Next Article in Journal
An Investigation of Global Reporting Initiative Performance Indicators in Corporate Sustainability Reports: Greek, Italian and Spanish Evidence
Next Article in Special Issue
The Economic Effect of Virtual Warehouse-Based Inventory Information Sharing for Sustainable Supplier Management
Previous Article in Journal
Migrants’ Role in Enhancing the Economic Development of Host Countries: Empirical Evidence from Europe
Open AccessArticle

Cost-Sharing Contracts for Energy Saving and Emissions Reduction of a Supply Chain under the Conditions of Government Subsidies and a Carbon Tax

by * and
School of Management, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2018, 10(3), 895; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030895
Received: 18 February 2018 / Revised: 10 March 2018 / Accepted: 13 March 2018 / Published: 20 March 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward Sustainability: Supply Chain Collaboration and Governance)
To study the cooperation of upstream and downstream enterprises of a supply chain in energy saving and emissions reduction, we establish a Stackelberg game model. The retailer moves first to decide a cost-sharing contract, then the manufacturer determines the energy-saving level, carbon-emission level, and wholesale price successively. In the end, the retailer determines the retail price. As a regulation, the government provides subsidies for energy-saving products, while imposing a carbon tax on the carbon emitted. The results show that (1) both the energy-saving cost-sharing (ECS) and the carbon emissions reduction cost-sharing (CCS) contracts are not the dominant strategy of the two parties by which they can facilitate energy savings and emissions reductions; (2) compared with single cost-sharing contracts, the bivariate cost-sharing (BCS) contract for energy saving and emissions reduction is superior, although it still cannot realise prefect coordination of the supply chain; (3) government subsidy and carbon tax policies can promote the cooperation of both the upstream and downstream enterprises of the supply chain—a subsidy policy can always drive energy saving and emissions reductions, while a carbon tax policy does not always exert positive effects, as it depends on the initial level of pollution and the level of carbon tax; and (4) the subsidy policy reduces the coordination efficiency of the supply chain, while the influences of carbon tax policy upon the coordination efficiency relies on the initial carbon-emission level. View Full-Text
Keywords: supply chain management; cost-sharing contract; energy-saving level; carbon-emission level supply chain management; cost-sharing contract; energy-saving level; carbon-emission level
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Yi, Y.; Li, J. Cost-Sharing Contracts for Energy Saving and Emissions Reduction of a Supply Chain under the Conditions of Government Subsidies and a Carbon Tax. Sustainability 2018, 10, 895.

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 by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop