Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 264, Issue 1–2, pp 307–323 | Cite as

Network DEA-based biobjective optimization of product flows in a supply chain

  • Sebastian Lozano
  • Belarmino Adenso-Diaz
Original Paper


This paper deals with planning the product flows along a supply chain (SC) in which there are product losses in the nodes and in the arcs. Given the demand by each retailer, appropriate quantities to be procured from the different suppliers must be decided and the routing of the product along the SC must be determined. Care must be taken because, due to losses, the amount of product that will be finally available at the retailers is lower than the amount of product procured. The objective is twofold: minimizing total costs and minimizing product losses. The proposed approach leverages the existence of data on the flows in previous periods. With those observed flows, a Network Data Envelopment Analysis technology is inferred which allows the computing of any feasible operating point. The resulting biobjective optimization problem can be solved using the weighted Tchebycheff method.


Supply chain Spoilage NDEA Cost and losses minimization Weighted Tchebycheff 



This research was carried out with the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Science Grant DPI2013-41469-P and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).


  1. Alfonso, E., Kalenatic, D., & López, C. (2010). Modeling the synergy level in a vertical collaborative supply chain through the IMP interaction model and DEA framework. Annals of Operations Research, 181(1), 813–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahuja, R. K., Magnanti, T. L., & Orlin, J. B. (1993). Network flows: Theory, algorithms, and applications. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Azadi, A., Zoroufchi, K. H., & Farzipoor Saen, R. (2012). A combination of Russell model and neutral DEA for 3PL provider selection. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 10(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertsekas, D., & Tseng, P. (1988). Relaxation methods for minimum cost for ordinary and generalized network flow problems. Operations Research, 36, 93–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, Y., Liang, L., & Yang, F. (2006). A DEA game model approach to supply chain efficiency. Annals of Operations Research, 145(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Du, J., Liang, L., Chen, Y., & Bi, G. B. (2010). DEA-based production planning. Omega, 38(1), 105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fu, L. F., Meng, J., & Liu, Y. (2015). Evaluation of supply chain efficiency based on a novel network of data envelopment analysis model. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 25(11), 1540036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fukuyama, H., & Weber, W. L. (2010). A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two-stage system with bad outputs. Omega, 38(5), 398–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hatami-Marbini, A., Agrell, P. J., Tavana, M., & Khoshnevis, P. (2017). A flexible cross-efficiency fuzzy data envelopment analysis model for sustainable sourcing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2761–2779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Izadikhah, M., Farzipoor Saen, R., & Ahmadi, K. (2017). How to assess sustainability of suppliers in volume discount context? A new data envelopment analysis approach. Transportation Research Part D, 51, 102–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kao, C. (2014). Network data envelopment analysis: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 239(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khalili-Damghani, K., & Tavana, M. (2013). A new fuzzy network data envelopment analysis model for measuring the performance of agility in supply chains. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 69, 291–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Khodakarami, M., Shabani, A., Farzipoor Saen, R., & Azadi, M. (2015). Developing distinctive two-stage data envelopment analysis models: An application in evaluating the sustainability of supply chain management. Measurement, 70, 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liang, L., Yang, F., Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2006). DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation. Annals of Operations Research, 145(1), 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lozano, S. (2011). Scale and cost efficiency analysis of networks of processes. Expert Systems With Applications, 38(6), 6612–6617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lozano, S. (2014). Company-wide production planning using a multiple technology DEA approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 65, 723–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lozano, S. (2015). Alternative SBM Model for Network DEA. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 82, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lozano, S., & Gutiérrez, E. (2016). Efficiency assessment and output maximization possibilities of European small and medium sized airports. Research in Transportation Economics, 56, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marler, R. T., & Arora, J. S. (2004). Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 26(6), 369–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mirhedayatian, S. M., Azadi, M., & Farzipoor Saen, R. (2014). A novel network data envelopment analysis model for evaluating green supply chain management. International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 544–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Momeni, E., Azadi, M., & Farzipoor Saen, R. (2015). Measuring the efficiency of third party reverse logistics provider in supply chain by multi objective additive network DEA model. International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics, 7(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Omrani, H., & Keshavarz, M. (2016). A performance evaluation model for supply chain of shipping company in Iran: an application of the relational network DEA. Maritime Policy and Management, 43(1), 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Omrani, H., Adabi, F., & Adabi, N. (2017). Designing an efficient supply chain network with uncertain data: A robust optimization–data envelopment analysis approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society. doi: 10.1057/jors.2016.42.
  24. Petridis, K., Dey, P. K., & Emrouznejad, A. (2016). A branch and efficiency algorithm for the optimal design of supply chain networks. Annals of Operations Research. doi: 10.1007/s10479-016-2268-3.
  25. Pourhejazy, P., Kwon, O. K., Chang, Y. T., & Park, H. K. (2017). Evaluating resiliency of supply chain network: A data envelopment analysis approach. Sustainability, 9, 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shabani, A., Farzipoor Saen, R., & Torabipour, S. M. R. (2012). A new benchmarking approach in Cold Chain. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36, 212–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shafiee, M., Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., & Saleh, H. (2014). Supply chain performance evaluation with data envelopment analysis and balanced scorecard approach. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38, 5092–5112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steuer, R. E. (1986). Multiple criteria optimization: Theory computation and application. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  29. Steuer, R. E., & Choo, E. U. (1983). An interactive weighted Tchebycheff procedure for multiple objective programming. Mathematical Programming, 26, 326–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tavana, M., Mirzagoltabar, H., Mirhedayatian, S. M., Farzipoor Saen, R., & Azadi, M. (2013). A new network epsilon-based DEA model for supply chain performance evaluation. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 66(2), 501–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tavana, M., Kaviani, M. A., Di Caprio, D., & Rahpeyma, B. (2016). A two-stage data envelopment analysis model for measuring performance in three-level supply chains. Measurement, 78, 322–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wong, W. P., & Wong, K. Y. (2007). Supply chain performance measurement system using DEA modeling. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(3), 361–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yang, F., Wu, D., Liang, J., Bi, G. & Wu, D. D. (2011). Supply chain DEA: production possibility set and performance evaluation model. Annals of Operations Research, 185, 195–211.Google Scholar
  35. Zhou, Z., Wang, M., Ding, H., Ma, C. & Liu, W. (2013). Further study of production possibility set and performance evaluation model in supply chain DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 206, 585–592.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial ManagementUniversity of SevilleSevilleSpain
  2. 2.Escuela Politécnica de IngenieríaUniversidad de OviedoGijónSpain

Personalised recommendations