4.7 Article

Tax or subsidy? Design and selection of regulatory policies for remanufacturing

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 287, 期 3, 页码 885-900

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2020.05.023

关键词

Manufacturing; Regulatory policy; Sustainable operations management; Green supply chain management

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71771108, 71772191]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2020jbkyzy037]
  3. Belt and Road Special Project of Lanzhou University [2018ldbryb017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates a regulatory policy design and selection problem for a social-welfare-maximizing regulator, whose policies influence the remanufacturing production of a profit-maximizing manufacturer. The decisions of the regulator and the manufacturer are characterized by a Stackelberg game model, where three regulatory policies, namely, a tax policy, a subsidy policy, and a tax-subsidy policy are considered. Analytical results show that regulatory policies cannot always promote remanufacturing, which goes against the original intention of the regulator who hopes to encourage remanufacturing via regulatory policies. Accordingly, we address regulatory policy design strategies to help the regulator make policy-making decisions on respective regulatory policies. We then propose a threshold-based regulatory policy selection strategy to aid the regulator in making policy-choice decisions between the three policies. Further analyses indicate that the quality of available cores and the environmental treatment cost essentially influence the policy selection decisions of the regulator. The selected policy helps the regulator achieve maximum social welfare with the best environmental performance in most cases. An interesting finding in this study is that when the subsidy policy is selected, it is superior to the tax policy in improving social welfare and economic benefit, but may lead to heavier environmental burdens. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据