Table of Contents:

1. Introduction: The Triple Bottom Line Page 3

for holistic sustainability
2. The environmental bottom line: Why Page 3
there is a need for sustainable change
in last mile logistics?
3. The environmental bottom line: Page 5
UAVs as an environmental
sustainability enabler

4. The economic bottom line: Page 7

Technology as a barrier to economic
sustainability

5. The socio-economic bottom line: Page 9

human geography as a barrier to
UAV implementation
6. Conclusion: Sustainability across the Page 11
triple bottom line, a futuristic
initiative which technology can
enable

7. Reference Page Page 14

List of Figures:

Figure 1.0: Sources of Scottish Greenhouse Page 4

Gas
Emissions, 2019. Values in MtCO2e

Figure 1.1: The comparison between C02 Page 7

emissions for deliveries without the use of
UAVs, with the use of UAV’s

Figure 1.2: The logistics map of multiple Page 8

DC’s/service stations in UAV delivery

Figure 1.3: Vehicle kilometres travelled in Page 11

London, 1993-2014 (index 1993 = 100)

1
An investigation into the barriers and enablers of UAV usage in last mile delivery logistics
within the UK; assessing sustainability across environmental, economic and social factors.

1. Introduction: The Triple Bottom Line for holistic sustainability

This paper will follow the guidance of the operational Triple Bottom Line theory, in which in
any decision surrounding an operational change, an organisation must consider three main
categories: the environmental impact, the economic impact and the social impact the change
could have. In this instance the three elements will be examined to demonstrate how they could
enable or prohibit the use of UAVs in last mile delivery practices within the UK (Slack and
Brandon-Jones, 2018). This paper seeks to be a point of reference for organisations that operate
last mile delivery services within the UK to determine a pragmatic approach that investigates
not individual aspects of sustainability, but the holistic network of sustainable factors across
environmental, economic and social factors. The understanding of last mile delivery in this
paper will be that of the scope of distribution from the parcels final distribution centre (DC) to
the independent delivery addresses from e-commerce retail and return to DC for refill or
recharging purposes. It must be noted that this paper will not consider the use of multi-echelon
UAV launch plans, it will focus solely on the use of UAV from DC to final delivery point and
return to DC to be used in future research for UAV implementation without the use of ground
vehicles (GVs).

2. The environmental bottom line: Why there is a need for sustainable change in last mile
logistics?

Within the UK, there has been a steady increase in electronic (e-)commerce that has been
exponentially growing for the last 5 years and has increased dramatically since the COVID-19
pandemic. Research shows that e-commerce spending, in February 2020 (pre-pandemic), was
at 19.7% of the total retail value spending across the UK, whereas most recently in August
2021, the value share of online retail is at 27.7%. The highest figure that has been recorded was
in February 2021, where the increase was at 36.5%, a 16.8% increase in one year due to the
impacts of the pandemic (Retail sales, Office for National Statistics, 2021). This expansion
must be assessed in understanding the urgency or need for a shift in last mile logistics; as with
the impact of e-commerce sales it becomes a delivery environment where every home address

2
becomes a potential point of delivery that needs to be covered by an organisations last mile
delivery resource (Viu-Roig and Alvarez-Palau, 2020).

Therefore, before discussing the implementation of UAVs a solution to an environmental

sustainability issue; there must be an examination of how the expansion of e-commerce, and
the subsequent emergence of increased delivery points that can be varied and uncertain, has on
CO2 emissions and traffic controls across the UK. In Scotland in 2019, domestic transportation
was the highest contributor to CO2 emissions. This is visually represented in Figure 1.0 in
which the difference between domestic transport, which this instance includes emissions from
domestic aviation, road transport, railways, domestic navigation, fishing and aircraft support
vehicles, and the next biggest contributor is 4.1 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent
(MtCO2e) (An Official Statistics publication for Scotland, 2019).

Figure 1.0: Sources of Scottish Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2019. Values in MtCO2e
Source: An Official Statistics publication for Scotland, 2019.

The numbers in Figure 1.0 are demonstrative of the larger trends across the UK, which show
that CO2 emissions from domestic transportation remain the biggest contributor across the

3
entirety of the UK. In 2019, domestic transportation accounted for 39% of all CO2 emissions
(National Statistics, 2020). These figures are presented as the catalyst needed for change in the
UK’s use of modes of road transportation. Although the findings are not explicitly categorised
by modes of delivery transportation, it is a foundational understanding of how road freight
modes need to be adapted to curb their environmental impact. This is the external enabler that
allows for change within last mile delivery, as it is not just a singular logistics issue, it is a
national initiative to lower CO2 emissions.

3. The environmental bottom line: UAVs as an environmental sustainability enabler

In a study conducted by Chiang (et al., 2019) it is empirically tested and concluded that by
implementing the use of UAVs in delivery, the CO2 emissions can fall by 20% than that of
using traditional fuel powered GVs. The study conducted this experiment thorough exploration
of vehicle routing problems (VRP) and how VRP can be adapted via the implementation of
UAVs for last mile delivery. Every study that investigates the implementation of UAVs to
reduce CO2 emissions that will be examined in this paper is based on prior study of traditional
VRPs in optimising last mile delivery for fuel-based vehicles. Therefore, it would be a
fallacious jump to skip the study of the VRP for fuel powered GVs prior to exploring how the
implementation of UAVs can assist or prohibit VRP optimisation for environmental
sustainability. In recent times studies of VRP optimisation have been adapted to examine
optimisation, not only as economically beneficial, but to enable them to assist in achieving
environmental sustainability. This would allow for a greener VRP (GVRP). The studies are
wide ranging and cover information that can conclude statistics such as the following: that by
creating a GVRP emissions can be reduced by 5% by reducing the delivery times an
organisations GV fleet are in transit, or that if you create a time-dependant VRP an
organisations CO2 emission can be reduced by 7% if an observation function of emissions was
implemented after routes are planned (Liao, 2017).

Of course, the information provided on GVRP for GVs is brief, but it is important to further
understand the implementation of UAVs as not the singular CO2 reducing initiative that is
being examined across the globe. The understanding that environmentally sustainable change
in last mile logistics is already being understood and examined is crucial to the examination of
the implementation of UAVs, as technological change, such as UAV implementation, does not
happen overnight. It cannot be a self-determined initiative; it must be met with a macro

4
understanding that environmental sustainability is crucial to the wider UK sustainability crisis
demonstrated in section 2.

In the aforementioned study conducted by Chiang (et al., 2019), they conducted an examination
of the CO2 emissions of GVs versus UAVs. All the vehicles were set to the same emission-
based functions; they are as followed, WAER: The weighted average of emission for the
vehicle, the PGFER: The C02 emitted at the power station (per watt hour (Wh)) and the AER
UAV: is the average energy requirements of UAVs per Wh per mile (Chiang, Li, Shang and
Urban, 2019). The findings are demonstrated in Figure 1.1 below, with the key C02 data noted
in pink.

This study is not standalone in its conclusions of CO2 reduction via the use of UAVs in last
mile delivery, which will explored in depth throughout. However, this is where this holistic
examination will interlink the environmental sustainability that can be achieved through the
implementation of UAVs in last mile delivery with the economic sustainability of UAV use.
As, if you took the above study as an independent, singular success, it is fundamental to
conclude that you have achieved the environmental sustainability goal of reducing CO2
emissions via the use of UAVs for the use of certain trips and certain weights, over the use of
GVs. Yet, this paper is intended to explore if sustainability can be achieved across the triple
bottom line, not take one conclusion as a singular driver for UAV implementation.

5
Figure 1.1: The comparison between C02 emissions for deliveries without the use of UAVs, with the use
of UAV’s
Source: Chiang, Li, Shang and Urban, 2019.

4. The economic bottom line: Technology as a barrier to economic sustainability

In a 2019 paper, a mathematical examination was conducted that considered both the lowering
of cost and the lowering of emissions in the sustainability of UAV implementation for last mile
delivery (Eun, et al., 2019). This is not to dimmish the study examined above by Chiang (et al.,
2019), whose findings highlight the economic sustainability needs to hold comparative weight
in an organisations decision to implement UAVs as a delivery method as transportation at the
time of writing accounted for 33% of all logistics costs. Their findings do show economic
sustainability by lowering the variable costs incurred by fuel consumption in GVs, that are not
incurred by UAVs and categorically show that by reducing CO2 emissions, a business can
subsequently lower variable cost, as the two are synergised with one another. Yet, the
limitations of the UAV technology are not explored in their economic findings, that is explored
in the Eun (et al.) 2019 mathematical examination who encapsulate the essence of this papers
purpose: that to be sustainable an implementation of operational change needs to be both
economically and environmentally effective, they cannot be separated for success.

The 2019 (Eun at al.) paper assesses the need for multiple sharable depots and multiple trips
(VRPMSDMT) in the UAV VRP, an issue not explored in the above literature. This needs to
be considered as a barrier to commercial last mile delivery UAV use as their technology limits

6
their travel time before charging and the capacity they can deliver in their trips from the DC
and back. This then subsequently leads to a need for more trips to depots to change batteries or
fill up on consumables (Eun et al., 2019). Their mathematical study encapsulates more than the
direct CO2 comparisons in Figure 1.1, as they consider the nature of the UAV that requires
more trips back to their DCs and they account for cost of energy needed for these added return
trips to a local DC. Their conclusion is rooted in the need for VRPMSDMT to allow for shorter
return journeys to lower the circular notions required by UAVs to deliver the same amount of
goods as the GVs for a similar cost per delivery. See Figure 1.2 for a visual representation of
one VRP operating base, but multiple DCs/service stations to further visualise the network
needed to support the implementation of UAV deliveries to enable them to be cost effective.
The conclusion is the similar to what is concluded in Figure 1.1, that the reduction of CO2 is
linked with a reduction of cost, but they open the question of the implementation costs of
having multiple depots to allow for UAV delivery and the sustainability, both environmental
(energy use for charging and so on) and the economic barriers this could present. This paper
will now examine the economic barrier of more DCs for UAV implementation.

Figure 1.2: The logistics map of multiple DC’s/service stations in UAV delivery
Source: (Song, Park and Kim, 2018)

7
As this paper is categorising last mile delivery as the use of freight mode from a DC or
warehouse to a final delivery destination there must be now a definition of the types of delivery
measurements that can be considered in cost determinators. These can be categorised by the
following:
1. ‘Stem’ distance: the distance to and from a delivery zone
And
2. ‘Drop’ distance: the distance travelled from final delivery drop back to DC (Rushton,
Croucher and Baker, 2017).

Thus, in theory the amount of DCs a business has, and the proximity of these DCs to their
customers will subsequently lower the transportation costs overall. This aligns with the
VRPMSDMT theory which presents the argument that to overcome the technological barriers
of flight time and weight capacity that hinders UAV usage, an organisation must implement
multiple refill stations, which by applying both theories, the cost will inherently be reduced as
the stem distanced travelled for each UAV trip will be lowered.

However, once again this paper seeks to fulfil a strategy for businesses to follow in UAV
implementation that assesses all aspects of the triple bottom line, so to ignore the social, and
geographical patterns of the UK’s population would be an oversight to the business to customer
(BTC) delivery demands last mile organisations are facing.

5. The socio-economic bottom line: human geography as a barrier to UAV

implementation

The use of UAVs in rural areas has been demonstrated in small-scale experiments across the
UK, most recently there has been a trial by Royal Mail out of Kirkwall airport to deliver to
remote islands near Orkney. This experiment has been successful in delivering 100kgs of goods
across 90 miles in less than 20 minutes, with less CO2 impact than the use of fuel powered
inter-modal road and sea freight usage (BBC, 2021). This is a recent example of linear VRP
being applied to UAV use that has been highly successful across the highlands of Scotland in
both economic cost reduction, environmental sustainability and social positivity with a

8
collaboration of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the Medicines and Healthcare
products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), that have allowed UAV deliveries of blood samples
and COVID-19 tests (Nuki, 2021). However, this demonstrates that shows the use of UAVs
does work for remote access areas, with one delivery point and a linear return journey to DC.
Furthermore, the population of the island of North Ronaldsay, where this UAV delivered to
has a population of only 70 people, that at most could account for 70 potential delivery
addresses, if they all lived individually.

However, it is shown that urbanisation is exponentially growing across Europe (Cardenas et

al., 2017) so the use of UAVs on a widescale level for last mile delivery in terms of this papers
aims, must consider the social impact of UAVs in urban areas too. The UK is no exception, the
population are shown to continuously be moving to urban, city areas, especially in London,
who’s population is expected to reach 10 million people by 2030 and has steadily increased
every year since 1990 (London Population Growth, Trust for London, 2021). This has a direct
relationship with the e-commerce boom of parcel deliveries, as Greater London has the highest
% of parcel order and dispatch rates in the entirety of the UK (excluding cross-border %’s). In
August 2018, Scotland accounted for 5.33% of all orders placed and dispatched comparative
to Greater London which accounted for 13.97% (Statista, 2018). Therefore, the highest
percentage of potential customers for last mile logistics operators lie within urban areas. Thus,
for social sustainable change, organisations must consider the social patterns of their main
potential customer base, which as this paper has examined, lies in highly populated areas. Then
following the conclusions drawn in each section, if UAV implementation was going to be
socially impactful and social change becomes sustainable it must be implemented in urban
areas.

The increase of highly densely populated areas collapses the notion explored above that a
higher amount of DCs close to customers lowers cost as inner-city costs are rising
exponentially, therefore it pushes businesses further out of the city boundary. This can be
referred to as the ‘logistics sprawl’ in which organisations need to coordinate their VRP from
a peripheral DC and not a centralised city-based DC (Cherrett and Allen, 2019). This
population shift to highly populated city areas has already had empirical impacts on GV use in
London for last mile delivery due to the introduction of traffic calming measures and
introductions of walking or cycling paths have lowered the amount of kerbside stopping
locations for delivery vehicles (Allen, et al., 2017). As shown in Figure 1.3 this has directly

9
has a decrease in both HGV use and car use across the city. However, the use of LGVs has
been steadily increasing since 2008 which has also increased traffic accident casualties across
the city which increased by 9% in 2012 comparative to the 2005-2009 average. This can be
viewed as a crucial social sustainability driver to the implementation of UAV last mile delivery
as their implementation meets all criteria for the sustainable progressions across all three
categories of the triple bottom line theory.

Figure 1.3: Vehicle kilometres travelled in London, 1993-2014 (index 1993 =

100)
Source: Allen, et al,. 2016.

6. Conclusion: UAV last mile delivery to achieve sustainability across the triple bottom
line, a futuristic initiative?

UAV last mile delivery in the context of this paper has shown that across each factor
considered; UAV use can be a real sustainability driver across environmental, economic and
social change. It has been empirically demonstrated in UK based UAV trials across the
highlands of Scotland that the theories must have transferable data that can, in real practice,
help the environment, the economy and the population by its speed, efficiency and accuracy.

10
This paper was conducted by concentrated study on peer-reviewed literature that has broken
ground on economic and environmental factors. It has extrapolated key findings to present a
foundational taxonomy UK last mile logistics companies can refer to should they be
considering UAV use following the boom of e-commerce sales and the imminent demand for
CO2 reduction across the UK.

However, the question remains can UAVs as a singular last mile delivery method be viable at
present? By following the social bottom line of geographical pulls towards urban areas, it is
fundamentally true that these areas create higher volatility and higher flexibility for delivery;
as they have an increased number of individual addresses, many variations of building types,
entrance ways and heights; all of which add complexity to the VRP of UAVs in last mile
delivery. The tests orchestrated and examined in the literate reviewed throughout do the upmost
to deliver complex algorithms and findings on UAV performance and provide blueprints for
companies in their implementation of UAVs for delivery use.

However, at present, it is shown that the technology of enabling UAVs to have the ability to
allow induvial address to drop of capabilities ballooned the weight of the UAV to 27kgs, which
means it is even further limited by weight capacity or flight time before recharge (Kersley,
2021). This means more stops, at more locations, to deliver less parcels at less addresses; thus,
creating an unsustainable economic prospect for last mile logistics organisations operating.
This then becomes a major barrier to the methodology of the VRP optimisation that can be
enabled by the consolidation of multirole DCs to enable multiple delivery points across a rural
or urban environment. The VRPMSDMT presented in the Eun (et al., 2019) examination
projects a future forward enabler to the use of UAVs, especially in conjunction with rural
experimentation of garden deliveries, or island drop offs; but its urban is bound and hindered
by the technological progress of UAV VRP capabilities and flexibility.

To conclude, philosopher Martin Heidegger stated that ‘the essence of technology is by no

means anything technological’ (Heidegger, 2013). Which in a rather ironic interjection this
paper has concluded that the discussion of UAV implementation is bound by the human
expansion of the essence of our modern technology, and we are in a state of UAV holding as
UAV technology is expanded further. This paper also uncovered that UAV use for urban areas
is not as easy to draw factual researched conclusions for, as there is a limitation of dynamic
responsiveness that comes with the more varied built-up and dense landscapes of urban areas

11
that has been largely untested. Yet, for real sustainable change across all three factors, UAVs
as a last mile delivery mode must be able to cater to the demands of the population, that are
ultimately concentrated in urban areas. Thus, the paper has drawn a conclusion that shows each
study examined can be used for future implementation, as for real change across all three
categories, the UAV technology needs to be experimented and expanded further; or work
collaboratively with current delivery methods (collection points, electric GVs and so on) that
are being explored in depth across the industry.

Yet, for the means of UAVs as a singular last mile freight mode, the metaphorical conceptual
route for UAV use in last mile delivery is set; all aspects needed for sustainable change, are
being examined and prepared, the UAV just needs to be technologically enabled to navigate
the flexibility of human geography, peaks in demand or product weight and variations of
natural and manmade landscapes.

12
References:

Allen, J., Piecyk, M. and Piotrowska, M., 2016. An analysis of road freight in London and
Britain: traffic, activity and sustainability. University of Westminster, FTC2050 project,.

Allen, J., Piecyk, M., Piotrowska, M., McLeod, F., Cherrett, T., Ghali, K., Nguyen, T.,
Bektas, T., Bates, O., Friday, A., Wise, S. and Austwick, M., 2017. Understanding the impact
of e-commerce on last-mile light goods vehicle activity in urban areas: The case of
London. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, [online] 61, pp.325-
338. Available at: <https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.07.020> [Accessed 7 October 2021].

An Official Statistics publication for Scotland, 2019. Scottish Greenhouse Gas Emissions
2019. Agriculture, Environment and Marine. The Scottish Government.

BBC News. 2021. Drones used to deliver post to remote Orkney island. [online] Available at:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-58792064> [Accessed
12 October 2021].

Boysen, N., Fedtke, S. and Schwerdfeger, S., 2020. Last-mile delivery concepts: a survey
from an operational research perspective. OR Spectrum, 43(1), pp.1-58.

Cardenas, I., Borbon-Galvez, Y., Verlinden, T., Van de Voorde, E., Vanelslander, T. and
Dewulf, W., 2017. City logistics, urban goods distribution and last mile delivery and
collection. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, 18(1-2), pp.22-43.

Cherrett, T. and Allen, J., 2019. Last mile urban freight in the UK: how and why is it
changing?. Foresight, Government Office for Science, University of Westminster.

Chiang, W., Li, Y., Shang, J. and Urban, T., 2019. Impact of drone delivery on sustainability
and cost: Realizing the UAV potential through vehicle routing optimization. Applied Energy,
242, pp.1164-1175.

Eun, J., Song, B., Lee, S. and Lim, D., 2019. Mathematical Investigation on the Sustainability
of UAV Logistics. Sustainability, 11(21), p.5932.

13
Heidegger, M., 2013. The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. Harper
Perennial Modern Classics.

Kersley, A., 2021. The slow collapse of Amazon’s drone delivery dream. [online] WIRED
UK. Available at: <https://www.wired.co.uk/article/amazon-drone-delivery-prime-air>
[Accessed 9 October 2021].

Liao, T., 2017. On-Line Vehicle Routing Problems for Carbon Emissions
Reduction. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 32(12), pp.1047-1063.

National Statistics, 2020. Greenhouse gas emissions, provisional figures. The Department for
Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

Nuki, P., 2021. Government gives go-ahead for vaccines and organs to be flown around UK
by drone. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-
health/science-and-disease/government-gives-go-ahead-vaccines-organs-flown-around-uk-
drone/> [Accessed 12 October 2021].

Ons.gov.uk. 2021. Retail sales, Great Britain - Office for National Statistics. [online]
Available at:
<https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/retailindustry/bulletins/retailsales/august2
021#online-retail> [Accessed 6 October 2021].

Rao, P., Balasubramanian, S., Vihari, N., Jabeen, S., Shukla, V. and Chanchaichujit, J., 2021.
The e-commerce supply chain and environmental sustainability: An empirical investigation
on the online retail sector. Cogent Business & Management, [online] 8(1), p.1938377.
Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1938377>.

Rushton A., Croucher, P. and Baker, P., 2017. Handbook of Logistics and Distribution
Management. 6th ed. Kogan Page.

14
Slack, N, Brandon-Jones, A, & Johnston, R 2018, Essentials of Operations Management PDF
Ebook, Pearson Education, Limited, Harlow. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [6
October 2021].

Song, B., Park, K. and Kim, J., 2018. Persistent UAV delivery logistics: MILP formulation
and efficient heuristic. Computers & Industrial Engineering, [online] 120, pp.418-428.
Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.05.013>.

Statista. 2018. Parcel order: distribution to regions and nations 2018 | Statista. [online]
Available at: <https://www.statista.com/statistics/884571/parcel-order-distribution-to-
regions-and-nations-uk/> [Accessed 12 October 2021].

Trust for London. 2021. Population Of London, London Population Growth - Trust For
London | Trust for London. [online] Available at:
<https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/population-over-time/> [Accessed 11 October
2021].

Viu-Roig, M. and Alvarez-Palau, E., 2020. The Impact of E-Commerce-Related Last-Mile

Logistics on Cities: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 12(16), p.6492.

15