Phase 3 Discussion Board (LOG676)

The paper will compare the involvement of the United States in humanitarian supply chains and that of Kenya. In 2004, the earthquake and tsunami claimed close to 230000 lives while displacing 1.7 million other people. In the United States, the response was unprecedented and unequaled mobilizing over US$565 million, in both cash and kind. Kenya has been involved in hosting refugees drawn from the neighboring war-torn Somalia and Sudan as well as providing soldiers under AMISON. In any disaster response management as pointed out by practitioners, and researchers, the effectiveness of any emergency drill rely entirely on logistic speed and efficiency.
While both countries face the same problems like the impact of political and decision makers in the humanitarian supply chain, other factors such as certainty as well as challenges in the supply of materials, are unique to either. With disaster management efforts measured in terms of uncertainty and complexity, the United States is better equipped with rapid response materials. The main humanitarian arms in the U. S government are the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, USAID, which work with the intergovernmental organizations like the UNHCR CARE and the Catholic Relief Services. While in Kenya, the Kenya Defense Forces, and the Red Cross standout. In my opinion, what makes the response of the United States more concerted is the almost seamless organization in the structure of disaster management as compared to Kenya.
Companies involved in roles such as donors, collectors, and providers seem to be well synchronized. It explains why most interventions such as those in Afghanistan and the Iraqi were successful. Companies also offer technological support and staff who are tasked with ensuring efficiency. Thus, the technological advancements help the staff access remote and almost inaccessible areas (Lee, 2003). The United States, as opposed to Kenya, has also ensured that there