Advertisement

A Conceptual Framework for Planning Transhipment Facilities for Cargo Bikes in Last Mile Logistics

  • Tom AssmannEmail author
  • Sebastian Bobeth
  • Evelyn Fischer
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 879)

Abstract

Global urbanization processes expedite a growing demand for more sustainability and higher liveability in cities. New logistic concepts like cargo bike schemes can be a vital means towards this goal. In this respect, both logistics planning and urban planning need to address several aspects of the urban fabric, but show a lack of holistic planning tools. We develop a conceptual framework that combines planning objects and planning scales of logistics planning with urban planning. We demonstrate the application of the framework for the theoretical deployment of an urban transhipment facility (UTF). Drawing upon interdisciplinary expertise from urban logistics, urbanism, sociology and psychology, several interdependencies of an UTF implementation with the urban fabric become apparent. Regarding this, several practical recommendations for the use case can be derived. In general, we recommend the application of the framework as a guideline for urban and urban logistics planning purposes to practitioners and encourage scientists to further develop and enrich the framework.

Keywords

Urban logistics Cargo bikes Urban planning Sustainability 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the ALLIANCE Project (Grant agreement no.: 692426) funded under European Union´s Horizon 2020 research innovation programme.

References

  1. 1.
    Newman, P., Kenworthy, J.: The End of Automobile Dependence. Island Press, Washington DC (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gehl, J.: Cities for People. Island Press, Washington DC (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Frick, D.: Theorie des Städtebaus. Ernst Wasmuth Verlag, Tübingen Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schliwa, G., Armitage, R., Aziz, S., Evans, J., Rhoades, J.: Sustainable city logistics — making cargo cycles viable for urban freight transport. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 15, 50–57 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Assmann, T., Behrendt, F.: Die Integration von Lastenrädern in urbane Logistiksysteme. In: Pradel, U.-H., Süssenguth, W., Piontek, J., Schwolgin, A.F. (eds.) Praxishandbuch Logistik. Deutscher Wirtschaftsdienst, Köln (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Browne, M., Allen, J., Leonardi, J.: Evaluating the use of an urban consolidation centre and electric vehicles in central London. IATSS Res. 35(1), 1–6 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bektaș, T., Gabriel, T., Tom, C., Woensel, V., Crainic, T.G., Van Woensel, T.: From Managing Urban Freight to Smart City Logistics Networks, no. May. CIRRELT, Montréal (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cuda, R., Guastaroba, G., Speranza, M.G.: A survey on two-echelon routing problems. Comput. Oper. Res. 55, 185–199 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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 37, 177–186 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Agrebi, M., Abed, M., Omri, M.N.: A new multi-actor multi-attribute decision-making method to select the distribution centers’ location. In: 2016 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bu, L., Van Duin, J.H.R., Wiegmans, B., Luo, Z., Yin, C.: Selection of city distribution locations in urbanized areas. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 39, 556–567 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Janjevic, M., Ndiaye, A.B.: Development and application of a transferability framework for micro-consolidation schemes in Urban Freight transport. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 125, 284–296 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Balm, S., Browne, M., Leonardi, J., Quak, H.: Developing an evaluation framework for innovative Urban and Interurban Freight transport solutions. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 125, 386–397 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patier, D., Browne, M.: A methodology for the evaluation of urban logistics innovations. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2(3), 6229–6241 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ambrosino, G., Liberato, A., Bellini, R., Pettinelli, I., Guerra, S., Pacini, G.: Guidelines - Developing and implementing a sustainable urban mobility plan. In: Enclose Deliverable D5.2: “A Framework for the definition and implementation of Sustainable Urban Logistics Plans in historic small-/mid-size towns (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kiba-Janiak, M.: Urban freight transport in city strategic planning. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 24, 4–16 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Quak, H., Lindholm, M., Tavasszy, L., Browne, M.: From freight partnerships to city logistics living labs – giving meaning to the elusive concept of living labs. Transp. Res. Procedia 12, 461–473 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Albers, G., Wékel, J.: Stadtplanung - Eine illustrierte Einführung, 3rd edn. WBG, Darmstadt (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schenk, M., Wirth, S., Müller, E.: Factory Planning Manual. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ogden, K.W.: Urban Goods Movement: A Guide to Policy and Planning. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Hants (1992)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krampe, H., Lucke, H.-J.: Einführung in die Logistik. In: Krampe, H., Lucke, H.-J., Schenk, M. (eds.) Grundlagen der Logistik, 4th edn, pp. 17–36. Huss-Verlag, München (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fleischmann, B., et al.: Grundkonzepte, Grundlagen. In: Arnold, D., Isermann, H., Kuhn, A., Tempelmeier, H., Furmans, K. (eds.) Handbuch Logistik, pp. 1–211. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bogdanski, R.: Bewertung der Chancen für die nachhaltige Stadtlogistik von morgen - Nachhaltigkeitsstudie 2017. Bundesverband Paket & Expresslogistik BIEK, Berlin (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Netsch, S.: Stadtplanung - Handbuch und Entwurfshilfe. DOM Publishers, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Löw, M.: Raumsoziologie. Suhrkamp, Berlin (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hesse, M.: Logistischer Wandel in der Region. Z. Wirtschgeogr. 51, 93–107 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jaeger-Erben, M., Matthies, E.: Urbanisierung und Nachhaltigkeit: Umweltpsychologische Perspektiven auf Ansatzpunkte, Potentiale und Herausforderungen für eine nachhaltige Stadtentwicklung. Umweltpsychologie 18(2), 10–30 (2014)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bonnes, M., Scopelliti, M., Fornara, F., Carrus, G.: Urban environmental quality. In: Steg, L., den Berg, A.E., De Groot, J.I.M. (eds.) Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, pp. 97–118. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Trebels, A.: Das dialogische Bewegungskonzept. Eine pädagogische Auslegung von Bewegung. Sportunterricht 41(1), 20–29 (1992)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Preiser, W.F.E., Hardy, A.E., Schramm, U.: From linear delivery process to life cycle phases: the validity of the concept of building performance evaluation. In: Preiser, W.F.E., Hardy, A.E., Schramm, U. (eds.) Building Performance Evaluation, 2nd edn., pp. 3–18. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Matthies, E., Blöbaum, A.: Partizipative Verfahren und Mediation. In: Lantermann, E.-D., Linneweber, V. (eds.) Umweltpsychologie Band 1: Grundlagen, Paradigmen und Methoden der Umweltpsychologie, pp. 443–470. Hogrefe, Göttingen (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bourdieu, P.: Physischer, sozialer und angeeigneter physischer Raum. Stadt-Räume. Die Zukunft des Städtischen. M. Wentz, Frankfurt am main (1991)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tanner, C.: Constraints on environmental behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 19(2), 145–157 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Assmann
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Sebastian Bobeth
    • 2
  • Evelyn Fischer
    • 3
  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institute for Factory Operation and Automation IFFMagdeburgGermany
  2. 2.Otto-Von-Guericke-University MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany
  3. 3.Fraunhofer IFFMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations