IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i15p9510-d879132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Pricing Mechanism Analysis of China’s Natural Gas Supply Chain under the “Dual Carbon” Target Based on the Perspective of Game Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng Che

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Xin Geng

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Huixian Zheng

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Yi Chen

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Xiaoguang Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

Abstract

China is currently the world’s largest energy consumer and carbon emitter. In order to reduce the harm of carbon dioxide to the global ecological environment, the use of natural gas instead of coal is a realistic choice for China to achieve the “dual carbon” goal. Opportunities also bring new challenges, and the price of natural gas is an important method of promoting the upstream and downstream industrial chains of natural gas, so it is of great practical significance to study the price of natural gas. This paper builds a three-level supply chain model consisting of suppliers in the natural gas market, city gas companies and consumers in the market and uses the Stackelberg game to study the decision-making models of different subjects under their own dominance and centralized decision-making; it also considers the pricing mechanism and profit situation of stakeholders in the natural gas market under the low-carbon preference of consumers and the level of corporate carbon emission reduction. The research results show that when considering consumers’ low-carbon preferences, the sales prices of various stakeholders in the market have increased, which is beneficial for all entities in the natural gas industry chain. At the same time, with the low-carbon transformation of energy companies, the production method drives the price of raw materials to rise in the process of low-carbon innovation, which, in turn, makes the price of various stakeholders in the natural gas market and the level of carbon emission reduction per unit show a positive relationship; in order to maximize the overall profit of the supply chain, the natural gas market should adopt a centralized decision-making method to further promote the reform of China’s natural gas marketization.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng Che & Xin Geng & Huixian Zheng & Yi Chen & Xiaoguang Zhang, 2022. "The Pricing Mechanism Analysis of China’s Natural Gas Supply Chain under the “Dual Carbon” Target Based on the Perspective of Game Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-21, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9510-:d:879132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9510/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9510/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dong, Kangyin & Sun, Renjin & Wu, Jin & Hochman, Gal, 2018. "The growth and development of natural gas supply chains: The case of China and the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 64-71.
    2. Chen, Yizhong & Li, Jing & Lu, Hongwei & Yang, Yiyang, 2020. "Impact of unconventional natural gas development on regional water resources and market supply in China from the perspective of game analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    3. Manera, Matteo & Nicolini, Marcella & Vignati, Ilaria, 2016. "Modelling futures price volatility in energy markets: Is there a role for financial speculation?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 220-229.
    4. Xiao, Jihong & Wang, Yudong, 2022. "Macroeconomic uncertainty, speculation, and energy futures returns: Evidence from a quantile regression," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    5. Crow, Daniel J.G. & Giarola, Sara & Hawkes, Adam D., 2018. "A dynamic model of global natural gas supply," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 452-469.
    6. Cheng Che & Yi Chen & Xiaoguang Zhang & Zhihong Zhang & Wei Zhang, 2021. "The Impact of Different Government Subsidy Methods on Low-Carbon Emission Reduction Strategies in Dual-Channel Supply Chain," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-9, January.
    7. Youngho Chang & Dang Thi Quynh Trang & Tsiat Siong Tan & Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary, 2021. "Competition and cooperation in the natural gas market: a game-theoretic demand-base analysis," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 21-49, December.
    8. Matteo Manera, Marcella Nicolini, and Ilaria Vignati, 2013. "Financial Speculation in Energy and Agriculture Futures Markets: A Multivariate GARCH Approach," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    9. Qin, Yue & Tong, Fan & Yang, Guang & Mauzerall, Denise L., 2018. "Challenges of using natural gas as a carbon mitigation option in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 457-462.
    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. Huilin Yao & Rizhao Gong & Zhihui Yuan, 2022. "Multi-Oligopoly Sequential Pricing Mechanisms and Their Game Analysis in Raw Material Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, 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. Algirdas Justinas Staugaitis & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2022. "Short-Term Speculation Effects on Agricultural Commodity Returns and Volatility in the European Market Prior to and during the Pandemic," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, April.
    2. Algirdas Justinas Staugaitis & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2022. "Financial Speculation Impact on Agricultural and Other Commodity Return Volatility: Implications for Sustainable Development and Food Security," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-27, November.
    3. Sarvar Gurbanov, 2021. "Role of Natural Gas Consumption in the Reduction of CO 2 Emissions: Case of Azerbaijan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Xiao, Jihong & Wen, Fenghua & He, Zhifang, 2023. "Impact of geopolitical risks on investor attention and speculation in the oil market: Evidence from nonlinear and time-varying analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    5. Zhou, Zhongbing & Qin, Quande, 2020. "Decoding China's natural gas development: A critical discourse analysis of the five-year plans," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Ederington, Louis H. & Fernando, Chitru S. & Hoelscher, Seth A. & Lee, Thomas K. & Linn, Scott C., 2019. "Characteristics of petroleum product prices: A survey," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 1-15.
    7. Martin T. Bohl & Martin Stefan, 2020. "Return dynamics during periods of high speculation in a thinly traded commodity market," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(1), pages 145-159, January.
    8. Martin T. Bohl & Alexander Pütz & Pierre L. Siklos & Christoph Sulewski, 2021. "Information transmission under increasing political tensions—Evidence from the Berlin Produce Exchange 1887–1896," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(2), pages 226-244, February.
    9. Wei, Qi & Zhou, Peng & Shi, Xunpeng, 2023. "The congestion cost of pipeline networks under third-party access in China's natural gas market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    10. Gao, Yanyan & Zheng, Jianghuai, 2022. "Clearing the air through pipes? An evaluation of the air pollution reduction effect of China's natural gas pipeline projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    11. Bohl, Martin T. & Sulewski, Christoph, 2019. "The impact of long-short speculators on the volatility of agricultural commodity futures prices," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    12. Martin T. Bohl & Christoph Sulewski, 2018. "The Impact of Long-Short Speculators on the Volatility of Agricultural Commodity Futures Prices," CQE Working Papers 7718, Center for Quantitative Economics (CQE), University of Muenster.
    13. Derek Bunn, Julien Chevallier, Yannick Le Pen, and Benoit Sevi, 2017. "Fundamental and Financial Influences on the Co-movement of Oil and Gas Prices," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    14. Yanhong Feng & Xiaolei Wang & Shuanglian Chen & Yanqiong Liu, 2022. "Impact of Oil Financialization on Oil Price Fluctuation: A Perspective of Heterogeneity," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    15. Xiao, Jihong & Wang, Yudong, 2022. "Macroeconomic uncertainty, speculation, and energy futures returns: Evidence from a quantile regression," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    16. Guo, Jiaqi & Long, Shaobo & Luo, Weijie, 2022. "Nonlinear effects of climate policy uncertainty and financial speculation on the global prices of oil and gas," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Devine, Mel T. & Russo, Marianna, 2019. "Liquefied natural gas and gas storage valuation: Lessons from the integrated Irish and UK markets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1389-1406.
    18. Zhu, Jianhua & Peng, Yan & Gong, Zhuping & Sun, Yanming & Lai, Chaoan & Wang, Qing & Zhu, Xiaojun & Gan, Zhongxue, 2019. "Dynamic analysis of SNG and PNG supply: The stability and robustness view #," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 717-729.
    19. Valentina G. Bruno & Bahattin Büyükşahin & Michel A. Robe, 2017. "The Financialization of Food?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(1), pages 243-264.
    20. Matteo Manera & Marcella Nicolini, 2013. "Futures Price Volatility in Commodities Markets: The Role of Short Term vs Long Term Speculation," Working Papers 2013.45, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    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:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9510-:d:879132. 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.