Designing a Model for Examining Impact of Government Intervention on the Competition between Green and Non-green Agency Supply Chains

Nowadays, due to the pollution that businesses and various industries impose to the environment, the adoption of strategies and policies by governments to improve the environmental performance of the supply chain has received more attention. The green supply chain will have many benefits, such as saving energy resources, reducing pollutants, and so on. Government intervention to develop these chains takes various forms, such as subsidies, taxes, licensing, and advertising. In this study, two manufacturers with green and non-green supply chains compete in a competitive market and sell their products through a joint retailer, and the government intervenes as a leader in the stackelberg game. These chains are designed based on the selection of agent-based pricing and wholesale pricing methods in four different models. In these models, the government advertises for green products in the first and second models and imposes taxes on the producer of non-green products in the third and fourth models, seeking to maximize social welfare and improving the environment. In order to analyze and compare the models, the game theory approach was used. The results show that in general, government intervention improves the environmental situation and social welfare, and in the case of advertising has a better effect on the overall market trend and also on social welfare than the tax imposing strategy.