Civil Society Development in Microcosm: the Case of Anavra

.ashgate.com w

In democratic countries the science of association is the motherww of science; the progress of all the rest depends upon the progress it has made. (Tocqueville, [1840] 1945, p. 110)

Introduction .ashgate.com w

www There is growing academic and political interest regarding the role of civil society in community development. Researchers, policymakers, international organisations and governments study the role of civil society in community development

(e.g.World Bank, 2010; OECD, 2012; 2013;.ash gaForss,te.com 2013; Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, 2013; Staveren and Webbink,w 2012). As civil society has come to be seen as a resource, essential for the implementation of local development policies, research has often turned to investigating strategies for enhancing civil society in areas where it is weak. This study is about the development of civil society in a rural mountain community in Greece. Anavra village.ashgate.com has ww been chosen as a case study as it represents a unique case of economicwww and social development in rural Greece. Its uniqueness is evident not only in the scale of changes and achievements witnessed in the village, but also in the fact that they were initiated and enhanced by a local government leader, who, during four terms in office, succeeded in transforming the village. The study contributes.ashgate.com to the understanding of both the role of leadership and of the cultural and sociopolitical environment in civic development. It is argued here that notions of trust and associational involvement are embedded in culture and influenced by the wider sociopolitical milieu. Precisely because of cultural embeddedness – and perhaps mainly due to the sociopolitical background at the national level – attempts at civil society development such as the one in Anavra require.ash gaa tevery.com w wlongw time and extraordinary effort and perseverance, if they are to endure. Anavra has made important steps in this direction, but whether these www will be sustainable and lead to further development remains to be seen. The present study concentrates on the initiatives taken for the development of civil society in Anavra by the local government leader (hereafter referred to as ‘the

.ashgate.com www © Copyrighted Material

© 2015 From Jennifer Clarke, Asteris Huliaras and Dimitri A. Sotiropoulos (eds), Austerity and the Third Sector in Greece: Civil Society at the European Frontline, published by Ashgate Publishing. See: http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781472452689 216 Austerity and the Third Sector in Greece © Copyrighted Material reformer’),1 in terms of infrastructure and procedures, over a period of nearly two m decades. It then focuses on the relevant developments in the village between 2010,o .c 2 te when the reformer retired, to the present day. a g The questions addressed here refer firstly to the environment in whichh formal s .a and informal types of civil society may emerge in a rural locality, secondlyw to the w circumstances and processes which favour civil society emergence wand thirdly to the conditions necessary for its consolidation and further enhancement.m The o study also examines to what extent developments in Anavra, over a.c period of two te a decades, constituted a learning and capacity building process forg the residents of h s the community, leading to an increase of social and political .atrust and resulting w in civil society consolidation, or whether, on the contrary,w the presence of a w transformational leader remains a precondition for the preservation and further m o development of civil society. In doing so, the present study.c also tests the theories te according to which membership in formal voluntary organisationsa is conducive g h to the creation of social and political/institutional trust,s which is viewed as a .a precondition for the emergence of social capital. Thew latter, as discussed below, is w perceived as the level of trust among people, as wellw as connections which facilitate

m collective activities with view to reaching commono goals and is directly associated .c with civil society. Trust, both in its social andte political dimensions, is pivotal in a g this study, as research has shown that it is a keyh factor in the development of civil s society in Anavra. A further issue examined.a in the study is that of how government w may enhance or obstruct the developmentw of civil society at the local level. w In this context, following a discussion of some key theoretical themes, an m o analysis of the socio-political and cultural.c background in Anavra village will be te presented. This includes an explorationa of perceptions of solidarity and trust, as g h well as forms of social and politicals interaction, before and after the changes in .a the village. w w w The field research on which the study is based was conducted initially m through direct observationo and informal interviewing, which allowed for a .c deep understanding of thete subject under discussion and the development of an a g ambiance of trust with theh community. Moreover, it proved extremely useful for s the formulation of semi-structured.a interviews which followed, with residents of w Anavra, members of wthe local council, and leaders and members of the voluntary w organisations. Thism method allowed the respondents the freedom to express their o views and offer .can account of their individual experiences, while it extended te a research to aspectsg which had not been considered. h s .a w w w

1 Them term is borrowed from Giddens (1998, p. 82) and is used here in a similar o context..c te 2 Thea sustainable economic development of the village was the subject of an g h unpublisheds paper presented at the 60th Political Studies Association Annual Conference in .a Edinburgh,w 29 March–1 April 2010, entitled: The role of leadership in mobilising collective w willw and the building of sustainable communities: the case of Anavra, Greece. © Copyrighted Material

The Theoretical Background

For the obvious reason of limited space, a thorough examination of the chaotic literature on civil society, and its related concepts of social capital and.ashg atethe. ww third sector, is not possible within this chapter. Here, the relevant discussion will therefore be limited to a brief discussion of concepts which are considered necessary for the analysis of the case study.

Civil Society .ashgate.com w

ww There is hardly any consensus among students of civil society as to the exact meaning of the concept, mainly as a result of different approaches of liberal thinkers on the one hand and conservative critics on the other (Seligman, 1992, p. ix). Just like the concept of social capital, with which.a shitga teis.co massociated w and often confused, the concept of civil society seems to be flexiblewww enough to accommodate various approaches (Dionne, 1997) and consequently has become the locus of much perplexity and vagueness. It is generally supposed to constitute the layer of society which stands between the state and the private sphere (Shils, 1991, p. 3, Pietrzyk, 2001). According to Seligman.as h(1992),gate.com what makes the idea of civil society so attractive is the assumption thatw it synthesises the private and public good, thus somehow alleviating the conflicts between the private interest and the social good (Seligman 1992, p. x). Voluntarism is an essential aspect of civil society, regardless of whether it is about organised or informal types of action. According to the definition of the Centre for Civil Society (CCS), civil.ashga tesociety.com ww is ‘the arena of uncoerced collective action around shared interests, purposeswww and values’ (CCS, 2009). It contains a large array of entities such as religious organisations, trade unions, social movements and women’s organisations (CCS, 2009). Despite the frequent emphasis on independence of civil society from the state, in reality this relationship is.as hmuchgate.com more complex. It is the state that produces the laws governing the civil society functioning (Shils, 1991, p. 15, Harris, 2001). Giddens further elaborates on this argument, attributing to the government an active role in civil society development (Giddens, 1998). He argues that, in fact, government and civil society are not strictly separated, suggesting that government can and should play an important role in ‘renewing civic culture’ (Giddens, 1998, p. 79–80). In the context of his.a proposalshgate.com www for ‘democratizing the democracy’ (Giddens, 1998, p. 72), in which he connects this process with decentralisation, he stresses the importance www of the downward and upward democratisation of government, linking the former with the ‘renewal of civil society’ (Giddens, 1998, p. 77). His list of actions for the renewal of civil society includes among others, a) partnership between the latter and the government, b) development of local initiatives, c) involvement of the .ashgate.com third sector, d) democratisation of the family and e) protection of the local public spherewww (Giddens, 1998, p. 79). © Copyrighted Material

More specifically, and significantly for the case of Anavra, within Giddens’ m civil society renewal agenda, community renewal involves the creation ofo an .c te ‘open public sphere’, including ‘physical public space’ and more particularlya g ‘safe public space – streets, squares, parks, and other areas where people canh feel s .a secure’, and places where social interaction can take place (Giddens, 1998,w p. 85). w That is, for Giddens, social interaction and sociability presuppose the existencew of the relevant basic infrastructure, which is the responsibility of the state.m o More recent literature on community development follows similar.c lines of te a argument. The Budapest Declaration on civil society and communityg development, h s regarding rural communities in particular, points to the role of.a national as well w as European level of governance in promoting voluntary andw community action w which ‘should be based on a well-developed rural infrastructure’ (International m o Association for Community Development (IACD), Combined.c European Bureau te for Social Development (CEBSD), Hungarian Associationa for Community g h Development (HACD) (IACD/CEBSD/HACD, 2004,s p. 4). .a On the other hand, and relevant to the findingsw in Anavra, Henderson and w Vercseg (2010) in their discussion of asset-basedw community development,

m argue that local people may well be involved ino decision-making regarding local .c resources, however, they are not always willingte to assume responsibility for their a g maintenance and sustainability (Henderson andh Vercseg, 2010, p. 76). s .a w Social Capital w w

m o The concept of social capital is closely.c related to that of civil society and is often te believed to be an important asset withina a community. However, to date it has not g h 3 been defined in a universally accepteds way. Here, for reasons of space restrictions, .a the relevant discussion is confinedw to the main elements of the concept necessary w w for the analysis of the case study. m While Bourdieu (1986) oin his theory of social capital offered an explanation .c of social stratification, andte Coleman (1988) demonstrated its use in the production a g of human capital, it is Putnam’sh (1993) contribution to the field that has been the s most influential. His line.a of argument accepts a bottom-up development of social w capital and civil society,w ignoring the role of the state in this process and this has w been at the heart ofm the criticism he has received (from, among others, Tarrow, o 1996; Harris, 2001;.c Mouritsen, 2003). te a Identifying gthe ‘vibrancy of associational life’ as the reason behind effective h government (Putnam,s 1993, p. 91), Putnam defines social capital as referring ‘to .a features of socialw organisation, such as trust, norms of reciprocity, and networks w w that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions’ m (Putnam,o 1993, p. 167). According to this approach, trust, an essential ingredient .c of socialte capital can come as a result of norms of reciprocity and networks of civic a g h s .a w 3 A concise account of the origins and definitions of the concept is offered, among w others,w by Portes (1998). © Copyrighted Material

Copyright material: You are not permitted to transmit this file in any format or media; it may not be resold or reused without prior agreement with Ashgate Publishing and may not be placed on any publicly accessible or commercial servers. Civil Society Development in Microcosm 219 © Copyrighted Material engagement, both formal and informal. Generalised reciprocity can be the answer to collective action problems (Putnam, 1993, pp. 171–3). An interesting approach to the production of trust and significant for the case study discussed here is that of K. Newton’s (2001), who, in contrast to Putnam’s.ashgate. ww thesis, argues that there is little evidence that trust is generated as a result of membership in voluntary associations (Newton, 2001, p. 201). Social trust as a generalised interpersonal trust is more frequently found among the successful social strata than the less fortunate of the society. Accordingly, ‘trusting people’, the educated and comfortably off are more likely to join voluntary.ashgate .cassociationsom w (Newton, 2001, p. 207), a case that reverses Putnam’s argument. wNewtonw correctly – and significantly for the findings of the present case study – sees interpersonal and political trust (trust in politicians and institutions) not as a natural trait or aptitude of the individual, but as a reflection of the trustworthiness of the social and political environment within which the individual functions. As he explains, this approach to the relationship between social trust.as handgate.co msocial w capital on the one hand and political trust and political capital onw wthew other does not deny this relationship, but simply moves analysis ‘to the aggregate level of society as a whole’ (Newton, 2001, p. 211).

The Third Sector .ashgate.com w As early as the 1970s, the term ‘third sector’ was introduced in the United States by Theodore Levitt and Amitai Etzioni, in order to describe the appearance of a field between the market and the state (Lorentzen, 2010, p. 27). The new emerging sector was to combine the efficiency and expertise of the private sector with the pursuit of the public interest (Etzioni,.ashgate. c1973,om ww p. 315). The third sector shares this aspect with the civil society approach,www a common trait also recognised by the European Union (EU) (Haché, 2011, p. 19). The characteristics of third sector organisations, as defined in the dominant model of the John Hopkins Comparative Non-profit Sector Project, are that they are: .ashgate.com

1. Formally constituted, without necessarily meaning that they have to receive approval from the government. 2. Private, i.e. organisationally separate from the government, although this does not exclude organisations receiving financial support from the public. asector.shgate.com www 3. Non-profit-distributing. www 4. Self-governing, meaning that the organisation has established its own bodies and procedures of governance. 5. Voluntary, referring to the uncoerced membership (Salamon, 1996, pp. 22–5). .ashgate.com www © Copyrighted Material

This model, pivotal in the international relevant theoretical discourse, applies m well to the American setting but, as correctly noted by Evers and Laville (2004),o .c te the characteristics of the third sector vary from region to region, as theya are g influenced by the particular regional traditions (Evers and Laville, 2004,h p. 11). s .a Their definition of the (European) third sector organisations is an extensionw of the w American model, in order to include cooperatives and mutual aid societies,w which are not part of the American version (Evers and Laville, 2004, p. 13).m o .c te a A Synthesis g h s .a w Despite the confusion in defining the three notions, commonw elements exist, thus w allowing for a synthesis under the concept of civil society as an all-inclusive term. m o Zimmer and Freise (2008) suggest that elements of the social.c capital as proposed te by Putnam, i.e. civic engagement, participatory behaviour,a trust, and societal g h networks on the one hand, and features of the third sectors on the other, such as .a organisational infrastructure for civic engagement, wsocial service production and w civic activity, can come under the umbrella of civilw society (Zimmer and Freise,

m 2008, pp. 28–9). It is this inclusive understandingo of civil society that is followed .c in this chapter. te a g h s .a w Civil Society in Greece w w

m o According to the argument deployed. c here, civil society development in general, te and in Anavra village in particular,a is influenced by the wider socio-political g h environment. It is therefore essentials to look into those factors that have been .a moulding patterns of civic perceptionsw and behaviour in Greece in general and in w w rural communities in particular. m In a recent article, Fukuyamao (2013) discusses the development of democracy .c in relation to the quality of tthee state. It is a comparative approach, in which he traces a g the causes of poor state performanceh and democracy in Greece and Italy to the way s state formation and evolution.a occurred in these countries. Regarding Greece in w particular, he observesw the existence of a deeply divided society characterised by w high levels of socialm and political distrust as a result of political conflicts and foreign o intervention, ever.c since the emergence of the modern Greek state. Moreover, he te a points to the cultureg of favouritism and the pursuit of individual interest through the h manipulation sof the state in the context of clientelist relationships, which has been .a at the detrimentw of private entrepreneurial initiatives in Greece (Fukuyama, 2013, w w pp. 9–11). In this context, reforms are difficult to effect, also due to the peculiar m economico development in the country which was not based on industrialisation. .c As a result,te urbanisation did not have the same social outcome as in Britain and a g the Unitedh States, for instance. Instead of the Gemeinschaft being transformed into s .a Gessellschaftw , the rural population migrating to the urban centres simply carried w withw them ‘its rural mores and habits of patronage’ (Fukuyama, 2013, p. 14). © Copyrighted Material

Diamandouros similarly (1994) notes the prevalence of a political culture characterised by hostility to reforms, attachment to precapitalist practices, the assignment of a preponderant role to the state as a ‘dispenser of rights’, and a feeling of insecurity towards an autonomous and active civil society in preference.ashgate. ww of clientelist structures (Diamandouros, 1994). Polis, discussing developments in Greek civil society in the post-authoritarian period, observes its deterioration owing to Papandreou’s ‘merger of the state and party, party clientelism and extensive regulatory legislation’. As she notes, the

‘partyfication’ of the state was reproduced within the interest .asgroups,hgate.com w which in turn became fields for inter-party conflict. The situationww led to an even tighter grip on civil society organisations by the state (Polis, 1997, p. 66). As a result, the intermediary bodies that constitute civil society in Greece, instead of aggregating and articulating their demands independently, do so in the context of a clientelist exchange. It is common practice for leaders of trade unions to build political careers, owing to strong ties to political parties (Collins.ashgate. coandm w Louloudis, 1995, p. 104). www The weakness of Greek civil society continues to date, leaving ample space for the state, political parties and the family (Sotiropoulos and Karamagioli, 2006; Angemann and Sittermann, 2010). Greek society exhibits a lack of civic engagement, despite flourishing informal .avoluntaryshgate.com activities at the local level, while old pathogenic features of organisations,w such as strong state intervention, persist (Sotiropoulos and Karamagioli, 2006). Equally important is the lack of social trust, necessary for the development of voluntarism. The ‘new wave of volunteering’, although attributed to the transformation of the Greek society during the past 15 years (GHK, 2010), was in fact generated in view of the funds made available by the EU for civil.as hsocietygate.com ww organisations. Moreover, the scandals which have surfaced lately regardingwww the corruption of a large number of (civil society organisations (CSOs), have increased and generalised the distrust of the society towards CSOs. Nevertheless, as argued by Sotiropoulos (2004), civil society is not confined to registered organisations,.a ssincehgate.com multiple informal instances of civil society do exist. Regarding the local level, in particular, such instances include the coffee shops, which, as argued, are equivalent to ‘popular assemblies’ (Papataxiarches, 1992 in Sotiropoulos, 2004, p. 14). Although this argument is valid to some degree, as shown below, research in Anavra has revealed certain qualitative elements that differentiate these places of interaction from civil society spaces.4 Agricultural.ashg acooperatives,te.com www as part of civil society, deserve special attention in the context of this study as Anavra’s agricultural and livestock cooperative is being www discussed regarding its function and contribution to civil society development of

4 An interesting account of the role of the coffeehouse in Greek villages is offered by .Photiadisashgate.com (1965). It is later in the 1980s that coffeehouses were divided into ‘green’ and ‘blue’ reflecting political party affiliations. Therborn (1995, p. 306) does not accept Mediterraneanwww coffeehouses as expressions of civil society. © Copyrighted Material

© 2015 From Jennifer Clarke, Asteris Huliaras and Dimitri A. Sotiropoulos (eds), Austerity and the Third Sector in Greece: Civil Society at the European Frontline, published by Ashgate Publishing. See: http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781472452689 222 Austerity and the Third Sector in Greece © Copyrighted Material the community. While studying the cooperative movement in modern Greece, one m has to take into consideration the wider sociopolitical environment in which it waso .c te developed. As already noted, the Greek state has always been extremely centraliseda g and clientelist and both aspects are tightly interconnected. It is through clientelisth s .a networks that consolidation and the reproduction of power structures at thew central w level have taken place (Papoudakis, 2001, pp. 50–97). Accordingly, the evolutionw of the agricultural cooperatives’ network in Greece, like other CSOs, has mbeen marked o by heavy state intervention and extremely centralised structures.. c In particular, te a during the 1980s the socialist government introduced a cooperativeg reform which h s resulted in the further deterioration of the cooperative movement .ina general and rural w cooperatives in particular. Among the provisions of the reform thatw further enhanced w the clientelist nature and the tight grip of the state over the cooperatives was the m o introduction of politically-driven party lists in the elections.c of boards, as well as the te allocation of ‘public administration authorities’ (Nasioulas,a 2012, p. 149), elements g h incompatible with the nature of civil society. Patronages has hindered equal resource .a distribution within the cooperatives, as well as amongw them, the amount allocated w being most of the times conditioned by the respectivew political ties.

m In such an environment, trust among the memberso of the cooperatives, but .c also in its political/institutional dimension iste obstructed, and subsequently the a g development of social capital is hard. Thish can have detrimental effects on the s cooperative’s efficiency. Members of. a a cooperative, instead of running their w enterprises independently, join forces to derivew mutual benefits. This entails their w commitment to process their products through the cooperative, which requires m o the existence of trust and reciprocity,.c a lack of which renders the commitment te pointless. It is on these grounds thata the agricultural cooperative is considered g h to be ‘the most social capital dependents organisation’ (Valentinov, 2003 cited in .a Hong and Sporleder, n.d., pp. 4–5).w w w Outlining the profile of civil society in Greece, it can be argued thatthe m prevalent political culture ofo the country has hindered the emergence of a sphere, .c that mediates between thete political, on the one hand, and private society on the a g other. It is argued here hthat this aspect would not be necessarily detrimental to s the function of civil society..a On the contrary, it would be a positive thing if not a w necessity, in so far as wthe two spheres would play a beneficial, complementary role w in smoothing civil societym development. It is shown in the case study below that the o private sector can.c help in this respect, especially in rural communities. Regarding te a the state/government’sg part, it becomes obvious that without its assistance, again h regarding rurals communities in particular, civil society cannot flourish. .a Trust, a cardinalw element in the formation of social and political capital, is not w w easily built in a clientelist socio-political environment, as is the case in Greece. m Such ano environment tends to be imbued with distrust and suspicion, both of the .c other andte of the state. Furthermore, the particularistic way of pursuing individual a g interest,h most of the times in defiance and to the detriment of the common good via s .a clientelistw networks, a practice deeply embedded in culture, is alien to the notions w ofw reciprocity and collective action. © Copyrighted Material

Anavra – The Background before the Reforms

The rural settlement of Anavra (Goura) nestling in a valley at 1.000 m. on Mount Orthrys dates back to the 6th century A.D. It flourished economically, .asociallyshgate. ww and culturally during the Ottoman occupation, in particular during the 17th–18th centuries, but declined during the 19th century. Efforts to revive the village during the first half of the 20th century were hampered by a series of disasters that came as a result of World War II, the civil war and two earthquakes in 1954 and 1980.

Until the early 1990s, Anavra suffered from almost a complete.ashgate.com w lack of basic infrastructure and services, isolation and outmigration.w wCommunity land delimitation had not taken place in the village, allowing the approximately 400 residents to keep the 25,000 animals in the village next to their homes during wintertime. This kind of arrangement, which meant that the way of living and animal breeding had not changed very much over the centuries, did not guarantee healthy living conditions for either humans or animals..ashgate.com w

With the exception of one road, the road networkww win the village, as well as the one connecting the village to the wider area consisted of unpaved muddy rural roads, often – and especially during the winter – filthy with animal manure. In short, ‘safe public space’, as defined by Giddens, to facilitate social interaction was non-existent. Apart from the.as hgchurch,ate.com the only places offered for sociability were two coffeehouses frequentedw by men only, while the elementary school was housed in a pre-fabricated construction. Regarding services, the rural doctor was not always consistent with his duties, but the community leadership did not do much to ensure his services, while the school functioned only when the weather conditions allowed the teacher access to the village. Moreover, the water.ash gasupplyte.com ww system often left the village without water especially during summertime.www Rearing produce was low due to rearing conditions. As a result, the average annual income amounted to only one tenth of the current income. As regards the social and civic background in Anavra in the early 1990s, it is suggestive of Banfield’s.ashgate .c(1958)om backward society in Montegrano. The reason why it is mentioned here, despite the considerably different settings and other differences, is that Banfield’s findings, during research carried out in this south Italian community, led to certain conclusions as to the causes of the backwardness of the community, explained to a significant degree by the fact that the villagers were unable to act collectively for the common good, and instead pursued family interests. Notably,.ashgate. cheom wlocatedww the origins of this situation in the lack of interpersonal trust and the presence of suspicion in relations among the villagers, as well as www towards the state (Banfield, 1958). These are characteristics Anavra shares with Montegrano. However, despite a lack of interpersonal trust, altruistic feelings were and still are present in Anavra and there has always been support among the villagers whenever someone is in need. .ashgate.com Despite the turmoil caused by war and natural disasters, old customs and traditionswww were preserved over the centuries, ensuring continuity and homogeneity © Copyrighted Material

In this society, the role of women was subordinate to men and mas character- o istically put by interviewees, it was almost ‘non-existent’. Apart from.c one or two te a traditional religious annual festivities joined by all members of theg community, the h s village coffeehouse was the only alternative of social interaction..a w The villagers were divided along party politics lines, as werew the coffeehouses w of the village. The so-called ‘green’ ‘and blue’ coffeehouses, nowadays in decline, m o flourished in Greek villages during the 1980s until.c the mid-1990s. They were te frequented by the followers of the two main politicala parties, i.e. PASOK and g h New Democracy, respectively. The role played by thiss type of coffeehouse should .a not be confused with that played by the coffeehousesw in late 17th- and early 18th- w 5 century Europe, which contributed greatly to the developmentw of civil society.

m According to the above-discussed definitions,o democracy and the general good .c are served by civil society, through an open participatoryte process. As described by a g respondents in Anavra, this was not the case hin the ‘green’ and ‘blue’ coffeehouses s of the village. In reality, they were places.a where social interaction took place w and decisions were made, but not with wa view to serving the public good. On w the contrary, the satisfaction of the individual interest was pursued through the m o use of political ties, i.e. the use of patronage..c The quest for solutions to problems te concerning the community was nota part of the discourse, which was carried out g h in a fanatical ambiance, in contrasts to the rationality of the interaction in the old .a European coffeehouses. w w w During general election campaigns, when party candidates visited the village, m speeches were made in the coffeehouseso in a similarly fanatical atmosphere, with .c instances of verbal violence.te This again is against another civil society component, a g i.e. civility, which shouldh not be understood as simply good manners, but ‘as s the conduct of a person.a whose individual self-consciousness has been partly w superseded by his collectivew self-consciousness’ (Shils, 1991, p. 12). w

m o .c te 5 Cowan (2005),a in his interesting book The Social Life of Coffee – The Emergence g h of the British Coffeehouses , describes the coffeehouses in 17th-century England as places .a relying entirelyw on the voluntary activities of their customers, offering a neutral setting for w interaction. wIn this sense, the coffeehouse was ‘the most important social space in which civil societym began to flourish’ (Cowan, 2005, p. 192). Habermas and Sennet saw in these o places the.c appearance of a ‘new sort of public life’, in which the discourse was determined, te not bya political power or social rank, but by rational argumentation (Cowan, 2005, p. g h 229).s These coffeehouses, emerged during the commercial and financial revolutions and .a respondedw to the needs of the new social and economic order, as opposed to the old state w embodiedw in the court (Cowan, 2005, p. 150). © Copyrighted Material

Lack of rationality and civility in both senses and the use of patronage in the pursuit of the individual – as opposed to public interest – in the assemblies of the ‘green’ and ‘blue’ coffeehouses in Anavra constitute the qualitative elements that distance them from civil society. .ashgate. ww Among the Anavriots of the early 1990s, the notion of collective self- consciousness and the collective good was alien. In reality, the reason why they would vote for a candidate was precisely the fact that this candidate would have served their individual interest in their previous term of office, or promised to do so if elected, by doing something small-scale which benefited the.a shindividualgate.com w voter, and not because they would have promoted the community’s wdevelopmentw with large-scale projects.6 Summing up, Anavra, in 1991, had many features of a backward society, owing to its isolation, poverty, and a value system deeply embedded in traditional parochial culture. Trust in social and political terms was at an extremely low level and complete lack of infrastructure to facilitate .asocial,shgate.com wcivic and economic development could be observed. Government, central,www regional and local self- government did nothing to change the situation. On the contrary, the same patterns were repeated, perpetuating structures and attitudes. In this environment civil society emergence had not been possible.

.ashgate.com w The Period of Reforms – 1991–2010

When the reformer took over in 1991, he was primarily obliged to overcome suspicion and distrust, both as an ‘outsider’ as he had returned to the village after many years of absence, and as embodying.ashgate.com w wlocal self-government, which had done almost nothing until then to improvewww conditions in the village. This stance towards him also reflected a wider distrust of the state, the representatives of which had never kept the promises they made during electoral campaigns. Before proceeding to the construction of physical infrastructure, he initiated a series of public meetings, which, although.ashga tstipulatede.com by law, had never taken place before. In the context of these gatherings of direct democracy – around 25 during his four terms in office – he used to explain to the villagers his plans, with a view to ensuring their consent. He used to promise less than what he intended to implement, making sure that he was capable of keeping his promises. The aim was to restore trust in local self-government leadership, realising that this was a prerequisite for successful reform stories.a s(Fairholm,hgate.com www 1994, p. 95). On the other hand, these meetings offered the opportunity for social www interaction, in which gradually Anavriots learnt to participate in a civil manner. Civility gradually also characterised the electoral campaign meetings, which were organised in an orderly manner, without excluding the candidates of any political party. Anavriots learnt to listen and to ask for permission to speak. .ashgate.com www 6 Interviews with Anavra residents who wish to remain anonymous, 23 April 2014. © Copyrighted Material

As is obvious by now, the challenge the reformer faced was twofold: on the m one hand he had to try to change deeply-rooted beliefs regarding Anavriots’o .c te relationships among themselves and with the state, as well as with the a outer g world, while creating the infrastructure and the conditions necessary for economich s .a growth. The two were interconnected. w w The creation of three livestock parks, accommodating 80 modernw livestock farms in the surroundings of the village, solved the problem of cohabitationm with o the animals. Thereafter, the construction of what Giddens identifies.c as secure te a public space began. A primary school and kindergarten were built,g the former with h s accommodation for teachers, so they wouldn’t have to travel every.a day from the w nearest large city, Volos. w w A medical centre, a folklore museum, a modern assembly room, a modern m o gym, soccer and basketball facilities, a new road system.c and squares were also te built. The valley along the Enippeas River was transformeda into a 24-hectare g h environmental park, receiving thousands of visitors everys year, while a permanent .a game refuge of 8,000 hectares was established. w w A large number of cultural and educational eventsw were organised annually

m while there was a growing demand on the parto of Anavriots for more similar .c activities. The position of women changed, partlyte as a result of the opening of a g the family to the community and the wider areah and society, contributing to what s Giddens refers to as democratisation of the. afamily. w Experts from outside the village werew invited to initiate the Anavriots in w organic stock breeding. This served a twofold purpose: a) bringing the residents m o into contact with the outside entrepreneurial.c world, and b) improving production te and subsequently an increase in income.a The second goal was reached, owing in g h part to the construction of a moderns organic abattoir. The first goal, as a transfer of .a know-how, was also reached. Nevertheless,w as regards its contribution to changing w w attitudes as a result of contact with the outside world, which was the ‘hidden’ 7 m expectation, this remains too be seen. .c During the two-decadete period of reforms, three civil society organisations a g were operating in the village:h the agricultural-livestock credit cooperative, the s women’s association and.a a cultural association. w Regarding the cooperative,w it was active since the 1950s, but started declining w in the mid-1990s mas a result of two developments. First, the cooperative, as o characteristically. c stated by all respondents, ‘went bankrupt’, literally and te a metaphorically,g a fact that is more or less true of the cooperative movement in h general in Greece.s The reason why this happened was attributed by Anavriots to .a the clientelistw way in which the cooperative functioned, especially since the 1980s, w w when the European funds became available. Allocation of these funds was in the m hands ofo the cooperative leaders who handled the operation to their own benefit .c using tclienteliste ties with the government. This slowly resulted in the bankruptcy a g of theh cooperative which was completely discredited in the eyes of its members. s .a w w w 7 Interview with the reformer, 24 April 2014. © Copyrighted Material

The word ‘trust’ – or the lack of it – came up repeatedly during the interviews and the possibility of revival of the cooperative was ruled out.8 The second organisation, the women’s association, was established in 2000, on the initiative of the Community’s Secretary – a close associate and supporter.as ofhgat ethe. ww reformer – supported by three or four other women. While in the beginning its goal was mainly recreational, it gradually extended its activities to include educational events as well, dealing with health and religious issues. The association’s own limited resources were assisted by a small donation from a private firm and the voluntary financial support of the secretary and the women who.ashg athade.com wstarted the association. The fervour of this small group kept the associationww active until 2008–2009.9 However, although Anavra women joined the events and benefited from the association’s activities, there was no interest expressed to stand for the positions of the association’s board, and as a result it was always the same people that carried the responsibility for its functioning. Consequently, the association gradually declined. .ashgate.com w

Lack of interest on the part of the women of thewww village has been attributed by some interviewees to the absence of collective social consciousness.10 Elinor Ostrom discussing the issue of collective action argues that ‘whenever one person cannot be excluded from the benefits that others provide, each person is motivated not to contribute to the joint effort but to .afree-rideshgate.com on the efforts of others. If all participants choose to free-ride, the collectivew benefit will not be produced’ (Ostrom, 1990, p. 6). Although this is would be a satisfactory explanation for the women’s stance, in this case it is not enough. More specifically, some respondents argued that, a considerable number of women in Anavra, despite the fact that the reforms contributed to the improvement of their position, still regard the .reformerashgate.com ww as an ‘outsider’, an attitude held and propagated even today, after theww wretirement of the reformer- by a hard and rather small nucleus of resistance to reforms and the reformer. Therefore, the fact that the latter was connected to the establishment of the association acted as a negative factor to its consolidation and further development. As stated by an old member, the problem is also connected.ashgate.co mto the age of Anavra women: the majority of them are rather old, maintaining parochial attitudes and hence more apt to being influenced by those who resist reforms.11 The third organisation, the cultural association, waned gradually, and despite efforts at revitalisation during the 2000s it survives to date but is virtually inactive, with its members meeting once or twice a year to celebrate New Year’s Eve. .ashgate.com www

www 8 Interviews with old members of the cooperative, 4 June 2014. 9 Interview with the Secretary of the Local Council, 24 April 2014. 10 Interviews with old members of the Women’s Association who wish to remain anonymous,.ashgate.com 5 June 2014. 11 Interviews with old members of the Women’s Association who wish to remain anonymous,www 23 May 2014. © Copyrighted Material

Apart from formal types of civil society, during the reform period, there were m also informal voluntary activities. The reformer’s wife was fully engaged ono a .c te totally voluntary basis in the task of changing the community. A retired professora g of engineering and architecture, she prepared all the relevant studies hfree of s .a charge, while she was part of the reforming process as a whole. The secretaryw of w the community also offered her services beyond the required working hours,w while gradually there were instances of other villagers who got involved min voluntary o activities. There was however, an instance of civil society action joined.c by almost te a all the Anavriots, even those residing in urban centres, which is worthg mentioning. h s Construction of the community car parking caused an objection.a of two villagers w on the grounds that the car parking building would obstruct theirw view of the main w village square and the dispute was taken to court. The Anavriots, mobilised by the m o reformer, collected more than 400 signatures, and gathered.c outside the courthouse te the day of the hearing, in support of the project. The court’sa decision rejected the g h appeal against the construction of the car parking. s .a The following elements offer an outline of the wperiod of reforms in Anavra. w The basic infrastructure necessary for social interactionw as perceived by Giddens,

m was produced. The Anavriots came into contacto with the outside environment, .c while their income increased. Social, cultural, teeducational and sports events were a g organised, and there were three civil society horganisations, all of which according s to Putnam’s theory (Putnam, 1993), would.a be expected to produce social capital. w All this sounds rather promising for the developmentw of civil society. w Nonetheless, the result was paradoxical. On the one hand, there were clear signs m o of the development of civility in the .csense of good conduct in social interaction. te On the other, as regards civility perceiveda as the development of ‘collective self- g h consciousness’, things are not sos clear. There were of course several instances .a of voluntary action, although thesew were instigated by the reformer. This is an w w undeniably important step. Nevertheless, three civil society organisations became m inactive during this period. o .c There is no single answerte to this turn of events. Regarding the cooperative, it is a g unambiguous that the resulth was due to state intervention and the close clientelist s ties between the cooperative.a leaders and the political parties, impacting on w resource distribution wand the loss of social trust within the cooperative. The reason w why the women’s mand the cultural association became inactive should be sought o in the remains of.c surviving parochial attitudes, despite the reforms. Therefore, te a the state and patternsg of resource and power distribution, on the one hand, and a h value system sdeeply embedded in civic and political culture, on the other, acted .a as impedimentsw to civil society development, despite the instances of informal w w voluntary action. One more important observation is that whatever development m took placeo in civil society in Anavra, it was not due to grassroots mobilisation but .c came ratherte as a result of local-government leadership intervention. a g h s .a w w w © Copyrighted Material

Anavra 2011–to Date

Owing to territorial consolidation reform, since January 2011,12 Anavra has been only one part of a larger territorial entity, namely the Municipality of Almyros..ashgate. ww This means that it no longer has a President and Community Council of its own, which in the past would make decisions and manage resources independently. The reformer retired and therefore is not among the Anavra representatives on the Municipal Council of Almyros, which means he cannot influence decisions regarding the village. The Municipality has been neglecting their.as hresponsibilitiesgate.com w towards Anavra since 2011. For instance, it has never wprovidedw cleaning services for the public buildings of Anavra. The same goes for the Community’s Environmental Park, with thousands of visitors annually, while public streets are only occasionally cleaned. Anavra’s 17.5-megawatt model wind farm, with 20 wind generators on the slopes of Mt Othrys, established during the reform period, yields around €80,000 per year, which could meet quite.as haga tfewe.com wof the community’s needs. According to the law, after the 2010 territorialww wreform, 80% of this amount should be allocated by the Municipality to Anavra. However, the Municipal Council of Almyros has refused, so far to abide by the law, allocating the total sum elsewhere instead.13

Moreover, there have been scarcely any.ashg aculturalte.com or educational events in Anavra since 2011. One more reason for bitterw disappointment among Anavriots has been the overdue filing by the Municipality of Almyros of a project proposal, prepared by Anavra Community Council just before local self-government consolidation took place. It was a €10,000,700 project in the context of a European green development project that would have offered the village a great development opportunity. The proposal.ashgate.com was ww rejected due to late submission. 14 It is pointless trying to explainwww the Municipality’s motives and course of action. The important thing is that it is one more instance of the inefficient and indifferent governance, which has resulted in a decrease in political/institutional trust on the part of the Anavriots. On the other hand, it is exactly because of this situation that new instances of civil .societyashgate.com have appeared in Anavra. Two formal structures have emerged: the non-profit ‘Voluntary Organisation of Anavra Magnesia for Environment, Sustainability and Culture’ under the name ‘Anavra Zo’, and a new non-profit organisation called ‘Cultural Association of Worldwide Anavriots’.

.ashgate.com www

12 Law ww w3852/2010 on ‘The new Architecture of Local Self-Government and Regional Administration – Kallikratis Plan’. 13 Field research was concluded in August 2014, while the new Almyros Municipal Authorities took over on 1 September 2014.

.a14shg Theate.com state can play a vital role in civil society enhancement. In fact the 2010 ‘Kallikratis Plan’ for restructuring local government (see footnote 12) provides for local governmentwww support to civil society organisations. © Copyrighted Material

Anavra-Zo was founded in August 201015 by the retired reformer, his wife and m five other members. As explained by the founder, it was established in ordero to .c te ensure maintenance of the Community’s assets, in view of the changes broughta 16 g about by the ‘Kallikratis Plan’. The organisation is the only agency takingh care of s .a the environmental park and the public buildings of Anavra, through dailyw personal w work and by attracting volunteers among the Anavriots, as well as donationsw from outside. It is worth mentioning that people visiting the website of the morganisation, o although they have never been to the village, respond to the call. cfor donations te a in a remarkable way. There are very important offers from businessmen,g and h 17 s simple citizens. An increasing number of scientists outside Anavra.a – for example w lawyers, engineers-environmentalists, physicians – offer their wservices voluntarily. w The association organises cleaning campaigns, involving children and m o teenagers, aiming to imbue them with the spirit of voluntarism..c An increasing te number of residents also offer voluntary work for thea preservation of public g h buildings. Although the response of the Anavriots tos the call of Anavra-Zo for .a voluntary work is not as high as one would have expected,w without the mobilisation w of the residents by the organisation and the donationsw attracted by the good work

m done by its members, a lot of what Anavra haso acquired during the past two .c decades would have been lost. te a g The Cultural Association of Worldwide Anavriots,h which supports cultural and s social events, was established in 2013. According.a to its founders, their motive w was their love for the village and the willw to provide it with a cultural association w like other villages in the wider area, while the majority of the respondents see its m o establishment also as a response to .cthe discontinued social and cultural events te 18 formerly provided during the reformer’sa administration. The important thing g h is that it has been a grassroots initiatives and was immediately embraced by 200 .a members. The leaders of the associationw aspire to uniting the Anavriots towards w w the achievement of collective goals. They have not organised voluntary action m o .c te 15 As stated in their websitea the goals of the organisation are: g h • The protection s(conservation, improvement and rehabilitation) of natural and .a human environmentw of Anavra and the region and not only, in accordance with w the principles ofw sustainability.

• The preservationm and development of culture and cultural heritage (history, o monuments.c and sites, cultural products, institutions and events). te In parallel and in aorder to achieve this, a third main goal is: g h • The s cultivation of attitudes and policy management, and coordination of .a actionsw and protests against options with adverse impact on environment and w culture.w Source: http://www.anavra-zo.gr/en/our-goals.

16 Interviewm with the reformer, 24 April 2014. o 17 Among.c others, an Australian businessman, having read about the work of te Anavra-Zoa visited the village and offered large amounts for the preservation of the g h environmentals park, while two businessmen offered a 20-acre piece of land. .a w 18 Interviews with the President, the Treasurer, and members of the new cultural w Association,w 22–25 April 2014, 4 June 2014. © Copyrighted Material

Copyright material: You are not permitted to transmit this file in any format or media; it may not be resold or reused without prior agreement with Ashgate Publishing and may not be placed on any publicly accessible or commercial servers. Civil Society Development in Microcosm 231 © Copyrighted Material events regarding, for instance, the environmental park or public buildings so far, but they plan to do so in the future.19 The treasurer of the association believes that merging with ‘Anavra-Zo’ would be beneficial for the village, although it would prove a rather difficult task. The association has been active for nearly one.ashg ateyear. ww only, and the Anavriots are optimistic that it will meet their expectations. Their resources are membership fees and revenues from the organised cultural activities. Interestingly, the wide membership of the association has been explained by some respondents by the fact that it was not established by the reformer, but it is ‘their association’. This is a sign that the idea of grassroots voluntary .amobilisationshgate.com w and organisation and the assumption of responsibility for their wcommonw future is gradually maturing in them. At any rate, it is a positive and optimistic step.

Conclusions .ashgate.com w

It has been argued here that concepts of trust and associationalwww involvement are embedded in culture and influenced by the wider sociopolitical environment. Research in Anavra has confirmed this argument. It has revealed the role of government in obstructing or enhancing civil society and the persistence of parochial attitudes towards reform. Important.ashga testeps.com have been made regarding civic development in the village. However,w social trust is still low and was so during the period when vertical trust in the reformer and the institution of local self-government was high. The Anavriots joined in public meetings organised by the reformer, thus participating in the decision-making process regarding common issues; nonetheless, this has not resulted in them learning to trust each other and put aside personal interests for the benefit.ashgate .coofm wthew common good. It is also worth noting that, as widely stated, without wstrongww leadership they cannot develop collective social consciousness.20 This indicates that the two forms of trust and respective capital are not necessarily connected. More specifically, political/institutional trust does not automatically generate social trust, although the reverse may be true.

One more point needs.ashg atote.co mbe made here. On the one hand, nearly 70% of the villagers would like to see the reformer back in office, accepting him as the proper person to lead the community to further development, while on the other, the remaining percentage is being influenced by a small group of anti-reformers, propagating a negative image of the reformer. This latter percentage, in combination with the rather low social trust cutting across the community as a whole, and the fact that the reformer.ashgate.com w wretiredw at a crucial stage of the community’s development is jeopardising the future of sustainability in social, civic and economic terms. www

19 Interviews with the President and the Treasurer of the new cultural Association, 22

April.ash g2014,ate.com 4 June 2014. 20 Interviews with village residents who wish to remain anonymous, 23, 24 April 2014.www © Copyrighted Material

The question arises why as to opinions about the reformer are so important, since m his coming back in office, while not excluded, is not a very likely prospect. Aparto .c te from the fact that the concept of division as such contradicts the idea of collectivea g social consciousness, this specific instance in Anavra suggests the persistenceh of s .a old attitudes and practices and acts as an agent of retrogression. Illustrativew of w this argument is the fact that the old ‘blue’ and ‘green’ coffeehousesw have been replaced by pro and anti-reformer establishments. Owing to the scarcitym of cultural o and educational events after January 2011, the importance of the coffeehouses.c as te a places of sociability and associational life has increased. Therefore,g they should be h s loci for uniting the villagers rather than separating them. .a w The fact that three organisations withered during the wreform period also w suggests that Putnam’s theory that associational membership creates social capital m o is not valid, or at least not in the case of Anavra. His .theoryc is not applicable te here also in another sense: Putnam perceives social capitala and civil society as g h emerging from grassroots. In the case of Anavra it wass a transformational leader .a that set off the process of civic development, regardlessw of the degree of progress w reached to date. w

m Banfield (1958), writing nearly four decadeso before Putnam, underlined the .c importance of persons of ‘moral capacity’ that wouldte act as leaders in the backward a g society of Montegrano and would ‘inspire moraleh in organisations’ (Banfield, 1958, s p. 167). He also acknowledged the difficulty.a in changing long established attitudes w even when the circumstances that producedw them no longer exist, referring to the w phenomenon as ‘cultural lag’ (Banfield, 1958, p. 167). This explains why, despite m o the growth of vertical trust in Anavra. cduring the reform period, social trust was – te and remains – rather low. Despite thea revolutionary changes, parochial attitudes g h persist to a certain degree becauses ‘they have a life of their own’. .a In addition, the wider socio-politicalw environment has not improved. Political w w trust has deteriorated lately, owing to the economic crisis and the discredit brought m upon the political system, ando this is one instance of the economic crisis affecting .c indirectly civil society development.te Also, at the local level, the Municipal a g authorities of Almyros haveh further contributed to the loss of vertical trust. In this s environment of insecurity.a it is easy to abide by old notions of individual interest w and how it is better served,w as well as old mentalities of distrust and suspicion at w the social level. Thism is a complex phenomenon with multiple interpretations. o One reason why.c civic development is below expectations can be sought in te a the fact that theg village is now a prosperous community, only slightly affected h by the economics crisis, if at all. At least this is an explanation offered by several .a respondentsw and it would mean that affluence contributes to social and political w w indifference. Such an explanation contradicts Newton’s (2001) approach discussed m above, accordingo to which the degree of associational involvement is higher in .c well-offte strata of society, as a result of higher levels of trust. It would also disagree a g withh similar research findings mentioned by Giddens (Hall, 1997 in Giddens, s .a 1998,w p. 82). w w © Copyrighted Material

On the other hand, owing to the strong vertical trust developed in the reformer during his term in office, citizens were convinced that he would provide for services, without them being obliged to take initiatives. Nonetheless, the fact that he delivered was only one – positive – side of the same issue. The.as hothergate. ww side is related to the fact that it was precisely trust in community authorities that hampered the residents from initiating ideas and actions from below and enhancing civil society involvement. Similar findings have been reported in the context of a research study in Sweden, where it was found that a strong vertical trust in municipal authorities can hold back entrepreneurial initiatives .afromshgate.co moriginating w from civil society actors (Tillberg et al., 2003 in Basile and Cecci,ww 2005, p. 20). Several respondents placed their hopes on the necessity resulting from developments in EU policies. More specifically, it was pointed out that the repercussions of associational inactivity will soon be obvious, as the new policy of the EU for livestock breeding jeopardises the economic sustainability of the village. Anavra is in need not only of strong leadership.ashgate.co mcapable w of lobbying and negotiating, but also of collective entrepreneurialwww initiatives that will keep economic sustainability alive.21 It is hoped that necessity will remove barriers of distrust and parochial mentality and will motivate collective action. There is also a strong conviction especially among the young Anavriots studying.ashgate.com or working in urban centres, that contact and the establishment of ties wwith the external environment would greatly contribute to departure from traditional ways of thinking and acting.22 This, nevertheless, has proven a difficult task up to now. A characteristic example is the case of a voluntary group of managers who recently offered to visit Anavra and transmit their knowledge with a view to encouraging entrepreneurial initiatives. The village would have to provide.ashg aonlyte.com w wfor board and lodging, as the seminar would be free of charge. Unfortunately,www there was no interest expressed on the part of the community. Again, deeply rooted mentalities ‘have a life of their own’. The newly elected mayor of Almyros, who assumed office in September 2014, is also convinced that the society of Anavra must be exposed to the external world to a much greater.a sdegreehgate.com than has been the case until now. He believes that opportunities should be offered for the construction of accommodation facilities in the village. This, which in turn would attract visitors to stay at least overnight when visiting the environmental park, would boost tourism and subsequently expose the Anavriots to the external world for a longer time.23 However, this prospect is rather poor, owing, among other things to the economic crisis which, according to respondents, .doesashgate. conotm ww wencourage investment in this sector of the economy in the

www

21 Interviews with old members of the Agricultural and Livestock Cooperative who wish to remain anonymous, 4–6 June 2014.

.a22shg Interviewsate.com with young Anavriots studying or working in urban centres, but keeping close contacts with the village, 11–13 June 2014. www 23 Interview with the new Mayor of Almyros, 12 June 2014. © Copyrighted Material

© 2015 From Jennifer Clarke, Asteris Huliaras and Dimitri A. Sotiropoulos (eds), Austerity and the Third Sector in Greece: Civil Society at the European Frontline, published by Ashgate Publishing. See: http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781472452689 234 Austerity and the Third Sector in Greece © Copyrighted Material village. This is another instance of the economic crisis influencing civil society m development in a negative way in Anavra. o .c te However, the turning point in this progress was not 2008, when the a crisis g began, but 2011, when the law introducing the ‘Kallikratis Plan’ cameh into s .a force. As already discussed, it was the transfer of resource managementw to the w Municipality of Almyros that caused neglect of the ‘physical public wspace’ and the lack of cultural and educational events promoting sociability. Onm the other o hand, it was exactly this negative turn that led to the creation of two.c civil society te a organisations, which came as a response to the need to maintaing the ‘physical h s public space’ and social interaction events. .a w There is no doubt that Anavra has made considerable progressw since the early w 1990s, but as pointed out before, there remains a lot to be done. Pigg, discussing m o Wilkinson’s (1991) approach to community development.c concludes that it ‘is a te process of building the capacity of community residentsa to create, maintain, and g h enhance generalized structures’ (Pigg, 1999, p. 199). s .a This process, often hampered by political and weconomic developments and w a value system deeply rooted in culture, must notw be terminated. Despite these

m negative factors, there are signs that the majorityo of the people of Anavra are .c determined to maintain and even enhance whatte has been achieved so far. Anavra- a g Zo is struggling to maintain the infrastructureh and promote voluntarism despite s meager resources. On the other hand, the new.a cultural organisation is an instance w of grassroots mobilisation. Both cases windicate that the ideas of voluntarism w and collective social consciousness and action are slowly growing among the m o Anavriots. As pointed out by a member.c of the new cultural organisation, ‘time 24 te is important’. Also, very encouraginga is the fact that young Anavriots, after g h concluding their studies in urban scentres, return to the village. It is among them .a that collective social consciousnessw and grassroots mobilisation are likely to build w w up with a view to community development. m As this chapter has demonstrated,o the dynamics of local civil society .c development are closely tetied to the social, political and economic context, a g although the nature of theseh relationships is complex. Local case studies, such s as the present contribution,.a can help further understanding of these dynamics. It w is to be hoped that governmentw at all levels will offer the necessary assistance to w 25 promote voluntarismm and community action in Anavra village, a requirement laid o down in the Budapest.c Declaration, not only because the ‘miracle’ of the village’s te a development mustg remain alive, but also because it can continue serve as an h informative examples of rural community development. .a w w w

m o .c te a g h s .a w 24 Interview with the Treasurer of the new Cultural Association. 4 June 2014. w w 25 See footnotes 12 and 14. © Copyrighted Material

References

Angemann, A. and Sittermann, B., 2010. Volunteering in the Member States of the European Union – Evaluation and Summary of Current Studies. Working.ashgate. ww Paper no. 5 [pdf] Observatory for Sociopolitical Developments in Europe. Available at: [Accessed 5 April 2014]. Banfield, E. and Banfield, L.F., 1958. The Moral Basis of a Backward Society. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

Basile E. and Cecchi C., 2005. Building social capital in rural.ashgat e.careas:om w Does public action help. In: The Government of Queenslandww and the United Nations Engaging Communities, International Conference. Brisbane, 14–17 August 2005. [pdf] Available at: [Accessed 20 March 2014]. Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital. In: J. Richardson, ed. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New. aYork:shgate.com Greenwood w Press.

IACD/CEBSD/HACD, 2004. The Budapest Declaration.www Building European Civil Society Through Community Development. [pdf] IACD/CEBSD/HACD Available at: [Accessed 5 August 2014]. Centre for Civil Society (CCS), 2009. What is Civil Society? [online] Centre

for Civil Society. Available at: ..ashgate.com [Accessed 3 April 2014]. w Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Suppl.), S95–S120. Collins, N. and Louloudis, L., 1995. Protecting the protected: The Greek agricultural policy network. Journal of European Public Policy, 2(1), pp. 95–114. Cowan, B., 2005. The Social Life.ashga teof.com Coffee.ww The Emergence of the British

Coffeehouse. [e-book] Newwww Haven and London: Yale University Press. Available at: [Accessed 16 April 2014]. Diamandouros, N., 1994. Cultural Dualism and Political Change in Post- authoritarian Greece. Working Paper, Madrid: Instituto Juan March de Estudios

e Investigaciones. .ashgate.com Dionne, E.J., 1997. Why Civil Society? Why Now? [online] BROOKINGS. Available at: [Accessed 11 May 2014]. Etzioni, A. 1973. The third sector and domestic missions. Public Administration Review, 33(4), pp. 314–23. Evers, A. and Laville, J.L. 2004. Social services by social enterprises: On the possible contributions.ashgate.com www of hybrid organisations and civil society. In: A. Evers and J.L. Laville, eds. 2004. The Third Sector in Europe. Cheltenham/Northampton: www Edward Elgar Publishing. Fairholm, G.W. 1994. Leadership and the Culture of Trust. Westport: Praeger Publishers. Forss, K. et al., 2013. A Study of Monitoring and Evaluation in Six Norwegian .ashgate.com Civil Society Organisations. Report 7/2012. [pdf] Norwegian Agency www © Copyrighted Material

for Development Cooperation (Norad). Available at: [Accessed 5 May 2014]. o .c te Fukuyama, F., 2013. Democracy and the Quality of the State. Journala of g Democracy, 24(4), pp. 5–16. h s .a GHK, 2010. Study on Volunteering in the European Union – Countryw Report w Greece. [pdf] The European Commission (Directorate-General forw Education

and Culture). Available at: [Accessedm 10 o April 2014]. .c te a Giddens, A., 1998. The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy.g Cambridge: h s Polity Press. .a w Haché, A., 2011. Under the Radar: The Contribution of Civilw Society and Third w Sector Organisations to Inclusion. [pdf] European Commission, Joint Research m o Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies..c Available at: [Accessed 2 May 2014]. a g h Harris, J. 2001. Social Capital and the Constructions of Civil Society in Rural .a Areas. [pdf] The International Relations and Securityw Network. Available at: w [Accessed 5 May w1014].

m Henderson, P. and Vercseg, I., 2010. Communityo Development and Civil Society. .c Making Connection in the European Context.te Bristol: The Policy Press. a g Hong, G. and Sporleder, T.L., n.d. Social Capitalh in Agricultural Cooperatives: s Application and Measurement. [pdf].a Available at: [Accessed 5 May 2014]. w w Lorentzen, H., 2010. Sector labels. In: R. Taylor, ed. 2010. Third Sector Research. m o New York, Dortrecht, Heidelberg,.c London: Springer. te Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland,a 2013. Complementarity in Finland’s g h Development Policy and Co-operation.s A Case Study on Complementarity in .a the NGO Instruments. Evaluationw Report 3. [pdf] Available at: [Accessed 5 May 2014]. m Mouritsen, P., 2003. What’s othe civil in civil society? Robert Putnam, Italy and the .c republican tradition. Politicalte Studies, 51, pp. 650–68. a g Nasioulas, I., 2012. Socialh cooperatives in Greece. Introducing new forms of social s economy and entrepreneurship..a International Review of Social Research, 2(2), w pp. 141–61. w w

Newton, K., 2001. mTrust, social capital, civil society, and democracy. International o Political Science.c Review, 22(2), pp. 201–14. te a Organisation forg Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2012. h Partnerings with Civil Society. 12 Lessons from DAC Peer Review. [pdf] .a Availablew at: [Accessed 3 May 2014]. w w Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2013. Civil m Societyo Empowerment. [pdf] Available at: .c [Accessedte 5 May 2014]. a g Ostrom,h E., 1990. Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for s .a w Collective Action. New York: Cambridge University Press. w w © Copyrighted Material

Papoudakis, F., 2001. The Impact of Structural Funds Regulations on Regional Policy Process in Greece. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The University of Edinburgh. Photiadis, J.D., 1965. The position of the coffee house in the social structure.a sofhgat ethe. ww Greek village. Sociologia Ruralis, 5(1), pp. 45–56. Pietrzyk, I.D., 2001. Civil Society – Conceptual History from Hobbes to Marx. [pdf] Marie Curie Working Papers No 1, Department of International Politics, University of Wales. Available at: . [Accessed

12 April 2014] .ashgate.com w Pigg, E.K., 1999. Community leadership and community theory:ww A practical synthesis. Journal of the Community Development Society, 30(2), pp. 196–212. Polis, A. 1997. Modernity, civil society and the papandreou legacy. Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, 23(1), pp. 59–82. Portes, A., 1998. Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, pp. 1–24. .ashgate.com w

Putnam, R.D., 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civicwww Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Salamon, L.M., 1996. Defining the Nonprofit Sector: The United States. John Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project.[pdf] Working Paper. Institute

for Policy Studies – Center for Civil Society.ashga teStudies,.com John Hopkins University. Available at: .w [Accessed 23 March 2014]. Seligman, A.B., 1992. The Idea of Civil Society. New York, Oxford: Free Press, Maxwell Macmillan International. Shils, E., 1991. The virtue of civil society. Government and Opposition, 26(1), pp. 3–20. Sotiropoulos, D.A., 2004. Formal.a sWeaknesshgate.com ww and Informal Strength: Civil Society

in Contemporary Greece. ww[pdf]w Discussion Paper No 16, The Hellenic Observatory, The European Institute, The London School of Economics. Available at: [Accessed 3 April 2014]. Sotiropoulos, D.A. and Karamagioli, E., 2006. Greek Civil Society: The Long

Road to Maturity. (2005).ashgate.c o[pdf]m Report for the Case of Greece. CIVICUS Civil Society Index Shortened Assessment Tool. Available at: . [Accessed 3 April 2014]. Staveren, I. and Webbink, E., 2012. Civil Society, Aid, and Development: A Cross-country Analysis. IOB Study No 368, [pdf] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. Available at: [Accessed 5 May 2014]..ashgate.com www Tarrow, S., 1996. Making social science work across space and time: A critical www reflection on Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. The American Political Science Review, 90(2), pp. 389–97. Therborn, G. 1995. European Modernity and Beyond: The Trajectory of European Societies 1945–2000. New Delhi: Sage Publications. .ashgate.com Tocqueville, A. 1945 [1840]. Democracy in America. Vol. 2. New York: www Vintage Books. © Copyrighted Material

World Bank, 2010. Civil Society – Background. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 May 2014]. o .c te Zimmer, A. and Freise, M., 2008. Bringing society back in: Civil society, asocial g capital, and third sector. In: W.A. Maloney and J. van Deth eds, 2008.h Civil s .a Society and Governance in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 19–42.w w w

m o .c te a g h s .a w w w