Next Article in Journal
Exposure to Environmental Contaminants and Lung Function in Adolescents—Is There a Link?
Next Article in Special Issue
An OWA Distance-Based, Single-Valued Neutrosophic Linguistic TOPSIS Approach for Green Supplier Evaluation and Selection in Low-Carbon Supply Chains
Previous Article in Journal
Electrode Modification and Optimization in Air-Cathode Single-Chamber Microbial Fuel Cells
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Environmental Management Maturity Model of Construction Programs Using the AHP-Entropy Approach
Open AccessArticle

Upstream-Downstream Joint Carbon Reduction Strategies Based on Low-Carbon Promotion

1
Business School, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China
2
Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong, China
3
School of Economics and Management, Huaiyin Normal University, Huaian 223300, China
4
General Education Center, Tokai University, Kumamoto 862-8652, Japan
5
Institute of Systems Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15(7), 1351; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071351
Received: 26 May 2018 / Revised: 19 June 2018 / Accepted: 23 June 2018 / Published: 27 June 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Operations and Innovations for the Environment)
A differential game model is established to analyze the impact of emissions reduction efforts and low-carbon product promotion on the reduction strategies of low-carbon product manufacturers (subsequently referred to as manufacturers) and the retailers of such products in a dynamic environment. Based on this model, changes in emissions reduction efforts and promotional efforts are comparatively analyzed under three scenarios (retailers bearing the promotional cost, manufacturers bearing the promotional cost, and centralized decision-making). The results are as follows: (1) the trajectory of carbon emissions reduction per product unit is the highest when the supply chain is under centralized decision-making, followed by when manufacturers bear the promotional cost, and lastly when retailers bear the cost; (2) when manufacturers bear the promotional cost, the market demand, emissions reduction effort, and promotional effort are higher, although the unit retail price is higher than when retailers bear the promotional cost; and (3) under centralized decision-making, the unit retail price is the lowest; however, sales volume, the emissions reduction effort, and the promotional effort are all higher than those in the other scenarios. View Full-Text
Keywords: carbon reduction; low-carbon promotion; differential game model carbon reduction; low-carbon promotion; differential game model
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Xia, X.; Ruan, J.; Juan, Z.; Shi, Y.; Wang, X.; Chan, F.T.S. Upstream-Downstream Joint Carbon Reduction Strategies Based on Low-Carbon Promotion. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1351.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map

1
Back to TopTop