Int. J.

Production Economics 140 (2012) 731–736

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Int. J. Production Economics

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

Chilled or frozen? Decision strategies for sustainable food supply chains

Simone Zanoni, Lucio Zavanella n
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica e Industriale, Universita degli Studi di Brescia Brescia, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: Along the food supply chains (FSC), energy plays a strategic role, being fundamental to guarantee
Received 14 April 2010 quality and influential in the determination of economic values. Moreover, the same type of product
Accepted 28 April 2011 may flow through chains differing in energy requirement, processing equipment and time spent in the
Available online 11 May 2011
chain itself.
Keywords: These differences between the FSCs (short vs. longer product lives and storage times, fast vs. slower
Food supply chain transportation, low vs. higher energy contribution) motivated the study, which aims at capturing in an
Cold chains analytical model the relationships between the relevant parameters influencing the problem, thus
Perishables addressing a possible approach to the chain optimisation.
By the modelling approach proposed, jointly looking at economic aspects and energy efforts
required to condition and preserve the product quality over time, it is possible to address new
considerations for understanding FSCs peculiarities, so as to support decisions and improving the
sustainability of the solution adopted.
& 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
There are several and different ways for treating and preser-
ving food: however, the greatest part of them requires some
contribution of energy. For example, heating was used since the
oldest times, because of warm sources availability, while produ-
cing cold temperatures, excluding determined geographical areas,
has acquired more relevance in the recent times, thanks to energy
availability (refrigerators) and, in the years preceding, ice trans-
portability. Nowadays, several supply chains for foods are based
on chilled and frozen goods: different transport chains and their
technical features are described in James et al. (2006). It is evident
that a key element within these chains is energy, also in its
different forms, as it is a necessary source to guarantee quality-
based processes. Furthermore, the use of energy implies the
consumption of resources (frequently, non-renewable ones) and
this fact directly influences the sustainability of the FSC consid-
ered, together with its economic performance.
Distribution and storage of frozen food fall into the category of
‘‘cold chains’’, in which the products are kept at low temperature
so as to preserve their quality. In ‘‘cold chains’’ energy should be
appropriately used to prevent food products deterioration over
time, avoiding their value decrease (e.g., due to spoilage of
perishable products) and guaranteeing quality preservation.
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ39 030 3715581; fax: þ39 030 3702448.
E-mail address: lucio.zavanella@ing.unibs.it (L. Zavanella).
Food quality and the nutritional value of food itself could be
related to some important nutrients characteristics (e.g., vitamin
C level for several vegetables, sugar level for several fruits,
proteins for meat, etc.), which begin to deteriorate immediately
upon harvest or butchery: the aim of cold chains is both to
preserve quality and to limit the loss in value over the following
stages of the chain from the field to the consumer.
The present paper aims at investigating the role of energy in a
FSC where a producer collects the products, freezing them to
the temperature set for their preservation, and transports the
products to an intermediate distributor for cold stocking before
final delivery to retailers. The temperature level must be guaranteed
throughout the chain, from the producer to the retailer and frozen
products face a cold storage the duration of which determines the
level of energy demand. Moreover, the lower the temperature, the
higher the energy required and the longer the product life:
i.e., the optimisation of the FSC outlined requires the modelling of
the chain itself, taking into consideration the temperature set and its
impact on quality (i.e., food preservation, together with its nutri-
tional values), energy and associated costs.
The aim is to present a model for FSC configuration encom-
passing the influence of both temperature and storage time, thus
appreciating their impact on product quality, costs and sustain-
ability of the chain, as related to quality degradation and energy
consumption.
To this end, the paper will be organised as follows. Section 2
offers a broader view of FSC, so as to set the problem dealt within
an appropriate background. Section 3 gives the notation and the
framework for the proposed modelling approach. Section 4 is

0925-5273/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.04.028
732 S. Zanoni, L. Zavanella / Int. J. Production Economics 140 (2012) 731–736
devoted to the comments to the model and to some insights
offered by the model itself. Finally some concluding remarks
jointly and foreseeable developments are given in Section 5.
2. Literature background
FSCs present peculiar features with respect to other goods
chains and, also from this point of view, FSCs reveal challenging
aspects for inventory and production researchers (Zavanella and
Zanoni, 2009). For example, FSCs are affected by peculiarities
close to typical production issues, but worthy of investigation
(e.g., Akkerman and van Donk, 2007):
 frequently, setup times are sequence dependent (think about
cleaning, equipment regulation and selection of packages)
both in time and costs;
 the time of storing should be limited, not only because of
limited shelf life, but also because of the need for dedicated
equipment and space, which could be additionally limited
when product mixing is to be avoided; and
 processing should be fast, by means of traced and high-quality
systems.
However, food processing and distribution may refer to
significantly different types of chains: this fact may be easily
perceived when comparing the supply chain of fresh foods
(characterised by short product lives, fast transportation and
low energy contribution, mainly concentrated in the transport
phases rather than in stocking) and the frozen foods one (long
product lives, slower transportation, high energy contribution,
especially at the stocking phases). The short description given
spotlights the different role played by energy in these two chains,
both in the form of energy (e.g., fuel and electricity) and time
intervals of energy usage (e.g., food stocking time before final
consumption). Of course, mixed situations may also be found in
practise, such as freezing–defrosting–cooking–freezing or fresh
delivery-freezing.
Moreover, in the recent years, the need for an accurate chain
control and its monitoring has emerged as one of the most critical
issues (Montanari, 2008). The need for guaranteeing food safety
and quality is directly linked to physical, biological and chemical
parameters, which frequently interact with each other, as in the
case of temperature and moisture. From this point of view,
regulations are also playing a remarkable role in boosting the
application of new technologies and tailored managerial
approaches to FSCs (Bogataj et al., 2005).
Within the scenario described, classic inventory models could
be implemented with appropriate adjustments (e.g., perishable
and variable holding costs) as well as new managerial practices
could be investigated and successfully applied. To this end, efforts
have been produced by researchers, addressing the critical
aspects and the relevant parameters of the problem. For example,
Zhang et al. (2003) present an algorithm to optimise the structure
of cold chains minimising storage and transportation costs
(considering product quality concerns). Zanoni and Zavanella
(2007) consider the shipping of a set of different perishable
products from a vendor to a buyer with the objective of mini-
mising the sum of the inventory and transportation costs. Kuo
and Chen (2010) propose specific chain architecture for
transport
Harvest Producer
Fig. 1. The considered chilled-frozen food supply chain.
perishable goods, based on multi-temperature distribution cen-
tres, while Cai et al. (2010) discuss the issues of coordination
between the producer and the distributor in fresh food chains.
van der Vorst et al. (2009) present a simulation tool for the design
of food chains, jointly taking into account food quality change and
environmental load of the different scenarios evaluated, consider-
ing different inherent uncertainties, too. An updated review of
planning models in the agri-food supply chain is offered in
Ahumada and Villalobos (2009), thus confirming the great atten-
tion gained by the argument and the different approaches to it.
Recently, Akkerman et al. (2010) presented a comprehensive
review of the quantitative operations management research on
food distribution management: they discussed the state-of-the-
art and identified challenges for further research.
Finally, despite of their importance, distribution centres for
fruit and vegetables have received limited attention in the
performance management literature (Manikas and Terry, 2010).
The present contribution aims at studying the optimal replen-
ishment quantities along the chain, so as to meet efficiently the
market demand at the retailers, but taking into consideration the
energy effort at the production site (due to the proper processing
of the products), the additional energy effort along the distribu-
tion channel (as required to preserve the quality of the product
themselves) and the impact determined by the cost of product
deterioration.
3. Problem definition and notation
The system studied consists of a distributor that procures
and stocks chilled or frozen products from a producer (who
properly treated the products, e.g., freezing them) and trans-
ports them to different retailers, thus reaching a final target
market for sale (Fig. 1).
The model proposed will try to capture the link between the
quality degradation rate of the food and the energy effort
required for its preservation. From this point of view, the most
relevant parameter linking quality and energy is the tempera-
ture set to preserve food: the lower the temperature, the higher
the energy required along the chain and the longer the food
quality preservation.
3.1. Quality change
Even when the optimal temperature of the products is main-
tained throughout the cold chain, the quality of the products
decreases over time (Zhang et al., 2003). In general, quality
degradation of food products depends on the storage time t, the
storage temperature T, and additional parameters depending on
the storage atmosphere. More generally, quality degradation may
be described by the following equation (for more details see
Labuza, 1982):
dq
¼ kqn , ð1Þ
dt
where q is the quality of a product, k the rate of degradation
(depending on environmental conditions) and n is a power
factor defined as the order of the reaction, determining how the
reaction rate is dependent on the amount of quality q remaining.
Temperature plays a primary role in product quality degradation: the
Distribution
centre transport
Retailers
 S. Zanoni, L. Zavanella / Int. J. Production Economics 140 (2012) 731–736 733

link between the rate of quality degradation k and temperature T can

be expressed thanks to Arrhenius equation:

k ¼ k0 eðEa =RTÞ , ð2Þ

where k0 is a constant, Ea the activation energy [J/kg] (an empirical

parameter characterizing the exponential temperature dependence),
R the gas constant [J/kg 1K], and T the absolute temperature [1K].
Moreover, it should be noted that the temperature along the cold
chain distribution could be not always uniform (James et al., 2006).
Therefore, the total quality decrease may be related to the original
quality and may be determined by summing the quality decrease at
every step of the chain (depending on the temperature level at each
supply chain step).
So as to predict the quality levels, Eq. (1) suggests that it is
possible to estimate the quality level of a product q(T, t) according
to an initial quality (q0) given, the subsequent storage time
interval t and the degradation rate k. Thus it is possible to define
the following expression:
ðEa =RTÞ
qðT,tÞ ¼ q0 ek0 te : ð3Þ

Peleg et al. (2002) proposed to use a Weibull-power law model to

describe the isothermal degradation of food quality, depending on
storage temperature and time, as follows:
nðTÞ
qðT,tÞ ¼ q0 ebðTÞt , ð4Þ
where b(T) and n(T) are temperature-dependent coefficients. In
particular, b(T) can be described by the empirical model as
follows (Peleg et al., 2002):
bðTÞ ¼ lnð1þ emðTTc Þ Þ ð5Þ
where T is the temperature [1C] and m and Tc are constants.
According to figures available from real data on quality degrada-
tion for different products categories, it is possible to empirically
obtain the values of parameters b(T), n(T), m and Tc so as to use
the equations above to calculate the expected quality of food
products after storage, at given time periods and temperature
levels.
Some examples related to the equations above are shown
hereafter for different food products (Hui et al., 2004). Examples
are selected so as to allow the reader to appreciate the critical role
played by temperature on quality with respect to time (see the
case of fish) and the significant range of temperature allowed for
the preservation of widely consumed vegetable goods (e.g., green
peas). Fig. 2 highlights the role of temperature and its impact on
the quality degradation over time. It should be also highlighted
that different products show different sensitiveness to degrada-
tion over time versus temperature: looking at Fig. 2 it is possible to
observe how green peas spoil in quality (here intended as the Vitamin
C level) of 50% after 50 days when stored at  8 1C, while fish
degrades its quality (here intended as the spoilage due to micro-
organism proliferation) of 50% after 100 days if stored at  18 1C.
Fig. 2. Examples of quality degradation over time for different storage
temperatures.
So as to compare the energy efforts required at the different
levels of the chain (e.g., the initial treatment at the producer is
generally more energy intensive than the subsequent storage
phases at the distribution centres), it is possible to consider the
physics of the cooling processes necessary to reach different
temperatures and to maintain them. According to Rong et al.
(2010), the ratio of the different coefficients of performance
(COPcooling) of the cooling phases required may be formulated as
follows:
Qcold Tcold
COPcooling ¼ ¼ : ð6Þ
Qhot Qcold Thot Tcold
In formula (6), Qhot is the heat given off by the hot heat
reservoir, Qcold is the heat taken in by the cold heat reservoir and
Thot and Tcold are the absolute temperatures of the hot and cold
heat reservoirs, respectively. For sake of simplicity, it is possible
to consider Thot as the average outside environmental tempera-
ture at the locations of the cold chain actors and, to this end, the
reference temperature will be set at 20 1C.
By means of Eq. (6), it is possible to compare the energy
required (and the related economic and environmental impacts)
to freeze the products to a planned temperature (e.g.,  30 1C),
instead of freezing them at a lower one (e.g., 20 1C):

243
COP30 1C ¼ ¼ 4:86,
3.2. Temperature effect 293243
253 COP301 C
As temperature along the cold chain may vary, synchronisa- COP20 1C ¼ ¼ 6:325, ¼ 0:768:
293253 COP20 1C
tion between each actor of the chain is desirable. In fact, the size
of the batch delivered determines the replenishment epoch and, The ratio between the two COPs indicates that, using 30 1C
considering that a determined quality level is to be assured to the as reference, the option to freeze the stuff at  20 1C requires the
retailers, the batch size is also influenced by the temperature set 76.8% of the energy required to freeze it at  30 1C. In fact, energy
for food preservation. In fact, the higher the temperature, the demand for food processing may be very intensive, also depend-
shorter the replenishment cycle to satisfy the demand according ing on the material conditioned and on the process considered
to the quality level given. Moreover, different temperatures at (e.g., in the case of bread, Le-bail et al., 2010).
storage and transportation phases will imply different energy To this end, Fig. 3 shows the relative cooling cost savings
efforts and, consequently, different costs and different levels of determined while using  30 1C as reference. It is also evident
environmental sustainability. that the different costs imposed may impact on the profit, as the
734 S. Zanoni, L. Zavanella / Int. J. Production Economics 140 (2012) 731–736
Fig. 3. Energy-related cost savings (temperature reference  30 1C).
quality variation may influence the value of the product
considered.
3.3. Temperature and quality: joint effects
As already observed, food products (even when properly
stored) are subjected to quality degradation over time. Conse-
quently, so as to meet a constant demand, markdowns may be
introduced at the different stages of the cold chain. Such a
practise is quite frequent, and it may also aim at saving the
disposal costs due to products unsold after their useful life. The
use of the markdown practise can be modelled as a convex
holding costs over time (according to Ferguson et al., 2007) or,
alternatively, the correspondent cost-loss over time can be
computed (according to Blackburn and Scudder, 2009). Of course,
the use of different policies to control and face the variation of
quality and profits over time may also impact on the profile of the
demand during the cycle considered. The model presented here
does not include this aspect: however, markdown policies repre-
sent an interesting perspective for future research and for the
model extension.
4. The model
The previous sections discussed the role of temperature in a
FSC, focussing on its relationship to energy (Section 3.2) and
quality degradation of food (Section 3.1). In a SC perspective, it is
necessary to identify the trade-offs between costs at the producer
(depending on the temperature set at the production site), costs
at the central distribution centre (depending on storage tempera-
ture and average stocking time at the distribution centre itself)
and quality preservation of the products. In other terms, lowering
holding costs by increasing temperature may boost quality
degradation, thus increasing the loss in value.
To this end, the following decision variables are considered:
 The transfer batch size Q between the producer and the
distribution centre (it directly determines the average length
of the storage period at the distribution centre itself).
 The temperature of food treatment at the producer’s side, TP,
and the temperature of food storage (at the distribution
centre), TD, which minimise the total cost over time of the
producer and the distribution centre operations.
The profile of the demand at the distribution centre, d, is
assumed to be continuous over time. Distribution centres are
used to guarantee a continuous supply to retailers that operate
with a rapid distribution of products to the markets (Zhang et al.,
2003). This assumption has been introduced for the analytical
treatability of the model, even if it may introduce room for further
development. In fact, demand may vary within a cycle because of
the combination of the freshness of the product and its selling
price or due to seasonality in the food production or/and con-
sumption. In other terms, newly supplied products may be
characterised by a higher demand, because of their freshness
and regardless of their selling price. On the opposite, costumers’
wait for significant markdowns may alter the demand profile in
favour of the last part of the product useful life.
4.1. Costs at the producer side
The costs faced by the producer include two main compo-
nents: the first one depends on the batch size (e.g., variable costs
due to cooling and treatment process) and the second one is
independent of it (e.g., set-up of the cooling and treatment
process). The first component is directly related to the Specific
Energy Consumption [kWh/kg] (SEC) required to cool a unit of
food to a given level of temperature, while the second component
depends on the specific treatment equipment. Moreover, it is
possible to link both of the components to the different tempera-
tures reached at the cooling process. At the producer’s facility, the
average total cost over time can be formulated as follows:
 
d
TCP ðQ ,TP Þ ¼ SEC ec d þ KP rTP , ð7Þ
Q
where ec is the cost of cooling energy [h/kWh], KP is the set-up
cost at the production facility [h] and rTP is the ratio between the
COP at the cooling temperature, set by the producer for treating
the product (i.e., TP), and the COP of the reference temperature Tr
(for sake of simplicity, it will be set to 0, i.e., Tr ¼ 0 1C).
4.2. Costs at the distributor side
The costs faced at the distribution centre may be resumed into
three main categories:
(a) fixed cost due to batch receiving (defined as KS);
(b) holding costs for keeping the product at the storing tempera-
ture (defined as TS); and
(c) the loss in value, due to quality degradation, registered while
product is held into the stock.
As far as category (c) is concerned, it is reasonable to assume
that the time spent at the distribution centre may rise up to a
significant part of the product useful life and, therefore, also the
distribution centre may be obliged to adopt a markdown policy,
thus setting a lower price for the goods affected by a lower
quality. It should be noted that, under a constant demand d faced
by the distribution centre, some products will be shipped to the
retailers immediately after the arrival of the batch Q, i.e., without
any quality degradation, while some other products, belonging to
the same batch, will be shipped to the retailer after a period
length equal to Q/d, thus implying a quality degradation and,
therefore, a loss in value.
Recalling the quality degradation function in (4) and using its
simplified version for n(T)¼1, the loss in value of a batch of size Q
may be expressed as follows, similarly to Rong et al. (2010):
Z Q !  
d
p Q ebðTÞððQ qÞ=dÞ dq ¼ p Q  ð1eððbðTÞQ Þ=dÞ Þ , ð8Þ
0 bðTÞ
where p is the selling price of the products. The simplification
introduced makes the problem formulation more tractable, but it
is also a reasonable assumption, as it implies that the cost loss is
directly proportional to quality degradation. For example, as
 S. Zanoni, L. Zavanella / Int. J. Production Economics 140 (2012) 731–736 735

already introduced, this case is evident when quality degradation

leads to the disposal of the damaged goods.
Therefore, the average total cost at the distribution centre may
be written as follows:
 
d Q d d
TCD ðQ ,TD Þ ¼ KD þ hs rTD þ p Q  ð1eððbðTD ÞQÞ=dÞ Þ , ð9Þ
Q 2 Q bðTD Þ
where hs is the holding cost, including the space and energy costs,
due to keeping a kilogram of product at the cooling temperature
for one day (i.e., [h/kg  day]) and rTD is the ratio between COP at
the storage temperature set by the distribution centre, TD, and the
COP of the reference temperature, Tr (set equal to 0 1C).

4.3. Total costs of the FSC considered

Considering Eqs. (7) and (9), the total cost of the cold chain
may be resumed as follows:
 
d d Q
TCðQ ,TP ,TD Þ ¼ TCD þ TCP ¼ SEC ec d þ KP rTP þ KD þ hs rTD
Q Q 2
 
d d
þ p Q ð1eððbðTD ÞQ Þ=dÞ Þ ð10Þ
Q bðTD Þ
Assuming TP ¼TD ¼T and since demand is exogenous, the
minimisation of TC with respect to Q is independent of the value
of d and it leads to the following:
  
d
min TCðQ ,TÞ ¼ KD þ KP rT þ p Q  ð1eððbðTÞQ Þ=dÞ Þ
bðTÞ
d Q
 þ hs rT subject to Q , d Z 0 ð11Þ
Q 2
Therefore, once given temperature T, it is possible to find the
optimal value of the transfer batch size Q by solving (11).
Moreover, a couple of values (Qn, Tn) may lead to the optimisation
of relationship (10) and, in some cases, the Q value may be Fig. 4. (a) Quality degradation while increasing the storage period and (b) total
costs function while varying the batch size.
influenced by the period: seasonality may affect the batch size
available or convenient, as during the initial and final parts of the
product harvesting. In such a case, i.e., when Q is assigned, it is 1967). The effect of freezing processes on product quality and its
possible to optimise (10) with respect to the optimal temperature features is discussed in Redmond et al. (2003); the same study
and, consequently, it is possible to identify the best profile of the draws a comparison between freeze–chilling and differently
chain in terms of cost and its sustainability with respect to energy conditioned potatoes, also with reference to different storage
requirements and food preservation. However, the present periods.
formulation of the objective function does not allow a full The case of cold processing and storing the par-fried French
analytical optimisation, thus introducing the opportunity for the Fried Potatoes (more technical details may be found in Davis and
numerical analysis proposed in the following section. Smith, 1963) will be used for an illustrative example. The main
combination of the variables, given a processing and a storage
temperature can be set arbitrarily as
5. Case study
d ¼ 1; hs rT ¼ 2; b ¼ 0:01; p ¼ 10; KD þ KP rT ¼ 500:

So as to show the usefulness of the model proposed, the
present section offers a numerical example referred to a well-
known product distributed in a frozen condition all over the
world in huge quantities, i.e., frozen potato products such as
frozen chips, roast potatoes, hash browns and waffles. Potatoes
are now the largest sold frozen food in the United States: more-
over, the export value of frozen potatoes from US accounts for
more than 0.5 billion$/year. The process to prepare frozen French
fried potatoes consists in washing, sorting and trimming of
potatoes, that are necessary to assure a clean and wholesome
product. Potatoes may or may not be cut into pieces and are deep
fried or blanched in a suitable fat or oil. The final product is frozen
and stored at the temperature necessary for its preservation.
Generally, frozen chips are par-fried so as to have a very fast
cooking time.
So as to guarantee an adequate level of quality, each country
sets Standards for Grades of frozen French fried potatoes by which
the quality of the products is guaranteed (e.g., US Standards,
According to these values, it is possible to calculate the quality
degradation (which, for frozen potatoes, is intended to correspond
to the relative vitamin C level expressed as the remaining
percentage with respect to the initial value in mg/100 g of
products) while increasing the storage period, as in Fig. 4a. Given
both temperature and batch size, it is possible to appreciate the
related total costs using (10) and, by its minimisation, the optimal
batch size and the corresponding optimal value for the average
storage period are obtained.
Looking at the joint optimisation of the decision variables in
(11), it is possible to replicate the results of Figs. 4a and b for
different sets of temperatures, so as to obtain the optimal
combination of both of the parameters. The concept of the joint
search of the optimal couple of Q and T is graphically proposed in
Fig. 5. Fig. 5a shows two different degradation curves, comparing
two different processing and storage temperatures: the dotted
line refers to the higher storage temperature, which implies a
more severe decline of the product quality during the storage
736 S. Zanoni, L. Zavanella / Int. J. Production Economics 140 (2012) 731–736
Fig. 5. (a) Quality degradation while increasing the storage period for two
different temperatures and (b) total costs function while varying the batch size
for two different temperatures.
time. From a different point of view, a higher storage temperature
may be attractive in terms of setup and preservation costs but,
because of the accelerated degradation of the product quality, the
total cost increases. Additionally, looking at Fig. 5b, it is possible
to observe that, while considering two different temperatures,
different optimal batch sizes are found with different total costs.
Finally, exploring the space of the storage temperatures
admitted, the batch size that minimises the total costs may be
computed, obtaining the average storage time for the considered
model, too.
6. Conclusions
The paper proposed introduces the problem of the best
alternative of FSC configurations considering, in particular, the
influence of the temperature and storage time and their related
impact on the product quality, costs and sustainability of the
chain as related to quality degradation and energy consumption.
The study showed how the energy effort produced in cooling and
maintaining products plays a relevant role in the FSC effective-
ness and sustainability. The introduction of energy as a key factor
of the chain optimisation implies an increased attention for the
sustainability of the chain considered, given the strict relationship
linking energy and environmental concerns, thus leading to an
eco-efficiency perspective of the supply chain.
From this point of view and under the assumptions made, the
model proposed allows the understanding of the relationships
between quality, temperature and energy, addressing a possible
approach to the chain optimisation. Given the growing relevance
of the problem dealt with, it is possible to foresee several
improvements to the study itself, e.g., considering the effect of
transportation, the price decisions at the different stages, the
price-elasticity and the freshness-elasticity demand functions at
the various levels of the chain. Moreover, ‘‘mixed’’ processing
alternatives, which may be found in practise, should be consid-
ered, too, such as freezing–defrosting–cooking–freezing or fresh
delivery-freezing.
References
Ahumada, O., Villalobos, J.R., 2009. Application of planning models in the agri-food
supply chain: a review. European Journal of Operational Research 196, 1–20.
Akkerman, R., van Donk, D.P., 2007. Product prioritisation in a two-stage food
production system with intermediate storage. International Journal of Produc-
tion Economics 108 (1–2), 43–53.
Akkerman, R., Farahani, P., Grunow, M., 2010. Quality, safety and sustainability in
food distribution: a review of quantitative operations management
approaches and challenges. OR Spectrum 32, 863–904.
Blackburn, J., Scudder, G., 2009. Supply chain strategies for perishable products:
the case of fresh produce. Production and Operations Management 18 (2),
129–137.
Bogataj, M., Bogataj, L., Vodopivec, R., 2005. Stability of perishable goods in cold
logistic chains. International Journal of Production Economics 93–94,
345–356.
Cai, X., Chen, J., Xiao, Y., Xu, X., 2010. Optimization and coordination of fresh
product supply chains with freshness-keeping effort. Production and Opera-
tions Management 19 (3), 261–278.
Davis, C.O., Smith, O., 1963. Potato Quality XVI. Low temperature storage of raw
French-fry cuts and potato slices for chipping. American Potato Journal 40 (6),
193–199.
Ferguson, M., Jayaraman, V., Souza, G.C., 2007. Note: an application of the EOQ
model with nonlinear holding cost to inventory management of perishables.
European Journal of Operational Research 180 (1), 485–490.
Hui, Y.H., Cornillon, P., Legarretta, I.G., Lim, M., Murrell, K.D., Nip, W., 2004.
Handbook of Frozen Foods. Marcel Dekker, New York.
James, S.J., James, C., Evans, J.A., 2006. Modelling of food transportation systems—a
review. International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (6), 947–957.
Kuo, J.C., Chen, M.C., 2010. Developing an advanced Multi-Temperature Joint
Distribution System for the food cold chain. Food Control 21 (4), 559–566.
Labuza, T.P., 1982. Shelf-life Dating of Foods. Food & Nutrition Press, Westport, CT,
USA.
Le-bail, A., Dessev, T., Jury, V., Zuniga, R., Park, T., Pitroff, M., 2010. Energy demand
for selected bread making processes: conventional versus part baked frozen
technologies. Journal of Food Engineering 96 (4), 510–519.
Manikas, I., Terry, L.A., 2010. A case study assessment of the operational
performance of a multiple fresh produce distribution centre in the UK. British
Food Journal 112 (6), 653–667.
Montanari, R., 2008. Cold chain tracking: a managerial perspective. Trends in Food
Science and Technology 19 (8), 425–431.
Peleg, M., Engel, R., Gonzalez-Martinez, C., Corradini, M.G., 2002. Non-Arrhenius
and non-WLF kinetics in food systems. Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture 82 (12), 1346–1355.
Redmond, G.A., Gormley, T.R., Butlerb, F., 2003. The effect of short- and long-term
freeze-chilling on the quality of mashed potato. Innovative Food Science &
Emerging Technologies 4, 85–97.
Rong, A., Akkerman, R., Grunow, M., An optimization approach for managing fresh
food quality throughout the supply chain. International Journal of Production
Economics, forthcoming, doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.11.026.
US Standards, 1967. United States Standards for Grades of Frozen French Fried
Potatoes.
van der Vorst, J.G.A.J., Tromp, S.O., van der Zee, D.J., 2009. Simulation modelling for
food supply chain redesign; integrated decision making on product quality,
sustainability and logistics. International Journal of Production Research 47
(23), 6611–6631.
Zanoni, S., Zavanella, L., 2007. Single-vendor single-buyer with integrated trans-
port-inventory system: models and heuristics in the case of perishable goods.
Computers & Industrial Engineering 52, 107–123.
Zavanella, L., Zanoni, S., 2009. Inventory and Energy. In: Jaber, M. (Ed.), Inventory
Management: Non-Classical Views. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton
(FL), pp. 73–95.
Zhang, G., Habenicht, W., Spie, W.E.L., 2003. Improving the structure of deep
frozen and chilled food chain with tabu search procedure. Journal of Food
Engineering 60 (1), 67–79.