碳交易规制下的制造商减排外包模式选择:定制vs订购?

doi:10.12005/orms.2021.0335

运筹与管理 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (10): 199-205.DOI: 10.12005/orms.2021.0335

碳交易规制下的制造商减排外包模式选择:定制vs订购?

夏良杰¹, 柳慧¹, 黄迎¹, 李友东², 孙莹³

1.天津财经大学商学院,天津 300222;
2.内蒙古财经大学工商管理学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010021;
3.中国石油集团渤海钻探工程有限公司井下技术服务分公司,天津 300457

收稿日期:2020-03-02 出版日期:2021-10-25
作者简介:夏良杰(1980-),男,湖北石首人,教授,管理学博士,研究方向:物流与供应链管理;柳慧( 1994-),女,山东济宁人,硕士研究生,研究方向:供应链管理;黄迎(1999-),女,安徽宿州人,硕士研究生,研究方向:供应链管理;孙莹(1984-),女,天津市人,中国石油渤海钻探工程有限公司,研究方向:企业管理。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(71972142,72062023,71972141);内蒙古自然科学基金资助项目(2019MS07026);天津市重点研发计划科技支撑重点项目(20YFZCGX00640)

A Manufacturer's Emission Reduction Outsourcing Mode Selection under the Cap-and-trade Regulation: Customizing vs Ordering

XIA Liang-jie¹, LIU Hui¹, HUANG Ying¹, LI You-dong², SUN Ying³

1. School of Business, Tianjin University of Finance and Economics, Tianjin 300222, China;
2. College of business administration, Inner Mongolia University of Finance and Economics, Hohhot 010070, China;
3. Downhole Technical Service Company, CNPC Bohai Drilling Engineering Company Limited, Tianjin 300457, China

Received:2020-03-02 Online:2021-10-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究碳交易规制下制造商减排服务外包时供应链各成员的最优决策和绩效问题,对比分析了定制和订购两种减排模式下的供应链博弈均衡和供应链成员绩效。研究发现,在碳交易规制下,定制和订购两种减排合作模式下供应链成员均存在最优决策。在定制模式下,单位产品的初始排放量和制造商的减排成本系数提高一定会降低最优产量、单位产品减排量和减排服务价格,减排服务商的减排成本系数提高会降低最优产量和单位产品减排量,但不一定会降低减排服务价格;在订购模式下单位产品初始排放量、制造商和减排服务商的成本系数对企业决策的影响不一定如此。当需求函数满足均匀分布时,无论制造商和减排服务商的减排效率如何,订购模式对减排服务商更有利,定制模式对制造商更有利,但供应链系统总利润的高低与制造商的减排成本系数有关。

关键词: 碳交易, 减排服务外包, 定制模式, 订购模式

Abstract: This paper studies the optimal decisions and performances of a supply chain with a manufacturer and a emission reduction service provider under the cap-and-trade regulation. The paper compares and analyzes the equilibrium and supply chain performance under two emission reduction modes: customizing and ordering. It is found that under the cap-and-trade regulation, both the manufacturer and the emission reduction service provider have optimal decisions under each emission reduction model. Under the customizing mode, as the initial carbon emission per unit product and the emission reduction cost coefficient of the manufacturer increase, the optimal production, the emission reduction service price and the emission reduction per unit product decrease; the optimal production and the emission reduction per unit product decrease as the emission reduction cost coefficient of the emission reduction service provider increase, while the emission reduction service price doses not necessarily decreases. In addition, the impacts of the emission reduction cost coefficients of the manufacturer and the service provider, and the initial carbon emission per unit product on the companies' decisions are the same in both emission reduction modes if demand function is uniformly distributed, while they are not necessarily the same in both emission reduction modes. When the demand function is uniformly distributed, regardless of the emission reduction efficiency of manufacturers and emission reduction service providers, the ordering mode is more beneficial to emission reduction service providers, while the customizing mode is more beneficial to manufacturers, but the total profit of supply chain system is related to the emission reduction cost coefficient of manufacturers.

Key words: cap-and-trade, emission reduction outsourcing, customizing mode, ordering mode

中图分类号:

F224.32

夏良杰, 柳慧, 黄迎, 李友东, 孙莹. 碳交易规制下的制造商减排外包模式选择:定制vs订购?[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(10): 199-205.

XIA Liang-jie, LIU Hui, HUANG Ying, LI You-dong, SUN Ying. A Manufacturer's Emission Reduction Outsourcing Mode Selection under the Cap-and-trade Regulation: Customizing vs Ordering[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2021, 30(10): 199-205.

参考文献

[1] 陈晓红,曾祥宇,王傅强.碳限额交易机制下碳交易价格对供应链碳排放的影响[J].系统工程理论与实践,2016,36(10):2562-2571.
[2] Yenipazarli A. Incentives for enviornme-ntal research and development: consum-er preferences, competitive pressure and emissions taxation[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2019, 276(2): 757-769.
[3] He Y, Wang L, Wang J. Cap-and-trade vs. carbon taxes: a quantitative comparison from a generation expansion planning perspective[J]. Fuel & Energy Abstracts,2012,63(3): 708-716.
[4] 阿里研究院.中国绿色消费者报告[R].北京:阿里研究院,2016.
[5] 京东集团.京东绿色消费发展报告[R].2017.
[6] 前瞻产业研究院发布.合同能源管理(EMC)行业发展前景与投资战略规划分析报告[R].2018.
[7] 王一雷,朱庆华,夏西强.基于消费偏好的供应链上下游联合减排协调契约博弈模型[J].系统工程学报,2017,32(2):188-198.
[8] 夏良杰,柳慧,张萌,等.强制减排规制下基于碳减排利润增量分享契约的供应链协调研究[J].运筹与管理,2019,28(5):92-98.
[9] 刘名武,吴开兰,付红.消费者低碳偏好下零售商主导供应链减排合作与协调[J].系统工程理论与实践,2017,37(12):3109-3117.
[10] Dong C, Shen B, Chow P S, et al. Sustainability investment under cap-and-trade regulation[J]. Annals of Operations Research, 2016, 240(2): 509-531.
[11] 徐春明,赵道致,闵杰.减排规制下基于存货影响销售模式的易变质产品库存优化模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2018,38(6):1512-1524.
[12] Halat K, Hafezalkotob A. Modeling carbon regulation policies in inventory decisions of a multi-stage green supply chain: a game theory approach[J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2019, 128(1): 807-830.
[13] 熊中楷,胡金辉.消费者低碳意识和政府碳税下低碳技术选择[J].科技进步与对策,2014,31(15):65-71.
[14] 刘名武,万谧宇,付红.碳交易和低碳偏好下供应链低碳技术选择研究[J].中国管理科学,2018,26(1):152-162.
[15] 支帮东,陈俊霖,刘晓红.碳限额与交易机制下基于成本共担契约的两级供应链协调策略[J].中国管理科学,2017,25(7):48-55.
[16] 陈玉玉,李帮义,徐健腾,等.碳限额交易政策下寄售契约对两级可持续供应链的协调[J].控制与决策,2019,34(5):192-200.
[17] Xia L, Hao W, Qin J, et al. Carbon emission reduction and promotion policies considering social preferences and consumers' low-carbon awareness in the cap-and-trade system[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018,195(6): 1105-1124.
[18] 周艳菊,鲍茂景,陈晓红,等.基于公平关切的低碳供应链广告合作-减排成本分担契约与协调[J].中国管理科学,2017,25(2):121-129.
[19] 石松,颜波,石平.考虑公平关切的自主减排低碳供应链决策研究[J].系统工程理论与实践,2016,36(12):3079-3091.
[20] Xia L, Guo T, Qin J, et al. Carbon emission reduction and pricing policies of a supply chain considering reciprocal preferences in cap-and-trade system[J]. Annals of Operations Research, 2018, 268(1-2): 149-175.
[21] 赵道致,史功明.节能服务公司参与的低碳供应链减排研究[J].重庆理工大学学报(自然科学),2015,29(1):115-122.
[22] He L, Zhao D, Xia L. Game theoretic analysis of carbon emission abatement in fashion supply chains considering vertical incentives and channel structures[J]. Sustainability, 2015, 7(1): 4280-4309.
[23] 周艳菊,熊凯伦.碳限额交易机制下嵌入式低碳服务供应链模型研究[J].软科学,2018,32(2):50-54.
[24] Wang Q, He L. Managing risk aversion for low-carbon supply chains with emission abatement outsourcing[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2018, 15 (2):367. doi:10.3390/ijerph15020367.
[25] Vine E. An international survey of the energy service company(ESCO)industry[J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33(5): 691-704.
[26] Zhang J, Gou Q, Liang L, et al. Supplychain coordination through cooperative advertising with reference price effect[J]. Omega, 2013, 41(2): 345-353.
[27] Kocabiykoglu A, Popescu I. An elasticity perspective to the newsvendor with price sensitive demand[J]. Operations Research, 2017, 59(59): 301-312.
[28] Kouvelis P, Zhao W. Who should finance the supply chain? impact of ratings on supply chain decisions[J]. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2018, 20(1): 19-35.

碳交易规制下的制造商减排外包模式选择:定制vs订购?

A Manufacturer's Emission Reduction Outsourcing Mode Selection under the Cap-and-trade Regulation: Customizing vs Ordering

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 10

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	黄肖玲, 任宇婷, 张佳安, 王丹, 陈继红, 罗勋杰. 基于低碳环保因素的“前港后厂”钢铁产成品运输网络优化[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(8): 59-66.
[2]	秦娟娟, 李婧. 碳交易机制下资金约束制造商替代产品的最优生产策略研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(5): 88-94.
[3]	范定祥, 李重莲, 王晓蕾. 基于Stackelberg博弈的闭环供应链回收模式选择及其优化研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(4): 135-141.
[4]	宋向南, 卢昱杰, 申立银. 碳交易驱动下建筑业主最优碳减排决策研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(12): 65-71.
[5]	李小燕, 王道平. 碳交易机制下考虑竞争和信息非对称的供应链协调研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(11): 47-52.
[6]	夏良杰, 白永万, 秦娟娟, 李友东. 碳交易规制下信息不对称供应链的减排和低碳推广博弈研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2018, 27(6): 37-45.
[7]	王道平, 李小燕, 赵亮. 碳交易机制下考虑制造商竞争的供应链协调研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2018, 27(4): 62-71.
[8]	马常松, 罗振宇. 随机需求下考虑碳限额与交易规制的企业生产策略研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2016, 25(1): 268-274.
[9]	马秋卓, 宋海清. CDM机制下政府碳税及垄断企业最优定价与碳排放策略研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2015, 24(6): 261-271.
[10]	戢守峰, 蓝海燕, 唐金环, 朱宝琳. 碳限额与碳交易约束下制造商生产-库存控制策略[J]. 运筹与管理, 2015, 24(3): 51-59.