Social responsibility disclosure format in a supply chain

IF 6.7 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Xiaoqing Fan , Jianxiong Zhang , Yao Yao , Liqun Wei
{"title":"Social responsibility disclosure format in a supply chain","authors":"Xiaoqing Fan ,&nbsp;Jianxiong Zhang ,&nbsp;Yao Yao ,&nbsp;Liqun Wei","doi":"10.1016/j.omega.2024.103043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>With a growing emphasis on corporate social responsibility (SR), companies are increasingly engaging in SR disclosure activities to establish transparency and enhance consumer confidence in the SR efforts of their supply chains. In this study, we introduce a game-theoretic model that examines the dynamic interplay of SR investment and disclosure within a supply chain. In our model, the supplier decides the SR investment effort aimed at mitigating the product’s negative social impact, while the retailer can disclose the supplier’s investment effort to promote SR transparency. Two disclosure formats are considered: mandatory disclosure, where the retailer commits to disclosing the supplier’s social impact before any evaluations, and strategic disclosure, where the retailer makes the disclosure decision after evaluating the supplier’s effort. We investigate the implications of disclosure formats on investment effort, chain members’ profits, and consumer surplus. Our analysis surprisingly shows that strategic disclosure can yield a higher investment effort. We further demonstrate that (i) the retailer may voluntarily choose mandatory format even without regulations, (ii) mandatory format may decrease consumer surplus, (iii) mandatory format will never benefit the monopolistic supplier, and (iv) only strategic format can serve all parties’ interests simultaneously. These findings provide insights for the design of policies that promote SR behaviors and serve different stakeholders’ interests.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19529,"journal":{"name":"Omega-international Journal of Management Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omega-international Journal of Management Science","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048324000100","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With a growing emphasis on corporate social responsibility (SR), companies are increasingly engaging in SR disclosure activities to establish transparency and enhance consumer confidence in the SR efforts of their supply chains. In this study, we introduce a game-theoretic model that examines the dynamic interplay of SR investment and disclosure within a supply chain. In our model, the supplier decides the SR investment effort aimed at mitigating the product’s negative social impact, while the retailer can disclose the supplier’s investment effort to promote SR transparency. Two disclosure formats are considered: mandatory disclosure, where the retailer commits to disclosing the supplier’s social impact before any evaluations, and strategic disclosure, where the retailer makes the disclosure decision after evaluating the supplier’s effort. We investigate the implications of disclosure formats on investment effort, chain members’ profits, and consumer surplus. Our analysis surprisingly shows that strategic disclosure can yield a higher investment effort. We further demonstrate that (i) the retailer may voluntarily choose mandatory format even without regulations, (ii) mandatory format may decrease consumer surplus, (iii) mandatory format will never benefit the monopolistic supplier, and (iv) only strategic format can serve all parties’ interests simultaneously. These findings provide insights for the design of policies that promote SR behaviors and serve different stakeholders’ interests.

供应链中的社会责任披露格式
随着对企业社会责任(SR)的日益重视,企业越来越多地参与社会责任披露活动,以建立透明度并增强消费者对其供应链的社会责任努力的信心。在本研究中,我们引入了一个博弈论模型,研究供应链中社会责任投资和披露的动态相互作用。在我们的模型中,供应商决定旨在减轻产品负面社会影响的社会责任投资努力,而零售商可以披露供应商的投资努力,以提高社会责任透明度。我们考虑了两种披露形式:一种是强制性披露,即零售商承诺在进行任何评估之前披露供应商的社会影响;另一种是战略性披露,即零售商在评估供应商的努力之后做出披露决定。我们研究了披露形式对投资努力、连锁成员利润和消费者剩余的影响。我们的分析出人意料地表明,战略性披露会带来更高的投资努力。我们进一步证明:(i) 即使没有法规,零售商也可能自愿选择强制性格式;(ii) 强制性格式可能会减少消费者剩余;(iii) 强制性格式永远不会使垄断供应商受益;(iv) 只有战略性格式才能同时满足各方利益。这些发现为设计促进自律行为并符合不同利益相关者利益的政策提供了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Omega-international Journal of Management Science
Omega-international Journal of Management Science 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
11.60%
发文量
130
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: Omega reports on developments in management, including the latest research results and applications. Original contributions and review articles describe the state of the art in specific fields or functions of management, while there are shorter critical assessments of particular management techniques. Other features of the journal are the "Memoranda" section for short communications and "Feedback", a correspondence column. Omega is both stimulating reading and an important source for practising managers, specialists in management services, operational research workers and management scientists, management consultants, academics, students and research personnel throughout the world. The material published is of high quality and relevance, written in a manner which makes it accessible to all of this wide-ranging readership. Preference will be given to papers with implications to the practice of management. Submissions of purely theoretical papers are discouraged. The review of material for publication in the journal reflects this aim.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信