The use of emergency backup and storage facilities to supplement existing facilities in response to the potential effects of various natural and anthropogenic hazards (e.g., floods, fires, outages, and acts of malice) can be an effective way of reducing vulnerability and enhancing the resilience of supply chain and other logistics functions. Although there can be additional costs associated with utilizing emergency backup and storage facilities, they can be a particularly attractive and cost-effective alternative in those cases where long-term disruptions can, or should, be expected. In this paper we use set cover location modeling as a decision to determine the number of backup facilities to locate under varying cover, anticover, and complementary anticover distances. We then add the flexibility of allowing existing facilities to serve as backup facilities and explore the interrelationships among hazards, vulnerability, and location. Finally, these model formulations are applied to an example data set over 900 cities and towns in New England and New York. Copyright (c) 2008 Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation (c) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc..
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Publisher Info
Article provided by Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky in its journal Growth and Change.