SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Social Review of Technology and Change / 2026 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1

Does Supply Chain Integration Enhance Humanitarian Supply Chain Performance? An Empirical Investigation of Operational Outcomes

Tedarik Zinciri Entegrasyonu İnsani Yardım Tedarik Zinciri Performansını Artırır mı? Operasyonel Sonuçlara İlişkin Ampirik Bir İnceleme

Monther Alaff(IŞIK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0003-5836-8836
Gamze Karayaz(IŞIK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6774-0933
Pages
22–43
Publication Date
2026-04-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

While limitations include the single-case focus and cross-sectional design, the study lays a foundation for future longitudinal and multi-context research to further refine integration strategies in complex, rapidly changing humanitarian environments.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Humanitarian supply chains operate in high-uncertainty environments where speed and adaptability are critical, yet existing supply chain integration (SCI) models are primarily derived from commercial contexts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This creates a gap in understanding how integration affects performance in crisis operations.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:While limitations include the single-case focus and cross-sectional design, the study lays a foundation for future longitudinal and multi-context research to further refine integration strategies in complex, rapidly changing humanitarian environments.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kriz Müdahelesi · Esneklik · İnsani Yardım Tedarik Zincirleri

Abstract

Humanitarian supply chains operate in high-uncertainty environments where speed and adaptability are critical, yet existing supply chain integration (SCI) models are primarily derived from commercial contexts. This creates a gap in understanding how integration affects performance in crisis operations. This study investigates the effect of SCI on humanitarian supply chain performance, focusing specifically on lead time and flexibility as two core performance dimensions. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed. Quantitative data were collected through a survey of 360 United Nations supply chain staff across five operational regions, while qualitative insights were obtained from three in-depth executive interviews. Five integration constructs: beneficiary, supplier, government, partner, and internal integration , were operationalized and analyzed using regression and complementary qualitative analysis. All five integration constructs significantly influence supply chain performance. Beneficiary integration shows the strongest effect on both lead time and flexibility, while supplier, government, and partner integrations exert more limited effects. Regression analysis indicates SCI explains 66.7% of the variance in lead time, validating the proposed theoretical framework. The findings provide a context-specific theory of humanitarian SCI, demonstrating that integration strategies must be tailored to crisis conditions rather than replicated from commercial models. They also offer actionable guidance for humanitarian organizations to enhance responsiveness, adaptability, and stakeholder alignment during emergencies. This research advances both theory and practice by establishing SCI as a pivotal driver of humanitarian supply chain effectiveness. While limitations include the single-case focus and cross-sectional design, the study lays a foundation for future longitudinal and multi-context research to further refine integration strategies in complex, rapidly changing humanitarian environments.

Özet

İnsani yardım tedarik zincirleri (Humanitarian Supply Chains – HSC), hız ve uyum sağlama kapasitesinin kritik öneme sahip olduğu yüksek belirsizlik ortamlarında faaliyet göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, mevcut tedarik zinciri entegrasyonu (Supply Chain Integration – SCI) modelleri büyük ölçüde ticari bağlamlardan türetilmiştir. Bu durum, entegrasyonun kriz operasyonlarındaki performans üzerindeki etkisinin nasıl şekillendiğine dair anlayışta önemli bir boşluk yaratmaktadır. Bu çalışma, SCI’nin HSC performansı üzerindeki etkisini incelemekte ve özellikle iki temel performans boyutu olan teslim süresi ve esneklik üzerine odaklanmaktadır. Araştırmada ardışık açıklayıcı karma yöntem tasarımı kullanılmıştır. Nicel veriler, Birleşmiş Milletler tedarik zinciri personelinden oluşan 360 katılımcıyla gerçekleştirilen anket yoluyla toplanmış; nitel içgörüler ise üst düzey yönetici görüşmeleri aracılığıyla elde edilmiştir. Araştırmada yararlanıcı entegrasyonu, tedarikçi entegrasyonu, hükümet entegrasyonu, ortak entegrasyonu ve iç entegrasyon olmak üzere beş entegrasyon boyutu operasyonelleştirilmiş ve regresyon analizi ile tamamlayıcı nitel analiz kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Bulgular, söz konusu beş entegrasyon boyutunun tamamının tedarik zinciri performansını anlamlı biçimde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Özellikle yararlanıcı entegrasyonu hem teslim süresi hem de esneklik üzerinde en güçlü etkiye sahipken; tedarikçi, hükümet ve ortak entegrasyonlarının etkilerinin daha sınırlı olduğu görülmüştür. Araştırma bulguları, insani yardım bağlamına özgü bir SCI kuramsal çerçevesi sunmakta ve entegrasyon stratejilerinin ticari modellerden doğrudan aktarılmak yerine kriz koşullarına göre uyarlanması gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışma, SCI’yi HSC etkinliğinin kritik bir belirleyicisi olarak konumlandırarak hem kuramsal literatüre hem de uygulamaya önemli katkılar sağlamaktadır. Araştırmanın sınırlılıkları arasında tek vaka odağı ve kesitsel araştırma tasarımı yer almakla birlikte, çalışma karmaşık ve hızla değişen insani yardım ortamlarında entegrasyon stratejilerinin daha da geliştirilmesine yönelik boylamsal ve çok bağlamlı araştırmalar için güçlü bir temel oluşturmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alaff, M., Karayaz, G. (2026). Does Supply Chain Integration Enhance Humanitarian Supply Chain Performance? An Empirical Investigation of Operational Outcomes. Social Review of Technology and Change, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 22–43. https://ajindex.com/articles/1646541

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (75)

  1. 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), 592–608.
  2. Arora, A., Hofman, D., & Vatsa, R. (2023). Beneficiary-centric humanitarian logistics: A framework for adaptive delivery. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 13(1), 45–62.
  3. Attorney, G. (2021). Legal structures of nonprofit organizations: Comparative analysis. Nonprofit Law Review, 29(2), 112–130.
  4. Akyuz, A., & Erkan, E. (2009). Supply chain performance measurement: A literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 47(17), 5137–5155.
  5. Balcik, B., Beamon, B. M., Krejci, C. C., Muramatsu, K. M., & Ramirez, M. (2010). Coordination in humanitarian relief chains: Practices, challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Production Economics, 126(1), 22–34.
  6. Bealt, J., Fernández Barrera, J. C., & Mansouri, S. A. (2016). Collaborative relationships between logistics service providers and humanitarian organizations during disaster relief operations. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 6(2), 118–144.
  7. Beamon, B. M. (1999). Measuring supply chain performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(3), 275–292.
  8. Bechtel, C., & Jayaram, J. (1997). Supply chain management: A strategic perspective. International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(1), 15–34.
  9. Bicking, M., & Wimmer, M. A. (2011). Government integration in public sector supply chains. Electronic Government, 6846, 1–12.
  10. Birchall, J. (2002). Local government and nonprofit partnerships. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 558–568.
  11. Boon‐itt, S., & Wong, C. Y. (2011). The moderating effects of technological and demand uncertainties on the relationship between supply chain integration and customer delivery performance. International Journal of
  12. Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41(2), 253–276.
  13. Boris, E. T., & Mosher-Williams, R. (1998). Nonprofit organizations in a democracy: Varied roles and responsibilities. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27(4), 467–472.
  14. Carton, R. B., & Hofer, C. W. (2006). Measuring organizational performance: Metrics for entrepreneurship and strategic management research. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  15. Chen, B., & Graddy, E. A. (2010). The effectiveness of nonprofit lead organizations in networks for social service delivery. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20(4), 405–422.
  16. Chopra, S., & Meindl, P. (2010). Supply chain management: Strategy, planning, and operation (4th ed.). Pearson.
  17. Cornforth, C. (2003). The governance of public and nonprofit organizations: What do boards do? Routledge.
  18. Courtney, R. (2002). Strategic management for voluntary nonprofit organizations. Routledge.
  19. Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  20. Danese, P., Romano, P., & Marco, G. (2013). The impact of supply chain integration on responsiveness: A logistics perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 142(1), 41–53.
  21. Day, J. M., Melnyk, S. A., Larson, P. D., Davis, E. W., & Whybark, D. C. (2012). Humanitarian and disaster relief supply chains: A matter of trust. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48(4), 21–36.
  22. Dong-Young, K. (2013). Supply chain performance measurement: A case study. Operations Management Review, 11(2), 34–45.
  23. Drucker, P. F. (1990). Managing the nonprofit organization: Practices and principles. HarperBusiness.
  24. Dubey, R., & Gunasekaran, A. (2016). Supply chain agility, adaptability and alignment: Empirical evidence from the Indian auto components industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(1), 111–132.
  25. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.
  26. Fallahpour, A., Yew Wong, K., & Rajoo, S. (2021). Supply chain integration and performance: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Production Research, 59(4), 1172–1194.
  27. Garcia, R., Moreira, F., & Sousa, J. P. (2012). A performance measurement framework for supply chains. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61(5), 488–512.
  28. Gimenez, C., & Ventura, A. (2005). Logistics-service quality and firm performance: An empirical study. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(3), 140–157.
  29. Gronbjerg, K. A. (1994). The nonprofit sector and the public sector: The organization of social services in the United States. Jossey-Bass.
  30. Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C., & McGaughey, R. E. (2004). A framework for supply chain performance measurement. International Journal of Production Economics, 87(3), 333–347.
  31. Hansmann, H. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale Law Journal, 89(5), 835–901.
  32. Hashemi, S., et al. (2022). Humanitarian logistics performance: A beneficiary-centered approach. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 12(3), 289–310.
  33. Heaslip, G., & Barber, E. (2014). Using the military in disaster relief: Systemizing challenges and opportunities. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 4(1), 60–81.
  34. Hedden, B. (2015). Objectivity in epistemology. Philosophical Studies, 172(1), 1–19.
  35. Houlihan, J. B. (1987). International supply chain management. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Materials Management, 17(2), 51–66.
  36. Jahre, M., & Heigh, I. (2008). Does the current constraints in funding promote failure in humanitarian supply chains? Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 9(1), 44–54.
  37. Jahre, M., et al. (2016). Coordination in humanitarian logistics: A framework and research agenda. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 6(2), 222–244.
  38. Kalyar, M. N., Shafique, I., & Ahmad, B. (2020). Supply chain flexibility and performance: The mediating role of innovation. Journal of Business Research, 109, 268–278.
  39. Karamouz, M., Ahmadi Kahnali, R., & Ghafournia, N. (2021). Cost optimization in humanitarian supply chains. Operations Research Perspectives, 8, 100189.
  40. Kearns, K. P. (1994). The strategic management of accountability in nonprofit organizations: An analytical framework. Public Administration Review, 54(2), 185–192.
  41. Kendall, J. (2015). Third sector organizations: A conceptual exploration. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(3), 777–803.
  42. Kovács, G., Tatham, P., & Larson, D. (2012). What skills are needed to be a humanitarian logistician? Journal of Business Logistics, 33(3), 245–258.
  43. Lambert, D. M., Emmelhainz, M. A., & Gardner, J. T. (1996). Developing and implementing supply chain partnerships. International Journal of Logistics Management, 7(2), 1–17.
  44. Lee, P. T. W., Seo, Y. J., & Dinwoodie, J. (2016). Supply chain integration and maritime logistics performance. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 19(5), 470–490.
  45. Liu, C., et al. (2021). Humanitarian supply chain resilience: A systematic literature review. Annals of Operations Research, 299(1), 1–30.
  46. Mentzer, J. T. (2004). Fundamental concepts of supply chain management. Journal of Business Logistics, 25(1), 1–25.
  47. Munir, M., et al. (2020). Measuring supply chain integration: Scale development and validation. Supply Chain Management Review, 25(3), 45–60.
  48. Nielsen, J. A. (2014). Government involvement in supply chains: A public sector perspective. Public Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 234–260.
  49. Nyamu, G. (2012). Challenges in humanitarian logistics: A Kenyan perspective. African Journal of Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 4(1), 12–25.
  50. Paciarotti, C., Piotrowicz, W., & Fenton, M. (2021). Performance measurement in humanitarian supply chains: A systematic review. International Journal of Production Research, 59(15), 4532–4554.
  51. Pagell, M. (2004). Understanding the factors that enable and inhibit the integration of operations, purchasing and logistics. Journal of Operations Management, 22(5), 459–487.
  52. Polater, A. (2020). Supply chain flexibility in humanitarian operations. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 10(1), 34–52.
  53. Prabir, K., et al. (2005). Humanitarian logistics: A new field of research and action. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(5), 377–391.
  54. Queiroz, M. M., et al. (2020). Digital transformation and supply chain resilience. Supply Chain Management Review, 25(4), 56–72.
  55. Rai, A., Patnayakuni, R., & Seth, N. (2006). Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS Quarterly, 30(2), 225–246.
  56. Saleheen, M., & Habib, M. (2022). Performance metrics in humanitarian logistics: A review. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 12(1), 78–95.
  57. Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1996). The emerging nonprofit sector: An overview. Manchester University Press.
  58. Sanders, N. R. (2016). How digital technologies are transforming supply chain integration. Journal of Business Logistics, 37(2), 73–84.
  59. Scholten, K., & Schilder, S. (2015). The role of collaboration in supply chain resilience. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 20(4), 471–484.
  60. Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P., & Simchi-Levi, E. (2003). Designing and managing the supply chain: Concepts, strategies, and case studies. McGraw-Hill.
  61. Stevens, G. C. (1989). Integrating the supply chain. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Materials Management, 19(8), 3–8.
  62. Swink, M., Narasimhan, R., & Wang, C. (2007). Managing beyond the factory walls: Effects of four types of strategic integration on manufacturing plant performance. Journal of Operations Management, 25(1), 148–164.
  63. Tan, K. C., Kannan, V. R., & Handfield, R. B. (1998). Supply chain management: Supplier performance and firm performance. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 34(3), 2–9.
  64. Tatham, P., & Houghton, L. (2011). The wicked problem of humanitarian logistics and disaster relief aid. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 1(1), 15–31.
  65. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.
  66. Tian, Y., et al. (2021). Supply chain integration and performance: Evidence from humanitarian operations. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 11(2), 145–162.
  67. Tomasini, R. M., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2009). Humanitarian logistics. Palgrave Macmillan.
  68. Turkishmaritime. (2024). Earthquake response logistics: Lessons from Turkey–Syria. Turkish Maritime Journal, 18(1), 22–35.
  69. UNHCR. (2023). Annual report on humanitarian logistics. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
  70. Van Looy, A., & Shafagatova, A. (2016). Business process performance measurement: A structured literature review of indicators, measures and metrics. SpringerPlus, 5, 179.
  71. Vafaei-Zadeh, A., et al. (2020). Supply chain trade-offs: Balancing cost, quality, and speed. Operations Management Review, 14(3), 88–102.
  72. Wantao, Y., et al. (2013). Humanitarian supply chain coordination: A review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 5, 112–123.
  73. WHO. (2020). COVID-19 supply chain system: Country support and logistics. World Health Organization.
  74. Wiengarten, F., Pagell, M., & Fynes, B. (2015). Risk management and performance in supply chains: The role of integration. International Journal of Production Economics, 170, 401–412.
  75. Zhu, Q., Geng, Y., & Lai, K. (2010). Circular economy practices among Chinese manufacturers: The role of supply chain integration. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(6), 1324–1331.