Search results

Background: The study focuses on the challenges encountered during the distribution of food and face-mask items during the first COVID-19 lock-down by various relief supply chain actors.

Methods: Data were collected from forty (40) relief actors through online (via Zoom and telephones) and face-to-face interviews, between January 2021 to March 2021. Data was coded based on per-determined themes after which it was further processed using Atlas ti. v7.57 to generate patterns.

Results: The study established challenges related to needs identification, procurement, warehousing, transportation, handling, beneficiary verification, and last-mile distribution. Additionally, the media and politics coupled with the emergence of new actors and governance issues were part of the challenges identified.

Conclusions: The identified challenges were internal and external to the relief supply chain; hence actors could have control over some while others were beyond their control. The findings could inform practitioners and policymakers on what challenges are likely to affect their operations, especially during a pandemic, and design appropriate coping mechanisms.

The purpose of this paper is to explore barriers and benefits of establishing relationships between humanitarian organizations (HOs) and logistics service providers (LSPs) in order to improve humanitarian disaster relief operations (DROs). The perceptions of a variety of actors are explored to determine key factors which influence collaboration.

This study comprises of qualitative and quantitative methodological approaches. A comprehensive literature review was undertaken alongside an online survey with a variety of respondents. Descriptive statistics, data visualization and qualitative data analysis were implemented to analyse survey results. A follow-up survey and interviews with LSPs validated the results.

The research presents the opinions of a variety of actors involved in DROs and reveals barriers which affect HO/LSP collaboration. Explanations for these barriers and possible solutions to mitigate them are disclosed. The findings also uncover gaps between research and practice; providing new insights into behaviour in the humanitarian field.

The authors provide an in-depth understanding of the barriers and challenges faced in this field and suggest a reevaluation of corporate decision making in order to increase trust between LSPs and HOs. The authors identify future research topics including the impact of donors and military organizations on HO decision making, and analysis of variables which may affect the formation of collaborative partnerships.

The authors introduce a unique empirical insight into the perspectives of HOs, LSPs and academics and offers suggestions for mitigating the numerous barriers associated with successful collaborative partnerships between HOs and LSPs.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon how encountering trauma unexpectedly in the field informs the doing of fieldwork.

A reflexive essay approach was adopted to explore traumatic incidents in extreme contexts. Written vignettes, interviews, field notes and information conversations served as the bases for reflections.

Four themes arose from the reflections (Bracketing, Institutional Pressure, Impact on Research and Unresolvedness). It was suggested that researchers engaged in extreme context research, and management and organization studies scholars engaged in dangerous fieldwork more broadly, are under institutional pressure to continue work that may put themselves in harm's way. Traumatic experiences also shape and reflect the researcher's identity, which informs choices about current and future research projects.

It was suggested that scholars will benefit from reading the accounts of others to reduce the burden of isolation that can accompany traumatic field experiences.

Exploring single traumatic events enabled in engaging with trauma encountered unexpectedly and directly in the field. The reflections reveal the effects of psychological and physical trauma on researchers, and highlight how trauma impacts the research process.