Academic Journal of Science and Technology ISSN: 2771-3032 | Vol. 11, No. 1, 2024 211 Effect of Green Supply Chain Management and Corporate Social Responsibility Practices on Small and Medium Enterprises Yuejiao Sun Philippine Women’s University, Conrado Benitez Institute of Business Education, Manila, Philippine Abstract: This article examines the impact of green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility on small and medium-sized enterprises. It emphasizes the importance of sustainability, environmental protection, and social responsibility in achieving economic benefits. Green supply chain management helps establish an environmental image, increase product value, and attract more consumers and investors, enhancing corporate competitiveness. As environmental regulations strengthen, small and medium-sized enterprises face increasing environmental pressure. Green supply chain management reduces resource consumption, environmental impact, and risks, promoting long-term stable development. Corporate social responsibility practices improve a company's social image, visibility, and partnerships with stakeholders, creating favorable conditions for long-term growth. These practices also require continuous innovation and management progress, fostering trust relationships with suppliers, customers, and investors. By implementing these practices, small and medium-sized enterprises can provide a better working environment, improve employee satisfaction, and reduce talent loss. The research results have significant theoretical and practical implications for promoting sustainable development in these enterprises. Keywords: Green supply chain management, corporate social responsibility, sustainability, competitiveness, innovation and improvement, cooperation, employee satisfaction. 1. Introduction With climate change and environmental issues becoming more and more serious, green supply chain management (GSCM) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) have become the focus of much attention in today's business world. Against this background, this study intends to explore the practices and potential benefits of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in implementing a green supply chain and fulfilling social responsibility. Firstly, the concept of green supply chain management refers to the active measures taken by enterprises to reduce environmental impacts and improve resource efficiency at all stages of the supply chain, from design, procurement, production, and final disposal of products. Secondly, CSR is defined as an enterprise's pursuit of economic benefits, and at the same time, it spontaneously pays attention to and enhances the enterprise's positive impacts on society and the environment for the sake of morality, law, and public expectation. This study will propose a quantitative research methodology to assess the performance of SMEs in green supply chain management (GSCM) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) and to analyze the specific effects of these practices on the economic benefits and social impacts of enterprises. The study aims to reveal the actual operation of GSCM and CSR in SMEs and their role in promoting sustainable development. 2. Eview of Related Literature and Studies Green Supply Chain Management Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) is a management model that considers environmental impact and resource efficiency throughout the supply chain. It not only focuses on the economic benefits of the enterprise, but also focuses on the protection of the environment during the product life cycle, and strives to minimize the environmental impact. With increasingly stringent global environmental regulations and growing consumer demand for environmentally friendly products, the implementation of green supply chain management has become critical to the sustainable development of enterprises (Gao,2024). Some literature points out that green supply chain management involves a variety of links, such as procurement: selecting environmentally compliant suppliers, avoiding the use of raw materials containing harmful substances or harmful to the environment. Production links: The use of energy saving and emission reduction production methods, reduce waste generation, improve the efficiency of resource use. Logistics: Optimize transportation and storage processes to reduce carbon emissions and packaging waste (Cao, 2024). The role and importance of green supply chain With the increasingly serious global environmental problems, environmental protection has become the common goal of all sectors of society. Green supply chain comes into being in this context, and it is committed to reducing environmental impact and realizing efficient use of resources in the whole supply chain. For enterprises, green supply chain is not only the embodiment of social responsibility, but also the key to enhance competitiveness. According to relevant data, a well-known electronic product manufacturer, for example, not only reduces the environmental impact in the production process, but also improves the efficiency of resource utilization through the implementation of green supply chain management. Its green supply chain practice has brought remarkable economic and environmental benefits to enterprises (Cao,2024). The government has given strong policy support to the promotion 212 of green supply chain, which provides a good external environment for enterprises to implement green supply chain management. At the same time, with the improvement of consumer awareness of environmental protection, market demand is also promoting enterprises to adopt more environmentally friendly production methods. Development of Green Supply Chain Management Green supply chain management is an important development direction of modern supply chain management, and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), as an important part of economic activities, have attracted much attention for their green supply chain management practices. Academics have conducted extensive research on green supply chain management of SMEs and formed certain research results (Cai Ling, 2021; Jin Baohui & Lan Ting, 2020; Liu Xiquan, Min Yuqiao, & Liu Na, 2021). The connotation of green supply chain management includes green design, green procurement, green production and green logistics (Li et al., 2006). Applying its concepts and methods to SMEs can help them realize a win-win situation in terms of environmental protection and economic benefits (Lee, 2008). SMEs face MORE principle constraints in carrying out green supply chain management, including management, organizational, resource, and economic constraints (Lee, 2009). Related studies have shown that appropriate policy incentives can help promote the application of green supply chain practices in SMEs (Liu, Xi- Quan, Yu-Keung, & Liu, Na, 2021). Currently, green supply chain management practices in SMEs are in the early stages, mainly focusing on green procurement and in-house environmental management (Wooi & Zailani, 2010). Green procurement in SMEs focuses on supplier selection with limited implementation (Lee & Klassen, 2008). For green production, SMEs focus on in- house environmental management, but the overall level of practice is low (Mao & Tao, 2021). In addition, SMEs are less likely to adopt advanced green logistics and packaging programs (Liu, Xi-Quan, Yu-Keung Min, & Liu, Na, 2021). Green Supply Chain Management Practices Green supply chain management is a hot topic in today's supply chain management field, aiming to integrate the concept of environmental protection into all aspects of the supply chain. Extensive research has been conducted by academics around green supply chain management practices in enterprises (Xinna Wang & Dongfan, 2019; Jiahui Liu & Chong Cao, 2022). The connotation of green supply chain management includes green procurement, green production, green logistics and green recycling (Srivastava, 2007). Implementing a green supply chain helps companies reduce negative environmental impacts while increasing operational efficiency (Liu, Xiquan et al., 2012). Positive outcomes of green supply chain practices include reducing waste and pollution, increasing resource efficiency, and reducing risks and costs (Fu Hengjia, 2018). In the procurement process, companies can prefer suppliers with high levels of environmental management and cooperate with them to develop green products, realizing a win-win situation for both parties (Shao Wen, 2016). Green production should focus on clean technology and process improvement to reduce resource consumption and waste generation (Chen Tingting, Yan Chun, & Ma Peijiao et al., 2019). Green logistics, on the other hand, requires optimizing transportation routes, using clean energy vehicles, and adopting recycled packaging solutions (Postzheng, 2016). In terms of product recycling, companies can extend product life through remanufacturing and refurbishment (Thakker & Rane, 2018). Corporate Social Responsibility Practice Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become one of the important contents of contemporary business management. Qiang Yihua and Li Qiong (2019) pointed out that while pursuing the maximization of economic benefits, enterprises should also assume social responsibility and give back to the society by participating in public welfare undertakings. The connotation, impact, practice and influencing factors of corporate CSR have been widely explored in academia. The connotation of CSR is multidimensional, including the social performance of enterprises in terms of employee rights protection, environmental management, and community participation (Zhao, Tong, 2021). Qin Shudong and Tan Huiying (2017) argued that CSR should focus on the three major issues of employees, community and environment. Carrying out CSR can enhance corporate reputation, brand image and influence (Luo Shengjun, 2019).Junior et al.'s (2022) study confirmed that CSR helps to attract good employees to join and increase employee motivation and satisfaction. In addition, some scholars found that there is a positive correlation between CSR and corporate financial performance (Saeidi et al., 2015). Factors affecting CSR practices include corporate culture, resource conditions, and external pressures. The awareness of responsibility and ethical concepts of business leaders is the endogenous driving force to promote CSR (Qiang, Yihua and Li, Qiong, 2019), while the pressure from external stakeholders such as the government and the public also plays an important role (Luo, Shengjun, 2019). Compared with large enterprises, SMEs face more constraints in carrying out CSR, such as insufficient funds and lack of professional capacity (Zhao Tong,2021). 3. Research Methodology Research Design This research survey is mainly based on the quantitative effect to show the main, at the same time to analyze the quantitative data, so this research will use quantitative research as the main research method selection, in the quantitative research, select the appropriate analysis method and collation and induction method as the main analysis of this research analysis method. The research design is essentially descriptive. Validity and Reliability Sampling Techniques In this study, the researcher will use the "intentional sampling" method to ensure that the small and medium-sized enterprises participating in the survey study support the conduct of this study and that the questionnaire data are authentic. Firstly, the researcher needs to determine the selection of enterprises that have participated in green supply chain based on different industries. Then, the researcher is expected to select five enterprises under different industries for the survey. The researcher will obtain the interviewed questionnaires from the 5 different enterprises. The names of the research sites are coded in accordance with the ethical and moral standards of the research: 213 Total number of respondents Ercentage Company A 1000 18.71% Company B 1290 24.1% Company C 1790 33.5% Company D 800 14.9% Company E 462 8.64% Total 5342 n= N/1+Ne² =5342/1+5342(0.05)² =5342/13.95 ≈383 4. Presentation, Analysis, AND Interpretation of Data Variables Categories Frequency Percent gender Male 188 49 Female 195 51 Total 383 100 age 20-30 years 192 50 31-41years 154 40 42-52years 36 9 More than 52years 1 1 Total 383 100 Civil Status Single 68 17.8 Married 315 82.2 Total 383 100 Level of Education Junior high school 55 14.4 High school 118 30.8 Universities 148 38.6 Graduate studies 61 15.9 Total 383 100 Monthly income 2000-3500 (RMB) 164 42.8 3501-4800 (RMB) 150 39.2 Above 4800 (RMB) 69 18.0 Total 383 100 Supply Chain Management practice introduction Table 2. Green Supply Chain Management Practices N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation GPRM1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3629 .88996 GPRM2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2689 .83022 GPRM3 383 1.00 4.00 3.3081 .84016 GPRM4 383 1.00 4.00 3.3264 .73827 GPRM5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2898 .81355 Valid N (listwise) 383 As can be seen from Table 2 above, Green Supply Chain Management Practices are divided into five items, GPRM1, GPRM2, GPRM3, GPRM4 and GPRM5. In terms of GPRM1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, and the median digit is 3.3629. The standard deviation is 0.88996; In terms of GPRM2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the median digit is 3.2689, and the standard deviation is 0.83022; in terms of GPRM3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the median digit is 3.3081, and the standard deviation is 0.84016. In GPRM4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the median digit is 3.3264, and the standard deviation is 0.73827. In terms of GPRM5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the median is 3.2898, and the standard deviation is 0.81355. As can be seen from the chart, among GPRM1, GPRM2, GPRM3, GPRM4 and GPRM5, the average values of GPRM1, GPRM3, GPRM4 and GPRM5 are 3.3629, 3.3081, 3.3264 and 3.2898 respectively, all of which strongly agree. This indicates that most people agree to give priority to environmentally friendly raw materials (GPRM1), which is consistent with the study of Zhang et al., environmentally friendly raw materials have less impact on the environment in the production process, and many raw materials can be recycled and renewable. For small and medium-sized enterprises, the selection of environmentally friendly raw materials can not only reduce production costs, but also meet consumer demand for environmentally friendly products, thereby increasing market share. Green supply chain management, corporate social responsibility practices, and priority selection of environmentally friendly raw materials have a profound impact on the development of smes (Zhang,2020). Faced with increasingly severe environmental challenges and fierce 214 market competition, small and medium-sized enterprises should actively take environmental protection measures to achieve double benefits of economy and environment. This is not only an inevitable choice for the sustainable development of enterprises, but also a positive commitment to social responsibility. Green supply chain management, corporate social responsibility practices and prioritizing the use of environmentally friendly raw materials have a profound impact on the development of smes. Faced with increasingly severe environmental challenges and fierce market competition, small and medium-sized enterprises should actively take environmental protection measures to achieve double benefits of economy and environment. This is not only an inevitable choice for the sustainable development of enterprises, but also a positive commitment to social responsibility. Table 3. Statement Weighted Mean Standard Deviation Interpretation 1.Prioritize environmentally friendly raw materials (GPRM1) 3.36 0.88996 Strongly agree 2.Choose renewable or biodegradable raw materials (GPRM2) 3.27 0.83022 Strongly agree 3.Prioritize the use of locally sourced raw materials (GPRM3) 3.31 0.84016 Strongly agree 4.Evaluate suppliers' environmental performance (GPRM4) 3.33 0.73827 Strongly agree 5.Help suppliers improve their environmental practices (GPRM5) 3.29 0.81355 Strongly agree Average Mean 3.31 0.82243 Strongly agree As shown in Table 3 above, in terms of Prioritize environmentally friendly raw materials (GPRM1), the weighted average is 3.36 and the standard deviation is 0.88996. For choosing renewable or biodegradable raw materials (GPRM2), the weighted mean is 3.27 and the standard deviation is 0.83022. In the aspect of prioritizing the use of locally sourced raw materials (GPRM3), the weighted mean is 3.31 and the standard deviation is 0.84016. For evaluating suppliers' environmental performance (GPRM4), the minimum value is 3.33 and the standard deviation is 0.73827. In terms of helping suppliers improve their environmental practices (GPRM5), the minimum is 3.29 and the standard deviation is 0.81355. It can be seen from the chart that by comparing the weighted average, prioritize environmentally friendly raw materials (GPRM1) has a higher weight, which is chosen by most people and has a higher frequency. Next, GPRM4, GPRM3, GPRM5 and GPRM2 have higher weights, and most people strongly agree with them. Table 4. Green production process improvement N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation GPPI1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3708 .80793 GPPI2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2742 .81897 GPPI3 383 1.00 4.00 3.2768 .81005 GPPI4 383 1.00 4.00 3.1932 .80525 GPPI5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2715 .83095 Valid N (listwise) 383 As can be seen from Figure 4, Green production process improvement is divided into five aspects: GPPI1, GPPI2, GPPI3, GPPI4 and GPPI5. In terms of GPPI1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, and the mean is 3.3708. The standard deviation is 0.80793; In terms of GPPI2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.2742, and the standard deviation is 0.81897. In terms of GPPI3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the median is 3.2768, and the standard deviation is 0.81005. In terms of GPPI4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the mean is 3.1932, and the standard deviation is 0.80525. In terms of GPPI5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the median is 3.2715, and the standard deviation is 0.83095. As can be seen from the chart, the average Reduction of energy consumption in the production process (GPPI1) is the largest, followed by GPPI3, GPPI2, GPPI5, and GPPI4. This is consistent with Zhang et al. 's research on the impact of green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility practices on smes. Reducing energy consumption during production is an important aspect of these practices (Zhang,2020). Green supply chain management is a management method that integrates environmental factors into every link of supply chain operation, aiming at reducing resource consumption and environmental impact. For smes, adopting green supply chain management can help them achieve sustainable development, reduce environmental costs, and improve their market competitiveness. For smes, actively fulfilling corporate social responsibility can enhance their reputation and brand image, attract more customers and investors, and promote their long-term development. Reducing energy consumption in the production process is also part of corporate social responsibility practices, which can help companies reduce their negative impact on the environment and win more social recognition and support for the company. 215 Table 5. Green packaging and recycling N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation GPR1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3890 .84233 GPR2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2480 .82411 GPR3 383 1.00 4.00 3.3473 .84199 GPR4 383 1.00 4.00 3.1906 .83617 GPR5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2272 .81741 Valid N (listwise) 383 As can be seen from Table 5, Green packaging and recycling are divided into five parts, GPR1, GPR2, GPR3, GPR4 and GPR5. In terms of GPR1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the average value is 3.3890, and the standard deviation is 0.84233. In terms of GPR2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the average value is 3.2480, and the standard deviation is 0.82411. In terms of GPR3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.3473, and the standard deviation is 0.84199. In GPR4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the average value is 3.1906, and the standard deviation is 0.83617. In terms of GPR5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2272, and the standard deviation is 0.81741. As can be seen from the figure, the average value of Use of biodegradable and recyclable packaging materials (GPR1) is the largest, followed by GPR3, GPR2, GPR5 and GPR4. This is consistent with the research of Zhao et al. (Zhao,2021). Green supply chain management and CSR practices have a multi-faceted impact on smes. The use of biodegradable and recyclable packaging materials is an important aspect of this, which helps companies achieve sustainable development and enhance their social image. The use of biodegradable and recyclable packaging materials can help companies reduce pollution to the environment. As consumers' awareness of environmental protection continues to increase, they are more inclined to choose those enterprises that pay attention to environmental protection in the production process. Therefore, the use of biodegradable and recyclable packaging materials can enhance the environmental image of enterprises, attract more consumers, and increase market share.Secondly, the use of biodegradable and recyclable packaging materials helps reduce costs for businesses. Traditional disposable packaging materials require a lot of resources and energy to produce, while biodegradable and recyclable packaging materials can reduce energy and resource consumption during production and use. This can not only reduce the production costs of enterprises, but also reduce the environmental governance costs of enterprises and improve the economic benefits of enterprises. Corporate Social responsibility Practices Table 6. Corporate Social Responsibility Practice N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation CER1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3316 .84829 CER2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2063 .87535 CER3 383 1.00 4.00 3.2846 .84069 CER4 383 1.00 4.00 3.2559 .78421 CER5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2898 .82948 Valid N (listwise) 383 As can be seen from the above table, there are five aspects in Corporate Social Responsibility Practice, namely CER1, CER2, CER3, CER4 and CER5. In the aspect of CER1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, and the average value is 3.3316. The standard deviation is 0.84829; In CER2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.2063, and the standard deviation is 0.87535. In CER3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.2846, and the standard deviation is 0.84069. In CER4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.2559, and the standard deviation is 0.78421. In CER5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2898, and the standard deviation is 0.82948. As can be seen from the figure, the average number of provided employees with a safe and comfortable working environment (CER1) is the largest, and most people strongly agree, which is consistent with the study of huang et al. (Huang,2021). Green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility practices have a multi-faceted impact on smes, one of which is to provide a safe and comfortable working environment for employees. Providing a safe and comfortable working environment for employees is one of the basic responsibilities of enterprises. Employees are a company's most important asset, and they deserve to work in a safe, healthy and comfortable environment. By taking appropriate measures, such as providing safety training and ensuring hygienic and safe conditions in the workplace, companies can ensure the safety and health of their employees and improve their motivation and efficiency. Secondly, providing a safe and comfortable working environment also helps companies attract and retain good employees. In today's highly competitive job market, employees are increasingly demanding work environments. If companies can provide a safe and comfortable working environment, it will help attract more talented people, retain existing employees, and reduce employee turnover. 216 Table 7. Prevention and control of environmental pollution N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation CPR1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3551 .87386 CPR2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2689 .85201 CPR3 383 1.00 4.00 3.3029 .80390 CPR4 383 1.00 4.00 3.2742 .72034 CPR5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2768 .83863 Valid N (listwise) 383 As shown in Table 7 above, in the Prevention and control of environmental pollution, there are CPR1, CPR2, CPR3, CPR4 and CPR5 respectively. In CPR1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, and the average value is 3.3551. The standard deviation is 0.87386; In CPR2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, and the average value is 3.2689. In CPR3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, and the average is 0.80390. In CPR4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, and the average value is 0.72034. In CPR5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2768, and the standard deviation is 0.83863. As can be seen from the table, the average value of Strengthening environmental P monitoring and control (CPR1) is the largest, and most people strongly agree, which is consistent with the study of sun et al. (Sun,2020). The practice of green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility has many impacts on small and medium- sized enterprises, among which strengthening environmental phosphorus monitoring and control is an important aspect. Strengthening environmental phosphorus monitoring and control can help enterprises reduce the negative impact on the environment. Phosphorus is an important fertilizer component in agricultural production, but excessive phosphorus discharge will lead to eutrophication of water and cause serious damage to ecological environment. Therefore, by strengthening environmental phosphorus monitoring and control, enterprises can reduce phosphorus emissions and protect water resources and the ecological environment. Table 10. Stakeholder relationships N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation ESR1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3838 .84472 ESR2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2768 .88717 ESR3 383 1.00 4.00 3.3211 .77847 ESR4 383 1.00 4.00 3.2533 .78339 ESR5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2480 .87645 Valid N (listwise) 383 As can be seen from Table 10 above, Stakeholder relationships are divided into 5 parts, namely ESR1, ESR2, ESR3, ESR4 and ESR5. In ESR1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the average value is 3.3838, and the standard deviation is 0.84472. In ESR2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.2768, and the standard deviation is 0.88717. In ESR3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.3211, and the standard deviation is 0.77847. In ESR4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the average is 3.2533, and the standard deviation is 0.78339. In ESR5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2480, and the standard deviation is 0.87645. Table 11. Innovation and competitive advantage N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation EIC1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3838 .82908 EIC2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2689 .84893 EIC3 383 1.00 4.00 3.2663 .86653 EIC4 383 1.00 4.00 3.2480 .79170 EIC5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2898 .81355 Valid N (listwise) 383 Table 11 shows that in Innovation and competitive advantage, in EIC1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the average value is 3.3838, and the standard deviation is 0.82908. In EIC2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the mean value is 3.2689, and the standard deviation is 0.84893. In EIC3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the mean value is 3.2663, and the standard deviation is 0.86653. In EIC4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the mean value is 3.2480, and the standard deviation is 0.79170. In EIC5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2898, and the standard deviation is 0.81355. As can be seen from The chart, The company encourages employees to propose innovative and improvement suggestions in their work. (EIC1) has the highest average value. Most people are strongly satisfied, which is consistent with the study by Wang et al. 217 Table 12. Performance N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation EPI1 383 1.00 4.00 3.3577 .80573 EPI2 383 1.00 4.00 3.2428 .80316 EPI3 383 1.00 4.00 3.2794 .82040 EPI4 383 1.00 4.00 3.2219 .82204 EPI5 383 1.00 4.00 3.2846 .80895 Valid N (listwise) 383 As can be seen from Table 12, Performance is divided into five parts. In EPI1, the minimum value is 1, the maximum value is 4, the average value is 3.3577, and the standard deviation is 0.80573. In EPI2, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2428, and the standard deviation is 0.80316. In EPI3, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2794, and the standard deviation is 0.82040. In EPI4, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2219, and the standard deviation is 0.82204. In EPI5, the minimum value is 1, the maximum is 4, the mean is 3.2846, and the standard deviation is 0.80895. 5. Conclusions 1.Although green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility practices have brought many positive impacts to smes, they also face some challenges and problems. For example, lack of relevant professional knowledge and skills, and insufficient capital investment are all factors that hinder smes from implementing green supply chain management and practicing corporate social responsibility practices. Therefore, the government, industry organizations and smes themselves need to work together to promote more smes to participate in green supply chain management and practice corporate social responsibility by providing measures such as training, funding and technical support. 2.Green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility practice are important ways for smes to achieve healthy and sustainable development. By strengthening their own capacity building, leveraging external support, strengthening cooperation and continuous innovation, smes can better integrate into environmental trends, fulfill their social responsibilities and make positive contributions to building an environmentally friendly society. This is not only conducive to the long-term development of enterprises, but also conducive to the prosperity and harmony of the whole society. 6. Recommendations Strengthening green supply chain management and implementing corporate social responsibility are of great significance to promote sustainable economic and social development. As an important force for social development, smes play a pivotal role in the implementation of green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility. The following are specific proposals and suggestions: 1. Improve environmental awareness: Green supply chain management requires enterprises to pay attention to environmental protection in all aspects of procurement, production, logistics, etc., so as to improve the environmental awareness of the entire enterprise. This increased awareness will encourage companies to more actively fulfill their social responsibilities and contribute to environmental protection. 2. Cost reduction: Through rational use of resources, reducing energy consumption and reducing waste disposal costs, green supply chain management can help enterprises reduce operating costs. These cost savings can be used to better fulfill corporate social responsibilities, such as improving employee welfare and supporting community development. 3. Enhance competitiveness: With the improvement of consumers' awareness of environmental protection and social responsibility, green supply chain management and corporate social responsibility practices have become an important source of competitive advantage for enterprises. The implementation of green supply chain management can help enterprises win the favor of consumers and thus increase their market share. References [1] Ashraf, S., Altaf, M. S., Bao, R., Bashir, M. K., Ilyas, S., & Alshammari, M. S. (2020). CHALLENGING STRATEGIC TRENDS IN GREEN SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT. [2] Chen, T., Yan, C., Ma, P., & Chen, L. (2019). Discussion on green supply chain management mode of electronic enterprises. China New Communication, 21(17), 230 [3] Cao Xiaogang, Hu Meiting, Wen Hui. Considering the consumer mentality of environmental protection green supply chain decision-making and coordination [J/OL]. Journal of wuhan university (science edition), 1-15 [2024-01-30]. https://doi.org/10.14188/j.1671-8836.2022.0289. [4] Epoh, L. R., & Loury-Okoumba, W. V. (2018). Green supply chain management in small and medium enterprises: further empirical thoughts from South Africa. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management, 12. https://doi.org/10.4102/jtscm.v12i0.343 [5] Fan, L. F. (2018). Research on green supply chain management of J company [Master's thesis, Nanjing University of Science and Technology]. [6] Fan, X., & Yao, G. (2020). Research on the impact of green supply chain management on the performance of small and medium-sized enterprises. Logistics Science and Technology, 43(07), 119-122. https://doi.org/10.13714/j.cnki.1002- 3100.2020.07.028 [7] Fu, H. (2018). Construction of green supply chain management system of RT-Mart Group in Q city [Master's thesis, Heilongjiang University]. [8] Junior, A. d. S., de Souza Freire, R., Cortes de Oliveira, L., da Costa, F. J., & Añez, M. E. M. (2022). The corporate social responsibility pyramid: its evolution and the proposal of the spinner, a theoretical refinement. Social Responsibility Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-04-2021-0163 [9] Kot, S. (2018). Sustainable Supply Chain Management in Small and Medium Enterprises. Sustainability, 10(4), 1143. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041143 [10] Li, G., Liu, H., Yi, X., Jiang, Z., & Fujitsuka, T. (2020). Green supply chain management in Chinese firms: Innovative measures and the moderating role of quick response technology. Journal of Operations Management, 66(4), 339-360. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1093 218 [11] Li, J., & Zhao, D. (2019). Research on Green Supply Chain Management Deficiency and Improvement. Guangxi quality supervision guide, (06), 159. [12] Mao, T. (2021). Progress, Dilemma and Cracking Countermeasures of Green Supply Chain Management Practice. Environmental Protection, 49(02), 61-65. https://doi.org/10.14026/j.cnki.0253-9705.2021.02.011 [13] Pazienza, M., de Jong, M., & Schoenmaker, D. (2022). Clarifying the Concept of Corporate Sustainability and Providing Convergence for Its Definition. Sustainability, 14(2), 1058. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14021058 [14] Peng, T. (2021). Analysis of Influencing Factors of Green Supply Chain Management and Its Countermeasures. Logistics Engineering and Management, 43(08), 69-71. [15] Tie, Z. (2016). Discussion on the strategic choice of enterprise green supply chain management under the new normal. Modern Business, (04), 136-137. https://doi.org/10.14097/j.cnki.5392/2016.04.066 [16] Wang, T. (2019). Discussion on Strengthening Enterprises to Fulfill Green Social Responsibility in the Context of Ecological Economy. Green Technology, 16(16), 287-288. https://doi.org/10.16663/j.cnki.lskj.2019.16.109 [17] Zhao, T. (2021). Corporate social responsibility: the balance of rights and responsibilities. Mall Modernization, (24), 54-56. https://doi.org/10.14013/j.cnki.scxdh.2021.24.021