A stakeholder-based multicriteria evaluation framework for city distribution

Abstract Urban areas face particular challenges for freight transport, both in terms of logistical performance and environmental impact. Many innovative city distribution concepts have failed because not all stakeholders were taken into account in the decision-making process ( Macharis & Melo, 2011 ). There is a clear need for a comprehensive approach to evaluate urban freight solutions in order to assess their chance of success. A new evaluation framework was worked out within the STRAIGHTSOL project (strategies and measures for smarter urban freight solutions, EC FP7) and incorporates the city distribution actors and their objectives as the primary focus. The multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) methodology developed by Macharis, 2005 , Macharis, 2007 ties with this aim and is complemented with other methods such as the cost–benefit analysis and business modeling. The so-called city distribution — multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (CD-MAMCA) methodology is fully explained through a case study with Kuehne and Nagel which tested real-time remote monitoring of the cargo leading to improve rail tracking and warehouse management in Thessaloniki.

[1]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  The importance of stakeholder analysis in freight transport , 2004 .

[2]  Adel Guitouni,et al.  Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Laetitia Dablanc.  City Distribution, a Key Element of the Urban Economy: Guidelines for Practitioners , 2011 .

[4]  Julian Allen,et al.  University of Westminster Eprints , 2006 .

[5]  Bertrand Mareschal,et al.  PROMETHEE-GDSS revisited: Applications so far and new developments , 2013 .

[6]  Frank Witlox.  Stadsdistributie, dé oplossing voor de tanende (groot)stedelijke mobiliteit? , 2006 .

[7]  R. Freeman.  Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach , 2010 .

[8]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  Multi-criteria Analysis as a Tool to Include Stakeholders in Project Evaluation: The MAMCA Method , 2007 .

[9]  E. Ballantyne,et al.  A comparative study of urban freight transport planning: addressing stakeholder needs , 2013 .

[10]  T. Saaty.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[11]  Hans Quak,et al.  Sustainability of urban freight transport , 2008 .

[12]  B. Roy,et al.  The uses of cost–benefit analysis in public transportation decision-making in France , 2009 .

[13]  Yves Pigneur,et al.  Business Model Generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers and challengers , 2010 .

[14]  Michael Browne,et al.  Urban Freight Consolidation Centers , 2014 .

[15]  Álvaro Costa,et al.  Definition of a Set of Indicators to Evaluate the Performance of Urban Goods Distribution Initiatives , 2011 .

[16]  Carlos F. Daganzo,et al.  Logistics Systems Analysis , 1991 .

[17]  Maurice Landry,et al.  A stakeholder approach to MCDA , 1998 .

[18]  M A Taylor,et al.  The city logistics paradigm for urban freight transport , 2005 .

[19]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  The multi‐actor, multi‐criteria analysis methodology (MAMCA) for the evaluation of transport projects: Theory and practice , 2009 .

[20]  Jaap Spronk,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Methods and Applications , 1985 .

[21]  Romeo Danielis,et al.  The potential demand for a urban freight consolidation centre , 2008 .

[22]  Agostino Nuzzolo,et al.  Urban freight policy innovation for Rome's ltz: A stakeholder perspective , 2011 .