A Systematic Review of Sustainable Ground-Based Last-Mile Delivery of Parcels: Insights from Operations Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of Last-Mile Delivery (LMD) in the current economy cannot be overstated, as it is the final and most crucial step in the supply chain between retailers and consumers. In major cities, absent intervention, urban LMD emissions are projected to rise by >30% by 2030 as e-commerce grows (top-100-city “do-nothing” baseline). Sustainable, innovative ground-based solutions for LMD, such as Electric Vehicles, autonomous delivery robots, parcel lockers, pick-up points, crowdsourcing, and freight-on-transit, can revolutionize urban logistics by reducing congestion and pollution while improving efficiency. However, developing these solutions presents challenges in Operations Research (OR), including problem modeling, optimization, and computations. This systematic review aims to provide an OR-centric synthesis of sustainable, ground-based LMD by (i) classifying these innovative solutions across problem types and methods, (ii) linking technique classes to sustainability goals (cost, emissions/energy, service, resilience, and equity), and (iii) identifying research gaps and promising hybrid designs. We support this synthesis by systematically screening 283 records (2010–2025) and analyzing 265 eligible studies. After the gap analysis, the researchers and practitioners are recommended to explore new combinations of innovative solutions for ground-based LMD. While they offer benefits, their complexity requires advanced solution algorithms and decision-making frameworks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.114 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".