Modeling the designs in terms of logistics service center placement: a case study

• Autorzy: Stopka Ondrej , Droździel Paweł , L'upták Vladimir

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0016.1049

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Suggesting the proper location for logistics facility can be considered as a decision making problem, wherein the final solution/decision is affected by multiple external or even internal circumstances. In order to address the decision making issues, various multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques may be implemented; and hence, they can be applied even when making a decision about an adequate logistics service center (LSC) placement in an examined territory (i.e., national logistics network of the selected territory), which is an aim of this manuscript. Following the statements above, as for the individual instruments of MCDM to be implemented in terms of the crucial objective of this research, the definite decision making process will be carried out by applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) followed by the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), on the basis of criteria weights defined by the Saaty pairwise comparison method. The methods used appear to be ideal instruments towards decision making on the most suit-able location which is represented by the region in our case. Subsequently, these will be ordered from the most preferred to least one by using a preference ranking. As a result of the application of AHP and TOPSIS approaches, based on the conducted calculations in regard to decision making on identifying the proper LSC location out of eight selected regions, one specific region will be defined as the most suitable (so-called compromise) scenario. Individual tools allow for reducing the number of assigned criteria that are taken into account in searching process for individual solutions. In order to objectify the entire decision making procedure, ten topic-involved experts having practical experience with a subject of logistics object allocation will be asked to participate in the process. Preferences differ from one decision maker (expert) to another; hence, the outcome depends on who is making decisions and what their goals and preferences are.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

multi-criteria decision making; logistic service centers; facility location; AHP; TOPSIS

PL

wielokryterialne podejmowanie decyzji; centrum obsługi logistycznej; lokalizacja obiektu; AHP; TOPSIS

• Wydawca: Warsaw University of Technology, Faculty of Transport
• Czasopismo: Archives of Transport
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 64, iss. 4
• Strony: 59--71
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 40 poz., tab., wzory

Twórcy

autor

Stopka Ondrej

• Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice, Faculty of Technologym, Department of Transport and Logistics, Czech Republic

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0932-4381

autor

Droździel Paweł

• Lublin University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Sustainable Transport and Powertrains, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2187-1633

autor

L'upták Vladimir

• Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice, Faculty of Technologym, Department of Transport and Logistics, Czech Republic

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7550-5714

Bibliografia

• [1] Adetunji O., Bischoff J., Willy C.J., (2018). Managing system obsolescence via multi-criteria decision making. Systems Engineering, 21(4), 307-321. DOI: 10.1002/sys.21436.
• [2] Alumur S.A., Kara B.Y., Karasan O.E., (2012) Multimodal hub location and hub network design. Omega, 40(6), 927-939.
• [3] Awasthi A., Chauhan S.S., Goyal S.K., (2011) A multi-criteria decision making approach for location planning for urban distribution centers under uncertainty. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 53(1-2), 98-109. DOI: 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.07.023.
• [4] Baric D., Zeljko L., (2021) Multi-Criteria Decision-Making on Road Transport Vehicles by the AHP Method. The Archives of Automotive Engineering – Archiwum Motoryzacji, 94(4), 17-26. DOI: 10.14669/AM.VOL94.ART2.
• [5] Čarný Š., Šperka A., Zitrický V., (2020) Multi-criteria Evaluation of Railway Transport Using Evaluation Method. LOGI – Scientific Journal on Transport and Logistics, 11(2), 88-99. DOI: 10.2478/logi-2020-0018.
• [6] Dey B., Bairagi B., Sarkar B., Sanyal S.K., (2016) Warehouse location selection by fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methodologies based on subjective and objective criteria. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 11(4) 262-278. DOI: 10.1080/17509653.2015.1086964.
• [7] Díaz-Madroñero M., Mula J., Peidro D., (2017) A mathematical programming model for integrating production and procurement transport decisions. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 52, 527-543. DOI: 10.1016/j.apm.2017.08.009.
• [8] Dockalikova I., Klozikova J., (2015) MCDM Methods in Practice: Localization Suitable Places for Company by the Utilization of AHP and WSA, TOPSIS Method. Proceedings of the Conference on European Management Leader-ship and Governance, Lisbon, Portugal, 543-552.
• [9] Ejem E.A., Uka C.M., Dike D.N., Ikeogu C.C., Igboanusi C.C., Chukwu O.E., (2021) Evaluation and Selection of Nigerian Third-Party Logistics Service Providers Using Multi-Criteria Decision Models. LOGI – Scientific Journal on Transport and Logistics, 12(1), 135-146. DOI: 10.2478/logi-2021-0013.
• [10] Hamurcu M., Eren T., (2018) An application of multi-criteria decision-making for the evaluation of alternative monorail routes. Mathematics, 7(1), 16. DOI: 10.3390/math7010016.
• [11] Hilmani A., Maizate A., Hassouni L., (2018). Multi-criteria analysis and advanced comparative study of self-organization protocols in wireless sensor network. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 13(13), 5168–5180.
• [12] Hruška R., Průša P., Babić D., (2014) The use of AHP method for selection of supplier. Transport, 29(2), 195–203. DOI: 10.3846/16484142.2014.930928.
• [13] Jablonský J., (2007) Operační výzkum: kvantitativní modely pro ekonomické rozhodování, ed. 3, Prague: Professional Publishing, Czech Republic, 323 p. ISBN 978-80-86946-44-3 (in Czech).
• [14] Kalčevová J., (2008) Multikriteriální analýza, Study materials, Available at: http://jana.kalcev.cz/vyuka/kestazeni/EKO422-Kriterialni-Matice.pdf., (Accessed 20th July 2019) (in Czech).
• [15] Kauf S., Tłuczak A., (2018). Allocation of logistic risk-investment in public-private-partnership - use of fuzzy TOPSIS method. Paper presented at the MATEC Web of Conferences, 184. DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/ 201818404025.
• [16] Keikha A., (2022). Generalized hesitant fuzzy numbers and their application in solving MADM problems based on TOPSIS method. Soft Computing, 26(10), 4673–4683. DOI: 10.1007/s00500-022-06995-z.
• [17] Li Y., Lin C., Wang Y., Gao X., Xie T., Hai R., Wang X., Zhang X., (2017) Multicriteria evaluation method for site selection of industrial wastewater discharge in coastal regions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 161, 1143-1152. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.030.
• [18] Li Y., Jiang P., Fan M., Fan H., Wu W., Yang C., (2022). Optimal selection of mountain rail-way location design based on twice-improved TOPSIS method. Xinan Jiaotong Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 57(2), 253-260. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20200056.
• [19] Makarov E.I., Nikolaeva Y.R., Shubina E.A., Golikova G.V., (2017) Impact of risks on stable and safe functioning of transport and logistics cluster of the transit region., (Book Chapter), Contributions to Economics, Issue 9783319552569, 321-326. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-55257-6_42.
• [20] Mangalan A.V., Kuriakose S., Mohamed H., Ray A., (2016) Optimal location of warehouse using weighted MOORA approach. International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, and Optimization Techniques, ICEEOT 2016, Tamilnadu, India, 3-5 March 2016, Article no. 7754764, 662-665. DOI: 10.1109/ICEEOT .2016.7754764.
• [21] Molnar V., Fedorko G., Honus S., Girovska, L., Ližbetin J., (2018) Selection and allocation of a warehouse linked to reloading terminal and seaport. Nase More, 65(4), 169-173. DOI: 10.17818/NM/2018/4SI.1.
• [22] O’Kelly M.E., (1987) A Quadratic Integer Program for the Location of Interacting Hub Facilities. European Journal of Operational Research, 32, 393-404.
• [23] Orynycz O., Tucki K., (2020) Technology management leading to a smart system solution assuring a decrease of energy consumption in recreational facilities. Energies, 13(13). DOI: 10.3390/en13133425.
• [24] Özcan T., Elebi N., Esnaf A., (2011) Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methodologies and implementation of a ware-house location selection problem. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(8), 9773-9779. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.02.022.
• [25] Pelegrina G.D., Duarte L.T., Romano J.M.T., (2019) Application of independent component analysis and TOPSIS to deal with dependent criteria in multi-criteria decision problems. Expert Systems with Applications, 122, 262-280.
• [26] Rashidi K., Cullinane K., (2019). A comparison of fuzzy DEA and fuzzy TOPSIS in sustainable supplier selection: Implications for sourcing strategy. Expert Systems with Applications, 121, 266-281. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa. 2018.12.025.
• [27] Saaty T.L., (1990) Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 292.
• [28] Saaty T.L., (2008) Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process, International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98. DOI: 10.1504/IJSSci.2008.0175.
• [29] Saaty T.L., Vargas L.G., Wendell R.E., (1983) Assessing Attribute Weights by Rations. Omega – International Journal of Management Science, 2(1), 9-13.
• [30] Sánchez-Lozano J.M., Ramos-Escudero A., Gil-García I.C., García-Cascales M.S., Molina-García A., (2022). A GIS-based offshore wind site selection model using fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making with application to the case of the Gulf of Maine. Expert Systems with Applications, 210. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118371.
• [31] Sender J., Clausen U., (2011) A new hub location model for network design of wagonload traffic. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 90-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.08.014.
• [32] Silva R.R.D., Santos G.D., Setti D., (2022). A multi-criteria approach for urban mobility project selection in medium-sized cities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 86. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.104096.
• [33] Sopha B.M., Asih A.M.S., Nursitasari P.D., (2018) Location planning of urban distribution center under uncertainty: A case study of Yogyakarta special region province, Indonesia. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 11(3), 542-568. DOI: 10.3926/jiem.2581.
• [34] Tadić S., Krstić M., Brnjac N., (2019) Selection of efficient types of inland intermodal terminals. Journal of Transport Geography, 78, 170-180. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo. 2019.06.004.
• [35] Tang J., Tang L., Wang X., (2013) Solution method for the location planning problem of logistics park with variable capacity. Computers and Operations Research, 40(1), 406-417.
• [36] Yu B., Cai M., Li Q., (2019a) A λ-rough set model and its applications with TOPSIS method to decision making. Knowledge-Based Systems, 165, 420-431.
• [37] Yu C., Shao Y., Wang K., Zhang L., (2019b). A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 123. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2019.01.053.
• [38] Zavadskas E.K., Turskis Z., (2011) Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods in Economics: An Overview. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(2), 397-427. DOI: 10.3846/20294913.2011. 593291.
• [39] Zhang K., Dai J., (2022). A novel TOPSIS method with decision-theoretic rough fuzzy sets. Information Sciences, 608, 1221-1244. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2022.07.009.
• [40] Zopounidis C., Pardalos P.M., (2010) Hand-book of Multicriteria Analysis: Applied Optimization, 103, Springer-Verlag Berlin/Heidelberg. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-92828-7_2.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023)