Manufacturer vs. Consumer Subsidy with Green Technology Investment and Environmental Concern

Abstract This paper analyzes the effect of environmental subsidies on the incentives of investing in emission-reducing technologies in manufacturing amid the environmental concerns of consumers. The study adopts a game theoretical approach with respect to the interactions of environmental subsidy policies, emissions abatement and other decisions between the government and manufacturer(s). We examine and compare two environmental subsidy policies, namely, consumer and manufacturer subsidies, and find that the former yields a lower abatement and higher consumption quantity than the latter by focusing on consumption quantity instead of production emissions abatement. The manufacturer takes advantage of the consumer subsidy to increase its profits by increasing its production quantity and setting a high price simultaneously. We also show that the manufacturer's practice of taking advantage of the consumer subsidy presents a higher financial burden for the government than under the manufacturer subsidy. Besides, the consumer subsidy results in higher net emissions than the manufacturer subsidy due to the larger production quantity and lower abatement level under this policy. Despite the result of higher emissions, the consumer subsidy generates a higher social welfare compared to the manufacturer subsidy given that the former can lead to a larger quantity supply and profit for the manufacturer. We also extend the base model to multiple other cases to check the robustness of our results and find that our main results still hold qualitatively in these extensions.

[1]  Georgia Perakis,et al.  On the Effectiveness of Uniform Subsidies in Increasing Market Consumption , 2017, Manag. Sci..

[2]  Min Zhang,et al.  Subsidy scheme or price discount scheme? Mass adoption of electric vehicles under different market structures , 2017, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Maia David,et al.  Pollution Abatement Subsidies and the Eco-Industry , 2010 .

[4]  Georges Zaccour,et al.  Price subsidies and guaranteed buys of a new technology , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Wuyi Yue,et al.  Quality investment and price decision in a risk-averse supply chain , 2011, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[6]  Omar Bentahar,et al.  Sustainable supply chain management: Trends and challenges , 2018, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review.

[7]  P. Kleindorfer,et al.  Technology Choice and Capacity Portfolios under Emissions Regulation , 2015 .

[8]  A. Mitchell Polinsky,et al.  Notes on the Symmetry of Taxes and Subsidies in Pollution Control , 1979 .

[9]  Qiang Wu,et al.  Optimal production and carbon emission reduction level under cap-and-trade and low carbon subsidy policies , 2017 .

[10]  Arda Yenipazarli,et al.  Incentives for environmental research and development: Consumer preferences, competitive pressure and emissions taxation , 2019, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[11]  Takashi Kimura,et al.  Evaluating the effectiveness of carbon tax and emissions trading for resolving social dilemma on global environment , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[12]  Linda C. Angell,et al.  Integrating environmental issues into the mainstream: an agenda for research in operations management , 1999 .

[13]  Tsung-hsiu Tsai,et al.  Can privatization be a catalyst for environmental R&D and result in a cleaner environment? , 2016 .

[14]  Bibhas Saha,et al.  Pollution tax, partial privatization and environment , 2015 .

[15]  C. Lombardini-Riipinen,et al.  Optimal Tax Policy under Environmental Quality Competition , 2005 .

[16]  Zuo-Jun Max Shen,et al.  Improving Consumer Welfare and Manufacturer Profit via Government Subsidy Programs: Subsidizing Consumers or Manufacturers? , 2017, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[17]  Christopher S. Tang,et al.  Research advances in environmentally and socially sustainable operations , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[18]  Dale W. Jorgenson,et al.  China's emissions trading system and an ETS-carbon tax hybrid , 2019, Energy Economics.

[19]  Georgia Perakis,et al.  The Impact of Demand Uncertainty on Consumer Subsidies for Green Technology Adoption , 2014 .

[20]  Hau L. Lee,et al.  Carrots or Sticks? Improving Social and Environmental Compliance at Suppliers Through Incentives and Penalties , 2015 .

[21]  T. Rutherford,et al.  Climate Policies and Induced Technological Change: Which to Choose the Carrot or the Stick? , 2001 .

[22]  Yasunori Ouchida,et al.  Do emission subsidies reduce emission? In the context of environmental R&D organization , 2014 .

[23]  Kevin W. Li,et al.  Decentralization or integration: Distribution channel selection under environmental taxation , 2017 .

[24]  Marcus Brandenburg,et al.  Quantitative models for sustainable supply chain management: Developments and directions , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  Magda Lovei Financing Pollution Abatement: Theory and Practice , 1995 .

[26]  Zhang Zhao,et al.  Production , Manufacturing and Logistics Dual-channel closed-loop supply chain with government consumption-subsidy , 2012 .

[27]  Joanna Poyago-Theotoky,et al.  The Timing of Environmental Policy: A Note on the Role of Product Differentiation , 2002 .

[28]  Joanna Poyago-Theotoky,et al.  The organization of R&D and environmental policy , 2007 .

[29]  Thomas Eichner,et al.  International Carbon Emissions Trading and Strategic Incentives to Subsidize Green Energy , 2010, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[30]  Per G. Fredriksson Environmental policy choice: Pollution abatement subsidies , 1998 .

[31]  K. Lai,et al.  Can carbon cap and trade mechanism be beneficial for remanufacturing? , 2018, International Journal of Production Economics.

[32]  M. Spence,et al.  Product Differentiation and Welfare , 1976 .

[33]  Stefan Spinler,et al.  OM Forum - Sustainable Operations Management: An Enduring Stream or a Passing Fancy? , 2013, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[34]  K. S. Gallagher,et al.  Carbon pricing in practice: a review of existing emissions trading systems , 2018 .

[35]  Fuqiang Zhang,et al.  Trade-In Remanufacturing, Customer Purchasing Behavior, and Government Policy , 2017, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[36]  L. V. Wassenhove,et al.  Sustainable Operations Management , 2005 .

[37]  Takayoshi Shinkuma,et al.  Tax versus emissions trading scheme in the long run , 2016 .

[38]  Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano,et al.  Sustainable allocation of greenhouse gas emission permits for firms with Leontief technologies , 2018, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[39]  P. Quirion,et al.  Interaction between CO2 emissions trading and renewable energy subsidies under uncertainty: feed-in tariffs as a safety net against over-allocation , 2019, Climate Policy.

[40]  Jianmei Zhao Did China’s Rural Appliance Rebate program boost home appliance consumption during the latest recession? , 2015 .

[41]  Min Wang,et al.  Joint replenishment and carbon trading in fresh food supply chains , 2019, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[42]  A. Ramudhin,et al.  Design of sustainable supply chains under the emission trading scheme , 2012 .

[43]  Dmitry Krass,et al.  Environmental Taxes and the Choice of Green Technology , 2013 .

[44]  Qinpeng Wang,et al.  Contracting emission reduction for supply chains considering market low-carbon preference , 2016 .

[45]  Stefan Seuring,et al.  A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[46]  Xu Chen,et al.  Sustainable pricing and production policies for two competing firms with carbon emissions tax , 2015 .

[47]  Hau L. Lee,et al.  Socially and Environmentally Responsible Value Chain Innovations: New Operations Management Research Opportunities , 2017, Manag. Sci..