检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:聂秀伍 姚金鑫 丁明雷 NIE Xiuwu;YAO Jinxin;DING Minglei(School of Economics and Management,Harbin University of Science and Technology,Harbin 150080,China)
机构地区:[1]哈尔滨理工大学经济与管理学院,黑龙江哈尔滨150080
出 处:《工业工程》2022年第4期165-172,共8页Industrial Engineering Journal
基 金:国家社会科学基金资助项目(NS130012);大学生创新创业资助项目(202110214010x)。
摘 要:在低碳经济背景下,为了实现不同合作机制下的供应链协调,以供应商、制造商和零售商组成的三级供应链为研究对象,运用博弈论的方法,求得博弈主体在非合作、成本分担以及协同合作三种机制下的纳什均衡减排策略,并对这三种机制下的均衡结果和利润最优值进行比较。结果表明:在协同合作机制下各博弈主体的碳减排努力程度更高,且产品减排量和利润最优值协同合作决策也均优于非合作和成本分担机制。In the context of a low-carbon economy, in order to achieve supply chain coordination under different cooperation mechanisms, a three-level supply chain composed of suppliers, manufacturers, and retailers is used as the research object, and the game theory method is used to find that the game subject under the Nash equilibrium emission reduction strategy in the three mechanisms of non-cooperation, cost sharing and coordination and cooperation. The equilibrium results and optimal profit values under these three mechanisms are compared. The results show that under the cooperative mechanism, each game player has a higher degree of emission reduction efforts, and the cooperative decisionmaking of product emission reduction and profit optimal value is also superior to non-cooperative and cost-sharing mechanisms.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.202