Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Game-theoretic analysis reveals trade-offs between green-subsidy and no-subsidy policies in competing supply chains, highlighting optimal fiscal strategies under manufacturer risk aversion.
Purpose This paper investigates how the government selects demand-side promotional subsidy strategies in a market where a green supply chain competes with a conventional supply chain and the green manufacturer is risk-averse. It focuses on analyzing the government's choice among no-subsidy, price-subsidy and the green-subsidy policies under different expenditure-benefit objectives. Design/methodology/approach This study develops a game-theoretic model of competing supply chains, in which inter-chain competition is modeled as Cournot competition and intra-chain interaction as a manufacturer-led Stackelberg game. The green manufacturer's risk-averse behavior is characterized using a mean-variance model. A comparative policy analysis is conducted under equal-expenditure conditions and is further extended to a policy space with unequal expenditures. Findings Under equal subsidy expenditure, the green-subsidy policy yields the highest environmental benefit, whereas the no-subsidy policy performs best in terms of economic benefit. When the government's comprehensive benefit is considered, the green-subsidy policy should be preferred at low subsidy levels. In contrast, the no-subsidy policy becomes more desirable at moderate or high subsidy levels. Under unequal subsidy expenditure, the optimal policy choice depends on the government's expenditure-benefit objectives and is determined by a policy space partitioned by iso-expenditure curves and iso-benefit curves. Originality/value This study integrates competition between a green supply chain and a conventional supply chain, the green manufacturer's risk-averse behavior and the selection of demand-side promotional subsidy strategies into a single theoretical framework. By distinguishing between equal and unequal subsidy expenditures, this study derives the policy selection rules under different objectives and provides a clear basis for designing government subsidy schemes under fiscal constraints and market uncertainty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: