Overcoming Logistics Challenges in Large-Scale Disruptions: Dynamic Capabilities in Türkiye’s Earthquake Response

Abstract

Dynamic capabilities (DC) play a critical role in addressing logistics challenges during emergency responses to natural disasters. While researchers in logistics operations (LO) acknowledge this importance, the specific context of major earthquakes remains underexplored. This study aims to analyze logistics challenges in emergency responses to major earthquakes, with a focus on the experiences of Türkiye’s recent seismic events. An exploratory mixed-methods approach that combines qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The research includes a systematic review of 23 academic articles published between 1999 and 2023, supplemented by secondary sources (news, websites, reports) and expert interviews. The Best-Worst Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (BWM) method was employed to identify and prioritize key criteria and alternatives for DC and logistics challenges. The Weighted Sum Model (WSM) prioritizes the other options. The findings highlight the core logistics challenges in earthquake responses, such as responsiveness and agility. Key DCs— organizational learning, visibility, information flow, robustness, delivery reliability and speed—were essential to mitigating risks for affected populations. This research supports and extends the humanitarian logistics literature by offering a DC framework to address logistics challenges in large-scale disasters, providing practical insights for improving response effectiveness during major earthquakes.

Keywords

• Logistics Operations
• Dynamic Capabilities
• Logistics Challenges
• Humanitarian Response
• Major earthquakes

References

1. Adobor, H. (2020). Open strategY: role of organizational democracY. Journal of StrategY and Management, 13(2), 310-331. google scholar
2. AkgiraY, V., Barbarosoglu, G., & Erdik, M. (2004). The 1999 marmara earthquakes in TurkeY. https://www.humanitarianlibrarY.org/sites/ default/files/2014/02/OECD_LargeScaleDisastersLessonsLearned.pdf#page=73 google scholar
3. Alcaraz, C., & ZeadallY, S. (2015). Critical infrastructure protection: Requirements and challenges for the 21st centurY. International journal of critical infrastructure protection, 8, 53-66. google scholar
4. AltaY, N., & Green III, W. G. (2006). OR/MS research in disaster operations management. European Journal of Operational Research, 175(1), 475-493. google scholar
5. Alzate, I. C., Manotas, E. C., Manotas, E. M., & Boada, A. (2022). Impact of supplY chain dYnamic capabilities (SCDC) and horizontal collab-oration over supplY chain resilience for SME’s sustainabilitY in emerging economies. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 25(2), 72-92. google scholar
6. Apte, A. (2009) Humanitarian logistics: A new field of research and action. Foundations and Trends in TechnologY, Information and Operations Management 3(1):1-1OO google scholar
7. 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. google scholar
8. Barabasoğlu, G., Özdamar, L. & Cevik, A. (2002), “An interactive approach for hierarchic alanalYsis of helicopter logistics in disaster relief operations”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 140 No. 1, pp. 118-33. google scholar

9. Barten, D. G., Klokman, V. W., Cleef, S., Peters, N. A., Tan, E. C., & Boin, A. (2021). When disasters strike the emergencY department: a case series and narrative review. International Journal of Emergency Medicine, 14, 1-9. google scholar
10. Behl, A., & Dutta, P. (2019). Humanitarian supplY chain management: a thematic literature review and future directions of research. An-nals of Operations Research, 283(1-2), 1001-1044. google scholar
11. Besiou, M., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2020). Humanitarian operations: A world of opportunitY for relevant and impactful research. Man-ufacturing & service operations management, 22(1), 135-145. google scholar
12. Blecken, A. (2010). Logistics in the context of humanitarian operations. In International Heinz Nixdorf SYmposium (pp. 85-93). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. google scholar
13. Brandon-Jones, E., Squire, B., AutrY, C.W., & Petersen, K.J., (2014). A Contingent Resource-Based Perspective of SupplY Chain Resilience and Robustness. J. Supply Chain Manag. 50, 55-73. google scholar
14. Brusset, X., & Teller, C. (2017). Supply chain capabilities, risks, and resilience. International Journal of Production Economics, 184, 59-68. google scholar
15. Çelik, M., Ergun, Ö., Johnson, B., Keskinocak, P., Lorca, Â., Pekgün, P., & Swann, J. (2012). Humanitarian logistics. İn New directions in informatics, optimization, logistics, and production (pp. 18-49). INFORMS. google scholar
16. Chen, R., Wang, L., Li, E.P.H., & Hu, G. (2021). Microdivisionalization as a waY toward dYnamic capabilitY. Management Decision, 59(3), 506-523. google scholar
17. Christopher, M., Lowson, R., & Peck, H. (2004). Creating agile supplY chains in the fashion industrY. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(8), 367-376. google scholar
18. Cinar, E.N., Abbara, A., & Yilmaz, E. (2023). Earthquakes in TürkiYe and SYria—collaboration is needed to mitigate longer-term risks to health. BMJ, 380. google scholar
19. Comes, T., Van de Walle, B., & Van Wassenhove, L. (2020). The coordination-information bubble in humanitarian response: theoretical foundations and empirical investigations. Production and Operations Management, 29(11), 2484-2507. google scholar
20. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A., (1990). Grounded theoıy research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qual. Socıol. 13 (i), 3-21. google scholar
21. Cura, F., & Demir, S. (2022). Possible impacts of the European Green Deal on TurkeY's logistics industrY. İn Hamburg İnternational Conference of Logistics (HİCL) 2022 (pp. 825-839). epubli. google scholar
22. Craighead, C.W., Ketchen Jr, D.J., & DarbY, J.L. (2020). Pandemics and supplY chain management research: toward a theoretical toolbox. Decision Sciences, 51(4), 838-866. google scholar
23. Çelik, M., Ergun, Ö., Johnson, B., Keskinocak, P., Lorca, Â., Pekgün, P., & Swann, J. (2012). Humanitarian logistics. İn New directions in informatics, optimization, logistics, and production (pp. 18-49). İNFORMS. google scholar
24. Dal Zilio, L., & Ampuero, J. P. (2023). Earthquake doublet in TürkiYe and SYria. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1), 71. google scholar
25. Değer, M. S., & Özdinç, A. (2023). Report on the earthquake in TürkiYe: Field observation on healthcare services and ethical challenges. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science, 22(4), 815-826. google scholar
26. Döringer, S. (2021). ‘The problem-centred expert interview’. Combining qualitative interviewing approaches for investigating implicit expert knowledge. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 24 (3), 265-278. google scholar
27. DubeY, R., Singh, T., & Gupta, O.K. (2015). İmpact of agilitY, adaptabilitY and alignment on humanitarian logistics performance: mediating effect of leadership. Global Business Review, 16(5), 812-831. google scholar
28. Ebi, K.L., & Semenza, J.C. (2008). CommunitY-based adaptation to the health impacts of climate change. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 501-507. google scholar
29. Eisenhardt, K.M., & Graebner, M.E., 2007. TheorY building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 50 (1), 25-32. google scholar
30. Ellram L.M. (1996) The use of the case studY method in logistics research. J Bus Logist 17(2):93-138 google scholar
31. Erdik, M. (2013). Earthquake Risk in TurkeY. Science 341, 724-725. DOİ:10.1126/science.1238945 google scholar
32. FlYnn B.B, Sakakibara S, Schroeder R.G, Bates K.A, & FlYnn E.J (1990) Empirical research methods in operations management. J Oper Manag 9(2):250-284 google scholar
33. Francis, V. (2008). SupplY chain visibilitY: lost in translation? SupplY Chain Manag. An İnt. J. 13, 180-184 google scholar
34. Freddi, F., Galasso, C., Cremen, G., Dall’Asta, A., Di Sarno, L., Giaralis, A., & Woo, G. (2021). İnnovations in earthquake risk reduction for resilience: Recent advances and challenges. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 60, 102267. google scholar
35. Ghosh, N., Das, S. & Deshpande, A. (2014), “Effect of Responsiveness and Process İntegration in SupplY Chain Coordination”, The İUP Journal of SupplY Chain Management, Vol. Xİ No. 1, pp.7-17. google scholar
36. Gupta, S., AltaY, N., & Luo, Z. (2019). Big data in humanitarian supplY chain management: A review and further research directions. Annals of Operations Research, 283(2019), 1153-1173. google scholar
37. Heaslip, G., & Barber, E. (2014). Using the militarY in disaster relief: sYstemising challenges and opportunities. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 4(1), 60-81. google scholar
38. Howard, S. (2023). Earthquakes in TürkiYe: Scale of task is enormous as crossings into SYria open up, saYs UN. google scholar
39. Jafari, H., Eslami, M.H., & Paulraj, A. (2022). Postponement and logistics flexibilitY in retailing: The moderating role of logistics integration and demand uncertaintY. International Journal of Production Economics, 243, 108319. google scholar
40. Joseph, İ. L. (2022). The effect of natural disaster on economic growth: Evidence from a major earthquake in Haiti. World Develop-ment, 159, 106053. google scholar
41. Kaneberg, E. (2018). EmergencY preparedness management and civil defence in Sweden: An all-hazards approach for developed countries' supplY chains (Doctoral dissertation, Jönköping UniversitY, Jönköping İnternational Business School). google scholar
42. Kaneberg, E., Hertz, S., & Jensen, L.M. (2016). EmergencY preparedness planning in developed countries: the Swedish case. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 6(2), 145-172. google scholar
43. Kolivand, P., Kivi, H.K., Hasheminezhad, S.F., Saberian, P., & Shamspour, N. (2023). The Presence of International Relief Teams in the 2023 Turkish Earthquake: Challenges, Strengths, and Lessons Learned. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 1-2. google scholar
44. Kovâcs, G., & Spens, K.M. (2007). Humanitarian logistics in disaster relief operations. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(2), 99-114. google scholar
45. Kunz, N., Van Wassenhove, L.N., Besiou, M., HambYe, C., & Kovacs, G. (2017). Relevance of humanitarian logistics research: best practices and waY forward. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 37(11), 1585-1599. google scholar
46. Laaksonen, O., & Peltoniemi, M. (2018). The essence of dYnamic capabilities and their measurement. International Journal of Manage-ment Reviews, 20(2), 184-205. google scholar
47. Labib, A., Hadleigh-Dunn, S., Mahfouz, A., & Gentile, M. (2019). Operationalizing learning from rare events: Framework for middle humanitarian operations managers. Production and Operations Management, 28(9), 2323-2337. google scholar
48. Lantagne, D., Lehmann, L., Yates, T., Gallandat, K., Sikder, M., Domini, M., & String, G. (2021). Lessons learned from conducting six multi-countrY mixed-methods effectiveness research studies on water, sanitation, and hYgiene (WASH) interventions in humanitarian response. BMC public health, 21(1), 1-7. google scholar
49. Leiras, A., de Brito Jr, I., Queiroz Peres, E., Rejane Bertazzo, T., & Tsugunobu Yoshida Yoshizaki, H. (2014). Literature review of humanitarian logistics research: trends and challenges. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 4(1), 95-130. google scholar
50. L'Hermitte, C., Tatham, P., Bowles, M., & Brooks, B. (2016). Developing organisational capabilities to support agilitY in humanitarian logistics: An exploratorY studY. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 6(1), 72-99. google scholar
51. Life Support. TürkiYe-Earthquake: EmergencY Situation Report (13.10.2023). ReliefWeb. https://reliefweb.int/organization/stl-0 google scholar
52. Liu, K., Zhang, H., & Zhang, Z.H. (2021). The efficiencY, equitY and effectiveness of location strategies in humanitarian logistics: A robust chance-constrained approach. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 156, 102521. google scholar
53. Los Angeles Times (2023). TurkeY's Istanbul Faces Earthquake Risk, Housing Crisis. www.latimes.com/world-nation/storY/2023-04-27/ turkeY-istanbul-earthquake-risk-housing-crisis, Accessed FebruarY 18, 2024. google scholar
54. Lucien Fobi, A. (2017). Improving efficiencY and effectiveness of operations in humanitarian aid logistics. google scholar
55. Maletckii, B., AstafYeva, E., Sanchez, S. A., Kherani, E. A., & De Paula, E. R. (2023). The 6 FebruarY 2023 TürkiYe earthquake sequence was detected in the ionosphere. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 128(9). google scholar
56. Medecins Sans Frontieres (2009). Aerzte ohne Grenzen e. V., Logistiker august 2009.pp (internal presentation) (August). google scholar
57. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., Saldana, J., 2020. Qualitative Data AnalYsis: A Methods Sourcebook, fourth ed. ed. Sage, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne google scholar
58. Mitrega, M., Forkmann, S., Zaefarian, G., & Henneberg, S.C. (2017). Networking capabilitY in supplier relationships and its impact on product innovation and firm performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 37(5), 577-606. google scholar
59. Naor, M., & Bernardes, E. (2016). Self-sufficient healthcare logistics sYstems and responsiveness: ten cases of foreign field hospitals deploYed to disaster relief supplY chains. Journal of Operations and Supply Chain Management, 9(1), 1-22. google scholar
60. Pescaroli, G., & Alexander, D. (2016). Critical infrastructure, panarchies and the vulnerabilitY paths of cascading disasters. Natural Hazards, 82, 175-192. google scholar
61. PYper Griffiths, J.H., Irfanoglu, A., & Pujol, S. (2007). Istanbul at the threshold: An evaluation of the seismic risk in Istanbul. Earthquake Spectra, 23(1), 63-75. google scholar
62. Rekapalli, R., & Gupta, H.K. (2023). How long the Mw> 5 aftershocks of the 6 FebruarY 2023 Mw 7.8 TurkİYe earthquake shall continue? Natural Hazards, 117(3), 3399-3402. google scholar
63. Rezaei, J. (2015). Best worst multicriteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, pp.49-57. google scholar
64. Schiffling, S., Hannibal, C., Tickle, M., & Fan, Y. (2022). The implications of complexitY for humanitarian logistics: A complex adaptive sYstems perspective. Annals of Operations Research, 319(1), 1379-1410. google scholar
65. Sheu, J. B. (2007). Challenges of emergencY logistics management. Transportation Research Part E-Logistics and Transportation Review, 43(6), 655-659. google scholar
66. Sipal, Y.Z. (2023). Depreminin Afet Yönetim ve Deprem Lojistiği Açısından Değerlendirilmesi. İzmir Katip Çelebi Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(2), 821-825. google scholar
67. Supartono, B., MuftisanY, H., & Rudi, M. (2023). EarlY Earthquake Disaster Response Management: The BSMI Humanitarian Aid Experience in TürkiYe. Indonesian Red Crescent Humanitarian Journal, 2(1), 33-48. google scholar
68. Suppasri, A., MalY, E., Kitamura, M., Pescaroli, G., Alexander, D., & Imamura, F. (2021). Cascading disasters triggered bY tsunami hazards: A perspective for critical infrastructure resilience and disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 66, 102597. google scholar
69. Tabak, Y. (2023). Perspective towards Construction and Demolition Waste Management: Case Study on Kahramanmaraş Earthquake. https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/1147991 google scholar
70. Tatham, P., & Christopher, M. (Eds.). (2018). Humanitarian logistics: Meeting the challenge of preparing for and responding to disasters. Kogan Page Publishers. google scholar
71. Teece, D.J. (2007). Explicating dYnamic capabilities: the nature and micro-foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. google scholar
72. Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). DYnamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. google scholar
73. Thomas, A., & Mizushima, M. (2011). Logistics training: necessitY or luxuıy? Forced Migration Review 22(l):60-61 google scholar
74. Ünüvar, O., & El, M.N. (2023) Maraş depremi sonrasi YiYecek içecek işletmeleri ve derneklerinin deprem bölgelerine Yardimi. Deprem ve Turizm, 65. google scholar
75. Walker, M., (2000). "The Turkish Miracle." The Wilson Quarterly (1976-) 24, no. 4, 72-87. google scholar
76. Walton, R., MaYs, R.E., & Haselkorn, M.P. (2011). Defining fast: Factors affecting the experience of speed in humanitarian logistics. In ISCRAM. google scholar
77. WHO, World Health Organization (2023). TürkiYe earthquake: External situation report no.5: 13-19 March 2023. https://www.who.int/ europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2023-7145-46911-68823 google scholar
78. Wieland, A., & Wallenburg, C.M. (2012). Dealing with supplY chain risks: Linking risk management practices and strategies to perfor-mance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 42(10), 887-905. google scholar
79. Winter, S.G. (2003). Understanding dYnamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995. google scholar
80. Yeow, A., Soh, C., & Hansen, R. (2018). Aligning with new digital strategY: A dYnamic capabilities approach. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(1), 43-58. google scholar
81. Yılmaz, S., KarakaYali, O., Yilmaz, S., Çetin, M., Eroglu, S.E., Dikme, O., & Akoğlu, H. (2023). EmergencY Medicine Association of TürkiYe Disaster Committee SummarY of Field Observations of FebruarY 6th Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 38(3), 415-418. google scholar
82. Zülfikar, A.C., Fercan, N.Ö.Z., Tunç, S., & Erdik, M. (2017). Real-time earthquake shake, damage, and loss mapping for the Istanbul metropolitan area. Earth, Planets and Space, 69, 1-15. google scholar