Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/153182
|
| Title: | 由永續平衡計分卡探索企業之永續轉型成熟度：以台灣永續績優ICT企業為例
Exploring Corporate Sustainability Transition Maturity through the Sustainable Balanced Scorecard: A Study of ESG Leading ICT Companies in Taiwan |
| Authors: | 葉奕佳
Yeh, Yi-Chia |
| Contributors: | 黃正忠
蘇威傑
Huang, Cheng-Chung
Su, Wei-Chieh
葉奕佳
Yeh, Yi-Chia |
| Keywords: | 永續平衡計分卡
永續轉型成熟度
資訊通信技術（ICT）產業
道瓊永續指數（DJSI）
Sustainability Balanced Scorecard
Sustainability Transition Maturity
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Industry
Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-09-04 14:10:50 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 隨著全球氣候變遷、資源枯竭及社會不平等問題日益加劇，永續發展已成為國際社會和企業界的共同議題。雖然大型企業在永續轉型方面的成功經驗為業界樹立了典範，但中小企業在推動永續轉型過程中，往往因資源有限及專業知識不足而面臨諸多挑戰。本研究聚焦於2023年入選道瓊永續指數（DJSI）的15家台灣資訊通信技術（ICT）產業績優企業，旨在探討這些企業的永續發展現狀和轉型成熟度，並建立一套適合於ICT產業的永續平衡計分卡（Sustainability Balanced Scorecard, SBSC）。此計分卡將傳統的四大構面擴展為包含環境、社會和治理（ESG）三個維度的4X3矩陣結構，並輔以永續轉型成熟度模型的六個階段（未認知、合規、發現、發展、先進、變革性）來量化評估企業的永續轉型成熟度。
分析15家企業研究結果顯示，內部流程構面與利害關係人構面分別佔據了40%和35%的關注度，為企業現階段發展重點；同時，ESG三個維度的發展相對均衡。就ICT三大子產業的轉型成熟度而言，電子設備與零組件產業的平均成熟度最高（4.48），其次為通訊服務產業（4.43），半導體產業則位居第三（4.19），整體ICT產業達到「先進」階段（4.36）。綜合分析重大性永續議題的關注度與永續成熟度，顯示企業在財務構面的轉型成熟度表現突出，但該構面的關注度相對較低。相反地，企業對內部流程構面的關注度較高，然而其平均成熟度偏低，顯示資源分散可能對發展效果產生影響。
本研究建議企業採取漸進式導入策略，靈活選擇適合自身情況的永續轉型議題並分階段推行，並參考成功企業的經驗。結合永續平衡計分卡與永續轉型成熟度模型，企業不僅能有效識別其永續發展的關鍵議題，還能根據不同的成熟度階段提供具體行動指引。研究結果對ICT產業的永續發展具有重要意涵，亦可作為策略制定者推動永續發展策略的重要參考。未來研究可擴大研究範圍，涵蓋更多ICT子產業，以提供更廣泛的參考依據。
As global climate change, resource depletion, and social inequality intensify, sustainable development has become a shared concern for both the international community and the business sector. While large enterprises have set a benchmark with their successful experiences in sustainable transformation, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) often face numerous challenges in promoting sustainable transformation due to limited resources and insufficient expertise. This study focuses on 15 top-performing companies in Taiwan’s Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industry that were selected for the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) in 2023. It aims to explore their current state of sustainable development and transformation maturity, and to establish a Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) tailored to the ICT industry. This scorecard expands the traditional four perspectives to a 4x3 matrix structure that incorporates Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) dimensions, and is supplemented by a six-stage sustainability transformation maturity model (Unaware, Compliance, Discovery, Development, Advanced, Transformational) to quantify the maturity of corporate sustainability transformation.
The analysis of the 15 companies reveals that the internal process perspective and the stakeholder perspective account for 40% and 35% of the focus, respectively, and are key areas of development for the companies. Meanwhile, the development across the three ESG dimensions is relatively balanced. In terms of transformation maturity across the three major sub-sectors of the ICT industry, the electronic equipment and components sector has the highest average maturity (4.48), followed by the communication services sector (4.43), with the semiconductor sector ranking third (4.19). Overall, the ICT industry has reached the "Advanced" stage (4.36). A comprehensive analysis of the focus on material sustainability issues and sustainability maturity shows that companies perform particularly well in terms of financial maturity, though the focus on this perspective is relatively low. Conversely, while companies place higher focus on the internal process perspective, their average maturity in this area is lower, suggesting that resource dispersion may impact development effectiveness.
This study suggests that companies adopt a phased and flexible approach to introducing sustainable transformation issues that suit their specific circumstances, and refer to the experiences of successful enterprises. By integrating the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard with the sustainability transformation maturity model, companies can not only effectively identify key issues in their sustainable development but also provide concrete action guidance based on different maturity stages. The research findings hold significant implications for the sustainable development of the ICT industry and can serve as an important reference for policymakers in promoting sustainable development strategies. Future research could expand the scope of study to cover more ICT sub-sectors, providing a broader basis for reference. |
| Reference: | 中文文獻
工研院 (2021)，鏈國際：強韌協創 永續共榮，https://ieknet.iek.org.tw/IEKTopics/2021/，擷取日期：2024年7月2日。
元太科技股份有限公司 (2022)，2022元太科技企業永續報告書，https://esg.eink.com/tw/report/03240104091s168293/2022-ESG-report，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
日月光投資控股股份有限公司 (2022)，2022日月光投資控股永續報告書， https://www.aseglobal.com/ch/pdf/aseh-2022-csr-ch-final.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
中華電信股份有限公司 (2022)，中華電信2022年永續報告書，\https://www.cht.com.tw/zh-TW/home/cht/-/media/Web/PDF/Sustainability/CSR-Report-Download/CSR/2022/2022_ESG_C.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
世界先進積體電路股份有限公司 (2022)，2022世界先進積體電路股份有限公司永續報告書，https://media-vis.todayir.com/20230829135733376812103_tc.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
台達電子工業股份有限公司 (2022)，2022台達電子永續報告書，https://filecenter.deltaww.com/about/download/2022_Delta_ESG_Report_CH.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
台灣大哥大股份有限公司 (2022)，台灣大哥大2022永續暨整合性報告/永續報告書，https://corp.taiwanmobile.com/pdf/2022_C_ESG.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
台灣經濟部 (2022)，當前經濟情勢概況(專題：數位轉型時代－我國ICT產業發展)，https://www.moea.gov.tw/mns/dos/bulletin/Bulletin.aspx?kind=23&html=1&menu_id=10212&bull_id=9910，擷取日期：2023年10月16日。
台灣積體電路製造股份有限公司 (2022)，台積公司111年度永續報告書，http://2255660.com/profile.html，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
台灣區電機電子工業同業公會（2023），台灣ICT產業供應鏈全球布局，台北：台灣區電機電子工業同業公會，https://www.teema.org.tw/exhibition-detail.aspx?infoid=46361，擷取日期：2024年1月20日。
台灣主計處 (n,d,)，什麼是「ICT產業」，https://www.stat.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=2679&s=103044，擷取日期：2023年10月13日。
行政院主計總處 (2022)，產業經濟統計簡訊，https://www.moea.gov.tw/mns/dos/bulletin/Bulletin.aspx?kind=9&html=1&menu_id=18808&bull_id=9756，擷取日期：2023年11月12日。
宏碁股份有限公司 (2022)，2022宏碁永續報告書，https://www.acer.com/sustainability/uploads/files/shares/sustainability-report/2022_Acer_Sustainability_Report_zh.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
光寶科技股份有限公司 (2022)，2022光寶永續報告書，https://www.liteon.com/upload/media/esg/06%E8%B3%87%E8%A8%8A%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%83/%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A%E6%9B%B8/2022%20liteon_esg%20report_ch_vf.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
胡憲倫、程大哲、許家偉 (2011)，構永續性平衡計分卡之研究－以半導體產業為例，中山管理評論，19(3)，頁709-741。
南亞科技股份有限公司 (2022)，南亞科技2022年永續報告書，https://www.nanya.com/ESG/storage/file/10789b99-b6fb-4f51-ad2b-387e1e135ea3?v=1719741371，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
研華股份有限公司 (2022)，研華科技2022企業永續報告書，https://advcloudfiles.advantech.com/csr/Report/2022ESG.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
國家發展委員會 (2024)，2024年我國國家永續發展指標：永續發展目標的訂定與推動經驗回顧及前瞻，https://www.ndc.gov.tw/，擷取日期：2024年5月25日。
國家發展委員會產業發展處 (2024)，六大核心戰略產業整體推動進度與展望，台灣經濟論衡，22(1)，4-21。
國家科學及技術委員會 (2024)，國家科技發展策略與布局專題報告，https://ppg.ly.gov.tw/ppg/SittingAttachment/download/2024040246/40250007616410210002.pdf，擷取日期：2024年5月22日。
黃莉雯 (2022)，半導體產業永續性平衡計分卡標竿架構之建構－以台灣積體電路製造與聯華電子為例，國立臺灣大學碩士論文，台灣台北。
群創光電股份有限公司 (2022)，2022群創光電永續報告書，https://www.innolux.com/Uploads/CsrReport/2022_INX%20ESG%20REPORT_CN_0954c9.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
遠傳電信股份有限公司 (2022)，2022遠傳電信企業永續報告書，https://corporate.fetnet.net/content/dam/fetnet/user_resource/corp/documents/csr/reportdownload/2022%E9%81%A0%E5%82%B3%E9%9B%BB%E4%BF%A1%E4%BC%81%E6%A5%AD%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A%E6%9B%B8.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
聯華電子股份有限公司 (2022)，2022聯華電子永續報告書，https://www.umc.com/upload/media/07_Sustainability/72_Reports_and_Results/1_Corporate_Sustainability_Reports/CSR_Reports/CS_Reort_chinese_pdf/2022_CSR_report_chi/UMC_2022_Sustainability_Report_Ch.pdf，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
穩懋半導體股份有限公司 (2022)，2022穩懋半導體永續報告書，https://www.winfoundry.com/wincsr/tw/downlaod.html，擷取日期：2023年11月25日。
英文文獻
Andrade, R. C., & El Rafei, S. (2023). The journey on the sustainability maturity curve. Nexio Projects Blog. Retrieved March 6, 2024, from https://blog.nexioprojects.com/the-journey-on-the-sustainability-maturity-curve
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039
Bieker, T., & Waxenberger, B. (2002). Sustainability Balanced Scorecard and business ethics: Developing a balanced scorecard for integrity management. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(2), 77-89.
Brammer, S., Hoejmose, S., & Marchant, K. (2011). Environmental management in SMEs in the UK: Practices, pressures and perceived benefits. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(7), 423-434. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.717
British International Investment. (2022). TCFD maturity matrix. Retrieved October 12, 2023, from https://toolkit.bii.co.uk/climate-change/tcfd-toolkit/resources/
British Standards Institution, Forum for the Future, & AccountAbility. (2003). The SIGMA Sustainability Scorecard. The SIGMA Project. Retrieved November 8, 2023, from http://www.projectsigma.com
British Standards Institution. (2017). BS 8001:2017 Framework for implementing the principles of the circular economy in organizations – Guide. Retrieved February 10, 2024, from https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/framework-for-implementing-the-principles-of-the-circular-economy-in-organizations-guide?version=standard
Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360-387. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030810882816
Dias-Sardinha, I., & Reijnders, L. (2005). Evaluating environmental and social performance of large Portuguese companies: A balanced scorecard approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14(2), 73-91. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.421
Dow Jones Sustainability Indices. (2023). 2023 Annual Review. Retrieved September 10, 2024, from DJSI website: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/sustainability/dow-jones-sustainability-world-index/
Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2016). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability. Organization & Environment, 29(2), 156-174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575176
Eccles, R. G., & Serafeim, G. (2013). The performance frontier: Innovating for a Sustainable Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 91(5), 50-60.
Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835-2857. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1984
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing.
Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M. J. (2001). Sustainability in action: Identifying and measuring the key performance drivers. Long Range Planning, 34(5), 585-604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(01)00084-X
Epstein, M. J., & Wisner, P. S. (2001). Using a balanced scorecard to implement sustainability. Environmental Quality Management, 11(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.1300
Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M. J. (2003). Making the business case for sustainability: Linking social and environmental actions to financial performance. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2003(9), 79-96.
Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2002). The sustainability balanced scorecard – Linking sustainability management to business strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(5), 269-284. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.339
Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2012). Is green and profitable sustainable? Assessing the trade-off between economic and environmental aspects. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.02.001
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.
Friedrich, R., Ullrich, S., & Hill, K. (2023). How tech and telecom can create a triple win in green. Boston Consulting Group. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://www.bcg.com/publications/2023/role-of-ict-in-sustainable-development-triple-green-win
Garengo, P., Biazzo, S., & Bititci, U. S. (2005). Performance measurement systems in SMEs: A review for a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(1), 25-47.
Global Reporting Initiative. (2022). GRI Standards. Retrieved February 6, 2024, from https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/
Guinée, J. B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Zamagni, A., Masoni, P., Buonamici, R., Ekvall, T., & Rydberg, T. (2011). Life cycle assessment: Past, present, and future. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(1), 90-96.
Hansen, E. G., & Schaltegger, S. (2016). The sustainability balanced scorecard: A systematic review of architectures. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(2), 193-221.
Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M. B. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Executive, 17(2), 56-69.
Hubbard, G. (2009). Measuring organizational performance: beyond the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18(3), 177-191. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.564
IBM Research. (2007). Interpreting the balanced scorecard: An investigation into performance analysis and bias. Measuring Business Excellence. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from https://research.ibm.com/publications/interpreting-the-balanced-scorecard-an-investigation-into-performance-analysis-and-bias
International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation. (2018). SASB standards. Retrieved April 7, 2024, from https://sasb.ifrs.org/standards/
International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation. (2023). IFRS sustainability standards. Retrieved March 27, 2024, from https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/
Jelavić, S. R., & Vulić, M. P. (2021). Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: Four performance perspectives or more?. Strategic Management, 26(4), 37-49.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2000). Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it. Harvard Business Review, 78(5), 167-176.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part II. Accounting Horizons, 15(2), 87-160.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2000). The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2007). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75-85.
Kaplan, R. S., & Mikes, A. (2008). Managing risks: A new framework. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 48-60.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2013). The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Harvard Business Review Press.
Lim, S., Lee, S., & Lee, Y. (2022). Big data applications in environmental management: A systematic review. Journal of Environmental Management, 305, 114-140.
Lundvall, B.-Å. (2007). Innovation system research: Where it came from and where it might go. Globelics Working Paper Series, No. 2008-01.
Malmodin, J., & Lundén, D. (2018). The Energy and Carbon Footprint of the Global ICT and E&M Sectors 2010–2015. Sustainability, 10(9), 3027.
Marr, B., & Schiuma, G. (2003). Business performance measurement–past, present and future. Management Decision, 41(8), 680-687.
McKinsey & Company. (2020). How COVID-19 has pushed companies over the technology tipping point—and transformed business forever. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/how-covid-19-has-pushed-companies-over-the-technology-tipping-point-and-transformed-business-forever
McLennan, M. (2021). The global risks report 2021 16th edition. Cologny, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-global-risks-report-2021/
McLennan, M. (2023). The global risks report 2023 18th edition. Cologny, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. Retrieved September 3 2023, from https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2023/
Melnyk, S. A., Narasimhan, R., & DeCampos, H. A. (2013). Supply chain design: issues, challenges, frameworks, and solutions. International Journal of Production Research, 52(7), 1887-1896.
MSCI ESG Research. (n.d.). ESG ratings. Retrieved April 5, 2024, from https://www.msci.com/esg-ratings
Nikolaou, I. E., Tsalis, T. A., Grigoroudis, E., & Tsagarakis, K. P. (2013). A framework development to evaluate the needs of SMEs in order to adopt a sustainability-balanced scorecard. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 10(3-4), 179-197.
Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (1993). Capability maturity model for software, version 1.1. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 7-14.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62-77.
Revell, A., Stokes, D., & Chen, H. (2009). Small businesses and the environment: Turning over a new leaf?. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(5), 273-288. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.628
Roca, L. C., & Searcy, C. (2012). An analysis of indicators disclosed in corporate sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production, 20(1), 103-118.
Sari, Y., Hidayatno, A., Suzianti, A., Hartono, M., & Susanto, H. (2021). A corporate sustainability maturity model for readiness assessment: a three-step development strategy. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 70(5), 1162-1186.
Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2017). Contemporary environmental accounting: Issues, concepts and practice. Routledge.
Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2006). Managing and measuring the business case for sustainability: Capturing the relationship between sustainability performance, business competitiveness and economic performance. The International Journal of Business in Society, 6(2), 182-190.
Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: Categories and interactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222-237.
Sterling, T. (2023). How artificial intelligence (AI) will strengthen the balanced scorecard (BSC) strategy framework. Balanced Scorecard Institute. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from https://balancedscorecard.org/blog/how-artificial-intelligence-ai-will-strengthen-the-balanced-scorecard-bsc-strategy-framework/
Sulaiman, M., & Mitchell, F. (2005). Utilising a typology of management accounting change: An empirical analysis. Management Accounting Research, 16(4), 422-437.
Szóka
, K. (2022). Conceptual model for developing a Sustainability Balanced Scorecard - taking into account ESG aspects. Mathematical Modeling, 6(1), 20-22.
Taticchi, P., Tonelli, F., & Pasqualino, R. (2015). Performance measurement of sustainable supply chains: A literature review and a research agenda. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64(6), 744-783. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2013-0056
Tseng, M. L., Lim, M. K., Wu, K. J., Zhou, L., & Bui, T. D. (2019). A novel approach for enhancing green supply chain management using converged interval-valued triangular fuzzy numbers-grey relational analysis. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 150, 104407.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2021). Technology and Innovation Report 2021: Catching Technological Waves – Innovation with Equity. Retrieved from https://unctad.org/webflyer/technology-and-innovation-report-2021
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). Addressing the digital divide. Retrieved February 7, 2024, from https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2021/11/addressing_the_digital_divide.pdf
United Nations Industrial Development Organization. (2012). Industrial Development Report 2012: UNIDO. Retrieved May 6, 2024, from https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/2013-04/13-80554_AR2012_Ebook_0.pdf
United Nations Global Compact. (2015). Guide to corporate sustainability. Retrieved March 13, 2024, from https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/1151
United Nations Global Compact. (2022). Urgent action required to deal with increasing risks from climate change. Retrieved February 10, 2024, from https://unglobalcompact.org/news/4874-02-28-2022
Verfaillie, H. A. (2000). Measuring eco-efficiency: a guide to reporting company performance. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2000.
Retrieved May 10, 2024, from https://www.gdrc.org/sustbiz/measuring.pdf
World Bank. (2019). Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Finance. Retrieved June 19, 2024, from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/smefinance
World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2010). Vision 2050: The new agenda for business. Retrieved May 22, 2024, from https://www.wbcsd.org/resources/vision-2050-the-new-agenda-for-business/
World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2019). Sustainable supply chain management. Retrieved February 10, 2024, from https://www.wbcsd.org/Clusters/Circular-Economy/Resources/Resource-Efficiency-in-Value-Chains
≫ World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2016). Sustainable supply chain management guides. Retrieved March 2, 2024, from https://www.wbcsd.org/resources/sustainable-supply-chain-management-guides/
Zhang, G., Yang, Y., & Yang, G. (2023). Smart supply chain management in Industry 4.0: the review, research agenda and strategies in North America. Annals of Operations Research, 322(2), 1075-1117. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所(MBA學位學程)
111363060 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111363060 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [企業管理研究所（MBA學位學程）] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 306001.pdf | | 3653Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
