See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276857849

A review of inventory lot sizing review papers

Article in Management Research Review March 2015

DOI: 10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0204

CITATIONS READS

20 317

4 authors, including:

Maxim Bushuev Alfred L Guiffrida

Morgan State University Kent State University
6 PUBLICATIONS 37 CITATIONS 48 PUBLICATIONS 681 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mehmood Khan
Abu Dhabi University
42 PUBLICATIONS 566 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Forgetting curves View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alfred L Guiffrida on 01 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Management Research Review
A review of inventory lot sizing review papers
Maxim A Bushuev Alfred Guiffrida M. Y. Jaber Mehmood Khan
Article information:
To cite this document:
Maxim A Bushuev Alfred Guiffrida M. Y. Jaber Mehmood Khan , (2015),"A review of inventory lot
sizing review papers", Management Research Review, Vol. 38 Iss 3 pp. 283 - 298
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0204
Downloaded on: 19 March 2015, At: 09:50 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 89 other documents.
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 50 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Amulya Gurtu, Cory Searcy, M. Y. Jaber, (2015),"An analysis of keywords used in the literature on
green supply chain management", Management Research Review, Vol. 38 Iss 2 pp. 166-194 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-06-2013-0157

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by Doctor Maxim
Bushuev
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of

download.
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-8269.htm

A review of inventory lot sizing A review of

inventory lot
review papers sizing review
papers
Maxim A. Bushuev and Alfred Guiffrida
Department of Management and Information Systems,
Kent State University, Twinsburg, Ohio, USA
283
M.Y. Jaber Received 2 September 2013
Revised 24 January 2014
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Accepted 21 February 2014
Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada, and
Mehmood Khan
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

College of Business Administration, Abu Dhabi University,

Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to give a comprehensive review, summary, and discussion on inventory
models that have appeared in the literature. During these past ten decades, no seminal paper reviewing
the field of inventory lot sizing has even been published. This limitation has been identified in the
literature by several researchers over the years, with the sheer volume of the number of published
inventory lot sizing models acting as a factor which has limited a research endeavor to review the
literature on inventory lot sizing models.
Design/methodology/approach This article reviews research on inventory lot size models and
provides a review of previously published literature review papers on inventory models. Based on this
initial review, the literature extending current research practices on inventory modeling in supply
chains and in sustainable practices is presented. Directions for expanding research in these two areas
are examined in light of concerns expressed in the historical use of inventory models and in light of a
new inventory research paradigm.
Findings In our paper, we have adopted a novel strategy to overcome this limitation by focusing our
review on a review of inventory lot sizing review papers.
Originality/value By adopting the methodology of reviewing published inventory review papers,
we can contribute a comprehensive review of the inventory lot sizing literature that serves to provide in
one paper a consolidation of inventory research that can serve as a single source to keep researchers up
to date with the research developments in inventory lot sizing models. We also identify gaps in the field
which could stimulate new research agendas in the areas of supply chain management and sustainable
inventory practices.
Keywords Inventory lot sizing, Inventory review, Mathematical inventory models
Paper type Literature review

1. Introduction
The efficient management of inventory requires managers to make decisions on two
fundamental questions:
Management Research Review
Vol. 38 No. 3, 2015
The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments that improved pp. 283-298
structure of the paper considerably. M.Y. Jaber thanks the Natural Sciences and Engineering Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2040-8269
Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for funding his research. DOI 10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0204
 MRR Q1. How large should an inventory replenishment order be?
38,3 Q2. When should an inventory replenishment order be placed?
These two decisions are critical inputs in an inventory management program that
typically has the objective of providing a desired level of customer service at a minimal
cost. The first decision model to aid managers in determining the size and timing of an
284 inventory replenishment order appeared ten decades ago with the contribution of the
economic order quantity (EOQ) model of Harris (1913).
In the years following the introduction of the Harris EOQ model, the literature on
inventory models has been ever expanding in its attempts to answer the fundamental
questions of how much to order and when to place an order. Numerous variants and
extensions of the EOQ rapidly appeared in the literature. Three selected highlights of
this research evolution from the time of the Harris EOQ until the 1950s which helped to
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

form the foundation of classical inventory models include the development of the
economic production quantity (EPQ) model, the concept of the reorder point and the
stochastic EOQ. Taft (1918) relaxed the EOQ assumption of instantaneous
replenishment in the development of the EPQ model. Wilson (1934) introduced the
concept of the reorder point which represented one of the first attempts to work with
probabilistic considerations in inventory management. The stochastic EOQ was
introduced by Whitin (1954).
Inventory models can be broadly classified as deterministic or stochastic inventory
models. Deterministic models assume that the demand and lead time characteristics of
the inventory system are known with complete certainty, leading to a relatively simple
and straightforward mathematical structure for modeling demand during lead time.
The typical total cost function includes the costs associated with ordering, holding and
purchasing inventory and the optimal order quantity that minimizes the total cost can
be easily found. Stochastic inventory models first appeared in the literature in the early
1950s in the seminal papers by Arrow et al. (1951) and Dworetzky et al. (1952a, 1952b)
and were formulated to capture the uncertainty and variability that exist in most
real-world inventory situations but were assumed away in deterministic inventory
models. As a result of incorporating uncertainty in demand and/or lead-time, the
underlying mathematical structure for a stochastic inventory model is more complex
than that of a deterministic model and requires a policy statement from management as
to an inventory system performance measure such as a service level or fill rate.
In practice, implementing either form of inventory model requires the acceptance of
a set of assumptions that govern the model use, as well as the recognition that estimates
must be made for model parameters such as demand rates, lead times and inventory
related costs. Several researchers have offered commentary on the development and
evolution of classical inventory models (EOQ, EPQ, reorder point, period review,
newsvendor, etc.). The commentaries of three researchers Peterson and Silver (1979),
Rumyantsev and Netessine (2007) and Chikn (2009) have been selected and are
overviewed to capture the essence of the managerial concerns in modeling inventory
systems. Clearly, there are other researchers that have similar concerns. Our intent is not
to be exhaustive, but to briefly portray the landscape of thought.
Peterson and Silver (1979, p. 4) offer an interesting retrospective view on the first 60
years of the evolution of research on inventory management by noting that the rate of
growth of theoretical inventory models has far outstripped the rate at which inventory
 decision practices have been upgraded. Peterson and Silver (1979) further observe that A review of
key segments of the total problem area such as managing information and uncertainty inventory lot
and the integration of inventory and production planning systems have still been sizing review
overlooked by researchers.
Rumyantsev and Netessine (2007) identify that insights gained from classical
papers
inventory models should be used with caution, as classic inventory models derived for
specific product(s)/echelon(s) ignore the complexities inherent to supply chains where 285
managers are often concerned with aggregate inventory behavior. Chikn (2009)
concludes that the traditional inventory paradigm, which is rooted in the models
developed in the golden age of inventory research of the 1950s and based on the
conceptual views that inventories:
(1) can be optimized independently of other managerial functions such as logistics,
operations or financial resources;
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

(2) have as their main role to buffer against uncertainty; and

(3) can increase profits by optimizing the additive inventory costs due to ordering
holding and shortage, is no longer viable given the new economic conditions of
todays global marketplace.

Chikn (2009) outlines a new paradigm for inventory management that is based on the
premise that inventories can contribute to value creation and support flexibility while
still acting as a means of control. This new paradigm is synergistic with modern day
value chains where firms view inventory as a strategic tool to gain and maintain
competitive advantage.
A comprehensive review of all inventory models published since 1913 has never been
undertaken and would be a daunting task due to the sheer number of published
inventory models. This opinion was first expressed nearly 45 years ago in the early
inventory literature review paper of Veinott (1966, p. 745). Recently, Williams and Tokar
(2008, p. 212) noted that the lack of an overall review of the inventory literature is a
handicap to the advancement of theory and practice in inventory management. The
broad scope of the inventory management research discipline has continued to increase
dramatically as evident by the 2.6 million hits resulting from a search using the phrase
inventory model in Google Scholar (a similar search using the phrase mathematical
inventory model returns 418,000 hits).
The results of these searches are a testimony to the high degree of importance and
interest that has been placed on research on inventory models. This ongoing interest,
coupled with the concerns held by researchers such as Peterson and Silver (1979),
Rumyantsev and Netessine (2007), Chikn (2009), and others, suggests that a paper
which gives a comprehensive review and discussion of inventory models would be a
useful research tool for new researchers entering into the field of inventory modeling as
well as for experienced researchers who have already contributed to the field. This
perspective is in accordance with the viewpoint expressed by Prasad (1994, p. 209) who
states that summarizing the inventory literature reduces the search time of inventory
analysts, supports the development of a common technology of standardized terms and
facilitates an understanding of model comparisons that stimulates academic discourse
in terms of both research and teaching.
 MRR In this paper, we give a comprehensive review, summary and discussion on
38,3 inventory models that have appeared in the literature. The review presented herein can
serve as a guide to focus and disseminate previous work published in the field of
inventory management. The methodology employed is to examine and classify
previously published literature review papers on inventory models. The sheer number
of published inventory models eliminates any possibility of providing a complete review
286 of each model in the form of a journal article, dissertation, textbook or edited volume. By
adopting the methodology of reviewing published inventory review papers, we can
contribute, without rote and narrative replication, a comprehensive review of the
inventory literature that serves the following objectives:
to provide a synthesis of previous published literature review papers on inventory
models that have addressed only specialized areas within the field of inventory
management;
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

to provide in one paper a consolidation of inventory research that can serve as a

single source to keep researchers up to date with the research developments in
inventory models;
to identify gaps in the field which could stimulate new research agendas; and
to identify areas in current research activities that need further development.

The remaining sections of the paper are organized as follows. In Section 2, we examine
contributions from 39 previously published inventory review papers. In Section 3, we
synthesize the review of Section 2 and introduce two directions for further research in
inventory management and provide supporting classification schemes to help define
these research directions. In Section 4, we present the summary and conclusions to the
paper.

2. Analysis of inventory review papers

2.1 Research methodology
The papers included in this review are papers that represent narrative reviews of
previously published inventory models. Given the narrative feature of the papers we
review, a formal structured literature review methodology or a meta-analysis-based
literature review methodology is not applicable. Hence, we adopted a narrative literature
review methodology in this paper.
Research papers considered for inclusion in this review where found by searching the
open literature using the keyword searches inventory models and inventory review
in EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, ProQuest and Science Direct. Only papers written in
English and appearing in peer-reviewed journals and edited books were considered.

2.2 Findings
In this section, we provide a review of 39 inventory review papers found in the literature
(see Table I). These papers can be initially classified into two groups, review papers that
present a general review of inventory modeling (10 papers) and papers that survey
inventory models in specialized research areas (29 papers).
The generalized inventory review papers, with the exception of Drake and Marley
(2014), Glock et al. (2013) and Ullah and Parveen (2010), appeared in the literature during
the time span from the 1950s to the early 1980s (Prasad, 1994; Silver, 1981; Nahmias,

Author(s)
Drake and Marley (2014)
Glock et al. (2013)
Bakker et al. (2012)
Glock (2012)
Khan et al. (2011)
Paterson et al. (2011)
Pentico and Drake (2011)
Qin et al. (2011)
Andersson et al. (2010)
Karmakar and Choudhury (2010)
Li et al. (2010)
Ramasesh (2010)
Ullah and Parveen (2010)
Yavuz (2010)
2014
review papers 1954
Summary of
Table I.
published inventory
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)
Overview of review
Historical overview of the EOQ model
General review of inventory models
Inventory systems with deterioration
Joint economic lot size problem
Modified EOQ models for imperfect quality
Inventory models with lateral transshipment
Deterministic EOQ and EPQ models with partial
backlogging
Newsvendor problem
Combined inventory management and routing
models
Inventory models for deteriorating items with
shortages
Deteriorating inventory models
Lot-sizing decisions under limited-time pricing
incentives
General review of inventory models
Fuzzy inventory management
No. of papers
Classification scheme used in review reviewed
Temporal evolution of the basic EOQ addressing model extensions, 151
implementation and criticisms
Parameters (stationary, dynamic) and models (deterministic, 52
stochastic)
Shelf life (fixed, age or time-dependent), demand type 241
(deterministic, stochastic) with sub-classifications on the form of
each demand type
Number of stages, model attributes (cost terms, characteristics of 165
demand and lead time, quality, deterioration, learning)
Extensions to Salameh and Jaber (2000) including imperfect items, 55
quality, shortages backordering, supply chains and fuzzy logic
Eleven characteristics relating to the inventory system, the 97
ordering policy and the form of transshipment
Model form (EOQ, EPQ) and related model features such as pricing, 151
demand source (time-varying or stock-dependent), quantity
discounts and warehousing
Form of customer demand, supplier pricing policy and buyer risk 51
Problem dimensions of time, demand, topology, inventory, fleet 125
composition and size with subcategories for each dimension
Different types of deterioration, demand patterns (linear, 68
exponential), inventory/shortage characteristics
Enterprise level (single, supply chain), type of demand 128
(deterministic, stochastic), rate of deterioration and production/
inventory characteristics (price discount, shortages)
Planning horizon (finite, infinite), approach to cost/profit 121
determination, type of inventive (price discount, trade credit, non-
traditional), window of pricing opportunity, price-demand
relationship, suppliers control and monitoring actions, disposition
of inventory item (durable, deteriorating), related managerial issues
Planning horizon (finite, infinite), number of items, characteristics 174
of lead time and demand, availability of capacity
Model type (EOQ, EPQ, single period) and inventory control 21
system (continuous review, periodic review)
(continued)
papers
287
sizing review
inventory lot
A review of

Table I.
Author(s)
Guiffrida (2009)
Ben-Daya et al. (2008)
Silver (2008)
Williams and Tokar (2008)
Urban (2005)
Minner (2003)
Kennedy et al. (2002)
Goyal and Giri (2001)
Shah and Shah (2000)
Bertazzi and Speranza (1999)
Khouja (1999)
Kleijn and Dekker (1999)
Petruzzi and Dada (1999)
Benton and Park (1996)
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)
Overview of review
Fuzzy inventory models
Joint economic lot sizing problem
Inventory models contributed by Canadian
researchers
Inventory models published in logistics journals
Inventory models with inventory-level-
dependent demand
Multiple-supplier inventory models in supply
chains
Spare parts inventories
Deteriorating inventory models
Models for deteriorating items
Models for minimizing inventory and
transportation costs
Single-period newsvendor problem (SPP)
Inventory systems with several demand classes
Pricing and the newsvendor problem
Lot sizing under quantity discounts
38,3
288
MRR
No. of papers
Classification scheme used in review reviewed
Model type (EOQ, EPQ, newsvendor, joint economic lot size), 160
inventory control system (continuous review, periodic review),
multi-period and multi-item models
Ordering policy for deterministic models (lot-for-lot, delayed,
geometric)
Number of items and stocking point, time horizon, type of demand 200
process, procurement cost structure, shelf-life considerations
Type of inventory control model used demand and stockout 66
assumptions, level of inventory management collaboration
Nine factors including type of inventory control policy, demand 66
pattern, treatment of shortages, perishability; planning horizon;
sub-categories within all factors
Lead time characteristics, replenishment policies and parameters 92
within policies, economic criteria, supply uncertainty and
disruption, modes of supply
Managerial issues, replacement age, placement of parts, 61
obsolescence and reparability of parts, related special applications
such as emergency ordering and planning for part replacement
Shelf-life (fixed and random lifetimes, decay proportion to 130
inventory level), demand characteristics and related characteristics
such as pricing, inflation and time value of money
Thirteen factors including lifetimes (fixed/random), production and 113
demand rates, delay in payments, pricing, inflation, time value of
money and warehousing
Continuous and discrete time models with sub-classifications 66
(asymptotic analysis, mathematical programming, power-of-two
policies, discrete shipping times)
Classifies extensions to the SPP along 11 categories including 92
objectives and utility functions, pricing policies, multi-product and
multi-item attributes, random yields
Inventory review policy (periodic, continuous), number of classes of 26
demand (2, more than 2)
Model horizon (single, multi-period), demand characteristics 21
(additive, multiplicative)
Demand pattern (time phased, non time phased), discount scheme 81
(all-units, incremental), discount perspective (buyer, buyerseller)
(continued)
 Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

No. of papers
Author(s) Overview of review Classification scheme used in review reviewed

Prasad (1994) Classification of inventory models and systems Four meta-categories (production/planning environment, product 29
and market characteristics, vendor/supplier arrangements, model
attributes) subdivided into a set of 18 sub-categories
Raafat (1991) Continuously deteriorating inventory models Eight categories consisting of single versus multiple items/periods, 70
demand characteristics, type of model (purchasing, production),
quantity discounts, shortage policy, deterioration rate
Goyal and Gupta (1989) Integrated inventory models for buyervendor Policy used for joint lot size, inventory coordination policy, 39
coordination characteristics of marketing program
Nahmias (1982) Perishable inventory theory Perishability lifetimes for single and multiple products (fixed, 55
random), type of demand pattern (deterministic, stochastic)
Silver (1981) General review of inventory management Nine categories including single versus multiple items/periods, 51
type of demand, demand, characteristics of model parameters
(stationary, time-varying), supply and procurement policies,
shortage policy, shelf-life considerations
Nahmias (1978) General review of inventory models Lead time demand (stationary/dynamic and stationary/dynamic), 131
inventory review policy (continuous, periodic), number of items and
echelons, product lifetime
Aggarwal (1974) General review of inventory models Model type (static, dynamic), number of items, number of locations 67
and echelons, characteristics of demand, research objectives of
models
Veinott (1966) General review of inventory models Number of products/echelons, demand and lead time patterns, 118
structure of order cost
Bramson (1962) Variable lead-time inventory models Inventory control policy, characteristics of lead time demand 17
Newberry (1960) General review of inventory management Inventory control policy (fixed quantity/cycle, continuous/periodic 57
models review), number of items (individual, aggregated)
Whitin (1954) General review of inventory management Chronological narrative of developments and illustration of basic 17
model concepts prior to 1954

Table I.
289
papers
sizing review
inventory lot
A review of
 MRR 1978; Aggarwal, 1974; Veinott, 1966; Newberry, 1960; Whitin, 1954). Reviews of
38,3 specialized inventory research areas appeared post 1981. Research areas where multiple
review papers exist included:
seven papers on deteriorating and perishable items (Bakker et al., 2012; Karmakar
and Choudhury, 2010; Li et al., 2010, Goyal and Giri, 2001; Shah and Shah, 2000;
Raafat, 1991; Nahmias, 1982);
290
three papers on joint economic lot sizing (JELS)/integrated inventory models
(Glock, 2012; Ben-Daya et al., 2008; Goyal and Gupta, 1989);
three papers on newsvendor models (Qin et al., 2011; Khouja, 1999; Petruzzi and
Dada, 1999); and
two papers on fuzzy inventory models (Yavuz, 2010; Guiffrida, 2009).
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

Fourteen additional papers were found that each contributed a review of models in a
unique area of inventory research. These included a review of modified EOQ models for
imperfect quality (Khan et al., 2011), inventory models with lateral transshipment
(Paterson et al., 2011), deterministic EOQ/EPQ models with partial backlogging (Pentico
and Drake, 2011), combined inventory and routing models (Andersson et al., 2010),
inventory models under limited-time price incentives (Ramasesh, 2010), inventory
models contributed by Canadian researchers (Silver, 2008), inventory models published
in logistics journals (Williams and Tokar, 2008), inventory-level-dependent demand
models (Urban, 2005), inventory models with multiple suppliers (Minner, 2003), spare
parts inventories (Kennedy et al., 2002), models for minimizing inventory and
transportation costs (Bertazzi and Speranza, 1999), inventory systems with several
demand streams (Kleijn and Dekker, 1999), lot sizing under quantity discounts (Benton
and Park, 1996) and variable lead-time inventory models (Bramson, 1962).

3. Research streams and classification structure for inventory research

In todays globally competitive market place two trends are emerging that impact the
ability of a firm to establish and maintain competitive advantage. First, many
organizations are adopting the supply chain management (SCM) philosophy as a
cornerstone for the foundation of their competitive strategy (Johnson and Templar,
2011; Kristal et al., 2010). Second, many organizations are embracing green and
sustainable business practices as a result of pressures from customers and/or
governmental legislative actions, to foster good corporate citizenship or to gain entry to
markets sensitive to green practices (Jing and Jiang, 2013; Tang and Zhou, 2012; Zhu and
Sarkis, 2007; DSouza et al., 2007). Inventory management plays an active and important
role in both of these trends.

3.1 Inventory management and SCM

Inventory management is a principle element of an integrated product supply chain, as
it is a mechanism of material flow (raw materials, work in process and finished goods)
and is also a mechanism that links the partners in a supply chain (Power, 2005;
Handfield and Nichols, 2002). Traditionally, inventory management practices were firm
centric whereby a firm was typically only concerned with optimizing their own
inventory position and with little to no concern to the inventory positions of their
suppliers. With the advent of the SCM philosophy, inventory decisions must be made
 with consideration of suppliers and business partnerships and must span across A review of
multiple echelons. A review of inventory planning in supply chains is found in Routroy inventory lot
(2010). sizing review
The inventory research summarized in Table I suggests that researchers are
undertaking the challenges of modern day inventory management in supply chains. papers
This is evident through the review papers, which summarize the models developed for
integrated buyervendor decision-making and JELS. Table II provides a compilation of 291
research papers (review papers from Table I and additionally selected single model
papers from the literature) that illustrate modeling structures and formulations that are
useful in advancing classical single-product single-echelon models to a multi-product
multi-echelon supply chain setting. Clearly, the single model papers in Table II are not
exhaustive of the literature. These additional papers have been selected to provide
examples of papers which contain model features that may be useful in advancing a
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

classical inventory model to the supply chain setting.

The broadest classification found in Table II is that between static (deterministic
demand) and dynamic (variable demand). We have observed that there is an
inconsistency among researchers as to how the phrase dynamic inventory model is
often used. Some researchers use this phrase to describe models where model
parameters vary over time, while other researchers use the phrase to represent either the
demand pattern or that a dynamic programming solution methodology was used. The
models summarized in Table II are further sub-classified as to the number of items
(single versus multiple) and nested within the number of items the number of echelons
(single versus multiple). The multi-product, multi-echelon models are the best candidate
models for solving inventory management problems from a supply chain perspective.

3.2 Inventory management and green and sustainable practices

The integration of inventory models in green and sustainable practices is in its infancy
stage. Inventory decisions can be linked to the level of carbon emissions, as lot sizing
decisions impact the amount of freight requiring transport and warehousing in the
supply chain. Research on this aspect of lot sizing has been scattered (Bouchery et al.,
2012; Bonney and Jaber, 2012; Jaber, 2009 for a gateway to this literature) with no
seminal review of this important literature having been addressed. In Table III, we
present a review of classical inventory lot sizing models that have sustainability criteria
in their model formulations.
Examining Table III, the EOQ and newsvendor are the most frequently used models
for sustainable lot sizing. Carbon emissions (typically measured in units of carbon
dioxide gas) is the most commonly used sustainability criteria. Fixed carbon cost,
unsold product and the number of emission permits have also been used as
sustainability criteria. The widespread use of carbon emissions may be the result of the
relative ease by which carbon emission can be captured and measured, however; carbon
dioxide gas represents only one component of overall green house gas emissions.
The JELS models represent a beginning attempt to advance inventory-based
sustainability modeling to the scope of a supply chain, as they integrate the inventory lot
sizing decision across two echelons. The sustainable order quantity model of Bouchery
et al. (2012) is also multi-echelon based. The only multi-product, multi-echelon model is
found in Zhang and Xu (2013).
 MRR Author(s) Static demand Dynamic demand
38,3 Items Single Multi Single Multi
Echelon Single Multi Single Multi Single Multi Single Multi

General classification
Whitin (1954) D, S D, S
Newberry (1960) D, S D, S
292 Bramson, (1962) D, S
Aggarwal, (1974) D D D D D, S D, S D, S D, S
Nahmias, (1978) D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S
Silver (1981) D, S S D, S D
Bahl et al., (1987) D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S

Extensions
Nahmias (1982) D, S D, S D, S D, S
Raafat (1991) D, S D, S
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

Benton and Park (1996) D, S D, S D, S D, S

Baita et al. (1998) D, S D, S
Kleijn and Dekker (1999) D, S
Goyal and Giri (2001) D, S D, S
Kennedy et al. (2002) D, S D, S
Minner (2003) D, S
Urban (2005) D, S D, S
Brahimi et al. (2006) D, S D, S
Silver (2008) D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S D, S
Williams and Tokar (2008) D, S
Guiffrida (2009) S S S S
Karmakar and Choudhury (2010) S
Khan et al. (2011) D, S
Paterson et al. (2011) D, S D, S D, S D, S
Pentico and Drake (2011) D D

Multi-item models
Elmaghraby (1978) D
Narro Lopez and Kingsman (1991) D
Salomon et al. (1991) D, S
Drexl and Kimms (1997) D D
Sox et al. (1999) S
Karimi et al. (2003) D, S
Jans and Degraeve (2007) D, S D, S D, S D, S
Jans and Degraeve, (2008) D D
Quadt and Kuhn (2008) D, S
Vidal-Carreras and Garcia-Sabater (2009) D, S
Buschkhl et al. (2010) D, S
Winands et al. (2011) S

Multi-echelon models
Goyal and Gupta (1989) D D
Sarmah et al. (2006) S, D S, D
Ben-Daya et al. (2008) D
Table II. Andersson et al. (2010) S, D
Inventory modeling Glock (2012) S, D
papers for the supply
chain setting Notes: D deterministic, S stochastic

Author(s)
Chen et al. (2013)
Jaber et al. (2013)
Rosic and Jammernegg (2013)
Bouchery et al. (2012)
Zhang and Xu (2013)
Choi and Chiu (2012)
Glock et al. (2012)
Song and Leng (2012)
Hua et al. (2011)
El Saadany et al. (2011)
Wahab et al. (2011)
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)
Type of inventory model
A review of
EOQ EPQ NV JELS Sustainability criteria inventory lot
sizing review
X Carbon emissions
X Carbon emissions papers
X Carbon emissions
X Carbon emissions
X Carbon emissions
293
X Unsold product
X Carbon emissions
X Carbon emissions
X Carbon emissions
X Green-quality measure
X X Carbon emissions

Manikas and Godfrey (2010) X Emission permits

Tao et al. (2010) X X Fixed carbon cost Table III.
Classical inventory
Notes: EOQ economical order quantity; EPQ economical production quantity; NV newsvendor; models with
JELS joint economical lot size sustainability criteria

4. Summary and conclusions

In this paper, we have provided a review of classical inventory models by reviewing 39
inventory review papers found in the literature. This review supports our first two
research objectives by providing in one paper a synthesis of previous published
literature review papers that have addressed model development in specialized areas
within the field of inventory management. This single source consolidation of inventory
model research may prove useful to research colleagues with new or continuing interest
in inventory management.
Based on our syntheses of the past body of research on inventory models, gaps in the
current research were discussed and two research directions were identified, thereby
supporting our third and fourth research objectives. The research directions identified
herein, broadening the scope of classical inventory models to support:
inventory decision-making in a coordinated supply chain; and
sustainability concerns, which are supportive in advancing classical inventory
models to meet the challenges of the new paradigm expressed by Chikn (2009)
and reducing the concerns expressed by Peterson and Silver (1979) and
Rumyantsev and Netessine (2007).

All literature reviews are subject to limitation. With the exception of Peterson and Silver
(1979), our review did not include inventory textbooks which often contain summaries of
inventory models. Similarly, non-refereed journals, white papers and non-English
publications were not included. This excluded set of resources could lead to additional
models that are of interest to the topic of this review.

References
Aggarwal, S.C. (1974), A review of current inventory theory and its applications, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 443-482.
 MRR Andersson, H., Hoff, A., Christiansen, M., Hasle, G. and Lkkentangen, A. (2010), Industrial
aspects and literature survey: combined inventory management and routing, Computers
38,3 and Operations Research, Vol. 37 No. 9, pp. 1515-1536.
Arrow, K., Harris, T. and Marschak, J. (1951), Optimal inventory policy, Econometrica, Vol. 19
No. 3, pp. 250-272.
Bahl, H.C., Ritzman, L.P. and Gupta, J.N. (1987), OR practice-determining lot sizes and resource
294 requirements: a review, Operations Research, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 329-345.
Baita, F., Ukovich, W., Pesenti, R. and Favaretto, D. (1998), Dynamic routing-and-inventory
problems: a review, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 32 No. 8,
pp. 585-598.
Bakker, M., Riezebos, J. and Teunter, R.H. (2012), Review of inventory systems with deterioration
since 2011, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 221 No. 2, pp. 275-284.
Ben-Daya, M., Darwish, M. and Ertogral, K. (2008), The joint economic lot sizing problem: review
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

and extensions, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 185 No. 2, pp. 726-742.
Benton, W.C. and Park, S. (1996), A classification of literature on determining the lot size under
quantity discounts, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 92 No. 2, pp. 219-238.
Bertazzi, L. and Speranza, M.G. (1999), Model and algorithms for the minimization of inventory
and transportation costs: a survey, in Speranza, M.G. and Sthly, P. (Eds), New Trends in
Distribution Logistics, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical systems, Vol. 480,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 253-265.
Bonney, M. and Jaber, M.Y. (2012), Environmentally responsible inventory models: non-classical
models for a non-classical era, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 133
No. 1, pp. 43-53.
Bouchery, Y., Ghaffari, A., Jemai, Z. and Dallery, Y. (2012), Including sustainability criteria in
inventory models, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 222 No. 2, pp. 229-240.
Brahimi, N., Dauzere-Peres, S., Najid, N.M. and Nordli, A. (2006), Single item lot size problem,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 168 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Bramson, M.J. (1962), The variable lead-time problem in inventory control a survey of the
literature - part I, Operations Research, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 41-35.
Buschkhl, L., Sahling, F., Helber, S. and Tempelmeier, H. (2010), Dynamic capacitated lot-sizing
problems: a classification and review of solution approaches, OR Spectrum, Vol. 32 No. 2,
pp. 231-261.
Chen, X., Benjaafar, S. and Elomri, A. (2013), The carbon-constrained EOQ, Operations Research
Letters, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 172-179.
Chikn, A. (2009), A new inventory paradigm conceptual basis and survey results, in Jaber, M.Y.
(Ed.), Inventory Management: Non-Classical Views, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 1-24.
Choi, T.M. and Chiu, C.-H. (2012), Mean-downside-risk and mean-variance newsvendor models:
implications for sustainable fashion retailing, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 135 No. 2, pp. 552-560.
Drake, M.J. and Marley, K.A. (2014), A century of the EOQ, in Choi, T.S. (Ed.), Handbook of EOQ
Inventory Problems, Springer-Verlag, NY, New York, pp. 3-22.
Drexl, A. and Kimms, A. (1997), Lot sizing and scheduling survey and extensions, European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 99 No. 2, pp. 221-235.
DSouza, C., Taghian, M. and Khosla, R. (2007), Examination of environmental beliefs and its
impact on the influence of price, quality, and demographics with respect to green purchase
 intention, Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 2, A review of
pp. 69-78.
inventory lot
Dworetzky, A., Kiefer, J. and Wolfowitz, J. (1952a), The inventory problem: I. case of known
distribution of demand, Econometrica, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 187-222.
sizing review
Dworetzky, A., Kiefer, J. and Wolfowitz, J. (1952b), The inventory problem: II. case of unknown
papers
distribution of demand, Econometrica, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 450-466.
El Saadany, A.M.A., Jaber, M.Y. and Bonney, M. (2011), Environmental performance measures 295
for supply chains, Management Research Review, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 1202-1221.
Elmaghraby, S.E. (1978), The economic lot scheduling problem (ELSP): review and extensions,
Management Science, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 587-598.
Glock, C.H. (2012), The joint economic lot size problem: a review, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 135 No. 2, pp. 671-686.
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

Glock, C.H., Grosse, E.H. and Ries, J.M. (2013), The lot sizing problem: a tertiary study,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 155, pp. 39-51.
Glock, C.H., Jaber, M.Y. and Searcy, C. (2012), Sustainability strategies in an EPQ model with
price and quality sensitive demand, The International Journal of Logistics Management,
Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 340-359.
Goyal, S.K. and Giri, B.C. (2001), Recent trends in modeling of deteriorating inventory, European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 134 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Goyal, S.K. and Gupta, Y.P. (1989), Integrated inventory models: the buyer-vendor coordination,
European Journal of Operation Research, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 261-269.
Guiffrida, A. (2009), Fuzzy inventory models, in Jaber, M.Y., (Ed.), Inventory Management:
Non-Classical Views, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 173-198.
Handfield, R.B. and Nichols, E.L. (2002), Supply Chain Redesign: Transforming Supply Chains into
Integrated Value Systems, FT Press.
Harris, F. (1913), How many parts to make at once, Factory, The Magazine of Management,
Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 135-136.
Hua, G., Cheng, T.C.E. and Wang, S. (2011), Managing carbon footprints in inventory
management, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 132 No. 2, pp. 178-185.
Jaber, M.Y. (2009), Inventory Management: Non-Classical Views, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Jaber, M.Y., Glock, C.H. and El Saadany, A.M.A. (2013), Supply chain coordination with emission
reduction incentives, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 69-82.
Jans, R. and Degraeve, Z. (2007), Meta-heuristics for dynamic lot sizing: a review and comparison
of solution approaches, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 177 No. 3,
pp. 1855-1875.
Jans, R. and Degraeve, Z. (2008), Modeling industrial lot sizing problems: a review, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 46 No. 6, pp. 1619-1643.
Jing, H. and Jiang, B.S. (2013), The framework for green business model for eco-innovation,
Journal of Supply chain and Operations Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 33-46.
Johnson, M. and Templar, S. (2011), The relationships between supply chain and firm
performance, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 88-103.
Karimi, B., Fatemi Ghomi, S.M.T. and Wilson, J.M. (2003), The capacitated lot sizing problem: a
review of models and algorithms, Omega, International Journal of Management Science,
Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 365-378.
 MRR Karmakar, B. and Choudhury, K.D. (2010), A review on inventory models for deteriorating items
with shortages, Assam University Journal of Science and Technology: Physical Sciences
38,3 and Technology, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 51-59.
Kennedy, W.J., Patterson, J.W. and Fredendall, L.D. (2002), An overview of recent literature on
spare parts inventory, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 76 No. 2,
pp. 210-215.
296 Khan, M., Jaber, M.Y., Guiffrida, A.L. and Zolfaghari, S. (2011), A review of the extensions of a
modified EOQ model for imperfect quality items, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 132 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Khouja, M. (1999), The single period (news-vendor) problem: literature review and suggestions
for future research, Omega, International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 27 No. 5,
pp. 537-553.
Kleijn, M.J. and Dekker, R. (1999), An overview of inventory systems with several demand
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

classes, in Speranza, M.G. and Sthly, P. (Eds), New Trends in Distribution Logistics,
Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Vol. 480, Springer-Verlag, Berlin
Heidelberg, pp. 253-265.
Kristal, M., Huang, X. and Roth, A. (2010), The effect of an ambidextrous supply chain strategy
on combinative competitive capabilities and business performance, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 415-429.
Li, R., Lan, H. and Mawhinney, J.R. (2010), A review on deteriorating inventory study, Journal of
Service Science and Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 117-129.
Manikas, A. and Godfrey, M. (2010), Inducing green behavior in a manufacturer, Global Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 27-38.
Minner, S. (2003), Multiple-supplier inventory models in supply chain management: a review,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vols 81/82, pp. 265-279.
Nahmias, S. (1978), Inventory models, in Belzer, J., Hlzman, A.G. and Kent, A. (Eds),
Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology, Vol. 9, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY,
pp. 447-483.
Nahmias, S. (1982), Perishable inventory theory: a review, Operations Research, Vol. 30 No. 4,
pp. 680-708.
Narro Lopez, M.A. and Kingsman, B.G. (1991), The economic lot scheduling problem: theory and
practice, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 147-164.
Newberry, T.L. (1960), A classification of inventory control theory, The Journal of Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 391-397.
Paterson, C., Kiesmller, G., Teunter, R. and Glazebrook, K. (2011), Inventory models with lateral
transshipments: a review, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 210 No. 2,
pp. 125-136.
Pentico, D.W. and Drake, M.J. (2011), A survey of deterministic models for the EOQ and EPQ with
partial backordering, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 214 No. 2,
pp. 179-198.
Peterson, R. and Silver, E.A. (1979), Decision Systems for Inventory Management and Production
Planning, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Petruzzi, N.C. and Dada, M. (1999), Pricing and the newsvendor problem: a review with
extensions, Operations Research, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 183-194.
Power, D. (2005), Supply chain management integration and implementation: a literature
review, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 252-263.
 Prasad, S. (1994), Classification of inventory models and systems, International Journal of A review of
Production Economics, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 209-222.
inventory lot
Qin, Y., Wang, R., Vakharia, A.J., Chen, Y. and Seref, M.M.H. (2011), The newsvendor problem:
review and directions for future research, European Journal of Operational Research,
sizing review
Vol. 213 No. 2, pp. 361-374. papers
Quadt, D. and Kuhn, H. (2008), Capacitated lot-sizing with extensions: a review, 4OR, 6 No. 1,
pp. 61-83. 297
Raafat, F. (1991), Survey of literature on continuously deteriorating inventory models, Journal of
the Operational Research Society, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 27-37.
Ramasesh, R. (2010), Lot-sizing decisions under limited-time price incentives: a review, Omega,
International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 38 Nos 3/4, pp. 118-135.
Rosic, H. and Jammernegg, W. (2013), The economic and environmental performance of dual
sourcing: a newsvendor approach, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 143
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

No. 1, pp. 109-119.

Routroy, S. (2010), Traditional inventory planning to multi-echelon supply chain inventory
planning: a critical review, The IUP Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 7 Nos 1/2,
pp. 49-60.
Rumyantsev, S. and Netessine, S. (2007), What can be learned from classical inventory models? A
cross-industry exploratory investigation, Manufacturing and Service Operations
Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 409-429.
Salameh, M.K. and Jaber, M.Y. (2000), Economic production quantity model for items with
imperfect quality, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 59-64.
Salomon, M., Kroon, L.G., Kuik, R. and Van Wassenhove, L.N. (1991), Some extensions of the
discrete lot sizing and scheduling problem, Management Science, Vol. 37 No. 7,
pp. 801-812.
Sarmah, S.P., Acharya, D. and Goyal, S.K. (2006), Buyer vendor coordination models in supply
chain management, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 175 No. 1, pp. 1-15.
Shah, N.H. and Shah, Y.K. (2000), Literature survey on inventory models for deteriorating items,
Economic Annals, Vol. 44 No. 145, pp. 221-237.
Silver, E.A. (1981), Operations research in inventory management: a review and critique,
Operations Research, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 628-645.
Silver, E.A. (2008), Inventory management: an overview, Canadian publications, practical
applications and suggestions for future research, INFOR, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 15-28.
Song, J. and Leng, M. (2012), Analysis of single-period problem under carbon emissions policies,
in Choi, T.M. (Ed.), Handbook of Newsvendor Problems Models, Extensions and
Applications, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 297-313.
Sox, C.R., Jackson, P.L., Bowman, A. and Muckstadt, J.A. (1999), A review of the stochastic lot
scheduling problem, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 62 No. 3,
pp. 181-200.
Taft, E.W. (1918), The most economical production lot, The Iron Age, Vol. 101 No. 18,
pp. 1410-1412.
Tang, C.S. and Zhou, S. (2012), Research advances in environmentally and socially sustainable
operations, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 223 No. 3, pp. 585-594.
Tao, Z., Guiffrida, A.L. and Troutt, M.D. (2010), A green cost based economic production/order
quantity model, Proceedings of the Kent State International Symposium on Green Supply
Chains, Canton, OH, pp. 210-223.
 MRR Ullah, H. and Parveen, S. (2010), A literature review on inventory lot sizing problems, Global
Journal of Researches in Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 21-36.
38,3
Urban, T. (2005), Inventory models with inventory-level-dependent demand: a comprehensive
review and unifying theory, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 162 No. 3,
pp. 792-804.
Veinott, A.F. (1966), The status of mathematical inventory theory, Management Science, Vol. 12
298 No. 11, Series A, pp. 745-777.
Vidal-Carreras, P.I. and Garcia-Sabater, J.P. (2009), Comparison of heuristics for an economic lot
scheduling problem with deliberated coproduction, Journal of Industrial Engineering and
Management, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 437-463.
Wahab, M.I.M., Mamun, S.M.H. and Ongkunaruk, P. (2011), EOQ models for a coordinated
two-level international supply chain considering imperfect items and environmental
impact, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 134 No. 1, pp. 151-158.
Downloaded by Doctor Maxim Bushuev At 09:50 19 March 2015 (PT)

Whitin, T.M. (1954), Inventory control research: a survey, Management Science, Vol. 1 No. 1,
pp. 32-40.
Williams, B.D. and Tokar, T. (2008), A review of inventory management research in major
logistics journals themes and future directions, The International Journal of Logistics
Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 212-232.
Wilson, R.H. (1934), A scientific routine for stock control, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 13
No. 1, pp. 116-129.
Winands, E.M.M., Adan, I.J.B.F. and Van Houtum, G.J. (2011), The stochastic economic lot
scheduling problem: a survey, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 210 No. 1,
pp. 1-9.
Yavuz, M. (2010), Fuzzy inventory management, in Kaharman, C. and Yavuz, M. (Eds),
Production Engineering and Management under Fuzziness, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
pp. 25-38.
Zhang, B. and Xu, L. (2013), Multi-item production planning with carbon cap and trade
mechanism, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 144 No. 1, pp. 118-127.
Zhu, Q. and Sarkis, J. (2007), The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green
supply chain practices and performance, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 45 Nos 18/19, pp. 4333-4355.

Corresponding author
Maxim A. Bushuev can be contacted at: mbushuev@kent.edu

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats