Soft Computing (2020) 24:155–178

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04289-5 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().
,- volV)

FOCUS

Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric

closed-loop supply chain management model in T-environment
Arindam Garai1 • Tapan K. Roy2

Published online: 19 August 2019

 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
This article presents one real-life-based cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain management model.
The review of the existing literature identifies the classical performance indicators to any supply chain management model
as the aggregate revenue, the customer satisfaction and the environmental concern. However, this review fails to find a
single optimization-based supply chain management model that considers these three indicators, simultaneously. In this
article, the proposed model maximizes the customer-satisfaction index and the aggregate revenue both under the envi-
ronmental considerations via the reverse chain, whereas many existing studies took the reverse chain and the associated
subsidies into account; this is the first mathematical model that optimizes the customer-satisfaction index, at the same time.
This article employs the T-set that represents the inherent impreciseness to objective functions to the proposed model. The
corresponding optimal values are superior than stipulated goals to both the objective functions in T-environment. The
managerial insights extracted from sensitivity analysis of parameters suggest the managers to stabilize the environmental
concern and the customer satisfaction, while ensuring the cost-effectiveness in real-life-based T-environment. Also, this
analysis finds that the subsidy assists any supply chain to sustain, only if it is offered without any break and within the
optimally determined bounds.

Keywords Customer satisfaction  Environmental concerns  Closed-loop supply chain  T-set  Subsidy 
Multi-objective optimization

1 Introduction Beamon 2000). In corporate sectors, the organizations, like

A supply chain is a set of facilities, provisions, clients,
goods and methods of regulating inventory, acquiring and
distribution. Traditionally, supply chain begins with the
acquisition of unrefined raw materials by suppliers and
ends with the consumptions of finished goods by customers
(Anderson 2014). In a supply chain, this flow of goods
between suppliers and customers passes through the layers.
Each layer consists of several components (Sabri and
Communicated by O. Castillo, D. K. Jana.
& Arindam Garai
fuzzy_arindam@yahoo.com
Tapan K. Roy
roy_t_k@yahoo.co.in
1
Department of Mathematics, Sonarpur Mahavidyalaya,
Kolkata 700149, India
2
Department of Mathematics, IIEST, Howrah 711103, India
planning, manufacturing, distribution, marketing and pur-
chasing, operate independently. However, the traditional
role of one organization often conflicts with another (Li
2014). So, the development of a comprehensive mecha-
nism by integrating all diverse functionaries turns out to be
essential. Accordingly, researchers introduced the supply
chain management (SCM) models to accomplish various
tasks, such as to forecast the forthcoming demands, to
schedule synchronized production of goods and to design
new products (Attaran and Sharmin 2007; Anderson 2014).
A survey of 421 organizations in ten countries by Deloitte
(2019), at which SCM leaders reported an above average
revenue growth of 79%, augments strength to SCM
concepts.
The livelihood of many hundreds of thousands of
stakeholder hinges on the performance of supply chain. So,
supply chain network (SCN) design problem is a major
comprehensive strategic decision-making problem.
Accordingly, the sustainability that pushes for long-term

123
156 A. Garai, T. K. Roy

Table 1 Summary of recent SCM researches on CS and EC

No. References Key findings Research gaps

A. CS in SCM studies
1. Chuang and Lin (2013) Customer information quality impacts CS Used only subjective measures. Based in Taiwan,
only
2. Wei et al. (2013) Developed unique marketing strategies to SCM model Focused on specific customer data in single
country
3. Choudhury and Harrigan Discussed changes in communications between Small sample size. Skipped organization size and
(2014) customers and marketers employees’ strength
4. Garrido-Moreno and Garcı́a- Found effects of the organizational commitments Variable measurement based on perceptions of
Morales (2014) only general managers
5. Bahari and Elayidom (2015) Predicted the behaviour of customers Focused only on neuro-fuzzy classifiers
6. Zablah et al. (2016) Established reciprocal relation between the CS and job Could hurt morale to frontline employees
satisfaction
7. Agnihotri et al. (2017) Deep insights to firms on optimized sales and service Employee effectiveness impacted outcomes. No
outcomes longitudinal study
8. Aquilani et al. (2017) Three different clusters of articles on CS Limited number of databases, search engines and
keywords
9. Campos et al. (2018) Psychology focused definition of on-site customers’ Neither empirical nor analytical. Fewer
experience evaluation of tourism experiences
10. Secchi et al. (2018) Reliable multi-item measurement scale of customer Less applicable to budget ended hotels. More
service analysis required
11. Zhang et al. (2019) Mass customization and product modularity improved Only empirically tested conceptual model. No
quality integration analytical study
12. Sarkar (2019) Decreased transportation and setup time Difficult to implement in real life
B. EC in SCM studies
13. Gaussin et al. (2013) Deliberated on environmental footprint index of goods No future research direction towards the ideal
sustainability index
14. Kronborg et al. (2013) Standard carbon footprint measurement methods of No answer to challenges of suppliers than the
goods secondary data sources
15. Govindan et al. (2014) Found research gaps through 382 articles in GSCM Less attention to multi-objective models and
integration of various levels
16. Chin et al. (2014) Review of EC of GSCM models Considered only three types of threats to
organizations
17. Jabbour and Jabbour (2016) Relationships between green human resource No solution on green human resource
management and GSCM management and GSCM issues
18. Uygun and Dede (2016) Measured GSCM performance by fuzzy-based Solely one type of company. No integration of
approaches mathematical methods
19. Geng et al. (2017) Conducted meta-analysis of 25,680 effect sizes from No relationship between adoption of GSCM goals
11,127 companies on GSCM and performance metrics
20. Mumtaz et al. (2018) Linear regression framework of CLSCM to measure Only empirical results. Based on a country, not
firm performance in Pakistan well-implemented CLSCM
21. Kaur et al. (2018) DEMATEL-based GSCM approach in seven Canadian Several drawbacks in DEMATEL approach.
firms Considered only Canada
22. Alinaghian and Zamani Bi-objective model for green inventory routing Less applicable in real-life industries due to no
(2019) problem impreciseness in data
23. Kusi-Sarpong et al. (2018) Many insights into sustainable innovation Based on 5 Indian manufacturing companies only
management in SCM study
Present study This article formulates one CLSCM model by simultaneously incorporating the three major performance
indicators, viz. the AR, the EC and the CS. This determines the Pareto optimal solution to the proposed
model by employing the T-set-based multi-objective optimization method. Besides, the sensitivity
analysis of parameters presents several managerial insights

123
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain…
multi-dimensional viability of organizations is the single
major scientific, economic, political, social and environ-
mental indicator to measure the performance of any supply
chain. Researchers recognize several performance indica-
tors to SCM models, such as aggregate revenue (AR),
environmental concerns (EC), customer satisfaction (CS),
adoption of recent technologies, corporate social respon-
sibility (CSR) and collaboration. These indicators deter-
mine the efficiency of existing SCM models by comparing
with alternative models and thereby design more effective
SCM models. Among all the indicators, researchers clas-
sify the AR, CS and EC to be the classical and most
influential indicators (Seuring and Muller 2008).
Firstly, the focus is on the revenue of supply chain.
Since time immemorial, one single organization and the
cluster of organizations mainly focus on the economic
aspects, i.e. to earn more revenue. There are countless
existing studies that had put thrust on maximum AR of
organizations (Khansalar et al. 2015). So, this article
emphasizes on the two other major aspects, like the CS and
the EC, to CLSCM models, in succession. Researchers find
that long-term success and competitiveness of organiza-
tions breathe through the CS (Hennig and Klee 1997). High
satisfaction post-purchasing of products and associated
services is one central determinant to customer retention
and to subsequent addition of fresh customers (Rust and
Zahorik 1993). In case, customers make considerable effort
to get products, and the satisfaction index is higher than
that associated with modest effort (Cardozo 1965). Besides,
quality and in-time delivery failing short of expectation
have stronger impacts on satisfaction and repurchase
intentions of customers than quality exceeding the antici-
pation (Anderson et al. 1994; Angelova and Zekiri 2011).
Bequeathing a habitable earth to future generations turns
out as major concern to civilized society. Of late, the
existing and potential customers are ever more learning the
consciences followed by organizations. When the organi-
zations adopt various environment-friendly policies, they
receive attractive financial and other incentives from a
number of agencies (Attaran and Sharmin 2007). More-
over, the recent technological progresses contribute to
rapid advancements to the reusability of goods. So, in
recent years, the EC comes to the forefront of debate of
global and local social interests. Also, the number of
organizations to contemplate the integration of environ-
mentally sound practices into strategic plans and daily
operations has steadily grown over years and across
geographies.
When any SCM study considers the EC, this is a closed-
loop supply chain management (CLSCM) model. Here, the
word ‘closed-loop’ refers to the integration of various
activities of the manufacturing chain layer (MC layer) and
the reverse chain layer (RC layer). The motivation behind
157
CLSCM model can be ethical, like to reflect the values of
decision-makers (DM), or commercial, like to achieve
advantageous position by signalling the EC to customers
(Testa and Iraldo 2010; Bloemhof and Soysal 2017).
However, there are very few attempts to optimize the
performance indicators through much general and broader
look at overarching core topics of CLSCM (Aven 2016).
To the best of the present knowledge, there is not a single
optimization-based study of CLSCM model, in which the
researchers considered the above three performance indi-
cators, simultaneously. This article proposes to develop an
integrated logistics, planning control and multi-objective
optimization-based analytical model that systematically
determines the maximum AR of chain by augmenting the
RC layer, along with the highest percentage of demands to
be met within stipulated access time.
Again, this simultaneous consideration of performance
criteria yields a multi-objective optimization problem
(MOOP). Review of well-established articles on MOOP
finds numerous methods to systematically and simultane-
ously optimize the collection of objective functions. In
many of these optimization methods, researchers use fuzzy
set theory (Bellman and Zadeh 1970; Ebrahimnejad and
Verdegay 2018), whereas the advantages of applying fuzzy
set-based optimization methods to solve MOOP are man-
ifold (Wu et al. 2015); these authors documented several
drawbacks to classical fuzzy set (Garai et al. 2016, 2017).
Subsequently, a new set, viz. T-set, was born to supersede
fuzzy set. This T-set represents the impreciseness much
efficiently than classical fuzzy set (Garai et al. 2016, 2017).
In addition, these authors presented one generalized multi-
objective optimization method to determine the Pareto
optimal solution to MOOP in T-environment (Garai et al.
2017).
The most important contributions to fill in existing
research gaps are as follows
• To formulate one CLSCM model by simultaneously
incorporating the three major performance indicators,
like the AR, the EC and the CS;
• To determine the Pareto optimal solution to the
proposed model by employing the T-set-based multi-
objective optimization method;
• To perform the sensitivity analysis of parameters to the
proposed model and present the key managerial
insights.
The organization of rest of this article is as follows.
Section 2 reviews the existing literature of SCM model
based on the CS and the EC aspects. Also, this section
briefly surveys the multi-objective optimization models in
fuzzy environment. This forms the basis of the present
research. Section 3 presents the problem definitions and the
underlying assumptions. The specifications to the proposed
123
158
model are in Sect. 4. Section 5 formulates the proposed
multi-objective CLSCM model by assembling two objec-
tive functions and constraints. Next, Sect. 6 presents the
existing definitions necessary to solve the proposed model.
Besides, this section discusses the multi-objective opti-
mization method in T-environment. The numerically
illustration to the proposed model is in Sect. 7. This section
compares the optimal values to objective functions
between T-environment and fuzzy environment. The sen-
sitivity analysis of parameters to the proposed model along
with several key managerial insights is in Sect. 8. Sec-
tion 9 presents the conclusions and the future scopes of
research.
2 Review of literature
The development of electronic data interchange system
initiated the era of SCM study around 1960. The intro-
duction of enterprise resource planning system advanced
this research through 1990s (Cardozo 1965). Keith Oliver,
a consultant at Booz Allen Hamilton, introduced the term,
SCM, to public domain (Markova and Tatjana 2013).
Subsequently, the SCM policies rose to prominence across
organizations. Operations managers began to use the term
‘SCM’ in the headings with increasing regularity (Markova
and Tatjana 2013). However, the SCM strategies turned
much acceptable only after the publication of a seminal
book, entitled, ‘Introduction to Supply Chain Management’
by Handfield and Ernest (1999). Around beginning of this
millennium, researchers initiated systematic investigation
of economic, social and environmental impacts of SCM
strategies (Janssen et al. 2015). Across several decades,
researchers performed numerous studies on various aspects
of CLSCM. Following list contains several existing and
well-established CLSCM studies
• Svensson (2007) presented an empirical study in order
to illustrate the aspects of SCM through the expansion
of existing theories. The author introduced several new
terms, like first-, second- and n-order supply chains.
Besides, he observed the first-order supply chain of
brand-new clothing to go beyond the traditional point of
consumption.
• Seuring and Muller (2008) reviewed the existing SCM
studies by considering 191 articles, published between
1994 and 2007. The authors found a considerable rise of
academic and corporate interests in CLSCM policies
within this time. Here, they integrated the three
classical dimensions of sustainability, viz. financial
performance, CS and EC.
• Carter and Easton (2011) conducted a systematic,
rigorous and methodologically valid review of CLSCM
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
studies. The authors considered the principal logistics
and SCM journals with time horizon of 20 years. They
found SCM research to evolve from a perspective and
stand-alone study in social and environmental areas
through CSR perspective.
• Walker and Jones (2012) described the organizations to
be mapped onto a typology of approaches to SCM. DM
could get useful lessons to smoothly implement the
SCM policies. Also, this article made several predic-
tions on future of SCM policies within leading
enterprises.
• Seuring (2013) summarized the research on quantitative
models of forward supply chains, which were published
in last fifteen years. The author could identify only 36
quantitative models from more than 300 articles on
SCM strategies. Around same time, Seuring and Gold
(2013) asked for more research on SCM policies by
adding the financial, social and environmental concerns.
• In recent years, Wieland et al. (2016) presented the
three-phase research study of SSCM models. The
authors began with open-ended collection of opinions
on research themes from 102 researchers. This article
identified several under-researched SCM areas, like
employees, ethical issues and internal integration.
• Dubey et al. (2016) raised the voice in favour of using
total interpretive structural modelling in SCM models.
The authors determined different drivers at various
levels. They found that the transitive links of one
particular driver influenced another.
• Melnyk et al. (2018) applied Dickens’ contrast between
the best of times and the worst of times as the frame.
Then, the authors hence assessed the current state of
empirical research in operations and SCM. The goal
was to find how the operations and SCM researchers
could learn from worst of times, so as to take
advantages of the best of times.
• Brandenburg et al. (2018) summarized the findings of
several reviews of the SCM literature. The authors
presented the propositions and guidelines of future
SCM research. Whereas they categorized the SCM
models by dimensions, sustainability and research foci,
there was a useful comparison between analytical and
empirical research on SCM.
• Jonkman et al. (2019) presented a general description of
SCN design problem in agri-food industrial chains. The
authors considered the role of seasonality, harvesting
decisions, perishability and timely processing in the
Netherlands. Besides, they considered the imprecise-
ness in demand and harvest in stochastic version of this
model.
• In a multi-stage production system, Sarkar (2019)
diminished the wastes and thereby minimized the total
cost to the model. The author found that one large
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain… 159

investment plan was superior decision to reduce setup respond to customers’ pressures and to encourage
cost. The author did not consider any particular goods partner-focused GSCM efforts in environmental
in this study. However, this article was not a SCM policies.
study. • Fernandes et al. (2017) suggested that the synergies of
quality management and SCM could promote the
Therefore, the above review of existing and well-
integration of existing approaches. In addition, the
established articles identifies the AR as the primary con-
author showed several other significant organizational
cern, along with the two major characteristics, like the CS
benefits of CS.
and the EC. Rest of this section deliberates on these two
• Singh et al. (2018) found that on one side, Indian
aspects, in succession.
retailers had good knowledge of the influences of CS on
SCM, and on the other side, these people understood
2.1 Customer satisfaction
less on how to match the competitive advantages of
supply chain practices with organizational performance.
The review of existing and well-established SCM articles
However, this article was based on only one country,
finds the thrust on the CS to kick off with the article by
India.
Cardozo (1965). The article of Cardozo (1965) was a
• Kandampully et al. (2018) presented a comprehensive,
detailed and experimental study of customer effort,
systematic review of the existing literature on CS. The
expectation and satisfaction. Next, Churchill and Sur-
authors presented the detailed mechanisms to properly
prenant (1982) investigated the effects of disconfirmation
manage customer experiences in the hospitality indus-
on CS in SCM studies. In next decade, Fornell (1992)
try. They integrated state-of-the-art customer experi-
reported the results of large-scale Swedish efforts. He
ence management knowledge in the generic business
showed the CS to be the quality of total consumption
context, along with principles of hospitality
process. Around same time, Anderson and Sullivan (1993)
management.
reported the antecedents and the consequences of CS. As
• Ali and Haseeb (2019) examined the effective supply
well, Anderson et al. (1994) demonstrated that the expec-
chain activities through radio frequency identification
tation, quality and price could affect CS and thereby the
(RFID). The authors collected the data from the surveys
profitability of supply chain in Swedish environment.
in textile and apparel companies. They found that RFID
Below, this article lists several existing researches on the
was contributing majorly in SCM operations and thus
influences of CS in SCM studies.
had significantly positive effects on performance of
• Siddiqi (2011) presented a study on the retail banking supply chain.
sector in Bangladesh, which was a South Asian • Imran et al. (2019) developed a comprehensive frame-
emerging economy in recent years. The authors studied work for e-logistics CS. The authors conducted an
the interrelation between service quality attributes, CS e-mail-based survey of 300 questionnaires. They found
and customer loyalty in banking sector. the information technology to be the main contributory
• Flint et al. (2011) examined three key parameters, like element between effective payment method and CS.
customer value anticipation, CS and loyalty in the
Additionally, Part A of Table 1 lists the several recent
context of supply chain. This article was an empirical
researches on the CS in supply chain.
study. There was no mathematical model presented in
Therefore, the present review of the existing literature
this article.
identifies several empirical forecasting methods as well as
• Ryu et al. (2012) examined the behavioural intention
the analytical models, in which researchers found the
along with the CS in restaurant chains. The authors
higher satisfaction of customers to financially boost the
studied the influence of several parameters, like qual-
organizations. However, this review could not find a single
ities of physical environment, foods, services and so on.
analytical CLSCM study, in which the goal of maximizing
• Recently, Saeidi et al. (2015) considered the mediating
the CS index had same importance as the goal of maxi-
role of reputation and CS in supply chain. The authors
mizing AR under the consideration of environmental con-
also presented the impact of corporate social responsi-
cerns via the RC layer to mathematical model.
bility in firms’ financial performance.
• Chavez et al. (2016) explored the links to implement
2.2 Environmental concerns
the customer-centric GSCM with operational perfor-
mance and CS. The authors suggested that customer
In several case studies and other researches, researchers
pressure had a positive effect on the implementation of
found that green supply chain management (GSCM)
customer-centric GSCM. They presented the guidelines
practices could not necessarily have direct influence on the
to implement the customer-centric GSCM in order to

123
160
economic performance of organizations. However, this
could greatly achieve indirect advances. Sarkis (2003)
discussed the components and elements of GSCM. That
article showed the various components of GSCM to serve
as the foundation of decision framework. Here, he explored
the applicability of dynamic nonlinear multi-attribute
decision-making model within green supply chain. Next,
Srivastava (2007) identified the lack of broad reference
frame for CLSCM practices. That article presented one
integrated and fresh look into the area of CLSCM by
deeply covering conceptualization in the reverse logistics
angle. Rest of this subsection presents several other exist-
ing and well-established articles based on EC of CLSCM
studies.
• Zhu et al. (2008) presented an empirical investigation.
The authors presented the construct and the scale in
order to evaluate the implementation of GSCM prac-
tices among manufacturers. In addition, they studied
how the globalization and entry of China into the World
Trade Organization helped to promote GSCM practices
in manufacturing enterprises.
• Bowen et al. (2009) presented one very useful study.
Here, the authors presented the benefits and downsides
of GSCM policies in real life. They showed why
managers should avoid GSCM-related complex initia-
tives in cases of not having the capability to implement
them.
• Sarkis et al. (2011) categorized and reviewed the recent
CLSCM literature under nine broad organizational
theories. The authors specially emphasized the adop-
tion, diffusion and outcomes of GSCM practices. They
identified other organizational theories as future
research scopes.
• Eltayeb et al. (2011) noted the positive effects of
reverse logistics on cost reductions. The authors
presented the ideal approaches for business organiza-
tions to generate benefits through reduced waste and
better resource utilization. These benefits were in
addition to the economic benefits and thereby reduced
the cost to organizations.
• Around same time, Green et al. (2012) found that the
adoption of GSCM practices by the manufacturing
industries could lead to an improved environmental,
economic and operational performance.
• Elhedhli and Merrick (2012) considered a SCN design
problem. Here, the authors considered the CO2 emis-
sions into the model. Besides, they considered the fixed
and variable location and production costs to the
analytical model.
• Hsu et al. (2013) employed the decision-making trial
and evaluation laboratory approach to recognize the
influential criteria of carbon management in GSCM to
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
improve the overall performance of suppliers in terms
of carbon management.
• Zhu et al. (2013) showed that institutional pressures had
driven the adoption of internal GSCM practices by
manufacturers. This in turn resulted in the adoption of
external GSCM practices. That research contributed to
the literature on institutional theory in corporate
environmental practices.
• Kannan et al. (2013) presented one comparative GSCM
study in fuzzy environment. Here, the authors inte-
grated the fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method
and the multi-objective optimization approach for
supplier selection and order allocation problem.
• Chen et al. (2017) presented one in-depth review
article. The authors took a systematic literature review
and a quantitative bibliometric analysis. The results
showed that the environmental and financial consider-
ations dominated the present research.
• In an extensive review, Rajeev et al. (2017) found that
the studies, which focused on multiple dimensions of
sustainability, were comparatively scarce. The authors
found that the models on pollution making industries
remained largely unaddressed, particularly in the
emerging economies. So, the authors suggested to have
more focus on the industry-specific studies.
• Petljak et al. (2018) studied the environmental and
financial performance of food retail markets. The
authors identified many positive relations between the
green in-store activities and the CLSCM practices.
• Chatterjee et al. (2018) thoroughly investigated the
GSCM studies. The authors considered fifteen criteria
and then categorized these into five dimensions. Also,
they proposed one evaluation framework in order to
select the suitable green suppliers.
• Sarvestani et al. (2019) presented an integrated frame-
work of one supplier selection, order acceptance and
scheduling problem. Here, the authors focused on the
profit in single-machine environment by considering
many customers.
• Tseng et al. (2019) presented one detailed review of the
existing literature published between 1998 and 2017.
The authors collected the data from Scopus and ISI
Web of Science databases and objectively selected 880
papers to conduct the metadata analysis. They found
that the research on drivers of GSCM had a declining
trend while there was a growing trend to apply
optimization models for enhancing the decision making
in pursuit of environmental performance.
The Part B of Table 1 lists several recent researches on
the EC in SCM. Thus, the present review finds that the RC
layer to any CLSCM model boasts significant positive
effects on the environment. In addition, the green policies
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain…
Fig. 1 Flow chart of the logistics flows and induced monetary flows to the proposed model
carry good vibes and lead to revenue growth, job creations,
image building exercises and so on. However, this review
finds not a single optimization-based mathematical model
of CLSCM that simultaneously considers the three classi-
cal performance indices, like AR, CS and EC.
2.3 Solution to MOOP in fuzzy environment
By concurrently considering the above three performance
indicators, this article turns into a MOOP. Again, in order
to match with real life, this article assumes the imprecise
aspiration levels to objective functions to the proposed
MOOP, whereas the researchers devised numerous meth-
ods to characterize the Pareto optimal solution to MOOP
(Dubois and Prade 2015); these authors find the fuzzy set-
based methods to be very popular for solving MOOP
(Ebrahimnejad and Verdegay 2018). Zimmermann
(1976, 1978) established the classical method to solve
MOOP in fuzzy environment. Many researchers, such as
Zhou et al. (2007), Sakawa and Matsui (2012), Sakawa
et al. (2013), Wei et al. (2014), Salehi et al. (2015), Pra-
manik et al. (2015), Garai et al. (2016, 2017), Dutta and
Jana (2017), Basu et al. (2019) and many others, applied
various optimization methods in order to solve MOOP in
fuzzy environment.
Again, in 2009, Jimenez and Bilbao showed that fuzzy
efficient solutions were not Pareto optimal, when one of the
fuzzy goals was fully achieved. The authors generalized the
two-phase methods of Guu and Wu (1999). However, Wu
et al. (2015) argued that the method of Jimenez and Bilbao
(2009) was not a general procedure to obtain the Pareto
optimal solution to MOOP in fuzzy environment. Also, Wu
161
et al. (2015) introduced the redefined membership func-
tions to objective functions in fuzzy environment. How-
ever, in 2016, authors of this article recognized several
drawbacks to redefined membership functions (Garai et al.
2016, 2017). ‘‘Appendix B’’ describes several drawbacks
of existing membership function of classical fuzzy set as
well as redefined membership function.
In order to overcome those drawbacks, present authors
proposed to discard both the upper bound and lower bound
of classical membership function of fuzzy set. Thus, a new
set, viz. T-set, was born to supersede fuzzy set. The
T-characteristic function of T-set represents the impre-
ciseness more efficiently than membership function of
fuzzy set (Garai et al. 2016, 2017). Besides, these authors
found several analogous drawbacks in classical fuzzy
optimization method of Zimmermann (1976, 1978) and in
other fuzzy set-based optimization methods (Garai et al.
2016, 2017). The resultant generalized T-set-based multi-
objective optimization method could determine ‘more
preferable’ Pareto optimal solution to MOOP in real-life-
based T-environment (Garai et al. 2016). Here, this article
proposes to employ the T-set-based method to determine
the Pareto optimal solution to the proposed CLSCM model
in real-life-based T-environment.
3 Problem definition and assumptions
This section describes the problem definition and
assumptions to the proposed CLSCM model.
123
162
3.1 Problem definition
This article proposes one cost-effective and customer-
centric CLSCM model by incorporating various conceiv-
able components into the structure. The proposed model,
not specific to any particular goods, is applicable to
numerous businesses. This multi-objective mathematical
model optimizes the three major classical performance
indicators of supply chain, such as the AR, the EC and the
CS, simultaneously. This is one unique characteristic to the
proposed model. On one side, the model proposes to
recycle the used goods via RC layer, and on other side, the
model emphasizes to maximize the CS index. The recy-
cling of used goods makes the best use of subsidies that the
Governments and various Environmental Protection
Agencies (EPA) provide as assistance. Figure 1 illustrates
the model graphically, in which the solid and dashed lines
explain the directional relationships in terms of logistics
flows and induced monetary flows, respectively.
Again, the proposed CLSCM model employs the real-
life-based T-set in order to determine the corresponding
Pareto optimal solution (Garai et al. 2016, 2017). The
T-characteristic functions to objective functions signify the
inherent impreciseness within the objective functions to the
proposed model. Lastly, the sensitivity analysis of param-
eters to the proposed model along with the graphical
illustrations yields several key managerial insights.
3.2 Assumptions
The following assumptions simplify the formulation of the
proposed model
i. The proposed model considers solely one finished
product at all the time. So, this is a single product
scenario. Besides, each component to the proposed
model has one single channel or single crane
warehouse [see, for reference, Sheu et al. (2005),
Sarkar (2019)].
ii. The flow of information and money is instantaneous.
This article presumes all the transportations and
productions to be immediate. There is no allotment
of time to any of these tasks [see, for reference,
Green et al. (2012), Grimm and Wosten (2018)].
iii. The time-dependent inventory capacities to various
components to the proposed CLSCM model are fixed
and are well known to DM at any time. Also, the
time-dependent maximum quantity of products to be
manufactured at the plants and goods to be treated at
the recycle plants are fixed at any time [see, for
reference, Khansalar et al. (2015), Sarkar (2019)].
iv. DM are acquainted with the time-dependent numbers
of available suppliers, customers, collecting points,
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
recycles plants, secondary material markets, landfills
at any time. In addition, DM know the maximum
operable units of plants and DCs at any time [see, for
reference, Altiparmak et al. (2006), Grimm and
Wosten (2018)].
v. This article emphasizes on the social stability in
order to achieve sustainability to the proposed
CLSCM model. So, the chain members stay away
from various conflicts, such as labour unrest, polit-
ical interferences and degradation of brand values.
Accordingly, this article presumes that once a new
plant or DC become operational, this remains
operational throughout the time.
vi. One customer purchases the products from only one
DC at any time. As well, DM know the time-
dependent quantity of customers’ demand at any time.
vii. The recycle plants plan the operation as per the
return ratios of used products. Here, DM are familiar
to the corresponding time-dependent values at any
time.
4 Specifications of the proposed SSCM
model
This section formulates the proposed CLSCM model.
4.1 Chain components
Based on the above deliberations, this article develops a
comprehensive conceptual framework to formulate an
integrated logistics operational CLSCM model. The pro-
posed model involves eight potential chain components,
scattered in two layers, viz. MC layer and RC layer. In MC
layer, the potential chain members are as follows
i. Suppliers (of unrefined or raw materials),
ii. Plants,
iii. Distribution centres (DCs) and
iv. Customers.
In RC layer, the potential chain members are as follows
i. Collecting points,
ii. Recycle plants,
iii. Secondary material markets and
iv. Final disposal locations (i.e. landfills).
Besides, this article proposes to include the Govern-
ments or independent EPAs to act as another key anchor to
the proposed model. The EPAs make various regulations to
be followed by several components to RC layer. These
authorities infuse taxpayers’ hard earned money in form of
the aids and subsidies. This, in turn, stimulates the
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain… 163

recycling of used products in the recycle plants to RC layer Secondly, the combined time-dependent quantity of
to the proposed model. revenue to the RC layer within given total time T ðTDrc Þ is
as follows
4.2 Variables and parameters 0 P P  1
Rix ðlÞ  ðqrÞix ðlÞ þ
Table 11 in ‘‘Appendix A’’ lists all the symbols along with B i PxP C
XT BB x t ðRxt ðlÞ  rxt ðlÞÞþ C
C
the descriptions to be used in the proposed model. In TDrc ¼ B PP C ð4Þ
B ðRtm ðlÞ  rtm ðlÞÞþ C
addition, the proposed model employs following binary l¼1 B C
@ Pt Pm A
integer variables Rmk ðlÞ  ðrqÞmk ðlÞ
 m k
1; if DC j is operational
8j 2 J; zj ¼ Thirdly, the combined time-dependent quantity of sub-
0; otherwise
 sidies received by RC layer within given total time TðTSrc Þ
1; if plant k is operational
8k 2 K; pk ¼ is as follows
0; otherwise !
 X T XX
1; if customer i is served by DC j
8i 2 I; 8j 2 J; yji ¼ TSrc ¼ ðStm ðlÞ  rtm ðlÞÞ ð5Þ
0; otherwise l¼1 t m
ð1Þ
5.1.2 Customer satisfaction

5 Formulation of model The proportion of customers’ demand to be met within the

stipulated access time governs the CS index. The maxi-
This section formulates the proposed CLSCM model. mization of the total percentage of demand of customers to
be encountered within total given time T boosts up the
5.1 Objective functions value of CS index (Fernandes et al. 2017). Accordingly, the
combined time-dependent CS index within given total time
The two objective functions to the proposed CLSCM T ðCSSSCM Þ is as follows
model are as follows !
XT XX  X
CSSSCM ¼ zj  qji ðlÞ = di ðlÞ ð6Þ
5.1.1 Aggregate revenue l¼1 j i i

The AR to the proposed model has three major parts as

5.2 Constraints
follows
i. Combined revenue associated with given MC layer This article proposes the logistics conditions to be restric-
ðTRmc Þ, ted by the operational requirements or to be compelled by
ii. Combined revenue associated with given RC layer various regulations. There are five groups of constraints to
ðTDrc Þ, and the proposed model as follows
iii. Total subsidies associated with given RC layer
• Inventory constraints,
ðTSrc Þ.
• Return resource constraints,
So, the time-dependent AR ðARSSCM Þ is as follows • Operational constraints,
ARSSCM ¼ TRmc þ TDrc þ TSrc ð2Þ • Capacity constraints and
• Production constraints.
Firstly, the combined time-dependent quantity of rev-
enue to the MC layer within given total time TðTRmc Þ is as
follows 5.2.1 Inventory constraints

X
T XX 5.2.1.1 MC layer
TRmc ¼ ðRsk ðlÞ  bsk ðlÞÞ
l¼1 s k
! • Suppliers of unrefined materials (s)
XX  XX 
þ Rkj ðlÞ  f kj ðlÞ þ Rji ðlÞ  qji ðlÞ To each supplier s, the time-dependent quantity of
k j j i
unrefined material in inventory at any time l is equal to the
ð3Þ sum of corresponding residual in inventory at previous

123
164
time ðl  1Þ and time-dependent quantity acquired by
given supplier at that time, minus corresponding combined
outbound flow of unrefined material transported to various
plants at that time. Moreover, this time-dependent quantity
in inventory complies with corresponding predetermined
upper bound and lower bound at given time l. Therefore,
the time-dependent inventory restriction owing to suppliers
to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
ð8s; 8lÞ : inf s ðlÞ  ðqiÞs ðlÞ X ð8oD ; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðqiÞj ðlÞ
¼ ðqiÞs ðl  1Þ þ qs ðlÞ  bsk ðlÞ  supðlÞ
s ¼ ðqiÞj ðl  1Þ þ
k
ð7Þ
• Plants (k)
To each plant k, the time-dependent quantity of both
unrefined materials and finished goods in inventory at any
time l is equal to the sum of corresponding residual in
inventory at previous time ðl  1Þ and combined inbound
time-dependent quantity of unrefined materials sourced
from various suppliers at that time and combined inbound
time-dependent quantity of unrefined materials sourced
from various secondary material markets at that time and
time-dependent quantity of products manufactured therein
at that time, minus corresponding time-dependent quantity
of unrefined materials used to manufacture goods at given
plant at that time, minus combined outbound time-depen-
dent quantity of finished goods transported to various DCs
at that time. Moreover, this time-dependent quantity in
inventory at given plant k complies with corresponding
predetermined upper bound and lower bound at given time
l. Therefore, the time-dependent inventory restriction
owing to plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as
follows
 
8k 2 op ; 8l : inf k ðlÞ  ðqiÞk ðlÞ
¼ ðqiÞk ðl  1Þ ! X
X X
þ bsk ðlÞ þ ðrqÞmk ðlÞ þ qk ðlÞ
s m
X
 sr=m  ðqk ðlÞÞ  fkj ðlÞ  supðlÞ
j k
ð8Þ
The above relation holds for any plant, provided that the
plant remains open at given time l.
• DCs (j)
To each DC j, the time-dependent quantity of finished
goods in inventory at any time l is equal to the sum of
corresponding residual in inventory at previous time ðl 
1Þ and combined inbound time-dependent quantity of fin-
ished goods sourced from various plants at given DC j at
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
that time, minus corresponding combined outbound time-
dependent quantity of finished goods transported to various
customers at that time. Moreover, this time-dependent
quantity in inventory at given DC j complies with corre-
sponding predetermined upper bound and lower bound at
given time l. Therefore, the time-dependent inventory
restriction owing to DCs to the proposed CLSCM model is
as follows
j X
fkj ðlÞ
X k
 qji ðlÞ  supðlÞ ð9Þ
i j
The above equation holds for any DC, provided that this
remains open at given time l.
5.2.1.2 RC layer
• Collecting points (x)
To each collecting point x, the time-dependent quantity
of untreated goods in inventory at any time l is equal to the
sum of corresponding inventory quantity of untreated
goods, residual at previous time ðl  1Þ and combined
inbound time-dependent quantity of untreated goods
sourced from various customers at that time, minus cor-
responding combined outbound time-dependent quantity of
untreated goods transported to various recycle plants at that
time. Moreover, this time-dependent quantity in inventory
at given collecting point x complies with corresponding
predetermined upper bound and lower bound at that time.
Therefore, the time-dependent inventory restriction owing
to collecting points to the proposed CLSCM model is as
follows
ð8x; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðriÞx ðlÞ
x X
¼ ðriÞx ðl  1Þ þ ðqrÞix ðlÞ
i
 rxt ðlÞ  supðlÞ ð10Þ
t x
• Recycle plants (t)
Recycle plants make use of three types of inventories,
such as (i) to store the untreated goods received from
collecting points, (ii) to store the treated goods to be
transported to secondary material markets and (iii) to store
wasted goods to be transported to final disposal locations.
i. Untreated goods
To each recycle plant t, the time-dependent quantity of
untreated goods received from collecting points in inven-
tory at any time l is equal to the sum of corresponding
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain…
quantity in inventory residual at previous time ðl  1Þ and
combined inbound time-dependent quantity of untreated
goods sourced from various collecting points at that time,
minus corresponding time-dependent quantity of untreated
goods put to use to be recycled at that time. Moreover, this
time-dependent quantity in inventory at given recycle plant
t complies with corresponding predetermined upper bound
and lower bound at that time. Therefore, the time-depen-
dent inventory restriction owing to untreated goods in
recycle plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
u • Secondary material markets (m)
ð8t; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðriÞt ðlÞ
t X u To each secondary material market m, the time-depen-
¼ ðriÞt ðl  1Þ þ rxt ðlÞðrtÞt ðlÞ  supðlÞ
x t
ii. Treated goods
To each recycle plant t, the time-dependent quantity of
treated goods in inventory at any time l is equal to the sum
of corresponding quantity of treated goods residual at
previous time ðl  1Þ and time-dependent quantity of
recycles goods at that time, minus corresponding combined
outbound time-dependent quantity of treated goods trans-
ported to various secondary material markets at that time.
Moreover, this time-dependent quantity in inventory at
given recycle plant t complies with corresponding prede-
termined upper bound and lower bound at that time.
Therefore, the time-dependent inventory restriction owing
to treated goods in recycle plants to the proposed CLSCM
model is as follows
m
ð8t; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðritmÞt ðlÞ
t
¼ ðritmÞt ðl  1Þ þ su=m  ðrtÞt ðlÞ
X m
 rtm ðlÞ  supðlÞ
m t
iii. Wasted goods
To each recycle plant t, the time-dependent quantity of
wasted goods to be transported to final disposal locations in
inventory at any time l is equal to the sum of corre-
sponding inventory quantity residual at previous time ðl 
1Þ and corresponding time-dependent quantity of wasted
goods at that time, minus corresponding combined out-
bound time-dependent quantity transported to various final
disposal locations at that time. Moreover, this time-de-
pendent quantity in inventory at given recycle plant t
complies with corresponding predetermined upper bound
and lower bound at that time. Therefore, the time-
165
dependent inventory restriction owing to wasted goods in
recycle plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
w
ð8t; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðritwÞt ðlÞ
t
¼ ðritwÞt ðl  1Þ þ su=w  ðrtÞt ðlÞ
X w
 rtw ðlÞ  supðlÞ ð13Þ
w t
Here, the physical transformation rate satisfies the con-
dition that su=m þ su=w ¼ 1:
dent quantity of goods in inventory at any time l is equal to
the sum of corresponding inventory quantity of goods
ð11Þ
residual at previous time ðl  1Þ and combined inbound
time-dependent quantity of goods sourced from various
recycle plants at that time, minus corresponding combined
outbound time-dependent quantity of goods transported to
various plants at that time. Moreover, this time-dependent
quantity in inventory at given secondary material market m
complies with corresponding predetermined upper bound
and lower bound at given time l. Therefore, the time-de-
pendent inventory restriction owing to secondary material
markets to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
ð8m; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðriÞm ðlÞ
m X
¼ ðriÞm ðl  1Þ þ rtm ðlÞ
X t
 ðrqÞmk ðlÞ  supðlÞ ð14Þ
m
k
• Final disposal locations (w)
To each final disposal location w, the time-dependent
quantity of wasted goods in inventory at any time l is equal
ð12Þ
to the sum of corresponding inventory quantity of wasted
goods residual at previous time ðl  1Þ and combined
inbound time-dependent quantity of wasted goods sourced
from various recycle plants at that time, minus corre-
sponding combined time-dependent quantity of wasted
goods disposed at that time. Moreover, this time-dependent
quantity in inventory at given final disposal location w
complies with corresponding predetermined upper bound
and lower bound at given time l. Therefore, the time-de-
pendent inventory restriction owing to final disposal loca-
tions to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
ð8w; 8lÞ : inf ðlÞ  ðriÞw ðlÞ
w X
¼ ðriÞw ðl  1Þ þ rtw ðlÞ  ðrf Þw ðlÞ  supðlÞ
w
t
ð15Þ
123
166 A. Garai, T. K. Roy

X
5.2.2 Return resource constraints ð8i; 8lÞ : qji ðlÞ  di ðlÞ  yji ðlÞ ð21Þ
j
The time-dependent quantity of the used product returned
by various customers at any time l is the product between and
X
combined time-dependent demand from customers at that ð8i; 8lÞ : yji ðlÞ ¼ 1 ð22Þ
time and used-product return flow ratio c. So, therefore, the j
time-dependent return resource constraint to the proposed
CLSCM model is as follows
! 5.2.4 Capacity constraints
XX X
ð8lÞ : Rrc ðlÞ ¼ ðqrÞix ðlÞ ¼ c  di ðlÞð  0Þ
i x i 5.2.4.1 Suppliers To any supplier s, the combined time-
dependent quantity of acquired materials is more than or
ð16Þ
equal to the corresponding combined outbound time-de-
Here, the statistical evidences predetermine the value of pendent quantity of unrefined materials transported to
parameter c.  So, the time-dependent
various plants within any time T.
capacity constraint owing to suppliers to the proposed
5.2.3 Operational constraints CLSCM model is as follows
! !
XT X T X
5.2.3.1 Operational plants There is a limit to number of ð8T  T; 8sÞ : qs ðlÞ  bsk ðlÞ ð23Þ
plants that operate at any time l. Moreover, each plant k l¼l1 l¼l1 k
either operates or remains closed during entire time T. The
total number of operational plants does not exceed the
corresponding maximum allowable number at any time l. 5.2.4.2 Plants To any plant k, the combined time-de-
So, the time-dependent operational constraint owing to pendent quantity of unrefined materials used to manufac-
plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows ture goods does not exceed the sum of corresponding
X combined time-dependent quantity of unrefined materials
ð8l; 8kÞ : pk ðlÞ  P ð17Þ received from several secondary material markets and
k2Op  In addition, the time-
various suppliers within any time T.
 
8k; li ðtime interval), 8lj ðtime interval) : pk ðli Þ dependent quantity of goods manufactured at any plant k is
¼ pk ðlj Þ ð18Þ more than or equal to the corresponding combined time-
dependent quantity of finished goods transported to various
DCs. So, the time-dependent capacity constraint owing to
5.2.3.2 Operational DCs There is a limit to number of plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
DCs that operate at any time l. Moreover, each plant k ð8T  T; 8kÞ :
either operates or remains closed during entire time T. The T T
X X X
total number of operational DCs does not exceed the cor- Unrefined materials s r=m
 qk ðlÞ  ð bsk ðlÞ
responding maximum allowable number at any time l. So, l¼l1 l¼l1 s
the time-dependent operational constraint owing to DCs to X
þ ðrqÞmk ðlÞÞ
the proposed CLSCM model is as follows m
X
ð8lÞ : zj ðlÞ  W ð19Þ ð24Þ
j2OD
 
8k; li ðtime interval), 8lj ðtime interval) : zj ðli Þ ¼ zj ðlj Þ
ð20Þ
Table 2 Structural overview of the proposed CLSCM model
5.2.3.3 On relations between DCs and customers The Facts Numbers
time-dependent quantity of products transported to cus-
tomer i from various DCs is less than or equal to the time- Number of objective functions 2
dependent demand of customer i at any time l. Moreover, Types of constraints 27
this article presumes that one customer buys goods from Types of decision variables 22
one DC only. So, the time-dependent operational constraint Types of binary variables 3
owing to customers to the proposed CLSCM model is as
follows

123
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain… 167

T
X T X
X dependent capacity constraint owing to treated goods in
Manufactured goods qk ðlÞ  fkj ðlÞ ð25Þ recycle plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
l¼l1 l¼l1 j
T X
X T
X
ð8T  T; 8tÞ : rtm ðlÞ  su=m  ðrtÞt ðlÞ ð29Þ
l¼l1 m l¼l1
5.2.4.3 DCs To any DC j, the combined outbound time-
dependent quantity of manufactured goods purchased by
many customers is less than or equal to the corresponding
combined inbound time-dependent quantity of manufac- • Wasted goods

tured goods sourced from various plants within any time T. The combined outbound time-dependent quantity of
So, the time-dependent capacity constraint owing to DCs to wasted goods transported to various final disposal locations
the proposed CLSCM model is as follows is less than or equal to the corresponding combined time-
T X
X T X
X dependent quantity of wasted goods processed within any
ð8T  T; 8jÞ : fkj ðlÞ  qji ðlÞ ð26Þ  So, the time-dependent capacity constraint owing
time T.
l¼l1 k l¼l1 i to wasted goods in recycle plants to the proposed CLSCM
model is as follows
5.2.4.4 Collecting points To any collecting point x, the T X
X T
X
combined inbound time-dependent quantity of untreated ð8T  T; 8tÞ : rtw ðlÞ  su=w  ðrtÞt ðlÞ ð30Þ
l¼l1 w l¼l1
goods sourced from various customers is more than or
equal to the combined outbound time-dependent quantity
of untreated goods transported to different recycle plants 5.2.4.6 Secondary material markets To any secondary
within any time T. So, the time-dependent capacity con- material market m, the combined outbound time-dependent
straint owing to collecting points to the proposed CLSCM quantity of recycled materials transported to various plants
model is as follows is less than or equal to the corresponding combined
T X
X T X
X inbound time-dependent quantity of treated goods sourced
ð8T  T; 8xÞ : ðqrÞix ðlÞ  rxt ðlÞ ð27Þ from various recycle plants within any time T.  So, the
l¼l1 i l¼l1 t time-dependent capacity constraint owing to secondary
material markets to the proposed CLSCM model is as
follows
5.2.4.5 Recycle plants Following relationships hold to
 T X
X T X
X
any recycle plant t within any time T.
ð8T  T; 8mÞ : ðrqÞmk ðlÞ  rtm ðlÞ ð31Þ
• Untreated goods l¼l1 k l¼l1 t

The combined inbound time-dependent quantity of

untreated goods sourced from various collecting points is 5.2.5 Production constraints
more than or equal to the corresponding combined time-
dependent quantity of goods taken for recycling within any 5.2.5.1 Plants The time-dependent quantity of goods
 So, the time-dependent capacity constraint owing
time T. produced in any plant k does not exceed the corresponding
to untreated goods in recycle plants to the proposed manufacturing capacity at any time l. So, the time-de-
CLSCM model is as follows pendent production constraint owing to plants to the pro-
T X
X T
X posed CLSCM model is as follows
ð8T  T; 8tÞ : rxt ðlÞ  ðrtÞt ðlÞ ð28Þ ð8k; 8lÞ : qk ðlÞ  Capak ðlÞ ð32Þ
l¼l1 x l¼l1

5.2.5.2 Recycle plants The time-dependent quantity of

• Treated goods
The combined outbound time-dependent quantity of
treated goods transported to various secondary material
markets is less than or equal to the corresponding inbound
time-dependent quantity of treated goods obtained by
recycling untreated goods within any time T. So, the time-
goods recycled at any recycle plant t does not exceed the
corresponding recycling capacity at any time l. So, the
time-dependent production constraint owing to recycle
plants to the proposed CLSCM model is as follows
ð8t; 8lÞ : ðrt)t ðlÞ  Capat ðlÞ ð33Þ
Here, the proposed analytical model considers two
objective functions along with twenty seven types of

123
168 A. Garai, T. K. Roy

constraints. This is to note that the actual quantities of Table 4 Unit revenues of MC layer and RC layer to the proposed
constraints, decision variables, binary variables, parameters model
and all that are subject to the values of various indices Parameters Unit revenues ($)
associated with chain components. Table 2 describes the
Lower bounds Upper bounds
vastness to the proposed CLSCM model.
MC layer
Suppliers of unrefined materials 29 55
6 Mathematical preliminaries Plants 360 610
Distribution centres 521 825
This section presents the existing mathematical develop- Customer 0 5
ment employed to determine the Pareto optimal solution to RC layer
the proposed model. Collecting points 4.3 6.8
Recycle plants 6.1 9.5
6.1 Definitions Secondary material markets 15. 30

‘‘Appendix C’’ presents the existing and useful definitions

to this article.
8
Definition A point x 2 X is said to be T-Pareto optimal > 1; zi ðxÞ  Li
<
solution to MOOP if there does not exist another x 2 X Ui  zi ðxÞ
li ðzi ðxÞÞ ¼ ; Li  zi ðxÞ  Ui ; 8i ¼ 1. . .k
such that Ti ðci xÞ  Ti ðci xÞ; 8i ¼ 1. . .k, i = j and >
: U i  Li
Ti ðcj xÞ\Ti ðcj xÞ, for at least one j. Here, ‘*’ denotes 0; zi ðxÞ  Ui
optimality. ð35Þ
Here Li and Ui are the goal and goal plus tolerance
6.2 T-sets-based multi-objective optimization
values, respectively, to ith objective function zi ðxÞ; i ¼
1. . .k (Zadeh 1965). The existing literature prefers to
The general form of MOOP with k imprecise objective
denote the interval ½Li ; Ui  by Xi ; 8i ¼ 1. . .k (Ebrahimne-
functions zi ðxÞ; i ¼ 1. . .k is as follows (Zimmermann
jad and Verdegay 2018).
1976, 1978)
In real-life-based environment, the linear T-character-
min ðz1 ðxÞ; z2 ðxÞ. . .zk ðxÞÞ istic function Ti ðzi ðxÞÞ; i ¼ 1. . .k to ith objective function
subject to ð34Þ zi ðxÞ; i ¼ 1. . .k to model (34) is as follows (Garai et al.
x 2 X: 2016, 2017)
Ui  zi ðxÞ
Here, X ¼ fx 2 Rn : Ax  b; x  0g; b ¼ ðb1 ; b2 . . .bm Þ 2 8i ¼ 1. . .k; Ti ðzi ðxÞÞ ¼ ; 8zi ðxÞ ð36Þ
m Ui  Li
Z and A is m  n matrix. Under the assumption of
imprecise aspiration level to each objective function By considering v ¼ maxfTi ðzi ðxÞÞg; i ¼ 1. . .k and
i
zi ðxÞ; i ¼ 1. . .k to the above model (34), there are numer- by employing the min–max operator of Zimmermann
ous methods to characterize the corresponding Pareto (1976) to model (34), the single objective optimization
optimal solutions (Zimmermann 1985; Ebrahimnejad and model to model (34) in T-environment is as follows (Garai
Verdegay 2018). et al. 2017)
In case the objective functions zi ðxÞ; i ¼ 1. . .k to model max v
(34) are fuzzy in nature, the corresponding linear mem-
subject to ð37Þ
bership function to ith objective function zi ðxÞ; i ¼ 1. . .k is
as follows (Zimmermann 1976, 1978) Ti ðzi ðxÞÞ  v; i ¼ 1. . .k; x 2 X:

Table 3 Demand of goods and

return of used products to the
proposed model
Time intervals Demands of goods from customers Used-product returns ðc ¼ 0:25Þ
1 4290 1072
2 4263 1065
3 4049 1012
4 4115 1028

123
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain… 169

Table 5 Numerical values of different parameters

Parameters Values Parameters Values

Subsidy 8.7 Physical transformation rate of finished goods 1

Physical transformation rate of treated goods 0.8 Physical transformation rate of wasted goods 0.2
Used-product return flow ratio 0.25 Weights associated with MC layer/RC layer 1
Maximum allowable number of open plants 1 Maximum allowable number of open DCs 1
Minimum inventory capacities Maximum inventory capacities
Suppliers 0 Suppliers 5000
Plants 0 Plants 5000
DCs 0 DCs 5000
Collecting points 0 Collecting points 3000
Untreated goods at recycle plants 0 Untreated goods at recycle plants 1000
Treated goods at recycle plants 0 Treated goods at recycle plants 1000
Wasted goods at recycle plants 0 Wasted goods at recycle plants 1000
Secondary material markets 0 Secondary material markets 2000
Disposal locations 0 Disposal locations 1000

Table 6 Individual maximum and minimum values to objective Table 8 Sensitivity analysis of the return flow of used products in
functions T-environment
Objective functions Maximum values Minimum values c Aggregate revenue Customer-satisfaction index

AR $22,970,400 $20,074,550 1.0 $23,031,794 5.78

CS index 7.70 3.11 0.8 $22,992,843 6.45
0.5 $22,984,889 7.31
0.33 $22,978,169 7.30
0.2 $22,965,303 7.56
0.1 $22,940,888 7.56
When the DM assign necessary numerical values, the
0.0 $22,914,669 7.20
software, like LINGO, SUPERLINGO, MATLAB,
MATHEMATICA, can determine the optimal solution to
the above single objective optimization model and hence
the Pareto optimal solution to the proposed CLSCM model.
7.1 Setting up the data

7 Numerical application
This section numerically illustrates the proposed multi-
objective CLSCM model in T-environment and thereby
determines the corresponding Pareto optimal solution.
The motivation behind the data used in this section comes
mainly from the mathematical models of several existing
articles, like Sheu et al. (2005) and Altiparmak et al.
(2006). The key strength of these articles is that both
articles are well established, and the data used in these
articles tasted the time. Again, Sheu et al. (2005) presented
one optimization-based mathematical model, in which the
authors dealt with various integrated logistics operational

Table 7 Comparison between optimal values in T-environment and fuzzy environment

Objective T- Fuzzy Remarks
functions environment environment

AR $22,970,400 $22,000,000 Optimal values to both the objective functions of the proposed CLSCM model in T-environment
CS index 7.5 6 are superior than that of classical fuzzy environment. The optimal values in T-environment are
preferable than goals to both objectives

123
170 A. Garai, T. K. Roy

problems of GSCM. Here, this model considered several Table 9 Sensitivity analysis of subsidy in T-environment
factors, like the used-product return ratio, Governments Stm ðlÞ Aggregate revenue Customer-satisfaction index
subsidies to RC layer and all that. However, this model did
not consider the CS index, one most fundamental perfor- 13 $22,968,000 7.31
mance index to any SCM model. Besides, the author solved 10 $22,970,400 7.49
the proposed model in crisp environment. 8 $22,970,400 7.49
Altiparmak et al. (2006) proposed a genetic algorithm- 6 $22,970,400 7.40
based solution procedure to determine the set of Pareto 3 $22,968,268 7.28
optimal solutions to a mixed-integer multi-objective SCN 0 $22,968,268 7.27
design problem. The authors used the actual data from one
company that produced the plastic products in Turkey.
Also, the solution method of Altiparmak et al. (2006)
consisted two different weight-based approaches. That products returned by customers at any time. Table 4 sets
mathematical model simultaneously determined the mini- the estimated unit revenues to MC layer and RC layer.
mum costs of supply chain and the maximum CS index in Next, Table 5 displays the other numerical values. This
crisp environment. However, there was no deliberation on numerical application considers around 125 constraints and
the corresponding environmental impact. 87 variables, including 3 binary integer variables.
Although the present article considers the data that are
partly inspired from Altiparmak et al. (2006) and are 7.2 Computation
moderately inspired from Sheu et al. (2005), the constraints
to the proposed model are much analytical and different Firstly, analysts consider one objective function arbitrarily.
from those existing studies. This article numerically solves Next, they compute the individual maximum and minimum
the proposed CLSCM model in real-life-based T-environ- values, subject to given constraints. Table 6 displays the
ment. Besides, the advantages of considering SCM models results.
in the real-life-based environments are well established. Based on the above values, DM predetermine the goals
Hence, this article does not compare present numerical and tolerance values to objective functions. This article
results with those of Sheu et al. (2005) or Altiparmak et al. assumes the goal of AR ðARSSCM Þ as $22; 000; 000 with
(2006). acceptable tolerance level $20; 500; 000; and the goal of
• Values CS index ðCSSSCM Þ as 6 with acceptable tolerance level 4.
So, the T-characteristic functions to objective functions are
Here, T = 1 year (i.e. four quarters in a year are four as follows
time intervals). For the sake of simplicity alone, this article
ARSSCM  20; 500; 000:
considers the number of members to various components to TðARSSCM Þ ¼ ; 8ARSSCM
1; 500; 000:
be unity in each case. Table 3 presents the demands of
manufactured goods along with the quantities of used and

Fig. 2 Graphical illustration of changes in the return flow of used products in T-environment

123
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain… 171

Fig. 3 Graphical illustration of changes in the subsidy in T-environment

Table 10 Sensitivity analysis of the physical transformation rate of The above optimal solution shows that the optimal value
treated goods from untreated goods in T-environment
to AR is superior than the corresponding goal. Likewise,
su=m Aggregate revenue Customer-satisfaction index the optimal value to the CS is better than the corresponding
goal.
1.0 $22,968,495 7.29
0.9 $22,974,997 7.41
7.3 Comparison between optimum values in T-
0.7 $22,971,353 7.51
environment and fuzzy environment
0.6 $22,972,022 7.30
0.5 $22,971,563 7.29
Table 7 compares the optimal values to objective functions
between fuzzy environment and T-environment. Here, the
proposed model finds an enhancement of 4.41% to AR and
an enhancement of 25% to CS index, while simultaneously
CSSSCM  4 addressing the EC in T-environment. This result confirms
TðCSSSCM Þ ¼ ; 8CSSSCM
64 the superiority of T-sets-based Pareto optimal solution over
Therefore, LINGO 17 determines the Pareto optimal the fuzzy counterpart to CLSCM models.
solution to the proposed CLSCM model as follows
v ¼ 1:65; ARSSCM  ¼ $22; 970; 400; SSSCM  ¼ 7:5:

Fig. 4 Graphical illustration of changes in the physical transformation rate of treated goods from untreated goods in T-environment

123
172
8 Sensitivity analysis and managerial
insights
This section performs the sensitivity analysis in detail.
8.1 Vulnerability of key parameters
The modifications of system parameters within present
study alter the optimal values, which are obtained in sub-
section 7.2 of this article, to both the objective functions to
the proposed model. In addition, to maintain the sensible
length, this article performs the sensitivity analysis to
solely the following key parameters by taking one param-
eter at a time and keeping the remaining parameters at
original levels.
i. Physical transformation rate of the treated goods
 
from untreated goods su=m ,
ii. Subsidies of the Governments or EPA ðStm ðlÞÞ, and
iii. Return flow of used products ðcÞ.
• Table 8 presents the sensitivity analysis of the return
flow of used products to the proposed CLSCM model in
T-environment. This analysis finds that the collection of
used products at higher rate leads to more revenue to
the proposed model. In addition, this yields that a col-
lection of 100% of used products from the customers
results in the maximum AR to the proposed model.
However, the relatively higher return flow negatively
impacts the CS index to the proposed model. When the
customers are bound to return the used products within
some given time, this analysis finds a subsequent drop
to CS index. The authors observe that various measures,
like to strategically place the collecting points, to
announce promotional schemes and all that make the
customers willing to return the used products within
given time. This article suggests putting more thrust to
collect the used products from customers. Moreover,
this article proposes more in-depth exploration of return
flow of used products. The authors used MATLAB to
depict all these findings graphically in Fig. 2.
• Table 9 illustrates the sensitivity analysis of the subsidy
as received by the RC layer to the proposed model in
T-environment. This analysis finds that both of the
inflated and the low subsidies result in much lesser
satisfaction level to customers along with lower AR to
supply chain. This finding adds strength to the matter
that the amounts of subsidies and thereby the quantity
of treated goods at various recycle plants should always
lie within some predetermined limits. Besides, this
suggests that there should have intervallic subsidies to
the businesses, who optimally recycles the used goods,
in order to protect the environment. Undeniably, the
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
above result is important to the political establishments
and philanthropical organizations. Figure 3 portrays all
these findings graphically.
• Table 10 presents the phenomenon of percentage
changes of physical transformation rate of the treated
goods from untreated goods. This analysis finds that
fully (100%) recyclable goods generate the less rev-
enue, and this reduces the satisfaction of customers to
supply chains. This is a contradiction to the general
phenomena that the fully recyclable goods invite
highest level of CS. Again, since the less recyclable
goods reduce the CS index faster, this article suggests
the use of customer centric and recyclable materials,
both, in optimal ratios to manufacture goods. More
research is necessary to optimally determine the CS
index as a function of quantity of recyclable goods.
Moreover, this strategy increases the AR to SCM
model. Figure 4 portrays all these findings graphically.
The above analysis presents a profound knowledge to
DM. However, the DM should think of the findings of
Oliver Wight (2019), who found that whereas an optimized
SCN reduced the corresponding operating costs by up to
50% along with the perfect order ratings by 17%, around
66% of change initiatives failed due to lack of management
skills and 75% of supply chains were unsuccessful to
deploy the planned policies. Hence, the DM should act so
that the proposed CLSCM model is customer friendly as
well as environmentally and financially sustainable at any
time.
8.2 Implications and managerial insights
There are well-established results in real-life-based envi-
ronments that the goal of maximizing the CS makes posi-
tive impacts on the AR, and the EC reflected through RC
layer certainly increases the brand value and all that to any
SCM model. However, this article demonstrates that the
AR and the CS index both improve under consideration of
the EC constraints to the proposed CLSCM model in real-
life-based T-environment. So, the DM should consider all
three classical performance indices to any SCM model
simultaneously.
The sensitivity analysis finds that the moderately high
percentage of return of used products by the customers
yields more AR and much higher CS index. And, very high
percentage of return of used products within specified time
reduces the CS index. Therefore, the policy makers should
function so as to make the customers more sincere and
more enthusiastic to timely return the used products under
the influences of higher ethical values and/or various pro-
motional schemes. So, the proposed optimal blending of
CS and EC increases the AR and thus makes any SCM
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain…
model to be sustainable. The DM can take analogous
blending in their organizations.
Besides, the DM should avoid the negative conse-
quences due to break in operations or due to shut down of
any plant, DC. So, the number of plants and DCs to be
newly established or to be operational at any time should
be optimally predetermined. Moreover, to earn through
subsidy increases the enthusiasm in managers of any sup-
ply chain. However, this study finds that the amount of
subsidy received by recycle plants should remain within
one predetermined interval. The entire above-mentioned
circumstances play key role in the decision-making process
and thus provide significant insights to supply chain
managers.
9 Conclusions
This article presents one CS- and EC-based analytical
CLSCM model in real-life-based environment. The review
of the existing literature in Sect. 2 identifies the AR, the CS
and the EC to be the classical performance indicators to
any SCM model. However, this review fails to find a single
optimization-based SCM model that simultaneously con-
siders these three classical indicators. This article considers
the AR and the CS as objective functions. The RC layer to
the proposed model reflects the EC through various con-
straints. Even though several existing studies take the RC
layer into account, the present study is the first to optimize
the CS index at the same time. The accompanying subsidy
obtained from the Governments and EPA to the recycle
plants at RC layer boosts the financial outcome to the
proposed model.
Here, the objective functions to the proposed model turn
the mathematical model into one MOOP. This article
determines the corresponding Pareto optimal solution in
real-life-based T-environment. ‘‘Appendix C’’ lists the
advantages of T-set over fuzzy set in order to represent
impreciseness. The numerical application in Sect. 6 shows
that the optimal values to both the objective functions, viz.
the AR and the CS index, are more preferable to DM than
respective goals. The sensitivity analysis along with
graphical illustrations in Sect. 7 to the parameters to the
proposed model finds that the moderately high percentage
Table 11 Symbols with the descriptions used in the proposed CLSCM model
Symbols Descriptions
Indices
s2S Supplier s among total S suppliers of unrefined materials
k2K Plant k among total K plants
j2J DC j among total J DC
173
of return of used products by customers can yield more AR
and higher CS index. But, very high percentage of return
within specified time decreases the CS index. Therefore,
this model blends the EC and the CS index while ensuring
the cost-effectiveness. Besides, this analysis finds that the
subsidies offered without any break and within the opti-
mally determined bounds to the RC layer can help the SCN
to achieve the EC related targets.
There are many scopes to carry future researches based
on the present study. One can consider the optimization of
net profit as one objective function. Future models can
impose the additional structures to the CS index. More
studies can help to fine-tune the constraints to present
model. Future mathematical models can consider several
recent indicators, like CSR, agility, data security and
sharing, IoT and all that, along with the classical perfor-
mance indicators to mathematical models. Also, future
researchers can consider more general numerical data sets
and thereby solve the MOOP. In future, the researchers
should simulate the results in order to make the industry-
ready model. One can consider higher number of members
to any chain component. One can formulate analogous
models to specific industry. And last but not the least, the
present study remains distinctive to the crisp environment,
classical fuzzy environment and other real-life-based
imprecise environments.
Funding This study was not funded by any agency or Government.
None of the authors received any kind of financial grant or support for
this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Ethical approval This article does not contain any studies with human
participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Appendix A: Symbols and descriptions
See Table 11.
123
174 A. Garai, T. K. Roy

Table 11 (continued)
Symbols Descriptions

i2I Customer I among total I customers

x2X Collecting point x among total X collecting points
t 2 PR Recycle plant t among total PR recycle plants
m2M Secondary material market m among total M secondary material markets
w2W Final disposal location w among total W final disposal locations
Objective functions
ARSSCM AR to the proposed CLSCM within given total time T
TRmc Combined time-dependent quantity of revenue to MC layer within given total time T
TDrc Combined time-dependent quantity of revenue to RC layer within given total time T
TSmc Combined time-dependent quantity of subsidy to RC layer within given total time T
CSSSCM Combined time-dependent value of CS index within given total time T
Coefficients to objective functions
Rsk ðlÞ Revenue of supplier s associated with one unit of unrefined material transported to plant k at any time l
Rkj ðlÞ Revenue of plant k associated with one unit of finished product transported to DC j at any time l
Rji ðlÞ Revenue of DC j associated with one unit of finished product transported to customer I at any time l
Rix ðlÞ Compensation received by customer I associated with one unit of used products returned to collecting point x at any time l
Rxt ðlÞ Revenue of collecting point x associated with one unit of used products transported to recycle plant t at any time l
Rtm ðlÞ Revenue of recycle plant t associated with one unit of treated item transported to secondary material market m at any time l
Rmk ðlÞ Revenue of secondary material market m associated with one unit of treated item transported to plant k at any time l
Stm ðlÞ Subsidy associated with one unit of treated item sent to secondary material market m, received by recycle plant t from Governments and/or EPA at any
time l
Decision variables and parameters
qs ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of unrefined material acquired by any given supplier s at any time l
qk ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of products manufactured at any given plant k from unrefined materials therein at any time l
ðqiÞs ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of unrefined materials in inventory associated with any given supplier s at any time l
ðqiÞk ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of both unrefined materials and finished goods in inventory related to each given plant k at any time l
ðqiÞj ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of finished goods in inventory associated with any given DC j at any time l
ðriÞx ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of used goods in inventory associated with any given collecting point x at any time l
ðriÞt ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of untreated goods in inventory associated with any given recycle plant t at any time l
ðrtÞt ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of untreated goods in inventory put to use for recycling related to each given recycle plant t at any time l
ðritmÞt ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of treated goods in inventory associated with any given recycle plant t at any time l
ðritwÞt ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of wasted goods in inventory associated with any given recycle plant t at any time l
 
ðriÞm ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of treated goods in inventory associated with any given secondary material market m at any time l
 
ðriÞw ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of wasted goods in inventory associated with any given final disposal location w at any time l
 
ðrf Þw ðlÞ Time-dependent quantity of wastages disposed at any given final disposal location w at any time l
bsk ðlÞ Quantity of unrefined materials sourced from supplier s to plant k at any time l
f kj ðlÞ Quantity of finished goods transported sourced from plant k to DC j at any time l
qji ðlÞ Quantity of finished goods transported sourced from DC j to customer I at any time l
ðqrÞix ðlÞ Quantity of used goods sourced from customer I to collecting point x at any time l
rxt ðlÞ Quantity of used goods sourced from collecting point x to recycle plant t at any time l
rtw ðlÞ Quantity of untreated goods sourced from recycle plant t to final disposal location w at any time l
rtm ðlÞ Quantity of treated goods sourced from recycle plant t to secondary material market m at any time l
ðrq)mk ðlÞ Quantity of treated goods sourced from secondary material market m to plant k at any time l
di ðlÞ Time-dependent demand of finished goods from customer I at any time l
T Total time
l Any given time
Op Number of open plants
OD Number of open DCs
sr=m Physical transformation rate of finished goods from unrefined materials
u=m Physical transformation rate of treated goods from untreated goods
s
su=w Physical transformation rate of wasted goods from untreated goods

123
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain…
Appendix B: Drawbacks of classical fuzzy set
The drawbacks of the membership function to classical
fuzzy set as well as the redefined membership function in
Wu et al. (2015) are as follows (Garai et al. 2016, 2017)
• Firstly, the employments of redefined membership
functions in Wu et al. (2015) were not as per the
definitions presented in mathematical model as well as
in numerical examples of that article.
• Secondly, the mathematical model in Wu et al. (2015)
employed strictly monotonic redefined membership
functions over the entire real line. However, the
definitions in that article specified otherwise.
• In addition, the researchers could only employ the part
of redefined membership functions, at which the
corresponding objective values lied within the goals
and goal plus tolerances, to the minimization type of
objective functions. However, so far, researchers did
not consider the above prerequisite (in form of
constraints) within the mathematical models.
• Thirdly, Wu et al. (2015) discarded the upper bound at
unity to membership functions of fuzzy objective
functions. However, the corresponding lower bound to
membership functions of fuzzy objective functions
remained intact at zero. Here, the authors find this to be
arbitrary and biased.
• Most importantly, the classical fuzzy membership
function could provide satisfying solution, only when
the extreme ends of imprecise information lied within
zero and one. However, Garai et al. (2016, 2017)
showed that the proper mathematical representation of
impreciseness cannot be confined within any closed and
bounded interval of real line, at all times.
Figure 5 illustrates the drawbacks of membership
function to classical fuzzy set (Garai et al. 2017).
Fig. 5 Drawbacks of the
membership function to
classical fuzzy set
175
Appendix C: T-set and related definitions
The characteristic function of crisp subset assigns either 1
or 0 to elements of universal set and thereby discriminates
between the members and non-members. Again, member-
ship function to fuzzy subset generalizes the characteristic
function and the values assigned to elements of universal
set fall within the specified range of closed unit interval [0,
1]. However, Garai et al. (2016, 2017) observed that the
membership function failed to discriminate between yes
and certainly yes by assigning same value ‘unity’ to both
cases and failed to discriminate between no and certainly
no by assigning same value ‘zero’ to both cases (Garai
et al. 2016, 2017).
In other words, elements to universal set must be or be
or partly be or not be or never be lying in a subset. The
concept of being, partly being or not being is well mea-
sured by membership function of fuzzy subset. However,
this cannot explain the cases of must being (since mem-
bership value is unity, at all times) as well as never being
(since membership value is zero, at all times) for elements
of fuzzy subset. Garai et al. (2017) presented the following
example to illustrate all these as follows
• The task is to pick up one tall policeman among all
policemen for the guard of honour ceremony of the
President of USA during the official visit to North
Korea. To assign the job solely to some tall person in
force is a bold step to North Korea. If one policeman
with height of more than 60 is considered to be tall, he
can be assigned unity as the membership value in fuzzy
subset of tall policemen.
Assume that Mr. Bansal is 60 400 tall and Mr. Chowd is
0 00
6 6 tall. In fuzzy set theory, both are given unity as the
same membership value. However, if the DM were all
machines with zero emotion, this would have been
123
176
acceptable to choose any one of two persons (or in fact,
any policeman taller than 60 ). Nevertheless, as human
beings, the mind plays key role. DM can have full happi-
ness only after selecting the tallest person. Here, all the
persons taller than 60 are assigned the same membership
value (unity). So, DM fail to find the most suitable person
in force for the prestigious ceremony.
This marks that the upper bound of membership func-
tion of fuzzy subset at unity causes the dilemma.
Consequently, Garai et al. (2016, 2017) introduced the
T-characteristic function and then T-set as follows
Definition 1 Let S be universal set and A is any subset of
S. Then, T-characteristic function of A is denoted by TA and
is defined as TA : S ! IR. So, this assigns real number
TA ð xÞ to each element x 2 S. Higher the value of TA ð xÞ,
larger the value of membership of x 2 S in A. Here IR
denotes set of real numbers.
Definition 2 Let S be universal set. Then, T-subset A of S
is defined as the ordered pair A ¼ fðx; TA ðxÞÞ : x 2 Sg,
where T-characteristic function TA : S ! IR assigns real
number TA ð xÞ as membership value to each x 2 S:
The universal set S is not necessarily an ordered set in
imprecise environment. However, the function TA : S ! IR
imposes an ordering over elements of S based on the value
of TA ð xÞ8x 2 S.
Definition 3 The union of two T-subsets A and B of S,
which is denoted by A [ B, is defined as
A [ B ¼ fðx; TA[B ðxÞÞ : x 2 Sg, where T-characteristic
function TA[B ðxÞ of A[B is defined as
TA[B ðxÞ ¼ maxfTA ðxÞ; TB ðxÞg; 8x 2 S.
Definition 4 The intersection of two T-subsets A and B of
S, which is denoted by A \ B, is defined as
A \ B ¼ fðx; TA\B ðxÞÞ : x 2 Sg, where T-characteristic
function TA\B ðxÞ of A\B is defined as
TA\B ðxÞ ¼ minfTA ðxÞ; TB ðxÞg; 8x 2 S.
Definition 5 The complement of T-subset A of S, denoted
by A or Ac , is defined as A ¼ fðx; TAðxÞÞ : x 2 Sg, where
T-characteristic function TA ð xÞ of A or Ac is defined as
TAðxÞ ¼ 1  TA ðxÞ; 8x 2 S:
References
Agnihotri R, Trainor KJ, Itani OS, Rodriguez M (2017) Examining
the role of sales-based CRM technology and social media use on
post-sale service behaviors in India. J Bus Res 81:144–154
Ali A, Haseeb M (2019) Radio frequency identification (RFID)
technology as a strategic tool towards higher performance of
supply chain operations in textile and apparel industry of
Malaysia. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag 7:215–226
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
Alinaghian M, Zamani M (2019) A bi-objective fleet size and mix
green inventory routing problem, model and solution method.
Soft Comput 23(4):1375–1391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-
017-2866-2
Altiparmak F, Mitsuo G, Lin L, Paksoy T (2006) A genetic algorithm
approach for multi-objective optimization of supply chain
networks. Comput Ind Eng 51(1):196–215
Anderson D (2014) Design for manufacturability: how to use
concurrent engineering to rapidly develop low-cost, high-quality
products for lean production. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Anderson E, Sullivan M (1993) The antecedents and consequences of
CS for firms. Mark Sci 12(2):125–143
Anderson E, Fornell C, Lehmann D (1994) Customer satisfaction,
market share, and profitability: findings from Sweden. J Mark
58(3):53–66
Angelova B, Zekiri J (2011) Measuring CS with service quality using
American CS model (ACSI model). Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci
1(3):232–258
Aquilani B, Silvestri C, Ruggieri A, Gatti C (2017) A systematic
literature review on total quality management critical success
factors and the identification of new avenues of research. TQM J
29(1):184–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2016-0003
Attaran M, Sharmin A (2007) Collaborative supply chain manage-
ment. Bus Process Manag J 13(3):390–404
Aven T (2016) Risk assessment and risk management: review of
recent advances on their foundation. Eur J Oper Res 253(1):1–13
Bahari F, Elayidom S (2015) An efficient CRM-data mining
framework for the prediction of customer behaviour. Procedia
Comput Sci 46:725–731
Basu S, Pramanik S, Dey S, Panigrahi G, Jana DK (2019) Fire
monitoring in coal mines using wireless underground sensor
network and interval type-2 fuzzy logic controller. Int J Coal Sci
Technol 6(2):274–285
Bellman RE, Zadeh LA (1970) Decision-making in a fuzzy environ-
ment. Manag Sci 17(4):141–164
Bloemhof JM, Soysal M (2017) Sustainable food supply chain design.
In: Bouchery Y, Corbett C, Fransoo J, Tan T (eds) Sustainable
supply chains, springer series in supply chain management, vol
4. Springer, Cham, pp 395–412
Bowen EF, Paul CD, Richard LC, Farukt AC (2009) The role of
supply management capabilities in green supply. Prod Oper
Manag 10(2):174–189
Brandenburg M, Gerd HJ, Rebs T (2018) Social and environmental
dimensions of organizations and supply chains: trade-offs and
synergies. Springer, Cham
Campos AC, Mendes J, Valle PO, Scott N (2018) Co-creation of
tourist experiences: a literature review. Curr Issues Tour
21(4):369–400
Cardozo RN (1965) An experimental study of customer effort,
expectation, and satisfaction. J Mark Res 2(3):244–249
Carter CR, Easton PL (2011) Sustainable supply chain management:
evolution and future directions. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag
41(1):46–62
Chatterjee K, Pamucar D, Zavadskas EK (2018) Evaluating the
performance of suppliers based on using the R’AMATEL-
MAIRCA method for green supply chain implementation in
electronics industry. J Clean Prod 184:101–129
Chavez R, Yu W, Feng M, Wiengarten F (2016) The effect of
customer-centric green supply chain management on operational
performance and customer satisfaction. Bus Strategy Environ
25(3):205–220
Chen L, Zhao X, Tang O, Price L, Zhang S, Zhu W (2017) Supply
chain collaboration for sustainability: a literature review and
future research agenda. Int J Prod Econ 194:73–87
Chin TA, Hamid ABA, Rasli A, Tat HH (2014) A literature analysis
on the relationship between external integration, environmental
Multi-objective optimization of cost-effective and customer-centric closed-loop supply chain…
uncertainty and firm performance in Malaysian SMEs. Procedia
Soc Behav Sci 130:75–84
Choudhury M, Harrigan P (2014) CRM to social CRM: the
integration of new technologies into customer relationship
management. J Strateg Mark 22(2):149–176. https://doi.org/10.
1080/0965254X.2013.876069
Chuang SH, Lin HN (2013) The roles of infrastructure capability and
customer orientation in enhancing customer-information quality
in CRM systems: empirical evidence from Taiwan. Int J Inf
Manag 33:271–281
Churchill G, Surprenant C (1982) An investigation into the determi-
nants of customer satisfaction. J Mark Res 19(4):491–504
Deloitte (2019) Deloitte touche tohmatsu limited. http://www.deloitte.
com. Accessed 21 July 2019
Dubey R, Gunasekaran A, Papadopoulos T, Childe S, Shibin K,
Wamba S (2016) Sustainable supply chain management: frame-
work and further research directions. J Clean Prod
142(2):1119–1130
Dubois D, Prade H (2015) The legacy of 50 years of fuzzy sets: a
discussion. Fuzzy Sets Syst 281:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fss.2015.09.004
Dutta A, Jana D (2017) Expectations of the reductions for type-2
trapezoidal fuzzy variables and its application to a multi-
objective solid transportation problem via goal programming
technique. J Uncertain Anal Appl. https://doi.org/10.1186/
s40467-017-0057-4
Ebrahimnejad A, Verdegay JL (2018) Fuzzy sets-based methods and
techniques for modern analytics. studies in fuzziness and soft
computing. Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw
Elhedhli S, Merrick R (2012) Green supply chain network design to
reduce carbon emissions. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ
17(5):370–379
Eltayeb TK, Zailani S, Ramayah T (2011) Green supply chain
initiatives among certified companies in Malaysia and environ-
mental sustainability: investigating the outcomes. Resour Con-
serv Recycl 55(5):495–506
Fernandes AC, Sampaio P, Sameiro M, Truong HQ (2017) Supply
chain management and quality management integration: a
conceptual model proposal. Int J Qual Reliab Manag
34(1):53–67. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-03-2015-0041
Flint JD, Christopher BP, Boutin PJ (2011) Customer value antici-
pation, CS and loyalty: an empirical examination. Ind Mark
Manag 40(2):219–230
Fornell C (1992) A national CS barometer: the Swedish experience.
J Mark 56(1):6–21
Garai A, Mandal P, Roy TK (2016) Intuitionistic fuzzy T-sets based
optimization technique for production-distribution planning in
supply chain management. Opsearch 53(4):950–975
Garai A, Mandal P, Roy TK (2017) Multipollutant air quality
management strategies: t-Sets Based optimization technique
under imprecise environment. Int J Fuzzy Syst 19(6):1927–1939
Garrido-Moreno A, Garcı́a-Morales LV (2014) Paving the way for
CRM success: the mediating role of knowledge management and
organizational commitment. Inf Manag 51(8):1031–1042
Gaussin M, Hu G, Abolghasem S, Basu S, Shankar MR, Bidanda B
(2013) Assessing the environmental footprint of manufactured
products: a survey of current literature. Int J Prod Econ
146(2):515–523
Geng R, Mansouri S, Aktas E (2017) The relationship between green
supply chain management and performance: a meta-analysis of
empirical evidences in Asian emerging economies. Int J Prod
Econ 183(A):245–258
Govindan K, Kaliyan M, Kannan D, Haq A (2014) Barriers analysis
for green supply chain management implementation in Indian
industries using analytic hierarchy process. Int J Prod Econ
147(B):555–568
177
Green KW, Zelbst PJ, Meacham J, Bhadauria VS (2012) Green
supply chain management practices: impact on performance.
Supply Chain Manag Int J 17(3):290–305
Grimm D, Wosten H (2018) Mushroom cultivation in the circular
economy. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 102(18):7795–7803
Guu S-M, Wu Y-K (1999) Two-phase approach for solving the fuzzy
linear programming problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst 107(2):191–195
Handfield RB, Ernest NL (1999) Introduction to supply chain
management. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
Hennig T, Klee A (1997) The impact of customer satisfaction and
relationship quality on customer retention: a critical reassess-
ment and model development. Psychol Mark 14(8):737–764
Hsu C-W, Kuo T-C, Chen S, Hu AH (2013) Using DMTEL to
develop a carbon management model of supplier selection in
green supply chain management. J Clean Prod 56:164–172
Imran M, Hamid S, Aziz A, Hameed W (2019) The contributing
factors towards e-logistic customer satisfaction: a mediating role
of information technology. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag
7:63–72
Jabbour C, Jabbour A (2016) Green human resource management and
green supply chain management: linking two emerging Agendas.
J Clean Prod 112:1824–1833
Janssen PB, Johnson MP, Schaltegger S (2015) 20 years of perfor-
mance measurement in sustainable supply chain management—
what has been achieved? Supply Chain Manag Int J
20(6):664–680. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2015-02
Jimenez M, Bilbao A (2009) Pareto-optimal solutions in fuzzy multi-
objective linear programming. Fuzzy Sets Syst
160(18):2714–2721
Jonkman et al (2019) Selecting food process designs from a supply
chain perspective. J Food Eng 195:52–60
Kandampully J, Zhang TC, Jaakkola E (2018) Customer experience
management in hospitality: a literature synthesis, new under-
standing and research agenda. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag
30(1):21–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2015-0549
Kannan D, Khodaverdi R, Olfat L, Jafarian A, Diabat A (2013)
Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making method and
multi-objective programming approach for supplier selection and
order allocation in a green supply chain. J Clean Prod
47:355–367
Kaur J, Sidhu R, Awasthi A, Chauhan S, Goyal S (2018) A
DEMATEL based approach for investigating barriers in green
supply chain management in Canadian manufacturing firms. Int J
Prod Res 56(1-2):312–332
Khansalar E, Bayez MLD, Safari R (2015) Maximizing profit in
reverse supply chain. Int Bus Res 8(11):111–118. https://doi.org/
10.5539/ibr.v8n11p111
Kronborg JJ, Munksgaard KB, Arlbjorn JS (2013) Chasing value
offerings through green supply chain innovation. Eur Bus Rev
25(2):124–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555341311302657
Kusi-Sarpong S, Gupta H, Sarkis J (2018) A supply chain sustain-
ability innovation framework and evaluation methodology. Int J
Prod Res. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1518607
Li X (2014) Operations management of logistics and supply chain:
issues and directions. Discrete Dyn Nat Soc. https://doi.org/10.
1155/2014/701938
Markova S, Tatjana P-M (2013) Social media and supply chain.
Amfiteatru Econ J 15(33):89–102
Melnyk SA, Flynn BB, Awaysheh A (2018) The best of times and the
worst of times: empirical operations and supply chain manage-
ment research. Int J Prod Res 56(1):164–192
Mumtaz U, Ali Y, Petrillo A (2018) A linear regression approach to
evaluate the green supply chain management impact on indus-
trial organizational performance. Sci Total Environ 624:162–169
Oliver Wight (2019) https://www.oliverwight-eame.com. Accessed
21 July 2019
123
178
Petljak K, Zulauf K, Stulec I, Seuring S, Wagner R (2018) Green
supply chain management in food retailing: survey-based
evidence in Croatia. Supply Chain Manag Int J 23(1):1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-04-2017-0133
Pramanik S, Jana DK, Mondal SK, Maiti M (2015) A fixed-charge
transportation problem in two-stage supply chain network in
Gaussian type-2 fuzzy environments. Inf Sci 325:190–214
Rajeev A, Pati R, Padhi S, Govindan K (2017) Evolution of
sustainability in supply chain management: a literature review.
J Clean Prod 162(20):299–314
Rust RT, Zahorik AJ (1993) Customer satisfaction, customer
retention, and market share. J Retail 69(2):193–215
Ryu K, Lee HR, Kim WG (2012) The influence of the quality of the
physical environment, food, and service on restaurant image,
customer perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral
intentions. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 24(2):200–223
Sabri EH, Beamon BM (2000) A multi-objective approach to
simultaneous strategic and operational planning in supply chain
design. Omega 28(5):581–598
Saeidi SP, Sofian S, Saeidi P, Saeidi SP, Saaeidi SA (2015) How does
corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial
performance? the mediating role of competitive advantage,
reputation, and customer satisfaction. J Bus Res 68(2):341–350
Sakawa M, Matsui T (2012) An interactive fuzzy satisficing method
for multi-objective stochastic integer programming with simple
recourse. Appl Math 3:1245–1251
Sakawa M, Yano H, Nishizaki I (2013) Linear and multi-objective
programming with fuzzy stochastic extensions. Springer, New
York
Salehi S, Selamat A, Mashiinchi MR, Fujita H (2015) The synergistic
combination of particle swarm optimization and fuzzy sets to
design granular classifier. Knowl Based Syst 76:200–218
Sarkar B (2019) Mathematical and analytical approach for the
management of defective items in a multi-stage production
system. J Clean Prod 216:896–919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2019.01.078
Sarkar B, Guchhait R, Sarkar M, Pareek S, Kim N (2018) Impact of
safety factors and setup time reduction in a two-echelon supply
chain management. Robot Comput Integr Manuf. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rcim.2018.05.001
Sarkis J (2003) A strategic decision framework for green supply chain
management. J Clean Prod 11(4):397–409
Sarkis J, Qinghua Z, Lai KH (2011) An organizational theoretic
review of green supply chain management literature. Int J Prod
Econ 130(1):1–15
Sarvestani HK, Zadeh A, Seyfi M, Barzoki MR (2019) Integrated
order acceptance and supply chain scheduling problem with
supplier selection and due date assignment. Appl Soft Comput
75:72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.10.045
Secchi E, Roth A, Verma R (2018) The impact of service
improvisation competence on customer satisfaction: evidence
from the hospitality industry. Prod Oper Manag. https://doi.org/
10.1111/poms.12969
Seuring S (2013) A review of modeling approaches for sustainable
supply chain management. Decis Support Syst 54(4):1513–1520
Seuring S, Gold S (2013) Sustainability management beyond
corporate boundaries: from stakeholders to performance.
J Clean Prod 56:1–6
Seuring S, Muller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual
framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean
Prod 16(15):1699–1710
Sheu BJ, Chou YH, Hu CC (2005) An integrated logistics operational
model for green-supply chain management. Transp Res Part E
Logist Transp Rev 41(4):287–313
123
A. Garai, T. K. Roy
Siddiqi O (2011) Interrelations between service quality attributes, CS
and customer loyalty in the retail banking sector in Bangladesh.
Int J Bus Manag 6(3):12–36
Singh R, Sandhu HS, Metri BA, Kaur R (2018) Supply chain
management practices, competitive advantage and organiza-
tional performance: a confirmatory factor model. Oper Serv
Manag. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-3909-4.ch054
Srivastava SK (2007) Green supply-chain management: a state-of-
the-art literature review. Int J Manag Rev 9(1):53–80
Svensson G (2007) Aspects of sustainable supply chain management
(SSCM): conceptual framework and empirical example. Supply
Chain Manag Int J 12(4):262–266
Testa F, Iraldo F (2010) Shadows and lights of GSCM (green supply
chain management): determinants and effects of these practices
based on a multi-national study. J Clean Prod 18(10-11):953–962
Tseng M, Islam M, Karia N, Fauzi F (2019) A literature review on
green supply chain management: trends and future challenges.
Resour Conserv Recycl 141:145–162
Uygun O, Dede A (2016) Performance evaluation of green supply
chain management using integrated fuzzy multi-criteria decision
making techniques. Comput Ind Eng 102:502–511
Walker H, Jones N (2012) Sustainable supply chain management
across the UK private sector. Supply Chain Manag Int J
17(1):15–28
Wei JT, Lee MC, Chen HK, Wu HH (2013) Customer relationship
management in the hairdressing industry: an application of data
mining techniques. Expert Syst Appl 40(18):7513–7518
Wei G, Wang H, Zhao X, Lin R (2014) Hesitant triangular fuzzy
information aggregation in multi-attribute decision making.
J Intell Fuzzy Syst Appl Eng Technol 26(3):1201–1209
Wieland A, Handfield RB, Durach CF (2016) Mapping the landscape
of future research themes in supply chain management. J Bus
Logist. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12131
Wu Y-K, Liu CC, Lur YY (2015) Pareto-optimal solution for multi-
objective linear programming problems with fuzzy goals. Fuzzy
Optim Decis Mak 14(1):43–55
Zablah AR, Carlson BD, Donavan DT, Maxham JG, Brown T (2016)
A cross-lagged test of the association between CS and employee
job satisfaction in a relational context. J Appl Psychol
101(5):743–755
Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353
Zhang M, Guo H et al (2019) Linking supply chain quality integration
with mass customization and product modularity. Int J Prod
Econ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.01.011
Zhou S, Lam J, Zheng WX (2007) Control design for fuzzy systems
based on relaxed non-quadratic stability and H! performance
conditions. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 15(2):188–199
Zhu Q, Sarkis J, Lai KH (2008) Confirmation of a measurement
model for green supply chain management practices implemen-
tation. Int J Prod Econ 111(2):261–273
Zhu Q, Sarkis J, Lai KH (2013) Institutional-based antecedents and
performance outcomes of internal and external green supply chain
management practices. J Purch Supply Manag 19(2):106–117
Zimmermann H-J (1976) Description and optimization of fuzzy
systems. Int J Gen Syst 2(4):209–215
Zimmermann H-J (1978) Fuzzy programming and linear program-
ming with several objective functions. Fuzzy Sets Syst
1(1):45–55
Zimmermann H-J (1985) Applications of fuzzy set theory to
mathematical programming. Inf Sci 36(1–2):29–58
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.