Innovative Delivery Methods in the Last-Mile: Unveiling Consumer Preference
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Discrete Choice Experiment
2.2. Survey and Sample
2.3. Model Estimation
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Results
3.2. Choice Model Estimation
3.3. Relative Importance of Delivery to the Address
3.4. Martket Share Simulation
4. Discussion
4.1. Theoretical Contributions
4.2. Practical Contributions
4.3. Research Limitations and Future Directions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jacobs, K.; Warner, S.; Rietra, M.; Mazza, L.; Buvat, J.; Khadikar, A.; Cherian, S.; Khemka, Y. The Last-Mile Delivery Challenge. Available online: https://www.capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Report-Digital-%E2%80%93-Last-Mile-Delivery-Challenge1.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2022).
- Wireless Logic A Research Report into the Changing Attitudes, Behaviors, and Expectations of UK Consumers: Could IoT Be an Enabler of next-Level Retail? Available online: https://wirelesslogic.com/library/Everything-Now-Infographic-Last-Mile-Delivery.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2022).
- Borghetti, F.; Caballini, C.; Carboni, A.; Grossato, G.; Maja, R.; Barabino, B. The Use of Drones for Last-Mile Delivery: A Numerical Case Study in Milan, Italy. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deloison, T.; Hannon, E.; Anja, H.; Heid, B.; Klink, C.; Sahay, R.; Wolff, C. The Future of the Last-Mile Ecosystem. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-the-last-mile-ecosystem (accessed on 11 May 2022).
- Gevaers, R.; Voorde, E.V.D.; Vanelslander, T. Characteristics of Innovations in Last Mile Logistics—Using Best Practices, Case Studies and Making the Link with Green and Sustainable Logistics. Assoc. Eur. Transp. Contrib. 2009, 1, 21. [Google Scholar]
- OECD Decarbonising Urban Mobility with Land Use and Transport Policies: The Case of Auckland. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/env/Decarbonising-Urban-Mobility-with-Land-Use-and-Transport-Policies--The-Case-of-Auckland.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2022).
- Asdecker, B. Building the E-Commerce Supply Chain of the Future: What Influences Consumer Acceptance of Alternative Places of Delivery on the Last-Mile. Logistics 2021, 5, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boysen, N.; Fedtke, S.; Schwerdfeger, S. Last-Mile Delivery Concepts: A Survey from an Operational Research Perspective. OR Spectr. 2021, 43, 1–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiba-Janiak, M.; Marcinkowski, J.; Jagoda, A.; Skowrońska, A. Sustainable Last Mile Delivery on E-Commerce Market in Cities from the Perspective of Various Stakeholders. Literature Review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 71, 102984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merkert, R.; Bliemer, M.C.J.; Fayyaz, M. Consumer Preferences for Innovative and Traditional Last-Mile Parcel Delivery. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2022, 52, 261–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, L.; Yuen, K.F.; Xie, D.; Fang, M.; Wang, X. Consumer’s Usage of Logistics Technologies: Integration of Habit into the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Technol. Soc. 2021, 67, 101789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kapser, S.; Abdelrahman, M.; Bernecker, T. Autonomous Delivery Vehicles to Fight the Spread of COVID-19—How Do Men and Women Differ in Their Acceptance? Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 148, 183–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kedia, A.; Kusumastuti, D.; Nicholson, A. Acceptability of Collection and Delivery Points from Consumers’ Perspective: A Qualitative Case Study of Christchurch City. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2017, 5, 587–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molin, E.; Kosicki, M.; Van Duin, R. Consumer Preferences for Parcel Delivery Methods: The Potential of Parcel Locker Use in the Netherlands. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 2022, 22, 183–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osakwe, C.N.; Hudik, M.; Říha, D.; Stros, M.; Ramayah, T. Critical Factors Characterizing Consumers’ Intentions to Use Drones for Last-Mile Delivery: Does Delivery Risk Matter? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 65, 102865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pani, A.; Mishra, S.; Golias, M.; Figliozzi, M. Evaluating Public Acceptance of Autonomous Delivery Robots during COVID-19 Pandemic. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 89, 102600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buldeo Rai, H.; Verlinde, S.; Macharis, C. Unlocking the Failed Delivery Problem? Opportunities and Challenges for Smart Locks from a Consumer Perspective. Res. Transp. Econ. 2021, 87, 100753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buldeo Rai, H.; Verlinde, S.; Macharis, C. The “next Day, Free Delivery” Myth Unravelled: Possibilities for Sustainable Last Mile Transport in an Omnichannel Environment. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2019, 47, 39–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caspersen, E.; Navrud, S.; Bengtsson, J. Act Locally? Are Female Online Shoppers Willing to Pay to Reduce the Carbon Footprint of Last Mile Deliveries? Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2022, 16, 1144–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caspersen, E.; Navrud, S. The Sharing Economy and Consumer Preferences for Environmentally Sustainable Last Mile Deliveries. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2021, 95, 102863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cebeci, M.S.; Tapia, R.J.; Kroesen, M.; De Bok, M.; Tavasszy, L. The Effect of Trust on the Choice for Crowdshipping Services. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2023, 170, 103622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Da Silva, J.V.S.; Vaz De Magalhães, D.J.A.; Medrado, L. Demand Analysis for Pick-up Sites as an Alternative Solution for Home Delivery in the Brazilian Context. Transp. Res. Procedia 2019, 39, 462–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gawor, T.; Hoberg, K. Customers’ Valuation of Time and Convenience in e-Fulfillment. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2019, 49, 75–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iannaccone, G.; Marcucci, E.; Gatta, V. What Young E-Consumers Want? Forecasting Parcel Lockers Choice in Rome. Logistics 2021, 5, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, L.K.D.; Morganti, E.; Dablanc, L.; Oliveira, R.L.M.D. Analysis of the Potential Demand of Automated Delivery Stations for E-Commerce Deliveries in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Res. Transp. Econ. 2017, 65, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Souza, N.L.S.D.; Stradioto Neto, L.A.; Fettermann, D.D.C.; Frazzon, E.M. Evaluation of the Customer Requirements for Last Mile Delivery in Brazil. Braz. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2022, 19, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wegerstedt, J.M.; Hetland, M. Measuring Consumer Preferences: Attributes Impacting Choice of Home Deliveries in Oslo. Master Thesis, Molde University College, Molde, Norway, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Wicaksono, S.; Lin, X.; Tavasszy, L.A. Market Potential of Bicycle Crowdshipping: A Two-Sided Acceptance Analysis. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2022, 45, 100660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polydoropoulou, A.; Tsirimpa, A.; Karakikes, I.; Tsouros, I.; Pagoni, I. Mode Choice Modeling for Sustainable Last-Mile Delivery: The Greek Perspective. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guy, V. An Exploratory Study into the Influence of Last-Mile Home Delivery Innovations on Consumer Delivery Service Choices in the Parcel and Meal Delivery Markets. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Collins, A.T. Behavioural Influences on the Environmental Impact of Collection/Delivery Points. In Green Logistics and Transportation; Fahimnia, B., Bell, M.G.H., Hensher, D.A., Sarkis, J., Eds.; Greening of Industry Networks Studies; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 4, pp. 15–34. ISBN 978-3-319-17180-7. [Google Scholar]
- Rossolov, A. A Last-Mile Delivery Channel Choice by E-Shoppers: Assessing the Potential Demand for Automated Parcel Lockers. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2021, 26, 983–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kedia, A.; Kusumastuti, D.; Nicholson, A. Establishing Collection and Delivery Points to Encourage the Use of Active Transport: A Case Study in New Zealand Using a Consumer-Centric Approach. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kedia, A. Estimating the Effect of Online Shopping and Collection-Delivery Points on Shopping Travel in New Zealand. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Lim, S.F.W.T.; Jin, X.; Srai, J.S. Consumer-Driven e-Commerce: A Literature Review, Design Framework, and Research Agenda on Last-Mile Logistics Models. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2018, 48, 308–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morikawa, T. Correcting State Dependence and Serial Correlation in the RP/SP Combined Estimation Method. Transportation 1994, 21, 153–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hensher, D.A.; Rose, J.M.; Greene, W.H. Applied Choice Analysis, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-1-107-09264-8. [Google Scholar]
- Paluri, R.A.; Mehra, S. Financial Attitude Based Segmentation of Women in India: An Exploratory Study. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2016, 34, 670–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, L.; Sun, B. Four Types of Typical Discrete Choice Models: Which Are You Using? In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics, Suzhou, China, 8 July 2012; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Soekhai, V.; De Bekker-Grob, E.W.; Ellis, A.R.; Vass, C.M. Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future. Pharmacoeconomics 2019, 37, 201–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michela, T. Applying Discrete Choice Experiments in Social Care Research; National Institute for Health Research, School for Social Care Research: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Çebi Karaaslan, K. Hanehalkı Tasarruf Tercihlerinin Kesikli Tercih Modelleriyle Incelenmesi. Ph.D. Thesis, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Yakutiye, Türkiye, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Grace-Martin, K. Logistics Regression Models for Multinomial and Ordinal Variables. Available online: https://www.theanalysisfactor.com/logistic-regression-models-for-multinomial-and-ordinal-variables (accessed on 17 September 2022).
- Garson, D.G. Logistics Regression: Binomial and Multinomial; Statistical Associates Publishing: Asheboro, NC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- IBM Choosing a Procedure for Binary Logistic Regression. Available online: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/spss-statistics/26.0.0?topic=regression-choosing-procedure-binary-logistic (accessed on 16 July 2022).
- Pham, D.K. Sustainable Fashion: A Statistical Analysis of Consumers’ Behaviors by Stated Choice Experiment. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Vojáček, O.; Pecáková, I. Comparison of Discrete Choice Models for Economic Environmental Research. Prague Econ. Pap. 2010, 19, 35–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hess, S.; Palma, D. Apollo: A Flexible, Powerful and Customisable Freeware Package for Choice Model Estimation and Application. J. Choice Model. 2019, 32, 100170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordera, R.; Sañudo, R.; Echániz, E.; Nogués, S.; dell’Olio, L. Future Scenarios for the European Railway Sector: A Methodology Based on Past Trends and a Stated Preference Survey. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2023, 17, 148–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reck, D.J.; Axhausen, K.W. Who Uses Shared Micro-Mobility Services? Empirical Evidence from Zurich, Switzerland. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2021, 94, 102803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garver, M.S.; Williams, Z.; Stephen Taylor, G.; Wynne, W.R. Modelling Choice in Logistics: A Managerial Guide and Application. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2012, 42, 128–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milioti, C.; Pramatari, K.; Zampou, E. Choice of Prevailing Delivery Methods in E-Grocery: A Stated Preference Ranking Experiment. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2020, 49, 281–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joerss, M.; Schröder, J.; Neuhaus, F.; Klink, C.; Mann, F. Parcel Delivery: The Future of Last Mile. Available online: https://bdkep.de/files/bdkep-dateien/pdf/2016_the_future_of_last_mile.pdf (accessed on 17 December 2021).
- Capgemini Making the Last Mile Pay: Balancing Customer Expectations and Commercial Reality. Available online: https://www.capgemini.com/cn-zh/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/08/making-the-last_mile-pay.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2022).
Alternatives/ Attributes | Delivery to the Address | Delivery Points |
---|---|---|
Delivery price |
|
|
Delivery method |
|
|
Delivery term |
|
|
Delivery time window |
| |
Pick-up accessibility |
| |
Information and traceability |
|
|
Distance |
|
Sample = 480 | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 222 | 46% |
Female | 258 | 54% |
Age | ||
1945–1964 | 18 | 4% |
1965–1982 | 133 | 28% |
1983–2000 | 193 | 40% |
>2001 | 136 | 28% |
Education | ||
Primary school | 31 | 6% |
High school | 219 | 46% |
Associate’s degree | 25 | 5% |
Bachelor’s degree | 153 | 32% |
Graduate degree | 52 | 11% |
Employment | ||
Public | 90 | 19% |
Private | 167 | 35% |
Student | 112 | 23% |
Housewife | 54 | 11% |
Retired | 11 | 2% |
Self-employed | 31 | 7% |
Unemployed | 15 | 3% |
Monthly Household Income | ||
5500 ₺< | 4 | 1% |
5501–13,000 ₺ | 168 | 35% |
13,001 ₺–26,000 ₺ | 198 | 41% |
>26,001 ₺ | 110 | 23% |
Sample = 480 | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|
How many online purchases, excluding food and grocery orders, do you make annually? | ||
1–3 | 21 | 4% |
4–11 | 82 | 17% |
12–24 | 138 | 29% |
25–52 | 112 | 24% |
>53 | 127 | 26% |
Which delivery methods do you use for your current e-commerce purchases? (You can check more than one option) | ||
Delivery workers | 476 | 99% |
Drone | 0 | - |
Autonomous robot | 0 | - |
Service points | 128 | 27% |
Smart parcel lockers | 55 | 11% |
Do you consider delivery points, such as smart parcel lockers or service points, a feasible option for your online shopping? | ||
Yes | 309 | 65% |
No | 59 | 12% |
Undecided | 112 | 23% |
Could you specify your preferences regarding delivery points, including smart parcel lockers or service points? | ||
Supermarket chains | 82 | 17% |
Gas stations | 21 | 4% |
Public transportation stops | 126 | 27% |
Store/Groceries/Market | 230 | 48% |
Shopping mall | 21 | 4% |
Innovative delivery methods, such as smart parcel lockers, service points, drones, and autonomous robots, will enhance my delivery experience. | ||
Yes | 297 | 62% |
No | 58 | 12% |
Undecided | 125 | 26% |
Model | MNL | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Parameters | Value | T. Ratio | Std. Err. | p-Value |
Alternative-specific constants (ASC) | ||||
ASC_DA | ||||
ASC_DP | −1.4841 | −4.4910 | 0.3304 | 0.00 |
Delivery to the address (DA) | ||||
Delivery price (DAP) | −0.0855 | −16.4709 | 0.0051 | 0.00 |
Delivery method (DAM) | ||||
Delivery workers (DAM1) | ||||
Drone (DAM2) | −0.1127 | −1.2665 | 0.0890 | 0.10 |
Autonomous robot (DAM3) | −0.0299 | −0.3517 | 0.0852 | 0.36 |
Delivery term (DAT) | ||||
Within 2 h (DAT1) | 1.9219 | 9.0271 | 0.2129 | 0.00 |
Within 24 h (DAT2) | 1.0245 | 5.3651 | 0.1909 | 0.00 |
Between 25 and 48 h (DAT3) | 0.6487 | 4.4816 | 0.1447 | 0.00 |
Between 3 and 7 days, but the delivery date of choice (DAT4) | ||||
Delivery time window (DAW) | ||||
Day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) (DAW1) | ||||
Option to choose between day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) or evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00) (DAW2) | 1.0280 | 8.5069 | 0.1208 | 0.00 |
Option to choose from day delivery during week-days (09:00–18:00), evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00), or day delivery during weekends (09:00–18:00) (DAW3) | 1.5856 | 13.8686 | 0.1143 | 0.00 |
Option to choose from day delivery during week-days (09:00–18:00), evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00), day delivery during weekends (09:00–18:00), or evening delivery during weekends (18:00–22:00) (DAW4) | 1.5952 | 14.1489 | 0.1127 | 0.00 |
Information and traceability (DAI) | ||||
Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipping and the package is shipped to the consumer (DAI1) | ||||
Notifications by SMS or e-mail when thepackage is received for shipping and the package is shipped to the consumer and live location tracking (DAI2) | −0.0025 | −0.0350 | 0.0733 | 0.48 |
Delivery points (DP) | ||||
Delivery price (DPP) | −0.0609 | −8.1564 | 0.0074 | 0.00 |
Delivery method (DPM) | ||||
Service points (DPM1) | ||||
Smart parcel lockers (DMP2) | 0.3372 | 3.6462 | 0.0924 | 0.00 |
Delivery term (DPT) | ||||
Within 2 h (DPT1) | 1.4305 | 6.6063 | 0.2165 | 0.00 |
Within 24 h (DPT2) | 1.3612 | 9.2462 | 0.1472 | 0.00 |
Between 25 and 48 h (DPT3) | 1.1543 | 8.3185 | 0.1387 | 0.00 |
Between 3 and 7 days, but the delivery date of choice (DPT4) | ||||
Pick-up accessibility (DPA) | ||||
Available for collection during weekdays (09:00–22:00) (DPA1) | ||||
Available for collection during weekdays (09:00–22:00) and Saturdays (09:00–22:00) (DPA2) | 0.2702 | 2.7468 | 0.0983 | 0.00 |
Available for collection seven days a week (09:00–22:00) (DPA3) | 0.4698 | 4.7448 | 0.0990 | 0.00 |
Available for collection 24/7 (DPA4) | 0.1860 | 1.8707 | 0.0994 | 0.03 |
Information and traceability (DPI) | ||||
Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points (DPI1) | ||||
Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points and live location tracking. (DPI2) | −0.3009 | −4.4061 | 0.0682 | 0.00 |
Distance | ||||
500 m from your home/workplace (DPD1) | 0.8113 | 6.3929 | 0.1269 | 0.00 |
1000 m from your home/workplace (DPD2) | 0.7390 | 6.6810 | 0.1106 | 0.00 |
1500 m from your home/workplace (DPD3) | 0.6452 | 6.1082 | 0.1056 | 0.00 |
2000 m from your home/workplace (DPD4) | ||||
Initial Log-Likelihood: −3992.53 | ||||
Final Log-Likelihood: −3351.1 | ||||
Adjusted McFadden’s R2: 0.1607 |
Attributes | Lowest Utility Contribution | Highest Utility Contribution | Utility Contribution Range | Relative Importance |
---|---|---|---|---|
Delivery price | −4.275 | −1.71 | 2.565 | 41% |
Delivery term | 0 | 1.9219 | 1.9219 | 31% |
Delivery time window | 0 | 1.5952 | 1.5952 | 26% |
Delivery method | −0.1127 | 0 | 0.1127 | 2% |
Information and traceability | −0.0025 | 0 | 0.0025 | - |
Attributes | Lowest Utility Contribution | Highest Utility Contribution | Utility Contribution Range | Relative Importance |
---|---|---|---|---|
Delivery price | −3.045 | −1.218 | 1.827 | 37% |
Delivery term | 0 | 1.4305 | 1.4305 | 29% |
Distance | 0 | 0.8113 | 0.8113 | 16% |
Pick-up accessibility | 0 | 0.4698 | 0.4698 | 9% |
Information and traceability | 0 | −0.3009 | 0.3009 | 6% |
Delivery method | 0 | 0.1561 | 0.1561 | 3% |
Scenario | Delivery Price | Delivery Method | Delivery Term | Delivery Time Window | Pick-Up Accessibility | Information and Traceability | Distance | Delivery to Address | Delivery Point |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reference scenario | 30 ₺ | Delivery workers | Between 25 and 48 h | Option to choose between day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) or evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when (1) the package is received for shipping and (2) the package is shipped to the consumer | 78% | 22% | ||
Reference scenario | 30 ₺ | Service points | Between 25 and 48 h | Available for collection during weekdays (09:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points | 2000 m from your home/workplace | |||
Price-focused scenario | 50 ₺ | Delivery workers | Between 25 and 48 h | Option to choose between day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) or evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when (1) the package is received for shipping and (2) the package is shipped to the consumer | 36% | 64% | ||
Price-focused scenario | 20 ₺ | Service points | Between 25 and 48 h | Available for collection during weekdays (09:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points | 2000 m from your home/workplace | |||
Innovation-focused scenario | 30 ₺ | Delivery workers | Between 25 and 48 h | Option to choose between day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) or evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when (1) the package is received for shipping and (2) the package is shipped to the consumer | 78% | 22% | ||
Innovation-focused scenario | 30 ₺ | Smart parcel lockers | Between 25 and 48 h | Available for collection during weekdays (09:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points and live location tracking. | 2000 m from your home/workplace | |||
Distance-focused scenario | 30 ₺ | Delivery workers | Between 25 and 48 h | Option to choose between day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) or evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when (1) the package is received for shipping and (2) the package is shipped to the consumer | 65% | 35% | ||
Distance-focused scenario | 30 ₺ | Service points | Between 25 and 48 h | Available for collection during weekdays (09:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points | 1500 m from your home/workplace | |||
Time-focused scenario | 30 ₺ | Delivery workers | Between 3 and 7 days, but the delivery date of choice | Option to choose between day delivery during weekdays (09:00–18:00) or evening delivery during weekdays (18:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when (1) the package is received for shipping and (2) the package is shipped to the consumer | 50% | 50% | ||
Time-focused scenario | 30 ₺ | Service points | Within 2 h | Available for collection on weekdays (09:00–22:00) | Notifications by SMS or e-mail when the package is received for shipment and placed at the delivery points | 2000 m from your home/workplace |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Karlı, H.; Tanyaş, M. Innovative Delivery Methods in the Last-Mile: Unveiling Consumer Preference. Future Transp. 2024, 4, 152-173. https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp4010009
Karlı H, Tanyaş M. Innovative Delivery Methods in the Last-Mile: Unveiling Consumer Preference. Future Transportation. 2024; 4(1):152-173. https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp4010009
Chicago/Turabian StyleKarlı, Halil, and Mehmet Tanyaş. 2024. "Innovative Delivery Methods in the Last-Mile: Unveiling Consumer Preference" Future Transportation 4, no. 1: 152-173. https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp4010009
APA StyleKarlı, H., & Tanyaş, M. (2024). Innovative Delivery Methods in the Last-Mile: Unveiling Consumer Preference. Future Transportation, 4(1), 152-173. https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp4010009