European Urban Freight Efficiency Index - English

Executive Summary

Foreword

Introduction

Rankings

Two Pillars

Safety

Fleet Management

City Snapshots

What This Means

Outlook

Methodology

Rome is the study’s most counterintuitive result. It holds the worst congestion score (39) of any city — yet records the best trip inefficiency score (74), the lowest truck idle waste, and the largest truck-passenger performance gap in the study. Traffic is slow, but it flows. Vehicles creep along steadily rather than stopping and starting, and that distinction produces better outcomes than the congestion score alone would suggest. The truck advantage (+26) is not despite Rome’s conditions — it is partly because of them. Designated freight windows and professional routing give structured operations a significant edge in a network where narrow streets and historic urban form make ad hoc navigation genuinely difficult. Trucks that work within the system outperform those that do not, by a wider margin here than anywhere else in the study. Predictability reinforces the picture (variability score 80). Rome’s congestion is severe by the numbers, but consistent in its timing. Fleets that schedule around the known pattern operate more reliably than the raw score implies.

City snapshot: 04 Rome: Slow but flowing

For fleets operating here Build congestion into the schedule rather than planning against it. Rome’s predictability means arrivals can be timed reliably when the network’s patterns are respected. Freight windows are the critical tool — the data shows a 26-point performance advantage for fleets that use them.

Score: 48

Driving profile

Congestion: 39

Trip Inefficiency: 74

Passenger: 37

Truck: 63

396 harsh events per 1,000 trips — safest in the study

2.8% Truck idle waste — lowest in the study

26 points Trucks outperform passengers by 26 points

European Urban Freight Efficiency Index 15

Powered by