Search results

Fairness concerns in the supply chain management have recently caught much attention in the OM research community. The combined effect of fairness and competition on supply chain coordination and the interplay between them, however, have yet to be thoroughly examined.

The authors study a multiplayer supply chain with one supplier and two competing retailers with fairness concerns by a three-player Stackelberg game model. This theoretical study provides equilibrium solutions under different ranges of fairness and competition combinations. Besides theoretical analysis, the authors also conduct standard economic experiments and estimate structural parameters using experimental data.

The authors find that a simple wholesale price can coordinate the whole supply chain with certain conditions of fairness and competition. Moreover, although fairness concerns always decrease the wholesale price and increase retailers' profit share, downstream competition weakens such effects and decreases downstream players' market share. The experiments confirm the existence of fairness concerns and the interaction of competition and fairness, as shown in the theoretical analysis.

A more comprehensive model with both distributional and peer-induced fairness considered could generate better insights in the interactive impact of competition and fairness. Moreover, the authors followed the previous channel competition literature and modeled the demand with linear demand function which makes the game decisions trackable in closed form solution. A more general demand function could result in different solutions and thus new insights.

The authors’ work provides a comprehensive theoretical study of the interaction between fairness concerns and competition and clarifies the in-depth connection between the effects of competition and fairness concerns in the literature.

With the global spread of environmental education, environmental awareness is becoming increasingly important in daily life and economic activities. Sustainable development, as the most effective development approach to address global climate change, has gradually become a research hotspot in countries around the world. The authors combine sustainable development with supply chain management and incorporate into the study the objective issue of corporate fairness preferences in real society to explore the pricing and product greenness decision problem of a secondary sustainable supply chain consisting of a manufacturer producing green products and a retailer selling green products. In particular, the authors explore how supply chain decisions change when both the manufacturer and the retailer focus on fairness and how this fairness behavior affects pricing and product greenness decisions in sustainable supply chains.

The authors consider that the manufacturers' greening efforts lead to expanded demand at the retail end. Upstream and downstream firms in the supply chain have preferences for the fairness of transactions. The impact of the fairness behavior of upstream and downstream firms in the supply chain on supply chain decisions is explored by building a Stackelberg game model.

The results of this study show that the fairness concern behavior of manufacturers and retailers in the supply chain has an impact on product greenness, product pricing and corporate profits.

This study on the fairness concern behavior of supply chain firms integrates behavioral economics and supply chain management. First, the authors consider the equilibrium problem of supply chain members in the centralized channel when there are no fairness preferences. Second, the decision problem of firms in the decentralized channel when fairness is considered and when fairness preferences are not considered is explored. The authors compare these three cases to derive the corresponding propositions. Finally, the authors verify the previous conclusions and draw other conclusions using arithmetic analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of fairness concern on the optimal pricing, carbon emission reduction (CER), green marketing efforts (GME) and utility of supply chain members in a two-echelon low-carbon supply chain composed of one manufacturer and one retailer. First, three basic models that consider the manufacturer’s different attitudes toward the retailer’s fairness concern are constructed. The optimal decisions of these models are obtained. Second, these optimal solutions are compared, and the effects of some key parameters including fairness concern on the optimal decisions and utility are examined for the three models. Furthermore, the manufacturer may misestimate the retailer’s fairness concern; therefore, an extended model is proposed.

The authors adopt the manufacturer-led Stackelberg game theoretic framework, where the manufacturer decides the wholesale price and CER level and, then, the retailer determines the retail price and GME.

The results show that fairness concern has a negative impact on the wholesale price, the level of CER and GME, and fairness concern are not always beneficial for maximizing utility, although it is related to whether the manufacturer pays attention to the retailer’s fairness concern. The manufacturer will gain more utility when considering the fairness concern of retailers than non-consideration. Overestimating or underestimating the fairness concern of the retailers does not lead to benefits for the manufacturer.

This study has the following two limitations that need to be addressed in future research. First, the authors only consider the fairness concern of a single retailer but not peer-induced fairness among multiple competing retailers, which can be taken into account in future studies. Second, the demand function is linearly related to price, CER and GME. Because of the uncertainty of market information, the uncertainty demand function can be further considered.

This paper simultaneously considers the factors CER, GME and fairness concern. The utility function of the retailer is established according to taking the Nash bargaining solution as a fairness reference point, and four different models are constructed and compared.

Responding to the store brand (SB) introduction by the retailer, the manufacturer may adopt the strategic choice of incorporating the fairness concern behavior of the retailer. This paper aims to examine how the manufacturer can counteract the retailer’s SB introduction by strategically choosing to or not to incorporating the retailer’s fairness concern.

This paper considers the SB introduction problem in a two-echelon supply chain consisting of one manufacturer and one retailer with fairness concern behavior. This paper resolves the pricing strategies under four strategic scenarios regarding fairness concern incorporation and SB introduction and examine the influences from the fairness concern on pricing strategies and profits. This paper further investigates the strategic choice equilibrium of the manufacturer and retailer on fairness concern and SB introduction decision.

The results show that the retailer can be better off by the introduction of the SB only when the acceptance degree of the SB is high enough. And whether the manufacturer should incorporate the retailer's fairness concern depends on the consumer's acceptance of the SB: Only when the consumer's acceptance is moderate, the manufacturer is able to counteract the SB by strategically not incorporating the retailer’s fairness concern behavior. Otherwise, the manufacturer cannot prevent the retailer from introducing the SB and can be better off by incorporating the retailer’s fairness concern behavior.

This paper contributes to the literature by examining whether the manufacturer can adopt the strategic incorporation of the retailer's fairness concern to counteract the retailer's SB introduction.

This study aims to model collaborative product development (CPD) among a focal firm (FF) and a fairness-concerned external partner (EP). The model is used to explore the impact of fairness concerns on revenue distributing contract and innovation efforts. The study also examines the role of follow-up sales in product development decisions.

A sequential game-theoretic model is developed to analyze product development decisions between the two parties, where participants exert innovation efforts to promote the product value and a revenue-sharing contract is used to distribute the revenue.

Fairness concern of EP has significant impacts on decisions. FF has incentives to change the contract in that fairness concerns might decrease his profit. Conditions and results change when the contract is endogenously decided. First, FF tends to develop the product independently. Second, FF may share a smaller revenue fraction with EP, as FF relies more on his own efforts during CPD. Third, FF cannot benefit from fairness concerns, as his profit is not higher than that in the benchmark. Finally, the existence of follow-up sales does not change FF’s decision about whether to collaborate with EP.

This study incorporates fairness preference into CPD decisions. Besides, a new concept of fairness called “effort-related fairness” is proposed.

This paper aims to explore the effect of fairness concerns on supply chain members' optimal decisions and profits, to compare their profits under different policies, and to investigate the impact of each policy on members, consumers, and the environment with fairness concerns.

Considering government policies and fairness concerns in recycling management, this paper develops five recycling and remanufacturing decision models (anarchy policy model, reward-penalty mechanism model, recycling investment subsidies model, government tax model, and fund subsidy system model). In each model, the manufacturer and the online platform form the Stackelberg game. This research further discusses comprehensive environmental benefits and consumer surplus under five scenarios.

First, the fairness concerns of the online platform inhibit the recovery rate and supply chain members' profit while increasing the platform's utility. Second, fairness concerns increase the profit gap between the manufacturer and online platform, and the higher the degree of fairness concerns, the greater the profit gap; however, the four policies reduce the profit gap. Finally, when there are fairness concerns, environmental taxes damage the interests of supply chain members and consumers, but are most beneficial to the environment; recycling investment subsidies are on the contrary; the fund subsidy system depends on the relative size of the treatment fund and the subsidy fund.

This paper provides useful insights on how to regulate government policy to improve supply chain management with fairness concerns.

Reasonable risk sharing is the key to the smooth implementation of infrastructure public-private partnership (PPP) projects and the optimization of benefit distribution among the participants. This study aims to explore the risk redistribution ratio between the government and the private sector under different degree of fairness concern.

Renegotiation is a mechanism to provide flexibility and make up for incompleteness of PPP contracts. However, the threshold value of risk redistribution ratio and negotiation cost are not explicitly considered in previous studies. In addition, these studies do not consider the influence of the fairness concern psychology on the negotiation process. To address these gaps, based on risk-income equilibrium analysis, this paper established the bargaining optimization model of PPP projects renegotiation considering the fairness concerns of the negotiating parties. Furthermore, this study analyzed the influence of fairness concern degree on negotiation thresholds, negotiation results, and negotiation incomes under three scenarios.

The results showed that excessive focus on the fairness of incomes may exclude the risk redistribution ratio that is most beneficial to project incomes from the negotiation threshold. Moreover, the increase in the fairness concerns of negotiating parties can reduce the negotiation success period, but the net income may not necessarily be improved.

The main contribution of this paper is to propose a new risk renegotiation methodology based on the risk-income equilibrium analysis, which is helpful to develop risk management strategies in the construction field. The research results can provide government with reference about renegotiation in decision making and provide theoretical support for the practice of PPP renegotiation.

This study explores the impact of EN's (venture entrepreneurs, simplified as EN) jealousy fairness concerns coefficient on two-stage venture capital decision-making in cases of symmetrical and asymmetrical information. It discusses the equilibrium solution of two-stage venture.

The principal-agent model was established based on multiple periods, and differentiated contracts were established at different stages. The validity of the models and the contract was verified by numerical simulation.

The results suggest that with the increase in the EN fairness concerns coefficient, the effort level of EN decreases continuously and decreases faster in the second stage because this is the last stage. The level of VC's (venture capitalist, simplified as VC) effort declines first and then increases; that is, VC will increase the effort level when the fairness concerns coefficient increases to a certain threshold. To motivate EN to pay more effort, VC will increase the incentive to EN in the first stage. However, it will reduce the level of incentive to EN in the second stage. In the limited stage of venture investment, consider that the fairness concerns of EN do not make the profits of EN and VC achieve Pareto improvement simultaneously.

First, the authors implanted fairness concerns into multi-stage venture capital and discussed the impact of fairness concerns on the efforts and returns of both parties. Second, among the influencing factors of the project output, the authors consider the bilateral efforts of EN and VC, the working capacity of EN, the initial investment scale, and the external uncertain environment.

This study explores how collaborative cost sharing between the buyer and the supplier in cold chain equipment and marketing and advertising affects the performance of a fresh agricultural produce supply chain (FAP-SC).

We use a contingency approach to modeling different scenarios and analyzing how fairness perception, interplaying with corporative–retailer cost sharing., influences the performance of fresh agricultural produce cold chains.

The findings of the research highlight the crucial role of the retailer's fairness concern. When the retailer's fairness concern is absent, cost sharing (in cold chain equipment and marketing and advertising) is found to help boost demand and enhance the profits of members of the supply chain; bilateral cost sharing is found to have a more significant impact than unilateral cost sharing. When the retailer's fairness concern is taken into account, however, cost sharing is found to reduce demand at a lower level of fairness coefficient but increases demand at a higher level of fairness coefficient; bilateral cost sharing boosts both demand and profit of the supply chain when the retailer is in a “high concern, high anger” state.

The findings of the research highlight the important role of the buyer's farness perception when supply chain partners adopt collaborative cost sharing programs. This study contributes significantly to research and practice in supply chain collaboration and agricultural cold chain performance.

The existing literature has a lack of modeling of procedural fairness concerns in the supply chain level. This paper aims to investigate how procedural fairness concerns affect channel decisions, performance and coordination.

This paper considers a supply chain consisting of one supplier and one retailer who have procedural fairness concerns in a classic Stackelberg game setting. The model is set in sales promotional environment. According to the existing literature, engagement is used to depict fair process. Some findings are made through analyzing respective decisions of the supplier and the retailer under the influence of procedural fairness concerns.

The results show that the channel efficiency can be improved when the retailer exhibits procedural fairness concerns, but if the aversion to unfair process exceeds a certain threshold, the retailer cannot benefit from it. Besides, the retailer profits more when he cares about distributional fairness, although the whole channel surplus can be improved by procedural fairness concerns.

This is the first paper to study the influences of procedural fairness concerns on supply chain decisions and channel performance. Finally, a mechanism combining a wholesale price contract with slotting allowances is proposed to coordinate the supply chain.