Next Article in Journal
Youth Empowerment for Sustainable Development: Exploring Ecosocial Work Discourses
Previous Article in Journal
Iron Ore Tailings Dewatering: Measurement of Adhesion and Cohesion for Filter Press Operation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 6
10.3390/su14063425
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Road Freight Transport Literature and the Achievements of the Sustainable Development Goals—A Systematic Review

by
Flávia Mendes de Almeida Collaço
1,*,
Ana Carolina Rodrigues Teixeira
2,
Pedro Gerber Machado
2,3,
Raquel Rocha Borges
4,
Thiago Luis Felipe Brito
4 and
Dominique Mouette
4
1
Institute of Advanced Studies, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-060, Brazil
2
Institute of Energy and Environment, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05428-000, Brazil
3
Chemical Engineering Department, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, UK
4
School of Arts, Science and Humanities, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 03828-000, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(6), 3425; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063425
Submission received: 13 December 2021 / Revised: 30 January 2022 / Accepted: 28 February 2022 / Published: 15 March 2022
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Considering the importance of the road freight transport sector on the sustainability debate, the purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive review of the road freight transport literature to provide key information on the role that this field of knowledge must play in contributing to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To accomplish this, we performed a state-of-the-art review via systematic literature on 86 documents published during 2015–2020, with an emphasis on environmental, economic, and technical studies. Ultimately, this paper seeks to uncover research gaps and to suggest means in which the freight transport literature and the 17 SDGs may be faced by this field in future studies. the results showed that the SDGs were not target by the analyzed papers, and the sustainable development goals were not quoted at all. The only SDG fully contemplated was number 7—affordable and clean energy. The findings of this study suggest that this field should add research of SDGs 2, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 17 as priority areas to be further developed by the RFT literature to achieve SDGs goals.

1. Introduction

In 2015, during the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit, the SDGs—a set of goals created to follow-up and review the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) initiated in 2013—were negotiated. The SDGs are composed of 17 goals to be met by 2030. They have 169 associated targets, integrated and indivisible, which are supposed to guide national policies and international cooperation activities for more than 190 countries. In general, the SDGs aims to ensure sustainable global social and economic development and to strengthen universal peace by focusing on people and their human rights. The 17 SDGs requires multilateral effort and integrated policies development.
With such complexity, it is expected that the economic, social, and environmental concerns considered in the definition of these 17 objectives will no longer be dealt with separately and independently. The SDG agenda calls for a global partnership—at all—between countries and stakeholders, including a broad spectrum of actors such as multinational and multisectoral businesses, local governments, regional and international bodies, academia, and civil society organizations.
In this regard, the road freight transport (RFT) sector has a key role in the achievement of a sustainable future, as it is wrapped in serious environmental concerns due to the use of petroleum-based fuels to power vehicles, which, according to Sharma and Strezov (2017) [1], are the main cause of greenhouse gases (GHG) and the criteria pollutant emissions worldwide. The search for alternative fuels is often associated with sustainable development, energy savings, efficiency, and environmental conservation [1].
In addition, RFT is an important sector in the global economy and directly affects the efficiency of national economies [2]. According to IEA (2019) [3], energy consumption and CO2 emissions generated by trucks and buses have increased by 2.2% yearly. In general, the sector is driven by fossil fuel demand, and diesel oil is still the most used energy carrier in road heavy-duty vehicles (HDV) [4]. Because the freight transport profile is associated with travelling long distances and powered by fossil sources, the sector is a major source of air pollution and GHG emissions, directly impacting human health and the environment [5].
However, the RFT is going through changes and has been evolving over the years to improve its efficiency and cost–benefit patterns and meet the emissions standards [4,6]. To attain the SDG and the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), countries have been creating different policies to support strategies in the transport sector [7,8,9].
In the same way, the scientific community has been studying and evaluating the use of different types of fuel technologies to be used in RFT to reach better performance and to reduce costs and emissions. Renewable fuels have been studied in several countries such as the case of biodiesel from different feedstock such as sunflower oil, canola oil, waste cooking oil, cottonseed, pomegranate seed, and others [10,11,12,13]. More alternative energy carriers such as hydrogen [14,15], renewable diesel [16], biogas [17], and natural gas [18,19,20,21] have also been studied to evaluate pollutant emissions and impacts on heavy-duty engines characteristics.
Considering the importance of this sector, the purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive review of the RFT literature to provide key information on the role that this field of knowledge must play in contributing to the achievement of the SDGs. To accomplish this, we performed a state-of-the-art systematic literature review on 86 documents, published during 2015–2020, with an emphasis on environmental, economic, and technical RFT literature. Ultimately, this paper seeks to uncover gaps and to suggest means in which the freight transport sector and the 17 SDGs may be faced by these fields of research in future studies.
The paper is organized as follows; in addition to this introduction, Section 2 presents the materials and methods used in achieving the paper’s goals by presenting the systematic review’s methodology. Section 3 presents the paper’s results in terms of the RFT literature performance in addressing the SDGs, and Section 4 gives insights on the field of research that need to be further developed. Finally, Section 5 concludes the paper, highlighting the study’s main discoveries.

2. Materials and Methods

The systematic review methodology is presented according to its scope, search strategy, eligibility criteria used to select papers, and the methodology used to extract data and analyze the results.
The study scope is the environmental, economic, and technical RFT literature (from the period of 2015–2020), which means that papers from the fields of social, regulation, and public policy knowledge areas were excluded from the analysis. In order to achieve the paper’s goal—assessing the RFT literature performance on addressing existing SDGs—the following research questions were proposed:
(1)
Has the environmental, economic, and technical literature on RFT addressed the SDGs in the last 5 years?
(2)
How is the RFT literature addressing the SGDs? What are the most and least addressed SDGs?
(3)
What are the main knowledge gaps that will need to be faced by this field considering future studies?
To answers those questions, this systematic review looked for relevant studies inside two databases: Scopus and Web of Science. Thus, a keyword search was developed by using different combinations: alternative fuel, HDV truck, commercial vehicle, freight, air pollution, and GHG emission. Searches were held on 15 May 2019. Only papers published in English and published during the period from 2015 to 2020 were considered. Duplicate papers were removed. Figure 1 summarizes the literature review steps.
After developing the search inside the databases previously mentioned, a total of 2631 papers were identified. By applying the inclusion criteria (only scientific and peer-reviewed journals, as well as papers with full available content), and by removing review studies, the new total was 1678. At this stage, the studies were screened by titles and abstracts. Just environmental, economic, and technical RFT literature was selected, and after full-text review, 86 papers were used in this study. To proceed with the corpus analysis on the achievement of the SDG, we divided the 17 SDG and respective targets (144 targets) into 2 categories called “ideals” and “instruments” (see Table 1). The SDG “ideals” category included the keywords associated with the qualitative goals of each SDG target. For instance, if we took SDG7 as an example, its first target is: “By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy”; the selected keywords were: “energy”, “modern energy”, “affordable modern energy”, and “reliable modern energy”. The category allocation was as an “ideal” of “Access to Modern Energy” (see Table 1).
The “instruments” category, in its turn, used keywords found in the SDG targets that were associated with measures/actions developed to achieve the SDG goals. For example, the target 7.a SDG—“By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology, including renewable energy, energy efficiency and advanced and cleaner fossil-fuel technology, and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology”—was summarized into the following keywords: “clean energy”, “research and technology”, “cleaner fossil-fuel technology”, “energy infrastructure”, “clean energy technology”, “international cooperation”, and “clean energy research”, which, in turn, was allocated as an “instrument” of “Enhance international cooperation to clean energy research and technology”. Figure 2 summarizes the categorization methodology’s development.
As a result of this categorization, i.e., the selection of keywords into SDG ideals and SDG instruments, a scoring analysis was performed through a Python script. The script was designed combining a PDF miner and a keyword processor. The script goes through each article and compares the keywords related to the SDG ideals and instruments with the words in the PDF. It then counts the number of times each keyword appears in the text.
Finally, since Python is unable to judge if each keyword is directly related to the SDG or just, for example, a coincidence, the coherence of the keywords was analyzed by reading each paper and judging if the keywords found in each paper were related with the SDG’s ideals and instrument goals. A matrix was developed with all 86 papers listed in a column and their keywords. By doing this, all papers were scored considering the keywords found and if they addressed the SDG’s general ideals or instruments.

3. Systematic Review Results

As it is possible to see in Figure 3, from the total of 42 ideals that could be targeted by the RFT literature, 22 SDG ideals were addressed, which represent 52% of the SDG coverage by the analyzed corpus. It is important to know that this result does not imply a high level of comprehensive literature engagement, since a single mention in one article to any of the keywords related to the SDG was sufficient to be scored and considered as an achievement of the corpus. This was the case for the following ideals: SDG1—reduce vulnerability; SDG4—lifelong learning opportunities; SDG6—water quality; and SDG16—peaceful societies.
Regarding the instrument’s achievement, from a total of 36 SDG instruments, the literature addressed 14 SDGs instruments (39%). So, less than half of the intended SDG instruments where target by the corpus. The same situation discussed for the SDG ideals happened for some of the SDG instruments, where just one paper scored the instrument and it was counted as the corpus achievement: SDG2—implement measures to food reserves, access to land, and limit food price—and SDG3—support research and development.
From the total of 20 non-targeted SDG ideals and 22 non-targeted SDG instruments, the following are directly associated with the sector and, thereby, should be further focused by the RFT literature: SDG8 ideal—productive and decent work; SDG15 ideal—protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems; and SDG17 ideal—sustainable development.
Mainly, the SDG12 instrument—policies to rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies—is particularly important for the sector, and curiously, none of the 86 papers had addressed or discussed this kind of policy implication since most of the papers were developing fuel technology replacements, which implicates them in policy analysis, i.e., calculating the impact of NOx emissions from changing from diesel fuel to other fuels.
Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that four SDGs were not targeted at all: SDG5—gender equality; SDG10—reduce inequalities; SDG15—life on land; and SDG16—peace, justice, and strong institutions. These SDGs did not have any of their ideals or instruments addressed by any of the 86 papers. Although this is an important gap concerning the RFT literature’s performance in addressing the SDGs, it was expected that the technical literature would not bring such themes to the discussion. Figure 4 presents the overall performance of the corpus in achieving each SDG regarding the ideals and instrument categories.
From all SDGs, just “SDG7—ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” had all ideals and instruments addressed by the reviewed papers, which means that this SDG was fully contemplated by the corpus. Nevertheless, it is important to understand how this literature is addressing the SDG ideals and instruments. Table 1 presents the allocation of SDG into ideals and instrument categories, and as mentioned in the methods sections, the keywords were selected from the 17 SDGs and their respective targets into keywords that represent the SGDs’ “ideals” or the SDGs’ “instruments”, resulting in a total of 42 SDG ideals and 36 SDG instruments. In red, Table 1 presents the SDGs’ ideals and instruments that were not tackled, and the last column presents the contemplated ideals and instruments per reference.
Analysis of the SDGs’ achievement by the corpus will be developed from the least achieved SDG to the most, with examples of how papers addressed the topics of each SDG.
SDG4 was addressed by 3% of the analyzed papers. ZHANG et al. (2019) [9] addresses the SDG4 ideal “decent job” when considering it as a factor of influence for truck fleets′ willingness to purchase alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in China, the need to consider as a cost for the transition, and the employment of new maintenance workers for AFVs. TAEFI et al. (2016) [50] addressed SDG4’s ideal “lifelong learning opportunities” when the authors specify that there will be a need for large investments in research, development, and pilot projects for training new workers for the delivery of supplies or the maintenance of technical equipment related to emissions-free vehicles.
Regarding SDG14 (also with 3% of the analyzed papers), Osorio-Tejada; Llera-Sastresa; Scarpellini, (2017a) address SDG14’s ideal “conserve oceans, seas, and marine resources” when they refer to the environmental risks of the construction of regasification terminals near settlements or in protected natural areas. Specifically, authors mention the “fracking and methane hydrates extraction from beneath the ocean floor, still generate controversy for their environmental risks” [39], p. 791.
SDG1 was the target of 5% of the papers in this corpus. SEN et al. (2019) [25] found that the costs incurred by the health impacts of tailpipe emissions are the major cost component for each HDT, so this was considered as one angle of the discussion of SDG1’s instrument “ensure resources for National Policies and Programs”.
Regarding SDG6, it was found in 6% of the papers, in which [27,37,40] relate SDG6’s ideal “water for all/reduce water scarcity” when presented that oil and gas operations extraction methods, such as fracking, could affect the availability and quality of water and soil [40] or when analyzing the water final uses in the RFT feedstock fuel production [27,37]. Regarding SDG6’s ideal “water quality”, papers [23,46] argue that freshwater eutrophication, human toxicity, eco-toxicity, soil/water contamination, and natural land transformation are the most relevant impact when comparing RFT fuels options.
SDG2 was target by 10% of the analyzed corpus. Papers that addressed SDG2’s ideal “end Hunger and malnutrition” discuss the challenges associated with biofuels in the indirect land-use change, which can result in additional GHG emissions and raise concerns around food security and biodiversity maintenance [26,27,28]. So, the discussion relates to the production of energy with food security and access to food.
SDG17 was scored by 16% of the corpus. SDG17’s instruments were observed as a general policy recommendation in papers that were exploring possibilities of the RFT energy transition. So, SDG17’s instrument “strengthen domestic resource mobilization” was targeted as a way to improve the domestic capacity for taxes and other revenue collection to fund sustainable transport in a renewable-based energy system and to mobilize additional financial resources [8,17,23,29,43].
SDG8 was targeted by 16 papers—19% of the total. The ideal “promote economic growth” was mentioned in eight papers as a possible outcome from the investment in the transport sector [8,10,32,41,51,53,72,78]. Its instrument “promote development-oriented policies” was target by five papers whose main concerns were about the technological upgrading and innovation of the transport sector [23,26,44,56,57]. Lastly, the instrument “implement resource efficiency programs” was only targeted by three papers in reference to the need for investment in resource efficiency [12,27,69].
SDG3 was scored by 23 references. SDG3’s ideals “ensure health and well-being”, “end preventable deaths, reduce disease”, and “reduce deaths from hazardous” were discussed by 17 papers that mentioned the relation between road freight fuel options and its pollutants emissions and the public health and well-being nexus [22,24,25,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,43,44,45,46]. Half of these papers also scored for the instrument “ensure access to universal health coverage and financing”, but from a perspective of the social costs of the choice of fuel and its implication on public health [10,13,22,24,25,33,34,35,42,43,44,47,48].
SDG11 was target by 51% of the corpus. SDG11’s ideal “inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities” was scored by 11 papers that mentioned the influence of RFT on the possible pathways for making cities sustainable [17,24,35,37,38,52]; for instance, [38,40] suggest that LNG use in HDT has the potential to reduce environmental impacts and noise in cities.
SDG9 was addressed by 52% of the corpus. The ideals “resilient infrastructure and sustainable industrialization” and “reliable infrastructure” were found in 24 papers (see Table 1). CONNOLLY (2017) found that there will be a need for large-scale investments in road infrastructure mainly for electric vehicles. OSORIO-TEJADA, LLERA-SASTRESA, and SCARPELLINI (2017a and 2017b) [39,40] highlight the decision-making relevance of defining a methodology to integrate the three pillars of sustainability to propose adequate road freight fuels policies, which will require legislative and infrastructural adaptations. SDG12 was addressed by 63% of the corpus; nevertheless, the ideal “sustainable consumption and production” was mentioned in just two papers [23,41]. On the other hand, the ideal “achieve the environmentally sound management” was target by 48 papers, in which the main arguments were built on the need to minimize pollution adverse impacts on the environment and on the need to reduce air pollution from diesel-powered trucks [73,82]
Finally, SDG13 was targeted by 56% of the corpus. SDG13’s ideal “combat climate change” was scored by 45 papers (see Table 1), addressing this issue by studying and discussing the technologies (fuel substitution and other related transport sector technologies, i.e., road infrastructure for electrical vehicles, batteries technologies, and combination of biofuels to replace diesel fuel) in experimental, life cycle analysis, or cost–benefit studies that aim to point to the best options to reduce the transport sector’s impact on GHG emissions and other pollutants.
Nevertheless, just two papers were found on the ideal “strengthen resilience”: Osorio-Tejada, Llera-Sastresa and Scarpellini, (2017b) touch on the SDG ideal context by presenting some literature review on adaptability implementation barriers for road freight alternatives fuel and rail infrastructure. Yangka and Newman (2018) [78], in turn, discuss how to strengthen Bhutan’s resilience to climate change by analyzing both transport and industries energy policies.
Lastly, SDG7 was target by 65% of the analyzed papers. The ideal “access to modern energy” was mainly targeted because all papers consider biofuels and electric mobility as types of modern energies, but no paper addressed the universal access to modern, affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy in the transport sector. From the total of the 56 papers that had scored on the SDG7, 22 also scored for the ideal “increase renewable energy” by arguing for the need to increase the share of renewable energy in the RFT sector [12,52,55] by improving the sector’s energy efficiency [8,46,56] and by developing renewable energy production, including in hybrid systems [17,36,41].

4. Gaps and Knowledge Areas to Be Addressed in Future Studies

Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted from the perspective of previous studies and of the working hypotheses. The findings and their implications should be discussed in the broadest context possible. Future research directions may also be highlighted.
As presented in the previous section, a great gap inside road freight literature was identified regarding its performance in discussing the SDG ideals and instruments. The analyzed corpus is developed in a very technical approach and does not recognize the need for developing an integrated and holistic research agenda. Nevertheless, of all the 17 SDGs, it is possible to consider that SDGs 1, 4, 5, 10, and 14 are not a priority for the RFT literature’s future areas of development. These SDG are essentially cross-sectional themes related to structural problems of our society (i.e., end poverty, quality education, and gender equality), and exploring such issues from the perspective of the RFT research agenda makes little if any sense.
Nevertheless, it is important to address the SDGs holistically, and the review performed here shows that the literature can still advance in key issues that are directly related to this research agenda. In this regard, SDGs 2, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 17 is advised as priority areas to be further developed by the RFT literature. Figure 5 presents a summary of key SDGs that need to be addressed by future studies.
The previous sections have shown the disparity in the objectives of articles in the road in environmental, economic, and technical RFT literature, which does not necessarily mean that studies from the fields of social, regulation, sectorial, and public policy have not addressed issues in the cross-section of freight transport and SDGs. Therefore, based on the importance of SDGs’ integration tradeoffs and synergies [91] and the importance of transdisciplinary research [92], it is possible to draw from other areas of science to build the knowledge of environmental, economic, and technical fields of research. For instance, SDG2 is concerned about ending hunger, achieving food security, improving nutrition, and promoting sustainable agriculture. Although this SDG is not directly related to RFT, it does have important connections on some topics.
LIPIŃSKA et al., (2019) [93] demonstrate the social relationship that food loss during cargo transportation can have by redirecting cargo considered inappropriate for commercial quality for people in vulnerable financial conditions, thus limiting food waste. Thus, the RFT system can be analyzed encompassing other SDGs, such as those that discuss sustainable consumption and production patterns (SDG12). To incorporate the proposed goals and indicators of SDG2 in a future RFT literature research agenda in environmental, economic, and technical areas of research, we highlight the following themes:
○
Studies designed to promote intelligent food logistics, aiming to reduce the scale of food losses and waste in the cargo transport phase;
○
Improve logistics by implementing collaborative transport based on geographic location, reducing travel distance and improving truck utilization;
○
Studies on the life cycle assessment of food production, considering the emissions associated with the transport of raw materials.
SDG3 aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. Considering the transport sector and the heavy-duty trucks′ scope of analysis, this SDG can be related to the reduction of deaths and injuries caused by traffic accidents [94]. In addition, it is also necessary to deepen the understanding of the negative impacts on humans health by the RFT sector [95,96,97,98].
Thus, the RFT system can be analyzed encompassing other SDGs, such as those that talk about sustainable industrialization and innovation fostering (SDG 9). From this discussion, we present general recommendations for future research to improve the understanding of this SDG for road cargo transportation:
○
Studies focused on reducing air pollution from trucks, promoting decarbonization, adopting sustainable fuel;
○
Studies that focus on mechanical changes in heavy vehicles, aiming at the ideal configuration for their best eco-efficiency;
○
Studies aimed at reducing the population′s exposure to emissions, especially those that live close to highways.
Even though SDG7 and SDG13 had presented the highest levels of assimilation by the corpus, when compared to the other SDGs, the RFT literature must be better engaged with the ideals and with the goals set by these SDGs.
Energy lies at the heart of both the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and according to the United Nations (2019), advancement in SDG7 has the potential to spur progress across the other SDGs (SDG4—quality education; SDG8—inclusive economic growth and jobs; SDG10—reduced inequality; SDG13—climate change; SDG16—peace, justice, and strong institutions; and SDG17—partnership for the goals).
Yet, progress on SDG7 is falling short. There is still much to do to ensure universal access. About 840 million people still lack access to electricity, and around 3 billion people rely on wood, charcoal, animal and crop wastes, or other solid fuels to cook their food and heat their homes, and the rate of progress towards cleaner fuels and technologies slowed down between 2009 and 2017 [99]. In this sense, RFT literature needs to advance in the following topics:
○
Energy efficiency: qualitative and quantitative analysis and discussion based more on diagnostic studies rather than scenarios development;
○
Renewables prospects, policies, and technologies for transport end use, focused more on pilot projects and empirical measures;
○
Synergies between climate change, affordable energy, and strategies for energy conservation on the RFT.
It is well-known that the transport sector depends on different variables to be managed, and infrastructure is one of them. Without the proper infrastructure, any type of modality will struggle to be implemented. So, SDG9 is of high-level importance to the sector. Moreover, SDG9 includes sustainable industrialization and fostering innovation, which have been pushing the development of alternative fuels for HDV to improve engine efficiency and reduce emissions [13,16,17,68,100]. To incorporate the targets and indicators proposed by this SDG, it is suggested that some areas should be deeply studied:
○
Energy decarbonization and the improvement of efficiency considering the local level energy potential to provide electricity generation to fuel e-buses or e-trucks;
○
Evaluate the actions for sustainable development in different countries through indices and measuring progress, which could facilitate the benchmark, identify mutual trends, and the first step for policy formulation and advocacy;
○
Increase research for cleaner technologies in specific places, not in a general way, since each country has particular characteristics regarding energy intensity, subsidies, and infrastructure.
In its turn, SDG11 is concerned about the sustainability of cities and how to develop an urban environment that is accessible, affordable, and inclusive, targeting relevant urban issues such as homes and transport, water and air quality, and urban development and planning [101]. This scope in its majority does not cover RFT, which does not mean that SDG11 has no connection with freight.
Future research in the field of RFT should address the SDG11 from the “inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” perspective and find ways to expand the SDG11 targets created for public transport to the freight sector. In general, research should approach ways to deliver goods and services at the local level with better environmental conditions, with improved road safety, and greater accessibility:
○
Study the effects of freight on road conditions and how these effects can be avoided;
○
Study more inclusive urban delivery methods and reach the more vulnerable;
○
Study ways to include RFT into municipal urban planning;
○
Study ways to increase waste collection and adapt the traditional truck collection to more sustainable ways.
SDG12 addresses the implementation of sustainable consumption and production. Thus, SDG12 can contribute to pushing the research on the use of waste sources for fuel/energy production for example. Some areas that need to be studied considering the area of the heavy-duty trucks and SDG 12 are as follows:
○
Fuel production from liquid and solid waste to reduce oil dependency;
○
Improve engines efficiency contributing to reducing fuel consumption and emission;
○
Research considering electric trucks instead of trucks powered by internal combustion engines;
○
Research about material considering those to build electric vehicles and batteries to reduce impacts and go behind sustainability production.
Finally, SDG17 focuses on global partnership. In the case of globalization, the RFT is seen as having a double role, as a beneficiary of its development, through the sharing of data, services, and information, and as a proactive agent [102]. With globalized knowledge, the overall cost of providing new transport systems would be reduced, which enhances the ability of effective local transport systems [103].
Critical challenges within the transport and infrastructure sectors are more and more subject to technology-based solutions. However, the lag between the innovative technologies cycle in the RFT and the political cycles in many countries still leads to technical fragmentation and interoperability issues across countries [103].
When it comes to strengthening the means of implementation and revitalizing the global partnership for sustainable development (SDG17), the RFT sector could benefit from research in the following areas:
○
Analyze the existing international links that enhance the access to science, technology, and innovation of vehicles and how they can help develop a global technology facilitation mechanism for the sector;
○
Study the transfer, dissemination, and diffusion of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries.

5. Conclusions

This study found that the RFT literature does not perform well in achieving the SGDs’ ideals and instruments. It is worth mentioning that there are some limits in this study since the analyses were performed considering a scientific papers from two database and bounded by language and keywords. Publication data were another filter used in the systematic review, although SDGs were presented only in 2015, which makes the period range ideal in this case.
The highest-scoring SDGs were SDG7 (65%), SDG12 (63%), and SDG13 (56%); the lowest-scoring ones were SDG1 (5%), SDG4 (3%), and SDG14 (3%). In addition, SDGs 5, 10, 15, and 16 were not mentioned at all. Thereby, the RFT literature must advance the literature on key-issues that are directly correlated with this research agenda and are still poorly addressed by the corpus. In this regard, we advise for the development of SDGs 2, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 17 as priority areas to be further developed by the RFT literature.
The analyzed corpus is developed in a very technical approach and does not recognize the necessity of integrated and holistic research development. In addition, there is a lack of a broad-spectrum discussions of relevant SDGs synergies, and these present relevant themes that should be addressed by futures studies in the field, since only SDG7 was fully contemplated by the analyzed corpus.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and methodology: F.M.d.A.C., A.C.R.T. and P.G.M.; software: A.C.R.T. and P.G.M.; formal analysis: F.M.d.A.C., A.C.R.T., P.G.M. and R.R.B.; investigation: F.M.d.A.C.; writing—original draft preparation: F.M.d.A.C., A.C.R.T. and P.G.M.; software: A.C.R.T. and P.G.M.; writing—review and editing, T.L.F.B. and D.M.; supervision: D.M.; project administration: D.M.; funding acquisition: T.L.F.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by FAPESP—São Paulo Research Foundation (2014/50279-4 and 2015/03804-9) and the support given by ANP (Brazil’s National Oil, Natural Gas and Biofuels Agency) through the R&D levy regulation. Ana Carolina Rodrigues thanks also to FAPESP support (2019/09242-3). We also had the support of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazil (CAPES) through the Programa de Pós-graduação em Energia (PPGE-IEE) Academic Excellence Program (PROEX).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sharma, A.; Strezov, V. Life cycle environmental and economic impact assessment of alternative transport fuels and power-train technologies. Energy 2017, 133, 1132–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nowakowska-Grunt, J.; Strzelczyk, M. The current situation and the directions of changes in road freight transport in the European Union. Transp. Res. Procedia 2019, 39, 350–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. IEA. Tracking Transport; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  4. Qu, Y.; Bektaş, T.; Bennell, J. Sustainability SI: Multimode Multicommodity Network Design Model for Intermodal Freight Transportation with Transfer and Emission Costs. Netw. Spat. Econ. 2016, 16, 303–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Kumar, A.; Mishra, R.K. Human health risk assessment of major air pollutants at transport corridors of Delhi, India. J. Transp. Health 2018, 10, 132–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Alam, A.; Besselink, B.; Turri, V.; MåRtensson, J.; Johansson, K.H. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Platooning for Sustainable Freight Transportation: A Cooperative Method to Enhance Safety and Efficiency. IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 2015, 35, 34–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Brotherton, T.; Gilde, A.; Tomic, J. 2015 e-truck task force: Key barriers affecting e-truck adoption, industry and policy implications, and recommendations to move the market forward. World Electr. Veh. J. 2016, 8, 651–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Gallo, J.B. Electric truck & bus grid integration, opportunities, challenges & recommendations. World Electr. Veh. J. 2016, 8, 45–56. [Google Scholar]
  9. Zhang, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Rui, W.; Thompson, R.G. Analyzing truck fleets’ acceptance of alternative fuel freight vehicles in China. Renew. Energy 2019, 134, 1148–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Qasim, M.; Ansari, T.M.; Hussain, M. Combustion, Performance, and Emission Evaluation of a Diesel Engine with Biodiesel Like Fuel Blends Derived From a Mixture of Pakistani Waste Canola and Waste Transformer Oils. Energies 2017, 10, 1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Li, Q.; Backes, F.; Wachtmeister, G. Application of canola oil operation in a diesel engine with common rail system. Fuel 2015, 159, 141–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Nantha Gopal, K.; Ashok, B.; Senthil Kumar, K.; Thundil Karuppa Raj, R.; Denis Ashok, S.; Varatharajan, V.; Anand, V. Performance analysis and emissions profile of cottonseed oil biodiesel–ethanol blends in a CI engine. Biofuels 2018, 9, 711–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tüccar, G.; Uludamar, E. Emission and engine performance analysis of a diesel engine using hydrogen enriched pomegranate seed oil biodiesel. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2018, 43, 18014–18019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hora, T.S.; Agarwal, A.K. Experimental study of the composition of hydrogen enriched compressed natural gas on engine performance, combustion and emission characteristics. Fuel 2015, 160, 470–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Park, C.W.; Kim, C.G.; Choi, Y.; Lee, S.Y.; Lee, S.W.; Yi, U.H.; Lee, J.H.; Kim, T.M.; Kim, D.S. Development of hydrogen-compressed natural gas blend engine for heavy duty vehicles. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 2017, 18, 1061–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Singh, D.; Subramanian, K.A.; Singal, S.K. Emissions and fuel consumption characteristics of a heavy duty diesel engine fueled with Hydroprocessed Renewable Diesel and Biodiesel. Appl. Energy 2015, 155, 440–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shafiei, E.; Davidsdottir, B.; Leaver, J.; Stefansson, H.; Asgeirsson, E.I. Comparative analysis of hydrogen, biofuels and electricity transitional pathways to sustainable transport in a renewable-based energy system. Energy 2015, 83, 614–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Quiros, D.C.; Smith, J.; Thiruvengadam, A.; Huai, T.; Hu, S. Greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty natural gas, hybrid, and conventional diesel on-road trucks during freight transport. Atmos. Environ. 2017, 168, 36–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rudolph, C. How may incentives for electric cars affect purchase decisions? Transp. Policy 2016, 52, 113–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mersky, A.C.; Sprei, F.; Samaras, C.; Qian, Z.S. Effectiveness of incentives on electric vehicle adoption in Norway. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2016, 46, 56–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. da Silva, R.E.; Sobrinho, P.M.; de Souza, T.M. How can energy prices and subsidies accelerate the integration of electric vehicles in Brazil? An economic analysis. Electr. J. 2018, 31, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Song, S. Assessment of transport emissions impact and the associated social cost for Chengdu, China. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2018, 12, 128–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Schulte, J.; Ny, H. Electric Road Systems: Strategic Stepping Stone on the Way towards Sustainable Freight Transport? Sustainability 2018, 10, 1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Song, H.; Ou, X.; Yuan, J.; Yu, M.; Wang, C. Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of diesel/LNG heavy-duty vehicle fleets in China based on a bottom-up model analysis. Energy 2017, 140, 966–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Sen, B.; Ercan, T.; Tatari, O.; Zheng, Q.P. Robust Pareto optimal approach to sustainable heavy-duty truck fleet composition. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 146, 502–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ally, J.; Pryor, T.; Pigneri, A. The role of hydrogen in Australia’s transport energy mix. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40, 4426–4441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Mulholland, E.; Teter, J.; Cazzola, P.; McDonald, Z.Ó.; Gallachóir, B.P. The long haul towards decarbonising road freight—A global assessment to 2050. Appl. Energy 2018, 216, 678–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Talebian, H.; Herrera, O.E.; Tran, M.; Mérida, W. Electrification of road freight transport: Policy implications in British Columbia. Energy Policy 2018, 115, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ogunkoya, D.; Fang, T. Engine performance, combustion, and emissions study of biomass to liquid fuel in a compression-ignition engine. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 95, 342–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Singh, D.; Singal, S.K.; Garg, M.O.; Maiti, P.; Mishra, S.; Ghosh, P.K. Transient performance and emission characteristics of a heavy-duty diesel engine fuelled with microalga Chlorella variabilis and Jatropha curcas biodiesels. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 106, 892–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Baltacioglu, M.K.; Arat, H.T.; Özcanli, M.; Aydin, K. Experimental comparison of pure hydrogen and HHO (hydroxy) enriched biodiesel (B10) fuel in a commercial diesel engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016, 41, 8347–8353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sathiyamoorthi, R.; Sankaranarayanan, G.; Adhith kumaar, S.B.; Chiranjeevi, T.; Dilip Kumar, D. Experimental investigation on performance, combustion and emission characteristics of a single cylinder diesel engine fuelled by biodiesel derived from Cymbopogon Martinii. Renew. Energy 2019, 132, 394–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Smajla, I.; Karasalihović Sedlar, D.; Drljača, B.; Jukić, L. Fuel Switch to LNG in Heavy Truck Traffic. Energies 2019, 12, 515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Yuan, J.H.; Zhou, S.; Peng, T.D.; Wang, G.H.; Ou, X.M. Petroleum substitution, greenhouse gas emissions reduction and environmental benefits from the development of natural gas vehicles in China. Pet. Sci. 2018, 15, 644–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Sen, B.; Ercan, T.; Tatari, O. Does a battery-electric truck make a difference?—Life cycle emissions, costs, and externality analysis of alternative fuel-powered Class 8 heavy-duty trucks in the United States. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 110–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hosseini, S.M.; Ahmadi, R. Performance and emissions characteristics in the combustion of co-fuel diesel-hydrogen in a heavy duty engine. Appl. Energy 2017, 205, 911–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cai, H.; Burnham, A.; Chen, R.; Wang, M. Wells to wheels: Environmental implications of natural gas as a transportation fuel. Energy Policy 2017, 109, 565–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hu, M.; Huang, W.; Cai, J.; Chen, J. The evaluation on liquefied natural gas truck promotion in Shenzhen freight. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2017, 9, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Osorio-Tejada, J.L.; Llera-Sastresa, E.; Scarpellini, S. Liquefied natural gas: Could it be a reliable option for road freight transport in the EU? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 785–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Osorio-Tejada, J.L.; Llera-Sastresa, E.; Scarpellini, S. A multi-criteria sustainability assessment for biodiesel and liquefied natural gas as alternative fuels in transport systems. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2017, 42, 169–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Yusop, A.F.; Mamat, R.; Yusaf, T.; Najafi, G.; Yasin, M.H.M.; Khathri, A.M. Analysis of Particulate Matter (PM) Emissions in Diesel Engines Using Palm Oil Biodiesel Blended with Diesel Fuel. Energies 2018, 11, 1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Yang, P.-M.; Lin, Y.-C.; Lin, K.C.; Jhang, S.-R.; Chen, S.-C.; Wang, C.-C.; Lin, Y.-C. Comparison of carbonyl compound emissions from a diesel engine generator fueled with blends of n-butanol, biodiesel and diesel. Energy 2015, 90, 266–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mouette, D.; Machado, P.G.; Fraga, D.; Peyerl, D.; Borges, R.R.; Brito, T.L.F.; Shimomaebara, L.A.; Moutinho dos Santos, E. Costs and emissions assessment of a Blue Corridor in a Brazilian reality: The use of liquefied natural gas in the transport sector. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 668, 1104–1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Grigoratos, T.; Fontaras, G.; Martini, G.; Peletto, C. A study of regulated and green house gas emissions from a prototype heavy-duty compressed natural gas engine under transient and real life conditions. Energy 2016, 103, 340–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Taefi, T.T.; Stütz, S.; Fink, A. Assessing the cost-optimal mileage of medium-duty electric vehicles with a numeric simulation approach. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2017, 56, 271–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Khan, M.I.; Shahrestani, M.; Hayat, T.; Shakoor, A.; Vahdati, M. Life cycle (well-to-wheel) energy and environmental assessment of natural gas as transportation fuel in Pakistan. Appl. Energy 2019, 242, 1738–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lee, D.Y.; Elgowainy, A.; Kotz, A.; Vijayagopal, R.; Marcinkoski, J. Life-cycle implications of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle technology for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. J. Power Sour. 2018, 393, 217–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. El Hannach, M.; Ahmadi, P.; Guzman, L.; Pickup, S.; Kjeang, E. Life cycle assessment of hydrogen and diesel dual-fuel class 8 heavy duty trucks. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2019, 44, 8575–8584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lajevardi, S.M.; Axsen, J.; Crawford, C. Examining the role of natural gas and advanced vehicle technologies in mitigating CO2 emissions of heavy-duty trucks: Modeling prototypical British Columbia routes with road grades. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2018, 62, 186–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Taefi, T.T.; Kreutzfeldt, J.; Held, T.; Fink, A. Supporting the adoption of electric vehicles in urban road freight transport—A multi-criteria analysis of policy measures in Germany. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 2016, 91, 61–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Banerjee, R.; Debbarma, B.; Roy, S.; Chakraborti, P.; Bose, P.K. An experimental investigation on the potential of hydrogen-biohol synergy in the performance-emission trade-off paradigm of a diesel engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016, 41, 3712–3739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tsita, K.G.; Pilavachi, P.A. Decarbonizing the Greek road transport sector using alternative technologies and fuels. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2017, 1, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Carrara, S.; Longden, T. Freight futures: The potential impact of road freight on climate policy. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2017, 55, 359–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Sharafian, A.; Asaee, S.R.; Herrera, O.E.; Mérida, W. Policy implications of liquefied natural gas use in heavy-duty vehicles: Examples in Canada and British Columbia. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2019, 69, 123–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Keller, V.; Lyseng, B.; Wade, C.; Scholtysik, S.; Fowler, M.; Donald, J.; Palmer-Wilson, K.; Robertson, B.; Wild, P.; Rowe, A. Electricity system and emission impact of direct and indirect electrification of heavy-duty transportation. Energy 2019, 172, 740–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zhiyi, Y.; Xunmin, O. Life cycle analysis on liquefied natural gas and compressed natural gas in heavy-duty trucks with methane leakage emphasized. Energy Procedia 2019, 158, 3652–3657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Hagos, D.A.; Ahlgren, E.O. Well-to-wheel assessment of natural gas vehicles and their fuel supply infrastructures–Perspectives on gas in transport in Denmark. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2018, 65, 14–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kampker, A.; Krciskother, K.; Buning, M.K.; Gomez, J.G.D. Technological and Total Cost of Ownership Analysis of Electric Powertrain Concepts for Long-Haul Transport in Comparison to Traditional Powertrain Concepts. In Proceedings of the 2018 8th International Electric Drives Production Conference (EDPC), Schweinfurt, Germany, 4–5 December 2018; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Shafiei, E.; Leaver, J.; Davidsdottir, B. Cost-effectiveness analysis of inducing green vehicles to achieve deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in New Zealand. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 150, 339–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Liu, J.; Wang, H.; Li, Y.; Zheng, Z.; Xue, Z.; Shang, H.; Yao, M. Effects of diesel/PODE (polyoxymethylene dimethyl ethers) blends on combustion and emission characteristics in a heavy duty diesel engine. Fuel 2016, 177, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Alamia, A.; Magnusson, I.; Johnsson, F.; Thunman, H. Well-to-wheel analysis of bio-methane via gasification, in heavy duty engines within the transport sector of the European Union. Appl. Energy 2016, 170, 445–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Pan, W.; Yao, C.; Han, G.; Wei, H.; Wang, Q. The impact of intake air temperature on performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel methanol dual fuel engine. Fuel 2015, 162, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Busch, J.; Strassburg, B. The Use of Border Tax Adjustment as a Tool to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Prospects for Energy Efficiency Improvement and Reduction of Emissions and Life Cycle Costs for Natural Gas Vehicles. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2017, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Askin, A.C.; Barter, G.E.; West, T.H.; Manley, D.K. The heavy-duty vehicle future in the United States: A parametric analysis of technology and policy tradeoffs. Energy Policy 2015, 81, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Holmer, O.; Eriksson, L. Simultaneous Reduction of Fuel Consumption and NOx Emissions through Hybridization of a Long Haulage Truck. IFAC-Pap. Online 2017, 50, 8927–8932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Adam, A.; Ramlan, N.A.; Jaharudin, N.F.; Hamzah, H.; Othman, M.F.; Mrwan, A.A.G. Analysis of combustion characteristics, engine performance and exhaust emissions of diesel engine fueled with upgraded waste source fuel. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017, 42, 17993–18004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Muthaiyan, P.; Gomathinayagam, S. Combustion Characteristics of a Diesel Engine Using Propanol Diesel Fuel Blends. J. Inst. Eng. Ser. C 2016, 97, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Emiroğlu, A.O.; Şen, M. Combustion, performance and exhaust emission characterizations of a diesel engine operating with a ternary blend (alcohol-biodiesel-diesel fuel). Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 133, 371–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kumar, R.S.; Loganathan, M.; Gunasekaran, E.J. Experimental investigation of the effect of simultaneous nitrogen, hydrogen and EGR addition in a biodiesel operated CI engine. Biofuels 2017, 8, 685–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Rupp, M.; Schulze, S.; Kuperjans, I. Comparative life cycle analysis of conventional and hybrid heavy-duty trucks. World Electr. Veh. J. 2018, 9, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Gao, Z.; LaClair, T.J.; Smith, D.E.; Daw, C.S. Exploring fuel-saving potential of long-haul truck hybridization. Transp. Res. Rec. 2015, 2502, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ližbetin, J.; Hlatká, M.; Bartuška, L. Issues concerning declared energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of FAME biofuels. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Liu, F.; Zhao, F.; Liu, Z.; Hao, H. The impact of fuel cell vehicle deployment on road transport greenhouse gas emissions: The China case. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2018, 43, 22604–22621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Liu, F.; Zhao, F.; Liu, Z.; Hao, H. China’s electric vehicle deployment: Energy and greenhouse gas emission impacts. Energies 2018, 11, 3353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Bachmann, C.; Chingcuanco, F.; MacLean, H.; Roorda, M.J. Life-cycle assessment of diesel-electric hybrid and conventional diesel trucks for deliveries. J. Transp. Eng. 2015, 141, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Connolly, D. Economic viability of electric roads compared to oil and batteries for all forms of road transport. Energy Strategy Rev. 2017, 18, 235–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Çelebi, K.; Uludamar, E.; Tosun, E.; Yıldızhan, Ş.; Aydın, K.; Özcanlı, M. Experimental and artificial neural network approach of noise and vibration characteristic of an unmodified diesel engine fuelled with conventional diesel, and biodiesel blends with natural gas addition. Fuel 2017, 197, 159–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yangka, D.; Newman, P. Bhutan: Can the 1.5 °C agenda be integrated with growth in wealth and happiness. Urb. Plan. 2018, 3, 94–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Zhao, Y.; Tatari, O. Carbon and energy footprints of refuse collection trucks: A hybrid life cycle evaluation. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2017, 12, 180–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Liimatainen, H.; van Vliet, O.; Aplyn, D. The potential of electric trucks–An international commodity-level analysis. Appl. Energy 2019, 236, 804–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Stettler, M.E.J.; Midgley, W.J.B.; Swanson, J.J.; Cebon, D.; Boies, A.M. Greenhouse Gas and Noxious Emissions from Dual Fuel Diesel and Natural Gas Heavy Goods Vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 2018–2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Zhao, Y.; Onat, N.C.; Kucukvar, M.; Tatari, O. Carbon and energy footprints of electric delivery trucks: A hybrid multi-regional input-output life cycle assessment. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2016, 47, 195–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Plötz, P.; Gnann, T.; Jochem, P.; Yilmaz, H.Ü.; Kaschub, T. Impact of electric trucks powered by overhead lines on the European electricity system and CO2 emissions. Energy Policy 2019, 130, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Al-lwayzy, S.H.; Yusaf, T. Diesel engine performance and exhaust gas emissions using Microalgae Chlorella protothecoides biodiesel. Renew. Energy 2017, 101, 690–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Lebeau, P.; Macharis, C.; Van Mierlo, J.; Lebeau, K. Electrifying light commercial vehicles for city logistics? A total cost of ownership analysis. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 2015, 15, 551–569. [Google Scholar]
  86. Tong, F.; Jaramillo, P.; Azevedo, I.M.L. Comparison of Life Cycle Greenhouse Gases from Natural Gas Pathways for Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 7123–7133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  87. Lepitzki, J.; Axsen, J. The role of a low carbon fuel standard in achieving long-term GHG reduction targets. Energy Policy 2018, 119, 423–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Camuzeaux, J.R.; Alvarez, R.A.; Brooks, S.A.; Browne, J.B.; Sterner, T. Influence of methane emissions and vehicle efficiency on the climate implications of heavy-duty natural gas trucks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 6402–6410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Kast, J.; Morrison, G.; Gangloff, J.J.; Vijayagopal, R.; Marcinkoski, J. Designing hydrogen fuel cell electric trucks in a diverse medium and heavy duty market. Res. Transp. Econ. 2018, 70, 139–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Yang, P.P.-J. Energy Resilient Urban Form: A Design Perspective. Energy Procedia 2015, 75, 2922–2927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Kroll, C.; Warchold, A.; Pradhan, P. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies? Palgrave Commun. 2019, 5, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Thomas, S.; Richter, M.; Lestari, W.; Prabawaningtyas, S.; Anggoro, Y.; Kuntoadji, I. Transdisciplinary research methods in community energy development and governance in Indonesia: Insights for sustainability science. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 45, 184–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Lipińska, M.; Tomaszewska, M.; Kołozyn-Krajewska, D. Identifying factors associated with food losses during transportation: Potentials for social purposes. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. DiMaggio, C.; Durkin, M.; Richardson, L.D. The association of light trucks and vans with paediatric pedestrian deaths. Int. J. Inj. Control Saf. Promot. 2006, 13, 95–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Zhao, B.; Zheng, H.; Wang, S.; Smith, K.R.; Lua, X.; Aunan, K.; Gu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Ding, D.; Xing, J.; et al. Change in household fuels dominates the decrease in PM2.5 exposure and premature mortality in China in 2005–2015. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 12401–12406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  96. Figliozzi, M.A. Lifecycle modeling and assessment of unmanned aerial vehicles (Drones) CO2 e emissions. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2017, 57, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Hao, H.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, F.; Li, W. Natural gas as vehicle fuel in China: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 521–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Lurie, K.; Nayebare, S.R.; Fatmi, Z.; Carpenter, D.O.; Siddique, A.; Malashock, D.; Khan, K.; Zeb, J.; Hussain, M.M.; Khatib, F.; et al. PM 2.5 in a megacity of Asia (Karachi): Source apportionment and health effects. Atmos. Environ. 2019, 202, 223–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. IEA. Global Energy & CO2 Status Report: Emissions; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  100. Brito, T.L.F.; dos Santos, E.M.; Galbieri, R.; de Medeiros Costa, H.K. Qualitative Comparative Analysis of cities that introduced compressed natural gas to their urban bus fleet. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 502–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Almeida, A.C.L. Multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) as a tool to build indicators and localize sustainable development goal 11 in Brazilian municipalities. Heliyon 2019, 5, e02128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Janelle, D.G.; Beuthe, M. Globalization and research issues in transportation. J. Transp. Geogr. 1997, 5, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Shirvani, T. Disruptive Technology and Innovation in Transport; European Bank: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 14 03425 g001 550
Figure 1. Systematic review flowchart.
Figure 1. Systematic review flowchart.
Sustainability 14 03425 g001
Sustainability 14 03425 g002 550
Figure 2. Categorization methodology developed for addressing RFT literature SDG achievements.
Figure 2. Categorization methodology developed for addressing RFT literature SDG achievements.
Sustainability 14 03425 g002
Sustainability 14 03425 g003 550
Figure 3. Road freight transport literature performance in achieving SDGs ideals and goals.
Figure 3. Road freight transport literature performance in achieving SDGs ideals and goals.
Sustainability 14 03425 g003
Sustainability 14 03425 g004 550
Figure 4. Road freight transport literature performance in achieving SDGs ideals and goals.
Figure 4. Road freight transport literature performance in achieving SDGs ideals and goals.
Sustainability 14 03425 g004
Sustainability 14 03425 g005 550
Figure 5. Summary of priority areas to be addressed in the near future.
Figure 5. Summary of priority areas to be addressed in the near future.
Sustainability 14 03425 g005
Table
Table 1. Corpus achievements and allocation of SDG ideals and instruments.
Table 1. Corpus achievements and allocation of SDG ideals and instruments.
SDGsSDG Ideal and Instrument AchievementResults per Reference and Its Performance (%)
Sustainability 14 03425 i001idealID1. End poverty;
ID2. Increase rights;
ID3. Reduce vulnerability.		ID3: [22];
IN2: [22,23,24,25];
Performance: 5% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Implement social protection systems;
IN2. Ensure resources for National Policies and Programs.
Sustainability 14 03425 i002idealID1. End hunger and malnutrition;
ID2. Increase agricultural productivity;		ID1: [26,27,28];
IN1: [12,13,29,30,31,32];
IN2: [13];
Performance: 10% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Increase investment, research, and gene banks;
IN2. Implement Measures to food reserves, access to land, and limit food price.
Sustainability 14 03425 i003idealID1. Ensure health and well-being;
ID2 End preventable deaths, reduce disease;
ID3. Reduce deaths from hazardous.		ID1: [25,33,34,35];
ID2: [22,24,34];
ID3: [22,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46];
IN2: [10,13,22,24,25,33,34,35,42,43,44,47,48];
IN3: [49];
Performance: 27% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive services;
IN2. Ensure access to universal health coverage and financing;
IN3. Support research and development.
Sustainability 14 03425 i004idealID1. Inclusive and quality education;
ID2 Lifelong learning opportunities;
ID3. Decent Job;
ID4. End gender education disparities.		ID2: [50];
ID3: [9,40];
Performance: 3% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Build and upgrade education facilities
Sustainability 14 03425 i005idealID1. Gender equality;
ID2. End discrimination;
ID3. End gender violence		N/A
Performance: 0% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Gender focused Public Policies;
IN2. Empower women
Sustainability 14 03425 i006idealID1. Water Sustainable management;
ID2. Water for all/Reduce water scarcity;
ID3. Water quality		ID2: [27,37,40];
ID3: [23,46];
Performance: 6% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Implement measures for Protect, Restore, and Management;
IN2. Implement Policies and Programs
Sustainability 14 03425 i007idealID1. Access to modern energy;
ID2. Increase renewable energy		ID1: [8,15,16,17,26,29,30,36,37,38,39,41,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64];
ID2: [7,8,9,12,17,22,23,26,28,29,31,35,36,37,40,41,44,45,46,47,51,52,55,56,59,61,63,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76];
IN1: [7,12,13,24,26,33,39,41,52,54,57,66,67,68,69,74,77];
Performance: 65% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Enhance international cooperation to clean energy research and technology
Sustainability 14 03425 i008idealID1. Promote economic growth;
ID2. Productive and decent work;
ID3. Eradicate forced labor.		ID1: [8,10,32,41,51,53,72,78];
IN1: [23,26,44,56,57];
IN2: [12,27,69];
Performance: 19% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Promote development-oriented policies;
IN2. Implement resource efficiency programs;
IN3. Strengthen the capacity of domestic financial institutions
Sustainability 14 03425 i009idealID1. Resilient infrastructure and Sustainable industrialization;
ID2. Reliable infrastructure;
ID3. Raise industry share employment and gross		ID1: [7,8,15,17,23,24,25,26,39,40,41,43,50,51,52,53,55,59,64,72,75,76,79,80];
ID2: [43,52];
IN2: [10,12,15,16,17,22,23,26,33,34,36,37,38,39,41,43,47,50,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,63,64,67,68,69,76,78,80];
Performance: 52% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Promote financial services;
IN2. Retrofit and enhance research and innovation
Sustainability 14 03425 i010idealID1. Reduce inequality;N/A
Performance: 0% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Adopt Social protection policies;
IN2. Strengthen the implementation of regulations and institutions;
IN3. Implement migration policies
Sustainability 14 03425 i011idealID1. Inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities;
ID2. Adequate and safe basic services/Upgrade slums;
ID3. Reduce impacts on deaths and economic losses.		ID1: [9,17,24,26,35,37,38,40,45,50,52];
ID3: [10,15,22,23,24,33,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,47,52,57,58,60,62,64,72,79,81,82];
IN1: [9,10,16,17,22,24,26,27,30,33,37,40,42,52,53,54,55,59,61,64,72,73,74,78,79,82,83];
Performance: 51% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Implement integrated policies development
Sustainability 14 03425 i012idealID1. Sustainable consumption and production;
ID2. Achieve the environmentally sound management		ID1: [23,41];
ID2: [10,13,15,16,17,22,24,26,29,30,31,33,34,35,36,39,40,41,42,43,46,47,48,49,51,52,55,56,57,59,60,61,62,63,64,66,68,72,73,74,78,79,81,82,83,84,85,86];
IN1: [10,23,24,34,35,40,43,47,48,49,52,70,72,73,74,79,82,86,87];
Performance: 63% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Implement programs on sustainable consumption and production patterns;
IN2. Policies to rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies
Sustainability 14 03425 i013idealID1. Combat climate change;
ID2. Strengthen resilience		ID1: [9,10,14,15,16,17,22,23,24,26,27,28,30,34,36,37,38,39,40,42,43,45,46,48,50,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,68,73,77,78,87,88,89];
ID2: [40,78];
Performance: 56% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Implement national disaster risk reduction strategies
Sustainability 14 03425 i014idealID1. Conserve oceans, seas, and marine resources.ID1: [30,37,39];
Performance: 3% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Regulate harvesting and combat illegal fishing;
IN2. Develop science and technology;
IN3. Recognizes rights for small-scale fisheries
Sustainability 14 03425 i015idealID1. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystemsN/A
Performance: 0% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Promote the implementation of sustainable management;
IN2. Restore and conserve degraded land and soil;
IN3. Finance and resource mobilization
Sustainability 14 03425 i016idealID1. Peaceful societies;
ID2. Reduce violence;
ID3. End abuse and exploitation;
ID4. Reduce corruption and bribery		N/A
Performance: 0% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Promote Public Policies to ensure justice, participation, and accountability
Sustainability 14 03425 i017idealID1. Sustainable development;
ID2. Share knowledge		IN1: [8,17,23,29,43];
IN2: [25,52,72];
IN3: [7,8,23,28,47,74,76,88,90];
Performance: 16% of the corpus
instrumentIN1. Strengthen domestic resource mobilization;
IN2. Implement development assistance commitments;
IN3. Promote access to science, technology, and innovation;
IN4. Global partnership for Sustainable Development
Total4236N/A
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Collaço, F.M.d.A.; Teixeira, A.C.R.; Machado, P.G.; Borges, R.R.; Brito, T.L.F.; Mouette, D. Road Freight Transport Literature and the Achievements of the Sustainable Development Goals—A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3425. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063425

AMA Style

Collaço FMdA, Teixeira ACR, Machado PG, Borges RR, Brito TLF, Mouette D. Road Freight Transport Literature and the Achievements of the Sustainable Development Goals—A Systematic Review. Sustainability. 2022; 14(6):3425. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063425

Chicago/Turabian Style

Collaço, Flávia Mendes de Almeida, Ana Carolina Rodrigues Teixeira, Pedro Gerber Machado, Raquel Rocha Borges, Thiago Luis Felipe Brito, and Dominique Mouette. 2022. "Road Freight Transport Literature and the Achievements of the Sustainable Development Goals—A Systematic Review" Sustainability 14, no. 6: 3425. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063425

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop