EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 388 (2023) E3S Web of Conf., 388 (2023) 01027 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web of Conf.
Volume 388, 2023
The 4th International Conference of Biospheric Harmony Advanced Research (ICOBAR 2022)
Article Number 01027
Number of page(s) 5
Section Sustainable Infrastucture, Industry, Architecture, and Food Technology
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338801027
Published online 17 May 2023
  1. S. A. R. Khan, Z. Yu, and K. Farooq, “Green capabilities, green purchasing, and triple bottom line performance: Leading toward environmental sustainability,” Bus. Strateg. Environ., 2022. [Google Scholar]
  2. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our common future: report of the world commission on environment and development, vol. 4, no. 1. 1987. [Google Scholar]
  3. T. Santika et al., “Impact of palm oil sustainability certification on village well-being and poverty in Indonesia,” Nat. Sustain. 2020 42, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 109–119, Nov. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  4. M. L. Tseng, T. P. T. Tran, H. M. Ha, T. D. Bui, and M. K. Lim, “Sustainable industrial and operation engineering trends and challenges Toward Industry 4.0: a data driven analysis,” https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2021.195022 7, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 581–598, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  5. G. Miotto, M. P. López, and J. R. Rodríguez, “Gender Equality and UN Sustainable Development Goals: Priorities and Correlations in the Top Business Schools’ Communication and Legitimation Strategies,” Sustain. 2019, Vol. 11, Page 302, vol. 11, no. 2, p. 302, Jan. 2019. [Google Scholar]
  6. R. Provasi and M. Harasheh, “Gender diversity and corporate performance: Emphasis on sustainability performance,” Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 127–137, Jan. 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. H. M. Alzoubi, G. Ahmed, A. Al-Gasaymeh, and B. Al Kurdi, “Empirical study on sustainable supply chain strategies and its impact on competitive priorities: The mediating role of supply chain collaboration,” Manag. Sci. Lett., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 703–708, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. S. K. Mangla, S. Kusi-Sarpong, S. Luthra, C. Bai, S. K. Jakhar, and S. A. Khan, “Operational excellence for improving sustainable supply chain performance,” Resour. Conserv. Recycl., vol. 162, p. 105025, Nov. 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. BPS-Statistic Indonesia, Statistik Kelapa Sawit Indonesia 2021. Badan Pusat Statistik, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  10. A. I. Suroso, H. Tandra, Y. Syaukat, and M. Najib, “The issue in Indonesian palm oil stock decision making: Sustainable and risk criteria,” Decis. Sci. Lett., vol. 10, pp. 241–246, 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. R. Wardhani and Y. Rahadian, “Sustainability strategy of Indonesian and Malaysian palm oil industry: a qualitative analysis,” Sustain. Accounting, Manag. Policy J., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1077–1107, 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. E. I. K. Putri et al., “The Oil Palm Governance: Challenges of Sustainability Policy in Indonesia,” Sustain. 2022, Vol. 14, Page 1820, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 1820, Feb. 2022. [Google Scholar]
  13. Marimin et al., “Supply chain performance measurement and improvement of palm oil agroindustry: A case study at Riau and Jambi Province,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, vol. 443, no. 1. [Google Scholar]
  14. I. Juwana, N. Muttil, and B. J. C. Perera, “Indicator-based water sustainability assessment - A review,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 438. pp. 357–371, 2012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. H. Warid and M. Asrol, “GIS-based Sustainability Assessment for Palm Oil Industry,” TEM J., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1432–1438, 2022. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. M. Asrol, H. Warid, A. A. N. P. Redi, and Y. T. Prasetyo, “A Framework for GIS-Based Sustainability Assessment for Palm Oil Industry: An Overview,” in International Conference on Biospheric Harmony Advanced Research (ICOBAR), 2021. [Google Scholar]
  17. Y. Phillis, V. S. Kouikoglou, and V. Manousiouthakis, “A Review of Sustainability Assessment Models as System of Systems,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 15–25, 2010. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. M. Yani et al., “An Adaptive Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Model for Sustainability Assessment of Sugarcane Agroindustry Supply Chain,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 5497–5517, 2022. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. F. Ecer, “Sustainability assessment of existing onshore wind plants in the context of triple bottom line: a best-worst method (BWM) based MCDM framework,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 28, no. 16, pp. 19677–19693, Apr. 2021. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. A. Francis and A. Thomas, “System dynamics modelling coupled with multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) for sustainability-related policy analysis and decision-making in the built environment,” Smart Sustain. Built Environ., vol. ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  21. T. J. Pitcher and D. Preikshot, “RAPFISH: A rapid appraisal technique to evaluate the sustainability status of fisheries,” Fish. Res., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 255–270, 2001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. P. Papilo, E. Hambali, I. S. Sitanggang, Marimin, E. Hambali, and I. S. Sitanggang, “Sustainability index assessment of palm oil-based bioenergy in Indonesia,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 196, pp. 808–820, Sep. 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. I. K. Sriwana, Y. Arkeman, D. Syah, and M. Marimin, “Sustainability improvement in cacao supply chain agro-industry,” World Rev. Sci. Technol. Sustain. Dev., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 256–275, 2017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. F. S. Wiryawan, Marimin, and T. Djatna, “Value chain and sustainability analysis of fresh-cut vegetable: A case study at SSS Co.,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 260, 2020. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.