Suchergebnisse

PurposeSome studies and reports have recently suggested using blockchain technology to improve transparency and trust in humanitarian supply chains (HSCs). However, evidence-based studies to display the utility and applicability of blockchains in HSCs are missing in the literature. This paper aims to investigate the key drivers and barriers of blockchain application to HSCs and explore whether evidence could support that the application of blockchain improves transparency and trust in HSCs.Design/methodology/approachThis paper puts forward a two-stage approach to explore the blockchain application in HSCs: an initial exploration of humanitarian practitioners and academicians interested in blockchain through focus group discussions; semi-structured interviews with practitioners involved at the UK Department for International Development's Humanitarian Supply Blockchain pilot project.FindingsFirst, we found that main drivers include accountability, visibility, traceability, trust, collaboration, time efficiency, reducing administrative work and cross-sector partnership. Main barriers, however, are composed of engagement issues, lack of technical skills and training, lack of resources, privacy concerns, regulatory problems, pilot scalability issues and governance challenges. Second, evidence from our case study revealed the blockchain application could have added value to improve visibility and traceability, thus contributing to improve transparency. Concerning trust, evidence supports that blockchain could enhance both commitment and swift trust in the pilot study.Practical implicationsOur study contributes to a more understanding of added values and challenges of blockchain application to HSCs and creates a perspective for humanitarian decision-makers.Originality/valueThis study provides the first evidence from the actual application of blockchain technology in HSCs. The study discovered that it is still less evident in many humanitarian organizations, including medium- and small-sized nongovernmental organizations, that they engage in a direct deployment of in-house or customized blockchain-based HSC. Instead, these actors are more likely to indirectly use blockchain in HSCs through a private commercial partner.

AbstractIn the debate on how to improve efficiencies in the humanitarian sector and better meet people's needs, the argument for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision-making (ADMs) systems has gained significant traction and ignited controversy for its ethical and human rights-related implications.Setting aside the implications of introducing unmanned and automated systems in warfare, we focus instead on the impact of the adoption of AI-based ADMs in humanitarian response. In order to maintain the status and protection conferred by the humanitarian mandate, aid organizations are called to abide by a broad set of rules condensed in the humanitarian principles and notably the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence. But how do these principles operate when decision-making is automated?This article opens with an overview of AI and ADMs in the humanitarian sector, with special attention to the concept of algorithmic opacity. It then explores the transformative potential of these systems on the complex power dynamics between humanitarians, principled assistance, and affected communities during acute crises. Our research confirms that the existing flaws in accountability and epistemic processes can be also found in the mathematical and statistical formulas and in the algorithms used for automation, artificial intelligence, predictive analytics, and other efficiency-gaining-related processes.In doing so, our analysis highlights the potential harm to people resulting from algorithmic opacity, either through removal or obfuscation of the causal connection between triggering events and humanitarian services through the so-called black box effect (algorithms are often described as black boxes, as their complexity and technical opacity hide and obfuscate their inner workings (Diakopoulos, Tow Center for Digital Journ, 2017). Recognizing the need for a humanitarian ethics dimension in the analysis of automation, AI, and ADMs used in humanitarian action, we endorse the concept of "explicability" as developed within the ethical framework of machine learning and human-computer interaction, together with a set of proxy metrics.Finally, we stress the need for developing auditable standards, as well as transparent guidelines and frameworks to rein in the risks of what has been defined as humanitarian experimentation (Sandvik, Jacobsen, and McDonald, Int. Rev. Red Cross 99(904), 319–344, 2017). This article concludes that accountability mechanisms for AI-based systems and ADMs used to respond to the needs of populations in situation of vulnerability should be an essential feature by default, in order to preserve the respect of the do no harm principle even in the digital dimension of aid.In conclusion, while we confirm existing concerns related to the adoption of AI-based systems and ADMs in humanitarian action, we also advocate for a roadmap towards humanitarian AI for the sector and introduce a tentative ethics framework as basis for future research.