1 Introduction
The distribution of goods in urban areas is a point of departure in many research papers, in which both its essential character and the many sustainability issues it raises, are acknowledged. Essential, because most goods are not consumed where they are produced, which is particularly true for cities, leading to the necessity to transport large amounts of goods and waste into and out of the city [
33]. Urban freight transport (UFT) contributes to wealth generating activities and the competitiveness of industry [
1], but it also generates negative social and environmental impacts. These impacts include, but are not limited to, fossil fuel consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, noise, road safety and traffic congestion. Moreover, those performing freight transport operations experience problems that relate to traffic flows, transport policy, loading/unloading and customer service, which are considered negative economic impacts [
37]. In order to address these issues, many innovative solutions have been introduced. Most proposals concentrate on enhancing either passenger or freight flows. Given the average passenger car occupancy rate of 1.45, driver included [
49], a significant part of the available transport capacities is not exploited [
2]. The growing interest in shared passenger and freight transportation practices [
31] indicates that an important opportunity could be in combining both.
Crowd logistics (CL) – alternatively termed
crowdshipping,
crowdsourced delivery,
cargohitching or
collaborative logistics – is presented as a promising concept as it encourages passengers to use their spare carrying capacity on cars, bikes, buses and planes to carry parcels for other people [
38]. CL uses the excess capacity on premeditated trips that already take place to make deliveries [
3], leading to maximisation of logistics efficiency and reduction of emissions and traffic [
2‐
9,
23‐
25,
31,
38,
41].
CL relates to the idea of the
physical internet, as well as to the global
sharing economy trend. The physical internet is a concept for freight transportation and logistics, aiming to improve efficiency and sustainability of the way physical objects are moved, stored, realised, supplied and used all across the world by applying concepts from internet data transfer to real-world shipping processes [
8]. The idea is to encapsulate physical objects in modular packets and containers of which the header contains all information required for identifying the packet. These packets and containers are then routed as efficiently as possible so that it absorbs spare capacity in transport systems, ensuring that they get to their destination in time, regardless of the route followed [
38]. CL relates to physical internet because technology enables passengers to use the capacity in their vehicle more efficiently, by carrying parcels for others. Sharing your vehicle with (freight volume of) others makes CL also part of a larger trend of sharing, termed the collaborative or sharing economy, which is a fast-growing sector disrupting mainstream industries [
3,
10]. In the sharing economy, physical assets become services that are redistributed, shared and reused more easily and inexpensively than ever before, thanks to technological advancements [
3,
11]. Vaughan and Daverio [
42] detect a thriving start-up scene for sharing initiatives across Europe and estimate that at least 275 platforms have been founded to date. A survey instructed by the European Commission shows that half of the respondents (52%) have heard of such sharing economy platforms and around two in ten respondents say that they have used them (17%). The most likely users are younger and highly educated respondents who live in urban areas [
43]. The sharing economy affects a variety of sectors, including mobility and transportation, to which CL belongs.
To date, limited scientific research has been done on the potential economic, social and environmental benefits of sharing economy activity in general and CL in particular. Primarily practitioners have been showing interest in CL, resulting in a growing number of start-ups and platforms. Increasingly, concepts are introduced that deviate from the initial idea, to a small extent by allowing considerable detours from the planned journey and, to a larger extent, by depending on dedicated trips. UberRush and Postmates, for example, offer on-demand deliveries. Their couriers make themselves available for a self-chosen period to use their own vehicle to carry out dedicated deliveries [
50‐
52]. This way of working raises the question which types of CL concepts have the ability of increasing urban sustainability of both passenger and freight transport.
To address this question, we combined desk and field research. First, we systematically reviewed the available literature to formulate a comprehensive definition of CL. Second, we defined a set of 18 criteria that characterise the variety of CL concepts. Theoretical insights were verified with 11 semi-structured interviews with practitioners that expressed an interest in using the crowd in their logistics activities. Third, we used the same body of information to evaluate whether these 18 characteristics affect economy, society and environment.
This paper covers a literature discussion in the second section, in which the CL concept is introduced and fit in the
4 A’s of sustainable city distribution framework that classifies innovative city distribution solutions [
12]. The third section clarifies the methodological approach of the research while the fourth section elaborates on research findings. The fifth section discusses these findings and explains final conclusions.
2 Literature
CL originates from the term
crowdsourcing, which covers both the word ‘crowd’ or a mass of people and ‘outsourcing’ or the shift of processes, functions and duties to third parties [
24]. In the transition towards sustainable UFT, CL has the capacity to contribute. Sustainable development is most commonly defined as ‘
meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ [
44]. With this, the joint harmonisation of three issues is implied: economic growth, social equality and protection of environmental resources [
13]. This could also be referred to as the triple-P or triple bottom line of sustainability (People, Profit, Planet) [
34]. For the UFT system to reach comprehensive sustainable development, necessary requirements are economic development and vitality, social well-being and environmental preservation and regeneration [
35].
In economic terms, the success of many sharing economy initiatives indicates the substantial efficiency gains that can be realised [
45]. With regards to logistics, CL provides consumers access to a more extensive range of products [
14] and superior delivery service by being faster [
3,
14,
31], more flexible [
2,
24,
25], more convenient [
23], more personal [
14,
23], traceable in real-time [
15] and better priced [
2,
3,
23]. Businesses benefit from CL since it has the potential to reach a large area [
2,
9], relies upon a flexible workforce [
26] and requires only an asset-light infrastructure that makes investments in vehicle fleet, employees and maintenance redundant [
2,
3,
14,
16,
25,
26]. The crowd is motivated by additional earning opportunities that are flexible, personalised and adaptable to their lifestyle [
2,
23,
25]. From a social point of view, the local character of CL is stressed, enabling the crowd to have personal contact with their neighbourhood and empowering communities [
2,
9,
26]. The most significant contributions of CL are, however, envisioned from an environmental perspective. By utilising existing transportation flows, CL encourages consolidation [
10], leads to more efficient vehicle loads and routes [
2,
7] and reduces traffic, congestion and air polluting emissions [
2‐
8,
23,
25,
31,
41].
Macharis and Kin [
12] propose a classification called the
4 A’s of sustainable city distribution that clusters innovative concepts based on their primary intention: Awareness, Avoidance, Act and shift and Anticipation of new technologies. It could be argued that CL complies with all A’s. First, by involving a crowd of randomly united citizens, awareness is created of the challenges that last mile transportation and home delivery impose on the city. E-commerce and omnichannel retail, which integrates online and offline sales channels, stimulate a rising amount of individual parcels and delivery vans [
17]. At the same time, altered mobility, demographic change and increasing employment reduce the possibility to successfully receive deliveries in person [
28]. This ‘online shopping paradox’ has substantial consequences regarding environment and quality of life, yet it is unlikely that consumers take these into account when placing orders. CL enables consumers to observe the large quantity of parcels that circulates in the neighbourhood, city or region and the spatial opportunities of commuters that move between home and business every day.
Second, by encouraging citizens to make use of the free capacity on a trip that was intended to be made either way, redundant vehicle kilometres of polluting vans can be avoided. Moreover, as citizens are more flexible and interconnected than traditional logistics service providers (LSPs), the number of failed deliveries can be reduced. In addition, integrating the crowd with other initiatives such as small load containers and pick-own-parcel stations potentially provides sustainability advantages in the future [
4,
27].
Third, as citizens are invited to carry a chosen amount of parcels on a chosen time and trajectory, the possibilities for shifting to alternative modes increase considerably. The crowd can opt to deliver a parcel on their daily commute by public transportation or to pick up their neighbours’ parcels and carry out the deliveries by bike or on foot.
Fourth, CL is an evident example of new technologies anticipation and digitalisation, as it is primarily based on exploiting the potential offered by mobile apps, geo-localisation, communication and navigation tools [
14,
23]. Crainic and Montreuil [
8] discuss CL as an example of
hyperconnected city logistics, in which the physical internet concept is applied to urban environments, resulting in interconnected people mobility and freight logistics in the city.
The CL concept exploits a new spirit of collaboration and commercialises social networks in a way that can be beneficial from an economic, social and environmental point of view [
46]. However, as leading enterprises (retailers and LSPs) are embracing this paradigm shift in the distribution of work, by outsourcing to the crowd in the cloud [
18], much of the thinking and discussion about CL has developed from the practitioner’s side [
26]. Examples of such initiatives include
Myways, a terminated pilot project of DHL that was launched in Sweden [
53],
bringr, an experiment by the Belgian postal operation bpost [
54] and efforts of retailer Walmart in the USA, at first with in-store customers that served as crowd, later on in cooperation with CL start-ups
Lyft,
Deliv and
UberRUSH [
55]. The latter example demonstrates the importance for businesses starting up in the increasingly competitive delivery service industry to collaborate with traditional or mature companies. The collaboration between fashion e-retailer Zalando and CL initiative
Trunkrs for last-mile deliveries in Amsterdam possibly fosters advantages for
Trunkrs, such as brand awareness, consumer trust and user generation [
56].
Together with the rise of CL initiatives, the variety of business models that are applied has grown considerably. Some concepts are dependent on a base of regular and flexible ‘crowd workers’, others allow (long) detours or encourage dedicated trips to deliver parcels. This causes discussion about the true capacities of CL to enhance urban sustainability. The research therefore aims to identify the characteristics that describe the various CL concepts and evaluate how these characteristics affect the economic, social and environmental sustainability of the concept. In order to do this, a clear definition of CL is warranted. However, no attempts have been made so far. The only exception being the definition by Mehmann et al. [
24], who claim that ‘
CL designates the outsourcing of logistics services to a mass of actors, whereby the coordination is supported by a technical infrastructure. The aim of CL is to achieve economic benefits for all stake- and shareholders.’ Despite the variety of concepts and utilitarian approaches that exist within the realm of CL, we argue that the objective of economic benefits is too narrow. Therefore, the research aims to develop a suitable and comprehensive definition of CL that captures current and future state of practice.
3 Methodology
The methodological approach includes both desk and field research by means of a systematic literature review (SLR) and semi-structured interviews. A SLR is a systematic, explicit and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating and synthesising the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners [
36]. By reviewing the available scientific literature on CL, we captured the knowledge that is available to date. We used a spreadsheet file to compose a comprehensive analysis of the CL descriptions, defining characteristics, involved parties and their activities, strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, the SLR took stock of all CL examples mentioned, which were examined in an explorative way. Literature was found using Google Scholar, which as an open and extensive database was fit best for researching this novel topic. Furthermore, the online databases of ScienceDirect, Web of Science and Taylor & Francis were checked but did not result in additional material. Several keywords were used and are listed in Table
1.
Table 1
Literature selection keywords and findings (2 February 2017)
Crowdshipping | 37 | “Crowdsourced deliveries” | 10 |
“Crowd logistics” | 34 | “Crowdsourcing delivery” | 18 |
“Crowdsourced delivery” | 33 | “Crowdsourcing deliveries” | 7 |
139
|
The search yielded 139 publications, of which 23 publications were found twice or more. An additional total of 55 publications were found unqualified, as 28 were identified as student thesis; 25 were unrelated to the subject or only mentioned CL in the list of references and 2 were excluded due to language barriers (Swedish and Finnish). Finally, 8 publications could not be accessed (Table
2). The literature search thus provided an input of 42 qualified and accessible papers.
Table 2
Literature selection exclusion criteria (2 February 2017)
Double publication | 23 | Unrelated subject | 25 |
Student thesis | 28 | Inaccessible publication | 8 |
Language barriers | 2 | | |
86
|
Because of the novelty of the topic, the search strategy included journal output but also other types of scientific publications, including conference papers (13), working papers (3), book chapters (3), project reports (1), white papers (1) and semi-scientific magazine articles (2). The 19 journal publications cover a diversity of journals including Transportation Science, International Journal of Web Information Systems, Journal of Cleaner Production and International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. All publications were written in English except for three (French and German). As far as region is concerned, CL is researched all over the globe. Although most research is based in Europe (20), other frequently found regions include Canada (4), Asia (4) and the USA (4). Four publications are located elsewhere (Australia, South-America and West-Africa). The remaining publications (6) could not be geographically classified.
The CL phenomenon is relatively new and understudied. As the systematic literature review indicated that sustainability implications are highly dependent on a number of parameters, we identified a need to involve logistics practitioners. Findings of the SLR provided input for the topic list that guided the semi-structured interviews and were also used as probes for follow-up questions. The findings were, however, not shared with the respondents until all interviews were carried out. Afterwards, the results of both literature and interviews were presented in a general meeting. During the interviews, open questions explored a qualified definition for CL, an analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) of CL from their company’s perspective, interesting CL concepts, current and future CL activities and finally their opinions on the sustainability implications of CL in general and the importance attached to sustainability issues when developing their own CL concept. In this way, we verified theoretical insights with the state of practice.
In total, 11 semi-structured interviews were conducted with practitioners: 8 LSPs, 1 shipper and 2 retailers. The practitioners were selected because of their stated interest in integrating or developing crowd-based activities in their logistics operations. Both size and geographical reach of practitioners differs considerably, from family-owned local business to multinational, but all have a headquarters within Flanders and Brussels capital region, Belgium.
In general terms, the interviewed practitioners agreed on the concept definition of CL. More disagreement was observed concerning the underlying motivations for getting involved in CL: while shipper and retailers were interested in the added value and service it potentially offers, LSPs were motivated by existential considerations and the possibly disruptive character of CL developments. Practitioners’ interest also differed with regards to specific CL concepts, which was in line with core activities and company’s mission and vision. For example, a company with strong environmental efforts envisioned a CL concept in line with these commitments, as opposed to another company in which sustainability is also in its daily activities of minor importance.
Compliant with the CL concept, we created an adapted stakeholder-framework consisting of receivers that receive the goods, commissioners that send the goods, LSPs that execute transportation in the traditional way, platform providers that match all parties and, finally, the crowd. Throughout the interviews, we identified 4 LSPs expressing the ambition to additionally become a platform provider, 2 platform providers that already host a logistics platform but aim to include the crowd and 2 LSPs and 3 commissioners that wish to use the crowd without hosting a platform (see Appendix for a list of interviewees).
5 Conclusion
The goal of this research paper entails to indicate if CL concepts can increase urban transport sustainability, of both passenger and freight flows. By combining desk (systematic literature review of 42 articles) and field research (11 semi-structured interviews), our research concludes with three findings. First, we define CL as ‘an information connectivity enabled marketplace concept that matches supply and demand for logistics services with an undefined and external crowd that has free capacity with regards to time and/or space, participates on a voluntary basis and is compensated accordingly’. Second, we list 18 characteristics able to define and describe the broad variety of CL concepts. These characteristics are categorised per involved CL stakeholder-group that they relate to, consisting of receivers that receive the goods, commissioners that send the goods, LSPs that execute transportation in the traditional way, platform providers that match all parties and the crowd. Third, by matching the characteristics with economic, social and environmental sustainability implications, we allow to assess the overall sustainability potential of CL initiatives. All characteristics have an impact on the economic sustainability, given that they are vital business model elements. Only three characteristics affect the three pillars of sustainability: third party involvement, crowd motivation and modal choice.
From a research point of view, the findings complement existing literature by combining both theory and practice to provide information on sharing space for passenger and freight transport in general and the novel topic of CL in particular. From a policy perspective, the research brings evidence that confirms statements of both ‘believers’ and ‘non-believers’ in the sharing economy, by listing examples of sustainable and less sustainable concepts. We suggest that policy-makers explicitly define the characteristics required for CL initiatives that can be considered for support. Such characteristics can include optimised transport and a non-professional crowd character. The findings prove insightful for practitioners that aim to set up a CL initiative as well, as it provides comprehensive understanding of important concept considerations. A sustainable CL business model provides enhanced service for customers and overall profitability, increases efficiency of vehicle usage and encourages progress in social equity by creating flexible work as opportunity but not as last resort. Overall, the goal of the research is to strengthen insight on CL as an alternative to inefficient UFT flows and to stimulate the efficient usage of the available transportation resources, by addressing relevant stakeholders such as consumers, businesses, policy-makers and researchers. Future research includes a stakeholder-analysis to find out for each of the involved stakeholders what type of CL concept they would support and a sustainability impact assessment of a CL pilot project. This stage of research explicitly involves the crowd, which is a drawback in the current conceptual research endeavour of a concept that is only starting to develop. Other avenues for future research include the potential of CL concepts to scale up and become a credible alternative to traditional logistics services and under which conditions this can take place.