碳限额及交易下同时考虑制造商和零售商的中小企业低碳供应链补贴策略

Low-carbon Supply Chain Subsidy Strategies for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Considering Both Manufacturers and Retailers under Carbon Cap and Trade System

摘要:

零售商的低碳营销有利于扩大低碳产品市场规模，进而激励制造商低碳生产，但目前政府碳补贴多只针对制造商，缺乏对不同补贴策略的对比分析，且缺乏对中小企业所在供应链的补贴研究。为此，在考虑碳限额及交易的背景下，分别构建无政府补贴、补贴制造商、补贴零售商和分别补贴制造商与零售商的4种补贴博弈模型，并通过数值仿真分析，探讨不同补贴模式下低碳供应链上下游企业低碳努力决策、消费者低碳产品需求量以及社会总福利的差异，为政府制定补贴策略提供参考。研究发现：政府采取碳补贴策略能够有效激励制造商降低碳排放和零售商进行低碳营销，进而扩大低碳产品市场规模；采取补贴制造商策略的减排率最高；采取分别补贴策略时可以获得最优社会福利，但当存在补贴额度限制即补贴力度较小时，采用补贴零售商策略在同补贴额下能获得更高的社会福利；无论政府是否采取补贴策略，消费者低碳偏好、补贴率对减排率、低碳营销努力水平、低碳产品需求量有正向激励作用，而碳价与低碳营销努力水平和产品需求量呈负向变化关系。由此可以得到启示，政府应当加大对中小型制造企业的减排补贴力度，注重培养消费者环境保护意识和低碳意识，同时对碳价进行合理调控，激励企业低碳转型。

Abstract:

Retailers' low-carbon marketing helps expand the low-carbon product market and incentivize manufacturers to produce low-carbon products. However, currently, government carbon subsidies mostly target manufacturers, lacking comparative analysis of different subsidy strategies and studies on subsidies for the supply chain of small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises. Therefore, considering carbon quotas and trading, four subsidy game models are constructed: no government subsidy, subsidy to manufacturers, subsidy to retailers, and separate subsidies to manufacturers and retailers. Through numerical simulation analysis, the differences in low-carbon effort decisions of upstream and downstream enterprises in the low-carbon supply chain, consumer demand for low-carbon products, and social welfare under different subsidy models are explored, providing reference for the government to formulate subsidy strategies. The study found that government carbon subsidies can effectively incentivize manufacturers to reduce carbon emissions and retailers to carry out low-carbon marketing, thereby expanding the low-carbon product market. The subsidy to manufacturers strategy has the highest emission reduction rate. The separate subsidy strategy can obtain the optimal social welfare, but when there is a subsidy limit, when the subsidy intensity is low, adopting the subsidy to retailers strategy can achieve higher social welfare under the same subsidy limit. Regardless of whether the government adopts a subsidy strategy, consumer low-carbon preferences and subsidy rates have a positive incentive effect on emission reduction rates, low-carbon marketing effort level, and low-carbon product demand, while carbon prices have a negative relationship with low-carbon marketing effort level and product demand. This provides insight that the government should increase subsidies for small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises to reduce emissions, focus on cultivating consumer awareness of environmental protection and low-carbon, and reasonably regulate carbon prices to incentivize corporate low-carbon transformation.