The increasing public attention on green products prompted firms and government to focus on the design and manufacturing of these products. This study focuses on a supply chain system that consists of three members, namely, supplier, manufacturer, and government, and then investigates the effects of government subsidies on social welfare and the profits of supply chain members. We utilize game and optimization theories to calculate and compare the optimal decisions and profits of players in the following scenarios: (i) the government provides a subsidy rate to the cost of manufacturer’s greenness efforts (first subsidy policy); and (ii) the government grants a per unit subsidy to the manufacturer for the demand for green product (second subsidy policy). We also derive the necessary condition for the most effective subsidy policy that maximizes expected social welfare and profits. Our analysis derives the following findings: (i) under the first subsidy policy, the government tends to provide high subsidy rate to a manufacturer with low marginal profit; (ii) under the second subsidy policy, the government tends to offer low subsidy to a manufacturer with low marginal profit; and (iii) a government’s selection of subsidy policy depends on the sensitivity of consumers to price.

This paper considers a retail platform selling a product to consumers and voluntarily discloses product quality information by using blockchain technology (BCT). Consumers decide whether to deliberate before making purchase decisions. We develop an analytical model to explore the effects of information disclosure strategies on the retail platform’s pricing and consumers’ deliberation decisions. Some interesting results are obtained. First, regardless of the information disclosure strategy, consumers’ deliberation and purchasing decisions depend on the deliberation cost and product price. Consumers will only deliberate if the price is at the medium level and the deliberation cost is not too high. Second, when the disclosure cost is high, the retail platform either stimulates or prevents consumer deliberation; however, when the disclosure cost is at a medium interval, the retail platform’s pricing decision depends on its information disclosure strategy. Specifically, when disclosing quality information, the retail platform will implement the stimulated deliberation (SD) or prevented deliberation (PD) strategy and will never adopt the sold at a low price (SL) strategy; however, when quality information is withheld, the retail platform will only adopt the PD strategy. Third, we identify the conditions under which the retail platform should disclose quality information when facing different disclosure costs.

Carbon tax policy is widely adopted by many countries to curb carbon emissions. In the context of carbon tax policy, firms have more incentive to improve carbon reduction levels by reducing their carbon tax costs. However, firms need to bear carbon reduction costs that may cause shortage of capital. Thus, firms may face problems of financial constraints, which may demotivate firms to produce greener products. To address the decision‐making challenges of firms in the contexts of carbon tax policy and financial constraints, we consider a supply chain with a manufacturer who produces green products and a retailer who sells these products. Our study develops five models to investigate the two firms’ optimal wholesale price, carbon reduction level and ordering quantity, according to the manufacturer and retailer with or without financial constraints. Our goal in this study is to explore how carbon tax policy and banks’ interest rates affect the profits of the two firms, supply chain and consumer surplus. Certain managerial insights are obtained as follows. We demonstrate that carbon tax policy and banks’ interest rates demotivate the manufacturer to produce greener products and demotivate the retailer to order more products. If the interest rate to the manufacturer (retailer) is relatively low, then the manufacturer with financial constraint benefits (harms) the consumers compared with the retailer with financial constraint. Importantly, our analysis suggests that carbon tax policy harms the firms but benefits consumers, and the government in some conditions should reduce unit carbon tax.