Strategi Sourcing Berkelanjutan MBG Berbasis Advanced Analytics: Analisis PESTLE dan Rantai Pasok
Bilah Samping Artikel
Isi Artikel Utama
Abstrak
The Free Nutritious Meal Program (MBG) is a national strategic initiative facing complex challenges in balancing supply security and environmental sustainability. This study aims to implement an Advanced Analytics framework to evaluate supplier performance based on the Triple Bottom Line principle. Using real logistics datasets for strategic commodities (Rice and Soybeans), this study applies the Weighted Scoring Model algorithm with parameters of logistics efficiency (40%), environmental impact (30%), and volume security (30%). The analysis of the supply chain shows a total carbon footprint (Scope 3) of 112.11 tons of CO2 with an average distribution distance of 297 KM. The model successfully identified the best "Green Suppliers," with the Pelalawan–Siak route recording the highest sustainability score (0.89) due to the balance of volume and distance. This study recommends the adoption of a data-driven scoring system to mitigate carbon emissions in the MBG supply chain.
Rincian Artikel
Referensi
[2] “Nutrition guidelines and standards for school meals: A report from 33 low and middle-income countries,” 2019.
[3] A. Rejeb, J. G. Keogh, and K. Rejeb, “Big data in the food supply chain: a literature review,” Journal of Data, Information and Management, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 33–47, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s42488-021-00064-0.
[4] “UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 18 TAHUN 2012,” 2012.
[5] J. Elkington, “Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business,” Environmental Quality Management, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 37–51, 1998, doi: 10.1002/tqem.3310080106.
[6] M. Sharma, S. Luthra, S. Joshi, and A. Kumar, “Developing a framework for enhancing survivability of sustainable supply chains during and post COVID-19 pandemic,” 2022.
[7] D. Ivanov, “Viable supply chain model: integrating agility, resilience and sustainability perspectives—lessons from and thinking beyond the COVID-19 pandemic,” Ann Oper Res, vol. 319, no. 1, pp. 1411–1431, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10479-020-03640-6.
[8] S. K. Srivastava, “Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review,” Mar. 2007. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00202.x.
[9] A. C. . McKinnon, Green logistics : improving the environmental sustainability of logistics. Kogan Page, 2010.
[10] The greenhouse gas protocol : the GHG protocol for project accounting. World Business Council for Sustainable Development ; World Resources Institute, 2005.
[11] K. Govindan, S. Rajendran, J. Sarkis, and P. Murugesan, “Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review,” J Clean Prod, vol. 98, pp. 66–83, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046.
[12] R. A. Hadiguna, “Manajemen Rantai Pasok Agroindustri: Pendekatan Berkelanjutan untuk Pengukuran Kinerja dan Penilaian Risiko,” 2016.
[13] D. Ivanov and A. Dolgui, “A digital supply chain twin for managing the disruption risks and resilience in the era of Industry 4.0,” Production Planning and Control, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 775–788, 2021, doi: 10.1080/09537287.2020.1768450.