French cities’ urban freight surveys
1st Scientific and Technical Workshop
Bologna
05/11/2013
Presented by:
Adrien Beziat, PhD, Paris, France
Freight Surveys in France
Three kinds of surveys in France:
• Occasional surveys, organized by public actors
• Regular surveys administered by the SESP
• Research studies (ECHO, Chargeurs…)
 Interesting surveys, but very limited, not specific to urban freight
Urban Freight Surveys:
two objectives
Two survey campaigns: 1994-1997 (Bordeaux, Marseille and Dijon), then
2010-2013 (Paris, Bordeaux), administered by the Laboratory of
Transport Economics
• 1. Understanding the complexity of urban freight (the organizational
and quantitative aspects of deliveries and pickups)
• 2. Providing a tool for local decision-makers interested in urban
freight that does not require costly data collection (the FRETURB
model)
Three categories of urban freight trips
• Flows generated by deliveries and pickups between urban
establishments (shops, manufacturing, services)
 the main focus of the survey
• Freight flows to the final consumer, including car-based shopping
trips
• Flows related to city management and services: construction sites,
public works (urban utilities, construction), garbage collection, postal
services, movings and hospitals
 to be integrated to the Urban Freight Model
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
How does the UFS work?
The focus of the study is to measure the social costs of urban freight
• Studied variable: the use of the road network
• A relevant unit of observation: the movement of goods, defined as
the delivery or the reception of the cargo
• Source of data: urban establishments, or transport operators
The best unit is the delivery (or pickup) operation serving
an establishment, by use of a vehicle
Logistics organization of
establishments
Urban environment
Transport system
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Essential information for explaining the formation of flows and their impact
Three surveys administered
• To urban establishments
• To truck drivers
• To major transport operators
Sample size:
• 1500 establishment questionnaires / 6000 deliveries and pickups over
1 week and 8000 product types (weight, packaging,…)
• 1000 driver questionnaires (6000 stops)
• 100 main truck companies and large wholesalers
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Implementation: on board survey
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Expension of sampling to the urban area
• Method : sampling per strata on the French register of establishments.
Three criterias:
Activity of establishments (45 main groups identified),
The size of the establishment (no employee, 1 to 5, 6 to 9 etc...)
The location of the premise (according to a zoning of the study area)
• Then a typology of municipalities (1301) according to land use
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Weakness and difficulties
A complex and costly survey
• More and more difficult to make contact with store-keepers,
business owners
• Poorly motivated respondents
• Two visits with self-administered questionnaire left for one week
•
•
•
•
… which requires
A preliminary information and promotion campaign
A competent contractor to ensure the recruitment and
management of experienced pollsters
Thorough training of the pollsters
Paying for each survey completed (incentives)
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
How much does the UFS cost?
• Three types of costs
• knowledge base (scientific support)
• data collection (field surveys)
• operational and scientific data processing
• Total budget : 1.2 million euros
• Three sources
• French Environment Agency (ADEME)
• Ministry of Transport
• Local authorities (cities, metropolitan authorities, regions)
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Robustness and main results of the
survey
• Large size of the sample, quality of face-to-face responses :
good estimation of the number of movements generated
• Very detailed stratification of activities
Three types of results
• A detailed description of the current situation: Standard data
and Indicators
• Consistant and stable relationships
• A generation model
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Indicators
• Number of deliveries/pick-ups per job each week
• Share of own account vs third party transport according to the
type of activity
• Average distance between two stops according to the
organisation (size of the tour, single trips)
• Speed average according to the vehicle and density of activity
• Time for delivering goods according to the size of the round
• On road parking time according to density
• Speed average according to vehicle and density
• Length of the trips according to the organisation (size of the
round, single trip, type of vehicle) and the density of activity
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Standard Data
• In average 1 delivery/pick-up each week, per job (with high
standard deviation according to type of activity)
• 50% light vehicles (vans) and 50% truck
• 50% own account and 50% for hire
• 75% deliveries and pick-ups carried out by rounds
• 80% deliveries <10 minutes, pick-ups 30 min in average
• 13 deliveries or pick-ups in a round in average (19 for hire,
11 in own account)
• Peak hours (9-11 am) different from car traffic PH (7-9 am)
• 25% energy consumption, 25% GHG, 35% NOx, 50% PM
emissions (all freight flows incl. shopping trips)
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Relationships
• Between activity, number of employees and movement
generation
• Between management mode and organization mode
• Between type of vehicle and management mode
• Between distances covered, management mode and
organization modes
• Between stop timing and size of the delivery tour
• Between distance covered between 2 stops and size of delivery
tour.
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Freturb : implementation
Source: Jean-Louis Routhier,
Laboratoire d’Economie des
Transports, Lyon
Thank you for your attention
http://www.ifsttar.fr/
adrien.beziat@ifsttar.fr
http://www.let.fr/
http://freturb.let.fr/
Freturb@entpe.fr
MARSEILLES
Type of vehicles
Under 3.5T
Trucks
heavy trucks
Traffic all vehicles
1 564,6820 575,66
Laboratoire d'Economie des Transports, Lyon - SIG Geoconcept 03/1999
Types of vehicles
Served by heavy trucks
Through-traffic by heavy trucks
Served by medium trucks
Through-traffic by medium trucks
Served by light veh
Through-traffic by light veh
MARSEILLES
Weekly service and
traffic
0
Laboratoire d'Economie des Transports, Lyon - SIG Geoconcept 03/1999
10 km
Sh
op
s
st
or
es
ce
To
ta
l
se
ct
or
In
du
st
ry
La
rg
e
us
es
Tr
ad
e
es
-W
-h
o
Re
ta
il
re
ce
s
ul
tu
m
en
-s
er
vi
Se
rv
i
-W
hsa
l
Cr
af
ts
Ag
ric
number of movements/week
Operations per week per employee
as a function of the type of activity
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
Marseille
Bordeaux
Dijon
Number of weekly number of deliveries/pick-ups
as a function of the number of employees
(example of retail)
number of movements/week
Retail trade in the three cities
60
50
40
Dijon
Bordeaux
Marseille
30
20
10
-
1
3
6
10
taskforce (nb of employees)
20
50
Duration of parking as a function of the number of stops and of the
type of vehicle
Durée d'un
arrêtasselon
le type
de véhicule
la taille
deround
la tournée
Duration
of a stop
a function
of type
of vehicleetand
size of
90
80
Duration of stop (mn)
70
<3,5T
60
Artic
Semi-trailer
CPort
Rigid truck
Puissance (Artic)
50
40
Puissance (CPort)
30
Puissance (<3,5T)
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
number of stops
50
60
70
The distance between two stops depends on the size
(total number of stops) of a delivery tour
Distance entre deux arrêts d'un parcours
Distance moyenne entre deux arrêts
(km)
16
DIJON
14
12
BORDEAUX
10
8
MARSEILLE
6
4
2
0
0
10
20
30
40
Nom bre d'arrêts dans un parcours
50
60
Hourly rhythms of Urban Freight
movements
Rythmes horaires des livraisons/enlèvements et des déplacements de
personnes dans l'agglomération de Bordeaux
3%
Individual car
Urban freight
transport
12%
10%
3%
8%
2%
6%
2%
4%
1%
1%
2%
0%
0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Heure d'un jour ordinaire
Répartition horaire des
dépl acements de personnes
R épartition au quart
d'heure des livraisons et
enlèvements
4%