Modeling and analysis of a sustainable supply chain with fairness concerns and green-sensitive consumer demand

Abstract

PurposeWith 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.Design/methodology/approachThe 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.FindingsThe 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.Originality/valueThis 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.