4.7 Article

Evaluating the feasibility of blockchain in logistics operations: A decision framework

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 158, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113543

关键词

Blockchain; Logistics; Multi-Criteria Decision Making; Intuitionistic Fuzzy AHP; Fuzzy VIKOR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility of blockchain technology in logistics industry using a quantitative approach. To this end, a decision framework is proposed based on a multi-criteria decision structure that incorporates AHP into VIKOR under Intuitionistic Fuzzy Theory. This integration presents different solutions and rankings based on different decision-making strategies and also captures uncertainty in the evaluation process. While Intuitionistic Fuzzy AHP calculates the importance weights of the proposed criteria indicated as scalability, privacy, interoperability, audit, latency, visibility, trust, and security, Fuzzy VIKOR ranks the logistics operations demonstrated as materials handling, warehousing, order processing, transportation, packaging, fleet management, labeling, vehicle routing and product returns management. The proposed decision framework was applied in a large-scale logistics company located in Turkey. The findings of this study suggest that while the most important criteria are security, visibility and audit, the most feasible logistics operations proved to be transportation, materials handling, warehousing, order processing and fleet management in a possible blockchain implementation. The decision framework in this study may enable decision makers to evaluate the feasibility of blockchain in logistics operations, which is one of the main research gaps in the current blockchain research. Furthermore, this is the first study that integrates AHP and VIKOR methods under Intuitionistic Fuzzy Theory in the context of blockchain. (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据