Cost-benefit analysis of road-underground co-modality strategies for sustainable city logistics

被引:1
|
作者
Liu, Qing [1 ]
Hu, Wanjie [2 ]
Dong, Jianjun [2 ]
Yang, Kai [3 ]
Ren, Rui [4 ]
Chen, Zhilong [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Univ Technol, Coll Architecture & Civil Engn, Beijing 100124, Peoples R China
[2] Nanjing Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Safety Sci & Engn, Nanjing 210094, Peoples R China
[3] Beijing Jiaotong Univ, State Key Lab Rail Traff Control & Safety, Beijing 100044, Peoples R China
[4] Army Engn Univ PLA, Coll Def Engn, Nanjing 210007, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
City logistics; Modal split; Co-modality; Underground freight transport; Cost-benefit analysis; URBAN FREIGHT TRANSPORT; PASSENGER; SYSTEM; OPTIMIZATION; MODEL; GOODS; FRAMEWORK; TRANSIT; ENERGY; TIME;
D O I
10.1016/j.trd.2024.104585
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
New-type urbanization necessitates smart, green, and efficient logistics systems to meet growing mobility demand. This paper explores the road-underground co-modality for urban freight transport (RUM4UFT) as a solution to urban traffic challenges, which includes three modal split strategies: mixed-use metro lines, metro freight-passenger integration, and purpose-built underground corridors. A monetized cost-benefit analysis (CBA) model is developed to evaluate the major costs of RUM4UFT and the accompanied benefits in transportation, ecological, and logistics economics from the perspectives of the public sectors and logistics service providers. Taking the Beijing Municipal Administrative Center as a case study, the CBA model demonstrates the advantages of RUM4UFT in promoting social and environmental sustainability, with the purposebuilt underground corridor offering the highest long-term investment value. The findings provide valuable insights for advancing city logistics performance through underground transport initiatives.
引用
收藏
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] The use of cost-benefit analysis in road assessments: a methodological inquiry
    Vecino-Ortiz, Andres I.
    Hyder, Adnan A.
    INJURY PREVENTION, 2014, 20 (01) : 50 - 53
  • [12] TAY ROAD BRIDGE - CASE STUDY IN COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    GILLHESPY, NR
    SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1968, 15 (02) : 167 - 183
  • [13] The Rise of the Renminbi in Asia Cost-Benefit Analysis and Road Map
    Jing, Li
    CHINESE ECONOMY, 2007, 40 (04) : 29 - 43
  • [14] A systematic cost-benefit analysis of 29 road safety measures
    Daniels, Stijn
    Martensen, Heike
    Schoeters, Annelies
    Van den Berghe, Wouter
    Papadimitriou, Eleonora
    Ziakopoulos, Apostolos
    Kaiser, Susanne
    Aigner-Breuss, Eva
    Soteropoulos, Aggelos
    Wijnen, Wim
    Weijermars, Wendy
    Carnis, Laurent
    Elvik, Rune
    Perez, Oscar Martin
    ACCIDENT ANALYSIS AND PREVENTION, 2019, 133
  • [15] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR MUNICIPAL TRANSIT PROJECTS - UNDERGROUND RAILWAY IN HANOVER
    HESSE, H
    ARNOLD, V
    KYKLOS, 1970, 23 (03) : 520 - 557
  • [16] A Framework of Cost-Benefit Analysis for Overhead-to-Underground Conversions in Florida
    Xu, L.
    Brown, R. E.
    2009 IEEE POWER & ENERGY SOCIETY GENERAL MEETING, VOLS 1-8, 2009, : 2543 - 2549
  • [17] Probabilistic cost-benefit analysis for mitigating hydrogeological risks in underground construction
    Merisalu, Johanna
    Sundell, Jonas
    Rosen, Lars
    TUNNELLING AND UNDERGROUND SPACE TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 131
  • [18] THE "COST-BENEFIT" ANALYSIS IN THE MODERN CITY ENVIRONMENT QUALITY MANAGEMENT
    Lazareva, Elena
    Anopchenko, Tatiana
    SGEM 2016, BK 4: ARTS, PERFORMING ARTS, ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL II, 2016, : 703 - 709
  • [19] The Cost-Benefit Analysis of Alternative Brucellosis Control Strategies in Turkey
    Can, Mehmet Ferit
    Yalcin, Cengiz
    KAFKAS UNIVERSITESI VETERINER FAKULTESI DERGISI, 2014, 20 (01) : 107 - 113
  • [20] An environmental cost-benefit analysis of alternative green roofing strategies
    William, Reshmina
    Goodwell, Allison
    Richardson, Meredith
    Le, Phong V. V.
    Kumar, Praveen
    Stillwell, Ashlynn S.
    ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING, 2016, 95 : 1 - 9