|
|
E-Commerce Letters 2025
不同换电主导权下考虑充电用户比例的新能源汽车供应链定价决策研究
|
Abstract:
在新能源汽车换电模式背景下，分别构建了整车制造商和电池制造商不同换电主导权的供应链Stackelberg博弈模型，探讨了充电用户比例、换电服务时长对企业利润及其定价决策的影响。研究发现：(1) 相较于传统充电模式，发展换电模式可使整车制造商和电池制造商的利润均获得提高，换电主导权直接决定企业利润；(2) 在一定范围内，换电服务时长增加会使换电服务价格不断降低；相较于整车制造商，由电池制造商主导的换电模式在定价和利润上更具优势；(3) 不同换电主导权下，充电用户比例的增加均会使电池制造商利润减少，且对换电模式主导者的影响更为显著。
Under the background of Battery Swapping Mode, Stackelberg game models of different supply chain dominance of vehicle manufacturers and battery manufacturers were constructed, to discuss the influence of proportion of charging user, consumers’ average battery rental duration on manufacturers’ profits and pricing decisions. The study found that: (1) compared to traditional charging modes, the development of battery swapping mode can increase the profits of both vehicle manufacturers and battery manufacturers, and the dominance directly determines the profits of enterprises; (2) Within a certain range, the increase in the duration of battery swapping services leads to a continuous decrease in the price of battery swapping services; Compared to vehicle manufacturers, the battery swapping mode led by battery manufacturers has more advantages in pricing and profit; (3) Under different dominant power of battery swapping, the increase in the proportion of charging users will reduce the profits of battery manufacturers, and the impact on the dominant power of battery swapping mode will be more significant.
| [1] | 卢志平, 姚逸飞, 刘婷, 等. 换电站建设补贴对新能源汽车换电模式的影响——基于供应链决策视角[J]. 供应链管理, 2022, 3(9): 64-82. |
| [2] | Yang, S., Yao, J., Kang, T. and Zhu, X. (2014) Dynamic Operation Model of the Battery Swapping Station for EV (Electric Vehicle) in Electricity Market. Energy, 65, 544-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.11.010 |
| [3] | Mahoor, M., Hosseini, Z.S. and Khodaei, A. (2019) Least-Cost Operation of a Battery Swapping Station with Random Customer Requests. Energy, 172, 913-921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.02.018 |
| [4] | Wu, H. (2022) A Survey of Battery Swapping Stations for Electric Vehicles: Operation Modes and Decision Scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23, 10163-10185. https://doi.org/10.1109/tits.2021.3125861 |
| [5] | 徐素秀, 谢冰, 秦威, 等. 电动汽车充电与换电模式定价及投资策略[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2021, 21(5): 183-189. |
| [6] | Cheng, H. and Zheng, S. (2022) Incentive Compensation Mechanism for the Infrastructure Construction of Electric Vehicle Battery Swapping Station under Asymmetric Information. Sustainability, 14, Article 7041. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127041 |
| [7] | 卢志平, 姚逸飞, 陆成裕. 差异供应链结构下新能源电动汽车换电模式定价策略[J]. 系统工程, 2022, 40(2): 27-37. |
| [8] | 郑雪芹, 伊万. 充换电模式的多元化探索[J]. 汽车纵横, 2022(7): 51-54. |
| [9] | 赵晓敏, 林英晖, 苏承明. 不同渠道权力结构下的S-M两级闭环供应链绩效分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2012, 20(2): 78-86. |
| [10] | Gao, J., Han, H., Hou, L. and Wang, H. (2016) Pricing and Effort Decisions in a Closed-Loop Supply Chain under Different Channel Power Structures. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 2043-2057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.066 |
| [11] | Ranjbar, Y., Sahebi, H., Ashayeri, J. and Teymouri, A. (2020) A Competitive Dual Recycling Channel in a Three-Level Closed Loop Supply Chain under Different Power Structures: Pricing and Collecting Decisions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 272, Article 122623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122623 |
| [12] | 熊勇清, 李小龙, 黄恬恬. 基于不同补贴主体的新能源汽车制造商定价决策研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(8): 139-147. |
| [13] | Yu, Y., Zhou, D., Zha, D., Wang, Q. and Zhu, Q. (2021) Optimal Production and Pricing Strategies in Auto Supply Chain When Dual Credit Policy Is Substituted for Subsidy Policy. Energy, 226, Article 120369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120369 |
| [14] | 唐金环, 杨芳, 徐家旺, 等. 双积分制下考虑消费者偏好的二级汽车供应链生产与定价问题研究[J]. 工业工程与管理, 2021, 26(1): 121-129. |
| [15] | Miao, R., Guo, P., Huang, W., Li, Q. and Zhang, B. (2022) Profit Model for Electric Vehicle Rental Service: Sensitive Analysis and Differential Pricing Strategy. Energy, 249, Article 123736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123736 |
| [16] | 邹清明, 胡李庆, 邹霆钧. 碳限额与碳交易机制下考虑公平关切的供应链定价与协调研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2022, 30(10): 142-154. |
