论文文献翻译库存补货买卖双方易腐农产品的建模Word文件下载.docx

1、Keywords: perishable; agricultural; products; inventory; replenishment; collaborative; forecasting The perishable agricultural products industry has been under pressure regarding the improvement of food safety,the implementation of efficient risk management and rapid response capabilities, and the m

2、anagement of quality from farm to fork. Since regulation 178/2002 of the European Parliament, and of the Council, on general food law came into force in 2005,traceability has become an essential business function for the food industry to consistently supply perishable agricultural products with qual

3、ity and safety assurance. Perishable agricultural products traceability is defined as the ability to trace and follow perishable agricultural products through all stages of production, processing and distribution （European Commission 2002）.Perishable agricultural products products are often tracked

4、and traced by manufacturing batches or logistic units,instead of individual product items （Jansen-Crullers et al. 2003）. Batch numbers assigned at the start of the manufacturing processes accompany products as identifications throughout a supply chain. If a perishable agricultural products safety pr

5、oblem comes from a raw material batch,all the finished products containing this raw material have to be identified and recalled.Integration into global markets offers the potential for more rapid growth and poverty reduction for poorer countries. However, market barriers within advanced economies to

6、 agricultural imports have made it harder for developing countries to take full advantage of this opportunity. This article examines the impact of increasing demands for food safety and quality by European food retailers, and how the fundamental structure and culture of supplier organizations requir

7、ed by European retail chains are a major entry barrier for developing.Mediterranean fresh produce exporting countries, and for developing countries in general. The long-term solution for such countries to sustain an international demand for their products lies in structural, strategic and procedural

8、 initiatives that build up the trust and confidence of importers/retailers in the quality and safety assurance mechanisms for their produce.Market failure to deliver the level of safety to meet public health requirements and consumer demands constitutes economic grounds for public policy interventio

9、n （Unevenness and Jensen, 1999）. The lack, or high cost, of information, and the resulting consequences for public health are the fundamental justifications for public intervention to improve food safety. However, allocating food chain safety responsibilities from farm to table has created a new par

10、adigm for stakeholder relationships characterized by complex interactions between public and private modes of regulation. The increasing globalization of food production and consumption make it difficult for national governments to exert comprehensive controls over the entire supply chain, and to id

11、entify the roots of quality problems in foreign countries, or end of pipe management （Spiller, 2002）. The resulting shift of responsibility towards the private sector has created a more complex and demanding policy space involving public and private sector incentives and controls. The interaction be

12、tween self-regulation and public regulation could provide a superior outcome, as industry and firms are more knowledgeable regarding product quality, and public regulation can generate reputation-based incentives to monitor quality, in the form of public exposure. However, increasing demands for foo

13、d safety by developed countries have raised concerns about likely food regulatory impacts on international trade, particularly in the case of developing countries （Trotski et al., 2001; Henson and Loader, 2001;Henson et al., 2000; Unevenness, 2000）. It is recognised that developing countries are lik

14、ely to have difficulties in meeting requirements associated with the implementation of high level sanitary or phytosanitary measures which come in connection with technical regulations, standards and conformity tests （IMF/World Bank, 2002; Garcia Martinez et al., 2002; Garcia Martinez and Poole, 200

15、4; Wilson and Abiosis, 2003）. As the commercial and institutional infrastructure develops, there is the risk that new regulatory barriers will be erected. This is of particular concernfor developing countries, where existing technical and institutional capacity to control and ensure compliance may n

16、ot allow for the adjustments needed to meet new requirements.Most of the current debate has focused on the impact of public national and supranational （e.g. European Union） regulatory demands on market access for developing countries （see for example, Reardon et al., 1999; Busch et al., 2000;Weather

17、 spoon and Reardon, 2003; Unevenness, 2000）. The critical focus now needs to shift from such public regulatory standards, or Tats （technical barriers to trade）, towards the increasing importance of food safety regulations imposed over and above public standards by private sector （commercial） firms,

18、and their potential impact on agricultural and food product exports from developing countries. Opportunities and threats both arise from the growth of such private standards,which can be termed commercial barriers to trade。Unsurprisingly, the safety of food products has been a topic of debate for ce

19、nturies. The first known law pertaining to the purity of food products, known as the “German Beer Purity Law” or Reinfestation,dates as far back as 1516 （Dornbusch, 1997）. Today we have a myriad of laws, regulations, standards, processes, tools and technologies intended to ensure food safety. Nevert

20、heless, food safety scandals still occur on an all too regular basis. Table 1 presents some high profile food safety incidents that have occurred in several countries.From a safety perspective, food supply chains have a number of vulnerabilities （Whipple et al., 2009）. First, they deal with natural

21、products, many of which are perishable and could become harmful to consumers if not managed in a timely and safe manner （Akkerman et al., 2010）. Secondly, food supply chains tend to be long, global and highly interconnected, leading to greater risk exposure （Henson and Reardon, 2005; Roth et al., 20

22、08; Triene kens and Zuricher, 2008; Whipple et al., 2009）. Third, food and beverage products are at risk of intentional or unintentional adulteration and could even be the target of terrorist threats （Wei n and Lou, 2005;Whipple et al., 2009）. According to Harl （2002）, among seven general areas of v

23、ulnerability to terrorism in the US, five are related to the food supply chain. Careful management across the entire supply chain is necessary to ensure that-products reaching the final consumer are safe to eat and drink.Research by Voss et al. （2009） explores the tradeoffs among price, delivery, qu

24、ality and safety in selecting suppliers in the food supply chains of the U.S. Their research concludes that, in general,safety considerations tend to be less important in selecting suppliers when compared to quality, delivery and price. They argue that this lower priority could be a factor behind th

25、e frequency of food safety incidents. However, their results also indicate that safety is more important under certain circumstances, particularly when products are sourced from abroad. Failures in food safety can have serious negative consequences not only for consumers, but also for the companies

26、involved. The worst case scenario occurs when incidents lead to deaths or illness （Trienekens and Zuurbier,2008）. According to Thomsen and McKenzie （2001） millions of people around the world become ill every year as a result of unsafe foods. It has been estimated that in the U.S. alone, foodborne pa

27、thogens account for 76 million illnesses and 5000 deaths （Mead et al., 1999）. Thomsen and McKenzie （2001） argue that human error and the limitations of food safety technology mean that,from time to time, consumers will face food safety risks. High profile incidents such as the Salmonella outbreak ca

28、used by peanut butter paste sold by the Peanut Corporation of America in 2008（Layton and Miroff, 2009）, or the adulteration of powdered milk with melamine in China in the same year （Spencer, 2009）, have made the headlines due to their scale and severity. In both cases the consequences for those invo

29、lved have been serious. The Peanut Corporation of America filed for bankruptcy in February 2009 （Layton and Miroff, 2009）. In the Chinese case, Sanlu, the company responsible,has been closed down, the general manager and a number of company officials are in jail, and two have been sentenced to death

30、 （Spencer, 2009）. Most food safety incidents do not lead to death or illness, and in many cases products can be recalled before they reach the consumer. However, recalls can be complex and costly （Thomsen and McKenzie, 2001; Whipple et al., 2009）, they can damage a firms reputation （Hornibrook et al., 2005; Thomsen and McKenzie, 2001;Whipple et al., 2009）, and