Abstract
Global supply chains face heightened exposure to compound disruptions arising from geopolitical shocks, seasonal peaks, labor actions, and force majeure events. These drivers increase lead-time variability, jeopardize on-time-in-full performance, and raise cost-to-serve; emergency rerouting and mode shifts also add Scope-3 carbon externalities. This study develops and evaluates an integrated framework that combines scenario planning with robust optimization to support cross-border network, inventory, and transport decisions under distributional ambiguity. We generate a portfolio of plausible, internally consistent scenarios that cover seasonal demand surges, capacity shortfalls from strikes, corridor closures or delays linked to geopolitical risk, and weather-driven outages, then apply scenario reduction to obtain tractable, representative sets. The optimization layer implements robust and distributionally robust models with service-level and carbon (Scope-3) constraints, benchmarked against deterministic and two-stage stochastic baselines. Using industrially realistic instances, we assess performance in terms of expected cost, tail risk (measured by Conditional Value at Risk, CVaR), on-time-in-full, lead-time variance, and CO₂e. Results indicate that robust designs improve worst-case service and lower tail risk with modest cost premia. Multimodal flexibility, dual sourcing, and targeted buffers are especially effective when shocks are correlated across lanes and periods. For managers, the framework provides a repeatable cadence for scenario reviews and contracting choices; for policymakers, it underscores the importance of corridor governance, customs cooperation, and labor-mediation mechanisms. Limitations include a static planning horizon, proxy-based geopolitical indicators, and a single-industry testbed. Future research should examine adaptive robust control, learning-augmented forecasting, and higher-fidelity carbon accounting.
References
Ben-Tal, A., El Ghaoui, L., & Nemirovski, A. (2009). Robust Optimization. SIAM–MPS. URL: www2.isye.gatech.edu
Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2004). The price of robustness. Operations Research, 52(1), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0065
Birge, J. R., & Louveaux, F. (2011). Introduction to Stochastic Programming (2nd ed.). Springer. URL: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4614-0237-4?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1–13. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228559011_Building_the_Resilient_Supply_Chain?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Caldara, D., & Iacoviello, M. (2022). Measuring geopolitical risk. American Economic Review, 112(4), 1194–1225. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20191823
Disney, S. M., & Towill, D. R. (2003). The effect of vendor managed inventory (VMI) dynamics on the bullwhip effect in supply chains. International Journal of Production Economics, 85(2), 199–215.
Esfahani, P. M., & Kuhn, D. (2018). Data-driven distributionally robust optimization using the Wasserstein metric: Performance guarantees and tractable reformulations. Mathematical Programming, 171(1–2), 115–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-017-1172-1
European Central Bank. (2022). Supply chain disruptions and the effects on the global economy. ECB Economic Bulletin(Box). URL: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/economic-bulletin/focus/2022/html/ecb.ebbox202108_01~e8ceebe51f.en.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Hasani, A., Khosrojerdi, A., Beygipoor, G., & Shishebori, D. (2024). Robust supply chain network design: A comprehensive review. Annals of Operations Research, 332, 1–55. URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10479-024-06228-6?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Heitsch, H., & Römisch, W. (2003). Scenario reduction in stochastic programming. Mathematical Programming, 95(3), 493–511.
Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 125, 285–307.
Ivanov, D. (2020). Viable supply chain (VSC): Towards a new paradigm of supply chain management? International Journal of Production Research, 58(10), 2904–2915.
Jüttner, U. (2005). Supply chain risk management: Understanding the business requirements from a practitioner perspective. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 16(1), 120–141.
Norrman, A., & Jansson, U. (2004). Ericsson’s proactive supply chain risk management approach after a serious sub-supplier accident. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34(5), 434–456. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030410545463
Rahimian, H., & Mehrotra, S. (2022). Frameworks and results in distributionally robust optimization. Open Journal of Mathematical Optimization, 3,
Shapiro, A., Dentcheva, D., & Ruszczyński, A. (2014). Lectures on Stochastic Programming: Modeling and Theory (2nd ed.). SIAM.
Snyder, L. V. (2006). Facility location under uncertainty: A review. Annals of Operations Research, 142(1), 367–402.
Tang, C. S. (2006). Robust strategies for mitigating supply chain disruptions. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 9(1), 33–45.
UNCTAD (2024). Suez and Panama Canal disruptions threaten global trade and development (Policy brief/news analysis). United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
Wan, Z., Chen, L., Wang, S., & Du, Y. (2023). Analysis of the impact of Suez Canal blockage on the global shipping network. Ocean & Coastal Management, 242, 106798.
ISO. (2018). ISO 31000:2018 Risk management—Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
ISO. (2019). ISO 22301:2019 Security and resilience—Business continuity management systems—Requirements. International Organization for Standardization.
Federal Reserve Bank of New York. (2022). The Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI): Staff Report No. 1017. URL: https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/staff_reports/sr1017.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Federal Reserve Bank of New York. (n.d.). Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI) (methodology & data portal).

