IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i4p341-d67748.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Partner Combination for Joint Distribution Alliance using Integrated Fuzzy EW-AHP and TOPSIS for Online Shopping

Author

Listed:
  • Yandong He

    (College of Mechanical Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China)

  • Xu Wang

    (College of Mechanical Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
    Chongqing Key Laboratory of Logistics, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China)

  • Yun Lin

    (College of Mechanical Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
    Chongqing Key Laboratory of Logistics, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China)

  • Fuli Zhou

    (College of Mechanical Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China)

Abstract

With the globalization of online shopping, deterioration of the ecological environment and the increasing pressure of urban transportation, a novel logistics service mode—joint distribution (JD)—was developed. Selecting the optimal partner combination is important to ensure the joint distribution alliance (JDA) is sustainable and stable, taking into consideration conflicting criteria. In this paper, we present an integrated fuzzy entropy weight, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (fuzzy EW-AHP) and fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) approach to select the optimal partner combination of JDA. A three-phase approach is proposed. In the first phase, we identify partner combination evaluation criteria using an economy-society-environment-flexibility (ESEF) framework from a perspective that considers sustainability. In the second phase, the criteria weights and criteria combination performance of different partner combinations were calculated by using an integrated fuzzy EW-AHP approach considering the objective and subjective factors of experts. In the third phase, the JDA partner combinations are ranked by employing fuzzy TOPSIS approach. The sensitivity analysis is considered for the optimal partner combination. Taking JDA in Chongqing for example, the results indicate the alternative partner combination 3 (PC3) is always ranked first no matter how the criteria weights change. It is effective and robust to apply the integrated fuzzy EW-AHP and TOPSIS approach to the partner selection of JDA.

Suggested Citation

  • Yandong He & Xu Wang & Yun Lin & Fuli Zhou, 2016. "Optimal Partner Combination for Joint Distribution Alliance using Integrated Fuzzy EW-AHP and TOPSIS for Online Shopping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:341-:d:67748
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/4/341/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/4/341/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cruijssen, Frans & Cools, Martine & Dullaert, Wout, 2007. "Horizontal cooperation in logistics: Opportunities and impediments," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 129-142, March.
    2. Guo, Sen & Zhao, Huiru, 2015. "Optimal site selection of electric vehicle charging station by using fuzzy TOPSIS based on sustainability perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 390-402.
    3. Amid, Amin & Ghodsypour, S.H. & O'Brien, Christopher, 2009. "A weighted additive fuzzy multiobjective model for the supplier selection problem under price breaks in a supply Chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 323-332, October.
    4. Jianqin Zhou & Xiaoqin Zhong, 2015. "TAOBAO Logistics Model Based on Joint Distribution," Springer Books, in: Zhenji Zhang & Zuojun Max Shen & Juliang Zhang & Runtong Zhang (ed.), Liss 2014, edition 127, pages 29-33, Springer.
    5. M Tavana, 2006. "A priority assessment multi-criteria decision model for human spaceflight mission planning at NASA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(10), pages 1197-1215, October.
    6. Brian Karlson & Lisa Callagher, 2012. "Which University To Partner With: An Investigation Into Partner Selection Motives Among Small Innovative Firms," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 1-16.
    7. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Feyzioglu, Orhan & Nebol, Erdal, 2008. "Selection of the strategic alliance partner in logistics value chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 148-158, May.
    8. Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan, 2010. "The moderating roles of risk and efficiency on the relationship between logistics performance and customer loyalty in e-commerce," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 950-962, November.
    9. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    10. Feng, Bo & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Ma, Jian, 2010. "A method for partner selection of codevelopment alliances using individual and collaborative utilities," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 159-170, March.
    11. Abbas Mardani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Kannan Govindan & Aslan Amat Senin & Ahmad Jusoh, 2016. "VIKOR Technique: A Systematic Review of the State of the Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-38, January.
    12. Xu, Su Xiu & Cheng, Meng & Huang, George Q., 2015. "Efficient intermodal transportation auctions for B2B e-commerce logistics with transaction costs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 322-337.
    13. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    14. Castro, Ignacio & Casanueva, Cristóbal & Galán, José Luis, 2014. "Dynamic evolution of alliance portfolios," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 423-433.
    15. Govindan, Kannan & Soleimani, Hamed & Kannan, Devika, 2015. "Reverse logistics and closed-loop supply chain: A comprehensive review to explore the future," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 603-626.
    16. Yezekael Hayel & Dominique Quadri & Tania Jiménez & Luce Brotcorne, 2016. "Decentralized optimization of last-mile delivery services with non-cooperative bounded rational customers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 239(2), pages 451-469, April.
    17. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    18. Jiang, Xu & Li, Yuan & Gao, Shanxing, 2008. "The stability of strategic alliances: Characteristics, factors and stages," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 173-189, June.
    19. Abbas Mardani & Ahmad Jusoh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Zainab Khalifah, 2015. "Sustainable and Renewable Energy: An Overview of the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Techniques and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-38, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Min-Sung Kim & Eul-Bum Lee & In-Hye Jung & Douglas Alleman, 2018. "Risk Assessment and Mitigation Model for Overseas Steel-Plant Project Investment with Analytic Hierarchy Process—Fuzzy Inference System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Szabolcs Duleba & Sarbast Moslem, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Transport Development with Stakeholder Participation, an AHP-Kendall Model: A Case Study for Mersin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Fuli Zhou & Yandong He & Felix T. S. Chan & Panpan Ma & Francesco Schiavone, 2022. "Joint Distribution Promotion by Interactive Factor Analysis using an Interpretive Structural Modeling Approach," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.
    4. Noorliza Karia, 2022. "Antecedents and Consequences of Environmental Capability towards Sustainability and Competitiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-16, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    2. Tingting Li & Dan Zhao & Guiyun Liu & Yuhong Wang, 2022. "How to Evaluate College Students’ Green Innovation Ability—A Method Combining BWM and Modified Fuzzy TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    4. Wabukala, Benard M. & Bergland, Olvar & Mukisa, Nicholas & Adaramola, Muyiwa S. & Watundu, Susan & Orobia, Laura A. & Rudaheranwa, Nichodemus, 2024. "Electricity security in Uganda: Measurement and policy priorities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Audrius Čereška & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ina Tetsman & Irina Grinbergienė, 2016. "Sustainable Assessment of Aerosol Pollution Decrease Applying Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    7. Nassim Mrabti & Nadia Hamani & Laurent Delahoche, 2022. "A Comprehensive Literature Review on Sustainable Horizontal Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-38, September.
    8. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Tatjana Vilutiene & Hojjat Adeli, 2017. "Sustainable Decision-Making in Civil Engineering, Construction and Building Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    11. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Syed Hammad Mian & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Strategic Outcome Using Fuzzy-AHP-Based Decision Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-22, October.
    12. Zhang, Xuemei & Zhou, Gengui & Cao, Jian & Wu, Anqi, 2020. "Evolving strategies of e-commerce and express delivery enterprises with public supervision," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    13. Zida Song & Quan Liu & Zhigen Hu, 2020. "Decision-Making Framework, Enhanced by Mutual Inspection for First-Stage Dam Construction Diversion Scheme Selection," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(2), pages 563-577, January.
    14. Montlaur, Adeline & Delgado, Luis & Prats, Xavier, 2023. "Domain-driven multiple-criteria decision-making for flight crew decision support tool," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. Zamani-Sabzi, Hamed & King, James Phillip & Gard, Charlotte C. & Abudu, Shalamu, 2016. "Statistical and analytical comparison of multi-criteria decision-making techniques under fuzzy environment," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 92-117.
    16. Yekani Motlagh, Elgar & Hajjarian, Marzieh & Hossein Zadeh, Omid & Alijanpour, Ahmad, 2020. "The difference of expert opinion on the forest-based ecotourism development in developed countries and Iran," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Somayeh Soheilirad & Kannan Govindan & Abbas Mardani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Mehrbakhsh Nilashi & Norhayati Zakuan, 2018. "Application of data envelopment analysis models in supply chain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 915-969, December.
    18. Jingyuan Shi & Jiaqing Sun, 2023. "Prefabrication Implementation Potential Evaluation in Rural Housing Based on Entropy Weighted TOPSIS Model: A Case Study of Counties in Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Vicent Penadés-Plà & Tatiana García-Segura & José V. Martí & Víctor Yepes, 2016. "A Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods Applied to the Sustainable Bridge Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-21, December.
    20. Huiru Zhao & Nana Li, 2016. "Optimal Siting of Charging Stations for Electric Vehicles Based on Fuzzy Delphi and Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approaches from an Extended Sustainability Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:341-:d:67748. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.