Houtian Ge, Jing Yi, Stephan J. Goetz, Rebecca Cleary and Miguel I. Gómez
Using recent US regional data associated with food system operations, this study aims at building optimization and econometric models to incorporate varying influential factors on…
Abstract
Purpose
Using recent US regional data associated with food system operations, this study aims at building optimization and econometric models to incorporate varying influential factors on food hub location decisions and generate effective facility location solutions.
Design/methodology/approach
Mathematical optimization and econometric models have been commonly used to identify hub location decisions, and each is associated with specific strengths to handle uncertainty. This paper develops an optimization model and a hurdle model of the US fresh produce sector to compare the hub location solutions between these two modeling approaches.
Findings
Econometric modeling and mathematical optimization are complementary approaches. While there is a divergence between the results of the optimization model and the econometric model, the optimization solution is largely confirmed by the econometric solution. A combination of the results of the two models might lead to improved decision-making.
Practical implications
This study suggests a future direction in which model development can move forward, for example, to explore and expose how to make the existing modeling techniques easier to use and more accessible to decision-makers.
Social implications
The models and results provide information that is currently limited and is useful to help inform sustainable decisions of various stakeholders interested in the development of regional food systems, regional infrastructure investment and operational strategies for food hubs.
Originality/value
This study sheds light on how the application of complementary modeling approaches improves the effectiveness of facility location solutions. This study offers new perspectives on elaborating key features to encompass facility location issues by applying interdisciplinary approaches.
Details
Keywords
Kamran Mahroof, Amizan Omar, Emilia Vann Yaroson, Samaila Ado Tenebe, Nripendra P. Rana, Uthayasankar Sivarajah and Vishanth Weerakkody
The purpose of this study is to evaluate food supply chain stakeholders’ intention to use Industry 5.0 (I5.0) drones for cleaner production in food supply chains.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to evaluate food supply chain stakeholders’ intention to use Industry 5.0 (I5.0) drones for cleaner production in food supply chains.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors used a quantitative research design and collected data using an online survey administered to a sample of 264 food supply chain stakeholders in Nigeria. The partial least square structural equation model was conducted to assess the research’s hypothesised relationships.
Findings
The authors provide empirical evidence to support the contributions of I5.0 drones for cleaner production. The findings showed that food supply chain stakeholders are more concerned with the use of I5.0 drones in specific operations, such as reducing plant diseases, which invariably enhances cleaner production. However, there is less inclination to drone adoption if the aim was pollution reduction, predicting seasonal output and addressing workers’ health and safety challenges. The findings outline the need for awareness to promote the use of drones for addressing workers’ hazard challenges and knowledge transfer on the potentials of I5.0 in emerging economies.
Originality/value
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to address I5.0 drones’ adoption using a sustainability model. The authors contribute to existing literature by extending the sustainability model to identify the contributions of drone use in promoting cleaner production through addressing specific system operations. This study addresses the gap by augmenting a sustainability model, suggesting that technology adoption for sustainability is motivated by curbing challenges categorised as drivers and mediators.