ChatGPT analysed the exported results from Scopus for the Query made on 2026-04-08, identified by “Q18b”. for TITLE-ABS-KEY(((“information sharing” OR interoperability OR “data infrastructure” OR “information infrastructure” OR traceability) AND (fashion OR textile* OR apparel))) Limited to: Business, and Economics sources; for the time period from 2015 to 2026 with 158 results with exported data in this file
Query for ChatGPT: “attached is the results´ export from Scopus database for the mentioned query. Analyse the abstracts and titles and give me the most relevant insights for my research”
I analyzed the 158 Scopus records in your export (2015–2026) using the titles and abstracts. The strongest conclusion is that your corpus is highly relevant for your research, but it also reveals a very important conceptual gap:
this literature is still dominated by traceability, transparency, and blockchain-enabled supply-chain visibility, while interoperability, data infrastructure, and governance architecture remain much less developed.
That is exactly where your work can make a stronger theoretical contribution.
1. What this corpus is really about
Across the 158 records, the most recurrent themes are:
Supply chain transparency / governance: 113
Traceability / blockchain / product identity: 104
Traceability alone: 93
Textile: 90
Fashion: 92
Supply chain: 77
Sustainability: 65
Transparency: 48
Information sharing: 36
Blockchain: 38
Circular economy / circularity: 25
Interoperability: only 13
Digital Product Passport (DPP): only 8
Main interpretation
The field is not yet primarily framed as data infrastructure research.
Instead, it is framed as:
traceability problem
transparency problem
supply chain coordination problem
consumer trust / communication problem
only secondarily as an interoperability or infrastructure problem
This is a major insight for your research because it suggests that your contribution should not simply repeat “DPP improves traceability,” but rather show that:
traceability depends on deeper interoperability and governance infrastructures that the current literature often under-specifies.
2. The strongest pattern: traceability is the dominant entry point
The corpus overwhelmingly treats digitalization in fashion/textiles through the lens of traceability.
The most visible technological and managerial narrative is:
map product origin
improve visibility across tiers
support sustainability claims
reduce fraud / counterfeiting
inform consumers
enable better circular decisions
This is why blockchain appears so often. In this corpus, blockchain is usually not presented just as a financial technology, but as a way to support:
immutable records
multi-actor trust
product history
chain-of-custody logic
decentralized information exchange
Implication for your research
This gives you a strong base, but also a clear opening:
much of this literature treats traceability as the goal
your research can argue that traceability is only one function of a broader DPP-enabled data governance infrastructure
In other words, you can position DPP not merely as a “tracking tool,” but as:
a coordination architecture
an information asymmetry reduction mechanism
a shared data infrastructure for circular business model innovation
That would move beyond the current center of gravity in the corpus.
3. Interoperability is present, but underdeveloped
This is one of the most important insights.
Although your query explicitly included:
information sharing
interoperability
data infrastructure
information infrastructure
the resulting corpus still leans much more toward:
traceability
transparency
blockchain adoption
consumer communication
sustainability signaling
rather than toward deep treatment of:
semantic interoperability
data models
standards architecture
governance of shared infrastructures
institutional coordination mechanisms
Why this matters
This means your literature base already gives you a strong justification to say:
the fashion/textile literature recognizes the need for information exchange, but still lacks a sufficiently mature conceptualization of the interoperable infrastructures that would make DPPs scalable, reliable, and circularity-enabling.
That is a very publishable gap.
More specifically
The corpus shows a lot of attention to “how to trace”, but much less to:
how actors agree on data semantics
how information is governed across ecosystems
how upstream/downstream data become interoperable
how DPP data move across life-cycle stages
how governance arrangements affect access, incentives, and data quality
This aligns extremely well with your institutional/governance framing.
4. DPP is clearly emerging, but still recent and thin
Only 8 records explicitly mention Digital Product Passport in titles/abstracts/keywords.
That tells us two things:
First
DPP is an emerging subfield, not yet a mature literature cluster in this corpus.
Second
Because it is still emerging, there is room for theoretical framing.
The DPP-related papers in your export are especially interesting because they move the conversation from generic traceability toward:
lifecycle information access
producer and consumer value
digital labels and product literacy
cleaner production
“twin transition” logic
strategic integration of circularity and digitalization
Most relevant DPP signal in the corpus
The most promising DPP papers in your export point toward five lines:
DPP as lifecycle traceability infrastructure
DPP as communication tool for consumers
DPP as strategic instrument for twin transition
DPP as cleaner production enabler
DPP as an emerging business strategy issue in textiles
Implication for your research
This is excellent for you, because you can position your work as one of the papers that helps move the field from:
“DPP as label”
“DPP as compliance tool”
“DPP as digital traceability device”
toward:
DPP as interoperable governance infrastructure
DPP as enabler of circular business model innovation
DPP as institutional mechanism to reduce information asymmetry
That would be a stronger and more original contribution than staying at the consumer-label level.
5. Circular economy is present, but often not deeply operationalized
Circularity is visible, but still secondary compared with traceability and transparency.
The term circular appears in 25 records. That is meaningful, but it is not the dominant organizing principle of the corpus.
What the corpus tends to do
Circularity is often discussed in connection with:
recycling
sustainable sourcing
eco-labels
lifecycle visibility
cleaner production
reverse logistics or value retention
But fewer papers seem to explain in depth how digital information infrastructures actually enable circular business model innovation.
This is one of your best opportunities
Your research can show that circularity in fashion/textiles requires more than product tracking. It requires:
usable lifecycle data
multi-actor coordination
governance over access and updating
interoperability across firms and stages
capabilities to convert data into business model redesign
That moves the field from a generic sustainability discourse into a more rigorous political economy / innovation / governance perspective.
6. Consumer-facing research is stronger than expected
A notable part of the corpus is not purely operations-focused. There is a visible strand on:
consumer trust
purchase intention
product literacy
digital labels
willingness to pay
social media information sharing
communication of sustainability
This is important because DPP in fashion is not only being imagined as an internal industrial data system, but also as a consumer-facing communication interface.
Key implication
This opens a useful dual framing for your research:
back-end role: DPP as infrastructure for traceability, interoperability, and lifecycle coordination
front-end role: DPP as signal, label, and trust-building device for consumers
However, the corpus also suggests a risk:
many papers stop at the communication layer and do not fully explain the underlying infrastructure and governance conditions required for trustworthy information.
That is another gap your research can fill.
7. Technology emphasis is uneven: blockchain dominates, RFID/IoT are secondary, semantic approaches are weak
The technological pattern is very clear:
blockchain is the dominant technical frame
RFID and IoT appear, but far less frequently
semantic / ontology / FAIR / knowledge graph language is almost absent
“data infrastructure” appears much less than your query would suggest
Interpretation
This means the literature often equates “digitalization” with a specific technical stack, especially blockchain-based traceability.
But from your perspective, that is too narrow.
Opportunity for your work
You can argue that the real question is not whether blockchain is used, but whether the system achieves:
interoperability
shared semantics
trusted governance
multi-tier data usability
life-cycle continuity
circular decision support
This is a more durable and theoretically valuable framing than a blockchain-centric one.
8. Social sustainability is becoming more important
The newest part of the corpus shows a noticeable shift from environmental transparency alone toward:
social sustainability
supply chain compliance
collaboration
barriers and enablers of technology adoption
ethical audits
multi-tier governance
This is significant for fashion/textiles because the sector’s sustainability problem is not only material/circular but also social:
labor conditions
supplier visibility
audit credibility
governance across fragmented chains
Research implication
Your work could benefit from explicitly recognizing that DPP-related infrastructures may support not only environmental circularity, but also:
social sustainability governance
responsibility allocation
auditable chain-level claims
That would make your framework richer and more aligned with the direction the field is starting to take.
9. The field is growing fast, especially after 2022
Your export shows strong growth over time:
2015: 3
2016: 4
2017: 6
2018: 5
2019: 9
2020: 15
2021: 14
2022: 21
2023: 15
2024: 22
2025: 34
2026: 10 so far
Interpretation
The topic has clearly accelerated since 2022, and 2025 is the strongest year in your export.
That growth pattern suggests three things:
the field is moving quickly
DPP-related research is still consolidating
now is a very good moment to publish a conceptual or integrative contribution
Because the field is still forming, strong conceptual papers can still shape it.
10. What appear to be the most important papers for your research positioning
Based on titles, abstracts, and prominence in the export, these are especially important for your agenda:
Foundational sustainability/traceability line
Traceability management systems and capacity building as new approaches for improving sustainability in the fashion multi-tier supply chain (2019)
Traceability and transparency for sustainable fashion-apparel supply chains (2022)
Circular fashion supply chain through textile-to-textile recycling (2019)
DPP / twin transition line
Blockchain-based digital product passport: design principles and demonstration (2025)
Environmental Concerns in the Fashion Industry: A Twin Transition With the Digital Product Passport (2025)
Digital product passports for cleaner production: Economic evidence from producers and consumers in the fashion industry (2026)
Exploring the role of digital product passports for supply chain traceability in the “Made in Italy” textile sector (2025)
Strategy / governance / adoption line
The impact of smart supply chain management on supply chain transparency: a dynamic resource-based view (2026)
Exploring the barriers and enablers of technology adoption for managing social sustainability in supply chains (2025)
Supply chain information system for sustainability and interoperability of business service (2023)
These papers seem especially useful because together they cover:
traceability
DPP emergence
consumer perception
adoption barriers
governance and interoperability
the circular transition
11. The biggest gaps that your research can address
This is the most important section for your manuscript strategy.
Gap 1: from traceability to infrastructure
The literature strongly shows that traceability matters, but it less clearly explains the infrastructure conditions required to make traceability scalable and useful.
Gap 2: from transparency to governance
Transparency is frequently treated as a good in itself, but the literature is thinner on:
who governs the data
who can update/access it
how quality is assured
how conflicts are managed
how data rights and responsibilities are distributed
Gap 3: from DPP as label to DPP as institutional architecture
Many emerging DPP papers still frame it mainly as:
digital label
consumer information mechanism
compliance tool
You can go further by theorizing DPP as:
institutional innovation
governance infrastructure
coordination device
enabler of circular market formation
Gap 4: weak treatment of interoperability
Your corpus confirms that interoperability is relevant but still under-theorized. This is one of the clearest opportunities for contribution.
Gap 5: limited connection to business model innovation
There is some movement toward strategy and business models, but the corpus still does not strongly integrate:
DPP data
interoperability
capabilities
circular business model innovation
This is exactly where your dynamic capabilities / CBMI framing can add value.
12. What I would recommend you do with this corpus
For your research, I would interpret this export as evidence of a field moving through three stages:
Stage 1 — visibility and traceability
The initial concern is knowing where products come from and how they move.
Stage 2 — transparency and sustainability signaling
The next concern is making claims about sustainability visible and credible to firms and consumers.
Stage 3 — infrastructure and circular coordination
The emerging but still underdeveloped concern is how interoperable data systems and governance arrangements can support:
circularity
lifecycle management
producer-consumer trust
multi-tier coordination
business model transformation
Your research is strongest if you explicitly place itself in Stage 3.
13. Suggested interpretation paragraph for your literature review
You could write something close to this:
The Scopus corpus on information sharing, interoperability, traceability, and digital infrastructures in fashion and textiles shows a rapidly expanding field centered primarily on traceability, transparency, and blockchain-enabled supply-chain visibility. While sustainability and circularity are increasingly present, the literature remains more focused on product-level tracking and communication than on the interoperable governance infrastructures required to operationalize lifecycle data across fragmented value chains. Digital Product Passport research is emerging as an important bridge between these domains, but remains relatively recent and conceptually underdeveloped. In particular, the corpus suggests a persistent gap in the theorization of interoperability, data governance, and institutional coordination mechanisms capable of transforming traceability systems into infrastructures for circular business model innovation.
14. Bottom line
The most relevant insight for your research is this:
Your corpus strongly supports a shift from “traceability as an end” toward “interoperable data governance infrastructure as the real enabler of circularity, trust, and business model innovation in fashion-textile ecosystems.”