Humanitarian intervention in conflict management in Africa: selected case study analysis of Sudan and Libya
- Authors: Muruviwa, Tapiwa Gladmore
- Date: 2015-04
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Conflict management -- Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10353/24772 , vital:63550
- Description: The study investigates the effectiveness of humanitarian intervention as a strategy in conflict management in Africa drawing from case studies in Sudan and Libya. The research utilized an interaction of both primary and secondary data sources. Primary sources used are African Union (AU) official reports, United Nations Security Council (UNSC) official reports as well as official International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) reports. Secondary sources used include journal articles, newspapers, books and other online publications. Among others, the study found out that humanitarian intervention in Sudan by the AU from 2004 until 2006 lacked the capacity and political will to effectively manage the conflict. At the same time, an analysis of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization‟s (NATO) military intervention in Libya in 2011 reveals that western-led interventions in Africa are often driven by geostrategic interests rather than the need to save people in danger. Against this backdrop, the study recommends amongst others that the AU should have a capacitated standby-force that will rapidly respond to manage conflicts in Africa. Also, UN peacekeeping operations in Africa should be coordinated by the African Union. , Thesis (MSoc) -- Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2015
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015-04
- Authors: Muruviwa, Tapiwa Gladmore
- Date: 2015-04
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Conflict management -- Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10353/24772 , vital:63550
- Description: The study investigates the effectiveness of humanitarian intervention as a strategy in conflict management in Africa drawing from case studies in Sudan and Libya. The research utilized an interaction of both primary and secondary data sources. Primary sources used are African Union (AU) official reports, United Nations Security Council (UNSC) official reports as well as official International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) reports. Secondary sources used include journal articles, newspapers, books and other online publications. Among others, the study found out that humanitarian intervention in Sudan by the AU from 2004 until 2006 lacked the capacity and political will to effectively manage the conflict. At the same time, an analysis of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization‟s (NATO) military intervention in Libya in 2011 reveals that western-led interventions in Africa are often driven by geostrategic interests rather than the need to save people in danger. Against this backdrop, the study recommends amongst others that the AU should have a capacitated standby-force that will rapidly respond to manage conflicts in Africa. Also, UN peacekeeping operations in Africa should be coordinated by the African Union. , Thesis (MSoc) -- Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2015
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015-04
A framework to measure supply chain management efficacy in humanitarian supply environments
- Authors: Linford, Pierre
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Business logistics
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Doctoral , DBA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/8155 , vital:25131
- Description: Supply chain management in the for-profit commercial environment is a broad, far-reaching field of study, impacting on a society’s standard of living. Commercial supply chain management is the science of balancing customer service levels with least total costs. In other words, the for-profit supply chain management practitioner is concerned with customer service levels, consumer value, shareholder value, total cost optimisation and ultimately maximising long term sustainable return on investment. Commercial supply chain management differs from military supply chain management in that the latter also focuses on service delivery, but the cost is almost irrelevant. In military operations, successful results (winning the battle) far surpass the total cost parameter or the return on investment. One of the major differentiating factors between commercial supply chain management (CSCM) in the for-profit theatre and humanitarian supply chain management (HSCM) in the not-for-profit supply environments hinges on strategic intent and how to measure success. In CSCM, return on investment (ROI) is key and in HSCM, the ability to create impact becomes paramount. Regarding spend, both CSCM and HSCM are concerned with optimising operational spend, optimal utilisation of capital goods and infrastructure as well as minimising the cost of goods, works and services. Commercial supply chain managers want to spend as little as possible on operational expenses similarly to their humanitarian counterparts but humanitarian supply chain managers are also concerned about underspending of donor funded programming. Humanitarian programming often happens under difficult and dangerous circumstances. This requires a special cadre of professionals who are willing to serve the most vulnerable without exploitation and are able to deliver value often with limited or even broken infrastructure, unreliable supply and under insecure conditions. Humanitarian supply chain management leadership requires a DBA thesis balanced approach between long term strategic views whilst managing the short term outcomes. Also, humanitarian leadership needs to balance decision-making between long term strategic interventions and the ability, maturity and cost structures at functional and executional levels. This conundrum is the fundamental difference between commercial supply chain management and humanitarian supply chain management. Once one understands and respects these nuances, one can measure performance and reward appropriate corrective behaviour. Zig Ziglar once said: “If you aim at nothing, you will hit it every time”. The question that has been asked for so long has been “how to measure supply chain management efficacy in humanitarian supply environments?” This study addresses this question of developing a framework to measure supply chain efficacy in humanitarian supply environments with the view to create an enabling environment within which service levels could enhance the impact of donor funding whilst the needs of intended beneficiaries are better served. During field research, ten key focus areas and sixty-five supply chain management elements were identified. These sixty-five elements were tested via two surveys making use of the Delphi technique. Four of the sixty-five SCM elements were eliminated following the second survey due to high disagreement between the respondents, and a further two were eliminated based on expert opinion feedback from the respondents leaving fifty-nine elements being significantly important for inclusion in the framework. Three additional elements were identified by the respondents but not empirically verified and therefore not included in the proposed frameworks but could be included in future research. Fifty-seven of the sixty-five elements can be directly controlled by the SCM function. However, four of these fifty-seven elements were eliminated during the second survey and a further two were eliminated reviewing the feedback from respondents leaving fifty-one elements under the direct control of the SCM function.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
- Authors: Linford, Pierre
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Business logistics
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Doctoral , DBA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/8155 , vital:25131
- Description: Supply chain management in the for-profit commercial environment is a broad, far-reaching field of study, impacting on a society’s standard of living. Commercial supply chain management is the science of balancing customer service levels with least total costs. In other words, the for-profit supply chain management practitioner is concerned with customer service levels, consumer value, shareholder value, total cost optimisation and ultimately maximising long term sustainable return on investment. Commercial supply chain management differs from military supply chain management in that the latter also focuses on service delivery, but the cost is almost irrelevant. In military operations, successful results (winning the battle) far surpass the total cost parameter or the return on investment. One of the major differentiating factors between commercial supply chain management (CSCM) in the for-profit theatre and humanitarian supply chain management (HSCM) in the not-for-profit supply environments hinges on strategic intent and how to measure success. In CSCM, return on investment (ROI) is key and in HSCM, the ability to create impact becomes paramount. Regarding spend, both CSCM and HSCM are concerned with optimising operational spend, optimal utilisation of capital goods and infrastructure as well as minimising the cost of goods, works and services. Commercial supply chain managers want to spend as little as possible on operational expenses similarly to their humanitarian counterparts but humanitarian supply chain managers are also concerned about underspending of donor funded programming. Humanitarian programming often happens under difficult and dangerous circumstances. This requires a special cadre of professionals who are willing to serve the most vulnerable without exploitation and are able to deliver value often with limited or even broken infrastructure, unreliable supply and under insecure conditions. Humanitarian supply chain management leadership requires a DBA thesis balanced approach between long term strategic views whilst managing the short term outcomes. Also, humanitarian leadership needs to balance decision-making between long term strategic interventions and the ability, maturity and cost structures at functional and executional levels. This conundrum is the fundamental difference between commercial supply chain management and humanitarian supply chain management. Once one understands and respects these nuances, one can measure performance and reward appropriate corrective behaviour. Zig Ziglar once said: “If you aim at nothing, you will hit it every time”. The question that has been asked for so long has been “how to measure supply chain management efficacy in humanitarian supply environments?” This study addresses this question of developing a framework to measure supply chain efficacy in humanitarian supply environments with the view to create an enabling environment within which service levels could enhance the impact of donor funding whilst the needs of intended beneficiaries are better served. During field research, ten key focus areas and sixty-five supply chain management elements were identified. These sixty-five elements were tested via two surveys making use of the Delphi technique. Four of the sixty-five SCM elements were eliminated following the second survey due to high disagreement between the respondents, and a further two were eliminated based on expert opinion feedback from the respondents leaving fifty-nine elements being significantly important for inclusion in the framework. Three additional elements were identified by the respondents but not empirically verified and therefore not included in the proposed frameworks but could be included in future research. Fifty-seven of the sixty-five elements can be directly controlled by the SCM function. However, four of these fifty-seven elements were eliminated during the second survey and a further two were eliminated reviewing the feedback from respondents leaving fifty-one elements under the direct control of the SCM function.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
The politics of humanitarian organizations neutrality and solidarity: the case of the ICRC and MSF during the 1994 Rwandan genocide
- Authors: Delvaux, Denise
- Date: 2005
- Subjects: International Committee of the Red Cross -- History , Médecins sans frontières (Association) , Humanitarian intervention , Neutrality -- Rwanda , Solidarity -- Rwanda , Genocide -- Rwanda -- History -- 20th century , Genocide -- Rwanda , Rwanda -- History -- Civil War, 1994 , Rwanda -- Politics and government
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2769 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002979 , International Committee of the Red Cross -- History , Médecins sans frontières (Association) , Humanitarian intervention , Neutrality -- Rwanda , Solidarity -- Rwanda , Genocide -- Rwanda -- History -- 20th century , Genocide -- Rwanda , Rwanda -- History -- Civil War, 1994 , Rwanda -- Politics and government
- Description: With the seemingly infinite existence of complex emergencies and the overwhelming presence of humanitarian organizations responding to such crises, it is essential that the assumptions, precepts, and actions of humanitarian organizations be critically examined and understood. The aim of this thesis is to explore differing traditions within humanitarian thought: neutrality and solidarity. In the process, this thesis will determine whether it is possible to maintain clear ideologies in the context of a complex emergency and whether the existence of different humanitarian ideologies results in a dichotomy or polarization of humanitarian action. This study is of great import as it delves into the contemporary literature claiming that humanitarianism is currently in a state of crisis – the unsustainability of competing humanitarian ideologies operating together in a complex emergency. Primary documents from both the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) regarding their operations in the 1994 Rwandan complex emergency were examined in order to provide a foundation for the theoretical investigation. Although the ICRC and MSF occupy seemingly polarized positions in the neutrality – solidarity debate, the investigation into their humanitarian activities during the 1994 genocide and the resulting refugee crisis reflected the difficulties of providing relief based upon humanitarian ideals. Due to the complex realities of the 1994 Rwandan crisis, the ideological notions dividing the ICRC and MSF were overshadowed by the simple humanitarian desire to aid those in need.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2005
- Authors: Delvaux, Denise
- Date: 2005
- Subjects: International Committee of the Red Cross -- History , Médecins sans frontières (Association) , Humanitarian intervention , Neutrality -- Rwanda , Solidarity -- Rwanda , Genocide -- Rwanda -- History -- 20th century , Genocide -- Rwanda , Rwanda -- History -- Civil War, 1994 , Rwanda -- Politics and government
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2769 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002979 , International Committee of the Red Cross -- History , Médecins sans frontières (Association) , Humanitarian intervention , Neutrality -- Rwanda , Solidarity -- Rwanda , Genocide -- Rwanda -- History -- 20th century , Genocide -- Rwanda , Rwanda -- History -- Civil War, 1994 , Rwanda -- Politics and government
- Description: With the seemingly infinite existence of complex emergencies and the overwhelming presence of humanitarian organizations responding to such crises, it is essential that the assumptions, precepts, and actions of humanitarian organizations be critically examined and understood. The aim of this thesis is to explore differing traditions within humanitarian thought: neutrality and solidarity. In the process, this thesis will determine whether it is possible to maintain clear ideologies in the context of a complex emergency and whether the existence of different humanitarian ideologies results in a dichotomy or polarization of humanitarian action. This study is of great import as it delves into the contemporary literature claiming that humanitarianism is currently in a state of crisis – the unsustainability of competing humanitarian ideologies operating together in a complex emergency. Primary documents from both the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) regarding their operations in the 1994 Rwandan complex emergency were examined in order to provide a foundation for the theoretical investigation. Although the ICRC and MSF occupy seemingly polarized positions in the neutrality – solidarity debate, the investigation into their humanitarian activities during the 1994 genocide and the resulting refugee crisis reflected the difficulties of providing relief based upon humanitarian ideals. Due to the complex realities of the 1994 Rwandan crisis, the ideological notions dividing the ICRC and MSF were overshadowed by the simple humanitarian desire to aid those in need.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2005
The validity of humanitarian intervention under international law
- Authors: Beneke, Méchelle
- Date: 2003
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Intervention (International law)
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11056 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/305 , Humanitarian intervention , Intervention (International law)
- Description: The study which follows considers the current approach to State sovereignty, use of force, and human rights, in order to determine the balance which exists between these concepts. A shift in this balance determines the direction of development of the concept of ‘humanitarian intervention.’ The investigation establishes that State sovereignty and certain human rights are at a point where they are viewed as equal and competing interests in the international arena. This leads to the question of whether or not the concept of humanitarian intervention has found any acceptance in international law. It is determined that the right to intervention rests exclusively with the United Nations Security Council. There are, however, obstacles to United Nations action, which necessitate either taking action to remove the obstacles, or finding an alternative to United Nations authorized action. The alternatives provided are unilateral interventions by regional organizations, groups of States or individual States, with interventions by regional organizations being favoured. The study further discusses the requirements which would make unilateral action more acceptable. These same requirements provide a standard against which the United Nations can measure its duty to intervene. Such an investigation was done by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, and a synopsis of its Report and Recommendations are included. Finally, the question of responsibility is addressed. State and individual responsibility for two separate types of action are considered. The responsibility of States and individuals for initiating an intervention is considered under the topic of the crime of aggression. The responsibility of States and individual for exceeding the mandate of a legitimate intervention is considered under the heading of war crimes.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2003
- Authors: Beneke, Méchelle
- Date: 2003
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Intervention (International law)
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11056 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/305 , Humanitarian intervention , Intervention (International law)
- Description: The study which follows considers the current approach to State sovereignty, use of force, and human rights, in order to determine the balance which exists between these concepts. A shift in this balance determines the direction of development of the concept of ‘humanitarian intervention.’ The investigation establishes that State sovereignty and certain human rights are at a point where they are viewed as equal and competing interests in the international arena. This leads to the question of whether or not the concept of humanitarian intervention has found any acceptance in international law. It is determined that the right to intervention rests exclusively with the United Nations Security Council. There are, however, obstacles to United Nations action, which necessitate either taking action to remove the obstacles, or finding an alternative to United Nations authorized action. The alternatives provided are unilateral interventions by regional organizations, groups of States or individual States, with interventions by regional organizations being favoured. The study further discusses the requirements which would make unilateral action more acceptable. These same requirements provide a standard against which the United Nations can measure its duty to intervene. Such an investigation was done by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, and a synopsis of its Report and Recommendations are included. Finally, the question of responsibility is addressed. State and individual responsibility for two separate types of action are considered. The responsibility of States and individuals for initiating an intervention is considered under the topic of the crime of aggression. The responsibility of States and individual for exceeding the mandate of a legitimate intervention is considered under the heading of war crimes.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2003
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »