2003
DOI: 10.1108/09590550310457827
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Unattended delivery to the home: an assessment of the security implications

Abstract: As the volume of retail sales distributed to the home rises, the proportion of deliveries made when there is no one at home (i.e. “unattended”) is also likely to increase. Traditionally unattended delivery involved leaving orders on the doorstep or with a neighbour. In recent years new systems of secured delivery have been developed, many of them employing reception boxes. This paper classifies the main types of unattended delivery and assesses their relative security. It identifies security problems common to… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
93
0
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(97 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
2
93
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…We further contribute to the literature by providing our specific findings for nonfood distribution, since previous literature focused on non-food warehouse management for OC retailing (e.g., Hübner et al 2015) and on grocery-specific distribution issues with online retailing (e.g., Kämäräinen et al 2001;Punakivi et al 2001;Punakivi and Tanskanen 2002;McKinnon and Tallam 2003;Boyer and Hult 2005;Grant et al 2006Grant et al , 2014Hübner et al 2016b). …”
Section: Systematization Of Concepts For Oc Distribution Based On Empmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We further contribute to the literature by providing our specific findings for nonfood distribution, since previous literature focused on non-food warehouse management for OC retailing (e.g., Hübner et al 2015) and on grocery-specific distribution issues with online retailing (e.g., Kämäräinen et al 2001;Punakivi et al 2001;Punakivi and Tanskanen 2002;McKinnon and Tallam 2003;Boyer and Hult 2005;Grant et al 2006Grant et al , 2014Hübner et al 2016b). …”
Section: Systematization Of Concepts For Oc Distribution Based On Empmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Focusing on OC destinations, McKinnon and Tallam (2003) classify the main forms of unattended home delivery, whereas Fernie et al (2009) classify home delivery options in general. Agatz et al (2008) identify the advantages of store pickup concepts, namely bridging the ''last mile'' and any positive effects on crosschannel sales.…”
Section: Literature On Forward Distributionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…retailer's intermediate warehouse or store). The destination can either be consumers' homes or, increasingly, their workplaces (McKinnon and Tallam, 2003). The mode of delivery can be in-sourced (using retailer's own vehicle fleet), outsourced to a third-party logistics provider (3PL) (Boyer and Hult, 2005), or crowd-sourced using independent contractors (Wang et al, 2016).…”
Section: Review Of Lml Distribution Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consumerdriven e-commerce reports studies based in Finland Saranen, 2001), Scotland (McKinnon andTallam, 2003), the USA (Boyer et al, 2009), England (McLeod et al, 2006, Germany (Wollenburg et al, 2017), and Brazil (Wanke, 2012), amongst others. While these studies contribute to generating a useful library of contexts, they are difficult to compare, given differences in geography and geographically based data collection and analysis methods.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reasons for this high failure rate have been largely due to lifestyle changes: the growth in single-person households; flexible working patterns and higher female employment levels, which have resulted in up to half of UK homes being empty between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. during weekdays (9). Unsecured delivery at the household, often without the householders consent, can result in theft of the product, denial of receipt and even burglary (11). IMRG (12) estimated that 65 million first-time home deliveries failed in 2006, costing £682 million ($1,012 million).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%