Game—The Transportation Game
Published Online:13 Apr 2020https://doi.org/10.1287/ited.2019.0223
References
- (2008) Hierarchical forest management with anticipation: An application to tactical–operational planning integration. Canadian J. Forest Res. 38(8):2198–2211.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2010) Annual planning of harvesting resources in the forest industry. Internat. Trans. Oper. Res. 17(2):155–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2013) An educational game in collaborative logistics. INFORMS Trans. Ed. 13(2):102–113.Link, Google Scholar
- (2017) Game—The online wood supply game. INFORMS Trans. Ed. 18(1):71–87.Google Scholar
- (2008) Using operational research for supply chain planning in the forest product industry. INFOR Inform. Systems Oper. Res. 46(4):265–281.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2005) The transport game—A tool for teaching the basics of transport decision proficiency. Internat. J. Forest Engrg. 16(2):57–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2005) FlowOpt—A decision support tool for strategic and tactical transportation planning in forestry. Internat. J. Forest Engrg. 16(2):101–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2016) Detailed scheduling of harvest teams and robust use of harvest and transportation resources. Scandinavian J. Forest Res. 31(7):681–690.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2010) Cost allocation in collaborative forest transportation. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 205(2):448–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) Using mixed integer programming models to synchronously determine production levels and market prices in an integrated market for roundwood and forest biomass. Ann. Oper. Res. 232(1):179–199.Google Scholar
- (2018) A bi-level model formulation for the distributed wood supply problem. Canadian J. Forest Res. 48(2):160–171.Google Scholar
- (2003) Optimization in forestry. Math. Programming 97(1):267–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) Operations research challenges in forestry: 33 open problems. Ann. Oper. Res. 232(1):11–40.Google Scholar
- (1989) Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment. Management Sci. 35(3):321–339.Link, Google Scholar

