Selection of cost-effective investment and output subsidies for eco-friendly products
Selection of cost-effective investment and output subsidies for eco-friendly products
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124985
复制
发表时间：
2020-11
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Xiao Su;Bing Sun;Yijiang Liu
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Xiao Su;Bing Sun;Yijiang Liu
投资补贴和产出补贴是促进生态友好型产品扩散的两种常见补贴方案。本文采用分析模型研究了在传统产品竞争市场中，应采用何种补贴方式促进EFP的扩散。考虑到EFP生产存在前期投资，且EFP生产技术尚不成熟，我们假设想要生产EFP的企业需要承担转换成本和较高的制造成本。在鼓励企业生产efp时，结果表明，当转换成本处于中等范围时，产出补贴成本较低。同时，在潜在市场大、EFP制造成本低的情况下，产出补贴更有可能用于吸引企业生产EFP。当鼓励所有公司生产efp时，产出补贴成本较低，因为它们面临较低的转换成本。但是，在潜在市场较小的情况下，更有可能实施投资补贴。最后，我们在由两家以上公司组成的市场中测试了这些发现的稳健性。我们考察了只有一家企业生产efp的情况下的补贴，发现在这种情况下，投资补贴更有可能实施。
Investment subsidies and output subsides are two common subsidy schemes used to promote the diffusion of eco-friendly products (EFPs). We adopted an analytical model to study which type of subsidies should be employed in promoting EFP diffusion in a competitive market of traditional products. Considering that there is a pre-investment in producing EFPs and EFP production technology is immature, we assume that a firm that wants to produce EFPs needs to bear both switching costs and higher manufacturing costs. When encouraging firms to produce EFPs, the results show that output subsidies are less costly when the switching costs are in the middle range. Meanwhile, in the case of a large potential market and low EFP manufacturing costs, output subsidies are more likely to be employed in attracting firms to produce EFPs. When encouraging all firms to produce EFPs, output subsidies are less costly, as they face a low switching cost. In the case of a small potential market, however, investment subsidies are more likely to be implemented. Finally, we tested the robustness of these findings in a market composed of more than two firms. We explored the subsidies in a circumstance where only one firm produced EFPs and found that investment subsidies were more likely to be implemented under these circumstances.