Abstract (EN):
Collaboration between companies in transportation problems seeks to reduce empty running of vehicles and to increase the use of vehicles' capacity. Motivated by a case study in the food supply chain, this paper examines a lateral collaboration between a leading retailer (LR), a third party logistics provider (3 PL) and different producers. Three collaborative strategies may be implemented simultaneously, namely pickup-delivery, collection and cross-docking. The collaborative pickup-delivery allows an entity to serve customers of another in the backhaul trips of the vehicles. The collaborative collection allows loads to be picked up at the producers in the backhauling routes of the LR and the 3 PL, instead of the traditional outsourcing. The collaborative cross-docking allows the producers to cross-dock their cargo at the depot of another entity, which is then consolidated and shipped with other loads, either in linehaul or backhaul routes. The collaborative problem is formulated with three different objective functions: minimizing total operational costs, minimizing total fuel consumption and minimizing operational and CO2 emissions costs. The synergy value of collaborative solutions is assessed in terms of costs and environmental impact. Three proportional allocation methods from the literature are used to distribute the collaborative gains among the entities, and their limitations and capabilities to attend fairness criteria are analyzed. Collaboration is able to reduce the global fuel consumption in 26% and the global operational costs in 28%, independently of the objective function used to model the problem. The collaborative pickup-delivery strategy outperforms the other two in the majority of instances under different objectives and parameter settings. The collaborative collection is favoured when the ordering loads from producers increase. The collaborative cross-docking tends to be implemented when the producers are located close to the depot of the 3 PL.
Language:
English
Type (Professor's evaluation):
Scientific
No. of pages:
15