跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.201.97.0) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/04/13 10:48
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:楊孟軒
研究生(外文):YANG,MENG-HSUAN
論文名稱:垂直相關市場下的企業社會責任與要素訂價策略
論文名稱(外文):Corporate Social Responsibility and Input Pricing Strategic in Vertically Related Markets
指導教授:楊雅博楊雅博引用關係
指導教授(外文):YANG,YA-PO
口試委員:吳世傑佘志民
口試委員(外文):WU,SHIH-JYESHE,CHIH-MIN
口試日期:2017-06-19
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄大學
系所名稱:經營管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2017
畢業學年度:105
語文別:中文
論文頁數:84
中文關鍵詞:企業社會責任要素差別訂價
外文關鍵詞:Corporate Social ResponsibilityDiscriminatory Pricing
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:131
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:6
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本文建立一個垂直相關模型,以比較上游獨占供應商在差別訂價與單一訂價的福利效果。在模型中,一家上游獨占廠商提供生產要素給不同企業社會責任程度之兩下游廠商以生產最終財,而上游獨占原料供應商則決定採取單一訂價或差別訂價之策略。兩下游廠商為一具備社會責任之企業,他們可能關心消費者,而消費者可能對於兩下游廠商的企業社會責任程度有所差異,進而影響上游廠商的最適要素訂價策略。
在第三章中,我們探討兩下游廠商企業社會責任程度對於上游廠商最適要素訂價策略的影響。我們發現(1)若兩下游廠商對消費者具有相同企業社會責任程度,則在上游廠商採取差別與單一訂價下,兩廠商的產量會增加,但其利潤皆下降,而上游廠商利潤會提高。(2)若僅有一家下游廠商對消費者具有社會責任,當該廠商的社會責任程度提高時,則在上游廠商採取差別訂價下,兩下游廠商利潤皆下降、上游廠商利潤則會提高,但在單一訂價下,具企業社會責任之廠商利潤可能上升或下降。
在第四章中,我們比較上游獨占廠商兩種訂價策略下的福利效果。我們發現(1)若兩下游廠商對消費者具有相同企業社會責任程度,則單一訂價下的社會福利大於差別訂價。(2)若僅有一家下游廠商對消費者具有社會責任,則當兩廠商成本差距較小時,差別訂價下的社會福利大於單一訂價。
在第五章中,我們探討上游廠商企業社會責任程度對於其最適要素訂價策略的影響。我們發現在上游廠商採取差別與單一訂價下,若其對消費者具有社會責任,則當其社會責任程度提高時,兩下游廠商的產量與利潤皆提高,但其利潤則會下降,而社會福利則在單一訂價較大。

This paper develops a vertically related market model to compare the welfare effects of these two pricing strategies by a monopoly supplier. In the model, an upstream monopoly supplier provides inputs to different degree of CSR downstream firms to produce the final goods, while the upstream firm decides to take a discriminatory or a uniform pricing strategy. The two downstream firms may be concerned consumer, which we call it a CSR firm, and the consumers have the cognition to the downstream firms’ CSR behavior, which in turn affect the optimal pricing strategy for upstream firm.
In Chapter 3, we discuss the impact of the two downstream firm's corporate social responsibility on the optimal pricing strategy of the upstream firm. We found that (1) if the two downstream firms take the same level of CSR under discriminatory or a uniform pricing, the two downstream firms will increase production, and its profits are decline, but the upstream firm profit will increase. (2) If only one downstream firm has a CSR to the consumer, when higher the degree of its CSR, the profits under discriminatory pricing is the same as above, but under uniform pricing with CSR firm's profit may increase or decrease.
In Chapter 4, we compare the welfare effects of these two pricing strategies by a monopoly supplier. We found that (1) if the two downstream firms take the same level of CSR, the social welfare under uniform pricing is greater than discriminatory pricing. (2) If only one downstream firm has a CSR to the consumer, the social welfare under discriminatory pricing is greater than uniform pricing when the cost difference between the two firms is small.
In Chapter 5, we discuss the impact of the upstream firm's corporate social responsibility on its optimal price strategy. We found that under discriminatory or a uniform pricing, when its’ cognition to the CSR exist, the higher the degree of its CSR, the two downstream firms of production and profits are improved, but its profits will decline, while the social welfare under uniform pricing is higher.

目錄
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與背景 1
第二節 研究目的 4
第三節 研究方法 4
第四節 本文架構 5
第二章 文獻回顧 6
第一節 要素價格相關文獻 6
第二節 企業社會責任與福利相關文獻 13
第三節 小結 24
第三章 下游廠商具企業社會責任程度之基本模型與均衡 25
第一節 基本模型 25
第二節 上游廠商差別訂價各項均衡值 26
第三節 上游廠商單一訂價各項均衡值 35
第四節 小結 43
第四章 兩種訂價下福利的比較 45
第一節 產量、要素價格比較 45
第二節 利潤比較 50
第三節 消費者剩餘、福利比較 54
第四節 小結 58
第五章 上游廠商具企業社會責任程度之基本模型與均衡 60
第一節 基本模型 60
第二節 上游廠商差別訂價各項均衡值 61
第三節 上游廠商單一訂價各項均衡值 66
第四節 兩種訂價下的福利比較 70
第五節 小結 71
第六章 結論與建議 72
參考文獻 75

圖目錄
圖3.1單一訂價之高成本廠商利潤示意圖 41
圖3.2單一訂價之低成本廠商利潤示意圖 42
圖4.1 之社會福利示意圖 55
圖4.2 之社會福利示意圖 57


表目錄
表2.1企業社會責任之相關文獻結果 12
表2.2要素訂價策略之相關文獻結果 21


Arya, Anil, and Brian Mittendorf. "Input price discrimination when buyers operate in multiple markets." The Journal of Industrial Economics 58.4 (2010): 846-867.
Brand, Björn, and Michael Grothe. "Social responsibility in a bilateral monopoly." Journal of Economics 115.3 (2015): 275-289.
Carroll, Archie B., and Kareem M. Shabana. "The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice." International journal of management reviews 12.1 (2010): 85-105.
Chang, Yang‐Ming, Chen, Hung‐Yi, Wang, Leonard F.S., and Wu, Shih‐Jye "Corporate Social Responsibility and International Competition: A Welfare Analysis." Review of International Economics 22.3 (2014): 625-638.
DeGraba, Patrick. "Input market price discrimination and the choice of technology." The American Economic Review 80.5 (1990): 1246-1253.
Goering, Gregory E. "Corporate social responsibility and marketing channel coordination." Research in Economics 66.2 (2012): 142-148.
Goering, Gregory E. "The Profit‐Maximizing Case for Corporate Social Responsibility in a Bilateral Monopoly." Managerial and Decision Economics35.7 (2014): 493-499.
Herweg, Fabian, and Daniel Müller. "Price discrimination in input markets: Downstream entry and efficiency." Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 21.3 (2012): 773-799.
Herweg, Fabian, and Daniel Müller. "Discriminatory nonlinear pricing, fixed costs, and welfare in intermediate-goods markets." International Journal of Industrial Organization 46 (2016): 107-136.
Inderst, Roman, and Greg Shaffer. "Market power, price discrimination, and allocative efficiency in intermediate‐goods markets." The RAND Journal of Economics 40.4 (2009): 658-672.
Inderst, Roman, and Tommaso Valletti. "Price discrimination in input markets." The RAND Journal of Economics 40.1 (2009): 1-19.
Katz, Michael L. "The welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination in intermediate good markets." The American Economic Review (1987): 154-167.
Lambertini, Luca, and Alessandro Tampieri. "Incentives, performance and desirability of socially responsible firms in a Cournot oligopoly." Economic Modelling 50 (2015): 40-48.
Lambertini, Luca, Arsen Palestini, and Alessandro Tampieri. "CSR in an Asymmetric Duopoly with Environmental Externality." Southern Economic Journal (2016).
Liu, Chih-Chen, Leonard FS Wang, and Sang-Ho Lee. "Strategic environmental corporate social responsibility in a differentiated duopoly market." Economics Letters 129 (2015): 108-111.
Manasakis, Constantine, Evangelos Mitrokostas, and Emmanuel Petrakis. "Certification of corporate social responsibility activities in oligopolistic markets." Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique46.1 (2013): 282-309.
Manasakis, Constantine, Evangelos Mitrokostas, and Emmanuel Petrakis. "Strategic corporate social responsibility activities and corporate governance in imperfectly competitive markets." Managerial and Decision Economics35.7 (2014): 460-473.
Matsumura, Toshihiro, and Akira Ogawa. "Corporate social responsibility or payoff asymmetry? A study of an endogenous timing game." Southern Economic Journal 81.2 (2014): 457-473.
Schmalensee, Richard. "Output and welfare implications of monopolistic third-degree price discrimination." The American Economic Review 71.1 (1981): 242-247.
Varian, Hal R. "Price discrimination and social welfare." The American Economic Review 75.4 (1985): 870-875.
Wood, Donna J. "Corporate social performance revisited." Academy of management review 16.4 (1991): 691-718.
Yoshida, Yoshihiro. "Third-degree price discrimination in input markets: output and welfare." The American Economic Review 90.1 (2000): 240-246.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top