Bohr article

1. Introduction

With the continuous expansion of agricultural products and cold chain logistics in the market, more and more cold chain companies have entered the market competition (1). In order to maintain industry competitiveness, reduce comprehensive logistics costs, and improve customer satisfaction, the control of logistics costs has become the focus of enterprises. Especially in industries such as e-commerce, the status of logistics cannot be ignored (2, 3). Logistics costs directly affect the company’s profits and have a crucial impact on its competitive position. Therefore, controlling the cost of logistics and distribution is of great significance to enterprises. This paper adopts the hierarchical analysis method and the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to analyze and evaluate the factors affecting the logistics distribution cost of logistics companies (4). By collecting data and analyzing the scores of the current control influencing factors, it is found that the cold chain distribution cost module needs additional attention and further sorts out the existing problems and causes and puts forward corresponding rectification suggestions to achieve the purpose of reducing logistics costs. Effectively reducing logistics costs can not only make product prices competitive but also bring more economic benefits to enterprises and help logistics companies improve their logistics service level (5).

With the continuous expansion of agricultural products and cold chain logistics in the market, more and more cold chain companies have entered the market competition (6). In order to maintain industry competitiveness, reduce comprehensive logistics costs, and improve customer satisfaction, the control of logistics costs has become the focus of enterprises. Especially in industries such as e-commerce, the status of logistics cannot be ignored (7, 8). Logistics costs directly affect the company’s profits and have a crucial impact on its competitive position. Therefore, controlling the cost of logistics and distribution is of great significance to enterprises. This paper adopts the hierarchical analysis method and the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to analyze and evaluate the factors affecting the logistics distribution cost of logistics companies. By collecting data and analyzing the scores of the current control influencing factors, it is found that the cold chain distribution cost module needs additional attention and further sorts out the existing problems and causes and puts forward corresponding rectification suggestions to achieve the purpose of reducing logistics costs. Effectively reducing logistics costs can not only make product prices competitive but also bring more economic benefits to enterprises and help logistics companies improve their logistics service level.

2. Literature review

In view of the research on the cold chain logistics model, Li et al. (9) pointed out that China’s cold chain logistics market is expanding. Through empirical research, they have identified three different cold chain logistics models, namely, self-built cold chain logistics, third-party cold chain, and “self-operated + third-party” compound mode. Through the analysis of these three different logistics models, we have found out the bottlenecks in the development of cold chain logistics in China and put forward feasible suggestions. In addition, Liu et al. (10) studied the current situation of cold chain logistics of fresh agricultural products in Guangxi and found existing problems and development bottlenecks. Yu et al. (11) studied the current situation of cold chain logistics development of more than 100 fresh e-commerce companies, including infrastructure construction and consumer satisfaction, and found that the comprehensive score of the self-built logistics model was the highest. A cold chain logistics model in line with the actual development situation has been established to solve the practical problems encountered on the development road through multiple channels. Zhou et al. (12) studied the development status of cold chain logistics of more than 100 fresh e-commerce companies, including infrastructure construction and consumer satisfaction, and found that the comprehensive score of the self-built logistics model was the highest.

In terms of cold chain logistics distribution, Chen et al. (13) conducted an in-depth analysis of the cold chain distribution of pine mushrooms. Combined with the preservation methods of pine antler products and various preservation processes, they studied and discussed the main reasons for the time consumption and inefficiency of logistics and distribution of pine antler products. On this basis, they established a guarantee and a safe urban and rural public distribution service system, with the help of a safe and perfect information sharing system, replanning, and setting up logistics distribution outlets to improve the efficiency of logistics distribution. In addition, Yu et al. (14) discussed the issue from the perspective of interference management. By measuring the freshness of agricultural products and measuring the distribution service time, they built an acceptance recovery model of logistics distribution and used the start-up algorithm to analyze model requests to provide the efficiency and reliability of high-flow distribution. These studies provide new ideas and methods for the development of cold chain logistics and are expected to be more widely applied and promoted in practice.

In terms of logistics cost control, Chu et al. (15) pointed out that the use of advanced logistics technology can improve logistics efficiency, which can effectively improve all aspects of the entire logistics service, thus reducing labor and error costs. Zhou et al. (16) believe that in modern logistics companies, there will be a new development direction, that is, third-party logistics and outsourcing or subcontracting their business. For enterprises, reducing logistics costs is one of the keys to improving their competitiveness. Borgström et al. (17) pointed out that for today’s enterprises, controlling logistics costs is to control the lifeline of the whole enterprise, so it is very important to solve the corresponding cost control problem. Due to the many factors affecting logistics today, attention should be paid to the collection, production, and sales of corresponding products; make full use of modern scientific and technological means to continuously improve the overall logistics and transportation system; and find the best solution. According to He et al. (18) logistics control is playing a more and more prominent role with the continuous rise of the service industry. It is conducive to adjusting the economic structure, strengthening regional coordination, and continuously enriching economic benefits.

3. Construction of the logistics delivery cost evaluation system

3.1. Establishment of the evaluation index system

According to the actual situation, this paper determines the criterion layer of timeliness, competitiveness, safety, and management A, that is, the first-level index layer. In the decision-making of these four first-level indicators, a total of 12 second-level indicators, namely, the indicator layer, are subdivided, and the entire indicator system is constructed, as shown in Table 1 (refer to Appendix Table 1).

TABLE 1

Table 1. Evaluation index system.

3.2. Construct the target layer and the first-level indicator layer judgment matrix

Experts are scored by Form A2 in the questionnaire and the importance of factors under the secondary indicator layer is compared, as shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2

Table 2. Judgment matrix of the target layer and first-level index layer.

3.3. Construct the judgment matrix of the first-level indicator layer and the second-level indicator layer

Experts are scored by Forms A3–A6 in the questionnaire and the importance of factors under the secondary indicator layer is compared, as shown in Tables 3–6.

TABLE 3

Table 3. Index layer judgment matrix under timeliness factors.

TABLE 4

Table 4. Judgment matrix of the index layer under competitive factors.

TABLE 5

Table 5. Index layer judgment matrix under safety factors.

TABLE 6

Table 6. Judgment matrix of the index layer under management factors.

Take the target layer and the first-level indicator layer A-Bi as examples.

Multiplication results:

a_{1} = 1 \times 2 \times 1 \times 3 = 6.0000

a_{2} = \frac{1}{2} \times 1 \times 1 \times 1 = 0.5000

a_{3} = 1 \times 1 \times 1 \times 1 = 1.0000

a_{4} = \frac{1}{3} \times 1 \times 1 \times 1 = 0.3333

(a = U 1 \times U 2 \times U 3 \times U 4)

Open to the nth power to get the eigenvector bi

b_{1} = {(a_{1})}^{\frac{1}{4}} = 1.5651

b_{2} = {(a_{2})}^{\frac{1}{4}} = 0.8409

b_{3} = {(a_{3})}^{\frac{1}{4}} = 1.0000

b_{4} = {(a_{4})}^{\frac{1}{4}} = 0.7598

Normalize BI: Get the indicator weight vector

w_{A} = {(\frac{1.5651}{4.1658}, \frac{0.8409}{4.1658}, \frac{1.0000}{4.1658}, \frac{0.7598}{4.1658})}^{T}

= {(0.3757, 0.2019, 0.2400, 0.1824)}^{T}

The maximum feature value corresponding to the weight vector w

A w_{A} = [\begin{matrix} 1 & 2 & 1 & 3 \\ 1 / 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 / 3 & 1 & 1 & 1 \end{matrix}] [\begin{matrix} 0.3757 \\ 0.2019 \\ 0.2400 \\ 0.1824 \end{matrix}] = [\begin{matrix} 1.5667 \\ 0.8122 \\ 1.0000 \\ 0.7495 \end{matrix}]

λ_{A} m a x = \frac{(\frac{1.5667}{0.3757} + \frac{0.8122}{0.2019} + \frac{1.0000}{0.2400} + \frac{0.7495}{0.1824})}{4}

= 4.1171

The judgment matrix for the target layer and the criterion layer, n = 4, RI = 0.9, CI = (4.1171-4)/3 = 0.0390, CR = 0.0390/0.9 = 0.0434 = 0.1, is determined. Therefore, it is judged that the matrix A–Bi passes the consistency test.

Similarly, the index weight vector and consistency test value CR corresponding to the judgment matrix of the first-level index layer and the second-level index layer are calculated, and they all pass the consistency test.

3.4. Calculation of combined weights

After calculating the weights of the indicators of the criterion layer and the indicator layer corresponding to their parent indicators, the combined weights are calculated. The method is to multiply the weight of each indicator layer by its corresponding benchmark layer weight, refer to Appendix Table 7, as shown in Table 7.

TABLE 7

Table 7. Combination weight of each indicator.

4. The use of the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method

4.1. Multifactor fuzzy judgment

The evaluation indicators of specific factors are scored according to the actual situation, refer to Appendix Table 8, and the specific data are shown in Table 8.

TABLE 8

Table 8. Expert scoring data sheet.

According to the expert scoring data in Table 8, the index membership of each indicator layer, that is, the initial membership degree, can be obtained, as shown in Table 9.

TABLE 9

Table 9. Results of indicator layer membership.

According to Table 9, the comprehensive fuzzy matrix of the secondary index layer is established.

(1) Evaluation of timeliness factors:

w_{B 1} = {0.4438 0.2120 0.2836 0.0606}

R_{B 1} = [\begin{matrix} 0.4000 & 0.3667 & 0.1667 & 0.0667 & 0.0000 \\ 0.4333 & 0.1333 & 0.2333 & 0.1333 & 0.0667 \\ 0.5667 & 0.2333 & 0.0667 & 0.0667 & 0.0667 \\ 0.2667 & 0.2667 & 0.2000 & 0.2000 & 0.0667 \end{matrix}]

S_{B 1} = w_{B 1} \cdot R_{B 1} = {0.4438 0.2120 0.2836 0.0606}

\times [\begin{matrix} 0.4000 & 0.3667 & 0.1667 & 0.0667 & 0.0000 \\ 0.4333 & 0.1333 & 0.2333 & 0.1333 & 0.0667 \\ 0.5667 & 0.2333 & 0.0667 & 0.0667 & 0.0667 \\ 0.2667 & 0.2667 & 0.2000 & 0.2000 & 0.0667 \end{matrix}]

= (0.4463 0.2733 0.1545 0.0889 0.0371)

(2) Evaluation of competitive factors:

w_{B 2} = {0.3126 0.3359 0.1518 0.1997}

R_{B 2} = [\begin{matrix} 0.6000 & 0.2667 & 0.1333 & 0.0000 & 0.0000 \\ 0.0667 & 0.0667 & 0.1333 & 0.5000 & 0.2333 \\ 0.2333 & 0.4667 & 0.2000 & 0.0667 & 0.0333 \\ 0.2333 & 0.2333 & 0.4667 & 0.0333 & 0.0333 \end{matrix}]

S_{B 2} = w_{B 2} \cdot R_{B 2} = (0.2920 0.2232 0.2100 0.1847 0.0901)

(3) Evaluation of safety factors:

w_{B 3} = {0.6667 0.3333}

R_{B 3} = [\begin{matrix} 0.3667 & 0.4000 & 0.1667 & 0.0667 & 0.0000 \\ 0.1333 & 0.3000 & 0.2667 & 0.2000 & 0.1000 \end{matrix}]

S_{B 3} = w_{B 3} \cdot R_{B 3} = (0.2889 0.3667 0.2000 0.1111 0.0333)

(4) Evaluation of management factors:

w_{B 4} = {0.3333 0.6667}

R_{B 4} = [\begin{matrix} 0.2333 & 0.4667 & 0.1333 & 0.1667 & 0.0000 \\ 0.3667 & 0.2667 & 0.2667 & 0.1000 & 0.0000 \end{matrix}]

S_{B 4} = w_{B 4} \cdot R_{B 4} = (0.3222 0.3333 0.2222 0.1222 0.0000)

Multifactor fuzzy assessment:

Assessment of the overall target layer:

w_{A} = {0.3757 0.2019 0.2400 0.1824}

R_{A} = (\begin{matrix} S_{B 1} \\ S_{B 2} \\ S_{B 3} \\ S_{B 4} \end{matrix})

= [\begin{matrix} 0.4463 & 0.2733 & 0.1545 & 0.0889 & 0.0371 \\ 0.2920 & 0.2232 & 0.2100 & 0.1847 & 0.0901 \\ 0.2889 & 0.3667 & 0.2000 & 0.1111 & 0.0333 \\ 0.3222 & 0.3333 & 0.2222 & 0.1222 & 0.0000 \end{matrix}]

S_{A} = w_{A} \cdot R_{A} = (0.3547 0.2966 0.1890 0.1196 0.0401)

4.2. Comprehensive evaluation results

According to the formula M_i = S_i ⋅ V, the final score of the B1-B4 index and the total system A is obtained:

M_{B 1} = S_{B 1} \cdot V = (0.4463 0.2733 0.1545 0.0889 0.0371)

[\begin{matrix} 100 \\ 80 \\ 60 \\ 40 \\ 20 \end{matrix}] = 80.0559

The score of the timeliness factor is between 70 and 80, and the final evaluation is good.

M_{B 2} = S_{B 2} \cdot V = (0.2920 0.2232 0.2100 0.1847 0.0901)

[\begin{matrix} 100 \\ 80 \\ 60 \\ 40 \\ 20 \end{matrix}] = 68.8439

The score of the competitive factor is between 50 and 70, and the final evaluation is average.

M_{B 3} = S_{B 3} \cdot V = (0.2889 0.3667 0.2000 0.1111 0.0333)

[\begin{matrix} 100 \\ 80 \\ 60 \\ 40 \\ 20 \end{matrix}] = 75.3333

The score of the safety factor is between 70 and 90, and the final evaluation is good.

M_{B 4} = S_{B 4} \cdot V = (0.3222 0.3333 0.2222 0.1222 0.0000)

[\begin{matrix} 100 \\ 80 \\ 60 \\ 40 \\ 20 \end{matrix}] = 77.1111

The score of the management factor is between 70 and 90, and the final evaluation is good.

M_{A} = S_{A} \cdot V = (0.3547 0.2966 0.1890 0.1196 0.0401)

[\begin{matrix} 100 \\ 80 \\ 60 \\ 40 \\ 20 \end{matrix}] = 76.1219

According to the analysis results of the above method, it can be seen that the overall result of the influencing factors of logistics cost control is 80.0559, which is between 70 and 90, and the evaluation result of this system is good, indicating that logistics cost control or some indicators need to be better controlled.

5. Suggestions for improving delivery costs

First of all, we rationally plan the logistics network and transportation routes and reduce unnecessary logistics links so as to reduce logistics costs and improve distribution efficiency. To this end, intelligent technologies such as GPS navigation and logistics big data analytics can be adopted to improve the efficiency of logistics operations while reducing the waste of time and resources. A reasonable delivery route is determined. Whether the delivery route is reasonable or not has a great impact on the delivery speed, cost, and benefit, so scientific methods are used to determine the reasonable delivery routes. In addition, for different cargo types, transportation distances, and timeliness requirements, a variety of distribution methods can be adopted, such as road, rail, and air, as well as express delivery, special line distribution, and self-pickup, so as to flexibly apply and reduce costs.

Second, choosing a more cost-effective logistics service provider is also an important strategy. By comparing with different logistics service providers, we can find more favorable logistics services, and through long-term cooperation, we can also build trust and work together to reduce distribution costs. In addition, strengthening inventory management and optimizing warehouse management is also an important aspect. We reasonably control inventory, reduce inventory costs, optimize warehousing management, improve warehousing efficiency, and reduce warehousing costs.

Finally, in order to improve distribution efficiency and service quality, we can also strengthen the training and management of distribution staff, improve their service awareness and professional level, and adopt a scientific distribution management mode. In addition, the introduction of intelligent logistics equipment, such as automated warehouse management systems, logistics robots, drones, and so on, can improve logistics efficiency, reduce logistics costs, and improve logistics service levels.

6. Conclusion

Based on relevant theoretical research, this paper summarizes the operation process and composition of logistics costs of e-commerce enterprises from the basic definitions and related concepts of logistics cost and cold chain logistics. This paper conducts theoretical research on the logistics of logistics companies on their own logistics, analyzes relevant cases from the perspective of logistics costs, sorts out the problems and causes in logistics control costs, and scientifically evaluates the existing factors affecting distribution costs.

Author contributions

XX has written all the content of this manuscript.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my advisor Yu Jing for her academic help with my article.

References

1. Kundu S, Achee B, Latif M. Exploiting discrete event simulation to improve a chicken supply chain. BOHR Int J Adv Manage Res. (2022) 1:63–74.

Google Scholar

2. Zhou C, Li X, Ren Y, Yu J. How do fairness concern and power structure affect competition between e-platforms and third-party sellers? IEEE Trans Eng Manage. (2023) 2023:1–17. doi: 10.1109/TEM.2023.3262318

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Yu J, Song Z, Zhou C. Self-supporting or third-party? The optimal delivery strategy selection decision for e-tailers under competition. Kybernetes. (2022) doi: 10.1108/K-02-2022-0216 [Epub ahead of print].

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Cui X, Zhou C, Yu J, Khan AN. Interaction between manufacturer’s recycling strategy and e-commerce platform’s extended warranty service. J Clean Prod. (2023) 399:1–16.

Google Scholar

5. Liu Z, Zhou C, Chen H, Zhao R. Impact of cost uncertainty on supply chain competition under different confidence levels. Int Trans Operat Res. (2021) 28:1465–504.

Google Scholar

6. Zhou C, Tang W, Zhao R. Optimal consumer search with prospect utility in hybrid uncertain environment. J Uncertain Anal Applic. (2015) 3:1–20.

Google Scholar

7. Brose S, Samunderu E. Reconfiguring a multi-period facility model – an empirical test in a dynamic setting. BOHR Int J Operat Manage Res Pract. (2023) 1:17–27.

Google Scholar

8. Santhosh T, Aswin K. The smart analysis for workforce and organization management in corporate environment. BOHR Int J Adv Manage Res. (2023) 2:55–60.

Google Scholar

9. Li C, Chu M, Zhou C, Xie W. Is it always advantageous to add-on item recommendation service with a contingent free shipping policy in platform retailing? Electron Commerce Res Applic. (2019) 37:1–11.

Google Scholar

10. Liu Z, Gao R, Zhou C, Ma N. Two-period pricing and strategy choice for a supply chain with dual uncertain information under different profit risk levels. Comput Ind Eng. (2019) 136:173–86.

Google Scholar

11. Yu J, Zhou C, Wang Y, Liu Z. Incentive contract design for supply chain enterprise’s pollution abatement with carbon tax. Math Problems Eng. (2021) 5556796:1–14.

Google Scholar

12. Zhou C, Tang W, Zhao R. Optimal consumption with reference-dependent preferences in on-the-job search and savings. J Ind Manage Optimiz. (2017) 13:503–27.

Google Scholar

13. Chen P, Zhao R, Yan Y, Zhou C. Promoting end-of-season product through online channel in an uncertain market. Eur J Operat Res. (2021) 295:935–48.

Google Scholar

14. Yu J, Zhao J, Zhou C, Ren Y. Strategic business mode choices for e-commerce platforms under brand competition. J Theor Appl Electron Commerce Res. (2023) 17:1769–90.

Google Scholar

15. Chu M, Zhou C, Yu J. The impact of online referral services on cooperation modes between brander and platform. J Ind Manage Optimiz. (2022) doi: 10.3934/jimo.2022174 [Epub ahead of print].

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Zhou C, Leng M, Liu Z, Yu J. The impact of recommender systems and pricing strategies on brand competition and consumer search. Electron Commerce Res Applic. (2022) 53:1–15.

Google Scholar

17. Borgström B, Hertz S, Jensen LM. Strategic development of third-party logistics providers (TPLs):“Going under the floor” or “raising the roof”? Ind Market Manage. (2021) 97:183–92.

Google Scholar

18. He P, Zhang S, He C. Impacts of logistics resource sharing on B2C E-commerce companies and customers. Electron Commerce Res Applic. (2019) 34:286–305.

Google Scholar

Appendix: Questionnaire

Dear Sir/Madam

Hello! I hope that for you to understand the logistics cost control of J company, your opinion will be of great help for our research; the questionnaire is filled in anonymously, the answer option is not right or wrong. I hope you answer truthfully. I sincerely thank you for your cooperation.

1. Problem description

This questionnaire takes the logistics cost control evaluation index system of J logistics company as the survey objective and uses the analytic hierarchy method to analyze its impact factors.

TABLE A1

Table A1. Hierarchical model.

Second, please judge the relative importance of the elements of each level by comparing them in pairs, determine the relative importance of the factors of the next layer to a factor of the previous level, and assign a certain score in the corresponding space according to the 1–9 scale method.

TABLE A2