Key Insights: An Analysis of Critical Issues in Logistics Standardization and Unitized Logistics

With 2,000 standards already in place, why devote so much effort and funding to a single, relatively minor pallet‑related standard?
 

After years of advocacy and promotion, logistics standardization has begun to attract widespread attention from all sectors of society, earning the high regard of national leaders and relevant ministries and commissions, as well as enthusiastic support from enterprises. By vigorously advancing the standardization of commercial and trade logistics, unitized logistics has also garnered significant attention. In 2018, the Ministry of Commerce, the National Standardization Administration, and eight other departments jointly issued the “Opinions on Promoting Standard Pallets and Developing Unitized Logistics,” setting forth goals for logistics standardization and the development of unitized logistics.

However, we have also observed that many Chinese experts and leaders still hold a rather vague understanding of logistics standardization. Some experts argue that any standard that enhances market efficiency should not be promoted by the state; instead, market mechanisms should be allowed to play the decisive role. If pallet standardization can significantly improve logistics efficiency, surely businesses are aware of this—wouldn’t they take the initiative themselves? Is it really necessary for the government to spend public funds to drive such efforts?

Some also argue that logistics standards constitute a large system, and recently… There are 2,000 standards, and many of them are highly important. So why is the government investing so much effort and resources into promoting a single, relatively minor pallet standard? What is the relationship between the pallet standard and the circular sharing of pallets?

There are many issues surrounding logistics standardization. Below, drawing on my own insights, I will examine several key questions in the areas of unitized logistics and commercial‑trade logistics standardization, for your reference.

01  Why Standardization Is the Engine of Modern Logistics Development

The CPC Central Committee has put forward the five major development concepts of innovation, coordination, openness, green development, and shared development, with standardization serving as the foundation for implementing these concepts. As global manufacturing enters the era of intelligent manufacturing under Industry 4.0, standardization has become a key enabler of this transformation.

From the perspective of the logistics system as a whole: Modern logistics is a vast, interconnected system, and the cornerstone of this interconnectivity is standardization. Without standardization, achieving seamless connectivity in modern logistics would be exceedingly difficult. Take the invention of the Internet—the greatest technological breakthrough of our time—as an example: its origins lie in the standardization of information‑transmission protocols, with the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) and the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) serving as its foundational building blocks. In essence, a simple, fundamental protocol for transmitting standardized information gave rise to the Internet’s remarkable success, transforming it into a critical social infrastructure and operating system that is now driving a revolutionary transformation of the global technological and economic landscape. Yet the Internet remains confined to the realm of information exchange. What if the broader modern logistics system were to achieve full‑scale interconnectivity, giving birth to a “logistics Internet” that links physical goods? And what, precisely, would constitute the standard transmission protocol for such a logistics‑system interconnection?

From the perspective of logistics enterprises: A company can strengthen itself through personalization, but to grow and scale up, it must embrace standardization—according to the great management scholar Peter Drucker. Crook once remarked that a single technological invention by a company has only limited impact on the socio‑economic landscape. Only when such inventions are transformed into standardized products through a series of innovations—enabling large‑scale, replicable production—can they truly drive comprehensive social progress. He cited the invention of the hamburger as an example: while a farmer’s wife who first created it may have confined its use to home‑cooked meals, offering little broader societal momentum, the subsequent wave of standardized innovations centered on the hamburger gave rise to McDonald’s, thereby catalyzing the evolution of global food culture.

From the perspective of the logistics industry: Over the past two years, most of the innovations in logistics have been driven by standardization—whether it’s unitizing cargo, implementing scheduled truck‑train services, productizing express delivery, or standardizing less‑than‑truckload (LTL) processes—all of which have propelled the transformation of modern logistics. Consequently, standardized innovation serves as the engine of modern logistics development and the foundation for its ongoing evolution.

02  Why must logistics standardization be centered on unitized logistics?

There are nearly 2,000 modern logistics standards, and there are numerous levers for advancing logistics standardization. Many of these standards are of critical importance, such as those related to logistics safety and logistics service quality. So why has commercial‑logistics standardization chosen pallet standards as its primary leverage and unitized‑logistics standards as its central thread?

Where to begin advancing the standardization of modern logistics is a crucial question, and many experts in the logistics field have offered a variety of differing recommendations. However, Old Wang believes that the primary object of logistical operations is… “Things”—the standardization of “things” is the very foundation of logistics standardization. By starting with the standardization of “things,” we can effectively address the core issue and seize the key to successful logistics standardization.

The invention of the Internet established standardized protocols for the transmission of logistics information; likewise, the logistics Internet will also require… Standardize the unit of “things” in the logistics chain and establish common, interoperable communication protocols as foundational standards for the logistics Internet. By starting with standardized unitization of “things,” we can effectively advance logistics standardization—this is where the key lies.

When the basic unit‑of‑load specifications differ across logistics systems, seamless interconnection becomes difficult. This necessitates re‑palletizing and breaking down logistical units during operations, leading to a host of inefficiencies. Similarly, if packaging units across various industries remain unstandardized and each adopts its own system, the handover and integration of goods between these systems will require frequent replacement of handling units.

The most straightforward and obvious example is rail‑gauge conversion. Along the Belt and Road, Chinese trains use a different track gauge than Russia’s, so once any railway reaches Russian territory, it must undergo gauge‑changing. With the logistics infrastructure already in place, this has become a perennial bottleneck for modern logistics—constantly hampering efficiency and proving stubbornly difficult to resolve—because neither our own railway system nor Russia’s can be rebuilt.

From By adopting standardized unitization criteria as a guiding framework to harmonize and standardize the logistics system—covering logistics technologies and equipment, logistics infrastructure, transport vehicles, sorting systems, and more—we can ensure seamless flow of goods across different logistics networks, enhance operational efficiency, and lay a foundation that will shape the future of logistics for generations to come.

Why must the government take the lead in promoting pallet‑centric standardization of logistics unitization?

Logistics standards can significantly enhance logistics efficiency and reduce costs. In line with market principles, any standard that boosts market efficiency should be left to the market to determine its implementation. If companies clearly recognize that pallet standardization can substantially improve logistics efficiency, why aren’t they leveraging market mechanisms? Is it really necessary for the government to spend public funds to drive this forward?

This is indeed a common misconception among many experts; even when the Ministry of Commerce promoted logistics standardization years ago, it faced considerable skepticism from them. In fact, these experts failed to recognize that using pallet standardization as a key lever to vigorously advance commercial‑logistics standardization can boost logistics efficiency and reduce costs—something most companies are well aware of, yet unable to implement on their own.

From the perspective of the logistics system as a whole: Pallet and logistics unitization standards are foundational to the logistics system; they are neither internal corporate standards nor universally adopted by upstream and downstream partners in the supply chain. Consequently, even when companies recognize that logistics standardization can enhance efficiency, achieving system-wide standardization remains challenging, as it requires coordinated alignment and shared specifications across the entire logistics ecosystem. No single enterprise can compel its upstream or downstream partners to alter their own standards to accommodate its proprietary system—especially since these standards govern such critical aspects as warehouse slot dimensions, conveyor and sorting system specifications, material-handling equipment configurations, vehicle compartment sizes, freight‑container dimensions, and product‑packaging module dimensions. A change in one area reverberates throughout the system; revising these standards entails retrofitting a host of facilities and equipment and reconfiguring production lines. Relying solely on market forces cannot deliver the goal of standardized uniformity. If market mechanisms were truly that powerful, the track gauges of China and Russia would have been harmonized long ago. This is precisely where the market fails catastrophically.

From the perspective of government functions: What is the role of government? The government’s task is to address market failures and, on that basis, activate market mechanisms so that the market can play a decisive role. The government should adopt a proactive and effective approach, using policy guidance and financial support to launch pilot projects and demonstration initiatives. By leveraging standardized pallets as a key leverage point, it can promote the harmonization of standards across cargo‑handover processes in the logistics system, enabling seamless interconnectivity and efficient operations. Only when national standards become mainstream in the market will the “invisible hand” of the market begin to function, allowing enterprises to assume a leading role in advancing logistics standardization.

It can be said that standardizing pallets and promoting their shared, cyclical use yields benefits the sooner it is implemented; the earlier the logistics system as a whole adopts unified standards, the sooner the broader economy reaps the rewards. The longer we delay, the more difficult it becomes to overhaul the status quo and advance standardization. Once disparate logistics systems have amassed vast social resources and established extensive infrastructure and technological platforms, the cost of achieving standardization will grow ever higher—ultimately rendering change irreversible. In such a scenario, all parties would be left with no choice but to compromise, condemning society to perpetually bear the burdens of non‑standard practices.

Although China’s efforts to advance pallet and unit‑load logistics standards started somewhat later, we are still in a favorable window of opportunity during this phase of rapid logistics development. We must seize this window firmly, persevere over the long term, and vigorously promote the standardization of commercial and logistics operations, thereby laying the groundwork for the enduring unification of logistics system standards and the sustained enhancement of logistics efficiency for generations to come.

Since standardized unitized logistics is so important, why not make it a mandatory standard to resolve the issue once and for all?

Indeed, many experts and policymakers hold a misconception in this regard: they believe that if pallet standards are made mandatory and enforced, there would be no need for the government to expend such significant effort on organizing and promoting their implementation, nor would it be necessary to allocate substantial funds for pilot projects and demonstration initiatives.

Indeed, when standardization efforts are launched for certain products, initial standards often lack uniformity. However, through the nationwide implementation of mandatory standards and their widespread dissemination, relevant standards are quickly harmonized, fostering healthy and efficient industrial development. For example, the specification standards for building elevators were standardized precisely through the enforcement of mandatory standards.

But can a standardized series of unitized logistics specifications be made mandatory? Clearly not. This is because the objects of logistics operations are not limited to a single product category; they encompass all products. With such complex packaging specifications—covering every product type, as well as newly designed and manufactured items—the uniformity of packaging dimensions cannot be mandated. Consequently, there can be no unified standard series for shipping container sizes, nor can pallet dimensions be fully standardized by force.

A container unit is already a very large cargo‑carrying unit; most products can be loaded into containers. However, many specialized goods still cannot be transported by container. Moreover, the dimensions of these units are far smaller than those of standard pallets used in containers.

Promoting pallet standardization and developing unitized logistics are indeed crucial, and businesses have an urgent need for these initiatives—yet they also require government support. So, couldn’t the government simply provide policy guidance? If logistics standards were harmonized, companies would naturally benefit—so why would the government still invest heavily in subsidies and pilot programs to drive this forward?

This is a good question. Indeed, once logistics system interface standards are unified, operational efficiency improves significantly, and enterprises stand to gain numerous benefits. On the surface, it might seem that the government simply needs to standardize specifications and advance policy to achieve uniformity. However, the reality is far more complex; the challenges encountered in practice go well beyond this simplistic view. For years, pallet‑standardization has remained fragmented, giving rise to vested interests tied to disparate systems within the market. If standardization were pursued solely through policy, many companies would have to overhaul their existing non‑standard logistics infrastructures—requiring substantial capital investment. Asking firms to shoulder these transformation costs in order to promote the adoption of a unified, industry‑wide standard, thereby creating value for others, is an almost impossible task.

Moreover, unitized logistics standards encompass the entire logistics system. Even if my logistics system is upgraded, without standardized freight‑vehicle specifications, palletized transport remains unattainable, and seamless interconnectivity cannot be achieved. Furthermore, acquiring new vehicles would require additional capital investment, among other considerations.

Government funding is intended to address market failures. By providing financial support, it can encourage enterprises in key areas where logistics standardization is applicable to upgrade their non‑standard logistics systems and acquire standardized vehicles, thereby fostering a market environment conducive to logistics standardization. Only then can market mechanisms be activated and allowed to play a decisive role. Once the logistics systems of mainstream firms in these standardized domains have been brought into compliance, and under the leadership of companies that hold dominant positions in the supply chain, market forces will begin to take effect, at which point government funding can gradually be phased out. At that stage, even individual firms with non‑standard logistics systems will, driven by market dynamics, inevitably undertake necessary upgrades.

Why is the pallet chosen as the foundational unit-of‑load standard for logistics system interoperability?

After all, in the land‑based logistics system, pallets serve as the most fundamental unit for seamless cargo handover and interconnection; they are the basic loading unit for freight transport, the key operational element enabling mechanized and automated handling, the most basic storage unit in warehousing systems, and the foundational data‑capture component of logistics information systems. They also constitute the standardized mobile floor of modern logistics, occupying a central position throughout the entire logistics network—changing one aspect affects the whole—and standing as a hallmark of logistics modernization. Are these compelling reasons still not enough?  

How are the standard dimensions of Chinese pallets determined?

In the broader logistics system, pallet standards must be coordinated with trucks, railcars, warehouse racking, and forklift forks, primarily to ensure smooth loading into transport equipment and achieve high volumetric utilization. Consequently, the internal widths of truck bodies, railcar compartments, and containers serve as key constraints in determining palletized unit dimensions. Given that container standards have achieved international recognition, palletized cargo unit sizes are typically based on container specifications. In accordance with this principle, and drawing on the standard dimensions of maritime shipping containers, two distinct pallet unit size configurations have been derived: square: 1100mm × 1100mm and rectangular 1200mm × 1000mm, as follows:

At present, China’s pallet size standards are defined by the two specifications mentioned above, with one of them being given priority. 1200mm x 1000mm dimensions.

Why should it be prioritized for recommendation? What about the 1200 mm × 1000 mm size? Since pallets are the most fundamental unit of load in logistics systems, they must accommodate a wide variety of goods. According to empirical studies, the internationally dominant packaging module is the 600 mm × 400 mm series. Taking into account the principle of aligning pallet dimensions with standard product packaging modules, only the 1200 mm × 1000 mm size meets the requirements. Although 1100 mm × 1100 mm is ideally suited to container dimensions, it does not correspond to the mainstream global packaging module.

In advancing the standardization of commercial and logistics systems, recognizing that a country’s logistics network should not accommodate two different specifications—thus avoiding inconsistencies in standards—the decision was made to unify the pallet standards for China’s commercial and logistics interfaces, establishing the Chinese pallet standard. Taking the 1200 mm × 1000 mm dimension as the benchmark, we will comprehensively advance the coordination and standardization of a unitized logistics system, thereby promoting the harmonization of pallet dimensions across China’s logistics network.

Why is it said that China’s pallet standard dimensions are the most universally applicable in the world?

The determination of pallet dimensions worldwide generally adheres to two criteria: compatibility with container sizes and alignment with the modular dimensions of mainstream product packaging.

Suitable container dimensions: Since containers are primarily used for maritime transport, most island nations—such as Japan—whose economies rely heavily on product exports, often adopt square‑shaped pallet standards. The predominant size is 1100 mm × 1100 mm. With this pallet dimension, forklifts can load and unload in a single direction, resulting in a simple bottom‑plate design that offers good weight capacity and structural strength, while also facilitating container handling. However, this pallet size is incompatible with the standard packaging modules of most mainstream products, making it difficult to stack items neatly on the pallet—this is its primary drawback.

Adaptation to product packaging modulus: Since the packaging modular standard for mainstream products worldwide is 600 mm × 400 mm; accordingly, the mainstream pallet standard in landlocked countries such as those in Europe is 1200 mm × 800 mm. However, this dimension is entirely incompatible with container sizes, necessitating the use of a 1200 mm × 1000 mm standard pallet when exporting products to accommodate container dimensions.

The pallet standard specifications established by China’s commercial and logistics standardization are: 1200 mm × 1000 mm—this dimension is very close to the standard pallet sizes used in the United States and other countries, and it also corresponds to the standard pallet size for product exports in continental Europe. Pallets of this specification are compatible with both maritime container dimensions and the prevailing packaging module standards, making them the most widely used worldwide. Consequently, this standardized pallet size has become the most universally adopted standard globally and holds the potential to serve as the benchmark for harmonizing pallet dimensions across the world.

03  What are the mainstream pallet standards in major countries?

What are the mainstream pallet standards in major countries? Do other countries around the world also use pallet standards as a key lever to promote logistics standardization?

At present, the world’s pallet dimensions are primarily limited to the three types mentioned above. The details are as follows:  

Advanced countries around the world place great emphasis on pallet standards, vigorously promoting pallet standardization through industrial policies as a key lever to drive the development of logistics standardization. Countries such as Japan and South Korea have followed this approach to advance their national logistics standardization efforts.  

Advanced countries not only promote the standardization of domestic logistics through pallet standards but also leverage government funding to advance pallet standardization on the international stage, actively advocating for their national pallet standards in other nations. For example, over the past decade or so, Japan has consistently used public funds to sponsor Chinese pallet experts to study in Japan, hoping that by learning about and gaining a deeper understanding of Japanese pallet standards, China will adopt them as well. Japanese pallet‑related associations and institutions—such as the Japan Distribution Research Institute—regularly dispatch delegations to China to promote Japanese pallet standards and lobby for their adoption. Of course, owing to a critical drawback—the incompatibility of Japanese pallet standards with the mainstream dimensional modules used in international product packaging—China ultimately did not fully embrace Japan’s pallet standards, instead opting to adopt… The 1200 mm × 1000 mm standard is the preferred recommendation; however, the Japanese standard was successfully incorporated into China’s pallet standards as one of the standard dimensions.

04   How has the Chinese pallet standard evolved?

In its early years, China sought to align itself with other countries, In 1996, China’s national pallet standards adopted, in an equivalent manner, the four globally recommended pallet specifications from ISO 1988, resulting in a situation where standardization was present yet far from uniform. Moreover, numerous industry‑specific pallet standards coexist in China, and the lack of harmonized dimensions has hindered the advancement of standardization within the country’s logistics system. This has led to confusion over standard pallet sizes, as well as difficulties in unifying cargo unit standards at logistics interface points. Although subsequent revisions sought to streamline the standards, they nevertheless incorporated Japanese specifications into the Chinese framework, leaving cargo unit standards at logistics interfaces still inconsistent and significantly increasing the overall cost of China’s logistics system.

Through pilot and demonstration projects on the standardization of commercial logistics, the concept of adopting a unified pallet standard in China has gained widespread consensus. To align with the Chinese pallet standard, the Chinese postal system has adjusted its standards for parcel‑packaging modules, and China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has revised… According to GB 1589, the standard for vehicle external dimensions, the interior dimensions of newly designed vehicles are precisely configured to accommodate two pallets side by side. Likewise, the dimensions of Chinese road‑transport containers have been revised to align with the two‑pallet‑wide configuration, thereby harmonizing with the vehicle‑external‑dimension requirements of GB 1589. It can be said that China’s pilot and demonstration projects for commercial‑logistics standardization have yielded significant results: the country’s broader logistics system has successfully integrated upstream and downstream links through pallet‑standardization, and a unified framework for logistics standardization has been preliminarily established. These achievements will profoundly transform the current state of logistics‑system standardization, with impacts that, like the historical initiatives of “unifying writing” and “standardizing track gauge,” will resonate across generations.

Internationally, China’s pallet standards are gaining increasing influence. Thanks to China’s efforts, countries in Europe have now agreed to adopt the pallet standards that China has prioritized for the Belt and Road Initiative, while nations across Asia have also widely embraced these standards. Moreover, the mainstream pallet dimensions in the United States are very close to this specification.

I hope that, in the next revision of pallet standards, China will standardize pallet dimensions and retain only one specification as our preferred standard: 1200mm x 1000mm. I also hope that China’s pallet standard will become the global standard—let’s all work together to make it happen!

05   Why does standardizing commercial logistics—using pallet standards as a key leverage point—yield such immediate and effective results?

Pallets circulate along with goods among manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, and end users. This circulation of pallets results in the following pallet dimensions:

1. It must be compatible with the product packaging module to ensure optimal palletized load efficiency.

2. It must be compatible with the dimensions of various forklifts to optimize loading and unloading efficiency.

3. It should be compatible with the shelf specifications to enhance storage efficiency.

4. It must be compatible with the dimensions of freight trucks, rail flatcars, and shipping containers to enhance transportation efficiency.

Pallet size standards are the most fundamental and quintessential interrelated standards in the logistics industry. By starting with pallet standardization, logistics standardization naturally drives progress in product packaging standardization, unit load device standardization, warehousing equipment standardization, and transport equipment standardization, yielding substantial economic benefits.

Of course, the standardization of pallets will necessitate the standardized upgrading of a range of non‑standardized logistics equipment and facilities, which in turn entails certain social adjustment costs. Therefore, it is not feasible to rely solely on market mechanisms to advance pallet standardization; government guidance and policy support are essential to drive this process.

By starting with pallet standardization, we’ve seized the key link in logistics standardization!  

06  What are the common misconceptions in advancing logistics standardization?

First, there is the view that logistics standardization simply means establishing logistics standards: Standardization is not about setting standards; the focus of standardization lies in… The character “hua” (化) is a play on words: it consists of the radical for “person” with a dagger beside it, symbolizing a normative, coercive action. In China, logistics standardization hinges on the practical application of standards—not on simply drafting numerous logistics standards.

Second, there is a view that standardization efforts are solely about promoting the application of national standards: In fact, the focus of standardization lies with enterprises; they are at the heart of logistics standardization and serve as the driving force behind its advancement. In the course of standardization efforts, it is essential to promote the harmonization and uniformity of national logistics standards, thereby encouraging the gradual refinement of internal enterprise standard systems—particularly in areas such as service standards, operational process standards, and management standards. Enterprise standards constitute the core and typically account for at least a significant portion of the standards implemented within the organization. More than 70%—to facilitate the implementation of corporate standards, companies should not merely draft and file their standards and internal regulations for record‑keeping; instead, they should promote the comprehensive application of these standards and vigorously advance standard‑visualization initiatives, making corporate standards tangible and easily enforceable.

Third, there is a perception that corporate standards are inadequate, leading to an overreliance on logistics standardization as a means of elevating these corporate standards to the national level. In fact, with respect to safety standards, service‑oriented standards, and operational standards, corporate standards should set the highest requirements, followed by industry standards, then national standards, and finally international standards. National and international standards are, by their very nature, benchmarks that all enterprises across a broader scope are expected to meet—outcomes shaped through negotiation and compromise among a wider range of stakeholders. Enterprises are inherently required to comply with national standards, while their own internal standards should exceed those national requirements; moreover, the state actively encourages companies to establish standards that go beyond the baseline set by national regulations.

Fourth, there is the view that standardizing commercial and logistics operations amounts to encouraging pallet leasing. In advancing the standardization of commercial and logistics operations, pallets—being the most commonly used unit of cargo in inter‑system handoffs—play a pivotal role. By promoting pallet‑based transportation through pallet leasing, we can achieve seamless connectivity across supply‑chain logistics systems: incoming goods can be directly loaded and unloaded with forklifts and routed straight into the company’s own storage system, eliminating the need to transfer items from the supplier’s pallets to the company’s own. This, in turn, necessitates that logistics equipment standards—including pallets, forklifts, handling equipment, racking and storage locations, and freight vehicles—be aligned with pallet dimensions, thereby driving broader logistics standardization. The national objective is not merely to encourage enterprises to adopt pallet leasing; rather, it is to leverage pallet leasing and palletized transport as a catalyst for harmonizing pallet‑related standards throughout the upstream and downstream supply chain.

Fifth, there is the view that standardization in commercial logistics is confined solely to pallets and unitized logistics. Its… It has been definitively confirmed. Following the establishment of unit standards for “goods,” we should comprehensively advance standards for “flows,” encompassing process standards for logistics operations, cargo handover procedures, and logistics services. Building on these standards for “goods” and “flows,” we can then move forward with standards for the “supply chain,” ensuring that logistics standards are implemented in a step-by-step, tiered manner.

Promote The standard for a “supply chain” requires the integration of logistics, information flow, capital flow, and commercial flow into a unified system. To achieve this, each physical unit must be assigned a unique identifier—akin to an ID card—enabling end-to-end logistics informatization at the level of individual units.

Coding of logistics units is the foundation of logistics informatization; it facilitates the integration of information‑based logistics units with physical cargo‑unitization, unifies physical logistics flows with virtual information streams, and thereby advances the convergence of logistics, commercial, and financial flows. This, in turn, enhances supply chain management and drives the development of smart logistics. Consequently, the standardization of commercial and trade logistics goes far beyond merely… The standardization of “physical objects” at the unit level must also be underpinned by such standardization to advance the standardization of “flows,” and in turn, further promote the standardization of “supply chains.”

Information units, measurement units, ordering units, circulation units, data units, and tracking units are all built upon the cargo unit as their foundation.  

07   What is unitized logistics?

Logistics is a broad and multifaceted concept, encompassing an exceptionally wide range of activities and sectors. It includes small‑item logistics, medium‑sized packaged logistics, as well as large‑ and extra‑large‑item logistics; it covers liquid logistics, bulk‑material logistics, and solid‑material logistics. Moreover, the industries involved in logistics are highly diverse, and logistics systems vary considerably from one another. The specialized knowledge required in this field is extremely sophisticated, to the point that no single expert can claim to be a true all‑round authority on logistics.

However, when analyzing logistics, we in the logistics industry must distill complexity into simplicity through highly concise summarization. From this perspective, I simplify logistics operations into five key actions: sort, consolidate, move, transport, and store—namely, sorting, merging flows, handling, transportation, and warehousing. This is what I call the “Five-Character Formula of Logistics” proposed by Mr. Wang.

The object of logistics operations is goods. By packaging these goods into standardized units, logistics processes can seamlessly integrate and disaggregate—much like assembling building blocks—enabling efficient sorting and consolidation, standardized stacking, and streamlined handling. Leveraging big data, cloud computing, and the Internet of Things, sorting and consolidation are optimized and strategically managed, allowing for rapid sorting and separation while also facilitating swift re‑consolidation, sharing logistics resources, and reducing overall logistics costs.

Unitized logistics refers to the process of consolidating goods at the point of origin into standardized, uniform cargo units and maintaining these basic unitized forms throughout the entire logistics chain, all the way to the final delivery stage. This is what constitutes unitized logistics.

Unitized logistics begins with packaging, where a wide array of complex items is organized into standardized packaging modules. Standardized logistics crates, pallets, and containers constitute the three most well-known standard units—small, medium, and large—in the logistics system. The standardization of each has sparked revolutionary changes in the logistics industry, reshaping the world.

Unitization technology has significantly reduced logistics costs, fundamentally transforming traditional transport packaging and handling equipment. It has also dismantled the previous fragmented approach—where packaging, loading and unloading, storage, and transportation were managed in isolation—thereby enabling seamless interconnection and integration across the entire logistics system.