Competitiveness of E Commerce Firms through ESG Logistics
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Research
2.1. E-Commerce Concept and Industry Status
2.2. Competitive Factors for E-Commerce
2.3. ESG
2.3.1. Environment
2.3.2. Social
2.3.3. Governance
2.4. Research Model
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Conjoint Analysis
3.2. Survey
3.3. Sample
4. Results
Results for Detailed Attributes
5. Discussion
6. Limitation and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kim, R.Y. The impact of COVID-19 on consumers: Preparing for digital sales. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 2020, 48, 212–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schaupp, L.C.; Bélanger, F. A conjoint analysis of online consumer satisfaction1. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2005, 6, 95. [Google Scholar]
- Choi, J.; Seol, H.; Lee, S.; Cho, H.; Park, Y. Customer satisfaction factors of mobile commerce in Korea. Internet Res. 2008, 18, 313–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, B.; Zhang, S. A conjoint approach to understanding online buyers’ decisions towards online marketplaces. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2020, 15, 69–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhong, R.Y.; Huang, G.Q. E-commerce logistics in supply chain management: Practice perspective. Procedia Cirp 2016, 52, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McDonach, P.; Prothero, A. Sustainability marketing research: Past, present and future. J. Mark. Manag. 2014, 30, 1186–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bassen, A.; Kovács, A.M. Environmental, social and governance key performance indicators from a capital market perspective. In Wirtschafts-und Unternehmensethik; Springer: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2020; pp. 809–820. [Google Scholar]
- Kalakota, R.; Whinston, A.B. Frontiers of Electronic Commerce, 1st ed.; Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Gupta, A. E-Commerce: Role of E-Commerce in today’s business. Int. J. Comput. Corp. Res. 2014, 4, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Meng, X. Developing Model of E-commerce E-marketing. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Symposium on Information Processing (ISIP 2009), Huangshan, China, 21–23 August 2009; Academy Publisher: Assam, India, 2009; p. 225. [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, X.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Z. The analysis of the logistics mode decision to e-commerce. J. Electron. Commer. Organ. JECO 2012, 10, 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deloitte. Global Powers of Retailing; Deloitte: London, UK, 2021; p. 5. [Google Scholar]
- Consumerinsight. CJ Shopping Report 20-03; Consumerinsight: Seoul, Korea, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Gao, X.; Wang, Z. Sustainable Supply Chain Decisions under E-Commerce Platform Marketplace with Competition. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oláh, J.; Kitukutha, N.; Haddad, H.; Pakurár, M.; Máté, D.; Popp, J. Achieving sustainable e-commerce in environmental, social and economic dimensions by taking possible trade-offs. Sustainability 2019, 11, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, Q.; Zhang, N. Does e-commerce provide a sustained competitive advantage? An investigation of survival and sustainability in growth-oriented enterprises. Sustainability 2015, 7, 1411–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huppertz, P. Market changes require new supply chain thinking. Transp. Distrib. 1999, 40, 70–74. [Google Scholar]
- Foster, T. Dot-com retailers give 3PLs their big chance. Logist. Manag. Distrib. Rep. 1999, 38, 38. [Google Scholar]
- Harrington, L.H. Supply chain execution in the internet era. Transp. Distrib. 2000, 41, 36. [Google Scholar]
- Hill, S. E-tailing: The internet meets SCM. Appar. Ind. Mag. 1999, 60, 66–69. [Google Scholar]
- Babenko, V.; Kulczyk, Z.; Perevosova, I.; Syniavska, O.; Davydova, O. Factors of the development of international e-commerce under the conditions of globalization. SHS Web Conf. 2019, 65, 04016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, H.F. The impact of website quality dimensions on customer satisfaction in the B2C e-commerce context. Total. Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2007, 18, 363–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; He, M.; Gao, F.; Xie, P. An empirical study of online shopping customer satisfaction in China: A holistic perspective. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2008, 36, 919–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.H.; Hsu, I.C.; Lin, C.C. Website attributes that increase consumer purchase intention: A conjoint analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 1007–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, T.P.; Ho, Y.T.; Li, Y.W.; Turban, E. What drives social commerce: The role of social support and relationship quality. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2011, 16, 69–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jarvenpaa, S.L.; Todd, P.A. Consumer reactions to electronic shopping on the World Wide Web. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 1996, 1, 59–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Friede, G.; Busch, T.; Bassen, A. ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. J. Sustain. Financ. Invest. 2015, 5, 210–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tarmuji, I.; Maelah, R.; Tarmuji, N.H. The impact of environmental, social and governance practices (ESG) on economic performance: Evidence from ESG score. Int. J. Trade Econ. Financ. 2016, 7, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schöder, D. The impact of e-commerce development on urban logistics sustainability. Open J. Soc. Sci. 2016, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Escursell, S.; Llorach, P.; Roncero, M.B. Sustainability in e-commerce packaging: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 280, 124314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Coelho, P.M.; Corona, B.; ten Klooster, R.; Worrell, E. Sustainability of reusable packaging–Current situation and trends. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. X 2020, 6, 100037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.; Choy, K.L.; Ho, G.T.; Chung, S.H.; Lam, H.Y. Survey of green vehicle routing problem: Past and future trends. Expert Syst. Appl. 2014, 41, 1118–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perboli, G.; Rosano, M. Parcel delivery in urban areas: Opportunities and threats for the mix of traditional and green business models. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2019, 99, 19–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coyle, J.J.; Gibson, B.J.; Langley, C.J.; Novack, R.A. Managing Supply Chains: A Logistics Approach, 10th ed.; Cengage Learn: Boston, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Amemba, C.S.; Nyaboke, P.G.; Osoro, A.; Mburu, N. Elements of green supply chain management. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. 2013, 5, 51–61. [Google Scholar]
- Muller, A. Sustainable agriculture and the production of biomass for energy use. Clim. Chang. 2009, 94, 319–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Punel, A.; Stathopoulos, A. Modeling the acceptability of crowdsourced goods deliveries: Role of context and experience effects. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2017, 105, 18–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shishiteva, P. Is Parcel Delivery Becoming More Sustainable? A Comparison between Delivery Companies and Traditional Couriers; Department of Mathematics and Logistics, Jacobs University Bremen: Bremen, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Rai, H.B.; Van Lier, T.; Meers, D.; Macharis, C. Improving urban freight transport sustainability: Policy assessment framework and case study. Res. Transp. Econ. 2017, 64, 26–35. [Google Scholar]
- He, Y.; Wang, X.; Lin, Y.; Zhou, F.; Zhou, L. Sustainable decision making for joint distribution center location choice. Transp. Res. Part D Transport. Environ. 2017, 55, 202–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vafa-Arani, H.; Jahani, S.; Dashti, H.; Heydari, J.; Moazen, S. A system dynamics modeling for urban air pollution: A case study of Tehran, Iran. Transp. Res. Part D Transport. Environ. 2014, 31, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, C.; Goh, M.; Zhao, Y.; Zheng, J. Location selection of city logistics centers under sustainability. Transp. Res. Part D Transport. Environ. 2015, 36, 29–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amazon. Available online: https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Frustration-Free-Packaging/b?ie=UTF8&node=5521637011 (accessed on 25 July 2021).
- Fama, E.F.; Jensen, M.C. Separation of ownership and control. J. Law Econ. 1983, 26, 301–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, V.R. Applied Conjoint Analysis; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Green, P.E.; Srinivasan, V. Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. J. Consum. Res. 1978, 5, 103–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, B.; Choi, D. Dynamic capability of the firm as driver of green supply chain management implementation. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arora, A.; Glaser, D.; Kluge, P.; Kim, A.; Sak, N. It’s Showtime! How Live Commerce Is Transforming the Shopping Experience; McKinsey Digital: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
Attributes | Definition | Example |
---|---|---|
Delivery Service [2,4,23,24] | Customer attraction by providing promptness and convenience to consumers through delivery service. | Specialized delivery service, delivery lead time, delivery safety, tracking service, recognition of potential delivery delays |
Platform Usability [2,3,4,22,24] | It can be described as the platform’s accessibility, search capabilities for products, user-friendly interfaces, and impact user satisfaction. | Accessibility, web design, search support, usefulness, content visibility |
Feedback Mechanism [4,22,25] | Performs a kind of certification that can be evaluated on a product through other consumers. | Reviews, comments, ratings |
Information Security [2,3,4,22,23,24] | The extent to which consumers feel safe from the illegal use of personal information online. | Personal information security, personal information collection, payment information protection |
Reliability [2,3,22,23,24] | The extent to which consumers feel that the products and transactions offered by e-commerce platforms are reliable. | Trust in transactions, trust in contents |
Product Diversity [2,23,24,26] | Diversity and depth of products provided by the platform. | Capability to present alternative products, a variety of products, and specialized products |
Price Competitiveness [2,3,23] | The extent to which the consumer perceives that the product has been purchased at a reasonable price. | Price comparison with other platforms, price satisfaction compared to offline transactions |
Information [3,22] | How up-to-date, accurate, and complete the information is that is provided by the platform. | Continuous update of information, the accuracy of information, completeness of information |
Reactivity [3,22,23] | The extent to which the platform is perceived to respond quickly and appropriately to consumer needs. | Customer response speed, customer response procedures |
Activities | Examples | |
---|---|---|
Environment | Packaging | Use reusable packaging, use recyclable packaging, avoid using additional packaging [30,31] |
Distribution (Last-mile delivery) | Reduction in air pollution and carbon emissions through Green Vehicle Routing [32], using electric vehicles or bicycles [33] | |
Operation of Distribution center | Green Warehousing and introducing eco-friendly power generation [34,35] | |
Social | Purchasing | Ethical purchasing [36] |
Distribution (Last-mile delivery) | Using the Crowd logistics platform [37], improving the working environment (work schedules, salaries, etc.) [38], avoidance of vehicle noise and illegal parking [39] | |
Operation of Distribution center | Creating local community jobs [40], improving the working environment (work schedules, salaries, etc.), avoidance of traffic congestion [41,42] | |
Governance | Partnership | Avoiding unfair trade practices and supporting SMES (retailers and suppliers) |
Attributes | Detailed Attributes | Levels |
---|---|---|
Service | Lead time and Quality (Last Mile Delivery) | Low, Medium, High |
Commodity | Wide variety, Medium variety, Narrow variety | |
Environment | Packaging | Implemented, Not implemented |
Distribution (Last Mile Delivery) | Implemented, Not implemented | |
Operation of distribution center | Implemented, Not implemented | |
Social | Purchase | Implemented, Not implemented |
Distribution (Last Mile Delivery) | Implemented, Not implemented | |
Operation of distribution center | Implemented, Not implemented | |
Governance | Partnership | Implemented, Not implemented |
Characteristics | Categories | Number of Respondents | Ratio of Respondents |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 40 | 41.7% |
Female | 56 | 58.3% | |
Age | 10~19 | 12 | 12.5% |
20~29 | 64 | 66.7% | |
30~39 | 15 | 15.6% | |
40~49 | 4 | 4.2% | |
More than 50 | 1 | 1.0% | |
Number of E-commerce usage (Average per week) | Less than 2 | 60 | 62.5% |
2 or 3 times | 31 | 32.3% | |
More than 4 | 5 | 5.2% |
Attributes | Detailed Attributes | Level | Utility Estimation | Importance (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Service | Lead time and Quality (Last Mile Delivery) | Low | −8.387 | 21.938 |
Medium | −0.099 | |||
High | 8.486 | |||
Commodity | Narrow variety | −7.794 | 18.054 | |
Medium variety | 1.702 | |||
Wide variety | 6.092 | |||
Environment | Packaging | Implemented | 3.199 | 8.320 |
Not Implemented | −3.199 | |||
Distribution (Last Mile Delivery) | Implemented | 2.751 | 7.153 | |
Not Implemented | −2.751 | |||
Operation of distribution center | Implemented | 3.177 | 8.262 | |
Not Implemented | −3.177 | |||
Social | Purchase | Implemented | 3.153 | 8.200 |
Not Implemented | −3.153 | |||
Distribution (Last Mile Delivery) | Implemented | 3.794 | 9.866 | |
Not Implemented | −3.794 | |||
Operation of distribution center | Implemented | 3.295 | 8.570 | |
Not Implemented | −3.295 | |||
Governance | Partnership | Implemented | 3.706 | 9.637 |
Not Implemented | −3.706 | |||
Constant | 59.384 | |||
Coefficient of Determination | Pearson’s R = 0.998, significance = 0.000 | |||
Kendall’s tau = 0.967, significance = 0.000 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kim, J.; Kim, M.; Im, S.; Choi, D. Competitiveness of E Commerce Firms through ESG Logistics. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11548. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011548
Kim J, Kim M, Im S, Choi D. Competitiveness of E Commerce Firms through ESG Logistics. Sustainability. 2021; 13(20):11548. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011548
Chicago/Turabian StyleKim, Jinsung, Minseok Kim, Sehyeuk Im, and Donghyun Choi. 2021. "Competitiveness of E Commerce Firms through ESG Logistics" Sustainability 13, no. 20: 11548. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011548
APA StyleKim, J., Kim, M., Im, S., & Choi, D. (2021). Competitiveness of E Commerce Firms through ESG Logistics. Sustainability, 13(20), 11548. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011548