外文翻譯--帕雷托改進式包裹遞送服務(wù)合同

1、<p>　　中文3700字,2050單詞</p><p><b>　　外文翻譯 </b></p><p><b>　　原文 </b></p><p>　　Pareto-Improving Contracts for Express Package Delivery Services</p><

2、p>　　Material Source: University of California Author: Alexandra M. Newman</p><p><b>　　Abstract:</b></p><p>　　We address the problem of an express package delivery company in str

3、ucturing a long-term customer contract whose terms may include prices that differ by day-of-week and by speed-of-service. The company traditionally offered speed-of-service pricing to its customers, but without day-of-we

4、ek differentiation, resulting in customer demands with considerable day-of-week seasonality. The package delivery company hoped that using day-of-week and speed-of-service price differentiation for contract custo</p&g

5、t;<p>　　Keywords: transportation contracts; contract pricing; speed-of-service pricing; time-of-use pricing; day-of-week pricing </p><p>　　1. INTRODUCTION </p><p>　　Most package delivery

6、companies PDCs charge a premium for faster delivery, but the practice of pricing by day of week is very limited. In the absence of this type of price differentiation, shipment volumes exhibit strong day-of-week patterns,

7、 especially in the express package delivery market. Although the schedules of various ground transport vehicles often can be adjusted to account for this day-of-week seasonality, express package delivery companies rely h

8、eavily on aircraft, for which it is no</p><p>　　Our research was motivated by a PDC whose management had hoped to induce the company’s contract customers to behave in the desired way via day-of week and spee

9、d-of-service pricing alone. As we explain in more detail later, this is usually not possible. For this reason, we seek to develop a methodology for structuring contracts? which may include day-of week and speed-of-servic

10、e pricing as one element? that achieves the highest total profit for the PDC while ensuring that the customer is at least</p><p>　　We examine this problem assuming that the PDC is negotiating with one major

11、customer at a time. The most promising opportunities for improving the PDC’s profit via more complex contract pricing arrangements occur in situations in which several customers sharing an aircraft route have similar day

12、-of week seasonality. This phenomenon occurs frequently due to weekly procurement cycles. </p><p>　　For example, automobile assembly plants request deliveries of many parts on Monday morning to supply the as

13、sembly line for the week. Although this may not be optimal,typical material requirements planning systems operate on a weekly schedule, and the procurement process follows suit. Component suppliers in the same vicinity t

14、hat provide parts to a given assembly plant therefore ship on the same day, usually Friday. The PDC would like all of these customers to modify their shipment plans, but it </p><p>　　In this paper, we focus

15、on the flow of a class of homogeneous or nearly homogeneous packages from a single shipper typically a manufacturer that provides vendor-managed inventory VMI services to a single consignee a downstream user of the manuf

16、actured parts. In the concluding section, we explain how our approach can be generalized to multiple package types. Because of the VMI arrangement, the shipper owns the goods and therefore incurs inventory holding costs

17、until the consignee utilizes the goo</p><p>　　The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: </p><p>　　The next section contains a review of the literature. </p><p>　　This is

18、followed by formal statements of the PDC’s and customer’s decision problems. In Section 4, we formulate the PDC’s and customer’s problems under a price-only contract and discuss the shortcomings of such a contract in our

19、 problem context, and this discussion provides a backdrop for our solution strategy. </p><p>　　In Section 5, we present the details of our methodology for structuring Pareto-improving contracts. Section 6 pr

20、ovides numerical examples that illustrate our proposed method and its benefits. Section 7 closes the paper with a discussion of extensions and generalizations of our approach. </p><p>　　2. Literature Review

21、</p><p>　　In this section, we provide an overview of the separate literatures on time-of-service pricing, and on speed of-service and priority pricing. It is important to point out that, to the best of our k

22、nowledge, there is very little research that considers both simultaneously. We first discuss time-of-service pricing with an emphasis on electricity, toll roads, and computer and telecommunication network services, which

23、 are the most common application areas. Later in the section, we discuss the litera</p><p>　　2.1. Time-of-Service Pricing </p><p>　　Vickrey 1971 provides a very lucid qualitative discussion of t

24、he benefits of what he calls “responsive pricing,” that is, pricing that varies according to the state of the system. Responsive pricing includes such concepts as dynamic pricing based on instantaneous real-time congesti

25、on, time-of-service pricing based on forecasted not real-time demand or congestion patterns, and pricing schemes in the vein of current day revenue management. Vickrey 1971 mentions application areas such as long-dista&l

26、t;/p><p>　　2.1.1. Electricity. Electricity markets are the most common application domain for time-of-use pricing, which is commonly referred to as peak load pricing in this industry. Here, peak prices have the

27、 effect of both reducing total demand and shifting some demand to off-peak periods. Most of the research can be classified into three broad areas: 1 the welfare economics of time-of-use pricing, 2 models of price elastic

28、ity for electricity, and 3 methods for setting prices. Seminal papers on the welf</p><p>　　The literature on models of price elasticity for electricity is too extensive to discuss here. For a recent article,

29、 see Kamerschen and Porter 2004. These price elasticity models and estimates are widely used in pricing methods, where the emphasis is on setting prices during peak demand periods so as to attenuate demand and thereby re

30、duce capacity requirements. Crew et al. 1995 provide a historical perspective on optimization-based time-of-use pricing approaches, focusing on non-storable goods s</p><p>　　2.1.2. Transportation </p>

31、<p>　　Although peak pricing is not yet widespread in transportation systems, researchers have been espousing the welfare gains and social benefits for years, citing the need to consider factors such as congestion e

32、xternalities and environmental effects. See, e.g., an early paper by Vickrey 1963 and a more recent anthology edited by Button and Verhoef 1998. Wachs 2005 describes the current state of peak-load pricing on urban road n

33、etworks, noting that only recently has technology enabled such pricing m</p><p>　　More recent research on time-of-day pricing for toll roads, bridges, tunnels, etc., has begun to consider the impact of trave

34、ler choices. Generally, these models assume that the traveler has the objective of minimizing some function of delay and out-of-pocket costs, and the toll setter chooses prices to maximize social welfare. Examples of pap

35、ers in this stream of research include Arnott et al. 1990, Yan and Lam 1996, and Daganzo and Garcia 2000 </p><p>　　Two papers that treat models similar to ours are Brotcorne et al. 2000 and 2001. The authors

36、 address static problems in which the transport provider sets day-of-week but not speed-of-service prices and the customer chooses how much to ship on each day to satisfy some aggregate requirement over the horizon. An i

37、mportant simplifying assumption in these models is that the PDC has infinite capacity to handle each of the customer’s shipping options </p><p>　　2.1.3. Computer Network and Telecommunication Services. Compu

38、ter network and Internet services represent another important application arena for peak-load pricing because of the very high amplitude of peaks that cause “busy signals” and slow transmission. At this writing, time-of-

39、use pricing is rarely used, and many vendors promote flat rate, rather than usage-based, pricing. Researchers have modeled and demonstrated the benefits of pricing based both on usage alone and on usage in combination w&

40、lt;/p><p>　　Interestingly, telecommunications service providers have long used time-of-day and day-of-week pricing, but as telecommunications capacity expands and competition becomes fiercer, vendors are offeri

41、ng more flat-rate, unlimited-use packages. These patterns are consistent with observations by Odlyzko 2001 who reports that for various communication technologies from regular mail to the Internet, as the technology matu

42、res, quality improves, prices fall, and pricing plans become simpler. </p><p>　　2.1.4. Time-of-Service Pricing in Other Industries. </p><p>　　Increasingly more sophisticated time-of-service pric

43、ing? often called “revenue management” in recent years? has been adopted in industries in which many customers make purchases or reservations in advance. Gerstner 1986 examines peak-load pricing for private enterprises s

44、uch as airlines, hotels, and restaurants. These scenarios differ from most of those above because of the need to consider competition, either directly or indirectly. For surveys, see Weatherford and Bodily 1992, Bitran a

45、nd Calde</p><p><b>　　譯文</b></p><p>　　帕雷托改進式包裹遞送服務(wù)合同</p><p>　　資料來源: 加利福尼亞大學(xué) 作者:亞歷山德拉.紐曼</p><p>　　摘要: 我們要解決快遞公司在建立長期客戶合約上的問題,該合約的條款可能包括因日-周和速度-服務(wù)而不同的定價?？爝f公

46、司傳統(tǒng)上為客戶提供速度-服務(wù)價格,而沒有日-周的區(qū)別,這導(dǎo)致了客戶要求日?周的季節(jié)性差價?？爝f公司希望在合同中運用日-周和速度-服務(wù)定價差異,客戶會促使他們的客戶調(diào)節(jié)他們的需求以能夠?qū)霞s外的需求進行反向循環(huán)。盡管這通常不能夠僅通過定價來實現(xiàn),但是我們設(shè)計了一種方法,利用日?周和速度?服務(wù)的定價方式作為帕累托改進合同的一個要素。該合同為快遞公司提供代價最低的安排,而能保證客戶至少能夠得到其在現(xiàn)有定價結(jié)構(gòu)下的好處。該合同的定價方式滿足了快

47、遞公司的需求,也降低了運輸能力的最高要求。后者能夠幫助降低資本話費,這可能會使客戶的價格也相應(yīng)降低。我們將定價問題作為兩面都是最優(yōu)化的模型進行系統(tǒng)闡述,并且也展示設(shè)計合同的方法,以及能夠說明可實現(xiàn)節(jié)余的無數(shù)個例子。 </p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞:運輸合同;合同定價;速度-服務(wù)定價; 實時定價;日-周定價 </p><p><b>　　引言 </b></p>

48、<p>　　大多數(shù)快遞公司對加快的郵件要求額外補貼,但是實際上按周算的天數(shù)的定價是有限的。缺少了這種類型的定價差異,船運總量顯示出了強烈的日-周形式,尤其在快遞市場上。雖然各種基礎(chǔ)運輸車輛的日程可以根據(jù)日-周的季節(jié)性差異進行調(diào)節(jié),但是快遞公司嚴重依賴于飛機,因為要求裝貨容量很好地達到需求是不可能的。結(jié)果,額外的裝貨容量在日-周和路徑上有所有不同。當(dāng)與可能是高額合同的客戶談判時,為客戶提供減緩包裹反向循環(huán)的動機在整個需求模式

49、中是有利的。這樣的反向循環(huán)減緩模式將會在兩方面提高快遞公司的利潤。第一,使用額外容量能產(chǎn)生收益,因為增加的運作費用非常少。第二,運用整個需求模式,額外的運輸能力要求(通常由商務(wù)運輸公司提供溢價)被最大化,快遞公司能夠為所有客戶提供更可靠的服務(wù),因為降低了的最高負荷給小型貨車,運輸和資源分類帶來的壓力更小。由于使用反向循環(huán)需求模式服務(wù)合同客戶的增量成本可能較少,快遞公司可能會把對客戶的平均價格降低而將這種節(jié)余傳遞下去。 </p>

50、;<p>　　我們的研究是由一家快遞公司所激發(fā)的,該快遞公司希望能夠僅僅通過日-周和速度?服務(wù)定價來促使合同客戶能按期望的方式行事。我們接下來將更詳細地解釋,這通常是不可能的。由于這個原因,我們尋求一個能夠建立合同的方法,而這個合同可能將包括日-周和速度-服務(wù)作為一個要素,能夠為快遞公司實現(xiàn)最高利潤總量,也保證客戶至少能得到在現(xiàn)有合同或者任意可參照的定價結(jié)構(gòu)一樣的好處。 </p><p>　　我們假

51、定快遞公司正在與一重要客戶進行一次談判來審視這個問題。通過更復(fù)雜的合同定價安排來提高快遞公司利潤的最有效機會發(fā)生在這種情況下??幾個客戶享有同樣的飛機路徑和相似的日?周季節(jié)性差價。由于以周計算的采購周期,這種現(xiàn)象頻有發(fā)生。例如,汽車裝配廠要求在周一上午運輸許多配件來供應(yīng)一周的裝配線。(雖然這可能不是最佳的,典型的物資要求計劃系統(tǒng)在周日程上運作,采購過程跟隨其上。)在周邊地區(qū)提供配件的部件供應(yīng)商就會在同一天發(fā)貨,然而這通常出現(xiàn)一個問題,就

52、是每次只能同他們中的一個協(xié)商。當(dāng)與一位客戶談判時,快遞公司可以考慮與其他客戶在之后的談判只可能出現(xiàn)的結(jié)果,但是這顯然很難,因為這其中的不確定性。在我們方法中,各種有問題的數(shù)據(jù)能夠被說明來解釋快遞公司希望考慮的容量可用性概況(包括非合同客戶和其他合同客戶)。 </p><p>　　在本論文中,我們主要討論來自于單一寄件人(通常是制造商)的同種快件的流動,這種流動為單一的收件人(使用制造產(chǎn)品的下一方)提供供應(yīng)商管理庫

53、存服務(wù)。在結(jié)論部分,我們將解釋我們的方法如何能夠運用于多種包裹類型。由于供應(yīng)管理庫存,寄件人擁有貨品,因此這帶來了存貨持有成本,直到收件人使用這些貨品。我們強調(diào)我們的方法是為這樣的情況設(shè)計的?客戶對包裹運輸?shù)臅r間有極大的掌控,而這通常會給產(chǎn)品日程帶來變化,因此我們的發(fā)貨可能不適用于網(wǎng)絡(luò)零售商,他們期望能盡快送達快遞,這通常是由最終收件人所選擇的服務(wù)速度或者服務(wù)模式。 </p><p>　　本論文的余下部分組織如下

54、:接下來的一部分包括對文獻的綜述。接著是對快遞公司和客戶決策問題的正規(guī)敘述。第四部分,我們將對在僅定價合同下的快遞公司和客戶問題進行闡述,并討論這種合同在具體問題下的缺點,我們的討論將為解決策略提供依據(jù)。第五部分,我們將說明建立帕累托改進合同方法的詳細內(nèi)容。第六部分用大量的例子來說明我們提出的方法及其優(yōu)點。第七部分以對我們方法的范圍和歸納的討論結(jié)束本論文。 </p><p><b>　　2.文獻綜述 &

55、lt;/b></p><p>　　在這一部分,我們在時間?服務(wù)定價和速度?服務(wù)及優(yōu)先定價上提供不同文獻的綜述。有一點很重要,從我們所有的知識來看,關(guān)于這兩項都有的研究非常少。我們首先討論時間?服務(wù)定價,強調(diào)的是電力,收費公路,計算機和電信網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù),這些是最普遍的應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域。本部分接下來我們將討論速度?服務(wù)及優(yōu)先定價的文獻,可能應(yīng)用并不明確。為了簡潔,我們的引用是有限的。我們的目的是為讀者提供關(guān)于被探索的問題的

56、大概感知。 </p><p>　　2.1 時間-服務(wù)定價 </p><p>　　維克利(1971)為被他稱為“響應(yīng)定價”的利益提供了非常清晰的定性討論,即,定價根據(jù)系統(tǒng)的狀態(tài)而不同。響應(yīng)定價包括一些概念,如基于即時(實時)擁塞的動態(tài)定價,基于預(yù)測(非實時)需求或者即時模式的時間?服務(wù),以及旨在當(dāng)天收入管理的定價策略。維克利(1971)提到應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域,如遠距離電話服務(wù),機票預(yù)訂和水電輸送??同

57、樣的應(yīng)用類型促使了當(dāng)今的研究。 </p><p>　　2.1.1. 電力。 </p><p>　　電力市場是實時計費定價最普遍的應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域,電力市場在這個行業(yè)中通常被認為是旺季定價。此處的旺季價格有降低需求總量和轉(zhuǎn)移一些需求至非旺季時期的兩個作用。大部分研究可以被劃分為3大領(lǐng)域:(1)實時計費定價的福利經(jīng)濟,(2)電力的價格彈性模式,(3)定價方法。關(guān)于旺季定價的福利金的創(chuàng)新論文包括布瓦特(

58、1960)和威廉森(1966)。雖然很多討論都是關(guān)于高峰負荷和非高峰負荷,但是潘薩爾(1976)認為足量成本不僅僅依賴于高峰負荷,而且依賴于非高峰期間的負荷。?？藸?1987)討論了關(guān)于基于需求類別的定價問題(如工業(yè),商業(yè)和住房消費者)。 </p><p>　　關(guān)于電力價格彈性模型的文獻太廣泛,這里就不做討論。可參照卡默遜和波特(2004)近期的一篇文章。這些價格彈性模型和估算在定價方法中廣泛運用,重點是在高峰需

59、求期間的定價,以減弱需求進而降低總量要求?？唆?shù)?1995)為基于最優(yōu)化的實時定價方法提供了歷史性角度,主要研究電力等不可儲存的商品。伯倫斯坦(2005)強調(diào)設(shè)計價格實施方案的幾個重要問題,以利用公司,包括:(1)價格變化的頻率,(2)制定和實現(xiàn)價格之間需要多久。最極端,但卻最有效的價格實施方案是實時定價。伯倫斯坦描述了不同實時定價的實施,以及每一種的暗藏含義。他指出技術(shù)在實時定價的有效性中起著關(guān)鍵的作用。 </p>&l

60、t;p>　　2.1.2. 運輸。 </p><p>　　盡管高峰定價在運輸系統(tǒng)中并不廣泛,但研究者們多年來支持福利所得和社會公益,引用了考慮諸如擁塞外部成本和環(huán)境影響等事實的需要。例如,維克利(1963)早起的一篇論文和由伯頓和沃霍夫(1998)進來編輯的文選。瓦克斯(2005)將現(xiàn)今城市公路網(wǎng)絡(luò)下的旺季定價狀況進行了描述,注意到只有進來技術(shù)才促進了這些定價方法。 </p><p>

61、　　更多的最近的關(guān)于研究對收費公路,橋梁,隧道等的當(dāng)日時間定價的研究,已經(jīng)開始考慮旅行者的選擇帶來的影響。一般來說,這些模型認為旅行者有著最小化延遲和花費的目標(biāo),而通行費制定者選擇能夠最大化社會福利的價格。這方面的研究的例子包括阿諾特等(1990),楊和蘭姆(1996),以及達甘索和加西亞(2000)。 </p><p>　　兩篇關(guān)于與我們的類似的模型的論文屬于伯羅特克納等(2000和2001)。作者們解決靜態(tài)問

62、題,這些問題中,運輸供應(yīng)商指定周?日(而非速度?服務(wù))價格,客戶可選擇每天裝運多少來滿足即將出現(xiàn)的總計要求。在這些模型中的一個重要簡單假設(shè)就是快遞公司有這掌控客戶貨運選擇的無限能力。 </p><p>　　2.1.3. 計算機網(wǎng)絡(luò)和電信服務(wù)。由于引起“忙碌信號”的高度充足的高峰和緩慢傳輸,計算機網(wǎng)絡(luò)和因特網(wǎng)服務(wù)展示了旺季定價的另一個重要的應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域。本論文中,實時定價很少用到,許多供貨商要求統(tǒng)一收費,而不是基于流量

63、的定價方式。研究者們已模仿和說明了在計算機網(wǎng)絡(luò)中僅僅基于流量和基于擁塞外部成本的定價的好處。關(guān)于計算機網(wǎng)絡(luò)和因特網(wǎng)服務(wù),帕斯哈利季斯和斯斯克里斯(2000)提出單單就實時定價而言,沒有即使擁塞的調(diào)節(jié),可能已足夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)收入和福利最大化的良好結(jié)果。在他們的模型中,客戶根據(jù)平均每個“電話”的辦理時間被分類,并且每個客戶都付不同的費用。在具體的通訊頻寬定價中,奧爾特曼和朱(2001)提出將覆蓋頻寬基本水平花費的統(tǒng)一收費和對高水平頻寬的立即響應(yīng)的基

64、于流量的費用相結(jié)合。 </p><p>　　有趣的是,電信服務(wù)提供商長期以來使用當(dāng)日時間和日?周定價方式,然而隨著通信能力的提升和競爭的日益節(jié)烈,供貨商們提供統(tǒng)一收費,無限制使用包裹。這些模式與奧德林克(2001)的研究一致,奧德林克報告稱關(guān)于通訊技術(shù),隨著技術(shù)的成熟,質(zhì)量的提高,價格的降低和定價方案的簡單化,技術(shù)已從尋常郵件轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榈揭蛱鼐W(wǎng)。 </p><p>　　2.1.4. 其他行業(yè)中

65、的服務(wù)時限定價 </p><p>　　越來越多復(fù)雜的服務(wù)時限定價??近年來通常被稱為“進項管理”---已經(jīng)在許多客戶提前購買或者預(yù)定的行業(yè)中被采用。格斯特納(1986)研究了私有企業(yè)的旺季定價,如飛機,賓館,以及飯店。這些方案與上述大多數(shù)都不同,因為要考慮到競爭,要么直接,要么不直接。關(guān)于研究,可參考韋瑟福德和波地利(1992),比特蘭和卡爾登泰(2003),以及塔盧里和范里津（2004）。</p>