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.
Just 29% of supply chain organizations have the competitive characteristics they’ll need for future readiness, according to a Gartner survey released Tuesday. The survey focused on how organizations are preparing for future challenges and to keep their supply chains competitive.
Gartner surveyed 579 supply chain practitioners to determine the capabilities needed to manage the “future drivers of influence” on supply chains, which include artificial intelligence (AI) achievement and the ability to navigate new trade policies. According to the survey, the five competitive characteristics are: agility, resilience, regionalization, integrated ecosystems, and integrated enterprise strategy.
The survey analysis identified “leaders” among the respondents as supply chain organizations that have already developed at least three of the five competitive characteristics necessary to address the top five drivers of supply chain’s future.
Less than a third have met that threshold.
“Leaders shared a commitment to preparation through long-term, deliberate strategies, while non-leaders were more often focused on short-term priorities,” Pierfrancesco Manenti, vice president analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a statement announcing the survey results.
“Most leaders have yet to invest in the most advanced technologies (e.g. real-time visibility, digital supply chain twin), but plan to do so in the next three-to-five years,” Manenti also said in the statement. “Leaders see technology as an enabler to their overall business strategies, while non-leaders more often invest in technology first, without having fully established their foundational capabilities.”
As part of the survey, respondents were asked to identify the future drivers of influence on supply chain performance over the next three to five years. The top five drivers are: achievement capability of AI (74%); the amount of new ESG regulations and trade policies being released (67%); geopolitical fight/transition for power (65%); control over data (62%); and talent scarcity (59%).
The analysis also identified four unique profiles of supply chain organizations, based on what their leaders deem as the most crucial capabilities for empowering their organizations over the next three to five years.
First, 54% of retailers are looking for ways to increase their financial recovery from returns. That’s because the cost to return a purchase averages 27% of the purchase price, which erases as much as 50% of the sales margin. But consumers have their own interests in mind: 76% of shoppers admit they’ve embellished or exaggerated the return reason to avoid a fee, a 39% increase from 2023 to 204.
Second, return experiences matter to consumers. A whopping 80% of shoppers stopped shopping at a retailer because of changes to the return policy—a 34% increase YoY.
Third, returns fraud and abuse is top-of-mind-for retailers, with wardrobing rising 38% in 2024. In fact, over two thirds (69%) of shoppers admit to wardrobing, which is the practice of buying an item for a specific reason or event and returning it after use. Shoppers also practice bracketing, or purchasing an item in a variety of colors or sizes and then returning all the unwanted options.
Fourth, returns come with a steep cost in terms of sustainability, with returns amounting to 8.4 billion pounds of landfill waste in 2023 alone.
“As returns have become an integral part of the shopper experience, retailers must balance meeting sky-high expectations with rising costs, environmental impact, and fraudulent behaviors,” Amena Ali, CEO of Optoro, said in the firm’s “2024 Returns Unwrapped” report. “By understanding shoppers’ behaviors and preferences around returns, retailers can create returns experiences that embrace their needs while driving deeper loyalty and protecting their bottom line.”
Facing an evolving supply chain landscape in 2025, companies are being forced to rethink their distribution strategies to cope with challenges like rising cost pressures, persistent labor shortages, and the complexities of managing SKU proliferation.
1. Optimize labor productivity and costs. Forward-thinking businesses are leveraging technology to get more done with fewer resources through approaches like slotting optimization, automation and robotics, and inventory visibility.
2. Maximize capacity with smart solutions. With e-commerce volumes rising, facilities need to handle more SKUs and orders without expanding their physical footprint. That can be achieved through high-density storage and dynamic throughput.
3. Streamline returns management. Returns are a growing challenge, thanks to the continued growth of e-commerce and the consumer practice of bracketing. Businesses can handle that with smarter reverse logistics processes like automated returns processing and reverse logistics visibility.
4. Accelerate order fulfillment with robotics. Robotic solutions are transforming the way orders are fulfilled, helping businesses meet customer expectations faster and more accurately than ever before by using autonomous mobile robots (AMRs and robotic picking.
5. Enhance end-of-line packaging. The final step in the supply chain is often the most visible to customers. So optimizing packaging processes can reduce costs, improve efficiency, and support sustainability goals through automated packaging systems and sustainability initiatives.
That clash has come as retailers have been hustling to adjust to pandemic swings like a renewed focus on e-commerce, then swiftly reimagining store experiences as foot traffic returned. But even as the dust settles from those changes, retailers are now facing renewed questions about how best to define their omnichannel strategy in a world where customers have increasing power and information.
The answer may come from a five-part strategy using integrated components to fortify omnichannel retail, EY said. The approach can unlock value and customer trust through great experiences, but only when implemented cohesively, not individually, EY warns.
The steps include:
1. Functional integration: Is your operating model and data infrastructure siloed between e-commerce and physical stores, or have you developed a cohesive unit centered around delivering seamless customer experience?
2. Customer insights: With consumer centricity at the heart of operations, are you analyzing all touch points to build a holistic view of preferences, behaviors, and buying patterns?
3. Next-generation inventory: Given the right customer insights, how are you utilizing advanced analytics to ensure inventory is optimized to meet demand precisely where and when it’s needed?
4. Distribution partnerships: Having ensured your customers find what they want where they want it, how are your distribution strategies adapting to deliver these choices to them swiftly and efficiently?
5. Real estate strategy: How is your real estate strategy interconnected with insights, inventory and distribution to enhance experience and maximize your footprint?
When approached cohesively, these efforts all build toward one overarching differentiator for retailers: a better customer experience that reaches from brand engagement and order placement through delivery and return, the EY study said. Amid continued volatility and an economy driven by complex customer demands, the retailers best set up to win are those that are striving to gain real-time visibility into stock levels, offer flexible fulfillment options and modernize merchandising through personalized and dynamic customer experiences.
Geopolitical rivalries, alliances, and aspirations are rewiring the global economy—and the imposition of new tariffs on foreign imports by the U.S. will accelerate that process, according to an analysis by Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
Without a broad increase in tariffs, world trade in goods will keep growing at an average of 2.9% annually for the next eight years, the firm forecasts in its report, “Great Powers, Geopolitics, and the Future of Trade.” But the routes goods travel will change markedly as North America reduces its dependence on China and China builds up its links with the Global South, which is cementing its power in the global trade map.
“Global trade is set to top $29 trillion by 2033, but the routes these goods will travel is changing at a remarkable pace,” Aparna Bharadwaj, managing director and partner at BCG, said in a release. “Trade lanes were already shifting from historical patterns and looming US tariffs will accelerate this. Navigating these new dynamics will be critical for any global business.”
To understand those changes, BCG modeled the direct impact of the 60/25/20 scenario (60% tariff on Chinese goods, a 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico, and a 20% on imports from all other countries). The results show that the tariffs would add $640 billion to the cost of importing goods from the top ten U.S. import nations, based on 2023 levels, unless alternative sources or suppliers are found.
In terms of product categories imported by the U.S., the greatest impact would be on imported auto parts and automotive vehicles, which would primarily affect trade with Mexico, the EU, and Japan. Consumer electronics, electrical machinery, and fashion goods would be most affected by higher tariffs on Chinese goods. Specifically, the report forecasts that a 60% tariff rate would add $61 billion to cost of importing consumer electronics products from China into the U.S.