Int. J. Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 9, No.

3, 2016 251

Management of marine logistics in the case of

emergency or disaster

Heng Wang* and Kenji Tanaka

Department of Systems Innovation,
The University of Tokyo,
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Email: k.oh.920718@gmail.com
Email: kenji_tanaka@sys.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp
*Corresponding author

Abstract: This paper proposes a system for the management of marine

logistics in the case of an emergency or disaster. We have developed a planning
model for marine logistics in case of disaster. In this model, we optimise
marine logistics by assigning ships to transportation routes. Then we applied
this model to estimate the required resources for marine logistics in the case of
the Tonankai earthquake. We designed two scenarios of damage caused by this
earthquake, and applied this model to each scenario. Our model suggests that
for the case of the Tonankai earthquake, 24 ships and 392,000 tons of goods
should be prepared.

Keywords: marine logistics; emergency; disaster; planning model;

optimisation; assignment problem; linear programming; simulation; Tonankai
earthquake.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Wang, H. and Tanaka, K.

(2016) ‘Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster’,
Int. J. Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.251–268.

Biographical notes: Heng Wang received his BSc in Systems Innovation from
The University of Tokyo in 2015. He is currently an MSc student at The
University of Tokyo. His research interests include marine logistics.

Kenji Tanaka received his BSc in Marine Engineering from The University of
Tokyo in 1998, and PhD in Systems Innovation from The University of Tokyo
in 2009. He is currently an Associate Professor at The University of Tokyo. His
research interests include logistics and energy management.

This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled ‘A study on

marine logistics system for emergency disaster control’ presented at CE2015,
TU Delft, 21 July 2015.

1 Introduction

Disasters have caused serious damage to society many times in the past. For example,
300,000 people died from the Sumatra earthquake in 2004. 200,000 people died from the
Haiti earthquake in 2010. Today, even though we have taken emergency measures

Copyright © 2016 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

252 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

against disasters, they still continue to cause serious damage. Therefore, it is important to
improve measures of recovery from disasters.
One of the problems after an earthquake is provision of goods for evacuees. When the
Kobe earthquake occurred in 1995, evacuees were short of water and portable toilets. On
the other hand, when Niigata earthquake occurred in 2007, excessive clothing was send
to the damaged area. Then, warehouses around damaged area were full of clothing, and
other goods could not be put in warehouses. Judging from these facts, it is important to
provide proper kind and amount of goods for evacuees.
In past disasters, most of the goods were transported by land logistics. On the other
hand, marine logistics have some advantages in emergency transportation: It is believed
that marine logistics suffer less damage than land logistics when a disaster occurs. If it
occurs close to coast line, we can provide goods for evacuees more efficiently and
effectively by using marine logistics.
In this paper, we propose a marine logistics system in case of emergency disaster,
including an estimation of the demand on goods for the damaged area and an
optimisation of the assignment of ships to transportation routes. Thanks to this system,
we can estimate how much goods and how many ships should be prepared for future
disasters.

2 Literature review

Holguín-Veras et al. (2014) summarised interviews and field work research after the
Tohoku disasters in Japan. Kaynak and Tuğer (2014) focused on discovering the clusters
for collaboration within disaster coordination operations. Bastos et al. (2014) identified a
set of logistics processes and actions which are related to the success of disaster response
operations. Kuse and Yano (2011) proposed logistics method in detail. However, these
studies only proposed qualitative methods. Though qualitative methods are useful to
determine the policy of plan for disaster relief, we cannot determine the detail of plan for
disaster relief, such as how many ships are required. Therefore, we should also consider
quantitative method to determine detail of plan for disaster relief.
There are other studies about resilience of logistics. Fizzanty et al. (2013) developed a
framework for evaluating and improving failed supply chains. Carvalho et al. (2012)
established links between supply chain disturbances and corresponding strategies of
resilience to counter them. Vlachos et al. (2012) developed robust supply chains by
reducing vulnerability and improving resilience. However, these studies did not mention
the disaster.
Some studies proposed optimisation of logistics in case of disaster by quantitative
method. Namimatsu et al. (1997) optimised logistics by vehicle routing problem. Senda
and Suzuki (2013) simulated logistics in case of disaster in Nagoya, Japan. Lin et al.
(2011) proposed a logistics model for delivery of prioritised items in disaster relief
operations. However, these studies only proposed land logistics in case of disaster. We
can provide goods for evacuees more efficiently and effectively by using marine logistics
than using land logistics, because marine logistics suffer less damage than land logistics
when a disaster occurs. Therefore, we should also consider marine logistics when a
disaster occurs.
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 253

Only few studies about marine logistics analyse the case of disasters by quantitative
methods. Majima et al. (2013) developed a marine transportation simulator for
emergency disaster. However, this system did not include an optimisation algorithm.
Therefore, this paper develops marine logistics system for emergency disaster control,
including an optimisation algorithm.

3 Model

3.1 Outline of model

We have developed a planning model for marine logistics in case of disasters. By using
this model, we can calculate required resources to supply demand on goods of evacuees:
for example, how many ships are required, how many quays are required for each port, or
how to assign ships to transportation routes. Figure 1 shows the procedures of this model.

Figure 1 Procedures of the model

First, we select the available origin ports, destination ports and ships for marine logistics.
Origin port is the port in a non-damaged area, and destination port is the port in the
damaged area. Then, we calculate the demand of goods in the damaged area based on its
population and the amount and type of goods required per person.
Next, we determine the assignment of ships to transportation routes based on these
conditions by assuming that ships transport goods by a shuttle service between origin port
and destination port. We optimise marine logistics by determination of the assignment of
ships to transportation routes. This is done using linear programming. From this
optimisation, required conditions to supply demand on goods of evacuees can be
calculated. For example, how many ships are required, how many quays are required for
each port, or how to assign ships to transportation routes. Then, we carry out marine
logistics simulation based on calculated conditions.
254 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

With the results of the marine logistics simulation, we can evaluate whether we can
supply demand on goods of evacuees under these conditions. We determine the required
resources such as how many ships are required and how to assign ships to transportation
routes.

3.2 Pick up available ports and ships

In order to use marine transportation in case of disaster, we first pick up available ports
and ships. We decide the area to which we have to transport goods depending on the
disaster damage. Then, an area near the coast line is selected in order to be able to use
marine transportation to reach the damaged area. We pick up the ports on this area as the
destination ports.
After picking up the destination ports, we pick up the origin ports. We choose as
origin port the undamaged ports closest to destination port. After choosing both origin
ports and destination ports, we can decide the transportation routes. When we define
norigin as number of origin ports and ndestination as number of destination ports, number of
transportation routes is represented as norigin * ndestination. We confirm distance of each
transportation route.
Then, we pick up available ships. We choose ferries and roll on/roll off ships as ships
because they are said to be adapted for marine transportation in case of disaster. We
select ferries and roll on/roll off ships which operate regularly around damaged area, and
confirm the capacity and speed of these ships.

3.3 Estimation of demand on goods

We can calculate demand on goods in the damaged area. In our model, we define the
demand of each port as the demand of evacuees on goods around that destination port.
First, we pick up goods which may be required for evacuees in case of disaster.
Table 1 shows the kind and amount of required goods for evacuees.
Table 1 List of goods

Kind of goods Required amount (per person*day) Target age Type of goods
A MA1 Division 1 α
B MB2, MB3 Division 2 α
Division 3
C MC2 Division 2 β
… … … …

‘Kind of goods’ means the kind of goods which may be required for evacuees in case of
disaster, such as water and food. ‘Required amount’ means the amount of goods per
person and per day. We define Mij as the weight of goods i required for age division j per
person and per day. ‘Target of age division’ describes the age of people of who require
the kind of goods. Finally, we divide goods into two types according to their occurrence.
Demand of type α goods occur regularly, such as water and food. On the other hand,
demand of type β goods only occur after disasters, such as blankets and toilets.
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 255

3.4 Determination of the assignment of ships to transportation routes

We determine the assignment of ships to transportation routes based on ports and ships
conditions and demand of goods conditions. In our model, we assume that ships transport
goods by a shuttle service between origin port and destination port. We optimise marine
logistics by determination of the assignment of ships to transportation routes. To
determine this assignment, we formulate an assignment problem and solve it by means of
linear programming.
First, we define objective function and variable of assignment problem. We define xijk
as variable of assignment problem, and define f as objective function of assignment
problem. If ship i is assigned to transportation route between origin port j and destination
port k, xijk is equal to 1. If ship i is not assigned to transportation route between origin port
j and destination port k, xijk is equal to 0. When the variable is defined as that,
equation (1) gives the definition of objective function. The best assignment maximises
the objective function. Therefore, we determine xijk so that the objective function is
maximised. Incidentally, aijk is the transportation amount when ship i is assigned to
transportation route between origin port j and destination port k.

∑ ∑ ∑
nship norigin ndestination
f = aijk xijk (1)
i =1 j =1 k =1

Next, we define the constraints. To determine the best assignment, we define three
constraints.
• one ship is only assigned to one transportation route
• αj to βj ships are assigned to transportation routes which are related to origin port j
• γk to δk ships are assigned to transportation routes which are related to destination
port k.
The first constraint means that one ship is never assigned to several transportation routes.
The second constraint means that there is proper number of ships to be assigned to each
origin port. This is because the number of quays is different at every origin port. αj and βj
are determined by the number of quays which can be used for transporting goods in case
of disaster at origin port j. The third constraint means that there is proper number of ships
to be assigned to each destination port. This is because the demand of goods is different
in every destination port. γk and δk are determined by the shortage of goods at destination
port k. Therefore, the best assignment is not the assignment which simply maximises the
transportation amount of goods but the assignment which is matched with the demand of
destination ports. These three constraints are expressed by equations (2) to (4).

∑ ∑
norigin ndestination
xijk ≤ 1 (2)
j =1 k =1

∑ ∑
nskip ndestination
αj ≤ xijk ≤ β j (3)
i =1 k =1

∑ ∑
nskip norigin
γk ≤ xijk ≤ δk (4)
i =1 j =1
256 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

nroute number of transportation routes

nship number of available ships
norigin number of origin ports
ndestination number of destination ports.

3.5 Marine logistics simulation

3.5.1 Outline of marine logistics simulator
We carry out marine logistics simulation based on the assignment which is calculated by
means of the method explained in Section 3.4. The required conditions to achieve enough
marine logistics in case of disaster, for example how many ships are required, can be
determined by this simulation. Figure 2 shows the procedures of used by the marine
logistics simulator.

Figure 2 Procedures of the marine logistics simulator

First, the simulator reads the required data. Required data includes port data, ship data,
and demand data which we determined in Sections 3.3 and 3.4. Next, we determine
whether the simulator should use the reassigning algorithm. The reassigning algorithm is
the optimisation algorithm to reduce number of required ships for transporting goods.
The reassigning algorithm is explained in detail in Section 3.5.2.
Then, the simulator determines the first assignment of ships to transportation routes
by means of linear programming. If we determine not to use reassigning algorithm, the
simulator carries out simulations based on this assignment until the end of the simulation
period. If we determine to use reassigning algorithm, the simulator carries out simulations
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 257

based on this assignment until the time when the simulator judges to change the
assignment. Then, the simulator determines another assignment of ships to the
transportation routes based on demand and supply of every destination port at that time.
Finally, the simulator carries out another simulation based on the newer assignment until
it judges to change assignment again.
The simulator repeats this process until the end of the simulation period.
When the simulation ends, we obtain the data of the output result. The result of the
simulation is an assignment of ships to routes, the supply of goods at every destination
port, and the stock of goods at every origin port.
After we obtain the data from the simulator, we change the number of ships and
simulator carries out simulations again. Through this loop, we obtain results of all
combinations of number of ships and reassigning patterns.

3.5.2 Reassigning algorithm

Assignment of ships to transportation routes is calculated whenever the number of
destination ports is changed. The change of the number of destination ports happens
when enough goods are transported to a destination port. After that, the ships that were
assigned to this destination port can be assigned to another destination port. Therefore,
transportation efficiency can be improved by using this algorithm.
The new assignment is determined based on the demand and the supply of goods at
that time. The greater the goods, the more ships are assigned to the destination port.

3.6 Determination of required resources

3.6.1 Determination of required ships
The result data of the assignment, stock, and supply is acquired from marine logistics
simulation. We determine the required resources by evaluating this data. To evaluate the
result of the simulation, we use the fill rate of goods as key performance indicator.
Equation (5) gives the definition of fill rate.

⎛
∑ ∑ Lij ⎞
ndestination _ port ngoods
⎜ i =1 j =1 ⎟
F = ⎜1 − ⎟ × 100 (5)
∑ ∑
ndestination _ port ngoods
⎜ Dij ⎟
⎝ i =1 j =1 ⎠
F fill rate
ndestination number of destination ports
ngoods number of kind of goods
Lij shortage of goods i at destination port j
Dij demand of goods i at destination port j.
According to this definition, fill rate equals to 100% if there is no shortage of goods at
destination ports. Figure 3 shows the relationship between the fill rate and the number of
required ships. In this case, the fill rate is equal to 100% if we prepare 16 ships for
transportation.
258 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

Figure 3 Relationship between fill rate and number of ships (see online version for colours)

However, if we only evaluate the fill rate at the end of the simulation period, the output
like Figure 4 is evaluated to be fine result. In this case, serious shortage of goods
occurred in the middle of the simulation period.

Figure 4 Serious shortage of goods occurred during simulation period (see online version
for colours)

Therefore, we calculate the fill rate in the middle of simulation to evaluate the output.
Figure 5 shows the relationship between the fill rate and the number of ships n days after
the disaster. According to this figure, if we prepare 19 ships for transportation, fill rate
equals to 100% seven days after the disaster; however fill rate equals to only 80% three
days after the disaster. We have to prepare 34 ships to achieve a 100% fill rate three days
after the disaster.
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 259

Figure 5 Relationship between fill rate and number of ships n days after the disaster (see online
version for colours)

Figure 6 shows the number of required ships to achieve 100% fill rate n days after the
disaster. This figure visualises the trade-off between the number of required ships and the
fill rate in the middle of simulation.

Figure 6 Number of required ships to achieve a 100% fill rate n days after the disaster (see online
version for colours)

Next, we determine the required kind and amount of stock of goods. To carry out the
assignment the simulator came up with, shortage of goods should not occur at the origin
port until the end of simulation period. Therefore, we have to store enough goods to
cover the required kind and amount at each origin port. In our model, the required goods
at each origin port are defined as the kind and amount of goods which are exported from
the origin port during the simulation period.
260 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

4 Case study

4.1 A scenario of simulation

This case study applies to the marine logistics system to calculate the required conditions
to carry out marine logistics in case of the Tonankai earthquake. The Tonankai
earthquake is the serious earthquake, which is likely to occur in Japan in the near future.
Figure 7 shows the expected distribution of seismic intensity for a Tonankai earthquake.
We calculate the required conditions for transporting goods to the region which is most
seriously damaged and which faces the sea.

Figure 7 Expected distribution of seismic intensity in times of Tonankai earthquake (see online
version for colours)

Figure 8 The region which is damaged most seriously in each scenario (see online version
for colours)
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 261

When we estimate the required resources for marine transportation, we have to estimate
several scenarios of disaster. This is because the degree of damage is different for each
scenario, meaning that required resources are different, too. In this case study, we
expected two scenarios of earthquake: The red X marks in Figure 8 indicate the regions
which are most seriously damaged in each scenario. The blue boxes indicate the origin
ports and green boxes indicate the destination ports.
We assumed that all origin ports can be used in scenario 1. On the other hand, origin
port 2 cannot be used in scenario 2 because of the earthquake damage. In addition, we
estimated the number of evacuees around the destination ports for each scenario as shown
in Table 2.
Table 2 Number of evacuees for each scenario

Number of evacuees Scenario 1 Scenario 2

d1 550,000 250,000
d2 550,000 250,000
d3 570,000 270,000
d4 1,330,000 630,000
d5 690,000 330,000
d6 430,000 500,000
d7 750,000 800,000
d8 750,000 800,000
d9 360,000 400,000
d10 470,000 350,000
d11 540,000 270,000
d12 340,000 0

4.2 Carrying out marine logistics simulation

First, we pick up the destination ports, the origin ports, and the available ships. We pick
up 12 destination ports and four origin ports based on the expected distribution of seismic
intensity. The position of each port is shown in Figure 8. In addition, we calculate the
distance between each origin port to each destination port as shown in Table 3. Then we
pick up the available ships. In both scenarios we pick up ferries and roll on/roll off ships
which operate regularly around Japan. We use real data of these ships in our simulation.
Table 3 Distance between origin ports and destination ports

Distance Origin port

(nautical mile) 1 2 3 4
Destination 1 113 282 388 411
port 2 109 252 358 381
3 182 212 318 354
4 201 231 337 360
5 200 230 336 359
6 317 41 158 205
262 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

Table 3 Distance between origin ports and destination ports (continued)

Distance Origin port

(nautical mile) 1 2 3 4
7 352 9 169 216
8 353 9 169 216
9 314 57 153 200
10 364 144 207 145
11 473 231 101 39
12 491 273 170 108

Next, we calculate demand on goods. Table 4 shows the kind and amount of required
goods for evacuees. In this table, goods for children include milk powder and baby’s
diapers, and goods for elderly people include food for the elderly people and adapted
diapers.
Table 4 List of required goods

Required amount Type of

Kind of goods Target age
(per person*day, ton) goods
Water 0.003 Children, adults, elderly people α
Food 0.00075 Children, adults α
Goods for children 0.0013 Children α
Goods for elderly people 0.00105 Elderly people α
Blanket 0.002 Children, adults, elderly people β
Portable toilet 0.0016 Children, adults, elderly people β

Then, we estimate how many evacuees will arise at each region based on the scenarios.
From this expected evacuees and the list of goods, we calculate the demand of goods for
each region.

Figure 9 The state immediately after the earthquake (see online version for colours)
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 263

Figure 10 The state four days after the earthquake (see online version for colours)

Figure 11 The state seven days after the earthquake (see online version for colours)

After determining ports and ships conditions as well as the demand of goods, we carry
out the marine logistics simulation. Simulation period is set to seven days. We calculate
the minimum number of required ships to cover the demand in this period. Figure 9 to
Figure 11 show the state of demand, supply and transportation routes obtained by the
simulation of scenario 1.

4.3 Simulation results

4.3.1 Scenario 1
After the simulation, we evaluate the result. Figure 12 shows the relationship between the
number of ships and the fill rate of goods in scenario 1. We will see that 35 ships are
required for 100% fill rate when we do not use the reassigning algorithm. On the other
hand, only 24 ships are required for 100% fill rate when we use the reassigning
algorithm. This result suggests that the reassigning algorithm decreases the number of
required ships for transportation.
264 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

Figure 12 Difference of required ships with and without the reassigning algorithm in scenario 1
(see online version for colours)

Then, we consider the trade-off between the number of required ships and the fill rate in
the middle of the simulation. Figure 13 shows the number of required ships for 100% fill
rate n days after disaster in scenario 1. According to this figure, if we prepare 24 ships for
transportation, the fill rate equals to 100% seven days after disaster. However, we have to
prepare 38 ships to achieve 100% fill rate three days after disaster.

Figure 13 Number of required ships for 100% fill rate in scenario 1 (see online version
for colours)

Next, we determine the kind and amount of goods to stock. Figure 14 shows the required
stock of goods at each origin port when we use 24 ships under the reassigning algorithm.
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 265

Figure 14 Required stock of goods at each origin port in scenario 1 (see online version
for colours)

4.3.2 Scenario 2

Figure 15 shows the relationship between the number of ships and fill rate of goods in
scenario 2. We will see that 40 ships are required for a 100% fill rate when we do not use
the reassigning algorithm. On the other hand, only 24 ships are required for a 100% fill
rate when we use the reassigning algorithm. Similarly to scenario 1, this result suggests
that the reassigning algorithm decrease the number of required ships for transportation.

Figure 15 Difference of the required ships with and without the reassigning algorithm in
scenario 2 (see online version for colours)
266 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

Then, we consider the trade-off between the number of required ships and the fill rate in
the middle of simulation. Figure 16 shows the number of required ships for a 100% fill
rate n days after disaster in scenario 2. According to this figure, if we prepare 24 ships for
transportation, fill rate equals to 100% seven days after disaster. However, we have to
prepare 42 ships to achieve a 100% fill rate three days after disaster.

Figure 16 Number of required ships for 100% fill rate in scenario 2 (see online version
for colours)

Next, we determine the kind and amount of goods to stock. Figure 17 shows the required
stock of goods at each origin port when we use 24 ships under the reassigning algorithm.

Figure 17 Required stock of goods at each origin port in scenario 2 (see online version
for colours)
 Management of marine logistics in the case of emergency or disaster 267

4.3.3 Discussion of the results

Finally, we determine the required resources to achieve a 100% fill rate after seven days
for both scenarios 1 and 2 combined: we have to prepare 24 ships and 329,000 ton of
goods. Figure 18 shows the required kind and amount of goods to stock at each origin
port.

Figure 18 Required kind and amount of stock of goods (see online version for colours)

5 Conclusions

We designed a marine logistics system for disaster or emergency situations. This system
includes a reassigning algorithm, which decreases the number of required ships for
transporting goods. Compared with previous approaches, this model determines
quantitative results using optimisation. By using this model, we can calculate required
resources for supply and demand of goods for evacuees.
We applied this system to estimate the required resources for marine logistics in case
of Tonankai earthquake. The simulation results show that we have to prepare 24 ships
and 329,000 tons of goods.
However, we only considered the transportation between origin port and destination
port in this paper. In future research, the transportation between destination port and
evacuees should also be considered.

References
Bastos, M.A.G., Campos, V.B.G. and Bandeira, R.A.M. (2014) ‘Logistic processes in a
post-disaster relief operation’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 111,
pp.1175–1184.
Carvalho, H., Maleki, M. and Cruz-Machado, V. (2012) ‘The links between supply chain
disturbances and resilience strategies’, Int. J. Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 5, No. 3,
pp.203–234.
268 H. Wang and K. Tanaka

Fizzanty, T., Russell, I. and Collins, R. (2013) ‘Learning from failed supply chains: the application
of complex adaptive systems and a modified SAFE framework in evaluating proposed system
improvements’, Int. J. Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.232–258.
Holguín-Veras, J., Taniguchi, E., Jaller, M., Aros-Vera, F., Ferreira, F. and Thompson, R.G. (2014)
‘The Tohoku disasters: chief lessons concerning the post disaster humanitarian logistics
response and policy implications’, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice,
Vol. 69, pp.86–104.
Kaynak, R. and Tuğer, A.T. (2014) ‘Coordination and collaboration functions of disaster
coordination centers for humanitarian logistics’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences
Vol. 109, pp.432–437.
Kuse, H. and Yano, Y. (2011) ‘Logistics planning for disaster prevention’, City Planning Review,
Vol. 60, No. 3, pp.87–90.
Lin, Y., Batta, R., Rogerson, P.A., Blatt, A. and Flanigan, M. (2011) ‘A logistics model for
emergency supply of critical items in the aftermath of a disaster’, Socio-Economic Planning
Sciences, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp.132–145.
Majima, T., Watanabe, D., Takadama, K. and Katsuhara, M. (2013) ‘A development of
transportation simulator for goods in disasters’, SICE Journal of Control, Measurement, and
System Integration, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.131–136.
Namimatsu, T., Tamura, H., Sengoku, M., Shinoda, S. and Abe, T. (1997) ‘Analysis of algorithms
using the set division on a delivery problem’, IEICE Technical Report, Vol. 97, No. 403,
pp.41–48.
Senda, Y. and Suzuki, A. (2013) The 2013 Spring National Conference of Operations Research
Society of Japan Abstracts, pp.98–99.
Vlachos, D., Iakovou, E., Papapanagiotou, K. and Partsch, D. (2012) ‘Building robust supply
chains by reducing vulnerability and improving resilience’, Int. J. Agile Systems and
Management, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.59–81.