Next Article in Journal
Exploration of Solar Panel Damage and Service Life Reduction Using Condition Assessment, Dust Accumulation, and Material Testing
Previous Article in Journal
Mapping Policy Actors Using Social Network Analysis on Integrated Urban Farming Program in Bandung City
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/su15129613
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Logistics Corporate Social Responsibility on Supply Chain Performance: Using Supply Chain Collaboration as an Intermediary Variable

by
Lu Chen
1,
Yueyue Fu
1,
Yujia Liu
1,2 and
Cui Wang
1,*
1
School of Business, Suzhou University, Suzhou 234000, China
2
School of Economics, Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(12), 9613; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129613
Submission received: 3 May 2023 / Revised: 5 June 2023 / Accepted: 7 June 2023 / Published: 15 June 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In recent years, there has been an increasing lack of social responsibility, such as low credibility of information disclosure, product quality defects, food safety, and other issues. This has had a certain impact on supply chain performance and has become an important topic of sustainable supply chain research. This study considers the relationship between logistics corporate social responsibility and supply chain performance. Structural equation models were built to explore the relationship between logistics corporate social responsibility, supply chain collaboration, and supply chain performance, and the bootstrap method was used to build path models to explore whether there is a mediation effect between logistics corporate social responsibility and supply chain performance. The results show that logistics corporate social responsibility has a significant positive impact on supply chain coordination, and logistics corporate social responsibility and supply chain coordination also have a significant positive impact on supply chain performance. Supply chain coordination plays an intermediary role between logistics corporate social responsibility and supply chain performance. Based on these results, it is suggested that logistics enterprises improve their awareness of fulfilling corporate social responsibility, improve transparency, strengthen supply chain collaboration, and accept the role of supervision and management at the government level.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

In recent years, low credibility of information disclosure [1], environmental pollution [2], product quality defects [3], food safety, and other social responsibility deficiencies have frequently occurred, causing widespread public concern. An increasing number of consumers are choosing businesses with a great sense of social responsibility [4]. With the gradual advancement of economic globalization, the behavior of a single corporate social responsibility will extend to the entire supply chain, triggering large-scale consumer boycotts and returns, which have a significant impact on the performance of the entire supply chain. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is continuously transmitted and fed back into the supply chain system, evolving into more complex and collective social responsibility behaviors [5]. In this context, supply chain node enterprises, especially core enterprises, are increasingly paying attention to social responsibility fulfillment issues [6], social responsibility concepts in the supply chain, such as sustainable green supply chain [7], are increasing in importance.
Logistics is a crucial link in the chain; it is a strategic industry to optimize industrial organization and enhance industrial value and has a big impact on the supply chain as well as on the entire socioeconomic system. The logistics industry has developed rapidly in recent years, but at the same time, the problems behind it are also gradually emerging, such as increased air pollution and carbon emissions caused by transportation, the indifference in employees’ work safety, and the lack of enthusiasm for public welfare undertakings [8]. From the root of the problems, they are mainly manifested in the lack and neglect of logistics enterprises’ social responsibility [9]. Some logistics enterprises have realized that actively performing logistics corporate social responsibilities (LCSR) involves not only their rights and missions but also their obligations and responsibilities [10]. They have actively undertaken their social responsibilities, participated in public welfare activities, served the community, and created jobs [11]. JD Logistics, for instance, provides free clothing and books to underprivileged communities using its custom-built logistics system. These companies believe that fulfilling CSR can help them better gain public recognition, improve competitiveness, and improve supply chain performance (SCP) [12]. But some scholars view CSR as a burden. They pointed out that CSR cannot bring benefits to enterprises but instead forces them to deduct investments originally used for production operations, weakening their ability to develop new products and improve production efficiency, thereby reducing the performance of the entire supply chain [13].
As an important node enterprise in the supply chain, whether logistics corporate fulfilling social responsibility has an effect on SCP, and if so, what kind of impact does it have, and by what path, are questions that need to be clarified.

1.2. Literature Review

Corporate social responsibility embodies the concept of sustainable development and is related to different levels of society, generally including the four main types of responsibilities: economic, legal, moral, and charitable [14]. Mainly using Springer, SCOPUS, and Web of Science, a literature review was conducted on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and supply chain performance. It was found that many scholars have reached different conclusions about the relationship between CSR performance and SCP. In summary, there are essentially three views.
The first postulates a positive impact relationship. A decision support framework can be developed for modeling and analyzing supply chain networks with CSR, in the belief that investing in CSR activities can increase profits, reduce risks, and positively impact the environment [15]. Four independent variables—green manufacturing, green information systems, customer collaboration, and ecological design—are statistically significant in predicting organizational performance [16]. Panda et al. (2017) investigated the effects of CSR in a closed-loop supply chain [17]. Li pointed out that CSR activities play a significant intermediary role in the process of improving innovation performance through internal control [18]. The profit generated by the non-profit maximization motivation developed by corporate social practice responsibility is higher than the profit generated by the profit maximization goal [19]. After studying many listed companies, the results indicated that social capital established through CSR investment could counteract the detrimental effects of uncertain economic policies on company financial performance. In addition, it is more significant in developed markets when the economic environment is unstable. The results of an analysis of vertical panel samples of 137 S&P 500 companies along with data collected from multiple sources indicated that CSR is positively correlated with corporate performance and that the degree of correlation is influenced by factors such as R&D [20]. Mondal and Giri (2021) found that the status of CSR investment is one of the factors affecting market demand, and that supply chain sustainability can be achieved through efforts such as CSR investment and used product recovery rates [21]. Singh et al. (2021) illustrated that practicing CSR can positively influence supply chain risk management practice and is essential for supply chain risk management practice to effectively improve corporate reputation [22]. Wu and Li (2022) found that as the CSR awareness of supply chain members increased, the carbon reduction, product sales, and technology of low-carbon supply chains improved under various CSR commitment models, and the overall profit also increased [23]. In addition, the promotion of low-carbon supply chain optimization is aided by the active CSR of retailers.
The second view postulates that it has a negative impact. Enterprise executives believe that where there is direct opposition between profits and social interests, it is possible to give priority to profits [24]. If an enterprise performs its social responsibilities, it will inevitably cause some loss of profits, which will then have adverse effects on financial performance [25]. The model is estimated in their study using the fixed effect model as well as the system generalized moment approach to estimate the model. The research demonstrates that overall CSR disclosure has negative effects on corporate performance, and environmental responsibility has an obvious negative impact. Dou (2015), using the fixed effect analysis method, found that CSR did not significantly improve financial performance and that there was a significant lag effect [26]. In emerging markets in Brazil, a significant negative correlation was found between CSR and corporate value [27].
The third view is uncertain or irrelevant. Yoon and Chung (2018), by comparing the effect of CSR on the internal and external stakeholders of the financial performance of catering companies, found that external CSR may not effectively improve operating profitability while improving the company’s market value [28]. Internal CSR improves the company’s short-term profitability while making no difference to the company’s market value. Through analyzing the data of 297 large manufacturing companies in Malaysia, Kraus et al. (2020) found no significant direct effect between CSR and environmental performance but did discover a remarkable intermediary role between environmental strategy and green innovation [29]. They explored the relationship between CSR and organizational performance from the viewpoint of European multi-national companies and took corporate reputation as the regulatory effect. When CSR is performed with external stakeholders, it affects organizational performance, but the effect varies across companies. A systematic review of the business case for CSR and firm performance attests to the inconclusive relationship between CSR and firm performance [30].
From the above literature, we can see that scholars have different perspectives on the relationship between corporate social responsibility fulfillment and supply chain performance, and no consensus has been reached yet. During the research process, intermediary variables have been introduced to further verify the relationship between CSR and the value of enterprises.
With a sample of businesses gathered in the Asia-Pacific area, Naseem et al. studied the pathways through which CSR influences corporate performance, specifically exploring the mediating function of enterprise risk management between CSR and corporate performance [31]. Combined with big data processing technology, Wang et al. discussed the internal connection among CSR, green supply chain (GSC) management, and corporate performance [32]. The empirical results indicate that internal and external social responsibility has positive promoting effects on GSC management and promotes the company’s business performance, while large sample data processing can significantly promote the relationship between external social responsibility and GSC management. GSC was used as a mediator by Novitasari et al. to study the impact between CSR and SCP by sampling 2019 PROPER companies in the Indonesian Stock Exchange market for the period 2011–2015 [33]. Considering the mediating role of corporate social capital and the moderating effect of market competition intensity, Liu et al. explored the impact mechanism of CSR on technological innovation performance [34].
Research on CSR and SCP is plentiful, indicating that CSR has become an important topic discussed by the academic community. Owing to the different data and methods, the research conclusions are inconsistent. The existing research results have laid a good foundation for CSR and SCP but need to be improved in the following three aspects:
(1)
Most research on CSR is focused on whole supply chain companies and less on logistics enterprises. The impact of fulfilling the LCSR on SCP is a topic worth exploring.
(2)
In terms of indicator measurement, most scholars pay less attention to environmental protection, so the measurement of CSR and SCP is not comprehensive. Moreover, environmental protection is a global problem, and logistics activities such as warehousing [35], transportation, and packaging [36] have made significant contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. Adding environmental protection to the measurement indicators is of practical significance.
(3)
Supply chain collaboration (SCC) refers to collaborative activities carried out by enterprises to improve the overall competitiveness of the supply chain and achieve common goals. It improves collaborative advantage and has a bottom-line influence on firm performance [37]. However, there is not much research that introduces SCC as an intermediary variable to explore the relationship between LCSR and SCP.
Based on data from logistics enterprises in the Anhui Province, this study empirically investigates the relationship between social responsibility and SCP and examines the mediating function of supply chain synergy. This research offers an empirical foundation for logistics businesses to actively uphold their social responsibility and enhance SCP, which has both theoretical and practical significance. The connection among the LCSR, SCP, and SCC is discussed from a theoretical standpoint in this study using the empirical analysis research method. This study enriches the existing literature in this field and serves as a benchmark for future research in the logistics industry.
The structure of this article is arranged as follows: Section 2 presents pertinent theoretical underpinnings and research hypotheses, and Section 3 explores the methods and processes of the connection among LCSR, SCC, and SCP. Section 4 is the analysis of the research results, and Section 5 summarizes the research situation and presents the shortcomings of the research as well as the outlook for future development.

2. Theoretical Basis and Research Hypothesis

2.1. Theoretical Basis

Stakeholder theory was first put forward by Freeman in the book Strategic Management: Analysis Methods of Stakeholder Management, published in 1984. In contrast to the traditional concept of shareholder supremacy, stakeholder theory states that if an enterprise fails to fulfill the expectations of stakeholders other than shareholders, its risk premium will increase, leading to the rise of other opportunity costs and the loss of profit opportunities and posing a threat to business sustainability.
When it comes to stakeholder theory and CSR, stakeholder theory provides theoretical support for CSR. According to stakeholder theory, the production and operation processes of an enterprise are affected by stakeholders. Therefore, to achieve sustainable development, enterprises need to fully consider the interests of their stakeholders, safeguard the interests of investors, and strive to maximize the benefits of the enterprise and society. As a form of enterprise, logistics enterprises are no exception. In addition to fulfilling their social responsibilities to shareholders, companies also need to be responsible for their customers, suppliers, employees, environment, government, and community. These are the main stakeholders of logistics enterprises.
Based on stakeholder theory, the dimensions of CSR are classified from the perspective of stakeholders, and the five dimensions of economic, legal, ethical, public welfare, and environmental protection are selected as the basis for measuring the level of logistics CSR.

2.2. Research Hypothesis and Conceptual Model

This study suggests the following research hypotheses to investigate the connection among LCSR, SCC, and SCP. The theoretical model is depicted in Figure 1.

2.2.1. Corporate Social Responsibility and Supply Chain Performance

Numerous scholars who have studied the relationship between CSR fulfillment and SCP have come to one of three conclusions: the relationship is positive, negative, or irrelevant. However, most of the conclusions state that the relationship is positive. As a result, Hypothesis 1 is formulated:
H1. 
The LCSR has a significantly positive impact on SCP.

2.2.2. Corporate Social Responsibility and Supply Chain Coordination

CSR activities are seen as signals for enterprises to communicate corporate information to the outside, serving as a signaling mechanism. It is another channel for external inference about enterprises [38]. The fulfillment of CSR is to transmit information such as business status and the moral quality of enterprises to stakeholders. Li et al. found that encouraging manufacturers to correctly assume CSR can achieve win–win results through collaborative contracts [39]. Alduais et al. showed that actively fulfilling CSR and disclosing CSR reports can reduce information asymmetry, thereby improving supply chain coordination [40]. As a result, Hypothesis 2 is formulated:
H2. 
The LCSR has a significantly positive impact on SCC.

2.2.3. Supply Chain Collaboration and Supply Chain Performance

Many countries and regions around the world have identified the theory of collaborative development as the basis for achieving sustainable social development. Maintaining coordination between departments and employees is an important way of improving enterprise performance. Today, there is not only competition between companies but also competition between supply chains. In a supply chain, it is particularly important to achieve coordination synergy among node enterprises. Kaipia et al. believe that information sharing helps all participants grasp market information more accurately, identify potential demand in depth, create more shared value in SCC, give full play to supply chain synergy, and ultimately improve SCP [41]. Collaborative innovation can improve the integration and creativity of resources and enhance operational flexibility. Additionally, it aids supply chain businesses in simultaneously raising their total level of innovation and operational effectiveness [42]. Baah et al. found that information sharing can bring great benefits and improve the visibility, collaboration, and agility of the supply chain while jointly having a key effect on its performance [43]. Vosooghidizaji et al. compared the results of three different decision models under the premise of a dual supply chain and found that under the two asymmetric information scenarios, in addition to the accurate estimation of unknown costs, the supply chain profits relative to information symmetry decreased, while the proposed coordination mechanism showed that the global supply chain profits improved [44]. As a result, Hypothesis 3 is formulated:
H3. 
SCC has a significant positive impact on SCP.
Based on the first three hypotheses, this paper proposes Hypothesis 4:
H4. 
SCC plays an intermediary role between LCSR and SCP.

3. Research Method

This study uses a variety of different analytical techniques to effectively examine the impact of LCSR on SCP. The primary research methods used were as follows (Figure 2):

3.1. Pre-Survey

Based on the existing literature and expert opinions, the survey questionnaire was developed. In order to ensure the validity and rationality of the questionnaire, a preliminary survey was conducted in July 2022, mainly targeting employees of logistics and supply chain-related enterprises in SZ City, Anhui Province. It took about a month to collect 60 valid questionnaires. SPSS 26.0 was used to analyze the reliability of the questionnaire, and the content was modified according to the CITC index to obtain the final questionnaire.
The modified scales were subjected to exploratory analysis, and the data were subjected to factor analysis using SPSS 26.0 software. According to the obtained KMO value and Bartlett’s sphericity test, the next step in the analysis could be carried out. The common factors of LCSR, SCC, and SCP were extracted using the extraction eigenvalue method. LCSR was rotated by maximum variance to obtain five common factors, which were named financial responsibility, legal responsibility, ethical responsibility, social responsibility, and environmental responsibility [45]. SCC was rotated by maximum variance to obtain three common factors, which were named information sharing, synchronous decision making, and incentive alliance [46]. The SCP was rotated by the maximum variance to obtain four common factors: financial performance, social performance, internal business process performance, and environmental performance.

3.2. Questionnaire Survey

After the formal survey questionnaire was formed, a formal survey was conducted on the final questionnaire in August 2022. The survey questionnaire was mainly collected by employees of logistics enterprises and supply chain practitioners in Anhui Province. The data collection process for the formal survey took about two months, from August to October 2022. Through the Questionnaire Star platform, a total of 408 questionnaires were distributed, of which 364 were valid.
The questionnaire used a five-level Likert scale, ranging from 1 point (strongly disagree) to 5 points (strongly agree). The survey questionnaire consists of four parts. The first part collects the basic characteristics of the samples. This includes the size, nature, and duration of the company, and the position level of the interviewees within the company. The second, third, and fourth parts describe the dimensions and measurement items of logistics enterprise social responsibility, supply chain collaboration, and supply chain performance, respectively.

3.3. Statistical Analysis

Using a variety of statistical methods to process the collected data, the connection among the variables was clarified to verify the research hypothesis of this study. We used SPSS 26.0 and AMOS 26.0 software to evaluate the questionnaire’s validity and dependability. Confirmatory factor analysis using the maximum likelihood estimation method (AMOS 26.0) confirmed validity, and Cronbach’s α coefficient was applied to test the reliability of the questionnaire.

3.4. Structural Equation Method

The SEM is a statistical technique for analyzing associations between variables on the basis of their covariance matrices and is a primary tool for studying multivariate data analysis [47] and structural equation generation [48]. AMOS 26.0 was used to build an SEM that identifies, estimates, and tests causal models on the basis of covariance matrices of variables. The model will analyze the role of individual indicators on the whole as well as the relationships between the indicators themselves [49].

3.5. Bootstrap Method

The SEM has more analytical advantages in the analysis of the intermediary effect [50]. AMOS 26.0 was applied to test for mediation effects, and a bootstrap sample size of 5000 was chosen to derive mediation data to ascertain whether the values within the 95% confidence interval contained zero [51].

4. Data Analysis

4.1. Questionnaire Collection

The pre-survey distributed 68 questionnaires. Sixty-five were returned, and sixty of these were considered acceptable, for an effective response rate of 88%. The valid data obtained from the pre-study were analyzed for reliability using SPSS 26.0, and the questions were partially modified with reference to the results of the CITC index. Easily confused items were eliminated, and the positions and expressions of some items were adjusted.
After obtaining the final formal questionnaire, a formal survey was conducted to obtain relevant data. The employees of logistics enterprises were the subjects of this formal survey. There were 408 questionnaires distributed in all, out of which 393 were retrieved, and 364 of those were valid.

4.2. Reliability and Validity Test of Questionnaire Data

Reliability test: Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to test reliability. Henseler et al. (2015) showed that Cronbach’s alpha and the composite reliability (CR) indicate that the model is internally consistent and reliable with values of ≥0.70 and ≥0.60, respectively [52]. The mean square deviation extraction (AVE) was used to evaluate the convergence effect of the construction, which must meet a threshold of >0.50. The sample data obtained from the formal questionnaire was analyzed using SPSS 26.0 and is presented in Table 1. According to the analysis, the three latent variables of SCP, SCC, and LCSR all had Cronbach’s alpha values > 0.7, indicating that the accepted level had been attained. Among these, the logistics CSR was 0.924, the supply chain synergy was 0.885, and the SCP was 0.924, suggesting that the questionnaire’s internal consistency, reliability, and stability were all good.
Validity test: Before performing validated factor analysis, KMO and Bartlett’s sphericity tests are required to measure its suitability. Upon analyzing the LCSR, the KMO value was 0.921, and the Sig. value in Bartlett’s sphericity test was 0.000, which indicated that factor analysis was appropriate. In SCC, the KMO value was 0.834, and the Sig. value in Bartlett’s sphericity test was 0.000, also indicating that factor analysis was appropriate. In the supply chain performance, the KMO value was 0.933, and the Sig. value in Bartlett’s sphericity test was 0.000, indicating the appropriateness of factor analysis. Validated factor analysis was performed using AMOS 26.0 software and the maximum likelihood estimation method. Details of the validity tests are shown in Table 1. The combined reliability CR is above 0.7, and the AVE of the extraction amount of variance is above 0.5, which is in line with the index. Structural model fit was assessed using the chi-square value/degree of freedom (CMIN/DF), the root-mean-square approximation error (RMSEA), the goodness of fit index (GFI), the value-added fitting index (IFI), the canonical fit index (NFI), and other indicators [53]. The model has a simple fitness when the CMIN/DF value is between 1 and 3. The standard values of GFI, IFI, and NFI were greater than 0.9, and the standard values of RMSEA were less than 0.08. Table 2 displays the results of the tests of structural model fit validity, and shows that in every aspect, the sample data have a good degree of fit; that is, they have good validity.

4.3. Results

4.3.1. Direct Effect Significance Test

This paper validates the hypotheses about LCSR, SCC, and SCP. Figure 3 displays the model’s path coefficient.
The effect of LCSR on SCP is positive and significant at p < 0.001, with a path coefficient of 0.52. The higher the LCSR degree of fulfillment, the more conducive it is to SCP improvement. Hypothesis 1 is therefore true: the fulfillment of LCSR is conducive to improving SCP. Complying with laws and regulations, reducing costs without affecting quality, and improving consumer satisfaction can directly affect and improve SCP. Second, by enhancing ethics and charitable giving, a company’s image and reputation are enhanced, and SCP is significantly improved as a result.
The effect of LCSR on SCC is positive and significant at p < 0.001, with a path coefficient of 0.87. The fulfillment of LCSR is conducive to SCC; thus, Hypothesis 2 is true. The social responsibility behavior of logistics enterprises promotes internal coordination of the supply chain. After responding to the varied demands of different stakeholders, logistics enterprises may boost confidence among various supply chain nodes, increase transparency, share resources more honestly, stabilize the structure between supply chains, and improve SCC.
The effect of SCC on SCP is positive and significant at p < 0.001, with a path coefficient of 0.43. Thus, collaboration between supply chains can improve SCP, and Hypothesis 3 is true. Stability and an increase in SCC will help improve SCP. The bullwhip effect is a common phenomenon in supply chains, and SCC is precisely the right method for dealing with it. In the supply chain, enterprises at all nodes trust each other, share information, make decisions synchronously, improve information transparency, establish win–win ideas, and establish strategic partnerships to make members closer. This enhances collaboration across the supply chain, with nodal companies and the supply chain functioning better and producing better results.

4.3.2. Mediation Effect Significance Test

Hypothesis 4 was verified using the AMOS 26.0 software Bootstrap method, and Table 3 displays the outcomes of the mediating variables detection. Z ≥ 1.96, and the specific values within the 95% confidence interval for each path do not contain zero, indicating that the effect is significant in the direct path and that the indirect effect is established in the indirect path. SCC plays a partially mediating role between the LCSR and SCP; thus, Hypothesis 4 is established. The fulfillment of LCSR will improve SCP by promoting SCC. While performing the corresponding CSR for stakeholders, logistics companies also improve various tangible and intangible resources for different stakeholders. Through these resources, information sharing and mutual trust between enterprises at supply chain nodes can be achieved. This brings supply chain coordination, optimizes the overall supply chain strategy along with the management of each element of the chain, and realizes value transmission, value-added, and maximization of the entire supply chain.

4.4. Framework for Future Development

From our research, we suggest the following:
(1)
Logistics enterprises should improve their awareness of fulfilling CSR: gradually deepen the practice of social responsibility from a practical point of view; be responsible for shareholders and employees internally; provide employees with treatment, management, and welfare; follow the green and low-carbon development path; realize the efficient use of resources; be responsible for consumers, suppliers, governments, and communities externally; abide by national laws and regulations; provide social employment resources; support community construction; and provide more convenient services for the public, to increase the popularity of enterprises, accumulate corporate reputation, improve profitability, and ultimately achieve the mutual promotion of corporate development and social responsibility.
(2)
Logistics enterprises should cooperate with enterprises at different nodes in the supply chain to drive upstream and downstream industries to participate in it, strengthening the synchronous operation of logistics, business flow, capital flow, and information flow, and strengthening the overall supply chain’s rapid response to customers’ personalized needs to maximize benefits.
(3)
At the government level, it should play a supervisory and management role in the performance of the social responsibilities of logistics enterprises, actively guide them to correctly perform their CSR, enhance the collaborative operation of the supply chain, provide good environments and services for logistics enterprises to better perform their CSR, and formulate a system of information disclosure, evaluation, rewards, and punishment in line with the social responsibilities of logistics enterprises to push forward the growth of CSR in the logistics industry. Ultimately, this improves the performance of the whole supply chain.

4.5. Discussion

Compared to existing studies [14,24,31,42], first, this study not only considers economic, social, legal, and ethical factors in indicator measurement but also adds the environment to this foundation, making the indicators more multidimensional and comprehensive. Secondly, a structural equation is used as the analysis tool, which has a high degree of fitness. Finally, the hypothesis that SCC plays a mediating role between LCSR and SCP was proposed and validated, enriching the research on the relationship between the two under supply chain collaboration. The research results show that LCSR has a significantly positive impact on SCP, which supports the first viewpoint; besides, we validated that SCC plays an intermediary role between LCSR and SCP.
Based on this, the following management insights are proposed.
(1)
The evaluation of SCP as a cross-enterprise, complex, multidimensional, and comprehensive system cannot be limited to a single-dimension evaluation. Only by establishing an evaluation system from multiple perspectives can strategic objectives be achieved.
(2)
The SEM is a good analytical tool to deal with the relationship between latent variables and indicators. It has many advantages, such as the simultaneous handling of multiple sets of dependent variables and the separation of measurement errors. In researching LCSR, SCC, and SCP, it is necessary to analyze multiple latent and observed variables, and SEM has no limit on the number of variables compared with linear regression, which is more suitable for this situation.
(3)
The mechanism of action of different mediating variables is different, and the mediating effect produced is also different. SCC is a collaborative activity conducted by companies to enhance the overall competitiveness of the supply chain and achieve corporate aims. SCC plays a vital role in the relationship between CSR and SCP and cannot be ignored.

5. Conclusions

With the continuous advancement of economic globalization and the gradual expansion of China’s “Belt and Road” strategy, in recent years, a lack of social responsibility issues such as low credibility of information disclosure, product quality defects, and food safety have frequently occurred, causing widespread public concern. In this regard, logistics enterprises have repeatedly assumed social responsibility, but some have not yet made clear how their social responsibility performance relates to their SCP. Against this background, it is of great significance to explore LCSR, SCC, and SCP.
Using questionnaires and SEM to explore the connections among variables, it was determined that the path coefficient of the impact of LCSR on SCP is 0.52, and the path coefficient of the impact on SCC is 0.87. The fulfillment of LCSR not only benefits the improvement of SCP but also promotes internal collaboration in the supply chain. It is not difficult to see that the impact of LCSR on SCC is stronger than on SCP. The path coefficient of SCC affecting SCP is 0.43, and the stability and increase of SCC also contribute to the improvement of SCP. In addition, SCC plays a partial intermediary role in the LCSR and SCP. SCP is directly and indirectly influenced by LSCR. On the one hand, LSCR directly affects SCP, and on the other hand, it partially mediates through SCC.
In theory, this article introduces the variable SCC, which enriches the current research on LSCR and SCP. From a practical standpoint, this study does the following: it helps logistics enterprises and stakeholders clarify the benefits of actively performing CSR; makes them supervisors of enterprise operations; urges logistics enterprises to uphold their social responsibilities; enhances the efficiency of the whole supply chain, realizes the value added; and promotes the wholesome growth of society.
The following are the main innovation points of this paper in terms of the effect of LCSR fulfillment on SCP: First, when measuring the indicators of LCSR and SCP, focus on environmental protection issues, use environmental responsibility and environmental performance as important indicators, and on this basis, define the connections among LCSR, SCP, and SCC. Second, most of the literature on CSR focuses on whole supply chain enterprises and less on logistics companies. This paper takes logistics enterprises as the research object, which can better describe the characteristics of the social responsibility of logistics enterprises. Third, explore the two’s relationship under the mechanism of supply chain synergy, introduce new variables, and constantly improve the theoretical framework of “corporate social responsibility and supply chain performance.”
This study has several shortcomings. For one thing, data collection is completed through questionnaires. Although most quantitative analysis is based on questionnaires [54,55], if multiple data sources had been used in this study, the reliability and effectiveness of the results may have been improved. Furthermore, most of the collected samples are from ordinary employees and cannot accurately reflect information on CSR fulfillment, SCP, and other issues. In future research, a variety of methods, such as grounded theory, case analysis, or expert interviews, should be adopted. At the same time, shifting more attention to feedback from senior management may improve the accuracy of the results. Other factors should also be considered, such as the institutional environment and relevant legislation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.W. and Y.L.; methodology, L.C. and Y.F.; formal analysis, Y.F.; questionnaire, L.C. and Y.F.; resources, C.W.; data curation, Y.F.; writing—original draft preparation, L.C. and Y.F.; writing—review and editing, L.C.; visualization, Y.L.; funding acquisition, C.W. and Y.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Anhui Province Excellent Youth Talent Support Project for Universities (No: gxyq2022102); Evaluation and improvement on manufacturing logistics sustainability based on data-driven (No: 2022ykf08); Suzhou University Doctoral Research Initiation Fund Project (No: 2023bsk036); Anhui Province University Humanities and Social Sciences Research Major Project (No: SK2021ZD0092).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Jiao, J.; Xu, X. Analysis of the Information Disclosure of Social Responsibility Accounting of Automobile Manufacturing Enterprises of China. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 25–27 May 2019; Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 286–289. [Google Scholar]
  2. Liu, C.; Chen, J.; Wang, X. Quantitative Evaluation Model of the Quality of Remanufactured Product. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2023, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Liu, C.; Chen, J.; Cai, W. Data-driven remanufacturability evaluation method of waste parts. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 18, 4587–4595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Piecyk, M.I.; Björklund, M. Logistics service providers and corporate social responsibility: Sustainability reporting in the logistics industry. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2015, 45, 459–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zimmer, K.; Fröhling, M.; Breun, P.; Schultmann, F. Assessing Social Risks of Global Supply Chains: A Quantitative Analytical Approach and its Application to Supplier Selection in the German Automotive Industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 149, 96–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Cheng, H.; Ding, H. Dynamic game of corporate social responsibility in a supply chain with competition. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 317, 128398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ahmadini AA, H.; Modibbo, U.M.; Shaikh, A.A.; Ali, I. Multi-objective optimization modelling of sustainable green supply chain in inventory and production management. Alex. Eng. J. 2021, 60, 5129–5146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Činčalová, S. Evaluation of the Current Position of CSR in the Logistics Sector. In Proceedings of the Innovation Management, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability (IMES 2018), Prague, Czech Republic, 31 May–1 June 2018; Vysoká Škola Ekonomická v Praze: Prague, Czech Republic, 2018; pp. 154–165. [Google Scholar]
  9. Quan, C.; Yu, S.; Cheng, X.; Liu, F. Comprehensive efficiency evaluation of social responsibility of Chinese listed logistics enterprises based on DEA-Malmquist model. Oper. Manag. Res. 2022, 15, 1383–1398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chien, F. The role of corporate governance and environmental and social responsibilities on the achievement of sustainable development goals in Malaysian logistic companies. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživanja 2023, 36, 1610–1630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Činčalová, S. Empirical research on corporate social responsibility in the logistics company. Innovation management and education excellence through vision 2020. In Proceedings of the 31st International-Business-Information-Management-Association Conference, Milan, Italy, 25–26 April 2018. [Google Scholar]
  12. El Ghoul, S.; Karoui, A. Does corporate social responsibility affect mutual fund performance and flows? J. Bank. Financ. 2017, 77, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kaplan, R.S.; Norton, D.P. The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1992, 70, 71–79. [Google Scholar]
  14. Thanh, T.L.; Huan, N.Q.; Hong TT, T. Effects of corporate social responsibility on SMEs’ performance in emerging market. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021, 8, 1878978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cruz, J.M. The impact of corporate social responsibility in supply chain management: Multicriteria decision-making approach. Decis. Support Syst. 2009, 48, 224–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Khan SA, R.; Qianli, D. Impact of green supply chain management practices on firms’ performance: An empirical study from the perspective of Pakistan. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 16829–16844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Panda, S.; Modak, N.M.; Cárdenas-Barrón, L.E. Coordinating a socially responsible closed-loop supply chain with product recycling. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 188, 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Li, X. The effectiveness of internal control and innovation performance: An intermediary effect based on corporate social responsibility. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0234506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Rjiba, H.; Jahmane, A.; Abid, I. Corporate social responsibility and firm value: Guiding through economic policy uncertainty. Financ. Res. Lett. 2020, 35, 101553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Al-Shammari, M.A.; Banerjee, S.N.; Rasheed, A.A. Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: A theory of dual responsibility. Manag. Decis. 2022, 60, 1513–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Mondal, C.; Giri, B.C. Optimizing price, quality and CSR investment under competing dual recycling channels in a sustainable closed-loop supply chain. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2021, 35, 193–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Singh, N.P. Managing the adverse effect of supply chain risk on corporate reputation: The mediating role of corporate social responsibility practices. J. Gen. Manag. 2021, 46, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wu, X.; Li, S. Impacts of CSR Undertaking Modes on Technological Innovation and Carbon-Emission-Reduction Decisions of Supply Chain. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Henderson, D. The case against “corporate social responsibility”. Policy Cent. Indep. Stud. 2001, 17, 28–32. [Google Scholar]
  25. Nguyen, C.T.; Nguyen, L.T.; Nguyen, N.Q. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: The case in Vietnam. Cogent Econ. Financ. 2022, 10, 2075600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Dou, X. The lag effect of corporate social responsibility on financial performance—An Empirical Analysis Based on the panel data of Shanghai and Shenzhen listed companies. Ind. Econ. Res. 2015, 3, 74–81. [Google Scholar]
  27. Crisóstomo, V.L.; de Souza Freire, F.; De Vasconcellos, F.C. Corporate social responsibility, firm value and financial performance in Brazil. Soc. Responsib. J. 2011, 7, 295–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Yoon, B.; Chung, Y. The effects of corporate social responsibility on firm performance: A stakeholder approach. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2018, 37, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kraus, S.; Rehman, S.U.; García, F.J.S. Corporate social responsibility and environmental performance: The mediating role of environmental strategy and green innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 160, 120262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kong, Y.; Antwi-Adjei, A.; Bawuah, J. A systematic review of the business case for corporate social responsibility and firm performance. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 444–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Naseem, T.; Shahzad, F.; Asim, G.A.; Rehman, I.U.; Nawaz, F. Corporate social responsibility engagement and firm performance in Asia Pacific: The role of enterprise risk management. Corp. Soc.-Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 501–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, C.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, W. Corporate social responsibility, Green supply chain management and firm performance: The moderating role of big-data analytics capability. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2020, 37, 100557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Novitasari, M.; Wijaya, A.L.; Agustin, N.M.; Gunardi, A.; Dana, L. Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Green supply chain management as a mediating variable. Corp. Soc.-Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2023, 30, 267–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Liu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Ren, Y.; Jin, B. Impact mechanism of corporate social responsibility on sustainable technological innovation performance from the perspective of corporate social capital. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 308, 127345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Datta, T.K. Effect of green technology investment on a production-inventory system with carbon tax. Adv. Oper. Res. 2017, 2017, 4834839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Waltho, C.; Elhedhli, S.; Gzara, F. Green supply chain network design: A review focused on policy adoption and emission quantification. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 208, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cao, M.; Zhang, Q. Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance. J. Oper. Manag. 2011, 29, 163–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lys, T.; Naughton, J.P.; Wang, C. Signaling through corporate accountability reporting. J. Account. Econ. 2015, 60, 56–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Li, S.; Li, M.; Zhou, N.; Xin, B. Pricing and coordination in a dual-channel supply chain with a socially responsible manufacturer. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0236099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Alduais, F.; Almasria, N.A.; Airout, R. The Moderating Effect of Corporate Governance on Corporate Social Responsibility and Information Asymmetry: An Empirical Study of Chinese Listed Companies. Economies 2022, 10, 280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kaipia, R.; Holmström, J.; Småros, J.; Rajala, R. Information sharing for sales and operations planning: Contextualized solutions and mechanisms. J. Oper. Manag. 2017, 52, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Thi Mai Anh, N.; Hui, L.; Khoa, V.D.; Mehmood, S. Relational capital and supply chain collaboration for radical and incremental innovation: An empirical study in China. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2019, 31, 1076–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Baah, C.; Opoku Agyeman, D.; Acquah, I.S.K.; Agyabeng-Mensah, Y.; Afum, E.; Issau, K.; Ofori, D.; Faibil, D. Effect of information sharing in supply chains: Understanding the roles of supply chain visibility, agility, collaboration on supply chain performance. Benchmarking Int. J. 2022, 29, 434–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Vosooghidizaji, M.; Taghipour, A.; Canel-Depitre, B. Coordinating corporate social responsibility in a two-level supply chain under bilateral information asymmetry. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 364, 132627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Carroll, A.B.; Shabana, K.M. The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2010, 12, 85–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Simatupang, T.M.; Sridharan, R. The collaboration index: A measure for supply chain collaboration. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2005, 35, 44–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Carter, C.R.; Jennings, M.M. The role of purchasing in corporate social responsibility: A structural equation analysis. J. Bus. Logist. 2004, 25, 145–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wisner, J.D. A structural equation model of supply chain management strategies and firm performance. J. Bus. Logist. 2004, 25, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ali, H.Y.; Danish, R.Q.; Asrar-ul-Haq, M. How corporate social responsibility boosts firm financial performance: The mediating role of corporate image and customer satisfaction. Corp. Soc.-Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 166–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav. Res. Methods 2004, 36, 717–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 879–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Khan SA, R.; Sharif, A.; Golpîra, H.; Kumar, A. A green ideology in Asian emerging economies: From environmental policy and sustainable development. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 27, 1063–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Chu, S.; Yang, H.; Lee, M.; Park, S. The Impact of Institutional Pressures on Green Supply Chain Management and Firm Performance: Top Management Roles and Social Capital. Sustainability 2017, 9, 764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Sustainability 15 09613 g001 550
Figure 1. Conceptual model of the relationships between LSCR, SCC, and SCP.
Figure 1. Conceptual model of the relationships between LSCR, SCC, and SCP.
Sustainability 15 09613 g001
Sustainability 15 09613 g002 550
Figure 2. Research process of the study.
Figure 2. Research process of the study.
Sustainability 15 09613 g002
Sustainability 15 09613 g003 550
Figure 3. Structural equation representing the relationships between LCSR, SCC, and SCP.
Figure 3. Structural equation representing the relationships between LCSR, SCC, and SCP.
Sustainability 15 09613 g003
Table
Table 1. Validity test for the variables and indices assessed.
Table 1. Validity test for the variables and indices assessed.
FacetsIndexAggregate Validity
Standard Load Factorp-ValueCRAVECronbach’s α
Logistics social responsibilityEnvironmental responsibility0.862***0.8760.5860.924
Social responsibility0.749***
Ethical responsibility0.734***
Legal responsibility0.755***
Financial responsibility0.719***
Supply chain coordinationIncentive alliance0.777***0.8290.6190.885
Synchronous decision making0.757***
Information sharing0.824***
Supply chain performanceEnvironmental performance0.82***0.8880.6640.924
Internal business process performance0.802***
Social performance0.819***
Financial performance0.819***
Note: *** indicates that p < 0.001 is significant.
Table
Table 2. Test of the structural model fit validity.
Table 2. Test of the structural model fit validity.
Statistical Test QuantitiesSymbol MeaningTest ResultsFit Judgment
CMIN/DFChi-square value/degree of freedom2.818Pass
GFIGoodness of fit index0.944Pass
IFIValue-added fitting index0.97Pass
NFICanonical fit index0.955Pass
RMRRoot of mean square residual0.01Pass
RMSEARoot-mean-square error of approximation0.068Pass
PNFIFrugality norm fitting index0.738Pass
Table
Table 3. Mediation effect significance test analysis.
Table 3. Mediation effect significance test analysis.
VariablePoint EstimatesProduct of CoefficientsBootstrapping 5000 Times 95% CI
Bias CorrectedPercentile
SEZLowerUpperLowerUpper
Indirect effects
LCSR → SCP0.4330.1952.2210.0650.8240.0320.79
Direct effects
LCSR → SCP0.6050.2262.6770.1921.0670.2091.082
Total effect
LCSR → SCP1.0380.06715.4930.9081.1710.9091.172
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, L.; Fu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, C. The Impact of Logistics Corporate Social Responsibility on Supply Chain Performance: Using Supply Chain Collaboration as an Intermediary Variable. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9613. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129613

AMA Style

Chen L, Fu Y, Liu Y, Wang C. The Impact of Logistics Corporate Social Responsibility on Supply Chain Performance: Using Supply Chain Collaboration as an Intermediary Variable. Sustainability. 2023; 15(12):9613. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129613

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Lu, Yueyue Fu, Yujia Liu, and Cui Wang. 2023. "The Impact of Logistics Corporate Social Responsibility on Supply Chain Performance: Using Supply Chain Collaboration as an Intermediary Variable" Sustainability 15, no. 12: 9613. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129613

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop