Originally set up in Afghanistan, the Paris-based Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development (ACTED) runs emergency, rehabilitation and development projects in four continents. One of the founders, General Delegate Marie-Pierre Caley, told Amy Cook about the organisation’s sustainable approach to disaster relief.

AN: When was ACTED founded, and by whom?

M-PC: ACTED was set up in 1993 by four friends who decided to work in international aid.

AN: What does your logo represent?

M-PC: It's a mathematical game. You ask someone to link nine points using four lines without lifting their pen. They try desperately to link the nine points within the limits of the grid, when actually to succeed, they should look outside the box. This is ACTED's number one message. In order to succeed, step out of the framework. And we added a second message, which is that you also need a direction.

ACTED was formed to carry out humanitarian aid differently, at least from what we had seen in other NGOs created in the past 10 years. This goes back to the logo -- it's innovative. We don't come from an NGO background. There's a will to do things differently, approach things differently, at least with our own eyes, with a fresh look.

AN: Where does ACTED work?

M-PC: ACTED was first created in Afghanistan, then moved into central Asia from 1996 -- into countries such as Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan…In 1997 we opened up operations in Africa, in 1998 in Central America, in 1999 in the Balkans. We still work in all these zones.

AN: What was your expertise on joining ACTED?

M-PC: We were relatively young when we created ACTED, so I didn't have much expertise. I was a student at the time -- I was doing a thesis on the geopolitics of Afghanistan. I had some experience in international aid, working with the United Nations system and local NGOs in Afghanistan. And I'd worked, like everyone, in Paris, but in a completely different field.

AN: What is your current role?

M-PC: I manage ACTED at the headquarters. I came back to France in 1999 to take on the general management of all our zones, as ACTED wasn't one country or one region but had a global approach, the centre of which had to be in Paris, because Paris is the centre of the world! At least as far as our four regions are concerned.

I ensure ACTED's general organisational coherence, and oversee our work in the 10 or so countries where we are active. I manage structural development and the lobbying side, dealing with various donors, in Washington, Brussels, Switzerland, Holland or London.

AN: Your organisation works in many different areas. How do you choose which populations need your help?

M-PC: As far as Afghanistan is concerned, we were already there for various reasons. Then, for central Asia in 1996, the Soviet area was undergoing a serious economic crisis. Extremely few actors were present in these countries and it was very complicated because it wasn't a humanitarian crisis, it wasn’t a development crisis -- it was structural. We were extremely interested because the area had not been studied much. There were many things to do, with the structural crisis, and the war in Tajikistan in the early 1990s.

In Africa, America and Europe, we were brought to each new area by a major crisis: the civil war in the case of Congo; Hurricane Mitch for the Americas; Kosovo for the Balkans. Each time new actors were needed. So it's a fundamentally pragmatic approach: there could be a need for us, so let's go.

AN: So each time you tackle a new disaster, you end up staying and working there?

M-PC: Exactly. Because ACTED is not an emergency organisation. Unlike some other NGOs, we don't have a "we come, we provide aid, we leave" approach. We have a long term, regional approach. So we build up experience while responding to an emergency -- we see the people, the problems, etc. There is an immediate problem to put right, but there are always medium and long-term problems, and they interest us.

AN: Could you give me an example of a long-term project that has developed from an emergency?

M-PC: In Tajikistan. There is quite a serious drought across the whole zone, so emergency help was sent out to pockets of vulnerability -- to people particularly affected, those in serious difficulty or pre-famine, etc. So we were able to work on these pockets of vulnerability, and at the same time set up a micro-credit programme involving 120,000 people. This programme will continue.

It's not just emergency work, or just development; often the phases overlap. During the emergency we lay the foundations for rehabilitation, and make the most of our presence to set up mechanisms for any later development project. But the boundaries between the phases aren't clear.

AN: Are ACTED's workers volunteers?

M-PC: No, they are all salaried employees. There are 70 or so expatriates, including about 10 at headquarters. We also have about 1,000-1,200 local employees in various countries. Then we employ extra people temporarily on individual projects.

AN: Do you ever lose hope when you come across terrible situations in your work?

M-PC: I'd say everyone sees horrible things everywhere, things that are sad or unacceptable. I think that one of the raisons d'être of an NGO is to tell yourself that, even if it's on a small scale, even if it's every now and then…even with all the limits involved, well, we can still do something. Because that's the main joy in this area of work, it's that when you do things, you see what you are doing. And that, I think, is true satisfaction.

Somehow it's reassuring and pleasing to see that when you set a programme up, whatever it is, say to reconstruct 1,500 houses…well six months later you have 1,500 houses. It's small, yes, and not very conceptual, but with all the problems worldwide, this allows us to stick to a reality that exists, it’s tangible.

There are of course dissatisfactions -- many. You try to have a positive vision of things. Our mandate is to react, so let's go in there, forge ahead, do this, that…let's move. And not say "my God, not another catastrophe, how depressing". No, we can never tackle the disaster itself, but as far as reacting to it we can do it well or badly or not at all. And that's the choice we made.

AN: Describe an example of a project that gave you this satisfaction.

M-PC: In March, an enormous earthquake hit a small region of Afghanistan. We happened to be working there -- it was already badly affected by drought and population movements because the front line was really close. And then "bang", a massive earthquake. Our office collapsed, well, everything collapsed really. Something like 8,000 or 9,000 houses were flattened. It's a seismic zone, so there are regular quakes.

The reaction was to call ACTED immediately saying there are this many houses to rebuild; to send teams out on field studies to see who, what and how, etc; to get a speedy evaluation of the situation and to be able to launch, not a tent distribution programme, but the immediate construction of houses.

Believe it or not, tents are expensive -- a house costs only two-and-a-half times as much as a tent. Temperatures reach minus 20 and you can't light a fire in the tents.

And the objective is for all these houses to be rebuilt before winter. And, so it's done. It's great! It's done.

AN: Will these new houses not collapse as soon as another quake hits?

M-PC: Oh no, these are real earthquake-proof houses. They should stand up to new quakes, unlike the previous ones.

It's forward looking. That's what I was saying earlier -- here is the emergency situation: an earthquake, and you have different ways of reacting. You can choose to give tents costing $100 each for one family, plus a hefty transport cost. Or you can say, "I will rebuild houses". And these traditional houses, built using quake-resistant techniques with wood and mud, cost $300. So, for me, the sum is simple. ACTED's method is "forget the tents, bin them", apart from specific cases where people are really moving in mid-winter and there's no choice.

And somehow to build 5,000 houses in six months after this earthquake, to mobilise specialist architects, put teams in place, ensure the supply of materials, which are often regional or local, to build and ask people to donate immediately to the construction, etc -- all that to finish in November, six months afterwards, yes I consider it a success!

To give tents and wait a year for plan B while considering it an emergency and handing out free food to people for months -- I consider a failure. I’m not saying that there is always a choice, but the question should always be asked. And even if it isn’t the easiest solution, clearly it's often the most difficult solution, I think that the satisfaction is real.

AN: Are there times when you would support giving out free food?

M-PC: When people have lost all work, and if you do nothing elsewhere, you have to give them food. But in one refugee camp -- Khwaga Bahadoudin in northeastern Afghanistan -- we set up a road-rebuilding project for the men, paying them for their work. One: there is a need, two: they are paid and three: with this money they can meet their living costs. We gave the women work making quilts and blankets which we then redistributed in the camp. You give people work, you give them value.

When a displaced population arrives, it's much simpler to hand out food than to put any longer term system into place.

But there is often a local, sustainable solution at the time of the emergency. And that is something that ACTED fights for all the time.