摘要：分享兴趣，传播快乐，增长见闻，留下美好！亲爱的您，这里是LearningYard新学苑。今天小编为大家带来文章“覃学苦练（72）：精读硕士论文《考虑原制造商双向公平关切的闭环供应链决策研究》两种公平中性决策对比分析”欢迎您的访问。Share interest,

分享兴趣，传播快乐，
增长见闻，留下美好！
亲爱的您，这里是LearningYard新学苑。
今天小编为大家带来文章
“覃学苦练（72）：精读硕士论文《考虑原制造商双向公平关切的闭环供应链决策研究》两种公平中性决策对比分析”
欢迎您的访问。
Share interest, spread happiness,
Increase knowledge, leave a beautiful!
Dear, this is LearningYard Academy.
Today, the editor brings you an article.
"Qin Xueku Lian (72): Intensive reading of the master's thesis "Research on closed-loop supply chain decision-making considering the two-way fairness concerns of the original manufacturer" Comparative analysis of two types of fair and neutral decisions"
Welcome to your visit.

一、思维导图（Mind mapping）

通过将公平中性下的集中决策与分散决策最优解进行多维度对比，量化揭示两种决策模式对供应链的影响差异，为后续供应链协调提供相关依据，具体分析如下。

By comparing the optimal solutions of centralized and decentralized decision-making models under fairness and neutrality in multiple dimensions, the differences in the impact of these two decision-making models on the supply chain are quantitatively revealed, providing a relevant basis for subsequent supply chain coordination. The specific analysis is as follows.

二、精读内容（Intensive reading content）

（一）比较核心（Comparison core）

该部分围绕供应链核心指标对比，仅聚焦产品定价、市场需求量、供应链利润三大维度。三者形成“定价影响需求、需求决定利润”的逻辑链，能直观反映决策模式差异。同时，对比限定在“公平中性”场景，排除行为偏好干扰，确保结果仅由“决策协同程度”导致，结论更具针对性。

This section compares core supply chain indicators, focusing on three key dimensions: product pricing, market demand, and supply chain profits. These three factors form a logical chain: "pricing influences demand, and demand determines profits," which intuitively reflects differences in decision-making models. Furthermore, the comparison is limited to a "fair and neutral" scenario, eliminating the influence of behavioral preferences and ensuring that the results are driven solely by the degree of decision-making coordination, resulting in more targeted conclusions.

（二） 定价对比（Pricing comparison）

命题3.2的结果与定价直接联动：分散决策下，新产品与第三方再制造产品因定价提高，需求量低于集中决策；原制造商再制造产品因定价不变，成为消费者“替代选择”，需求量高于集中决策。

The results of Proposition 3.2 are directly linked to pricing: under decentralized decision-making, the demand for new products and third-party remanufactured products is lower than under centralized decision-making due to the increase in pricing; the demand for remanufactured products from original manufacturers is higher than under centralized decision-making due to the unchanged pricing, making them a "choice" for consumers.

这贴合市场规律：消费者支付意愿固定时，价格是需求分配核心变量。新产品与第三方再制造产品涨价，部分消费者转向原制造商再制造产品，导致需求“此消彼长”，也反映出分散决策“非协同”弊端，各主体未考虑整体需求效率，挤压部分产品需求。

This aligns with market principles: when consumers' willingness to pay is fixed, price is the core variable in demand allocation. However, price increases for new and third-party remanufactured products have led some consumers to switch to remanufactured products from the original manufacturer, resulting in a shift in demand. This also reflects the drawbacks of decentralized decision-making, which lacks coordination and consideration of overall demand efficiency, resulting in a squeeze on demand for certain products.

（三） 需求量对比（Demand comparison）

命题3.2的结果与定价直接联动：分散决策下，新产品与第三方再制造产品因定价提高，需求量低于集中决策；原制造商再制造产品因定价不变，成为消费者“替代选择”，需求量高于集中决策。

The results of Proposition 3.2 are directly linked to pricing: under decentralized decision-making, the demand for new products and third-party remanufactured products is lower than under centralized decision-making due to the increase in pricing; the demand for remanufactured products from original manufacturers is higher than under centralized decision-making due to the unchanged pricing, making them a "choice" for consumers.

这贴合市场规律：消费者支付意愿固定时，价格是需求分配核心变量。新产品与第三方再制造产品涨价，部分消费者转向原制造商再制造产品，导致需求“此消彼长”，也反映出分散决策“非协同”弊端，各主体未考虑整体需求效率，挤压部分产品需求。

This aligns with market principles: when consumers' willingness to pay is fixed, price is the core variable in demand allocation. However, price increases for new and third-party remanufactured products have led some consumers to switch to remanufactured products from the original manufacturer, resulting in a shift in demand. This also reflects the drawbacks of decentralized decision-making, which lacks coordination and consideration of overall demand efficiency, resulting in a squeeze on demand for certain products.

命题3.3指出，分散决策的供应链系统利润低于集中决策，核心原因是“双重边际化”效应。集中决策以整体利润最大化为目标，无额外加价；分散决策中，原制造商提高新产品批发价、第三方抬高再制造产品直销价，形成“层层加价”，导致消费者购买成本上升、需求量下降，整体利润缩水。

Proposition 3.3 states that decentralized decision-making leads to lower profits in supply chain systems than centralized decision-making. The core reason is the "double marginalization" effect. Centralized decision-making maximizes overall profits without adding additional markups. In decentralized decision-making, original manufacturers raise the wholesale price of new products, and third parties raise the direct price of remanufactured products, creating a "layered markup" that increases consumer costs, decreases demand, and reduces overall profits.

系统利润差值由新产品与第三方再制造产品需求损失的利润减少构成，且差值恒为正，说明集中决策利润优势必然，论证了“分散决策效率更低”，为后续协调契约指明“需解决双重边际化”的方向。

The system profit difference is composed of the profit reduction from the loss of demand for new products and third-party remanufactured products, and the difference is always positive, indicating that centralized decision-making has an inevitable profit advantage, proving that "decentralized decision-making is less efficient", and pointing out the direction of "resolving double marginalization" for subsequent coordination contracts.

今天的分享就到这里了。
如果您对文章有独特的想法，
欢迎给我们留言，
让我们相约明天。
祝您今天过得开心快乐！
That's all for today's sharing.
If you have a unique idea about the article,
please leave us a message,
and let us meet tomorrow.
I wish you a nice day!

翻译：谷歌翻译

参考资料：百度百科、Chat GPT

参考文献：闫毓敏.考虑原制造商双向公平关切的闭环供应链决策研究[D].湖南大学,2021.

本文由LearningYard新学苑整理发出，如有侵权请在后台留言沟通！

来源：LearningYard学苑