[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7572-d1139994.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Profit-Sharing Contract of the Fresh Agricultural Products Supply Chain under Community Group Purchase Mode Considering Freshness Preservation Efforts

Author

Listed:
  • Min Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
    Center of Comprehensive Transportation Economic Management, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Zhen Lian

    (School of Economics and Management, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Guangchuan Yang

    (Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA)

  • Liaoning Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

Abstract
This article constructed a four-level fresh agricultural product (FAP) supply chain with a two-stage pricing strategy under a “community group purchase (CGP) platform + direct procurement from the FAP supplier” sales model. We investigate the influence of the CGP agency’s participation in the control strategy of FAP freshness preservation efforts on the profits of supply chain stakeholders. This article discusses the effects of the FAP supplier profit-sharing ratio, the CGP agency profit-sharing ratio, and consumers’ sensitivity to FAP freshness on the supply chain stakeholders’ freshness preservation efforts. Moreover, based on the fairness preference theory, this article designed a profit-sharing contract that involves the Nash bargaining game between the FAP supplier and the CGP agency as the supply chain coordination mechanism. Modeling results revealed that: (1) The CGP agency’s freshness preservation efforts increased total supply chain profits. (2) The FAP supplier profit-sharing ratio, CGP agency profit-sharing ratio, and consumers’ sensitivity to FAP freshness have a positive correlation to the profits of the FAP supply chain and promote the coordination of the supply chain. (3) Considering fairness preferences, with the increase in FAP suppliers’ business negotiating ability, their freshness preservation efforts and fairness utility both increased gradually, while the fairness utility of the CGP agency gradually decreased.

Suggested Citation

  • Min Li & Zhen Lian & Guangchuan Yang & Liaoning Li, 2023. "Profit-Sharing Contract of the Fresh Agricultural Products Supply Chain under Community Group Purchase Mode Considering Freshness Preservation Efforts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7572-:d:1139994
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7572/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7572/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michał Pietrzak & Aleksandra Chlebicka & Paweł Kraciński & Agata Malak-Rawlikowska, 2020. "Information Asymmetry as a Barrier in Upgrading the Position of Local Producers in the Global Value Chain—Evidence from the Apple Sector in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-21, September.
    2. David A. Hennessy, 1996. "Information Asymmetry as a Reason for Food Industry Vertical Integration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1034-1043.
    3. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    4. Ronald W. Ward, 1982. "Asymmetry in Retail, Wholesale, and Shipping Point Pricing for Fresh Vegetables," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(2), pages 205-212.
    5. Gabriella Dellino & Teresa Laudadio & Renato Mari & Nicola Mastronardi & Carlo Meloni, 2018. "A reliable decision support system for fresh food supply chain management," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(4), pages 1458-1485, February.
    6. Jabarzare, Nahid & Rasti-Barzoki, Morteza, 2020. "A game theoretic approach for pricing and determining quality level through coordination contracts in a dual-channel supply chain including manufacturer and packaging company," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Hennessy, David A., 1996. "Information Asymmetry As a Reason for Vertical Integration," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10422, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Konstantinos Giannakas, 2002. "Information Asymmetries and Consumption Decisions in Organic Food Product Markets," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(1), pages 35-50, March.
    9. Zhao, Yingxue & Wang, Shouyang & Cheng, T.C.E. & Yang, Xiaoqi & Huang, Zhimin, 2010. "Coordination of supply chains by option contracts: A cooperative game theory approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 668-675, December.
    10. Yang, Lei & Tang, Ruihong, 2019. "Comparisons of sales modes for a fresh product supply chain with freshness-keeping effort," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 425-448.
    11. Ilkyeong Moon & Yoon Jea Jeong & Subrata Saha, 2020. "Investment and coordination decisions in a supply chain of fresh agricultural products," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 2307-2331, December.
    12. Cai, Xiaoqiang & Chen, Jian & Xiao, Yongbo & Xu, Xiaolin & Yu, Gang, 2013. "Fresh-product supply chain management with logistics outsourcing," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 752-765.
    13. Liu, Molin & Dan, Bin & Zhang, Shuguang & Ma, Songxuan, 2021. "Information sharing in an E-tailing supply chain for fresh produce with freshness-keeping effort and value-added service," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 572-584.
    14. Yu, Yunlong & Xiao, Tiaojun, 2021. "Analysis of cold-chain service outsourcing modes in a fresh agri-product supply chain," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    15. Leng, Mingming & Parlar, Mahmut, 2009. "Lead-time reduction in a two-level supply chain: Non-cooperative equilibria vs. coordination with a profit-sharing contract," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 521-544, April.
    16. Sheu, Jiuh-Biing, 2011. "Marketing-driven channel coordination with revenue-sharing contracts under price promotion to end-customers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 246-255, October.
    17. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    18. Fahr, Rene & Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2000. "Fairness as a constraint on trust in reciprocity: earned property rights in a reciprocal exchange experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 275-282, March.
    19. Hung‐Hao Chang & Chad D. Meyerhoefer, 2021. "COVID‐19 and the Demand for Online Food Shopping Services: Empirical Evidence from Taiwan," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(2), pages 448-465, March.
    20. repec:bla:scandj:v:97:y:1995:i:2:p:295-307 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Min Li & Lina He & Guangchuan Yang & Zhen Lian, 2022. "Profit-Sharing Contracts for Fresh Agricultural Products Supply Chain Considering Spatio-Temporal Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    22. Widodo, K.H. & Nagasawa, H. & Morizawa, K. & Ota, M., 2006. "A periodical flowering-harvesting model for delivering agricultural fresh products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(1), pages 24-43, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haiping Ren & Rui Chen, 2023. "Porcelain Supply Chain Coordination Considering the Preferences of Consumers against the Background of E-Commerce," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-19, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Min Li & Lina He & Guangchuan Yang & Zhen Lian, 2022. "Profit-Sharing Contracts for Fresh Agricultural Products Supply Chain Considering Spatio-Temporal Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Qian Zheng & Manman Wang & Feng Yang, 2021. "Optimal Channel Strategy for a Fresh Produce E-Commerce Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, May.
    3. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    4. repec:clg:wpaper:2008-22 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Sugden, Robert & Wang, Mengjie, 2020. "Equality of opportunity and the acceptability of outcome inequality," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    6. James C. Cox & Daniel T. Hall, 2010. "Trust with Private and Common Property: Effects of Stronger Property Right Entitlements," Games, MDPI, vol. 1(4), pages 1-24, November.
    7. Xiao, Erte & Bicchieri, Cristina, 2010. "When equality trumps reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 456-470, June.
    8. Jan Stoop, 2014. "From the lab to the field: envelopes, dictators and manners," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(2), pages 304-313, June.
    9. Kritikos, Alexander S. & Tan, Jonathan H. W., 2005. "Indenture as a Commitment Device in Self-Enforced Contracts: An Experimental Test," Discussion Papers 241, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
    10. Sebastian J. Goerg & Werner Güth & Gari Walkowitz & Torsten Weiland, 2007. "Interregional diversity of fairness concerns - An online ultimatum experiment," Jena Economics Research Papers 2007-016, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    11. Oxoby, Robert J. & Friedrich, Colette, 2008. "Incentive Design and Trust: Comparing the Effects of Tournament and Team-Based Incentives on Trust," IZA Discussion Papers 3424, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Stephan Kroll & Todd Cherry & Jason Shogren, 2007. "The impact of endowment heterogeneity and origin on contributions in best-shot public good games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(4), pages 411-428, December.
    13. Mengjie Wang, 2017. "Does strategy fairness make inequality more acceptable?," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 17-08, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    14. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2005. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism – Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 66, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    15. Liu, Chao & Lv, Jingyu & Hou, Ping & Lu, Danrong, 2023. "Disclosing products’ freshness level as a non-contractible quality: Optimal logistics service contracts in the fresh products supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1085-1102.
    16. Bergh, Andreas, 2008. "A critical note on the theory of inequity aversion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1789-1796, October.
    17. Ederer, Florian & Stremitzer, Alexander, 2017. "Promises and expectations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 161-178.
    18. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    19. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    20. Ellingsen, Tore & Johannesson, Magnus, 2009. "Time is not money," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 96-102, October.
    21. Falk Armin & Kosfeld Michael, 2012. "It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-36, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7572-:d:1139994. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.