政府奖惩下双渠道供应链减排时滞微分博弈研究
Time Lag Differential Game Study of Two-Channel Supply Chain Emission Reduction under Premium and Penalty of Government
摘要: 基于政府奖惩针对单制造商、单供应商和单零售商组成的三级供应链,考虑技术与宣传的多时滞效应以及消费者线上渠道偏好,建立两种奖惩机制结合两种双渠道结构的四类模型,利用微分博弈理论和连续型动态规划理论得到不同模型的减排决策以及最优利润,并结合算例对模型进行对比分析以及关键参数敏感性分析。研究发现,时滞存在阈值,只有低于阈值时利润才会随时滞延长而提高,政府奖惩力度和消费者渠道偏好都会因所处不同时滞期而对收益产生不同的影响,因此政府和企业做决策时要综合考虑滞后期以及市场环境,进行动态调整和及时优化。不仅如此,时滞较短时政府只奖惩供应商和制造商且制造商开辟线上渠道情形下供应链减排量、低碳商誉水平以及利润都相对较高。
Abstract: Based on the three-level supply chain composed of a single manufacturer, a single supplier, and a single retailer with premium and penalty of government, considering the multi-lag effect of technology and publicity as well as the preference of consumers’ online channel, four models of two reward-penalty mechanisms combined with two dual-channel structures are established. The differential game theory and continuous dynamic programming theory are used to obtain the emission reduction decisions and the optimal profits of different models, the comparative analysis of the models and sensitivity analysis of key parameters are also carried out with the examples. The study found that there is a threshold for the time lag. Only below the threshold, the profit will increase with the extension of the time lag. The government’s reward and punishment intensity and consumer channel preference will have different effects on the income due to different time lag periods. Therefore, the government and enterprises should comprehensively consider the lag period and the market environment when making decisions, and make dynamic adjustments and timely optimization. Moreover, when the time lag is short, the government only rewards and punishes suppliers and manufacturers and manufacturers open up online channels, the supply chain emission reduction, low-carbon goodwill level, and profit are relatively high.
文章引用:李卓君, 杨梅, 程贞敏. 政府奖惩下双渠道供应链减排时滞微分博弈研究[J]. 运筹与模糊学, 2023, 13(2): 476-489. https://doi.org/10.12677/ORF.2023.132047

参考文献

[1] 国际能源署. 全球能源评论: 2021年的二氧化碳排放量[EB/OL]. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-2021, 2022-08-03.
[2] Carrillo, J.E., Vakharia, A.J. and Wang, R. (2014) Environmental Implications for Online Re-tailing. European Journal of Operational Research, 239, 744-755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] 张世平, 卜少少. 环境监管、环保投资与生产力——基于中国企业问卷的实证研究[J]. 南开经济研究, 2011(2): 129-146.
[4] 徐春秋, 王芹鹏. 考虑政府参与方式的供应链低碳商誉微分博弈模型[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(8): 35-44.
[5] 向小东, 李翀. 三级低碳供应链联合减排及宣传促销微分博弈研究[J]. 控制与决策, 2019, 34(8): 1776-1788.
[6] 姜跃, 韩水华, 赵洋. 低碳经济下三级供应链动态减排的微分博弈分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(12): 89-97.
[7] 聂秀伍, 姚金鑫, 丁明雷. 基于微分博弈的三级供应链碳减排协调策略研究[J]. 工业工程, 2022, 25(4): 165-172.
[8] Matsui, K. (2021) Should a Re-tailer Bargain over a Wholesale Price with a Manufacturer Using a Dual-Channel Supply Chain? European Journal of Operational Research, 300, 1050-1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Meng, Q.F., Li, M.W., Liu, W.Y., et al. (2021) Pricing Policies of Dual-Channel Green Supply Chain: Considering Government Subsidies and Consumers’ Dual Preferences. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26, 1021-1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] 陈静, 赵灿红, 高歌, 赵志港. 碳限额及交易背景下双渠道供应链纵向合作动态减排研究[J/OL]. 中国管理科学: 1-15. 2022-09-16.[CrossRef
[11] 杨磊, 张琴, 张智勇. 碳交易机制下供应链渠道选择与减排策略[J]. 管理科学学报, 2017, 20(11): 75-87.
[12] 梁喜, 蒋琼, 郭瑾. 不同双渠道结构下制造商的定价决策与渠道选择[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(7): 97-107.
[13] Jia, D.F. and Li, S.J. (2020) Optimal Decisions and Distribution Channel Choice of Closed-Loop Supply Chain When e-Retailer Offers Online Marketplace. Journal of Cleaner Production, 265, Article ID: 121767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] Sun, Y.H., Wang, Z.H. and Han, X.H. (2020) Supply Chain Channel Strategies for Online Retailers: Whether to Introduce Web Showrooms? Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 144, Article ID: 102122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] 曹晓宁, 刘晓冰. 权力结构影响下考虑预售的双渠道供应链决策研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(9): 93-99.
[16] 胡劲松, 纪雅杰, 马德青. 基于消费者效用的电商供应链企业的产品质量和服务策略研究[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2020, 40(10): 2602-2616.
[17] 付秋芳, 忻莉燕, 马士华. 惩罚机制下供应链企业碳减排投入的演化博弈[J]. 管理科学学报, 2016, 19(4): 56-70.
[18] 焦建玲, 陈洁, 李兰兰, 等. 碳减排奖惩机制下地方政府和企业行为演化博弈分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(10): 140-150.
[19] 王道平, 王婷婷. 政府奖惩下供应链合作减排与低碳宣传的动态优化[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(4): 113-120.
[20] 王道平, 张可, 周玉. 政府奖惩下考虑回收率动态随机的闭环供应链微分博弈[J/OL]. 中国管理科学: 1-15. 2022-07-14.[CrossRef
[21] Chen, J., Zhang, T. and Zhou, Y. (2020) Dynamics of a Risk-Averse Newsvendor Model with Continuous-Time Delay in Supply Chain Financing. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 169, 133-148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[22] 陈东彦, 黄春丽. 滞后效应影响下低碳供应链减排投入与零售定价[J]. 控制与决策, 2018, 33(9): 1686-1692.
[23] Sun, L., Cao, X., Alharthi, M., et al. (2020) Carbon Emission Transfer Strategies in Supply Chain with Lag Time of Emission Reduction Technologies and Low-Carbon Preference of Consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 264, Article ID: 121664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[24] 卓四清, 韩雪. 碳补贴和时滞效应下低碳供应链微分博弈研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2022, 31(8): 7-14.
[25] 刘虹, 林敏. 减排和宣传的时延与低碳参考双重效应影响下供应链决策研究[J]. 工业工程, 2021, 24(4): 56-66+99.
[26] Giovanni, P.D. (2011) Quality Improvement vs. Adver-tising Support: Which Strategy Works Better for a Manufacturer? European Journal of Operational Research, 208, 119-130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[27] El Ouardighi, F. and Kogan, K. (2013) Dynamic Conformance and Design Quality in a Supply Chain: An Assessment of Contracts’ Coordinating Power. Annals of Operations Research, 211, 137-166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[28] Basin, M. and Gonzalez, J.R. (2006) Optimal Control for Linear Systems with Multiple Time Delays in Control Input. IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 51, 91-97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef