Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Industrial Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/caie

Sustainable fertilizer supply chain network design using evolutionary-based

resilient robust stochastic programming
Motahareh Rabbani a, Seyyed Mohammad Hadji Molana a, *, Seyed Mojtaba Sajadi b,
Mohammad Hossein Davoodi c
a
Department of Industrial Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
b
School of Strategy and Leadership, Coventry University, England, UK
c
Soil and Water Research Institute, Karaj Iran

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Phosphorus is an unsustainable substance that plays an essential role in modern agricultural systems and crop
Phosphorus fertilizer supply chain yield. Due to phosphorus growing demand and the importance of sustainable application of this critical resource,
Sustainability there is increasing concern about its supply chain network sustainability and resiliency. In this paper, a multi-
Resiliency
objective, multi-product, multi-period mathematical model is developed for the sustainable phosphorus supply
Robust stochastic programming
chain management in an uncertain environment. The parametric uncertainties such as demand and supply are
Genetic algorithm
aggravated by disruptions with devastating effects on strategic, tactical, and operational decisions. Given the
potential adverse effects of the phosphorus supply chain on the environment and human beings, a sustainable-
resilient supply chain network of the fertilizer industry is designed by considering the related environmental,
social, and economic challenges of the phosphorus managing. A reactive strategy is adapted to encounter the
disruptions and breakdowns along with the network, while a robust stochastic programming is extended and
solved using genetic algorithm to cope with the real-world uncertainties. The proposed model effectively controls
the uncertainty and risk-aversion of output decisions and confronts the adverse effects of disruptions. The
effectiveness and applicability of the model are validated through a real case study. Besides, the performance and
reliability of the model are proved by the realization under new scenarios. The results indicate that the proposed
model performs well in capturing real-world uncertainties and promoting the sustainability and resiliency of the
network.

1. Introduction
Phosphorus (P) is the most important element used in inorganic
fertilizers industry. P-fertilizers are indispensable for agricultural prac­
tices and food security. The primary source of P is phosphate rock (PR),
which is non-renewable and limited (Scholz et al., 2013). Along with the
rapidly growing global population, the demand for food has been
increased significantly (Gong, Xiang, et al., 2022). Modern agriculture
consumes substantial phosphates for crop farming, and consequently,
the P intake is increasing by population growth (Scholz et al., 2013).
According to some estimates, the global P reserves are being depleted at
a higher rate, and there will be no soil P reserve by 2050 (Gong, Xiang,
et al., 2022; Röös et al., 2017). Therefore, more attention should be paid
to boosting the efficiency of the P consumption, which is a vital
substance.
P is a low-cost commodity. Based on (Scholz & Wellmer, 2013), each
person annually consumes about 6 US$ worth of PR. Given the increased
efficiency of mining technology and rising demand, some closed un­
derground mines may be economically feasible to produce P again in the
long run. However, economical and physical access to phosphate varies
greatly. Despite the fact that many smallholder farmers, particularly
those located in developing countries, cannot afford P (economic scar­
city) or it is not available near them, the concentration of the known
phosphate mines in a few countries is also disconcerting (Scholz et al.,
2013). Such countries need to import active phosphate soil or fertilizers
from foreign suppliers and producers. Besides, countries have to tackle
several challenges related to the P supply chain (PSC).
On the one hand, natural and human disturbances in unstable real-

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: motahareh.rabbani@srbiau.ac.ir (M. Rabbani), molana@srbiau.ac.ir (S. Mohammad Hadji Molana), mojtaba.sajadi@coventry.ac.uk (S. Mojtaba
Sajadi), davoodi_mh@yahoo.com (M. Hossein Davoodi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108770

Available online 5 November 2022

0360-8352/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Rabbani et al.
world environments adversely affect the PSC network. They create a
high degree of uncertainty in the network, preventing network perfor­
mance optimization. Long-term decisions intensify such uncertainty in
network design. Therefore, the main challenge is to provide a robust and
reliable solution that can cope with the uncertainties and has the least
possible performance fluctuation (Vali-Siar & Roghanian, 2022). In this
study, there is a high degree of uncertainty related to the demand and
supply parameters of the PSC, and thus, a robust stochastic supply chain
network is designed to cope with this increasing uncertainty.
Other challenge in supply chain network design (SCND) is associated
with disruptions risks, which may halt or adversely affect the operation
of PSC and lead to deviations in its objectives. The risk sources of the
disruption include operational risks, natural disasters, pandemics and
political events (Shokouhifar and Ranjbarimesan, 2022). Hence, one of
the primary factors in SCND is identifying disruptive behaviors and
finding productive ways to face them. In this aspect, supply chain
resilience design is a practical approach to cope with the supply chain
risk sources (Shafaghizadeha et al., 2021).
Current strategies for the P management face with rapid depletion of
PR, low P use efficiency (PUE), and high P-related environmental
pollution (Luo et al., 2017). In this regard, suggesting a strategy to
protect the environment is the main concern area (Simons et al., 2014).
Given the finite nature of PR and the environmental impacts of improper
management of P-fertilizers, particularly on aquatic ecosystems, and
potential adverse effects of P overuse on biodiversity, sustainable P
management has to focus on understanding prerequisites for sufficient P
supply. In this way, the communities can ensure long-term food security
and prevent aquatic pollution and potential negative effects on terres­
trial biodiversity derived from P products (Garske & Ekardt, 2021).
Technically, sustainability and resiliency should be considered together
to ensure the system’s survival by exploiting the synergy and in­
teractions between these two concepts. Moreover, the supply chain
should be resilient to maintain its sustainability performance, including
the environmental dimension (Mehrjerdi & Shafiee, 2021). Despite the
crucial importance of the PSC network optimization, it has not received
adequate attention for a long time, especially through mathematical
approaches and operational researches.
In this paper, an integrated sustainable-resilient SCND is studied. A
multi-objective mathematical model is developed considering three
pillars covering the concept of economic, environmental, and social
factors. Moreover, to enhance the resiliency of the network against
disruptions, a reactive strategy is applied. Finally, an evolutionary-based
algorithm is presented to solve the established problem and handle the
problem’s computational complexity. A real case study and various test
problems are provided to verify the mathematical model and solution
method. This study aims to design the first PSC network model
employing a robust stochastic approach to 1) promote the resiliency of
the PSC network in the case of disruption risk, 2) improve the sustain­
ability of the PSC considering all the triple-pillars, and 3) tackle un­
certain real-world challenges. The proposed model suggests the proper
inventory flow along with the PSC and optimize the effects of different
types of mineral P-fertilizers yield. Moreover, explore potential effective
approaches to improve PUE and reduce the adverse environmental im­
pacts of P from a supply chain perspective.
The remaining of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 reviews
the literature in the cases of sustainable SCND, resilient SCND, and
handling uncertainties in SCND. The problem modelling and solution
method are provided in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. Section 5 presents
the details of the case study. The computational results and analyses are
provided in Section 6, and finally, the paper is concluded in section 7.
2. Literature review
This section addresses the relevant studies to the subject of this
paper. The literature is reviewed from two main aspects: P-fertilizer
supply chain and sustainability and resiliency in the uncertain SCND.
2
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
Then, the research gaps are analyzed, and our main contributions
against the existing literature are mentioned.
2.1. Phosphorous fertilizer supply chain
Researchers shifted their attention to P as a scarce and crucial
resource in recent years. They encouraged the emergence of a “peak
phosphorus” discourse oriented around the world’s scarcity of the PR
(Nedelciu et al., 2020; Ragnarsdóttir et al., 2011). The rates of the P
consumption and geographical distribution of the PR reserves are sig­
nificant inequalities on a global scale (Scholz & Wellmer, 2013). The
regional balance is highly relevant to food security, especially in facing
with the increasing world population that also shows different growth
rates depending on the region (Nedelciu et al., 2020).
P-fertilizers include single superphosphate (SSP), triple superphos­
phate (TSP), and calcium magnesium phosphate (CMP) from medium-
low PR processing; and mono ammonium phosphate (MAP), dia­
mmonium phosphate (DAP), and nitrogen‑phosphorus‑potassium (NPK)
from high PR processing (Gong, Xiang, et al., 2022). Most of the losses
from fertilizer application on the soil to fork are in runoff from agri­
cultural land (Scholz & Wellmer, 2015). Research on P production and
utilization indicates an 80 % loss from the mine to the fork. Humans
digest only 10 % of the processed P-fertilizers (Cordell et al., 2009). The
digested P finds its way into human wastewater or may be discarded
outside of the wastewater refining system in the context of uncontrolled
disposal. According to the United Nations wastewater assessment, un­
treated or inadequately treated wastewater is acknowledged to have
negative impacts on 1) environment, 2) human health, and 3) economy
(Water, 2021). P runoff and P untreated wastewater are the leading
causes of creating or expanding “dead zones” (Nedelciu et al., 2020;
Oberle et al., 2019). This phenomenon’s adverse effects are tangible on
the environment and the people’s livelihoods living in the affected areas.
Another P-rich runoff impact is threatening marine biodiversity (Mar­
tinez-Escobar & Mallela, 2019). Furthermore, severe P footprint on air
pollution and climate change cannot be neglected. Mining and refining
PR to produce P-fertilizers is the main reason for almost all of the
negative impacts of the PSC on the air quality and climate (Oberle et al.,
2019).
Studies in the PSC have included quantitative models, and their re­
sults pointed toward P scarcity (Nedelciu et al., 2020; Ragnarsdóttir
et al., 2011; Sverdrup & Ragnarsdottir, 2011; Sverdrup & Ragnarsdóttir,
2014). In these researches, a system dynamics model was proposed and
mentioned the growing population as a primary driver for P consump­
tion and demand. They also assumed P-containing waste recycling in
their model, including recapturing P substances in human waste, food
industry waste, etc. Some authors developed a production and trade
model to investigate concerns about P depletion. According to their
conclusion, there was no short-term or medium-term depletion (Van
Vuuren et al., 2010). In another study, a demand-production interaction
resource model was presented, considering low, best, and high estimate
scenarios of peak phosphate production (Mohr & Evans, 2013).
Some studies focused on analyzing and improving P products yield
and managing the PSC environmental activities (Altamira-Algarra et al.,
2022; Gong, Xiang, et al., 2022; Meyer et al., 2020). A series of the
single-factor and integrated methods have been utilized to improve the
P-fertilizer consumption efficiency in agricultural systems (Bai et al.,
2013; Gong, Meng, et al., 2022; Withers et al., 2014). The yield response
to the P-fertilizer was employed to calculate the optimal P-fertilizer use
for soils with P deficiency (Bai et al., 2013). A maintenance and makeup
approach was proposed for the sustainable P management of soils with
high P accumulation (Li et al., 2011). Another study explored potential
practical approaches to reduce the negative environmental impacts of
the P-fertilizers and improve their efficiency (Gong, Meng, et al., 2022).
Besides, a substitution strategy suggesting feeding crop roots rather than
the soil was advocated to obtain high P-fertilizer use yield (Withers
et al., 2014).
M. Rabbani et al.
Environmental effects of the PSC from the RP exploitation to the crop
production are shown in Fig. 1. Managing the PSC toward sustainable
approaches in agriculture struggles with PR mining, P-fertilizer
manufacturing, and crop production. Effects of different P-fertilizers on
the PUE must be quantitatively calculated and analyzed from a supply
chain perspective (Nedelciu et al., 2020). Moreover, the nature and
magnitude of P substances flow in the supply chain should be deter­
mined (Chowdhury et al., 2016). These two approaches are extensively
used in recent studies to identify general trends of the P flow.
The previous studies focused on quantitative approaches concerning
the production of PR and P-fertilizers. However, the PSC network
modelling and optimization is very useful to help the decision-makers in
managing a reliable P inventory flow among different echelons of the
PSC from the top-level (supplier) to the lowest level (consumer). To be
more specific, more dedicated studies in the literature are noteworthy by
noticing the critical concerns of the PSC network, such as resiliency and
sustainability challenges. Moreover, regional differences in terms of P-
fertilizers requirements, price sensitivity of different regions, environ­
mental impacts of P on the PSC network have not been pragmatically
included in studies so far.
2.2. Sustainability and resiliency in uncertain SCND
Recently, one of the primary contexts in operations research and
mathematical modeling has been focused on supply chain management
concerns (SCM). The generative design of supply chains and focusing on
the problems of supply chain echelons helps organizations to achieve a
competitive advantage (Sadeghi et al., 2021; Sohrabi et al., 2021a). The
emerging study area in this field is finding practical ways to boost SC
performance to prevent vulnerability (Vali-Siar & Roghanian, 2022).
Accessing and sharing the disruption information in supply chains is
important to achieve a proper disruption reduction strategy (Thomas &
Mahanty, 2021). Several studies examined the disruption recovery
problems due to the importance of preparation to encounter the
disruption (Aldrighetti et al., 2021; Golan et al., 2021). The modern
supply chains are facing more complex uncertainties. Sustainable supply
chains reward competitive advantage to tackle the unforeseen disrup­
tions challenges. However, there is a long way to achieving a sustainable
supply chain configuration, especially in critical industries such as
healthcare and agriculture (Baghizadeh et al., 2022; Jiang et al., 2022;
Sohrabi et al., 2021b).
By outbreaking COVID-19 pandemic, considerable attention has
been turning on simultaneously examining disruptions and the role of
sustainability in the supply chains (Babbitt et al., 2021; Farhadi et al.,
2018; Karmaker et al., 2021). A recent study proposed a sustainable
Fig. 1. P environmental effects (P losses and greenhouse emissions) in PSC.
3
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
logistic model considering four objectives to minimize the total cost,
carbon emission coverage driven from transportation, and fraud func­
tion that gains from the extensive sharing of supply chain data, and
maximize the demand satisfaction. They used a robust fuzzy stochastic
approach to deal with the uncertain parameters and the augmented
ε-constraint approach to solve the multi-objective problem (Gholizadeh
et al., 2020).
Reliable and safe infrastructures are pivotal for ensuring the sus­
tainability of advanced societies. Resilience is an integrated supply
chain design and planning strategy to prevent disruption risks and deal
with destructive events such as disasters that attack infrastructure (Fang
et al., 2019). In this regard, researchers have introduced and applied
various resilience strategies. In (Elluru et al., 2019), a location-routing
problem has been developed with a time window considering different
reactive and proactive disaster-resilient supply chain scenarios. In
another research, a mixed-integer programming model has been pre­
sented to deal with the disruption distribution centers. They utilized
safety stock inventory as one of the essential resilience strategies
(Taleizadeh et al., 2020).
Most of the previous researches considered sustainability and resil­
iency separately. However, addressing sustainability challenges of the
supply chain alongside resiliency helps outperform such problems more
practically (Sadeghi et al., 2021). One of the first studies in this respect
that investigated the sustainable-resilience relationship for SCND
quantifies social and environmental performances of the supply chain
through a multi-objective optimization model. A performance scoring
method and a fuzzy goal programming approach were conducted to find
trade-off solutions (Fahimnia & Jabbarzadeh, 2016). Accordingly, a
study addresses bi-level programming for sustainable supply chain
optimization by considering resilience and pricing decisions. Further­
more, they suggested some policies that governments optimize and
affect social and environmental responsibilities by setting emissions tax
rates (Taleizadeh et al., 2022).
Some authors noticed the resilient SCND and developed a multi-
objective location-allocation model to design uncertainty in a
sustainable-resilient supply chain network (Zahiri et al., 2017). A
stochastic-probabilistic programming model was developed to capture
the uncertainty. Also, new sustainability and resilience measures, such
as total cost, social satisfaction, and environmental resilience, were
proposed. Some authors conducted simulation-based research on the
intersections among sustainability and environmental factors in supply
chains (Ivanov, 2018). They majorly focused on analyzing sustainability
features and their role in the supply chains. The model analyzed the risk
of disruption considering three aspects of sustainability to design a
resilient supply chain. Another research proposed a hybrid approach for
M. Rabbani et al.
the SCND (Jabbarzadeh et al., 2018), which remains sustainable while
facing stochastic disruptions in a resilient way. They benefited from a
clustering method to quantify and evaluate suppliers’ sustainable per­
formance while facing disruption. In (Pavlov et al., 2019), a resilient-
sustainable supply chain management technique has been developed
by suggesting a model for network redundancy and proactive contin­
gency plan optimization to handle disruptions.
2.3. Our contribution against existing works
Regarding previous works conducted in the SCM area, a lack of
dedicated studies on supply chain problems of fertilizers, especially
those related to the P products, is tangible. According to the literature, it
is understood that recently the supply chain’s sustainability and resil­
ience have been a heated debate among researchers. Hence, there is no
robust mathematical model for designing a sustainable and resilient
supply chain considering disruption risks for the P-fertilizers industry. In
this regard, to cover the existing gaps, a robust stochastic programming
is extended for designing resilient portfolios to achieve a sustainable-
resilient P-SCND. The proposed model optimizes the supply chain’s
economic, environmental, and social performances and makes a trade-
off among the conflicting objectives. The remarkable contributions in
this paper against the existing researches can be summarized as follows:
• Investigating the challenges and concerns of modelling the P-SCND
mathematically for the first time from the whole supply chain
perspective.
• Proposing a multi-objective model for P-fertilizers to design a
sustainable-resilient supply in both normal and disrupted conditions.
• Considering a resilient supply portfolio to encounter disruption risks
along with designing a sustainable supply chain network for P-fer­
tilizers with economic, social, and environmental considerations.
• Presenting a resilience robust stochastic programming (RRSP)
approach for the P-SCND to capture the real-world uncertainties and
reduce the decision risks.
• Utilizing an evolutionary metaheuristic algorithm based on genetic
algorithm (GA) to solve the P-SCND.
• Highlighting the widespread applicability of the proposed P-SCND
model through a real case study in Iran.
Fig. 2. The P-SCND model.
4
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
3. Problem modelling
3.1. Phosphate supply chain model
This paper considers a four-stage P-SCND comprising internal sup­
pliers (supplying raw materials), internal producers, external suppliers/
producers (importing raw materials and products from other countries),
and distribution centers, as seen in Fig. 2. The P-SCND is discussed in T
time periods (i.e., months). At every month t, each distribution center
d faces a demand Ddpt for each fertilizer p. To bound the model, the
following conditions are assumed:
• The raw materials include P, ammoniac (A), phosphoric acid (PA),
and sulphuric acid (SA), which are required to produce different
fertilizers.
• The products include three types of P-fertilizers: SSP, TSP, and DAP.
• SSP is composed of P and SA.
• TSP is composed of S and PA.
• DAP is composed of A and PA.
• PA is produced using P and SA. However, the production of the PA is
not included in the proposed P-SCND model. Instead, it is considered
to be supplied as a raw material.
• At every month, each internal/external supplier can support
different manufacturers up to its capacity.
• The required level of raw materials for each manufacturer may be
fulfilled by internal and/or external suppliers.
• Manufacturers can store some of the products at the end of each time
period.
• Each distribution center may purchase from internal manufactures
and/or external producers until satisfying its required fertilizers.
• Each distribution center may store some of the received products at
the end of each time period.
• The lead time of delivery between internal suppliers, manufacturers,
and distribution centers is zero, i.e., the ordered raw material/fer­
tilizer in month t is delivered at the same month t.
• The lead time of delivery between external suppliers/producers to
manufacturers and distributors is one month, i.e., the requested raw
material/fertilizer in month t would be delivered in month t + 1.
• Each supplier has limited capacities to supply each raw material.
• Each external supplier/producer has limited capacities to provide
each raw material/product.
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

• Each manufacturer may have one/two, or three production lines to
produce SSP, TSP, or DAP.
• Each manufacturer has a limited capacity to produce each type of
fertilizer.
• The demand of distribution centers, amount of raw materials sup­
plied by internal/external suppliers, and amount of fertilizers sup­
plied by external producers, are assumed to be uncertain for each
time period.
• In each time period, breakdown may happen in suppliers (raw ma­
terials), external suppliers (raw materials and fertilizers), or manu­
facturers (fertilizers), with different disruption probabilities.
proposed model for each scenario ξ. The second term measures the so­
lution robustness by coefficient λ, while the third term denotes the
model robustness, penalizes infeasible solutions, weighted by a weight
parameter ω. In Eq. (1), θξ calculates the absolute cost difference in each
scenario relative to the cost weighted possibilistic mean value. The
definition of the penalty function is related to the problem characteris­
tics and the program’s constraints. In fact, lξ calculates the amount of
shortage (for each fertilizer in each distributor at every month) under
each scenario. Note that λ and ω are the solution optimality robustness
coefficient (to control standard deviation) and model robustness coef­
ficient (for feasibility and preventing shortage), respectively.

3.3. Notations
3.2. Uncertainty handling
The list of indices, sets, parameters, and decision variables to model
Most of the parameters in the P-SCND are tainted with a high degree the phosphate SCDN are summarized as follows. The uncertain param­
of uncertainty in the real-world environment, because of dynamic na­ eters are denoted by ~ above them.
ture of the problem (i.e., possible fluctuations in parameters’ values over Indices & Sets:
the long-term horizon). These parameters include the demands of dis­
i∊I Set of (internal) suppliers
tribution centers, the capacity of supplying raw materials by internal/
j∊J Set of manufacturers (internal producers)
external suppliers, the capacity of supplying fertilizers by external pro­ k∊K Set of other countries (external suppliers/producers)
ducers, and the probabilistic breakdowns in internal/external suppliers/ d∊D Set of distribution centers
producers. In such a situation, the robustness of the final solution is r∊R Set of raw materials (P, A, PA, and SA)
crucial since it deals with inventory handling and production decisions p∊P Set of fertilizers (SSP, TSP, and DAP)
t∊T Set of time periods (months)
that cannot be changed easily in long-term horizon (Mousazadeh et al., ξ∊S Set of scenarios
2018). Parameters:
Robust stochastic programming (RSP) is one of the most popular Air 1 if raw material r is supplied in supplier i, 0 otherwise
methods proposed in programming under uncertain conditions in which Urp 1 if raw material r is used to produce fertilizer p, 0 otherwise
stochastic and robust uncertainties can be controlled simultaneously in Vjp 1 if production line p exists at manufacturer j, 0 otherwise

the system (Babazadeh & Sabbaghnia, 2018). To address the risk issue in CapS
̃ Amount of supplying raw material r by supplier i in time period t in
irtξ
scenario ξ (per tonne (t))
stochastic programming, Mulvey et al. (1995) presented a flexible ̃E Amount of supplying raw material r by external supplier k in time period t
CapS
robust optimization approach for scenario-based stochastic program­ krtξ
in scenario ξ (per t)
ming, called RSP. It integrates the goal programming concept with the CapPjp Capacity of producing fertilizer p by manufacturer j in each time period
stochastic programming formulation. They extended the traditional (per t)
Amount of supplying fertilizer p by external producer k in time period t in
stochastic programming formulation by adding the objective function’s ̃E
CapPkptξ
scenario ξ (per t)
cost variance. The programming approach was later developed by Yu 1 if internal supplier i is broken down in time period t for scenario ξ,
BD
̃
and Li (2000) and Leung et al. (2007). Several RSP models have been
itξ
0 otherwise
used in the literature for various applications that prove the flexibility of BDE
̃
ktξ
1 if the external supplier/producer k is broken down in time period t for
the RSP models to solve different optimization problems under uncer­ scenario ξ, 0 otherwise
BDM 1 if manufacturer j is broken down in time period t for scenario ξ,
tainty (Babazadeh & Sabbaghnia, 2018; Bozorgi-Amiri et al., 2013;
̃
jtξ
0 otherwise
Hassannayebi et al., 2017). RSP also has been widely applied in SCND WSjr Warehouse capacity of manufacturer j for raw material r (per t)
(Suryawanshi & Dutta, 2022; Zeballos et al., 2014). However, the RSP WPjp Warehouse capacity of manufacturer j for fertilizer p (per t)
approach has not been used in the fertilizers supply chain management. WDdp Warehouse capacity of distributor d for fertilizer p (per t)
Accordingly, to cope with uncertain parameters of the proposed P-SCN αrp Amount of raw material r required in manufacturing fertilizer p (per %)
D̃ Total demand of distributor d for fertilizer p in time period t in scenario ξ
problem, an RSP approach is considered in this paper. RSP introduces dptξ
(per t)
two robustness concepts, including solution robustness and model TSr Truck size for carrying raw material r (per t)
robustness. The solution robustness means the solution is close to TPp Truck size for carrying fertilizer p (per t)
optimal in all possible scenarios. Alternatively, the model robustness dSij Distance between supplier i and manufacturer j (per km)
refers to the situation when the solution is almost feasible in all sce­ dSEkj Distance between external supplier k and manufacturer j (per km)
narios. The general framework for the RSP approach is briefly explained dPjd Distance between manufacturer j and distributor d (per km)
as follows: dPEkd Distance between external producer k and distributor d (per km)
⎧ FTCSijr Fixed cost of carrying raw material r from supplier i to manufacturer j
( ( ))
⎪
⎪ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ($/truck)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ min π .z
ξ ξ + λ. π ξ 2θ ξ − z ξ − π .z
ξ ξ + ω πξ .lξ FTCSEkjr Fixed cost of carrying raw material r from external supplier k to
⎪
⎪ manufacturer j ($/truck)
⎪
⎪ ξ∈S ξ∈S ξ∈S ξ∈S
⎪
⎪ FTCPjdp Fixed cost of carrying fertilizer p from manufacturer j to distributor d ($/
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ truck)
⎪
⎪ zξ = c⊺ξ .xξ + dξ⊺ y∀ξ ∈ S
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∑ FTCPEkdp Fixed cost of carrying fertilizer p from external producer k to distributor
⎨ d ($/truck)
θξ ≥ zξ − πξ .zξ ∀ξ ∈ S
(1) VTCSijr Variable cost of carrying raw material r from supplier i to manufacturer j
⎪
⎪ ξ∈S
⎪
⎪
⎪ ($/truck/km)
⎪ s.t.Aξ xξ + Kξ y ≥ bξ − lξ ∀ξ ∈ S
⎪
⎪ VTCSEkjr Variable cost of carrying raw material r from external supplier k to
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Ry = q manufacturer j ($/truck/km)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ VTCPjdp Variable cost of carrying fertilizer p from manufacturer j to distributor
⎪
⎪ y ∈ Y, xξ ≥ 0 d ($/truck/km)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ VTCPEkdp Variable cost of carrying fertilizer p from external producer k to
θξ ≥ 0
distributor d ($/truck/km)
BCSPL Purchasing cost of raw material r from supplier i for planned orders ($/t)
The first term in the objective function denotes the weighted possi­ ir

bilistic mean value of the objective function obtained by solving the (continued on next page)

5
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

(continued ) (continued )
Indices & Sets: Indices & Sets:

BCSRT
ir
Purchasing cost of raw material r from supplier i for real-time on-demand YSEkjrtξ Amount of carried raw material r from external supplier k to manufacturer
orders ($/t) j in time period t in scenario ξ (per t)
BCSEkr Purchasing cost of raw material r from external supplier k ($/t) YPPL
jdptξ
Amount of carried fertilizer p from manufacturer j to distributor d via
BCPEkp Purchasing cost of fertilizer p from external producer k ($/t) planned order in time period t in scenario ξ (per t)
PCjp Manufacturing cost of fertilizer p in manufacturer j ($/t) YPRT
jdptξ
Amount of carried fertilizer p from manufacturer j to distributor d via real-
time order in time period t in scenario ξ (per t)
OCjp Operation cost of installing a new production line for fertilizer p in
YPEkdptξ Amount of carried fertilizer p from external producer k to distributor d in
manufacturer j ($/t)
time period t in scenario ξ (per t)
ICSjr Inventory holding cost of raw material r in manufacturer j for each time
SDdptξ Satisfied demand of distributor d for fertilizer p in time period t in scenario
period ($/t)
ξ (per t)
ICPjp Inventory holding cost of fertilizer p in manufacturer j for each time
SMjrtξ Satisfied demand of manufacturer j for raw material r in time period t in
period ($/t)
scenario ξ (per t)
ICDdp Inventory holding cost of fertilizer p in distributor d for each time period
USjrtξ 0 if demand of manufacturer j for raw material r is fully satisfied in time t
($/t)
of scenario ξ; 1 otherwise
Hjp Number of work forces needed to construct production line of fertilizer p
UDdptξ 0 if demand of distributor d for fertilizer p is fully satisfied in time t of
in manufacturer j
scenario ξ; 1 otherwise
PYp Average crop yield increasement by fertilizer p (per %)
ISjrtξ Amount of inventory of raw material r held at manufacturer j at the end of
PLp Total P loss for production of fertilizer p (per %)
time period t in scenario ξ (per t)
G Vehicle fuel consumption (liter/kilometer) IPjptξ Amount of inventory of fertilizer p held at manufacturer j at the end of
eg The penalty cost of environmental impacts by transportation (per t of time period t in scenario ξ (per t)
GHGs emissions) IDdptξ Amount of inventory of fertilizer p held at distributor d at the end of time
et The amount of GHGs emissions (t) from burning each liter of gasoline period t in scenario ξ (per t)
ep The amount of GHGs emissions (t) from producing product type p
er The amount of GHGs emissions (t) from producing row material type r
πξ Probability of occurrence of scenario ξ 3.4. Resilient RSP model for P-SCND
λEC Coefficient assigned to economic objective function variability (Solution
robustness coefficient)
λSC Coefficient assigned to social objective function variability (Solution In this section, the sustainable-resilience P-SCND is mathematically
robustness coefficient) modeled by mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) and the resilient
λEN Coefficient assigned to environmental objective function variability RSP (named RRSP) approach. To solve the model, it is formulated
(Solution robustness coefficient) considering economic costs as well as social and environmental issues.
ωp Model robustness coefficient for each product
In normal cases, the required raw materials for each manufacturer are
Direct Decision Variables:
Ojp 1 if manufacturer j produces fertilizer p (if production line p is activated in supplied through planned orders from the internal and/or external
manufacturer j); 0 otherwise suppliers. Moreover, the required fertilizers for the distribution centers
Pjpt Planned amount of fertilizer p produced by manufacturer j in time period t are satisfied through planned orders from the internal manufacturers
(per t)
and/or external producers. In the case of any disruption in supplying
XSijrt 1 if supplier i is planned to supply raw material r for manufacturer j in
time period t; 0 otherwise
raw materials or fertilizers caused by breakdowns in internal or external
XSEkjrt 1 if external producer k is planned to supply raw material r for sources, a reactive resilient mechanism is applied to compensate the
manufacturer j in time period t; 0 otherwise shortages. To achieve this purpose, the required raw materials (or fer­
XPjdpt 1 if manufacturer j is planned to provide fertilizer p for distributor d in tilizers) can be supplied through real-time orders at each time period
time period t; 0 otherwise
only by the internal suppliers or manufacturers (as their lead time is
XPEkdpt 1 if external producer k is planned to provide fertilizer p to distributor d in
time period t; 0 otherwise zero). More specifically, external suppliers/producers located in foreign
YSijrt Amount of planned carried raw material r from supplier i to manufacturer countries cannot be called to satisfy the real-time orders. This resilient
j in time period t (per t) issue is controlled by two backup lists BLS and BLP, to compensate the
YSEkjrt Amount of planned carried raw material r from external supplier k to
shortages due to the disruptions in internal/external suppliers/
manufacturer j in time period t (per t)
YPjdpt Amount of planned carried fertilizer p from manufacturer j to distributor
producers.
d in time period t (per t)
YPEkdpt Amount of planned carried fertilizer p from external producer k to 3.4.1. Economic objective
distributor d in time period t (per t) The total economic cost comprises the purchasing costs of raw ma­
BLSj Resilient backup list of selecting internal suppliers by manufacturer j (for
terials from internal/external suppliers and fertilizers from external
disruption circumstances)
BLPd Resilient backup list of selecting manufacturers by distributor d (for producers, the installation cost of new production lines, the production
disruption circumstances) cost of manufactures, inventory holding cost, and transportation cost, as
Indirect (Scenario-based) Decision Variables: denoted in Eqs. (2)-(6), respectively. The total economic objective
Pjptξ Amount of fertilizer p produced by manufacturer j in time period t in function can be expressed in terms of the RSP as formulated in Eqs. (7)
scenario ξ (per t)
PL 1 if manufacturer j is sourced via planned order by supplier i for raw
and (8).
XSijrtξ
material r in time period t in scenario ξ; 0 otherwise Cost of purchasing raw materials/fertilizers
XSRT
ijrtξ
1 if manufacturer j is sourced via real-time order by supplier i for raw ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑
material r in time period t in scenario ξ; 0 otherwise BCξ = (BCSPL
ir YSPL PL
ijrtξ XSijrtξ )+ (BCSRT
ir YSRT RT
ijrtξ XSijrtξ )
XSEkjrtξ 1 if manufacturer j is sourced by external supplier k for raw material r in i r t j i r t j
∑∑ ∑∑
time period t in scenario ξ; 0 otherwise + (BCSEkr YSEkjrtξ XSEkjrtξ )
XPPL
jdptξ
1 if manufacturer j provides fertilizer p via planned order to distributor k r t j
d in time period t in scenario ξ; 0 otherwise ∑∑ ∑∑
XPRT 1 if manufacturer j provides fertilizer p via real-time order to distributor + (BCPEkp YPEkdptξ XPEkdptξ )
jdptξ
d in time period t in scenario ξ; 0 otherwise k p t d

XPEkdptξ 1 if external producer k provides fertilizer p to distributor d in time period (2)

t in scenario ξ; 0 otherwise
YSPL Amount of carried raw material r from supplier i to manufacturer j via Cost of new production line installation
ijrtξ
planned order in time period t in scenario ξ (per t) ∑∑ ( )
YSRT
ijrtξ
Amount of carried raw material r from supplier i to manufacturer j via OC = OCjp 1 − Vjp Ojp (3)
real-time order in time period t in scenario ξ (per t) j p

(continued on next column)

Cost of production

6
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

∑∑ ∑
PCξ = PCjp Ojp Pjptξ (4) manufacturers), which is formulated in Eq. (9). Moreover, the second
j p t social objective function is to maximize the average crop yield incre­
ment, which can be expressed as Eq. (10). Finally, Eq. (11) addresses the
Cost of inventory holding
total social objective function.
∑∑∑( ) ∑∑∑( )
ICξ = ICSjr ISjrtξ + ICPjp IPjptξ Number of employed new workers
∑∑ ( )
(5)
t j r t j p
∑∑∑( ) Z SC1 = Hjp 1 − Vjp Ojp (9)
+ ICDdp IDdptξ j p
t j p
Average crop yield
Cost of transportations

( ⌈ ⌉) ( ⌈ ⌉)
∑∑∑∑ ( ) YSPL XSPL + YSRT XSRT
ijrtξ ijrtξ ijrtξ ijrtξ
∑∑∑∑ ( ) YSE XSE
kjrtξ kjrtξ
TCξ = FTCSijr + VTCSijr dSij + FTCSEkjr + VTCSEkjr dSEkj
TSr TSr
(6)
t i j r t k j r
( ⌈ PL ⌉) ( ⌈ ⌉)
∑∑∑∑ ( ) YP XP
jdptξ
PL RT RT
jdptξ + YPjdptξ XPjdptξ
∑∑∑∑ ( ) YPE XPE
kdptξ kdptξ
E E E
+ FTCPjdp + VTCPjdp dPjd + FTCPkdp + VTCPkdp dPkd
t j d p
TPp t k d p
TPp

( )/
∑ ∑∑ ∑∑∑
Total economic objective function ZξSC2 = PY p SDdptξ SDdptξ (10)
p t d p t d

( )
∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑∑
ZξEC = (BCSPL
ir YS PL
ijrtξ XS PL
ijrtξ ) + (BCS RT
ir YS RT
ijrtξ XS RT
ijrtξ ) + (BCS E
kr YS E
kjrtξ XS E
kjrtξ ) + (BCP E
kp YPE
kdptξ XPE
kdptξ )
i r t j i r t j k r t j k p t d
( ) ( ) ( )
∑∑ ( ) ∑∑ ∑ ∑∑∑( ) ∑∑∑( ) ∑∑∑( )
+ OCjp 1 − Vjp Ojp + PCjp Ojp Pjptξ + ICSjr ISjrtξ + ICPjp IPjptξ + ICDdp IDdptξ
j p j p t t j r t j p t j p
( ( ⌈ ⌉) ( ⌈ ⌉)
∑∑∑∑ ( ) YSPL XSPL + YSRT XSRT
ijrtξ ijrtξ ijrtξ ijrtξ
∑∑∑∑ ( ) YSE XSE
kjrtξ kjrtξ
E E E
+ FTCSijr + VTCSijr dSij + FTCSkjr + VTCSkjr dSkj
t i j r
TSr t k j r
TSr
( ⌈ PL ⌉ ) ( ⌈ ⌉))
∑∑∑∑ ( ) PL RT RT
YPjdptξ XPjdptξ + YPjdptξ XPjdptξ ∑∑∑∑ ( ) YPEkdptξ XPEkdptξ
E E E
+ FTCPjdp + VTCPjdp dPjd + FTCPkdp + VTCPkdp dPkd
t j d p
TPp t k d p
TPp
(7)

Total social objective

( ( )) ( ( ))
⎧ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑
⎨ min πξ .ZξEC + λEC . πξ 2θξ − ZξEC − ⎧ ∑ ∑ ∑
π ξ .ZξEC + ω πξ .lξ ⎨ min πξ .ZξSC + λSC . πξ 2θξ − ZξSC − πξ .ZξSC
Z EC =
⎩
ξ∈S ξ∈S ξ∈S ξ∈S
Z SC = ξ∈S ξ∈S ξ∈S (11)
⎩
ZξEC = BCξ + OC + PCξ + ICξ + TCξ
ZξSC = wsc1 Z SC1 + wsc2 ZξSC2
(8)
To obtain the total social objective function, the sub-social objectives
where lξ is the total shortage of all fertilizers in different distribution
ZSC1 and ZSC2 are normalized to be minimized within [0,1] using the
centers at all time periods under scenario ξ. In other words, the third ξ

term is the total unsatisfied demand (per t) under scenario ξ. The value min–max method. Then, they are unified in a single social objective
of ω can be considered equal to the cost of shortage per unit fertilizer, so considering sub-weights wsc1 and wsc2 (i.e., wsc1 + wsc2 = 1) which adjust
that the third term is equal to the expected cost in case of shortage. the relative impact of the sub-social objectives within the total social
objective function. Finally, the normalized ZSCξ is converted into the RSP

3.4.2. Social objectives model to calculate ZSC .

In the P-SCND, two social objectives are considered. The first social
objective function is to maximize the number of new workers employed 3.4.3. Environmental objectives
by the system, for the installation of new production lines in manufac­ In terms of the environmental issues, two objectives are considered
turers (installing new production lines even in new or in the existing to minimize the total P loss (per t), and minimize the total greenhouse

7
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

gas emissions (CO2) due to production and transportations, which can penalties of the solution can be expressed as OFP = OF×(1 + PF), where
be formulated as Eqs. (12) and (13), respectively. As a result, the total PF is penalty function, which can be formulated as
environmental objective function is achieved by Eq. (14).
PF = NUC + NUS × (1 + APUS ) + NUD × (1 + APUD ) (16)
Total P loss
( ) where NUC is the number of unsatisfied constraints (as existed). NUS
∑ ∑∑ ∑∑∑
ZξEN1 = PLp Pjptξ Ojp + YPEkdpt XPEkdpt (12) and NUD are the number of unsatisfied demands for raw materials and
p t j t k d fertilizers, respectively. Moreover, APUS and APUD are the average un­
satisfied demands (in %) for manufacturers and distribution centers,
Total greenhouse gas emission
respectively.

⎧ ⎛
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎜ ( ) ( )
⎪
⎨∑⎜∑ ∑ ∑∑ ∑∑ ∑( ) ∑
⎜
ZξEN2 = ⎜ Pjptξ + YPEkdptξ .ep + YSPL RT
ijrtξ + YSijrtξ + YSEkjrtξ .er
⎪
⎪ t ⎜
⎪
⎪ ⎝ p j k d j r i k
⎪
⎩
⎛ ⌈ ⌉ ⌈ ⌉ ⎞ ⎞
∑∑∑ YSPL PL RT RT
ijrtξ XSijrtξ + YSijrtξ XSijrtξ
∑∑∑ YSEkjrtξ XSEkjrtξ
E
⎜ .dS ij + .dS kj + ⎟ ⎟
⎜ i j r
TSr k j r
TSr ⎟ ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎟
+⎜ ⌈ ⌉ ⌈ ⌉ ⎟ .G.et.eg ⎟ (13)
⎜ ∑∑∑ YPPL XPPL + YPRT XPRT ∑ ∑ ∑ E E
YPkdptξ XPkdptξ ⎟ ⎟
⎝ jdptξ jdptξ jdptξ jdptξ E ⎠ ⎠
.dPjd + .dPkd
j d p
TPp k d p
TPp

∑∑∑∑
NUS = USjrtξ (17)
Total environmental objective ξ t j r
( ( ))
⎧ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑∑∑∑ ( )
⎨ min πξ .ZξEN + λEN . πξ 2θξ − ZξEN − πξ .ZξEN 1 Mjrtξ − SM jrtξ
APUS = 100 × max 0, (18)
Z EN = ξ∈S ξ∈S ξ∈S (14) S×T ×J×R ξ t d p Ddptξ
⎩
EN EN1 EN2
Zξ = wen1 Zξ + wen2 Zξ ∑∑∑∑
NUD = UDdptξ (19)
The total environmental objective function is calculated similarly to ξ t d p
the social objective function. To do this, the two sub-environmental
( )
objectives ZEN1 and ZEN2 are normalized to be minimized within [0,1] 1 ∑∑∑∑ Ddptξ − SDdptξ
ξ ξ APUD = 100 × max 0, (20)
using the min–max method. Then, they are unified in a single environ­ S×D×P×T ξ t d p Ddptξ
mental objective considering sub-weights wen1 and wen2 (wen1 + wen2 = 1)
where the demand of manufacturer j for raw material r in time t for
which adjust the relative impact of the sub-environmental objectives
scenario ξ can be expressed as the summation of the amount of raw
within the total environmental objective function.
material r required to produce all fertilizers, as
∑
3.4.4. Objective function Mjrtξ = αrp Pjptξ Ojp ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (21)
To solve a multi-objective problem, converting multiple objectives p
via weighted average and Pareto front are the most popular techniques.
Generally, the Pareto front technique gives better insight when there are 3.4.5. Constraints
few objective functions. However, interpretability of this method is In the following, the constraints of the proposed P-SCND problem are
reduced by increasing the number of objective functions (Shokouhifar & formulated in four stages, related to distribution centers, manufacturers,
Jalali, 2017; Shokouhifar, 2021). By varying the weights in the weighted suppliers, and external suppliers/producers, respectively.
average method, any point of a convex Pareto front can be obtained and Distribution centers
more effectively investigated by focusing on the desired area within the ∑∑
search space (Jakob and Blume, 2014). In this paper, regarding the SDdptξ ≥ D̃
dptξ ∀p, ∀d, ∀t, ∀ξ (22)
problem under study with five objectives (an economic, two social, and
t d

two environmental objectives), the weighted average method is used. To

IDdp0ξ = 0∀d, ∀p, ∀ξ (23)
this end, each objective is normalized to be minimized within [0,1] via
min–max method. To ensure being within [0,1] for all feasible solutions ∑ ∑ ∑
IDdpt− + YPPL PL
jdptξ XPjdptξ + YPRT RT
jdptξ XPjdptξ + YPEkdptξ XPEkdptξ
in pessimistic circumstances, the expected minimum and maximum 1ξ
j j k
values extended by 10 % (i.e., different objective functions are
≥ SDdptξ ∀d, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ (24)
normalized in [0.1,0.9]). As a result, the multiple objectives are con­
verted into a single-objective function to be minimized using the ∑ ∑ ∑
weighted average method, as: IDdptξ =IDdpt− 1ξ + YPPL PL
jdptξ XPjdptξ + YPRT RT
jdptξ XPjdptξ + YPEkdptξ XPEkdptξ
j j k

OF = wEC Z EC + wSC Z SC + wEN Z EN (15) − SDdptξ ∀d, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ

where wEC , wSC , and wEN , are constant weights in [0,1], which (25)
determine the relative importance of the relative objectives within the
IDdptξ ≤ WDdp ∀p, ∀d, ∀t, ∀ξ (26)
overall objective function. The total objective function including the

8
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Constraint (22) illustrates that the total satisfied demand of all dis­ ( )
∑ ∑ ∑
tributors for fertilizer p in time t under scenario ξ must be at least equal ISjrt− 1ξ +
PL PL
YSijrtξ XSijrtξ + RT RT
YSijrtξ XSijrtξ + E E
YSkjrtξ XSkjrtξ
to their total demand under the same scenario. Constraint (23) indicates i i k
∑
that the initial on-hand inventory of distributer d is zero. Constraint (24) ≥ αrp Pjptξ Ojp ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (35)
shows that the summation of on-hand inventory of distributor d for p

fertilizer p in time t under scenario ξ and those purchased from internal/ ( )

external sources must at least fulfill its demand for fertilizer p in time t ∑ ∑ ∑
ISjrtξ =ISjrt− + YSPL PL
ijrtξ XSijrtξ + YSRT RT
ijrtξ XSijrtξ + YSEkjrtξ XSEkjrtξ
under scenario ξ. Constraint (25) expresses the inventory of distributor 1ξ
i i k
d for fertilizer p in time t under scenario ξ after satisfying the demand of ∑
− αrp Pjptξ Ojp ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ
the same period. Constraint (26) ensures that the on-hand inventory p
held by distributor d for fertilizer p in time t under scenario ξ does not
(36)
exceed its warehouse capacity.
Manufacturers IPjp0ξ = 0∀j, ∀p, ∀ξ (37)
Ojp ≥ Vjp ∀j, ∀p (27) ∑ ∑
IPjpt− 1ξ + Pjptξ Ojp ≥ YPPL PL
jdptξ XPjdptξ + YPRT RT
jdptξ XPjdptξ ∀j, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ (38)
( ) d d
XSPL
ijrtξ ≤ max Urp Ojp ∀i, ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (28)
p ∑ ∑
IPjptξ = IPjpt− 1ξ + Pjptξ Ojp − YPPL PL
jdptξ XPjdptξ − YPRT RT
jdptξ XPjdptξ ∀j, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ
( )
(29)
d d
XSRT ≤ max Urp Ojp ∀i, ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ
ijrtξ
p (39)
( )
XSEkjrtξ ≤ max Urp Ojp ∀k, ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (30) ISjrtξ ≤ WSjr ∀r, ∀j, ∀t, ∀ξ (40)
p

IPjptξ ≤ WPjp ∀p, ∀j, ∀t, ∀ξ (41)

XPPL
jdptξ ≤ Ojp ∀j, ∀d, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ (31)
Constraint (27) shows whether the production line p is activated in
XPRT
jdptξ ≤ Ojp ∀j, ∀d, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ (32) manufacturer j or not. It ensures that all existed production lines are
certainly activated. Constraints (28)-(30) indicates that raw material r
Pjptξ Ojp ≤ CapPjp ∀j, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ (33) can be delivered by the planned orders, real-time orders, and external
suppliers to the manufacturer j in each time period under each scenario,
ISjr0ξ = 0∀j, ∀r, ∀ξ (34) respectively, if the raw material r is required for the fertilizer production
in the manufacturer j. Constraints (31) and (32) ensure that the

Fig. 3. Flowchart of the GA-based optimization of the P-SCND model.

9
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Fig. 4. Encoding of a feasible solution.

10
M. Rabbani et al.
manufacturer j cannot deliver fertilizer p to any distribution center
through planned or real-time orders, if there is no production line for the
fertilizer p in the manufacturer j. Constraint (33) ensures the amount of
fertilizer p produced by manufacturer j in period t under scenario ξ does
not exceed its capacity. Constraint (34) shows that the initial on-hand
inventory of raw material r held at manufacturer j under scenario ξ is
zero. Constraint (35) ensures that there are enough raw materials to
produce the required fertilizer p produced by manufacturer j in period t
under scenario ξ. Constraint (36) calculates the on-hand inventory of
raw material r held at manufacturer j at the end of period t under sce­
nario ξ. Constraint (37) expresses that the initial amount of fertilizer p
produced by manufacturer j under scenario ξ is zero. Constraints (38)
and (39) ensure that the on-hand and produced amounts of fertilizer p by
manufacturer j satisfy its planned and real-time demands in period t
under scenario ξ. Constraints (40) and (41) ensure the on-hand in­
ventories of a specific raw material or fertilizer held in manufacturer j
storage do not exceed its capacity.
Suppliers
XSPL
ijrtξ ≤ Air ∀i, ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (42)
XSRT
ijrtξ ≤ Air ∀i, ∀j, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (43)
∑ ∑
YSPL PL
ijrtξ XSijrtξ + YSRT RT
ijrtξ XSijrtξ ≤ CapSirtξ ∀i, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (44)
j j
Constraints (42) and (43) express that the required raw material r by
the manufacturer j may be sourced by the supplier i through planned or
real-time orders, if the raw material r is supplied (produced) in the
supplier i, i.e., each supplier can supply-one or some specific raw ma­
terials. Constraint (44) ensures the total amount of delivered raw ma­
terial r sourced by the supplier i to all manufacturers via planned and
real-time orders in period t under scenario ξ should not exceed the
production capacity of the supplier i.
External suppliers/producers
∑
YSEkjrtξ XSEkjrtξ ≤ CapSEkrtξ ∀k, ∀r, ∀t, ∀ξ (45)
j crossover operator. Moreover, a new offspring can be generated by
∑
YPEkdptξ XPEkdptξ ≤ CapPEkptξ ∀k, ∀p, ∀t, ∀ξ (46)
d GA ensures balanced exploration–exploitation to investigate the search
External supplier may provide raw materials or ready-to-use fertil­
izers. Constraint (45) ensures that the amount of raw material r sourced
by the external supplier k for the manufacturer j in the period t under
scenario ξ should not exceed its capacity. Similarly, Constraint (46)
ensures that the amount of fertilizer p sourced by the external supplier k
for the distributer d in the time period t under scenario ξ must not exceed
its capacity.
4. Solution method
The literature has proven that SCND is an NP-hard problem (Naderi
et al., 2021; Shokouhifar et al., 2021). Thus, metaheuristic algorithms
are the best choice to solve the SCND problems. GA is the most common
population-based metaheuristic algorithm that benefits from both
exploration and exploitation strategies to effectively investigate the
whole search space. The search process in GA starts by randomly
generating an initial population of chromosomes, and then, iteratively
attempts to enhance the population’s quality through selection, cross­
over, and mutation operators. Overall flowchart of the GA to optimize
the P-SCND can be shown in Fig. 3.
4.1. Solution representation
A feasible solution, S, can be represented as a hybrid binary-integer-
permutation structure comprising 12 matrices, as shown in Fig. 4. The
decision variables include S.O to determine the installation of new
11
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
production lines in manufacturers, S.P to set the amount of production of
each fertilizer in each manufacturer at every time period, four binary
matrices to set the network connections, and four integer matrices to
determine the amount of carrying raw materials/products between the
different network stages. Moreover, two resilience backup lists S.BLS
and S.BLP are defined to make the solution resilient against the un­
certainties and breakdowns in the model. As seen in Fig. 4, each row j in
S.BLS is a permutation vector of I internal suppliers to determine the
backup list of suppliers for the manufacturer j. Moreover, each row d in
S.BLP is a permutation vector of J manufacturers, which are considered
the backup list of supplying fertilizers for the distributor d when it faces
uncertainties and breakdowns.
4.2. Objective function evaluation
At every iteration of the GA procedure, each solution is evaluated via
the objective function of Eq. (15) according to the weights of the
different objectives, which the decision-maker have specified. Then, the
current population is sorted from the best chromosome to the worst
chromosome into a list. Moreover, the global best solution found so far is
updated and saved as Sgbest.
4.3. Population updating
Population updating in GA is done using recombination, crossover, and
mutation operators, which construct NumR, NumC, and NumM solutions,
respectively (Shokouhifar and Pilevari, 2022). The pseudo-code of GA
for the optimization of the P-SCND is provided in Algorithm 1. In the
recombination phase, NumR best chromosomes in the current genera­
tion are directly transferred to the next generation to avoid losing the
best solutions found so far. Moreover, NumC and NumM offspring are
generated via crossover and mutation, respectively. To generate a new
offspring in the crossover phase, two parents are chosen probabilistically
via the roulette wheel selection method. Then, they are combined via a
selecting a single chromosome and then mutating it via a mutation
operator. Utilizing the crossover and mutation operators together in the
space effectively. Different crossover and mutation operators are applied
based on the binary, integer, or permutation structure of the matrices.
Algorithm 1. Optimization of the P-SCND using GA.
Input:
Model parameters of the supply chain
Output:
Optimized P-SCND model
Optimization via GA:
Generation of random initial population
n = 0;
while (n < maximum number of iterations)
for (p ≤ population)
Evaluation of the objective function for solution p using Eq. (15)
end for
Sort population from the best to the worst according to their fitness
Transfer NumR best solutions directly to the next generation
for (p ≤ NumC)
Select two parents based on roulette wheel selection method
Generate an offspring using crossover operator
end for
for (p ≤ NumM)
Select a parent based on roulette wheel selection method
Generate an offspring using mutation operator
end for
Update the global best solution, found so far
n = n + 1;
end while
Return global best solution as optimized P-SCDN model
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

5. Case study
Table 2
Average annual demands of distribution centers by type of fertilizer (per t).
A real case study in Iran is considered to validate the proposed model
# Distribution center SSP TSP DAP
and the obtained results. Iran is a country with around 83 million
population. So, crop nutrients are essential for Iranian agriculture for 1 18,946 20,763 19,017
2 16,835 20,972 19,370
food insurance since a significant portion of land available for cultiva­
3 17,934 19,132 17,859
tion has poor soil fertility. In addition, fertilizers become a prerequisite 4 13,371 15,672 14,989
to enhance agricultural production due to low precipitation levels. 5 7,059 7,855 6,340
Thanks to rich natural gas reserves, the country has multiple facilities to 6 8,287 8,868 8,412
produce various chemical fertilizers’ raw materials. However, the low 7 2,229 2,278 2,310
8 6,602 6,833 6,628
participation of the Iranian fertilizer industry in producing P products
9 3,963 4,486 4,275
has put the country at the risk of shortage, and the demand for P-fer­ 10 4,354 4,966 4,616
tilizer is still being met mainly by external suppliers (Davoodpour, 11 28,927 36,114 30,206
2020). 12 8,881 9,436 8,719
13 43,640 47,368 48,054
The development of the Iranian fertilizer industry offers a complex
14 10,089 10,830 9,629
analytical problem in which most of the parameters are rapidly chang­ 15 3,239 3,612 3,365
ing. It is necessary to estimate future regional demands and take a much 16 8,049 9,565 9,368
closer look into the variation in costs of satisfying those demands from 17 29,381 32,410 30,220
internal and external sources, to obtain a clearer understanding of the 18 10,926 12,685 11,667
19 3,119 3,419 3,308
development options available to the industry. The extent and intensity
20 14,252 15,885 13,841
in Iran, leading to high annual fertilizer application rates, have strongly 21 11,710 13,688 13,261
influenced water quality. Accordingly, there are concerns about the 22 20,428 19,590 20,556
negative impacts of P on water quality. Large amounts of P-fertilizer and 23 3,787 4,192 3,383
24 20,300 24,398 21,376
poorly managed irrigated systems may lead to P accumulation and
25 12,648 14,226 12,275
surface and groundwater pollution (Jalali, 2007). 26 16,329 16,682 15,757
The required data for this study’s case study were collected from the 27 8,794 9,370 9,368
Iran Water and Soil Organization statistical reports, the reports pub­ 28 6,755 8,383 7,474
lished on the comprehensive database of fertilizer materials in Iran, and 29 6,167 6,184 5,635
30 17,021 17,729 15,107
expert opinions. Three types of P-fertilizers with the most application in
31 2,601 2,883 3,158
Iranian agriculture have been considered, including SSP, TSP, DAP, 32 9,742 11,637 10,948
which may be produced by internal manufacturers’ production lines or Sum 396,365 442,111 410,491
be imported from external suppliers. The main raw materials for pro­
ducing these fertilizers are P, A, PA, SA, which also may be produced by
internal suppliers or be imported by external producers. In fact, the
external suppliers/producers are considered those who exist in other Table 3
countries. The raw materials composition for producing P-fertilizers are Annual capacity of internal raw material suppliers (per t).
provided in Table 1. Raw material type # Suppliers Capacity Range Total capacity
A three-level direct supply chain of suppliers (internal/external), P 3 (40,000–120,000) 230,000
manufacturers, and distribution centers, have been considered in this A 9 (16,500–1,500,00) 5,900,000
paper. The distributors are considered the lowest echelon of the PSC, PA 7 (12,000–260,000) 890,000
which are the regional demand hubs of the chain and serve several local SA 36 (15,000–650,000) 3,450,000
farms. The data of the case study is reported in Tables 2-8. The annual
demands for distribution centers have been provided in Table 2. The
capacity of manufacturers and suppliers is addressed in Tables 3-5. As
can be seen in Table 3, Iran’s requirements for P-fertilizers’ raw mate­ Table 4
rials other than P are met through internal suppliers. In addition, more Annual capacity of external suppliers/producers (per t).
than 35 % of the country’s P needs can be satisfied from domestic Raw material # Suppliers Capacity Range (in Total
sources. By noticing Table 5, it can be precepted that there are also P- type Thousands) capacity
fertilizers shortages. Accordingly, two strategies have been considered P 5 (12,000 ~ 300,000) 900,000
to face the shortages: establishing new lines and importing from other SSP 5 (110,000 ~ 200,000) 750,000
countries. Therefore, only P and ready-to-use fertilizers might be im­ TSP 5 (115,000 ~ 210,000) 800,000
DAP 5 (80,000 ~ 200,000) 600,000
ported from other countries. Above all, the available manufacturers
which have only the production lines of one or two types of P-fertilizers
can also establish new lines for producing the other types of P-fertilizers situation to produce the internal P-fertilizers needs. The potential ca­
if needed and be justified. It is due to their achievement in the pro­ pacity of establishing new lines is considered 5,000 to 15,000 t annually.
duction technology and essential resources for the new lines. Also, 50 The costs of PSC are shown in Table 6. Other parameter values and data
potential manufacturing facilities can be installed in Iran upon the sets for the case study are reported in Table 7.

Table 1 6. Computational results and discussion

P-fertilizers properties based on main raw materials composition (%).
Fertilizer type P A PA SA
6.1. Parameters settings

SSP 0.64 0 0 0.37

This section reports the parameters setting for adjusting the GA al­
TSP 0.4 0 0.34 0
DAP 0 0.23 0.47 0 gorithm to solve the proposed model and the uncertain parameters
setting for the P-SCND problem.

12
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Table 5 6.1.1. Simulation settings

Annual capacity of producing P-fertilizers by available production lines (per t). The proposed model has been developed in MATLAB R2018b and
# Manufacturer SSP TSP DAP solved by the GA algorithm. Experiments were conducted on a laptop
with a 2.6 GHz i7 processor and 16 GB memory running on windows 10.
1 20,040 4,320 8,640
2 1,560 960 – To set each controllable parameter of the GA, different values were
3 8,880 11,400 7,200 evaluated, and eventually, the best value was considered for final sim­
4 2,280 480 – ulations (Esmaeili et al., 2022). The controllable parameters of the GA
5 1,320 840 – are summarized in Table 8.
6 3,360 2,160 –
7 4,440 2,880 2,640
8 2,280 840 1,080 6.1.2. Uncertain parameters settings
9 3,120 960 – As mentioned before, the demands and supplies in the proposed P-
10 3,480 – – SCND were considered uncertain parameters. We have analyzed previ­
11 3,360 1,440 –
ous years’ data for the case study to generate data for uncertain demands
12 3,480 – –
13 3,360 2,160 1,920 and supplies. The uncertain parameters of supply and demands in this
14 4,440 1,440 – study follow Normal distribution. Accordingly, average of demands/
15 5,520 – 3,960 supplies of similar periods has been considered based on expected mean
16 3,360 720 – values of data reported in Tables 1-5 for the case study. By considering
17 2,280 1,440
the expected standard deviation (Std.) for the uncertain supply/demand
–
18 11,160 4,320 –
19 2,640 – – parameters according to Table 9, the required data for the uncertain
20 – 14,280 – demands and supplies was achieved.
21 4,440 – – Besides, the breakdown parameters are also uncertain since the
22 22,200 15,720
–
disruption risks cannot be predicted. However, all the layers of the
23 – 14,280 10,200
24 13,320 1,800 5,400 supply chain may face disruption, but the occurring disruption on the
25 2,280 1,440 1,320 top levels of the chain has a bull-whip effect on the performance of other
26 3,240 3,840 – layers of the chain. In this regard, a reactive strategy has been noticed to
27 2,280 720 – promote the resiliency of the chain. In this paper, the disruption of two
28 11,160 14,280 –
29 2,640 120 –
30 5,520 720 2,280
31 5,520 – 3,960 Table 7
32 9,960 2,160 – Other data sets for the case study.
33 2,040 1,320 1,200
34 11,160 7,200 – Parameter Value Parameter Value
35 1,800 1,200 – T 12 (months) eg 0.5
36 8,040 5,160 4,680 S 10 et 2 e-3
37 1,560 720 – πξ 1/S ep 1 e-3
38 2,640 – – TSr , TPp 25 (t) er [2, 0.5, 1, 0.8] e-3
39 2,280 1,440 –
Hjp 5 ~ 12 (workers) λEC , λSC , λEN 5
40 4,440 1,320 –
G 0.1 (liter/kilometer) ω 1500 $
Sum 207,000 108,000 70,000

Table 8
Parameters setting of GA algorithm.
Table 6
Parameter Value/Description
PSC costs ($).
Maximum Iterations (IGA) 200
(a) Raw materials purchasing costs ($/t)
Population Size (PopGA) 50
Cost P A PA SA
Number of recombination solutions (NumR) 5
BCSPL
ir
80 ~ 90 18 ~ 25 450 ~ 500 90 ~ 100 Number of Crossover solutions (NumC) 30
BCSRT 1.5*BCSPL 1.5*BCSPL 1.5*BCSPL 1.5*BCSPL Number of Mutation solutions (NumM) 15
ir ir ir ir ir
BCSEkr 150 ~ 180 35 ~ 45 800 ~ 900 160 ~ 200 Selection Strategy Roulette wheel selection
Weigh of economic objective function (wEC) 0.5
(b) P-fertilizers producing costs Weigh of social objective function (wSC) 0.25
Cost SSP TSP DAP Weigh of environmental objective function (wEN) 0.25

BCPEkp ($/t) 300~350 750~850 1,300~1,500

PCjp ($/t) 140~160 220~250 350~380
OCjp ($) 300,000~350,000 450,000~500,000 800,000~900,000 Table 9
Uncertain parameters.
(c) Transportation costs
Fixed-cost (per truck) Value Variable cost (per truck/km) Value Uncertain parameter Distribution function Std. Probability of occurrence
FTCSijr 50~100 VTCSijr 1~1.5 CapS
̃ Normal random 0.2 N/A
irtξ
FTCSEkjr 200~300 VTCSEkjr 2.5~3.5 ̃E Normal random 0.3 N/A
CapSkrtξ
FTCPjdp 50~100 VTCPjdp 1~1.5
̃E
CapP Normal random 0.3 N/A
FTCPEkdp 200~300 VTCPEkdp 2.5~3.5 kptξ

D̃
dptξ
Normal random 0.1 N/A
(d) Monthly holding costs ($/t) Binary random N/A 3%
BD
̃
itξ
ICSjr ICPjp ICDdp
BDE
̃ Binary random N/A 5%
ktξ
3 3 2 Binary random N/A 2%
BDM
̃
jtξ

13
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Table 10
Size of test problems.
Problem # Raw materials # Products # External suppliers/ # Suppliers # Manufacturers # Distributors # Time periods # Scenarios
(r) (P) producers (K) (I) (J) (D) (T) (S)

1 (small) 2 1 0 1 1 1 3 1
2 (small) 2 1 0 2 2 2 3 1
3 (medium) 2 2 1 2 3 2 6 3
4 (medium) 2 2 1 3 5 3 6 3
5 (rather large) 3 2 2 5 10 3 12 5
Case Study 4 3 5 55 40 32 12 10
(large)

such situations, the other internal suppliers and manufacturers respond

Table 11
to unfulfilled demands via a backup list. The breakdown possibilities
Comparison of GA algorithm (on average over 10 consecutive runs) against
have been mentioned in Table 9.
exact method.
Dataset Exact (Optimal) GA
OFP CPU Time* OFP CPU Time* Error (%) 6.2. Results and discussion

1 0.4592 0.8 0.4592 8.2 0.00

2 0.4149 5.2 0.4149 13.4 0.00
6.2.1. Validation of GA against exact method
3 0.378 211 0.3783 41.5 0.079 In this section, the results of GA are compared with those obtained by
4 0.4302 29,336 0.4314 70.2 0.278 the exact method for several test problems given in Table 10 with small,
5 N/A N/A 0.4342 193 N/A medium, rather large, and large problem sizes. It should be emphasized
Case Study N/A N/A 0.3861 755 N/A
that the test problems #1–5 are synthetic problems given to validate our
* CPU Time in seconds (s)
GA-based solution approach against the exact search method, while the
case study is a real data which has been discussed in Sec. 5. As the
problem under consideration is an NP-hard problem, the dimension of
Table 12
the search space increase exponentially as the size of the problem ex­
Comparison of the different metaheuristic algorithms over 10 consecutive runs,
pands. Comparison among the obtained results of the exact method and
in term of OFP.
GA can be summarized in Table 11. As shown in Table 11, the mean
Run # SA PSO GA deviation of the solution obtained by the GA algorithm from the optimal
1 0.4108 0.3911 0.3832 solution varies from 0 % to 0.278 % for the small- and medium-size test
2 0.4026 0.3969 0.385 problems which have been solved via the exact method. Although the
3 0.4146 0.4083 0.3881
computational time of the exact method for the small-size problems is
4 0.4084 0.3896 0.3872
5 0.409 0.3964 0.3913 less than GA, it raises with the expansion of the problem size. Besides,
6 0.4235 0.393 0.384 the exact method does not work well for large-size problems and cannot
7 0.3973 0.3916 0.3836 find the solution in a reasonable time. Despite this, the computational
8 0.4174 0.4087 0.3823 time of finding the feasible solutions increase some linearly with the
9 0.4005 0.3951 0.3905
10 0.4218 0.4033 0.3865
problem size expansion in GA. The findings demonstrate the potential of
Best 0.3973 0.3896 0.3823 the GA approach in solving real-size P-SCND problems.
Average 0.4106 0.3974 0.3861 To justify the performance of GA against other metaheuristic algo­
Standard Deviation (STD) % 2.15 1.76 0.81 rithms, we applied particle swarm optimization (PSO: as a population-
based metaheuristic) and simulated annealing (SA: as a solution-based
metaheuristic) to solve the RRSP model under the case study data. For
echelons has been considered: raw material suppliers (internal and
the sake of fair comparison, the same number of function evaluations
external) and P-fertilizer manufacturers/producers (internal and
(NFEs) equal to 10,000 (200 × 50) was considered for all algorithms.
external). When a disruption occurs for external suppliers/producers,
More specifically, the number of iterations and population size of PSO
internal sources are responsible for satisfying the demands via a real-
were set similar to GA as 200 and 50, respectively. Moreover, the single-
time backup list. Nevertheless, vice versa is not possible. In other
solution SA was performed with 10,000 iterations. Due to random-
words, in the case of internal suppliers and manufacturers disruption,
nature of metaheuristics, each algorithm was applied to solve the
meeting demands by external suppliers is not possible. That is because of
model in 10 consecutive runs. Comparison of the obtained results in
the lead-times that importing goods from other countries require. In
term of OFP can be summarized in Table 12. Although SA and PSO have

Table 13
Optimized values of sustainable objective functions obtained by solving the proposed model with case study data.
# Scenario EC SC1 SC2 EN1 EN2 OF PF OFP

1 923281884.1 627 0.3255 256257.78 12229688.7 0.3772 0 0.3772

2 907842652.7 627 0.3253 254434.98 11989852.7 0.3735 0 0.3735
3 911482597.4 627 0.3247 255110.78 12,031,458 0.3745 0 0.3745
4 904798808.9 627 0.3250 255183.32 11857113.6 0.3726 0 0.3726
5 903560619.4 627 0.3249 253569.46 11879620.2 0.3723 0 0.3723
6 913808679.4 627 0.3248 255787.2 12010688.3 0.3749 0 0.3749
7 912191693.9 627 0.3247 255652.66 11939374.8 0.3743 0 0.3743
8 915761104.8 627 0.3244 255196.34 12046984.5 0.3754 0 0.3754
9 890118141.4 627 0.3250 252770.28 11791029.4 0.3696 0 0.3696
10 901548552.7 627 0.3248 253831.1 11902906.1 0.3722 0 0.3722
Mean 908439473.5 627 0.3249 254779.39 11967871.63 0.3736 0 0.3736
Std. 9108246.696 0 0.0003 1101.971482 123615.9399 0.0021 0 0.0021

14
M. Rabbani et al.
Fig. 5. The performance of GA in the aspect of OF for solving the proposed RRSP model.
Fig. 6. The performance of GA in the aspect of PF for solving the proposed RRSP model.
acceptable results in some runs, the results show the superiority of GA
against SA and PSO, by obtaining better OFP on average for 10 runs.
Moreover, the best result of SA, PSO, and GA, have been obtained as
0.3973, 0.3896, and 0.3823, respectively. It shows that GA outperforms
SA and PSO in term of the best result by 3.78 % and 1.87 %, respectively.
Another point is that the STD% of GA is less than SA and PSO, which
shows that the result of GA is more trustable than the compared algo­
rithms for a single run.
6.2.2. Model performance analysis
To evaluate the performance of the model for real-world situations,
the case study data has been employed for the sustainable P-SCND
model with the proposed RRSP approach. The results of solving the
presented model with real data for 10 different scenarios are reported in
Table 13. Due to the random nature of the metaheuristics, the GA al­
gorithm was performed for 10 successive runs. The mean and Std. of the
15
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
results for all scenarios are also reported.
Figs. 5–7 illustrate the performance of GA for the case study. In the
beginning, the algorithm’s convergence speed is tangible. As the algo­
rithm progresses, the convergence speed decreases gradually. The GA
starts the simulation and searches the solution by generating an initial
population. The average initial value for OF, PF, and OFP for all sce­
narios are obtained as 0.5792, 125.76, and 70.04, respectively. More­
over, the best solution within the initial population has OF = 0.4696, PF
= 43, and OFP = 20.66. By iteratively improving the solution via
recombination, crossover, and mutation operators, finally GA coverages
to the global best solution with OF = 0.3861, PF = 0, and OFP = 0.3861.
Fig. 8 indicates the new lines required to be established to satisfy the
PSC demands of each P-fertilizer type. The new lines may be established
in pre-launched plants (by using available manufacturers’ infrastruc­
ture) or in new plants (that had been considered potentially). As can be
seen, 32, 46, and 46 new lines are needed to be established for SSP, TSP,
M. Rabbani et al.
Fig. 7. The performance of GA in the aspect of OFP for solving the proposed RRSP model.
Fig. 8. The new lines were established for satisfying demands.
and DAP fertilizers, respectively.
Fig. 9 investigates the effects of conducting new production lines
establishment strategy for producing P-fertilizers inside the country on
the total PSC costs. According to Fig. 9, an operational cost of estab­
lishing new lines is imposed on the system, but the PSC total costs
significantly decrease by considering the domestic potential of produc­
ing P-fertilizers inside Iran from 1526.3 to 908.4 (M$). That is mainly
related to purchasing ready-to-use P-fertilizers from other countries
(1024.6 out of 1071.4 M$ of total purchasing cost) and transporting
them to Iran (327.1 out of 376.6 M$ out of total transportation cost). In
the case of implementing the new lines establishment strategy, a great
portion of the country’s demand for raw materials is also sourced by
domestic suppliers. The results ensure that establishing new production
lines can be a potent alternative that is beneficent for long-term
decisions.
Table 14 addresses the raw material flow from suppliers to
16
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
manufacturers for a 12-months planning horizon. As mentioned before,
the total requirements to A, SA, and PA are supplied domestically
through internal suppliers. As seen in Table 14, the main portion of A,
SA, and PA requirements are provided via planned orders (97.3 %, 95.7
%, and 97.4 %, respectively). A total of 52.6 % of manufacturing re­
quirements to P raw material are sourced via domestic suppliers through
planned (49.5 %) and real-time (3.1 %) orders. The rest of 47.4 % are
provided from other countries.
Table 15 indicates how the demands of distribution centers are
satisfied for a 12-months planning horizon. As mentioned before, do­
mestic manufacturers or external producers might provide all types of P-
fertilizers. According to Table 15, almost the same portion of different
fertilizers is satisfied via planned and real-time orders (~85 % and 2.5
%, respectively). The rest of the demands are satisfied from other
countries directly.
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Fig. 9. The effects of establishing new production lines on the PSC costs.

6.3. Realization
Table 14
Raw materials ordering quantity (per t).
In this section, the performance of the Nominal, RSP, and RRSP ap­
Purchased raw material P A SA PA proaches for the sustainable P-SCND problem are compared under
YSPL
ijrt
170,409 77,198 238,642 137,158 several realizations of the uncertain parameters. The Nominal model
YSPL
ijrt (%)
49.5 97.3 95.7 97.4 was solved according to the nominal values of all uncertain parameters.
YSRT
ijrt
10,643 2,152 10,797 3,685 In this regard, new random realizations are generated concerning the
YSRT
ijrt (%)
3.1 2.7 4.3 2.6 corresponding uncertainty sets to examine the obtained results of each
YSEkjrt 162,937 0 0 0 approach under the realization models. Moreover, the total costs of
YSEkjrt (%) 47.4 0 0 0 constraints violation would be calculated aside from the other costs
Total 343,989 79,350 249,439 140,843 (Fazli-Khalaf et al., 2017; Hosseini-Motlagh et al., 2020), by means of a
penalty function as in Eq. (16). We generated 10 new scenarios for the
realization. Finally, the solutions obtained by the Nominal, RSP, and
Table 15 RRSP models were compared in the aspects of mean and Std. The model
P-fertilizers ordering quantity (per t). with a lower mean and Std has a better performance than another
model. The realization results for the 10 realization scenarios in aspects
Purchased P-fertilizer SSP TSP DAP
of OF, PF, and OFP are reported in Table 16. As it can be seen, the
YPPL
idrt
345,673 368,230 351,380 nominal model indicated the worst performance compared to the RSP
YPPL
idrt (%)
86.8 86.7 85.2
and RRSP approaches for all scenarios with a considerable number of
YPRT 9846 10,883 9084
idrt penalties. Note that the Nominal model ignores the penalty cost for
YPRT
idrt (%)
2.5 2.6 2.2
violation of robustness criteria (i.e., optimality robustness and feasibility
YPEkdrt 42,493 45,421 51,735
10.7 10.7 12.6
robustness). Although the RSP approach performed better than Nominal
YPEkdrt (%)
Total 398,012 424,534 412,199 for the new scenarios and achieved the same results as the RRSP
approach in a few scenarios, it still has a substantial number of penalties.
On the other hand, the proposed RRSP approach has obtained the best

Table 16
Result of realization for Nominal, RSP and RRSP models.
# Realization Nominal RSP RRSP
OF PF OFP OF PF OFP OF PF OFP

1 0.3939 3 1.5756 0.3703 0 0.3703 0.3835 0 0.3835

2 0.3890 3 1.5561 0.3650 5 2.1899 0.3820 0 0.3820
3 0.3730 4 1.8651 0.3619 2 1.0857 0.3554 0 0.3554
4 0.3789 6 2.6526 0.3848 0 0.3848 0.3588 0 0.3588
5 0.3711 5 2.2268 0.3553 2 1.0658 0.3551 0 0.3551
6 0.3813 6 2.6689 0.3602 2 1.0805 0.3581 1 0.7161
7 0.4016 2 1.2047 0.3734 0 0.3734 0.3551 0 0.3551
8 0.3847 3 1.5386 0.3577 0 0.3577 0.3674 0 0.3674
9 0.3937 5 2.3624 0.3649 4 1.8244 0.3577 1 0.7153
10 0.3847 6 2.6927 0.3744 4 1.8718 0.3772 2 1.1317
Mean 0.3852 4.3 2.0343 0.3668 1.9 1.0604 0.3650 0.4 0.5120

17
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Fig. 10. Comparison of the performance of Nominal, RSP, and RRSP approaches under the realization in the aspects of OFP.

Table 17
Unsatisfied demands of manufacturers for raw materials (%).
# Realization Nominal RSP RRSP
P A PA SA P A PA SA P A PA SA

1 3.66 1.13 4.64 3.07 1.16 0.83 1.12 3.39 0.1 0.03 0.16 0.02
2 4.07 0.87 2.85 1.77 2 0.35 1.61 1.21 0.14 0.04 0.14 0.1
3 4.1 0.87 4.15 1.91 1.59 0.66 1.31 1.03 0.1 0.05 0.24 0.1
4 2.45 1.16 5.25 8.43 0.73 0.55 2.24 4.46 0.11 0.05 0.15 0.06
5 4 1.15 2.51 0.83 2.24 0.37 1.49 0.93 0.11 0.03 0.21 0.08
6 2.95 1.46 2.38 4.62 1.08 0.58 1.81 2.64 0.1 0.04 0.2 0.05
7 2.11 0.87 4.99 2.84 1.96 0.28 1.33 0.57 0.08 0.02 0.14 0.08
8 2.96 0.45 4.33 5.67 1.85 0.37 1.11 2.58 0.16 0.04 0.18 0.11
9 3.01 0.83 2.03 5.51 2.22 0.39 1.46 0.98 0.16 0.04 0.25 0.04
10 3.41 0.39 3.2 5.05 2.03 0.43 1.54 2.44 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.03
Mean 3.272 0.918 3.633 3.97 1.686 0.481 1.502 2.023 0.114 0.037 0.178 0.067

Table 18
Unsatisfied demands of distribution centers for P-fertilizers (%).
# Realization Nominal RSP RRSP
SSP TSP DAP SSP TSP DAP SSP TSP DAP

1 1.49 1.79 4.78 0 0.17 0 0 0 0

2 3.43 4.34 3.32 1.46 9.58 0 1.1 0.45 0.32
3 4.53 3.42 2.33 0 1.47 1.93 0 0 0.67
4 7.06 5.77 5.02 0.21 3.12 0.78 0 0 0
5 3.67 4.69 4.23 0.22 4.67 1.54 0 0.73 1.31
6 3.03 4.96 4.95 2 3.32 0 0.48 0 0
7 0 3.59 2.17 0.65 2.72 0 0 0.17 0
8 0.99 3.89 2.77 1.38 2.07 0 0 1.02 0
9 3.59 5.02 4.11 0 4.25 2.65 0 1.1 1.44
10 2.96 10.5 0 3.94 6.09 0 1.7 1.13 0
Mean 3.075 4.797 3.368 0.986 3.746 0.69 0.328 0.46 0.374

performance in all scenarios compared to the Nominal and RSP ap­
proaches. Fig. 10 compares the OFP obtained through different ap­
proaches for the 10 realization scenarios. The RRSP model almost
dominates the perception of uncertain parameters. The result shows the
applicability of the proposed RRSP approach to encounter real-life
scenarios.
Tables 17 and 18 compare the unsatisfied demands obtained by the
Nominal, RSP, and RRSP approaches for the 10 realization scenarios.
Table 17 shows the unmet demand of manufacturers separately for each
raw material. Compared with Nominal and RSP models, considering
each approach’s mean and Std., the RRSP model has greatly fulfilled the
demands of realization scenarios with the lowest shortage. Table 18 also
shows unsatisfied demands of distribution centers to the P-fertilizers.
Similar to the unsatisfied demands of manufacturers, in this case, the
RRSP approach performed better than the other two approaches, and the
shortage has been significantly decreased to a total of 0.39 % for all P-
fertilizer types. The results indicate the applicability of the proposed
model against the Nominal and RSP approaches in facing real-world
situations.
6.4. Sensitivity analysis
6.4.1. Robustness evaluation
A trade-off between the model robustness and solution robustness

18
M. Rabbani et al.
Fig. 11. The effect of λ on solution robustness and model robustness.
Fig. 12. The effect of ω on solution robustness and model robustness.
could be obtained through penalty parameters λEC and ω defined in the
economic objective function of the proposed RRSP model, as seen in Eq.
(8). These penalties allow the model to be infeasible, and therefore,
violation of controlling constraints would be permitted (Fazli-Khalaf
et al., 2017). When ω = λEC = 0, there is no penalty for controlling
violations. Then, because the first objective (economic) roles to mini­
mize total costs, no inventory flow through the system is preferred.
Unless constraints control the maximum allowed shortages, otherwise,
the system will face the maximum unmet demand. So, the effect of
penalty costs on controlling the constraint violations must be examined.
Fig. 11 indicates the effect of solution robustness penalty (λEC ) on the
performance of solution robustness and model robustness. For λEC = 0,
since the model has no control on the solutions Std, a significant risk is
imposed on the system, and the rate of Std. is sensible. By increasing the
λEC value, gradually, the weight of the second term of the objective
function (i.e., solution robustness) increases. Hence, the algorithm
severely tries to minimize the amount of Std. of the solutions. As seen in
Fig. 11, for the small value of λEC (i.e., λEC < 5), the second term of the
total economic objective function of the RRSP model in Eq. (8) slightly
affects the total economic objective performance. In this case, the weight
of the third term of the total economic objective (model robustness)
19
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
dominates the second term. That is why the most of demand is satisfied
for lower values of λEC . However, the model robustness is still affected by
two factors: 1) the model constraints that must be satisfied; 2) the first
term of the total economic objective (solutions’ mean), which has a
great impact in total. As the amount of λEC increases, the weight of the
solution robustness gradually increases. As a result, the second term of
the economic objective function becomes more effective. From λEC > 5,
the weight of the second term of the objective function dominates the
third term. As a result, the algorithm takes less effort to reduce the
amount of shortage. Furthermore, a great cost is imposed t the system to
make intangible progress in reducing Std. On the other hand, the solu­
tion robustness and the model robustness indicate a roper trade-off on
λEC = 5. At this point, it seems that an equal weight has been shared
among the second term and the third terms of the total economic
objective function. As a result, the unsatisfied demand and Std. which
are imposed on the system are appropriately optimized.
Fig. 12 compares the solution robustness and model robustness
performance for different values of model robustness penalty (ω). When
ω = 0, there is no control on the solution feasibility (i.e., model
robustness). In this case, the most shortage is imposed on the system. On
the other hand, the weight of the second term of the economic objective
M. Rabbani et al. Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770

Table 19
Effect of the sustainable objective function weights on the different objective functions.
(wEC , wSC , wEN ) Economic Objective Social Objectives Environmental Objectives
ZEC (106 $) ZEC ZSC1 (person) ZSC2 (%) ZSC ZEN1 (106 t) ZEN2 (106 t) ZEN

(0.5,0.25,0.25) 912.21 0.3162 627 28.23 0.5686 0.2218 10.54 0.3434

(0.25,0.5,0.25) 1135.3 0.3981 943 41.1 0.3857 0.3042 13.75 0.457
(0.25,0.25,0.5) 1060.7 0.367 559 23.95 0.6521 0.1997 9.213 0.3042
(1/3,1/3,1/3) 1002.5 0.3482 647 29.88 0.5415 0.211 9.186 0.3127
(0,0.5,0.5) 1494.8 0.5135 856 38.7 0.406 0.1668 8.447 0.2672
(0.5,0,0.5) 833.6 0.2865 505 18.86 0.7256 0.145 7.289 0.235
(0.5,0.5,0) 911.9 0.3143 1040 45.11 0.3463 0.3618 18.447 0.5813
(1,0,0) 773 0.2613 453 22.89 0.754 0.4013 19.843 0.6338
(0,1,0) 1642.1 0.5632 1163 49.41 0.3187 0.2992 15.471 0.4765
(0,0,1) 1366.4 0.4787 548 23.14 0.674 0.1476 6.559 0.2189

function and the Std. of the solutions gets greater overally. So, for the
lower value of ω (i.e., ω < 1,500) the algorithm indicates more effort on
reducing the Std., but the unsatisfied demands are at the highest level.
From this point on, the shortage decreases significantly since the weight
of the third term of the economic objective increases, and the algorithm
tries to minimize its value. Notably, shortage reduction with greater
values ω imposes a high cost on the system. Moreover, the shortage
never gets zero, as mentioned before, since capacity constraints must be
satisfied and because of the role of the first term of the economic
objective function. Contrary, due to a decrement in the weight of the
second term, the Std. increases. In total, the result illustrates that at ω =
1, 500, there is a balance between solution robustness and model
robustness. At this point, the unsatisfied demand and Std. are at
appropriate optimality.
6.4.2. Sustainability trade-off
As mentioned above, the decision-makers may have different pref­
erences depending on the available resources in real-world situations. In
this regard, such constraints may affect their decisions on pursuing
sustainability. Hence, the sustainability objectives (i.e., economic, so­
cial, and environmental) may not have the same weights. This section
discusses the effect of sustainable objective functions weights on the
system’s overall performance. Table 19 reports the trade-off among the
weights of sustainable objectives of the proposed RRSP model, wherein
the first row corresponds to the default values of the weights in all above
simulations. In Table 19, the five sub-objectives including total eco­
nomic cost ZEC ($), number of employed new workers ZSC1 (person),
average crop yield ZSC2 (%), total P loss ZEN1 (t), and total GHG emission
ZEN2 (t), are reported. Among them, ZEC , ZEN1 , and ZEN , are to be mini­
mized, while ZSC1 and ZSC2 are to be maximized. Moreover, the total
economic, social, and environmental objective functions are respec­
tively reported by ZEC , ZSC , and ZEN , all provided in normalized form to
be minimized within [0,1].
According to the obtained results in Table 19, by considering higher
weigh for each objective function (economic, social, and environ­
mental), the normalized value of the related objective (ZEC , ZSC , and ZEN )
is reduced. The less wEC, the higher economic cost ZEC ($). By increasing
wSC, the higher ZSC1 (number of employed new workers) and ZSC2 (crop
yield %) have been obtained. Moreover, the higher wEN, the less ZEN1
(total P loss) and ZEN2 (total GHG emission) are achieved. However,
there are some correlations between the different objectives. For
example, the first social objective (ZSC1 ) attempts to install more pro­
duction lines to employ more workers in the system. In one hand, it
boosts more costs to install new lines. On the other hand, by installing
new production lines, the capacity of the internal manufacturers is
increased. Generally, the total cost of purchasing raw materials, trans­
portation cost, installation, and production, is less than purchasing
fertilizers from the external suppliers (on average). Therefore, this cor­
relation may lead to reduce the total economic cost. In addition, less
transportation is needed to transfer fertilizers from the internal
manufacturers than from the external suppliers. It may result in less
GHGs emissions (second environmental objective). However, some ob­
jectives have conflict impacts on each other. For example, the aim of the
second social objective is to increase the average crop yield as much as
possible. It means that more DAP than the SSP and TSP should be
delivered to the demand nodes, which results in more value of the total
economic cost. In addition, more vehicles are needed to transport them,
resulting in more GHGs emissions.
6.5. Managerial insights
Nowadays, management of soil resources for global food security is a
strategic purpose of countries. Hence, optimizing soil nutrition’s supply
chains for the fertility of the agricultural fields is one of the most critical
priorities of administrators. Meanwhile, P-fertilizer is an essential and
non-substitutable nutrient for food and fiber production. Thus, it is
necessary to design a supply chain network to source the required P-
fertilizer productions for the provinces in different crop periods. Despite
the importance of optimizing the PSC network, it has not received
enough attention so far mathematically. In this paper, the problem of P-
SCND has been examined by considering its sustainability and resiliency
in an uncertain environment. It helps the administrators select proper
strategies and tactics as well as promote the network’s performance in
all the triple aspects of sustainability (i.e., economic, social, and envi­
ronment). Besides, the proposed model helps decision-makers encounter
disruptions using an RRSP approach. The model has been validated with
real data from Iran. In addition, some sensitivity and realization ana­
lyses have been evaluated its performance.
To help the decision-makers to have a proper grasp on the applica­
tion of the proposed model and its solution, several insights are pro­
vided. This paper discusses two strategies for satisfying the P-fertilizers
demands: purchasing ready-to-use fertilizers by export from other
countries and establishing new production lines domestically. We
widely discussed the consequence of these strategies in Section 6.2.2.
The results indicated that establishing new lines is an appropriate
strategy for long-term operations, especially in the economic aspect. In
that case, the external suppliers still play a significant role in sourcing
the raw materials, especially P. From the resilience point of view, since
purchasing P-fertilizers from other countries needs a noticeable lead-
time, by occurring a disruption for external producers, the compensa­
tion of shortage is impossible pragmatically. In that case, by the model’s
ability to handle the disruption from backup lists, the unmet demands
can be satisfied significantly. This result also verifies establishing new
production lines justification and resiliency.
Promoting social and environmental aspects of sustainability is
another issue that requires considerable attention. Thus, the adminis­
trators can measure and determine their decisions’ social and environ­
mental effects. It is necessary to make a trade-off among sustainable
objective issues to achieve better performance and improve the
competitive advantage. The proposed model plays a significant role in
reducing P-loss, improving P use, and P yield. Besides, it is effective in

20
M. Rabbani et al.
reducing GHGs emissions and the unemployment rate by providing new
job opportunities. Thus, by the proposed model, sustainability is
emphasized as well. In addition, the policies considered in developing
the proposed RRSP model help administrators to capture real-world
uncertainties.
7. Conclusion and future directions
The design of a strategic P-fertilizer supply chain network under
disruption is one of the most critical priorities of the world. One of the
strategic purposes of agricultural managers is to supply sustainable
agricultural products in stable conditions that require P-fertilizers. In
this regard, some disruptions such as sanctions and natural disasters
have a destructive effect on the supply of raw materials. The uncertainty
of input parameters negatively impacts the decision-making levels,
including strategic, tactical, and operational levels.
This study introduced a new resilient P-fertilizer supply chain
network model considering sustainable responsibilities for the first time.
The model applicability has been evaluated with a real-case study. The
model performance in encountering the disruption risks has been
boosted by using an RRSP approach and conducting a proactive strategy.
Further, the modelling approach guarantees optimality and feasibility
robustness through the efficient solution that deals with parametric
uncertainty. Also, some sensitivity analyses have been accomplished on
the main parameters to evaluate the model’s performance and provide
practical insight for administrators.
The results show that the proposed model and solution approach
significantly satisfies various demands at the desired service level. The
proposed model helps administrators consider social and environmental
issues besides economic concerns. The model suggests beneficial
disruption risk management strategies to satisfy various demands more
desirably and prevent shortages appropriately. The model helps man­
agers act decisively for their sustainable responsibilities to achieve
better performance.
In this paper, we have tested the proposed model on five synthetic
datasets as well as a real case study in Iran. As a future work, other real
case studies and scenarios would be used to show the quality of the
proposed model on different datasets. Due to the lack of attention to the
issue of PSC problems in the literature, future research can focus on
optimizing the P-fertilizers supply chain in different echelons by using
other modelling approaches and solution techniques. The location-
allocation problem of establishing new plants is also another inter­
esting research area. Besides, investigating the recycling problem of P
leach is a sustainable research idea that can reduce the P-loss and
improve the productivity of the PSC network. Applying problem-
dependant heuristics to guide the metaheuristic algorithm can be
practical for empowering the solution method. Moreover, examining
Pareto front metaheuristics such as non-dominated sorting genetic al­
gorithms and multi-objective particle swarm optimization to solve the
proposed RRSP model is encouraged.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Aldrighetti, R., Battini, D., Ivanov, D., & Zennaro, I. (2021). Costs of resilience and
disruptions in supply chain network design models: A review and future research
directions. International Journal of Production Economics, 235, Article 108103.
21
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
Altamira-Algarra, B., Puigagut, J., Day, J. W., Mitsch, W. J., Vymazal, J., Hunter, R. G., &
García, J. (2022). A review of technologies for closing the P loop in agriculture
runoff: Contributing to the transition towards a circular economy. Ecological
Engineering, 177, Article 106571.
Babazadeh, R., & Sabbaghnia, A. (2018). Evaluating the performance of robust and
stochastic programming approaches in a supply chain network design problem under
uncertainty. International Journal of Advanced Operations Management, 10(1), 1–18.
Babbitt, C. W., Babbitt, G. A., & Oehman, J. M. (2021). Behavioral impacts on residential
food provisioning, use, and waste during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainable
Production and Consumption, 28, 315–325.
Baghizadeh, K., Cheikhrouhou, N., Govindan, K., & Ziyarati, M. (2022). Sustainable
agriculture supply chain network design considering water-energy-food nexus using
queuing system: A hybrid robust possibilistic programming. Natural Resource
Modeling, 35(1), e12337.
Bai, Z., Li, H., Yang, X., Zhou, B., Shi, X., Wang, B., … Qin, W. (2013). The critical soil P
levels for crop yield, soil fertility and environmental safety in different soil types.
Plant and Soil, 372(1), 27–37.
Bozorgi-Amiri, A., Jabalameli, M. S., & Mirzapour Al-e-Hashem, S. M. J. (2013). A multi-
objective robust stochastic programming model for disaster relief logistics under
uncertainty. OR Spectrum, 35(4), 905–933.
Chowdhury, R. B., Moore, G. A., Weatherley, A. J., & Arora, M. (2016). A novel substance
flow analysis model for analysing multi-year phosphorus flow at the regional scale.
Science of The Total Environment, 572, 1269–1280.
Cordell, D., Drangert, J.-O., & White, S. (2009). The story of phosphorus: Global food
security and food for thought. Global Environmental Change, 19(2), 292–305.
Davoodpour, M. (2020). A look at the Phosphate Industry in the World and Iran’s
Opportunities in Developing the Value Chain of this Mineral Material. Construction
Science and Technology, 1(3).
Esmaeili, H., Hakami, V., Bidgoli, B. M., & Shokouhifar, M. (2022). Application-specific
clustering in wireless sensor networks using combined fuzzy firefly algorithm and
random forest. Expert Systems with Applications, 210, Article 118365.
Elluru, S., Gupta, H., Kaur, H., & Singh, S. P. (2019). Proactive and reactive models for
disaster resilient supply chain. Annals of Operations Research, 283(1), 199–224.
Fahimnia, B., & Jabbarzadeh, A. (2016). Marrying supply chain sustainability and
resilience: A match made in heaven. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and
Transportation Review, 91, 306–324.
Fang, Y.-P., Fang, C., Zio, E., & Xie, M. (2019). Resilient critical infrastructure planning
under disruptions considering recovery scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 68(2), 452–466.
Farhadi, F., Taghizadeh Yazdi, M. R., Momeni, M., & Sajadi, S. M. (2018). Providing
Sustainable Supply Chain Agility Model in the Brick Industry of Isfahan province.
Industrial Management Journal, 10(3), 335–352.
Fazli-Khalaf, M., Mirzazadeh, A., & Pishvaee, M. S. (2017). A robust fuzzy stochastic
programming model for the design of a reliable green closed-loop supply chain
network. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 23(8),
2119–2149.
Garske, B., & Ekardt, F. (2021). Economic policy instruments for sustainable phosphorus
management: Taking into account climate and biodiversity targets. Environmental
Sciences Europe, 33(1), 1–20.
Gholizadeh, H., Fazlollahtabar, H., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2020). A robust fuzzy stochastic
programming for sustainable procurement and logistics under hybrid uncertainty
using big data. Journal of Cleaner Production, 120640.
Golan, M. S., Trump, B. D., Cegan, J. C., & Linkov, I. (2021). Supply chain resilience for
vaccines: Review of modeling approaches in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Industrial Management & Data Systems.
Gong, H., Meng, F., Wang, G., Hartmann, T. E., Feng, G., Wu, J., … Zhang, F. (2022).
Toward the sustainable use of mineral phosphorus fertilizers for crop production in
China: From primary resource demand to final agricultural use. Science of the Total
Environment, 804, Article 150183.
Gong, H., Xiang, Y., Wu, J., Nkebiwe, P. M., Feng, G., Jiao, X., & Zhang, F. (2022). Using
knowledge-based management for sustainable phosphorus use in China. Science of
the Total Environment, 814, Article 152739.
Hassannayebi, E., Zegordi, S. H., Amin-Naseri, M. R., & Yaghini, M. (2017). Train
timetabling at rapid rail transit lines: A robust multi-objective stochastic
programming approach. Operational Research, 17(2), 435–477.
Hosseini-Motlagh, S.-M., Samani, M. R. G., & Cheraghi, S. (2020). Robust and stable
flexible blood supply chain network design under motivational initiatives. Socio-
Economic Planning Sciences, 70, Article 100725.
Ivanov, D. (2018). Revealing interfaces of supply chain resilience and sustainability: A
simulation study. International Journal of Production Research, 56(10), 3507–3523.
Jabbarzadeh, A., Fahimnia, B., & Sabouhi, F. (2018). Resilient and sustainable supply
chain design: Sustainability analysis under disruption risks. International Journal of
Production Research, 56(17), 5945–5968.
Jalali, M. (2007). Phosphorus status and sorption characteristics of some calcareous soils
of Hamadan, western Iran. Environmental Geology, 53(2), 365–374.
Jakob, W., & Blume, C. (2014). Pareto optimization or cascaded weighted sum: A
comparison of concepts. Algorithms, 7(1), 166–185.
Jiang, Y., Li, K., Chen, S., Fu, X., Feng, S., & Zhuang, Z. (2022). A sustainable agricultural
supply chain considering substituting organic manure for chemical fertilizer.
Sustainable Production and Consumption, 29, 432–446.
Karmaker, C. L., Ahmed, T., Ahmed, S., Ali, S. M., Moktadir, M. A., & Kabir, G. (2021).
Improving supply chain sustainability in the context of COVID-19 pandemic in an
emerging economy: Exploring drivers using an integrated model. Sustainable
Production and Consumption, 26, 411–427.
M. Rabbani et al.
Leung, S. C. H., Tsang, S. O. S., Ng, W.-L., & Wu, Y. (2007). A robust optimization model
for multi-site production planning problem in an uncertain environment. European
Journal of Operational Research, 181(1), 224–238.
Li, H., Huang, G., Meng, Q., Ma, L., Yuan, L., Wang, F., … Chen, X. (2011). Integrated soil
and plant phosphorus management for crop and environment in China. A review.
Plant and Soil, 349(1), 157–167.
Luo, Z., Ma, S., Hu, S., & Chen, D. (2017). Towards the sustainable development of the
regional phosphorus resources industry in China: A system dynamics approach.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 126, 186–197.
Martinez-Escobar, D. F., & Mallela, J. (2019). Assessing the impacts of phosphate mining
on coral reef communities and reef development. Science of the Total Environment,
692, 1257–1266.
Mehrjerdi, Y. Z., & Shafiee, M. (2021). A resilient and sustainable closed-loop supply
chain using multiple sourcing and information sharing strategies. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 289, Article 125141.
Meyer, G., Bell, M. J., Doolette, C. L., Brunetti, G., Zhang, Y., Lombi, E., & Kopittke, P. M.
(2020). Plant-available phosphorus in highly concentrated fertilizer bands: Effects of
soil type, phosphorus form, and coapplied potassium. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry, 68(29), 7571–7580.
Mohr, S., & Evans, G. (2013). Projections of future phosphorus production. Philica, 380.
Mousazadeh, M., Torabi, S. A., Pishvaee, M. S., & Abolhassani, F. (2018). Health service
network design: A robust possibilistic approach. International Transactions in
Operational Research, 25(1), 337–373.
Mulvey, J. M., Vanderbei, R. J., & Zenios, S. A. (1995). Robust optimization of large-scale
systems. Operations Research, 43(2), 264–281.
Naderi, R., Shafiei Nikabadi, M., Alem Tabriz, A., & Pishvaee, M. S. (2021). Supply chain
sustainability improvement using exergy analysis. Computers and Industrial
Engineering, 154(January), Article 107142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cie.2021.107142
Nedelciu, C. E., Ragnarsdottir, K. V., Schlyter, P., & Stjernquist, I. (2020). Global
phosphorus supply chain dynamics: Assessing regional impact to 2050. Global Food
Security, 26, Article 100426.
Oberle, B., Bringezu, S., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Hellweg, S., Schandl, H., Clement, J.,
Cabernard, L., Che, N., Chen, D., & Droz-Georget, H. (2019). Global resources outlook
2019: natural resources for the future we want.
Pavlov, A., Ivanov, D., Pavlov, D., & Slinko, A. (2019). Optimization of network
redundancy and contingency planning in sustainable and resilient supply chain
resource management under conditions of structural dynamics. Annals of Operations
Research, 1–30.
Ragnarsdóttir, K. V., Sverdrup, H. U., & Koca, D. (2011). Challenging the planetary
boundaries I: Basic principles of an integrated model for phosphorous supply
dynamics and global population size. Applied Geochemistry, 26, S303–S306.
Röös, E., Bajželj, B., Smith, P., Patel, M., Little, D., & Garnett, T. (2017). Greedy or
needy? Land use and climate impacts of food in 2050 under different livestock
futures. Global Environmental Change, 47, 1–12.
Sadeghi, Z., Boyer, O., Sharifzadeh, S., & Saeidi, N. (2021). A Robust Mathematical
Model for Sustainable and Resilient Supply Chain Network Design: Preparing a
Supply Chain to Deal with Disruptions. Complexity, 2021.
Scholz, R. W., Ulrich, A. E., Eilittä, M., & Roy, A. (2013). Sustainable use of phosphorus:
A finite resource. Science of the Total Environment, 461, 799–803.
Scholz, R. W., & Wellmer, F.-W. (2013). Approaching a dynamic view on the availability
of mineral resources: What we may learn from the case of phosphorus? Global
Environmental Change, 23(1), 11–27.
Scholz, R. W., & Wellmer, F.-W. (2015). Losses and use efficiencies along the phosphorus
cycle. Part 1: Dilemmata and losses in the mines and other nodes of the supply chain.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 105, 216–234.
Shafaghizadeha, S., Ebrahimnejadb, S., Navabakhsh, M., & Sajadic, S. M. (2021).
Proposing a Model For a Resilient Supply Chain: A Meta-heuristic Algorithm.
International Journal of Engineering Transactions C: Aspects, 34(12), In-Press.
22
Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022) 108770
Shokouhifar, M., & Jalali, A. (2017). Optimized sugeno fuzzy clustering algorithm for
wireless sensor networks. Engineering applications of artificial intelligence, 60, 16–25.
Shokouhifar, M. (2021). Swarm intelligence RFID network planning using multi-antenna
readers for asset tracking in hospital environments. Computer Networks, 198, Article
108427.
Shokouhifar, M., Sabbaghi, M. M., & Pilevari, N. (2021). Inventory management in blood
supply chain considering fuzzy supply/demand uncertainties and lateral
transshipment. Transfusion and Apheresis Science, 103103.
Shokouhifar, M., & Pilevari, N. (2022). Combined adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system
and genetic algorithm for e-learning resilience assessment during COVID-19
pandemic. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 34(10), e6791.
Shokouhifar, M., & Ranjbarimesan, M. (2022). Multivariate time-series blood donation/
demand forecasting for resilient supply chain management during COVID-19
pandemic. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 100078.
Simons, A., Solomon, D., Chibssa, W., Blalock, G., & Lehmann, J. (2014). Filling the
phosphorus fertilizer gap in developing countries. Nature Geoscience, 7(1), 3.
Sohrabi, M., Zandieh, M., & Afshar-nadjafi, B. (2021). A simple empirical inventory
model for managing with demand differentiation. Computational and Applied
Mathematics, 40(8), 1–38.
Sohrabi, M., Zandieh, M., & Afshar-Nadjafi, B. (2021). Dynamic demand-centered
process-oriented data model for inventory management of hemovigilance systems.
Healthcare Informatics Research, 27(1), 73–81.
Suryawanshi, P., & Dutta, P. (2022). Optimization models for supply chains under risk,
uncertainty, and resilience: A state-of-the-art review and future research directions.
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 157, Article
102553.
Sverdrup, H. U., & Ragnarsdottir, K. V. (2011). Challenging the planetary boundaries II:
Assessing the sustainable global population and phosphate supply, using a systems
dynamics assessment model. Applied Geochemistry, 26, S307–S310.
Sverdrup, H. U., & Ragnarsdóttir, K. V. (2014). Natural resources in a planetary
perspective. Geochemical Perspectives, 3(2), 129–130.
Taleizadeh, A. A., Ahmadzadeh, K., Sarker, B. R., & Ghavamifar, A. (2022). Designing an
optimal sustainable supply chain system considering pricing decisions and resilience
factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 332, Article 129895.
Taleizadeh, A. A., Ghavamifar, A., & Khosrojerdi, A. (2020). Resilient network design of
two supply chains under price competition: Game theoretic and decomposition
algorithm approach. Operational Research, 1–33.
Thomas, A. V., & Mahanty, B. (2021). Dynamic assessment of control system designs of
information shared supply chain network experiencing supplier disruption.
Operational Research, 21(1), 425–451.
Vali-Siar, M. M., & Roghanian, E. (2022). Sustainable, resilient and responsive mixed
supply chain network design under hybrid uncertainty with considering COVID-19
pandemic disruption. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 30, 278–300.
Van Vuuren, D. P., Bouwman, A. F., & Beusen, A. H. W. (2010). Phosphorus demand for
the 1970–2100 period: A scenario analysis of resource depletion. Global
Environmental Change, 20(3), 428–439.
Water, U. N. (2021). The United Nations World Water Development Report 2021: Valuing
Water. Paris, France: UNESCO.
Withers, P. J. A., Sylvester-Bradley, R., Jones, D. L., Healey, J. R., & Talboys, P. J. (2014).
Feed the crop not the soil: Rethinking phosphorus management in the food chain.
ACS. Publications.
Yu, C.-S., & Li, H.-L. (2000). A robust optimization model for stochastic logistic problems.
International Journal of Production Economics, 64(1–3), 385–397.
Zahiri, B., Zhuang, J., & Mohammadi, M. (2017). Toward an integrated sustainable-
resilient supply chain: A pharmaceutical case study. Transportation Research Part E:
Logistics and Transportation Review, 103, 109–142.
Zeballos, L. J., Méndez, C. A., Barbosa-Povoa, A. P., & Novais, A. Q. (2014). Multi-period
design and planning of closed-loop supply chains with uncertain supply and demand.
Computers & Chemical Engineering, 66, 151–164.