Managerial models for disaster and humanitarian operations: enhancing empirical validation through case studies of disaster responses in Haiti

IF 3.2 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Ludmylla da Silva Moreira, D. Mendes, Tharcisio Cotta Fontainha, A. Leiras
{"title":"Managerial models for disaster and humanitarian operations: enhancing empirical validation through case studies of disaster responses in Haiti","authors":"Ludmylla da Silva Moreira, D. Mendes, Tharcisio Cotta Fontainha, A. Leiras","doi":"10.1108/jhlscm-02-2021-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe research areas of humanitarian supply chain (HSC) and disaster and humanitarian operations (DHO) have evolved through the use of managerial models. Recent studies, however, point to the need for the empirical validation of such managerial models in real-life scenarios. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the validation of recent managerial models based on empirical data of two disasters in Haiti: the earthquake in 2010 and Hurricane Matthew in 2016.Design/methodology/approachThis research developed two case studies from the perspective of the Brazilian Navy (BN), a part of the Brazilian Armed Forces that led the United Nations Mission for Stabilization in Haiti (MINUSTAH) in both disasters. The case studies focused on empirically validating managerial models for stakeholder identification, stakeholder satisfaction, response processes, strategies for collaboration and the integration of these models.FindingsThe results revealed that compared to the response to the earthquake in 2010, the response to Hurricane Matthew in 2016 was superior. The collaborative strategies of the BN and other stakeholders used after the earthquake were more reactive, while the strategies after Hurricane Matthew aimed more at planning and anticipating adverse situations.Originality/valueThis research reinforces the investigated managerial models and indicates their suitability as planning tools for practitioners of HSC and DHO, which is essential for the further development of academic contributions related to integrating the models into more robust solutions.","PeriodicalId":46575,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jhlscm-02-2021-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

PurposeThe research areas of humanitarian supply chain (HSC) and disaster and humanitarian operations (DHO) have evolved through the use of managerial models. Recent studies, however, point to the need for the empirical validation of such managerial models in real-life scenarios. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the validation of recent managerial models based on empirical data of two disasters in Haiti: the earthquake in 2010 and Hurricane Matthew in 2016.Design/methodology/approachThis research developed two case studies from the perspective of the Brazilian Navy (BN), a part of the Brazilian Armed Forces that led the United Nations Mission for Stabilization in Haiti (MINUSTAH) in both disasters. The case studies focused on empirically validating managerial models for stakeholder identification, stakeholder satisfaction, response processes, strategies for collaboration and the integration of these models.FindingsThe results revealed that compared to the response to the earthquake in 2010, the response to Hurricane Matthew in 2016 was superior. The collaborative strategies of the BN and other stakeholders used after the earthquake were more reactive, while the strategies after Hurricane Matthew aimed more at planning and anticipating adverse situations.Originality/valueThis research reinforces the investigated managerial models and indicates their suitability as planning tools for practitioners of HSC and DHO, which is essential for the further development of academic contributions related to integrating the models into more robust solutions.
灾害和人道主义行动的管理模式:通过海地灾害反应案例研究加强经验验证
目的人道主义供应链(HSC)和灾害与人道主义行动(DHO)的研究领域是通过管理模型的使用而发展起来的。然而,最近的研究表明,有必要在现实生活中对这种管理模式进行实证验证。因此,本研究旨在调查基于海地两次灾害(2010年地震和2016年飓风马修)经验数据的近期管理模型的验证。设计/方法/方法本研究从巴西海军的角度开发了两个案例研究,巴西武装部队的一部分,曾在两次灾难中领导联合国海地稳定特派团(联海稳定团)。案例研究侧重于实证验证利益相关者识别、利益相关者满意度、响应过程、合作战略以及这些模型的整合的管理模型。调查结果显示,与2010年对地震的反应相比,2016年对飓风马修的反应更为出色。BN和其他利益相关者在地震后使用的合作策略更具反应性,而飓风马修之后的策略更多地旨在规划和预测不利情况。独创性/价值这项研究强化了所研究的管理模式,并表明它们适合作为HSC和DHO从业者的规划工具,这对于进一步发展与将模式整合到更稳健的解决方案中相关的学术贡献至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management (JHLSCM) is targeted at academics and practitioners in humanitarian public and private sector organizations working on all aspects of humanitarian logistics and supply chain management. The journal promotes the exchange of knowledge, experience and new ideas between researchers and practitioners and encourages a multi-disciplinary and cross-functional approach to the resolution of problems and exploitations of opportunities within humanitarian supply chains. Contributions are encouraged from diverse disciplines (logistics, operations management, process engineering, health care, geography, management science, information technology, ethics, corporate social responsibility, disaster management, development aid, public policy) but need to have a logistics and/or supply chain focus. JHLSCM publishes state of the art research, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative approaches, in the field of humanitarian and development aid logistics and supply chain management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信