{"title":"Expand or not? Trade-offs of the remanufacturer on recycling channels\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n ","authors":"Xin Qi, Tao Zhang","doi":"10.1051/ro/2024150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The integration of online trading has emerged as a crucial driver of operational efficiency in the reverse supply chain. This study expands the recycling model to include three distinct scenarios: basic-offline recycling (BR), single-platform recycling (SR), and dual-platform recycling (DR). The research delves into the implications of varying platform numbers, profit-sharing contracts, consumer recycling preferences, and recycling price adjustment speeds on supply chain stability within a multi-period decision-making framework. Findings reveal that the SR model is not always yield higher profits for remanufacturers through lower revenue allocation proportions to platforms, in stark contrast to the DR model. Furthermore, rapid decision adjustments do not consistently enhance the stability of the recycling system across multiple decision cycles. Remanufacturers' expansion strategies are significantly impacted by the costs associated with acquiring e-waste from individual recyclers. Importantly, an excess of platforms does not always result in favorable outcomes. Conversely, the SR model proves superior to the DR model in practical contexts that may arise. These insights offer valuable guidance to remanufacturers seeking to develop viable expansion strategies that foster mutually beneficial relationships among individual recyclers, remanufacturers, and platforms.","PeriodicalId":506995,"journal":{"name":"RAIRO - Operations Research","volume":"5 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RAIRO - Operations Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2024150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The integration of online trading has emerged as a crucial driver of operational efficiency in the reverse supply chain. This study expands the recycling model to include three distinct scenarios: basic-offline recycling (BR), single-platform recycling (SR), and dual-platform recycling (DR). The research delves into the implications of varying platform numbers, profit-sharing contracts, consumer recycling preferences, and recycling price adjustment speeds on supply chain stability within a multi-period decision-making framework. Findings reveal that the SR model is not always yield higher profits for remanufacturers through lower revenue allocation proportions to platforms, in stark contrast to the DR model. Furthermore, rapid decision adjustments do not consistently enhance the stability of the recycling system across multiple decision cycles. Remanufacturers' expansion strategies are significantly impacted by the costs associated with acquiring e-waste from individual recyclers. Importantly, an excess of platforms does not always result in favorable outcomes. Conversely, the SR model proves superior to the DR model in practical contexts that may arise. These insights offer valuable guidance to remanufacturers seeking to develop viable expansion strategies that foster mutually beneficial relationships among individual recyclers, remanufacturers, and platforms.
在线交易的整合已成为提高逆向供应链运营效率的重要驱动力。本研究将回收模型扩展到三种不同的情景:基本离线回收(BR)、单平台回收(SR)和双平台回收(DR)。研究在多期决策框架内深入探讨了不同平台数量、利润分享合同、消费者回收偏好和回收价格调整速度对供应链稳定性的影响。研究结果表明,与 DR 模式形成鲜明对比的是,SR 模式并不总能通过降低平台的收入分配比例为再制造商带来更高的利润。此外,在多个决策周期中,快速决策调整并不能持续增强回收系统的稳定性。再制造商的扩张战略受到从单个回收商处收购电子废弃物的相关成本的显著影响。重要的是,过多的平台并不总能带来有利的结果。相反,在可能出现的实际情况中,SR 模式被证明优于 DR 模式。这些见解为再制造商提供了宝贵的指导,帮助他们制定可行的扩张战略,促进个体回收商、再制造商和平台之间的互利关系。