4.6 Article

Digital Twins: A Critical Discussion on Their Potential for Supporting Policy-Making and Planning in Urban Logistics

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 12, Issue 24, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su122410623

Keywords

digital twins; urban freight; living lab; behavioural models; policy; planning

Funding

  1. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [861598]
  2. SNAPSHOT project from National Research Council Norway [303094]
  3. project AIM Linea di Attivita 3-Mobilita sostenibile: Trasporti under the programme PON Ricerca e Innovazione 2014-2020-Fondo Sociale Europeo, Azione 1.2 Attrazione e mobilita internazionale dei ricercatori [CUP E66C18001380007]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Poor logistics efficiency, due to low load factors caused by high demand fragmentation, will have relevant negative consequences for cities in terms of pollution, congestion and overall city liveability. Policy-makers should equip themselves with appropriate tools to perform reliable, comprehensive and timely analyses of urban logistics scenarios, also considering upcoming (i) technological changes, (ii) business model evolutions and (iii) spatial-temporal changes these innovations will produce. This paper discusses the Digital Twin (DT) concept, illustrating the role it might play and clarifying how to properly conceive it with respect to urban freight transport policy-making and planning. The main message is that without a sound theory and knowledge with respect to the relationships linking contextual reality and choice/behaviour, it is not possible to make sense of what happens in the real world. Therefore, the joint use of behavioural and simulation models should characterise a DT within a Living Lab approach so to stimulate effective, well-informed and participated planning processes, but also to forecast both behaviour and reactions to structural changes and policy measures implementations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available