Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

doi:10.4236/jssm.2011.43042

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Journal of Service Science and Management, 2011, 4, 357-367

doi:10.4236/jssm.2011.43042 Published Online September 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/jssm)

357

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally

Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics

Performance

T. Bosona, G. Gebresenbet, I. Nordmark, D. Ljungberg

Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.

Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Received May 7th, 2011; revised June 18th, 2011; accepted June 30th, 2011.

ABSTRACT

The local food systems such as fruit and vegetable box-schemes are gaining new profitable niche markets as the de-

mand for local food is increasin g. This paper presen ts the study mad e on box-sch eme based lo cal food supply system in

Sweden, the Roslagslådan network, in which three distributors of locally produced organic food (LPOF) were th e ma in

actors. The objective of the study was to investigate the Roslagslådan LPOF supply network and evaluate its logistics

performanc e. The study was based on literature review, interview, field measurement and route simulation and optimi-

sation (in terms of route distance and driving time) analysis. The geographic information system (GIS) software was

used to map the locations of the distributing companies and their delivery points (customer locations) while Route

LogiX software was used for the simulation and optimisation analyses of routes for collection and distribution of LPOF,

mainly vegetables and herb-based products. From the quantified information, the three companies distributed, on av-

erage about 134 bo xes of LPOF to about 116 delivery points, once in two weeks period mainly during August-October.

The distribution via Roslagslådan network was supplemented with other means of selling: on farm sale, open market

sales and selling via supermarket. The route optimisatio n analysis resulted in significant savings in ro ute distance and

delivery time. The savings in distance were up to 76%, 23% and 32% for Company-1, Comp any-2 and Company-3 re-

spectively while the corresponding savings in delivery time were up to 75%, 10% and 16%. This reduction in distance

and time led to positive improvement toward the environmental and economical issues enhancing the sustainability of

local food systems.

Keywords: Sw eden, Roslagslådan Network, Box-scheme, Locally Produced Or ganic Food, Route Analysis

1. Introduction

The local food systems are gaining new profitable niche

markets as consumers start to value traceability and pro-

duction quality of locally produced food over cheaper

food grown and processed at unknown places around the

globe. As a result, fruit and vegetable box-scheme based

delivery systems are emerging as alternatives to conven-

tional and centralized food delivery systems [1-3]. Al-

though a common understanding of local food is its

proximity to production place to customers, other char-

acteristics such as small scale, greenness and socially

sustainable have been associated with it. Consumers

should be aware that purchasing local food has implica-

tions for biodiversity and landscape, local employment,

fair trade and social justice [4]. Brown et al. [3] studied

commercial box schemes (in England and France) of

local food produced approximately within 100 km radius

and identified that customers have been motivated (to

purchasing from the box scheme) by positive contribu-

tion to the ecosystem, food quality and pleasure. The

increasing demand for organic, welfare-friendly and lo-

cally produced food is creating more opportunities for

both existing farmers producing local food and for new

entrants to farming.

Due to political desires to reshape rural spaces to

market niche and quality food products and foster ‘alter-

native’ channels of food provision, local food is gaining

prominence within debates how to encourage the explo-

rations of the connections along the food chain, including

links between producers and retailers [1,5]. Therefore,

more research is needed to get better understanding on

consumers’ perceptions of local food, the impact of local

foods on rural-urban interactions and the problems re-

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

358

lated to local food systems. Usually, consumers perceive

local food as “expensive” and not available at the right

time with required quantity as local sourcing is often

seasonal [3].

In Sweden, farmers markets have existed for hundreds

of years enhancing the delivery of products from local

producers to consumers [2,6]. Although open-air markets

exist mainly during the harvest season (August to Octo-

ber), they have social, cultural and economical benefits

as they are integrating producers and consumers. How-

ever, from logistics point of view, the main problem re-

lated to such selling system (open-air market) is that the

producers drive their own cars and also most of the buy-

ers drive to the market place. This leads to congestion

and increases emissions of greenhouse gases [2,6]. Simi-

lar problem related to local food distribution was re-

ported by Coley et al. [4] i.e. for large-scale vegetable

box system, the bulk of the emissions arise not from

chilling or mass transportation to regional hubs using

heavy goods vehicles but the final delivery phase using

light goods vehicles. This indicates that the local food

delivery systems should be evaluated based on the spe-

cific situations of producers and customers in the area/

region under consideration. Also, logistic cost has been a

bottleneck for small and local food producers to compete

with large scale and conventional food supply systems.

These logistic related problems can be counteracted by

creating efficient logistics systems adaptable for local

food systems such as coordinated box-scheme delivery

systems, direct sale (example to restaurants, schools),

integration into large scale food distribution systems and

planning optimized food delivery routes[6,7]. Such logis-

tics improving efforts should be supplemented by suc-

cessful planning and designing efficient distribution sys-

tems [8]. Freidberg and Goldstein [9] pointed out that as

local food is scarce on market, researches should focus

not only on quality of food but also on building genu-

inely alternative food supply networks. In the current

study, the Roslagslådan LPOF supply network (see Fig-

ure 1) which is operating in Roslag region, in Sweden,

has been investigated.

1.1. Roslagslådan LPOF Supply Network

Roslagslådan network is located in the region of Roslag

that is located in the Stockholm and Uppsala provinces,

Sweden (see Figure 2). In the region of Roslag, there is

an economic association known as Roslagsmat estab-

lished for small scale, local farmers and food producers

and it promotes “local food with identity and quality”. At

present, it has around 20 members who produce organic

food and sell directly to consumers and to retailers. The

produces are diversified but they are traceable and KRAV

certified. KRAV is the Swedish labelling certification that

a product has been organically produced without using any

synthetic fertilizers and pesticides and the livestock raising

does not rely on feed additives. However, this certification

does not guarantee quality [11].

In May 2006, the association initiated a pilot project to

explore and develop marketing channels for small scale

food producers in the region. As a result the concept of

Roslagslådan food supply network emerged with the ba-

sic purpose to avoid unnecessary transport distance and

logistics cost and to promote LPOF with high quality.

There are three companies which are main actors of the

network (see Figure 1). They collaborate chiefly for mu-

tual marketing and distribution benefits. They do have

their own farms for growing organic food and also col-

lect the produces from local farmers and distribute to the

retailers and consumers.

1.2. Main Characteristics of the Roslagslådan

Network

The main characteristics of the three main actors in the

Roslagslådan network are presented in Tables 1 and 2. In

addition to distributing LPOF to consumers, they also use

on farm sale and open market sales which promote social

connections and communications.

Table 2 indicates the distance of delivery routes varied

Table 1. Product type and me ans of delivery.

Farm Production type Selling channel

Company-1

Produces only herb-based products such as vinegars, oils, skin

products and teas; but also distributes vegetables (sourced

from Company-3)

Through Roslagslådan network (August-December)

Company-2

Tomato, cucumber, aubergine, paprika, lettuce, capsicum,

carrot and snow peas but potatoes, celeriac, squash, leek, pars-

nips, onion, garlic, cabbage, broccoli, bean, corn, parsley, dill,

red beet and meat*

On site sell (July-September) ; Annual open market;

through nearby ICA supermarket (May-September);

through Roslagslådan network (1/3 of its harvest) (August-

October)

Company-3

Vegetable (white, red and Savoy Cabbages), Root products

( beet, carrot and parsnip) and 17 - 20 different varieties of

potatoes; sheep**

Through Roslagslådan network (August-December); via

Supermarkets; direct supply to restaurants

*Senneby farm rears a small number of sheep, which are slaughtered and sold locally during the winter; **Forsbergs Gris & Grönt rears a number of sheep,

which are slaughtered and used for wool production locally.

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance359

Figure 1. Concept of Roslagslådan food supply network. The information flow indicates how the social interaction is in-

creased due to the network.

Table 2. Characteristics of the existing distribution routes.

Route Farm Vehicle type Vehicle Capacity

[m3]

Route length

[km]

Total time

[h:min]

Route 1* Company-1 Peugeot Expert van 4 190 8:00

Route 2 Company-2 (route- I) VW transporter 5 174 5:30

Route 3 Company-2 (route-II) Renault Kangoo 2.8 109 4:00

Route 4 Company-3 (route-I) Citroen Jumper 9HDI 7.5 94 2:36

Route 5 Company-3 (route-II) Vehicles of other transport company (collaborator)N/A 131 N/A

*Collecting from production place and delivery to distribution point (complete route). It doesn’t include the distance travelled (which varies from 624 m to 70

km) by each of its customers to collects the produce from distribution point (see Figure 3).

from 94 km to 190 km while the respective transport

time (including loading/unloading) varied from 2:36 hr:

min to 8 hr. For Company-3, route-II covered the deliv-

ery from production area (Östhammar) to large cities,

namely Uppsala and Stockholm and the vehicle used for

delivery on this route was owned by external transport

company (see Figure 2). About 23% of the produces

delivered by Company-3 was performed via its route-II.

For the remaining route (see Table 2) the companies used

their own vehicles whose volume varies from 2.8 m3 to 7.5

m3.

Prior to the initiation of the Roslagslådan network, the

members have experienced constraints associated with

the logistics service. After garnering a pilot group of

customers via a local newspaper advertisement, the three

partners began planning logistical routes based on where

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

360

Figure 2. Location of study area and routes and customers

in the Roslagslåda network.

their clients lived. After a period of trial and error, Ro-

slagslådan network became a fully fledged delivery

scheme in 2006 and over four years, the operation has

developed a steady customer base, totalling approxi-

mately 150 regular customers.

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the

logistics performances of the Roslagslåda network mainly

in relation to transport distance and time and develop

recommendation for improvement, in case of any gap

identified. The specific objectives were to:

 Identify and map the locally produced organic food

producers, distributors and delivery points in the

Roslagslådan network

 Investigate the existing packaging condition, deliv-

ery frequency and quantity

 Investigate the existing collection and distribution

routes

 Carry out route simulation/optimisation analysis in

relation to transport distance and time

In summary, improving the logistics performance in-

crease the competitiveness of local food producers and

promote the sustainability of local food systems. In the

existing situation, the Roslagslådan LPOF supply net-

work is relatively good example of coordinated and inte-

grated local food delivery system. However, the finding

of this study indicated that further improvements could

be gained by replanning more optimal routes and revis-

ing delivery time windows. The remaining part of this

paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, the materials

and methods are described. The results are presented in

Section 3, while the main findings have been discussed

in Section 4. Finally, the major conclusions have been

drawn in Section 5.

2. Materials and Methods

In order to understand the characteristics of Roslagslådan

LPOF supply network and map out its logistics activities,

the information on packaging, the existing delivery

routes, the type and capacity of vehicles used, the main

bottlenecks or/and coordination in the food delivery sys-

tems were gathered and analyzed. The study was con-

ducted through literature review, interviews, field meas-

urements and route analysis (simulation and optimisa-

tion).

2.1. Data Collection

In order to complement the literature review, the three

main actors in the Roslagslådan network and some of

their customers were interviewed. These interviews were

conducted face-to-face, via telephone, and via email. In

addition to conducting interview, field measurements

were carried out in September and October months, 2009.

Data collection on the coordinates of location of produc-

ers, distributors, distribution points and food collection/

distribution routes was done using the global positioning

system (GPS). Two pieces of portable GPS receivers and

a stop watch were used. The portable GPS receivers were

used to collect information about points along 5 delivery

routes including time and coordinates of required loca-

tions. The recorded and stored data could be uploaded to

PC with the help of USB interference cable. The second

GPS receiver was used to quickly capture coordinates of

all stops or distribution points where, simultaneously

vehicles’ arrival and departure times, the numbers of

delivered boxes and customers’ postal addresses were

registered.

2.2. Mapping the Project Area

The location of the three distributing companies and their

delivery points in the network were mapped with ArcMap

of GIS software [12] utilizing the coordinates of each

point recorded during data gathering and field measure-

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance361

ment (see Figure 2). The distribution Company-1 is lo-

cated at 59˚50′28″ N latitude and 18˚26′31″ E longitude

while Company-2 is located at 59˚58′01″ N latitude and

18˚50′56″ E longitude and Company-3 is located at

60˚16′19″ N latitude and 18˚05′06″ E longitude. Com-

pany-2 owns farm area that covers about 6.15 hectares in

its three open fields and one green house (650 m2).

Company-3 own farm land that covers about 20 hectares.

Customers of Roslagslådan network are Restaurants,

retailers and non business people. Also, the distribution

may be to working places, direct to residents and to pub-

lic waiting places.

2.3. The Existing Distribution System

In addition to on farm sale, the three main companies

distribute their products to their customers. Company-1

collects the food products from the farm owned by Com-

pany-3 and also from at least two other producers of

small quantity (see Figure 3). Then it transports the

products to a distribution point located at 59˚44′35″ N

and 18˚22′03″ E longitude, which is about 14 km away

from the place of Company-1. From the distribution

point, about 15 customers collect the products. One of

the customers is found in Stockholm, about 67 km far

away from the distribution point. For the remaining 14

customers the distance from the distribution point varies

from 1 km to 25 km.

Company-2 uses two routes (route-I and route-II) to

distribute LPOF to a distribution point and directly to the

place of some customers (see Figure 4). The company

first loads the produces from its own farm and then on the

way to distribution it picks the produces of small produc-

ers and distributes directly to some of its customers and to

a distribution point from where some customers collect

their orders.

Figure 3. The current distribution system of Company-1.

Similar to Company-2, the distributing Company-3 has

two delivery routes (see Figure 5). In its surrounding

area, the company uses route-I while route-II reaches

delivery points located at Östhammar, Uppsala and

Stockholm (three places in Stockholm) cities (see Figure

2 and 8(c)). The company delivers only to Östhammar

from where the products are distributed further to Upp-

sala and Stockholm by other external transporter (col-

laborator).

2.4. Route Analysis

Using Route LogiX software [13] and data gathered dur-

ing field measurement, route optimization analysis was

done to investigate the optimality of the current distribu-

tion routes of food products and to analyze the new dis-

tribution route based on different scenarios. RoutelogiX

software has most powerful vehicle routing and it finds

optimised routes by minimizing driving distance and

time, which in turn reduces transport cost and emission

of green house gases [13]. In total, seven different routes

Figure 4. The current distribution system of Company-2.

Figure 5. The current distribution system of Company-3.

The producer distributes to its customers.

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

362

were analysed for the three distributing companies of

Roslagslådan LPOF supply network.

2.4.1. Routes of Company-1

For Company-1, four routes i. e. a single collection route

and three distribution routes were studied. For the collec-

tion route, first the existing route distance and delivery

time was determined and thereafter the route was opti-

mised. For the distribution routes, three scenarios were

considered.

2.4.1.1. When Company-1 Delivers to a Distribution

Point from Where Customers Collect Their

Orders

This scenario is the same as existing route where the

company transport the products to the distribution centre

located at 59˚44′35″ N latitude and 18˚22′03″ E longi-

tude. The route analysis was done with and without in-

cluding the customer in Stockholm, because the customer

in Stockholm is relatively far from the area where Com-

pany-1 operates, and its impact on the simulation results

is high in relation to driving distance and time.

2.4.1.2. When Company-1 Distributes Products Directly

to Its Customers

In this case, the company delivers to each customers.

Similar to scenario 1, the simulation analysis was done

including and excluding the customer in Stockholm.

2.4.1.3. Scenario 3: When Only the Delivery to the

Distribution Point is Considered

In this case, the company delivers only to the distribution

place, from where its customers collect their order.

However, in Scenario 3, the transport distance and time

was simulated only for the delivery to the distribution

place, neglecting the transport distance and time taken by

each customer to collect their order taking into consid-

eration that most of the customers might collect their

order on the way from job or other trip.

2.4.2. Rout es of C omp any-2

There were two distribution routes for this company. In

both cases, first the route distance and travel time were

simulated for existing (unoptimized) route (i.e . following

the order of visiting each customer) and then the routes

were optimized. The transport distance and time deter-

mined for optimized routes were compared to that of

unoptimized routes.

2.4.3. Combined Distribution Route for Company-1

and Company-2

In this case, a single route was proposed for distributing

the products to all the customers of the two companies.

The optimized driving distance and total time of this new

route was compared to the sum of the three existing

routes i.e. scenario-1 of Company-1 (excluding its cus-

tomer in Stockholm) and the two routes of Company-2.

The distance and time were determined for the combined

and optimized route considering the address of Com-

pany-2 as starting and end point of the delivery tour on

this new route.

2.4.3. Rout es of C omp any-3

For this company, the route distance and travel time were

determined for unoptimized and optimized cases of its

two routes and then the unoptimized and optimized

routes were compared. In route II, simulation was done

taking into consideration the case when a single trans-

porter (collaborator) picks the products from Östhammar,

on the way from job (therefore, only one way journey

was considered) and transports to the customers in Upp-

sala and Stockholm cities.

For all the three companies, the comparison analysis

was done using the driving distance and total time deter-

mined for optimised and unoptimised routes. However in

this comparison analysis, the driving distance and time

considered for the existing routes, were not the measured

values, but the simulated values. This was preferred in

order to make the analysis approach consistent, because

for some scenarios, there were no distance and time val-

ues recorded for the routes.

In all cases, the loading and unloading time was esti-

mated based on the information gathered during field

measurement and interview. For loading time (for each

company) 15 to 30 minutes was considered depending on

the volume of produces loaded. The unloading time (in-

cluding delivery time) was taken to be equal to 2 minutes

on average for each customer. When picking products

(during product collection) the loading time at the place

of each producer (producing small quantity) was consid-

ered to be about 5 minutes.

During the field measurement it was learnt that the ex-

isting delivery routes were formed based on the delivery

time window set by the customers. The distribution

companies try to fulfil the need of customers although

the order of visiting the customers seems to be uneco-

nomical.

3. Results

3.1. Packaging

Transporting fresh producers requires appropriate pack-

aging. A wooden box, locally produced from pine was

used as the standard packaging material (see Figure 6).

The box is known as Roslagslåda and it is reused. In ad-

dition to the wooden boxes, paper bags are available and

used to complement the box when there is additional

order. The paper bag is also used when customer chooses

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

363

it rather than wooden box. The sizes of the wooden box

and paper bag are 25 × 30 × 40 and 35 × 25 × 17 cm re-

spectively. Each delivery time the wooden box or paper

bag contains 8 to 10 different types of fresh vegetables

and root vegetables.

3.2. Delivery Quantity and Frequency

Considering the delivery amount observed during the

field measurement, about 134 boxes were distributed by

the three companies per delivery day. Large number of

boxes (about 111) was distributed by Company-2 while

Company-1 and Companu-2 delivered about 17 and 26

boxes respectively. About 71 delivery points (customers)

were recorded for Company-2. Company-3 had 30 deliv-

ery points while for Company-1, only 15 delivery points

were recorded (see Figure 7).

All three companies carried out the distribution of

LPOF once in two weeks period from August up to Oc-

tober. The deliveries of Company-1 and Company-3 ex-

tend until December. Company-1 also delivers once a

month in January and February.

3.3. Route Analysis

Table 3 presents the result of route simulation/optimisa-

tion analysis for the delivery routes of the three compa-

nies. For Company-1, the simulated driving distance and

total time for unoptimised collection route were about

225 km and 3:49 hr:min respectively. For this route,

there was no improvement obtained from optimisation

analysis indicating that the existing collection route is

optimum (see Table 3).

Comparing scenario-2 with scenario-1 (Company-1),

the driving distance and total time (excluding customer

in Stockholm) were reduced from 282 km to 119 km and

from 6:48 hr:min to 3:42 hr:min. This indicated that the

driving time and transport distance were improved by

about 58% and 46% respectively. In scenario-3, the

driving distance and total time were about 29 km and 54

minutes (i.e. to deliver to the distribution point). When

compared to the existing route of scenario-1, scenario3

improved the driving distance by 76% and total time by

74%.

Concerning Company-2, for route-I (Figure 4), the

distance was reduced from 156 km to 140 km while the

time was reduced from 5:36 to 5:12 hr:min indicating

that the distance and time were improved by 10% and

7% respectively. Similarly for route-2, the driving dis-

tance was reduced from 194 km to 149 km while total

time was reduced from 6:54 hr:min to 6:13 hr:min re-

spectively indicating that the distance and time were re-

duced by 23% and 10% respectively.

Regarding the combined routes of Company-1 and

Company-2 (see Figure 8a), the sum of distance for the

three existing routes (scenario1 of Company-1 and two

routes of Company-2) was about 632 km and the respec-

tive total time was 19:18 hr:min. By using the new com-

bined route, the total distance and time were reduced to

287 km and 12:41 hr:min which implied the improve-

ment of 55% and 34% for transport distance and time

respectively.

Regarding Company-3, for route-I (Figure 5), the

transport distance (unoptimised) was 160 km and the

corresponding total delivery time was 5:39 hr:min. When

optimized, the figures reduced to 108 km and 4:44

hr:min which meant improvement of 32% for distance

and 16% for time. For route-2, the analysis result indi-

cated that the transport distance and time (single trip) are

163 km and 3:34 hr:min and the optimization analysis

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 6. LPOF products of Company-2. (a) Organic vegetables on the farm field owned by Company-2; (b) boxes filled with

LPOF and ready for distribution by Company-2; (c) standard box of Roslagslådan network (source www.sennebytradgard.nu

nd a

www.roslagsmat.se).

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

364

(a)

(b)

Figure 7. Number of delivery quantities and delivery points

recorded for each company. (a) The number of boxes deliv-

ered on each delivery day (once in 2 weeks); (b) the number

of delivery points recorded during field measurements.

indicated that the existing route (route-2) is optimum.

Figure 8 presents examples of unoptimized and optimized

routes.

4. Discussions

Nowadays, in relation to food safety and food security,

the demand for locally produced food is increasing and

the local food systems are being considered as alternative

strategies to conventional large scale food supply chains

[14-16]. This situation helped the companies in the Ro-

slagslådan network to gain costumers acceptance in rela-

tively short time and with less expenses to introduce their

marketing concept.

Roslagslådan is one example of business networks that

could facilitate some of the social and economic benefits

of local food systems. When food supply systems operate

as networks, social benefits such as potential for mutual

learning, reduced transaction costs, social cohesion and

competitive strengths emerge [17-21].

The members of the network are dedicated to satisfy

the consumers by supplying food with identity and qual-

ity. For example, the crops are allowed to mature in the

field to their specific requirements and they deliver fresh

produce to consumers. However, due to seasonal con-

straints, the varieties of vegetable to be supplied during

every distribution tour should be decided by the supplier

depending on the season and available produces.

The Roslagslådan LPOF supply network could facili-

tate the flow of information (see Figure 1). It created

good opportunity for the customer and the producers to

have contact and that helps the producer to get direct

response from the customers. Newsletters are distributed

with the delivery boxes outlining the varieties included in

the box, source of the produce and its price, relevant in-

formation about the vegetables and recipes for some pro-

duces which are uncommon in the region. The newsletter

also includes contact details, any relevant news or com-

munication and additional produce available for custom-

ers to purchase through Roslagslådan network from other

members of Roslagsmat. Such a local food brand, with

assurance of sustainability and quality, increases con-

sumers’ confidence [7].

There is internet based flow of information between

consumers, producers and distributing companies. The

customers could order the products by telephone or sub-

scribing via internet. The distributors contact the small

producers before starting the distribution and collect the

boxes from each small producer and perform the distri-

bution. The three main actors also play key role in adver-

tising the LPOF in the region. In addition to using news-

letters, in the region, the association arranges market

days 3 times per year between the months of August and

September mainly to promote the direct contact between

producers and consumers and increase consumers’ con-

fidence on the produces.

From the results of route analysis, it was noted that the

simulated value of route distance showed some deviation

from the value recorded during field measurement due to

different measurement errors and/or possible road changes

(i.e. the road embedded in the software may deviate from

the actual road the driver could use). Therefore, it would

be more realistic to do the comparison analysis based on

the simulated values, omitting the recorded values which

were available only for some of the routes (see Tables 2

& 3).

The route optimization analysis revealed that some of

the existing routes were nearly optimal, for example the

collection route for Company-1 and the distribution route-

II of Company-3. On the other hand, significant improve-

ments were gained for some routes. Good improvements

noticed in the distribution routes of Company-1 (e.g. for

Scenarios 2, up to 58% for distance and 46% for time),

Company-2 (up to 23% for distance and 10% for time) and

Company-3 (up to 32% for distance and 16% for time)

(see Table 3).

The highest improvement was observed for the sce-

nario3 for distribution route of Company-1, i.e. 76% for

distance and 75% for time. In scenario3 it was assumed

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance365

Table 3. Summary of route analysis for product collection and distribution by the three companies.

Improvement

Route Driving distance Total time distance time

Collection route

Unoptimized Collection Route

225

3:49

Optimized Collection Route 225 3:44 0 0

Distribution Route

Scenario1

-With customer in Stockholm

414

8:27

-Without customer in Stockholm 282 6:48

Scenario2

-with customer in Stockholm

243

5:05

41.26

39.84

-without customer in Stockholm 119 3:42 57.85 45.59

Company-1

Scenario 3

Delivery to distribution point

0:57

75.63

74.32

Route-I

Unoptimized

156

5:36

Company-2 Optimized 140 5:12 10.34 7.14

Route-II

Unoptimized

194

6:54

Optimized 149 6:13 23.14 9.90

Summation of existing 3 routes 632 19:18

Combined route of

company-1 & company-2 New combined route 287 12:41 54.62 34.28

Route-I

Existing (Un optimized)

Optimized

160

108

5:39

4:44

32.14

16.22

Company-3

Route-II

Existing(unoptimized)

optimized

163

3:34

that the customers could collect the produce from distri-

bution point. Although, this option show good improve-

ment it should be noted that this option might not satisfy

the need of some customers who could not collect the

produce from distribution centre. The other problem re-

lated to this selling system (scenario-3) is that the buyers

drive their own cars to the distribution centre, which in

turn leads to congestion and increases emissions of

greenhouse gases [2,6]. Good improvement (upto 55%

for distance and 34% for time) was also seen when the

combined distribution route was considered for Com-

pany-1 and Company-2. This showed that integrating the

distribution activities of the actors and optimising the

route could result in significant savings and this con-

firmed the findings of previous researches [7,8].

The reduction in the driving distance led to positive

improvement towards environmental issue by reducing

emission. However, from practical point of view, it is

needed to consider other factors such as changing the

delivery time window and using vehicles of more capac-

ity (eg. for combined route of Company-1 and Com-

pany-2), in order to implement the optimised routes. This

is not easy for the distributors as they give priority to the

customers need and it might be difficult for some cus-

tomers to be flexible easily. However, improving the

delivery time window might be facilitated through dis-

cussion between customers and distributing companies.

Due to the increasing concern on environmental deg-

radation and energy crises, effective logistics networks

should consider not only economic and operational per-

formance but also the environmental sustainability of

food supply networks [22]. In the future, as the Ro-

slagslådan network expands or changes, updating the

design of optimal delivery routes with best possible de-

livery time windows, is recommendable to strengthen the

sustainability of the system. The continuation of this

study addresses the environmental, economical, and

management issues related to the sustainability of the

Roslagslådan LPOF supply chain.

5. Conclusions

his study mapped out the supply chain of LPOF (locally

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance

366

Figure 8. Examples of distribution routes. (a) presents the combined route of Company-1 and Company-2; (b) and (c) show

unoptimized and optimised routes of Company-3 . (d) illustrates route-II of Company-3, the case where the existing route has

been found to be the best.

produced organic food). As a case study, Roslagslådan

food supply network, in which three LPOF distributing

companies are the main actors, was investigated with the

main aim of evaluating its logistics performance. The

study was based on literature review, interview, field

measurement and route simulation and optimisation (in

terms of route distance and driving time) analysis.

The three companies in the Roslagslådan network dis-

tribute about 134 boxes of LPOF to about 116 delivery

points, once in two weeks period mainly during August-

October, with 5 different distribution routes. The prod-

ucts are mainly vegetables and herb-based products. In

Box-Scheme Based Delivery System of Locally Produced Organic Food: Evaluation of Logistics Performance367

addition to the distributing via Roslagslådan food supply

network, the partners of the network uses also other

means of selling: on farm sale, open market sales and

selling via supermarket.

The locations of the distributing companies and deliv-

ery points (customer locations) were mapped using

ArcMap of GIS software. The route simulation and opti-

misation analyses were conducted utilizing Route LogiX

software. The route optimisation analysis indicated that

for all the three distributors significant savings were

noted in terms of route distance and delivery time. The

savings in distance were 76%, 23% and 32% for Com-

pany-1, Company-2 and Company-3 respectively. The

corresponding savings in delivery time were 75%, 10%

and 16%. This leads to positive improvement toward the

environmental and economical issues enhancing the sus-

tainability of local food systems.

REFERENCES

[1] L. Nichol, “Local Food Production: Some Implications

for Planning,” Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 4, No. 4,

2003, pp. 409-427. doi:10.1080/1464935032000146264

[2] H. Nilsson, “Local Food Systems from a Sustainability

Perspective: Experiences from Sweden,” International

Journal of Sustainable Society, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2009, pp.

347-363. doi:10.1504/IJSSOC.2009.028906

[3] E. Brown, S. Dury and M. Holdsworth, “Motivations of

Consumers That Use Local, Organic Fruit and Vegetable

Box Schemes in Central England and Southern France,”

Appetite, Vol. 53, No. 2, 2009, pp. 183-188.

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2009.06.006

[4] D. Coley, M. Howard and M. Winter, “Local Food, Food

Miles and Carbon Emissions: A Comparison of Farm

Shop and Mass Distribution Approaches,” Food Policy,

Vol. 34, No. 2, 2009, pp. 150-155.

doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.11.001

[5] B. Ilbery and D. Maye, “Retailing Local Food in the Scot-

tish-English Borders: A Supply Chain Perspective,” Geo-

forum, Vol. 37, No. 3, 2006, pp. 352-367.

doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2005.09.003

[6] C. Wallgren, “Local or Global Food Markets: A Com-

parison of Energy Use for Transport,” Local Environment,

Vol. 11, No. 2, 2006, pp. 233-251.

doi:10.1080/13549830600558598

[7] T. G. Bosona and G. Gebresenbet, “Cluster Building and

Logistics Network Integration of Local Food Supply

Chain,” Biosystems Engineering, Vol. 108, No. 4, 2011,

pp. 293-302. doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2011.01.001

[8] D. Ljungberg and G. Gebresenbet, “Mapping out the

Potential for Coordinated Goods Distribution in Urban

Areas: The Case of Uppsala,” International Journal of

Transport Management, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2004, pp. 161-172.

doi:10.1016/j.ijtm.2005.07.001

[9] S. Freidberg and L. Goldstein, “Alternative Food in the

Global South: Reflections on a Direct Marketing Initia-

tive in Kenya,” Journal of Rural Studies, in press.

www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

[10] J. Murdoch, “Networks—A New Paradigm of Rural De-

velopment?” Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 16, No. 4,

2000, pp. 407-419. doi:10.1016/S0743-0167(00)00022-X

[11] KRAV, “Standards for KRAV-Certified Production”.

www.krav. se

[12] Economic and Social Research Institute, “ArcGIS Desk-

top Help,” ESRI GIS Software Corporate, New York,

2008.

[13] DPS, “Route LogiX Professional V5.0.4.39,” Distribution

Planning Software Ltd., Halesowen, 2004.

[14] F. Curtis, “Eco-Localism and Sustainability,” Ecological

Economics, Vol. 46, No. 1, 2003, pp. 83-102.

doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00102-2

[15] M. M. Kroma, “Organic Farmer Networks: Facilitating

Learning and Innovation for Sustainable Agriculture,”

Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 28, No. 4, 2006,

pp. 5-28. doi:10.1300/J064v28n04_03

[16] T. Marsden and E. Smith, “Ecological Entrepreneurship:

Sustainable Development in Local Communities through

Quality Food Production and Local Branding,” Geoforum,

Vol. 36, No. 4, 2005, pp. 440-451.

doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2004.07.008

[17] M. Nousiainen, P. Pylkkänen, F. Saunders, L. Seppnen

and K. M. Vesala, “Are Alternative Food Systems So-

cially Sustainable? A Case Study from Finland,” Journal

of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 33, No. 5, 2009, pp.

566-594. doi:10.1080/10440040902997819

[18] A. Hughes, “Geographies of Exchange and Circulation:

Alternative Trading Spaces,” Progress in Human Geog-

raphy, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2005, pp. 496-504.

doi:10.1191/0309132505ph563pr

[19] L. Holloway, R. Cox, L. Venn, M. Kneafsey, E. Dowler

and H. Tuomainen, “Managing Sustainable Farmed Land-

scape through ‘Alternative’ Food Networks: A Case

Study from Italy,” The Geographical Journal, Vol. 172,

No. 3, 2006, pp. 219-229.

[20] A. Halinen and J. Törnroos, “Using Case Methods in the

Study of Contemporary Business Networks,” Journal of

Business Research, Vol. 58, No. 9, 2005, pp. 1285-1297.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.02.001

[21] T. Eng, “The Effects of Learning on Relationship Value

in a Business Network Context,” Journal of Business to

Business Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 4, 2005, pp. 67-101.

doi:10.1300/J033v12n04_03

[22] W. D. Solvang and M. H. Hakam, “Sustainable Logistics

Networks in Sparsely Populated Areas,” Journal of ser-

vice science and management, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2010, pp.

72-77. doi:10.4236/jssm.2010.31008