Abstract
This paper aims to incorporate two important measures into a freight shortest path problem, namely reliability and sustainability. Reliability measure deals with the uncertainty of link travel time while sustainability measure tends to reduce the fuel consumption and emission along the path. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rates are generated from Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) model and approximated as a function of the average link travel speed. To model uncertainty, the link travel speed is treated as a discrete random variable with a given distribution. Freight carriers are assumed to be risk-averse; for example, given two paths with the same average cost, carriers prefer the one with less variability. The risk-averse behavior is captured by the second order stochastic dominance (SSD) relationship. Specifically, SSD constraints are introduced in our model to narrow down the feasible paths which dominate a chosen benchmark path. The reliable and sustainable routing model is formulated as an integer program that can be easily tailored to a variety of modeling preferences. The study experiments with eight variants of the base model, each corresponding to a different trade-off strategy between three objectives, namely, efficiency, reliability and sustainability. The numerical experiments illustrate the benefits of the models discussed in the paper.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2010/2010-05-21-02.html, last visited on July 5, 2012.
see, e.g., http://www.mpgforspeed.com/.
We note that road travel speeds may vary with the time of day, especially in urban areas. This practical feature is not considered in this paper in order to simplify the analysis of efficiency, reliability and environmental consideration.
Determining the weight vector is a challenge in its own right in practice. One possibility is for the analyst to interview the decision makers and then estimate the weights properly from the survey data. The reader is referred to Keeney (1993) for detailed discussions along this line.
References
Ahn K, Rakha H (2008) The effects of route choice decisions on vehicle energy consumption and emissions. Transp Res D 13(3):151–167
Ando N, Taniguchi E (2006) Travel time reliability in vehicle routing and scheduling with time windows. Netw Spat Econ 6(3–4):293–311
Arrow K (1965) Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing. Helsinki: Yrj Hahnsson Foundation
Barth M, An F, Norbeck J, Ross M (1996) Modal emissions modeling: a physical approach. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1520:81–88
Bektaş T, Laporte G (2011) The pollution-routing problem. Transp Res B 8:1232–1250
Chen A, Zhou Z, Ryu S (2011) Modeling physical and environmental side constraints in traffic equilibrium problem. Int J Sustain Transp 5(3):172–197
Chen BY, Lam WH, Sumalee A, Li Q, Shao H, Fang Z (2012) Finding reliable shortest paths in road networks under uncertainty. Networks and spatial economics, pp 1–26
Davies J, Facanha C (2007) Greenhouse gas emissions from freight trucks. International Emissions Inventory Conference. http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei16/session5/davies_pres.pdf, Accessed 5 July 2012
Dentcheva D, Ruszczynski A (2003) Optimization with stochastic dominance constraints. SIAM J Optim 14(2):548–566
Dial RB (1979) A model and algorithm for multicriteria route-mode choice. Transp Res B 13(4):311–316
EPA U (2002) User guide to mobile 6.1 and 6.2., Technical report, Office of Transportation and Air Quality
EPA U (2012) User guide for moves2010b. Technical report, United States Environmental Protection Agency
Erdoğan S, Miller-Hooks E (2012) A green vehicle routing problem. Transp Res E 48(1):100–114
Fan Y, Nie Y (2006) Optimal routing for maximizing the travel time reliability. Netw Spat Econ 6(3–4):333–344
FHWA (2005) Traffic congestion and reliability: trends and advanced strategies for congestion mitigatio. Technical report, Federal Highway Administration
Figliozzi M (2010) Emissions minimization vehicle routing problem, paper# 10-4117. In: ‘89th annual meeting of transportation research board 2010, Washington DC
Friedman M, Savage L (1948) The utility analysis of choices involving risk. J Polit Econ 56:279–304
Hadar J, Russell WR (1971) Stochastic dominance and diversification. J Econ Theory 3:288–305
Hanoch G, Levy H (1969) The efficiency analysis of choices involving risk. Rev Econ Stud 36:335–346
Keeney RL (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kickhöfer B, Nagel K (2013) Towards high-resolution first-best air pollution tolls. Networks and Spatial Economics, pp 1–24
Koupal J, Hart C, Brzezinski D, Giannelli R, Bailey C (2002) Draft emission analysis plan for moves ghg. Technical report, Report EPA420-P-02-008. US Environmental Protection Agency
Levy H (1992) Stochastic dominance and expected utility: survey and analysis. Manag Sci 38:555–592
Li Z-C, Wang Y-D, Lam WH, Sumalee A, Choi K (2013) Design of sustainable cordon toll pricing schemes in a monocentric city. Networks and Spatial Economics, pp 1–26
Lin D-Y, Xie C (2011) The pareto-optimal solution set of the equilibrium network design problem with multiple commensurate objectives. Netw Spat Econ 11(4):727–751
Maden W, Eglese R, Black D (2009) Vehicle routing and scheduling with time-varying data: a case study. J Oper Res Soc 61(3):515–522
Muller A, Stoyan D (2002) Comparison methods for stochastic models and risks. Wiley, Chichester
Nagurney A (2000) Congested urban transportation networks and emission paradoxes. Transp Res D 5(2):145–151
Nie Y, Wu X, Dillenburg JF, Nelson PC (2012) Reliable route guidance: a case study from chicago. Transp Res A 46(2):403–419
Nie Y, Wu X, Homem-de-Mello T (2011) Optimal path problems with second-order stochastic dominance constraints. Networks and Spatial Economics. doi:10.1007/s11067-011-9167-6, in press
Penic M, Upchurch J (1992) Transyt-7f: enhancement for fuel consumption, pollution emissions, and user costs. Transportation Research Record, 1360
Rakha H, Ahn K, Trani A (2004) Development of vt-micro model for estimating hot stabilized light duty vehicle and truck emissions. Transp Res D 9(1):49–74
Rilett L, Benedek C (1994) Traffic assignment under environmental and equity objectives. Transp Res Rec 1443:92–92
Rothschild M, Stiglitz JE (1970) Increasing risk I a definition. J Econ Theory 2:225–243
Sugawara S, Niemeier D (2002) How much can vehicle emissions be reduced?: exploratory analysis of an upper boundary using an emissions-optimized trip assignment. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1815:29–37
Tzeng G, Chen C (1993) Multiobjective decision making for traffic assignment. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 2:180–187
Whitmore GA (1970) Third degree stochastic dominance. Am Econ Rev 60:457–459
Winkelman S, Bishins A, Kooshian C (2009) Cost-effective ghg reductions through smart growth and improved transportation choice. Technical report
Wu X, Nie Y (2011) Modeling heterogeneous risk-taking behavior in route choice: a stochastic dominance approach. Transp Res A 45(9):896–915
Yang Y, Yin Y, Lu H (2013) Designing emission charging schemes for transportation conformity. J Adv Transp
Yin Y, Lawphongpanich S (2006) Internalizing emission externality on road networks. Transp Res D 11(4):292–301. doi:10.1002/atr.1226
Acknowledgments
This research was partially supported by National Science Foundation under the Award number CMMI-0928577 and National Center for Freight and Infrastructure Research and Eduction.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, Q., Nie, Y.(., Vallamsundar, S. et al. Finding Efficient and Environmentally Friendly Paths for Risk-Averse Freight Carriers. Netw Spat Econ 16, 255–275 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-013-9220-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-013-9220-8