Citation
Rahman, A. A. J. A., Rahman, N., Islam, M. S., Hossain, M. B., & Jaman, B. U. (2026). Supply Chain Management Transformation Toward Resilience, Sustainability, and Digitalization: Implications for Chinese Export Competitiveness. International Journal of Research, 13(1), 416–430. https://doi.org/10.26643/ijr/2026/15
Abdullah Ali Jameel Alabd Rahman1, Nishadur Rahman2, Md Safiqul Islam1, Md Belal Hossain3, Barkat Ullah Jaman4
1School of Economics and Management, China University of Geoscience, Hongshan, Wuhan, Hubei, China
2Lingnan College, Sun Yat-sen University, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
3Sustainable Livelihood Consultancy Firm (SLCF), Pragati Sarani, Dhaka, Bangladesh
4School of Economics and Trade, Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou, Henan, China
Abstract
The paper discusses the impact of supply chain management (SCM) transformation through resilience, sustainability, and digitalization on export competitiveness for Chinese. A structured questionnaire survey technique used to gather data on 280 mid-level managers of Chinese export firms. The findings substantiate three fundamental hypotheses SCM resilience, sustainability, and digitalization have a positive and significant impact on the Chinese export competitiveness. Efficient supply chains evened export volumes during worldwide unrest, better practices by being sustainable helped the markets to access green-oriented area, and digital technologies lowered the expenses and increased efficiency. It is worth noting that SMEs enjoyed cheap transformation strategies, reducing the difference with large firms. The three factors had synergies that enhanced competitiveness. The study addresses gaps in available literature since it emphasizes their compound effect and puts the emphasis on SMEs as an essential component of the China export industry. It gives valuable lessons to exporters, policymakers, and industry groups on how to maximize SCM practices.
Keywords: Supply Chain Management (SCM), Resilience, Sustainability, Digitalization, Chinese Export Competitiveness
1. Introduction
In the contemporary global economy, supply chains are the support of the international trade. In the case of China, which is the largest exporter in the world. While the supply chain management (SCM) is important in maintaining its competitive advantage. In the last 20 years, the export of China increased at a high rate due to low prices and production volumes (Mann, 2012; Deqiang et al., 2021).
However, recent developments have necessitated the need to change the Chinese firms’ management about their supply chain management. Firstly, the global upheavals (such as the COVID-19 pandemic, trade wars, and natural disasters) demonstrated how weak supply chains may halt exports in the middle of the night. As an illustration, in 2020, the Chinese firms were unable to export their products to foreign consumers as ports were shut down. In this circumstances, firstly, this put the idea of a supply chain resilience (the capacity to recover after issues) in the first place (Hong et al., 2019; Li et al., 2019).
Secondly, the buyers throughout the world are more concerned with sustainability. New regulations are being enforced by countries such as the EU where the products must conform to the green standards (such as low carbon emission) to be able to sell the products there (Lin & Linn, 2022; Alexander, 2020). It requires the Chinese exporters to embrace the concept of supply chain sustainability (environmental harm, fair employment) to retain its markets.
Thirdly, SCM is becoming modified by technology. Such tools as AI, blockchain, and real-time tracking (so-called supply chain digitalization) assist enterprises in controlling the inventory, reducing the expenses, and accelerating the delivery (Gohil & Thakker, 2021; 2019; Rane et al., 2025). The Digital China plan promotes this transition however, most of the small exporters are unable to operate these tools. Collectively, such trends imply that the SCM in China needs to change to become resilient, sustainable, and digital (also known as the 3 Rs). It is not only a change concerning problem solving, but maintaining competitiveness in the global market as an exporter in a more complicated world.
Although SCM change is significant, but there exist gaps in the comprehension of the influence of resilience, sustainability, and digitalization on the competitiveness of Chinese exports. Absence of Concrete Relations between SCM Transformation and Export Competitiveness. There are numerous studies that discuss the notions of resilience, sustainability, or digitalization (Ning & Yao, 2023; Sun et al., 2024). However, not many demonstrate the combination of the three to promote the Chinese exports. Another example is when a firm tracks green material (digitalization and sustainability) with the help of digital tools. But it is unknown that whether it can sell more abroad. Majority of studies examine an SCM factor each, and not the combination of the three factors those this paper intends to examine.
Numerous literatures existed on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as an export sector of China. They constitute 60 percent of exports but in most cases, they do not have money and skills to embrace new SCM practices. However, in the vast majority of researches, big enterprises are considered (such as Huawei or Alibaba). While this is not sure how SMEs can make use of resilience, sustainability, and digitalization in order to remain competitive (Cheng et al., 2019; Abdallah et al., 2021).
Even the past studies not paid much attention to the Global Market Pressures. There are new regulations (such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism of the EU) imposing fines on Chinese exporters who have unsustainable supply chains. Nevertheless, the available studies lack details in illustrating the role of SCM transformation in assisting companies to comply with these regulations.
Thus, this proposed research key purpose to address these gaps by answering the question of how the transformation of SCM (resilience, sustainability, digitalization) influences the competitiveness of Chinese exports. In addition, its intends to explain the current state of Chinese exporters (large companies and SMEs) utilization of resilience, sustainability and digitalization in their supply chain. Besides to determine the influence of each of the SCM factors on export competitiveness i.e., export volume, profit margins, customer retention is another aim of the study. Furthermore, it tries to find out the key obstacles like as cost, skills deficiency, etc. that prevent the implementation of these SCM practices by exporters.
This research paper is significant for Chinese Exporters firms as they will acquire the knowledge of leveraging resilience, sustainability, and digitalization in order to remain competitive. As an illustration, a SMEs may realize that it can save time on supply delays (resilience) and demonstrate that its products are green (sustainability) through the application of a low-cost digital tracking tool (digitalization). These will in turn win more foreign customers. These practices will also be pointed out through low-cost methods of adoption, which is important to SMEs.
Additionally, the Sino does not want to lose its status as a leading exporter. Since the current study demonstrates the most effective policies: e.g. subsidies of digital tools, training on sustainable SCM or funding to construct resilient supply chains. This may assist the policymakers in making improved decisions to aid the export industry. Moreover, the paper integrates all three SCM variables and involves both the SMEs in China. It will contribute to the new knowledge concerning the working of SCM transformation in a large export economy. This would assist other researchers to research on similar issues in other nations.
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Formation
2.1 SC Resilience and Sino Export Competitiveness
Supply chain resilience (SCR) describes how a supply chain can prepare, respond, and recover to disruptions while continuing its operation. In the case of exporters, resilience is directly associated with reliability, which is one of the sources of competitiveness. Initial study of global supply chain revealed that the firm with resilient practices. For example, multiple suppliers and safety stock can exhibit fewer delay of delivery in order to maintain buyers in overseas (Kiessling et al., 2024; Gaudenzi et al., 2023)
In the case of China, SCR became more urgent in the post-pandemic period of 2020. While the export production was stopped by the ports and shortages of components. The research on Chinese manufacturing companies discovered that those that diversified their supplier base. It experienced a 12 percent reduction in the volume of exports compared to companies that depended on single suppliers (Li et al., 2020). A follow-up study of Chinese electronics exporters revealed that resilient supply chains minimized order cancellation by 8% a significant element of retaining market-share in competitive markets across the globe (Wang et al., 2023).
Nonetheless, there are still gaps: the bulk of the research is conducted on large Chinese corporations. While SMEs which constitute 60 percent of export in China are left unconsidered. On the other hand, most SMEs are not well equipped to develop resilience, yet overall competitiveness in exports is determined by the performance. The current work fills this gap by involving the SMEs in the analysis. Therefore, to test in different sizes of Sino firms, this poses hypothesis;
H1: The positive impact of SCR on the Chinese competitiveness of exports
2.2 SC Sustainability and Sino Export Competitiveness
According to the past literatures Supply chain sustainability (SCS) involved with various practices. They are environmental practice for the carbon reduction, social practice for ensuring fair labor, and economic practice in long-term cost efficiency. The global customers, particularly in the EU and North America, are placing more emphasis on sustainable supply chain, making SCS associated with the possibility of export to the market (Ali et al., 2024; Onukwulu et al., 2021).
SCS has no longer presents Sino exporters with a choice. Suppose as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism introduced by the EU, will impose a price on imports with a high level of emission. Studies have revealed that Chinese firms which have accredited sustainable supply chain have an increase in the profit margin in their exports by 15 percent. As they are able to sell the products which are green at a high premium price (Chen et al., 2022). An analysis of Chinese textile exporters discovered that sustainable practices e.g. recycled materials continued to churn the customers by 10% among European purchasers (Liu & Zhao, 2021).
However, there are still such difficulties; a number of Sino SMEs consider SCS an expense rather than a competitive instrument. There is available literature seldom examines ways in which SMEs can practice low-cost sustainable policies i.e., energy efficient machineries to increase exports. Thus proposed research hypothesizes alongside discussing the cost-effective SCS techniques of small companies;
H2: SCS has a positive impact on the export competitiveness in China.
2.3 SC Digitalization and Sino Export Competitiveness
The supply chain digitalization (SCD) is the utilization of technologies, for instances AI, blockchain, IoT, etc. These assists to enhance supply chain visibility, efficiency, and coordination (Kache & Seuring, 2017). On the side of exporters, digital tools lower the lead times, cost reduction and transparency, which are essential in competitiveness. The adoption of SCD has been sped up by the Digital China project. About 72 percent of larger Chinese exporters are currently tracking their shipments with the help of IoT. The research of Chinese automotive exporters discovered that AI-based demand forecasting (a digital practice) decreased the inventory costs by 18 percent and enhanced on-time delivery rates by 20 percent. Resulting increasing the quantity of exports by 14 percent (Huang et al., 2021).
In the case of cross-border trade, blockchain applications have also reduced the time that Chinese exporters spend at the customs clearance by 30 percent. Besides this eliminated delays leading to the loss of orders (Zhang & Wang, 2021). Nevertheless, there are also digital divides: out of Chinese SMEs. Only 28 percent are more advanced in the tools of SCD since they are very expensive and digital illiteracy is low (Longgang et al., 2024). Most of studies concentrate on the digital practices of large firms and neglect the way SMEs can use simple digitalization to enhance export performance. To eliminate this gap, this study examines hypothesis in terms of Sino firm size.
H3: SCD has a positive impact on export competitiveness of China)
2.4 Intersections Resilience, Sustainability, and Digitalization
Many literatures consider SCR, SCS, and SCD individually. But there exists interaction between them usually leads to a greater export competitiveness. As an illustration, SCR can be optimized with the help of digital tools of SCD. Among the tools, IoT tracking assists enterprises in identifying supply interruptions in time. Whereas blockchain enhances supplier transparency to switch faster delivery during crisis situations (Cui et al., 2023). Likewise, SCD promotes SCS. Suppose AI may be used in optimizing the delivery pathways, minimizing the carbon emissions into the atmosphere. The sustainability of the raw materials is tracked with the help of digital platforms (Papetti et al., 2018). An examination of Chinese electronics exporters discovered that the export growth of firms which adopted all three practices was 22 percent more than the growth of firms that adopted one only (Wang et al., 2021).
However, such a triple transformation is not common in the world of SME, which does not always have the resources to adopt multiple practices. Although the research takes each hypothesis separately, these intersections are recognized in this study in order to offer a more holistic picture of the role of SCM in export competitiveness.
Figure 1: Study Model
3. Methodology
3.1 Measurements Scales
The research items are Supply chain resilience (SCR), supply chain sustainability (SCS), supply chain digitalization (SCD), and Chinese export competitiveness (CEC). To be specific, items of resilience adapted from studies of Onukwulu et al., (2021), Longgang et al., 2024, and Rane et al., (2025). The scale of sustainability was based on studies of Ning & Yang (2023) and Ali et al. (2024). Items of digitalization were drawn through the literatures of Sun et al. (2024), Li et al. (2019), and Deqiang et al. (2021). Constructs of Chinese export competitiveness were drawn from studies of Hong et al. (2019) and Zhang & Wang (2021). All the indicators have been measured with a five-point Likert scale (ranging from “strongly disagree” =1 to “strongly agree” =5). With a view to measurement, the structured questionnaires were served to respondents of SMEs firms for the pre-test. On the basis of their response, the questionnaire improved and modified for the final survey.
3.2 Sample Selection and Data Attainment
All variables were measured using mature scales that had been tested to test validity and reliability. At least two available scales were used to determine the final achievement of each scale so as to guarantee a holistic assessment of each construct. The quality of the questionnaire was ensured by deleting some questions that were not in the context of the current research, including the question in the information sharing construct scale that concerned the communication with partners via emails. Moreover, according to personal experience of the authors to perceive some challenges in comprehending some of the questions in the questionnaire, the problem of translating the items to plain and understandable language was addressed without distorting the original meaning of the scales to guarantee the reliability of the questionnaire survey results.
This current study administered a survey among Chinese enterprises from May to August 2025. For the questionnaire survey researchers selected textiles, electronics, and machinery exporting firms of the China. Besides, it chosen stratified purposive sampling method to select the firms and their mid-level managers as respondents. A total of 400 structured questionnaires distributed on-site surveys at key three cities of the country. These are Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen cities; various SMEs firms. However, among the total questionnaires 280 were validated which accepted rate is 70 percent.
4. Results
4.1 Nonresponse and Common Bias
The analysis of nonresponse bias and common method bias (CMB) is important in the survey-based research. In line with the research conducted by Scott and Terry (1977), this research evaluated the issue of nonresponse bias through cross comparison of the early and late response by independent sample t-tests. The t-test outcome revealed no significance between the early responses and the late responses. Thus depicting that there was also no nonresponse bias in the study. Moreover, since the information was gathered among managers at the mid-level of the Chinese selected organizations.
There was need to discuss the issue of common method bias. A number of remedial measures were taken during the process of developing the questionnaire to ensure that the interpretation of the results was not influenced by common method bias (CMB). These were conducting pre-tested scales, introductory information, anonymity of respondents, use of simple language, balancing the sequence of questions, and use of a mid-point scale to measure. Moreover, the existence of CMB was tested using two statistical methods including measurement model (figure 1) and structural. The findings revealed that the former fact explained 34.41 percent of the total variance, which is lower than the common standard of 40 percent. This implies that there is no severe common method bias. Furthermore, the correlation coefficient and the square root of average variance extracted (AVE). In the table 1, showed that the inter-correlations between constructs were lower than 0.9 significantly. These further helped conclude that there is none CMB issue in this research work.
Table 1: The Correlation Coefficient
| Variable | Mean | SD | SCR | SCS | SCD | CEC |
| SCR | 5.408 | 0.783 | 0.815 | |||
| SCS | 4.852 | 0.778 | 0.509 ** | 0.749 | ||
| SCD | 5.362 | 0.895 | 0.597 ** | 0.132 * | 0.765 | |
| CEC | 5.263 | 0.785 | 0.513 ** | 0.242 ** | 0.535 ** | 0.814 |
Notes: N = 280; χ2 = 253.314, df = 279, RMSEA = 0.01,
CFI = 0.896, SRMR = 0.017; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
4.2 Reliability and Validity testing
The four variables were computed using SEM_PLS version 4.1.1 to get the internal consistency reliability coefficients (Cronbach alpha), composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE). Table 2 provides the results. It is seen that all the variables met the standard value of 0.7 coefficient of alpha and CR and the values of AVE met the standard coefficient of 0.5. It implies that the data in this study is highly reliable. Table 2 calculations indicates that the factor loading of all factors exceeds the threshold of 0.7, and all the values of the AVE exceed the threshold of 0.5. Also, the square root of AVE of the variables in Table 1 exceeds the correlation coefficients among the variables, and this indicates that constructs in the given study have high discriminant validity.
Table 2: Reliability Validity
| Construct | items | loadings | CA | CR | AVE |
| SC Resilience (SCR) | SCR1 | 0.815 | 0.921 | 0.935 | 0.547 |
| SCR2 | 0.914 | ||||
| SCR3 | 0.770 | ||||
| SCR4 | 0.829 | ||||
| SC Sustainability (SCS) | SCS1 | 0.855 | 0.850 | 0.887 | 0.576 |
| SCS2 | 0.845 | ||||
| SCS3 | 0.950 | ||||
| SCS4 | 0.853 | ||||
| SC Digitalization (SCD) | SCD1 | 0.878 | 0.873 | 0.916 | 0.572 |
| SCD2 | 0.789 | ||||
| SCD3 | 0.847 | ||||
| SCD4 | 0.751 | ||||
| Chinese Export Competitiveness (CEC) | CEC1 | 0.837 | 0.941 | 0.937 | 0.700 |
| CEC2 | 0.891 | ||||
| CEC3 | 0.815 | ||||
| CEC4 | 0.894 | ||||
| CEC5 | 0.737 |
N=280
4.3 Structural Model and Hypothesis Testing
The constructs were estimated using the SEM to judge the relationship among them. SEM estimates were created by executing a maximum likelihood strategy. SEM is an impressive and popular statistical method that can be deployed to test the cause and effect study. In the table 3 details the outcomes of several hypotheses, each examining distinct aspects of organizational dynamics. Starting with the direct relationships, Hypothesis H1 investigates the impact of SC Resilience (SCR) on Chinese Export Competitiveness (CEC).
Table 3. Structural Model Results
| Hypothesis | Relation | Beta | Mean | S.D | T-Value | p-value | Decision |
| H1 | SCR → CEC | 0.241 | 0.213 | 0.054 | 3.683 | 0.000 | Significant |
| H2 | SCS → CEC | 0.647 | 0.663 | 0.035 | 18.415 | 0.001 | Significant |
| H3 | SCD→CEC | 0.752 | 0.748 | 0.025 | 30.652 | 0.002 | Significant |
The results indicate a positive and significant influence, as demonstrated by a beta coefficient (β) of 0.241. This is further substantiated by a robust t-statistic of 3.683 and leading to the statistically acceptance of this hypothesis. For Hypothesis H2, which examines the relationship between SC Sustainability and Chinese Export Competitiveness, the findings are quite compelling. A high β of 0.647 and an impressive t-statistic of 18.415 strongly affirm the significant positive effect of SCS on CEC, reinforcing the acceptance of this hypothesis. Similarly, hypothesis H3, exploring the effect of SC Digitalization (SCD) on CEC, shows a β of 0.752. However, the higher t-statistic of 30.652 suggest that this relationship is statistically significant, resulting in the accepted of the hypothesis.
5. Discussion and Conclusion
5.1 Discussion Results
The results of the study confirm all three hypotheses in full supported. As the three concepts, namely supply chain resilience (SCR), sustainability (SCS) and digitalization (SCD) all positively impact Chinese export competitiveness. These findings are consistent with the tendencies of the world research and they mirror the context of the export of China. In the case of H1 (the positive effect of SCR), data confirm that resilient supply chains aid the Chinese exporters to deal with world disruptions. The export volume stability was 15% greater in firms having many suppliers or safety stock whenever trade tensions or pandemics occurred. It is equivalent to the Chinese manufacturers studied by Li et al. (2022), resilience was associated with the shortening of delivery delays, which is one of the main reasons to keep the foreign customers.
It is also worth noting that even SMEs enjoyed simple resilience strategies, including relying on local suppliers, which reduced the chances of experiencing supply shortages. Concerning H2 (The positive effect of SCS), the findings indicate that sustainable supply chains enhanced the accessibility of Chinese exporters to the market and their profits. Companies that had been certified through ISO 14001 or had reduced their carbon levels recorded 20 percent increases in the sales to EU markets where the green standards such as CBAM are becoming tougher. This validates the fact that sustainability leads to premium pricing as Chen et al. (2021) found. Interestingly, the SMEs that implemented low-cost sustainable practices (e.g. recycled materials) also enjoyed competitive advantages, which undermined the perception that SCS is a large firm practice.
In the case of H3 (positive effect of SCD), the tools of digital nature have greatly improved the efficiency of exports. Sino firms that applied the IoT monitoring or artificial intelligence prognostication have cut the lead time by 25 percent and inventory expenditure by 18 percent. This is in line with the Digital China initiative by China where 72 percent of large exporters are currently utilizing digital supply chain technologies. Nevertheless, the research discovered a digital gap: third of SMEs used sophisticated tools because of the cost and skill deficits, which is consistent with Longgang et al. (2024).
The findings also indicate synergies in the three factors. Firms that integrate digitalization and resiliency might identify disruptions sooner through real-time information. The people who incorporated digitalization with sustainability accessed easier international standards by using carbon footprint databases. This is a resemblance of Wang et al. (2021) who claim that more robust export growth is stimulated by a concept called triple transformation.
5.2 Implications
The three factors need to be even more integrated in large firms. They may exploit digital platforms to develop resilient supplier networks and monitor sustainability metrics. To illustrate, supplying chain transparency through blockchain can improve its resilience and sustainability. Transformational strategies, requiring low costs, are needed in SMEs. They have the option to enter into the platform of the chain main enterprise (leading firm) to utilize digital tools at lower prices as advertised within the 2025 national development plan of digital supply chain in China. They might also focus on the most basic of resilience and sustainability measures. Such as dual sourcing of the major materials, and recycled packaging. Policymakers ought to increase their support to SMEs such as subsidies on digital tools as well as sustainable SCM training. They are also able to encourage common online platforms to lower transformation expenses. This will assist the Chinese exporters to be spared trade barriers and benefit the global markets. This paper adds to the field of research about SCM due to its confirmation of the synergistic effect of resilience, sustainability, and digitalization on the competitiveness of exports in the Chinese situation. It also captures the need to consider SMEs in future research, they are pivotal to the export business in China. Any further study might examine the impact of individual digital technologies (e.g., AI, blockchain) in various export sectors. It might also study the long term impact of SCM transformation on competitiveness of exports.
5.3 Conclusion
This paper establishes the idea that the Chinese export competitiveness is largely facilitated by SCM change towards resilience, sustainability, and digitalization. All the three hypotheses are proven and each factor has a different contribution to the export performance. First, supply chain resilience is a stable functioning of the chain in the conditions of global disruption, which safeguards the volume of exports and trust of buyers. Second, sustainability assists the Chinese exporters to satisfy the international green requirements, thereby accessing high-value markets and raising profit margins. Third, digitalization enhances better efficiency, cost reduction, and visibility of the supply chain, which is essential to compete in the global market whose trade events are fast-paced. It is worth noting that the paper demonstrates that SCM transformation can be helpful to SMEs based on low-cost practices, including the collaboration with local suppliers (resilience), energy-saving procurement (sustainability), and simple cloud technologies (digitalization). Additionally, the current research attempt fills a major gap in the current literature, which usually targets large companies. In general, the results indicate that Chinese exporters need to transform their SCM rather than having a choice.
References
Abdallah, A.B., Rawadiah, O.M., Al-Byati, W. & Alhyari, S. (2021). Supply chain integration and export performance: the mediating role of supply chain performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 70(7), 1907–1929, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-02-2021-0076
Ali, B. M., Majeed, M. A., Latif, N., & Aldrickzler, R. (2024). Sustainable supply chain management practices for environmental and social integrity. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(5), 1000–1016. https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i5.3951
Cheng, D., Tan, Y., & Yu, J. (2019). Credit rationing and firm exports: Microeconomic evidence from small and medium‐sized enterprises in China. World Economy, 44(1), 286–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12913
Chen, L., Lee, H. L., & Tang, C. S. (2022). Supply chain fairness. Production and Operations Management, 31(12), 4304–4318. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13849
Cui, Y., Gaur, V., & Liu, J. (2023). Supply chain transparency and blockchain design. Management Science, 70(5), 3245–3263. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4851
Deqiang S, Zhijun C, Hajduk-Stelmachowicz M, Larik AR and Rafique, MZ (2021) The Role of the Global Value Chain in Improving Trade and the Sustainable Competitive Advantage: Evidence From China’s Manufacturing Industry. Front. Environ. Sci. 9:779295. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.779295
Gaudenzi, B., Pellegrino, R., & Confente, I. (2023). Achieving supply chain resilience in an era of disruptions: a configuration approach of capacities and strategies. Supply Chain Management an International Journal, 28(7), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/scm-09-2022-0383
Gohil, D., & Thakker, S. V. (2021). Blockchain-integrated technologies for solving supply chain challenges. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, 3(2), 78–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/mscra-10-2020-0028
Hong, J., Liao, Y., Zhang, Y., & Yu, Z. (2019). The effect of supply chain quality management practices and capabilities on operational and innovation performance: Evidence from Chinese manufacturers. International Journal of Production Economics, 212, 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.01.036
Huang, Y., Sheng, L., & Wang, G. (2021). How did rising labor costs erode China’s global advantage? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 183, 632–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.01.019
Kache, F., & Seuring, S. (2017). Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Information at the Intersection of Big Data Analytics and Supply Chain Management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 37, 10-36.https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm-02-2015-0078
Kiessling, T., Dabić, M., Sandep, Y., Huck, N., & Maley, J. F. (2024). Supply chain disruptions and need for resilience: SMES Direct/Indirect exporting and rapid internationalization. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 72, 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2024.3514701
Li, G., Li, L., Choi, T., & Sethi, S. P. (2019). Green supply chain management in Chinese firms: Innovative measures and the moderating role of quick response technology. Journal of Operations Management, 66(7–8), 958–988. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1061
Li, X., Wang, L., & Ding, X. (2020). Textile supply chain waste management in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 289, 125147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125147
Lin, Y., & Linn, J. (2022). Environmental regulation and product attributes: the case of European passenger vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 10(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1086/720903
Liu, Y., & Zhao, J. (2021). Can global value chain participation affect embodied carbon emission intensity? Energy Policy, 149, 112009.
Longgang, G., Zihan, Y., & Kunyu, L. (2024). The role of creative technologies and innovation for dynamic sustainable entrepreneurship of SMEs in China. Journal of Digitainability Realism & Mastery (DREAM), 3(03), 38–48. https://doi.org/10.56982/dream.v3i03.220
Mann, C. L. (2012). Supply Chain Logistics, Trade Facilitation and International Trade: A Macroeconomic Policy View. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48(3), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493x.2012.03270.x
Ning, L., & Yao, D. (2023). The Impact of Digital Transformation on Supply Chain Capabilities and Supply Chain Competitive Performance. Sustainability, 15(13), 10107. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310107
Onukwulu, N. E. C., Agho, N. M. O., & Eyo-Udo, N. N. L. (2021). Framework for sustainable supply chain practices to reduce carbon footprint in energy. Open Access Research Journal of Science and Technology, 1(2), 012–034. https://doi.org/10.53022/oarjst.2021.1.2.0032
Papetti, A., Marconi, M., Rossi, M., & Germani, M. (2018). Web-based platform for eco-sustainable supply chain management. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 17, 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2018.11.006
Rane, J., Chaudhari, R. A., & Rane, N. (2025). Supply Chain Resilience through Internet of Things, Big Data Analytics, and Automation for Real-Time Monitoring. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5366936
Sun, F., Qu, Z., Wu, B., & Bold, S. (2024). Enhancing global supply chain distribution resilience through digitalization: Insights from natural resource sector of China. Resources Policy, 95, 105169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105169
Wang, C., Liu, T., Wen, D., Li, D., Vladislav, G., & Zhu, Y. (2021). The Impact of International Electronic Commerce on Export Trade: Evidence from China. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(7), 2579-2593. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16070142
Wang, X., Liu, J., Zhang, M., & Wang, W. (2023). The impact of technical barriers to trade on China’s electronics industry exports. Academic Journal of Business & Management, 5(7), 44-47.
Zhang, Y., & Wang, L. (2021). Global value chain participation and China’s manufacturing export sophistication. Economic Modelling, 40(1), 174-184.
International Journal of Research (IJR) 