IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i18p13938-d1243511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on E-Commerce Platforms’ Return Policies Considering Consumers Abusing Return Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Huixin Liu

    (School of Management, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Feng Du

    (School of Management, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

Abstract

Currently, major e-commerce platforms are competing to improve their return services, while merchants are suffering from consumers abusing return policies. We developed a dual oligopoly model consisting of two e-commerce platforms, one offering a lenient return policy and the other enforcing a stringent one, to investigate the effectiveness of lenient return policies in the presence of opportunistic consumers. We examine the impact of the proportion of opportunistic consumers, cross-network effects, gains from dishonest returns, and penalties on the scale of users and profits for both platforms. The findings indicate that: (1) As the proportion of opportunistic consumers increases, multi-homing merchants tend to be single-homing on a platform with a stringent return policy. This reduces the number of consumers on a platform with a lenient return policy and lowers the platform’s profit. Moreover, increased gains from dishonest returns worsen the situation. (2) Network effects on merchants from the consumer side significantly affect the effectiveness of lenient return policies. (3) Enforcement of penalties for dishonest returns could prevent an exodus of consumers and merchants from platforms that offer lenient return policies. However, it does not raise profits. In other words, its impact on the success of lenient return policies is limited.

Suggested Citation

  • Huixin Liu & Feng Du, 2023. "Research on E-Commerce Platforms’ Return Policies Considering Consumers Abusing Return Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-19, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:18:p:13938-:d:1243511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/18/13938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/18/13938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yannis Bakos & Hanna Halaburda, 2020. "Platform Competition with Multihoming on Both Sides: Subsidize or Not?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5599-5607, December.
    2. Sui, Ronghua & Zhang, Xumei & Dan, Bin & Zhang, Haiyue & Liu, Yi, 2023. "Bilateral value-added service investment in platform competition with cross-side network effects under multihoming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(3), pages 952-963.
    3. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    4. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    5. Belleflamme, Paul & Peitz, Martin, 2019. "Platform competition: Who benefits from multihoming?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-26.
    6. Yifan Dou & D. J. Wu, 2021. "Platform Competition Under Network Effects: Piggybacking and Optimal Subsidization," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 820-835, September.
    7. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. "Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    8. Guangzhi Shang & Bikram P. Ghosh & Michael R. Galbreth, 2017. "Optimal Retail Return Policies with Wardrobing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(7), pages 1315-1332, July.
    9. Jung Mee Mun & Hae Won Ju & Kim K.P. Johnson, 2014. "Young consumers and retail borrowing: application of the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 60-73, January.
    10. Xuanming Su, 2009. "Consumer Returns Policies and Supply Chain Performance," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 595-612, March.
    11. Chen, Jing & Grewal, Ravneet, 2013. "Competing in a supply chain via full-refund and no-refund customer returns policies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 246-258.
    12. Rasch, Alexander & Wenzel, Tobias, 2013. "Piracy in a two-sided software market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 78-89.
    13. Amit Basu & Sreekumar Bhaskaran & Rajiv Mukherjee, 2019. "An Analysis of Search and Authentication Strategies for Online Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2412-2431, May.
    14. Andrei Hagiu, 2006. "Pricing and Commitment by Two-Sided Platforms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 720-737, Autumn.
    15. Chokri Aloui & Khaïreddine Jebsi, 2010. "Optimal pricing of a two-sided monopoly platform with a one-sided congestion effect," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 57(4), pages 423-439, December.
    16. Marc Rysman, 2004. "Competition Between Networks: A Study of the Market for Yellow Pages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(2), pages 483-512.
    17. Chen, Jing & Bell, Peter C., 2012. "Implementing market segmentation using full-refund and no-refund customer returns policies in a dual-channel supply chain structure," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 56-66.
    18. Andrei Hagiu, 2006. "Pricing and commitment by two‐sided platforms," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 720-737, September.
    19. Chen, Jing & Yu, Bo & Chen, Bintong & Liu, Zhuojun, 2023. "Lenient vs. stringent returns policies in the presence of fraudulent returns: The role of customers’ fairness perceptions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    20. Harris, Lloyd C., 2008. "Fraudulent Return Proclivity: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 84(4), pages 461-476.
    21. Mehmet Sekip Altug & Tolga Aydinliyim & Aditya Jain, 2021. "Managing Opportunistic Consumer Returns in Retail Operations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5660-5678, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Sui, Ronghua & Zhang, Xumei & Dan, Bin & Zhang, Haiyue & Liu, Yi, 2023. "Bilateral value-added service investment in platform competition with cross-side network effects under multihoming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(3), pages 952-963.
    3. Jan Frederic Nerbel & Markus Kreutzer, 2023. "Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Carrillo, Juan D. & Tan, Guofu, 2021. "Platform competition with complementary products," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. Belleflamme, Paul & Peitz, Martin & Toulemonde, Eric, 2022. "The tension between market shares and profit under platform competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Wang, Jin, 2021. "Do birds of a feather flock together? Platform’s quality screening and end-users’ choices theory and empirical study of online trading platforms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Yiyi Zhou, 2017. "Bayesian Estimation of a Dynamic Model of Two-Sided Markets: Application to the U.S. Video Game Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3874-3894, November.
    8. Saruta, Fuyuki, 2021. "Exclusive contracts and multihoming agents in two-sided markets," MPRA Paper 110070, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Tang, Hua & Chen, Jing & Ai, Xingzheng & Li, Xiaojing & He, Haojia, 2023. "First-party content decision under competitive hardware/software platforms: Free vs. charge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 1068-1083.
    10. Przemyslaw Rys & Maciej Sobolewski, 2020. "Two-sided platforms: dynamic pricing and multiple equilibria," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2020-14, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Galeotti, Andrea & Moraga-González, José Luis, 2009. "Platform intermediation in a market for differentiated products," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 417-428, May.
    12. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Jullien, Bruno & Klimenko, Mikhail, 2021. "Language, internet and platform competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Jingtao Yi & Jinqiu He & Lihong Yang, 2019. "Platform heterogeneity, platform governance and complementors’ product performance: an empirical study of the mobile application industry," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Anil K. Jain & Robert M. Townsend, 2021. "The economics of platforms in a Walrasian framework," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(3), pages 877-924, April.
    15. Jiri Chod & Nikolaos Trichakis & S. Alex Yang, 2022. "Platform Tokenization: Financing, Governance, and Moral Hazard," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6411-6433, September.
    16. Liu, He & Li, Xuerong & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of platform research: Developing the research agenda for platforms, the associated technologies and social impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    17. Yingxiu Zhao & Sitong Zhou, 2023. "The Impact of Two-Sided Market Platforms on Participants’ Trading Strategies: An Evolutionary Game Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    18. Frank Stähler & Leander Stähler, 2022. "Copyright Protection in the Digital Single Market," CESifo Working Paper Series 9597, CESifo.
    19. Adachi, Takanori & Tremblay, Mark J., 2020. "Business-to-business bargaining in two-sided markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    20. Frank Stähler & Leander Stähler, 2022. "Copyright Protection in the Digital Single Market: Potential Consequences for Content Platform Competition," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 61(1), pages 73-94, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:18:p:13938-:d:1243511. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.