# The implications of blockchain for logistics operations and sustainability

Javed Aslam, Kee-Hung Lai, Yun Bae Kim, Horst Treiblmaier

► To cite this version:

Javed Aslam, Kee-Hung Lai, Yun Bae Kim, Horst Treiblmaier. The implications of blockchain for logistics operations and sustainability. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 2024, 9 (4), pp.100611. 10.1016/j.jik.2024.100611. hal-04764062

HAL Id: hal-04764062

https://hal.science/hal-04764062v1

Submitted on 3 Nov 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

# The implications of blockchain for logistics operations and sustainability

Javed Aslam<sup>a</sup>, Kee-hung Lai<sup>a,*</sup>, Yun Bae Kim<sup>b,*</sup>, Horst Treiblmaier<sup>c,*</sup>

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Check for
updates

## ARTICLE INFO

JEL classification codes:

O3
O31
O310
O320
O330
O350

Keywords:

Blockchain
Logistics operations
Sustainability
Fit-viability model
Task technology fit theory

## ABSTRACT

Empirical studies based on detailed, theory-based analyses are essential for a deep understanding of technology adoption. This study provides an overview of blockchain applications in logistics management, employing a comprehensive theoretical framework. Blockchain is considered a critical digital infrastructure for logistics operations due to its distinctive characteristics, including decentralization, transparency, immutability, real-time information sharing, reliability, and end-to-end visibility. These characteristics address many contemporary logistics challenges. The study introduces a research model that integrates the fit-viability model (FVM) and task technology fit theory (TTF), demonstrating blockchain's suitability for enhancing logistics operational functions and sustainability performance. To validate the model, data were collected from logistics managers of 576 companies and analyzed using partial least squares (PLS) regression. This research offers valuable insights for managers, policymakers, and decision-makers on practical challenges and potential solutions in logistics through the application of blockchain. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that the implementation of blockchain can improve the alignment, resilience, transparency, integration, and sustainability of logistics tasks.

## Introduction

Digital transformation is pivotal in shaping the dynamic business landscape, particularly in supply chain operations and logistics. Blockchain is viewed as a revolutionary digital infrastructure within the supply chain management (SCM) literature (Ahmed, MacCarthy, & Treiblmaier, 2022), noted for its distinctive features such as decentralization, transparency, immutability, real-time information dissemination, reliability, and end-to-end visibility. These features facilitate novel approaches to addressing challenges within logistics and the supply chain (Ahmed & MacCarthy, 2023; Aslam, Saleem, & Kim, 2023a; Jum'a, 2023).

The SCM sector has recently shown increasing interest in adopting blockchain solutions, although their implementation is still at an early stage (Durach, Blesik, von Düring, & Bick, 2021; Gligor et al., 2022), and restrained by a lack of empirical studies investigating blockchain implementations in logistics (Aslam, Saleem, Khan, & Kim, 2021; Karakas, Acar, & Kucukaltan, 2021). Over the past few decades, logistics practices have faced challenges including data integration, cybersecurity, supply chain complexity, uncertainty, resilience, transparency, collaboration, and real-time information dissemination (Gläser, Jahnke,

& Strassheim, 2023; Xu & He, 2022). Blockchain technology has been recommended as a central solution to overcome these challenges by, for example, facilitating the digitalization of logistics operations by providing a secure and immutable platform that improves operational efficiency, transparency, and data integrity (Guo, Chen, Li, Li, & Lu, 2022).

The lack of empirical research on blockchain implementation in logistics leaves the academic community with a deficit of in-depth studies and adoption frameworks. This study introduces an empirical and theoretical model of blockchain adoption in logistics management to address this gap. The study presents an initial framework relating blockchain adoption to specific challenges in logistics management, to aid decision-making by informing about the relevance and application of blockchain technologies. Blockchain provides a secure, decentralized, smart contract-based, transparent, reliable, and immutable platform for real-time information sharing (Omar et al., 2022; Sangari & Mashatan, 2022), offering significant advantages for logistics. This study categorizes the benefits of blockchain for logistics into five main areas: alignment, resilience, transparency, integration, and sustainability (Adhi & Ramanathan, 2022; Iranmanesh et al., 2023; Tan et al., 2023; Zhu, Guo, & Zou, 2022). The implementation of blockchain technology represents

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Department of Logistics and Maritime Studies, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> Department of Systems Engineering Management, Sungkyunkwan University, Korea</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> School of International Management, Modul University Vienna, Vienna, Austria</footnote>

<footnote>* Corresponding authors.</footnote>

<footnote>E-mail addresses: mike.lai@polyu.edu.hk (K.-h. Lai), kimyb@skku.edu (Y.B. Kim), horst.treiblmaier@modul.ac.at (H. Treiblmaier).</footnote>
a revolutionary approach to logistics, with features that promise to enhance logistics efficiency. Blockchain's capabilities include providing immutable, transparent, secure, auditable, and streamlined documentation, which can be used to enhance social responsibility, manage economic variability, and promote environmental sustainability (Mulligan, Morsfield, & Cheikosman, 2023).

Prior research has revealed various ways in which new technologies align with an organization and its environment. Numerous theories have been proposed, including the well-established technology acceptance model (TAM), technology-organization-environment model (TOE), fit-viability model (FVM), unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT), and task-technology fit (TTF) (Baker, 2012; Furneaux, 2012; Goodhue & Thompson, 1995; Marangunić & Granić, 2015; Saleem, Aslam, Kim, Nauman, & Khan, 2022; Venkatesh, Thong, & Xu, 2016). This study builds on two relevant theories, TTF and FVM, by examining their utility in understanding logistics managers' intentions toward the adoption of blockchain technologies. TTF evaluates the alignment of a technology with specific tasks; we use TTF to assess blockchain's suitability for effective integration into logistics objectives such as alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration. Viewed through the lens of TTF, blockchain can be considered a sustainable technology fit (STF). TTF facilitates the assessment of blockchain compatibility with logistics sustainability requirements (Oh, Xiao, Park, & Roh, 2023) across social, economic, and environmental contexts. Further insights into the adoption of blockchain are provided by the FVM, which emphasizes factors of feasibility or viability (top management support and technology readiness) and whether firms have the necessary resources for successful implementation (Liang, C, Y, & Lin, 2007, 2021). The novel integration of TTF and FVM in this study's conceptual model represents a significant contribution to logistics research, as this approach has not previously been explored within the logistics context.

This study contributes novel ideas in several ways. First, we emphasize logistics management challenges in modern businesses and propose a blockchain-based framework as a potential solution. This involves exploring blockchain technology's applicable properties and addressing practitioners' and decision-makers' questions regarding the relevance of blockchain. Second, adopting blockchain is a pivotal decision that requires significant capital investment. We demonstrate how the characteristics of blockchain technology are suitable for completing logistics tasks and enhancing sustainable logistics management. Third, we analyze how the FVM helps determine the intention to adopt blockchain and how blockchain-enabled agility influences adoption behavior. Fourth, we provide an empirical analysis for practitioners and decision-makers, aiding their understanding of how logistics managers perceive the benefits of blockchain adoption, particularly in enhancing logistics practices and sustainability.

The rest of the article is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a comprehensive review of the existing literature on digital transformations in logistics, blockchain properties, logistics management challenges, FVM, TTF, STF, viability, and intention to adopt blockchain. This section also outlines the proposed framework and research model. Section 3 describes the study methodology, covering sampling, measures, and data collection. Section 4 focuses on data analysis and presents the results. Section 5 offers a detailed discussion encompassing both theoretical and managerial implications of blockchain adoption. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper by reflecting on the study's limitations and providing recommendations for future research.

## Literature review, theories, and hypotheses development

### Digital transformation in logistics

Logistics management continually seeks to establish efficient systems that guarantee robust tracking, traceability, and data privacy for shipments and inventory. In the digital era, technology plays a critical role in

addressing complex issues related to SCM and logistics, such as visibility, traceability, and transparency (Gohil & Thakker, 2021; Goldsby & Zinn, 2016; Tiwari, Sharma, Choi, & Lim, 2023). The integration of advanced technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), blockchain, robotics, and cloud computing into supply chains and logistics is fundamental to these objectives (Lei & Ngai, 2023; Sung, Bock, & Kim, 2023). It is essential to understand the potential effects of these technologies on logistics, as each technology also exhibits limitations, including security vulnerabilities, centralization issues, scalability challenges, and the tradeoff between immutable and auditable records (Chung, 2021; Cichosz, Wallenburg, & Knemeyer, 2020). Blockchain promises unique benefits to the logistics industry by addressing many of these challenges. Its decentralized and cryptographic architecture offers enhanced security, protection against cyber threats, and data immutability, all of which ensure the integrity of transaction records and data (Awadallah, Samsudin, Teh, & Almazrooe, 2021; Bansal, Panchal, Bassi, & Kumar, 2020; Bodkhe et al., 2020; Gohil & Thakker, 2021). Table 1 encapsulates the fundamental properties, implications, and limitations of various technologies.

### Logistics and blockchain

Prior studies have highlighted the role of blockchain in SCM (Fernandez-Vazquez, Rosillo, De la Fuente, & Puente, 2022; Risso et al., 2023; Sauer, Orzes, & Culot, 2022), yet the literature still requires a clearer delineation of blockchain's value creation within logistics, which must be explored through empirical studies; this study aims to establish a connection between logistics operations and blockchain attributes.

<table><caption>**Table 1**
Summary of digital technologies used in logistics.</caption><thead><tr><td>Technology</td><td>Fundamental properties</td><td>Implication</td><td>Limitation</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Blockchain (Orji, Kusi-Sarpong, Huang, & Vazquez-Brust, 2020; Zhang & Liu, 2023)</td><td>Decentralization, cybersecurity, smart contracts, immutability, real-time irrevocable information sharing, transparency, and standardization.</td><td>Provides a real-time, tamperproof, transparent, reliable, and visible data management system.</td><td>The complexity of implementation and regulatory uncertainty.</td></tr><tr><td>IoT (Kumar, Tyagi, & Sachdeva, 2023)</td><td>Real-time data collection, connectivity, and exchange.</td><td>IoT facilitates real-time data monitoring, enhancing efficiency, automation, and decision-making processes.</td><td>Issues include data security, privacy, scalability, data overload, interoperability, and compatibility.</td></tr><tr><td>AI (Chien, Dauzère-Pérès, Huh, Jang, & Morrison, 2020; Tsolakis, Zissis, Papaefthimiou, & Korfiatis, 2022)</td><td>Capabilities encompass learning, reasoning, and decision-making.</td><td>Focus areas include automation, predictive analytics, and optimization.</td><td>Challenges pertain to data availability, quality, transparency, and interpretability.</td></tr><tr><td>Robotics (Atzeni, Vignali, Tebaldi, & Bottani, 2021; Liu, Hua, Cheng, Choi, & Dong, 2023)</td><td>Focuses on automation and execution of physical tasks.</td><td>Enables efficient repetitive activities, increasing accuracy and efficiency.</td><td>Challenges include limited adaptability, substantial capital investment, and high maintenance costs.</td></tr><tr><td>Cloud Computing (Zhang & Liu, 2023)</td><td>Offers scalability and unlimited data storage.</td><td>Enables seamless collaboration, integration, and data accessibility.</td><td>Vulnerable to issues such as high internet dependency, data privacy, and security.</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 2**
Blockchain properties and logistics operations.</caption><thead><tr><td>Blockchain properties</td><td>Blockchain-enabled Logistics</td><td>Reference</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Decentralization</td><td>Decentralization allows authorized supply chain stakeholders to access real-time information directly via a highly secure platform, eliminating the need for intermediaries. This method enhances communication efficiency and improves coordination amongst stakeholders.</td><td>(Lin et al., 2022; Sharma et al., 2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Real-time information sharing</td><td>Real-time information sharing is essential in logistics, as it delivers accurate, current, and immediate data, facilitating timely decision-making and expedited actions.</td><td>(Sauer et al., 2022; Treiblmaier et al., 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Data management</td><td>Blockchain provides synchronized data across all supply chain partners, offering tamper-proof information and removing discrepancies.</td><td>(Patro et al., 2021; Treiblmaier et al., 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Immutability</td><td>Immutability ensures data integrity by guaranteeing that information cannot be altered once confirmed. It prevents unauthorized modifications and facilitates proper information flow through the system.</td><td>(Aslam, Saleem, Khan, & Kim, 2022; Swain et al., 2021; Treiblmaier et al., 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Smart Contractor</td><td>Smart contracts facilitate digitalization and automation, reducing human errors from manual processes and enhancing efficiency.</td><td>(Lin et al., 2022; Vyas et al., 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Scalability</td><td>Blockchain-based scalability ensures the handling of high transaction volumes without performance degradation, permitting smooth and rapid financial transactions.</td><td>(Helo & Shamsuzzoha, 2020)</td></tr><tr><td>Auditability</td><td>Blockchain's verified ledger maintains data accuracy and integrity, facilitating transparent auditing processes.</td><td>(Vyas et al., 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Cyber-security</td><td>Blockchain employs advanced cryptographic techniques, creating a highly secure data platform that is virtually impenetrable. This security protects the confidentiality of sensitive logistics information.</td><td>(Aslam et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Trust</td><td>Blockchain enhances logistic operations security, enabling stakeholders to depend on data transparency, authenticity, and immutability, thus fostering trust and collaboration.</td><td>(Aslam et al., 2022; Fosso Wamba, Kala Kamdjoug, Bawack, & G Keogh, 2018)</td></tr><tr><td>Traceability</td><td>Blockchain ensures real-time, transparent information that facilitates the traceability of goods throughout the logistics process.</td><td>(Queiroz, Telles, & Bonilla, 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Transparency</td><td>Blockchain provides a decentralized system that grants all relevant stakeholders access to uniform information. This functionality enhances transparency, fosters trust, and improves collaboration.</td><td>(Lin et al., 2022; Treiblmaier et al., 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>End-to-end visibility</td><td>Blockchain promotes visibility by sharing information in real-time and ensuring transparency, which supports effective collaboration, helps anticipate demand fluctuations, and optimizes inventory management.</td><td>(Behnke & Janssen, 2020; Vyas et al., 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Irrevocable information</td><td>In the context of blockchain, irrevocable information means that data cannot be altered or deleted without the permission of the relevant participant, thus providing reliability by preventing the tampering or manipulation of information.</td><td>(Dilawar et al., 2019; Sharma et al., 2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Data privacy</td><td>Privacy protection is a key function of blockchain, utilizing its cybersecurity and immutability features to maintain control over sensitive data related to customers, suppliers, inventory, and pricing.</td><td>(Arora et al., 2019; Behnke & Janssen, 2020)</td></tr></tbody></table>

Blockchain possesses numerous properties that can enhance the efficiency of logistics processes (Arora, Gautham, Gupta, & Bhushan, 2019; Aslam et al., 2021, 2022, 2023b; Behnke & Janssen, 2020; Dilawar, Rizwan, Ahmad, & Akram, 2019; Helo & Shamsuzzoha, 2020; Lin, Zhang, Li, Ji, & Sun, 2022; Patro, Ahmad, Yaqoob, Salah, & Jayaraman, 2021; Sauer et al., 2022; Sharma, Kaur, & Singh, 2021; Swain, Peter, Adimuthu, & Muduli, 2021; Treiblmaier, Rejeb, & Ahmed, 2022; Vyas, Beije, & Krishnamachari, 2019; Yang, Garg, Huang, & Kang, 2021). Table 2 lists and describes the blockchain properties most relevant for logistics.

## Logistics challenges and blockchain

In complex and globalized supply chains, business enterprises encounter numerous challenges in achieving smooth operations, including concerns with data integration, visibility, traceability, information sharing, supply chain complexity, transparency, collaborative communication, data privacy, trust, supply chain disruptions, security, demand uncertainty, standardization, and resilience (Enarsson, 2006; Jagtap et al., 2020; Lai & Cheng, 2016; Montoya-Torres, Muñoz-Villamizar, & Mejia-Argueta, 2023). Considering these challenges, blockchain is viewed as the optimal solution to overcome these difficulties and enhance logistics efficiency (Aslam et al., 2021, 2022; Choi & Siqin, 2022; He et al., 2022). Leveraging blockchain properties can improve decision-making, prevent disruptions, optimize inventory, secure financial transactions, combat counterfeiting, manage high transaction volumes, reduce supply chain complexities, and facilitate communication and collaboration among supply chain participants. Moreover, blockchain ensures data privacy, facilitates accurate and timely demand forecasting, and standardizes processes and systems. Table 3 discusses how blockchain addresses the pressing challenges in SCM and logistics.

Implementing blockchain can address challenges in logistics management across two dimensions. Firstly, enhancing logistics functions

such as alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration boosts operational activities. Secondly, logistics processes require upgrades to enhance sustainability in terms of social, economic, and environmental factors. In this context, blockchain-enabled logistics activities can enhance the overall sustainability performance of organizations. Fig. 1 presents a graphical overview that maps blockchain properties to the challenges outlined in Table 3 in order to enhance logistics performance. Each blockchain property is distinguished by a different color in Fig. 1 to indicate the challenges it addresses.

## Fit-viability model and task technology fit theory

The FVM is a well-known model used to examine the conditions under which firms adopt a new technology (Liang, Huang, H, & Li, 2021). This study explores the FVM to understand the alignment of logistics tasks with blockchain characteristics, termed tasks-technology fit. It also investigates blockchain's contribution to sustainability to assess the technology's fit with the social, economic, and environmental demands of logistics activities. In FVM, 'fit' refers to the degree to which a new technology's capabilities are appropriate for an organization's tasks and create value in the firm's processes. This concept is derived from the TTF model (Muchenje & Seppänen, 2023). Integrating technology with tasks is deemed crucial for enhancing a firm's capabilities and improving performance. The utilization of blockchain in logistics particularly helps to overcome challenges related to alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration. If a given technology meets the task performance requirements, the firm should assess the technology's viability within the organization. In this study, 'viability' encapsulates the support of top management for blockchain adoption and its readiness for logistics functions. Top management support is essential for adopting new technology as it provides leadership, vision, and decision-making authority crucial for driving the implementation process. Evaluating the readiness of blockchain in logistics entails whether the current technological infrastructure, workforce skills, and processes
<table><caption>**Table 3**
Mapping of blockchain properties as a solution to challenges.</caption><thead><tr><td>Logistics challenges</td><td>Relevant blockchain properties</td><td>Blockchain as a solution</td><td>Reference</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Data integration</td><td>Decentralization, real-time information sharing, data management, auditability, irrevocable information, data privacy, and transparency.</td><td>In logistics operations, data integration involves harmonizing and consolidating data from the supply chain process. Blockchain enhances data integration by facilitating decentralization with real-time information and enabling irrevocable, auditable, transparent, and private data management.</td><td>(Adere, 2022; Queiroz & Fosso Wamba, 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Visibility</td><td>Real-time information sharing, data management, auditability, cyber-security, traceability, and end-to-end visibility.</td><td>In the modern era, challenges in logistics visibility include difficulties in obtaining real-time and accurate visibility of goods and information. Blockchain can address these challenges with its capabilities for real-time information sharing, data management, auditability, cyber-security, traceability, and end-to-end visibility. These features ensure accurate and timely information, help prevent disruptions, and optimize logistics process visibility.</td><td>(Sahoo, Kumar, Mishra, & Tripathi, 2022; Yoo & Won, 2018)</td></tr><tr><td>Traceability</td><td>Real-time information sharing, data management, scalability, traceability, and end-to-end visibility.</td><td>Logistics traceability issues involve challenges in obtaining accurate and real-time visibility of items and information. Blockchain can address these issues through features such as real-time information sharing, data management, auditability, cyber-security, traceability, and end-to-end visibility.</td><td>(Kshetri, 2021; Shahzad, Zhang, Zafar, Ashfaq, & Rehman, 2023)</td></tr><tr><td>Information Sharing</td><td>Decentralization, real-time information sharing, data management, auditability, scalability, and cyber-security.</td><td>Information sharing is a critical aspect of logistics. Due to the complexity of logistics operations, ensuring the flow of accurate and timely information is challenging. Blockchain offers an efficient data management system that supports real-time information sharing and decentralization, handles high transaction volumes, and incorporates auditability and cybersecurity.</td><td>(Hald & Kinra, 2019; Oliveira-Dias, Moyano-Fuentes, & Maqueira-Marín, 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Supply Chain Complexity</td><td>Real-time information sharing, immutability, and transparency.</td><td>Logistics is inherently complex due to multiple suppliers, unpredictable demand, varied lead times, and the need for improved coordination among partners. Blockchain smooths logistics operations by enabling real-time information sharing in an immutable and transparent system, thereby reducing supply chain challenges.</td><td>(Charles, Emrouznejad, & Gherman, 2023; Khan et al., 2022; Zhu et al., 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Transparency</td><td>Real-time information sharing, scalability, auditability, cybersecurity, trust, transparency, and data management.</td><td>Challenges in transparency stem from difficulties in achieving clear visibility into movements, relevant data, and status within the logistics process. Blockchain offers a solution through its provision of an auditable, secure, and trusted data management system capable of handling large volumes of data in real time.</td><td>(Kshetri, 2021; Yoo & Won, 2018)</td></tr><tr><td>Collaboration and Communication</td><td>Scalability, decentralization, transparency, data management, real-time information sharing, smart contractors, and trust.</td><td>Logistics entails managing multiple activities concurrently, with significant challenges in establishing seamless communication among supply chain members. Blockchain enhances collaboration and communication by providing scalability, decentralization, transparency, data management, real-time information sharing, smart contracts, and trust.</td><td>(Agrawal, Angelis, Khilji, Kalaiarasan, & Wiktorsson, 2023; Akhavan & Philsoophian, 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Data Privacy</td><td>Cybersecurity, data management, irrevocable information, and data privacy.</td><td>Logistics operations generate extensive data, involve multiple parties, and carry high privacy risks and susceptibility to unauthorized access. Blockchain, with its robust features such as cybersecurity, data management, irrevocable information, and heightened data privacy, effectively addresses these security and privacy concerns.</td><td>(Longo, Nicoletti, Padovano, d'Atri, & Forte, 2019; Wu et al., 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Trust</td><td>Transparency, scalability, immutability, real-time information sharing, auditability, trust, and end-to-end visibility.</td><td>Logistics involves multiple partners, making trust among all participants essential. Blockchain features such as transparency, scalability, immutability, real-time information sharing, auditability, trust, and end-to-end visibility are crucial in managing trust.</td><td>(Chang & Chen, 2020; Wu & Zhang, 2022)</td></tr><tr><td>Supply chain disruptions</td><td>Real-time information sharing, decentralization, and end-to-end visibility.</td><td>Supply chain disruptions are unforeseen events that interrupt the smooth flow of logistics operations. Blockchain features like real-time information sharing provide valuable up-to-date information for effective visibility in a decentralized system.</td><td>(Alkhudary, Queiroz, & Fénies, 2022; Cole, Stevenson, & Aitken, 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Security</td><td>Cyber-security, data management, immutability, scalability, auditability, and irrevocable information.</td><td>Logistics functions must multitask to handle vast amounts of information and product flow. At each point, the logistics system requires a highly secure structure for managing both information and products. The blockchain provides a data management system that ensures cyber-security, including features such as immutability, scalability, auditability, and irrevocable information, making it resistant to tampering and hacking.</td><td>(Kim & Shin, 2019; Queiroz, Telles, & Bonilla, 2020)</td></tr><tr><td>Demand uncertainty</td><td>Transparency and real-time information sharing.</td><td>Demand uncertainty presents a significant challenge in supply chain operations, affecting logistics especially when demand is irregular or intermittent. Blockchain features, including transparency in inventory management and real-time</td><td>(Babaei, Khedmati, Akbari Jokar, & Tirkolaee, 2023; Yoon, Talluri, Yildiz, & Sheu, 2020)</td></tr></tbody></table>

(continued on next page)
<table><caption>**Table 3 (continued)**</caption><thead><tr><td>Logistics challenges</td><td>Relevant blockchain properties</td><td>Blockchain as a solution</td><td>Reference</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Standardization</td><td>Irrevocable information, smart contracts, and data management.</td><td>Logistics must standardize processes and systems across multiple partners, customers, and suppliers. Blockchain provides a data management platform using irrevocable information and smart contracts, ensuring the integrity of information, which, once recorded, cannot be altered or modified.</td><td>(Banerjee, 2018; Jabbar, Lloyd, Hammoudeh, Adebisi, & Raza, 2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Supply chain resilience</td><td>Real-time information, traceability, transparency, decentralization, end-to-end visibility, and data management.</td><td>Logistics are vulnerable to various risks, including supplier issues, demand uncertainty, and natural disasters. To manage these risks, blockchain provides a reliable system based on real-time information sharing, traceability, transparency, visibility, and updated data management through a decentralized platform.</td><td>(Li, Xue, Li, & Ivanov, 2022; Min, 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Last-mile delivery</td><td>Real-time information sharing, smart contracts, traceability, transparency, end-to-end visibility, cybersecurity, and data privacy.</td><td>Real-time information sharing is crucial in last-mile logistics, where updates are essential for accurate, timely, and efficient delivery. Blockchain provides a secure system based on real-time data sharing and tracking, which enhances the visibility and transparency of delivery operations. Blockchain smart contracts automate processes such as delivery confirmation and payments, reducing errors and manual intervention.</td><td>(Chu, Wang, Ren, Li, & Zhang, 2024; Lobo, Wicaksono, & Valilai, 2022)</td></tr></tbody></table>

are geared to support blockchain adoption. This insight into viability underscores the necessity for substantial financial and technical support in adopting new technology (Vekinis, 2023). We analyze the critical FVM factors of fit and viability to comprehend organizations' intentions to adopt blockchain technology for logistics functions.

## Hypotheses development

### Task-technology fit between logistics tasks and blockchain

In this study, we focus on the challenges encountered in logistics operations and suggest that adopting blockchain properties can address these challenges and enhance overall efficiency. Specifically, we highlight the potential for blockchain to enhance logistics performance in terms of alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration. According to the TTF theory, these tasks are technology-related characteristics that can be improved by implementing blockchain (Ahmed & MacCarthy, 2022). In this study, TTF refers to the compatibility between blockchain properties and logistics tasks, evaluating whether blockchain can effectively support tasks such as alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration in logistics operations (Roth, Stohr, Amend, Fridgen, & Rieger, 2023).

Logistics alignment involves synchronizing and coordinating logistics partners, stakeholders, and firm processes (Salam & Bajaba, 2023). Blockchain provides real-time, updated information that is invaluable for improving communication and collaboration in logistics operations. Moreover, it enhances alignment in logistics operations as the technology improves the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of data, aiding the decision-making process and reducing errors, which in turn boosts alignment-related tasks within logistics functions (Cui, Gaur, & Liu, 2023; Guan, Ding, Zhang, & Verny, 2023). Referring to the TTF, blockchain-enabled alignment is a technology-related characteristic that can significantly improve logistics functions (Mumtaz, Bergey, & Letch, 2024). In summary, we hypothesize that blockchain-enabled alignment positively influences the TTF:

**H1.** Blockchain-enabled logistics alignment positively impacts the TTF.

Resilience in logistics is defined by the capacity of the logistics activities to resist and recover from supply chain disruptions (Shishodia, Sharma, Rajesh, & Munim, 2023). Blockchain provides end-to-end visibility throughout the entire logistics process, enabling timely monitoring and control of logistics activities to mitigate disruptions. In the event of a disruption, blockchain rapidly identifies the affected products and components, facilitating the timely application of solutions to

minimize impact. This is facilitated through smart contracts, which automate the execution and triggering of actions based on predefined conditions (Datta, Jauhar, & Paul, 2023; Pattanayak, Arputham, Goswami, & Rana, 2023). The TTF theory highlights task-specific issues and emphasizes the critical need to align tasks with technology. Thus, logistics resilience benefits from the integration of blockchain technology to manage disruptions and facilitate smooth operations. Consequently, blockchain-enabled logistics resilience aligns tasks and technology more effectively, resulting in superior TTF outcomes. We therefore propose the following hypothesis:

**H2.** Blockchain-enabled logistics resilience positively impacts the TTF.

Transparency means that a firm is fully aware of all stages of logistics activities, supported by open communication between internal and external participants. The need for logistics to swiftly meet pressing demands necessitates that transparency be prioritized during the real-time assessment of stocks, deliveries, and order scheduling (Morgan, Gabler, & Manhart, 2023). Blockchain enhances logistics transparency by providing visible, traceable, and auditable real-time records of logistics processes on highly secure platforms (Centobelli, Cerchione, Vecchio, Oropallo, & Secundo, 2022). These blockchain technology attributes significantly boost transparency and thus contribute to effective logistics operations. Blockchain-improved transparency in logistics therefore constitutes a high TTF (Han, Shiwakoti, Jarvis, Mordi, & Botchie, 2023; Urman & Makhortykh, 2023). Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis:

**H3.** Blockchain-enabled logistics transparency positively impacts the TTF.

In logistics, integration refers to the seamless combination and coordination of various logistics processes, systems, and functions, which includes closely aligning both internal and external activities (Wang & Feng, 2023). Through the provision of a unified and interconnected structure, blockchain streamlines the integration of internal and external logistics processes. This architecture ensures the efficient flow of secure, dependable, and precise information. Integration enabled by blockchain leads to modernized operations, reduced costs, enhanced customer satisfaction, and improved overall logistics performance (Long, Feng, Fan, & Liu, 2023). Achieving this integration through blockchain is recognized as a technological characteristic (Queiroz et al., 2020). Within the TTF framework, effective integration in logistics functions fosters exceptional task performance, enhancing TTF. Consequently, we hypothesize that blockchain-facilitated logistics integration significantly enhances TTF:
**H4.** Blockchain-enabled logistics integration positively impacts the TTF.

*Logistics and blockchain as a sustainable technology fit*

Sustainability in logistics encompasses practices and processes aimed at enhancing performance across environmental, economic, and social dimensions. For the full enhancement of logistics functions, sustainability must be an integral component (Parhi, Joshi, Gunasekaran, & Sethuraman, 2022). The academic literature indicates that organizations have implemented various initiatives, such as green, sustainable, and circular practices, to advance the sustainability of logistics activities (Shahidzadeh & Shokouhyar, 2023; Sun, Yu, & Solvang, 2022). In this context, blockchain can transform logistics functions by integrating sustainable activities focused on social reforms, economic stability, and environmental protection. In this study, we propose that blockchain has a high STF on account of offering greater visibility, accountability, traceability, immutability, and a decentralized structure. These blockchain features can significantly enhance the overall efficiency of logistics processes in terms of sustainability from social, economic, and environmental perspectives (Rejeb & Rejeb, 2020; Saberi, Kouhizadeh, Sarkis, & Shen, 2019; Sarfraz, Khawaja, Han, Ariza-Montes, & Arjona-Fuentes, 2023).

Logistics management can contribute to social sustainability through various internal and external measures. Internally, firms support social sustainability by ensuring favorable working conditions, providing equal employment opportunities, respecting human rights, and offering fair compensation that promotes the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) framework (Park, Voss, & Voss, 2023). Externally, firms must engage with local communities, enhance their development, and minimize the adverse social impacts of logistics operations (Mani et al., 2016). The transparency, auditability, and trust attributes of blockchain enhance logistics operations and address social issues such as promoting fair labor practices, preventing child labor, and ensuring safe working environments. Moreover, blockchain's automation capabilities facilitate the timely and equitable payment of wages and eliminate intermediaries (Ronaghi & Mosakhani, 2022; Venkatesh, Kang, Wang, Zhong, & Zhang, 2020). Considering blockchain's role in enhancing social sustainability, we propose that effective blockchain-enabled social sustainability leads to higher STF:

**H5.** Blockchain-enabled social sustainability in logistics positively impacts the STF.

In terms of economic sustainability, logistics operations must sustain long-term economic value without adversely affecting the economic environment. To achieve this, logistics organizations strive to enhance operational efficiency, reduce costs, boost profitability, and contribute to economic growth (Bhattacharjee & Cruz, 2015; Mota, Gomes, Carvalho, & Barbosa-Povoa, 2015). Recognized as both disruptive and innovative, blockchain technology streamlines, automates, and optimizes logistics processes. It also improves the transparency and security of financial transactions, making them more reliable and tamper-proof (Esmaeilian, Sarkis, Lewis, & Behdad, 2020). Blockchain thus enables economic sustainability by accelerating transactions and cutting transaction costs while reducing the necessity for intermediaries (Kouhizadeh, Saberi, & Sarkis, 2021). Therefore, we propose:

**H6.** Blockchain-enabled economic sustainability in logistics positively impacts the STF.

Environmental sustainability in logistics operations focuses on minimizing adverse environmental impacts associated with the movement, storage, and handling of goods. It involves implementing strategies and measures to reduce carbon emissions, waste generation, energy consumption, and other forms of ecological degradation (Abbasi & Nilsson, 2012; Kumar, Singh, Mishra, & Daim, 2023). Blockchain enhances transparency and traceability, supporting sustainable sourcing and mitigating risks related to illegal or unsustainable practices. Within the STF context, blockchain contributes to environmental sustainability by enabling real-time visibility, tracing, and tracking of products, thereby reducing rework, resource use, and emissions (Biswas, Jalali, Ansaripoor, & De Giovanni, 2023). Consequently, the benefits of adopting blockchain for environmental sustainability lead to an improved STF. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:

**H7.** Blockchain-enabled environmental sustainability in logistics positively impacts the STF.

*Task-technology fit of blockchain adoption*

TTF refers to the alignment between the characteristics of a technology and the tasks it needs to perform. It plays a dual role when evaluating the intention to adopt new technologies, like blockchain, in logistics. First, TTF enables organizations to assess how blockchain can address the specific tasks and needs of their logistics operations. Secondly, by evaluating the compatibility between blockchain's features and the requirements of logistic functions, TTF guides the identification of potential benefits and drawbacks of blockchain adoption (Thakuriya, Kaur, & Mishra, 2023). In this study, TTF assists in verifying if blockchain technology meets the logistical tasks and demands effectively. Moreover, blockchain characteristics such as decentralization, immutability, and transparency contribute to increased trust, security, and accountability (Chaudhuri, Bhatia, Subramanian, Kayikci, & Dora, 2022). Thus, TTF sheds light on the decision to adopt blockchain according to its alignment with the specific tasks and goals of logistics processes. This study proposes that blockchain demonstrating TTF is crucial for understanding the intention to adopt blockchain in logistics, as outlined in the following hypothesis:

**H8.** Adequate blockchain TTF positively impacts the intention to adopt blockchain.

*Sustainable technology fit of blockchain adoption*

STF examines the compatibility and alignment between the principles of sustainability and the capabilities offered by blockchain. In logistics, blockchain technology holds significant potential to support sustainability initiative by enabling transparent and immutable record-keeping, enhancing supply chain traceability, and verifying sustainable practices (Bai & Sarkis, 2020). Organizations can more effectively monitor and validate sustainable sourcing, reduce carbon emissions, and promote ethical practices using blockchain technology. STF evaluates whether the adoption of blockchain technology aligns with sustainability goals, fostering environmentally friendly practices, social responsibility, and long-term economic viability. In this study, STF is a crucial consideration in evaluating the integration of blockchain technology. Therefore, we propose that a high STF significantly influences the intention to adopt blockchain:

**H9.** A high STF positively impacts the intention to adopt blockchain.

*Viability of blockchain adoption*

In the FVM model, viability refers to the feasibility of organizations adopting new technologies (Zekhnini, Cherrafi, Bouhaddou, Chaouni Benabdellah, & Raut, 2021). The viability of blockchain adoption is influenced by two primary factors: top management support and technology readiness. Top management support, defined as the assistance and commitment of senior executives toward adopting and implementing blockchain technology, provides the necessary resources, direction, and influence to effectively drive the adoption process (Clohessy & Acton, 2019). Technology readiness, which assesses the organization's preparedness and capability for blockchain adoption, involves evaluating the existing infrastructure, technical expertise, and processes
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. Mapping blockchain properties to logistics challenges and their impact on logistics performance.</figcaption></figure>

to effectively accommodate blockchain integration (Holm & Goduscheit, 2020; Ozturan, Atasu, & Soydan, 2019). In summary, top management support and technology readiness are crucial in influencing the intention to adopt blockchain. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

**H10.** Viability positively impacts the intention to adopt blockchain.

## Blockchain-enabled logistics agility

In a competitive environment, logistics departments strive to be flexible and responsive to meet supply chain requirements. This concept is known as agility (Lai, Ngai, & Cheng, 2002). Logistics agility describes a firm's capability to rapidly adapt and modify strategies to address fluctuations in logistics operations and processes (Bai, Govindan, & Huo, 2023). This study specifically examines the moderating role of blockchain-enabled logistics agility in enhancing the relationship between TTF, STF, and the intention to adopt blockchain. Adopting blockchain aims to increase a firm's flexibility and responsiveness to manage the complexities and challenges of logistics. Blockchain improves a firm's ability to integrate new functionalities, quickly adapt sustainability strategies, and enhance decision-making processes (Beck, Birkel, Spieske, & Gebhardt, 2023). Blockchain supports a decentralized, immutable, and transparent network where all supply chain participants (i.e., suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, and customers) can interact in real time. This interaction promotes agility by enabling faster communication, coordination, decision-making (Aslam et al., 2023a), accelerating transactions, streamlining processes, and enhancing coordination, thereby strengthening the fit between logistics tasks and the technology. Furthermore, STF assesses the extent to which a technology contributes to the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of an organization's sustainability goals (Nozari & Nahr, 2022). The impact of blockchain-enabled logistics agility on the relationship among TTF, STF, and the intention to adopt blockchain is significant. Thus, we propose the following moderating hypotheses:

**H11a.** Blockchain-enabled agility moderates the relationship between TTF and the intention to adopt blockchain.

**H11b.** Blockchain-enabled agility moderates the relationship between STF and the intention to adopt blockchain.

Fig. 2 presents the conceptual model and illustrates the direction of the proposed hypotheses.

## Methodology

### Data collection

South Korea is renowned for its rapid adoption of emerging technologies. According to the World Economic Forum, it is globally recognized for its advanced implementation of AI and robotics (Smith, 2021). This provides an ideal scenario for analyzing organizational adoption behaviors of emerging technologies. In the realm of blockchain technology, South Korea leads in global development and application. In 2016, the national blockchain market was estimated at around $20 billion, demonstrating early adoption across various sectors. By 2030, it is expected to grow to $356.2 billion, propelled by broad acceptance of the technology. Our research seeks to gauge the perceptions of logistics managers from different sectors regarding blockchain adoption for logistics tasks. We gather data from Korean industries to empirically evaluate our hypotheses.

In this study, 600 logistics managers from high-tech industrial zones including Daejeon, Ulsan, Jeju, Namyangju, Gyeongsan, Suncheon, and Chuncheon participated in an online/offline survey. The sample encompassed representatives from nearly all major Korean industries, such as electronics, automotive, telecommunications, shipbuilding, chemicals, and steel. Invitations to join the survey were issued to 1020 logistics managers based on their experience with logistics tasks and knowledge of blockchain features, with the aim of discerning their intentions regarding blockchain adoption. Each manager represented a different firm, such that a total of 600 firms participated, representing a response rate of 56%. Twenty-four responses were deemed invalid due to incompleteness or bias, resulting in 576 valid responses that were used for further analysis and hypothesis testing.
## Measures and questionnaire development

We carefully developed the questionnaire for this research, measuring constructs with scales validated in prior studies (see the questionnaire in Appendix A), and adapting the items to the context of the study. Initially prepared in English, the survey instruments were then translated into Korean by specialized translators. To ensure accuracy and equivalence in the translations, we employed the back-translation method with two independent translators. We engaged five qualified researchers (three from academia and two from industry) to review and analyze the understandability and consistency of the Korean version of the survey. These researchers also had expertise in blockchain applications for logistics and sustainability, aiding in the validation of the survey's measures and items.

Regarding measurement, this research utilizes twelve variable-based constructs including independent, dependent, and moderating variables, all measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The blockchain-enabled logistics tasks are differentiated across four dimensions: alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration. The measurement of alignment employs a four-item scale (Iranmanesh et al., 2023; Narasimhan & Kim, 2002), resilience is assessed with a three-item scale (Ambulkar, Blackhurst, & Grawe, 2015; Narasimhan & Das, 2001; Sheel & Nath, 2019), transparency is measured using a four-item scale (Liu, Zhou, Zhong, & Shi, 2023; Zhu, Song, Hazen, Lee, & Cegielski, 2018), and integration is measured by a four-item scale (Aslam et al., 2023a; Sheel & Nath, 2019). Additionally, the TTF of blockchain is measured using a three-item scale (Goodhue & Thompson, 1995).

The construct of social sustainability is measured with a four-item scale (Abdul-Rashid, Sakundarini, Raja Ghazilla, & Thurasamy, 2017), as are the economic dimension of sustainability (Adebanjo, Teh, & Ahmed, 2016), and the environmental dimension (Dey, Malesios, De, Chowdhury, & Abdelaziz, 2020). The three items measuring the STF

originated from (Al-Emran & Griffy-Brown, 2023).

Blockchain-enabled logistics agility is posited as a moderating variable and measured by a four-item scale (Aslam et al., 2023a; Sheel & Nath, 2019). The viability construct was quantified using a six-item scale (Liang, Huang, H, & Li, 2021) that included factors such as top management support and technology readiness. The intention to adopt blockchain technology was measured with a three-item scale (Karahoca, Karahoca, & Aksöz, 2018; Maruping, Bala, Venkatesh, & Brown, 2017). The respondent profile for this study was constructed using four demographic queries: industry type, region, experience (in years), and qualifications.

## Analysis and results

In this study, we employed partial least squares (PLS) to evaluate the reliability, convergence, and discriminant validity of our research model and empirically test it. The respondent profile is detailed in Table 4.

### Common method bias

Survey-based research carries a high likelihood of bias, which we conscientiously sought to address through the design and development of the survey. We assured participants' anonymity and confidentiality in the cover letter that accompanied the questionnaires, also stating explicitly that there were no right or wrong answers. Our strategy to minimize 'straight-line' responses involved subdividing the survey question into several sections. We deployed two methods for formally assessing the presence of common method variance (CMV): the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with unrotated factor analysis and the variance inflation factor (VIF). EFA aids in detecting CMV by examining if a single factor explains a majority of the variance, signaling potential bias in the measurement model. VIF assesses multicollinearity in regression models. Harman's one-factor EFA revealed that no singular factor

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2. Conceptual model of the study.</figcaption></figure>
emerged in the unrotated structure (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). A VIF exceeding 3.3 suggests pathological collinearity and potential contamination by common method bias. Upon evaluating the VIF through PLS-SEM (see Table 5), we found the collinearity value to be under 2.5, thus indicating a low likelihood of common method bias affecting the study results.

## Reliability and validity

As shown in Table 5, Cronbach's alpha values (α) ranging from 0.712 to 0.852 indicate robust reliability for each of the constructs. Additionally, all items' composite reliabilities (CR) range from 0.703 to 0.895, thereby exceeding the 0.70 threshold (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The statistically significant factor loadings of all constructs, with coefficients greater than 0.710, further supports the constructs' reliability and validity. Moreover, the average variance extracted (AVE) values for all constructs surpass the 0.5 threshold and confirm strong convergent validity. Therefore, we affirm that the constructs' reliability and validity are both acceptable and sufficient.

## Correlations and discriminant validity

To assess the discriminant validity of the constructs, we compared the square root of the AVE with the correlations among the constructs. Discriminant validity was further evaluated by examining the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT) of the correlations. The results indicate that all HTMT values fall below the recommended threshold of 0.85, thereby providing evidence of adequate discriminant validity. Furthermore, the square root of the AVE for each variable, as displayed on the diagonal, exceeded its corresponding correlations, offering additional support for discriminant validity (Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2015; Kline, 2011). The results are summarized in Table 6.

## Hypothesis testing

### Direct effects

We tested the study's hypotheses using SMART-PLS4.0 software. The study examines the direct and moderating relationships between variables based on the conceptual model. Regarding the direct relationships proposed in hypotheses H₁, H₂, H₃, and H₄, we analyzed the impact of blockchain-enabled logistics tasks, namely alignment, resilience,

<table><caption>**Table 4**
Profile of Respondents.</caption><thead><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Item</th><th>Sample</th><th>Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="5">Industry Type</td><td>Electronics</td><td>150</td><td>26.0</td></tr><tr><td>Automobiles</td><td>200</td><td>34.8</td></tr><tr><td>Telecommunications</td><td>31</td><td>5.3</td></tr><tr><td>Shipbuilding</td><td>45</td><td>7.8</td></tr><tr><td>Chemicals</td><td>80</td><td>13.8</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Region</td><td>Steel</td><td>70</td><td>12.1</td></tr><tr><td>Daejeon</td><td>179</td><td>31.0</td></tr><tr><td>Ulsan</td><td>140</td><td>24.3</td></tr><tr><td>Jeju</td><td>50</td><td>8.7</td></tr><tr><td>Namyangju</td><td>62</td><td>10.8</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Experience (Years)</td><td>Gyeongsan</td><td>50</td><td>8.7</td></tr><tr><td>Suncheon</td><td>50</td><td>8.7</td></tr><tr><td>Chuncheon</td><td>45</td><td>7.8</td></tr><tr><td>Below 1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>1–5 (under)</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Qualification</td><td>5–10 (under)</td><td>89</td><td>15.4</td></tr><tr><td>10–15 (under)</td><td>251</td><td>43.6</td></tr><tr><td>15–20 (under)</td><td>201</td><td>34.9</td></tr><tr><td>Above 20</td><td>35</td><td>6.1</td></tr><tr><td>Diploma</td><td>20</td><td>3.5</td></tr><tr><td>Undergraduate</td><td>109</td><td>19.0</td></tr><tr><td>Master's</td><td>317</td><td>55.0</td></tr><tr><td>PhD</td><td>80</td><td>13.9</td></tr><tr><td>Certification</td><td>50</td><td>8.70</td></tr></tbody></table>

transparency, and integration, on the TTF of blockchain. The results show that H₁ (b=0.032, p > 0.05) was not supported, indicating that alignment does not significantly influence the TTF. However, H₂, H₃, and H₄ were supported, with resilience (b=0.077, p < 0.05), transparency (b=0.783, p < 0.05), and integration (b=0.100, p < 0.05) significantly influencing the TTF. Secondly, the study examined the impact of blockchain-enabled social, economic, and environmental sustainability on the STF of blockchain. The proposed hypotheses were H₅, H₆, and H₇. The results indicate significant influences, with social (b=0.101, p < 0.05), economic (b=0.115, p < 0.05), and environmental (b=0.483, p < 0.05) aspects all impacting STF. Lastly, we studied the impact of blockchain's TTF, STF, and viability on the intention to adopt blockchain in logistics operations, to test hypotheses H₈, H₉, and H₁₀ respectively. The results revealed significant influences of each on adoption intention: TTF (b=0.796, p < 0.05), STF (b=0.203, p < 0.05), and viability (b=0.636, p < 0.05). Table 7 presents the results for the direct relationships proposed in hypotheses H₁ to H₁₀.

## Moderating effects

To examine the moderating effects, a PLS-SEM bootstrap re-sampling procedure with 5000 re-samples was implemented. The conceptual model suggests that blockchain-enabled logistics agility functions as a moderating variable among TTF, STF, and the intention to adopt

<table><caption>**Table 5**
Factor Loading, CR, AVE, and Alpha.</caption><thead><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Items</th><th>Factor Loading</th><th>α</th><th>CR</th><th>AVE</th><th>VIF</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="4">Alignment (ALN)</td><td>ALN1</td><td>0.741</td><td rowspan="4">0.724</td><td rowspan="4">0.825</td><td rowspan="4">0.645</td><td>1.188</td></tr><tr><td>ALN2</td><td>0.712</td><td>1.338</td></tr><tr><td>ALN3</td><td>0.747</td><td>1.542</td></tr><tr><td>ALN4</td><td>0.849</td><td>1.698</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Resilience (RES)</td><td>RES1</td><td>0.710</td><td rowspan="3">0.712</td><td rowspan="3">0.817</td><td rowspan="3">0.601</td><td>1.316</td></tr><tr><td>RES1</td><td>0.808</td><td>1.337</td></tr><tr><td>RES2</td><td>0.868</td><td>1.392</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Transparency (TRN)</td><td>TRN1</td><td>0.872</td><td rowspan="4">0.743</td><td rowspan="4">0.835</td><td rowspan="4">0.670</td><td>2.311</td></tr><tr><td>TRN2</td><td>0.897</td><td>2.720</td></tr><tr><td>TRN3</td><td>0.786</td><td>1.509</td></tr><tr><td>TRN4</td><td>0.721</td><td>1.231</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Integration (INT)</td><td>INT1</td><td>0.755</td><td rowspan="4">0.721</td><td rowspan="4">0.807</td><td rowspan="4">0.611</td><td>1.099</td></tr><tr><td>INT2</td><td>0.711</td><td>1.237</td></tr><tr><td>INT3</td><td>0.722</td><td>1.176</td></tr><tr><td>INT4</td><td>0.735</td><td>1.128</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Task Technology Fit (TTF)</td><td>TTF1</td><td>0.840</td><td rowspan="3">0.780</td><td rowspan="3">0.880</td><td rowspan="3">0.651</td><td>1.369</td></tr><tr><td>TTF2</td><td>0.815</td><td>1.429</td></tr><tr><td>TTF3</td><td>0.732</td><td>1.074</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Social (SOC)</td><td>SOC1</td><td>0.832</td><td rowspan="3">0.762</td><td rowspan="3">0.703</td><td rowspan="3">0.690</td><td>1.357</td></tr><tr><td>SOC2</td><td>0.715</td><td>1.401</td></tr><tr><td>SOC3</td><td>0.721</td><td>1.205</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Economic (ECO)</td><td>SOC4</td><td>0.705</td><td rowspan="4">0.788</td><td rowspan="4">0.881</td><td rowspan="4">0.641</td><td>1.032</td></tr><tr><td>ECO1</td><td>0.731</td><td>1.141</td></tr><tr><td>ECO2</td><td>0.835</td><td>1.027</td></tr><tr><td>ECO3</td><td>0.748</td><td>1.137</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Environmental (ENV)</td><td>ECO4</td><td>0.722</td><td rowspan="3">0.753</td><td rowspan="3">0.857</td><td rowspan="3">0.668</td><td>1.200</td></tr><tr><td>ENV1</td><td>0.731</td><td>1.356</td></tr><tr><td>ENV2</td><td>0.883</td><td>1.898</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Sustainable Technology Fit (SFT)</td><td>ENV3</td><td>0.859</td><td rowspan="4">0.741</td><td rowspan="4">0.852</td><td rowspan="4">0.657</td><td>1.653</td></tr><tr><td>STF1</td><td>0.771</td><td>1.222</td></tr><tr><td>STF2</td><td>0.845</td><td>1.978</td></tr><tr><td>STF3</td><td>0.819</td><td>1.927</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Agility (AGL)</td><td>AGL1</td><td>0.718</td><td rowspan="4">0.771</td><td rowspan="4">0.753</td><td rowspan="4">0.632</td><td>1.297</td></tr><tr><td>AGL2</td><td>0.754</td><td>1.309</td></tr><tr><td>AGL3</td><td>0.763</td><td>1.358</td></tr><tr><td>AGL4</td><td>0.745</td><td>1.397</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">Viability (VAB)</td><td>VAB1</td><td>0.712</td><td rowspan="6">0.850</td><td rowspan="6">0.880</td><td rowspan="6">0.653</td><td>1.390</td></tr><tr><td>VAB2</td><td>0.821</td><td>2.407</td></tr><tr><td>VAB3</td><td>0.841</td><td>2.297</td></tr><tr><td>VAB4</td><td>0.745</td><td>2.410</td></tr><tr><td>VAB5</td><td>0.757</td><td>2.340</td></tr><tr><td>VAB6</td><td>0.730</td><td>2.388</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Intention to Adopt Blockchain (BCA)</td><td>BCA1</td><td>0.717</td><td rowspan="3">0.717</td><td rowspan="3">0.794</td><td rowspan="3">0.663</td><td>1.188</td></tr><tr><td>BCA2</td><td>0.711</td><td>1.251</td></tr><tr><td>BCA3</td><td>0.818</td><td>1.237</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 6**
Correlations and Discriminant Validity.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>ALN</th><th>RES</th><th>TRN</th><th>INT</th><th>SOC</th><th>ECO</th><th>ENV</th><th>TTF</th><th>STF</th><th>VIB</th><th>AGL</th><th>BCA</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th>ALN</th><td>0.803</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>RES</th><td>0.473</td><td>0.775</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>TRN</th><td>0.705</td><td>0.222</td><td>0.818</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>INT</th><td>0.789</td><td>0.337</td><td>0.766</td><td>0.795</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>SOC</th><td>0.114</td><td>0.287</td><td>0.111</td><td>0.126</td><td>0.830</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>ECO</th><td>0.466</td><td>0.401</td><td>0.469</td><td>0.497</td><td>0.206</td><td>0.835</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>ENV</th><td>0.666</td><td>0.438</td><td>0.656</td><td>0.589</td><td>0.134</td><td>0.762</td><td>0.817</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>TTF</th><td>0.471</td><td>0.237</td><td>0.764</td><td>0.560</td><td>0.120</td><td>0.364</td><td>0.465</td><td>0.806</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>STF</th><td>0.736</td><td>0.337</td><td>0.789</td><td>0.788</td><td>0.106</td><td>0.587</td><td>0.710</td><td>0.757</td><td>0.810</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>VIB</th><td>0.755</td><td>0.454</td><td>0.803</td><td>0.752</td><td>0.689</td><td>0.473</td><td>0.711</td><td>0.636</td><td>0.804</td><td>0.808</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>AGL</th><td>0.412</td><td>0.359</td><td>0.423</td><td>0.375</td><td>0.129</td><td>0.602</td><td>0.802</td><td>0.348</td><td>0.545</td><td>0.467</td><td>0.781</td><td></td></tr><tr><th>BCA</th><td>0.508</td><td>0.249</td><td>0.595</td><td>0.820</td><td>0.329</td><td>0.312</td><td>0.344</td><td>0.405</td><td>0.396</td><td>0.665</td><td>0.467</td><td>0.794</td></tr></tbody></table>

n=576. Values in the diagonal represent each variable's square roots of the AVE.

<table><caption>**Table 7**
Direct relationships of proposed hypotheses.</caption><thead><tr><th>Path</th><th></th><th>β</th><th>Mean</th><th>SD</th><th>t-value</th><th>p-value</th><th>R<sup>2</sup></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>H<sub>1</sub></td><td>Alignment → TTF</td><td>0.032</td><td>0.032</td><td>0.037</td><td>0.87</td><td>0.383</td><td>0.536</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>2</sub></td><td>Resilience → TTF</td><td>0.712</td><td>0.680</td><td>0.042</td><td>12.45</td><td>0.014</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>3</sub></td><td>Transparency → TTF</td><td>0.783</td><td>0.783</td><td>0.048</td><td>16.41</td><td>0.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>4</sub></td><td>Integration → TTF</td><td>0.100</td><td>0.090</td><td>0.040</td><td>2.503</td><td>0.012</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>5</sub></td><td>Social sustainability → STF</td><td>0.101</td><td>0.101</td><td>0.049</td><td>2.065</td><td>0.039</td><td>0.326</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>6</sub></td><td>Economic sustainability → STF</td><td>0.115</td><td>0.125</td><td>0.052</td><td>2.205</td><td>0.027</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>7</sub></td><td>Environmental sustainability → STF</td><td>0.483</td><td>0.475</td><td>0.052</td><td>9.331</td><td>0.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>8</sub></td><td>TTF → Intent to adopt blockchain</td><td>0.796</td><td>0.698</td><td>0.046</td><td>12.108</td><td>0.035</td><td>0.333</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>9</sub></td><td>STF → Intent to adopt blockchain</td><td>0.203</td><td>0.200</td><td>0.057</td><td>3.562</td><td>0.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>10</sub></td><td>Viability → Intent to adopt blockchain</td><td>0.636</td><td>0.637</td><td>0.054</td><td>11.780</td><td>0.000</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table 8**
Moderating effects.</caption><thead><tr><th>Path</th><th></th><th>β</th><th>Mean</th><th>SD</th><th>t-value</th><th>p-value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>H<sub>11a</sub></td><td>(TTF x logistics agility) →<br>Intention to adopt<br>blockchain</td><td>0.295</td><td>0.100</td><td>0.046</td><td>4.076</td><td>0.038</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>11b</sub></td><td>(STF x logistics agility) →<br>Intention to adopt<br>blockchain</td><td>0.136</td><td>0.136</td><td>0.044</td><td>3.075</td><td>0.002</td></tr></tbody></table>

blockchain, leading to the proposition of hypotheses H<sub>11a</sub> and H<sub>11b</sub>. Table 8 demonstrates that blockchain-enabled logistics agility interacts positively and significantly with the association between TTF and the intention to adopt blockchain (b=0.295, p < 0.05), supporting H<sub>11a</sub>. Additionally, it interacts positively and significantly with the association between STF and the intention to adopt blockchain (b=0.136, p < 0.05), confirming H<sub>11b</sub>. Table 9 presents the results of all hypotheses, and Fig. 3 displays the PLS-SEM diagram with beta and p-values.

## Discussion

This study's findings are divided into two parts. The first part confirms that blockchain technology is exceptionally well-suited to address logistics management challenges due to its unique properties (Table 2) and presents a framework (Fig. 1) that highlights the value of blockchain adoption in logistics activities. This framework provides policymakers and decision-makers with a detailed understanding of potential logistics management challenges and the benefits from blockchain adoption. In the second part, the study categorizes the challenges faced by logistics into operational and sustainability domains. The conceptual model (Fig. 2) details these domains along with attributes of FVM, TTF, and STF pertinent to blockchain. TTF pertains to logistics tasks involved in operational activities such as alignment, resilience, transparency, and

<table><caption>**Table 9**
Summary of the hypothesis results.</caption><thead><tr><th>Hypotheses and path</th><th>Relationship</th><th>Results</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>H<sub>1</sub> Alignment → TTF</td><td>Direct</td><td>Not Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>2</sub> Resilience → TTF</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>3</sub> Transparency → TTF</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>4</sub> Integration → TTF</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>5</sub> Social sustainability → STF</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>6</sub> Economic sustainability → STF</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>7</sub> Environmental sustainability → STF</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>8</sub> TTF → Intention to adopt blockchain</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>9</sub> STF → Intention to adopt blockchain</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>10</sub> Viability → Intention to adopt blockchain</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>11a</sub> (TTF x logistics agility) → Intention to adopt blockchain</td><td>Moderator</td><td>Supported</td></tr><tr><td>H<sub>11b</sub> (STF x logistics agility) → Intention to adopt blockchain</td><td></td><td>Supported</td></tr></tbody></table>

integration.

Conversely, STF addresses sustainability factors that include social, economic, and environmental dimensions. The study emphasizes the importance of management support and technology readiness (viability variable) for adopting blockchain technology. It also highlights the moderating role of blockchain-enabled agility between TTF, STF, and blockchain adoption, whereby the enhanced adaptability and responsiveness of blockchain-enabled logistics to meet sustainability and operational challenges increases managers' willingness to adopt the technology.

We employed PLS to evaluate the hypotheses of this study. The results demonstrate that blockchain's contribution to three logistics tasks—resilience, transparency, and integration—have a positive and significant impact on the TTF. These findings suggest that logistics managers consider blockchain technology valuable for enhancing the resilience, transparency, and integration of logistics functions. For instance, blockchains, characterized by decentralization, immutability,
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3. Smart-PLS-SEM model with results.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 4. Study findings, impact, and recommendations.</figcaption></figure>

visibility, real-time data, and transparency, enhance logistics resilience by reducing the risk of system failures (Nagariya, Mukherjee, Baral, & Chittipaka, 2023; SadeghZadeh, Ansaripoor, & Oloruntoba, 2023). For enhancing logistics transparency, blockchain's characteristics ensure real-time visibility and traceability of goods, transactions, and processes. Moreover, blockchain technology facilitates internal and

external integration by providing accurate, real-time information. Consequently, companies such as Walmart, Nestle, and Unilever have successfully implemented blockchain-based platforms to advance resilience, transparency, and integration in their food product logistics and supply chain functions (Yiannas, 2018). These components are crucial in determining the TTF of blockchain.
Conversely, blockchain's contribution to logistics alignment is deemed to have an insignificant impact on TTF. This finding implies that logistics managers view blockchain technology as not universally applicable across all industries (Dubey, Gunasekaran, & Foropon, 2022). This study featured participation of logistics managers from various sectors (i.e., electronics, automobile, telecommunication, shipbuilding, chemicals, and steel), suggesting varied perceptions about blockchain alignment. We also explored the impact of blockchain-enabled sustainability factors—social, economic, and environmental—on the STF of blockchain (Tian et al., 2021; Treiblmaier, 2019). The findings indicate that sustainability factors significantly and positively affect the STF of blockchain, affirming the belief of logistics managers in blockchain as a functional digital infrastructure promoting sustainable logistics management.

The study assessed the impact of TTF, STF, and viability on the intention to adopt blockchain for logistics functions. The results showed that TTF, STF, and viability significantly influence this intention. They further indicate that logistics managers perceive blockchain as a task technology for accomplishing logistics operations and a sustainable technology for enhancing the sustainability of logistics processes (Alazab, Alhyari, Awajan, & Abdallah, 2021; Wong, Yeung, Lau, & Kawasaki, 2023). From a viability standpoint, managers believe that top management is willing to implement blockchain and will provide essential support and resources for its deployment. These viability-related factors markedly influence the intention to adopt blockchain. Blockchain-enabled agility moderates the relationship between TTF, STF, and the intent to adopt blockchain. In summary, Fig. 4 outlines the study's findings, impacts, and recommendations.

## Theoretical implications

The study enriches the literature in various ways. It highlights potential challenges in logistics management and establishes a connection between blockchain attributes and logistics issues (Table 3), previously unexplored in other studies. Additionally, it proposes a framework aimed at generating value from blockchain attributes to address specific logistics challenges.

This study utilizes existing theories, specifically the FVM and TTF, to examine the intention to adopt blockchain technology in logistics. It explores how logistics functions such as alignment, resilience, transparency, and integration relate to the TTF model, which has not been thoroughly investigated before. Additionally, this study evaluates the implications of blockchain technology across the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Moreover, it assesses the viability of blockchain adoption by examining factors like top management support and technological readiness. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the adoption of blockchain in logistics in light of its perceived contribution to operational functions and sustainability. By investigating the factors affecting the intention to adopt blockchain technology, this research illuminates the decision-making process around integrating emerging technologies into logistics management.

## Managerial implications

The findings of this study provide valuable insights for managers, policymakers, and decision-makers on the application of blockchain technology in logistics management, offering a detailed understanding of blockchain's potential and requirements through a series of interconnected steps.

First, the research identifies practical challenges in logistics management (Table 2), allowing managers to pinpoint which areas might benefit from implementing blockchain technology. Second, the study links the properties of blockchain with potential solutions to these logistics management challenges (Table 3), guiding managers in utilizing blockchain to address specific issues. Third, the research demonstrates how blockchain enhances logistics alignment, resilience, transparency,

integration, and sustainability, providing managers with insights to devise strategies that utilize blockchain to improve operations and sustainability. Fourth, the study examines TTF and STF in the context of blockchain adoption, helping managers determine if blockchain is suitable for their operational tasks and sustainability goals. If the fit is unsatisfactory, managers might consider other options or modify operations to better integrate blockchain. Finally, the study evaluates the practicality of blockchain adoption within a company's operations, assisting managers in deciding whether to implement the technology based on practicality and cost-effectiveness. If feasibility is low, alternative solutions may be considered, or ways to enhance feasibility may be sought. Ultimately, this comprehensive overview serves as a guide for decision-makers by providing a clear roadmap for considering the implementation of blockchain technology, urging managers to scrutinize the specific challenges they face, the potential benefits of blockchain, its alignment with their operations, and the feasibility of its implementation.

## Conclusion, limitations, and future research

This study elucidates the role of blockchain technology in enhancing key logistics management functions such as resilience, transparency, integration, and sustainability by developing a conceptual model grounded in the FVM, TTF, and STF frameworks. Moreover, the research identifies specific logistics challenges and matches blockchain properties with effective solutions for these issues. By charting these connections, the study offers managers a comprehensive understanding of how blockchain can elevate operational efficiency and promote sustainable practices in their logistics operations. This guidance empowers decision-makers to strategically implement blockchain technology to meet both operational and sustainability goals, ultimately leading to stronger and more sustainable logistics systems.

Despite the promising theoretical and managerial implications, this study has some limitations. Firstly, the research is limited to analyzing blockchain adoption for logistics management, omitting other critical SCM functions. Therefore, future studies should investigate blockchain's applicability across various SCM functions, including sourcing and procurement, resource management, demand forecasting, last-mile logistics, and transportation. Secondly, while this study focuses on factors that facilitate blockchain implementation, it does not explore the challenges and barriers to adoption, which future research should address. Thirdly, although blockchain adoption is capital-intensive, this study does not provide a cost analysis; future research should offer a detailed examination of technology costs and benefits. This study is also limited to examining the adoption of blockchain for logistics management and does not consider the adoption of other emerging technologies such as AI, IoT, cloud computing, and robotics, which could be explored in future studies. Finally, the sample of this study was drawn from a specific population, and future studies need to replicate the findings in different geographical regions.

## CRediT authorship contribution statement

**Javed Aslam:** Writing – original draft, Validation, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization, Funding acquisition.
**Kee-hung Lai:** Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Funding acquisition.
**Yun Bae Kim:** Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Data curation.
**Horst Treiblmaier:** Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Methodology.

## Acknowledgements

We express our sincere gratitude to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which have significantly contributed to enhancing the quality of our paper. The work was partially supported by the Theme-based Research Scheme of the Research Grants Council of
Hong Kong (T32-707/22-N).

## Appendix A

### Survey questionnaire

<table><caption>Measured with a 5-point Likert scale (1= Strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly agree)</caption><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>Items</td><td>Source</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Alignment</td><td>Blockchain can improve our firm's logistics capabilities.<br/>Blockchain can improve logistics coordination within our firm's internal departments.<br/>Blockchain can strengthen the relationship with our firm's suppliers.<br/>Blockchain can enhance logistics coordination for our firm's customers.</td><td>(Iranmanesh et al., 2023; Narasimhan & Kim, 2002)</td></tr><tr><td>Resilience</td><td>Blockchain enables our firm to rapidly adapt to market changes.<br/>Blockchain facilitates our firm's prompt adaptation to supply chain disruptions.<br/>Blockchain can enhance our firm's continuous high situational awareness.</td><td>(Ambulkar et al., 2015; Narasimhan & Das, 2001; Sheel & Nath, 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Transparency</td><td>Blockchain can effectively manage and distribute logistics plans within our firm.<br/>Blockchain supports real-time information sharing about our firm's logistics processes.<br/>Blockchain facilitates the sharing of strategic information among our firm's stakeholders.<br/>Blockchain enables the secure dissemination of planning and implementation details across supply chain partners within the firm.</td><td>(Liu et al., 2023; Zhu et al., 2018)</td></tr><tr><td>Integration</td><td>Blockchain will enhance integration across logistics functions.<br/>Blockchain will improve logistics integration across departments.<br/>Integration with suppliers and stakeholders will be enhanced via blockchain.<br/>Logistics integration with customers will be enhanced through the use of blockchain.</td><td>(Aslam et al., 2023a; Sheel & Nath, 2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Task Technology Fit (TTF)</td><td>In my opinion, the functionality of blockchain aligns well with logistics tasks.<br/>Blockchain functions are adequate for logistics tasks.<br/>Blockchain functions fulfill the requirements for logistics tasks.</td><td>(Al-Maatouk et al., 2020; Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)</td></tr><tr><td>Social Sustainability</td><td>Blockchain technology can enhance workforce training and development.<br/>Blockchain can enhance relationships between internal and external departments.<br/>Blockchain can improve the workplace environment.<br/>Blockchain enhances job satisfaction.</td><td>(Abdul-Rashid et al., 2017)</td></tr><tr><td>Economic Sustainability</td><td>By utilizing blockchain, firms can reduce operational costs in logistics.<br/>By using blockchain, firms can enhance customer and supplier satisfaction.<br/>With blockchain, firms can enhance delivery performance.<br/>Using blockchain, firms can improve their overall financial performance.</td><td>(Adebanjo et al., 2016)</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental Sustainability</td><td>Blockchain aids in reducing waste across logistics processes.<br/>Blockchain enables firms to achieve resource efficiency in logistics processes.<br/>Blockchain assists firms in enhancing compliance with environmental standards.</td><td>(Dey et al., 2020)</td></tr><tr><td>Sustainable Technology Fit</td><td>In my opinion, blockchain can enhance sustainable practices in logistics.<br/>In my opinion, blockchain functions are sufficiently related to logistics sustainability.<br/>In my opinion, blockchain functions are well-suited for logistics sustainability tasks.</td><td>(Al-Emran & Griffy-Brown, 2023)</td></tr><tr><td>Agility</td><td>Blockchain facilitates a swift and effective response to logistics challenges.<br/>Blockchain can manage interruptions in logistics.<br/>Blockchain can enhance logistics forecasting.<br/>Blockchain can improve logistics functions.</td><td>(Aslam et al., 2023a)</td></tr><tr><td>Viability</td><td>Top management is considering the adoption of blockchain technology.<br/>Top management possesses sufficient financial resources for blockchain adoption.<br/>Top management recognizes the advantages of blockchain adoption.<br/>Blockchain development aligns with our firm's strategic roadmap.<br/>Our firm is well-prepared with measures to integrate blockchain technology.<br/>The introduction and potential of blockchain are advantageous for our firm.</td><td>(Liang, Huang, H, & Li, 2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Blockchain Adoption</td><td>In the near future, our firm will implement blockchain in logistics operations.<br/>I anticipate that our firm will increasingly utilize blockchain technology in the future.<br/>I believe our firm's employees are comfortable with adopting blockchain technology.</td><td>(Karahoca et al., 2018; Maruping et al., 2017)</td></tr></tbody></table>

## References

Abbasi, M., & Nilsson, F. (2012). Themes and challenges in making supply chains environmentally sustainable. *Supply Chain Management: An International Journal*, 17 (5), 517-530.

Abdul-Rashid, S. H., Sakundarini, N., Raja Ghazilla, R. A., & Thurasamy, R. (2017). The impact of sustainable manufacturing practices on sustainability performance. *International Journal of Operations & Production Management*, 37(2), 182-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-04-2015-0223

Adebanjo, D., Teh, P.-L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2016). The impact of external pressure and sustainable management practices on manufacturing performance and environmental outcomes. *International Journal of Operations & Production Management*, 36(9), 995-1013. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-11-2014-0543

Adere, E. M. (2022). Blockchain in healthcare and IoT: A systematic literature review. *Array*, 14, Article 100139.

Adhi Santharm, B., & Ramanathan, U. (2022). Supply chain transparency for sustainability—an intervention-based research approach. *International Journal of Operations & Production Management*, 42(7), 995-1021.

Agrawal, T. K., Angelis, J., Khilji, W. A., Kalaiarasan, R., & Wiktorsson, M. (2023). Demonstration of a blockchain-based framework using smart contracts for supply chain collaboration. *International Journal of Production Research*, 61(5), 1497-1516.

Ahmed, W. A. H., & MacCarthy, B. L. (2022). Blockchain in the supply chain – A comprehensive framework for theory-driven research. *Digital Business*, 2(2), Article 100043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2022.100043

Ahmed, W. A. H., & MacCarthy, B. L. (2023). Blockchain-enabled supply chain traceability – How wide? How deep? *International Journal of Production Economics*, 263, Article 108963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108963

Ahmed, W. A. H., MacCarthy, B. L., & Treiblmaier, H. (2022). Why, where and how are organizations using blockchain in their supply chains? Motivations, application areas and contingency factors. *International Journal of Operations & Production Management*, 42(12), 1995-2028. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-12-2021-0805
Akhavan, P., & Philsoophian, M. (2022). Improving of Supply Chain Collaboration and Performance by Using Block Chain Technology as a Mediating Role and Resilience as a Moderating Variable. *Journal of the Knowledge Economy*. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-022-01085-9

Al-Emran, M., & Griffy-Brown, C. (2023). The role of technology adoption in sustainable development: Overview, opportunities, challenges, and future research agendas. *Technology in Society*, (March), 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102240

Al-Maatouk, Q., Othman, M. S., Aldraiweesh, A., Alturki, U., Al-Rahmi, W. M., & Aljeraawi, A. A. (2020). Task-technology fit and technology acceptance model application to structure and evaluate the adoption of social media in academia. *IEEE Access*, 8, 78427-78440. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990420

Alazab, M., Alhyari, S., Awajan, A., & Abdallah, A. B. (2021). Blockchain technology in supply chain management: An empirical study of the factors affecting user adoption/acceptance. *Cluster Computing*, 24(1), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-020-03200-4

Alkhudary, R., Queiroz, M. M., & Fénies, P. (2022). Mitigating the risk of specific supply chain disruptions through blockchain technology. *Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal*, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2022.2090273

Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J., & Grawe, S. (2015). Firm's resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. *Journal of Operations Management*, 33-34, 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.11.002

Arora, D., Gautam, S., Gupta, H., & Bhushan, B. (2019). Blockchain-based security solutions to preserve data privacy and integrity. In *2019 International Conference on Computing, Communication, and Intelligent Systems (ICCCIS)* (pp. 468-472).

Aslam, J., Saleem, A., Khan, N. T., & Kim, Y. B. (2021). Factors influencing blockchain adoption in supply chain management practices: A study based on the oil industry. *Journal of Innovation and Knowledge*, 6(2), 124-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2021.01.002

Aslam, J., Saleem, A., Khan, N. T., & Kim, Y. B. (2022). Blockchain Technology for Oil and Gas: Implications and Adoption Framework Using Agile and Lean Supply Chains. *Processes*, 10(12), 2687.

Aslam, J., Saleem, A., & Kim, Y. B. (2023a). Blockchain-enabled supply chain management: Integrated impact on firm performance and robustness capabilities. *Business Process Management Journal*. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2023-0165

Aslam, J., Saleem, A., Khan, N. T., & Kim, Y. B. (2023b). A proposed framework for designing blockchain solutions for logistics in post-covid scenario and future pandemics. In P. Golinska-Dawson, K. M. T.Sai, & K. Werner-Lewandowska (Eds.), *Smart and sustainable supply chain and logistics — challenges, methods and best practices. ecoproduction*. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15412-6_3.

Atzeni, G., Vignali, G., Tebaldi, L., & Bottani, E. (2021). A bibliometric analysis on collaborative robots in Logistics 4.0 environments. *Procedia Computer Science*, 180, 686-695.

Awadallah, R., Samsudin, A., Teh, J. Sen, & Mazazroie, M. (2021). An integrated architecture for maintaining security in cloud computing based on blockchain. *IEEE Access*, 9, 69513-69526.

Babaei, A., Khedmati, M., Akbari Jokar, M. R., & Tirkolaee, E. B. (2023). Designing an integrated blockchain-enabled supply chain network under uncertainty. *Scientific Reports*, 13(1), 3928. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30439-9

Bai, C., Govindan, K., & Huo, B. (2023). The contingency effects of dependence relationship on supply chain information sharing and agility. *The International Journal of Logistics Management*.

Bai, C., & Sarkis, J. (2020). A supply chain transparency and sustainability technology appraisal model for blockchain technology. *International Journal of Production Research*, 58(7), 2142-2162.

Baker, J. (2012). The technology-organization-environment framework. *Information Systems Theory: Explaining and Predicting Our Digital Society*, 1, 231-245.

Banerjee, A. (2018). Chapter Three - Blockchain Technology: Supply Chain Insights from ERP. In P. Raj & G.C.B.T.A. & in C. Deka (Eds.), *Blockchain technology: platforms, tools and use cases* (Vol. 111, pp. 69-98). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adcm.2018.03.007.

Bansal, P., Panchal, R., Bassi, S., & Kumar, A. (2020). Blockchain for cybersecurity: A comprehensive survey. In *2020 IEEE 9th International Conference on Communication Systems and Network Technologies (CSNT)* (pp. 260-265).

Beck, J., Birkel, H., Spieske, A., & Gebhardt, M. (2023). Will the blockchain solve the supply chain resilience challenges? Insights from a systematic literature review. *Computers & Industrial Engineering*, Article 109623.

Behnke, K., & Janssen, M. F. W. H. A. (2020). Boundary conditions for traceability in food supply chains using blockchain technology. *International Journal of Information Management*, 52, Article 101969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.025

Bhattarajee, S., & Cruz, J. (2015). Economic stability of closed loop supply chains: A holistic model for decision and policy analysis. *Decision Support Systems*, 77, 67-86.

Biswas, D., Jalali, H., Ansaripoor, A. H., & De Giovanni, P. (2023). Traceability vs. sustainability in supply chains: The implications of blockchain. *European Journal of Operational Research*, 305(1), 128-147.

Bodkhe, U., Tanwar, S., Parekh, K., Khanpara, P., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Alazab, M. (2020). Blockchain for industry 4.0: A comprehensive review. *IEEE Access*, 8, 79764-79800.

Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., Vecchio, P. Del, Oropallo, E., & Secundo, G. (2022). Blockchain technology for bridging trust, security and transparency in circular supply chain. *Information & Management*, 59(7), Article 103508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103508

Chang, S. E., & Chen, Y. (2020). When blockchain meets supply chain: A systematic literature review on current development and potential applications. *IEEE Access*, 8, 62478-62494. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2983601

Charles, V., Emrouznejad, A., & Gherman, T. (2023). A critical analysis of the integration of blockchain and artificial intelligence for supply chain. *Annals of Operations Research*, 1-41.

Chaudhuri, A., Bhatia, M. S., Subramanian, N., Kayikci, Y., & Dora, M. (2022). Sociotechnical capabilities for blockchain implementation by service providers: Multiple case study of projects with transaction time reduction and quality improvement objectives. *Production Planning & Control*, 1-14.

Chien, C.-F., Dauzère-Pérès, S., Huh, W. T., Jang, Y. J., & Morrison, J. R. (2020). Artificial intelligence in manufacturing and logistics systems: Algorithms, applications, and case studies. *International Journal of Production Research*, 58(9), 2730-2731. Taylor & Francis.

Choi, T.-M., & Sigin, T. (2022). Blockchain in logistics and production from Blockchain 1.0 to Blockchain 5.0: An intra-inter-organizational framework. *Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review*, 160, Article 102653.

Chu, X., Wang, R., Ren, L., Li, Y., & Zhang, S. (2024). Enabling joint distribution with blockchain technology in last-mile logistics. *Computers & Industrial Engineering*, 187, Article 109832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2023.109832

Chung, S.-H. (2021). Applications of smart technologies in logistics and transport: A review. *Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review*, 153, Article 102455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2021.102455

Cichosz, M., Wallenburg, C. M., & Knemeyer, A. M. (2020). Digital transformation at logistics service providers: Barriers, success factors and leading practices. *The International Journal of Logistics Management*, 31(2), 209-238. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-08-2020-0229

Clohessy, T., & Acton, T. (2019). Investigating the influence of organizational factors on blockchain adoption: An innovation theory perspective. *Industrial Management & Data Systems*, 119(7), 1457-1491.

Cole, R., Stevenson, M., & Aitken, J. (2019). Blockchain technology: Implications for operations and supply chain management. *Supply Chain Management: An International Journal*, 24(4), 469-483. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-09-2018-0309

Cui, Y., Gaur, V., & Liu, J. (2023). Supply chain transparency and blockchain design. *Management Science*.

Datta, S., Jauhar, S. K., & Paul, S. K. (2023). Leveraging blockchain to improve nutraceutical supply chain resilience under post-pandemic disruptions. *Computers & Industrial Engineering*, 183, Article 109475.

Dey, P. K., Malesios, C., De, D., Chowdhury, S., & Abdelaziz, F. Ben (2020). The impact of lean management practices and sustainably-oriented innovation on sustainability performance of small and medium-sized enterprises: Empirical evidence from the UK. *British Journal of Management*, 31(1), 141-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12388

Dilawar, N., Rizwan, M., Ahmad, F., & Akram, S. (2019). Blockchain: Securing internet of medical things (IoMT). *International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications*, 10(1).

Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., & Foropon, C. R. H. (2022). Improving information alignment and coordination in humanitarian supply chain through blockchain technology. *Journal of Enterprise Information Management, ahead-of-p ahead-of-print*. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-07-2022-0251

Durach, C. F., Blesik, T., von Düring, M., & Bick, M. (2021). Blockchain applications in supply chain transactions. *Journal of Business Logistics*, 42(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12238

Enarsson, L. (2006). *Future logistics challenges*. Copenhagen Business School Press DK.

Esmailian, B., Sarkis, J., Lewis, K., & Behdad, S. (2020). Blockchain for the future of sustainable supply chain management in Industry 4.0. *Resources, Conservation and Recycling*, 163, Article 105064.

Fernandez-Vazquez, S., Rosillo, R., De la Fuente, D., & Puente, J. (2022). Blockchain in sustainable supply chain management: An application of the analytical hierarchical process (AHP) methodology. *Business Process Management Journal*, 28(5/6), 1277-1300.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. *Journal of Marketing Research*, 18(1), 39-50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3151312.

Fosso Wamba, S., Kala Kamdjoug, J. R., Bawack, R., & G Keogh, J. (2018). Bitcoin, blockchain, and FinTech: A systematic review and case studies in the supply chain. *Production Planning and Control, Forthcoming*.

Furneaux, B. (2012). Task-technology fit theory: A survey and synopsis of the literature. *Information Systems Theory: Explaining and Predicting Our Digital Society*, 1, 87-106.

Gläser, S., Jahnke, H., & Strassheim, N. (2023). Opportunities and challenges of crowd logistics on the last mile for courier, express and parcel service providers—a literature review. *International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications*, 26(8), 1006-1034.

Gligor, D. M., Davis-Sramek, B., Tan, A., Vitale, A., Russo, I., Golgeci, I., & Wan, X. (2022). Utilizing blockchain technology for supply chain transparency: A resource orchestration perspective. *Journal of Business Logistics*, 43(1), 140-159. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12287

Gohil, D., & Thakker, S. V. (2021). Blockchain-integrated technologies for solving supply chain challenges. *Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications*, 3(2), 78-97. https://doi.org/10.1108/MSCRA-10-2020-0028

Goldsby, T. J., & Zinn, W. (2016). Technology innovation and new business models: Can logistics and supply chain research accelerate the evolution? *Journal of Business Logistics*, 37(2), 80-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12130

Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance. *MIS Quarterly*, 19(2), 213-236. https://doi.org/10.2307/249689

Guan, W., Ding, W., Zhang, B., & Verny, J. (2023). The role of supply chain alignment in coping with resource dependency in blockchain adoption: Empirical evidence from China. *Journal of Enterprise Information Management*, 36(2), 605-628.

Guo, L., Chen, J., Li, S., Li, Y., & Lu, J. (2022). A blockchain and IoT-based lightweight framework for enabling information transparency in supply chain finance. *Digital
Communications and Networks, 8(4), 576-587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdn.2022.03.020

Hald, K. S., & Kinra, A. (2019). How the blockchain enables and constrains supply chain performance. *International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 49*(4), 376-397. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-02-2019-0063

Han, H., Shiwakoti, R. K., Jarvis, R., Mordi, C., & Botchie, D. (2023). Accounting and auditing with blockchain technology and artificial Intelligence: A literature review. *International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 48*, Article 100598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2022.100598

He, M., Wang, H., Sun, Y., Bie, R., Lan, T., Song, Q., Zeng, X., Pustisëk, M., & Qiu, Z. (2022). T2L: A traceable and trustable consortium blockchain for logistics. *Digital Communications and Networks*.

Helo, P., & Shamsuzzoha, A. H. M. (2020). Real-time supply chain—A blockchain architecture for project deliveries. *Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 63*, Article 101909.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. *Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43*(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Holm, K., & Godscuthel, R. C. (2020). Assessing the technology readiness level of current blockchain use cases. In *2020 IEEE Technology & Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON) (pp. 1-6)*.

Iranmanesh, M., Maroufkhani, P., Asadi, S., Ghobakhloo, M., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Tseng, M. L. (2023). Effects of supply chain transparency, alignment, adaptability, and agility on blockchain adoption in supply chain among SMEs. *Computers and Industrial Engineering, 176*(January 2022), Article 108931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108931

Jabbar, S., Lloyd, H., Hammoudeh, M., Adebisi, B., & Raza, U. (2021). Blockchain-enabled supply chain: Analysis, challenges, and future directions. *Multimedia Systems, 27*(4), 787-806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00530-020-00687-0

Jagtap, S., Bader, F., García-García, G., Trollman, H., Fadiji, T., & Salonitis, K. (2020). Food Technology 4.0: Opportunities and challenges. *Logistics, 5*(1), 2.

Jum'a, L. (2023). The role of blockchain-enabled supply chain applications in improving supply chain performance: The case of Jordanian manufacturing sector. *Management Research Review*.

Karahoca, A., Karahoca, D., & Aksöz, M. (2018). Examining intention to adopt to internet of things in healthcare technology products. *Kybernetics, 47*(4), 742-770. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-02-2017-0045

Karakas, S., Acar, A. Z., & Kucukaltan, B. (2021). Blockchain adoption in logistics and supply chain: A literature review and research agenda. *International Journal of Production Research, 1-24*. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.2012613

Khan, S. A., Mubarak, M. S., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Gupta, H., Zaman, S. I., & Mubarak, M. (2022). Blockchain technologies as enablers of supply chain mapping for sustainable supply chains. *Business Strategy and the Environment, 31*(8), 3742-3756.

Kim, J. S., & Shin, N. (2019). The impact of blockchain technology application on supply chain partnership and performance. *Sustainability (Switzerland), 11*(21). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216181

Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 3rd ed. *Principles and practice of structural equation modeling Guilford Press, 3rd ed.*

Kouhizadeh, M., Saberi, S., & Sarkis, J. (2021). Blockchain technology and the sustainable supply chain: Theoretically exploring adoption barriers. *International Journal of Production Economics, 231*, Article 107831.

Kshetri, N. (2021). *Blockchain and supply chain management*. Elsevier Science. https://boosk.google.co.kr/books?id=aHINEAAAQBAJ

Kumar, D., Singh, R. K., Mishra, R., & Daim, T. U. (2023). Roadmap for integrating blockchain with Internet of Things (IoT) for sustainable and secured operations in logistics and supply chains: Decision making framework with case illustration. *Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 196*, Article 122837.

Kumar, N., Tyagi, M., & Sachdeva, A. (2023). A sustainable framework development and assessment for enhancing the environmental performance of cold supply chain. *Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 34*(4), 1077-1110.

Lai, K., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2016). *Just-in-time logistics*. CRC Press.

Lai, K., Ngai, E. W. T., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2002). Measures for evaluating supply chain performance in transport logistics. *Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 38*(6), 439-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-5545(02)00019-4

Lei, C. F., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2023). Blockchain from the information systems perspective: Literature review, synthesis, and directions for future research. *Information & Management, 60*(7), Article 103856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103856

Li, G., Xue, J., Li, N., & Ivanov, D. (2022). Blockchain-supported business model design, supply chain resilience, and firm performance. *Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 163*, Article 102773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2022.102773

Liang, Huang, C, Yeh, Y&., & Lin, B. (2007). Adoption of mobile technology in business: A fit-viability model. *Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107*(8), 1154-1169.

Liang, Kohli, Huang, R., H, C., & Li, Z.-L. (2021). What drives the adoption of the blockchain technology? A fit-viability perspective. *Journal of Management Information Systems, 38*(2), 314-337.

Lin, S.-Y., Zhang, L., Li, J., Ji, L., & Sun, Y. (2022). A survey of application research based on blockchain smart contract. *Wireless Networks, 28*(2), 635-690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-021-02874-x

Liu, S., Hua, G., Cheng, T. C. E., Choi, T.-M., & Dong, J.-X. (2023). Pricing strategies for logistics robot sharing platforms. *International Journal of Production Research, 61*(2), 410-426.

Liu, X., Zhou, Z., Zhong, F., & Shi, J. (2023). Improving supply chain transparency with blockchain technology when considering product returns. *International Transactions in Operational Research, 0*, 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.13303

Lobo, C. R., Wicaksono, H., & Valilai, O. F. (2022). Implementation of Blockchain Technology to Enhance Last Mile Delivery Models with Sustainability Perspectives. *IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55*(10), 3304-3309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.10.123

Long, Y., Feng, T., Fan, Y., & Liu, L. (2023). Adopting blockchain technology to enhance green supply chain integration: The moderating role of organizational culture. *Business Strategy and the Environment, 32*(6), 3326-3343. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3302

Longo, F., Nicoletti, L., Padovano, A., d'Atri, G., & Forte, M. (2019). Blockchain-enabled supply chain: An experimental study. *Computers & Industrial Engineering, 136*, 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.07.026

Mani, V., Agarwal, R., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2016). Social sustainability in the supply chain: Construct development and measurement validation. *Ecological Indicators, 71*, 270-279.

Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: A literature review from 1986 to 2013. *Universal Access in the Information Society, 14*, 81-95.

Maruping, L. M., Bala, H., Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2017). Going beyond intention: Integrating behavioral expectation into the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. *Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68*(3), 623-637. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23699

Min, H. (2019). Blockchain technology for enhancing supply chain resilience. *Business Horizons, 62*(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.012

Montoya-Torres, J. R., Munoz-Villamizar, A., & Mejia-Argueta, C. (2023). Mapping research in logistics and supply chain management during COVID-19 pandemic. *International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 26*(4), 421-441.

Morgan, T. R., Gabler, C. B., & Manhart, P. S. (2023). Supply chain transparency: Theoretical perspectives for future research. *The International Journal of Logistics Management*.

Mota, B., Gomes, M. I., Carvalho, A., & Barbosa-Povoa, A. P. (2015). Towards supply chain sustainability: Economic, environmental and social design and planning. *Journal of Cleaner Production, 105*, 14-27.

Muchenje, G., & Seppänen, M. (2023). Unpacking task-technology fit to explore the business value of big data analytics. *International Journal of Information Management, 69*, Article 102619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinjfomgt.2022.102619

Mulligan, C., Morsfield, S., & Cheikosman, E. (2023). Blockchain for sustainability: A systematic literature review for policy impact. *Telecommunications Policy, 102676*. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102676

Mumtaz, U. U., Bergey, P., & Letch, N. (2024). Assessing the role of blockchain technology for marine bunkering operations – A case study of task technology fit. *Marine Policy, 159*, Article 105909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105909

Nagariya, R., Mukherjee, S., Baral, M. M., & Chittipaka, V. (2023). Analyzing blockchain-based supply chain resilience strategies: Resource-based perspective. *International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, ahead-of-p-ahead-of-print*. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2022-0330

Narasimhan, R., & Das, A. (2001). The impact of purchasing integration and practices on manufacturing performance. *Journal of Operations Management, 19*(5), 593-609. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(01)00055-9

Narasimhan, R., & Kim, S. W. (2002). Effect of supply chain integration on the relationship between diversification and performance: Evidence from Japanese and Korean firms. *Journal of Operations Management, 20*(3), 303-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00008-6

Nozari, H., & Nahr, J. G. (2022). The Impact of Blockchain Technology and The Internet of Things on the Agile and Sustainable Supply Chain. *International Journal of Innovation in Engineering, 2*(2), 33-41.

Oh, S. J., Xiao, S., Park, B. Il, & Roh, T. (2023). Coping or threat? Unraveling the mechanisms enabling user acceptance of blockchain technologies. *Information Technology and Management, 1-15*.

Oliveira-Dias, D., Moyano-Fuentes, J., & Maqueira-Marín, J. M. (2022). Understanding the relationships between information technology and lean and agile supply chain strategies: A systematic literature review. *Annals of Operations Research*. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04520-x

Omar, I. A., Debe, M., Jayaraman, R., Salah, K., Omar, M., & Arshad, J. (2022). Blockchain-based supply chain traceability for COVID-19 personal protective equipment. *Computers & Industrial Engineering, 167*, Article 107995.

Orji, I. J., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Huang, S., & Vazquez-Brust, D. (2020). Evaluating the factors that influence blockchain adoption in the freight logistics industry. *Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 141*, Article 102025.

Ozturan, M., Atasu, I., & Soydan, H. (2019). Assessment of blockchain technology readiness level of banking industry: Case of Turkey. *International Journal of Business Marketing and Management (IJBMM), 4*(12), 1-13.

Parhi, S., Joshi, K., Gunasekaran, A., & Sethuraman, K. (2022). Reflecting on an empirical study of the digitalization initiatives for sustainability on logistics: The concept of Sustainable Logistics 4.0. *Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 4*, Article 100058.

Park, Y. W., Voss, G. B., & Voss, Z. G. (2023). Advancing customer diversity, equity, and inclusion: Measurement, stakeholder influence, and the role of marketing. *Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 51*(1), 174-197.

Patro, P. K., Ahmad, R. W., Yaqoob, I., Salah, K., & Jayaraman, R. (2021). Blockchain-based solution for product recall management in the automotive supply chain. *IEEE Access, 9*, 167756-167775.

Pattanayak, S., Arputham, R. M., Goswami, M., & Rana, N. P. (2023). Blockchain technology and its relationship with supply chain resilience: A dynamic capability perspective. *IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management*.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. *Journal of Applied Psychology*, 88(5), 879-903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. American Psychological Association.

Queiroz, M. M., & Fosso Wamba, S. (2019). Blockchain adoption challenges in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in India and the USA. *International Journal of Information Management*, 46, 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.021

Queiroz, M. M., Telles, R., & Bonilla, S. H. (2019). Blockchain and supply chain management integration: A systematic review of the literature. *Supply Chain Management*, 25(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0143

Queiroz, M. M., Telles, R., & Bonilla, S. H. (2019). Blockchain and supply chain management integration: A systematic review of the literature. *Supply Chain Management: An International Journal*, 25(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0143

Rejeb, A., & Rejeb, K. (2020). Blockchain and supply chain sustainability. *Logforum*, 16 (3).

Risso, L. A., Ganga, G. M. D., Godinho Filho, M., de Santa-Eulalia, L. A., Chikhi, T., & Mosconi, E. (2023). Present and future perspectives of blockchain in supply chain management: A review of reviews and research agenda. *Computers & Industrial Engineering*, Article 109195.

Ronaghi, M. H., & Mosakhani, M. (2022). The effects of blockchain technology adoption on business ethics and social sustainability: Evidence from the Middle East. *Environment, Development and Sustainability*, 24(5), 6834–6859.

Roth, T., Stohr, A., Amend, J., Fridgen, G., & Rieger, A. (2023). Blockchain as a driving force for federalism: A theory of cross-organizational task-technology fit. *International Journal of Information Management*, 68, Article 102476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102476

Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J., & Shen, L. (2019). Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. *International Journal of Production Research*, 57(7), 2117–2135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1533261

SadeghZadeh, H., Ansaripoor, A. H., & Oloruntoba, R. (2023). *The role of blockchain in developing supply chain resilience against disruptions bt - Supply Chain risk and disruption management: latest tools, techniques and management approaches* (S. K. Paul, R. Agarwal, R. A. Sarker, & T. Rahman (eds.); pp. 117–140). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-932-169269-9.6.

Sahoo, S., Kumar, A., Mishra, R., & Tripathi, P. (2022). Strengthening Supply Chain Visibility With Blockchain: A PRISMA-Based Review. *IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management*.

Salam, M. A., & Bajaba, S. (2023). The role of supply chain resilience and absorptive capacity in the relationship between marketing-supply chain management alignment and firm performance: A moderated-mediation analysis. *Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing*, 38(7), 1545–1561.

Saleem, A., Aslam, J., Kim, Y. B., Nauman, S., & Khan, N. T. (2022). Motives towards e-Shopping Adoption among Pakistani Consumers: An Application of the Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Reasoned Action. *Sustainability*, 14(7), 4180.

Sangari, M. S., & Mashatan, A. (2022). A data-driven, comparative review of the academic literature and news media on blockchain-enabled supply chain management: Trends, gaps, and research needs. *Computers in Industry*, 143, Article 103769.

Sarfratz, M., Khawaja, K. F., Han, H., Ariza-Montes, A., & Arjona-Fuentes, J. M. (2023). Sustainable supply chain, digital transformation, and blockchain technology adoption in the tourism sector. *Humanities and Social Sciences Communications*, 10(1), 1–13.

Sauer, P. C., Orzes, G., & Culot, G. (2022). Blockchain in supply chain management: A multiple case study analysis on setups, contingent factors, and evolutionary patterns. *Production Planning & Control*, 1–16.

Shahidzadeh, M. H., & Shokouhyar, S. (2023). Toward the closed-loop sustainability development model: A reverse logistics multi-criteria decision-making analysis. *Environment, Development and Sustainability*, 25(5), 4597–4689.

Shahzad, K., Zhang, Q., Zafar, A. U., Ashfaq, M., & Rehman, S. U. (2023). The role of blockchain-enabled traceability, task technology fit, and user self-efficacy in mobile food delivery applications. *Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services*, 73, Article 103331.

Sharma, A., Kaur, S., & Singh, M. (2021). A comprehensive review on blockchain and Internet of Things in healthcare. *Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies*, 32(10), e4333. https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.4333

Sheel, A., & Nath, V. (2019). Effect of blockchain technology adoption on supply chain adaptability, agility, alignment and performance. *Management Research Review*, 42 (12), 1353–1374. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-12-2018-0490

Shishodia, A., Sharma, R., Rajesh, R., & Munim, Z. H. (2023). Supply chain resilience: A review, conceptual framework and future research. *The International Journal of Logistics Management*, 34(4), 879–908.

Smith, R. (2021). *South korea has the highest density of robot workers in the world.*

Sun, X., Yu, H., & Solvang, W. D. (2022). Towards the smart and sustainable transformation of Reverse Logistics 4.0: A conceptualization and research agenda. *Environmental Science and Pollution Research*, 29(46), 69275–69293.

Sung, J., Bock, G.-W., & Kim, H.-M. (2023). Effect of blockchain-based donation system on trustworthiness of NPOs. *Information & Management*, 60(5), Article 103812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103812

Swain, S., Peter, O., Adimuthu, R., & Muduli, K. (2021). Blockchain technology for limiting the impact of pandemic: Challenges and prospects. *Computational Modeling and Data Analysis in COVID-19 Research*, 165–186.

Tan, C. L., Tei, Z., Yeo, S. F., Lai, K.-H., Kumar, A., & Chung, L. (2023). Nexus among blockchain visibility, supply chain integration and supply chain performance in the digital transformation era. *Industrial Management & Data Systems*, 123(1), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-12-2021-0784

Thakuriya, P., Kaur, S., & Mishra, V. (2023). Assessment of Blockchain Technology as Remedy to Counterfeit Drugs Problem in Pharmaceutical Supply Chain and Implementation Approach. *Operations Research Forum*, 4(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43069-023-00221-8

Tian, Z., Zhong, R. Y., Vatankhah Barenji, A., Wang, Y. T., Li, Z., & Rong, Y. (2021). A blockchain-based evaluation approach for customer delivery satisfaction in sustainable urban logistics. *International Journal of Production Research*, 59(7), 2229–2249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1809733

Tiwari, S., Sharma, P., Choi, T.-M., & Lim, A. (2023). Blockchain and third-party logistics for global supply chain operations: Stakeholders’ perspectives and decision roadmap. *Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review*, 170, Article 103012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2022.103012

Treiblmaier, H. (2019). Combining Blockchain Technology and the Physical Internet to Achieve Triple Bottom Line Sustainability: A Comprehensive Research Agenda for Modern Logistics and Supply Chain Management. *Logistics*, 3(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics301010

Treiblmaier, H., Rejeb, A., & Ahmed, W. A. H. (2022). Chapter 8 - Blockchain technologies in the digital supply chain (B. L. MacCarthy & D. B. T.-T. D. S. C. Ivanov (eds.); pp. 127–144). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91614-1.00008-3.

Tsolakis, N., Zissis, D., Papaefthimiou, S., & Korfiatis, N. (2022). Towards AI driven environmental sustainability: An application of automated logistics in container port terminals. *International Journal of Production Research*, 60(14), 4508–4528.

Urman, A., & Makhortykh, M. (2023). How transparent are transparency reports? Comparative analysis of transparency reporting across online platforms. *Telecommunications Policy*, 47(3), Article 102477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2022.102477

Vekinis, G. (2023). Viability, Not Just Feasibility. *The researcher entrepreneur: best practices for successful technological entrepreneurship* (pp. 91–94). Springer.

Venkatesh, V. G., Kang, K., Wang, B., Zhong, R. Y., & Zhang, A. (2020). System architecture for blockchain based transparency of supply chain social sustainability. *Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing*, 63, Article 101896.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2016). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. *Journal of the Association for Information Systems*, 17(5), 328–376.

Vyas, N., Beije, A., & Krishnamachari, B. (2019). Blockchain and the supply chain: concepts, strategies and practical applications. *Kogan Page Publishers*.

Wang, J., & Feng, T. (2023). Supply chain ethical leadership and green supply chain integration: A moderated mediation analysis. *International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications*, 26(9), 1145–1171.

Wong, S., Yeung, J. K. W., Lau, Y. Y., & Kawasaki, T. (2023). A Case Study of How Maersk Adopts Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Sustainable Practices. *Sustainability (Switzerland)*, (9), 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097305

Wu, H., Cao, J., Yang, Y., Tung, C. L., Jiang, S., Tang, B., Liu, Y., Wang, X., & Deng, Y. (2019). Data Management in Supply Chain Using Blockchain: Challenges and a Case Study. In *2019 28th International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks (ICCCN)* (pp. 1–8). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCN.2019.8846964

Wu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2022). An integrated framework for blockchain-enabled supply chain trust management towards smart manufacturing. *Advanced Engineering Informatics*, 51, Article 101522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101522

Xu, X., & He, Y. (2022). Blockchain application in modern logistics information sharing: A review and case study analysis. *Production Planning & Control*, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2022.2058997

Yang, W., Garg, S., Huang, Z., & Kang, B. (2021). A decision model for blockchain applicability into knowledge-based conversation system. *Knowledge-Based Systems*, 220, Article 106791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2021.106791

Yiannas, F. (2018). A New Era of Food Transparency Powered by Blockchain. *Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization*, 12(1–2), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1162/innov_a_00266

Yoo, M., & Won, Y. (2018). A study on the transparent price tracing system in supply chain management based on blockchain. *Sustainability (Switzerland)*, 10(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114037

Yoon, J., Talluri, S., Yildiz, H., & Sheu, C. (2020). The value of Blockchain technology implementation in international trades under demand volatility risk. *International Journal of Production Research*, 58(7), 2163–2183. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1693651

Zekhnini, K., Cherrafi, A., Bouhaddou, I., Chaouni Benabdellah, A., & Raut, R. (2021). Barriers of blockchain technology adoption in viable digital supply chain. In *IFIP International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management* (pp. 225–238).

Zhang, Y., & Liu, N. (2023). Blockchain adoption in serial logistics service chain: Value and challenge. *International Journal of Production Research*, 61(13), 4374–4401. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2022.2132312

Zhu, C., Guo, X., & Zou, S. (2022). Impact of information and communications technology alignment on supply chain performance in the Industry 4.0 era: Mediation effect of supply chain integration. *Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering*, 39(7), 505–520.

Zhu, S., Song, J., Hazen, B. T., Lee, K., & Cegielski, C. (2018). How supply chain analytics enables operational supply chain transparency: An organizational information processing theory perspective. *International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management*, 48(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-11-2017-0341