Sustainable Procurement Practices in Humanitarian Organizations: Adaptive Capability and Co-Evolution as Antecedents in a Developing Economy

Authors

  • Wilbroad Aryatwijuka Department of Procurement and Marketing, Faculty of Business and Management Sciences, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 1410, Mbarara, Uganda Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2857-1273
  • Henry Mutebi Department of Procurement and Supply Chain Management, Faculty of Procurement and Logistics Management, Makerere University Business School, Plot 21A, Port Bell Road, Nakawa, P.O. Box 1337, Kampala, Uganda Author
  • Joan Arimpa Department of Procurement and Supply Chain Management, Faculty of Procurement and Logistics Management, Makerere University Business School, Plot 21A, Port Bell Road, Nakawa, P.O. Box 1337, Kampala, Uganda Author
  • Wilson Tusiime Department of Procurement and Supply Chain Management, Faculty of Procurement and Logistics Management, Makerere University Business School, Plot 21A, Port Bell Road, Nakawa, P.O. Box 1337, Kampala, Uganda Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.66050/fhyp2h23

Keywords:

sustainable procurement practices, co-evolution, adaptive capability, humanitarian organizations, Complex Adaptive Systems

Abstract

This study examines the interplay among co-evolution, adaptive capability, and sustainable procurement practices in Humanitarian Organisations (HOs). In addition, it examines the mediating role of adaptive capability in the relationship between co-evolution and sustainable procurement practices. Following a positivistic stance, data collected from 79 HOs at a particular point in time were evaluated using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS version 4.0.9.0. The results reveal significant positive relationships between co-evolution, adaptive capability, and sustainable procurement practices. Further, adaptive capability mediates the relationship between co-evolution and sustainable procurement practices. In order to achieve sustainable procurement practices in HOs, the study concludes and recommends that co-evolution with agents in the procurement environment needs to be considered and adaptive capability strengthened and streamlined. The findings should, however, be interpreted within the limitations of the research design, since the results do not capture the different levels at which HOs practice procurement sustainability; hence, future research is encouraged to employ longitudinal and qualitative analysis. This study is novel in demonstrating how co-evolution relates to adaptive capability and sustainable procurement practices. It also explains the role that adaptive capability plays in the relationship between co-evolution and sustainable procurement practices.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Abatecola, G. (2013). Survival or failure within the organisational life cycle: What lessons for managers? Journal of General Management, 38(4), 23–38. doi:10.1177/030630701303800403

2. Abbasi, M., Nilsson, F., & Syntetos, A. (2018). Supply chain sustainability in humanitarian logistics. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 21(6), 615–631.

3. AbuRamadan, A. I. R., & El-Mougher, M. M. (2022). Level of coordination between the humanitarian and governmental organizations in Gaza Strip and its impact on the humanitarian interventions to the internally displaced people (IDPs) following May escalation 2021. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(2), 15–45. doi:10.18485/ijdrm.2022.4.2.2

4. Al Nuaimi, B. K., Khan, M., & Ajmal, M. M. (2020). Implementing sustainable procurement in the United Arab Emirates public sector. Journal of Public Procurement, 20(2), 97–117. doi:10.1108/JOPP-07-2019-0044

5. Aryatwijuka, W., Kamukama, N., Frederick, N. K., & Rukundo, A. (2021). Managerial competencies and supply chain performance of relief aid organizations in Western Uganda. American Journal of Supply Chain Management, 5(1), 33–44. doi:10.47672/ajscm.538

6. Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

7. Brammer, S., & Walker, H. (2011). Sustainable procurement in the public sector: An international comparative study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(4), 452–476. doi:10.1108/01443571111119551

8. Chin, W. W., Thatcher, J. B., & Wright, R. T. (2012). Assessing common method bias: Problems with the ULMC technique. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 1003–1019. doi:10.2307/41703491

9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

10. Cvetković, V. M. (2026a). Disaster risk management: Theory, concepts and methods (2nd rev. and expanded ed.). Belgrade, Serbia: Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management.

11. Cvetković, V. M. (2026b). Underlying causes and drivers of disasters: A systematic integrative review of structural vulnerability, risk governance, development pathways, and systemic risk. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 8(2). doi:10.66050/zt5wa410

12. Cvetković, V. M., Milenković, D., Lukić, T., & Renner, R. (2026). Theoretical evolution of measuring community resilience to natural and technological disasters: Past, present, and future – Empirical insights from qualitative research in Serbia. Open Geosciences, 18(1), Article 20250968. doi:10.1515/geo-2025-0968

13. DeSarbo, W. S., Di Benedetto, C. A., Song, M., & Sinha, I. (2005). Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: Uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1), 47–74. doi:10.1002/smj.431

14. Djordjević, I., & Gačić, J. (2024). Sustainable recovery: The link between development and response to disasters. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 6(2), 223–244. doi:10.18485/ijdrm.2024.6.2.15

15. Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S. J., Bryde, D. J., Giannakis, M., Foropon, C., . . . Hazen, B. T. (2020). Big data analytics and artificial intelligence pathway to operational performance under the effects of entrepreneurial orientation and environmental dynamism: A study of manufacturing organisations. International Journal of Production Economics, 226, Article 107599. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.107599

16. Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008

17. Gavrić, N., & Trivan, D. (2026). Adaptive governance of disaster and systemic risks in critical energy infrastructure: A complex adaptive systems perspective. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 8(2), 35–56. doi:10.66050/jts33w36

18. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

19. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. doi:10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

20. Holland, J. H. (1992). Complex adaptive systems. Daedalus, 121(1), 17–30.

21. Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

22. Hrebiniak, L. G., & Joyce, W. F. (1985). Organizational adaptation: Strategic choice and environmental determinism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(3), 336–349. doi:10.2307/2392666

23. Kaehler, C., Busatto, F., Becker, G. V., Hansen, P. B., & Santos, J. L. S. (2014). Relationship between adaptive capability and strategic orientation: An empirical study in a Brazilian company. iBusiness, 6(1), 1–9. doi:10.4236/ib.2014.61001

24. Kannan, D. (2021). Sustainable procurement drivers for extended multi-tier context: A multi-theoretical perspective in the Danish supply chain. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 146, 102092. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2020.102092

25. Kemp, R. P. M., Parto, S., & Gibson, R. B. (2005). Governance for sustainable development: Moving from theory to practice. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(1–2), 12–30. doi:10.1504/IJSD.2005.007372

26. Khine, E. M. K., Tay, H. L., & Loh, H. S. (2026). Enhancing resilience and sustainability in humanitarian procurement: A supplier evaluation framework using the best-worst method. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 17(4), 902–917. doi:10.1007/s13753-026-00757-3

27. Kovács, G., & Spens, K. M. (2007). Humanitarian logistics in disaster relief operations. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(2), 99–114. doi:10.1108/09600030710734820

28. Lema, R., Rabellotti, R., & Gehl Sampath, P. (2018). Innovation trajectories in developing countries: Co-evolution of global value chains and innovation systems. The European Journal of Development Research, 30, 345–363. doi:10.1057/s41287-018-0149-0

29. Levin, S. A., Xepapadeas, T., Crépin, A.-S., Norberg, J., de Zeeuw, A., Folke, C., . . . Walker, B. (2013). Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: Modeling and policy implications. Environment and Development Economics, 18(2), 111–132. doi:10.1017/S1355770X12000460

30. Masaba, A. K., Aryatwijuka, W., Ntayi, J. M., & Bagire, V. (2025). Network structure in disaster response: The mediating role of coordination within a humanitarian organizational network in Uganda. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 7(1), 39–54. doi:10.18485/ijdrm.2025.7.1.3

31. Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J., Jr. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546–562. doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305755

32. Moshtari, M., Altay, N., Heikkilä, J., & Gonçalves, P. (2021). Procurement in humanitarian organizations: Body of knowledge and practitioner's challenges. International Journal of Production Economics, 233, 108017. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.108017

33. Murmann, J. P. (2013). The coevolution of industries and important features of their environments. Organization Science, 24(1), 58–78. doi:10.1287/orsc.1110.0718

34. Mutebi, H., Aryatwijuka, W., Rukundo, A., Twongyirwe, R., Tumwebembeire, N., & Tugiramasiko, M. (2025). Stakeholder expectations, inter-organizational coordination and procurement practices among humanitarian organizations. Journal of Business and Socio-economic Development, 5(3), 259–276. doi:10.1108/JBSED-12-2022-0129

35. Mutebi, H., Muhwezi, M., & Munene, J. C. K. (2021). Self-organisation and supply chain agility: Empirical evidence from humanitarian relief operations in a developing country. International Journal of Emergency Services, 10(3), 390–411. doi:10.1108/IJES-07-2020-0044

36. Mutebi, H., Muhwezi, M., Ntayi, J. M., Mayanja, S. S., & Munene, J. C. K. (2022). Organisational networks, organisational learning, organisational adaptability and role clarity among humanitarian organisations during relief delivery. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 12(2), 249–284. doi:10.1108/JHLSCM-04-2021-0034

37. Mutebi, H., Ntayi, J. M., Muhwezi, M., & Munene, J. C. K. (2020). Self-organisation, adaptability, organisational networks and inter-organisational coordination: Empirical evidence from humanitarian organisations in Uganda. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 10(4), 447–483. doi:10.1108/JHLSCM-10-2019-0074

38. Nitzl, C., Roldán, J. L., & Cepeda-Carrión, G. (2016). Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling: Helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(9), 1849–1864. doi:10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302

39. Norgaard, R. B. (1981). Sociosystem and ecosystem coevolution in the Amazon. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 8(3), 238–254. doi:10.1016/0095-0696(81)90039-5

40. Norgaard, R. B. (1988). Sustainable development: A co-evolutionary view. Futures, 20(6), 606–620. doi:10.1016/0016-3287(88)90003-1

41. Norgaard, R. B. (1994). Development betrayed: The end of progress and a coevolutionary revisioning of the future. London, England: Routledge.

42. Peng, D. X., & Lai, F. (2012). Using partial least squares in operations management research: A practical guideline and summary of past research. Journal of Operations Management, 30(6), 467–480. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2012.06.002

43. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

44. Raj, A., Agrahari, A., & Srivastava, S. K. (2020). Do pressures foster sustainable public procurement? An empirical investigation comparing developed and developing economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, 122055. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122055

45. Ramli, N. A., Latan, H., & Nartea, G. V. (2018). Why should PLS-SEM be used rather than regression? Evidence from the capital structure perspective. In N. K. Avkiran & C. M. Ringle (Eds.), Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Recent advances in banking and finance (pp. 171–209). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

46. Sarkis, J. (2012). A boundaries and flows perspective of green supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(2), 202–216. doi:10.1108/13598541211212924

47. Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Becker, J.-M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM. Australasian Marketing Journal, 27(3), 197–211. doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2019.05.003

48. 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. doi:10.1007/s10479-020-03658-w

49. Setia, M. S. (2016). Methodology series module 3: Cross-sectional studies. Indian Journal of Dermatology, 61(3), 261–264. doi:10.4103/0019-5154.182410

50. Shmueli, G., Ray, S., Velasquez Estrada, J. M., & Chatla, S. B. (2016). The elephant in the room: Predictive performance of PLS models. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4552–4564. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.049

51. Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. doi:10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189

52. Stacey, R. D. (2007). Strategic management and organisational dynamics: The challenge of complexity (5th ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education.

53. Tay, H. L., Loh, H. S., & Chen, H. S. (2025). Exploring humanitarian procurement: A systematic review. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1), Article 2445182. doi:10.1080/23311975.2024.2445182

54. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. doi:10.1002/smj.640

55. Testa, F., Iraldo, F., Frey, M., & Daddi, T. (2012). What factors influence the uptake of GPP (green public procurement) practices? New evidence from an Italian survey. Ecological Economics, 82, 88–96. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.07.011

56. Tukamuhabwa, B. R., Stevenson, M., Busby, J., & Zorzini, M. (2015). Supply chain resilience: Definition, review and theoretical foundations for further study. International Journal of Production Research, 53(18), 5592–5623. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1037934

57. Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2006). Humanitarian aid logistics: Supply chain management in high gear. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(5), 475–489. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602125

58. Wankmüller, C., & Reiner, G. (2021). Identifying challenges and improvement approaches for more efficient procurement coordination in relief supply chains. Sustainability, 13(4), Article 2204. doi:10.3390/su13042204

59. Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991–995. doi:10.1002/smj.318

60. Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

61. Zaidi, S. A. H., Mirza, F. M., Hou, F., & Ashraf, R. U. (2019). Addressing the sustainable development through sustainable procurement: What factors resist the implementation of sustainable procurement in Pakistan? Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 68, Article 100671. doi:10.1016/j.seps.2018.11.008

62. Zarei, M. H., Carrasco-Gallego, R., & Ronchi, S. (2019). Integrating sustainability into humanitarian procurement: A prioritization of barriers and enablers. In S. K. Mangla, S. Luthra, S. K. Jakhar, A. Kumar, & N. P. Rana (Eds.), Sustainable procurement in supply chain operations (pp. 279–299). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. doi:10.1201/9780429466328-12

International Journal of Disaster Risk Management

Published

2026-10-14

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 2 (2026): International Journal of Disaster Risk Management

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Wilbroad Aryatwijuka, Henry Mutebi, Joan Arimpa, Wilson Tusiime (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The International Journal of Disaster Risk Management (IJDRM) publishes all articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits use, sharing, distribution, reproduction, adaptation, and transformation of the published material in any format or medium, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source, a link to the license is included, and any modifications are clearly indicated.

Authors retain the copyright to their articles and grant IJDRM the right of first publication.

IJDRM permits and encourages authors to deposit and share all versions of their manuscripts, including:

  • the preprint or submitted manuscript;
  • the accepted manuscript or postprint;
  • the published version of record, including the final publisher’s PDF.

These versions may be deposited or shared, without an embargo, through:

  • personal or professional websites;
  • institutional and disciplinary repositories;
  • university or departmental websites;
  • academic networking platforms, including ResearchGate and Academia.edu;
  • other non-commercial or commercial platforms permitted under the CC BY 4.0 license.

Authors may deposit or share their work at any time, either before or after formal publication.

When sharing the accepted manuscript or published version of record, authors should provide:

  • the complete bibliographic citation;
  • the full title of the journal;
  • a clear statement that the article was originally published in IJDRM;
  • a direct, clickable link to the article’s DOI and official journal webpage;
  • an indication of any changes made to the original published version, where applicable.

No prior permission from the publisher or editorial office is required for depositing, reproducing, distributing, or otherwise reusing an article, provided that all uses comply with the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.

 

How to Cite

Aryatwijuka, W., Mutebi, H., Arimpa, J., & Tusiime, W. (2026). Sustainable Procurement Practices in Humanitarian Organizations: Adaptive Capability and Co-Evolution as Antecedents in a Developing Economy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.66050/fhyp2h23

Similar Articles

1-10 of 112

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.