Product greening and pricing strategies of firms under green sensitive consumer demand and environmental regulations

  • Debabrata GhoshEmail author
  • Janat Shah
  • Sanjeev Swami


Manufacturing firms globally face an increasing consumer demand for environmentally friendly products, along with regulatory changes. These entail significant costs for firms who are unsure about the benefits of greening. In this paper, we aim to answer questions on the economics of greening. We explore various problem settings where we study the impact of product greening costs and Government regulations on a single firm and duopoly, in a green sensitive consumer market. We study firm strategy to derive optimal values of product greening level, price and profits. In addition, we also analyze the impact of Government regulations on firms and society. We find that regulations serve the requisite objective of forcing firms to provide higher greening levels. However, under certain conditions they may have a limited effect. We find that under higher Government penalty or subsidy, a firm with a lower greening cost will offer higher product greening level than its competitor, in turn benefitting in a green consumer market. Under duopoly settings, we find that the relative greening level difference between the competing firms is increasing in the cost of greening difference. Further, the relative greening level difference between the firms is increasing in Government taxation or subsidy as well. We discuss various conditions under which firms would incur Government taxation or subsidy. The key contribution of our work lies in modeling Government regulations and decision making under demand expansion effects while analyzing the resulting decisions of product greening and pricing.


Environmental operations Game theory Green product Government regulations Pricing 


  1. Atasu, A., Guide, V. D. R., & Wassenhove, L. N. (2008). Product reuse economics in closed-loop supply chain research. Production and Operations Management, 17(5), 483–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banker, R. D., Khosla, I., & Sinha, K. K. (1998). Quality and competition. Management Science, 44(9), 1179–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnett, A. J. (1980). The Pigouvian tax rule under monopoly. American Economic Review, 70, 1037–1041.Google Scholar
  4. Bhaskaran, S. R., & Krishnan, V. (2009). Effort, revenue, and cost sharing mechanisms for collaborative new product development. Management Science, 55(7), 1152–1169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonanno, G. (1986). Vertical differentiation with Cournot competition. Economic Notes, 15, 68–91.Google Scholar
  6. Champsaur, P., & Rochet, J. C. (1989). Multi-product duopolists. Econometrica, 57, 533–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen, C. (2001). Design for the environment: A quality-based model for green product development. Management Science, 47(2), 250–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Choi, C. J., & Shin, H. S. (1992). A comment on a model of vertical product differentiation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 40, 229–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Drozdenko, R., Jensen, M., & Coelho, D. (2011). Pricing of green products: Premiums paid, consumer characteristics and incentives. International Journal of Business, Marketing, and Decision Sciences, 4(1), 106–116.Google Scholar
  10. Geyer, R., Wassenhove, L. N. V., & Atasu, A. (2007). The economics of remanufacturing under limited component durability and finite product life cycles. Management Science, 53(1), 88–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ghosh, D., & Shah, J. (2012). A comparative analysis of greening policies across supply chain structures. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(2), 568–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gouda, S. K., Jonnalagedda, S., & Saranga, H. (2015). Design for the environment: Impact of regulatory policies on product development. European Journal of Operational Research, 248(2), 558–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. KPMG. (2016). Global automotive executive survey. Retrieved March 11, 2016 from
  14. Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of consumer marketing, 18(6), 503–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Letmathe, P., & Balakrishnan, N. (2005). Environmental considerations on the optimal product mix. European Journal of Operational Research, 167(2), 398–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mitra, S., & Webster, S. (2008). Competition in remanufacturing and effects of Government subsidies. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Motta, M. (1993). Endogenous quality choice: Price vs. quantity competition. Journal of Industrial Economics, 41, 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K., & Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 56–64.Google Scholar
  19. Parsons, R. (2005). Rentabilite comparee des fermes laitie’res biologiques du Nord-Est. Mimeo, University of Vermont.Google Scholar
  20. PricewaterhouseCoopers, L. L. P. (2010). Green products: Using sustainable attributes to drive growth and value. Retrieved February 13, 2016 from
  21. Ren, J., Bian, Y., Xu, X., & He, P. (2015). Allocation of product-related carbon emission abatement target in a make-to-order supply chain. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 80, 181–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Savaskan, C., Bhattacharya, S., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2004). Closed-loop supply chain models with product remanufacturing. Management Science, 50(2), 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Savaskan, C., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2006). Reverse channel design: The case of competing retailers. Management Science, 52(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schlegelmilch, B. B., Bohlen, G. M., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1996). The link between green purchasing decisions and measures of environmental consciousness. European Journal of Marketing, 30(5), 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Spence, Michael. (1975). Monopoly, quality, and regulation. Bell Journal of Economics, 6, 417–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Swami, S., & Shah, Janat. (2012). Channel coordination in green supply chain management. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(3), 336–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vives, X. (1985). On the efficiency of Bertrand and Cournot equilibria with product differentiation. Journal of Economic Theory, 36(1), 166–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Walley, N., & Whitehead, B. (1994). It’s not easy being green. Harvard Business Review, 72, 46–52.Google Scholar
  29. Zhang, J. J., Nie, T. F., & Du, S. F. (2011). Optimal emission-dependent production policy with stochastic demand. International Journal of Society Systems Science, 3(1–2), 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang, B., & Xu, L. (2013). Multi-item production planning with carbon cap and trade mechanism. International Journal of Production Economics, 144(1), 118–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Operations and Supply Chain Management, Malaysia Institute for Supply Chain InnovationMIT SCALE NETWORKKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.Operations Management, Quantitative Methods and Information SystemsIndian Institute of Management UdaipurUdaipurIndia
  3. 3.Department of Management, FOSSDayalbagh Educational InstituteAgraIndia

Personalised recommendations