On the use of evidence in humanitarian logistics research

Bibliographic Data

ID3898737
AuthorsAlfonso J Pedraza‐martinez (0000-0002-7921-4567, Indiana University), Orla Stapleton (New York University), Luk N Van Wassenhove (0000-0002-5573-1834, INSEAD)
Year2013
Volume37
Issues1
PagesS51-67
Publication date2013-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueDisasters (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0361-3666 • E-ISSN: 1467-7717
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/disa.12012
PMID23905767
OpenAlexW2086764260
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited22

This paper presents the reflections of the authors on the differences between the language and the approach of practitioners and academics to humanitarian logistics problems. Based on a long-term project on fleet management in the humanitarian sector, involving both large international humanitarian organisations and academics, it discusses how differences in language and approach to such problems may create a lacuna that impedes trust. In addition, the paper provides insights into how academic research evidence adapted to practitioner language can be used to bridge the gap. When it is communicated appropriately, evidence strengthens trust between practitioners and academics, which is critical for long-term projects. Once practitioners understand the main trade-offs included in academic research, they can supply valuable feedback to motivate new academic research. Novel research problems promote innovation in the use of traditional academic methods, which should result in a win-win situation: relevant solutions for practice and advances in academic knowledge

Business · Forensic engineering · Injury prevention · Medical emergency · Occupational safety and health · Poison control · Political science · Suicide prevention · Blood donation and transfusion practices · Engineering · Facility Location and Emergency Management · Human Factors and Ergonomics · Law · Medicine

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub