Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Research Part D

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/trd

Environmental sustainability in the service industry of

transportation and logistics service providers: Systematic
literature review and research directions
Piera Centobelli a, Roberto Cerchione b,⇑, Emilio Esposito a
a
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Naples Federico II, P. le Tecchio 80, 80125 Naples, Italy
b
Department of Engineering, University of Naples Parthenope, Centro Direzionale di Napoli, Isola C4, 80143 Naples, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper provides a systematic review on the subject of environmental sustainability in
Available online 15 May 2017 the service industry of logistics service providers (LSPs) to analyse the advances of the
literature on the topic and pick out appropriate research questions to investigate. The
Keywords: literature review has been performed using two academic databases and spans the years
CO2 emission 1960–2014. The paper shows that despite the increasing number of papers on the subject,
Environmental sustainability several areas of research are still being neglected. In particular, the paper highlights six
Freight transport
main literature gaps concerning the classification of green initiatives, the impact of green
Green supply chain
Literature review
initiatives on LSP performance, the evaluation of sustainability performance, the factors
Logistics service provider (LSP) influencing the adoption of environmental sustainability initiatives, the customer perspec-
Third-party logistics (3PL) tive in the sustainable supply chain, and the information and communication technologies
supporting green initiatives. Starting from these six gaps, eight research questions have
been identified. These research questions represent possible emerging areas of investiga-
tion on the topic.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

In the last decade, supply systems appeared to be affected by the debate on sustainability (Carter and Easton, 2011;
Fahimnia et al., 2015). Due to more stringent requirements affecting manufacturing production, increasing attention was
given to developing environmental management strategies for the supply systems (Seuring and Müller, 2008; Vachon and
Klassen, 2008). The literature on supply chain was influenced by the debate on the circular economy, first defined by
Pearce and Turner (1989), and more recently by Su et al. (2013) as an industrial economy developing with a built-in ten-
dency to recycle in order to meet no-waste and pollution targets. Many authors stressed that green supply systems based
on the circular economy offered new opportunities and represented a new view for sustainable manufacturing (Zhu,
2006; Dhakal et al., 2016; Zhu et al., 2011).
Despite the ample literature focusing on environmental sustainability in the manufacturing industry, showing how it has
become a very crucial issue for the supply system, little attention has been dedicated to the service industry (Foster et al.,
2000), and least of all to the logistics industry (Lin and Ho, 2011; Davarzani et al., 2016). Although the service industries are
considered to play a less significant role than manufacturing industries in reducing environmental impact, from the point of

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: piera.centobelli@unina.it (P. Centobelli), roberto.cerchione@uniparthenope.it (R. Cerchione), emilio.esposito@unina.it (E. Esposito).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.04.032
1361-9209/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 455

view of the transportation and logistics industries, the adoption of green initiatives by logistics service providers (LSPs) is
taking on a pivotal role in supporting manufacturers and customers working for environmental sustainability strategies
(Zailani et al., 2011; Maas et al., 2012; Sutton, 2004). For this reason, the topic of green initiatives adopted by logistics service
providers has been gaining greater prominence in the literature (McKinnon, 2005; Liu et al., 2010), where this issue has been
analysed from different perspectives.
Much research highlights that the critical role of environmental initiatives adopted by firms operating in the logistics ser-
vice industry is related to the following aspects (Lammgård, 2012; van Hoek and Johnson, 2010):

– In the logistics service industry, environmental issues are becoming increasingly fundamental due to the increasing
demand for the mobility of goods
– Environmental sustainability is becoming an important selection criterion for firms operating in the logistics service
industry
– In the logistics service industry, environmental sustainability is becoming a critical success factor in cost reduction (e.g.
access to financial incentives, energy efficiency, tax relief), and increased sales (e.g. customer demand for green products/
services, improvement of customer relations, participation in sustainability programmes).

In addition to these aspects that seem to highlight the factors influencing the adoption of environmental sustainability
initiatives by firms operating in the logistics service industry, consideration should also be given to the role of Information
and Communication Technologies (ICTs) providing new low-cost and easy-to-use information tools (Antonelli et al., 2000;
Centobelli et al., 2016; Esposito and Mastroianni, 2001; Garrigos-Simon et al., 2012) that may be able to support their envi-
ronmental practices better.
These issues are also highlighted by Marchet et al. (2014), who reviews 72 papers published between 1994 and 2011 on
the issue of green initiatives in both logistics and freight transportation industry. The authors highlight an emergent interest
in decision-making processes for the adoption of green strategies in logistics and freight transportation industry but also
underline that the topic of environmental sustainability among logistics service providers (LSPs) is still being neglected in
the current literature. Therefore, it emerges the opportunity to conduct a literature review that offers a complementary per-
spective to the study of Marchet et al. (2014), in that it is more in-depth focused on logistics service providers as a unit of
analysis. With these premises, it offers the opportunity to integrate their findings and draw a more comprehensive frame-
work on the areas to be analysed in order to improve the body of knowledge in the field of investigation.
Given this background, the paper aims to provide a comprehensive and updated overview on the topic of environmental
sustainability in logistics service providers. The objective is to highlight possible gaps in the literature and identify feasible
research questions that could represent areas of investigation to be addressed by future research on the topic.
The paper is organised into six sections. In the next section, method and data are illustrated. This section shows that the
proposed systematic literature review is divided into two main phases: the first phase concerns the selection of papers, and
the second phase is dedicated to describing and analysing the contents of the papers selected. The third section presents the
process of papers selection. In the fourth section, the descriptive analysis provides a summary overview of the selected
papers. In the fifth section, the content analysis of papers makes it possible to identify six search gaps in the literature as
well as to define eight consequent research questions. The paper closes with a conclusion and some research implications
deriving from the study in the sixth section.

2. Method and data

In this paper, a systematic review approach adapted by Easterby-Smith et al. (2012), Petticrew and Roberts (2006) and
Pittaway et al. (2004) is proposed.
Summarising these three contributions, we propose organising the systematic review into two main phases that in turn
are divided into two steps:

1. Papers selection:
1.1. Comprehensive material research. This step includes identifying keywords, constructing search strings, selecting the
databases to be examined (Scopus, Web of Science, etc.), and using search strings to review selected databases.
1.2. Selecting papers for detailed analysis. This step includes defining criteria for inclusion/exclusion and the selection
process on the basis of the inclusion/exclusion criteria.
2. Describing the selected papers and content analysis:
2.1. Descriptive analysis. The papers are aggregated according to different perspectives to give an overall mapping of the
selected papers.
2.2. Content analysis. Papers are reviewed and studied in depth. Analysing papers highlights the strengths and weak-
nesses in the literature, highlights research gaps, and identifies appropriate research questions to be investigated.

Fig. 1 reports the steps of the methodology and each phase is examined in depth in the subsequent sections. According to
Tranfield et al. (2003), our systematic review approach is based on manual filtering over other survey or review approaches
456 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

for its replicable and transparent process that allows authors to minimize bias in the results of literature reviews. In fact, this
approach is adequate for literature reviews on qualitative topics such as environmental sustainability in LSPs and
allows reviewers to get more insights and provide an in-depth understanding of qualitative aspects rather than automatic
filtering.

3. Papers selection

According to the methodology, this section is divided into two parts: Phase of material research and phase of papers
selection.

3.1. Phase of material research

The aim of this phase is to identify relevant output on the topic of environmental sustainability in the logistics service
industry. In the interests of rigour, the search was conducted using two databases (Scopus and Web of Science) covering
the period from 1960 to 2014. Three researchers and two senior consultants operating in the logistics service industry were
involved in a focus group to identify the initial search string of keywords. The initial search string included the following
keywords: ‘‘green”, ‘‘environmental”, ‘‘sustainability”, ‘‘carbon footprint”, ‘‘CO2 emission⁄” in combination with ‘‘LSP⁄”, ‘‘lo-
gistics service⁄”, ‘‘third party logistics”, ‘‘third-party logistics” or ‘‘3PL⁄”.
Two additional filters were adopted:

Only peer-reviewed papers were included in the review process (Gunasekaran et al., 2015).

Papers belonging to subject areas out of topic were excluded (Demartini, 2013).

More specifically, the material search was firstly conducted including the following subject areas: Environmental Science,
Social Sciences, and Business, Management and Accounting. Subsequently, we excluded all the subject areas except Business,
Management and Accounting, Decision Sciences, Engineering, Environmental Science, and Social Sciences. Therefore, subject
areas like Chemistry, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Physics and Astronomy were excluded.
Furthermore, using the functionalities provided by the academic databases adopted we have validated our
strings by comparing our keywords with additional keywords used by the individual papers identified in the initial list.
The keywords frequency analysis revealed the importance of the keywords ‘‘freight transport” and ‘‘freight transportation”
which are used by more than 10% of the papers. Therefore, the search string was refined and the final one also includes
‘‘freight transport⁄”:
(‘‘green” OR ‘‘environmental” OR ‘‘sustainability” OR ‘‘carbon footprint” OR ‘‘CO2 emission⁄”) AND
(‘‘LSP⁄” OR ‘‘logistics service⁄” OR ‘‘third party logistics” OR ‘‘third-party logistics” OR ‘‘3PL⁄” OR ‘‘freight transport⁄”).

This allowed the authors to identify 298 papers from Scopus and 243 from Web of Science, for a total of 415 papers
excluding duplications.

3.2. Phase of papers selection

To select the articles regarding the specific aim of the paper, three criteria of inclusion or exclusion were defined.
In accordance with Pittaway et al. (2004) the first criterion makes it possible to identify those papers with the abstract
that focus on environmental sustainability in the logistics service industry. To this end, the abstracts of the 415 papers were
read by two researchers and, in the case of uncertainty, by a third researcher. In accordance with Easterby-Smith et al.
(2012), Petticrew and Roberts (2006), and Pittaway et al. (2004) papers were categorized into the following three lists as
shown in Table 1:

– List A, papers whose abstracts focus on both environmental sustainability and the logistics service industry
– List B, papers whose abstracts mainly focus on environmental sustainability, but make scarce or insignificant reference to
the logistics service industry
– List C, papers whose abstracts mainly focus on the logistics service industry, but make scarce or inconsiderable reference
to environmental sustainability.

The papers contained in List C (124 papers) and List B (178 papers) were excluded as they were beyond the scope of the
research. The 113 papers included in List A were fully considered and subjected to the second criterion.
The second criterion is based on a detailed analysis of each paper. To this end, the full papers were read by two research-
ers. This reading phase allowed us to exclude 80 papers (out of 113) not focusing on the research topic.
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 457

Material comprehensive research

Focus group including three researchers

and two senior consultants operating in the
logistics service industry
Filters adoption: Papers extraction:
• Only peer-reviewed articles were - Scopus: 298
Definition of search string: papers
(“green” OR "environmental" OR included in the review process
- Web of Science:
“sustainability” OR “carbon footprint” • The material search was conducted
243 papers
OR “CO2 emission*”) AND (“LSP*” OR under the following subject areas
“freight transport*”

“logistics service*” OR “third party “Business, Management and

Final sample
logistics” OR “third-party logistics” OR Accounting, Decision Sciences,
removing
“3PL*” OR “freight transport*”) Environmental Science, Social
duplications:
Sciences”
415 papers
Analysis of papers’ keywords frequencies
to refine the search string

Selection of papers
First criterion (exclusion): focus of the abstracts
113 papers
Abstracts focusing on environmental sustainability in the LSP industry were included

Second criterion (exclusion): focus of the papers 33 papers

Papers focusing on environmental sustainability in the LSP industry were included

Third criterion (inclusion): cited references

Papers not included in the two databases but cited by the 33 papers selected in the previous 46 papers
step and focused on environmental sustainability in the LSP industry were included

Descriptive analysis
Papers over time Papers across journals Papers by methodology

Content analysis
Theories and experiences about the context

Identification of topic areas

Revision of topic areas after the analysis of 50% of papers

Interpretation of results

Definition of research questions

RQ1: How can be identified a comprehensive taxonomy of green initiatives supporting LSPs in the field of environmental
sustainability?
RQ2: What is the impact of green initiatives on LSP’s environmental, economic, operational, market and organisational
performance?
RQ3: How can a LSP’s sustainability performance be assessed in terms of both energy efficiency and the environmental
impact of green initiatives?
RQ4: What are the factors influencing the adoption of green initiatives?
RQ5: How do factors influencing the adoption of green initiatives act as drivers and/or barriers?
RQ6: How do dyadic customer-3PL relationships support the adoption of collaborative green initiatives?
RQ7: How do ICTs support the adoption of green initiatives?
RQ8: What is the degree of alignment between ICTs and the green initiatives they are meant to support?

Fig. 1. Systematic literature review process.

458 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

Table 1
First step selection.

List Description Number of

papers
C Abstracts with a predominant focus on the logistics service industry, but scarce or insignificant reference to environmental 124
sustainability
B Abstracts with a prevalent focus on environmental sustainability, but scarce or insignificant reference to the logistics service 178
industry
A Abstracts with a focus on both environmental sustainability and the logistics service industry 113
Total 415

The third criterion concerns references cited in the literature analysed but not included in Scopus and Web of Science.
Thirteen additional papers were identified. Therefore the papers selected for the subsequent phase of descriptive analysis
number 46.

4. Descriptive analysis

This section aims to provide an overview of the papers dealing with the issue of environmental sustainability in the logis-
tics service industry. For this purpose, three viewpoints were considered:

1. Papers distribution over time.

2. Papers distribution across journals.
3. Papers distribution by methodology.

4.1. Papers over time

The first viewpoint (Fig. 2) shows that only two papers were published between 2000 and 2002, four in the period 2003–
2005, three during the years 2006–2008, fourteen between 2009 and 2011, and twenty-three papers in the last period, i.e.,
2012–2014. Therefore, the trend of articles on this topic has increased in recent years, and 50% of the articles were published
over the last three years. Most prolific authors belong to Austria, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Sweden, Taiwan, USA.

4.2. Papers across journals

The distribution of papers across journals highlights that there are a variety of journals (34) on the topic of environmental
sustainability in the LSP industry (Table 2). Specifically, two journals have published three different papers on the topic;
eight journals have published two papers, and the remaining twenty-five only one paper.
As for the distribution of papers by subject area of the journal, the papers selected were grouped into five areas (Fig. 3):
(A) Logistics, supply chain management and transportation (19 papers); (B) Environmental management (13 papers); (C)
Innovation management (11 papers); (D) Information systems (2 papers); and (E) Engineering (1 paper). The papers by sub-
ject area of the journal show that the topic of environmental sustainability in LSPs involves not only the subject areas of
logistics and environmental management, but it also crosses different research areas (e.g. ICTs).

10
9 Number of papers
8 N=46
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Fig. 2. Distribution of papers over time.

 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 459

Table 2
Distribution of papers across journals.

Journal Number of papers

Int. J. of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 6
Business Strategy and the Environment 3
Energy Policy 2
J. of Cleaner Production 2
J. of Purchasing and Supply Management 2
Research in Transportation Business and Management 2
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 2
Transportation Journal 2
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2
Advances in Management & Applied Economics 1
Computers and Industrial Engineering 1
Environmental Research Journal 1
European Management Journal 1
Information Systems Frontiers 1
Int. Business Management 1
Int. Food and Agribusiness Management Review 1
Int. J. of Logistics Management 1
Int. J. of Production Economics 1
Int. J. of Services, Technology and Management 1
J. of Business Ethics 1
J. of Economic and Social Studies 1
J. of Food, Agriculture and Environment 1
J. of Management Development 1
J. of Management in Engineering 1
Journal of Technology Management & Innovation 1
Management of Environmental Quality 1
Management Research Review 1
Promet-Traffic & Transportation 1
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 1
The International Journal of Organizational Innovation 1
Thermal Science 1
Transportation Research Record 1
Total 46

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Logistics, Environmental Innovation Information Engineering
supply chain management management systems
management and
transportation

Fig. 3. Papers by subject area of the journal.

30

25

20

15

10

0
Survey Model Case study Conceptual Mixed method

Fig. 4. Distribution of papers by methodology.

460 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

4.3. Papers by methodology

Concerning the research methodology adopted, the vast majority of papers are based on quantitative methodologies (sur-
veys, models), and few adopt qualitative (case studies), conceptual or mixed approaches (Fig. 4).
The 32 papers based on quantitative methods are divided into 24 surveys and 8 decision-making evaluation models. The 8
papers based on qualitative methods are multiple case studies. The 5 conceptual papers are based on conceptual approaches
and use secondary data and information rather than empirical data. The paper based on a mixed method combines qualita-
tive and quantitative methodologies.

5. Content analysis

This analysis aims to provide a detailed picture of the issues covered by the literature on environmental sustainability in
the LSP industry.
According to Mayring (2000) and Krippendorff (2013), before the analysis of the 50% of selected papers we defined an
initial set of topic areas on the basis of experiences with the context and theoretical based definition of main literature cat-
egories (i.e. green initiatives, green performance, green factors, ICTs supporting green initiatives). After the analysis of the
50% of papers and the application of procedures of inductive category development, we revised the initial set of topic areas
and included an additional topic area concerning the role of customer perspective in the sustainable supply chain. With these
premises, the content analysis of selected papers makes it possible to identify 5 different topic areas:

TA1. ‘‘Classification of green initiatives”, in which environmental initiatives are categorized according to different criteria
(e.g. financial, operational, organisational).
TA2. ‘‘Green initiatives and performance”, showing the impact of green initiatives on performance and the evaluation of
performance.
TA3. ‘‘Factors influencing the green initiatives adoption”, in which the main drivers and barriers associated with the intro-
duction of environmental initiatives among LSPs are identified.
TA4. ‘‘The customer perspective in the sustainable supply chain”, in which main forms of collaboration in purchasing more
environmentally sustainable logistics services are described.
TA5. ‘‘ICTs supporting green initiatives”, in which appropriate tools to facilitate the adoption of environmental initiatives
among LSPs are analysed.

Table 3 shows that ‘‘factors influencing the green initiatives adoption” is the topic area with the highest number of papers
(14), ‘‘green initiatives and performance” includes 16 papers, ‘‘the customer perspective in the sustainable supply chain”
numbers 12 papers, ‘‘classification of green initiatives” includes 4 papers, and ‘‘ICTs supporting green initiatives” has 2
papers.
Since two papers deal with two different topic areas, the total in the table is 48, but the number of papers analysed is 46.
In the next paragraphs, these five topics will be analysed.

5.1. Classification of green initiatives

Few papers have been published on the categorization of sustainable initiatives adopted by logistics service companies.
Lieb and Lieb (2010a) divide the green initiatives adopted to improve the environmental performance of 40 large third-party
logistics providers (3PLs) into four categories: (1) administrative green initiatives (setting sustainability goals, committees for
sustainability efforts), (2) analytical green initiatives (carbon footprint benchmarking, environmental checklists, environmen-
tal evaluation software), (3) transportation-related green initiatives (alternative fuels, purchasing more fuel-efficient vehicles,
reducing fuel consumption), and (4) other green initiatives (solar panels in warehouses, recycling office supplies and packag-
ing materials, reduction of company-printed materials). Pieters et al. (2012) classify into four categories 608 green initiatives
for physical distribution adopted by 145 surveyed LSPs: (1) Internal (green initiatives adopted and self-organised by the LSP),
(2) External (green initiatives which need collaboration with other firms), (3) Innovating (green initiatives previously
unknown to the LSP), and (4) Optimizing (green initiatives to increase efficiency). The authors suggest a two-dimensional
matrix of sustainable initiatives and identify four areas (Internal initiatives of optimization, internal initiatives of innovation,
external initiatives of optimization, external initiatives of innovation). Perotti et al. (2012) conduct a case study analysis on a
sample of 15 Italian 3PLs. The authors propose eight different categories of green initiatives (green supply, distribution strate-
gies and transportation, warehousing and green building, reverse logistics, cooperation with customers, investment recovery, eco-
design and packaging and internal management). Colicchia et al., 2013, through a case study analysis on a sample of 10 logis-
tics service providers, categorize the green initiatives into two macro areas: intra-organisational green initiatives (e.g. distri-
bution strategies and transportation execution, warehousing and green building, reverse logistics, packaging management,
and internal management), and inter-organisational green initiatives (e.g. collaboration with customers and external collab-
orations). The main findings highlight that green initiatives related to distribution and transportation activities are the most
widely adopted, whereas green initiatives involving management still seem to be neglected.
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 461

Table 3
Classification of papers by topic area.

Authors and year TA1 TA2 TA3 TA4 TA5

Ang-Olson and Schroeer (2002)

Bai and Sarkis (2013)

Baumgartner et al. (2008)

Beskovnik and Jakomin (2010)

Björklund (2011)

Björklund and Forslund (2013)

Colicchia et al. (2013)*


Efendigil et al. (2008)

Facanha and Horvath (2005)

Ferguson (2011)

Ho et al. (2009)

Ho et al. (2014)

Ho and Lin (2012)

Iacob et al. (2013)

Isaksson and Huge-Brodin (2013)

Jumadi and Zailani (2010)

Kang et al. (2013)

Kannan et al. (2009)

Kudla (2012)

Lai et al. (2011)

Lammgård (2012)

Lammgård and Andersson (2014)

Large et al. (2013)

Léonardi and Baumgartner (2004)

Lieb and Lieb (2010a)

Lieb and Lieb (2010b)

Liimatainen et al. (2012)

Liimatainen et al. (2014)

Lin and Ho (2008)

Lin and Ho (2011)

Maas et al. (2012)

Martinsen and Björklund (2012)

Meade and Sarkis (2002)

Min and Ko (2008)

Oberhofer and Dieplinger (2014)

Oberhofer and Fürst (2013)

Pålsson and Kovács (2014)

Perotti et al. (2012)*


Pieters et al. (2012)

Rondinelli and Berry (2000)

Rossi et al. (2013)

Tacken et al. (2014)

Vujanović et al. (2010)

Wolf and Seuring (2010)

Wong and Fryxell (2004)

Zailani et al. (2011)

Total 4 16 14 12 2

The content analysis for the first area highlights that the various contributions focus on specific classifications of green
initiatives (Table 4), but no shared overview or interpretative taxonomy of green initiatives that LSPs could adopt emerges.
In addition, no clear distinction emerges between ‘‘single firm initiatives” (e.g. alternative fuels, purchasing more fuel-efficient
vehicles, reducing fuel consumption) and ‘‘supply chain initiatives” (e.g. green supply, reverse logistics, cooperation with cus-
tomers) according to the degree of collaboration with the customer that is required for their adoption. Moreover, as stressed
by Pieters et al. (2012), an interpretative taxonomy of green initiatives should also highlight their intensity of use (used for
any situation or just once). In summary, the content analysis for this area shows that the classification of green initiatives needs
more extensive analysis (first gap). Such a classification could include three dimensions: (1) the phases of the service (ship-
ping, warehousing, inventory, packaging, security); (2) the intensity of use of the initiatives; and (3) the typology of initia-
tives (single firm initiatives or supply chain initiatives).

5.2. Green initiatives and performance

The second area includes 16 papers and deals with the relationship between green initiatives and LSP performance
(Table 5). The analysis of papers highlights that green initiatives impact on three main performance types:
462 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

Table 4
Classification of green initiatives.

Authors and year Classification of green initiatives

Colicchia et al. (2013)
Lieb and Lieb (2010a)
Perotti et al. (2012)
Pieters et al. (2012)
Intra-organisational, inter-organisational
Administrative, analytical, transportation-related, other green initiatives
Green supply, distribution strategies and transportation, warehousing and green building, reverse logistics,
cooperation with customers, investment recovery, eco-design and packaging and internal management
Internal, external, Optimizing, innovating

– Environmental performance (14 papers), i.e. the alignment of the company with prescribed sustainable standards in terms
of compliance with regulations (e.g. ISO 14000), waste reduction and productivity.
– Economic performance (1 paper), i.e. the alignment between inter-organisational business processes and the achievement
of economic objectives (e.g. cost reduction, increase in revenues).
– Operational performance (3 papers), i.e. the alignment of the company with standard or prescribed indicators of process
efficiency and effectiveness (e.g. cycle time, productivity, flexibility).

Starting from the paper dealing with environmental, economic, and operational performance, Perotti et al. (2012) develop
a multiple case study to investigate the correlation between the adoption of green supply chain initiatives and the three
types of performance identified in a sample of 15 3PLs. Although the impact on performance is quite limited, environmental
and economic performance seem to be the areas predominantly influenced by green initiatives.
As for the 14 papers dealing with environmental performance, Colicchia et al., 2013 provide similar findings to those
obtained by Perotti et al. evaluating the impact of multiple green initiatives on environmental performance in a sample
of 10 LSPs. Rondinelli and Berry (2000) provide a conceptual model to analyse how the adoption of intermodality in transport
services has a significant impact on environmental performance. Ang-Olson and Schroeer (2002) explore how the different
strategies for freight trucking impact on environmental performance in terms of energy efficiency. Léonardi and
Baumgartner (2004) carry out a survey in a sample of 50 German LSPs to evaluate the improvement of CO2 efficiency due
to the adoption of scheduling systems. Baumgartner et al. (2008) develop a qualitative survey to investigate how comput-
erized routing and scheduling systems impact positively on the CO2 efficiency. Jumadi and Zailani (2010) analyse green ini-
tiatives, which need collaboration with customers, and show how they positively influence on firms’ environmental
performance in the logistics service industry in Malaysia. Vujanović et al. (2010) develop a single case study to analyse
the environmental performance of an LSP in terms of vehicle energy efficiency (VEE). Lai et al. (2011) investigate the ways
that many LSPs operating in the shipping industry manage the impact of their green initiatives to enhance their performance
and reduce their environmental damage. Ferguson (2011) conducts a multiple case study to analyse corporate social respon-
sibility and the adoption of green initiatives within DHL’s Asia-Pacific branch affecting environmental performance. The
main findings highlight the positive impact of the three major company programmes on the eco-efficiency management
of fleet and warehousing energy use. Moreover, advantages have been achieved in terms of increasing the environmental
awareness of employees and improving the commitment of both staff and management. Lammgård, 2012 highlights how
intermodality in road-rail transport allows LSP to reduce CO2 emissions and improve environmental performance.

Table 5
Papers dealing with the impact of green initiatives on performance.

LSP performance
Authors and year Environmental performance Economic performance Operational performance
Ang-Olson and Schroeer (2002)

Bai and Sarkis (2013) n

Baumgartner et al. (2008)

Colicchia et al. (2013)

Ferguson (2011)

Isaksson and Huge-Brodin (2013)

Jumadi and Zailani (2010)

Lai et al. (2011)

Lammgård (2012)

Léonardi and Baumgartner (2004)

Liimatainen et al. (2012)

Liimatainen et al. (2014)

Min and Ko (2008)

Perotti et al. (2012)



Rondinelli and Berry (2000)

Vujanović et al. (2010)

Total 14 1 3
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 463

Liimatainen et al. (2012) conduct an online survey involving 295 Finnish LSPs and the results highlight how formal agree-
ments among haulers, shippers and policy makers allow to improve environmental performance in terms of energy effi-
ciency. In the following years, Liimatainen et al. (2014) develop a new survey to replicate the Finnish LSP survey in
Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. An energy efficiency index (EEI) was defined to measure environmental performance and
compare the similar results obtained in the three countries. The findings show a wide adoption of low-cost actions (e.g.
idling avoidance, selecting the vehicle according to the cargo). Isaksson and Huge-Brodin (2013) explore how firm perfor-
mance is affected by green initiatives in a sample of six LSPs operating in Sweden. Authors identify three different patterns.
The first looks at the strategic point of view of green initiatives and the competitive awareness of development in the logis-
tics market. The second deals with the green knowledge-sharing process. The third shows how companies manage green
initiatives (including resources investment).
As for the papers focusing on operational performance, Bai and Sarkis (2013) develop a mathematical model using rough
set theory to measure LSP flexibility performance in reverse logistics. Similarly, also Min and Ko (2008) focus on reverse
logistics from the perspective of 3PLs. Using a genetic algorithm, the authors identify the optimal number and location of
repair services to manage more efficiently the product returns.
In summary, as far as the literature on the topic of green initiatives and performance is concerned, there are papers focusing
on the impact of green initiatives (e.g. intermodality, reverse logistics) on LSP performance, and papers dealing with the eval-
uation of performance. Concerning the impact of green initiatives on LSP performance, it needs to be analysed considering not
only three different levels of performance (environmental, economic and operational) but also market performance and
organisational performance. Therefore, from a content analysis of papers focusing on green initiatives affecting performance,
the need to further investigate the relationship between green initiatives and their impact on performance, taking into consider-
ation all the aspects of performance not analysed in literature (second gap) clearly emerges.
Regarding the papers on the evaluation of LSP performance, even though the authors consider some specific indexes (the
energy efficiency index, vehicle energy efficiency, CO2 efficiency) for measuring performance, they do not present an overall view
of a set of indexes integrating energy efficiency and environmental impact. The content analysis of the seven papers included
in this area thus shows the need for a systemic approach that includes the individual logistics from the company perspective for
evaluating sustainability performance (third gap).

5.3. Factors influencing the green initiatives adoption

This area includes 14 papers focusing on the factors influencing the green initiatives adoption. Content analysis of the
papers shows that the selected papers deal with the following two sub-topics:

– Drivers, factors positively affecting the adoption of green initiatives (13 papers).
– Barriers, that are factors affecting negatively the adoption of green initiatives (9 papers).

The number of papers coming under the two sub-topics identified is greater than 14 since the majority of papers analyzes
both the drivers and the barriers.
The 13 papers concerning the first sub-topic highlight eighteen drivers, which range from Regulations pressure (8 papers
out of 18) to Profitability (just 1 paper out of 18) (Table 6).
The 9 papers concerning the second sub-topic highlight twelve barriers (Regulations and standards, Investment costs,
Small size of firm, etc.) affecting the adoption of green initiatives (Table 7).
Tables 6 and 7 show that the literature identifies a large quantity of drivers and barriers affecting the adoption of green
initiatives, but no interpretative taxonomy of such drivers and barriers emerges. Nevertheless, as far as the drivers are
concerned, they may be classified into seven category: Human drivers (Quality of Human resources, Decision-makers atti-
tude, Desire to do the right thing); Contingency drivers (Organisation support, Company size, Environmental uncertainty);
Technical drivers (Technology compatibility, Knowledge accumulation); Relational drivers (Customers pressure, Role in the
supply chain); Regulation drivers (Government support, Regulations pressure, Innovation support); Market drivers (Compet-
itive pressure, Market Factors and competitiveness); and Benefit drivers (Image company, Advantageous perception,
Profitability). Regarding the twelve barriers, they may be divided into seven category: Contingency barriers (Small size of firm,
Industry organisation, Facilities, Environmental uncertainty); Technical barriers (Complexity of technology, Complexity of
green initiatives); Regulation Barriers (Regulations and standards); Market barriers (Pricing pressure); Blockage barriers
(Investment costs, Doubtful payback, Decrease in the quality of service); and Managerial barriers (Absence of a long-term
strategy).
In summary, content analysis of this area shows that the literature on the topic does not still offer an interpretive frame-
work and a shared definition for drivers and barriers of green initiatives. Specifically, no distinction emerges between ‘‘pure
drivers” (i.e. factors whose presence would have a positive impact on the green initiatives adoption, but their absence would
not hinder their adoption), ‘‘pure barriers” (i.e. factors whose presence would hinder the adoption of green initiatives, but
whose absence would not positively affect their adoption), ‘‘contextual drivers/barriers” (i.e. factors whose presence would
affect positively/negatively the adoption of green initiatives, but whose absence would positively hinder/affect their
adoption).
 464
P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470
Table 6
Papers dealing with drivers affecting the adoption of green initiatives.

Authors and years Quality of Decision- Desire to Organisation Company Environmental Technology Knowledge Customers Role in Government Regulations Innovation Competitive Market factors Image Profitability Advantageous
human makers do the support size uncertainty compatibility accumulation pressure the support pressure support pressure and perception
resources attitude right thing supply competitiveness
chain

Ho and Lin (2012)

Ho et al. (2009)



Ho et al. (2014)









Lieb and Lieb (2010b)





Lin and Ho (2008)





Lin and Ho (2011)






Maas et al. (2012)

Oberhofer and Dieplinger (2014)





Oberhofer and Fürst (2013)





Rossi et al. (2013)


Tacken et al. (2014)



Wong and Fryxell (2004)


Zailani et al. (2011)


Total 5 1 1 4 3 3 3 2 4 2 5 8 2 3 6 1 1 3
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470
Table 7
Papers dealing with barriers affecting the adoption of green initiatives.

Authors and year Investment Doubtful Decrease Pricing Industry Small Facilities Environmental Regulations Complexity of Complexity of Absence of
costs payback in the pressure organisation size uncertainty and standards technology green initiatives a long-term
quality of firm strategy
of service
Beškovnik and Jakomin (2010)


Ho and Lin (2012)

Ho et al. (2014)




Lin and Ho (2011)


Oberhofer and Dieplinger (2014)



Oberhofer and Fürst (2013)

Rossi et al. (2013)

Tacken et al. (2014)


Zailani et al. (2011)

Total 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1

465
466 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

In summary, this last point highlights the need for a clear definition of drivers and barriers, a consequent identification of
a set of factors that drive or hinder the adoption of green initiatives, a contextual classification and a more comprehensive
empirical investigation in the logistics service industry (fourth gap).

5.4. The customer perspective in the sustainable supply chain

The fourth area includes 12 papers and deals with the customer perspective and collaboration in purchasing more envi-
ronmentally sustainable LSP services (Table 8). Content analysis of the papers highlights three sub-areas:

– Papers dealing with the repercussion of environmental issues on logistics outsourcing (7 papers).
– Papers dealing with the inclusion of environmental issues in purchasing contracts (1 paper).
– Papers dealing with 3PL selection (4 papers).

Concerning the 7 papers dealing with the impact of environmental issues on logistics outsourcing, Facanha and Horvath
(2005) analyse two different scenarios adopting life-cycle assessment (LCA) in the automotive industry. In the first scenario,
logistics functions are internalized. In the second scenario, these functions are externalised to an LSP. The effects of out-
sourcing do not allow customers to improve energy utilisation. Björklund (2011) investigates the role of environmental fac-
tors influencing logistics outsourcing. These factors are categorized according to the specific actors involved (e.g. company’s
resources, image, internal activities management). Kudla (2012) develops a case study analysis in a sample of large (3) and
small and medium (5) European LSPs operating in the road transport industry to analyse how customers stimulate their
logistics service providers to adopt sustainable initiatives. Martinsen and Björklund (2012) analyse the impact of environ-
mental issues on the interface between customers and LSPs. They conduct a survey involving a sample of 55 LSPs and
103 customers. The main results highlight that surveyed LSPs are very sensitive to environmental issues. Customers, on
the other hand, seem to perceive a gap between the large quantity of environmental services offered by LSP and what they
demand. Large et al. (2013) carry out a survey on a sample of 750 purchase and logistics managers. Their results highlight
that despite the fact that customers are strongly influenced by ecological and social aspects, they do not stimulate their LSPs
to adopt both ecological and social initiatives. Lammgård and Andersson (2014) illustrate the degree of importance large
firms attribute to environmental issues when purchasing logistics and transportation services. The survey is conducted on
a sample of large shippers in Sweden. Pålsson and Kovács (2014) identify the role of customers as the pivotal driver of sup-
plier selection in logistics service industry. Also in this case the survey data were collected in Sweden.
For the paper dealing with the inclusion of environmental issues in purchasing contracts, Björklund and Forslund (2013) con-
duct a survey on a sample of LSPs located in Sweden. This paper aims to analyse the adoption of contracts for environmental
performance.
As far as the last group of 4 papers dealing with 3PL selection is concerned, Meade and Sarkis (2002) develop a model of
decision-making to investigate how the factors affecting the process of third-party reverse logistics selection are different
from those related to supplier selection. Efendigil et al. (2008) propose a holistic approach to evaluate and select the best
3PL, based on fuzzy logic and neural networks. Similarly, Kannan et al. (2009) illustrate a multi-criteria model for selecting
the most appropriate third-party reverse logistics provider (3PRLP) using a Fuzzy-TOPSIS approach. Wolf and Seuring (2010)
analyse a sample of three 3PLs and six customers to identify their selection criteria. These are still based on traditional per-
formance objectives (e.g. delivery time, quality, price), whereas environmental objectives seem to be neglected by selected
firms.

Table 8
Papers dealing with the customer perspective in the sustainable supply chain.

Authors and year Impact of environmental issues Inclusion of environmental issues LSP selection
on logistics outsourcing in purchasing contracts
Björklund (2011)

Björklund and Forslund (2013)

Efendigil et al. (2008)

Facanha and Horvath (2005)

Kannan et al. (2009)

Kudla (2012)

Lammgård and Andersson (2014)

Large et al. (2013)

Martinsen and Björklund (2012)

Meade and Sarkis (2002)

Pålsson and Kovács (2014)

Wolf and Seuring (2010)

Total 7 1 4
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 467

Table 9
Papers dealing with ICTs supporting green initiatives.

Authors and year RFID Carbon management systems

Iacob et al. (2013)

Kang et al. (2013)

Total 1 1

The content analysis of the fourth area highlights that the customer influences the adoption of green initiatives and the
purchasing decision-making process, but the papers included in this area do not analyse the way this influence translates in
the adoption of collaborative environmental initiatives.
In summary, the study highlights that the adoption of collaborative green initiatives based on a dyadic customer-LSP rela-
tionship could be a fertile area of investigation (fifth gap).

5.5. ICTs supporting green initiatives

The fifth area includes 2 papers analysing the importance of ICTs in supporting the adoption of green initiatives (Table 9).
Few studies have been published on the role of innovation and ICTs to support the adoption of sustainability initiatives by
logistics service companies. Iacob et al. (2013) propose a fuel-based carbon management system to measure CO2 emissions
in the logistics industry. This system is different from distance-based carbon management systems.
Similarly, Kang et al. (2013) analyse a real-time RFID-based system to monitor and measure CO2 emissions within the 3PL
industry. This system allows 3PLs to avoid carbon tax.
In summary, the content analysis of the fifth area highlights that the two papers focus on specific localisation tools (RFID)
or environmental management systems (fuel-based carbon management systems) used by logistics firms, but the analysis of
different categories of tools (e.g. tools supporting green initiatives of individual LSPs or tools supporting collaborative green
initiatives within the supply chain) is still neglected.
The analysis of this area highlights that the ICTs supporting green initiatives need a more comprehensive analysis high-
lighting the variety of tools used by LSPs. This issue requires a further study to analyse if the ICTs used by LSPs are appro-
priate to support their green initiatives (degree of alignment between ICTs and green initiatives) (sixth gap).

6. Conclusions and implications

This paper proposes a systematic literature review on the topic of environmental sustainability in the logistics service
industry, offering a panorama of the literature and has identified some literature gaps and future research opportunities.
The descriptive analysis provides a summary overview of the selected papers. In particular, this phase highlights a pos-
itive trend over recent years. Moreover, the distribution of papers by journal testifies that environmental sustainability
regards different research areas (logistics, supply chain management, and transportation; innovation management; information
systems; engineering). Concerning the research methodology, the majority of papers are based on surveys, with few papers
using models, case studies, and conceptual or mixed approaches.
The content analysis makes it possible to identify five investigated topic areas: Classification of green initiatives, Green
initiatives, and performance, Factors influencing the adoption of green initiatives, the customer perspective in the sustain-
able supply chain, ICTs supporting green initiatives. The most analysed topic is that of ‘‘factors affecting the adoption of green
initiatives”, whereas ‘‘ICTs supporting green initiatives” is a relatively unexplored topic area. The content analysis of these
five topic areas has made it possible to identify six main literature gaps. These gaps represent eight possible research ques-
tions to be investigated.
Starting from the first topic area (Classification of green initiatives), it emerges the need to analyse and classify the whole
set of initiatives affecting a single LSP or multiple supply chain actors to improve their sustainability efforts (first gap). This
gap suggests the first research question concerning the identification of an interpretative taxonomy of green initiatives sup-
porting environmental sustainability strategies:

RQ1: How can be identified a comprehensive taxonomy of green initiatives supporting LSPs in the field of environmental
sustainability?

The second topic area (Green initiatives and performance) has shown the need to analyse further the impact of green ini-
tiatives on performance, considering the whole set of performance parameters not analysed in the literature (second gap).
The second research question that arises then is:

RQ2: What is the impact of green initiatives on LSP’s environmental, economic, operational, market and organisational
performance?
468 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

Furthermore, this second topic area has shown the need for a systemic approach that includes the individual logistics
company’s point of view for the assessment of both energy efficiency and the environmental impact of green initiatives
on a firm’s performance (third gap). This gap allows the identification the third research question:

RQ3: How can an LSP’s sustainability performance be assessed in terms of both energy efficiency and the environmental
impact of green initiatives?

The third topic area of study (Factors affecting the adoption of green initiatives) has highlighted the necessity for a clear
definition of drivers and barriers, the consequent identification of a set of factors that drive or hinder the adoption of green
initiatives, contextual classification and a more comprehensive empirical investigation of the logistics service industry
(fourth gap). In addition, it seems important to see differences between drivers and barriers affecting long-distance LSP
and urban LSP, as this urban focus includes more policy making and regulatory questions relevant for the external impacts.
From this gap it is possible to formulate the fourth and fifth research questions:

RQ4: What are the factors influencing the adoption of green initiatives?
RQ5: How do factors influencing the adoption of green initiatives act as drivers and/or barriers?

The fourth topic area (the customer perspective in the sustainable supply chain) has highlighted that the adoption of collab-
orative green initiatives based on the dyadic customer-3PL relationship is scarcely analysed (fifth gap). The sixth relevant
research question is:

RQ6: How do dyadic customer-3PL relationships support the adoption of collaborative green initiatives?

The content analysis of the fifth topic area (ICTs supporting green initiatives) shows that the ICTs supporting green initia-
tives need a more comprehensive analysis in order to study the whole set of tools used by LSPs to improve their environ-
mental behaviour. This issue requires further study regarding the alignment between ICTs used by LSPs and the green
initiatives they are meant to support (sixth gap). From this gap the following two research questions may be formulated:

RQ7: How do ICTs support the adoption of green initiatives?

RQ8: What is the degree of alignment between ICTs and the green initiatives they are meant to support?

These eight research questions identify some possible topic areas in the field of environmental sustainability in the logis-
tics service industry. These areas of investigation need to take into consideration not only the individual LSP, but also the
dyadic customer- LSP relationship.

References

Ang-Olson, J., Schroeer, W., 2002. Energy efficiency strategies for freight trucking potential impact on fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions. Transp. Res.
Rec. 1815 (1), 11–18.
Antonelli, C., Geuna, A., Steinmueller, W.E., 2000. Information and communication technologies and the production, distribution and use of knowledge. Int.
J. Technol. Manage. 20, 72–94.
Bai, C., Sarkis, J., 2013. Flexibility in reverse logistics, a framework and evaluation approach. J. Cleaner Prod. 47, 306–318.
Baumgartner, M., Léonardi, J., Krusch, O., 2008. Improving computerized routing and scheduling and vehicle telematics, a qualitative survey. Transp. Res. D
Transp. Environ. 13 (6), 377–382.
Beškovnik, B., Jakomin, L., 2010. Challenges of green logistics in southeast Europe. Promet-Traffic Transp. 22 (2), 147–155.
Björklund, M., 2011. Influence from the business environment on environmental purchasing - drivers and hinders of purchasing green transportation
services. J. Purchas. Supply Manage. 17 (1), 11–22.
Björklund, M., Forslund, H., 2013. The inclusion of environmental performance in transport contracts. Manage. Environ. Quality 24 (2), 214–227.
Carter, C.R., Easton, P.L., 2011. Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and future directions. Int. J. Phys. Distribut. Logistics Manage. 41 (1), 46–62.
Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., Esposito, E., Raffa, M., 2016. The revolution of crowdfunding in social knowledge economy: literature review and identification
of business models. Adv. Sci. Lett. 22, 1666–1669.
Colicchia, C., Marchet, G., Melacini, M., Perotti, S., 2013. Building environmental sustainability: empirical evidence from Logistics Service Providers. J. Clean.
Prod. 59 (15), 197–209.
Davarzani, H., Fahimnia, B., Bell, M., Sarkis, J., 2016. Greening ports and maritime logistics: a review. Transp. Res. D: Transp. Environ. 48, 473–487.
Demartini, C., 2013. Performance Management Systems. A literature review. Part of the series Contributions to Management Science, 55–88.
Dhakal, M., Smith, M.H., Newbery, R., 2016. Secondary market: a significant aspect in reverse logistics and sustainability. Int. J. Social Sustain. Econ. Soc.
Cultural Context 12 (1), 24–35.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P., 2012. Management Research. SAGE Publications, London.
Efendigil, T., Önüt, S., Kongar, E., 2008. A holistic approach for selecting third-party reverse logistics provider in the presence of vagueness. Comput. Ind. Eng.
54 (2), 269–287.
Esposito, E., Mastroianni, M., 2001. Information technology and personal computers: the relational life cycle. Technovation 22, 41–50.
Facanha, C., Horvath, A., 2005. Environmental assessment of logistics outsourcing. J. Manage. Eng. 21 (1), 27–37.
Fahimnia, B., Sarkis, J., Davarzani, H., 2015. Green supply chain management: a review and bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 162, 101–114.
Ferguson, D., 2011. CSR in Asian logistics: operationalisation within DHL (Thailand). J. Manage. Develop. 30 (10), 985–999.
Foster, S.T., Scott, E.S., Dunn, S.C., 2000. The impact of customer contact on environmental initiatives for service firms. Int. J. Operat. Prod. Manage. 20 (2),
187–203.
Garrigos-Simon, F.J., Lapiedra Alcami, R., Barbera Ribera, T., 2012. Social networks and Web 3.0: their impact on the management and marketing of
organizations. Manage. Decis. 50, 1880–1890.
 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470 469

Gunasekaran, A., Irani, Z., Choy, K.-L., Filippi, L., Papadopoulos, T., 2015. Performance measures and metrics in outsourcing decisions: a review for research
and applications. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 161, 153–166.
Ho, Y.H., Lin, C.Y., 2012. An empirical study on Taiwanese logistics companies’ attitudes toward environmental management practices. Adv. Manage. Appl.
Econ. 2 (4), 223–241.
Ho, Y.H., Lin, C.Y., Chiang, S.H., 2009. Organizational determinants of green innovation implementation in the logistics industry. Int. J. Organ. Innov. 2 (1), 3–
12.
Ho, Y.H., Lin, C.Y., Tsai, J.S., 2014. An empirical study on organizational infusion of green practices in Chinese logistics companies. J. Econ. Soc. Stud. 4 (2),
159–189.
Iacob, M.E., Van Sinderen, M.J., Steenwijk, M., Verkroost, P., 2013. Towards a reference architecture for fuel-based carbon management systems in the
logistics industry. Inform. Syst. Front. 15 (5), 725–745.
Isaksson, K., Huge-Brodin, M., 2013. Understanding efficiencies behind logistics service providers’ green offerings. Manage. Res. Rev. 36 (3), 216–238.
Jumadi, H., Zailani, S., 2010. Integrating green innovation in logistics service towards logistics services sustainability: a conceptual paper. Environ. Res. J. 4
(4), 261–271.
Kang, Y.S., Youm, S., Lee, Y.H., Rhee, J., 2013. RFID-based CO2 emissions allocation in the third-party logistics industry. J. Food Agric. Environ. 11 (3–4), 1550–
1557.
Kannan, G., Murugesan, P., Senthil, P., Haq, A.N., 2009. Multicriteria group decision making for third-party reverse logistics service providers in the supply
chain model using fuzzy TOPSIS for transportation services. Int. J. Serv. Technol. Manage. 11 (2), 162–181.
Krippendorff, K., 2013. Content Analysis an Introduction to Its Methodology (third ed.). SAGE Publications.
Kudla, N.L., 2012. Sustainability in shipper-logistics service provider relationships, a tentative taxonomy based on agency theory and stimulus-response
analysis. J. Purchas. Supply Manage. 18, 218–231.
Lai, K.H., Lun, Y.H.V., Wong, C.W.Y., Cheng, T.C.E., 2011. Green shipping practices in the shipping industry: conceptualization, adoption, and implications.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 55 (6), 631–638.
Lammgård, C., 2012. Intermodal train services: a business challenge and a measure for decarbonisation for logistics service providers. Res. Transp. Business
Manage. 5, 48–56.
Lammgård, C., Andersson, D., 2014. Environmental considerations and trade-offs in purchasing of transportation services. Res. Transp. Business Manage. 10,
45–52.
Large, R.O., Kramer, N., Hartmann, R.K., 2013. Procurement of logistics services and sustainable development in Europe: fields of activity and empirical
results. J. Purchas. Supply Manage. 19 (3), 122–133.
Léonardi, J., Baumgartner, M., 2004. CO2 efficiency in road freight transportation, status quo, measures and potential. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 9 (6),
451–464.
Lieb, K.J., Lieb, R.C., 2010a. Environmental sustainability in the third-party logistics (3PL) industry. Int. J. Phys. Distribut. Log. Manage. 40 (7), 524–533.
Lieb, R.C., Lieb, K.J., 2010b. The North American third-party logistics industry in 2008, the providers CEO perspective. Transp. J. 49 (2), 53–65.
Liimatainen, H., Nykänen, L., Arvidsson, N., Hovi, I.B., Jensen, T.C., Østli, V., 2014. Energy efficiency of road freight hauliers - a Nordic comparison. Energy
Policy 67, 378–387.
Liimatainen, H., Stenholm, P., Tapio, P., McKinnon, A., 2012. Energy efficiency practices among road freight hauliers. Energy Policy 50, 833–842.
Lin, C.Y., Ho, Y.H., 2008. An empirical study on logistics service providers’ intention to adopt green innovations. J. Technol. Manage. Innovat. 3 (1), 17–26.
Lin, C.Y., Ho, Y.H., 2011. Determinants of green practice adoption for logistics companies in China. J. Business Ethics 98 (1), 67–83.
Liu, X., Grant, D.B., McKinnon, A.C., Feng, Y., 2010. An empirical examination of the contribution of capabilities to the competitiveness of logistics service
providers: a perspective from China. Int. J. Phys. Distribut. Log. Manage. 40 (10), 847–866.
Maas, S., Schuster, T., Hartmann, E., 2012. Pollution prevention and service stewardship strategies in the third-party logistics industry, effects on firm
differentiation and the moderating role of environmental communication. Business Strat. Environ. 23 (1), 38–55.
Marchet, G., Melacini, M., Perotti, S., 2014. Environmental sustainability in logistics and freight transportation: a literature review and research agenda. J.
Manuf. Technol. Manage. 25 (6), 775–811.
Martinsen, U., Björklund, M., 2012. Matches and gaps in the green logistics market. Int. J. Phys. Distribut. Log. Manage. 42 (6), 562–583.
Mayring, P., 2000. Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qual. Soc. Res. 1(2), art. 20.
McKinnon, A.C., 2005. The economic and environmental benefits of increasing maximum truck weight: the British experience. Transp. Res. D: Transp.
Environ. 10 (1), 77–95.
Meade, L., Sarkis, J., 2002. A conceptual model for selecting and evaluating third-party reverse logistics providers. Supply Chain Manage.: Int. J. 7 (5), 283–
295.
Min, H., Ko, H.J., 2008. The dynamic design of a reverse logistics network from the perspective of third-party logistics service providers. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
113, 176–192.
Oberhofer, P., Dieplinger, M., 2014. Sustainability in the transport and logistics sector: lacking environmental measures. Business Strat. Environ. 23, 236–
253.
Oberhofer, P., Fürst, E., 2013. Sustainable development in the transport sector: influencing environmental behaviour and performance. Business Strat.
Environ. 22 (6), 374–389.
Pålsson, H., Kovács, G., 2014. Reducing transportation emissions: a reaction to stakeholder pressure or a strategy to increase competitive advantage. Int. J.
Phys. Distribut. Log. Manage. 44 (4), 283–304.
Pearce, D.W., Turner, R.K., 1989. Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Perotti, S., Zorzini, M., Cagno, E., Micheli, M.J.L., 2012. Green supply chain practices and company performance: the case of 3PLs in Italy. Int. J. Phys. Distribut.
Log. Manage. 42 (7), 640–672.
Petticrew, M., Roberts, H., 2006. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences. Blackwell Publishing, Malden.
Pieters, R., Glockner, H.H., Omta, O., Weijers, S., 2012. Dutch logistics service providers and sustainable physical distribution: searching for focus. Int. Food
Agribusiness Manage. Rev. 15, 107–126.
Pittaway, L., Robertson, R., Munir, K., Denyer, D., Neely, D., 2004. Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence. Int. J. Manage. Rev. 5–6
(3–4), 137–168.
Rondinelli, D., Berry, M., 2000. Multimodal transportation, logistics, and the environment, managing interactions in a global economy. Eur. Manage. J. 18 (4),
398–410.
Rossi, S., Colicchia, C., Cozzolino, A., Christopher, M., 2013. The logistics service providers in eco-efficiency innovation: an empirical study. Supply Chain
Manage. Int. J. 18 (6), 583–603.
Seuring, S., Müller, M., 2008. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J. Cleaner Prod. 16 (15), 1699–
1710.
Su, B., Heshmati, A., Geng, Y., Yu, X., 2013. A review of the circular economy in China: moving from rhetoric to implementation. J. Cleaner Prod. 42, 215–227.
Sutton, P., 2004. <http://www.green-innovations.asn.au/A-Perspective-on-Environmental-Sustainability.pdf>.
Tacken, J., Rodrigues, V.S., Mason, R., 2014. Examining CO2e reduction within the German logistics sector. Int. J. Log. Manage. 25 (1), 54–84.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., Smart, P., 2003. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic
review. Br. J. Manag. 14 (3), 207–222.
Vachon, S., Klassen, R.D., 2008. Environmental management and manufacturing performance: the role of collaboration in the supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
111 (2), 299–315.
470 P. Centobelli et al. / Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 454–470

van Hoek, R.I., Johnson, M., 2010. Sustainability and energy efficiency. Research implication from an academic roundtable and two case examples. Int. J.
Phys. Distribut. Log. Manage. 40 (1–2), 148–158.
Vujanović, D., Mijailović, R., Momčilović, V., Papić, V., 2010. Energy efficiency as a criterion in the vehicle fleet management process. Therm. Sci. 14 (4), 865–
878.
Wolf, C., Seuring, S., 2010. Environmental impacts as buying criteria for third party logistical services. Int. J. Phys. Distribut. Log. Manage. 40 (1–2), 84–102.
Wong, L.T., Fryxell, G.E., 2004. Stakeholder influences on environmental management practices: a study of fleet operations in Honk Kong (SAR), China.
Transp. J. 43 (4), 22–35.
Zailani, S., Amran, A., Jumadi, H., 2011. Green innovation adoption among logistics service providers in Malaysia: an exploratory study on the managers’
perceptions. Int. Business Manage. 5 (3), 104–113.
Zhu, H., 2006. Strategic green supply chain based on circular economy - a new view for sustainable manufacturing in china. J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. 28 (1),
289–292.
Zhu, Q., Geng, Y., Lai, K.H., 2011. Environmental supply chain cooperation and its effect on the circular economy practice-performance relationship among
Chinese manufacturers. J. Ind. Ecol. 15 (3), 402–419.