本研究旨在探討第三方認證在不同市場競爭模式下對企業社會責任（CSR）水平的影響，以及其在極大化社會福利時的策略。研究結果表明，在 Cournot 競爭中，第三方認證將 CSR 水平設定為極大化社會福利時的水平，並在市場均衡時兩家廠商都願意進行認證。然而，在 Bertrand 競爭中，隨著市場競爭的加劇，第三方認證若想要設定極大化社會福利時的 CSR 水平，可能會面臨廠商不願承擔額外成本而不實施 CSR 的情況。因此，在這種情境下，第三方認證需要妥協，要求廠商採取較低水平的 CSR。在 Stackelberg 競爭中，第三方認證會將 CSR 水平設定在極大化社會福利時的水平，並鼓勵領導者和跟隨者都採取認證，以促進整體社會福利極大化。

這些研究結果強調了第三方認證在不同競爭模式下的策略差異，以及其在追求社會福利極大化時面臨的挑戰。第三方認證機構在實踐中應考慮各種競爭環境下的因素，以制定適應性的 CSR 標準，既要鼓勵企業採取負責任的行為，又要兼顧企業的競爭力和永續性發展。這些研究結果為 CSR 認證的管理提供了有價值的見解，並為推動企業和社會的永續性發展做出貢獻。

[1] Akenji, L. (2014). Consumer scapegoatism and limits to green consumerism. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.05.022

[2] Bagnoli, M., & Watts, S. G. (2003). Selling to socially responsible consumers: Competition and the private provision of public goods. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 12(3), 419–445.

[3] Brécard, D. (2017). Consumer misperception of eco-labels, green market structure and welfare. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 51, 340–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-017-9328-8

[4] Delmas, M. A., & Gergaud, O. (2021). Sustainable practices and product quality: Is there value in eco-label certification? The case of wine. Ecological Economics, 183, 106953.

[5] Fischer, C., & Lyon, T. P. (2014). Competing environmental labels. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 23, 692–716.

[6] Gosselt, J. F., van Rompay, T., & Haske, L. (2019). Won’t Get Fooled Again: The Effects of Internal and External CSR ECO-Labeling. Journal of Business Ethics, 155, 413–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3512-8

[7] Hamilton, S. F., & Zilberman, D. (2006). Green Markets, Eco-Certification, and Equilibrium Fraud. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 52, 627–644.

[8] Horner, R. E. (2009). Limits to labels: the role of eco‐labels in the assessment of product sustainability and routes to sustainable consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(2), 175–182.

[9] Kaul, A., & Luo, J. (2018). An Economic Case for CSR: The Comparative Efficiency of For-profit Firms in Meeting Consumer Demand for Social Goods. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 1650–1677.

[10] Kirchhoff, S. (2000). Green Business and Blue Angels. Environmental and Resource Economics, 15, 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008303614250

[11] Kurrer, C. (2022). Environment Policy: General Principles and Basic Framework. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/erpl-app-public/factsheets/pdf/en/FTU_2.5.1.pdf

[12] Lambertini, L., & Tampieri, A. (2015). Incentives, performance and desirability of socially responsible firms in a Cournot oligopoly. Economic Modelling, 50, 40–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.05.016

[13] Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006155

[14] Liu, C. C., Wang, L. F., & Lee, S. H. (2015). Strategic environmental corporate social responsibility in a differentiated duopoly market. Economics Letters, 129, 108– 111. https://doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.027

[15] Manasakis, C., Mitrokostas, E., & Petrakis, E. (2013). Certification of corporate social responsibility activities in oligopolistic markets. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne D'économique, 46(1), 282–309.

[16] Nik Abdul Rashid, N. R. (2009). Awareness of Eco-label in Malaysia’s Green Marketing Initiative. International Journal of Business and Management, 4, 132–141.

[17] Poret, S. (2019). Label wars: Competition among NGOs as sustainability standard setters. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 160, 1-18. ISSN 0167-2681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2019.02.015.

[18] Wei, S., Ang, T., & Jancenelle, V. E. (2018). Willingness to pay more for green products: The interplay of consumer characteristics and customer participation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 45, 230–238.

[19] Yenipazarli, A. (2015). The economics of eco-labeling: standards, costs and prices. International Journal of Production Economics, 170, 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.09.032