Paper presented at the 7th RESER Conference, Tampere (Finland), 13 - 15 September 2007

The performance of freight transport systems: an evaluation in terms of service trajectories

Antje BURMEISTER
INRETS-SPLOT BP 317, F-59666 Villeneuve dAscq cedex antje.burmeister@inrets.fr

Introduction
This paper focuses on methods of evaluation of performance in freight transport services. Traditionally, efficiency of transportation is analyzed through productivity indices, using ton-km as an indicator of output of the transport industry. During the past 50 years, we can observe a shift from rail to road in the transport of goods in terms of ton-km. Can we conclude from this observation to a clearly superior performance of road transport in the haulage of goods during this period? We question the existing measurements of performance and will show that, although they convey a general idea of the evolution of efficiency in road transport, they cannot explain the differential evolution of performance over time and the various strategies that lead to improvements in performance. An alternative conceptual and methodological framework to evaluate the efficiency of transport services can be based on three schools of thought in industrial economics: transport as a service, the variety of productive configurations, and production system as networks. From these lines of theoretical analyses, we can draw the concept of transport service configurations. The underlying assumption is that there is not a single way of achieving efficiency in freight transport (as in any other service), but a variety of transport service configurations, each of them having a particular logic of performance. The empirical analysis in the paper is based upon a large-scale national survey of freight transport operations in France (ECHO) and on a small-scale qualitative firm survey in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region. Through the breakdown of transport services in elementary units and their precise description, combined with the analysis of the strategies of all actors involved in the filire as well as of the institutional framework, we will describe in detail the different configurations of road haulage and their articulation with the production system.

1. Problems in measuring the performance of freight transport services

Throughout the 20th century, freight transport has grown dramatically in France, as in all Western countries. Since World War II, freight flows in ton-km have grown by factor 5. As shown in figure 1 below, one specific mode of transport has more particularly benefitted from this growth: road haulage. On the contrary, the share of rail transport which had dominated freight transport for more than a century has fallen continuously since the 1950s.

This evolution is common to all Western countries, but is even more accentuated in France, where the dominance of road transport and the decline of railroads for freight transport are particularly evident and a source of public debate.

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1948 1958 1968 1978 1988

Route Voie d'eau Rail

Source : Neiertz (1999) Figure 1 : Evolution of mode shares in freight transport in France (km) between 1841 and 1994 Can we thus conclude that the economic performance of road transport has risen more rapidly than in other transport modes?

1.1. What do productivity indexes measure in road transport services? Traditionally, on the macro-economic level, performance of transport services is measured by productivity indicators. Battese et alii (1998) distinguish three main types of methods: The production function approach Index methods Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)

Lefebvre (2007) compares and discusses various studies carried out on French data, using index methods. Rmy (2001) evaluates the annual growth of labor productivity for long distance freight transport by road at 3.6 % between 1986 and 1991 and at 1.3 % between 1991 and 1998. A number of other studies lead to comparable results, demonstrating that productivity of road haulage services has grown substantially and regularly over the past 20 or 30 years. As for the other surface transport modes, however, productivity growth has also been substantial. Kune/Mulder (2001) evaluate labor productivity growth for freight transport by waterways at 3.6 % per annum between 1973 and 1995, and at 2.7 % per annum for railroads during the same period of time. The comparison between modes, however, is difficult. Contrary to air transport, the service of freight transport by road is more difficult to identify and to measure. Nevertheless, 2

1935-38

1841-44

1845-54

1855-64

1865-74

1875-84

1885-94

1895-04

1905-13

1921-24

1925-34

1994

we can conclude that comparisons of productivity growth between freight transport modes cannot explain the economic success and domination of road haulage in freight transport. On the European level, the performance of the French road haulage sector is rather unimpressive. Lefebvre (2007) calculates productivity scores of road haulage services in 12 European countries, using the data envelopment analysis (DEA) method, and shows that France comes only 9th out of 12. Figure 2 : DEA efficiency scores and mode shares of road haulage services in various European countries Road freight in % DEA score of total inland Country (Eurostat data) freight in t/km 1998 Finland 191,81 72 % Sweden 136,67 62 % Belgium 110,54 68 % Germany 109,13 66 % UK 96,82 85 % Netherlands 92,55 50 % Portugal 89,07 87 % Austria 76,60 41 % France 73,82 75 % Italy 73,37 86 % Greece 72,34 98 % Spain 54,06 85 % Source : Lefebvre (2007) ; Kune/Mulder (2000) Again, this comparison of performance does not explain the mode share of road haulage compared to other transport modes in the various European countries. The technical and conceptual limitations of productivity measures in general are well known (see Griliches (1994). In the field of freight transport, a major problem is the measurement of the output of transport services, which is generally the ton-km. Transport specialist generally agree that the ton-km is not a satisfactory measure for the output of freight transport services, given the variety of modes and services. Nevertheless, the statistical apparatus in ministries of transport usually relies solely on these measures.

1.2.The changing environment of logistics and freight transport services The dominance of road haulage in freight transport is, of course, also an important issue of public debate. This mode of transport is often criticized for its negative external effects (pollution, accidents, congestion, ). INFRAS/IWW (2001) evaluates the socioeconomic cost of 1000 ton-km at 88 for road haulage, 19 for rail transport and 17 for transport by waterways. According to these figures, the superior performance of road transport is thus only apparent. Despite a clear political will (as well on the national as on the European level) to correct the modal split, the trend appears to be difficult to stop, given the

difference in infrastructure costs and the difficulties of alternative modes to adapt to the current trends in production systems. The rapid development of road haulage compared to the heavy modes of freight transport cannot only be explained by its productivity, nor by regulatory and technical constraints, as it is often debated in France. The type of transport services that this mode delivers appears to be particularly well fitted to the organizational and market structure changes that began in the 1970s. In an environment of rising differentiation of consumption goods, shortened life cycles of products and just-in-time production, logistic management systems become a strategic function in production systems. In this context, road haulage becomes the most efficient mode of transport for frequent, rapid and flexible deliveries, in comparison to railroads and waterways, far more competitive for large-scale transport flows of heavy or bulk goods. Trucks became, in a way, the symbol of the post-fordist accumulation regime. In the 1990s, the structural changes in production and distribution methods lead to a reorganization of logistic and transport systems, in particular through the development of global supply chain management, involving producers, large-scale retailers, and logistic integrators in collaborative logistic processes. Freight transport services become part of more and more complex logistic processes, and transport firms cover a large variety of situations, from third party logistic providers who also provide transport services, to highly specialized companies, or very small scale subcontracting firms. The adoption and development of information and communication technologies in freight transport, such as EDI (electronic data interchange) and web EDI, GPS, RFID (radiofrequency identification) etc., and the development of new methods of organizing logistics, information and transport flows (tracking and tracing methods, cross docking hubs, etc.) transform logistic processes in general and freight transport services in particular. As a result, freight transport services, and in particular road haulage services, are nowadays far more complex than transporting a good from point A to point B.

2. A typology of transport service configurations

We will now develop an alternative framework to analyse performance in freight transport services, based on three main assumptions: 1) Transport services, as all types of service, are heterogeneous products. 2) Various logics of performance co-exist in freight transport services. 3) The main source of performance of freight transport services lies in their articulation with the production system. We will analyse more precisely the variety of transport services in two steps. First, we will analyse the material configuration of shipments in order to show the complexity of situations. In a second step, we will introduce an analysis in terms of service economics in order to show the variety of service trajectories in road haulage services. The empirical data used in this analysis come from two different surveys: A national large-scale survey of approximately 9000 shipments made by 3000 shippers (ECHO, Enqute CHargeurs-Oprateurs, carried out by INRETS in 2005)

A small scale qualitative study of 9 industries in the North of France: food, rubber, paper, printing, wood, textile, waste treatment, metalworking, chemicals and automobile repair, as well as a survey of road haulage companies.

2.1. The configuration of shipments Shipments are often understood as simple shipments of full loads by a single carrier from one origin to one destination. carrier

shipper

consignee

Figure 3 : Simple shipment (full loads) This representation of transport services (often called full truck load, or FTL shipping) is, however, only one of a variety of patterns existing in freight transport and thus too simplistic for an important share of this service. Many freight transport operations, for instance, contain operations of consolidation and dispatching batches between multiple shippers and multiple destinations (so-called less-than-truckload, or LTL shipping). LTL carriers collect freight from various shippers, consolidate these batches in hubs, transport them between hubs, and distribute them in delivery tours to various consignees.

consignees

shippers

Figure 4: Consolidation and distribution (less-than-truck loads) As opposed to simple shipments from point A to point B, these configurations imply a process of rationalization. The share of management operations in the production of transport service becomes more important: planning systems, management of driving, handling and waiting times, optimization, fleet management, chartering services etc. Moreover, even in the apparently simple pattern of FTR shipping, a variety of services can be found, such as express courier services, which deliver small, urgent parcels door to door, dangerous goods with specific technical and regulatory constraints, specific goods with dimensions or weights above the maximum loads authorized etc.. Each of these freight

transport services has different technical, regulatory and economic constraints, and the logics of achieving performance can thus vary greatly. Figure 5 : Share of full and less-than-full loads by industry Industry (28 groups) In % of total number of shipments Full load Metals Construction material, glass Refinery, bulk chemicals Other chemicals Metalworking Textiles, leather Wood, paper Wholesale agricultural goods WS intermediary goods Machinery Tools, hardware Electrical equipment WS investment goods Fresh foods Other food, cereals Beverages WS fresh foods WS other food Clothing, leather goods Transportation equipment Pharmacy Household appliances, computers Furniture Printing, publishing Precious metals, jewellery Other manufactured goods WS consumer goods, mail order Warehouses Total (all industries)
67.96 92.80 80.49 78.98 85.94 78.83 89.93 65.57 65.02 79.44 91.40 91.89 41.14 32.97 58.09 38.12 31.63 16.78 83.62 71.38 35.44 80.81 24.07 74.33 67.42 65.25 46.37 76.32 54%

Consolidation Distribution (LTL) tour (LTL)

5.37 2.03 2.92 12.74 9.13 2.17 6.13 5.99 2.86 9.50 5.23 5.23 15.21 41.91 14.99 10.64 7.56 5.60 7.56 7.19 33.68 16.94 72.77 16.36 29.33 19.47 6.91 10.31 12% 26.66 5.18 16.60 8.28 4.92 19.00 3.93 28.44 32.11 11.06 3.37 2.88 43.65 25.12 26.92 51.24 60.81 77.62 8.82 21.43 30.88 2.25 3.15 9.31 3.25 15.28 46.72 13.37 34%

Source : ECHO The data available in the ECHO survey allows us to roughly describe shipment configurations. As shown in table 5, full load shipments account for little more than half of all shipments (54 %). The characteristics of shipments vary greatly among industries. Full loads are the main mode of shipment in bulk intermediary goods such as construction material, chemicals, wood and paper, in production equipment such as machinery, electrical and

transportation equipment, but also in textile and clothing and in household appliances and computers. Consolidated shipments, on the other hand, are typical of the food industry (fresh foods) and the furniture industry.

2.2 Service trajectories in freight transport services Beyond the technical and spatial variety mentioned above, performance in freight transport services is also more and more influenced by the integration of information flows and logistics management systems. In general, freight transport is considered as a simple, material service, that is to say having a material object. Following Gadreys (1991) definition of services, different objects of services can be distinguished: material objects, people, or information. According to this typology of services, freight transport clearly belongs to the first category, moving material objects in space. Similarly, in Du Tertres (2000) typology of production systems (configurations productives), freight transport would belong to logistic services, the productivity of which is mainly determined by direct intensity of labor, scale economies and material integration. Djellal (1999) discusses the distinction between services dealing with information and non-informational services and demonstrates, in particular for road haulage services, the coexistence of material configurations with a growing integration of information, methodological and relational aspects. The introduction of information and communication technologies (ICT) has transformed the nature of these services. In a previous paper (Burmeister/Djellal, 2004), we have discussed the co-existence of different types of operations in freight transport services. Following Gadrey (1991) and Gallouj (1999), we distinguish four types of operations in freight transport: material operations (the basic object of transport), treatment of (codified) information, relational or contact operations, and methodological operations. Figure 6: The variety of operations coexisting in freight transport services Material operations (M) Operations Physical concerning : transport, handling, loading, unloading Treatment information (I) of Relational and contact operations (R) Treatment of Direct contacts information flows between the driver inside the firm and and the shippers with other firms, customers, tracing/tracking feedback on quality of products and distribution Use of ICTs, creation Training for and optimisation of drivers and information systems, personnel, optimization of codification of management of quality control freight flows and fleet systems
Source: Burmeister/Djellal, 2004

Methodological operations (C ) Coordinate and organize the different operations ; find necessary competencies Creation and improvement of management systems of goods and information for the shipper

Improvement of performance through :

Innovations in vehicles, automatisati on of handling etc.

Material operations (M) concern mainly the traditional purpose of freight transport: shipping object from one point in space to another, as well as handling of goods, loading and unloading. More recently, however, transport service providers sometimes provide other material services such as warehousing, packaging and labeling. In the next table, we can analyze the breakdown of operations performed on shipments calculated from ECHO survey data. The upper part of the table concerns the material operations, starting from the more traditional freight transport operations, but including also operations of warehousing (5 % on shipments), and, more surprisingly, operations of finalization, packaging and labeling of goods carried out by transport firms in 15 % of the shipments. Figure 7 : Service operations other than transport performed on shipments
Type of operation Material (M) M M M M Information (I) I I I Service operations Freight consolidation Customs clearance, air or ocean forwarding Supply of containers, loading, unloading Warehousing Finalization, packaging and labeling of goods Quality control of goods Inventory and/or order management Electronic tracing / tracking Electronic proof of delivery % of shipments (multiple answers possible)

43% 1% 2% 5% 15% 24% 5% 39% 24%

Source : ECHO The lower half of table 7 concerns information operations (I) and demonstrates that an important share of shipments undergo this type of service operations. For almost 40 % of shipments, the transport company provides some form of electronic tracking and tracing, and electronic proofs of delivery for one quarter of all shipments. The methodological type of operations (C) in Galloujs (1999) addition to Gadreys functional breakdown of service operations concern operations of coordination and organization of freight flows and the logistic system on the whole. This type of operations cannot be identified in our ECHO data. The only indirect information we can use in this respect is the degree of contracting out logistic operations. According to our data base, while 94 % of shippers in the survey contract out at least part of their transport operations, only 35

% of shippers use logistic service providers outside the firm in other terms, 65 % of the shippers carry out logistic operations in-house. In relational operations (R), according to Gadreys typology, the object of the service operation is the customer himself, in a direct contact service. In our case of freight transport services, this type of operations is difficult, if not impossible, to identify, especially in large, codified data sets such as the ECHO survey. In our case studies in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais Region, we could however identify some cases where this type of operation applies. The object of the relational service operation is, in these cases, the relation between the shippers and his customer, in which the transport firm plays a particular role. This is mainly the case for transport firms that operate frequent dedicated delivery tour type operations on a regular basis for a given shipper. The transport service provider has the only direct contact to the customer and can give important feedback on quality issues and customer satisfaction. On the conceptual level, we can now identify four different service trajectories in freight transport services, summarized in table 8 below. Figure 8: The variety and complexification of service trajectories in freight transport firms Les tapes lenrichissement de fonction transport de Service trajectories la Simple material service trajectory Informational service trajectory Complex methodological / trajectories Relational service trajectory

(M) (M) + (I) (M) + (I) + (C) or (I) + (C) or (C) (M) + (R)

informational

This table can also be interpreted in dynamic terms, as the possible evolution of transport firms, from a simple material trajectory, towards more complex informational and methodological trajectories. A large share of firms, in particular small transport firms and subcontractors for large logistic providers, remain in a mainly material service trajectory. More and more transport firms, however, are forced, under pressure from their customers, to adopt information and communication technologies and to include informational service operations. A small number of large scale transport and logistic services providers evolve towards a complex methodological and informational service trajectory, some of which even contract out all of their transport operations and concentrate on the management of logistic systems.

4. The articulation between freight transport service configurations and production systems
In order to analyze the articulation between production systems and freight transport services, we will combine the typology of service trajectories developed above with a typology of production systems. The thesis of a differentiation (or, at least, a variety) of modes of production has been developed by many authors. In a previous paper (2002), we use Salais' and Storper's (1993)

analysis of the differentiation of development trajectories through the concept of "worlds of production", which express abstract types of co-ordination in production. They distinguish four worlds of production according to two dimensions: the co-ordination with demand and co-ordination with resources. 1. The industrial mode of production corresponds to mass production for an undifferentiated demand 2. The flexible mode of production can be described as mass production for a differentiated demand, mainly in the area of consumption goods. 3. In the professional mode of production, firms customise their products for a specific demand. 4. The immaterial mode of production is the field of creation, of research, of development of new products. Through our qualitative survey of production and transport firms in Nord-Pas-deCalais, we can more precisely describe these modes of production and their correspondence with transport service trajectories. Group 1: Industrial production and circulation Material transport operations This logic is dominant in intermediary goods, as well as in certain consumption goods, characterized by high potential economies of scale. (e.g. intermediary goods such as cereals, fibres, bulk chemicals, and metal products). Production is spatially concentrated. Flows of goods are massified, and transport costs remain an important decision factor. Transportation in this type of firms concerns large-scale standardised flows of goods, and can use different modes of transport, including the traditional heavy modes of rail and waterways. Transport is usually contracted out, and transport services remain almost strictly limited to material operations. Information flows take place more massively inside the firm (between plants and with headquarters), namely through computerised data exchange, than with other firms. EDI is not used in interactions with other firms, and in particular not with transport firms. Group 2: Products determined by final demand The rise of information operations This group concerns consumption goods, especially those distributed by large scale retailers (such as clothing, beverages, fresh foods, etc.). A high degree of differentiation of goods leads to different logistic and transport strategies, based on JIT deliveries, service quality and adaptation to demand variations. The main characteristic is the strong association of flows and goods and flows of information to ensure flexibility of production and distribution. The need for inter-firm coordination becomes important here, and EDI is used more often here than in other modes of production. A major factor in this mode of production appears to be the possibility to reorganise the logistic system frequently. This perhaps explains why we can note a trend towards contracting out of logistic services to third-party logistic providers. Group 3: Products based on competencies, user-producer interactions, and service Production relies on close interactions between producers and users, which limitates the potential for standardization and scale economies. This group is mainly composed of high technology investment goods and engineering. As opposed to the previous two cases, face-toface contacts are extremely frequent and appear to be the most important mode of coordination in close co-operation between producers and users. Intensive use of telecommunication means can also be observed, except EDI, which is only marginal in this 10

mode of production relying mainly on mutual adjustment. Frequent contacts, interpersonal networks, and more generally non-market interactions, are vital to build trust and reputation. Transport and logistics do not play a major strategic role for this type of product. Transport flows are usually small, or seldom, and sometimes carried out by the production firm itself. Group 4: The immaterial logic This group contains high technology consumer goods and new products. In our recent Nord-Pas-de-Calais survey, we do not find any production firms in this group, given the industries included in the survey. However, from previous studies, we can conclude that information flows play a prominent role, and that logistic and transport organisation (in particular the association of goods and information flows) is similar to group 2. as. The externalisation of logistics and transport services appears to be even more important in this group. The next table summarizes these results.

11

Mode of circulation Industrial (eg: basic chemicals) Flexible (eg : clothing, food)

Production

Typical freight service operations M (large-scale, standardized flows)

Logistics

Service trajectories in freight transport (M) Tendency towards (M) + (I)

Intermediary goods No differentiation Economies of scale Specialized production plants Consumption goods Mass production, differentiated

Industrial logistics, based on the criterion of cost Externalized transport All transport modes, including heavy modes Sophisticated logistics (high-speed transport + EDI) JIT production and/or distribution Main criteria: reliability (time, quality) and flexibility (frequent changes in logistic organization) Mainly road haulage

but

I; sometimes C Association of frequent, rapid and small-scale or consolidated flows of goods and flows of information

(M) + (I) Tendency towards (M) + (I) + (C) Tendency towards a disintegration of logistic operations among service providers A few cases (M) + (R) (M) In some cases (M) + (R)

Professional (eg : machinery, engineering) Immaterial (eg : high tech consumer goods)

Production of units or very small scale of production Customized production Specific knowledge, close user-producer interactions New products Specialized equipment Highly qualified labor

M Small-scale flows of goods

Basic logistics, on a small scale No contracting out of logistic services Internalized transport operations Road haulage

I and / or C

Third-party logistics JIT production / distribution Almost exclusively road haulage

(M) + (I) + (C) Disintegration of logistic operations among service providers: (M) / (I) + (C)

Figure 9 : Articulation between modes of production and transport service trajectories

12

It now becomes clear that the strategies to achieve performance in these different transport service configurations differ greatly. Optimization of physical transport operations is only a small part of the strategy, more important in the industrial mode of production, associated with the material transport service trajectory. In other words, the traditional evaluation of performance in terms of productivity, measured by ton-km, can only be applied to one of the four service trajectories that we have identified. In the three other configurations, the achievement of performance relies on the management of information flows, on the improvement of information systems, and on the flexibility of the logistic system. Figure 10: The complexity of logics of performance in freight transport services Freight transport service trajectory Association Logics of performance with modes of production Evaluation of performance through traditional productivity measures Industrial Optimization of physical transport Yes Professional operations (FTL) Flexible Optimization of consolidation of No (except for Immaterial transport operations partial sometimes optimization of Industrial Management of information flows transport operation) Optimization of flexibility of logistics Immaterial Improvement of management and No Flexible information systems, development of new management and information systems Few cases Improvement of coordination No (flexible, processes, quality of interactions, professional) establishment of trust, stabilization of relations (Interface role of transport services)

M M+I

M+I+C

M+R

The reason for the transformation of transport service trajectories towards the inclusion of informational and methodological operations lies mainly in the pressure from shippers and the transformation of modes of production, in particular the development of more flexible mode of production, which rely heavily on flexible logistic systems and information flows.

13

Conclusion
In this paper we have attempted to demonstrate that performance in the case of freight transport, as in other types of services, is a multidimensional concept, and that traditional productivity measures are unable to capture a large share of the factors of performance in these services. It is therefore difficult to explain the dramatic shift towards the use of road haulage vs. the traditional freight transport modes of railroads and waterways beyond the well known problem of external costs. Conceptual frameworks developed in economics and management of services could greatly help to raise the understanding of the complexity of performance logics in freight transport and thus improve the methodologies used in transport ministries. We use a typology of freight transport operations derived from Gadreys (1991) functional breakdown of services in order to identify and describe different service trajectories which are based on material logistic operations, but can include to various degrees the treatment of information, contact operations, and methodological operations. This typology of freight transport trajectories gives a coherent description of the changes that the freight and logistics sector has undergone in the past 25 years from moving heavy goods from A to B to managing complex logistic systems including a rising share of information flows. In our view, the main source of performance of freight transport services lies in their articulation with the production system. In our empirical analysis, we attempt articulate modes of production of goods in the production system and the service trajectories in freight transport and distribution logistics. This analysis shows that the complexification of freight transport services, which leads to the inclusion of informational operations and management, are to be found mainly in highly flexible production systems of differentiated consumption goods. The observed shift towards road haulage in freight transport could be at least partly explained by its superior adaptability to flexible production systems.

14

Annex : Figure 11 : Service operations other than transport performed on shipments, by industry group
Type of operation % of shipments (multiple answers possible) Freight consolidation Customs clearance, air or ocean forwarding Supply of containter, loading, unloading Warehousing Finalization, packaging and labelling of goods Quality control of goods Inventory and/or order management Tracing/tracking Electronic proof of delivery
Intermediary goods industries
47% 6%

Industry of the shipper (9 groups)

Wholesale of intermed. goods 20%
1%

Equipment goods industries

54% 4%

Wholesale of equipment
64% 1%

Food industry
47% <1%

Wholesale of food products

23% <1%

Other consumer goods industries 51%

1%

Wholesale of consumer goods 43%

1%

Warehouse s
33% 1%

TOTAL

43% 1%

9%

<1%

2%

2%

<1%

<1%

<1%

3%

1%

2% 5% 15% 24% 5% 39% 24%

13% 25%

3% 9%

8% 13%

4% 23%

7% 16%

3% 5%

6% 22%

2% 13%

12% 6%

41% 13% 53% 26%

16% 9% 21% 16%

30% 7% 46% 40%

32% 3% 53% 40%

32% 6% 38% 22%

10% 2% 19% 6%

32% 7% 45% 30%

17% 1% 40% 24%

26% 7% 37% 17%

Source : ECHO

15

References
AFT-IFTIM, (2001), Le secteur du transport routier de marchandises face lvolution du march de lemploi des conducteurs routiers, Rapport PREDIT, n 99 MT 44, 75 pages. ALLAIN Marie-Laure, CHAMBOLLE Claire, (2003), Les relations entre la grande distribution et ses fournisseurs : bilan et limites de trente ans de rgulation , revue Franaise dEconomie, vol. XVII, Avril, pp. 168 212. ARTOUS Antoine SALINI Patrice, (1997), Comprendre l'industrialisation des transports, Editions Liaisons, 196 pages. BATTESE George E. COELLI Tim RAO Prasada, (1998), An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 275 pages. BATTS L.R., (1976), The ton-miles : does it properly measure transportation output ? BERNADET Maurice, (1985), Rflexions sur la notion de qualit de service, Contribution au groupe de travail sur ladaptation des transports la logistique moderne, Conseil Gnral des Ponts et Chausses, 11 pages. BETARD Pierre, (1977), La productivit dans les transports routiers de marchandises, dfinition et mesure, Thse dEtat Universit Paris IX Dauphine, U.E.R. Science des Organisations, 286 pages + annexes. BIENCOURT Olivier (1994), Concurrence par la qualit et viabilit d'un march. Le cas du transport routier de marchandises (en collaboration avec F. Eymard-Duvernay et O. Favereau), Rapport pour le Commissariat Gnral du Plan, novembre, 39 pages + annexes. BILLAUDOT Bernard, (1995), De la productivit globale des facteurs la productivit globale de rpartition , Note de travail IREPD, n 39, Aot, 38 pages. BOUSSEMART Jean-Philippe DERVAUX Benot, (1993), Lefficacit productive : dfinitions et mesures par la mthode Data Envelopment Analysis , Communication aux 3me Journes IFRESI, 28-29 Janvier, pp. 205 219. BOYER Robert FREYSSENET Michel, (2002), Entre innovations historiques et contraintes structurelles : lments dune thorie des modles productifs, Les cahiers oranges du CEPREMAP, n 05, 91 pages. BOYLAUD O. (2000), Regulatory reform in road freight and retail distribution. OECD Economics Department Working Paper no. 255, August, 63 p. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, (1999), transportation satellite accounts : a new way of measuring transportation services in America, US Department of Transportation, 82 pages. BURMEISTER A., LEFEBVRE L., MEUNIER C., DJELLAL F. (2007), Logiques de performance dans le transport routier de marchandises, une approche par filires productives. rapport pour le GRRT, mars BURMEISTER A., DJELLAL F. (2004)., Limpact des technologies de linformation et de la communication sur lorganisation spatiale des activits de services, Cahiers de lconomie de linnovation, n19, janvier CHAVAS Jean-Paul, COX Thomas L., (1999), A generalized distance function and the analysis of production efficiency, Universit du Winsconsin-Madison, staff papers n422, 41 pages. CHOW G. et alii (1995) : logistics performance : definition and measurement , International journal of physical distribution and logistics management, 24, pp 17-28 COLIN J. (2004) : La logistique du point de vue des sciences de gestion, in la logistique entre management et optimisation, coordonn par P. Livre et N. Tchernev, Hermes Science, Paris, pp 3443 D.D.E., (2000), "Quels indicateurs de niveau de service pour le transport de marchandises ?", journe de travail du Club dchanges sur lconomie du transport de marchandises, prvision long terme et valuation de projet, 4 fvrier, Paris.

16

DAUTUME Agns, (2001), Evaluation des cots unitaires des dplacements routiers partir du compte satellite des transports , Note de Synthse du SES, n 133, pp. 13 18. De BANDT Jacques GADREY Jean (sous la direction de), (1994), Relations de service, marchs de services, CNRS Editions, 360 pages. De la Villarmois O. (2001) : le concept de performance et sa mesure : un tat de lart , Les Cahiers de la Recherche du Clare, Avril, 21p. DESFONTAINES Hlne, (2000), La norme temporelle comme rgle dorganisation du travail dans le transport routier de marchandises , in Les transformations des relations du travail dans le transport routier de marchandises, rapport PREDIT, n 98-MT 14, pp. 141 211. DETCHESSAHAR Mathieu, (1998), Les prestataires logistiques en conomie de la qualit? Relations chargeurs/prestataires et rgimes de concurrence sur le march de la prestation logistique. Deuximes rencontres internationales de la Recherche en Logistique "Logistique et interfaces organisationnelles, dit par Nathalie FABBES-COSTES et Christine ROUSSAT, Janvier, Marseille, pp. 381 398. DIEWERT W.E., (1992), The measurement of productivity , Bulletin of Economic Research, 44 : 3, pp. 163 198. DJELLAL Farida, (1999), "Les trajectoires d'innovation dans les entreprises de transport routier de marchandises", non publi, 19 pages. DJELLAL F., GALLOUJ F. (2006), Les services publics lpreuve de la productivit et la productivit lpreuve des services publics. 16th International RESER Conference, Sept. 28-30, Lisbon DOYLE Dawn, (1998), Performance measure initiative at the Texas Department of Transportation , Transportation Research Record, n 1649, pp. 124 128. DU TERTRE Christian, (2000), Services immatriels : productivit et subjectivit , document de travail IRIS, 12 pages. DUHAUTOIS Richard MAYO Sverine ROBIN Yves, (1998), Vers un indice de production de services de transport , Notes de Synthse du SES, Mai-Juin, n117, pp. 11 18. DURET Benjamin GRAND Lionel, (2000), Diffrentiels de comptitivit et dlocalisation des entreprises europennes de transport routier de marchandises , Transports, n400, pp. 99 107. FORUM CEREM, (2001), Consquences des nouvelles dispositions sociales dans le transport routier de marchandises, rapport PREDIT Emploi et veille sociale , 68 pages. FOUQUET J.P. (2001), Espaces de travail, espaces familiaux : la transformation des conditions de la pratique professionnelle des conducteurs routiers, rapport PREDIT n99MT33, 182 pages + annexes. FRITSCH Robert, PRUDHOMME Rmy, (1996), Le transport de marchandises : comment mesurer le service rendu ? , Revue de Rexecode, n50, pp. 5 71. GACOGNE V. TWEDDLE G. VIEGAS J. MESQUITA R, (1998), Quality of service in transport, projet SOFTICE, Task 3, 37 pages. GADREY Jean, (1999), "La caractrisation des biens et des services, d'Adam Smith Peter Hill : un approche alternative", Sminaire du groupe "Services" (CLERSE), 6 mai, 28 pages. GADREY Jean, (2000), Compter ce qui compte : les exemples de la distribution et de lhpital en France et aux Etats-Unis , Tout nest pas conomique : des entreprises qui construisent leur performance, (sous la direction de KAISERGRUBER Danielle, LANDRIEU Jose), Editions de lAube, pp. 67 85.

GADREY, J., GALLOUJ, F., (2002) Productivity, Innovation and Knowledge in Services, New Economic and Socio-Economic Approaches. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
GALLOUJ Camal GALLOUJ Faz, (1996), L'Innovation dans les Services, Economica, 112 pages. GOUVERNAL Elisabeth HANAPPE Paul, (1995), "La formation des prix dans le transport de marchandises, valeur et poids de l'envoi, distance et dure du transport", rapport INRETS, n195, fvrier, 60 pages. GRILICHES Zvi, (1994), productivity, R&D and the Data Constraint , American Economic Review, 84, n1, pp. 1 23

17

JEGER Franois, (2000), La productivit dans les entreprises de TRM vue au travers des fonctions de production , Notes de Synthse du SES, Septembre-Octobre, pp. 23 28. KUNE Bernard Chane MULDER Nanno, (2000), Capital stock and productivity in french transport, an international comparison, Confrence du CLERSE : the economics and socio-economics of services : international perspectives, juin, Lille, 22 pages. LEFEBVRE L. (2007), Analyse des dterminants de la productivit dans le transport Routier de Marchandises. Une approche rgulationniste, Thse de doctorat de sciences conomiques, Universit de Lille I, 326p. ( paratre) LILLE Franois, (1984), La productivit dans les transports de marchandises, Ministre des Transports, 114 pages. METEYER Jean-Claude, (2001), Commentaires sur la diversit des valeurs du temps en transport de marchandises , Notes de Synthse du SES, n133, pp. 29 34. MEUNIER C., LEFEBVRE L., BURMEISTER A. (2004), Logistic performance and development of the firms. World Conference on Transport Research, Istanbul, 4-8 July16 p. MORANA J, PACHE G. (2000) : Supply chain management et tableau de bord prospectif : la recherche de synergies , Logistique et Management, vol 8, n1, pp77-88 NEIERTZ Nicolas, (1999), La coordination des transports en France de 1918 nos jours, Etudes Gnrales, Comit pour l'histoire conomique et financire de la France, 800 pages. NICOLAS Nicole, (2002), Lindice de production des services de transport (IPST) , Note de Synthse du SES, Novembre Dcembre, pp. 13 20. OUM T.H. WATERS W.G. YU C., (1999), A survey of productivity and efficiency measurement in rail transport , Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, volume 33, Part. 1, pp. 9 42. PACHE G, SAUVAGE T. (2004), La logistique : enjeux stratgiques, Vuibert, octobre, 178p. PECQUEUR B., J.B. ZIMMERMANN J.B.,ed., 2004, Lconomie de proximits, Paris : ditions Hermes-Lavoisier, 264 p. PRTM, Cohen S., Roussel J. (2002) , Avantage supply chain, Edition dorganisation, coll performance/ qualit, septembre, 406p. REMY Andr, (2001), Evolution de la productivit globale du transport routier interurbain sur la priode 1986-1998 , La productivit dans les transports (sous la direction de Nanno Mulder et Andr Rmy), rapport SES, pp. 70 80. SALAIS Robert STORPER Michal, (1993), Les mondes de production. Enqute sur lidentit conomique de la France, Editions de lEHESS, Paris, 467 pages. SALINI Patrice, (2003), Productivities, efficiencies and performance indicators in transportation, document de travail, 43 pages. SAVY Michel, (1987), Le fret : industrie ou service ? , Les Cahiers Scientifiques du Transport, n 15 et 16, pp. 151 172. STAPLETON D. Et alii (2002): Measuring Logistics Performance Using the Strategic Profit Model, International Journal of logistics management, Vol 13, No. 1, pp. 89-107 TALVITIE Antti, (1999), Performance indicators for the road sector , Transportation, 26, pp. 5 30. TRETHEWAY Michael W. WATERS W.G., (1999), Comparing Total Factor Productivity and price performance, concepts and applications to Canadian railways , Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, vol. 33, Part 2, pp. 209 220. VIEIRA L.F.M., (1992), The value of service in freight transportation, PHD thesis, Massachussets Institute of Technology, Boston, Massachussett, 221 pages.

18