Search results

The purpose of this study is to analyse the crisis network response of European countries and the role played by defence organizations (DOs) during the early response phase of the pandemic, here set to encompass 75 days.

Published materials – reports, news and communications – provided by authorities and DOs were used. Some of the authors actively participated in national pandemic response networks. An exploratory approach and qualitative content analysis were applied. The data were collected in national languages from 13 European countries, and they were coded and analysed using the actors, resources and activities (ARA) framework.

This study identified three main categories of activity structures in which the DOs interacted with civilian members of response networks, health-related services, logistics services and public support services. These networks among actors were found within formal response systems and emergent networks. The DOs engaged as actors that provided a range of services when civil authorities could not cope with the huge demand for specific services and when resources were scarce in the initial response phase.

This study contributes by filling an important research gap with regard to the civil-military relations associated with the use of DO resources in the civil response to the pandemic crisis in Europe, which is described as an untraditional response. The ARA network approach provides a framework for arranging ARA and extends the wider civil-military network to expand the formal networks of the early crisis response. The study lays knowledge about the co-operation between civilian and military actors in different contexts and provides a broader understanding of the roles that DOs played in the response operations.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the challenges encountered by international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) operating in armed conflicts within the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Central African Republic (CAR). Through a 20-month fieldwork analysis, this research maps logistical risks and highlights key obstacles on the ground for successful humanitarian deployments in dynamically changing and complex environments. The study brings together academics and practitioners, providing practical and concrete recommendations for nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to focus on in the conflict zones studied.

Using a mixed-methods approach that combines qualitative and quantitative methods, this research provides valuable insights into the challenges faced by INGOs in conflict zones. After collecting data from the field, including interviews with key stakeholders and on-the-ground observations, the data analysis uses software tools such as Text Analysis Markup System analyzer and Macbeth. By adhering to ethical principles and incorporating a reflexive analysis, the study sheds light on the multidimensional nature of successful humanitarian deployments.

The primary risk in all armed conflict zones, including the DRC and CAR, is insecurity. However, to achieve a successful humanitarian deployment in such contexts, a multidimensional approach is required. This involves first securing the acceptance of local communities and conflict parties, which can be achieved through a deep understanding of both political and customary structures, with a focus on respecting key engagement leaders. Sustainability also plays a crucial role, and NGOs must maintain a secure stock of energy and provide greater initiative for on-the-ground managers to meet the expressed needs of beneficiary populations and involve them from the planning stage onwards. Finally, effective communication, cooperation and collaboration with United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs are essential to overcome procurement, technical and security risks, particularly during the initial deployment phases.

This study provides an illustration of the uncommon practice of conducting collaborative research in humanitarian settings amidst two neighboring areas of armed conflict. The authors identified 268 common risk factors across eight categories during five deployment phases. To analyze these risks based on criticality and NGO responsiveness, the authors used a multicriteria method. This approach allowed the authors to validate unanimous judgments, resulting in valuable insights and concrete recommendations.