Resource Proximity vs Market Proximity
Locate resource-intensive processing near inputs and downstream finishing near markets, splitting the value chain where geographic economics diverge.
CyberTRIZ analysis · GreenFieldIndustrialProjects contradiction GFP024 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Resource-intensive industries benefit from locating production near raw materials, energy, water, or feedstocks, while customer economics may favor locations closer to final markets. Moving either inputs or finished products over long distances can create significant cost and supply exposure.
Green Field Industrial Projects TRIZ Resolution
Reconfigure the value chain according to the transportability and transformation economics of inputs and outputs. Perform resource-intensive processing near the source when appropriate and locate downstream finishing, customization, storage, or distribution closer to demand.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 1 – Segmentation divides production stages according to geographic requirements.
Principle 3 – Local Quality locates each process where its dominant resource or market condition is most favorable.
Principle 24 – Intermediary uses intermediate processing or logistics nodes to connect resource and market locations.
Expected Outcome
Lower total logistics cost
Better resource access
Preserved market responsiveness
More efficient industrial-network design
Decision Indicators
Raw-material transportation dominates operating cost.
Market proximity requires transporting large volumes of low-value inputs.
Resource-proximate sites create excessive finished-product logistics.
All production stages are colocated despite different geographic economics.
Site decisions optimize one transportation flow while penalizing another.
Monitoring these indicators helps determine whether the production system should be geographically reconfigured rather than forcing a single site to satisfy incompatible location requirements.