Journal of the Operational Research Society

, Volume 66, Issue 12, pp 2086–2091 | Cite as

Bi-criterion procedures to support logistics decision making: cost and uncertainty

  • Willem A Rijpkema
  • Eligius M T Hendrix
  • Roberto Rossi
General Paper


In practical decision making, one often is interested in solutions that balance multiple objectives. In this study we focus on generating efficient solutions for optimization problems with two objectives and a large but finite number of feasible solutions. Two classical approaches exist, being the constraint method and the weighting method, for which a specific implementation is required for this problem class. This paper elaborates specific straightforward implementations and applies them to a practical allocation problem, in which transportation cost and risk of shortage in supplied livestock quality are balanced. The variability in delivered quality is modelled using a scenario-based model that exploits historical farmer quality delivery data. The behaviour of both implementations is illustrated on this specific case, providing insight in (i) the obtained solutions, (ii) their computational efficiency. Our results indicate how efficient trade-offs in bi-criterion problems can be found in practical problems.


multi-objective optimization allocation problems scenario-based modelling constraint method weighting method stochastic programming 


  1. Birge J and Louveaux F (1997). Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer Series in Operations Research. Springer-Verlag: New York.Google Scholar
  2. Chalmet L, Lemonidis L and Elzinga D (1986). An algorithm for the bi-criterion integer programming problem. European Journal of Operational Research 25 (2): 292–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohon J, Church R and Sheer D (1979). Generating multiobjective trade-offs: An algorithm for bicriterion problems. Water Resources Research 15 (5): 1001–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Geoffrion A (1967). Solving bicriterion mathematical programs. Operations Research 15 (1): 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grunert K (2006). How changes in consumer behaviour and retailing affect competence requirements for food producers and processors. Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales 6 (11): 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hansen P (1979). Multiple Criteria Decision Making Theory and Application. chapter Bicriterion path problems. Springer Verlag: Berlin.Google Scholar
  7. Lofti M, Rabbani M and Ghaderi S (2011). A weighted goal programming approach for replenishment planning and space allocation in a supermarket. Journal of the Operational Research Society 62 (6): 1128–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lokman B and Köksalan M (2013). Finding all nondominated points of multi-objective integer programs. Journal of Global Optimiza-tion 57 (2): 347–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Marglin SA (1967). Public Investment Criteria. MIT Press: London.Google Scholar
  10. Mavrotas G and Florios K (2013). An improved version of the augmented e-constraint method (augmecon2) for finding the exact pareto set in multi-objective integer programming problems. Applied Mathematics and Computation 219 (18): 9652–9669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ozlen M, Burton B and MacRae C (2014). Multi-objective integer programming: An improved recursive algorithm. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 160 (2): 470–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Perez C, de Castro R and Font i Furnols M (2009). The pork industry: A supply chain perspective. British Food Journal 111 (3): 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rijpkema W, Hendrix E, Rossi R and van der Vorst J (2013). Application of stochastic programming to reduce uncertainty in quality-based supply planning of slaughterhouses. Annals of Operations Research. to appear doi: 10.1007/s10479-013-1460-y.Google Scholar
  14. Romero C and Rehman T (2003). Multiple Criteria Analysis for Agricultural Decisions. Developments in Agricultural Economics. Elsevier Science: Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  15. Sylva J and Crema A (2004). A method for finding the set of non-dominated vectors for multiple objective integer linear programs. European Journal of Operational Research 158 (1): 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tóth SF, McDill ME and Rebain S (2006). Finding the efficient frontier of a bi-criteria, spatially explicit, harvest scheduling problem. Forest Science 52 (1): 93–107.Google Scholar
  17. Zadeh L (1963). Optimality and non-scalar-valued performance criteria. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 8 (1): 59–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhang W and Reimann M (2014). A simple augmented e-constraint method for multi-objective mathematical integer programming problems. European Journal of Operational Research 234 (1): 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Operational Research Society Ltd. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Willem A Rijpkema
    • 1
  • Eligius M T Hendrix
    • 2
  • Roberto Rossi
    • 3
  1. 1.Wageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.University of MálagaMálaga, España
  3. 3.University of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations