.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Achieving a More Equitable Distribution of Resources in Cross-Sector Disaster Relief Operations Through Selective Coupling
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
P
D
W
J
J
DOI：10.1111/jbl.70076.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Disaster response efforts bring diverse organizations together in rapidly formed, ad hoc, and decentralized disaster relief supply networks (DRSNs) involving government agencies, for-profit firms, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Although responders broadly share humanitarian objectives, sectoral differences in priorities and decision rules can create conflict and coordination challenges that undermine equitable relief distribution. Using data from a multi-actor disaster response simulation, this research examines decentralized behavioral adjustments by DRSN participants and how they aggregate into system-level equity outcomes. Drawing on institutional logics theory, these behaviors are conceptualized as humanitarian-oriented selective coupling—the selective integration of humanitarian priorities guided by urgency, impartiality, and moral obligation into sector-specific decision rules. Results indicate that equity is most strongly associated with forms of humanitarian-oriented selective coupling that preserve sectoral roles, such as pricing restraint by for-profits and indirect distribution through network partners. In contrast, behaviors that bypass sectoral routines, including poorly targeted direct donations, are associated with lower equity. The findings identify decentralized and contingent mechanisms through which equity can emerge without centralized coordination, while highlighting boundary conditions where humanitarian-oriented selective coupling actions are associated with more—or less—equitable outcomes.
Keywords:
disaster relief supply network
equity
humanitarian logistics
institutional logics
selective coupling
AI Summary
Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.
Journal
IF:
7.4
Papers:
579
Citations:
3.6K
Organization
Cited Papers