The emergence of peace engineering and innovation

Marinakis, Yorgos; Harvey, Heather A.; Walsh, Steven T.

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120867

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study contributes to addressing the gap in the scientific literature concerning PE (Marinakis et al. , 2021; Vesilind, 2006) and CO (Camargo et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study contributes to addressing the gap in the scientific literature concerning PE (Marinakis et al, 2021;Vesilind, 2006) and CO (Camargo et al, 2019;Sarkis, 2012). The proposed framework and its drivers reveal an intriguing relationship between PE and CO, Ajagekar and You (2019), Khan et al (2019), Sufian et al (2020), Taylor (2020) Which are the most useful cutting-edge technologies to achieve more rapidly social good through minimizing income inequalities?…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Concerning the definitions of these PE variants, peace innovation refers to technology development to support people in having friendly relationships with one another (Nelson, 2014). In this context, recent literature has highlighted the contributions of peace innovation in the contemporary world (Marinakis et al, 2021). Peace data refers to vast amounts and types of data that can be used and analyzed by technology in an aggregated way, aiming to provide peaceful outcomes derived from social interactions (Diehl et al, 2021;Guadagno et al, 2018).…”

Section: Literature Review 21 Peace Engineering (Pe): Past and Recent...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Concerning the limitations of this paper, the extant literature concerning PE (Marinakis et al, 2021;Vesilind, 2006) and CO (Camargo et al, 2019;Sarkis, 2012) is scarce, especially on the subject of using technology for social good. Thus, it was unfeasible to establish a comparison of our categories' dimensions and an integrative perspective.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Peace engineering and compassionate operations: a framework for leveraging social good

Queiroz

Jabbour²,

Jabbour³

et al. 2022

BIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposePeace engineering and compassionate operations can unlock the potential of emerging technologies for social good. This work aims to investigate the integration of peace engineering and compassionate operations by proposing an integrative framework and identifying the main drivers regarding social good, considering the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) landscape.Design/methodology/approachThe authors used a two-stage methodology by employing a narrative literature review in the first stage to identify the relationships and drivers and propose an original framework. In the second stage, the authors utilized an expert panel to validate the framework’s drivers.FindingsThe authors identified five main categories related to peace engineering and compassionate operations, which were then used to support the categorization of the drivers. In the second stage, the authors validated the drivers with a panel of academicians and experienced industry practitioners.Practical implicationsThe proposed framework can provide insightful directions for practitioners and governments to develop strategies and projects in different contexts, including humanitarian logistics, climate change crises, supply chain disruptions, etc.Originality/valueThis work makes unique contributions by reinvigorating an amalgamation of the peace engineering and compassionate operations arenas and their integration with the SDGs to enable enhanced social good, supported by cutting-edge technologies. Thus, this framework’s contributions encompass essential theoretical, managerial, and social implications.

show abstract

“…This study contributes to addressing the gap in the scientific literature concerning PE (Marinakis et al. , 2021; Vesilind, 2006) and CO (Camargo et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%