适用于农产品的物流管理模型外文翻译

适用于农产品的物流管理模型外文翻译 外文翻译原文A Model of Physical Management Adapted for Agricultural Products Material Source:/.Author: ASFAW Yilma In the past decades we have seen an increasing rate of globalization of the economy and thereby also of supply chains. Products are no longer produced and consumed within the same geographical area. Even the different parts of a product may come from all over the world. This creates longer and more complex supply chains, and therefore it also changes the requirements within supply chain management. Models for this purpose need to be dynamic because of the time correlation of upstream and downstream operations and the various uncertainties that exist in a supply-chain. Some researchers have tried to come up with different models for supply chain management with more focus on manufacturing. Hodder and Dincer 1986 studied the international plant location problem and developed a single-period model to determine the best locations, material flows and financing patterns. Their model identifies the best sourcing plan given multiple possible production sites for a product to be sold in multiple markets. Breitman and Lucas 1987 described the PLANETS model, which was developed at General Motors with a number of features considered such as tariffs, local content, balance of trade, and trade complementation. Cohen and Lee1989 developed a multi-period, production?distribution model with time-varying parameters for the personal computer manufacturers to establish a global manufacturing strategy. Haug 1992 designed an international location model to study the global sourcing problem in high technology firms. Kogut and Kulatilaka 1994 developed a stochastic, dynamic programming model to study the value of production switching in conditions where currency exchange rates are uncertain. They provided a numerical example without identifying a specific industry application. Arntzen et al. 1995 developed a mixed integer program to solve the global supply chain design problem at an electronics manufacturer, Digital Equipment Corporation, now part of the Compaq Corporation. A distinguishing feature of the model by Arntzen et al. 1995 is its ability to reflect both cost and time in the objective functionGutierrez and Kouvelis 1995 developed a model and an algorithm for international sourcing with uncertain currency exchange rates and investigated the utility of operational flexibility to hedge against losses in this environment. In a global context Canel and Khumawala 1996 developed un-capacitated and capacitated versions of a mixed integer programming model to solve an international facility location problem IFLP. The model includes a number of features relating to global supply chains, including exchange rates, corporate tax rates, tariffs, and direct export incentives. Munson and Rosenblatt 1997 investigated a global supply chain problem that emphasizes supplier sourcing with local content rules. These rules require that a firm purchase a specified quantity of components from suppliers within the country where it opens a manufacturing plant. Hadjinicola and Kumar 2002 took a broader approach by combining manufacturing and marketing functions into a global supply chain model that they then used to assess eight manufacturing-marketing strategies. However the model does not include the supply segments of the supply chain. Nagurney et al. 2003 developed a network equilibrium model for a global supply chain comprised of three tiers: manufacturer, retailer, and consumer. The model uses a variation inequality formulation to derive product shipments and price patterns in the network, assuming cooperation between tiers but competition within tiers. As we have seen above, we could not find model specifically relating with the supply chain management of agricultural products. Even some researchers who tried to develop supply chain model for agricultural product like Vorst and Adrie 2001 focus only on timed colored Petri-nets to support decision-making when redesigning a supply chain for chilled food products. , Therefore it is necessary to look for a new general supply chain model which is adapted for agricultural products. This may result in a reduced bullwhip effect, lower inventory levels, reduced logistics costs, and advanced streamlined payments for the firm. These improvements appear to have helped produce macroeconomic benefits such as more stable economic output and higher productivity growth. It also has positive effect on how to identify Facilitate market access of agricultural commodities in developed and developing countries, notably by improving terms of trade, adapting multilateral trade rules to the institutional, human capital and infrastructural context and assisting in developing product quality and pre- and post-production standards. Thus, this paper focuses on the model adaptation of supply chain management for agricultural products. With a necessary understanding of the characteristics, difficulties and problems of agricultural products, likewise it designs a model of supply chain management for agricultural products. By using a case study about coffee, this paper also illustrates the benefits and insights gained with this adapted modeling approach.2 Uniqueness of Agricultural Products and Their Supply Chain Management2.1 Pillar Industry of Agriculture Deserves Better Supply Chain Management in LDC The agricultural sector is the backbone of the economies of the least developed countries LDCs. It accounts for a large share of gross domestic product GDP ranging from 30 to 60 percent in about two thirds of them, employs a large proportion of the labor force from 40 percent to as much as 90 percent in most cases, represents a major source of foreign exchange ranging from 25 percent to as much as 95 percent in three quarters of the countries, supplies the bulk of basic food and provides subsistence and other income to more than half of the LDCs population.2.2 Poor Physica Management Resulting in Unfavorable International Agricultural Trade However, the participation of LDCs in international agricultural trade is insignificant and has been declining. Their share in world agricultural exports has dropped steadily from 3.3 percent in 1970-79 to 1.9 percent in 1980-89 and a mere 1.5 percent in 1990-98. Their share in world imports has also declined, though much less so, from 1.8 percent in 1970 to 1.6 percent in 1998. While world agricultural trade including the intra-trade of EU expanded at an average annual rate of over 5 percent during 1990-98, exports from LDCs grew by only 3.9 percent, in contrast to 6.6 percent for the developing countries as a whole. Their market share of many key agricultural commodities has fallen significantly from the 1980s to the 1990s, by over 30 percent for such commodities as timber, coffee, tea and cocoa and about 20 percent for cattle Brussels, 2001. This may be due to lack of information and lack of global market knowledge on how to inter to the market with capable knowing components of supply chain. For this there is no specific model todays which can be directly applicable for agricultural products.2.3 General Flowchart of physica of Ethiopian Coffee as a Case Coffee, a typical agricultural product, is one of the most popular Fair Trade goods. Coffee is grown in a number of places around the world. In some countries, the coffee industry is a huge part of the economy. When coffee is grown, it must make its way from the farm to the customers coffee cup. Collectively, the path through which a product such as coffee makes its way from the farmer to the final consumer is known as the supply chainAs shown in Figure 1, both the Non-Fair Trade and the Fair Trade coffee supply chains start with the farmer who plants and then tends to coffee trees. The trees sprout the coffee “fruit which is known as the “red cherry. In Ethiopia, the red cherry is harvested from the trees by people who are employed by the farmers, or those independent contractors who are paid a couple of cents for every pound of coffee that they harvest, usually depending on how much money the farmer is able to pay and what prevailing wages are. At this point, the Fair Trade supply chain splits off from the rest of the coffee After the cherry is harvested, it is sold to wholesalers or collectors or to the cooperative. The cooperative washes, dries, and packages the coffee. It is transported from the inland rural farms to Addis Ababa for shipment to global Companies like Starbucks and Oxfam in the developed world. The Coffee may be sold by the farmer to the Fair Trade Cooperative of which he is a member. By law in Ethiopia, all coffee must be sold either at auction or through deals with cooperatives. Sometimes the coffee is bought by exporters. The global Companies like Oxfam and Starbucks roast and package the coffee to prepare for sale to the final consumerSales to the final consumer can happen either through those campaniles or through retail channels. The coffee is then sold by the exporter to a roasting company. The roasting company roasts the coffee, blends it with other kinds of coffee and prepares it for the final consumer. If the company sells bagged coffee, the coffee is bagged for sale. If the company operates coffee shops, the coffee is roasted and prepared for drinking. The coffee then makes its way to a consumers cup at a markup of 1200-1500% or more from the prices that are paid to farmers. On the other hand, the giant coffee franchise opposes Ethiopias efforts to trademark the names of its most famous coffee regions Sidamo, Yirgacheffe and Harar. Starbucks, after all, is already using those names to sell coffee for top dollars across the globe. From the complex and special flowchart of coffee supply, we can conclude that the uniqueness of agricultural products should be fully understood and considered for any development of supply chain model with adaptation to agricultural products.3 Design of Supply Chain Management Model for Agricultural Products3.1 Foundations for Model Adaptation of physica Management As discussed above, the supply chain of Ethiopian Coffee starting from planting the tree to the end consumers could not traced in the theoretical aspects of the supply chain model by Wu and OGrady, 2001, and the other model of Ganeshan and Harrison 1995. However, both models are basically focused on manufacturing products, and ignore the characteristics of agricultural products at all. Though some researchers like Vorst and Adrie 2000 tried to develop some supply chain models for agricultural products, they more or less concentrated only on timed colored Petri-nets to support decision-making especially for the supply chain of chilled food products. So it is encouraging to come up with the new general model for agricultural products. Therefore, the following model Figure 2 which is developed in this research may fill the existed gap.3.2 Components of Supply Chain for Agricultural products The supply chain has basically four components: 1 Production: where businesses focus on how much to produce, where to produce it, and what suppliers to use. 2 Inventory: where businesses decide where to store their products, and how much to store. 3 Distribution: where businesses address questions about how their products should be moved and stored. 4 Payments: where businesses look for the best ways to pay suppliers and get paid by customers. The efficiency and effectiveness of a supply chain is contingent on the ability to gather and analyze important information through these components Supply chain management is one of the most important strategic aspects of any business enterprise. Decisions must be made about how to coordinate the production of goods and services, how and where to store inventory, whom to buy materials from and how to distribute them in the most cost-effective, timely manner.3.3 Benefits of Supply Chain Model Adapted for Agricultural Products In order to provide responsiveness, high frequency of delivery, controllable and reliable lead times, and involvement of a great diversity of outlets the new model will play an important role in agricultural supply chains. On the other hand, it helps to market developments demand that the agricultural supply chain of the future responds in a quick and high-frequent manner to changing market needs. Products would have to be delivered within a manageable mannerThus, Customers will get the product with reasonable price. Quality will be guaranteed and the delivered product will show details of its origin. Besides the market, the transport of agricultural products would have to be organized more efficiently to conform to a higher utilization of loading capacity, and environmental-friendly concepts would have to be found. It can help to cater to the demands of the consumer, and, help to reduce unnecessary transportation costs. Also, the demands on the environment, space and living conditions of the farmers will be better.4 ConclusionsPhysica modeling approaches can be classified into two main types: analytical models and simulation models. Analytical models often employ mathematical programming techniques to optimize the strategic design and/or operational policies of the supply-chain, but they are often too simplistic to be of practical use for complex supply-chains. On the other hand, simulation models can capture realistic supply-chain characteristics and allow the evaluation of the impact of policy changes carried out by one or more supply-chain members. Hence, simulation models can be used as an important first step towards realistic optimization. Thus, this paper is only concerned with simulation models, and aims to make the model more adaptable to deal effectively with external strategic changes, such as globalization, and operational uncertainties, such as demand fluctuations, in order to take advantage of any new opportunities and to drive down the overall supply costs. While the cost of changing a business strategy or operational policies can be huge, managers can minimize the risk of making expensive mistakes by quantitatively analyzing their business and assessing various strategies and policies with simulation models. So, the model developed on this paper has a significant role to managers to analyze their business related with agricultural products译文适用于农产品的物流管理模型 资料来源: /0.作者: ASFAW Yilma 在过去的十年中,我们看到了在全球化环境下,社会经济不断增长,同时社会物流体系也在不断完善。产品不仅仅只是在同一地理区域内的生产和消费。一个产品的不同部件可能来自世界各地。这将引起更长,更复杂的物流环节,因此这将也改变了社会对物流管理的要求。由于当前物流操纵在上游和下游的各种不确定性是存在的,所以物流运作需要动态来减少物流环节。 一些研究人员一直试图想出不同的物流管理模型,并把这些模型更集中在制造业。霍德和戴宁尔研究了国际植物选址问题,并制定了单期模型,以确定最正确位置,物流和融资模式。他们的模型确定了最正确的采购方案提供尽可能多的产品生产在多个市场上销售的网站。彼得曼和卢卡斯描述的行星模型,这个模型使得通用汽车公司开发多了一些功能的考虑,如关税,当地含量,贸易平衡和贸易互补。科恩和Lee开发了多期的时变参数的个人电脑模型,建立一个全球制造策略,生产分配模式。豪格设计了一个模型来研究国际定位在高科技公司的全球采购问题。可瑞德和卡拉莱尔开发了一种随机的,动态规划模型,研究了生产条件交换值,但其中汇率是不确定的。他们提供一个没有确定具体的行业应用算例。艾森制定了一个混合整数规划来解决一家电子制造商,?康柏公司的全球供给链。该模型的一个显著特点是是其能力反映在本钱和时间的目标函数中。古铁雷斯和卡佛里斯(1995)开发了一个基于不确定的国际货币汇率的采购方法模型,以对冲在这样的环境损失的效用。在全球范围内卡内尔和卡瓦拉(1996)开发了一个混合整数规划模型联合国容量限制和容量限制的版本,以解决国际设施选址问题(IFLP)。该模型包括了与全球物理,包括汇率,企业所得税税率,关税和直接出口刺激功能。 曼森和罗森布拉特(1997)调查了全球供给链问题,强调与当地供给商采购的内容规那么。这些规那么要求一个企业生产元器件的数量。海德和库曼(2002)注意到运用一个全球供给链模型,然后用它们来评估八个生产营销策略,生产和营销功能的更广泛的方式。然而,模型不包括供给链的供给环节。南德宁(2003 年)制定的全球供给链的三个层次组成一个网络均衡模型:制造商,零售商和消费者。该模型 采用了变分问题制订推导网络产品出货量和价格模式,假设层内各层之间但竞争的合作。 正如我们上面看到的,我们无法找到具体模式与农业的物流管理有关。即使是一些研究人员试图开发像福斯特和埃德尔物流模式(2001年)只注重运用因特网,用因特网支持决策,重新设计了冷藏食品物流模式,因此,有必要寻找一种新的物流模式,即农业产品适应物流的开展的新型模式。这有可能降低牛鞭效应,降低库存水平,降低物流本钱,并为公司先进的流线型付款。这些改良似乎已经帮助企业开展,能更稳定的加大经济产出和加大生产率增长。它也对能如何识别,特别是通过改善贸易条件来适应多边贸易规那么,完善人力资本和根底设施建设,提高产品的质量,促进农产品市场准入等方面,有重要的意义。 因此,本文着重论述了适用农产品物流管理管理的模型设计。理解一个农产品的特点,困难和问题,从而也可以设计一种咖啡农产品物流管理模型。通过案例分析,并得出了咖啡模型的相关内容。通过对咖啡案例研究,来阐述这种农产品建模是适宜的2农产品及其供给链管理2.1不兴旺国家的物流管理在农业支柱产业的开展是最欠缺的 最不兴旺国家(LDCs)的农业生产是这个国家的经济支柱。它占了国内生产总值的很大份额(约三分之二)有30%?60%GDP,在大多数情况下,雇用的劳动力从最低百分之四十,最高高达百分之九十,是外汇的主要来源。农业部门担负着家一半以上人口的经济收入。2.2物流管理的缺乏是由国际农产品贸易所导致 最不兴旺国家参与国际农产品贸易中,农产品通过运用物流管理来实现贸易是微缺乏道的。它们在世界农产品出口中的份额已下降至百分之3.3 。从1990-2000年的1.9百分点向2000-2021年的1.5百分点递减。它们在世界进口中所占份额也有所下降,从1990年的百分之1.8至1998 年的百分之1.6。尽管世界农产品贸易(包括内部欧盟贸易)以平均每年超过5个百分点增长,在2000年至2002年,但最不兴旺国家的出口只增长了3.9个百分点,而相比之下,百分之6.6可以作为一个整体的开展中国家。他们的许多重要农产品的市场占有率已大幅下降,从20世纪80年代到90年代,木材,咖啡,茶和可可等商品由百分之30降至百分之20(布鲁塞尔,2001年)。这可能是由于全球市场的信息不流畅和物流知识的缺乏有关。国际米兰元器件市场的物流管理模型在整个农业没有模型的今天,可直接用于农业生产的产品。2.3一般物流流程,以埃塞俄比亚咖啡的物流链为例 咖啡,一个典型的农业产品,是目前最流行的公平贸易商品之一。咖啡生长在世界各地。在一些国家,咖啡业是经济的重要局部。咖啡的种植,必须从农场开始。总的来说,通过它的链条,如咖啡产品从农户到最终消费者,这就是供给链。无论是不公平贸易或者公平贸易咖啡的供给链都从农户开始。在埃塞俄比亚,从树上收割红樱桃的人都受雇于农民,农户独立承包种植的咖啡。在这一点上,当地的公平贸易供给链有别于世界其它地区的咖啡。 樱桃收获后,它被出售给批发商、经销商。一起合作洗,烘,和包装咖啡。并把它从内地运到亚的斯亚贝巴农村,再运往星巴克以及兴旺国家的全球性公司。那么咖啡厂商是公平贸易合作的一个成员。在埃塞俄比亚法律,所有的咖啡必须出售或拍卖,或通过与合作社的交易。有时候咖啡的出口商?全球公司,如星巴克烤在包装咖啡后出售给最终消费者。通常星巴克做出的咖啡比所支付给农民的价格多1200?1500%的价格出售给消费者。另一方面,咖啡特许经营,反对使用埃塞俄比亚商标。 3设计的供给链管理模式的农业产品3.1供给链管理模式适应根底 如上所述,如埃塞俄比亚咖啡供给链,它的物流模型无法开始追查从种植到消费者各个环节。因为这两个模型根本上集中在制造产品,而无视对农业产品的特性分析。虽然像福斯特和艾瑞德试图开展农产品一些供给链模型,他们或多或少只集中在一个方面进行摸索,尤其是冷冻食品。虽然如此,这是令人鼓舞的典范。因此,这是本研究开发可填补存在的差距。3.2农产品物流管理的四个局部 根本四局部组成:(1)生产:在企业生产多少,在哪里生产的,以及供给商使用的重点在哪里。(2)存货:其中企业决定在哪里存储他们的产品,有多少储存。(3)分布:企业应该如何解决他们的产品移动和存储问题。(4)付款:业务中,以最好的方式给支付给供给商和顾客。 效率与效益取决于供给链的能力,重要信息采集和分析是企业运行物流管理最重要的组成局部。必须确定如何协调货物的生产和效劳,在哪里以及怎样储存存货,谁买材料和如何分配最符合本钱效益,就有及时性。3.3基于物流模型的农产品 为了加大响应能力,提前交货日期,交货时间可控,可靠的高频率,以及多样性,需要农业主体的参与。另一方面,有利于适应市场开展的要求,未来的农产品供给链将快速和高频繁地对不断变化的市场需求作出反响。因此,客户将获得价格合理的产品,同时质量将得到保证,所交付的产品将展示其来源。除了市场,农产品的运输将要提高承载能力和适应环境友好的概念,找到更高的利用率。它可以满足消费者的需求,并有助于减少不必要的运输本钱。另外,根据农民的实际情况,空间和生活条件的要求会更好。4结论 物流建模方法可分为两大类:分析模型和仿真模型。分析模型通常采用的战略是,通过能优化供给链的数学编程技术,但这技术往往过于简单化。另一方面,仿真模型能够捕捉到现实物流的特点,并一个或更多的物流主体允许评价政策变化影响。因此,仿真模型可以重点作为优化的第一步。因此,本文只涉及模拟模型,旨在使模型更适用于处理外部战略的变化,如全球化的不确定性,如需求波动,以便采取任何新的措施来降低整体供给本钱。虽然改变经营策略或营运政策是一个巨大的本钱,管理人员仍然可以通过决策的定量分析来评估各项业务,来降低昂贵的错误的风险。因此,本文开发的模型对农产品开展具有重要的作用