The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact that unevenly allocating buffer capacity has on throughput and average buffer level regarding unreliable lines to better understand the relevant factors in supply chain design. Results show that the best patterns for unreliable merging lines in terms of generating higher throughput rates (TR), as compared to a balanced merging line counterpart, are those where total available buffer capacity is allocated between workstations in either an inverted bowl pattern (i.e. concentrating buffer capacity towards the centre of the line), or a balanced line pattern. In contrast, when considering the trade-off between generating revenue resulting from TR and reducing cost created by average buffer levels (ABL), we found that the balanced pattern was not the best pattern. The best pattern was dependent on the length of the line and on the total buffer capacity as shorter lines with very constrained buffers were best served with an inverted bowl pattern while longer lines had the best results when applying an ascending buffer allocation pattern. Longer lines, in contrast, had the best results regarding the trade-off between TR and ABL, on average, by allocating buffer capacity evenly in one of the parallel lines while applying any other pattern in the remaining parallel line.
LINK
To facilitate energy transition, in several countries regulators have devised ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to create a participatory experimentation environment for exploring revision of energy law. These sandboxes allow for a two-way regulatory dialogue between an experimenter and an approachable regulator to innovate regulation and enable new socio-technical arrangements. However, these experiments do not take place in a vacuum but need to be formulated and implemented in a multi-actor, polycentric decision-making system through collaboration with the regulator but also energy sector incumbents such as the distribution system operator. We are, therefore, exploring new roles and power division changes in the energy sector as a result of such a regulatory sandbox. We research the Dutch Energy Experimentation Decree (EED) that invites homeowners’ associations and energy cooperatives to propose projects prohibited by extant regulation. In order to localize, democratize and decentralize energy provision, local experimenters can, for instance, organise peer-to-peer supply and determine their own tariffs for energy transport. Theoretically, we rely on Ostrom’s concept of polycentricity to study the dynamics between actors involved in and engaging with the participatory experiments. Empirically, we examine 4 approved EED experiments through interviews and document analysis. Our conclusions focus on the potential and limitations of bottom-up, participatory innovation in a polycentric system. The most important lessons are that a more holistic approach to experimentation, inter-actor alignment, providing more incentives, and expert and financial support would benefit bottom-up participatory innovation.
LINK
