GFORS: Greek Case Studies

1
G-FORS Greek Case Studies
Pecs, Hungary

• UEHR
• Vassilis Markantonis
• Alexis Politakis

2
Particulate Matters

• Methodological issues
• Progress on the Discourse analysis
• Mapping of actors
• 25 Documents analyzed (media papers, scientific
  reports)
• 3 interviews

3
Context

• high concentrations of PMs in the biggest cities
  
• It is not yet specified if these high values are
  caused by human activities or by natural
  processes
• A network of 15 measuring stations is operating
  in Athens
• It came to publicity during the pre-olympic
  period
• It is mostly connected to health issues
• no long-term planning

4
Context

• lack of policy measures
• conflicts between the relevant state authorities
• Limited funding
• Increased awereness

5
Governance arrangement

• Hierarchical policy framework
• Dominance of the responsible state actors
• Weak participation of scientific actors, media
  and civil society.
• Absence of institutionalized dialogue
• Need for a new independent Organization

6
Governance arrangements

• Main rules in use Position rules, Authority
  rules and Information rules
• The Ministry of Environment has developed
  dialogue with the scientists and some private
  companies (consultants). No dialogue with the
  NGOs.
• The local authorities do not participate in
  policy-making or implementation
• Since the last year an informal network consisted
  by scientists, media and NGOs is operating

7
KnowledgeScapes

• Dominant forms of knowledge (so far) Expert
  Knowledge, Steering knowledge, Product knowledge,
  Everyday knowledge
• No evidence or signs for reflexive knowledge
• Conflict between the scientific knowledge and the
  steering knowledge (within YPEXODE)
• Conflict between the scientific knowledge and the
  everyday knowledge
• Conflict between steering and expert knowledge

8
Action arena

• Mapping of Actors

9
Interactions

• this hierarchical mode of governance does not
  enhance the learning process and the exchange of
  knowledge
• the knowledge is fragmented because there is no
  dialogue and participatory conditions

10
Identifying Governance for Sustainability

• Weak sustainability
• Contradictory opinions about the effectiveness
• Low legitimacy (input throughput)
• High Legitimacy (output)

11
Greek SEA case study

• Change of case study

SEA of the Special Framework for the Spatial
Planning and Sustainable Development of Renewable
Source of Energy
12
The belated beginning of SEA in Greece

• Stalling implementation of renewables in Greece
  Council of State decision (2004) facilities
  cannot be established before the completion of
  the Special Framework for the Spatial Planning
  and Sustainable Development of Renewable Source
  of Energy (Oct 2005 January 2007)
• Common Ministerial Decision (5th September 2006)
  application of SEA to Regional level or higher
  including to Spatial Plan for Renewables
• Renewables SEA (January-February 2007)
• Consultation on Renewables SEA (23rd February
  9th April 2007)

13
Context

• Hierarchical governance leadership (public
  authorities consultation)
• Private sector (via Chambers represented in
  Regional Councils) SEA as an added restriction
  to the roll out of renewables
• Lack of public awareness/information often leads
  to conflict e.g. formal legal appeals to Council
  of State ? stall policy (wind parks)
• Expert input geared towards accelerating process
  (results, deadlines)
• NGOs and pressure groups already participating

14
Governance arrangements

• Rules EU Directive 2001/42 Draft Special
  Framework for the Spatial Planning and
  Sustainable Development of Renewable Source of
  Energy Common Ministerial Decision
• Authority rules Article 4
• Boundary, Aggregation and Information rules
  Article 7
• Hierarchy with some weaker market features.
  Centrally directed, short expert involvement
• 45-day consultation since late February with
  Regions (TUs, Chambers, local regional
  self-government)
• Letters from NGOs, pressure groups and interested
  public.

15
KnowledgeScapes

• Special Service for the Environment (Ministry)
  Institutional, steering, some expert
• Environmental consultants (SEA authors) Expert
  some steering
• NGOs expert, steering and some milieu
• Regional and local government and chambers not
  interviewed yet
• Ranking of knowledge bundles Bundle 2, Bundle 1,
  Bundle 3, weak reflective knowledge (tacitly in
  expert field but individual rather than
  institutional)

16
Synergies, contradictions, conflicts

• Environmental consultancy that carried out the
  SEA also participated in the writing of the SEA
  for the Anatoliki Makedonia Thraki but also the
  Spatial Plan for Renewables.
• Disagreement between environmental NGOs

Greek Society for the Protection of Nature
Hellenic Ornithological Society Extension of
restrictions
Greenpeace Greece Minimise and clarify
restrictions swiftest renewables roll-out
Indicators for reflexivity

• Time constraint from rushed implementation is not
  conducive for the development of reflexive
  knowledge

17
Action arena
18
Interactions

• Consultation ongoing (all formal comments not
  available yet) - institutional learning?
• Hierarchical governance and leadership of process
  by central government emphasised by interviews
  with the Special Service for the Environment,
  Ministry of Environment, Planning and Public
  Works and with the ENVIROPLAN (environmental
  consultants).

19
Effectiveness legitimacy

• Too soon for results regarding effectiveness and
  legitimacy.
• YPEHODE
• Input legitimacy lacking as policy-makers admit
  that SEA is only taking place to satisfy the
  European SEA Directive.
• Throughput legitimacy? - strong direction of the
  process particularly with regard to the tight
  time frame (SEA delivery consultation) but
  consultation nevertheless.
• ENVIROPLAN
• Tight time frame ? little debate or discussion
  between consultancy and ministry ? less
  institutional learning?
• Effectiveness promoted by SEA which more clearly
  defines restrictions placed on the location of
  renewables facilities by the Spatial Plan for
  Renewables.
• Input and output legitimacy tainted by the fact
  that the same consultancy participated in the
  writing of the draft Spatial Plan for Renewables