Search results

Due to the unknown location, size and timing of disasters, the rapid response required by humanitarian operations (HO) faces high uncertainty and limited time to raise funds. These harsh realities make HO challenging. This study aims to systematically capture the complex dynamic relationships between operations in humanitarian settings.

To achieve this goal, the authors undertook a systematic review of the extant academic literature linking HO to system dynamics (SD) simulation.

The research reviews 88 papers to propose a taxonomy of different topics covered in the literature; a framework represented through a causal loop diagram (CLD) to summarise the taxonomy, offering a view of operational activities and their linkages before and after disasters; and a research agenda for future research avenues.

As the authors provide an adequate representation of reality, the findings can help decision makers understand the problems faced in HO and make more effective decisions.

While other reviews on the application of SD in HO have focused on specific subjects, the current research presents a broad view, summarising the main results of a comprehensive CLD.

Disaster management and humanitarian logistics (HT) play crucial roles in large-scale events such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes and tsunamis. Well-organized disaster response is crucial for effectively managing medical centres, staff allocation and casualty distribution during emergencies. To address this issue, this study aims to introduce a multi-objective stochastic programming model to enhance disaster preparedness and response, focusing on the critical first 72 h after earthquakes. The purpose is to optimize the allocation of resources, temporary medical centres and medical staff to save lives effectively.

This study uses stochastic programming-based dynamic modelling and a discrete-time Markov Chain to address uncertainty. The model considers potential road and hospital damage and distance limits and introduces an a-reliability level for untreated casualties. It divides the initial 72 h into four periods to capture earthquake dynamics.

Using a real case study in Istanbul’s Kartal district, the model’s effectiveness is demonstrated for earthquake scenarios. Key insights include optimal medical centre locations, required capacities, necessary medical staff and casualty allocation strategies, all vital for efficient disaster response within the critical first 72 h.

This study innovates by integrating stochastic programming and dynamic modelling to tackle post-disaster medical response. The use of a Markov Chain for uncertain health conditions and focus on the immediate aftermath of earthquakes offer practical value. By optimizing resource allocation amid uncertainties, the study contributes significantly to disaster management and HT research.

Mapping and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are widely used in disaster research and practice. While, in some cases, these practices incorporate methods inspired by critical cartography and critical GIS, they rarely engage with the theoretical discussions that animate those fields.

In this commentary, the author considers three such discussions, and draws out their relevance for disaster studies: the turn towards processual cartographies, political economy analysis of datafication and calls for theorising computing of and from the South.

The review highlights how these discussions can contribute to the work of scholars engaged in mapping for disaster risk management and research. First, it can counter the taken-for-granted nature of disaster-related maps, and encourage debate about how such maps are produced, used and circulated. Second, it can foster a reflexive attitude towards the urge to quantify and map disasters. Third, it can help to rethink the role of digital technologies with respect to ongoing conversations on the need to decolonise disaster studies.

The paper aims to familiarise disaster studies scholars with literature that has received relatively little attention in this field and, by doing so, contribute to a repoliticisation of disaster-related maps.

The notion that disasters are not natural is longstanding, leading to a growing number of campaigns aimed at countering the use of the term “natural disaster.” Whilst these efforts are crucial, critical perspectives regarding the potential risks associated with this process are lacking, particularly in places affected by violent conflict. This paper aims to present a critical analysis of these efforts, highlighting the need to approach them with care.

The author draws upon insights and discussions accumulated over a decade of research into the relationship between disasters and conflict. The article includes a critical literature review on the disaster–conflict relationship and literature specifically addressing the idea that disasters are not natural. The analysis of field notes led to a second literature review covering topics such as (de) politicisation, instrumentalisation, disaster diplomacy, ethics, humanitarian principles, disaster risk reduction, peacebuilding and conflict sensitivity.

This analysis underscores the importance of advocating that disasters are not natural, especially in conflict-affected areas. However, an uncritical approach could lead to unintended consequences, such as exacerbating social conflicts or obstructing disaster-related actions. The article also presents alternatives to advance the understanding that disasters are not natural whilst mitigating risks, such as embracing a “do-no-harm” approach or conflict-sensitive analyses.

The author offers an innovative critical approach to advancing the understanding that disasters are not natural but socio-political. This perspective is advocated, especially in conflict-affected contexts, to address the root causes of both disasters and conflicts. The author also invites their peers and practitioners to prioritise reflective scholarship and practices, aiming to prevent the unintentional exacerbation of suffering whilst working towards its reduction.

Disasters and armed conflict often co-occur, but does that imply that disasters trigger or fuel conflict? In the small but growing body of literature attempting to answer this question, divergent findings indicate the complex and contextual nature of a potential answer to this question. The purpose of this study is to contribute a robust cross-country analysis of the co-occurrence of disaster and conflict, with a particular focus on the potential role played by disaster.

Grounded in a theoretical model of disaster–conflict co-occurrence, this study merges data from 163 countries between 1990 and 2017 on armed conflict, disasters and relevant control variables (low human development, weak democratic institutions, natural resource dependence and large population size/density).

The main results of this study show that, despite a sharp increase in the co-occurrence of disasters and armed conflict over time, disasters do not appear to have a direct statistically significant relation with the occurrence of armed conflict. This result contributes to the understanding of disasters and conflicts as indirectly related via co-creation mechanisms and other factors.

This study is a novel contribution, as it provides a fresh analysis with updated data and includes different control variables that allow for a significant contribution to the field.

Unforeseen events can disrupt the operational process and negatively impact emergency resources optimization and its supply chain. A limited number of studies have addressed risk management issues in the context of emergency supply chains, and this existing research lacks inbuilt and practical techniques that can significantly affect the reliability of risk management outcomes. Therefore, this paper aims to identify and practically analyze the specific risk factors that can most likely disrupt the normal functioning of the emergency supply chain in disaster relief operations.

This paper has used a three-step process to investigate and evaluate risk factors associated with the emergency supply chain. First, the study conducts a comprehensive literature review to identify the risk factors. Second, the research develops a questionnaire survey to validate and classify the identified risk factors. At the end of this step, the study develops a hierarchical structure. Finally, the research investigates the weighted priority of the validated risk factors using the fuzzy-analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) methodology. Experts were required to provide subjective judgments.

This paper identified and validated 28 specific risk factors prevalent in emergency supply chains. Based on their contextual meanings, the research classified these risk factors into two main categories: internal and external risk factors; four subcategories: demand, supply, infrastructural and environmental risk factors; and 11 risk types: forecast, inventory, procurement, supplier, quality, transportation, warehousing, systems, disruption, social and political risk factors. The most significant risk factors include war and terrorism, the absence of legislative rules that can influence and support disaster relief operations, the impact of cascading disasters, limited quality of relief supplies and sanctions and constraints that can hinder stakeholder collaboration. Therefore, emergency supply chain managers should adopt appropriate strategies to mitigate these risk factors.

This study will contribute to the general knowledge of risk management in emergency supply chains. The identified risk factors and structural hierarchy taxonomic diagram will provide a comprehensive risk database for emergency supply chains.

The research findings will provide comprehensive and systemic support for respective practitioners and policymakers to obtain a firm understanding of the different risk categories and specific risk factors that can impede the effective functioning of the emergency supply chain during immediate disaster relief operations. Therefore, this will inform the need for the improvement of practices in critical aspects of the emergency supply chain through the selection of logistics and supply chain strategies that can ensure the robustness and resilience of the system.

This research uses empirical data to identify, categorize and validate risk factors in emergency supply chains. This study contributes to the theory of supply chain risk management. The study also adopts the fuzzy-AHP technique to evaluate and prioritize these risk factors to inform practitioners and policymakers of the most significant risk factors. Furthermore, this study serves as the first phase of managing risk in emergency supply chains since it motivates future studies to empirically identify, evaluate and select effective strategies that can eliminate or minimize the effects of these risk factors.

As stated in the United Nations Global Assessment Report 2022 Concept Note, decision-makers everywhere need data and statistics that are accurate, timely, sufficiently disaggregated, relevant, accessible and easy to use. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate scalable and replicable methods to advance and integrate the use of earth observation (EO), specifically ongoing efforts within the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) Work Programme and the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) Work Plan, to support risk-informed decision-making, based on documented national and subnational needs and requirements.

Promotion of open data sharing and geospatial technology solutions at national and subnational scales encourages the accelerated implementation of successful EO applications. These solutions may also be linked to specific Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 2015–2030 Global Targets that provide trusted answers to risk-oriented decision frameworks, as well as critical synergies between the Sendai Framework and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This paper provides examples of these efforts in the form of platforms and knowledge hubs that leverage latest developments in analysis ready data and support evidence-based DRR measures.

The climate crisis is forcing countries to face unprecedented frequency and severity of disasters. At the same time, there are growing demands to respond to policy at the national and international level. EOs offer insights and intelligence for evidence-based policy development and decision-making to support key aspects of the Sendai Framework. The GEO DRR Working Group and CEOS Working Group Disasters are ideally placed to help national government agencies, particularly national Sendai focal points to learn more about EOs and understand their role in supporting DRR.

The unique perspective of EOs provide unrealized value to decision-makers addressing DRR. This paper highlights tangible methods and practices that leverage free and open source EO insights that can benefit all DRR practitioners.

The current pandemic and ongoing climate risks highlight the limited capacity of various systems, including health and social ones, to respond to population-scale and long-term threats. Practices to reduce the impacts on the health and well-being of populations must evolve from a reactive mode to preventive, proactive and concerted actions beginning at individual and community levels. Experiences and lessons learned from the pandemic will help to better prevent and reduce the psychosocial impacts of floods, or other hydroclimatic risks, in a climate change context.

The present paper first describes the complexity and the challenges associated with climate change and systemic risks. It also presents some systemic frameworks of mental health determinants, and provides an overview of the different types of psychosocial impacts of disasters. Through various Quebec case studies and using lessons learned from past and recent flood-related events, recommendations are made on how to better integrate individual and community factors in disaster response.

Results highlight the fact that people who have been affected by the events are significantly more likely to have mental health problems than those not exposed to flooding. They further demonstrate the adverse and long-term effects of floods on psychological health, notably stemming from indirect stressors at the community and institutional levels. Different strategies are proposed from individual-centered to systemic approaches, in putting forward the advantages from intersectoral and multirisk researches and interventions.

The establishment of an intersectoral flood network, namely the InterSectoral Flood Network of Québec (RIISQ), is presented as an interesting avenue to foster interdisciplinary collaboration and a systemic view of flood risks. Intersectoral work is proving to be a major issue in the management of systemic risks, and should concern communities, health and mental health professionals, and the various levels of governance. As climate change is called upon to lead to more and more systemic risks, close collaboration between all the areas concerned with the management of the factors of vulnerability and exposure of populations will be necessary to respond effectively to damages and impacts (direct and indirect) linked to new meteorological and compound hazards. This means as well to better integrate the communication managers into the risk management team.

This paper aims to identify key factors for a contextualised Systemic Risk Governance (SRG) framework and subsequently explore how systemic risks can be managed and how local institutional mechanisms can be tweaked to deal with the complex Indonesian risk landscape.

Using a case study from Palu triple-disasters in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, the authors demonstrate how inland earthquakes in 2018 created cascading secondary hazards, namely tsunamis, liquefactions and landslides, caused unprecedented disasters for the communities and the nation. A qualitative analysis was conducted using the data collected through a long-term observation since 2002.

The authors argue that Indonesia has yet to incorporate an SRG approach in its responses to the Palu triple-disasters. Political will is required to adopt more appropriate risk governance modes that promote the systemic risk paradigm. Change needs to occur incrementally through hybrid governance arrangements ranging from formal/informal methods to self- and horizontal and vertical modes of governance deemed more realistic and feasible. The authors recommend that this be done by focusing on productive transition and local transformation.

There is growing awareness and recognition of the importance of systemic and cascading risks in disaster risk studies. However, there are still gaps between research, policy and practice. The current progress of disaster risk governance is not sufficient to achieve the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030) unless there is an effective governing system in place at the local level that allow actors and institutions to simultaneously manage the interplays of multi-hazards, multi-temporal, multi-dimensions of vulnerabilities and residual risks. This paper contributes to these knowledge gaps.

This study aims to compare the humanitarian supply chains and logistics of two countries in earthquake preparedness by modifying and using a previously established preparedness evaluation framework.

A European flood emergency management system (FEMS) is a seven-dimensional framework to assess a country’s preparedness for flood emergencies. The FEMS framework was modified to apply to earthquakes. Leveraging a multiple explanatory case study approach with data analysis, the authors reconstructed the events of the earthquakes in Pakistan (2005) and Japan (2011) with an applied grading (1–5). Findings were evaluated within the adopted FEMS framework. From a practitioner’s perspective, the framework is applicable and can accelerate support in the field.

Pakistan lacked emergency plans before the 2005 earthquake. In contrast, Japan possessed emergency plans before the disaster, helping minimise casualties. Overall, Japan demonstrated considerably better emergency management effectiveness. However, both countries significantly lacked the distribution of responsibilities among actors.

Practical factors in the humanitarian supply chain are well understood. However, synthesising individual factors into a comprehensive framework is difficult, which the study solves by applying and adopting the FEMS framework to earthquakes. The developed framework allows practitioners a structured baseline for prioritising measures in the field. Furthermore, this study exemplifies the usefulness of cross-hazard research within emergency management and preparedness in a real-world scenario.