Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Identifying challengesin humanitarian logistics
Gyongyi KovacsDepartment of Marketing, HANKEN School of Economics,Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Research Institute,
Helsinki, Finland, and
Karen SpensDepartment of Marketing, HANKEN School of Economics, Helsinki, Finland
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify the challenges of humanitarian logisticians withrespect to different types of disasters, phases of disaster relief and the type of humanitarianorganization. A conceptual model is constructed that serves as a basis to identify these challenges.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on a country as a case, namely Ghana.Structured and unstructured data are collected in a workshop with humanitarian logisticians, andcomplemented with presentations of humanitarian logisticians, as they perceive their challenges.Disaster statistics and country profiles are used as secondary data.
Findings – The paper shows that some disasters defy a categorization between natural and man-madecauses. Challenges of humanitarian logisticians depend not only on the disaster at hand, but also on thelocal presence of their organization. The most emphasized challenge is the coordination of logisticalactivities. Challenges can be managed better if attributing them to different stakeholder environments.
Research limitations/implications – Applying stakeholder theory to logistics, this paperprovides a greater understanding for the challenges of humanitarian logisticians.
Practical implications – A stakeholder categorization of the challenges of humanitarian logisticianshelps to find potential collaboration partners as well as to mitigate these challenges.
Originality/value – Humanitarian logistics is a rather new field in logistics literature. What is more,there is a lack of empirical cases in the field. This paper proposes a conceptual model based on anactual empirical case.
Keywords Aid agencies, Distasters, Stakeholder analysis, Ghana
Paper type Research paper
1. IntroductionLogistics research and practice has been very much focused on its application in abusiness context. A different application area of logistics is in the context ofhumanitarian aid, which has been only recently embraced by research. Whilst therewere only a handful of articles on humanitarian logistics up till 2005 (as the two literaturereviews by Kovacs and Spens, 2007 and 2008 would indicate – though more can befound from an operations research perspective, Altay and Green, 2006). In these last twoyears, humanitarian logistics was included as special tracks of the INFORMS; POMS,LRN and NOFOMA conferences, and debated in many other platforms. This sameperiod also saw the formation of a number of research groups dedicated to the topic.
Based on a workshop with humanitarian organizations, Thomas and Mizushima(2005, p. 60) defined humanitarian logistics as “the process of planning, implementingand controlling the efficient, cost-effective flow and storage of goods and materials, as
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm
IJPDLM39,6
506
International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics ManagementVol. 39 No. 6, 2009pp. 506-528q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0960-0035DOI 10.1108/09600030910985848
well as related information, from point of origin to point of consumption for thepurpose of meeting the end beneficiary’s requirements”. Except for its focus on the endbeneficiary, this definition is largely comparable to any definition of business logistics.Balcik and Beamon (2008, p. 102) summarize crucial characteristics of humanitarianlogistics (as different from business logistics) to consist of the:
. unpredictability of demand, in terms of timing, location, type, and size;
. suddenness of the occurrence of demand in large amounts but with short leadtimes for a wide variety of supplies;
. high stakes associated with the timeliness of deliveries; and
. lack of resources in terms of supply, people, technology, transportation capacity,and money.
There are several reasons why humanitarian logistics is of interest to researchers.First, in its broader context, humanitarian supply chains have been argued to be mostagile (Oloruntoba and Gray, 2006). Thus, their core competence is to deal with differenttypes of disasters, they are very responsive when it comes to disruptions. Second,supply chain risk management literature includes the question of disruptions due tonatural disasters and terrorist attacks as well as operational disruptions (Norrman andJansson, 2004). Humanitarian supply chains are specialized in managing large-scalerisks, but also supply chains operating in a business context are more and moreinterested in their management, as a disaster anywhere on the globe can interruptsupplies or demolish markets (Wallace and Webber, 2004). What is more, humanitarianaid has a significant economic importance (Thomas and Fritz, 2006), and officialdevelopment assistance alone accounted for USI$ 103.7 billion in 2007[1] (OECD, 2008),not including private donors.
The global relevance of humanitarian supply chains is highlighted by the fact of allgovernments being involved in humanitarian aid as either donors or recipients, not tospeak of the number of commercial organizations involved in humanitarian supplychains as product suppliers and third party logistics providers (Kovacs and Spens,2007). Also, there is a myriad of humanitarian organizations that need to co-ordinatetheir efforts in every disaster. At the same time, the number of disasters is growing;with number of reported large-scale disasters having risen from 50 to over 400 yearlyin 30 years Emergency Events Database (Emergency Events Database – EM-DAT,2008). Interestingly, about 80 percent of costs related to humanitarian aid can beassigned to material plus delivery costs, and are therefore labeled “logistical costs”(van Wassenhove, 2006).
The very characteristics of humanitarian logistics, the unpredictability of demand,suddenness of its occurrence, the high stakes associated with the timeliness ofdeliveries, and a lack of resources (Balcik and Beamon, 2008) are also indicative of thechallenges faced by humanitarian logisticians. What is more, the actual challengesfaced in a disaster depend on the type of the disaster as well as the region the disasteroccurs in. The purpose of this paper is therefore to identify the challenges ofhumanitarian logisticians with respect to different types of disasters, phases of disasterrelief, and types of humanitarian organizations. Based on a study of humanitarianorganizations in Ghana, a conceptual model is constructed that serves as a basis toidentify such challenges.
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
507
The paper is structured as follows: it commences with a discussions of disastercategorizations, phases of disaster relief, and types of humanitarian organizations.Particular attention is paid to the regional context of disaster relief, that is, regionaldisaster profiles as well as pre-existing infrastructure that assists to prepare fordisasters. Next, the design of the study is introduced before turning to its findings, andthe presentation of the conceptual model to identify challenges of humanitarianlogisticians. The paper ends with suggestions for further research.
2. Humanitarian logistics literatureHumanitarian logistics deals with disasters which range from earthquakes, tsunamis,hurricanes, epidemics, droughts, famines, terrorist attacks, and war situations to acombination of several disasters which may occur simultaneously. Ludema (2000)categorizes humanitarian relief operations into emergency relief as immediate responseto a disaster, elementary or subsistence relief, rehabilitation relief to restore everydaylife, and development relief aimed to improve a system. Yet this differentiation isunclear as to the causes of disasters and the timing of humanitarian assistance. Thecauses, effects and scale of disasters vary largely; so do the organizations that areinvolved in mitigating them and/or in delivering aid – as well as the challenges theypose for humanitarian logisticians. For example, earthquakes and wars affect thephysical infrastructure of a region, leading to special routing problems and planning ofdelivery systems (Barabasoglu et al.; 2002; Ozdamar et al., 2004, Tzeng et al., 2007; Yiand Ozdamar, 2007). Similarly, security questions related to complex emergencies, forexample natural disasters or famines during war situations, in particular regions affectquestions of inventory control (Beamon and Kotleba, 2006a, b). Thus, different types ofdisasters pose particular challenges for humanitarian logisticians.
2.1 Challenges related to different types of disastersA general definition of disasters is given by the International Strategy for DisasterReduction (UN/ISDR, 2004, p.3) – a disaster is:
[. . .] a serious disruption of the functioning of society, posing a significant, widespread threatto human life, health, property or the environment, whether caused by accident, nature orhuman activity, and whether developing suddenly or as a result of complex, long-termprocesses.
Another broad definition is a disaster being “a disruption that physically affects asystem as a whole and threatens its priorities and goals” (van Wassenhove, 2006,p. 476). Importantly, as long as a system, or nation, has the capabilities to cope with theeffects of an event, it is not perceived as a major disaster (Kovacs et al., 2007; Long andWood, 1995; UN CHINA, 2001). To be included in the UN/ISDR linked databaseEM-DAT, a disaster must fulfill the criterion of a declaration of state of emergency anda call for international assistance. These criteria are, however, disputed in disasterssuch as the Myanmar floods or the cholera epidemics in Zimbabwe, both in 2008.Different types of disasters can be distinguished according to origin of a disaster beingnatural or man-made, and its warning time being slow vs rapid, or sudden-onsetdisasters (Pettit and Beresford, 2006; van Wassenhove, 2006) (Table I).
Similarly, the EM-DAT database[2] aggregates disasters in the “natural” vs“technological” categories. A natural disaster is a potentially damaging natural event or
IJPDLM39,6
508
the probability that such an event will occur within a given time period and area (UNCHINA, 2001). However, “complex emergencies” show elements of both man-made(armed conflict) and natural disasters (e.g. famine). Thus, the emergency at hand caninvolve a number of different types of disasters at the same time.
The causes of specific disasters will often provide insight into post-disasterhumanitarian logistics challenges. Generally, the predictability of a disaster plays a rolein the possibilities of responding to it and the occurrence of particular types of disasterscan be tied to specific geographical areas (Chang et al., 2007). For instance, Iceland,Japan and New Zealand are prone to earthquakes, whereas avalanches are specific tosnowy mountainous areas. On the African continent, on the other hand, one can see apattern of slow-onset disasters. Many of these are categorized as complex emergenciesas they are the results of armed conflicts. However, it is the Asia Pacific region thataccounts for over 60 percent of world’s disaster events. Many countries in the region arefrequently hit by serious earthquakes, the entire region suffers from seasonal typhoonsand floods which kill thousands of people and cause billions of dollars worth of damageand cause severe hardship for millions of people. Each of the disasters has a differentimpact in each of the different sub-regions, depending on geography, demography andsocio-economic status. The situation is unfortunately also expected to get worse in thefuture due to the effects of climate change. (International Federation of Red Cross –IFRC, 2008).
Sudden-onset disasters have a strong negative impact on the physical infrastructureof the region, destroying transport infrastructure such as bridges and air fields,electricity networks and communication infrastructure (Barabasoglu et al., 2002).Thus, an important challenge of humanitarian logisticians is to determine bottlenecksand the usability of infrastructure. A long-term view on assuring the accessibility ofdisaster-struck regions is through the mapping and even construction of transportinfrastructure as part of humanitarian logistics projects, such as UNJLC’s roadconstructions in South Sudan. Such infrastructure projects are of strategic relevance tohumanitarian logistics (Altay et al., 2009).
Forecasting, even planning, is possible in the case of slow-onset disasters. Forexample, agricultural production can be monitored, and refugee camps constructed inadvance. What is new to humanitarian logistics is the emphasis of such planningand preparedness in also sudden-onset disasters (Jahre and Heigh, 2008). In this casethe challenge of logisticians consists of prepositioning items out of the reach of thepotential demolishing impact of a disaster while at the same time close enoughto the disaster as to deliver aid quickly and effectively (Balcik and Beamon, 2008).
Natural Man-made
Sudden-onset EarthquakeHurricaneTornadoes
Terrorist attackCoup d’ EtatChemical leak
Slow-onset FamineDroughtPoverty
Political crisisRefugee crisis
Source: van Wassenhove (2006, p. 476)Table I.
Categorizing disasters
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
509
Moreover, as Oloruntoba and Gray (2006) argue, responding to a sudden-onset disastercalls for agile supply chains, thus focusing on response times, while the planninghorizon for slow-onset disasters enables logisticians to focus on cost efficiencies.
The natural vs man-made divide also bears implications for humanitarian logisticians.Preparedness is also possible for cyclical disasters such as cyclones, hurricanes orsnow-related floods. Others, such as earthquakes and avalanches, are region-specific.Affected populations can be trained to respond rapidly, or even avoid being affected by adisaster. But while natural disasters can be prepared for, man-made disasters might beprevented. However, logisticians facing man-made disasters with elements of armedconflict and political crises need to tackle increased security and safety-related challenges(Pettit and Beresford, 2006). Indications for such security-related challenges are recentabductions and killings of humanitarian staff in complex emergencies.
2.2 Challenges related to disaster relief phasesHumanitarian logistics literature distinguishes between different phases of disasterrelief. The minimal distinction is between preparation and post-event phases (Long,1997; van Wassenhove, 2006). On a more detailed level, Ludema (2000) differentiatesbetween emergency relief, rehabilitation and development; Safran (2003) betweenprevention, transition and recovery; Pettit and Beresford (2006) between preparedness,response and recovery; Altay and Green (2006) between mitigation, preparedness,response and recovery; and Kovacs and Spens (2007) between preparation,immediate response and reconstruction. In this, Ludema’s (2000) “emergency relief”phase can be equaled with Safran’s (2003) “transition”, Pettit and Beresford’s (2006) aswell as Altay and Green’s (2006)“response” and Kovacs and Spens’ (2007) “immediateresponse”. In the case of predictable disasters such as hurricanes, Altay et al. furtherdistinguish between a pre-event and a post-event response.
The phases of disaster relief can be seen in terms of a cycle that links recovery backto the preparedness phase (Pettit and Beresford, 2006; Safran, 2003). Thus, ideally,rehabilitation and reconstruction includes a learning element for further disasters tocome. This is the basis for the installation of tsunami warning systems (Beresford andPettit, 2007) or disaster awareness in education programs. Contrary to this cyclicalview, reconstruction and rehabilitation can be seen as the start of development aid.Therefore, in the following, “preparedness” will be used to refer to preparation andprevention, “immediate response” for emergency relief or transition, and“reconstruction” for activities related to recovery, rehabilitation, and development.
Further details can be added to these phases. For example, Safran (2003) separatestwo elements of the immediate response phase, namely the disaster and the emergencyelements. Tatham and Kovacs (2007) investigated the change from disaster andemergency elements towards recovery and found that:
(1) the response of national and international humanitarian organizationsdepended on these elements, as to say, search and rescue operations andnational disaster relief activities ongoing in the disaster element, whileinternational aid agencies would arrive in the emergency element only; and
(2) the primary transportation modes between these elements and phases differed.
In specific, a modal shift from air to road transportation taking place between theemergency element and the recovery phase of disaster relief. In conclusion, both the
IJPDLM39,6
510
activation of organizations and the challenges of humanitarian logistics depend uponthe phase of disaster relief.
The mandate of a humanitarian organization also determines which phase ofdisaster relief the organization can be involved in, for example. World Food Programme(WFP) focusing on immediate response, whereas Food and Agricultural Organization(FAO) is in charge of development aid when it comes to food aid. Anothermandate-based divide can be seen between natural and man-made disasters. Forexample, IFRC focuses on disaster relief in (mostly) sudden-onset natural disasters,while International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) responds to political and armedconflicts, leading to the presence of both in complex emergencies. Thus, the activities aswell as challenges of a humanitarian logistician depend on the presence and mandate ofher/his own organization, and of the presence of other organizations in the field.
2.3 Challenges related to different types of humanitarian organizationsRelated to the challenges of humanitarian logisticians is the involvement of differentorganizations in the response. Humanitarian organizations take many different forms:from supranational aid agencies (e.g. UN agencies) and governmental organizations(GOs) to big international non-governmental organizations (BINGOs) and one-mannon-governmental organizations (NGOs). They differ in local presence, size, andmandate. Whilst IFRC and many faith-based organizations have a loose couplingbetween national “chapters” and an international coordinating body, UN agencies haveno national presence per definition. This difference in organizational structure affectsthe response times of these organizations. National chapters are thus involved in thefirst wave of relief in the immediate response phase, Safran’s (2003) “disaster element”,while agencies with no presence in the affected country need to wait to be officiallyinvited in order to enter the country.
The size of an organization effectively delimits its operational possibilities. On theone hand, small humanitarian NGOs can focus on “niche markets” and disasters thatare particularly prevalent in a region (Spens et al., 2007). On the other hand, evenBINGOs are specialized on particular items and sometimes, groups of beneficiaries, etc.Community-based BINGOs further specialize on some international activities in eachcommunity. For example, the Norwegian and Finnish Red Cross supply field hospitalsin international missions while the Canadian and Danish Red Cross provide logisticalsupport.
The mandate of a humanitarian organization defines its operational boundaries,including:
. the items it delivers, for example Oxfam focusing on water and sanitation, UnitedNations High Commissioner for Refugees and IFRC on shelter, WFP on food;
. which beneficiaries it focuses on, such as the children and their families focus ofboth UNICEF and Save the Children;
. the types of disasters it is concerned with (see IFRC vs ICRC);
. which phase of disaster relief it focuses on (see WFP vs FAO) and even; and
. which partners it can or cannot collaborate with.
Here, particular attention is paid to civil-military collaboration (Pettit and Beresford,2006).
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
511
The humanitarian aid supply network consists of more than just “humanitarian”organizations. Kovacs and Spens (2008) list donors, aid agencies, NGOs, governments,the military, and logistics service providers, and suppliers as actors involved in ahumanitarian aid supply network. Oloruntoba and Gray (2006) add aid recipients(beneficiaries) to the list, while stressing the distinction between international andnational, including community-based organizations. van Wassenhove (2006) adds themedia as a stakeholder of disaster relief. Which organizations are encompassed in theselists depends on whether or not a study looks at the organizations actively involved indelivering relief, the “actors”, or at all organizations with an interest in disaster relief,the “stakeholders” (Tatham and Kovacs, 2007). The presence of such a myriad of actorsin disaster relief has led to a number of articles discussing the coordination of theiractivities (Kaatrud et al., 2003; Oloruntoba and Gray, 2006; Pettit and Beresford, 2006;Tatham and Kovacs, 2007; Thomas and Fritz, 2006; van Wassenhove, 2006).
A challenge to humanitarian logisticians is to determine which organizations she/hecan effectively collaborate with for which purpose. Logisticians are torn between thefront office media exposure of the organization, leading to the requirement to be first onsite, which in its turn triggers donations to the organization, and the back officelogistical operation that ideally puts the needs of beneficiaries first. This front office –back office indicates that humanitarian organizations do, indeed, regard each others ascompetitors, be it for the same funding resources or for media attention, while at thesame time collaborators in the effective delivery of relief. Nonetheless, coordinationmechanisms have of late been put in place, such as the UN’s cluster approach and theestablishment of an agency that serves the purpose of coordinating relief efforts,namely UNJLC[3] (Kaatrud et al., 2003).
Yet the mere knowledge of which other humanitarian organizations are present in aregion poses a challenge to humanitarian logisticians. Regional maps of organizationalpresence have been developed for development aid, but who will respond to a particularsudden-onset disaster is less clear. Humanitarian logisticians need to find counterpartsin other organizations, both in the field as well as between the headquarters of eachorganization involved. Relating back to the phases of disaster relief, the question in thehumanitarian aid supply network is not only which other organizations are present, butalso in which of the phases of relief they are present. As Tatham and Kovacs (2007)pointed out, the very first response to a disaster is conducted by national organizations.The magnitude of the disaster does not in itself justify a call for international aid; rather,the ability of a region to cope with a disaster determines whether this call is issued.Considering a regional proneness to particular disasters, national humanitarianorganizations may play an important role as they can specialize on the types of disastersthat occur in their region.
In summary, challenges of humanitarian logisticians may arise from a regionalcontext as well as particular disaster types, the actual phase of disaster relief, and eventhe type of organization the logisticians work for. Therefore, the following study hasbeen designed to focus on a particular region, Africa, and more specifically, Ghana.
3. Research designThe study started out with an extensive literature review of academic literature onhumanitarian supply chains while also assembling data from disaster managementdatabases, in order to identify the types of disasters which are prevalent within
IJPDLM39,6
512
a particular geographic area. Statistical data on the occurrence and magnitude ofdifferent disasters was available from the EM-DAT. This sequential literature reviewwas subsequently narrowed down to challenges in Africa. Augmenting the literaturereview, secondary data on 12 challenges related to humanitarian logistics in Africa wasanalyzed in this paper. These challenges can be summarized to consist of (FritzInstitute, 2004):
. a lack of standards and indicators;
. inadequate training;
. lack of collaboration;
. (low) recognition of logistics; and
. inadequate infrastructure.
While the SPHERE international standards for humanitarian aid items and serviceshave developed, their implementation by smaller, regional organizations is limited.Inadequate training in humanitarian logistics has also been highlighted in literature(Thomas and Kopczak, 2005; Perry, 2007). This has led to the development ofcertifications and even MBA programs for humanitarian logisticians. That said, neitherthe lack of collaboration across humanitarian organizations nor the lack of recognitionof logistics in the humanitarian context is unique to Africa. Yet the low recognition oflogistics is surprising given the large share of logistical costs in humanitarian aid (vanWassenhove, 2006). Inadequate infrastructure is also a common problem of developingcountries (Bookbinder and Tan, 2003; Pedersen, 2003); though disasters themselves alsoimpact negatively on the physical infrastructure of a region (Ozdamar et al., 2004). Justhow these challenges manifest themselves was therefore the topic of a two-dayworkshop with humanitarian logisticians in Ghana in August 2007.
Invitations to the workshop were sent directly to humanitarian organizations, butthe workshop was also announced in newspapers. This was important as to make surethat all organizations that are involved in the humanitarian supply chain would indeedbe reached. While there are over 4,000 humanitarian organizations present in thecountry, most of these are related to small religious congregations focusing on theirparticular community and therefore lack their own logistical operations. In essence, thesampling strategy for the workshop was to invite participants with logistical expertisein humanitarian aid. Eventually, the over forty participants of the workshoprepresented the largest humanitarian organizations in Ghana: United NationsHumanitarian Response Depot (UNHRD), World Vision, Adventist Development andRelief Agency (ADRA), CARE, the National Disaster Management Organization(NADMO), the Ghanaian armed forces, fire service, national ambulance service (NAS),etc. In other words, workshop attendees represented international aid agencies,Ghanaian governmental agencies, international and national non-governmentalagencies, as well as the Ghanaian armed forces.
In this study, Ghana as a country is treated as a case. Though geographically boundcase studies are rare in business logistics, examples of such cases can be found inCampbell et al.’s (2001) city as a case, and Bookbinder and Tan’s (2003) comparison ofthe logistical systems of different regions. Also, transport geography literature oftendiscusses regions, or countries, as cases (Hesse and Rodrigue, 2004).
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
513
The workshop used Bak’s (2005) blended technique for data collection, combiningstructured with experimental elements. A key structured element of the workshop wasthe development of a survey instrument that served as a topical guide for the workshopand took up the topics identified in the review of humanitarian supply chain literature toensure the link to this literature as proposed by Forza (2002). Moreover, the instrumentwas discussed in a group of five people consisting of local and international workshoporganizers and the NADMO prior to the workshop to ensure its topical relevance as wellas the understandability of the questions. This increased the construct validity of thestudy (Voss et al., 2002). The instrument was introduced during a presentation onthe first day, thus establishing a common conceptual understanding. This wasparticularly important due to the variety of organizations represented at the workshop.Furthermore, some of the organizations were also asked to prepare a presentation on thechallenges they face in their humanitarian supply chain (see the Notes section for the listof these presentations), which were debated among all workshop participants. Paneldiscussions were also included as another debate element of the workshop.
Data from the workshop was collected from multiple sources, to increase the depthof the study and thus, its external validity (Meredith, 1998) as well as to increase itsconstruct validity (Ellram, 1996). The data were comprised of:
. presentations of the organizations;
. (student) field notes from the debates and panel discussions; and
. each participant handing in their own individual answers and written reflectionson the survey instrument.
The survey is not reported as the findings in this paper result not from the survey itselfbut from presentations, the subsequent discussions, individual presentations andopen-ended answers of participants. The survey had two main functions in this study:establishing a common conceptual understanding, and guiding the discussion.Emerging themes from the presentations were summarized in a tabular manner tofacilitate the analysis of re-occurring themes across different organizations.
4. FindingsThe workshop revealed a list of challenges of humanitarian logisticians in Ghana. Allchallenges that were noted by the Africa conference of the Fritz Institute in 2004 havebeen identified also in Ghana. However, not all of these challenges affected allhumanitarian organizations the same way (see the Appendix for a complete list).Therefore, in the following, we will discuss them in relation to different types ofdisasters, phases of disaster relief, and humanitarian organizations.
4.1 Challenges related to different types of disastersIn Ghana, many disasters such as floods and droughts, soil erosion can have bothnatural and man-made causes. Others, depending on their cause, can be seen as sudden-or slow-onset disasters such as insect infestations. About 85 percent of the disasters inGhana are human induced and/or due to human activity and negligence (Obiri-Buahin,2007). While this is substantial, the figure is rather low in an international comparison –van Wassenhove (2006) sets the figures to 97 percent of disasters being man-madeglobally. The different disasters Ghana is prone to can be illustrated by using the vanWassenhove (2006) categorization (Figure 1).
IJPDLM39,6
514
Looking at the different categories of disaster, sudden-onset natural disasters includeearthquakes and landslides as well as floods, droughts, insect infestations, etc. Ghanahas an earthquake history that repeats itself in a sixty-five (65)-year cycle with the latestearthquake disaster occurring in 1939. Based on statistical data from EM-DAT, floodsare the most prevalent disasters both in terms of people affected as well as in terms ofmonetary loss[4]. Floods are caused by intense rainfall run-offs, dam-bursts and tidalwaves. In Ghana, the potential burst of the Weija dam that is located over faults of threetectonic plates as a threat to the capital was for example seen as serious threat(Asante-Mensah, 2007). Therefore, the case of dam bursts is categorized as a manmadedisaster. In other words, just looking at the disaster itself, as in the van Wassenhove,2006 categorization, does not determine its causes per se; rather, the same effect (floods)can have different causes.
Ghana also experiences acute drought when the rains fail but drought can also becaused by human activities such as bushfires for agriculture leading to deforestationand a lack of rainfall. Thus, arguably, Ghana experiences a man-made climate change(Wireko-Brobbey, 2007). This has lead to a severe energy crisis due to a lack of rainfalldue to the fact that Ghana is largely dependent on hydropower. Pests and insects canalso cause disasters such as famines and epidemics. Ghana is particularly prone toepidemics such as yellow fever, malaria, as well as seasonally bound epidemics such ascholera in the rainy season.
The most prevalent slow-onset natural disasters are related to soil erosion. Soilerosion is mostly prevalent in areas where the vegetative cover has been removed.Coastal erosion is severe along the coastal stretch and has resulted in the construction ofthe Keta sea defence walls. Expansive clays and soil can be found in areas with claydeposits. Many disasters related to soil erosion are, however, man-made and relate tothe use of lands that were originally rainforests and are now used for agriculture.
One of the most prominent sudden-onset man-made disasters is the occurrence ofbush fires. However, other fires occur with frequency: industrial fires in fuel depots,mines and factories that are typically caused by the mismanagement of electrical andgas appliances. Apart from fires, pollution-related disasters are also man-made. Forexample, the mismanagement of water supplies leads to frequent typhoid epidemics.Slow-onset man-made disasters concern mostly the influx of refugees from conflictareas, which cause lack of food and other supplies in the areas close to conflict areas.
Figure 1.Categorizing
disasters in Ghana
Slow-onset
Sudden-onset
Natural Man-made
Influx of refugeesreturnees
Coastal erosion
Bush fireIndustrial fire
Water pollution
EarthquakeLandslide
Pests/Insects
Soil erosion
Drought
Flood
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
515
The causes of disasters are, however, not always clear-cut. Floods, for example, canbe natural due to the rainy season, man-mad1e as a result of dams being constructed ontectonic fault lines, or primarily natural but with a man-made component as a result ofdeforestation. Therefore, many of the listed disasters defy a clear-cut categorization.Yet exactly this problem with the categorization of disasters helps to pinpoint some ofthe challenges of humanitarian logisticians, as man-made causes for disasters can becounteracted and thus alter the focus of relief programs. In Ghana, measures to preventsuch disasters could include the reconsideration of future infrastructure decisions, e.g.dam location, or educational measures for the population to counteract deforestationand soil erosion. As for the latter, international NGOs have started to awardcommunities that did not set traditional yearly bush fires, in order to reduce theireffects on deforestation. Also, knowing the causes for a disaster helps in setting earlywarning indicators, mitigate the disaster, and prepare for its occurrence.
4.2 Challenges related to the phases of disaster reliefThe challenges of humanitarian logistics do not only depend on the types of disasters,but also on the activities related to different phases of disaster relief. Immediateresponse from international aid agencies depends on a call for international assistance.Such a call is issued when a system or country is not able to cope with a disaster (vanWassenhove, 2006). In other words, the Ghanaian Government must declare a state ofemergency before international humanitarian organizations can respond to a disaster.However, this is rarely the case in Ghana. There is a general feeling among the Ghanaianpopulation of Ghana being “safe” and that disasters are unlikely to occur (Okoampa,2007). This affects the Ghanaian level of preparation. Whilst risk maps do exist fordifferent disasters such as for the potential burst of the Weija dam, the national level ofpreparedness is rather low. Not even the NADMO has any pre-positioned stock of reliefitems. International humanitarian organizations, on the other hand, struggle in thepreparedness phase with customs procedures – here, a lack of exemptions fromcustoms duties on imports of relief items leads to the absence of in-country warehouses(Asante-Mensah, 2007). As an example, World Vision distributes all of its relief itemsimmediately upon arrival, with no means for keeping pre-positioned inventory in thecountry (Okoampa, 2007). This is contrary to the suggestion in literature and thestrategy employed by international humanitarian organizations to pre-positioninventory to prepare for disasters (Balcik and Beamon, 2008). Furthermore, importsoften relate to delays of supplies (Asante-Mensah, 2007). However, as customsprocedures differ for UN agencies, there is a clear differentiation between challengesfaced by international NGOs and UN agencies, the latter having a regional warehousefor entire West Africa based in Ghana (Ndianabo, 2007). What UN agencies do share as achallenge with the other national and international humanitarian organizations inGhana relates to the accessibility of beneficiaries in different parts of the country.
A challenge particularly striking during the reconstruction phase is that of aiddependency. This issue does not only relate to beneficiaries becoming dependent butalso local authorities depending on donors and NGOs to solve issues instead of actingthemselves (Asante-Mensah, 2007). Generally, however, development andreconstruction projects are rare. In a West African comparison, Ghana is after allseen as a country with a rather well-developed transport infrastructure (Pedersen,2003). Thus, contrary to an idea of a potential learning loop between reconstruction and
IJPDLM39,6
516
preparedness, such a link is not to be seen in Ghana, neither on the national level norwithin humanitarian organizations.
4.3 Challenges related to different types of humanitarian organizationsInternational humanitarian organizations in Ghana are dependent on the GhanaianGovernment to declare a state of emergency and call for international assistance. Thisleaves national humanitarian organizations to be the first responders to disasters.Among these, the NADMO is supposed to coordinate relief efforts in Ghana(Osei-Akom, 2007). However, the absence of clear mandates and legislation to stipulatethe operation of national (governmental) organizations leads to their incapacitation. Asa result, a lack of coordination among humanitarian organizations was seen as a bigchallenge. The coordination of GOs is further hampered by their lack of knowledgeabout each other (Kaba, 2007; Osei-Akom, 2007). There is a general absence ofcommunication among these organizations, defying NADMO’s coordinating role(Osei-Akom, 2007). There are no strategic partnerships among humanitarianorganizations in Ghana (Okoampa, 2007); NGO consortia for disaster relief only existon an ad hoc basis (Asante-Mensah, 2007).
NADMO is unable to enforce standards of procedures in other GOs or productstandards for suppliers, even though international standards for humanitarian reliefitems and relief procedures have been in place for over ten years due to the SPHEREproject, and were shown to have positive effects on both cost and time efficiencies indisaster relief (Weerawat, 2007). There are no vehicle standards, either (Pedersen,2003). In Ghana, not even the use of sirens is regulated. This has lead to a disrespect ofthe NAS and creates additional logistical problems due to false alarms. In NAS’ case,the absence of clear mandates leads to lengthy referrals between hospitals, using NASfor referrals instead of emergencies, and in hospitals refusing to take in patients orinsisting to take the trolleys of the ambulances, leaving these without stretchers.
National and international humanitarian organizations struggle with findingqualified humanitarian logisticians in Ghana. A lack of logistical training ofhumanitarian staff is evident – as in other regions as well (Perry, 2007). From theperspective of logisticians, the problem is the in-availability of in-country training andeducation possibilities (Asante-Mensah, 2007). At the same time, GOs suffer from abrain drain (Kaba, 2007). The combination of the lack of supplies, lack of training, andabsence of mandates leads to situations such as NADMO’s personnel being equippedwith life vests for floods but not having been trained to swim, while navy personnelhaving sufficient training but no life vests to distribute to beneficiaries. Related to thelack of supplies is the issue of funding, humanitarian organizations struggling withculturally inappropriate in-kind supplies, and donors being interested in particularregions only (Okoampa, 2007). In-kind donations are often used to counteract thefungibility of monetary donations, yet come with particular problems. As Hellenius andRudbeck (2003) note, these donations often consist of inadequate, second-rate products,and create extra logistical costs of transportation and of maintaining the donations.
During the workshop, access to beneficiaries was revealed to be particularlydifficult for both national and international organizations. While Ghana is seen asa country with a rather well-developed transport infrastructure in the West Africancomparison (Pedersen, 2003), the state of the road network with an abundance ofunpaved roads leads to frequent vehicle breakdowns and accidents. This adds to the
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
517
liabilities and transportation costs of humanitarian organizations when working withtransportation service providers (Asante-Mensah, 2007; Okoampa, 2007). Interestingly,the World Bank’s Logistics Performance Index rates Ghana’s transport infrastructureas better developed than the Sub-Saharan average, while its customs clearance andoverall LPI are lacking behind (World Bank, 2007).
Few organizations have their own fleet but rather use local transportation providersto distribute their aid items (Asante-Mensah, 2007). Thus, local transportation serviceproviders are important actors in the humanitarian aid supply network in Ghana.Transportation costs are also high due to the requirement of special materials handlingequipment, and the lack of access to remote areas (Asante-Mensah, 2007) – remotenessand isolation being highlighted as challenges also by Altay et al.. In essence, the high,particularly road, transportation costs in the country are related to both infrastructuralas well as managerial questions (Pedersen, 2001). Furthermore, in many regions thereare no street signs and names, adding to the complexity of an efficient response to fireand medical emergencies. The lack of support equipment extends beyondtransportation-related assets to Information and Communication Technology (ICT)infrastructure (Kaba, 2007; Osei-Akom, 2007).
Evidently, some challenges are more pronounced for national (in Ghana mostlygovernmental) organizations than international humanitarian organizations. When itcomes to GOs, the lack of supplies (including equipment and funding), legislation andcommunication are salient. Also, all participants in the study agreed that one of the moststriking challenges is the insufficient clarity of the mandates of different GOs. At the sametime, import-related issues such as delays in receiving materials, customs duties, etc. aremore pronounced challenges faced by international humanitarian organizations, leadingto an absence of in-country preparation, including supplies and their pre-positioning.
4.4 A matter of coordinationWhilst humanitarian logisticians in Ghana face a number of challenges ranging fromcustoms clearance procedures hampering a potential pre-positioning of relief items to alack of access to training, the most important challenge is the lack of coordination.Logistical coordination is needed both in between humanitarian organizations as wellas in the humanitarian supply chain (Altay et al., 2009; van Wassenhove, 2006;Oloruntoba and Gray, 2006). Relief items can be pre-positioned jointly in the case ofusing UNHRD which is indeed located in Accra, Ghana, and even humanitarianlogistics training can be offered in a joint effort.
To be able to mitigate the challenges of humanitarian logisticians in Ghana,stakeholder theory was used to identify the origin of these challenges in terms ofcoming from an input/output environment, i.e. the supply chain, the competitiveenvironment, here composed of other humanitarian organizations, regulatoryenvironment, or internal stakeholders (Achrol et al., 1983; Carter and Ellram, 1998).In logistics literature, stakeholder theory has been used in sustainable supply chainmanagement and in closed-loop supply chain management (Carter and Ellram, 1998;Handfield et al., 1997). Like humanitarian logistics, both these fields are categorized bya larger societal embeddedness. In other words, stakeholder theory is used in logisticsprimarily in questions that extend beyond the profit-seeking aim of organizations.
A categorization of challenges related to stakeholder environment is useful whendetermining different strategies for stakeholder negotiations. Logisticians from
IJPDLM39,6
518
particular types of humanitarian organizations face challenges that arise fromparticular stakeholder environments. Thus, we will further examine the challenges ofhumanitarian logisticians related to international NGOs and aid agencies vs thoserelated to GOs, as originating from different stakeholder environments (Table II). In thiscategorization, infrastructure-related questions were included in the “regulatory”environment, as the transport infrastructure of a region adds to its capability to receiveextra-regional support in the first place (Ndianabo, 2007).
This categorization is needed in order not only to identify different challenges, butalso to understand which other organizations are involved in their potential mitigation.Challenges related to the input/output environment need to be discussed with suppliersand customers – which in the case of humanitarian logistics primarily relate to financialand material suppliers. Special to the competitive environment in humanitarianlogistics is an absence of anti-trust regulations, rather, humanitarian organizations areencouraged to coordinate their efforts (Kaatrud et al., 2003). On the other hand, manyhumanitarian organizations are specialized in different types of disasters, relief phases,or items they deliver. Such a specialization and differentiation is usually seen as afacilitator of coordination in disaster relief (Kaatrud et al., 2003). While many of thechallenges related to the regulatory environment are bound to the case of Ghana, onechallenge in particular – the dependence on governments declaring a state ofemergency – is shared across all geographical regions.
Based on these findings, some conclusions can be drawn for humanitarianorganizations operating in Ghana. Whilst there are some externalities that needlong-term solutions such as the transport infrastructure of the country, some issues aremore managerial in nature. First, it is of utmost importance that all humanitarianlogisticians and their organizations in the country establish a common knowledge of
Source ofchallenge
Input/outputenvironment
Competitiveenvironment Regulatory environment
Internalstakeholders
PerspectiveInternationalhumanitarianorganizationperspective
DelaysLack of fundingInappropriatedonationsLimits in use offundingAid dependency
Lack ofcoordination
Dependence ongovernment declaringstate of emergencyLack of transportinfrastructureDutiesLack of early warningsystemsLack of governance
Lack of trainedlogisticiansLack of vehiclesLack of warehouse
Governmentalorganizationperspective
Lack of suppliesLack of equipmentLack of fundingInappropriatedonationsLack of access towaterDifficulties inenforcing standards
Lack ofcommunicationLack ofknowledge ofhumanitarianorganizations
Absence of legislationLack of fundingStreets have no nameSecurity problemsDifficulties in enforcingstandards
Lack of trainedlogisticiansBrain drainLack of vehiclesLack of suppliesLack of equipmentLack of ICT
Table II.Categorizing challenges
by stakeholderenvironment
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
519
each other including the other organizations’ mandates and focus. Without thisknowledge, coordinating relief efforts is rendered impossible, even though a call for suchcoordination has long been established. Only on this basis can further informationsharing and closer collaboration be developed. Second, it would aid all organizations inthe country to establish the in-country training of logisticians. Having identified thischallenge, the organizations in the workshop in fact agreed to participate in theestablishment of common logistics education in cooperation with the Chartered Instituteof Logistics and Transport and a technical university, Kwame Nkrumah University ofScience and Technology. Finally, there is much to do on the national level; creating anawareness for disaster proneness and educating the population, as well as establishingnational plans for disaster management that include knowledge on existing stocks andstock levels in the country.
As a general conclusion, a conceptual model is constructed to identify the challengesof humanitarian logisticians with respect to different types of disasters, phases ofdisaster relief and the type of humanitarian organization.
5. Model presentation and conclusionsThe purpose of this paper is to identify the challenges of humanitarian logisticians withrespect to different types of disasters, phases of disaster relief, and types ofhumanitarian organizations. Challenges of humanitarian logisticians have beenidentified based on an exploratory case study of a country (Ghana) as a case. Theanalysis of the study led to the development of a conceptual model that serves as a basisto identify challenges of humanitarian logisticians (Figure 2).
Humanitarian logisticians can use this conceptual model at the beginning of theirmission to identify the challenges they face. The model can also be used on a programlevel, identifying the potential challenges of program implementation. Looking into thecauses of different disasters enables humanitarian logisticians to even redirect a
Figure 2.Conceptual model toidentify challenges ofhumanitarian logisticians
Identify challengesbased on
Disaster types
Focus and location ofthe humanitarian
organization
Stakeholderenvironment
- Internal vs. external challenges
- Mandate related to phase ofrelief
- Disaster cause (natural/man-made)- Warning time (onset)- Probability of disaster in theregion
- Regional presence- Dependence on declartion ofstate of emergency
- Relevant other organizations
Dimensions
IJPDLM39,6
520
program, if it turns out that a “natural” disaster shows potential man-made causes thatcould be prevented in the long run. Our discussion of disaster types highlighted thatvan Wassenhove’s (2006) disaster categorization is not to be seen as exclusive, as thesame disaster can have different causes, e.g. floods having man-made or natural causes.It is these causes that need to be investigated in order to be able to mitigate them.
Another important issue related to disaster types is their warning time. As Altayet al. (2009) pinpoint, the pre-warning of even sudden-onset disasters can leave timeenough for a pre-event response, such as evacuations, and the establishment ofevacuation centers in a hurricane.
Not only are the types of disasters relevant (van Wassenhove, 2006) but also theprobability of their occurrence and effects (Norrman and Jansson, 2004). Looking at theprobability of the occurrence of particular disasters in a region (or EM-DAT’s countrydisaster profiles) enables national humanitarian organizations to focus on the mosttypical disasters they face. The geographical context of a disaster also plays a role in thepotential preparedness for disaster relief; not only in terms of the actual preparednessmeasures of pre-positioning relief items, but also related to the pre-disasterinfrastructure (potential road network, access points, electrical grid, medical centers)in the region.
The mandate of a humanitarian organization determines its focus in terms of therelief phase it primarily operates in, the items it delivers, and even its pre-disasterpresence in a region. Humanitarian logisticians are confined by the mandate of theirorganization, even when it comes to seeking potential collaboration partners. Beingconfined to particular types of disasters and phases of relief also brings the challenge ofhanding over projects to other organizations at the end of a relief phase. Humanitarianlogisticians thus not only need to identify their potential partners at the time of theirown presence in a region but also partners who will take care of future operations. Thisis particularly difficult as contracts in the humanitarian area are typically short-term.
The location and regional presence of a humanitarian organization determines itsrole in disaster relief as much as its mandate. At which point in time an organization canstart delivering relief depends on its local role. However, even aid agencies that dependon the declaration of a state of emergency can plan their activities immediately upon theoccurrence of a disaster. What is more, international humanitarian organizations withlocal chapters can channel relief through these. Yet local presence is crucial for capacitybuilding in terms of education and the pre-positioning of relief items. Capacity buildingis particularly important in order to overcome the problem of aid dependence.
As the study in Ghana highlighted, the utmost challenge of humanitarian logisticiansis to find collaboration partners. Therefore, we propose a categorization of challengesaccording to their stakeholder environment. This helps to identify not only the challengeat hand, but also, which other organizations share the same challenge, and whichcollaboration partners would be needed to mitigate it. Generally, it is important to knowwhich other organizations are “out there” and what they are doing, in order to coordinaterelief and establish standard procedures. Most challenges are shared across logisticiansfrom similar types of organizations, thus strategic alliances will help to mitigate them.
5.1. Concluding remarks and avenues for further researchHumanitarian logistics is a growing field of interest for logisticians. Not only ishumanitarian aid a growing area of concern due to an expected increase in the number
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
521
and effect of disasters in the coming decades, but humanitarian supply chains are alsoan interesting research phenomenon being the most agile and flexible supply chains tobe found (Oloruntoba and Gray, 2006). However, the field is still in need of bothconceptual and empirical studies in order to improve humanitarian logistics. So far,studies covering the field have very much focused on Asia. This is understandable fromthe background of Asia being the most disaster-prone region in the world. However,considering the impact of the regional context on the effects of a disaster, studies onother continents and also other disaster types have been called for.
The purpose of this paper is to identify the challenges of humanitarianlogisticians with respect to different types of disasters, phases of disaster relief,and types of humanitarian organizations. While discussing each of these points onthe case of Ghana, the study concluded in presenting a conceptual model whichhelps identify challenges in humanitarian logistics. Yet apart from the model itself,some points of interest in the Ghana study also deserve interest of further research. Oneis the lack of exemptions from customs leading to a lack of in-house warehouses ofhumanitarian organizations. While the UN Logistics Cluster is working on developingcommon customs procedures for all humanitarian organizations, it is for policy makersto note that difficulties in customs procedures translates to a lack of preparedness in thecountry. The second point is the lack of clear mandates and legislation supportingnational humanitarian organizations. Considering a delay in the potential reliefcoming from international organizations, further research would be needed on the topicof policy support for national preparedness. A third point raised in the study is the braindrain and the lack of qualified in-country staff. This point calls for more educationalprograms for local humanitarian logisticians – or logisticians at large, as theimportance of local transportation service providers in humanitarian aid wouldemphasize.
Although the conceptual model was contextualized by using Ghana as an example,one could expect that it can also be used in other types of contexts, both on a regional aswell as interregional level. Yet, further research is needed to test the model in othercontexts, in regions with similar disaster patterns and organizational structures, as wellas in regions with substantial differences to the Ghana case. Furthermore, the modelcould be tested on a number of humanitarian organizations operating in differentgeographical environments.
Based on the difficulties to attribute particular disasters to man-made vs naturalcauses, further research is needed in developing more in-depth categorization schemes.It can also be concluded natural disasters such as famines and floods can haveman-made elements (such as bush fires leading to soil erosion and thus, famines; ordams built on tectonic fault lines leading to floods) and thus, be mitigated via policiesinducing behavioral changes.
Although the model was developed to identify the logistical challenges ofhumanitarian organizations, parallels can also be drawn to a business environment.As in Norrman and Jansson (2004), business logistics treats large-scale disasters as a typeof risk, but risk mitigation models have insofar been focusing on operationalvulnerabilities. Yet to increase supply chain resilience, corporations also need toinvestigate their vulnerabilities in terms of disasters, and how to respond to these (Wallaceand Webber, 2004). As a first step, Aon Corporation (Aon Inc.) has developed a politicaland economic risk map of different regions that it sells as a “supply chain risk map”.
IJPDLM39,6
522
Business has started to acknowledge its vulnerabilities related to the geographicallocations of its suppliers and customers – thus supply chain management literature hasa lot to gain from investigating organizations that are specialized in dealing with suchrisks.
Notes
1. Of which “humanitarian aid” accounts for about 7 percent, the rest consisting ofdevelopment aid and debt relief. It needs to be noted that, e.g. transport infrastructureprojects are seen as general “economic” aid and not humanitarian aid in this statistics.
2. EM-DAT has been maintained by the WHO Collaborating Centre for Research on theEpidemiology of Disasters since 1988. On their webpage, statistics and information ondisasters are given both in terms of their occurrence and the effects, both on human lives andfinancial effects. EM-DAT prepares and categorizes disasters according to (1) naturaldisasters; (2) technological disasters; or (3) complex emergencies. In order for a disaster to beentered into the database at least one of the following criteria has to be fulfilled (EM-DAT,2008): (1) 10 or more people reported killed; (2) 100 people reported affected; (3) a call forinternational assistance; and (4) declaration of a state of emergency. For more information oncategorization and glossary of disasters, refer to www.emdat.be/ExplanatoryNotes/guidelines.html
3. Which has since merged into the Logistics Cluster.
4. Monetary loss is calculated by a specific formula used by EM-DAT as they argue that thereis no standard procedure to determine a global figure for economic impact.
References
Achrol, R.S., Reve, T. and Stern, L.W. (1983), “The environment of marketing channeldyads: a framework for comparative analysis”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 No. 4,pp. 55-67.
Altay, N. and Green, W.G. (2006), “OR/MS research in disaster operations management”,European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 175 No. 1, pp. 475-93.
Altay, N., Prasad, S. and Sounderpandian, J. (2009), “Strategic planning for disaster relieflogistics: lessons from supply chain management”, International Journal of ServicesSciences, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 142-61.
Asante-Mensah, S. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, ADRA(Adventist Development and Relief Agency).
Bak, O. (2005), “Towards triangulation – blending techniques in supply chainmanagement context”, in Kotzab, H., Seuring, S., Muller, M. and Reiner, G. (Eds),Research Methodologies in Supply Chain Management, Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg,pp. 331-48.
Balcik, B. and Beamon, B.M. (2008), “Facility location in humanitarian relief”, InternationalJournal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 101-21.
Barabasoglu, G., Ozdamar, L. and Cevik, A. (2002), “An interactive approach for hierarchicalanalysis of helicopter logistics in disaster relief operations”, European Journal ofOperational Research, Vol. 140 No. 1, pp. 118-33.
Beamon, B.M. and Kotleba, S.A. (2006a), “Inventory management support systems foremergency humanitarian relief operations in South Sudan”, International Journal ofLogistics Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 187-212.
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
523
Beamon, B.M. and Kotleba, S.A. (2006b), “Inventory modelling for complex emergencies inhumanitarian relief operations”, International Journal of Logistics: Research andApplications, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Beresford, A. and Pettit, S. (2007), “Disaster management and mitigation: a case study oflogistics problems in Thailand following the Asian Tsunami”, in Halldorsson, A. andStefansson, G. (Eds), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference for Nordic Researchers inLogistics, NOFOMA 2007, Reykjavık, Iceland, pp. 121-36.
Bookbinder, J.H. and Tan, C.S. (2003), “Comparison of Asian and European logistics systems”,International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 33 No. 1,pp. 36-58.
Campbell, J.F., Labelle, A. and Langevin, A. (2001), “A hybrid travel distance approximation fora GIS-based decision support system”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 2,pp. 165-71.
Carter, C.R. and Ellram, L.M. (1998), “Reverse logistics: a review of the literature and frameworkfor future investigations”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 85-102.
Chang, M.-S., Tseng, Y.-L. and Chen, J.-W. (2007), “A scenario planning approach for the floodemergency logistics preparation problem under uncertainty”, Transportation ResearchPart E, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 737-54.
Dwamena, O.D. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, Fire Service.
Ellram, L.M. (1996), “The use of the case study method in logistics research”, Journal of BusinessLogistics, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 93-138.
EM-DAT (2008), EM-DAT – Emergency Events Database, Centre for Research on theEpidemiology of Disasters (CRED), Universite Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-La-Neuve,available at: www.emdat.be (accessed March 15, 2008).
Forza, C. (2002), “Survey research in operations management”, International Journal ofOperations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 152-94.
Fritz Institute (2004), “Humanitarian logistics conference – Africa region 2004”, Proceedings ofthe Nairobi, available at: www.fritzinstitute.org/prgSC-HLCaf2004-proceedings.htm(accessed September 10, 2007).
Handfield, R.B., Walton, S.V., Seegers, L.K. and Melnyk, S.A. (1997), “‘Green’ value chainpractices in the furniture industry”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 15 No. 4,pp. 293-315.
Hellenius, R. and Rudbeck, S. (2003), “In-kind donations for nonprofits”, McKinsey Quarterly,No. 4, pp. 23-7.
Hesse, M. and Rodrigue, J.-P. (2004), “The transport geography of logistics and freightdistribution”, Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 171-84.
IFRC (2008), “International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)”, availableat: www.ifrc.org/where/annualappeal/asia_pacific.asp (accessed February 12, 2008).
Jahre, M. and Heigh, I. (2008), “Does failure to fund preparedness mean donors must be preparedto fund failure in humanitarian supply chains?”, in Autere, V., Bask, A.H., Kovacs, G.,Spens, K. and Tanskanen, K. (Eds), Beyond Business Logistics. NOFOMA ConferenceProceedings, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 265-82.
Kaatrud, D.B., Samii, R. and van Wassenhove, L.N. (2003), “UN joint logistics centre: acoordinated response to common humanitarian logistics concerns”, Forced MigrationReview, Vol. 18, pp. 11-14.
Kaba, S. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, NAS.
IJPDLM39,6
524
Kovacs, G. and Spens, K. (2008), “Chapter 13: Humanitarian logistics revisited”, in Arlbjørn, J.S.,Halldorsson, A., Jahre, M. and Spens, K. (Eds), Northern Lights in Logistics & Supply ChainManagement, CBS Press, Copenhagen, pp. 217-32.
Kovacs, G. and Spens, K.M. (2007), “Humanitarian logistics in disaster relief operations”,International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 37 No. 2,pp. 99-114.
Kovacs, G., Buatsi, S.N. and Spens, K.M. (2007), “Challenges of humanitarian logisticians inAfrica”, in Tatham, P. (Ed.), CD-ROM Proceedings of the International HumanitarianLogistics Symposium, Faringdon.
Long, D. (1997), “Logistics for disaster relief”, IIE Solutions, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 26-9.
Long, D.C. and Wood, D.F. (1995), “The logistics of famine relief”, Journal of Business Logistics,Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 213-29.
Ludema, M.W. (2000), “Military and civil logistic support of humanitarian relief operations”,in Arnold, E. and Walden, D. (Eds), A Decade of Progress – A New Century of Opportunity,Proceedings of the 10th Annual International Symposium of the International Council onSystems Engineering, INCOSA, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 143-150.
Meredith, J. (1998), “Building operations management theory through case and field research”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 441-54.
Ndianabo, E. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, UNHRD (UnitedNations Humanitarian Response Depot).
Norrman, A. and Jansson, U. (2004), “Ericsson’s proactive supply chain risk managementapproach after a serious sub-supplier accident”, International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 434-56.
Obiri-Buahin, N. (2007), oral sources presentations and workshop discussions, Minister of State(presenting the speech of Kwamena Bartels).
OECD (2008), Development Aid at a Glance 2008: Statistics by Region, Organisation for EconomicCo-operation and Development, Paris.
Okoampa, E. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, World Vision.
Oloruntoba, R. and Gray, R. (2006), “Humanitarian aid: an agile supply chain?”, Supply ChainManagement, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 115-20.
Osei-Akom, K. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, NADMO (NationalDisaster Management Organisation).
Ozdamar, L., Ekinci, E. and Kucukyazici, B. (2004), “Emergency logistics planning in naturaldisasters”, Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 129 Nos 1/4, pp. 217-45.
Pedersen, P.O. (2001), “Freight transport under globalisation and its impact on Africa”, Journal ofTransport Geography, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 85-99.
Pedersen, P.O. (2003), “Development of freight transport and logistics in Sub-Saharan Africa:Taaffe, Morrill and Gould revisited”, Transport Reviews, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 275-97.
Perry, M. (2007), “Natural disaster management planning”, International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 409-33.
Pettit, S.J. and Beresford, A.K.C. (2006), “Emergency relief logistics: an evaluation of military,non-military, and composite response models”, International Journal of Logistics: Researchand Applications, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 313-31.
Safran, P. (2003), “A strategic approach for disaster and emergency assistance”, paper presentedat the 5th Asian Disaster Reduction Center International Meeting and the 2nd UN-ISDR
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
525
Asian Meeting, January 15-17, 2003, Kobe, available at: www.adb.org/Documents/Policies?Disaster_Emergency/disaster_emergency.pdf, (accessed Junuary 26, 2006).
Spens, K., Kovacs, G. and Vellenga, D.B. (2007), “On a logistical mission”, WIP paper presented atNOFOMA 2007 Conference, Reykjavık.
Tatham, P. and Kovacs, G. (2007), “The humanitarian supply network in rapid onset disasters”,in Halldorsson, A. and Stefansson, G. (Eds), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference forNordic Researchers in Logistics, NOFOMA 2007, Reykjavık, pp. 1059-74.
Thomas, A. and Fritz, L. (2006), “Disaster relief”, Harvard Business Review, November,pp. 114-22.
Thomas, A. and Mizushima, M. (2005), “Logistics training: necessity or luxury?”, ForcedMigration Review, No. 22, pp. 60-1.
Thomas, A.S. and Kopczak, L.R. (2005), “From logistics to supply chain management. The pathforward in the humanitarian sector”, Fritz Institute, San Francisco, CA, available at: www.fritzinstitute.org/PDFs/WhitePaper/FromLogisticsto.pdf (accessed March 15, 2008).
Tzeng, G.-H., Cheng, H.-J. and Huang, T.D. (2007), “Multi-objective optimal planning fordesigning relief delivery systems”, Transportation Research: Part E, Vol. 43 No. 6,pp. 673-86.
UN CHINA (2001), “Natural disaster management”, United Nations Development ProgrammeChina, available at: www.unchina.org/theme/html/disaster.shtml (accessed February 14,2008).
UN/ISDR (2004), “Living with risk. A global review of disaster reduction initiatives,Inter-Agency Secretariat of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN/ISDR)”,available at: www.unisdr.org/eng/about_isdr/bd-lwr-2004-eng.htm (accessed March 14,2008).
van Wassenhove, L.N. (2006), “Humanitarian aid logistics: supply chain management in highgear”, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 57 No. 5, pp. 475-89.
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N. and Frohlich, M. (2002), “Case research in operations management”,International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 195-219.
Wallace, M. and Webber, L. (2004), The Disaster Recovery Handbook, AMACOM, New York, NY.
Weerawat, W. (2007), “Efficacy of international standards on logistics in disaster management.Case study: National Crisis Management Center, Thailand”, in Gupta S., and Coelho J.(Eds), CD-ROM Proceedings of the POMS 2007 Conference, Dallas, TX, Paper 007-0688.
Wireko-Brobbey, B. (2007), oral sources, presentations and workshop discussions, CARE.
World Bank (2007), “Logistics performance index”, available at: info.worldbank.org/etools/tradesurvey/mode1a.asp?countryID¼49&compareWith¼region, comparison of Ghana toSub-Saharan Africa (accessed March 15, 2008).
Yi, W. and Ozdamar, L. (2007), “A dynamic logistics coordination model for evacuation andsupport in disaster response activities”, European Journal of Operational Research, No. 179,pp. 1177-93.
Further reading
Friedman, A.L. and Miles, S. (2004), “Stakeholder theory and communication practice”, Journal ofCommunication Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 89-97.
Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. and Wood, D.J. (1997), “Toward a theory of stakeholder identificationand salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts”, Academy ofManagement Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 853-86.
IJPDLM39,6
526
Appendix
Ch
alle
ng
e
Wor
ldV
isio
n(O
koa
mp
a,20
07)
AD
RA
(Asa
nte
-Men
sah
,20
07)
NA
DM
O:
(Ose
i-A
kom
,20
07)
FIR
ES
ER
VIC
E(D
wam
ena,
2007
)N
AS
(Kab
a,20
07)
Dep
end
ence
onp
olit
ical
dec
isio
nto
dec
lare
stat
eof
emer
gen
cyU
U
Du
ties
(cu
stom
s)U
Ab
sen
ceof
in-c
oun
try
war
ehou
sin
gU
Del
ays
UU
Lac
kof
co-o
rdin
atio
nw
ith
oth
erh
um
anit
aria
nor
gan
isat
ion
sU
U
Lac
kof
com
mu
nic
atio
nw
ith
oth
erG
Os
UU
U
Lac
kof
kn
owle
dg
eab
out
oth
eror
gan
isat
ion
sU
U
Ab
sen
ceof
leg
isla
tion
U
Dif
ficu
ltie
sin
enfo
rcin
got
her
sto
adh
ere
top
roce
du
res
and
stan
dar
ds
UU
Lac
kof
trai
ned
log
isti
cian
sU
UU
Bra
ind
rain
U
Lac
kof
veh
icle
sU
U
Lac
kof
sup
pli
es/e
qu
ipm
ent
UU
U
Lac
kof
ICT
UU
Lac
kof
fun
din
g,
inap
pro
pri
ate
don
atio
ns
UU
UU
U
Lim
its
inth
ep
oten
tial
use
offu
nd
ing
for
adm
inis
trat
ion
U
Lac
kof
tran
spor
tin
fras
tru
ctu
reU
U
Str
eets
hav
en
on
ame
U
Acc
ess
tow
ater
U
Sec
uri
typ
rob
lem
sU
Aid
dep
end
ency
ofb
enefi
ciar
ies
U
Lac
kof
gov
ern
ance
(ost
rich
pla
yin
g)
U
Lac
kof
earl
yw
arn
ing
syst
ems
U
Table AI.
Challenges inhumanitarian
logistics
527
About the authorsGyongyi Kovacs is an Assistant Professor in Supply Chain Management and CorporateGeography at the HANKEN School of Economics, in Helsinki, Finland, where she also earned herPhD. Amongst others, her publications have appeared in the International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics Management and the Journal of Transport Geography. She is currentlythe European Co-editor of the International Journal of Physical Distribution & LogisticsManagement. Her current research interests include sustainable supply chain management,supply chain collaboration, the abductive research approach, reverse logistics and humanitarianlogistics. She is the Co-ordinator of the HUMLOG Group, an international research network inhumanitarian logistics and the Director of the Humanitarian Logistics and Supply ChainResearch Institute (HUMLOG Institute). Gyongyi Kovacs is the corresponding author and can becontacted at: [email protected]
Karen Spens earned her PhD from the HANKEN School of Economics in Helsinki, Finlandand is Professor of Supply Chain Management and Corporate Geography at the Department ofMarketing. She has published in the International Journal of Physical Distribution & LogisticsManagement, International Journal of Logistics, International Journal of Integrated SupplyManagement and others. She is currently the European Co-Editor of the International Journal ofPhysical Distribution & Logistics Management. Her current research focuses on supply chainmanagement in the health care and service sectors, integration, humanitarian logistics and theuse of different research approaches in logistics and supply chain literature.
IJPDLM39,6
528
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
