A large share of urban freight in cities is related to construction works. Construction is required to create attractive, sustainable and economically viable cities. When activities at and around construction sites are not managed effectively, they can have a negative impact on the cities liveability. Construction companies implementing logistics concepts show a reduction of logistic costs, less congestion around the sites and improved productivity and safety. The client initially sets the ‘ground rules’ for construction in the tendering process. This paper explores how tendering for construction projects can support sustainable urban construction logistics. We explore the potential for tendering construction projects, by both public and private clients, for sustainable urban construction logistics and we present a conceptual framework for specifying ‘logistics quality’ as a quality criterion for EMAT (Economically Most Advantageous Tender). Our exploration results in questions for further research in tendering for sustainable urban construction logistics.
Urban construction logistics has a big impact on cities. The topic of this paper is governance strategies for realising more sustainable urban construction logistics. Although not much research has been done in the field of governance of construction logistics, several authors have stressed the fragmented nature of the construction industry and the importance of collaboration in urban construction logistics as issues. A literature review was done to identify the barriers in collaboration. Based on these barriers the research objective was to determine which drivers for collaborative governance are needed to improve urban construction logistics. The methods for data collection were semi-structured interviews and a focus group. The collaborative governance model is applied as a strategy to overcome the barriers in collaboration and governance identified. Key findings are both formal and informal barriers hinder the governance of construction logistics. Based on a collaborative governance model we identified four for improving collaborative governance.
Although urban agriculture as a way to come to sustainable urban food systems can be questioned and we have to be aware not falling into a ‘local trap’ regarding its benefits (Born & Purcell, 2006), initiatives for urban agriculture emerge all over the world. Some of these primarily focus on achieving social and educational goals while others try to become an (high tech) alternative to existing food supply chains. Whichever the goals of urban agriculture, in practice many of these initiatives have difficulties in their (logistics) operations. Research on urban agriculture and local‐for‐local food supply chains mainly focuses on environmental and economic benefits, alternative production techniques, short food supply chains (logistics infrastructure) or socio‐economic benefits of urban agriculture. So far, the alignment of urban agriculture goals with the chosen logistics concept – which includes more aspects than only infrastructure – has not gained much attention. This paper tries to fill this gap through an exploration of urban agriculture projects – both low and high tech – from around the world by using the integrated logistics concept (Van Goor et al., 2003). The main question to be answered in this paper is: to what extend can the integrated logistics concept contribute to understanding logistics drivers and barriers of urban agriculture projects? To answer this question, different urban agriculture projects were studied through information on their websites and an internet based questionnaire with key players in these projects. Our exploration shows that the ILC is a useful tool for determining logistics drivers and barriers and that there is much potential in using this concept when planning for successful urban agriculture projects.
MULTIFILE
CILOLAB contributes to the transition of the UFT-system towards zero emission city logistics in 2025 by examining, developing and enabling alternatives for urban logistics activities. Specifically, CILOLAB focuses on the transferability and scaling-up of successful logistics initiatives; i.e. concepts that facilitate decoupling between transport towards and in cities. CILOLAB is an action-driven partnership where cities cooperate with transport operators, interest groups, research institutes and societal partners and collaboratively develop new approaches for urban logistical solutions. Through continuous monitoring and impact assessment these solutions are evaluated and further developed within this experimentation environment, all contributing to the CILOLAB ambition.
CILOLAB contributes to the transition of the UFT-system towards zero emission city logistics in 2025 by examining, developing and enabling alternatives for urban logistics activities. Specifically, CILOLAB focuses on the transferability and scaling-up of successful logistics initiatives; i.e. concepts that facilitate decoupling between transport towards and in cities. CILOLAB is an action-driven partnership where cities cooperate with transport operators, interest groups, research institutes and societal partners and collaboratively develop new approaches for urban logistical solutions. Through continuous monitoring and impact assessment these solutions are evaluated and further developed within this experimentation environment, all contributing to the CILOLAB ambition.
PBL is the initiator of the Work Programme Monitoring and Management Circular Economy 2019-2023, a collaboration between CBS, CML, CPB, RIVM, TNO, UU. Holidays and mobility are part of the consumption domains that PBL researches, and this project aims to calculate the environmental gains per person per year of the various circular behavioural options for both holiday behaviour and daily mobility. For both behaviours, a range of typical (default) trips are defined and for each several circular option explored for CO2 emissions, Global warming potential and land use. The holiday part is supplied by the Centre for Sustainability, Tourism and Transport (CSTT) of the BUas Academy of Tourism (AfT). The mobility part is carried out by the Urban Intelligence professorship of the Academy for Built Environment and Logistics (ABEL).The research question is “what is the environmental impact of various circular (behavioural) options around 1) holidays and 2) passenger mobility?” The consumer perspective is demarcated as follows:For holidays, transportation and accommodation are included, but not food, attractions visited and holiday activitiesFor mobility, it concerns only the circular options of passenger transport and private means of transport (i.e. freight transport, business travel and commuting are excluded). Not only some typical trips will be evaluated, but also the possession of a car and its alternatives.For the calculations, we make use of public databases, our own models and the EAP (Environmental Analysis Program) model developed by the University of Groningen. BUAs projectmembers: Centre for Sustainability, Tourism and Transport (AT), Urban Intelligence (ABEL).
