Article by Yannis Spilanis
Spatial planning is the spatial expression of economic and social development programmes and constitutes an important tool for achieving social and economic objectives, guided by the principles of sustainability and precaution, with the aim of protecting the environment in the long term and ensuring the best possible living conditions for the population, as stated in the introduction (p. 5) to the Special Spatial Planning Framework for Tourism, which was published recently. A review of the relevant Joint Ministerial Decisions – which are complex technical documents – the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessments (EIS) and the ‘responses’ provided by the Ministry of the Environment itself to the public regarding questions it had posed to itself, provides an insight into how those in charge are thinking.
What is the development model for the islands?
As mentioned previously, spatial planning translates economic and social development programmes into the physical environment. But what does this actually mean for the islands? Have we clearly defined the vision for the islands and set the strategic development objectives? Have we taken into account the right to remain on the islands – which forms part of the European strategy for economic, social and territorial cohesion?
And on this basis, further fundamental questions arise:
First question: What are the development plans and who decided on them? The only clear answer given, and it concerns energy policy and the role of renewable energy sources, is the Prime Minister’s well-known statement… ‘My vision is for Greece to become Europe’s battery.’ Indeed, the Spatial Plan for Renewable Energy Sources reflects this, despite the verbal acrobatics and rhetorical expressions about protecting environmentally sensitive areas.
However, how does this contribute to the economic and social development of the country and its individual regions, when it relies on imported materials, creates very few jobs – and those that are created are unskilled, at least locally, where the renewable energy installations are situated – and has a significant environmental and aesthetic impact (such as, for example, large-scale road construction)?
And finally, the areas being protected are those sensitive to tourism (high-development zones A and B), but not, for example, the mastic-growing areas on Chios. Indeed, have we compared the income and employment generated by mastic on the island with what renewable energy sources will provide? Why are we not making use of the expertise gained on Agios Stratis, where a single wind turbine and two small photovoltaic systems met the island’s needs, whilst at the same time, through the establishment of an energy community (as on Halki), the benefits would remain on the island?
Second question: Do the spatial planning provisions for renewable energy sources (as well as for tourism and industry) conflict with the very philosophy of the government’s own GRECO Islands programme, which supports the economic diversification of the islands by boosting local production, with jobs that will keep educated young people on the islands? Where exactly in the Joint Ministerial Decision on Industry is there provision for creating infrastructure to facilitate collaboration between local businesses, local authorities, and island universities, which will not only harness locally generated knowledge but also create centres of innovation and excellence to tackle the specific challenges facing the islands? Do we want our islands to have activities beyond tourism so we can maintain a population and social life year-round, or not?
Third question: Does the concept of carrying capacity actually exist or not? Recently, the Prime Minister has cast doubt on it, yet it is mentioned repeatedly in the texts of all three Joint Ministerial Decisions, as is the concept of ‘sustainable development’, yet there is no mention of how this will be measured, even though, for sustainable development at least, there are indicators approved by the UN. Are these concepts being used to circumvent the obstacle posed by the Council of State, or will they finally serve to ‘steer’ development towards more sustainable paths, as the texts suggest? An analysis of the National Tourism Development Plan reveals no such intention, as it sets no limits. Even in saturated areas such as Mykonos and Santorini, which have exceeded every limit on building and tourist concentration under the Ministry of the Environment’s own specifications, tourism and residential expansion are set to continue. On Paros, which is following closely in the footsteps of the other islands, the first private development comprising 250 rooms and a corresponding number of swimming pools was recently approved, alongside many other developments, despite the problems of overcrowding, excessive water consumption, and waste management that exist on the island and remain unaddressed. Milos, Ios, Naxos, Tinos, Kos, Corfu, Zakynthos, Rhodes, Kea, etc., while under increased pressure, are considered by the National Tourism Organisation capable of continuing to accommodate new beds.
From sustainable development to the ‘economy of greed’
Citizens have highlighted numerous problems as part of the major consultation carried out and still being conducted by ‘VOICES for the ARCHIPELAGO’ in collaboration with the Laboratory for Local and Island Development, and these relate to both the quality of work and the quality of life on the islands, which are linked to tourism development. Overcrowding, the degradation of the landscape and architecture, the decline in cultural life, excessive dependence on tourism, a significant outflow of income off the island, water and energy problems, etc.—issues that neither the current plan nor the ‘disappeared’ Local Town Planning Schemes will address, as they are not part of their underlying philosophy.
The plan’s philosophy supports an economy of greed that need not be sustainable because, particularly on the islands, it relies on short-term profits from property and state funding through strategic investments. After all, spatial plans are binding only insofar as they give the green light to investment. There is, of course, an alternative model. One centred on people and their right to live in their own communities with dignity and environmental, amongst other things, security.
Yannis Spilanis is a professor in the Department of Environmental Studies at the University of the Aegean, Director of the Laboratory of Local and Island Development, and Scientific Director of ‘VOICES for the ARCHIPELAGO’.
Leave a Reply