In recent ten years, because of the rapid progress of technology, the time of releasing products was shortened, especially in 3C market. Thus, pricing policy for a short life-cycle product has become an issue. In addition, due to the awareness of the environmental degradation, many countries like EU have set up the barriers of the strict regulation barriers to ensure the green products being imported, for instance, WEEE, RoHS, and Eup. Since green products are market driven, how to determine their proper prices which can be beneficial to the suppliers has drawn both enterprises and researchers’ attentions. Therefore, in this study, proposing a method for pricing on a green product for its short life cycle is our primal intention.
Under a given market scale, this study particularly concerns about the optimal pricing policy where there are two kinds of products having different degrees of greenness from different manufacturers sold by one retailer, or equally green products sold by two retailers. The objective is to maximize the retailer(s)’s profit. Based on the characteristic of the multiple periods along the life cycle, in this study, based on Game Theory, Dynamic Programming (DP) model is developed to analyze the competitive condition as well as the market behavior for two products. Besides, due to many environmental protection regulations like WEEE of EU, the un-soled green products have to be recycled by the manufacturer, thus, the retailer(s) will refund the remaining products to the manufacturer with lower price at the last stage.
Without loss of generality, three stages of DP model are constructed to determine the optimal prices for two products at every stage. Besides, under the same order quantity and recycling at last stage, we have compared the respective revenues of three stages (two in the market and one for recycling) and two stages (one in the market and one for recycling) to discuss the influence of different markets on revenue. Sensitivity analysis has been carried out on various parameters to facilitate the effective control and management. Finally, the proposed pricing policy has been shown to be theoretically valid and thoroughly applicable.

近十年，在3C產品的市場，因為高科技的快速發展，縮短產品推出的時間。加上近幾年環境的嚴重惡化，使人們的環保意識高漲，歐盟更是提出三大環保指令WEEE、RoHS及Eup，因此短生命週期綠色產品的定價策略成為目前重要的研究議題。
本研究是在市場規模為已知時，針對兩家製造商所生產不同綠色程度的產品在一家零售商，或者是同種綠色產品在兩家零售商，提供一組最佳的價格策略，使得零售商獲得最大利潤。基於多期定價的特性，在本研究中，我們採用動態規劃(DP)模式，根據競局論來分析兩產品的市場供需、彼此競爭的狀況。由於如歐盟WEEE指令所規定，綠色產品必需由製造商回收，因此，在最後一期零售商需將未出售的產品以較低價格退還給製造商。在未失ㄧ般性的前提下，我們以三期的產品週期為例，應用我們所研發出的動態規劃模式，求得每一期兩個競爭產品的最佳定價。並且，在相同訂貨量、及最後一期回收的情況下，我們將比較規劃期數為三期跟兩期的利潤，探討規劃期數對利潤的影響，並作敏感度分析來有效控管不同的參數。結果顯示所提的短生命週期綠色產品定價策略有其理論與應用實效。

1. 陳順宇、鄭碧娥，統計學，第四版，ISBN 9574116646，華泰，台北，2004。
2. 翁佰瑞等，「結合產業消費紀錄及綠色產品消費行為調查資料建構之-產品推薦與應用系
統」，大學專題，國立清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系，2008。
3. R. E. Bellman, Dynamic Programming, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1957.
4. S. Bamberg, “How Does Environmental Concern Influence Specific Environmentally Related
Behaviors? A New Answer to an Old Question,” Environmental Psychology, 23, 21-32, 2003.
5. K. Conrad, “Price Competition and Product Differentiation when Consumers Care for the
Environment,” Environmental & Resource Economics, 31, 1-19, 2003.
6. Y. M. Chang, C. C. Liu, C. Y Hung, A. Hu, and S. S. Chen, “Change In MSW Characteristics
Under Recent Management Strategies In Taiwan,” Waste Management, 28, 2443-2455, 2007.
7. Y. Dai, X. Chao, S. C. Fang, and H. L.W. Nuttle, “Pricing In Revenue Management For
Multiple Firms Competing For Customers,” International Journal of Production Economics,
98, 1-16, 2005.
8. D. Fullerton and W. Wu, “Policies for Green Design,” Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management, 36, 131-148, 1998.
9. R. Gibbons, Game Theory for Applied Economists, ISBN 0-691-00395-5, Princeton University
Press, 1992.
10. S. M. Gilbert and V. Cvsa, “Strategic Commitment to Price to Stimulate Downstream
Innovation in a Supply Chain,” European Journal of Operational Research, 150, 617-639,
2003.
11. S. C. Graves, A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan, and P. H. Zipkin, Logistics of Production and Inventory,
Elsevier, 2005.
12. H. Gurnani, M. Erkoc, and Y. Luo, “Impact of Product Pricing and Timing of Investment
Decisions on Supply Chain Coopetition,” European Journal of Operational Research, 180,
228-248, 2007.
13. M. Hoel and T. Sterner, “Discounting and Relative Prices: Assessing Future Environmental
Damages,” RFF Discussion Paper, 06-18, 2006.
14. P. H. Hsu, H. M. Teng, Y. T. Jou, and H. M. Wee, “Coordinated Ordering Decisions for
Products with Short Lifecycle and Variable Selling Price,” Computers & Industrial
Engineering, 54, 602-612, 2008.
15. M. L. Katz and H. S. Rosen, Microeconomics, 3rd ed. , Irwin, 1998.
16. V. C. Lakhan and P. D. LaValle, “Use of Log-linear Models to Assess Factors Influencing
Concern for the Natural Environment,” Environmental Management, 30, 77–87, 2002.
17. K. H. Rosen, Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications, 6th ed. , McGraw-Hill, 2007
18. H. F. Wang, Multi-criteria Decision Analysis –From Certainty to Uncertainty, ISBN
986-7777-55-7, Ting Lung Book Co, 2004.
19. T. Xiao and D. Yang, “Price and Service Competition of Supply Chains with Risk-averse
Retailers under Demand Uncertainty”, International Journal of Production Economics, 114,
187-200, 2008.
20. T. Xiao and X. Qi, “Price Competition, Cost and Demand Disruptions and Coordination of a
Supply Chain with One Manufacturer and Two Competing Retailers,” Omega, 36, 741-753,
2008.
21. D. York, “Least squares fitting of a straight line,” Can. J. Phys, 44, 1079–1086, 1966.
22. 10 May 2009 <http://www.epeat.net>.