Carbon Emission Reduction Decision-Making in an Online Freight Platform Service Supply Chain Under Carbon Trading Mechanism
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Platform Service Supply Chain
2.2. Carbon Emission Reduction Decision Under Cap-and-Trade Regulation
2.3. Green Operations Management of OFPs
2.4. Carbon Allowance Allocation Methods
3. The Model and Benchmark
3.1. Model Description
3.2. Non-Participation in Carbon Trading Market (NC Model)
4. Adoption of Absolute Emission Cap-Based CAA Method (AC Model)
Symbol | Detailed Optimal Solution |
---|---|
5. Adoption of Intensity-Based CAA Method (IC Model)
Symbol | Detailed Optimal Solution |
---|---|
6. Comparison Analysis
6.1. OFP Perspective
6.2. Government Perspective
6.3. Sensitivity Analysis
7. Practical Implications and Conclusions
7.1. Practical Implications
7.2. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Nomenclature
Abbreviations | |
OFP | Online freight platform |
SSC | Service supply chain |
NC | Non-participation in carbon trading market |
AC | Absolute emission cap-based allocation |
IC | Intensity-based allocation |
RFS | Road freight sector |
CAA | Carbon allowance allocation |
Symbols | |
The membership fee of shipper | |
The carbon emission reduction rate per trucker | |
The price of per unit carbon emission allowance | |
The average freight fee of freight order | |
The indirect network externality of shipper | |
The indirect network externality of trucker | |
The probability of successful two-sided user transactions | |
The unit service cost of OFP without carbon trading mechanism | |
The unit service cost coefficient of OFP under carbon trading mechanism | |
The number of shippers in OFP | |
The number of truckers in OFP | |
The number of truckers in RFS | |
The basic utility obtained by shipper from joining OFP | |
The basic utility obtained by trucker from joining OFP | |
The utility obtained by shipper after buying services | |
The unit conversion cost of shipper | |
The unit conversion cost of trucker | |
The average carbon emissions per trucker on OFP | |
The unit carbon emissions coefficient per trucker off OFP | |
The amount of carbon emissions of OFP | |
The amount of carbon emissions of RFS | |
The investment cost of low-carbon technology | |
E | The free initial carbon allowance under AC model |
e | The free initial carbon allowance under IC model |
The OFP’s profit |
Appendix A
References
- Li, S.; Liu, J.; Wu, J.; Hu, X. Spatial spillover effect of carbon emission trading policy on carbon emission reduction: Empirical data from transport industry in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 371, 133529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bian, J.; Guo, X. Policy analysis for emission-reduction with green technology investment in manufacturing. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022, 316, 5–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Ji, X.; Zhang, B. Allocation of carbon emission permits in heterogeneous complex network systems: A DEA-based study among China’s industrial sectors. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2022, 174, 108836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, L.; Bai, Y.; Ghose, S.; Qin, J. Differential game analysis of carbon emissions reduction and promotion in a sustainable supply chain considering social preferences. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022, 310, 257–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, J.; Jiang, F. Decision models of pricing and carbon emission reduction for low-carbon supply chain under cap-and-trade regulation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2023, 264, 108964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, X.; Chang, Y.T.; Kwon, O.K.; Zhang, N. Potential gains of trading CO2 emissions in the Chinese transportation sector. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2021, 90, 102639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stavins, R.N. A meaningful US cap-and-trade system to address climate change. Harv. Envtl. L. Rev. 2008, 32, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Guan, D.; Crawford-Brown, D.; Zhang, Q.; He, K.; Liu, J. A low-carbon road map for China. Nature 2013, 500, 143–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.; He, P.; Xu, H.; Zhang, Q. Supply chain coordination with green technology under cap-and-trade regulation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 183, 433–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, C.; Zhang, Z.A.; Fu, X.; Ge, Y.E. A low-carbon transportation network: Collaborative effects of a rail freight subsidy and carbon trading mechanism. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2024, 184, 104066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heinbach, C.; Beinke, J.; Kammler, F.; Thomas, O. Data-driven forwarding: A typology of digital platforms for road freight transport management. Electron. Mark. 2022, 32, 807–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guo, J.; Zhang, J.; Cheng, T.; Zhao, S. Truthful double auction mechanisms for online freight platforms with transaction costs. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2022, 158, 164–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Yu, Y. The use of freight apps in road freight transport for CO2 reduction. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2017, 9, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Padidar, M.; Keivanpour, S.; BenAli, M. Smart Freight Transportation Platform Development and Impacts on CO2 Emission in Quebec. In Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2021, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 28–29 October 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Li, X.; Gao, L.; Liu, J. The approach to carbon emission quotas of road transportation: A carbon emission intensity perspective. J. Adv. Transport. 2020, 2020, 8819694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, P.; He, Y.; Tang, X.; Ma, S.; Xu, H. Channel encroachment and logistics integration strategies in an e-commerce platform service supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 244, 108368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, X.; He, Y. Mathematical modeling and optimization of platform service supply chains: A literature review. Mathematics 2022, 10, 4307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, D.; Wang, M.; Li, X. Strategic introduction of marketplace platform and its impacts on supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 242, 108300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Li, G.; Liu, M.; Sethi, S.P. Online platform service investment: A bane or a boon for supplier encroachment. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 235, 108079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yi, S.; Yu, L.; Zhang, Z. Research on pricing strategy of dual-channel supply chain based on customer value and value-added service. Mathematics 2021, 9, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lan, C.; Zhu, J. New Product Presale Strategies considering Consumers’ Loss Aversion in the E-Commerce Supply Chain. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2021, 2021, 8194879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, X.; Zheng, S.; Yu, Y.; Zhang, F. Optimal Bundling Strategy for a Retail Platform Under Agency Selling. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2021, 30, 2273–2284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Yu, Z.; Shen, L.; Fan, R.; Tang, R. Decisions and coordination in e-commerce supply chain under logistics outsourcing and altruistic preferences. Mathematics 2021, 9, 253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Song, Z.; Zhou, C. Self-supporting or third-party? The optimal delivery strategy selection decision for e-tailers under competition. Kybernetes 2022, 52, 4783–4811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, Y.; Chen, B.; Lee, C.C. Equilibrium in platform service supply chain network with quality and innovation considering digital economy. Ann. Oper. Res. 2023, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, C.; Zhu, Q.; Sarkis, J. Joint blockchain service vendor-platform selection using social network relationships: A multi-provider multi-user decision perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 238, 108165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Avinadav, T.; Chernonog, T.; Meilijson, I.; Perlman, Y. A consignment contract with revenue sharing between an app developer and a distribution platform. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 243, 108322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Q.; Fan, X.; Chen, Y.J.; Yang, H. On-demand service delivery under asymmetric information: Priority pricing, market selection, and horizontal substitution. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 237, 108146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, X.T.; Kang, K.; Zhong, R.Y.; Luo, H.; Xu, S.X. Cyber physical system-enabled on-demand logistics trading. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 233, 108005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Li, Q.; Guo, P. Time-based or fixed-fee? How to penalize cancellation of orders of car-hailing applications. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 232, 107960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Long, S.; Xie, D.; Liang, Y.; Wang, J. How to govern the big data discriminatory pricing behavior in the platform service supply chain? An examination with a three-party evolutionary game model. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 231, 107910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, K.; Xu, X.; Wu, Q.; Zhang, Q. Optimal production and carbon emission reduction level under cap-and-trade and low carbon subsidy policies. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 167, 505–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Zhou, H.; Liu, Y.; Lu, R. The optimal carbon emission reduction and prices with cap and trade mechanism and competition. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, C.J.; Yang, C.T.; Yen, H.F. Stackelberg game approach for sustainable production-inventory model with collaborative investment in technology for reducing carbon emissions. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 121963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.; Chen, J.; Ma, Y. Renewable energy investment and carbon emissions under cap-and-trade mechanisms. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 278, 123341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, C.; Yuan, T.; Zhong, L.; Liu, W. Production decision-making system for manufacturing enterprises constrained by carbon emission reduction policies. Complex Intell. Syst. 2021, 9, 2393–2411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, X.; Chen, K.; Chen, Y.J. Is price commitment a better solution to control carbon emissions and promote technology investment? Manag. Sci. 2023, 69, 325–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, L.; Zhang, Q.; Ji, J. Pricing and carbon emission reduction decisions in supply chains with vertical and horizontal cooperation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 191, 286–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, Y.; Wang, M.; Zhao, L. Production-inventory and emission reduction investment decision under carbon cap-and-trade policy. Rairo-Oper. Res. 2018, 52, 1043–1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Xu, X.; Zhu, Q. Carbon emission reduction decisions of supply chain members under cap-and-trade regulations: A differential game analysis. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2021, 162, 107711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Astanti, R.D.; Daryanto, Y.; Dewa, P.K. Low-carbon supply chain model under a vendor-managed inventory partnership and carbon cap-and-trade policy. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex 2022, 8, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, H.; Qin, J.; Zheng, H. Equilibrium pricing mechanism of low-carbon supply chain considering carbon cap-and-trade policy. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 407, 137107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, J.; Zhang, Z.; Yang, L. Carbon emission reduction decisions in the retail-/dual-channel supply chain with consumers’ preference. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 852–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, L.; Hao, W.; Qin, J.; Ji, F.; Yue, X. Carbon emission reduction and promotion policies considering social preferences and consumers’ low-carbon awareness in the cap-and-trade system. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 195, 1105–1124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, L.; Guo, T.; Qin, J.; Yue, X.; Zhu, N. Carbon emission reduction and pricing policies of a supply chain considering reciprocal preferences in cap-and-trade system. Ann. Oper. Res. 2018, 268, 149–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.; Li, Z.; Anwar, S.; Zhang, Y. Supply chain carbon emission reductions and coordination when consumers have a strong preference for low-carbon products. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 19969–19983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, J.; Lu, Q.; Fu, P. Carbon footprint management of road freight transport under the carbon emission trading mechanism. Math. Probl. Eng. 2015, 2015, 814527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, W.; Liu, L.; Fu, J. A comparative study on the routing problem of electric and fuel vehicles considering carbon trading. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, G.; Hu, J.; Yang, Y.; Xia, S.; Lim, M.K. Vehicle routing problem in cold Chain logistics: A joint distribution model with carbon trading mechanisms. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 2020, 156, 104715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.A.; Gajpal, Y.; ElMekkawy, T.Y. Mixed fleet based green clustered logistics problem under carbon emission cap. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 72, 103074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, Q.; Gao, J. The Multi-Visit Vehicle Routing Problem with Drones under Carbon Trading Mechanism. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, W.; Ma, J.; Fan, A.; Zhang, J.; Pan, Y. Effectiveness of policies for electric commercial vehicle adoption and emission reduction in the logistics industry. Energy Policy 2024, 188, 114116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, R.; Li, L.; Lin, X.; Zha, Y.; Zhao, Y. Pricing strategy for logistics service platforms with competition and user distance preference. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 2021, 28, 3437–3469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, Y.; Zhang, W.; Su, Y.; Tang, X.; Liao, T.W. Two-Stage Game-Based Pricing Strategy for the Duopoly Online Freight Platform. Math. Probl. Eng. 2023, 2023, 1049758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, C.; Chen, L.; Xia, Q. Freight insurance pricing strategy based on an online freight platform. Ind. Manag. Data. Syst. 2023, 123, 2929–2945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, J.; Nie, Y.; Liu, X. Hyperpath truck routing in an online freight exchange platform. Transport. Sci. 2020, 54, 1676–1696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.L.; Zhang, C.; Wu, Q.L.; Meng, B.R. Vehicle routing problem with soft time windows of cargo transport O2O platforms. Int. J. Simul. Model. 2021, 20, 351–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Zheng, Y.; Dai, B.; Yu, J. Implications of matching and pricing strategies for multiple-delivery-points service in a freight O2O platform. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2020, 136, 101871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Li, Y.; Gu, F.; Guo, J.; Wu, X. Two-sided matching and strategic selection on freight resource sharing platforms. Physica A 2020, 559, 125014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, G.; Hu, X.; Wang, T.; Liu, J.; Feng, S.; Wang, C. Tripartite Evolutionary Game Analysis of a Logistics Service Supply Chain Cooperation Mechanism for Network Freight Platforms. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2024, 2024, 4820877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, A.; Chen, R.; Cho, S.; Zhao, Y. The determinants of online matching platforms for freight services. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2023, 179, 103284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, W.; Chen, X.; Xue, Z.; Liao, Y.; You, J. Platform-based stable truck matching problem with trailer-swapping mode. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2024, 188, 103638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, W.; Chen, X.; Lang, M.; Li, S.; Liu, Y.; Li, W. Optimization of Truck–Cargo Online Matching for the Less-Than-Truck-Load Logistics Hub under Real-Time Demand. Mathematics 2024, 12, 755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atasoy, B.; Schulte, F.; Steenkamp, A. Platform-based collaborative routing using dynamic prices as incentives. Transport. Res. Rec. 2020, 2674, 670–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, S.; Zhou, D.; Wu, G.; Wang, L.; You, G. Evolutionary game analysis of three parties in logistics platforms and freight transportation companies’ behavioral strategies for horizontal collaboration considering vehicle capacity utilization. Complex Intell. Syst. 2023, 9, 1617–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, C.; Bian, J.; Guo, X.; Jiang, W. Logistics outsourcing strategy with online freight platforms. Omega 2024, 125, 103042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwak, S.Y.; Cho, W.S.; Seok, G.A.; Yoo, S.G. Intention to use sustainable green logistics platforms. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mei, Q.; Li, J.; Ursavas, E.; Zhu, S.X.; Luo, X. Freight transportation planning in platform service supply chain considering carbon emissions. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 240, 108241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, C.; Xu, J.; Li, S.; Zhang, X.; Wu, Y. The order allocation problem and the algorithm of network freight platform under the constraint of Carbon tax policy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; Shao, X.; Zhang, X.; Bao, J. A study of the allocation of carbon emission permits among the provinces of China based on fairness and efficiency. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, F.; Long, R.; Yu, B.; Wang, Y.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Dai, Y.; Yang, Q.; et al. How can China allocate CO2 reduction targets at the provincial level considering both equity and efficiency? Evidence from its Copenhagen Accord pledge. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 130, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, Y.; Gu, B.; Tan, X.; Yan, H.; Sheng, Y. Allocation of provincial carbon emission allowances under China’s 2030 carbon peak target: A dynamic multi-criteria decision analysis method. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 837, 155798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhan, D. Allocation of carbon emission quotas among provinces in China: Efficiency, fairness and balanced allocation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 21692–21704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hu, Z.; Huang, Y.; Sun, L.; Qi, X.; Pan, X. Study on international carbon emission quota allocation of shipping industry-based on fairness and efficiency. Front. Mar. Sci. 2023, 10, 1269643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.Y.; Tang, B.J. Incorporating the transport sector into carbon emission trading scheme: An overview and outlook. Nat. Hazards 2017, 88, 683–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, R.; Yu, B.Y.; Tang, B.J.; Liao, H.; Wei, Y.M. Carbon emissions quotas in the Chinese road transport sector: A carbon trading perspective. Energy Policy 2017, 106, 298–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, P.; Ma, Z.; Wei, X.; Jia, R. Allocation scheme selection for transportation carbon allowance-evidence from China’s top ten economic regions. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 428, 139310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teixidó, J.; Verde, S.F.; Nicolli, F. The impact of the EU Emissions Trading System on low-carbon technological change: The empirical evidence. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 164, 106347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lyu, X.; Shi, A.; Wang, X. Research on the impact of carbon emission trading system on low-carbon technology innovation. Carbon Manag. 2020, 11, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Sun, H. Assessing the impact of emissions trading scheme on low-carbon technological innovation: Evidence from China. Environ. Impact Assess 2021, 89, 106589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, W.; Ye, P. Does carbon emission trading improve low-carbon technical efficiency? Evidence from China. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 2022, 29, 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aloui, C.; Jebsi, K. Optimal pricing of a two-sided monopoly platform with a one-sided congestion effect. Int. Rev. Econ. 2010, 57, 423–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.; Wang, Y.; Albitar, K.; Huang, Z. Does ownership concentration affect corporate environmental responsibility engagement? The mediating role of corporate leverage. Borsa Istanb. Rev. 2021, 21, S13–S24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, Y.; Zhang, B.; Wang, L.; Wang, L. Low-carbon strategies considering corporate environmental responsibility: Based on carbon trading and carbon emission reduction technology investment. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Decision Variables | |
---|---|
The membership fee of shipper | |
The carbon emission reduction rate per trucker | |
Other Parameters | |
The price of per unit carbon emission allowance | |
The average freight fee of freight order | |
The indirect network externality of shipper | |
The indirect network externality of trucker | |
The probability of successful two-sided user transactions | |
The unit service cost of OFP without carbon trading mechanism | |
The unit service cost coefficient of OFP under carbon trading mechanism | |
The number of shippers in OFP | |
The number of truckers in OFP | |
The number of truckers in RFS | |
The basic utility obtained by shipper from joining OFP | |
The basic utility obtained by trucker from joining OFP | |
The utility obtained by shipper after buying services | |
The unit conversion cost of shipper | |
The unit conversion cost of trucker | |
The average carbon emissions per trucker in OFP | |
The unit carbon emissions coefficient per trucker off OFP | |
The amount of carbon emissions of OFP | |
The amount of carbon emissions of RFS | |
The investment cost of low-carbon technology | |
E | The free initial carbon allowance under AC model |
e | The free initial carbon allowance under IC model |
The OFP’s profit |
Symbol | Detailed Optimal Solution |
---|---|
0.2 | 6.466 | 8.218 | 7.233 | 0 | 0.704 | 0.717 |
0.4 | 6.367 | 8.119 | 7.067 | 0 | 0.725 | 0.738 |
0.6 | 6.268 | 8.018 | 6.900 | 0 | 0.745 | 0.759 |
0.8 | 6.169 | 7.916 | 6.730 | 0 | 0.763 | 0.779 |
1 | 6.070 | 7.813 | 6.560 | 0 | 0.781 | 0.798 |
0.2 | 12.896 | 15.313 | 13.848 | 3.927 | 1.048 | 1.061 |
0.4 | 12.685 | 14.957 | 13.977 | 4.057 | 1.003 | 1.014 |
0.6 | 12.442 | 14.589 | 14.087 | 4.184 | 0.955 | 0.964 |
0.8 | 12.166 | 14.212 | 14.178 | 4.304 | 0.906 | 0.912 |
1 | 11.858 | 13.827 | 14.246 | 4.419 | 0.856 | 0.858 |
λ | ||||||
0.2 | 34.292 | 33.332 | 32.341 | |||
0.4 | 33.771 | 32.787 | 31.643 | |||
0.6 | 33.266 | 32.259 | 30.950 | |||
0.8 | 32.782 | 31.753 | 30.269 | |||
1 | 32.325 | 31.274 | 29.605 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ju, S.; Zhang, P. Carbon Emission Reduction Decision-Making in an Online Freight Platform Service Supply Chain Under Carbon Trading Mechanism. Mathematics 2025, 13, 1930. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13121930
Ju S, Zhang P. Carbon Emission Reduction Decision-Making in an Online Freight Platform Service Supply Chain Under Carbon Trading Mechanism. Mathematics. 2025; 13(12):1930. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13121930
Chicago/Turabian StyleJu, Sisi, and Peng Zhang. 2025. "Carbon Emission Reduction Decision-Making in an Online Freight Platform Service Supply Chain Under Carbon Trading Mechanism" Mathematics 13, no. 12: 1930. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13121930
APA StyleJu, S., & Zhang, P. (2025). Carbon Emission Reduction Decision-Making in an Online Freight Platform Service Supply Chain Under Carbon Trading Mechanism. Mathematics, 13(12), 1930. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13121930