IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i23p4719-d1284871.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nash-Bargaining Fairness Concerns under Push and Pull Supply Chains

Author

Listed:
  • Shuchen Ni

    (School of Transportation and Logistics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China)

  • Chun Feng

    (School of Transportation and Logistics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China
    National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Chengdu 610031, China)

  • Handan Gou

    (School of Transportation and Logistics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China)

Abstract

Unbalanced power structures can lead to an inequitable distribution of the supply chain’s profits, creating unstable supply chain relationships and serious social problems. This paper builds a two-tier newsvendor model composed of a single supplier and a single retailer and introduces Nash bargaining as a reference for fairness. We investigate (1) the impact of fairness concerns on the performance of a retailer-dominated supply chain and a manufacturer-dominated supply chain; (2) how demand uncertainty affects the inequitable state; and (3) how overestimated and underestimated values of fairness concerns affect supply chain performance when fairness concerns are private information. After solving the equilibrium solution of the Stackelberg game and Nash-bargaining games and numerical analyses, it is shown that unilateral fairness concerns by the Stackelberg leader or follower can motivate the leader to sacrifice its profit to reduce their income inequality by offering a coordinating wholesale price. Of course, it is also effective for both participants to be fair-minded as soon as their fairness sensitivity is moderate enough. However, followers’ fairness concerns are more effective at decreasing inequity, while leaders can improve social welfare, i.e., increase the entire supply chain’s efficiency as well as market scale. We also find that in a more uncertain market, fewer fairness-concerned participants are supposed to reach a relatively fair condition. In addition, we conclude that sometimes asymmetric information about fairness concerns can improve the profit share of the disadvantaged and even channel efficiency. This paper extends the study of Nash-bargaining fairness concerns to retailer-dominated newsvendor models and enriches the field, when fairness concerns are asymmetric information.

Suggested Citation

  • Shuchen Ni & Chun Feng & Handan Gou, 2023. "Nash-Bargaining Fairness Concerns under Push and Pull Supply Chains," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-20, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:23:p:4719-:d:1284871
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/23/4719/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/23/4719/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maxime C. Cohen & Adam N. Elmachtoub & Xiao Lei, 2022. "Price Discrimination with Fairness Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8536-8552, December.
    2. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1986. "Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 285-300, October.
    3. Charness, Gary & Grosskopf, Brit, 2001. "Relative payoffs and happiness: an experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 301-328, July.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    5. Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
    6. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard, 1986. "Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 728-741, September.
    7. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    8. Liu, Weihua & Wang, Di & Shen, Xinran & Yan, Xiaoyu & Wei, Wanying, 2018. "The impacts of distributional and peer-induced fairness concerns on the decision-making of order allocation in logistics service supply chain," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 102-122.
    9. Wu, Desheng & Baron, Opher & Berman, Oded, 2009. "Bargaining in competing supply chains with uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(2), pages 548-556, September.
    10. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    11. Kenneth M. Amaeshi & Onyeka K. Osuji & Paul Nnodim, 2008. "Corporate Social Responsibility in Supply Chains of Global Brands: A Boundaryless Responsibility? Clarifications, Exceptions and Implications," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 223-234, August.
    12. Caliskan-Demirag, Ozgun & Chen, Youhua (Frank) & Li, Jianbin, 2010. "Channel coordination under fairness concerns and nonlinear demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1321-1326, December.
    13. Gérard P. Cachon, 2004. "The Allocation of Inventory Risk in a Supply Chain: Push, Pull, and Advance-Purchase Discount Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 222-238, February.
    14. Teck-Hua Ho & Xuanming Su, 2009. "Peer-Induced Fairness in Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2022-2049, December.
    15. Rami Zwick & Xiao-Ping Chen, 1999. "What Price Fairness? A Bargaining Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(6), pages 804-823, June.
    16. Nie, Tengfei & Du, Shaofu, 2017. "Dual-fairness supply chain with quantity discount contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 491-500.
    17. Jiang, Yanmin & Wu, Xiaole & Chen, Bo & Hu, Qiying, 2021. "Rawlsian fairness in push and pull supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 194-205.
    18. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    2. Jiang, Yanmin & Wu, Xiaole & Chen, Bo & Hu, Qiying, 2021. "Rawlsian fairness in push and pull supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 194-205.
    3. Nie, Tengfei & Du, Shaofu, 2017. "Dual-fairness supply chain with quantity discount contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 491-500.
    4. García-Gallego, Aurora & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Ruiz-Martos, María J., 2019. "The Heaven Dictator Game: Costless taking or giving," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Bart J. Wilson, 2012. "Contra Private Fairness," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 407-435, April.
    6. Patanjal Kumar & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Yigit Kazancoglu & Ali Emrouznejad, 2023. "A decision framework for incorporating the coordination and behavioural issues in sustainable supply chains in digital economy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 721-749, July.
    7. Croson, Rachel & Konow, James, 2009. "Social preferences and moral biases," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 201-212, March.
    8. Du, Shaofu & Chen, Yuan & Peng, Jing & Nie, Tengfei, 2022. "Incorporating risk fairness concerns into wine futures under quality uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Yoshihara, Rikuo & Matsubayashi, Nobuo, 2021. "Channel coordination between manufacturers and competing retailers with fairness concerns," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 546-555.
    10. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Liu, Zhi & Li, Kevin W. & Huang, Jun & Chen, Ji, 2019. "Cooperative game approaches to coordinating a three-echelon closed-loop supply chain with fairness concerns," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 92-110.
    11. William J. Allender & Jura Liaukonyte & Sherif Nasser & Timothy J. Richards, 2021. "Price Fairness and Strategic Obfuscation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(1), pages 122-146, January.
    12. Ni Du & Qinglan Han, 2018. "Pricing and Service Quality Guarantee Decisions in Logistics Service Supply Chain with Fairness Concern," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 35(05), pages 1-41, October.
    13. Greiff, Matthias & Ackermann, Kurt & Murphy, Ryan O., 2016. "The influences of social context on the measurement of distributional preferences," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145529, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Zongsheng Huang, 2020. "Stochastic Differential Game in the Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Fairness Concern Retailer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, April.
    15. Antonio Filippin & Manuela Raimondi, 2016. "The Patron Game with Heterogeneous Endowments: A Case Against Inequality Aversion," De Economist, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 69-81, March.
    16. Messinger, Paul R., 2016. "The role of fairness in competitive supply chain relationships: An experimental studyAuthor-Name: Choi, Sungchul," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 798-813.
    17. Wei, Lin & Chen, Menghan & Du, Shaofu & Zhang, Baofeng, 2022. "By-state fairness in selling to the newsvendor," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    18. Guy Kaplanski & Haim Levy, 2017. "Envy and Altruism: Contrasting Bivariate and Univariate Prospect Preferences," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(2), pages 457-483, April.
    19. Choi, Tsan-Ming & Zhang, Ting, 2023. "Will being an angel bring more harm than good? Altruistic newsvendors with different risk attitudes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(3), pages 1153-1165.
    20. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Jeon, Joo Young, 2014. "Impure altruism or inequality aversion?: An experimental investigation based on income effects," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 143-150.

    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:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:23:p:4719-:d:1284871. 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.