A comparative study of urban freight transport planning: addressing stakeholder needs

Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Transport Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo

A comparative study of urban freight transport planning: addressing stakeholder needs Erica E.F. Ballantyne a,1, Maria Lindholm b,⇑, Anthony Whiteing a,2 a b

University of Leeds, Institute for Transport Studies, LS2 9JT, UK Chalmers University of Technology, Division for Logistics and Transportation, 412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Keywords: Local authorities Urban freight Transport planning Urban freight stakeholders

a b s t r a c t Over the last decade, research in the area of urban freight transport has increased and local authorities are slowly beginning to acknowledge the need to consider freight in their overall transport planning. Most urban freight studies to date consider specific solutions and measures, as opposed to ways in which the local authorities could and should consider this issue in the wider transport planning and decision making process. The aim of this paper is to examine cities that differ in context in order to demonstrate that urban freight transport planning can be improved by involving a wider range of stakeholders. Interview data from Sweden, the UK and the Baltic Sea Region has been analysed to draw out the factors that influence the perceptions of local authorities and freight operators of freight transport issues in urban areas. The findings show that the issues faced by the freight industry are still not fully understood. The paper contradicts earlier research results that suggest differences in the ways that local authorities consider freight transport, and goes some way towards demonstrating that the problems faced by local authorities are not unique to one country or any specific category of urban area, and hence a generic decision-making framework would be of value. A framework is developed to facilitate meaningful interaction between the various urban freight actors and stakeholders. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Over the last couple of decades urban freight transport has gained increasing attention both in the research arena and in the wider policy context. In Europe, a large number of policy measures have been trialled, and local authorities are slowly beginning to acknowledge the need to consider freight in their overall transport planning processes. Whilst urban areas and freight activities differ around the world, there are many common issues though these can be complex and difficult to understand (Dablanc, 2011). For example, two neighbouring areas may have conflicting policies that operators find hard to reconcile. This paper aims to demonstrate the requirement for greater interaction between local authorities and freight transport stakeholders with regards to urban freight issues. This is illustrated through an examination of current interactions between these groups in different urban areas across a range of northern European countries.

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +46 31 7721325. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (E.E.F. Ballantyne), maria.lindholm@ chalmers.se (M. Lindholm), [email protected] (A. Whiteing). 1 Tel.: +44 113 343 1790. 2 Tel.: +44 113 343 5359. 0966-6923/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.08.013

The paper addresses what constitutes urban freight, examines the extent to which perceptions of urban freight problems are similar from a local authority perspective and seeks to motivate a more thorough transport planning process. Interview data from Sweden, the UK and the Baltic Sea Region has been analysed to draw out the factors that influence local authority and freight operator perceptions of urban freight issues, thus identifying a need to improve the transport planning process. Interviews have been performed by the authors individually, at different locations, and thereafter compared and analysed within the context of the purpose of this paper. The paper is structured as follows: Firstly, we present an introduction to urban freight transport planning. This is followed by a description of the research methodology employed. Thereafter the findings from the interviews are presented with respect to two key themes: firstly, the perception of freight transport amongst local authorities; and secondly, the relationship between local authorities and urban freight stakeholders. A framework for use in the facilitation of improved relationships between stakeholders is then developed and discussed by way of conclusion. It should be noted that the authors have conducted very similar surveys in different locations as part of their own independent work, and this paper represents the coming together and synthesis of their combined efforts.

94

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

2. Urban freight transport planning In this section, we define urban freight transport, examine the importance of freight in transport policy and planning and address the issue of identifying urban freight stakeholders.

2.1. Urban freight transport planning Urban freight transport, also commonly referred to as city logistics, is defined in various ways in the literature. To our knowledge, Hicks (1977, p. 101) presented the first formal definition of urban freight transport as ‘‘all journeys into, out of, and within a designated urban area by road vehicles specifically engaged in pick-up or delivery of goods (whether the vehicle be empty or not), with the exception of shopping trips’’. Since then, numerous definitions have been presented, with varying levels of detail, for example by Ogden (1992), Taniguchi et al. (1999), Allen et al. (2000), Quak and de Koster (2006), and Dablanc (2008). The number of different definitions of urban freight transport and city logistics reflects the complexity of this field and the persistent lack of consensus on how to address the issues. Discussions have revolved around whether or not to include elements such as service transport and through freight traffic, but a common conclusion from the authors discussed above is that shopping trips by household private cars should be excluded from definitions of urban freight (Dablanc, 2008). However, when discussing goods movements from a local authority perspective, all movements of goods should be included in the planning process. It is also important to note that a variety of vehicle types can be used; given the need to capture goods movements widely, we have chosen to consider both light (LGV) and heavy (HGV) goods vehicles. It should be noted that the distribution of goods via water or rail is possible in locations where the urban transport infrastructure enables it through the existence of suitable canals or urban rail terminals. However, since the aim of this research is to investigate ways of planning for or handling freight transport, as opposed to evaluating specific solutions, we have focused on road freight. Based on this discussion, we have chosen to adopt a broad definition of urban freight for the purpose of this paper: Urban freight transport is defined as all movements of goods (as distinct from people) into, out of, through or within the urban area made by light or heavy goods vehicles. Also included are service vehicle movements (refuse collection, utilities etc.) and demolition/construction traffic. It is often stressed that urban freight transport is associated with undesirable aspects for which local authorities impose restrictions to manage the situation. Allen et al. (2007) summarise urban distribution problems including (amongst others) traffic flow/congestion, restrictions and regulations relating to freight vehicles, parking and loading/unloading problems, and customer/ receiver related problems. Historically, policies adopted by local authorities have hindered freight operations by placing restrictions on operations in urban areas (Anderson, 2000; Dablanc, 2007; Woudsma, 2001), however some more recent policy measures have been more helpful to freight transport (Browne et al., 2007). For example, relaxing vehicle weight limits could lead to economic and environmental benefits (McKinnon, 2005), by reducing the total time taken to complete collections and deliveries and reducing the number of vehicles in the urban area (Anderson et al., 2005). Quak (2008) uses the example of time windows, arguing that municipalities (local authorities) should consider harmonising delivery time windows in order to reduce the risk of sub-optimisation, leading to negative effects on the environment and increased operating costs. The BESTUFS projects (I and II) (BESTUFS project, 2010) have collected best practice data regarding urban freight transport projects and measures trialled and implemented in

Europe. Other EU projects such as CIVITAS (2012) and NICHES (2012), and the UK national project on Green Logistics (2008), have also contributed to a variety of potential ‘‘solutions’’ to urban freight transport problems. A common focus of these projects is on collecting information about potential solutions. According to our knowledge, most comparisons are made between cities of either a similar size or similar historical topography. If local authorities are to achieve their objective of reaching a sustainable city transportation system, they need to be aware of the different activities involved as well as their potential impacts. Hence, the transport planning process is a complex task with numerous actor and stakeholder interactions, for which Quak (2011) states that there is a high degree of uncertainty caused by three general factors: (1) the large number of potential policy packages (2) the method of implementation and (3) the response of users to each of those policy packages. Since our focus is on urban freight transport, we suggest a fourth factor be added to this list: (4) the responses of freight stakeholders to the policy packages. However, the transportation planning process is very much dependent on individual planners and policy makers, since they may have different ways of interpreting concepts such as sustainable development (Quak, 2011).

2.2. Urban freight stakeholders In urban freight transport flows (as for other transport flows) the realisation of transport demand results from the decisions taken by many different actors who are often strongly interdependent. In addition to the many actors, there are other stakeholders that have an interest in urban freight transport. Crainic et al. (2004) concludes that public–private understanding, collaboration and partnership is necessary in order to achieve sustainable urban freight transport. However, Lindholm and Browne (2013) highlight that there are few examples where public authorities have involved private actors in transport planning. This suggests that little has changed since the 1980s when Ogden (1984) concluded that private industry has a significant part to play in improving urban freight activities but indicated that transport planning rarely actively considered commercial freight activities. Further, Lindholm and Browne (2013) conclude that, from a long-term perspective, partnerships between local authorities and private stakeholders can have positive effects on the outcomes of urban freight for both groups. It is important to note that in our consideration of ‘stakeholders’, we have not adopted the commonly-applied ‘Stakeholder Theory’ approach (Freeman, 1994). Whilst Stakeholder Theory has been applied in various research fields at least partly related to our work, such as corporate social responsibility, business ethics and various ecological aspects of business, the theory by definition is focused very largely on the stakeholders in a single organisation. Stakeholder Theory also takes a business-oriented stance, in which it is understood that the focal organisation, in order to thrive, must prepare robust strategies to deal with perceived threats from actions taken by other stakeholders such as public authorities or pressure groups, even though those actions might have been developed in the interests of society at large. There is typically a strong emphasis on shareholders as an important stakeholder group, and governmental and other public stakeholder groups are accorded much lesser importance, along with other ‘secondary stakeholder’ groups (Clarkson, 1995). Our research is centred on all the stakeholders and actors relevant to a particular problem area, rather than on any particular organisation, and we aim to take a much more balanced view of the interests of all relevant stakeholder groups. Hence our work falls clearly into the realm of what Phillips et al. (2003) claim is ‘what stakeholder theory is not’.

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

We therefore consider stakeholders in a rather different sense, following previous literature in the urban freight field. Ogden (1992) and van Binsbergen and Visser (2001) highlight that it can be a difficult task for local authorities to recognise and identify all the relevant stakeholders and different interest groups within the urban area, in particular those interest groups that only have an indirect effect on transport operations. Each group may well have different perceptions, objectives, constraints, and options which all need to be balanced. Freight transport in urban areas is complex and there are various stakeholders along the supply chain, all of which have different requirements for and perceptions of freight transport operations. Ogden (1992) categorised participants involved in urban freight under the following headings: shippers, receivers, forwarders, trucking firms, truck drivers, terminal operators, firms involved with modes of transport other than road, road and traffic authorities, and governments. More recent studies have considered broader sets of stakeholder categories to be more appropriate, such as those suggested by Stathopolous et al. (2012), which include representatives of freight carriers, local policy makers and retailers. Muñuzuri et al. (2005) identify three main stakeholder groups that could be responsible for the implementation of different measures: Carriers/logistics operators (companies that deliver goods into the urban area, including those making deliveries on their own account), Receivers (companies that receive goods delivered by carriers), and Local authorities (responsible for implementing regulations). The stakeholders mentioned above are the most obvious stakeholders that directly influence transport operations. Russo and Comi (2011) add end consumers, inhabitants and visitors to the list of identified stakeholders. 3. Research approach Interviews with representatives from local authorities (LA’s) and the freight industry were conducted in five Northern European Countries. These interviews focused on the perceptions of urban freight and relationships between LA’s and urban freight stakeholders to ascertain the variety in behaviour and attitudes towards urban freight. On the whole, the interviews were conducted in a face to face, personal setting, with the exception of three telephone interviews. Halvorsen (1992) and Hellevik (1996) describe this type of interview as one where the questions asked are of an open-ended nature, as opposed to a multiple choice of closed questions. Multiple choice questions would have been selected if the interviews were intended to elicit an exact answer to each question for direct comparison of different interviews but in this case, our purpose was to investigate reasons behind the urban freight problem, for which it was necessary to ask questions of a more open-ended nature.

95

of interviews with local authorities and freight operators compared to Sweden. This was due to the researchers spending more time in the UK. The 36 local authorities represent a wide range of urban contexts. However, we feel that these are representative samples of urban freight stakeholders, since a saturation point in terms of new findings emerging from the interviews was reached. Furthermore, we found that perceptions of the issues and any differences of opinions between stakeholder groups were generally very similar between countries. The interviewees were selected through existing contacts with local authorities and the freight industry, as well as through methods such as cold-calls, emails, and letters targeted at local authorities and freight transport organisations whose vehicles perform operations in urban areas. In addition, established freight networks and partnerships such as Freight Quality Partnerships (FQPs) were used to reach prospective participants in the UK and Sweden. In Germany, Poland and Lithuania, the interviewees were recruited through the local authorities (both for local authority and freight stakeholder interviewees) in specific cities with the support of an EU project conducting research into Sustainable Urban Transport Plans (SUTP) (BUSTRIP project, 2005–2008). 3.2. Survey design Interview questions were grouped under two overarching themes. Firstly, there is a requirement for local authorities to possess knowledge on urban freight transport in order to include freight issues in their overall transport planning, therefore general perceptions of urban freight have been investigated. Questions under this first theme were aimed at determining perceptions on:  The importance of freight in the urban economy.  The extent to which local politicians and the general public recognise the role of urban freight; and,  The nature of urban freight problems. Secondly, urban freight stakeholders and the relationships between them need to be identified to determine current levels of collaboration between LA’s and the freight industry and the potential for future collaboration. Aspects of relationships and interactions between the freight industry and policy makers investigated under the second theme included:  Consistency of approach towards freight issues both regionally and nationwide.  The level of involvement with the freight industry (willingness of both parties to interact with each other); and,  Potential ways in which the freight industry could become more engaged in policy decision making. 3.3. Credibility of results

3.1. Survey sample A total of 74 semi-structured interviews, lasting between 1 and 2 h each have been conducted over the period of study 2008–2012, see Table 1. The survey sample is divided across the five countries studied, with the UK featuring approximately double the number

Table 1 Distribution of interviews in the five areas of study. Organisation type

UK

Lithuania

Total

Local Authorities Freight Stakeholders

16 14

Sweden 9 8

4 4

Germany

Poland 3 7

4 5

36 38

Total

30

17

8

10

9

74

Various methods were used by the researchers conducting the interviews to ensure reliability and robustness of the findings. To ensure accurate recording of responses, for the majority of interviews either audio recording equipment was used which enabled a transcription of the complete interview to be made, or else two researchers were present to take detailed notes. Where neither of these two options was available, the interviews were conducted by one researcher and a transcript was subsequently crosschecked with the interview participant. When a study is conducted at several sites and the results are comparable the research is credible. However, if several investigators study the same phenomena at different sites, with different methods and obtain comparable findings then the results have a very high credibility (Johnson, 1999). In this case, two independent researchers have performed

96

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

individual studies over the same time period, at different sites, using the same method (interviews) with interview themes that closely matched from which comparable results were found. Discussions have confirmed that a similar interpretation of concepts and interview topics were found across the researchers. Hence this produces solid results and creates good opportunities for valid analysis and significant conclusions. 4. Perceptions of urban freight transport One of the interview themes was to identify how the stakeholders perceive urban freight, based on the premise that whilst freight transport is a driver of the urban economy, it is at the same time a factor in disturbing the attractiveness of the urban environment. In this section we will present the analysis of the findings connected to this theme. 4.1. Lack of freight transport expertise in local authorities There was a general consensus amongst most of the transport planners interviewed that they ‘‘don’t have much expertise on freight, to be honest’’. This is possibly due to the local authorities being ‘‘light on staff and technical expertise’’ to develop freight transport ideas in-house, instead placing more emphasis on passenger transport. The majority of local authorities interviewed in the UK admitted to out-sourcing freight related scoping studies and reports required to support their Local Transport Plans and City Region Transport Strategies. Local authorities in the other countries studied also lack in-house competence regarding freight transport, and therefore rely heavily on consultants. Three of the UK and one Swedish local authority interviewed were confident in their ability to manage local freight movements in-house. Of these, two have a transport planner with previous experience of working in the logistics industry and have become heavily involved in organising their FQP and a freight steering group, as well as coordinating representatives from the local freight industry to develop policies and initiatives in the area. In Germany, one surveyed local authority has an officer responsible for freight transport issues, although this person mostly deals with issues of a technical nature regarding surveillance and collection of statistics. Amongst all other local authorities interviewed, there was a general lack of acknowledgement of the area of urban freight transport. The LA’s trust the freight industry to handle transport operations as efficiently as possible, but at the same time they see the transport operations in the urban area as a potential source of disturbance. ‘‘They get in the way of transporting people’’ says one representative of a public transport company in Lithuania who, on paper at least, is equally responsible for handling the planning of freight transport for the local authority in the area concerned. 4.2. Recognition of freight transport in urban areas Freight transport movements are rarely considered in land use planning, with respondents commonly admitting that ‘‘we never thought of handling the freight issues’’. Local businesses tend to be more concerned with how their customers will be able to access their amenities, rather than how they will get their goods to their premises. Even though freight transport is recognised as a feature in many local transport plans as ‘‘a driver of the urban economy’’ and is therefore regarded as an important issue, urban freight remains excluded from tasks or planned development measures outlined in transport plans. Where freight has been mentioned this is generally related to bans and regulations aimed to meet objectives such as minimising noise or damage to pavements caused by heavy

vehicles. Furthermore, there is a general lack of cooperation between different local authority internal departments regarding freight transport issues. In order to achieve sustainability for freight transport more cooperation between departments (e.g. environmental, strategic planning and traffic departments) within local authorities needs to be encouraged, and currently there is little evidence from our interviews to suggest that this occurs on a regular basis. Freight transport is most often recognised in urban areas at the local authority level when various stakeholders raise a complaint, e.g. regarding noise, safety and access restrictions. In particular, transport operators commonly complain about the availability and access to loading/unloading areas. Although UK interviewees from both the freight industry and local authorities agreed that freight has a very important role to play in supporting the urban economy, most believe that freight is generally taken for granted by the general public, and is therefore not at the top of the political voting agenda. It was even observed that the politicians ‘‘like to think it’s important but I’m not sure that a lot of politicians give it the attention it deserves’’. There was consensus amongst those interviewed that the general public have very little knowledge of the freight movements going on around them, and as a result they mostly notice the negative aspects of freight transport. One industry respondent commented that freight is ‘‘most probably misunderstood more than anything. I think when any individual goes to their corner store they’re happy to pick up their loaf of bread but they’re pretty [annoyed] that they can’t park their vehicle... because the truck is in the way...people certainly want the convenience but they don’t want the inconvenience of vehicles being in the inner cities or built up areas at the times when they are trying to go about their daily business.’’ For many of the authorities interviewed, freight plays a key role in the region’s manufacturing, quarrying, timber and agricultural industries and provides a steady source of employment. Even in the areas where the economy is service sector dominated with a healthy tourism industry, the local authority recognises that for ‘‘the tourists that come here to buy the ice creams, the ice cream has got to get here... it probably came on a lorry’’. It is also noteworthy that general knowledge of freight transport operations is relatively poor, with reliable statistics rarely available. Only a few of the localities surveyed perform regular traffic counts, and in even fewer instances was it possible to separate heavy vehicle movements from other traffic. Furthermore, no statistics have been formally published regarding freight transport volumes or intensity on a regular basis. This lack of evidence base for decision-making hinders the opportunity for freight transport to move further up the local authority agenda. 4.3. Impediments to urban freight transport The most common way of managing freight transport in urban areas is by regulation and restrictions. For the localities interviewed, weight and time restrictions of some kind or infrastructure restrictions such as pedestrian-only streets and one-way street systems are amongst the most frequently used. From the operators’ point of view, one of the main downsides of weight limit restrictions is that HGVs are forced to take longer routes to go around the limited zone to reach customers, and this contributes to higher fuel consumption and emissions. However, the reason behind those restrictions is not always in the interest of freight transport effectiveness or efficiency, but is more often a very site-specific reason due to environmental sensitivity of the area or specific demands by certain stakeholders. In the UK, operators involved in grocery distribution reported difficulties with supplying stores in residential areas, where planning conditions often restrict weekend deliveries and may prohibit deliveries on public

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

holidays, impacting on distribution schedules. Respondents cited, for example, at Easter when deliveries may be severely limited over the extended weekend, meaning that basic groceries such as milk and bread cannot be replenished despite stores trading throughout the four day holiday period. All localities are somewhat hindered in their work by infrastructure networks and certain kinds of regulations, depending on national and other (e.g. European) legislation. Other important factors that hinder their work are economic and political structures (e.g. it is the local authority civil servants that are responsible for the planning procedures, but it is the political representatives that are responsible for decision making). Furthermore, historical factors and cultural traditions may also have great influence on planning procedures. For example, many towns and cities with historic centres have narrow cobbled streets with archways and overhanging buildings that pre-date modern motor vehicles, and are actually better suited to horse and cart type movements than present day delivery vehicles. A lot of urban deliveries are made to premises that have undergone a change of use, for example what may once have been a hairdressing shop on a high street in the 1960s may have since been converted to a small convenience store, and therefore access to the store is limited as it had never previously been required at the outset. A number of the transport operators interviewed described the operational pitfalls of policies such as time windows. The majority of freight distributed in and around urban centres begins its journey at a regional distribution centre, usually in close proximity to the motorway network and is therefore impacted by major incidents occurring on that network. When such delays occur city centre delivery time windows can be missed, often resulting in either a failed delivery or forcing hauliers to park a significant distance from their delivery point, perhaps parking illegally and compounding the delayed schedule. Some hauliers who are members of a pallet network noted that they make their deliveries within a specific postcode area where freight comes in overnight and there is a short turn-around time to ensure next day delivery within a specific time window. City centre pedestrian precincts were highlighted as being particularly difficult. Operators recognise that it can be a balancing act for local authorities between the needs of operators and the safety of pedestrians. However, with growing regeneration and city centre developments, the volumes of freight being delivered here are on the increase. From a business perspective, hauliers would rather have deliveries well spread across the day so that they can maximise vehicle utilisation. Freight forwarders in smaller localities recognise that time windows could be a problematic issue when considered across several neighbouring localities. If the windows are very similar, then freight forwarders need to operate more vehicles in order to serve all the areas within the same time window. If windows are different in neighbouring areas, it may be possible for a single vehicle to cover all deliveries, although scheduling of this vehicle may be a highly complex affair. With regards to parking legislation, government and local councils tend to be very restrictive. Access to and provision of adequate loading/unloading facilities was a commonly reported impediment by operators interviewed in all localities. Penalty Charge Notices (PCN’s) in response to parking offences are frequently received as operators struggle to make deliveries to city centre commercial premises such as restaurants and pharmacies where access may be poor and suitable loading bays may be lacking. For operators covering Central London, dealing with the sheer volume of parking tickets and bus lane fines can often be a full time occupation. Over a thirty-month period between 2009 and 2011, a survey of 26 Freight Transport Association (FTA) members revealed that over 80,000 PCN’s had been accumulated, totalling £3.86 million in revenue for London councils, with the average PCN cost per member being £148,349 (Chapman, 2012). The operators interviewed

97

consider that parking regulations in city centres are too tight, especially for quick deliveries, and it would appear that leniency varies greatly between towns and cities with operators reporting a distinct lack of uniformity with regards to the enforcement of parking related regulations. It was suggested that perhaps there needs to be some leeway regards parking enforcement for the utilities sector who are servicing residential and other premises and who collectively accumulate PCN’s to the value of millions of pounds over the course of a year. Furthermore, unauthorised parking at loading and unloading facilities by private cars for example was highlighted as a major hindrance for efficient freight transport operations in the majority of the localities interviewed. However, in Gothenburg, Sweden, a good example of enforcement has been demonstrated, with a higher surveillance of the traffic situation in the inner city resulting in a 90% decrease of such loading bay parking violations (Jäderberg, 2012). Operators also identified a significant lack of suitable lorry parking in and around large urban conurbations, an issue which has become more problematic following the introduction of Drivers’ working hours legislation in the European Union in April 2007. EC regulation 561/2006 states that after a period of fourand-a-half hours driving time, a driver must take an uninterrupted 45 min break (Goel, 2009). 5. Relationships between local authorities and urban freight stakeholders The second theme for the interview questions related to the relationships between local authorities and other urban freight stakeholders. Here we present the analysis of those results. 5.1. Ways in which local authorities currently involve urban freight stakeholders in their decision making process As a consequence of the lack of local authority awareness and knowledge regarding freight transport in the urban area, there is also a lack of involvement regarding the issue. Involvement is most common when the local authority responds to a complaint regarding freight transport in the urban area. Such complaints may come directly from the transport operator, regarding e.g. problems with loading bays or road pavements disrupting goods deliveries, or from residents or business owners regarding issues relating to vehicle noise, safety problems or visual intrusion. This could then lead to ‘‘stakeholder consultation’’ as suggested by Dablanc (2007) aimed at solving a particular issue or problem that has occurred. However, there are examples where more regular stakeholder involvement takes place in urban areas. The best-recognised example is that of Freight Quality Partnerships (FQPs) in the UK (Allen et al., 2010), but similar partnerships exist in Sweden, Holland and France for example. Nevertheless, a requirement for those cities or urban areas that have a working public–private partnership and stakeholder involvement is an acknowledgement from the local authority as well as from other stakeholders involved of a common interest in solving a problem. Hence, those local authorities have in general a better understanding of freight transport, although not necessarily by having a person working exclusively in the field. Over half of the private stakeholder representatives interviewed reported having no contact at all with local authority policy makers and planners. Where contact had been experienced, it was noted as very limited, and one of the main issues raised was the difficulty in getting an appointment with local authorities. Two companies referred to engagement with local authority planning departments

98

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

regarding the development of new sites, however in such situations it was noted that councils preferred to meet with consultants working on a company’s behalf rather than the company directly. Less than half of the local authorities interviewed considered themselves as taking an active approach to engaging with the freight industry. Three reported regular attendance at local Chamber of Commerce meetings, in particular at transport themed meetings, where they are able to discuss the views and perspectives of their business stakeholders on issues that need to be addressed, in addition to getting feedback on draft project proposals. For those local authorities demonstrating active engagement with industry in their area, involvement in the Local Strategic Partnership meetings was also seen as important. In locations where a significant portion of freight movements are due to one particular industry in the area (such as shipping and port activities, quarrying or forestry), the majority of engagement with industry occurs through specific industry sector themed FQPs or forums to discuss any issues arising from the routes travelled by commercial vehicles. Public consultation as part of the development of Local Transport Plans in the UK were, for most of the local authorities interviewed, the only opportunity provided for industry to comment on the proposed new policies that may affect their future operations. Industry trade associations represent their members’ interests, and it is often the road haulage or freight transport associations in each country that have the main contact with local authorities on behalf of their members. The FTA in the UK is one of the largest trade associations in the country, and is also responsible for representing its members at FQP meetings where possible. The interviews enquired about the role that such industry organisations play in influencing freight transport policy on behalf of the logistics industry. On the whole UK respondents felt that the main focus of such organisations is mainly on influencing central policy, and that they were good at voicing the concerns of hauliers and raising awareness of operational issues (such as the impact of high fuel prices) on a national basis. However they fall short with respect to addressing local issues. The same is evident in other countries, where trade associations have greater success at influencing issues affecting several localities or a large proportion of their members, rather than smaller and location-specific issues. 5.2. Opportunities for future involvement Even though freight transport is not fully acknowledged by local authorities, there is a clear perception that it has become an area of increasing interest for them. During the interviews, it could be seen that in recent years freight transport is no longer simply seen as a business problem. Moreover, the interviews have highlighted the issue for the interviewees. The freight operators welcome this higher level of awareness of the urban freight transport situation and encourage more active involvement from local authorities. However, operators did raise some concerns about the possible risk of more restrictions being applied, leading to a higher degree of inefficiency and sub-optimisation in their freight transport operations. Most of the local authorities interviewed agreed that there was potential for more active engagement with the freight industry, though one local authority pointed out that ‘‘the private sector [is] probably the hardest to reach, because by its very nature there are a lot of small operators...who are often two man bands who don’t have a lot of time to send people to meetings, they work around the clock. When you do get to them, the small operators tend to have very localised specific problems. The bigger operators are much easier to reach because they will have a dedicated officer

whose job it is to talk to people and they will have more global problems which are probably easier or more meaningful to get to grips with.’’ 6. Developing an actor and stakeholder framework Hesse (1995) concluded, back in the 1990s, that stakeholder cooperation is a success factor for city logistics projects. However, the findings from our research show that there is still very little stakeholder cooperation within the local authority context today. Stathopolous et al. (2012) point out that traditionally studies have focused on a single stakeholder or actor, and they suggest a wider perspective is necessary to understand more complex interactions between stakeholders. This helps to improve urban freight planning and enables policy makers to propose suitable trade-offs between different priorities. Based on the results of the interviews in our comparative study, we have been able to reconsider the identification of stakeholders. First of all, we can differentiate between two groups of stakeholders: those who directly affect the issues and those with an indirect interest in urban freight. Therefore, we have differentiated between ‘actors’ and ‘stakeholders’: Stakeholders are all that have an interest in the system of urban freight transport (individuals, groups of people, organisations, companies, etc.); whereas actors are those that have a direct influence on the system. Therefore, all actors are stakeholders, but not all stakeholders are actors. We present a new framework that differentiates between actors and stakeholders and provides for a closer examination of the actor/stakeholder relationships (Fig. 1). The actors highlighted in the framework were initially based on the actor groups identified by previous literature, which were used to determine the interviewees for this research. The interviews have helped to identify additional actors, to differentiate between stakeholders and actors, and to establish the relationships between the different actors involved in urban freight. The actors are divided into four groups, in line with previous identifications as discussed above: Shippers; Customers; Freight Transport operators; and, Authorities. All of these have a direct impact on urban freight transport through direct operations or regulations. The shippers category encompasses the actors who send the goods and arrange transportation; including those that perform their ‘‘own-account transport’’ whose main business function is non-transport related (for instance retail and or grocery stores). The shippers are looking for advantages in efficiency and competitiveness. The customers could include both the consignees of goods (for example offices, shops or restaurants), or the end-consumers (residents and visitors in the urban area) who complete the last mile delivery of goods privately (either on public transport, by car or other modes). The customers/consignees have an interest stake in several different aspects of urban freight transport, e.g. attractiveness of the urban area, cost efficiency, environmental issues, safety, and security or reliability. The freight transport operators include for example third party logistics operators or hauliers who are responsible for logistics operations being undertaken in the urban area. The vehicle drivers are the ones who actually perform the transport operation within the urban area (the driver of the vehicle could also appear in other groups, but predominantly relate to the freight transport operators group). Maintenance and service transport operation (for example waste, linen or window cleaning services), as well as construction logistics (delivery of materials for construction sites) have also been included in this category, since those are the often ‘‘hidden’’ or forgotten freight transport operations. Cherrett et al. (2012) identify that different kinds of service transport could represent

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

99

Fig. 1. Urban freight stakeholders and their relationships.

as much as 43% of the total number of vehicles that arrive at a high-street shop during a typical week. The authorities category includes local authorities who set regulations on the local road network and create opportunities (and sometimes barriers) for efficient urban freight transport (for example infrastructure changes and transport planning policies). Regional or state governments also influence urban freight through their implementation of policies and regulations that local authorities need to consider, in addition to the national road network in some urban areas that is also their responsibility. The key concerns of these stakeholders are to maintain an attractive urban area and to increase the quality of life, whilst attempting to attract businesses and visitors to the area. Stakeholders have an indirect impact on urban freight transport through their actions as indicated in the framework proposed. The vehicle manufacturers have an indirect impact on urban freight transport through the design and technological innovation behind freight vehicles: they are interested in building (and marketing) vehicles that suit urban freight transport operations. The public transport operators have an influence on local authorities (or constitute a division of the local authorities) and have an indirect impact on urban freight transport due to potential conflicts between passenger and freight activities. Trade associations and commercial organisations could potentially impact urban freight transport operations through for example lobbying for a particular policy, whilst land and property owners impact urban freight through the appropriate provision of freight facilities on their properties or by setting demands on their tenants relating to how and when goods are to be received, for example shops and restaurants in urban areas may

only accept deliveries during certain time-windows. This final group of stakeholders could perhaps be considered as an actor, since they also have the potential to have a direct effect on the outcomes of urban freight transport, however the interviews highlight that they rarely regard themselves as an actor in urban freight transport, nor are they included in such discussions on a wider scale by any other actors or stakeholders. Nevertheless, there is the potential to transfer land and property owners from the stakeholder category to the actor category. Finally, it is important to remember that there is a large group of stakeholders that is rarely considered in the freight context: the visitors and citizens of the urban areas, who are not primarily there for shopping, but are in the area for recreational purposes or similar. This group have an indirect interest in freight transport through their desire for an attractive urban area, free from noise and visual intrusion caused by freight vehicles.

7. Conclusions and the way ahead The aim of this paper was to examine a variety of cities in relation to urban freight transport, and their inclusion of urban freight stakeholders in local authority transport planning. Although each city is unique in context, their local authorities face similar urban problems and issues. However, each local authority could incorporate a wider range of freight stakeholders to help them address these issues. As such, this paper has provided a description of the relationships between different actors and stakeholders, which can be used by local authorities to aid in the identification of appropriate freight stakeholders.

100

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101

Through the interviews we have identified several factors that impact on the extent to which freight is considered as an integral part of the urban transport planning processes. Four key factors were identified:  There is a need to identify the relevant stakeholders.  There is a lack of awareness, knowledge and statistics about freight transport activities.  There is insufficient knowledge of possible policy measures (with the present focus strongly on the traditional approach through the use of regulations); and,  There is a lack of interaction between stakeholders. Very similar perceptions of freight transport appear to exist across the Northern European countries studied. The paper contradicts earlier research results that suggest differences in the ways that local authorities consider freight transport, and goes some way towards demonstrating that the problems faced by local authorities are not unique to one country or any specific category of urban area, and hence a generic decision-making framework would be of value. Each city or town shares similar impediments, lack of knowledge and the common problem of stakeholders having little regular involvement in the decision making process. Transport plans rarely include freight transport, except for mentioning its contribution to economic development and the importance of regulating the disturbance from large and heavy vehicles. For example, the City of Westminster’s Core Strategy (2011, p. 127) stipulates that ‘‘Developments must demonstrate that freight, servicing and deliveries required will be managed in such a way that minimises adverse impacts [. . .] especially where the quality of the public realm, local pollution, and/or function and reliability of the transport network would be otherwise compromised.’’ Local authorities often address urban freight transport either solely through regulations and restrictions, or treat it as a business problem for the logistics industry to solve. Culture and tradition, as well as mentality have been identified through the interviews as common reasons for this lack of attention. The regulations imposed by local authorities could be a major barrier towards effective, efficient and sustainable urban freight transport systems. In order to successfully address urban freight transport issues, it is necessary for key stakeholders to perceive those problems and come to understand the elements involved, and this reinforces the need for a fully thought-out planning process. Local authorities need to improve their understanding of urban freight transport within their sphere of influence, which will lead to a more positive impact on day-to-day urban freight transport. The new framework developed in this paper and illustrated in Fig. 1 offers a structured method of taking the interests of all relevant actors and stakeholders into account. The basis of this approach is very different from that of more familiar ‘Stakeholder Theory’, which is focused on the impacts on one (typically large) organisation, and seeks to establish how that business can achieve its primary objective (e.g. maximising shareholder value) in the face of constraints imposed by other stakeholder groups. In contrast, our aim has been to establish a framework that can support a mechanism for negotiations to take place to facilitate decision-making that effectively takes the needs of all relevant stakeholders into account in a much more balanced way. However, it is recognised that further work is required to determine precisely how this framework can be adopted and implemented in practice to enable greater interaction between the stakeholder groups. One potential route is for already-established stakeholder forums such as the UK FQPs to be restructured around our framework in a way that would facilitate more open, more balanced and much more meaningful discussion of the issues

affecting the area concerned and the potential solutions that might be available. Potential changes to the nature of such forums and their methods of operation might include, for example, neutral meeting locations and chairpersons, focusing each meeting around a key issue or problem and use of more innovative meeting or workshop formats and teamworking, rather than more traditional formalised business meeting agendas and protocols. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge all the interviewees who kindly donated their valuable time to talk to us and, to everyone who provided contacts for interviews. We would also like to acknowledge: Interreg IIIB, the Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA), and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) in the UK whose funding supported our research. References Allen, J., Anderson, S., Browne, M., Jones, P., 2000. A Framework for Considering Policies to Encourage Sustainable urban Freight Traffic and Goods/Service Flows; Summary Report. Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster, London, UK. Allen, J., Thorne, G., Browne, M., 2007. BESTUFS Good Practice Guide on Urban Freight Transport. Allen, J., Browne, M., Piotrowska, M., Woodburn, A., 2010. Freight Quality Partnerships in the UK – an Analysis of their Work and Achievements. Green Logistics Project Report. Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster, London, UK. Anderson, S., 2000. Distribution logistics in big cities. In: Paper Presented at the ISTP 4th International Conference on Transport, Lisbon. Anderson, S., Allen, J., Browne, M., 2005. Urban logistics – how can it meet policy makers’ sustainability objectives? Journal of Transport Geography 13 (1), 71– 81. BESTUFS project. 2010. Retrieved 10 February 2010. . Browne, M., Piotrowska, M., Woodburn, A., Allen, J., 2007. Literature Review WM9: Part I – Urban freight transport, Carried out as part of Green Logistics Project. Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster, London, UK. BUSTRIP project. 2005–2008. Retrieved 14 March 2012. from . Chapman, N., 2012. Parking fines rise by a third in London – but FTA victory as plan for Olympic PCN increases is abandoned. In: FTA (Eds.) FREIGHT: Promoting Safe, Efficient and Sustainable Supply Chains. FTA, Tunbridge Wells, UK. Cherrett, T., Allen, J., McLeod, F., Maynard, S., Hickford, A., Browne, M., 2012. Understanding urban freight activity – key issues for freight planning. Journal of Transport Geography 24, 22–32. CIVITAS. 2012. The CIVITAS Initiative by the European Commission. Retrieved 26 January 2012. . Clarkson, M.B.E., 1995. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review 20 (1), 92–117. Crainic, T.G., Ricciardi, N., Storchi, G., 2004. Advanced freight transportation systems for congested urban areas. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 12 (2), 119–138. Dablanc, L., 2007. Goods transport in large European cities: difficult to organize, difficult to modernize. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 41 (3), 280–285. Dablanc, L., 2008. Urban goods movement and air quality policy and regulation issues in European cities. Journal of Environmental Law 20 (2), 245–266. Dablanc, L., 2011. City distribution, a key element of the urban economy: guidelines for practioners. In: Macharis, C., Melo, S. (Eds.), City Distribution and Urban Freight Transport: Multiple Perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, UK. Freeman, R.E., 1994. The politics of stakeholder theory: some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4), 409–421. Goel, A., 2009. Vehicle Scheduling and Routing with Drivers’ Working Hours. Transportation Science 43 (1), 17–26. Green Logistics. 2008. The Green Logistics project, UK. Retrieved 10 April 2008. . Halvorsen, K., 1992. Samhällsvetenskaplig Metod. Studentlitteratur, Sweden. Hellevik, O., 1996. Forskningsmetoder i sociologi och statsvetenskap. Bokförlaget Natur och Kultur, Sweden. Hesse, M., 1995. Urban space and logistics: on the road to sustainability? World Transport Policy and Practice 1 (4), 39–45. Hicks, S., 1977. Urban freight. In: Hensher, D.A. (Ed.), Urban Transport Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Jäderberg, M., 2012. Personal Communication in April 2012. Johnson, D.H., 1999. The insignificance of significance testing. Journal of Wildlife Management 63 (3), 763–772.

E.E.F. Ballantyne et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 32 (2013) 93–101 Lindholm, M., Browne, M., 2013. Local authority cooperation with urban freight stakeholders: A comparison of partnership approaches. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 13 (1), 20–38. McKinnon, A., 2005. The economic and environmental benefits of increasing maximum truck weight: the British experience. Transport Research Part D: Transport and Environment 10 (1), 77–95. Muñuzuri, J., Larrañeta, J., Onieva, L., Cortés, P., 2005. Solutions applicable by local administrations for urban logistics improvement. Cities 22 (1), 15–28. NICHES. 2012. The EU project NICHES. Retrieved 26 January 2012. . Ogden, K.W., 1984. A framework for urban freight policy analysis. Transportation Planning and Technology 8 (4), 253–265. Ogden, K.W., 1992. Urban Goods Movement: A Guide to Policy and Planning. Ashgate Publishing Company, USA. Phillips, R., Freeman, R.E., Wicks, A.C., 2003. What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (4), 479–502. Quak, H., 2008. Sustainability of Urban Freight Transport: Retail Distribution and Local Regulations in Cities. (Ph.D.), Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Quak, H., 2011. Urban freight transport: the challenge of sustainability. In: Macharis, C., Melo, S. (Eds.), City Distribution and Urban Freight Transport: Multiple Perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 37–55.

101

Quak, H.J., de Koster, M.B.M., 2006. Urban Distribution: The Impacts of Different Governmental Time-Window Schemes. Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM) report. Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Russo, F., Comi, A., 2011. Measures for sustainable freight transportation at urban scale: expected goals and tested results in Europe. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 137 (2), 142–152. Stathopolous, A., Valeri, E., Marcucci, E., 2012. Stakeholder reactions to urban freight policy innovation. Journal of Transport Geography 22 (May), 34–45. Taniguchi, E., Thompson, R., Yamada, T., 1999. Modelling city logistics. In: Taniguchi, E., Thompson, R. (Eds.), City Logistics I. Institute of Systems Science Research, Japan. Van Binsbergen, A., Visser, J., 2001. Innovation steps towards efficient goods distribution systems for urban areas: Efficiency improvements of goods distribution in urban areas. Ph.D., TRAIL Research School. Delft University, The Netherlands. Westminster City Council. 2011. Core Strategy: Local Development Framework. City of Westminster. Woudsma, C., 2001. Understanding the movement of goods, not people: issues, Evidence and Potential. Urban Studies 38 (13), 2439–2455.