Humanitarian Logistics at a Crossroads: How Logisticians Reconcile Their Professional and Humanitarian Identities in Response to Tougher Host Government Regulations. Issue 2 (10th February 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Dube, Nonhlanhla; Broekhuis, Manda
• Is Part Of: Risk, hazards & crisis in public policy. Volume 9:Issue 2(2018)
• Page Start: 151
• Page End: 182
• Publication Date: 2018-02-10
• Subjects: humanitarian logisticians -- host government regulations -- professional and -- humanitarian identities; 人道主义物流人员 -- 职业化 -- 东道主政府规定; logísticos humanitarios -- profesionalización -- regulaciones de los gobiernos anfitriones; Emergency management -- Periodicals; Disasters -- Government policy; Disasters -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; Disasters; Disasters -- Government policy; Emergency management; Public health; Periodicals; 363.3405
• DOI: 10.1002/rhc3.12134
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1944-4079

Abstract

Abstract: Humanitarian aid workers increasingly experience pressure to professionalize their services in order to ensure more efficient and effective assistance to disaster victims. Particularly for logisticians, this pressure is also the result of increasingly tough regulations imposed by host governments. This causes a dilemma for aid workers: Professionalization can be at odds with their humanitarian values and principles, such as providing unhindered assistance, without discrimination, to whoever needs it. This research explores how humanitarian logisticians experience and deal with this dilemma. In particular, how they reconcile humanitarian values and principles on the one hand with their (developing) professional standards and practices on the other. Theoretical concepts on professionalization, social identity, and so‐called boundary work are used to analyze the problem. Results show that individual logisticians adopt one of four distinct identities when approaching reconciliation, namely: Professional‐dominance, intersection, union, or humanitarian‐dominance identities. The associated approaches inform how they engage with stakeholders and make decisions. Each approach has its benefits and shortcomings in various operational settings. This implies there is a need to further establish the settings in which each approach delivers the best logistics performance.