Carbon Management Integration at Road Freight Service Providers

 Carbon Management Integration at Road Freight Service Providers –
Contingency- and Learning-based Analysis of Integration Alternatives
DISSERTATION
of the University of St. Gallen,
School of Management,
Economics, Law, Social Sciences
and International Affairs
to obtain the title of
Doctor of Philosophy in Management
submitted by
Markus Gogolin
from
Germany
Approved on the application of
Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Stölzle
and
Prof. Dr. Ulrich Alois Weidmann
Dissertation no. 4271
KDD Kompetenzzentrum Digital-Druck GmbH, Nürnberg 2014
The University of St. Gallen, School of Management, Economics, Law, Social and
International Affairs hereby consents to the printing of the present dissertation, without
hereby expressing any opinion on the views herein expressed.
St. Gallen, May 19, 2014
The President:
Prof. Dr. Thomas Bieger
Vorwort
Die vorliegende Dissertation ist das Ergebnis meiner Forschungstätigkeit am Lehrstuhl für
Logistikmanagement der Universität St. Gallen (LOG-HSG). Die Motivation zur Untersuchung
des Themas „Carbon Management Integration at Road Freight Service Providers“ entstand im
Rahmen meiner Arbeit an den diversen Projektierungen: „GreenCart”, „GreenTool” und „Eco
Performance Award“. Die praktischen Herausforderungen der Unternehmen, das CO2Management zu greifen und im Unternehmen zielgerichtet umzusetzen, haben mich dazu
motiviert, dieses Thema wissenschaftlich zu untersuchen.
Dieses Vorwort möchte ich nutzen, um all denen zu danken, die mich während meiner
Dissertationszeit unterstützt haben.
An erster Stelle möchte ich Herrn Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Stölzle (LOG-HSG) für die intensive
fachliche und persönliche Betreuung der Dissertation sowie die Begleitung meiner
Praxisprojekte danken. Ebenso gilt mein Dank Herrn Prof. Dr. Ulrich Alois Weidmann (ETH
Zürich) für die Übernahme des Koreferats. Einen grossen Dank möchte ich auch an Herrn Dr.
Thorsten Klaas-Wissing (LOG-HSG) richten. Durch die Einbringung seiner Ideen und dem
konstruktiven fachlichen Austausch, hat er massgeblich zum Erfolg der Dissertation
beigetragen.
Einen besonderen Dank möchte ich an meine Kollegen vom LOG-HSG aussprechen, die mich
durch zahlreiche Diskussionen und Anregung fachlich bei der Dissertation unterstützt haben,
mit denen ich aber auch viele schöne private Momente erleben durfte, besonders hervorheben
möchte ich dabei meinen Kollegen und Freund Tim Germann.
Diese Arbeit wäre nicht möglich gewesen, ohne die Bereitschaft zahlreicher
Unternehmensvertreter, die sich für Interviews und Workshops zur Verfügung gestellt haben.
Für ihre kostbare Zeit und die Offenheit sowie das Engagement möchte ich mich daher sehr
herzlich bedanken.
Mein grösster Dank gilt schliesslich meinen Eltern Barbara und Walter Gogolin, die mich stets
in allen Belangen unterstützt und mir den nötigen Rückhalt für das Gelingen dieser Arbeit
gegeben haben. Unschätzbarer Dank gilt meiner Frau Jeanette Gogolin, die mich mit ihrer
liebevollen und unermüdlichen Art immer wieder auffing und in arbeitsintensiven Phasen stets
motivierte.
St. Gallen, im Juli 2014
Markus Gogolin
I
Table of Content
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ V List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. VII List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. VIII Summary ...................................................................................................................................... IX Zusammenfassung.......................................................................................................................... X A Introduction: Mounting Requirements to Manage Carbon Emissions ..................................... 1 I Managerial Relevance ....................................................................................................... 3 II Theoretical Relevance ....................................................................................................... 9 III Research Objectives and Questions ................................................................................ 16 IV Scientific-Theoretical Positioning ................................................................................... 18 V Thesis Outline.................................................................................................................. 22 B Development of the Research Framework ............................................................................. 25 I Theoretical Perspective of Carbon Management ............................................................ 26 1 Conceptual Background ............................................................................................... 26 1.1 Understanding “Carbon Management” ................................................................... 26 1.1.1 Methodology of the Literature Review ............................................................ 30 1.1.2 Research Map of Carbon Management ........................................................... 33 1.2 Understanding “Integration” ................................................................................... 41 1.3 Understanding “Road Freight Service Providers” .................................................. 46 1.4 Synthesis ................................................................................................................. 49 2 Theory Selection .......................................................................................................... 49 2.1 Theories Compatible with the Research Field of CM Integration .......................... 50 2.2 Selection Criteria..................................................................................................... 53 2.3 Evaluation and Choice of Theories ......................................................................... 53 2.4 Introduction to Contingency Theory ....................................................................... 56 2.5 Introduction to Organizational Learning Theory .................................................... 58 2.6 Contingency Based-Framework for Analysis ......................................................... 62 3 Synthesis ...................................................................................................................... 67 II Practical Perspective of Carbon Management ................................................................ 68 1 Empirical Research Setting .......................................................................................... 68 1.1 Case Selection ......................................................................................................... 72 1.2 Data Collection ....................................................................................................... 74 1.3 Data Preparation and Analysis ................................................................................ 78 2 Case Analysis ............................................................................................................... 80 2.1 RFSP I ..................................................................................................................... 82 2.2 RFSP II .................................................................................................................... 84 2.3 RFSP III .................................................................................................................. 86 2.4 RFSP IV .................................................................................................................. 87 II
2.5 2.6 2.7 RFSP V ................................................................................................................... 89 RFSP VI .................................................................................................................. 90 RFSP VII ................................................................................................................. 91 3 Case Synthesis ............................................................................................................. 93 III Consolidation of the Results – Research Framework ..................................................... 96 C Cornerstones of Carbon Management at Road Freight Service Providers ........................... 100 I Carbon Accounting........................................................................................................ 100 1 Application of Standards............................................................................................ 101 2 Setting Company-specific Boundaries....................................................................... 103 3 Capturing Energy Consumption and Calculation Carbon Emissions ........................ 107 4 Allocation of Carbon Emissions ................................................................................ 110 5 Synthesis .................................................................................................................... 113 II Carbon Management Process ........................................................................................ 114 1 Planning ..................................................................................................................... 114 1.1 Planning Context ................................................................................................... 116 1.2 Target Formulation ............................................................................................... 118 1.2.1 Target planning .............................................................................................. 119 1.2.2 Development of a Target System................................................................... 127 1.2.3 Operationalization of the Carbon Reduction Target ...................................... 129 1.3 Search for Mitigation Measures ............................................................................ 131 1.4 Forecast and Evaluation of Mitigation Measures ................................................. 137 1.5 Making Decisions on Mitigation Measures .......................................................... 146 2 Execution ................................................................................................................... 147 3 Monitoring ................................................................................................................. 150 3.1 Making a Comparison ........................................................................................... 151 3.2 Deviation Analysis ................................................................................................ 153 3.3 Specification of Starting Points to Minimize Deviations ..................................... 154 3.4 Frequency of Monitoring ...................................................................................... 155 4 Synthesis .................................................................................................................... 157 III Organization ................................................................................................................. 157 1 Structures ................................................................................................................... 158 2 Systems ...................................................................................................................... 163 2.1 IT Systems............................................................................................................. 164 2.2 Incentive Systems ................................................................................................. 167 IV Synthesis ........................................................................................................................ 172 D Carbon Management Integration Alternatives .................................................................... 174 I Situational Analysis of Integration Alternatives ........................................................... 174 1 Carbon Accounting .................................................................................................... 176 2 Carbon Management Process ..................................................................................... 178 3 Organization ............................................................................................................... 180 II Management Model for Conducting Carbon Management at RFSPs ........................... 184 E Contributions, Limitations, and Recommendations for further Research........................... 191 I II Contributions ................................................................................................................. 191 Managerial Implications ................................................................................................ 194 III
III Theoretical Implications ................................................................................................ 195 IV Research Limitations ..................................................................................................... 197 V Recommendations for Further Research ....................................................................... 199 References ................................................................................................................................... 202 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 218 Appendix A: References (Analyzed books, N=10) .............................................................. 218 Appendix B: References (Structured Literature Review – Analyzed Papers, N=96) ......... 219 Appendix C: Paper Publications – Assignment to Journals ................................................. 226 Appendix D: Paper Publications – Assignment to Content and Methodology .................... 229 Appendix E: Introduction of Further Theories ................................................................... 236 Appendix F: Survey ............................................................................................................ 238 Appendix G: Interview Guideline ........................................................................................ 250 Curriculum Vitae ........................................................................................................................ 260 IV
List of Figures
Figure 1: Related literature fields of CM integration at RFSPs. ............................................. 15 Figure 2: Managerial and theoretical objectives of the thesis................................................. 17 Figure 3: Roadmap of the thesis. ............................................................................................ 22 Figure 4: Number of paper publications from 2005–2013. .................................................... 36 Figure 5: Analysis of methodologies applied in the selected papers. ..................................... 37 Figure 6: Derived research map and related research fields. .................................................. 41 Figure 7: Logistics triad. ........................................................................................................ 47 Figure 8: 4I organizational learning framework. .................................................................... 61 Figure 9: Contingency-based framework. .............................................................................. 66 Figure 10: Methodological triangulation. ............................................................................... 69 Figure 11: Case study approach. ............................................................................................ 72 Figure 12: Research framework. ............................................................................................ 98 Figure 13: Carbon accounting. ............................................................................................. 101 Figure 14: Positioning within carbon accounting – application of standards. ...................... 101 Figure 15: Positioning within carbon accounting – setting company-specific boundaries. .. 103 Figure 16: Overview of the three scopes. ............................................................................. 104 Figure 17: Differentiation between scope 1 and scope 3 emissions. .................................... 106 Figure 18: Positioning within carbon accounting – calculation of carbon emissions. .......... 107 Figure 19: Quality of various carbon emissions depending on input data. ........................... 109 Figure 20: Positioning within carbon accounting – allocation of carbon emissions. ............ 110 Figure 21: Planning process. ................................................................................................ 115 Figure 22: Positioning in the planning process – planning context. ..................................... 116 Figure 23: Positioning in the planning process – target formulation. ................................... 118 Figure 24: Positioning in the planning process – target planning. ........................................ 119 Figure 25: Positioning in the planning process – scaling a carbon reduction target. ............ 120 Figure 26: Positioning in the planning process – coverage scope of the carbon reduction
target. ................................................................................................................. 124 Figure 27: Positioning in the planning process – timeline for meeting the carbon
reduction target. ................................................................................................. 126 Figure 28: Positioning in the planning process – development of a target system. .............. 127 Figure 29: Positioning in the planning process – operationalization of the carbon
reduction target. ................................................................................................. 129 V
Figure 30: Operationalization of the carbon reduction target. .............................................. 130 Figure 31: Positioning in the planning process – search for mitigation measures. ............... 131 Figure 32: Positioning in the planning process – forecast and evaluation of mitigation
measures. ........................................................................................................... 137 Figure 33: Positioning in the planning process – specification of evaluation criteria. ......... 138 Figure 34: Positioning in the planning process – analysis of the relations among the
evaluation criteria. ............................................................................................. 142 Figure 35: Positioning in the planning process – resolution of conflicts of interest. ............ 145 Figure 36: Positioning in the planning process – making decisions on mitigation
measures. ........................................................................................................... 146 Figure 37: Execution process. .............................................................................................. 147 Figure 38: Positioning in the execution process – preparation of the mitigation measure. ... 147 Figure 39: Positioning in the execution process – implementation of the mitigation
measure. ............................................................................................................. 149 Figure 40: Monitoring process. ............................................................................................ 151 Figure 41: Positioning in the monitoring process – making a comparison. .......................... 151 Figure 42: Positioning in the monitoring process – deviation analysis. ............................... 153 Figure 43: Positioning in the monitoring process – specification of starting points to
minimize deviations. .......................................................................................... 154 Figure 44: Behavior and outcome control matrix. ................................................................ 169 Figure 45: Integration alternatives of CM from the seven case studies. ............................... 175 Figure 46: Seven-stage management model of CM. ............................................................. 185 VI
List of Tables
Table 1: CM profile at large companies in the transportation industry. ................................... 7 Table 2: Scientific-theoretical positioning of the thesis. ........................................................ 20 Table 3: Definitions of CM and concepts with comparable meaning. .................................... 29 Table 4: Results of content-related analysis of selected book publications. ........................... 34 Table 5: Papers concerned with CM. ..................................................................................... 40 Table 6: Fields of integration applied in the literature. .......................................................... 44 Table 7: Classification scheme to specify the degree of integration for various fields. .......... 46 Table 8: Introduction of applicable theories for the research field of CM integration. .......... 52 Table 9: Evaluation of the pre-selected theories. ................................................................... 55 Table 10: Main streams of literature within organizational learning theory. .......................... 60 Table 11: Overview of situational parameters and their delimitation. .................................... 65 Table 12: Overview of gathered data and interviewees. ......................................................... 78 Table 13: Core business characteristics of the seven RFSPs. ................................................. 82 Table 14: Overview of current CM profile at selected RFSPs. .............................................. 94 Table 15: Operational metrics depending on the type of operation. ..................................... 123 Table 16: Various levels of decision alternatives of RFSPs. ................................................ 132 Table 17: Overview of possible mitigation measures. .......................................................... 135 Table 18: Overview of evaluation criteria and the related scale. .......................................... 140 Table 19: Evaluation of mitigation measures according to their conflicts of interest. .......... 143 Table 20: Relation between energy consumption and carbon emissions. ............................. 188 Table 21: Internal value of the CM process. ........................................................................ 189 Table 22: Assignment to journals. ........................................................................................ 228 Table 23: Assignment to content and methodology. ............................................................ 235 Table 24: Introduction of further theories. ........................................................................... 237 VII
List of Abbreviations
BAFU
Bundesamt für Umwelt
BGL
Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr Logistik und Entsorgung e.V.
CA
Carbon Accounting
CDP
Carbon Disclosure Project
CEN
Comité Européen de Normalisation
CM
Carbon Management
CNG
Compressed Natural Gas
CSR
Corporate Social Responsibility
DHL
Deutsche Post
DIN
Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V.
DSLV
Deutscher Speditions- und Logistikverband
EEA
European Environment Agency
HBEFA
Handbook Emission Factors
HSEQ
Health, Safety, Environment, and Quality
IEA
International Energy Agency
ISO
International Organization for Standardization
LNG
Liquefied Natural Gas
LPG
Liquefied Petroleum Gas
RFSP
Road Freight Service Provider
RQ
Research Question
SBB
Schweizerische Bundesbahnen
SGVD
Strassengüterverkehrsdienstleister
WBCSD
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
WRI
World Research Institute
VIII
Summary
Global warming and its expected consequences have led to increased interest within business
and government circles in detailed information about the amount of carbon emissions emitted
by road transportation. According to the International Energy Agency, the transportation sector
is responsible for approximately 19 percent of global energy use and 23 percent of energyrelated carbon dioxide emissions. Seventy-five percent of these emissions are related to road
transportation. Against this background, selected road freight service providers (RFSPs) have
addressed the management of carbon emissions (CM). Because CM presents a new task field
for companies, the business practice reveals that RFSPs are increasingly facing the challenge of
concretizing tasks, as well as conducting and integrating CM at the company. Despite
increasing awareness from scholars in various disciplines, studies of the elements of CM and its
integration remain scarce.
This thesis focuses on this topic by systematically structuring and exploring the key elements –
the cornerstones – of the management of carbon emission. It also specifies various integration
alternatives of CM in business practices and explores internal and external framework
conditions (situational parameters) that affect the chosen integration alternative of CM and their
relations. Finally, the thesis develops a management model for conducting CM that supports
RFSPs in addressing and integrating the new task field of CM in the company.
The contributions of the investigation address scientific and practical issues. From a scientific
point of view, this thesis contributes by exploring the research construct through an eclectic
approach, including insights from such literature fields as sustainability management,
management accounting, integrated management systems, organization, and logistics
management. Beyond this, the study discusses the empirical findings with respect to the
relations between situational parameters and design variables (integration alternatives of CM)
in the context of the contingency theory. Moreover, the development process of CM within the
company is explained by the patterns of the organizational learning theory.
From a managerial point of view, the thesis is particularly fruitful for sustainability managers
or executives of RFSPs that intend to, or have started to, deal with the issue of CM. The
characterization of the related tasks of each cornerstone of CM can help practitioners acquire an
overview and enhance their understanding in the field of CM. Moreover, the management
model of conducting CM provides sustainability managers with indications about which
integration alternative might be appropriate, depending on the specific framework conditions.
IX
Zusammenfassung
Die globale Erderwärmung und die resultierenden Auswirkungen haben in Wirtschafts- und
Regierungskreisen zu steigendem Interesse, hinsichtlich der im Strassenverkehr verursachten
CO2-Emissionen, geführt. Gemäss der Internationalen Energieagentur, können 23 Prozent des
energiebezogenen CO2-Ausstosses dem Transportsektor zugeschrieben werden, wovon 75
Prozent auf den Strassenverkehr entfallen. Führende Strassengüterverkehrsdienstleister
(SGVD) haben sich mit dem Management der CO2-Emissionen bereits auseinandergesetzt. Die
Praxis zeigt jedoch, dass SGVDs bei diesem neuen Aufgabenfeld der Herausforderung
gegenüberstehen, die Aufgaben zu konkretisieren und das Emissionsmanagement im
Unternehmen zu integrieren. Trotz des steigenden Bewusstseins von Wissenschaftlern
verschiedener Disziplinen, sind Untersuchungen zu den Elementen des CO2-Managements und
deren Integration in die Unternehmensstrukturen weitgehend unterrepräsentiert.
Die vorliegende Dissertationsschrift beleuchtet dieses Thema mittels einer systematischen
Strukturierung und Erforschung der Elemente des CO2-Managements. Des Weiteren werden
verschiedene Integrationsalternativen des CO2-Managements in der Praxis charakterisiert und
die internen und externen Rahmenbedingungen (Situationsparameter), die einen Einfluss auf
die gewählte Integrationsalternative ausüben, ergründet. Im Ergebnis wird ein ManagementModell zur zielgerichteten Durchführung des CO2-Managements erarbeitet, das SGVDs
unterstützt, das neue Themenfeld des CO2-Managements im Unternehmen zu integrieren.
Die Forschungsarbeit ist dabei sowohl von wissenschaftlicher als auch praktischer Relevanz.
Der wissenschaftliche Beitrag besteht in der Erarbeitung des Forschungskonstrukts mittels
Anwendung eines eklektischen Ansatzes, der Erkenntnisse verschiedener Literaturströmungen,
wie beispielsweise Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement, Organisation und Logistikmanagement,
umfasst. Des Weiteren werden die empirischen Ergebnisse, unter Einbezug der Beziehung
zwischen Situationsparametern und Designvariablen im Kontext der Kontingenztheorie,
diskutiert. Der Entwicklungsprozess des CO2-Managements wird mittels Erklärungsmustern
der Theorie des Organisationalen Lernens aufgezeigt.
Aus der Perspektive des Managements eignet sich die Forschungsarbeit im Besonderen für
Nachhaltigkeitsmanager oder Entscheidungsträger von SGVDs, die planen oder bereits
begonnen haben, sich mit dem Themenfeld des CO2-Managements auseinanderzusetzen. Die
Charakterisierung der verbundenen Aufgaben jedes Elements im CO2-Management, hilft
Praktikern, einen fundierten Überblick zu gewinnen. Das entwickelte Management-Model zeigt
Managern konkrete Ansatzpunkte für die Ausgestaltung der Integrationsalternative des CO2Managements, in Anbetracht der jeweiligen Rahmenbedingungen, auf.
X
A Introduction: Mounting Requirements to Manage Carbon
Emissions
According to the International Energy Agency, approximately 19 percent of global energy use
and 23 percent of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions are attributed to the transportation
sector. Of these emissions, 75 percent are related to road transportation (IEA, 2009: 3). Because
the implementation of mitigation measures to improve carbon efficiency in the road
transportation sector is much slower than the rate of growth in transport volume (Aronsson and
Brodin, 2006), the projected increase in road transport could result in carbon emissions
increasing by approximately 50 percent by 2030 and by more than 80 percent by 2050 (IEA,
2009: 3). Moreover, in Europe, only the road transportation sector experienced significant
growth in the amount of carbon emissions between 1990 and 2011 (EEA, 2013: 10).
Against this background, both government and business circles demand detailed information
regarding the total amount of carbon emissions and expect a reduction in the inventory of
carbon emissions released by transportation services. To address the increasing requirements of
and pressure from various stakeholders, selected road freight service providers1 (RFSPs) (for
example, Deutsche Post DHL, DB Schenker, and Schweizerische Post AG) have adopted the
business mantra “you cannot manage what you cannot measure” and have initiated activities in
the field of carbon accounting (CA), including quantifying and reporting their carbon emissions
in the operations (transportation services). By doing so, RFSPs obtain information regarding
the carbon emissions caused by the energy consumption of vehicles using a single joint
indicator (such as a carbon emissions equivalent). This clear picture of traceable carbon
emissions makes it possible to identify the main emissions drivers and savings potential.
Given significant complexity, RFSPs have gone to great lengths to develop company-specific
solutions to calculate carbon emissions. The different approaches (for example, calculation
methods, calculation tools) lead to difficulties in comparing the amount of carbon emissions
calculated by various RFSPs. To facilitate the calculation for RFSPs and to contribute to a
more standardized approach in CA in the transportation industry, a number of business practice
activities are underway or have already been realized. A European standard (CEN standard EN
16258) tailored to the requirements of the transportation industry was published at the
beginning of 2013. Additionally, leading companies in the transportation industry and shippers
1
For a profound delimitation of the term road freight service providers (RFSPs), refer to section B-I 1.3.
1
have cooperatively formed initiatives such as Green Freight Europe,2 EcoTransIT,3 and the
Clean Cargo Working Group4 to enhance the comparability of carbon indicators.
Nevertheless, these multilayered engagements in the field of CA only represent the basis for the
management of carbon emissions, or carbon management (CM). Carbon emissions provided
from CA must be actively used in management decisions to influence the total amount released
in the operations. To increase the awareness of carbon-efficient transportation services in the
company, specifying a company-wide carbon reduction target is required, expressed in the form
of an increase in carbon efficiency. Furthermore, mitigation measures must be systematically
evaluated and decisions must be made around these measures (Lee, 2011) that aim to meet the
defined reduction targets. Thereby, the implementation of mitigation measures in the field of
transportation services frequently leads to a reduction in both operative costs and the amount of
carbon emissions (Zadek and Schulz, 2010). Additionally, the inventory of carbon emissions
released during the operations must be regularly checked, with the goal of analyzing the
development over time and identifying deviations from the defined reduction targets. Once
deviations from the defined reduction target are identified, actions are required such as the
implementation of further mitigation measures or an adjustment to the carbon reduction target.
The outlined approach to manage the amount of carbon emissions shows many content-related
similarities with the basic principles of management accounting.5 Nevertheless, because CM
presents a new task field for companies, the business practice reveals that RFSPs are
increasingly facing the challenge of concretizing the tasks and conducting CM. Moreover, in
business practice, sustainability management and, consequently, CM are frequently carried out
in parallel with other task fields in the company (Schaltegger et al., 2003). As a result,
operative tasks in the field of CM are performed in a disconnected manner and the amount of
carbon emissions indicators are handled as an indicator of its own, which is not considered in
management decisions (Wolf and Seuring, 2010). Hereby, because CM is a new task field of
RFSPs, in business practices questions are raised concerning the development and, particularly,
integration of CM into the task fields6 of the company, as well as the specific framework
condition that impacts the chosen integration alternative of CM.
2
For further focused explanations on road freight transportation, refer to: http://www.greenfreighteurope.eu/.
3
For further focused explanations on train freight transportation, refer to: http://www.ecotransit.org/.
4
For further focused explanations on sea freight transportation, refer to: http://www.bsr.org/our-work/workinggroups/clean-cargo. 5
For a delimitation of the term management accounting, refer to section B-II.
6
For example, management accounting, quality and sustainability management
2
To address the specified challenges in business practice, one research objective of the thesis is
to systematically structure and explore the key elements – the cornerstones – of the
management of carbon emissions. For each cornerstone, the related tasks are elaborated on.
Thereby, various business characteristics of RFSPs7 are contemplated with the goal to enhance
the understanding of the content-related particularities and the design of CM in the context of
the transportation industry. Another research objective is to characterize various identified
integration alternatives of CM in business practices and to systematically explore internal and
external framework conditions (situational parameters) that affect the chosen integration
alternative of CM. Based on the insights, a management model for conducting CM is
developed that supports RFSPs in addressing and integrating the new task field of CM in the
company.
The first chapter of this thesis consists of five sections and starts with a presentation of the
managerial relevance that aims to sharpen the research construct under investigation (section
A-I). Furthermore, the scientific relevance of CM integration at RFSPs is outlined and the
related literature fields are introduced (section A-II). Based on this understanding, the core
research objectives and guiding research questions of the thesis are presented (section A-III).
The scientific-theoretical positioning of the research is emphasized (section A-IV), and finally,
the roadmap of the thesis is presented (section A-V).
I
Managerial Relevance
This section presents the managerial relevance and political and business drivers to substantiate
the mounting necessity of RFSPs to address the issue of CM. Moreover, the approaches taken
by large companies in the transportation industry to address the issue of CM are outlined in an
attempt to concretize the main research construct of CM integration.
Political Drivers
Given the negative environmental effects from the higher volume of road freight transport, the
political agenda in Europe is increasingly focusing on ecological issues. Consequently, the first
carbon reduction targets were formulated and environmental regulations were signed:
 European Commission – Carbon reduction target of 60 percent by 2050 (base year 1990) as
specified in the White Book (European Commission, 2011: 3);
7
For example, the organization’s size, and different types of operations
3
 Switzerland – CO2-Gesetz, carbon reduction target of 20 percent by 2020 (base year 1990)
(CO2-Gesetz, 2013); and,
 France – “Obligation to inform about the quantity of carbon dioxide emitted during
transportation” (Décret n° 2011-1336 du 24 October 2011, 2011).
The status of the transportation sector as a main emission driver caused the European
Commission to specify a concrete carbon reduction target. The White Book published in March
2011 formulated a target of a 60 percent reduction in the inventory of carbon emissions by
2050. The foundation for the specification of the carbon reduction target was the amount of
carbon emissions quantified in 1990. Given the importance of the transport industry for the
European economy and the wealth of the people, the carbon reduction target should be met and
the projected growth in freight transport and mobility of travelers should be ensured. Therefore,
the European Union stated that future developments should be based on a number of standards
(European Commission, 2011: 3):
 Increasing the energy efficiency of all transport modes;
 Improving the energy-efficient performance of multimodal logistics chains; and,
 Efficiently using the available infrastructure by applying improved information systems.
In Switzerland in 2012, the CO2-Gesetz, initially introduced in 2000, was extended to 2020.
The adapted law, which uses as a basis the inventory of carbon emissions in 1990, specifies a
reduction in carbon emissions of at least 20 percent by 2020. Given the specification of the
carbon reduction target, Switzerland intends to contribute to the politically-agreed-upon aim to
limit the global temperature increase by up to two degrees (CO2-Gesetz, 2013). To achieve the
self-defined target, a bundle of measures was specified that affects nearly all industries in
Switzerland. Thereby, one measure – the offset obligations of carbon emissions – has a direct
effect on the business activities of RFSPs. This offset obligation is valid for importers of fossil
fuels from an annual volume of 1,000 tons of carbon emissions. Using this measure, a
reduction of 1.5 million tons of carbon emissions is aspired to by 2020, which corresponds to
10 percent of the amount of carbon emissions released by the transport sector in 1990 (BAFU,
2013).
As the first European country, France legally implemented a law, decree n° 2011-1336, that
requires the calculation and reporting of carbon emissions to the “beneficiary” for
transportation services concerning passengers, goods, and moving processes. Applied from this
decree are the transportation services that depart from or travel to a French location. The
service provider carrying out the transportation services is responsible for the quantification of
carbon emissions, whereas the “beneficiary” is the co-contractor, respectively the customer.
4
According to the decree, the service provider should make available the information either on
the agreed on date or two months after conducting the transportation services (Décret n° 20111336 du 24 October 2011, 2011). The regulations of decree n° 2011-1336 became effective in
July 2013 (Legifrance, 2014).
To summarize, the previously outlined carbon reduction targets and introduced political
regulations directly affect companies in the transportation industry. Therefore, RFSPs that
already calculate the amount of carbon emissions and provide transportation services with high
carbon efficiency are at an advantage. Moreover, other European countries are assumed to
follow the example of Switzerland and France and take legal action aimed at reducing the
inventory of carbon emissions in the transportation industry. Hence, RFSPs should address the
issue of CM to be prepared for current and future political regulations.
Business Drivers
In addition to the first political regulations, increasing public pressure on and environmental
consciousness in companies contributed to the mounting awareness of ecological issues related
to business relations. Thereby, as Wolf and Seuring (2010) constituted, the amount of carbon
emissions is the single ecological indicator to receive increasing attention in business relations.
In the recent past, industrial and trading companies (focal companies) focused strongly on their
core competences and omitted (transportation) activities that did not belong to their central
business with external partners (for example, Persson and Virum, 2001; Selviaridis and Spring,
2007). The reduction in the degree of vertical integration uncovered the fact that a large amount
of the carbon emissions revealed in the manufacture and transport of goods (supply chain) were
caused by the business activities of focal firms at their external partners (Koplin et al., 2007).
An international study estimates that, as an industry average, nearly two-thirds of all carbon
emissions caused by the production and transport of goods are emitted outside the focal
company (Matthews et al., 2008). Hence, to receive a traceable picture of carbon emissions and
to optimize their supply chain with regard to carbon efficiency, focal companies playing a
pioneering role in their industry started to manage carbon emissions not only in their own
companies but also at the involved partners in the supply chain. Thereby, the number of focal
companies showing interest in managing the inventory of carbon emissions in their supply
chain is steadily increasing (CDP, 2012: 11). Active management of the carbon emissions of
the focal company in their supply chains must seek to include all associated carbon emissions,
which requires that all external partners including RFSPs must provide carbon emissions
according to the same guidelines and standards to reach comparability. Moreover, the delivered
5
carbon emissions enable focal companies to compare and select their service partners with
respect to carbon efficiency and to aim to improve the carbon efficiency in their supply chain.
As a general rule, RFSPs are involved in a multitude of supply chains. Therefore, RFSPs must
quantify the inventory of carbon emissions from transportation activities, and the carbon
emissions must be differentiated according to the caused portion to various customers8 as
accurately as possible. Thus, the carbon emissions revealed at the RFSPs are assigned to
different supply chains based on their corresponding responsibilities and, finally, allow the
focal companies to specify a profound inventory of carbon emissions revealed in their supply
chain.
These statements are underpinned by the results of the supply chain report published by the
Carbon Disclosure Project. According to this report, 56 percent of international industrial and
trading companies believe that providing meaningful carbon indicators and environmentally
friendly transportation services will help define an important decision criterion for the selection
of service partners (CDP, 2012: 11).
To conclude, the calculation of meaningful carbon indicators and a continuous improvement in
the carbon efficiency of the transportation services will become a necessity of RFSPs in
business relations to meet the increasing ecological expectations of their customers. Therefore,
the only RFSPs expected to be successful in the long term will be those that adapt to changing
business requirements and intensively address the issue of CM.
Approaches to Address CM in the Transportation Industry
A couple of companies in the transportation industry addressed the issue of CM in an effort to
turn the mounting political and business requirements into opportunities. To obtain initial
indications with respect to the elements of CM and, consequently, to sharpen the research
construct, empirical evidence in the field of CM using the examples of Deutsche Post DHL, DB
Schenker, SBB Cargo,9 Schweizerische Post AG, and Österreichische Post AG are presented
and analyzed.
These companies were selected because they play a pioneering role in their home country in the
field of CM. Thereby, that the chosen companies were or still are state owned must be taken
into account to potentially enhance political expectations to actively address the issue of CM.
8
For a further explanation of customers of RFSPs, refer to section B-I 1.3.
9
The core transportation activity of SBB Cargo is train services. Because the company is active in the transportation
industry, considering SBB Cargo is appropriate to illustrate the key elements of CM and to sharpen the research
construct.
6
Nonetheless, efforts are being made predominately to communicate to the public to give them
an overview of the current form of elaboration in the field of CM. Thereby, the published
sustainability reports and the web pages contained fruitful sources of information.
To structure the first empirical facts in the field of CM, the calculation of carbon indicators
(starting year / carbon calculation tool), the determination of a carbon reduction target, and the
current organizational anchorage of CM are differentiated. Table 1 summarizes the results of a
few examples of companies in the transportation industry.
Company
Calculation of
carbon emissions
(starting year / carbon
calculation tool)
Deutsche
Post DHL
(Deutsche
Post DHL,
2013)
 Starting year 2007
 Calculation tool:
Embedded into
financial and
management reporting
systems (since 2009)
DB Schenker
(Deutsche
Bahn, 2013;  Starting year: 2006
 Calculation tool:
DB
EcoTransIT
Schenker
2012)
SBB Cargo
(SBB,
2013)
Schweizerische Post
AG
(Schweizerische Post
AG, 2014)
Österreichische
Post AG
(Österreichische
Post AG,
2013)
 Starting year 2008
 Calculation tool:
EcoTransIT
Carbon reduction
target
 Improvement in carbon
efficiency of its own
logistics and
subcontractors’ services
of 10 percent by 2012
and 30 percent by 2020
compared with the base
year of 2007
 Parent company
(Deutsche Bahn): carbon
reduction of 20 percent
by 2020 (base year 2006)
 DB Schenker broke down
the overall carbon
reduction target and set
separate carbon reduction
targets for each transport
mode
 30 percent reduction in
carbon emissions by 2020
(base year 1990)
Organizational anchorage
 Financial department (since
2011)
 Establishment of a GoGreen
Sponsors Board (chaired by the
CEO and including
representatives of various
departments)
 Centralized environmental
competence team
 Environmental department
 Starting year: 2006
 Calculation tool: no
information available
 Annual carbon emissions
reduction of approx.
15.000 tonnes between
2010 and 2013
 Environmental department, plus
a sustainability management
coordinator in every business
unit
 Starting year: 2007
 Calculation tool: no
information available
 Ten percent reduction in
carbon emissions by 2012
(base year 2007)
 No information available
Table 1: CM profile at large companies in the transportation industry.
7
The five companies in the transportation industry started their activities in the field of CA and
calculated the first company-specific carbon emissions between 2006 and 2008. Thereby, the
companies received a significant overview with respect to the inventory of carbon emissions
revealed by their business (transportation) activities. During the first year in which carbon
calculations were done, information on the inventory of carbon emissions was first made
available, and three of the five companies set a carbon reduction target for the base year, in line
with the year in which CA was initiated. Other approaches are selected by SBB Cargo and
Schweizerische Post AG. Although SBB AG started its CM activities in 2008, the base year for
the reduction target was set to 1990, to be in line with the guidelines of the “CO2-Gesetz” in
Switzerland. Schweizerische Post, on the other hand, formulated a reduction in its annual
carbon emissions of approximately 15,000 tonnes between 2010 and 2013.The specified carbon
reduction targets function as a benchmark against which the future development of the
inventory of carbon emissions is evaluated. To meet the carbon reduction target, the
sustainability reports and web pages revealed that the companies plan or have already
implemented a broad package of mitigation measures.10
Moreover, the insights from the initial empirical facts indicate that the companies created IT
solutions (information technology), in particular those that aim to facilitate the regular
calculation of the amount of carbon emissions. Thereby, DB Schenker and SBB Cargo reverted
to an externally provided carbon calculation platform called EcoTransIT11 because both
companies were involved in the development of this carbon calculation platform. Deutsche
Post DHL developed a company-specific carbon calculation tool that is embedded in its
established financial and management reporting systems.
Moreover, the RFSPs determined organizational responsibility and created structures to enable
the management of carbon emissions in the company. Thereby, at three companies, the
environmental department bears the content-related responsibility in the field of CM. At
Deutsche Post DHL, the financial department is in charge primarily because the carbon
calculation solution is embedded in the financial and management reporting systems.
The previous outlined form of elaboration of CM reveals that companies in the transportation
industry gained experience in the field of CM through a learning and development process
10
Such mitigation measures include, for example, shifting modes of transport, steady modernization of vehicle fleet
(highest Euro norms), or vehicles with alternative drive technologies; for further explanations on mitigation measures
in the field of transportation services, refer to section C-II 1.3.
11
The EcoTransIT initiative was formed by leading European railway companies such as DB Schenker, SBB Cargo,
Trenitalia S.p.A., and SNCF. This jointly developed initiative was a free, accessible, and commercially distributed
carbon emission calculator; refer to http://www.ecotransit.org/calculation.de.html.
8
related to CM. This learning process is exemplarily illustrated in the case of Deutsche Post
DHL with respect to the applied IT tool and the organizational anchorage of CM. In the starting
year of 2007, information on the calculation of the initial inventory of carbon emissions was
gathered using a manual request procedure. Since the middle of 2009, the carbon emissions
calculation process has been embedded in the company’s financial and management reporting
systems to enable a resource-efficient calculation on a monthly basis. Moreover, given the
many similarities in the calculation of carbon emissions with that of financial accounting, the
organizational anchorage was changed. Since 2011, the financial department has been in charge
of several operative tasks in the field of CM (Deutsche Post DHL, 2012: 49).
To conclude, the active management of the amount of carbon emissions presents a new task
field for a company and shows content-related parallels to management accounting. Because
CM is a new task field, the establishment of processes and the creation of systems (IT) and
structures (organizational anchorage) must be organized in the company. Furthermore, initial
empirical evidence indicates that various approaches to integrating CM into the established task
fields of the company are applied and may be traced to different internal and external
framework conditions (situational parameters). Moreover, learning and development processes
that occur at the companies lead to adoption of the chosen integration alternative of CM.
II
Theoretical Relevance
Having developed an understanding of the research construct CM integration from a
managerial perspective, it is necessary to also specify the relevance of the investigation from a
theoretical point of view. Therefore, this section identifies the related literature fields in order
to obtain theoretical starting points. The research gap is outlined based on the state of the
research in the field of sustainability (CM).12 This section also delimits all of the related
literature fields and emphasizes the relevant contributions of the literature fields concerning this
investigation.
Related Literature Fields
In order to gain a holistic view on the research field, it is necessary to consider various
literature fields simultaneously. Therefore, related literature fields can be systematically
identified based on the outlined research construct of CM integration within the managerial
relevance.
12
Because the investigation is grounded in the literature field of sustainability management, the state of research is
reflected and the research gap the thesis aims to fill is concretized.
9
The investigation centers on the management of carbon emissions at RFSPs, and therefore the
scope of the management activities is the amount of carbon emissions, which presents an
ecological issue. The fact that the investigation addresses the ecological dimension of the
concept of sustainability management makes it particularly grounded in this research field. As
the introduction from the practical perspective indicates, the management of carbon emissions
shows many parallels, in terms of content, to the well-established concepts of management
accounting. Hence, the literature field management accounting is also considered as a related
literature field. Moreover, the conduction of the new task field CM involves creating structures
and systems, as well as establishing processes that have to be organized and integrated into the
established tasks field of the company. Therefore, the organization and integrated management
systems literature can be characterized as further related literature fields of the investigation.
Moreover, the research field of CM integration is analyzed in the concrete application context
of RFSPs, the core business activity of which is transportation – or, more generally, logistics
services. Insights from the literature field logistics management are also taken into
consideration.
To summarize, the following literature fields are considered as related to the research construct
of CM integration: sustainability management, management accounting, organization and
integrated management systems, and logistics management.
Sustainability Management
The underlying understanding of sustainability management within the thesis is based on the
triple-bottom-line concept introduced by Elkington (1998: 69), which encompasses ecological,
economic, and social dimensions. As the investigation centers on the management of the
amount of carbon emissions, the ecological dimension13 is a particular area of focus within the
sustainability management literature. Based on the understanding of Dyllick and Hockerts
(2002), ecological sustainable companies can be characterized as using “only natural resources
that are consumed at a rate below the natural reproduction, or at a rate below the development
of substitutes. They do not cause emissions that accumulate in the environment at a rate beyond
the capacity of the natural system to absorb and assimilate these emissions” (Dyllick and
Hockerts, 2002: 133).
13
The economic dimension of the sustainability management concept is contemplated within the literature field of
management accounting, whereas the social dimension is neglected within this thesis.
10
Moreover, addressing the current state of research, the research gap is elaborated upon, as the
investigation can be grounded in this literature field.14 The state of research in the field of CM
reveals increasing relevance and interest from scholars in various disciplines. Due to the range
of research disciplines that have addressed CM, a variety of terms with a slightly different
understanding are applied and a common understanding and there is still no clear definition of
CM among the scientific community. Moreover, publications have focused on calculating
carbon indicators, particularly at the supply chain level and on energy-intensive industries as
well as consumer product companies (e.g., Dormer et al., 2013; Yuttitham et al., 2011; Pelletier
et al., 2013). In particular, consumer product companies are often selected by researchers
because they are closest to the customers and are therefore early adopters of sustainability
issues (Carter and Easton, 2011). Therefore, relatively little attention has been paid to
transportation (logistics) activities (Edwards et al., 2011). Beyond this, within the literature,
some aspects of CM – such as organization (structure, systems) or the carbon management
process (carbon reduction targets, range of mitigation measures, and monitoring) – are
discussed briefly here without systemizing the research field from a general perspective.
Moreover, guidelines for integrating the sustainability issues of CM within the established task
fields of the company are not yet available in the literature (Rocha et al., 2007).
Considering the state of research in the field of sustainability management with a focus on CM,
researchers such as Okereke (2007), Lohmann (2009), Burrit et al. (2011), Milne and Grubnic
(2011), and Schaltegger and Csutora (2012) have emphasized the importance of research on a
corporate level in the field of CM and research into basic relations between the integration of
CM and the given framework conditions of a company. Schaltegger and Csutora (2012: 6)
underlined that “corporate practice in relation to collecting, managing and communication
corporate carbon related information is still under researched.” Furthermore, the importance of
industry-specific research in the field of sustainability management is, in general, underlined by
Carter and Easton (2011), who have said that “researchers should carefully select individual
industries with the goal of identifying specific types of sustainability activities that are germane
to those industries, and industries in which boundaries of specific theories might be extended or
shown to apply” (Carter and Easton, 2011: 55).
To summarize, the literature lacks a delimitation of the term CM, the specification of the
cornerstones of CM, and guidelines for the integration of CM. Moreover, companies in the
transportation industry are widely neglected within this literature field, although industryspecific focus has enhanced the understanding in the field of CM. Nevertheless, the literature in
14
For an in-depth literature analysis, refer to section B-I 1.1.
11
the field of sustainability management makes it possible to specify some initial indications with
regard to the cornerstones of CM. Although most research into calculation carbon emissions
has not focused explicitly on transportation services, the insights from the literature have
allowed general contributions for RFSPs. Thus, the required steps to calculate the amount of
carbon emissions and a content-related specification of the steps can be derived.
The literature fields outlined below have focused on delimiting the literature field and
contributions for the investigation.
Management Accounting
The management accounting literature centers on “the process of identifying, measuring,
accumulating, analyzing, preparing, interpreting, and communicating information that helps
managers fulfill organizational objectives” (Horngren et al., 2002: 5). The economic dimension
within the triple-bottom-line concept of sustainability management is contemplated and there is
an understanding that “economically sustainable companies guarantee at any time cash flow
sufficient to ensure liquidity while producing a persistent above average return to their
shareholders” (Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002: 133). This statement shows that the activities in the
task field of CM should positively contribute to a company’s long-term success, not negatively
affect it.
There is a comprehensive body of literature analyzing the field of management accounting
from different perspectives (e.g., Burrit et al., 2002). Following the classification of Rom and
Rhode (2007), it is possible to differentiate between tasks, techniques and design, organization
of management accounting, as well as between behavior, use, and perception. In particular,
tasks, techniques, and designs deliver fruitful contributions for the investigation. Transferring
these insights in the field of sustainability management with a focus on CM, the steps and
concepts to develop a well-founded approach to manage the amount of carbon emissions can be
derived.
Integrated Managements Systems
The integrated management system literature field is a young one that centers on the “process
of putting together different function-specific management systems into a single and more
effective integrated management system” (Beckmerhagen et al., 2003: 214). Within this
literature field, a system is delimitated as a “simple set of processes and resources that are
designed and performed in order to achieve a desired objective” (Karapetrovic and Willborn,
1998: 205). The addressed objectives are intended to help ensure that the activities within the
12
companies meet the requirements and guidelines of internationally accepted standards.
Therefore, the focus is set on environmental standards (ISO 9001 series), quality standards
(ISO 14001 series), and occupational health and safety standards, the implementation and
conduction of which within the company is understood as a management system.
Asif et al. (2010a) conducted a literature review in the field of integrated management systems
and divided the literature into three main literature streams. The first stream presents the
foundation and centers on the basic concepts of integrated management systems, including the
definitions and an enhanced understanding of the need for integration.15 The second literature
stream focuses on the factors and challenges of the integration within companies. The third
literature stream delivers various strategies and models to analyze the integration alternatives at
companies (for example, integration fields and degrees). The third literature stream appears to
be particularly fruitful for the investigation as it delivers a broad range of concepts for
analyzing the integration of the new task field such as CM into structures, systems, and
processes of the company.
Organization
Within the organizational literature, the divisions of labor and the coordination of the subtasks
within the structure of the company16 are the key areas of interest (e.g., Klaas, 2002: 63;
Mintzberg, 1979: 2). Moreover, the literature addresses the exploration of structure alternatives,
depending on both internal and external framework (situational) conditions (Schreyögg, 1998:
9).
Transferring the insights of the organizational literature to the research field of the
investigation, contributions can be expected concerning the organizational structuring of the
new task field of CM, including the division of labor and coordination mechanism. Moreover,
the organizational literature is particularly fruitful for the investigation as both the contingency
and organizational learning theories are rooted in this literature field.
15
The growing number of independent management systems increases the complexity within the organization and leads
to increasing need for integration of the management systems into itself and into the overall business activities (Rocha
et al., 2007).
16
The German-language literature differentiates between an instrumental and institutional understanding of the term
organization. The instrumental understanding centers on the methodology of the design, aiming to analyze the entire
tasks to derive subtasks and coordinate them. The institutional understanding, on the other hand, addresses the results
of the design including structure alternatives, depending on internal and external (situational) parameters (Klaas, 2002:
63). Within the thesis, the instrumental understanding is followed, as CM presents a new task field within the company
that must be analyzed with the aim of dividing the subtasks and coordinate them. Nevertheless, as the institutional
understanding of the organization broadens the perspective and makes it possible to analyze structure alternatives,
depending on situational parameters (Schreyögg, 1998: 9), it is additionally taken into consideration.
13
The contingency theory,17 which is applied as the leading theoretical lens, states that the
organizational structure must be aligned with internal and the external framework (situational)
conditions (Fiedler, 1964). Thus, structure alternatives (integration alternatives of CM) and the
internal and external framework conditions that impact the integration alternative can be
analyzed within a contingency-based framework, based on “if–then” relations. The
complementary theory is the organizational learning theory,18 which addresses the learning and
development perspective of strategic renewals within an organization (Crossan et al., 1999).
The explanatory patterns of the organizational learning make it possible to explain identified
relations within the contingency-based framework and offers design recommendations for the
further learning process of CM. The use of these two theoretical lenses in the research construct
of CM integration helps enrich the theories in a new field of research.19
Logistics Management
The literature field logistics management addresses the planning, execution, and monitoring of
a logistics system. Thereby, the logistics systems focus on the spatial and temporal transfer of
goods as well as information and corresponding structures and processes for conducting (Huber
and Laverentz, 2012: 6). A functional differentiation of logistics systems includes
transportation, warehousing, warehouses, and packaging systems (Pfohl, 2010: 20).
As this thesis concentrates on the management of carbon emissions within the application
context of RFSPs, it focuses on the transportations system (operations). Therefore, the
contributions from the literature field of logistics management are expected to derive the core
characteristics of RFSPs and elaborate different types of operations concepts (transportation
services). Thus, the particularities of CM with a concrete focus on different types of operations
can be characterized.
Synthesis
It can be concluded that the sustainability management literature lacks specification of the
elements, namely the cornerstones of CM and issues in terms of the integration of CM.
Furthermore, CM integration can be seen as an interface research field, as relevant
17
For further explanations, refer to section B-I 2.4.
18
For further explanations, refer to section B-I 2.5.
19
To date, the application of theoretical lenses in the literature field of CM has been widely neglected. An exception is
Burrit et al. (2012), who used the theoretical lenses of contingency theory and transaction cost theory. For further
explanation, refer to section B-I 1.1
14
contributions are embedded in different literature fields. Therefore, in order to engage in a
serious derivation for the research construct of CM integration, related literature fields are
narrowed to theoretical concepts that deliver fruitful contributions for the research construct.
Moreover, further theoretical access to the research field is offered by contingency theory and
organizational theory. Applying this eclectic approach, the insights from different literature
fields and theories are combined with the aim of establishing a profound basis and explaining
the research construct of CM integration.
As the research field of CM integration is rooted in the sustainability management literature
and the RFSPs present the application context, this thesis particularly aims to contribute to the
knowledge in the sustainability and logistics management literature.
Figure 1 summarizes the main related research fields and introduces the contributions expected
for the investigation.
Figure 1: Related literature fields of CM integration at RFSPs.
15
III Research Objectives and Questions
The previous sections concretized the research construct of CM integration at RFSPs from a
managerial perspective that was embedded and grounded in the related literature fields. Based
on this understanding, the core research objectives of the thesis as differentiated between
managerial and theoretical are introduced to profoundly derive the guiding research questions.
From a managerial point of view, one objective of the thesis is to systematically describe the
management of carbon emissions. Thereby, the core elements of CM are summarized as
cornerstones that are central to specifying CM. Hereby, a general understanding of each
cornerstone of CM should be developed and the related tasks of each cornerstone are
characterized in an in-depth manner by considering the specific business characteristics of
RFSPs. Beyond this analysis, various integration alternatives of CM in business practice should
be characterized, and the situational parameters that have an effect on the chosen integration
alternative of CM are specified. Other RFSPs intending to conduct CM should take into
account these situational parameters. Moreover, a further research objective is to provide
general recommendations for the development and integration of the new task field of CM into
the structures, systems, and processes of the company.
From a theoretical point of view, the research project aims to contribute to the underrepresented
research field of CM integration at RFSPs and, in particular, to complement the knowledge in
the fields of sustainability and logistics management. Thereby, this thesis specifically aims to
fill the existing research gaps of delimitation of the term CM and specification of the
cornerstones of CM. A further objective of the thesis is to characterize the various integration
alternatives of CM and discuss the interrelation between a set of situational (contingencies)
parameters and various design variables (integration alternatives of CM) within a contingencybased framework. Explanatory patterns of the organizational learning make it possible to
explain identified relations within the contingency-based framework and the learning and
development process of the new task field of CM. Because this thesis focuses on the
management of carbon emissions at RFSPs, it pursues the goal of broadening contingency and
organizational learning theory through different application contexts.
Figure 2 consolidates the objectives of both perspectives and introduces the derived objective
of the thesis.
16
Figure 2: Managerial and theoretical objectives of the thesis.
By addressing the specified research objectives, the guiding research question (RQ) focuses on
the integration of the new task field of CM into the structures, systems, and processes at
RFSPs.
RQ:
How can CM be integrated into the structures, systems, and processes at
RFSPs by considering RFSPs’ business characteristics?
To guide the research process, five additional secondary research questions are derived from
the primary question.
RQ 1:
What are the cornerstones of CM?
RQ 2:
What are the key tasks of the specified cornerstones of CM?
As pointed out in section A-II, the literature is still missing a delimitation and specification of
the cornerstones of CM from a general perspective. Hence, the cornerstones of CM and the
respective tasks are developed using insights from a series of explorative case studies and a
literature overview. This understanding and the related CM tasks at RFSPs should function as
the basis for the following investigation.
RQ 3:
Which different integration alternatives of CM are identified in business
practice?
17
RQ 4:
Which situational (contingency) parameters affect the
alternatives of CM at RFSPs and what effect do they have?
integration
These two research questions have an empirical focus. Through a set of case studies, various
integration alternatives of CM in business practice are characterized and situational parameters
that show an effect on the chosen integration alternative are elaborated on. To systematically
structure the investigation, the delimitated cornerstones of CM serve as dimensions in which to
specify the integration alternatives.
RQ 5:
What design recommendations are derived with respect to the integration of
CM at RFSPs?
CM is a relatively young task field for RFSPs, raising questions in business practice concerning
the development and integration of CM into the structures, systems, and processes of the
company. The specification of a management model to integrate CM at RFSPs is addressed by
the fifth research question.
IV Scientific-Theoretical Positioning
The research questions derived from the managerial and theoretical perspective deal with a
broad range of aspects addressing the same research construct. Thus, in the following section,
the analyzed research field is linked to its scientific-theoretical background.
The research construct of CM integration is assigned to business research. In general, business
research was recognized only recently as a scientific discipline. In the early days, important
studies primarily focused on substantive practical knowledge that aimed to support the daily
decisions of merchants (Fülbier, 2004: 266). Today, the understanding of business research has
changed significantly. Business research claims scientific substantiation and, therefore, follows
the general logic of the philosophy of science (Fülbier, 2004: 266; Raffée and Abel, 1979: 1).
In the philosophy of science, a distinction exists between deductive and inductive approaches
concerning knowledge generation. The inductive approach is characterized as research logic
based on a broad range of observations. Thereby, from the variety of observable facts through
to the conclusion, general scientific findings are derived (Chalmers, 2001: 39). Hereafter,
scientific substance is successfully generated by an argumentative discourse (Fülbier, 2004:
269). As a main drawback in particular, a specific number of inductive observations are
clarified as difficult to generalize because they do not present proof for an overall phenomenon
18
(Chalmers, 2001: 40). To address the criticism of inductivism, a deductive approach was
developed and is traceable to the initial understanding of Popper (2002: 5). The deductive
approach is rooted in the comprehension that a general valid proposition is only derived
through justification of hypotheses based on scientific rules (Popper, 2002: 6). Nevertheless,
these facts provide evidence for the hypotheses that normally must be developed through real
observations (Chalmers, 2001: 43). However, against this clear methodological separation,
blurred boundaries of inductive and deductive research strategies in the scientific community
are observed that aim to counterbalance the flaws of one knowledge generation approach with
the strengths of the other applied approach. Furthermore, a focus on one approach leads to a
conflict with the scientific diversity of available methods and limits the possibility of
addressing complex and varying research questions (Fülbier, 2004: 270). Consequently, note
that most empirical research is based on a combination of inductive and deductive elements
(Behnke, 2010: 32).
Transferring the theoretical insights to the investigation at hand shows that a sole inductive
approach is not expedient. Because CM is a new task field in business practice, scarce suitable
approaches are available to integrate CM into the structures, systems, and processes of the
company. In contrast, taking into account particularities of the business characteristics of
RFSPs shows that a theoretical foundation of CM integration does not exist20 and a purely
deductive approach is also not suitable for knowledge generation in this field. To conduct
rigorous business research and to strengthen the findings of the research, this thesis combines
deductive and inductive elements.
Moreover, concerning a scientific-theoretical positioning, Ulrich (1995: 165) in general
differentiates between a theoretical and an applied science approach. In addition to knowledge
generation (inductive/deductive), the two approaches are differentiated according to the
following characteristics:
 Origin of the problem;
 Research target; and,
 Research criteria.
In the theoretical science approach, the origin of the problem is rooted in science, whereas the
problem results from practical observations using the applied science approach (Ulrich, 1995:
165). In this thesis, the research problem was specified in the transportation (logistics) practice
20
For a comprehensive state of research in the field of CM, refer to section B-I 1.1. 19
and is sharpened by theoretical insights particularly from sustainability and logistics
management literature.
The research targets of the theoretical science approach are theory development and testing,
and an explanation of existing phenomena. In contrast, the applied science approach focuses on
the design of realities (Ulrich, 1995: 165). This thesis addresses both theoretical and practical
research targets. The challenge to deductively derive first indications with respect to the
cornerstones of CM and to develop a contingency-based framework that addresses the
interrelation between situational parameters and design variables (integration alternatives of
CM) is the theoretical target. Moreover, contingency and organizational learning theory is
applied in the application context of CM integration. In contrast, the thesis aims to provide a
practical approach to manage the amount of carbon emissions and design recommendations for
the integration of CM.
In a theoretical science approach, the quality of the research criteria is determined by
universality, confirmation degree, explanatory strength, and forecast power. The practical
problem-solving power of models and rules are the focus of the applied science approach
(Ulrich, 1995: 165). In particular, the explanatory strength of the derived cornerstones of CM
and the problem-solving power with respect to the integration of CM at RFSPs present the core
research criteria.
Table 2 summarizes the discussed considerations with respect to the scientific-theoretical
positioning of the thesis.
Theoretical science
approach
Applied science
approach
Origin of the
problem
 Within science
 Within practice
Research targets
 Theory development
and testing
 Explanation of
existing phenomena
 Design of realities
Research
criteria
 Universality
 Confirmation degree
 Explanatory strength
 Forecast power
 Practical problemsolving power
Knowledge
generation
 Deductive
 Inductive
Core characteristics of the
thesis
 In business practice at RFSPs
 Particularly in the sustainability and
logistics management literature fields
 Indications with respect to the cornerstones
of CM and developing a contingency-based
framework
 Development of a practical approach to
manage carbon emissions and design
recommendations for the integration of CM
 Explanatory strength concerning the
cornerstones of CM
 Practical problem-solving power with
respect to the integration of CM at RFSPs
 Combined deductive-inductive approach
Table 2: Scientific-theoretical positioning of the thesis.
(Adapted: Ulrich, 1995: 165)
20
It can be concluded that this thesis addresses both the theoretical science and applied science
approach, including a combined deductive-inductive knowledge generation approach. The
problem is particularly assigned to business practice and practical problem-solving presents a
core research criteria; therefore, this thesis can be said to be particular rooted in the applied
science approach. Moreover, as CM integration presents a new task field in business practice,
explorative elements within the research setting are a crucial part of the investigation.
21
V
Thesis Outline
The following section outlines the structure of this dissertation. The monograph is divided into
five chapters and an appendix. Figure 3 presents the roadmap of the dissertation, including the
main sections of each chapter.
Figure 3: Roadmap of the thesis.
22
In chapter A, the thesis starts with a structured overview of the challenges that RFSPs
currently face within business practices to derive the objectives of this investigation from a
managerial point of view (section A-I). This overview is followed by the derivation of the
theoretical relevance of CM at RFSPs and the specification of the gap in research that this
thesis aims to fill in (section A-II). The objectives and the research questions are formulated
(section A-III) using insights from both perspectives, and this thesis is scientific–theoretically
positioned (section A-IV).
The aim of chapter B is to develop the research framework for this dissertation. The
framework is derived from the consolidation of a theoretical (section B-I) and a practical
perspective of CM (section B-II). To derive the central research construct, the key terms for the
thesis, “carbon management” and “integration,” are introduced within a conceptual background
(section B-I 1.1 and B-I 1.2). Moreover, the company type central to the dissertation – namely
RFSPs – are delimitated (section B-I 1.3). Section B-I 2 presents a set of theories frequently
applied in sustainability management literature, including an assessment of their applicability
in this research context based on customized evaluation criteria (section B-I 2.1 to section B-I
2.3). The problem-oriented selection process leads to the choice of the contingency theory as
the leading theoretical lens (section B-I 2.4) and the organizational learning theory as a
complementary theoretical lens (section B-I 2.5).
Section B-II addresses the practical perspective and provides a detailed description of the
applied research methods and insights from a series of explorative case studies conducted.
Thereby, section B-II 1 introduces the research setting, the criteria for the case selection, the
data collection, and the analysis process. Furthermore, main business characteristics and their
current form of CM in the series of conducted case studies at the RFSPs are presented (section
B-II 2), and the main results are summarized (section B-II 3). Section B-III consolidates the
theoretical perspective and insights from the set of cases studies to define the research
framework.
Chapter C systematically introduces the core tasks of each cornerstone of CM (CA in section
C-I, CM process in section C-II, and organization in section C-III), and considers the business
characteristics of various types of RFSPs. Thereby, a conceptual understanding of CM and
related tasks for companies in the transportation industry is developed.
Chapter D centers the analysis of the integration alternatives of CM identified in the selected
case studies. A cross-case analysis is used to elaborate on the interrelation between the chosen
integration alternative at the selected RFSPs and various situational (contingency) parameters.
Based on the gathered empirical data sets, general propositions for each of the specified
23
integration dimensions are derived (section D-I). Moreover, a management model that offers
design recommendations for the integration of CM into the structures, systems, and processes
at RFSPs is derived (section D-II).
Chapter E starts with the core contributions of this dissertation (section E-I), which are further
concretized for both practice (section E-II) and scientific use (section E-III). The limitations of
the research project are critically discussed (section E-IV). Based on the disclosed limitations,
recommendations for further research opportunities are derived and summarized (section E-V).
24
B Development of the Research Framework
Chapter B elaborates on a theoretical-conceptual research framework addressing the research
construct of CM integration. A research framework is an instrument with which the available
knowledge in a research field is made transparent and the core elements are structured and
categorized (Becker, 1993: 119). Thereby, the subject of research is systematically delimitated
and the interrelations between the respective elements of the research field are revealed (Rössl,
1990). Thus, the developed research framework, which includes content-related, procedural,
and methodological elements, guides the following research process and allows a systematic
approach to classifying empirical and theoretical insights (Becker, 1993: 119).
To engage in a serious derivation of the research framework for the thesis, both a theoretical
(section B-I) and a practical perspective (section B-II) of CM are contemplated. From a
theoretical perspective and using a conceptual background, the key terms “carbon
management” (section B-I 1.1), “integration” (section B-I 1.2), and “road freight carriers”
(section B-I 1.3) are defined to create a common understanding of the main research construct.
This definition is followed by a description and evaluation of various theories, whereby the
contingency and the organizational learning theories are selected with the goal of obtaining
theoretical access and receiving explanatory approaches for the research field of CM
integration (section B-I 2). Section B-I 3 summarizes the results of the theoretical perspective.
To sharpen the first theoretical indications with respect to the cornerstones of CM, the practical
perspective centers the description of the current form of elaboration of CM on a set of case
studies. Thereby, initially, the chosen research setting – a methodological triangulation – is
explained, whereby the focus is on the case study approach (section B-II 1). Furthermore, the
main business characteristics and the current CM profile at seven RFSPs are presented (section
B-II 2) and are combined in a case synthesis (section B-II 3).
In section B-III, the core results of both perspectives are consolidated and the core elements of
the research field and their interrelations are presented within the derived research framework.
25
I
1
1.1
Theoretical Perspective of Carbon Management
Conceptual Background
Understanding “Carbon Management”
Despite the increasing relevance of the management of carbon emissions, its definition and
terminology vary significantly in the literature and in practice. In particular, a broad number of
terms with a slightly different understanding of CM are applied in the literature, including
carbon footprint (Wiedmann and Minx, 2007; Sundarakani et al., 2010; Chowdhury, 2010;
Jensen, 2012), carbon accounting (Ascui and Lovell, 2011; Bowen and Wittneben, 2011;
Stechemesser and Günther, 2012), carbon management accounting (Burrit et al., 2011), carbon
auditing (Edwards et al., 2011), and carbon management (Okereke, 2007). The diversity of the
terms indicates the variety of understanding and points out that a clear definition of CM is still
missing.
As an introduction to the research field from both a managerial and a scientific perspective
indicates (section A-I and A-II), CA presents the basis for conducting CM. As a consequence,
this introduction starts with the definition of the term “carbon accounting” to develop the
foundation for an understanding of CM.
“Carbon Accounting”
In the literature, the term “carbon accounting” is frequently used to discuss issues related to the
integration of environmental aspects into general management accounting (Stechemesser and
Günther, 2012). Thereby, scientists in various disciplines frequently apply CA, indicating that a
“concise definition of carbon accounting is somewhat elusive and problematic” (Ascui and
Lovell, 2011: 980) because each component of the term – “carbon” and “accounting” – may be
applied and interpreted in various ways. Consequently, a broad range of possible meanings for
CA exists in the literature, requiring an adjustment to the research context of the thesis.
Furthermore, the literature distinguishes between a non-monetary focus and a monetary focus
of CA (Ratnatunga, 2008; Stechemesser and Günther, 2012). In the former, CA refers to the
physical measurement of (direct and indirect) carbon emissions released to obtain a
comprehensive inventory of operations-based carbon emissions (Hespenheide et al., 2010). In
the latter, it addresses the monetary valuation of carbon emissions, particularly those applied
for financial statement purposes. Therefore, CA is primarily important for companies obliged
to participate in an emission trading scheme (Ratnatunga, 2008). This thesis places a nonmonetary focus on CA because the current ecological, political, and economic requirements
26
that RFSPs are faced with primarily address the physical information on released carbon
emissions. Furthermore, based on a significant inventory of physical carbon emissions, a
monetary evaluation of carbon emissions is conducted with minimal additional effort.
Focusing on physical carbon emissions, the term “carbon” is also used for the element carbon
dioxide, the six main greenhouses gases (also referred to as the “Kyoto gases”), or all identified
greenhouse gases (Bebbington and Larrinaga-Gonzalez, 2008). All relevant standards of CA
such as the CEN standard EN 16258, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol,21 and the PAS22 published
by the British Standard Organisation require the inclusion of the six “Kyoto gases” (BSI, 2011:
9; DIN, 2013: 12; WBCSD and WRI, 2011b: 5). The thesis focuses on these six greenhouse
gases to be compatible with the established standards in the field of CA. Thereby, to achieve
comparability among the six greenhouse gases, the gases are quantified using the common
measurement scale of carbon equivalents (e.g., DIN, 2013: 6).
In general, “accounting” focuses on gathering and reporting quantifiable metrics concerning
the company’s activities (Schaltegger and Burrit, 2010). In the field of carbon accounting, the
quantifiable metrics present the carbon equivalents. Ascui and Lovell (2011) and Stechemesser
and Günther (2012) understand the term “accounting” as being further differentiated with
respect to the level of observation (for example, product, project, organization, supply chain,
nation) and the purpose of the accounting activities (for example, research, compliance,
reporting, information, benchmarking). The thesis focuses on the company perspective of CA.
Moreover, to meet the increasing expectations of various stakeholders in the field of
environmental transportation services, the aim of CA in this research context is to deliver
strong carbon indicators to support internal management decisions and to meet external
requirements.
CA shares many similarities with other accounting activities (Bowen and Wittneben, 2011),
such as the well-established concepts of financial and cost accounting. These accounting
activities cover the gathering, preparation, and reporting related to a particular unit of the
company (for example, financial data) for internal management decisions and for external
stakeholders (Schaltegger and Burrit, 2010).
Based on the derived delimitation of the terms “carbon” and “accounting,” complemented by
the established understanding of cost and financial accounting, “carbon accounting” is
characterized in this dissertation as follows.
21
For the guidelines of the CEN standard EN 16258 and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, refer to section C-I 1.
22
PAS 2050:2011: Specification for the assessment of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services; for
further information, please refer to http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/forms/PASs/PAS-2050/.
27
CA encompasses the systematic measurement, preparation, and reporting of carbon
equivalents based on internationally accepted standards at the company level. The aim
of CA is to provide carbon indicators to support internal management decisions and to
meet external requirements.
This understanding of CA is primarily in line with the delimitation of Bowen and Wittneben
(2011), who defined CA in a comparable research context as “the measurement of carbon
emissions, the collation of this data and the communication thereof within and between firms”
(Bowen and Wittneben, 2011: 1025).
“Carbon Management”
Although the term “carbon management” is frequently applied in the literature (e.g., Burritt et
al., 2011, Okereke, 2007), to date no widely accepted definition of this term is available. Table
3 presents selected definitions of “carbon management” and concepts with comparable
meaning to review the first indications of the current understanding of the term “carbon
management” within the literature.
Papers
Definition of “carbon management” and concepts with
comparable meaning
Burrit et al.,
2011: 80
“Carbon management accounting is one part of sustainability accounting designed to provide
managers with information that assist companies facing short- and long-term decisions about
carbon emission (…).”
Chan, 2009: 11
“Carbon management means the measurement and management of the six greenhouse gases
covered by the Kyoto Protocol, including carbon dioxide (CO2).”
Hoffmann,
2007: 5
“Corporate carbon management encompasses measurement … for achieving direct and
indirect reductions from a company`s own operations (such as energy efficiency initiatives);
research, development and investment in low carbon production and process-related
technologies as well as reductions obtained through emission offsets and trading; activities to
reduce ‘upstream’ or ‘downstream’ emissions along the value chain; and adaption strategies.”
Lee and
Cheong, 2011:
972
“Carbon management practice usually involves carbon reduction targets and clear measures
to achieve them.”
Lee, 2012b: 35
“Carbon management activities are those activities in which companies engage to respond to
climate change. (…) The six categories of CM activities are: emission reduction commitment;
product improvement; process and supply chain improvement; new market and business
development; organizational involvement and external relationship development.”
28
Weinhofer and
Hoffmann,
2010: 78
“We understand a company`s CO2 strategy as a pattern in action over time intended to
manage its direct and indirect CO2 emissions.”
Table 3: Definitions of CM and concepts with comparable meaning.
This presented understanding of CM and concepts with comparable meaning are either very
generic (management of the six greenhouses gases) or focus on specific elements of CM, such
as the emission reduction commitment or mitigation measures without specification of the CM
task fields from a general perspective. However, that the scope of the management activities is
in line with CA with respect to the six main greenhouses gases (carbon equivalents) becomes
obvious. Furthermore, the core goal of CM is to reduce the inventory of the carbon emissions
caused by the company’s activities based on the selection of an appropriate package of
mitigation measures.
Therefore, the comprehensive body of literature in the field of “management” can be
additionally applied to derive an initial understanding of “carbon management.” Existing
studies widely accept that management encompasses the organizing, planning, executing, and
monitoring of business processes for a specific scope (for example, supply chain, company,
quality, or energy consumption). The goal of management activities is to identify the potential
in the operational process and to decide on appropriate measures to create efficiency gains
(e.g., Töpfer, 2007: 171). In particular, transferring this generic understanding of a management
concept to the research field requires the specification of the scope and aim of the management
activities. Derived from insights from the literature, the scope of the management activities in
the field of CM presents the six greenhouse gases measured as carbon equivalents. The aim of
management activities in the field of CM is to identify the potential for and achieve
improvements in carbon efficiency within the operational process (Lee and Cheong, 2011).
Based on the discussed insights from the literature, an initial understanding of the term “carbon
management” is developed as follows.
Carbon management encompasses the organizing, planning, executing, and
monitoring of carbon equivalents with the goal of identifying the current carbon
reduction potential in operational processes and continuously improving the carbon
efficiency of the company.
The initial understanding of the key terms “carbon accounting” and “carbon management” form
the foundation for the following literature review.
29
1.1.1
Methodology of the Literature Review
An explorative literature analysis was conducted to derive significant implications for the
specification of the cornerstones of CM. To broaden and create a comprehensive literature basis
for the forthcoming evaluation steps, the literature review concentrates on peer-reviewed
journals, complemented by selected book publications (section B-I 1.1.1). Based on insights
from the paper and book publications, a research map is developed to structure the research
field of CM and reveal connecting points with the related research fields (section B-I 1.1.2).
Paper Publications
The paper-based literature analysis covers the research field of CA and CM, with a dedicated
focus at the company and supply chain levels. A broad understanding in the literature,
particularly of the term “carbon accounting,” necessitated the exclusion of papers that used the
term in another research context. For example, paper publications that concentrated on CA and
CM at the city, country, or global level are excluded. Because these publications addressed the
research field of CM in a foreign research context, the gained theoretical implications are
hardly transferable; therefore, no additional insights into the research field of CM at RFSPs are
expected.
The review was performed systematically to minimize research bias and to ensure the
reproducibility of the literature review. Three main steps were conducted to identify all relevant
papers that fit the analyzed research context (e.g., Aronsson and Brodin, 2006; Stechemesser
and Günther, 2012; Perego et al., 2011):
 Keyword-supported searches in various scientific databases;
 Manual screening of tables of contents for all identified journals; and,
 Analysis of all identified papers and selection of relevant papers.
First, a comprehensive search in scientific databases including Science Direct, Emerald,
SpringerLink, and EBSCOhost was conducted, with the aim to achieve an open-minded
identification of relevant journals and the timeframe in which papers were published that
addressed the issue of CM. To find the relevant literature, the following key terms in various
combinations were applied:
 Carbon / carbon equivalent / CO2 / greenhouse gas / emission management;
 Carbon / carbon equivalent / CO2 / greenhouse gas / emission accounting; and,
 Carbon / carbon equivalent / CO2 / greenhouse gas / emission footprint.
30
The combination of these keywords with logistics-related terms, such as transportation or
logistics services, a further focus on green logistics (keywords: environmental, green, and
sustainability), and combinations of these terms did not yield additional results because the
issue of CM was a very ancillary part of the research focus in these papers, if at all.
Second, to achieve a comprehensive general view of the literature in this field, the tables of
contents for all identified journals were manually screened. Accordingly, an overview was
prepared that indicated that all identified papers were published in 32 different academic
journals (see Appendix C) between 2005 and 2013. Prior to 2005, ecological issues,
particularly energy consumption during transportation activities, were discussed intensively in
journals (e.g., Vanek and Morlock, 2000). Given the increasing concerns about global warming
since 2005, the focus of academia, particularly in the field of logistics and with respect to
transportation, shifted from the pure calculation of energy consumption to the calculation of
carbon emissions. The application of carbon emissions or carbon equivalents offers the benefit
that the energy consumption of various energy sources is made comparable on the basis of a
single measurement scale. Other literature reviews (e.g., Jensen, 2012) conducted in a
comparable research context but with a slightly different focus (product carbon footprint)
showed the same outcome with respect to the identified period. In summary, the manual review
of the literature resulted in the identification of 45 additional articles, resulting in a total of 110
articles.
Third, starting from this basis, the papers were analyzed and a subset was selected that deals
directly with the calculation and management of carbon emissions at company and supply
chain levels and that provides insights into the research field previously delimited. A total of 14
papers were eliminated because they did not contribute to the research field. The most common
reasons for the elimination were:
 A focus on the assignment of responsibilities for environmental pollution in the context of
cross-border delivered products (e.g., McKerlie et al., 2006; Lenzen et al., 2007); and
 Discussion of a package of mitigation measures within another industry focus (e.g., Bocken
and Allwood, 2012).
To summarize, 96 papers were identified that were compatible with the described research
focus.
31
Book Publications
Additionally, a literature review was conducted that focused on book publications released in
the German-speaking literature in the 1990s. German book publications were included because
of an increasing awareness by transportation sector companies of environmental issues and the
related certification scheme (ISO 14000 family). Given this growing importance, researchers
from different disciplines addressed this topic with a focus on logistics management, thus
creating a body of literature. The comparable scope, similar challenges, and profound insights –
not taken into account in current journal publications – make German book publications fruitful
for the previously delimited research field.
A further driver for considering the German-speaking literature was the different scientific
cultures between the German-speaking and English-speaking scientific communities. During
the selected period in German-speaking countries, the instrument for publishing scientific
results were book publications, which later shifted to a more paper-oriented focus. In contrast,
in the English-speaking scientific community, the importance of journal publications was much
more significant during the same period. Moreover, the scientific results of book publications
in English are reflected in current journal publications. Therefore, extending the literature
review with respect to English book publications was evaluated as not target-oriented.
To identify the relevant book publications, a comparable approach – similar to that described
for the paper publications – was chosen, excluding the second step (manual screening of the
tables of contents for all identified journals). As a first step, a keyword-supported analysis
using search engines (Google scholar and Google books) was carried out. Thereby, the
following keywords in all possible combinations were applied:
 Environment / sustainability / carbon management at logistics service providers / carriers23.
In summary, 15 books were identified that were published between 1991 and 1998. In the next
step, the book publications were analyzed for their contributions to the delimitated research
field. After screening the content of the books, five books were eliminated. The most common
reasons for the exclusion of the books were as follows.
 The book publications created another industry focus, of which RFSPs are a very ancillary
part.
 Although the book publications center the business characteristics of RFSPs, environmental
issues are marginally discussed.
23
German terms: Umwelt- / Nachhaltigkeits- / CO2-Management bei Logistikdienstleistern / Transporteuren
32
To conclude, 96 papers and 10 books were identified and analyzed in depth to gain state-of-theart insights into the research field for CM in general, and particularly from a RFSP perspective.
1.1.2
Research Map of Carbon Management
The creation of a research map requires a systematic evaluation of the identified literature and
an evaluation of the findings with regard to the specified research goal. For this purpose, in
chronological rank order, the identified book and then the paper publications are first
analyzed to structure the research field of CM and to reveal connecting points with related
research fields.
Book Publications
To start with, a content-related analysis of the book publications provides a comprehensive
overview of the initial discussion to integrate environmental issues into the daily business
processes of transportation companies in the 1990s. This originally understanding constitutes a
fruitful foundation for the following evaluation of the paper publications. Table 4 summarizes
the main content-related insights from the book publications, subdivided into the research
approach adopted, the key results of the books, and the implications for the delimitated field of
research.
Books24
Research
approach
Results of the books
Implications for the research
field
Baumgarten et
al., 1996
Case studies
This book publication developed an
approach for the specific evaluation
of distribution centers (CITY
FREIGHT) with respect to
environmental and economic
criteria.
In-depth description and evaluation
of a measure to bundle goods and
reduce carbon emissions
Baumgarten, et
al., 1998
Case studies
The book publication focused on
recommendations for the design of
cross-company logistics value
chains by considering quality and
environmental aspects.
Importance of the integration of
environmental issues into other
business processes to manage
logistics processes
Göpfert and
Wehberg, 1995
Conceptual
Within this book publication,
various strategies were discussed to
incorporate environmental aspects
into the marketing strategy of
logistics service providers.
Relevance to integrate the
environmental aspect into the target
systems and the marketing processes
24
For the references of the book publications, refer to appendix A.
33
Läpple, 1995
Conceptual
This book publication addressed
various approaches for an efficient
and simultaneous environmentally
friendly transportation service with
a focus on urban regions.
Package of logistics-oriented
concepts aimed to increase the
carbon efficiency of transportation
services
Meffert and
Kirchgeorg,
1992
Conceptual
and case
studies
The anthology took a holistic
perspective of environmental
management, with a particular
focus on the target system, planning
instruments, and information
systems.
Relevance for environmental
management: targets, integrated
planning approach, and information
systems
Pfohl, 1993
Conceptual
with a set of
practical
examples
The anthology addressed various
issues of environmental
management, whereas the focus
was on aspects of disposal logistics.
Importance of integrating
environmental aspects into the
transportation processes
Richter et al.,
1997
Conceptual
and case
studies
This book publication addressed
several approaches for efficient and
simultaneous environmentally
friendly transportation
management.
Range of mitigation measures in the
field of road freight transport,
relevance of an environmental
system
Steger, 1992
Conceptual,
case studies
and empirical
data analysis
The anthology took a holistic
perspective of environmental
management, with a focus on
elements and the integration of
environmental management into
other units.
Elements of the management
process: target and investment
planning, monitoring and selected
mitigation measures, and
organizational anchorage of
environmental management
Spelthahn et al.,
1993
Literature
review,
complemented
by selected
interviews
This book publication focused on
approaches for an environmentally
friendly design of the relationship
between RFSPs and shippers.
Cooperative approaches to conduct
environmentally friendly logistics
services in cross-company relations
Wehberg, 1997
Conceptual
Based on the perspective of
evolutionary theory, this book
publication elaborated on a holistic
framework for environmentally
friendly logistics management.
Importance of the integration of the
environmental aspect into systems
(information system) and logistics
processes.
Table 4: Results of content-related analysis of selected book publications.
These book publications contemplated a package of measures to improve the environmental
efficiency of logistics and, in particular, transportation services. Thereby, cooperative and
cross-company approaches that take into account the requirements of supply chain partners
were evaluated as the most promising measures. Moreover, the integration of environmental
34
management into structures, systems, and processes of the overall business, particularly into the
planning and monitoring process, is another main element of the discussion.
To summarize the key findings, the book publications focused on aspects of managing
environmental issues at RFSPs, with a particular focus on environmentally friendly measures
and the integration of environmental management into established management processes.
Paper Publications
The preselected papers were analyzed using a two-pronged approach (e.g., Perego et al., 2011;
Selviaridis and Spring, 2007):25
 Content, complemented by the year of publication; and
 Research method, complemented by the content.
Initially, the papers were assigned to the type of journal to obtain first indications of the
perspective and the academics dealing with the issues of CM. In general, the literature review
shows that 59 papers were published in environmental journals, nine in transport and logistics
journals, nine in accounting journals, five in supply chain management journals, and 14 in other
journals (such as production, management, and business). The result of this analysis indicates
that the research was largely dominated by environmental journals, with an emerging
awareness in transport and logistics and supply chain journals (Jensen, 2012). Although the
present review only includes CM literature with a focus at the company and supply chain
levels, the wide range of journals indicates that different types of scientists deal with the issue
of CM and that the issue is analyzed from various perspectives.
Figure 4 shows the distribution of papers within the analyzed timeframe. The papers were also
classified according to their content, with categories developed using an iterative process
during the in-depth literature analysis. A differentiation was made between CA and CM topics
in general. CA is further subdivided according to different observation levels (supply chain and
company level) and general topics without specifying an observation level.
25
For the references, the assignment to journals and the assignment to content and methodology of the paper publications,
refer to appendix B-D.
35
25
N=96
20
1
1
1
5
5
Carbon Management
15
4
5
10
3
5
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2005
2006
2007
2
1
3
2008
Carbon Accounting (General)
2
5
9
8
9
2011
2012
2013
1
16
2
5
2009
2010
Carbon Accounting (Company
Level)
Carbon Accounting (Supply Chain
Level)
Figure 4: Number of paper publications from 2005–2013.
Figure 4 illustrates the increasing popularity and academic interest of this research area in
recent years, with a notable decline in 2013. One explanation for this decline is that a couple of
special issues in various journals that focused on environmental problems contributed to a
variety of publications between 2010 and 2012.
The content-related focus of the publications was on CA, particularly at the supply chain level.
Thereby, relatively little attention was paid to transportation (logistics) activities (Edwards et
al., 2011), which primarily results from the scarce research focus on CA in transportation and
logistics journals. Moreover, 12 studies concentrated on CA at the company level, whereas
none of these papers analyzed the research field from a RFSP perspective. Fifteen papers
discussed the research field of CA on a general basis and primarily focused on interpreting and
applying CA standard directives. Fifteen papers addressed selected aspects of CM based on the
initially derived understanding (see section B-I 1.1).
36
The set of papers were further classified according to their methodological approach by
considering the aforementioned and applied content classification.
60
N=96
50
7
40
11
Carbon Management
2
30
Carbon Accounting
(General)
20
34
10
4
3
5
8
0
Case Studies
Conceptual /
Theory
12
Literature Review
3
6
4
2
4
Model
Empirical Data
Analysis
Carbon Accounting
(Company Level)
Carbon Accounting
(Supply Chain Level)
Quantitative Research
Qualitative Research
Figure 5: Analysis of methodologies applied in the selected papers.
Figure 5 indicates that most studies were qualitative and presented the experiences and results
from CA in explorative case studies. Conceptual qualitative research or those based on
literature reviews are scarce. Quantitative approaches are also rare; only nine papers
contributed by developing mathematical models to calculate carbon emissions. Ten papers
analyzed empirical data. Among the 15 papers concerning CM, seven derived results based on
a case study analysis, four were conceptual, and four analyzed empirical data sets.
To derive a current theoretical baseline for the investigation (see Table 5), the 15 papers on CM
were analyzed with respect to their core findings. Furthermore, key implications for the
delimitated research field are pointed out to concretize the first indications regarding the
cornerstones of CM.
Paper
Burrit et al.,
2011
Results of the papers
Key implications
Ten leading German companies were investigated for their Organization (structure,
corporate CM accounting practices, applying the contingency IT systems), carbon
theory and transaction cost theory as theoretical lenses. The focus indicators
of the investigation was on carbon indicators, involved
departments, and applied IT systems. As one of the main findings,
the authors’ concluded that a generally low level of maturity with
regard to CM accounting was observed and that the companies
37
should contemplate a more sophisticated design of CM
accounting.
GonzálezGonzález and
ZamoraRamírez, 2013
In the case of Heineken Spain, the developed strategies and Critical success factors
critical success factors to monitor and reduce the inventory of for conducting CM
carbon emissions were elaborated on. Top management support,
communication, training, formalization, technical / rational,
internal supervision, and consistency were identified and
described as the main influencing factors.
Hoffmann and
Busch, 2008;
Busch, 2010
These conceptual papers introduced four corporate carbon Carbon reduction targets,
performance indicators (carbon intensity, carbon dependency, carbon indicators
carbon exposure, and carbon risk). Furthermore, the authors
developed a framework for selecting operational metrics to
calculate meaningful carbon indicators, taking into account
specific industry characteristics.
Jeswani et al.,
2008
This paper analyzed responses to climate change by focusing on
the nine most energy-intensive and greenhouse gas-emitting
industrial sectors in Pakistan and the UK. The companies were
evaluated for specific predefined characteristics such as
management activities (for example, targets set to reduce
consumption, greenhouse gas inventory, audit) and operational
activities for energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction (for
example, various mitigation measures). Four various maturity
levels of CM at a company level were developed: indifferent,
beginner, emerging, and active, and the analyzed companies were
assigned to a specific maturity level.
Carbon management
process (reduction
targets, mitigation
measures, monitoring
carbon emissions)
Lee and
Cheong, 2011;
Lee, 2011
In the case of Hyundai Motors Co., the authors analyzed the
introduction of CM within a supply chain and concluded that the
basis of CM is to measure the carbon footprint of products and
processes. Based on this information, continuous monitoring and
evaluation of the performance of suppliers’ carbon emissions were
carried out and companies tackled their carbon emission
challenges within supply chains.
Carbon management
process (carbon reduction
targets, mitigation
measures, monitoring of
carbon emissions)
Lee, 2012a
Employing the case of a South Korean automotive manufacture,
the paper introduced and explored the eco-control approach and
noted that conducting eco-control delivers fruitful information on
carbon emissions for decisions makers, which helps increase
carbon performance measurement.
Carbon management
process (mitigation
measures, monitoring of
carbon emissions)
Lee, 2012b
Within this paper, empirical data on 241 Korean companies were Carbon management
analyzed with regard to the carbon strategy and other variables, process (emission
such as the industry or company size. As one of the core results, reduction commitment,
38
Liu, 2012
six different types of corporate carbon strategy were identified and
characterized: “wait-and-see observer,” “cautious reducer,”
“product enhancer,” “all-round enhancer,” “emergent explorer,”
and “all-round explorer.”
process and supply
improvement),
This study analyzed barriers to enacting CM in fuel-intensive
industries (91 companies in total), such as manufacturing
chemical fibers, raw chemical material, and chemical products in
China. Thereby, the key barriers to implementing CM were
External and internal
framework conditions,
organization (incentive
systems)
organization
(organizational structure,
incentive systems)
categorized as structural, regulatory, contextual, and behavioral.
McKinnon and
Piecyk, 2012
Based on a sample size of 11 semi-structured interviews with Carbon reduction targets
logistics managers26 and a literature analysis, different approaches
for setting a carbon reduction target for logistics operations were
analyzed. As a main finding, the authors concluded that corporate
target-setting differs significantly in the field of logistics
operations. Thereby, only a small majority of companies
systematically analyzed the company-specific carbon reduction
potential.
Okereke, 2007
Motivations for, drivers of, and barriers to carbon management External and internal
were presented based on an analysis of the UK FTSE 10027 as an framework conditions
empirical case. The summarized main findings are as follows:
 Main motivation: profit, credibility, fiduciary obligation,
guiding against risk, ethical considerations;
 Drivers: energy prices, market shifts, regulations and
governments directives, investors pressure, and technical
change; and,
 Barriers: lack of strong and policy framework, uncertainty about
governments’ actions and the marketplace.
Okereke et al.,
2012
In this conceptual paper, the authors discussed general challenges Aspects of an
regarding how governments and businesses deal with climate organizational anchorage
change and developed an overview of the range of possible
options and approaches to tackle these climate challenges.
Rankin et al.,
2011
This paper analyzed the framework conditions for CM and, in Internal framework
particular, credible carbon disclosures on the basis of 80 conditions, organization
Australian firms. A key finding of this paper is the close (structure)
relationship among a certified environmental management system,
reporting to the Carbon Disclosure Project, and the extent and
26
The sample size included four logistics service providers, four major retailers, and three manufacturers.
27
The UK FTSE (Financial Time Stock Exchange) 100 Index presents a share index of the stocks of the 100 companies
listed on the London Stock Exchange with the largest market capitalization. 39
credibility of carbon disclosures.
Schaltegger and
Csutora, 2012
In this conceptual paper, the authors argued that CA supports CM
and provides the basis for a profound decision process.
Additionally, selected aspects of a comprehensive CM process
were introduced with a particular focus on carbon indicators.
Carbon management
process (carbon
indicators, causes of
deviation, mitigation
measures)
Table 5: Papers concerned with CM.
In the presented papers, CM was primarily discussed as the calculation of carbon indicators
extended by mitigation measures with the goal of improving carbon efficiency. The papers
loosely discussed some aspects of CM – such as organization (structure, systems) or the carbon
management process (carbon reduction targets, range of mitigation measures, and monitoring)
– without systemizing the research field from a general perspective. However, an in-depth
analysis of the papers indicates that, in addition to CA, a CM process and organizational
aspects (structure and systems) were discussed as further elements of CM.
Based on the results of the literature analysis, Figure 6 presents the research map, including
insights from both the analyzed papers and the book publications. In particular, the literature
focused on the calculation of the amount of carbon emissions. The other elements of CM, such
as CM process and organizational aspects, were widely neglected. Moreover, the initially
introduced interrelated literature fields28 were assigned to the elements of CM.
28
See section A-II.
40
Figure 6: Derived research map and related research fields.
1.2
Understanding “Integration”
The term “integration” is applied in various literature and research streams but with slightly
different meanings. Thus, the concrete definition of the term “integration” is diverse and
strongly depends on the specific research context (Häusler, 2002: 9). However, in the economic
research context, the term “integration” is generally understood as combining two or more
separate parts with the aim to create a whole (Beckmerhagen et al., 2003). As noted in the
introduction to the research field from both managerial and theoretical relevance (section A-I
and A-II), the management of carbon emissions presents a new task field for companies. This
new task field, which encompasses various elements (structures, systems and processes),
cannot be viewed as disconnected and must be integrated into companies’ established task
fields.
41
The following section presents insights from different fields of literature that deliver fruitful
implications to enhance the understanding of the term “integration” and to develop the
underlying definition of this thesis. Because CM presents a new task field, the organizational
structures for conduct with respect to CM must be created to focus on the organizational issues.
Therefore, the organizational literature should make available insights into the appropriate
delimitation of the term “integration” for the research context. Moreover, the literature field on
“integrated management systems” addresses the integration of various management systems29
into themselves and into the company’s overall business activities. Because CM shows many
content-related parallels with a management system, valuable insights are expected from the
understanding of the term “integration” in this literature stream.
The organizational30 literature discusses the issue of integration in the design of organizational
structures for various decades (Häusler, 2002: 16) and, in particular, focuses on the area of
tension with respect to division of labor (Schreyögg, 1998: 158). An increasing division of
labor in organizations induces complexity because the holistic task is interrupted and carried
out by various employees at separate units. Consequently, the separate elaborated on results
must be united to achieve a close performance unit. Hence, following the general understanding
of Schreyögg (1998: 158), integration into the organizational context encompasses the
combination of various separated task fields into a holistic unit. A far-reaching delimitation of
the term “integration” in the organizational context provided by, for example, Rühli (1992), is
that the goal of integration is the insertion of a new task field into the established structure to
achieve a new, high quality overall unit.
Frequently, the term “coordination” is simultaneously applied in the organizational literature
(Schreyögg, 1998: 158). As Kieser and Walgenbach (2010: 93) argued, division of labor leads
to interdependence among various members of the company who carry out the respective
subtasks. Consequently, because employee performance must be aligned with the targets of the
company, coordination is required. Based on this understanding, integration may be delimited
as the target-oriented coordination of the divided tasks within a company.
To delimit the term “integration” for the research field of CM integration, insights from the
young literature field on “integrated management systems” are additionally contemplated. In
recent years, organizations employed various management systems to focus on the areas of
environment, social responsibility, quality, and safety management to cater to the increasing
requirements of various stakeholders. A growing number of independent management systems
29
For an in-depth delimitation of the term “management system,” refer to section A-II.
30
For an in-depth specification of the literature field “organization,” refer to section A-II.
42
significantly increases the complexity within the organization and lead to an increasing need
for integration of management systems into themselves and into the company’s overall
business activities (Rocha et al., 2007). With this concept in mind, Beckmerhagen et al. (2003)
defined the integration of management systems “as a process of putting together different
function-specific management systems into a single and more effective integrated management
system” (Beckmerhagen et al., 2003: 214). Thus, various goals of the company are composited
and human, information, infrastructure, and financial resources are commonly shared and used
effectively (Karapetrovic, 2003).
Based on the understanding of the term “integration” in the previously described literature
streams, the following concept is developed.
Integration focuses on the process of combining or coordinating CM with other task
fields of the company to create a single unit. The goal of integration is to align
companywide targets among various task fields and to effectively apply the company’s
available resources.
Moreover, a main objective of the investigation at hand is to systematically structure and
analyze different business practices identified as integration alternatives to CM. As revealed by
insights from the literature review in the field of CM, CM encompasses various elements
including structures, systems, and processes. Therefore, to analyze integration alternatives to
CM, different areas or fields of integration must be considered. Moreover, because integration
may be understood as a process, the intensity of combining or coordinating CM with other
established task fields within the company might vary. Consequently, further concretization of
the integration alternative may be achieved by considering the degree of integration. In this
thesis, the CM integration alternatives are specified along the following two criteria.
 Field of integration
 Degree of integration
The following section conducts further specification of the field of integration and the degree of
integration with respect to the research field of CM integration.
Field of Integration
The field of integration may be specified as the area in which the elements of the new task field
(CM) are combined or coordinated with the established task field of the company. In the
43
literature, a broad range of fields of integration may be identified. To enhance the
understanding of the fields of integration and to receive first indications of applied fields of
integration, Table 6 provides an overview of several fields of integration by taking into account
the specific research context.31
Paper
Asif et al.,
2010a
Fields of integration
Research context
 Strategic
Based on four case studies, the authors focused on
the integration approach of different management
systems. The fields of integration were selected in
 Tactical
 Operational
line with insights from the literature.
Bernardo et
al., 2011
 Internal audit (team, time, plan, and
report)
 External audit (team, time, plan, and
report)
 Audit process (internal and external
audit)
Bernardo et
al., 2012
 Integration process (subdivided into 12
criteria)
 Objectives and documentation
(subdivided into six criteria)
 Procedure (subdivided into 12 criteria)
Karapetrovic
and Willborn,
1998
 Resources
This paper has an empirical focus and analyzes
the degree of integration of internal and external
audits with respect to several managements
systems. The considered fields of integration are
based on the understanding in the literature and
are customized for the purpose of the research.
This paper has an empirical focus and investigates
the relationship between difficulties in the
integration process and the degree of integration
with respect to quality and environmental
management. Further subcriteria are based on the
results of a comprehensive literature review.
The authors of this conceptual paper discussed
various aspects of the integration of quality and
environmental management. The three fields of
integration are applied because the authors of the
paper defined them as the elements of a system.
 Processes
 Objectives
Table 6: Fields of integration applied in the literature.
In general, the considered fields of integration are either very generic (strategic, tactical,
operative) in nature or encompass a broad range of different fields of integration. Furthermore,
the overview indicates that the specification of fields of integration highly depends on the
understanding of the scope addressed by the research.
To ensure completeness with respect to relevant fields of integration and to consider the
characteristics of CM, the fields of integration for the thesis are delimited in line with the
31
The focus is on the literature field on “integrated management systems” given many content-related parallels and
similarities to CM.
44
understanding of the specific research scope: CM. Following this approach, the cornerstones of
CM are considered to delimit the fields of integration in this investigation. Thereby, insights
from the literature review (see section B-I 1.1) reveal that CM encompasses the following
cornerstones: organizational aspects (structures and systems) and the CA and CM process that
presents the fields of integration.
Degree of Integration
The degree of integration specifies the extent (Asif et al., 2010a) to which CM is combined or
coordinated with the established task fields at the company. Thus, the degree of integration
describes how far CM is integrated into the four previously introduced fields of integration.
Considering the insights from the literature field into “integrated management systems,” the
degree of integration is frequently differentiated (in ascending rank order) among “no
integration,” “partial integration,” and “full integration” (e.g., Asif et al., 2010a; Bernardo et
al., 2009; Bernardo et al., 2011). Asif et al. (2010a) delivered comprehensive guidelines to
operationalize and delimit various degrees of integration.32 Based on this classification scheme
provided, the evaluation criteria for the specification of the various degrees of integration are
derived.
Table 7 summarizes the classification scheme for the various degrees of integration: no
integration, partial integration, and full integration. The evaluation criteria are presented in a
generic manner for each field of integration (structures, systems, and processes).33
Structures  Separate unit, no
exchange with other
corporate units
 Separate unit, exchange with
other departments / units to
 Tasks are distributed among
various departments / units
the same degree
Systems
 New systems present a
stand-alone solution that
is not interlinked with the
established systems
 New systems are interlinked
with the established system
to the same degree (for
example, at IT systems’
selective interfaces)
 New systems are completely
embedded into the established
systems of the company
Processes
 Company targets are not
aligned
 Company targets are aligned
to the same degree
 Common company target
 People have combined duties
32
Asif et al. (2010a) presented various criteria for the specification of the degree of integration, subdivided by field of
integration: strategic, tactical, and operational.
33
A tailored and more in-depth specification of the evaluation criteria for the specific degree of integration is conducted
in section D-I, which concretizes the content-related particularities of each field of integration. The conceptual
understanding of the different integration fields (cornerstones of CM) is developed in chapter C.
45
 No interaction among
people
 No integration among
various aspects of
processes
 Separate documents that
promote little
collaboration
 People have combined
responsibilities to some
extent
 Various aspects of processes
are considered in a combined
manner during execution
 Execution of processes is
considered in a partially
combined manner
 Combined management
manuals, procedures,
checklists, data collection
sheets
 Combination of only a few
relevant documents
Table 7: Classification scheme to specify the degree of integration for various fields.
An analysis of the specific degree of integration shows that the degrees of integration among
various fields of integration likely differ significantly, requiring a systematic evaluation process
of each specified field of integration. This statement is underpinned by the empirical results of
a single case study conducted by Satolo et al. (2013), who analyzed the degree of integration of
the quality and environmental management system into a single unit at a sugar and ethanol
manufacturing entity. The results revealed that the degree of integration varies between “not
integrated” to “totally integrated” with respect to 11 applied integration fields.34
1.3
Understanding “Road Freight Service Providers”
This section outlines the core business characteristics of road freight service providers (RFSPs).
Because RFSPs may be assigned to the category of logistics service providers, this section
starts with a brief introduction of the positioning of logistics service providers within business
relations and the offered range of logistics services. Based on this developed insight, the main
business characteristics of RFSPs are systematically elaborated on to create a common
understanding of the companies that are central to the thesis.
In the recent past, a growing outsourcing trend in nearly all industrial sectors was observed
(e.g., Selviaridis and Spring, 2007). Industrial companies focused on their core competences
and omitted (logistics) activities that do not belong to their central business. Outsourcing of
logistics activities enables industrial companies to exploit external logistics expertise (Sink et
al., 1996). Thus, the number of companies involved in the supply chain increased, creating
34
Satolo et al. (2013) specified a total of 11 integration fields, such as document control, measurement and monitoring,
complaint management, corrective and preventive action, control of records, auditing, integrated management system
manual, company policy, mission, vision, and training.
46
more complex relationships among them. To illustrate the role of logistics service providers as
a third-party in such business relationships, the logistics triad is frequently applied in the
logistics community (e.g., Stefansson, 2006; Sternberg et al., 2013). Figure 7 illustrates the
relationship between the three involved parties in the logistics triad: seller (sender), buyer
(recipient) of the goods, and the logistics service provider (Bask, 2001).
Figure 7: Logistics triad.
(Adapted: Bask, 2001: 473)
Larson and Gammelgaard (2001) specified a logistics triad as a cooperative, three-way
relationship between a seller and a buyer of goods, and a logistics service provider moving and
/ or storing the goods between the seller and the buyer. By conducting the logistics services, the
logistics service provider reverts to its own transportation or warehousing resources, or those of
other external service partners (e.g., Sternberg et al., 2013; Larson and Gammelgaard, 2001).
Given increasing customer requirements,35 in recent years logistics service providers extended
their service portfolios to encompass both physical and administrative services with respect to
service depth and width. Thereby, the physical dimensions address value-added services, such
as tracking and tracing, product labeling and packaging, and product assembly and installation
(e.g., Berglund et al., 1999; Langley et al., 1999). Administrative services are combined with
physical services and might include freight brokerage, information processing and invoicing,
and payment services (e.g., Halldórsson and Skjøtt-Larsen, 2004; Selviaridis and Spring, 2007).
The focus of the thesis is on RFSPs; therefore, the wide range of logistics services carried out
by logistics services providers must be sharpened to enhance the understanding of the main
logistics service characteristics of the companies that are central to this thesis. Following
35
The customer of the logistics service provider might be the seller or the buyer of the goods depending on the specified
incoterms between the two other parties.
47
Thyssen (2010: 20),36 a concretization of logistics services may be conducted along the
following two dimensions:
 Service comprehensiveness; and,
 Transport mode.
First, the comprehensiveness of services is described by service bundles that are divided into
single services, combined services, and system services. Single services present specific
services such as transportation activities. Combined services reflect – in addition to
transportation activities – further related services such as warehousing and transshipment
activities. The last service type encompasses a further increase in logistics services depth or
width, which might contain value-added services such as final assembly and quality assurance
(Thyssen, 2010: 20). Given the increasing relevance of the provision of carbon indicators in
business relations and mounting environmental regulations in the transportation industry, this
thesis pays particular attention to single transportation services.37
Second, transportation services are differentiated with respect to the following six transport
modes: road, rail, intermodal, sea, inland sea, and air. Worldwide, approximately 75 percent of
the amount of carbon emissions released by transportation activities is assigned to road freight
transport (IEA, 2009: 3); therefore, road freight transport is a particular focus of various
stakeholders. Consequently, this thesis centers on companies that conduct transportation
services that apply the road mode of transportation.38
36
Thyssen (2010: 20) developed a morphological box in an attempt to characterize the main attributes of companies in
the logistics industry. Thereby, the following three criteria are additionally applied: executing party, type of goods, and
use of assets. First, the executing party criterion centers the player conducting the logistics services with a
differentiation on logistics service providers and the shipper’s internal logistics unit. This thesis addresses logistics
service providers. Second, regarding the characteristic type of goods, Thyssen (2010: 21) differentiated between bulk
cargo, mixed cargo and courier, and express and parcel (CEP) goods. This thesis does not focus on a specific type of
good. Third, the last criterion refers to the use of assets and addresses whether the logistic services are conducted with
own / leased assets or are partially / completely assigned to service partners. As previously discussed, logistics service
providers conduct their services using their own resources or those of others.
37
This thesis addresses, in particular, single logistics service transportation. Companies in this thesis that are referred to
as RFSPs might additionally offer combined or system services.
38
Companies classified as RFSPs might include other transport modes; however, the main mode of transport is the road.
48
Based on this presented understanding of logistics service providers and the further
concretization of logistics services, the companies central to this thesis are delimited as
follows:
RFSPs are companies that commercially carry out logistics services on behalf of
a customer. Thereby, transportation services are conducted using the road mode
of transportation.
1.4
Synthesis
The previous sections defined the key terms “carbon management,” “integration,” and “road
freight service providers” of this research to refine the common understanding of the main
research construct.
 CM presents a new task field for companies and addresses the continuous improvement in
the amount of carbon emissions revealed by the company’s operations. Conducting CM
requires the creation of structures and systems and the establishment of CA and CM
processes.
 Integration addresses coordinating or combining CM with other task fields within the
company to align its goals and to achieve operational synergies. Different integration
alternatives in the field of CM may be concretized through the field of integration and the
degree of integration, where at the degree of integration it is differentiated (in ascending
rank order) between no, partial, and full integration.
 A RFSP may be characterized as a company that conducted logistics services on behalf of a
customer (sender and recipient of goods). Thereby, the focus of logistics services is on
transportation services as road freight services.
The understanding of the core research constructs functions as a basis for the following section
on theory.
2
Theory Selection
This section introduces theories on delivering access and fruitful implications for the delimited
research problem. To conduct a systematic and transparent theory selection, initially, an
overview of theories that might fit in the research field of CM integration at RFSPs is presented
(section B-I 2.1), followed by the derivation and specification of evaluation criteria to ensure
49
the choice of a significant theory (section B-I 2.2). These criteria are applied to assess the preselected theories (section B-I 2.3). The value of the selected theories, more specifically the
contingency and organizational learning theory, with respect to CM integration is introduced,
and the specific drawbacks of the theories are discussed (sections B-I 2.4 and B-I 2.5).
Moreover, section B-I 2.6 presents a contingency-based framework for analyzing the
integration alternatives of CM in business practice.
2.1
Theories Compatible with the Research Field of CM Integration
The research field of CM integration at RFSPs is concretized within the conceptual background
(section B-I 1) through the definition of key terms. Moreover, an in-depth analysis of the
literature in the field of CM indicates (see B-I 1.1) that, to date, the application of theoretical
lenses that could serve as a first approximate orientation for the investigation at hand is widely
neglected.39 However, because the research on CM integration is grounded in the literature
field of sustainability management, indications from this field of literature with respect to
applicable theories are expected.
The literature on sustainability management is broad and various theoretical lenses are applied
to analyze the research field from different perspectives. Therefore, referencing the theories
already applied in the sustainability management literature may be fruitful for obtaining a
significant overview of theories that may be appropriate for the research field of CM
integration at RFSPs.
Sarkis et al. (2011) carried out an organizational theoretic review of the sustainability
management literature, with a particular focus on the recent green supply chain management
literature. Thereby, nine broad organizational theories are identified: complexity theory,
ecological modernization theory, information theory (information asymmetry and signaling
theory), institutional theory, resource-based view, resource dependence theory, social network
theory, stakeholder theory, and transaction cost theory. Moreover, five organizational theories
are promised, which might deliver fruitful implications for the green supply chain management
literature: diffusion of innovation theory, path dependency theory, social embeddedness theory,
structuration theory, and agency theory.
From the literature review on sustainable supply chain management and logistics and supply
chain management journals, Carter and Easton (2011) determined that organizational learning
39
An exception is Burrit et al. (2012), who used the theoretical lenses of contingency theory and transaction cost theory.
50
theory is a further theoretical lens that is frequently applied.40 Furthermore, Burrit et al. (2012)
explained the practice of leading German companies with respect to the current form of
elaboration of carbon management accounting; thereby, two theoretical lenses are used:
contingency theory and transaction cost theory.
In sum, 16 theories were identified that are frequently applied or recommended to deliver
fruitful implications for the research field of sustainability management. Excluding theories
that are not tailored early in the theory selection process offers the benefit of a more in-depth
focus on the remaining theories. Therefore, a total of eight theories were eliminated because no
access or implications for the research construct CM integration are expected. The contentrelated focus of the eliminated theories is as follows:41
 External pressure or motivation to address sustainable issues within the company (diffusion
of innovation theory, ecological modernization theory, institutional theory, social
embeddedness theory, social network theory, and stakeholder theory);
 Mechanisms that produce path dependency or reasons why a company sticks to a specific
routine (path dependency theory); and,
 Dependence of resources from other supply chain partners (resource dependency theory).
To conclude, the remaining nine theories are presented and evaluated in the subsequent section
on theory. For an initial understanding, Table 8 introduces the key statements of the preselected theories in alphabetic rank order.
Theory
Short introduction
Agency theory focuses on the challenges that arise under conditions of incomplete and asymmetric
information when one party (the principal) delegates tasks to another party (the agent) who
Agency theory
Complexity
theory
40
41
performs the work. Incentive mechanisms such as piece rates, commissions, profit sharing, and
efficiency wages are applied to achieve alignment between the interests of the agent and those of
the principal (Eisenhardt, 1989b).
The complexity of an organization is concretized through heterogeneity or diversity with respect
to technological aspects or customers and suppliers (Chakravarthy, 1997). Complexity theory
points out that growing complexity leads to difficulties in planning and predicting their actions.
Therefore, companies should be sensitive by adopting their systems and should consider related
interdependences (Crozier and Thoenig, 1967).
In addition to organizational learning theory, the aforementioned transaction cost theory, resource-based view, and
stakeholder theory are noted.
For an in-depth specification of the excluded theories, refer to appendix E.
51
Contingency
theory
Contingency theory states that no one best way exists to organize / lead and that an organizational
/ leadership style that is successful under certain framework conditions may not be successful in
other conditions. Therefore, the optimal organization / leadership style is contingent on various
internal and external constraints (Fiedler, 1964). The literature in the field of contingency theories
addresses various organizational characteristics, such as management accounting, leadership,
human resource management, and strategic decision-making processes (Donaldson, 2001: 4).
Information
theory
Information theory focuses on asymmetries evolving out of an imbalance concerning relevant
information. These information asymmetries lead to difficulties for companies when they attempt
to communicate their sustainable commitment to external groups (Sarkis et al., 2011). Information
(information
asymmetry and
signaling
theory)
asymmetries may be successfully reduced through enhanced interaction and communication;
however, this effort becomes more difficult with the increasing global organization of supply
chains (Simpson, 2010). Signaling theory attempts to overcome these information asymmetries by
proposing, for example, a certification standard binding on the partners (Gonzales et al., 2008).
Organizational
learning theory
Organizational learning theory systematically describes the process of learning within an
organization and argues that, to be competitive in a changing environment, organizations must
continuously verify and, if necessary, adapt their companywide goals and take action to achieve
those goals (Levitt and March, 1988). Thereby, organizational learning occurs when the
knowledge gained by the individual flows over the group to the organizational level (Crossan et
al., 1999) in such a way that individuals other than the progenitor have access to the acquired
knowledge (Argote, 2011).
Resource-based
view
(knowledgebased view)
The resource-based view (RBV) argues that resources and capabilities are central to creating
competitive advantages for a firm. Resources, which lead to unique advantages through the core
competences of the company, are characterized as valuable, difficult to imitate, and nonsubstitutable (Barney, 1991). The knowledge-based view builds on and extends the RBV. In
particular, in contrast to the RBV, the knowledge-based view does not treat knowledge as a
generic resource; instead, it distinguishes between different types of knowledge-based capabilities
(Grant, 1996).
Structuration
theory
Structuration theory, rooted in Giddens (1984), focuses on the interdependence among actors and
structure. Thereby, the structure within a company strongly influences the scope for innovative
action by actors. This scope is shaped by interactions between customers and suppliers that are
embedded in a specific structure and by how these actors guide the implementation process within
the scope of their specific requirements (Sarkis et al., 2011).
In general, transaction cost economics attempt to achieve a balance between effort and costs with
respect to an efficient supplier–buyer relationship. Transaction costs differ from production costs
Transaction cost
in that they are the costs generated from using the market (Williamson, 1981). Thereby, actors
theory
seek a transaction characterized by minimal costs and appropriate effort for both entities (Lai et
al., 2005).
Table 8: Introduction of applicable theories for the research field of CM integration.
52
2.2
Selection Criteria
The evaluation of the pre-selected theories as the basis for selecting a critical theory requires
the specification of the appropriate selection criteria. Various selection criteria are discussed in
the literature (e.g., Stölzle, 1999: 112); however, the selection criteria must be derived from the
analyzed research field and, consequently, must be customized for the specific research
context.
By addressing the derived research question (see B-III) and characteristics of the research
construct (see particular section B-I 1.4), the following two selection criteria are applied:
 Structuration potential, or bringing together various results (focus: integration alternatives
of CM and several situational parameters); and,
 Explanatory patterns, or explaining the learning and development process of the new CM
task field within the company
The first selection criterion, “structuration potential,” addresses aspects of the research
context to analyze different situational parameters and their effect on the chosen integration
alternative of CM.42 Consequently, the selected theory must structure and bring together
various empirical and conceptual results of the investigation. The theory must be broad in
scope because several situational parameters should be analyzed and the specified fields of
integration should encompass structures, systems, and processes.
The further theory selection criterion, “explanatory pattern,” focuses on the learning and
development process of CM as a new task field within the organization. By considering this
criterion, a theory should be selected that explores systematically the development process of a
new task field and, ideally, delivers recommendations for the further integration of CM into
structures, systems, and processes.43
2.3
Evaluation and Choice of Theories
This section evaluates the pre-selected theories with respect to their value for theoretical access
to the research problem previously delimited. The basis for the evaluation is the understanding
42
In particular, this selection criterion addresses the fourth research question of the investigation at hand: Which
situational (contingency) parameters affect the integration alternatives of CM at RFSPs and what are their effects?
43
In particular, the fifth research question is considered by this selection criterion: What design recommendations can be
derived with respect to the integration of CM at RFSPs?
53
of the theories and the two specified selection criteria. Table 9 presents an overview of the
theory evaluation process.
Theory
Structuration
potential
Explanatory
pattern
Evaluation
 Delivers theoretical access to analyze incentive
mechanisms within and across companies; therefore,
Agency theory
structuration potential is limited to this phenomenon.
 Covers only a minor part of a comprehensive CM
because the explanatory patterns are limited to a
principal–agent relationship.
 Focuses on complexity to explain challenges with
respect to conducting new task fields; thereby, the
Complexity
theory
theory has broad organizational focus (for example,
size, relationship) but limited structuration potential.
 Does not offer significant explanatory patterns with
respect to the development of new task fields, in
addition to the growing complexity in a company.
 Delivers a general framework that enables that
Contingency
theory
Information
theory
(information
asymmetry and
signaling
theory)
results with a broad scope (various organizational
characteristics) are systematically brought together.
 Addresses the development of a new task field as a
very ancillary part (for example, length of time is a
situational parameter).
 Identifies information asymmetries as a barrier for
companies when attempting to communicate their
sustainable engagement; therefore, addresses only
selected parameters for structuring the research field.
 Overcoming information asymmetries covers only a
minor part of the development of a comprehensive
CM.
 Addresses the learning process in organizations and
Organizational
learning theory
Resourcebased view
specifies only a few parameters (for example,
learning capabilities and atmosphere in the
company) to structure the research field.
 Delivers profound explanatory patterns with regard
to the development process of CM and offers design
potential with respect to further integration of CM.
 Points to the resources and capabilities central to
creating competitive advantages; CM does not
54
(knowledgebased view
present a core competence of a RFSP.
 Selected parameters (resources and capabilities) with
regard to structuration are addressed.
 Focuses solely on the capabilities of resources to
explain the development of a new task field.
 Focuses on the interdependencies between actor
(agent) and context (structure).
 Offers the potential to bring together results;
however, the focus is on actors and structures.
Structuration
theory
 Delivers selected explanatory patterns with respect
to the development of a new task field that can be
traced to actors and structures.
 Provides theoretical access to characterize
transaction mechanisms between a supplier and a
buyer; although open to a broad range of content,
has little potential to bring together results with a
broad scope.
Transaction
cost theory
 Does not address the development of a new task
field in the company.
Legend:
High suitability of the theory
No suitability of the theory
with respect to the criterion
with respect to the criterion
.
Table 9: Evaluation of the pre-selected theories.
Based on the evaluation process of the pre-selected theories, contingency theory was selected
as the leading theory and addressed the requirement to structure the empirical and conceptual
results in this investigation. Contingency theory delivers a general framework that enables the
results of various organizational characteristics to be systematically brought together.
Moreover, the theory supports the derivation of explanation approaches based on “if–then”
relations. Therefore, applying contingency theory as a theoretical lens in the young research
field of CM integration allows for the creation of a conceptual basis on which to anchor further
research (Sousa and Voss, 2008).
According to Carter and Easton (2011), the use of multiple theoretical lenses supports the
development of propositions and adds fruitful insights into the interpretation of the findings.
Chenhall (2003) argued that advancement of the contingency-based framework might be
achieved by applying other theoretical perspectives; in particular, organizational theories seem
appropriate. Other theoretical lenses offer the opportunity to explain identified patterns in the
contingency-based framework.
55
Thereto, organizational learning theory is applied as a complementary theory to address the
explanatory pattern with respect to the development of the new task field of CM in the
company. This theory systematically structures the learning process of new task fields in an
organization (Wang and Ahmed, 2003) and explores the concept that organizational learning
occurs when the knowledge flows from the individual over the group to the organizational level
(Crossan et al., 1999). Organizational learning delivers explanatory patterns with regard to the
development process of CM and allows for the classification of the current development stage.
Moreover, applying this theory enables the derivation of design recommendations for further
development steps.
The following sections thoroughly describe contingency theory (section B-I 2.4) and
organizational learning theory (section B-I 2.5) and focus on the expected value of the theories
for analysis of the research field of CM integration. Furthermore, the main limitations, which
must be contemplated in the subsequent research process, are pointed out to identify
methodological critical parts of the selected theories.
2.4
Introduction to Contingency Theory
Contingency theory aims to explore the notion that no best way exists to manage and organize
a company. Hence, a company’s management style and organizational structure must be
aligned with the framework conditions or situational (contingency) parameters because the
management or organizational style that fits at one company might fail at another company
(Fiedler, 1964).
In general, contingency theory delivers a framework that increased with the number of
theoretical concepts over the last decades. A broad range of conceptual and empirical results
are classified into the framework of contingency theory and enable findings for various
organizational elements to be systematically composited (Kieser and Walgenbach, 2010: 435).
Thereby, the literature in the field of contingency theories addressed various organizational
characteristics, such as management accounting, leadership, human resource management, and
strategic decision-making processes (Donaldson, 2001: 4). The noted organizational
characteristics underpin the broad, content-related application fields of contingency theory.
The framework of contingency theory may be differentiated between situational (contingency)
parameters and design (structural) variables (Mintzberg, 1979: 221). Situational parameters are
56
characterized as internal and external framework conditions44 usually exogenous to the
company. In most cases, the opportunity for the company to control or influence these
parameters is limited or indirect. Only in some cases is the company able to change these
parameters but primarily in the long run (Schreyögg, 1995: 25; Sousa and Voss, 2008). In
contrast, the design variables addressed the structures of the organization45 (Mintzberg, 1979:
221). These variables were within managerial control and, consequently, were more easily
changed by decision makers to fit with the specific situational parameters (Donaldson, 2001:
5f).
In the literature, contingency theory was discussed as being somewhat controversial.
Addressing the criticism of contingency theory allows identification of critical parts,
specification of the appropriate research setting, and reasonable evaluation of the validity with
respect to the findings (Kieser and Walgenbach, 2010: 432). In particular, the literature raised
the following criticisms of contingency theory (e.g., Kieser and Walgenbach, 2010: 432;
Mintzberg, 1979: 223; Otley, 1980).
 Contingency parameters are difficult to measure and operationalize.
 Contingency parameters are analyzed in isolation and not in an integrated context; hence, the
interrelations between various contingency variables are often neglected.
 Conflicting recommendations in terms of organizational structure may be derived from
various contingency parameters.
The emphasized drawbacks of contingency theory may be overcome to a large extent by
conducting qualitative research, in particular, case studies. Within the case study analysis
framework, measuring the analyzed contingency parameters is not required because a
qualitative evaluation may be conducted using ordinal rank order. Moreover, case study
research enables the analysis of the situational parameters within a specific business context
and a discussion and clarification of the effect of situational parameters on specific design
variables (Tillema, 2005). Thus, a case study allows for the identification and significant
elaboration of all relevant situational parameters and their specific effect on the design
variables (Chenhall, 2003).
Transferring the insights of contingency theory to the research field of CM integration, the
method for approaching CM may be anticipated to differ among various RFSPs because of the
44
For example, Mintzberg (1979: 221) discussed, among other topics, the following situational parameters: organizational
age and size, technical system regulations, and environmental stability and complexity.
45
For example, Mintzberg (1979: 221) differentiated between nine dependent variables such as job specialization, the
planning and controlling system, liaison devices, and vertical and horizontal decentralization.
57
different internal and external framework conditions. Hence, a broad range of integration
alternatives is expected, which reflects the specific needs of a company (Burrit et al., 2011) and
may be traced to various situational parameters. Moreover, considering the previously
described drawbacks to contingency theory, a case study approach seems particularly
appropriate for the investigation. During a case study approach, the interrelations between a set
of situational parameters and the chosen integration alternative for CM are discussed and
elaborated on within a specific company context. Therefore, the value that contingency theory
contributes to the investigation is multidimensional.
First, contingency theory delivers a general theoretical framework that allows for the
classification of a broad range of conceptual and empirical results. Thus, applying a
contingency-based framework facilitates the structuration process of the findings in the young
research field of CM integration, which has a limited conceptual and theoretical foundation.
Second, contingency theory offers a comprehensive body of analyzed situational parameters
and design variables, and their interrelations. These insights support the identification,
classification, and exploration of situational parameters and design variables and offer initial
indications with respect to their interrelations. Based on the interrelations identified in the
literature, explanation approaches in terms of “if–then relations” may be developed.
Section C-I 2.6 introduces the contingency-based framework for analyzing the integration
alternatives of CM in business practice.
2.5
Introduction to Organizational Learning Theory
Cyert and March (1963: 171) initially introduced organizational learning theory and specified
organizational learning as a process by which organizations learn as a collective. To be
competitive in a changing environment, organizations must recognize and affectively respond
to changing framework conditions. Hence, organizational learning focuses on improving
individuals’ capabilities to ensure that the organization as a whole is better able to respond to
the requirements of its environment (Murray and Donegan, 2003).
In general, the initial learning process at organizations occurs at the individual level; thus,
organizational learning shows many similarities to psychology and cognitive research.
However, this individual learning process does not necessarily lead to an organizational
learning process (Argyris and Schon, 1996) because individuals may keep the knowledge
private or may leave the organization (Sinkula, 1994). Consequently, organizational learning
58
occurs when an individual shares his or her knowledge or stores it organizational memory46 in
such a way that individuals other than the progenitor are able to access the acquired knowledge
(Argote, 2011).
The concept of organizational learning theory is widely established and was defined in a wide
range of studies (Levitt and March, 1998; Wang and Ahmed, 2003). Argote (2011) concluded
that, in the last 20 years, “a large river of research on organizational learning that is wide and
has several deep currents” was developed (Argote, 2011: 440-441). However, the following
concurrent criticism of organizational learning theory may be rooted (e.g., Bontis et al., 2002;
Cohen and Sproull, 1991; Wang and Ahmed, 2003) in the broad application of the theory in
just about all areas of organizational change.47
 The concept of organizational theory is too broad and lacks a concrete delimitation.
 The body of literature delivers overwhelming but unclear concepts for researchers and
practitioners.
Therefore, the following section introduces the main concepts of various literature streams
within organizational learning theory. Based on these insights into literature streams, the focus
is on one of the streams to derive concrete anchor points for the integration of CM, in particular
the learning and development process of a new task field such as CM within a company.
To structure and update the understanding of organizational learning within the scientific
community, Wang and Ahmed (2003) elucidated the five main streams of literature for
organizational learning theory. Table 10 lists the various streams of literature and summarizes
the core concepts.
Literature stream
Core concepts of the related literature streams
Individual learning
Within this stream of literature, individuals are contemplated as “agents” for
organizations to learn. Consequently, learning within an organization occurs when
individuals notice a challenging situation and address upcoming issues on the
organization’s behalf and interests (Argyris and Schon, 1996).
Process and system
Research on this stream of organizational learning focused particularly on the learning
process within organizations and understands the organization as a learning system
(Revans, 1982). Moreover, processes were discussed regarding how the organization
manages the gained experiences by addressing the individual, group, and organizational
46
47
For example, organizational rules, structures, documented and active processes, or the application of IT systems.
Cohen and Sproull (1991) determined that organizational theory addresses “all organizational changes, from ontological
complaints that organizations cannot learn, and from various other maladies that arise from insufficient agreement
among those working in the area on its key concepts and problem” (Cohen and Sproull, 1991: 1).
59
levels (Crossan et al., 1999).
Culture and
metaphor
Within this stream of literature, the origin of learning was understood as a metaphor and
not as a type of structure. Moreover, this research stream focused the creation and
maintenance of the appropriate learning culture within an organization (Drew and Smith,
1995).
Knowledge
management
Organizational learning and knowledge management present two parallel concepts that
often refer to each other (Wang and Ahmed, 2003). Therefore, this stream of literature
addressed the changes in the state of knowledge within an organization (Lyles, 1998),
encompassing knowledge acquisition, dissemination, refinement, creation, and
implementation (Fiol, 1994).
Continuous
improvement
The final stream of literature argued that an organization should intensively deal with a
continuous improvement process of individuals to adapt the entire organization with
respect to its required context (Buckler, 1996).
Table 10: Main streams of literature within organizational learning theory.
The stream of literature on “process and systems” seems particularly fruitful for the
investigation because the focus is set on the learning process at various levels within an
organization. Conducting CM is a new task field; therefore, a continuous learning and
development process within the organization is required that aims to integrate CM into the
structures, systems, and processes at the RFSPs. Therefore, explanations of the stream of
literature on “process and systems,” in particular for this aspect of the research construct, are
expected.
Within this stream of literature on organizational learning theory, the framework of the 4I
(Intuition, Interpreting, Integrating, Institutionalizing) organizational learning processes
introduced by Crossan et al. (1999) addresses the learning and development perspective of
strategic renewals (Crossan et al., 1999). In particular, this framework appears to be of great
interest for the analysis because CM is a new task field with strategic relevance for companies
in the transportation industry given the mounting requirements of various stakeholders.
Moreover, this framework is consistent with previous frameworks in the field of organizational
learning theory (Stevens and Dimitriadis, 2002) and gained certain recognition within the
organizational learning literature (e.g., Berson et al., 2006; Bontis et al., 2002; Stevens and
Dimitriadis, 2002). As Jones and Macpherson (2006) noted, the 4I framework “gives greater
theoretical coherence to the field of organizational learning” (Jones and Macpherson, 2006:
157).
This 4I organizational learning framework, as presented in Figure 8, encompasses the four
related (sub)processes of Intuition, Interpreting, Integrating, and Institutionalizing. These
60
processes occur at three levels – individual, group, and organization – that delimit the structure
of organizational learning within organizations. Learning begins at the individual level, at
which the intuiting and interpreting processes occur. Thereby, intuiting encompasses a preconscious recognition of business possibilities based on inherent personal experiences or
external events. Interpreting addresses the explanation of new ideas to oneself or to other
members of the organization, thus requiring the development of a common language.
Interpretation and integration occur at the group level and lead to recognition of the insights
from the learning that occurs within the organization. Furthermore, during the process stage of
integration, a shared understanding within the organization is developed and coordinating
action through mutual adjustments is taken. Finally, at the organization level, the acquired
information is integrated and institutionalized. Institutionalization is the process that ensures
that learning is embedded into routine, including companywide structures, systems, and
processes. Thus, conducting and maintaining the new strategic field in the daily business of the
company could be achieved.
Furthermore, within the framework, the tension between the assimilation of the field of new
tasks (feed-forward) and the exploiting of gained insights within a company is addressed
(feedback). Thereby, through feed-forward processes, knowledge flows from the individual to
the organizational level; in contrast, insights from the learning process represent feedback in
the opposite direction (see Crossan et al., 1999) for further discussion of the 4I framework).
Figure 8: 4I organizational learning framework.
(Source: Crossan et. al, 1999: 532)
61
By transferring insights from the 4I framework to the research context, in particular the CM
learning and development process within a company, learning in the field of CM is anticipated
to initially occur at the individual level. With greater experiences in the field of CM, an
increasing number of employees within the company are expected to be affected by the task
field of CM. This learning process within the company might lead to changes through the
chosen CM integration approach, such as variations within the organizational anchorage of CM
or the applied IT systems. Therefore, the expected value of organizational learning theory, in
particular the 4I framework, is twofold.
First, the 4I organizational learning framework delivers explanatory patterns, which helps
explain identified relations in the contingency-based framework. Second, because the 4I
organizational learning framework systematically structures the learning process within an
organization, design recommendations for the integration of CM can be derived. The notion is
included that the conduction of sustainability issues such as CM does not concern just one
employee or one department but is, in contrast, a task field of the entire organization.
2.6
Contingency Based-Framework for Analysis
This section derives the contingency-based framework used to analyze the integration
alternatives and related situational parameters affecting the integration alternative of CM in
business practice. Developing a contingency-based framework requires the specification of
situational parameters and design variables (Mintzberg, 1979: 221).
Situational Parameters
Situational parameters present internal and external framework conditions that are usually
exogenous to the company. The investigation cannot exhaustively analyze the wide range of
potential situational parameters and their relation to the design variables because including the
full range of situational parameters and interrelations in the contingency-based framework is
impossible. First indications with respect to relevant situational parameters are derived in
advance to support the structuration of the subsequent research process. Further contingency
parameters identified during the case studies are considered in the contingency-based
framework and their relevance in the literature is specified.
62
Following the guidelines delivered by Evangelista et al. (2013),48 situational parameters that are
expected to affect the design variables are selected by applying the following approach:
 Insights from the literature review;49
 Other research studies on the logistics (transportation) industry;50
 Outcome of focus groups workshops;51 and,
 Experiences of the researcher in the field of CM integration.
Generally, the literature differentiated between internal and external situational parameters
(Sila, 2007). The internal contingency parameters frequently investigated in the literature are
grouped into three broad categories: the organization’s size, the organization’s technology, and
other organizational context parameters (e.g., Chenhall, 2003; Haldma and Lääts, 2002; Sousa
and Voss, 2008). The literature focuses on the following technological contingency parameters:
established IT solutions and IT infrastructure, means-end relationships, and the amount of task
variety (Haldma and Lääts, 2002). The other organizational context parameters encompass a
wide range of situational parameters, such as task complexity, item variety, or organizational
age.
This investigation considers the size of the company in the contingency-based framework
because the requirements in the field of CM might be greater as the size of a RFSP increases,
thus affecting the design variables. Because CM and, in particular, CA encompass significant
technological involvement, particularly with respect to the calculation of carbon indicators, the
interrelation between the IT capability of the company and various design variables are
analyzed. Moreover, taking into account the characteristics of the CM integration research
construct, the following two situational parameters might also be relevant: experience with
calculating carbon indicators and the complexity of the operations (transportation services).
Because CM is a young task field for companies in the transportation industry, the experiences
gained in the field lead to a learning process within the organization that might affect the design
variables. Moreover, the complexity of the operations, which various studies on the logistics
industry considered (e.g., Funk, 1995; Dröge and Germain, 1998), might also be a core
parameter because quantifying the amount of carbon emissions is more difficult for complex
operations.
48
Evangelista et al. (2013) analyzed the adoption of technology at logistics service providers and developed a contingency based framework for their investigation.
49
Situational parameters were selected that were frequently applied in the literature on contingency theory, and these
situational parameters were discussed as having a traceable effect on different design variables.
50
For example, Funk (1995) and Dröge and Germain (1998).
51
For explanations on the empirical research setting, refer to section B-II 1.
63
The major external situational parameters examined in the literature are global criteria such
as nation, culture, and society, and task-specific criteria including the dynamics of technology
development, competitive situations, and customer structure (Haldma and Lääts, 2002; Kieser
and Ebers, 2006: 226; Mintzberg, 1979: 221).
All selected RFSPs in the case studies52 have their headquarters in a German-speaking
country;53 therefore, national, cultural, or societal differences are less relevant and these
situational parameters were not in the scope of the contingency-based framework. Furthermore,
the dynamics of the technology development are also not considered to be a situational
parameter because all RFSPs are active in the transportation industry, resulting in RFSPs
having access to the same level of technology. The competitive situation and the customer
structure might be relevant because customer expectations are identified as a main driver for
conducting CM in business practice (Okereke, 2007). Therefore, customer requirements for
receiving meaningful carbon indicators were selected as an external situational parameter
because they reflect the external pressure on RFSPs when addressing CM.
As introduced in section B-I 2.4, a main point of criticism of contingency theory is that the
situational parameters are difficult to operationalize and, consequently, to measure. Therefore,
for all applied situational parameters, delimitation and measurement criteria are specified in
advance, allowing a concrete and mostly objective evaluation of the status quo at the selected
RFSPs. In Table 11, these introduced situational parameters are subdivided into internal and
external parameters and summarized in alphabetic rank order. Identified situational parameters
are partially adopted for the purpose of the investigation to consider the particularities of CM at
RFSPs.
Internal
parameters
Delimitation
Experiences in
calculating carbon
indicators54
The first situational parameter focuses on the
knowledge and competences that RFSPs gained in
the field of calculating carbon indicators.
Organization’s size
This situational parameter addresses the size of
the RFSP, which is specified by the volume of
revenues and the number of employees.
Measurement indicators
Years and months (calculating
carbon indicators), knowledge of
employees in charge with respect
to CA
Revenues and number of
employees
52
For the case selection approach, refer to section C-II 1.1.
53
Germany, Austria and the German-speaking part of Switzerland
54
Because the calculation of carbon indicators presents the starting point in the field of CM, the focus is on this aspect of
the field.
64
Internal
parameters
IT capability
Operations
complexity
(transportation)
External
parameters
Customer
expectations
Delimitation
Measurement indicators
IT capability focuses on knowledge of the RFSP
in the field of the development or adoption of IT
tools.
Employees involved in the IT
department and established IT
tools (in operations)
Operations complexity is specified by the
Type of operations,56 market, and
bandwidth of the offered transportation services
(main, pickup, distributions runs, various modes
of transport) and different market and goods
segments.55
good segments
Delimitation
Customer expectations address the external
pressure of dealing with the issue of CM and are
concretized by the number of customer inquiries.
Measurement indicators
Number of customer inquiries in
the last three years
Table 11: Overview of situational parameters and their delimitation.
Design Variables
The design variables focus on the structures of the organization and are under control of the
company. In the literature, design variables, through which the effects of the situational
variables were analyzed, vary from study to study. To consider the characteristics of CM, the
developing cornerstones of CM should function as the design variables in this investigation. As
revealed by the first indication of the literature review in the field of CM,57 the cornerstones of
CM encompass structures, systems (IT and incentive systems), and processes (CA and CM).
On an abstract level, these design variables are in line with the focus of other investigations:
structures (e.g., Dröge and Germain, 1998; Funk, 1995), systems (e.g., Tillema, 2005; Otley,
1980), and processes (e.g., Cadez and Guilding, 2008; Haldma and Lääts, 2002).
The design variables – cornerstones of CM – are thoroughly specified in chapter C of the
thesis.
55
Following the understanding of Funk (1995), who specified logistical complexity as “the number of manufacturing
steps or the number of different part numbers handled in a factory” (Funk, 1995: 63).
56
For a further explanation of the different types of operations, refer to section C-II 1.1.
57
For further explanations, refer to section B-I 1.1.2.
65
Contingency-based Framework
Figure 9 presents the contingency-based framework in which the situational parameters are on
the left and the design variables are on the right.
Figure 9: Contingency-based framework.
Chapter D reveals and discusses the identified interrelations between the parameters and
variables in business practice.
66
3
Synthesis
For the research project to proceed, the following summarizes the core results from the
theoretical perspective of CM.
Conceptual background (section B-I 1)
 CM is delimited as the organizing, planning, executing, and monitoring of carbon emissions.
The basis for a comprehensive CM is CA that aims to quantify meaningful carbon indicators
for internal and external purposes. Within the CM process, the provided carbon indicators
from CA are applied to identify the current potential in operational (transportation) processes
and to continuously improve the carbon efficiency of the conducted transportation services.
The conduction of CA and the CM process must be organized to encompass structures and
systems.
 Integration addresses coordinating or combining CM with other task fields of the company.
Thus, the targets of the company with respect to various task fields are aligned and the
available resources may be effectively applied. Different integration alternatives in the field
of CM that are expected in the business practice may be specified and analyzed by
considering the field of integration and the degree of integration.
 This thesis focuses on RFSP, which is classified as a category of logistics service providers.
A RFSP may be characterized as a company that commercially conducts logistics services
on behalf of a costumer, whereby its main business activity is road freight transportation
services.
Theory selection (section B-I 2)
 Contingency theory was selected to support the structuration process with respect to the
empirical and conceptual results. Contingency theory focuses on the notion that no best way
exists to manage and organize a company because it must be aligned with the framework
conditions or situational (contingency) parameters. The theory delivers a general framework
that enables the systematic collection of the results of various organizational characteristics.
Hence, the integration alternatives of CM identified in business practices and the situational
parameters that affect the specific integration alternative may be systematically analyzed.
 Organizational learning theory delivers explanatory patterns regarding the learning and
development process of the new task field of CM in the company. The theory formulates that
the initial learning process occurs at the individual level and requires that the individual’s
knowledge is shared and stored in organizational memory to give other employees access to
the acquired knowledge. To analyze the CM learning process in organizations, the decision
67
was made to revert to the 4I organizational learning framework, including four related
(sub)processes – the intuition, interpretation, integration, and institutionalization that occur
over the three levels of individual, group, and organization.
 The contingency-based framework for the analysis of the integration alternatives of CM
encompasses five situational parameters and three design variables. Experience with
calculating carbon indicators, and the organization’s size, IT capability, operations
complexity, and customer expectations are chosen as situational parameters. The design
variables are in line with the cornerstones of CM and include structures, systems, and
processes.
The derived insights from the theoretical perspective of CM serve as a basis for the
specification of the empirical research setting and as an analytical framework for the conducted
exploratory case studies.
II
Practical Perspective of Carbon Management
The following section introduces the empirical research setting and the research proceeding of
the dissertation (section B-II 1). This section also presents the main business characteristics and
the current profile of CM at RFSPs (section B-II 2), investigated through a series of case
studies and analyzed to refine the first theoretical indications with respect to the cornerstones of
CM (section B-II 3).
1
Empirical Research Setting
A main research goal of the thesis is to shed light on the core elements of CM by considering
the business characteristics of RFSPs. Moreover, this thesis aims to explore different
integration alternatives of CM as identified in business practices and concretizes the effect of a
set of situational parameters on the integration alternatives. Based on these insights, profound
design recommendations for the integration of CM at RFSPs are elaborated on. Moreover, the
theoretical perspective of CM reveals (see B-I 1.1) that CM is still a young research field with a
limited conceptual and theoretical foundation. To address the specific research goals in a young
research field and to enhance the external reliability of the findings, a triangulated research
strategy was designed with a particular focus on qualitative research methods.
Denzin (1978) originally defined the term triangulation and described “the combination of
methodologies in the study of the same phenomenon” (Denzin, 1978: 291). As a
68
methodological triangulation, both quantitative and qualitative research methods are employed
to integrate the findings (Selviaridis and Spring, 2007) and to increase their consistency and
reliability (Jick, 1979). Multiple sources of data offer the benefit of corroborative evidence of a
phenomenon from several sources (Dinwoodie and Xu, 2008; Voss et al., 2002) and to
counterbalance the flaws of one method using the strengths of other applied methods (Mangan,
2004). Moreover, the research strategy addresses the call of Selviaridis and Spring (2007)
regarding the need to link qualitative and quantitative research methods within a triangulation
research framework in the logistics industry.
Following the approach of Evangelista et al. (2013) and the recommendations of various
authors (e.g., Dinwoodie and Xu, 2008; Selviaridis and Spring, 2007), methodological
triangulation combines focus group workshops, surveys, and a series of case studies, as
illustrated in Figure 10.
Figure 10: Methodological triangulation.
First, the empirical research started with the establishment of three focus group workshops. A
focus group workshop is described as “an interview style designed for small groups” (Berg,
1998: 100). Under the guidance of a moderator, a particular issue is discussed that allows
learning from participants with respect to a specific phenomenon (Blackburn and Stokes,
2000). Therefore, the aim of the focus group workshops was to receive further practical insights
into the current form of elaboration of CM in business practice in an early stage of the research.
69
Second, a survey was conducted. A survey is characterized as a questionnaire sent to a
respondent with a request to answer it and send it back to the research team; no interview is
involved in answering of the questionnaire (Schnell et al., 2011: 315). Because a survey is
characterized as efficient with respect to speed and cost in generating large amounts of data
(Snow and Thomas, 1994), the main objectives were to receive a broader overview with respect
to the efforts made in the field of CM and, more generally, in the sustainability of a large
number of companies in the transportation industry. Furthermore, the generated information
with respect to CM and the main business characteristics of the RFSPs were used as a
significant basis for the case study selection.
Third, a series of case studies that presents the primarily research method in this thesis was
carried out to allow an in-depth analysis of the research phenomenon. According to Eisenhardt
(1989a), “the case study is a research strategy which focuses on understanding the dynamics
present within single setting” (Eisenhardt, 1989a: 534). This research method uses cases as its
basis (Voss et al., 2002).
A case study approach is both appropriate and essential when a theory is lacking (Stuart et al.,
2002) and uncertainty exists in the specification of the research construct (Mukherjee et al.,
2000). A case study approach enables questions related to a young and upcoming research field
to be addressed (Siggelkow, 2007). By applying exploratory case studies, the holistic unit of
analysis makes it possible to identify themes and enrich existing theories because phenomenondriven research provides answers to more broadly scoped “how” and “why” research questions
(Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Yin, 1981). Thus, the case study approach offers the
opportunity for multiple sources of evidence and initial insights with an in-depth understanding
and exploration of corporate practices by considering the environmental and company-specific
business context (Dinwoodie and Xu, 2008). Moreover, this approach allows for the
specification of the framework conditions and an analysis of the respective reasons (Eisenhardt
and Graebner, 2007). Transferring the application strength of the case study approach into the
young research field of CM enables an in-depth specification of the core elements of CM
within the company. Furthermore, the case study approach allows for the specification of
different integration alternatives and to seriously question the reason and motivation for the
chosen CM integration alternative.
The case study research largely differentiated between single and multiple case study designs.58
A single case study addresses the research phenomenon at one research object (for example,
company) and enables a more in-depth analysis but limits the generalizability of the
58
According to Voss et al. (2002), further types of case studies are retrospective and longitudinal.
70
conclusions and is vulnerable to misunderstanding and misjudging (Voss et al., 2002). For a
multiple case study design, more research objects are considered that require additional
resources and the analysis is less deep per case. In return, the evidence from multiple case
studies is more compelling and the results are regarded as more robust (Dinwoodie and Xu,
2008). Furthermore, a multiple case study design enables the researcher to analyze a particular
phenomenon in various settings and to carry out cross-case analysis (Darke et al., 1998). To
augment the validity of the results and to meet the specified research goals – in particular,
analyzing the effect of a set of situational parameters on the integration alternatives – a multiple
case study design was selected.
Moreover, within a case study, the unit of analysis varies and may be differentiated as holistic
(single unit of analysis) or embedded (multiple units of analysis), such as various logistics sites,
plants, or departments at the same company (Yin, 2003: 40). Because this research focuses on
the design and the integration of CM into structures, systems, and processes at RFSPs, the
entire organization presents a single unit of analysis.
Additionally, the case study design focuses the approach on selecting case studies that
encompass forms replication and sampling design. Within a replication design, the respective
cases are carefully selected and aim to replicate their findings. In contrast, using sampling logic
frequently found in statistical surveys, the case selection is carried out with a statistical
procedure that considers the population (Yin, 2003: 47). A replication design is chosen because
it allows for a conscious selection of an RFSP with contrasting business characteristics (for
example, organizational size, operations complexity that aims to receive a significant overview
of the current form of elaboration and various integration alternatives of CM.
Furthermore, literal replication and theoretical replication are differentiated within the
replication logic. In a literal replication, similar results are predicted, whereas theoretical
replication aims to produce contrasting findings that are traced to predictable reasons (Yin,
2003: 47). The research design follows the theoretical replication design because contrasting
integration alternatives of CM at various RFSPs should be reverted to a set of different
situational parameters.
To conclude, a triangulated research strategy was designed with a particular focus on multiple
case studies and a single unit of analysis. Thereby, the case studies follow the replication
design – to be concrete, theoretical replications – because contrasting results were predicted.
The research strategy is to fit accurately with regard to the research objective that aims to
explore the cornerstones of CM and the situational parameters affecting the CM integration
alternative at RFSPs.
71
Figure 11 presents the theoretical replication for multiple case studies and illustrates the
required steps of the empirical research design, including case selection (B-II 1.1), data
collection (B-II 1.2), and data preparation and analysis (B-II 1.3). Moreover, the feedback loop
shown in the dashed-line feedback addresses the situation in which important insights occur
during the conduct of one individual case study, which might require the redesign of the case
study approach (for example, selection of alternative case studies) (Yin, 2003: 49).
Figure 11: Case study approach.
(Adopted: Yin 2003: 50)
1.1
Case Selection
In case study research, the validity of the results and the limits to the generalization of the
findings are determined largely by the case selection. To achieve enhanced external validity
and to provide a stronger base on which to develop the theory, a set of multiple case studies
was conducted (Dinwoodie and Xu, 2008). Thereby, the sample size must be large enough to
observe patterns across firms (Lillis, 1999). According to Eisenhardt (1989a), a range between
four to ten cases is ideal for explorative research that aims to conduct in-depth analysis of the
research phenomenon in each case study. According to Yin (2003: 47), adequate evidence on
the phenomenon should be obtained from six to ten cases. Dul and Hak (2008) also noted that
more than ten case studies is inappropriate in explorative research because the increasing
amount of data results in a less in-depth evaluation of each case study.
Saturation in this investigation was achieved when conducting a total of seven case studies;
thus, no additional insights from further case studies were expected to strengthen the
72
deliverables with regard to the cornerstones of CM and the interrelationship between situational
parameters and the integration alternatives of CM.
Because case studies with an exploratory character are restricted to a small sample, the
generalization of the findings is limited because the sample does not reflect the entire
population. This limitation may be partially overcome by applying a theoretical sampling in
which major and representative examples are selected. According to Dinwoodie and Xu (2008)
and Eisenhardt (1989a), the preference is to select examples that reflect extreme situations,
polar types, or companies that differ in size to identify differences in patterns across firms.
The case selection follows the approach of Evangelista et al. (2013), who selected their case
studies on the basis of available information from a questionnaire survey to evaluate
technology adoption at logistics service providers. Therefore, a set of appropriate RFSPs was
compiled from the survey participants. This selection approach offers the benefit that relevant
information with respect to business characteristics (for example, organizational size, revenues,
transportation services) or efforts in the field of CM were available beforehand, enabling and
supporting a strong case study selection process.
In line with Isaksson and Broding (2013),59 the following three main criteria were applied to
select the RFSPs for the investigation at hand:
 Addressing the issue of CM;
 Working in a comparable market environment; and,
 Varying in business characteristics.
First, the first criterion – that RFSPs already have experience in the field of CM – serves as a
prerequisite for the case selection; otherwise, no experiences in the research field from the case
studies could be expected. Furthermore, RFSPs that received certain external recognition for
their sustainability concepts or, ideally, for their CM activities were selected to minimize the
bias of the findings. To obtain state-of-the-art information with respect to the current status of
CM in business practices, front-runners were also included in the sample. Front-runners in the
field of CM can be characterized as companies that addressed the task field of CM early on and
acquired certain experience in it.60
59
Isaksson and Broding (2013) applied, in a comparable research setting, the three above-introduced selection criteria.
Their research focus was on an analysis of the green service offerings at logistics service providers
60
Following the understanding of Asif et al. (2010a), who specified “front-runners” in the context of integrated
management systems as companies that are early adopters and are known to have integrated management systems.
73
Second, all RFSPs in the case study should be active in a comparable environment to ensure
similar market requirements for customers, rules, and legislation related to transportation. In
the dissertation, RFSPs with headquarters in German-speaking countries were included, given
the benefit that the researcher was familiar with the domestic transportation market of the
RFSPs and had access to possible case studies.
Third, because the research objective is to analyze the effect of various situational parameters
with respect to the current integration alternative of CM, RFSPs characterized by sharply
contrasting business characteristics were selected. As previously described, the case study
approach follows the theoretical replication design logic and should lead to contrasting results
but for predictable reasons (Yin, 2003: 47). Thereto, in the quantitative sample of the survey,
RFSPs were identified with different business characteristics concerning delimited situational
parameters, such as organizational size, operations complexity, and experience in calculating
carbon indicators.
In summary, the sample encompasses the following seven RFSPs, which are referred to as
RFSP I to RFSP VII to protect confidentiality:
 Three large RFSPs offering a broad range of transportation and logistics services on a global
basis (RFSP I to RFSP III);
 Two medium-sized RFSPs with a focus on national transportation services (RFSP IV to
RFSP V); and,
 Two small-sized RFSPs specializing in regional business services (RFSP VI to RFSP VII).
1.2
Data Collection
A triangulated research strategy was designed to use the case study as the primarily research
method. To increase the construct validity of the conducted case studies, a combination of
multiple sources of evidence within each case study was applied (Yin, 2003: 34). According to
the chosen research strategy, the following data collection methods were used:
 Focus group workshops;
 Survey;
 Archival data;
 Onsite interviews; and,
 Observations.
74
First, three focus group workshops were conducted to generate further practical experiences in
the field of CM with regard to key elements and integration alternatives of CM in business
practice. Additionally, following the understanding of Evangelista et al. (2013),61 the focus
group workshops were applied to validate the overall research questions and to gain valuable
insights into the survey and the case studies’ designs (for example, semi-structured interview
guideline).
The composition of participants in the three focus group workshops did not change and
encompassed a total of seven participants:
 Five representatives of different small and medium-sized RFSPs;62
 Two members of road freight associations;63 and,
 One provider of ICT solutions64 (Information and Communication Technology) with a
business focus on IT-based calculation tools for carbon emissions.
The members of the five RFSP were chosen to receive in-depth practical insights with respect
to CM. The representative of the road freight associations was given an overview of the
activities of a large number of companies in the field of CM. The one member of the ICT
solution company could contribute to approaches for how ICT could be designed to support the
calculation of carbon emissions within a RFSP. This composition of the focus group workshops
enabled discussions of the issue of CM from different perspectives.
The first two workshops focused on the current form of elaboration of CM with a particular
focus on the five RFSPs, including the core challenges and the key elements of CM. The third
workshop addressed the integration alternatives and situational parameters that affect the
current integration alternative of CM. Moreover, the next steps in the field of CM at the five
RFSPs were frequently discussed. The workshops were sequentially conducted during a sixmonth period (December 2010 to August 2011).
Second, a survey was developed und distributed to the RFSPs. A questionnaire survey was
used for several reasons. A survey is efficient with respect to speed and cost; consequently, it
allows the generation of a broader overview of the CM activities within the transportation
61
Evangelista et al. (2013) evaluated technology adoption at logistics service providers and designed a triangulated
research strategy including focus group workshops, a questionnaire survey, and case studies.
62
The representatives of the RFSPs were the CEOs in three cases and the employees in charge of environmental
management in two cases. Thereby, the RFSPs differed in organizational size, the range of transportation services, and
experiences in the field of CM. Two RFSPs dealt with the issue of CM over a longer period of three years, whereas the
other three RFSPs started their activities a few months ago.
63
The two members of the road freight associations were in charge of environmental issues within the association.
64
The representative of the ICT company dealt with the development and distribution of the carbon calculation tools.
75
industry. Detailed information on the main business characteristics and efforts in the field of
CM by a number of RFSPs were available and functioned as a strong basis for the case
selection. Additionally, the broad range of data from the RFSPs offered advantages for the
seven conducted case studies. The interviewer was better prepared for the onsite interviews.
Moreover, during the interviews, a concrete focus was placed on the current profile of CM and
the reasons and drivers for the chosen integration alternative of CM.
The survey consisted of 30 questions subdivided into the following six sections: companyspecific information, staff, volume of transport, vehicle fleet information, effort in the field of
sustainability, and future prospects.65 To achieve completeness with respect to the covered
questions, the questionnaire was cross-checked by two further researchers in addition to
insights from the focus group workshops. RFSPs, which were interested in getting involved in
the research process and made efforts in the field of sustainability, could request the
questionnaire. This path enabled a target-oriented pre-selection of RFSPs to be achieved. To
create awareness for the survey within the transportation industry, a package of various
measures such as direct mailings, development of a web page, integration of various road
freight associations, and articles in practical-oriented journals was developed. Furthermore,
RFSPs that prominently communicated their efforts in the field of CM to the public were
directly addressed und motivated to participate. In summary, 230 RFSPs asked for the
questionnaires and 65 responds were received, whereby 60 contained usable responses. This
step of the research was conducted over 18 months.
Third, archival data were gathered from a set of the seven selected RFSPs to obtain a deeper
understanding of their main business characteristics, their current CM profile, and their external
communication efforts with respect to CM. Thereby, the following documents, if available,
were analyzed:
 Sustainability reports, web pages, papers, and other documents such as brochures,
organizational charts and guidelines.
Fourth, onsite interviews were conducted. An interview is a type of survey structured by
verbal communication and an interviewer (Schnell et al., 2011: 315). Thereby, the interviews
proceeded in a partially structured manner based on a semi-structured interview guideline. The
aim of the interviews was to gather descriptive data and in-depth information on the current
profile of CM and to identify and qualitatively evaluate situational parameters. To analyze the
interaction between various contingency parameters and the design variables, the reasons and
65
Refer to the appendix F for the survey.
76
motivations for the kind of integration alternative of CM encompassed the main part of the
interview.
A semi-structured interview guideline66 was prepared as a foundation on which to conduct the
various interviews. Based on initial insights in the literature review and the focus group
workshops with respect to the elements of CM and the specific situational parameters, the
interview guideline was thematically structured to ensure completeness (Lillis, 1999). The
interview guideline consisted of an average of 25 questions classified into six sections:
reporting and IT solutions, motivation conducting CM, CA, and CM processes, organization,
and miscellaneous (such as next steps). Because a few documents on the RFSPs and the
answers to the survey were available beforehand, the information was turned into a selective
adaption of the interview guideline. Another researcher cross-checked the interview guideline
for completeness of the covered issues and clarity of the objectives. The interview guidelines
were sent to the interviewees at least two weeks in advance to enable them to prepare for and
achieve a high level of availability of the relevant information.
The same researcher conducted all of the interviews during a face-to-face meeting, which
provided a high level of consistency within the data gathering process. To ensure that
respondents have deep knowledge of their company’s CM activities, the number of involved
interviewees and their function within the company differed from RFSP to RFSP depending on
the organizational anchorage of CM. Furthermore, the interviews proceeded partially in a less
structured manner when relevant issues arose (Tillema, 2005); these emergent issues are
discussed in greater depth to obtain explorative, open-minded insights that allow for an analysis
of the relevant issues from various perspectives (Eisenhardt, 1989a). The interviews lasted
between two and four hours depending on the current profile of CM, the size of the RFSP, and
the respective complexity of the operations. Each interview was recorded and transcribed.
Stuart et al. (2002) underpinned the importance of reflecting on the transcribed interview data.
Therefore, the interviewee checked and approved the transcribed results of the conducted
interviews to detect misunderstandings. To maximize recall and to fill in gaps regarding
relevant information, the follow-up questions were asked through e-mail or the telephone as
soon as possible after the case conduction (Voss et al., 2002). The interviews took place
between June and December 2013.
Fifth, the richness of the data was enhanced by observation. The researcher took an internal
perspective and systematically observed the action taken, and insights were written down
(Schnell et al., 2011: 382). This data collection method allows for the gathering of valuable
66
Refer to the appendix G for the interview guideline.
77
insights that otherwise are not available or are frequently subject to misinterpretation (Mayring,
1990: 68). The focus of the observation was primarily on the calculation process for the carbon
indicators, particular on the tools and methods. Based on these insights, the level of integration
into established IT systems could be evaluated systematically. When the observation took
place, the key insights were documented in writing.
Finally, to enhance the quality of the data gathering process and to gain a consistent picture of
each case study, the data from all conducted phases were compared with one another. Identified
inconsistencies within each case study were questioned and discussed with the staff in charge
of CM at the selected RFSPs.
Table 12 presents an overview of the archival data sources gathered and the interviewees
during the data collection phase.
Documents
Interviewees
Sustainability report, web pages, papers, and Member of the quality and environmental
sustainability brochures
department
RFSP I
Sustainability report, web pages, papers, and
sustainability brochures
Member of the HSEQ (Health, Safety,
Environment, and Quality) Management &
Compliance department
RFSP III
Sustainability report, web pages, papers,
sustainability brochures, and organizational
charts
CEO, head, and employee of the controlling
department
RFSP IV
Web pages, papers, brochures, organizational
charts, and environmental guidelines
Staff authority (head of infrastructure /
environment)
RFSP V
Web pages, brochures, organizational charts,
company newsletters, environmental and
quality guidelines, and management reports
Employee and head of quality / environmental
management
RFSP VI
Web pages and brochures
CEO
RFSP VII
Web pages, sustainability brochures, and
management reports
CEO
RFSP II
Table 12: Overview of gathered data and interviewees.
1.3
Data Preparation and Analysis
Qualitative data are subject to potential bias because the derived results depend on the
classification and particular interpretation of the researchers. To minimize researcher bias and
to enhance the internal validity of the research, a systematic process of data documentation,
including case study protocols, must be conducted (Lillis, 1999; Yin, 2003: 34; Seuring, 2008).
78
In particular, procedural reliability and validity may enhance the level of qualitative research
(Stuart et al., 2002).
The databases in both oral and written format were completely documented and prepared. In
particular, to save the comprehensive data material of the case studies, accurate records of the
onsite interviews and observations were highly relevant (Voss et al., 2002). Therefore, the
interviews were audiotaped and transferred into protocols immediately after the interview.
Insights from the observation were documented in writing as the observation took place. The
key statements of all data sources were clearly consolidated when summarizing protocols,
subdivided for each of the seven case studies. Another researcher checked these summarizing
protocols for consistency. Finally, the interviewee at the respective RFSP reviewed the
summarizing protocol of each case study to increase the accuracy of the documentation.
Concerning the data analysis, Eisenhardt (1989a) suggested two different approaches:
 Within-case analysis; and,
 Cross-case analysis.
After summarizing the case data, the researcher should analyze patterns of data within the
cases (Voss et al., 2002). Applying a within-case analysis gives the researcher the benefit of
becoming familiar with each case study on a stand-alone basis and to identify unique patterns
within each case (Eisenhardt, 1989a). Within this research context, a within-case analysis was
conducted to specify and sharpen the elements of CM derived from the literature review. This
analysis also helped understand and characterize the task of each cornerstone by considering
specific business characteristics of the RFSPs. The thorough insights into each case helped
generate the needed understanding to accelerate a cross-case comparison (Eisenhardt, 1989a).
The purpose of the cross-case analysis is justified on several grounds. The application of
diverse and structured lenses on the amount of data forced the researcher to go beyond first
impressions (Eisenhardt, 1989a). A cross-case analysis is well suited to finding similar and
contrasting underlying patterns among various cases (Isaksson and Broding, 2013).
Consequently, the cross-case analysis facilitates an understanding of the linkage between the
independent (contingency) parameters and design variables (integration alternatives of CM).
Specified situational parameters within the case studies were again reflected with insights from
contingency literature to gain a deeper understanding of their possible effect on the integration
alternative of CM.
Eisenhardt (1989a) identified a set of three tactics to identify cross-case patterns and
differences among case studies. The first approach is to select categories (in this research
context, the design variables) and to search for within-group similarities or intergroup
79
differences. The second tactic is to select pairs of cases and analyze the similarities and
differences for each pair. The third recommended tactic for a cross-case analysis encompasses
dividing the data based on data sources (for example, questionnaires, interviews). When an
identified pattern elaborated on from one data source is confirmed using insights from another
data source, the findings are evaluated as better grounded. Contrasting evidence leads to the
identification of random patterns (Eisenhardt, 1989a).
All three aforementioned tactics seem fruitful and were applied in the thesis to generate the
most valuable insights from the gained data set and to derive relations in the contingency-based
framework. The first and second tactics were particularly appropriate for identifying situational
parameters and their interrelations with respect to the chosen integration alternative. Thereby,
in particular, the second tactic offers the benefit of forcing the researcher to analyze even small
similarities and differences, which may lead to a more in-depth understanding and even
unanticipated categories and concepts (Eisenhardt, 1989a). The third tactic was applied to
underline how insights from the questionnaires differ from the findings of the documents (such
as sustainability reports), the interviewee statements, and the observations.
2
Case Analysis
This section introduces the current profile of CM in the seven conducted cases to create a basis
for the following concretization of the cornerstones of CM (section B-III). Each case study
follows the same structure and consists of a short overview of the core business characteristics
and the development of the issues of CM within the RFSP. Finally, an outlook is presented.
Table 13 summarizes the main business characteristics of the selected RFSPs. The RFSPs are
presented in rank order based on their organizational size, measured by annual revenues, from
large to small RFSPs.
80
RFSP I
Calculation of
the first
carbon
indicators
Revenues67
Employees
Own fleet size
Transported
weight
(percent road
freight)
Market
segments –
services
Market
segments –
goods
67
68
RFSP II
RFSP III
RFSP IV
2006
January 2012
January 2011
First half of 2011
> €1,000 million
Appr. 3,200
11168
12 million t (91%)
> €1,000 million
Appr. 6,000
300
7 million t (89%)
€100 to 1,000 million
Appr. 1,900
120
No information
available (99%)
€100 to 1,000 million
Appr. 860
500
0.779 million t (66%)
 Full and part load
transport
 Parcel transport
 Courier, express,
parcel
 Transport of
dangerous goods
 Full and part load
transport
 Parcel transport
 Courier, express,
parcel
 Transport of
dangerous goods
 Full and part load
transport
 Parcel transport




















 Full and part load
transport
 Parcel transport
 Courier, express,
parcel
 Transport of
dangerous goods
 Night express
 Mineral products
 Building materials
 Chemical products
 Textile goods
Building materials
Fertilizer
Chemical products
Food
Textile goods
Machines
Automotive
Agriculture products
Mineral products
Building materials
Chemical products
Food
Textile goods
Machines
Automotive
Furniture
Textile goods
Furniture
Automotive
Bicycles
To enable confidentiality of the RFSPs, the following categories with respect to revenues were formed: €1 to €15
million; €15 to €30 million; €30 to €50 million; €50 to €75 million; €75 to €100 million; €100 to €1,000 million; and
more than €1,000 million.
In the following columns, the data refer to the German subsidiary of RFSP I, which was the focus of the analysis. 81
RFSP V
Calculation of
the first
carbon
indicators
Revenues
Employees
Own fleet size
Transported
weight
(percent road
freight)
Market
segments –
services
Market
segments –
goods
RFSP VI
RFSP VII
Beginning of 2010
(field of
transportation
services)
Mid of 2011
January 2010
€50 to 75 million
Appr. 720
103
3.5 million t (100%)
€15 to 30 million
Appr. 105
80
351,000 t (100%)
€1 to 15 million
Appr. 25
11
55,753 t (100%)
 Full and part load
transport
 Transport of
dangerous goods
 Temperaturecontrolled transport
 Tank and silo
transport
 Building materials
 Chemical freight
 Food
 Machines
 Automotive
 Paper,
pharmaceutical
industry
 Transport of
dangerous goods
 Tank and silo
transport
 Waste
 Agriculture products
 Coal, ore, mineral
products
 Building materials
 Food
 Full and part load
transport
 Parcel transport
 Courier, express,
parcel
 Agriculture
products
 Building materials
 Chemical products
 Food
 Machines
 Paper, plastics
Table 13: Core business characteristics of the seven RFSPs.
2.1
RFSP I
The RFSP in case I presents an internationally oriented logistics group with many subsidiaries
in different countries; headquarters are in Lower Saxony, Germany.69 The German subsidiary
of the RFSP employs approximately 3,200 staff members, including 170 truck drivers. In
addition to road freight transport, which accounts for approximately 27 percent of total
revenues, train, air, and sea freight transportation services in particular are highly relevant with
respect to annual revenues. In 2013, the entire group generated revenues of more than €1,000
million, whereas the volume of revenues of the German subsidiary was more than €100
million.
69
The focus of the interview and the following analysis are on the German subsidiary.
82
In 2006, the RFSP began addressing the issue of CM and calculated the first inventory of
carbon indicators to be in line with its environmental policy. Thereby, the issue of CM was
formally made the responsibility of the CEO. Given many content-related parallels with respect
to CA standards and quality management, the quality and environmental department was put in
charge of competence generation in the field of CA. Thus, synergies derived from an
understanding of the specific directives of the CA standards could be exploited. Moreover, for
special environmental issues also in the field of CM, an external consultant could be asked for
advice. In general, to achieve broad awareness and to integrate environmental issues into the
daily business decisions of the German subsidiary, the RFSP established a working group for
each of the approximately 30 logistics sites. The employee(s) of the working group specify and
monitor the environmental issues of the respective logistics site.
Currently, the quality and environmental department of the German subsidiary, which consists
of two employees, is in charge of the further development and selected operative task fields in
the field of CM. The core operative task fields are gathering and preparing relevant input data
and calculating carbon emissions for internal and external purposes. Because the evaluation of
mitigation measures in road freight transport is decentralized at the respective logistics site, no
general evaluation criteria are applied. As a general role, top management makes the final
investment decision on the set of mitigation measures.
Concerning the calculation of carbon emissions inventory, in the starting year of 2006, the
RFSP focused on transportation services. Carbon emissions from other functional areas (for
example, warehousing, administration) were considered step-by-step into the calculation
process. The inclusion of all functional areas allows for an overview of the main emission
drivers within the German subsidiary and to quantify a corporate carbon footprint.70 The RFSP
developed and implemented a carbon calculator in an Excel spreadsheet to calculate the carbon
indicators. Thereby, the main challenge for the development and execution of the calculation
tool was the availability of the data on energy consumption and performance indicators and
their interconnection. For internal purposes, the RFSP calculates the inventory of carbon
indicators once a year and partially contemplates the carbon emissions of its service partners
(transportation services). The RFSP publishes this inventory of carbon emissions in a
sustainability report. For external purposes, the RFSP calculates carbon emissions on request
and, generally, receives between two and three customer inquiries per month.
As forthcoming steps in the field of CM, RFSP I plans to implement a standardized group wide
reporting system to capture energy consumption and to quantify group wide meaningful carbon
70
Section B-I 2 provides an in-depth introduction of the term “corporate carbon footprint.”
83
emissions. Furthermore, the RFSP intends to enhance the accuracy of the carbon calculation of
its service partners, particularly in road freight transport, to minimize the share of purely
calculated values.71 The RFSP uses this more detailed inventory of carbon emissions released
during direct and indirect transportation (logistics) services to formulate the specification of
group wide carbon reduction targets. The disclosure of carbon emissions on each customer
invoice is also under discussion. To offer this service, management prefers to outsource the
calculation of carbon indicators to an external service partner. RFSPS I is not considering
adding carbon emissions as a component of employee incentive systems.
2.2
RFSP II
The RFSP in case II is an international operating company with 170 company-owned locations
nearly all over the world, and its headquarters is in Austria. RFSP II has approximately 6,000
employees, and the entire group generated more than €1,000 million in 2012. The RFSP’s core
business is road freight transport services that unite approximately 40 percent of its operating
performance. Moreover, because RFSP II offers logistics services on a global basis, the
transport modes of sea, air, and train are additionally integrated into its transportation chain.
To meet future market requirements and to achieve a leading position in the field of
sustainability, in 2011, top management at the RFSP decided to address issues related to CM.
Thereby, within top management, the CFO formally has responsibility for CM. The RFSP
assigned competence generation in the field of CM to an employee in the product management
department for road freight services because this employee has in-depth knowledge of group
wide processes and the capacity of an established IT system. After the initial phase, top
management decided that the content-related responsibility of CM in the product management
department for road freight services was inappropriate for a company applying various
transport modes; therefore, the HSEQ (Health, Safety, Environment and Quality) Management
& Compliance department was formed. In addition to the task field of CM, this department
addresses aspects of quality and environmental management, particularly ISO certification of
the group’s various logistics sites, and using CSR (corporate social responsibility) topics and
compliance. At RFSP II, business unit heads evaluate and make decisions in a decentralized
manner regarding the set of mitigation measures. Thereby, the scope of decisions is partially
limited by general purchasing guidelines delivered by RFSP headquarters. Nevertheless,
general evaluation criteria are not applied.
71
Purely calculated values present the lowest quality of carbon emissions. Section C-I 3 provides a systematic structure of
the quality of different emissions indicators depending on the input data.
84
In particular, to achieve broad credibility of the calculated carbon indicators and, consequently,
to minimize the required declaration to customers, RFSP II decided not to develop its own
carbon calculator to calculate carbon emissions in the field of transportation services. Instead,
RFSP II chose the commercially distributed carbon calculation tool EcoTransIT,72 and first
carbon indicators were quantified in January 2012. RFSP II developed an automatic interface
between its IT tools and EcoTransIT, enabling the transfer of all input data such as the start,
final location, product weight, and mode of transport on a daily basis. Based on the shipment
structures of RFSP II, EcoTransIT is able to provide carbon indicators for various granularities
(for example, per customer or shipment) in the quality of purely calculated values.73 Although
these carbon indicators are available for each transport, the RFSP provides them at customers’
requests. During the last three years, approximately 10 to 20 customers actively asked for
carbon indicators.
Moreover, because the complete shipment structures are transferred to EcoTransIT, this
calculation approach enables the calculation of an inventory of carbon emissions of RFSP II for
internal purposes based on a bottom-up approach. The inventory includes all emissions in the
functional area transport and selected scope 3 emissions (service partners and the upstream
energy supply chain74). The RFSP quantifies these carbon indicators on an annual basis and
publishes them in its sustainability report.
The formulation of a concrete group wide carbon reduction target is still in discussion among
the top management of the RFSP. Following the politically specified aim to minimize global
warming up to 2 degrees by 2050, the RFSP prefers an absolute value of carbon emissions that
it is theoretically allowed to reveal. To achieve the politically defined aim, until 2050, an
expected maximum 750 gigatonnes of carbon emission from all industries will be allowed. By
considering the share of the transportation industry at the gross value added and the share of
RFSP II within the transportation industry, the acceptable “allowances” of RFSP II is
mathematically quantifiable. The first calculation results indicate that the current per-year
revealed amount of carbon emissions are widely in line with the permitted allowances.
As one of the next steps in the field of CM, the RFSP plans to break down the specified carbon
reduction targets for the various operative units to allow for an evaluation of the operative unit
with respect to its carbon efficiency. Based on the planned carbon emissions, a comparison
72
73
74
For further information on EcoTransIT, refer to section A-I.
Purely calculated values present the lowest quality carbon emissions. Section C-I 3 provides a systematic structure of
the quality of different emissions indicators depending on the input data.
Section C-I 2 provides an introduction of the different scopes of carbon emissions.
85
with the current carbon emissions is conducted. Furthermore, the company is considering the
introduction of a scoring system as a type of bonus / malus system. The resulting intercompany
transfer payments would have an effect on the financial results of the operating units and,
consequently, on the bonus distributed to employees in charge. Thus, the head of the business
unit will be encouraged to enhance the amount of carbon emissions in daily business decisions.
2.3
RFSP III
The main market segments of the RFSP in case III with respect to goods are textiles, shoes, and
automotive. Approximately 50 percent of the RFSP’s annual revenues (category: €100 to
€1,000 million) are generated by road freight transportation services with a focus on national
and international long-distance road freight traffic. The headquarters of RFSP III is in Lower
Saxony, Germany, and the company has approximately 1,900 employees, including 180 truck
drivers. Out of volume of approximately 250,000 annual shipments, 80 percent is handled by
service partners. Given the high level of outsourcing of transportation services to various
service partners, the company’s vehicle fleet encompasses approximately 120 trucks.
Motivated by a responsibility to society, to save energy costs, and for marketing purposes,
RFSP III decided to establish a project team consisting of the CEO, the assistant to the CEO
and the head of warehousing to initially generate competences at CM within the company.
Moreover, to underpin the strategic relevance of CM within the company, CM was formally
made the responsibility of the CEO. In the beginning of 2013, the content-related
responsibilities and selective operative task fields of CM were transferred from the project team
to the “controlling”75 department. Operative task synergies and enhancing the systematic
management of transportation (logistics) services by considering the amount of carbon
emissions are noted as the main motivations for adjusting the content-related responsibility of
CM. Thereby, the RFSP conducts the data gathering, preparation, and calculation of carbon
emissions in a decentralized manner at the respective departments. Top management evaluates
and makes decisions regarding mitigation measures in the field of transportation services. Thus,
the RFSP tailors the evaluation criteria for each respective mitigation measure.
As a result of the established project team, in January 2011, the RFSP started to calculate
carbon indicators with a primarily focus on the functional area of warehousing activities. Given
greater availability of relevant input data, such as energy consumption and performance
indicators, the RFSP focused primarily on warehousing activities. Gradually, the RFSP
75
The “controlling” department corresponds to the “management accounting” department.
86
considered transportation services and other functional areas in the carbon calculation process,
which aimed to quantify a corporate carbon footprint. The RFSP also developed a calculation
tool in Excel for carbon emissions. Thereby, the main challenge with respect to the
quantification of carbon emissions was to gather the relevant input data. Currently, the RFSP
calculates carbon emissions for internal purposes on a quarterly basis, including carbon
emissions of all functional areas and of services partners. For external purposes, the RFSP
quantifies carbon indicators at the request of customers, and such requests during the last three
years were minimal.
Top management applied a top-down approach to formulate a companywide carbon reduction
target that specifies an improvement in the company’s carbon efficiency up to 20 percent until
2020 as measured from the base year of 2011. Furthermore, the long-term carbon reduction
target is accompanied by further milestones. More concretely, the company’s carbon efficiency
should increase by 3 percent each year.
As the main next steps, RFSP III plans to further develop and increase the accuracy of the
calculation of carbon indicators for transportation services, including important service
partners. In particular, the focus is on the specification of a meaningful carbon indicator to
allow systematic management of carbon efficiency inventory. Furthermore, the RFSP plans to
implement a companywide reporting tool for carbon emissions that aims to enable high-level
integration into established reporting structures and to reduce manual efforts concerning the
calculation of carbon emissions. Based on a new IT tool, the frequency of the specification of
carbon emissions will increase and carbon emissions will be calculated on a monthly basis.
Additionally, to achieve broad support and awareness of CM within the company, the CEO
plans to consider the amount of carbon emissions as a further component in the annual
incentive agreements of members of top management.
2.4
RFSP IV
RFSP IV is in Switzerland and provides less than full load services, predominantly in its home
country. This RFSP has 860 employees and a vehicle fleet of approximately 500 trucks
(including contracting service partners). Its annual revenues are between €100 and €1,000
million, of which revenues from transportation services (road and rail) account for
approximately 80 percent. A main business characteristic of RFSP IV is that it frequently uses
overnight train services for national long-distance transportation services between various
logistics sites.
87
In 2001, the general company principles of the RFSP stated that ecological aspects should
increasingly affect daily business activities. As a strategic goal, the company specified the
achievement and maintenance of a leading position in the field of transport-ecology in its home
country. Therefore, the CEO bore the formal responsibility. Moreover, in 2007, the RFSP
established a staff authority that addressed ecological issues and its infrastructural
development. Furthermore, in 2010, the RFSP launched “team-ecology,” which included
decision makers from various units (for example, CEO, head of vehicle fleet, facility
management, marketing, and IT). Given that they play a key role in the field of ecological
issues, the staff authority and the working group focus on competence generation in the field of
CM within the company.
Currently, the accounting department gathers the data used in the carbon calculation, whereas
the staff authority is in charge of the preparation and final calculation of carbon emissions. The
RFSP primarily evaluates mitigation measures in the field of transportation services on the
basis of practical tests and economic criteria (for example, investment and operating costs).
Based on these evaluation criteria, the CEO or “team-ecology” make the final decisions
regarding further investments.
To accurately reflect the less than full load transportation services, including the road and rail
transport modes, the RFSP decided to develop a company-specific IT tool for CA. The
implemented IT tool is embedded into the current transport management system; however, the
calculation of carbon emissions requires manual efforts because the relevant data are stored in
different IT tools and must be prepared76 before being entered into the carbon calculator. The
RFSP calculated the first carbon emissions in the first half of 2011. Given the high resource
input (approximately 50 percent of the work time of an employee), the RFSP calculates carbon
indicators on a semi-annual basis for internal and external purposes. For internal reporting
purposes, the RFSP calculates the amount of carbon emissions for the entire vehicle fleet and
selected scope 3 emissions (service partners and upstream energy supply chain). Since 2011,
the RFSP has offered customers a report on the carbon emissions released during the
transportation services of a customer’s goods free of charge, which was used by approximately
30 customers in that year. In 2013, approximately 80 customers made use of this report.
Based on the insights into the inventory of carbon emissions, RFSP IV took a bottom-up
approach to formulate a carbon reduction target. The target specification was rooted in an indepth analysis of the carbon abatement potential based on modernization of the vehicle fleet
76
The preparation process of the data encompasses that the data (such as energy consumption and tour data) from
different IT tools are linked with other.
88
and further improvements in the operative transportation processes (particular drivers and route
optimization). Thereby, the expected development of the business volume was contemplated.
As a result, RFSP IV formulated the following carbon reduction target for the field of
transportation services: a five percent increase in carbon efficiency (carbon emissions / tonneskilometers) between 2011 and 2013.
As one of the next steps, RFSP IV intends to provide the heads of various internal departments
with the quantified carbon indicators to analyze whether they are considered in decisionmaking processes. Furthermore, the RFSP plans to purchase a telematics-based information
system for the entire vehicle fleet to improve the quality of the input data and to minimize the
manual efforts made in calculating the carbon indicators. An improvement in the input data will
simplify the calculation of meaningful carbon indicators for each vehicle and, consequently,
enforce the identification of current further potential in the operational processes with respect
to carbon efficiency. At the time of the interview, the RFSP was not considering including
carbon emissions as a further component in the employee incentive systems.
2.5
RFSP V
The RFSP in case V has 23 logistics-sites in Germany and Poland, and its headquarters is in
Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. The company primarily focuses on national and international
full load long-distance road freight services. Approximately 67 percent of its annual revenues
(category: €50 to €75 million) are generated by road freight transport. RFSP V employed 720
people, including 15 truck drivers, and its vehicle fleet encompassed approximately 103 trucks
in 2013.
RFSP V initiated its actives in the field of CM in 2009 and engaged an external consultant to
collect the amount of carbon emissions and to evaluate and identify carbon reduction potentials
for its own logistics facilities. Moreover, to meet legal requirements and motivated by
responsibility to society, in the beginning of 2010, RFSP V addressed the calculation of carbon
indicators for its own vehicle fleet. Thereby, the RFSP gave formal responsibility to the CEO,
and put the assistant to the CEO in charge of competence generation of CM within the RFSP.
In 2013, the RFSP transferred responsibility for the field of CM from the assistant to the CEO
to a staff authority (quality management and environmental) to realize operative synergies.
Concerning the operative tasks in the field of CM, a staff member manages input data
gathering, preparation, and carbon calculation. Top management carries out the evaluation of
and decisions regarding mitigation measures, whereas the functionality of the mitigation
measures function as a central evaluation criterion.
89
The RFSP uses an Excel spreadsheet to calculate the inventory of carbon emissions, which
requires manually entering fossil fuel consumption for each vehicle on a monthly basis.
Thereby, a telematics system provides the required input data. The RFSP receives real carbon
emissions values in various granularities, such as for functional area transport, per logistics site,
and per vehicle.
Instead of carbon emissions, RFSP V deals with fossil fuel consumption of the vehicle fleet
through its internal management process; consequently, no carbon reduction target is specified.
Nevertheless, the RFSP aims to achieve continuous improvement and specifies fossil fuel
reduction targets. In addition to modernization of the vehicle fleet, driver performance is
specified as a main adjustment lever to enhance fossil fuel efficiency.
As a main next step, the RFSP is working to create a sustainability report that will be published
on the company website. Thereby, the main part of the sustainability report will be the efforts
in the field of CM that focus on the amount of carbon emissions in various granularities and a
concrete package of measures to improve carbon efficiency.
2.6
RFSP VI
RFSP VI, which has one logistics site located in Saarland (Germany), primarily provides tank
and silo transportation services between loading and unloading hubs. The vehicle fleet of RFSP
VI encompasses approximately 80 trucks, including three vehicles of permanent service
partners. The workforce of RFSP VI is comprised of 105 employees, including 85 truck
drivers. In 2012, revenues generated by this RFSP were within the €15 to €30 million category,
of which approximately 99 percent was from road freight transportation services.
To save energy costs and to create a competitive advantage on the transportation market, the
RFSP addressed the issue of CM. Given the small workforce, the CEO bore the formal and
content-related responsibility in the field of CM. Moreover, the CEO had responsibility for
operative tasks such as evaluation of mitigation measures and final decisions. Thereby,
practical experiences and investment costs functioned as the main criteria for the evaluation of
appropriate measures in the field of road freight transportation services.
To improve the comparability of the performance of the truck drivers and to create
transparency of the relevant truck parameters, the CEO decided to found a startup company
cooperatively with a partner, which focuses on the development of a device to gather and
prepare truck data. The final device presents a Microsoft Windows-based calculator that is
interlinked with the RFSP’s applied freight forwarding tools and allows for evaluations of fuel
90
consumption and related performance indicators of the trucks. The application of the device,
which began in the middle of 2011, additionally enables the calculation of carbon indicators in
various granularities, even broken down to a specific tour or shipment. Based on this
information, the RFSP quantifies the amount of carbon emissions for its vehicle fleet on an
annual basis. The RFSP provides the carbon indicators for external purposes to customers on
request. During the period in which interviews were conducted, one customer regularly asked
for the amount of carbon emissions revealed.
After an in-depth evaluation process, the CEO decided not to include the amount of carbon
indicators in the internal management process. The main reason for this decision was that a
target conformity between the cost of fossil fuel consumption and carbon reduction exists,
meaning that each mitigation of carbon emissions is also reflected in fossil fuel savings to the
same proportion. This relationship may be linked to the fact that all vehicles at RFSP VI have
the same engine technology and consume the same fossil fuel. Therefore, the internal
management process focuses on monitoring the fossil fuel consumption of the vehicle fleet.
The RFSP did not specify a concrete fuel reduction target during the next period; instead, it
aimed to steadily improve the fossil fuel efficiency of the trucks. To gain continuity in the
monitoring process and to recognize early negative developments, the RFSP carried out the
monitoring process on a monthly basis. Furthermore, the RFSP introduced an incentive system
for truck drivers to allow employee participation with respect to fossil fuel savings and,
consequently, to increase the awareness of the truck drivers.
As a next step, the CEO plans to publish its corporate carbon footprint and fuel efficiency
achievements on the company’s homepage on an annual basis to document its environmental
commitment. Currently, the main argument against publishing this information is that a
publicly revealed improvement in the amount of carbon emission or fossil fuel consumption
could result in shippers demanding service fee discounts.
2.7
RFSP VII
The RFSP in case VII is classified as a small-sized RFSP in North Rhine-Westphalia,
Germany. The workforce encompasses 25 employees, including 17 truck drivers. RFSP VII
generates annual revenues that are in the category of €1 to €15 million. The focus of the
RFSP’s transportation activities is on national long-distance road freight transportation
services, as a general rule up to 300 kilometers. Service partners conduct approximately 33
percent of the RFSP’s shipments.
91
RFSP VII addressed the issue of CA in 2009, primarily driven by corporate responsibility and
to create a competitive advantage in the transportation market. Given the small workforce, the
CEO (also the owner of the RFSP) has the formal and content-related responsibility in the field
of CM. In cooperation with a student from a technical university, the foundation for the
calculation of carbon emissions, such as the current status of the science and the practice,
internal and external data gathering, and the development of a concept for climate-neutral
transportation services, were elaborated on. Given the small size of the RFSP, the CEO makes
decisions and primarily evaluates the set of mitigation measures. Thereby, in particular, the
payback period of the mitigation measures functions as an evaluation criterion.
To conduct a companywide calculation of carbon emissions, the RFSP developed a carbon
calculation tool in collaboration with an IT service provider. This carbon calculator is
completely embedded into the established transport management tool, which required a partial
redesign of the established IT system. The relevant input data for the quantification of carbon
indicators (for example, pallet space, starting point, and destination) are captured as part of the
order acceptance process. Based on this gathered input data, since January 2010, the RFSP has
automatically calculated carbon indicators using the established IT tool for every tour and has
disclosed them on each customer’s invoice.77
For internal purposes, the RFSP calculates a corporate carbon footprint for all functional areas
and selected scope 3 emissions (for example, service partners and the upstream energy supply
chain) using an Excel spreadsheet in which the required data are manually filled in. The RFSP
conducts the calculation process on an annual basis to reduce the manual data gathering efforts,
particularly of frequently applied service partners. During the year, the RFSP monitors carbon
efficiency development by evaluating fossil fuel consumption on a monthly basis.
Instead of carbon emissions, the internal management process of RFSP VII deals with the fossil
fuel consumption of the vehicle fleet; consequently, no carbon reduction target is specified.
Nevertheless, the RFSP aims to achieve continuous improvements and specifies fossil fuel
reduction targets. At RFSP VII, truck drivers are rewarded with monetary bonuses if they
achieve a specific level of fossil fuel consumption.78
As revealed in the discussion with the CEO, to date no further steps in the field of CM are
planned.
77
Section C-I 3 provides a systematic structure of the quality of different emissions indicators depending on the input
data.
78
Including carbon emissions as a further component within the incentive systems of the truck driver is not being
discussed.
92
3
Case Synthesis
Table 14 presents an overview of the current form of elaboration of CM at the selected RFSPs.
To systematize the results and to enforce an in-depth analysis of the case studies, the first
indications of the key elements of CM that are derived from the theoretical perspective within
this thesis are applied for an initial differentiation: CA, CM process and organization further
subdivided into the components structures, and systems.
RFSP
I
RFSP
II
RFSP
III
RFSP
IV
RFSP
V
79
CA
CM process
(starting year,
frequency of
calculation)
(carbon reduction target,
evaluation criteria for
mitigation measures)
Structures
Systems
(formal and content(IT and incentive systems)
related responsibility)79
• 2006
• On request (external)
• Annual basis
(internal)
• Formulation of
emissions reduction
target is under
discussion
• No general criteria
• CEO
• Excel spreadsheet
• Department (quality • No incentive systems
and environmental)
• January 2012
• Provided on request,
calculation for each
transport (external)
• Annual basis
(internal)
• Formulation of
emissions reduction
target is under
discussion
• No general criteria
• CFO
• HSEQ (Health,
Safety,
Environment, and
Quality)
Management &
Compliance
department
• External carbon
calculation tool
(EcoTransIT)
• Consideration of carbon
emissions to evaluate
operational units is under
discussion
• January 2011
• On request (external)
• Quarterly basis
(internal)
• Annual reduction of
3%, long-term target:
20% toward 2020 (base
year 2011)
• No general criteria
• CEO
• “Controlling”
department
• Excel spreadsheet
• Consideration of carbon
emissions into incentive
systems is under
discussion
• First half of 2011
• Semi-annual basis
(external and
internal)
• 5% carbon reduction
target (between 2011
and 2013)
• Evaluation primarily
based on practical tests,
investments, and
operating costs
• CEO
• Staff authority
(infrastructure and
environment)
• Developed own tool
• No incentive systems
• Beginning of 2010
(in the field of
transportation
services
• No emissions reduction
target / continuous
improvement of fossil
fuel consumption
• CEO
• Staff authority
(quality and
environment
• Excel spreadsheet and
telematics system
• No incentive systems
Formal responsibility addresses the overall responsibility of CM within the company, whereas content-related
responsibility addresses the knowledge holder and the employee who supervises or conducts the main operative tasks
in the field of CM.
93
RFSP
VI
RFSP
VII
• On request (external)
• Monthly basis
(internal)
• Evaluation criterion:
primarily functionality
• Mid-2011
• On request (external)
• Annual basis
(internal)
• No emissions reduction
target / continuous
improvement in fossil
fuel consumption
• Evaluation primarily
basing on practical
experience and
investment costs
• CEO
• CEO
• Own developed tool
(GreenBOX)
• No incentive systems
• Jan. 2010
• Each invoice
(external)
• Annual basis
(internal)
• No emissions reduction
target / continuous
improvement in fossil
fuel consumption
• Evaluation criterion:
payback period
• CEO
• CEO
• Own developed tool
• No incentive systems
management)
Table 14: Overview of current CM profile at selected RFSPs.
Concerning CA, the focus in Table 14 was on the starting year and the current frequency of the
carbon calculation at the RFSPs, subdivided into external and internal purposes. The starting
year of the carbon calculation differed and fell between 2006 and mid-2011. In four of the
seven case studies, carbon indicators for external purposes were calculated predominantly
based on direct costumer requests. Two RFSPs regularly provide their customers with carbon
indicators, one on a semi-annual basis and the other with each invoice. In addition, one RFSP
calculates the carbon indicators for each shipment on a daily basis but provides the carbon
indicators to customers only on request. Furthermore, the frequency of the calculation of
carbon indicators for internal purposes is between a monthly and an annual basis. The insights
from the case studies underpinned the initial understanding that CA presents the foundation in
the field of CM because the RFSPs receive a significant overview of carbon emissions released
during transportation (logistics) activities.
The formulation of a carbon reduction target and the evaluation criteria of mitigation measures
are addressed as components within the CM process. On the foundation of the calculated
carbon inventory provided from CA, two RFSPs in the sample specified and two RFSPs plan to
formulate a companywide carbon reduction target. This carbon reduction target functions as a
foundation against which to benchmark the further development of carbon emissions.
Currently, the evaluation of various measures in road freight transport is based on a broad
range of criteria dominated by economic components. Nevertheless, carbon indicators delivered
from CA play an increasing role within the decision process of mitigation measures at RFSPs.
94
The experiences gained in the case studies confirm that the CM process focuses on targetoriented actions that actively influence the total amount of carbon emissions.
With respect to structure, differentiation exists between formal and content-related
responsibility. In each of the seven conducted case studies, the CEO or the CFO have the
formal responsibility that underpins the strategic relevance of the issue of CM at RFSPs.
Concerning the current anchorage of content-related responsibility, a broad range of
alternatives was identified. In two cases, the CEO has the content-related and the formal
responsibility. A staff authority in two cases and the “Controlling” department, the quality and
environmental department, and the HSEQ Management & Compliance department in one case
has content-related responsibility for CM. Thus, the case studies underline the notion that the
creation of organizational structures presents a core element of CM.
Concerning systems, the focus was on the applied IT systems and incentive systems. To
facilitate the carbon calculation process within the company and to minimize the required
manual efforts, the case studies indicate that the applied carbon calculation tool shows high
relevance. Currently, at three of the RFSPs, carbon indicators are calculated using an Excel
spreadsheet, whereas three RFSPs developed their own carbon calculation tool that is, to a
certain extent, embedded in the established IT infrastructure. The RFSP in case II chose to
apply a commercially distributed carbon emissions tool. Reflecting the current status in
business practice with respect to the application of carbon indicators within incentive systems,
none of the RFSPs contemplate carbon indicators in their employee incentive systems.
However, one RFSP plans to apply carbon indicators to evaluate top management. Moreover,
at the RFSP in case II, evaluating operational units with respect to their carbon efficiency is
under discussion, which should have a direct effect on the distributed incentive to employees in
charge. The case descriptions substantiate the initial expectation that one core element of CM is
the creation or partial adoption of the established systems.
To conclude, the experiences in the in-depth case studies corroborate the initial understanding
of the elements of CM derived from the comprehensive literature analysis (B-I 1.1). All RFSPs
in the sample created structures to conduct CM. To a specific degree, the RFSPs developed or
adapted their systems – particularly their IT tools – to quantify meaningful carbon indicators
that apply company-specific IT tools or external distributed calculators. Furthermore, the CA
and the CM processes were identified as the main processes at the task field of CM. The aim
of the CA is to calculate meaningful company-specific carbon indicators for external and
internal purposes. The carbon indicators are actively applied in the CM process to influence the
total amount of carbon emissions on a target-oriented basis.
95
III
Consolidation of the Results – Research Framework
This section consolidates the experiences of the theoretical and practical perspective of CM to
concretize the understanding of and, consequently, specify the research framework, including
the cornerstones of carbon management, the conceptual understanding of integration, and the
theoretical lenses.
Cornerstones of Carbon Management
Based on the insights from the literature, CM was initially delimitated as “the organizing,
planning, executing, and monitoring of carbon equivalents with the goal of identifying the
current carbon reduction potential in operational processes and continuously improving the
carbon efficiency of the company.”
The series of case studies and insights from the literature in the field of CM underline the
concept that the foundation of CM presents CA. The calculation of carbon emissions makes
RFSPs aware of and enables them to understand the current status and development of direct
and indirect carbon emissions released by their transportation (logistics) activities over time
(e.g., Lee and Cheong, 2011; Lee, 2012a). The calculated carbon emissions inventory
heightened the consciousness of energy-related issues within the companies and allowed the
identification and prioritization of emission reduction opportunities (Lash and Wellington,
2007). Thereby, the literature discussed the following components of CA: application of
standards, setting company-specific boundaries, capture of energy consumption and calculation
of carbon emissions, and allocation of carbon emissions (Edwards et al., 2011; Gogolin et al.,
2011; McKinnon, 2010a / 2011).
To continuously improve the carbon efficiency of the conducted transport services, the carbon
indicators delivered from CA must be actively used in a CM process. The numerous
similarities between the CM process and the basic concepts of management, and of
management accounting in general, indicate that basic principles of the “cybernetic feedback
loop” are applicable to structure and characterize the relevant tasks of the CM process. The
cybernetic feedback loop presents an ideal model with which to coordinate and control business
processes within an organization. Generally, the key components of the cybernetic feedback
loop are planning, executing, and monitoring (e.g., Braunschweig et al., 2001: 59; Hahn and
Hungenberg, 2001: 36; Pfohl and Stölzle, 1997: 13). Consequently, the CM process may be
subdivided into the same three components.
96
Furthermore, on an organizational level (structures and systems), the framework conditions
for the conduction of the CA and CM processes should be created. The literature, supported by
empirical evidence of the explorative case studies, differentiated between organizational
structures, including the organizational anchorage of CM and systems, whereby IT and
incentive systems in particular show high relevance for the conduction of CM.
Based on the insights from the literature review and, in particular, the in-depth evaluation of the
15 papers on CM reflected and sharpened by the explorative case studies, the cornerstones of
CM that describe its key elements may be specified as follows: CA and CM processes and
organization, subdivided into the structures and systems components. The interrelationship of
the cornerstones is presented within the research framework (see Figure 12).
Understanding of Integration
Within the conceptual background of this thesis, integration was concretized as the process of
coordinating or combining CM with other task fields within the company to align the
company’s targets and achieve operational synergies. To characterize different integration
alternatives of CM in business practice, it is necessary to specify the field of integration
(cornerstones of CM) and the degree of integration. The degree of integration can be
differentiated (in ascending rank order) between no, partial, and full integration,
Theoretical Lenses
In order to support the structuration process with respect to the empirical and conceptual
results, the contingency theory presents the leading theory within this thesis. The theory
formulates the notion that there is no single best way to manage and organize a company
because the company must be aligned with the situational (contingency) parameters (Fiedler,
1964). Within the contingency-based framework, the integration alternatives of CM identified
in business practices and the situational parameters impacting the integration alternative are
systematically analyzed. The contingency-based framework encompasses the following five
situational parameters: experiences with calculating carbon indicators, the organization’s size,
its IT capability, its operations complexity, and customer expectations. The design variables are
in line with the cornerstones of CM.
The organizational learning theory is integrated in the research framework with the aim of
elucidating the learning and development process of the strategic task field of CM at RFSPs.
The theory states that the initial learning process occurs at the individual level and requires that
the individual’s knowledge be shared and stored in organizational memory in order to give
97
other employees access to the acquired knowledge (Argote, 2011). In order to receive
explanatory patterns for the CM learning process in organizations, the decision was made to
revert to the 4I organizational learning framework, including the four related (sub)processes
that occur over the three levels of individual, group, and organization.
Figure 12 illustrates the research framework that merges the theoretical and practical
perspective of CM.
Figure 12: Research framework.
The conceptual cornerstones of CM may be characterized as a management model based on
established management understanding and profound theoretical concepts. Effectively, the
management model presented is generic in nature and encompasses all core task of CM, which
both allows and requires customization that considers the specific research context. On this
basis, structuration and a description of the relevant tasks of CM (chapter C) and an analysis of
various integration alternatives (chapter D-I) are conducted in a systematic manner.
Furthermore, in the following research process of this dissertation, the specific cornerstones of
98
CM are accounted for to develop a management model to deliver design recommendations and
guide the integration of CM into the structures, systems, and processes of RFSPs (section D-II).
99
C Cornerstones of Carbon Management at Road Freight Service
Providers
In this chapter, the related tasks for each of the cornerstones of CM are introduced:
 Carbon Accounting (section C-I);
 Carbon Management process (section C-II); and,
 Organization (section C-III).
The goal of this chapter is to describe and develop a conceptual understanding from each
cornerstone of CM, taking into account the business characteristics of RFSPs. Therefore, the
insights from the literature review in the field of CM are complemented by parallels to other
related literature fields such as management accounting, organization, and logistics
management, and enhanced by the practical evidence of the series of case studies (B-II 2).
Moreover, based on the conceptual understanding of the cornerstones of CM, first indications
with respect to relations between the situational parameters and the design variables
(integration alternatives of CM) are derived.
I
Carbon Accounting
Within the conceptual background (B-I 1.1), CA was delimitated as “the systematic
measurement, preparation, and reporting of carbon equivalents based on internationally
accepted standards at the company level. The aim of CA is to provide carbon indicators to
support internal management decisions and to meet external requirements.” Thus, CA sets the
basis for CM because, according to the business mantra “you cannot manage what you cannot
measure,” RFSPs require a clear picture of traceable carbon emissions to make significant
management decisions regarding mitigation measures (Lee and Cheong, 2011; Lee, 2012a) in
the field of transportation services.
The literature review revealed (B-I 1.1) that body of literature that addresses the calculation of
carbon emissions within supply chains is growing; however, few studies discussed the issues of
CA from a company perspective. Although most (supply chain) research does not explicitly
focus on transportation (or further logistics) services, a number of general issues were
identified and specified in-depth, which allows general derivations for a CA with a particular
focus on RFSPs. According to the understanding of Edwards et al. (2011), Gogolin et al.
100
(2011), Gogolin and Klaas-Wissing (2012), and McKinnon (2010a / 2011), the key tasks in the
field of CA are summarized as follows (see Figure 13):
 Application of standards (section C-I 1);
 Setting company-specific boundaries (section C-I 2);
 Capture of energy consumption and calculation of carbon emissions (section C-I 3); and,
 Allocation of carbon emissions (section C-I 4).
Figure 13: Carbon accounting.
Finally, section C-I 5 presents a synthesis of the key tasks of CA.
1
Application of Standards
The first task at CA concerns the choice of applicable standards (see Figure 14). CA standards
define directives and guidelines for capturing energy consumption, calculating carbon
emissions, and allocating these carbon emissions (Gogolin et al., 2011).
Figure 14: Positioning within carbon accounting – application of standards.
Based on the applicable standards, a common approach with regard to the calculation of carbon
emissions is ensured and, consequently, the transparency of carbon indicators from different
RFSPs is enhanced. Thus, an increasing comparability of carbon emissions within the
transportation industry meets political requirements and allows industrial and trading
companies to obtain significant information on the carbon efficiency of their RFSPs.
Two established standards provided by the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development and the World Resources Institute (Greenhouse Gas Protocol; WBCSD and WRI,
2004 / 2011a / 2011b), and the International Standards Organization (ISO 14064-1; ISO, 2006)
are available, with which the directives and guidelines of the respective standards are broadly
in line (McKinnon, 2011; Pandey et al., 2010). These standards deliver guidelines for the
101
calculation of different so-called “carbon footprints”80 (Zadek and Schulz, 2010) that
encompass various scopes of carbon emissions and different system boundaries. Nevertheless,
these CA standards only cover a general framework for manufacturing and trading companies,
and consequently, the standards are not explicitly tailored to the requirements of companies in
the transportation industry. Therefore, the guidelines of these standards allow substantial
flexibility, requiring an enhanced interpretation and leaving decisions up to the practitioners
(Plassmann et al., 2010), particularly concerning the required input data on the quality of
energy consumption81 and allocation factors.82
To minimize interpretation, at the beginning of 2013 the European Commission published a
standard (CEN standard EN 16258) developed by a consortium of representatives of several
European countries. This standard defines concrete guidelines and is tailored to the specific
demands of companies in the transportation industry (DIN, 2013: 6). The standard also focuses
on the specification of input data with respect to fossil fuel consumption and allocation factors
to increase the comparability of carbon indicators within the transportation industry.
In the series of case studies, all RFSPs refer to the directives and guidelines of CEN standard
EN 16258. Moreover, the application of CEN standard EN 16258 by leading RFSPs in Europe,
such as Deutsche Post DHL (Deutsche Post DHL, 2013) and DB Schenker (DB Schenker,
2013), and the high response in the practice-oriented literature (e.g., DSLV, 2013, Kranke et
al., 2011) are indicators that CEN standard EN 16258 is expected to develop into an important
standard in the transportation industry for quantifying the amount of carbon emissions.
The next step takes into account the directives and guidelines of the standard and develops
company-specific boundaries.
80
For further explanations, refer to section C-I 2.
81
For further explanations, refer to section C-I 3.
82
For further explanations, refer to section C-I 4.
102
2
Setting Company-specific Boundaries
This task of CA (see Figure 15) requires that the reporting company (RFSPs) must decide on
the “scope” of carbon emissions that should be considered within the carbon calculation
process (Gogolin et al., 2011).
Figure 15: Positioning within carbon accounting – setting company-specific boundaries.
Therefore, RFSPs are able to revert to the directives and guidelines provided by the
Greenhouse Gas Protocols. The Greenhouse Gas Protocols differentiate between various
“scopes” (McKinnon, 2010a) that become widely accepted in other standards and regulations
(Lee, 2012a). These scopes are in line with the possible outcomes of the standards: several
carbon footprints. Differentiating among a corporate carbon footprint, a corporate value chain
footprint, and a product carbon footprint is possible (WBCSD and WRI, 2011b: 6). Because the
product carbon footprint primarily deals with physical products, RFSPs only have to set these
boundaries during the allocation process.83 Depending on whether a corporate carbon footprint
or a corporate value chain footprint should be quantified, various “scopes” must be considered.
In general, the guidelines of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol classify carbon emissions into the
following three categories (WBCSD and WRI, 2004: 25 / 2011b: 32):
 Scope 1: All direct emissions occurring from sources owned or controlled by the reporting
company (e.g., the combustion of fossil fuel in the vehicle fleet);
 Scope 2: Indirect emissions from the generation of purchased electricity consumed by
equipment or operations owned or controlled by the reporting company; and,
 Scope 3: All other indirect carbon emissions that occur in the supply chain of the RFSP,
including the inventory of both upstream and downstream carbon emissions.
83
For further explanations, refer to section C-I 4. 103
Figure 16 provides a schematic illustration of the delimitation of the various scopes.
Figure 16: Overview of the three scopes.
(Source: WBCSD and WRI, 2011b: 5)
For the calculation of a so-called “corporate carbon footprint,” all direct scope 1 and indirect
scope 2 emissions must be considered in the carbon calculation process (WBCSD and WRI,
2004: 25). In addition to scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, a “corporate value chain footprint”
includes scope 3 emissions and currently is, according to the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a
facultative option (WBCSD and WRI, 2011b: 6). To provide a systematic framework for the
calculation of scope 3 emissions, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol developed its own standard that
it published in 2011.84 As previously discussed, the guidelines of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol
standards are particularly tailored to the requirements of manufacturing and trading companies.
Therefore, for the calculation of scope 3 emissions, the guidelines recommend the inclusion of
all emissions that occur in the supply chain of the respective reporting company, including both
upstream and downstream emissions (WBCSD and WRI, 2011b: 34).
84
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Value Chain Scope 3 Accounting and Reporting
Standard (see WBCSD and WRI, 2011b).
104
As a general rule, because RFSPs are integrated into a couple of supply chains, considering all
scope 3 emissions is hardly realizable given the large number of supply chain partners. In
addition, the quantified amount of scope 3 emissions has low expressiveness because RFSPs
are able to influence only a negligible amount of the scope 3 emissions. Nevertheless,
depending on the specific business characteristics, RFSPs are advised to contemplate selected
categories of scope 3 emissions85, particularly the following ones:
 Carbon emissions that occur at direct services partners; and
 Carbon emissions that occur during the extraction, production, and transportation of fossil
fuel to the petrol station.
The amount of carbon emissions that occurs at other direct service partners (e.g., other
RFSPs) can be emphasized as one of the most important scope 3 categories (WBCSD and
WRI, 2011b: 35). Regardless, if the amount of carbon emissions is caused by the RFSP or by a
service partner, all such emissions are considered in the corporate value chain footprint. This
category of carbon emissions is particularly considerable for RFSPs that exceedingly outsource
transportation services to a large number of service partners. By including this category of
carbon emissions, a better level of comparability of the inventory of carbon emissions among
different years is achievable even if the volume of outsourced transportation services differs
significantly. Furthermore, if real values86 of the carbon indicators of the service partners are
available, the carbon efficiencies of their offered transportation services may be compared.
Another important scope 3 category concerns emissions that occur during the extraction,
production, and transportation of fossil fuel to the petrol station (WBCSD and WRI, 2011b:
35). This category of scope 3 emissions can be considered within the calculation process by
multiplying the consumed energy value with a different emissions factor.87 For example, if
biodiesel is combusted in the vehicle, scope 1 emissions are zero and scope 3 emissions are
1.92 CO2e per liter. In contrast, the corresponding scope 1 emission factor for diesel fuel is 2.67
CO2e per liter and is 0.56 CO2e per liter for scope 3 emissions (DIN, 2013: 23). This example
illustrates that carbon emissions caused during extraction, production, and transportation to the
petrol station (scope 3 emissions) must be considered in addition to scope 1 emissions. Thus,
85
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol differentiates between 15 different categories of scope 3 emissions, such as purchased
goods and services, capital goods, fuel- and energy-related activities, business travel, and employee commuting. For
further explanations, refer to WBCSD and WRI, 2011b: 32).
86
For further explanations, refer to section C-I 4.
87
An emission factor transfers the energy consumption into the amount of carbon emissions revealed. In general, the
emission factor may be differentiated between two emission factors: emission factors that consider the emissions
revealed by the combustion of fossil fuel in the vehicle (scope 1 emission) and emission factors that contemplate the
emissions caused during the extraction, production, and transportation of fossil fuel (scope 3 emissions).
105
enhanced comparability with respect to the carbon efficiency of various energy sources is
achievable. Because various energy sources are applied in different modes of transport, this
category of scope 3 emissions is particularly relevant for RFSPs offering transportation
services using various transportation modes.
Figure 17 illustrates the interrelation between scope 1 and scope 3 emissions in the case of the
transportation chain of fossil fuels.
Figure 17: Differentiation between scope 1 and scope 3 emissions.
The insights from the series of case studies reveal that all seven RFSP calculate a corporate
carbon footprint, at least on an annual basis. For example, the required data of fossil fuel
consumption from direct controlled sources, particularly the deployed vehicle fleet, and the
consumption of electricity are frequently evaluated for other reporting purposes and are easily
available. Consequently, the cases indicate that the corporate carbon footprint may be
quantified using a comparably low input of resources.
In contrast, the RFSPs are faced with several challenges when quantifying a corporate value
chain footprint due to the broad range of categories of scope 3 emissions. During the period in
which the case studies were carried out, five RFSPs quantified selected components of scope 3
emissions. Of the case studies, five RFSPs calculate or attempt to estimate (if no information
from the service partners is available) the revealed carbon emissions of transportations or
logistics services conducted by service partners. Three out of the seven case studies include the
carbon emissions that occur during the extraction, production, and transportation of fossil fuel
to the petrol station.
106
To summarize, by setting company-specific boundaries, the RFSP’s specific business
characteristics must be contemplated, particularly regarding decisions on whether and which
selected categories of scope 3 emissions are fruitful. For example, for an RFSP that outsources
transportation services to a high degree and variations in the outsourcing volume occur among
different periods, service partners’ carbon emissions should be considered to enhance
transparency among different periods. For RFSPs offering transportation services using various
modes of transport, including carbon emissions that occur during the extraction, production,
and transportation of fossil fuel to the petrol station is appropriate to enable a comparison of the
carbon efficiency of different transport modes.
In the next step, within the specified boundaries, energy consumption must be captured and
carbon emissions are calculated.
3
Capturing Energy Consumption and Calculation Carbon Emissions
A key task of CA is the systematic capturing of energy consumption data and multiplying them
with accurate emission factors88 (see Figure 18) in order to quantify the amount of carbon
emissions (Gogolin et al., 2011; Pandey et al., 2010).
Figure 18: Positioning within carbon accounting – calculation of carbon emissions.
In the field of road freight transport, the focus is on capturing the amount of fossil fuel
consumed by transportation services. The following generic formula illustrates the required
components needed to calculate the amount of carbon emissions:
Fossil fuel consumption * Emission factors = Carbon emissions
To calculate meaningful carbon emissions for vehicle movement in various granularities,
several types of data are required, including the following (Edwards et al., 2011):
 Vehicle-specific (for example, actual or average fossil fuel consumption, average payload,
and vehicle weight)
88
The emissions factors are defined by CEN standard EN 16258.
107
 Tour-specific (for example, actual or average kilometers)
 Shipment-specific (for example, weight, volume, start and final location)
Given the high relevance for the accuracy of the amount of carbon emissions, CEN standard
EN 16258 defines four different categories of input data for capturing fossil fuel consumption.
The four categories show a decreasing level of detail; thus, if the specific data are available,
RFSPs should apply the categories in the following rank order (DIN, 2013: 1489):
 Own measured data: Own data measured directly for a specific transportation service;
 Specific data of the RFSPs: Own values measured for a group of vehicles characterized by
the criterion of same vehicle or route type;
 Fleet data of the RFSPs: Own data measured for the RFSP’s entire fleet, primarily on a
monthly or annual basis by considering all transportation services; and,
 Default data: External data measured by service partners or based on generally accepted
statistics (for example, HBEFA 3.190).
Furthermore, depending on the specific category of fossil fuel consumption, various methods
may be applied to calculate carbon emissions from mobile sources. The following three
methods differentiate the calculation (Zadek and Schulz, 2010):
 Fuel-based method (requires own measured data for fossil fuel consumption);
 Distance-based method (requires kilometers and average fossil fuel consumption or default
data); and,
 Activity-based method (requires kilometers and weight).
To apply the fuel-based method, own measured data regarding fossil fuel consumption in the
transportation processes are necessary. The fuel-based method delivers the highest accuracy
and reliability of the calculated inventory of carbon emissions. On this data foundation, the
main emission sources and areas with a high carbon reduction potential within the
transportation processes are specified. Furthermore, based on own measured values for fuel
consumption, the effects of nearly all company-specific mitigation measures are reflected in the
inventory of carbon emissions.91
89
The four categories of fossil fuel consumption were translated from German to English.
90
The Handbook Emission Factors (HBEFA) provides emission factors for road freight transport divided into, for
example, all current vehicle categories and a wide variety of traffic situations. For further explanations, refer to
http://www.hbefa.net/e/index.html.
91
For further explanations of the importance of real values of carbon emissions to reflect the effects of mitigation
measures, refer to section C-II 1.1.
108
The application of distance-based and activity-based methods set lower requirements for the
availability of the input data. The main drawback to these calculation methods is the high level
of uncertainty concerning the quality and current inventory of carbon emissions (Ubeda et al.,
2011). In particular, by using default values for fossil fuel consumption, many companyspecific efforts to minimize the amount of carbon emissions within the transportation processes
are not reflected. Default values are provided by, for example, HBEFA, which presents the
main database for emissions factors in the transportation industry (Zadek and Schulz, 2010).
These default values are based on average fossil fuel consumption in the transportation
industries and are updated in specific periods of a few years (HBEFA, 2014). Consequently, the
carbon efficiency within the transportation processes does not increase if, for example, truck
drivers improve their driving performance; otherwise, the efficiency is the result of a lower
default value provided by HBEFA.
The required input data for the application of the various calculation methods are assigned to
the four predefined fossil fuel categories according to CEN standard EN 16258. Figure 19
presents the required input data for the three calculation methods and illustrates that the level of
detail from carbon emissions varies from company-specific real values to only calculated
values.
Figure 19: Quality of various carbon emissions depending on input data.
That the broad range of possible input data for fossil fuel consumption, combined with a
variety of calculation methods, leads to a different level of details concerning the amount of
carbon emissions – despite concrete directives of CEN standard EN 16258 – becomes obvious.
Consequently, the carbon indicators of various RFSPs are still difficult to compare.
109
The experiences gained in the case studies point out that, in business practice, the quality of the
fossil fuel consumption data used to calculate carbon emissions varies from own measured data
to default data. Thereby, particularly for the purpose of the carbon calculation, influencing
parameters are the differentiation between internal and external92 and the capacity of IT tools.93
For internal purposes, as a general rule, own measured values are applied to obtain a profound
inventory of carbon emissions. To enable regular calculations of carbon emissions for external
purposes, in particular for their customers, RFSP fleet data or default data are used to calculate
carbon emissions. Moreover, an efficient IT tool with respect to the calculation of carbon
emissions contributes by enabling a large amount of data to be systematically processed and by
increasing the quality of the carbon emissions data.
By calculating the amount of carbon emissions, the requirements are primarily influenced by
the volume and complexity of the operations. The higher the volume and the more complex the
operations of the RFSP, the more vehicle-, tour-, and shipment-specific data required to
quantify the carbon emissions. Consequently, IT tools make it possible to process a large
amount of data and calculate meaningful carbon emissions.
In the next step of CA, the calculated amount of carbon emissions is allocated.
4
Allocation of Carbon Emissions
The final task of CA (see Figure 20) encompasses the allocation of carbon emissions, a process
that requires that the calculated inventory of carbon emissions must be assigned to various
customers and different company-specific reference values based on clear and concrete
allocation factors specified (Kellner and Otto, 2012).
Figure 20: Positioning within carbon accounting – allocation of carbon emissions.
The allocation of carbon emissions is explained using the following generic formula:
Carbon emissions / Allocation factor = Carbon indicators
92
For further explanations, refer to section C-I 4.
93
For further explanations, refer to section C-III 2.1. 110
The results of the allocation process are several carbon indicators that may be applied for both
external communication and internal management purposes (Lee, 2012a).
External Communication Purposes
For external communication purposes, the calculation of carbon emissions becomes
increasingly important as political and business circles ask RFSPs for information on the
inventory and development of carbon emissions over time (Lee, 2012a). Moreover, in addition
to increasing external pressure, several RFSPs started to actively use the quantified corporate
carbon footprints to inform stakeholders, such as the media, NGOs, or customers, about their
achievements in the field of CM and to influence customers’ choice for carbon-efficient
transportation services (Schaltegger and Csutora, 2012).
Furthermore, carbon indicators are provided to customers to enable them to determine a
corporate value chain footprint and to calculate a product’s carbon footprint. A product carbon
footprint accounts for the inventory of the carbon emissions that occur during an individual
physical product’s life cycle and requires carbon indicators of each supply chain partner
according to the same guidelines (WBCSD and WRI, 2011a: 6).
To quantify these carbon indicators, an appropriate allocation factor that accurately reflects the
contribution of the product to the amount of carbon emissions caused must be specified. During
the transport of products by road freight, the allocation factors should consist of the
multiplication product between the distance travelled94 and a physical allocation factor, such as
the product’s weight, volume, or pallet space (DIN, 2013: 16). Ideally, the physical allocation
factor should be determined using the limiting factor of the specific form of transportation to
consider the individual level of utilization (WBCSD and WRI, 2011a: 68). Therefore, in the
case of a load limited by weight, the weight of the products should be chosen as a component
of the allocation factor. For volume-constrained loads, carbon emissions should be calculated
on this basis.
Specifying an appropriate allocation factor is challenging, particularly in the field of pickup and
distribution runs. These tours are characterized by daily changing routes, many loading and
unloading stops, and – as a general rule – a broad range of different products varying in size
and weight (Edwards et al., 2011). Consequently, a variety of data from different IT tools is
required to accurately allocate carbon emissions to the different customers.
94
Exception: In the case of case of pickup and distribution runs, CEN standard EN 16258 recommends the application of
the Great Circle Distance, which describes the shortest distance between two locations (DIN, 2013: 18).
111
Depending on customers’ specific expectations, the RFSPs in the case studies are requested to
provide carbon indicators in the following various granularities:
 Carbon indicators per customer on a monthly or annual basis; and,
 Carbon indicators per shipment on a monthly or quarterly basis.
In particular, allocation for external purposes determines the requirements based on the
operational complexity of the RFSP and the customers’ expectations, particularly concerning
the frequency and granularity of the carbon emissions. Thereby, the more complex the
operations (for example, pickup and distribution runs), the more vehicle and shipment-specific
data (such as concrete start, final location, and payload) required to allocate the amount of
carbon emissions. Regarding the customer’s expectations, the following interrelation is
plausible: The higher the customer’s expectations, the greater the amount of shipment-specific
data needed (such as weight or volume of the transported goods), which leads to a more
complex allocation.
Internal Management Purposes
Moreover, the choice and specification of company-specific carbon indicators for internal
management purposes represent a core task field of CA because these carbon indicators must
support managers during the decision process (Schaltegger and Csutora, 2012). No specific
guidelines for CA standards must be considered, indicating that no specific rules exist
regarding the scopes of carbon emissions that must be included and the allocation factor that
should be used. Consequently, companies are able to select these carbon indicators according to
their individual requirements and preferences. However, to unveil management’s supporting
role, the carbon emissions should be based on own measured data of fossil fuel consumption.
Moreover, within the allocation, the amount of carbon emissions must be linked with
responsibilities and activities (Hoffmann and Busch, 2008; Schaltegger and Csutora, 2012) that
aim to facilitate the identification of emission reduction opportunities and to prioritize areas
with a high carbon reduction potential (Carbon Trust, 2006).
In the set of seven case studies, the following carbon indicators for internal purposes are
frequently quantified and may be classified into three categories:
 General carbon indicators (for example, carbon emissions per group, per company, per
functional area (transportation), or per logistics site [CO2]);
 Performance-oriented carbon indicators (for example, carbon emissions per haulage
capacity [CO2 / km], per distance [CO2 / km]); and,
112
 Capacity-oriented carbon indicators (for example, carbon emissions per weight [CO2 /
kg], per palette space [CO2 / m3]).
By quantifying carbon indicators for internal purposes, it is plausible that there is an
interrelation between the complexity of the operations and the level and granularity of carbon
indicators. Because the specification of emissions reduction potential in general, the
management of carbon emissions at more complex operations sets higher requirements with
respect to the granularity of the carbon indicators.95
5
Synthesis
To conclude, the in-depth description illustrates that CA tasks are strongly intertwined and, in
summary, show a high level of complexity. The basis for conducting CA at RFSPs is a contentrelated analysis of the guidelines of the CA standards, particularly CEN standard EN 16258,
followed by a comprehensive analysis of the available data structure and the capacity of the
established IT tools within the company. Based on this understanding, company-specific
boundaries must be set that require that decisions on the scopes (or categories of scope 3
emissions) are included in the carbon calculation. Input data regarding the energy consumption
and performance indicators are gathered and the amount of carbon emissions is calculated.
Finally, the quantified inventory of carbon emissions is allocated by considering specific
reference values to meet the external requirements of various stakeholders and to support the
quality of internal management decisions. Thereby, Bowen and Wittneben (2011) underpinned
the relevance of accuracy and summarized the requirements of the measurement techniques at
CA as follows: “materially accurate, that is, they need to reflect actual atmospheric emissions,
consistent over space and time through the use of calibrated equipment, agreed procedures and
verification” (Bowen and Wittneben, 2011: 1023).
As the discussion in this section of CA shows, the requirements of conducting CA are
particular determined by the operations complexity of the RFSP and the customers’
expectations. Taking the complexity of the operations into account, more and differentiated
carbon indicators are required in order to calculate meaningful carbon indicators for both
internal and external purposes, which requires a large amount of data to be gathered and
processed. Therefore, the more complex the operations of the RFSPs, the more complex the
conducting of CA.
95
For further explanation of the specification of meaningful carbon indicators depending on the RFSP’s business
characteristics, refer to section C-1.2.1
113
Furthermore, the customers’ expectations, particularly the frequency and granularity of the
carbon indictors, have an impact on the amount of data to be processed. Based on this
conceptual understanding, it is plausible that the higher the customers’ expectations concerning
the frequency and granularity of carbon indicators, the higher the requirements to calculate
and allocate carbon emissions.
The quantified inventory of carbon emissions presents the basis for the CM process that aims to
improve the carbon efficiency of the offered transportation services within the company.
II
Carbon Management Process
The CM process is a series of activities in the planning, executing, and monitoring96 cycle,
whereby the scope of the company’s transportation activities represents the amount of carbon
emissions that they release. The aim of the CM process is to actively influence the carbon
efficiency within the operations of the company through the executing of a set of targetoriented mitigation measures. Thereby, the carbon indicators delivered from CA function as a
basis for specifying the inventory of carbon emissions and should be considered in
management decisions to support the quality of such decisions. Finally, the effects of the
mitigation measures with respect to the carbon efficiency of the operations are monitored.
Based on the understanding of the cybernetic feedback loop, the CM process covers the
following three elements:
 Planning a carbon reduction target and mitigation measures (section C-II 1);
 Executing a package of mitigation measures (section C-II 2); and,
 Monitoring the development of carbon inventory during various periods (section C-II 3).
1
Planning
Planning is characterized as an activity to purposely create prospective events under uncertain
internal and external framework conditions. Within the specific framework condition of the
company, action alternatives are identified, analyzed, and selected by considering their effects
on a specified target (Küpper, 2001: 63). Therefore, planning presents a core subsystem of
management and unites such functions to ensure success, increase efficiency, identify risks, and
reduce complexity (Horvàrth, 2006: 151).
96
Following the understanding of Horngren et al. (2002), who defined the management process as “a series of activities
in a cycle of planning and control” (Horngren et al., 2002: 9).
114
Within the planning process, the planning context must be initially specified and the concrete
planning problem must be delimited.97 Based on the concretized planning context, a carbon
reduction target must be formulated. To achieve the carbon reduction target, action alternatives
or more concrete mitigation measures must be sought, and their effect on the carbon reduction
target must be forecasted and quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated considering other
targets of the company. Finally, decisions must be made regarding the evaluated mitigation
measures.
Consequently, the planning process encompasses the following tasks that are partially tailored
to consider the particularities of CM:98
 Planning context (section C-II 1.1);
 Target formulation (section C- II 1.2);
 Search for mitigation measures (section C- II 1.3);
 Forecast and evaluation of mitigation measures (section C- II 1.4); and,
 Making decisions on mitigation measures (section C- II 1.5).
Figure 21 illustrates the tasks of the planning process.
Figure 21: Planning process.
Within this planning process as outlined, the content-related core tasks of planning are
contemplated. Nevertheless, that the planning process occurs in a different order or that
selected tasks may be completely neglected in business practice must be taken into account
(Küpper, 2001: 64).
97
Within the planning context, the focus is on the delimitation of various types of operations from RFSPs, which affect
the complexity of the following CM process.
98
Küpper (2001: 64) and Horvàrth (2006: 188) concretized the planning process into the following six tasks: target
formulation, problem analysis, search for alternatives, forecasting, evaluation of measures, and making decisions. This
thesis considers the problem analysis as the first tasks of the planning referred to as planning context. Offering the
advantages that the problem can be specified at first and various types of operations, impacting the entire planning
process, can be delimitated. This understanding is in line with Hahn and Hungenberg (2001: 33) who specified the
problem identification as the starting point. Moreover, the tasks of forecasting and evaluation of mitigation are
considered commonly, due to various dependencies.
115
1.1
Planning Context
The planning context presents the first task (see Figure 22) and focuses on the specification of
the problem.
Figure 22: Positioning in the planning process – planning context.
The problem within the CM process is concretized such that the (transportation) activities of
RFSPs consume energy (for example, fossil fuel, electricity), leading to the release of carbon
emissions. Therefore, to meet the mounting requirements of various stakeholders, RFSPs must
enhance their carbon efficiency within their operations (transportation activities).
Different types of operations are characterized to systematically elaborate on the particularities
of RFSPs’ operations within the planning process and to discuss their interrelations. Within this
investigation, three types of operations that show an increasing level of complexity regarding
their planning and conduct are differentiated (Bohlmann and Krupp, 2007: 29; Krause, 2007:
66; Pfohl, 2010: 5) and described as follows.99
 Type A operations: Main runs / point-to-point runs
The first type of operation encompasses the transport of goods primarily between a loading
and uploading location and logistics sites without any transshipment activities. Therefore,
this type of transportation service is characterized as a single-stage system (transportation
chain) frequently conducted as a full truckload. Moreover, because one tour is usually
conducted for one customer, the processes generally show a low level of complexity and
enable a high degree of standardization with respect to the planning and conduct of
operations. The main tasks within the disposition process are the combination of specific
tours aimed at minimizing empty run kilometers and a tour ending close to the depot.
 Type B operations: Pickup, main, and distribution runs (transportation mode road)
The second type of operation includes pickup, main, and distribution runs only as road
freight transportation services. A main differentiation criterion is that the transport chain is
99
A further criterion that affects the complexity of the operations and, consequently, the CM planning process is the
degree to which transportation services are outsourced to service partners. Outsourcing may be conducted in all three
types of operations; therefore, the complexity induced by outsourcing activities is discussed in general and not for a
specific type of operation.
116
interrupted in this multi-state system, indicating that the parceled goods as a general rule are
transshipped one or more times. At the transshipment point, the parceled goods are
consolidated to increase the vehicle’s level of utilization. These operation services are
conducted as partial load transport; consequently, different customers’ goods are transported
in a single tour. Given the increasing complexity, the level of standardization of the planning
and conduct of operations is much lower than for type A operations. The core goal within
the dispatching process is to consolidate and combine various orders into a specific tour to
meet customer requirements and to minimize the required financial efforts for the
transportation, transshipment, and warehousing activities of the goods.
 Operations type C: Pickup, main, and distributions runs (various transportation
modes)
Pickup, main, and distributions runs include various transportation modes (for example, train
or inland water) as the type C operation characteristics. The various transportation modes
considered induces increasing complexity into the planning and conduct of the transportation
processes. The core tasks are the design of transportation chains with the goal of meeting the
specific customer requirements and to take into account the strength of the respective
transport mode.
The delimited types of operations are very generic. In business practice, the boundaries
between the various types are frequently blurred. However, for the following tasks of the
planning process, the previously described differentiation is referenced to enable in-depth
specifications of the characteristics of the planning process in light of the various types of
operations.
The next step formulates a concrete carbon reduction target.
117
1.2
Target Formulation
This task of the planning process focuses on the specification of a concrete carbon reduction
target, the development of a target system, and operationalization of the target (see Figure 23).
Figure 23: Positioning in the planning process – target formulation.
Within the target formulation, a carbon reduction target is defined to reflect the aspired carbon
efficiency of the operations (transportation services). To reveal and coordinate the
interdependencies between the carbon reduction target and other companies’ targets, a target
system must be developed. Moreover, the carbon reduction target must be consistently broken
down over various levels of the hierarchy to allow for operationalization of the target.
Following the understanding of Pfohl and Stölzle (1997: 126),100 this task of the planning
process encompasses the following three subtasks:
 Target planning (section C-II 1.2.1);
 Development of a target system (section C-II 1.2.2); and,
 Operationalization of the carbon reduction target (section C-II 1.2.3).
100
Pfohl and Stölzle (1997: 126) differentiated between different planning and controlling functions (for example,
coordination, flexibility, or optimization). Following the “coordination-oriented” understanding, the task target
formulation encompasses the following subtasks: target planning, development of a target system, and
operationalization of the carbon reduction target.
118
1.2.1
Target planning
Target planning presents a core task within target formulation (see Figure 24) and addresses the
concrete specification of a carbon reduction target.
Figure 24: Positioning in the planning process – target planning.
Determining a carbon reduction target presents a critical task within the CM process because
the target guides the future direction (Lee, 2012b) and serves as a benchmark against which to
evaluate the further development of the inventory of carbon emissions at the RFSP (McKinnon
and Piecyk, 2012). Moreover, a carbon reduction target contributes to strengthening the
company’s emissions reduction commitment (Lee, 2012b) because it is communicated within
the company and is frequently announced publicly for corporate social responsibility or
marketing reasons (McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012). International studies revealed that customers
(shippers), competitors, regulators, and governments frequently function as the main external
drivers for conducting CM and, consequently, to specify a concrete carbon reduction target at
companies (e.g., Okereke, 2007; Ranking et al., 2011).
Determining a carbon reduction target requires scaling the target, including its concrete
components such as the amount of carbon emission and an operational metric.101 Moreover, the
target coverage within the company must be specified and, finally, a timeline is necessary to
schedule the period in which the carbon reduction target should be achieved. Thus, the
following three subtasks encompass target planning (McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012):102
 Scaling of a carbon reduction target;
101
An operational metric should present a main driver of the carbon emissions released and reflect the performance- or
capacity-oriented transportation activities of the RFSP.
102
Küpper (2001: 64) additionally noted the extent of the target achievement or a concrete value as a task. The carbon
reduction potential varies from RFSP to RFSP depending on the specific type of operation, previous efforts to increase
carbon efficiency, and the current status of the technology (McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012). Consequently, the carbon
reduction potential depends on a broad range of different factors. General statements are quite challenging; therefore,
the specification of a value for the carbon reduction target is not the focus of the investigation. To determine the value
with respect to a target, three different approaches are discussed in the literature: top-down, bottom-up, and
countercurrent planning. For further explanations, refer to Küpper (2001: 85) and Pfohl and Stölzle (1997: 134).
119
 Coverage scope of a carbon reduction target; and,
 Timeline for meeting the carbon reduction target.
To illustrate and underpin the tasks for formulating a carbon reduction target, the chosen
approach of the RFSP in case IV may be applied. The carbon reduction target is to increase
carbon efficiency by 5 percent whereby carbon efficiency is calculated by considering (scaling)
carbon emissions and an operational metric (tonnes-kilometers of the vehicle fleet and train
services). The target addressed the functional area of transportation services within the
company (coverage scope) and is scheduled for a period of three years (timeline).
Scaling a Carbon Reduction Target
Scaling a carbon reduction target is the first task of target planning (see Figure 25) and
encompasses the specification of a measured value.
Figure 25: Positioning in the planning process – scaling a carbon reduction target.
In general, a carbon reduction target is expressed as the decline in the amount of carbon
emissions (absolute) or an increase in the carbon efficiency (relative) released during the
RFSP’s transportation and other logistics activities. Using a relative carbon reduction target,
the absolute amount of carbon emissions is put in relation to the output value of an operational
metric (Lee, 2012b; McKinnon, 2011). An operational metric presents a driver or cause of the
carbon emissions revealed and should reflect the performance- or capacity-oriented
transportation activities of the RFSP.
The specification of an absolute carbon reduction target is evaluated as less expressive because
the variations in the output value (for example, volume of transportation services) caused by,
for example, changes in customer demands or the size of the company (merges and
120
acquisitions) are not contemplated (Hoffmann and Busch, 2008). Consequently, comparability
among different periods103 without considering an operational metric is quite challenging or
hardly achievable. Therefore, the following discussion focuses on the characterization of a
relative carbon reduction target.
To illustrate and determine the components of a relative carbon reduction target (carbon
efficiency), the following generic formula is applied:
Carbon emissions / Operational metric = Relative carbon reduction target
A key demand for the scaling of a relative carbon reduction target is that it should reflect the
effects of all possible mitigation measures in the field of transportation services related to
carbon efficiency, indicating that a successfully implemented package of mitigation measures
must lead to an improvement in the carbon efficiency. This demand sets high requirements for
the quality of carbon indicators delivered from CA, including both components: the amount of
carbon emissions (absolute) and the operational metric.
Because the quality of the quantified carbon emissions is determined by the available input
data, enabling the quality differentiation of the emissions among real, partially real, and only
calculated values is possible.104 Thereby, real values of carbon emissions based on own
measured data on fossil fuel consumption allows for quantification of an accurate picture of the
inventory of carbon emissions. Consequently, all mitigation measures that directly affect the
fossil fuel consumption of the vehicle fleet are reflected in the calculation of carbon efficiency
based on own measured data. In contrast, default data on the fossil fuel consumption of the
vehicle fleet (for example, HBEFA) are considered when applying only calculated values of
carbon emissions. Because fossil fuel consumption is determined using an industry average, the
average fossil fuel consumption of the vehicle fleet only changes once in several years, when
the data on average fuel consumption are updated. Thus, the effects of a broad range of
mitigation measures affecting the fossil fuel consumption of the vehicle (for example, driver
training) are not reflected within the carbon efficiency. Clearly, the expressiveness of the
carbon reduction target depends on the quality of the input data with regard to energy
consumption. Thus, the higher the real values of the amounts of carbon emissions, the stronger
the expressiveness of the scaled carbon reduction target.
103
In general, different periods are various financial years.
104
For further explanations, refer to section B-I 3.
121
The other component of a carbon reduction target is an operational metric, which must be in
line with the main driver of the carbon emissions revealed. The choice of an operational metric
for companies in the transportation industry is quite challenging because, as McKinnon and
Piecyk (2012) noted, “seldom an ideal dominator for the carbon intensity” exists (McKinnon
and Piecyk, 2012: 632). Depending on the respective industry characteristics, various
operational metrics may be preferable. Busch (2010) distinguished between five industryspecific categories of applicable operational metrics and recommended that industries with
services having strong carbon intensity during the usage phase of the technology, such as the
transportation industry, should select performance- (for example, tonnes-kilometers,
kilometers) or capacity-oriented (for example, transported tonnes, volume, palette space)
metrics as an operational metric. Because the operational metric should reflect the main
emission drivers, the respective type of operation must be taken into account for a concrete
specification.
Concerning type A operations, focusing on main runs enables the selection of a single
operational metric such as a capacity-oriented metric (for example, transported tonnes) or
kilometers driven if no significant variation in transportation volume occurs among different
periods. To be more concrete, the prerequisite for the application of the transported tonnes is
that the kilometers driven during various periods are nearly in line. In contrast, the application
of the operational metric kilometers driven requires that the transported tonnes do not change
during various periods. Nevertheless, if significant changes occur in both parameters, the
operational metric should consist of a combination of kilometers driven and transported tonnes.
Thus, the changing transportation volume is reflected within the specified operational metric.
Considering the more complex type B or C operations, including pickup, main, and distribution
runs with one or more modes of transport, changes in transport volume are expected to occur
among various periods. Therefore, to reflect the different size (and weight) and transport
distance of various goods, a combination of kilometers driven and a capacity limiting factor is
required as an operational metric to specify a meaningful relative carbon reduction target.
122
Table 15 summarizes the results of the discussion and presents the appropriate operational
metrics for each specific type of operation.
Type of
operations
Appropriate operational metrics
 Constant kilometers
A
 Capacity limiting factor, such as transported
tonnes, volume, or palette space
 Kilometers driven
 Combination of kilometers and a capacity
limiting factor
 Variations in transport volume
B/C
 Combination of kilometers and a capacity
limiting factor (typically the tonnes of the
goods)
Assumptions
 Constant capacity limiting factor
 Variations in transport volume
Table 15: Operational metrics depending on the type of operation.
Moreover, regardless of the operational metric selected, an interrelation exists between the
quality of the input data for the quantification of the operational metric and the expressiveness
of the scaled carbon reduction target. Therefore, a larger number of real values considered in
the quantification of the operational metric results in higher quality of the scaled carbon
reduction target.
Finally, independent of the scaled carbon reduction target, the carbon efficiency for the defined
base period presents the baseline and is set as an index value of 100 percent. On this
foundation, the carbon efficiency of various periods is evaluated and an improvement in the
carbon efficiency of the transportation services in other periods is reflected through a
decreasing index value (Lohmeier et al., 2010).
At the case studies, the RSP in case IV chose as an operational metric the tonnes-kilometers of
the vehicle fleet and the train services. To enhance the expressiveness of the scaled carbon
reduction target, both components (carbon emissions and the operational metric) are based on
real values.
Scaling the carbon reduction target shows that, in summary, the particular type of operation
must be considered to specify the appropriate operational metric. Thereby, a more complex
type of operation and variations in transportation volume require a more differentiated
operational metric. Moreover, the expressiveness of the scaled carbon reduction target highly
depends on the quality of the input data for the calculation of the amount of carbon emissions
and the operational metric. A larger number of real values enhances the quality of the scaled
carbon reduction target.
123
Coverage Scope of the Carbon Reduction Target
The coverage scope of the carbon reduction target within target planning (see Figure 26)
addresses the specification of the covered area of the company (or within the supply chain) for
which the scaled carbon reduction target is valid.
Figure 26: Positioning in the planning process – coverage scope of the carbon reduction target.
According to McKinnon and Piecyk (2012), the coverage scope of a carbon reduction target is
differentiated among:
 Organizational level;
 Geographical level; and,
 Functional area.
The organizational level focuses on the scope of carbon emissions defined by the Greenhouse
Gas Protocol, which should be included in the scaled carbon reduction target and, therefore,
shows many parallels to the tasks of setting company-specific boundaries for CA.105 The
delimitation of the various scopes reveals the varying possibility for influencing the amount of
carbon emissions. Scopes 1 and 2 emissions occur at sources that are owned or controlled by
the reporting company and, consequently, are in the RFSP’s sphere of influence. In contrast,
scope 3 emissions are emitted at service partners and are indirectly influenced, if at all. As
McKinnon and Piecyk (2012) noted, companies “naturally prefer to focus on those activities
over which they have strong or total control” (McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012: 634). Therefore,
the consideration of scope 1 and scope 2 emissions within the carbon reduction target seems
appropriate when the relevant input data (for the quantification of carbon emissions and an
operational metric) are available. For example, the considerations of scope 3 emissions from
105
For further explanations of the different scope emissions categories, refer to section C-I 2.
124
direct service partners are simply target-oriented if the RFSP has the potential to influence the
carbon efficiency of the service partners. Moreover, that including emissions from direct
service partners induced more complexity within the planning process must be taken into
account, particularly with respect to the scaling of the carbon reduction target and the
forecasting carbon reduction potential106 at service partners.
The coverage scope of the carbon reduction target is also addressed at various geographical
levels, which are characterized as relevant decision options for RFSPs operating
internationally. The company must decide on the geographical areas considered within the
scaled carbon reduction target. Thereby, considering more geographical areas indicates a
mounting complexity within the planning process because the estimation of the carbon
reduction potential requires the consideration of particularities including the decarbonization
options in each country. As the international Energy Agency (IEA, 2009) noted, selective
options to improve carbon efficiency in certain developing countries are not available, such as,
among others, the biofuel supply.
Finally, differentiation in the coverage scope of the scaled carbon reduction target may be
conducted concerning the covered functional areas of RFSPs, namely transportation,
warehousing, transshipment, and administration. As a general rule, because the largest amount
of carbon emissions are revealed in the functional area of transportation services, focusing on
this area might be appropriate if emissions in other functional areas are negligible. Given the
increasing relevance of warehousing and transshipment activities, considering further functions
is target orientated, which is in line with the understanding of McKinnon and Piecyk (2012),
who argued that selecting a more holistic approach offers the benefit that “logistics carbon
trade-offs” concerning carbon emissions from warehousing and transportation activities may be
revealed and systematically analyzed. Centralizing warehouses enables reductions in carbon
emissions within warehousing activities; in contrast, the amount of carbon emissions from
transportation increases given longer distances. With increasing decentralization, the opposite
development is observed.
To emphasize these considerations, insights from cases III and IV may be applied. Both
companies formulated a carbon reduction target by taking into account their scope 1 and scope
2 carbon emissions because they are able to directly influence the inventory of these carbon
emissions. An extension to scope 3 emissions, in particular service partners, was not conducted
given the low level of information on released carbon emissions and scarce options to influence
such emissions. Both RFSPs considered all geographical areas within their carbon reduction
106
For explanations on the forecast of carbon reduction potential, refer to section C-II 1.4.
125
targets.107 Concerning the covered functional areas, the RFSP in case III addresses all
functional areas, particularly because their warehousing activities emit a large amount of
carbon emissions given their business focus. Because the focus of RFSP IV’s business
activities is on transportation services, it started to calculate carbon emissions for the functional
area of transport and specified a carbon reduction target for this functional area.
To summarize, in particular, the coverage scope of the carbon reduction target should be
determined by areas in the sphere of influence of the RFSP. Thereby, the general interrelation
exists that a higher covered area of the carbon reduction target results in more complex induced
requirements within the planning process; in particular, scaling the carbon reduction target and
forecasting a carbon reduction potential.
A Timeline for Meeting the Carbon Reduction Target
The determination of a timeline, including a basis and an end period in which the defined
carbon reduction target should be met, is a further task within target planning (see Figure 27).
Figure 27: Positioning in the planning process – timeline for meeting the carbon reduction target.
Concerning the timeline for a carbon reduction target, McKinnon and Piecyk (2012) argued
that the target period length of one year or shorter raises suspicion about the credibility of the
target’s objectivity given the limited room to maneuver to implement short-term mitigation
measures. A time horizon of three to five years allows for the implementation of a broad range
of mitigation measures given a certain reliability of the development of relevant internal and
external framework conditions (Hoffmann and Busch, 2010). As the time horizon lengthens,
the degree of uncertainty concerning business trends, technological advances, and economic
development grows, indicating that the specification and achievement of the carbon reduction
107
The RFSP in case IV focuses on transportation only in its home country.
126
target is quite challenging. Moreover, the specified carbon reduction target might be
predominated by changing top management or another significant event108 (McKinnon and
Piecyk, 2012). These challenges may be overcome to a large extent if the long-term carbon
reduction targets are accompanied by concrete milestones for earlier periods because doing so
allows for continuously monitoring carbon efficiency and, finally, early adoption of the longterm carbon target in both directions.
In the series of case studies, the RFSP in case III formulated a long-term carbon reduction
target with a base year of 2011 and an end year of 2020. Intervening carbon reductions targets
for an annual improvement in carbon efficiency of three percent are specified and aim to allow
continuous monitoring and underpinning the relevance of the issue within the company.
Given the specification of the timeline, the period in which the mitigation measures are
implemented is crucial. The effects from individual measures such as implementing a speed
limit on the vehicle fleet or purchasing few vehicles may make possible a short timeline for the
carbon reduction target. In contrast, realignment of operations such as cooperation with other
RFSPs within complex operations (types B or C) requires a longer period, as the effects of the
mitigation measures on carbon efficiency reveal. As a general rule, faster implementation of the
respective measures into the operations enables setting a shorter timeline for the carbon
reduction target.
1.2.2
Development of a Target System
The subtask within target formulation (see Figure 28) focuses on an analysis of the
interdependencies between the specified carbon reduction target and other companies’ targets
and their coordination within a target system.109
Figure 28: Positioning in the planning process – development of a target system.
108
For example, noticeably increase or decrease of the customers’ demand, significant extensions of the transportation
services (geographically), and mergers and acquisitions
109
Following the understanding of Küpper (2001: 72) from a target system.
127
In general, companies pursue a broad range of targets and different interdependencies exist
among these targets. Pfohl and Stölzle (1997: 87) differentiated among content-, time-, and
hierarchical-related interdependences. To enable a rational decision process within the
company, different targets must be analyzed with respect to their relations that enable
coordination within the target system (Küpper, 2001: 72). Thereby, the target system should
reflect the company’s strategy with respect to various targets, including improvements in the
carbon efficiency of the operations.
Three different categories of relations between different companies’ targets are specified
(Küpper, 2001: 72; Pfohl and Stölzle, 1997: 88):
 Complementarity: The achievement of one target simultaneously leads to improvement in
another target (for example, a reduction in the consumption of fossil fuel indicates a
decrease in both costs and carbon emissions).
 Competition: The achievement of one ecological target reduces the extent to which the
other target is achieved (for example, a high modern vehicle fleet leads to high carbon
efficiency, but the purchase requires a significant financial investment).
 Indifference: The achievement of one target is completely independent of the achievement
of another target. Indifferent relations are marginal in business practices and are frequently
in different company areas (for example, the application of alternative drive technologies
leads to a reduction in carbon emissions from road freight transport; however, this measure
has no effect on, for example, employee satisfaction).
Although the development of a target system might be conducted during this task of the
planning process, it is particular relevant for the profound evaluation and consideration of
mitigation measures. Therefore, section C-II 1.4 concretely discusses the relevance of a
specified target system in the context of a set of mitigation measures.
128
1.2.3
Operationalization of the Carbon Reduction Target
This final task within the target formulation (see Figure 29) shows the companywide carbon
reduction target broken down into operative, measurable carbon indicators for various
company-specific units.
Figure 29: Positioning in the planning process – operationalization of the carbon reduction target.
Within the operationalization, the specified carbon reduction target is broken down consistently
over various hierarchy levels in such a manner that the achievement of all subtargets (carbon
indicators) results in the achievement of the company-wide carbon reduction target.110 Thereby,
differentiation of the carbon reduction target is conducted for subsidiaries, business units, or
logistics sites; moreover, this outlined organizational and geographical level or functional area
may be considered. The derived operative measurable carbon indicators are characterized as a
key performance indicator system. A key performance indicator system serves as a foundation
to enable a systematic evaluation of the implemented mitigation measures and, consequently, to
monitor the development of carbon emissions during various periods (Schaltegger and Csutora,
2012).111
During the time period in which the case studies were conducted, neither of the RFSPs that
have formulated a carbon reduction target has operationalized its carbon reduction target.
The requirements with respect to the operationalization and differentiation of the carbon
indicators are particularly driven by the size of the RFSP112 and the complexity of the
operations. For a small-sized company with type A operations, the company-wide carbon
reduction target might be sufficient to monitor the development of carbon emissions during
periods. In contrast, an internal RFSP with a type C operations concept requires a differentiated
key performance indicator system with various carbon indicators broken down over several
110
Following the understanding of Pfohl and Stölzle (1997: 89).
111
For further explanation on the relevance of the key performance system, refer to section B-II 3.2.
112
In this case, that the size of the RPSPs is affected by the coverage scope of the carbon reduction target must be
considered.
129
levels. Thereby, the following interrelation is plausible: a larger RFSP with more complex
operations requires more and more greatly differentiated carbon indicators to allow a profound
evaluation of the effects of mitigation measures concerning the carbon emission development.
Figure 30 illustrates an example of the operationalization of a company-wide carbon reduction
target.
Figure 30: Operationalization of the carbon reduction target.
To meet the carbon reduction target, carbon mitigation measures are identified in the next step.
130
1.3
Search for Mitigation Measures
This task of the planning process (see Figure 31) focuses on the systematic search for action
alternatives (Hahn and Hungenberg, 2001: 33) to obtain a profound overview of applicable
mitigation measures in the field of road freight transportation.
Figure 31: Positioning in the planning process – search for mitigation measures.
Searching for action alternatives requires an analysis of the current status of carbon efficiency
by taking into account the specific type of RFSP operation to receive initial indications of
efficiency potentials within the transportation processes. Based on these insights, the extent of
the required mitigation measures – that may vary in the range from individual measures (for
example, new vehicles) to realignment of operations (for example, different transport modes,
cooperation with other service partners) – are specified with the aim of meeting the carbon
reduction target.
In general, the amount of energy consumption and, consequently, the carbon emissions released
during transportation services depend on a broad range of factors, such as kilometers driven,
transport mode, vehicle size, engine parameters, and the nature of the driving (Gajanand and
Narendran, 2013). By searching for action alternatives to mitigate carbon emissions in the field
of transportation services, McKinnon (2003) underpinned the relevance of taking a more
holistic (supply chain) view of the effects within transportation activities; otherwise, the
efficiency gained in other (for example, operative conducting of transportation services) areas
is eradicated by strategic decisions. In general, strategic decisions, in particular, product-related
factors, the design of the entire supply chain, and commercial factors such as distribution
strategies create opportunities to minimize the volume of road freight transport and the amount
of carbon emissions, while at the same time limiting the range of decisions with respect to the
operative conduction of transportation services (Aronsson and Brodin, 2006). However, these
strategic decisions within the supply chain are primarily in the decision-making power of the
industrial and trading companies (e.g., Aronsson and Brodin, 2006; Piecyk and McKinnon,
2010) and if RFSPs have an influence, it is limited. Because this thesis focuses on a RFSP’s
perspective, these strategic decisions at the supply chain level are neglected. The focus is on the
bandwidth of the mitigation measures that are in the sphere of influence of a RFSP.
131
To elaborate and systematically structure the mitigation measures from a RFSP perspective, the
decision alternatives of RFSPs at various levels must be analyzed. Table 16 presents an
overview of the range of decision alternatives of RFSPs subdivided into strategic, tactical, and
operational levels, which follows the understanding of Aberle (2009: 415), Klaas (2002: 142),
and Piecyk and McKinnon (2010). Moreover, for the respective levels, selective decision
alternatives are outlined and evaluated regarding their relevance to the derivation of carbon
mitigation measures in the field of transportation services.
Decision level
Selected decision alternatives
• Corporate principles
• Competitive strategy
Strategic level
(design
specification)
Relevance for the derivation of
mitigation measures
 Decision on whether or not CM is
conducted within the RFSP
 Framework condition for
conducting transportation services
 Otherwise rather insignificant for
the concrete derivation of
mitigation measures
Tactical level
(process
preparation)
1) Logistics efficiency (for example,
transport mode, cooperation)
2) Route efficiency (for example, road and
traffic conditions)
3) Vehicle efficiency (for example,
vehicle design and technology)
4) Driver efficiency (for example, training
or assistance)113
 High relevance, a broad set of
mitigation measures are derived
from the tactical level
Operative level
(process
conduction)
•
•
•
•
 Rather insignificant because the
framework conditions for
conducting carbon-efficient
transportation services are created
on the other decision levels
Disposition (tour and route)
Operative use of service partners
Transport
Transshipment
Table 16: Various levels of decision alternatives of RFSPs.
Strategic Level
In particular, the strategic level encompasses the specification of the corporate principles
(Aberle, 2009: 415) and the determination of the competitive strategy114 of the RFSP (KlaasWissing, 2010a: 127). Concerning corporate principles, the mission statement and the corporate
113
Following the classification of mitigation measures in the transportation industry according to Léonardi and
Baumgartner (2004).
114
Klaas-Wissing (2010a: 127) used the term strategic basic options.
132
philosophy of the company are addressed (Aberle, 2009: 415). On this level, general decisions
are made to provide carbon-efficient transportation services and, consequently, to address the
issue of CM as a core principle within the company. Thus, the task field of CM is anchored
within the company and its relevance is underpinned.
The competitive strategy of RFSPs is concretized along the character of the range of services
(width of the service115 and geographical orientation) and the creation of services (depth of the
service116 and service integration at the customer) (Klaas-Wissing, 2010a: 127). These
decisions determine the conduct of transportation services,117 including the operations concept
and the volume of transportation services; consequently, they have a direct effect on the
inventory of carbon emissions released. Nevertheless, given the strong relevance and lengthy
time horizon, these decisions in business practice are primarily driven by financial (for
example, available financial resources) or non-financial economic criteria, such as market
requirements or the competitive situation of the RFSP (Bohlmann and Krupp, 2007: 26).
Furthermore, for example, that a company in the transportation industry decides not to expand
its transportation services to a strategically important country or not to offer further
transportation services on the foundation that doing so will increase the absolute amount of
carbon emissions released seems unrealistic.
To summarize, at the strategic level, the decision is made on whether or not CM should be
conducted within the company. Moreover, the framework conditions for the conduct of
transportation services are created. Because the in-depth preparation of transportation services
is part of the tactical level, the strategic level is rather insignificant for deriving mitigation
measures.
115
Service width addresses the extent of the service portfolio, encompassing for example transportation, warehousing, and
transshipment activities.
116
Service depth focuses on the extent to which the logistics services are conducted with own resources or are outsourced
to service partners. In this context, service depth is differentiated between asset-based and asset-free RFSPs.
117
The design specification for conducting transportation services is, among other things, determined by the specification
of the set of logistics sites. In the literature, studies first addressed the interrelation between the number of logistics
sites and the carbon emissions released during transportation and warehousing activities (e.g., McKinnon and Piecyk,
2012, Kohn and Broding, 2013). Given that customer orders are altered by constantly changing start and end locations,
in business practice, the effects of the number of logistics sites on the inventory of carbon emissions in the field of
transportation services are quite complex to estimate. Moreover, Schmidt and Wilhelm (2000) emphasized that these
decisions are primarily driven by labor and transportation costs, and by non-financial criteria such as infrastructure,
closeness to the market, and strategic alliances. Nevertheless, given the specification of the logistics location, such as
near the train infrastructure or inland ports, the foundation for considering other transportation modes in the transport
chain is created.
133
Tactical Level
The tactical level encompasses process preparation measures for conducting transportation
services including, for example, the vehicle fleet and the required IT systems. As an
approximate orientation, tactical decisions are made within a mid-range time horizon of six to
twenty-four months and function as a bridge between the strategic and operational levels
(Schmidt and Wilhelm, 2000). To systematically structure the broad range of mitigation
measures in the field of transportation services at this decision level, this thesis follows the
classification approach of Léonardi and Baumgartner (2004) and differentiates among the
following four categories: logistics, route, vehicle, and driver efficiency, which are directly
tailored for road freight transportation.118 Table 17 presents119 selected mitigation measures in
the field of transportation services for the respective categories.120 Thereby, the presented
overview of possible mitigation measures does not claim to be comprehensive.
Category
Logistics
efficiency
Route
efficiency
(disposition
efficiency)
Vehicle
efficiency
Selected mitigation measures
Applicable for a
specific operations type
 Shifting mode of transport (specification of selection  (A), (B), C
criteria)
 Cooperation with other road freight or logistics service
providers (bundling of transport, cross docking)
 Choice of RFSPs according to their carbon efficiency
 Optimization of cargo space utilization (increasing the load
factor)
 Optimal vehicle size (vehicle category)
 Telematics solutions to optimize routing and minimize  (A), B, C
kilometers driven
 Telematics solutions to take into account current traffic
conditions
 Steady modernization of vehicle fleet (highest EURO
norms)
 Vehicles with alternative drive technologies (for example,
electric or hybrid)
 Use of biodiesel
 A, B, C
118
Categorization of the mitigation measures based on the evaluation of statements from 200 operators and experts, and
British and German examples in the transportation industry (Léonardi and Baumgartner, 2004).
119
This thesis does not provide an estimation of the carbon reduction potential of the selected measures because actual
carbon reduction potential depends on a broad range of factors, such as type of operations, transport volume, and
efforts made in the field of CM. Nevertheless, the rank order in which the categories of the mitigation measures are
presented should provide an approximate orientation of their general carbon reduction potential. 120
The selected mitigation measures are based on the experiences of the representatives of the selected RFSPs, the
participants of the focus group workshops, and insights from the literature (e.g., Gajanand and Narendran, 2013; Kohn
and Broding, 2013; Léonardi and Baumgartner, 2004; McKinnon, 2010b).
134
 Aerodynamic measures at the vehicle to minimize air
resistance
 Use of telematics solutions to regularly check fuel
consumption
 Low resistance tires
 Speed limitations
Drivers
efficiency
Legend:
 Driver training
 A, B, C
 Driver assistance
() indicates that, for the type of operation, the categories of mitigation measure are rather
insignificant or only selected mitigation measures are available
Table 17: Overview of possible mitigation measures.
To summarize, at the tactical level, a broad range of measures are derived to reduce the amount
of carbon emissions within transportation services.
Operational Level
At the operational level, transportation services are scheduled to assure the delivery of goods to
the recipient and encompass, for example, the choice of service partners and transport modes,
and the specification of a concrete tour and route (Aberle, 2009: 415). Thereby, decisions at the
strategic and tactical levels limit the room for making decisions at the operational level and
determine the general framework conditions (Schmidt and Wilhelm, 2010). Consequently, in
business practice, the dispatcher makes the final decision regarding transport mode (rail, road
or inland water) or transport resources (own or service partners) used to transport the specific
good. However, the action based on predetermined criteria (for example, weight, volume, or
distance of the goods) was elaborated on and provided at the tactical level.
To summarize, the operational level is rather insignificant for the specification of mitigation
measures because of the decisions made at other decision levels based on predefined criteria
and framework conditions.
Appropriate Mitigation Measures Depending on Operations Type
Eliminating inaccurate mitigation measures at an early stage within the planning process offers
the benefit of concretizing the focus on the remaining measures. A reflection on the decision
alternatives for RFSPs at the three previously described delimited decision levels makes it
obvious that the tactical level is highly relevant and aims to derive mitigation measures.
Because the decisions alternatives at the tactical level are limited by the decisions made at the
strategic level, the applicable categories of mitigation measures in the field of transportation
135
services are strongly determined by the specific type of operations of the RFSP and, thus, the
comprehensiveness of the transportation services offered.
Given the broad range of transportation services including various transportation modes, type C
RFSPs are able to select a set of mitigation measures from all four categories. Because type B
RFSPs focus on transportation services using the road as the mode of transportation, selected
measures in the category of logistics efficiency, particularly the selection of other
transportation modes, are unavailable. RFSPs with type A characteristics focus primarily on
full load transportation services between two locations and should revert to mitigation
measures in the categories of vehicle and driver efficiency. In addition to logistics efficiency,
route efficiency may be evaluated as rather important because, as noted by Gajanand and
Narendran (2013), most efficiency gains from the application of a telematics-based route
optimization are generated by pickup and distribution runs. Table 17 (see p. 134) illustrates the
four categories of mitigation measures regarding their accuracy of fit for the delimitated types
of operations.
Considering the empirical insights from the case studies, all RFSPs aim to improve their carbon
efficiency through a broad range of mitigation measures. Thereby, all companies address
measures in the category of vehicle and driver efficiency, with particular focus on constantly
modernizing the vehicle fleet and driver trainings. Measures in the field of the route efficiency
is addressed by the RFSP I, IV and V. Moreover, the RFSPs in cases I, II, and III evaluate the
shifting the mode of transport (from road to rail) as a core measure to enhance the carbon
efficiency within their operations.
To conclude, the aforementioned outlined considerations revealed that mitigation measures are
particularly available at the tactical level, whereby the type of operation determines their
available range. Based on this conceptual understanding, the following interrelation can be
formulated: the more complex the type of operations of the respective RFSP, the broader the
range of mitigation measures to increase carbon efficiency within the operations.
In the next step, the identified mitigation measures must be evaluated regarding their effect on
the predefined evaluation criteria with the goal of excluding measures that are not tailored.
136
1.4
Forecast and Evaluation of Mitigation Measures
In this task of the planning process (see Figure 32), the evaluation criteria are specified and the
potential to reduce the amount of carbon emissions is forecasted. Moreover, relations between
the evaluation criteria are analyzed and conflicts are resolved.
Figure 32: Positioning in the planning process – forecast and evaluation of mitigation measures.
Given budgetary constraints, RFSPs must focus on a selected set of mitigation measures.
Moreover, because the implementation of mitigation measures may be predominantly
characterized by high investment of financial and / or personnel resources and long operational
times, a systematic evaluation process is required (Schmidt and Wilhelm, 2000). Thereby, the
degree to which various predefined evaluation criteria are met (Horvàrth, 2006: 33) and the
likelihood of yielding the aspired carbon reduction target (McKinnon, 2011) function as the
basis for prioritizing the mitigation measures relative to one another.
A systematic evaluation of various mitigation measures necessitates the concrete specification
of evaluation criteria and a forecast for how the preselected mitigation measures contribute to
meeting the aspired carbon reduction target. Moreover, the relations among the evaluation
criteria must be analyzed with the goal of resolving their identified conflicts and by considering
the company’s targets (Küpper, 2001: 72). Hence, the forecast and evolution of mitigation
measures within the planning process encompasses the following subtasks:
 Specification of evaluation criteria (including a forecast of the carbon reduction potential);
 Analysis of the relations among the evaluation criteria; and,
 Resolution of conflicts of interest.
137
Specification of Evaluation Criteria
This subtask addresses the specification of criteria (see Figure 33), based on which the set of
mitigation measures can be evaluated. To concretize the evaluation criteria, determining the
criteria and defining an evaluation scale must occur (Horvàrth, 2006: 189). The carbon
reduction potential, which can be achieved with the evaluated measure, is also forecasted.
Figure 33: Positioning in the planning process – specification of evaluation criteria.
In general, RFSPs pursue various targets. Therefore, the evaluation criteria should reflect the
companies’ targets and require that, in the evaluation process of mitigation measures in the
field of road freight transportation services, criteria from the following three dimensions should
be applied:
 Ecological dimension;
 Economic dimension; and,
 Technical dimension.
The major ecological criterion is the carbon reduction potential, which is calculated by
comparing current operations with another possible action alternative with respect to the
amount of released carbon emissions. For example, the carbon emissions of an operating
vehicle are quantified and set in relation to the carbon emissions released by a truck with stateof-the-art technology, taking into account the same operating conditions, particularly
kilometers driven. The deviation with respect to the amount of carbon emissions between the
two vehicles presents the carbon reduction potential. Thereby, the input data used to evaluate
the carbon emissions of the current operating truck should be based on meaningful carbon
indictors delivered from CA.121
121
Schaltegger and Csutora (2012) introduced a more complex ecological criterion to evaluate the mitigation measures:
the carbon payback period. This ecological criterion describes the period until the carbon savings in the operation
138
A broad range of economic criteria for the evaluation of measures on the tactical level are
discussed and applied in the field of road freight transportation service. The following
economic criteria are particularly relevant:122
 Investment costs;
 Total costs of ownership (including both investment and operating costs);
 Return on investment (profit / investment costs);
 Payback period (period during which the annual profit exceeds the initial investment costs);
and,
 Resource efforts of the company’s own workforce.
In addition to these introduced ecologic and economic criteria, additional criteria within a
technical dimension play a central role in the evaluation of mitigation measures in the field of
road freight transportation. The focus is on the accuracy of fit of the measures with respect to
the specified requirements of the transportation profile. Thereby, the specific requirement
profile of the RFSPs is particularly influenced by the transportation services offered (for
example, main or pickup and distribution runs) and the transported type of goods (for example,
liquid or parceled goods). In addition, the durability, including the failure rate of the possible
measure, is frequently based on own experiences and serves as an additional criterion within
the technical dimension to evaluate mitigation measures.
exceed the carbon emissions caused by the production of the specific investment (for example, a vehicle). Based on the
quantified carbon reduction potential, the period is calculated in which carbon emissions caused during the production
process are overcompensated by savings within the operations. Given the significant requirements concerning the
calculation of a carbon payback period, this evaluation criterion is rather insignificant in business practice.
122
The presented economic criteria are primarily based on insights from the case studies, extended by selected literature
(e.g., McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012).
139
Table 18 summarizes the aforementioned evaluation criteria, subdivided into the ecological,
economic, and technical dimension in the field of transportation services. Thereby, for each
evaluation criterion, an applicable evaluation scale is introduced to reach a precise and
comprehensive definition of the evaluation criteria. The following overview of several
evaluation criteria presented does not claim comprehensiveness.
Ecological dimension
(evaluation scale)
 Carbon reduction
potential (carbon
emissions)
 Carbon payback period
(for example, years)
Economic dimension
(evaluation scale)
Technical dimension
(evaluation scale)
 Investment costs (monetary units)
 Total cost of ownership – investment
and operating costs (monetary units)
 Return on investment (for example,
percentage)
 Payback period (for example, years)
 Resource efforts – initial and in
operation (for example, monetary
units, hours)
 Fit for use in the field of
transportation services (for
example, specification of a
degree)
 Durability, including failure
rate (for example, years)
Table 18: Overview of evaluation criteria and the related scale.
The carbon reduction potential presents the core criterion within the ecological dimension;
therefore, the forecast of the amount of carbon emissions that can be saved through selective
mitigation measures is discussed in further depth. The specification or simply an approximate
forecast of the carbon reduction potential of mitigation measures requires significant
information on the amount of carbon emissions from both measures that are in operations123
and are to be evaluated.124 Consequently, the complexity of forecasting carbon reduction varies
among mitigation measures and is especially dependent on the impact of the measure
concerning the operations. In general, a high level of data availability on the limited adoption
of operations such as speed limitations (of vehicles) or modernization of the vehicle fleet makes
forecasting the carbon reduction potential easier. In contrast, less information on the effects of
carbon efficiency might be available for significant changes in operations, including, for
example, cooperation or the use of different transportation modes.125 The following two
examples illustrate these outlined connections.
123
Information on the current carbon efficiency for the measure in practice is delivered from CA. Thereby, the higher the
number of real values for the amount of carbon emissions considered, the greater the quality of the forecasted carbon
reduction potential.
124
The amount of carbon emissions for potential mitigation measures is based on own experiences, manufacturer data (for
example, vehicle), or a simulation using a carbon calculation tool.
125
In the operation concepts B and C, the forecast of the carbon reduction potential related to significant changes is much
more complex, evoked by, among other factors, daily changing tours for the pickup and distribution runs.
140
 Example 1: An RFSP plans to limit the speed of all vehicles to 90 km/h to reduce fuel
consumption and, consequently, the inventory of carbon emissions from transportation
processes. The effects of this mitigation measure on the carbon reduction potential are easily
quantified because a broad range of information on fuel consumption of the current vehicle
fleet is available. This information may be applied to forecast the carbon reduction potential
of the selected measured speed limitation.
 Example 2: In contrast, another RFSP aims to calculate the carbon reduction potential that
results from a new cooperation with several service partners. The primary target of the
cooperation is the consolidation of various parceled goods that aim to increase truck
utilization and to minimize empty truck runs. For the portion of the RFSP’s operations that is
affected by the cooperation, the current carbon efficiency is based on information from CA.
Nevertheless, because the RFSP cannot refer to historical data on the amount of carbon
emissions developed by the cooperation, forecasting the carbon reduction potential is
complex and, consequently, associated with several risks. In these examples, specifying a
range for the carbon reduction potential is preferable.
For further mitigation measures, Table 19 (see p. 143) evaluates the expected complexity of the
forecast of the carbon reduction potential.
The experiences gained in the seven case studies reveal that the evaluation of measures in the
field of road transportation is primarily dominated by ecological and technical criteria.
However, as the core ecological criterion, the carbon reduction potential becomes increasingly
relevant in the evaluation process of RFSPs I, II, III and IV.
To summarize, for the evaluation of each mitigation measure, the RFSP must decide on the
appropriate evaluation criteria and, therefore, the criteria that should be considered within the
evaluation process. Various factors such as the effect on the operations, or the required
financial investment should affect which and how many evaluation criterions are contemplated.
Thereby, as a general rule, greater emphasis should be placed on the evaluation criteria for the
evaluation process given a more significant effect on operations and/or the greater financial
resources required to enable a meaningful evaluation process.
Moreover, the outlined considerations reveal that the challenges to forecasting the carbon
reduction potential are particularly determined by the mitigation measure assessed. Thereby, a
mitigation measure with a stronger effect on operations is associated with less available
141
information on the possible development of carbon emissions and, consequently, greater
challenges to specifying the carbon reduction potential.126
Analysis of the Relation among the Evaluation Criteria
This task (see Figure 34) focuses on an analysis of the relations among the evaluation
criteria.127
Figure 34: Positioning in the planning process – analysis of the relations among the evaluation criteria.
To achieve clarity of the specific relations among various evaluation criteria, Pfohl and Stölzle
(1999: 89) recommended that the relations must be empirical analyzed in selected cases by
considering the specific framework conditions characterized by the organization or the
employees involved.
Table 19 illustrates the type of and reasons for the respective relation between carbon reduction
potential and the ecological criteria investment cost (short-term), and the total cost of
ownership (long-term)128 through examples of selective mitigation measures for the logistics
and vehicle efficiency categories. In this context, conflict of interest – differentiated between
no, low, medium, and high – is applied to specify the relation between the two evaluation
criteria.
126
Assuming that real values concerning the amount of carbon emissions of the current measure are available.
127
As introduced in section C-II 1.2.2, complementary, competitive, or indifferent relations may be differentiated.
128
To discuss exemplarily, the relation of the evaluation criteria carbon reduction potential, and investment costs, and total
costs of ownership are chosen, due to the relevance of the selected economic criteria in business practice.
142
Mitigation
measures
Complexity of
forecast
Conflict of
interest
Conflict of
interest
(carbon reduction
potential)
(carbon reduction
target, investment
costs, short term)
(carbon reduction
target, total costs of
ownership, long term)
Discussions of the
conflicts of interest
Logistics
efficiency
Shifting
mode of
transport
Cooperation
with other
service
partners
Short-term: Choice of
further partners and
realignment of the operations
are resource-intensive
Medium
High
Medium
Low / Medium
High
Low / No
Long-term: Highly
dependent on the specific
route; intermodal transport
requires additional
transshipment costs
Short-term: High resource
input for the selection of
service partners and initial
investment to coordinate
transportation processes
Long-term: Reduction in
driven kilometers leading to
both fuel and carbon savings
Vehicle
efficiency
Modernization of
vehicle fleet
Speed
limitation
Low / Medium
Low
High
Low / No
Low / No
Low / No
Short-term: High
investment costs for
modernization of vehicle
fleet
Long-term: Fossil fuel
consumption and carbon
emissions savings from stateof-the-art technology
Short-term: Low initial
investment to limit vehicle
speed
Long-term: Both fossil fuel
and carbon emissions savings
Table 19: Evaluation of mitigation measures according to their conflicts of interest.
143
Table 19 shows that a range of low to high conflicts of interest between the carbon reduction
potential evaluation criterion and investment costs exists in the short term. In the long term,
harmonization between carbon reduction potential and the total cost of ownership economic
criterion is specified in most of the discussed examples.
The presented speed limitation mitigation measure is an example of a negligible or non-existent
conflict of interest between ecological and economic criteria for the selected mitigation
measures in the short term. These types of mitigation measures are characterized as “lowhanging fruit” because they are frequently easy to implement and are self-financing in the short
to medium term (McKinnon, 2010b). In contrast, for other mitigation measures, such as
modernization of the vehicle fleet in the short term, a competitive relation exists between
ecological (carbon reduction potential) and economic criteria (investment costs). This relation
can be reverted to the fact that the purchase and implementation of these mitigation measures
into the operations require high financial (or personnel resources) of RFSPs.
However, target harmonization or complementary targets was achieved in the medium to long
term for all previously discussed mitigation measures. This achievement is explained as
follows: in transportation processes, most measures should lead to a reduction in energy
consumption that results in both cost (fossil fuel) and carbon emissions savings. This
explanation is underpinned by the findings of McKinnon (2010b) and Rao and Holt (2005),
who stated that in the long run in the transportation industry, a broad range of measures
generates streams of economic and environmental benefits.
The insights from the case studies reveal that the carbon reduction potential becomes
increasingly relevant in the evaluation process of RFSPs I, II, III and IV. Nevertheless, as the
carbon reduction potential is a new evaluation criterion for measures, the relation to other
evaluation criteria has not yet been analyzed and specified.
To summarize, the interrelation between the evaluation criteria depends on the specific
mitigation measures formally establishes the concept that a lower conflict of interest among
economic and ecological criteria results in more attractive respective mitigation measures.
These measures are denoted as “low-hanging fruit” because they increase carbon efficiency and
are frequently easy to implement and self-finance in the short to medium term.
144
Resolution of Conflicts of Interest
In the final tasks (see Figure 35), conflicts identified among evaluation criteria must be
resolved. Through the resolution of conflicts, company preferences or decision makers must be
contemplated. Thus, the extent to which one evaluation criterion is preferred over another
criterion may be specified (Küpper, 2001: 74).129
Figure 35: Positioning in the planning process – resolution of conflicts of interest.
In the next step, a decision is made around the measures based on the foundation of the
evaluated mitigation measures.
129
Due to the absence of particularities in content by the solving of interest, induced by the evaluation criteria carbon
reduction potential, it is not addressed within this thesis. For an in-depth explanation of various approaches to solving
conflicts of interest, refer to Küpper (2002: 74).
145
1.5
Making Decisions on Mitigation Measures
The final task of the planning process (see Figure 36) encompasses the decisions around the
preselected and evaluated mitigation measures that aim to meet the defined carbon reduction
target.130
Figure 36: Positioning in the planning process – making decisions on mitigation measures.
The decision on which mitigation measure to implement should be based on the degree of
target achievement (Hahn and Hungenberg, 2001: 33). Moreover, based on the decision
regarding mitigation measures, the interrelation between the timeline for achieving the carbon
reduction target and the period during which the mitigation measures are implemented must be
taken into account.131
In the next step of the CM processes, the chosen mitigation measures are integrated within the
operations.
130
Horvàrth (2006: 189) noted that to document the key elements of the entire planning process, a specific planning report
as a short summary should be prepared during this phase of the planning process. Within this planning document,
personal responsibilities should be determined to assure the conduct of the plan and to inform the affected employees.
Moreover, the planning document may include, for example, the aspired carbon reduction target, the underlying
forecast assumptions of the carbon reduction potential of the mitigation measures, the chosen mitigation measures, and
the respective deadlines. Based on this information in the planning document, the mitigation measures may be
implemented and the development with respect to carbon efficiency during different time periods may be
systematically monitored.
131
As the decision on measures does not reveal any particularities, with respect to other decision in the operations, it is not
addressed further in this thesis.
146
2
Execution
The execution of mitigation measures within the CM process directly follows the planning
process and focuses on the preparation and, finally, implementation (Hahn and Hungenberg,
2001: 34) of the selected package of carbon mitigation measures into the RFSP’s operations
(see Figure 37).
Figure 37: Execution process.
The presented bandwidth of mitigation measures in Table 17 (section C-II 1.3) describes
characteristic measures in the field of road freight transportation services. The execution of
mitigation measures within the CM process does not show any particularities with respect to
the execution of other measures in the transportation industry. Therefore, this thesis briefly
outlines the key execution tasks.
Preparation of the Mitigation Measure
In particular, the first task of execution specifies the approach to implementing the mitigation
measures (see Figure 38).132
Figure 38: Positioning in the execution process – preparation of the mitigation measure.
The implementation approach is differentiated between an ad hoc and a step-by-step
approach.133 An ad hoc approach may be characterized as all components of the mitigation
132
In addition to the implementation approach, to prepare the implementation of measures, personnel and organizational
aspects must be considered. At a personal level, implementation ability and willingness of the workforce are core
issues, whereas the organizational level focuses on the temporary project structure (Heusler, 2004: 176; Pladeck, 2005:
173).
147
measures being implemented at the same time. This type of implementation approach requires
an in-depth understanding of the effects of the measure on the RFSP’s operative transportation
processes; otherwise, the complexity of the implementation of the measure may increase the
probability of failure. A short implementation duration is noted as the main advantage of this
approach (Heusler, 2004: 173).
By applying a step-by-step approach, the components of the mitigation measure are divided
and gradually implemented at the operations. Thereby, the implemented components of the
mitigation measure should ideally build on one another. This implementation approach is
particularly applicable to measures characterized by a high level of complexity and innovation
because the approach leads to a longer period and higher associated costs. In contrast,
advantages are gained, such as a reduction in implementation complexity, greater acceptance
within the workforce, and the exploitation of learning effects during the process (Heusler,
2004: 173).
In particular, the implementation approach and preparation efforts are determined by the level
of innovation and the effect of mitigation measures on operations. For example, in the field of
road freight transport, a new vehicle with an established engine technology and no significant
new features may be implemented on an ad hoc basis into operative transportation processes
because the vehicle’s capabilities are well known. In contrast, cooperation with other service
partners is characterized by a high level of innovation and a significant effect on operations.
Therefore, cooperation might begin with a combination of selected transportation services (for
example, a specific region or area) that is extended in a step-by-step manner based on the
information collected on the performance of the other service partners. Consequently, the more
complex the mitigation measure and its effect on operations, the higher the required
participation efforts, which might lead to a decision to select a step-by-step implementation
approach.134
After preparation, the mitigation measures are implemented into the operations in the next step.
133
Pladeck (2005: 192) provided further differentiation and concretized four different approaches to enable a transfer
between the new and the old measure, namely synchronized, asynchronous, an overlapping transfer, and simultaneous
operation.
134
In addition to the complexity of the mitigation measure, the implementation ability and willingness of the workforce,
and the organizational responsibilities (for example, temporary project) are further core issues that must be considered
when making decisions regarding the implementation approach to select.
148
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure
The second task of the execution process (see Figure 39) encompasses the implementation of
the mitigation measure into the operations and, if necessary, ad hoc monitoring of the effects
with respect to the development of carbon efficiency.
Figure 39: Positioning in the execution process – implementation of the mitigation measure.
The extent of the required monitoring activities during the implementation of the measures is
determined by the selected implementation approach (ad hoc or step-by-step). Thereby, within
the scope of the monitoring activities is the development of carbon efficiency within the
operations, induced by the implemented mitigation measure.135 In reference to the
aforementioned introduced example of the ad hoc implemented new vehicle, as a general rule
no ad hoc monitoring activities are required. The effect of the measure on carbon efficiency is
determined through a regular monitoring process.136 In contrast, the implementation of a new
cooperation with several service partners, which is conducted as a step-by-step approach,
requires a higher level of monitoring during the implementation process. Thus, possible
mistakes137 may be identified during an early stage and the effect of the mitigation measure
with respect to carbon efficiency may be enhanced through corresponding measures, enabling
the following interrelation to be derived: the longer the period for implementing a measure, the
more target-oriented the ad hoc monitoring activities should be with respect to the effect of
measuring carbon efficiency.
Monitoring the effects of the mitigation measures at regular intervals with respect to the
predefined carbon reduction target is within the scope of the “monitoring” process as part of the
CM process.
135
For further explanations concerning the monitoring activities during the CM process, refer to section C-II 3.
136
For the interrelation between the implemented mitigation measure and the frequency of the monitoring process, refer to
section C-II 3.4.
137
Heusler (2004: 197) differentiated between mistakes at the implementation object or during the implementation process.
149
3
Monitoring
Monitoring is understood as the counterpart and a complement of the planning process that
aims to reduce the uncertainty with respect to the underlying assumptions and achievement of
the target (Horvàrth, 2006: 155). Hence, monitoring encompasses the tracking and evaluation
of the effect of the implemented package of measures with respect to the expected development
of carbon efficiency (Schaltegger and Csutora, 2012). Based on this information, if required,
the main deviations must be specified and analyzed, and adjusted measures with a direct effect
on the planning process should be derived (Küpper, 2001: 169). Consequently, without
planning, the monitoring process cannot be conducted in a target-oriented manner (Horvàrth,
2006: 155).
A common understanding of the term “monitoring” is not available in the literature (Horvàrth,
2006: 149). The diversity of the applied terms, including supervision, audit, or revision, which
shows comparable or the same meaning, strengthens the problem of making a general
specification (Reihlen, 1997: 24). However, as a general rule, the key task of the monitoring
process is comparing the two values of target and actual indicator, a rule that is largely
uncontroversial. In addition to this common understanding in the literature, different views
exist concerning the scope and further related tasks of the monitoring process. That the
deviation analysis, which focuses on the identification of the reasons for the main deviation
between target and actual indicators, additionally presents part of the monitoring process is
widely accepted (Hahn and Hungenberg, 2001: 34; Horvàrth, 2006: 190; Küpper, 2001: 169).
Whether the final decision and the implementation of the recommended possible adjustment
measures – if main deviations are specified – include a monitoring process task is controversial
(Horvàrth, 2006: 190; Reihlen, 1997: 24).
150
This thesis takes a holistic view of the monitoring process. Consequently, only the decision
regarding and the execution of further mitigation measures are not considered because these
tasks were already addressed in other elements of the CM process. Therefore, the monitoring
process encompasses the following three tasks, which are illustrated in Figure 40:
• Making a comparison (section C-II 3.1);
• Deviation analysis (section C-II 3.2);
• Specifying starting points to minimize deviations (section C-II 3.3).138
Figure 40: Monitoring process.
These delimitated tasks are reasonable tasks of comprehensive monitoring but do not
characterize a general definition of the monitoring process. Otherwise, making a comparison
without deviation analysis and specifying starting points to minimize the deviations cannot be
understood as monitoring (Küpper, 2001: 170). Furthermore, to comprehensively characterize
the monitoring and the time interval in which the monitoring process is conducted (section C-II
3.4) must be determined (Horvàrth, 2006: 155).
3.1
Making a Comparison
This task of the monitoring process (see Figure 41) focuses on comparing the planned and the
current carbon efficiency of the operations.
Figure 41: Positioning in the monitoring process – making a comparison.
138
The specification of starting points to minimize the deviations is considered by Horvàrth (2006: 190) within the
deviation analysis. To underpin the relevance of this phase, contemplating this task as an own phase of the monitoring
process was decided.
151
This task of the monitoring process determines the success of the action taken (Hahn and
Hungenberg, 2001: 34) and, in general, encompasses a comparison between a standard
indicator and an indicator to be assessed (Küpper, 2001: 173). Thereby, the standard indicators
present the aspired carbon reduction target defined within the planning process. The aim of the
monitoring process is to analyze the development of carbon efficiency during periods
characterized as a “plan improvement monitoring.” Küpper (2001: 174) used this type of
monitoring to differentiate between current or future-oriented indicators with respect to the
indicators to be assessed. The forward projection of the future inventory of carbon emissions is
extremely difficult to estimate and is associated with several internal and external uncertainties.
Therefore, business practice focuses on the current carbon indicators that reflect the actual
inventory of carbon emissions. The current carbon indicators are delivered from CA.
The foundation for conducting a comparison within the monitoring process is the key
performance indicator system (Burrit et al., 2011) that encompasses a couple of carbon
indicators and is specified within the planning process.139 Furthermore, the validity of the
comparison primarily depends on the extent and, in particular, quality of the actual carbon
indicators provided from CA. An enhanced validity of the deviation analysis is achieved if the
amount of carbon emissions140 and the operational metric are based on real values. In the case
of purely calculated values, a high level of uncertainty regarding carbon efficiency in
operations exits. Consequently, applying a larger number of real carbon emission values results
in a higher quality comparison and, consequently, greater expressiveness of the results.
Based on the results of the conducted comparison between target and actual carbon indicators,
the next step of the monitoring process analyzes the main deviations.
139
140
The key performance indicator system is elaborated on in the target operationalization subphase of the planning process
(see section C-II 1.2.3). In this phase of the planning process, the specified carbon reduction target is broken down
consistently over various hierarchy levels into operative and measurable carbon indicators; for example, it is
differentiated for subsidiaries, business units, or logistics sites.
For a systematic classification of the quality of carbon emissions based on various input data, refer to section C-I 3.
152
3.2
Deviation Analysis
In this task of the monitoring process (see Figure 42), the identified deviations are analyzed
with respect to the reasons and implications for achievement of the target (Horvàrth, 2006:
190), respectively, the carbon reduction target.
Figure 42: Positioning in the monitoring process – deviation analysis.
Because conducting a deviation analysis is time and resource consuming, it must focus on the
core deviations. Core deviations are characterized as deviations that have a significant effect on
and could lead to the failing of the planned carbon reduction target of the company. In
particular, these deviations must be the focus of the analytical process.
Following the understanding of Küpper (2001: 186), deviations between target and actual
(carbon) indicators revert to the following three reasons, which are partially customized to
consider the particularities of the CM process:
 Incorrect specification of the carbon reduction target: Inappropriate forecast model,
underlying assumption, or forecast process (for example, the effects of the implemented
package of mitigation measures with respect to their carbon reduction potential turned out to
be much lower than expected within the planning process);
 Incorrect calculation of the actual carbon indicators: Errors in the calculation of the
amount of carbon emission or operational metric (for example, the fossil fuel consumption
of several vehicles is not included or is calculated twice in CA); and,
 Incorrect CM process (“Execution”): Mistakes within the execution process (for example,
a set of planned mitigation measures not being implemented on time or properly).
These particularities outline the characteristics of the deviation analysis and reveal that the
challenges to specifying the main reasons are strongly influenced by the size of the company
and the type of operations.141 At larger RFSPs with complex operations (type B or C),
deviations between the planned and the current carbon efficiency may occur for more
141
A further driver of the challenges that arise during deviation analysis might be the range of implemented mitigation
measures. The requirements for a concrete specification of the reasons for the deviation become greater as more and
complex mitigation measures are or should be implemented.
153
reasons.142 Moreover, these reasons are complex to specify and require a large amount of
corresponding information. Given the limited number of reasons for deviations at small, type A
RFSPs,143 the concretization of the deviations is much easier. Therefore, the larger the RFSP
and the more complex its operations, the broader the range of possible reasons for deviations
between the planned and the current carbon efficiency. As a result, identifying the set of
reasons leading to a deviation becomes more complex.
The insights from the deviation analysis serve as a basis for deriving adjusted measures with an
aim to meet the aspired carbon reduction target.
3.3
Specification of Starting Points to Minimize Deviations
The final tasks in the monitoring process (see Figure 43) focus on the development of
appropriate adjustment measures for the main deviations between planned and current carbon
indicators.
Figure 43: Positioning in the monitoring process – specification of starting points to minimize deviations.
In future periods, McKinnon and Piecyk (2002) noted that, to avoid or reduce the deviations
between the target and the actual carbon efficiency, starting points imply a recommendation to
either further a different set of mitigation measures or adjust the value of the carbon reduction
target.144
The foundation of the target-oriented selection of a set of mitigation measures presents those
measures that are preselected, evaluated, and prioritized during the planning process
(McKinnon, 2011). This initial evaluation of mitigation measures is particularly complemented
by insights into the already implemented measures to include the own experiences gained
142
In general, a significant key performance indicator system facilitates the specification of the reasons for deviations
(refer to section C-II 1.2.3 and the discussed interrelations).
143
The focus may be on the single service main runs.
144
This implication is in line with the understanding of Horvàrth (2006: 190), who specified the planning of measures and
feedback to the planning authority with the goal of target adjustments as starting points to minimize deviations in
future periods.
154
during the operative transportation processes. Additionally, new available insights from, for
example, articles, face-to-face communications, and conferences, are fruitful sources for the
significant evaluation of mitigation measures. Based on this broad range of information, the
evaluation process might lead to another rank order and, consequently, to the recommendation
of a different package of mitigation measures. Thereby, as discussed in section C-II 1.3, that
the range of applicable mitigation measures is determined by the type of operation must be
taken into account.
In the monitoring process, an adjustment in the value of the carbon reduction target also
occurs in both directions – toward a higher or lower company-wide carbon reduction target.
Thereby, the experiences gained within the CM process contribute to a better forecast of the
carbon reduction potential of the mitigation measures. Based on these experiences, the carbon
reduction potential within operative transportation processes is evaluated as being closer to
reality. As a result, the carbon reduction target might be adopted in both directions. Drivers of
complexity related to adopting the carbon reduction target such as the scope of coverage (C-II
1.2.1) or the selected mitigation measures (C-II 1.4) and their interrelations were already
introduced. Moreover, changes in the corporate strategy, the expectations and requirements of
stakeholders, and the guidelines delivered by government agencies are further possible
arguments for an adjustment to the initially defined carbon reduction target.
Independently, the adjustment measures chosen have a direct effect on and, consequently, are
the link to the planning process.
3.4
Frequency of Monitoring
The frequency at which elements of the complete monitoring process are conducted must be
determined. To illustrate the main drivers of this frequency, a high145 and a lower146 frequency
are differentiated in the following paragraphs.
A high frequency of the monitoring process offers the benefit that deviations between target
and actual carbon indicators are detected and adjusted measures are initiated at an early stage.
Consequently, the effects of mitigation measures are evaluated contemporarily and carbon
efficiency may steadily improve through further subtle adjustments. Thus, the effects of various
mitigation measures with respect to carbon reduction potential may be better understood. In
145
146
In this thesis, a frequent monitoring process is conducted at least on a quarterly basis.
A lower frequency means that the least frequent amount of monitoring is carried out less than on a quarterly basis or, as
a general rule, on a semi-annual or annual basis.
155
addition, high monitoring frequency and a profound deviation analysis underpin the relevance
of CM and contribute to an enhanced awareness of the issue of CM within the company.
Lower monitoring frequency might be appropriate if no significant development of carbon
efficiency is expected for transportation activities. Such a situation is related to the fact that no
mitigation measures are implemented within a specific period or the effect of mitigation
measures are revealed in the long term.147 Moreover, lower monitoring frequency reduces the
(personnel) efforts needed to calculate the carbon indicators148 from CA to conduct the related
monitoring activities.
In the series of case studies conducted, carbon emissions for internal monitoring purposes are
calculated on a monthly to an annual basis. In the case of RFSP III (in progress) and RFSP V,
the time interval for the quantification of carbon emissions corresponds to regular financial
reporting that occurs on a monthly basis. The carbon efficiency monitoring process is
embedded into the established financial reporting structure and, thus, personnel synergies may
be exploited. In the case of RFSP I, II, IV, VI, and VII, the carbon indicators for internal
purposes are calculated on a semi-annual or annual basis as these indicators are required for the
sustainability report and to reduce the (manual) effort needed to gather, prepare, and calculate
carbon indicators.
To summarize, the frequency of the monitoring process should be determined in line with the
implementation periods for the mitigation measures.149 Mitigation measures with a short-term
effect on carbon efficiency, such as driver training or new vehicles, require high frequency. In
contrast, the regular monitoring process may occur at a lower frequency if the effects of the
implemented mitigation measures, such as cooperation, are apparent during a longer period.
Thus, the shorter the period of the effects of the respective mitigation measures on carbon
efficiency, the higher the frequency of monitoring should be select to aim to detect variations
during an early phase.
147
For example, the use of vehicles at least with alternative engine technologies in a step-by-step approach for
implementation over several years or in cooperation with several service partners.
148
Efforts to calculate carbon emissions are determined by the selected IT solution. Thereby, the following interrelation
exists: the higher the level of automation, the lower the required manual efforts. For further explanations, refer to
section C-III 2.1.
149
Based on the specification of the monitoring frequency, the timeline of the carbon reduction target must be considered.
Thereby, to identify deviations in an early phase, a shorter timeline for the carbon reduction target should lead to a
higher frequency. For the interrelation between the timeline of target reduction and the implementation period of the
mitigation measures, refer to section C-II 1.2.1.
156
4
Synthesis
To conclude, the tasks of the CM process are strongly intertwined and are based on a
significant inventory of carbon emissions and meaningful carbon indicators provided regularly
by CA. As the description of the several tasks reveals, the CM process is generally iterative in
nature and represents a closed feedback loop (McKinnon, 2011). Based on the planned carbon
reduction target, decarbonization activities in areas offering the greatest carbon leverage are
derived and mitigation measures are executed. Changes in the carbon emissions of
transportation services are monitored and the results and subsequent acquired knowledge in the
field of CM are fed back into previous stages of the CM process. Thereby, if necessary, a
specified carbon reduction target value or a set of mitigation measures are adopted that have a
direct effect on the planning process.
The particularities of the CM process are primarily rooted within the tasks of the planning
process; in particular, the scaling of a carbon reduction and its operationalization to develop a
key performance indicator system, the deviation of mitigation measures, and the forecast of the
carbon reduction potential. As the conceptual understanding in the section CM process reveals,
the challenges within these tasks are particularly driven by the operations complexity of the
RFSPs. Therefore, it is plausible that, the more complex the operations of the RFSP, the higher
the requirements in conducting the CM process.
III
Organization
The “organization” cornerstone of CM focuses on the creation of the structural and systemspecific framework conditions in terms of conducting CA and the CM process. This
cornerstone of CM encompasses the following two elements:
 Structures (section C-III 1); and,
 Systems (section C-III 2) subdivided into IT and incentive systems.
157
1
Structures
CM presents a new task field for RFSPs, requiring the creation of structural framework
conditions for conducting CA and the CM process (Burrit et al., 2011; Okereke et al., 2011).
According to Mintzberg (1979: 2), “the structure of an organization can be defined simply as
the sum total of the ways in which it divides its labor into distinct tasks and then achieves
coordination150 among them.” Among others, Zutshi and Sohal (2005) noted that structures
within the organization are a critical success factor for engaging in a new task field.
An appropriate design of the structure requires consideration of the particularities of the task
field (Kieser and Walgenbach, 2010: 72; Mintzberg, 1979: 2); therefore, the following text
elaborates on the main characteristics of the new task field of CM that affect the structures
within the organization.151 In general, CM presents a new task field encompassing the elements
of CA and the CM process, both of which do not present a component of RFSP operations. To
conduct CA, a broad range of data (for example, energy consumption and performance
indicators) from operations is required and processed to quantify carbon indicators for internal
and external purposes. Therefore, the key task of CA is to provide information for management
decisions. The CM process addresses a broad range of tasks, including the specification of a
carbon reduction target, evaluation, decision making regarding and executing mitigation
measures, and monitoring effects. Because CA and the CM process are established to affect
various functional units of the company, CM is characterized as a cross-functional task field.
This notion is in line with the statements of Schaltegger and Csutora (2012) and Burrit et al.
(2011), who underpinned that involving numerous corporate functions, such as sustainability
management, fleet management, procurement, management accounting, and marketing, are
necessary given the broad range of CM activities.
Considering the explanatory pattern of organizational learning theory, in particular the 4I
framework provided by Crossan et al. (1999),152 shows that initial learning in a new task field
occurs at an individual or small group level. Competence must be generated and, given the
cross-functional role of CA and the CM process, a common language and a concept for the
integration of CM within the company must be developed. These experiences are fed forward
150
Kieser and Walgenbach (2010: 93) concretized coordination as the alignment of employees or company departments
performance of a divided task with respect to the targets of the company. Clearly, coordination is induced by the
division of labor as interdependence among various members of the company who carry out the respective subtasks
exits. Therefore, to enable an alignment, respective coordination mechanisms are applied. Kieser and Walgenbach
(2010: 100) introduced the following coordination mechanisms: personal instructions, self-coordination, programs,
plans, organizational intern markets, and organizational culture.
151
The logical order of the task execution of CA (section C-I) and the CM process (C-II) were introduced.
152
For further explanations of the 4I framework provided by Crossan et al. (1999), refer to section B-I 2.5.
158
and an increasing number of employees are affected by the operative conduct of CM, which
requires the specification of corresponding structures. An in-depth analysis of the development
process of CM within organizational structures is differentiated between the following two
phases:
 Developing competence; and,
 Operative conduct of CM.
Developing Competence
This initial learning phase focuses on developing competence in the field of CM and
encompasses – among other factors – an understanding of the guidelines with respect to CA
standards and an analysis of the IT system to determine the availability of relevant input data
within the company. The aim of the learning phase is the development and evaluation of
different concepts for the integration and operative conduct of CM as a basis for decisions
made by top management. Developing competence may be characterized as time and resource
intensive and is evoked by the fact that CM presents a new task field with a cross-functional
role. As the discussion at CA (C-I) and the CM process (C-II) revealed, drivers of complexity
are the bandwidth of the operations, enhanced by increasing the size of the RFSP. In general,
developing competence may be assigned to employees not working in departments or to a
department.153
Employees not assigned to departments are frequently referred to as staff authority (Schreyögg,
1998: 152).154 According to Kieser and Walgenbach (2010: 395), the staff authority155 directly
reports to top management and supports and consults with line departments on daily business
activities. Separating the development of competence in the field of CM within staff authority
allows an extension of capacity without additional personnel resources of the department or
adoption of the established organizational structure (Schreyögg, 1998: 152). This approach is
particularly appropriate for small- and medium-sized RFSP because the operations and IT
153
Another option might be creating a project team encompassing employees from various departments to meet the
requirements of a cross-functional task field (such as sustainability/quality management, IT, operations, and
marketing). For an in-depth specification of the composition of a project team, refer to (Pladeck, 2005: 173).
Moreover, an external consultant may provide support for developing a concept for conducting CM.
154
Given scarce financial and personnel resources, at small RFSPs, the CEO carries out the development of competences
in the field of CM.
155
Horngren et al. (2002) defined a staff authority as an “authority to advise but not command” (Horngren et al., 2002:
16).
159
systems are, as a general rule, less complex. Moreover, at these RFSPs, scarce financial and
personnel resources are available that can used to elaborate on concepts for a new task field.156
To develop competence in the field of CM, a new department (for example, environmental or
sustainability department) may be formed or responsibility for CM may be assigned to an
established department. Assigning the development of competence to an established
department is fruitful when the department already manages a comparable task field, such as
environmental and quality management, or a compliance issue because it is already familiar
with the requirements of the standards and understands the implemented concepts within the
company through a similar objective. Thus, synergies within the company are achievable.
Regardless, whether a new department is formed or the tasks are assigned to an established
department, the concentration and specialization of the development of competence, including
more resources, might contribute to more professionalized concepts157 with respect to
conducting CM. More resources to develop competence and elaborate on a concept are required
as tasks increases in complexity, which occurs with a broad range of operations and increasing
company size.
Independent of the approach selected, the final decision must be made regarding the concept to
implement and how CM is to be integrated and conducted within the company. As a general
rule, this decision is the responsibility of top management.
Operative Conduct of Carbon Management
The following section focuses on the organizational structure for the operative conduct of CM
and addresses the division of labor and possible coordination mechanism. Thereby, a broad
range of structural options158 may be applied, which depends on various parameters.159
Nevertheless, to provide an overview and to underline the bandwidth of structural options, the
focus is on two extreme alternatives:
156
This concept is in line with the understanding of Klaas-Wissing (2010b: 145), who noted that internal or external
specialists or the CEO of the RFSP are responsible – if at all – strategic task fields such as quality or environmental
management, business development, or marketing at small companies in the transportation industry.
157
Kieser and Walgenbach (2010: 72), among others, outlined the relevance of functional specialization within an
organization to enhance task quantity and quality. Thereby, a reduction in complexity, a short training period, and the
learning effects from recurrent task execution are discussed in organizations as arguments for specialization.
158
Taking into account this discussed option of developing competence, these options determine the possible space
available for the specification of the content-related responsibility of CM. However, the content-related responsibility
of CM may be transferred to another staff authority or a department with the goal of achieving operative synergies in
daily business activities.
159
Klaas-Wissing (2010b: 143) focused on companies in the logistics industry and introduced five main parameters that
have a concrete effect on organizational structure: the number of employees and revenues, the number of logistics
sites, the number of and different logistics markets, the type and range of logistics services, and geographic expansion.
160
 No structural integration of CM; and,
 High structural integration of CM.
For no structural integration, the task field of CM is not considered in the organizational
chart in a department or in the title of a staff authority. The employee who bears the contentrelated responsibility is not functionally specialized in sustainability issues and in conducting
the core tasks in the field of CA (for example, calculation of carbon indicators) and the CM
process, in addition to his or her other daily business activities. Other employees rarely or never
carry out other tasks in the field of CM. To achieve a closed CA and CM process and to
consolidate the subtask, no coordination mechanism is applied.
High structural integration of CM is characterized by the task field of CM being visible in
the organizational chart, such as in the title of a staff authority or in a department that underpins
the relevance of CM for the company. In such a department (staff authority), a functional
specialization exists, indicating that employees focus on CM or comparable tasks fields such
environmental or quality management. The functional specialization enables the CA and CM
tasks to be carried out in a more professional manner.160
Nevertheless, considering the broad range of tasks in the field of CA and CM shows that these
tasks are, for high structural integration of CM, further divided to reduce their extend and
complexity for the responsible department (staff authority). Through division of labor, the
selected CM subtasks are assigned to different employees from various departments based on a
functional focus. Such a functional specialization of the CM tasks enables the achievement of
operative synergies with other tasks fields and the enhancement of the professionalization of
the CM process. For example, the vehicle fleet manager can evaluate and make decisions on
mitigation measures in operations that are crucial to meeting the defined carbon reduction
target. This employee has in-depth knowledge of the operations and is able to make appropriate
decisions to continuously increase carbon efficiency, which contributes to enhancing the
quality of the CM process.
The division of labor and the assignment of subtasks to employees in various departments are
interruptions to all activities related to CA and the CM process. To achieve a closed CA and
CM process, the subtasks must be coordinated,161 which requires coordination mechanism. A
coordination mechanism enables the responsible department (staff authority) to centrally
160
To concretize and illustrate the term professionalization in the field of CM, the quality of the carbon indicators may be
applied. In the case of a professional solution, the carbon indicators are based on real values for energy consumption
and performance indicators, which significantly enhance the expressiveness of such indicators.
161
Schreyögg (1998: 158) described the consolidation of separate subtasks into a closed unit as organizational integration.
161
structure the subtasks to enable that these subtasks can be conducted decentralized in the
intended manner (Kieser and Walgenbach, 2010: 94). This is achievable through
standardization,162 and Mintzberg (1979: 5) differentiated between standardization of work
processes and standardization of outputs.163 Thereby, standardizing the process encompasses
specifying the content of the work (Mintzberg, 1979: 5), which is achieved by, for example,
using an IT system (IT tools). An IT tool enables standardization of the data gathering process
for CA because the data mask specifies the input data to be filled in. Thus, loss of data quality
may be minimized and increasing accordance costs may be avoided (Burrit et al., 2011).
In contrast, standardizing the output addresses concretization of the results of the work
(Mintzberg, 1979: 5). For example, for a fleet manager, specifying a carbon efficiency target
within the operation may be characterized as output standardization. Thereby, the fleet manager
receives no guidelines on the measures that should be implemented to achieve the carbon
efficiency target. An incentive system may be implemented to enhance the probability that the
fleet manager makes economically acceptable decisions to meet the defined carbon reduction
target.
Various approaches concerning the organizational structures were identified in the seven case
studies. At the two small RFSPs in the sample (RFSP VI and VII), the CEO generated
competences and conducted a broad range of the operative tasks in the field of CM. In three
cases (RFSP II, III, and IV), after developing competence, the content-related responsibility
was transferred to another staff authority or department.164 As the size of the RFSP increased, a
staff authority (RFSP IV and V) or a department (I, II, and III), including a higher level of
functional specialization, was given the content-related responsibility for the operative conduct
of CM.165
To conclude, the new task field of CM requires structures for developing competence and
operative conduct. Considering the learning process of a new task field that flows from the
individual, over the group, and – finally – to the organizational level suggests that the more
162
Mintzberg (1979: 5) introduced further coordination mechanisms: mutual adjustments (coordination achieved through
informal communication) and direct supervision.
163
Additionally, Mintzberg (1979: 5) noted that standardization is achievable using skills requiring employee training.
164
For RFSP II, a member of the product management department for road freight services and, for cases III and V, the
CEO’s assistant generated competences in the field of CM. For RFSP III and V, the main driver for the decision to
transfer the contented-related responsibility for conducting CM was to exploit synergies with other task fields.
Achieving broad awareness and underpinning the relevance of CM within the group was the motivation of the RFSP in
case II.
165
For an in-depth specification of the division of labor in the case studies, refer to section B-II 2.
162
experiences the RFSPs gained in calculating carbon indicators166, the greater the effect on
employees from the operative CM tasks and, as a result, the higher the integration of CM in the
structures in terms of a functional specialization.
Moreover, by conducting the operative tasks of CM with increasing extent of the CM tasks, the
advantages of a functional specialization increase, enabling enhanced professionalization of CA
and the CM process. As the key driver determining the extent of the tasks, the size of the RFSP
can be specified. Based on this understanding, a larger RFSP is plausibly associated with
stronger integration of CM in the organization’s structures in terms of functional
specialization.
2
Systems
Furthermore, the “organization” cornerstone of CM addresses the design of the required
systems in the company. This thesis characterizes a system as a unit set of procedures and
resources of the company that are designed to enable or enhance the conduct of CA and the CM
process.167 Therefore, the core systems are derived from the characteristics of CA and the CM
process.
CA focuses on the calculation of carbon indicators, which requires processing a large amount
of energy consumption data and the corresponding performance data through IT systems,
respectively, IT tools. Moreover, because CM is a new task field with a cross-functional role,168
it affects the daily business activities of nearly the entire workforce.169 To increase awareness
and ensure the desired employee behavior with respect to CA and the CM process, incentive
166
The experience in calculating carbon indicators is defined as a situational parameter that reflects the knowledge and the
competences in a company in the field of CM. For further explanation, refer to section B-II 2.6.
167
The delimitation of the term system follows the understanding of Karapetrovic and Willborn (1998: 205), who defined
a system as a “simple set of processes and resources that are designed and performed in order to achieve a desired
objective” (Karapetrovic and Willborn, 1998: 205).
168
For further explanations, refer to section C-III 2.1.
169
For example, management creates the framework condition to conduct carbon-efficient operations and makes decisions
on mitigation measures. The driving style of the truck drivers directly influences the amount of carbon emissions
emitted.
163
systems may be applied.170 Hence, this investigation conducts an in-depth analysis of the
following two systems:171
 IT systems (section C-III 2.1); and,
 Incentive systems (section C-III 2.2).
2.1
IT Systems
In general, IT systems consist of hardware components and software tools (Arató et al., 2005),
and the established IT system of a RFSP encompasses a broad range of software tools (IT
tools) used to conduct daily business activities.172 Concerning CM, IT tools support and
facilitate the calculation of carbon indicators for internal and external purposes, which in
particular address the tasks of CA.
The calculation of carbon indicators requires fossil fuel consumption data and performance
data, which are generally stored in several established IT tools, such as order acceptance (for
example, weight and size of products), transportation management (for example, driven
kilometers and route), and accounting (for example, fossil fuel consumption) tools.173
Typically, the established IT tools at RFSPs are not designed to provide output data given that
the input data from one IT tool must be linked to the input data from other IT tools. To
calculate carbon indicators, vehicle-, tour-, and shipment-specific data are required and must be
linked with one another by, for example, applying corresponding keys. Considering the
fragmented IT tools of RFSPs and the broad range of required data, the type of IT tools used
for carbon calculations are within the range between stand-alone and integrated. Moreover, the
calculation of carbon indicators may be outsourced to a service provider. Thus, the
characteristics of IT tools in the field of CM are elaborated on in greater detail through a
discussion of the following options:
 Internal IT tool, further differentiated between:174
170
Lee (2012b) underlined the notion that, in addition to the design of incentive systems, education, training, and clear
responsibilities are crucial to enhancing employee awareness of CM. The responsibilities are addressed in section C-III
1; the investigation does not focus on education and training.
171
The relevance of the two systems for CM is underpinned by insights from the case studies and the focus group
workshops, and is supposed by the understanding in the literature (e.g., Burrit et al., 2011; Lee, 2012b).
172
For example, order acceptance, transportation management, and accounting tools.
173
The outlined IT tools are used to illustrate the challenges to using IT tools to calculate carbon indicators.
174
A separate IT tool and an integrated IT tool in an established IT system are two extreme options. This differentiation
seems appropriate to reveal the core differences in applied IT tools. Nevertheless, an IT tool used to calculate carbon
emissions may fall within the entire range between the two extreme options.
164
o stand-alone IT tool;
o integrated IT tool; and,
 External IT tool, outsourcing to external service providers.
An internal carbon calculation IT tool offers the advantage that the tool may be designed
according to the requirements of the RFSP. Thus, operations may be adequately reflected,
which enhances the quality of the carbon indicators. Nevertheless, depending on the chosen
approach, an internal IT tool requires corresponding IT capabilities within the company and
(financial and/or personnel resources).
A stand-alone IT tool does not enable the carbon calculator to be linked through interfaces with
other IT tools of the company. An option for a stand-alone IT tool is an Excel spreadsheet
template that, for example, standardizes and documents formulas and emission factors used to
calculate carbon indicators. Therefore, using a stand-alone IT tool to calculate carbon indicators
must be performed manually. Energy consumption and related performance data of the
operations are evaluated using other IT tools and are manually prepared (for example, linked
with each other) and filled in using the carbon calculation tool. Given the required personnel
efforts, this type of calculation of carbon indicators is time and resource consuming.
Furthermore, manual activities, in particular the preparation process, are prone to errors (Burrit
et al., 2011). Nevertheless, this approach offers the benefit that a stand-alone IT tool requires
no or only slight adjustments to the established IT system (including IT tools) that are
frequently cost, and personal intensive.
An integrated IT tool enables the carbon calculator to be completely interlinked with the other
IT tools, thus requiring automatic data interfaces. Consequently, the relevant input data from
other IT tools are automatically transferred to the carbon calculation tool. A high degree of
automation may be achieved using an integrated solution that facilitates the calculation of
carbon emissions because such a solution avoids repetitive manual data gathering and
preparation. Moreover, because no manual data transfer occurs, the risk of incorrect
quantification of carbon indicators is minimized (Burrit et al., 2011). In general, an integrated
IT tool places significant demands on the IT systems because, as previously discussed, energy
consumption and related performance data are stored in various IT tools. Consequently, the
established IT tools must be either updated (integration of an additional carbon calculation
functions as another IT tool) or completely redesigned (Burrit et al., 2011) to enable an
integrated carbon calculation tool.
165
Moreover, external carbon calculation tools175 may be used to calculate carbon indicators.
Using an external IT tool (IT platform) enables the transfer of the required input data from
RFSPs to the service provider that processes the data on an IT platform and calculates carbon
emissions (indicators). Finally, the calculated carbon emissions are made available to the
RFSPs.
The advantage of an external IT tool is the enhanced credibility of the calculated carbon
indicators176 because they are calculated by an independent service provider, thus contributing
to reducing the effort needed to declare carbon emissions toward various stakeholders.177 A
further argument for the application of an external carbon calculator is that the adoption of CA
standards or further political requirements does not require personal or financial effort to adjust
the in-house IT tool. A main drawback to external IT tools is that they are usually generic to
enable the calculation of carbon indicators from various RFSPs. Thus, default data on energy
consumption are used, resulting in lower accuracy concerning the calculated inventory of
carbon emissions. Moreover, to achieve a high level of automation during the preparation
phase,178 the relevant input data structure for company-owned IT tools must be adapted.
Suitable interfaces must be developed between such tools and the external carbon calculation
tool to meet the specific input data requirements of the IT platform. This requirement incurs
personnel and/or financial efforts at the RFSP.
The insights from the series of case studies show that the entire bandwidth of IT tools are
applied. The RFSPs in cases I, III, and IV apply a separate IT tool in an Excel spreadsheet to
calculate the carbon indicators. The RFSP in case IV developed a more integrated IT tool – a
carbon calculation tool embedded in the established transport management tool without
interfaces to other IT tools to transfer energy and performance data. Integrated IT tools are
applied at RFSP VII that extended functionality and integrated a carbon calculator into an IT
tool (transport management tool), and at RFSP VI, which redesigned its IT system and
considered an automatic carbon calculation function in its transport management tool. For
RFSP II, an external service partner calculated the carbon indicators.
175
For
example,
EcoTransIT
(http://www.ecotransit.org/index.de.html)
(http://www.greenfreighteurope.eu/).
176
For an explanation of various calculation methods and the bandwidth of the quality of carbon indicators, refer to
section C-I 3.
177
For example, EcoTransIT provides a background report explaining the applied carbon calculation methods and default
values
with
respect
to
the
energy
consumption;
refer
to:
http://www.ecotransit.org/download/ecotransit_background_report.pdf.
178
Data transfer to the service provider may also be done using an Excel spreadsheet, which offers almost the same
advantages and drawbacks of a stand-alone IT tool as an internal solution.
166
and
Green
Freight
Europe
To conclude, the discussions revealed that IT tools that enable and support the calculation of
carbon indicators fall within a bandwidth between a stand-alone and an integrated IT tool and
are further differentiated as internal or external solutions. The increasing integration of the
carbon calculation tool into the established IT tools (or an external IT platform) results in a
higher level of automation that enables a large of amount of data to be processed without
manual effort. The amount of data is determined by the complexity of the operations and the
size of the RFSP.179 At small RFSPs with type A operations, a low amount of data must be
processed to calculate carbon emissions. At larger RFSPs with complex operations (type B or
C), a larger amount of data must be processed to calculate carbon indicators, which is
facilitated by a high level of automation. Based on the discussed interrelation, that more
complex operations and larger RFSPs must process more data to calculate carbon indicators is
plausible; consequently, integration of the carbon calculation tool180 into established IT tools is
greater.
Moreover, that an interrelation exists between the IT capability of the company and the
integration of the carbon calculation tool with other IT tools seems plausible because the
adoption of the IT system requires IT knowledge and corresponding resources. Consequently,
the stronger the IT capability within the RFSP, the greater the integration of the carbon
calculation tool into the established IT tools.
2.2
Incentive Systems
An incentive system focuses on compensating employees for their performance at the company
(Dijk et al., 2001). Because CM presents a new task field, considering carbon indicators in
employees’ incentive systems enhances the awareness of and strengthens the spirit for
ecological sustainability within the organization because such indicators function as a catalyst
for driving organizational change in the field of CM (Lee, 2012b). Thus, that the new processes
and tasks of CA and CM are adopted and conducted by employees in the desired manner
should be ensured.
The next section introduces the basic principles of incentive systems from a theoretical point of
view to enhance the understanding of the application of this system. Finally, the gained insights
are transferred to the research context of CM integration.
179
Further drivers for the amount of data, such as the frequency of the carbon calculation process and the granularity of
the carbon indicators, are not considered to reduce complexity.
180
Both internal and external solutions.
167
Theoretical Perspective of Incentive Systems
The reasons for and the design of incentive systems are strongly link to the explanatory patterns
of the principal–agency theory, which focuses on the contractual relations between a principal
and the agent taking action on the behalf of the principal (Eisenhardt, 1989b). In the context of
an organization, the principal might be the owner of the company (or top management),
whereas employees (for example, management members and truck drivers) are the agents.
The work efforts and performance of employees are crucial to the success of the organization
(Dijk et al., 2001) because an organization consists of employee actions (Levitt and March,
1988) that become embedded in established patterns of interaction (Mirrlees, 1976). As a
general rule, employees behave in accordance with their own interests (opportunistic behavior),
which are frequently not in line with the interests of the organization (Prendergast, 1999).
Therefore, employee actions may develop to be in conflict with the overall targets specified by
the organization. Moreover, Mirrlees (1976) constituted that imperfect or lack of information
by the organization’s top management with respect to the abilities and willingness of
employees presents another central determinant for the application of incentive systems in
organizations.
The problems that result from conflicting interest and information asymmetries are
characterized by the principal–agent theory, and solutions to align the interests of the agent and
of the principal are delivered (Eisenhardt, 1989b). As Dijk et al. (2001) noted, incentive
systems are an appropriate instrument for inducing employees to elicit significant valuable
energy and to contribute to activities aimed at the organization. Thus, harmonization may be
obtained between employee motivation and the aimed behaviors of the organization to improve
its overall performance.
To concretize and shed light on the main features of the incentives distributed to employees,
the following four premises are presented, which are in line with the understanding of Clark
and Wilson (1961).
 Incentives are scarce.
Incentives such as a commodity or a status are rare because, if they were not rare, they
would not provide any inducements to employees.
 Incentive output does not exceed resources.
Incentive output, which a company may distribute to its employees, must not exceed the
available incentive resources of the company.
168
 Added value should be generated through incentives.
Incentives must be applied in a manner that enables their creation of a surplus for the
company, indicating that the value of the distributed incentives is much lower than the value
created for the company.
 Three categories of incentives are available.
In general, incentives may be distinguished into three different categories: material, solidary,
and purposive.181
Employee performance measurements present the foundation for the distribution of incentives.
Thereby, Baker and Jensen (1988) differentiated between objective and subjective performance
measurement approaches.182 Eisenhardt (1985) presented further differentiated considerations
with respect to performance measurements on the basis of the initially introduced
understanding of Ouchi (1979). Comparable with Baker and Jensen (1988), employee
performance measurements may be based on either the employee’s behavior (subjective) or the
outcomes of the employee’s behavior (objective). To specify the appropriate approach,
Eisenhardt (1985) suggested that task programmability (differentiated between perfect and
imperfect) and outcome measurability (expressed by high or low) must be contemplated.
Figure 44 presents an overview of whether a behavior- or outcome-based performance control
should be applied depending on task programmability and outcome measurability criteria.
Figure 44: Behavior and outcome control matrix.
(Source: Eisenhardt, 1985: 135)
181
Material incentives are tangible rewards that have monetary value (for example, salary) or that are easily transferred
into one (for example, other fringe benefits). Solidary and purposive incentives are intangible and generally have no
monetary component. Solidary incentives vary widely and generate value for the employee primarily from the act of
associating (for example, the sense of group membership). Purposive incentives show many parallels with solidary
incentives, with one main difference that the value of the employee is produced by the stated ends of the association
rather from the act of associating.
182
An object performance measurement encompasses concretely defined measurable targets as a measurement scale, such
as revenues, profits, or fossil fuel consumption. In contrast, the performance measurement based on a subjective scale
primarily depends on measurements of an organizational authority and might address the estimated value of the
employee for the success of the company (Baker and Jensen, 1988).
169
Managerial Perspective of Incentive Systems
The transfer of the theoretical insights into incentive systems to the task field of CM integration
enables identification of conflicts of interest between employees and the organization’s overall
targets. Considering the range of mitigation measures in the field of transportation services
(Table 17, section C-II 1.3), the conflict of interest depends on the respective measures.
 Example A: The organization aims to improve the energy consumption and, consequently,
the carbon efficiency of its operations and decides to modernize its vehicle fleet. Because
employees (truck drivers) receive a new vehicle with state-of-the-art technology, no conflict
of interest is present.
 Example B: To improve its carbon efficiency, the organization conducts driver training and
starts to monitor the vehicle fleet’s fossil fuel consumption. In contrast, the truck drivers
might prefer a fast driving style, resulting in significant fuel consumption and, consequently,
low carbon efficiency of the transportation services. A conflict of interest is present.
Nevertheless, the truck drivers’ style of driving directly affects fossil fuel consumption and,
consequently, the amount of carbon emissions. An efficient driving style enables the truck
driver to contribute to enhancing the carbon efficiency of the operations. Moreover, because
fuel consumption depends on a broad range of factors, such as kilometers driven, vehicle
weight, goods transported, and the flow of traffic (Gajanand and Narendran, 2013), an
imperfect information situation exists between the truck driver and top management.
The behavior and outcome control matrix indicates that, generally, task programmability may
be evaluated as imperfect and evoked by the broad range of factors that affect fossil fuel
consumption in the field of transportation services. Measurability of the outcome falls between
a range of low to high and particularly depends on the quality and capacity of the established IT
tools. If a high level of outcome measurability is achieved (for example, by deploying a
telematics system), an outcome control approach may be applied. Thereby, the operation’s
current carbon efficiency provided by CA may be compared with the planned carbon efficiency
that functions as an objective measurement scale for monitoring the performance of the
operations and, respectively, the employee.
To summarize, the requirements for the application of incentive systems, discussed in the
literature, such as a conflict of interest and an imperfect information situation, are frequently
met in the field of CM. Therefore, a closer analysis of incentive systems in the field of CM is
worthwhile. Depending on the specific room to influence the amount of carbon emissions
170
within operations, the following section differentiates between members of management (such
as the head of a business unit or a logistics site) on the one hand and truck drivers on the other
hand.
For members of management in particular, the sphere in which to influence carbon efficiency
is determined by the level and area of responsibility, and the type of operations of the RFSP.183
Particularly for type C RFSPs, the consideration of carbon indicators to evaluate the carbon
efficiency of operations and, consequently, the performance of management may be evaluated
as valuable given the broad bandwidth of mitigation measures. Carbon emissions enable RFSPs
to obtain a detailed overview and engage in a profound comparison of the energy consumption
of different transportation modes, including all energy sources. Otherwise, for example, the
fossil fuel consumption of vehicles (measured in liters) and the electricity consumption of a
train (expressed in kilowatt hours) are rarely compared, thus requiring consideration of two
different indicators. Therefore, carbon indicators function as a single indictor for evaluating the
energy efficiency of the operations and, consequently, management performance. Furthermore,
integrating the carbon indicators into the incentive system of management underpins the
relevance of the issue of CM at the company. Thus, enhanced employee awareness may be
achieved and management is stimulated to contemplate economically acceptable decisions with
the goal of increasing the carbon efficiency of the operations.
Truck drivers directly affect fossil fuel consumption and, consequently, the amount of carbon
emissions emitted by their style of driving. Because a vehicle consumes just one type of fossil
fuel, a linear relation exists between fossil fuel consumption and the amount of carbon
emissions. In this case, fossil fuel consumption may be assessed as an equivalent indicator of
carbon emissions. Therefore, the RFSP may make decisions regarding which of these
indicators are integrated into the incentive system. Nevertheless, the consideration of one of the
two indicators contributes to the notion that truck drivers adopt a more energy-efficient style of
driving.
During the period in which the case studies were conducted, none of the RFSPs integrated
carbon indicators into their employee incentive systems. Nevertheless, the RFSPs in cases II
and III intend to evaluate the heads of logistics sites – management – with regard to the carbon
efficiency of the operations.
To conclude, given conflicts of interest and imperfect information between top management
and employees, the application of an incentive system contributes to enhancing the awareness
183
For in-depth explanations of the range of mitigation measures depending on the type of operations, refer to section C-II
1.3.
171
of CM and the adaption of employee behavior. Thereby, the application of carbon indicators
into incentive systems is particularly valuable for management members from RFSPs with
complex operations because the energy efficiency of operations may be evaluated on the basis
of a single indicator (carbon indicator). As a general rule, the more complex the operations of
an RFSP, the higher the number of different energy sources that can be made comparable using
single indicator carbon emissions. Based on this interrelation, the following statement is
plausible: the more complex the operations of the RFSP, the higher the value of carbon
indicators to achieve comparability among different types of energy sources; consequently, the
more target-oriented they must be to integrate carbon indicators into the incentive system of
management.
IV Synthesis
The content-related understandings of the three cornerstones of CM are summarized as follows.
 The aim of CA is to calculate meaningful carbon indicators to meet external requirements
and to support the quality of management decisions. A content-related interpretation of the
directives and guidelines of the CA standards and the analysis of the available data structure
of the company’s IT systems functions as the basis for conducting CA. Furthermore,
company-specific boundaries must be set, input data must be gathered, and the amount of
carbon emissions must be calculated. Finally, the quantified inventory of carbon emissions is
allocated based on transparent reference values.
 The CM process follows the aim of actively influencing the carbon efficiency of the
transportation services based on the carbon indicators provided from CA. Thereby, the CM
process might be characterized as iterative in nature and represents a closed feedback loop.
A carbon reduction target is formulated to guide subsequent tasks and to benchmark the
development of the inventory of carbon emissions. Areas offering the greatest carbon
leverage are identified and target-oriented mitigation measures are implemented with the
goal of meeting the specified carbon reduction target. Changes in the inventory of carbon
emissions are monitored and the gained insights are fed back into previous stages of the CM
process.
 The third cornerstone of CM is the organization that addresses the requirement to create the
framework conditions for conducting CA and the CM process. The cornerstone organization
is further subdivided into structures and systems. The structures address the division of the
tasks (CA and CM process) and the coordination among them. The systems contemplate the
172
IT tools needed to support the quantification of meaningful carbon indicators and incentive
systems, which should enhance the awareness of CM within the company.
In the following chapter, the cornerstones of CM function as the design variables to
systematically analyze various identified integration alternatives of CM in business practice.
173
D
Carbon Management Integration Alternatives
As CM presents a new task field for RFSPs, by conducting CM, the RFSP must take into
account decisions regarding how to integrate CM into its structures, systems, and processes.
Therefore, this chapter focuses on an analysis of the integration alternatives of CM from the
case studies and aims to derive design recommendations for the integration of CM. The
characteristics of CM were considered to delimit the term “integration” (see section B-I 1.2) as
“the process of combining or coordinating CM with other task fields of the company to create a
single unit. The goal of integration is to align companywide targets among various task fields
and to effectively apply the company’s available resources.”
This chapter provides a characterization of the integration alternatives of CM identified in the
seven case studies. Differences in the integration alternatives of CM are reflected using
situational parameters, and the relations are discussed (section D-I). A management model to
conduct CM is introduced (section D-II) by combining the insights from the conceptual
understanding of CM and the integration alternatives of CM.
I
Situational Analysis of Integration Alternatives
This section focuses on the integration alternatives of CM from the seven case studies and
addresses an analysis of situational parameters affecting such alternatives. Figure 45 presents
an overview of the integration alternatives of CM, differentiated for each of the seven case
studies.
174
Figure 45: Integration alternatives of CM from the seven case studies.
In general, a broad range of integration alternatives of CM at the RFSPs is discerned. One
exception presents the RFSPs in cases I and III, which are evaluated for all integration fields
175
with the same integration degree. Moreover, as indicated by the insights from the literature,184
the degree of integration differs between the various integration fields (cornerstones of CM) for
all of the RFSPs studied. To allow an in-depth analysis of the degree of integration, the
following sections differentiate between fields of integration:
 Carbon accounting (section D-I 1);
 Carbon management process (section D-I 2); and,
 Organization (section D-I 3), differentiated between structures and systems (IT and incentive
systems).
Situational parameters that affect the degree of integration are specified and relations are
presented and discussed by considering the conceptual understanding of CM (chapter C).
Moreover, based on the relation identified, propositions are derived that are supported by
theoretical understandings within the literature
1
Carbon Accounting
CA encompasses the calculation of carbon indicators to meet the requirements of various
external stakeholders and to support the quality of management decisions in terms of mitigation
measures. In the seven case studies, the degree of integration of CA into the structures varies
from “partial integration” to “full integration.” To increase the validity of the research results
and to achieve transparency with respect to the classification scheme of the integration degree,
the following section presents a customization of the initially introduced generic criteria.185
Thereby, the focus is on the extreme positions of “no integration” and “full integration.”
Classification as “no integration” indicates that the tasks, in particular the calculation of carbon
indicators is conducted by a company unit186 that does not functionally specialize in
sustainability issues but operates on an ad hoc basis for internal or external inquiries. In the
case of a “full integration,” the tasks of CA are assigned to functionally specialized units.
Moreover, the required input data are regularly transferred to the carbon calculation tool and
carbon indicators are quantified.
The empirical evidence in the sample indicates that no relation between the number of
customer inquiries and the degree of integration of CA in the structures was identified. An
explanation may be that, during the period in which the case studies were conducted, all RFSPs
184
For a further explanation, refer to section B-I 1.2.
185
For a further explanation of the generic criteria, refer to section B-I 1.2.
186
Within this thesis, a company unit is understood as a staff authority or the employees within a department.
176
faced only a few customer inquiries for carbon indicators. In short, a low number of customer
inquiries do not require a high degree of integration of the carbon calculation process into the
company’s structures. However, the empirical evidence indicates that the complexity of the
operation can be specified as a situational parameter that influences the integration degree of
CA. As discussed conceptually (see B-I 5), the more complex the operations of the RFSP, the
higher the requirements with respect to the calculation of carbon indicators. Therefore, a higher
degree of integration of CA at the structures in terms of a functional specialization enhances the
efficient conduction of CA. This is especially obvious in the case of RFSP II, the integration
degree of which is evaluated as full; this RFSP can be characterized from operations type C.
Moreover, the statements of the interviewed employees indicate that the aspired positioning of
the RFSP within the market may be emphasized as the main driver for a high degree of
integration of CA. The RFSPs187 that achieved a high degree of integration of CA in their
structures provided or created a framework for giving their customers carbon indicators for
each shipment. These RFSPs are convinced that delivering carbon indicators is necessary and
appropriate to differentiating and creating an image as a sustainable company within the
transportation market. Furthermore, the interviewees expected that providing meaningful
carbon indicators would develop into an important criterion in business relations and is
therefore required in order to achieve long-term success. However, greater willingness on the
part of the customer to pay extra is not expected. This understanding is underpinned by the
empirical results of Okereke (2007), who perceived that providing carbon indicators to
customers is done particularly to position the company in the respective market and to avoid
“to be severely disadvantaged by reason of its inaction or lassitude on this potential game
changer” (Okereke, 2007: 482).
The first proposition is derived based on these insights.
Proposition 1: The greater the (expected) relevance of providing carbon indicators for the
creation of an image as a sustainable company enhanced by complex
operations, the higher the integration of CA into the structures of the
organization.
187
The integration degree at the RFSP II and RFSP VII was evaluated as full. RFSP II has type C operations
characteristics, whereas the operations characteristics of RFSP VII can be assigned to type A.
177
2
Carbon Management Process
The CM process is specified as a series of activities in the planning, executing, and monitoring
cycle with the goal of enhancing the carbon efficiency of the operations. Regarding the CM
process, a range from “no integration” to “partial integration” is specified at the seven RFSPs
with respect to the degree of integration.188 Classification as “no integration” of the CM process
indicates that the amount of carbon emissions is (widely) not considered within the established
management process189 (for example, through evaluations of and decisions made on measures).
The classification “full integration” requires the formulation of a carbon reduction target and
considering carbon efficiency as a performance indicator in the management process.
Moreover, the subtasks in the CM process are divided to consider the functional specialization
of units and are coordinated by mechanisms such as the standardization of work processes or
the outputs.
In the case studies, the analysis of the situational parameters with respect to the degree of
integration of the CM process indicated a relation between such a degree of integration and the
operational complexity of the RFSPs. At RFSPs190 offering a broad bandwidth of transportation
services (particular type C RFSPs), the amount of carbon emissions delivered from CA is
evaluated as a valuable performance indicator in the management process. To analyze the
energy consumption within operations that utilize various transportation modes and engine
technologies191 used in vehicles, carbon emissions may be applied as a single performance
indicator. Carbon emissions amounts enable a comparison of the energy consumption caused
by electricity and by various types of fossil fuel. Thus, the current level of energy consumption
can be systematically evaluated, various approaches to improving energy consumption of the
operations are compared with one another, and mitigation measures192 can be derived.
Furthermore, using the amount of carbon emissions as a performance indicator in the
188
In general, the experiences gained in the case studies reveal that the degree of integration of CA at most of the RFSPs
is higher than at the integration field of the CM process. One explanation is that a significant inventory of carbon
emissions is quantified by CA, which presents the baseline and foundation for conducting the CM process, particularly
the specification of a carbon reduction target. The identified patterns in business practice reflect the initial
understanding that CA is the basis for the CM process.
189
According to Horngren et al. (2002: 9), “the management process is a series of activities in a cycle of planning and
control. Decision making – the purposeful choice from among a set of alternative courses of action designed to achieve
some objective – is the core of the management process.”
190
In the case studies, the RFSPs in the cases I, II, III and IV can be assigned to type C operations. At these RFSPs, the
integration degree of the CM process is evaluated as partially integrated.
191
As revealed by the experiences gained in the case studies, operating vehicles with alternative drive technologies were
tested particularly in the field of pickup and distribution runs.
192
For an in-depth specification of the range of possible mitigation measures depending on operations, refer to section BII 1.3.
178
management process enhances management’s awareness and understanding of the carbon
efficiency of the operations and the effects of the respective mitigation measures. In this
manner, other energy-related performance indicators (such as fossil fuel consumption/costs)
can be replaced or supplemented in the established management process.193
In contrast, the RFSPs with type A or B operations in the sample194 decided not to integrate the
amount of carbon emissions as a further performance indicator into their management process
because target congruence exists between the amount of carbon emissions and fossil fuel
consumption of the operations. Because RFSPs with type A or B operations focus on road
freight transportation services, all vehicles use the same engine technology and the same fossil
fuel (for example, diesel). As a result, a reduction in fossil fuel consumption simultaneously
results in a decrease in the amount of carbon emissions, in exactly the same proportion.
Moreover, given the significant relevance of fossil fuel costs to overall operations costs,195
fossil fuel costs frequently present a well-established key performance indicator in the
management processes of RFSPs. Consequently, RFSPs do not generate further benefits by
considering carbon indicators in their management processes if the fossil fuel costs are already
considered because they are evaluated as an equivalent indicator.
As a result, the second proposition is formulated.
Proposition 2: The more complex the operations of the RFSP, the more valuable carbon
indicators are in enabling a comparison between different energy sources and,
consequently, the stronger the integration of the CM process into established
management processes.
193
The considerations reveal that to conduct a profound CM process at RFPS with complex operations, meaningful carbon
indicators provided from CA are necessary. This underpins the first proposition, that the integration degree of CA is
enhanced by more complex operations.
194
Cases V, VI, and VII show the operations characteristics of type A or B at these companies; the integration degree of
CM is classified as not integrated.
195
According to Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr Logistik und Entsorgung (BGL) e.V., approximately 25 percent of the
costs of the operations of long distance transport in Germany are omitted from fossil fuel costs (BGL, 2014).
179
3
Organization
To be in accordance with the defined cornerstones of CM, the third integration field
“oganization” is differentiated between:
 Structures;
 IT systems; and,
 Incentive systems.
Structures
Structures deal with the division of tasks with respect to CA and the CM process, and the
coordination among the subtasks. The series of case studies identified a range of “no
integration” to “partial integration.” To concretize the classification criteria for the “structures”
integration field, “no integration” indicates that the unit that bears the content-related
responsibility for CM is not functionally specialized in sustainability issues. To no extent or
only to a scarce extent are the other tasks in the field of CM divided, and the coordination
mechanism that consolidates the subtasks is weak. In contrast, “full integration” indicates that
the company unit with the responsibility for CM is functionally specialized in sustainable
issues. Moreover, the CM tasks are divided in such a manner that achieves functional
specialization at the subtasks and, finally, coordination mechanisms (for example, in terms of
standardizing the work processes or the outputs) are implemented to smoothly consolidate the
subtasks to achieve a closed CA and CM process.
The empirical evidence in the sample reveals that the conceptually derived relation196 between
the experiences in calculating carbon indicators and the degree of integration of CM within the
structures is not apparent.197 An explanation of this pattern may be found by considering that –
sometimes in business practice – environmental sustainability such as CM are dominated by the
company’s economic requirements and special events198 (McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012).
Consequently, scarce or no personnel and financial resources are temporarily available at the
RFSPs to push forward the development and integration of CM in the company.
196
For further explanation, refer to section C-III 1.
197
In the case of RFSP I, the company started to calculate carbon indicators in 2006 and the department has profound
knowledge in the field of CA and the CM process. Nevertheless, the integration degree was evaluated as partially
integrated, such as at RFSP in case III, where the company calculated the first carbon indicators at January 2011, and
the unit bearing the content-related responsibility has a less deep knowledge at CA.
198
For example, a noticeable increase or decrease of customers’ demand, significant extensions of the transportation
services (geographically), and mergers and acquisitions.
180
The empirical analysis discerns that a relation between the degree of integration of CM in the
structures and the organization size situational parameter exits. Considering the broad range of
tasks at CA and CM process, it is clear that the extent of the tasks mounts with the increasing
size of the company, which enhances the advantages of a functional specialization of the
respective tasks. At the task field of CM, the data gathering, preparation process, and the
evaluation of the set of mitigation measures are especially divided and distributed to various
units in larger RFSPs.199 The distribution of data gathering and preparation may revert to the
fact that the relevant data input for carbon calculation is stored in several IT tools because of
fragmented IT systems (for example, different functional areas of RFSPs or national and
international operations). Therefore, only a few employees have access to the respective IT
tools and the knowledge needed to adequately prepare the relevant input data for the carbon
calculation process. One explanation for the division of labor with respect to the evaluation
process regarding mitigation measures is that, for example, the heads of logistics sites have
deeper knowledge of performance and the carbon efficiency of the operations at these
respective logistics sites. By taking into account customer requirements, these employees are
able to thoroughly evaluate the bandwidth of the applicable mitigation measures in the field of
transportation services.
An overwhelming consensus within the literature field of organization is found for this
understanding that a larger company requires a higher level of task specialization (e.g., Kieser
and Walgenbach, 2010: 299; Mintzberg, 1979: 230; Schreyögg, 1997: 158). The explanation
for this pattern is found by considering job specialization in larger companies. As the
company’s size increases, the volume of output rises. To handle output volume in a
professional manner, the organization divides the tasks and increases the number of employees.
The respective employee fulfills tasks at a higher level of homogeneity, resulting in a much
greater division of labor and functional specialization than in smaller companies (Mintzberg,
1979: 230).
Based on these insights, the third proposition of the thesis is formulated:
Proposition 3: The larger the RFSP, the stronger the integration of CM in the structures of the
organization in terms of functional specialization.
199
In the case studies, especially at RFSP I, II, III, and IV, where the integration degree of CM at the structures is
specified as partially integrated, these subtasks were divide among different company units.
181
IT Systems
In particular, IT systems address IT-based tools used to calculate carbon indicators for internal
and external purposes. In the case studies, the degree of integration of the carbon calculation
tool with other IT tools varies from “no integration” to “full integration.” Classification of “no
integration” indicates that the amount of carbon emissions is quantified based on a stand-alone
IT tool requiring manual data transfer from other IT tools. In contrast, “full integration”
encompasses that no manual efforts are necessary to quantify carbon emissions. A high level of
automation are achieved using interfaces to other IT tools or a carbon calculation function
embedded in another IT tool.
To explain the drivers for a specific degree of integration, that the conceptually derived
relations between the situational parameter (operations complexity, and organization size)200
and the degree of integration cannot be discerned at the RFSPs in the sample. Given the
increases in the complexity of the operations and the size of the RFSP, the heterogeneity of the
established IT systems grows to adequately reflect and meet the requirements of the operations.
As a general rule, adapting a more complex IT system to integrate the carbon calculation tool
requires higher personal and/or financial efforts, which can be seen as a barrier to carrying out
an integrated IT tool. Moreover, the integration of a carbon calculation tool in an already
heterogeneous IT system further enhances the complexity of the IT system, which leads RFSPs
to try and avoid such a tool. The considerations discussed above can also be used to explain
that no interrelation between the situational parameter IT capacity and the degree of integration
of the IT tool are identified in the sample.
In the case studies, as indicated in the discussion with interviewees, a relation is noticed with a
design variable – CA. Thereby, the requirements in the field of CA address in particular the
frequency of the carbon calculation process for customers. Carbon indicators are frequently
calculated (for example, per shipment) because these RFSPs201 are convinced that providing
carbon indicators is necessary and appropriate to meeting the aspired market awareness and to
creating an image as a sustainable company. Thereby, consider that the amount of data that
must be processed depends on the frequency of the carbon calculation process, in addition to
the complexity of the operations and the organization’s size. A greater integration of the carbon
calculation tool into other IT tools enables carbon indicators to be calculated regularly at a high
level of automation. This is particularly beneficial when the frequency of the carbon calculation
200
201
For further explanation, refer to section C-III 2.1.
The RFSP in cases II and VII have created the framework condition that the calculation of carbon emissions can be
conducted on each shipment or invoice, reached by an integrated carbon calculating tool.
182
process is higher. Thus, manual efforts to gather data, prepare data, and conduct the calculation
can be minimized or completely avoided.
Therefore, based on the empirical insights gleaned thus far, the fourth proposition of the thesis
is as follows.
Proposition 4: The higher the (expected) relevance of providing carbon indicators to create an
image as a sustainable company to stakeholders, the greater the integration of
the carbon calculation tool in other IT tools.
Incentive Systems
The incentive system focuses on employee compensation based on the employees’ performance
and should contribute to determining whether employees are carrying out the tasks of CA and
the CM process as desired. During the period in which the case studies were conducted, none
of the RFSPs considered carbon indicators in their established incentive systems, a situation
classified as “no integration.” “Full integration” requires the carbon indicators to be
components within the incentive system and to affect the amount of employee compensation.
In line with the formulated conceptually relation in section C-III 2.2 and comparable with the
discussed arguments related to the CM process, the empirical evidence in the sample indicates
a relation between operations complexity and integration degree of carbon indicators into
management incentive systems. In the cases of RFSP II and III, which can be characterized as
operations type C, the integration of carbon indicators into the incentive systems of
management is under discussion.
In general, the integration of carbon emissions into the management incentive systems is
valuable because doing so contributes to an increasing awareness of CM within the RFSP.
Thereby, particularly for type C RFSPs, carbon indicators function as a single measurement
scale to evaluate the carbon efficiency of different transportation modes and engine
technologies. Thus, the energy efficiency of the operations is analyzed. Moreover, based on this
current status, the aspired improvement in carbon efficiency, which must be linked to the
specified carbon reduction target, is formulated and contemplated as a further component in the
management incentive systems.
In contrast, for type A RFSPs (and frequently type B), linearity is perceived to exist between
the amount of carbon emissions and fossil fuel consumption (costs). This concept may be
reverted to the fact that, in road freight transportation services, most vehicles applied have the
same engine technology and combust one type of fossil fuel. Consequently, both indicators are
183
target-congruent and may be used equivalently. Furthermore, the amount of fossil fuel
consumption (or costs) is frequently considered a component of the incentive system.
This leads to our fifth proposition.
Proposition 5: The more complex the operations of the RFSP, the more valuable carbon
indicators are in enabling a comparison between different energy sources;
consequently, the higher the integration of carbon indicators into the
management incentive system.
II
Management Model for Conducting Carbon Management at RFSPs
Based on the insights into the conceptual understanding of CM (chapter C) and the empirical
results of the situational analysis with respect to integration alternatives of CM (D-I), this
section presents a management model for conducting CM at the RFSPs.
By applying a logical deductive approach, an ideal type management model is derived that
encompasses all stages required for conducting and integrating at RFSP.202 Thereby, the
cornerstones of CM and the related tasks are prepared in procedural rank order and the insights
of analysis concerning the integration of CM are considered, especially in order to derive
design recommendations for the integration of CM into the structures, systems, and processes
of the company. Moreover, the explanatory patterns of organizational learning theory are
considered and options for integrating the specific tasks of CM into the established structure,
systems, and processes are outlined.
To enhance the theoretical foundation and to obtain fruitful implications for the management
model, the literature in the field of CM is also analyzed to determine whether comparable
approaches were published. Two applicable approaches in the research field of CM are
available. McKinnon and Piecyk (2012) elaborated on an eight-stage procedure that aims to
guide companies in the transportation (logistics) industry to develop a decarbonization
strategy.203 Furthermore, Lee (2012a) used the integrated eco-control approach that was
adopted and further developed from the initial approach introduced by Schaltegger and Sturm
202
Nevertheless, the possibility that the CM might occur in a partially different order, or some stages may be completely
neglected in business practice must be taken into account.
203
The eight-stage procedure includes the following stages: 1) corporate carbon commitment, 2) measure and report
logistics carbon footprint, 3) set target for carbon reduction, 4) identify carbon-reducing measures, 5) evaluate the
carbon and cost effects of these measures, 6) establish a set of measures capable of meeting the carbon reduction target
within the budget, 7) devise an implementation plan and schedule, and 8) exploit/monitor the effects.
184
(1998). Lee (2012a) applied this approach and explored the role of environment management as
part of the management of a company.204 In particular, the eight-stage procedure of McKinnon
and Piecyk (2012) is beneficial because this approach addresses companies’ needs in the
logistics (transportation) industry for conducting CM. To ensure the completeness of the
relevant stage of the management model, the model was reflected with the eight-stage
procedure of McKinnon and Piecyk (2012), which led to the supplementation of the first stage
(corporate commitment) with presents the starting point for conducting CM.
Figure 46 introduces the seven-stage management model for conducting CM at RFSPs.
Figure 46: Seven-stage management model of CM.
204
The eco-control approach encompasses five key procedures: 1) goal and policy formulation, 2) information
management, 3) decision support, 4) steering/control and implementation, and 5) internal and external communication.
185
The starting point for conducting CM presents the corporate commitment of top management
to address the issue of CM, which can be evoked by, for example, external pressure from
different stakeholders or increasing internal consciousness regarding ecological issues. To
ensure that the plan to improve the carbon efficiency of the operations is in accordance with the
wider sustainability goals and the corporate strategy, it must be coordinated within the strategy
development process with other functions (McKinnon, 2011). Thus, management backing,
which usually plays a key role in driving organizational change in the field of CM (GonzálezGonzález and Zamora-Ramírez, 2013), may be enhanced.
The second stage of the management model addresses the competence generation in the field
and the development of a concept for conducting CM.
At small- and medium-sized RFSPs, the competence generation can be carried out by
employees outside of the established departments, such as a staff authority, the assistant to the
CEO, or – at small RFSPs – the CEO. Thus, separation of the competence generation in CM
from the established organizational structures allows an extension of the company’s capacity.
Consequently, adoption of or work overload of the established department are avoided. At large
RFSPs, a new department (for example, an environmental or sustainability department) may be
formed or the development of competence in CM may be assigned to an established
department. Concentration on and specialization in the development of competence, including
additional resources, are required to meet the increasing complexity (for example, broad range
of operations) and can contribute to professionalized concepts for the conducting CM.
To develop a concept for conducting and, finally, integrating CM, it is advisable to determine
the external value of CA and the internal value of the CM process. The external value of CA
centers on the requirements of the customers with respect to carbon indicators, which means it
can be characterized as the external market pressure.205 Moreover, the understanding of the
external values includes the notion that providing carbon indicators will develop towards an
important criterion in business relations, which is required in order for long-term success in the
market. However, customers are not willing to pay extra for the provision of carbon indicators.
Therefore, in the case where only a few (if any) customers demand carbon indicators in a low
frequency, the external value of providing carbon indicators can be evaluated as low. In such a
case, it might be appropriate for an RFSP with type A operations characteristics to opt for a low
degree of integration of CA into the structures of the company. This means that the calculation
of carbon indicators is conducted by a unit that does not functionally specialize in sustainability
205
Taking into account that external pressure to provide carbon indicators can also be evoked by political regulations.
186
issues and operates on an ad hoc basis for external inquiries. As only a small amount of data
must be processed to calculate carbon indicators, a stand-alone carbon calculations tool
implemented within an Excel spreadsheet is also appropriate. Thus, the market requirements
can be met with relatively low input of financial and personnel resources of the RFSP.
With increasing inquires of the customers with respect to carbon indicators, especially with
respect to the frequency, a higher external value of CA for the RFPS can be constituted. This
requires a more integrated degree of CA, which is also enhanced, taking into account more
complex operations (type C) of the RFSP. Thus, a higher level of functional specialization of
the company unit, bearing the content-related responsibility, contributes to a deeper knowledge
in the field of CA to make it possible to handle the increasing volume of task more efficiently.
Furthermore, because the amount of data that must be processed for the calculation of carbon
indicators is influenced by the frequency of carbon calculation, a higher level of automation of
carbon calculation is target-oriented. Therefore, a more integrated carbon calculation tool can
minimize or completely avoid manual efforts to gather data, prepare data, and conduct the
calculation. Thus, with a higher degree of integration of CA at the structures, the increasing
market requirements can be fulfilled.
The internal value of the CM process can be determined by the relevance of carbon indicators
aiming to optimize their own operations with respect to energy consumption. Therefore, the
RFSPs must evaluate whether the operation’s target-congruent performance indicators with
respect to carbon indicator exist. If this is the case, it must be further specified whether these
indicators are already established in the management process.
In this context, target-congruence indicates the existence of a constant relation between two
different indicators. Consequently, an increase in one indicator simultaneously leads to the
improvement of another indicator, to exactly the same proportion. In the field of transportation
services, a constant relation is available between the consumption of one type of energy or
fossil fuel and the revealed amount of carbon emissions during the combustion in the vehicle.
To illustrate, the combustion of one liter of diesel leads to a constant amount of 2.67 CO2e
(DIN, 2013: 23); as a result, a target-congruent relation between these two indicators is
specified.
187
Depending on the type of operations,206 Table 20 discusses the expected relation between
energy consumption and the amount of carbon emissions.
Main runs
Expected
relation
Explanation
Pickup, main, and
distribution runs
Pickup, main, and
distribution runs
(various transportation modes)
Constant relation between
energy consumption and
carbon emissions
Widely no constant relation
between energy consumption
and carbon emissions
No constant relation between
energy consumption and carbon
emissions
Frequently, one type of
fossil fuel is used in longdistance runs (diesel)
For pickup and distribution
runs, alternatives engine
technologies (e.g., LNG, CNG,
LPG, hybrid, electrified)207 are
partially applied; therefore,
various types of energy are
consumed
Various transportation modes are
applied, including different types
of energy sources
Table 20: Relation between energy consumption and carbon emissions.
Table 20 underpins the notion that the more complex the operations, the more different energy
sources are applied. This leads to the conclusion that, for RFSPs with operation characteristic
types B and C, the internal value of the CM process might be given. This is because the amount
of carbon emissions makes it possible to compare the energy consumption caused by different
energy sources. Based on this single indicator, the energy consumed by operations is evaluated
and mitigation measures are derived with the goal of enhancing the energy consumption within
the operation.
In the case that a target-congruent indicator does exist, a further criterion to determine the
internal value of the CM process is whether the target-congruent indicator (for example, fossil
fuel consumption) is established as a key performance indicator and is taken into account
during management decisions (for example, through evaluations of and decisions made on
measures). When the equivalent indicator is considered in the management process, carbon
emissions do not deliver further insights into the energy efficiency of the operations. For this
type of operation (type A in particular), the internal value of the CM process does not exist to
optimize its own operations with respect to energy consumption, which means that the CM
process is not required.
206
For a further explanation on the different types of operations, refer to section C-II 1.1.
207
Legend: LNG (liquefied natural gas), CNG (compressed natural gas) and LPG (liquefied petroleum gas).
188
If the target-congruent indicator does not present a performance indicator, carbon indicators
must be applied to manage the energy consumption within the operations. Thus, the internal
value of the CM process is given.
Table 21 summarizes the aforementioned considerations.
Target-congruence between carbon emissions and a
further indicator (e.g., fossil fuel consumption)
Target-congruent
indicator is a key
performance
indicator
Yes
NO
208
Yes
CM process is not valuable
CM process is valuable
No
CM process is valuable
CM process is valuable
Table 21: Internal value of the CM process.
In the case that internal value of the CM process is given, following the understanding of the
4I’s organizational learning framework from Crossan et al. (1999), the RFSPs should develop a
concept for integrating and, ultimately, institutionalizing the tasks of CA and the CM process
into the structures, systems, and processes of the company. Assuming a “full integration” of
CM, the company unit with responsibility for CM is functionally specialized in sustainable
issues and the CM tasks are divided, taking into account the functional specialization of the
units. To smoothly consolidate the subtasks to achieve a closed CA and CM process,
coordination mechanisms (for example, in terms of standardization with respect to work
processes and outputs) must be implemented.
The new insights into CM should feed forward and flow from individuals to the group and,
finally, to the organizational level. To reap future value from the knowledge gained for the
company, a valid notion is that CM does not concern just one employee or a group of
employees is crucial. In contrast, CM must be understood as a task field of the entire
organization. Doing so will enable the learning that occurred at the individual or group level to
be embedded in the company for further employee access. Thus, the capabilities and awareness
of employees are enhanced to respond effectively in daily business activities with the aim of
continuously improving energy efficiency within the operations.
Based on the above consideration, concepts for the integration of CM can be determined within
the company. It must be taken into account that the framework conditions can be changed,
which can lead to an adoption of the specified external or internal value requiring changes at
208
Taking into account in this case that the value of the CM process is not given, depending on the results of the external
value of CA, the RFSP can focus on the integration of CA.
189
the integration of CM. The next stages of the management model address content-related tasks
of CA and the CM process.
The third stage centers on CA and therefore focuses on the data gathering, preparation, and
calculation of the carbon indicators as well as their allocation, which can be conducted to meet
the expectations of the customers or for internal management purposes.
The fourth and fifth stages focus on the planning task in the CM process. Thereby, the
specification of a carbon reduction target is illustrated as an own stage that underpins the
specific relevance. A carbon reduction target increases the company’s emissions reduction
commitment (Lee, 2012b), allows the derivation of target-oriented mitigation measures and
functions as a benchmark for evaluating the further development of the inventory of carbon
emissions at the RFSPs (McKinnon and Piecyk, 2012). The calculated carbon indicators
provided by CA and a comprehensive analysis of the carbon reduction potential of the
operations serve as a foundation for specifying the carbon reduction target. Within the planning
process, the carbon reduction target is consistently broken down over various hierarchy levels
to specify the measurable operative carbon indicators. These indicators function as a key
performance indicator system and allow systematic monitoring of the development of carbon
emissions. Furthermore, RFSPs must compile an overview of carbon reduction measures by
considering their type of operations. The set of mitigation measures in the field of
transportation services are systematically evaluated and, finally, decisions must be made on
these measures.
The packages of mitigation measures are executed in the sixth stage of the management model.
In the seventh and final stage, the effects of the mitigation measures are monitored and
consider both ecological and economic indicators. The foundation for the monitoring process
represents the amount of carbon emissions provided by CA based on real values for energy
consumption and performance indicators. The results of the monitoring process are fed back
into previous stages that might result in adoption of the originally specified carbon reduction
target or in a revision to the package of carbon reduction measures.
In the operative conduct of CM, the changing framework conditions and the specific
requirements of the involved employees must be contemplated in order to continuously develop
CM within the company. Therefore, the experienced gained in daily business practice should be
fed back from the organization to the group and, finally, to the individuals who bear the
responsibility for CM. Thus, target-oriented development and learning of CA and the CM
process are achieved. Moreover, adjustments to CM based on employee requirements results in
enhanced acceptance of CM activities by the company’s workforce.
190
E
Contributions, Limitations, and Recommendations for further
Research
This final chapter discusses the contributions emerging from the investigation (section E-I) and
outlines the managerial (section E-II) and theoretical implications of the thesis (section E-III).
This chapter also discusses the limitations of the research deliverables (section E-IV) and offers
recommendations for further research opportunities in the research field of CM integration
(section E-V).
I
Contributions
This study offers three core contributions: the specification of the cornerstones of CM, the
analysis of various integration alternatives of CM, and the development of a management
model for conducting CM.
Cornerstones of Carbon Management
An understanding of the elements that comprise the cornerstones of CM are derived (RQ 1)
based on the theoretical (section B-I) and practical perspective of CM (section B-II). In order to
sharpen the initial understanding of CM, for each of the cornerstones, the related tasks are
thoroughly introduced by taking into account the business characteristics of RFSPs (RQ 2).
Thereby, the identified method of elaborating CM in business practice is summarized, while a
conceptual understanding of the cornerstones of CM has also been developed. To reach a
profound theoretical basis, established concepts from various literature fields such as
sustainability management, management accounting, organization, and logistics management
are considered.
The core contributions are summarized as follows:
 The cornerstones of CM encompass CA, the CM process, and organization, subdivided into
the elements of structures and systems.
 The aim of CA is to calculate carbon indicators for internal and external purposes.
Thereby, the directives and guidelines of the CA standards must be analyzed and companyspecific boundaries must be set. Moreover, input data with respect to energy consumption
and performance indicators are gathered and prepared. Based on this input data, the amount
of carbon emissions are calculated and allocated taking transparent reference values into
account.
191
 During the CM process, which presents the core cornerstone of CM, the amount of carbon
emissions revealed during the operations must be actively influenced. The basis for the CM
process, and consequently the specification of a carbon reduction target, are the inventory
of carbon emissions delivered from CA. To meet the carbon reduction target, areas offering
the greatest carbon leverage are identified and a set of mitigation measures is executed. The
development of the amount of carbon emissions is monitored on a regular basis and the
gained insights are fed back into earlier stages of the CM process.
 The requirements to create the framework conditions for conducting the CA and CM
process are contemplated by the third cornerstone: organization, which can be further
subdivided into structures and systems (IT and incentive systems). The element structure
addresses the division of the tasks (CA and CM process) and the coordination among the
subtask to ensure a closed process. The IT system element centers IT tools in order to
support the data gathering process and the quantification of meaningful carbon indicators.
Furthermore, carbon emissions as a further component of the established incentive systems
make it possible to enhance the awareness of and strengthen the spirit for ecological
sustainability within the organization.
Integration Alternatives of Carbon Management
In the series of conducted case studies, the identified integration alternatives of CM are
classified (RQ 3) and situational parameters are discussed along with their impact on the
chosen integration alternative of CM (RQ 4). Taking the insights of the contingency theory
literature into consideration, a profound contingency-based framework is elaborated that
includes a broad range of situational parameters and design variables that reflect the
cornerstones of CM. The empirical data gained from the set of seven case studies is applied to
derive propositions concerning the integration alternatives of CM, depending on situational
parameters.
The core contributions are summarized below.
 The empirical insights from the sample provides a broad picture of integration alternatives of
CM and make it possible to specify the following propositions:
Carbon accounting:
 The range of the integration degree at the case studies varies from “no integration” to “full
integration”.
192
 Proposition: The greater the (expected) relevance of providing carbon indicators for the
creation of an image as a sustainable company enhanced by complex operations, the higher
the integration of CA into the structures of the organization.
Carbon management process:
 The case studies range from “no integration” to “partial integration”.
 Proposition: The more complex the operations of the RFSP, the more valuable carbon
indicators are in enabling a comparison between different energy sources and,
consequently, the stronger the integration of the CM process into established management
processes.
Organization (structure):
 The integration degree at the case studies ranges from “no integration” to “partial
integration”.
 Proposition: The larger the RFSP, the stronger the integration of CM in the structures of the
organization in terms of functional specialization.
Organization (IT systems):
 The case studies range from “no integration” to “full integration”.
 Proposition: The higher the (expected) relevance of providing carbon indicators to create an
image as a sustainable company to stakeholders, the greater the integration of the carbon
calculation tool in other IT tools.
Organization (incentive systems):
 The case studies reveal “no integration”.
Proposition: The more complex the operations of the RFSP, the more valuable carbon

indicators are in enabling a comparison between different energy sources; consequently, the
higher the integration of carbon indicators into the management incentive system.
Management Model for Conducting Carbon Management
The third contribution of the thesis addresses the requirement with respect to design
recommendations for the integration of CM at RFSPs (RQ 5). A generic management model,
which can be characterized as an ideal type approach, is developed to address the conducting of
CM for the needs of companies in the transportation industry. The foundations for the
management model are the conceptual understanding of CM and the empirical results of the
situational analysis with respect to integration alternatives of CM.
193
The core contributions are summarized as follows:
 The management model encompasses the following seven stages: (1) Corporate carbon
commitment, (2) generate competences in the field of CM, (3) calculate and report carbon
emissions, (4) specify a carbon reduction target, (5) identify, evaluate, and decide on
measures, (6) execute mitigation measures, and (7) monitor the effects and decide on further
steps.
 To determine the integration alternative of the CM into the structures, systems and
processes, the external value of CA and the internal value of the CM process should be
specified. Thereby, taking into account the requirements of the customers to provide carbon
indicators, the external value of CA is specified. As a general rule, the higher the external
value of CA, the more an integrated CA at the structures is preferable, which is enhanced by
the complexity of operations. The internal value of CM process centers on the relevance of
carbon indicators to optimize the operations within the RFSP considering the energy
consumption. It is required to determine, whether target-congruent indicators to carbon
emissions exist and whether this indicators considered at management decision. If no
internal value exists, the CM is not required to optimize the operation with respect to energy
consumption. In contrast, when an internal value is given, the RFSPs should consider
integrating and ultimately institutionalizing the tasks of CA and the CM process into the
structures, systems, and processes of the company.
II
Managerial Implications
Due to mounting political and business relevance, from a managerial point of view, CM has
been developed towards a strategic issue for companies in the transportation industry. In
business practice, RFSPs are faced with the challenge of concretizing the tasks of CM and
integrating CM into the structures, systems, and processes of the company. Against this
background, the present thesis aims to increase the knowledge in the field of CM and provide
several action alternatives for practitioners. The managerial implications are particularly
fruitful for RFSPs that plan or have started to deal with the issue of CM. Moreover, the
deliverables of the thesis also provide a starting point for improving the CM activities of RFSPs
that deal with the issue over a longer time period. The managerial implications of the study can
be assigned to the three above-mentioned contributions in section E-I.
194
Cornerstones of Carbon Management
Practitioners benefit from the in-depth exploration of the elements; that is, the cornerstones of
CM. The characterization of the related tasks of each cornerstone, taking different business
characteristics of RFSP into consideration, can help practitioners acquire an overview and
enhance their understanding in the field of CM. In particular, the presented tasks of CA (see
section C-I) and the CM process (see section C-II) contemplate a broad range of information,
which is vital for conducting CM. With respect to CA, the core CA standards, guidelines for
boundary setting, required data for the calculation and allocation of carbon emissions are
identified. The profound recommendations to specify a carbon reduction target, the bandwidth
of mitigation measures and the discussion of the relation between various evaluation criteria
appear to be particularly fruitful in the field of the CM process.
Integration Alternatives of Carbon Management
Sustainability managers are provided with various integration alternatives to CM to receive
insights of the broad range of integration options in business practice. Situational parameters
that have an impact on the chosen integration alternative at different integration fields
(cornerstones of CM) are revealed and the relations are discussed in this investigation. These
practical experiences provide a basis for the decisions of sustainability managers regarding
which integration alternative of CM is preferable, considering the type of operations and other
relevant framework conditions of their own company.
Management Model for Conducting Carbon Management
Sustainability managers planning to start their activities in the field of CM can build on the
developed management model. These deliverables are particularly useful for guiding and
supporting RFSPs with respect to the competence generation and the operative conduction of
CM. In particular, practitioners benefit from the concept of the external value of CA and the
internal value of the CM process, as it makes it possible to indicate which integration
alternative of CM might be appropriate.
III Theoretical Implications
This thesis addresses a research field with steadily mounting scholarly relevance that has
revealed a general shortage of studies addressing the management of carbon emissions and its
integration with the observation level on companies in the transportation industry. Therefore,
195
the thesis aims to contribute and shed light on the vastly unexplored research field of CM
integration, aiming to specify the cornerstones of CM and investigate situational parameters
and design variables (integration alternatives of CM).
The investigation is grounded in the literature field of sustainability management. Because an
eclectic approach has been chosen, concepts from different literature fields as management
accounting, integrated management systems, organization, and logistics management have also
been contemplated. Furthermore, the contingency and organizational learning theories are
applied as the theoretical access and to support the structuration process of the investigation.
Thus, various theoretical constructs and concepts are applied within the thesis, with the aim of
putting forward the discussion in the field of CM with a particular focus on RFSPs. The
following theoretical implications are derived in order to bridge the identified gaps in research
on CM integration. The theoretical implications can be assigned to the three contributions
introduced in section E-I.
Cornerstones of Carbon Management
The conceptual cornerstones of CM are derived based on theoretical and practical perspectives.
In particular, the cornerstones of CM make a novel contribution to the young research field
because they encompass the core elements of a CM and reveal their specific relation. As the
cornerstones of CM are basically generic in nature, which both allows and requires
customization, they offer researchers the opportunity to apply them to subsequent
investigations with a focus on companies in the logistics, but also in other industries.
The three cornerstones of CM break down the issue of CM into partial cornerstones and make
it possible to profoundly characterize the specific tasks of each cornerstone. By specifying the
content with regard to the cornerstones of CM, the thesis contributes to the literature in
sustainability and logistics management, management accounting, and organization by
providing a systematic approach to manage the amount of carbon emissions within companies
in the transportation industry.
Integration Alternatives of Carbon Management
Various integration alternatives of CM are systematically characterized and several situational
parameters are evaluated with respect to their relation on the design variables within a
contingency-based framework. The empirical evidence documented in this study provides
researchers with initial indications regarding relevant situational parameters for companies in
the transportation industry and their impact on design variables (cornerstones of CM).
196
From a theoretical point of view, this part of the investigation complements the knowledge in
the research fields of sustainability, logistics management and integrated management systems.
Moreover, it underlines the applicability of the contingency theory in the research field of CM
with the goal of analyzing different integration alternatives of CM and the situational
parameters that impact these alternatives.
Management Model for Conducting Carbon Management
The conceptual understanding of CM and the empirical results of the situational analysis
presents the foundation of the management model, which are further stimulated by the eightstage procedure introduced by McKinnon and Piecyk (2012). As the management model is
developed in an early stage of CM, scholars can build on this management model and
complement it with further theoretical and practical insights in the field of CM. Moreover, the
stages of the management model are generic in nature; consequently, researchers can apply the
seven-stage management model for subsequent investigations with a focus on companies in the
transportation industry, but also in other industries.
This study makes a novel contribution to the existing knowledge in the sustainability and
logistics management by developing a management model for conducting CM at RFSPs.
Furthermore, the explanatory patterns of the organizational learning theory are transferred to
the research field of CM to underpin the relevance that the gained knowledge should feed
forward from individuals to the group level. By applying the organizational learning theory, the
insights of the theory are complemented to a new application context.
IV Research Limitations
The thesis makes several contributions concerning the management of CM and its integration
into structures, systems, and processes of the company. These deliverables can be seen as an
attempt to harmonize existing knowledge from different literature fields and to push forward
the discussion in the field of CM integration. Nevertheless, the contributions must be
accompanied by the limitations of the investigation. The core research limitations can be
reverted to the applied research method, the derived contingency-based framework and the
initial stage with respect to CM in business practice, to the time period during which the case
studies were conducted.
197
Limitations of the Applied Research Method
In order to derive a rich and comprehensive understanding of the current form of elaboration of
CM in business practice, a methodological triangulation was applied. Thereby, the focus was
set on qualitative research methods and, in particular, on the case study approach encompassing
seven RFSPs. The number of conducted case studies made it possible to reach saturation,
which meant that the researcher did not expect any additional insights from further case studies
to strengthen the deliverables with regard to the cornerstones of CM and the interrelationship
between situational parameters and the integration alternatives of CM. However, this also
means that it presents a small overall sample. Therefore, the derived propositions with respect
to the relation between situational parameters and design variables do not base as well as they
have not been tested on a large quantitative scale. Hence, given the small number of case
studies, one weakness is the limited generalizability of the contributions either from a scientific
or a managerial point of view.
Limitations of the Derived Contingency-based Framework
To avoid an overload of the contingency-based framework, it was not possible to analyze the
full range of situational parameters and their relation to the design variables (cornerstones of
CM). Therefore, the contingency-based framework cannot be described as exhaustive because
selected situational parameters and their relation might be neglected. The consideration of
further situational parameters in the investigation could lead to further relations between
situational parameters and design variables.
Moreover, the designed case study approach focuses on companies in the transportation
industry with headquarters located in a German-speaking country. These selection criteria
could bias of the contributions with respect to the specified relation. For this argument, the
validity of empirical evidence discussed in the investigation is limited to the transportation
market in German-speaking countries. With a different cultural context or industry focus, other
relations of situational parameters and their impact on the chosen integration alternatives could
be expected. Although the framework conditions and the structure of the transportation industry
in other countries might be comparable, caution should be exercised when extrapolating the
deliverables geographically. Furthermore, the focus on companies in the transportation industry
limits the transferability of the contributions to other industries, driven particularly by the
consideration of the operations complexity as a core situational parameter that has an impact on
the chosen integration alternative of CM.
198
To allow a concrete and mostly objective evaluation of the situational parameters and design
variables, the evaluation was carried out by the researcher based on the insights gained from the
set of case studies. Thus, a deviating perception of situational parameters by employees in
charge at the RFSPs could be largely avoided. However, the evaluation of the situational
parameters and design variables based on the assessment of the researcher necessarily implies
some judgment and consequently, a specific degree of subjective evidence.
Limitation of the initial Stage in the Field CM
The third limitation concerns CM still being in an initial stage. However, one benefit of
investigations in a young research field is that initial theoretical and conceptual constructs can
be developed, upon which further research can be built. The initial stage of CM particularly
impacts the contributions with regard to the relations between the situational parameters and
integration alternatives of CM (contingency-based framework). With increasing maturity in the
field of CM or changing external framework conditions, the deliverables might be changed.
Consequently, the revealed relations present a snapshot of the business practice and cannot be
evaluated as timeless.
Moreover, due to the initial stage of CM, it is challenging to benchmark or evaluate the quality
of the CM activities of the RFSPs. To minimize the bias of the deliverables, RFSPs were
selected that had received certain external recognition for their sustainability concepts, or
ideally for their CM activities. Nevertheless, the contributions with respect to the relations
between situational parameters and design variables might be slightly distorted by the
inclusions of “not best in class” RFSPs in the field of CM.
V
Recommendations for Further Research
Drawing from the above-introduced limitations of the thesis, initial indications from which to
derive further research opportunities can be elaborated.
As CM is a young research field, qualitative research methods in various research settings are
recommended in order to further elaborate the derived theoretical construct of CM integration.
To partially overcome the limitations resulted from the initial stage of CM in business practice,
qualitative research, particularly case studies, should be conducted at other front-runners in the
field of CM. In this way, the understanding of the tasks and the integration alternatives of CM
can be enhanced and the theoretical insights complemented by further practical experiences.
199
Thereby, a focus in content should be placed on the further differentiation of the concepts of
external value of CA and internal value of CM process, as they can help specify the required
integration alternative of CM into the structures, systems, and processes. Moreover, the
specification of the carbon reduction target and particular the operationalization of the target
could be addressed by subsequent investigations. These elements, which are central within the
CM process, are underrepresented in business practice and in the literature.209
Subsequent investigations could evaluate the relevance of further situational parameters with
respect to the chosen integration alternatives of CM. Furthermore, much research is needed to
enhance the understanding of corporate CM in different contexts. The focus of such research
can be logistics service providers offering a different range of logistics services (train, inland
water or warehousing, transshipment), or located in different countries and consequently faced
with different external framework conditions. Subsequent studies could also look into whether
the considered situational parameters are also relevant in another industry context. The
consideration of further logistics services, or companies located in different countries or other
industries, could lead to an enhancement of the developed contingency-based framework.
Subsequent analysis can also consider longitudinal case studies, as these can lead to a better
understand of the evolutionary path and the changes over time in the field of CM at a company
(Lee, 2012b). Thus, the impact of a set of situational parameters on the integration alternatives
of CM in different phases can be evaluated and the identified relations can be disclosed.
Moreover, it is advisable to contemplate a larger sample of companies. Due to the limited
number of small and medium-sized RFSPs dealing actively with CM, a quantitative, large-scale
survey reflecting the entire structure and broad range of companies within the transportation
industry could be quite challenging. However, a majority of the international RFSPs have
addressed the issue and communicated their efforts in the field of CM to the public. As
communication instruments, particularly the sustainability, corporate social responsibility or
annual reports, websites, and newspapers are applied. Therefore, besides a survey at
international RFSPs, an empirical analysis based on the available documentation could be
another fruitful option.210 Thus, the quantitative basis for a subsequent investigation can be
209
These further research opportunities are in line with the understanding of Lee (2012a), who noted the existence of a
“knowledge gap between the types of information required and the usefulness of this information for carbon
management” (Lee, 2012a: 84). Moreover, Schaltegger and Csutora (2012) bemoaned the absence of knowledge about
the required information in order to support good management decisions in the field of CM.
210
Empirical research strategies that include a large quantitative basis with a comparable research focus are chosen; for
example, by Lee (2012b), who analyzed the corporate carbon strategies of 241 South Korean companies based on the
insights from sustainability reports, Carbon Disclosure Project reports, and newspaper articles. Another example is the
investigation of Björklung and Piecyk (2012) that addressed the key performance indicators in the field of
200
increased, given that a large amount of data is easily available. Therefore, the subsequent
analysis can concentrate on large-scale testing of the propositions with respect to the situational
parameters and the design variables (cornerstones of CM). Moreover, the focus in content can
be set on one of the delimitated cornerstones of CM. Due to the high relevance of the CM
process, the planning process encompassing – as discussed above – the specification of the
carbon reduction target and its operationalization might be a promising field for research. environmental sustainability of 112 international logistics service providers. The developed database includes the
information from the corporate websites and the corporate social responsibility reports.
201
References
Aberle, G., 2009. Transportwirtschaft – Einzelwirtschaftliche und gesamtwirtschaftliche
Grundlagen. 5th edition. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München.
Arató, P., Mann, Z.A., Orbán, A., 2005. Extending component-based design with hardware
components. Science of Computer Programming 56, 23-39.
Argote, L., 2011. Organizational learning research: Past, present and future. Management
learning 42, 439-446.
Argyris, C., Schon, D. A., 1978. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective.
Addison-Wesley, New York.
Aronsson, H., Brodin, M.H., 2006. The environmental impact of changing logistics structures.
International Journal of Logistics Management 17, 394-415.
Ascui, F., Lovell, H., 2011. As frames collide: making sense of carbon accounting.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24, 978-999.
Asif, A., Fischer, O.A.M., de Bruijn, E.J., Pagell, M., 2010a. An examination of strategies
employed for the integration of management systems. The TQM Journal 22, 648-669.
Baker, G.P., Jensen, M.C., Murphy, K.J., 1988. Compensation and Incentives: Practice vs.
Theory. The Journal of Finance 43, 593-616.
Barney, J.B., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
Management 17, 99-120.
Bask, A.H., 2001. Relationships between 3PL providers and members of supply chains – a
strategic perspective. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 16, 470-86.
Baumgarten, H., Hidberg, C., Steger, U., 1996. Güterverkehrszentren und Umwelt. Verlag
Paul Haupt, Bern.
Baumgarten, H., Stabenau, H., Steger, U., Zentes, J., 1998. Qualitäts- und
Umweltmanagement logistischer Prozessketten. Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern.
Bebbington, J., Larrinaga-Gonzalez, C., 2008. Carbon trading: accounting and reporting
issues. European Accounting Review 17, 697-717.
Becker, F.G., 1993. Explorative Forschung mittels Bezugsrahmens – ein Beitrag zur
Methodologie des Entdeckungszusammenhangs. In: Becker, F.G., Martin, A. (eds.),
Empirische Personalforschung: Methoden und Beispiele. Reiner Hampp Verlag, München,
111-127.
Beckmerhagen, I.A., Berg, H.P., Karapetrovic, S.V., Willborn, W.O., 2003. Integration of
management systems: focus on safety in the nuclear industry. International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management 20, 210-228.
Behnke, J., Baur, N., Behnke, N., 2010. Empirische Methoden der Politikwissenschaft. 2nd
edition. Ferdinand Schöningh, Paderborn.
Berg, B. L., 1998. Qualitative Methods for Social Sciences. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
202
Berglund, M., van Laarhoven, P., Sharman, G., Wandel, S., 1999. Third-Party Logistics: Is
There a Future? International Journal of Logistics Management 10, 59-70.
Bernardo, M., Casadesus, M., Karapetrovic, S., Heras, I., 2009. How integrated are
environmental, quality and other standardized management systems? An empirical study.
Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 742-750.
Bernardo, M., Casadesus, M., Karapetrovic, S., Heras, I., 2011. Relationships between the
integration of audits and management systems: An empirical study. The TQM Journal 23,
659-672.
Bernardo, M., Casadesus, M., Karapetrovic, S., Heras, I., 2012. Do integration difficulties
influence management system integration levels? Journal of Cleaner Production 21, 23–33.
Berson, Y., Nemanich, L. A., Waldman, D. A., Galvin, B. M., Keller, R. T., 2006.
Leadership and organizational learning: A multiple levels perspective. The Leadership
Quarterly 17, 577-594.
Björklund, M., Piecyk, T., 2012. Logistics service providers and corporate social
responsibility – How do they measure environmental performance. Logistics Research
Networks Annual Conference 2012. University of Cranfield, United Kingdom.
Blackburn, R., Stokes, D., 2010. Breaking Down the Barriers: Using Focus Groups to
Research Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. International Small Business Journal 19, 4467.
Bocken, N. M. P., Allwood J. M., 2012. Strategies to reduce the carbon footprint of consumer
goods by influencing stakeholders. Journal of Cleaner Production 35, 118-129.
Bohlmann, B., Krupp, T., 2007. Bedeutung des Strategischen Managements für
Logistikdienstleister. In: Bohlmann, B., Krupp, T., Strategisches Management für
Logistikdienstleister. DVV Media Group, Deutscher Verkehrs-Verlag, Hamburg.
Bontis, N., Crossan, M. M., Hulland, J., 2002. Managing an organizational learning system
by aligning stocks and flows. Journal of Management Studies 39, 437-469.
Bowen, F., Wittneben, B., 2011. Carbon accounting: Negotiating accuracy, consistency and
certainty across organisational fields. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24,
1022-1036.
Braunschweig, C., Kindermann, D.F., Wehrlin, U., 2001. Grundlagen der Managementlehre.
Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München.
Bretzke, W. R., 2009. Logistische Netzwerke. 2nd edition. Springer Verlag, Berlin
Heidelberg.
British Standards Institution (BSI), 2011. PAS 2050:2011: Specification for the assessment
of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. British Standards
Institution, London.
Buckler, B., 1996. A learning process model to achieve continuous improvement and
innovation. The Learning Organization 3, 31-39.
203
Bundesamt für Umwelt (BAFU), 2013. Kompensation von CO2-Emissionen: Treibstoffe.
(http://www.bafu.admin.ch/klima/12325/12349/12350/index.html?lang=de. [Retrieved: 26
January 2014]).
Bundesgesetz über die Reduktion der CO2-Emissionen (CO2-Gesetz), 2013. (as of January
2013).
Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr Logistik und Entsorgung (BGL) e.V., 2014.
Kostenentwicklung
im
Güterkraftverkehr.
(http://www.bglev.de/web/initiativen/kosten_kalkulator.htm&v=2#form. [Retrieved: 31 March 2014]).
Burritt, R., Hahn, T. and Schaltegger, S., 2002. Towards a Comprehensive Framework for
Environmental Management Accounting, Links between Business Actors and
Environmental Management Accounting Tools. Australian Accounting Review 21, 39-50.
Burritt, R. L., Schaltegger, S., Zvezdov, D., 2011. Carbon Management Accounting:
Explaining Practice in Leading German Companies. Australian Accounting Review 21, 8098.
Busch, T., 2010. Corporate Carbon Performance Indicators Revisited. Journal of Industrial
Ecology 14, 374-377.
Cadez, S., Guilding, C., 2008. An exploratory investigation of an integrated contingency
model of strategic management accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society 33, 836863.
Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), 2012. Carbon Disclosure Project: Supply Chain Report
2011 – Migrating to a low carbon economy through leadership and collaboration.
(https://www.cdproject.net/cdpresults/cdp-2011-supply-chain-report.pdf [Retrieved: 24
January 2014]).
Carbon Trust, 2006. Carbon Footprints in the Supply Chain. Carbon Trust, London.
Carter, C. R., Easton, P. L., 2011. Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and
future directions. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 41,
46-62.
Chakravarthy, B., 1997. A new strategy framework for coping with turbulence. Sloan
Management Review 38, 69–82.
Chalmers, A. F., 2001. Wege der Wissenschaft. Einführung in die Wissenschaftstheorie.
Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.
Chan, M.-K., 2009. Carbon Management. A Practical Guide for Suppliers University of
Cambridge Program for Sustainability Leadership. Business in the Community, Cambridge,
UK.
Chenhall, R.H., 2003. Management control systems design within its organizational context:
findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting,
Organizations and Society 28, 127-168.
Chowdhury, G., 2010. Carbon footprint of the knowledge sector: What's the future? Journal of
Documentation 66, 934-946.
204
Clark, P.B., Wilson, J.Q., 1961. Incentive Systems: A Theory of Organizations.
Administrative Science Quarterly 6, 129-166.
Cohen, M.D., Sproull, L.S., 1991. Editors` Introduction, Organization Science 2, Special
Issue: Organizational learning, 1-3.
Connelly, B., Ketchen, D., Slater, S., 2010. Toward a ‘‘theoretical toolbox’’ for sustainability
research in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 39, 86-100.
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., White, R. E., 1999. An Organizational Learning Framework:
From Intuition to Institution. Academy of Management Review 24, 522-537.
Crozier, M., Thoenig, J.-C., 1976. The regulation of complex organized systems.
Administrative Science Quarterly 21, 547–570.
Cyert, R. M., March, G.P., 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs,
Prentice-Hall, NJ.
Darke, P., Shanks, G., Broadbent, M., 1998. Successfully completing case study research:
combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Info Systems Journal 8, 273-289.
DB Schenker, 2012. Umweltbroschüre. (http://www.deutschebahn.com/file/3105826/
data/umweltbroschuere_schenker.pdf [Retrieved: 20 January 2014]).
Décret n° 2011-1336 du 24 octobre 2011 (relatif à l'information sur la quantité de dioxyde
de carbone émise à l'occasion d'une prestation de transport), 2011. (as of October 2011).
Delmas, M., 2001. Stakeholders and competitive advantage: the case of ISO14001. Production
and Operation Management 10, 343-358.
Denzin, N. K., 1978. The Research Act. 2nd edition. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Deutsche
Bahn,
2013.
Nachhaltigkeitsbericht
2012.
(https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/nachhaltigkeit/nachhaltigkeitsbericht/der_bericht.html
[Retrieved: 20 January 2014]).
Deutsche Post (DHL), 2013. Bericht zur Unternehmensverantwortung
(http://www.dpdhl.com/content/dam/dpdhl/verantwortung/bericht-zurunternehmensverantwortung-2012.pdf. [Retrieved: 20 January 2014]).
2012.
Deutsche Post DHL, 2012. Corporate Responsibility: We deliver responsibility 2011.
(http://www.dp-dhl.com/en/responsibility.html [Retrieved: 28 May 2012]).
Deutscher Speditions- und Logistikverband (DSLV)., 2013. Berechnung von
Treibhausgasemissionen in Spedition und Logistik gemäss DIN EN 16258. 2nd edition.
(http://www.verkehrsrundschau.de/sixcms/media.php/4513/DSLVLeitfaden_Berechnung_von_THG-Emissionen_Stand_03-2013.pdf.
[Retrieved:
30
December 2013]).
Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V. DIN, 2013. Methode zur Berechnung und Deklaration
des Energieverbrauchs und der Treibhausgasemissionen bei Transportdienstleistungen
Güter- und Personenverkehr. Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V, Berlin.
Dijk, F. v., Sonnemans, J., Winden, F. v., 2001. Incentive systems in a real effort experiment.
European Economic Review 45, 187-214.
205
DiMaggio, P.J., Powell, W.W., 1983. The iron cage revisited: institutionalisomorphism and
collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48, 147-160.
Dinwoodie, J., Xu, J., 2008. Case studies in logistics: a review and tentative taxonomy.
International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 11, 393-408.
Donaldson, L., 2001. The Contingency Theory of Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Dormer, A., Donal, P., Finn, D.P., Ward, P., Cullen, J., 2013. Carbon footprint analysis in
plastics manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production 51, 133-141.
Drew, S.A.W., Smith, P.A.C., 1995. The learning organization: “change proofing” and
strategy. The Learning Organization 2, 4-14.
Dröge, C., Germain, R., 1998. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation
Review 34, 25-37.
Dul, J., Hak, T., 2008. Case study methodology in business research. Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford.
Dyllick, T., Hockerts, K., 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability.
Business Strategy and the Environment 11, 130-141.
Edwards, J., McKinnon, A., Cullinane, S., 2011. Comparative carbon auditing of
conventional and online retail supply chains: a review of methodological issues. Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal 16, 57-63.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989a. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of
Management Journal 14, 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M., Graebner, M. E., 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and
challenges. Academy of Management Journal 50, 25-32.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1985. Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches. Management
Science 31, 134-149.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989b. Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of
Management Review 14, 57-74.
Elkington, J., 1998. Cannibals with Forks: The triple Bottom Line of the 21st Century.
Capstone, Oxford.
European Commission, 2011. WHITE PAPER: Roadmap to a Single European Transport
Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system. (http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0144:FIN:EN:PDF [Retrieved: 24
January 2014]).
European Environment Agency (EEA), 2013. Annual European Union greenhouse gas
inventory
1990-2011
and
inventory
report
2013.
(http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/european-union-greenhouse-gas-inventory-2013.
[Retrieved: 24 January 2014]).
Evangelista, P., McKinnon, A., Sweeney, E., 2013. Technology adoption in small and
medium-sized logistics providers. Industrial Management & Data Systems 113, 967-989.
206
Fiedler, F.E., 1964. A Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness. Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology 1, 149-190.
Fiol, C.M., Lyler, M.A., 1985. Organizational Learning. Academy of Management Review 10,
803 -813.
Fülbier,
R.U.,
2004.
Wissenschaftstheorie
Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Studium 33, 226-271.
und
Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
Funk, J., 1995. Just-in-time manufacturing and logistical complexity: A contingency model.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 15, 60-71.
Gajanand, M. S., Narendran, T. T., 2013. Green route planning to reduce the environmental
impact of distribution. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications: A
Leading Journal of Supply Chain Management 16, 410-432.
Giddens, A., 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration.
University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Gogolin, M., Klaas-Wissing, T., 2012. From Carbon Accounting to Carbon Management at
Logistics Service Providers: a Literature Review and Research Agenda. Logistics Research
Networks Annual Conference 2012. University of Cranfield, United Kingdom.
Gogolin, M., Klaas-Wissing, T., Stölzle, W., 2011. Carbon Accounting – a Challenging Task
for Logistics Service Providers. Transport and Mobility Management 63, 38-43.
González, P., Sarkis, J., Diaz, B.A., 2008. Environmental management system certification
and its influence on corporate practices: Evidence from the automotive industry.
International Journal of Operations and Production Management 28, 1021-1041.
González-González, J.M., Zamora-Ramírez, C., 2013. Towards the consolidation of climate
change strategies in organizations: The case of Heineken Spain. International Journal of
Climate Change Strategies and Management 5, 6-20.
Göpfert, I., Wehberg, G., 1995. Ökologieorientiertes Logistik-Marketing. W. Kohlhammer
GmbH, Stuttgart.
Grant, R.M., 1996. Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm. Strategic Management
Journal 17 (Winter Special Issue), 109-122.
Hahn, D., Hungenberg, H., 2001. PuK: Planung und Kontrolle, Planungs- und
Kontrollsysteme, Planungs- und Kontrollrechnung. 6th edition. Betrieblicher Verlag Dr. Th.
Gabler GmbH, Wiesbaden.
Haldma, T, Lääts, K., 2002. Contingencies influencing the management accounting practices
of Estonian manufacturing companies. Management Accounting Research 13, 379-400.
Halldórsson, A., Skjøtt-Larsen, T., 2004. Developing logistics competencies through third
party logistics relationships. International Journal of Operations & Production Management
24, 192-206.
Handbook
Emission
Factors
(HBEFA),
2014.
http://www.hbefa.net/e/index.html. (Retrieved 12 March, 2014).
HBEFA
Introduction.
Häusler, P., 2002. Integration der Logistik in Unternehmensnetzwerken. Europäischer Verlag
der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main.
207
Hespenheide, E., Pavlovsky, K., McElroy, M., 2010. Accounting for sustainability
performance. Financial Executive 26, 52-58.
Heusler, K. F., 2004. Implementierung von Supply Chain Management: Kompetenzorientierte
Analyse aus der Perspektive eines Netzwerkakteurs. Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag / GWV
Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden.
Hoffman, A., 2007. Carbon strategies: how leading companies are reducing their climate
change footprint. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
Hoffmann, V. H., Busch, T., 2008. Corporate Carbon Performance Indicators: Carbon
Intensity, Dependency, Exposure, and Risk. Journal of Industrial Ecology 12, 505-520.
Horngren, C.T., Sundem, G.L., Stratton, W.O., 2002. Introduction to Management
Accounting. 12th edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Horváth, P., 2006. Controlling. 10th edition. Verlag Franz Vahlen, München.
Huber, A., Laverentz, K., 2012. Logistik. Verlag Franz Vahlen GmbH, München.
International Energy Agency (IEA), 2009. Transport, Energy and CO2: Moving Toward
Sustainability.
OECD
Publishing.
(http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/transport2009.pdf [Retrieved:
20 January 2014]).
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2006. ISO 14064-1: 2006:
Greenhouse gases - Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for the
quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
Isaksson, K., Huge-Brodin, M., 2013. Understanding efficiencies behind logistics service
providers' green offerings. Management Research Review 36, 216-238.
Jänicke, M., 2008. Ecological modernisation: new perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production
16, 557-565.
Jennings, P.D., Zandbergen, P.A., 1995. Ecologically sustainable organizations: an
institutional approach. The Academy of Management Review 20, 1015-1052.
Jensen, J.K., 2012. Product carbon footprint in supply chains developments and gaps.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 42, 338-354.
Jeswani, H.K., Wehrmeyer, W., Mulugetta, Y., 2008. How Warm Is the Corporate Response
to Climate Change? Evidence from Pakistan and the UK. Business Strategy and the
Environment 17, 46-60.
Jick, T.D., 1979. Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Administrative Science Quarterly 24, 602-611.
Jones, C., Hesterly, W.S., Borgatti, S.P., 1997. A general theory of network governance:
exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review 22, 911–
945.
Jones, O., MacPherson, A., 2006. Inter-Organizational Learning and Strategic Renewal in
SMEs. Long Range Planning 39, 155-175.
208
Karapetrovic, S., 2003. Musings on integrated management systems. Measuring Business
Excellence 7, 4-13.
Karapetrovic, S., Willborn, W., 1998. Integration of quality and environmental management
systems. The TQM Magazine 10, 204-213.
Kellner, F., Otto, A., 2012. Allocating CO2 emissions to shipments in road freight
transportation. Journal of Management Control 22, 451-479.
Kieser, A., Ebers, M., 2006. Organisationstheorien. 6th edition. W. Kohlhammer GmbH,
Stuttgart.
Kieser, A., Walgenbach, P., 2010. Organisation. 6th edition. Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag,
Stuttgart.
Klaas-Wissing, T., 2002. Logistik-Organisation. Ein konfigurationstheoretischer Ansatz zur
logistikorientierten Organisationsgestaltung. Deutscher Universitätsverlag GmbH,
Wiesbaden.
Klaas-Wissing, T., 2010a. Strategische Positionierung. In: Stölzle, W., Fagagnini, H-P. (eds.),
Güterverkehr kompakt. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München, 125-138.
Klaas-Wissing, T., 2010b. Organisation. In: Stölzle, W., Fagagnini, H-P. (eds.), Güterverkehr
kompakt. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München, 139-150.
Kohn, C., Brodin, M. H., 2008. Centralised distribution systems and the environment: how
increased transport work can decrease the environmental impact of logistics. International
Journal of Logistics Research and Applications: A Leading Journal of Supply Chain
Management 11, 229-245.
Koplin, J., Seuring, S., Mesterharm, M., 2007. Incorporating sustainability into supply
management in the automotive industry - the case of the Volkswagen AG. Journal of
Cleaner Production 15, 1053-1062.
Kraatz, M.S., Zajac, E.J.,1996. Exploring the limits of the new institutionalism: the causes
and consequences of illegitimate organizational change. American Sociological Review 61,
812–836.
Kranke, A., Schmied, M., Schön, A.D., 2011. CO2-Berechnung in der Logistik. Verlag
Heinrich Vogel, München.
Krause, K., 2007. Organisation und Steuerung von Transportnetzwerken. Kölner
Wissenschaftsverlag, Köln.
Küpper, H.-U., 2001. Controlling: Konzeption, Aufgaben und Elemente. 3rd edition. SchäfferPoeschl Verlag, Stuttgart.
Labodova, A., 2004. Implementing integrated management systems using a risk analysis based
approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 12, 571-580.
Lai, K.H., Cheng, T.C.E., Yeung, A.C.L., 2005. Relationship stability and supplier
commitment to quality. International Journal of Production Economics 96, 397-410.
Lai, K.H., Wong, C.W.Y., Cheng, T.C.E., 2006. Institutional isomorphism and the adoption
of information technology for supply chain management. Computers in Industry 57, 93-98.
209
Langley, C.J. Jr, Newton, B.F., Tyndall, G.R., 1999. Has the future of third-party logistics
already arrived? Supply Chain Management Review Autumn, 85-94.
Läpple, D., 1995. Güterverkehr. Logistik und Umwelt: Analysen und Konzepte zum
interregionalen und städtischen Verkehr. Verlag Ed. Sigma, Berlin.
Larson, P.D., Gammelgaard, B., 2001. Logistics in Denmark: A Survey of the Industry,
International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications 4, 191-206.
Lash, J., Wellington, F., 2007. Competitive Advantage on a Warming Planet. Harvard
Business Review 8, 94-102.
Lee, K.-H., 2011. Integrating carbon footprint into supply chain management: the case of
Hyundai Motor Company HMC in the automobile industry. Journal of Cleaner Production
19, 1216-1223.
Lee, K.-H., 2012a. Carbon accounting for supply chain management in the automobile
industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 83-93.
Lee, K.-H., Cheong, I.-M., 2011. Measuring a carbon footprint and environmental practice:
the case of Hyundai Motors Co. HMC. Industrial Management & Data Systems 111, 961978.
Lee, S. Y., 2012b. Corporate Carbon Strategies in Responding to Climate Change. Business
Strategy and the Environment 21, 33-48.
Legifrance, 2014. Décret n° 2011-1336 du 24 octobre 2011 relatif à l'information sur la
quantité de dioxyde de carbone émise à l'occasion d'une prestation de. transport.
(http://legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000024710173 [Retrieved 28
May 2012]).
Lenzen, M., Murray, J., Sack, F., Wiedmann, T., 2007. Shared producer and consumer
responsibility — Theory and practice. Ecological Economics 61, 27-42.
Léonardi, J., Baumgartner, M., 2004. CO2 efficiency in road freight transportation: Status
quo, measures and potential. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 9,
451-464.
Levitt, B., March, J. G., 1988. Organizational Learning. Annual Review of Sociology 14,
319-340.
Lillis, A. M., 1999. A framework for the analysis of interview data from multiple field research
sites. Accounting and Finance 39, 79-105.
Liu, Y., 2012. An empirical research of awareness, behavior and barriers to enact carbon
management of industrial firms in China. Science of the Total Environment 15, 1-8.
Lohmann, L., 2009. Toward a different debate in environmental accounting: The cases of
carbon and cost-benefit. Accounting, Organizations and Society 34, 499-534.
Lohmeier, M., Schablinski, S., Fähnrich, G., 2010. Accounting, Controlling und
Management von CO2-Emissionen - Messen und Bewerten ganzheitlicher Logistik am
Beispiel von Deutsche Post DHL.
In: Global Logistics – Umweltschutz und
Ressourceneffizienz. DVV Media Group, Deutscher Verkehrs Verlag, Hamburg, 74-91.
210
Lyles, M., 1998. Learning among Joint-Venture Sophisticated Firms. Management
International Review 28, 85-98.
Mangan, J., Lalwani, C., Gardner, B., 2004. Combining quantitative and qualitative
methodologies in logistics research. International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management 34, 565-578.
Matthews, H. S., Hendrickson, C. T., Weber, C.L., 2008. The Importance of Carbon
Footprint Estimation Boundaries. Environmental Science & Technology 42, 5839-5842.
Mayring, P., 1990. Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung. Beltz, Weinheim.
McKerlie, K., Knight, N., Thorpe, B., 2006. Advancing extended producer responsibility in
Canada. Journal of Cleaner Production 14, 616-628.
McKinnon, A. C., 2010a. Product-level carbon auditing of supply chains: Environmental
imperative or wasteful distraction? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management 40, 42-60.
McKinnon, A. C., Piecyk, M.I., 2012. Setting targets for reducing carbon emissions from
logistics: current practice and guiding principles. Carbon Management 3, 629-639.
McKinnon, A.C., 2003. Logistics and the environment. In: Henscher, D.A., Button, K.J. (eds.),
Handbook of transport and the environment. Elsevier, 665-685.
McKinnon, A.C., 2010b. Green Logistics: The carbon agenda. LogForum 6, 1-9.
McKinnon, A.C., 2011. Developing a decarbonisation strategy for logistics. Logistics
Research Network Conference. University of Newcastle, Newcastle.
Meffert, H., Kirchgeorg, M., 1992. Marktorientiertes Umweltmanagement. Schäffer-Poeschel
Verlag, Stuttgart.
Milne, M. J., Grubnic, S., 2011. Climate change accounting research: keeping it interesting
and different. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24, 948-977.
Mintzberg, H., 1979. The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, NJ.
Mirrlees, J.A., 1976. The Optimal Structure of Incentives and Authority within an
Organization. The Bell Journal of Economics 7, 105-131.
Mukherjee, A., Mitchell, W., Talbot, F.B., 2000. The impact of new manufacturing
requirements on production line productivity and quality at a focused factory. Journal of
Operations Management 18, 139-168.
Murphy, J., Gouldson, A., 2000. Environmental policy and industrial innovation: integrating
environment and economy through ecological modernisation. Geoforum 31, 33–44.
Murray, P., Donegan, K., 2003. Empirical linkages between firm competencies and
organisational learning. The Learning Organization 10, 51-62.
Okereke, C., 2007. An Exploration of Motivations, Drivers and Barriers to Carbon
Management: The UK FTSE 100. European Management Journal 25, 475-486.
Okereke, C., Wittneben, B., Bowen, F., 2012. Climate Change: Challenging Business,
Transforming Politics. Business & Society 51, 7-30.
211
Österreichische
Post
AG,
2013.
GRI-Nachhaltigkeitsbericht
2012.
(http://www.post.at/footer_ueber_uns_investor_relations_csr_nachhaltigkeit_nachhaltigkeits
bericht.php [Retrieved: 20 January 2014]).
Otley, D. T., 1980. The Contingency Theory of Management Accounting: Achievement and
Prognosis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 5, 413-428.
Ouchi, W.G., 1979. A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control
Mechanisms. Management Science 25, 833-848.
Pandey, D., Agrawal, M., Pandey, J. S., 2010. Carbon footprint: current methods of
estimation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 178, 135-160.
Pelletier, N., Ibarburu, M., Xin, H., 2013. A carbon footprint analysis of egg production and
processing supply chains in the Midwestern United States. Journal of Cleaner Production 54,
108-114.
Perego, A., Perotti, S., Mangiaracina, R., 2011. ICT for logistics and freight transportation: a
literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management 41, 457-483.
Persson, G., Virum, H., 2001. Growth Strategies for Logistics Service Providers: A Case
Study. International Journal of Logistics Management 12, 53-64.
Pfeffer, J., Salancik, G., 1978. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource
Dependence Perspective. Harper&Row, NewYork, NY.
Pfohl, H.C., 1993. Unternehmensführung und Logistik: Ökologische Herausforderungen an die
Logistik in den 90er Jahren. Erich Schmidt Verlag GmbH & Co., Berlin.
Pfohl, H.-C., 2010. Betriebswirtschaftliche Grundlagen. 8th edition. Springer Verlag, Berlin
Heidelberg.
Pfohl, H.-C., Stölzle, W., 1997. Planung und Kontrolle. 2nd edition. Verlag Franz Vahlen
GmbH, München.
Piecyk, M.I., McKinnon, A.C., 2010. Forecasting the carbon footprint of road freight
transport in 2020. International Journal of Production Economics 128, 31-42.
Pierson, P., 2000. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. The American
Political Science Review 94, 251–267.
Pladeck, M., 2005. Implementierung von Logistiksystemen: Ein Instrumentarium zur
situativen Gestaltung des Implementierungsmanagements bei der Modernisierung von
Logistiksystemen. Verlag DR. KOVAC, Hamburg.
Plassmann, K., Norton, A., Attarzadeh, N., Jensen, M.P., Brenton, P., Edwards-Jones, G.,
2010. Methodological complexities of product carbon footprinting: a sensitivity analysis of
key variables in a developing country context. Environmental Science & Policy 13, 393-405.
Popper, K., 2002[1935]. Logik der Forschung. Springer, Wien.
Prendergast, C., 1999. The Provision of Incentives in Firms. Journal of Economic Literature
37, 7-63.
212
Raffée, H., Abel, B., 1979. Aufgaben und aktuelle Tendenzen der Wissenschaftstheorie in den
Wirtschaftswissenschaften. In: Raffée, H., Abel, B. (eds.), Wissenschaftstheoretische
Grundfragen der Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Vahlen, München, 1-10.
Rankin, M., Windsor, C., Wahyuni, D., 2011. An investigation of voluntary corporate
greenhouse gas emissions reporting in a market governance system Australian evidence.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24, 1037-1070.
Rao, P., Holt, D., 2005. Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic
performance? International Journal of Operations & Production Management 25, 898-916.
Ratnatunga, J., 2008. Carbonomics: Strategic Management Accounting Issues. Journal of
Applied Management Accounting Research 6, 1-10.
Reihlen, M., 1997. Entwicklungsfähige Planungssysteme: Grundlagen, Konzepte und
Anwendungen zur Bewältigung von Innovationsproblemen. Deutscher Universitäts- Verlag,
Wiesbaden.
Revans, R.W., 1982. The Origins and Growth of Action Learning. Chartwell-Bratt, Bromley.
Richter, G., Riedl, C., Tiebler, P., 1997. Umweltdynamik im Transport. Verlag Paul Haupt,
Bern.
Rocha, M., Searcy, C., Karapetrovic, S., 2007. Integrating Sustainable Development into
Existing Management Systems. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 18, 8392.
Rogers, E.M., 2003. Diffusion of Innovation. 5th edition. Free Press, New York.
Rom, A., Rohde, C., 2007. Management accounting and integrated information systems: A
literature review. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 8, 40–68.
Rössl, O. M., 1990. Die Entwicklung eines Bezugsrahmens und seine Stellung im
Forschungsprozess. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft 40, 99-110.
Rühli, E., 1992. Koordination. In: Frese, E. (eds.), Handwörterbuch der Organisation.
Schaeffer-Poeschel Verlag, Stuttgart, 1164-1175.
Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., Lai, K., 2011. An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain
management literature. International Journal of Production Economics 130, 1-15.
Satolo, E. G., Calarge, F. A., Cauchick Miguel, P. A., 2013. Experience with an integrated
management system in a sugar and ethanol manufacturing unit: Possibilities and Limitations.
Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal 24, 710-725.
Schaltegger, S., Burritt, R. L., 2010. Sustainability accounting for companies: Catchphrase or
decision support for business leaders? Journal of World Business 45, 375-384.
Schaltegger, S., Burritt, R. L., Peterson, H., 2003. An Introduction to Corporate
Environmental Management: Striving for Sustainability. Greenleaf Publishing Limited,
Sheffield.
Schaltegger, S., Csutora, M., 2012. Carbon accounting for sustainability and management.
Status quo and challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 1-16.
Schaltegger, S., Sturm, A., 1998. Eco-efficiency through Eco-control. VDF, Zürich.
213
Schmidt, G., Wilhelm, W.E., 2000. Strategic, tactical and operational decisions in multinational logistics networks: A review and discussion of modelling issues. International
Journal of Production Research 38, 1501-1523.
Schnell, R., Hill, P.B., Esser, E., 2011. Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. 7th
edition. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München.
Schreyögg, G., 1995. Umwelt, Technologie und Organisationsstruktur: Eine Analyse des
kontingenztheoretischen Ansatzes. 3rd edition. Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern.
Schreyögg, G., 1998. Organisation: Grundlagen moderner Organisationsgestaltung. 2nd
edition. Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlage Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH, Wiesbaden.
Schreyögg, G., 2012. Grundlagen der Organisation: Basiswissen für Studium und Praxis.
Gabler Verlag / Springer Fachmedien, Wiesbaden.
Schweizerische Bundesbahnen (SBB), 2013. Geschäfts- und Nachhaltigkeitsbericht 2013.
(http://www.sbbcargo.com/content/dam/sbbcargo/de/medien/SBB_GBNB_2013_d.pdf
[Retrieved: 20 January 2014]).
Schweizerische Post AG, 2014. Nachhaltig handeln: In unsere Zukunft investieren.
(http://www.post.ch/post-startseite/post-konzern/post-engagement/post-engagementklimaschutz/post-nachhaltigkeitsverstaendnis.pdf [Retrieved: 20 January 2014]).
Selviaridis, K., Spring, M., 2007. Third party logistics: a literature review and research
agenda. International Journal of Logistics Management 18, 125-150.
Seuring, S. A., 2008. Assessing the rigor of case study research in supply chain management.
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 13, 128-137.
Siggelkow, N., 2007. Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal 50, 2024.
Sila, I., 2007. Examining the effects of contextual factors on TQM and performance through
the lens of organizational theories: An empirical study. Journal of Operations Management
25, 83-109.
Simpson, D., 2010. Use of supply relationships to recycle secondary materials. International
Journal of Production Research 48, 227–249.
Sink, H.L., Langley Jr.C., Gibson, B.J., 1996. Buyer observations of the US third-party
logistics market, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 26,
38-46.
Sinkula, J. M., 1994. Market Information Processing and Organizational Learning. Journal of
Marketing 58, 35-45.
Snow, C., Thomas, J.B., 1994. Field research methods in strategic management: contributions
to theory building and testing. Journal of Management Studies 3, 457-480.
Sousa, R., Voss, C.A., 2008. Contingency research in operations management practices.
Journal of Operations Management 26, 697-713.
Spelthahn, S., Schlossberger, U., Steger, U., 1993. Umweltbewusstes Transportmanagement.
Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern.
214
Stechemesser, K., Günther, E., 2012. Carbon accounting: a systematic literature review.
Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 17-38.
Stefansson, G., 2006. Collaborative logistics management and the role of third-party service
providers. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 36, 76-92.
Steger, U., 1992. Handbuch des Umweltmanagements – Anforderungs- und Leitungsprofile
von Unternehmen und Gesellschaft. C.H. Beck`sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, München.
Sternberg, H., Germann, T., Klaas-Wissing, T., 2013. Who controls the fleet? Initial insights
into road freight transport planning and control from an industrial network perspective.
International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications: A Leading Journal of Supply
Chain Management 16, 493-505.
Stevens, E., Dimitriadis, S., 2002. New service development through the lens of
organisational learning: evidence from longitudinal case studies. Journal of Business
Research 57, 1074-1084.
Stölzle, W., 1999. Industrial Relationships. R. Oldenbourg Verlag, München Wien.
Stuart, I., McCutcheon, D., Handfield, R., McLachlin, R., Samson, D., 2002. Effective case
research in operations management: a process perspective. Journal of Operations
Management 20, 419-433.
Sundarakani, B., de Souza, R., Goh, M., Wagner, A. M., Manikandan, S., 2010. Modeling
carbon footprints across the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics
128, 43-50.
Thyssen, C., 2010. Güterverkehrsunternehmen im Überblick. In: Stölzle, W., Fagagnini, H-P.
(eds.), Güterverkehr kompakt. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München, 19-33.
Tillema, S., 2005. Towards an integrated contingency framework for MAS sophistication:
Case studies on the scope of accounting instruments in Dutch power and gas companies.
Management Accounting Research 16, 101-129.
Töpfer, A., 2007. Betriebswirtschaftslehre - Anwendungs- und prozessorientierte Grundlagen.
2nd edition. Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.
Ubeda S., Arcelus, F.J., Faulin, J., 2011. Green logistics at Eroski: A case study. International
Journal of Production Economics 131, 44-51.
Ulrich, D., Barney, J.B., 1984. Perspectives in organizations-resource dependence, efficiency,
and population. Academy of Management Review 9, 471-481.
Ulrich, H., 1995. Von der Betriebswirtschaftslehre zur systemorientierten Managementlehre.
In: Wunderer, R. (eds.), Betriebswirtschaftslehre als Management-und Führungslehre. 3rd
edition. Schäffer Poeschel Verlag, Stuttgart, 161-178.
Vanek F.M., Morlok E.K., 2000. Improving the energy efficiency of freight in the United
States through commodity-based analysis: justification and implementation. Transportation
Research Part D: Transport and Environment 5, 11-29.
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N., Frohlich, M., 2002. Case research in operations management.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22, 195-219.
215
Wang, C. L., Ahmed, P. K., 2003. Organisational learning: a critical review. The Learning
Organization 10, 8-17.
Wehberg, G., 1995. Ökologieorientiertes Logistikmanagement. Betriebswirtschaftlicher
Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH, Wiesbaden.
Weinhofer, G., Hoffmann, V.H., 2010. Mitigating climate change - how do corporate
strategies differ? Business Strategy and the Environment 19, 77-89.
Wiedmann, T., Minx, J., 2007. A Definition of Carbon Footprint. In: Pertsova, C.C. (eds.),
Ecological Economics Research Trends. Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge NY, 1-11.
Williamson, O.E., 1981. The economics of organization: the transaction cost approach.
American Journal of Sociology 87, 548-577.
Wolf, C., Seuring, S., 2010. Environmental impacts as buying criteria for third party logistical
services. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 40, 84-102.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), World Resources
Institute (WRI), 2004. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and
Reporting Standard. (http://pdf.wri.org/ghg_protocol_2004.pdf [Retrieved: 20 December
2013]).
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), World Resources
Institute (WRI), 2011a. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Product Life Cycle Accounting and
Reporting Standard. (http://pdf.wri.org/ghgp_product_life_cycle_standard.pdf [Retrieved: 20
December 2013]).
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), World Resources
Institute (WRI), 2011b. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Corporate Value Chain Scope 3 Accounting and Reporting Standard.
(http://pdf.wri.org/ghgp_corporate_value_chain_scope_3_standard.pdf
[Retrieved:
20
December 2013]).
Wuyts, S., Stremersch, S., VanDenBulte, C., Franses, P.H., 2004. Vertical marketing
systems for complex products: a triadic perspective. Journal of Marketing Research 41, 479–
487.
Yin, R. K., 1981. The case Study Crises: Some Answer. Administrative Science Quarterly 26,
58-65.
Yin, R. K., 2003. Case study research: Design and methods. 3rd edition. Sage, Thousand Oaks,
CA.
Yuttitham, M., Gheewala, S. H., Chidthaisong, A., 2011. Carbon footprint of sugar produced
from sugarcane in eastern Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production 19, 2119-2127.
Zadek, H., Schulz, R., 2010. Methods for the Calculation of CO2 Emissions in Logistics
Activities. In: Dangelmaier, W. et al. (eds.), Advanced Manufacturing and Sustainable
Logistics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 263-268.
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J.,2007. The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green
supply chain practices and performance. International Journal of Production Research 45,
4333-4355.
216
Zutshi, A., Sohal, A.S., 2005. Integrated management system: The experiences of three
Australian organizations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 16, 211-232.
217
Appendix
Appendix A:
References (Analyzed books, N=10)
Baumgarten, H., Hidberg, C., Steger, U., 1996. Güterverkehrszentren und Umwelt. Verlag
Paul Haupt, Bern.
Baumgarten, H., Stabenau, H., Steger, U., Zentes, J., 1998. Qualitäts- und
Umweltmanagement logistischer Prozessketten. Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern.
Göpfert, I., Wehberg, G., 1995. Ökologieorientiertes Logistik-Marketing. W. Kohlhammer
GmbH, Stuttgart.
Läpple, D., 1995. Güterverkehr. Logistik und Umwelt: Analysen und Konzepte zum
interregionalen und städtischen Verkehr. Verlag Ed. Sigma, Berlin.
Meffert, H., Kirchgeorg, M., 1992. Marktorientiertes Umweltmanagement. Schäffer-Poeschel
Verlag, Stuttgart.
Pfohl, H.C., 1993. Unternehmensführung und Logistik: Ökologische Herausforderungen an die
Logistik in den 90er Jahren. Erich Schmidt Verlag GmbH & Co., Berlin.
Richter, G., Riedl, C., Tiebler, P., 1997. Umweltdynamik im Transport. Verlag Paul Haupt,
Bern.
Spelthahn, S., Schlossberger, U., Steger, U., 1993. Umweltbewusstes Transportmanagement.
Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern.
Steger, U., 1992. Handbuch des Umweltmanagements – Anforderungs- und Leitungsprofile
von Unternehmen und Gesellschaft. C.H. Beck`sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, München.
Wehberg, G., 1995. Ökologieorientiertes Logistikmanagement. Betriebswirtschaftlicher
Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH, Wiesbaden.
218
Appendix B:
References (Structured Literature Review – Analyzed Papers, N=96)
Ascui, F., Lovell, H., 2011. As frames collide: making sense of carbon accounting.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24, 978-999.
Ascui, F., Lovell, H., 2012. Carbon accounting and the construction of competence. Journal of
Cleaner Production 36, 48-59.
Baldo, G.L., Marino, M., Montani, M., Ryding, S., 2009. The carbon footprint measurement
toolkit for the EU Ecolabel. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14, 591596.
Berners-Lee, M., Howard, D.C., Moss, J., Kaivanto, K., Scott, W.A., 2011. Greenhouse gas
footprinting for small businesses – The use of input-output data. Science of the Total
Environment 409, 883-891.
Bowen, F., Wittneben, B., 2011. Carbon accounting: Negotiating accuracy, consistency and
certainty across organizational fields. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24,
1022-1036.
Brenton, P., Edwards-Jones, G., Jensen, M.F., 2009. Carbon Labelling and Low Income
Country Exports: A Review of the Development Issues. Development Policy Review 27,
243-267.
Browne, M., Allen, J., Rizet, C., 2006. Assessing transport energy consumption in two
product supply chains. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications: A
Leading Journal of Supply Chain Management 9, 237-252.
Burritt, R.L., Schaltegger, S., Zvezdov, D., 2011. Carbon Management Accounting:
Explaining Practice in Leading German Companies. Australian Accounting Review 21, 8098.
Busch, T., 2010. Corporate Carbon Performance Indicators Revisited. Journal of Industrial
Ecology 14, 374-377.
Busch, T., Hoffmann, V.H., 2007. Emerging carbon constraints for corporate risk
management. Ecological Economies 62, 518-528.
Busch, T., Hoffmann, V.H., 2011. How Hot Is Your Bottom Line? Linking Carbon and
Financial Performance. Business & Society 50, 233-265.
Carballo-Penela, A., Doménech, J. L., 2010. Managing the carbon footprint of products: the
contribution of the method composed of financial statements (MC3). The International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15, 962-969.
Cholette, S., Venkat, K., 2009. The energy and carbon intensity of wine distribution: A study
of logistical options for delivering wine to consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production 17,
1401-1414.
Chowdhury, G., 2010. Carbon footprint of the knowledge sector: what's the future? Journal of
Documentation 66, 934-946.
219
de Koning, A., Schowanek, D., Dewaele, J., Weisbrod, A., Guinée, J., 2010. Uncertainties in
a carbon footprint model for detergents; quantifying the confidence in a comparative result.
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15, 79-89.
Dormer, A., Donal, P., Finn, D.P., Ward, P., Cullen, J., 2013. Carbon footprint analysis in
plastics manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production 51, 133-141.
Downie, J., Stubbs, W., 2012. Corporate Carbon Strategies and Greenhouse Gas Emission
Assessments: The Implications of Scope 3 Emission Factor Selection. Business Strategy and
the Environment 21, 412-422.
Edwards, J.B., McKinnon, A.C., Cullinane, S.L., 2010. Comparative analysis of the carbon
footprints of conventional and online retailing: A last mile perspective. International Journal
of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 40, 103-123.
Edwards, J.B., McKinnon, A.C., Cullinane, S.L., 2011. Comparative carbon auditing of
conventional and online retail supply chains: a review of methodological issues. Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal 16, 57-63.
Edwards-Jones, G., Plassmann, K., York, E.H., Hounsome, B., Jones, D.L., Mila` i
Canals, L., 2009. Vulnerability of exporting nations to the development of a carbon label in
the United Kingdom. Environmental Science & Policy 12, 479-490.
Elhedhli, S., Merrick, R., 2012. Green supply chain network design to reduce carbon
emissions. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 17, 370-379.
Espinoza-Orias, N., Stichnothe, H., Azapagic, A., 2011. The carbon footprint of bread. The
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 16, 351-365.
Finkbeiner, M., 2009. Carbon footprinting—opportunities and threats. The international
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14, 91-95.
Flower, D.J.M., Sanjayan, J.G., 2007. Green House Gas Emissions due to Concrete
Manufacture. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12, 282-288.
Flysjö, A., Cederberg, C., Henriksson, M., Ledgard, S., 2011. How does co-product
handling affect the carbon footprint of milk? Case study of milk production in New Zealand
and Sweden. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 16, 420-430.
González-González, J.M., Zamora-Ramírez, C., 2013. Towards the consolidation of climate
change strategies in organizations: The case of Heineken Spain. International Journal of
Climate Change Strategies and Management 5, 6-20.
Guan, Y., Shao, C., Tian, X., Ju, M., 2013. Carbon footprint attributed to aluminum
substitution for copper in the Chinese indoor air conditioner industry. Journal of Cleaner
Production 51, 126-132.
Gunady, M. G. A., Biswas, W., Solah, V. A, James, A. P., 2012. Evaluating the global
warming potential of the fresh produce supply chain for strawberries, romaine/cos lettuces
(Lactuca sativa), and button mushrooms (Agaricus bisporus) in Western Australia using life
cycle assessment LCA. Journal of Cleaner Production 28, 81-87.
220
Halldórsson, Á., Kovács, G., 2010. The sustainable agenda and energy efficiency: Logistics
solutions and supply chains in times of climate change. International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management 40, 5-13.
Harris, I., Naim, M., Palmer, A., Potter, A., Mumford, C., 2011. Assessing the impact of
cost optimization based on infrastructure modelling on CO2 emissions. International Journal
of Production Economics 131, 313-321.
Hitchcock, T., 2012. Low carbon and green supply chains: the legal drivers and commercial
pressures. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 17, 98-101.
Hoffmann, V.H., Busch, T., 2008. Corporate Carbon Performance Indicators: Carbon
Intensity, Dependency, Exposure, and Risk. Journal of Industrial Ecology 12, 505-520.
Hopwood, A.G., 2009. Accounting and the environment. Accounting, Organizations and
Society 34, 433-439.
Hrasky, S., 2012. Carbon footprints and legitimation strategies: symbolism or action?
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 25, 174-198.
Hu, G., Cheng, T.C.E., Wang, S., 2011. Managing carbon footprints in inventory
management. International Journal of Production Economics 132, 178-185.
Huang, Y.A., Lenzen, M., Weber, C.L., Murray, J., Matthews, H.S., 2009. The role of
input-output analysis for the screening of corporate carbon footprints. Economic Systems
Research 21, 217-242.
Jensen, J.K., 2012. Product carbon footprint developments and gaps. International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 42, 338-354.
Jeswani, H.K., Wehrmeyer, W., Mulugetta, Y., 2008. How Warm Is the Corporate Response
to Climate Change? Evidence from Pakistan and the UK. Business Strategy and the
Environment 17, 46-60.
Kalenoja, H., Kallionpää, E., Rantalaa, J., 2011. Indicators of energy efficiency of supply
chains. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications: A Leading Journal of
Supply Chain Management 14, 77-95.
Kellner, F., Otto, A., 2012. Allocating CO2 emissions to shipments in road freight
transportation. Journal of Management Control 22, 451-479.
Kendall, A., Yuan, J., Brodt, S.B., 2013. Carbon footprint and air emissions inventories for
US honey production: case studies. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18,
392-400.
Kim, B., Neff, R., 2009. Measurement and communication of greenhouse gas emissions from
U.S. food consumption via carbon calculators. Ecological Economics 69, 186-196.
Lee, K.-H., 2011. Integrating carbon footprint into supply chain management: the case of
Hyundai Motor Company, HMC in the automobile industry. Journal of Cleaner Production
19, 1216-1223.
Lee, K.-H., 2012a. Carbon accounting for supply chain management in the automobile
industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 83-93.
221
Lee, K.-H., Cheong, I.-M., 2011. Measuring a carbon footprint and environmental practice:
the case of Hyundai Motors Co., HMC. Industrial Management & Data Systems 111, 961978.
Lee, S. Y., 2012b. Corporate Carbon Strategies in Responding to Climate Change. Business
Strategy and the Environment 21, 33-48.
Leonardi, J., Baumgartner, M., 2005. CO2 efficiency in road freight transportation: Status
quo, measures and potential. Transportation research. Part E, Logistics and transportation
review 9, 451-464.
Leonardi, J., Browne, M., 2010. A method for assessing the carbon footprint of maritime
freight transport: European case study and results. International Journal of Logistics
Research and Applications: A Leading Journal of Supply Chain Management 13, 349-358.
Liu, Y., 2012. An empirical research of awareness, behavior and barriers to enact carbon
management of industrial firms in China. Science of the Total Environment 425, 1-8.
Lodhia, S., 2011. The Australian National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act and its
implications for accounting practice and research: A mini-review. Journal of Accounting &
Organizational Change 7, 190-198.
Lohmann, L., 2007. Toward a different debate in environmental accounting: The cases of
carbon and cost-benefit. Accounting, Organizations and Society 34, 499-534.
Matthews, H.S., Hendrickson, C.T., Weber, C.L., 2008. The Importance of Carbon Footprint
Estimation Boundaries. Environmental Science & Technology 42, 5839-5842.
McKinnon, A. C., 2010. Product-level carbon auditing of supply chains: Environmental
imperative or wasteful distraction? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management 40, 42-60.
McKinnon, A. C., Piecyk, M.I., 2012. Setting targets for reducing carbon emissions from
logistics: current practice and guiding principles. Carbon Management 3, 629-639.
Milà i Canals, L., Cowell, S. J., Sim, S., Basson, L., 2007. Comparing Domestic versus
Imported Apples: A Focus on Energy Use. Environment Science Pollution Research 14,
338-344.
Milà i Canals, L., Sim, S., García-Suárez, T., Neuer, G., Herstein, K., Kerr, C.,
Rigarlsford, G., King, H., 2010. Estimating the greenhouse gas footprint of Knorr. The
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 16, 50-58.
Milne, M. J., Grubnic, S., 2011. Climate change accounting research: keeping it interesting
and different. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24, 948-977.
Murray, J., Wiedmann, T., Dey, C., 2011. Comment on “Corporate Carbon Performance
Indicators Revisited. Journal of Industrial Ecology 15, 158-163.
Nieuwenhuis, P., Beresford, Choi, A.K., 2012. Shipping or local production? CO2 impact of a
strategic decision: An automotive industry case study. International Journal of Production
Economics 140, 138-148.
Oglethorpe, D., Heron, G., 2010. Sensible operational choices for the climate change agenda.
The International Journal of Logistics Management 21, 538-557.
222
Okereke, C., 2007. An Exploration of Motivations, Drivers and Barriers to Carbon
Management: The UK FTSE 100. European Management Journal 25, 475-486.
Okereke, C., Wittneben, B., Bowen, F., 2012. Climate Change: Challenging Business,
Transforming Politics. Business & Society 51, 7-30.
Ozawa-Meida, L., Brockway, P., Letten, K., Davies, J., Fleming, P., 2011. Measuring
carbon performance in a UK University through a consumption-based carbon footprint: De
Montfort University case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 56, 185–198.
Pandey, D., Agrawal, M., Pandey, J.S., 2010. Carbon footprint: current methods of
estimation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 178, 135-160.
Pelletier, N., Ibarburu, M., Xin, H., 2013. A carbon footprint analysis of egg production and
processing supply chains in the Midwestern United States. Journal of Cleaner Production 54,
108-114.
Peters, G.P., 2010. Carbon footprints and embodied carbon at multiple scales. Environmental
Sustainability 2, 245-250.
Piecyk, M.I., McKinnon, A.C., 2010. Forecasting the carbon footprint of road freight
transport in 2020. International Journal of Production Economics 128, 31-42.
Pishgar-Komleh, S.H., Ghahderijani, M., Sefeedpari, P., 2012. Energy consumption and
CO2 emissions analysis of potato production based on different farm size levels in Iran.
Journal of Cleaner Production 33, 183-191.
Plassmann, K., Norton, A., Attarzadeh, N., Jensen, M.P., Brenton, P., Edwards-Jones, G.,
2010. Methodological complexities of product carbon footprinting: a sensitivity analysis of
key variables in a developing country context. Environmental Science & Policy 13, 393-405.
Quinteiro, P., Araújo, A., Cláudia Dias, A.C., Oliveira, B., Arroja, L., 2012. Allocation of
energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the production of earthenware ceramic
pieces. Journal of Cleaner Production 18, 14-21.
Rankin, M., Windsor, C., Wahyuni, D., 2011. An investigation of voluntary corporate
greenhouse gas emissions reporting in a market governance system Australian evidence.
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 24, 1037-1070.
Reap, J., Roman, F., Duncan, S., Bras, B., 2008a. A survey of unresolved problems in life
cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13, 290-300.
Reap, J., Roman, F., Duncan, S., Bras, B., 2008b. A survey of unresolved problems in life
cycle assessment Part 2: impact assessment and interpretation. International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment 13, 374-388.
Rizet, C., Browne, M., Cornélis, E., Léonardi, J., 2012. Assessing carbon footprint and
energy efficiency in competing supply chains: Review - Case studies and benchmarking.
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 17, 293-300.
Rizet, C., Cornélis, E., Browne, M., Léonardi, J., 2010. GHG emissions of supply chains
from different retail systems in Europe. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 61546164.
223
Rogers, M. M., Weber, W. L., 2011. Evaluating CO2 emissions and fatalities trade-offs in
truck transport. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 41,
750-767.
Röös, E., Sundberg, C., Hansson, P., 2010. Uncertainties in the carbon footprint of food
products: a case study on table potatoes. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
15, 478-488.
Röös, E., Sundberg, C., Hansson, P., 2011. Uncertainties in the carbon footprint of refined
wheat products: a case study on Swedish pasta. The International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment 16, 338-350.
Rugani, B., Vázquez-Rowe, I., Benedetto, G., Benetto, E., 2013. A comprehensive review of
carbon footprint analysis as an extended environmental indicator in the wine sector. Journal
of Cleaner Production 54, 61-77.
Schaltegger, S., Csutora, M., 2012. Carbon accounting for sustainability and management.
Status quo and challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 1-16.
Schmidt, M., 2009. Carbon accounting and carbon footprint – more than just diced results?
International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management 1, 19-30.
Schultz, K., Williamson, P., 2005. Gaining Competitive Advantage in a Carbon constrained
World: Strategies for European Business. European Management Journal 23, 383-391.
Scipionia, A., Manzardo, A., Mazzi, A., Mastrobuono, M., 2012. Monitoring the carbon
footprint of products: A methodological proposal. Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 94-101.
SETAC Europe LCA Steering Committee, 2008. Standardisation Efforts to Measure
Greenhouse Gases and 'Carbon Footprinting' for Products. The International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment 13, 455-466.
Sinden, G., 2009. The contribution of PAS 2050 to the evolution of international greenhouse
gas emission standards. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14, 195-203.
Soode, E., Weber-Blaschke, G., Richter, K., 2013. Comparison of product carbon footprint
standards with a case study on poinsettia (Euphorbia pulcherrima). The International Journal
of Life Cycle Assessment 18, 1280-1290.
Stechemesser, K., Guenther, E., 2012. Carbon accounting: a systematic literature review.
Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 17-38.
Sullivan, R., Gouldson, A., 2012. Does voluntary carbon reporting meet investors needs?
Journal of Cleaner Production 36, 60-67.
Sundarakani, B., de Souza, R., Goh, M., Wagner, S.M., Manikandan, S., 2010. Modelling
carbon footprints across the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics
128, 43-50.
Svanes, E., Aronsson, A.K.S., 2013. Carbon footprint of a Cavendish banana supply chain.
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18, 1450-1464.
Tsai, W.H., Shen, Y.S., Lee, P.L., Chen, H.C., Kuo, L., Huang, C.C., 2012. Integrating
information about the cost of carbon through activity-based costing. Journal of Cleaner
Production 36, 102-111.
224
Vázquez-Rowe, I., Villanueva-Rey, P., Mallo, J., De la Cerda, J.J., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo,
G., 2013, Carbon footprint of a multi-ingredient seafood product from a business-to-business
perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production 44, 200-210.
Weinhofer, G., Hoffmann, V.H., 2010. Mitigating Climate Change – How Do Corporate
Strategies Differ? Business Strategy and the Environment 19, 77-89.
Wells, J.R., Boucher, J.F., Laurent, A.B., Villeneuve, C., 2012. Carbon Footprint
Assessment of a Paperback Book. Journal of Industrial Ecology 16, 212-222.
Yuttitham, M., Gheewala, S. H., Chidthaisong, A., 2011, Carbon footprint of sugar produced
from sugarcane in eastern Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production 19, 2119-2127.
Ziegler, F., Winther, U., Hognes, E.S., Emanuelsson, A., Sund, V., Ellingsen, H., 2013. The
Carbon Footprint of Norwegian Seafood Products on the Global Seafood Market. Journal of
Industrial Ecology 17, 103-116.
225
Appendix C:
Topic
Accounting
journals
Environmental
journals
Paper Publications – Assignment to Journals
Journals
 Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal
 Accounting,
Organizations and
Society
 Australian Accounting
Review
 Journal of Accounting
& Organizational
Change
 Business Strategy and
the Environment
 Carbon Management
 Ecological Economics
 Environment Science
Pollution Research
 Environmental
Monitoring and
Assessment
 Environmental Science
& Policy
 Environmental Science
& Technology
 Environmental
Sustainability
 International Journal of
Climate Change
Strategies and
Management
 Journal of Cleaner
Production
 Journal of Industrial
Ecology
 The International
Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment
 Science of the Total
Environment
226
Paper
Ascui, F., Lovell, H., 2011; Bowen, F.,
Wittneben, B., 2011; Burritt, R. L.,
Schaltegger, S., Zvedzdov, D., 2011;
Hopwood, A. G., 2009; Hrasky, S., 2012;
Lodhia, S., 2011; Lohmann, L., 2007; Milne,
M. J., Grubnic, S., 2011; Rankin, M.,
Windsor, C., Wahyuni, D., 2011
N=9
Ascui, F., Lovell, H., 2012; Baldo, G. L.,
Marino, M., Montani, M., Ryding, S., 2009;
Berners-Lee, M., Howard, D.C., Moss, J.,
Kaivanto, K., Scott, W.A., 2011; Busch, T.,
2010; Busch, T.; Hoffmann, V., 2007;
Carballo-Penela, A., Doménech, J. L., 2010;
Cholette, S., Venkat, K., 2009; de Koning, A.,
Schowanek, D., Dewaele, J., Weisbrod, A.,
Guinée, J., 2010; Dormer, A., Donal P., Finn,
D. P., Ward, P., Cullen, J., 2013; Downie, J.,
Stubbs, W., 2012;
Edwards-Jones, G.,
Plassmann, K., York, E.H., Hounsome, B.,
Jones, D.L., Mila` i Canals, L., 2009;
Espinoza-Orias, N., Stichnothe, H., Azapagic,
A., 2011; Finkbeiner, M., 2009; Flower, D. J.
M., Sanjayan, J. G., 2007; Flysjö, A.,
Cederberg, C., Henriksson, M., Ledgard, S.,
2011; González-González, J.M., ZamoraRamírez, C., 2013; Guan, Y., Shao, C, Tianb,
X., Ju, M., 2013; Gunady, M. G. A., Biswas,
W., Solah, V. A, James, A. P., 2012;
Hoffmann, V., Busch, T., 2008; Jeswani, H.
K., Wehrmeyer, W., Mulugetta, Y., 2008;
Kendall, A., Yuan, J, Brodt, S. B., 2013; Kim,
B., Neff, R., 2009; Lee, K.-H., 2011; Lee, K.
H., 2012a; Lee, S. Y., 2012; Liu, Y., 2012b;
Matthews, H. S., Hendrickson, C. T., Weber,
C. L., 2008; McKinnon, A. C. , Piecyk, M.I.,
2012; Milà i Canals, L., Cowell, S. J., Sim, S.,
Basson, L., 2007; Milà i Canals, L., Sim, S.,
García-Suárez, T., Neuer, G., Herstein, K.,
Kerr, C., Rigarlsford, G., King, H., 2010;
Murray, J., Wiedmann, T., Dey, C., 2011;
Ozawa-Meida, L., Brockway, P., Letten, K.,
Davies, J., Fleming, P., 2011; Pandey, D.,
Agrawal, M., Pandey, J. S., 2010; Pelletier,
N., Ibarburu, M., Xin, H., 2013; Peters, G. P.,
2010; Pishgar-Komleh, S.H., Ghahderijani,
M., Sefeedpari, P. , 2012; Plassmann, K.,
Norton, A., Attarzadeh, N., Jensen, M.P.,
Brenton, P., Edwards-Jones, G., 2010;
Quinteiro, P., Araújo, A., Cláudia Dias, A. C.,
Oliveira, B., Arroja, L., 2012; Reap, J.,
Roman, F., Duncan, S., Bras, B., 2008a;
Reap, J., Roman, F., Duncan, S., Bras, B.,
2008b; Röös, E., Sundberg, C., Hansson, P.,
2010; Röös, E., Sundberg, C., Hansson, P.,
2011; Rugani, B, Vázquez-Rowe, I.,
Benedetto, G., Benetto, E., 2013; Schaltegger,
S., Csutora, M., 2012; Schmidt, M., 2009;
Scipionia, A., Manzardo, A., Mazzi, A.,
Mastrobuono, M., 2012; SETAC Europe
LCA Steering Committee, 2008; Sinden, G.,
2009; Stechemesser, K., Guenther, E., 2012;
Soode, E., Weber-Blaschke, G., Richter, K.,
2013; Sullivan, R., Gouldson, A., 2012;
Sundarakani, B., de Souza, R., Goh, M.,
Wagner, S. M., Manikandan, S., 2010;
Svanes, E., Anna K. S. Aronsson, A. K. S.,
2013; Tsai, W.H., Shen, Y.S., Lee, P.L., HuiChiao Chen, H.C., Kuo, L. Huang, C.C.,
2012; Vázquez-Rowe, I., Villanueva-Rey, P.,
Mallo, J., De la Cerda, J. J., Moreira, M. T.,
Feijoo, G., 2013; Weinhofer, G., Hoffmann,
V. H., 2010; Wells, J.R., Boucher, J. F.,
Laurent, A. B., Villeneuve, C., 2012;
Yuttitham,
M.,
Gheewala,
S.
H.,
Chidthaisong, A., 2011; Ziegler, F., Winther,
U., Hognes, E. S., Emanuelsson, A., Sund, V.
and Ellingsen, H., 2013
N= 59
227
Supply Chain
Management
journals
Transport and
Logistics journals
Other journals
 International Journal of
Logistics Research and
Applications: A Leading
Journal of Supply Chain
Management
 Supply Chain
Management: An
International Journal
 International Journal of
Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management
 The International
Journal of Logistics
Management
 Transportation research.
Part D, Transport and
environment
 Transportation research.
Part E, Logistics and
transportation review
 Business & Society
 Development Policy
Review
 Economic Systems
Research
 European Management
Journal
 Industrial Management
& Data Systems
 International Journal of
Production Economics
 Journal of
Documentation
 Journal of Management
Control
 Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences
Browne, M., Allen, J., Rizet, C., 2006;
Edwards, J., McKinnon, A. C., Cullinane,
S.L., 2011; Hitchcock, T., 2012; Kalenoja, H.,
Kallionpää, E., Rantalaa, J., 2011; Leonardi,
J., Browne, M., 2010
N=5
Edwards, J. B., McKinnon, A. C., Cullinane,
S.L., 2010; Elhedhli, S., Merrick, R.,, 2012;
Halldórsson, Á., Kovács, G., 2010; Jensen, J.
K., 2012; Leonardi, J., Baumgartner, M.,
2005; McKinnon, A. C., 2010; Oglethorpe,
D., Heron, G., 2010; Rizet, C., Browne, M.,
Cornélis, E. Léonardi, J., 2012; Rogers, M.
M., Weber, W. L. , 2011
N=9
Brenton, P, Edwards-Jones, G., Jensen, M. F.,
2009; Busch, T.; Hoffmann, V., 2011;
Chowdhury, G., 2010; Harris, I., Naim, M.,
Palmer, A., Potter, A., Mumford, C., 2011;
Huang, Y. A., Lenzen, M., Weber, C.L.,
Murray J., Matthews, H. S., 2009; Hu, G.,
Cheng, T.C.E., Wang, S., 2011; Kellner, F.;
Otto, A., 2012; Lee, K.-H., Cheong, I.-M.,
2011; Nieuwenhuis, P., Beresford, Choi,
A.K., 2012; Okereke, C., 2007; Okereke, C.,
Wittneben, B., Bowen, F., 2012; Piecyk, M.
I., McKinnon, A. C. , 2010; Rizet, C.,
Cornélis, E., Browne, M., Léonardi, J., 2010;
Schultz, K., Williamson, P., 2005
N=14
Table 22: Assignment to journals.
228
Appendix D:
Paper Publications – Assignment to Content and Methodology
Content
Author
Total Number
Ascui, F.,
Lovell, H., 2011
Ascui, F.,
Lovell, H., 2012
Baldo, G. L.,
Marino, M.,
Montani, M.,
Ryding, S.,
2009
Berners-Lee,
M., Howard,
D.C., Moss, J.,
Kaivanto, K.,
Scott, W.A.,
2011
Bowen, F.,
Wittneben, B.,
2011
Brenton, P,
Edwards-Jones,
G., Jensen, M.
F., 2009
Browne, M.,
Allen, J.,
Rizet, C., 2006
Burritt, R. L.,
Schaltegger, S.,
Zvezdov, D.,
2011
Busch, T., 2010
Busch, T.,
Hoffmann, V.
H., 2007
Busch, T.,
Hoffmann, V.
H., 2011
Carballo-Penela,
A.,
Doménech, J.
L., 2010
Cholette, S.,
Venkat, K.,
2009
Chowdhury, G.,
2010
de Koning, A.,
Schowanek, D.,
Carbon
Management
Carbon
Accounting
General
15
15
Methodology
Carbon
Accounting
(Company
Level
12
Carbon
Accounting
(Supply
Chain
Level)
54
Case
Studies
Conceptual /
Theory
Literature
Review
Model
Empirical Data
Analysis
43
28
5
10
10
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
229
X
X
Dewaele, J.,
Weisbrod, A.,
Guinée, J., 2010
Dormer, A.,
Donal, P., Finn,
D. P., Ward, P.,
Cullen, J., 2013
Downie, J.,
Stubbs, W.,
2012
Edwards, J. B.,
McKinnon, A.
C., Cullinane, S.
L., 2010
Edwards, J.,
McKinnon, A.,
Cullinane, S.,
2011
Edwards-Jones,
G., Plassmann,
K., York, E. H.,
Hounsome, B.,
Jones, D.L.,
Mila` i Canals,
L., 2009
Elhedhli, S.,
Merrick, R.,
2012
Espinoza-Orias,
N., Stichnothe,
H., Azapagic,
A., 2011
Finkbeiner, M.,
2009
Flower, D. J.
M.,
Sanjayan, J. G.,
2007
Flysjö, A.,
Cederberg, C.,
Henriksson, M.,
Ledgard, S.,
2011
GonzálezGonzález, J. M.,
ZamoraRamírez, C.,
2013
Guan, Y., Shao,
C, Tian, X., Ju,
M., 2013
Gunady,
M.G.A.,
Biswas, W.,
Solah, V. A.
James, A. P.,
2012
Halldórsson, Á.,
Kovács, G.,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
230
X
2010
Harris, I., Naim,
M., Palmer, A.,
Potter, A.,
Mumford, C.,
2011
Hitchcock, T.,
2012
Hoffmann, V.
H., Busch, T.,
2008
Hopwood, A.
G., 2009
Hrasky, S., 2012
Hu, G., Cheng,
T.C.E.,
Wang, S., 2011
Huang, Y. A.,
Lenzen, M.,
Weber, C.L.,
Murray J.,
Matthews, H.
S., 2009
Jensen, J. K.,
2012
Jeswani, H. K.,
Wehrmeyer, W.,
Mulugetta, Y.,
2008
Kalenoja, H.,
Kallionpää, E.,
Rantalaa, J.,
2011
Kellner, F.,
Otto, A., 2012
Kendall, A.,
Yuan, J, Brodt,
S. B., 2013
Kim, B., Neff,
R., 2009
Lee, K. H., 2011
Lee, K. H.,
2012a
Lee, K.-H.,
Cheong, I.-M.,
2011
Lee, Y. S.,
2012b
Leonardi, J.,
Baumgartner,
M., 2010
Leonardi, J.,
Browne, M.,
2005
Liu, Y., 2012
Lodhia, S., 2011
Lohmann, 2007
Matthews, H.S.,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
231
X
Hendrickson,
C.T., Weber,
C.L., 2008
McKinnon, A.
C. , Piecyk,
M.I., 2012
McKinnon, A.,
2010
Milà i Canals,
L., Cowell, S. J.,
Sim, S., Basson,
L., 2010
Milà i Canals,
L., Sim, S.,
García-Suárez,
T., Neuer, G.,
Herstein, K.,
Kerr, C.,
Rigarlsford, G.,
King, H., 2007
Milne, M. J.,
Grubnic, S.,
2011
Murray, J.,
Wiedmann, T.,
Dey, C., 2011
Nieuwenhuis,
P., Beresford,
Choi, A.K. ,
2012
Oglethorpe, D.,
Heron, G., 2010
Okereke, C.,
2007
Okereke,
C.,
Wittneben, B.,
Bowen, F., 2012
Ozawa-Meida,
L., Brockway,
P., Letten, K.,
Davies, J.,
Fleming, P.,
2011
Pandey, D.,
Agrawal, M.,
Pandey, J. S.,
2010
Pelletier, N.,
Ibarburu,
M.,Xin, H.,
2013
Peters, G. P.,
2010
Piecyk, M. I.,
McKinnon, A.
C., 2010
PishgarKomleh, S.H.,
Ghahderijani,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
232
X
X
M., Sefeedpari,
P., 2012
Plassmann, K.,
Norton, A.,
Attarzadeh, N.,
Jensen, M.P.,
Brenton, P.,
Edwards-Jones,
G., 2010
Quinteiro, P.,
Araújo, A.,
Dias, A. C.,
Oliveira, B.,
Arroja, L., 2012
Rankin, M.,
Windsor, C.,
Wahyuni; D.,
2011
Reap, J.,
Roman, F.,
Duncan, S.,
Bras, B., 2008a
Reap, J.,
Roman, F.,
Duncan, S.,
Bras, B., 2008b
Rizet, C.,
Browne, M.,
Cornelis, E.,
Leonardi, J.,
2010
Rizet, C.,
Cornêlis, E.,
Browne, M.,
Lêonardi, J.,
2012
Rogers, M. M.,
Weber, W. L.,
2011
Röös, E.,
Sundberg, C.,
Hansson, P.-A.,
2010
Röös, E.,
Sundberg, C.,
Hansson, P.-A.,
2011
Rugani, B,
Vázquez-Rowe,
I., Benedetto,
G., Benetto, E.,
2013
Schaltegger, S.,
Csutora, M.,
2012
Schmidt, M.,
2009
Schultz, K.,
Williamson, P.,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
233
2005
Scipionia, A.,
Manzardo, A.,
Mazzia, A.,
Mastrobuono,
M., 2012
SETAC Europe
LCA Steering
Committee,
2008
Sinden, G.,
2009
Soode, E.,
WeberBlaschke, G.,
Richter, K.,
2013
Stechemesser,
K., Guenther,
E., 2012
Sullivan, R.,
Gouldson, A.,
2012
Sundarakani, B.,
de Souza, R.,
Goh, M.,
Wagner, S. M.,
Manikandan, S.,
2010
Svanes, E.,
Anna K. S.
Aronsson, A. K.
S., 2013
Tsai, W.H.,
Shen, Y.S., Lee,
P.L., Hui-Chiao
Chen, H.C.,
Kuo, L. Huang,
C.C., 2012
Vázquez-Rowe,
I., VillanuevaRey, P., Mallo,
J., De la Cerda,
J. J., Moreira,
M. T., Feijoo,
G., 2013
Weinhofer, G.,
Hoffmann, V.
H., 2010
Wells, J.R.,
Boucher, J.F.,
Laurent, A.B.,
Villeneuve, C.,
2012
Yuttitham, M.,
Gheewala, S.
H.,
Chidthaisong,
A., 2011
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
234
Ziegler, F.,
Winther, U.,
Hognes, E. S.,
Emanuelsson,
A., Sund, V. and
Ellingsen, H.,
2013
X
X
Table 23: Assignment to content and methodology.
235
Appendix E:
Introduction of Further Theories
Theory
Diffusion of
innovation
theory
Short introduction
In general, the diffusion of innovation theory describes the spread of innovation through
communication in a social system with a strong focus on the process through which
innovation is initiated (Rogers, 2003). Thereby, the need for innovation is fostered through
pressure from outside a company to address a specific organizational or technological
challenge (Kraatz and Zajac, 1996). This pressure may evolve out of customer requests or to
meet requirements from regulatory recommendations (Zhu et al., 2007).
Ecological
modernization
theory
Ecological modernization theory concentrates on the joint attempt to protect the environment
through innovation and technological achievements and regulations by decision makers
(Jänicke, 2008). In the first dimension, the focus is on ecological regulations that serve as a
driver for companies to enhance their ecological performance. The second dimension is on
technological innovation that assists in overcoming barriers to improved environmental
performance (Murphy and Gouldson, 2000).
Institutional
theory
Institutional theory studies how a company is influenced by external pressure when
implementing an internal practice (Lai et al., 2006). Such analysis is particularly suitable for
issues in the field of sustainability driven by external pressure (Jennings and Zandbergen,
1995). These pressures may be differentiated among coercive, normative, and mimetic
mechanisms, all aligned toward an isomorphic organization (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983).
Path
dependency
theory
Path dependency theory points out that choices in a company are systematically influenced by
prior decisions. A path, once followed, limits the options for change, indicating that selecting
a specific program might hinder the decision to engage in other options. The theory
specifically addresses the mechanisms that produce path dependency, namely positive
feedback (Pierson, 2000).
Resource
dependence
theory
Resource dependence theory refers to a strong interdependency of companies in terms of
external resources. To improve performance, companies should collaborate rather than
seeking short-term benefits for their own advantage (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). The theory
states that companies always depend on resources provided by other companies to be
competitive and need to carefully manage these relationships (Ulrich and Barney, 1984).
Social
embeddedness
theory
Social embeddedness theory points to the embeddedness of companies in strong networks.
The theory states that partner companies regularly play a significant role when attempting to
implement new task fields that require information from supply chain partners, for example,
data. Social relationships play a crucial role because embeddedness is characterized as a
process (Sarkis et al., 2010).
Social network
theory
Social network theory describes innovation in a company that results from interactions
through social relationships, such as between organizations or entities in an organization
(Jones et al., 1997). Connelly et al. (2011) introduced social network theory as a promising
236
attempt to explain developments in the general field of sustainability. Thereby, companies are
assumed to support their decisions through information gained from interactions within their
social system (Wuyts et al., 2004). A strong link exists between the network structure and the
diffusion of innovative action among companies. In a strong network, the likelihood for
innovation increases, driven by significant pressure from external forces (Sarkis et al., 2011).
Stakeholder
theory
Stakeholder theory states that a company`s success or failure always affects individuals or
groups both within and outside a company, and points out that a company bears responsibility
for itself and for a large number of associated actors. These stakeholders are in a position to
put pressure on a firm with the objective of enhancing performance (Delmas, 2001), which
strongly influences organizational decisions for or against changes in specific practices
(Sarkis et al., 2011).
Table 24: Introduction of further theories.
237
Appendix F:
Survey
I. Company-specific Information
1. General Information
(Company name, street, postcode, town, name of contact(s), phone, e-mail, …)
Please attach the business card(s) of the
responsible contacts here
Please attach the business card(s) of the
responsible contacts here
2. How many sites does your company have?
(excl. sales offices)
Germany
________
Austria
________
Switzerland
________
Benelux
________
France
________
Spain
________
Great Britain
________
Italy
________
Poland
________
Czech Republic
________
Hungary
________
Croatia
________
Other Europe
________
Other World
________
3. In what market segments does your company operate?
(select all that apply)
Service-related
Goods-related
Full loads……………… ..................................
Agricultural products……………………….
Partial loads…………. ..................................
Coal/ores………………
Groupage freight……. ..................................
Mineral oil products….
Courier-/express-/parcel services ....................
Building materials…… .................................
Dangerous goods…… ..................................
Fertilizer……………….
Temperature-controlled goods .........................
Chemical products…....
Tank and silo transports
Foodstuffs…………… .................................
Textiles………………. .................................
Pharmaceuticals………………. ......................
Machinery……………. .................................
Electronic engineering…………………….
Motor vehicles………. .................................
Furniture/removals… .................................
Trade fair/works of art .................................
Other: __________________
Other: ___________________
Other: __________________
Other: ___________________
238
4. What was your turnover for the last financial year?
between EUR 1 and 15 million ..........................
between EUR 15 and 30 million ........................
between EUR 30 and 50 million ........................
What percentage of this turnover is generated
by road freight operations? ________________
between EUR 50 and 75 million ........................
between EUR 75 and 100 million ......................
more than EUR 100 million ...............................
____________________________%
5. How important are the following logistics services in generating turnover for your company?
Not
important
Extremely
important
Local goods traffic ...........................................................
National long-distance goods traffic ................................
International long-distance goods traffic .........................
Partial loads/groupage freight ..........................................
Packing/order preparation ................................................
Combined road/rail freight traffic ....................................
Air freight ........................................................................
Sea freight ........................................................................
Rail freight .......................................................................
Inland waterways freight..................................................
Warehousing/transshipment/logistics ..............................
Contract logistics .............................................................
Sale/renting of logistics real estate...................................
Other:_______________________ .................................
Other:_______________________ .................................
II. Staff
6. How many people are currently employed by your company?
Number of employees:
________
thereof truck drivers
thereof bookers:
thereof warehousemen:
thereof commercial employees:
________
________
________
________
Number of trainees:
________
thereof truck drivers:
thereof bookers:
thereof warehousemen:
thereof commercial employees:
________
________
________
________
What is the average number of trainee takeovers during your last three financial years?
239
________%
7. How many employees of your permanent staff left and joined your company last year?
Total:
approx. ________ New hires, thereof employees over 50 years
________
approx. ________ Leavers, thereof employees over 50 years
________
Truck drivers:
approx. ________ New hires, thereof employees over 50 years
________
approx. ________ Leavers, thereof employees over 50 years
________
Bookers:
approx. ________ New hires, thereof employees over 50 years
________
approx. ________ Leavers, thereof employees over 50 years
________
Warehousemen:
approx. ________ New hires, thereof employees over 50 years
________
approx. ________ Leavers, thereof employees over 50 years
________
Commercial employees:
approx. ________ New hires, thereof employees over 50 years
________
approx. ________ Leavers, thereof employees over 50 years
________
8. How has the topic “employee” ̕been integrated in the corporate culture/values of your company (e.g., mission
statement)?
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
9. Does your company offer any special incentive or driver motivation programs? (multiple responses allowed)
We offer annual working time accounts .....................................................................................................
"Drivers recruit drivers".............................................................................................................................
We nominate a driver of the month/year ...................................................................................................
We nominate a booker of the month/year ..................................................................................................
Staff is awarded bonuses based on annual profits......................................................................................
We hold regular team events (for example, company celebrations) ..........................................................
Bonuses are awarded when cost/quality targets are achieved ....................................................................
Bonuses are awarded to drivers not involved in any accidents ..................................................................
Additionally, we offer these programs:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
No, we do not have any special programs ..................................................................................................
240
10. Does your company offer professional training/on-the-job training?
If yes, which staff groups take part? (multiple responses allowed)
Management ......................................................................................................
Middle management ..........................................................................................
Young executives...............................................................................................
Truck drivers......................................................................................................
Bookers ..............................................................................................................
Warehousemen ..................................................................................................
Commercial employees......................................................................................
Amount
[per year]
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
Others: __________________________________ ...........................................
________
11. Do you track the rate of illness in your company?
Yes
No
If yes, what is the average rate of illness during the last three financial years?
________ % rate of illness
How do you determine the rate of illness?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
III. Volume of Transport
12. How many consignments did your company conduct in the last financial year?
_____________ consignments
_____________ % share processed by service partners
How is the term consignment defined in your company?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
What share of these consignments was transported by road?
approx. _____________ consignments
approx. _____________ %
What share of these consignments was transported by rail?
approx. _____________ consignments
approx. _____________ %
241
What share of these consignments was transported by intermodal transport?
approx. _____________ consignments
approx. _____________ %
13. How many tonnes did your company transport in the last financial year?
_____________ thousand tonnes
_____________ % share processed by service partners
What share was transported by road?
approx. _____________ thousand tonnes
approx. _____________ %
What share of these consignments was transported by rail?
approx. _____________ consignments
approx. _____________ %
What share was transported by intermodal transport?
approx. _____________ thousand tonnes
approx. _____________ %
14. How many service partners are currently employed by your company?
__________ service partners
How many employees deploy their service partners for the execution of their orders?
__________ employees
15. Do you know how much of your average road freight capacity you did use in the last fiscal year?
Yes
No
Average capacity was approx. _________% ..............................................................................
How is capacity utilization measured in your company?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
IV. Vehicle fleet information
16. How many vehicles does your currently used truck fleet contain?
Overall quantity of deployed trucks*: ______
≤3,5t
≤7,5t
Number of own trucks (incl. leased
trucks)
Number of trucks by permanent deployed
service partners
Number of trucks = Number of motor tractors
242
≤12t
≤16t
>16t
How many deployed trucks have a hybrid drive?
________
How many deployed trucks use LNG/LPG/CNG?
________
Standards of deployed trucks:
Trucks of permanent deployed service
partners
Own trucks (incl. leased trucks)
EURO 2
Number of trucks__________________
Number of trucks__________________
EURO 3
Number of trucks__________________
Number of trucks__________________
Number of trucks__________________
Number of trucks__________________
thereof with SPF*_______________
thereof with SPF*_______________
thereof with AdBlue®**____________
thereof with AdBlue®**____________
EURO 4
Number of trucks__________________
EURO 5
Number of trucks__________________
thereof with AdBlue®**____________
thereof with AdBlue®**____________
EURO EEV***
Number of trucks__________________
Number of trucks__________________
EURO 6
Number of trucks__________________
Number of trucks__________________
* SPF = Soot particulate filter, **AdBlue® = SCR-Diesel-technology – diesel fuel additives, ***EEV=Enhanced Environmentally
Friendly Vehicle
17. How many kilometers did the trucks used by your company cover on average in the last financial year?
_____________ thousand km
≤3,5t
≤7,5t
≤12t
≤16t
Mileage of own trucks (incl. leased
trucks) in thousand km
Mileage of trucks by permanent
deployed service partners in
thousand km
Thereof empty vehicle kilometers:
approx. _____________ thousand km
approx. _____________ %
How is the term “empty run” defined in your company?
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
243
>16t
18. How old is the fleet of trucks that you use on a day-to-day basis?
average:
_____ years
oldest truck:
_____ years
newest truck:
_____ months / years
19. How much total fuel did you need in the last financial year for the journeys made by your trucks?
Fuel type
Total amount of fuel consumption
in the last financial year by own
trucks (in liters)
Diesel
_________________________
_________________________
Biodiesel
_________________________
_________________________
Vegetable Oil
_________________________
_________________________
AdBlue®
_________________________
_________________________
LPG (liquefied gas)
_________________________
_________________________
CNG (compressed gas)
_________________________
_________________________
Other:_________________
_________________________
_________________________
Total amount of fuel consumption
in the last financial year by the
truck fleet of service partners,
under your responsibility (in liters)
Total amount of fuel consumption subdivided into vehicle categories:
≤3,5t
≤7,5t
≤12t
≤16t
>16t
Fuel consumption of own trucks (incl.
leased trucks) in liters
Fuel consumption of trucks by permanent
deployed service partners in liters
On what basis are the fuel consumption figures calculated for the permanently deployed trucks of your service
partners?
Actual fuel consumption ............................................................................................................
Imputed fuel consumption ..........................................................................................................
Not known .................................................................................................................................
20. Do you keep accident statistics?
Yes
No
If so, how many accidents—excluding shunting accidents—did you record in the last financial year that were caused by
your vehicles (including trucks operating on behalf of your company)?
less than 10 accidents ..............................
less than 30 accidents ................................
less than 50 accidents ..............................
50 or more accidents..................................
Exact number of accidents (optional statement): _____________________________
244
V. Efforts in the field of sustainability
21. Do you measure the eco performance of your company? (Economic success, environmental sustainability
and social issues)?
Yes
No
If so, what are the criteria?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
22. Are you asked by the shipper for a sustainable commitment?
Yes
No
If so, please mention the requirements the shipper asked for (e.g., reporting of CO2 emissions):
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
23. Are you requiring sustainable commitment from your subcontractors and your cooperation partners?
Yes
No
a) If so, please name the three most important requirements that you are demanding from your subcontractors and
cooperation partners:
______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
245
b) In terms of your requirements: With what measurements do you demand a sustainable commitment from
your subcontractors and your cooperation partners?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
c) In terms of measurements and requirements: How does your company check the compliance with the
requirements of your subcontractors and cooperation partners?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
24. Does your company create a sustainability report?
Yes
No
If so, how frequently? _____________________ years
On which basis do you prepare your sustainability report?
Global Reporting Initiative (common standard for the preparation
of a sustainability report) ................................. ……………………
Own guidelines…………………………………………………
Other:________________________________________
25. Does your company calculate any CO2 emission indicators?
Yes
No
If so, since when does your company calculate carbon emissions?
___________ Month / Year
If so, at which granularity are CO2 indicators in your company being calculated?
CO2 emissions absolute (entire organization/enterprise) ...................................................................
CO2 emissions per functional area (for example, transport, transshipment) .......................................
CO2 emissions per site ........................................................................................................................
CO2 emissions per vehicle group .......................................................................................................
CO2 emissions per transport relation .................................................................................................
CO2 emissions per client ....................................................................................................................
CO2 emissions per consignment .........................................................................................................
CO2 emissions per package ...............................................................................................................
Other:_________________________________________ .................................................................
246
26. What measures do you take at your company's locations and in the area of transport to improve energy
efficiency and environmental protection?
Transport
Environment-oriented modal split ........................................................................................................
Use of telematic solutions to check fuel consumption...........................................................................
Use of telematic solutions to optimize routing ......................................................................................
Steady modernization of vehicle fleet ..................................................................................................
Highest EURO norms ...........................................................................................................................
Driver training beyond law regulations ................................................................................................
Avoidance of traffic/bundling of transports...........................................................................................
Optimization of cargo space utilization ................................................................................................
Use of ecological packages/auxiliary packaging materials....................................................................
Routing .................................................................................................................................................
Use of fuel-saving tires ..........................................................................................................................
Continuous observation of tire pressure ................................................................................................
Other:_________________________________________ ...................................................................
Other:_________________________________________ ...................................................................
Locations/storage
Use of energy-saving lamps...................................................................................................................
Use of alternative energy .......................................................................................................................
Renewal of heating systems...................................................................................................................
Renewal of air conditioning systems .....................................................................................................
Wastewater treatment ............................................................................................................................
Energy retrieval ....................................................................................................................................
Other:________________________________________ ....................................................................
Please list detailed actions below:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
247
27. What measures does your company take to guarantee and improve quality? (Tick all that apply)
We measure our delivery time/delivery reliability..........................................................................
________% of our consignments arrive on time, meaning
within the period the consignee has been quoted
How do you measure delivery time and delivery reliability:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
We carry out regular internal quality audits.......................................................................................
We carry out regular customer surveys..............................................................................................
We are certified to _________________________ ...........................................................................
We are environmental certified to _______________ ......................................................................
We operate a bonus-based company suggestion scheme ...................................................................
We offer online tracking and tracing (Track & Trace) ......................................................................
We operate a systematic benchmarking scheme between sites..........................................................
Other: _______________________________________________ ...................................................
Other: _______________________________________________ ...................................................
28. What measures does your company take to reduce operating costs? (Tick all that apply)
We use freight exchanges ...................................................................................................................
We use the cheapest gas station in the area ........................................................................................
We use fuel hedging ...........................................................................................................................
We installed a diesel floater in the contracts with our consignors ......................................................
We use the services provided by fuel card operators ..........................................................................

If so, what services in particular? (for example, toll discounts, foreign VAT refunds)
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
We cooperate with other logistics service providers, especially in the sectors:
Purchasing (material, services, fuel)…………
Operations/transport .................................................................................................................
Marketing/sales......................................
IT/technology/infrastructure
Further information regarding type of cooperation/cost reduction measures/concrete results:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
248
VI. Future prospects
29. In your opinion, which topics will have a significant relevance to logistics services focusing on sustainability?
(Please check the three most important!)
 Traffic reduction in road-based goods forwarding ...............................................................................
 Switching traffic from road to rails ......................................................................................................
 Intermodal traffic .................................................................................................................................
 Use of long-trucks ................................................................................................................................
 Use of new drive technology (LNG, CNG, LPG, hybrid, electrified)..................................................
 Expand cooperation with service partners............................................................................................
 Install ICT solutions to optimize transport ...........................................................................................
 Reduce resource consumption ..............................................................................................................
 Creating CO2 emission indicators ........................................................................................................
 Improving CO2 efficiency in logistics ..................................................................................................
 Lack of (truck) drivers .........................................................................................................................
 Improving staff-focused programs .......................................................................................................
 Enforcing trainings and professional development of employees ........................................................
 Other:____________________________ ............................................................................................
 Other:____________________________ ............................................................................................
30. Which starting points did your company identify to cover those topics in a sustainable manner?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
249
Appendix G:
Interview Guideline
I. Reporting and IT solutions
1.
At which frequency does your company conduct business reporting?
How many key performance indicators are included? Which dimensions are included (economy, ecology, and
social)?
How many employees are involved in the reporting process?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2.
Does your company has its own IT department? How many employees are in charge of the IT systems within
the company?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.
How does the disposition within your company works?
Completely automatic ........................................................................................................................
Manual supported by an IT solution ..................................................................................................
Manual ...............................................................................................................................................
What performance does your IT solution in the field of the disposition have?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
250
II. Motivation conduction of carbon management
4.
What are the main reasons why your company deals which the issue of carbon management? (1: great
relevance; 7: no relevance)!
Assessment
Requirements of the shipper .............................................
Energy cost savings ..........................................................
Legal requirement.............................................................
Marketing / image ............................................................
Competitive advantage .....................................................
Own responsibility / company policy ...............................
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
Other:_______________________ .................................. _________
5.
Are you asked by the shippers for carbon emissions from the last three years?
Yes
No
If so, at what frequency and in which granularity?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
251
III. Carbon accounting
6.
Since when does your company calculate carbon emissions?
___________ Month / Year
7.
What carbon accounting standards are considered to calculate carbon emissions?
Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative (GHGI)……………………
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)…………
CEN norm EN 16258……………………..………………………...
Other:_________________________________________
8.
For which functional areas of the company are carbon emissions calculated?
Transport ............................................................................................................................................
Warehousing ......................................................................................................................................
Transshipment....................................................................................................................................
Administration ...................................................................................................................................
Entire company ..................................................................................................................................
Why are carbon emissions calculated for these functional areas?
Which carbon indicators are calculated for each of the functional areas?
On what basis of the data are the carbon emissions are calculated?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
9.
In which frequency are carbon emissions calculated?
Why was this frequency chosen?
Does the frequency change during the period?
___________Frequency
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
10.
Which categories of scope 3 emissions are calculated? Why are these categories of scope 3 emissions
calculated? Are there considerations to include further categories of scope 3 emissions?
252
Service partners (logistics service providers) ....................................................................................
Upstream energy supply chain ...........................................................................................................
Generated waste .................................................................................................................................
Commuter traffic/business trips .........................................................................................................
Investment goods ...............................................................................................................................
Other: _______________________________________________ ...................................................
Other: _______________________________________________ ...................................................
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
If so, does your company receive or calculate carbon emissions of your service partners?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
11.
What type of carbon calculation tool is applied to quantify the amount of carbon emissions?
Why was this type of tool chosen?
Own developed tool ...........................................................................................................................
Free available carbon calculator ........................................................................................................
Commercially distributed carbon calculator ......................................................................................
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
12.
How are the required input data (energy consumption) transferred into the carbon calculation tool?
Electronic without an interface to the established IT system ...........................................................................
Electronic with an interface to the established IT system ................................................................................
Manual .............................................................................................................................................................
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
253
_________________________________________________________________________________
13.
What were the three main challenges to the development of the carbon calculator?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
254
IV. Carbon management process
14.
Does your company have a formulated carbon reduction target?
Yes
No
If so, how is your carbon reduction target specified (value of carbon reduction, timeline)?
Why did you choose this carbon reduction target?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
15.
Which approach is applied to evaluate measures in the field of road freight transportation services?
Why was this approach chosen?
What criteria are applied to evaluate measures?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
16.
Which are the core measures for your company to improve the carbon efficiency of its transportation
services?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
255
17.
Which carbon indicators are applied to monitor the development of the amount of carbon emissions? Why are
these carbon indicators chosen? At what frequency are the carbon indicators calculated?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
18.
If the specified carbon reduction target is not met, what measures are planned?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
256
V. Organization
19.
Organizational structure of the company (please introduce the organizational structure)
20.
Which employees have formal and content-related responsibility in the field of carbon management?
Which responsibilities are assigned to these employees?
Formal responsibility
___________
Content-related responsibility
___________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
21.
Which employees conduct the following tasks?
Why are the task assigned to these employees?
Gathering data
........
___________
.....
___________
.......
___________
Evaluation of mitigation measures ......
___________
Decisions on mitigation measures .......
___________
Preparation of data
Calculation of carbon emissions
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
22.
How is carbon management anchored at your company? (for example, company principles)
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
257
23.
Are carbon emissions considered in employees’ incentive systems?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
258
VI. Miscellaneous
24.
What are the next steps in the field of carbon management?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
25.
Are there any issues that are not addressed by the interview?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
259
Curriculum Vitae
Markus Gogolin
Personal Details
Date and Place of Birth
Work Experiences
12/2010 –
02/2007 – 11/2010
Education
12/2010 – 09/2014
24th August 1980, Berlin
University of St. Gallen, Chair of Logistics Management (LOGHSG)
Project Manager, Research Associate
KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft
Assistant Manager
University of St. Gallen, Chair of Logistics Management
Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Stölzle
Ph.D. Programme in Management
10/2001 – 01/2007
Technical University of Berlin
Degree dipl. engineer
08/1993 – 06/2000
Catholic Private School Sankt Marien
Abitur
Internship
10/2005 – 3/2006
KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft
10/2004 – 12/2004
Dachser GmbH & Co. KG
4/2002 – 6/2002
EMAS-Eilslebener Maschinen-, Anlagen- und Stahlbau GmbH
260