Next Article in Journal
Property Improvement of Recycled Coarse Aggregate by Accelerated Carbonation Treatment under Different Curing Conditions
Previous Article in Journal
Mechanism of Interaction of Backfill Mixtures with Natural Rock Fractures within the Zone of Their Intense Manifestation while Developing Steep Ore Deposits
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Developing a Conceptual Framework Model for Effective Perishable Food Cold-Supply-Chain Management Based on Structured Literature Review

1
Department of Marketing & Entrepreneurship, Dhofar University, Salalah 211, Oman
2
College of Administrative and Financial Sciences, Saudi Electronic University, Riyadh 13316, Saudi Arabia
3
University Centre for Research and Development, Chandigarh University, Mohali 140413, India
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(6), 4907; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064907
Submission received: 7 December 2022 / Revised: 5 March 2023 / Accepted: 7 March 2023 / Published: 9 March 2023

Abstract

:
This paper reviews the literature on perishable food cold-chain management (FCCM) in order to assess its current state, pinpoint its knowledge gaps, and suggest a framework for addressing the issues faced by this industry. This work examines 103 academic articles on the topic of the perishable food supply chain published in various journals between 2001 and 2022. Research publications were selected from two reputed databases—Scopus and Web of Science. The study finds that the current trend in FCCM is toward sustainable FCCM, which offers financial, ecological, and social benefits. However, sustainable FCC practices are more common in wealthy nations but are still lacking in developing countries. High lead times, costs, waste, order returns, complaints, and dissatisfied consumers are the results of a fragmented market and the associated proliferation of chain intermediates. The authors have also developed a conceptual framework based on the findings that illustrates the interconnected nature of the food cold-chain facilities, collaboration among food cold-chain (FCC) stakeholders, concern among FCC stakeholders, economic enhancement, fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities, and overall functioning of the FCC. This study may be helpful to FCC professionals, food regulators, government authorities, and researchers because it gives a concise picture of the state of research in the field.

1. Introduction

The term “food cold-chain” (FCC) refers to a subset of “cold chain” (CC) designed specifically to maintain the quality of perishable foods [1]. The goal of food cold-chain management (FCCM) is to keep perishable goods at the appropriate temperature and humidity and prevent them from becoming contaminated by harmful micro-organisms [2]. The FCC begins at the farm level and extends all the way to the consumer [3]. Pre-cooling facilities, cold storage facilities, refrigerated carriers, containers, packaging, and track-and-trace measurement tools are all part of the standard FCC infrastructure [4]. Benefits for all parties involved in the supply chain, the businesses serving them, their customers, and the general public can be realised if the FCC is managed efficiently.
The global food supply chain is under enormous strain as the world’s population, as per the data of the World Economic Forum [5], is projected to rise from its current 7.5 billion to 8.5 billion by 2030. About a trillion dollars’ worth of food is lost or wasted every year around the world [6]. In fact, as per [7], the two of the most populous and rapidly developing countries, China and India, are also two of the worst in the world when it comes to preventing post-harvest food losses due to insufficient food cold-chain performance. Therefore, food insecurity and malnutrition are exacerbated by substantial post-harvest losses [8]. The most impoverished and nutritionally deficient region on the planet is Sub-Saharan Africa [1], and studies have shown that even a 1% reduction in food waste there would result in an annual economic gain of $40 million [9]. There is an additional annual CO2 cost of about 3.3 billion tons due to food waste [10]. For the safety and longevity of consumables such as medicinal products, plasma, flower petals, fruit and vegetables, seafood, animal-flesh processed-food product, milk products, frozen food, etc., the cold chain is essential [11].
The worldwide demand for food with added value has increased significantly over the past decade [12]. One of the FCC’s primary functions is to help fulfill the increasing demand for perishable items [13]. As a result, the FCC is advocating for the “Global Food Village” concept and making it easier to distribute food in countries with surpluses [14]. However, there is a higher risk of microbiological hazards and, consequently, food-borne illnesses if FCCM is not properly implemented [15]. The World Health Organization estimates that more than half a billion people (0.6 billion) become ill and about 0.42 million people die each year as a direct result of eating tainted food [16]. Due to its unique characteristics, measuring food cold-chain performance (FCCP) is more difficult than measuring other SCs [17]. Features such as these include the ability to supply and maintain varying temperature levels for numerous products across different modes of transportation. Firms, especially those in developing economies, may see their efforts hampered by the FCC’s restrictions on things such as in frastructure, expense, electricity, advanced technologies, and expertise [2]. Because of this, a strategic plan, adaptation, and the sharing of information are becoming crucial and important factors in moderating the risk of food competition across the globe.
To stay competitive in the food market and appeal to customers who value quality, freshness, and health, value addition is rapidly becoming a requirement, rather than a notion [18]. The FCC framework defines value addition as the process by which a company increases its share in the market, positive reputation, and cash flow by extending the life span of perishable food and minimising the post-harvest rate of loss. Not only that, but FCC value addition methodologies significantly affect overall firm performance [19]. Therefore, it is not the sole duty of a single company but rather the fruit of the co-operation among all SC members. According to the FCC literature [2,8,18], measuring and assessing partners’ value addition practices on a regular basis is more important than ensuring the chain’s efficiency. Because of its profound effect on people’s health, food safety is a pressing concern, and the rapid expansion of the CC has become a topic of discussion. However, there has been no noteworthy review of FCCM published recently, and there are still gaps in the literature regarding food safety. This paper conducts a literature review based on these premises in an effort to bring to fore and shed light on the uncertainty sources that have stymied the growth and development of the FCC. The main objectives of this study are (1) to provide a critical overview of the research work carried outin the domain of the FCC; (2) to locate omissions in the existing body of literature and formulate pertinent questions in the form of research statements; and (3) to put forth an approach to FCCP evaluation based on a conceptual framework. In fact, this FCC-focused structured literature review supplements the work of [1] rather than replacing them. However, it is unique in the sense that the research questions (RQs) raised in this study point to potential research avenues for bolstering the content of the FCCP assessment and administration framework which the previous studies could not do. In addition, this study could be helpful to FCC professionals, food regulators, and researchers because it provides a concise and updated picture of the state of research in the field.
The second section of this study (“Research methodology”) describes the approach used to perform the comprehensive structured literature review. The conceptual framework is illustrated in Section 3, and the discussion is provided in Section 4. Section 5 deals with the conclusion.

2. Research Methodology

This paper presents a structured review of the literature focused on the various dimensions of the FCC. Attention is drawn to the fact that the process of reviewing the literature employed in this study follows the method suggested by [20,21], who demonstrate the process by which a systematic review of the literature should be conducted. They chose to adopt a systematic review technique in which papers are manually filtered, to ensure that it could be replicated and is transparent, thus ensuring that any bias in the literature review outcomes is diminished. This approach is a suitable method of determining the criteria for selecting papers and ensures that the methodology applied for scrutinising the literature is sufficiently robust. Additionally, this approach enables researchers to obtain greater insights from existing papers and allows them to comprehensively understand qualitative features instead of being a bibliometric analysis. In fact, their approach incorporates the suggestions of [22,23,24] for performing structured reviews of the literature.
The literature review encompasses the following four stages: The initial stage (Stage 1) consists of searching for the materials, which include determining keywords, defining search strings, and selecting scholarly databases. Then, the second phase (Stage 2) is the stage of selecting papers based on the defined criteria according to which specific papers should be included or excluded from the review. The descriptive analysis stage (Stage 3) is that in which reviewers are provided with an initial analysis for the categorization of the chosen works. The last stage (Stage 4) is the content analysis stage in which the papers are reviewed, the subject areas and deficiencies in the literature are identified, and, ultimately, a conceptual framework is proposed.

2.1. Stage1: Literature Exploration

At the initial stage of searching for content, two different databases were searched (Web of Science and Scopus) to ensure that the process was sufficiently rigorous, as can be seen in Figure 1. Due to the comparative newness of the FCC topic, papers were limited to those with publication dates between 2001 and 2022. In terms of keywords utilised, the strings comprised ‘cold chain performance’, ‘sustainable food SC’, ‘cold SC’, ‘food traceability’, ‘food cold SC’, ‘cold logistic’, and ‘perishable food SC’ (Table 1). During the preliminary search phase, an overall total of 1077 studies were identified from the pair of databases when duplicate papers were excluded.

2.2. Stage2: Selection of Papers

During the paper selection phase, three different criteria were established according to which the papers were compared. This guaranteed that the procedure concentrated on the works that had a strong association with the topic being reviewed. According to the selection criteria, four reviewers conducted an analysis of the preliminary sample comprising 1077 papers, and only those determined to have relevance were chosen. The inclusion criteria adopted were: (i) studies that focused on the management of cold supply chains for perishable foods published in business-related papers; (ii) empirical studies that utilised qualitative or quantitative research methods pertaining to FCCM; (iii) studies that addressed various stages of the cold supply chain, including production, storage, transportation, and distribution; and (iv) research that examined the impact of different factors on the efficiency and effectiveness of cold supply chain management for perishable foods, such as logistics, technology, regulations, and sustainability.
The authors examined all the given papers’ abstracts in parallel and subsequently identified 143 works that met the inclusion criteria (Table 2). Afterwards, the full texts of the chosen papers were read to ensure that the entire paper was relevant to the subject in question. Resultantly, this stage led to the exclusion of 49 papers and the retention of 94. Examining the other papers in depth and scrutinising their references, nine additional papers were also considered. Consequently, the number of research papers that passed scrutiny and were included in the following descriptive analysis stage totalled 103. It should be noted that the process by which the papers were selected in this study conformed with that proposed by [25,26,27].

2.3. Descriptive Analysis Stage

At the stage in which a descriptive analysis was applied to the 103 papers that have been chosen, the following aspects were adopted: (1) papers spread over the period of study, and (2) papers published by reputed publishers. When the manner in which the papers were distributed across time was examined, it was found (Figure 2) that most of them were published in 2021 (16 papers). The number of papers published in the year 2022 stood at 11. Furthermore, the number of works published in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 totalled eight, 10, 10, and 14, respectively. The rest of the 34 papers were published during the period from 2001 to 2016. Therefore, the conclusion can be drawn that there has been an increased focus on researching the FCC topic, and reputed journals have begun to consider publishing papers on subjects associated with the FCC at this time. Thus, there has been a growing trend of researchers contributing to this topic recently.
As stated by [1], the FCC is a research subject where various research fields intersect, such as energy and chemistry, and it incorporates different journals published in specific places by distinct publication houses. Consequently, author such as [1,28] recommended that works should be categorised according to publishers to help academics and those engaged in the field identify which publishers produce up-to-date papers in a particular field. As shown in Figure 3, the number of FCC research papers thus far published by Elsevier totals 50, which is the high estamong all the publishers. A total of14, 11, 11, 9, three, three, and two papers were published by MDPI, Springer Nature, Wiley, Emerald, Sage, Hindawi, and Indersicnce, respectively.

2.4. Content Analysis Stage

A more in-depth understanding of the FCC topics explored in the literature was revealed by conducting a content analysis. Based on the approach of [1], the chosen papers were grouped into four research areas: (1) ‘Factors causing the inefficiency of FCCP’, (2) ‘Issues relating to FCC sustainability’, (3) ‘Important measures for measuring FCCP’, and (4) ‘Key methods of improving FCCP’.

3. Analysis of the Content and Development of Conceptual Framework

3.1. Analysis of the Content

The section provides details about the challenges of FCCP, including a poor logistics infrastructure, a shortage of cold storage facilities, increased costs, inadequate traceability, a lack of integration, abnormal flow of information, insufficient technical knowledge, outdated devices and technology, and a lack of resources such as water and electricity. It also discusses the environmental impact of the FCC, such as the waste of food, refrigerated vehicles, cold storage facilities, packaging, and retail outlets, and the negative impact on emissions of carbon.
As shown in Table A1, the largest number of research papers were focused on the subject area of ‘Important measures for measuring FCCP’ (35 papers), followed by ‘Factors causing the inefficiency of FCCP’ (28 papers). There were 25 and 15 papers, respectively, on the topics of ‘Issues relating to FCC sustainability’ and ‘Key methods of improving FCCP’. The initial topic category contains 28 papers (Table A1), which cover aspects that could be detrimental to FCCP. As suggested by [29], the FCC can even be challenging within developed nations, despite their superior SC infrastructure. In terms of developing countries, the key problems reducing their efficiency and ability to manage the FCC effectively include a poor logistics infrastructure, a shortage of cold storage facilities, increased costs, inadequate traceability, a lack of integration, abnormal flow of information, and insufficient technical knowledge. Additional facts obstructing FCCP include the frequent utilisation of outdated devices and technology which are unable to provide the protective advantage of more modern designs. Another issue creating difficulties is the lack of resources such water and electricity needed for the FCC. Ref. [30] made the explicit argument that a lack of expertise in managing FCC operations is causing food wastage and the prevalence of food-borne diseases to continuously increase. In recent years, it has been suggested by researchers that the safety of food and efforts to reduce waste should be achieved through the co-operation of farmers, suppliers, processors, distributors, and retailers. Nevertheless, recent studies have emphasised the significance of customer responsiveness in the context of the FCC. Such researchers have noted that waste after harvest has an environmental impact along with effects on the economy and nutrition; thus, food safety is also the responsibility of those who consume it. In this context, an important factor is consumers having insufficient knowledge regarding the FCC. In general, they have minimal regard for expiration dates and when perishable foodstuffs should be bought, and also have minimal awareness of how to properly adjust the temperatures at which food should be refrigerated. As a result of the role that consumers play in the FCC, it is necessary to integrate FCC processes throughout the supply chain to reduce the volume of food waste, enhance health, and help emerging economies participate in global trade.
A total of 25 papers are included in the second area which is focused on matters of FCC sustainability. In recent years, there has been more demand for the ‘Triple Bottom Line’ approach to be adopted in the context of SC sustainability. According to the definition of sustainability in SC management, it is where the environmental, economic, and social goals of an organisation involving the systemic co-ordination of key inter-organisational procedures are strategically and transparently integrated and achieved to improve the financial effectiveness of the organisation and its SC in the long term. As shown by [31], the reputation of an organisation as well as the value of its partners could be vulnerable if it cannot provide justification for its rational stance in accomplishing sustainability. It is interesting that, when researchers first explored the topic, they concentrated on the beneficial ability of the FCC in terms of product life-cycle sustainability, freshness, and waste reduction. Today, researchers have begun to report how the FCC has a negative environmental impact. In particular, they focus on how the waste of food, refrigerated vehicles, cold storage facilities, packaging, and retail outlets affect the emissions of carbon. Ref. [32] pointed to the continual rise in annual energy consumption, which subsequently causes the carbon footprint to increase. Furthermore, the systems used for cooling consume significant volumes of hydrofluorocarbon gases which contribute to the rise in global temperature.
As previously mentioned, approximately 1 percent of all carbon emissions result from global CC processes. For instance, within the United Kingdom, the emissions of carbon generated from CC activities constitute around 3.5 percent of overall emissions. Hence, reducing emissions could potentially provide benefits for all parties in the chain. Moreover, the increased prevalence of pesticides/toxic substances within foodstuffs represents another important factor affecting sustainability. Ref. [33] as well as [34] published research involving scans of dairy products which showed that milk contained both saturated oil and powder. Additionally, ref. [35] drew attention to the outbreak of Escherichia coli originating from spinach, as well as cases of Salmonella caused by tomatoes. Such instances have caused the awareness of consumers regarding health issues to be increased. Resultantly, food safety authorities have begun to evaluate the general processes of companies to ensure that customers are protected from exposure to food contamination. If such firms can lower their levels of consumption, reduce their total waste, and pay increased attention to the health of consumers, they can enhance their sustainability. Therefore, we have pinpointed various key issues surrounding FCC sustainability. Considering the issues, the actions of companies could be both environmentally beneficial and advantageous for consumers.
A total of 35 papers are included in the third category, which is focused on the primary FCCP metrics. With the high level of competition in the modern business environment, one of the ways in which a firm can gain a competitive advantage is through performance management. SC performance management is a key topic in terms of both academia and in practice. This permits problems in efficiency and efficacy to be tracked and traced, which allows better decisions regarding the chain design to be made. Nevertheless, certain factors including seasonal products, the limited shelf life, product characteristics, the high volume of intermediates, refrigerated vehicles, and the need for storage increase the complexity of FCCP management procedures in comparison with different SC models. Different food products have different temperature criteria such as the requirement for freezing or chilling, and this can even vary among food types. Exposure to severe hot or cold temperatures for even a short time, including only several hours, can cause the product quality or shelf life to decrease significantly. In the FCC, storing food at incorrect temperatures can result in microbial hazards, as well as a reduction in the quality of the product, which can ultimately negatively impact human health.
The capability to trace problems can positively affect the management of inventory, and the performance of operations, and can also reduce reverse chain costs which can impact the FCC integrity. Nonetheless, stakeholders are increasingly urging FCC companies to enhance their sustainable performance. Therefore, to resolve the deficiency between the anticipated and necessary FCC performance, it is necessary for stakeholders to think outside the FCC issues in order for the chain resources to be sufficient and effective. Additionally, stakeholders must ensure that the required finance is provided in a timely manner for the implementation of FCC system improvements aimed at minimising FCC risks. In particular, research suggests that firms publish pertinent metrics on their sustainability performance to increase the confidence of consumers and the relevant authorities. On the other hand, planning routes precisely can generate a reduction in lead time and the volume of waste. However, as suitable systems for managing performance are not available, the knowledge of FCCP is generally lacking. Even though various researchers have suggested distinct models for measuring SC performance, they lack applicability in the context of FCCP.
Hence, to improve the comprehension of how to measure sustainable FCCP, the fourth area, which incorporates a total of 15 papers, concentrated on key approaches for improving FCCP. Several scholars have contributed to the enhancement of FCCP through the application of various methods. For example, ref. [36] suggested a methodological approach for measuring FCCP in terms of the required product quality at retail establishments, as well as to forecast the anticipated proportion of perishable food items. Ref. [37] proposed a framework to increase the effectiveness of the cold-chain logistics system by rearranging various cargoes into a single truck. Ref. [38] provide indices for use at the macro and micro levels in the meat sector. Among the accomplishments of this study is the implementation of the recommended framework for a performance measurement of the chain at both the strategic and tactical levels. The findings indicate that six primary criteria are needed to evaluate the success of the meat sector. Similarly, ref. [39] established a novel routing optimization model for cold-chain distribution, considering the costs of quality deterioration and carbon emissions, to meet the quality requirement for fresh agricultural products and low-carbon logistics.

3.2. Development of Conceptual Framework

In this section, a conceptual framework (see Figure 4) is developed that incorporates all the factors examined in Section 3.1 to offer avenues for further analysis. The concept of this type of model may be intriguing when viewed from two perspectives. Firstly, it incorporates a summary of the research conducted over the last two decades on FCCM and amalgamates diverse viewpoints on FCCM into a single distinctive model. Secondly, different scholars could embrace this model in their research and, if required, incorporate it into further empirical analyses. The next parts describe the suggested framework which comprises five factors, specifically: food cold-chain facilities, collaboration among FCC stakeholders, concern for and among FCC stakeholders, economic enhancement, and fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities. The way in which these factors are interrelated, in addition to how they impact FCCP, will be explored in depth.

3.2.1. FCC Facilities, Economic Enhancement, Fulfilment of FCC Stakeholders’ Responsibilities, and Overall Functioning of FCC

A key factor that ensures the efficient operations of the FCC without being interrupted to a great extent is the facilities [40]. Cold-chain facilities play a critical role in ensuring the quality, safety, and integrity of perishable food products throughout the supply chain. Properly designed, operated, and maintained cold-chain facilities can enhance the overall functioning of the food cold-chain. If a company has a robust FCC facility, the quality of its products will be enhanced, while quantity losses, lead time, and costs can also be reduced [41]. FCCP in the developing and developed world primarily differs according to the infrastructural support, facility usage, and access to equipment [42]. These variances have caused the efficiency in FCCP in emerging countries to be reduced, whereas they produce positive outcomes in developed nations.
On the negative side, poor road networks, outdated transportation systems, and a lack of efficient production points cause delivery times and production lead times to be increased [43]. Furthermore, obsolete devices cause large volumes of food to be wasted and substandard products to be delivered, and increase manufacturing, cooling, and transportation costs, and, thus, cause consumers to become dissatisfied [44]. Conversely, from a positive perspective, an efficient information system embedded within the FCC facilities can positively influence the company’s ability to respond to customers as well as its financial effectiveness [45]. This is because an adequate energy and IT infrastructure must be in place in order for FCC operations to be supported. Multiple researchers point to insufficient high-tech infrastructure for processing food as the main factor driving the limited rate at which food is processed, the and delivery of products that offer no added value [46]. If an FCC firm has access to storage and distribution facilities, it will have the ability to store a greater number of products for extended periods in order to meet the demands of downstream partners in a more effective way [1]. Utilising cold storage equipment and refrigerated vehicles can also support the system of distribution [47]. Hence, the logistics facilities of companies should be able to support product distribution while minimising lead times [48]. The key factors causing the wastage of perishable food are outdated and negligent systems for processing food, the lack of cold storage locations, processes being contaminated, substandard packaging devices, losses incurred when products are being transported, and increased levels of inventory, which are apparent as a result of poor forecasting [49,50]. If suitable FCC facilities are not available, this can be detrimental to the efforts to achieve added value, and results in a substandard FCCP [51]. Based on the arguments presented above, it is evident that the cold chain brings about economic enhancement by minimizing food waste, reducing spoilage and contamination, and increasing the shelf life of perishable food products. This can increase the availability of high-quality food products, reduce production and transportation costs, and improve the financial performance of stakeholders, such as producers, processors, distributors, and retailers. By reducing waste and spoilage, cold-chain facilities can also minimize the economic and environmental costs associated with the disposal of unsaleable or contaminated food products. In addition, it is also evident that cold-chain facilities help stakeholders in the exercise of their functions by providing a safe and reliable environment for the storage, transportation, and distribution of perishable food products. If the CC facilities are not improved, consumers will remain dissatisfied, and firms will be unable to reach high levels of FCCP. Consequently, the following statements can be generalized: (1) FCC facilities impact added value, (2) the fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities is dependent on the FCC facilities, and (3) the overall functioning of the FCC is also dependent on the FCC facilities.

3.2.2. Collaboration among FCC Stakeholders, Economic Enhancement, Fulfilment of FCC Stakeholders’ Responsibilities, and Overall Functioning of FCC

According to studies on the SC, it is important that processes are both internally and externally collaborated for the stakeholders to outperform their competitors and enhance the performance of the chain [52]. As stated by [53,54], such collaboration allows companies to develop innovative concepts to provide better service to consumers, thus providing customer value benefits. Collaboration in relationships enables information to be shared which facilitates the procedure of comprehending and reacting to the demands of customers prior to rivals [55]. Moreover, the sharing of information reinforces SC decision-making processes as well as how they are implemented [56]. When existing logistics, technology, packaging, and data are shared, this can help FCC partners in addressing problems related to inventory, costs, lead time, waste, and in responding to the growing demand in a timely manner [1].
Scholars make the strong argument that collaboration improves the ability to respond to consumers, optimises delivery schedules, and reduces cycle time, which provide cost benefits [57]. Ref. [58] proposed that in the SC, a firm that can effectively perform a specific task should become responsible for that activity. When substandard raw materials are delivered by upstream partners, this will have a negative effect on the end-product quality [59]. SC collaboration has a positive association with the operational performance of companies which facilitates the procedure of achieving superior financial outcomes [60]. Refs. [61,62] alluded to the fact that customer, supplier, and internal collaboration have a positive correlation with the overall performance, operational performance, and financial outcomes of firms. Based on the aforementioned arguments, it is evident that collaboration among FCC stakeholders leads to the development of innovative solutions and best practices for managing the food cold-chain, which can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. By sharing knowledge, expertise, and resources, stakeholders can identify and address common challenges, such as food safety, quality, and waste, and work together to develop new technologies, processes, and policies that can enhance the economic performance of the system. It is also clear from the studies mentioned above that collaboration among FCC stakeholders can help fulfil FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities by promoting transparency and accountability in the food cold-chain. By working together, stakeholders can ensure that the food cold-chain meets the needs and expectations of all participants, from producers to consumers, and that it operates in a fair, ethical, and sustainable manner. Collaboration can also facilitate compliance with regulatory requirements and industry standards. Thus, the following statements can be generalised: (1) collaboration among FCC stakeholders has a positive impact on economic enhancement, (2) collaboration among FCC stakeholders has a positive impact on the fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities, and (3) collaboration among FCC stakeholders has a positive impact on the overall functioning of FCC [63].

3.2.3. Concern for and among FCC Stakeholders, Economic Enhancement, Fulfilment of FCC Stakeholders’ Responsibilities, and Overall Functioning of FCC

Various different stakeholders are involved in the SC including suppliers, workers, governmental organisations, financial institutions, providers of third-party logistics, along with those responsible for the distribution and retailing, and consumers [64]. According to stakeholder theory, companies that appreciate and manage the concern of their stakeholders have increased long-term success in comparison with other firms [65]. As stated by ref. [66,67], all stakeholders deliver resources to the central company that influence the performance of that firm to a certain extent. Researchers have provided evidence showing that pressure from stakeholders positively affects the performance of a firm such as in reducing SC risks [68]. On the other hand, pressure from retailers has a positive relationship with SC enhancement which provides added value to customers while also enhancing both the financial and market performance [69]. If stakeholders are managed effectively, companies would be able to gain a competitive edge over their rivals as a result of more informed decisions, the sharing of information, usage of resources, diminished costs, the satisfaction of demand, and the delivery of improved services to customers [70]. Stakeholders impact the gains of SC partners and enable firms to remain competitive in the market [71]. The empirical analysis also shows that both the management of employees and corporate governance have a positive correlation with a firm’s business performance in general [72,73]. Hence, the company at the center requires innovative approaches for efficiently managing stakeholders in the context of the SC [74]. According to the factors above, the following generalisations can be made: (1) concern for and among FCC stakeholders positively affects economic enhancement, (2) concern for and among FCC stakeholders positively affects the fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities, and (3) concern for and among FCC stakeholders positively affects the overall functioning of the FCC [75].
Apart from the above-mentioned relationships, economic enhancement is critical for business success, as it can directly affect how the firm performs in the market, financially and from a consumer perspective [76]. Certain positive consequences resulting from economic enhancement activities within the SC include enhanced chain efficiencies, improved customer services, increased quality, availability, and affordability of products, a better rate of consumption, more satisfied consumers, a reduction in wastage, lower costs and lead time, and superior performance compared with rivals [77]. Ref. [78] stressed that as consumer value increases, customers will become more loyal and satisfied [79]. Furthermore, the perception of economic enhancement promotes sustainability, which alleviates energy issues, the rate of wastage, and contamination of the environment, while also building a sustainable image of the company and boosting demand [80]. Refs. [1,77] empirically demonstrated that the upstream SC partners’ economic enhancement can positively affect the SC downstream value addition. Such actions within the SC could provide benefits for every member of the chain. Consequently, the statement that economic enhancement has a positive impact onthe overall functioning of the FCC can be generalized [81].
In the context of the SC, the extent to which members are successful is a factor that effectively predicts the SC performance as a whole [82]. Thus, if a given action does not perform efficiently, this can be detrimental toall other actors’ performance and leads to a decline in SC performance [83]. When the costs of suppliers are reduced, this can help to minimise those of the end products, while also providing consumer value [84]. Similarly, when the materials supplied have a superior quality and deliveries are made punctually, retailers are capable of satisfying the demands of customers [85]. On the other hand, tardy material deliveries not only cause the quality of the products to decline, but also result in an increase in the manufacturing lead time, thus potentially increasing overall costs and reducing consumer satisfaction levels [86]. This situation can particularly be exemplified by an incident involving cases of contaminated milk produced by the Shanlu Group in 2008 which demonstrated how the performance of partners can influence the FCC performance in general [87]. When credible information is shared by partners with the central firm punctually, this can result in more informed decision making, as well as the improved usage of resources and management of demand [88], whereas if the partners act opportunistically, the performance of the companies can be negatively affected. Based on the aforementioned arguments, it can be said that the fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities positively affects the overall functioning of the FCC [89].

4. Discussion

The findings of this study reveal that there has been a shift in the focus of the research on FCCM in the direction of sustainable FCCM to achieve cost savings, prevent environmental harm, reduce food wastage, and benefit society. It is clear that developed nations are adopting sustainable FCC practices, whereas such practices are more limited in developing countries [90]. Global environmental authorities must assess the FCC practices implemented in developing countries and oblige them to adhere to the ‘Triple Bottom Line’ criteria [91]. Nevertheless, companies wishing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases frequently reach the conclusion that their direct emissions of carbon in fact underestimate the levels of carbon released in the SC [92]. Therefore, the implementation of advanced systems and technology could make the logistical processes more efficient [93], while the utilisation of refrigeration equipment with increased energy efficiency would help those in the field with sustaining the volume and quality of products, as well as reducing the emissions of carbon [94]. Firms should place significant value on using energy sources with zero carbon emissions to enhance their sustainability [95]. Additionally, regularly maintaining equipment and a skilled workforce is critical for alleviating issues such as temperature abuse as well as tracking errors.
There is currently a significant fragmentation of farms and markets, resulting in a growing number of middlemen and intermediaries, which cause increased costs, lead time, order returns, wastage, complaints, and unhappiness among consumers [1]. Consequently, it is recommended that systems of direct marketing are developed or that products are delivered directly to processors or markets from farms with no input from intermediates, as this will assist in extending the lifecycle of products and addressing unforeseen challenges in an efficient manner [96]. Bypassing the superfluous intermediates in the FCC would allow farmers to earn higher levels of income while providing benefits to customers in terms of price and quality [1]. Similarly, innovations in the packaging of products would support distributors as well as the integrity of products [97]. The reason why customers want generic food products is purely related to cost [98] which results in them downplaying the potential of contracting a food-borne illness from eating food containing contaminants. Hence, retailers must trade organised retail food products to ensure that food delivered to consumers is safe for consumption [99]. Accordingly, this study proposes that costs should be reduced at every FCC intermediate point which will allow companies to provide branded foodstuffs at reasonable prices. This would attract more potential customers, allow the firm to gain an increased share of the market, and improve customer satisfaction and loyalty, while keeping abreast of rivals.
Governmental authorities should promote investment from the private sector to improve the FCC infrastructure [100]. Certainly, lessening FCC obstacles could enable prices to be reduced, thus offering consumers access to more inexpensive and healthy processed and unprocessed foodstuffs [101]. Additionally, firms should prioritise measures such as lean manufacturing procedures [102], innovating packaging, complying with ISO 14001 standards, and implementing recycling practices. These actions will benefit companies administratively as well as in terms of stakeholders. However, while the absence of an FCC logistics infrastructure is a significant problem, different issues represent obstacles preventing the FCC from growing, including insufficient chain integration, collaboration, sharing of information, shipping precision, and expertise [103]. The implementation of integrated IT frameworks would be an effective means of overcoming such problems which would allow business strategies to be shaped and reshaped [104]. Moreover, it would certainly enable demand to be measured accurately, overproduction to be prevented, inventories to be reduced, and service quality to be improved [105]. The results of the study confirm that, in emerging economies, there is a lack of awareness among both partners in the chain and consumers about how to handle perishable foodstuffs properly. Those handling food have no knowledge of the growth of bacteria and how this occurs in food [106]. Therefore, both government institutions and NGOs are critical actors in organising seminars concentrated on handling food after harvest, as well as training sessions to resolve such knowledge deficiencies [107]. This study advocates for the conclusion of ref. [108,109] that increased focus should be placed on raising the awareness of farmers and testing for pesticide residues. It is surprising that reckless firms are neglecting performance sustainability to achieve gains in the short term [110].
According to the findings of the study, it can be deduced that, rather than being merely an option, significantly reducing waste, emissions, energy usage, andthe utilisation of toxic materials, expanded recycling levels, usage of eco-labels, ecological packaging, and environmentally-friendly refrigerants in FCC practices are essential. Both Brazil and the United Kingdom have implemented potentially effective programmes achieving significant reductions in energy usage rates from household freezers and refrigerators [111,112]. In this context, energy labels represent an effective means of reducing the usage of energy [113]. Refs. [114,115] inferred that the operations of companies would be detrimentally impacted when partners in the chain are inefficient. Uncoordinated FCC processes result in a situation where there is a discrepancy between the real and expected FCCP [116]. Improvements could be made to delivery reliability, adaptability, and the service rate through both internal and external integration [117]. Within the food industry, a key procedure related to waste after harvest affecting the environment involves how it is ultimately disposed of [118]. If firms establish sufficient systems for the disposing of waste, there would be a significant potential to harvest energy and recycle nutrients through the use of composting [119].
It is critical that systems are in place to effectively measure performance for the management of the FCC because, if this is not implemented, there would be no opportunity to make improvements [40]. Practically speaking, it is important that FCCP indicators are outlined using standardised terminology to establish a uniform awareness of performance measurement among the various FCC members [120,121].It is necessary for companies to determine a group of key performance criteria in order to monitor and follow up on their own products in addition to that of their partners [122].Moreover, regular evaluations will enable shortcomings to be identified which will subsequently facilitate the process of devising enhanced strategies [123]. Hence, this study plays an important role in determining the specific factors that reduce the efficiency of FCCP, producing a sustainable FCC, and detailing the important metrics for performance management as well as existing methods of measuring performance.
As we know, systematic literature reviews are conducted to identify and synthesise existing research on a particular topic, but they are also done to identify gaps in the current knowledge and areas where further research is needed. As far as this paper is concerned, the paper suggests potential avenues for future research such as:
  • Exploring the use of advanced systems and technology to improve the efficiency of logistical processes in the food cold-chain;
  • Studying the impact of refrigeration equipment with increased energy efficiency on product volume, quality, and carbon emissions reduction;
  • Examining the benefits of using energy sources with zero carbon emissions for sustainability in the FCC industry;
  • Exploring innovations in the packaging of food products and their impact on distributors and product integrity;
  • Investigating the drivers of customer preference for generic food products and the potential of branded foodstuffs to increase customer satisfaction and loyalty;
  • Exploring the effectiveness of lean manufacturing procedures and implementing recycling practices in improving administrative and stakeholder benefits for firms;
  • Investigating the effectiveness of integrated IT frameworks in addressing FCC problems related to insufficient chain integration, collaboration, sharing of information, shipping precision, and expertise;
  • Identifying strategies to raise awareness among both partners in the chain and consumers about how to handle perishable foodstuffs properly in emerging economies.
Conducting research on the suggested topics could bring about various benefits, such as improving the efficiency of logistical processes in the food cold-chain, reducing carbon emissions, and enhancing product integrity. The research could also help identify strategies for sustainability, such as using energy sources with zero carbon emissions and implementing recycling practices. Furthermore, investigating the drivers of customer preference for generic and branded food products could lead to increased customer satisfaction and loyalty. Additionally, exploring the effectiveness of integrated IT frameworks and raising awareness among partners and consumers about the proper handling of perishable foodstuffs could address various challenges encounteredin the FCC industry.

5. Conclusions

In this study, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on the FCC which, as far as the authors are aware, is the only study in the literature that covers virtually every facet of the FCC. The in-depth analysis outlines the studies in the literature, beneficially summarising the research on subjects including the FCC, FCCM, and FCCP. In particular, the descriptive analysis revealed the interdisciplinary nature of the FCCM research topic, as related studies have been published in various different journals with distinct purposes and aims. Analysing the content of the selected works offered an insight into the primary topics included in the research work on cold/cool-supply-chain management. In terms of the food cold-chain, the review has shown that the integration of various transportation modes, as well as the use of advanced planning and optimization techniques, can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of cold-supply-chain management. The use of information and communication technology (ICT) has also been identified as an important enabler of logistics management in the cold supply chain.
The findings indicate that the following four main themes are investigated: factors causing the inefficiency of FCCP, issues relating to FCC sustainability, important measures for measuring FCCP, and key methods of improving FCCP. Based on the outcomes of the literature review, several research deficiencies have been identified, according to which the RQs below have been defined: Which factors cause the efficiency of FCCP to be reduced in emerging economies? What are the primary FCC sustainability problems? What are the main strategies/techniques used for measuring FCCP?
The above-mentioned RQs comprise a study agent for enhancing the corpus of knowledge in the FCCM domain. Furthermore, we have suggested a conceptual framework for measuring FCCP. This represents a pioneering study in which the FCC has been systematically reviewed. Certainly, it should not be ignored that different types of CCssuch asfloriculture, chemical, and pharmaceutical matters should be investigated further. Hence, studies conducted in the future could explore the relevant matters in greater depth. The expansion of the population, coupled with the limited resources required to satisfy the growing demands of the populace, necessitates significant focus from stakeholders and institutions. According to the discussions presented above, it is clear that political measures and reasonable direction should be provided by the government to implement policies capable of ensuring superior standards in FCC management. FCC infrastructure and, therefore, the integration of supply networks, the performance of partners, and the interests of stakeholders are all highly affected by policies enacted by state governments, as they have the responsibility for allocating resources. Hence, policy enforcement should be established accordingly along with incentives and advantageous measures for regulating and promoting FCCM. The optimal usage of policy measures will additionally protect people’s safety.
The review of the literature presented here enables the identification of various implications from the factors that influence the FCC, as well as its performance, and emphasises the critical impact that the performance of partners has in FCCP. Nevertheless, the application of the suggested model for measuring sustainable FCCP to actual data would be an intriguing area that could be studied further. Consequently, data could be collected from various national and international firms through the use of surveys, and the structural equation modeling method could be used, thus strengthening the suggested framework. If a single hypothesis is validated (or multiple hypotheses are validated), this research would provide suitable approaches for FCCM. Consequently, policymakers will be able to determine FCCM shortcomings and then devise targeted policies to make it more competitive. The study findings could present serious ramifications for development, both regionally and nationally, in terms of the effect on global logistics, food transportation, and policies related to the environment. Moreover, the outcomes could motivate companies to encourage all SC partners to become integrated for a common purpose and to enhance the network performance as a whole.
As far as the limitations of this study are concerned, this paper only focuses on the literature related to perishable food cold-chain management, and does not cover other aspects of the food supply chain. In addition to that, the findings and framework suggested in the paper are not applicable to other areas of the food industry. Additionally, the study only includes academic articles published in two databases, Scopus and Web of Science, and may have missed relevant research published in other sources.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.W.A.; methodology, S.A.; software, A.A.; investigation and validation, I.A.; writing—review and editing, H.W.A. & A.A.; supervision, M.A.B.A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Because private data is not available, please contact us if necessary.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Research contribution work in different areas of FCCP.
Table A1. Research contribution work in different areas of FCCP.
Research AreasSub-AreasName of AuthorsTitle of the PaperJournal
1. Factors causing the inefficiency of FCCP
  • Poor logistics infrastructure
  • Shortage of cold storage facilities
  • Increased costs
  • Inadequate traceability
  • Lack of integration
[124]Changes in beef consumption and retailing competitiveness in Brazil: a rapid appraisalAgribusiness: An International Journal
[125]A resilience model for cold chain logistics of perishable productsThe International Journal of Logistics Management
[126]A two-stage decision-support approach for improving sustainable last-mile cold chain logistics operations of COVID-19 vaccineAnnals of Operations Research
[29]Blockchain-enabled pharmaceutical cold chain: Applications, key challenges, and future trendsJournal of Cleaner Production
[90]Food cold chain management: what we know and what we deserveSupply Chain Management: An International Journal
[127]The study of cold storage and temperature controlled transportation: A case study of a chain restaurant in ThailandPamukkaleÜniversitesi MühendislikBilimleriDergisi
[128]The implications of socialization and integration in supply chain managementJournal of operations management
[129] Applying marketing channel theory to food marketing in developing countries: Vertical disintegration model for horticultural marketing channels in kenyaAgribusiness: An International Journal
[130]Management of COVID-19 vaccines cold chain logistics: a scoping reviewJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice
  • Abnormal flow of information, and insufficient technical knowledge
  • Utilisation of outdated devices and technology
  • Difficulties is the lack of resources like water and electricity needed for FCC
  • Lack of competitiveness
[131]Analysis of challenges inhibiting the reduction of waste in food supply chainJournal of cleaner production
[132]Modeling the key factors influencing the reduction of food loss and waste in fresh produce supply chainsJournal of Environmental Management
[133]supply chain failure in the agri-food sector: A case study from MoldovaFood Policy
[134]Consumers’ awareness of food safety from shopping to eating.Food control
[135]Indian cold chain: modeling the inhibitorsBritish Food Journal
[136]Developing an advanced multi-temperature joint distribution system for the food cold chainFood control
[108]Why is the food traceability system unsuccessful in Taiwan? Empirical evidence from a national survey of fruit and vegetable farmersFood Policy
[137]Characterization of cooling equipment in the food industry: Case study of the Colombian meat, dairy, and fruit and vegetable sectorsEnvironmental Development
[30]The Canadian food cold chain: A legislative, scientific, and prospective overviewInternational Journal of Refrigeration
[138]Losses in the grain supply chain: Causes and solutionsSustainability
  • Cold chain logistics risks and issues of resilience
  • Unsustainable last-mile cold chain logistics operations
[139]Factors affecting food waste at the downstream entities of the supply chain: A critical reviewJournal of Cleaner Production
[140]Modelling the enablers of food supply chain for reduction in carbon footprintJournal of Cleaner Production
[141]Food supply chain management (FSCM): a structured literature review and future research agendaJournal of Advances in Management Research
[142]Evaluation of public private partnerships in perishable food supply chain in IndiaJournal of Supply Chain Management Systems
[143]Ensuring the quality of meat in cold chain logistics: A comprehensive reviewTrends in Food Science & Technology
[144]Third party logistics (3PL) selection for cold chain management: a fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approachAnnals of Operations Research
[11]trade-offs in fresh-fruit cold chains by combining virtual cold chains with life cycle assessmentApplied Energy
[145]A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Food Loss and Waste and Sustainable Mitigation Strategies: A Logistics Service Providers’ PerspectiveSustainability
[146]Economic analysis of a traceability system for a two-level perishable food supply chain.Sustainability
2. Issues relating to FCC sustainability
  • Use of ecofriendly refrigerants
  • Cost reduction
  • Recycling
  • Triple Bottom Line approach
  • SC sustainability
  • Environmental goals
  • Economic goals
[147]Performance measurement in agri-food supply chains: a case study.Supply chain management: an international Journal
[148]RFID-An Emerging Technology for Cold Chain Sustainability.ZENITH International Journal of Business Economics & Management Research
[149]New trends in cold chain monitoring applications-A reviewFood Control
[150] Assessment of the economic and environmental sustainability of a food cold supply chainIFAC-PapersOnLine
[151]Towards integrated performance evaluation of future packaging for fresh produce in the cold chain.Trends in food science & technology
[152]Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of perishable food products delivered by the cold chain in ChinaJournal of Cleaner Production
[153]Sustainable supply chain management in emerging economies: Trade-offs between environmental and cost performance.International Journal of Production Economics
[154]Trading off cost, emission, and quality in cold chain design: A simulation approachComputers & Industrial Engineering
[155]Food chain management for sustainable food system development: a European research agenda.Agribusiness: An International Journal
  • Social goals
  • Inter-organizational procedures
  • Financial effectiveness
  • Reputation of organization
  • Product life-cycle sustainability
  • Freshness
  • Waste reduction
  • Negative environmental impact
[156]Designing sustainable cold chains for long-range food distribution: Energy-effective corridors on the Silk Road BeltSustainability
[157] A sustainable distribution design for multi-quality multiple-cold-chain products: An integrated inspection strategies approachEnergies
[7]Challenges in perishable food supply chains for sustainability management: A developing economy perspective.Business Strategy and the Environment
[158]Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through operations and supply chain management.Energy Economics
[159]Food cold chain management improvement: A conjoint analysis on COVID-19 and food cold chain systemsFood Control
[127]The study of cold storage and temperature controlled transportation: A case study of a chain restaurant in ThailandPamukkaleÜniversitesi MühendislikBilimleriDergisi
[160]When challenges impede the process: For circular economy-driven sustainability practices in food supply chain. Management Decision
[161]Sustainable marketing innovation and consumption: Evidence from cold chain food online retailJournal of Cleaner Production
  • Emissions of carbon
  • Waste reduction
  • Emission reduction
  • Energy consumption reduction
  • Water consumption reduction
[162]A conceptual framework model for an effective cold food chain management in sustainability environmentJournal of Modelling in Management
[163]Is it food or is it waste? The materiality and relational agency of food waste across the value chainJournal of Cultural Economy
[164]Literature review analytics (LRA) on sustainable cold-chain for perishable food products: research trends and future directions.Opsearch
[165]Optimization of a low-carbon two-echelon heterogeneous-fleet vehicle routing for cold chain logistics under mixed time windowSustainability
[166]Sustainable solar powered battery-free wireless sensing for food cold chain management.Sensors International
[167]A systematic literature review of the agro-food supply chain: Challenges, network design, and performance measurement perspectives.Sustainable Production and Consumption
[168]Super cold chain—a high quality, energy-efficient, and environmentfriendly methodInternational Journal of Energy Research
[169]The effect of transportation disruptions on cold chain sustainabilityEvergreen
3. Important measures for measuring FCCP
  • Reduction in lead time and volume of waste
  • Temperature monitoring
  • Microbial hazards
  • Refrigerated vehicles
[124]Changes in beef consumption and retailing competitiveness in Brazil: a rapid appraisalAgribusiness: An International Journal
[147]Performance measurement in agri-food supply chains: a case studySupply chain management: an international Journal
[170]Refrigerated container versus bulk: evidence from the banana cold chain.Maritime Policy & Management
[171]Temperature management for the quality assurance of a perishable food supply chain Food Control
[172]Promoting food security and enhancing Nigeria’s small farmers’ income through value-added processing of lesser-known and under-utilized indigenous fruits and vegetables.Food Research International
[173]Stability of perishable goods in cold logistic chains.International journal of production economics
[174]Firm size and sustainable performance in food supply chains: Insights from Greek SMEs.International Journal of Production Economics
[35]Prophage induction reduces Shiga toxin producing Escherichia coli (STEC) and Salmonella enterica on tomatoes and spinach: A model studyFood Control
[104]Decision-making in cold chain logistics using data analytics: a literature review.The International Journal of Logistics Management
  • Chain design
  • Shelf life monitoring
  • efficiency, flexibility, responsiveness
  • Temperature mapping
[152]Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of perishable food products delivered by the cold chain in ChinaJournal of Cleaner Production
[175]Make to stock or make to order: The decoupling point in the food processing industriesInternational Journal of Production Economics
[176]Inventory control of perishables in supermarkets.International journal of production economics
[177]Combining quantitative risk assessment of human health, food waste, and energy consumption: The next step in the development of the food cold chain?Risk Analysis
[178]Investigating last food mile deliveries: A case study approach to identify needs of food delivery demand.Research in transportation economics
[179]Modeling and evaluation on WSN-enabled and knowledge-based HACCP quality control for frozen shellfish cold chainFood Control
[180]Blockchain-based traceability system that ensures food safety measures to protect consumer safety and COVID-19 free supply chainsFoods
[33]Using confocal laser scanning microscopy to probe the milk fat globule membrane and associated proteins. Journal of Agricultural and food Chemistry
[34]Effect of relative humidity on the oxidative and physical stability of encapsulated milk fat. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society
[181]The food cold-chain and climate change.Food Research International
  • Laser scanning microscopy
  • Refrigeration equipment calibration
  • Blockchain-based traceability system
[182]Use of cold chains for reducing food losses in developing countriesThe Postharvest Education Foundation
[136]Developing an advanced multi-temperature joint distribution system for the food cold chainFood control
[108]Why is the food traceability system unsuccessful in Taiwan? Empirical evidence from a national survey of fruit and vegetable farmersFood Policy
[183]Cold chain transportation decision in the vaccine supply chain.European Journal of Operational Research
[184]Cold-chain transportation in the frozen food industry may have caused a recurrence of COVID-19 cases in destination: successful isolation of SARS-CoV-2 virus from the imported frozen cod package surface.Biosafety and health
[185]Co-regulation as a possible model for food safety governance: Opportunities for public–private partnerships. Food Policy
[31]Food cold chain in indonesia during the Covid-19 pandemic: A current situation and mitigation. JurnalRekayasaSistemIndustri
[186]The effect of traceability system and managerial initiative on Indonesian food cold chain performance: A Covid-19 pandemic perspective.Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management
  • Cold chain tracking
[4]Cold chain tracking: a managerial perspective. Trends in Food Science &Technology
[187]Time-temperature abuse in the food cold chain: Review of issues, challenges, and recommendations.Food Control
[188]Ensuring supply chain safety through time temperature integrators.The international journal of logistics management
[189]Research on the evaluation system of agricultural product cold chain logistics based on analytic hierarchy process (AHP)Applied Mathematics, Modelling, and Intelligent Computing
[190]Food quality and safety risk diagnosis in the food cold chain through failure mode and effect analysisFood Control
[191] Improving traceability and transparency of table grapes cold chain logistics by integrating WSN and correlation analysisFood Control
[192]Supplier integration and firm performance: the moderating effects of internal integration and trust.Production Planning & Control
[193]Cold chain distribution: how to deal with node and arc time windows?Annals of Operations Research
4. Key methods of improving FCCP
  • Adoption of the pull-based lean management system
  • Stand-alone renewable energy systems
  • Hybrid renewable energy systems
[36]A resilience model for cold chain logistics of perishable products. The International Journal of Logistics Management
[105]Reducing global supply chains’ waste of overproduction by using lean principles: a conceptual approachInternational Journal of Quality and Service Sciences
[194]A comprehensive review on impacts of COVID-19 in food preservation and cold chain: An approach towards implementing green energy technologiesEnvironmental Progress & Sustainable Energy
[38]A model for measuring the performance of the meat supply chain.British Food Journal
[195]A review of application status and replacement progress of refrigerants in the Chinese cold chain industryInternational Journal of Refrigeration
[196]Improving performance of cold-chain insulated container with phase change material: an experimental investigationApplied Sciences
[9]Utilization of vegetable and fruit by-products as functional ingredient and food.Frontiers in nutrition
[37]Biobjective low-carbon location-routing problem for cold chain logistics: Formulation and heuristic approaches.Journal of Cleaner Production
  • Green food preservation methods
  • Insulated container optimization of cold chain logistics
[197]Optimization of cold chain logistics distribution network terminalEURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking
[198]Cold chain break detection and analysis: Can machine learning help?Trends in Food Science &Technology
[199]Decision modelling of critical success factors for cold chains using the DEMATEL approach: a case studyMeasuring Business Excellence
[103]Improvement in the food losses in fruits and vegetable supply chain-a perspective of cold third-party logistics approach.Operations Research Perspectives
[143]Ensuring the quality of meat in cold chain logistics: A comprehensive review.Trends in Food Science & Technology
[200]An IoT-based cargo monitoring system for enhancing operational effectiveness under a cold chain environment. International Journal of Engineering Business Management
[28]Sustainable tourism: a comprehensive literature review on frameworks and applications. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja

References

  1. Cerchione, R.; Singh, R.; Centobelli, P.; Shabani, A. Food cold chain management: From a structured literature review to a conceptual framework and research agenda. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2018, 29, 792–821. [Google Scholar]
  2. Joshi, R.; Banwet, D.K.; Shankar, R. A Delphi-AHP-TOPSIS based benchmarking framework for performance improvement of a cold chain. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38, 10170–10182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Taghikhah, F.; Voinov, A.; Shukla, N.; Filatova, T.; Anufriev, M. Integrated modeling of extended agro-food supply chains: A systems approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2021, 288, 852–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Montanari, R. Cold chain tracking: A managerial perspective. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2008, 19, 425–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. WEF. These Countries Will Be the World’s Most Populous Countries by 2030. 2022. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/08/world-population-countries-india-china-2030/#:~:text=The%20world’s%20population%20is%20expected,the%20end%20of%20the%20century (accessed on 16 November 2022).
  6. Ishangulyyev, R.; Kim, S.; Lee, S.H. Understanding food loss and waste—Why are we losing and wasting food? Foods 2019, 8, 297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Kumar, A.; Mangla, S.K.; Kumar, P.; Karamperidis, S. Challenges in perishable food supply chains for sustainability management: A developing economy perspective. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2020, 29, 1809–1831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mwaniki, F.N.; Nyamu, F.K. Reducing Food Loss in Kenya for a Sustainable Food Future. In Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 311–326. [Google Scholar]
  9. Lau, K.Q.; Sabran, M.R.; Shafie, S.R. Utilization of vegetable and fruit by-products as functional ingredient and food. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Panahi, H.K.S.; Dehhaghi, M.; Guillemin, G.J.; Gupta, V.K.; Lam, S.S.; Aghbashlo, M.; Tabatabaei, M. Bioethanol production from food wastes rich in carbohydrates. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2022, 43, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wu, W.; Beretta, C.; Cronje, P.; Hellweg, S.; Defraeye, T. Environmental trade-offs in fresh-fruit cold chains by combining virtual cold chains with life cycle assessment. Appl. Energy 2019, 254, 113586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Naylor, R.L.; Kishore, A.; Sumaila, U.R.; Issifu, I.; Hunter, B.P.; Belton, B.; Bush, S.R.; Cao, L.; Gelcich, S.; Gephart, J.A.; et al. Blue food demand across geographic and temporal scales. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 5413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Skawińska, E.; Zalewski, R.I. Economic Impact of Temperature Control during Food Transportation—A COVID-19 Perspective. Foods 2022, 11, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Stella, G.; Torquati, B.; Paffarini, C.; Giordani, G.; Cecchini, L.; Poletti, R. “Food Village”: An Innovative Alternative Food Network Based on Human Scale Development Economic Model. Foods 2022, 11, 1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Todd, E. Food-borne disease prevention and risk assessment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Son, N.M.; Nguyen, T.L.; Huong, P.T.; Hien, L.T. Novel system using blockchain for origin traceability of agricultural products. Sens. Mater. 2021, 33, 601–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. León-Bravo, V.; Caniato, F.; Caridi, M. Sustainability assessment in the food supply chain: Study of a certified product in Italy. Prod. Plan. Control. 2021, 32, 567–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Yoo, S.R.; Lee, S.W.; Jeon, H.M. The role of customer experience, food healthiness, and value for revisit intention in Grocerant. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Oncioiu, I.; Bunget, O.C.; Türkeș, M.C.; Căpușneanu, S.; Topor, D.I.; Tamaș, A.S.; Hint, M.Ș. The impact of big data analytics on company performance in supply chain management. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cerchione, R.; Esposito, E. A systematic review of supply chain knowledge management research: State of the art and research opportunities. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 182, 276–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kummer, S.; Herold, D.M.; Dobrovnik, M.; Mikl, J.; Schäfer, N. A systematic review of blockchain literature in logistics and supply chain management: Identifying research questions and future directions. Future Internet 2020, 12, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Petticrew, M.; Roberts, H. Exploring heterogeneity and publication bias. In Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide; Blackwell Publishing: Malden, MA, USA, 2006; pp. 215–246. [Google Scholar]
  24. Swanson, D.; Goel, L.; Francisco, K.; Stock, J. Applying theories from other disciplines to logistics and supply chain management: A systematic literature review. Transp. J. 2017, 56, 299–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Dumay, J.; Bernardi, C.; Guthrie, J.; Demartini, P. Integrated reporting: A structured literature review. Account. Forum 2016, 40, 166–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Campion, M.A.; Palmer, D.K.; Campion, J.E. A review of structure in the selection interview. Pers. Psychol. 1997, 50, 655–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Pittaway, L.; Robertson, M.; Munir, K.; Denyer, D.; Neely, A. Networking and innovation: A systematic review of the evidence. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2004, 5, 137–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zolfani, S.H.; Sedaghat, M.; Maknoon, R.; Zavadskas, E.K. Sustainable tourism: A comprehensive literature review on frameworks and applications. Econ. Res. Ekon. Istraživanja 2015, 28, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Bamakan, S.M.H.; Moghaddam, S.G.; Manshadi, S.D. Blockchain-enabled pharmaceutical cold chain: Applications, key challenges, and future trends. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 302, 127021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mercier, S.; Mondor, M.; Villeneuve, S.; Marcos, B. The Canadian food cold chain: A legislative, scientific, and prospective overview. Int. J. Refrig. 2018, 88, 637–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Masudin, I.; Safitri, N.T. Food cold chain in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A current situation and mitigation. J. Rekayasa Sist. Ind. 2020, 9, 99–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Meneghetti, A.; Monti, L. Greening the food supply chain: An optimisation model for sustainable design of refrigerated automated warehouses. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2015, 53, 6567–6587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gallier, S.; Gragson, D.; Jiménez-Flores, R.; Everett, D. Using confocal laser scanning microscopy to probe the milk fat globule membrane and associated proteins. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 4250–4257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Hardas, N.; Danvirivakul, S.; Foley, J.L.; Nawar, W.W.; Chinachoti, P. Effect of relative humidity on the oxidative and physical stability of encapsulated milk fat. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2002, 79, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Cadieux, B.; Colavecchio, A.; Jeukens, J.; Freschi, L.; Emond-Rheault, J.G.; Kukavica-Ibrulj, I.; Goodridge, L.D. Prophage induction reduces Shiga toxin producing Escherichia coli (STEC) and Salmonella enterica on tomatoes and spinach: A model study. Food Control. 2018, 89, 250–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Aiello, G.; La Scalia, G.; Micale, R. Simulation analysis of cold chain performance based on time–temperature data. Prod. Plan. Control. 2012, 23, 468–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Leng, L.; Zhang, C.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, W.; Zhang, J.; Li, G. Biobjective low-carbon location-routing problem for cold chain logistics: Formulation and heuristic approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 122801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Fattahi, F.; Nookabadi, A.S.; Kadivar, M. A model for measuring the performance of the meat supply chain. Br. Food J. 2013, 115, 1090–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chen, J.; Gui, P.; Ding, T.; Na, S.; Zhou, Y. Optimization of transportation routing problem for fresh food by improved ant colony algorithm based on tabu search. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Mercier, S.; Villeneuve, S.; Mondor, M.; Uysal, I. Time–temperature management along the food cold chain: A review of recent developments. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2017, 16, 647–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  41. Duan, J.; Zhang, C.; Gong, Y.; Brown, S.; Li, Z. A content-analysis based literature review in blockchain adoption within food supply chain. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. McCarthy, U.; Uysal, I.; Badia-Melis, R.; Mercier, S.; O’Donnell, C.; Ktenioudaki, A. Global food security—Issues, challenges and technological solutions. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 77, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ambra, T.; Caris, A.; Macharis, C. Towards freight transport system unification: Reviewing and combining the advancements in the physical internet and synchromodal transport research. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 1606–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sheffi, Y. The New (Ab)Normal: Reshaping Business and Supply Chain Strategy beyond COVID-19; MIT CTL Media: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  45. Manglani, H.; Hodge, G.L.; Oxenham, W. Application of the internet of things in the textile industry. Text. Prog. 2019, 51, 225–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gligor, D.; Tan, A.; Nguyen, T.N.T. The obstacles to cold chain implementation in developing countries: Insights from Vietnam. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2018, 29, 942–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Che, S.; Kim, J.; Chang, D. Liquid Air as an Energy Carrier for Liquefied Natural Gas Cold Energy Distribution in Cold Storage Systems. Energies 2021, 14, 272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Nechaev, A.; Skorobogatova, Y.; Nechaeva, M. Toolkit for the transportation and logistics infrastructure. Transp. Res. Procedia 2021, 54, 637–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. de Moraes, C.C.; de Oliveira Costa, F.H.; Pereira, C.R.; da Silva, A.L.; Delai, I. Retail food waste: Mapping causes and reduction practices. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Dora, M.; Biswas, S.; Choudhary, S.; Nayak, R.; Irani, Z. A system-wide interdisciplinary conceptual framework for food loss and waste mitigation strategies in the supply chain. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2021, 93, 492–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sylim, P.; Liu, F.; Marcelo, A.; Fontelo, P. Blockchain technology for detecting falsified and substandard drugs in distribution: Pharmaceutical supply chain intervention. JMIR Res. Protoc. 2018, 7, e10163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Prajogo, D.; Toy, J.; Bhattacharya, A.; Oke, A.; Cheng, T.C.E. The relationships between information management, process management and operational performance: Internal and external contexts. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 199, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Cagliano, R.; Caniato, F.; Spina, G. The linkage between supply chain integration and manufacturing improvement programmes. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2006, 26, 282–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Frank, A.G.; Mendes, G.H.; Ayala, N.F.; Ghezzi, A. Servitization and Industry 4.0 convergence in the digital transformation of product firms: A business model innovation perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 141, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kaeothep, W. A Service Design for an Air Cargo Business. J. Supply Chain. Manag. Res. Pract. 2017, 11, 24–38. [Google Scholar]
  56. Al-Talib, M.; Melhem, W.Y.; Anosike, A.I.; Reyes, J.A.G.; Nadeem, S.P. Achieving resilience in the supply chain by applying IoT technology. Procedia CIRP 2020, 91, 752–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yan, Y.; Gupta, S.; Licsandru, T.C.; Schoefer, K. Integrating machine learning, modularity and supply chain integration for Branding 4.0. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2022, 104, 136–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chang, W.; Ellinger, A.E.; Kim, K.K.; Franke, G.R. Supply chain integration and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis of positional advantage mediation and moderating factors. Eur. Manag. J. 2016, 34, 282–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Radzi, R.M.; Saidon, I.M.; Ab Ghani, N. Japanese Food Company Supply Chain in Malaysia: Its Structure and Risk Management Strategies. In Ethics, Governance and Risk Management in Organizations; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 151–168. [Google Scholar]
  60. Ni, W.; Sun, H. The effect of sustainable supply chain management on business performance: Implications for integrating the entire supply chain in the Chinese manufacturing sector. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 232, 1176–1186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ataseven, C.; Nair, A. Assessment of supply chain integration and performance relationships: A meta-analytic investigation of the literature. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 185, 252–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zhang, M.; Lettice, F.; Chan, H.K.; Nguyen, H.T. Supplier integration and firm performance: The moderating effects of internal integration and trust. Prod. Plan. Control. 2018, 29, 802–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kamble, S.S.; Gunasekaran, A.; Parekh, H.; Mani, V.; Belhadi, A.; Sharma, R. Digital twin for sustainable manufacturing supply chains: Current trends, future perspectives, and an implementation framework. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022, 176, 121448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Goswami, M.; De, A.; Habibi, M.K.K.; Daultani, Y. Examining freight performance of third-party logistics providers within the automotive industry in India: An environmental sustainability perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 7565–7592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Parmar, B.B.L.; Wicks, A.C.; Freeman, R.E. Stakeholder Management & The Value of Human-Centred Corporate Objectives. J. Manag. Stud. 2022, 59, 569–582. [Google Scholar]
  66. Barro, F. Stakeholder theory and dynamics in supply chain collaboration. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2009, 29, 591–611. [Google Scholar]
  67. Andriof, J.; Waddock, S. Unfolding stakeholder engagement. In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2017; pp. 19–42. [Google Scholar]
  68. Khan, S.A.R.; Godil, D.I.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Shujaat, S.; Razzaq, A.; Yu, Z. Green data analytics, blockchain technology for sustainable development, and sustainable supply chain practices: Evidence from small and medium enterprises. Ann. Oper. Res. 2021, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Michalski, M.; Montes-Botella, J.L.; Narasimhan, R. The impact of asymmetry on performance in different collaboration and integration environments in supply chain management. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2018, 23, 33–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ferrell, W.; Ellis, K.; Kaminsky, P.; Rainwater, C. Horizontal collaboration: Opportunities for improved logistics planning. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 4267–4284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Santos, H.; Lannelongue, G.; Gonzalez-Benito, J. Integrating green practices into operational performance: Evidence from Brazilian manufacturers. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Galbreath, J. Does primary stakeholder management positively affect the bottom line? Some evidence from Australia. Manag. Decis. 2006, 44, 1106–1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Naciti, V. Corporate governance and board of directors: The effect of a board composition on firm sustainability performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 237, 117727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Villazón, C.C.; Pinilla, L.S.; Olaso, J.R.O.; Gandarias, N.T.; de Lacalle, N.L. Identification of key performance indicators in project-based organisations through the lean approach. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Parhi, S.; Joshi, K.; Gunasekaran, A.; Sethuraman, K. Reflecting on an empirical study of the digitalization initiatives for sustainability on logistics: The concept of Sustainable Logistics 4.0. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain. 2022, 4, 100058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Esmaeel, R.I.; Zakuan, N.; Jamal, N.M.; Taherdoost, H. Understanding of business performance from the perspective of manufacturing strategies: Fit manufacturing and overall equipment effectiveness. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 22, 998–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Tavana, M.; Shabani, A.; Singh, R. The impact of interwoven integration practices on supply chain value addition and firm performance. J. Ind. Eng. Int. 2019, 15, 39–51. [Google Scholar]
  78. Kumar, M.; Srai, J.; Pattinson, L.; Gregory, M. Mapping of the UK food supply chains: Capturing trends and structural changes. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2013, 10, 299–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hill, N.; Alexander, J. The Handbook of Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Measurement; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  80. Farrukh, A.; Mathrani, S.; Sajjad, A. A natural resource and institutional theory-based view of green-lean-six sigma drivers for environmental management. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 31, 1074–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Belhadi, A.; Kamble, S.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Gunasekaran, A.; Ndubisi, N.O.; Venkatesh, M. Manufacturing and service supply chain resilience to the COVID-19 outbreak: Lessons learned from the automobile and airline industries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2021, 163, 120447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Aday, S.; Aday, M.S. Impact of COVID-19 on the food supply chain. Food Qual. Saf. 2020, 4, 167–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Govindan, K.; Mangla, S.K.; Luthra, S. Prioritising indicators in improving supply chain performance using fuzzy AHP: Insights from the case example of four Indian manufacturing companies. Prod. Plan. Control. 2017, 28, 552–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Di Maio, F.; Rem, P.C.; Baldé, K.; Polder, M. Measuring resource efficiency and circular economy: A market value approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 122, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Min, S.; Zacharia, Z.G.; Smith, C.D. Defining supply chain management: In the past, present, and future. J. Bus. Logist. 2019, 40, 44–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Mindur, M.; Pawęska, M. Basic Determinants in Integrated Supply Chains. Logist. Transp. 2019, 41, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Hassanzadeh, A.; Rasti-Barzoki, M. Minimizing total resource consumption and total tardiness penalty in a resource allocation supply chain scheduling and vehicle routing problem. Appl. Soft Comput. 2017, 58, 307–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Han, G.; Yan, S.; Fan, B. Regional regulations and public safety perceptions of quality-of-life issues: Empirical study on food safety in China. Healthcare 2020, 8, 275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Nammour, F.L. Clinical Intelligence Framework for Decision-Support. Ph.D. Thesis, Kingston University, London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  90. Sharma, P.; Gunasekaran, A.; Subramanian, G. Distributor Opportunism Toward the Supplier: A Social Network Perspective. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2022, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Centobelli, P.; Cerchione, R.; Ertz, M. Food cold chain management: What we know and what we deserve. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2020, 26, 102–135. [Google Scholar]
  92. Phillips, F.K. Sustainable Bio-Based Supply Chains in Light of the Nagoya Protocol. In Implementing Triple Bottom Line Sustainability into Global Supply Chains; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2017; pp. 294–316. [Google Scholar]
  93. Poulsen, R.T.; Sampson, H. A swift turnaround? Abating shipping greenhouse gas emissions via port call optimization. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 86, 102460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Koh, L.; Dolgui, A.; Sarkis, J. Blockchain in transport and logistics–paradigms and transitions. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 2054–2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Li, Y.; Li, B.; Deng, F.; Yang, Q.; Zhang, B. Research on the Application of Cold Energy of Largescale Lng-Powered Container Ships to Refrigerated Containers. Pol. Marit. Res. 2021, 28, 107–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Raihan, A.; Tuspekova, A. Toward a sustainable environment: Nexus between economic growth, renewable energy use, forested area, and carbon emissions in Malaysia. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. Adv. 2022, 15, 200096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Reardon, T.; Heiman, A.; Lu, L.; Nuthalapati, C.S.; Vos, R.; Zilberman, D. “Pivoting” by food industry firms to cope with COVID-19 in developing regions: E-commerce and “copivoting” delivery intermediaries. Agric. Econ. 2021, 52, 459–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Varadarajan, R. Innovating for sustainability: A framework for sustainable innovations and a model of sustainable innovations orientation. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2017, 45, 14–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Gielens, K.; Ma, Y.; Namin, A.; Sethuraman, R.; Smith, R.J.; Bachtel, R.C.; Jervis, S. The future of private labels: Towards a smart private label strategy. J. Retail. 2021, 97, 99–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Rana, J.; Paul, J. Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Rueda, X.; Garrett, R.D.; Lambin, E.F. Corporate investments in supply chain sustainability: Selecting instruments in the agri-food industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 2480–2492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Nandakumar, N.; Saleeshya, P.G.; Harikumar, P. Bottleneck identification and process improvement by lean six sigma DMAIC methodology. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 24, 1217–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Raut, R.D.; Gardas, B.B.; Narwane, V.S.; Narkhede, B.E. Improvement in the food losses in fruits and vegetable supply chain-a perspective of cold third-party logistics approach. Oper. Res. Perspect. 2019, 6, 100117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Chaudhuri, A.; Dukovska-Popovska, I.; Subramanian, N.; Chan, H.K.; Bai, R. Decision-making in cold chain logistics using data analytics: A literature review. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2018, 29, 839–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Chen, C.K.; Palma, F.; Reyes, L. Reducing global supply chains’ waste of overproduction by using lean principles: A conceptual approach. Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci. 2019, 11, 441–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Ray, B. The Need for Food Biopreservation. In Food Biopreservatives of Microbial Origin; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2019; pp. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
  107. Chegere, M.J. Post-harvest losses reduction by small-scale maize farmers: The role of handling practices. Food Policy 2018, 77, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Liao, P.A.; Chang, H.H.; Chang, C.Y. Why is the food traceability system unsuccessful in Taiwan? Empirical evidence from a national survey of fruit and vegetable farmers. Food Policy 2011, 36, 686–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Khayatnezhad, M.; Nasehi, F. Industrial pesticides and a methods assessment for the reduction of associated risks: A review. Adv. Life Sci. 2021, 8, 202–210. [Google Scholar]
  110. Alsayegh, M.F.; Abdul Rahman, R.; Homayoun, S. Corporate economic, environmental, and social sustainability performance transformation through ESG disclosure. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Fekete, H.; Kuramochi, T.; Roelfsema, M.; den Elzen, M.; Forsell, N.; Höhne, N.; Gusti, M. A review of successful climate change mitigation policies in major emitting economies and the potential of global replication. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 137, 110602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Vieira, N.D.B.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Haddad, J. An assessment of CO2 emissions avoided by energy-efficiency programs: A general methodology and a case study in Brazil. Energy 2018, 142, 702–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Camilleri, A.R.; Larrick, R.P.; Hossain, S.; Patino-Echeverri, D. Consumers underestimate the emissions associated with food but are aided by labels. Nat. Clim. Change 2019, 9, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Ageron, B.; Gunasekaran, A.; Spalanzani, A. Sustainable supply management: An empirical study. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140, 168–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Zhu, G.; Chou, M.C.; Tsai, C.W. Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic exposing the shortcomings of current supply chain operations: A long-term prescriptive offering. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Krishnan, R.; Yen, P.; Agarwal, R.; Arshinder, K.; Bajada, C. Collaborative innovation and sustainability in the food supply chain-evidence from farmer producer organisations. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 168, 105253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Huo, B.; Ye, Y.; Zhao, X.; Zhu, K. Supply chain quality integration: A taxonomy perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 207, 236–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Ferronato, N.; Torretta, V. Waste mismanagement in developing countries: A review of global issues. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  119. Abdel-Shafy, H.I.; Mansour, M.S. Solid waste issue: Sources, composition, disposal, recycling, and valorization. Egypt. J. Pet. 2018, 27, 1275–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Ali, M.H.; Suleiman, N.; Khalid, N.; Tan, K.H.; Tseng, M.L.; Kumar, M. Supply chain resilience reactive strategies for food SMEs in coping to COVID-19 crisis. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 109, 94–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Xu, D.; Long, Y. The role of supply chain integration in the transformation of food manufacturers: A case study from China. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2021, 24, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Rostamzadeh, R.; Ghorabaee, M.K.; Govindan, K.; Esmaeili, A.; Nobar, H.B.K. Evaluation of sustainable supply chain risk management using an integrated fuzzy TOPSIS-CRITIC approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 175, 651–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Astill, J.; Dara, R.A.; Campbell, M.; Farber, J.M.; Fraser, E.D.; Sharif, S.; Yada, R.Y. Transparency in food supply chains: A review of enabling technology solutions. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 91, 240–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Aguiar, D.R.; Silva, A.L.D. Changes in beef consumption and retailing competitiveness in Brazil: A rapid appraisal. Agribus. Int. J. 2002, 18, 145–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Ali, I.; Nagalingam, S.; Gurd, B. A resilience model for cold chain logistics of perishable products. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2018, 29, 922–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Andoh, E.A.; Yu, H. A two-stage decision-support approach for improving sustainable last-mile cold chain logistics operations of COVID-19 vaccines. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Chaitangjit, P.; Ongkunaruk, P. The study of cold storage and temperature controlled transportation: A case study of a chain restaurant in Thailand. Pamukkale Univ. J. Eng. Sci. 2019, 25, 1014–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  128. Cousins, P.D.; Menguc, B. The implications of socialization and integration in supply chain management. J. Oper. Manag. 2006, 24, 604–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Dijkstra, T.; Meulenberg, M.; Van Tilburg, A. Applying marketing channel theory to food marketing in developing countries: Vertical disintegration model for horticultural marketing channels in Kenya. Agribus. Int. J. 2001, 17, 227–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Fahrni, M.L.; Ismail, I.A.N.; Refi, D.M.; Almeman, A.; Yaakob, N.C.; Saman, K.M.; Mansor, N.F.; Noordin, N.; Babar, Z.-U.-D. Management of COVID-19 vaccines cold chain logistics: A scoping review. J. Pharm. Policy Pract. 2022, 15, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Gokarn, S.; Kuthambalayan, T.S. Analysis of challenges inhibiting the reduction of waste in food supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 595–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Gokarn, S.; Choudhary, A. Modeling the key factors influencing the reduction of food loss and waste in fresh produce supply chains. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 294, 113063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Gorton, M.; Dumitrashko, M.; White, J. Overcoming supply chain failure in the agri-food sector: A case study from Moldova. Food Policy 2006, 31, 90–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Jevšnik, M.; Hlebec, V.; Raspor, P. Consumers’ awareness of food safety from shopping to eating. Food Control 2008, 19, 737–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Joshi, R.; Banwet, D.K.; Shankar, R. Indian cold chain: Modeling the inhibitors. Br. Food J. 2009, 111, 1260–1283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Kuo, J.C.; Chen, M.C. Developing an advanced multi-temperature joint distribution system for the food cold chain. Food Control. 2010, 21, 559–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Martínez, C.I.P.; Poveda, A.C. Characterization of cooling equipment in the food industry: Case study of the Colombian meat, dairy, and fruit and vegetable sectors. Environ. Dev. 2022, 41, 100693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Mesterházy, Á.; Oláh, J.; Popp, J. Losses in the grain supply chain: Causes and solutions. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  139. Özbük, R.M.Y.; Coşkun, A. Factors affecting food waste at the downstream entities of the supply chain: A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 244, 118628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Parashar, S.; Sood, G.; Agrawal, N. Modelling the enablers of food supply chain for reduction in carbon footprint. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 122932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Patidar, S.; Shukla, A.C.; Sukhwani, V.K. Food supply chain management (FSCM): A structured literature review and future research agenda. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2021, 19, 272–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Rais, M.; Kaul, A.; Jain, A. Evaluation of public private partnerships in perishable food supply chain in India. J. Supply Chain. Manag. Syst. 2019, 8, 52–63. [Google Scholar]
  143. Ren, Q.S.; Fang, K.; Yang, X.T.; Han, J.W. Ensuring the quality of meat in cold chain logistics: A comprehensive review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 119, 133–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Singh, R.K.; Gunasekaran, A.; Kumar, P. Third party logistics (3PL) selection for cold chain management: A fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Ann. Oper. Res. 2018, 267, 531–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Yan, H.; Song, M.J.; Lee, H.Y. A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Food Loss and Waste and Sustainable Mitigation Strategies: A Logistics Service Providers’ Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Zhu, L. Economic analysis of a traceability system for a two-level perishable food supply chain. Sustainability 2017, 9, 682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  147. Aramyan, L.H.; Lansink, A.G.O.; Van Der Vorst, J.G.; Van Kooten, O. Performance measurement in agri-food supply chains: A case study. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2007, 12, 304–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Arora, M.; Panda, B.P. RFID-An Emerging Technology for Cold Chain Sustainability. ZENITH Int. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. Res. 2018, 8, 136–145. [Google Scholar]
  149. Badia-Melis, R.; McCarthy, U.; Ruiz-Garcia, L.; Garcia-Hierro, J.; Villalba, J.R. New trends in cold chain monitoring applications-A review. Food Control. 2018, 86, 170–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Bottani, E.; Casella, G.; Nobili, M.; Tebaldi, L. Assessment of the economic and environmental sustainability of a food cold supply chain. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 367–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Defraeye, T.; Cronjé, P.; Berry, T.; Opara, U.L.; East, A.; Hertog, M.; Verboven, P.; Nicolai, B. Towards integrated performance evaluation of future packaging for fresh produce in the cold chain. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 44, 201–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Dong, Y.; Miller, S.A. Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of perishable food products delivered by the cold chain in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 303, 126982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Esfahbodi, A.; Zhang, Y.; Watson, G. Sustainable supply chain management in emerging economies: Trade-offs between environmental and cost performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 181, 350–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  154. Fan, Y.; de Kleuver, C.; de Leeuw, S.; Behdani, B. Trading off cost, emission, and quality in cold chain design: A simulation approach. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2021, 158, 107442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Fritz, M.; Schiefer, G. Food chain management for sustainable food system development: A European research agenda. Agribus. Int. J. 2008, 24, 440–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Gallo, A.; Accorsi, R.; Baruffaldi, G.; Manzini, R. Designing sustainable cold chains for long-range food distribution: Energy-effective corridors on the Silk Road Belt. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  157. Khan, A.S.; Salah, B.; Zimon, D.; Ikram, M.; Khan, R.; Pruncu, C.I. A sustainable distribution design for multi-quality multiple-cold-chain products: An integrated inspection strategies approach. Energies 2020, 13, 6612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Plambeck, E.L. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through operations and supply chain management. Energy Econ. 2012, 34, S64–S74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Qian, J.; Yu, Q.; Jiang, L.; Yang, H.; Wu, W. Food cold chain management improvement: A conjoint analysis on COVID-19 and food cold chain systems. Food Control. 2022, 137, 108940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Sharma, Y.K.; Mangla, S.K.; Patil, P.P.; Liu, S. When challenges impede the process: For circular economy-driven sustainability practices in food supply chain. Manag. Decis. 2019, 57, 995–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Su, M.; Fang, M.; Kim, J.; Park, K.S. Sustainable marketing innovation and consumption: Evidence from cold chain food online retail. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 340, 130806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Turan, C.; Ozturkoglu, Y. A conceptual framework model for an effective cold food chain management in sustainability environment. J. Model. Manag. 2021, 17, 1262–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Van Bemmel, A.; Parizeau, K. Is it food or is it waste? The materiality and relational agency of food waste across the value chain. J. Cult. Econ. 2020, 13, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  164. Vrat, P.; Gupta, R.; Bhatnagar, A.; Pathak, D.K.; Fulzele, V. Literature review analytics (LRA) on sustainable cold-chain for perishable food products: Research trends and future directions. Opsearch 2018, 55, 601–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Wang, Z.; Wen, P. Optimization of a low-carbon two-echelon heterogeneous-fleet vehicle routing for cold chain logistics under mixed time window. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  166. Xiao, X.; Fu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, X. Sustainable solar powered battery-free wireless sensing for food cold chain management. Sens. Int. 2022, 3, 100157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Yadav, V.S.; Singh, A.R.; Gunasekaran, A.; Raut, R.D.; Narkhede, B.E. A systematic literature review of the agro-food supply chain: Challenges, network design, and performance measurement perspectives. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 29, 685–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Zhang, X.R. Super cold chain—A high quality, energy-efficient, and environment-friendly method. Int. J. Energy Res. 2017, 41, 1225–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  169. Zulkefly, N.S.; Hishamuddin, H.; Rashid, F.A.A.; Razali, N.; Saibani, N.; Ab Rahman, M.N. The effect of transportation disruptions on cold chain sustainability. Evergreen 2021, 8, 262–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Arduino, G.; Murillo, D.C.; Parola, F. Refrigerated container versus bulk: Evidence from the banana cold chain. Marit. Policy Manag. 2015, 42, 228–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Aung, M.M.; Chang, Y.S. Temperature management for the quality assurance of a perishable food supply chain. Food Control. 2014, 40, 198–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Aworh, O.C. Promoting food security and enhancing Nigeria’s small farmers’ income through value-added processing of lesser-known and under-utilized indigenous fruits and vegetables. Food Res. Int. 2015, 76, 986–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Bogataj, M.; Bogataj, L.; Vodopivec, R. Stability of perishable goods in cold logistic chains. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2005, 93, 345–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Bourlakis, M.; Maglaras, G.; Aktas, E.; Gallear, D.; Fotopoulos, C. Firm size and sustainable performance in food supply chains: Insights from Greek SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 152, 112–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  175. Van Donk, D.P. Make to stock or make to order: The decoupling point in the food processing industries. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2001, 69, 297–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Van Donselaar, K.; Van Woensel, T.; Broekmeulen, R.; Fransoo, J. Inventory control of perishables in supermarkets. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2006, 104, 462–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Duret, S.; Hoang, H.M.; Derens-Bertheau, E.; Delahaye, A.; Laguerre, O.; Guillier, L. Combining quantitative risk assessment of human health, food waste, and energy consumption: The next step in the development of the food cold chain? Risk Anal. 2019, 39, 906–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Fancello, G.; Paddeu, D.; Fadda, P. Investigating last food mile deliveries: A case study approach to identify needs of food delivery demand. Res. Transp. Econ. 2017, 65, 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Feng, H.; Chen, J.; Zhou, W.; Rungsardthong, V.; Zhang, X. Modeling and evaluation on WSN-enabled and knowledge-based HACCP quality control for frozen shellfish cold chain. Food Control. 2019, 98, 348–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Iftekhar, A.; Cui, X. Blockchain-based traceability system that ensures food safety measures to protect consumer safety and COVID-19 free supply chains. Foods 2021, 10, 1289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  181. James, S.J.; James, C. The food cold-chain and climate change. Food Res. Int. 2010, 43, 1944–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Kitinoja, L. Use of Cold Chains for Reducing Food Losses in Developing Countries. 2013. Available online: http://postharvest.org/Use%20of%20cold%20chains%20PEF%20white%20paper%2013-03%20final.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2022).
  183. Lin, Q.; Zhao, Q.; Lev, B. Cold chain transportation decision in the vaccine supply chain. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2020, 283, 182–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Liu, P.; Yang, M.; Zhao, X.; Guo, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhang, J.; Lei, W.; Han, W.; Jiang, F.; Liu, W.J.; et al. Cold-chain transportation in the frozen food industry may have caused a recurrence of COVID-19 cases in destination: Successful isolation of SARS-CoV-2 virus from the imported frozen cod package surface. Biosaf. Health 2020, 2, 199–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Martinez, M.G.; Fearne, A.; Caswell, J.A.; Henson, S. Co-regulation as a possible model for food safety governance: Opportunities for public–private partnerships. Food Policy 2007, 32, 299–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  186. Masudin, I.; Ramadhani, A.; Restuputri, D.P.; Amallynda, I. The effect of traceability system and managerial initiative on Indonesian food cold chain performance: A COVID-19 pandemic perspective. Glob. J. Flex. Syst. Manag. 2021, 22, 331–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Ndraha, N.; Hsiao, H.I.; Vlajic, J.; Yang, M.F.; Lin, H.T.V. Time-temperature abuse in the food cold chain: Review of issues, challenges, and recommendations. Food Control. 2018, 89, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  188. Sahin, E.; Babaï, M.Z.; Dallery, Y.; Vaillant, R. Ensuring supply chain safety through time temperature integrators. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2007, 18, 102–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Sun, J.; Pan, H. Research on the Evaluation System of Agricultural Product Cold Chain Logistics Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Applied Mathematics, Modelling, and Intelligent Computing (CAMMIC 2022), Kunming, China, 25–27 March 2022; Volume 12259, pp. 1576–1580. [Google Scholar]
  190. Wu, J.Y.; Hsiao, H.I. Food quality and safety risk diagnosis in the food cold chain through failure mode and effect analysis. Food Control 2021, 120, 107501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Xiao, X.; He, Q.; Li, Z.; Antoce, A.O.; Zhang, X. Improving traceability and transparency of table grapes cold chain logistics by integrating WSN and correlation analysis. Food Control. 2017, 73, 1556–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Zhang, S.; Chen, N.; Song, X.; Yang, J. Optimizing decision-making of regional cold chain logistics system in view of low-carbon economy. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 130, 844–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Zhang, Y.; Hua, G.; Cheng, T.C.E.; Zhang, J. Cold chain distribution: How to deal with node and arc time windows? Ann. Oper. Res. 2020, 291, 1127–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Edwin, M.; Nair, M.S.; Sekhar, S.J. A comprehensive review on impacts of COVID-19 in food preservation and cold chain: An approach towards implementing green energy technologies. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 2022, 41, e13820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Gao, E.; Cui, Q.; Jing, H.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, X. A review of application status and replacement progress of refrigerants in the Chinese cold chain industry. Int. J. Refrig. 2021, 128, 104–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Huang, L.; Piontek, U. Improving performance of cold-chain insulated container with phase change material: An experimental investigation. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  197. Liu, H.; Pretorius, L.; Jiang, D. Optimization of cold chain logistics distribution network terminal. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2018, 2018, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Loisel, J.; Duret, S.; Cornuéjols, A.; Cagnon, D.; Tardet, M.; Derens-Bertheau, E.; Laguerre, O. Cold chain break detection and analysis: Can machine learning help? Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 112, 391–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Prakash, S.; Jasti, N.V.K.; Chan, F.T.S.; Sharma, V.P.; Sharma, L.K. Decision modelling of critical success factors for cold chains using the DEMATEL approach: A case study. Meas. Bus. Excell. 2021, 26, 263–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Tsang, Y.P.; Choy, K.L.; Wu, C.H.; Ho, G.T.S.; Lam, H.Y.; Koo, P.S. An IoT-based cargo monitoring system for enhancing operational effectiveness under a cold chain environment. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2017, 9, 1847979017749063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Methodological process.
Figure 1. Methodological process.
Sustainability 15 04907 g001
Figure 2. Publications over time (total 103).
Figure 2. Publications over time (total 103).
Sustainability 15 04907 g002
Figure 3. Distribution of papers by publication.
Figure 3. Distribution of papers by publication.
Sustainability 15 04907 g003
Figure 4. Conceptual model for FCCP measurement. Note: The suggested framework is broken down into the following sections: food cold-chain facilities, collaboration among FCC stakeholders, concern for and among FCC stakeholders, economic enhancement, and fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities. This section elaborates on the connections between the aforementioned elements and their impact on the FCCP.
Figure 4. Conceptual model for FCCP measurement. Note: The suggested framework is broken down into the following sections: food cold-chain facilities, collaboration among FCC stakeholders, concern for and among FCC stakeholders, economic enhancement, and fulfilment of FCC stakeholders’ responsibilities. This section elaborates on the connections between the aforementioned elements and their impact on the FCCP.
Sustainability 15 04907 g004
Table 1. Literature search.
Table 1. Literature search.
Search TermsPeriodTotal Number of Papers Retrieved from the Databases of Scopus and Web of Science
“food cold chain” “sustainable food supply chain” OR “perishable food supply chain” OR “cold chain performance” OR “cold supply chain” OR “foodtractability”2000–20221077
Table 2. Literature selection.
Table 2. Literature selection.
Selection Criteria: 1Selection Criteria: 2Selection Criteria: 3
All papers whose abstracts concentrated on FCCM were included.Papers having a mention of FCCM in the body were included.Papers which were cited in the literature on FCCM were included.
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

Akram, H.W.; Akhtar, S.; Ahmad, A.; Anwar, I.; Sulaiman, M.A.B.A. Developing a Conceptual Framework Model for Effective Perishable Food Cold-Supply-Chain Management Based on Structured Literature Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064907

AMA Style

Akram HW, Akhtar S, Ahmad A, Anwar I, Sulaiman MABA. Developing a Conceptual Framework Model for Effective Perishable Food Cold-Supply-Chain Management Based on Structured Literature Review. Sustainability. 2023; 15(6):4907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064907

Chicago/Turabian Style

Akram, Hafiz Wasim, Samreen Akhtar, Alam Ahmad, Imran Anwar, and Mohammad Ali Bait Ali Sulaiman. 2023. "Developing a Conceptual Framework Model for Effective Perishable Food Cold-Supply-Chain Management Based on Structured Literature Review" Sustainability 15, no. 6: 4907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064907

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