Advertisement

Improvement of the Containerized Logistics Performance Using the Unitary Traceability of Smart Logistics Units

  • S. Wattanakul
  • S. Henry
  • L. Bentaha
  • N. Reeveerakul
  • Y. Ouzrout
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 540)

Abstract

Based on the emergence of the Internet of Things, smart logistic units (container, pallet, cardboard) offers a new opportunity to improve the responsiveness to disturbances of the supply chain and to develop robust scheduling approach based on the knowledge extracted from the historical data of traceability on the smart logistic units. The limitations of the current traceability solutions are related in particular to the insufficient level of detail, the late availability of data and the scattering of data in databases of different actors in the supply chain who are reluctant to exchange them. Then, the unitary traceability based on the Internet of Things with a real-time tracking of multiple parameters of each object (position, temperature, vibration, humidity, etc.) is a solution which makes it possible to improve reactivity in real time when facing disturbances and to extract knowledge from historical data. Therefore, this paper proposes a conceptual framework based on seven activities that exploit smart container traceability data for real-time analysis and decision to monitor risks of disruptions and to mitigate the impact of disruptions.

Keywords

Supply chain performance Smart container Unitary traceability Disruption management Reactivity 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work is supported under the Erasmus Mundus’s SMARTLINK (South-east-west Mobility for Advanced Research, Learning, Innovation, Network and Knowledge).

References

  1. 1.
    UNCTAD: The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development: The Review of Maritime Transport 2017 (UNCTAD/RMT/2017). United Nations Publication, New York and Geneva (2017). http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/rmt2017_en.pdf
  2. 2.
    The World Bank: Statistics of Container Port Traffic (TEU: 20 foot equivalent units) (2017). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.SHP.GOOD.TU
  3. 3.
    SEALS Consortium: Final Report: Statistical coverage and economic analysis of the logistics sector in the EU (SEALS) prepared for the European Commission, DG Energy and Transport. Technical report. ProgTrans AG (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kridel, D., Dolk, D., Castillo, D.: Adaptive modeling for real time analytics: the case of “Big Data” in mobile advertising. In: 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 887–896. IEEE, Hawaii (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2015.111
  5. 5.
    Elluru, S., Gupta, H., Kaur, H., Singh, S.P.: Proactive and reactive models for disaster resilient supply chain. Ann. Oper. Res. 1–26 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2681-2
  6. 6.
    Chung, S.H., Tse, Y.K., Choi, T.M.: Managing disruption risk in express logistics via proactive planning. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 115(8), 81–1509 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-04-2015-0155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Verdouw, C.N., Wolfert, J., Beulens, A.J.M., Rialland, A.: Virtualization of food supply chains with the internet of things. J. Food Eng. 176, 128–136 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2015.11.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aboulaid, H., et al.: Process re-engineering and success of integration projects of information technologies case study: process modeling of a cross docking platform of a car manufacturer. In: 3rd Logistics Operations Management, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1109/gol.2016.7731697
  9. 9.
    Balci, G., Cetin, I.B., Tanyeri, M.: Differentiation of container shipping services in Turkey. Transp. Policy 61, 26–35 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisseler, D., Kemény, Z., Reiners, R.: Monitoring and control framework for business processes in ubiquitous environments. In: Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced and Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing and Communications, Cloud and Big Data Computing, Internet of People, and Smart World Congress, pp. 863–868. IEEE (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1109/uic-atc-scalcom-cbdcom-iop-smartworld.2016.0136
  11. 11.
    GS1 AISBL: EPC Information Services (EPCIS) Standard, Release 1.2 (2016). https://www.gs1.org/epcis
  12. 12.
    Wang, J., Yue, H.: Food safety pre-warning system based on data mining for a sustainable food supply chain. Food Control 73, 223–229 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.09.048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xiao, X., Wang, X., Zhang, X., Chen, E., Li, J.: Effect of the quality property of table grapes in cold chain logistics-integrated WSN and AOW. Appl. Sci. 5(4), 747–760 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.3390/app5040747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, W.R., Aung, M.M., Chang, Y.S., Makatsoris, C.: Freshness Gauge based cold storage management: a method for adjusting temperature and humidity levels for food quality. Food Control 47, 510–519 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.07.051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guo, X., Wei, D.: Under the environment of supply chain logistics outsourcing decision and risk research. In: International Conference on Logistics Engineering, Management and Computer Science, pp. 168–171. Atlantis Press (2014).  https://doi.org/10.2991/lemcs-14.2014.39
  16. 16.
    Yuen, K.F., Thai, V.: Barriers to supply chain integration in the maritime logistics industry. Marit. Econ. Logist. 19(3), 551–572 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2016.10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Drewry and ESC: Satisfaction survey in container transport: customers rate service quality of ocean carriers “poor to average”. Drewry Supply Chain Advisors and European Shippers’ Council, London and Brussels (2017). https://www.drewry.co.uk/news/news/satisfaction-survey-in-container-transport-customers-rate-service-quality-of-ocean-carriers-poor-to-average
  18. 18.
    Meng, Q., Wang, S., Andersson, H., Thun, K.: Containership routing and scheduling in liner shipping: overview and future research directions. Transp. Sci. 48(2), 265–280 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2013.0461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Drewry: Service reliability falls to 12-month low (2016). https://www.drewry.co.uk/news/news/service-reliability-falls-to-12-month-low
  20. 20.
    Angel, M., Salazar, F.: Proposal for the implementation of a wireless sensor network system for container transportation. In: Proceedings of the Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, pp. 2074–2083. IISE (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wattanakul, S., Henry, S., Bentaha, M.L., Reeveerakul, N., Ouzrout, Y.: Improving risk management by using smart containers for real-time traceability. In: 9th International Conference on Logistics and Transport: Supply Chain 4.0 Challenges and Prospects, pp. 222–230. ICLT (2017). http://www.iclogisticstransport.org/uploads/files/ICLT2017 Full Papers.pdf
  22. 22.
    Traxens: Traxens Technology (2017). https://www.traxens.com/en/technology
  23. 23.
    Mersk: Smart containers listen and talk (2016). https://www.maersk.com/stories/smart-containers-listen-and-talk
  24. 24.
    Bask, A., Rajahonka, M., Laari, S., Solakivi, T., Töyli, J., Ojala, L.: Environmental sustainability in shipper-LSP relationships. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 2986–2998 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.112CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Wattanakul
    • 1
  • S. Henry
    • 2
  • L. Bentaha
    • 1
  • N. Reeveerakul
    • 3
  • Y. Ouzrout
    • 1
  1. 1.DISP LaboratoryUniversity of Lyon, University Lyon 2LyonFrance
  2. 2.DISP LaboratoryUniversity of Lyon, University Lyon 1LyonFrance
  3. 3.College of Arts, Media and TechnologyChiang Mai UniversityChiang MaiThailand

Personalised recommendations