IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p5925-d1688989.html

Navigating the Last Mile: A Stakeholder Analysis of Delivery Robot Teleoperation

Author

Listed:
  • Avishag Boker

    (Department of Information Systems, University of Haifa, Haifa 3498838, Israel
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Einat Grimberg

    (Data61, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Dutton Park, QLD 4102, Australia
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Felix Tener

    (Department of Information Systems, University of Haifa, Haifa 3498838, Israel)

  • Joel Lanir

    (Department of Information Systems, University of Haifa, Haifa 3498838, Israel)

Abstract

The market share of Last-Mile Delivery Robots (LMDRs) has grown rapidly over the past few years. These robots are mostly autonomous and supported remotely by human operators. As part of a broader shift toward sustainable urban logistics, LMDRs are seen as a promising low-emission alternative to conventional delivery vehicles. While there is a large body of literature about the technology, little is known about the real-world experiences of operating these robots. This study investigates the operational challenges faced by remote operators (ROs) of LMDRs, aiming to enhance their efficiency and safety. Through interviews with industry professionals, we explore the scenarios requiring human intervention, the strategies employed by ROs, and the unique challenges they encounter. Our findings not only identify key intervention scenarios but also provide a thorough examination of the teleoperation ecosystem, operational workflows, and how they affect the ways the ROs manage their interactions with robots. We found that ROs’ involvement varies from monitoring to active intervention to support the robots in completing their tasks when they face connectivity issues, blocked routes, and various other interruptions on their journeys. The findings highlight the importance of intuitive user interfaces (UIs) and decision-support systems to reduce cognitive load and improve situational awareness. This research contributes to the literature by offering a detailed examination of real-world teleoperation practices and focusing on the human factors influencing LMDR scalability, sustainability, and integration into future-ready logistics systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Avishag Boker & Einat Grimberg & Felix Tener & Joel Lanir, 2025. "Navigating the Last Mile: A Stakeholder Analysis of Delivery Robot Teleoperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-28, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5925-:d:1688989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5925/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5925/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valeska Engesser & Evy Rombaut & Lieselot Vanhaverbeke & Philippe Lebeau, 2023. "Autonomous Delivery Solutions for Last-Mile Logistics Operations: A Literature Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Srinivas, Sharan & Ramachandiran, Surya & Rajendran, Suchithra, 2022. "Autonomous robot-driven deliveries: A review of recent developments and future directions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    3. José Luis Fuentes-Bargues & Mª José Bastante-Ceca & Pablo Sebastián Ferrer-Gisbert & Mª Carmen González-Cruz, 2020. "Study of Major-Accident Risk Assessment Techniques in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Lim, Xin-Jean & Chang, Jennifer Yee-Shan & Cheah, Jun-Hwa & Lim, Weng Marc & Kraus, Sascha & Dabić, Marina, 2024. "Out of the way, human! Understanding post-adoption of last-mile delivery robots," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    5. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 1-13.
    6. Saerom (Ronnie) Lee, 2022. "The myth of the flat start‐up: Reconsidering the organizational structure of start‐ups," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 58-92, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Yali & Ding, Zhenbin & Sun, Jun & Chen, Delin & Goh, Mark & Yang, Zhaojun, 2026. "Evolving last-mile logistics: Where unmanned delivery fits," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    2. Ermağan, Umut & Yıldız, Barış & Salman, F. Sibel, 2024. "Express shipments with autonomous robots and public transportation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Zeng, Ying & Liu, Xinyi & Zhang, Xinyuan & Li, Zhiyong, 2024. "Retrospective of interdisciplinary research on robot services (1954–2023): From parasitism to symbiosis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Samani, Ali Riahi & Talebian, Ahmadreza & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Golias, Mihalis, 2025. "Evaluating consumer shopping, delivery demands, and last-mile preferences: An integrated MDCEV-HCM approach," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    5. Wenming Liu & Jingjing Li, 2025. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Knowledge Dynamics in Rural Tourism Supply Chains: Challenges, Innovations, and Cross-Sector Applications," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(2), pages 6732-6764, June.
    6. Julia Eichholz & Nicole Hoffmann & Anja Schwering, 2024. "The role of risk management orientation and the planning function of budgeting in enhancing organizational resilience and its effect on competitive advantages during times of crises," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 17-58, March.
    7. repec:arp:tjssrr:2019:p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Mussard, Stéphane & Pi Alperin, María Noel, 2021. "Accounting for risk factors on health outcomes: The case of Luxembourg," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 1180-1197.
    9. Zohreh Molamohamadi & Mahmoud Asad Samani & Marjan Karimi, 2024. "Reviewing the historical milestones of risk management," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 4(12), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    11. Zeng, Qing & Lu, Xinjie & Xu, Jin & Lin, Yu, 2024. "Macro-Driven Stock Market Volatility Prediction: Insights from a New Hybrid Machine Learning Approach," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB).
    12. Mangirdas Morkunas & Gintaras Cernius & Gintare Giriuniene, 2019. "Assessing Business Risks of Natural Gas Trading Companies: Evidence from GET Baltic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-14, July.
    13. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    14. repec:bcp:journl:v:7:y:2023:i:1:p:1107-1138 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Li, Weijun & Sun, Qiqi & Zhang, Jiwang & Zhang, Laibin, 2024. "Quantitative risk assessment of industrial hot work using Adaptive Bow Tie and Petri Nets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    16. Don Pagach & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala, 2020. "The Challenges and Opportunities for ERM Post-COVID-19: Agendas for Future Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    17. KeumJi Kim & SeongHwan Yoon, 2018. "Assessment of Building Damage Risk by Natural Disasters in South Korea Using Decision Tree Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.
    18. Noemi Giampaoli & Matteo Renghini, 2026. "Climate change, risks and ECB strategy: what is the effect on European banks’ stock return?," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(1), pages 1-38, February.
    19. Tatiana Yu. Kudryavtseva & Angi E. Skhvediani & Maiia S. Leukhina & Alexandra O. Schneider, 2023. "A Fuzzy Model for Personnel Risk Analysis: Case of Russian-Finnish Export-Import Operations of Small and Medium Enterprises," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 22(3), pages 683-709.
    20. Marcin Nowak & Rafał Mierzwiak & Marcin Butlewski, 2020. "Occupational risk assessment with grey system theory," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(2), pages 717-732, June.
    21. Kayode Ajewole & Elliott Dennis & Ted C. Schroeder & Jason Bergtold, 2021. "Relative valuation of food and non‐food risks with a comparison to actuarial values: A best–worst approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 927-943, November.
    22. Simon Ashby & Trevor Buck & Stephanie Nöth-Zahn & Thomas Peisl, 2018. "Emerging IT Risks: Insights from German Banking," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 180-207, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5925-:d:1688989. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.