Incentive strategies for retired power battery closed-loop supply chain considering corporate social responsibility.

Global environmental concerns and resource scarcity are driving the growth in sales of electric vehicles (EVs). Reusing and recycling retired batteries from EVs has significant economic value and reduces the environmental burden. Rising raw material prices have intensified competition among recyclers; in particular, recyclers without corporate social responsibility (CSR) have been added. These observations lead to a game-theoretical model consisting of three players: a battery manufacturer, a recycler with CSR and a recycler without CSR (non-CSR). The non-CSR recycler enjoys a cost advantage over the CSR recycler, but may not be considered by the consumers with high environmental awareness (CEA). We explore the incentive strategies for CSR recyclers outperform, and how the equilibrium is affected by the recyclers' Stackelberg game. Results show that (1) the deposit- refund is the most profitable strategy for all members and the whole supply chain if raw material price rises high enough; otherwise, a contract strategy should be adopted. (2) Improving CEA and echelon utilization ratio is more conducive to the implementation of revenue-sharing contract. In addition, increasing CEA contributed to CSR recycler collects more retired batteries instead of non-CSR recycler. (3) Stackelberg game between recyclers may hurt supply chain. However, CSR recycler may benefit from the non-CSR recycler-led Stackelberg game. Our work provides the basis of incentive strategies for different participants in the closed-loop supply chain of retired batteries, in particular, to encourage retired batteries flow to CSR recyclers.

A comparison of survey incentive methods to recruit rural cancer survivors into cancer care delivery research studies.

Unconditional (upfront) incentives are proposed to improve acceptance of cancer research among underrepresented, racial/ethnic minority populations, but few studies have tested incentive strategies among rural cancer survivors. Descriptive statistics summarized demographic characteristics of survey respondents, and response rates by arm were compared using Chi-square tests. We compared upfront ($2) and response-based ($10 conditional) incentives in a mailed survey of adult post-treatment rural survivors. Individuals meeting eligibility criteria from the electronic medical record (n = 2,830) were randomized into two incentive arms (n = 1,414 for the upfront arm and n = 1,416 for the contingent arm). Of the total delivered, presumed eligible participants (n = 1,304 upfront arm; n = 1,317 contingent arm), 67.8% were aged 65y+, 49.8% were female, and 95.1% were non-Hispanic white. The response rate for all participants was 18.5%. We received eligible surveys from 281 rural survivors in the first arm (response rate: 21.5%); and 205 surveys in the second arm (response rate: 15.6%). Participants who received the upfront incentive had a higher response rate than those receiving a response-based incentive, X2 (1, 2,621) = 15.53, p < 0.0001. Incentivizing survey completion with an upfront $2 bill encouraged a higher survey response rate; other supplemental strategies are needed to achieve a higher response rate for this population.