IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i4p1151-d208050.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavior-Based Pricing of Organic and Conventional Agricultural Products Based on Green Subsidies

Author

Listed:
  • Kanying Liu

    (School of Economics & Trade, Hunan University, Changsha 410006, China
    School of Business, Hunan Agriculture University, Changsha 410128, China
    Hunan Key Laboratory of Logistics Information and Simulation Technology, Changsha 410006, China)

  • Yong Lan

    (School of Business, Hunan Agriculture University, Changsha 410128, China)

  • Wei Li

    (School of Economics & Trade, Hunan University, Changsha 410006, China
    Hunan Key Laboratory of Logistics Information and Simulation Technology, Changsha 410006, China)

  • Erbao Cao

    (School of Economics & Trade, Hunan University, Changsha 410006, China
    Hunan Key Laboratory of Logistics Information and Simulation Technology, Changsha 410006, China)

Abstract

This study considers two types of consumers: those without preference difference, and those that prefer organic agricultural products. It constructs two two-stage hoteling behavior-based pricing models and solves for the optimal loyalty price and poaching price of the two types of enterprises. It analyzes the influence of subsidies on the pricing of the two types of products and corporate profits. The study also undertakes numerical simulation for further analysis, finding that green subsidies are negatively correlated with the loyalty price and poaching price of organic agricultural products, but that they will not affect the difference between the two types of prices. When the inherited market of organic agricultural products is dominant, the size of green subsidy affects the relationship between the prices of the two types of products. However, when organic agricultural products do not dominate the initial market, green subsidies do not affect the size of the relationship between the two prices of the two types of products. When the initial market position of organic agricultural products is different, the types of competing customers are different between the two types of enterprises, and the intensity of competition will increase with the increase of subsidies. Green subsidies increase the profits of organic agricultural enterprises and reduce the profits of conventional agricultural enterprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanying Liu & Yong Lan & Wei Li & Erbao Cao, 2019. "Behavior-Based Pricing of Organic and Conventional Agricultural Products Based on Green Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1151-:d:208050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1151/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1151/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rhee, Ki-Eun, 2014. "What types of switching costs to create under behavior-based price discrimination?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 209-221.
    2. Liu, Huihui & Lei, Ming & Deng, Honghui & Keong Leong, G. & Huang, Tao, 2016. "A dual channel, quality-based price competition model for the WEEE recycling market with government subsidy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 290-302.
    3. Chongwoo Choe & Stephen King & Noriaki Matsushima, 2017. "Pricing with Cookies: Behavior-Based Price Discrimination and Spatial Competition," Monash Economics Working Papers 07-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    4. Esteves, Rosa-Branca & Reggiani, Carlo, 2014. "Elasticity of demand and behaviour-based price discrimination," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 46-56.
    5. Chongwoo Choe & Stephen King & Noriaki Matsushima, 2018. "Pricing with Cookies: Behavior-Based Price Discrimination and Spatial Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(12), pages 5669-5687, December.
    6. Krittinee Nuttavuthisit & John Thøgersen, 2017. "The Importance of Consumer Trust for the Emergence of a Market for Green Products: The Case of Organic Food," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 323-337, January.
    7. Rosa-Branca Esteves & Sofia Cerqueira, "undated". "Behaviour-Based Price Discrimination under Advertising and Imperfectly Informed Consumers," NIPE Working Papers 08/2014, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    8. Yu, Xiaohua & Gao, Zhifeng & Zeng, Yinchu, 2014. "Willingness to pay for the “Green Food” in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 80-87.
    9. Stefano Colombo, 2018. "Behavior‐ and characteristic‐based price discrimination," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 237-250, June.
    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. Tao Wang & Shi-Xiao Wang, 2022. "International Manufacturer’s Online Marketplace Choice Considering Behavior-Based Pricing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Chunmei Li & Tianjian Yang & Ying Shi, 2023. "Blockchain Adoption and Organic Subsidy in an Agricultural Supply Chain Considering Market Segmentation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.

    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. Stefano Colombo, 2018. "Behavior‐ and characteristic‐based price discrimination," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 237-250, June.
    2. Li, Jianpei & Zhang, Wanzhu, 2022. "Behavior-based pricing and signaling of product quality," MPRA Paper 120263, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 03 Jan 2023.
    3. Yang, Xiaoke & Chen, Qiuhua & Lin, Nenmei & Han, Mengzhu & Chen, Qian & Zheng, Qiuqin & Gao, Bin & Liu, Fengbo & Xu, Zhongyue, 2021. "Chinese consumer preferences for organic labels on Oolong tea: evidence from a choice experiment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(3), February.
    4. Esteves, Rosa-Branca & Resende, Joana, 2019. "Personalized pricing and advertising: Who are the winners?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 239-282.
    5. Jeong, Yuncheol & Maruyama, Masayoshi, 2018. "Positioning and pricing strategies in a market with switching costs and staying costs," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 47-57.
    6. Choe, Chongwoo & Matsushima, Noriaki & Tremblay, Mark J., 2022. "Behavior-based personalized pricing: When firms can share customer information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    7. Zhijun Chen & Chongwoo Choe & Noriaki Matsushima, 2020. "Competitive Personalized Pricing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4003-4023, September.
    8. Hoe Sang Chung, 2020. "Quality choice and behavior-based price discrimination," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 131(3), pages 223-236, December.
    9. Paul Belleflamme & Wing Man Wynne Lam & Wouter Vergote, 2019. "Competitive Imperfect Price Discrimination and Market Power," CESifo Working Paper Series 7964, CESifo.
    10. Rosa‐Branca Esteves & Qihong Liu & Jie Shuai, 2022. "Behavior‐based price discrimination with nonuniform distribution of consumer preferences," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 324-355, April.
    11. Garella, Paolo G. & Laussel, Didier & Resende, Joana, 2021. "Behavior based price personalization under vertical product differentiation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    12. Rosa-Branca Esteves, 2021. "Can personalized pricing be a winning strategy in oligopolistic markets with heterogeneous demand customers? Yes, it can," NIPE Working Papers 08/2021, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    13. Marco Botta & Klaus Wiedemann, 2020. "To discriminate or not to discriminate? Personalised pricing in online markets as exploitative abuse of dominance," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 381-404, December.
    14. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    15. Xiaoxu Dong & Huawei Zhao & Tiancai Li, 2022. "The Role of Live-Streaming E-Commerce on Consumers’ Purchasing Intention regarding Green Agricultural Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-13, April.
    16. Huihui Liu & Xiaohang Yue & Hui Ding & G. Keong Leong, 2017. "Optimal Remanufacturing Certification Contracts in the Electrical and Electronic Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, March.
    17. Jianhua Wang & Jiaye Ge & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Urban Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pork with Certified Labels: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    18. Bo Wang & Ning Wang, 2022. "Decision Models for a Dual-Recycling Channel Reverse Supply Chain with Consumer Strategic Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-18, August.
    19. Ginder, Whitney & Byun, Sang-Eun, 2022. "To trust or not to trust? The interplay between labor-related CSR claim type and prior CSR reputation of apparel retailers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    20. He, Qidong & Wang, Nengmin & Browning, Tyson R. & Jiang, Bin, 2022. "Competitive collection with convenience-perceived customers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(1), pages 239-254.

    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:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1151-:d:208050. 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.