考虑政府低碳政策的双销售模式供应链决策研究

doi:10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2018.04.004

中国管理科学 ›› 2018, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (4): 30-40.doi: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2018.04.004

考虑政府低碳政策的双销售模式供应链决策研究

曹斌斌¹, 肖忠东^2,1, 祝春阳³

1. 西安交通大学管理学院, 陕西西安 710049;
2. 新疆大学经济与管理学院, 新疆乌鲁木齐 830046;
3. 青岛海尔特种电冰柜有限公司, 山东青岛 266500

收稿日期:2017-01-13 修回日期:2017-12-30 出版日期:2018-04-20 发布日期:2018-06-22
通讯作者: 肖忠东(1968-),男(汉族),湖南安化人,西安交通大学管理学院教授,新疆大学天山学者,博士生导师,研究方向:低碳物流管理,E-mail:xzd@mail.xjtu.edu.cn E-mail:xzd@mail.xjtu.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目（71390333，71671136）；教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目（16YJA630058）

Research on Decision-making of Supply Chain with Dual Sale Mode Considering Government's Low-carbon Policies

CAO Bin-bin¹, XIAO Zhong-dong^2,1, ZHU Chun-yang³

1. School of Management, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China;
2. School of Economics and Management, Xinjiang University, Urumchi 830046, China;
3. Qingdao Haier Special Refrigerator Co., Ltd, Qingdao 266500, China

Received:2017-01-13 Revised:2017-12-30 Online:2018-04-20 Published:2018-06-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 消费者低碳消费趋势及政府碳排放政策的颁布和实施，迫使企业必须审视自身生产运营中的碳排放问题。本文研究单一销售模式和双销售模式下政府价格补贴、一次性补贴、碳税等政策对低碳供应链决策的作用机制，构建含有一个生产商和一个零售商的低碳供应链集中式决策模型。基于基准模型和三种政策决策模型，解析分析各政策对供应链产品定价和利润的影响。研究结果表明相同减排程度下，双销售模式的产品价格补贴力度大于单一销售方式；从政府角度来看，对于单一销售模式，要使企业达到相同的减排效果应当选择一次性补贴政策，而双销售模式应实行价格补贴政策；政府征收碳税提高了减排边界，促使更多企业进行减排，同时单一销售模式减排边界高于双销售模式；政府应该合理制定碳税，否则会导致企业不愿减排或退出市场。另外仿真分析了减排量对产品价格和供应链利润的影响以及三种政策参数对供应链利润的影响，揭示出相关的管理学启示，本文的研究结论能为政府制定低碳政策提供一定的理论依据。

关键词: 低碳供应链, 价格补贴, 一次性补贴, 碳税

Abstract: The trend of consumers' low-carbon consumption and the promulgation and implementation of the government carbon emission policies compel the company to inspect carbon emission of their own production and operations. The effects of government price subsidy, one-time subsidy and carbon tax on the decision-making of low-carbon supply chain under the single and dual sale modes are studied in this paper. A low-carbon supply chain centralized decision-making model with one producer and one retailer is built. On the basis of base model and decision models of three policies, the impacts of each policy on pricing and supply chain profit are explored analytically. The results show that given the same emission reduction degree, the product price subsidy under dual sale mode is greater than that of single sale mode. From the perspective of government, for single sale mode, the company should choose one-time subsidy policy to achieve the same emission reduction effect, while dual sale mode should implement the price subsidy policy. Carbon tax can improve emission reduction boundary to promote much more companies to reduce emission. Emission reduction boundary of single sale model is still higher than that of dual sale mode. Government should make a reasonable carbon tax, otherwise the company will not be willing to reduce emission or withdraw from the market. Additionally, the effects of emission reduction on pricing and supply chain profit as well as the influence of three policies' parameters on supply chain profit have been simulated, and some managerial implications have been revealed. The conclusions of this paper can provide theoretical foundation for the government to formulate low-carbon policy.

Key words: low-carbon supply chain, price subsidy, one-time subsidy, carbon tax

中图分类号:

F272.3

曹斌斌, 肖忠东, 祝春阳. 考虑政府低碳政策的双销售模式供应链决策研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(4): 30-40.

CAO Bin-bin, XIAO Zhong-dong, ZHU Chun-yang. Research on Decision-making of Supply Chain with Dual Sale Mode Considering Government's Low-carbon Policies[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2018, 26(4): 30-40.

参考文献

[1] Resnier M, Wang Can, Du Pengfei, et al. The promotion of sustainable development in China through the optimization of a tax/subsidy plan among HFC and power generation CDM projects[J]. Energy Policy, 2007, 35(9):4529-4544.

[2] Toshimitsu T. On the paradoxical case of a consumer-based environmental subsidy policy[J]. Economic Modeling, 2010, 27(1):159-164.

[3] Hong J, Koo, Y, Jeong G, et al. Ex-ante evaluation of profitability and government's subsidy policy on vehicle-to-grid system[J]. Energy Policy, 2012, 42:95-104.

[4] 朱庆华, 窦一杰. 基于政府补贴分析的绿色供应链管理博弈模型[J]. 管理科学学报, 2011, 14(6):86-95.

[5] Sheu J B, Chen Y J. Impact of government financial intervention on competition among green supply chains[J]. International Journal of Production Economics, 2012, 138(1):201-213.

[6] Letmathe P, Balakrishnan N. Environmental considerations on the optimal product mix[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2005, 167(2):398-412.

[7] Anand K S, Carrier F G.Pollution regulation:An operations perspective[R].Working Paper, University of Utah, 2015.

[8] Benjaafar S, Li Yanzhi, Daskin M. Carbon footprint and the management of supply chains:Insights from simple models[J]. IEEE Trans on Automation Science and Engineering, 2013, 10(1):99-116.

[9] Jaber M Y, Glock C H, Saadany A. Supply chain coordination with emissions reduction incentives[J]. International Journal of Production Research, 2013, 51(1):69-82.

[10] 谢鑫鹏,赵道致.低碳供应链生产及交易决策机制[J].控制与决策,2014,29(4):651-658.

[11] He Ping, Zhang Wei, Xu Xiaoyan, et al. Production lot-sizing and carbon emissions under cap-and-trade and carbon tax regulations[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2015, 103:241-248.

[12] 支帮东, 陈俊霖, 刘晓红. 碳限额与交易机制下基于成本共担契约的两级供应链协调策略[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(7):48-56.

[13] 李剑, 苏秦. 考虑运输过程的供应链减排模型研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(2):78-86.

[14] 刘超, 慕静. 碳排放政策不同和碳敏感度差异对于供应链的影响研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 9(9):178-187.

[15] Yohe G W, Michael E S. Sea-level change:The expected economic cost of protection or abandonment in the United States[J]. Climatic Change, 1998, 38:447-472.

[16] Yue Jinfeng, Austin J, Wang M C, et al. Coordination of cooperative advertising in a two-level supply chain when manufacture offers discount[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, 168(1):65-85.

考虑政府低碳政策的双销售模式供应链决策研究

Research on Decision-making of Supply Chain with Dual Sale Mode Considering Government's Low-carbon Policies

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	刁心薇, 曾珍香, 孙丞. 混合碳政策下两产品供应链的协同研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2021, 29(2): 149-159.
[2]	王珊珊, 张李浩, 范体军. 基于碳减排技术的竞争供应链投资均衡策略研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(6): 73-82.
[3]	邢恩凤, 史成东, 闫秀霞, 程顺斌, 林静, 倪士萍. 三维交易模式下企业协同低碳减排研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(3): 174-181.
[4]	王芹鹏. 考虑参考减排努力水平效应的联合减排与竞争动态策略研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(10): 172-182.
[5]	周艳菊, 胡凤英, 周正龙. 碳税政策下制造商竞争的供应链定价策略和社会福利研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(7): 94-105.
[6]	李友东, 夏良杰, 王锋正. 基于产品替代的低碳供应链博弈与协调模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(10): 66-76.
[7]	周章金, 符小玲, 李敏. 基于碳排放的废弃产品回收站点分布研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(4): 41-48.
[8]	孙嘉楠, 肖忠东. 考虑消费者双重偏好的低碳供应链减排策略研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(4): 49-56.
[9]	郭正权, 张兴平, 郑宇花. 能源价格波动对能源-环境-经济系统的影响研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(11): 22-30.
[10]	刘超, 慕静. 碳排放政策不同和碳敏感度差异对于供应链的影响研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(9): 178-187.
[11]	吴义生, 吴顺祥, 白少布, 朱振涛. 面向网购的低碳供应链超网络优化模型及其应用[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(6): 111-120.
[12]	李剑, 苏秦. 考虑运输过程的供应链减排模型研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(2): 78-86.
[13]	周艳菊, 鲍茂景, 陈晓红, 徐选华. 基于公平关切的低碳供应链广告合作-减排成本分担契约与协调[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(2): 121-129.
[14]	张汉江, 张佳雨, 赖明勇. 低碳背景下政府行为及供应链合作研发博弈分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015, 23(10): 57-66.
[15]	凌六一, 郭晓龙, 胡中菊, 梁樑. 基于随机产出与随机需求的农产品供应链风险共担合同[J]. 中国管理科学, 2013, (2): 50-57.