ESG equity or green credit: Financing strategies for green transformation in the supply chain under consumption subsidies

IF 9.8 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
Yuting Liang , Qingyu Zhang
{"title":"ESG equity or green credit: Financing strategies for green transformation in the supply chain under consumption subsidies","authors":"Yuting Liang ,&nbsp;Qingyu Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We consider a supply chain with a capital-constrained supplier and a manufacturer, where the supplier seeks funding for green transformation. We develop an ESG Equity Financing (EEF) model that incorporates dividend ratios based on ESG valuation, reflecting both the supplier's financial and ESG performance. In addition to the EEF offered by the manufacturer, the supplier can opt for traditional Green Credit Financing (GCF) from banks. Under government subsidies for consumers buying green transformation products, we explore pricing strategies under different financing models and examine how subsidies impact green transformation, value creation, and financing equilibrium in the supply chain. We also compare the sustainability of EEF and GCF in driving green transformation. Our analysis reveals that consumption subsidies may not incentivize suppliers to increase green investments. In pricing strategies, GCF encourages both the supplier and manufacturer to raise prices, while EEF can lead the manufacturer to lower prices. Regarding financing equilibrium, the supplier's carbon emissions profile and subsidy rate significantly affect the balance between the two financing options. Interestingly, a higher degree of product greenness does not always result in lower overall carbon emissions. Most importantly, EEF has the potential to be the only financing strategy that creates a win-win outcome for the supply chain, consumers, and societal welfare. With suitable government interventions, particularly in setting consumption subsidies, EEF can emerge as the preferred financing option, facilitating green transformation and benefiting all stakeholders.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":14287,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Production Economics","volume":"280 ","pages":"Article 109491"},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Production Economics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527324003487","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We consider a supply chain with a capital-constrained supplier and a manufacturer, where the supplier seeks funding for green transformation. We develop an ESG Equity Financing (EEF) model that incorporates dividend ratios based on ESG valuation, reflecting both the supplier's financial and ESG performance. In addition to the EEF offered by the manufacturer, the supplier can opt for traditional Green Credit Financing (GCF) from banks. Under government subsidies for consumers buying green transformation products, we explore pricing strategies under different financing models and examine how subsidies impact green transformation, value creation, and financing equilibrium in the supply chain. We also compare the sustainability of EEF and GCF in driving green transformation. Our analysis reveals that consumption subsidies may not incentivize suppliers to increase green investments. In pricing strategies, GCF encourages both the supplier and manufacturer to raise prices, while EEF can lead the manufacturer to lower prices. Regarding financing equilibrium, the supplier's carbon emissions profile and subsidy rate significantly affect the balance between the two financing options. Interestingly, a higher degree of product greenness does not always result in lower overall carbon emissions. Most importantly, EEF has the potential to be the only financing strategy that creates a win-win outcome for the supply chain, consumers, and societal welfare. With suitable government interventions, particularly in setting consumption subsidies, EEF can emerge as the preferred financing option, facilitating green transformation and benefiting all stakeholders.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Production Economics
International Journal of Production Economics 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
21.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
266
审稿时长
52 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Production Economics focuses on the interface between engineering and management. It covers all aspects of manufacturing and process industries, as well as production in general. The journal is interdisciplinary, considering activities throughout the product life cycle and material flow cycle. It aims to disseminate knowledge for improving industrial practice and strengthening the theoretical base for decision making. The journal serves as a forum for exchanging ideas and presenting new developments in theory and application, combining academic standards with practical value for industrial applications.
×
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