State of Supply Chain Sustainability 2022
C. Results of Global
Comparisons
Comparisons across regions were statistically tested using a chi-
squared distribution test with Bonferonni correction. This method
tests whether the groups of responses are dissimilar enough to
conclude that they must have been drawn from meaningfully
different populations. This is a probabilistic test that is commonly
employed to compare responses to ordinal survey data like ours.
We first tested entire data sets to see where some difference was
observed. We then looked for differences in groups, across the
Global North-South divide-and to confirm that the effect of this
grouping was not just a result of aggregating, we also tested along
an East-West divide. The results of those tests are shown in the
tables below.
Table 2: Results of regional comparisons of SCS pressure sources/influences, goals, and investments
Pressure sources
1: End consumers
2: Corporate buyers
3: Investors
4: Current and future employees
5: Company executives
6: NGOs and third parties
7: Industry associations
8: Governments
9: Mass media
10: Local communities*
Goals
1: Climate change mitigation*
2: Energy conservation*
Global
comparison
North-South
comparison
x²
p+
x²
p+
* Indicates statistical significance
All comparisons evaluated at threshold α =
15.1
0.23
16.5
0.17
12.16
0.43
25.9 0.011
-
14.1
0.29
7.2
0.84
23.14 0.007
21.47 0.044
16.18
0.18
-
I
41.65 <0.001 15.1 0.002
= 0.05
With Bonferroni correction, global significance threshold < 0.0025, Global North-South threshold < 0.006
+ Counts for question scores 1 and 2 were combined to avoid any item showing a count of less than 5,
which can compromise the validity of chi-squared tests. For a full discussion of this methodology, see
Harvey Russell Bernard, Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (Thousand
Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 2000), 563-67.
47.5 <.001
24
<.001
73.7 <.001 36.4 <.001
3: Water conservation
14.3
0.28
4: Supply chain circularity
11.9
0.45
5: Natural resource conservation
24.4
0.02
-
6: Employee welfare*
32.7 0.001
25.8 <.001
7: Human rights protection.
21.8
0.04
8: Local community impact
13.2 0.36
9: Supplier DEI
19.7
0.07
-
10: Fair pay/fair trade*
43.3
<.001 18.4 <.001
Investments
1: Climate change mitigation
24.5
2: Energy conservation
24.7
0.02
0.02
3: Water conservation*
52.8 <.001
42.4 <.001
4: Supply chain circularity*
37.3 <.001
15.1 0.002
5: Natural resource conservation*
42.9 <.001
31.7 <.001
10.6
-
6: Employee welfare
7: Human rights protection*
8: Local community impact
9: Supplier DEI*
10: Fair pay/fair trade
0.56
41.3 <.001 23.23 <.001
0.03
22.5
-
31.58 0.002 22.46 <0.001
13.8
0.31
-
State of Supply Chain Sustainability 2022 | Appendices | sscs.mit.edu |18View entire presentation