Next Article in Journal
Governmental Anti-Pandemic and Subsidy Strategies for Blockchain-Enabled Food Supply Chains in the Post-Pandemic Era
Next Article in Special Issue
Pattern of Grain Production Potential and Development Potential in China–Mongolia–Russia Economic Corridor
Previous Article in Journal
Measuring the Self-Efficacy of Health Professionals for Practicing Hand Hygiene and Using Gloves: Development and Validation of an Instrument
Previous Article in Special Issue
Returns to Disease Resistance Research When Pest Management Is an Option
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 15
10.3390/su14159498
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Traceability Information Model for Sustainability of Black Soybean Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature Review

by
Syaiful Anwar
1,*,
Tomy Perdana
2,
Meddy Rachmadi
3 and
Trisna Insan Noor
2
1
Doctorate Program of Agricultural Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang 45363, Indonesia
2
Department of Agro Socio-Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang 45363, Indonesia
3
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang 45363, Indonesia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(15), 9498; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159498
Submission received: 21 June 2022 / Revised: 31 July 2022 / Accepted: 1 August 2022 / Published: 2 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Agricultural Production of Crop Plants)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Traceability information as a solution option becomes an important task for the industry in providing products, preparing sustainable raw materials, and ensuring adequate safety quality. The emergence of these demands makes the industry perform tracking in order to prepare product inventories ranging from raw materials to products that have been produced. Based on these reasons, the scope of this paper is to provide a systematic review of the literature on various aspects of implementing information traceability models and sustainability of supply chain on economic, social, environmental, technological, institutional, and infrastructural dimensions. For this purpose, we use the Scopus, Science Direct, EBSCO Host, and ProQuest databases. We used the PRISMA model to identify, filter, and test for the eligibility of articles to be included. We selected 52 articles contributed by this search engine. We found was that between 2018 to 2021 there was increasing interest in this research. The dominant traceability information model in the article uses blockchain, the rest use operations research (OR), Google Earth Engine (GEE), website-based, Unified Modeling Language (UML), Extensible Markup Language (XML), physical markup language (PML), logit, enterprise resource planning (ERP), soft independent modelling of class analogies (SIMCA), and Spatially Explicit Information on Production to Consumption Systems (SEI-PCS).

1. Introduction

As an agricultural product that is consumed globally, the soybean has long been one of the most important commodities in today’s international market [1]. In the global market, soybeans are consumed in various forms such as whole soybeans, soybean oil, and foods made from soybeans [2]. However, only 6% of the total soybean production in the world is used in its whole form (seeds), and the remaining 94% is for the industrial use of soybean oil or producing food products [3] such as tempeh, tofu, soy sauce, tauco, oncom, yogurt, soy milk, soy burgers, and animal feed [4,5,6].
The challenges of globalization are combined with the complexity between production and consumption that continues to increase, such that traceability information from supply chain networks is needed accurately, effectively, and efficiently [7]. When Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) or industries that require soybean raw materials (such as Unilever, Hershey, Mars, Cargill, and Nestle), such as black soybeans for soy sauce making, they redesign strategies to utilize small-scale agriculture in developing countries [8,9]. Not to mention there are consumer concerns about food production, not wanting to buy food products from industries with genetically modified organism (GMO) soybean raw materials [10]. So, it is necessary to track soybean production and processing as well as analyse the basic traceability framework to record information related to product quality and safety [11].
The main use of black soybeans as a raw material is for making soy sauce [12], with the reason that they are preferred because of the natural black color and a delicious and savoury taste [13]. In addition, the advantage of this black soybean is that it has a tannin content of four times that of the yellow soybean; the tannin content in yellow soybeans ranges from 0.63–0.70, while in black soybeans it ranges from 4.10–4.27 [14]. Since black soybeans are a raw material, companies must ensure a stable black soybean supply chain to meet production requirements in terms of quality and quantity [8,9]. The need for black soybeans has increased by 10%, and their availability must be maintained for the sustainability of the soy sauce industry [15].
Basically, this study aims to conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) on the traceability, sustainability, and supply chain of black soybeans. This review complements existing review articles related to supply chain traceability and sustainability information. Table 1 shows the differences between this review and the previous review articles. The review articles listed in Table 1 are classified based on: content analysis, time spent, traceability, supply chain, food/soy products, and sustainability with six dimensions, namely economic (eco), social (soc), environmental (env), technological (tech), institutional (inst), and infrastructural (infra). This traceability information for supply-chain sustainability can affect the economic, social, environmental, technological, institutional, and infrastructural dimensions [1,10,11,16,17,18,19,20]. The symbols Y and N, representing Yes and No, respectively, indicate whether a given article falls within the predefined classification.
The assumption of this research arises because the industry conducts searches in order to prepare product inventories, ranging from raw materials to products that have been produced. This traceability information is present as a solution option and becomes an important task for the industry in providing products by preparing sustainable raw materials and ensuring adequate safety quality [11,21,22,23,24,25]. The development of traceability research related to soybeans is about actor commitment, by analyzing the transparency and sustainability of soybean supply chains [26], and actor contracts, by demonstrating business transactions and soybean supply chain workflows [27]. Then, research on product traceability, process, quality, and transformation in the presentation of the soybean value chain from farmers, elevators, and processors [28], application of a non-GMO soybean certification traceability system [29,30], web-based information on traceability of organic soybean production supply [11], traceability of food products produced from soybeans [31], and traceability of production information by knowing the time of planting and harvesting soybeans as a decision maker [32].
We have a reason to focus on this research considering the importance of traceability information in the sustainable supply of product raw materials and the certainty of the quality of the product itself. In addition, traceability information is needed for actors, for example transactions, activities, effectiveness, and social and environmental impacts, as well as policies and commitments [26]. The behavior of actors also needs to be known, for example, about the role, nature, relationships between actors (contracts, supplier relationships, and their implications), resource-use decisions, steps to overcome risks, buy/sell options, empowerment, and partnerships [26]. Other traceability information about product, process, and product quality was reviewed by three stakeholders of the soybean chain, namely farmers, elevators, and processors [28]. In addition to the three stakeholders above, it is also necessary to know information about seed companies, distributors, retailers, and consumers [27]. Timely and accurate information about the area where crops are grown is essential for estimating crop production, and mapping crops beforehand can benefit decision-making related to crop insurance, land leases, supply chain logistics, and markets [32].
Objectively, the purpose of this research is to provide an overview of the model/methodology of information on the supply of traceability of existing products to date and to review supply-chain sustainability in six dimensions. As a form of the originality of this research and the contribution to knowledge, we would like to provide an overview of other models/methodologies that have not been found on traceability information during this SLR search, in the Section 6 of this study. This paper used the preferred reporting items for this systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines for this SLR. We identify articles from the target database. After that, we complete article screening. Articles, after duplicates are removed, are entered into the eligibility column and filtered according to the research theme. Duplicated articles go into the included column for preservation and use in the bibliography. We analyse backwards and forwards from the articles that were filtered according to the research theme, so that they were finally entered into the included column and retained for analysis. We use VOSviewer for bibliometric use.
Finally, this paper provides a new definition that expands on existing definitions of traceability information for supply-chain sustainability. In addition, this study also examines studies that focus on developing traceability as a potential strategy to respond to the quantity and quality of a product.

2. Theoretical Background

Sustainability of the supply chain means managing supply chain functions, which are in harmony with the social environment, and economic sustainability requirements of stakeholders, to reduce sustainability risks in the supply chain and improve market performance [33]. Another opinion [34] is that a sustainable supply chain not only generates profits while achieving its potential but also is one that is responsible to consumers, suppliers, society, and the environment with innovative strategies, tactics, and technology management. Actually, the supply chain itself is defined as an indispensable element in the global economy: it must be based on the efforts of various industrial stakeholders, such as government and non-governmental organizations [35], while being sustainable as a balance of the environmental, social, and business dimensions [36].
Sustainability of the supply chain means managing the flow of material, information, and capital as well as cooperation among companies along the supply chain, while taking aim at the three dimensions of sustainable development, namely economic, environmental, and social, which must be considered as derived from customer requirements and stakeholders [37]. Supply chain management tools coordinate the flow of material, information, and capital both within and between supply chain partners [38]. The supply chain ensures the production and distribution of products at the right time, keeping in view the needs of consumers, all at the lowest possible cost [39].
The soybean supply chain is a complex network that creates significant economic advantages in many countries but requires many supporting services such as infrastructure and processing [40]. The soybean supply chain refers to carrying out several physical economic activities of soybeans and relevant information from producers to consumers to meet consumer demands [11]. Soybean supply-chain sustainability requires engagement with stakeholders to address environmental and social issues, so that it will improve the economy, where a facilitated mechanism is needed for better governance [1].
Information of traceability is a supply chain problem and is usually a feature of quality assurance schemes [41]. Traceability is a solution option and is an important task for the food industry in providing food products with adequate quality and safety assurance [24]. Thakur and Donnelly [28] define traceability as the ability to trace food, feed, animals, or food-producing substances to be consumed, through all stages of production, processing, and distribution. Traceability should maintain information about cultivation and processing, which can provide some information for quality issues and provide consumers with useful information [11].
Traceability is a systematic record of the supply chain linked to a food product item through the identification and documentation of how the ingredients of the food product are combined [7]. Traceability systems are implemented as a tool to assist in food safety and quality assurance and to achieve consumer trust [25]. Traceability information is needed to make decisions and find out the whereabouts of relevant actors and production volume [42]. The traceability information reports on the various actors involved in the supply chain (including production, transportation, and processing systems), such as the roles and relationships between actors (including contracts and supplier relationships and their power implications), and at the site of production [26].

3. Materials and Methods

One of the main problems in sustainability efforts here is the lack of traceability information in providing stable raw materials in quantity and quality to maintain the safety of the quality of the products they sell. Traceability is a registration system that documents the product path from suppliers through intermediary steps to consumers, where the product is subject to local quality and safety controls [31]. This literature search required a systematic bibliometric literature review to provide new insights and analyse the existing literature [43]. A literature review is a form of research that uses a rigorous research process to collect valid and reliable data to build knowledge [44]. Several strategies, standards, and guidelines can be adopted for developing and collaborating networks and themes in the literature review [45].
For this literature search we have adopted a stepwise approach, namely modelling, analysis, structuring, and writing. We used the Scopus, Science Direct, EBSCO Host, and ProQuest databases for this literature search. As an initial step in the literature search, we begin with determining the research theme, namely with the theme of traceability information, sustainability, supply chain, and soybeans. Then, the keywords A, B, and C were created related to traceability, sustainability, supply chain, and soybean information. After that, we created keyword D to combine keywords B and C as well as keyword E for A and D. Keyword searches (Table 2) were not limited to titles and abstracts but also included article content and articles published before July 2021.
Searching the literature in Table 2, we found articles in the Scopus database with 169 articles, Science Direct 1137 articles, EBSCO Host (Academic Search Ultimate) 1535 articles, and ProQuest (ABI/INFORM) 179 articles. We combined the search results to obtain 3020 articles using code E. The results of this literature search show that the document type is only in the form of articles and in English. We exclude conference papers, reviews, book chapters, books, conference reviews, notes, editorials, letters, and short surveys. After searching for keywords in the database, we approached using PRISMA (Figure 1), identified, filtered, and tested the feasibility of articles and included [46,47,48,49,50,51].
The articles identified in the search in the database, after we combined and used code E (Figure 1), yielded 3020 articles. We screened each article and filtered by research theme, namely traceability, sustainability, supply chain, and soybean information. We can still accept products other than soybeans, because it can add insight to the literature and new knowledge on traceability, sustainability, and supply chain theory. In total, 751 articles were reviewed for feasibility, with the latest issues of traceability information models and the existence of sustainability issues in the supply chain, such as sustainability from the social, economic, environmental, technological, institutional, and infrastructural dimensions, and also including one or more actors in supply-chain sustainability. We also identify sustainability challenges, value chains, mechanisms, consequences, and potential barriers [1].
As a result, we obtained 39 articles after the feasibility test was carried out. We published 712 articles because they were more related to health issues, DNA, molecular biology, fuel, biosensors, biodiesel, biochemistry, transgenics, compound content, animal nutrition, and forest conservation. For the 39 articles that have been reviewed for feasibility, we perform a backward and forward citation analysis of each article. Our aim is to add to the relevant articles in the literature and to find out the origins of traceability theory in the articles. For backward and forward citation analysis, we still use the same databases: Scopus, Science Direct, EBSCO Host, and ProQuest. During backward and forward citations, we also take care to avoid duplication of articles. We obtained 22 additional articles from backward and forward citation analysis. We did a feasibility study of the 22 articles, and we obtained an additional 13 articles; we excluded 9 articles because there is no traceability theory or no traceability model. Finally, we obtained 52 articles that we will analyse, and we also used 751 articles to visualize bibliometrics in VOSviewer.

4. Literature Analysis: Themes and Trends

We obtained 52 articles from 1998 to 2021 (Figure 2). The year 2021 is the year with the highest number of articles for the research themes we are looking for; articles with traceability began in 1998 and articles began to increase in 2018, so we can say that between 2018 and 2021 there is increasing interest in research on traceability information and supply-chain sustainability.
In Table 3, we use the Scimago Journal & Country Rank 2020 (SJR 2020) analysis, best quartiles, h-index, and number of published articles. The result of our analysis is that 40 articles have been published: 18 Q1, 12 Q2, 6 Q3, and 1 Q4. The study of published articles with the highest score of 2.96 (SJR 2020) produced Q1, h-index 138, and 1 article. Articles with the highest publication IEEE Access totalled five articles, Journal of Food Engineering three articles, Sustainability three articles, International Journal of Production Research two articles, Food Control two articles, Information Processing in Agriculture two articles, Applied Sciences two articles, and others one article each.
We present a bibliometric study to investigate and identify indicators of the dynamics and evolution of scientific information (Figure 3). To review the bibliometric results, we use the scientific software VOSviewer 1.6.18. This aims to identify the keywords of this research, namely traceability information and supply-chain sustainability.
In Figure 3, we found from the results of VOSviewer that there were four clusters of 52 words items that appeared. The keyword traceability appears in cluster 4, sustainability in cluster 2, and supply chain in cluster 1. Cluster 1 (red) contain 19 words items such as blockchain, blockchain technology, concept, decentralization, internet, IoT, lack, performance, architecture, security, smart contract, solution, supply chain management, technology, thing, transparency, trust, and year. In cluster 2 (green) there are 17 items such as actor, analysis, consumer, country, demand, farmer, food, impact, market, origin, producer, product, production, study, sustainability, type, and use. Cluster 3 (blue) raises 10 items such as article, factor, field, implementation, importance, literature, opportunity, practitioner, review, and role. In cluster 4 (yellow) there are six words items such as addition, case study, efficiency, food safety, safety, and traceability system.
We further analyse the keywords that we have created, namely traceability and supply-chain sustainability (Figure 4). We haven’t seen many articles using that keyword. If given a network of traceability, it can be seen that blockchain, technology, smart contracts, study, analysis, product, consumer, production, food safety, market, and trust are more often used. For our keywords shown in Figure 4, traceability is in yellow (cluster 4), sustainability is in green (cluster 2), and supply chain is in red (cluster 1). Overall, our keywords are related to all existing clusters.

5. Theoretical Perspectives

5.1. Traceability Information for Sustainability of Supply Chain

The lack of traceability information in supply-chain sustainability raises concerns among consumers and stakeholders about providing important credibility for food information, food quality, and food safety [52]. Traceability here of agricultural products such as low security, unreliability, and difficulty in gathering information [53]. Traceability also plays an important role in ensuring a secure, immutable, and transparent exchange of information between actors in the supply chain [54,55]. Products are tracked by building traceability to obtain information, size, and product safety [56] because traceability can identify and detail the entire process and production of a product’s quality [57]. In addition to product traceability, the transparency of interactions between actors needs to be tracked for common approaches, beliefs, and performance issues [58]. There are three important characteristics for traceability, namely: (1) identification of units/batches of all materials and products, (2) information about when and where they are transferred and changed, and (3) systems that link the data [59]. Overall, good traceability helps minimize the production and distribution of unsafe or poor quality so that traceability is applied as a tool to assist in food safety and quality assurance to achieve consumer confidence [25].
Traceability for supply-chain sustainability can influence economic, social, environmental, technological, institutional, and infrastructural dimensions. For the economic dimension, traceability can reduce losses, increase income, and minimize risk [52,60] as well as be able to allocate resources efficiently [26,61]. Since, if not followed up, sustainability will have risks that can affect the economy, environment, or society [62]. Traceability is also able to maximize the expected profits of supply-chain participants and improve product quality, so that the higher the product quality is, the lower the returns [63,64,65]. So, it must be handled with quality reliability, availability, and risk of disruption [66]. For businesses, traceability can increase the value of business assets and increase profits through reducing costs and risks that will occur [8,16,30]. The product has the quality, and the proportion of contributions will have an effect on customer value [67].
Regarding sustainability for the social dimension, traceability can effectively reduce performance bottlenecks and improve supply-chain-participant communication [68]. However, there needs to be government support, consumer support, and vendor support with management, effective communication [60,64,69], and human resource training [70], so that it can bring about strong trust and transparency among supply chain actors [26,71] and influence the recognition and adoption of community activities [72]. For the environmental dimension, for example, waste management [60,73], pest and disease control [74,75], availability of fertilizers and pesticides [63,64,76,77], and sustainable water management [26,41,78,79].
Technology ensures sustainability under climate change by adopting plant-breeding seed technologies that will enable long-term genetic gain, so as to achieve high and sustainable productivity along with enhanced nutritional properties [74,80]. The use of seeds used in the field needs to be tracked [77] because seeds have a direct impact on production [81]. For the institutional dimension, stakeholders in supply-chain sustainability make internal governance arrangements for their own institutions as well as external stakeholders who seek to influence supply-chain activities [60]. Proactive development of various institutions and innovation regulations for supply-chain sustainability including eco-label, code of ethics, audit procedures, product information systems, procurement guidelines, and eco-branding [61,82]. Sustainability in the infrastructure dimension has increased, such as for roads, storage areas for product conditions, irrigation construction, and port repairs [60].

5.2. Traceability Information Model

The traceability model information from 52 selected articles gave rise to 12 traceability information models (Appendix A). Dominantly brought up was the blockchain model with as many as 22 articles, blockchain-operational research with (OR) 1 article, blockchain–IoT with 1 article, and blockchain–IPFS with 1 article. The rest are one article each, with traceability models such as decision-making evaluation and laboratory (DEMATEL), OR, soft independent modelling of class analogies (SIMCA), Google Earth Engine (GEE), logit, enterprise resource planning (ERP), Spatially Explicit Information on Production to Consumption Systems (SEI-PCS), Unified Modeling Language (UML), Extensible Markup Language (XML), physical markup language (PML), website-based, and website–UML.
Blockchain, as a created traceability information model, aims to provide evidence that new technologies and supply-chain sustainability practices are needed [52] and have the potential to ensure a secure, immutable, and transparent exchange of information between actors [54]. Blockchain as a traceability tool has become an important element in the supply chain, especially in matters sensitive to the safety of sectors such as food [59]. Investing in a blockchain system not only increases product reliability but also improves the performance of every major component of the fresh food supply chain [83]. The decentralized nature of blockchain, with distributed storage and modification of data, provides for fair exchange and secure sharing of data [53]. By using distributed software architectures and advanced computing, blockchain can change the way information is exchanged between actors and track product information [55]. The construction of the blockchain-based traceability system (BTS) found the level of damage to be freshly produced and traceability cost allocation [56]. Blockchain technology is revolutionizing any distributed-data-related application, by adding authentication and trust among stakeholders [84]. Integration of blockchain technology with supply chains can improve performance and maintain traceability, transparency, and product trust [58].
Blockchain as the backbone of Internet of Things (IoT) devices collects data from the field level, and smart contracts regulate interactions between all contributing parties [52,81], because traceability with blockchain–IoT is one of the most promising technologies, which has the advantage of being tamper-resistant and transparent and able to monitor of transactions [85]. IoT technologies, such as WSNs and RFIDs, can be utilized to monitor conditions in product-delivery scenarios [86]. Blockchain technology is combined with IPFS technology, which can ensure data security and effectively overcome data shortages in blockchain capacity [57]. Blockchain-OR constructs a differential model under four modes to explore the interaction between sales mode choice and service strategy [87].
The Information traceability model based on the website produces information on organic soybean products [11] and subsidized fertilizers using the UML method [63]. The traceability model was analysed using Fuzzy, and the combination of these techniques helps in and identifies the application of agri-food supply chains [88]. SIMCA modelling showed the highest percentage in terms of predictive ability of cross-validation for soybean classification [31]. The GEE computational model can access and process a number of multi-sensor images to examine the earliest identifiable time (EIT) of rice, soybean, and maize products [32]. The logit model examines the impact of consumer preference factors on traceability [61]. The DEMATEL approach evaluates the relationship of drivers (main factors), with the effect of traceability system implementation [89]. ERP is a key factor for businesses, with the support of e-procurement as a tool in business relations, specifically for suppliers in soybean supply chain information systems [42]. The SEI-PCS model information relates production impacts to consumption, usually by tracking product origins and socio-environmental impacts [64]. OR investigates and compares two quality control methods, namely inspection control and traceability control, to optimize supply chain quality in the fashion and textile industry [65]. Trace Core XML contains recommendations for the traceability of food-ingredient identification and general standard procedures [7]. The traceability system in the XML implementation was identified and categorized in the first stage, and the second stage was transformed and incorporated into a five-element generic model using PML to track food products [22]. UML is presented for the soybean value chain and models product, quality, and transformation information captured by farmers, elevators, and processors [28].

6. Conclusions

From this literature review, we find that from 2018 to 2021, there was increasing interest in research on information traceability and supply-chain sustainability. The more dominant traceability model information in the article uses blockchain, the rest are OR, GEE, website, UML, XML, PML, logit, ERP, SIMCA, and SEI-PCS. Maybe, in the future, models/methodologies that do not exist on traceability, for example, agent-based modelling or dynamic systems, can be put into practice. This traceability for supply-chain sustainability can affect economic dimensions such as reducing losses, increasing revenues, and minimizing risks. It also affects social dimensions, such as reducing poor performance and improving communications between supply chain actors, as well as influencing the adoption of community activities. Then, for the environmental dimension, for example, sustainability needs better waste management, pest and disease control, availability of fertilizers and pesticides, and water management. For the technological dimension, such as the adoption of plant-nursery technology. For the institutional dimension, for example, stakeholders need to be making internal and external governance arrangements as well as proactive development and innovation arrangements. For the infrastructure dimension, includes road repairs, product storage areas, irrigation construction, and port repairs or product delivery.
The practical implication is that the enormous complexity of supply-chain agricultural products limits the development of efficient and global transparency and traceability solutions, so there is also a crossroads between blockchain technology, supply chain management, and sustainability. In addition, breaches in the supply chain have led to the need to mobilize all involved stakeholders to tackle counterfeiting challenges, and blockchain and IoT technologies are needed to ensure safe and sustainable supply chain operations; moreover, investment in the circular economy is increasing sharply, so that high quality data and methodologies are needed capable of improving, assessing, and documenting implementation processes and outcomes. A traceability system has been developed as a practical tool to increase supply chain (SC) transparency and visibility, especially in health- and safety-sensitive sectors such as food and pharmaceuticals.
The relevant limitations of the traceability system, the emerging technology literature classification level (ETLCL) framework, may not be the best guide when applied to established technologies and the impact of developing traceability models and traceability systems, where there is a relationship between traceability and economic circulars, since it only uses published peer reviewed journals, excluding book chapters or international peer review conferences. In addition, content analysis is too reductive and leads to an increase in abstractions and certain subjective interpretations. From the limitations of this research, future research efforts should focus on how to tackle and overcome. Moreover, researchers and developers should concentrate on how the blockchain can be made even safer and, in parallel, more efficient. Combined use of the framework (ETLCL) and grounded theory, along with 5W+1H, focuses on the detailed analysis of all aspects of specific product supply chains, as this can facilitate the more accurate and effective establishment of a traceability system. Then, there are future research and innovation opportunities related to the circular economy (CE), as circularity brings a new layer to this multi-disciplinary field and future research too, by developing and testing real-life traceability solutions, especially considering the feasibility of creating value-added subjects for aspects related to supply-chain costs.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.A.; methodology, S.A., T.P., M.R. and T.I.N.; software, S.A.; validation, T.P., M.R. and T.I.N.; formal analysis, S.A.; investigation, S.A.; resources, S.A.; data curation, S.A.; writing—original draft preparation, S.A.; writing—review and editing, S.A., T.P., M.R. and T.I.N.; visualization, S.A.; supervision, T.P., M.R. and T.I.N.; project administration, S.A.; funding acquisition, S.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Agency for Extension and Development of Agricultural Human Resources, the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Indonesia and the University of Padjadjaran through the International Open Access Programs (IOAP).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the support from the Agency for Extension and Development of Agricultural Human Resources through scholarship funds, Doctoral Program, for Civil Servants of the Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Indonesia, to support this research as part of the doctoral thesis and Universitas Padjadjaran through the International Open Access Program (IOAP) in the preparation of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. Data synthesis (52 selected articles).
Table A1. Data synthesis (52 selected articles).
No.ReferenceResearch ItemTraceabilityModelSupply ChainSustainabilityProduct
1Anders et al. [80]Breeding Technology---TechnologicalAgriculture
2Medina & Thomé
[60]		Soybean Supply Chain--√Social, economic, environmental, infrastructural, institutionalSoybean
3Nurgazina et al. [52]Technology Applications in Food Supply Chains√Blockchain–IoT√EconomicAgri-food
4Liu & Guo [83]Supply Chain Decision Model Based on Blockchain√Blockchain√-Food
5Kang & Li [53]Blockchain for Data Sharing Traceability System Based on Blockchain Smart Contract√Blockchain--Food
6Aldrighetti, Canavari & Hingley [54]Blockchain Application to Food Traceability√Blockchain--Food
7Ronaghi
[55]		Blockchain Model in Agricultural Supply Chain√Blockchain√-Agriculture
8Wu, Fan & Cao [56]Blockchain Technology in Fresh Product Supply Chain√Blockchain√-Agri-food
9Patel et al. [84]Blockchain for AFSC√Blockchain√-Agri-food
10Rana et al. [58]Blockchain-Based-Model for Digital Supply Chain√Blockchain√-Agri-food
11Pranto et al. [81]Blockchain–IoT Smart Agriculture√Blockchain√TechnologicalAgri-food
12Zhang et al. [57]Blockchain–IPFS for Agriculture Product√Blockchain–IPFS√-Agri-food
13Guo et al.
[87]		Blockchain Anti-Counterfeit Traceability Service Strategy√Blockchain–OR√-Food
14Ekawati et al. [71]Blockchain Tech for White Sugar Supply Chain√Blockchain√SocialSugar
15Kurniawan, Pramono & Amalia
[63]		Website-Based Traceability Information System on Subsidized Fertilizer Supply Chain√Website–UML√Environmental, economicFertilizer
16Srivastava & Dashora
[88]		A Fuzzy ISM Approach for Modeling Electronic Traceability in AFSC√OR√-Agri-food
17Monteiro et al. [76]Model for Pervasive Traceability of Agrochemicals√Blockchain√EnvironmentalAgrochemical
18Hong et al. [72]Application of Blockchain in Food Safety Management√Blockchain√SocialAgri-food
19Kaur, Kalra & Attri
[86]		Secure Product Traceability in Food Supply Chain Based on Blockchain√Blockchain√-Food
20Zhang et al. [85]Blockchain–IoT-Based Traceability System for Frozen Aquatic Product√Blockchain–IoT√-Frozen Aquatic
21Ng & Ker [74]On the Changing Nature of Canadian Crop Yield Distributions---Technological, environmentalSoybean
22Latif et al.
[90]		Blockchain for Product Supply Chain√Blockchain√-Food
23Shahid et al. [91]Blockchain-Based Agri-Food Supply Chain√Blockchain√-Agri-food
24Demestichas et al. [16]Blockchain in Agriculture Traceability Systems√Blockchain√EconomicAgriculture
25Ding et al. [68]Blockchain-Based Double-Layer for Product Traceability System√Blockchain√SocialAgriculture
26Sunny, Undralla & Pillai [92]Supply Chain Transparency through Blockchain-Based Traceability√Blockchain√-Agriculture
27Casino et al. [59]Blockchain-Based Food Supply Chain Traceability√Blockchain√-Agriculture
28Hidalgo et al. [31]Traceability of Soybeans Produced in Argentina Based√SIMCA--Soybean
29You & Dong [32]Examining Earliest Identifiable Timing of Crops Using All Available Sentinel ½ Imagery and Google Earth Engine√GEE--Rice, Soybean, Corn
30Zhang et al. [61]Consumer Perception, Mandatory Labeling, and Traceability of GM Soybean Oil√Logit-Economic, institutionalSoybean
31Hinkes & Peter
[30]		Traceability for Deforestation-Free Supply Chains Applied to Soy Certification√-√EconomicSoybean
32Jose & Shanmugam [93]Supply Chain Issues in SME Food Sector√-√-Agriculture
33Creydt & Fischer [77]Blockchain Algorithm Driven Food Traceability√Blockchain√Environmental,
technological		Food
34Haleem et al. [89]Traceability in Food Supply Chain: A Grey-DEMATEL Spproach√DEMATEL√SocialFood
35Salah et al. [27]Blockchain-Based Soybean Traceability in Agricultural Supply Chain√Blockchain√-Soybean
36Wang et al. [94]Smart Contract-based Product Traceability System in the Supply Chain Scenario√Blockchain√-Agriculture
37Gardner et al. [26]Transparency and Sustainability in Global Commodity Supply Chains√-√Social, economic, environmentalSoybean
38Sjauw-Koen-Fa et al.
[9]		Exploring the Integration of Business and CSR Perspectives in Smallholder Souring--√Social, economicBlack soybean
39Mao et al.
[79]		Innovative Blockchain-Based for Sustainable√Blockchain√EnvironmentalFood
40Duan et al. [69]Implementation of Food Traceability Systems√-√SocialFood
41Morales et al. [42]Information Systems in the Soybean Brazilian Supply Chain√ERP√-Soybean
42Godar et al. [64]Tracing Fine-Scale Socio-Environmental Impacts of Production to Consumption√SEI-PCS√Social, economic, environmentalSoybean
43Aung & Chang
[25]		Traceability in a Food Supply Chain: Safety and Quality Perspectives√-√-Food
44Cheng et al. [65]Optimal Product Quality of Supply Chain Based on Information Traceability in Fashion and Textiles Industry√OR√EconomicTextile
45Storøy, Thakur & Olsen
[7]		The TraceFood Framework for Implementing Traceability in Food Value Chains√XML√-Food
46Wang et al. [11]Study for Organic Soybean Production Information Traceability System Based on Web√Website-based--Soybean
47Thakur dan Donnelly
[28]		Modeling Traceability Information in Soybean Value Chains√UML√-Soybean
48Pelaez et al. [29]Implementation of a Traceability and Certification System for Non-Genetically Modified Soybeans√---Soybean
49Wang et al. [24]Adding Value of Food Traceability to the Business: A Supply Chain Management Approach√-√-Food
50Regattieri, Gamberi & Manzini [23]Traceability of Food Products√---Food
51Folinas, Manikas & Manos [22]Traceability Data Management for Food Chains√XML, PML--Food
52Moe
[21]		Perspectives on Traceability in Food Manufacture√---Food

References

  1. Jia, F.; Peng, S.; Green, J.; Koh, L.; Chen, X. Soybean Supply Chain Management and Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 255, 120254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Fearnside, P.M. Soybean cultivation as a threat to the environment in Brazil. Environ. Conserv. 2001, 28, 23–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Oliveira, G.D.L.T.; Schneider, M. The politics of flexing soybeans: China, Brazil and global agro-industrial restructuring. J. Peasant. Stud. 2016, 43, 167–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ercin, A.E.; Aldaya, M.M.; Hoekstra, A.Y. The water footprint of soy milk and soy burger and equivalent animal products. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 18, 392–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Susilowati, I.; Kirana, M. Re-evaluation of value-chain and the strategy to secure soybeans as the main input for Javanese indigenous dish of “Tahu-Tempe-Kecap” (With a pilot project in Central Java Province). Espacios 2018, 39, 27. [Google Scholar]
  6. Wiloso, E.I.; Sinke, P.; Muryanto; Setiawan, A.A.R.; Sari, A.A.; Waluyo, J.; Putri, A.M.H.; Guinee, J. Hotspot identification in the Indonesian tempeh supply chain using life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess 2019, 24, 1948–1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Storøy, J.; Thakur, M.; Olsen, P. The TraceFood Framework—Principles and guidelines for implementing traceability in food value chains. J. Food Eng. 2013, 115, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sjauw-Koen-Fa, A.R.; Blok, V.; Omta, O. Exploring the applicability of a sustainable smallholder sourcing model in the black soybean case in Java. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2017, 20, 709–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sjauw-Koen-Fa, A.R.; Blok, V.; Omta, O. Exploring the integration of business and CSR perspectives in smallholder souring: Black soybean in Indonesia and tomato in India. J. Agribus. Dev. Emerg. Econ. 2018, 8, 656–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Teuscher, P.; Grüninger, B.; Ferdinand, N. Risk Management in Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM): Lessons Learnt from the Case of GMO-Free Soybeans. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2006, 13, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, X.; Wang, C.; Wang, X.; Zhuang, W. Study for organic soybean production information traceability system based on web. In IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; Volume 345, pp. 567–572. [Google Scholar]
  12. Hizbi, M.S.; Ghulamahdi, M. Pertumbuhan dan Produksi Kedelai Hitam dengan Pemberian Jenis Biomassa dan Dosis Pemupukan Kalsium pada Budidaya Jenuh Air di Lahan Pasang Surut. Bul. Agrohorti 2019, 7, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Ginting, E.; Yulifianti, R.; Tarmizi, H.I.M.d. Varietas Unggul Kedelai Hitam Sebagai Bahan Baku Kecap. In Prosiding Seminar Agroindustri dan Lokakarya Nasional FKPT–TPI; Teknologi Industri Pertanian: Jambi, Indonesia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  14. Wardani, A.K.; Wardani, I.R. Ekplorasi Potensi Kedelai Hitam Untuk Produksi Minuman Fungsional Sebagai Upaya Meningkatkan Kesehatan Masyarakat. J. Pangan Dan Agroindustri 2014, 2, 58–67. [Google Scholar]
  15. Fitry, N.; Herdiansah, D.; Hardiyanto, T. Analisis Nilai Tambah Agroindustri Kecap (Studi Kasus pada Pengusaha Kecap Cap Jago di Desa Cibenda Kecamatan Parigi Kabupaten Pangandaran). J. Ilm. Mhs. Agroinfo Galuh 2017, 4, 352–359. [Google Scholar]
  16. Demestichas, K.; Peppes, N.; Alexakis, T.; Adamopoulou, E. Blockchain in Agriculture Traceability Systems: A Review Featured Application: The paper elaborates on the applicability of blockchain technology in traceability systems of agri-food products. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 22. [Google Scholar]
  17. Paliwal, V.; Chandra, S.; Sharma, S. Blockchain Technology for Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review and a Classification Framework. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gayialis, S.P.; Kechagias, E.P.; Papadopoulos, G.A.; Masouras, D. A Review and Classification Framework of Traceability Approaches for Identifying Product Supply Chain Counterfeiting. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Santana, S.; Ribeiro, A. Traceability Models and Traceability Systems to Accelerate the Transition to a Circular Economy: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dasaklis, T.K.; Voutsinas, T.G.; Tsoulfas, G.T.; Casino, F.A. A Systematic Literature Review of Blockchain-Enabled Supply Chain Traceability Implementations. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Moe, T. Perspectives on traceability in food manufacture. Trend Food Sci. Technol. 1998, 9, 211–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Folinas, D.; Manikas, I.; Manos, B. Traceability data management for food chains. Br. Food J. 2006, 108, 622–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Regattieri, A.; Gamberi, M.; Manzini, R. Traceability of food products: General framework andexperimental evidence. J. Food Eng. 2007, 81, 347–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wang, X.; Li, D.; Li, L. Adding value of food traceability to the business: A supply chain management approach. Int. J. Serv. Oper. Inform. 2009, 4, 232–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Aung, M.M.; Chang, Y.S. Traceability in a food supply chain: Safety and quality perspectives. Food Control. 2014, 39, 172–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gardner, T.A.; Benzie, M.; Börner, J.; Dawkins, E.; Fick, S.; Garrett, R.; Godar, J.; Grimard, A.; Lake, S.; Larsen, R.K.; et al. Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains. World Dev. 2018, 121, 163–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Salah, K.; Nizamuddin, N.; Jayaraman, R.; Omar, M. Blockchain-Based Soybean Traceability in Agricultural Supply Chain. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 73295–73305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Thakur, M.; Donnelly, K.A.-M. Modeling traceability information in soybean value chains. J. Food Eng. 2010, 99, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Pelaez, V.; Aquino, D.; Hofmann, R.; Melo, M. Implementation of a Traceability and Certification System for Non-genetically Modified Soybeans: The Experience of Imcopa Co. in Brazil. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2010, 13, 27–44. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hinkes, C.; Peter, G. Traceability matters: A conceptual framework for deforestation-free supply chains applied to soy certification. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2019, 11, 1159–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hidalgo, M.J.; Fechner, D.C.; Ballabio, D.; Marchevsky, E.J.; Pellerano, R.G. Traceability of soybeans produced in Argentina based on their trace element profiles. J. Chemom. 2020, 34, e3252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. You, N.; Dong, J. Examining earliest identifiable timing of crops using all available Sentinel 1/2 imagery and Google Earth Engine. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2020, 161, 109–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chowdhury, M.M.H.; Quaddus, M.A. Supply chain sustainability practices and governance for mitigating sustainability risk and improving market performance: A Dynamic capability Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 278, 123521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kim, K.; Jeong, B.; Jung, H. Supply chain surplus: Comparing conventional and sustainable supply chains. Flex. Serv. Manuf. J. 2014, 26, 5–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gurzawska, A. Towards Responsible and Sustainable Supply Chains–Innovation, Multi-stakeholder Approach and Governance. Philos. Manag. 2019, 19, 267–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Seuring, S.; Sarkis, J.; Müller, M.; Rao, P. Sustainability and supply chain management–an introduction to the special issue. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1545–1551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Seuring, S.; Müller, M. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1699–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Allaoui, H.; Guo, Y.; Sarkis, J. Decision support for collaboration planning in sustainable supply chains. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 229, 761–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Stadtler, H.; Kilger, C. Supply Chain Management and Advanced Planning—Concepts, Models, Software and Case Studies, 3rd ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  40. Garrett, R.D.; Lambin, E.F.; Naylor, R.L. The new economic geography of land use change: Supply chain configurations and land use in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy 2013, 34, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhao, D.-A.; Teng, C.-F.; Wang, X.-W. Design of traceability system for pork safety production based on RFID. In Proceedings of the 2009 Second International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation, Changsha, China, 10–11 October 2009; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2009; Volume 3, pp. 562–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Morales, V.; Vendrametto, O.; Rois, J.G.M.d.; Toloi, R.G.; Canuto, S.A. Information Systems in the Soybean Brazilian Supply Chain: An Analysis from the Trading Companies Perspective. In Proceedings of the ILS Conference, Bordeaux, France, 1–4 June 2016. [Google Scholar]
  43. Liu, F.; Lai, K.-H.; Cai, W. Responsible Production for Sustainability: Concept Analysis and Bibliometric Review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Dodgson, J.E. Critical analysis: The often-missing step in conducting literature review research. J. Hum. Lact. 2021, 37, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhu, W.; Wang, Z. The Collaborative Networks and Thematic Trends of Research on Purchasing and Supply Management for Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Group, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Yusop, S.R.M.; Rasul, M.S.; Yasin, R.M.; Hashim, H.U.; Jalaludin, N.A. An Assessment Approaches and Learning Outcomes in Technical and Vocational Education: A Systematic Review Using PRISMA. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Utomo, D.S.; Onggo, B.S.; Eldridge, S. Applications of agent-based modelling and simulation in the agri-food supply chains. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 269, 794–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Liu, H.; Zhou, X.; Yu, G.; Sun, X. The effects of the PRISMA statement to improve the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions for patients with heart failure. Int. J. Nurs. Pract. 2019, 25, e12729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Tounakaki, O.; Tsakou, A.; Malamas, A.; Chrisoula, D.; Ioannis, S.; Elias, Z. Assessment of reporting quality of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials in neovascular age-related macular degeneration published from April 2014 to May 2018 using PRISMA statement. Int. Ophthalmol. 2020, 40, 1163–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Hermiatin, F.R.; Handayati, Y.; Perdana, T.; Wardhana, D. Creating Food Value Chain Transformations through Regional Food Hubs: A Review Article. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Nurgazina, J.; Pakdeetrakulwong, U.; Moser, T.; Reiner, G. Distributed Ledger Technology Applications in Food Supply Chains: A Review of Challenges and Future Research Directions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kang, Y.; Li, Q. Design and Implementation of Data Sharing Traceability System Based on Blockchain Smart Contract. Sci. Programing 2021, 2021, 1455814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Aldrighetti, A.; Canavari, M.; Hingley, M.K. A delphi study on blockchain application to food traceability. Int. J. Food Syst. Dyn. 2021, 12, 6–18. [Google Scholar]
  55. Ronaghi, M.H. A blockchain maturity model in agricultural supply chain. Inf. Process. Agric. 2021, 8, 398–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wu, X.Y.; Fan, Z.P.; Cao, B.B. An analysis of strategies for adopting blockchain technology in the fresh product supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2021, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhang, L.; Zeng, W.; Jin, Z.; Su, Y.; Chen, H. A Research on Traceability Technology of Agricultural Products Supply Chain Based on Blockchain and IPFS. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2021, 2021, 3298514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Rana, S.K.; Kim, H.C.; Pani, S.K.; Rana, S.K.; Joo, M., II; Rana, A.K.; Aich, S. Blockchain-based model to improve the performance of the next-generation digital supply chain. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Casino, F.; Kanakaris, V.; Dasaklis, T.K.; Moschuris, S.; Stachtiaris, S.; Pagoni, M.; Rachaniotis, N.P. Blockchain-based food supply chain traceability: A case study in the dairy sector. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 59, 5758–5770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Medina, G.; Thomé, K. Transparency in Global Agribusiness: Transforming Brazil’s Soybean Supply Chain Based on Companies’ Accountability. Logistics 2021, 5, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhang, M.; Fan, Y.; Chen, C.; Cao, J.; Pu, H. Consumer perception, mandatory labeling, and traceability of GM soybean oil: Evidence from Chinese urban consumers. GM Crop Food 2021, 12, 36–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Bashiri, M.; Tjahjono, B.; Lazell, J.; Ferreira, J.; Perdana, T. The Dynamics of Sustainability Risks in the Global Coffee Supply Chain: A Case of Indonesia–UK. Sustainability 2021, 13, 589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kurniawan, M.; Pramono, D.; Amalia, F. Design of a website-based traceability information system on subsidized fertilizer supply chain. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 924, 012050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Godar, J.; Persson, U.M.; Tizado, E.J.; Meyfroidt, P. Towards more accurate and policy relevant footprint analyses: Tracing fine-scale socio-environmental impacts of production to consumption. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 112, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Cheng, Z.; Xiao, J.; Xie, K.; Huang, X. Optimal Product Quality of Supply Chain Based on Information Traceability in Fashion and Textiles Industry: An Adverse Logistics Perspective. Math Probl. Eng. 2013, 2013, 629363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Sanjaya, S.; Perdana, T. Logistics system model development on supply chain management of tomato commodities for structured market. Procedia Manuf. 2015, 4, 513–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Utami, H.N.; Sadeli, A.H.; Perdana, T. Customer Value Creation of Fresh Tomatoes Through Branding and Packaging as Customer Perceived Quality. J. Int. Soc. Southeast Asian Agric. Sci. 2016, 22, 123–136. [Google Scholar]
  68. Ding, Q.; Gao, S.; Zhu, J.; Yuan, C. Permissioned Blockchain-Based Double-Layer Framework for Product Traceability System. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 6209–6225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Duan, Y.; Miao, M.; Wang, R.; Fu, Z.; Xu, M. A framework for the successful implementation of food traceability systems in China. Inf. Soc. 2017, 33, 226–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Rajesh, R. Sustainable supply chains in the Indian context: An integrative decision-making model. Technol. Soc. 2020, 61, 101230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ekawati, R.; Arkeman, Y.; Suprihatin; Sunarti, T.C. Proposed Design of White Sugar Industrial Supply Chain System based on Blockchain Technology. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2021, 12, 459–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kaur, W.; Mao, J.; Wu, L.; Pu, X. Public cognition of the application of blockchain in food safety management—Data from China’s Zhihu platform. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 303, 127044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. França, A.S.L.; Neto, J.A.; Gonçalves, R.F.; Almeida, C.M.V.B. Proposing the use of blockchain to improve the solid waste management in small municipalities. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 244, 118529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ng, H.; Ker, A.P. On the Changing Nature of Canadian Crop Yield Distributions. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2021, 46, 101–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zhu, Z.; Chu, F.; Dolgui, A.; Chu, C.; Zhou, W.; Piramuthu, S. Recent Advances and Opportunities in Sustainable Food Supply Chain: A Model-oriented Review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 5700–5757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Monteiro, E.S.; Righi, R.da.R.; Barbosa, J.L.V.; Alberti, A.M. APTM: A Model for Pervasive Traceability of Agrochemicals. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 8149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Creydt, M.; Fischer, M. Blockchain and more—Algorithm driven food traceability. Food Control 2019, 105, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Zhao, G.; Liu, S.; Lopez, C.; Lu, H.; Elgueta, S.; Chen, H.; Boshkoska, B.M. Blockchain technology in agri-food value chain management: A synthesis of applications, challenges and future research directions. Comput. Ind. 2019, 109, 83–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Mao, D.; Hao, Z.; Wang, F.; Li, H. Innovative Blockchain-Based Approach for Sustainable and Credible Environment in Food Trade: A Case Study in Shandong Province, China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Anders, S.; Cowling, W.; Pareek, A.; Gupta, K.J.; Singla-Pareek, S.L.; Foyer, C.H. Gaining Acceptance of Novel Plant Breeding Technologies. Trends Plant Sci. 2021, 26, 575–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Pranto, T.H.; Noman, A.A.; Mahmud, A.; Haque, A.B. Blockchain and smart contract for IoT enabled smart agriculture. PeerJ Comput. Sci. 2021, 7, e407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Boström, M.; Jönsson, A.M.; Lockie, S.; Mol, A.P.; Oosterveer, P. Sustainable and responsible supply chain governance: Challenges and opportunities. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Liu, Z.Y.; Guo, P.T. Supply Chain Decision Model Based on Blockchain: A Case Study of Fresh Food E-Commerce Supply Chain Performance Improvement. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2021, 2021, 5795547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Patel, N.; Shukla, A.; Tanwar, S.; Singh, D. KRanTi: Blockchain-based farmer’s credit scheme for agriculture-food supply chain. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2021, e4286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Jiong, Z.; Zhang, X.; Li, B.; Chen, E. Development and assessment of blockchain-IoT-based traceability system for frozen aquatic product. J. Food. Process Eng. 2021, 44, e13669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Kaur, R.; Kalra, S.; Attri, V.K. An Approach for Secure Product Traceability in Food Supply Chain Based on Blockchain. Turk. J. Comput. Math Educ. 2021, 12, 3286–3298. [Google Scholar]
  87. Guo, F.; Ma, D.; Hu, J.; Zhang, L. Optimized Combination of e-commerce Platform Sales Model and Blockchain Anti-Counterfeit Traceability Service Strategy. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 138082–138105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Srivastava, A.; Dashora, K. A Fuzzy ISM approach for modeling electronic traceability in agri-food supply chain in India. Ann. Oper. Res. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Haleem, A.; Khan, S.; Khan, M.I. Traceability implementation in food supply chain: A grey-DEMATEL approach. Inf. Processing in Agric. 2019, 6, 335–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Latif, R.M.A.; Farhan, M.; Rizwan, O.; Hussain, M.; Jabbar, S.; Khalid, S. Retail level Blockchain transformation for product supply chain using truffle development platform. Clust. Comput. 2020, 24, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Shahid, A.; Almogren, A.; Javaid, N.; Al-Zahrani, F.A.; Zuair, M.; Alam, M. Blockchain-Based Agri-Food Supply Chain: A Complete Solution. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 69230–69243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Sunny, J.; Undralla, N.; Madhusudanan Pillai, V. Supply chain transparency through blockchain-based traceability: An overview with demonstration. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 150, 106895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Jose, A.; Shanmugam, P.V. Supply chain issues in SME food sector: A systematic review. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2020, 17, 19–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Wang, S.; Li, D.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J. Smart contract-based product traceability system in the supply chain scenario. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 115122–115133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 14 09498 g001 550
Figure 1. PRISMA model. Source: own elaboration.
Figure 1. PRISMA model. Source: own elaboration.
Sustainability 14 09498 g001
Sustainability 14 09498 g002 550
Figure 2. Articles by year. Source: own elaboration.
Figure 2. Articles by year. Source: own elaboration.
Sustainability 14 09498 g002
Sustainability 14 09498 g003 550
Figure 3. Network of all keywords. Source: own elaboration.
Figure 3. Network of all keywords. Source: own elaboration.
Sustainability 14 09498 g003
Sustainability 14 09498 g004 550
Figure 4. Network of keyword traceability, sustainability, and supply chain. Source: own elaboration.
Figure 4. Network of keyword traceability, sustainability, and supply chain. Source: own elaboration.
Sustainability 14 09498 g004
Table
Table 1. Differences between the relevant literature reviews and this review.
Table 1. Differences between the relevant literature reviews and this review.
SourceContent Analysis?
Y/N		Article Time Span (Year)Traceability
(Y/N)		Supply Chain? (Y/N)ProductSustainability
Food (Y/N)Soy (Y/N)Eco (Y/N)Soc (Y/N)Env (Y/N)Tech (Y/N)Inst (Y/N)Infra (Y/N)
[16]Y2002–2020YYYNNNNNNN
[17]Y1967–2020YYYNYYYYNN
[18]Y2006–2022YYYNNNNYNN
[19]Y1998–2021YYYNYNNYNN
[20]Y1992–2022YYYNYYYYNN
This ArticleY1998–2022YYNYYYYYYY
Source: own elaboration.
Table
Table 2. Use of keywords in the database.
Table 2. Use of keywords in the database.
CodeKeywordsScopusScience DirectEBSCO Host (Academic Search Ultimate)ProQuest (ABI/INFORM)Total
ATraceability or “information traceability” or “information model”46.11379.7362.5965.592134.037
BSustainability and “supply chain” or “supply chains”105.9636.9124.86726.099143.841
CSoybean or “tropical soybean” or “local soybean” or “black soybean”480.86015.47126.9288.406531.665
DB and C2.4775.5306474479.101
EA and D1691.1371.5351793.020
Source: own elaboration.
Table
Table 3. SJR, best quartile, h-index, and articles.
Table 3. SJR, best quartile, h-index, and articles.
JournalSJR 2020Best QuartileH-IndexArticles
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing2.96Q11381
Trends in Food Science & Technology2.68Q11881
World Development2.39Q11751
Journal of Cleaner Production1.94Q12001
Ecological Economics1.92Q12021
International Journal of Production Research1.91Q11422
Plant Science1.51Q11501
Food Control1.37Q11252
Computers and Industrial Engineering1.32Q11281
Journal of Food Engineering1.29Q11793
Information Society1.13Q1751
Annals of Operations Research1.07Q11051
GM Crops & Food1.06Q1271
PeerJ Computer Science0.81Q1241
Information Processing in Agriculture0.77Q1272
Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal0.62Q1291
Sustainability0.61Q1853
IEEE Access0.59Q11275
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics0.55Q2481
British Food Journal0.51Q2801
Journal of Food Process Engineering0.51Q2451
Journal of Chemometrics0.47Q2921
International Food and Agribusiness Management Review0.47Q2351
Journal of Advances in Management Research0.46Q2201
Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies0.46Q2151
Security and Communication Networks0.45Q2431
Applied Sciences0.44Q2522
Logistics0.4Q2211
Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies0.37Q2471
Cluster Computing0.34Q3501
International Journal on Food System Dynamics0.34Q281
Scientific Programming0.27Q3361
Mathematical Problems in Engineering0.26Q3621
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society0.26Q3391
Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education0.22Q331
International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications0.19Q3181
International Journal of Services Operations and Informatics0.15Q4131
International Federation for Information Processing--371
IOP Conference Series. Earth and Environmental Science--261
International Conference on Information Systems, Logistics and Supply Chain--51
Note: - data not available. Source: own elaboration.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Anwar, S.; Perdana, T.; Rachmadi, M.; Noor, T.I. Traceability Information Model for Sustainability of Black Soybean Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9498. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159498

AMA Style

Anwar S, Perdana T, Rachmadi M, Noor TI. Traceability Information Model for Sustainability of Black Soybean Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2022; 14(15):9498. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159498

Chicago/Turabian Style

Anwar, Syaiful, Tomy Perdana, Meddy Rachmadi, and Trisna Insan Noor. 2022. "Traceability Information Model for Sustainability of Black Soybean Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature Review" Sustainability 14, no. 15: 9498. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159498

APA Style

Anwar, S., Perdana, T., Rachmadi, M., & Noor, T. I. (2022). Traceability Information Model for Sustainability of Black Soybean Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 14(15), 9498. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159498

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop