Shopping trip or home delivery: which has the smaller carbon footprint?

Julia Edwards, Alan Campbell McKinnon

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

Abstract

To look at how successful home delivery compares favourably with conventional shopping with regard to the effects on the environment. Design/methodology/approach - Suggests that the key to any environmental comparison is the treatment of the final link in the supply chain to the home, which typically generates more CO2 emissions than all the upstream logistical activities. Considers two issues central to the comparison of the level of carbon emissions from a conventional shopping trip with those of delivery to the home: what is the typical home delivery or shopping trip; and how do we account for complicating factors such as people combining shopping and other trips, and failed delivery, when no is at home to receive the goods. Examines three conditions that impair the efficiency of parcel carriers' operations: failed delivery, product returns, and trip chaining and browsing trips. Demonstrates how the amount of CO2 emitted by conventional and online purchases on the last link in the supply chain can vary enormously. Indicates that online retailing can make a significant contribution to the development of a future low-carbon economy. Feels there are a number of opportunities for parcel carriers to reduce the carbon footprint of home deliveries through maximizing drop densities, use of low-emissions delivery vehicles, use of parcel reception boxes at people's homes, and conveniently located collection points. Originality/value - Compares the environmental effect of home shopping and conventional shopping trips.
Original languageEnglish
Pages20-24
Number of pages5
Volume11
No.7
Specialist publicationLogistics and Transport Focus
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2009

Fingerprint

supply
purchase
efficiency
economy
methodology
Values

Cite this

Edwards, Julia ; McKinnon, Alan Campbell. / Shopping trip or home delivery: which has the smaller carbon footprint?. In: Logistics and Transport Focus. 2009 ; Vol. 11, No. 7. pp. 20-24.
@misc{4fa3ee3d4f6a427aaaf5cddd8e171b30,
title = "Shopping trip or home delivery: which has the smaller carbon footprint?",
abstract = "To look at how successful home delivery compares favourably with conventional shopping with regard to the effects on the environment. Design/methodology/approach - Suggests that the key to any environmental comparison is the treatment of the final link in the supply chain to the home, which typically generates more CO2 emissions than all the upstream logistical activities. Considers two issues central to the comparison of the level of carbon emissions from a conventional shopping trip with those of delivery to the home: what is the typical home delivery or shopping trip; and how do we account for complicating factors such as people combining shopping and other trips, and failed delivery, when no is at home to receive the goods. Examines three conditions that impair the efficiency of parcel carriers' operations: failed delivery, product returns, and trip chaining and browsing trips. Demonstrates how the amount of CO2 emitted by conventional and online purchases on the last link in the supply chain can vary enormously. Indicates that online retailing can make a significant contribution to the development of a future low-carbon economy. Feels there are a number of opportunities for parcel carriers to reduce the carbon footprint of home deliveries through maximizing drop densities, use of low-emissions delivery vehicles, use of parcel reception boxes at people's homes, and conveniently located collection points. Originality/value - Compares the environmental effect of home shopping and conventional shopping trips.",
author = "Julia Edwards and McKinnon, {Alan Campbell}",
year = "2009",
month = "7",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "20--24",
journal = "Logistics and Transport Focus",
issn = "1466-836X",

}

Shopping trip or home delivery: which has the smaller carbon footprint? / Edwards, Julia; McKinnon, Alan Campbell.

In: Logistics and Transport Focus, Vol. 11, No. 7, 07.2009, p. 20-24.

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

TY - GEN

T1 - Shopping trip or home delivery: which has the smaller carbon footprint?

AU - Edwards, Julia

AU - McKinnon, Alan Campbell

PY - 2009/7

Y1 - 2009/7

N2 - To look at how successful home delivery compares favourably with conventional shopping with regard to the effects on the environment. Design/methodology/approach - Suggests that the key to any environmental comparison is the treatment of the final link in the supply chain to the home, which typically generates more CO2 emissions than all the upstream logistical activities. Considers two issues central to the comparison of the level of carbon emissions from a conventional shopping trip with those of delivery to the home: what is the typical home delivery or shopping trip; and how do we account for complicating factors such as people combining shopping and other trips, and failed delivery, when no is at home to receive the goods. Examines three conditions that impair the efficiency of parcel carriers' operations: failed delivery, product returns, and trip chaining and browsing trips. Demonstrates how the amount of CO2 emitted by conventional and online purchases on the last link in the supply chain can vary enormously. Indicates that online retailing can make a significant contribution to the development of a future low-carbon economy. Feels there are a number of opportunities for parcel carriers to reduce the carbon footprint of home deliveries through maximizing drop densities, use of low-emissions delivery vehicles, use of parcel reception boxes at people's homes, and conveniently located collection points. Originality/value - Compares the environmental effect of home shopping and conventional shopping trips.

AB - To look at how successful home delivery compares favourably with conventional shopping with regard to the effects on the environment. Design/methodology/approach - Suggests that the key to any environmental comparison is the treatment of the final link in the supply chain to the home, which typically generates more CO2 emissions than all the upstream logistical activities. Considers two issues central to the comparison of the level of carbon emissions from a conventional shopping trip with those of delivery to the home: what is the typical home delivery or shopping trip; and how do we account for complicating factors such as people combining shopping and other trips, and failed delivery, when no is at home to receive the goods. Examines three conditions that impair the efficiency of parcel carriers' operations: failed delivery, product returns, and trip chaining and browsing trips. Demonstrates how the amount of CO2 emitted by conventional and online purchases on the last link in the supply chain can vary enormously. Indicates that online retailing can make a significant contribution to the development of a future low-carbon economy. Feels there are a number of opportunities for parcel carriers to reduce the carbon footprint of home deliveries through maximizing drop densities, use of low-emissions delivery vehicles, use of parcel reception boxes at people's homes, and conveniently located collection points. Originality/value - Compares the environmental effect of home shopping and conventional shopping trips.

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 20

EP - 24

JO - Logistics and Transport Focus

JF - Logistics and Transport Focus

SN - 1466-836X

ER -