Robust and resilient strategies for managing supply disruptions in an agribusiness supply chain

Abstract

Agribusiness supply chains involve more sources of uncertainty than typical manufacturing supply chains due to attributes such as long supply lead-times, seasonality, and perishability. Therefore, it is critical but challenging to mitigate risks in agribusiness supply chains. However, the extant literature includes limited quantitative research on robust and resilient strategies for agribusiness supply chain risk management, particularly when perishability is explicitly modeled. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of a mixed set of robust and resilient strategies for managing rare high-impact harvest time and yield disruptions. We develop a two-stage stochastic programming model, which integrates an exponential perishability function, to conduct our analysis. The model maximizes the expected profit by selecting optimal risk management strategies and making tactical supply chain planning decisions. The model is applied to a numerical case study of a real-world kiwifruit supply chain. The results suggest that a mixed combination of robust and resilient strategies are most effective for mitigating supply-side disruption risks. Furthermore, as perishability increases, risk management strategies provide a greater relative improvement in the expected profit.

Operational resilience, disruption, and efficiency: Conceptual and empirical analyses

“…This study argues that it is possible for a firm to possess both components of operational resilience and that each component plays unique and important role in disruption management (Li et al, 2019;Behzadi et al, 2017;Brandon-Jones et al, 2014). In line with the disruption profile framework, we contend that it may be difficult for a firm to activate both components of operational resilience simultaneously in that disruption absorption would logically and practically precede disruption recovery actions.…”

“…In essence, possession of disruption absorption does not prevent a firm from possessing recoverability, and vice versa. Additionally, the fact that a firm has disruption absorption does not necessarily imply that the firm has recoverability (Behzadi et al, 2017). As Holling (1973) asserts, a system can be 'resilient' (i.e., persist in the face of disruptions) and yet lack 'stability' (i.e.…”

“…That is, complex IBR antecedent elements may drive the disruption absorption and recoverability capabilities (Brandon-Jones et al, 2014;Blackhurst et al, 2011), making them idiosyncratic, difficult to imitate, trade, and transferred (Barney, 1991). Furthermore, their unique intended purposes and roles in disruption management make them non-substitutable (Behzadi et al, 2017). Accordingly, all things being equal, we expect firms with high disruption absorption and recoverability to be more effective in managing disruptions (Kwak et al, 2018;Brandon-Jones et al, 2014).…”

A structured-literature-review of the supply chain practices in dairy industry

“…Chen, Zhang, and Delaurentis (2014) developed a model to study the 'quality measures' in FSC via a case study and concluded that the decentralized SC lead to distortion in food quality. Behzadi, O'Sullivan, Olsen, Scrimgeour, and Zhang (2017) investigated the effectiveness of robust and resilient strategies along with the profit gain through optimal RM and SC planning decisions. Mangla, Sharma, and Patil (2016) proposed that it is expected to focus on basic success factors to enhance the execution of FSCM practices.…”

A knowledge-based algorithm for supply chain conflict detection based on OTSM-TRIZ problem flow network approach

“…Therefore, the major task of supply chain management is accurate and timely collection of customers' demand and delivering a right product with the right quality at the right time and the right location [1]. One of the most challenging problems in supply chain management is the conflicts that may occur between supply chain entities or inside each of them [2,3].…”