The paper "Global Supply Chain and Logistics Strategies for Mitigating Adverse Effects of Natural Disasters" is an outstanding example of business coursework. Disaster management chain comprises of four phases including mitigation, preparedness, reaction and recovery. The mitigation phase entails the group of activities used to aid in the reduction of a disaster’ s impact. Preparedness operations make organizations and the community ready for a fast and effective response following the occurrence of a disaster. The aim of the reaction phase in humanitarian relief process is to quickly provide the affected people with relief, including water, food, shelter and medicine, in large scale in order to lessen death and human suffering.
Recovery activities intend to restore the region that was affected by a disaster to its initial state. The effectiveness of the mitigation phase depends on the strategies that are put in place in relation to global logistics and supply chain (Ivgin 2013, p. 1). This essay will discuss the various logistics and worldwide supply chain strategies that are required for the mitigation of natural disasters’ adverse effects. Strategies for mitigating the negative effects of natural disasters Ivgin (2013, p. 2) maintains that natural disasters are usually characterized by epicentre, occurrence time and effect.
Thus, it is nearly impossible to ascertain the precise damage as well as relief requirements prior to the disaster. This makes the planning of pre-disaster response difficult. However, the formulation and implementation of a number of strategies in relation to logistics and supply chain used to provide humanitarian relief after the occurrence of a natural calamity may help reduce the effects of such a calamity. Pre-positioning of necessary relief items According to Ivgin (2013, p. 2), pre-positioning of essential items for relief, such as food, water, medicines, clothing and evacuation facilities, in strategic sites along with effective distribution of such items following a disaster can highly help in dealing with the situation.
Decisions on relief facility location influence the performance level and relief activities’ efficiency. This is because; the locations and number of distribution points along with the stock level of relief items held in those points directly affect disaster response time and costs involved throughout the relief chain. Information on the previous occurrence of disasters should be used to predict the likely timing and impact of natural disasters.
Based on this prediction, the relative amount of relief items should then be distributed to areas prone to such disasters. Retrofitting of transportation infrastructure and buildings Retrofitting of buildings as well as transportation infrastructure can aid in the mitigation of natural calamities’ adverse impacts. Retrofitting involves reinforcing the structures to a level that is highly resistant to natural disasters, such as earthquakes and flooding. The pre-disaster state of buildings highly determines the damage levels during a disaster, which in turn determine the needed quantity of relief items.
Besides, the vulnerability of transportation infrastructure to a calamity like an earthquake will impact the network connectivity, which constitutes the key determinant ineffective supply of relief items to the affected regions. Consequently, retrofitting decisions made prior to a disaster to strengthen transportation networks and buildings are principally relevant to post-disaster response’ s efficiency (Ivgin 2013, p. 3). Accordingly, buildings located in regions that are susceptible to natural calamities, such as hurricanes and earthquakes should be constructed in such a way that they are able to withstand the impact of such calamities.
For instance, very tall buildings should be avoided in areas that are prone to earthquakes. This would help reduce the impact of calamities. Moreover, transportation networks connecting disaster-prone areas and the likely source of relief should be constructed or renovated to a status that is resilient to natural disasters (Ivgin 2013, p. 3).
Afshar, A & Haghani, A 2012, Modeling integrated supply chain logistics in real-time large-scale disaster relief operations, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 46 (2012), 327-338.
Chakravarty, AK 2011, A contingent plan for disaster response, International Journal of Production Economics, 134 (2011), 3-15.
Fitrianto, AR & Hadi, S 2012, Supply Chain Risk Management in Shrimp Industry Before and During Mud Volcano Disaster: An Initial Concept, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65 (2012), 427 – 435.
Ivgin, M 2013, The Decision‐Making Models for Relief Asset Management and Interaction With Disaster Mitigation, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 8 (5), 1-20.
Ozguven, EE & Ozbay, K 2013, A secure and efficient inventory management system for disasters, Transportation Research Part C, 29 (2013), 171-196.
Park, Y, Hong, P & Roh, JJ 2013, Supply chain lessons from the catastrophic natural disaster in Japan, Business Horizons, 56 (2013), 75-85.
Torre, LE, Dolinskaya, IS & Smilowitz, KR 2012, Disaster relief routing: Integrating research and practice, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 46 (2012), 88-97.
Trkman, P & McCormack, K 2009, Supply chain risk in turbulent environments—A conceptual model for managing supply chain network risk, International Journal of Production Economics, 119 (2009), 247–258.
Wohlgemuth, S, Oloruntoba, R & Clausen, U 2012, Dynamic vehicle routing with anticipation in disaster relief, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 46 (2012), 261-271.
Yang, YC 2011, Risk management of Taiwan’s maritime supply chain security, Safety Science, 49 (2011), 382–393.