Srai Jagjit Singh, Joglekar Nitin, Tsolakis Naoum, Kapur Sandeep
Centre for International Manufacturing Institute for Manufacturing (IfM) Department of Engineering School of Technology University of Cambridge CB3 0FS Cambridge United Kingdom.
Questrom School of Business Boston University Boston Massachusetts USA.
Prod Oper Manag. 2022 Feb;31(2):457-477. doi: 10.1111/poms.13553. Epub 2021 Sep 6.
Competing and coexisting policies (CACPs) may arise from the incompatibility of incentives, standards, and regulatory models between a local state and a federal government, or between two government jurisdictions across which supply networks operate. Traditional studies of supply chain dynamics typically explore the impact of policy regimens as standalone instruments. This study explores how the interplay between CACP regimens can affect the supply dynamics between producers, customers, and their intermediaries. We use a supply network configuration lens to assess implications for supply chain actors and system-level outcomes. Our work is motivated by the federal-state dissonance in the current dispute between India's farmers and the federal government regarding new laws that impact agricultural supply chains in India. In this case, alternative and coexisting policy interventions, ostensibly aimed at modernizing and transforming production and distribution, can lead to significant supply chain netting and inventory pooling reconfigurations in terms of material, information, and financial flows among Indian agricultural stakeholders, along with inventory repositioning and market creation options. In addition, of significance is the consequent shift in the balance between state/nation and federal/supranational equity and bargaining power, an increasingly relevant context where supply chains operate across a common but multi-jurisdictional territory, and implications for system-level outcomes, in this particular case equity, welfare economics, and food security. We conclude by pointing to the implications of CACP regimens, and their interplay, for the broader field of operations management and supply chain research.
相互竞争与共存的政策(CACPs)可能源于地方政府与联邦政府之间,或供应网络所跨越的两个政府管辖区域之间,在激励措施、标准和监管模式上的不兼容性。传统的供应链动态研究通常将政策方案作为独立工具来探讨其影响。本研究探讨了相互竞争与共存的政策方案之间的相互作用如何影响生产者、客户及其中间机构之间的供应动态。我们使用供应网络配置视角来评估对供应链参与者和系统层面结果的影响。我们的研究动机源于印度农民与联邦政府当前就影响印度农业供应链的新法律产生争端中的联邦与邦之间的不一致。在这种情况下,表面上旨在使生产和分销现代化及转型的替代性和共存的政策干预措施,可能导致印度农业利益相关者之间在物资、信息和资金流动方面的供应链大幅调整和库存集中重新配置,以及库存重新定位和市场创造选择。此外,重要的是随之而来的国家/邦与联邦/超国家公平及议价能力之间平衡的转变,在供应链跨越共同但多管辖区域运作的背景下,这一情况越来越相关,以及对系统层面结果的影响,在这种特定情况下即公平、福利经济学和粮食安全。我们最后指出相互竞争与共存的政策方案及其相互作用对运营管理和供应链研究更广泛领域的影响。