An optimal redistribution plan considering aftermath disruption in disaster management

  • Deepshikha Sarma
  • Amrit DasEmail author
  • Uttam Kumar Bera


Unpredictable occurrence of any disaster emerges immeasurable demand in an affected society. Importance of immediate response in the aftermath of disaster is a crucial part of humanitarian logistic. Resource redistribution among the affected areas makes the optimal allocation in this chaotic situation. The research work has introduced a transportation plan considering the redistribution of resources from those areas which has already acquired relief and restored the normal condition to those areas still not being recovered from the effect of calamities. This research plan is developed to minimize the total cost of the relief operation as well as optimal allocation of the resources. The optimal allocation amidst the disruption of some resource storing points in the aftermath attack of disaster is also one of the key factors of the research. This research work has a great impact for decision-maker to derive an appropriate decision-making in such an anarchic situation of critical humanitarian supply chain. Due to the complexity of disaster, the model is considered in mixed uncertain environment. A numerical study is also performed to show the smooth functioning of the mathematical model assuming the uncertainty by trapezoidal neutrosophic number. Also, trapezoidal fuzzy number is implemented for uncertain parameters of the mathematical model and hereby compared with trapezoidal neutrosophic number.


Disaster management Solid transportation problem Trapezoidal fuzzy number Trapezoidal neutrosophic number Redistribution Disruption 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The Authors declare that they have no funding agency and no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights statement

The article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. Abdel-Basset M, Gunasekaran M, Mohamed M, Smarandache F (2018) A novel method for solving the fully neutrosophic linear programming problems. Neural Comput Appl 31:1595–1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abounacer R, Rekik M, Renaud J (2014) An exact solution approach for multi-objective location-transportation problem for disaster response. Comput Oper Res 41:83–93MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Altay N, Green WG III (2006) OR/MS research in disaster operations management. Eur J Oper Res 175(1):475–493zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amador-Angulo L, Castillo O (2018) A new fuzzy bee colony optimization with dynamic adaptation of parameters using interval type-2 fuzzy logic for tuning fuzzy controllers. Soft Comput 22(2):571–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atanassov KT (1983) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, VII ITKR’s session, Sofia June 1983 (Deposed in Central Sci.- Techm Library og Bulg.Acad.of Sci. 1697/84) (in Bulg.)Google Scholar
  6. Balcik B, Beamon BM (2008) Facility location in humanitarian relief. Int J Logist 11(2):101–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bozorgi-Amiri A, Jabalameli MS, Alinaghian M, Heydari M (2012) A modified particle swarm optimization for disaster relief logistics under uncertain environment. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 60(1–4):357–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Broumi S, Smarandache F, Talea M, Bakali A (2016) Single valued neutrosophic graphs: degree, order and size. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE). IEEE, pp 2444–2451Google Scholar
  9. Broumi , Talea M, Smarandache F, Bakali A (2016) Decision-making method based on the interval valued neutrosophic graph. In: Future technologies conference (FTC). IEEE, pp 44–50Google Scholar
  10. Broumi S, Bakali A, Talea M, Smarandache F (2016) Shortest path problem under triangular fuzzy neutrosophic information. Infinite study. IEEE, pp 169–174Google Scholar
  11. Broumi S, Bakali A, Talea M, Smarandache F (2016) Isolated single valued neutrosophic graphs. Infinite studyGoogle Scholar
  12. Caunhye AM, Nie X, Pokharel S (2012) Optimization models in emergency logistics: a literature review. Socioecon Plan Sci 46(1):4–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cavdur F, Kose-Kucuk M, Sebatli A (2016) Allocation of temporary disaster response facilities under demand uncertainty: an earthquake case study. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 19:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cook AD, Shrestha M, Htet ZB (2018) An assessment of international emergency disaster response to the 2015 Nepal earthquakes. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 31:535–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dantzig G (2016) Linear programming and extensions. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  16. Das A, Bera UK, Maiti M (2017) A profit maximizing solid transportation model under a rough interval approach. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 25(3):485–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Das A, Bera UK, Maiti M (2018) Defuzzification and application of trapezoidal type-2 fuzzy variables to green solid transportation problem. Soft Comput 22(7):2275–2297zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ebrahimnejad A, Tavana M (2014) A novel method for solving linear programming problems with symmetric trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Appl Math Model 38(17–18):4388–4395MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Galindo G, Batta R (2013) Review of recent developments in OR/MS research in disaster operations management. Eur J Oper Res 230(2):201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ganesan K, Veeramani P (2006) Fuzzy linear programs with trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Ann Oper Res 143(1):305–315zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gao X, Lee GM (2018) A stochastic programming model for multi-commodity redistribution planning in disaster response. In: Production management for data-driven, intelligent, collaborative, and sustainable manufacturing. APMS 2018. IFIP advances in information and communication technology. Springer, Cham, vol 535, pp 67–78Google Scholar
  22. Gosling H, Geldermann J (2014) A framework to compare or models for humanitarian logistics. Proc Eng 78:22–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gupta C, Jain A, Tayal DK, Castillo O (2018) ClusFuDE: forecasting low dimensional numerical data using an improved method based on automatic clustering, fuzzy relationships and differential evolution. Eng Appl Artif Intell 71:175–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gutjahr WJ, Nolz PC (2016) Multicriteria optimization in humanitarian aid. Eur J Oper Res 252(2):351–366MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haghani A, Oh SC (1996) Formulation and solution of a multi-commodity, multi-modal network ow model for disaster relief operations. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 30(3):231–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haley K (1962) New methods in mathematical programming—the solid transportation problem. Oper Res 10(4):448–463zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hitchcock FL (1941) The distribution of a product from several sources to numerous localities. Stud Appl Math 20(1–4):224–230MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoyos MC, Morales RS, Akhavan-Tabatabaei R (2015) OR models with stochastic components in disaster operations management: a literature survey. Comput Ind Eng 82:183–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jia H, Ordoñez F, Dessouky M (2007) A modeling framework for facility location of medical services for large-scale emergencies. IIE Trans 39(1):41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaur A, Kumar A (2012) A new approach for solving fuzzy transportation problems using generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Appl Soft Comput 12(3):1201–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kivijarvi H, Korhonen P, Wallenius J (1986) Operations research and its practice in finland. Interfaces 16(4):53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lin L, Nilsson A, Sjolin J, Abrahamsson M, Tehler H (2015) On the perceived usefulness of risk descriptions for decision-making in disaster risk management. Reliab Eng Syst Safety 142:48–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lindbom H, Hassel H, Tehler H, Uhr C (2018) Capability assessments-how to make them useful for decision-making. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 31:251–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lubashevskiy V, Kanno T, Furuta K (2014) Resource redistribution method for short-term recovery of society after large-scale disasters. Adv Complex Syst 17(05):1450026MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mashi SA, Oghenejabor OD, Inkani AI (2019) Disaster risks and management policies and practices in Nigeria: a critical appraisal of the national emergency management agency act. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 33:253–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Melin P, Ontiveros-Robles E, Gonzalez CI, Castro JR, Castillo O (2019) An approach for parameterized shadowed type-2 fuzzy membership functions applied in control applications. Soft Comput 23(11):3887–3901zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mendel JM (2007) Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems: an overview. IEEE Comput Intell Mag 2(1):20–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mete HO, Zabinsky ZB (2010) Stochastic optimization of medical supply location and distribution in disaster management. Int J Prod Econ 126(1):76–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mohamed M, Abdel-Basset M, Zaied ANH, Smarandache F (2017) Neutrosophic integer programming problem. Infinite studyGoogle Scholar
  40. Nagurney A, Salarpour M, Daniele P (2019) An integrated financial and logistical game theory model for humanitarian organizations with purchasing costs, multiple freight service providers, and budget, capacity, and demand constraints. Int J Prod Econ 212:212–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nikoo N, Babaei M, Mohaymany AS (2018) Emergency transportation network design problem: identification and evaluation of disaster response routes. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 27:7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Noham R, Tzur M (2018) Designing humanitarian supply chains by incorporating actual post-disaster decisions. Eur J Oper Res 265(3):1064–1077MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Opit PF, Lee W-S, Kim BS, Nakade K (2013) Stock pre positioning model with unsatisfied relief demand constraint to support emergency. Oper Supply Chain Manag 6(2):103–110Google Scholar
  44. Ozdamar L, Ertem MA (2015) Models, solutions and enabling technologies in humanitarian logistics. Eur J Oper Res 244(1):55–65MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rodrĩguez-Espĩndola O, Albores P, Brewster C (2018) Disaster preparedness in humanitarian logistics: a collaborative approach for resource management in floods. Eur J Oper Res 264(3):978–993MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sahebi IG, Arab A, Moghadam MRS (2017) Analyzing the barriers to humanitarian supply chain management: a case study of the tehran red crescent societies. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 24:232–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sarma D, Das A, Bera UK, Hezam IM (2019) Redistribution for cost minimization in disaster management under uncertainty with trapezoidal neutrosophic number. Comput Ind 109:226–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sherali HD, Carter TB, Hobeika AG (1991) A location-allocation model and algorithm for evacuation planning under hurricane/ ood conditions. Transp Res Part B Methodol 25(6):439–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sheu J-B et al (2007) Challenges of emergency logistics management. Transp Res Part E 43:655–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smarandache F (1998) A unifying field in logic: neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic. American Research Press, RehobothzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. Sotirov S, Sotirova E, Atanassova V, Atanassov K, Castillo O, Melin P, Petkov T, Surchev S (2018) A hybrid approach for modular neural network design using intercriteria analysis and intuitionistic fuzzy logic. Complexity 2018:3927951:1–3927951:11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tofighi S, Torabi SA, Mansouri SA (2016) Humanitarian logistics network design under mixed uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res 250(1):239–250MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ukkusuri SV, Yushimito WF (2008) Location routing approach for the humanitarian prepositioning problem. Transp Res Rec 2089(1):18–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Xingchen H, Pedrycz W, Castillo O, Melin P (2017) Fuzzy rule-based models with interactive rules and their granular generalization. Fuzzy Sets Syst 307:1–28MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yi W, Ozdamar L (2007) A dynamic logistics coordination model for evacuation and support in disaster response activities. Eur J Oper Res 179(3):1177–1193MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yu L, Zhang C, Yang H, Miao L (2018) Novel methods for resource allocation in humanitarian logistics considering human suffering. Comput Ind Eng 119:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zaheh LA (1975) The concept of Linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-1. Inf Sci 8:199–249MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhou L, Wu X, Xu Z, Fujita H (2018) Emergency decision making for natural disasters: an overview. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 27:567–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deepshikha Sarma
    • 1
  • Amrit Das
    • 2
    Email author
  • Uttam Kumar Bera
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsNational Institute of Technology AgartalaAgartalaIndia
  2. 2.School of Advanced SciencesVellore Institute of TechnologyVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations