Purpose

This article intended to add clarity about the role of symbolic constructions used by humanitarian executives and disaster survivors to relate with one another.

Design/methodology/approach

A total of 30 purposefully sampled decision-makers were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. The conversations were transcribed in full and analyzed using a deductive approach. The article undergoes an analysis of the institutional logics that are used by both collectives in the aftermath of a disaster. Data from field research trips to Mexico, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, and Mozambique were also used.

Research limitations/implications

Considering the limited amount of data collected, the findings of this article cannot be considered representative of the global humanitarian community. But it provides crucial insights to open a new field of research that has not received enough attention yet: the role of symbolic constructions in the relationship between different collectives during international humanitarian interventions.

Findings

The research supports that disasters affect the cognitive structures of international humanitarian actors and local stakeholders alike but in different ways. Because of this, their post-disaster institutional systems are unarguably different.

Implications

Consequently, how they perceive and interpret the new post-disaster reality is different, having important implications in the way they relate.

中文翻译：

---

了解人道主义行动期间人道主义者和幸存者之间的认知差距

目的

这篇文章旨在澄清人道主义行政人员和灾难幸存者使用的象征性结构的作用，以将彼此联系起来。

设计/方法/方法

使用半结构化问卷调查了总共 30 名有目的地抽样的决策者。对话被完整转录并使用演绎方法进行分析。本文分析了两个集体在灾难发生后所使用的制度逻辑。还使用了对墨西哥、多米尼加共和国、波多黎各和莫桑比克进行实地考察的数据。

研究限制/影响

考虑到收集的数据量有限，本文的调查结果不能被视为代表全球人道主义界。但它为开启一个尚未受到足够关注的新研究领域提供了重要的见解：符号结构在国际人道主义干预期间不同集体之间关系中的作用。

发现

该研究支持灾害以不同的方式影响国际人道主义行动者和当地利益相关者的认知结构。正因为如此，他们的灾后制度体系无疑是不同的。

影响

因此，他们如何看待和解释新的灾后现实是不同的，对他们的联系方式具有重要意义。