The Price of Delivery Efficiency

---

Dilys Lam

Vice Chairman (Development), ICSD

The Price of Delivery Efficiency: Rethinking Britain's Last-Mile Logistics Model

Parcel theft in the UK has become a significant challenge for retailers, logistics operators and consumers. According to a 2025 Quadient survey, vulnerable doorstep deliveries are targeted by parcel thieves every seven seconds. An estimated £666.5 million worth of parcels was stolen over a twelve-month period, affecting approximately 4.83 million UK households. Affected consumers may feel less secure in their neighbourhoods and lose confidence in delivery services.

Only around one in every 353 incidents was reported to the police. This low reporting rate obscures the true scale and geographical distribution of parcel theft, making it more difficult for businesses and policymakers to identify patterns and target interventions. While often viewed as a security issue, parcel theft has broader implications for supply chain resilience. The costs extend beyond the direct loss of goods, highlighting broader issues relating to incentive structures, risk allocation and delivery infrastructure.

Delivery Efficiency and Incentive Structures 

In delivery service, operational performance is measured primarily through speed and completion rates. Unattended deliveries can become a rational response to commercial pressures, even where they increase theft risk. The Ofcom’s survey of UK logistics operators in Oct 2026 prompted common delivery issues including leaving parcels in an inappropriate location (28%), the delivery driver not knocking loudly enough (25%), and not being given sufficient time to answer the door (20%). Collectively, these findings suggest that operational speed can sometimes take priority over secure customer handover, increasing the risk of disputed or vulnerable deliveries.

Many delivery networks rely on self-employed couriers and contractor-based operating models, with compensation often linked to completed deliveries and route efficiency. This can encourage a focus on speedy delivery rather than delivery security, leaving parcels unattended and vulnerable to theft.  Parcel theft can generate avoidable environmental costs through additional journeys and replacement shipments. The consequences extend beyond logistics performance, affecting consumer confidence and experience, raising concern about the reliability of last-mile delivery services.

• 

Photo credit : My Parcel Locker 

Theft Risk and Cost Allocation

Under the UK's Consumer Rights Act 2015, responsibility for goods generally remains with the retailer until they come into the possession of the consumer or an authorised recipient. When an unattended parcel is stolen, retailers are frequently required to provide a refund or replacement. Replacement deliveries generate additional transport activity, customer-service costs and administrative overheads. Retailers and logistics providers may also incur increased claims-handling, insurance and risk-management expenses. Some of these costs are ultimately absorbed within broader pricing structures, creating what might be described as an indirect "theft tax" borne collectively by consumers.  The parcel theft loss costs are distributed across businesses, workers and customers throughout the logistics ecosystem, raising question of fairness for those unaffected by the losses.

Infrastructure Responses: The InPost Case

Censuswide research indicates that thefts are heavily concentrated in dense urban areas where shared buildings lack secure parcel management facilities. Greater London alone accounted for 27% of reported apartment thefts. This is largely driven by unsecured communal hallways and building lobbies becoming exposed "piling zones" for courier deliveries.

Parcel lockers and out-of-home collection networks offer an alternative approach. They seek to reduce system-wide costs and risks through delivery consolidation and secure transfer points between couriers and consumers. Importantly, they align operational efficiency with security outcomes rather than forcing a trade-off between the two. Growing consumer acceptance for alternative options suggests that delivery preferences may also be evolving.

A leading example is InPost, the Polish logistics company that pioneered Automated Parcel Machines (APMs). Despite generating significantly stronger profitability in Poland than in the UK, the company has continued to invest heavily in British locker networks. By August 2026, InPost operates more than 16,000 APMs across the UK. As concerns over parcel security increase, secure collection points are becoming part of the mainstream delivery ecosystem.

The future growth of parcel locker networks may depend not only on infrastructure investment but also on customer behaviour. Delivery incentives, such as free locker delivery or preferential pricing, may encourage consumers to select options that improve overall network efficiency. For example, on 1 June 2026, The Very Group introduced free InPost Locker delivery on standard orders over £30. Rather than treating doorstep delivery as the default option, future delivery networks may increasingly reward choices that reduce system-wide costs and security risks.

Future Directions: From Parcel Lockers to Drone Delivery

Emerging drone technologies may further reshape the last-mile delivery landscape. The UK market is currently transitioning from isolated testing to tightly regulated commercial trials, with a government roadmap aiming for routine and integrated operations by 2027.

Drone delivery is often presented as a solution to last-mile inefficiencies. However, its ability to address the underlying causes of parcel theft remains uncertain. While drones may reduce delivery times and labour requirements, they do not eliminate the need for secure and accountable transfer points. Drone deployment in dense urban environments presents practical challenges relating to safety, airspace management, privacy and landing-site availability. For these reasons, drone networks may ultimately depend on designated collection points, smart lockers and supervised pickup locations that provide a reliable and secure handover between logistics providers and consumers.

Conclusion

Britain's parcel theft challenge is not simply a story about opportunistic criminals. It reflects the trade-offs embedded within a delivery model optimised for speed, convenience and cost efficiency. 

The visible losses are stolen parcels. The less visible losses are environmental costs to replace shipments, consumer anxiety and frustration, as well as system-wide inefficiencies that spread losses beyond those directly affected.  As such, parcel theft has evolved into a supply chain risk affecting retailers, logistics operators and consumers.

The central issue is not theft itself, but the allocation of risk within modern logistics networks. Britain's experience demonstrates that the long-term resilience of e-commerce will depend not only on technological innovation, but also on infrastructure, incentive design and the ability to balance efficiency, security and accountability.

(Date: 30 October 2026)