4.7 Article

Cost allocation in collaborative forest transportation

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
Volume 205, Issue 2, Pages 448-458

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2010.01.015

Keywords

Transportation; OR in natural resources; Supply chain management; Logistics; Economics; Group decisions and negotiations; Linear programming; Backhauling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Transportation planning is an important part of the supply chain or wood flow chain in forestry. There are often several forest companies operating in the same region and collaboration between two or more companies is rare. However, there is an increasing interest in collaborative planning as the potential savings are large, often in the range 5-15%. There are several issues to agree on before such collaborative planning can be used in practice. A key question is how the total cost or savings should be distributed among the participants. In this paper, we study a large application in southern Sweden with eight forest companies involved in a collaboration. We investigate a number of sharing mechanisms based on economic models including Shapley value, the nucleolus, separable and non-separable costs, shadow prices and volume weights. We also propose a new allocation method, with the aim that the participants relative profits are as equal as possible. We use two planning models, the first is based on direct flows between supply and demand points and the second includes backhauling. We also study how several time periods and geographical distribution of the supply and demand nodes affect the solutions. Better planning within each company can save about 5% and collaboration can increase this about another 9% to a total of 14%. The proposed allocation method is shown to be a practical approach to share the overall cost/savings. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available