Research on Low-Carbon Strategies of Supply Chains, Considering Livestreaming Marketing Modes and Power Structures

Abstract

A livestreaming supply chain composed of a single manufacturer and a single streamer in the low-carbon market is examined. Motivated by the actual production and operation, both the manufacturer and the streamer have a chance to dominate the supply chain. Low-carbon strategies and livestreaming marketing modes of the supply chain are studied. The impacts of the consumer’s price sensitivity coefficient, low-carbon preference, and streamer’s promotion sensitivity coefficient on the equilibrium results are further studied. The results show that: the streamer achieves the optimal level of promotion effort in the resale mode under both power structures. The manufacturer achieves the optimal low-carbon level in the commission mode when the promotion sensitivity coefficient is smaller under both of two power structures. The streamer’s profit is optimal in the resale mode, while the manufacturer’s profit is optimal in the commission mode when under the streamer-led structure. Two parties’ profits are optimal in the commission mode when the promotion sensitivity coefficient is smaller under the manufacturer-led structure. The low-carbon level, streamer promotion effort and selling price in two livestreaming marketing modes will increase when the streamer promotion sensitivity coefficient and consumer low-carbon preference increase and will decrease when consumer price sensitivity increases under two power structures. Lastly, the selling price in resale mode is always higher than that in commission mode under two power structures.

Emission Reduction Decisions in Blockchain-Enabled Low-Carbon Supply Chains under Different Power Structures

“…Cai et al [28] used a differential game model to study the issues of carbon trading limits and trading systems under power structures and consumers' low-carbon preferences, and they analyzed the optimal pricing and carbon emission reduction decisions of supply chain members. Gong et al [29] investigated the selection of low-carbon strategies and live marketing models for supply chains under two power structures. The above literature adequately considers the differences in power structures between enterprises and analyzes the influence of different power structures on enterprise decision-making.…”

“…Blockchain technology affects the profits and emission reduction decisions of low-carbon supply chain enterprises, while the unequal power structure determines the influence and voice of all parties. Referring to the studies of Xu et al [26] and Gong et al [29], due to different power structures, leaders in the low-carbon supply chain will have different motivations and strategies for emission reduction, which will affect the effect of carbon emission reduction.…”

“…In this section, the main conclusions are further analyzed by numerical simulation. This is achieved through collecting the relevant data of enterprises with blockchain and carbon emission reduction in practice, and referring to relevant literature [17,28,29,32] to process the data without loss of generality. The relevant parameter values are set as follows:…”

Sustainable Supply Chains in Industrial Engineering and Management

“…Gong et al [1] established game models for a live-streaming supply chain and found optimal strategies for live-streaming members on streaming marketing modes, prices, and carbon emission reduction efforts.…”

Intelligent algorithms and methodologies for low‐carbon smart manufacturing: Review on past research, recent developments and future research directions

“…The adoption of circular economy principles, material recycling, and waste reduction not only serve to enhance the environmental friendliness of manufacturing processes but also result in financial gains and improved profitability [9,26]. Moreover, optimisation of the supply chain is vital to low-carbon SM [27,28]. Efficient logistics and transportation planning have the potential to significantly reduce energy consumption associated with the transportation of products [29,30].…”