Retailer-driven carbon emission abatement with consumer environmental awareness and carbon tax: Revenue-sharing versus Cost-sharing

Omega ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 78 ◽  
pp. 179-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huixiao Yang ◽  
Wenbo Chen
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Jian Liu ◽  
Chao Hu

Carbon tax policy has been shown to be an effective incentive for the reduction of carbon emissions, and it also profoundly influences supply chain cooperation. This paper explores the interaction between carbon taxes and green supply chain cooperation. Specifically, we analyze the impact of a carbon tax on green supply chain coordination and further optimize the carbon tax to achieve a win-win situation for both the supply chain and the environment. Because consumer’s behavior has a significant impact on green product demand, we consider the problems above under two types of consumer’s behavior characteristics: consumer’s environmental awareness and consumer’s reference behavior. A game-theoretic model is employed to describe a green supply chain consisting of a manufacturer and a retailer, combining important factors such as the carbon tax rate, green investment coefficient, and degree of reference effect. Then, we obtain the optimal carbon tax rate by balancing the total tax revenue and product greenness. A revenue-sharing contract is introduced to achieve green supply chain coordination, and the impact of the carbon tax on coordination is analyzed. The results show the following. (1) The carbon tax rate and the difference between the power of the manufacturer and retailer are the main factors determining green supply chain coordination. (2) Maximum greenness can be achieved when development costs are higher, while the maximum tax revenue is obtained when the development cost is lower, but with the loss of greenness. (3) If the power of the manufacturer is low, coordination can be achieved under the optimal carbon tax. If the power of the manufacturer is at a medium level, coordination can be achieved by increasing the carbon tax; as a result, increased greenness will be realized, but with the loss of tax revenue. However, when the power of the manufacturer is strong, coordination cannot be achieved. (4) Price reference behavior can promote supply chain coordination, but consumer’s environmental awareness cannot.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Chao-qun Han ◽  
Hua-ying Gu ◽  
Li-hui Sui ◽  
Chang-peng Shao

Since the tax of carbon emission is popular and consumers are exhibiting low-carbon preference, the green manufactures have to spend more extra cost on investing carbon emission reduction (CER) technology to decrease the carbon emission. To encourage the manufacture’s CER investment efforts, this paper explores the impact of carbon tax, CER cost, and consumers’ low-carbon preference on low-carbon decision-making and designs a revenue-sharing contract (RS) by constructing Stackelberg models. Based on the theoretical and numerical analysis, this paper finds that the supply chain would benefit from the increment of consumer’s environmental awareness but be depressed by the increase of the CER investment cost factor. Additionally, there exists a unique optimal carbon tax to make CER degree the maximum. Furthermore, RS can effectively promote manufacturers to reduce carbon emissions and also improve the supply chain efficiency.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Wen Song ◽  
Ai Ren ◽  
Xiaodong Li ◽  
Qi Li

In this paper, we investigate the role of carbon subsidies in a capital-constrained supply chain. We analyze two green technology investment structures in such supply chains: one where the manufacturer determines the optimal carbon emission abatement level (MI-structure) and one where the retailer determines the optimal carbon emission abatement level (RI-structure). As the leader (the powerful participant or the first mover in a supply chain), the manufacturer may choose the investment structure that is most favorable to them. Our major findings are as follows: (1) carbon subsidies can improve the performance of a centralized green supply chain; (2) there exists a threshold value of carbon subsidy that determines the manufacturer’s choice of the best carbon emission abatement investment structure, but the retailer always benefits from RI-structure; and (3) the traditional cost-sharing contract fails to achieve green supply chain coordination. However, as an orchestrator, the carbon subsidy plays a crucial role in achieving quantity coordination when implemented alongside traditional cost-sharing contracts. Furthermore, using a parameter of side-payment, we propose a new contract design that facilitates win-win coordination.


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 399-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao Liu ◽  
Yee Leung ◽  
Yuan Xu ◽  
Linda Chor Wing Yung

2019 ◽  
Vol 212 ◽  
pp. 1462-1477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tao Li ◽  
Rong Zhang ◽  
Senlin Zhao ◽  
Bin Liu

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul A Ponce-Rodriguez ◽  
Juan Medina-Guirado

Abstract Fiscal institutions, which are responsible for the delegation of tax and spending powers among different tiers of governments, are important determinants of the size and efficiency of public redistribution. In this paper we develop a comparative analysis of the impact of fiscal decentralization vis-à-vis tax revenue sharing on the government’s effort to redistribute income. The main findings are: first, the size of the national budget for public redistribution is the same under fiscal decentralization and tax revenue sharing. Second, different fiscal institutions lead to different regional distributions of public transfers. Third, when choosing between decentralization and tax revenue sharing, there is a tradeoff between the efficiency and the regional effort of the government to redistribute income. Resumen Las instituciones fiscales, que determinan la responsabilidad del diseño de impuestos y gasto entre los diferentes niveles de gobierno, son importantes determinantes del tamaño y eficiencia de la redistribución pública. En este artículo, se desarrolla un análisis comparativo del impacto en el esfuerzo del gobierno en redistribuir el ingreso, entre la descentralización fiscal en y una política de compartir el ingreso fiscal. Los principales resultados son: primero, el tamaño del presupuesto en redistribución es el mismo para una economía con descentralización o en la que se comparte el ingreso fiscal. Segundo, las instituciones fiscales implican una asignación diferente en la distribución regional de transferencias públicas. Tercero, al escoger entre descentralización y el compartir el ingreso fiscal, existe un intercambio entre la eficiencia y la distribución regional de las transferencias públicas.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document