Perspectives on sustainability in humanitarian supply chains

Author:

Haavisto Ira,Kovács Gyöngyi

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework for analysing how humanitarian organisations (HOs) address different expectations regarding sustainability. Design/methodology/approach – Quantitative and qualitative content analysis is used to assess the annual reports (ARs) of HOs for their discussions on sustainability overall, and in relation to contextual expectations, subsystems and supply chains, organisational structure and strategy. Findings – HOs address sustainability primarily from the perspective of contextual expectations from society and beneficiaries. Some fits between supply chain design and societal expectations are attended to, but fits between programmes and contextual expectations are not discussed explicitly. Research limitations/implications – ARs express what organisations want to portray of their activities rather than being direct reflections of what occurs in the field, hence the use of ARs for the study delimits its findings. However, HOs rarely publish sustainability reports. Practical implications – Even though there is a general pursuit of the elusive aim of aid effectiveness, organisational structures need to be further aligned with societal aims as to support these. Social implications – Beneficiaries are still seen as external to the humanitarian supply chain and humanitarian programmes, though their role may change with the introduction of more cash components in aid, voucher systems, and ultimately, their empowerment through these. Originality/value – The suggested conceptual framework combines elements of contingency theory with a prior four perspectives model on sustainability expectations. The framework helps to highlight fits between the humanitarian context, operations and programmes as well as misalignments between these.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Health(social science)

Reference78 articles.

1. Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (2007), “An introduction to evaluation of humanitarian action (EHA)”, Course Manual, available at: www.alnap.org/pool/files/CourseManual.pdf (accessed October 2013).

2. American Red Cross (2010), “Annual Report 2010”, available at: www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3140116_2010AnnualReport.pdf (accessed October 2013).

3. Anderson, M.B. (1999), Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace – Or War, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, CO.

4. Balcik, B. , Iravani, S. and Smilowitz, K. (2010), A Review of Equity in Nonprofit and Public Sector: A Vehicle Routing Perspective, Wiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science, JohnWiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.

5. Ballou, R.H. (2004), Business Logistics/Supply Chain Management, 5th ed., Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Cited by 60 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3