BY UNI SALLNÄS, VENDELA SANTÉN, AND SARA ROGERSON
How sustainable is today’s fast e-commerce distribution? And to what extent do customers need fast e-commerce deliveries? In the logistics system, there is a link between speed and less sustainable transportation in the form of increased energy consumption—for example, due to higher speeds, lower load factors, or more transportation resources in the system.
In addition, a tight schedule allows for less flexibility in coordinating and consolidating shipments. It is clear that demands for speed put pressure on the logistics system, and above all, it is far from obvious that the speed currently found in e-commerce systems is necessary from the customer’s perspective. In a new study, researchers from Linköping University and RISE Research Institutes of Sweden have examined consumers’ time expectations and views on sustainable delivery options in e-commerce.
The Development of Sustainable Delivery Options
One way to address the issue of sustainable delivery options for e-retailers and logistics companies is to clearly indicate to consumers which options are in some way more sustainable or ”better for the environment” than others. Many e-retailers have begun to explore these possibilities, as discussed in previous articles in Supply Chain Effect (e.g., Issues 4 and 6, 2022), and the issue remains highly relevant in the retail industry. This is evident not least in the delivery options that have been under development in recent years and are now appearing at the checkout pages of several e-retailers—that is, where we as consumers can choose a delivery option. This applies, for example, to the Nordic Swan Ecolabel for e-commerce deliveries and the industry agreement ”Fossil-Free Delivery.” On several occasions, we as researchers have systematically visited the websites of Sweden’s largest e-retailers, added items to our shopping carts, and documented which delivery options are offered to consumers. The results clearly point to an increase in the number of e-retailers offering some type of sustainable delivery option; in 2021, we noted that 18 percent of e-retailers had one or more sustainable delivery options, while the corresponding survey in 2024 showed 38 percent. The same studies revealed few connections between sustainable delivery options and delivery times. More specifically, we could not see any clear signs that sustainable delivery options resulted in longer delivery times. It was also the case that some of the options labeled as sustainable could involve very short delivery times, such as ”tomorrow.”.
Time as a Key Aspect of Sustainable Deliveries
Expectations for speed are rising, and a delivery time of 1–3 days appears to be the norm, as we have also seen in the website surveys we conducted. However, this emphasis on speed stands in stark contrast to research showing that longer time frames allow for better planning and lead to more efficient and sustainable logistics flows. There are many questions surrounding time in e-commerce. Who is driving this rush for speed? Is it the e-retailers who want to compete for the fastest deliveries with consumers? Is it the logistics companies pushing to be chosen by e-retailers? Or is it perhaps consumers who are demanding fast deliveries?
Fast or sustainable?
To shed light on the issue of time and sustainable e-commerce, a project funded by the Swedish Trade Council is currently underway: ”Fast-paced e-commerce—the opposite of sustainable e-commerce?” In the remainder of this article, we would like to present the results of a diary study conducted as part of the project, in which fifteen consumers participated. These carefully selected consumers kept a web-based diary for one month. Daily reflections were collected, and the study concluded with a summary interview with each respondent. By following a number of consumers, we were able to map out all the time-related aspects they experienced that could potentially influence the sustainability of e-commerce distribution. It was also of interest to determine just how aware consumers really were of the delivery options presented at e-retailers’ checkout pages. Below, we present parts of our findings.
Fast Delivery Times and Differences Among Consumer Types
The results show that fast delivery times are sometimes important to consumers, but by no means always. For those who had priorities other than time, delivery time did not appear to be a deciding factor when choosing a delivery option. This is interesting given that the literature suggests that short delivery times can hinder efficient logistics and lead, among other things, to lower load factors during transport. Therefore, there may be an opportunity for e-retailers to guide these consumers toward more efficient logistics solutions—and thus also toward better environmental alternatives, such as slower deliveries. There are also times when consumers need their goods quickly. For these consumers, it is important that e-retailers offer sufficiently fast and reliable delivery. If delivery takes too long, these consumers may choose to shop elsewhere—a risk e-retailers are reasonably unwilling to take. For environmentally conscious e-retailers, these different consumer types could represent a delicate balancing act between, on the one hand, rewarding consumers who choose slower delivery options and, on the other hand, being able to offer the fast deliveries that certain consumers expect.
Spoiled consumers?
Another interesting aspect related to delivery times is that several of the consumers in the diary study described that, even though they were not in a hurry to receive the product, they still wanted their order quickly after deciding to purchase a product. One of the respondents described their expectation of speed as follows:
”I think it’s a misperceived sense of importance. After all, it’s rare that you really ’absolutely must’ have something. When you want something, you usually want it right away—even if you don’t actually need it right away.”
As mentioned above, there is an ongoing discussion that we as researchers often encounter when talking to e-retailers, logistics companies, and consumers, and it revolves around the question, ”Who is pushing for such fast delivery?” Sometimes it seems as though everyone is blaming everyone else, and it’s not uncommon for consumers to be accused of demanding fast deliveries, while e-retailers and logistics companies are doing everything they can to meet those demands. However, the diary study shows that far from all consumers care particularly much about delivery time, but also that there is a built-up expectation that it must not take ”too long.” It’s easy to see how consumers have become ”spoiled” by the fast delivery times that are offered.
Are time windows more important than delivery times?
Interestingly, the diary studies revealed that consumers viewed time windows as extremely relevant to their choice of delivery options, whether for pickup or home delivery. By “time windows,” we mean either the time interval during which a home delivery is scheduled to take place, or the time window during which packages can be picked up from pickup locations and package lockers. Above all, it was the awareness of time windows among many consumers that surprised us; consumers often made conscious choices, such as opting out of home deliveries because they had to accommodate the logistics company’s time window, or actively choosing a package locker when they knew the opening hours fit well with the rest of their lives. When it came to pickup in relation to delivery windows, some preferred parcel lockers while others preferred parcel pickup locations, and it was clear that there were individual preferences and differing opinions among consumers. In summary, the results show that consumers are aware of the time windows available for the various delivery options and that these influence their choice of delivery location—a fact that may not be immediately apparent when looking at e-retailers’ checkout pages. Based on the results of the diary study, it also appears that time windows are more important to consumers when choosing a delivery option than the exact delivery times offered by retailers.
Consumer shipments—an important part of e-commerce distribution
Several research studies show that consumers’ trips to pick up deliveries can have a significant impact on the environment in e-commerce distribution. Among other factors, the choice of transportation method plays a role; for example, picking up a package on foot or by bike has a smaller environmental impact than picking it up by car. Coordinating errands is another key factor; from an environmental perspective, the worst thing a consumer can do is drive to pick up a package when that is the only reason for the trip. It’s better to combine it with other errands so that you don’t have to make a separate car trip for each one.
Coordinates with other matters
What stood out in the diary study was that consumers made an effort to coordinate package pickups with other errands. In many cases, it may not have been environmental considerations that led consumers to think this way, but their behavior nonetheless appears to be consistent with a relatively lower environmental impact. Although the study’s sample size was small, it is noteworthy that consumers, with few exceptions, seemed immediately reluctant to make an extra trip just to pick up an e-commerce package. This applied to both urban and rural consumers and, to some extent, contradicts what we wrote above—that consumers want their packages quickly once they’ve ordered an item, regardless of how urgent it actually is. For even though many wanted to pick up their orders quickly, they usually coordinated the pickup with other errands.
Reminders have little effect
One factor that could conceivably influence consumer behavior is the reminders that consumers often receive to help them remember to pick up their packages. One hypothesis our research group had at the start of the project was that these reminders might cause consumers to feel stressed and, as a result, pick up their packages sooner than they otherwise would have. This could lead to perceived stress and cause people to not coordinate the trip with other errands, but instead make a separate trip solely to pick up the package. In the diary study, however, the reminders were not perceived as negative nor did they significantly influence the behavior of the participating consumers.
Few people considered the environmental aspect—low willingness to pay
The diary study also took into account consumers” willingness to choose eco-labeled delivery options. These could include the Nordic Swan Ecolabel, options labeled ”fossil-free delivery,” or other variations. Somewhat surprisingly, only a few of the consumers in the study had considered the delivery options linked in any way to the environment at the e-retailers” checkout pages. During the interviews, it emerged that some consumers had a vague recollection of some kind of wording linked to an “eco-friendly option,” but few had actually chosen that option. When we asked for general reflections following the diary study, one of the respondents, for example, replied:
”The thing is, I don’t care as much about the environment as I’d like to.”.
The same respondent—and several others—emphasized that price is the deciding factor, and they often stressed emphatically that they would not be willing to pay more for an eco-friendly option. Although only a few consumers paid attention to eco-labeled options, several said they were interested in sustainability and tried to act accordingly.
Who are these sustainable deliveries intended for?
The study suggests that it is more common for people to make other trade-offs—such as combining pickups with other errands or avoiding returns—for environmental reasons. This may seem somewhat discouraging for companies that have worked hard to implement initiatives such as the Nordic Swan Ecolabel and ”Fossil-Free Delivery.” Here, it’s worth considering who these types of delivery options are intended for. Are they primarily intended to give consumers confidence that the delivery meets certain environmental sustainability standards? Or are they rather intended to allow e-retailers and/or logistics companies to use them as a way to market themselves to consumers? There is probably no objectively correct answer here, and regardless, we believe it is important to continue working on these types of delivery options. However, it seems there is still some way to go before eco-labeled delivery options actually help consumers make the most sustainable delivery choices, and perhaps there is also reason to consider how the time factor should be incorporated as additional guidance for consumers’ selection of sustainable delivery options.
Further research
The diary study shows that there is considerable variation in how consumers perceive time, and it may not be possible to meet these different expectations with a one-size-fits-all solution. Perhaps the latest technological advances in AI could be used to tailor delivery options to individual consumer behavior? This would be an interesting area to explore in greater depth in future studies. Furthermore, although the study we have presented here does not prove how different time-related factors affect sustainability in e-commerce, it does provide interesting insights for the next phase of the research project. This includes linking the identified time-related aspects to the perspectives of e-retailers and logistics companies. If you represent a company that can contribute insights related to the relationship between time and sustainability in e-commerce distribution, please feel free to contact any of us, and we’d be happy to discuss this further. We believe that ”fast e-commerce” warrants further discussion, and the research findings we’ve shared so far help us shed light on some interesting aspects of time and sustainability. We’d like to see the continued development of e-commerce that benefits both businesses and consumers, but that can also go hand in hand with a sustainable future. Here, we believe the time aspect must continue to be questioned in order to challenge old assumptions.
Uni Sallnäs is an associate professor of environmental logistics in the Department of Logistics and Quality Development at Linköping University.
Vendela Santén, Researcher in Maritime Logistics, RISE.
Sara Rogerson, Logistics Researcher, RISE.
