## 4 Results and Discussion
### Discussion on the Statistical Tests of H1 and H2  
In the following, statistical results concerning our research hypotheses on categories of geographic area are discussed. In particular, such hypotheses--which are negatives of the null ones reported in Table 8a--state that:  
**Hypothesis 1 (H1). **_The profit distribution varies across categories of geographic area, that is, across the different geographic areas, not across each country pertaining to a specific geographic area._  
**Hypothesis 2 (H2). **_The profitability distribution varies across categories of geographic area, that is, across the different geographic areas, not across each country pertaining to a specific geographic area._  
As a first remark, such hypotheses are rejected. In fact, both profit and profitability distributions are the same across categories of geographic area (Table 8a). In this case, multiple comparisons were not performed because the overall test does not show significant differences across such categories. Considering profit and profitability performances shown in Tables 3 and 4, the statistical analysis of area-specific variables (Table 8a) shows an overall significance of success factors and policies in the European context. It also proves that there are no single factors or policies having a relevantly higher impact than others on the likelihood of success of cycle logistics projects. Although differences between distributions depending on the area are not significant, we can still analyze data in Table 4 in order to obtain a deeper understanding of the determinants of such a phenomenon. Data concerning profit and profitability by area highlight somewhat high values in terms of mean and standard deviation, except for Scandinavia. Mean values associated with projects in \"Central Europe\" prove to be higher than the overall average, whilst those in the \"UK and Ireland\" and \"Greece, Italy and the Mediterranean islands\" are just below it. \"Scandinavia\" has the lowest mean values. One of the main reasons behind that may be found by considering that cycling is an activity deeply rooted in Scandinavian cultures, especially in Denmark, which is the application context of the two projects considered for this area. Therefore, Danish people are used to transporting both small- and big-sized goods by themselves, thus not calling for bike delivery services. For instance, in 2008, IKEA invested in bikes--and trailers, if needed--at selected stores in Denmark (and also in Sweden) so that customers can ride home for free with their new purchases [111; 112]. Although Danish projects show the lowest profit level, their profitability level goes high, much more than in any other area in Europe. A possible interpretation is that the high degree of accessibility and availability of suitable infrastructures in those countries helps with lowering the cost of some items--e.g., vehicle maintenance, insurance and, hence, purchase of new bikes. On the other hand, it helps with increasing service levels--e.g., deliveries are more likely to be made on time and customers are more satisfied. Moreover, supporting economic measures prove to nurture