Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 221, Issue 1, pp 407–426 | Cite as

The stop-and-drop problem in nonprofit food distribution networks

Article

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce the stop-and-drop problem (SDRP), a new variant of location-routing problems, that is mostly applicable to nonprofit food distribution networks. In these distribution problems, there is a central warehouse that contains food items to be delivered to agencies serving the people in need. The food is delivered by trucks to multiple sites in the service area and partner agencies travel to these sites to pick up their food. The tactical decision problem in this setting involves how to jointly select a set of delivery sites, assign agencies to these sites, and schedule routes for the delivery vehicles. The problem is modeled as an integrated mixed-integer program for which we delineate a two-phase sequential solution approach. We also propose two Benders decomposition-based solution procedures, namely a linear programming relaxation based Benders implementation and a logic-based Benders decomposition heuristic. We show through a set of realistic problem instances that given a fixed time limit, these decomposition based methods perform better than both the standard branch-and-bound solution and the two-phase approach. The general problem and the realistic instances used in the computational study are motivated by interactions with food banks in southeastern United States.

Keywords

Nonprofit logistics Routing-location-allocation problems Benders decomposition 

References

  1. Beasley, J. E., & Nascimento, E. M. (1996). The vehicle routing-allocation problem: A unifying framework. Top, 4, 65–86. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Black, R., Morris, S., & Bryce, J. (2003). Where and why are 10 million children dying every year? The Lancet, 361, 2226–2234. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke, G., & Wright, J. (1964). Scheduling of vehicles from a central depot to a number of delivery points. Operations Research, 12, 568–581. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Codato, G., & Fischetti, M. (2006). Combinatorial Benders cuts for mixed-integer linear programming. Operations Research, 54(4), 756–766. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Souza, L. V., & Siqueira, P. H. (2010). Heuristic methods applied to the optimization school bus transportation routes: a real case. In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on industrial engineering and other applications of applied intelligent systems: part II (pp. 247–256). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  6. Desrochers, M., & Laporte, G. (1991). Improvements and extensions to the Miller-Tucker-Zemlin subtour elimination constraints. Operations Research Letters, 10, 27–36. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fazel-Farandi, M. M., & Beck, J. C. (2009). Solving a location-allocation problem with logic-based Benders decomposition. In Principles and practice of constraint programming—CP 2009 (pp. 344–351). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Feeding America (2009). Local Impact Study, September 2009. http://feedingamerica.org/newsroom/local-impact-study.aspx. Accessed 22 February 2010.
  9. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2009). Food security statistics. http://www.fao.org/economic/ess/food-security-statistics/en/. Accessed 22 February 2010.
  10. Gillett, B., & Miller, L. (1974). A heuristic algorithm for the vehicle-dispatch problem. Operations Research, 22(2), 340–349. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gunes, C., van Hoeve, W.-J., & Tayur, S. (2010). Vehicle routing for food rescue programs: A comparison of different approaches. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on integration of AI and OR techniques in constraint programming for combinatorial optimization problems (CPAIOR) (pp. 287–291). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  12. Hooker, J. N. (2000). Logic-based methods for optimization: combining optimization and constraint satisfaction. New York: Wiley. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hooker, J. N. (2007). Planning and scheduling by logic-based Benders decomposition. Operations Research, 55(3), 588–602. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hooker, J. N., & Ottosson, G. (2003). Logic-based Benders decomposition. Mathematical Programming, 96, 33–60. Google Scholar
  15. Hooker, J. N., & Yan, H. (1995). Logic circuit verification by Benders decomposition. In V. Saraswat & P. Van Hentenryck (Eds.), Principles and practice of constraint programming: The newport papers (pp. 267–288). Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  16. Jain, V., & Grossmann, I. E. (2001). Algorithms for hybrid MILP/CLP models for a class of optimization problems. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 13, 258–276. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, M. P., & Smilowitz, K. (2008). Community-based operations research. OR/MS Today, 35(1), 22–25. Google Scholar
  18. Kara, I., Laporte, G., & Bektas, T. (2004). A note on the lifted Miller–Tucker–Zemlin subtour elimination constraints for the capacitated vehicle routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 158, 793–795. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Labbé, M., & Laporte, G. (1986). Maximizing user convenience and postal service efficiency in post box location. Belgian Journal of Operations Research, Statistics, and Computer Science, 26(2), 24–33. Google Scholar
  20. Labbé, M., Laporte, G., Martin, I. R., & Gonzalez, J. J. S. (2005). Locating median cycles in networks. European Journal of Operational Research, 160, 457–470. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Laporte, G., & Louveaux, F. (1993). The integer L-shaped method for stochastic integer programs with complete recourse. Operations Research Letters, 13, 133–142. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. le Blanc, H. M., Fleuren, H. A., & Krikke, H. R. (2004). Redesign of a recycling system for LPG-tanks. OR-Spektrum, 26, 283–304. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lien, R., Iravani, S., & Smilowitz, K. (2010). Sequential resource allocation for nonprofit operations (Working paper). Available online at http://www.iems.northwestern.edu/docs/working_papers/WP_10-02.pdf.
  24. Miller, C. E., Tucker, A. W., & Zemlin, R. A. (1960). Integer programming formulations and traveling salesman problems. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 7, 326–329. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Murty, K., & Djang, P. (1999). The US army national guard’s mobile training simulators location and routing problem. Operations Research, 47(2), 175–182. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nagy, G., & Salhi, S. (2007). Location-routing: Issues, models and methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 177(2), 649–672. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nord, M., Andrews, M., & Carlson, S. (2008). Household food security in the United States. USDA Economic Research Report No. ERR-83. Google Scholar
  28. Sherali, H. D., & Smith, J. C. (2001). Improving discrete model representations via symmetry considerations. Management Science, 47, 1396–1407. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Senay Solak
    • 1
  • Christina Scherrer
    • 2
  • Ahmed Ghoniem
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Finance and Operations Management, Isenberg School of ManagementUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstAmherstUSA
  2. 2.Department of Industrial Engineering TechnologySouthern Polytechnic State UniversityMariettaUSA

Personalised recommendations