NATIONAL CENTRE FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH

The NATIONAL CENTER FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH's (EKKE) Environment Group believes that both the development and the exchange of information is necessary for the development of good organisational and management plans. This is especially so regarding the area of environmental concerns, an area in which in Greece, over the last few years, efforts have been made to define a separate identity and perspective for environmental issues.

The Environment Group made a research proposal to the GREEK MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS, and with the Ministry’s economic and scientific support, worked out a program to serve the aforementioned exchange of information. The research’s objective, which was carried out from January 1996 to March 1997, was the creation and publishing of the following two databases which are available in the traditional printed form and in electronic form on the Internet http://www.ekke.gr.

The NATIONAL CENTER FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH'S (EKKE) Environment Group interviewed the representatives of each N.G.E.-E.O. at their place of residence and filled out a questionnaire developed for this research. The contents of the questionnaire are as follows:

The NATIONAL CENTER FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH'S (EKKE) Environment Group grouped elements and made specific lists of the Departments and Offices with responsibilities, duties and objectives concerning the Environment.

This research includes:

The first database greatly facilitates the interconnection among the various Non Governmental Environmental-Ecological Groups as they could find contact information, common areas of action and/or interests for each other. Further more the locals could find out about the local environmental groups at their area.
From a sociological point of view the analysis of the data provides interesting insights in the nature and forms of action of the Environmental Movement in Greece.

The second database supply information on all major public and private sectors, which their action has an environmental impact, in a simple and eligible way in order to facilitate the Non Governmental Environmental-Ecological Groups and the general public access to them.

Year of foundation

The first E.O was founded in 1945. As you can see from the table the actual proliferation of the E.Os began in the 80s and 90s. Most E.Os emerged from the initiative of small groups, which were concerned with local environmental issues.

The need for co-operation among the E.Os soon became apparent and various organisational structures were used, on a local and national level. A political party was formed from the co-operation of the E.Os and in the 1989 election won a parliamentary seat. The political life of the party did not last for long and it soon dissolved. From 1992 onward the majority of the E.Os participate in an annual congress, the first five of them were organised by EKBY (Greek Biotope/Wetland Centre), and from the last two congresses they have elected seven representatives which form the "Secretariat".

The 21.1% of E.Os declare that they are affiliated to broader organizational structures. This tendency is stronger in the E.Os of the Greater Athens area, which accounts for the 31.3% of the Athenian E.Os and for the 63.4% of the E.Os that participate in broader organizational structures. The rest are one E.O in Salonika and 14 E.Os in the province.

There is, however, a strong tendency for co-ordination among the various E.Os. This tendency is stronger mainly in E.Os of nearby geographical regions for obvious reasons (easy face to face communication and common or similar problems to deal with). As a result, various efforts have been made for the appropriate organizational forms to be established.

The aim of every E.O is stated in its constitution. As a rule these aims are very loosely defined, e.g. "The conservation of nature". We group these responses into the following four broad categories:

1. Natural environment

It is understandably the first priority of E.Os as 83.2% of them are concerned mainly with the protection and conservation of the natural environment (73.5% of the Athenian E.Os and 90.2% of the Provincial E.Os).

2. Human environment

The environmental and housing problems of urban space score only a 49% in the preferences of the E.Os.

It appears that the E.Os estimate that they are too weak to deal with such problems and, when they intervene to solve them they tend to do so in co-operation with other E.Os. Especially in Athens, were these problems are more severe than anywhere else in Greece, the Athenian E.Os tend to have increased participation in more varied forms of formal and informal co-operations.

The tendency to deal with these problems by creating broader co-operations, is indicative of the tendency whereby the greater number of the Athenian E.Os do participate in various formal and informal forms of co-operations.

3. Problems

In this category are the references of the E.Os to a specific local or environmental problem, e.g. the protection of a specific lake, or valley. The 57.7% of the E.Os did not mention specific problems.

4. Cultural heritage

Informing public opinion is the mean the E.Os utilise to advocate their theses. To this end they utilise local and national mass media (television, radio, daily and periodic press). The 57% of them have steady and permanent co-operation with the mass media. Quite a few of them publish their own magazines. Almost all of them have published leaflets and brochures.

The range of influence of their activities was classified into three categories, international, national and local. The local level is prominent. The majority, 68.7%, of E.Os characterises their range of activities as local. The 23.6% as national and a 7.7%, mainly those E.Os that are branches of international E.Os, as international. The Provisional E.Os are more focused on local issues, only a 6.6% of them characterise their range of activities as national. The relevant percentage is 88.7% for Athenian and 81.8% for Salonika's E.Os.

The 23% of the E.Os conduct research on specific issues. Most of the research is funding by the European Community and concerns, mainly, the sustainability of ecosystems which are in danger or various endangered species of fauna and flora.

Only 15 E.Os (8 Athenians and 7 provisional) have an organized multimedia package on various topics of environmental education and conduct seminars in schools. Nevertheless there is a strong tendency for more and more E.Os be engaged in such activities.

Except for the involvement of the E.Os in environmental education as such, within 62 E.Os there is participation, as members or friends, of 174 teachers or professors who take part in or are responsible for environmental education lessons in their schools.

The following results refer only to the members of councils of E.Os and not to all the register members of them.

Of the Greek total, 69.9% are males and 30.1% females. The corresponding figures by geographical region are, 65.5% and 34.5% for Athens, 71.4% and 28.6% for Salonika and 74.4% and 25.6% for the rest of Greece. There is a tendency for greater female participation in leading positions according the urbanization level. If we compare these percentages to the total Greek population, 48% males and 52% females, the participation of women is quite limited.

Age and Family Structure

The vast majority (60.7%) of the members of E.Os, are in their most productive age, i.e. 30 to 50. The 67.3% are married and the 28.2% single. For the married members the majority follows the typical Greek norm, i.e. the 53.5% have two children and the 32.7% have one child.

Education Level

This social characteristic is the one that is most striking in comparison to the total Greek population. The 16% have a postgraduate university degree and a 46.7% have a university degree. The relevant percentage in total Greek population is 6.3%.

Employment

57% of the members work in the scientific sector and/or are self-employed. Only a 17.2% do not work because they are pensioners (7.9%), housewives (7.9%), students (2.4%) or unemployed (2.2%).

The integration of E.Os into the local societies is often controversial. The E.Os on the one hand co-operate with local authorities in finding solutions to local problems, and on the other hand they oppose the policies of local authorities that they think are against the conservation of nature. This is also true as far as their relations with their fellow citizens are concerned. Sometimes the local people expect from them to be in the front line of the struggle to resolve local problems. Sometimes they think that the E.Os are a problem, especially when the E.Os come into conflict with some of their fellow citizens, who have either committed illegal actions (e.g. illegal constructions) or strive to press the authorities, both local and national, to act according to their personal interests (e.g. to "develop" the Lagana golf in the island of Zakynthos, which is the main reproduction area of careta - careta).

In general whenever the E.Os face the dilemma "economic development" or ecological balance they choose the second.

The most prominent fields of antitheses are:

1. The E.Os are opposed to public and private investments that they consider to be environmentally unfriendly, such us the construction of new highways, changes in land use, new factories etc. Such issues divide the local population, more according to its personal interests and less to environmental concern. The E.Os then offer the ideological platform to those who oppose such plans.
2. The E.Os advocate sustainable agricultural development and thus they come into conflict with those who insist on the "traditional" intensive land cultivation and the extensive utilisation of chemicals in agriculture. The local farmers ascribe the increasing development of some forms of biological agricultural production during the last few years more to the increasing demand for biological products from the urban population than to the acceptance of the ideas of sustainable development.
3. The conservation and further development of cultural heritage by the E.Os, is usually the least controversial of their aims. It can become a field of conflict only in cases that some monuments, old buildings or areas of outstanding natural beauty stand in the way of more profitable forms of investment. Local population adopts these views of E.Os, but usually through a folklore outlook, as tourist attraction.

The various E.Os differ greatly in their main activities, their organizational structure, the effectiveness of their actions and their future perspectives and possibilities.

In general, the low organizational level and development characterize the majority of the E.Os. It follows, as a logical consequence, an impermanent form of their activities and changes in their organizational structure (splitting up, merging with other E.Os to form a new E.O, periods of inactivity, changes in their aims and perspectives etc).

Nevertheless, there is a vigorous perspective that in the years to come, not without contradictions and delays, the E.Os will progress into a more mature state of organizations, will specialized thematically and, as a whole, they will contribute substantially in the confrontation of the acute environmental issues.