Conference PaperPDF Available

The impact of failed home deliveries on carbon emissions: are collection / delivery points environmentally-friendly alternatives?

Authors:

Figures

Content may be subject to copyright.
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
The impact of failed home deliveries on carbon emissions:
Are collection / delivery points environmentally-friendly
alternatives?
Julia Edwards1, Alan McKinnon1,
Tom Cherrett2, Fraser McLeod2, Liying Song3
1Logistics Research Centre, Heriot-Watt University,
Riccarton Campus, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
Email: J.B.Edwards@hw.ac.uk
2Transportation Research Group
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ
Email: T.J.Cherrett@soton.ac.uk
3School of Traffic and Transportation
Beijing Jiaotong University
Beijing, 100044, China
EMail: lysong@bjtu.edu.cn
Introduction
There has been phenomenal expansion of online shopping in recent years, with growth rates
exceeding 35% year-on-year (IMRG, 2008). Retail sales for this channel now account for £18.5bn in
the UK (Mintel, 2008). IMRG (2008) estimates that 820 million parcels were delivered to UK online
shoppers in 2008. This delivery experience is critical to the success of online shopping.
General consensus among consumers is that online shopping is good for the environment (IMRG,
2008; Royal Mail, 2007), yet consideration needs to be given to the frequency and treatment of failed
deliveries. Not only are unsuccessful deliveries costly and time-consuming for both retailers and
carriers and inconvenient for the consumer, they also have a detrimental effect on the environment
(Webster, 2007). Increasingly many people are not-at-home to receive deliveries during the working
day, when most home delivery companies operate (Prologis, 2008). As a result, it has been estimated
that half of households are unoccupied between the hours of 9.00 and 16.00 (Retail Logistics Task
Force, 2001). Therefore, it is not surprising that the majority of respondents, who have experienced a
failed delivery, report that it was because no one was at home to receive the package (IMRG, 2008). It
is mainly parcel carriers which must cope with this failed delivery problem.
The aim of this paper is first, to assess the additional carbon emissions generated by failed delivery
(as opposed to a successful first-time delivery) on a per drop basis and second, to consider the
potential environmental savings from the use of alternative collection/delivery locations over traditional
delivery methods.
Frequency of failed delivery
There are several variations to the traditional home delivery method but generally, goods are ordered
by the customer and delivered to a location of their choosing, using relatively narrow time windows
defined by the retailer. If the delivery fails because no-one is at the address to receive the item, the
carrier may make several re-delivery attempts as part of the round. If these also fail, the recipient is left
a notification card detailing a number of options, typically that:
The item has been left with a neighbour;
The item has been left somewhere outside the premises (unsecured delivery);
The item has been returned to the carrier’s depot and further instructions are required from
the intended recipient. (Under these circumstances, the recipient can request a further
redelivery attempt which could be chargeable, or could visit the carriers’ depot personally to
collect the item).
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
Actual first-time delivery failure rates
1
among carriers vary considerably; Beveridge (2007) indicated a
range between 2-30%, depending on the carrierspolicies for dealing with ‘no-one-at-home’. Some
parcel delivery companies achieve very high first-time delivery rates (McKinnon & Tallam, 2003), as
they are prepared to leave deliveries in alternative locations, (e.g. with neighbours or in ‘unsecure’
areas around the premises). According to IMRG (2008), 84% of online shoppers report that they
would be happy for a neighbour to receive their delivery on their behalf. Other carriers require proof-
of-delivery, and consequently have a much higher delivery failure rate when no-one is available at the
delivery address. As a result of these different delivery arrangements, estimates of first-time delivery
failure rates vary widely from 6 out of every 10 small-package deliveries (Retail Logistics Task Force,
2001) to a more conservative one in nine (IMRG, 2008).
Quantifying CO2 emissions for failed delivery
Methodology
This research uses the carbon audit model outlined by Edwards et al. (2009) to calculate the CO2
emissions from failed deliveries. Emissions factor data from Defra (2008), NAEI, (2008), RHA (2008)
and FTA (2008) have been used to derive an average emissions factor for van-based home deliveries.
The analysis presented here is based on a typical van
2
home delivery round of 120 drops and 50-
miles distance. Having already noted the wide variations in failed deliveries, three first-time failed
delivery ratios were considered:
10%, similar to the 12% assumed by Weltevreden & Rotem-Mindali (2008), and recorded by
IMRG (2008);
30%, in line with findings by McLeod & Cherrett (2006), Song et al. (2009) and Belet et al.
(2009);
50% failure rate (worst case scenario) of a magnitude noted by Retail Logistics Task Force
(2001).
Low first-time failure rates of approximately 2%, achieved by parcel companies practicing unsecured
deliveries, and couriers who have made prior arrangements with regular customers in the event of
failures are not considered here. In these delivery cases, there will be only a very marginal increase in
carbon emissions.
For each of the three different first-time failure rates, emissions are also calculated for a second
attempted drop (the customer is notified of the intended re-delivery). Normally, the two delivery
attempts are on consecutive days, which results in a high percentage of second, re-delivery attempts
also failing, assumed to be 50% in this research (in accordance with McLeod & Cherrett, 2009). Often,
the customer will then travel to the local depot to collect the missed package rather than arrange for
another delivery attempt which could be at additional cost. The CO2 implications of the above
scenarios have been analysed.
Only 5% of people would wish to nominate a local depot as an alternative delivery address (Retail
Logistics Task Force. 2001) implying that the location of a typical depot is inconvenient for the majority
of online customers. Therefore, we can assume that most customers collect undelivered packages
either by car or by public transport with previous surveys suggesting that the vast majority of these
trips (87%) are by car (McLeod & Cherrett, 2006). Defra’s emission factors (CO2 per km travelled) for
average car and bus journeys have been used to calculate the emissions generated by these
individual trips (Defra, 2007).
1
IMRG (2008, p.25) define a first-time delivery failure “as a delivery for which a signature cannot be obtained,
either from the customer or a designated customer representative, and this results in the customer's address
being carded and the item returned to the delivery depot for either redelivery or customer collection”.
2
A van denotes a light goods vehicle up to 3.5-tonnes maximum permissible gross vehicle weight of van-
type construction on a car chassis that operates on diesel fuel.
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
Three different collection depot scenarios were modelled (being 15km, 25km and 40km away from the
average home) are examined, in accordance with Clements (2005); McLeod & Cherrett (2009) and
Song et al. (2009) respectively. Further, as customers wherever possible will wish to minimise both the
time and expense involved in retrieving a missed delivery from a depot, we assume that they will try to
combine collection with other activities (a non-dedicated trip). Few previous studies have examined
consumer travel behaviour in relation to missed deliveries. Turner (2007) found that out of a sample of
167 visitors collecting failed home deliveries at a Royal Mail sorting office, 62% drove and 60%
claimed to be making dedicated trips (no trip chaining on either leg). 84% said that this was their usual
response to a failed home delivery (personal collection). Parcel carrier depots are often more distant
and not as accessible as Royal Mail sorting offices. As a result, we assume that only 50% of the
overall return trip from customer’s home to the depot is allocated to the collection of the missed
package, and that most people will travel by car.
Results
Edwards et al. (2009) modelled carbon emissions for a standard home delivery round. Assuming
average delivery rates of 120 drops over a typical 50km round, it was calculated that a successful first-
time drop emitted 181gCO2. Using this emissions value per drop as a base, re-calculated emissions
generated for the different first-time failed delivery rates are shown in Table 1. The additional gCO2
attributable to delivery failures arise from subsequent delivery attempts and the extra vehicle mileage
they generate. We assume that re-delivery attempts as part of the same round are subsumed within
the initial round length.
100%
successful
first-time
delivery
10%
failure
rate
30%
failure
rate
50%
failure
rate
gCO2 per
drop
181g
199g
235g
271g
Table 1: First-time van-based delivery: Emissions (gCO2) per drop
Emissions of CO2 per average drop increase from 181g for 100% first-time delivery to the worst-case
scenario of 271g when one in two deliveries are assumed to fail. Moreover, when a parcel carrier
finds no one at home at the first attempt, most delivery companies repeat the delivery 24-hours later.
Customers normally out during the working day, therefore, have very little advance notice to arrange
receipt of the package; consequently, the second attempt often fails, compounding the effects of the
initial failed delivery (Table 2). It has been assumed that regardless of initial delivery failure rates, half
of all second attempts fail.
1st delivery attempt failure rate
(plus 50% 2nd delivery failure)
10% failure
rate
30% failure
rate
50% failure
rate
208g
262g
316g
15%
45%
75%
Table 2: Re-delivery factoring in a 50% failure rate: Emissions (gCO2) per drop
When a carrier experiences a 50% delivery failure rate for both first and second delivery attempts,
each drop in a typical round would be allocated 316gCO2 or approximately three-quarters more CO2
per drop than a successful first-time delivery.
Normally after two failed delivery attempts the parcel carrier returns the package to a local depot for
the individual to collect. While 15% of online shoppers claim not to visit a parcel depot to collect a
missed delivery (IMRG, 2008), Department for Transport (2009) estimate that around 3% of all home
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
delivery recipients make a trip to retrieve an item left at a post-office, depot or outlet. In comparison, in
a survey of 379 households across West Sussex, Song (2008) found that 21% of respondents claimed
to have travelled to a carrier’s depot for the purpose of collecting failed home deliveries between 3 and
11 times per year. When these individual trips are undertaken by private cars or public transport
(buses), the carbon intensity of online retailing rises steeply.
Distance to local depot
gCO2 per trip
15km
25km
40km
Car
3,113g
5,188g
8,300g
Bus
1,340g
2,234g
3,574g
Table 3: Emissions (gCO2) per consumer trip to a local depot to collect a missed delivery
3
Table 3 shows the CO2 emissions produced by a customer travelling to a local depot of varying
distance from the point of origin to collect packages. Generally, local depots, often on the outskirts of
urban centres for ease of access to the road network, serve much wider areas than their immediate
conurbation. Consequently, the greater the distance a customer has to travel to the local depot, the
more CO2 will be generated by that trip. Clearly, using a car to make a 40km journey to bring back a
missed delivery will produce 8,300gCO2 (or the equivalent of 26 re-delivery attempts by delivery van,
when half of first and second-time deliveries fail) (Table 3). When the bus is the chosen mode of
travel to a depot, the consumer (assuming the bus has average patronage of 9.2 passengers) will be
responsible for 3,574g (or 11 times the amount of CO2 generated by the two missed parcel deliveries)
for the 40km journey. Even the shorter distance of 15km, representing for example an individual’s city
centre-to-suburb trip to collect a package, will generate 3,113gCO2 by car and 1,340gCO2 when the
journey is undertaken by bus. The individual trip to the local depot accounts for the vast majority of
the CO2 emissions associated with the failed delivery. Therefore, minimising the emissions associated
with personal consumer travel to the depot is key to mitigating the overall environmental impact of
failed deliveries.
Alternative collection/delivery points (CDPs)
Failed deliveries are clearly undesirable from a number of viewpoints:
The carrier incurs additional costs in trying to make further attempts to deliver (related to the
associated logistics and call centre charges which have been estimated to be up to £38.50
for each delivery failure (IMRG, 2006))
The customer is inconvenienced and may have to travel to the carrier’s depot personally to
collect the item,
There are wider environmental impacts due to the additional vehicle trips made by carriers
and consumers.
With such a large proportion of failed deliveries, different delivery solutions have emerged, allowing
carriers to drop consignments without the need to obtain the final customer’s signature. One solution is
to deliver packages to secure storage boxes, sometimes fitted as an integral part of the house, or
secured to an outer wall, or for communal use in the form of locker banks (Giraffe Marketing, 2004;
Bearbox, 2004; ByBox, 2004). Another solution is for the carrier to take failed deliveries to a local
attended ‘collection/delivery point’ (CDP), which could be a shop, a petrol station or a post office. The
customer is left a card, or could in principle be sent an email or a text message, to inform them where
to collect their package. This delivery method is now used by Royal Mail and Parcel Force in the UK
using specific post offices as CDPs whilst other examples use grocery stores, newsagents and petrol
stations. Kiala has 5000 CDPs across Europe with outlets in the UK, Belgium, Germany, Austria,
Spain, The Netherlands, Luxembourg and France while Pickpoint has a network of CDPs across
Germany. A similar system using convenience stores operates successfully in Japan (Chopra, &
Meindl, 2003).
A delivery policy which automatically took failed first-time home deliveries to the customer’s nearest
CDP, if such a network of attended or unattended points were available, could benefit all parties and
3
It was assumed that a customer used a standard car of unknown fuel
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
reduce the aggregate mileage associated with either redelivering or collecting failed consignments.
This would need the customer’s agreement in advance and for a preferred CDP to be identified at the
point of sale, to be used by the carrier in the event of the failed first-time delivery.
Quantifying CO2 implications from using alternative collection/delivery points (CDPs)
The type of alternative CDP and typical distances from a consumers home are listed in Table 4, after
Song et al. (2009) who looked at the impacts on householder collection mileage from using different
densities of CDP across West Sussex. The increased CO2 per average drop (compared with a
successful standard delivery) reflects the additional distance travelled when a parcel carrier deviates
from a round to drop failed deliveries at the CDP before returning to base. It was assumed that no
deliveries were taken back to the depot, as they would either be delivered to the intended recipient
first-time or taken to their nearest CDP, for the customer to collect. Extending an average delivery
round by 6.5km to deposit failed deliveries at a Tesco Extra store would result in each drop being
allocated an extra 23gCO2 while the relatively short additional mileage to a post office (1.2km) would
add just 4gCO2 to each drop. The carrier benefits from having denser networks of CDPs as this
minimises the length of the diversions that vehicle make in the event of delivery failures.
The results suggested that compared with a standard failed delivery
4
, all the alternative CDPs offered
significant CO2 reductions due to the consumer having to travel less distance (on average) to collect
failed first-time deliveries, against travelling to the carriers local depot. Even greater CO2 savings
could be achieved by incorporating a collection into a normal travel routine. Belet et al. (2009)
reported that end consumers could reduce CO2 emissions per parcel by as much as 83% when items
were retrieved from CDPs as part of a trip chain.
Overall, the results suggested that the local post office was the most environmentally-favourable
location for a CDP, as a package left there would be responsible for just 13% of the CO2 generated by
a collection from a carriers local depot. This reflects the relatively high density of post offices and
short average distance to customershomes (1.2km) across the sample West Sussex householders.
A high proportion of customers can walk to post-offices to collect packages, and 40% of householders
in the West Sussex sample stated that walking would be their preferred mode to collect packages from
their local CDP (Song et al., 2009). Additional CO2 emissions associated with the walking trip are very
difficult to calculate and are normally excluded from carbon auditing calculations.
Rail commuters could also collect packages from railway stations as part of their daily commute, in
effect eliminating the additional customer trip to the CDP. Large supermarkets as potential CDPs,
although located the greatest distance from the average householder (6.5km), are regular destinations
for shoppers and the collection of a failed delivery could easily be incorporated into a more general
grocery trip (with minimal additional travel on the part of the consumer). Moreover, unlike post offices,
many of the larger supermarkets have extended (and sometimes 24-hour) opening hours.
CO2 per
average
drop
(including
additional
km to
C/DP)
CO2 for consumer trip
to Collection/Delivery
Points
Car Bus
% CO2 per
C/DP drop
compared
with
traditional
delivery
Type of
collection/delivery
point
Average
distance
(km) from
customer’s
home
Tesco Extra
6.5
204g
1,349g
581g
47%
Other supermarkets1
1.6
186g
332g
143g
16%
Average supermarket
4.0
195g
830g
357g
31%
Post office
1.2
185g
249g
107g
13%
Railway station
3.2
192g
664g
664g
26%
1From ASDA, Morrison, Sainsbury, Waitrose
4
The calculation for a standard failed delivery assumes 30% of first-time deliveries fail, 50% of the re-attempts
fail and a customer, having been notified of the unsuccessful second delivery attempt, makes a 15km trip by car
to collect the package from the holding local depot.
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
Table 4: Emissions (gCO2) per consumer trip to alternative CDPs
Conclusions
Various traditional failed delivery scenarios have been examined, based on different realistic failure
rates for home delivery. When only the freight component of failed delivery is assessed, the additional
CO2 from the second delivery attempt increased the emissions per drop by between 9 and 75%.
However, the vast majority of emissions associated with traditional failed delivery arise from the
personal trip to the local depot by an individual collecting the missed package. In the worst case
scenario, 8,300gCO2 is produced by a car journey of 40km to a parcel carrier’s depot, which is
equivalent to 26 re-delivery attempts by a delivery van. In addition to the environmental effects, these
collection trips are inconvenient and costly for the customer.
As a result, viable alternative delivery methods have the support of consumers: 78% of respondents
said that they would use a carbon-friendly delivery alternative over a traditional method when available
(IMRG, 2008). This research has highlighted the potential CO2 savings from the use of alternative
CDPs for failed deliveries. Supermarkets, railway stations and post offices each offer distinctive
benefits for consumers, and all lessen the CO2 emissions from failed home deliveries. Post offices,
owing to their extensive network, present the greatest savings. It should be remembered that smaller
CDPs (e.g. post offices and corner shops) have limited capacity for receiving packages and if such a
system was to be adopted more widely, particularly as a first-time delivery address, storage, handling
and security issues might arise.
While the research presented here considers only the potential CO2 savings for failed deliveries, CDPs
can also be well-positioned to receive products that consumers are returning. To date the take-up of
alternative CDPs has been slow, though with potentially a million online shoppers a year having to
collect orders that carriers were not able to delivery to the home (Department for Transport, 2009),
CDPs could make a major contribution to reducing the environmental impact of online shopping.
References
Clements, A. (2005), Nobody home, Retail Week, pp.22-23, 4 March 2005.
Bearbox (2004), Available online at http://www.bearbox.com/, accessed on 6 October
2005.
Belet, P., W.Mensaert, l.Sys & S.Verstrepen (2009), Carbon footprint comparison of
parcel delivery via pick-up points versus home delivery: Case Kiala Belgium, Green
Transportation & Logistics Summit, Brussels, March 18th, 2009.
Beveridge, I. (2007), Personal Communications, Meeting with Beveridge Associates,
19th July 2007.
ByBox (2004), Available online at http://www.bybox.com/, accessed on 6 October
2005.
Chopra, S. & P.Meindl (2003), Supply Chain Management, Upper Saddle River, NJ,
Prentice Hall.
Defra (2008), Guidelines for Company Reporting on Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
Annexes, updated April 2008.
Defra (2007), Passenger transport emissions factors, Methodology Paper, June 2007.
Department for Transport (2009), Public experiences of home working and internet
shopping, Department for Transport: London.
Edwards, J.B., A.C.McKinnon & S.L.Cullinane (2009), Carbon Auditing the ‘Last
Mile’: Modelling the Environmental Impacts of Conventional and Online Non-food
Shopping, Green Logistics Report, Heriot-Watt University.
Freight Transport Association (2007), The Manager’s Guide to Distribution Costs,
FTA.
Giraffe Marketing (2004), Available online at http://www.hippo-box.co.uk/, accessed
on 10 October 2005.
IMRG (2006), Valuing Home Delivery; A CostBenefit Analysis, IMRG, London.
IMRG (2008), Valuing Home Delivery; E-retail Industry Review, IMRG, London.
Published in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Logistics Research Network 2009
edited by Whiteing, A, University of Leeds.
McKinnon, A.C. & D.Tallam (2003), Unattended delivery to the home: assessment of
the security implications, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,
Vol.31, No.1, pp.30-41.
McLeod, F. & T.J.Cherrett (2006), Optimising vehicles undertaking waste collection,
Final report for the Department for Transport, September 2006, unpublished,
Department for Transport, London.
McLeod, F. & T.J.Cherrett (2009), Quantifying the environmental benefits of
collection/delivery points, Journal of Operational Research Society (forthcoming).
National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (2008), Vehicle Emissions, Version 8,
NAEI.
Prologis (2008), Internet Retailing: Opportunities and Challenges for the UK’s
Distribution Property Markets, Prologis Supply Chain Research Reports, Winter 2008.
Retail Logistics Task Force (2001), @ Your Home: New Markets for Customer
Service and Delivery, Foresight Programme, Department of Trade and Industry,
London, (available online at http://www.foresight.gov.uk. accessed 09/02/2005).
Road Haulage Association (2008), RHA Cost Tables 2008, RHA.
Royal Mail (2007), Home Shopper Tracker 2007, RAPID Marketing Services.
Song, L. (2008), Transport and Environmental Impacts of Current Home Delivery
Services and the Benefits of Alternative Measures, PhD Thesis, Faculty of Engineering,
Science and Mathematics, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University
of Southampton.
Song, L., T.Cherrett, F.McLeod & W.Guan (2009), Addressing the last mile problem
the transport impacts of collection / delivery points, paper given to the 88th Annual
Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
Turner, M.W. (2007), Sorry, we tried to deliver but you weren’t in’ – Quantifying the impacts
of failed first time deliveries, MSc Transportation Planning and Engineering Dissertation,
School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton.
Webster, B. (2007), Boom in Internet Shopping may be adding to Carbon Dioxide
Emissions, The Times, 7th July 2007.
Weltevreden, J.W. & T.O.Rotem-Mindali (2008), Mobility effects of b2c and c2c e-
commerce: A literature review and assessment, Working First Version, Netherlands
Institute of Spatial Research.
.
... Second and third delivery attempts, when the customer is not at home, double, triple the impact on logistics and the impact on the environment [13]. ...
... Collecting a product from someone's home is problematic, there is no infrastructure to support the operation, and companies deal directly with the end consumer. This information is confirmed by [13,74]. The authors list the lack of formal procedures for product returns as one of the major obstacles to RL practices. ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study is to trace the processes behind the elaboration of the product page and map the shopping journey to identify ways to reduce returns. This is a qualitative study conducted in three stages: exploratory interviews with users, semi-structured interviews with e-commerce and logistics specialists, and directed storytelling sessions with users. Our findings indicate that the e-commerce specialists are not fully aware of the impacts caused by the high return rates, and product presentation pages are therefore not elaborated to provide users with all the information necessary to make accurate purchases. Sellers should improve product presentation pages to increase product knowledge by providing tools to enhance quality mental imagery. Additionally, sellers should inform consumers of the impact of their shipping options and returning habits. There are ways to optimize logistics processes to reduce the environmental impact. Prior research has addressed these issues separately. Besides, have addressed mental imagery to increase sales. This study brings a holistic approach and brings mental imagery as a tool to provide users with more information about a product.
... Deliverers store parcels at a depot station near a customer's address when home deliveries fail, and customers pick up their products later. In addition, delivery time can be reduced by visiting a proximity point during the night when traffic volume is low [62]. ...
... Integrating proximity stations/points into the existing Improvement of delivery time, increase in average travel speed, and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by using proximity stations/points [62] LML Modular bento-box system for customer pickup [63] Identifying potential locations for proximity stations/points Network min-cost flow problem with pick-own-parcel stations to maximize resources using a collaborative approach [64] Evaluation of using parcel lockers in the Polish InPost Company system [26] Routing problem for last mile delivery hubs Location-routing model to determine the placement of last mile delivery hubs [65,66] Development of a hybrid genetic algorithm to efficiently solve the computational complexity issue of the location-routing problem with large-size instances for LML hubs [67] Development of a two-stage stochastic travel time model to solve a delivery VRP to the set of final customer's homes and the set of hub locations for pickup stores [68] Hub location problems can be also applied to properly address the location of proximity stations and/or points and to consolidate last mile deliveries across urban areas that can reduce traffic and cut greenhouse gas emissions (see Table 4). Depending on the type of demand allocation for final customers, a last mile hub location problem can be partitioned into single and multiple allocation problems. ...
Article
Full-text available
One of the most challenging problems in last mile logistics (LML) has been the strategic delivery due to various market risks and opportunities. This paper provides a systematic review of LML-related studies to find current issues and future opportunities for the LML service industry. To that end, 169 works were selected as target studies for in-depth analysis of recent LML advances. First, text mining analysis was performed to effectively understand the underlying LML themes in the target studies. Then, the novel definition and typology of LML delivery services were suggested. Finally, this paper proposed the next generation of LML research through advanced delivery technique-based LML services, environmentally sustainable LML systems, improvement of LML operations in real industries, effective management of uncertainties in LML, and LML delivery services for decentralized manufacturing services. We believe that this systematic literature review can serve as a useful tool for LML decision makers and stakeholders.
... There are currently few studies on the comparative environmental impacts of different shipping options offered by e-commerce platforms. The existing literature has focused on the carbon implications of short-haul domestic deliveries and has mainly sought to identify more sustainable alternatives that can reduce the impact on the environment (4,(11)(12)(13)(14). In comparison with domestic deliveries, cross-border deliveries are more carbon-intensive because of their longer and more complex supply chain operation (15). ...
... For the last-mile delivery to a consumer's home or CP (stages D and E), conventional diesel delivery vans are assumed to be used for transporting parcels from the warehouses to their destinations. This research utilizes the carbon audit approach employed by Edward et al., where carbon emissions for last-mile deliveries are calculated on a per drop basis (11). ''Average emissions per drop'' refers to the average carbon emissions sustained by the carrier per parcel delivered. ...
Article
Full-text available
In the bid to stay competitive, online shopping platforms often offer a variety of shipping options to meet the preferences of consumers. While faster delivery might be desirable for consumers, this may be detrimental to the environment. Limited studies have evaluated the comparative environmental impact of different shipping options offered by e-commerce platforms. To fill this gap, this study aims to conduct a comparative carbon footprint assessment of the shipping options available in Taobao, a highly popular Chinese online shopping website. The case of cross-border e-commerce is evaluated, where goods are ordered from China to Singapore as the shipment destination. Thereafter, a shipping choice preference survey is conducted to evaluate the impact of carbon labelling on consumers’ shipping preferences. From the perspective of the consumer, when offered a variety of shipping options to choose from, there is always a trade-off between the cost and the speed of delivery. Additional information on the carbon impact of different options could influence consumers’ decision-making. The shipping options from Taobao are referenced to determine the cost, speed, and carbon emission values for the scenarios presented in the survey. Out of 188 survey respondents, slightly more than half (55%) were found to be willing to compromise the speed of delivery for a less carbon-intensive alternative. Given this finding, the study advocates for carbon labelling to be introduced for e-commerce shipping options.
... Another problem is the costs and emissions of delivery trips that are performed in vain due to consumers who are not at home (Gevaers et al., 2011). Researchers found that the amount of CO2 emissions rises on average by about 15% per extra delivery attempt (Edwards et al., 2009). Finally, the increased demand for deliveries has put a strain on employees, who have little time to deliver many parcels -especially during festive periods (Kuunders, 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
In the Netherlands, as in many other densely populated countries, home delivery is the dominant way of delivering online ordered parcels. This is mainly because big retail companies offer this delivery option for free. Due to the expansion of e-commerce, home delivery that typically makes use of diesel vans puts increasing pressure on logistics service providers, their employees, traffic, and the environment. Increased use of service points or parcel lockers could relieve some of this pressure, but these delivery alternatives are barely used by Dutch consumers. The goal of this paper is to better understand how consumers can be stimulated to use pick-up points and in particular parcel lockers. To achieve this goal, a stated choice experiment was conducted among Dutch e-commerce consumers, in which they made choices between home delivery, service point, and parcel locker alternatives that systematically varied in costs, delivery moment, and distance. The application of the model to predict choices under a number of scenarios makes clear that even a small increase in home delivery costs together with an expansion of parcel lockers that decreases the distance to the parcel lockers, could severely reduce the choice for home delivery: home delivery is predicted to reduce from 71% to only 7%. This suggests that there is potential for breaking through the dominance of home delivery.
... The use of stations or proximity points is an innovative strategy to improve the efficiency of lastmile delivery, especially for the distribution of small and medium-sized goods. This approach is based on the use of a drop-off station where goods can be stored when customers are not at home until they can pick them up, thereby reducing costs and avoiding the risk of delivery failure (Edwards, 2009). ...
Article
Full-text available
Defining a public policy for vaccination against Covid-19 is one thing, ensuring its proper execution is another. Faced with the complexity of delivering millions of doses, only national and transversal coordination will ensure a smooth vaccination campaign. [The risk of queues, shortages of doses, unused stocks ordered, trafficking in vaccines by ill-intentioned individuals... Never has the proper execution of a public policy been so crucial" (GSS, 2020). Hence the great attention given by practitioners and researchers to the question of the efficiency of logistics related to the distribution of Covid-19 vaccines and the logistics of the last mile. What are the prospective applications of the delivery of anti-Covid-19 vaccines as a public health issue with strong constraints for logisticians and transporters? This is the issue to which this article attempts to provide an answer. Based on a prospective approach to national and international best practices, the research highlights the unavoidable antecedents and irreducible best practices to be adopted by the players in the logistics of the last mile of vaccine distribution in Morocco. These include the development of micro-consolidation platforms, innovative vehicles, collaboration and cooperation in urban logistics, the adoption of innovative distribution modes (UAV, underground driving) and the application of digital technology.
... Parcel lockers also increase the consolidation of deliveries [7,9,12,[15][16][17], decrease the number of drop-off points [16], decrease the vehicle kilometer traveled (VKT) [14,18,19] and decrease delivery cost [8,9,13,20,21]. From an environmental viewpoint, authors have stated that parcel lockers are more sustainable [22], and reduce exhaust emissions [6,8,12,17,23,24], transport-related noise [6] and traffic jams [6]. Only Arnold et al. [25] concluded that, based on a simulation study, parcel lockers reduce the operational costs but increase the external costs. ...
Article
Full-text available
Global concerns about the environmental effects (e.g., pollution, land use, noise) of last-mile deliveries are increasing. Parcel lockers are seen as an option to reduce these external effects of last-mile deliveries. The contributions of this paper are threefold: firstly, the research studies simulating the emissions caused by parcel delivery to lockers are summarized. Secondly, a demand model for parcel deliveries in New York City (NYC) is created for 365 days and delivery trips to lockers and homes are optimized for 20 “real-world” scenarios. Thirdly, using the emission factors included in the HandBook Emission Factors for Road Transport (HBEFA) database, the maximum percentage of customers who could pick up a parcel by car from parcel lockers that would result in fewer total emissions (driving customers + walking customers) than if home deliveries were adopted is calculated for various pollutants and scenario assumptions (i.e., street types, temperature, parking duration, level of service and vehicle drivetrain). This paper highlights how small changes in the calibration can significantly change the results and therefore using average values for emission factors or only considering one pollutant like most studies may not be appropriate.
... In all of these cases, it is reasonable to count a delivery attempt as failed since this immediately requires an additional effort. Edwards et al. (2009) report on failed first-time delivery attempts in the magnitude of 10% to 50% where specific delivery times were not prearranged. More recent numbers of Okholm et al. (2013) show an average of 12% and a maximum of more than 50% failed first-time delivery attempts for CEP deliveries in the European Union. ...
... Collection-and-delivery points (CDPs), defined as third-party locations that provide consumers with an opportunity to collect parcels from (or deliver parcels to), have been viewed as a sustainable means of delivering goods bought online in many European countries (e.g., Germany, France, UK, and the Netherlands) [21,22] and parts of Latin America (e.g., Brazil) [23][24][25]. Two types of CDPs have been used in practice, namely, service points (i.e., local shops, convenience stores, fuel stations, news agents, etc.) and locker points (i.e., communal locker boxes located at places such as parking lots, bus terminals, etc.). ...
Article
Full-text available
The current and projected trends of growth in online shopping might change the activity and travel patterns in Christchurch, one of the largest cities in New Zealand. Online shopping might reduce consumers’ shopping trips, but it has substantially increased courier companies’ trips to deliver parcels to the end-consumers, because a considerable proportion of parcels are often required to be redelivered due to consumers not being at home during the first delivery attempt. This also adds to the operational cost of courier companies and adverse traffic impacts. To mitigate these issues, Collection-and-Delivery Points (CDPs) have recently been introduced in New Zealand, on a trial basis. This study aims to identify the optimal density and locations for establishing CDPs in Christchurch, using a modified p-median location-allocation (LA) model. A consumer-centric approach to locating CDPs has been adopted by considering the socio-demographic characteristics of Christchurch’s residents and the distances to/from CDPs. Non-traditional CDP locations (e.g. supermarkets and dairies) were considered as potential candidate facilities and were found to be more suitable as CDPs than traditional post shops. Based on consumers’ shopping pattern, supermarkets appeared to be the most frequently visited and preferred type of facility to be used as CDPs. However, the results of the LA analyses show that dairies are the most accessible locations, and CDPs at dairies located within two kilometres will encourage consumers to walk and cycle to receive their parcels from CDPs. The results suggest the optimal location configuration for each type of facility considered, based on their spatial distribution in the city.
Chapter
Full-text available
Das Thema Last Mile umfasst eine Fülle von Methoden und Technologien sowie von Erfahrungen mit neuen technisch-organisatorischen Lösungen. Diese sind der jeweiligen unternehmerischen Situation anzupassen und zur optimalen Last Mile zu kombinieren. Die Herausforderung für die beteiligten Akteure besteht darin, neue Technologien situativ und unter Berücksichtigung der Kundensicht in entsprechende Gesamtkonzepte einzubetten. Last Mile ist zu einem der Brennpunkte des Digital Business geworden. Es sind wichtige Kontaktpunkte zum Kunden betroffen, die über die klassischen Logistikfunktionen hinaus zu gestalten sind. Optimale Customer Touchpoints gehören zu den kritischen Erfolgsfaktoren der beteiligten Unternehmen. Schwachstellen im Bereich der Last Mile - und auch in anderen Bereichen der Digitalisierung - können sich in Krisensituationen für die betroffenen Unternehmen existenzbedrohend auswirken.
Thesis
Full-text available
This thesis explores to what extent electronic commerce (e-commerce) might present a potential for reduction in passenger-transport related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, by use of numerical evaluation of a theoretical model of last mile transit for e-commerce and individual shopping trips for conventional commerce. E-commerce has grown exponentially since the beginning of the 21st century which consequently has resulted in increased CO2 emissions due to higher delivery frequency. While several studies have concluded that e-commerce is a more likely sustainable shopping mode than conventional commerce, studies considering changed shopping activity as a result of e-commerce are ambiguous. This thesis therefore aims to diminish knowledge gaps by simulating scenarios on how changed transport activity affect the CO2 emissions due to shifting consumption patterns. This study moves beyond the current literature by including three categories of interactions between e-commerce and personal travel behaviour into a theoretical model of last-mile transport informed by previous literature and evaluates the model numerically using a case study of Austria. The categories are substitution (elimination of shopping trips), generation (stimulation of shopping trips that would otherwise not have been made), and modification (when characteristics of a shopping trips changes, which in this study considers transportation mode only). A sensitivity analysis was conducted by stimulating three types of scenarios, in urban and rural areas, respectively: best-case scenario (no occurred failed delivery nor customer return), moderate-case scenario (failed delivery by 10 %) and worst-case scenario (failed delivery by 20 % and occurred customer return). The results emphasise the importance of transportation mode and travel behaviour. In order to avoid an increase of CO2, a minimum of 0 to 10 % more substitution than generation, and between 20 to 60 % of modification (depending on scenario and area) are required.
Article
Full-text available
Using a node-based routing and scheduling package, this paper estimates the environmental impacts of using a local railway station as a collection/delivery point (CDP) for small parcel transactions. This delivery option was compared with a typical existing situation where some customers who suffer a failed home delivery attempt decide to travel to the carrier's depot to collect their goods. The modelled results suggested that, at a 20 per cent take-up level, the CDP method would reduce the carbon monoxide emissions associated with the deliveries by around 20 per cent and other emissions (nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, carbon dioxide and hydrocarbons) by between 13 per cent and 15 per cent, with higher savings at higher take-up levels. The customer mileage attributable to the collection was modelled to reduce by up to 33 per cent. Modest travel savings were also found for the carrier.
Thesis
p>Home shopping and delivery services offer customers the opportunity to purchase goods and receive deliveries to their home rather than having to travel to high-street stores. Given the promising future of home shopping and delivery market, many efforts have been devoted to solving the problems currently encountered by service providers and customers which include unsecured deliveries, first-time delivery failures, demands for faster delivery, and product returns. Of major concern in this research are the implications of home delivery failures when there is nobody in to receive the package at the delivery address. Collection/delivery point (CDP) systems are one of the emerging solutions to mitigate failed home deliveries, in which CDPs are used as alternative addresses to receive the packages. Particularly focused on the small package home shopping market, this research has identified and modelled the existing home delivery and CDP methods. The carrier and customers travelling distance incurred in each delivery method was compared. It was then possible to quantify whether the CDP method is an economic solution to improve home delivery operations and the environment. A six-step research method was then developed to achieve those research objectives. Firstly, the existing and emerging home delivery methods were identified from the literature. The second stage consisted of conducting two home delivery surveys in Winchester and West Sussex, respectively. The surveys were'used to identify the home shopping and delivery characteristics of customers. In the third research step, the</p
Nobody home, Retail Week
  • A Clements
 Clements, A. (2005), Nobody home, Retail Week, pp.22-23, 4 March 2005.
The Manager's Guide to Distribution Costs, FTA
 Freight Transport Association (2007), The Manager's Guide to Distribution Costs, FTA.
Optimising vehicles undertaking waste collection, Final report for the Department for Transport
  • F T J Mcleod
  • Cherrett
 McLeod, F. & T.J.Cherrett (2006), Optimising vehicles undertaking waste collection, Final report for the Department for Transport, September 2006, unpublished, Department for Transport, London.
Sorry, we tried to deliver but you weren't in' -Quantifying the impacts of failed first time deliveries', MSc Transportation Planning and Engineering Dissertation
  • M W Turner
 Turner, M.W. (2007), 'Sorry, we tried to deliver but you weren't in' -Quantifying the impacts of failed first time deliveries', MSc Transportation Planning and Engineering Dissertation, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton.