## 4 Conclusions and Suggestions  
On the premise of the invested cost of ecological conservation and restoration, whether the government supports EPVR and how to support EPVR will have a greater impact on the sustainable transformation of eco-products' value. Hence, following the law of the market, this paper first constructs and generalizes a two-level ecological products supply chain system under different government subsidies. Secondly, the supply chain models of subsidy-free, operating subsidy, and consumption subsidy are proposed under a cooperative game to optimize the pricing decision and attain the win-win goal, for further research on the impact of different subsidy policies and ecological cost-sharing contract on EPVR. Finally, numerical simulations were used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the  
Figure 8: The relationship between the subsidy price and the subsidy coefficient. Figure 9: The effect on the supply chain under the condition of a consistent subsidy amount. (**a**) The ecological level. (**b**) The utility of the supply chain. models and were applied to analyze the effect of EPVR. Based on the results of this study, the following conclusions can be drawn:  
(1) The ecological cost-sharing contrast can affect the behavior of eco-product stakeholders regardless of whether there is government support or not. To maximize the scale of the EPVR benefits, the ecological products' supplier and distributor should collaborate and negotiate an agreement on sharing the ecological protection cost. In addition, the government can give appropriate guidance to promote cooperation between the supplier and distributor, improving the information transparency and the contract of the supply chain. (2) Although the proceeds from subsidy-free eco-products relying on market regulation have increased, the ecological level of the supply process constantly decreases, which means EPVR comes at the expense of good ecological resources. Hence, the marketization mechanism of EPVR in China is not mature, and remains an artificial market under government regulation. It is essential for the government to establish a standard for ecological cost-sharing, which should specify the lower limits of sharing the ecological cost under different conditions, such as for material goods, regulating services, and cultural services. (3) The primary purpose of government subsidies is to incentivize all operation parties of ecological products in the market to improve the marketization level and the scale benefit. Based on this, this study finds which form of subsidies is beneficial to increase the utility of the eco-product supply chain, which will guide operating entities to take a more active part in ecological protection and utilization, laying a solid foundation for sustainable eco-product supply. Therefore, the government should establish a long-term mechanism to give more financial support for the development of ecological products at the current stage. (4) Although direct and indirect subsidies can both influence the coordination and pricing decisions of the supply chain, the effects of these two approaches show an apparent difference by the same amount. Accordingly, the government should judge the situation and make a decision on which subsidy is more suitable. (5) By increasing the ecological level rapidly, the direct subsidy has proven to be good for the ecosystem's ability to supply eco-products, which is applicable at the EPVR's embryonic phase; although with a slower increase of the ecological level, the indirect subsidy can create a virtuous circle of people willing to pay for ecological products, naturally forming eco-product marketization, which is suitable in the mid- to late stages of EPVR market cultivation. Additionally, in view of the increased demand on the consumer side, it is more of a benefit for the ecological products' long-term development, and the government can strengthen publicity and education to accelerate people's identification with ecological products.