Demonstrates emergency supply effectiveness in urban logistics, suggesting better dual-use systems are needed.
Sustainable urban logistics requires infrastructure that can support routine low-carbon freight delivery while maintaining emergency supply capacity under disruptions. However, existing underground logistics system studies mainly focus on routine freight efficiency and network feasibility, whereas emergency logistics research is largely based on surface transport systems. Limited attention has been paid to the integrated design and operational validation of dual-use underground logistics networks under uncertain routine and emergency demand. To address this gap, this study proposes a dual-use underground logistics system (DULS) framework that combines robust layout optimization with dynamic simulation. A multi-echelon network consisting of supply centers, primary nodes, secondary nodes, and demand points is constructed. Candidate primary nodes are screened using an entropy-weighted TOPSIS method, and a Wasserstein-based distributionally robust optimization model is formulated to jointly determine node location, resource allocation, and freight paths under demand uncertainty. A hybrid heuristic is developed to solve the model, and an AnyLogic-based discrete-event simulation model is used to evaluate operational performance under different demand-generation patterns and train operation strategies. In the Nanjing case, the optimized DULS includes 19 primary nodes and 72 secondary nodes, achieves an emergency-demand fulfillment rate of 84.84%, and keeps the average end-to-end emergency supply time within 4 h. Cross-station operation performs better than the all-stop mode in both transport time and deprivation cost. An ex-post operational emission comparison further indicates that the DULS can reduce road-based freight emissions by 60.20% under routine operations. The proposed framework provides methodological support for planning sustainable dual-use underground logistics infrastructure serving both routine freight delivery and emergency supply.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: