Manufacturer's cooperative recycling strategies considering the negative externality of unrecycled products: Non‐cooperative, fund‐cooperative, or labour‐cooperative

Abstract This paper proposes a new objective function for manufacturer considering the negative externality of unrecycled products (NEUP), and develops three cooperative recycling modes: non‐cooperative, fund‐cooperative and labour‐cooperative. Results indicate that compared to non‐cooperative, while fund‐cooperative can enhance the recycling rate, it hurts the system's profitability. In contrast, labour‐cooperative can achieve a win–win situation for both. Moreover, considering NEUP expands the dominant space of fund‐cooperative in recycling rate, but weakens its advantage in market demand. Notably, considering NEUP may render cooperative recycling ineffective in improving profit, which largely depends on the degree of considering NEUP and recycling cost coefficient ratio.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Managerial and Decision Economics
Published
2024-08-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.4369
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.55
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Manufacturer's cooperative recycling strategies considering the negative externality of unrecycled products: Non‐cooperative, fund‐cooperative, or labour‐cooperative

Shan Liu, Jinyou Qiao, Caiquan Duan, Yan Sun
1 citations
Managerial and Decision Economics
Sustainable Supply Chain Management
0.55
article

Manufacturer's cooperative recycling strategies considering the negative externality of unrecycled products: Non‐cooperative, fund‐cooperative, or labour‐cooperative

Shan Liu, Jinyou Qiao, Caiquan Duan, Yan Sun
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper proposes a new objective function for manufacturer considering the negative externality of unrecycled products (NEUP), and develops three cooperative recycling modes: non‐cooperative, fund‐cooperative and labour‐cooperative. Results indicate that compared to non‐cooperative, while fund‐cooperative can enhance the recycling rate, it hurts the system's profitability. In contrast, labour‐cooperative can achieve a win–win situation for both. Moreover, considering NEUP expands the dominant space of fund‐cooperative in recycling rate, but weakens its advantage in market demand. Notably, considering NEUP may render cooperative recycling ineffective in improving profit, which largely depends on the degree of considering NEUP and recycling cost coefficient ratio.

Managerial and Decision EconomicsVol. 46(1)
Oxford Brookes University (GB), Northeast Agricultural University (CN), Fudan University (CN)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Sustainable Supply Chain Management
0.55
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Manufacturer's cooperative recycling strategies considering the negative externality of unrecycled products: Non‐cooperative, fund‐cooperative, or labour‐cooperative — Shan Liu, Jinyou Qiao, et al. · Managerial and Decision Economics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS