Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Transport and Telecommunication Journal

The Journal of Transport and Telecommunication Institute

4 Issues per year

Cite Score 2016: 0.87

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.324
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 1.129

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Assessing the Contribution of Urban Freight Terminals in Last Mile Operations

Eftihia Nathanail
  • Corresponding author
  • University of Thessaly, Department of Civil Engineering Pedion Areos, 38334 Volos, Greece Ph.: +302421074164. Fax: +302421074131
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Michael Gogas
  • University of Thessaly, Department of Civil Engineering Pedion Areos, 38334 Volos, Greece Ph.: +302421074158. Fax: +302421074131
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Giannis Adamos
  • University of Thessaly, Department of Civil Engineering Pedion Areos, 38334 Volos, Greece Ph.: +302421074158. Fax: +302421074131
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-06-28 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ttj-2016-0021


This paper introduces a multi-stakeholder multi-criteria evaluation framework, which can be used for the assessment of the last mile distribution performance of urban freight terminals. To this end, a comparative analysis is conducted addressing two Greek urban intermodal freight terminals located at the port of Thessaloniki (ThPA) and Kuehne+Nagel (K+N)’s premises. The assessment of the terminals’ performance relies on a tailored multi-criteria Key Performance Indicator (KPI)-based evaluation framework, whereas the selection and significance of the incorporated criteria and KPIs is predetermined by the relevant responsible stakeholders, who imposed their viewpoint through an analytic hierarchy process. Results showed that ThPA was ranked first according to its performance pertaining to the role of an intermodal interchange; still, K+N’s performance index was only 8.5% lower than ThPA’s, while in specific KPIs it seems that it performs in a better way.

Keywords: Freight terminals; last mile; key performance indicators; multi-stakeholder; multi-criteria; sensitivy analysis; AHP; PROMETHEE; GAIA


  • 1. Andersen J., Eidhammer O., Osland, O., Parra L. and Adamos, G. (2010) Interconnections between short and long-distance transport networks: Structure of interface and existing indicators. Deliverable 3.1. CLOSER - Connecting LOng and Short-distance networks for Efficient tRansport.Google Scholar

  • 2. Andersen, J., Eidhammer, O., Gogas, M., Papoutsis, K. and Nathanail, E. (2014) Demonstration assessments. Deliverable 5.1. STRAIGHTSOL - STRAtegies and measures for smarter urban freiGHT SOLutions.Google Scholar

  • 3. Chen, M.K. and Wang, S. (2010) The critical factors of success for information service industry in developing international market: Using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 37, 2010, pp. 694-704.Google Scholar

  • 4. Christiansen, P., Johansen, B.G., Andersen, J. and Eidhammer, O. (2012) Case studies: Results and synthesis. Deliverable 5.2. CLOSER - Connecting LOng and Short-distance networks for Efficient tRansport.Google Scholar

  • 5. European Center for Government Transformation, (2015) Boosting innovation in cities to deliver better public services - A view from tomorrow’s leaders. College of Europe student case studies, Final report.Google Scholar

  • 6. European Commission (2014) Living well, within the limits of our planet. 7th EAP - The New General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020.Google Scholar

  • 7. Gogas, M. and Nathanail, E. (2014) Multilevel multicriteria design of intermodal transport Freight Center networks. International Conference on Engineering and Applied Sciences Optimization (OPTi 2014), Kos Island, Greece.Google Scholar

  • 8. Järvi, T. and Nagel, I. (2013) Guidance and recommendations for interconnection between long distance and local/regional passenger transport. Deliverable 6.1. CLOSER - Connecting LOng and Short-distance networks for Efficient tRansport.Google Scholar

  • 9. Li, S. and Li, J.Z. (2009) Hybridising human judgment, AHP, simulation and a fuzzy expert system for strategy formulation under uncertainty. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 2009, 5557-5564.Google Scholar

  • 10. Nathanail, E. and Gogas, M. (2005) Spatial planning - Development of nodal points and terminals. Deliverable 4. IMONODE - Efficient Integration of cargo transport MOdes and NODEs in CADSES area.Google Scholar

  • 11. Nathanail, E. (2007) Developing an integrated logistics terminal network in the CADSES area.Transition Studies Review, May 2007, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 125-146.Google Scholar

  • 12. Nathanail, E.G., Gogas, M.A. and Papoutsis, K.N. (2014) Investigation of Stakeholders’ View towards the introduction of ICT in Supply Chain using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal of Traffic and Logistics Engineering, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 113-119.Google Scholar

  • 13. Perez, D.H. (2013) Supply Chain Roadmap: aligning supply chain with business strategy. ISBN 978-1494200497.Google Scholar

  • 14. Rodrigue, J.P., Comtois, C. and Slack, B. (2009) The "Last Mile" in Freight Distribution. The Geography of Transport Systems (2nd ed.), Routledge. p. 212. ISBN 978-0-415-48323-0.Google Scholar

  • 15. Saaty, T. (1972) An eigenvalue allocation model for prioritization and planning. In working paper Energy Management and Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania, 1972.Google Scholar

  • 16. Saaty, T. (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 15 1977, pp. 234-281.Google Scholar

  • 17. Scott, M. (2009) Improving Freight Movement in Delaware Central Business Districts. Institute for Public Administration, University of Delaware.Google Scholar

  • 18. Taniguchi, E., Thompson, R.G. and Yamada, T. (1999) Modeling city logistics. In: City Logistics I (E. Taniguchi and R.G. Thompson, eds.), Institute of Systems Science Research, Kyoto, pp. 3-37.Google Scholar

  • 19. Woudsma, C., Jensen, J., Karoglou, P. and Maoh, H. (2007) Logistics land use and the city: A spatialtemporal modeling approach. Transportation Research Part E, 44, 277-297.Google Scholar

  • 20. Zahir, S. (1999) Clusters in group: Decision making in the vector space formulation of the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 112: 620-634.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-06-28

Published in Print: 2016-09-01

Citation Information: Transport and Telecommunication Journal, Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 231–241, ISSN (Online) 1407-6179, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ttj-2016-0021.

Export Citation

© Transport and Telecommunication Institute. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. BY-NC-ND 4.0

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Chompoonut Amchang and Sang-Hwa Song
Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 2018, Volume 9, Number 3, Page 7
Sebastjan Škerlič, Robert Muha, and Edgar Sokolovskij
Transport, 2017, Volume 32, Number 4, Page 415

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in