The growing complexity of global supply chains has intensified the need for sustainable and circular approaches that integrate technological innovation, environmental responsibility, and social resilience. This study develops a multi-criteria decision-making framework to evaluate and rank alternative artificial intelligence (AI) implementation strategies for circular supply chains (CSC), considering benefits, opportunities, and costs, followed by a risk-based assessment. The framework applies the best-worst method (BWM) and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to support the strategic evaluation of AI-related alternatives, incorporating sub-criteria to enable a more granular assessment. Methodologically, the study advances existing decision-support approaches by integrating BWM and AHP within a unified multi-criteria framework that jointly evaluates benefits, opportunities, and costs and is further extended through a multidimensional risk-based assessment. The integration of BWM and AHP within a unified framework enables a transparent ranking of AI strategies and extends the analysis through a multidimensional risk-based assessment. Results indicate that benefits, particularly improved data-driven decision accuracy, dominate the evaluation, while hybrid and centralized AI strategies emerge as the most effective options once risks are incorporated. This provides a comprehensive and practical perspective for managers seeking to align AI adoption with CSC objectives
A Decision-Making Framework for Artificial Intelligence Implementation Strategies in Circular Supply Chains
Petrillo A.;
2026-01-01
Abstract
The growing complexity of global supply chains has intensified the need for sustainable and circular approaches that integrate technological innovation, environmental responsibility, and social resilience. This study develops a multi-criteria decision-making framework to evaluate and rank alternative artificial intelligence (AI) implementation strategies for circular supply chains (CSC), considering benefits, opportunities, and costs, followed by a risk-based assessment. The framework applies the best-worst method (BWM) and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to support the strategic evaluation of AI-related alternatives, incorporating sub-criteria to enable a more granular assessment. Methodologically, the study advances existing decision-support approaches by integrating BWM and AHP within a unified multi-criteria framework that jointly evaluates benefits, opportunities, and costs and is further extended through a multidimensional risk-based assessment. The integration of BWM and AHP within a unified framework enables a transparent ranking of AI strategies and extends the analysis through a multidimensional risk-based assessment. Results indicate that benefits, particularly improved data-driven decision accuracy, dominate the evaluation, while hybrid and centralized AI strategies emerge as the most effective options once risks are incorporated. This provides a comprehensive and practical perspective for managers seeking to align AI adoption with CSC objectivesI documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


