Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 323

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparative analysis of the carbon footprints of conventional and online retailing: A “last mile” perspective

Edwards, Julia B., McKinnon, Alan C., Cullinane, Sharon L.·2010·International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to focus on the carbon intensity of “last mile” deliveries (i.e. deliveries of goods from local depots to the home) and personal shopping trips. Design/methodology/approach: Several last mile scenarios are constructed for the purchase of small, non‐food items, such as books, CDs, clothing, cameras and household items. Official government data, operational data from a large logistics service provider, face‐to‐face and telephone interviews with company managers and realistic assumptions derived from the literature form the basis of the calculations. Allowance has been made for home delivery failures, “browsing” trips to the shops and the return of unwanted goods. Findings: Overall, the research suggests that, while neither home delivery nor conventional shopping has an absolute CO 2 advantage, on average, the home delivery operation is likely to generate less CO 2 than the typical shopping trip. Nevertheless, CO 2 emissions per item for intensive/infrequent shopping trips by bus could match online shopping/home delivery. Research limitations/implications: The number of items purchased per shopping trip, the choice of travel mode and the willingness to combine shopping with other activities and to group purchases into as few shopping trips or online transactions as possible are shown to be critical factors. Online retailers and home delivery companies could also apply measures (e.g. maximising drop densities and increasing the use of electric vehicles) to enhance the CO 2 efficiency of their logistical operations and gain a clearer environmental advantage. Practical implications: Both consumers and suppliers need to be made more aware of the environmental implications of their respective purchasing behaviour and distribution methods so that potential CO 2 savings can be made. Originality/value: The paper offers insights into the carbon footprints of conventional and online retailing from a “last mile” perspective.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/09600031011018055

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 323

Metadata

Authors
Edwards, J. B., McKinnon, A. C., & Cullinane, S. L.
Venue
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2010-02-02
Volume
40
Issue
1/2
Pages
103-123
ISSN
0960-0035 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1499964891
Cited by
323
References
0
FWCI
22.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative analysis of the carbon footprints of conventional and online retailing: A “last mile” perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09600031011018055
The paper
Edwards, J. B., McKinnon, A. C., & Cullinane, S. L. (2010). Comparative analysis of the carbon footprints of conventional and online retailing: A “last mile” perspective. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600031011018055

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.