ArticlePloS one2022
Contract choice and advance selling strategy in a supply chain of FAP.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advance selling (AS) has been widely applied in fresh industry for it can elevating the customer experience and increase flexibility thus profit for a retailer. However, the introduction of the AS will have an impact on spot market in pricing strategy, market share and the profit of the retailer. Hence, to coordinate the supply chain and improve the efficiency of the agricultural supply chain, a two-stage game theory model is constructed to analyze the effects of AS on three classic contracts: wholesale price, quantity discount and revenue-sharing contract. This paper also discusses the boundary conditions of whether a retailer should sell in advance. The conclusions of this paper are as follows: First, revenue-sharing contracts are superior to wholesale price and quantity discount contracts when retailers sell in advance, the wholesale price contract can perform better than the quantity discount contract in the presence of AS if the contract parameter is properly set. Second, a revenue-sharing contract that normally coordinates the supply chain can performs poorly when the retailer sells in advance that the social welfare would be higher if using a quantity discount contract instead. These conclusions have important implications for suppliers when retailers sell in advance. Such suppliers need to design appropriate contracts to distribute FAP that carefully take into consideration the AS activities in the market.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.