Resources, Conservation and Recycling 97 (2015) 76–92

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Resources, Conservation and Recycling

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec

Review

A literature review and perspectives in reverse logistics

Saurabh Agrawal∗, Rajesh K. Singh, Qasim Murtaza
Mechanical, Production & Industrial Engineering Department, Delhi Technological University, Delhi 110042, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In recent years, reverse logistics (RL) has become a field of importance for all organizations due to growing environmental
Received 4 November 2014 concerns, legislation, corporate social responsibility and sustainable competitiveness. RL refers to the sequence of activities
Received in revised form 18 February 2015 required to collect the used product from the customers for the purpose of either reuse or repair or re-manufacture or recycle
Accepted 18 February 2015
or dispose of it. Perusal of the literature shows that research in the field of RL is in evolving phase and issues pertaining to
adoption and implementation, fore- casting product returns, outsourcing, RL networks from secondary market perspective,
Keywords:
and disposition decisions have not been reviewed extensively. This study attempts to fill the existing gap through litera- ture
Reverse logistics
review on these issues, and outline the future directions for research based on research gap analysis. Total 242 published
Forecasting product returns
Reverse logistics network
articles were selected, categorized, analyzed, and gaps in literature were identified to suggest for future research
Secondary market Disposition opportunities. The review may be useful for academicians, researchers and practitioners for better understanding of RL and
Outsourcing guidance for future research.
© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 77
2. RL processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 77
2.1. Product acquisition/gate keeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
78
2.2. Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 78
2.3. Inspection and sorting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 78
2.4. Disposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 78
3. Research methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 78
3.1. Material collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 79
3.2. Descriptive analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 79
3.3. Category selection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 79
3.4. Material evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 79
4. Detailed analyses of the literature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
81
4.1. Adoption and implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
81
4.2. Forecasting product returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
81
4.3. Outsourcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 81
4.4. RL network from secondary market perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
4.4.1. Recycling network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 84
4.4.2. Reuse network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 84
4.4.3. Remanufacturing networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
84
4.4.4. Repairing network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 85
4.4.5. Secondary market network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
86
 4.5. Disposition decisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 86
5. Discussion and research gap analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
88

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9911924907.

E-mail addresses: agrawals.iit@gmail.com (S. Agrawal), rks.dce@yahoo.com (R.K. Singh), qasimmurtaza@gmail.com (Q. Murtaza).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.02.009
0921-3449/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
77 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and Recycling
and Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 77

5.1. Adoption and implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 88
5.2. Forecasting product returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 88
5.3. Outsourcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 88
5.4. RL networks from secondary market perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
5.5. Disposition decisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 89
6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 89
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 89

1. Introduction analyze current practices, critical issues, and managerial tech- niques.
Fleischmann et al. (2000), Akc¸ alı et al. (2009), Chanintrakul et al. (2009),
The research on RL has evolved over the years and authors have defined Sheriff et al. (2012) reviewed the literature on RL network design issues.
RL in different ways. Earliest definition of RL was found to be given by These reviews provide insight to the RL previous research on various
Murphy and Poist (1989) mentioning about the reverse flow of goods. Later issues. However, it was observed that issues like adoption and
on Carter and Ellram (1998) introduced the term “environment” in the implementation, forecasting product returns, outsourcing, RL networks from
definition of RL. Rogers and Tibben- Lembke (1999) stressed on the secondary market per- spectives, and disposition decisions are not covered in
purpose of the RL and established the most widely accepted definition as “RL depth. For example, Govindan et al. (2015) reviewed 382 articles covering
is the process of planning, implementing, and controlling the efficient, cost whole area of RL providing in depth insight from different perspec- tives but
effective flow of raw materials, in process inventory, finished goods and related reviewed very few articles on forecasting product returns and outsourcing.
information from the point of consumption to the point of origin for the Adoption and implementation as well as disposi- tion decisions are not dealt.
purpose of recapturing value or proper disposal”. Stock (1998), Dowlatshahi Pokharel and Mutha (2009) reviewed
(2000) and Srivastava (2008) have also defined RL from different perspectives. 164 articles on important RL features such as product acquisition, pricing,
Definition of RL has been changing over time and widening its scope with collection of used products, RL network structure vis-à-vis the integration of
the interest of researchers. manufacturing, and remanufacturing facilities of location of facilities for
Researchers and practitioners have consistently given attention to the inspection and consolidation activity. How- ever, select issues for the proposed
forward supply chains and ignored the reverse flow of sup- ply chains study are not reviewed in this article also. Krapp et al. (2013a) observed that
(Bernon and Cullen, 2007). The scope for the forward supply chain has there are very few reviews focusing on the issue of forecasting product returns.
been extended to include the reverse flow of prod- ucts from the point of Rogers et al. (2012) and Hall et al. (2013) stated that disposition is one of the
consumption back to the source (Rogers and Tibben-Lembke, 2001). RL has major RL issues and need more attention. Rogers et al. (2012) also stated that
recently received growing impor- tance and more firms are adopting it as a there is an acute need for exploring the secondary market networks given the
strategic tool for economic benefits and corporate social image (Kannan et al., size and profitability potential of this market. De Brito and Dekker (2002),
2012a). Firms have also realized that a better understanding of product returns Linton et al. (2007), Meade et al. (2007), Rubio et al. (2008), Lambert
and efficient RL can provide a competitive advantage (Stock and Mulki, 2009). et al. (2011) reviewed published literature on various aspects of RL but select
Although many industries have realized that RL is a necessity for sustainable issues are either under-represented or not reviewed in their articles. The pro-
competitiveness, there is a lack of agree- ment on timing of adaptation and posed article aims at filling these gaps in literature by reviewing these issues
implementation of RL system (Richey et al., 2004). RL has been beneficial to and finding research gaps for identifying future scope of research.
some of the orga- nizations like General Motors, Canon, Dell, and Hewlett- This study makes an attempt to present a comprehensive review of the
Packard. Jayaraman and Luo (2007) have mentioned that Kodak is able to published literature on these RL issues. Subsequently, study analyzed the
reuse up to eighty percent of the used camera’s parts. Wu and Cheng research gaps in the literature to facilitate further study, and research
(2006) investigated the possible advantages of RL imple- mentation in the directions. Remaining part of the study is organized as follows: Section 2
publishing industry. Kumar and Craig (2007) studied computer assembly defines the basic RL processes. Research methodology is presented in
line of Dell. Lau and Wang (2009) studied the electronics industry in China Section 3. In Section 4, detailed discussions on specified classifications
and explored the prob- lems encountered in RL implementation. Subramanian are undertaken. Section 5 discusses and critically analyzes research gaps, and
et al. (2014) worked on end of life products in the Chinese manufacturing sec- the study is summarized in Section 6 by offering conclusions along with its
tor. Jayaraman et al. (2003) discussed RL systems for recycling and reuse of limitations.
beverage containers. Studies on reverse logistics imple- mentation have
been done in many sectors such as carpet industry by Biehl et al. (2007), retail 2. RL processes
industry by Bernon et al. (2011), bot- tling sector by González-Torre et al.
(2004), paper industry by Ravi and Shankar (2006), packaging firms by RL processes have been explained by many authors in different
González-Torre and Adenso-Diaz (2006), cell phone industry by Rathore et al. perspectives. Based on the work carried out by Rogers and Tibben- Lembke
(2011), pharmaceuticals industry by Narayana et al. (2014), and battery (1999), Fleischmann et al. (2000), Fleischmann (2001) as well as Guide and
recycling by Wang et al. (2014). Wassenhove (2003), different key processes of RL have been identified and are
Literatures on RL have been reviewed by many researchers in the past. shown in Fig. 1. The used or returned products are collected after their
Fleischmann et al. (1997) studied RL from the perspectives of distribution acquisition and are inspected for sorting into the different categories. The
planning, inventory management and production planning. Carter and Ellram next step is to dispose them for repair, remanufacturing, recycling, reuse or
(1998) focused on the environmental aspects of transportation, packaging and final disposal depending on the decision taken to either recapture value or dis-
purchasing. Dowlatshahi (2000) developed a theory of RL successful pose of it. The key processes are identified as product acquisition, collection,
implementation considering various strategic and operational factors. inspection/sorting, and disposition are described in the following section.
Prahinski and Kocabasoglu (2006) identified ten research propositions to
78 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
Fig. 1. Basic flow of forward and RL processes.
2.1. Product acquisition/gate keeping
Product acquisition is the process of acquisition of used prod- ucts,
components or materials from the end users for further processing.
Since product returns are uncertain in terms of time, quantity and
quality, their acquisition is important for the suc- cess of RL
(Fleischmann et al., 1997). According to Guide and Wassenhove
(2003), product acquisition is the first step and is critical process
for establishing the profitable RL. Gate keeping rep- resents the main
entrance of RL. It is a set of practices performed usually by retailers to
identify the products which are allowed into the system or given back to
the user after resolving issues at their end. For example, if consumer
returns the product to retailer then retailer decides whether product
must be sent for further process- ing (Acquisition) or given back to
consumer. This act of decision making is known as “Gate keeping”.
2.2. Collection
Products after acquisition are collected and delivered to the
facilities for inspection, sorting, and disposition. Collection refers to the
activity in which a firm gains the possession of the products
(Fleischmann et al., 2003). Kumar and Putnam (2008) discussed
three collection methods as manufacturers directly collect from
customers, manufacturers collect via retailers or manufactures
collect through third party logistics. Webster and Mitra (2007) con-
sidered two alternative take back methods for collection which are
distinguished by the “degree of control” on product returns. First method
is collective take back in which the manufacturer has no control over
returns while second method is individual collection which gives
complete control to the manufacturer. Choice of collec- tion method
depends on the cost structure and collection quantity decisions (Atasu
et al., 2013). Decision of collection centers and related parameters
must be involved considerably in designing RL for its operational
efficiency (Pochampally and Gupta, 2004).
2.3. Inspection and sorting
Product returns may be commercial returns, service returns, dis-
tribution returns or end of life returns. Rogers and Tibben-Lembke
(1999) reported that the customer may return the products because of
known or unknown reasons, and the condition of returned prod- ucts
may differ greatly. So a separate inspection of each item is
required for sorting the products. Its overall appearance and state
and Recycling
and Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 78
of the constituting elements need to be evaluated. Products and
components are sorted out based on this evaluation (De Brito and
Dekker, 2002). In a study, Zikopoulos and Tagaras (2008) found
that sorting before disassembly and remanufacturing depends on the
transportation, disposal and disassembly cost, and quality of returned
product. Loomba and Nakashima (2012) examined the role of
sorting used products before disassembly by using Markov decision
process. Some of the previous research examples include distinguishing
repairable and recyclable subassemblies of copiers (Krikke et al.,
1999a), inspection of sieved sand for pollution (Barros et al., 1998), and
separation of non-relevant waste paper (Pati et al.,
2008). Galbreth and Blackburn (2006) derived optimal acquisition and
sorting policies with used product condition variability and uncertain
demand.
2.4. Disposition
Once the products are inspected, next step is to take disposi- tion
decision for further processing. Thierry et al. (1995) illustrated three
disposition alternatives as product reuse, product recovery, and waste
management. Krikke et al. (2003), and Tibben-Lembke and Rogers
(2002) further modified these alternatives as reuse, product
upgrade, material recovery, and waste management. Norek (2003)
reported that firms mostly have five recovery options including sell
as new; repair or repackage and resell as new; repair or repackage
and resell as used; resell at a lower value to a sal- vage house;
and sell by the weight to a salvage house. There are different
combinations which have been discussed for disposition alternatives.
Each study emphasized slightly different alternatives and definitions.
Five common disposition alternatives discussed by authors are reuse,
repair, remanufacturing, recycling, and disposal (Thierry et al., 1995; De
Brito and Dekker, 2002; Fleischmann et al.,
1997; Mutha and Pokharel, 2009).
3. Research methodology
A literature review seems to be a valid approach for reviewing
thoroughly and structuring a research area (Easterby-Smith et al.,
2002). Literature review helps in identifying the conceptual con- tent of
the research area (Meredith, 1993) and guides toward the theory
development. In order to systematically review the litera- ture and to
clarify research methodology for the article, four steps such as material
collection, descriptive analysis, category selection,
79 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and Recycling
and Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 79

and material evaluation given by Mayring (2008) are described in

28
following section.
27

3.1. Material collection 23

Material collection methodology and unit of analysis is the first step

20
of the literature review process. The unit of analysis has been defined 19
as a single research article/book/report. The study was conducted
in two stages. In first stage, pair of key words “reverse logistics” and 16
“literature review” was used in title, abstract, and keywords to carry 15
15
out review articles search. These keywords were used in Google- 14
scholar search engine (www.scholar.google.com) and in Scopus
(www.scopus.com) with options of searching for articles in English
language excluding articles in other languages, and sorted by
relevance. After reading and analyzing the literature review articles
7 7 8 8
(discussed in Section 1), further literature search were inductively
6 6
attributed to the categorization of RL i.e. adoption and implementation, 6

forecasting product returns, outsourcing, disposition decisions, and

3
RL networks from secondary market perspective. The terms 2 2 2 2 2
“Forecasting product returns”, “Imple- mentation”, “Disposition”, and 1 1 2

“Outsourcing” along with the key term “reverse logistics” were used
for searching articles with options as in first stage. The key word

1986
1989
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
“RL network” was jointly Fig. 2. Annual distribution of publications across the period of the study.
used with “secondary market” for literature search. Articles on RL
networks were searched only in contest of secondary mar- ket
because the intent was to explore secondary market and its
3.3. Category selection
consideration in RL networks design. Same searches were
repeated for the year 2014 and 2015 to ensure the recent publi- cations
Categories of the study and framework for the study are shown in
inclusion in the review. The articles belong to the leading publishers
Fig. 3. As discussed above in Section 1, the literatures on RL are
including Elsevier (www.sciencedirect.com), Emerald
classified into five categories. These five categories are (1)
(www.emeraldinsight.com), Springer (www.springerlink.com), Taylor
Adoption and implementation; (2) Forecasting product returns; (3)
and Francis (www.tandf.co.uk/journals/), Wiley
Outsourcing; (4) RL network from secondary market perspective; (5)
(www.wiley.com), and Informs (http://journals.informs.org/). Total
Disposition decisions. This classification and frame work for the study is
503 articles were collected and all collected articles were
shown in Fig. 3.
considered for first quick check of content and relevancy for the study.
Distribution of research articles for five categories is shown in Fig. 4.
Only those articles which were focused on the above men- tioned
RL Networks from secondary market perspective has max- imum
issues were taken into consideration. Seventeen articles from
percentage (40%) of publications while most of the other
conferences, research reports, and books were also included because
categories comparatively have less percentage of articles which
of their contribution and importance for the study of RL. Finally, total
indicates the future scope and need of exploration of these areas.
242 articles were selected, reviewed and examined in detail. The
number of articles analyzed for the review appears to be adequate
because of focus on specific issues. It is consistent with the number of 3.4. Material evaluation
articles analyzed in recent literature reviews in the area of RL.
Measures were taken to make sure a high level of inter-rater reli-
3.2. Descriptive analysis ability. Rigor in validity is achieved by validation tests performed by
three researchers using the deductive and inductive approaches
To comprehend the multi perspective view of the concepts, simultaneously. Preliminary measures involved classification of
articles were sorted out from more than fifty journals. Table 1 articles by the researchers, and then comparing these articles to
illustrates the articles published by various journals. From Table 1, it is ensure consensus. To increase the reliability of the research, data-
observed that most of the articles have been published in reputed banks, and journals as well as the individual articles, materials were
journals such as Resource, Conservation and Recycling, Omega, cross checked by three researchers with the help of spread sheets and
International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics intense discussion among themselves. In order to examine the reliability
Management, European Journal of Operational Research, Interna- of the study, inter-coder reliability was assessed using Krippendorf’s
tional Journal of Production Research, and Journal of Production alpha for measuring the quality of the review because it is considered
Economics. “the most general agreement measure with appro- priate reliability
Annual distribution of number of articles published from year interpretations” (Krippendorff, 2004). Neuendorf (2002) reviewed
1986 to 2015 is shown in Fig. 2. Most of the articles were selected from various opinions of several methodologists and concluded that the
recent publications. 63 articles out of total 242 selected arti- cles were values of alpha, 0.80 or greater are consid- ered acceptable. The
published before the year 2006. Rests of the articles (179) were study was carried out by the authors and two independent coders, after
selected from the year 2006 and onwards. Highest number of being trained. The values of alpha were calculated by using SPSS 22.0
articles (28) has been published in year 2012. It is also clear that with the help of macros developed by Hayes and Krippendorff (2007).
numbers of articles have increased considerably in last few years The resulting inter-coder reliabil- ity for research categories and
because of growing interest of researchers in this area. research gap analysis were found to be ˛rc = 0.91 and ˛rg = 0.86
respectively, which are well above 0.8. It shows consistency and
reliability of this study.
80 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and Recycling
and Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 80

Table 1
Number of articles published by main journals.

S. No. Articles published by Journals Numbers of articles

1 Omega 16
2 International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 14
3 International Journal of Production Research 14
4 Resources, Conservation and Recycling 12
5 European Journal of Operational Research 11
6 International Journal of Production Economics 9
7 Transportation Research 8
8 Computers and Industrial Engineering 7
9 Journal of Business Logistics 7
10 The International Journal of Logistics Management 7
11 International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 6
12 Journal of Cleaner Production 6
13 Production and Operations Management 6
14 Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management 5 each
15 Applied Mathematical Modelling, Computers and Operations Research, Expert Systems with Applications, Interfaces, Journal of 4 Each
Operations Management
16 IIE Transactions, OR Spectrum, Decision Sciences 3 Each
17 Applied Mechanics and Materials, California Management Review, International Journal of Operation and Production Management, Journal 2 Each
of Advances in Management Research, Journal of the Operational Research Society, International Journal of Business Performance and
Supply Chain Modelling, Management Research News
18 Academy of Management Executive, Academy of Management Perspectives, Advanced Materials Research, Benchmarking: An 1 Each
International Journal, British Journal of Management, Business Horizons, Communication Methods and Measures, Computers and Chemical
Engineering, Computers and Mathematics with Applications, DC Velocity, Decision Support System, Environmental Science and
Technology, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Foresight, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Human Communication
Research, Industrial Marketing Management, Information Management, Information, Knowledge, System Management, International
Business Review, International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, International Journal of Environmental Science and
Technology, International Journal of Logistics, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, International Journal of
Management and Information Systems, International Journal of Modeling and Optimization, International Journal of Operational Research,
International Journal of Procurement Management, International Journal of Sustainable Development and Ecology, International Journal of
Sustainable Engineering, International Journal of Value Chain management, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Journal of
Fashion Marketing and Management, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Journal of Material Cycles Waste Management, Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information
Technology, Knowledge-Based Systems, Management Research – An Introduction, Management Science, Networks, Operations
Management Research, Operations Research, Production Planning and Control, Robotics and Computer-Integrated manufacturing,
Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, Waste Management and Research, World Journal of Social Technology and Sustainability Development
21 Conferences/Books/Reports 17
Total number 242

Fig. 3. Frame work for the study.

81 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and Recycling
Fig. 4. Distribution of research papers for different categories.
4. Detailed analyses of the literature
The selected articles of the literature review are discussed and analyzed in
this section to construct a holistic view of the recent and state-of-the-art studies
in RL. The results will clarify the current gaps and future directions for
research.
4.1. Adoption and implementation
Adoption and implementation of RL decisions involve several factors
which are useful in decision making and RL effectiveness. A critical analysis
of the factors affecting RL can provide valuable information for RL
implementation (Ravi et al., 2005). Rogers and Tibben-Lembke (1999)
suggested that there are number of factors affecting RL practices. The
presence or absence of these factors can become drivers or barriers to
RL implementation. The study categorized the factors into drivers and
barriers and is shown in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
Firms may adopt RL by choice because of inherent economic or
competitive advantages or by force because of legislation or envi- ronmental
reasons. Knowing the drivers influencing the RL may be helpful in RL
implementation. De Brito and Dekker (2002) catego- rized two types of
drivers, internal and external. Carter and Ellram (1998) identified internal and
external factors to examine whether a firm is reactive, proactive, or value-
seeking in RL implementa- tion. Fleischmann et al. (1997) listed the
economics, marketing, legislation as main drivers of RL. Dowlatshahi (2010)
developed a framework for an optimal design and RL implementation consider-
ing strategic and operational factors based on cost-benefit analysis. There are
number of drivers which have been discussed in the lit- erature. The drivers
were identified in a given region or country for a particular sector and varies
across them. These drivers are sum- marized in Table 2. It is evident from
Table 2 that these drivers are different depending on the sector and country in
which the study was carried out.
Carter and Ellram (1998) asserted customer preferences, regula- tions,
resource constraint, and lack of stakeholder commitment as major barriers of
RL implementation. Rogers and Tibben-Lembke (1999) identified the
attitude of top management and company policies as two major barriers.
Ravi and Shankar (2004), in a study of automobile sector in India and added
more barriers like problems with product quality, resistance to change to RL,
lack of appropri- ate performance metrics, and lack of training and education.
There are number of barriers which have been discussed in the literature. Major
barriers for RL, identified in different studies are summarized in Table 3. These
barriers vary from sector to sector and country to
and Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 81
country. No study was found in literature showing comparative study of
the barriers.
4.2. Forecasting product returns
Planning for RL is more difficult than forward logistics because of more
uncertainty in terms of quantity, time and quality of returned product (Flapper,
1996). Forecasting for products available for col- lection, transportation,
remanufacturing/recycling is important to achieve the optimum level of
performance (Tibben-Lembke and Rogers, 2002). According to Xiaofeng and
Tijun (2009), forecasting product returns is important for designing the RL
network, layout planning of the recovery facilities as well as the planning and
con- trol of recovery processes. Toktay et al. (2003) stated that there are few
documented business examples of forecasting product returns. Krapp et al.
(2013a) also observed that there are very few reviews focusing on the issue
of forecasting product returns. The litera- ture has been reviewed
comprehensively and some of the previous studies on forecasting product
returns are summarized in Table 4. The forecasting methods include both
quantitative and qualitative methods as mentioned in the table. The product
return is supposed to be function of factors varying from sector to sector and
type of disposition of returned product. However, it is difficult to analyze the
sufficiency of these factors for forecasting product returns from past research.
4.3. Outsourcing
Outsourcing can be defined as acquiring services from external service
providers (Grover et al., 1994). Manufacturers may adopt RL by choice or by
force but they have to decide whether performing the functions themselves and
outsourcing to a third party (Ferguson and Toktay, 2006; Martin et al.,
2010). Manufactures have three choices including do nothing, develop own
RL system or find a third party logistics provider and partner with them (Meade
and Sarkis,
2002). Daugherty and Droge (1997) observed that outsourcing deci- sions are
based on a variety of qualitative as well as quantitative factors and the
organizational structure has a significant effect on the outsourcing decision of
the RL functions completely or partly.
In past, Authors have suggested number of reasons and scenar- ios in which
outsourcing RL functions may be considered. Insigna and Werle (2000)
suggested that the firms should outsource activ- ities for which internal
capability is weak and the potential for gaining competitive advantage is
low. Boyson et al. (1999) men- tioned that the decision to outsource is
driven by profit growth and increased focus on core competencies. Arnold
(2000) distin- guishes among core activities, core-close activities, core-
distinct activities, and disposable activities. The core activities have the
highest degree of contribution to the competitiveness while dispos- able
activities have minimal contribution. The outsourcing strategy changes with
the degree of contribution to the competitiveness. Wu et al. (2005) stated
that if RL activities are not the part of its core functions, RL activities might
be outsourced. Serrato et al. (2007) found that the industry with high return
variability and a short product life cycle must outsource RL activities
because of reduced economic feasibility of maintaining a firm’s own RL.
Ko and Evans (2007) observed that specialized infrastructure need- ing
special information systems for tracking and capturing data, dedicated
equipment for the processing of returns, and specialist trained nonstandard
manufacturing processes are major reasons for outsourcing. Pagell et al.
(2007) predicted that manufacturers may initially adopt low cost strategies but
they will consider other strategies like in-house disassembly to protect
intellectual prop- erty at a later stage. Kannan et al. (2012b) summarized the
main reasons for outsourcing including sophisticated information sys- tem
capabilities and state-of-the-art transportation and material
82 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 82

Table 2

Drivers of RL implementation.

Authors Factors Sector Country

Fleischmann et al. (1997) Economic factor, Marketing, Legislation General Autry et al.
(2001) Sales volume, Firm size, Customers’ satisfaction, Disposition Electronics De Brito and Dekker
(2002) Economic factor, Legislation, Extended producer’s responsibility, Corporate
citizenship
Ravi et al. (2005) Economic factors, Environment and green issues, Corporate citizenship End of life computer India
Lau and Wang (2009) Promotion of corporate image, Fulfillment of obligation for environment protection, Electronics China
Improvement of customer service
Janes et al. (2010) Top management awareness, Strategic partnerships, Performance visibility, Strategic focus in Electronics USA
avoiding returns, Reclaiming value from returns, Put products swiftly back in the market
Rahman and Subramanian (2012) Legislation, customers, strategic cost, environmental concerns, volume and quality, incentives,
resources, and integration and coordination EOL-Computers Australia
Chiou et al. (2012) Economic needs, Environmental needs, Social needs, Recycled volumes,
Recycling costs, Increase of sales volume for new product Electronics Taiwan
Tyagi et al. (2012) Facilities, Handling, Ease of access, Information Hospitals Canada Jindal and Sangwan
(2013) Economical, Environmental, and Social drivers Indian Industry India Kapetanopoulou and Tagaras (2011)
Legislation, Profitability, Green image, Customer service, Competition Manuf. Greek Industry Mittal and Sangwan (2014) Internal, Policy and
Economic drivers Manuf. India
Kannan et al. (2012b) Extended producer, responsibility, codes of conduct, and resource scarcity EOL Tire Manuf. India

handling equipment and warehousing facilities of third party logis- tics
providers. Huscroft et al. (2012) also emphasized on use of information
technology for reverse logistics cost effectiveness. These studies explain the
reasons and scenario in which a RL func- tions may be considered for
outsourcing. Studies are mainly focused on outsourcing whole of RL functions.
However, no comprehensive study was found related to process or part of RL
functions outsourc- ing. For example, inspection, sorting, and disposition may
also be outsourced which may help a company to directly get the products
either for recycling or remanufacturing as the case may be.
Once a firm considers for outsourcing some of its RL functions, there are
methodologies and models developed by the researchers to take outsourcing
decisions. Krumwiede and Sheu (2002) devel- oped a decision making
framework for outsourcing transportation services. They conducted field
study for a company to take out- sourcing decision through evaluation of
market, customers and competitors. Ordoobadi (2009) developed a multi
phased deci- sion model for strategic and economic analysis of
outsourcing recycling or remanufacturing. Bernon et al. (2011) proposed a
conceptual framework for retail sector outsourcing options by considering
trust, power, impact on organizational performance, quality costing,
avoidance techniques, and ultimate organizational performance in terms of
both customer satisfaction and bottom line performance. The framework
considers the qualitative fac- tors comprehensively for outsourcing in
retail sector. Mafakheri and Nasiri (2013) addressed the issue of revenue
sharing in RL to formulate the decision problems of coordinating parties.
They emphasized on horizontal collaboration among firms sharing RL
activities/work and contributions. Apart from the number of stud- ies discussed
above, there are number of articles focusing on selection of third party RL
service provider (Meade and Sarkis, 2002; Bottani and Rizzi, 2006; Saen, 2009;
Efendigil et al., 2008; Kannan et al., 2009; Cheng and Lee, 2010; Ravi and
Shankar, 2012; Kannan and Murugesan, 2011; Divahar and Sudhahar, 2012;
Govindan et al.,
2013; Aguezzoul, 2014; Senthil et al., 2014; Kumar et al., 2014a,b). A lot of
benefits of outsourcing RL functions and methodologies have been
discussed in the literature. However, benefits depend on the type of
business and products handled by the companies.

Table 3
Barriers of RL implementation.

Authors Factors Sector Country

Carter and Ellram (1998) Customer preferences, Regulation, Resource constraint, Lack of stakeholder commitment General
Rogers and Tibben-Lembke (1999) Attitude of top management, Company policies General
Ravi and Shankar (2004) Lack of awareness, Lack of commitment, Lack of strategic planning, Quality problems, Automobile India
Financial constraints
Lau and Wang (2009) Lack of laws and legislation, Economic policies, Underdevelopment of recycling Electronics China
technology, Lack of publicity and knowledge of reverse logistics
Janes et al. (2010) Lack of clear return policies, Little recognition of strategic value, Poor performance Electronics USA
measurement system, Inadequate IT support, Limited forecasting and planning, Insufficient
tax know-how
Sharma et al. (2011) Lack of awareness about reverse logistics, Management inattention, Financial constraints, Legal Industry India
issues
Rahman and Subramanian (2012) Lack of personnel resources, Management’s low commitment, Lack of initial capital, Lack of Manufacturing China
enforceable laws, Regulations and directives, Lack of coordination
Chiou et al. (2012) Environmental regulations and directives, Consumer’s environmental awareness,
Pressures with stakeholders Electronics Taiwan
González-Torre et al. (2010) Reluctance on the part of government, Customer, and social actors, Lack of know-how, Lack
of top management commitment, Lack of information Systems, High cost in financial Automotive Spain
and human resources
Mittal and Sangwan (2013) Legislation, Public pressure, Competitiveness, Customer demand, Top management
commitment, Technology, Organizational resources Indian Industry India
Abdulrahman et al. (2014) Lack of reverse logistics experts, Low commitment, Lack of initial capital, Funds for return
monitoring systems, Lack of enforceable laws, Government supportive economic policies, Manufacturing Industry China
Lack of systems for return monitoring
83 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 83

Table 2

Table 4
Forecasting models for product returns.

Authors Method/model Factors for forecasting Sector Disposition Country

Goh and Varaprasad (1986) Statistical Trip-page, Trip Containers Reuse

Methodology duration, Loss rate,
Expected useful life
Kelle and Silver (1989) Simulation Model Quantitative Reusable Containers Reuse USA
Toktay et al. (2000) Discrete-Time Quantitative Kodak Camrea Reuse
Distributed-Lag Model
Marx-Gomez et al. (2002) A neurofuzzy system Quantitative Photo copiers Remanuf., Recycling
Srivastava and Srivastava (2006) Decomposition methods and Product ownership data, Electronic General India
heuristics Life cycle of products,
Sales, Forecasted demand,
Environmental policy,
Green Indexes Number of
devices in use, Current
Peralta and Fontanos (2006) Mathematical end-of-life, Serviceable Electronic Recycling Philipines
equations years of the product,
Disposal behavior of
consumers
Product life, Social and
Sales factor, Marketing and
Hanafi et al. (2007) Petri Net Forecasting advertising budget, Mobile phone General Australia
Model Population density, Age
Liu and Fang (2007) Transfer Function Quantitative – – –
Noise model
Xiaofeng and Tijun (2009) Wave function Quantitative Electronic General China
Efendigil et al. (2009) Artificial intelligence Demand with Durable consumer Closed loop supply Turkey
approaches incomplete goods chain
information
Chen and He (2010) Simplex gray forecast model Quantitative House hold appliances General China
with time series model
Yu et al. (2010) Logistic and material
flow analysis Quantitative Personal Computers Recycling Asia
Shih et al. (2012) Analytic Network Consumer behavior, Printers Recycling Taiwan
Process Marketing mix
Potdar and Rogers (2012) Data Envelopment Consumer behavior Electronic General USA
Analysis
Benedito and Corominas (2013) Markov Decision Model Product demand, Product life – Remanuf., recycling –
cycle, Return rate of end
of life
Clottey et al. (2012) A generalized approach Quantitative – Remanuf. –
Krapp et al. (2013a) Bayesian estimation Quantitative – Closed loop supply
techniques chain
Krapp et al. (2013b) A generic framework Quantitative Electronic Closed-loop supply chain
Agrawal et al. (2014) Graphical Evaluation and Quantitative E-waste Recycling
Review Technique
Temur et al. (2014) Fuzzy Expert System Quantitative General Closed loop supply chain
Kumar et al. (2014a,b) ANFIS Quantitative Closed loop supply
chain

Outsourcing RL to third party may impact the business of a com- pany because
of the return information to the third party. No study was found in the literature
analyzing the impact of outsourcing RL functions.
Fourth party logistics is also one of options of outsourcing. Its market grew
considerably with the use of information technology (Win, 2008). It functions
as a control tower by taking respon- sibility of all the users’ outsourced
operations and serves as a single interface between the client and
multiple logistic service providers (Buyukozkan et al., 2009). They provide
administrative services while other operators perform the physical movement
of goods (Selviaridis and Spring, 2007). Mukhopadhyay and Setaputra (2006)
used the fourth party logistics provider as RL integrator and used it as a
return service provider. Hingley et al. (2011) investigated the
collaboration and implementation through an exploratory study of retailers,
suppliers, and fourth party logistics service providers. In fact, fourth party
service providers work in
a virtual supply chain and manages all the work through IT and
communications tool.
4.4. RL network from secondary market perspective
Network design is one of the important strategic issues which may have
long term impact on the performance of RL. Strate- gic decisions for
designing RL include number of facilities in the network, their location and
region to be covered, and their capac- ity or size (De Brito and Dekker, 2002).
RL network designs have been studied for different business scenario through
various mod- eling techniques. One scenario is that when secondary markets
are also considered while designing the RL network. This study was done
from the perspective of secondary market. The intent was to explore
opportunities for introducing and considering secondary market in RL network
design. All four types of RL network (repair- ing, remanufacturing, recycling,
and direct reuse) and secondary
84 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
market are reviewed and discussed in following section. The char- acteristics
and features are illustrated in research gap analysis.
4.4.1. Recycling network
Recycling network is generally concerned with the material recovery
from rather low value products (Blackburn et al., 2004). In many cases,
investment costs are high due to advanced techno- logical equipments
requirement for recycling. Low recovery value and high investments require
higher processing volume to make it economically viable. That’s the reason
that a centralized, open loop network structure involving a small number of
levels is preferred. Also, these networks tend to be highly vulnerable to the
uncertainty concerning the supply volume (Fleischmann et al., 2000).
Barros et al. (1998) reported a case study for the recycling of sand
coming from construction waste for multi-level capac- itated warehouse
location problem. The model determined the optimal number, capacities,
and locations of the depots and clean- ing facilities. Louwers et al. (1999)
considered the design of a recycling network for carpet waste and
proposed a continu- ous location model that used a linear approximation.
Pati et al. (2008) formulated a mixed integer goal programming model
for paper recycling logistics system and studied the inter-relationship between
multiple objectives with changing priorities of recycled paper distribution
network. Kara and Onut (2010) proposed a stochastic programming model
for paper industry to determine a long term strategy including optimal
facility locations and opti- mal flow amounts for large scale RL network
design problem under uncertainty. They considered optimal recycling and
collection cen- ter locations and optimal flow amounts between the nodes
in a multi-facility environment. Zeballos et al. (2012) developed a sce- nario
based model simultaneously considering planning and design decisions under
uncertainty in terms of quantity and quality of the flow of products for
Portuguese glass manufacturing company. Qiang et al. (2013) investigated a
network model with decentral- ized decision-makers consisting of raw
material suppliers, retail outlets, and the manufacturers who collect the
recycled product directly from the demand market. They discussed the
effects of competition, investment, yield and conversion rates on equilibrium
quantity transactions and prices. Schweiger and Sahamie (2013)
considered a combined continuous and discrete facility location problem
and utilized a hybrid Tabu Search approach to develop the scenario based
model for a paper manufacturer. Literature on recy- cling network along with
key remarks is summarized in Table 5a. Recycling network models are
designed for strategic decisions including number of facilities, location,
region to be covered, and their capacity or size. Previous studies have been
carried out in wide range of sectors for various propositions. The solution
method- ologies utilized by the previous researchers include deterministic,
stochastic modeling, simulation and heuristic methods.
4.4.2. Reuse network
Direct reusable products require only minor inspection, cleaning and minor
maintenance. They are expected to form a flat network structure comprising a
small number of levels. These products gen- erally go back to forward supply
chain and form a closed loop supply chain network (Fleischmann et al.,
2000). A fairly large number of reuse cycles and absence of other
processing steps results in a higher transportation cost (Flapper, 1996).
This may be one of the reasons for having a decentralized network. At the
same time decentralization renders balancing of product flows as an impor- tant
task in direct reuse networks (Crainic et al., 1993). Guide and
Wassenhove, (2001) developed a framework for analyzing the profitability of
reuse activities and explored the influences of prod- uct returns on operational
efficiency.
In past, different types of models and methodologies have been developed
for strategic decisions in reuse networks for different
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 84
categories of products. Kroon and Vrijens (1995) reported a case study for
reusable transportation packages, considering a single level decentralized
structure with timing of returns as an impor- tant element of uncertainty to
determine the number of containers, the number of container depots, and
their locations. The article focused on designing the RL system by using
mixed integer lin- ear programming for selecting best alternatives. Mollenkopf
et al. (2005) proposed a cost model to evaluate the combined impact of
logistics and packaging costs on the reuse of containers. They pointed out that
most of the models consider logistics cost and ignoring packaging costs,
may be substantial in some of the cases may result in reduced purchase cost.
González-Torre et al. (2004) considered joint implementation of environmental
practices in col- laboration with suppliers and customers, and analyzed the
existing differences in the relations between bottling/packaging firms and their
suppliers. Silva et al. (2013) developed a returnable packaging model to
minimize waste generation and environmental impacts which resulted in 18%
less material consumption than the dis- posable packaging model thus
reducing costs. Carrasco-Gallego et al. (2013), in a review of case studies
discussed the reuse net- work studies including returnable glass bottles by Del
Castillo and Cochran (1996), reusable wheelchairs by Rudi et al. (2000), postal
maintainers by Duhaime et al. (2001), chemical railcars by Young et al. (2002),
and Breen’s (2006) work on variety of items like pal- lets, tote boxes, trays,
kegs, trolleys, and bins. They also find that the literature on reuse networks is
staggered and scarce. Atasu et al. (2009) reviewed analytical research on the
business economics of product reuse from the industrial practice perspective.
Park (2014) studied the impact of various factors in technical, economic,
regula- tory, and behavioral perspective for industrial waste reuse in Unites
States. Literature on reuse network along with key remarks is sum- marized in
Table 5b. Reuse network models include the models based on cost
evaluation, and operational effectiveness. The solu- tion methodologies include
mathematical, stochastic, simulation, and MCDM. The models developed
are focused on some prod- ucts/items only. Carrasco-Gallego et al. (2012)
also reported that no article was found considering different classes of reusable
items simultaneously.
4.4.3. Remanufacturing networks
Remanufacturing network is generally concerned with mate- rial
recovery from high value products (Blackburn et al., 2004). In most of the
cases, remanufacturing is carried out by the man- ufacturers because of their
knowledge of products. Products are remanufactured by utilizing existing
facilities that forms a closed loop supply chain network (Fleischmann et al.,
2000). Uncertainty in terms quality, quantity and timing of product returns are
impor- tant factor for the success of remanufacturing network (Rogers and
Tibben-Lembke, 1999). Since this network works as inter- mediary
between the collection and redistribution, they form a fairly complex
multi level structure (Fleischmann et al., 1997). Kocabasoglu et al. (2007)
conducted a survey empirically for assessing the linkages between supply
chain investments, orga- nizational willingness to take risk and business
uncertainty, and found that ongoing investment in the forward supply
chain was more inclined toward recycling and waste management, but not in
remanufacturing. Wilcox et al. (2011) stated that the firms must manage
uncertain cash flow problems due to the erratic and unpredictable cash
transactions associated with uncertain product returns.
Krikke et al. (1999a) reported a case for the returns, process- ing, and
recovery of discarded copiers. Products taken back from the customers were
stored at pre determined locations and from there, were routed via recovery
processing facilities to the demand locations for determining the locations and
capacities of the recov- ery facilities as well as the transportation links
connecting various
85 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 85

Table 5a
Review of recycling network models.

Authors Industry/Product Remarks

Barros et al. (1998) Sand Descriptive statistics based case study

Krikke et al. (1999a)
Krikke et al. (1999b)
Shih (2001)
Le Blanc et al. (2004)
Nagurney and Toyasaki (2005)
Gomes et al. (2008)
Ahluwalia and Nema (2006)
Pati et al. (2006)
Kara et al. (2007)
Pati et al. (2008)
Lee and Dong (2008)
Choi and Fthenakis (2010)
Kannan et al. (2010)
Kara and Onut (2010)
Sinha et al. (2010)
Azadivar and Ordoobadi (2012)
Bautista and Pereira (2012)
Dat et al. (2012)
Zeballos et al. (2012)
Giannetti et al. (2013)
Lundkvist et al. (2013)
Gołe˛biewski et al. (2013)
Schweiger and Sahamie (2013)
Barrera and Cruz-Mejia (2014)
Subulan et al. (2014)
Ardjmand et al. (2015)
Chen et al. (2014)
Demirel et al. (2014a,b)
Electronic A two-step procedure for optimizing a recovery strategy
PC-monitor OR-optimization models to determine an optimal degree of disassembly with optimal recovery
and disposal options
Electrical A two-level location model for optimization using heuristic procedures
LPG tanks A vehicle routing model, the redesign of a recycling system
E-waste Multi-tiered e-cycling network equilibrium model considering decision-makers, the
recyclers, the processors, and the consumers
E-waste A multi criteria decision support system is developed
Computer Waste Multi-objective model for minimizing environment risk and cost
Waste Paper A linear optimization model to compare total system cost of wood, as a raw material, with
recycling of waste paper
EOL Appliances A simulation model for collecting EOL appliances in the Sydney Metropolitan
Area
Waste Paper A mixed integer goal programming multi-objective model to determine the facility location, route
and flow of different varieties of recyclable wastepaper
EOL Computers Developed a two stage heuristic approach by decomposing the integrated design networks into a
location allocation problem and a revised network flow problem
Photovoltaic An operational model for an actual recycling process for multiple scenario
Battery A multi echelon, multi period, multi product closed loop supply chain network model for the
decisions regarding material procurement, production, distribution, recycling and disposal
Paper Stochastic model to determine optimal facility locations and optimal flow under uncertainty
Construction Minimization of total cost
After Market A computer-based simulation model to determine the breakeven for the primary production
rate at which recycling is justified
Municipal Waste Developed a genetic algorithm and a GRASP heuristic to solve problem
E-waste A mathematical model which minimizes the total processing cost considering costs of collection,
treatment, transportation and sales
Glass Industry Scenario based model simultaneously considering planning and design decisions under
uncertainty in terms of quantity and quality
Steel Analyzed network using emergy synthesis, and performed the system environmental
costs and benefits analyses
Steel A mixed-integer linear programming model for optimization of a recovery strategy for waste
materials
Vehicle A genetic algorithm by considering the transportation and storage cost, and dismantling of
ELVs
Paper A combined continuous and discrete facility location problem and utilized a hybrid Tabu Search
approach
Packaging Proposed solution for the collection routing problem by using “profitable visit algorithm”
Tire Industry Designed a closed loop supply chain network with different recovery alternatives by
using Fuzzy Goal Programming
Hazardous Materials Developed a genetic algorithm based model for the location, and routing in facilities and disposal
sites considering risk and transportation cost
Cartridges An Integer programming model considering delivery routes and quantity of different materials
for maximizing the recycling rate and profits
End of Life Vehicles A mixed integer linear programming model for network design considering
the de-polluting, dismantling, shredding and recycling of ELVs

locations. Jayaraman et al. (1999) developed a model to determine the location
of distribution remanufacturing facilities, the trans- shipment, production,
and stocking of the optimal quantities of the remanufactured products and
cores. Guide and Pentico (2003) considered the case of a cellular phone
remanufacturing firm that acquired used phones with different quality levels,
remanufactured them to a single quality level, and sold them at a certain
price. Pishvaee et al. (2009) developed a stochastic model for recovery and
disposal considering uncertainty in the quantity and quality of returned
products. Sasikumar et al. (2010) developed a multi criteria decision
making model for maximizing the profit of a multi echelon RL network for
tire remanufacturing in India. Korchi and Millet (2011) proposed different
RL channels for supplying reusable modules for remanufacturing products
with less environ- mental impact and higher economic benefits. Lee and Dong
(2009) developed a stochastic model for dynamic network design under
uncertainty.Ramezani et al. (2013) developed a stochastic model under
uncertainty for maximizing the profit, responsiveness, and quality focusing on
financial risk in RL. Stochastic modeling has
been utilized by researchers for dealing with uncertainties. How- ever, other
approaches like chaos theory have not been examined. Soleimani et al. (2013)
developed a remanufacturing model incor- porating three important risk
measures mean absolute deviation, value at risk, and conditional value at risk.
Literature on remanufac- turing network along with key remarks is summarized
in Table 5c. Remanufacturing networks model have been developed for wide
range of products providing solutions to various propositions of strategic
issues.
4.4.4. Repairing network
Repairing network is concerned with repairing, and servicing of
products and return of those products to the customers. Since there is no link
with forward supply chain, they form an open loop supply chain network
(Fleischmann et al., 2000). In decen- tralized operations, testing and
grading close to the source may reduce transportation costs but investment
for test equipment may require more centralized operations. Trade off
between central- ized/decentralized operations and transportation cost is
needed
86 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 86

Table 5b
Review of reuse network models.

Authors Industry/Product Remarks

Kroon and Vrijens (1995)
Louwers et al. (1999)
Jayaraman et al. (2003)
Zikopoulos and Tagaras (2007)
Francesco et al. (2009)
Geyer and Blass (2010)
Salema et al. (2010)
Meng and Wang (2011)
Amin and Zhang (2012)
Kissling et al. (2012)
Silva et al. (2013)
Lieckens et al. (2013)
Xie et al. (2013)
Diabat et al. (2013)
Dai and Wang (2014)
Transportation packages A closed loop network with single level decentralized structure
Carpet Waste A facility location allocation model for the collection and preprocessing with dynamic locations
General A strong and a weak formulation for reverse distribution logistical problems including product recall, product
recycling and reuse, product disposal, and hazardous product return
General A single period system with one refurbishing site and two supplying collection sites under uncertain
demand
Shipping Containers Proposed a time-extended multi-scenario optimization model with consideration of shipping company
opinions
Cell Phone Examined the trade offs of cell phone reuse and recycling and concluded that cell phone reuse has a
healthy profit margin and recycling is a by-product of reuse
General Multi-period network model for the simultaneous design and planning of reverse supply chains
Shipping Containers A mixed-integer linear programming model solved for real industry problems
General A general closed loop supply chain network that includes manufacturer, disassembly, refurbishing, and
disposal sites
Electrical and Electronic equipment Developed the Social Enterprise Model, the Close the Digital Divide Model, the IT Asset
Management Model and the Networking Equipment Recovery Model
Packaging A returnable packaging model to minimize waste generation and environmental impacts
General A stochastic model for profit maximization to determine the optimal service delivery for a multi-product,
multi-level network
Electric Appliances Re-use reverse logistics network based on election campaign algorithm
General A mixed integer non-linear programming for number and location of collection points, and centralized return
centers with the maximum holding time (collection frequency).
Retailers Model for direct reuse reverse logistics center location by using stochastic simulation,
genetic algorithm and linear programming

for decision making. Generally a decentralized structure close to customer is
preferred for this type of network (Fleischmann et al.,
2000).
Amini et al. (2005) discussed the competitive value of service management
activities, particularly repair services. A binary inte- ger programming model
was developed for the case study of a medical diagnostics center. Du and
Evans (2008) analyzed RL net- works dealing with the returns requiring
repair service for post sales services with objective of minimization of the
overall costs, and minimization of total tardiness of cycle time. Lieckens
et al. (2013) build a stochastic model for profit maximization model to
determine the optimal service delivery for a multi-product, multi- level network
for repairable service parts. Literature on repairing network along with key
remarks is summarized in Table 5d. There are very few repairing networks
models found in the literature.
4.4.5. Secondary market network
For some firms, selling through the secondary market such as factory outlet
store owned and operated by the manufacturer, can be more profitable
than their volume channel through dis- tributors or retailers (Rogers and
Tibben-Lembke, 1999). Abraham (2011) conducted an empirical study to map
and understand the RL systems in the apparel aftermarket in India and found
that col- laboration between stakeholders can improve logistics, business
predictability and margins. Louwers et al. (1999) developed a model for
recycling and reusing old carpets with an option of considering secondary
market for resale of carpets. Listes and Dekker (2005) proposed a stochastic
programming model for recycling sand while considering selling the sand
into the secondary market. Alumur et al. (2012) developed a RL model for
washing machines and con- sidered an option of selling them into the
secondary market. They found that major flow is sent to the secondary market
because of more profit into the secondary market compared to revenues either
from recycling or external remanufacturing. This shows that sec- ondary
market can play an important role in the success of RL if explored properly.
However, selling through secondary markets can be more complicated
than marketing new product. Suppli- ers are often concerned about brand
equity and hesitate to enter
products into the secondary market (Rogers et al., 2012). Literature on
secondary network is summarized in Table 5e.
4.5. Disposition decisions
A schematic flow diagram of RL for product returns is shown in Fig. 1.
Products are returned by the users through product acqui- sition process, and
are transported for inspection and separation. Inspection/sorting are carried out
for determining the action which recovers the most value from the returned
product, and products are disposition accordingly. Tan and Kumar (2006)
developed a system dynamics model for disposition of products for
remanu- facturing or refurbishing. They found that part replacements from
suppliers are more profitable than refurbished computer parts. Skinner et
al. (2008) empirically examined the different disposi- tion strategies and found
that if adequate resource support for RL is not available then choose to destroy
the product because other disposition options like recycling or remanufacturing
require sig- nificant resources for recapturing value. In a study, Ketzenberg and
Zuidwijk (2009) found that investments to reduce the recovery cost or
uncertainty of product returns are minimal, while invest- ments to increase
recovery speed and to reduce uncertainty may be expensive. Gobbi (2011)
considered product recovery value and found that low product recovery value is
associated with recycling and energy recovery, and high product recovery value
is associated with reprocessing and reuse. When the recovery option is
recy- cling, time is not relevant; the primary objective is cost reduction. When
the recovery option is reprocessing, time is primarily rel- evant, tradeoffs
between costs and time efficiency are necessary. Hazen et al. (2012) identified
seven RL disposition decision compo- nents by utilizing a problem-driven
content analysis methodology. The study considers wide range from corporate
strategy to business level strategy and also the external factors of disposition
decision making. Hazen (2011) also analyzed the strategic factors and used
previous conceptual RL frameworks to provide a summary of these factors for
the improvements of RL functions. Although different firms in different
industries have been using potential disposition options (reuse, recycle,
remanufacture, repair) in practice, Genchev
87 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 87

Table 5c
Review of remanufacturing network models.

Authors Industry/Product Remarks

Jayaraman et al. (1999)
Krikke et al. (1999a)
Guide and Pentico (2003)
Franke et al. (2006)
Kim et al. (2006)
Mitra (2007)
Salema et al. (2007)
Pishvaee et al. (2009)
Pishvaee and Torabi (2010)
Tire
Multi-time scale Markov decision problem solved by using dynamic
Krikke (2011)
Das and Chowdhury (2012)
Nenes and Nikolaidis (2012)
Kannan et al. (2012c)
Cardoso et al. (2003)
Huang and Su (2013)
Korchi and Millet (2011)
Ramezani et al. (2013)
Vahdani et al. (2013)
Barker and Zabinsky (2014)
Eskandarpour et al. (2014)
Gu and Tagaras (2014)
Niknejad and Petrovic (2014)
Manufact. A single period mixed integer linear programming model based on a multi product capacitated
warehouse location
Discarded Copiers A mixed integer liner programming model based on a multi-level un-capacitated
warehouse location
Cellular Phone A model to determine the optimal acquisition prices for used phones and selling price for
remanufactured phones for profit maximization
Cellular Phone A linear optimization model considering quantity and conditions of mobile phones, reliability
of capacities, processing times, and demand
Manufact. Remanufacturing process of reusable parts by overhauling returned products to bring them back
to ‘as new’ condition.
Cellular Phone A pricing model to maximize the expected revenue
Office Documents A generic reverse logistics network considering capacity limits, multi-product management and
uncertainty on product demands and returns
General Stochastic model for recovery and disposal considering uncertainty in the quantity and quality
of returned products
General Multi Criteria Decision Making model considering risk and uncertainty Sasikumar et al. (2010)
Model for maximizing the profit of a multi-echelon reverse logistics network Wongthatsanekorn et al. (2010) General
programming, linear programming and Q-Learning approaches
Copier A decision framework for optimizing the combined disposition and location-
transport decision
Retail To maximize profit by considering the collection of returned products, the recovery of modules and
the proportion of the product mix at different quality levels
Used Products A Mixed Integer Linear Programming model, for the optimization of procurement,
remanufacturing, stocking and salvaging decisions
Plastics products A mixed integer linear model based on carbon footprint minimizing climate change
Manufact. Optimization of the net present value for determining size and location of plants, warehouses and
retailers under demand uncertainty using a scenario tree approach
General A mathematical model for analyzing a capacitated reverse supply chain with single manufacturer
and multiple retailers for optimal batch size and maximal profit
Manufact. Remanufacturing products with less environmental impact and higher economic benefits
General Stochastic model under uncertainty for maximizing the profit, responsiveness, and quality focusing
financial risk
General To minimize the total costs for closed loop supply chain with multi-echelon, multi-facility,
multi-product and multi-supplier
Tire The AHP model with criteria and sub criteria including costs and business relations
General Tabu search-based heuristic method for computing optimal solutions and
Taguchi experimental design technique for parameter tuning of the heuristic
General Focused on the optimal collection quantity for the collector, and for the remanufacturer using
game theory under both deterministic and uncertain demand
General A two phase fuzzy mixed integer optimization algorithm by considering parameters, quantity of
returned products, unit repair costs, unit production
cost, setup costs and unit disposal cost

et al. (2011) revealed additional disposition options like return to
manufacturer/supplier, return to stock, resale, balance inventory, and donate.
A common disposition used by firms is prioritizing various options
based on contribution margins of each disposition option (Ozdemir-Akyıldırım
et al., 2014). Authors have developed some of the models for disposition
decisions based on other criteria and methodology. Guide et al. (2008)
developed a model for the opti- mal disposition of returned products
considering the time value of
the return, the condition of the product, and the congestion effect at the
remanufacturing facility. This model is helpful in extract- ing value from
product return processes. Ozdemir-Akyıldırım et al. (2014) utilized opportunity
cost based dynamic models for selec- tion among different recovery options.
Karamouzian et al. (2014) worked on queuing theory based optimal disposition
model which utilizes an acquisition policy by grading the returned
products. Objective of the study was to maximize the product recovery
value. Some of the multi criteria decision making models have

Table 5d
Review of repairing network models.

Authors Industry/Product Remarks

Krikke et al. (2003) Refrigerator Decision model for location allocation and product design for optimization of environmental
impact and total cost
Amini et al. (2005) Medical Diagnostic A binary integer programming model
Zhou and Wang (2008) General A mixed integer formulation, solved by using standard Branch & Bound techniques
Lieckens et al. (2013) General A stochastic model for profit maximization to determine the optimal service delivery for a multi-product,
multi-level network
88 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 88

Table 5e
Review of secondary market network models.

Authors Industry/Product Remarks

Louwers et al. (1999)
Realff et al. (2004)
Listes and Dekker (2005)
Lieckens and Vandaele (2007)
Francas and Minner (2009)
Abraham (2011)
Alumur et al. (2012)
Matar et al. (2014)
Demirel et al. (2014a,b)
Huang et al. (2014)
Liu et al. (2014)
Carpet A model for recycling and reusing old carpets with an option of considering secondary market for resale of carpets
Carpet Developed a mixed integer linear programming model for reverse production infrastructure design for recycling
Sand A stochastic programming model for recycling sand while considering selling the sand into the secondary market
General A mixed integer nonlinear programming model with queuing model and genetic algorithm
General Considering two cases, first where the newly manufactured and remanufactured products are sold on the same market
and second, the case where recovered products are in a secondary market
Apparel Aftermarket An empirical study
Washing Machine A reverse logistics model for washing machines considering an option of selling them in to the secondary market
Plastic Beverage Bottles Costs based model validated through numerical analysis
General Mixed integer programming model, multi periods and multi-parts under two main policies as secondary market
pricing and incremental incentive policies
Retail Retailers’ inventory decision considering secondary market to salvage the returns and the leftovers from the
initial sales
E-waste Developed the network model by using theory of constrains

also been used for disposition decision making. Wadhwa et al. (2009)
developed fuzzy-set theory based flexible decision model for selection of the
best alternative of disposition strategy. Senthil et al. (2012) proposed a
hybrid methodology based on AHP and TOPSIS under fuzzy environment
for the selection and evalua- tion of manufacturer operations, third party
operations or joint operations.
5. Discussion and research gap analysis
Based on the literature review on categorized issues for the
study, research gaps were identified and analyzed by the researchers.
Summary of the findings and research gaps are dis- cussed in following
sub-sections.
5.1. Adoption and implementation
Successful adoption and implementation of RL in various sec- tors have
been explored in many countries. Drivers and barriers are important for
the decision making of the RL adoption and efficient implementation.
Previous research was focused on iden- tifying different factors at sector level
as shown in Tables 2 and 3. These factors may vary from sector to sector,
company to com- pany and may change over a period. There was no study
found on comparative study on variation of these factors across the sectors and
demographics. Previous studies were focused mainly on elec- tronic,
manufacturing, tire, hospital and manufacturing industry. These studies were
carried out in limited sectors so there is scope for future study in other sectors
like oil and gas, consumer goods, FMCG, plastics. Also, the risk assessment of
RL has been mentioned in some of the studies but not explored exclusively.
Risk assessment of RL implementation offers an opportunity for future
research.
5.2. Forecasting product returns
Models developed for forecasting product returns for reuse, recycle,
remanufacturing by considering different business sce- narios are shown
in Table 4. However, none of them consider the factors like consumer
behavior, customs and culture, demo- graphics, rules and regulations
collectively, which can make a very different scenario and may affect
forecasting product returns sub- stantially. No study was found to analyze the
sufficiency of these factors for forecasting product returns. Also, forcasting
methods were developed either for recycling or remanufacuring products
but no comprehensive model was found for forecasting product
returns up to disposition level. The techniques used for model- ing
include mathematical, analytical, simulation, and MCDM. The techniques or
methodology used for a particular sector in a given scenario may be applied for
other sectors also and may be compared with existing methodologies used by
the practioners. However, during the literature review, no study was
found regarding key performance indicators for forecasting product returns
which are important for accessing and monitoring the accuracy of models.
5.3. Outsourcing
Outsourcing has been the key word for the corporate world and
researchers in the modernized business world. Firms are more focused toward
core competencies and outsourcing other activi- ties. It was observed that
RL is not the part of core business for many firms and it is a potential area
for outsourcing. As discussed in Section 4.3, outsourcing RL has been explored
both from strate- gic and operational perspectives in many sectors. Outsourcing
RL and decision for selecting third party RL service providers were
discussed frequently in the literatures and various mathematical, analytical, and
MCDM had been applied for decision making. Most of the studies provided the
information on outsourcing part of RL activities, mainly collection and
transportation. No comprehen- sive frame work was found for decision
making with respect to completely or partly outsourcing the product
acquisition, reuse, recycle, repair or remanufacturing activities, and conditions
under which these activities must be outsourced. In addition to this, it
was also observed that no study analyzed the negative impact of outsourcing
RL functions on performance. The option of formation of joint consortium
was mentioned in some of studies (Huscroft et al., 2013), but this option is
rarely considered in decision making. Joint formation just like
telecommunication tower sharing model, may not only reduce the initial
investment but also may reduce operational costs. Any other alternative like
fourth party logistics provider has also not been explored much in reference to
RL. Since product returns are uncertain and economies of scale are difficult to
achieve, fourth party logistics can play a crucial role in RL through integration
and collaboration.
5.4. RL networks from secondary market perspective
RL networks are designed for strategic decisions including num- ber of
facilities, location, region to be covered, and their capacity or size. RL
networks i.e. reuse, repairing, remanufacturing, recy- cling, modeled in the
past have been summarized in Tables 5a–5d.
89 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
The solution methodologies utilized by the previous researchers include
deterministic and stochastic modeling (linear/non lin- ear, mixed integer,
goal programming, queuing models), heuristic methods (genetic algorithm,
Tabu-search, simulated annealing), MCDM (AHP, ANP, TOPSIS, DEA,
ISM). Stochastic modeling is fre- quently being used for tackling uncertainties.
However, there is an opportunity to examine the other approaches like chaos
theory for dealing with uncertainties. Tables 5a–5d indicate that mixed inte- ger
programming is the most common methodology used by the researchers. These
mixed integer programming models range from simple single product un-
capacitated models to complex multi- product capacitated or multi-
objective models. Multi-Objective models are developed in last few years
only and offer an opportu- nity for future research. LINDO, LINGO, GAMS,
CPLEX are the most commonly used software for linear-nonlinear
optimization. Previ- ous research on secondary markets is also summarized in
Table 5e. In case of secondary market, very few solution methodologies have
been applied for modeling RL networks. Other solution method- ologies
like queuing models, graph theory, Markov chain models may also be
examined and applied for RL networks design consid- ering secondary market.
Many of the RL problems are modeled as trade-off analysis between costs and
customer service as shown in Tables 5a–5e. In forward logistics, costs are
usually well defined and systems are adoptable to even complex costs
models. How- ever, these costs systems are often not very effective in
managing the reverse flows of the products. More practical models for
the scenarios, where costs and service level visibility are low and com- plex
may be developed for RL networks design. Also, it is evident from Tables 5a–
5e that there are very few simulation models devel- oped for RL network
designs. Simulation based RL network models may be tested for having better
“Goodness of Fit” to the real life business environment. It was also
observed that there are few RL models considering secondary market sales
options. Secondary market offers an opportunity to explore this area especially
for the countries where secondary market has big market share. There is also
opportunity for comparative analysis of network models for selection of
suitable RL network.
5.5. Disposition decisions
Various operational and strategic decision making models have been
developed for the selection of best disposition alternative. Disposition
alternatives like reuse, recycle, remanufacture, return to manufacturer/supplier,
return to stock, resale, balance inven- tory, donate were discussed in the
literature. Disposition options for particular industry in different business
scenario are yet to be explored. There is a need of developing comprehensive
strategic decision models for identifying conditions under which each alter-
native must be selected. There are very few studies on disposition decisions
and it offers a lot of potential for future research.
6. Conclusion
In summary, Implementation of legislation, corporate imaging,
environmental concern, economic benefits, and sustainable com- petitiveness
are forcing firms not only to adopt RL practices but also to make them
efficient and effective. This review is focused on important issues which are
underrepresented in the past literature reviews. The article, through a
systematic and structured literature review provides insights into the
conceptualization and research on the issues including adoption and
implementation, forecasting product returns, outsourcing, RL networks from
secondary market perspective, and disposition decisions. In this perspective,
total 242 previous published research articles were selected, categorized,
and reviewed to find the research gaps and future scope of research. The
research gaps were identified, discussed, and suggestions were
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 89
made for future research opportunity. The opportunities for future research will
help academicians, practitioners and researchers in their future work.
Classifications and cited references may be used as a broad frame of references
to develop concepts and models for the future research. One of the limitations
of this study is that select issues were considered for the review. This work may
be further extended for other issues like marketing, information technology in
the area of RL.
References
Abdulrahman MD, Gunasekaran A, Subramanian N. Critical barriers in implement- ing reverse
logistics in the Chinese manufacturing sectors. Int J Prod Econ
2014;147(Part B):460–71.
Abraham N. The apparel aftermarket in India – a case study focusing on reverse logistics. J
Fash Mark Manag 2011;15(2):211–27.
Agrawal S, Singh RK, Murtaza Q. Forecasting product returns for recycling in Indian electronics
industry. J Adv Manag Res 2014;11(1):102–14.
Aguezzoul A. Third-party logistics selection problem: a literature review on criteria and methods.
Omega 2014;49:69–78.
Ahluwalia PK, Nema AK. Multi objective reverse logistics model for integrated com- puter waste
management. Waste Manag Res 2006;24(6):514–27.
Akc¸ alı E, C¸ etinkaya S, Üster H. Network design for reverse and closed loop supply chains: an
annotated bibliography of models and solution approaches. Networks
2009;53(3):231–48.
Alumur SA, Nickel S, Saldanha-da-Gama F, Verter V. Multi-period reverse logistics network
design. Eur J Oper Res 2012;220(1):67–78.
Amin SH, Zhang G. An integrated model for closed-loop supply chain config- uration and
supplier selection: multi-objective approach. Expert Syst Appl
2012;39(8):6782–91.
Amini MM, Retzlaff-Roberts D, Bienstock CC. Designing a reverse logistics operation for short
cycle time repair services. Int J Prod Econ 2005;96(3):367–80.
Ardjmand E, Weckman Z, Park N, Taherkhani P, Singh M. Applying genetic algo- rithm to
a new location and routing model of hazardous materials. Int J Prod Res
2015;53(3):916–28.
Arnold U. New dimensions of outsourcing: a combination of transaction cost economics and
the core competencies concept. Eur J Purch Supply Manag
2000;6(1):23–9.
Atasu A, Guide VDR Jr, Wassenhove LNV. Product reuse economics in closed-loop supply chain
research. Prod Oper Manag 2009;17(5):483–96.
Atasu A, Toktay LB, Van Wassenhove LN. How collection cost structure drives a
manufacturer’s reverse channel choice. Prod Oper Manag 2013;22(5):1089–102. Autry CW,
Daugherty PJ, Richey RG. The challenge of reverse logistics in catalog
retailing. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2001;31(1):26–37.
Azadivar F, Ordoobadi S. Decision rules for recycling returned products. Int J Sustain
Eng 2012;5(3):208–19.
Barker TJ, Zabinsky ZB. A multi criteria decision making model for reverse logistics using
analytical hierarchy process. Omega 2014;39(5):558–73.
Barrera MMM, Cruz-Mejia O. Reverse logistics of recovery and recycling of non- returnable
beverage containers in the brewery industry. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2014;44(7):577–
96.
Barros AI, Dekker R, Scholten V. A two level network for recycling sand: a case study.
Eur J Oper Res 1998;110(2):199–214.
Bautista J, Pereira J. Modeling the problem of locating collection areas for urban waste
management. An application to the metropolitan area of Barcelona. Omega
2012;34(6):617–29.
Benedito E, Corominas A. Optimal manufacturing policy in a reverse logistic sys- tem with
dependent stochastic returns and limited capacities. Int J Prod Res
2013;51(1):1–13.
Bernon M, Cullen J. An integrated approach to managing reverse logistics. Int J Logist
2007;10(1):41–56.
Bernon M, Rossi S, Cullen J. Retail reverse logistics: a call and grounding framework for research.
Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2011;41(5):484–510.
Biehl M, Prater E, Realff MJ. Assessing performance and uncertainty in developing carpet reverse
logistics systems. Comput Oper Res 2007;34:443–63.
Blackburn JD, Guide VDR Jr, Souza GC, Wassenhove LNW. Reverse supply chains for
commercial returns. Calif Manag Rev 2004;46(2):6–22.
Bottani E, Rizzi A. A fuzzy TOPSIS methodology to support outsourcing of logistics services.
Supply Chain Manag 2006;11(4):294–308.
Boyson S, Corse T, Dresner D, Rabinovich E. Managing effective third party logistics
relationships: what does it take? J Bus Logist 1999;20:73–100.
Breen L. Give me back my empties or else! A preliminary analysis of customer compliance
in reverse logistics practices (UK). Manag Res News 2006;29(9):
532–51.
Buyukozkan G, Feyzioglu O, Ersoy MS. Evaluation of 4PL operating models: a deci- sion making
approach based on 2-additive Choquet integral. Int J Prod Econ
2009;121(1):112–20.
Cardoso SR, Barbosa-Povoa APFD, Relvas S. Design and planning of supply chains with
integration of reverse logistics activities under demand uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res
2003;226(3):436–51.
Carrasco-Gallego R, Ponce-Cueto E, Dekker R. Closed-loop supply chains of reusable
articles: a typology grounded on case studies. Int J Prod Res
2012;50(19):5582–96.
90 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
Carter CR, Ellram LM. Reverse logistics: a review of the literature and framework for future
investigation. J Bus Logist 1998;19(1):85–102.
Chanintrakul P, Coronado Mondragon AE, Lalwani C, Wong CY. Reverse logistics network
design: a state-of-the-art literature review. Int J Bus Perform Supply Chain Model
2009;1(1):61–81.
Chen H, He H. Reverse logistics demand forecasting under demand uncertainty. Int
Conf Logist Eng Manag ASCE Conf Proc 2010;1:343–8.
Chen YT, Chan FTS, Chung SH. An integrated closed-loop supply chain model with location
allocation problem and product recycling decisions. Int J Prod Res 2014.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.975849.
Cheng YH, Lee F. Outsourcing reverse logistics of high-tech manufacturing firms by using a
systematic decision-making approach: TFT-LCD sector in Taiwan. Ind Mark Manag
2010;39(7):1111–9.
Chiou YC, Chen HC, Yu HC, Yeha CY. Consideration factors of reverse logistics imple-
mentation – a case study of Taiwan’s electronics industry. Procedia Soc Behav Sci
2012;40:375–81.
Choi J, Fthenakis V. Economic feasibility of recycling photovoltaic modules. J Ind Ecol
2010;14(6):947–64.
Clottey T, Benton WC Jr, Srivastava R. Forecasting product returns for remanufac- turing
operations. Decis Sci 2012;43(4):589–614.
Crainic TG, Gendreau M, Dejax P. Dynamic and stochastic models for the allocation of empty
containers. Oper Res 1993;41(1):102–26.
Dai LF, Wang XF. Research on mixed intelligent arithmetic of reuse reverse logistics centers’
location model. Adv Mater Res 2014;945–949:3246–51.
Das K, Chowdhury AH. Designing a reverse logistics network for optimal col- lection
recovery and quality-based product-mix planning. Int J Prod Econ
2012;135(1):209–21.
Dat LQ, Linh DTT, Chou SY, Yu VF. Optimizing reverse logistic costs for recycling end-
of-life electrical and electronic products. Expert Syst Appl 2012;39(7):
6380–7.
Daugherty PJ, Droge C. Organizational structure in divisionalized manufacturers:
the potential for outsourcing logistical services. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag
1997;27(5/6):337–49.
De Brito MP, Dekker R. Reverse logistics: a framework. Econometric Institute Report
EI; 2002. p. 2002–38.
Del Castillo E, Cochran JK. Optimal short horizon distribution operations in reusable container
systems. J Oper Res Soc 1996;47(1):48–60.
Demirel N, Özceylan Paksoy T, Gökc¸ en H. A genetic algorithm approach for opti- mising
a closed-loop supply chain network with crisp and fuzzy objectives. Int J Prod Res
2014a;52(12):3637–64.
Demirel E, Demirel N, Gökc¸ en H. A mixed integer linear programming model to optimize
reverse logistics activities of end-of-life vehicles in Turkey. J Clean Prod 2014b.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.079.
Diabat A, Kannan D, Kaliyan M, Svetinovic D. An optimization model for product returns
using genetic algorithms and artificial immune system. Resour Conserv Recycl 2013;74:156–
69.
Divahar SR, Sudhahar C. Selection of reverse logistics provider using AHP. Proced
Eng 2012;38:2005–8.
Dowlatshahi S. Developing a theory of reverse logistics. Interfaces
2000;30(3):143–55.
Dowlatshahi S. A cost-benefit analysis for the design and implementation of reverse logistics
systems: case studies approach. Int J Prod Res 2010;48(5):
1361–80.
Du F, Evans GF. A bi-objective reverse logistics network analysis for post-sale service.
Comput Oper Res 2008;35(8):2617–34.
Duhaime R, Riopel D, Langevin A. Value analysis and optimization of reusable con- tainers at
Canada Post. Interfaces 2001;31(3):3–15.
Easterby-Smith M, Thorpe R, Lowe A. Management Research – An Introduction.
London: Sage Publications; 2002.
Efendigil T, Önüt S, Kongar E. A holistic approach for selecting a third-party reverse
logistics provider in the presence of vagueness. Comput Ind Eng
2008;54(2):269–87.
Efendigil T, Onut S, Kahraman C. A decision support system for demand forecasting with artificial
neural networks and neuro-fuzzy models: a comparative analysis. Expert Syst Appl
2009;36(3):6697–707.
Eskandarpour M, Masehian E, Soltani R, Khosrojerdi A. A reverse logistics network for recovery
systems and a robust meta heuristic solution approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2014;74(9–
12):1393–406.
Ferguson M, Toktay LB. The effect of competition on recovery strategies. Prod Oper
Manag 2006;15(3):351–68.
Flapper SDP. One-way or reusable distribution items. In: Fransoo JC, Rutten WGMM, editors.
Proceedings of the second international conference on computer inte- grated manufacturing
in the process industries. The Netherlands: Eindhoven University of Technology; 1996. p.
230–43.
Fleischmann M. Reverse logistics network structures and design. In: Guide VDR Jr, Van
Wassenhove LN, editors. Business aspects of closed-loop supply chains. Pittsburgh, PA:
Carnegie Bosch Institute; 2001. p. 117–48.
Fleischmann M, Van Wassenhove LN, Van Nunen JAEE, van der Laan EA, Dekker R, Bloemhof-
Ruwaard JM. Quantitative models for reverse logistics: a review. Eur J Oper Res
1997;103(1):1–17.
Fleischmann M, Krikke HR, Dekker R, Flapper SDP. A characterization of logistics
networks for product recovery. Omega 2000;28(6):653–66.
Fleischmann M, Van Nunen JAEE, Grave B. Integrating closed-loop supply chains and spare parts
management at IBM. Interfaces 2003;33(6):44–56.
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 90
Francas D, Minner S. Manufacturing network configuration in supply chains with product recovery.
Omega 2009;37(4):757–69.
Francesco MD, Crainic TG, Zuddas P. The effect of multi-scenario policies on empty container
repositioning. Transp Res E 2009;45(5):758–70.
Franke C, Basdere B, Ciupek M, Seliger S. Remanufacturing of mobile phones-capacity program
and facility adaptation planning. Omega 2006;34(6):562–70.
Galbreth MR, Blackburn JD. Optimal acquisition and sorting policies for remanufac- turing. Prod
Oper Manag 2006;15(3):384–92.
Genchev SE, Richey RG, Gabler GB. Evaluating reverse logistics programs: a sug- gested
process formalization. Int J Logist Manag 2011;22(2):242–63.
Geyer R, Blass VD. The economics of cell phone reuse and recycling. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2010;47(5–8):515–25.
Giannetti BF, Bonilla SH, Almeida CMVB. An emergy-based evaluation of a reverse logistics
network for steel recycling. J Clean Prod 2013;46:48–57.
Gobbi C. Designing the reverse supply chain: the impact of the product residual value. Int J
Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2011;41(8):768–96.
Goh TN, Varaprasad N. A statistical methodology for the analysis of the life-cycle of reusable
containers. IIE Trans 1986;18(1):42–7.
Gołe˛biewski B, Trajer J, Jaros M, Winiczenko R. Modelling of the location of vehicle
recycling facilities: a case study in Poland. Resour Conserv Recycl
2013;80:10–20.
Gomes CSF, Nunes KRA, Xavier LH, Cardoso R, Valle R. Multi criteria decision making applied
to waste recycling in Brazil. Omega 2008;36(3):395–404.
González-Torre PL, Adenso-Diaz B. Reverse logistics practices in the glass sector in
Spain and Belgium. Int Bus Rev 2006;15(5):527–46.
González-Torre PL, Adenso-Diaz B, Artiba H. Environmental and reverse logis- tics policies
in European bottling and packaging firms. Int J Prod Econ
2004;88(1):95–104.
González-Torre P, Aı´lvarez M, Sarkis J, Adenso-Dıı´az B. Barriers to the imple- mentation
of environmentally oriented reverse logistics: evidence from the automotive industry
sector. Br J Manag 2010;21(4):889–904.
Govindan K, Sarkis J, Palaniappan M. An analytic network process-based multi- criteria
decision making model for a reverse supply chain. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2013;68(1–
4):863–80.
Govindan K, Soleimani H, Kannan D. Reverse logistics and closed-loop sup- ply
chain: a comprehensive review to explore the future. Eur J Oper Res
2015;240(3):603–26.
Grover V, Cheon MJ, Teng JT. A descriptive study on the outsourcing of information system
functions. Inf Manag 1994;27(1):33–44.
Gu Q, Tagaras G. Optimal collection and remanufacturing decisions in reverse supply chains with
collector’s imperfect sorting. Int J Prod Res 2014;52(17):5155–70.
Guide VDR Jr, Pentico DW. A hierarchical decision model for re-manufacturing and re-use. Int J
Logist Res Appl 2003;6(1–2):29–35.
Guide VDR, Wassenhove LN. Managing product returns for remanufacturing. Prod
Oper Manag 2001;10(2):142–55.
Guide VDR, Wassenhove LN. Full cycle supply chains. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mel- lon Press;
2003.
Guide VDR Jr, Gunes ED, Souza GC, VanWassenhove LN. The optimal disposition decision
for product returns. Oper Manag Res 2008;1(1):6–14.
Hall DJ, Huscroft JR, Hazen BT, Hanna JB. Reverse logistics goals metrics and challenges:
perspectives from industry. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag
2013;43(9):768–85.
Hanafi J, Kara S, Kaebernick H. Generating fuzzy coloured petri net forecasting model to predict
the return of products. In: IEEE international symposium on electron- ics and the environment;
2007. p. 245–50, 7–10 May.
Hayes AF, Krippendorff K. Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data.
Commun Methods Meas 2007;1:77–89.
Hazen BT. Strategic reverse logistics disposition decisions: from theory to practice.
Int J Logist Syst Manag 2011;10(10):275–92.
Hazen BT, Hall DJ, Hanna JB. Reverse logistics disposition decision making: devel- oping a
decision framework via content analysis. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag
2012;42(3):244–74.
Hingley M, Zindgreen M, Grant DB, Kane C. Using fourth-party logistics manage- ment to
improve horizontal collaboration among grocery retailers. Supply Chain Manag
2011;16(5):316–27.
Huang SM, Su JCP. Impact of product proliferation on the reverse supply chain.
Omega 2013;41(3):626–39.
Huang X, Gu JW, Ching WK, Siu TK. Impact of secondary market on consumer return policies and
supply chain coordination. Omega 2014;45:57–70.
Huscroft JR, Hazen BT, Hall DJ, Hanna JB. Task-technology fit for reverse logistics
performance. Int J Logist Manag 2012;24(2):230–46.
Huscroft JR, Hazen BT, Hall DJ, Skipper JB, Hanna JB. Reverse logistics: past
research current management issues and future directions. Int J Logist Manag
2013;24(3):304–27.
Insigna RC, Werle MJ. Linking outsourcing to business strategy. Acad Manag Exec
2000;14(4):58–70.
Janes B, Schuur P, Brito De MP. A reverse logistics diagnostic tool: the case of the consumer
electronics industry. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2010;47(5–8):495–513. Jayaraman V, Luo Y.
Creating competitive advantages through new value creation:
a reverse logistics perspective. Acad Manag Perspect 2007;21(2):56–73. Jayaraman V, Guide
VDR Jr, Srivastava R. A closed loop logistics model for remanu-
facturing. J Oper Res Soc 1999;50(5):497–508.
Jayaraman V, Patterson RA, Rolland E. The design of reverse distribution networks:
models and solution procedures. Eur J Oper Res 2003;150(1):128–49.
91 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
and and
Jindal A, Sangwan KS. Development of an interpretive structural model of drivers for reverse
logistics implementation in Indian industry. Int J Bus Perform Supply Chain Model
2013;5(4):325–42.
Kannan G, Murugesan P. Selection of third-party reverse logistics provider using fuzzy
extent analysis. Benchmarking 2011;18(1):149–67.
Kannan G, Pokharel S, Sasikumar P. A hybrid approach using ISM and fuzzy
TOPSIS for the selection of reverse logistics provider. Resour Conserv Recycl
2009;54(1):28–36.
Kannan G, Sasikumar P, Devika M. A genetic algorithm approach for solving a closed loop
supply chain model: a case of battery recycling. Appl Math Model
2010;34:655–70.
Kannan G, Palaniappan M, Zhu Q, Kannan D. Analysis of third party reverse logistics
provider using interpretive structural modeling. Int J Prod Res
2012a;140(1):204–11.
Kannan D, Diabat A, Shankar KM. Analyzing the drivers of end-of-life tire man- agement
using interpretive structural modeling (ISM). Int J Adv Manuf Technol
2012b;72(9–12):1603–14.
Kannan D, Diabat A, Alrefaei M, Govindan K, Yong G. A carbon footprint based reverse logistics
network design model. Resour Conserv Recycl 2012c;67:75–9.
Kapetanopoulou P, Tagaras G. Drivers and obstacles of product recovery activities in the Greek
industry. Int J Oper Prod Manag 2011;31(2):148–66.
Kara SS, Onut S. A stochastic optimization approach for paper recycling reverse logistics
network design under uncertainty. Int J Environ Sci Technol
2010;7(4):717–30.
Kara S, Rugrungruang F, Kaebernick H. Simulation modelling of reverse logistics networks.
Int J Prod Econ 2007;106(1):61–9.
Karamouzian A, Jalali Naini SGH, Mazdeh MM. Management of returned products to a
remanufacturing facility considering arrival uncertainty and priority process- ing. Int J Oper
Res 2014;20(3):331–40.
Kelle P, Silver EA. Forecasting the returns of reusable containers. J Oper Manag
1989;8(1):17–35.
Ketzenberg ME, Zuidwijk RA. Optimal pricing ordering and return policies for con- sumer goods.
Prod Oper Manag 2009;18(3):344–60.
Kim K, Song I, Kim J, Jeong B. Supply planning model for remanufacturing system in reverse
logistics environment. Comput Ind Eng 2006;51(2):279–87.
Kissling R, Fitzpatrick C, Boeni H, Luepschen CS, Dickenson J. Definition of generic re-use
operating models for electrical and electronic equipment. Resour Conserv Recycl 2012;65:85–
99.
Ko HJ, Evans GW. A genetic algorithm based heuristic for the dynamic inte- grated
forward/reverse logistics network for 3PLs. Comput Oper Res 2007;34(2):
346–66.
Kocabasoglu C, Prahinski C, Klassen RD. Linking forward and reverse sup- ply chain
investments: the role of business uncertainty. J Oper Manag
2007;25(6):1141–60.
Korchi AE, Millet D. Designing a sustainable reverse logistics channel: the 18 generic structures
framework. J Clean Prod 2011;17(6–7):588–97.
Krapp M, Nebel J, Sahamie H. Forecasting product returns in closed-loop supply chains. Int
J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2013a;43(8):614–37.
Krapp M, Nebel J, Sahamie H. Using forecasts and managerial accounting information
to enhance closed-loop supply chain management. OR Spectr
2013b;35(4):975–1007.
Krikke H. Impact of closed-loop network configurations on carbon footprints: a case study in
copiers. Resour Conserv Recycl 2011;55(12):1196–205.
Krikke H, Van Harten A, Schuur P. Business case Oce: reverse logistics network re- design for
copiers. OR Spectr 1999a;21:381–409.
Krikke HR, Van Harten A, Schuur PC. Business case Roteb: recovery strategies for
monitors. Comput Ind Eng 1999b;36(4):739–57.
Krikke HR, Bloemhof-Ruwaard J, Van Wassenhove LN. Concurrent product and closed-loop
supply chain design with an application to refrigerators. Int J Prod Res 2003;41(16):3689–719.
Krippendorff K. Reliability in content analysis: some common misconceptions and
recommendations. Hum Commun Res 2004;30(3):411–33.
Kroon L, Vrijens G. Returnable containers: an example of reverse logistics. Int J Phys
Distrib Logist Manag 1995;25(2):56–68.
Krumwiede DW, Sheu C. A model for reverse logistics entry by third party providers.
Omega 2002;30(5):325–33.
Kumar S, Craig S. Dell Inc.’s closed loop supply chain for computer assembly plants.
Inf Knowl Syst Manag 2007;6(3):197–214.
Kumar S, Putnam V. Cradle to cradle: reverse logistics strategies and opportunities across three
industry sectors. Int J Prod Econ 2008;115(2):305–15.
Kumar DT, Soleimani H, Kannan G. Forecasting return products in an integrated
forward/reverse supply chain utilizing an ANFIS. Int J Appl Math Comput Sci
2014a;24(3):669–82.
Kumar DT, Palaniappan M, Kannan D, Shankar KM. Analyzing the CSR issues behind the
supplier selection process using ISM approach. Resour Conserv Recycl
2014b;92:268–78.
Lambert S, Riopel D, Abdul-Kader W. A reverse logistics decisions conceptual frame- work.
Comput Ind Eng 2011;61(3):561–81.
Lau KH, Wang Y. Reverse logistics in the electronic industry of China: a case study.
Supply Chain Manag 2009;14(6):447–65.
Le Blanc HM, Fleuren HA, Krikke HR. Redesign of a recycling system for LPG-tanks.
OR Spectr 2004;26(2):286–304.
Lee DH, Dong M. A heuristic approach to logistics network design for end of lease computer
products recovery. Transp Res E 2008;44(3):455–74.
Lee DH, Dong M. Dynamic network design for reverse logistics operations under
uncertainty. Transp Res E 2009;45:61–71.
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 91
Lieckens K, Vandaele N. Reverse logistics network design with stochastic lead times.
Comput Oper Res 2007;34:395–416.
Lieckens KT, Colen PJ, Lambrecht MR. Optimization of a stochastic remanufacturing network
with an exchange option. Decis Support Syst 2013;54(4):1548–57.
Linton JD, Klassen RB, Jayaraman V. Sustainable supply chains: an introduction. J Oper
Manag 2007;25(6):1075–82.
Listes O, Dekker R. A stochastic approach to a case study for product recovery net- work design.
Eur J Oper Res 2005;160(1):268–87.
Liu WJ, Fang ZG. A conceptual framework for reverse logistics. In: Proceedings of
2007 IEEE international conference on grey systems and intelligent services;
2007. p. 1180–5.
Liu DL, Zhu XB, Xu KL, Fang DM. Reverse logistics network design of waste electrical
appliances. Appl Mech Mater 2014;513–517:474–7.
Loomba AP, Nakashima K. Enhancing value in reverse supply chains by sorting before product
recovery. Prod Plan Control 2012;23(2–3):205–15.
Louwers D, Kip BJ, Peters E, Souren F, Flapper SDP. A facility location allocation model for
reusing carpet material. Comput Ind Eng 1999;36(4):855–69.
Lundkvist K, Larsson M, Samuelsson C. Optimization of a centralized recycling sys- tem for steel
plant by-products a logistics perspective. Resour Conserv Recycl
2013;77:29–36.
Mafakheri F, Nasiri F. Revenue sharing coordination in reverse logistics. J Clean Prod
2013;59:185–96.
Martin P, Guide VDR Jr, Craighead CW. Supply chain sourcing in remanufactur- ing
operations: an empirical investigation to remake versus buy. Decis Sci
2010;41(2):301–21.
Marx-Gomez J, Rautenstrauch C, Nurnberger A, Kruse R. Neuro-fuzzy approach to forecast returns
of scrapped products to recycling and remanufacturing. Knowl Based Syst 2002;15(1/2):119–
28.
Matar N, Jaber MY, Searcy C. A reverse logistics inventory model for plastic bottles.
Int J Logist Manag 2014;25(2):315–33.
Mayring P. Qualitative Inhaltanalyse-Grundlagen und Techniken [Qualitative content analysis].
Weinheim: Beltz Verlag; 2008.
Meade L, Sarkis J. A conceptual model for selecting and evaluating third party reverse logistics
providers. Supply Chain Manag 2002;7(5):283–95.
Meade L, Sarkis J, Presley A. The theory and practice of reverse logistics. Int J Logist
Syst Manag 2007;3(1):56–84.
Meng Q, Wang S. Liner shipping service network design with empty container repo- sitioning.
Transp Res E 2011;47(5):695–708.
Meredith J. Theory building through conceptual methods. Int J Oper Prod Manag
1993;13(5):3–11.
Mitra S. Revenue management for remanufactured products. Omega
2007;35(5):553–62.
Mittal VK, Sangwan KS. Assessment of hierarchy and inter-relationships of barri- ers to
environmentally conscious manufacturing adoption. World J Soc Technol Sustain Dev
2013;10(4):297–307.
Mittal VK, Sangwan KS. Development of a structural model of environmentally con- scious
manufacturing drivers. J Manuf Technol Manag 2014;25(8):1195–208.
Mollenkopf D, Closs D, Twede D, Lee S, Burgess G. Assessing the viability of reusable packaging:
a relative cost approach. J Bus Logist 2005;26(1):169–97.
Mukhopadhyay SK, Setaputra R. The role of 4PL as the reverse logistics inte- grator:
optimal pricing and return policies. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag
2006;36(9):716–29.
Murphy PR, Poist RP. Managing of logistics retro movements: an empirical analysis of literature
suggestions. Transp Res Forum 1989;29(1):177–84.
Mutha A, Pokharel S. Strategic network design for reverse logistics and remanu- facturing
using new and old product modules. Comput Ind Eng 2009;56(1):
334–46.
Nagurney A, Toyasaki F. Reverse supply chain management and electronic waste recycling:
a multitiered network equilibrium framework for e-cycling. Transp Res E 2005;41(1):1–28.
Narayana SA, Elias AA, Pati RK. Reverse logistics in the pharmaceuticals industry: a systemic
analysis. Int J Logist Manag 2014;25(2):379–98.
Nenes G, Nikolaidis Y. A multi-period model for managing used product returns. Int
J Prod Res 2012;50(5):1360–76.
Neuendorf KA. The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002. Niknejad A,
Petrovic D. Optimization of integrated reverse logistics networks with
different product recovery routes. Eur J Oper Res 2014;238(1):143–54. Norek CD.
Throwing it into reverse. DC Veloc 2003;1(1):54–8.
Ordoobadi SM. Outsourcing reverse logistics and remanufacturing functions: a con- ceptual
strategic model. Manag Res News 2009;32(9):831–45.
Ozdemir-Akyıldırım O, Denizel M, Ferguson M. Allocation of returned products among
different recovery options through an opportunity cost–based dynamic approach. Decis Sci
2014;45(6):1083–116.
Pagell M, Wu Z, Murthy NN. The supply chain implications of recycling. Bus Horiz
2007;50:133–43.
Park JY. Assessing determinants of industrial waste reuse: the case of coal ash in the
United States. Resour Conserv Recycl 2014;92:116–27.
Pati RK, Vrat P, Kumar P. Integrated chain analysis of recycled vis-a-vis wood pulp paper industry
an Indian manufacturer viewpoint. Int J Value Chain Manag
2006;1(1):44–63.
Pati RK, Vrat P, Kumar P. A goal programming model for paper recycling system.
Omega 2008;36(3):405–17.
Peralta GL, Fontanos PM. E-waste issues and measures in the Philippines. J Mater
Cycles Waste Manag 2006;8(1):34–9.
Pishvaee MS, Torabi SA. A possibilistic programming approach for closed-loop sup- ply chain
network design under uncertainty. Fuzzy Sets Syst 2010;161:2668–83.
92 S. Agrawal
S. Agrawal
et al.et/ al.
Resources,
/ Resources,
Conservation
Conservation
Pishvaee MS, Jolai F, Razmi J. A stochastic optimization model for integrated for-
ward/reverse logistics network design. J Manuf Syst 2009;37:1100–12.
Pochampally K, Gupta SM. A business mapping approach to multi-criteria group selection
of collection centers and recovery facilities. In: Proceedings of the
2004 IEEE international symposium on electronics and the environment; 2004. p. 249–54.
Pokharel S, Mutha A. Perspectives in reverse logistics: a review. Resour Conserv
Recycl 2009;53(4):175–82.
Potdar A, Rogers J. Reason-code based model to forecast product returns. Foresight
2012;14(2):105–20.
Prahinski C, Kocabasoglu C. Empirical research opportunities in reverse supply chains.
Omega 2006;34(6):519–32.
Qiang Q, Ke Kerson T, Dong J. The closed-loop supply chain network with
competition distribution channel investment and uncertainties. Omega
2013;41(2):186–94.
Rahman S, Subramanian N. Factors for implementing end-of-life computer recycling operations in
reverse supply chains. Int J Prod Econ 2012;140(1):239–48.
Ramezani M, Bashiri M, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R. A new multi-objective stochastic model for a
forward/reverse logistic network design with responsiveness and quality level. Appl Math
Model 2013;37(1–2):328–44.
Rathore P, Kota S, Chakrabarti A. Sustainability through remanufacturing in India: a case study on
mobile handsets. J Clean Prod 2011;19(15):1709–22.
Ravi V, Shankar R. Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics.
Technol Forecast Soc 2004;72(8):1011–29.
Ravi V, Shankar R. Reverse logistics operations in paper industry: a case study. J Adv
Manag Res 2006;3(2):88–94.
Ravi V, Shankar R. Evaluating alternatives in reverse logistics for automobile orga- nizations. Int J
Logist Syst Manag 2012;12(1):32–51.
Ravi V, Shankar R, Tiwari MK. Analyzing alternatives in reverse logistics for end- of-life
computers: ANP and balanced scorecard approach. Comput Ind Eng
2005;48(2):327–56.
Realff MJ, Ammons JC, Newton DJ. Robust reverse production system design for carpet
recycling. IIE Trans 2004;36(8):767–76.
Richey GR, Daugherty PJ, Genchev SE, Autry CW. Reverse logistics: the impact of timing
and resources. J Bus Logist 2004;25(2):229–50.
Rogers DS, Tibben-Lembke R. Going backwards: reverse logistics trends and prac- tices. Reno,
NV: Reverse Logistics Executive Council; 1999.
Rogers DS, Tibben-Lembke RS. An examination of reverse logistics practices. J Bus
Logist 2001;22(2):129–48.
Rogers DS, Melamed B, Lembke RS. Modeling and analysis of reverse logistics. J Bus
Logist 2012;33(2):107–17.
Rubio S, Chamorro A, Miranda FJ. Characteristics of the research on reverse logistics
(1995–2005). Int J Prod Res 2008;46(4):1099–120.
Rudi N, Pyke DF, Sporsheim PO. Product recovery at the Norwegian national insur- ance
administration. Interfaces 2000;30(3):166–79.
Saen RF. A mathematical model for selecting third-party reverse logistics providers.
Int J Procure Manag 2009;2(2):180–90.
Salema MIG, Barbosa-Povoa AP, Novais AQ. An optimisation model for the design of a
capacitated multi-product reverse logistics network with uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res
2007;179(3):1063–77.
Salema MIG, Barbosa-Povoa PA, Novais AQ. Simultaneous design and planning of supply
chains with reverse flows: a generic modelling framework. Eur J Oper Res 2010;203(2):336–
49.
Sasikumar P, Kannan G, Haq AN. A multi-echelon reverse logistics network design for product
recovery – a case of truck tire remanufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2010;49(9–
12):1223–34.
Schweiger K, Sahamie R. A hybrid tabu search approach for the design of a paper recycling
network. Transp Res E 2013;50:98–119.
Selviaridis K, Spring M. Third party logistics: a literature review and research agenda.
Int J Logist Manag 2007;18(1):125–50.
Senthil S, Srirangacharyulu B, Ramesh A. A decision making methodology for the selection
of reverse logistics operating channels. Proced Eng 2012;38:418–28.
Senthil S, Srirangacharyulu B, Ramesh A. A robust hybrid multi-criteria decision making
methodology for contractor evaluation and selection in third-party reverse logistics.
Expert Syst Appl 2014;41(1):50–8.
Serrato MA, Ryan SM, Gaytan J. A Markov decision model to evaluate outsourcing in reverse
logistics. Int J Prod Res 2007;45(18–19):4289–315.
Sharma SK, Panda BN, Mahapatra SS, Sahu S. Analysis of barriers for reverse logistics:
an Indian perspective. Int J Model Optim 2011;1(2):101–6.
Sheriff M, Gunasekaran A, Nachiappan S. Reverse logistics network design: a review on strategic
perspective. Int J Logist Syst Manag 2012;12(2):171–94.
Shih L. Reverse logistics system planning for recycling electrical appliances and computers
in Taiwan. Resour Conserv Recycl 2001;32(1):55–72.
Shih HS, Lee ES, Chuang SH, Chen CC. A forecasting decision on the sales volume of
printers in Taiwan: an exploitation of the analytic network process. Comput Math Appl
2012;64(6):1545–56.
Silva DAL, Reno GWS, Sevegnani G, Sevegnani TB, Truzzi OMS. Comparison of dis- posable
and returnable packaging: a case study of reverse logistics in Brazil. J Clean Prod
2013;47:377–87.
and and
Recycling
Recycling
97 (2015)
97 (2015)
76–92
76–92 92
Sinha S, Shankar R, Taneerananon P. Modelling and case study of reverse logistics for construction
aggregates. Int J Logist Syst Manag 2010;6(1):39–59.
Skinner LR, Bryant PT, Richey RG. Examining the impact of reverse logistics disposi- tion
strategies. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2008;38(7):518–39.
Soleimani H, Seyyed-Esfahani M, Kannan G. Incorporating risk measures in closed- loop supply
chain network design. Int J Prod Res 2013;52(6):1843–67.
Srivastava S. Network design for reverse logistics. Omega 2008;36(4):535–48. Srivastava SK,
Srivastava RK. Managing product returns for reverse logistics. Int J
Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2006;36(7):524–46.
Stock JR. Development and implementation of reverse logistics program. Oak Brook, IL: Council
of Logistics Management; 1998.
Stock JR, Mulki JP. Product returns processing: an examination of practices of manu- facturers
wholesalers/distributors and retailers. J Bus Logist 2009;30(1):33–62. Subramanian N,
Gunasekaran A, Abdulrahman M, Liu C. Factors for implementing end-of-life product reverse
logistics in the Chinese manufacturing sector. Int J
Sustain Dev World Ecol 2014;21(3):235–45.
Subulan K, Tas¸ an AS, Baykasog˘lu A. Designing environmentally conscious tire
closed-loop supply chain network with multiple recovery options via interactive
fuzzy goal programming. Appl Math Model 2014.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2014.11.004.
Tan AWK, Kumar A. A decision-making model for reverse logistics in the computer industry. Int J
Logist Manag 2006;17(3):331–54.
Temur GT, Balcilar M, Bolat B. A fuzzy expert system design for forecasting return
quantity in reverse logistics network. J Enterp Inf Manag 2014;27(3):
316–28.
Thierry MC, Salomon M, Van Nunen JAEE, Van Wassenhove LN. Strategic issues in product
recovery management. Calif Manag Rev 1995;37(2):114–35.
Tibben-Lembke RS, Rogers DS. Differences between forward and reverse logistics in a retail
environment. Supply Chain Manag 2002;7(5):271–82.
Toktay LB, Wein LM, Zenios SA. Inventory management of remanufacturable prod- ucts. Manage
Sci 2000;46(11):1412–26.
Toktay LB, Vander Laan EA, De Brito MP. Managing product returns: the role of
forecasting. Reverse logistics network design. In: Dekker R, Fleischmann M, Inderfurth
K, Van Wassenhove LN, editors. Reverse logistics – quantitative mod- els for closed-loop
supply chains. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2003.
Tyagi RK, Dhanda KK, Young S. An operational framework for reverse supply chains.
Int J Manag Inf Syst 2012;16(2):1–13.
Vahdani B, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Jolai F. Reliable design of a logistics net- work under
uncertainty: a fuzzy possibilistic-queuing model. Appl Math Model
2013;37(5):3254–68.
Wadhwa S, Madaan J, Chan FTS. Flexible decision modeling of reverse logistics sys- tem: a value
adding MCDM approach for alternative selection. Robot Comput Integr Manuf
2009;25(2):460–9.
Wang X, Gaustad G, Babbitt CW, Richa K. Economies of scale for future lithium-ion battery
recycling infrastructure. Resour Conserv Recycl 2014;83:53–62.
Webster S, Mitra S. Competitive strategy in remanufacturing and the impact of take- back laws. J
Oper Manag 2007;25(6):1123–40.
Wilcox W, Horvath PA, Griffis SE, Autry CW. A Markov model of liquidity effects in reverse
logistics processes: the effects of random volume and passage. Int J Prod Econ
2011;129(1):86–101.
Win A. The value a 4PL provider can contribute to an organisation. Int J Phys Distrib
Logist Manag 2008;38(9):674–84.
Wongthatsanekorn W, Realff MJ, Ammons JC. Multi-time scale Markov decision pro- cess
approach to strategic network growth of reverse supply chains. Omega
2010;38(1–2):20–32.
Wu CJ, Cheng WP. Reverse logistics in the publishing industry: China, Hong Kong and Taiwan.
Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 2006;36(7):507–23.
Wu F, Li HZ, Chu LK, Sculli D. An outsourcing model for sustaining long-term per- formance. Int
J Prod Res 2005;43(12):2513–35.
Xiaofeng X, Tijun F. Forecast for the amount of returned products based on wave function. Int
Conf Inf Manag Innov Manag Ind Eng 2009;2:324–7.
Xie QH, Zhang XW, Lv WG, Cheng SY, Huang HX, Cai SD. Research on re-use reverse logistics
network of disused electric appliances based on election campaign algorithm. Appl Mech
Mater 2013;397–400:1121–8.
Young RR, Swan PF, Burn RH. Private railcar fleet operations: the problem of exces- sive
customer holding time in the chemicals and plastics industries. Transp J
2002;42(1):51–9.
Yu J, Williams E, Ju M, Yang Y. Forecasting global generation of obsolete personal computers.
Environ Sci Technol 2010;44(9):3232–7.
Zeballos LJ, Gomes MI, Barbosa-Povoa AP, Novais AQ. Addressing the uncertain qual- ity and
quantity of returns in closed-loop supply chains. Comput Chem Eng
2012;47:237–47.
Zhou Y, Wang S. Generic model of reverse logistics network design. J Transp Syst
Eng Inf Technol 2008;8(3):71–8.
Zikopoulos C, Tagaras G. Impact of uncertainty in the quality of returns on the
profitability of a single-period refurbishing operation. Eur J Oper Res
2007;182(1):205–25.
Zikopoulos C, Tagaras G. On the attractiveness of sorting before disassembly in
remanufacturing. IIE Trans 2008;40(3):313–23.