Antecedents and mechanisms of enterprises' willingness to participate in government-led emergency logistics collaboration

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.12.0185

Abstract

Abstract:

This study examines antecedents and underlying mechanisms shaping enterprises' willingness to participate in government-led emergency logistics collaboration. A questionnaire of transportation enterprises in Wuhan was conducted to assess their participation willingness. Drawing on TPB and CSR Pyramid theory, a theoretical model was developed to represent the formation mechanisms of enterprise participation willingness and empirically tested using Logit regression analysis. Results show that the government's multi-party coordination and scheduling capabilities and safety assurance capabilities have significant positive effects on enterprise participation willingness, while the compensation mechanism has a marginally significant effect. Two improvement pathways are proposed: strengthening perceived facilitating factors to reinforce enterprises' trust and confidence, and optimizing enterprises' expectations of long-term positive returns to enhance their recognition of social impact.

Key words: emergency logistics, government-enterprise collaboration, enterprise participation willingness, theory of planned behavior (TPB), corporate social responsibility (CSR), logit regression analysis

CLC Number:

X922.28部门管理机构

WANG Yi, LI Ying, CHEN Yan, GU Yong. Antecedents and mechanisms of enterprises' willingness to participate in government-led emergency logistics collaboration[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(12): 246-253.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Fig.4

Table 6

References 17

[1]	CHEN Heng, LIN Xianglong, GUO Yuan, et al. The impact of regional emergency logistics response capacity on sustainable economic growth in China[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-78484-2.
[2]	戢晓峰, 杨春丽, 郝京京, 等. 国内外应急物流研究热点对比与展望[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(12): 144-152. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.12.019
	JI Xiaofeng, YANG Chunli, HAO Jingjing, et al. Research prospects and hotspot comparison for emergency logistics in China and foreign countries[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(12): 144-152. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.12.019
[3]	董欣静, 蔡劲松. 事故灾难应急协同网络的结构特征及优化策略研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(10): 229-237. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.10.0260
	DONG Xinjing, CAI Jinsong. Research on structural characteristics and optimization strategy of accident and disaster emergency coordination network[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(10): 229-237. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.10.0260
[4]	邵舒羽, 刘艳, 王晴, 等. 非常规突发事件下应急物资储备政企协同演化博弈[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(4): 210-220. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.04.0952
	SHAO Shuyu, LIU Yan, WANG Qing, et al. Government-enterprise cooperative evolutionary game of emergency material reserve under unconventional emergency events[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(4): 210-220. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.04.0952
[5]	DIEHLMANN F, LUTTENBERG M, VERDONCK L, et al. Public-private collaborations in emergency logistics: a framework based on logistical and game-theoretical concepts[J]. Safety Science, 2021, 141(9): DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105301.
[6]	ARNSTEIN S R. A ladder of citizen participation[J]. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1969, 35(4): 216-224. doi: 10.1080/01944366908977225
[7]	新华社. 因在飓风期间哄抬物价美国3家企业被起诉[EB/OL]. (2017-09-13). https://news.haiwainet.cn/n/2017/0913/c3541083-31114098.html.
[8]	KUANG Yunming, LIN Boqiang. Public participation and city sustainability: evidence from urban garbage classification in China[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2021, 67(4): DOI:10.1016/j.scs.2021.102741.
[9]	CHEN Fei, DA Qingli, DENG Yulin. Realization of corporate social responsibility in natural disasters emergency management[C]. Proceedings of the 2012 Fifth International Conference on Business Intelligence and Financial Engineering (BIFE 2012), 2012: 247-251.
[10]	AJZEN I. The theory of planned behavior[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991, 50(2): 179-211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
[11]	FU Bitian, KURISU K, HANAKI K, et al. Influential factors of public intention to improve the air quality in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 209(1): 595-607. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.192
[12]	LI Dai, QI Han, BAUKE DE V, et al. Exploring key determinants of willingness to participate in EIA decision-making on urban infrastructure projects[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2022, 34(2): 769-789.
[13]	CARROLL A B. Corporate social responsibility[J]. Business & Society, 1999, 38(3): 268-295.
[14]	刘清, 李亦涵, 王磊. 城市多方协同应急物流分级体系建设思考[J]. 物流技术, 2024, 43(8): 141-150.
	LIU Qing, LI Yihan, WANG Lei. Thoughts on construction of a hierarchical municipal emergency logistics system based on multi-party collaboration[J]. Logistics Technology, 2024, 43(8): 141-150.
[15]	王静, 邹静静, 汪勇. 考虑转运的应急物资两阶段优化调度[J/OL]. 计算机技术与发展: 1-9[2024-12-06]. https://doi.org/10.20165/j.cnki.ISSN1673-629X.2024.0365.
	WANG Jing, ZOU Jingjing, WANG Yong. Optimized two-phase emergency material scheduling considering transfer[J/OL]. Computer Technology and Development: 1-9[2024-12-06]. https://doi.org/10.20165/j.cnki.ISSN1673-629X.2024.0365.
[16]	ADSANVER B, BALCIK B, BELANGER V, et al. Operations research approaches for improving coordination, cooperation, and collaboration in humanitarian relief chains: a framework and literature review[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2024, 319(2): 384-398. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2023.11.031
[17]	国家统计局. 统计上大中小微型企业划分办法(2017)[EB/OL]. (2017-12-28). https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/tjbz/gjtjbz/202302/t20230213_1902763.html.

变量名称	变量类别	企业数量	占比/ %
企业类型	国有(独资、控股、参股)企业(公司)	16	25.00
	集体企业	0	0.00
	私营企业	47	73.44
	港、澳、台商投资企业	1	1.56
	外商投资企业	0	0.00
企业规模	大型	5	7.81
	中型	18	28.12
	小型	31	48.44
	微型	10	15.62
企业提供的运输方式	公路	62	96.88
	水路	5	7.81
	航空	1	1.56
	铁路	5	7.81
是否进入武汉市应急物流保障运力清单	是	21	32.81
是否进入武汉市应急物流保障运力清单	否	43	67.19
是否了解武汉市应急物流保障运力清单评估标准	是	22	34.38
是否了解武汉市应急物流保障运力清单评估标准	否	42	65.62
是否有应对突发事件的经验	是	49	76.56
是否有应对突发事件的经验	否	15	23.44
是否定期组织员工进行应急物流相关培训	是	48	75.00
是否定期组织员工进行应急物流相关培训	否	16	25.00
培训周期	1个月	30	55.56
	1个季度	13	24.07
	半年	5	9.26
	1年	5	9.26
	其他(≥2次/月)	1	1.85
企业拥有的应对突发事件经验的丰富程度	0	15	23.43
	1	0	0.00
	2	8	12.50
	3	10	15.63
	4	19	29.69
	5	12	18.75
是否参与过应急流政企协同行动	是	40	62.50
是否参与过应急流政企协同行动	否	24	37.50
参与的应急物流政企协同行动类型	严重自然灾害 (如洪水、地震)	7	12.73
	事故灾害(如交通事故、火灾)	11	20.00
	公共卫生事件 (如传染病暴发)	41	74.55
	社会安全事件 (如恐怖袭击、重大社会安全事件)	2	3.64
	其他	7	12.73
政府提供的安全辅助设备类型	口罩、防护服	41	74.55
	卫星电话	1	1.82
	无人机	1	1.82
	其他	14	25.45
愿意参与政府主导的应急物流政企协同行动	是	56	87.50
愿意参与政府主导的应急物流政企协同行动	否	8	12.50

是否愿意参与应急物流政企协同行动	不愿意	愿意	总计
国有(独资、控股、参股)企业(公司)	1(6.25%)	15(93.75%)	16
私营企业	7(14.89%)	40(85.11%)	47
港、澳、台商投资企业	0	1(100.00%)	1

因子类别	因子名称	测量题项	因子载荷	Cronb- ach's α
潜在因子	协调调度	协同机制的健全性	0.979	0.758 9
	协调调度	任务安排合理性	0.720	0.758 9
	安全保障	信息同步的及时性	0.935	0.918 0
	安全保障	资源保障的充足性	0.762	0.918 0
	短期经济收益	先进技术应用水平	0.992	0.771 2
	短期经济收益	应急协同行动的成本不可控性	0.974
		政府补偿机制	0.658
未归属因子	企业对协同行动对自身运营产生不利影响的感知	应急物流政企协同行动对企业自身运营产生的不利影响	—	—

变量		均值	标准差	性质	说明
控制变量	企业类型	—	—	分类	国有(独资、控股、参股)企业(公司)1,集体企业2,私营企业3,港、澳、台商投资企业4,外商投资企业5
	企业应对突发事件经验的丰富程度	2.72	1.82	连续	无经验0,不丰富1,非常丰富5
	企业规模	2.72	0.83	连续	大型1,中型2,小型3,微型4
解释变量	政府的多方协调调度能力	4.92	1.25	连续	影响程度极低1,影响程度极高6
	政府的安全保障能力	4.72	1.11	连续	影响程度极低1,影响程度极高6
	政府的补偿机制	4.11	1.55	连续	影响程度极低1,影响程度极高6
	企业对协同行动对自身运营产生不利影响的感知	2.17	1.54	连续	影响程度极低1,影响程度极高6
被解释变量	是否愿意参与政府主导的应急物流政企协同行动	—	—	分类	是1,否0

变量		被解释变量
		参与意愿
		回归系数	p值
控制变量	企业类型(参照国有 (独资、控股、参股) 企业(公司)	—	—
	私营企业	-2.690 433	0.575
	企业应对突发事件经验的丰富程度	1.769 434	0.122
	企业规模	1.203 679	0.287
解释变量	政府的多方协调调度能力	3.254 512^*	0.037
	政府的安全保障能力	3.653 999^*	0.049 9
	政府的补偿机制	1.226 701	0.102
	企业对协同行动对自身运营产生不利影响的感知	-0.265 025	0.628
常数项		-33.587 701	0.088 6
样本数		64
模型拟合指标	对数似然值	Log likelihood = -6.787 844 4
	似然比卡方统计量	LR chi²=34.65
	伪决定系数	Pseudo R² =0.718 5