3.8 Article

A mixed procurement model for humanitarian relief chains

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/JHLSCM-10-2018-0067

关键词

Disaster relief; Procurement management; Mixed-integer programming; Multi-attribute combinatorial auction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to improve the relief procurement process as one of the most important elements of humanitarian logistics. For doing so, a novel two-round decision model is developed to capture the dynamic nature of the relief procurement process by allowing demand updating. The model accounts for the supply priority of items at response phase as well. Design/methodology/approach A mixed procurement/supply policy is developed through a mathematical model, which includes spot market procurement and a novel procurement auction mechanism combining the concepts of multi-attribute and combinatorial reverse auctions. The model is of bi-objective mixed-integer non-linear programming type, which is solved through the weighted augmented e-constraint method. A case study is also provided to illustrate the applicability of the model. Findings This study demonstrates the ability of proposed approach to model post-disaster procurement which considers the dynamic environment of the relief logistics. The sensitivity analyses provide useful managerial insights for decision makers by studying the impacts of critical parameters on the solutions. Originality/value This paper proposes a novel reverse auction framework for relief procurement in the form of a multi-attribute combinatorial auction. Also, to deal with dynamic environment in the post-disaster procurement, a novel two-period programming model with demand updating is proposed. Finally, by considering the priority of relief items and model's applicability in the setting of relief logistics, post-disaster horizon is divided into three periods and a mixed procurement strategy is developed to determine an appropriate supply policy for each period.

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

3.8
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