中国管理科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (9): 128-139.doi: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2020.0165
陈金晓1, 陈剑2
收稿日期:
2020-02-07
修回日期:
2020-05-08
出版日期:
2022-09-20
发布日期:
2022-09-01
通讯作者:
陈金晓(1983-),男(汉族),浙江台州人,中国社会科学院,博士,研究方向:供应链管理,Email:jincheng0830@126.com.
E-mail:jincheng0830@126.com
基金资助:
CHEN Jin-xiao1, CHEN Jian2
Received:
2020-02-07
Revised:
2020-05-08
Online:
2022-09-20
Published:
2022-09-01
Contact:
陈金晓
E-mail:jincheng0830@126.com
摘要: 供应链涉及多个利益主体,优化供应链的全局效益需要成员企业的协调来实现。效率评估的非参数法应用广泛,但是单纯的效率优化未考虑资源的可替代性和再分配,忽视了投入(产出)结构调整释放的优化空间。对于效率分解,取折衷或单边最优的方案不完全符合企业追求各自利益最大化的目标。本文针对两级供应链的利润优化问题建立一般化的分析框架,同时考虑了技术进步和资源可替代性的影响,对成员企业的利润博弈展开讨论,探讨了合作博弈如何促成供应链实现集权模式下的最优。通过建立议价模型得出了纳什均衡基础上的成员企业最优利润组合,并给出了实现最优分配方案的中间产品均衡定价。
中图分类号:
陈金晓, 陈剑. 供应链的利润博弈与均衡定价[J]. 中国管理科学, 2022, 30(9): 128-139.
CHEN Jin-xiao, CHEN Jian. Supply Chain Profit Game and Equilibrium Pricing[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2022, 30(9): 128-139.
[1] 陈剑. 低碳供应链管理研究[J]. 系统管理学报, 2012, 21(6): 721-728,735.Chen Jian. Study on supply chain management in a low-carbon era[J]. Journal of Systems & Management, 2012, 21(6): 721-728,735. [2] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. The balanced score card-measures that drive performance[J]. Harvard Business Review, 1992, 1: 71-79. [3] 马士华, 李华焰, 林勇. 平衡记分法在供应链绩效评价中的应用研究[J]. 工业工程与管理, 2002(4): 5-10.Ma Shihua, Li Huayan, Lin Yong. An application research of supply chain performance measurement using balanced scorecard[J]. Industrial Engineering and Management, 2002(4): 5-10. [4] Saaty T L. The analytic hierarchy process[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980. [5] Zadeh L A. Fuzzy sets[J]. Information and Control, 1965, 8(3): 338-353. [6] Buckley J J. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis[J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1985, 17(3): 233-247. [7] Zahedi F. The analytic hierarchy process: A survey of the method and its applications[J]. Interfaces, 1986, 16(4): 96-108. [8] Charnes A, Cooper W W, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1978, 2(6): 429-444. [9] Seiford L M, Zhu J. Profitability and marketability of the top 55 U.S. commercial banks[J]. Management Science, 1999, 45(9): 1270-1288. [10] Kao C, Hwang S-N. Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2008, 185(1): 418-429. [11] 毕功兵, 梁樑, 杨锋. 两阶段生产系统的DEA效率评价模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2007, 15(2): 92-96.Bi Gongbing, Liang Liang, Yang Feng. A DEA-based efficiency-measuring model for a two-stage production system. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2007, 15(2): 92-96. [12] Liang Liang, Yang Feng, Cook W D, et al. DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation[J]. Annals of Operations Research, 2006, 145: 35-49. [13] Chen Yao, Du Juan, Sherman H D, et al. DEA model with shared resources and efficiency decomposition[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2010, 207(1): 339-349. [14] Wu Desheng. BiLevel programming data envelopment analysis with constrained resource[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2010, 207(2): 856-864. [15] 陈凯华, 官建成. 共享投入型关联两阶段生产系统的网络DEA效率测度与分解[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2011, 31(7): 1211-1221.Chen Kaihua, Guan Jiancheng. Network DEA-based efficiency measurement and decomposition for a relational two-stage production system with shared inputs[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2011, 31(7): 1211-1221. [16] Fre R, Grosskopf S. Productivity and intermediate products: A frontier approach[J]. Economics Letters, 1996, 50(1): 65-70. [17] 夏琼, 杨锋, 梁樑, 等. 多阶段混联生产系统的DEA效率评价[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2011, 31(2): 291-296.Xia Qiong, Yang Feng, Liang Liang, et al. DEA efficiency evaluation to multi-stage parallel-series production systems[J]. Systems Engineering — Theory & Practice, 2011, 31(2): 291-296. [18] 韩松, 苏熊. 中国商业银行结构效率研究: 基于复杂网络DEA模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(8): 1-9.Han Song, Su Xiong. Study on structure efficiency of Chinese commercial banking: Basing on complex network DEA model[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2016, 24(8): 1-9. [19] Chen Yao, Liang Liang, Yang Feng. A DEA game model approach to supply chain efficiency[J]. Annals of Operations Research, 2006, 145(1): 5-13. [20] Du Juan, Liang Liang, Chen Yao, et al. A bargaining game model for measuring performance of two-stage network structures[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2011, 210(2): 390-397. [21] Mahmoudi R, Emrouznejad A, Rasti-Barzoki M. A bargaining game model for performance assessment in network DEA considering sub-networks: a real case study in banking[J]. Neural Computing and Applications, 2019, 31: 6429-6447. [22] 熊曦, 关忠诚, 杨国梁, 等. 嵌套并联结构两阶段DEA下科技创新效率测度与分解[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(3): 206-216.Xiong Xi, Guan Zhongcheng, Yang Guoliang, et al. Measuring S&T efficiency and its decomposition using a two-stage DEA model with nested parallel structure[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2019, 27(3): 206-216. [23] Debreu G. The coefficient of resource utilization[J]. Econometrica, 1951, 19(3): 273-292. [24] Farrell M J. The measurement of productive efficiency[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 1957, 120(3): 253-290. [25] Fre R, Grosskopf S, Lovell C A K. Measurement of efficiency of production[M]. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing Co., Inc., 1985. [26] Cooper W W, Seiford L M, Tone K. Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software[M]. New York: Springer, 2007. [27] Liang Liang, Cook W D, Zhu J. DEA models for two-stage processes: Game approach and efficiency decomposition[J]. Naval Research Logistics, 2008, 55(7): 643-653. [28] Chen Yao, Cook W D, Zhu J. Deriving the DEA frontier for two-stage processes[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2010, 202(1): 138-142. [29] Rubinstein A. Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model[J]. Econometrica, 1982, 50(1): 97-109. |
[1] | 熊强,练帅,李治文,金帅. 双边道德风险下软件供应链信息安全责任协调契约设计[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(10): 265-274. |
[2] | 姜涛,高丽,刘露,柴旭东. 队列中的信息异构:基于口碑传播的等待制服务系统定价决策[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(10): 123-132. |
[3] | 黄苒,胡丽琴,李梦圆. 专有关系投资、议价力与企业违约风险[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(9): 11-23. |
[4] | 张艳芬,徐琪,孙中苗. 供应商竞争下考虑道德风险的平台供应链最优动态激励契约[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(9): 160-170. |
[5] | 李恒宇,柴俊武. 溢出效应下制造商的直播带货策略研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(9): 171-181. |
[6] | 王鹏,王要玉,王建才. 零售平台自有品牌与制造商渠道策略的竞合博弈分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(9): 214-224. |
[7] | 李进,刘格格,张海霞,张江华. 基于消费者绿色偏好和渠道竞争的制造商分散式入侵策略[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(7): 281-290. |
[8] | 冯颖,魏敏,何文豪,张炎治. 质量信息不对称下考虑参考价格效应的灰市供应链定价决策[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(6): 207-218. |
[9] | 李志鹏,周晓宇. 考虑消费者餍足效应的网络视频产业链最优决策研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(6): 229-239. |
[10] | 马德青,王晓晴,胡劲松. 多渠道零售下考虑消费者反展厅现象的平台型供应链销售模式选择[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(5): 133-146. |
[11] | 孙中苗,徐琪,张艳芬. 信息不对称下按需服务平台拥有不同类型代理人时的动态激励契约[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(5): 241-253. |
[12] | 熊一凡. 多重行动异质网络博弈[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(5): 265-274. |
[13] | 赵丹,严啸宸,汪和平,李艳. 双积分政策下汽车企业合作创新演化博弈分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(4): 279-292. |
[14] | 李波,张春燕,张俊飚. 食品企业质量安全意识提升的演化博弈逻辑[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(4): 315-324. |
[15] | 杨松,张言彩,王爱峰. 多主体参与下食品安全社会共治演化博弈稳定性[J]. 中国管理科学, 2024, 32(4): 325-334. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||
|