New research examines how crowd logistics differs from traditional logistics service models and which type of crowd logistics might be the most disruptive.
The Journal of Business Logistics (JBL), published by the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), is recognized as one of the world's leading academic supply chain journals. But sometimes it may be hard for practitioners to see how the research presented in its pages applies to what they do on a day-to-day basis. To help bridge that gap, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly challenges the authors of selected JBL articles to explain the real-world applications of their academic work.
THE UPSHOT
Since 2010 a flurry of startups have attempted to adapt the "Uber" or "Airbnb" model of crowdsourcing to logistics services. While much has been written on this development by the media, consultants, and industry analysts, this article by three professors from business schools and universities in France is the first academic paper that takes a close look at the emerging business model. As such, the article provides the first conceptual definition of what the authors call "crowd logistics": "Crowd logistics is done through collaborative platforms and mobile apps that connect individuals and firms to peers (travelers, movers, authorized drivers, owners of empty storage spaces, etc.) in order to make the best use of distributed, idle logistics resources and capabilities." The authors also delineate how crowd logistics differs from more traditional logistics service models, the main difference being that crowd logistics calls on individuals—mostly amateurs—to perform basic logistics services on an ad hoc basis.
What was the impetus for your research?
I began this research program with my two co-authors, Valentina Carbone and Christine Roussat, three years ago. We have been investigating the logistics aspects inherent in the sharing economy. This economy is booming, but it seems to underestimate the importance of controlling the physical flows it generates. In our first study, we identified four types of logistics characteristic of the collaborative economy: business logistics, peer-to-peer logistics, open logistics, and crowd logistics.
The second stage of our research, which is published in the Journal of Business Logistics, focuses on the logistics type that we considered to be most promising: crowd logistics. Although many researchers have investigated crowdfunding and crowdsourcing, the logistics and supply chain management literature is almost devoid of work on crowd logistics. So it was exciting for us to be the first to explore this field.
How does crowd logistics differ from traditional business logistics?
Our definition of crowd logistics highlights three features. The first is the fact that crowd logistics relies on amateurs rather than logistics professionals. The second is that it relies on resources that are spread among the crowd and are underused or even unused. This is extremely different from traditional logistics with its dedicated infrastructure (warehouses, trucks, boats, etc.). The final key feature is that this type of logistics has been enabled by the development of digital technologies, such as mobile apps. Crowd logistics does not rely on traditional corporate information systems, such as enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems or electronic data interchange (EDI).
What do practitioners need to know about the four main types of crowd logistics?
We believe two things need to be noted by practitioners. The first is that crowd logistics firms can provide four major types of logistics services: crowd local delivery, crowd storage, crowd freight shipping, and crowd freight forwarding. The second is that each type of crowd logistics service creates a different type of logistics value.
For example, crowd storage relies on real estate resources, such as cellars and garages, to offer local storage services to city dwellers. Crowd freight forwarding relies on other resources related to individual mobility, such as air or sea travel, to make products that are unavailable in a given country accessible economically or to transport goods. So, each crowd logistics service uses different crowd resources and offers the client a different value proposition.
Why did you choose to exclude some of the companies, such as Cargomatic and Shyp, that are often identified as "Uber for freight" from your study?
Crowd logistics, as we define it, is based on a crowd of amateurs rather than professionals, even though the boundary is becoming increasingly blurred. The two firms that you mention do not call on individuals. Cargomatic can be likened to a marketplace that uses new technologies to transform contacts with logistics service providers. Shyp uses professionals and offers logistics services to facilitate peer-to-peer transactions that have increased enormously with the sharing economy (for example, the types of transactions that occur on eBay). These two firms do indeed propose a form of logistics "uberization," in the sense that they use digital technologies to rethink logistics practices, but not in the precise field of crowd logistics as we have defined it. But it is interesting that the boundaries between these activities are becoming blurred: Some crowd logistics firms use traditional marketplace models, and some traditional businesses are investing in these startups. And the difference between the amateur individual and the self-employed courier is often tenuous!
In your paper, you and your co-authors predict that crowd local delivery will have the strongest disruptive impact. Why do you believe that to be true?
We believe that crowd local delivery is the most promising segment for two reasons. The first is that there is currently a great demand from city dwellers for cheap, personalized, and rapid delivery services. This is just the type of service that crowd local delivery firms are offering. They are using the crowd to make themselves more competitive than traditional logistics service providers, and they are offering brands, which are increasingly looking to develop multichannel distribution methods, a more flexible, modern, and attractive model.
The second is that the resources on which these services are based are widely available and possessed by a wide range of people; in towns, everyone moves around all the time and can easily take a parcel with them! So there is great potential for innovation and development in the field. Moreover, it is clear that firms such as Deliv, Postmates, and Instacart have already reached a significant size.
What impact could crowd logistics have on logistics service providers and their customers?
Crowd logistics is both a threat and an opportunity for logistics service providers. They are a genuine threat because the crowd can replace traditional logistics providers and reduce their market share. But crowd logistics also provides an opportunity to develop new activities. For that reason, service providers can look to include crowd delivery services in their offerings. They are better able to do so if they are positioned as "4PL providers," since by definition they have the skills to orchestrate logistics resources, which are precisely the skills needed by successful crowd logistics firms. DHL, for example, has tested a service of this type in Sweden, called MyWays.
For retailers the risk is that, with the emergence of crowd local delivery firms, they will lose their direct link with the consumer, which is strategically vital. A firm like Instacart is looking to position itself as a new intermediary between consumers and traditional retailers. The risk for the retailers is that they might become just suppliers, where Instacart's shoppers will go to shop for their clients.
What does an academic look at crowd logistics provide that could not be found in other types of analyses or media coverage?
An academic analysis provides multiple benefits. First, in methodological terms, our analysis is thorough, detailed, and, of course, is in no way biased by private interests. We are not here to promote crowd logistics or sell our services, and we provide an objective view of the subject. Second, the value of our approach is that it relies on a systemic analysis, sustained by our knowledge of logistics, logistics operators, and, more broadly, management science. For example, our analysis here is based on a theoretical framework, that of the service-dominant logic. This leads us to propose an original approach to crowd logistics in terms of value co-creation and, above all, to develop theoretical proposals about the boom in crowd logistics.
How has the crowd logistics market evolved since the article was written?
The crowd logistics market is very unstable, and it is difficult to monitor its rapid changes. Since our paper was published, we have observed numerous company creations and failures and mergers between startups. However, the most interesting trend is the fact that traditional players are buying up firms operating in this segment. For example, the French Post Office bought the crowd delivery service Stuart in 2017.
How can practitioners use the information discussed in your paper?
Professionals can use the information in our paper in two ways. First, traditional firms can use it to develop an overall strategy with regard to crowd logistics: Which crowd logistics services can I call on? What startups are currently in this market? What opportunities and threats does it represent for us? Meanwhile, firms that are entering the crowd logistics market can use the paper to develop a successful strategy in this extremely competitive market.
Editor's Note: CSCMP members can access JBL articles by clicking on the "Develop" tab at cscmp.org, selecting "Journal of Business Logistics," and using the secure link to the Wiley Online Library.
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain.”
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.