Advertisement

Facility Location Selection Employing Fuzzy DEA and Fuzzy Goal Programming Techniques

  • Michele Cedolin
  • Nazlı Göker
  • Elif DoguEmail author
  • Y. Esra Albayrak
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 641)

Abstract

Facility location selection have strategic importance for companies because it influences not only manufacturing and transportation costs but also productivity and lead times to a great extend. Additionally, it is considered as hard and complicated tasks with respect to its multi-objective nature and difficulties resulted from collecting necessary data. Therefore this problem has always been an important subject of engineering literature. The aim of this study is to solve a facility location selection problem in a manufacturing company that locates in Tekirdağ/Turkey. This company has six different factories in the same facility and is considering about establishing a plastic injection factory in the future for producing some of the important plastic components in order to gain cost advantage and also to increase know-how. For this purpose, facility location selection problem is aimed to be solved by applying fuzzy data envelopment analysis (Fuzzy DEA) and fuzzy goal programming (Fuzzy GP) methods.

Keywords

Facility location selection Fuzzy DEA Fuzzy goal programming MCDM 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The numerical application data of this study is gathered from the thesis written by Sevinç Koç under the surveillance of Prof. Dr. Y. Esra Albayrak. This study is supported by Galatasaray University Research Fund, Project 17.402.005.

References

  1. 1.
    Hoffman, J.J., Schniederjans, M.J.: A two-stage model for structuring global facility site selection decisions: the case of the brewing industry. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 14(4), 79–96 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badri, M.A., Davis, D.L., Davis, D.: Decision support models for the location of firms in industrial sites. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 15(1), 50–62 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Badri, M.A.: Combining the analytic hierarchy process and goal programming for global facility location-allocation problem. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 62(3), 237–248 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liang, G.-S., Wang, M.-J.J.: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method for facility site selection. Int. J. Prod. Res. 29(11), 2313–2330 (1991)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shen, C.-Y., Yu, K.-T.: A generalized fuzzy approach for strategic problems: the empirical study on facility location selection of authors’ management consultation client as an example. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(3), 4709–4716 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stevenson, W.J.: Operations Research. McGraw-Hill, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Erol, I., Sencer, S., Ozmen, A., Searcy, C.: Fuzzy MCDM framework for locating a nuclear power plant in Turkey. Energy Policy 67, 186–197 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deveci, M., Demirel, N.C., John, R., Özcan, E.: Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making for carbon dioxide geological storage in Turkey. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 27, 692–705 (2015). doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2015.09.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Onden, I., Eldemir, F.: GIS and f-AHP integration for locating a new textile manufacturing facility. Fibres Text. East. Eur. 23(5), 18–22 (2015). doi: 10.5604/12303666.1161751 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Erdogan, M., Kaya, I.: A combined fuzzy approach to determine the best region for a nuclear power plant in Turkey. Appl. Soft Comput. 39, 84–93 (2016). doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2015.11.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yang, J., Lee, H.: An AHP decision model for facility location selection. Facilities 15(9/10), 241–254 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stevenson, W.J.: Production/Operations Management, 4th edn. Irwin, Homewood (1993)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ertuğrul, İ., Karakaşoğlu, N.: Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods for facility location selection. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 39(7), 783–795 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DuBrin, A.J.: Fundamentals of Organizational Behavior, 2nd edn. South-Western, Mason (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ou, C.-W., Chou, S.-Y.: International distribution center selection from a foreign market perspective using a weighted fuzzy factor rating system. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(2), 1773–1782 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kahraman, C., Ruan, D., Doǧan, I.: Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection. Inf. Sci. 157, 135–153 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2(6), 429–444 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Doyle, J., Green, R.: Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: derivations, meanings and uses. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 45(5), 567–578 (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karsak, E., Ahiska, S.: Practical common weight multi-criteria decision-making approach with an improved discriminating power for technology selection. Int. J. Prod. Res. 43(8), 1537–1554 (2005)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li, X.-B., Reeves, G.R.: A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 115(3), 507–517 (1999)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sengupta, J.K.: A fuzzy systems approach in data envelopment analysis. Comput. Math Appl. 24(8–9), 259–266 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zadeh, L.: Fuzzy Sets. Inf. Control 8(3), 338–353 (1965)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 1(1), 3–28 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Triantis, K., Girod, O.: A mathematical programming approach for measuring technical efficiency in a fuzzy environment. J. Prod. Anal. 10(1), 85–102 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Saati, S.M., Memariani, A., Jahanshahloo, G.R.: Efficiency analysis and ranking of DMUs with fuzzy data. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 1(3), 255–267 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guo, P., Tanaka, H.: Fuzzy DEA: a perceptual evaluation method. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 119(1), 149–160 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Adler, N., Friedman, L., Sinuany-Stern, Z.: Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 140(2), 249–265 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hatami-Marbini, A., Emrouznejad, A., Tavana, M.: A taxonomy and review of the fuzzy data envelopment analysis literature: two decades in the making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 214(3), 457–472 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zimmermann, H.-J.: Fuzzy mathematical programming. Comput. Oper. Res. 10(4), 291–298 (1983)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen, L.-H., Tsai, F.-C.: Fuzzy goal programming with different importance and priorities. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 133(3), 548–556 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michele Cedolin
    • 1
  • Nazlı Göker
    • 1
  • Elif Dogu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Y. Esra Albayrak
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringGalatasaray UniversityBesiktasTurkey

Personalised recommendations