4.7 Article

An integrated multitiered supply chain network model of competing agricultural firms and processing firms: The case of fresh produce and quality

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 307, 期 1, 页码 364-381

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2022.07.053

关键词

OR in agriculture; Supply chains; Networks; Game theory; Disruptions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, an integrated multitiered competitive agricultural supply chain network model is developed to study the competition between agricultural and processing firms in selling differentiated products. The focus is on fresh produce and minimally processed agricultural products, considering the quality as well. Game theory is applied to analyze the competition, with the governing Cournot-Nash equilibrium conditions corresponding to a variational inequality problem. The algorithm provides explicit closed form expressions for agricultural product flows, shipments, and Lagrange multipliers. Numerical studies show the applicability of the modeling framework under different supply chain disruption scenarios.
In this paper, we develop an integrated multitiered competitive agricultural supply chain network model in which agricultural firms and processing firms compete to sell their differentiated products. The fo-cus here is on fresh produce and minimally processed such agricultural products, with quality also cap-tured. The competition among agricultural firms and processing firms is studied through game theory, where the governing Cournot-Nash equilibrium conditions correspond to a variational inequality prob-lem. The algorithm, at each iteration, yields explicit closed form expressions for the agricultural product path flows, the agricultural product shipments from agricultural firms to the processing firms, and the Lagrange multipliers. A numerical study consisting of several supply chain disruption scenarios demon-strates the applicability of our modeling framework.(c) 2022 Elsevier B.V. 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