- Please check and comment entries here.
Low-carbon tourism supply chain
Low-carbon tourism is a kind of way to reduce the "carbon" tourism, that is, in the tourism activities, tourists try to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions. That is, green travel based on low energy consumption and low pollution, advocating the minimum reduction of carbon footprint and carbon dioxide emissions during travel, is also a deep-seated performance of environmental tourism. This paper integrates a low-carbon tourism supply chain consisting of a low-carbon tourist attraction (LTA) providing a low-carbon service and an online travel agency (OTA) responsible for big data marketing. Consumers may also encounter sudden crisis events that occur in the tourist attraction during their visit, and the occurrence of crisis events can damage the low-carbon goodwill of the tourist attraction to the detriment of the sustainable development of the supply chain. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate how tourism firms can develop dynamic strategies in the pre-crisis environment if they envision the occurrence of a crisis event and how crisis events affect interfirm cooperation. Our findings provide important managerial insights for enterprises in the tourism supply chain and suggest that they need to not only become aware of the tourist attraction crisis events, but also, more importantly, they need to adjust their appropriate input strategies based on the degree of anticipation of the crisis.
1. Literature Review
1.1. Low-carbon tourism
1.2. Sudden Crisis Events
1.3. Cost-Sharing Contracts
Based on the problem description and various assumptions in the previous section, this section analyzes the member decision, low-carbon goodwill under the three models of the Nash non-cooperative decision (), the cost-sharing decision ( ) and the centralized decision ( ) in the pre- and post-crisis reigmes and analyzes the members’ and system’s profits after the crisis and throughout the planning period. Furthermore, the key parameters under the different decision-making models are compared and statically analyzed to give different decision management insights of the models in order to provide a basis for decision making for the relevant companies in the low-carbon tourism supply chain. For the model to be easily distinguished, this paper will use the superscripts , and to represent the three different decision-making modes and the subscripts and to represent the supply chain decision subjects, LTA and OTA, respectively.
2.1. Nash Non-Cooperative Decision-Making Model (Model-N)
When the Nash non-cooperative decision-making model (Model-N) is taken between the LTA and the OTA in the low-carbon tourism supply chain, both supply chain members, as autonomous business decision makers, behave as fully rational decision makers, and each decision maker makes decisions separately to pursue the maximization of their own profits. The LTA first determines its own low-carbon service level, and the OTA determines its optimal big data marketing level on this basis. Furthermore, the study finds that the optimal strategies under Nash’s non-cooperative decision and Stackelberg’s non-cooperative decision are consistent .
2.2. Cost-Sharing Decision-Making Model (Model-D)
Under the cost-sharing decision-making model (Model-D), the part of the cost of the OTA’s big data marketing investment will be borne by the LTA to incentivize the OTA to actively promote tourist attraction and develop potential tourism markets . Therefore, to build a low-carbon tourism supply chain differentital game model led by the LTA, the LTA firstly decides its own low-carbon service and the sharing coefficient of the big data marketing of the OTA, and then the OTA decides its own big data marketing level on this basis.
2.3. Centralized Decision-Making Model (Model-C)
The centralized decision-making model (Model-) of LTA and OTA is the most ideal state in the low-carbon tourism supply chain, where both members constitute a unified decision maker and jointly determine the service inputs and big data marketing inputs in the supply chain to enhance the low-carbon goodwill, which in turn stimulates the consumers’ choice of low-carbon tourist attractions and improves the overall profit of the supply chain system. In this model, the LTA and the OTA seek to maximize system profits and jointly determine the service and marketing strategies, with the letter SC denoting the supply chain as a whole.
The entry is from 10.3390/su13158228
- Huang, W. On Low Carbon Tourism and Low Carbon Establishment of tourist attractions. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 11, 100–102.
- Wang, K.; Gan, C.; Ou, Y.; Liu, H. Low-carbon behaviour performance of scenic spots in a world heritage site. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3673.
- Zhao, L.; Chen, Z.; Liu, J. Evolutionary Game Theory between Local Government and Tourism Enterprises in the Context of a Low-carbon Economy. Tour. Trib. 2015, 30, 72–82.
- He, P.; He, Y.; Xu, F. Evolutionary analysis of sustainable tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2018, 69, 76–89.
- Saarinen, J. Understanding and governing sustainable tourism mobility: Psychological and behavioural approaches. Anatolia 2015, 26, 119–121.
- Xu, F.; Fox, D. Modelling attitudes to nature, tourism and sustainable development in national parks: A survey of visitors in china and the UK. Tour. Manag. 2014, 45, 142–158.
- Jinsoo, L.; Hsu, L.; Han, H.; Yunhi, K. Understanding how consumers view green hotels: How a hotel’s green image can influence behavioural intentions. J. Sustain. Tour. 2010, 18, 901–914.
- Chen, M.F.; Tung, P.J. Developing an extended theory of planned behavior model to predict consumers’ intention to visit green hotels. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2014, 36, 221–230.
- Chen, Z.; Zhao, L.; Xu, J. Cooperative Strategies of Low-carbon Differential Game in Tourism Supply Chain in China. Tour. Trib. 2016, 31, 38–49.
- Ma, D.; Hu, J.; Yao, F. Big data empowering low-carbon smart tourism study on low-carbon tourism o2o supply chain considering consumer behaviors and corporate altruistic preferences. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2021, 153, 107061.
- Fung, W.; Fung, R. The development of a supply chain model for tourism crisis management. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), Singapore, 23–25 September 2014.
- Lu, L.; Navas, J. Advertising and quality improving strategies in a supply chain when facing potential crises. Eur. J. Oper Res. 2021, 288, 839–851.
- Mukherjee, A.; Chauhan, S.S. The impact of product recall on advertising decisions and firm profit while envisioning crisis or being hazard myopic. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2021, 288, 953–970.
- Jang, S.; Kim, J.; Song, R. Advertising strategy and its effectiveness on consumer online search in a defaming product-harm crisis. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2018, 30, 705–724.
- Wang, G.; Liu, Y.; Yang, P.; Yang, R.; Zhang, H. Study on decision-making method for complex crisis. Syst. Eng. Pract. 2015, 35, 2449–2458.
- Liu, Y.; Shankar, V. The dynamic impact of product-harm crises on brand equity and advertising effectiveness: An empirical analysis of the automobile industry. Manag. Sci. 2015, 61, 2514–2535.
- Wang, Y.; Song, L. Emergency management strategy and simulation analysis of supply chain emergencies. Stat. Dec. 2019, 35, 51–55.
- Shanfeng, H.U.; Wang, J.; Zhou, C.; Zhang, J. Research on the risk assessment and prevent to collapse disaster in huangshan scenic area. Geogr. Res. 2013, 32, 1814–1823.
- Li, J.; Liu, X.; Yao, X.; Liu, K.; Gong, G. The Situation, Challenges and Countermeasures of the Security Event Monitoring and Early Warning in the National Park—Based on the Research of Multi-source Information Integration Sharing. Sci. Tech. Devel. 2018, 14, 849–856.
- Zhao, C.; Wang, X.; Huang, X. Assessment of tourists’ rainstorm disaster risk perception under perspective of bounded rationality: A case study of nangongshan scenic. Ar. Res. Devel. 2018, 37, 120–124+137.
- Chutani, A.; Sethi, S. Dynamic cooperative advertising under manufacturer and retailer level competition. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2018, 268, 635–652.
- Li, X.; Lian, Z.; Choong, K.K.; Liu, X. A quantity-flexibility contract with coordination. Inter. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 179, 273–284.
- Modak, N.M.; Kazemi, N.; Cárdenas-Barrón, L.E. Investigating structure of a two-echelon closed-loop supply chain using social work donation as a corporate social responsibility practice. Inter. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 207, 19–33.
- Zhou, Y.J.; Bao, M.J.; Chen, X.H.; Xu, X.H. Co-op advertising and emission reduction cost sharing contract and coordination in low-carbon supply chain based on fairness concerns. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 133, 402–413.
- Bai, Q.; Chen, M.; Xu, L. Revenue and promotional cost-sharing contract versus two-part tariff contract in coordinating sustainable supply chain systems with deteriorating items. Inter. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 187, 85–101.
- Yang, H.; Chen, W. Retailer-driven carbon emission abatement with consumer environmental awareness and carbon tax: Revenue-sharing versus cost-sharing. Omega 2018, 78, 179–191.
- Li, T.; Zhang, R.; Zhao, S.; Liu, B. Low carbon strategy analysis under revenue-sharing and cost-sharing contracts. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 212, 1462–1477.
- Di, X.; Jw, A.; Qla, B. Stimulating sustainability investment level of suppliers with strategic commitment to price and cost sharing in supply chain—Sciencedirect. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 252, 119732.
- Zhao, L.; Li, C.; Guo, X. Research of cooperative relief strategy between government and enterprise based on differential game. Syst. Eng. Pract. 2018, 38, 885–898.