Purpose – The paper seeks to discuss and develop SCM as a scientific discipline using different theories from non-logistics areas to explain inter-organizational phenomena. It also attempts to establish a frame of reference that allows us to mitigate the gap between the current SCM research and practice and the theoretical explanations of how to structure and manage supply chains. Design/methodology/approach – The paper introduces three different perspectives that together will contribute to a broader understanding of SCM in practice: an economic perspective; a socio-economic perspective; and a strategic perspective. The theoretical framework is applied to two important research topics within SCM: third party logistics (TPL); and new product development (NPD). Findings – There is no such thing as “a unified theory of SCM”. Depending on the concrete situation, one can choose one theory as the dominant explanatory theory, and then complement it with one or several of the other theoretical perspectives. Research limitations/implications – The way the four theories complement one another is explored on a conceptual basis, but further research into this direction may explore more deeply how these alleged complementarities occur in practice, and how managers mould their decisions by these ideas. Practical implications – The four theories can provide normative support to important management decisions in supply chains, such as outsourcing, safeguards against opportunism, and alignment of incentives. Originality/value – The main contribution is that one cannot rely on one theoretical explanation when analyzing phenomena in SCM. It is neccessary to consider several theories and how they may complement one another in order to provide a more comprehensive view of SCM.

Purpose: This double special issue called for logistics solutions and supply chains in times of climate change. The purpose of this editorial is to investigate the current and future implications of climate change, and in particular, energy efficiency for logistics and supply chain management (SCM).Design/methodology/approach: Against the backdrop of climate change, a conceptual framework is constructed that reflects on the immediate and tangible effects of a sustainable agenda on logistics and SCM.Findings: Energy efficiency has been largely neglected in logistics and SCM. At the same time, considering energy efficiency requires considerable rethinking on the operational level (from transportation emissions to the cold chain) as well as even the conceptual level. The energy agenda needs a further development of logistics theory and practice.Originality/value: The editorial highlights the challenges of sustainability and energy in the context of logistics and SCM pertaining to their novelty, importance and interdependence. SCM needs to develop new performance measures that include measures of energy efficiency, in order to adapt to an environment where the old assumption of low fuel costs does not hold stand.

Purpose: – The aim of this paper is to identify ways by which the theorizing of supply chain management (SCM) takes place, with particular attention to complementary theories. SCM suffers as well as benefits from a “conceptual slack”.Design/methodology/approach: – The nature of SCM is discussed, and the role and relevance of theorizing is addressed by using key characteristics of “academic scholarship” based on a literature review of SCM and evaluation of application of theory and theory development.Findings: – The integrative and multi-layered nature of SCM sets the conditions for “theorizing SCM” that can take place through various forms: theory application, new theoretical combinations and sensitivity to managerial practice. It is pivotal that future research explore further the performative potential of SCM.Research limitations/implications: – Research with focus on theory development or using complementary theories to advancing understanding of SCM can benefit from the five building blocks of theorizing SCM proposed in the paper.Practical implications: – Theoretical principles in SCM are not only used to describe practical problems but also to “produce the world”; supply chains can be seen as organizational units that act or consummate an action that delivers a particular performance.Originality/value: – This paper portrays SCM sensitivity to managerial challenges by moving from borrowing to a more bilateral view on theorizing of SCM, reflecting the nature of SCM.

This paper considers third party logistics (TPL) from a resource and competence perspective. New competencies are developed in the relationship between the shipper and the TPL provider. A typology of TPL relationships is developed going from market exchanges to joint logistics solutions. Here, the article will concentrate on the highest level – joint logistics solutions. The theoretical grounding of competence development will be outlined. Two case examples will illustrate the learning process in TPL arrangements. Finally, the article will discuss managerial implications and implications for future research in TPL.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to develop the paradigmatic justification for the use of case studies in logistics research. The argument is based on a critical realist (CR) ontology and epistemology. The current logistics paradigm's flat ontology – based on regularity – is replaced by an ontology emphasising structures and mechanisms underlying actual events in the form of logistics practice and performance.Design/methodology/approach: The approach takes the form of desk research, conceptual work and theorizing.Findings: Based on this CR view of the logistics domain it is argued that the justifications for conducting case studies lie in their ability: to reach the causal depth required for revealing the real domain of logistics activities and performance: to reveal the working of mechanisms in loosely coupled structures showing open systems characteristics through a constant alternation between abstract and concrete reasoning and; to include the causal powers and effects of agents' ascribed meanings. Also, it is argued, in contrast with Yin's work which refers to the possibility of generalising case studies, that the justification of case studies not only must refer to their complementary role in research but also must build on groundings that allow this form of research to take a primary role in knowledge creation.Practical implications: The arguments have direct implications primarily for the scientific justification for case studies in logistics. CR thinking in this respect offers a view in which case studies should be seen as a more legitimate method in logistics inquiries. Second, the paper has implications for further work on the methods of using case studies in logistics: between what types of case studies can one distinguish, and which practical guidelines regarding design and reasoning can be developed based on the CR view?Originality/value: The paper problematizes current research methodology in logistics. Based on critical realism, it presents a thorough and systematic justification for using case studies as a research approach.