1、 1 外文翻译 原文 The potential demand for a urban freight consolidation centre Materials Source: Author: Edoardo Marcucci Introduction A substantial share of urban trafcestimated between 20% and 30% of vehicle kilo- metres and between 16% and 50% of air pollution emissions (Dablanc 2007; LETAria technolo
2、gies 2006)is related to goods transport. Van and truck trafc increases congestion, noise and air pollution, especially in the narrow streets of European city centres characterised by scarce curb-side and off-road parking availability. City administrators have designed and implemented a wide array of
3、 policies to tackle the urban goods transport issue. Some of the implemented policies are regulatory in nature and comprise dedicated parking bays for loading/unloading trucks, access restrictions to some areas of the city centre, time restrictions, vehicle restrictions according to the size of the
4、vehicles, fuel used, fuel efciency, and minimum load factor required. A second set of policies affects the costs of distributing goods within the city centre, e.g. by requiring the acquisition of time-based access permits or use of vehicles with low environmental impact. A different, more ambitious,
5、 approach seeks to alter the logistics of the existing urban goods distribution by creation of urban freight consolidation centres (UFCC). The paper is especially concerned with this last option. There is little agreement in the literature about the characteristics of a UFCC, or even about the name
6、to be used to represent it. The University of Westminster Report (2005, p. 3) quotes 13 different names and/or concepts. Regan and Golob (2005) use the term urban shared-use freight terminals. For the purpose of our research, the term UFCC as dened by the University of Westminster Report (2005, p. 3
7、) is appropriate: a logistics facility that is situated in relatively close proximity to the geographic area that it serves be that a city centre, an entire town or a specic site (e.g. shopping centre), from which consolidated deliveries are carried out within that area. A range of other value-added
8、 logistics and retail services can also be provided at the UFCC. Logistics companies with deliveries scheduled for the urban area or site are able to transfer their loads at the UFCC and thereby avoid entering 2 the congested area. The UFCC operator sorts and consolidates the loads from a number of
9、logistics companies, if necessary stores them, and delivers them, often on environmentally friendly vehicles, to an agreed delivery pattern. Urban freight consolidation centres have been discussed or implemented in various European cities including Amsterdam, Leiden, Utrecht, Berlin, Bremen, Ko ln,
10、Freeburg, Kassel, Munich, La Rochelle, Basel, and Stockholm. In Italy, in Genova, Padua, Ferrara, Venezia, Ancona, Naples, and Milan. Technically, the UFCC implies adding a stage to an existing supply chain. Economi- cally, the transhipment to a store and to a new vehicle increases the logistic cost
11、 by increasing handling, administration, information, and transaction costs.This also provides an opportunity to consolidate consignments and optimise runs. The net result is unclear both privately and socially. A retailer will nd the services of the UFCC advantageous only if the cost of the deliver
12、y for the urban leg is greater than the UFCC service charges, unless the UFCC is able to provide specic value-added logistics services for which businesses are willing to pay extra. Socially, the external costs generated when using the two different consignment schemes need to be considered. The UFC
13、C is justied when the cost of the urban leg using a private vehicle is larger than the sum of the additional cost imposed by the UFCC (i.e. the cost of the delivery to the nal user with the UFCC vehicle and the difference between the external costs caused by UFCCs and the private vehicle). These cos
14、ts and benets depend on a large number of factors including the type of goods to be delivered, the organisational and business characteristics of the receiver (e.g. number of goods traded per day, store capacity, location, parking availability, etc.), the organisational and business characteristics
15、of the transport operator (own account or third party, means of transportation available, number of drivers, number of consignments in the urban area, availability of private depots in the proximity of the urban area, etc.), the type of UFCC (location, size, store capacity, types of vehicle, type of
16、 ownership, etc.), and the characteristics of the urban area (size, trafc conditions and regulation, types of street and ane, degree of pedestrianisation, etc.). The private and social viability of a UFCC, con-sequently, needs to be evaluated case by case. In order to evaluate both the economic viab
17、ility of a UFCC scheme and its ability to improve goods distribution and alleviate local environmental and trafc problems within urban areas, it is important to have some knowledge of the above 3 mentioned cost and benets in the various instances, both privately and socially. The lack of knowledge o
18、n the cost structure and, hence, on the potential demand for the UFCC services is one of the main causes of failure of many European UFCC schemes which proved economically unsustainable once public funding became unavailable or insufcient. Various contributions have recently attempted to clarify not
19、 only the economic, but also the strategic and political issues involved in the promotion of UFCCs. Probably the most comprehensive and recent is the European project BESTUFS (http:/www.bestuf.org). City Ports (Progetto City Ports 2005), another European project, discussed the European and Italian e
20、xperiences with the UFCC strategy and provided a list of recommendations to local authorities or interested parties. In an in-depth review of UFCC experiences around theworld commissioned by the UK Department of Transport, the University of Westminster Report (2005) calls for and proposes a comprehe
21、nsive method for evaluating the effects of a UFCC, including those on businesses and supply chains. The lack of evidence-based information on the costs and benets of UFCCs makes it difcult for potential operators or policy-makers to make decisions about the viability of such initiatives. One of the
22、still unsettled questions concerns the conditions under which the UFCC is most likely to be privately and socially successful. The existing studies provide insufcient, uncertain, and qualitative information on this crucial aspect. On the basis of evidence available, the University of Westminster Rep
23、ort (2005) concludes that UFCCs are most likely to be successful in: 1 specic and clearly dened geographical areas where there are delivery-related problems; 2 town centres that are undergoing a retailing renaissance; 3 historic town centres and districts that are suffering from delivery trafc conge
24、stion; 4 new and large retail or commercial developments (both in and out of town); and 5 major construction sites. The report also reaches the conclusion that the major potential beneciaries from the establishment of UFCCs would be: 1 transport operators making small, multi-drop deliveries; 2 share
25、d-user distribution operations; 3 businesses located in an environment where there are particular constraints on delivery operations (e.g. limited access conditionsphysical or time-related); and 4 4 independent and smaller retail companies. In Italy, research conducted within the City Ports project
26、for the city of Bologna by analysing origin and/or destination ows, the logistic efciency of the existing supply chains, and their structural characteristics concludes that a UFCC might attract trafc from the following supply chains: packages, dry products, home deliveries, and that part of hotel re
27、creation and catering that does not include fresh products (Progetto City Ports 2005, p. 106). This paper assumes that, in the absence of sufcient empirical evidence, stated preference (SP) data might be of help to estimate the potential demand for UFCC services.Stated preference analysis, using hyp
28、othetical scenarios and specic models to estimate choice probabilities, have been applied to a wide range of issues and could prove valuable for designing and implementing urban trafc policies. One of the most appealing characteristic of SP studies is the possibility of studying currently non-existe
29、nt transportation infrastructures such as UFCC for most urban areas. This paper pursues this line of research. A crucial aspect determining the success or failure of an S P study is the formulation of alternative choice scenarios that should be both realistic and informative. Differently from previo
30、us SP studies (e.g. Regan and Golob 2005; Da Rios and Gattuso 2003) which evaluated UFCC per se, in formulating our case-study scenarios we decided to set our UFCC evaluation within an explicit and specic urban trafc context. This decision stems from the observation that users decide whether or not
31、they want to use the UFCC depending not only on its specic characteristics but also on the characteristics of the alternative private transport. In fact, local governments often set up transport policies that include both the UFCC and complementary trafc regulations. One of the most successful cases
32、 in Italy so far is Padua. Along with the implementation of the UFCC in 2004, an agreement was signed between the city administration and the UFCC company that reserved specic areas for uploading and downloading freight within the old city centre, permitted the use of reserved bus lanes, and allowed
33、 around-the-clock access to the limited trafc zone (LTZ). Only low- impact (methane and electric) vehicles were allowed for urban consignment (Stefan 2006). Genoa has adopted an even wider array of accompanying measures for implementation of UFCC (Merella 2006). In this paper we explore the preferen
34、ce for using the UFCC services, as described by a set of attributes, instead of using a private vehicle for transporting 5 goods within the city centre. The conditions under which the private transport of goods takes place are deter-mined both by the organizational efciency of the transport operator
35、 and by the regulatory regime (access limitations, parking restrictions, access pricing, etc.). An SP experiment, mimicking the actual scenarios under which the transport choice takes place, is used to gather information about economic agents preferences. Face-to-face interviews were conducted in th
36、e summer of 2006 in Fano, a city of about 58,000 inhabitants in the Marche region, Italy. The formulation of a discrete choice model and statistical estimation of its parameters based on the data collected basically provides quantitative answers to two relevant questions: what is the demand potentia
37、l of a given UFCC5 and which demand or supply segments of urban freight trafc might be most likely to be more interested in using the UFCC. On the second question, the results are preliminary, because of the limited sample size given the experimental nature of the project. The paper is structured as
38、 follows. Section 2 illustrates the interview and the hypothetical choice exercises, Sect. 3 describes the model estimated. and Sect. 4 the main characteristics of the sample. Section 5 presents the econometric results and Sect. 6 some policy simulations. Section 7 discusses how the preference struc
39、ture is affected by the type of goods traded and by the characteristics of other business. Section 8 draws some conclusions and illustrates future research objectives. The interview and hypothetical choice exercises Data collection consisted in face-to-face interviews with: 1 eighty-six shop-keepers
40、 and small businesses located in the LTZ (limited trafc zone, Zona a trafco limitato) of the city of Fano, which broadly corresponds to the entire city centre, and 2 six transport operators serving the area. Because these two types of business agent play quite different roles in urban good distribut
41、ion, we will report the results only for the former group and provide some comments about the results for the latter in the last paragraph of Sect. 6. As of February 2007, two areas of Fano are regulatedthe area bordering the sea and the historical centre, which broadly corresponds to the LTZ. The r
42、egulation of the former is applied only during the summer. The latter has been subject to year-long regulation since 2001, and is concerned with vehicle weight and the time of access to the LTZ (it is limited to some vehicles between 4:30 and 7 p.m.). LTZ circulation permits are assigned on request
43、to single operators. There are two main categories of permitspermanent (city residents, garage owners or users, economic agents, doctors, newspaper distributors, etc.) and temporary (commercial goods 6 delivery, personal goods delivery, etc.). 译文 一个城市物流集装中心的需求潜力 资料来源 : 中国知网 作者： Edoardo Marcucci 简介 一
44、个城市交通中货车占有 20%到 30%的份额 ， 并占有有 16至 50的空气污染排放（ Dablanc， 2006 年 ； LET 技术 2006）。在货物运输中面包车和货车流量增加了拥塞，噪音及空气污染，特别在欧洲城市中心狭窄的街道。 城市管理人员设计并实施了各种各样的政策来解决 城市货物运输问题。 所实施的一些政策性法规包括专门用于装载 /卸载卡车，按照 车辆，燃料，燃料效率和最小负荷率要求， 限制访问城市的中心，某些地区限制时间，限制车辆的大小 。其中一种政策影响市中心， 减少商品成本 ， 如 通过要求 收购访问许可证以降低车 辆使用对环境的影响。有一部分积极的人希望寻找另一种方法来改
45、变现有的城市物流 ，通过 城市货物配送中心，货运合并等方式来达到目的。 这种方法目前还没有公认的定义，里根和葛洛布（ 2005）使用的术语来称呼它 “ 城市共同使用的货运码头 ” 。 我们的研究采用由威斯敏斯特报告（ 2005年，第 3 页）的定义：它坐落在相对接近的地理区域，是服务 一个城市的中心，是整个城镇或一个特定的网站（如购物中心），它从 综合交付该领域内进行恰当的物流 设施 ，简称 UFCC。 UFCC 可以提供 其他增值 物流和零售服务。物流公司为避免要进入挤塞的地区 ， 已达到 市区或网站能够如期交付的目的。会向VFCC 寻求服务 ，比如他们需要商店，或提供他们需要的车辆，等等模
46、式。 整合城市货运中心已经在许多城市讨论或实施。包括阿姆斯特丹，莱顿，乌得勒支，柏林，不来梅，弗里堡等欧洲城市， 还有 卡塞尔，慕尼黑，拉罗谢尔，巴塞尔和斯德哥尔摩。在意大利，在热那亚，帕多瓦，费拉拉， 威尼斯，安科纳和米兰等众多地方。 从技术上讲， UFCC 意味着现有的供应链进入一个新的阶段。这个模式增加了物流成本 增加处理、管理信息和交易成本。但也提供托运货物的机会，巩固和优化运行城市交通。 零售商发现 UFCC 服 务费用较大，但是 UFCC 能够提供具体的物流增值服务。所以大多公司都愿意支付额外费用。 在社会方面，在使用两种不同的货物运输 计划需要考虑 所产生的外部成本 ，对比 用私
47、家车的成本比 UFCC 费用的总和（即 在交货成本与最终用户和 UFCC 车辆之间的区别。和 由 UFCC 造成的7 外部成本和私人车辆）。 这些成本和效益取决于许多因素，包括运输类型，货物交付，接收器的成本（例如在组织和业务特点，成交商品数量，每天存储容量，位置，停车可用性，等等）， 运输经营者（自己的帐号或第三方的组织和业务特点 ，交通工具，司机数量，货物的数量 ，邻近私人仓库等情况）， UFCC 服务的类型（位置，大小，存储容量，车辆类型，所有制类型等），以及 市区的特色（大小，交通条件和调节，街道类型，行人专用区等）都有很大影响。 UFCC 的社会活力，制度，需要进行评估。 为了评估
48、UFCC 计划经济活力和能力， 提高货物配送，减轻当地的环境和内部交通问题 ，重要的是了解上述费用 在各种情况下特点。 由于缺乏成本知识结构的了解，因此对 UFCC 服务的潜在需求，是主要原因之一 。许多欧洲 UFCC计划失败的原因这证明对 UFCC 的了解不够彻底。 UFCC 的推广不仅是经济 ， 而且是战略和政治上的问题，两者都要参与UFCC 的推广。 尤其是对于欧洲建设（ http:/www.bestuf.org）。市端口建设（波捷特城市港口 2005 年）是另一个欧洲计划，关于这个计划，地方机关和有关当事人讨论了欧洲和意大利与 UFCC 战略提供了经验和建议清单。为了对 UFCC深入总
49、结经验，英国运输部向世界威斯敏斯特大学提出做相关 报告（ 2005）的要求，并提出了关于 UFCC 的 评价方法， 包括对企业和供应链的。以便 UFCC管理层根据成本和效益做出真确的决定。 在 问题没有解决的情况下， UFCC 仍旧有可能 被私人和社会上的成功。 现有的研究现状提供了 关于定性信息这一关键环节的信息基础。 基于信息的基础上 ，威斯敏斯特大学的报告（ 2005 年）做出的结论 UFCC 可能成功的原因和方向： （ 1）明确的界定了交货相关的地理区域。 （ 2）零售镇中心正在经历着一场复兴。 （ 3）历史悠久的镇中心和地区的交通拥堵造成了交货的痛苦。 （ 4）了解新型的大型零售和商业的发展情况（包括市中心内外）。 （ 5）专业的网络布局。 该报告还得出结论：潜在受益者对 UFCC 的建立到的作用有： （ 1）为运输经营者提供小额，多点交付。 （ 2） 共享用户的分销业务。 在一个环境设立了 3 个企业交货有特殊限制业务的企业（如有限的准入条件，物理或时间有关） ;及 4 个
