## 3 Methodology
### NAD Calculation Results
This contributes to clarifying  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**SSLs** & **C2-1** & **C2-2** & **C2-3** \\ \hline SSL-01 & \(<\)((4.1,5.1,6.1);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) & \(<\)(3.6,4.6,5.6);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.2,5.2,6.2);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) \\ SSL-02 & \(<\)(3.8,4.8,5.8);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(2.9,3.9,4.9);(0.7,0.4,0.4)\(>\) & \(<\)((2.6,3.6,4.6);(0.7,0.4,0.4)\(>\) \\ SSL-03 & \(<\)(4.0,5.0,6.0);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.4,5.4,6.4);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) & \(<\)((2.5,3.5,4.5);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-04 & \(<\)(4.0,5.0,6.0);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) & \(<\)(2.7,3.7,4.7);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((2.5,3.5,4.5);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-05 & \(<\)(4.1,5.1,6.1);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.7,5.7,6.7);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((3.8,4.8,5.8);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-06 & \(<\)(3.2,4.2,5.2);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(3.9,4.9,5.9);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((3.5,4.5,5.5);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-07 & \(<\)(4.7,5.7,6.7);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(3.5,4.5,5.5);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.2,5.2,6.2);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-08 & \(<\)(3.7,4.7,5.7);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(3.8,4.8,5.8);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.2,5.2,6.2);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) \\ SSL-09 & \(<\)(3.9,4.9,5.9);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.1,5.1,6.1);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((3.0,4.0,5.0);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-10 & \(<\)(4.0,5.0,6.0);(0.7,0.4,0.4)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.2,5.2,6.2);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.2,5.2,6.2);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-11 & \(<\)(3.3,4.3,5.3);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.5,5.5,6.5);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((3.4,4.4,5.4);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-12 & \(<\)(4.3,5.3,6.3);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(3.9,4.9,5.9);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((2.9,3.9,4.9);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-13 & \(<\)(3.8,4.8,5.8);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.1,5.1,6.1);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.6,5.6,6.6);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-14 & \(<\)(4.1,5.1,6.1);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) & \(<\)((2.7,3.7,4.7);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.9,5.9,6.9);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-15 & \(<\)(4.2,5.2,6.2);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(3.4,4.4,5.4);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.1,5.1,6.1);(0.8,0.2,0.2)\(>\) \\ FR & \(<\)(4.3,5.3,6.3);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((4.0,5.0,6.0);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)((3.1,4.1,5.1);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ \hline
**SSLs** & **C3-1** & **C3-2** & **C3-3** \\ \hline SSL-01 & \(<\)(2.8,3.8,4.8);(0.5,0.5,0.5)\(>\) & \(<\)(4.6,5.6,6.6);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(2.6,3.6,4.6);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) \\ SSL-02 & \(<\)(3.2,4.2,5.2);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(>\) & \(<\)(2.5,3.5,4.5);(0.3,0.7,0.7)\(  
context of the current logistics industry in Vietnam, the Applying green technology strategy has the highest SF value (0.524), showing that this is a suitable and potential orientation to promote sustainable development. This strategy is not only in line with the global green transformation trend but also contributes to reducing the negative impact of the logistics industry on the environment, while improving the competitiveness of domestic enterprises. Strategies such as Optimizing supply chain network (0.468), Developing green warehouses (0.490), and Applying environmentally friendly means of transport (0.448) are also highly rated for feasibility. This reflects the urgent need to optimize supply chain operations, build green logistics infrastructure, and use environmentally friendly means of transport. These are all important factors to reduce costs, increase efficiency, and meet international standards on sustainable development. However, some strategies such as Applying circular economy models (0.063) and Managing and reducing greenhouse gas emissions (0.178) have low SF scores, indicating major challenges in implementation in Vietnam. The reasons may be due to high investment costs, lack of resources, and advanced technology, along with limited support policies from the government. These strategies need to be carefully considered and can be piloted or combined with other solutions to improve feasibility.