Wenqi Wu , Ming Li , Yishu Yang , Beijia Huang , Shuo Wang , George Q. Huang
{"title":"Optimal deposit-return strategies for the recycling of spent electric automobile battery: Manufacturer, retailer, or consumer","authors":"Wenqi Wu , Ming Li , Yishu Yang , Beijia Huang , Shuo Wang , George Q. Huang","doi":"10.1016/j.tranpol.2025.01.035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There has been limited research on the supply chain performance of spent electric automobile battery recycling under various combinations of take-back models and deposit return strategies. This paper compares three deposit return strategies: manufacturer-targeted, retailer-targeted, and consumer-targeted approaches. Additionally, three take-back models—single-channel, mixed, and collaborative—are developed based on practical applications and evaluated in terms of their impact on supply chain profitability and collection rates. The results indicate that the optimal values of decision variables are influenced by the deposit return strategies, which, in turn, vary according to the take-back models. Furthermore, the deposit return scheme significantly enhances the collection rate, with manufacturer-targeted and consumer-targeted strategies outperforming the retailer-targeted approach in both supply chain profitability and collection rates. Notably, the consumer-targeted strategy results in the lowest retail price. Among the models, the collaborative take-back strategy demonstrates superior performance in both supply chain profitability and collection rates. Sensitivity analyses results reveal that higher subsidies and lower deposits result in greater total profits for the supply chain, while higher deposit and refund amounts lead to improved collection rates.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48378,"journal":{"name":"Transport Policy","volume":"164 ","pages":"Pages 92-103"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transport Policy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X25000411","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
There has been limited research on the supply chain performance of spent electric automobile battery recycling under various combinations of take-back models and deposit return strategies. This paper compares three deposit return strategies: manufacturer-targeted, retailer-targeted, and consumer-targeted approaches. Additionally, three take-back models—single-channel, mixed, and collaborative—are developed based on practical applications and evaluated in terms of their impact on supply chain profitability and collection rates. The results indicate that the optimal values of decision variables are influenced by the deposit return strategies, which, in turn, vary according to the take-back models. Furthermore, the deposit return scheme significantly enhances the collection rate, with manufacturer-targeted and consumer-targeted strategies outperforming the retailer-targeted approach in both supply chain profitability and collection rates. Notably, the consumer-targeted strategy results in the lowest retail price. Among the models, the collaborative take-back strategy demonstrates superior performance in both supply chain profitability and collection rates. Sensitivity analyses results reveal that higher subsidies and lower deposits result in greater total profits for the supply chain, while higher deposit and refund amounts lead to improved collection rates.
期刊介绍:
Transport Policy is an international journal aimed at bridging the gap between theory and practice in transport. Its subject areas reflect the concerns of policymakers in government, industry, voluntary organisations and the public at large, providing independent, original and rigorous analysis to understand how policy decisions have been taken, monitor their effects, and suggest how they may be improved. The journal treats the transport sector comprehensively, and in the context of other sectors including energy, housing, industry and planning. All modes are covered: land, sea and air; road and rail; public and private; motorised and non-motorised; passenger and freight.