Measuring the gaps between shippers and logistics service providers on green logistics throughout the logistics purchasing process

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to measure the gaps between the engagements of shippers (i.e. logistics buyers) and logistics service providers (LSPs) in different green logistics practices (GLPs) throughout the key phases of the logistics purchasing process: request for proposal, negotiations, contracting and execution.Design/methodology/approachA large-scale survey of shippers and LSPs in Sweden was conducted. Respondents were 331 firms (169 shippers, 162 LSPs). Mean values of the actors' perceptions were analysed using independent- and paired sample t-tests.FindingsWhile this study supports previous research indicating that LSPs engage more extensively in selling GLPs than shippers do in buying them, it shows that this conclusion does not uniformly apply to all GLPs nor all purchasing phases. Three patterns emerged for the gaps between the actors' buying-selling engagements throughout the purchasing process: (1) steady and wide gaps, (2) steady and narrow gaps and (3) emergent gaps. Distinct GLPs were associated with each pattern. It is also shown that the prioritisation of GLPs is fairly aligned between shippers and LSPs.Research limitations/implicationsThis study contributes to the green logistics purchasing literature by systematically and simultaneously creating three types of distinction, between (1) shippers and LSPs, (2) different GLPs and (3) different logistics purchasing phases. Future studies could replicate the analysis in countries other than Sweden.Practical implicationsManagers of shipper/LSP firms learn tips to spot the GLPs that their partners prioritise, enabling them to modify their purchasing/marketing strategies accordingly.Originality/valueThe three types of distinction represent a novel approach in the green logistics purchasing literature.

Unravelling collaboration mechanisms for green logistics: the perspectives of shippers and logistics service providers

“…green logistics systems , green warehousing ) carries implications for both the green- and contract logistics fields. For the former, the stronger support for GLPs among LSPs is consistent with the general notion that LSPs are more environmentally committed in their green logistics engagements compared to shippers (Jazairy and von Haartman, 2021; Martinsen and Björklund, 2012; Wolf and Seuring, 2010). This may also indicate that LSPs are more willing to collaborate for GLPs in comparison to shippers, signalling that the lack of shippers' commitment may indeed be a reason for “de-greening” logistics networks (Abbasi and Nilsson, 2016; Bask et al , 2018; Sallnäs and Huge-Brodin, 2018).…”

“…Shippers, on the other hand, engage in GLPs as part of their purchasing strategy (Large et al , 2013), and demand them to compensate for the environmental damage of their own industries (Jazairy and von Haartman, 2020). LSPs are generally seen as more environmentally committed (in providing GLPs) compared to shippers (in purchasing them) (Jazairy and von Haartman, 2021; Martinsen and Björklund, 2012; Wolf and Seuring, 2010). Given the tight profit margins under which LSPs operate (Piecyk and Björklund, 2015), they frequently call for shippers' long-term commitments to secure the return on investment of their green ventures (Goh, 2020; Nilsson et al , 2017), whilst shippers frequently refrain from these commitments to maintain their flexibility in the market (Jazairy, 2020).…”

Supply chain firm performance in circular economy and digital era to achieve sustainable development goals

“…For this study, data were collected using a questionnaire‐based survey (Jazairy & von Haartman, 2021; Zouari et al, 2021). The items of all the variables were measured on a 7‐point Likert scale.…”

Exploring green logistics practices in freight transport and logistics: a study of biomethane use in Sweden

“…CO 2 emissions, shipping less than truckload (LTL), noise pollution, possible material waste from packaging), hence stakeholders in the freight and logistics industry have focused on methods to minimise these effects, such as overall system design, eco-driving, collaborative projects, alternative propulsion technology, fossil-free fuels, route optimisation, or more sustainable packaging (Martinsen and Huge-Brodin 2014;Pålsson and Hellström 2016;Pieters et al 2012). These methods have been labelled differently over time but have lately been referred to as Green Logistics Practices (GLPs) (Jazairy and von Haartman 2020). Although climate challenges may take centre stage in certain debates, GLPs promote a wider understanding of environmental sustainability.…”

“…GLPs are often described in their general meaning and from a systems perspective. Exceptions include Jazairy and von Haartman (2020), who frame their discussion based on shippers' perspective, and Martinsen and Huge-Brodin (2014) who discuss GLPs from both the LSPs' and the shippers' perspectives. Shifting to fossil-free fuels can itself be a GLP but may have an impact on other GLPs as well, thus affecting the operations, finances and offerings from the involved actors.…”