Agricultural Economics and Development

Agricultural Economics and Development

Identification and Prioritization of Key Economic, Social, and Environmental Indicators in Sustainable Food Supply Chain Using Fuzzy DEMATEL Technique

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
jamshid ebrahimpuor samani 1
Sayyed Mohammad Davoodi 2
1 Assistant professor. Department of Industrial Management, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2 Sayyed Mohammad Reza DavoodiAssociate Professor of Management, Dehaghan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Dehaghan, Iran.
10.30490/aead.2025.367399.1663
Abstract
Introduction: The agricultural food supply chain plays a pivotal role in ensuring food security, safeguarding public health, and advancing sustainable development goals. In the face of rapid population growth, climate change, economic fluctuations, and geopolitical uncertainties, the need for resilient and sustainable supply chains has become more pressing than ever. A robust agricultural food supply chain not only guarantees the steady availability of nutritious food but also supports rural livelihoods, stimulates economic growth, and preserves environmental resources for future generations. However, the transition toward sustainability is complex and challenging. In many agricultural regions, outdated infrastructure, limited access to advanced technologies, fragmented market structures, and insufficient farmer training hinder progress. Additionally, political instability, environmental degradation, and the impact of international sanctions exacerbate these constraints. Overcoming such challenges requires a holistic approach that integrates economic, social, and environmental priorities into coherent strategies and feasible policies. Although the global body of literature on sustainable supply chains has grown significantly, many studies tend to focus on individual dimensions such as economic performance, social welfare, or environmental protection, without adequately capturing their interdependencies. This lack of integration limits the ability of policymakers and practitioners to address systemic issues effectively. There is a pressing need for a comprehensive evaluation framework that identifies, prioritizes, and analyzes sustainability indicators in an integrated manner. Such a framework would allow for the identification of both the most critical factors and the causal (cause-and-effect) relationships that underpin the performance of the supply chain. In response to this gap, this study aimed at identifying, prioritizing, and analyzing the most influential indicators of a sustainable agricultural food supply chain in 2024. A mixed-method approach was employed, integrating qualitative insights with quantitative modeling to deliver a robust analytical framework. 
Materials and Methods: The research was conducted in two main phases (including qualitative and quantitative) following a sequential design to ensure analytical depth. In the qualitative phase, a systematic review of 44 scholarly articles published between 2015 and 2024 was conducted to develop a preliminary conceptual model. The literature encompassed diverse themes, including resource efficiency, socio-economic equity, environmental stewardship, and technology adoption. Building on this model, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 purposively selected experts, each with at least 10 years of experience and specialized knowledge in sustainable agricultural food supply chains. The interviews continued until theoretical saturation was achieved, ensuring a comprehensive capture of perspectives. The data from interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis guided by Clarke’s six-stage coding process, incorporating both open and axial coding. MAXQDA 2022 software was used to facilitate the analysis and organization of data. The paradigmatic model derived from the coding process was refined through iterative feedback sessions with participating experts. To ensure validity and reliability, validation measures such as member checking, peer debriefing, and consensus assessment were applied. In the quantitative phase, the indicators validated in the qualitative phase were evaluated using the fuzzy Delphi method to reach consensus on their relative importance. The same group of experts participated in this stage, leading to the identification of 12 high-priority indicators. These indicators were subsequently analyzed using the fuzzy DEMATEL method to determine the causal relationships and to classify indicators based on their level of influence and dependence. This analysis made it possible to distinguish between driving factors and dependent factors, providing strategic insight into where interventions would be most effective.
Results and Discussion: The study results revealed that among the three dimensions of sustainability (i.e. economic, social, and environmental), the economic dimension held the greatest importance in influencing the overall sustainability of the agricultural food supply chain. Within this dimension, support performance, adoption of region-specific technologies, and enhancement of farmers’ knowledge and skills were identified as the most effective criteria. In the social dimension, political, social, and cultural factors emerged as critical, particularly in shaping stakeholder engagement and policy effectiveness. The persistent effects of economic sanctions were also highlighted as significant barriers that would limit access to technology, financial resources, and international market opportunities. In the environmental dimension, challenges such as water scarcity, soil degradation, and biodiversity loss were recognized as major threats to long-term sustainability. The fuzzy DEMATEL analysis indicated that environmental management challenges, political-social-cultural factors, and sanctions were among the primary driving forces in the system, influencing multiple other indicators. These findings highlighted the interconnected nature of sustainability challenges and emphasized the need for integrated strategies. For example, adopting advanced yet locally appropriate technologies could improve productivity while reducing environmental impact, and implementing inclusive social policies could enhance farmer participation and resilience. Without addressing these interdependencies, isolated measures are unlikely to yield sustainable outcomes.
Conclusion and Suggestions: This study provided a comprehensive framework for understanding and enhancing the sustainability of agricultural food supply chains. The study findings highlighted the need for strategies that would address economic, social, and environmental factors in a balanced and interconnected manner. Based on the results, several strategic recommendations were proposed: developing targeted support policies, including subsidies, tax incentives, and access to affordable credit, to strengthen farmers’ financial stability and encourage the adoption of sustainable practices; promoting the adoption of locally appropriate technologies that improve productivity while conserving resources and reducing environmental impacts; strengthening capacity-building initiatives to equip farmers with the skills and knowledge required to adapt to changing market and environmental conditions; mitigating the impact of political and economic sanctions by fostering domestic innovation, enhancing regional trade partnerships, and diversifying export markets; and implementing comprehensive environmental management policies focusing on water conservation, soil fertility restoration, biodiversity preservation, and climate adaptation. By integrating these measures, stakeholders can build a more resilient, adaptable, and future-ready agricultural food supply chain. The methodological approach of combining qualitative thematic analysis with fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making techniques offers a replicable model for similar sustainability assessments in other sectors. Achieving sustainability in the agricultural food supply chain is not a one-off goal but a continuous process that demands collaboration among policymakers, producers, researchers, and consumers. Prioritizing key indicators, understanding their interactions, and implementing evidence-based strategies will enable significant progress toward food security, public health improvement, and sustainable development in a complex and uncertain global context
Keywords
Dimensions of Sustainability
Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Sustainable Supply Chain
Agro-Food Industry

Subjects

1. Aghajani, D., Seraji, H., Kaur, H., & Vilko, J. (2024). A sustainable integrated model for multi-objective planning of an agri-food supply chain under uncertain parameters: a case study. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 188, 108766. DOI: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2024.108766.
2. Ahmadpour, M., Movahhedi, M. M., & Gholipour Kanaani, Y. (2023). Developing a strategic model for evaluating the performance of a sustainable supply chain in the service sector (case study: Social Security Organization of Iran). Supply Chain Management, 25(78), 1-8. [In Persian]
3. Akbari, M. & Parvin, F. (2022). Identification of the components/dimensions of entrepreneurial development in the agricultural sector based on information technology. Entrepreneurship and Sustainable Agricultural Development Studies, 9(3), 71-86. [In Persian]
4. Akyüz, Y., Salali, H. E., Atakan, P., Günden, C., Yercan, M., Lamprinakis, L., ... & Knez, M. (2023). Case study analysis on agri-food value chain: a guideline-based approach. Sustainability, 15(7), 6209.‏
5. Arda, O. A., Montabon, F., Tatoglu, E., Golgeci, I., & Zaim, S. (2023). Toward a holistic understanding of sustainability in corporations: resource-based view of sustainable supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 28(2), 193-208.‏
6. Asim, Z., Sorooshian, S., Al Shamsi, I. R., Muniyanayaka, D., & Al Azzani, A. (2025). Supply chain 4.0: a source of sustainable initiative across the food supply chain: trends and barriers. In: Human perspectives of industry 4.0 organizations (pp. 17-37). CRC Press.‏
7. Aungkulanon, P., Atthirawong, W., Luangpaiboon, P., & Chanpuypetch, W. (2024). Navigating supply chain resilience: a hybrid approach to agri-food supplier selection. Mathematics, 12(10), 1598.‏
8. Božič, K., & Dimovski, V. (2019). Business intelligence and analytics use, innovation ambidexterity, and firm performance: a dynamic capabilities perspective. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(4), 101578.‏
9. Chitete, M. M. N., Mgomezulu, W. R., Bwanaisa, M., Damazio, C., Kaunda, R. T., & Dzanja, J. (2024). A systematic review of the performance of agricultural marketing in Malawi. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 60(5), 2829-2846. DOI: 10.1177/00219096231224679.
10.   Constantine, K., Makale, F., Mugambi, I., Rware, H., Chacha, D., Lowry, A., ... & Williams, F. (2023). Smallholder farmers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards biological control of papaya mealybug in Kenya. CABI Agriculture and Bioscience, 4(1), 1-15.‏
11.   Cricelli, L., Mauriello, R., & Strazzullo, S. (2024). Technological innovation in agri-food supply chains. British Food Journal, 126(5), 1852-1869.
12.   de Carvalho, M. I., Relvas, S., & Barbosa-Póvoa, A. P. (2022). A roadmap for sustainability performance assessment in the context of the agri-food supply chain. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 34, 565-585.
13.   Deng, Q., Huang, X., Zou, J., & He, Y. (2024). Screening of sustainable supply chain performance evaluation indicators based on the ill-conditioned index cycle method. Plos One, 19(3), e0293038.‏
14.   Dhal, S. B., & Kar, D. (2024). Transforming agricultural productivity with AI-driven forecasting: innovations in food security and supply chain optimization. MDPI Forecasting, 6(4), 925-951.‏
15.   Ebrahimpour Samani, J., Khani, N., Davoodi, S. M. R., & Yazdani., B. (2025). Identification and prioritization of economic indicators for the sustainability of the food and agriculture supply chain: an analytical approach using the fuzzy DEMATEL technique. Agricultural Economics, 19(1), 23-46. DOI: 10.22034/iaes.2024.2024181.2051. [In Persian]
16.   Elufioye, O. A., Ike, C. U., Odeyemi, O., Usman, F. O., & Mhlongo, N. Z. (2024). AI-driven predictive analytics in agricultural supply chains: a review: assessing the benefits and challenges of AI in forecasting demand and optimizing supply in agriculture. Computer Science & IT Research Journal, 5(2), 473-497.
17.   FAO (2023). Food control systems — Food safety and quality. Food and Agriculture Organization of the Ubited Nations (FAO). Retrieved at 18 April, 2023. Available at https://www.fao.org/food-safety/food-control-systems/en.
18.   Fattahzadeh, H. S., Hariri, N., & Behjati, S. (2025). Identifying and categorizing the processes and components of agricultural supply chain knowledge management based on block chain technology. Librarianship and Information Organization Studies, 36(3), 224-253. DOI: 10.30484/nastinfo.2025.3664.2302. [In Persian]‏
19.   Ghasemi, R., Rayatpisheh, H., Haddadi, S., & Rayatpiseh, H. (2017). Identifying and prioritizing indicators involved in the sustainability of the food supply chain. Environmental Science and Technology, 19(Special Issue No. 4), 369-382. [In Persian]
20.   González-Mon, B., Mancilla-García, M., Bodin, Ö., Malherbe, W., Sitas, N., Pringle, C. B., & Schlüter, M. (2024). The importance of cross-scale social relationships for dealing with social-ecological change in agricultural supply chains. Journal of Rural Studies, 105, 103191.‏
21.   Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., & Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 66-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046.
22.   Hajivand, S., Moghaddasi, R., Zeraatkish, Y., & Mohammadinejad, A. (2020). An application of the stochastic frontier gravity approach (the case of Iran’s potential agricultural exports). International Journal of Analysis and Applications, 18(3), 482-492.‏
23.   Hamzaoğlu, N. M. (2023). The impact of unionization in the agricultural sector: farmer perceptions and behavior. Hacettepe University, Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 41(Agriculture Special Issue), 51-60.
24.   Handayati, Y., & Widyanata, C. (2024). An effective food waste management model for the sustainable agricultural food supply chain. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 10290.
25.   Huddiniah, E. R., & Pradana, H. (2023). Impacts of product variety and supply chain networks on the influx of information exchange in industry applications. Smart Cities, 6(2), 1059-1086.‏
26.   Hugos, M. H. (2024). Essentials of supply chain management. John Wiley & Sons.
27.   Huseynov, R., Aliyeva, N., Bezpalov, V., & Syromyatnikov, D. (2024). Cluster analysis as a tool for improving the performance of agricultural enterprises in the agro-industrial sector. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(2), 4119-4132.
28.   Ibba, M. I., Timsina, J., Odjo, S., Palacios, N., Singh, P. K., He, X., ... & Sonder, K. (2025). Challenges in the global cereal supply chain. In: Food safety (pp. 245-270). Elsevier.‏
29.   Jones, S. K., Monjeau, A., Perez-Guzman, K., & Harrison, P. A. (2023). Integrated modeling to achieve global goals: lessons from the Food, Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land-use, and Energy (FABLE) initiative. Sustainability Science, 18(1), 323-333.‏
30.   Kalfas, D., Kalogiannidis, S., Papaevangelou, O., Melfou, K., & Chatzitheodoridis, F. (2024). Integration of technology in agricultural practices towards agricultural sustainability: a case study of Greece. Sustainability, 16(7), 2664.
31.   Karimi, A., Hassanpoor, H., & Mosadegh Khah, M. (2024). Providing a model for analysis of disorders and resilience of the food supply chain. Journal of Improvement Management, 18(2), 48-73. DOI: 10.22034/jmi.2024.449228.3074. [In Persian]
32.   Khan, S. A. R. Zkik, K., Belhadi, A., & Kamble, S. S. (2021). Evaluating barriers and solutions for social sustainability adoption in multi-tier supply chains. International Journal of Production Research, 59(11), 3378-3397. DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2021.1876271….
33.   Lei, J. (2024). Efficient strategies on supply chain network optimization for industrial carbon emission reduction. arXiv:2404.16863. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.16863.
34.   Luo, L., Liu, Y., Zhug, Y., Chow, C. W., Clos, I., & Ravenden, R. (2022). A multi-objective optimization approach for supply chain design of alum sludge-derived supplementary cementitious material. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 17, e01156. DOI: 10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01156.‏
35.   McCorriston, S., & MacLaren, D. (2024). Market intermediaries, storage, and policy reforms. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75(1), 114-136.
36.   Munir, M. A., Hussain, A., Farooq, M., Rehman, A. U., & Masood, T. (2024). Building resilient supply chains: empirical evidence on the contributions of ambidexterity, risk management, and analytics capability. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 200, 123146.
37.  Ndondo, J. T. K. (2023). Review of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) strategic priorities on food safety. In: Ahmad, R. S. (Ed.) Food safety—New insights, 1st ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, Volume 3, pp. 1-11.
38.   Oliver, M., & Matheus, A. (2020). Current challenges of the European nuclear supply chain. EU Publications. DOI: 10.2760/23903.
39.   Proença, J. F., Torres, A. C., Marta, B., Silva, D. S., Fuly, G., & Pinto, H. L. (2022). Sustainability in the coffee supply chain and purchasing policies: a case study research. Sustainability, 14(1), 459. DOI: 10.3390/su14010459.
40.   ‏Qorri, D., & Felfoeldi, J. (2024). Research trends in agricultural marketing cooperatives: a bibliometric review. Agriculture, 14(2), 199.
41.   Ramesh, A. Singh, R., & Kumar, P. (2018). Food supply chain management: a systematic review. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 54(2), 12-25.
42.   Reganold, J. P., & Wachter, J. M. (2021). Organic agriculture in the twenty-first century. Nature Plants, 2(3), 1-8. DOI: 10.1038/nplants.2016.112.
43.   Sari, S. P., Handriansyah, A. E., Anwar, W., Suryaningsih, N., Jubaedah, E., Rustandi, R., & Nurniawan, H. (2024). Operations & Supply Chain Management. Sukemi (Ed.) Pradina Pustaka. ISBN: 6238106484,9786238106486.
44.   Sepehri, A., Tirkolaee, E. B., Simic, V., & Ali, S. S. (2024). Designing a reliable-sustainable supply chain network: adaptive m-objective ε-constraint method. Annals of Operations Research, 1-32.
45.   Shalpegin, T., Kumar, A., & Browning, T. R. (2025). Undiversity, inequity, and exclusion in supply chains: the unintended fallout of economic sanctions and consumer boycotts. Production and Operations Management, 34(4), 829-836. DOI: 10.1111/poms.14001.hal-04325729.
46.   Silvestri, C., Silvestri, L., Piccarozzi, M., & Ruggieri, A. (2024). Toward a framework for selecting indicators of measuring sustainability and circular economy in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 29(8), 1446-1484.‏
47.   Singh, S., Ghosh, K., & Maji, P. K. (2024). Advanced packaging for safety and security of agricultural produce in the supply chain. In: Novel packaging systems for fruits and vegetables (pp. 289-318). Apple Academic Press.‏
48.   Slavinskaitė, N., Čižiūnienė, K., & Bundonytė, V. (2025). Assessment of the sustainable supply chain finance factors. Sustainability, 17(3), 1002.
1. 49. Teichmann, F. M. J., & Wittmann, C. (2022). How can sustainability be effectively regulated? Journal of Financial Crime, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 31(5), 1156-1165. DOI: 10.1108/JFC-07-2022-0174.Top of FormTop of Form
50.   Wang, G., Hou, Y., & Shin, C. (2023). Exploring sustainable development pathways for agri-food supply chains empowered by cross-border e-commerce platforms: a hybrid grounded theory and DEMATEL-ISM-MICMAC approach. Foods, 12(21), 3916.‏
51.   Wang, G., Wang, Y., Li, S., Yi, Y., Li, C. & Shin, C. (2024). Sustainability in global agri-food supply chains: insights from a comprehensive literature review and the ABCDE framework. Foods, 13(18), 2914.‏
52.   Wibowo Putro, P. A., Purwaningsih, E. K., Sensuse, D. I., Suryono, R. R., & Kautsarina (2022). Model and implementation of rice supply chain management: a literature review. Procedia Computer Science, 197, 453-460. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.161.
53.   Yanbo, Q., Shilei, W., Yaya, T., Guanghui, J., Tao, Z., & Liang, M. (2023). Territorial spatial planning for regional high-quality development – An analytical framework for the identification, mediation, and transmission of potential land utilization conflicts in the Yellow River Delta. Land Use Policy, 125, 106462.
54.   Yuan, C. W. T., Bi, N., Lin, Y. F., Lu, A. P., & Chiang, T. W. (2023). Farm to table: understanding collaboration and information practices among stakeholders in the process of produce production, sales, and consumption. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7(CSCW1), Article 53. DOI: 10.1145/3579486.
55.   Zambujal‐Oliveira, J., & Fernandes, C. (2024). The contribution of sustainable packaging to the circular food supply chain. Packaging Technology and Science, 37(5), 443-456.
56.   Zámková, M., Rojík, S., Prokop, M., Činčalová, S., & Stolín, R. (2024). National labelling system of organic agriculture and food products — How familiar are Czech consumers with the national organic agri-food brand? Agriculture, 14(1), 100.