An integrated decision making model for supplier and carrier selection with emphasis on the environmental factors

  • Alireza EydiEmail author
  • Arezoo Fathi
Methodologies and Application


A suitable green supply chain network can significantly affect both the supply chain and the environment. Such network should guide the supply chain toward an efficient and effective management to increase the profit, desirable impacts on the environments and responsiveness to the customers’ requests. In this research, a green supply chain with limited greenhouse gas emission was designed which could reduce the chain costs by simultaneous selection of the supplier and carriers with various capacities. Thus, in this research a bi-objective nonlinear programming model was proposed which is aimed to select the carriers between the chain levels and select the supplier based on the quality of the consumed material. Moreover, the delivery time to customers and emission from transportation and production were the other constraints of the problem. The first goal was to minimize the total chain costs while reduction in the rejection of the consumed material was in the second rank. In order to validate the proposed model, several numerical problems were randomly generated and solved using GAMS optimization software. Since the problem is NP-hard and its solution time increased exponentially by increase in the problem dimension, a multi-objective meta-heuristic imperialist competitive algorithm was proposed to solve the problem in large scales. Crowding distance was also used to rank the solutions of one front. The computational results and comparisons by indices like mean distance from the ideal were employed to describe the algorithm efficiency. The results showed that features such as carrier selection and environmental factors can enable the decision process of supplier selection to be well approximated with the real-world situation, showing the potential usefulness of these concepts.


Green supply chain Supplier selection Carrier selection Emission of greenhouse gases Multi-objective meta-heuristic imperialist competitive algorithm Crowding distance 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal participants

This article does not contain any studies on human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all the participants in the study.


  1. Abu Qamar M, Hasan N (2019) An approach toward a Q-neutrosophic soft set and its application in decision making. Symmetry 11(2):139zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abualigah LMQ (2019) Feature selection and enhanced Krill Herd algorithm for text document clustering. Studies in computational intelligence. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abualigah LMQ, Hanandeh ES (2015) Applying genetic algorithms to information retrieval using vector space model. Int J Comput Sci Eng Appl 5(1):19Google Scholar
  4. Abualigah LM, Khader AT (2017) Unsupervised text feature selection technique based on hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm with genetic operators for the text clustering. J Supercomput 73(11):4773–4795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Abualigah LM, Khader AT, Hanandeh ES (2018a) Hybrid clustering analysis using improved krill herd algorithm. Appl Intell 48(11):4047–4071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Abualigah LM, Khader AT, Hanandeh ES (2018b) A combination of objective functions and hybrid Krill Herd algorithm for text document clustering analysis. Eng Appl Artif Intell 73:111–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Abualigah LM, Khader AT, Hanandeh ES (2018c) A new feature selection method to improve the document clustering using particle swarm optimization algorithm. J Comput Sci 25:456–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Agha Mohammad Ali Kermani M, Aliahmadi A, Salamat VR, Barzinpour F, Hadiyan E (2015) Supplier selection in a single-echelon supply chain with horizontal competition using Imperialist competitive algorithm. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 28(6):628–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Aissaoui N, Haouari M, Hassini E (2007) Supplier selection and order lot sizing modeling: a review. Comput Oper Res 34(12):3516–3540zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Atashpaz-Gargari E (2009) Development social optimization algorithm and efficacy it. Master’s thesis. Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Tehran UniversityGoogle Scholar
  11. Atashpaz-Gargari E, Lucas C (2007) Imperialist competitive algorithm: an algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 4661–4667Google Scholar
  12. Bai C, Sarkis J (2000) Green supplier development: analytical evaluation using rough set theory. J Clean Prod 18(12):1211Google Scholar
  13. Barzinpour F, Taki P (2015) A dual-channel network design model in a green supply chain considering transportation mode choice and Limitation greenhouse gas emissions. Q Innov Technol Environ Renew Sources 1:45–56Google Scholar
  14. Beg I, Rashid T (2014) Group decision making using intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Fuzzy Log Intell Syst 14(3):181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bilel N, Mohamed N, Zouhaier A, Lotfi R (2016) An improved imperialist competitive algorithm for multi-objective optimization. Eng Optim 48(11):1823–1844MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Choudhary D, Shankar R (2014) A goal programming model for joint decision making of inventory lot-size, supplier selection and carrier selection. Comput Ind Eng 71:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan TAMT (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dekker R, Bloemhof J, Mallidis I (2012) Operations research for green logistics—an overview of aspects, issues, contributions and challenges. Eur J Oper Res 219(3):671–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elhedhli S, Merrick R (2012) Green supply chain network design to reduce carbon emissions. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 17(5):370–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grzegorzewski P (2017) On separability of fuzzy relations. Int J Fuzzy Log Intell Syst 17(3):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Humphreys PK, Wong YK, Chan FTS (2003) Integrating environmental criteria into the supplier selection process. J Mater Process Technol 138(1):349–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jàfarnezhad A, Esmaèlian M, Rabiè M (2008) Evaluation and selection of suppliers in supply chain to single sourcing with approach fuzzy. Q Modarres Hum Sci 4(12):127–153Google Scholar
  23. Jamshidi R, Ghomi SF, Karimi B (2012) Multi-objective green supply chain optimization with a new hybrid memetic algorithm using the Taguchi method. Sci Iran 19(6):1876–1886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jolai F, Razmi J, Rostami NKM (2011) A fuzzy goal programming and meta heuristic algorithms for solving integrated production: distribution planning problem. CEJOR 19(4):547–569MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li CC, Fun YP, Hung JS (1997) A new measure for supplier performance evaluation. IIE Trans 29:753–758Google Scholar
  26. Noci G (1997) Designing ‘Green’ vendor rating systems for the assessment of a supplier’s environmental performance. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 3(2):113–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paksoy T, Özceylan E, Weber GW (2010) A multi objective model for optimization of a green supply chain network. In: Barsoum N, Weber GW, Vasant P (eds), AIP conference proceedings, vol 1239(1). AIP, pp 311–320Google Scholar
  28. Pishvaee MS, Rabbani M (2011) A graph theoretic-based heuristic algorithm for responsive supply chain network design with direct and indirect shipment. Adv Eng Softw 42(3):57–63zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Saber YM, Alsharari F (2018) Generalized fuzzy ideal closed sets on fuzzy topological spaces in sostak sense. Int J Fuzzy Log Intell Syst 18(3):161–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sadeghi Moghadam MR, Mòmeni M, Nalchigar S (2010) Planning, integrated supply, production and distribution supply chains using genetic algorithm. Publication Industrial Management, the period of 1, number 2, spring and summer 2010, pp 71–88Google Scholar
  31. Sedehzadeh S, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Jolai F (2015) A new multi-mode and multi-product hub covering problem: a priority M/M/c queue approach. Int J Ind Math 7(2):139–148Google Scholar
  32. Şenyiğit E (2013) Supplier selection and purchase problem for multi-echelon defective supply chain system with stochastic demand. Neural Comput Appl 22(2):403–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seuring S, Müller M (2008) Core issues in sustainable supply chain management–a Delphi study. Bus Strategy Environ 17(8):455–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shaw K, Shakar R, Yadav SS, Thakur LS (2012) Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy multi-objective linear programming for developing low carbon supply chain. Exp Syst Appl 39(9):8182–8192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tahriri F, Osman MR, Ali A, Yusuff RM (2008) A review of supplier selection methods in manufacturing industries. Suranaree J Sci Technol 15(3):201–208Google Scholar
  36. Wang F, Lai X, Shi N (2011) A multi-objective optimization for green supply chain network design. Decis Support Syst 51(2):262–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zitzler E (1999) Evolutionary algorithms for multiobjective optimization: methods and applications. Dissertation, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ZurichGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of KurdistanSanandajIran
  2. 2.Industrial EngineeringUniversity of KurdistanSanandajIran

Personalised recommendations