The impact of humanitarian organizations’ principles
on coordination efforts within refugee supply chains
Master Thesis Supply Chain Management Faculty of Business and Economics
Abstract
In light of the growing refugee crisis, this paper aims to identify the influencing factors related to coordinating activities among different humanitarian organizations. Particularly, the objective of this research is to investigate the impact of principles in achieving coordination in the provision of aid within refugee supply chains. Literature in general lacks knowledge on the specific setting of refugee supply chains and little is known about the role of humanitarian principles across independent and mandated humanitarian organizations. The paper aims to contribute to existing SCM literature, as well as provide rich insights on a practical level for both practitioners and academics alike. Data is collected by means of a multiple case-study approach among six humanitarian organizations active within the EU refugee crisis. A brief literature review is also used to provide background knowledge on the relevant concepts and serve as a basis for data analysis. The findings show that the influencing role of principles on coordination efforts depends on the several factors that include identity, funding and the contextual phase of the refugee crisis.
1. Introduction
As more countries in Europe are experiencing an increased influx of refugees, widespread interest in the characteristics of the refugee crisis has also significantly increased (Milovancevic, Ispanovic & Stupar, 2016). In 2015, it was estimated that there were a total of 20.2 million refugees in the world of which over half were children (Williams et al, 2016). The humanitarian relief environment, specifically the refugee crisis in Europe, involves many actors that include host governments, international and local relief organizations, private sector companies and the military (Van Wassenhove, 2006; Balcik, Beamom, Krejci, Muramatsu & Ramirez, 2010; Rysaback-Smith, 2015). As no single organization has sufficient resources to respond to disasters independently (Bui, Cho, Sankaran & Sovereign, 2000; Arschinder, Kanda, Deshmukh, 2008), it is critical to form partnerships and coordinate with other actors in order to provide the immediate and long-term needs of refugees. However, each of these actors may have different interests, mandates and missions that affect their ability to coordinate activities and information flow across the supply chain (Balcik et al., 2010; McLachlin & Larson, 2011).
Although humanitarian organizations essentially seem to embrace the same principles, how these principles are adapted into activities can differ significantly (Hilhorst & Schmiemann, 2002). Kovacs & Spens (2009) argue that the mandate of a humanitarian organization determines its operational boundaries, which includes its involvement in particular types and phases of disasters, items delivered, and the partners it is allowed to collaborate with. This indicates that differences may occur when looking at mandated humanitarian organizations and its application of principles when compared to independent humanitarian organizations. In addition, Hilhorst & Schmiemann (2002) argue that the interpretation of fundamental principles among humanitarian organizations such as, impartiality and independence is subject to different types of humanitarian organizations. As a consequence, the different meanings may clash and create friction when organizations attempt to work together in a coordinated response to a refugee crisis (Hilhorst & Schmiemann, 2002). Thereby, comparing the principles of independent humanitarian organizations and mandated humanitarian organizations may present differences in its impact on coordination success. This topic presents a literature gap in the humanitarian field, particularly in the context of refugee supply chains, which has not been studied from an SCM perspective. Previous literature have addressed various aspects with respect to coordination in the relief sector (Minear, 2002; Kehler, 2004), while other group of studies discuss the challenges associated with coordination efforts in humanitarian aid (Rey, 2001; Stephenson & Schnitzer, 2006; Kovács & Spens, 2007; Arschinder et al, 2008; Akhtar et al., 2012 Nascimento, 2015). The impact of humanitarian principles in the coordination of supply chains is not addressed in any of these studies. Thus, this paper aims to investigate the relationship between coordination and the principles and ideologies of mandated and independent humanitarian organizations. This leads to the following research question to be answered:
How do the principles of mandated and independent humanitarian organizations influence coordination efforts in the provision of needs across refugee supply chains?
provide new and in-depth insights on the effects of humanitarian principles on coordination efforts. This paper aims to contribute to existing humanitarian SCM literature by investigating the principles and philosophies of mandated and independent humanitarian organizations and how this influences the level of coordination and performance achieved in a refugee chain environment. Further, focusing on the new setting of refugee supply chains adds new insights to a relatively unknown field in the humanitarian sector. Thus, the study’s contribution is to provide specific insights into the effects of differing principles, values and philosophies on coordination success in a refugee supply chain. On a practical level, this is useful for refugee coordinators and managers alike to make better decisions that help achieve coordination within their supply chains.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section two provides a literature review of the relevant concepts. This is followed by the methodology used to investigate the problem to which the findings are derived. Section four presents the results of the research and section five discusses the results’ implication in literature and practice. Section six concludes with the study’s limitations, provides gaps and opportunities for future research and provides the conclusion.
2. Theoretical Framework
The research question involves two main theoretical concepts: principles of mandated and independent humanitarian organizations, and coordination within the context of refugee supply chains.
2.1 Humanitarian principles
Humanity - Human suffering is addressed wherever it is found with the aim to protect
life and ensure respect for human beings.
Neutrality - Humanitarian actors do not take sides in hostilities or engage in
controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature.
Impartiality - Humanitarian action is carried out on the sole basis of need, prioritizing
the most vulnerable without making distinctions on nationality, race, gender, religious belief or political views.
Independence - Humanitarian action is free from the political, economic, and military
or other objectives that actors may have concerning areas where humanitarian action is found.
With these humanitarian principles, the humanitarian sector implies that its agents must deliver services according to the principles they uphold (Hilhorst & Janson, 2010). Thereby, “these principles provide the foundation for humanitarian action” and function as a compliance facilitator to promote and ensure that effective humanitarian coordination is achieved (OCHA, 2012).
values. To illustrate this point, in 2016 MSF, an independent non-profit humanitarian organization, decided to reject EU and UK funding in protest of their deterrence and non-humanitarian policies during the refugee crisis (Médecins Sans Frontières, 2016). With this in consideration, the extent to which humanitarian organizations abide by their principles and motives can impact coordination (Leader, 2000) in a refugee supply chain.
2.2 Refugee supply chain
Refugee supply chains can be described as a sub-set of relief aid supply chains. Thereby, relief supply chains and refugee supply chains share similar characteristics. For example, logistics and supply chain management play a key role in the relief operations of slow-onset man-made disasters such as the refugee crisis (Van Wassenhove, 2006). Similarly, it is imperative to pursue efficient and responsive supply chains in order to reduce throughput time and provide rapid response as this could mean saved lives and increased opportunities to mitigate problems (Van Wassenhove, 2006). Zobel (2010) argues the need to cooperate and involve other organizations and other social and environmental factors as it impacts the decision-making process in relief aid operations. The need to cooperate becomes more important as relief supply chains including that of a refugee crisis involve high uncertainty due to the fact that more often than not, the information on when, where and to what scale relief is required is unknown (Kumar, 2013).
2.3 Coordination
In research and in practice, the term coordination is understood in different ways. From a supply chain perspective, coordination is defined from several angles. Larsen (2000) describes it as working together in collaboration to achieve joint planning, joint product development, mutual exchange of information and integrated information systems, including cross coordination between companies towards long-term cooperation and to share risks and benefits. The importance of coordination in refugee supply chains is similar, where coordination relates to taking advantage of benefits and greater success by jointly working together (Simatupang & Sridharan 2002; Kleindorfer & Saad, 2004; Arschinder et al., 2008). Also, it is important to note that humanitarian organizations frequently use the terms collaboration and coordination interchangeably (Russell, 2005). In practice, the term coordination is interpreted differently across humanitarian organizations and “may refer to resource and information sharing, centralized decision-making, conducting joint projects, regional division of tasks, or a cluster-based system in which each cluster represents a different sector area (e.g. food, water, and information technology)” (Balcik et al., 2010). The aforementioned description of coordination is adopted in this paper. Specifically, the following four coordination mechanisms namely, information exchange, joint working, joint-decision making and integrated information systems are used to measure coordination among humanitarian organizations.
Figure 2.1 Research framework
3. Methodology
This section covers the research design, research setting, data collection, operationalization of concepts, and data analysis. It explains the methodological choices made during the research including its related limitations.
3.1 Research design
Based on the nature of the phenomenon to be studied, a multiple case study method was chosen to investigate the relationship between humanitarian principles and coordination efforts in the context of the recent refugee crisis. A case research method allows for scientific inquiry and the exploration of a phenomenon in highly complex contexts (Stuart et al., 2002; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). Moreover, it allows the researcher to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the nature and complexity of a phenomenon (Meredith, 1998). The impact of humanitarian principles on coordination is a relatively unknown topic. As the refugee crisis deals with many actors that have different identities, the nuance of their interpretation of principles adds to the complexity in this setting. The aim of this research is theory building through the employment of a grounded theory approach, which is suitable due to the limited knowledge regarding the impact of humanitarian principles on coordination efforts in a supply chain (Yin, 1989; Strauss and Corbin, 1990). As a result, the
approach allows for in-depth insights including emergent themes which otherwise could not have been achieved (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).
3.2 Research setting and case selection
The refugee aid field, a subsector of the humanitarian sector is the main interest and research setting of this paper. In particular, this research focuses on the EU refugee crisis; a slow-onset disaster that is the result of major humanitarian needs arising from the increasing number of people affected by wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The setting being in Europe, this refugee crisis is in a more stable environment as the infrastructure such as access to certain areas and warehouses are readily available. In comparison, the war in Somalia and Yemen has led to the destruction of infrastructure and armed groups complicate access to affected areas. As a result, the EU setting allows for influencing factors on coordination to be controlled for. Since the research setting is less varied, the context allows the impact of principles on coordination to emerge better.
Table 3.1 Overview of case selection and data collection
* In the column “Size” small, medium and large are represented by S, M, and L.
3.3 Data collection
An interview protocol was developed based on relevant concepts and was pilot tested with two academics in the field of supply chain management. The complete protocol can be found in Appendix A. This allowed modifying the protocol in a way that questions were answered in a comprehensive manner. For example, some questions were reformulated in a more open-ended way to probe for the ‘hows’ and ‘whys’. All interviews were conducted in person or over Skype in English and lasted approximately 45 minutes. These interviews were recorded, transcribed and sent back to the respondents to increase construct validity and ensure accurateness of data.
managerial roles had more experience with coordination decisions with other actors while technical roles were more in charge of implementing these decisions.
For each organization, two to three respondents were interviewed depending on availability in an effort to decrease biases and triangulate evidence for reliability purposes (Voss et al., 2002). Most of the cases consisted of two to three respondents except for one organization with only one interview, as no other person was available at the time. Altogether a data pool of 12 interviews were collected, of which seven interviews represented independent organizations and five interviews represented mandated organizations. The summary of data collection is provided in Table 3.1.
In addition, secondary sources including publicly available reports, articles and archives were used to triangulate the data. The triangulation of data collection from using different sources increases the reliability and construct validity of the results (Yin, 2003; Voss et al., 2002; Easterby-Smith et al., 2002; Eisenhardt, 1989).
3.4 Operationalization of constructs
Table 3.2 Definitions of concepts
*Funding is an emerging theme that transpired during data analysis.
3.5 Data Analysis
which allows for data reduction and patterns to emerge such as funding. First, open coding was performed by matching statements from the transcribed interviews with the concepts and categories derived from the conceptual framework (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006). After all interviews were coded, axial coding was applied in which concepts and categories were related to generating more abstract codes. Last, overarching themes were developed based on the abstract codes generated during axial coding. These themes were used to explain and gain meaningful insights on the influence of humanitarian principles on coordination efforts. Once the with-in case analysis is complete, a cross-case analysis is carried out based on the previous results found to identify the similarities and differences between cases.
*The following were emergent categories that required their own category in order to organize the coding process.
4. Results
The following sections present the findings of this research organized by discussing the results of the within case analysis, followed by the cross-case analysis to show the relationship of humanitarian principles and coordination within a refugee supply chain. The results are presented by showing how different humanitarian organizations coordinate using the four main coordination mechanisms. Simultaneously, insights are drawn on the effect of the use of principles on coordination efforts within aid work.
4.1 Within-case analysis
Case 1 – Lone ranger
organization means addressing suffering with a particular attention to the most vulnerable. It operates in accordance with these principles, with the aim of maximizing the interest of its beneficiaries.
In the pursuit of these principles, Lone Ranger understands that for a successful operation it is necessary for them to coordinate with organizations through sharing practical operational information related to scope, intent, and capacity to divide tasks. They will also share expert knowledge in terms of mortality and diseases as well as importation procedures and contacts in places where they already have operations from a previous crisis. This information is mainly shared through writings and meetings per phone, e-mail and coordination meetings. Additionally, Lone ranger also coordinates with parties specializing in certain fields such as water and sanitation, food and boats by sharing warehouses and materials with them if need be.
“There is high concurrence for getting the goods. One time we bought all the production of tents. We shared these with other NGOs and agencies as at the end of the day whether we buy them or they buy them, we are helping the same people.”
Moreover, the importance of the principles impartiality and humanity are also reflected in their willingness to compromise of losing some of their independence. Lone ranger also coordinates through joint-decision making tasks with actors such as the government and Ministry of Health. Both parties must approve their medical kits before they can send them into a certain area. Therefore, this is considered forced coordination, as it is mostly not by choice but by obligation and necessity.
“We are obliged to work with governments as without their permission we can not function and import our goods. With the Ministry of Health because otherwise, we don't get access to the ministry’s facilities. They also need to validate your importations, they don’t allow anything to go in which is good but it creates a lot of headaches.”
authorities when an organization asks for it as an independent entity. As a result, this is performed at the expense of their neutrality in order to pursue the principal humanity and impartiality. Thereby, Lone ranger argues that when access is the priority to help refugees, it more often than not affects their decision to coordinate or not with others.
“Humanity and impartiality can affect maybe our not coordinating with others rather than coordinating. If that enables us to access those more vulnerable, we might compromise some other things such as the principle neutrality.”
In this case, an influencing factor that emerged is the role of donors. Large private donations to the organization have given Lone ranger full independence in economical terms. It enables them to carry out operations and independent logistics and supply with fewer partners as they can afford their own warehouses, trucks, and planes. However, it does not mean that they work alone since interaction and coordination with NGOs and local authorities and communities are necessary for any crisis.
"From an economical point of view, we are far better than most. It still does not mean you are completely operating in isolation. The fact that you can afford your own plane, and your trucks, and staff, does not mean you can walk into any crisis without having to interact with the local actors and government.”
Case 2 – Job seeker
Job seeker is an independent local humanitarian organization that provides tailor made support to refugees in the Netherlands. It supports them by providing a safe space where they can improve their employability skills. As such, Job seeker considers the individual situation of refugees including their dreams and struggles. Thereby, this organization's main principle strongly relates to humanity and independence.
offer trainings to enhance the employability of refugees. For the connector program, the idea is that professionals would act as mentors to ultimately help refugees find a job. These professionals and Job seeker share information regarding the tailor made aim of the connector program and the strengths and weaknesses of the refugee during the process. In addition, there are also training projects provided by partners who have expert knowledge and skills in a certain field such as their barista and atelier training. Information on the project’s progress and struggles are exchanged on a weekly basis through phone and e-mail. Therefore, Job seeker considers coordination a crucial part of their activities in the pursuit of achieving the principle humanity. The goal of networking in this way calls for an intensive way of working together.
"The joint projects in a way allows us to use our partner's skills and their network and the connections that they have made to also enlarge the opportunities for refugees. This includes the barista and beer projects from … companies.”
Another way that Job seeker coordinates are by ensuring that they have a strong network of trusted partners to refer refugees to when they require other types of support. Therefore, they work very closely with external services that can provide housing, legal, and psychiatric assistance. This type of partnership requires regular exchange of information.
"I think it's very important to have a good referral system for when example, refugees need a lawyer, and that we can really trust these parties and send the refugees to them in order for us to stay neutral."
Funding was an emerging theme found in this case that had a negative impact on Job seeker’ independence and accordingly the decision to not coordinate with certain parties. While Job seeker is funded for their projects by private organizations, the municipality is also funding them. Consequently, the municipality places certain constraints on which Job seeker can partner with.
Moreover, as Job seeker receives funding from the municipality, they are forced to report back to the municipality about the progress and struggles of refugees. This is an issue for Job seeker as it is a balancing act to provide the municipality sufficient information on progress while ensuring that they are not disclosing information that may harm the refugees. The municipality has the power to decide that refugees are not putting enough effort to integrate and find a job.
Case 3 – Disciple
The Disciple is a mandated faith-based organization active in running a refugee shelter in Germany. Their main identity is founded on faith and respect to other human beings and has long history of providing help to refugees and homeless people in the country. It has a mandate from its local municipality to provide shelter to refugees in the region and is thereby also solely funded by the government. Disciple’s main principles relate to humanity and impartiality. They want to help refugees with their basic needs by providing shelter and food, as well as support them to integrate into society by learning the language to ultimately find a job.
As humanity is the essence of Disciple’s mission, they coordinate through sharing information and joint-projects with many parties who are willing to help them run and improve the assistance to refugees. These parties consist mainly of Christian organizations, volunteers, and local politicians. They share information related to capacity, security, and contacts during monthly coordination meetings. Some joint- projects are also set up between parties, such as free haircuts, and arts and crafts programs.
“We meet once a month here in Berlin Spandau with the local politicians. They organize coordination meetings for the social managers or directors of the other shelters to improve the service. There is also a monthly meeting with the volunteer coordination here in the district of Spandau and sometimes we meet people for networking events.”
They refuse to work with parties that are interested in making money and who treat refugees not on the same level but as permanent victims. This also means that if a lower quality of service were being provided then they would terminate the cooperation.
Similar to previous cases, the decision to coordinate with other parties to provide certain activities is affected by funding. Disciple has budget constraints from the municipality, which affects their resource capability to coordinate with other relevant parties as for example, to build a playground. Thereby, Disciple highly depends on its funding in its operations and accordingly, its involvement with other related humanitarian organizations. Simultaneously, in a contrary effect within the realm of their capacity, Disciple seeks out information and support from other organizations due to a lack of coordination from the municipality’s side. They voluntarily engage in coordinating with local politicians and other Christian organizations that they know will help their cause and contribute to their objectives.
“It is very chaotic and they do not have enough employees. That’s why we have to coordinate with others because you do not get the information or reasonable exchange of ideas and regular meetings with the administrations, so you have to work with local politicians and other organizations to get their support, to get better care for the refugees we have.”
Case 4 – Business Angel
Business Angel is an independent local humanitarian organization that offers support to talented newcomers to explore entrepreneurship as a means of economic reintegration. Due to the nature of the service, they do not aim at the most vulnerable instead at the strongest and young refugees who are interested in setting up their own business. However, Business Angel still upholds the principle of humanity as their work relates to respect through not seeing the refugees as poor victims but as resilient and strong people. Humanity is what drives the organization to provide talented refugees a safe space to experiment with entrepreneurship.
them create their own business. This networking objective motivates the organization to seek out partnerships from the private sector and academic world. In addition, Business Angel shares an office with several other refugee foundations. As a result of this co-working space, they are able to exchange information, share resources and connections. These foundations also regularly have joint projects such as events for a joint cause.
“We share an office with six small foundations that each work with refugees so we speak to each other and refer our clients and participants to one another. For instance, if we have people from outside Amsterdam, we collaborate with BnB who offers free lodging to refugees that join our program.”
Although, Business Angel wants to be as independent of other interests as much as possible, due to a lack of funding, they are willing to augment their programs to cater to the corporate sector in order to receive sponsors. Therefore, they describe this to be a dependency that they may have to deal with soon. This is an influencing factor that emerged which also has an impact on their principle independence. Business Angel struggles to exist without sufficient funding and as result has forced them to focus more on seeking out organizations that would sponsor their projects.
“We have been really focused on what we want to offer but its starting to get more pressing that we need funding. So we will have to be more flexible and cater for more corporates that would be willing to pay for our projects. We might need to shift the way we work.”
Case 5 – Refugee Advocator
Refugee Advocator is an international mandated humanitarian organization, which provides protection and assistance to refugees. They often play a coordinating role in refugee assistance involving NGOs and local governments. Also, they heavily advocate for the rights of refugees in accordance with the humanitarian law. Therefore, the most important principle applied in all their activities is humanity.
Information sharing and joint decision-making are primarily carried out to determine the asylum claim of refugees in support for their protection. And joint projects with the host government to build housing projects, playgrounds and help call centers for the refugees. Thereby, these coordination mechanisms are pursued in order to provide refugees their basic human rights and allow them to integrate into their new society.
“Everything we do is based on humanity. First, humanity is the core principle of protection in the sense that when refugees come to a country, we advocate for countries to open up their border on humanity grounds. We ask the governments to give them access to jobs, work permit, education, livelihood and to whatever is possible within the means of the host country.”
With the use of their own coordination model, Refugee Advocator extensively coordinates with other UN agencies. The aim of this model is to provide aid in a coordinated effort by optimizing the division of tasks among different humanitarian organizations specializing in fields such as water, basic needs, and medical care. This means information sharing, joint decision-making, joint projects and process, and integrated information technologies are in place and used as coordination mechanisms. However, there are limitations to the information that Refugee Advocator share. Information sharing related personal details that may put the refugees at risk is avoided. At the same time, Refugee Advocator will seek to coordinate with the government and other relevant parties to improve the situation of the refugees concerned.
“If this puts the refugee at risk then we can not share certain kind of information but we will always try to coordinate to improve for those individuals that are concerned.”
organization.
“We will often be perceived as very bureaucratic but then again if we are sitting on top and we receive a twenty million dollar EU grant, it needs to be accountable back to EU. There are certain constraints on how, where, what. If we have a small partner, how they have to do it must be reported to us because that is part of reporting back to the EU on how we spent this grant.”
Case 6 – National Cross
National Cross is an independent international humanitarian organization that ensures protection and assistance for victims of conflict. It has the authority under a specific humanitarian law to protect the life and dignity of refugee victims. Apart from humanity, National Cross also highly values their independence and neutrality. These three principles are embedded in their activities and is reflected in their joint projects, joint decision-making and extensive information sharing with relevant parties. Some examples are provided below to show how their principles strongly link to their coordination activities. Specifically, National Cross exchanges information related to technical and operational support of local authorities, National Cross and National Societies. Additionally, within their expert areas, they participate in joint decision-making and joint projects that include restoring family links, forensic and detection projects to ensure the dignified identification process and management of dead bodies. These activities reflect the importance for National Cross to safeguard respect and the rights of refugees regardless of their status.
“The aim is to secure humane treatment and conditions of detention for all detainees, regardless of the reasons for their arrest and detention. We assess the conditions of detention and the treatment they receive, whether they are afforded due process of law, and whether they are able to maintain contact with the outside world.”
make the complex task of restoring family links possible. On the logistical side, National Cross is part of a logistics coordination initiative where information is exchanged such as demand forecasts and planning capacity with partners and other humanitarian organizations. The main objective is to efficiently distribute tasks among the organizations involved.
“We exchange opinions about possible optimization ways of our procedure. We do exchange demand forecasts and planning capacity with our closest partners as well as with Save, Medics, etc. as we try to make a distribution of the work to each other. That’s the goal.”
Neutrality is a principle that National Cross also cherishes. This is reflected in their choice to ensure that no relevant party is excluded during important strategic decisions, especially in terms of refugee protection and assistance. Whether it may be with the local government, media, and other related humanitarian agencies, National Cross seeks transparency and neutrality in their actions.
“We always have to find the ways not to exclude someone from the table, as one of our main beliefs is neutrality. We remain neutral whatever the parties’ beliefs are. Also, we do not encourage or discourage migration. Rather, our focus is helping the most vulnerable migrants and we seek to ensure their protection under international and domestic law.
4.2 Cross-case analysis
Table 4.1 Summary of findings
Cases
Principles' influence on coordination
mechanisms Joint decision-making Joint projects Information sharing
Integrated information technologies Lone rangers Humanity Forced coordination with local authortieis and MOH Material, warehouse and boat sharing Reading of context, operational capability, intent,
scope etc. E-mail & Phone
Neutrality
Compromise neutrality for
humanity See humanity See humanity See humanity
Impartiality
Medical focus strongly links to
being impartial n/a Patient data not disclosed See humanity
Job seekers Humanity Passive coordination - seek approval and consent from private sponsors Willing coordination e.g. networking programs and trainings Passive towards municipality reporting and willing if it benefits refugees Log database to report refugee progress Neutrality See humanity Referral system of trusted partners e.g. legal, housing, counseling advice etc. Development and problem related issues with referral
partners Email & Phone
Disciples Humanity Forced coordination - shelter costs and capacity with municipality Network of Christian organizations e.g. volunteer projects, networking events Coordination meetings with other shelters e.g. capacity, security, contact sharing
etc. Excel, E-mail & Phone
Independence With municipality related to shelter costs Budget constraints limits projects - seeks out other
partners See humanity See humanity
Business angels Humanity Only in terms of joint networking events Entrepreneurial workshops w/ private firms, co-working space w/ refugee foundations Referral & entrepreneurship courses related to refugee progress w/ private firms E-mail & Phone Independence Seeks out sponsors from
corporate sector See humanity See humanity See humanity
humanitarian law Independence Forced coordination with agencies and gov't as part of
mandate See humanity See humanity See humanity
National Cross Humanity Forced logistics coordination with other agencies Water & sanitation projects, warehouse and plane sharing scope & capacity, customer clearance, supplier
database etc. E-mail & Phone
Neutrality / Impartial Respect humanitarian law while being impartial RFL projects, forensice and detection activities with
local authorities technical and operational advice See humanity * Activities relate to other NGOs/INGOs or PVOs if otherwise not specified.
* RFL stands for Restoring Family Links.
The principle humanity is the core and most important principle that all the cases share. In many situations, it overrides the three other principles if they are not already overlapping, such as when the pursuit of impartiality is directly related to achieving humanity. To most organizations, impartiality means addressing suffering on the sole basis of need without discriminating on religion, race, political opinion etc. Thereby, in a sense impartiality functions as an extension of achieving humanity.
Moreover, independence is a principle that all the humanitarian organizations cherish. Independence from external interests is key in pursuing one’s own agenda and operations. At the same, no one can be truly independent as humanitarian work is intrinsically linked with having to interact and coordinate with other actors. Without coordinating with others through exchanging information related to demand, task division and risk management would result in not maximizing the use of resources at the expense of the beneficiaries. The goal that all humanitarian organizations share is to help as many refugees in need in the shortest time possible as this could mean lives saved. This common purpose drives humanitarian parties both mandated and independent to work together as no party can ever cover all the scope of needs that a refugee crisis demands.
influencing factors. The initial phase of a refugee crisis where arriving at the location quickly is critical forces a humanitarian organization to avoid coordinating with others when it takes too much time and own resources. The objective during an emergency situation is to deliver the goods and supplies that an organization already has prepared from their warehouses to those in need. The idea is that everyone does the same on their area of expertise, such as Lone ranger who specializes in medical care and Refugee advocators who specialize in basic needs. Most of these large international organizations are aware of each other's capabilities so the inclination to not coordinate can be understood. Another exception to coordinating with others is under the circumstance that legal access must be obtained first in order to enter an area. This typically implies interacting with authorities and local leaders. Therefore, coming alone rather than with other parties is beneficial to gain quicker access.
Once the critical needs of refugees have been met, most humanitarian organizations start to engage in coordinating with other parties in an effort to maximize the use of resources. Therefore, effectiveness is the driving force during an emergency phase and once the urgency has settled, efficiency becomes more important. The latter case is the situation most humanitarian organizations are involved in the current EU refugee crisis. Here, many humanitarian organizations that provide relief aid exchange information on scope, intent, and capacity in order to appropriately make decisions relating to time and amount of delivery, as well as storage. In addition, they engage in activities such as joint projects and processes with other related humanitarian organizations such as to improve camp life, reconnect separated family members and create better opportunities for refugees to integrate.
mandated organizations whereas independent organizations have the freedom to partner with any other actor that they see fit. In comparison, independent organizations will coordinate with other parties if it contributes to their mission. The exceptions and factors that determine their decision to engage in coordination or not have been explained in the within-case analyses.
As a whole, it can be concluded that the main driver for both local and international humanitarian organizations to coordinate with other parties is its relative impact on the effectiveness of their service in relation to humanity. In other words, within the context of the European refugee crisis, most humanitarian organizations will stretch the borders of their principles in order to effectively help refugees coordinate with essentially anybody as long as it contributes to their objectives.
Emerging themes
From the within case analysis, a few emerging themes were established. One is funding which emerges as an influential factor in coordination decisions of organizations. Among the cases, some struggle with funding while others have sufficient funding either from private donors or given as part of their mandate. It was found that humanitarian organizations with a lack of funding affect the willingness to coordinate with other parties as it costs extra resources that the humanitarian organization does not have. As a result, insufficient funding negatively affects the economical independence of humanitarian organizations to pursue coordination initiatives that cost them resources. In other words, it affects their capability to coordinate with other parties. Particularly, this was the case among the young local foundations that do not have as much capacity to engage in coordination initiatives and as a result, refrain from doing so. Consequently, it may limit the effectiveness and efficiency of their operations as they try to work more on their own.
and strategic decisions to ensure continued funding. In turn, this can limit the extent of coordination efforts performed by humanitarian organizations. Nevertheless, it remains a fact that without sufficient donations, these organizations would seize to exist or struggle to provide their services within the refugee environment.
On the other hand, sufficient funding from private donors means a higher level of independence in operational activities and decisions. This means that an independent humanitarian organization with sufficient private funds can choose to coordinate with any partner they believe will benefit their humanitarian goals. As a result, funding positively affects the independence of humanitarian organizations, which accordingly creates a higher quality of coordination that adds more value to both parties. It is reflected through investing in more effort to have joint projects, joint decision-making and information exchange to optimize procedures for the refugees. However, in an emergency phase where coordinating with certain parties creates a delay in response, a humanitarian organization with sufficient private funds is able to pursue operations using its own resources and current network.
In addition, another element that strongly relates to funding is the reliability of its partners. This is an aspect that well-off humanitarian organizations can afford to demand upfront. The reliability that an external party meets delivery at a given time and place is critical to the operations of international aid work. Thereby, having sufficient funds allows a humanitarian organization to deliver supplies on time. And in case an external party fails to meet their promise, they are capable of simply doing it themselves as they have the funds to do so.
5. Discussion
In this research, the goal was to answer the following question: How do the principles
of mandated and independent humanitarian organizations influence coordination efforts in the provision of needs in refugee supply chains?
factors, the effect of principles on coordination was reflected very differently among the organizations. It was found that the identity of a humanitarian organization essentially relates to their values and principles, which affects their involvement with other parties. For example, a faith-based organization naturally has more contact and involvement with other faith-based parties. Since they attract the support of organizations that have similar identities, it is logical that a faith-based humanitarian organization is more likely and willing to work with them. Also, an independent medical aid identity dictates the priority to gain access and security for their medical kits to enter an affected area.
Furthermore, the identities and values of these humanitarian organizations strongly link to being independent or mandated, and whether relief support and/or integration is provided. For example, Lone ranger and National Cross who are independent tended to be more flexible in their choice to coordinate based on their more valued principles at the expense of compromising other principles. In comparison, mandated organizations are tasked to uphold certain principles and humanitarian laws. Particularly for Refugee Advocator and National Cross, neutrality is perceived crucial, as actions that would diminish it in the eyes of their parties could be detrimental to their image. Since coordinating is part of their mandate, Refugee Advocator are forced to work with certain humanitarian agencies in a coordinated effort to provide relief. If they work outside of this model, they must report back to their donors and describe who, when and what actions were performed with external parties. As a result, operational boundaries are given making them less flexible in coordination decisions.
5.1 Relation to existing literature and to theory
According to Hilhorst & Schmiemann (2002), although humanitarian organizations essentially embrace the same principles, how these are adapted into activities can differ significantly as it is subject to their relative identities and values. The results from this paper confirm this and build upon previous research by explicitly describing the influencing factors of coordination by investigating the role of principles. Moreover, the theoretical arguments from the findings contribute to existing literature where it is argued that the different actors involved in coordination pose as one of the main challenges in effective disaster response (Kovács and Spens, 2007; Akhtar, Marr & Garnevska, 2012). The results of this study validate that the various actors involved in humanitarian response particularly in the context of a refugee crisis make it difficult to make the decision to interact and coordinate with others. In relation to mandated organizations, this study also confirms previous research that mandates determine its operational boundaries including items delivered and the partners it is allowed to collaborate with (Kovacs & Spens, 2009). In line with Metcalfe-Hough (2015), the study reports that coordination in humanitarian supply chains is a challenge due to its sensitivity to the politics of the EU governments involved. This is especially the case in this paper as the research setting relates to the EU refugee crisis. The cases showed that working with local authorities and government is critical in many cases, particularly to obtain legal access. Moreover, information sharing and joint projects that humanitarian organizations pursue sometimes must be approved first by the government. This is specifically the case when it comes to the protection and providing refugees opportunities to seek asylum within the country, as these are government sensitive issues. The insights also reveal, in accordance with previous research, that the effectiveness of humanitarian response is the initial focus. Afterwards, operations efficiency such as avoiding duplication in services becomes more important (Holguín-Veras et al., 2012). The main emergent theme found also validates earlier observation that funding plays a critical role in determining the scope of humanitarian response especially in relation to capability, speed, effectiveness and efficiency (Wakolbinger & Toyasaki, 2011 & Burkart, Besiou, & Wakolbinger, 2017).
mandated organizations can work outside of these boundaries as long as they are able to argue for this action and ensure that their decisions are reported. While mandated organizations may be less flexible as the partners they are to coordinate with is prescribed, does not mean that they can not collaborate with other humanitarian organizations outside of this mandate. Moreover, the findings suggest that there are differences in the impact of principles on coordination efforts across mandated and independent humanitarian organizations. The insights also found that the effectiveness-versus-efficiency focus of humanitarian organizations affects their coordination decisions, which is another contribution of this paper. By combining the findings from the within-case and cross-case analyses, a contribution is made to literature that addresses the relationship gap between humanitarian principles and coordination efforts among different humanitarian organizations.
5.2 Implications for practice
for the interest of helping refugees. Lastly, practitioners should take into account the impact of funding on the willingness and capability of parties to invest in coordination initiatives.
6.1 Limitations and opportunities for future research
This paper presents limitations that should be noted. First, the study provides insights on the influence of principles on coordination efforts but it does not consider the impact on performance. This opens an avenue for future research to build upon this paper’s findings and explore the impact of the relationship of principles and coordination on performance outcomes. Second, it is beneficial to investigate how the role of funding affects an organization’s ability to pursue their humanitarian imperative in relation to principles and coordination activities. Third, the study did not take into account the phases of a refugee crisis, which the findings show to have an impact on the effectiveness-versus-efficiency focus. Thereby, future studies could explore the phase development of a slow-onset crisis and its relative affect on coordination and service performance. Furthermore, the methodological limitations of this study also create opportunities for future research. The setting is limited to the EU refugee crisis, which differs from other crisis settings as the infrastructure to provide assistance is already in place. This opens research avenues to investigate other crisis setting such as in Somalia or Yemen where war and conflict have led to the destruction of infrastructure and is associated with armed groups that complicate access issues. It is meaningful to study more unstable settings to gain insights on the environment’s impact on coordination capabilities. Lastly, this paper did not reach theoretical saturation. This shortcoming creates opportunities for future research to expand analysis on a larger sample of respondents, as well as take the organization’s size and experience into account.
6.2 Conclusion
References
Akhtar, P., Marr, N. E., & Garnevska, E. V. (2012). Coordination in humanitarian relief chains: chain coordinators. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply
Chain Management, 2(1), 85-103.
Arshinder, Kanda, A., & Deshmukh, S. G. (2008). Supply chain coordination: Perspectives, empirical studies and research directions. International Journal Of
Production Economics, 115(2), 316-335. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.05.011
Balcik, B., Beamon, B. M., Krejci, C. C., Muramatsu, K. M., & Ramirez, M. (2010). Coordination in humanitarian relief chains: Practices, challenges and opportunities.
International Journal of Production Economics, 126(1), 22-34.
Bui, T., Cho, S., Sankaran, S., Sovereign, M., 2000. A framework for designing a global information network for multinational humanitarian assistance/ disaster relief. Information Systems Frontiers 1 (4), 427–442.
Burkart, C., Besiou, M., & Wakolbinger, T. (2017). The funding—Humanitarian supply chain interface. Surveys in Operations Research and Management Science.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Lawe, A. (2002), Management Research – An Introduction, Sage, London.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-50.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Fenton, G., 2003. Coordination in the Great Lakes. Forced Migration Review September, 23–24.
analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development”, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 80-92.
Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. (2015). European Refugee Crisis: Data, Technology & Coordination Briefing Note | ATHA. Retrieved from http://atha.se/blog/european-refugee-crisis-data-technology-coordination-briefing-note
Heydari, J. (2014). Coordinating supplier׳ s reorder point: A coordination mechanism for supply chains with long supplier lead time. Computers & Operations Research, 48, 89-101.
Hilhorst, D., & Jansen, B. J. (2010). Humanitarian space as arena: A perspective on the everyday politics of aid. Development and Change, 41(6), 1117-1139.
Hilhorst, D., & Schmiemann, N. (2002). Humanitarian principles and organisational culture: Everyday practice in Meédecins Sans Frontié res-Holland. Development in Practice, 12(3-4), 490-500.
Holguín-Veras, J., Jaller, M., Van Wassenhove, L. N., Pérez, N., & Wachtendorf, T. (2012). On the unique features of post-disaster humanitarian logistics. Journal of
Operations Management, 30(7), 494-506.
Kehler, N., 2004. Coordinating humanitarian assistance: a comparative analysis of three cases. Master Thesis, Virginia State University /http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ theses/available/etd-05202004-170632/unrestricted/KehlerMajorPaper.pdfS
(10.21.2008).
Kleindorfer, P. R., & Saad, G. H. (2005). Managing disruption risks in supply chains.
Production and operations management, 14(1), 53-68.
Management, 37(2), 99-114.
Kovács, G., & Spens, K. (2009). Identifying challenges in humanitarian logistics.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39(6),
506-528.
Kumar, S., & Havey, T. (2013). Before and after disaster strikes: A relief supply chain decision support framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 145(2), 613-629.
Leader, N. (2000). The Politics of Principle: the principles of humanitarian action in practice. Overseas development institute.
Lindenberg, M., Bryant, C., 2001. Going Global: Transforming Relief and Development NGOs. Kumarian Press, Bloomfield, CT.
Louise Barriball, K., & While, A. (1994). Collecting Data using a semi‐structured interview: a discussion paper. Journal of advanced nursing, 19(2), 328-335.
Macrae, J., & Harmer, A. (Eds.). (2003). Humanitarian Action and the" global War on Terror": A Review of Trends and Issues. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute.
McLachlin, R., & Larson, P. D. (2011). Building humanitarian supply chain relationships: lessons from leading practitioners. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics
and Supply Chain Management, 1(1), 32-49.
Médecins Sans Frontières. (2016). MSF to no longer take funds from EU Member
States and institutions. Retrieved from
https://www.msf.org.uk/article/msf-no-longer-take-funds-eu-member-states-and-institutions
Meredith, J. (1998), “Building operations management theory through case and field research”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 441-54.
Metcalfe-Hough, V. (2015, October 01). A migration crisis? Facts, challenges and
possible solutions. Retrieved March 19, 2017, from
https://www.odi.org/publications/9993-migration-migrants-eu-europe-syria-refugees-borders-asylum
Milovancevic M.P., Ispanovic V., & Stupar D. (2016). Lessons learned from the past on mental health care of refugee children in Serbia. European Child And Adolescent Psychiatry, 25(6), 669-672. doi:10.1007/s00787-016-0827-4
Minear, L., 2002. The Humanitarian Enterprise: Dilemmas and Discoveries. Kumarian Press, Bloomfield, CT.
Nascimento, D. (2015). One step forward, two steps back? Humanitarian Challenges and Dilemmas in Crisis Settings. Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, 18.
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. (2012). What are humanitarian
principles. Available from
https://docs.unocha.org/sites/dms/Documents/OOM-humanitarianprinciples_eng_June12.pdf
Patton, E. and Appelbaum, S.H. (2003), “The case for case studies in management research”, Management Research News, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 60-71.
Pictet, J. (1979). The fundamental principles of the Red Cross. International Review
of the Red Cross, 19(210), 130-149.
Russell, T.E., 2005. The humanitarian relief supply chain: analysis of the 2004 South East Asia earthquake and tsunami. MLog Thesis, MIT.
Rysaback-Smith, H. (2015). History and Principles of Humanitarian Action. Turkish
Journal of Emergency Medicine, 15, 5-7.
Sanders, N. R. (2008). Pattern of information technology use: The impact on buyer– suppler coordination and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 26(3), 349-367.
Sandoz, J.-C. (2015). Principles in action: How do neutrality and independence contribute to humanitarian effectiveness? | International Committee of the Red Cross. Geneva: International Committee of Red Cross. Retrieved from https://www.icrc.org/en/event/principles-action-how-do-neutrality-and-independence-contribute-humanitarian-effectiveness
Seuring, S.A. (2008), “Assessing the rigor of case study research in supply chain management”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 128-37.
Simatupang, T. M., & Sridharan, R. (2002). The collaborative supply chain. The
international journal of logistics management, 13(1), 15-30.
Stephenson, M., Schnitzer, M.H., 2006. Interorganizational trust, boundary spanning, and humanitarian relief coordination. Nonprofit Management and Leadership 17 (2), 211–232.
Stuart, I., McCutcheon, D., Handfield, R., McLachlin, E., Samson, D., 2002. Effective research in operations management: a process perspective. Journal of Operations
Management 20 (5), 419–433.
Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2006). Humanitarian aid logistics: supply chain management in high gear. Journal of the Operational research Society, 57(5), 475-489.
Vickery, S. K., Jayaram, J., Droge, C., & Calantone, R. (2003). The effects of an integrative supply chain strategy on customer service and financial performance: an analysis of direct versus indirect relationships. Journal of operations management, 21(5), 523-539.
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N. and Frohlich, M. (2002), “Case research in operations management”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 195-219.
T. Wakolbinger, F. Toyasaki, Impacts of Funding Systems on Humanitarian Operations, Kogan Page, 2011, pp. 33–46. (Chapter 2).
Weiss, T. G. (1999). Principles, politics, and humanitarian action. Ethics & International Affairs, 13(1), 1-22.
Williams B., Taylor S., Cassar C., & Siggers G. (2016). Medical and social issues of child refugees in Europe. Archives Of Disease In Childhood, 101(9), 839-842. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2016-310657
Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 5, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Yin, R.K. (1989), 'Case Study Research, Design and Methods', Beverly Hills, CA, Sage.
