Transport Climate Action Directory

Shifting urban delivery trips to off-peak times can reduce congestion and lead to more efficient freight operations. Dense urban areas typically deal with high levels of congestion during the daytime. Still, they have unused road and un(loading) space during the evening, at night or early in the morning (Sánchez-Díaz, Georén and Brolinson, 2016). During off-peak hours, lower congestion and higher availability of parking space lead to reduced delivery trip times and resulting CO2 emissions. Pilot

Off-peak deliveries are not well-adapted to the needs of all businesses. Food providers such as bakeries rely on off-hour deliveries and may be more open to shifting delivery schedules (Holguín-Veras et al., 2007). For large firms that conduct internal deliveries, well-designed off-peak schedules can lead to productivity gains that offset the additional costs of receiving operations (Sánchez-Díaz, Georén and Brolinson, 2016). During periods of high congestion, receivers may be open to shifting delivery schedules if it allows them to receive goods on time. During the 2012 Olympics in London, around 40% of businesses in the city adopted off-peak delivery schedules (Browne et al., 2014).

Since goods carriers deal with the travel time delays of peak period congestion, the benefits of off-peak deliveries are more salient for carriers than receivers. Receivers may gain from off-peak deliveries if they are located in areas with high congestion, limited un(loading) space, or access restrictions. Yet, off-peak deliveries may result in higher costs for receivers from additional employee wages and the potential need for increased security measures for night-time operations. Therefore, the most effective way to promote off-peak schedules is to incentivise receivers to adopt them.

Policies promoting off-peak deliveries include direct incentives for goods receivers and support in developing the necessary infrastructure and mutual trust among actors (Sánchez-Díaz, Georén and Brolinson, 2016). In New York, a pilot programme offered 2 000 USD to receivers who agreed to shift some of their deliveries to off-hour periods for six months and assisted in managing unassisted goods reception (Holguín-Veras et al., 2011). After the pilot incentive program ended, 90% of participating businesses continued operating off-peak delivery schedules.

Impact on CO2 emissions

Shorter delivery trip times during off-peak hours result in lower per-delivery carbon emissions.

In London, the city-managed off-peak delivery pilot programme was implemented as a trial before the 2012 Olympic games, retained for the games, and then incorporated into the city’s freight policies after they concluded. Off-peak deliveries resulted in per-trip CO2 emissions reductions of 48-62% (Sánchez-Díaz, Georén and Brolinson, 2016). The pilot programme in Paris was implemented by a non-governmental organisation working with logistics industry groups and environmental organisations. This programme led to per-trip emissions reductions of 36-40% (Sánchez-Díaz, Georén and Brolinson, 2016). The variation in CO2 emissions result from different characteristics of each freight trip and the prevalent traffic conditions.

Costs

The costs of shifting delivery schedules to off-peak hours fall on the public sector and freight receivers. The public sector incurs the cost of incentives to encourage goods receivers to adopt off-peak deliveries and the cost of programmes to support implementation. Goods receivers incur additional costs from the need for receiving staff during off-peak hours and the potential need for increased safety measures for night time deliveries.

An alternative to reduce additional staffing requirements for off-peak deliveries is to implement systems enabling carriers to deliver goods without on-site staff. These include developing automated reception facilities or giving carriers access to receiving business storage areas (Holguín-Veras et al., 2013). These systems impose upfront costs on receivers and require high levels of trust between carriers and receivers.

Co-benefits

Successful off-peak hour delivery programmes can reduce congestion, reduce local air pollution, increase the reliability of deliveries for receivers, and improve road safety by reducing the conflicts between vans, trucks, passenger cars, cyclists and pedestrians (Sánchez-Díaz, Georén and Brolinson, 2016).

Other considerations

The main consideration of implementing off-peak deliveries is the potential for additional noise pollution – particularly at night – in delivery areas. Noise from freight vehicles and un(loading) operations may result in opposition to off-peak delivery programs from neighbouring residents. However, noise mitigation measures can be adopted to address these concerns. These include using low-noise technologies, training delivery workers to make less noise when un(loading), and establishing a system for residents to report excessive noise (Holguín-Veras et al., 2013).

Cite this measure as

ITF (2021) Transport Climate Action Directory – Change in delivery schedules/Night deliveries, https://www.itf-oecd.org/policy/change-delivery-schedules

Sources

Browne, M. et al. (2014) ‘London 2012: changing delivery patterns in response to the impact of the Games on traffic flows’, International Journal of Urban Sciences, 18(2), pp. 244–261. doi: 10.1080/12265934.2014.929508.

Holguín-Veras, J. et al. (2007) ‘An Investigation on the Effectiveness of Joint Receiver–Carrier Policies to Increase Truck Traffic in the Off-peak Hours’, Networks and Spatial Economics, 7(3), pp. 277–295. doi: 10.1007/s11067-006-9002-7.

Holguín-Veras, J. et al. (2011) ‘Overall Impacts of Off-Hour Delivery Programs in New York City Metropolitan Area’, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2238(1), pp. 68–76. doi: 10.3141/2238-09.

Holguín-Veras, J. et al. (2013) ‘Fostering the Use of Unassisted Off-Hour Deliveries’, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2379(1), pp. 57–63. doi: 10.3141/2379-07.