Requirements for Relief Distribution Decision-Making in Humanitarian Logistics

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 39)


Making efficient and effective decisions in the chaotic environment of humanitarian relief distribution (HRD) is challenging. Decision-makers need to concentrate on numerous decision factors categorized into decision objectives, variables, and constraints. Recent HRD literature focuses on optimizing procedures while neglecting the quantification of essential requirements (decision factors) for information systems to provide decision-making support. In this article, we address this gap by accumulating affecting decision factors from both literature and practice. We investigated the practical implications of these factors in HRD decision-making by measuring the preferences of a Delphi panel consisting of 23 humanitarian experts. The results from our study emphasize the importance of the decision factors in the proposed process model for HRD in a large-scale sudden onset. Our work provides researchers not only with a comprehensive set of practically feasible decision factors in HRD but also with an understanding of their influences and correlations.


Natural disasters Decision support system Decision factors Relief distribution Humanitarian logistics Delphi technique Expert preferences 



The authors acknowledge the cooperation and valuable assistance received from Eli Hustad, Dag Håkon Olsen, and Rania El-Gazzar on the Delphi process. At the same time, the authors are grateful to all panel members, who provided insightful information, and evaluations and valuable comments for this research on relief distribution decision making.


  1. 1.
    Afshar, A., Haghani, A.: Modeling integrated supply chain logistics in real-time large-scale disaster relief operations. Socio-Economic Plan. Sci. 46(4), 327–338 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aljamal, M.S., Ashcroft, D., Tully, M.P.: Development of indicators to assess the quality of medicines reconciliation at hospital admission: an e-Delphi study. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 24(3), 209–216 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Avery, A., Savelyich, B., Sheikh, A., Cantrill, J., Morris, C., Fernando, B., Bainbridge, M., Horsfield, P., Teasdale, S.: Identifying and establishing consensus on the most important safety features of GP computer systems: e-Delphi study. J. Innov. Health Inform. 13(1), 3–11 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balcik, B., Beamon, B.M., Krejci, C.C., Muramatsu, K.M., Ramirez, M.: Coordination in humanitarian relief chains: practices, challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 126(1), 22–34 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barahona, F., Ettl, M., Petrik, M., Rimshnick, P.M.: Agile logistics simulation and optimization for managing disaster responses. In: Proceedings 2013 Winter Simulation Conference: Simulation: Making Decisions in a Complex World, pp. 3340–3351. IEEE Press (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chunguang, C., Dongwen, C., Xiaoyu, S., Bo, G.: Logistics routes optimization model under large scale emergency incident. In: 2010 International Conference on Logistics Systems and Intelligent Management, Harbin, pp. 1471–1475 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Comes, T., Schätter, F., Schultmann, F.: Building robust supply networks for effective and efficient disaster response. In: ISCRAM Conference, Baden-Baden, pp. 230–240 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cottam, H., Roe, M., Challacombe, J.: Outsourcing of trucking activities by relief organisations. J. Humanitarian Assistance 1(1), 1–26 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dajani, J.S., Sincoff, M.Z., Talley, W.K.: Stability and agreement criteria for the termination of Delphi studies. TFSC 13(1), 83–90 (1979)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    El-Gazzar, R., Hustad, E., Olsen, D.H.: Understanding cloud computing adoption issues: A Delphi study approach. J. Syst. Softw. 118, 64–84 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    English, J.M., Kernan, G.L.: The prediction of air travel and aircraft technology to the year 2000 using the Delphi method. Transp. Res. 10(1), 1–8 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gralla, E., Goentzel, J., Fine, C.: Assessing trade-offs among multiple objectives for humanitarian aid delivery using expert preferences. Prod. Oper. Ma. 23, 978–989 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grime, M.M., Wright, G.: Delphi method. Wiley StatsRef, 1–6 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gutjahr, W.J., Nolz, P.C.: Multicriteria optimization in humanitarian aid. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 252(2), 351–366 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    MacCarthy, B.L., Atthirawong, W.: Factors affecting location decisions in international operations–a Delphi study. IJOPM 23(7), 794–818 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Han, Y., Guan, X., Shi, L.: Optimal supply location selection and routing for emergency material delivery with uncertain demands. In: 2010 International Conference on Information, Networking and Automation (ICINA), pp. V1-87–V1-92. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hasson, F., Keeney, S., McKenna, H.: Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J. Adv. Nurs. 32(4), 1008–1015 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hsu, C.C., Sandford, B.A.: The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract. assess. Res. Eval. 12(10), 1–8 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Humanitarian assistance from Non-State donors (2015). Accessed 30 Mar 2019
  20. 20.
    Kapoor, P.: Systems approach to documentary maritime fraud. University of Plymouth (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kobus, J., Westner, M.: Ranking-type Delphi studies in IS research: step-by-step guide and analytical extension. In: 9th IADIS IS, pp. 28–38. IADIS, Vilamoura (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li, Y., Hu, Y., Zhang, X., Deng, Y., Mahadevan, S.: An evidential DEMATEL method to identify critical success factors in emergency management. A. Soft C. 22, 504–510 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liberatore, F., Ortuño, M.T., Tirado, G., Vitoriano, B., Scaparra, M.P.: A hierarchical compromise model for the joint optimization of recovery operations and distribution of emergency goods in humanitarian logistics. Comput. Oper. Res. 42, 3–13 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Linstone, H., Turoff, M.: The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McMillan, S.S., King, M., Tully, M.P.: How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques. Int. J. Clin. Pharm. 38(3), 655–662 (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Okoli, C., Pawlowski, S.D.: The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inform. Manag. 42(1), 15–29 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Peres, E.Q., Brito Jr., I., Leiras, A., Yoshizaki, H.: Humanitarian logistics and disaster relief research: trends, applications, and future research directions. In: 4th International Conference Information Systems, Logistics and Supply Chain, Quebec, pp. 26–29 (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pettit, S.J., Beresford, A.K.: Emergency relief logistics: an evaluation of military, non-military and composite response models. Int. J. Logistics Res. Appl. 8(4), 313–331 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pettit, S., Beresford, A.: Critical success factors in the context of humanitarian aid supply chains. IJPDLM 39(6), 450–468 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rahman, M.T., Comes, T., Majchrzak, T.A.: Understanding decision support in large-scale disasters: challenges in humanitarian logistics distribution. In: International ISCRAM-MED Conference, Xanthi, pp. 106–121 (2017)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rahman, M.T., Majchrzak, T.A., Comes, T.: Deep uncertainty in humanitarian logistics operations: decision-making challenges in responding to large-scale natural disasters. Int. J. Emerg. Manag. 15(3), 276–297 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rancourt, M.È., Cordeau, J.F., Laporte, G., Watkins, B.: Tactical network planning for food aid distribution in Kenya. Comput. Oper. Res. 56, 68–83 (2015)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ransikarbum, K., Mason, S.J.: Multiple-objective analysis of integrated relief supply and network restoration in humanitarian logistics operations. Int. J. Prod. Res. 54(1), 49–68 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Richardson, D.A., de Leeuw, S., Dullaert, W.: Factors affecting global inventory prepositioning locations in humanitarian operations—a Delphi study. J. Bus. Logistics 37(1), 59–74 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rottkemper, B., Fischer, K.: Decision making in humanitarian logistics – a multi-objective optimization model for relocating relief goods during disaster recovery operations. In: 10th International ISCRAM Conference, Baden-Baden, pp. 647–657 (2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rowe, G.: A guide to Delphi. Foresight 8, 11–16 (2007)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Roy, P., Albores, P., Brewster, C.: Logistical framework for last mile relief distribution in humanitarian supply chains: considerations from the field. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Manufacturing Research, Birmingham, pp. 11–13 (2012)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Safeer, M., Anbuudayasankar, S.P., Balkumar, K., Ganesh, K.: Analyzing transportation and distribution in emergency humanitarian logistics. Pro. Eng. 97, 2248–2258 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schmidt, R.C.: Managing Delphi surveys using nonparametric statistical techniques. Decis. Sci. 28(3), 763–774 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Stewart, D., Gibson-Smith, K., MacLure, K., Mair, A., Alonso, A., Codina, C., et al.: A modified Delphi study to determine the level of consensus across the European Union on the structures, processes and desired outcomes of the management of polypharmacy in older people. PLoS ONE 12(11), 1–17 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Strasser, A.: Design and evaluation of ranking-type Delphi studies using best-worst-scaling. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 31(4), 492–501 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tofighi, S., Torabi, S.A., Mansouri, S.A.: Humanitarian logistics network design under mixed uncertainty. EJOR 250(1), 239–250 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Trkman, P.: The critical success factors of business process management. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 30(2), 125–134 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Varho, V., Tapio, P.: Combining the qualitative and quantitative with the Q2 scenario technique—the case of transport and climate. TFSC 80(4), 611–630 (2013)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vitoriano, B., Ortuño, M.T., Tirado, G., Montero, J.: A multi-criteria optimization model for humanitarian aid distribution. J. Glob. Optim. 51(2), 189–208 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yadav, D.K., Barve, A.: Analysis of critical success factors of humanitarian supply chain: an application of interpretive structural modeling. IJDRR 12, 213–225 (2015)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Özdamar, L., Ertem, M.A.: Models, solutions and enabling technologies in humanitarian logistics. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 244(1), 55–65 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AgderKristiansandNorway

Personalised recommendations