. These outcomes reinforce the findings of the study executed by Grandia et al. (2013), McMurray et al. (2014), Butler and Keaveney (2014), and Testa et al. (2012) that emphasize the role of expertise in the adoption of SP.
2.3 Summary
Considering the outcomes of the literature reviewed above, it can be noted that the different authors have consensus on different factors that should be perceived for sustainability. For instance, Grandia et al. (2013), McMurray et al. (2014), Mwangi (2018), Butler and Keaveney (2014), and Testa et al. (2012) have a consensus on expertise as a factor to be perceived for sustainable development. Ramakrishnan et al. (2015), Adham and Siwar (2017), Testa et al. (2012), and Buniamin et al. (2014) have a consensus on perceived benefits, whereas Buniamin et al. (2014), Nasiche and Ngugi (2014), and Young et al. (2015) emphasize the aspect of cost as a factor to be considered for sustainable procurement. Wong et al. (2016), Butler and Keaveney (2014), Joanne and David (2015), Grandia et al. (2013), and Grandia et al. (2015) have consensus on organizational commitment as a factor to be considered for the adoption of SP. Ramakrishnan et al. (2015), Testa et al. (2012), Adham and Siwar (2017) have a consensus on regulations. Butler and Keaveney (2014) and Grandia et al. (2013) emphasize the role of support from top management, as a factor to be considered for sustainable procurement. As such, it can be noted that top management support, commitment from senior management, expertise, perceive benefits, and regulations happen to the major factors discussed by the authors. However, these findings focus on other sectors apart from the plastic industry. As such, this study focused on the investigation of these factors in relation the plastic sector.
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Methodology
3.1 Research Design
Quantitative research design was adopted for the execution of this study. Quantitative research is employed in quantifying the problem my manner of generating figures or numerical that can be converted into meaningful statistics. This method of research is employed in quantifying behaviours, opinions, and attitudes among other defined variables followed by the generalization of findings to a larger population sample. This method of research was embraced owing to the benefits it presents to the researcher and the study. According to Little (2014) and Walliman (2017) quantitative method of research has benefits such as data being very reliable, precise, and consistent, relative ease of measurement, and easy generalization of findings.
3.2 Participants and Participant Selection
The study distributed questionnaires to 97 participants chosen via random sampling from the procurement departments of 4 organizations within the plastic industry. This method of sampling ensures accuracy of representation of participants and eliminates bias associated with the process of choosing participants (Creswell, 2014; Punch & Oancea, 2014; Stangor, 2014).
3.3 Data Collection
Data collection involves gathering facts, figures, and events associated with the issue under investigation. Questionnaire method was employed in gathering data from participants (See appendix for the sample questionnaire employed in the study). This technique of data gathering was embraced owing to the benefits it presented to the study and author. Johnson (2014) and Christensen et al. (2011) assert that questionnaire presents benefits such as relative ease of reaching large population of people, economical, and offers quantifiable responses for a research topic. Moreover, answers obtained using this method of gathering data are easy to analyze.
3.4 Data Analysis
Data analysis involves the systematic application of logical and statistical techniques in describing and illustrating, condensing and recapping, and evaluating data (Creswell & Creswell, 2017; Little, 2014; Walliman, 2017). Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics involving percentages. Results were presented in tables, charts, and figures.
3.5 Ethics
Adhering to ethical guidelines contributes significantly to the integrity of the study (Berger, 2018; Almalki, 2016). This study adhered to ethics in many ways including seeking informed consent from participants, maintenance of anonymity, and avoidance of disclosure of data gathered from participants to a third-party.
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Findings
4.1 Response Rate
Out of the 97 participants, 85 participants completely filled and submitted their questionnaire copies to the author for analysis. This turnout represented a response rate of 88% as shown in the figure below:
Figure I: Response Rate
4.2 Whether Organization Practices Sustainable Procurement
All the 85 participants admitted that their organizations practiced sustainable procurement. This response represented 100%, as exemplified in the figure below:
Figure II: Whether organizations practice sustainable procurement
4.3 Whether Employee Aware of What Sustainable Procurement Entails
Apart from admitting that their organizations practice sustainable procurement, all the 85 participants stated that they were aware of what sustainable procurement entailed. This response denoted 100% agreement, as shown in the figure below:
Figure III: Whether Participants are Aware of What Sustainable Procurement Entails
4.4 Factors that Organizations Perceive for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.1 Top Management Support
When asked whether top management support is perceived for sustainable procurement, 53 participants (62%) strongly agreed, 31 participants (37%) agreed, 1 participant (1%) moderately agreed, 0 participants (0%) disagreed, and 0 participants strongly disagreed, as exemplified in the table and figure below:
|
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Moderately Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
Number of Participants in Support |
0 |
0 |
1 |
31 |
53 |
|
% Number of Participants in Support |
0% |
0% |
1% |
37% |
62% |
Table I: Whether Top Management Support Is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
Figure IV: Whether Top Management Support Is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.2 Commitment from Senior Management
When questioned whether commitment from senior management is perceived for sustainable procurement, 49 participants (58%) strongly agreed, 27 participants (32%) agreed, 8 participants (9% moderately agreed), 1 participant (1%) disagreed, and 0 participants strongly disagreed, as shown in the table and figure below:
|
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Moderately Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
Number of Participants in Support |
0 |
1 |
8 |
27 |
49 |
|
% Number of Participants in Support |
0% |
1% |
9% |
32% |
58% |
Table II: Whether Organizational Commitment Is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
Figure V: Whether Organizational Commitment Is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.3 Expertise
When questioned whether expertise is perceived for sustainable procurement, 48 participants (56%) strongly agreed, 25 participants (29%) agreed, 9 participants (11% moderately agreed), 3 participants (4%) disagreed, and 0 participants (0%) strongly disagreed, as exemplified in the table and figure below:
|
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Moderately Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
Number of Participants in Support |
0 |
3 |
9 |
25 |
48 |
|
% Number of Participants in Support |
0 |
4% |
11% |
29% |
56% |
Table III: Whether Expertise is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
Figure VI: Whether Expertise is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.4 Perceive Benefits
When asked whether perceived benefits are perceived for sustainable procurement, 32 participants (38%) strongly agreed, 29 participants (34%) agreed, 15 participants (18%) moderately agreed, 5 participants (6%) disagreed, and 4 participants (4%) strongly disagreed, as illustrated in the figure below:
|
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Moderately Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
Number of Participants in Support |
4 |
5 |
15 |
29 |
32 |
|
% Number of Participants in Support |
4% |
6% |
18% |
34% |
38% |
Table IV: Whether Perceived Benefits Are Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
Figure VII: Whether Perceived Benefits Are Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.5 Regulations
When questioned whether regulations are perceived for sustainable procurement, 27 participants (32%) strongly agreed, 18 participants (21%) agreed, 23 participants (27%) moderately agreed, 11 participants (13%) disagreed, and 6 participants (7%) strongly disagreed, as exemplified in the figure below:
|
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Moderately Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
Number of Participants in Support |
6 |
11 |
23 |
18 |
27 |
|
% Number of Participants in Support |
7% |
13% |
27% |
21% |
32% |
Table V: Whether Regulations are Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
Figure VIII: Whether Regulations are Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.6 Cost
When interrogated whether cost is perceived for sustainable procurement, 29 participants (34%) strongly agreed, 22 participants (26%) agreed, 19 participants (22%) moderately agreed, 13 participants (15%) disagreed, and 2 participants (3%) strongly disagreed, as exemplified in the table and figure below:
|
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Moderately Agree |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
Number of Participants in Support |
2 |
13 |
19 |
22 |
29 |
|
% Number of Participants in Support |
3% |
15% |
22% |
26% |
34% |
Table VI: Whether Regulations are Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
Figure IX: Whether Cost is Perceived for Sustainable Procurement
4.4.7 The Most Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
Top management support was the most perceived factor for sustainability having being been supported by 27 participants (32%), followed by organizational commitment, which was mentioned by 21 participants (25%). Expertise, cost, perceived benefits, and regulations were mentioned by 17 participants (20%), 11 participants (13%), 6 participants (7%), and 3 participants (3%), as shown in the table and figure below
|
Factor Perceived for Sustainable Procurement |
Number of Participants in Support |
% Number of Participants in Support |
|
Top Management Support |
27 |
32% |
|
Commitment |
21 |
25% |
|
Expertise |
17 |
20% |
|
Perceived Benefits |
6 |
7% |
|
Regulations |
3 |
3% |
|
Cost |
11 |
13% |
Table VII: The Most Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
Figure X: The Most Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
4.4.8 The Least Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
Regulations support was the least perceived factor for sustainability having being been mentioned by 31 participants (36%), followed with perceived benefits, which was mentioned by 23 participants (27%). Cost, expertise, organizational commitment, and top management were mentioned by 15 participants (17%), 9 participants (11%), 4 participants (5%), and 3 participants (4%) respectively, as shown in the table and figure below:
|
Factor Perceived for Sustainable Procurement |
Number of Participants in Support |
% Number of Participants in Support |
|
Top Management Support |
3 |
4% |
|
Organizational Commitment |
4 |
5% |
|
Expertise |
9 |
11% |
|
Perceived Benefits |
23 |
27% |
|
Regulations |
31 |
36% |
|
Cost |
15 |
17% |
Table VIII: The Least Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
Figure XI: The Least Perceived Factor for Sustainable Procurement by Organizations
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 Discussion
This study aimed to investigate the factors organizations perceive for sustainable procurement. The study registered a response of rate of 88%, as shown in figure I of the findings section. Out of the 97 participants to whom questionnaire copies were submitted, 85 participants completely filled and sent their copies of questionnaire to the author for analysis. All the participants admitted that their organizations were practicing sustainable procurement (SP) and they were aware of what SP entails, as shown in figure II and figure III respectively in the findings section. The factors perceived for sustainable development that were investigated were top management support, organizational commitment to sustainable procurement, expertise, perceived benefits, regulations, and cost.
In relation to top management support, 53 participants (62%) strongly agreed, participants (37%) agreed, and 1 participant (1%) moderately agreed that their organizations perceive top management support for sustainable procurement. None of the participants disagreed or strongly disagreed with this claim, as illustrated in table I and figure IV of the findings section. As such, these finding matches those of Butler and Keaveney (2014) and Grandia et al. (2013), which established that companies perceive support from top management for sustainable development. When it comes to organizational commitment, 49 participants (58%) strongly agreed, 27 participants (32%) agreed, and 8 participants (9% moderately agreed) that their organizations perceive organizational commitment for sustainable procurement. Only 1 participant disagreed and none strongly disagreed, as exemplified in table II and figure V of the section of findings. Therefore, this finding is line with the findings of Wong et al. (2016), Butler and Keaveney (2014), Joanne and David (2015), Grandia et al. (2013), and Grandia et al. (2015), which revealed that organizations perceive organizational commitment as a factor for sustainability. In relation to expertise, 48 participants (56%) strongly agreed, 25 participants (29%) agreed, and 9 participants (11%) moderately agreed that their organizations perceive expertise as a factor for sustainable procurement. Only 3 participants (4%) disagreed, and none strongly disagreed, as shown in table III and figure VI in the results section. As such, this outcome is in accordance with those of Grandia et al. (2013), McMurray et al. (2014), Mwangi (2018), Butler and Keaveney (2014), and Testa et al. (2012), which established that expertise is among the factors perceived by firms for sustainable procurement. When it comes to perceived benefits, 32 participants (38%) strongly agreed, 29 participants (34%) agreed, and 15 participants (18%) moderately agreed that perceived benefits are perceived for sustainable procurement by their organizations. Only 5 participants (6%) disagreed and 4 participants (4%) strongly disagreed, as exemplified in table IV and figure VII of the section of result. This outcome is in line with the outcomes of Ramakrishnan et al. (2015), Adham and Siwar (2017), Testa et al. (2012), and Buniamin et al. (2014), which revealed that perceived benefits are perceived for SP by organizations. In relation to regulations, 27 participants (32%) strongly agreed, 18 participants (21%) agreed, and 23 participants (27%) moderately agreed that regulations are perceived by their organizations for sustainable procurement. Only 11 participants (13%) disagreed and 6 participants (7%) strongly disagreed to this statement, as shown in table V and figure VIII in the results section. This result matches the findings of Ramakrishnan et al. (2015), Testa et al. (2012), and Adham and Siwar (2017), which revealed that regulations are among the factors organizations perceive for sustainability. When it comes to cost, 29 participants (34%) strongly agreed, 22 participants (26%) agreed, and19 participants (22%) moderately agreed that their organizations perceive cost for SP. Only 13 participants (15%) disagreed and 2 participants (3%) strongly disagreed, as shown it table VI and figure IX of the results section. This outcome is in line with the findings of Buniamin et al. (2014), Nasiche and Ngugi (2014), and Young et al. (2015), which established that cost is among the factors perceived for sustainable procurement by organizations. Thus, it can be noted that cost is among the aspects perceived for SP in companies within the plastic sector.
Considering the findings discussed above, it can be noted that top management support, regulations, perceived benefits, cost, organizational commitment, and expertise are some of the factors perceived for sustainability by organizations within the plastic sector. This study proceeded to investigate the most perceived factor for SP among these six factors. In relation to this, the outcomes of the study revealed that top management support is the most perceived factor for sustainable procurement having been backed by 27 participants (32%). Organizational commitment, expertise, cost, perceived benefits, and regulations were supported by 21 participants (25%), 17 participants (20%), 11 participants (13%), 6 participants (7%), and 3 participants (3%) respectively, as exemplified in table VII and figure X in the results section. These findings are in line with the findings of Grandia et al. (2013), which emphasized top management support as a significant factor to be perceived for sustainable procurement by organizations. As such, it can be noted that many organizations within the plastic industry that practice sustainability focus most on the aspect of top management support for successful SP implementation. When it comes to the factor that receive the least attention in the implementation of SP in firms within the plastic sector, the study results showed that regulations are the least perceived factor for SP. This factor was mentioned by 31 participants (36%), as the least perceived aspect for SP. Top management support, organizational commitment, expertise, cost, and perceived benefits were mentioned by 3 participants (4%), 4 participants (5%), 9 participants (11%), 15 participants (17%), and 23 participants (27%) respectively. These findings reveal that even though regulations happen to be a factor perceived for SP, it does not receive the same attention as that received by factors such as perceived benefits, cost, expertise and top organizational commitment. Many organizations place little emphasis on regulations when it comes to the implementation of SP.
CHAPTER SIX
6.0 Conclusion
This study investigated the factors perceived by organizations for sustainable procurement. The study outcomes revealed that organizations within the plastic industry perceive six factors for sustainable procurement including perceived benefits, top management support, cost, regulations, expertise, and organizational commitment. Among these findings top management support was established to be the most perceived factor for SP, whereas regulations was identified to be the least perceived factor for sustainability. As such, this study recommends companies within the plastic sector that have not embraced sustainable procurement to focus on implementing it by considering the six factors identified in this study. This study focused only on 97 participants owing to the limitations of time and resources. Future studies should focus on a larger sample to enhance the generalizability and validity of the study outcomes. Moreover, the study focused on gathering data using the questionnaire technique. In relation to this, future studies should focus on the adoption of data collection methods such as interviews, which allow for probing. The adopting of such data gathering techniques will allow for in-depth data collection, which in turn will reveal a range of factors that organizations within the sector of plastic perceive for sustainability.
References
|
Adham, N. K., & Siwar, C. (2017). Factors influencing government green procurement practices: structural equation modelling analysis, MEJELSD, 1(1), 61-88. Almalki, S. (2016). Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Data in Mixed Methods Research–Challenges and Benefits. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 288-296. American Chemistry Council. (2016). Plastics and Sustainability: A Valuation of Environmental Benefits, Costs and Opportunities for Continuous Improvement. 1-86. Pdf file. Available at: https://plastics.americanchemistry.com/Plastics-and-Sustainability.pdf Butler, P, & Keaveney, M. (2014). An Analysis of the Barriers to and Drivers of Green Public Procurement in Achieving a More Sustainable Construction Industry, International Virtual Conference, University of Zilina, Slovakia, 24-28 Berger, A. A. (2018). Media and communication research methods: An introduction to qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage Publications. Buniamin, S., Johari, H. N., Ahmad, N., Rauf, A. F., & Rashid, A. A. (2014). The Determinants of Green Government Procurement (GGP) Implementation in Malaysian Public Enterprises. Journal of Global Business and Economics, 9(1), Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., Turner, L. A., & Christensen, L. B. (2011). Research methods, design, and analysis. Comăniță, E. D., Hlihor, R. M., Ghinea, C., & Gavrilescu, M. (2016). Occurrence of Plastic Waste in the Environment: Ecological and Health Risks. Environmental Engineering & Management Journal (EEMJ), 15(3). Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. Eriksen, M., Lebreton, L. C., Carson, H. S., Thiel, M., Moore, C. J., Borerro, J. C., … & Reisser, J. (2014). Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: more than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PloS one, 9(12), e111913. European Commission. (2018). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. 1-17, Pdf file available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2df5d1d2-fac7-11e7-b8f5-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF Faure, F., Demars, C., Wieser, O., Kunz, M., & De Alencastro, L. F. (2015). Plastic pollution in Swiss surface waters: nature and concentrations, interaction with pollutants. Environmental Chemistry, 12(5), 582-591. Gelderman, C. J., Semeijn, J., & Bouma, F. (2015). Implementing sustainability in public procurement: The limited role of procurement managers and party-political executives. Journal of public procurement, 15(1), 66-92. Ghadge, A., Kidd, E., Bhattacharjee, A., & Tiwari, M. K. (2019). Sustainable procurement performance of large enterprises across supply chain tiers and geographic regions. International Journal of Production Research, 57(3), 764–778. Doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1482431 Ghadimi, P., Azadnia, A. H., Heavey, C., Dolgui, A., & Can, B. (2016). A review on the buyer–supplier dyad relationships in sustainable procurement context: past, present and future. International Journal of Production Research, 54(5), 1443–1462. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1079341 Grandia, J., Groeneveld, S., Kuipers, B., & Steijn, B. (2013). Sustainable Procurement in Practice: Explaining the Degree of Sustainable Procurement from an Organisational Perspective. Rivista di politica economica. 2. 41-66. Grandia, J., Steijn, B., & Kuipers, B. (2015). It is not easy being green: increasing sustainable public procurement behaviour. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, 28(3), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2015.1024639 Grob S. M., & Benn S. H. (2014). Conceptualising the Adoption of Sustainable Procurement: An Institutional Theory Perspective. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 11-21 Hasselbach, A. J., Blecken, A., & Cost, N. (2012). Investigating the barriers to sustainable procurement in the United Nations. Supplement to the 2012 Annual Statistical Report on United Nations Procurement 1-54 Haward, M. (2018). Plastic pollution of the world’s seas and oceans as a contemporary challenge in ocean governance. Nature communications, 9(1), 667. Jambeck, J. R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T. R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., … & Law, K. L. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347(6223), 768-771. Joanne, M., & David, J. B., (2015). A Field-Level Examination of the Adoption of Sustainable Procurement in the Social Housing Sector, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 35(7), 982-1004. Doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-07-2014-0359 Johnson, D. E. (2014). Quantitative Methods in Sociolinguistics. Kipkorir, L. E., & Wanyoike, D. M. (2015). Factors influencing implementation of green procurement in multinational tea companies in Kericho County. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 3(6), 431-444. Lindahl, P., Robèrt, K. H., Ny, H., & Broman, G. (2014). Strategic sustainability considerations in materials management. Journal of cleaner production, 64, 98-103. Little, T. D. (Ed.). (2014). The Oxford handbook of quantitative methods: Foundations (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press, USA. Mavi, R. K., Goh, M., & Zarbakhshnia, N. (2017). Sustainable third-party reverse logistic provider selection with fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy MOORA in plastic industry. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 91(5-8), 2401-2418. McMurray, A. J., Islam, M. M., Siwar, C., & Fien, J. (2014). Sustainable procurement in Malaysian organizations: practices, barriers and opportunities. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 20(3), 195-207. Meehan, J., & Bryde, D. (2011). Sustainable procurement practice. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(2), 94-106. Mwangi N. E. (2018). Evaluation of Factors Affecting Implementation of Green Public Procurement Governments in Laikipia County Government, Kenya.. Intern. Journal of Profess. Bus. Review. 4 (91). Nadeem, S, Mohamad, Mhb and Abdullah, Nahbn (2017). Sustainable Procurement Behavior: A Case of Government Departments, International Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 402–416 Nasiche, F., & Ngugi, G. K. (2014). Determinants of Adoption of Green Procurement in the Public Sector: A Case Study of Kenya Pipeline Company. International Journal of Social Sciences and Entrepreneurship, 1(11), 351-372 Punch, K. F., & Oancea, A. (2014). Introduction to research methods in education. Sage. Ramakrishnan, P., Haron, H., & Goh, Y. (2015). Factors Influencing Green Purchasing Adoption for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Society, 16 (1), 39 – 56 Ruparathna, R., & Hewage, K. (2015a). Sustainable procurement in the Canadian construction industry: current practices, drivers and opportunities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 109, 305-314. Ruparathna, R., & Hewage, K. (2015b). Sustainable procurement in the Canadian construction industry: challenges and benefits. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 42(6), 417-426. Stangor, C. (2014). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Nelson Education. Testa, F., Iraldo, F., Frey, M., & Daddi, T. (2012). What Factors Influence the Uptake of GPP (Green Public Procurement) Practices? New Evidence from an Italian Survey. Ecological Economics, 82, 88–96 Testa, F., Annunziata, E., Iraldo, F., & Frey, M. (2016). Drawbacks and opportunities of green public procurement: an effective tool for sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1893-1900. Young S., Nagpal, S., & Adams, C. A. (2015). Sustainable Procurement in Australian and UK Universities, Public Management Review. DOI (Permanent URL) 10.1080/14719037.2015.1051575 Walliman, N. (2017). Research methods: The basics. Routledge. Watkins, E., & Schweitzer, J. (2015). Moving towards a circular economy for plastics in the EU by 2030 Pdf file available at: https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/76f63c44-9abb-4758-92e9-f92008f60930/DRAFT%20-%20Moving%20towards%20a%20circular%20economy%20for%20plastics%20in%20the%20EU%20by%202030%20-%2012%20October.pdf?v=63706580235 Wong, J. K. W., San Chan, J. K., & Wadu, M. J. (2016). Facilitating effective green procurement in construction projects: An empirical study of the enablers. Journal of cleaner production, 135, 859-871.
Appendix Questionnaire SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT KNOWLEDGE AND AWARENESS
FACTORS PERCEIVE FOR SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT
Appendix
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Related Samples
The Role of Essay Writing Services in Online Education: A Comprehensive Analysis
Introduction The...
Write Like a Pro: Effective Strategies for Top-Notch Explication Essays
Introduction "A poem...
How to Conquer Your Exams: Effective Study Strategies for All Learners
Introduction Imagine...
Overcoming Writer’s Block: Strategies to Get Your Essays Flowing
Introduction The...
Optimizing Your Online Learning Experience: Tips and Tricks for Success
The world of education...
