The milk run revisited: A load factor paradox with economic and environmental implications for urban freight transport

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

Volumn 51, Issue , 2013, Pages 56-62

  Arvidsson, Niklas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Load factor; Paradox; Sustainability; Urban freight; Vehicle utilization

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; DAIRIES; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; URBAN TRANSPORTATION; VEHICLES;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS; LOAD FACTORS; PARADOX; URBAN DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS; URBAN FREIGHT; VEHICLE UTILIZATION;

FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION;

ACCESS RESTRICTION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; FREIGHT TRANSPORT; PLANNING METHOD; POLICY APPROACH; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; RESEARCH WORK; SUSTAINABILITY; TRANSPORTATION ECONOMICS;

EID: 84877666786     PISSN: 09658564     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2013.04.001     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Afimeimounga H., Solomon W., Ziedins I. The downs-thomson paradox: existence, uniqueness and stability of user equilibria. Queueing Systems 2005, 49:321-334.
2. Allen J., Browne M., Piotrowska M., Woodburn A. Freight Quality Partnerships in the UK: An Analysis of Their Work and Achievements, Green Logistics Report 2010, University of Westminster, London.
3. Arnott R., Small K. The economics of traffic congestion. American Scientist 1994, 82:446-455.
4. Arvidsson N., Woxenius J., Lammgård C. Review of road hauliers' measures for increasing transport efficiency and sustainability in urban freight distribution. Transport Reviews: A Transnational Transdisciplinary Journal 2013, 33:107-127.
5. Banister D., Button K.J., Button K. Transport, the Environment and Sustainable Development 1993, E & FN Spon.
6. Bayliss D. Urban transport research priorites. Transportation 1977, 6:3-17.
7. Bektaş T., Laporte G. The pollution-routing problem. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2011, 45:1232-1250.
8. Boyer K.K., Prud'homme A.M., Chung W. The last mile challenge: evaluating the effects of customer density and delivery window patterns. Journal of Business Logistics 2009, 30:185-201.
9. Braess D. Uber ein paradoxen der verkehrsplanung. Unternehmensforschung 1968, 12:258-268.
10. Braess D., Nagurney A., Wakolbinger T. On a paradox of traffic planning. Transportation Science 2005, 39:446-450.
11. Browne, M., Allen, J., Woodburn, A., Piotrowska, M., 2007. Literature Review WM9: Part II - Light Goods Vehicles in Urban Areas, Carried as part Work Module 1. Green Logistics Project, English.
12. Cherrett T., Allen J., Mcleod F., Maynard S., Hickford A., Browne M. Understanding urban freight activity - key issues for freight planning. Journal of Transport Geography 2012, 24:22-32.
13. Chopra S., Meindl P. Supply Chain Management: Strategy, Planning, and Operation 2007, Pearson Prentice Hall.
14. Cidell J. Concentration and decentralization: the new geography of freight distribution in US metropolitan areas. Journal of Transport Geography 2010, 18:363-371.
15. Crainic T.G., Ricciardi N., Storchi G. Advanced freight transportation systems for congested urban areas. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 2004, 12:119-137.
16. Dablanc L. Goods transport in large European cities: difficult to organize, difficult to modernize. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2007, 41:280-285.
17. Dablanc L., Rakotonarivo D. The impacts of logistics sprawl: how does the location of parcel transport terminals affect the energy efficiency of goods' movements in Paris and what can we do about it?. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2010, 2:6087-6096.
18. Dablanc, L., Ross, C., in press. Atlanta: a mega logistics center in the Piedmont Atlantic Megaregion (PAM). Journal of Transport Geography.
19. Danielis R., Rotaris L., Marcucci E. Urban freight policies and distribution channels. European Transport Trasporti Europein 2010, 46:114-146.
20. De Magalhães D.J.a.V. Urban freight transport in a metropolitan context: the Belo Horizonte city case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2010, 2:6076-6086.
21. Gaines L., Levinson T. Idling - Cruising the Fuel Inefficiency Highway 2011, Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), United States.
22. Gaines L., Vyas A., Anderson J.L. Estimation of fuel use by idling commercial trucks. Transportation Research Record. Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2006, 1983(1):91-98.
23. Geroliminis N., Daganzo C. A Review of Green Logistics Schemes Used in Cities Around the World 2005, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California.
24. Gonzalez-Feliu J., Salanova J.-M. Defining and evaluating collaborative urban freight transportation systems. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2012, 39:172-183.
25. Goodman R.W. Whatever you call it, just don't think of last-mile logistics, last. Global Logistics and Supply Chain Strategies 2005, Keller International Publishing Corporation.
26. Hall R.W. Consolidation strategy: inventory, vehicles and terminals. Journal of Business Logistics 1987, 8:57-73.
27. Holden E., Linnerud K. Troublesome leisure travel: the contradictions of three sustainable transport policies. Urban Studies 2011, 48:3087-3106.
28. Kara, I, Kara, B., Yetis, M., 2007. Energy Minimizing Vehicle Routing Problem Combinatorial Optimization and Applications. In: Dress, A., Xu, Y., Zhu, B. (Eds.), Springer Berlin, Heidelberg.
29. Kawamura K. Empirical examination of the relationship between firm location and transportation facilities. Transportation Research Record 2001, 1747:97-103.
30. 2 efficiency in road freight transportation: Status quo, measures and potential. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2004, 9:451-464.
31. Liimatainen H., Pöllänen M. Trends of energy efficiency in Finnish road freight transport 1995-2009 and forecast to 2016. Energy Policy 2010, 38:7676-7686.
32. Ljungberg D., Gebresenbet G. Mapping out the potential for coordinated goods distribution in city centres: the case of Uppsala. International Journal of Transport Management 2004, 2:161-172.
33. Mårtensson, L., 2003. Emissioner från Volvos lastbilar (Mk1 dieselbränsle). Volvo lastvagnar. (accessed 12.11.20). http://www.rejmes.se/Hem/Nyhetsfiler/emmissioner.pdf.
34. Mckinnon A. Sustainable distribution: opportunities to improve vehicle loading. Industry and Environment 2000, 23:26-30.
35. Morgan J., Orzen H., Sefton M. Network architecture and traffic flows: experiments on the Pigou-Knight-Downs and Braess Paradoxes. Games and Economic Behavior 2009, 66:348-372.
36. Muñuzuri J., Larrañeta J., Onieva L., Cortés P. Solutions applicable by local administrations for urban logistics improvement. Cities 2005, 22:15-28.
37. Muñuzuri, J., Grosso, R., Cortés, P., Guadix, J, in press. Estimating the extra costs imposed on delivery vehicles using access time windows in a city. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems.
38. Nagurney A. Congested urban transportation networks and emission paradoxes. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2000, 5:145-151.
39. Nagurney A. Supernetworks: paradoxes, challenges, and new opportunities. Transforming Enterprise: The Economic and Social Implications of Information Technology 2005, MIT Press. W.H. Dutton (Ed.).
40. Nagurney A., Dong J. Paradoxes in networks with zero emission links: implications for telecommunications versus transportation. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2001, 6:283-296.
41. OECD Delivering the Goods - 21st Century Challenges to Urban Goods Transport 2003, OECD, Paris.
42. Quak H.J., De Koster M.B.M. Delivering goods in urban areas: how to deal with urban policy restrictions and the environment. Transportation Science 2009, 43:211-227.
43. Rodrigue J.-P., Slack B., Comtois C. Green logistics. Handbook of Logistics and Supply Chain Management 2001, Elsevier Science. Button, Brewer, Hensher (Eds.).
44. Rodrigue J.P., Comtois C., Slack B. The Geography of Transport Systems 2009, Routledge, New York.
45. Ryan M.J. The distribution problem, the more for less (nothing) paradox and economies of scale and scope. European Journal of Operational Research 2000, 121:92-104.
46. Sahin B., Yilmaz H., Ust Y., Guneri A.F., Gulsun B. An approach for analysing transportation costs and a case study. European Journal of Operational Research 2009, 193:1-11.
47. SMILE, 2003. City Goods Ordinance (City Gods Ordningen). Copenhagen, Denmark: European Commission. <> (accessed 12.11.20). http://www.managenergy.net/resources/545.
48. START, 2009. Short Term Actions to Reorganize Transport of Goods. Gothenburg: WSP, CIP. <> (accessed 12.11.20). http://www.start-project.org/.
49. Stathopoulos A., Valeri E., Marcucci E. Stakeholder reactions to urban freight policy innovation. Journal of Transport Geography 2012, 22:34-45.
50. Thambiran T., Diab R.D. Air pollution and climate change co-benefit opportunities in the road transportation sector in Durban, South Africa. Atmospheric Environment 2011, 45:2683-2689.
51. Thompson R.G., Hassall K.P. A collaborative urban distribution network. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2012, 39:230-240.
52. Thynell M., Mohan D., Tiwari G. Sustainable transport and the modernisation of urban transport in Delhi and Stockholm. Cities 2010, 27:421-429.
53. Ülkü, M.A., in press. Dare to care: Shipment consolidation reduces not only costs, but also environmental damage. International Journal of Production Economics.
54. Woxenius, J., 2012. Directness as a key performance indicator for freight transport chains. Research in Transportation Economics, 18 April.
55. Xiao Y., Zhao Q., Kaku I., Xu Y. Development of a fuel consumption optimization model for the capacitated vehicle routing problem. Computers and Operations Research 2012, 39:1419-1431.