Governments all over the world adopted different forms of progressive carbon taxation strategies (for example concave, convex and linear for respectively Swedish, French, and Canadian government). These progressive strategies provide companies with different degrees of flexibility to adapt their decisions to the new environmental regulations and reduce their carbon emissions without compromising their profit. However, no existing work has compared the impact of each progressive legislation on the optimal decisions of the supply chain, its profit, and its environmental performances. In this paper, we contribute to the literature by developing four multi-period technology selection models under different forms of progressive carbon taxes. We analytically determine the optimal strategic investment timing decision under each taxation strategy. We then develop a carbon tax assessment method using multi-criteria analysis techniques to compare the efficiency of each carbon taxation form in reducing carbon emission and maximising the Supply Chain (SC) profit. We prove that the earliest green investment decision and the decision of not investing in green depend on the target carbon tax rather than the taxation form. We show that government decision about the suitable taxation form should be based on the performance of the available green technologies.

世界各国政府采用了不同形式的累进碳税战略（例如瑞典、法国和加拿大政府分别采用凹、凸和线性）。这些先进的战略为公司提供了不同程度的灵活性，使他们的决策适应新的环境法规，并在不影响利润的情况下减少碳排放。然而，现有的工作没有比较每项进步立法对供应链的最佳决策、利润和环境绩效的影响。在本文中，我们通过在不同形式的累进碳税下开发四种多时期技术选择模型来为文献做出贡献。我们通过分析确定每种税收策略下的最佳战略投资时机决策。然后，我们使用多标准分析技术开发了一种碳税评估方法，以比较每种碳税形式在减少碳排放和最大化供应链 (SC) 利润方面的效率。我们证明了最早的绿色投资决策和不投资绿色的决策取决于目标碳税而不是税收形式。我们表明，政府关于合适的税收形式的决定应该基于可用绿色技术的表现。我们证明了最早的绿色投资决策和不投资绿色的决策取决于目标碳税而不是税收形式。我们表明，政府关于合适的税收形式的决定应该基于可用绿色技术的表现。我们证明了最早的绿色投资决策和不投资绿色的决策取决于目标碳税而不是税收形式。我们表明，政府关于合适的税收形式的决定应该基于可用绿色技术的表现。