A Compromise Decision-Making Model to Recover Emergency Logistics Network

  • Yiping Jiang
  • Lindu Zhao
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 15)


Quick recovery of emergency service facilities (ESFs) in the aftermath of large-scale disasters has emerged as a hot topic in the field of emergency logistics. This paper focuses on the ESFs recovery problem under the constraints of scare emergency resource and recovery time. In this study, a compromise programming model is proposed as an integrated decision support tool to obtain an optimal compromise solution with regard to two objectives: minimize the consumption of recovery resources and maximize the resilience capacity through selecting different recovery strategies. Then a genetic algorithm is proposed to solve the developed mathematical model, and a numerical example is followed to illustrate the effectiveness and usefulness of proposed model.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Zhao, L.D., Jiang, Y.P.: A replenishment model for emergency rescue systems. In: Proc. of The Third International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McDaniels, T., Chang, S., Cole, D., Mikawoz, J., Longstaff, H.: Fostering resilience to extreme events within infrastructure systems: Characterizing decision contexts for mitigation and adaptation. Global Environ. Chang. 18(2), 310–318 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bruneau, M., Chang, S.E., Eguchi, R.T., et al.: A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthq. Spectra. 19(4), 733–752 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berkes, F., Colding, J.F., Folke, C.: Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Losada, C., Scaparra, M.P., O’Hanley, J.R.: Optimizing system resilience: a facility protection model with recovery time. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 217(3), 519–530 (2012)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zobel, C.W., Khansa, L.: Characterizing multi-event disaster resilience. Comput. Oper. Res. (2011) (in press)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rose, A., Liao, S.Y.: Modeling regional economic resilience to disasters: a computable general equilibrium model of water service disruptions. J. Regional. Sci. 48(1), 75–112 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nojima, N., Ishikawa, Y., Okumura, T., Sugito, M.: Empirical estimation of lifeline outage time in seismic disaster. In: Proc. of U.S.—Japan Joint Workshop and Third Grantee Meeting, U.S.—Japan Cooperative Research on Urban Earthquake Disaster Mitigation, Seattle, WA, USA, pp. 516–517 (August 2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang, S.E., Rose, A., Shinozuka, M., Svekla, W., Tierney, K.J.: Modeling earthquake impact on urban lifeline systems: advances and integration. In: Research Progress and Accomplishments 1999-2000, MCEER (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bryson, K.M., Millar, H., Joseph, A., Mobolurin, A.: Using formal MS/OR modeling to support disaster recovery planning. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 141(3), 679–688 (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Altay, N., Green III, W.G.: OR/MS research in disaster operations management. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 175(1), 475–493 (2006)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sheffi, Y.: Building a resilient supply chain. Harvard Business Review 1(8), 1–4 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yu, P.L.: A class of solutions for group decision problems. Manage. Sci. 19(8), 936–946 (1973)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zelelny, M.: Compromise programming. In: Cochrane, J.L., Zeleny, M. (eds.) Multiple-Criteria Decision Making, pp. 262–301. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia (1973)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zelelny, M.: A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Comput. Oper. Res. 1, 479–496 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Freimer, M., Yu, P.L.: Some new results on compromise solutions for group decision problems. Manage. Sci. 22(6), 688–693 (1976)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goldberg, D.E.: Genetic algorithms in search optimization and machine learning. Addison Wesley, MA (1989)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vose, M.D.: Modelling simple genetic algorithm. In: Foundations of Genetic Algorithms II, pp. 63–73. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Systems EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations