# Research on Resource Carbon Emission Allocation Efficiency Based on Blockchain Consensus Algorithm

Authors: Menglin Yin
Journal: Mobile Information Systems
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

This paper takes the secondary low-carbon supply chain composed of a manufacturer and a retailer as the research object and takes the government subsidy strategy of low-carbon supply chain as the research theme, the government invests in the construction of blockchain technology application platform, and supply chain enterprises use blockchain technology for compensation. Under this background, considering consumers’ low-carbon preference and green trust, a three-stage game model dominated by the government and followed by manufacturers and retailers under the four scenarios of emission reduction technology input subsidy and low-carbon product output subsidy before and after the application of blockchain technology is established. By comparing the optimal social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and low-carbon product output under the four scenarios, the optimal problem of government low-carbon subsidy strategy is discussed. It is found that when the product of consumers’ low-carbon preference coefficient and green trust coefficient is greater than a certain fixed value, the government can obtain higher social welfare and promote enterprises’ emission reduction through output subsidies. The government can always promote the demand for low-carbon products through output subsidies. When the emission reduction cost coefficient approaches infinity, the demand for low-carbon products when the government implements output subsidies are four times that when the government implements technology subsidies. When the single cycle shared cost of the blockchain platform and the unit cost of enterprise application of blockchain technology are less than a certain threshold, the government’s construction of the blockchain platform can obtain higher social welfare, promote enterprise emission reduction, and improve consumers’ demand for low-carbon products.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

With the continuous progress of China’s economy and society, green development has become a national strategy, and carbon emission reduction is an important measure. Li Liancheng, an expert from the national development and Reform Commission, said “the R & amp; D and product promotion of emission reduction technology improve the environmental quality of the whole society, which is inseparable from the guidance of national policies.” The government can promote the investment of emission reduction technology and increase social welfare through appropriate low-carbon subsidies to enterprises [1]. As the representative of the fourth scientific and technological revolution, blockchain technology is setting off an upsurge all over the world [2]. In China, blockchain technology has been officially included in the National Informatization Plan of the 13th five year plan. The 2018 white paper on China’s blockchain Industry issued by the Ministry of industry and information technology points out that blockchain technology is gradually infiltrating into physical fields such as supply chain management. The introduction of blockchain technology into low-carbon supply chain can improve the coordination of low-carbon decision-making of all subjects in the supply chain and promote enterprise emission reduction [3]. In the whole process of emission reduction, the tamper proof and real-time nature of blockchain technology can ensure that the government can timely obtain accurate carbon emission information of enterprises. The government can timely and reasonably adjust the mode and amount of low-carbon subsidies according to the green information provided by blockchain, implement green supervision, better restrict enterprise carbon emission, and encourage enterprise carbon emission reduction [4]. For example, Shenzhen emission rights’ exchange has cooperated with China energy blockchain laboratory to build a digital trading platform for green carbon emission reduction assets based on blockchain, so as to increase enterprise participation, encourage enterprises to participate in energy conservation and emission reduction, and consolidate the achievements of environmental protection. As a tamper proof, transparent, and reliable database, blockchain has an impact on the green operation of the supply chain [5]. The application of blockchain technology can realize information sharing, improve the collaborative operation level and operation efficiency of the supply chain, and reduce the period cost [6, 7]. In addition, blockchain technology can realize product traceability and carbon footprint tracking and can effectively solve the problem of green trust of consumers in purchasing green and low-carbon products [8, 9]. Therefore, it is of great significance to study the government subsidy strategy of low-carbon supply chain based on blockchain technology.At present, the research on the application of blockchain technology to supply chain is roughly divided into three aspects. (1) Supply chain finance: Li and He [10] found that blockchain technology can break the information barrier between organizations and have a subversive impact on supply chain financial innovation. Chen et al. [11] used the newsboy model to compare and analyze the interests of supply chain members under the blockchain debt transfer platform mode and the traditional supply chain financing mode and found that the blockchain debt transfer platform can increase the output of suppliers and improve the income of each member of the supply chain. (2) Supply chain logistics information: the government’s low-carbon subsidy policy will have a great impact on the supply chain emission reduction decision-making and social welfare. The government’s low-carbon subsidies to enterprises mainly include emission reduction technology input subsidies (hereinafter referred to as technology subsidies) and low-carbon product production subsidies (hereinafter referred to as production subsidies). The former is a behavior subsidy to encourage more enterprises to invest in R & D of emission reduction technologies, while the latter is a result subsidy to encourage enterprises that successfully develop low-carbon products [12]. Existing studies have found that the proportion change of technology subsidies has a great impact on the optimal carbon emission reduction and expected profit of the supply chain and has a positive change relationship. Production subsidies for low-carbon products are more conducive to enterprise emission reduction than taxation for high-carbon products. Some scholars compared and analyzed the impact of technology subsidies and output subsidies on social welfare. Dusanee and Vasileios found that when the technology spillover effect is high, technology subsidies are conducive to improving social welfare. When the technology spillover effect is low, the output subsidy is conducive to improving social welfare. Lee et al. discussed technology subsidies and output subsidies in the case of partially privatized duopoly. The research results show that output subsidies can bring better social welfare than technology subsidies, but output subsidies will promote the government to privatize listed companies. Lu Yali studied the impact of government technology subsidy policy and output subsidy policy on social welfare and profits of upstream and downstream enterprises in equilibrium by constructing a two-level supply chain game model under the condition of product R & D by downstream enterprises.At present, there are many research studies on the application of blockchain technology in supply chain and government low-carbon subsidy strategy, but few scholars consider the formulation of government low-carbon subsidy policy under the influence of blockchain technology. In addition, empirical studies have found that green trust plays a key role in consumers’ purchase intention of green and low-carbon products, while the existing literature lacks quantitative research on consumers’ green trust. Therefore, considering the impact of blockchain technology application platform construction cost, blockchain technology application cost, consumers’ low-carbon preference, and green trust on supply chain emission reduction, this paper establishes a three-stage game model dominated by the government and followed by manufacturers and retailers. By comparing the social welfare under the four scenarios of technology subsidy and output subsidy before and after the application of blockchain technology carbon emission reduction rate and output of low-carbon products, we analyze the impact of blockchain technology application and different low-carbon subsidy strategies on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and output of low-carbon products and provide targeted suggestions for the government to make low-carbon subsidy decisions under the background of blockchain technology.The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section2 is based on the related work. Section 3 contains the model construction and solution. Section 4 has numerical example, and Section 5 is the concluding section.


## 2. Related Work

Collaborative emission reduction is an important way to improve the emission reduction efficiency of upstream and downstream enterprises in the supply chain. For example, Wal Mart promoted the improvement of packaging and printing processes of 60000 suppliers by integrating supplier production and supply modes, effectively reducing the carbon emission of 5% (667000 m3) of its total packaging and printing volume. However, the current supply chain performance optimization mainly depends on the decision-making of core enterprises. Due to the lack of trust mechanism, this centralized network structure makes it difficult to realize information sharing among core enterprises, noncore enterprises, and consumers. Information asymmetry is an important factor affecting the efficiency of supply chain collaborative emission reduction (Nouira et al., 2016 [1]).At present, the main method to solve the information asymmetry is the principal-agent theory. Zhang et al. [5] pointed out that when the contemporary manager’s information is incomplete, the agent has private information, and the trustee cannot fully monitor the agent’s behavior; it is necessary to provide an incentive and feasible contract to control the agent’s behavior. This method mainly solves the problem of information asymmetry when the two subjects participate in emission reduction. For example, Qu et al. [6] believe that core enterprises usually cooperate with noncore enterprises to jointly improve corporate social responsibility awareness (including environmental responsibility awareness). Building a principal-agent model can solve the problem of how to improve corporate social responsibility when there is information asymmetry between core enterprises and noncore enterprises. Lin et al. [7] build a principal-agent model between core enterprises and noncore enterprises. Core enterprises can effectively promote noncore enterprises’ emission reduction through incentive contracts. Hao et al. [8] believe that the information advantage party (noncore enterprise) prefers to make later decisions, while the information disadvantage party (core enterprise) prefers to make decisions first. Information asymmetry has a certain impact on the decision-making order of enterprises.Aiming at the problem of information asymmetry among multiple subjects in the supply chain, ① when the core enterprise is the manufacturer and the noncore enterprise is the retailer, the leading manufacturer is not likely to lie about its carbon emission information, while the follower retailer may hide the carbon emission information, and the revenue-sharing contract can better coordinate the income among the members of the supply chain. It can effectively force retailers to disclose their true carbon information [9]. Lin Zhibing believes that when manufacturers’ estimation of the externality of green product network meets certain conditions and retailers will share their own information, which is beneficial to both manufacturers and retailers. ② When the core enterprise is the manufacturer and the noncore enterprise is the supplier, Chen et al. [11] assumed that the supplier’s emission reduction rate information is asymmetric, constructed the supplier and manufacturer’s supply chain system, and studied how the manufacturer designs the contract so that single and multiple suppliers can truly disclose the emission reduction rate information and further studied how the optimal order quantity of manufacturers changes under the carbon trading system, which provides a certain research basis for manufacturers’ procurement under information asymmetry. Yu et al. [13] believed that, under information asymmetry, enterprises can identify it suppliers with different capabilities and improve their efforts by designing the optimal contract menu. The information-sharing mechanism based on centralization in the above research is only one-sided sharing. The current research does not involve multiparty information sharing. Followers only disclose some information or falsely report information, which still cannot fundamentally solve the problem of effective information circulation and sharing among various subjects [14, 15].Unlike the previous centralized information sharing mechanisms, the decentralized feature of blockchain can fully realize the bilateral sharing of information under the condition of ensuring users’ privacy [1], effectively solve the problem of information asymmetry among multiple subjects [4], and reduce the risk caused by unilateral information sharing. The decentralized tracking system formed by applying the blockchain to the supply chain system can further improve the connection degree between nodes and effectively realize the information sharing degree between nodes [12]. Among consumers, blockchain can enable consumers to accurately grasp product quality and price information. Among upstream and downstream enterprises of the supply chain, blockchain can improve information and resource flow barriers among enterprises and improve operation management performance.By constructing information asymmetry and information sharing model, this study compares and studies the problem of supply chain emission reduction and revenue optimization under the information sharing mechanism based on blockchain and reveals the internal mechanism of supply chain emission reduction under the information sharing mechanism of “blockchain + collaborative emission reduction.”


## 3. Model Construction and Solution

Considering the impact of blockchain platform construction cost, blockchain technology application cost, consumers’ low-carbon preference, and green credit, a three-stage game model of government, manufacturers, and retailers is constructed. Firstly, the government determines the subsidy coefficient of emission reduction technology investment with the fundamental goal of maximizing the total social welfare levelθ or subsidies for unit low-carbon products μ, constitutes the first stage game. Then, the manufacturer decides the wholesale price W and carbon emission reduction R with the goal of maximizing its own income, which constitutes the second stage game. Finally, the retailer decides the retail price p to form the third-stage game with the goal of maximizing its own revenue.


### 3.1. Technology Subsidy Model

The government needs to determine the technology subsidy coefficient given to the manufacturer. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure is only the technology subsidy cost to the manufacturer. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(1)πg1=πm1+πr1+a+λβr−pq1−θkr22+rq1,πm1=w−Cz−Cmq1−121−θkr2,πr1=p−w−Crq1.Theorem 1.
In the technology subsidy model, there are optimal subsidy coefficientθ1∗, carbon emission reduction rate r1∗, wholesale price w1∗, and retail price p1∗ to maximize social welfare and maximize the income of manufacturers and retailers.
It is proved that, according to the reverse solution method, firstly, we replace equation (1) to obtain the retailer’s income function, and let ∂πr1/∂p=0, and we obtain(2)p1=a+λβr+w+Cr2.By substituting equation (2) into equation (1), we can obtain πm1 Heather matrices about w and r:(3)H1=∂2πm∂w2∂2πm∂w∂r∂2πm∂w∂r∂2πm∂r2=−1βλ2βλ2−k1−θ.Whenk>β2λ2/41−θ, it can be seen that −1 < 0, the second-order principal subformula k1−θ>β2λ2/4, and the Heather matrix is negative; there is an optimal carbon emission reduction rate and wholesale price so that the manufacturer can obtain the maximum benefit. Let ∂πr1/∂w=0 and ∂πr1/∂r=0; with simultaneous equations, we obtain w1 and r1:(4)w1=β2λ2Cm+Cz−2k1−θa+Cm+Cz−Crβ2λ2−4k1−θ,r1=βλCm+Cz+Cr−aβ2λ2−4k1−θ.Substitute equation (4) into equation (3) to obtain the government income function, πg1:(5)πg1=k7k1−θ2+βλ2−2θ−βλCm+Cz+Cr−a22β2λ2−4k1−θ2.It can be seen∂2πg1/∂θ2<0 that there is an optimal subsidy rate θ1∗ to maximize social welfare. Make ∂πg1/∂θ=0 get the optimal subsidy rate θ1∗:(6)θ1∗=4k+3βλk+β2λ24k+7βλk.With simultaneous equations (4)–(6), we give r1∗, w1∗, and p1∗:(7)r1∗=4+7βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr16k−8βλ−7β2λ2,w1∗=8k−6βλ−7β2λ2Cm+Cz+8k−2βλa−Cr16k−8βλ−7β2λ2,p1∗=4k−5βλ−7β2λ2Cm+Cz+Cr+12k−3βλa16k−8βλ−7β2λ2.


### 3.2. Output Subsidy Model

The government needs to determine the subsidy for manufacturers per unit of low-carbon products. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure is only the production subsidy cost of manufacturers. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(8)πg2=πm2+πr2+a+λβr−pq12−μq1+rq1,πm2=w−Cz−Cm+μq1−12kr2,πr2=p−w−Crq1.Theorem 2.
In the output subsidy model, there are optimal subsidy amountμ2∗, carbon emission reduction rate r2∗, wholesale price w2∗, and retail price p2∗ to maximize social welfare and maximize the income of manufacturers and retailers.


### 3.3. Technology Subsidy Model Based on Blockchain Technology

The government needs to determine the technology subsidy coefficient given to the manufacturer. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure includes the technology subsidy cost to the manufacturer and the single cycle sharing cost of blockchain platform construction and the manufacturer. The retailer needs to pay the application cost of blockchain technology. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(9)πg3=πm3+πr3+a+βr−pq2−θkr22−GN+rq2,πm3=w−Cz−ηmCm−Cbq2−1−θkr22,πr3=p−w−ηrCr−Cbq2.


### 3.4. Output Subsidy Model Based on Blockchain Technology

The government needs to determine the subsidy for manufacturers per unit of low-carbon products. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure includes the production subsidy cost for manufacturers and the single cycle sharing cost of blockchain platform construction, and manufacturers and retailers need to pay the application cost of blockchain technology. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(10)πg4=πm4+πr4+a+βr−pq22−μq−GN+rq2,πm4=w−Cz−ηmCm−Cb+μq2−12kr2,πr4=p−w−ηrCr−Cbq2.


### 3.5. Comparative Analysis of Four Situations

Summarizing the game results of the above four situations, we can get the situation in Table1.Table 1
Comparative analysis of game results in four situations.
Technology subsidyProduction subsidyBlockchain technology is not appliedπg1∗=1+7ka−Cm−Cz−Cr2/216k−8βλ−7β2λ2r1∗=4+7βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr/16k−8βλ−7β2λ2q1∗=4k−βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr/16k−8βλ−7β2λ2πg2∗=ka−Cm−Cz−Cr2/2k−2βλ−β2λ2r2∗=βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr/k−2βλ−β2λ2q2∗=ka−Cm−Cz−Cr/k−2βλ−β2λ2Apply blockchain technologyπg3∗=1+7ka−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb2/216k−8β−7β2r3∗=4+7βa−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/16k−8β−7β2q3∗=4k−βa−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/16k−8β−7β2πg4∗=ka−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb2/2k−2β−β2r4∗=βa−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/k−2β−β2q4∗=ka−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/k−2β−β2Compare the optimal decisions in Table1 horizontally and vertically, and analyze the impact of single cycle shared cost G/N of blockchain platform construction, emission reduction cost coefficient k, consumers’ green trust λ and low-carbon preference β on the optimal social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and output of low-carbon products. In the four situations mentioned above, the following inferences can be obtained:(1) Emission reduction cost coefficientk has a negative impact on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate and low-carbon product output, and low-carbon preference β has a positive impact on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and low-carbon product output. When the supply chain does not adopt blockchain technology, consumers’ green trust has a positive impact on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and output of low-carbon products. When blockchain technology is adopted in the supply chain, consumers can accurately know the carbon emission information of low-carbon products. The green trust coefficient λ = 1. The impact of consumers’ green trust λ on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and low-carbon product output reaches the maximum.It is proved that it is easy to prove that the cost coefficient of emission reductionk, consumers’ green trust λ and low-carbon preference β, πg1∗, πg2∗, πg3∗, and πg4∗ are derived: πg1∗<0,πg2∗<0,πg3∗<0,πg4∗<0; ∂πg1∗/∂λ>0,∂πg2∗/∂λ>0,∂πg3∗/∂λ=0,∂πg4∗/∂λ=0, ∂πg1∗/∂β>0,∂πg2∗/∂β>0,∂πg3∗/∂β>0,and∂πg4∗/∂β>0. Similarly, we can prove the functional relationship between carbon emission reduction rate and low-carbon product output on emission reduction cost coefficient k, consumer green trust λ, and low-carbon preference β.(2) Social welfare decreases linearly with the increase of single cycle apportioned costG/N of blockchain platform construction. There are thresholds GT and GL for shared costs. When the government adopts technology subsidies and meets G/N<GL or the government adopts production subsidies and meets G/N<GL, the government can obtain higher social welfare by adopting blockchain technology.


## 3.1. Technology Subsidy Model

The government needs to determine the technology subsidy coefficient given to the manufacturer. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure is only the technology subsidy cost to the manufacturer. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(1)πg1=πm1+πr1+a+λβr−pq1−θkr22+rq1,πm1=w−Cz−Cmq1−121−θkr2,πr1=p−w−Crq1.Theorem 1.
In the technology subsidy model, there are optimal subsidy coefficientθ1∗, carbon emission reduction rate r1∗, wholesale price w1∗, and retail price p1∗ to maximize social welfare and maximize the income of manufacturers and retailers.
It is proved that, according to the reverse solution method, firstly, we replace equation (1) to obtain the retailer’s income function, and let ∂πr1/∂p=0, and we obtain(2)p1=a+λβr+w+Cr2.By substituting equation (2) into equation (1), we can obtain πm1 Heather matrices about w and r:(3)H1=∂2πm∂w2∂2πm∂w∂r∂2πm∂w∂r∂2πm∂r2=−1βλ2βλ2−k1−θ.Whenk>β2λ2/41−θ, it can be seen that −1 < 0, the second-order principal subformula k1−θ>β2λ2/4, and the Heather matrix is negative; there is an optimal carbon emission reduction rate and wholesale price so that the manufacturer can obtain the maximum benefit. Let ∂πr1/∂w=0 and ∂πr1/∂r=0; with simultaneous equations, we obtain w1 and r1:(4)w1=β2λ2Cm+Cz−2k1−θa+Cm+Cz−Crβ2λ2−4k1−θ,r1=βλCm+Cz+Cr−aβ2λ2−4k1−θ.Substitute equation (4) into equation (3) to obtain the government income function, πg1:(5)πg1=k7k1−θ2+βλ2−2θ−βλCm+Cz+Cr−a22β2λ2−4k1−θ2.It can be seen∂2πg1/∂θ2<0 that there is an optimal subsidy rate θ1∗ to maximize social welfare. Make ∂πg1/∂θ=0 get the optimal subsidy rate θ1∗:(6)θ1∗=4k+3βλk+β2λ24k+7βλk.With simultaneous equations (4)–(6), we give r1∗, w1∗, and p1∗:(7)r1∗=4+7βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr16k−8βλ−7β2λ2,w1∗=8k−6βλ−7β2λ2Cm+Cz+8k−2βλa−Cr16k−8βλ−7β2λ2,p1∗=4k−5βλ−7β2λ2Cm+Cz+Cr+12k−3βλa16k−8βλ−7β2λ2.


## 3.2. Output Subsidy Model

The government needs to determine the subsidy for manufacturers per unit of low-carbon products. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure is only the production subsidy cost of manufacturers. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(8)πg2=πm2+πr2+a+λβr−pq12−μq1+rq1,πm2=w−Cz−Cm+μq1−12kr2,πr2=p−w−Crq1.Theorem 2.
In the output subsidy model, there are optimal subsidy amountμ2∗, carbon emission reduction rate r2∗, wholesale price w2∗, and retail price p2∗ to maximize social welfare and maximize the income of manufacturers and retailers.


## 3.3. Technology Subsidy Model Based on Blockchain Technology

The government needs to determine the technology subsidy coefficient given to the manufacturer. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure includes the technology subsidy cost to the manufacturer and the single cycle sharing cost of blockchain platform construction and the manufacturer. The retailer needs to pay the application cost of blockchain technology. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(9)πg3=πm3+πr3+a+βr−pq2−θkr22−GN+rq2,πm3=w−Cz−ηmCm−Cbq2−1−θkr22,πr3=p−w−ηrCr−Cbq2.


## 3.4. Output Subsidy Model Based on Blockchain Technology

The government needs to determine the subsidy for manufacturers per unit of low-carbon products. At this time, the government’s financial expenditure includes the production subsidy cost for manufacturers and the single cycle sharing cost of blockchain platform construction, and manufacturers and retailers need to pay the application cost of blockchain technology. The revenue functions of government, manufacturer, and retailer are(10)πg4=πm4+πr4+a+βr−pq22−μq−GN+rq2,πm4=w−Cz−ηmCm−Cb+μq2−12kr2,πr4=p−w−ηrCr−Cbq2.


## 3.5. Comparative Analysis of Four Situations

Summarizing the game results of the above four situations, we can get the situation in Table1.Table 1
Comparative analysis of game results in four situations.
Technology subsidyProduction subsidyBlockchain technology is not appliedπg1∗=1+7ka−Cm−Cz−Cr2/216k−8βλ−7β2λ2r1∗=4+7βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr/16k−8βλ−7β2λ2q1∗=4k−βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr/16k−8βλ−7β2λ2πg2∗=ka−Cm−Cz−Cr2/2k−2βλ−β2λ2r2∗=βλa−Cm−Cz−Cr/k−2βλ−β2λ2q2∗=ka−Cm−Cz−Cr/k−2βλ−β2λ2Apply blockchain technologyπg3∗=1+7ka−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb2/216k−8β−7β2r3∗=4+7βa−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/16k−8β−7β2q3∗=4k−βa−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/16k−8β−7β2πg4∗=ka−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb2/2k−2β−β2r4∗=βa−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/k−2β−β2q4∗=ka−ηmCm−Cz−ηrCr−2Cb/k−2β−β2Compare the optimal decisions in Table1 horizontally and vertically, and analyze the impact of single cycle shared cost G/N of blockchain platform construction, emission reduction cost coefficient k, consumers’ green trust λ and low-carbon preference β on the optimal social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and output of low-carbon products. In the four situations mentioned above, the following inferences can be obtained:(1) Emission reduction cost coefficientk has a negative impact on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate and low-carbon product output, and low-carbon preference β has a positive impact on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and low-carbon product output. When the supply chain does not adopt blockchain technology, consumers’ green trust has a positive impact on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and output of low-carbon products. When blockchain technology is adopted in the supply chain, consumers can accurately know the carbon emission information of low-carbon products. The green trust coefficient λ = 1. The impact of consumers’ green trust λ on social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and low-carbon product output reaches the maximum.It is proved that it is easy to prove that the cost coefficient of emission reductionk, consumers’ green trust λ and low-carbon preference β, πg1∗, πg2∗, πg3∗, and πg4∗ are derived: πg1∗<0,πg2∗<0,πg3∗<0,πg4∗<0; ∂πg1∗/∂λ>0,∂πg2∗/∂λ>0,∂πg3∗/∂λ=0,∂πg4∗/∂λ=0, ∂πg1∗/∂β>0,∂πg2∗/∂β>0,∂πg3∗/∂β>0,and∂πg4∗/∂β>0. Similarly, we can prove the functional relationship between carbon emission reduction rate and low-carbon product output on emission reduction cost coefficient k, consumer green trust λ, and low-carbon preference β.(2) Social welfare decreases linearly with the increase of single cycle apportioned costG/N of blockchain platform construction. There are thresholds GT and GL for shared costs. When the government adopts technology subsidies and meets G/N<GL or the government adopts production subsidies and meets G/N<GL, the government can obtain higher social welfare by adopting blockchain technology.


## 4. Numerical Example

Referring to the relationship between the parameters in the actual emission reduction decision-making driven by consumers, the probability of L-type and H-type consumers is set aspx=0.4 and py=0.6, respectively, the emission reduction cost coefficient of manufacturers is γm=500, the emission reduction cost coefficient of suppliers is γs=600, the basic market demand is a=1000, and the investment cost coefficient of “blockchain + collaborative emission reduction” is η=70. The revenue coefficients of blockchain information sharing are km=21 and ks=20, the unit raw material cost is w=1, the unit raw material price is c=3, and the initial product price is p=50. The following numerical calculations are carried out by programming with MATLAB r2012a software.Figures1 and 2, respectively, show the income of producers and suppliers and the income of supply chain under information asymmetry. It can be seen that, with the increase of low-carbon preference of H-type consumers, the income of manufacturers and suppliers gradually increases, the information rent obtained by H-type consumers gradually increases, and the enthusiasm of H-type consumers to imitate L-type consumers also gradually increases. The manufacturer pays extra information rent to H-type consumers in order to avoid H-type consumers imitating L-type consumers. This part of information rent is also the loss cost of supply chain revenue caused by information asymmetry.Figure 1
Income of producers and suppliers under information asymmetry.Figure 2
Supply chain revenue under information asymmetry.Figures3 and 4, respectively, show the income of producers and suppliers and the income of supply chain under the information sharing mechanism of “blockchain + collaborative emission reduction.” With the increase of cost sharing and information sharing, the income distribution ratio φ increases, the income of manufacturers increases, and the income of suppliers decreases. It can be seen that the information sharing benefits brought by joining the blockchain can effectively overcome the costs brought by sharing the blockchain investment and bring significant growth in benefits. In the supply chain revenue, there is one point φ∗=0.58∈0,1, which makes the supply chain revenue optimal. Compare Figures 2 and 4. Under the same parameter assignment conditions, the supply chain revenue under the “blockchain + collaborative emission reduction” information sharing mechanism is significantly higher than that under the information asymmetry. The blockchain can effectively improve the overall revenue and effectively solve the revenue loss caused by information asymmetry under the condition of multiparty information sharing.Figure 3
Benefits of producers and suppliers under the information sharing mechanism of “blockchain + collaborative emission reduction.”Figure 4
Supply chain revenue under the information sharing mechanism of “blockchain + collaborative emission reduction.”


## 5. Conclusion

This paper establishes a three-stage game model dominated by the government and followed by manufacturers and retailers under the four scenarios of emission reduction technology input subsidy and low-carbon product output subsidy before and after the application of blockchain technology. By comparing the optimal social welfare, carbon emission reduction rate, and low-carbon product output under the four scenarios, this paper discusses the optimal problem of the government’s low-carbon subsidy strategy. It is found that when the product of consumers’ low-carbon preference coefficient and green trust coefficient is greater than a certain fixed value, the government can obtain higher social welfare and promote enterprises’ emission reduction through output subsidies. The government can always promote the demand for low-carbon products through output subsidies. When the emission reduction cost coefficient approaches infinity, the demand for low-carbon products when the government implements output subsidies is four times that when the government implements technology subsidies.


## 6. Future Work

This paper can be further enhanced at a major level. The three-stage game model can be further realized for the optimal problem of the government’s low-carbon subsidy strategy.



---

*Source: 9565379-2021-12-27.xml*