Aid Watch recognizes the following findings:

The modern humanitarian movement has been gaining great power over the past three decades, and not only in developed countries.
​In France, research on humanitarian aid in armed conflicts is incomplete, to say the least, and disorganized, in comparison to that from our Anglo-Saxon colleagues (especially the Refugee Studies Centre in Oxford, the Humanitarian and War Project in the US or the Centre for Development Research in Copenhagen).
NGOs working in or about conflict situations have become real political actors on the global diplomacy scene: lobbies which have contributed to the establishment of an International Criminal Court or the signature of a treaty banning the use of landmines.
The humanitarian movement has reached a stage that allows outside criticisms without harming the cause.
The evaluation of humanitarian programs is made internally, creating a transparency issue. Many NGOs are, along with their financial backers, judges of the quality of their own actions. Following an accountancy logic, the audits of financial backers focus more on the use of the funds than on the impact of international aid on the receiving populations.
 The different private structures composing the humanitarian movement are far more difficult to seize and study than the institutional actors of aid, namely states and intergovernmental organizations. Any NGO can call itself “humanitarian”, for better and for worse.
It is therefore necessary to set up a database on NGOs.