Impacts of Behavioral, Organizational, and Spatial Factors on the Carbon Footprint of Traditional Retail and E-commerce in the Paris Region

15Citations
Citations of this article
54Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Carbon footprint assessment of retail is necessary to optimize procurement strategies and adopt sustainable shopping habits. However, estimating carbon footprints is a complex task, given the diversity of existing distribution channels. Average values for carbon emissions of “conventional” retail (i.e., purchasing and receiving the product directly at the physical point of sale) found in most studies mask a heterogeneous reality: different retail strategies entail diverse shopping behavior for consumers, as well as varied procurement processes for outlets. In this paper, we propose a methodology to assess greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of different distribution systems related to the consumption of goods in the Paris Region by coupling traditional transport modeling with a life-cycle assessment (LCA) approach. We model and compare six distribution systems, including five traditional retail formats (hypermarkets, supermarkets, small generalist retail, small food retail, and small nonfood retail) and E-commerce home deliveries. Our model includes warehouse activity, shop and home delivery, shop energy consumption, consumer mobility, and goods packaging. Overall, we conclude that E-commerce emits fewer GHG emissions than retail outlets per kilogram of product purchased. This result is in line with the existing literature on the topic. However, the carbon footprint varies greatly within the case study depending on the characteristics of the logistics procurement processes of outlets, the behavior of shoppers, and spatial characteristics.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Beziat, A., & François, C. (2024). Impacts of Behavioral, Organizational, and Spatial Factors on the Carbon Footprint of Traditional Retail and E-commerce in the Paris Region. Environmental Science and Technology, 58(17), 7325–7334. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c01901

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free