In order to weaken the monopoly position of traditional retailer, manufacturers introduce online channel to compete with retailers. This paper is on the basis of consumers' low-carbon and channel preferences, to research whether manufacturers would take action to reduce emissions. Through the comparative analysis of different decision models, the optimal boundary of emission reduction can be found. The results show that,in decentralized decision-making model, the low carbon decision of the manufacturer is influenced by the channel preference; the low carbon decision of the manufacturer remains unchanged when the centralized decision is made. Reduction boundary of different decision models is related to the preference for channel.When the channel preference is higher, the reduction boundary of decentralized decision-making is higher; when the channel preference is lower, the reduction boundary of centralized decision is higher; when the channel preference is neutral, both of them have same reduction boundary. The manufacturer should bring in low-carbon technology, low-carbon management and other ways to reduce the cost sensitive value, and also increase consumers' recognition of its low carbon products through low carbon product certification and advertising at the same time.
Sun Jia-nan, Xiao Zhong-dong
. Decision-making of Dual-channel Supply Chain Emission Reduction based on Consumer Preference to Low-carbon[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2018
, 26(4)
: 49
-56
.
DOI: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2018.04.006
[1] 王建明, 贺爱忠. 消费者低碳消费行为的心理归因和政策干预路径:一个基于扎根理论的探索性研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2011,14(4):80-89.
[2] Shuai Chuanmin, Ding Liping, Zhang Yukun, et al. How consumers are willing to pay for low-carbon products?-Results from a carbon-labeling scenario experiment in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014, 83:366-373.
[3] 范小军, 刘艳. 制造商引入在线渠道的双渠道价格与服务竞争策略[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016,24(7):143-148.
[4] Benjaafar S, Li Yanzhi, Daskin M. Carbon footprint and the management of supply chains:Insights from simple models[J]. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 2013, 10(1):99-116.
[5] Yang Lei, Zheng Chengbin, Xu Minghui. Comparisons of low carbon policies in supply chain coordination[J]. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2014, 23(3):342-361.
[6] 何华, 马常松, 吴忠和. 碳限额与交易政策下考虑绿色技术投入的定价策略研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(5):74-84.
[7] 赵道致, 原白云, 徐春秋. 考虑消费者低碳偏好未知的产品线定价策略[J]. 系统工程, 2014, 32(1):77-81.
[8] Du Shaofu, Hu Li, Song Malin. Production optimization considering environmental performance and preference in the cap-and-trade system[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 112:1600-1607.
[9] 刘名武, 吴开兰, 许茂增. 面向消费者低碳偏好的供应链减排成本分摊与协调[J]. 工业工程与管理, 2016, 21(4):50-57.
[10] 吴义生, 吴顺祥, 白少布, 等. 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.
[11] Martín-Herrán G, Taboubi S. Price coordination in distribution channels:a dynamic perspective[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2015, 240(2):401-414.
[12] Li Bo,Zhu Mengyan, Jiang Yushan, et al. Pricing policies of a competitive dual-channel green supply chain[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 112(20):2029-2042.
[13] 滕文波, 庄贵军. 基于电子渠道需求预测的渠道模式选择[J]. 中国管理科学, 2011, 19(5):71-78.
[14] Chiang W K, Chhajed D, Hess J D. Direct marketing, indirect profits:A strategic analysis of dual-channel supply-chain design[J]. Management science, 2003, 49(1):1-20.
[15] 黄松, 杨超, 杨珺. 需求和成本同时扰动下双渠道供应链定价与生产决策[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2014, 34(5):1219-1229.
[16] 王一雷, 朱庆华, 夏西强. 基于消费偏好的供应链上下游联合减排协调契约博弈模型[J]. 系统工程学报, 2017, 32(2):188-198.
[17] 胡新平, 李天丽, 邓腾腾. 质量和价格影响需求的双渠道供应链饥饿营销策略[J]. 系统管理学报, 2015, 24(3):436-443.
[18] Yohe G W,Schlesinger M E.Sea-level change:the expected economic cost of protection or abandonment in the United States[J]. Climatic Change,1998,38(4):447-472.
