Please write for me the data sources used for this article for my presentation. "Supply chain sustainability: A risk management approach, by Mihalis Giannakis and Thanos Papadopoulos". I have tried to do it but it is very similar to what my friend wrote for the methodology part

$($they included the interview, survery$)$Risk Identification: A content analysis of academic papers,

industry reports and white papers was conducted to produce an

initial list of sustainability$-$related risks. The final list was then

completed by incorporating the comments of the interviewed

managers $($Table $1).$

Risk Assessment: The FMEA technique has been applied for the risk

assessment and analysis steps. FMEA is an established technique that

can be used to study problems that might arise in a system. It can be

used to evaluate and measure risk factors in a systematic way,

without the need of complex statistical methods $($Stamatis$,2003).$

The FMEA has been applied as follows: the survey participants were

asked to evaluate the level of severity $(S),$ probability of occurrence $(P)$

and ease of detection $($D$)$ of each risk factor $($Tuncel and Alpan, $2010).$

Likert type scales of answers were used, using numbers from $1$ to $7$

$($Table $4).$ A definition for each risk grade was also provided to

facilitate the responses and avoid confusion. Respondents were also

given the option to give potential causes of each risk category. $124$

Usable answers were received, giving a response rate of $20\mathrm{.}6\%.$

The detectability $($or ease of detection$)$ of a risk hazard is

commonly used in the FMEA method $($Stamatis$,2003),$ and it is

considered a significant factor in this study. Speier et al$.(2011)$ suggest

that the ability to recognise an incident and its consequences depends

on the detectability: some incidents$/$consequences are easy to be

recognised, whereas others referring to the environmental conse$-$

quences, e$.$g$.$ "contamination of food with a biological agent that goes

undetected" $($p$.725),$ can be very difficult. In this respect, detectability

is not related to the probability of the occurrence of a sustainability$-$

related risk, but to the probability of occurrence of a consequence. It

may alter the probability of a consequence of a risk occurring, with

the assumption that proactive decisions will be acted upon to prevent

its negative consequences $($Sodhi and Tang, $2009).$ This can lower the

overall level of importance of a particular risk. By keeping it distinct in

the risk management process, it assists in the subsequent state of risk

treatment: either through the reduction of the probability of the

consequences of an observed sustainability$-$related risk, or through

improving the detectability, thereby preventing the consequence

$($harmful effect$)$ of occurring.

Risk Analysis: Following the assessment of risks in these three

dimensions, FMEA proceeds with a calculation of a risk index score

based on the three dimensions of risk. Multiplication of these

components enables the prioritisation of risk factors based on risk

priority numbers $(RP{N}_i=S_i^{**}{P}_i^{**}{D}_i,$ where $i=$ risk factor$).$ The higher the

RPN$,$ the greater the risk of that event. After the calculation of RPNs$,$

the major risks were calculated through a Pareto diagram. The FMEA

process was complimented by a series of cause and effect analyses.

Managers of the two participating companies were asked to identify

potential causes and effects of all the sustainability$-$related risks, as

well as to assign a level of probability for each of the potential causes

or effects they mentioned $($from $1-$extremely improbable, $2-$improb$-$

able, $3-$neutral, $4-$probable, $5-$extremely probable$).$ Only those causes

and effects that were assigned a high probability score $(4$ or $5$ were

included in the analysis$).10$ Semi$-$structured interviews were con$-$

ducted $(5$ in each company$)$ that involved the head of risk manage$-$

ment and senior operations, and supply chain managers.

Once the major risk factors have been identified and assessed and

potential causes and effects were identified, correlation analyses were

conducted, using data from the survey, to identify potential correla$-$

tions amongst the most important risk factors. The correlation

coefficient varies between $-1,+1,$ to reflect a positive $(+1),$ a

negative $(-1),$ or no correlation $(0).$ Potential causality between the

hypothesised correlations was not investigated. The correlation ana$-$

lyses reflect the managers' perceptions about the degree of relation$-$

ship between prioritised risk factors and do not involve financial or

other performance measurement data.

Risk Treatmen

I would really appreciate it if you please opened the article by yourself because it doesnt allow me to post more than one picture and theres more info than what the one page covered, Thank you so much!