Collaborative Transportation Planning with Forwarding Limitations
In collaborative transportation planning, independent forwarders align their transportation plans by exchanging requests within a horizontal coalition. The goal of the coalition members is to increase their profitability and flexibility in competitive mar
- PDF / 98,244 Bytes
- 7 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 59 Downloads / 313 Views
Abstract In collaborative transportation planning, independent forwarders align their transportation plans by exchanging requests within a horizontal coalition. The goal of the coalition members is to increase their profitability and flexibility in competitive markets with high demand fluctuations. In recent publications, it is assumed that each request can be fulfilled by any coalition member. However, in practice some requests are prohibited to be forwarded due to contractual agreements. These requests are known as compulsory requests. The contribution of this paper is to identify the increase of costs caused by compulsory requests of a collaborative pickup and delivery transportation planning problem. To analyze the impact of compulsory requests, an existing column generation-based heuristic with two solution strategies for handling compulsory requests is applied and investigated.
1 Introduction In competitive transportation markets with high demand fluctuations, forwarders have to reduce their costs and to improve their flexibility by considering different fulfillment modes. As fulfillment modes forwarders use beside their own transportation resources (self-fulfillment), external carriers (subcontracting), and horizontal cooperation (collaborative planning). In collaborative transportation planning (CTP), independent forwarders try to improve their planning situation by reallocating their transportation requests or capacities in a horizontal coalition [6]. The goal of CTP is the identification of a transportation plan where each coalition member reduces his operational costs. In the literature several CTP models are examined. Most of them focus on request exchange where either all requests [1, 6] or just a subset of M. Ziebuhr (B) · H. Kopfer Chair of Logistics, University of Bremen, Wilhelm-Herbst-Str. 5, 28359 Bremen, Germany e-mail: [email protected] URL: http://www.logistik.uni-bremen.de H. Kopfer e-mail: [email protected] URL: http://www.logistik.uni-bremen.de © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017 K.F. Dœrner et al. (eds.), Operations Research Proceedings 2015, Operations Research Proceedings, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-42902-1_19
141
142
M. Ziebuhr and H. Kopfer
requests are exchanged [2, 5]. In practice, the latter approach seems to be preferable because coalition members do not want to reveal their entire request portfolio in a competitive environment. A common solution approach for these CTP problems is a cherry-picking procedure which identifies profitable requests for self-fulfillment (referred to as reserved requests) and unprofitable requests for outsourcing. In our approach some of these reserved requests are selected due to contractual obligations while the remaining ones are selected due to their profitability. This means that a forwarder has to use a certain fulfillment mode for requests with contractual obligations while the remaining requests can be served by a profitable fulfillment mode. These requests with contractual obligations (e.g. security relevant goods) are kn
Data Loading...
