Shows how collaboration enhances efficiency in wine supply chains, indicating new methods for improvement.
The wine industry faces growing challenges associated with risk management, sustainability, and supply chain (SC) efficiency. This study proposes a novel methodological framework that integrates Network Data Envelopment Analysis (NDEA) and Agent-Based Modelling (ABM) to measure SC efficiency under varying risk and sustainability conditions. The framework extends conventional NDEA by explicitly modelling inter-decision-making-unit (DMU) product exchanges, thereby capturing the collaborative dynamics frequently observed in real-world SCs. Using the Alentejo wine region as a reference context, synthetic data are generated through ABM to simulate a range of plausible SC configurations. Results illustrate how collaboration between SCs can enhance overall SC efficiency, particularly in high-risk scenarios, while also revealing trade-offs and resource reallocations between global and local performance across SC stages. Although illustrative, the simulation-based results provide insights into the implications of inter-DMU collaboration, offering a foundation for future empirical validation and policy design. The study contributes methodologically by extending NDEA to incorporate inter-organisational exchanges and demonstrates how simulation can support complex efficiency measurements under uncertainty. Exploratory correlation analyses further reveal that collaborative flows are significantly associated with scenario-dependent efficiency gains, especially in upstream stages, reinforcing the explanatory power of the proposed model. • Proposes a network DEA model with inter-DMU collaboration in supply chains. • Uses Agent-Based Modelling to generate synthetic data under uncertainty. • Shows how collaboration affects efficiency in simulated risk scenarios. • Reveals correlations between collaborative flows and efficiency gains. • Provides a methodological basis for future empirical supply chain studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vieira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: