AHP Application to Select Logistical Location in Upstream Oil and Gas Operation: A Case Study



Abstract Views
254

Downloads
268

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Jun 29, 2023
Published Oct 1, 2023
10.24018/ejbmr.2023.8.5.2073

Abstract viewed = 254 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The objective of this research is to select the best logistics operation location for supporting multi-production field operations in an upstream oil and gas working area in Indonesia (Company XYZ). Company XYZ will have several upcoming production fields in the future, which are in different locations along the working area and far from the existing logistics operation location. Existing storage occupancy also becomes another consideration in preparation for the logistics operation plan to support multi-production fields. Some locations are examined as alternatives for upcoming logistics operation locations. The selection process will go through the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method as part of the Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) tool. Three decision criteria used in this research refer to company XYZ’s strategic pillars, which are Financial, HSE (Health, Safety, and Environment), and Production. The sub-criteria are selected from previous research that is relevant to the study. Some experts are involved in providing professional judgment for the available options to result in the alternative location with the highest priority as a business solution.

Keywords: Analytical Hierarchy Process Decision Making Logistics Operation Upstream Oil and Gas

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Chang, Y.-T., Lee, S.-Y., & Tongzon, J. L. (2008). Port selection factors by shipping lines: Different perspectives between trunk liners and feeder service providers. Marine Policy, 32(6), 877-885.
     Google Scholar
  2. Crawley, F. K. (1999). The change in safety management for offshore oil and gas production systems. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 77(3), 143-148.
     Google Scholar
  3. Çetinkaya, V., & Akdaş, O. (2022). Depo yeri seçim kriterlerinin önem düzeyinin BWM yöntemi ile ölçülmesi [Measuring the importance of warehouse location selection criteria using best-worst method]. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2), 291-305.
     Google Scholar
  4. Demirel, T., Demirel, N. Ç., & Kahraman, C. (2010). Multi-criteria warehouse location selection using Choquet integral. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(5), 3943-3952.
     Google Scholar
  5. Goepel, K. D. (2018). Implementation of an Online Software Tool for the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP-OS). International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 10(3). 469-487.
     Google Scholar
  6. Hakim, R. T., & Kusumastuti, R. D. (2018). A model to determine relief warehouse location in East Jakarta using the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Technology, 9(7), 1405-1414.
     Google Scholar
  7. Ishizaka, A., & Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-criteria decision analysis: Methods and software. John Wiley & Sons.
     Google Scholar
  8. Jubiz-Diaz, M., Saltarin-Molino, M., Arellana, J., Paternina-Arboleda, C., & Yie-Pinedo, R. (2021). Effect of infrastructure investment and freight accessibility on gross domestic product: A data-driven geographical approach. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021, 1-22.
     Google Scholar
  9. Laik, S. (2018). Offshore petroleum drilling and production. CRC Press.
     Google Scholar
  10. Lee, P. T.-W., & Yang, Z. (Eds.). (2018). Multi-criteria decision making in maritime studies and logistics (Vol. 260). Springer International Publishing.
     Google Scholar
  11. Mu, E., & Pereyra-Rojas, M. (2017). Practical decision making. Springer International Publishing.
     Google Scholar
  12. Munier, N., Hontoria, E., & Jiménez-Sáez, F. (2019). Strategic approach in multi-criteria decision making: A practical guide for complex scenarios (Vol. 275). Springer International Publishing.
     Google Scholar
  13. Rahman, M. S., Khan, F., Shaikh, A., Ahmed, S., & Imtiaz, S. (2019). Development of risk model for marine logistics support to offshore oil and gas operations in remote and harsh environments. Ocean Engineering, 174, 125-134.
     Google Scholar
  14. Rahmani, H., Lavasani, M. R. M., Tehrani, M. M. E., & Lotfi, F. H. (2021). Identify economic indicators (direct and indirect costs) of occupational accidents. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 27(3).
     Google Scholar
  15. Saaty, T. L. (1994). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces, 24(6), 19-43.
     Google Scholar
  16. Singh, R. K., Chaudhary, N., & Saxena, N. (2018). Selection of warehouse location for a global supply chain: A case study. IIMB Management Review, 30(4), 343-356.
     Google Scholar
  17. Sousa, C. J. N., Santos, I. H. F., Almeida, V. T., Almeida, A. R., Silva, G. M., Ciarlini, A. E., Prado, A., Senra, R. D. A., Gottin, V., Bhaya, A., Calmon, T., & Ferreira, L. (2015, October 27). Applying big data analytics to logistics processes of oil and gas exploration and production through a hybrid modeling and simulation approach. OTC Brasil.
     Google Scholar
  18. Speight, J. G. (2015). Handbook of offshore oil and gas operations. Gulf Professional Publishing
     Google Scholar
  19. Sun, D., & Yang, Y. (2014). The research on port logistics mode and the selection. Advanced Materials Research, 945-949, 3209-3218.
     Google Scholar
  20. Uthaug, I. O., & Engelseth, P. (2016). Network interdependencies in a logistics service network: A case study of offshore oil and gas supply bases. Industrial Marketing and Purchasing Group.
     Google Scholar
  21. Uysal, F., & Tosun, Ö. (2014). Selection of sustainable warehouse location in supply chain using the grey approach. International Journal Information and Decision Sciences, 6(4), 376-391.
     Google Scholar