The local authorities of Paros-Antiparos recently announced major works to:
- extend the airstrip at Paros airport, to allow access to larger aircraft from abroad
- expand existing airport buildings.
This work will be co-financed by European funds.
This information gives rise to hopes and fears among Paros-Antiparos inhabitants, whether they reside full-time or part-time.
The hopes raised
A large part of the island’s inhabitants and operators see it facilitating access from large cities abroad and the possibility for the inhabitants of the islands to travel there more easily without intermediate stopover and at a lower cost. (by charter or low-cost flights like Ryanair). This would even allow the construction of larger and more luxurious hotels and even the possibility of going to other islands (like Naxos, Mykonos) via Paros. It would also increase the value of the island’s real estate (land and houses).
The fears aroused
The influx of large numbers of people who would not keep up with the load-bearing capacity of the island would create risks such as:
- denser traffic, with the accompanying traffic jams
- increasingly difficult/insufficient treatment of solid and liquid waste
- drinking water supply problems.
This quantitative increase in tourists would intensify economic activities towards mass tourism with flights (day and night) at low prices and packages at compressed prices. That would go against the wish expressed by the majority of the inhabitants for the non-increase in the number of tourists but rather for an extension of the tourist season in spring and autumn which would be less intrusive and more respectful of cultural identity and the character of the island.
There is also the fear that economic activities will shift to foreign operators on the two islands to the locals’ detriment. Besides, increased construction would further alter the islands’ environment and character and be detrimental to their development.
Also, the works budget, less than 50 million euros, allows them to pass for the moment below the “radars” of the European authorities and the obligation to consult the local population, but would not be sufficient to finance the measures necessary to remedy the drawbacks mentioned above.
What to do?
Our association addressed the competent Minister, Mr Hadjidakis, specifying that our approach was neither political nor ideological and requested information on the measures taken so that the work in question does not have adverse effects on the environment and the character of the island, which has already undergone substantial alteration in recent years, due to tourist hyperactivity and the excessive exploitation of its resources. More specifically, we requested a copy of the environmental impact assessment study and information on the prior consultation and any official document concerning the “compensatory” works planned to alleviate the planned works’ harmful effects.
Based on the information we receive and, provided that the legal framework has been respected, as we hope, we will offer other associations and local authorities a discussion on the corrective/accompanying measures to be taken.
Amid a crisis that seems to be related to the destruction of eco-systems, in an island that became famous because of its small-scaled minimalism, the planning of the airport’s extension is an opportunity to seriously reevaluate the idea that never-ending economic growth is a fatality and can only be fair to us.
If we were reasonable, we would first aim in improving the quality of life and resilience to the impending crisis of the inhabitants. Encouraging external investments for mega tourist resorts that have adverse effects on the environment, the island’s character and social cohesion, while leaving little benefits to the local economy, is not addressing that aim.
Instead, we would want to target the type of tourist inclined to discover the place he visits, participate in its events with its inhabitants, learn its history and traditions. This type of tourists is globally in an upward trajectory, and the Cycladic islands organically conceal all the resources to cater to their needs. Those travellers do not mind spending a few more hours to reach their paradise by boat and can consider crossing the Aegean as an experience by itself.
So true Nicolas. More discussion is needed and a broad initiative that makes the topic public and can ultimately achieve something. Couldn’t the Friends of Paros be that initiative?
couldn’t agree more .
I wish everyone could see this simple but vital truth …
Globally we have brought the planet to the edge of the cliff, which may be irreversible and locally we still debate which way we should go. It’s amazing. What else it will take to understand that we have to reconsider the way we live. If we don’t preserve what’s left of Paros, we will be left with nothing but concrete. As for those who look forword increasing their fortune, what will they do when the model of massive tourism will be obsolete? Probably they will invest in Mars!
Now it’s the time to change things so we will have the chance to live on a human scale.
The planned extension of the airport raises some interesting issues.
Whilst I have concerns about the preservation of the character of the island, the fact that the new airport was built with the capacity to extend it and the availability of EU funding, creates a degree of inevitability to this plan. Wholesale opposition is therefore the wrong approach.
The best position to take in my view, is to seek information –as FOP have done- and then campaign directly and indirectly to ensure that if it goes ahead it is not just the airport expansion, but the programme also includes the infrastructure that is necessary re roads, water and waste. I am sure that this is a position that would attract support from other organisations and individuals on the island. If this can be accomplished, then the project would bring real benefits to Paros.
Hello Niko,
Very interesting issue, and discussion.
First, it would be worth to clarify if this project is part of the Recovery Plan / Next Generation EU proposal,
Second, once obtained more information from your inquiry to the ministry, I would propose to hold a meeting (by presence or remote) open to all FoP members and supporters.
As early discussion points, also considering what other cities and communities have experienced, I would suggest a cap to short-term rental platforms (Airbnb and similar), and – if not yet in place – a strict regulatory framework for new buildings (what can be built and how) to preserve landscapes and local architecture.
If this project has to happen, and cannot be discussed or modified, the focus should be on offsetting the most logical counter effects.
Looking forward to keep following this topic.
Hi Giorgio
The project would be funded under the current (2014-2020) program. The new 2021-2027 budget will not include financing to this kind of infrastructure, so the promoters are pressed by the time to submit the project.
In fact, Paros is from the very few areas in Greece that have developed a General Urban Plan, defining what can be built (or not built) and where. The problem is that a nasty central law allows large investors to override the local plan. And the main offset of an international airport will probably be the construction of mega tourist complexes offering all-inclusive packages.
We will look into a public discussion around the issue. The only way to oppose this project would be to have a strong rejection from the local community, as it has happened for the installation of wind turbines.
well said !
Low-cost flights like Ryanair linking with the construction of larger and more luxurious hotels is a contradiction of course. A study in Barcelona about the choice of hotels from Ryanair tourist shows that their choice more than often equals the money they paid for their flight= budget hotels and rooms. I can’t comprehend this view on the Airport issue. Anyone responsible for tourism with a sound mind would have seen the horrible traffic jams the Island suffers from during the height of Summer. There is no infrastructure for this huge upgrade. The people of the town council can’t even manage to create a decent crossroad on top of the hill of Parika with traffic lights let alone redesigning a whole new road system to accommodate this huge influx of traffic. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. What Paros needs is a decent study of how to run this Island by a non-biased foreign team with experience in the field of long-term planning. Not a group of investors that will further commercialize every square meter of this beautiful place. I know very well that my opinion is not very helpful, but that’s just how it is. Good luck to those who want to sacrifice the best of their time in this Sisyphean task.
As I said to Fionnuala above, the draft text is a collective contribution and may have some contradictions.
The reality is that the central administration has chosen to make Paros an attractive place for large investors and an airport hub for all the Cyclades. This choice is not consistent with the sustainable development that our mayor doesn’t miss a chance to praise. He swiftly approved the project as the best thing to happen to the Island, without any deliberation or discussion about the pros and the cons.
WELL SAID!
Do you have figures tor the percentage of residents who are in favour of and against the airport expansion?
There seems to be a contradiction in these two claims…” a large part of the inhabitants see it as facilitating access for access from large cities…. increase in value of houses and land” and the second claim..” the majority of inhabitants see the expansion as going against their wishes for the non-increase in the numbers of tourists , preferring extended tourist seasons.
Personally I believe that the proposed expansion is not in the long-term interest of the island or islanders. The experience of mass tourism in other European countries tends to be in favour of outside tour companies who benifit most as they can drive hard bargains with local hotels etc thus depressing local profits.
There hasn’t been any poll concerning the extension of the airport, not even a consultation. The draft text above is a collective contribution, and as such may have some contradictions. It’s aiming to bring some insight, such as yours, and trigger a discussion around the issue.