Article Sidebar

Submitted
April 2, 2026
Accepted
June 18, 2026
Published
July 28, 2026
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 23 Download : 14

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Indonesia’s rapid e-commerce growth has intensified pressure on last-mile delivery (LMD) systems, making sustainable and consumer-centric solutions increasingly urgent. While self-collection parcel (SCP) lockers offer promising alternatives to conventional home delivery, their adoption remains limited despite mounting urban logistics inefficiencies. Drawing on service-dominant logic (SDL), this study examines how logistics value, utilitarian and hedonic orientations, and environmental knowledge influence consumers’ willingness to co-create and, subsequently, their intention to adopt SCPs. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was administered to 235 online shoppers in Greater Jakarta, selected through purposive sampling from a target population of active online marketplace users with prior e-commerce experience. Data were collected electronically via a structured questionnaire distributed through online channels and analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Results confirm that logistics value, utilitarian orientation, hedonic orientation, and environmental knowledge each positively influence willingness to co-create. Furthermore, willingness to co-create and environmental knowledge directly and significantly predict SCP adoption intention. These findings advance SDL theory by positioning consumers as active operant resources in sustainable logistics ecosystems, moving beyond traditional efficiency-based perspectives. The study also contributes empirical evidence from a developing urban market, broadening the applicability of co-creation frameworks in contexts where infrastructure limitations and environmental awareness remain uneven. Practical guidance is offered for designing co-creation-oriented SCP services aligned with consumer motivations and sustainability goals.

Keywords

Last-mile delivery self-collection parcel lockers value co-creation service-dominant logic sustainable logistics environmental knowledge

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Lis Lesmini, Muhammad Iqbal Firdaus, Lira Agusinta, Ika Utami Yulihapsari

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
How to Cite
Lesmini, L., Firdaus, M. I., Agusinta, L., & Yulihapsari, I. U. (2026). Logistics value co-creation in sustainable last-mile delivery: Evidence from parcel lockers in Indonesia. Asian Management and Business Review, 6(2), 510–528. https://doi.org/10.20885/AMBR.vol6.iss2.art13
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Ahmed, B., Zada, S., Zhang, L., Sidiki, S. N., Contreras-Barraza, N., Vega-Muñoz, A., & Salazar-Sepúlveda, G. (2022). The Impact of customer experience and customer engagement on behavioral intentions: Does competitive choices matters? Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.864841 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.864841
  2. Akdim, K., Casaló, L. V., & Flavián, C. (2022). The role of utilitarian and hedonic aspects in the continuance intention to use social mobile apps. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 66, 102888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102888 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102888
  3. Alhomaid, A., & Bel Hadj, T. (2025). Tourist value co-creation through hedonic and utilitarian features in the Saudi case: Relational trust, service innovation, and smart technology adoption as driving factors. SAGE Open, 15(3), 21582440251384132. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251384132 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251384132
  4. Amaya, J., Encarnación, T., & Cantillo, V. (2025). Sustainable last mile delivery alternatives: Influencing factors and willingness to use. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 139, 104574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.104574 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.104574
  5. Badan Pusat Statistik. (2025). Statistik E-Commerce 2023. Retrieve from https://www.bps.go.id/id/publication/2025/01/30/d52af11843aee401403ecfa6/statistik-e-commerce-2023.html
  6. Balla, J., & Hagger, M. S. (2025). Protection motivation theory and health behaviour: Conceptual review, discussion of limitations, and recommendations for best practice and future research. Health Psychology Review, 19(1), 145–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2024.2413011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2024.2413011
  7. Barrett, J. A. M., Jaakkola, E., Heller, J., & Brüggen, E. C. (2024). Customer engagement in utilitarian vs. hedonic service contexts. Journal of Service Research, 10946705241242901. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705241242901 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705241242901
  8. Bordian, M., Gil-Saura, I., Fuentes-Blasco, M., Ruíz-Molina, M. E., & Berenguer-Contrí, G. (2024). Sustainability-oriented service innovation and customer satisfaction in hospitality: Assessing the impact of value co-creation, ecological knowledge and gender. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 13567667241261395. https://doi.org/10.1177/13567667241261395 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13567667241261395
  9. Burgos-Espinoza, I. I., García-Alcaraz, J. L., Gil-López, A. J., & Díaz-Reza, J. R. (2024). Effect of environmental knowledge on pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors: A comparative analysis between engineering students and professionals in Ciudad Juárez (Mexico). Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-024-00991-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-024-00991-5
  10. Carrión-Bósquez, N. G., Ortiz-Regalado, O., Veas-González, I., Naranjo-Armijo, F. G., & Guerra-Regalado, W. F. (2024). The mediating role of attitude and environmental awareness in the influence of green advertising and eco-labels on green purchasing behaviors. Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, 29(3), 330–350. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-08-2023-0217 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-08-2023-0217
  11. Chen, Y., & Ryu, M. H. (2025). Sustainable logistics: exploring the determinants of consumer attitudes and intention to use toward autonomous delivery services. Sustainability, 17(8), 3290. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17083290 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17083290
  12. Correa, C., Alarcón, D., & Cepeda, I. (2021). “I am delighted!”: The effect of perceived customer value on repurchase and advocacy intention in B2B express delivery services. Sustainability, 13(11), 6013. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116013
  13. Dinh, C.-M., & Park, S. (Steven). (2024). How to increase consumer intention to use Chatbots? An empirical analysis of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on social presence and the moderating effects of fear across generations. Electronic Commerce Research, 24(4), 2427–2467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-022-09662-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-022-09662-5
  14. Elliot, E. A., Adams, R., & Tsetse, E. K. K. (2023). Customer value co-creation: Environmental sustainability as a tourist experience. Sustainability, 15(13), 10486. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310486 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310486
  15. Esposito, L., & Jalal, R. N.-U.-D. (2025). Environmental awareness and pro-environmental behavior impact on renewables investments: A moderating role of environmental concerns. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 101, 102256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2025.102256 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2025.102256
  16. Gao, Y., & Liang, J. (2025). The impact of ai-powered try-on technology on online consumers’ impulsive buying intention: The moderating role of brand trust. Sustainability, 17(7), 2789. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072789 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072789
  17. Garcia-Herrera, A., Serrano-Hernandez, A., & Faulin, J. (2025). Understanding the dynamics of crowdshipping in last-mile distribution within urban mobility: A comprehensive framework. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 101, 102249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2025.102249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2025.102249
  18. Google, Temasek, & Bain & Company. (2024). e-Conomy SEA 2024 report—Google. Retrieved from https://economysea.withgoogle.com/report/
  19. Hair, J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
  20. Heikkinen, H. (2024). Exploring how retail and logistics service provider managers make sense of sustainability in last mile delivery. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 54(2), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-02-2023-0073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-02-2023-0073
  21. Hovi, I. B., & Bø, E. (2024). Unlocking the potential: How can parcel lockers drive efficiency and environmental friendliness in E-commerce? Sustainable Futures, 7, 100189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2024.100189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2024.100189
  22. Indrawati, I., Ramantoko, G., Widarmanti, T., Aziz, I. A., & Khan, F. U. (2022). Utilitarian, hedonic, and self-esteem motives in online shopping. Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, 26(2), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-06-2021-0113 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-06-2021-0113
  23. Ishizuka, C., & Aoki, K. (2024). Drivers of sustained brand engagement: Cases of long-term customers of hedonic and utilitarian brands in Japan. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 12(4), 979–989. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-023-00242-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-023-00242-6
  24. Jang, S., Hong, D., & Lee, C. (2024). Exploring the behavioral adoption of automated parcel locker systems under COVID-19. Transport Policy, 151, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.03.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.03.016
  25. Justavino-Castillo, M. E., Gil-Saura , I., Fuentes-Blasco, M., Moliner-Velázquez, B., & Servera-Francés, D. (2023). Managing sustainable practices and logistics value to improve customer loyalty: Importers vs. freight forwarders. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 22(4), 479–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-023-00299-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-023-00299-1
  26. Kawa, A., & Światowiec-Szczepańska, J. (2021). Logistics as a value in e-commerce and its influence on satisfaction in industries: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 36(13), 220–235. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-09-2020-0429 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-09-2020-0429
  27. Kock, N. (2017). Common method bias: A full collinearity assessment method for PLS-SEM. In H. Latan & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial Least Squares Path Modeling: Basic Concepts, Methodological Issues and Applications (pp. 245–257). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64069-3_11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64069-3_11
  28. Kock, N. (2022). Harman’s single factor test in PLS-SEM: Checking for common method bias. Retrieved from https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:254629079
  29. Lai, K., Prajogo, D., Wong, C. W. Y., & Lun, V. Y. H. (2025). Examining sustainability engagement of logistics service providers: Drivers, practices, and propositions. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2025.2534009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2025.2534009
  30. Liu, X., Pang, Q., Yuen, K. F., & Wang, X. (2025). Transforming last-mile delivery into marketplaces of logistics services: An investigation on consumer participation motives, resources, and contextual differences. Journal of Business Research, 200, 115624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115624 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115624
  31. Nguyen, H. S. (2024). The impact of value co-creation behavior on customer loyalty in the service domain. Heliyon, 10(9), e30278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30278 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30278
  32. Opata, C. N., Xiao, W., Nusenu, A. A., Tetteh, S., & Opata, E. S. (2019). Customer willingness to participate in value co-creation: The moderating effect of social ties (empirical study of automobile customers in Ghana). Cogent Business & Management, 6(1), 1573868. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1573868 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1573868
  33. Perea, H. R., Piedrahita, A. R., & Alzate, Ó. E. T. (2025). Models of environmental awareness: Exploring their nature and role in environmental education – a systematic review. Heliyon, 11(13), e43679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e43679 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e43679
  34. Puspitasari, I., Rusydi, F., Nuzulita, N., & Hsiao, C.-S. (2023). Investigating the role of utilitarian and hedonic goals in characterizing customer loyalty in E-marketplaces. Heliyon, 9(8), e19193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19193 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19193
  35. Putz-Egger, L.-M., Pfoser, S., & Plasch, M. (2025). Intergenerational differences of consumers’ perception related to the value of green logistics: A focus on transport, packaging, and waste management. Sustainable Futures, 9, 100458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100458 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100458
  36. Reppmann, M., Harms, S., Edinger-Schons, L. M., & Foege, J. N. (2025). Activating the sustainable consumer: The role of customer involvement in corporate sustainability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 53(2), 310–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-024-01036-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-024-01036-7
  37. Restuputri, D. P., Fridawati, A., & Masudin, I. (2022). Customer perception on last-mile delivery services using kansei engineering and conjoint analysis: A case study of Indonesian logistics providers. Logistics, 6(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6020029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6020029
  38. Roemer, E., Schuberth, F., & Henseler, J. (2021). HTMT2–an improved criterion for assessing discriminant validity in structural equation modeling. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 121(12), 2637–2650. (world). https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-02-2021-0082 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-02-2021-0082
  39. Rohden, S. F., Silveira Netto, C. F., & Espartel, L. B. (2025). Autonomous technology in the marketplace: The impact of enjoyment on consumer responses. Computers in Human Behavior, 168, 108647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108647 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108647
  40. Royo-Vela, M., Frau, M., & Ferrer, A. (2024). The role of value co-creation in building trust and reputation in the digital banking era. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2375405. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2375405 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2375405
  41. Sarkar, A., Routroy, S., & Sultan, F. A. (2022). The impact of co-creation and co-invention in supply chains: A bibliometric review. Arab Gulf Journal of Scientific Research, 40(4), 364–391. https://doi.org/10.1108/AGJSR-04-2022-0010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/AGJSR-04-2022-0010
  42. Sharma, V. P., Prakash, S., Singh, R., Ojha, R., & Ramtiyal, B. (2025). Strategic insights into last-mile delivery: Modelling the industry 4.0 enabler for e-commerce industry. RAUSP Management Journal, 60(1), 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2024-0146 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2024-0146
  43. Shen, M., & Wang, J. (2022). The impact of pro-environmental awareness components on green consumption behavior: The moderation effect of consumer perceived cost, policy incentives, and face culture. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.580823 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.580823
  44. Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
  45. Tsai, Y.-T., & Tiwasing, P. (2021). Customers’ intention to adopt smart lockers in last-mile delivery service: A multi-theory perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61, 102514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102514 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102514
  46. Vargo, S. L. (2021). Beyond circularity—A service-dominant (S-D) logic perspective. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1(1), 257–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00007-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00007-2
  47. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2017). Service-dominant logic 2025. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 46–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.001
  48. Vrhovac, V., Dakić, D., Milisavljević, S., Ćelić, Đ., Stefanović, D., & Janković, M. (2024). The factors influencing user satisfaction in last-mile delivery: The structural equation modeling approach. Mathematics, 12(12), 1857. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12121857 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math12121857
  49. Wang, X., Wong, Y. D., Chen, T., & Yuen, K. F. (2023). Co-creating consumer logistics from self-collection to crowd-sourced delivery: An examination on contextual differences in last-mile. Journal of Business Research, 168, 114136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114136
  50. Wang, X., Yuen, K. F., Wong, Y. D., & Teo, C.-C. (2019). Consumer participation in last-mile logistics service: An investigation on cognitions and affects. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 49(2), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-12-2017-0372 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-12-2017-0372
  51. Wiśniewska, A., Liczmańska-Kopcewicz, K., & Żemigała, M. (2025). Cognitive and affective antecedents of consumer engagement in green innovation processes. Sustainable Futures, 9, 100750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100750 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100750
  52. Xie, L., Liu, C., Li, Y., & Zhu, T. (2023). How to inspire users in virtual travel communities: The effect of activity novelty on users’ willingness to co-create. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75, 103448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103448 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103448
  53. Yao, Q., Liang, Y., Feng, M., & Wang, H. (2023). Are consumers willing to co-create value when focal firms’ suppliers are proactive in green innovation? A chain liability and green halo effect. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 53(10), 1240–1260. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-05-2022-0163 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-05-2022-0163
  54. Yao, X., Liu, Y., & Qi, G. (2024). Enhancing sustainable consumer practices: The role of environmental knowledge in adopting BORS services. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 37(7), 1937–1954. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-05-2024-0649 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-05-2024-0649
  55. Yuen, K. F., Wang, X., Ma, F., & Wong, Y. D. (2019). The determinants of customers’ intention to use smart lockers for last-mile deliveries. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49(March), 316–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.022
  56. Zhang, X., Singh, S., Li, J., & Shao, X. (2024). Exploring the effects of value co-creation strategies in event services on attendees’ citizenship behaviors: The roles of customer empowerment and psychological ownership. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 76, 103619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103619 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103619
  57. Zhao, Y., Chen, Y., Zhou, R., & Ci, Y. (2018). Factors influencing customers’ willingness to participate in virtual brand community’s value co-creation: The moderating effect of customer involvement. Online Information Review, 43(3), 440–461. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2017-0232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2017-0232