Abstract
Humanitarian supply chains are essential for timely and effective crisis response, yet measuring their performance remains challenging. This article identifies and analyzes factors influencing the performance of humanitarian supply chains, aiming to establish a comprehensive performance measurement system. Initially, it examines the current methods used to assess performance in these supply chains. Based on this analysis, a structured system of performance indicators is proposed, distinguishing between efficiency and effectiveness in processes and measuring outcomes to evaluate the results and impact of humanitarian efforts. The research concludes with a validated set of indicators designed to enhance efficiency and optimize logistics capabilities in humanitarian operations, providing practical value for application within humanitarian organizations.
Keywords: humanitarian supply chains, KPI, performance measurement, 3E model
Sažetak
Humanitarni lanci opskrbe ključni su za pravodoban i učinkovit odgovor na krizu, no mjerenje njihova učinka i dalje je izazov. Ovaj članak identificira i analizira čimbenike koji utječu na učinak humanitarnih lanaca opskrbe, s ciljem uspostavljanja sveobuhvatnog sustava mjerenja učinka. U početku se ispituju trenutne metode koje se koriste za procjenu uspješnosti u tim lancima opskrbe. Na temelju ove analize predlaže se strukturirani sustav pokazatelja uspješnosti, koji razlikuju učinkovitost u procesima te mjere ishode za procjenu rezultata i utjecaja humanitarnih napora. Zadnji dio istraživanja prikazuje validirani skup pokazatelja osmišljenih za poboljšanje učinkovitosti i optimizaciju logistike u humanitarnim aktivnostima, pružajući praktičnu vrijednost za primjenu unutar humanitarnih organizacija.
Ključne riječi: humanitarni lanci opskrbe, KPI, mjerenje učinka, 3E model
JEL klasifikacija: H41, L91, O22.
1. INTRODUCTION
Over the past 50 years, climate change and extreme weather events have caused a significant increase in natural disasters, through its consequences, disproportionately impacting developing countries (UN DESA, 2024). Simultaneously, the number of armed conflicts has significantly increased since World War II (UN Press, 2023), with civilians accounting for up to 90 percent of war casualties (UN, 2022). The global pandemic that emerged in 2020 has had a continuing impact on the global economy and healthcare systems, triggering humanitarian crises in various regions. Additionally, the armed conflict in Ukraine that began in 2022 has exacerbated humanitarian crises worldwide due to its effects on global food, agricultural, and energy supply chains. About 184 million people— 2.3 percent of the world's population—live outside of their country of nationality (WB, 2023). It is projected that by 2030, the number of people living in fragile and conflict-affected situations will rise to 46 percent of the global population (WB, 2021). Furthermore, the number of deaths resulting from both natural and man-made disasters is expected to increase fivefold over the next 50 years (Thomas and Kopczak, 2005).
The performance of humanitarian supply chains (HSC) is crucial for the success of relief operations (Repík and Foltin, 2022a). Unlike commercial supply chains, where performance is often measured in terms of cost efficiency and customer satisfaction, or CO2 on societal sustainable development (Doófasi-Kovacs and Nagy, 2023), HSC prioritize the effectiveness and timeliness of aid delivery (Repík and Foltin, 2023). Thus, performance in this context is not merely a matter of operational efficiency but a critical factor in the overall impact of humanitarian interventions. Despite the critical importance of performance, there are significant challenges in accurately measuring it within HSC (Repík and Foltin, 2023). Recent studies emphasize the urgent need for a more robust approach to performance measurement that can quickly and still flexibly adapt to the dynamic conditions of humanitarian logistics and provide actionable insights for continuous improvement (Repík and Foltin, 2023).
While the importance of efficient HSC is widely acknowledged, there remains a substantial gap in the research regarding the development and implementation of comprehensive performance measurement systems tailored to the unique challenges of humanitarian operations. Most existing models are derived from commercial supply chains and fail to capture the specific needs of humanitarian logistics. Our distinctiveness stems from the empathy we express for the limited resources and capacities of humanitarian organizations combined with a changing and uncertain environment.
The primary objective of this research is to develop a tailored set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that are applicable to HSCs, ensuring that these indicators are aligned with the unique requirements of the sector. The study addresses the research question: How can performance indicators, commonly used in the business environment, be adapted and categorized for effective use in HSCs?
The article focuses on the performance measurement of HSCs, which are essential in delivering aid during crises but face unique challenges compared to commercial supply chains. The paper outlines the existing gap in research regarding the development of performance metrics tailored to HSCs, given their dynamic, uncertain environments, and the non-profit nature of their operations. It proposes a comprehensive system of KPIs that adapts metrics from business models to align with the humanitarian sector's goals of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. These KPIs aim to enhance operational efficiency, resource management, and aid impact while being practical and validated in humanitarian practice. The study underscores the importance of a balanced approach, using the 3E model, to ensure that aid is delivered promptly, cost-effectively, and with a meaningful impact on beneficiaries. The research has several limitations. First, the proposed KPIs are derived from commercial supply chains and may require further adaptation to address the full complexity of HSCs, which operate in volatile and unpredictable environments. Additionally, the empirical validation of these KPIs is limited to a select group of humanitarian organizations, potentially restricting the generalizability of the findings across different types of humanitarian crises and contexts. Moreover, data availability and quality in HSCs are often inconsistent due to disrupted communication networks and logistical challenges in crisis zones, which can hinder the effective implementation of the proposed performance measurement system. Lastly, the study does not fully explore the long-term impacts of using KPIs on humanitarian outcomes, leaving room for future research to assess the sustainability and effectiveness of this approach over extended periods.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Humanitarian Supply Chains
Analogous to the evolution in the business sector between 1980-1990, there is also a shift from logistics to supply chain management in the humanitarian sector. HSCs are vital infrastructures that ensure the timely delivery of aid and resources to populations affected by crises such as natural disasters, armed conflicts, pandemics etc. These supply chains differ significantly from commercial ones due to their emphasis on speed, flexibility, and the imperative to save lives rather than generate profit (Repík et al., 2023). HSCs often operate under severe constraints, including limited access to affected areas, poor infrastructure, and the unpredictable nature of demand, which complicates the task of delivering aid effectively (Repík and Foltin, 2023). It must be acknowledged that in recent dynamic years these conditions have increasingly occurred in the commercial sector (Jambor and Nagy, 2022). However, actions in the humanitarian sector are often uncoordinated, spontaneous, unsolicited or unwanted ( T o m a s i n i and Wassenhove, 2009).
It is valid to adopt models and lessons from the business sector. However, there are specifics in the humanitarian context that can compromise the application of commercial sector approaches (see Table 1).
Performance measurement systems are frequently recommended to facilitate the implementation of strategies and enhance organizational performance
(Davis and Albright, 2004). Since the late 1950s, these systems have been introduced in business, public, and military organizations, and more recently in the humanitarian sector, with the aim of improving productivity, accountability, and service delivery (Abidi, 2019). Performance metrics can significantly influence performance by initiating action, through improving decision-making and execution, and focusing attention on key areas, increasing objectivity, enhancing understanding, maintaining performance consistency over the long term, facilitating feedback, providing timely warnings to leadership, and helping organizations prepare for the future (Parmenter, 2015).
2. 2. Performance Measurement in Humanitarian Context
In modern management, performance measurement goes beyond mere quantification and accounting. Due to the limitations of traditional financial metrics, both academics and practitioners advocate for multidimensional performance indicators (typically both financial and non-financial) (Chan and Qi, 2003). There are numerous frameworks for performance measurement in both academic and practical contexts (Kennerley and Neely, 2002), such as the Results-Determinants Framework (Brignall et al., 1991), the SCOR model (Supply Chain Council, 2010), the Strategic Measurement and Reporting Technique (Lynch and Cross, 1995), the BSC (Kaplan and Norton, 1992), and the Performance Prism (Neely, Adams and Crowe, 2001). Frameworks focused on transparency, such as The Red Cross Code of Conduct (IFRC, 1994), The Sphere Project (UNHCR, 2011), and The Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS Alliance, 2014) have also been developed, along with those that consider the impact of contextual and political barriers on the performance of HSC (Kovács and Tatham, 2009).
Identifying the right metrics and their quantity amidst vast amounts of available data (Parmenter, 2015) is another critical filter for success. Organizations often fail to distinguish critical success factors (Parmenter, 2015). Staff should monitor no more than a dozen indicators, only half of which should be critical (Monczka, 2009). Selecting a smaller number of meaningful indicators is thus crucial for improving performance (Parmenter, 2015). However, excessive aggregation can be a mistake, as it summarizes information to the point where it loses its significance (Monczka, 2009). To establish a meaningful performance measurement system, it is essential to focus on controllable events, ensure strong internal communication of the system and metrics, reduce bureaucratic burdens, and maintain a future-oriented approach (Parmenter, 2015).
3. METHODOLOGY
The research design follows a structured and systematic approach to answer the research question effectively. The study began with an extensive review of the existing literature on KPIs within business models (Van De Ven et al., 2023) building on findings from previous research on HSCs and their performance measurement capabilities (Repík and Foltin, 2023). This is complemented by practical insight from humanitarian logistics professionals.
A systematic literature review conducted by (Van De Ven et al., 2023) played a crucial role in this research. The review collated a comprehensive catalogue of KPIs used across various business models in academic literature. This catalogue served as the foundation for the selection process, wherein indicators suitable for humanitarian contexts were identified based on the needs of the sector.
The research incorporated primary data collected through semi-structured interviews with professionals in the humanitarian logistics. These interviews were designed to capture the priorities and challenges faced by those working directly in HSCs. The respondents for the study were carefully selected professionals with substantial experience in humanitarian or crisis logistics. All respondents (N = 23) had a minimum of three years (with 61% of respondents having 10 or more years) of experience in the sector, ensuring that their insights were grounded in practical knowledge and experience (see Figure 1).
Many respondents represented prominent NGOs such as IFRC, People in Need, and Médecins Sans Frontières, among others. Participants also included academic professionals from universities such as the Hanken (HUMLOG Institute), Kuehne Logistics University etc. Several respondents were part of integrated rescue systems, particularly from organizations like General Directorate of the Fire Rescue Corps of the Czech Republic. The business sector was represented by professional consultant from Health Commodities Associates Limited and a respondent from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic also contributed to the study.
The positions held by respondents were diverse, ranging from senior roles such as Heads of Departments, and Directors to specialized roles like Humanitarian Logistics Professionals. This diversity ensured a broad range of perspectives on humanitarian logistics. The majority of respondents had over 10 years of experience, reflecting a deep understanding of the field. A significant portion of the participants fell into 6 to 10 years category, bringing considerable mid-career insights. The smallest segment had between 3 to 5 years of experience.
These interviews were conducted either through in-person meetings or via video calls. Prior to the interviews, 19 questions were prepared in advance. The questions included both open-ended questions and those with a fixed scale. During the interviews, respondents were asked to provide open-ended responses for qualitative analysis. In cases where fixed-scale questions were posed, respondents were prompted to answer directly within the scale. The data obtained from these semi-structured interviews were subsequently used to fill in a questionnaire. The quantitative responses derived from closed-ended questions were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods. This analysis allowed for a systematic comparison of respondents' perspectives and the identification of patterns or trends within the data. Importantly, the authors did not interpret the closed-ended responses beyond categorizing them according to the predefined scale, ensuring that the responses reflected the participants' own views.
The selection process involved a systematic analysis of the KPIs from the catalogue, focusing on their relevance and applicability to the humanitarian sector. This analysis was guided by the principles of the 3E model as key dimensions of performance in humanitarian operations. Each selected indicator was evaluated for its potential to contribute to these three areas:
- Economy: Indicators that focus on cost management and resource allocation were identified, ensuring that humanitarian organizations can maintain financial sustainability while maximizing the impact of their resources.
- Efficiency: Indicators that measure the effectiveness of operational processes, including logistics, resource utilization, and time management, were categorized under this dimension.
- Effectiveness: Indicators that assess the overall impact of humanitarian interventions, particularly in terms of beneficiary satisfaction and the achievement of organizational goals, were included in this category.
4. ANALYSIS
4.1. Analysis of performance measurement issues
Establishing performance indicators that are applicable in HSC management has been a longstanding challenge (Kyne et al., 2007; Anjomshoae et al., 2022). Research indicates that up to 55 percent of humanitarian organizations do not monitor any performance indicators, a quarter utilize some indicators, and only the remaining 20 percent measure performance consistently (Blecken, 2010). While there is an abundance of performance indicators available for commercial supply chains, many of these are rendered ineffective by the unique nature of the humanitarian sector (Beamon and Kotleba, 2006). Given the intangible nature of humanitarian services and the ambiguity surrounding what constitutes a successful humanitarian outcome, it is even more challenging to translate humanitarian goals and principles into measurable performance indicators (Anjomshoae et al., 2022).
In addition to the practical limitations, there are also constraints at a conceptual level. It is difficult to link the performance (Abidi, de Leeuw and Klumpp, 2014) or year-round efforts (Sawhill and Williamson, 2001) of a humanitarian organization directly to its objectives. Although humanitarian aid is primarily concerned with alleviating suffering, identifying and quantifying the relationship between HSC performance and the alleviation of suffering is a complex task (Abidi, de Leeuw and Klumpp, 2014). Moreover, humanitarian organizations often lack the resources and accurate data needed to consult with aid recipients about their perceptions of the assistance provided (Clarke and Parris, 2019; Cardoso et al., 2023). This leads to a disconnect between the organization's self-perceived performance and the recipients' perception of the relevance and quality of the aid (Clarke and Parris, 2019). Furthermore, there is often an absence of a forward-looking focus in performance indicators, which are rarely designed to drive future improvements (Van der Laan, De Brito and Vergunst, 2009). Moreover, humanitarian organizations are not fully capable of controlling their HSC's performance (Kunz and Reiner, 2012).
Following a sudden disaster, the speed of response within the first 72 hours is crucial to saving as many lives as possible (Tomasini and Wassenhove, 2009). Preparation and planning are critical aspects, yet predicting the timing, location, and extent of humanitarian needs remains challenging. At the onset of a disaster, information is still limited (Tomasini and Wassenhove, 2009), even if the area had been well-monitored prior to the event - a rarity in less developed countries (Repík and Foltin, 2022b). From a logistical performance perspective, it is essential to understand specific impacts and needs, and to design and coordinate an effective response (Tomasini and Wassenhove, 2009). However, the accuracy and availability of data may be limited in environments where information and communication networks are disrupted (Van der Laan, De Brito and Vergunst, 2009). Additionally, uncertain and rapidly changing conditions rarely allow for the collection of comprehensive and reliable data (Kunz, 2019). This challenge is also evident in the development sector and in protracted conflict areas where security concerns hinder assessments and data collection (Anjomshoae et al., 2022).
While in the commercial sector, the pressure for optimal performance stems from the demand side, in the humanitarian sector, it typically originates from the supply side (Tomasini and Wassenhove, 2009). Donor influence on performance is significant, as they may insist that their financial contributions be used directly for their purpose (Murray, 2005). Large organizations are known for their high bureaucratic burden, which can limit the speed of disaster response (Thorvaldsdottir, Patz and Eckhard, 2021). Moreover, highly publicized events are often subject to political and marketing pressures (Repík and Foltin, 2022b), which can strain bottlenecks within the supply chain and further burden already limited personnel capabilities. The issue of human resources extends beyond limited skills, abilities, or knowledge. Managing volunteers, who often constitute the workforce of humanitarian organizations, is challenging (Repík and Foltin, 2022b). HSCs face uncertain availability and workload challenges, which are compounded by the absence of performance-based rewards or penalties (Repík and Foltin, 2022b). High turnover rates result in weak knowledge retention, creating additional challenges for performance measurement processes (Anjomshoae et al., 2022). Especially in long-term operations, there is a risk of staff burnout or mental exhaustion (Repík and Foltin, 2022b).
At the core of the debate on aid effectiveness is the realization that humanitarian actions are often driven by short-term goals, which can potentially lead to unintended negative long-term societal impacts (Anjomshoae et al., 2022). These negative impacts may manifest as market disruptions, aid dependency (Moyo, 2010), environmental damage, or even the prolongation of conflict (Anderson, 1999). For the reasons outlined above, it is imperative for the humanitarian sector to move beyond mere cost or time optimization.
Given these challenges, the application of the 3E model - Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness - presents a viable next step for enhancing HSCs. By focusing on these three pillars, humanitarian organizations can more systematically and effectively address the complexities of their operations, ensuring that resources are utilized efficiently, outcomes are achieved effectively, and costs are managed prudently. All this while maintaining the directness and simplicity of the model.
4.2. The 3E Model: Applicability to the Humanitarian Sector
The analysis of semi-structured interviews with professionals in the humanitarian logistics sector reveals a strong alignment between the core objectives of HSCs and the principles of the 3E model—Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness (see Figure 2). When respondents were asked to identify the most important goals for their HSCs, the responses consistently highlighted objectives such as cost-effectiveness, time efficiency, and the reach of aid, all of which are directly aligned with the 3E model.
These findings underscore the relevance and applicability of the 3E model in the humanitarian sector. By focusing on Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness, humanitarian organizations can better align their performance measurement systems with their operational goals, leading to improved outcomes in their missions. Therefore, integrating the 3E model into performance measurement frameworks represents a strategic approach to enhancing the effectiveness of humanitarian logistics and ensuring that aid is delivered in a timely, cost-effective, and impactful manner.
In the context of humanitarian operations, economy refers to the prudent use of resources to minimize costs without compromising the quality of aid delivered. Traditional KPIs can be adapted to monitor and control expenses in humanitarian missions. Economy, for instance, was reflected in terms of cost-effectiveness (cited by 43% of respondents), indicating the importance of managing costs and ensuring judicious use of resources to maintain financial sustainability in humanitarian operations.
Efficiency was a dominant concern, with time (83% of respondents) being the most frequently mentioned goal, highlighting the critical need for timely delivery of aid in emergency situations. This focus on speed is crucial for optimizing logistics processes and reducing delays, ensuring that aid reaches beneficiaries when they need it most. Moreover, emphasis on quality (52% of respondents), flexibility (39% of respondents) and accuracy in deliveries (43% of respondents) demonstrate the importance of overall efficiency.
Effectiveness in the humanitarian sector is about achieving the intended impact of interventions. Effectiveness was underscored by the importance of reach (43% of respondents), aiming to maximize the number of beneficiaries served. Additionally, the goals related to trust (22% of respondents) and safety and security (39% of respondents) highlight the critical role of building and maintaining trust with beneficiaries, partners, and donors, and ensuring the safety of staff, volunteers, and resources.
However, it is essential to acknowledge certain limitations of the 3E model when applied to the humanitarian sector. While Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness provide a robust framework, they may not fully capture the complexities of humanitarian operations, such as the need for adaptive decision-making in highly volatile environments or the prioritization of equity over efficiency in some contexts. Furthermore, the reliance on KPIs, while beneficial, can lead to an overemphasis on measurable outcomes, potentially neglecting qualitative factors like community engagement or long-term sustainability. Addressing these limitations requires a balanced approach that complements quantitative metrics with qualitative insights and contextual understanding.
5. RESULTS
The integration of the 3E model into the KPI framework for the HSC underscores the importance of a balanced approach to performance measurement. While some KPIs may need significant modification to fit the non-profit, impact-driven nature of humanitarian work, many of the core principles remain applicable. By focusing on 3E dimensions, HSCs can ensure that they are not only managing their resources well but also delivering high-quality aid that meets the needs of those they serve.
This chapter presents a comprehensive result of the study's findings, highlighting indicators relevant to the research objective. The data is systematically organized and summarized in the included tables of indicators, which serves as a visual representation of the core outcomes (see Table 2, 3 and 4). Each indicator has been meticulously analyzed to assess the impact and significance of the variables under investigation. The results reveal a clear pattern, offering valuable insights into the effectiveness of the methodologies employed.
6. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION
This study aimed to address the long-standing challenge of establishing effective performance measurement systems in HSCs. By integrating the 3E model into the performance measurement framework, the research contributes to a more systematic approach in aligning humanitarian logistics with operational goals. The findings underscore the importance of adopting a balanced and strategic approach to performance measurement that not only manages resources efficiently but also ensures the timely and impactful delivery of aid.
The analysis revealed significant gaps in the current performance measurement practices within the humanitarian sector. A considerable portion of humanitarian organizations either do not measure performance indicators or only do so inconsistently. This lack of systematic monitoring is compounded by the unique challenges of the humanitarian environment, where traditional commercial KPIs often fall short due to the intangible and complex nature of humanitarian outcomes. The study highlights the need for tailored indicators that can better capture the nuances of humanitarian efforts, particularly in terms of alleviating suffering and achieving long-term positive impacts.
Bysystematically selecting and categorizing indicators from the business environment and adapting them to the needs of HSCs, this research provides a clear answer to the research question. The study demonstrates that performance indicators from commercial settings can be effectively repurposed for humanitarian use when aligned with the 3E model. This categorization ensures that the performance indicators align with the strategic objectives of HSCs, allowing them to monitor and improve their operations across the three critical dimensions of performance. An important part of the results is the emphasis that the conditions of each emergency are different, as are the conditions of each HSC. For practical benefit, it is important to view this set of indicators as a database from which specific indicators can be selectively considered. For the reasons described above, HSCs should aim for as few sample indicators as possible.
One of the key insights from this research is the importance of the 3E model in bridging the gap between humanitarian objectives and measurable outcomes. The model's focus on Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness resonates with the core goals of HSCs, as evidenced by the semi-structured interviews with sector professionals. The alignment between the model and the respondents' priorities - such as cost-effectiveness, timely delivery, and the reach of aid - demonstrates the model's applicability in enhancing the operational performance of HSCs.
The study also brings to light the critical role of donor influence in shaping the performance of HSCs. Donor-driven pressures, particularly concerning the allocation and use of funds, often dictate the operational focus of humanitarian organizations. Donor influence on performance is significant, as they may insist that their financial contributions be used directly for their specific purposes, leaving little room for flexibility in addressing broader, long-term goals. This often leads to a skewed emphasis on short-term deliverables and narrowly defined objectives, which may compromise the sustainability of interventions. Therefore, integrating the 3E model into HSC performance frameworks not only aids in resource optimization but also helps in navigating the complexities of donor expectations while maintaining a focus on long-term humanitarian objectives.
Despite the promising results of this research, several areas for future research remain. First, further studies should investigate the development of more specialized KPIs tailored to specific types of humanitarian operations, such as disaster relief versus protracted conflicts. This would help refine the application of the 3E model in different operational contexts and increase the accuracy of performance measurement.
Second, there is a need to explore the role of technology in improving data collection and analysis in HSCs, particularly in environments where information and communication networks are disrupted. Studies which explore the digitalisation needs for improving supply chain efficiency offer valuable insights into how technology can optimize the flow of goods in complicated logistical contexts (Nowak, Kirchner and Koliński, 2022). Research into how digital tools, such as blockchain, big data analytics, and AI, can be also integrated into the 3E model could lead to significant advancements in real-time performance monitoring.
Lastly, future research should also focus on the long-term societal impacts of humanitarian interventions, specifically how performance measurement frameworks can be expanded to assess not just short-term effectiveness, but also the long-term sustainability of aid efforts. This includes investigating the potential unintended consequences of humanitarian actions, such as market disruptions and aid dependency, and how performance measurement systems can account for these complex dynamics. A more comprehensive evaluation of these long-term effects would allow organizations to better navigate unintended consequences and improve the sustainability of their interventions.
However, it is crucial to recognize that the 3E model has certain limitations when applied in the humanitarian context. The focus on Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness may not fully address the unpredictability and complexities of humanitarian operations, where the prioritization of speed or cost-effectiveness could sometimes overshadow critical factors such as equity, community engagement, or the long-term sustainability of interventions. This could lead to a neglect of the qualitative aspects of humanitarian efforts, such as emotional and psychological support for beneficiaries. These risks and limitations must be considered when adapting the 3E model for humanitarian purposes, ensuring that the measurement systems remain flexible and context-sensitive.
The 3E model needs further refinement and validation to account for these complexities. Given the diverse and dynamic nature of humanitarian operations, the simplicity of a model that focuses on measurable indicators may not capture some of the more nuanced aspects of humanitarian work. Therefore, continued efforts are needed to fine-tune these frameworks to ensure their full applicability to the wide range of conditions humanitarian organisations face.
In conclusion, this research reinforces the necessity of evolving beyond traditional performance metrics to adopt a more holistic and tailored approach to performance measurement in HSCs. The 3E model presents a viable pathway for achieving this evolution, aligning humanitarian efforts with measurable outcomes that reflect both operational efficiency and humanitarian impact. By embedding this model into their performance frameworks, humanitarian organizations can better navigate the complexities of their operational environment, ensuring that their missions are not only fulfilled efficiently but also leave a lasting positive impact on the communities they serve. Further exploration into specialized KPIs, the role of technology, and the long-term impacts of aid will continue to enrich our understanding and improve the effectiveness of humanitarian logistics.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.R. and P.F.; Methodology, D.R. and P.F.; Validation, D.R. and P.F; Formal Analysis, P.F.; Investigation, D.R.; Resources, D.R.; Data Curation, D.R. and P.F.; Writing - Original Draft Preparation, D.R.; Writing - Review & Editing, P. F .; Visualization, D.R.; Supervision, P.F.; Project Administration, D.R.; Funding Acquisition, D.R.
Funding: This article is funded using resources from a specific research project at the University of Defence conducted under the title Using Performance Indicators for Planning and Managing Humanitarian Supply Chains and the tag SV22-FVL-K109-R E P .
Conflict of interest: None.
REFERENCES
Abidi, H. (2019). Performance Management in Supply Chains: Applications to humanitarian and commercial supply chains (PhD-Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam). Available at: https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/78517330/complete+dissertation.pdf
Abidi, H., de Leeuw, S., & Klumpp, M. (2014). Humanitarian supply chain performance management: a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19 (5/6), 592-60 8. Available at : https:/ /doi.org/10.1108/ SCM-09-2013-0349
Anderson, M. B. (1999). Do no harm: how aid can support peace-or war. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, Colo. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781685854065
Anjomshoae, A. et al. (2022). A systematic review of humanitarian supply chains performance measurement literature from 2007 to 2021. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 72, 102852. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102852
Balcik, B., Bozkir, C. D. C., & Kundakcioglu, O. E. (2016). A literature review on inventory management in humanitarian supply chains. Surveys in Operations Research and Management Science, 21 (2), 101-116. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sorms.2016.10.002
Beamon, B., & Balcik, B. (2008). Performance measure in humanitarian relief chains. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21, 4-25. Available at: https://doi.org/ 10.1108/09513550810846087
Beamon, B. M., & Kotleba, S. A. (2006). Inventory management support systems for emergency humanitarian relief operations in South Sudan. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 17 (2), 187-212. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090610689952
Bititci, U. et al. (2012). Performance Measurement: Challenges for Tomorrow*: Performance Measurement. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14 (3), 305-327. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00318.x
Blecken, A. (2010). Supply chain process modelling for humanitarian organizations. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 40 (8/9), 675-692. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09600031011079328
Brignall, T. J. et al. (1991). Performance measurement in service businesses. Management Accounting, 69 (10), 34.
Cardoso, B. et al. (2023). Performance evaluation in humanitarian operations based on the beneficiary perspective. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 72 (1), 66-91. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-06-2020-0295
Chan, F. T. S., & Qi, H. J. (2003). An innovative performance measurement method for supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 8 (3), 209-223. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540310484618
Chopra, S., & Meindl, P. (2013). Supply chain management: strategy, planning, and operation. 5th ed. Pearson, Boston.
Christopher, M. (2005). Logistics and supply chain management: creating value-added networks. 3rd ed. FT Prentice Hall, Harlow, England; New York.
Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the Resilient Supply Chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15 (2), 1-14. Available at: https://doi.org/ 10.1108/09574090410700275
Christopher, M., & Tatham, P. (2011). Humanitarian logistics: meeting the challenge of preparing for and responding to disasters. 1st ed. Kogan Page, London ; Philadelphia, Pa.
CHS Alliance (2014). Core Humanitarian STANDARD. CHS Alliance. Available at: https://corehumanitarianstandard.org/the-standard/language-versions
Clarke, M., & Parris, B. W. (2019). Understanding disasters: managing and accommodating different worldviews in humanitarian response. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 4 (1), 19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41018-019-0066-7
Davis, S., & Albright, T. (2004). An investigation of the effect of Balanced Scorecard implementation on financial performance. Management Accounting Research, 15 (2), 135-153. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2003.11.001
Drucker, P. F. (1994). Řízení neziskových organizací: praxe a principy. 1. vyd. Management Press, Praha.
Gatignon, A., Va n Wassenhove, L. N., & Charles, A. (2010). The Yogyakarta earthquake: Humanitarian relief through IFRC's decentralized supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 126 (1), 102-110. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.01.003
Gopal, P R. C, & Thakkar, J. (2012). A review on supply chain performance measures and metrics: 2000‐2011. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61 (5), 518-547. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401211232957
Gros, I. (2016). Velká kniha logistiky. Vydání: první. Vysoká škola chemicko-technologická v Praze, Praha.
IFRC (1994) Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief. Available at: https://www.ifrc.org/document/code-conduct-international-red-cross-and-red-crescent-movement-and-ngos-disaster-relief
Jambor, Z., & Nagy, J. (2022). Resilience of food supply chains - a dynamic capability approach. Ekonomska misao i praksa, 31 (2), 473-486. Available at: https://doi.org/ 10.17818/EMIP/2022/2.6
Kaplan, R., & Norton, D. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard business review, 70 (1), 71-79.
Kennerley, M., & Neely, A. (2002). A framework of the factors affecting the evolution of performance measurement systems. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22 (11), 1222-1245. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210450293
Kisperska-Moroń, D. (2010). Evolution of competencies of logistics and supply chain managers. Electronic Scientific Journal of Logistics, 6 (3), 21-31. Available at: https://www.logforum.net/pdf/6_3_3_10.pdf
Kovács, G., & Spens, K. (2009). Identifying challenges in humanitarian logistics. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39 (6), 506-528. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030910985848
Kovács, G., & Spens, K. M. (2007). Humanitarian logistics in disaster relief operations. International Journal of Phys i cal Dis t ribu t ion & Logi s tics Ma nage men t, 37 ( 2), 99-114. Av aila ble at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030710734820
Kovács, G., & Tatham, P. (2009). Humanitarian logistics performance in the light of gender. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 58 (2), 174-187. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400910928752
Kunz, N. (2019). An automated quantitative content analysis process for humanitarian logistics research. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 9 (3), 475-491. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JHLSCM-06-2018-0051
Kunz, N., & Reiner, G. (2012). A meta‐analysis of humanitarian logistics research. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 2 (2), 116-147. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/20426741211260723
Kyne, D. et al. (2007). Balanced Scorecard for Natural Disaster Management Projects. Disaster Prevention and Management, 16, 785-806. Available at: https://doi.org/ 10.1108/09653560710837073
Lu, Q., Goh, M., & De Souza, R. (2016). A SCOR framework to measure logistics performance of humanitarian organizations. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 6 (2), 222-239. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JHLSCM-09-2015-0038
Lynch, R. L., & Cross, K. F. (1995). Measure up! yardsticks for continuous improvement. 2nd ed. Blackwell Business, Cambridge, Mass.
Mangan, J., Lalwanis, C., & Calatayud, A. (2021). Global logistics and supply chain management. Fourth edition. Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom.
Monczka, R. M. (ed.) (2009). Purchasing and supply chain management. 4th ed. South-We s t e r n , Mason, OH. Available at: http://www.mim.ac.mw/books/Purchasing% 20And%20Supply%20Chain%20Management%204th%20edition.pdf
Moyo, D. (2010). Dead aid: why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New Y o r k .
Murray, S. (2005). How to deliver on the promises, Financlal Times. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/79ae9810-6012-11d9-bd2f-00000e2511c8 .
Neely, A., Adams, C., & Crowe, P. (2001). The performance prism in practice. Measuring Business Excellence, 5 (2), 6-13. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040110385142
Nowak, P., Kirchner, M., & Koliński, A. (2022). Analysis of digitalisation needs improving the supply chain efficiency for new silk road transport corridor. Ekonomska misao i praksa, 31 (2), 487-503. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17818/EMIP/2022/2.7
Parmenter, D. (2015). Key performance indicators: developing, implementing, and using winning KPIs. Third edition. Wiley, Hoboken. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119019855
Pettit, S., & Ber esfo rd, A. (20 09). Critical success factors in the context of humanitarian aid supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39 (6), 450-468. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030910985811
Repík, D. et al. (2023). Present Trends, Emergencies and Their Impact on Supply Chain Security. Vojenské rozhledy, 32 (3), 063-081. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3849/2336-2995.32.2023.03.063-081
Repík, D., & Foltin, P. (2022a). Applications of performance indicators for optimization of humanitarian chains. Logforum, 18 (4), 495-504. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17270/J.LOG.2022.765
Repík, D., & Foltin, P. (2022b). Measuring The Performance of Humanitarian Supply Chains and Problems of Their Application In Practice. 39th IBIMA Conference Proceedings. 39th IBIMA International Conference. IBIMA publishing, Granada.
Repík, D., & Foltin, P. (2023). Analysis of problems of the performance management of humanitarian supply chain. Proceedings of International Scientific Conference Business Logistics in Modern Management. 23rd International Scientific Conference on Business Logistics in Modern Management (BLMM), Ekonomski fakultet u Osijeku, Osijek. Available at: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001226680300012
Sawhill, J. C., & Williamson, D. (2001). Mission Impossible?: Measuring Success in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 11 (3), 371-386. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.11309
Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P., & Simchi-Levi, E. (2000). Designing and managing the supply chain: concepts, strategies, and case studies. Irwin/McGraw-Hill (The Irwin/McGraw-Hill series Operations and decision sciences Operations Management), Boston.
Supply Chain Council (2010). SCOR Model. Available at: https://scor.ascm.org/ processes/introduction.
Thomas, A. S., & Kopczak, L. (2005). From Logistics to Supply Chain Management: The Path Forward in the Humanitarian Sector. Fritz Institute, 15, 1-15.
Thorvaldsdottir, S., Patz, R., & Eckhard, S. (2021). International bureaucracy and the United Nations system: introduction. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 87 (4), 695-700. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211038730
Tomasini, R., & Wassenhove, L. V. (2009). Humanitarian Logistics. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230233485
UN (2022). Ninety Per Cent of War-Time Casualties Are Civilians, Speakers Stress, Pressing Security Council to Fulfil Responsibility, Protect Innocent People in Conflicts. Available at: https://press.un.org/en/2022/sc14904.doc.htm
UN DESA (2024). Sustainable Development Topics. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/topics
UN Press (2023). With Highest Number of Violent Conflicts Since Second World War, United Nations Must Rethink Efforts to Achieve, Sustain Peace, Speakers Tell Security Council. Available at: https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15184.doc.htm
UNHCR (2011). The Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response. 2011 Edition, UNHCR. Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/media/ 31692; https://doi.org/10.3362/9781908176202
Va n De Ven, M. et al. (2023). Key performance indicators for business models: a systematic review and catalog. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 21 (3), 753-794. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-023-00650-2
Va n der Laan, E. A., De Brito, M. P. , & Vergunst, D. A. (2009). Performance measurement in humanitarian supply chains. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 13 (1), 22-45. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJRAM.2009.026388
WB (2021). Fragility, Conflict and Violence, World Bank. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/fragilityconflictviolence
WB (2023). World Bank Open Data, World Bank Open Data. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2025. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the "License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Humanitarian supply chains are essential for timely and effective crisis response, yet measuring their performance remains challenging. This article identifies and analyzes factors influencing the performance of humanitarian supply chains, aiming to establish a comprehensive performance measurement system. Initially, it examines the current methods used to assess performance in these supply chains. Based on this analysis, a structured system of performance indicators is proposed, distinguishing between efficiency and effectiveness in processes and measuring outcomes to evaluate the results and impact of humanitarian efforts. The research concludes with a validated set of indicators designed to enhance efficiency and optimize logistics capabilities in humanitarian operations, providing practical value for application within humanitarian organizations.