A Method for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Transport Models as a Tool for Improving the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport Policy
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Lack of capacity to properly identify urban freight transport characteristics within a city’s transport system. This influences their ability to adopt effective solutions supporting the implementation of sustainable transport policy, such as urban freight models.
- Local authorities do not follow a systemic approach to urban freight transport. This results in a lack of clearly defined policy objectives or relevant implementation indicators. As a result, it is difficult to precisely define requirements for transport models whose functionality should reflect the purpose for which they are applied.
- There are no comprehensive studies on how urban freight models are applied to improve the implementation of measures. As a result, a reliable connection between sustainable urban policy objectives and policy implementation measures supported by transport models can hardly be established.
2. Literature Review
- Participative decision-making methods involving the private and public sector;
- Multi-criteria analysis including the input of groups of transport system users (MAMCA—multi actor, multi-criteria analysis); and
- Analysis of economic and social costs and benefits of measures designed to improve urban freight transport (cost benefit analysis/social cost benefit analysis).
3. Methodological Background for Identifying Evaluation Criteria for Models
3.1. The Influence of Urban Freight Transport Structure on Model Evaluation Requirements
- Diverse types of urban freight transport; and
- The role of local authorities within the structure of those involved in freight transport.
- Statutory responsibility for the local transport system with managerial systems in place already but requiring tools and procedures to match the specificity of urban freight
- The ability to act as a neutral negotiator between participants of transport processes to guarantee information security and ensure a balance between the entities involved
- Ability and need for coordinating regulations across different areas of urban transport policy in line with the principles of sustainable development
- Ability to ensure continuity of actions by including urban freight in strategy papers and shaping the awareness of those responsible for areas of administration which affect freight in the broad sense (infrastructure management, land use planning, economy, and social policy).
3.2. Parametrisation of Urban Transport System Objectives and Analytical Requirements of Implementation Measures
3.3. Significance of Urban Freight Data Availability for Model Evaluation
4. Structure of the Method to Evaluate Urban Freight Transport Models
- Strategic level where freight transport models are checked against the strategic objectives of urban freight transport management. The basis for the analysis is to identify quantitative indicators for parameterisation. With a known functional structure of models, they can be assessed for how well they can support the delivery of strategic objectives while ensuring that their key parameters are represented. Strategic objectives can be expressed with a set of indicators which would serve as decision criteria at this level.
- Tactical level where an assessment is made of the analytical requirements of improvement measures (Figure 3) in reference to what the models can do. This problem had not been studied before. It is also one of the most important issues that determine whether models can be used in practice when planning and delivering a sustainable urban transport policy. To ensure that both levels of analysis are consistent, the same quantitative set of criteria is used. As a result, a single point of reference is maintained.
- Operational level where urban freight data are checked for their availability and the capacity to build a comprehensive data collection system is verified. In this case again reference can be made to quantitative criteria applied to parameterise strategic objectives and to define the analytical requirements of improvement measures. As a consequence, a method designed around the qualitative approach uses a quantitative element to combine the problems of strategic freight management with the technical and functional characteristics of transport models. The possibility of feedback with previous levels of analysis is also included. This may involve data acquisition when selecting improvement tools or how they should be verified. The parameterisation of objectives can also be changed to take account of the practical measurement ramifications. Figure 4 shows the structure of the method.
- Analysis of the urban freight management system. The idea is to identify the relevant experience and competence of local authorities and define strategic goals.
- Evaluation of freight transport models being analysed and a synthetic presentation of their characteristics including the requirements of the method in question. This involves: identifying the basic variable to be modelled and the related demand for input data.
- Conduct a qualitative assessment of the models in question and formulate conclusions at each level of using the method. The conclusions may exclude the models from further analysis due to their inability to meet the basic requirements at any given level.
- Present final recommendations regarding the use of the transport models and identify the conditions for implementing the model to meet local authority requirements as much as possible.
5. Implementation and Validation of the Method
5.1. Analysis of the Urban Freight Transport Management System in Gdynia and Selection of Models to Be Verified
5.2. Implementation of the Method
6. Discussion
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Banister, D. The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp. Policy 2008, 15, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hull, A. Policy integration: What will it take to achieve more sustainable transport solutions in cities? Transp. Policy 2008, 15, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- JASPERS. JASPERS Appraisal Guidance. The Use of Transport Models in Project Appraisal. Available online: http://kc-sump.eu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Upotreba-Modela-u-prometnom-planiranju_JASPERS_kolovoz-2014.pdf (accessed on 1 December 2018).
- te Brömmelstroet, M.; Skou Nicolaisen, M.; Büttner, B.; Ferreira, A. Experiences with transportation models: An international survey of planning practices. Transp. Policy 2017, 58, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bertolini, L.; le Clercq, F.; Straatemeier, T. Urban Transportation Planning in Transition; Transp. Policy 2008, 15, 69–72. [Google Scholar]
- Ferreira, A.; Marsden, G.; Te Brömmelstroet, M. What Curriculum for Mobility and Transport Studies? A Critical Exploration. Transp. Rev. 2013, 33, 501–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Te Brömmelstroet, M.; Bertolini, L. The role of transport-related models in urban planning practice. Transp. Rev. 2011, 31, 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gudmundsson, H. Analysing Models as a Knowledge Technology in Transport Planning. Transp. Rev. 2011, 31, 145–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- May, A.D.; Page, M.; Hull, A. Developing a set of decision-support tools for sustainable urban transport in the UK. Transp. Policy 2008, 15, 328–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toilier, F.; Gardrat, M.; Routhier, J.L.; Bonnafous, A. Freight transport modelling in urban areas: The French case of the FRETURB model. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2018, 6, 753–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonzalez-Feliu, J.; Gardrat, M.; Pluvinet, P.; Ambrosini, C. Urban Goods Movement Estimation for Public Decision Support: Goals, Approaches and Applications. Hal-Shs, 2013; pp. 1–15. Available online: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00778480/ (accessed on 10 March 2019).
- Russo, F.; Comi, A. A model system for the ex-ante assessment of city logistics measures. Res. Transp. Econ. 2011, 31, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ambrosini, C.; Routhier, J.-L. Objectives, Methods and Results of Surveys Carried out in the Field of Urban Freight Transport: An International Comparison. Transp. Rev. 2004, 24, 57–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muñuzuri, J.; Larrañeta, J.; Onieva, L.; Cortés, P. Solutions applicable by local administrations for urban logistics improvement. Cities 2005, 22, 15–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wefering, F.; Rupprecht, S.; Bührmann, S.; Böhler-Baedeker, S. Guidelines. Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan; Rupprecht Consult: Cologne, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- ENCLOSE. Guidelines. Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Logistics Plan. Available online: http://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/trainingmaterials/enclose_d5_2_sulp_methodology_final_version_0.pdf (accessed on 25 January 2019).
- Fossheim, K.; Andersen, J. Plan for sustainable urban logistics – comparing between Scandinavian and UK practices. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2017, 9, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ambrosini, C.; Gonzalez-Feliu, J.; Toilier, F. A design methodology for scenario-Analysis in urban freight modelling. Eur. Transp. Trasp. Eur. 2013, 54, 7–21. [Google Scholar]
- Nuzzolo, A.; Comi, A. City Logistics Planning: Demand Modelling Requirements for Direct Effect Forecasting. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 125, 239–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Russo, F.; Comi, A. Urban freight transport planning towards green goals: Synthetic environmental evidence from tested results. Sustainabity 2016, 8, 381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuzzolo, A.; Comi, A. Urban freight transport policies in Rome: Lessons learned and the road ahead. J. Urban. Int. Res. Placemaking Urban Sustain. 2014, 8, 133–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Comi, A.; Donnelly, R.; Russo, F. Urban Freight Models; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; ISBN 9780124104006. [Google Scholar]
- Nuzzolo, A.; Coppola, P.; Comi, A. Freight Transport Modeling: Review and Future Challenges. Int. J. Transp. Econ. 2013, 40, 183–206. [Google Scholar]
- Gonzalez-Feliu, J.; Routhier, J.-L. Modeling Urban Goods Movement: How to be Oriented with so Many Approaches? Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 39, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Anand, N.; Van Duin, R.; Quak, H.; Tavasszy, L. Relevance of City Logistics Modelling Efforts: A Review. Transp. Rev. 2015, 35, 701–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allen, J.; Browne, M. Review of Survey Techniques Used in Urban Freight Studies; Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster: London, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Patier, D.; Routhier, J.-L. How to Improve the Capture of Uran Goods Movement Data? In Proceedings of the 8th International conference on Survey Methods in Transport, Annecy, France, 25–31 May 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Bonnafous, A.; Patier, D.; Routhier, J.-L.; Toilier, F.; Serouge, M. French Surveys of the Delivery Approach: From Cross-section to Diachronic Analyses. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 12, 181–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Macharis, C.; Bernardini, A. Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach. Transp. Policy 2015, 37, 177–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mardani, A.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Khalifah, Z.; Jusoh, A.; Nor, K.M. Multiple criteria decision-making techniques in transportation systems: A systematic review of the state of the art literature. Transport 2016, 31, 359–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gatta, V.; Marcucci, E. Urban freight transport and policy changes: Improving decision makers’ awareness via an agent-specific approach. Transp. Policy 2014, 36, 248–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roorda, M.J.; Cavalcante, R.; McCabe, S.; Kwan, H. A conceptual framework for agent-based modelling of logistics services. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2010, 46, 18–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Duin, J.H.R.; van Kolck, A.; Anand, N.; Taniguchi, E. Towards an Agent-Based Modelling Approach for the Evaluation of Dynamic Usage of Urban Distribution Centres. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 39, 333–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mommens, K.; Lebeau, P.; Verlinde, S.; van Lier, T.; Macharis, C. Evaluating the impact of off-hour deliveries: An application of the TRansport Agent-BAsed model. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 62, 102–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buldeo Rai, H.; van Lier, T.; Meers, D.; Macharis, C. Improving urban freight transport sustainability: Policy assessment framework and case study. Res. Transp. Econ. 2017, 64, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macharis, C.; Milan, L.; Verlinde, S. A stakeholder-based multicriteria evaluation framework for city distribution. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2014, 11, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macharis, C.; De Witte, A.; Turcksin, L. The Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) application in the Flemish long-term decision making process on mobility and logistics. Transp. Policy 2010, 17, 303–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- HEATCO. Developing Harmonised European Aproaches for Transport Costing and Project Assessment; IER: Stuttgart, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Beria, P.; Maltese, I.; Mariotti, I. Multicriteria versus Cost Benefit Analysis: A comparative perspective in the assessment of sustainable mobility. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2012, 4, 137–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotowska, I.; Iwan, S.; Kijewska, K.; Jedliński, M. Assumptions of Social Cost-Benefit Analysis for Implementing Urban Freight Transport Measures: Modeling and Planning Initiatives. In City Logistics 2; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; ISBN 9781786302069. [Google Scholar]
- Annema, J.A.; Mouter, N.; Razaei, J. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA), or multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) or both: Politicians’ perspective in transport policy appraisal. Transp. Res. Procedia 2015, 10, 788–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ECMT. Goods Distribution Systems in Urban Areas; ECMT Round Table 61; European Conference of Ministers of Transport: Paris, France, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Comi, A.; Russo, F. Demand model for city logistics: A state of art and a proposed integrated system. In Recent Advances for City Logistics; Eiichi, T., Thompson, R.G., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 91–105. [Google Scholar]
- Filippi, F.; Nuzzolo, A.; Comi, A.; Site, P.D. Ex-ante assessment of urban freight transport policies. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2010, 2, 6332–6342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Boerkamps, J.; van Binsbergen, A.; Bovy, P. Modeling Behavioral Aspects of Urban Freight Movement in Supply Chains. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2000, 1725, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visser, J.; Van Binsbergen, A.; Nemoto, T. Urban freight transport policy and planning Review. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on City Logistics, Cairns, Australia, July 1999. [Google Scholar]
- European Commision. Togehter towards Competitive and Resource Efficient Urban Mobility; COM (2013) 913; European Commision: Brussels, Belgium, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- European Commision. Directive 2004/27/Ec of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on Measuring Devices; European Commision: Brussels, Belgium, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Bruntland, G.H. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Wolfram, M. Expert Working Group on Sustainable Urban Transport Plans Final Report; Rupprecht Consult—Forschung & Beratung GmbH: Cologne, Germany, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Taniguchi, E.; Thompson, R.G.; Yamada, T. Visions for city logistics. In Logistics Systems for Sustainable Cities; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2004; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Browne, M.; Allen, J. Enhancing the Sustainability of Urban Freight Transport and Logistics. Transp. Commun. Bull. Asia Pac. 2011, 80, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
- Browne, M.; Allen, J.; Nemoto, T.; Patier, D.; Visser, J. Reducing Social and Environmental Impacts of Urban Freight Transport: A Review of Some Major Cities. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 39, 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ogden, K. Urban Goods Transportation: A Guide to Policy nad Planning; Ashgate: Farnham, UK, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Woudsma, C. Understanding the Movement of Goods, Not People: Issues, Evidence and Potential. Urban Stud. 2001, 38, 2439–2455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schoemaker, J.; Allen, J.; Huschebeck, M.; Monigl, J. Quantification of Urban Freight Transport Effects; University of Westminster: London, UK, 2006; pp. 1–72. [Google Scholar]
- COST 321. Urban Goods Transport; Final Report of the Action; European Commision, Directorate General Transport: Luxembourg, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- City Ports. City Ports Project Interim Report; City Ports: Bologna, Italy, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Van Duin, J.H.R.; Quak, H.J. City logistics: A chaos between research and policy making? A review. Wit Trans. Built Environ. 2007, 96, 135–146. [Google Scholar]
- Russo, F.; Comi, A. A classification of city logistics measures and connected impacts. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2010, 2, 6355–6365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Henriot, F.; Patier, D.; Bossin, P.; Gérardin, B. Méthodologie D’évaluation des Innovations en Matière de Logistique Urbaine. Programme National de Recherche et D’innovation dans les Transports Terrestres à L’initiative du Ministère de l’Ecologie, du Développement et de l’Aménagement Durable; LET: Lyon, France, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Patier, D.; Browne, M. A methodology for the evaluation of urban logistics innovations. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2010, 2, 6229–6241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kaszubowski, D. Recommendations for urban freight policy development in Gdynia. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 12, 886–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holguín-Veras, J.; Jaller, M. Comprehensive Freight Demand Data Collection Framework for Large Urban Areas. In Sustainable Urban Logistics: Concepts, Methods and Information Systems; Gonzalez-Feliu, J., Semet, F., Routhier, J.L., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 91–112. ISBN 978-3-642-31788-0. [Google Scholar]
- Danielis, R.; Rotaris, L.; Marcucci, E. Urban freight policies and distribution channels. Eur. Transp. Trasp. Eur. 2010, 46, 114–146. [Google Scholar]
- Hounwanou, S.; Comi, A.; Gonzalez-Feliu, J.; Gondran, N. Inner city versus urban periphery retailing: Store relocation and shopping trip behaviours. Indications from Saint-Etienne. Transp. Res. Procedia 2018, 30, 363–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marsden, G.; Frick, K.T.; May, A.D.; Deakin, E. How do cities approach policy innovation and policy learning? A study of 30 policies in Northern Europe and North America. Transp. Policy 2011, 18, 501–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Oskarbski, J.; Kaszubowski, D. Potential for ITS/ICT Solutions in Urban Freight Management. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 16, 433–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Patier, D.; Dufour, J.-G. Introduction to discussion based on the experience of the French experimental and research programme. In Freight Transport and the City; ECMT Round Table 109; ECMT: Paris, France, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Routhier, J.; Patier, D. Une Méthode D’ Enquête Du Transport De Marchandises En Ville Pour Un Diagnostic En D Anièle Patier. In Les Cahiers Dcientifiques du Transport; AFITL: Lyon, France, 2009; pp. 11–38. [Google Scholar]
- Browne, M.; Allen, J.; Woodburn, A.G.; Patier, D.; Routhier, J.-L.; Ambrosini, C. Comparison of urban freight data collection in European countries. In Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Transportation Research, Berkeley, CA, USA, 24–28 June 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Allen, J.; Browne, M.; Cherrett, T.; McLeod, F. Review of UK Urban Freight Studies; Green Logistics Project Work Module 9; University of Westminster: London, UK; University of Southampton: Southampton, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Cherrett, T.; Allen, J.; McLeod, F.; Maynard, S.; Hickford, A.; Browne, M. Understanding urban freight activity—Key issues for freight planning. J. Transp. Geogr. 2012, 24, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuzzolo, A.; Crisalli, U.; Comi, A.; Galuppi, S. Demand Models for the Estimation of Urban Goods Movements: An Application to the City of Rome. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Transportation Research (WCTR 2010), Lisbona, Portugal, 11–15 June 2010; pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar]
- Nuzzolo, A.; Crisalli, U.; Comi, A. A restocking tour model for the estimation of O-D freight vehicle in urban areas. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 20, 140–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BMVBS. Mobilitätsstudie Kraftfahrzeugverkehr in Deutschland 2010; BVMI: Braunschweig, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Kaszubowski, D. Relevance of Urban Freight Transport Modelling Towards the Challenges of Urban Freight Policy. In New Research Trends in Transport Sustainability and Innovation; Suchanek, M., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 122–134. ISBN 978-3-319-74461-2. [Google Scholar]
- Kaszubowski, D.; Pawłowska, A.; Marszałkowska, K. Adapting new tools of urban freight management based on Gdynia’s dedicated delivery bays example—An analysis of the process. Transp. Res. Procedia 2018, 30, 265–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Okraszewska, R.; Romanowska, A.; Wołek, M.; Oskarbski, J.; Birr, K.; Jamroz, K. Integration of a Multilevel Transport System Model into Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning. Sustainability 2018, 10, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sonntag, H. A computer model of urban commercial traffic—Analysis, basic concept and application. Transp. Policy Decis. Mak. 1985, 3, 171–180. [Google Scholar]
- Sonntag, H.; Meimbresse, B. Modelling urban commercial traffic with model WIVER. In L’intégration des Marchandises dans le Système des Déplacements Urbains; Patier, D., Ed.; Laboratoire d’Economie des Transports: Lyon, France, 2001; pp. 93–106. [Google Scholar]
- Ambrosini, C.; Meimbresse, B.; Routhier, J.-L.; Sonntag, H. Urban freight policy-oriented modelling in Europe. In Innovations in City Logistics; Nova Science Publishers: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 197–2012. [Google Scholar]
- Routhier, J.L.; Aubert, P.L. FRETURB, un modèle de simulation des transports de marchandises en ville. In Proceedings of the 8th WCTR, Antwerp, Belgium, 12–16 July 1998; pp. 531–544. [Google Scholar]
- Patier, D. L’intégration des Marchandises dans le Système de Déplacements Urbains: Actes des Treizièmes Entretiens Jacques Cartier, 1er–6 octobre 2000, Montréal (Québec); Coll. Etudes et Recherches 15; Laboratoire D’Économie des Transports: Lyon, France, 2000; ISSN 0769-6434. [Google Scholar]
- Routhier, J.; Toilier, F. FRETURB V3, A Policy Oriented Software of Modelling Urban Goods Movement. In Proceedings of the 11th WCTR, Berkeley, CA, USA, 24–28 June 2007; p. 23. [Google Scholar]
- Gonzalez-Feliu, J.; Toilier, F.; Ambrosini, C.; Routhier, J.-L. Estimated Data Production for Urban Goods Transport Diagnosis. In Sustainable Urban Logistics: Concepts, Methods and Information Systems; Gonzalez-Feliu, J., Semet, F., Routhier, J.L., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 113–143. ISBN 978-3-642-31788-0. [Google Scholar]
- Segalou, E.; Ambrosini, C.; Routhier, J.-L. The environmental assessment of urban goods movement. In Logistics Systems for Sustainable Cities; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2004; pp. 15–207. [Google Scholar]
- Comi, A.; Rosati, L. CLASS: A City Logistics Analysis and Simulation Support System. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 87, 321–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Comi, A.; Rosati, L. CLASS: A DSS for the analysis and the simulation of urban freight systems. Transp. Res. Procedia 2015, 5, 132–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonzalez-Feliu, J.; Ambrosini, C.; Routhier, J. New trends on urban goods movement: Modelling and simulation of e-commerce distribution. Eur. Transp. 2012, 50, 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Vigo, D.; Gentile, G. A demand model for freight movements based on a tree classification of the economic activities applied to city logistics. City Goods. In Proceedings of the 2nd Roundtable, BESTUFS Workshop TFH, Wildau, Germany, 8–9 June 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Oskarbski, J.; Kaszubowski, D. Applying a Mesoscopic Transport Model to Analyse the Effects of Urban Freight Regulatory Measures on Transport Emissions—An Assessment. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Objective | Problem Areas | Method of Description | Core Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
Economic efficiency | Transport accessibility | Total travel time |
|
Transport services supply and demand | Freight and transport demand generation |
| |
Operational efficiency | Distance optimisation | Total distance |
|
Efficient vehicle working time |
| ||
Delivery organisation |
| ||
Delivery efficiency | Fleet utilisation level |
| |
Vehicle characteristics | Structure of vehicle types |
| |
Road safety | Risk reduction | Characteristics of incidents involving freight vehicles |
|
Environment protection | Reduction of air and noise pollution | Operation characteristics of freight vehicles |
|
Infrastructure management | Demand for freight transport infrastructure | Characteristics of freight infrastructure utilisation |
|
Prognosis of freight vehicles traffic | Factors influencing freight vehicles traffic |
| |
Urban structure management | Analysis of freight traffic scenarios regarding spatial planning | Impact of functional characteristics of urban space at freight transport characteristics |
|
Functional and organisational characteristics of urban freight transport | Availability of urban freight analytical methods and ability to assess the relevant actions | Availability of freight transport models and selection tools |
|
|
|
Category | Freturb | Wiver | Multilevel Model in Gdynia |
---|---|---|---|
Purpose | Urban freight transport | Urban freight transport | Passenger transport; basic functions related to freight |
Structure | Complex model | Complex model | Complex model |
Objectives | Diagnosis and planning, transport policy support | Diagnosis and planning, transport policy support | Diagnosis and planning, transport policy support |
Main variable | Delivery and delivery round | Delivery and delivery round | Passenger trip |
Methodology | Generation of demand for deliveries, round generation, round distribution | Generation of demand for deliveries, round generation, round distribution | Four step approach |
Primary source of data | Receivers delivery survey and logistics operators surveys | National commercial freight vehicles activity survey (KID) | Traffic counts and public transport passenger surveys |
Indicator | Freturb | Wiver | Multilevel Model in Gdynia |
---|---|---|---|
Total distance travelled during delivery round | Total distance in rounds between zones | Total distance in rounds between zones | Only direct trips as a share of general traffic |
Total vehicle working time | Cannot be directly estimated | Cannot be directly estimated | Cannot be directly estimated |
Delivery duration | Primary model parameter | Not available | Not available |
Deliveries per round | Primary model parameter | Primary model parameter | Not available |
Direct deliveries | Primary model parameter | Primary model parameter | Not available |
Deliveries per 1 employee | Primary model parameter | Estimation per zone based on total employment | Not available |
Freight vehicle kilometres | Based on number and structure of delivery trips | Based on number and structure of delivery trips | Basic calculation (only direct trips as a part of total traffic) |
Number and type of freight vehicles in selected area | Three categories of freight vehicles | Three categories of freight vehicles | As a share of each category in total traffic |
Load utilisation factor | Not available | Not available | Not available |
Daily distribution of deliveries | Available based on detailed delivery survey input | Not available | Available only in relation to total traffic distribution |
Share of freight vehicles in total road traffic | Provided in PCU (Passenger Car Unit) equivalent | Possible to include O-D matrices in VISSUM software | Freight vehicles may be included in road traffic for each road section |
Strategic Objective | Freturb | Wiver | Multilevel Model in Gdynia |
---|---|---|---|
Economic efficiency of urban freight transport | Models offer similar functionality with regard to core indicators such as number of deliveries, round characteristics and structure of freight vehicles used. This is related to the main variable used which is a delivery considered as a movement of a vehicle from point of origin to freight receiver. Deliveries are organised in rounds to better reflect the characteristics of urban distribution patterns. Both models differ in how input data are provided and structured. This implies that further analysis is required concerning their potential to support implementation of improvement measures. This would reveal practical differences between these models. | Model offers no practical possibility to support local authority in implementing this objective. It cannot reflect primary indicators required to properly describe the structure of urban freight transport. | |
Environmental protection | Inclusion of detailed information on delivery structure with regard to characteristics of receivers and freight vehicles enables in-depth analysis of environmental effects. | As the model utilises a rough classification of receivers based on zonal characteristics, it provides less potential to reflect environmental characteristics of transport activity with regard to receiver type. | Model does not provide any opportunity to reflect origin and destination of freight movements with regard to receiver type and vehicle used. These parameters are crucial for the estimation of environmental characteristics of freight activity and its simulation. |
Infrastructure management | The model helps to estimate the level of infrastructure utilisation by freight movements with passenger car unit (PCU). It translates road occupancy by different types of freight vehicles into multiplied passenger car units. | The model estimates road space utilisation level related to freight movements by providing origin-destination matrices which may be used in traffic modelling software VISSUM. | The model cannot be applied to this task because it does not reflect factors determining the structure of freight vehicles movements with an acceptable level of detail. Only basic calculations are possible, but they are based on general structure of total road traffic only. |
Category | Indicator | Freturb | Wiver | Multilevel Model in Gdynia |
---|---|---|---|---|
Freight traffic optimisation | Structure of freight vehicles | ★★★ | ★★★ | ★ |
Share of freight vehicles in total traffic | ★★★ | ★★★ | ★★ | |
O-D matrices | ★★★ | ★★★ | ─ | |
Freight vehicle kilometres | ★★★ | ★★★ | ★ | |
Demand for deliveries | ★★★ | ★★★ | ─ | |
Demand for freight | ─ | ─ | ─ | |
Daily distribution of deliveries | ★★★ | ★ | ─ | |
Type of receivers | ★★★ | ★★ | ─ | |
Location of receivers | ★★★ | ★ | ─ | |
Direct deliveries | ★★★ | ★★★ | ─ | |
Deliveries per round | ★★★ | ★★★ | ─ | |
Delivery duration | ★★★ | ─ | ─ | |
Vehicle working time | ─ | ─ | ─ | |
Vehicle speed | ─ | ─ | ★★★ | |
Freight traffic demand reduction | Load utilisation factor | ─ | ─ | ─ |
Type of transport service | ★★★ | ─ | ─ | |
Deliveries per 1 employee | ★★★ | ★★ | ─ | |
Technological changes | Share of low emission vehicles | ★★★ | ★ | ─ |
Total kilometres for low emission vehicles | ★★★ | ★ | ─ | |
Emission factors | ★★★ | ─ | ─ | |
Rating scale | (─) application not possible (★)—basic functionality (★★)—limited functionality (★★★)—full functionality |
Category | Freturb | Wiver |
---|---|---|
Freight traffic optimisation | Model provides a comparable level of utility with regard to core indicators such as delivery number and vehicle characteristics. However, Freturb offers a more detailed analysis due to input data based on receiver surveys instead of transport providers. A very detailed description of time and spatial characteristics of deliveries is possible. It helps to model freight traffic at local or even street section level unlike Wiver’s zonal approach. | |
Freight traffic demand reduction | Model provides complex projection of factors determining the demand for freight movements and transport service organisation. If used by local authority it allows for a complex analysis of comprehensive improvement measures beyond simple traffic optimisation solutions. | Potential of the model is reduced by lack of type of service inclusion (own transport or external supplier). This is one of the most important factors when modelling freight demand scenarios. There is no possibility to reflect differences between these type of services with regard to vehicle used, umber of deliveries and total kilometres travelled. |
Technological changes | Model includes a dedicated module which allows for a complex analysis of environmental effects of freight movements. It is based on a detailed characteristics of both the delivery process and spatial distribution of receivers and their demand for deliveries. This allows for a very detailed modelling of changes related to the introduction of low emission vehicles or other technological changes to transport process. | There is a possibility to simulate changes in fleet composition at a general level, including introduction of low emission vehicles. The level of detail is limited by input data characteristics, which offer no information on type of service. |
Category | Freturb | Wiver |
---|---|---|
Main variable | Delivery and delivery round | Delivery and delivery round |
Method of data acquisition | Surveys of commercial receivers complemented with targeted logistics operators surveys | Nationwide survey of commercial vehicles activity survey (KID, every 8 years since 2000) |
Primary data availability in Poland | No comprehensive receiver surveys available | No comprehensive commercial vehicle surveys available |
Examples of surveys similar to model’s operational requirements | Receiver surveys in Szczecin (2015) and Gdynia (2017) utilising the adopted methodology, but without modelling implications | Limited attempts to analyse commercial vehicle activity, scattered and not conclusive |
Possibility to adapt external data for model development | None, see above. Data from other countries may not reflect local conditions of freight operation in Polish cities. | None, see above. Data from other countries may not reflect local conditions of freight operation in Polish cities. |
Potential for integration with standard transport analysis method currently used by cities. | None, dedicated surveys required. | None, dedicated surveys required. |
Model | Required Activities | Comments |
---|---|---|
Freturb |
|
|
Wiver |
|
|
© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kaszubowski, D. A Method for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Transport Models as a Tool for Improving the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport Policy. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1535. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061535
Kaszubowski D. A Method for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Transport Models as a Tool for Improving the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport Policy. Sustainability. 2019; 11(6):1535. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061535
Chicago/Turabian StyleKaszubowski, Daniel. 2019. "A Method for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Transport Models as a Tool for Improving the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport Policy" Sustainability 11, no. 6: 1535. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061535
APA StyleKaszubowski, D. (2019). A Method for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Transport Models as a Tool for Improving the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport Policy. Sustainability, 11(6), 1535. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061535