Approaches to Performance Assessment in Reverse Supply Chains: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Background: The interest in the topic of performance assessment in reverse supply chains (RSC) is increasing, although the body of research is still in its early stages. As this is a developing field, it is crucial to expand discussions on topics that have not yet been thoroughly examined, such as the intrinsic bias of indicators and metrics that may be associated with specific operational, economic, environmental perspectives, etc. Such perspectives should be considered in the decision-making process within the context of reverse logistics (RL) and waste management (WM). The aim of this research was to identify different perspectives employed in the development of proposed models in the literature. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to analyze thirty papers from Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct databases without time restrictions. Results: The review identified various ways in which authors grouped perspectives, including qualitative and quantitative, sustainability, and operational perspectives, among others. Conclusions: This study revealed several gaps in the field, including limited studies on RSC performance assessment and a lack of studies linking performance assessment to decision-making components.

1. Introduction

Waste treatment has expanded its focus beyond environmentally responsible disposal. According to [1], waste management (WM) has increasingly identified and promoted options for value recovery, such as energy generation or material recovery, instead of final disposal, which has changed the structures of the reverse supply chain (RSC). In the literature, it is observed that reverse logistics (RL) and WM work together to develop viable solutions to waste management issues. Several examples include [2] in the retail context, [3,4,5] in the construction industry, and [6] on electrical and electronic waste. Thus, WM and RL cannot be separated as they are both essential instruments for the proper management of waste, leading to a reduction in natural resource extraction, an extension of the lifespan of products and materials, and a reduction in waste at final disposal points.

Ref. [7] noted that while there are many terms and definitions used to describe RL, the concept is primarily attributed to a few authors, including [8,9,10,11], among others. Therefore, the most commonly used definition is “The process of planning, implementing, and controlling the efficient, cost-effective flow of raw materials, in-process inventory, finished goods, and related information from the point of consumption to the point of origin to recapture value or ensure proper disposal.” According to [8], the primary objectives of RL processes are to recover (through activities such as reuse, repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing, recycling, etc.) or properly dispose of waste (through activities such as landfilling, incineration, etc.). RL and WM are therefore linked by the shared challenges of processing waste and redirecting recovered materials to different stakeholders in the supply chain (through recovery) or to appropriate disposal locations (through proper environmental disposal).

Ref. [7] conducted an extensive literature review to identify the most commonly cited or described RL processes in the literature. Based on the findings, the authors proposed a framework that illustrates the possible waste flows (including discarded products, spare parts or materials, and recovered materials) and related information flows. The material-flow-related RL activities include collection, inspection/testing, sorting, redistribution, transport, disassembly, and warehousing. The information-flow-related activities encompass acquisition, gatekeeping, and integration acquisition, gatekeeping, and integration. The recovery-related activities involve reuse, repair, refurbishing, remanufacturing, and recycling, while proper disposal activities are presented as the final option for waste disposal. For a more comprehensive understanding of the framework, readers are advised to refer to [7].

RL and WM activities take place within a network of facilities known as a reverse supply chain (RSC) or reverse network, which is characterized by the flow of materials and information through reverse channels between these facilities. As noted by [3], effective management of the RL process can lead to several benefits for RSC companies, highlighting the importance of performance evaluation systems in this context.

The topic of performance assessment, as observed in the literature [6,12], is related to decision making. Typically, effective decision making follows a cycle that includes the collection of information (quantitative or otherwise) to evaluate the state of the system, using performance indicators that serve as a basis for monitoring, controlling, and managing the process. According to [3], assessing the performance of RL activities through indicators supports decision making and the continuous improvement of these activities.

Ref. [7] highlighted the increasing interest in RL topics, but pointed out that the subject of performance assessment in RSC has not kept up with this growth. In a literature review on RL performance in the civil construction sector, [3] found only one paper that specifically addressed RL performance assessment in this industry, indicating a significant research gap. This gap may also exist in other specific areas, as identified in several literature reviews summarized in this research.

In their literature review, [6] focused on closed-loop supply chains (CLSCs) for electrical and electronic equipment waste (EEEW) from 1999 to mid-2017. CLSCs encompass the flow of materials from raw material suppliers to final consumers, as well as the efficient return of post-consumer products and materials for recovery. Their research aimed to investigate topics such as decision making, performance assessment, planning and design of redistribution activities, and qualitative studies related to these topics. The authors found few studies related to decision making and performance assessment and recommended future studies to assess the environmental performance of EEEW CLSCs. Indicators such as the rate of collection, facility capacity, cost, and product life cycle were suggested as promising elements for future research.

Ref. [12] conducted a literature review to identify key performance indicators (KPIs) applied in remanufacturing, considering economic, social, and environmental benefits. The study employed a systematic literature review (SLR) and expert opinion gathering to evaluate the 20 KPIs identified in the literature. The results revealed the interdependence of KPIs in decision-making processes, and the prevalence of performance assessment frameworks based on the Balanced Scorecard model. However, the authors noted that this model had limitations in identifying performance parameters from customer, financial, internal process, learning and growth, and environmental perspectives. The review also revealed a lack of studies that incorporate performance assessment into decision making in the RSC context.

Ref. [2] conducted a performance assessment of sustainable RL practices in the Indian retail sector and concluded that while such practices offer social and economic benefits, the lack of organization in RL activities is apparent. They conducted a literature review of 99 articles published between 1999 and 2020 that focused on the Indian retail context. From this review, the authors identified 15 criteria (e.g., green initiatives, RL awareness, approach towards returns, and gatekeeping) to evaluate the performance of RL practices in retail. The proposed Fuzzy-TOPSIS model was used to evaluate eight retailers based on these criteria.

In the realm of RL and WM activities, uncertainties may greatly impact performance across various stages. Addressing this issue, [13] specifically examined the collection stage within the context of CLSCs and papers addressing RL activities. The study aimed to investigate the salient aspects of collection activities, including performance assessment. The authors found approximately 25 papers that dealt with performance measures in collection activities, and categorized these measures into social, environmental, economic, and operational dimensions. Despite this work, the authors concluded that further research is necessary to expand environmental performance measures, given the variety of pollutants found in different types of waste. Additionally, they suggested that performance assessment should include activities such as inventory management, transport, and inspection, while considering the influence of government policies. Lastly, the authors emphasized the need for further research to explore collection in greater depth.

As observed in previous reviews, the interest in the topic of performance assessment in RSCs is increasing, but the volume of research is still small, as the database of previous reviews [2,3,6,12] contains an average of only two dozen articles. Research on performance assessment in RSCs is still in full development, and it is opportune to expand discussions on topics that have not yet been thoroughly examined, such as the profile of the approach or focus of performance assessment. As observed in [6,12], performance assessment is closely tied to decision making, but the indicators and metrics employed in this evaluation can carry an intrinsic bias. The decision makers must ensure the bias or perspective of their assessment approach aligns with the objectives they wish to accomplish. Therefore, this review aimed to identify the different perspectives of models disseminated in the literature by observing their indicators and metrics. This review can encourage a reflection on the alignment of these approaches with the objectives that support decision making. According to the authors’ knowledge of this research, the collection and grouping of models under different perspectives in performance assessment within the context of RSCs has not yet been carried out. Thus, this result expands discussions on the relationship between the different performance assessment perspectives presented in the literature and their influence on the selection of proposed models or even in developing performance assessment proposals in RSCs based on the consideration of single or multiple perspectives.

Recently, [14] drew attention to the growing pressure on supply chains to enhance their efficiency regarding environmental issues. Furthermore, the authors emphasize that the path to this improvement lies in performance assessment. However, the current methods used for assessment do not always address all dimensions of sustainability. Taking the matter further, [15] assert that the inclusion of political and technological dimensions is now being considered in the performance assessment of RSCs focusing on sustainability. Ref. [16] already concluded that it is necessary to develop a robust performance assessment in order to address different perspectives desired by decision makers, such as sustainability. These findings highlight the importance of understanding the different intrinsic perspectives of the indicators or models used in RSC performance assessment. Therefore, this research sought to identify the different perspectives or dimensions related to performance assessment in RSCs as outlined in the literature.

Therefore, once these perspectives are presented, the decision maker will be able to select performance assessment models and performance indicators that are more aligned with the corporate objectives from among those available in the literature, whether they are focused on sustainability or other considered dimensions. To achieve this goal, it was decided to conduct a systematic literature review (SLR). An SLR has been utilized to identify research opportunities and propose frameworks that relate to essential theoretical aspects in RL. This is evident in recent works. such as [7,12,17,18], and in the specific context of RSCs it is possible to mention [16,19]. In our study, an SLR was conducted, which is distinct from previous reviews as it does not limit the type of waste or its route, whether a closed-loop or open-loop supply chain. For this purpose, a database of thirty papers was sourced from Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct databases, without any time restrictions. The research scope considered how performance assessment in RSC has been applied to the surveyed papers, whether from the perspective of RL or WM, and aims to identify answers to the following research questions:

(i)

What is the overview of published research in the literature addressing performance assessment in reverse networks?

(ii)

What are the performance approaches that have been discussed in the literature on performance assessment in reverse networks?

(iii)

What gaps were identified in the literature on reverse supply network performance assessment?

The research questions considered a strict research protocol that followed the SLR technique. The papers identified through this technique provided enough evidence to obtain answers to the questions. Research question (i) was answered using a set of graphs and statistics containing papers per year, papers per journal, type of waste considered in RSC, and the co-occurrence of the most common terms related to the topic. These results are presented in Section 3.1. Research question (ii) was answered by extracting several parameters from the research protocol (performance assessment dimensions; based on indicators; nature of the indicators), which were grouped into dimensions that were considered as perspectives biased towards performance assessment. These results were gathered in Section 3.2. Research question (iii) was answered by observing the results from Section 3.1 and Section 3.2, while also considering the need to further develop the topic due to its current relevance. This led to the proposal of future research studies. These considerations are presented in Section 5.

This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 describes the methodological procedures employed in the study, including the research protocol, search strings, researched bases, and exclusion and inclusion criteria. Section 3 presents a bibliometric study that characterizes the evolution of publications relevant to the research scope. Section 4 outlines the research parameters related to the characterization of the data extracted from the selected articles. Section 5 provides the conclusions, limitations of the study, research gaps, theoretical and practical implications of the results, and proposals for future research.

2. Research Method

In this study, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using the following research questions: (i) What is the overview of published research in the literature addressing performance assessment in reverse supply networks? (ii) What are the performance approaches that have been discussed in the literature on performance assessment in reverse networks? (iii) What gaps were identified in the literature on reverse supply network performance assessment? To answer these questions, several stages were developed using the SLR approach proposed by [20], which consists of the following steps (synthesized in Figure 1): Initially, a preliminary review was conducted on the Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to evaluate the quantity of research on the topic and determine the best search string composition. It was observed that the scope of performance assessment in RSCs would be better captured in articles by a string that combined terms such as “Reverse Supply Chain”, “Reverse Channels”, “Reverse Logistics”, and “Reverse Network”, with terms specifically related to performance assessment such as “Performance Indicators”, “Performance Assessment”, “Key Performance Indicators”, “Performance Evaluating”, “Chain Performance”, “Chain Assessment”, and “Network Assessment”. Additionally, at this stage, it was possible to observe which exclusion and inclusion criteria best met the research objective. In this case, it was decided to exclude articles that did not address performance assessment in RSCs, and, on the other hand, articles that met the following criteria would be accepted for full reading: articles that use performance assessment models or methods (quantitative or qualitative) in reverse supply chains or reverse supply networks under any definition of performance; and articles that quote, use, or define performance indicators or their metrics in reverse supply chains or reverse supply networks.

After defining the databases and search string, the protocol was developed to adequately answer research questions (i), (ii), and (iii). An important part of the protocol is related to the parameters for extracting the selected articles. These parameters were also directed to directly support the research questions. In general, the parameters observed in

Table 1. Research Protocol.

Research Protocol
Strings	Reverse Supply Chain, Reverse Channels, Reverse Logistics, Reverse Network; Performance Indicators, Performance Assessment, Key Performance Indicators, Performance Evaluating, Chain Performance, Chain Assessment, Network Assessment
Boolean operator	OR, AND
Database	Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science
Inclusion Criteria	Use performance assessment models or methods (quantitative or qualitative) in reverse supply chains under any definition of performance
Exclusion Criteria	Articles that do not address the topic of reverse supply network performance or reverse supply chain performance
Extraction parameters	Authors; year; country; type of waste considered; performance assessment dimensions; based on indicators; nature of the indicators (i.e., qualitative or quantitative); relationship between performance assessment and other areas of knowledge, i.e., waste management, sustainability, circular economy, green supply chain management, supply chain management, reverse supply chain management, green logistics
Language	English
Document Type	Journal papers, including review papers
Search period	No period restriction

were related to questions (i) and (ii), while question (iii) was answered after observing the results of the brief bibliometric study in Section 3.1, where gaps and opportunities for research development in the field were identified.

The next step involved obtaining the articles from the scientific databases. Firstly, the articles were downloaded from the defined string, resulting in the following quantity per database: Science Direct (35), Scopus (78), and Web of Science (83). This totaled 187 papers, of which 43 were duplicates. Thus, the remaining 144 papers proceeded to the title, abstract, and keywords reading phase, of which 95 did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, 49 papers were selected for full reading, of which only 30 met the inclusion criteria of the research protocol.

In the data extraction stage, the selected papers were read in full, and data were extracted according to the guidelines of the research protocol. At this stage, it was still possible to identify the need for including new data extraction that complement the research questions according to the scope defined by the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All data extracted at this stage were consolidated in electronic spreadsheets for further processing for presentation and analysis.

The results presentation stage consisted of deciding the best way to present the data extracted from the full reading of the articles. Alternative options such as tables, graphs, and figures were considered, choosing those that best suited the reading and interpretation consistent with the desired answers. Most of the data presentation elements (Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4) were created using dynamic Google spreadsheets. Two additional software tools supported the creation of Figure 5: the Docfetcher software (https://docfetcher.sourceforge.net/en/index.html (accessed on 15 August 2022) and Adobe Photoshop. The Docfetcher software supported searching for terms in the selected papers, Google spreadsheets supported generating the co-occurrence statistics, and Adobe Photoshop supported the construction of the figure. The construction logic of the figure followed the principle that the color intensity and thickness were proportional to the co-occurrence count of the terms. The distance from the central region of the figure represents a weak relationship with the themes identified as central, which, in turn, have a strong relationship with each other.

In the final stage, the results were analyzed by comparing them with the information collected and results obtained by other authors, with the aim of addressing the research questions. The answer to question (i) is consolidated in Section 3.1, while the answer to question (ii) is addressed in Section 3.2. By observing the publication overview of the research topic, it was possible to identify relevant gaps for the development of the research theme, which represent opportunities for future research. These discussions converge on question (iii) and are gathered in Section 4.

3. Results and Analysis

The research protocol, which is the outcome of the initial two steps of the research, namely the initial review and the creation of the research proposal and protocol, is presented in Table 1, which displays the key information pertaining to the study.

3.1. Brief Bibliometric Analysis

Based on the selected papers, several bibliometric characteristics were identified to understand the publication trends of performance assessment in RSCs. As depicted in Figure 2, approximately 70% of the publications (22) were published in the last 5 years, indicating a growing interest in the subject. Nonetheless, the overall volume of publications seems insufficient, given the importance of the theme. The lack of research on this topic was also reported by [12,13].

In terms of journal distribution (Figure 3), the Journal of Cleaner Production had the most papers (3), followed by Sustainability, Resources, Conservation & Recycling, CIRP Proceedings, and Expert Systems with Applications, each with two papers. Figure 3 also shows other journals, with one paper each.

An important aspect to consider is the type of waste, as it can influence the performance assessment approach. Some papers focused on specific waste types in certain RSCs, while others had a more general approach that could be applied to any waste type (called general context). As shown in Figure 4, the majority of the studies identified (17) were related to the general context, while others focused on electric electronic equipment waste —EEEW (3)—and construction and demolition waste—CDW (2). Additionally, eight papers investigated various other waste types.

Identifying and understanding the areas of knowledge or concepts that motivate or support performance assessment in RSC was an important issue. Different terms were identified in the selected papers that could help to understand the approaches used. The concepts that were recurrently highlighted were reverse logistics, waste management, sustainability, circular economy (CE), green supply chain management (GSCM) or green supply chain (GSC), supply chain management (SCM), reverse supply chain management (RSCM), and green logistics (GL). Terms frequently associated with performance assessment in RSCs, such as social, economic, and environmental, were also observed (see Figure 5).

In Figure 5, RL is the main focal point with a strong occurrence relationship among the terms RL, social, environmental, and economic, followed by sustainability, WM, SCM, GSC, and CE. These findings suggest that the theoretical basis and motivation for performance assessment in RSCs are rooted in the concept of RL and the social, environmental, and economic aspects (which comprise sustainability), supported by the assumptions of WM, SCM, GSC, and CE. WM is strongly related to the objective of RL, which serves as a means for WM to achieve its own objectives. Similarly, RL emerges as an alternative to facilitate the central idea of CE. Moreover, performance assessment is an inherent aspect of SCM, which explains the consistent occurrence of this term. GSC refers to a specific way of conceptualizing a supply network based on sustainability drivers that align with the principles that underpin the use of RL as a tool. Furthermore, the surveyed papers strongly emphasize the sustainability theme, which is one of the identified perspectives for performance assessment.

In a more specific context, it was observed that the concepts of RSCM and GL were less frequently associated with performance assessment in RSCs. RSCM can be regarded as a niche area within SCM, which has not been extensively explored as a theoretical foundation for performance assessment in RSCs. In contrast, although GL had lower occurrence rates, it has gained importance since it is linked to all the main themes identified in the co-occurrence analysis. This may suggest an increasing interest in performance assessment approaches for RSCs.

3.2. Performance Assessment Approaches in RSCs

Based on the paper analysis, various perspectives on performance assessment in RSCs stand out, including quantitative and qualitative, sustainability, stakeholders, and operational approaches. 23 studies proposed groupings of performance indicators, which were considered as different dimensions representing the process perspectives for performance assessment in RSCs.

3.2.1. Qualitative and Quantitative

Qualitative approaches in RSC performance assessment do not rely on indicators with scales. For example, “compliance with legislation” is assessed as either “yes” or “no” in [21,22]. Other methods, such as Fuzzy-Topsis [2,23], Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) [24,25], Analytic Network Process (ANP) [21], Structural Equation Modeling [26], and a combination of multi-criteria decision-making methods (such as DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP, and AHP) [27] often utilize hierarchical models for performance assessment. While these methods do not rely on indicators with numeric scales, some use qualitative assessment scales, such as the fuzzy scale used for the “encourage to recycling” indicator in [21].

In the cited surveys, performance assessment is linked to the perception of the interviewee, who assigns importance grades and degrees to the indicators. In this case, the assessment outcome is influenced by the interviewees’ perceptions, and there are no defined metrics for these indicators. In contrast, the other studies (25) are based on indicators whose measurements are independent of the interviewees’ perceptions, such as CO₂ emissions, recycling costs, and product return rate, among others. In some cases, the authors describe precisely how to calculate these indicators [3,28,29]. Therefore, this type of evaluation is more objective and less influenced by individual perceptions regarding the value attributed to the indicators.

3.2.2. Sustainability

This approach has been extensively investigated in studies that use indicators. As shown in

Table 2. Perspectives identified in the performance indicators.

Perspectives	Papers
Economic	[1,5,13,21,25,27,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39]
Social	[1,5,13,21,23,25,27,29,30,31,32,33,35,38,40]
Environmental	[1,2,13,25,27,30,31,32,34,35,36,41]
Operational	[1,5,13,24,25,27,29,30,31,32,33,34,36,37,41,42]
Others *	[21,23,27,30]

*—technology; information; innovation and flexibility.

, many studies cover the three dimensions of sustainability, namely economic, social, and environmental (3BL). The authors cited in this table have proposed the presented grouping. However, other dimensions, such as operational, technology, information, innovation, and flexibility, were also observed. These dimensions are directly or indirectly related to one or more sustainability dimensions, and, therefore, the authors have considered them separately. For instance, the indicator “recyclable collected material rate” is related to environmental aspects since recycling helps reduce raw material extraction.

In terms of the 3BL approach, it was observed that few authors in their research specifically described these dimensions. Ref. [27] stated that an efficient reverse logistics system is required for the environmental dimension, which must comply with current regulations. Ref. [13] considered elements such as pollutant emissions, costs per non-recycled and non-remanufactured volume, and waste volume reduction as being directly linked to the environmental issue. Ref. [34] highlighted the importance of considering the different types of waste that cause various environmental impacts and individually assessed the use of water and land and air quality through RL activities and waste management. Ref. [31] emphasized the need to adopt policies for reducing carbon emissions and the carbon credit market as options to reduce environmental impacts.

The economic dimension in RSCs has been frequently highlighted for its operations costs and profitability. According to [27], maximum profits should be obtained from recovery activities with the lowest possible cost in RL activities involved in WM, with profitability associated with stakeholders involved in RSCs. Ref. [13] highlighted the different perspectives of stakeholders, presenting the profitability obtained through efficiency in recovery and partnerships among stakeholders. Ref. [39] discussed the costs of recovery activities, while [34] considered costs associated with RL and WM activities, including environmental costs related to carbon emissions, using the value chain approach.

3.2.3. Operational

This perspective aims to evaluate performance using indicators that demonstrate efficiency, often expressed through rates related to resources, such as monetary value, the volume of materials and products, the number of workers, work hours, among others. The studies surveyed, which group indicators from the perspective of RL efficiency, frequently propose indicators that express the volume or cost associated with the resources applied in the RL processes, or even the actual quantities of materials and products processed.

Ref. [27] define the operational perspective of RL as the set of processes that fulfill all stakeholders’ demands associated with productivity and efficiency in process flows. Similarly, [36] emphasizes the importance of evaluating RL activities’ efficiency through operational indicators, such as gatekeeping effectiveness, return transit time, and the percentage of transport cost involved in warehousing. Ref. [25] report operational performance indicators related to the volumes transported among suppliers, manufacturers, and distributors. Ref. [42] identified time-related indicators, such as waiting time, return time, and idle time. Ref. [31] considered operational costs, such as routing cost, driver salary, and fuel cost. Therefore, it can be concluded that the operational perspective of RL performance assessment requires a quantitative approach.

3.2.4. Other Perspectives

Several authors have approached performance assessment in RL from alternative perspectives, beyond those commonly found in the literature. These perspectives include dimensions such as stakeholders, information, technology, and the legal dimension. The stakeholder perspective emphasizes indicators that reflect the interests of the client. For example, [30] presented the customer perspective, which includes indicators such as customer satisfaction and service level. Ref. [21] focused on the legal perspective, which includes indicators related to compliance with relevant legislation.

Ref. [18] examined the use of social networking services/sites and user-generated content as indicators related to information in RSCs. The innovation perspective was also considered, with indicators such as technological innovation [21] and innovation capability in process technology [27]. These less-frequently explored perspectives provide a broader understanding of what can be considered important in assessing the performance of RSCs.

4. Discussion

As previously noted, the primary motivation for implementing performance assessment is to support decision making in a company’s daily operations, and some form of assessment is necessary to control the system and complete the management cycle. Control measures guide or motivate decisions at various levels (strategic, tactical, and operational), with impacts over different time horizons (short, medium, and long). Given that the reverse supply chain (RSC) is made up of a set of facilities, it is even more critical that performance assessment aligns with the objectives of the chain as a whole. Thus, presenting the various perspectives of performance assessment in RSCs found in the literature can assist managers in selecting models, metrics, and indicators that are more closely aligned with the organization’s objectives.

According to the research database, some articles present models that aim to address all three dimensions of sustainability, although this perspective is relatively recent. In the past, the operational perspective tended to be the primary focus, guiding the indicators and metrics adopted for performance assessment. RSC facilities must be sustainable business models from an economic perspective, which, at a tactical and operational level, is closely related to daily operational efficiency. However, at a strategic level, RSCs must also meet the sustainability concept, focusing on measuring the environmental, social, and economic impacts involved. Models, metrics, and indicators under this perspective can support decisions ranging from reducing pollutant emissions in transportation activities (route definition—operational level), to selecting the most suitable forms of waste recovery in daily life (destination—tactical level), and even to actions that impact the structure of RSCs, such as expanding, closing, or opening new facilities. Therefore, the sustainability perspective has a broader scope and coverage than the purely operational perspective.

The stakeholders’ perspective is a critical consideration in performance assessment within RSCs. Specifically, the customer’s point of view is of utmost importance for achieving service quality excellence, particularly in closed-loop chains that offer after-sales service. In such cases, the pursuit of better service quality takes precedence over operational efficiency, and operating at a lower level of efficiency can be justified by gains in quality. Conversely, in a more general context, such as open-loop chains, the customer can be considered the adjacent facility that receives the materials or products that follow in the network. From this perspective, performance assessment serves as a motivator for decisions that prioritize satisfying the customer.

In the waste management field, there has been a notable increase in research focused on specific waste types, particularly electric and electronic equipment waste (EEEW). This trend suggests that the design of the performance assessment process may be influenced by the specific waste types considered by the relevant recycling systems committee. In contrast, some research gaps were identified, and significant waste categories, such as civil construction and end-of-life vehicles, remain scarce despite their current importance. In the waste management decision-making process, a control activity is employed, which requires the measurement or verification of attributes. However, it is noteworthy that most surveys are limited to the evaluation of quantitative indicators. Conversely, a performance assessment of the RSC with a more qualitative perspective would encompass a range of issues. Nevertheless, in the majority of papers reviewed for this research, there appears to be no clear connection between the decision-making process and the results of the RSC performance assessment.

The authors in [16] highlight the importance of performance assessment for coordinating companies and the success of the remanufacturing process. Ref. [43] also discusses how performance assessment can reflect other aspects of management, such as the integration and sharing of information. Once the appropriate set of dimensions is considered in performance assessment, it can accurately reflect sustainability perspectives in RSCs. It is crucial for decision makers to carefully consider the objectives of performance assessment within the context of their specific RSC. They must take into account the potential impacts of related decisions as well as any inherent perspectives or biases that may be present in the models, metrics, and indicators they adopt. Failure to align these factors can have long-lasting consequences across various time horizons, including short-, medium-, and long-term, ultimately compromising the management cycle and overall efficiency of the RSC.

5. Final Considerations Research Gaps and Future Studies

The academic interest in assessing the performance of reverse supply chains (RSCs) has been growing, particularly in the last five years. However, given the importance of this topic, the number of specific papers on the subject (31) is relatively small, with no restriction on the period researched. Moreover, sustainability has emerged as the most frequent perspective in RSC performance assessment, with most authors grouping performance indicators according to the Triple Bottom Line (3BL) view. Nonetheless, it is unclear whether RSC performance indicators have been related to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals.

In the waste management field, there has been a notable increase in research focused on specific waste types, particularly electric and electronic equipment waste (EEEW). This trend suggests that the design of the performance assessment process may be influenced by the specific waste types considered by the relevant recycling systems committees. In contrast, some research gaps were identified, and significant waste categories, such as civil construction and end-of-life vehicles, remain scarce despite their current importance. In the waste management decision-making process, a control activity is employed, which requires the measurement or verification of attributes. However, it is noteworthy that most surveys are limited to the evaluation of quantitative indicators. Conversely, a performance assessment of the RSC with a more qualitative perspective would encompass a range of issues. Nevertheless, in the majority of papers reviewed for this research, there appears to be no clear connection between the decision-making process and the results of the RSC performance assessment.

The current study provides a comprehensive overview of the state of the art in reverse supply chain (RSC) performance assessment, which contributes to enhancing understanding for those interested in the subject. Furthermore, this study provides several proposals and perspectives for analyzing the theme, expanding the discussions on the alignment between models, indicators, and metrics with the decision-making cycle and corporate objectives. This reflection can guide the development of new models, indicators, and metrics for performance assessment in RSCs, considering the various perspectives presented. In terms of practical implications, it facilitates reflections that can support the performance assessment processes, including selecting specific dimensions, choosing a qualitative or quantitative approach, and adopting appropriate indicators and metrics. It is essential to note that decision making driven by the assessment process has a significant impact on the entire reverse supply chain (RSC) and can have long-term consequences. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that the implementation of the performance assessment system is consistent with the strategic vision of the RSC as a whole.

The main limitation of this research is the limited volume of articles found in the obtained database due to performance assessment in RSCs still being in development. With the evolution of the topic, new dimensions can be considered in future studies, leading to a new grouping of perspectives.

To guide future research, it is suggested to investigate how the characteristics of specific waste streams within reverse channels may influence the performance assessment of the RSC system. Additionally, it is important to examine the connection between performance assessment and decision-making processes in RSC management. Furthermore, considering the significance of sustainability, potential links should be identified between RSC performance assessment and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.