Comparative Carbon Footprint Assessment of Cross-Border E-Commerce Shipping Options

被引:9
作者
Cheah, Lynette [1 ]
Huang, Qiuhong [1 ]
机构
[1] Singapore Univ Technol & Design, Engn Syst & Design, Singapore, Singapore
关键词
freight systems; urban freight transportation; delivery; sustainability and resilience; transportation and sustainability; transportation energy; freight; INFORMATION; EMISSIONS; ONLINE; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1177/03611981211037249
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
In the bid to stay competitive, online shopping platforms often offer a variety of shipping options to meet the preferences of consumers. While faster delivery might be desirable for consumers, this may be detrimental to the environment. Limited studies have evaluated the comparative environmental impact of different shipping options offered by e-commerce platforms. To fill this gap, this study aims to conduct a comparative carbon footprint assessment of the shipping options available in Taobao, a highly popular Chinese online shopping website. The case of cross-border e-commerce is evaluated, where goods are ordered from China to Singapore as the shipment destination. Thereafter, a shipping choice preference survey is conducted to evaluate the impact of carbon labelling on consumers' shipping preferences. From the perspective of the consumer, when offered a variety of shipping options to choose from, there is always a trade-off between the cost and the speed of delivery. Additional information on the carbon impact of different options could influence consumers' decision-making. The shipping options from Taobao are referenced to determine the cost, speed, and carbon emission values for the scenarios presented in the survey. Out of 188 survey respondents, slightly more than half (55%) were found to be willing to compromise the speed of delivery for a less carbon-intensive alternative. Given this finding, the study advocates for carbon labelling to be introduced for e-commerce shipping options.
引用
收藏
页码:584 / 595
页数:12
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] Al Karim R., 2013, Journal of Business and Management, V11, P13, DOI [DOI 10.9790/487X-1161320, https://doi.org/10.9790/487X-1161320]
  • [2] Amenta, 2020, NCSTUCDRR2006
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2016, Statista
  • [4] Brennan, 2016, ALIZILA
  • [5] Brunetti, P 21 INT C EXC SERV
  • [6] Stubbing out hypothetical bias: improving tobacco market predictions by combining stated and revealed preference data
    Buckell, John
    Hess, Stephane
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2019, 65 : 93 - 102
  • [7] Food miles or carbon emissions? Exploring labelling preference for food transport footprint with a stated choice study
    Caputo, Vincenzina
    Nayga, Rodolfo M.
    Scarpa, Riccardo
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2013, 57 (04) : 465 - 482
  • [8] Perceptions, Preferences, and Behavior Regarding Energy and Environmental Costs: The Case of Montreal Transport Users
    Daher, Nayer
    Yasmin, Farhana
    Wang, Min Ru
    Moradi, Ehsan
    Rouhani, Omid
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2018, 10 (02)
  • [9] Dawson C., 2019, TAMEBAY
  • [10] Devonshire-Ellis, 2019, CHINAS STATE COUNCIL