Beyond the Hype: A Systematic Exploration of Emerging Thematic Trends and Persistent Challenges in Combating Greenwashing Across Global Supply Chains

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General Comment:

This systematic review aims to explore how research has addressed greenwashing in supply chains by identifying emerging themes and pinpointing gaps that must be addressed in combating the practice. While the topic is interesting, the theoretical and empirical sections require deeper discussion and greater rigor. The paper has potential, but the following areas need improvement: Problematization of the literature and Discussion of the thematic analysis

The discussion of the identified themes often pertains to greenwashing in general rather than the specific focus of this research: global supply chains. The manuscript should be revised to elaborate on its contribution to this specific scope.

Abstract:

• The statement "research on greenwashing remains limited" is inaccurate. Greenwashing research is currently booming (e.g., Montgomery, A. W., Lyon, T. P., & Barg, J. (2024). No End in Sight? A Greenwash Review and Research Agenda. Organization & Environment, 37(2), 221-256. DOI:10.1177/10860266231168905). The claim should be revised.

Introduction:

• The topic is not clearly introduced. The section on increased consumer and stakeholder concern about sustainability does not adequately present the research context. I recommend to revise the introduction to clearly articulate the study's focus on greenwashing in global supply chains from the beginning.
• The discussion should specifically highlight greenwashing in supply chains, rather than addressing greenwashing in general.
• Justification for SLR: The purpose of the systematic literature review (SLR) should be more compelling. The manuscript should answer: Why is an SLR on greenwashing in supply chains needed? What is the value of an SLR in this context beyond summarizing research and identifying new avenues? Greater problematization of the literature is needed to justify the study’s relevance.

Section: Persistence of Greenwashing

Greenwashing research is introduced at a superficial level, and several sentences lack clarity or supporting references.

Specific Issues:

• "Greenwashing practices have emerged due to the sustainability boom in developing nations, preventing third-world countries from making sustainable progress." → Unclear meaning. Needs revision.
• P.3 (102-105): "The main driver of greenwashing is the inability of the consumer to detect the authenticity of the product he is purchasing, and most businesses ride on it, making companies create a green image to appeal to their environmental concerns while avoiding substantial accountability." → Not clearly formulated. Needs rewording.
• P.3 (105-108): "Minimal research exists on managing greenwashing in environmental, social, and governance (ESG). This leads to a lack of uniformity, regulatory gaps, and inadequate accountability systems, allowing companies to continue with greenwashing practices." → No justification provided for this claim. Add references or rephrase.

Keywords Selection and Data Analysis:

The term "greenwashing" appears in various forms (greenwash, green wash, green-washing, green washing). These variations should be explicitly included as alternative keywords.

Figure 3:

Why are US articles (10 publications) not highlighted? The distinction between greyed-out countries and colored countries (even when both have only one publication) is unclear.

Thematic Analysis (P.8)

The study claims to offer "a thorough evaluation of the literature, highlighting its emerging themes, research gaps, and main findings." Provide more details about thematic analysis:How were the themes identified? Why are these themes relevant for global supply chain management? A more systematic explanation is needed.

Discussion:

• Standardization of Regulatory Policies: The section is insightful but redundant in parts.
• Role of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): This subsection could be further elaborated using stakeholder theory, particularly in relation to Habermasian dialogue and political CSR, which argue for dialogue between NGOs and companies.
• Industry-Specific Cases: The analysis of themes should be explicitly connected to their relevance for global supply chains.
• Theoretical Framework (figure 4): Needs better justification and discussion. The framework’s elements and relationships should be linked to the discussion. One idea could be to restructure the discussion around the framework, presenting themes with reference to the framework.

Conclusion:

The following sentence is unclear: "However, many firms still engage in greenwashing due to the high cost of implementing these technologies, as the financial burden of adopting them is higher than the perceived risks." This suggests that greenwashing is caused by high technology costs, whereas greenwashing is a much more complex strategic decision.

Final Notes:

Overall Assessment: The manuscript has some potential but requires substantive improvements in theoretical depth, problematization of literature, thematic discussion, and justification of the framework. A clearer focus on greenwashing in supply chains (rather than general greenwashing) is necessary to enhance its contribution to the field.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Even though I am not a native speaker, I suggest that English could be improved

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Please see the attach response. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

When reading the paper, my initial impression is that this is a well written paper with an important topic written in a structured way. The paper includes a comprehensive systematic review of greenwashing in global supply chains. I also find the PRISMA framework useful to conduct the review. Further, the paper includes inclusion of gaps in the literature, which is useful for future research.

I especially like the inclusion of section 2.3. Combatting Greenwashing in Global Supply Chains –   since this captures the headline and thereby gives a good logic of the paper’s structure.

Here's some suggestions for improvement:

2.2 Since the paper seeks to elaborate on new research within greenwashing, it would be beneficial to include more recent cases. Shell – 2007, Mattel 2007, Nestle 2010. Also, more recent research papers should be included.  

The introduction of the paper starts with historical examples before discussing research gaps. I would prefer the opposite, to raise the interest of the paper.

The paper sort of takes for granted that firms are “victims” of green washing.  Could it be that some do it on purpose – given that they expect not to be caught?

Scopus is a great source, although I would expect the 58 papers to be cross-checked against other databases, such as Web of Science and Google Scholar.

Can the data be used to explain/discuss why there is difference between industries/sectors?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Please see the attached response. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf