Global supply chains face increasing legal, commercial, and stakeholder pressure to verify supplier sustainability rather than rely only on supplier claims. This study develops a safety-gated tabular Q-learning framework for adaptive supplier scoring, limited sourcing-share adjustment, and audit targeting in a stylized Bangladesh ready-made garment sourcing portfolio. The simulation distinguishes direct exporters, subcontractors, and small or informal suppliers; represents safety, labour, and environmental performance separately; prohibits rewards when verified safety or labour falls below 0.60; and imposes a minimum annual audit. Three independently trained agents were evaluated in 75 paired out-of-sample replications against a contextual bandit, a risk-based adaptive heuristic, a static threshold, a combined scheduled-audit-and-threshold policy, scheduled auditing, and random action. Q-learning achieved mean true compliance of 0.862 compared with 0.820 under the static threshold, increased the share of suppliers at or above 0.80 from 58.2 to 81.3%, and reduced mean severe incidents from 3.29 to 1.71. It used 167 audits compared with 362 for the combined scheduled-audit-and-threshold policy, a 53.8% reduction, while mean procurement cost was 1.1% higher than under the static threshold. The contextual bandit produced lower compliance (0.742) and more incidents (2.96), supporting the value of delayed-action learning. The risk-based heuristic produced statistically similar mean compliance but required 55 additional audits and yielded a narrower compliant-supplier share. Paired tests, effect sizes, convergence diagnostics, supplier-stratum results, credit-assignment ablation, time-state testing, and multi-parameter robustness analyses are reported. The findings remain simulation evidence rather than factory-level validation, but they provide a reproducible and technically strengthened test of adaptive supplier governance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kazi Md. Tanvir Anzum (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: