Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Transportation
Available Research
online Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
A novel approach for assessing sustainable city logistics
A novel approach for assessing sustainable city logistics
Eftihia Nathanailaa*, Giannis Adamosaa & Michael Gogasaa
Eftihia Nathanail *, Giannis Adamos & Michael Gogas
a
University of Thessaly, Pedion Areos, Volos, 38334, Greece
a
University of Thessaly, Pedion Areos, Volos, 38334, Greece

Abstract
Abstract
City logistics is a key catalyst in the urban economy but, in parallel, urban road freight transport significantly affects the quality
City logistics
of life in the isurban
a keyenvironment.
catalyst in theOptimization
urban economy but, infreight
of urban parallel, urban road
transport freight
(UFT) can transport
make ansignificantly affects the quality
important contribution to the
of life in the and
sustainability urban environment.
livability of cities,Optimization
conducing inofthe urban freight of
alleviation transport (UFT) canand
traffic congestion make
the an important
mitigation of contribution
CO2 emissions to and
the
sustainability
noise impacts.andThelivability of cities, conducing
detailed understanding of the in the alleviation
causal of traffic
effect of UFT congestion
measures and the
on achieving mitigation of
sustainability of CO emissionsis and
city2 logistics the
noise scope
main impacts. The paper.
of this detailed understanding
Life of the causal
cycle sustainability effect of
assessment UFT measures
(LCSA) is adoptedontoachieving sustainability
assess selected of city logistics
UFT measures is the
by advancing
mainresearch
the scope ofinthis
lifepaper.
cycle Life cycle(LCA)
analysis sustainability
to city assessment (LCSA) is
logistics processes. adoptedon
Focusing to assess selected UFT measures
administrative/regulatory by advancing
schemes, strongly
the research
related in typology,
to city life cycle aanalysis (LCA)
scenario to city logistics
is evaluated and twoprocesses.
indices are Focusing on administrative/regulatory
estimated, schemes, logistics
one addressing the city (demand strongly
related to cityindex),
sustainability typology,
and athescenario
second isreferring
evaluated and two stakeholders
to logistics indices are estimated, one addressing
(supply logistics the city
sustainability index).(demand logistics
The difference
sustainability
between index),
the two andreferred
indices, the second
to as referring to logistics
logistics gap, stakeholders (supply logistics sustainability index). The difference
is also estimated.
between the two indices, referred to as logistics gap, is also estimated.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2017 The Authors.
Peer-review Published by
under responsibility
responsibility of Elsevier
WORLDB.V. CONFERENCE ON ON TRANSPORT
TRANSPORT RESEARCHRESEARCH SOCIETY.
SOCIETY.
Peer-review under of WORLD CONFERENCE
Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
Keywords: city logistics; urban freight transport; evaluation framework; life cycle analysis.
Keywords: city logistics; urban freight transport; evaluation framework; life cycle analysis.

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
During the last decades, technological, economical and social transformations, reclassifications in the urban land
During
uses, the last decades,
and environmental technological,
consequences of economical
road based and social systems,
transport transformations, reclassifications
caused significant in the
changes urban land
in patterns of
uses, and
freight environmental
movements, and consequences
have increasedof theroadinterest
based transport systems,
and attention causedtransportation
to freight significant changes
within inurban
patterns of
areas.
freight movements,
Traditionally, urban and have has
planning increased the interest
been focused and attention
on passenger to freight
transport, transportation
and this, withinled
over the years, urban areas.
to serious
Traditionally,
problems that urban planning
cities had to dealhaswith,
beenresulting
focusedfromon passenger
the lack oftransport, and this,
an integrated over
freight the transportation
urban years, led to serious
system
problems
design andthat cities had to deal with, resulting from the lack of an integrated freight urban transportation system
implementation.
design and implementation.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +302421074164; fax: +302421074131.

E-mail address:author.
* Corresponding Tel.: +302421074164; fax: +302421074131.
enath@uth.gr
E-mail address: enath@uth.gr
2214-241X © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
2214-241X
Peer-review©under
2017responsibility
The Authors.ofPublished
WORLDbyCONFERENCE
Elsevier B.V. ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.

2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.477
 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045 1037
2 Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Nowadays, both citizens and decision makers and planners face a contradictory situation, since, although they
have technological instruments to ameliorate their daily lives, still, the economic crisis restricts the introduction and
absorption of such instruments to sustainable management. It is clear that cities need to identify new strategies in
order to improve quality of life of citizens, adjusting their planning to economic competitiveness and market needs,
but also to emerging consuming behavior and trends. Statistics are revealing and actions, initiatives and sustainable
solutions and approaches are required. A glance of the stage of play is depicted, as follows:

• Over 50% of the world population is living in cities (Grimm et al., 2008);
• More than 100 million people have migrated to cities globally since the beginning of this decade (Lee,
2014);
• In Europe, around 75% of the population lives in urban areas (European Commission, 2014);
• Urban mobility accounts for 40% of all CO2 emissions of road transport and up to 70% of other
pollutants from transport (European Commission, 2015);
• Annually, approximately 1% of Gross Domestic Product is lost by the European economy due to
congestion (European Commission, 2011);
• Urban freight vehicles account for 6-18% of total urban travel (Figliozzi, 2010);
• Urban freight transport accounts for 19% of energy use and 21% of CO2 emissions (Russo & Comi,
2012).
• By 2050, at least 70% of world population will live in cities (Lee, 2014);

Urban implications have been of concern for the Communitarian Bodies, and when the mid-term review of
Transport White Paper (COM(2006)314) was carried out in 2006, the intention of introducing a Green Paper in
urban transport was announced by the European Commission. The Green Paper “Towards a new culture for urban
mobility” (COM(2007)551 final) was presented in September 2007 and contained a number of questions addressed
to stakeholders and citizens, in order to indicate the most serious problems on urban mobility and possible solutions
to these problems. This consultation resulted in the Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions “Action
Plan on Urban Mobility” (European Commission, 2009). In this Action, urbanization and its impact on transport was
indicated as one of the key challenges in achieving more sustainable transportation systems that integrate urban
mobility and promote partnerships at a local, regional and national level and enhance the involvement of European
Union stakeholders, citizens and industry (European Commission, 2009). In addition, in the Transport White Paper
of the European Commission, the achievement of CO2-free city logistics by 2030 was set as an intermediate
objective towards a reduction of 60% in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions (European Commission, 2011).
City logistics have been introduced as an efficient concept to address the intricate problems arising from the
multidimensional character of urban areas, which is formulated by environmental considerations, economic growth,
new and smart technologies, legal and institutional frameworks, but also by congestion, air pollution, noise, crashes
and reduced accessibility due to obsolete infrastructure or environmental and traffic restrictions. Optimization of
Urban Freight Transport (UFT) can make a significant contribution to the sustainability and livability of cities,
alleviating traffic congestion and mitigating emissions and noise impacts. The necessity to find solutions in order to
reduce the undesirable impacts of urban freight logistics on quality of life and market, has encouraged a number of
initiatives in urban areas and several measures of city logistics have been implemented and relevant solutions have
been demonstrated in European cities.
To this end, two basic categories of measures are indicated related to city logistics: administrative/regulatory
schemes and incentives, and collaborative schemes and cooperative logistics. This paper focuses on the first
category, since the relevant measures are strongly related to the city typology, as concerns their feasibility and
effectiveness. A list of indicative measures follows (Torrentellé et al., 2012; TURBLOG, 2011; BESTFACT, 2013;
Ruesch and Glücker, 2001; TRAILBLAZER, 2013; SUGAR, 2011; Dasburg and Schoemaker, 2006; Geroliminis et
al, 2005; STRAIGHTSOL 2012, European Center for Government Transformation, 2015; Papoutsis and Nathanail,
2015):
• Use of restriction/low-emission/light or low traffic zones, which integrate access control within time
windows or by load factor and determine loading/unloading and parking areas for freight vehicles.
1038 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045
Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3

• Promotion of green freight transport modes, which can prioritize the circulation of clean vehicles (i.e.
electric vans, bicycles and tricycles for the last mile delivery), or promotion of alternative transport
modes, like rail and inland waterways.
• Incorporation of concepts for the reduction of congestion, including multi-user lanes, infrastructure
sharing between public transport and freight assignments, and off-peak and night time deliveries.
• Realization of tariff policies (i.e. congestion charging, truck toll system, etc.).
• Implementation of coordinated transport, between traffic management and freight travel plans through
the application of intelligent transportation systems and information and communication technologies.

The detailed understanding of the causal effect of UFT measures on achieving sustainability of city logistics is the
main scope of this paper. Specifically, the paper objectives are:
• To develop a modular integration evaluation framework for city logistics which will portray the
complexity of the life cycle of UFT systems and implement it to assess the effectiveness of measures on
different city contexts; and
• To enable determination of optimum measures associated with the city typologies and objectives.

Adapted life cycle analysis (LCA), further named as life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is adopted to
assess selected UFT measures by advancing the research in LCA to city logistics processes. The evaluation
framework produces a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) which reflect the effectiveness of the measures on
each selected city context. External costs, especially social and environmental, logistics’ benefits and the associated
costs for achieving these benefits area coupled with the estimated KPI’s and relevant criteria and indicator weights
comprise the input to a multi-stakeholder multi-criteria decision making framework. Behavioral modeling is also
integrated to enable measuring the possibility of behavioral change towards the measures.
Two indices are estimated, one addressing the city (demand logistics sustainability index), and the second
referring to logistics operators (supply logistics sustainability index), to gauge the sustainability capacity of each city
case and the respective UFT measure. The difference between the two indices, referred to as logistics gap, is also
estimated, indicating the consensus between the main players in urban logistics.

2. Life cycle analysis and assessment of logistics processes

Over the last years, attention on environmental issues is getting increased and efforts are made for the reduction
of the impacts that transportation has on environment, energy and society. Globalization has facilitated international
freight transport, and goods and services produced and developed in any part of the earth become easily available all
around the world. In addition, there are significant changes in consumer habits and behavior, whereas businesses
also have growing demands for new and innovative logistics services. The tendency of people to grow in city centers
combined with the aging of population resulted in increased urban delivery needs and local customer requirements,
further resulting in higher traffic volumes and respective environmental impacts, i.e. traffic delays, emissions, etc.
(The Green Logistics Project, 2007). Another trend is the rapid development of e-commerce, which provided a high
level of flexibility to customers, but also reinforced the market of home deliveries, which resulted in a more dense
and frequent last mile distribution of goods, and opened ground to new actors to join these services, apart from large
postal operators. Parcel transport and express transport services have become one of the fastest growing transport
businesses in cities, and the use of city networks by their truck or van fleets increases significantly traffic, noise and
emissions.
Life-cycle analysis (LCA) is considered as a valuable decision making tool towards sustainability, introduced as a
“response” to the emerging environmental concerns, capable of measuring and assessing potential environmental
impacts. The added value of this analysis is that it takes into consideration the entire life cycle of a process, system
or product, eschewing the crucial errors caused by limited scope work (Cellura et al. 2012). Recently the terms “Life
Cycle Inventory” (LCI) or “Life Cycle Assessment” (LCA) started to be used and have partly replaced the original
term of LCA.
 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045 1039
4 Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Life cycle analysis was initially introduced in Europe and the United States of America in the late 1960’s and
early 1970’s, applied mainly to the estimation of energy requirements for the production of chemical products
(Ciambrone, 1997), and to the assessment of the environmental effects of beverage containers (Hunt & Franklin,
1996). LCA covers the whole product -goods, services- life and has been used in many sectors, like agriculture,
water technologies, construction, energy production, domestic production, and transportation for the estimation of
energy demands and emissions’ derivation (Mitropoulos et al., 2011). Through the specific analysis, the
environmental impacts of a given product’s life cycle from cradle to grave are quantified, divided into five phases:
raw material extraction, manufacturing, transportation, use, and end-of-life (Rebitzer et al., 2004).
Life cycle analysis is a methodology that can support decision making in the private and public sector, and has
been used, for example, for the establishment of a set of indicators for environmental decision making by comparing
different activities in a specific territory (Lundin and Morrison, 2002), or the improvement of strategies related to the
decrease of energy and material consumption (Procter and Gamble, 1990). LCA has also been used for the analysis
of alternatives for the technological design of a product, based on a comparative evaluation between product and
processes, focusing on the improvement of the product impacts over its life span (Verschoor and Reijnders, 1999).
Other applications of LCA include the environmental assessment of international transportation of products (Gerilla
et al., 2005) or the assessment of potential environmental and energy implications of a midsized automobile
(MacLean and Lave, 1998).
Expanding their research scope, a number of studies have included more aspects apart from environment in life
cycle analyses, like social and economic concerns (Norris, 2001), and this emphasis on the quantification of social
and economic dimensions of sustainability in addition to environmental impacts, has resulted to the transition of life
cycle analysis/assessment to Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) (Onat et al., 2015). The LCSA
framework foresees the integration of the LCA methodology with environmental, economic and social dimensions,
the impacts of which are quantified throughout the life cycle of a process, product or system (Zimagni, 2012; Sala et
al., 2012).
In the present paper, a LCSA is adopted to assess selected urban freight measures by advancing the research in
LCA to city logistics processes. The structure of the analysis is based on the four phases that LCA is consisted of,
according to the International Standards Organization–ISO 14040 (ISO, 2006), including goal and scope definition,
inventory analysis, impact assessment and interpretation. Analytically, the approach is described in the following
paragraphs, as part of the overall evaluation framework.

3. Evaluation framework

The proposed evaluation framework reflects the complexity of Urban Freight Transport (UFT) systems, which is
mainly caused by disparate interests of stakeholders, contradictory business models and unsustainable operations.
The framework, based on a transparent and consensual decision-making model, is expanded through the components
of the life cycle analysis and is eventually structured as a multi-stakeholder multi-criteria decision making tool. The
structure of the overall evaluation framework is depicted in Figure 1.
The tool is composed of four modules including impact assessment, social cost-benefit analysis, adaptability
analysis and risk analysis, while behavioral modeling is also integrated in order to enable measuring the possibility
of behavioral change towards the proposed measures on achieving sustainability is cities. The diamond of Figure 1
reflects the four modules and the behavioral modeling, from which life cycle analysis components originate and
reflects also the fact that components are interrelated.
Life cycle sustainability assessment, acting as an umbrella for the whole framework, is implemented under four
discrete phases, which are taken into account in each one of the modules and the behavioral modeling. The phases
are the following:

• Identification of urban logistics components, including urban freight and service trips activities, policies
and measures, key influential factors and logistics scenarios.
• Process mapping–life cycle inventory. This phase is further distinguished into creation-construction,
operation, maintenance and closure-disposal (back logistics).
• Disaggregation of sustainability disciplines, regarding economy, environment, mobility and society.
1040 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045
Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 5

• Data interpretation in terms of policy and measure maturity, social acceptance and users’ uptake.

Fig. 1. Structure of the evaluation framework.

The impact assessment module applies to the identification of relevant models and their correlation to the
particularities of each city or alternative measure. The elaboration of any urban freight and service data (i.e. demand
data) follows, and then sustainable urban logistics scenarios are developed and values of future time horizons are
estimated.
Through the social cost-benefit analysis (SCBA) module, the costs and benefits of each measure can be estimated,
after economic, environmental and societal indicators for each stakeholder group have been collected. Taking into
consideration the account of UFT functioning, the requirements of each group of stakeholders and the need for
keeping a balance between the logistics’ benefits and the social costs, key factors of SCBA are analyzed and
evaluated.
Behavioral modeling is applied in order to reveal and assess any direct impacts that are generated by several
stakeholders participating in city logistics, including policy makers, operators, shippers and receivers, and civilians,
propose actions, and eventually affect behavior changes. Taking into account that each category of stakeholder has
specific objectives it is feasible to identify the potentiality that operators adopt sustainable measures (e.g. eco-
driving), cross compare subjective (self-reported) with objective (observed or recorded) data, capture what caused or
what motivated the attitude and behavioral change, and to assess the level of acceptance of solutions or measures
through comparison groups (i.e. before-after design) or time series analyses.
The module of adaptability and transferability analysis assesses the feasibility and easiness of adapting UFT
measures to the city context and implementing good practices.
 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045 1041
6 Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

The monitoring and prevention of any risks that may take place during the organization and the preparation of the
measure, during the implementation phase and after the finalization of it, the risk-analysis module is developed and
applied. Through this module, potential risks in the implementation of UFT measures are identified, assumptions
and requirements for the assessment of risks are prepared, and corrective actions are identified and realized.
All outcomes of the previous modules are integrated into a multi-stakeholder multi-criteria decision making tool,
which provide a transparent and clear environment for all involved stakeholders to establish and combine objectives,
criteria, performance and importance of both criteria and performance indicators.

4. Data processing and results

The methodology has been validated in the assessment of implementing administrative/regulatory schemes for the
UFT in Greek cities. The anticipated measure examines the impact of access provision within time windows of
heavy vehicles, currently restricted on the urban network, based on high load factor, and combined truck loads which
are delivered on a consolidated itinerary, employing “truck-sharing”.
Firstly, the city typology was structured, reflecting the main Greek cities, as presented in Table 1. All capital
cities of each prefecture of the nine regions of Greece –Central Greece, Peloponnese, Ionian Islands, Epirus,
Thessaly, Macedonia, Thrace, Aegean Islands, Crete- composed the database and the data collected regard the
parameters that are associated with city logistics and the feasibility and effectiveness of UFT measures:

• Population in persons (http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/ESYE). Categorization was done

according to the number of persons into four groups: very high (>300.000), high (50.001-300.000),
medium (10.000-50.000) and low (<10.000).
• Industry, reflecting whether there is an industrial area in the surroundings of the city (√) or not (-).
• Transportation connectivity, indicating whether the city is connected to maritime, road and rail network
(√) or not (-).
• Tourism, quantified by the number of tourists’ arrivals at the city. Categorization was done according to
the number of arrivals, into four groups: very high (>1.000.000), high (300.001-1.000.000), medium
(100.000-300.000) and low (<100.000).

Then, a sub-set of cities was selected as pilot cities, using as criterion their familiarization with UFT concept and
measures. The stakeholders’ viewpoint was collected from Athens, Thessaloniki, Volos, Trikala, Kavala and Xanthi,
regarding the new measure. As this measure assumes the “truck sharing” among logistics’ stakeholders,
representative from both the side of the city (authorities) and the side of logistics’ stakeholders (shippers, receivers,
service providers) were involved in the assessment. A modification of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP),
being one of the most practical Multi-Criteria Decision-Making methods (De Brucker et al., 2004; Saaty, 1972) was
selected as the method to be applied in this case. Stakeholders set and weighted the following criteria: economy,
environment, mobility, society, policy and measure maturity, social acceptance and user uptake, in a pair-wise
comparison, and relevant weights were attributed to each criterion by each city and stakeholder category. Then,
stakeholders evaluated the measure’s performance change as compared to the “do nothing” case in a scale from -2 to
+2, where negative sign indicates worsening and positive improvement and the integer indicates small or big change.
Zero stands for no change. The output of this process was the valuation of the scenario, addressing both the city side,
quantified by the “demand logistics sustainability index”, and the operators’ side, quantified by the “supply logistics
sustainability index”. The difference between the two indexes, referred to as logistics gap, was also estimated.
As the number of cities included in this analysis was limited, clustering was done based only on the population,
and it led to two clusters: large cities (Athens, Thessaloniki) and medium cities (Volos, Trikala, Kavala, Xanthi).
The results for each cluster are presented in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
 1042 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045
Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 7

Table 1. City typology

Population Transportation connectivity Tourism
Region Prefecture Capital city Industry Number of
Persons Category Port Rail Road Category
arrivals
Very
Attiki Athens 664046 Very high - - √ √ 2387635
high
Aitoloakarnania Mesologgi 12785 Medium - √ - - 114790 Medium
Central Voiotia Livadeia 21379 Medium - - - - 53390 Low
Greece Evvoia Chalkida 59125 High - √ - √ 171678 Medium
Evrytania Karpenisi 7183 Low - - - - 36114 Low
Fthiotida Lamia 52006 High √ - - √ 87805 Low
Fokida Amfissa 6919 Low √ - - - 108495 Medium
Argolida Nafplio 14203 Medium - √ - - 258815 Medium
Arkadia Tripoli 30866 Medium √ - √ √ 47027 Low
Achaia Patra 167446 Very high √ √ √ √ 217404 Medium
Peloponnese Ilieia Pyrgos 24359 Medium - √ - - 258380 Medium
Korinthia Korinthos 30176 Medium - √ √ √ 228638 Medium
Lakonia Sparti 16239 Medium - - - - 113436 Medium
Messinia Kalamata 54100 High √ √ √ - 192840 Medium
Zakynthos Zakynthos 9772 Low - √ - - 371570 High
Kerkyra Kerkyra 24838 Medium - √ - - 584024 High
Ionian Islands
Kefallinia Argostoli 9748 Low - √ - - 119040 Medium
Lefkada Lefkada 8673 Low - √ - - 72439 Low
Arta Arta 21895 Medium - - - √ 28416 Low
Thesprotia Igoumenitsa 9145 Low - √ - - 49100 Low
Epirus
Ioannina Ioannina 65574 High √ - - √ 217361 Medium
Preveza Preveza 19042 Medium √ √ - - 74960 Low
Karditsa Karditsa 38554 Medium √ - - - 64047 Low
Larisa Larisa 144651 Very high √ - √ √ 108158 Medium
Thessaly
Magnisia Volos 86046 High √ √ √ √ 340793 High
Trikala Trikala 61653 High - - - - 228116 Medium
Grevena Grevena 13137 Medium - - - - 975 Low
Drama Drama 44823 Medium √ - √ - 33010 Low
Imathia Veroia 43158 Medium - - - - 37548 Low
Very
Thessaloniki Thessaloniki 315196 Very high √ √ √ √ 1002288
high
Kavala Kavala 54027 High √ √ - √ 243339 Medium
Kastoria Kastoria 13387 Medium √ - - √ 62431 Low
Macedonia
Kilkis Kilkis 22914 Medium √ - - - 13245 Low
Kozani Kozani 41066 Medium - - √ √ 37391 Low
Pella Edessa 18229 Medium √ - - - 44410 Low
Pieria Katerini 55997 High - √ √ √ 175986 Medium
Serres Serres 58287 High √ - √ - 79062 Low
Florina Florina 17686 Medium √ - √ - 31468 Low
Chalkidiki Polygyros 6121 Low - - - - 686208 High
Evros Alexandroupoli 57812 High √ √ √ √ 136400 Medium
Thrace Xanthi Xanthi 56122 High √ - √ √ 51799 Low
Rodopi Komotini 50990 High √ - √ √ 59833 Low
Very
Dodekanisos Rhodes 49541 Medium - √ - - 2228656
high
Aegean Kyklades Ermoupoli 11407 Medium - √ - - 539050 High
Islands Lesvos Mytilini 27871 Medium - √ - - 123242 Medium
Samos Samos 6191 Low - √ - - 121072 Medium
Chios Chios 26850 Medium - √ - - 55818 Low
Very
Irakleio Irakleio 140730 Very high √ √ - √ 1388690
high
Agios
Crete Lasithi 11421 Medium - √ - - 470874 High
Nikolaos
Rethymno Rethymno 32468 Medium - √ - √ 432375 High
Chania Chania 53910 High - √ - √ 774148 High
 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045 1043
8 Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Table 2. Scenario valuation for large cities

Weights Measure valuation
Supply side Measure performance
Criteria Demand side Demand logistics Supply logistics
(logistics change
(city) sustainability index sustainability index
stakeholders)
Economy 0.05 0.5 1 0.05 0.5
Environment 0.2 0.05 1 0.2 0.05
Mobility 0.15 0.1 2 0.3 0.2
Society 0.2 0.05 1 0.2 0.05
Policy and
0.25 0.15 -1 -0.25 -0.15
measure maturity
Social acceptance 0.1 0.05 0 0 0
User uptake 0.05 0.1 0 0 0
Sum: 0.5 0.65
Logistics gap 0.15

Table 3. Scenario valuation for medium cities

Weights Measure valuation
Supply side Measure performance
Criteria Demand side Demand logistics Supply logistics
(logistics change
(city) sustainability index sustainability index
stakeholders)
Economy 0.05 0.5 1 0.05 0.5
Environment 0.15 0.05 2 0.3 0.1
Mobility 0.1 0.1 1 0.1 0.1
Society 0.2 0.05 1 0.2 0.05
Policy and
0.35 0.15 -2 -0.7 -0.3
measure maturity
Social acceptance 0.1 0.05 -1 -0.1 -0.05
User uptake 0.05 0.1 0 0 0
Sum: -0.15 0.4
Logistics gap 0.45

Results showed that in both city clusters and both stakeholder categories (cities and logistics stakeholders), the
measure is expected to bring insignificant change. In the case of large cities like Athens and Thessaloniki, the
consensus between the two stakeholder categories is higher than in the case of the medium sized cities, with a
logistics gap of 0.15. In particular, in the latter, city seems to be very cautious (negative ranking) in the
implementation of the measure, and the logistics gap was estimated to 0.45. It is noted here that this gap can take
values between 0 and 5 (valuation ranges between -2 and +2), so in both city clusters the gap can be considered as
low.
Policy measure and maturity and social acceptance got a negative mark in all city clusters and stakeholder
categories, and social acceptance was negative in medium-sized cities. All other criteria were weighed and valuated
similarly.

5. Conclusions

Optimization of urban freight transport (UFT) can contribute to the sustainability and livability of cities,
alleviating congestion and mitigating emissions and noise impacts. There is an imperative need that city authorities
and operators cooperate and work on finding solutions for the reduction of the undesirable impacts of urban freight
logistics on the quality of life and the marker dynamics.
In this paper, a life cycle sustainability assessment was integrated in a multi-stakeholder multi-criteria decision
making framework for city logistics. The framework was validated, in order to assess the effectiveness of the
implementation of a new UFT measure in two clusters of cities, large, represented by Athens and Thessaloniki, and
medium reflecting Volos, Trikala, Kavala and Xanthi. Using a modification of the Analytical Hierarchy Process,
selected stakeholders both from the side of the city and logistics domain, selected and weighted a number of criteria,
such as economy, environment, mobility, society, policy and measure maturity, social acceptance and user uptake,
and valuated the measure against them. The output of this process was the estimation of a “demand logistics
1044 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045
Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 9

sustainability index”, from the city side and a “supply logistics sustainability index” from the logistics stakeholders’
side. Results showed that in large cities stakeholders are keener to accept the tested UFT measure, compared to
medium cities, where city authorities mainly are skeptical for this implementation. The logistics gap, which indicates
the consensus of the various stakeholders towards the new measure, in both cases is low, with lower in the case of
large cities.
Based on the city typology presented in this paper, further steps of the research anticipate the clustering of the
Greek cities based on multiple combinations of the indicators processed in the document, like population, industry,
transportation connectivity and tourism, and the relevant implementation of the developed evaluation framework.

Acknowledgements

The evaluation framework has been designed for the supporting of the “Evaluation tool” of the NOVELOG
project, funded by the European Commission H2020 (2015 - 2018).

References

BESTFACT, 2013. Deliverable 2.2 - Best Practice Handbook 1.

Cellura, M., Longo, S., Mistretta, M., 2011. The energy and environmental impacts of Italian households consumptions: an inputeoutput
approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 3897e3908. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.025.
Ciambrone D.F. (1997). “Environmental Life Cycle Analysis”Lewis Publishers, New York.
COM (2007) 551: Green Paper - Towards a new culture for urban mobility {SEC(2007) 1209}
Dasburg, N., Schoemaker, J., 2006. Best Urban Freight Solutions II (BESTUFS II), Deliverable D5.2 - Quantification of Urban Freight Transport
Effects II.
DE BRUCKER, K., VERBEKE, A. and MACHARIS K., 2004. “The applicability of Multi-Criteria Analysis to the evaluation of Intelligent
Transport Systems (ITS)”, Economic Impacts of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Innovations and Case Studies: Research in
Transportation Economics, Vol. 8 2004, pp. 151–179.
European Center for Government Transformation, 2015. Boosting innovation in cities to deliver better public services – A view from tomorrow’s
leaders. College of Europe student case studies, Final report.
European Commission, 2006. Keep Europe Moving. Sustainable mobility for our continent. Mid-term review of the European Commission’s
2001 transport White Paper. ISBN 92-79-02312-8. Luxemburg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2006.
European Communities, 2009. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Action Plan of Urban Mobility. COM (2009) 490 final. Brussels, Belgium.
European Commission, 2011. Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system.
White Paper. COM (2011) 144 final. European Commission. Brussels, Belgium.
European Commission (2014). Living well, within the limits of our planet. 7th EAP — The New General Union Environment Action Programme
to 2020.
Figliozzi, M.A. (2010). The impacts of congestion on commercial vehicle tour characteristics and costs. Transportation Research Part E:
Logistics and Transportation Review, 46 (4), 496–506.
Geroliminis N., Daganzo C. F., 2005. A review of green logistics schemes used in cities around the world. UC Berkeley Center for future urban
transport, VOLVO center of excellence.
Grimm, N.B., Faeth, S.H., Golubiewski, N.E., Redman, C.L.,Wu, J., Bai, X., et al. (2008). Global change and the ecology of cities. Science,
319(5864), 756–760. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1126/science.1150195.
Hunt, R.G., Franklin, W.E., 1996. LCA how it came about personal reflections on the origin and the development of LCA in the USA. Int. J.
LCA 1 (1), 4e7.
ISO14040, 2006a. Environmental Managementdlife Cycle Assessmentd Principles and Framework.
ISO14044, 2006b. Environmental Managementdlife Cycle Assessmentd Requirements and Guidelines.
Lundin M.; Morrison G.M. – A life cycle assessment based procedure for development of environmental sustainability indicators for urban water
systems –Urban water – vol. 4, 2002, pp 145-152.
Mitropoulos L., Prevedouros P., Nathanail E., 2011. Life-Cycle Assessment through a comprehensive sustainability framework: A case study of
urban transportation vehicles, XXIVth World Road Congress in Mexico City, 26-30 September 2011.
Norris, G., 2001. Integrating life cycle cost analysis in LCA. Int. J. LCA 6 (2), 118e120.
Onat, N.C., Kucukvar, M., Tatari, O., 2015. Conventional, hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicles? State-based comparative carbon and energy
footprint analysis in the United States. Appl. Energy 150, 36e49.
Papoutsis K,. Nathanail, E. (2015). Facilitating the selection of city logistics measures through a concrete measures package: A generic approach.
9th International Conference on City Logistics, Tenerife, Canary Islands (Spain), 17-19 June 2015.Procter & Gamble European Technical
 Eftihia Nathanail et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 1036–1045 1045
10 Nathanail E., Adamos G. and Gogas M. / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Center (org.) – Life Cycle Analysis for Packaging Environmental Assessment – Proceedings of the Specialized Workshop held in Leuen,
Belgium, Procter & Gamble European Technical Center, Strombeck-Bever, Belgium, 24-25 September 1990.
Rebitzer, G., Ekvall, T., Frischknecht, R., Hunkeler, D., Norris, G., Rydberg, T., Schmidt, W.-P., Suh, S., Weidema, B.P., Pennington, D.W.,
2004. Life cycle assessment part 1: framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications.Environ. Int. 30, 701e720.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.envint.2003.11.005.
Ruesch, M., Glücker, C., 2001. Best Urban Freight Solutions (BESTUFS), Deliverable D2.1 - Best Practice Handbook Year 1.
Russo, F., & Comi, A. (2012). City characteristics and urban goods movements: A way toenvironmental transportation system in a sustainable
city. Procedia — Social and behavioral sciences, 39, 61–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.091.
SAATY, T., 1972. “An eigenvalue allocation model for prioritization and planning”, in working paper Energy Management and Policy Center,
University of Pennsylvania.
STRAIGHTSOL project 2012. Deliverable D3.3 - Description of indicators, KPIs and measurement methods.
SUGAR project, 2011. City Logistics Best Practices: a Handbook for Authorities
The Green Logistics Project, http://www.greenlogistics.org/, Access: 24/09/2015.
Torrentellé, M., Tsamboulas, D., Moraiti P., 2012. Deliverable D2.1 - Elicitation of the good practices on UFT. C-LIEGE project: Clean Last
mile transport and logistics management for smart and efficient local Governments in Europe.
TRAILBLAZER project, 2013. Deliverable D2.3 - Report on the State of the Art.
TURBLOG - Transferability of urban logistics concepts and practices from a worldwide perspective, 2011. Deliverable 3: Urban Logistics
Practices - Synthesis of Selected Case Studies.
Verschoor A.H., Reijnders L. – Notes from the field: the use of Life Cycle methods by seven major companies – Journal of Cleaner Production –
vol. 7, 1999, pp 375-382.
Zamagni, A., 2012. Life cycle sustainability assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 17, 373e376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0389-8