A Comparative Analysis of Smart and Traditional Logistics Parks: A Maturity Model Perspective

Smart logistics parks (SLPs) drive economic growth but lack specialised maturity assessment frameworks. This study addresses this gap by developing a maturity assessment framework for SLPs, underscoring distinctions from the traditional logistics parks (TLPs) assessment model to guide the transformation toward smart logistics. The proposed framework comprises five main factors and twenty sub-factors: Smart Economy, Public Services and Smart Governance, Smart Infrastructure and Intelligent Technology Application, Skilled Human Capital, and Environmental Sustainability. These factors were identified through a literature review followed by expert consultations, while the TLPs model is based on China's national standard (2018). The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was applied to prioritize each factor in both TLPs and SLPs. The results indicate that for SLPs, Smart Infrastructure and Intelligent Technology Application (0.3229) is the most critical factor, followed by Public Services and Smart Governance (0.2447). At the sub-factor level, Smart Logistics Technology Coverage (0.1051) and Percentage of IT Investment (0.0796) are key factors for SLPs. In contrast, TLPs prioritise Service Capability (0.3317) and Operation Management (0.3317), with Customer Satisfaction (0.0639) and Logistics Operation Area (0.0475) as the most influential sub-factors. A comparative analysis reveals that while both models emphasize infrastructure, operational services, and environmental considerations, SLPs focus more on technological innovation and digital governance, whereas TLPs give priority to efficiency and service quality. The framework guides stakeholders, highlighting that SLPs' transformation requires integrating intelligent systems while maintaining efficiency and sustainability. Future research should validate the framework’s practical applicability through empirical case studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Mathematical Engineering and Management Sciences
Published
2026-01-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.33889/ijmems.2026.11.1.003
Primary Topic
Urban and Freight Transport Logistics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Comparative Analysis of Smart and Traditional Logistics Parks: A Maturity Model Perspective

Huiqiong Huang, Woramol Chaowarat Watanabe
International Journal of Mathematical Engineering and Management Sciences
Urban and Freight Transport Logistics
article

A Comparative Analysis of Smart and Traditional Logistics Parks: A Maturity Model Perspective

Huiqiong Huang, Woramol Chaowarat Watanabe
article en

Abstract

Smart logistics parks (SLPs) drive economic growth but lack specialised maturity assessment frameworks. This study addresses this gap by developing a maturity assessment framework for SLPs, underscoring distinctions from the traditional logistics parks (TLPs) assessment model to guide the transformation toward smart logistics. The proposed framework comprises five main factors and twenty sub-factors: Smart Economy, Public Services and Smart Governance, Smart Infrastructure and Intelligent Technology Application, Skilled Human Capital, and Environmental Sustainability. These factors were identified through a literature review followed by expert consultations, while the TLPs model is based on China's national standard (2018). The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was applied to prioritize each factor in both TLPs and SLPs. The results indicate that for SLPs, Smart Infrastructure and Intelligent Technology Application (0.3229) is the most critical factor, followed by Public Services and Smart Governance (0.2447). At the sub-factor level, Smart Logistics Technology Coverage (0.1051) and Percentage of IT Investment (0.0796) are key factors for SLPs. In contrast, TLPs prioritise Service Capability (0.3317) and Operation Management (0.3317), with Customer Satisfaction (0.0639) and Logistics Operation Area (0.0475) as the most influential sub-factors. A comparative analysis reveals that while both models emphasize infrastructure, operational services, and environmental considerations, SLPs focus more on technological innovation and digital governance, whereas TLPs give priority to efficiency and service quality. The framework guides stakeholders, highlighting that SLPs' transformation requires integrating intelligent systems while maintaining efficiency and sustainability. Future research should validate the framework’s practical applicability through empirical case studies.

International Journal of Mathematical Engineering and Management SciencesVol. 11(1)
Guangxi University of Science and Technology (CN), Naresuan University Hospital (TH)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
Urban and Freight Transport Logistics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.