Assessing Drivers Influencing Net-Zero Emission Adoption in Manufacturing Supply Chain A Hybrid ANN-Fuzzy ISM Approachpdf

sustainability
Article
Assessing Drivers Influencing Net-Zero Emission Adoption
in Manufacturing Supply Chain: A Hybrid ANN-Fuzzy
ISM Approach
Alok Yadav 1 , Anish Sachdeva 1 , Rajiv Kumar Garg 1 , Karishma M. Qureshi 2 , Bhavesh G. Mewada 2 ,
Mohamed Rafik Noor Mohamed Qureshi 3, * and Mohamed Mansour 3,4
1 Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar National Institute of Technology,
Jalandhar 144008, India; [email protected] (A.Y.); [email protected] (A.S.); [email protected] (R.K.G.)
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Parul Institute of Technology, Parul University,
Vadodara 391760, India; [email protected] (K.M.Q.); [email protected] (B.G.M.)
3 Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, King Khalid University,
Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia; [email protected]
4 Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
* Correspondence: [email protected]
Abstract: Nowadays, there is a constant focus on implementing the net-zero emission (NZE) concept
in the manufacturing supply chain (MSC). To reduce emissions and improve organisational efficiency,
adopting the net-zero concept is a prevalent trend in today’s highly competitive global business
environment. Governments and stakeholders are pressuring the manufacturing sector to use natural
resources efficiently and reduce environmental impacts. As a result, the manufacturing industry is
focusing on cleaner production using net-zero practices. This study aims to identify and analyse the
interaction among the drivers of net-zero adoption in the MSC. Through a systematic literature review
(SLR), a list of drivers was recognised. To validate these drivers, we conducted an empirical study with
173 respondents from the Indian manufacturing industry. Further, we employed an artificial neural
Citation: Yadav, A.; Sachdeva, A.; network (ANN) to weigh the nonlinear effect of drivers. Fuzzy interpretive structural modelling (F-
Garg, R.K.; Qureshi, K.M.; Mewada, ISM) was used to identify the interaction relationships among the drivers and construct a hierarchical
B.G.; Qureshi, M.R.N.M.; Mansour, M. structure among these identified drivers. The fuzzy matrix of cross-impact multiplications applied
Assessing Drivers Influencing to the classification (F-MICMAC) method was used to categorise these drivers into driving and
Net-Zero Emission Adoption in dependent categories. The outcomes of ANN show that Environmental predictors (100%) emerged
Manufacturing Supply Chain: A as the most significant drivers, followed by Economic drivers (60.38%) and Technological drivers
Hybrid ANN-Fuzzy ISM Approach.
(59.05%). This study is a valuable resource for academia and industry professionals, providing
Sustainability 2024, 16, 7873.
essential insights into how adopting net zero facilitates the manufacturing industry’s ability to
https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177873
achieve net zero across the supply chain.
Academic Editors: Ilija Djekic and
Giada La Scalia Keywords: manufacturing supply chain; net-zero adoption; drivers; ANN; fuzzy ISM MICMAC
Received: 10 July 2024

Revised: 26 August 2024
Accepted: 3 September 2024
Published: 9 September 2024
1. Introduction
In recent years, environmental sustainability has emerged as a pivotal strategic ob-
jective within manufacturing supply chains (MSCs) globally [1]. Rapid industrialisation
and consequent economic growth have brought significant ecological challenges, including
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. heightened greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, climate change impacts and depletion of
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. the ozone layer [2]. These challenges underscore the urgent need for proactive measures
This article is an open access article
among business professionals towards environmental stewardship [3]. Manufacturers are
distributed under the terms and
increasingly compelled to balance economic interests across stakeholders while enhancing
conditions of the Creative Commons
ecological efficiency and fostering a competitive business environment [4]. The ‘United Na-
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
tions Climate Change Conference’ (COP-26) has underscored the imperative of sustainable
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
development, advocating a shift from economically driven manufacturing to low-emission
4.0/).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 7873. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177873 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2024, 16, 7873 2 of 35
production methods to achieve a net-zero society [5]. This global agenda necessitates
integrated efforts within organisations, spanning strategic, tactical and operational levels
of SC management, to achieve environmental sustainability [6,7]. In response to these
challenges, frameworks such as net-zero emission (NZE) regulatory policies are crucial
to curb emissions and mitigate environmental impacts. Aligned with the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goal 2030 agenda, NZE is designed to balance environmental
protection, economic growth and social welfare [8]. NZE plays a pivotal role in guiding
MSCs towards sustainable development by imposing regulations that promote emission-
efficient operations. Economies worldwide have committed to achieving NZE targets,
compelling industry leaders and decision makers to effectively manage supply chain (SC)
operations [9]. Key strategies include reducing production costs, fostering international col-
laborations, enhancing product quality and attracting foreign investments [10]. Countries
like China, the USA and India, among others, have set ambitious targets for achieving NZE,
requiring robust management of SC operations and business activities [11]. These targets
necessitate a comprehensive NZE that targets significant stakeholders such as suppliers,
logistics providers, manufacturers and retailers. These policies encourage greener prac-
tices and innovative resource conservation within manufacturing processes. Governments
worldwide have introduced market-based regulatory mechanisms like pollution taxes and
cap-and-trade policies to incentivise organisations towards sustainable operations [12].
Such policies include carbon taxes, carbon offset programs and carbon cap-and-trade
systems aimed at enhancing the carbon efficiency of manufacturing operations [13].
In India, the implementation of new policies and sustainable initiatives in the manu-
facturing sector is closely monitored by regulatory bodies, reflecting a growing awareness
and responsiveness to environmental concerns among stakeholders [14]. Despite these
advancements, challenges persist, including economic uncertainties and technical complex-
ities associated with adopting NZE [15]. Successful implementation requires collaboration
and support from suppliers, stakeholders, consumers and governmental bodies [16]. The
Indian manufacturing sector, poised as one of the fastest-growing globally, holds substan-
tial revenue generation and job creation potential. However, realising this potential hinges
on the sector’s ability to effectively align with environmental regulatory policies [17]. Large
enterprises, leveraging financial resources, advanced technology and robust infrastructure,
are at the forefront of adopting sustainable practices.
Despite their significant socio-economic contributions, the manufacturing sector re-
quires enhanced government support to navigate towards an environmental sustainability
roadmap [18]. Identifying key drivers influencing their implementation is critical to fos-
tering broader adoption of NZE among the manufacturing sectors. Such insights can
empower manufacturing organisations, particularly in emerging economies, to strategize
their environmental initiatives effectively and advance towards long-term sustainability
goals. Despite the growing recognition of NZE’s importance, there remains a dearth of
literature on its adoption within emerging economy manufacturing sectors [14].
Addressing these gaps necessitates the development of analytical frameworks that
elucidate the critical drivers influencing NZE implementation in manufacturing SCs. Such
frameworks are essential for analysing the interrelationships among these drivers and
devising targeted strategies to facilitate the widespread adoption of NZE. In this regard,
adopting net zero to promote sustainability practices within the MSC will benefit the
manufacturing sector. Identifying and analysing the interaction among drivers that can
support the net-zero business model will improve market competitiveness and the overall
effectiveness of the MSC. Therefore, the present study aims to develop a framework for
modelling the associations within the potential drivers identified by a systematic literature
review (SLR). Further, the present study will influence the decision to adopt net zero in the
MSC. Based on the above premises, the following research questions (RQs) are proposed:
RQ1: What are the key drivers that facilitate the adoption of NZE in the MSC?
RQ2: What nonlinear relationships exist among these identified drivers, influencing
the adoption of NZE?
RQ1: What are the key drivers that facilitate the adoption of NZE in the MSC?
RQ2: What nonlinear relationships exist among these identified drivers, influencin
the adoption of NZE?
RQ3: How do these drivers interrelate in influencing net-zero adoption?
RQ4: What are the driving and dependence powers of these drivers in the context o
net-zero adoption?
RQ3: How do these drivers interrelate in influencing net-zero adoption?
Based on the SLR, an expert panel identified and validated a list of potential drivers
RQ4: What are the driving and dependence powers of these drivers in the context of
net-zerothe
Using survey data, an artificial neural network (ANN) was employed to estimate th
adoption?
nonlinear
Based on relationship amongpanel
the SLR, an expert drivers. The fuzzy
identified ISM method
and validated a list ofispotential
used todrivers.
interrelate th
drivers,
Using the and
surveythedata,
fuzzy MICMAC
an artificial method
neural was(ANN)
network used towascategorise
employed the driversthe
to estimate of net-zer
nonlinear relationship among
adoption into different categories. drivers. The fuzzy ISM method is used to interrelate the
drivers, and
The the fuzzy MICMAC
upcoming sections ofmethod was used
the present to categorise
study the drivers
are organised of net-zero
as follows: Backgroun
adoption into different categories.
and related literature are presented in Section 2. An overview of the research methodolog
The upcoming sections of the present study are organised as follows: Background and
is presented in Section 3. Section 4 outlines the development of the framework. In Sectio
related literature are presented in Section 2. An overview of the research methodology is
5, we discuss the data analysis and results. Section 6 represents a discussion of the result
presented in Section 3. Section 4 outlines the development of the framework. In Section 5,
Lastly,
we Section
discuss 7 explores
the data the conclusions,
analysis and limitations
results. Section and
6 represents scope of future
a discussion of the research.
results.
Lastly, Section 7 explores the conclusions, limitations and scope of future research.
2. Background and Related Literature
2. Background and Related Literature
Extracting useful information from numerous scientific articles available in variou
Extracting
databases anduseful information
inaccessible from numerous
to practitioners andscientific articles available
policymakers in variousand time
is a challenging
databases and inaccessible to practitioners and policymakers is a challenging and time-
consuming task that requires significant resources [19]. Therefore, it is crucial to provid
consuming task that requires significant resources [19]. Therefore, it is crucial to provide
policymakers, practitioners and academics with a detailed overview of the manufacturin
policymakers, practitioners and academics with a detailed overview of the manufacturing
SCand
SC andNZE
NZE to to guide
guide future
future research.
research. The strategy
The strategy used toused to identify
identify the from
the drivers drivers
the from th
SLR is represented in Figure
SLR is represented in Figure 1. 1.
Figure1. 1.
Figure Strategy
Strategy forfor literature
literature review
review (Authors’
(Authors’ work).work).
ToToobtain
obtainarticle-based data,data,
article-based threethree
indexed databases,
indexed namelynamely
databases, Scopus,Scopus,
Web of Science
Web of Scienc
and IEEE Xplore, were used. These selected databases are widely used for quantitative
and IEEE Xplore, were used. These selected databases are widely used for quantitativ
analysis [19]. The flow chart depicted in Figure 2 shows the main keywords used for article
analysis [19]. The flow chart depicted in Figure 2 shows the main keywords used for art
selection. Further, Figure 3 shows the various inclusive and exclusive criteria considered
cle selection. Further, Figure 3 shows the various inclusive and exclusive criteria consid
for article selection.
ered for article selection.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 7873
x FOR PEER REVIEW 44of
of 37
35
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 37

Figure 2. Flow chart for article selection (Authors’ work).
Figure 2. Flow chart for article selection (Authors’ work).
Figure 3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for article selection (Authors’ work).
Figure 3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for article selection (Authors’ work).
2.1. Theoretical Background
The increase in global temperatures due to GHG emissions has become a critical issue
requiring definitive solutions. In 2020, the Earth’s surface temperature was 0.98 °C above
the 20th-century average [7]. China is recognised as the most significant GHG emitter,
followed by India and the United States. Industrially developed countries have seen a rise
in GHG emissions, highlighting the need for sustainable and green organisational pro-
cesses to achieve NZE’s aim through rapid and radical structural change. Achieving the
NZE goal is expected to significantly impact the climate change landscape. However,
2.1. Theoretical Background

The increase in global temperatures due to GHG emissions has become a critical issue
requiring definitive solutions. In 2020, the Earth’s surface temperature was 0.98 ◦ C above
the 20th-century average [7]. China is recognised as the most significant GHG emitter,
followed by India and the United States. Industrially developed countries have seen a
rise in GHG emissions, highlighting the need for sustainable and green organisational
processes to achieve NZE’s aim through rapid and radical structural change. Achieving
the NZE goal is expected to significantly impact the climate change landscape. However,
NZE’s goal will require overcoming significant challenges, particularly in managing global
SC for large organisations [3,6].
The core principles of various frameworks remain the same to attain sustainable
practices that individuals and large-scale industries can adopt globally. Decarbonising
the SC is crucial, as GHG emissions have increased significantly in upstream SCs. Direct
operational emissions may be low in many sectors, but supplier emissions can be up to
10 times higher. Therefore, managing complexity in the global SC is essential to achieving
NZE goals and establishing a net-zero SC management framework. Sustainability has
become increasingly important for firms seeking a competitive advantage alongside societal
growth. Information management is viewed as a new development paradigm aiming to
improve compliance with social, environmental and economic sustainability regulations. A
net-zero SC framework can manage the GHG emission surge following industrialisation.
The core principles of such a framework involve identifying and eliminating strategies
to integrate environmentally sustainable practices. These practices encompass ‘material
sourcing’, ‘product design’, ‘selection processes’, ‘manufacturing’ and ‘delivery’.
2.2. Net-Zero Adoption and MSC

The concept of a net-zero supply chain has garnered significant attention in recent
years as organisations recognise the urgent need to mitigate climate change [20]. According
to the United Nations, net zero entails ‘cutting GHG emissions to as close to zero as possible,
with any remaining emissions re-absorbed from the atmosphere, by oceans and forests,
for instance’ [5]. Industrial logistic networks significantly affect emissions across various
supply chain stages, including raw material extraction, manufacturing, transportation and
end-of-life disposal. The global supply chain substantially contributes to the world’s GHG
emissions. Although pinpointing an exact percentage is challenging, studies suggest that
emissions from global supply chains are substantial [21,22]. A report by Accenture states
that global supply chains are responsible for up to 60% of the world’s GHG emissions [11].
Global institutions are collaborating to create a more net-zero emission environment.
The manufacturing sector is moving towards a NZE economy [23,24]. Achieving NZE in
the MSC involves minimising or offsetting the GHG emissions associated with the entire
supply chain network, including the production, transportation and disposal of goods.
This concept requires measuring, reducing and offsetting GHG emissions throughout the
supply chain network [25,26]. Numerous studies have explored strategies for reducing
GHG emissions in supply chains, as represented in Figure 4.
To adopt and implement these strategies effectively, collaboration among all stakehold-
ers, including governments, businesses and consumers, is crucial for driving sustainable
practices and reducing GHG emissions in global supply chains. A promising approach to
achieving these goals is the implementation of digital technology, which can facilitate the
transition to a net-zero economy.
the MSC involves minimising or offsetting the GHG emissions associated with the entire
supply chain network, including the production, transportation and disposal of goods.
This concept requires measuring, reducing and offsetting GHG emissions throughout the
Sustainability 2024, 16, 7873 supply chain network [25,26]. Numerous studies have explored strategies for reducing
6 of 35
GHG emissions in supply chains, as represented in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Strategy
Figure 4. Strategyfor achieving
for achieving net-zero
net-zero emissions
emissions (NZEs)(NZEs) in the manufacturing
in the manufacturing supply chain
supply chain (MSC)
(MSC) (Authors’ work).
(Authors’ work).
2.3. Literature Gaps

To adopt and implement these strategies effectively, collaboration among all stake-
holders, In recent years,
including the adoptionbusinesses
governments, of the net-zero
andconcept in the manufacturing
consumers, is crucial forindustries
driving sustain-
has gained attention due to its crucial role in promoting an emission-free supply chain and
ablereducing
practices and reducing GHG emissions in global supply chains. A promising ap-
waste, resource extraction and pollution. These practices incorporate a zero-waste
proach to achieving
philosophy theseclosed-loop
and consider goals is the implementation
supply of digital
chain flows within technology,
the system. which can
Studies have
facilitate
shownthethetransition
benefits of to a net-zero
adopting economy.
the net-zero concept, including improved organisational
performance, enhanced market competitiveness and better resource utilisation. Compared
to traditional concepts like reusing, reducing and recycling, the manufacturing sector’s
approach now extends to new strategies such as regeneration and restoration. Despite
these benefits, there remains a need for a better understanding of the net-zero concept in
the manufacturing sector, particularly regarding its role and benefits for the industry in
developing economies. Due to government pressure and dynamic customer markets, the
manufacturing sector in emerging economies recognises the need for net-zero techniques
to improve ‘resource efficiency’, ‘decentralised decision making’ and ‘energy management’.
These technologies also foster collaborative environments within SC networks to facilitate
the net-zero goal. Therefore, understanding the role of these net-zero adoption drivers is
crucial for developing economies. We identified key drivers that can support an MSC, as
shown in Figure 5. Based on an SLR, gaps related to the relationship between net-zero
adoption and the MSC were identified:
1. Existing studies provide a theoretical understanding of the NZE concept and MSC, but
empirical investigations are needed in developing countries, necessitating further research.
2. While the studies discuss net-zero economy enablers, the impact on improving organ-
isational performance in the manufacturing industry remains to be determined.
3. Current research overlooks the manufacturing perspective in emerging economies.

Given
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW the varied levels of adoption and maturity among MSCs, a detailed under-
8 of 37
standing of these concepts is needed.
Figure 5. List of potential drivers for net-zero adoption (Authors’ compilation).

Figure 5. List of potential drivers for net-zero adoption (Authors’ compilation).
2.4. Motivation and Novelty

Addressing climate change necessitates
necessitates adopting
adopting netnet zero
zero in MSCs,
MSCs, yet yet existing
existing re-re-
search largely
search largelyoverlooks
overlooksthe thecomplex
complexinteractions
interactions among
among drivers
drivers influencing
influencing thisthis transi-
transition.
Traditional studies
tion. Traditional focus focus
studies on individual drivers,
on individual using primary
drivers, methodologies
using primary methodologies that fail to
that
capture the nuanced
fail to capture interplay
the nuanced between
interplay factors.factors.
between This research fills this
This research gap
fills bygap
this introducing
by intro-
aducing
novel ahybrid
novelapproach that integrates
hybrid approach ANN, fuzzy
that integrates ANN, ISM and ISM
fuzzy fuzzyand MICMAC analyses.
fuzzy MICMAC
ANN excels
analyses. ANN at modelling
excels at complex,
modellingnonlinear
complex,relationships among multiple
nonlinear relationships among drivers, pro-
multiple
viding
drivers,aproviding
sophisticated analysis of analysis
a sophisticated their interactions. Fuzzy ISM
of their interactions. is adept
Fuzzy ISMat is handling
adept at han- the
inherent uncertainty and ambiguity in expert opinions, ensuring that
dling the inherent uncertainty and ambiguity in expert opinions, ensuring that the model the model accurately
reflects the complexity
accurately reflects the of real-worldofscenarios.
complexity real-world MICMAC
scenarios.analysis
MICMAC categorises
analysis drivers based
categorises
on
drivers based on their ‘driving’ and ‘dependence power’, offering strategic insightsmore
their ‘driving’ and ‘dependence power’, offering strategic insights that facilitate that
effective
facilitate decision making.
more effective The novelty
decision making.ofThethisnovelty
research oflies
thisinresearch
its unprecedented hybrid
lies in its unprece-
approach,
dented hybrid combining
approach,ANN, fuzzy ISM
combining ANN,andfuzzy
MICMACISM andfor the first time
MICMAC forinthethefirst
context
time of in
net-zero adoption in MSCs. This comprehensive and robust analytical
the context of net-zero adoption in MSCs. This comprehensive and robust analytical framework surpasses
the limitations
framework of previous
surpasses studies by of
the limitations providing
previousa studies
holistic byunderstanding
providing a holisticof the intricate
under-
interactions among drivers. By leveraging the strengths of each
standing of the intricate interactions among drivers. By leveraging the strengths methodology, theofstudy
each
not only enhances
methodology, the our
study experience
not only but also offers
enhances our aexperience
scalable and butadaptable
also offers model for future
a scalable and
research.
adaptable Thismodel hybrid model
for future sets a new
research. Thisstandard in thesets
hybrid model field, bridging
a new standardcritical research
in the field,
gaps and critical
bridging offeringresearch
valuablegapsinsights for policymakers
and offering and industry
valuable insights stakeholdersand
for policymakers aiming
indus-to
achieve net-zero targets through more effective and sustainable practices.
try stakeholders aiming to achieve net-zero targets through more effective and sustainable
practices.
3. Methodology
We developed the proposed research model by employing a combination of quanti-
tative and qualitative research methods for data collection and a comprehensive three-
4, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 37
3. Methodology
We developedmethod
step ANN-fuzzy ISM-MICMAC the proposed research
for data model by
analysis, as employing
illustrateda combination
in Figure 6 of and quantita-
tive and qualitative research methods for data collection and a comprehensive
detailed in the subsequent sections. The first phase involved conducting an SLR to identify three-step
ANN-fuzzy ISM-MICMAC method for data analysis, as illustrated in Figure 6 and detailed
potential drivers of net-zero adoption in the MSC. In the second phase, we used a hybrid
in the subsequent sections. The first phase involved conducting an SLR to identify potential
survey approach,drivers
incorporating
of net-zeroboth online
adoption in and offline
the MSC. In questionnaires,
the second phase,to wegather
used adata
hybrid forsurvey
analysing nonlinear relationships
approach, through
incorporating both ANN. Theoffline
online and thirdquestionnaires,
phase involved an expert
to gather panel
data for analysing
review to examine the structural associations among the identified drivers. Finally, wereview
nonlinear relationships through ANN. The third phase involved an expert panel
utilised MICMACtoanalysis
examine to thecategorise
structural associations among
these drivers basedtheon
identified drivers.and
their driving Finally, we utilised
depend-
MICMAC analysis to categorise these drivers based on their driving and dependence
ence power. We offer strategic insights for more effective decision making and implement-
power. We offer strategic insights for more effective decision making and implementing
ing net-zero initiatives in the MSC.
net-zero initiatives in the MSC.
Figure 6. Research Figure 6. Research

methodology formethodology
ANN-ISM. for ANN-ISM.
The drivers identified from the literature were validated by a survey conducted
The drivers within
identified frommanufacturing
the Indian the literature were validated
industries, bythea selected
ensuring that surveydrivers
conducted
significantly
within the Indian manufacturing industries, ensuring
influence the MSC in emerging economies. that the selected drivers signifi-
cantly influence the MSC in emerging economies.
A two-step multi-investigative approach was applied using the ANN-fuzzy ISM
technique. F-ISM, which only checks linear associations, is unsuitable for decisions like
technology adoption. Therefore, ANN was integrated with F-ISM to detect linear and non-
linear relationships among drivers for adopting the net-zero technique in MSC. F-ISM
A two-step multi-investigative approach was applied using the ANN-fuzzy ISM

technique. F-ISM, which only checks linear associations, is unsuitable for decisions like
technology adoption. Therefore, ANN was integrated with F-ISM to detect linear and
nonlinear relationships among drivers for adopting the net-zero technique in MSC. F-ISM
identifies linear relationships where one driver influences another. At the same time, ANN
explores nonlinear relationships and learns and identifies complex interactions.
3.1. Empirical Analysis

An empirical analysis using quantitative and qualitative methods offers a solid the-
oretical foundation for the study. Additionally, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was
employed to organise the drivers and analyse the questionnaire survey data collected
from respondents.
3.2. Details of the Survey

To gather empirical data for our study, a comprehensive survey was designed and
administered to participants from the manufacturing sector. The following subsections
provide a detailed description of the survey design, distribution and data collection process,
including the specific methodologies used to ensure the reliability and validity of the
collected data.
3.2.1. Questionnaire Survey Development and Data Gathering

In the first phase, an empirical investigation was conducted to establish statistical
validity and provide a theoretical foundation for the drivers identified from the SLR.
Following this, a five-point Likert scale (1: No Influence (NI); 5: Max Influence (MI))
questionnaire survey was developed based on prior research [27]. The questionnaire
underwent pre-testing by three professors: one from the management department and
two from the industrial engineering department and four experts from manufacturing
industries specialising in NZE and supply chain consultancy (see Table 1). After detailed
discussions with these experts, several modifications were made based on their feedback.
The sampling process and eligibility criteria for selecting organisations for this study are
detailed as follows:
Table 1. Demographics of experts (Expt.) participating in questionnaire pre-testing.
Expert Background Work Experience (in Years)

Expt1 Academia 35
Expt2 Academia 28
Expt3 Academia 19
Expt4 Manufacturing head 23
Expt5 General manager 20
Expt6 Production manager 15
Expt7 Logistics head 16
3.2.2. Sampling and Eligibility Criteria

To select manufacturing organisations for the study, we employed a systematic sam-
pling approach comprising the following steps:
Sampling Frame: We identified a list of manufacturing industries from industry
databases and government records, which served as the foundation for selecting potential
study participants.
Inclusion Criteria: Industries had to meet criteria including size, the presence of an
operational website, the nature of operations and the adoption of net-zero practices. We
targeted small and medium-sized manufacturing industries that had either implemented
or were in the process of implementing net-zero sustainability practices, ensuring relevance

to the research objectives.
Exclusion Criteria: Industries that failed to meet the inclusion criteria, were unwill-
ing to participate or provided incomplete or unreliable data were excluded to ensure
data quality.
The questionnaire consisted of three phases: (1) Challenges, (2) Driving Forces and
(3) Maturity Items. The same population was surveyed across all three phases. This study
reports only the results related to the drivers. We prepared a list of 732 manufacturing
firms from various geographical locations in India using industry directories. These firms
were contacted via mail, which explained the survey’s purpose and provided a description
of the drivers involved. Initially, only 37 responses were received within the first month.
We then leveraged LinkedIn to reach out to top management employees from the listed
firms, urging them to participate. Ultimately, we finalised 173 responses after eliminating
9 biased ones. With a response rate of 23.7%, this outcome is considered acceptable and
comparable to other empirical investigations in the Indian context [5,27]. Responses were
kept anonymous to minimise bias and ensure the integrity of the primary data collected. A
brief description of the drivers was included in the email to enhance understanding and
clarity. The details of the respondents are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Respondents’ demographic summary.
Subcategory with Frequency

Demographic Characteristics
and Percentage
Qualification Bachelor’s Master’s PhD
93 55 25
53.7% 31.8% 14.5%
Work experience (years) Junior (1 to 5) Intermediate (6 to 10) Senior (Above 10)
64 82 27
37% 47.4% 15.6%
Background Manager Supervisor Researcher
77 33 63
44.5% 19% 36.5%
Automobile, rubber and Agriculture and
Respondent organisation Others
textile industries food processing
92 37 44
53.2% 21.4% 25.4%
Industry type Small Medium Large
54 85 34
31.2% 49.2% 19.6%
3.2.3. Reliability and Validity Checks

SPSS v26.0 software was used to conduct reliability and validity tests, ensuring the
accuracy and integrity of the data gathered from the manufacturing sector. Reliability was
assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which yielded a value of 0.863. This is considered accept-
able, according to the literature [28]. Convergent validity was determined by examining
the factor loadings of each variable, with values exceeding 0.5 indicating validity [29]. In
this study, all factors exhibited factor loadings greater than 0.5, confirming the gathered
data’s convergent validity.
3.3. Exploratory Factor Analysis

The EFA approach is frequently employed in operations management to determine
the structure of factors, especially when there is limited or no existing literature or specific
concepts available. EFA offers several advantages, such as minimising information loss and
reducing significant variables into a more manageable structure. To assess the suitability of
the data for EFA, we conducted Bartlett’s test of sphericity and the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin
(KMO) measure. Bartlett’s test of sphericity should have a p-value less than 0.01 and
the KMO value should be at least 0.60. In our study, the KMO value was found to be
0.841, indicating that the data were appropriate for EFA. Using the varimax factor rotation
method,
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW the EFA revealed that the drivers of NZE in the MSC could be categorised 12 of 37 into
eight major groups, accounting for 67.725% of the total variance. The factor loadings for
these drivers ranged from 0.603 to 0.906, exceeding the acceptable threshold suggested in
thethese
literature.
drivers ranged from 0.603 to 0.906, exceeding the acceptable threshold suggested in
the literature.
4. Development of a Framework for MSCs
4. The
Development of a Framework
EFA analysis for MSCs
indicated that all drivers related to NZE are highly significant for
TheThe
this study. EFAexpert
analysis indicated
team reviewedthat the
all drivers related
EFA results andto was
NZEthen
are highly
askedsignificant for these
to categorise
this study. The expert team reviewed the EFA results and was then
drivers into groups for framework development. Based on the inputs from experts, we asked to categorise
thesethese
named drivers into groups
groups for framework
as follows: development.
(1) Regulatory Based(2)
and Policy, on Economic,
the inputs from experts,
(3) Technological,
we named these groups as follows: (1) Regulatory and Policy, (2) Economic, (3) Techno-
(4) Market and Consumer, (5) Supply Chain and Procurement, (6) Corporate Governance
logical, (4) Market and Consumer, (5) Supply Chain and Procurement, (6) Corporate Gov-
and Ethics, (7) Environmental and (8) Operational. Figure 7 illustrates the detailed frame-
ernance and Ethics, (7) Environmental and (8) Operational. Figure 7 illustrates the detailed
work developed for the MSC after the EFA analysis. To understand expert perceptions
framework developed for the MSC after the EFA analysis. To understand expert percep-
of the key
tions drivers
of the for net-zero
key drivers adoption,
for net-zero adoption,these drivers
these driverswere
wereanalysed
analysed using ANN,F-F-ISM
using ANN,
andISMMICMAC
and MICMACtechniques through
techniques an expert
through panel
an expert review.
panel review.Data
Data were
werecollected
collected from
from three
types of experts:
three industryindustry
types of experts: specialists, academic
specialists, expertsexperts
academic and those
and experienced in both
those experienced in areas.
Experts assessed
both areas. eachassessed
Experts pair of factors
each pairforofinterrelationships, identifying
factors for interrelationships, one of four
identifying one possible
of
connections:
four possible‘achieved by’,‘achieved
connections: ‘leads to’, ‘bidirectional’
by’, or ‘no relation’.
‘leads to’, ‘bidirectional’ These assessments
or ‘no relation’. These
wereassessments
then mappedwere following
then mapped thefollowing
guidelines thein
guidelines
Table 1. in Table 1.
Figure
Figure 7. 7. Frameworkfor
Framework for the
the manufacturing
manufacturing industry to to
industry achieve net-zero
achieve supply
net-zero chain chain
supply (Authors’
(Authors’
work).
work).
To provide a clear understanding, we categorised the identified drivers into eight

main groups, which are predictors in the context of ANN and their respective subgroups.
Using the collected data as a foundation, ANN was employed to assess the nonlinear in-
fluence of these predictors. The scale used in this study for measuring various drivers and
predictors. All drivers and predictors were evaluated using 173 and 91 responses through
a questionnaire survey.
To provide a clear understanding, we categorised the identified drivers into eight

main groups, which are predictors in the context of ANN and their respective subgroups.
Using the collected data as a foundation, ANN was employed to assess the nonlinear
influence of these predictors. The scale used in this study for measuring various drivers
and predictors. All drivers and predictors were evaluated using 173 and 91 responses
through a questionnaire survey.
4.1. Case Study

A case study was performed on the developed framework within a leading manufac-
turing industry in India. This section provides a comprehensive discussion of the details of
the case study.
Details of Case Organisation

A rubber tire manufacturing industry (disguised as ABC) was selected to test the
framework due to its critical role in supporting net-zero practices. The case industry, which
was founded in 1983 in northwestern India, employs approximately 500 people. ABC has
implemented green business practices, manufacturing and supplying rubber goods to large
corporations and international clients. The company prioritises sustainability initiatives
and regularly conducts employee training and awareness programs. After discussions
with top management, ABC agreed to participate in the study. An expert team of six
members was formed, including one senior manager, one R&D manager, one logistics
head, one plant head, one operations manager and one manufacturing manager. Each team
member has over 10 years of experience in the MSC, and three are actively involved in
sustainability projects.
4.2. Artificial Neural Network

In the first step of ANN-F-ISM modelling, ANN is chosen for its ability to handle input
data without requiring a specific equation form. It adapts easily to different datasets and
effectively manages incomplete or partial data [30]. ANN offers higher predictive precision
than traditional linear models like structural equation modelling (SEM), multiple linear
regression, multiple discriminant analysis (MDA) and binary linear regression analysis.
F-ISM is a valuable method for predictors with a statistically significant effect on dependent
variables (net-zero adoption). However, traditional linear statistical techniques, including
sequential ISM, can only detect linear relationships, oversimplifying complex human
decision making [31–33]. To address this, we used ANN, a leading artificial intelligence (AI)
model, in the decision-making process. ANN, especially ‘the multi-layer perceptron type’,
can model ‘nonlinear relationships’ and learn from input/output mappings [34]. ANN
models mimic the structure of the human brain, detecting nonlinear and non-compensatory
relationships [35,36]. Compared to linear models, ANN achieves superior predictive
accuracy, adaptability and robustness [34,37,38]. However, we developed a two-step
method combining ANN with fuzzy ISM since ANN is unsuited for examining causal
relationships and hypothesis testing [9,39,40].
4.2.1. Training of ANN

The ANN training phase aims to adjust the network’s internal weights to accurately
capture the implicit relationship between inputs and outputs. The provided input/output
pairs are formatted as follows:
T = (a1 , x1 ), (a2 , x2 ), .., (ani , xni ) (1)
where xi indicates the ith sample of the input parameter vector and ai denotes the cor-
responding vector of output responses. These samples implicitly define the nonlinear
relationship between the input parameters and output responses. The objective is to de-
velop an ANN model to learn this implicit function. The general form of the ANN output
is expressed as:
u = u(x, w) (2)
where ‘w’ is the vector of unknown weights of the ANN, ‘x’ is the input parameters and ‘u’
is the vector of output responses of the ANN. The vector of unknown weights is determined
by solving an optimisation problem.
w* = min x Et = min x∑i ∥ ai −y(xi − w) ∥ (3)
where Et represents the error across all samples. Many approaches can be used to solve
this optimisation problem.
µEτ
wnext = wnow − β (4)
µw
where β is referred to as the ‘ANN’ learning rate [32]. The weights are initially set to
random values. This process continues until a solution to Equation (3) is found.
Continuous optimisation and calibration of ‘wi ’ and ‘ci ’ are essential to achieve ac-
curate function training. The goal is to minimise the mean square error to its optimum.
This iterative process repeats until the required level of accuracy is attained. According to
Raut et al. (2018) [36], the calibration procedure for weights ‘wi ’ and biases ‘ci ’ is as follows:
n
Vi = ∑i=1 wij ui + ci (5)
The bias ‘ci ’ represents a nonzero value added to the sum of inputs multiplied by their
corresponding weights. In this sum, ‘Vi ’ transforms an activation function. The activation
unit’s value ‘Pi ’ is computed as follows:
Pi = f(V i ) (6)
4.2.2. ANN Performance

The performance of ANN is typically measured using metrics such as root mean
square error (RMSE), absolute mean deviation (AMD) and the coefficient of determination
(R2 ). These metrics are calculated as follows:

1 n
n ∑ i=1
2 2
RMSE = Mi − Mia) (7)

2
∑ni=1 Mi − Mia)
2
R = 1− n 2
(8)
∑i=1 (Mia − Mm)
1 n (Mi − Mia)

n ∑ i=1
AMD = × 100 (9)
Mia
where ‘Mia ’ represents the actual value, ‘Mi ’ denotes the predicted value, ‘Mm ’ represents
the mean of the actual values and ‘n’ indicates the number of data points.
4.3. Fuzzy ISM Approach

Initially introduced by Warfield (1974), ISM is used to analyse complex systems. It
helps recognise fundamental interaction relationships among specific elements and con-
struct a hierarchical structure model [35,38]. The ISM approach integrates several mathe-
matical foundations, including digraph theory, expert elicitation methods, matrix operation
theory and computer-aided calculations. In the traditional ISM approach, contextual rela-
tionships among system units are determined based on a binary relationship between each
pair of units. This binary assumption overlooks the strength of these relationships and can
influence expert judgment in identifying them. The fuzzy linguistic approach is integrated
into traditional ISM to address these limitations. This enhancement improves rationality in
determining contextual relationships among system units by expressing these relationships

using fuzzy linguistic variables.
Triangular Fuzzy Linguistic Variables: This study introduces triangular fuzzy linguis-
tic variables into ISM because they more effectively manage expert judgment information.
The fuzzy ISM approach ensures a more nuanced and accurate representation of the rela-
tionships among system units, accommodating these relationships’ inherent uncertainties
and strengths.
F-ISM Method Steps

Step 1: Pair-wise comparison of drivers. Triangular fuzzy numbers (TFNs) are em-
ployed in FISM. The linguistic variables used in FISM are detailed in Table 3. For the
element (i and j) denoted by ‘HI’, the TFN is (0.5, 0.7 and 0.9). For the element (j and i), the
TFN is (0, 0.1 and 0.3).
Table 3. Fuzzy scale for expert opinion [27].
Sr. No. Linguistic Term Corresponding TFN

1 No Influence (NI) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
2 Low Influence (LI) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
3 Average Influence (AI) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
4 High Influence (HI) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
5 Max Influence (MI) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
Table 4 lists the fuzzy influence between the ith and jth hindrances using fuzzy
linguistic parameters. This section develops the structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM) by
considering contextual relationships [35].
Table 4. Details of fuzzy hindrances between ith and jth.
Symbol Element (ith to jth) Element (jth to ith) Symbol Element (ith to jth) Element (jth to ith)
V (MI) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) X (MI, HI) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
V (HI) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) X (MI, AI) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
V (AI) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) X (MI, LI) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
V (LI) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) X (HI, MI) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
A (MI) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) X (HI, AI) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
A (HI) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) X (HI, LI) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
A (AI) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) X (AI, MI) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
A (LI) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) X (AI, HI) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
X (MI) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) X (AI, LI) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
X (HI) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) X (LI, MI) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
X (AI) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) X (LI, HI) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
X (LI) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) X (LI, AI) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
O (NI) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
Step 2: Integration of expert opinions. Various strategies can be employed to integrate

expert opinions, as advocated by [35]. The present study used the geometric mean approach
to combine the experts’ opinions.
Step 3: Defuzzification. Many methods can be used for defuzzification, including the
centre of gravity (COG), mean of maximum (MOM) and centre average methods. The COG
method determines the value at the centre of the area under the curve, while the MOM
approach identifies the point where balance is achieved. The COG method was employed
in this research as per Equation (10). A TFN is defined as X = (fi , gi , hi ), where ‘fi ’ represents
the smallest likely value, ‘gi ’ is the most probable value and ‘hi ’ is the highest possible
value of any fuzzy event.
fi + gi + hi
λij = (10)
3
Step 4: Partitioning the reachability matrix. A threshold (Ψ) based on the aggregate of
expert opinions (from Step 3) is required. In this study, the average of all elements of the
defuzzified matrix was calculated to determine the threshold. The reachability matrix was
then constructed using Equations (11) and (12).
if λij ≥ Ψ −→ λij = 1, λji = 0 (11)
if λij ≤ Ψ −→ λij = 0, λji = 1 (12)

Step 5: ‘Fuzzy Conical Matrix’. F-ISM is a more updated method than ISM. In ‘FISM’,
the possibility of interaction is measured on a 0–1 scale, excluding 0 and 1. To achieve this,
the reachability matrix must be raised to the power of ‘r+1’ to reach a steady state. This
process is described in Equations (13) and (14).
M = D+I (13)
M* = Mr = Mr+1 , r > 1 (14)

Here,
M: The reachability matrix represents the connections between elements in the system.
D: The direct relationship matrix shows direct connections between elements (initial
direct relationship matrix D after defuzzification).
I: The identity matrix adds self-loops (each element is reachable from itself).
Step 6: Digraph development. An initial digraph that includes transitive links is
constructed using the conical matrix. This initial digraph is represented by lines connecting
edges (relationships) and nodes (elements). To achieve the final digraph, indirect links
are removed. Positioning factors begin with placing the top-level factor at the highest
position in the digraph. The second-level factor is positioned below it, continuing until the
bottom-level factor is placed at the lowest in the digraph.
Step 7: The ‘MICMAC’ method creates a graph to classify factors based on their driving
and dependence powers. This analysis is used to validate the interpretive structural model’s
factors and derive results and conclusions. MICMAC analysis categorises the drivers into
four groups: ‘linkage’, ‘autonomous’, ‘dependent’ and ‘independent’.
5. Results and Analysis

The results of our study are presented in this section. Here, we showcase the findings
from EFA, ANN and fuzzy ISM.
5.1. Results Obtained through EFA

The EFA results reveal that the drivers of NZE in the MSC could be categorised into
eight major groups, accounting for 67.725% of the total variance. The factor loadings for
these drivers ranged from 0.603 to 0.906, exceeding the acceptable threshold. The final
factor analysis results for net-zero adoption drivers are outlined in Table 5.
Table 5. EFA results for net-zero adoption drivers.
Drivers (Predictor) Name Sub-Drivers Mean SD Item Loading Eigenvalue Cumulative %

Regulatory and Policy (RPP) D1. Regulatory Compliance (RPP1) 3.360 1.380 0.725 3.741 14.383%
D2. Government Incentives (RPP2) 3.227 1.342 0.906
Table 5. Cont.
Drivers (Predictor) Name Sub-Drivers Mean SD Item Loading Eigenvalue Cumulative %

D3. Environmental Regulations (RPP3) 3.151 1.325 0.864
D4. Industry Standards (RPP4) 3.093 1.411 0.682
Economic (EP) D5. Cost Reduction (EP1) 3.233 1.407 0.815 3.175 26.600%
D6. Financial Performance (EP2) 3.081 1.313 0.706
Technological (TP) D7. Technological Advancements (TP1) 3.244 1.320 0.840 2.815 37.426%
D8. Innovation Opportunities (TP2) 3.186 1.329 0.784
D9. Eco-design (TP3) 3.279 1.206 0.765
Market and Consumer (MCP) D10. Consumer Demand (MCP1) 3.378 1.276 0.868 2.087 45.454%
D11. Brand Reputation (MCP2) 3.320 1.052 0.878
D12. Competitive Advantage (MCP3) 3.512 1.046 0.794
D13. Market Differentiation (MCP4) 3.157 1.249 0.780
Supply Chain and
D14. Supply Chain Pressure (SCPP1) 3.081 1.230 0.781 1.660 51.840%
Procurement (SCPP)
D15. Green Supply Chain
3.169 0.962 0.871
Management (SCPP2)
D16. Sustainable Procurement (SCPP3) 3.064 1.377 0.895
Corporate Governance and D17. Corporate Social
3.169 1.087 0.829 1.424 57.317%
Ethics (CGEP) Responsibility (CGEP1)
D18. Long-term Viability (CGEP2) 3.477 1.152 0.807
D19. Community Impact (CGEP3) 3.203 1.065 0.815
Environmental (EnP) D20. Carbon Footprint Reduction (EnP1) 3.134 1.165 0.699 1.397 62.991%
D21. Renewable Energy
3.128 1.158 0.804
Adoption (EnP2)
D22. Circular Economy Practices (EnP3) 3.017 1.221 0.833
D23. Pollution Control (EnP4) 3.238 1.292 0.603
D24. Climate Change Mitigation (EnP5) 3.238 1.132 0.649 1.309 67.757%
Operational (OP) D25. Energy Efficiency (OP1) 3.355 1.319 0.726
3.145 0.959 0.677
D27. Product Lifecycle
3.087 1.354 0.744
Management (OP3)
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling (KMO): 0.841; Bartlett’s test of sphericity: Approx. Chi-square: 1760.33;
df: 325; Sig.: 0.000. Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalisation.
5.2. Outcomes of ANN

In the second phase of the hybrid ANN-F-ISM MICMAC framework, we developed
our ANN model using selected predictors. Fuzzy ISM effectively identifies interrela-
tionships among factors impacting dependent variables, but traditional linear association
methods, including ISM, fail to detect nonlinear relationships, leading to an overgeneralised
view of complex human decision making [30,34]. We used ANN, a critical AI method, to
address this and model the decision-making process. In this study, 70% of the data train the
network model, while 30% test it, employing tenfold cross-validation. The ANN model’s
input layer included eight variables: Regulatory and Policy, Economic, Technological,
Market and Consumer, Supply Chain and Procurement, Corporate Governance and Ethics,
Environmental and Operational. The dependent variable, net-zero adoption, is the output
in the ANN model’s output layer. The evaluation results, indicated by RMSE, demonstrate
the ANN model’s superior performance, as shown in Table 6.
The mean RMSE value of the testing model stands at 0.08, while that of the training
model is 0.16, indicating the superior performance of the NN model in capturing nonlinear
relationships among independent variables influencing net-zero adoption in the MSC.
The proposed framework of ANN is illustrated in Figure 8. A sensitivity analysis of the
NN model reveals the relative importance of independent variables in predicting net-zero

adoption. The normalised importance quantifies how changes in independent variables
affect the model-predicted outcomes.
Table 6. Performance evaluation of the ANN model by RMSE.
SS SSE SSE SS RMSE RMSE

NN TSS
(Training) (Training) (Testing) (Testing) (Training) (Testing)
4, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 37
ANN Config: 1 70 2.293 0.399 21 0.181 0.138 91
ANN Config: 2 66 2.113 0.453 25 0.179 0.135 91
ANN Config: 3 60 1.895 0.752 31 0.178 0.156 91
Config4 = Configuration,
ANN Config: 56 SSE1.732
= Sum of Square
0.212 Error, 35
NN = Neural
0.176Network, SS = Sample
0.078 91 Size and
TSS = Total
ANN Config: 5 Sample
70 Size. 3.058 0.121 21 0.209 0.076 91
ANN Config: 6 65 1.226 0.164 26 0.137 0.079 91
ANN Config:The
7 mean RMSE
67 value1.391of the testing
0.171 model24stands at0.144 0.08, while that of the
0.084 91 training
model8 is 0.16, indicating
ANN Config: 58 the
1.379superior performance
0.012 33 of the 0.154NN model0.019 in capturing 91 nonlin-
ear relationships
ANN Config: 9 53among independent
1.091 variables influencing
0.056 38 net-zero 0.038
0.143 adoption in91the MSC.
The proposed
ANN Config: 10 framework
61 of
1.19 ANN is illustrated
0.014 30in Figure 8.
0.140 A sensitivity
0.022 analysis
91 of the
NN model reveals the relative
Mean 1.74 importance0.24 of independent0.16 variables in predicting net-zero
0.08
adoption. The normalised0.59
SD importance 0.22quantifies how changes 0.02 in independent
0.05 variables
affect the model-predicted outcomes.
Config = Configuration, SSE = Sum of Square Error, NN = Neural Network, SS = Sample Size and TSS = Total
Sample Size.
Figure 8. The proposed framework

Figure 8. The of ANN.of ANN.
proposed framework
According to the ANN findings, Environmental drivers emerge as the most influential
According to the ANN
independent findings,
variable, Environmental
attributing 100% importance drivers emerge of
to the prediction asnet-zero
the most influen-
adoption.
tial independent variable,
Following attributing
closely are Economic100% importance
drivers to the prediction
at 60.38%, Technological drivers atof59.05%,
net-zero adop-
Market
tion. Following closely are Economic drivers at 60.38%, Technological drivers at 59.05%,
Market and Consumer at 47.02%, Corporate Governance and Ethics at 46.22%, Regulatory
and Policy at 43.94%, Operational drivers at 33.75% and Supply Chain and Procurement
at 24.85%. A comprehensive overview of RMSE is represented in Figure 9. This paragraph
and Consumer at 47.02%, Corporate Governance and Ethics at 46.22%, Regulatory and
Policy at 43.94%, Operational drivers at 33.75% and Supply Chain and Procurement at
24.85%. A comprehensive overview of RMSE is represented in Figure 9. This paragraph
maintains
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW the structure and content of the original while adapting it to fit the
19 context
of 37 of
drivers influencing net-zero adoption in the MSC.
Figure 9. Comparative analysis of RMSE.

Figure 9. Comparative analysis of RMSE.
To measure the predictive power of each input neuron, a sensitivity analysis (Table
To measure the predictive power of each input neuron, a sensitivity analysis (Table 7)
7) was conducted to obtain the normalised importance of these neurons. This was per-
wasformed
conducted to obtain
by dividing the
their normalised
relative importance
importance of these neurons.
by the maximum This
significance was
and performed
present-
by dividing
ing it as a percentage [32,36]. The results show that Environmental drivers are the most it as
their relative importance by the maximum significance and presenting
a percentage [32,36].
critical predictor withThe results
a score show
of 100%, that Environmental
followed by EP, which has drivers are the
a normalised most critical
importance
predictor with
of 60.38%, anda TP,
score of 100%,
which followed
has a score by EP, which has a normalised importance of
of 59.05%.
60.38%, and TP, which has a score of 59.05%.
Table 7. Summary of normalised importance (Sensitivity analysis).
Table 7. Summary of normalised importance (Sensitivity analysis).
Independent
Variable
Independent
Variable Importance
Importance
NI
PredictorPredictor NI NI(in NI NI (in NINI (in NI NI (in NI NI NI
NI (in NI Avg.
NI (in Avg. NSNS (%)
(in %) NI(in NI (in %) Rank
Name (in %) (in%)%) NI (in %) (in %) (in %) NI (in %) NI
(in %) (in %)(in %)
(in %) (in %) Score Rank
Name %) %) %) %) %) %) Score (%)
RPP 21.79 9.00 67.11 59.54 46.71 63.18 24.80 68.50 33.80 30.23 0.42 43.94 6
RPP 21.79 9.00 67.11 59.54 46.71 63.18 24.80 68.50 33.80 30.23 0.42 43.94 6
EP 37.86 76.64 46.84 53.62 73.46 13.09 46.35 88.01 47.72 100.00 0.58 60.38 2
EP 37.86 76.64 46.84 53.62 73.46 13.09 46.35 88.01 47.72 100.00 0.58 60.38 2
TP 33.54 97.40 55.65 68.04 73.67 39.31 49.25 59.72 63.40 30.72 0.57 59.05 3
TP 33.54 97.40 55.65 68.04 73.67 39.31 49.25 59.72 63.40 30.72 0.57 59.05 3
MCP 20.27 24.05 27.80 73.95 40.29 30.71 54.23 97.83 23.83 61.51 0.45 47.02 4
MCP 20.27 24.05 27.80 73.95 40.29 30.71 54.23 97.83 23.83 61.51 0.45 47.02 4
SCPP 2.81 23.51 61.67 17.36 38.01 16.60 11.07 34.62 21.82 12.72 0.24 24.85 8
SCPP 2.81 23.51 61.67 17.36 38.01 16.60 11.07 34.62 21.82 12.72 0.24 24.85 8
EnP 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 66.54 0.97 100.00 1
EnP 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 66.54 0.97 100.00 1
CGEP 39.13 43.36 64.76 46.55 27.10 33.27 60.19 59.56 41.37 31.42 0.45 46.22 5
CGEP 39.13 43.36 64.76 46.55 27.10 33.27 60.19 59.56 41.37 31.42 0.45 46.22 5
OP 29.56 39.55 62.51 32.30 26.55 41.14 20.61 30.88 14.94 28.19 0.33 33.75 7
OP 29.56 39.55 62.51 32.30 26.55 41.14 20.61 30.88 14.94 28.19 0.33 33.75 7
NI = Normalised Importance, NS = Normalise Score and Avg. = Average.
NI = Normalised Importance, NS = Normalise Score and Avg. = Average.
5.3.5.3.
Outcomes through
Outcomes throughF-ISM
F-ISM MICMAC
MICMAC
In In
this
thissection,
section, we presentthe
we present theoutcomes
outcomes related
related to RQ3.
to RQ3. Initially,
Initially, we identified
we identified 30
30 potential driversrelated
potential drivers related to net-zero
to net-zero adoption,
adoption, as represented
as represented in Figurein4.Figure 4. For
For further further
anal-
ysis using
analysis fuzzy
using ISMISM
fuzzy techniques, we only
techniques, we considered 27 drivers27
only considered that were distinctly
drivers that wereagreed
distinctly
uponupon
agreed by most
by experts. For the F-ISM
most experts. For themethod,
F-ISMwe selectedwe
method, a panel of sixaexperts,
selected panel ofensuring
six experts,
ensuring a balance between academia and industry to minimise individual bias. Topair-
a balance between academia and industry to minimise individual bias. To establish establish
wise associations
pair-wise associationsamong the 27the
among drivers, the experts
27 drivers, thewere askedwere
experts to provide
askedtheir opinions their
to provide
on the relationships across the rows and columns using four options: ‘achieved by’, ‘leads
to’, ‘bidirectional’ or ‘no relation’.
opinions on the relationships across the rows and columns using four options: ‘achieved
by’, ‘leads to’, ‘bidirectional’ or ‘no relation’.
Formulation of SSIM
A pair-wise association among the finalised 27 drivers is developed in the second
step. An SSIM is then established based on the initial associations among the drivers across
the rows and columns of Table A1 (refer to Appendix A), with ‘i’ representing the row
number and ‘j’ representing the column number. The symbols O, X, V and A represent the
correlation paths among drivers. Specifically:
• O indicates no relation between the drivers.
• X signifies a bi-directional association between the drivers.
• V means driver ‘i’ helps to achieve driver ‘j’.
• A implies driver ‘j’ helps to achieve driver ‘i’.
An SSIM matrix is constructed based on the interrelationships among the drivers and
is reviewed in collaboration with experts in the rubber and tire manufacturing industries.
Fuzzy calculations were employed to use the aggregated SSIM and construct a reacha-
bility matrix. As shown in Table A2 (refer to Appendix A), the fuzzy reachability matrix
is derived. Subsequently, the FISM hierarchical diagram, based on the final reachability
matrix (FRM) (see Table 8) and level partitioning of net-zero adoption drivers (see Table 9),
is presented. Figure 10 illustrates the FISM hierarchy. As indicated in the F-MICMAC
results (Figure 11), the driving power and dependent quantities from the FRM were used
to categorise the drivers into four groups. MICMAC analysis primarily aims to estimate
drivers’ drive and dependence powers. The drivers are classified into four groups:
Autonomous drivers: These drivers have weak drive and dependence and are placed
in the first cluster. They need to be connected to the system, with few but solid links.
Dependent drivers: The second cluster includes drivers with strong dependence
power but weak drive power.
Linkage drivers: This cluster consists of drivers with solid dependence and strong
drive power. They are unstable, and any action on them will impact others and have a
negative effect on themselves.
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW Independent drivers: The fourth cluster contains drivers with solid drive
23 of power
37 but
weak dependence power. A driver with extreme drive power called the ‘key driver’, falls
into the independent or linkage hindrance category.
Figure 10.
Figure 10.Hierarchical
Hierarchicalmodel
modelof fuzzy ISM.ISM.
of fuzzy
Table 8. Final reachability matrix (FRM).
Driving Power
Drivers
D12
D18
D19
D23
D26
D10
D11
D13
D14
D15
D17
D20
D21
D22
D24
D25
D27
D16
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7
D8
D9
D1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 11
D2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9
D3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 15
D4 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 17
D5 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 15
D6 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 14
D7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 26
D8 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 19
D9 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 18
D10 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 10
D11 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
D12 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 17
D13 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 18
D14 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 14
D15 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 19
D16 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 17
D17 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 10
D18 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 16
D19 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 14
D20 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11
D21 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 12
D22 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 15
D23 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 11
D24 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21
Table 8. Cont.
D25 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 13
D26 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 12
D27 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18
Dependence 18 25 14 12 18 12 18 10 9 14 15 14 17 15 18 14 16 11 14 13 12 17 15 14 17 15 14
Table 9. Level partitioning of net-zero adoption drivers.
Drivers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level

D1 (2, 15, 18) (2, 15, 18, 22, 26) (2, 15, 18) IV
D2 (1, 12, 14) (1, 12, 19, 27) (1, 12) VII
D3 (1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 17, 23, 24) (1, 4, 5, 12, 17, 23, 24, 27) (1, 4, 5, 12, 17, 23, 24) I
D4 (4, 6, 7, 11,2024,
Sustainability 19, 26)
16, x FOR PEER REVIEW(4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 18, 19, 21, 26, 27) (4, 6, 11, 19, 26) III 23 o
D5 (1, 11, 12, 15, 16, 23, 27) (2, 4, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 23, 24, 25) (1, 11, 12, 15, 23) VIII
D6 (1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 16, 20, 22, 23) (1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24) (1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 20, 23) I
D7 (1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 26, 27) (1, 2, 3, 15, 17, 18, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27) (1, 3, 15, 17, 18, 20, 26, 27) V
D8 (1, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24) (1, 11, 15, 20) VII
D9 (1, 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18, 23) (3, 4, 8, 12, 14, 15, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26) (12, 15, 17, 23) I
D10 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 19, 21, 24) (2, 3, 8, 21) IV
D11 (2, 3, 5, 7, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24) (2, 3, 7, 15, 20) VII
D12 (2, 5, 18, 19) (2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24) (2, 5, 18, 19) III
D13 (6, 18, 21, 23, 24, 26) (8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24, 26) (6, 23, 24, 26) V
D14 (1, 10, 17, 18, 24) (1, 2, 10, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24) (1, 10, 24) II
D15 (4, 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18, 25, 27) (2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 25, 23, 27) (12, 25, 27) VI
D16 (8, 9, 18, 21) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 18, 23, 24, 25) (8, 9, 18) VIII
D17 (1, 2, 5, 6, 12, 16, 19, 20) (1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 16, 19, 20, 23, 24) (1, 2, 5, 6, 16, 19, 20) I
D18 (1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20) (2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 18, 20, 23) (3, 12, 15, 18, 20) VI
D19 (2, 3, 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20) (2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24) (2, 15, 20) II
D20 (1, 2, 3, 5, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22) (1, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 12, 23, 24) (1, 15, 17) V
D21 (4, 6, 12, 17, 18, 20) (1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24) (4, 6, 20) VII
D22 (1, 5, 6, 14, 18, 20, 26) (1, 2, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 20, 23, 24, 26) (1, 14, 20, 26) VI
D23 (1, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18) (1, 8, 11, 14, 15, 18, 20, 23) (1, 15, 18) III
D24 (3, 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 18, 21, 26) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24, 26) (3, 12, 15, 26) IV
D25 (1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 22, 24) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 22, 27) (1, 3, 22, 27) VI
D26 (18, 21, 23) (18, 20) (18) IX
D27 (2, 9, 13, 16, 20, 27) (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 19, 20, 22, 27) (2, 9, 13, 16, 20, 27) II
Figure 10. Hierarchical model of fuzzy ISM.
Figure 11. Analysis.

Figure 11. Fuzzy MICMAC Fuzzy MICMAC Analysis.
6. Findings and Discussion

Following the objective of this study outlined in the introduction, an SLR was c
ducted and identified 30 potential drivers of net-zero adoption in the MSC. We conduc
a comprehensive questionnaire survey and selected a panel of seven experts based
their knowledge and experience. This panel identified 27 out of 30 drivers as distinct a
crucial. Valid responses from 173 manufacturing sectors were analysed using EFA. Sub
6. Findings and Discussion

Following the objective of this study outlined in the introduction, an SLR was con-
ducted and identified 30 potential drivers of net-zero adoption in the MSC. We conducted
a comprehensive questionnaire survey and selected a panel of seven experts based on
their knowledge and experience. This panel identified 27 out of 30 drivers as distinct
and crucial. Valid responses from 173 manufacturing sectors were analysed using EFA.
Subsequently, a specific manufacturing industry was selected for a case study to test the pro-
posed framework. An integrated decision support system, incorporating ANN and fuzzy
ISM MICMAC, was utilised to prioritise, analyse the influence, identify the interaction
relationship among the drivers, construct a hierarchical structure among these identified
drivers and validate the framework. These 27 distinct drivers, agreed upon by most experts,
were subjected to further analysis using the ANN-fuzzy ISM MICMAC approach.
The EFA approach was utilised to categorise the identified drivers [41], while NN was
employed to identify ‘non-linear relationships’ and prioritise. The F-ISM approach was
then applied to establish the interrelationships among the drivers supported by ANN and
to determine the critical drivers based on their driving power.
The ANN results indicate that the most critical driver (predictor) groups are Environ-
mental drivers, which emerge as the most influential independent variable, attributing 100%
importance to the prediction of net-zero adoption. Following closely are Economic drivers
at 60.38%, Technological drivers at 59.05%, Market and Consumer at 47.02%, Corporate
Governance and Ethics at 46.22%, Regulatory and Policy at 43.94%, Operational drivers at
33.75% and Supply Chain and Procurement at 24.85%. A study emphasised the importance
of environmental drivers in adopting the net-zero concept in the MSC [27]. The ‘RMSE’
value of the testing model stands at 0.08, while for the training model, it is 0.16, indicating
the superior performance of the ANN model in capturing nonlinear relationships among
independent variables influencing net-zero adoption in the MSC. A sensitivity analysis is
conducted to identify the relative importance of the drivers of net-zero adoption.
To establish a pair-wise comparison between the 27 drivers, experts were asked to
evaluate the relationships between rows and columns using four options: ‘achieved by’,
‘leads to’, ‘bidirectional’ and ‘no relation’. The resulting F-ISM-based structural model,
represented in Figure 10, arranges these drivers into nine distinct levels within the hierarchy.
Figure 10 represents the F-ISM model of net-zero adoption drivers to MSC, organised into
nine hierarchical layers. The lowest levels are essential, impacting higher-level drivers in
the hierarchy. The most important drivers, found in levels VII, VIII and IX, include five
key drivers: D4, D6, D8, D9 and D18. Policymakers and decision makers should prioritise
addressing these drivers to ensure long-term success in the industry. The moderately
important drivers, spanning levels IV, V and VI, consist of 13. Those above and below them
influence these drivers in the hierarchy. The least essential drivers are found in levels I, II
and III; nine are in this group. These drivers are less substantial but still relevant to the
overall structure.
The F-MICMAC analysis is classified into four groups: autonomous group drivers,
dependent group drivers, linkage group drivers and driving group drivers.
Autonomous group drivers: The autonomous group drivers are marked by a lack of
‘influential power’ and ‘dependency’, requiring minimal attention by ‘decision-makers’.
Only one driver, D21, belongs to the autonomous group of drivers.
Dependent group drivers: This group comprises drivers with low influential power
but high dependency. Eight drivers fall into this group: D1, D2, D10, D11, D17, D20, D23
and D26.
Linkage group drivers: Drivers in this group have high driving power and dependency.
Out of the 27 drivers, 13 belong to this group, as represented in Figure 11.
Driving group drivers: This group comprises the most crucial drivers with high
influence and low dependence power. Five drivers belong to this group: D4, D6, D8, D9
and D18.
The outcomes of this study align with past research on MSC to achieve sustainability,
such as [42], which identified technological innovation and regulatory frameworks as key
drivers for sustainability. Our hybrid approach extends these insights by quantifying the
influence of these drivers and elucidating their interrelationships.
Past studies have also emphasised the importance of circular procurement practices
and economic viability in decarbonisation efforts [5]. Our results support these findings
and highlight how these factors operate within the Indian manufacturing sector. The use of
ANN and the fuzzy ISM approach in our study provides robust validation, underscoring
their strategic significance in planning decarbonisation initiatives.
This discussion integrates past study findings, emphasising the implications of our
current research. It underscores the necessity for continuous innovation and the adoption of
advanced technologies like IoT and blockchain to enhance supply chain transparency and
efficiency. These insights validate our results and highlight the practical applications for in-
dustry practitioners and policymakers aiming to achieve NZE in the manufacturing sector.
7. Conclusions, Contributions and Recommendations for Future Research

This study proposes conducting net-zero adoption in the MSC. Only a few studies
have examined drivers affecting net-zero adoption but have yet to explore their interrela-
tionships. An integrated two-stage ANN-FISM approach was developed to address this gap
and analyse drivers influencing net-zero adoption for the MSC. We identified 30 potential
drivers through an SLR, and a panel of seven experts narrowed this to 27 distinct drivers
for further analysis. These drivers were further distributed into eight main groups (predic-
tors). The ANN analysis quantified the importance of these drivers, with Environmental
drivers being the most influential at 100%, followed by Economic drivers at 60.38% and
Technological drivers at 59.05%.
The F-ISM MICMAC analysis categorized the 27 drivers into four quadrants: 1 au-
tonomous, 8 dependent, 13 linkage and 5 driving-group drivers, highlighting the complex
interdependencies that shape net-zero adoption in MSC.
The hybrid approach, combining ANN for predicting key drivers and fuzzy ISM for
uncovering their relationships, provides a comprehensive framework for understanding
net-zero adoption. The findings offer valuable insights for the Indian manufacturing indus-
tries, guiding the development of effective business policies and strategies for enhancing
performance through net-zero practices. The model was validated by industry experts,
with all hypotheses confirmed, reinforcing the robustness of the proposed methodology.
7.1. Theoretical Contributions

Previous reports have highlighted the growing interest in NZE and its effect on
environmental sustainability. Still, more case studies, reviews and reports are needed. In
developing countries such as India, net zero is a new concept that requires more in-depth
analysis and vision. Through SLR, we identified 27 potential drivers related to net-zero
adoption that affect the MSC. To validate these drivers, 173 responses were collected and
analysed using EFA. We conducted a case study in a specific manufacturing industry.
The ANN technique is applied to weigh the drivers’ nonlinear effects. The results reveal
that Environmental drivers, which emerge as the most influential independent variable,
attribute 100% importance to the prediction of net-zero adoption. Following closely are
Economic drivers at 60.38% and Technological drivers at 59.05%, which are particularly
important for the MSC. The Indian manufacturing sector must focus on R&D practices and
establish dedicated teams for net-zero initiatives. Collaboration with research and academic
institutions will allow manufacturing industries to share their views and experiences on
achieving net zero. Embracing these drivers will help the MSC reach the net-zero goal.
Investing in green initiatives and renewable infrastructure will help the manufacturing
sector achieve its net-zero aim.
7.2. Managerial Implications

The present study provides valuable insights into the drivers influencing net-zero
adoption and their effects on business performance, which can benefit managers in various
sectors, including service, manufacturing and process industries. Effective strategies
can be formulated for adopting the net-zero concept in their industries and evaluating
the time required for its efficient implementation. Since ‘Environmental drivers’ were
identified as the most crucial drivers in adopting net zero in the MSC, organisations must
incorporate trust-building measures into their business strategies. Regular assessments
should ensure trust in adopting new technology among managers. Feedback forms, surveys
and interviews can help gauge managers’ trust. Maintaining Environmental drivers is
crucial for successfully adopting net zero in the MSC. Therefore, organisations need to
ensure that Environmental drivers are continuously upheld. This necessitates periodic
revisions of their strategies to embrace new technologies like net zero effectively.
7.3. Limitations
This study is limited to the Indian manufacturing industry, which may restrict the
applicability of findings to other regions. Future studies should include data from diverse
countries to enhance global relevance and provide cross-cultural insights into achieving
NZE in MSC. Secondly, the data collection method, which relies heavily on expert opinions,
may introduce bias. To mitigate this, future studies should incorporate a broader range
of decision-making approaches, including surveys and interviews with a diverse sample
of stakeholders. Lastly, while the ANN-F-ISM approach employed in this study is robust,
additional validation tools such as SEM could further corroborate the findings. Employing
different analytical techniques in future research would provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the drivers influencing net-zero adoption in the MSC. These limitations
highlight the need for further studies to enhance the robustness and generalisability of the
findings across various emerging economies and industry contexts.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G., K.M.Q., B.G.M. and M.R.N.M.Q.; method-
ology, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G. and M.R.N.M.Q.; software, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G., K.M.Q., B.G.M., M.R.N.M.Q. and
M.M.; validation, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G. and M.R.N.M.Q.; formal analysis, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G. and M.R.N.M.Q.;
writing—original draft preparation, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G. and M.M.; writing—review and editing, K.M.Q.,
B.G.M., M.R.N.M.Q. and M.M.; supervision, A.Y., A.S., R.K.G. and M.M.; project administration, A.Y.,
A.S., R.K.G. and M.M.; funding acquisition, M.R.N.M.Q. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research, King Khalid University,
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the large grant number is RGP.2/476/44.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data is contained within the article.
Acknowledgments: The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at
King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia, for funding this work through the Research Group Program
under Large Grant No. RGP. 2/476/44.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
26 of 35
D1
1
D2
X (HI, AI) 1
D3
X (AI, MI) X (HI) 1
D4
X (LI, AI) A (MI) X (MI, LI) 1
D5
A (MI) X (HI) V (MI) X (LI, HI) 1
D6
X (MI) V (MI) X (HI, AI) X (LI, HI) A (MI) 1
D7
V (AI) X (LI, AI) O (NI) X (AI, MI) X (MI, LI) X (AI, MI) 1
D8
X (HI, AI) A (MI) X (LI, AI) X (MI) X (LI, HI) X (AI, MI) A (MI)
D9
V (AI) X (HI) X (HI) X (HI, AI) X (HI) X (LI, HI) A (MI)
D10
X (LI, HI) A (MI) X (LI, AI) V (MI) X (LI, HI) X (MI, HI) X (HI, LI)
D11
X (MI) A (MI) X (MI, LI) V (MI) X (MI) X (HI, LI) V (MI)
D12
V (AI) X (LI, HI) X (HI, MI) A (MI) V (MI) X (LI, AI) X (HI, AI)
D13
A (MI) X (AI, MI) X (HI) X (MI) V (AI) X (LI) X (MI, HI)
D14
V (MI) O (NI) X (LI, HI) X (AI, MI) A (MI) X (LI, AI) X (MI)
D15
X (MI) X (LI, HI) A (MI) V (MI) X (HI, LI) X (HI, AI) X (HI, LI)
D16
V (MI) X (MI, LI) O (NI) X (LI, HI) X (MI, LI) X (HI, MI) V (MI)
Table A1. Structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM).
D17
X (MI) A (MI) V (HI) V (MI) A (MI) X (HI) X (LI)
D18
X (LI, HI) X (HI) X (HI, MI) X (LI, HI) X (HI, LI) X (HI, AI) X (MI)
D19
X (MI) A (MI) X (MI, LI) V (MI) X (MI) X (MI, LI) X (LI, AI)
D20
V (AI) X (HI) V (HI) X (MI, HI) A (MI) V (AI) X (LI)
D21
A (MI) X (LI, HI) A (MI) X (HI, LI) X (MI, LI) V (MI) A (MI)
Appendix A
D22
V (AI) X (MI) X (MI, LI) O (NI) X (HI, MI) A (MI) X (HI, LI)
D23
X (AI) X (AI, MI) V (LI) X (HI, MI) V (MI) X (MI, HI) V (MI)
D24
A (AI) X (LI) X (HI) X (MI, LI) X (MI) X (HI, LI) X (HI, MI)
D25
X (HI, AI) X (AI) A (LI) X (HI) X (HI, LI) X (MI, LI) V (HI)
D26
V (LI) V (LI) A (AI) V (AI) A (LI) A (MI) X (MI, HI)
D27
V (AI) X (AI) O (NI) A (MI) X (MI) V (MI) X (HI)
Drivers D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7
27 of 35
1
X (HI) 1
X (HI) X (AI, MI) 1
X (LI, HI) X (MI, HI) V (MI) 1
X (HI) X (LI) V (AI) V (MI) 1
X (LI) X (MI, LI) X (HI) V (HI) V (MI) 1
X (HI, LI) X (MI) X (MI, HI) V (AI) A (MI) V (MI) 1
X (AI, MI) X (HI, LI) X (AI, MI) X (MI) V (HI) O (NI) X (MI) 1
X (LI, AI) X (HI, LI) A (LI) X (HI) X (LI, HI) O (NI) X (LI, HI) X (MI) 1
X (LI, HI) X (MI, HI) V (AI) X (HI) V (HI) X (LI, HI) O (NI) O (NI) X (MI)
A (MI) X (HI, LI) V (AI) V (AI) A (LI) X (MI) A (MI) X (LI, MI) O (NI)
O (NI) X (LI, HI) X (HI, LI) X (MI, LI) X (MI, HI) V (HI) V (AI) X (LI) X (HI, AI)
X (HI, MI) X (HI, LI) X (MI, HI) V (AI) X (HI) V (MI) X (LI, HI) X (MI, HI) O (NI)
X (HI, AI) X (LI) V (MI) V (AI) V (HI) X (LI, AI) O (NI) X (LI, MI) X (LI)
Table A1. Cont.
O (NI) X (MI) X (LI, HI) V (AI) A (MI) X (LI) X (MI, HI) O (NI) X (LI, MI)
A (MI) X (MI) X (MI, HI) A (LI) X (HI) O (NI) V (AI) X (MI) X (HI, LI)
V (MI) X (MI, LI) X (HI, LI) X (LI) X (HI, MI) V (AI) X (MI) X (MI, HI) A (MI)
V (AI) V (MI) X (MI, LI) A (MI) A (LI) V (AI) X (MI, LI) X (LI, MI) X (HI)
A (MI) V (MI) A (MI) X (HI, MI) V (HI) X (LI) V (MI) X (AI, MI) V (AI)
A (MI) X (MI, HI) X (MI) V (MI) V (HI) V (AI) A (MI) X (MI) V (MI)
D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 D13 D14 D15 D16
28 of 35
1
X (MI) 1
X (LI, MI) X (LI, MI) 1
V (AI) X (MI, HI) X (LI, MI) 1
X (LI, HI) O (NI) X (MI) X (MI, HI) 1
Table A1. Cont.
V (AI) O (NI) O (NI) X (MI) X (MI) 1

O (NI) X (MI) X (MI, HI) O (NI) V (AI) O (NI) 1
V (MI) X (LI) V (AI) X (MI) O (NI) X (MI) X (LI, MI) 1
O (NI) X (MI) X (MI, HI) O (NI) X (MI, LI) V (MI) X (MI) V (MI)
1
V (AI) X (HI, MI) X (MI) A (MI) X (LI, MI) X (LI) X (MI, HI) X (LI, MI) X (MI)
A (MI) V (HI) A (LI) X (LI) O (NI) A (MI) A (MI) X (MI) V (AI)
D17 D18 D19 D20 D21 D22 D23 D24 D25
D27 D26
D5 D4 D3 D2 D1 Drivers
1 A (MI)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D27
1
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) D26
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) D25
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) D24
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D23
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D22
Table A1. Cont.
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) D21
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D20
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D19
Table A2. Fuzzy reachability matrix.
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) D18
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D17
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D16
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D15
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D14
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) D13
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D12
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D11
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) D10
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D9
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) D8
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D7
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) D6
1, 1, 1 (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) D5
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) D4
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) 1, 1, 1 (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) D3
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) 1, 1, 1 (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) D2
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) 1, 1, 1 D1
29 of 35
D12 D11 D10 D9 D8 D7 D6
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
Table A2. Cont.
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) 1, 1, 1 (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) 1, 1, 1 (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
30 of 35
D18 D17 D16 D15 D14 D13
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
Table A2. Cont.
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) 1, 1, 1
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
31 of 35
D25 D24 D23 D22 D21 D20 D19
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) 1, 1, 1 (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
Table A2. Cont.
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1 (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) 1, 1, 1 (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
32 of 35
D27 D26
1, 1, 1 (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) 1, 1, 1
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)

Table A2. Cont.
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.1, 0.3, 0.5) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
(0.7, 0.9, 1) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
(0.3, 0.5, 0.7) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
(0, 0.1, 0.3) (0, 0.1, 0.3)

33 of 35
References
1. Bashir, M.A.; Dengfeng, Z.; Khan, M.I.; Shahzad, F.; Khalil, S. Novel Research Methods on the Net-Zero Economy of Climate
Finance in the Energy Sector. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraz. 2023, 36, 2389–2399. [CrossRef]
2. Arif, J.; Samadhiya, A.; Kumar, A. Net Zero Supply Chain Performance and Industry 4.0 Technologies: Past Review and Present
Introspective Analysis for Future Research Directions. Heliyon 2023, 9, e21525.
3. Anika, O.C.; Nnabuife, S.G.; Bello, A.; Okoroafor, E.R.; Kuang, B.; Villa, R. Prospects of Low and Zero-Carbon Renewable Fuels in
1.5-Degree Net Zero Emission Actualisation by 2050: A Critical Review. Carbon Capture Sci. Technol. 2022, 5, 100072. [CrossRef]
4. Richter, M.; Lombardi, P.; Arendarski, B.; Naumann, A.; Hoepfner, A.; Komarnicki, P.; Pantaleo, A. A Vision for Energy
Decarbonization: Planning Sustainable Tertiary Sites as Net-Zero Energy Systems. Energies 2021, 14, 5577. [CrossRef]
5. Agrawal, R.; Priyadarshinee, P.; Kumar, A.; Luthra, S.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Kadyan, S. Are Emerging Technologies Unlocking the Potential
of Sustainable Practices in the Context of a Net-Zero Economy? An Analysis of Driving Forces. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
6. Bag, S. From Resources to Sustainability: A Practice-Based View of Net Zero Economy Implementation in Small and Medium
Business-to-Business Firms. Benchmarking An Int. J. 2023, 31, 1876–1894. [CrossRef]
7. Godsell, J.; Zafeiriadis, A.; Mate, O.A.; Monge, R.C. Towards Net-Zero: Exploring the Current State of Low Carbon Supply Chains
in the Midlands; Warwick Manufacturing Group. Available online: https://supplychainresiliencehub.com/resources/towards-
net-zero/ (accessed on 14 February 2024).
8. Chen, G.; Lim, M.K.; Yeo, W.; Tseng, M.-L. Net Zero vs. Carbon Neutrality: Supply Chain Management Challenges and Future
Research Agenda. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2024, 1–36. [CrossRef]
9. Dohale, V.; Ambilkar, P.; Bilolikar, V.; Narkhede, B.E.; Kumar, A.; Kumar, A. Evaluating Circular Economy and Smart Technology
Adoption Barriers in the Indian Textile and Apparel Industries Using Neutrosophic ISM. Ann. Oper. Res. 2023. [CrossRef]
10. Karlsson, I. Decarbonization of Construction Supply Chains-Achieving Net-Zero Carbon Emissions in the Supply Chains Linked to the
Construction of Buildings and Transport Infrastructure. Ph.D. Thesis, Chalmers Tekniska Hogskola, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2020.
11. Singh, J.; Pandey, K.K.; Kumar, A.; Naz, F.; Luthra, S. Drivers, Barriers and Practices of Net Zero Economy: An Exploratory
Knowledge Based Supply Chain Multi-Stakeholder Perspective Framework. Oper. Manag. Res. 2023, 16, 1059–1090. [CrossRef]
12. Qureshi, K.M.; Mewada, B.G.; Kaur, S.; Alghamdi, S.Y.; Almakayeel, N.; Almuflih, A.S.; Qureshi, M.R.N.M. Sustainable
Manufacturing Supply Chain Performance Enhancement through Technology Utilization and Process Innovation in Industry 4.0:
A SEM-PLS Approach. Sustainability 2023, 15, 15388. [CrossRef]
13. Warmate, S. Net-Zero-Enforcing Global Coalition against Climate Change through Procurement and Supply Chain. 2024. Avail-
able online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380112574_Net-Zero_Enforcing_Global_Coalition_against_Climate_
Change_through_Procurement_and_Supply_Chain (accessed on 14 February 2024).
14. Jamwal, A.; Kumari, S.; Agrawal, R.; Sharma, M.; Gölgeci, I. Unlocking Circular Economy Through Digital Transformation: The
Role of Enabling Factors in SMEs. JGBC 2024, 19, 24–36. [CrossRef]
15. Vijay, V.; Sathish, A.S. Advancing Towards a Sustainable Future: A Systematic Review of Sustainable Net Zero Economy
Implementation Studies. Qubahan Acad. J. 2024, 4, 137–149. [CrossRef]
16. Attri, A.; Yadav, A.; Garg, R.K. Enhancing Supply Chain Sustainability Through Industry 4.0 and Additive Manufacturing
Technologies: A Bibliometric-Based Review. In Optimization of Production and Industrial Systems; Bhardwaj, A., Pandey, P.M.,
Misra, A., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering; Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore, 2024; pp. 67–77. ISBN
978-981-9983-42-1.
17. Singh, R. Net Zero Economy, Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Value Creation: Exploring Strategies, Drivers, and Challenges;
Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024.
18. Nevisi, M.M.S.; Salehi, R. Eco Energy, Energy Aware and Net-Zero Supply Chain. Int. J. Ind. Eng. Oper. Res. 2023, 5, 39–49.
19. Jamwal, A.; Agrawal, R.; Sharma, M.; Kumar, A.; Kumar, V.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.A. Machine Learning Applications for Sustainable
Manufacturing: A Bibliometric-Based Review for Future Research. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2022, 35, 566–596. [CrossRef]
20. Mishra, R.; Singh, R.; Govindan, K. Net-Zero Economy Research in the Field of Supply Chain Management: A Systematic
Literature Review and Future Research Agenda. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2023, 34, 1352–1397. [CrossRef]
21. Balci, G.; Ali, S.I. The Relationship between Information Processing Capabilities, Net-Zero Capability and Supply Chain
Performance. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2024, 29, 351–370. [CrossRef]
22. García-Freites, S.; Gough, C.; Röder, M. The Greenhouse Gas Removal Potential of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage
(BECCS) to Support the UK’s Net-Zero Emission Target. Biomass Bioenergy 2021, 151, 106164. [CrossRef]
23. Lotfi, R.; Khanbaba, A.; Ali, S.S.; Afshar, M.; Mehrjardi, M.S.; Omidi, S. Net-Zero, Resilience, and Agile Closed-Loop Supply
Chain Network Design Considering Robustness and Renewable Energy. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2024. [CrossRef]
24. Miller, S.A.; Habert, G.; Myers, R.J.; Harvey, J.T. Achieving Net Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Cement Industry via Value
Chain Mitigation Strategies. One Earth 2021, 4, 1398–1411. [CrossRef]
25. Sarker, M.N.I.; Hossain, B.; Shi, G.; Firdaus, R.B.R. Promoting Net-Zero Economy through Climate-Smart Agriculture: Transition
towards Sustainability. Sustain. Sci. 2023, 18, 2107–2119. [CrossRef]
26. Simeon, E.O.; Hongxing, Y.; Sampene, A.K. The Role of Green Finance and Renewable Energy in Shaping Zero-Carbon Transition:
Evidence from the E7 Economies. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2024, 21, 7077–7098. [CrossRef]
27. Jamwal, A.; Agrawal, R.; Sharma, M. Challenges and Opportunities for Manufacturing SMEs in Adopting Industry 4.0 Technolo-
gies for Achieving Sustainability: Empirical Evidence from an Emerging Economy. Oper. Manag. Res. 2023. [CrossRef]
28. Field, A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics; Sage: New Delhi, India, 2013.
29. Nunnally, J.; Bernstein, I., 3rd. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed.; McGrawHill: New York, NY, USA, 1994; Volume 19, pp. 303–305.
30. Ali, S.; Baseer, S.; Abbasi, I.A.; Alouffi, B.; Alosaimi, W.; Huang, J. Analyzing the Interactions among Factors Affecting Cloud
Adoption for Software Testing: A Two-Stage ISM-ANN Approach. Soft Comput. 2022, 26, 8047–8075. [CrossRef]
31. Qureshi, M.R.N.M. Evaluating and Prioritizing the Enablers of Supply Chain Performance Management System (SCPMS) for
Sustainability. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11296. [CrossRef]
32. Qureshi, M.R.N.M. Evaluating enterprise resource planning (ERP) Implementation for sustainable supply chain management.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 14779. [CrossRef]
33. Beshr, A.A.A.; Basha, A.M.; Lofty, N.; Farhan, M.H. Using Interpretative Structure Model and Analytical Network Process for
Optimum Site Selection of Airport Locations in Delta Egypt. Open Geosci. 2024, 16, 20220631. [CrossRef]
34. Shukla, A.; Kumar, S.; Singh, H. ANN Based Execution Time Prediction Model and Assessment of Input Parameters through ISM.
Int. Arab. J. Inf. Technol. 2020, 17, 683–691. [CrossRef]
35. Ghasemian Sahebi, I.; Toufighi, S.P.; Azzavi, M.; Masoomi, B.; Maleki, M.H. Fuzzy ISM–DEMATEL Modeling for the Sustainable
Development Hindrances in the Renewable Energy Supply Chain. Int. J. Energy Sect. Manag. 2024, 18, 43–70. [CrossRef]
36. Raut, R.D.; Priyadarshinee, P.; Gardas, B.B.; Jha, M.K. Analyzing the Factors Influencing Cloud Computing Adoption Using Three
Stage Hybrid SEM-ANN-ISM (SEANIS) Approach. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 134, 98–123. [CrossRef]
37. Bhosale, V.A.; Kant, R. An Integrated ISM Fuzzy MICMAC Approach for Modelling the Supply Chain Knowledge Flow Enablers.
Int. J. Prod. Res. 2016, 54, 7374–7399. [CrossRef]
38. Hu, H.; Jiang, S.; Goswami, S.S.; Zhao, Y. Fuzzy Integrated Delphi-ISM-MICMAC Hybrid Multi-Criteria Approach to Optimize
the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Factors Influencing Cost Management in Civil Engineering. Information 2024, 15, 280. [CrossRef]
39. Satapathy, S. ANN, QFD and ISM Approach for Framing Electricity Utility Service in India for Consumer Satisfaction. IJSOM
2014, 18, 404. [CrossRef]
40. Srivastava, A.; Dashora, K. A Fuzzy ISM Approach for Modeling Electronic Traceability in Agri-Food Supply Chain in India. Ann.
Oper. Res. 2022, 315, 2115–2133. [CrossRef]
41. Yadav, A.; Sachdeva, A.; Garg, R.K.; Qureshi, K.M.; Mewada, B.G.; Qureshi, M.R.N.M.; Mansour, M. Achieving Net-Zero in the
Manufacturing Supply Chain through Carbon Capture and LCA: A Comprehensive Framework with BWM-Fuzzy DEMATEL.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 6972. [CrossRef]
42. Anil, K.; Sunil, L.; Kumar, M.S.; Arturo, G.-R.J.; Yigit, K. Analysing the Adoption Barriers of Low-Carbon Operations: A Step
Forward for Achieving Net-Zero Emissions. Resources Policy. 2023, 80, 103256. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Assessing Drivers Influencing Net-Zero Emission Adoption in Manufacturing Supply Chain A Hybrid ANN-Fuzzy ISM Approachpdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessing Drivers Influencing Net-Zero Emission Adoption in Manufacturing Supply Chain A Hybrid ANN-Fuzzy ISM Approachpdf

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessing Drivers Influencing Net-Zero Emission Adoption in Manufacturing Supply Chain A Hybrid ANN-Fuzzy ISM Approachpdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Received: 10 July 2024

Sustainability 2024, 16, 7873. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177873 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 37

2.1. Theoretical Background

2.2. Net-Zero Adoption and MSC

2.3. Literature Gaps

3. Current research overlooks the manufacturing perspective in emerging economies.

Figure 5. List of potential drivers for net-zero adoption (Authors’ compilation).

2.4. Motivation and Novelty

Figure 6. Research Figure 6. Research

A two-step multi-investigative approach was applied using the ANN-fuzzy ISM

3.1. Empirical Analysis

3.2. Details of the Survey

3.2.1. Questionnaire Survey Development and Data Gathering

Table 1. Demographics of experts (Expt.) participating in questionnaire pre-testing.

Expert Background Work Experience (in Years)

3.2.2. Sampling and Eligibility Criteria

or were in the process of implementing net-zero sustainability practices, ensuring relevance

Table 2. Respondents’ demographic summary.

Subcategory with Frequency

3.2.3. Reliability and Validity Checks

3.3. Exploratory Factor Analysis

To provide a clear understanding, we categorised the identified drivers into eight

To provide a clear understanding, we categorised the identified drivers into eight

4.1. Case Study

Details of Case Organisation

4.2. Artificial Neural Network

4.2.1. Training of ANN

T = (a1 , x1 ), (a2 , x2 ), .., (ani , xni ) (1)

w* = min x Et = min x∑i ∥ ai −y(xi − w) ∥ (3)

4.2.2. ANN Performance

4.3. Fuzzy ISM Approach

determining contextual relationships among system units by expressing these relationships

F-ISM Method Steps

Table 3. Fuzzy scale for expert opinion [27].

Sr. No. Linguistic Term Corresponding TFN

Table 4. Details of fuzzy hindrances between ith and jth.

Step 2: Integration of expert opinions. Various strategies can be employed to integrate

if λij ≥ Ψ −→ λij = 1, λji = 0 (11)

if λij ≤ Ψ −→ λij = 0, λji = 1 (12)

M* = Mr = Mr+1 , r > 1 (14)

5. Results and Analysis

5.1. Results Obtained through EFA

Table 5. EFA results for net-zero adoption drivers.

Drivers (Predictor) Name Sub-Drivers Mean SD Item Loading Eigenvalue Cumulative %

Drivers (Predictor) Name Sub-Drivers Mean SD Item Loading Eigenvalue Cumulative %

5.2. Outcomes of ANN

NN model reveals the relative importance of independent variables in predicting net-zero

Table 6. Performance evaluation of the ANN model by RMSE.

SS SSE SSE SS RMSE RMSE

Figure 8. The proposed framework

Figure 9. Comparative analysis of RMSE.

Table 8. Final reachability matrix (FRM).

Table 9. Level partitioning of net-zero adoption drivers.

Drivers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level

Figure 11. Analysis.

6. Findings and Discussion

6. Findings and Discussion

7. Conclusions, Contributions and Recommendations for Future Research