marsaed1Marsa Makris has studied theatre directing and acting at the Stella Adler Conservatory, in New York. She subsequently pursued filmmaking studies at the University of California Los Angeles.

Her filmography includes short fiction films “A minor parallax” (1986), which won the second prize at the Drama short film festival, “Against the wall” (2003), which won best prize for original soundtrack at the Drama short film festival, and “Dry cleaning” (2005). Makris is mostly known for her short fiction, "To Tameno"/ “Offered boy” (2002), about a young monk discovering the real world, which was officially selected for the 56th Cannes film festival-2003, as well as at the International film festivals of Ismailia, Tehran, Alpe Adria Cinemay, Bilbao, Fajr, while it was also the Greek Film Centre’s entry for the European Academy Awards-Felix.

Offered boy ed

"To tameno"/ “Offered boy” (2002)

Her first feature film, “Ierosyloi” (Sacrilege), co-produced by the Greek Film Centre & ERT (Greek National Broadcaster), has just been completed. In "Ierosyloi"/ “Sacrilege”, the two protagonists, a beautiful woman (played by Loukia Michalopoulou) and a sick bed-ridden man (played by musician and performer Blaine Reininger), share their common life, caged in a large and decaying labyrinthine penthouse, cut off from a crazy and threatening surrounding world that they spy upon through the window's grilles and slots. Together they fall into a world between fantasy, history and reality. Fear, anger, illusion, ridiculousness and wonder interchange constantly in a frantic psychological twist of obsessive faith and the need of salvation. They are “The Beauty and the Beast”, but with the absence of Love. The third protagonist is a Byzantine icon of St-George, which was stolen by the male protagonist and hidden in a secret spot inside the apartment.

Interviewed by Greek News Agenda* Makris describes the difficult journey of filming "Ierosyloi"/ “Sacrilege”. She notes that confined characters provide both the filmmaker and the viewer with a variety of opportunities to explore all kinds of extremities and aspects of human existence. Asked how she works with the banality of objects and banality in general, she underlines that the placement of banality in a wider context helps one to contemplate the priorities and necessities in life. Makris also stresses that a cardinal point in her work is the sense of ambivalence, both in life and art, because “in the end, it is the question, the enigma that feeds imagination”.

rainiger woman

Loukia Michalopoulou, Blaine Reininger, "Ierosyloi"/ "Sacrilege" (2017)

Self confinement and its repercussions on the state of mind is a recurring theme in cinema. How does it function in your film?

I guess the attraction to the confined-cornered, as I prefer to see them, characters, provides both the filmmaker and the viewer with a variety of opportunities to explore all kinds of extremities. It may have to do with the exploration of those underlying aspects of human existence that have always been present throughout time, aspects which we prefer to regard as primitive in our anxiety to disassociate ourselves from them.

Fear, obsession, oppression, fixation, delusion and a perpetual search for love, justice, catharsis and liberation are the recurrent themes in the crossings from darkness to light and vice versa, where we have to dig in, if we want to make any sense of it all. In the case of "Ierosyloi"/ “Sacrilege”, it is the paranoiac nature of all characters involved in the narrative, through their relation to faith, history, love, family ties and even public space that are in a sense left deserted in the empty shell of a life, full of objects and symbols that try desperately to articulate a coherent story. Pairs and opposites, at the same time eating their guts.

The apartment, the universe of the characters is a jumble of banal and rococo artefacts in a way that becomes familiar to the viewer. How do you work on banality?

There is only one way, Comedy... Self sarcasm also helps. There is a representation of quite some bits and pieces of our Greek history, arrangements of contemporary urban abandonment, as well as 'cute' female elements creating an interesting chaos in the film setting. I believe that the placement of banalities into a larger context creates a canvas worth experiencing. In any way, I think it makes you wonder about the necessities and priorities in life.

scary women

Ersi Malikenzou, Olga Damanis, "Ierosyloi"/ "Sacrilege" (2017)

What is the influence of the Byzantine iconography in your films? How does the intertextuality of visual arts manifest in "Ierosyloi"/ “Sacrilege”?

For better or worse, Byzantine imagery is a big part of who I am. Besides aesthetics, this influence also affects the way I “sketch” my characters: as almost two dimensional characters, without the emotional burden (or mess) of contemporary western narration. I try to avoid manipulating viewer feelings and I find this a very Greek way to go.

In my short film “To tameno" / "Offered boy”, I believe that we have also achieved a deep relevance to iconography. However, in this film I tried to incorporate a sense of Mediterranean rococo-baroque and a vivid palette of electric colours in the imagery, that I think work well in underlining the delirium of the main female character and the constant fluctuation from dream and time confusion to a so-called reality. Even though part of the plot is the "rescue" of an icon of St George, it is to the very end of the film that clearer Byzantine aesthetic elements emerge again.


Loukia Michalopoulou, "Ierosyloi"/ "Sacrilege" (2017)

As in Offered Boy, religion, ranging from faith to fixation and delusion, is a central element of the plot. Would you like to elaborate?

There is a great paradox in our relation with God. Our nature contradicts the basic principle of faith and the teachings of organized religions, loving and respecting God’s greatest manifestation, Life. I find it fascinating to plunge into the muddy waters of ambivalence. We are complicated beings and as far as telling a story about it, the challenge for me is to arrange parts of this sort of inherent madness, as an allegory, a metaphor, whatever...

Let's say it is the big framework, where the drama of my characters is not the sacrilege against a religious artifact or ceremonial purity, but rather our crippling inability to selfless love and offering to each other. It's never boring; it may be right, it may be wrong. In the end, it is the question, the enigma that feeds the imagination.

woman boy

"Ierosyloi"/ "Sacrilege" (2017)

Your film was supported by the Greek Film Centre and the National TV Broadcaster ERT. Based on your experience, what was the effect of the economic crisis on Greek Film production?

I am thankful for their support. However, we have actually received the minimum possible. I am reluctant to say how much that was. There was also the time when the National broadcaster was shut down by our benevolent leaders of the time.

The initial approval from the Greek film Centre, which is the one major pillar of financial support for cinema in Greece, was announced while the second pillar (ERT) operated in a zombie like state. Then we had to wait again... It was an unforgettable nightmare. Of course that changed in the summer of 2016, when ERT once more provided invaluable and necessary support to many productions including ours, allowing us to move on.


Loukia Michalopoulou and Marsa Makris on the set of "Ierosyloi"/ "Sacrilege"

Apart from the aforementioned support from the Greek Film Centre and ERT, it was through the miraculous and crucial gesture that was offered by three major companies from abroad that provided us with top of the line equipment, which was necessary to maintain an aesthetic standard. However, all that would not have been enough if it wasn't for the extra support provided by some younger friends in the filmmaking industry of Greece and without of course the collaboration of other artists that added their personal creative forces for the realization of my personal vision. Anyway, the truth of the matter is that Greek Film production is a painful story and was long before the recent crisis of the country.


SACRILEGE trailer from Authorwave on Vimeo.

Ιerosyloi/Sacrilege, 2017, 89'

Dir. Marsa Makris

Scr. M. Makris &  Vangelis Hatziyannidis

Ed. Chronis Theocharis

Mus. Nikos Xydakis

DoP. Dimitris Theodoropoulos

Pr. Greek Film Centre, ERT SA, with the support of Arri-Rental,Thales-Angénieux, Luma-Tech, Authorwave

With: Loukia Michalopoulou, Blaine L. Reininger, Ersi Malikenzou, Yorgos Kontoyannis, et al.

* Interview by Florentia Kiortsi

Read also: Greek Cinema 2017: New and Upcoming Films


santorinios6Nectarios Santorinios, Deputy Minister of Maritime Industry & Island Policy and MP for the Dodecanese with SYRIZA, spoke to Greek News Agenda* on the need for an insularity clause at the national and EU level to ensure the equitable development of island regions, the government's effort to modernize the current institutional framework in order to tackle issues such as the islands' connection to the mainland, transport, accessibility to public services, and supply of goods. Santorinios further mentioned several government projects such as the Special Development Plan for North & South Aegean that will finance major infrastucture projects, or the target to achieve water autonomy for all islands by the summer of 2018.

Historian Ruggiero Romano and other thinkers, such as Spyros Asdrachas and Angelos Elefantis, viewed the Aegean archipelago as a dipersed city.  Insularity is a salient morphological feature of Greece. What are its specific characteristics in Greece?

The blend of characteristics that make up insularity, a concept sometimes grueling, other times redeeming, are essentially small size, long distance from places of supply of goods, seasonality in social and economic life and vulnerability to environmental challenges.

At times when insularity is experienced as redemption, the islands become pioneers of extroversion in trade and interaction with other cultures. During tougher times, insularity is experienced as isolation from current developments, like for example from the digital era.

The view of the Aegean as a kind metapolis, the promise of a different kind of city, is based on island features, such as their encirclement by the sea, the arid, dry landscape, the clarity of the sky and the seasonality of their visitors. We must keep in mind though that a major characteristic of urban centers is that they function as melting pots, merging various civilizations together. In the Aegean islands, however, one can find different cultural elements like costumes, dances, products and folk speech that have been preserved in time, precisely because of the lack of connections with the mainland or the neighboring islands.

Stratos Kalafatis photography project "Archipelago" was originally commissioned for the Greek participation at the 10th Edition of the International Architecture Exhibition in Venice 2006 ("The Dispersed Urbanity of the Aegean Archipelago")

What are the main challenges insular countries like Greece have to face? How have are they been dealt with so far from a policy point of view?

The challenge all island regions face is depopulation. The same applies to Greece, of course. Especially in times of economic recession, this trend is widening. Fortunately, we are essentially talking about islanders, people who have a particular emotional connection to their homeland, even though they travel more often than most of us; however, we cannot rely on this connection to curb the phenomenon of depopulation.

What we have to do is respect it practice the islanders΄ longstanding demand for equal social treatment: this is both a challenge and a mission for the ministry of Maritime Affairs and Island Policy. The islanders’ particular living conditions require special considerations from the part of the state. That is why we are talking about an insularity clause that would ensure that any law of the Greek state or the EU must be adjusted so that it can be applicable to island life.

What is the European dimension of the issue of insularity? EU cohesion policies are designed for land territories and Greece is a country with 277 inhabited islands. How can island regions be developed on an equal footing with land regions?

In the Treaty of Lisbon, the objective of strengthening economic and social cohesion is described as:  “The EU shall aim at reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions.  Among the regions concerned, particular attention shall be paid to rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition, and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions.”


Postcard: The port of Hermoupolis on the island of Syros

Therefore, cohesion policies based on modern tools and indicators, such as the human development index, the social welfare index and the regional competitiveness index are key for the equitable development of island regions.

Another defining factor for linking the Greek islands to the European commerce flow are trans-European networks.  In Article 170 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2007) it is mentioned that, “the Union shall contribute to the establishment and development of trans-European networks in the areas of transport, telecommunications and energy infrastructures.”

Furthermore, in article ΙΙΙ-144 of the Draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution For Europe (2003) it was mentioned that “Within the framework of a system of open and competitive markets, action by the Union shall aim at promoting the interconnection and interoperability of national networks as well as access to such networks. It shall take account in particular of the need to link islands, landlocked and peripheral regions with the central regions of the Union.”

One big concern for smaller islands is infrequently serviced lines during off-season periods. What are the solutions you propose?

At present, through state subsidized lines, the so-called "nonprofit” lines, we ensure - although at a great cost- that each island will have a stable, and as much as possible frequent connection to the major ports of the country.

However, this policy is under review and the institutional framework is being modernized along the following axes: Improving accessibility through better interconnection with the mainland, optimizing the design of the coastal routes in order to reduce the cost of nonprofit lines, striking a better balance between passenger and freight traffic, strengthening commercial and tourist activity and promoting combined transport.

The Valetta Declaration, adopted this March, mentions “equal growth for islands and insular regions.” What are Greece’s goals as far as insular policy in the EU after the Maltese Presidency?

The objective remains to create a common framework for island policy at the European level, in accordance to Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union for “reducing disparities between the levels of development of the least favoured regions” such as islands, as that will lead to the adoption a separate package of actions to tackle the issue of insularity.

Fields that call for direct developmental interventions are education, health, administration, entrepreneurship, basic infrastructure and the transport of islanders.

What are your plans and priorities for this year?

For the current period, the Government's plan is focused on promoting economic and development opportunities for the islands. More specifically:

The Special Development Plan for North & South Aegean, with an initial budget of 50 million by the National Investments Programme, is going to finance major infrastructure projects for the islands.

insul7The Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Islands Policy collaborated with the Ministries of Development, Infrastructure and Home Affairs, to create a dedicated unit that will support the municipalities of small islands in designing and completing infrastructure projects using the NSRF, the National Investments Programme and other funds.

On the initiative of the Ministry of Digital Policy, Telecommunications and Information, and in collaboration with the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Islands Policy, a program to improve public administration in the islands and make islanders’ access to public services easier is being implemented.

For a better balance in the supply of goods, a collaboration has been launched with the University of the Aegean to prepare a study which will set down ways to reduce the cost of transporting people and goods to and from the islands.

The Ministry of Energy, in cooperation with Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Islands Policy has introduced the innovative concept of “energy communities” in a draft bill currently under consultation. We aim to promote such projects so that islands can become energy self-sufficient.

However, the most important and urgent task is achieving water autonomy for the arid islands. By the summer of 2018 we plan to have a desalination plant on each island, providing sufficient drinking water for the needs of the island so that water tank become a thing and local communities start examining more advanced forms of water supply for the future.

*Interview by Ioulia Livaditi & Nikolas Nenedakis

reg78 The top international sailing event in Greece, the Aegean Regatta is organised by the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Island Policy

waldenxen2Sotiris Walldén studied economics in Sweden and France and has a Ph.D. from the University of Athens. From 1996 to 2014 he was an official at the European Commission, mostly dealing with enlargement. He has also served, inter alia, as secretary-general at the Ministry of National Economy, as counsellor to the foreign minister and as a visiting professor at the Panteion University, Athens. Today, he teaches a post-graduate course at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. He is the author of a large number of books and articles, mostly on the Balkans, EU enlargement and Greek foreign and domestic policy issues. Active in the anti-dictatorship resistance (1967-1974), he has since militated in parties and organisations of the Greek Left.

Sotiris Walldén spoke with Greek News Agenda* on the Greek debt issue, austerity policies, the SYRIZA government agenda, EU enlargement fatigue, and the current crisis of the European project:

You have recently noted that the Greek case is the most vivid expression of a course of Europe that is untenable and that the rise of a radical left party (Syriza), that remains pro-European, is probably the best of possible options for the country. Can you tell us more?

The Greek crisis was the result of bad economic management during the 2004-2010 period, but has its roots in long-standing structural problems of theeconomy and society. However, the crisis was precipitated and aggravated by external factors: the world financial crisis and deficiencies in the construction and management of the Eurozone.

Equally importantly, the medicine administered by the country’s lenders as of 2010 in the form of unprecedented harsh austerity had disastrous effects on the economy, the social tissue and on the democratic political system. The measures imposed were inspired by the neo-liberal philosophy and national egoisms prevailing in Europe. These have had negative effects, albeit less acute than in Greece, practically throughout the continent: high unemployment, pressure on incomes, increasing inequalities and insecurity as well as curtailment of the welfare state.

Unavoidably, the above mentioned policies generate reactions, and these have as a rule been hijacked by anti-European, xenophobic, extreme right forces. In the case of Greece, while we have witnessed the rise of a thuggish quasi-Nazi party, protests have mostly turned towards a pro-European radical left which is now in power. This, in my view, should be cause of relief, and not only for supporters of the left.

The present government is of course itself a product of the crisis: it came to power riding on a populist wave, it lacks experience, it carries remnants of mentalities from the time it was a small leftist group, and it has committed a number of mistakes, including the grave one of miscalculating the power of the German conservative establishment. It has an awkward populist right partner in government. And its ambitions are crushed under the programmes imposed by the lenders. On the other hand, SYRIZA is firmly pro-European and has a progressive social agenda, similar to the one of European social-democracy. Its people have not been corrupted by decades of power.

The alternative to the present government would be a coalition of the two parties that ruled the country, in alteration or together, during the last forty years; parties that bear the bulk of the responsibility for leading us to catastrophe. Their cadres are identified with corruption, clientelism and arrogance. The main opposition party, conservative New Democracy, is an incoherent mixture of neo-liberals and far-right populists. Their credibility for bringing the country back to a sustainable economic and political path is close to zero. And, of course, the New Democracy agenda is no choice for progressive citizens.

It is in this sense that I do believe that SYRIZA is the best of existing alternatives. Having said this, I also believe that the present government is far from satisfactory. To a large extent this is due to the imposed policies, but time for the government is running out and there is no room for complacency. Among other things, I think it should aim at disentangling from its unseemly junior partner and associate with forces of the centre-left.


Regarding the debt issue and IMF’s stance, you have referred to the risk of a ‘compromise’ with Berlin at the expense of Greece. Does current Greece's strategy to regain access to international bond markets create room for optimism regarding end of memoranda?

A compromise at the expense of Greece was already reached. This was the essence of the deal by which the IMF agreed in principle to participate in the third programme, once Athens accepted to adopt what amounts to further austerity measures. The Fund’s attitude is an extreme case of hypocrisy and opportunistic horse trading with Germany. It started out by declaring the Berlin line of demanding from Greece exorbitant primary surpluses ad infinitum as unrealistic. Greece cannot sustain further austerity, it rightly pointed out. Then it settled for a deal that does just that, extends and increases austerity. Clearly, a deal with Mr.Schäuble, be it wholly at the latter’s terms, was assessed as more important than consistency, let alone care for the Greek people.

Regaining access to international bond markets will by definition facilitate the country’s exit from the quasi-colonial state under the memoranda. In this sense the government’s strategy to that end –and the first successful step that was recently made- is welcome. Nonetheless, a so-called “return to normality” under the present quasi-permanent straitjacket of austerity, is highly fragile and probably unsustainable in the medium term. As I see it, only a substantial lightening of the country’s debt burden would allow a recovery based on solid economic, social and political foundations.

It has been argued, as far as policy implementation is concerned, that, under the current circumstances, Syriza cannot put forward even a moderate social democratic agenda (regarding e.g, welfare state policies) and that unavoidably its governance will further enhance and legitimize austerity policies and neoliberalism. What is your view?

I am afraid I will have to agree that a social-democratic agenda, however moderate (as long as we do not mean a disguised neo-liberal one), can hardly be implemented under the draconian measures imposed on Greece by its lenders. Indeed, I suspect that Berlin also has a party-political aim in mind in its strategy towards our country. This is one of the reasons why the main battlefield for a policy change has to be at the European level.

Does this mean that SYRIZA has no margin to implement a progressive policy? Well, to a certain extent, yes. Of course, SYRIZA does not need to “legitimise” austerity and neoliberalism, as long as it makes clear the circumstances under which it has no choice but to comply and provided it avoids triumphalism when it succeeds in implementing the diktats. More importantly, there are quite a few areas and policies where a government of the Left could and should make a difference: some aspects of education and health system reform, cleaning the media landscape, fighting corruption, foreign policy (notably vis-à-vis the Cyprus issue and Macedonia), civil rights including Church-State relations, etc. Unfortunately, the government’s record in these areas is at best mixed. True, SYRIZA faces many constraints: the pressure from the economic policies it has to implement, its partner in government, its own inexperience. Nevertheless, it is progress in such areas that will largely decide whether or not the SYRIZA experiment, quite unique in Europe, will be a success –against all odds.

The abduction of Europa2

You have noted that undeniable negative effects of the EU enlargement “are rather the result of its instrumentalisation by the prevailing extreme neoliberal response to globalization”. What exactly has happened with the EU’s enlargement agenda during the last decade?

An inclusive European project was part of the vision of its founders. The EU “belongs” to all the democratic European countries and peoples that wish to be part of it, not to some selected few. Hence, I believe the 2004/2007 enlargement had to be done. So has the completion of this process with the Balkans. Excluding countries from the European process is a dangerous open-ended venture and we Greeks strongly oppose the “Europe of the fittest” concept which was behind the aborted 2015 Schäuble plan for Grexit.

On the other hand, we have to acknowledge the fact that a majority of Europeans have turned against enlargement, past and future. Part of this opposition reflects ethnic prejudice, isolationism and xenophobia, currents that merge with anti-migrant opinion throughout Europe. These should be resolutely combatted.

Nonetheless, just as Euroscepticism, “enlargement fatigue” has its roots also in real problems. People rightly realise that enlargement was used to deepen the neo-liberal model of governance. Lower wages and taxation of capital and the rich, less labour market regulation, weaker trade unions in the new member states were all used to put pressure on the European social model. Integration brought benefits to large firms, but contributed to lower incomes, more unemployment and insecurity, less social protection for many workers in the incumbent member states.

Defending social and regional cohesion in the context of enlargement was simply not part of the EU enlargement agenda. On the contrary, negative effects were often labelled advantages, in line with neo-liberal concepts on competitiveness. As a result, a growing number of Europeans have come to see enlargement as the Trojan horse of globalisation, a globalisation which they have experienced mostly in its negative dimension.

Then there is the issue of democracy. Its derailment in Hungary and Poland as well as institutional dysfunctions in Bulgaria and Romania are evidence that the quality of these countries’ democracy should have been scrutinised more closely before they were admitted into the EU. Also, authoritarian trends in some Western Balkan countries (not to mention Turkey) would definitely have to be arrested before these countries join.

On the other hand, anti-democratic currents, populism and xenophobia are not the privilege of “new” member states or candidates. These are Europe-wide and global trends, the deeper causes of which are related to global developments, but also to the specific way Europe and the West have been addressing modern challenges. It would be grossly unfair to attribute these problems exclusively to the enlargement countries.

Also, with respect to the Western Balkans and Turkey, the EU has a part of the responsibility for their democratic backsliding. All too often, the EU has recourse to double language, pretending the European course of candidates solely depends on their fulfilment of democratic criteria, while in reality other, less noble, reasons are behind “enlargement fatigue”.

Be it as it is, the EU’s enlargement agenda is in my view stuck. Its narrative is artificially kept alive for geopolitical reasons, a largely irrational anti-Russia crusade and concern over the refugee waves. However, further enlargement seems unlikely. This is unfortunate with respect to the remaining countries in the Balkans, but a revival of the policy can only be conceived within the framework of broader policy changes in the EU, changes that should undermine Euroscepticism.

Would you like to comment on the “potential future state of the EU” as presented in the European Commission’s five scenarios?  

In recent decades the policy of major member states has been to deprive the Commission of any leading role. This is a key symptom of the deepening crisis of the European project. The Juncker Commission has attempted to regain some of the territory lost by its predecessors, but was repeatedly reminded of its limited relevance. The ‘five scenario’ paper simply reflects this sad state of affairs; the Commission refrains from taking a position on the future of Europe and merely presents possible options to the member states.

In my view the method of focusing the debate on options along a unidimensional axis of “more or less Europe” is deeply flawed. Faced with the present widespread Euroscepticism, this method unavoidably excludes the option of “more Europe” from the realm of realism. Yet, “more Europe” is a prerequisite for overcoming the present crises and successfully addressing global challenges. The relevant question is, however, “more Europe to do what?” and “in what way?”. As long as people understand more Europe to mean more austerity, more insecurity, more inequalities, more bureaucracy, more German hegemonism, Europe will have no future. If, however, instead of putting the cart before the horse, we formulate a clear project and vision for a Europe based on development, solidarity and democracy, then the need for “more Europe” will appear natural and will regain legitimacy. Unfortunately, this is not the approach of the Commission paper, nor of most European leaders.

*Interview by Nikolas Nenedakis

vasmoulakis graffiti
artist: Alexandros Vasmoulakis, photo: LeBasse Projects

A vibrant capital in the midst of economic and migratory crisis, a metropolis of contrasts, a cultural hub in constant flux, Athens’ many facets are what make it one of the most interesting cities in Europe. A few days after the end of the Greek leg of Documenta 14 - "Learning from Athens" (8.4-16.7.2017) Greek News Agenda and Grèce Hebdo* interviewed sociologist Nikos Souliotis, Research Fellow at the National Center for Social Research (EKKE).

Nikos Souliotis spoke about Athens’ modern cultural identity, its new public and private cultural infrastructures, how social life in city has changed after the 60’s, the transformation of the city center through its rehabilitation and the  development of cultural and leisure activies in the 90’s, the "labour division" between public and private funding for culture, and what kind of impact can major cultural events, such as Documenta 14, have on Athens:

What is the imprint of culture in Athens life today?

The crisis has hit a large part of Athens and Greece´s cultural industry, while public funding for culture has shrunk. Yet, lifestyle and urban dynamics associated with Athens, such as the transformation of the city centre through entertainment and culture, have not changed much when compared to what was happening fifteen or ten years prior to the crisis. At the same time, Athens remains closely linked to globalized culture, without however being in its avant-garde. A new element in Athenian life is the multiplication of artistic initiatives coming from below, promoted by well-educated young artists with a cosmopolitan outlook. These initiatives often have a socio-political orientation, which was less the case in the years before the crisis. Their emergence coincides with that of social solidarity endeavours; these represent efforts at self-organization, following the weakening of public structures of support.   

Another important element marking Athenian cultural life today is the strengthening of the role of private cultural foundations, either through the funding of cultural activities - often projects by young artists - or through the establishment of new metropolitan infrastructures. Finally, it should be noted that Athens has the sad privilege of attracting international attention because of the crisis; hosting Documenta 14 for the first time in the Greek capital is a typical example of this.

athens 60s aspis pronia
Athens city center in the 1960s

During the 1960s, Athens basically consisted of an agglomeration of families resettled here from the countryside. What does the Greek capital represent today? What does the way that leisure and entertainment have evolved tell us about the changes in the organization of life and social relations in the city?  

In the first decades following World War II, the population of Athens tripled as a result of the great migration from rural areas to the capital. This demographic transformation was also the cause of a cultural transformation in the city. The new populations that settled in Athens gradually adopted urban lifestyles, which were themselves changing due to economic growth and rise in consumer spending. There were, however, other elements that ran against the shaping of urban cultures, such as social class divisions, cultural and social links with places of origin in the provinces, and the relatively limited number of cultural infrastructures in Athens.

Things changed a great deal since the late 1970s. The rural exodus was now over and there were new generations that were Athens born-and-bred, who developed an identity-based interest in Athens, its city centre, its history - or at least in the idealized images of the Athenian past - and in the relationship between Athens and other metropolises of the Western world. This interest has played a fundamental role in the “return” of the middle class to the city centre since the early 1990s. The cultural transformation of the city centre has brought about two trends: the rediscovery of the Athenian past and attempts to associate Athenian cultures with trends in European and American metropolises. Going through media articles of the 1990s, it becomes evident that the city of Athens is increasingly compared with international capitals in terms of culture, lifestyle, entertainment, etc., a pattern that is still valid today.

At the same time, since the 1980s, the public and private sector have continued to add to the city's metropolitan cultural infrastructure, the latest three significant additions being the new National Museum of Contemporary Art, the Onassis Cultural Centre, and the National Opera and National Library at the ​Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center complex. These institutions play a fundamental role in shaping and reshaping Athenian cultures; they constitute public spaces that "educate" the public and contribute in the development of a collective consciousness. They also make it possible to better integrate Athens into international cultural flows, thanks to their capacity to host demanding events. However, these centres also increase the centralization of cultural production and consumption, creating a kind of control over artistic opportunities that did not exist before. The relationship between public and private sectors is fundamental in this respect.


The construction of the new facilities of the National Opera and the National Library. Source: Athens Social Atlas

In fact, in Athens and generally in Greece, as far as culture is concerned, there exists a particular “institutional order”: the state monopolises antiquities, identified as an important area of national identity, while private agents and members of cultural elites have invested symbolically and materially in other cultural fields (popularization of science, modern art, contemporary art). This division has its historical roots in the Greek Diaspora of the 19th century and continues to persist, in more or less different terms, to the present day. It is, in fact, impossible to understand the cultural life of Athens from an institutional point of view without taking into consideration this division of labour between the state and the private sector. Naturally, there are no impregnable boundaries; yet there is a strong tradition that explains why, for example, the state delayed the creation of a Museum of Modern Art and a Museum of Contemporary Art, and why we are witnessing today the birth of new private cultural institutions like the Onassis Cultural Centre.

Another development that should be mentioned is the relative shrinking of class divisions in culture. The National Centre of Social Research recently completed a survey under the scientific direction of Dimitris Emmanuel, based on 2,500 questionnaires about cultural consumption in Athens. This study has shown that while upper classes are more likely to consume goods of so-called "high culture" (classical music, jazz, experimental theatre and dance, alternative cinema etc.), what we call “pop culture” (international and Greek popular music, commercial cinema and theatre) is addressed to all social classes, with the partial exception of the most disadvantaged strata. One reason for this is that after decades of social mobility, the social structure of the city changed as the working class shrunk. Moreover, in Athens you have places that function as "melting pots" frequented by people from different social classes sharing common cultural experiences.

The escape to the suburbs began at the end of the 70's and has not stopped since; at the same time we are witnsessing a boom of cultural and entertainment activities in the otherwise "decayed" centre of Athens. Would you like to comment? Is this a precursor of gentrification in Athens?

Since the late 1970s, the western neighborhoods of the city centre (Kerameikos, Metaxourgeio) have lost part of their population as a result of the middle classes move to the suburbs. Sometimes this tendency is over-used as an explanation for the decline of this part of the city: there are western neighborhoods, like that of Psirri, which were never residential. In any case, it is true that during the 1980s and early 1990s, several downtown areas became quite depressed and abandoned. Since the early 1990s however, these inner city neighbourhoods, one after the other, have experienced new life. They’ve attracted a number of public and private cultural institutional spaces, dozens of theatres and galleries and hundreds of bars and restaurants. All this was the result of a combination of several factors: both state and local authorities announced or promoted urban renewal plans; small scale entrepreneurs endeavoured, in speculation, to anticipate the beneficial effects of these plans; artists, increasingly in growing numbers as a result of the expansion of arts education, have sought affordable venues in dilapidated downtown neighbourhoods to showcase their work; the new generations of Athenians were increasingly interested in the downtown area, which created significant demand; and the elites found new spaces in the historical centre and in Pireos street to create monumental cultural establishments (Benaki Museum Pireos St. AnnexeMichael Cacoyannis FoundationFoundation of the Hellenic World).
Hope Dies Last street art by WD Athenes Psiri
"Hope Dies Last", Psiri, 2015

All this has undoubtedly transformed and is still transforming the centre of Athens, giving the city a cultural verve and nightlife that has been almost constantly changing for the past two or three decades. But can we say that this is gentrification? With this term we usually mean a process of transformation of a neighborhood, often through the establishment of cultural and entertainment activities, which is followed then by the influx of new, more affluent residents. These new residents are usually middle class and their presence increases rental and real estate values, ​​which in turn, leads to the exodus of the area’s original, poorer inhabitants. Researchers, such as Thomas Maloutas and others, studying the housing market and demographic movements in decayed downtown neighborhoods in Athens, have not found evidence of a massive resettlement by new middle class residents. Thus there is no gentrification process, in the strict sense of the term; there is a process of economic reinvestment and reintegration of certain neighbourhoods into urban mobility, but typically gentrification describes something else that is not found, at least not to a large extent, in the centre of Athens.

So, since we don’t have gentrification, how has the growth of entertainment (bars, restaurants, cafes) and cultural activities (theaters, galleries, cultural venues) changed the centre of Athens? What has been the impact of the economic crisis?

The economic crisis has unevenly affected cultural and entertainment activities. As a recent statistical study carried out by a Panteion University scientific team (V. Avdikos, M. Michailidou, G. Klimis, A. Mimis) revealed, sectors such as publishing and media were severely struck. In contrast, entertainment, bars and restaurants, as is visible in downtown Athens, carry on. There are three reasons for this: Firstly, Athens increasingly attracts more and more tourists as a result of the rehabilitation of its historic centre, a growing offer of cultural activities, and the geopolitical turmoil affecting tourism in neighbouring countries; Secondly, as statistics show, in times of crisis, local consumers do reduce their spending in entertainment as much as they do in other areas, such as clothing. This shows the psychological value of entertainment and its importance in maintaining a social life. Finally, entertainment offers entrepreneurial opportunities during a crisis: to open a bar or a cafe, you don’t need specialized knowledge and you can rely mainly your own resources (personal work, personal networks, etc).  

Can a major international exhibition such as Documenta influence the identity of a city like Athens?

Documenta is a large-scale event that embraces the majority of important cultural spaces of the city, attracts international visitors and provides visibility for Athens. However, I do not think that an event, however important, can change the cultural identity of a city. Cultural identity depends on more structural conditions, such as the existence of local artistic scenes whose products can be exported abroad, the involvement of a more or less broad public that is educated and interested in culture, the availability of public and private funding for cultural activities and the existence of cultural infrastructures. An event like Documenta can work as a catalyst when some of the above structural conditions are met, but this is as far as it goes.

doc14cOne should address with certain realism the cultural impact Documenta had on Athens. In general, such exhibitions could have symbolic and /or organizational impact. From an organizational point of view, Documenta has created a precedent, in the sense that it has shown to the international artistic world that Athens has the infrastructure to host such a big event. This is important, but it should not be overestimated. From a symbolic point of view, I fear that the impact is more limited. Documenta came to Athens under the slogan "learning from Athens". This interest in "learning" from Athens is related to the crisis, rendering the Greek capital as an almost exotic or experimental space in socio-political terms. In fact, Documenta’s interest in Athens is part of a wider international interest from journalists, researchers and activists who visit ‘Athens of the crisis’, write about it etc. From this point of view, there is nothing original in Documenta’s concept of “learning from Athens”.

What we should comment on is the way in which Documenta integrates ‘Athens of the crisis’ in its symbolic strategies. According to organizers, choosing Athens as the second site for Documenta 14, utilizes the "tension between Athens and Kassel" in order to create "a critical space for the design of a collaborative, artistic and activist project beyond the nation-state and enterprises". For Documenta 14 itself, this is important because it renews its artistic-cultural identity by referencing resistance against neoliberalism, as Documenta 11 did, when, from a postcolonial perspective, it included non-European cities in its programme. Athens also provided a framework for creating site-specific art. 

My point is that Documenta utilizes “Athens of the crisis” in artistic and identity strategies that are addressed to the international art world and not to local society. Documenta’s interventions in local social life are insignificant from the point of view of the inhabitants (one can see for example the small Documenta restaurant which offers free meals at Kotzia square, in a city where various organizations have been offering thousands of free meals since the beginning of the crisis). In addition, although several Documenta works have a socio-political content, they employ, like a good part of contemporary art in general, an artistic language inaccessible to the general public. In fact, I think that if there is a symbolic impact of Documenta on Athens, it concerns mostly young Greek artists: because of the crisis, Greek artists have fewer opportunities to travel abroad and Documenta was an opportunity for them to attend a major contemporary art event and to get to know international trends right here in Greece.

*Interview to Ioulia Livaditi, Magdalini Varoucha / Translation from French Ioulia Livaditi, Magdalini Varoucha

monastirakimccabeMonastiraki square, Athens 1954, Photo by Robert McCabe

 YHY7751aYiorgis Yerolymbos is a photographer and architect with a Ph.D. from the School of Art and Design of the University of Derby, UK. His photographic work has been published in a number of books on landscape and architectural photography. His work focuses on the interface of nature and culture as it can be exemplified in contemporary topography. He photographs landscapes under transition, places that have sustained changes in the face of modernisation and optimisation of land exploitation.

His research interests include the process of beautification of landscape in contemporary photography, the construction of identity through lived-in space. In 2008, supported by a Fulbright scholarship, he travelled the US by car from East to West and back focusing on the American landscape and how its visitor-user perceives it. He has participated in the Venice Biennale of Architecture twice: in 2012 with large-scale works of the city of Athens and again in 2014, with landscape images of Greece. In 2013 his photographs were included in the main exhibition Everywhere but Now of the 4th Biennale of Thessaloniki, curated by Adelina Von Fürstenberg. Since 2007 and for a decade, he has been the official photographer of the construction of Renzo Piano’s Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center (SNFCC).  He recently presented his work in MoMA, New York. 


Yiorgis Yerolymbos views the 20th century Greek city as a museum for the next generations and tries to give to the world his whole self while photographing. He spoke with Greek News Agenda* about his work on the construction of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center, architectural photography, photography in Greece, Athens’ image and the Greek urban landscape: 

You were asked to capture the work at and the construction of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center? How would you describe this experience?

It was an incredible experience and granted me the best decade of my life. I enjoyed it enormously, and had fun while working. I had the opportunity to meet thousands of people and make friends for life. On its heyday, we had more than 5.500 people in the construction site of all nationalities and backgrounds, people from India and Pakistan, from Germany, Italy, Albania and Poland; I worked with every single one of them, and consider myself very fortunate to have done so, I was somehow a privileged spectator of a closed environment which was not accessible to the general audience due to safety reasons. As you can understand, a construction site is always secured; one cannot enter without clearance, and has to wear a helmet, a jacket or special shoes in order not to step on something. It is a protected environment and I was privileged to be one of the very few witnesses of its day-by-day changes. They were so fast to take place, ephemeral in a way that they could not be found the very next day. The photographs taken are the only proof that they ever existed.

What does a building like the SNFCC add to the image of Athens?

I would say the world for a number of reasons, but most importantly, I think that Renzo Piano’s Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center adds a modern contemporary building to this city that already had enough ancient ones to demonstrate. 


In Athens, as one easily imagines, there is no lack of ancient locations and sights to visit. What was missing was a building of contemporary architecture of the highest level, a signature building if you like. And, before the Niarchos Centre, we could only find that in power buildings of restricted access. For example, the Ethinki Bank's Mario Botta building in Kotzia Square or Walter Gropius' the American Embassy. So, I would consider the Niarchos Centre as the first signature building by a star architect that belongs to everybody and it is there for everybody. I think this is quite significant at this time and age.

What led you into photography? When did you realize that this is what you want to do with your life?

I was trained both as an architect and a photographer. I chose to become a photographer for two main reasons. First, being that with photography you to get to visit other people’ s worlds, which helps one enormously to broaden ones horizons. You find yourself in a environment of constant learning. For example, you get to an oil refinery to take photos, you meet the people there, you understand the process and you spend time with them, and this is a rare opportunity that very few people have. Again, you have a privileged point of view. Whatever subject matter you approach, you find yourself in multiple worlds so to speak, thus enriching your experience. Secondly and most importantly, I wanted to have a chance to see the world. It may be incredible, but the quality of world-seeing that photography provides is unparallel to any other profession, one could argue, and I think I am intitled to say so as photography has taken me everywhere in Greece, although I am pretty sure I have missed some parts (Amorgos comes to mind...). I have seen my fair share of the world precisely because I had to photograph it.

What is photography for you? What do you express through architectural photography?

Somebody far more intelligent and far more eloquent than myself gave the very definition of what photography is. It was the great Robert Adams, one of the photographers from the New Topographics movement in the 1970s, who said "what photography traditionally tries to do is to show what is past, present and future in one shot". For a photograph to work you need ghosts of the past, the daily news and prophecy. So I think this is what makes a photograph interesting. In a successful photograph, you recognise the updated information of the current world, and at the same time you trace the past and from a proposal for the future. It goes deeper than the visual surface and that is, to my mind at least, what makes photography interesting.

Yerolymbos Thessaloniki Fog II

As far as architectural photography is concerned, architectural photography is exactly what the title describes. It is photography of architecture and at the same time the architecture of photography itself, a structured photograph if you like and it is precisely this that takes a lot of time to reach. You need follow a very slow and careful process, you work with a tripod, you need to have a big view camera, and take your time; and through this process you methodically compose your photography.  You look at the world in a completely different pace and you give it your whole self. And this puts you, at the end of the day, in an extraordinary position to appreciate the world far more than the average person who shoots thousands of photos a day and then moves on to the next point of interest.

If I have to photograph a monument, it will take me hours and hours to set everything, to look at it, to take my time and as a result I start to experience it differently.  That is what architectural photography offers, in my view.

What are your thoughts regarding photography in Greece?

We really have photography of the highest level in Greece and there are fellow photographers whom I highly appreciate. If one would like to point out a problem is that photographers they will go as far as their own strength and means go, there is no institution to support or back them up. Artists of the medium will have to do everything by themselves and unfortunately the same applies to all kind of art in our country. 

And this is not the case abroad, for example, all the established photographers that we know from the US or Germany enjoy the support of a number of institutions that help an artist to advance his or her work beyond his or her own reach; museums, galleries, collections that support the work and help an artist to get to the next level. 

We, also, experience the same problem in education. The education system in photography, for example, is a very poor one and therefore only you have to be really exceptional to survive once you left school. Unfortunately, most of the people in photography once they earn a degree, they find themselves in a position were they have to make a living by doing something else, and practice photography as a hobby instead of a full time profession. I am afraid that the same applies in the overwhelming majority of the creative, so to speak, professions. We are alone. So if somebody has the determination and the strength to go down a lonely path, fine, we hear from him. If not, that is pretty much it.

athens spread yerolymbos 23

What does the Greek city mean to you? How would you describe it?

Well, it depends really. I recently had the opportunity to describe Athens as a frozen wave, seen from a distance. If you go up the hill on Ymittos or Lykavitos, the city resembles like a huge wave of cement frozen in its current form. The city has sped basically towards all directions: it knows no barriers, no limits; and you can literally see it everywhere. It expands.  There is no planning or anything of the sort. To be frank, the city is as important to me as it is to most fellow Greeks, it is our chosen habitat. The majority of us, we are people of the cities; half of the country’ s population lives in Athens, one million lives in Thessaloniki and most others live in the major cities around the country. And although we do not value Greek cities, it would be fair to admit that it is just the outcome of our own actions. We the people are responsible for the way Greek cities look like. It is our doing, our making, like looking into a mirror: it is us, whether we like what we see or not.

In the Greek urban landscape there are elements that characterize it and attribute to the Greek particularity and make it special. What is Greek particularity for you and where do you find it?

I have been a landscape photographer for the last 22-23 years and I had the opportunity to visit every single part of this country, so I would say an extraordinary diversity found within short distances. Our planet is beautiful everywhere, but the one thing I believe can be particularly  distinct in our country is the variety of our landscape in such a small part of the world.  For example, if one drives from Athens to Thessaloniki, one will experience mountains, lakes, and seascapes every 50 kilometres, to experience the same in France one would have to drive for a day and a half to see the scenery change. The same applies in the US, in Kansas, for example, I drove for 3 days through cornfields, 3 days of driving in flat. From the valley of Thessaloniki where everything is also flat to mountain Olympus which can be found only 30 minutes down the road, to Iliki Lake and to the Pindos mountain range, this diversity in such sort distance is literally amazing. It’ s an exceptional characteristic that inspires travelling and makes this country an attractive destination to visit again and again.


Museum of Byzantine Culture in Thessaloniki (architect: Kyriakos Krokos, photographed by Yiorgis Yerolymbos)

The tension between Greekness and modernity is an important aspect of the Greek urban landscape. Typical examples are architects Dimitris Pikionis and Kyriakos Krokos, whose work has references to the Greek architectural tradition that tries to emerge through the modern waves. How do you feel about the contemporary discourse between Greekness and modernity? How does Greek modernity exist in the urban landscape and where can it be found?

In many people's view, there is no clash between modernity and locality; Greekness is the subject in hand. It was actually one of the founders of the international style, the modern movement, and Bauhaus' director Walter Gropius, who argued that the modern movement in architecture celebrates locality. The more successful a modern style is, the more it transcends, celebrates the local elements and features.

Now, where can Greek modernity be found in the urban landscape? Should we refer to the very successful example of Thessaloniki’s new sea front? We should be reminded that there was a huge battle at the time when plans for the new sea front were unveiled, and most of the people initially thought of it as too western, too modern, by arguing that the Byzantine past of the city has not been celebrated. Both the architects and the architectural community responded by saying that Thessaloniki had already enough of beautiful Byzantine architecture and is, certainly, in no need to add more. What it lacked, on the other hand, was a contemporary public space.

In short, we don’ t need to create everything in the form of the Cycladic house. We can experiment with new styles and ideas and, having said that, it was Le Corbusier who was gravely impressed by Cycladic architecture and used it to create the international style. So, I would go back to my point that modernity and locality, when applied successfully, intertwine. They become one interesting new form that pushes the envelope forward. Otherwise we go round the same thing again and again without really going anywhere.


What does the human-altered landscape mean for Greek Modernity? What in particular characterizes this man altered Greek landscape?

The human-altered Greek landscape is a landscape in an interim phase. It is stuck in the middle. It’ s not a pure landscape, pristine and beautiful, and it’ s not an urban environment either.  For every single illicit cement structure to house a rent-a-bike or rooms to let facility our institutions were unable to stop it on time, or fix it afterwards. It seems we are bound for ever to live in an environment cement "skeletons" will be a permanent part of our landscape. This can, also, be found in our cities, everywhere around the country you can see these leftovers marring the landscape. I would say that the foremost characteristic of the human altered landscape in Greece is precisely this - stuck in the middle, in an interim phase, it doesn’ t go back and doesn’ t go forward. It is there, in many respects and works as a metaphor for what we experience right now in every single aspect of our lives.

The urban landscape has changed.  In the 70’s we already had a plethora of apartment buildings emerging. The apartment buildings are a distinctive feature of Athens. How do such buildings shape the image of the city?

They do so and, possibly, in a very constructive way, as far as I am concerned. What do I mean by this? It has been argued by a number of architects and historians among whom, Jean Sauvaget and Aldo Rossi that has said that architecture represents the petrification of a society. In a few words, architecture freezes time and what can one discover of the construction of that era is the circumstances and values of that era. For example, Paris is the petrification of the 19th century and the same can be argued about London for example and the Victorian period.  Equally, Athens will be the petrification of 20th century.


How did these buildings come about? Constructors approached small homeowners and offered 2 or 3 apartments for their land, on which they would built apartment buildings making a profit from the sale of the rest of the apartments. In the course of time this period ended and now, Athens and every single Greek city have frozen in a time period that reminds us of the 60’s, the 70’s and the 80’s, working, so to speak, as a living museum of that particular time frame. People will be visiting Athens in 200 years time to see how people lived in the 20th century, in the same way that we visit a medieval city in Italy. 

We are used to seeing Greece projected abroad through photography in a romantic way. In your work, it’s a different case. You show that great projects exist but also continue being built. We see imposing buildings, great architectural buildings that stand out. How does all this happen? What makes you project Greece that way?

Frank Gohlke famously said that “where we live is far more important than where we visit”. You go to a mountain, you take a shot of a beautiful landscape and then you go back to a small alley in Pagkrati or Kypseli or anywhere in the suburbs and you don’ t appreciate that as a landscape. You look at a mountain or cove and that is the only landscape you acknowledge as important, your everyday surrounding are pale in comparison, or so you think.

unfamiliar city athens yerolymbos 01a

Truth is that landscape is where we live, not where we visit, and it is the most important landscape of all exactly because we are shaped in it. So, if it looks like a environment consisting of cement buildings in an alley with a few or no trees at all, then this is the defining landscape for us You don’ t have to disregard it or throw it away. And that, I think, explains to a large extent why I photograph Greece in a way different to romantic portrayals: because I don’ t visit it, I live it, it is mine as I am hers, I am not a visitor or a tourist, it is my home.

We have reached a point in our recent history where we constantly complain about literally everything: we think ourselves as the best, we blame others for our shortcomings and I honestly think I had enough of this attitude. Considering myself a person with love of country - defining such a person as somebody who wants his country to be better, not necessary recognizing it as such- I would like to see it to a cleaner, more structured and lawful, a better place for everybody to come and visit time and time again.

And in that respect, I point my camera towards our county's best parts. I want to show it as the dynamic, interesting and diverse country that I hope it is, that I wish it to be. I photograph multiple aspects and visit many of its parts, even the now so interesting ones, which can disappoint at times, but insist that if we look at it in a more constructive way, we will appreciate it more and eventually take good care of it. That is why I photograph what I consider interesting architecture from exciting young Greek architects that I consider worth promoting: as many of my photographs are published in international magazines, I would love to do my part for the world to see that this country produces interesting architecture and art of the highest quality.

*Interview by Veroi Katsarou 

More Yiorgis Yerolymbos Interviews:; Bookshelf: Orthographs - The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center


Lina Venturas is Professor of History and Sociology of Migration at Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Athens. She has studied history and sociology in France and Belgium. Using historical and sociological approaches her current research focuses on migrations, diaspora, sending states’ policies, transnationalism and International Organizations. She has published articles and books and has edited special issues and volumes on migration, diaspora and border issues. Her pubications in English include Greek Immigrants in Postwar Belgium: Community and Identity Formation Processes (2002), Deterritorialising’ the Nation: the Greek State and ‘Ecumenical Hellenism (article in a volume on the Greek Diaspora and Migration, 2009), and International “Migration Management” in the Early Cold War: The Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration (editor, 2015).

Lina Venturas is director of the Research Unit for the History of Migratory and Refugee Movements at the Panteion University and she has been scientific coordinator of the "Migration Management and International Organizations: A history of the establishment of the International Organization for Migration" (MIMIO) research Programme. She is also head of the Ministry of Education Research & Religious Affairs Scientific Committee for the integration of refugee children in education.

Professor Venturas spoke with Rethinking Greece* about the waves of Greek emigration to the US, Northwest Europe and Australia as part of wider population movements from agricultural economies to industrial countries, the key role human mobility has played in the development of the modern and contemporary world, the programme for integration of refugee children in the Greek educational system and the importance of according legal status and other socio-economic rights to refugees and migrants.


Greek coalminers in Belgium 
What are the most important waves of Greek migration from the establishment of the Greek state until today? How does the nature of Greek migration to the US (late 19th century-1924) compare to the later migration to Northwest Europe, USA, Australia and Canada (1945-1974)? 
Emigration from the Greek state to the Ottoman Empire’s merchant cities and ports occurred throughout the 19th century. From the late 19th century onwards, many Greeks also headed towards Egypt, where they formed a large and socially heterogeneous community. However, it was in the 1890s that Greece became a major source of labour immigrants, when the stream of emigrants shifted towards the USA. From the last decades of the 19th century to 1924, the USA received over 400,000 Greeks, a large part of them originating in the Peloponnese. Immigration to the USA marked a shift in the traditional patterns of population movements, as Greeks heading there became part of the extending American multiethnic industrial working class. Due to the overall structure of the economy and the specific economic circumstances in the USA in the first half of the 20th century -and to other social and political factors- a significant part of these immigrants followed an upward social mobility pattern and gradually acquired American citizenship. However, about 40% of them returned to Greece, while many others who stayed there did not achieve their “American dream”. 
As regards the following wave of immigration (1945-1974), we can observe the following: Greece entered the post-World War II period with significant inequalities in working conditions, incomes and productivity between the urban and the rural-agricultural sector, and with a significant surplus of labor force in rural areas. For a large part of the population, bad living conditions, a virtually nonexistent welfare state, combined with the gradual spread of consumerist values and the rising awareness of the differences in standards of living, set the conditions for a second mass emigration abroad. These economic and social conditions, as well as the exclusion of adherents of the Left from the economic, social and political life of the country, after the Left’s defeat in the civil war (1949) and until the fall of the military dictatorship in 1974, constituted the main emigration push factors. Evidence suggests that during the period 1955-1971, at least one million Greeks -that is 1/9 of the total Greek population- emigrated to overseas countries (Australia, United States and Canada) and to Europe (mainly West Germany) in order to find work.


Overall, both the turn of the 20th century movement to the USA and post-war emigration, form part of broader population movements from agricultural economies to countries with a strong and expanding secondary sector. These movements were largely dictated by the receiving states’ labour market needs; they mainly involved peasants from agricultural countries who settled in urban areas of the host countries and were transformed into proletarians. In the post-war era these overseas movements continued; some 140,000 Greek migrants settled in the USA, 175,000 in Australia and 86,000 in Canada. But, after the enactment of the German-Greek migration agreement in 1960, Germany became the main destination of emigrants. 61% of post-war emigrants went to Northwestern European countries, while emigration to West Germany alone accounted for 53% of the total number of emigrants in the period 1960-1977. There was a significant change in the geographical provenance of post-war migrants to Europe as they now departed mostly from the North of Greece: Macedonia contributed 36% of all migrants and 44% of those who went to European countries during the post-war era.

Post-war immigration to Western European countries was subject, much more than migration to other continents, or during other periods, to a policy of organised labour importation, drafted by the host countries’ governments and employers and regulated bya temporary contract labor system, bilateral migration agreements and the implementation of welfare policies. Many young Greeks were persuaded to leave the country through the combination of active recruitment by Western European countries and especially Western Germany, the wages these countries offered (which were three times higher than in Greece) and the relative security of an employment contract and the various social benefits.

Whereas overseas emigration was seen by receiving countries as largely permanent, outflows directed to Germany and other European destinations were intended to be a temporary import of cheap labour. Therefore, although immigrants that settled in European countries were accorded social rights, they were not naturalized, due to the receiving states’ policies. Greek immigrants in European states secured jobs and steady incomes and enjoyed a significant improvement in their standard of living. Nevertheless, deindustrialization and the economic transformations instigated by the oil crisis of 1973, did not allow for significant social mobility. Furthermore, both the receiving states and Greece adopted policies concerning the education of migrants’ children which did not facilitate their upward mobility. 

Greece is to this day both a receiving and a sending migration country. How does this affect the Greek public debate on immigration?
Numerous countries were successively receiving and sending states during the last two centuries or are simultaneously receiving and sending migrants today. I do not think that this fact weighs significantly on the current public debate on immigration in Greece or elsewhere. In my opinion, global asymmetries and social inequalities interact with the way different groups perceive their country’s position in the international arena and their own position in society; along with hopes and fears about the future, that are the factors that most effectively influence stances and opinions on migration. 
I would like to add that public debates on important issues like immigration, do not always aim at achieving a deeper understanding; more often than not, those participating in such debates seek to influence others by selectively pointing out certain elements while obscuring others and by simplifying and de-historicizing. In the public debate on immigration in Greece, those who are hostile to immigrants, when they have to comment on emigration from their country, claim that, in contrast to foreigners living in Greece today, Greek emigrants moved and settled abroad legally and also that, because they were of a “better quality” or “more civilized”, they were law abiding and successful residents in their host countries. Those who have a more positive view on immigrants underline the common economic and social factors that lead to migration, as well as to the discrimination and difficulties most immigrants face. Both use stereotypes and common-sense scenarios to influence the outcome of social, political and ideological conflicts and the future.
You are the director of the Research Unit for the History of Migratory and Refugee Movements at the Panteion University of Athens. Can you talk to us about the work being done there? What can we learn from studying population movements?
The Research Unit for the History of Migrant and Refugee Movements is part of the Research Center for Modern History, which was created at the Department of Political Science and History of the Panteion University of Athens. The Unit functions as an area of interdisciplinary research, production and transmission of knowledge, as well as a sphere of exchange among those who are interested in global population movements and their impact on citizenship, past and present. The Unit seeks to contribute in the study of the history of population movements, Diaspora and citizenship, during the modern and contemporary era.  
Human mobility has played a key role in the course of the development of the modern and contemporary world, affecting the natural environment and material culture, the global distribution of population and resources, political and social organization, economics, technology, cultural systems and everyday life. Whether forced or voluntary, intercontinental, local, intra-imperial, cross-border or internal to nation-states, population movements influenced in various ways, depending on the era, not only those moving, but also the abandoned homelands and the sites of new settlement, the course of political communities, states and international relations, contributing decisively to closer links between more or less remote areas and isolated cultural systems. Human migration has contributed to marking out and transforming racial, ethnic, gender, class, and other identities and/or relationships. Organizing their lives in various locations, migrant populations transferred, exchanged and transformed cultural systems, triggering social conflicts and social change, or even wars.
Historical research, in interaction with relevant studies and the tools of other social sciences that focus on population movements, expands and deepens our knowledge of the diverse and shifting causes, motivations and consequences of human mobility, along with the multilevel power relations that accompany it; in this way, it contributes thus to the analysis of the multiple forms of mobility and the mechanisms that underpin or undermine it. A historical approach allows us, among other things, to demonstrate the complex factors linked to population movements, to correlate in a more productive way between local and global transformations and to critically question dominant conceptions of related contemporary phenomena. Via the study of the history of the migrant, refugee and Diasporic phenomena, the localization and use of relevant archives (documents, oral testimonies, audiovisual material etc.) and the diffusion of knowledge on moving populations and their relations with local and sedentary ones, the Unit attempts, by operating as a mediator between the scientific community and the broader audience, to contribute to a better understanding of the transformation of political communities and collective representations that emanate from human mobility.
Since March 2016, you are heading the Scientific Committee the Ministry of Education Research & Religious Affairs set up in order to form a plan for the integration of refugee children in education. Can you tell us more?

Safeguarding the right of refugee children to education has been a major concern of the Greek Ministry of Education, teachers, academics and many others. The objective of the Greek state is to ensure psychosocial support and to integrate refugee children in the Greek educational system, without burdening schools with an excessively large number of children who do not speak Greek and have not been appropriately prepared to attend a Greek school. In March 2016, the Ministry of Education Research & Religious Affairs set up a Scientific Committee to form a plan for the integration of refugee children in education; this plan had to be designed in such a way so as to increase the chances that refugee children succeed at school and do not abandon it. 

For the school year 2016-2017, the Scientific Committee considered the specific need refugee children had due to the fact that they were experiencing a transition from war to normality. Furthermore, owing to wars and being continuously on the move, a significant percentage of refugee children had been outside the school environment for years, and many children had never attended school, although they were of school age. Additionally, many children are burdened by psychological traumas. In order to meet their needs, emphasis needed to be placed on their adaptation and familiarization with the school environment and on cultivating a sense of security, communication and acceptance. A transitional education program was also considered necessary as these children do not speak Greek and many had to cover gaps in their education due to their long absence from schools. 


The refugee population living in Greece is quite heterogeneous in terms of characteristics and fluctuating in numbers. So, predicting the exact number of children that will stay in Greece is not easy; neither is the duration of their stay or their place of residence. Therefore, the Ministry of Education Research & Religious Affairs had to take into account the insecurity and instability of the situation and prepared for multiple scenarios in terms of the numbers and locations. An additional issue making planning difficult was the fact that the children who will probably stay in Greece belong to different legal status categories: There are children whose parents have been accorded refugee status; others that are waiting for relocation or family unification without being sure about their departure or the departure date; also children whose families have submitted an application for asylum that is yet to be considered, others who live on the islands, unaccompanied minors etc.

With the exception of the children whose parents have been given refugee status, it is impossible to predict if and when the status of the others will be regulated, or when and how many of them will be relocated. However, given the fact that we are talking about children, the needs of the entire potentially existing population had to be provided for and covered. Furthermore, as shown by a number of studies, the trend in the migration and asylum policies of the EU is the long wait of immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers under a quasi-precarious regime.

How does this uncertainty impact the refugees’ attitudes towards formal education?

Refugees that crossed to Greece did not aim at settling here; fully aware that it is almost impossible to find work, they aimed at moving to other European countries. Remaining stranded for a long time in Greece caused insecurity, either because they were waiting for an answer to their for asylum/relocation request or because those refugees who could not look forward to these solutions were looking for other ways to leave the country. After the closing of the borders and the European Union-Turkey agreement, the legal status and the relocation prospects to another country of the various refugee groups -in mainland Greece and on the islands- started to change. Under these conditions, the refugees’ attitude towards formal education was, and still is, ambivalent. The feeling of precariousness is, still today, intensified by the fact that a significant percentage of refugees still live in Accommodation Centers and, what is more, they are frequently moved from one to another. With a view to remedy this situation, many refugees have been moved for some months now by the High Commissioner or other agencies to flats, hotels and shelters in Athens, Piraeus, Thessaloniki, Livadia, Kilkis, Arta, etc. The Ministry of Migration Policy aims at expanding the accommodation program in such urban facilities and decreasing the number of refugees living at Accommodation Centers.

Now that the school year is over, what is your overall assessment of the program for the education of refugee children in Greece?

The effort to integrate refugee children in the educational system for the 2016-2017 school year, was not without difficulties, mistakes and omissions, there were however, equally significant achievements. The basic omissions concern the non-implementation of the Scientific Committee’s proposals for the operation of kindergartens and non-mandatory education programs for children over 15 years old. The organization and operation of obligatory schooling also faced many problems, weaknesses and delays as all refugee children had to be vaccinated. Furthermore, there was a relatively high percentage of dropouts, while irregular attendance was also registered (although the percentages were number similar to those of other countries), mainly due to the unstable and adverse conditions under which refugees live, which are intensified by institutional and educational omissions and deficiencies.

Finally, there was inadequate and delayed information and sensitization of several local societies and, as a result, there were few, but vociferous local reactions which were reproduced by the media. Nevertheless, in laying down the foundation for school attendance and social connection, the Ministry of Education Research & Religious Affairs took the first step in the integration of refugees. The social and political bet of getting refugees out of the ghetto of camps, bringing back some normality to refugee children’s life, familiarizing them with the school system, and finally, making refugees more visible in Greek society, has been won to a great extent. All this has occurred against a difficult background, if we look at the wider European and international reality right now. These achievements are important, given that refugees have limited opportunities for interaction with Greek citizens and social integration in general. These accomplishments are also of great significance because they constitute a starting point for the greater acceptance of refugee rights and their integration in Greek and European societies.

r4rThessaloniki Museum of Photography: Another life: Human flows / Unknown Odysseys 

Historically, the UK has applied a mildly multiculturalist approach to integration, while France opted for assimilation. Angela Merkel recently stated that "Multiculturalism leads to parallel societies and therefore remains a sham".  What do you think should be the principles of a successful integration policy in Greece? 

Integration is an open-ending, multi-factorial social process that extends over time. Global and local asymmetries, international and social hierarchies, combined with transformations in the economic sphere and labor markets, play a major role in processes of social and cultural integration. Most of all, integration depends on whether refugees and migrants are accorded a legal status and rights and are able to gain a decent living in their host country. So, residence and work permits, social and other rights, along with economic relations and the structure of the labor market in host countries, are of great importance. It is of great importance that refugees and migrants feel that they are recognized and respected as human beings, like the citizens of the host country: when they are stigmatized and scapegoated, collectively condemned for the acts of an extremist or a criminal with the same national/cultural background, then they rightly feel that whatever their personal views and actions are, they will be excluded from society.

Instead, when people reasonably aspire to live with dignity, safety and make a decent living, when they have opportunities to improve their families’ future, then they are motivated to learn the language of their host country, to adapt to new conditions and to participate in society. Both the UK and France are relatively affluent consumerist countries with a colonial background that, since the 1980s, have adopted economic, social and political measures that lead to the exclusion of a significant part of their citizenry from the labor market and social benefits. Furthermore, the EU, during the last decades has adopted neo-colonial policies vis-à-vis developing countries and a hostile stance towards the refugees and migrants coming from them. In both the UK and France islamophobic discourses have been legitimized by several politicians and media. These factors and their economic, social, political and cultural consequences weigh, in my opinion, more heavily than multicultural or assimilationist policies on social relations and integration processes.

 *Interview by Ioulia Livaditi

Image source: International “Migration Management” in the Early Cold War: The Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration (eBook, University of the Peloponnese, 2015)

EviSachini EKT portraited5

Evi Sachini is the Director of the National Documentation Centre (EKT), the national institution for documentation, information and support on science, research and technology issues. She is also member of the board of directors of the National Hellenic Research Foundation and member of the Board of Directors of the Greek Network for Research and Technology (GRNET). She holds a PhD in Chemical Engineering from the National Technical University of Athens. Dr. Sachini has substantially contributed to the cultivation of the Greek knowledge ecosystem and has led a number of important initiatives in the area of reliable digital content. As a national expert and representative to the European Commission and OECD, she has advised on issues of R&D and Innovation, management and exploitation of knowledge capital. She has published a series of reports relating to areas of research policy, development and innovation.

Founded in 1980, under the United Nations Development Programme, the National Documentation Centre is integrated with the National Hellenic Research Foundation and is supervised by the General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT) of the Ministry for Education, Research and Religious Affairs.


Dr Evi Sachini talked to Greek News Agenda* on the role and activities of the National Documentation Centre, which include accessibility to digital content regarding scientific research, production of the national statistics for Research, Development and Innovation and connection of research and innovation to entrepreneurship. Dr Sachini also stressed EKT’s contribution to the preservation of the Greek cultural heritage through its portal, searchculture, which offers access to digital cultural content from 55 collections of 43 respected institutions. She further elaborates on how EKT helps Small and Medium Enterprises, including start-ups, to innovate and grow internationally. Dr Sachini underlines that EKT supports a virtuous policy making and entrepreneurial decision-making circle by providing research, technology and innovation statistics and informed analyses. Finally, she stresses that the national policies on Research, Development and Innovation, the highly skilled R&D human resources and high scientific quality research that is performed in specific niches of excellence, make her optimistic for the future and for the ability of the country to integrate its research and innovation dynamic in its new growth and productive model: 

What is the role and main activities of EKT as regards the diffusion of knowledge?

Knowledge-intensive activities are a major source of potential economic growth for Greece as a means to exit the economic crisis. Towards this goal, and in accordance with our mission to collect, document, manage, disseminate and preserve quality digital content and data produced by the Greek scientific, research and cultural communities, EKT performs the following actions.

Firstly, in terms of digital content, a) we make available digital data and information accessible within the scientific, research and cultural communities (eContent), b) we disseminate and promote trustworthy Greek content on an international level, c) we have developed electronic infrastructures with an effective mechanism for collecting and searching content and data (Open Access, Open Science), and d) we provide SaaS services (Software as a Service) including digital repositories, such as openABEKT.


As the designated organization responsible for the production of the national statistics for Research, Development and Innovation (RDI), EKT is very actively pursuing the enhancement of understanding of the national innovation system. To meet this end, EKT not only provides statistical data on various aspects of the national and regional research, technology and innovation system, but also puts data into context. In other words, it places statistical data within a geographical, sectoral, etc. context via dedicated and in-depth analysis of various RDI-related topics, and thus aspires to assist policy-making by the provision of up-to-date and comprehensive information.

On an international level, EKT participates in scientific conferences, presenting its contribution to RDI relevant issues (RDI statistics, public policy, dimensions of national innovation system, etc.). Lastly, EKT being a member of the Enterprise Europe Network, provides consulting services for international business partnerships, information on European policies, innovation and technology transfer and fosters the participation of SMEs in European Programmes for Research and Technology.

How is EKT contributing to the preservation of Greek cultural heritage?

EKT has been actively involved in the preservation and dissemination of cultural content for years. One of our first cultural content projects was Pandektis, the digital library of the National Hellenic Research Foundation’s Institute of Historical Research collections. Last year we completed the development of a suite of comprehensive services initially offered to Cultural organizations that were beneficiaries of the last “Digital Convergence” Operational Programme Calls. These cloud services are offered on a Software as a Service model, enabling Greek cultural organizations to navigate the modern information environment, where everything is interoperable and connected. We developed a workflow for digital cultural content that includes safe long-term storage, quality control, standards-based documentation and aggregation.


End-users can now search for cultural content via our portal,, an aggregator of cultural heritage content. offers central access to and single search of digital cultural content of more than 160,000 documents from 55 collections of 43 respected institutions, ranging from museums and folk heritage organizations to archives and local cultural collections. It also establishes interoperability with major 3rd party search engines and portals like Europeana, thus making quality Greek cultural content more accessible and exploitable.

To further help safeguard Hellenic digital heritage, we provide a repositories service which is a comprehensive content publication service for authorised content producers. Various cultural organizations have used the service: the Acropolis Restoration Service has two repositories we created the one hosting their restoration archive and the other their educational content. We are also developing repositories for academic Art History collections, manuscripts, local art collectives and oral histories collections, Faculties of Art etc. 

How does EKT measure the output and outcome of the Greek Research, Development and Innovation system?

Since 2012 EKT has been a member of the Hellenic National System (and by extension of the European Statistical System) and has been tasked with the provision of the official statistics on Research, Development and Innovation in Greece. In this capacity, EKT undertakes a series of Eurostat-approved and synchronized surveys on concerning research spending, personnel and innovation activities.

sliderEKT deiktes6

In addition, EKT is responsible for measuring a range of other research enablers and outcomes. For example, on matters of scientific publications, highly educated human capital, the performance of domestic research and business institutions in European research projects, the research infrastructure, female participation in research activities, the career of PhD holders, Greek participation in competitive EU R&D calls (under Framework Programmes /Horizon 2020), etc.

How is EKT supporting the collaboration between academia and businesses and the networking of Greek research organizations with those abroad? In what ways can innovative start-ups receive assistance from EKT?

By way of the provision of statistical data as well as via informed reporting and analysis, EKT supports the relevant policy makers in helping them make decisions based on updated information. By being coordinator of Enterprise Europe Network - Hellas, EKT provides a wide range of value-added services for SMEs using the concept of "one-stop-shop" and under the guise of a unique organizational mechanism-network. This can be broken down into three groups of related services. 1) Providing information to enterprises regarding European issues, such as finding foreign business partners and supporting outward-looking entrepreneurship. 2) Offering innovation and technology transfer services. 3) Promoting aspects of the knowledge triangle in Greece, focusing on higher education institutes’ third mission and their contribution to national production and, 4) helping in accessing European funding, finding the appropriate partners, submitting proposals and helping in project implementation.

As regards innovative start-ups, let me start by saying that innovative SMEs, including start-ups, are claimed to play an important role in generating growth and employment, throughout Europe. According to Eurofound’s latest annual report, young innovative SMEs with high international potential are the biggest recruiters in the European Union. Their growth is also expected to support the shift of the EU economy towards more knowledge-intensive activities.

Open Access 0034 169The National Documentation Centre, as National Contact Point for Horizon 2020 and Coordinator of the Enterprise Europe Network-Hellas supports SMEs, including start-ups to innovate and grow internationally. For example, Enterprise Europe Network-Hellas is a successful strategic alliance of business support organizations and networks, helping Greek business grow faster through commercial partnerships, access to finance and tailored support. It is a nationally distributed infrastructure of institutions and expertise, with extensive experience in cooperation at national level and distinguished performance in global networks. As a member of the Enterprise Europe Network, it collaborates with more than 600 organizations in 60 countries to find the best opportunities for Greek enterprises to grow.

During the period 2008-2016, Enterprise Europe Network-Hellas produced 740 international partnership agreements. 1,960 Greek profiles were disseminated in more than 60 countries. 645 company missions and brokerage events were organized and supported by the Enterprise Europe Network-Hellas.

How does EKT support evidence based policy making for research, technology and innovation and the transition to a knowledge-intensive development model?

Incentivizing sustainable and long-term economic growth is primarily based upon a policy mindset that takes into consideration the range of available quantitative and qualitative evidence relevant to each occasion and sensitive enough to adapt to societal and economic fluctuations. EKT being a provider of research, technology and innovation statistics and of informed analyses supports a virtuous policy making and entrepreneurial decision-making circle, by way of providing up-to-date evidence on the range of the topics involved. Indicative of that is the effort made to support the implementation and monitoring of smart specialization strategy in Greece, by providing regional RDI-relevant indicators, elaborated specifically for the purposes of the national strategy for growth.

What are the main characteristics of the Greek RDI system?

Greece has been experiencing a rapid deterioration of a number of several macroeconomic and quality of life indicators since the onset of the financial crisis. Despite the fact that the Greek RDI system has been under pressure, national expenditure rose in absolute and relative value (e.g. R&D intensity). Additionally, other initiatives, such as the appointment of a Deputy Minister for Research in 2015 (for the first time since 1985), the implementation of a National Strategy on Smart Specialisation or the mobilization of Regional authorities to support research and innovation may be considered to be signs of the higher priority that the RDI sector is given on the national policy agenda.

econtentThis positive juncture for RDI in Greece, combined with the capable R&D human resources and research of high scientific quality that is performed in specific niches of excellence, make us optimistic for the future and for the ability of the country to integrate its research and innovation dynamic in its new growth and productive model. This can be seen from the latest R&D indicators for spending (R&D intensity) which shows an increase to 0.97% of GDP for 2015 from 0.84% in 2014. In addition, domestic SMEs exhibit a healthy/robust attitude towards innovation – for example, Greece (0.87%) outranked the EU average (0.69%) in terms of non-R&D innovation spending as % of turnover for 2012.

Similarly, the domestic scientific and research base is increasingly internationalizing. The number of international scientific co-publications has been systematically rising during the last decade indicating the growing networking of the international science base. Also, Greek actors have been systematically excelling in attracting competitive European research funds.

Are Greek organizations successful in participating in European research funded programmes or are they lagging behind?

To elaborate more on my last point, one of the clearest indications of Greece’s great research potential, is manifested in terms of Greek domestic scientific, research and business participation in EU Framework Programmes. European Framework Programmes are the major funding mechanisms for increasing the scientific and technological capacity of the member states on behalf of the EU.

As such and according to the latest data (Horizon 2020), Greece is ranked 9th in the number of signed contracts and 12th in budget share. This is very important given that 28 countries are members of the EU. Greek organizations exhibit an equally good success rate in H2020 (2014-2020), while, the success rate of Greek participation (in terms of number of Greek participations) reaches approximately 13%, a rate which is even higher for specific programmes, such as Research Infrastructures or Space. Greek organizations have attracted more than €437 million euro with 312 Greek SME participations attracting approximately €83 million euro.

What is EKT’s strategy for the future?

In answering this question it should first be noted that EKT is one of the (very) few organizations in Greece that has undertaken the difficult task of setting a carefully crafted and comprehensive strategy until the year 2022 that builds upon the current developments. In accordance to the Centre’s central objectives, and in the broadest terms, EKT aims to increase the volume and quality of the Greek digital scientific and cultural content that will be made freely available for use and re-use by all interested parties, supporting actively open-access policies. This will be achieved by making use of state-of-the-art technologies.

Secondly, EKT will safeguard the production of the national RDI statistics by accomplishing all the relevant milestones. In addition, new metrics and RDI-relevant publications addressing various and currently-hidden aspects of the national and regional innovation system will be brought out. Thirdly, emphasis will be put on matters of incorporating new knowledge produced by the domestic science and academic system into innovation-intensive business ventures, and facilitating the interplay between academia and the private sector.

* Interview by Florentia Kiortsi

Learn more about EKT’s strategy (in Greek). Read also: "Research - Create - Innovate": Connecting R&D with Enterprises, Summary of the Operational Programme 'Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship & Innovation', Doctorate holders in Greece: Highly competitive, highly mobile, Historic high in research spending, Industrial scholarships to boost research in Greek enterprises, Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation to Strengthen Research across Greece, New Initiative on Research & Development funding, new era for Universities and SMEs

slider bannersEIE library

papagianneas12345Stavros Papagianneas is Managing Director of StP Communications consultancy. He has previously served as Communication Officer at the European Commission and as Press Officer and Spokesperson to various diplomatic missions in Brussels. He specialises in PR, strategic communications, public affairs, digital communication, social media and media relations. He is the author of several articles in EU media like New Europe, L' Echo, De Tijd, Communication Director and Research Europe. His recently published book “Rebranding Europe” explores the future of communication in Europe and illustrates how Europe can be rebranded by providing key recommendations on how to convey the added value of the EU in the daily lives of its citizens.

Asked by Greek News Agenda* how can communication overcome economic and policy problems in the EU, Papagianneas says that Europe needs to present a narrative that answer citizen's concerns, but underlined that communication cannot work properly, if it is not backed by real reforms and political will and elaborates on the interaction between communication and policy. He comments that the negative representation of economically weaker Member States in the media had a negative effect for the entire European Union. Regarding the lessons learnt by the previous months’ elections he concludes that the populist wave wasn’t as strong as it was feared to be and that Emmanuel Macron’s strategy is an example that EU should follow.

In your recently published “Rebranding Europe” you explore why EU communication fails and how to make it succeed. How can communication overcome economic and policy problems?

Communication cannot work properly because there is a weakened sense of citizenship and political engagement brought about by: a decreasing interest in politics; a lack of knowledge of political processes; a lack of a common European public sphere; the use of jargon; the absence of professionalism in EU communication and low levels of trust in politicians. The European political system suffers from insufficient communication and missing links between its political institutions and the citizens. In addition, the existing links between EU and the people are not working efficiently. The EU needs to challenge the myths that surround the Union by presenting stories that answer citizen's concerns. It needs a real communication revolution if it wants to highlight its achievement and value.

However, branding and communication cannot work properly if not backed by real reforms and political will. The EU should send out a message of unity and recovery, to show that it's coming out of the crisis and focus on what matters to the people e.g. employment, education, security, etc. If the EU could communicate a unified story, a shared vision, a common future - something in which both politicians and citizens could believe - many economic or policy problems would find a more coherent platform for being resolved. In other words, people need to realise that the EU’s problems are the problems of all Europeans.Therefore, there is an urgent need of a long-term national and supranational strategy to communicating the EU through Europe and the world. An innovative and sustainable public-private partnership, between the EU , the Member States, civil society, academia, political parties, media and the main economic sectors, committed to a dedicated brand, seeking to collaborate with the citizens and make a meaningful difference in their daily lives.


Part of communications involves crisis management. How does this concept work with the Greek crisis and rebranding Greece? What was the result of the way media treated Greece for the rest of the EU members?

Crisis management of the eurozone crisis failed considerably. Negative media reporting has led to increased Euroskepticism.Despite being widely considered to be derogatory, the use of the highly offensive and inappropriate term PIGS/PIIGS by the media has contributed to a huge negative perception of the entire EU. The eurozone crisis and the bashing of the PIGS/PIIGS has played into the hands of those campaigning against the EU: the populists and the neo-nationalists. In particular, the anti-Greece campaign of mainstream European media took on grotesque proportions. The media seemed to lead public opinion to conclude that the whole country is populated by lazy and corrupt people. A headline in the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf on 19 May 2011 is characteristic: “Kick them out of the eurozone. Our citizens no longer want to pay for these wasteful Greeks.” Germany’s best selling tabloid Bild Zeitung has been the champion of the Greek-bashing campaigns. This kind of actions against economically weaker Member States has a boomerang effect for the entire Union.  “Greece is de facto a colony,” Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszcykowski said in an interview with POLITICO, explaining his country’s resistance to joining the euro. “We don’t want to repeat this scenario.”

In what ways may “Brexit and the Trump paradox turn the tide towards a better Europe”?

Brexit and Trump’s election seemed to herald a new wave of nationalism and populism. However, this did not happen. In France, Marine Le Pen's Front National almost disappeared from the political scene. In the UK, Theresa May saw her attempt to strengthen her position fail. The attitude towards the EU has warmed significantly in many EU countries after Britain's Brexit vote to leave the Union and the isolationism of Donald Trump and his verbal attacks on Europe. The result of the developments in the UK and the US has been a sense that Europeans do share a common destiny and that what happens in one EU Member State has a direct relevance on what happens in another. The Union will now for example be moving ahead with closer defense and security cooperation, which London had long blocked.

Would you like to comment on the results of the elections in the UK, France and the Netherlands? What do their campaigns regarding the EU teach us?

The lack of trust in the political establishment has never been greater in Europe and the world. Nevertheless, thepopulist wave that seemed to be sweeping in the West turns out to be merely a storm in the Anglosphere. Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders both fared worse than expected in France and the Netherlands. The election of Macron gives hope to millions in the EU and the world at a moment when apathy and political despair have been gaining ground in the Western world.. Macron did what successful entrepreneurs do: he developed the brand En Marche! and kept promoting it. He created a dynamic of change by aspiring to the role of a unifying European leader, a highly desired model in a Europe going through its worst identity crisis. As Europe is facing anti-establishment politics and reduced trust in politicians, it is Macron’s vision of political reform and his plan to make politicians more accountable that should be the example to follow. He has set out an agenda for institutional reform. He has pledged to concentrate the government’s energy on key priorities and to limit bureaucracy. This is exactly what Brussels has to do. History, especially during periods of constant change like the one we are living in, is often shaped by random events. Taking a more serious approach to communication could stimulate the engagement of citizens and restore public approval.

* Interview by Florentia Kiortsi

Read more on strategic communication by Stavros Papagianneas here.


karaliscinema27Vrasidas Karalis holds the Sir Nicholas Laurantos’ Chair in Modern Greek and Byzantine Studies at the University of Sydney. He has published extensively on Byzantine historiography, Greek political life, Greek Cinema, European cinema and contemporary political philosophy. He has edited three volumes on modern European political philosophy, especially on Martin Heidegger, Hannah Arendt and Cornelius Castoriadis. His recent publications include Realism in Greek Cinema: From the Post-War Period to the Present (2017) and A History of Greek Cinema (2013). He has also published two volumes of oral history, Recollections of Mr Manoly Lascaris (2007) and The Demons of Athens (2014), a chronicle of his experiences from Athens in the time of recent crisis.

Professor Karalis, who has been very active in promoting Modern Greek and Byzantine Studies in Australia, talks to Greek News Agenda,* stressing that Greek Cinema is one of the oldest cinematic traditions in Europe, with a big production compared to the country’s market size. He refers to Greek films that deserve more study and analysis as the foundational filmic texts of Greek cinema, such as “Daphnis and Chloe” (1931) by Orestis Laskos. He describes the Renaissance of Greek Cinema, a reversal of the cinematic traditions currently taking place, as a reflection of the deep structural incongruity between image and reality in the years before the Greek economic crisis. He also comments on the so called Greek weird wave that it is a new form that de-constructs in a way that gives new momentum to the visual tradition that started after the war.

Karalis also explores the quest for Greekness (Greek identity) throughout the History of Greek Cinema, concluding that in the new millennium Greek identity became associated with global trends, regaining a universality that transcends barriers of language and historical experience. Finally, he suggests that Greek Film studies will benefit by gender and queer studies approaches as long as they remain historically informed and underlines that his main point throughout his two books on Greek cinema is that Greek films form a continuous conversation between filmmakers and their audience, but above all between society and its historical trajectory.


Daphnis and Chloe, Orestis Laskos (1931)

What is the current state of Modern Greek studies in Australia? How did you decide to focus on the history of Greek cinema?

The current status of Greek studies in Australia is relatively positive. However, after the remarkable proliferation of Modern Greek departments in the 70s and 80s, a distinct decline became obvious in the early 2000s. Yet, three departments still remain strong and have a continuous impact on the academic representation of Modern Greek Studies at tertiary level. The University of Sydney, Flinders University in Adelaide and Macquarie University continue to have considerable enrollments while publishing original research and promoting Greek culture through publications, journals and conferences.

My specific focus on the history of Greek cinema emanated from the interest that our students showed for Greek films and film stars, as well as after using Greek films to teach Greek language. While literature was the preferred course during the 70s and 80, cinema became a much more attractive course for students as the language of images was a universal language which could be understood without translation. For me personally, the absence of a history of Greek cinema constituted an obvious gap in the curriculum of Greek studies.

My perception was that we needed a narrative account of how Greek cinema evolved in contrast or comparison to other cinematic traditions in the Balkans and Europe. By researching further I understood that beyond the literary achievements of Greek writers, the cinematic work of Greek directors was in many ways equal or even surpassed many filmmakers from global cinemas and needed a comprehensive, fair and accurate presentation.

apo tin akri

From the edge of the city, Constantinos Giannaris (1998). Watch Giannaris film online here

In your work you often mention that Greek film culture “deserves more recognition and credit”. Why is that? Moreover, as you conclude in ‘A History of Greek Cinema’, “In reality, many good films were produced in Greece and some of them could be safely and comfortably labeled as “great films” in the European or even global canon”. To which films are you referring?

Very few people world-wide know that Greek cinema is one of the oldest cinematic traditions in Europe. The fact that Greece was a small ‘market’ but managed to produce more than 7, 000 films indicated that the realm of images was an extremely important cultural form of expression for Greek society and a distinct socializing experience for Greek people.

Most people know for example Michael Cacoyannis’ Zorba the Greek (1964) or for more artistic audiences Theo Angelopoulos’ The Travelling Players (1975). However early films like Dimitris Gaziadis’ Astero (1929) or Orestis Laskos’ Daphnis and Chloe (1931) are films that deserve more study and analysis as the foundational filmic texts of Greek cinema. What we see in them remained one of the most enduring threads of semiotic resignification throughout the last 100 years of cinematic production.

There are also many other films whose quality and complexity stands next to the best productions of Hollywood and European cinemas. I just want to mention Michael Cacoyannis’ A Girl in Black (1956), Nikos Koundouros’ Young Aphrodites (1963) and Constantinos Giannaris’ From the Edge of the City (1997), films with their own aesthetic philosophy and visual form. Furthermore, films like Maria Plyta’s Eve (1953) or Greg Tallas’ The Barefoot Battalion (1954) even Yannis Dalianidis’ Stephania (1965) are films which deserve to be discussed for their unique organization of visual time and space. The whole oeuvre of Yorgos Tzavellas is, according to my opinion, at the same level as Jean Renoir’s and Rene Clair’s.

Young AfroditesYoung Aphrodites, Nikos Koundouros (1963)

You state that a Renaissance of Greek cinema is currently taking place, “which, breaking through the barriers of language and introspection, constructs a significant new chapter in the history of European and global cinema”. Is this renaissance a cultural product of the economic crisis?

I think that the renaissance started before the crisis as a crisis in representation before becoming a crisis of what was represented. The first films of what I call the ‘radical un-imagining’ of Greek cinematic tradition were those by Nikos Nikolaides, an un-imagining which in its early stages culminated with Yorgos Lanthimos’ Kinetta (2004), a film that turned Theo Angelopoulos’ Reconstruction (1970) upside down.

Also Yannis Oikonomides’ films deconstructed the language, ideology and sexuality on which the cultural complacency of the urban petit-bourgeoisie was founded. I believe that the renaissance started after the Athens Olympics in 2004 when the whole edifice of conspicuous consumption and reckless spending took monumental dimensions. A deep structural incongruity between image and reality became initially obvious and in several years disastrous. The new cinema was the consequence of a profound cultural implosion that engulfed the Greek imaginary and was crystalized around forms of disaster and catastrophe even in comedies (prime example is P.N. Koutras’ The Attack of the Giant Moussaka).

As you suggest in your work, the so-called Weird Wave that emerged after 2005 with Yorgos Lanthimos and Athina Rachel Tsangari, deconstructed all codes of representation that legitimised the dominant political order. Would you like to elaborate? What do you think about the term Weird Wave?

The foundations of the dominant political order were legitimized by a belief in the perenniality of Greek language, the idealization of the family institution, the myth of historical victimhood of the nation and finally of the ideology of a vital transparency in the cultural imaginary of the country. With Lanthimos, Tsangari, Panos Koutras and Costas Zappas, these pillars of self-deception were single-handedly demolished. Greek landscapes, the archetypal forms of lucidity and rationality were covered by shadows, dark secrets and incomprehensible words. The so-called ‘weird wave’ looks weird outside Greece but within the country it is what I call “the cinema of transgression.” It is a new form of representation that challenges, dismantles and demolishes. It is not destructive; it de-constructs but in a way that gives new momentum to the visual tradition that started after the war. When we realize how Stella becomes Strella we immediately see the continuity and the rupture of this new form of representation.


The quest for Greekness has been an important aspect in Greek arts and literature since the 30’s. What was its impact on Greek Cinema?

Historically, the quest for Greekness indicated lack, loss and absence, something that was the case after the Asia Minor Catastrophe. It appeared fleetingly in Astero and in some other neglected masterworks of the 30s, like The Refugee Girl. But the German Occupation and the Civil War raised new questions and defined new existential, political and stylistic quests which had more to do with class, status and power and less with history, memory or landscape. The new perception of the self emerged with Tzavellas, Gregoris Gregoriou and Cacoyannis who struggled to construct a new style for the new reality while using the underdeveloped infrastructure of small private studios. Tzavellas’ Applause (1944) is the film which re-imagined the representational codes that dominated Greek cinema with an ingenious use of montage and editing.

Following him, Gregoriou, Maria Plyta, Alekos Sakellarios and Dinos Dimopoulos established new codes of visual self-perception which later became more sophisticated and complex by directors like Roviros Mathoulis, Kostas Manousakis, Panos Glykofridis and Costas Andritsos: each one of them constructed a new style for the multiple political, sexual and class identities that emerged during the 60s. An oscillation between representational empathy and abstraction, between melodrama and critical realism offered a new impetus just around the 1967 dictatorship. The New Greek Cinema of the 1970s is the product of the immense tension between conflicting social energies, incongruous visual styles and colliding perceptions of the self.

Greekness took many forms because it represented the polymorphous diversity of desires that we find in Greek society after the 60s. In the 80s, Greekness was transformed to new perceptions of gender and sexuality whereas in the 90s expanded to the resident aliens, the immigrants. In the new millennium Greek identity became associated with global trends, discourses and codes regaining a universality that transcends barriers of language and historical experience.

In “Realism in Greek Cinema”, you mostly focus on the work of five Greek Cinema directors: Michael Cacoyannis, Nikos Koundouros, Yannis Dalianidis, Theo Angelopoulos and Antoinetta Angelidi, all representing distinct cinema styles and approaches. Which were the criteria for your choice?

First of all I wanted to map out a complete picture of cinematic production in the country. I included a chapter on Cacoyannis, as nothing was written on his complete oeuvre in English, intended to focus on his less known films, beyond Stella and Zorba the Greek. His first film Windfall in Athens (1954) for example represents a turning point to the construction of the new visual idiom that established what we call ‘national Greek cinema’. Furthermore I wanted his masterpiece Electra (1962) to be re-interpreted as his response to postwar existentialist angst as expressed by Ingmar Bergman. Electra stands on the same level both stylistically and philosophically as The Seventh Seal. And while it is true that his other films do not have the visual strength and stylistic coherence of his early creative period, his whole work represents a social commentary on the violent transformation of Greek society towards the capitalist organization of time and therefore of social relations.

The same perception was behind the chapter on the most neglected director Nikos Koundouros. Despite the fact that many critics believe that his Ogre of Athens (O Drakos) is the finest film ever made in the country nothing was also written in English on his work. Koundouros was a truth-seeker in films like The Outlaws, The River, Vortex and especially 1922: he was the first director who confronted the successive traumas of history and tried to deal with their lingering impact by transforming them into public discourse and cultural discussion. Unfortunately his work is not known outside Greece and the chapter in my book wanted to cover this gap.

Usually we ignore or denigrate the ‘commercial cinema’ of Yannis Dalianidis but in my reading I found in his films one of the most ruthless critics of the Greek petit-bourgeoisie and its ideological regimes. I insisted on the films he made during the most productive period of his career, between 1964 and 1975, when, together with his musicals and comedies, he released some of the most vicious attacks against dominant ideas about normality, sexual identity and political ideology. I think that his film The Sinners (1971), which was never released, still remains one of the most rebellious and subversive films made in the country. His film The Story of a Life (1966) is, I believe, one of the most significant feminist films ever made in the country exposing the capitalist exploitation of the female body in all classes of society.

As for Theo Angelopoulos, who is well-known, I approached him from the perspective of what I call his ‘ocular poetics.’ He was the first director who tried to teach the viewer’s eye to watch filmic images with cinematic intelligence and sensibility. Beyond his politics and his post-political melancholia, I saw him as the director who throughout his films experimented with light and color, and therefore as a major formal innovator globally. His magnificent achievement in infusing colors with emotional and self-critical content links him to the work of Kurosawa and Godard. He is one of the few global directors who succeeded in making color an integral part of cinematic iconography, with images ranging between expressionism, impressionism and hyper-realism in a surprising way transcending the obsessions of his left-wing ideological disenchantment.

Antouaneta Angelidi is also the most important film-maker in the tradition of what we call ‘experimental’ or “avant-garde cinema.’ Very few people know of the extremely complex works of Costas Sfikas, Thanasis Rentzis and many others which were produced in the country and can safely take a prominent position next to the most significant experimental films world-wide. Angelidi’s four films stand out as unique explorations of the limits of cinematic representation as well as hypnotic images foregrounding the archetypal platonic forms under the ephemerality of visual impressions.

So my purpose was to give a comprehensive account of the diversity and the complexity of filmmaking in Greece. In the introductory section of the book, I delineated the historical ruptures that made Greek cinema possible (what I call Greek visuality). Namely the discovery of perspective and the abandonment of the two-dimensional space of Byzantine iconography, the introduction of a new perception of filmic time through montage and exploration of different forms of realism in order to express the unstable realities of historical experience.

Since 1929 the dominant moods of the filmic imaginary in Greece remained those of trauma and mourning, with the relief offered by comedies also foregrounding a sense of dislocation and displacement mainly from rustic communitarianism to the anonymity of large urban centers.

dogtoothDogtooth, Yorgos Lanthimos (2009)

It seems that there is an increasing interest in family, gender and queer sexuality in Modern Greek studies. Which Greek cinema aspects could be viewed in this perspective? 

From the first Greek film Golfo, in 1911, the central question was always about the inferior position of women in society and their peculiar representation in public discourse. Gender was at the central organizational principle of all images produced from Gaziadis to Pandelis Voulgaris – both female and male. In the beginning women were the central focus of cinematic images as innocent girls or femmes fatales, as mothers, sisters, wives or lovers. Their sexuality was always unsettling, or even threatening, as we see in most films by George Tzavellas or mischievously popularized by the only star of the industry, Aliki Vouyouklaki.

In the 70s and 80s masculinity and male sexuality were also problematized and unsettled the norms of representation. I think that ‘queer’ Greek films go back to Dalianidis’ closeted sexuality, or even further to Cacoyannis’ cryptic Eroica. Queering Greek films does not mean simply homosexualising them: it means pointing out the submerged libidinal currents that unsettled the moral certainties of dominant social groups and classes. Greek Film studies will be benefited by such approaches as long as they remain historically informed. My main point throughout my two books on Greek cinema is that Greek films form a continuous conversation between filmmakers and their audience, but above all between society and its historical trajectory.

Finally, many things remain to be discovered. Early films which believed to be lost, or films which have been neglected for various reasons. The formal aesthetics of cinematic representation in the country also needs to be explored. The lonely enigmatic figures of Takis Kanelopoulos and Stavros Tornes invite new explorations of cinematic visualities in the country.

For these reasons I believe that the importance of Greek cinema as a unique cultural achievement will increase and expand. As scholars of Greek culture in all its manifestations, we must articulate a language which will situate and interpret the achievements of Greek filmmakers in order to help other scholars to construct theoretical models and hermeneutical positions accounting for the development, form and ideology of cinematic images in Greece.

* Interview by Florentia Kiortsi

Read Vrassidas Karalis' History of Greek Cinema [the full text] here & a book review in Filmicon Journal.



Combining innovation and extrovert entrepreneurship, start-ups in Greece leave no room for doubt that the country participates in the IT/digital revolution. Whereas the Greek startup industry is still in its early development, there exist success stories and strong indicators that it is capable of creating benefits for the Greek economy. Since 2013, tech startups coming from Greece have managed to build worldclassproducts, score multi-million dollar rounds from worldclassinvestors and exit to worldclasscorporations. Taxi-beat, BugSense, Crypteia Networks, AbZorba Games, e– and others were founded and developed in Greece and then sold to foreign investors. Furthermore, relevant data suggest that Greek SMEs have a strong attitude towards innovation and that, despite the low R&D intensity, remarkable efforts have been made in recent years to preserve public investment. Main challenges include improvement of the framework conditions by reducing barriers to entrepreneurship and establishment of a systematic evaluation process of the public R&I system, including policies and funding, to further strengthen its quality.

Tech start-ups blooming in Greece is not accidental. Skilful human capital, hard earned experience, start-up culture and funding, constitute the main assets which allow for competitive and extrovert businesses. A useful tool in the hands of those interested in raising funds is, i.e. the institutional agency which provides support for foreign direct investments, promotes the international attractiveness of Greece as a start-up investors’ destination, and fosters the Greek innovation ecosystem through funding solutions at every stage (seed, start-up, early growth or development). Entrepreneurs can choose among three types of funding solutions: Greek state/EU Funding, purely European Union, purely private.


A Q&A follows with Efstratios Zafiris, Secretary General for Industry, Ministry of Economy and Development and Head of "" Read more information about fund raising perspectives after the Q&A.

What are the features of the start-up policy implemented by the Ministry of Economy and Development?

The Ministry of Economy and Development designs and implements policies aimed at strengthening Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and supporting new businesses, motivating dynamically developing start-ups. Multi-faceted institutional interventions are planned to remove barriers to entrepreneurship in terms of the establishment, licensing and operation of businesses. Examples include the “new development law”, co-funded state aid schemes, modern financial tools, start-up support structures (e.g., European programs for SME competitiveness, research and innovation. The Ministry's basic guidelines are to provide support to start-ups throughout their development cycle, encourage clusters, promote innovative new entrepreneurship, simplify licensing of economic activities, and so on.

Start-ups are often used as an example of how the Greek economy can return to growth. Could you elaborate on the ways that start-ups are a boost factor of the country’s financial ecosystem? 

Start-ups are seen as an important lever for the Greek economy. By implementing new and innovative ideas, they fill existing gaps in the market, thus increasing GDP. They can also fill gaps in existing value chains. The majority of start-ups are targeting the international market, helping to inflow funds into the country. In addition, start-ups can become a mechanism for linking research centers with industries and production units. It is obvious that they create a significant number of new jobs.

From your experience so far, as institutional agency for start-ups, can you describe us the critical needs of young entrepreneurs who address to you? 

From our experience so far, as an institutional organization for start-ups, their most critical need is funding. Furthermore, business development and marketing are also very important to start-ups. Also, many young entrepreneurs face difficulty in finding qualified staff for their companies. With regard to financing needs, young entrepreneurs are trying to secure funding, both from European funding programs and from Greek investment funds. Finally, the majority doesn’t count on bank lending.

According to the latest data Greece ranks 9th in number of participants signed contracts and 12thin budget share (EU-28) for Horizon 2020. How do you comment on that? Is there room for improvement?

The fact that Greece holds the abovementioned positions is very important. It is hopeful that Greece can rise to higher positions in the future. There is clearly room for improvement and this will be done by better understanding the requirements for participation in Horizon 2020, which is the most significant program for Research and Innovation in the EU. It is particularly crucial to link research to production. Research results should lead to new innovative products, the great ideas that arise in the laboratory, have to be transported to the market.


More information about raising funds for start-ups in Greece

Greatly facilitated by the creation of EU-backed venture capital funds that specifically target technology start-ups in Greece, successive governments placed emphasis on startup companies. More specifically, the so-called “JEREMIE funds” were put together in late 2012 under a scheme of public and private co-financing in a 70/30% ratio. Under the management of the European Investment Fund-EIF, public financing came from national and EU structural funds (from the national Operational Programme ‘Digital Convergence’ and JEREMIE scheme), while the private financing came from both institutional and individual private investors. Following the expiry of the JEREMIE funds investment period having expired, the government is seeking to move forward tech entrepreneurship and funding opportunities for scalable businesses. To this end, a new fund-of-funds is being set up along with EIF in order to pour at least €260 million to Greek startups through intermediary Venture Capitals and Private Equity funds.

Widening the Horizons - EU's Horizon 2020 for SMEs including start-ups

In terms of purely EU funding solutions, Horizon 2020 is a game-changer. The biggest EU Research and Innovation programme ever with nearly €80 billion of funding available over 7 years (2014 to 2020) is the financial instrument implementing the Innovation Union, a Europe 2020 flagship initiative aimed at securing Europe's global competitiveness. By coupling research and innovation, Horizon 2020 places great emphasis on excellent science, industrial leadership and tackling societal challenges, so that Europe is able to produce world-class science, to remove barriers to knowledge, research & innovation and  to facilitate public and private sector synergies in delivering innovation.

H2020 supports SMEs with a new instrument that runs throughout various funded research and innovation fields, enhances EU international research and Third Country participation, attaches high importance to integrate social sciences and humanities encourages to develop a gender dimension in project. Cosme is a special Programme for the COmpetitiveness of Enterprises and SMEs (COSME) that will run from 2014 to 2020, with a planned budget of €2.3bn. It will facilitate SME access to finance, create supportive environment for business creation, help small businesses operate outside their home countries and improve their access to markets.

The National Documentation Centre acts as a National Contact Point for Horizon 2020 and according to the latest data (May 2017) 1,437 participants from Greece have received, thus far, a financial contribution of €437.26 million. Total number of SME participants reached 312,receiving €82.84 million. Greece ranks 9th in number of participants signed contracts and 12th in budget share (EU-28). Top five beneficiaries include:Centre for Research and Technology Hellas (CERTH) Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas (FORTH) Institute of Communication and Computer Systems (ICCS), National Technical University of Athens (NTUA) and University of Athens (UoA).

Watch the video with former EU Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science, Geoghegan-Quinn explaining Horizon 2020.