how to improve the eco-efficiency of urban goods distribution romeo danielis - università di...

How to improve the eco-efficiency of urban goods distribution

Romeo Danielis - Università di TriesteLucia Rotaris - Università di TriesteEdoardo Marcucci - Università di Urbino

Nectar Cluster 1 - Seminar "From sustainability to ecoefficiency in transportation”, 15th – 16th October 2005 , Fiesole, Firenze (Italy)

Urban goods distribution

city logistics: the possibility of co-ordinating urban goods storage and distribution, as an alternative to the prevailing organization base on individual decision makers

Motivations Pollution Noise Safety Intrusion Congestion Energy saving Transport cost High share of commercial traffic Low load factor Lack of loading\unloading facilities High proportion of own account transport Re-balancing between commercial and transport

activities Political considerations

Conflicting views and interestsi

Transport operators: cost, time and flexibility

Economic activities: efficiency, lead time, security

Consumers: cost, diffusion, variety Citizens (socio-economic): minimum

impact on other urban activities and functions

Decision-making with conflicting goals and uncertainty

Local administrators takes decisions facing Conflicting interests conflittuali (times,

loading\unloading areas, size and type of vehicles, size and storage facilities, pedestrian areas, public transport)

Tastes uncertainty (e-commerce) Technological uncertainty (fuels) Behavioural uncertainty (acceptance of

road pricing measure)

Suggestions from economic theory

Theoretical motivations for public intervention – Areas of improvement with respect to the status quo situation

1. Externalities A. environmentalB. congestion

2. Insufficient consolidation 3. Inefficiencies in the supply chain

1A - Environmental externalities

Pollution, noise, visual intrusion, safety Borne by all citizens Many contributers Awareness, free riding incentive Public intervention needed (no private

cost advantages ) Regulation Fiscal pollicies

Revenue ear-marking

1B. Congestion Externalities

Mainly within the transport system Borne directly by transport operators and

indirectly by shopkeepers and consumers Private cost advantages, possibly

transferred to consumers

Insufficient consolidation Foregone economies of scale and scope It is necessary to distinguish between for-hire

and own account transport Own\account is farther from optimality Third-party transport might face

coordination cost and lack of information (vehicle planning and routing)

Inadequate firms’ dimension Excess competion

Inefficiencies in supply chain

Co-ordination among the actors (producer, wholesale, trasport operators, retailer, consumer).

Various difficulties: information, conflict of interest, communication.

Decision-support tools from economic and engineering sciences

Models and analysis

Forecasting and simulation models of flows, routes, etc.

Preference analysis Behavioural studies Economic and land use models

Intermediate conclusions

Difficult task for local administrators Knowledge of conflictiing interests

and goals Information, monitoring,

experimentation, partecipation

Policy options

Regulation

Road pricing

Urban distribution center

Regulation: description

Access restrictions to the urban area, or to the loading/unloading area located within the urban perimeter, according to:

the characteristics of the vehicle (length, width, height);

the time during which those activities are performed;

the truck routes.

Regulation: issues Enforcement and enforcement cost Costs imposed on transport operators

and retailers Co-ordination with urban planning Flexibility and heterogeneity among

cities

Regulation: costs and benefits

Tab. - 1 – Impacts of different regulation policies on the involved stakeholders

Public Administration

costs Transport

operator costs Retailer costs

Negative externalities

reduction

Vehicle characteristics

+ +++ + ↓ emissions,

noise, impact on buildings

Time window + ++ +++ ↓ congestion Low Emission

Zones + + ++

↓ emissions , congestion

Regulation: innovations

Optimization technology Reserved lanes shared with public

transport

Road pricing: description

Polluter pays principle Loading factor Vehicle type route

Objectives: Congestion reduction revenue raising Modal transfer

Road pricing: discussion

Passenger and freight transport? Relative fee Implementing an efficiency-inducing fee Effect on congestion Who bears the fee

Trasport operators, retailers or consumers? Spatial effect (urban sprawling) Acceptabilty

Urban distribution Centers: definition

Freight platforms o Freight villages Urban distribution Centers(UDC):

French Model Dutch Model German Model

Urban distribution Centers: costs and benefits

Tab. – 3 – UDC costs and benefits distribution among the involved stakeholders

COSTS

UDC owner /

operator Transport operators Retailers Residents

Land, infrastructure, maintenance, management X Higher transaction costs X X Loading\unloading costs X No customer assistance X X New logistic organization of each supply chain stakeholder X Higher negative externalities around the UDC X BENEFITS Lower urban negative externalities X Lower interurban delivery time X Lower transaction costs X

Urban distribution centers: issues

Type of goods Location Management Acceptability Efficiency and financial sustainability

Volumes User fees

Urban distribution Centers: volumes

How to create volume: Authoritarian

Total access restriction Discouraging:

Regulation and\or pricing Partnerships

With transport operators Spontaneous

Efficiency and higher services

Urban distribution Centers: international experiences

Delusion and doubts on economic sustainability

Successes and failures Optimization issues

Compatibility with private optimization efforts

Conclusions

Tab. - 4 – Critical issues and potentialities of each group of policy measures Pros Cons Issues

Regulation Management Lower incentives Characteristics of city, transport operators, …

Road pricing Strong incentives, Funds

Localization, acceptability City dimension, fee level

UDCs Efficiency road

network and fleet Volumes, management,

investments Optimization supply chain

Acceptability of policy measures

Stakeholders’ preferences for UDC (Regan and Golob, 2005)

Interactive Agent Conjoint Analysis (David Henher, 2003) of stakeholder preferences for policy measures

Thanks for your attention!

Respect of rules

Rules in some Italian citiesTab. - 2 – Regulation heterogeneity among some Italian cities Bologna Brescia Firenze Roma Siena Piacenza LTZ 7-20 0-24 7:30-19:30 6:30-18 n/a 8-19

Cost of the access license

X X X X X n.a.

Time windows with access license

n.a. 9:30-12; 14-16

7:30-9:30; 15-16:30

X X X

Dedicated loading/unloading areas

X X X X X X

Time limits for loading/unloading operations

X X n.a. X n.a. X

Weight restriction >80 q. n.a. >35 q. >35 q. >35 q. >35 q. Exemption for low impact vehicles

X n.a. X X n.a.

Rules in the city of Cordoba

Automatic control system in Barcellona

Shared reserved lanes in Barcellona