Analysis On Emission Reduction Game Of Three-level Supply Chain Under Different Low Carbon Policies

With the rapid rise of the three major industries,the carbon dioxide in the air has increased excessively,and the greenhouse effect has become more and more serious.High carbon emissions have become a major problem that governments and societies in various countries have to face.In the study of corporate emission reduction issues,a large number of scholars have found that emission reduction is not only a matter of individual enterprises,but also closely related to the cooperation of upstream and downstream enterprises and national policies,and thus put forward the concept of“supply chain emission reduction”.Previous studies have shown that,compared with the secondary supply chain,the three-level supply chain can play a greater role in emission reduction,but there are still some deficiencies in these three-level supply chain emission reduction research.Therefore,it is of great significance to further explore the three-level supply chain emission reduction.The three-level supply chain consisting of a single supplier,manufacturer,and retailer is studied in this article,and three emission reduction models including companies in the supply chain to reduce emissions individually,the supplier share the costs of carbon emission reductions from manufacturer,and the supplier and retailer share the carbon emission reduction costs of manufacturer has been established under three low-carbon policies of government subsidies,carbon taxes,carbon quotas and transactions,in the solution to these models,the supply chain balanced decisions including the cost sharing rate and unit emission reduction are obtained under different emission reduction models.Through the analysis of the game results,it can be seen that there is a common conclusion under these three low-carbon policies,that is,the unit product emission reductions and profits of all companies reach the maximum when the three parties in the supply chain jointly reduce emissions,in other words,the above decision variables reach the maximum when supplier and retailer share the carbon emission reduction cost of the manufacturer,achieving Pareto optimal,but the supplier's sharing rate is lower than before retailer joining the reduction under these three low-carbon policies.It can be inferred from the analysis of examples that government subsidies are not only contribute to the realization of national carbon emission reduction targets,but also can increase corporate profits and overall social benefits,although the increase in subsidy rates will contribute to the realization of a fully integrated emission reduction model,however,the excessivelyhigh subsidy rate will affect the development of the market economy;Compared with no policy intervention,these two kinds of carbon tax policies can enhance the emission reduction effect of enterprises and create more value for society,however,the profits of enterprises which have been subject to carbon tax are Lowering and this situation becomes more and more serious with the increase of tax rate;Carbon quotas and carbon rights trading not only help the realization of corporate emission reduction targets,but also improve the overall benefits,however,the setting of the carbon quota directly determines the increase and decrease of the manufacturer's profits compared with the absence of the policy,excessive carbon quotas and carbon trading prices are not conducive to the realization of joint upstream and downstream emission reductions.From the comparison of supply chain balanced decision under different low-carbon policies,it is found that the combination of government subsidies and carbon tax policies on consumption links is more advantageous in promoting corporate emission reduction.These conclusions will provide a theoretical basis for the government to establish appropriate low-carbon policies and formulate corporate emission reduction strategies in the supply chain.