(Kemp 2008), should be simultaneously considered with the lowest cost. To meet
the first objective, a comprehensive framework of criteria which are used for this
decision needs to be formed. Such a framework increases the accuracy of the
selected locations (Bhushan and Rai 2007). However, although in existing literature
there are many criteria under social, economic, and environmental dimensions of
sustainability to calculate the utility of distribution centers, there is no a comprehensive framework which covers all the dimensions. To this end, a comprehensive
framework of sustainability criteria which is the extended version of the framework
presented by Kheybari et al. (2019a) is used in this study. By using the proposed
framework and a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method, the utility
of candidate places is calculated.
To satisfy the second objective discussed, a hybrid methodology including the
best-worst method (BWM) (Rezaei 2015) and a set covering model is presented.
Through the proposed methodology, minimum number of places with the maximum
utility can be selected so that customers’ need is satisfied at the right time.
The rest of this chapter is organized as follows: In Sect. 5.2, the literature is
reviewed and the sustainability framework is presented. In Sect. 5.3, the suggested
methodology is discussed. In Sect. 5.4, the proposed methodology is employed to
determine the appropriate location of bioethanol distribution centers in Iran, and
finally the conclusion is presented in Sect. 5.5.
2 Literature Review
In this section, the literature is reviewed in order to identify criteria which have effect
on the utility of candidate places. In this regard, papers employing MCDM methods
to select distribution centers in different industries were reviewed. The text and
tables of the reviewed papers were used to identify criteria which had effect on the
location of bioethanol distribution centers. As the result of the literature review, a
comprehensive framework is presented in Table 5.1. To categorize criteria into
economic, social, and environmental dimensions, both references and criteria’s
definition were applied. The papers reviewed are discussed as follows.
Chen (2001) used a fuzzy set theory and fuzzy preferences approach in order to
investigate factors affecting the location of distribution centers in logistic companies.
Alternatives in that research were evaluated by five criteria including investment
cost, expansion possibility, closeness to demand market, availability of acquirement
material, and human resource. Chan and Chong (2004) suggested analytic hierarchy
process (AHP) and genetic algorithm (GA) to select the appropriate location of
distribution centers in a supply chain. Inventory handling cost, production lead-time,
delivery unit cost, and demand were among the main criteria in that research. Lee
(2005) in a research evaluated candidate places using the strength, weakness, and
overall performance indexes applied to select the optimal location of distribution
centers in logistics system design. The candidate places in that research were
5 Location Selection of Bioethanol Distribution Centers
73
the first objective, a comprehensive framework of criteria which are used for this
decision needs to be formed. Such a framework increases the accuracy of the
selected locations (Bhushan and Rai 2007). However, although in existing literature
there are many criteria under social, economic, and environmental dimensions of
sustainability to calculate the utility of distribution centers, there is no a comprehensive framework which covers all the dimensions. To this end, a comprehensive
framework of sustainability criteria which is the extended version of the framework
presented by Kheybari et al. (2019a) is used in this study. By using the proposed
framework and a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method, the utility
of candidate places is calculated.
To satisfy the second objective discussed, a hybrid methodology including the
best-worst method (BWM) (Rezaei 2015) and a set covering model is presented.
Through the proposed methodology, minimum number of places with the maximum
utility can be selected so that customers’ need is satisfied at the right time.
The rest of this chapter is organized as follows: In Sect. 5.2, the literature is
reviewed and the sustainability framework is presented. In Sect. 5.3, the suggested
methodology is discussed. In Sect. 5.4, the proposed methodology is employed to
determine the appropriate location of bioethanol distribution centers in Iran, and
finally the conclusion is presented in Sect. 5.5.
2 Literature Review
In this section, the literature is reviewed in order to identify criteria which have effect
on the utility of candidate places. In this regard, papers employing MCDM methods
to select distribution centers in different industries were reviewed. The text and
tables of the reviewed papers were used to identify criteria which had effect on the
location of bioethanol distribution centers. As the result of the literature review, a
comprehensive framework is presented in Table 5.1. To categorize criteria into
economic, social, and environmental dimensions, both references and criteria’s
definition were applied. The papers reviewed are discussed as follows.
Chen (2001) used a fuzzy set theory and fuzzy preferences approach in order to
investigate factors affecting the location of distribution centers in logistic companies.
Alternatives in that research were evaluated by five criteria including investment
cost, expansion possibility, closeness to demand market, availability of acquirement
material, and human resource. Chan and Chong (2004) suggested analytic hierarchy
process (AHP) and genetic algorithm (GA) to select the appropriate location of
distribution centers in a supply chain. Inventory handling cost, production lead-time,
delivery unit cost, and demand were among the main criteria in that research. Lee
(2005) in a research evaluated candidate places using the strength, weakness, and
overall performance indexes applied to select the optimal location of distribution
centers in logistics system design. The candidate places in that research were
5 Location Selection of Bioethanol Distribution Centers
73