Research reveals optimal indicators for operational and technical readiness in fire departments, suggesting improved logistical support management.
Purpose. The article substantiates the need to support decision-makers in assessing the equipment readiness of fire departments. The proposed model makes it possible to identify units with insufficient logistical support. Based on conducted research, minimum optimal indicators for operational (OR) and technical readiness (TR) have been established. The previously developed model is modified to enhance the procedure for ranking garrisons in terms of their priority for allocation of fire and rescue vehicles. The authors addressed the following tasks: normalization of OR and TR criteria to simplify readiness assessment; development of approaches for optimizing the obtained criterion values; application of gamma distribution to test the Cobb–Douglas production function and the linear production function. The relationship between production functions is revealed for determining optimal minimum values of the criteria during the logistics allocation procedure. Methods. The research employed methods from decision theory, probability theory, least squares, multicriteria optimization, and graphical solutions to linear programming problems. Findings. The authors propose enhancing the management model of the organizational system for logistical support based on retrospective and current data by applying socio-economic modeling and combining production functions. Research application field. The findings can be applied to organizing logistical support management within the EMERCOM of Russia. Conclusions. Based on the research results, it becomes possible to support practical decision-making for the justified selection of fire and rescue units in urgent need of equipment. The identified minimum optimal indicators serve as a foundation for decision-making and must be integrated into the legal framework to improve fire safety across the Russian Federation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
ZAICHENKO et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: