Title: Exploring social support actions as alternative forms of … · 2014-08-23 · Exploring...
Transcript of Title: Exploring social support actions as alternative forms of … · 2014-08-23 · Exploring...
Exploring Social Support Actions as Alternative
Forms of Resilience in a Greek Urban
Community
Stefania Kalogeraki, Samy Alexandridis &
Marina Papadaki*
Department of Sociology, University of Crete, Greece
Paper to be presented at the ECPR (European Consortiumfor Political Science) General Conference, University of
Glasgow, 3-6 September 2014
Work in progress, please do not cite or quote without authors'
permission
*Stefania Kalogeraki is lecturer, Samy Alexandridis is PhD candidate andMarina Papadaki is specialized technical and laboratory staff in the Departmentof Sociology, University of Crete, Greece.Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
2
Abstract
Since 2008 Greece has faced an unprecedented economic crisis with multifacetedimpacts on individuals’ lives. In response to the crisis social support actions havebeen organised including individual and collective economic and non-economicactivities that target to counterbalance recession’s detrimental consequences. Themain rationale of the mixed method study is to explore collective responses of socialsupport actions (e.g., soup kitchens, free distribution of material staff, free medicalcare) to socio-economically deprived individuals in a Greek urban community, i.e.Chania. Based on the community resilience framework, the quantitative part of themixed method design unveils the escalating trend in social support actions as therecession deepens whereas the qualitative study explores social support actions as oneof the critical elements of the community capacity of social capital in Chania to copewith and adapt to the acute economic crisis.
Key words: resilience, social support actions, social capital, economic crisis,Greece, mixed method design
1. Introduction
The recent global financial crisis has threatened the prosperity and economic security
of Eurozone. Greece has been at the epicentre of the crisis and one of the Eurozone
member-states most severely affected. The country in order to avoid default received
massive bailouts1 that involved the implementation of radical reductions in
Government expenditures and austerity programmes that featured severe cuts in
salaries, pensions and social benefits as well as sharp increases in taxes (e.g. VAT and
property taxes).
Although the structural adjustment and the austerity measures aimed at reducing the
country’s fiscal deficit, since 2008 the Greek economy has been deteriorated
indicating no improvements of tackling the increasing sovereign debt. The country’s
general government gross debt (as a percentage of GDP) escalated from 112.9% in
2008 to 175.1% in 2013, which is the highest in the European Union-28 and the
Eurozone2. Moreover, in 2013, Greece became the first developed nation to be
downgraded from a developed to an emerging economy (MSCI, 2013), unveiling the
failure of the implemented structural reform programmes to improve country’s fiscal
position.
1 From the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Commission (EC).2 Available from:http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=teina225
3
Beyond the economic figures the recession has devastating impacts on Greek people’s
lives as they have experienced an unprecedented decline in their living standards. The
official unemployment rate skyrocketed between 2008 and 2013 from 7.7% to 27.3%,
whereas youth unemployment (younger than 25 years old) escalated to a record of
58.6% in 20133. Moreover, the austerity measures have led to significant reductions in
households’ incomes which between 2007 and 2012 dropped by one third, indicating
the biggest decrease in the OECD countries and four times as big as the loss recorded
in the average Eurozone countries (OECD, 2014). Since 2008, broader segments of
the Greek population have been threatened with poverty, as severe deprivation
increased between 2008 and 2012 from 11.2% to 19.5%4 and the percentage of people
at risk of poverty or social exclusion for the same time period raised from 28.1% to
34.6%5. Moreover, the severe public spending cuts in health and social security as
well as other social benefits have further contributed to more Greeks being exposed to
poverty, inequality and inability to access primary services (OECD, 2014).
As the Greek social safety nets diminish, new socially excluded groups have emerged
which have experienced all the major and extreme aspects of poverty and social
exclusion due to the economic meltdown. The economic crisis has led to a sharp
increase in homelessness in Greece and “neo-homeless”, i.e. a new generation of
homeless people who up until recently had a satisfactory standard of living and many
of them are well-educated (Theodorikakou et al., 2012; Theodorikakou, Alamanou &
Katsadoros, 2013). Moreover, an escalating number of patients have been seeking free
medical care and services (Doctors of the World, 2013) whereas there is an alarming
increase in individuals eating free meals in soup kitchens and food banks (Tsatsou,
2012). Given the sharp increase in the individuals experiencing severe deterioration in
their well-being, the President of the Greek section of the ‘Doctors of the World’,
Nikitas Kanakis6, underlines
It is no exaggeration to suggest that what we are faced with in Greece is nolonger a debt crisis, or a crisis in the economy, but a humanitarian crisisreminiscent of those occurring in impoverished parts of the world.
3Available from : http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=une_rt_a&lang=en4 Available from : http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_mddd11&lang=en5 Available from : http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_peps01&lang=en6 Available from : http://www.projetoulisses.net/2012/12/greece-humanitarian-crisis.html
4
During a period of economic turmoil, the Greek society has stepped into cover for the
gaps in social protection left by the Greek state. In response to the crisis social support
actions have been organised from groups of citizens, formal and informal community
networks, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), different associations (e.g.,
charitable associations, professional associations etc) and the Orthodox Church
(Sotiropoulos, 2013a; Sotiropoulos & Bourikos, 2014). These activities target to assist
socio-economically deprived individuals to improve their means of subsistence and
healthcare including soup kitchens, free distribution of clothes and other material
staff, free health care and medicines, educational services etc.
The main rationale of the mixed method study is to explore social support actions as
one of the critical elements of the community capacity of social capital in a Greek
urban community, i.e. Chania to become resilient by coping with the recession’s
detrimental consequences and adapting to the acute economic crisis.
2. Theoretical background: Community resilience, social capital and social
support actions
The term resilience derives its origins from the Latin ‘resilio’, meaning ‘leap or spring
back’ or ‘rebound’7. Resilience has been initially employed in sciences such as
ecology, materials sciences and psychology underlying different concepts and
theoretical perspectives. The field in which it was originally used is ecology with the
pioneering work of Holling (1973) describing the capacity of an ecosystem to bounce
back by adapting to changes from environmental stresses and disturbances
maintaining its existing state of functioning. Moreover, the term has been applied in
physics of material sciences to describe the elasticity of materials, i.e. their ability to
return to their original form after having been compressed or bent (Bodin & Wiman,
2004) whereas resilience has been also studied in the field of psychology to describe
how individuals cope with major life events and traumas (Bonanno, 2005).
Recently, social scientists have incorporated basic concepts, primarily derived from
the ecological perspective of resilience, to develop the term of community resilience.
Community resilience is broadly defined as a multidimensional, complex,
multilayered process through which communities demonstrate a capacity to respond
7 Available from: http://www.latin-dictionary.net/definition/33432/resilio-resilire-resilui
5
positively to adverse events (Wickes, Zahnow & Mazerolle, 2010). Despite this broad
approach, there is limited agreement on what exactly community resilience is which
becomes evident from the plethora of definitions traced in relevant literature. Some
definitions characterize community resilience as an attribute of the community and
others as a process, some emphasize issues of adaptation (i.e. the community adapts to
adversity by changing the way it functions or by using resources in innovative ways)
and others of resistance (i.e. the community resists adversity to avoid change) whereas
some definitions underline that community resilience emerges only in periods of crisis
whilst others consider it as a continuing part of the community (CARRI, 2013).
Despite the lack of definitional clarity and the numerous conceptualizations of
community resilience, the concept is often understood in terms of community capacity
and as a process of positive adaptation to adverse events (Coles & Buckle, 2004;
Pfefferbaum et al., 2007; Twigg, 2009; Magis, 2010, Berkes & Ross, 2013).
With respect to the former, community resilience has been often used as synonymous
of community capacity8. For instance, Coles and Buckle (2004:6) define resilience as
the “capacity, skills and knowledge” of a community to participate meaningfully in
the recovery from disasters whereas Pfefferbaum et al. (2007:349) underline that
community resilience reflects community’s ability to take collective action in order to
remedy adverse events. Similarly, Chaskin (2008) defines community capacity as the
ability to collectively act in the face of severe events and disasters. This capacity can
operate through “the actions and interactions of individuals, organizations, and the
relational networks among them, often informally, but also through targeted,
organized action” (Chaskin, 2008:70).
Community resilience not only incorporates the concept of community capacity but
also is intertwined with the process of adaptation. The linkage has been made explicit
in Norris et al. (2008) theoretical model, in which resilience is defined as “a process
linking a set of adaptive capacities to a positive trajectory of functioning and
adaptation after a disturbance” (Norris et al., 2008:131). The specific definition
advances community resilience as a process, as it highlights the inherent and dynamic
mechanisms, resources and conditions that allow community to absorb the impacts
and cope with adverse events. Moreover, the definition provides for re-organisation,
8 Although Magis (2010) recognises the overlap between community capacity and communityresilience, the author underlines that the former focuses broadly on all matters associated withcommunity whereas community resilience involves issues related to community’s capacity to adapt tochange.
6
change and adaptation that occur after disasters and acute events have taken place and
underlines key adaptive capacities which are critical for community resilience. More
specifically, Norris et al. (2008) refer to a set of four networked adaptive capacities,
i.e. ‘Information and Communication’, ‘Economic Development’, ‘Community
Competence’ and ‘Social Capital’,9 which are part of the social and economic fabric
of the community and shape the processes of resilience, i.e. community’s ability to
“bounce back” from severe disasters.
Social capital is associated with the rationale of the present study, as it can be
enhanced through the community capacity for collective actions, i.e. community’s
members engagement and participation to collective actions in times of adversity and
change (Walker et al., 2010). In literature social capital is widely acknowledged as a
facilitator of community resilience (Mayunga, 2008; Magis, 2010, Sherrieb et al.,
2010). For instance, Aldrich (2012) describes different types of social capital that
assist communities to cope with and recover from different shocks and stresses.
Mayunga (2008) considers social capital as one of the five forms of community’s
capital10 including networks, norms and trust which are considered key driving forces
of community resilience. Similarly, Twigg (2009) advocates that characteristics such
as mutual support systems, social networks, established communication and
information channels constitute critical components of social capital in resilient
communities.
The present study recognizes the critical role of social capital as an adaptive capacity
of community resilience; hence it focuses on specific elements of social capital as
developed in Norris et al. (2008) model. The specific capacity includes three critical
components, i.e. network structures and linkages, social support and community
bonds. According to Goodman et al. (1998), network structures and linkages
constitute an important attribute of community capacity that enhance social capital
through inter-organizational networks which are characterized by reciprocal links,
9 ‘Information and Communication’ refers to the ways that communities provide accurate, reliable andtrusted sources of information during different phases of severe disturbances or disasters. ‘EconomicDevelopment’ involves issues associated with the level and diversity of economic resources, the equityof their distribution and the efforts made to alleviate poverty among social vulnerable groups.‘Community Capacity’ reflects community’s solving skills and abilities for collaborative actions inorder to address specific problems during adverse events.10 According to Mayunga (2008), the five forms of community’s capital include social, economic,human, physical and natural capital.
7
frequent supportive interactions, the ability to form new associations as well as
cooperative decision-making processes.
Social support captures the “social interactions that provide individuals with actual
assistance and embed them into a web of social relationships perceived to be loving,
caring, and readily available in times of need” (Norris et al., 2008: 138). Social
support involves received and perceived support; the former denotes the actual help
provided and the latter the perceptions of availability of help in times of need. The
received or perceived help may be provided from informal networks including family
and friendship relationships as well as from formal agencies and take the form of
emotional, informational or tangible support.
The concept of community bonds in Norris et al. (2008) resilience framework
primarily involves issues associated with citizen or social participation and the sense
of community. The former is characterized by strong participant base, diverse
networks that enable different interests to take collective actions as well as citizens’
involvement in community activities providing assistance during severe events
(Goodman et al., 1998). Sense of community constitutes an attribute of bonding, in
terms of trust and feelings of belonging with other members of society as well as in
terms of developing high concern for community matters, the sense of connection and
shared values. Overall community bonds act as an element of social capital that
motivate individuals to “develop effective ways of coping with the challenges of
living,” thereby providing community with “the capacity and resourcefulness to cope
positively with adversity” (Sonn & Fisher, 1998:459).
Although the theoretical framework of community resilience has been primarily
applied to explore the community capacity to cope with natural and human-caused
disasters (e.g. hurricanes, earthquakes, fires, floods etc) the present study focuses on
the adverse event of the acute Greek economic crisis. Different scholars include in
their definitions of community resilience the economic (e.g. extreme poverty) and
socio-political dimensions of adverse events (Adger, 2000; Pfefferbaum et al., 2007);
however to the best of our knowledge the specific framework has not been applied for
economic crises. The rationale of the mixed method design is to explore social
support activity as an indicator of the community capacity of social capital in the
urban area of Chania that reflects one of the components of community resilience
during the process of adaptation to the detrimental consequences of the Greek crisis.
8
3. Methods
3.1 Mixed method design
The present study applies a mixed method design to explore social support actions in
Chania between 2010 and 2012. The study applies a concurrent (or parallel) design
(i.e. the quantitative and qualitative study are conducted the same time period) with
the rationale of complementarity. In a complementarity mixed method design, the
results from different methods serve to elaborate and enhance the overall
interpretations that tap into different facets of the same complex phenomenon (Greene
et al., 1989), i.e. social support actions.
It should be noted that in the empirical examination of community resilience, social
support refers to the assistance provided from networks of family and friends (Norris
et al., 2008; Sherrieb et al., 2010). However, the present study adopts a wider
approach exploring social support as collective activity. This approach emerges from
the sharp increase in collective responses (including forms of organized, tangible
support actions) detected in the Greek society during the Greek economic crisis
(Sotiropoulos & Bourikos, 2014). Under such framework, the study explores social
support as collective actions that have been organized (e.g. from NGOs, local social
movement organizations, the Orthodox Church etc.) in Chania and target to support
the vulnerable members in terms of health, education, food, shelter and access to other
basic material staff, i.e. the social goods that considered to be essential for a decent
standard of living (Matsaganis 2004).
3.1.1 Aim and method of quantitative study
The quantitative study of the mixed method design explores main characteristics of
social support actions (such as time tendency, diversity of forms and aims, types of
organizing agencies, calls to the local community to participate) as elements of the
community capacity of social capital in Chania to cope with the crisis’ detrimental
consequences. The method applied is inspired from the quantitative approach of event
analysis which is primarily used to study collective action events (Earl et al., 2004)
and specifically protest events (Koopmans & Rucht, 2002). The method in the present
study is based on the data collection of newspaper articles (from the most popular
9
daily local newspaper ‘Chaniotika Nea’)11 that are relevant to the events of social
support actions. The event, the unit of data collection and the unit of data analysis are
designated to social support action as it is previously defined12. Overall, newspaper
articles for 229 social support actions are recorded and used in the analysis. It should
be noted that one of the major limitations of the specific method is that it records only
social support actions that have been published in the press, hence excludes the
activities that are not published in newspapers.
3.1.2 Aim and method of qualitative study
The qualitative study of the mixed method design explores the interpretive schemata
that frame social support actions during the period under study. More specifically,
the study investigates the discourses and frames of social support actions conducted
from specific agencies by examining elements of social capital as one of the
community capacities to become resilient during an era of severe economic
recession.
The qualitative methods applied are frame analysis, discourse analysis and
participant observation. The participant observation method uses resources and data
collected from systematic observation, immediate writing down, study in the natural
and/or social setting and informal interviews during the events of social support
activity. Frame analysis is used to the newspaper articles derived from the
quantitative study. The specific technique’s origins are traced in Goffman’s concept
where frames are the schemata that “allow individuals to locate, perceive, identify
and label events with in their life space and the world at large” (Goffman, 1974).
In the present study, Snow and Benford’s (1992) frame analysis’ approach of
collective action is applied. In the specific methodological path of the sociology of
collective action, the frames serve as accenting devices that redefine a social
condition as unjust, immoral and deserving corrective action. Diagnostic frame is the
term that describes the discourses of the social problem identifications and the
prognostic frame describes the narrations of problem resolution (Snow & Benford,
1992). Motivational frame serves as a call for action. When the actions’ frames are
connected with the wider belief system and are relevant to the participants’ realities
11 The data collection of the published newspaper articles is between May 2010 and April 2012. Thespecific period is associated with particular events. May of 2010 is the first bailout received from IMFand EC and April 2012 is one month before the national elections of May 2012.12 For more information on the study, see Papadaki 2014.
10
and narrations large scale social changes can be achieved through frame alignments
(Bedford & Snow, 2000). According to the “Frame Analysis Theory” there are four
types of frame alignment, i.e. frame bridging, frame amplification, frame extension
and frame transformation. Frame bridging acts as the linkage between ideologically
congruent frames. Frame amplification refers to the clarification and empowerment
of the interpretive schemata of corrective action. Frame extension is the effort to
incorporate different participants by extending boundaries of the proposed frames in
order to include the views and interests of different groups. Frame transformation
takes place when new values, meanings and understandings arise through
transformative actions that secure participation (Bedford & Snow, 2000).
4. Results
4.1 Quantitative analysis results
Figure 1 illustrates the time pattern of social support actions with respect to their
monthly occurrence between May 2010 and April 2012. The figure shows a periodical
occurrence but also an increasing trend of social support actions with peak periods on
Christmas and Easter months. The results are in agreement with specific traits of the
Greek Orthodox culture which demonstrates a plethora of philanthropic actions during
these important events of Orthodoxy.
Figure 1. Total social support actions between May 2010 and April 2012
May
201
0
June
201
0
July
2010
Augu
st 2
010
Sept
embe
r 201
0
Oct
ober
201
0
Nov
embe
r 20
10
Dec
embe
r 201
0
Janu
ary
2011
Febr
uary
201
1
Mar
ch 2
011
April
201
1
May
201
1
June
201
1
July
2011
Augu
st 2
011
Sept
embe
r 201
1
Oct
ober
201
1
Nov
embe
r 20
11
Dec
embe
r 201
1
Janu
ary
2012
Febr
uary
201
2
Mar
ch 2
012
April
201
2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2 1 15 6
36
22
42
4
11
4
10
4 53
9
14
57
911
14
22
11
However, the sharp escalation of actions between, for instance December 2010 (22
actions) and December 2011 (57 actions) is interpreted as the outcome of the dramatic
increase in needs that emerged due to the economic crisis. Although social support
actions were also present before the crisis, the analysis indicates the increasing trend
in collective social support as the economic crisis deepens, providing some
preliminary evidence of the rapid mobilization of community capacity to cope with
the recession’s impacts to the well-being of community members (Norris et al., 2008).
Table 1 presents the distribution of social support actions according to the main
organizing agencies. The results illustrate a dynamic community as a whole and
further capture the most active agencies that organized such actions during the period
under study. The most active agencies include local social movement organizations,
associations (e.g. cultural clubs, women associations etc), public schools and NGOs
or volunteer organizations. It should be noted that except the local authorities13 social
support actions conducted from the above agencies are based exclusively on the
volunteer contribution of their members.
Table 1. Social support actions from main organizing agencies between May 2010and April 2012
Main organizing agencies Number ofactions
(%)
Local social movement organizations (e.g.collectivities assisting immigrants, occupied houses,networks of product exchanges etc.)
32 13.97
Associations (e.g. cultural clubs, women associationsetc.)
29 12.66
Local Authorities 29 12.66
Public schools (with the participation of students) 23 10.04
NGO & local volunteer organizations (e.g. 'Red Cross','Doctors of the World', local volunteer organization of'Splantzia')
21 9.17
Professional Unions (e.g. union of medical doctors,union of high school teachers etc.)
18 7.86
Private sector (e.g. small enterprises, private schoolsetc.)
17 7.42
Orthodox Church 14 6.11
Welfare Institutions for children (e.g. caring forchildren with disabilities or cancer)
14 6.11
13 Local authorities primarily involve actions which are carried out from their social servicesdepartments; however also a volunteer sector which partly supports social support actions has beenestablished.
12
Citizens' initiatives (e.g. group of artists, group offriends etc.)
12 5.24
Political Parties 8 3.49
EU (e.g. free food distribution program) 7 3.06
Scientific agencies (University of Oreon) 4 1.75
Associations with common social characteristics (e.g.association of multi-child families)
1 0.44
Total 229
Additionally, an interesting feature deriving from the data is that only the European
Union (EU) free distribution program represents a central institutional support effort,
whereas the rest actions are organized within the community of Chania either from
local organizations, collectivities and citizens’ initiatives or local sectors of NGO's
(e.g. 'Red Cross', 'Doctors of the World' etc), political parties and the Church. The
high degree of involvement of local agencies as well as the significant volunteer
contribution to these agencies indicates the increased engagement of community
members to the social support actions’ organization. Under such framework, the
results provide some elements of citizen or social participation, which is considered as
an important dimension of the community capacity of social capital and “a
fundamental element of community resilience” (Norris et al., 2008: 139).
Moreover, in Figure 2 the analysis indicates that issues associated with food and
health care are top priorities of social support actions. The high percentage (41.9%) of
actions that aim to gather and provide free food or meals reflects the alarming
situation of the socio-economically vulnerable individuals in Chania. During the
period of data collection, two soup kitchens organized from local social movement
organizations were added to the existing daily provision of meals by the local
volunteer organization of ‘Splantzia’. Moreover, the Church organized and supported
the provision of cooked food in many of its central parishes. The more bureaucratized
structure of ‘Social Grocery’ was organized from the municipality of Chania whereas
an additional ‘Social Grocery’ started to operate primarily supporting the residents of
a particular neighborhood in Chania (named ‘Xalepa’).
Unions, public schools, associations and private enterprises were collecting food to
support the above agencies of social support actions. Especially during Christmas and
Easter periods additional support was provided from the Church and organizations
such as the local sector of ‘Red Cross’ providing poor families with meat and sweets.
13
Similarly, women associations and cultural clubs prepared meals for young students in
primary schools.
Figure 2. Percentage (% on total number of 229 actions1) of social supportactions with respect to their overall aim of support
1 the % extents 100% since one action may has more than one aim
The majority of actions related to health issues aim to provide support to the free
access to the multi-clinic of the ‘Doctors of the World’ and/or welfare institutions for
children with cancer or disabilities. Moreover, the support included financial aid
and/or collection and supply of medicines. During the period of data collection, the
main agency providing healthcare on an ongoing basis was the local sector of
‘Doctors of the World’. However, the increasing needs led to the establishment of the
‘Social Pharmacy’ and the ‘Social Clinic’ from the unions of pharmacists and doctors,
respectively. All these permanent structures (operating up to now) aim to support
uninsured patients with no access to the National Healthcare Service (ESY) and
individuals who cannot afford buying their medicines.
The collection of clothes and other basics was also one of the main targets of social
support actions, which were usually combined with food collection. Additionally, a
very popular way of collecting goods was via cultural events (e.g. theater
performances, concerts, movie shows etc) where the equivalent of the ticket was no
longer money but for instance, a pasta package or a milk cartoon. An additional
popular activity is associated with exchange bazaars organized from the “Exchange
Network of Chania” or from schools and associations.
With respect to the educational support, several agencies including ELME (Union of
High School Teachers) and the Church organized free private tutoring lessons for
students with financial difficulties. Additionally, volunteers of local social movement
food
health
cloths
other goods
education
financial support
shelter
41,9
37,1
15,7
12,2
5,7
3,9
2,2
14
organizations provided Greek language lessons to immigrants, whereas an association
of women established a new library open to the public. In terms of shelter and aid to
homeless, free heaters and mattresses were provided from professional unions,
whereas the local authorities provided during the cold winter periods shelters to
homeless people14. The exploration of actions’ profile in terms of their aims and forms
provides some clues of their great diversity and variety in their patterns. It can be
argued that such characteristics (along with the increased number of actions) reflect
the intense community mobilization to cope with and adapt to the acute consequences
of the economic crisis.
As argued earlier, the most active organizing social support agencies relied on the
volunteer work of their own members. Besides the volunteering, many agencies
encouraged the local community of Chania to participate and/or support collective
actions. More specifically, the results indicate that 56.8% of the total number of
actions addressed a general call to the community to act and participate as a whole.
An interesting element is the fact that a small but significant number of actions took
place in the public space, thereby sending a message to the broader community. For
instance, cultural events took place in public squares and school courtyards whereas
food and clothes were gathered in street markets or in front of public buildings. These
attributes of social support actions provide some elements of a resilient community,
i.e. a community that tries to act as a unit in order to protect and promote the well-
being of its members during adverse events (Chaskin, 2007). Moreover, such actions
are likely to empower community bonds through a common sense of concern and
responsibility for those in need, hence strengthen the “sense of community’’ (Norris et
al., 2008: 139) during a recessionary era.
4.2 Qualitative analysis results
4.2.1 Complementary results concerning the range of social support actions
In the quantitative analysis social support actions of local social movement
organizations are represented with the highest percentage (almost 14%) of the total
actions (see Table 1). However, the qualitative analysis indicates that the specific
organizations are more active as not all of their actions are published in the press due
14 Despite the pressure of many local organizations who deal with the problem of homelessness, thespecific action lasted only for a limited time.
15
to the parallel use of autonomous media usage or social movement media resources
and self-organized media, independent social movement campaigns or even temporal
tensions with the newspaper of “Chaniotika Nea”. For instance, on a daily or weekly
basis there are food and clothing support actions of social movement organizations,
such as the “Social Centre-Immigrant Centre-Steki”, the “Immigrant Forum of
Crete”, the “Social Kitchen” or the “Rosa Nera Squat” which are not always
presented in the local newspapers. The same applies to other organizing agencies. On
a weekly basis there are food, clothing and health support actions organized from
local sectors of the “Red Cross” or the “Doctors of the World” which are rarely
published in the press. Under such framework, the qualitative analysis
counterbalances quantitative study’s limitations to record the full range of actions.
4.2.2 Sectors of social support activity
The qualitative analysis identifies three sectors of social support activity based on
their differences in organizing agencies’ network structures, organizational forms of
decision-making and participation as well as frames of action15. The first sector refers
to the “Local Social Movement Organizations” describing networks between
immigrants' and natives’ social movement organizations, occupied buildings,
networks of product exchanges, informal citizens’ initiatives and neighborhood
assemblies. The decision-making of the social support actions and the frames
processes in this sector is primarily horizontal, as a result of the equal participation in
grass root organizations.
The second sector refers to the “Formal Organizations and Institutions”, describing
social support activity of formal associations, volunteers or professionals of the local
authorities, public schools and scientific agencies, professional unions, the Church,
welfare institutions, formal citizens’ unions and associations, political parties and the
European Union (EU). In this sector, the decision-making of the social support
actions and frames processes derive from the formal responsibility of each institute,
union or association. Generally, there is no exclusion in participating or receiving
15 It should be noted that frame antagonism and conflicts are regular between the three sectors, i.e. the“Local Social Movement Organizations”, the “Formal Organizations and Institutions” and the “Localand International NGOs & Volunteer Organizations”. However, it is out of the scope of the presentpaper to explore these tensions.
16
benefits, except from specific social support centers of the local administration where
identification papers (I.D) are required as a precondition for support16.
The last sector of social support activity refers to the “Local and International NGOs
& Volunteer Organizations”. In this sector, the decision-making of the social support
actions and frames processes come from volunteers and (primarily) professional
members. Likewise the other sectors, no exclusions in receiving support are
identified.
4.2.3 Frame analysis, discourse analysis and participant observation
In the following sections the results from frame analysis, discourse analysis and
participant observation are presented. It should be noted that the qualitative analysis
focuses on social support actions conducted from the most active organizing agencies
(as depicted from the quantitative analysis, see Table 1) that have permanent support
infrastructures, considering them as representative cases in each of the three sectors
described above. In the first sector, the analysis derives from the social movement
organizations, in the second sector from the local authorities, the professional unions
and the Church, whereas in the third sector from the NGOs.
4.2.3.a Solidarity
The exploration of frames in the discourses of the writings and public speech of the
local social movement organizations shows that the main prognostic and motivational
concept that creates frame bridging is solidarity. Solidarity is framed both as a social
value and as a meaning of collective action that affects social change, socio-political
rights and social justice in the process of community adaptation to the adverse
consequences of the recession. Solidarity constitutes an interpretive schema that
frames social capital, as bridging between the discourses of different social movement
organizations. In an action call for collecting food and prepare Sunday meals
organized from the social movement organization “Steki” we read:
The Sunday Food Support is collecting food from everyone that
wants to help and participate in this solidarity action. (...) it is
16 There were also "solidarity actions only for Greeks" or "blood aim support only for Greeks" with aracial frame, as the far right-neonazi political party of "Golden Dawn" provided support only to peoplethat could prove with their I.D. that they are Greek.
17
established in the participation of all the people, even those that can
help with something small (...) everyone is welcome to participate in
cooking, package (...) Let's show that we have the ability to organize
a network of social support, mutual aid and solidarity in our town.
Nobody will be left alone during the crisis.
Solidarity is our weapon!
Solidarity has also become a common accepted social value and a dominant
interpretive schema amplified and extended from the social movement sector to the
discourses of the formal institutions and the NGOs. During the period under study,
the formal institutions transform their institutional prognostic narrations using more
often the concept of solidarity in their actions of social support. This becomes more
evident in social support networks between the social movement organizations and
specific agencies of the “Formal Organizations and Institutions” sector such as the
unions of doctors, of secondary education teachers and of hospital personnel. For
instance, in a newspaper article providing information on educational free lessons co-
organized from “Steki” and the formal institution of Secondary Education Teachers
Union (ELME), the frame alignment and the extension of solidarity as motivational
frame appears in their common discourse as:
(…) our aim is to create an environment of solidarity, social trust and
understanding (...) we accept that it is not enough to accept the social
existence of the "different" but also to recognize its importance and
its abilities to the pluralistic process capacities of the societies.
Although solidarity is an ambiguous concept, it embraces among others the idea of
mutual support, which is crucial in the interpretation of social support as one of the
elements of the social capital capacity in a resilient community (Norris et al. 2008).
4.2.3.b Social participation and social inclusion
In Norris et al. (2008) community resilience framework, one of the elements of social
capital is social participation, i.e. community members’ engagement in organizations
including different types of groups and associations. The qualitative analysis shows
that the social movement organizations encourage social participation for both
18
volunteers and beneficiaries of social support actions. For instance, in the newspaper
article mentioned before referring to the educational free lessons-network of the
social movement organization of “Steki” and the formal institution of Secondary
Education Teachers Union (ELME), we can read the narration of the ‘abilities of the
different’, when the aim of the action is described in terms of ‘equal participation and
not assimilation’ of the beneficiaries.
Moreover, an interviewed immigrant worker explains the educational support
provided in terms of equal social participation:
The educational support helps us to participate equally in
this society. We are learning so we can communicate (....)
we cooperate with natives and immigrants and now the
immigrants are also providing language lessons to
natives.
The social movement sector is primarily characterized from social support actions
that are self-organized from immigrant communities where equal participation is
insured. For instance, in organizations such as the “Immigrant Forum of Crete”, ex
beneficiaries of the local immigrant population become actors of social support. New
immigrant collectives find in these organizations the social capital to build new forms
of self-organization. Severely affected from the recession, socio-economic vulnerable
citizens, legal immigrants or ‘sans papiers’ often become participants through their
direct engagement in the social movement support activities in order to cope with the
acute consequences of the economic crisis.
The analysis shows that formal organizations and institutions frame their social
support actions with distinctions in social participation which primarily concerns the
specialists, the professionals and the volunteers (mostly native) and not the
beneficiaries who have a more passive role compared to the social movement sector.
For instance, during a ‘food collection for the poor’ organized by the local authorities
the interviewed mayor says:
the economic crisis is big
the social crisis is bigger
we call "those who have"
19
to give
to "those that don't have"
Almost all of the temporal support actions conducted from the local authority frame
social participation as a responsibility that concerns mostly ‘those who have’. ‘Those
who don't have’ play the passive role of a beneficiary of these actions, which is line
with the orthodox religion’s interpretation of social support. In the semi-voluntary
structure of the NGOs and volunteering organizations, participation in social support
activities concerns mostly -but not only- the professionals and the volunteers.
Moreover, the qualitative analysis uncovers the social inclusiveness of support
actions as framed from organizing agencies belonging to different sectors. For
instance, a press release of the Church of Crete with respect to its daily food support
in Chania frames these actions as such:
..we are standing by
to every human being
without any kind of exclusions
A similar frame is also found in the narrations of the local Churches’ support actions
and their permanent infrastructures in the region of Chania. In a networked action
between the local Church of Kydonia region and the local administration of Chania
we can read a narration of the social support framed in terms of including all those in
need independently from their race, ethnic background or religion:
the church and the regional administration can do a lot (...) in the difficult
times that will come, we can share and organize food support actions in all
regions of Chania providing a plate of food to all the people, no matter their
colour, nationality, race or religion.
Similar inclusively-based social support actions are identified in the “Local and
International NGOs & Volunteer Organizations” sector. The social support frames of
the specific sector shows that social exclusion or distinction between individuals with
or without legitimate papers is not accepted. However, due to the increasing number
of beneficiaries of the indigenous population, the NGOs frame a diagnostic
interpretive schema of ‘new-poverty’, concerning specifically the natives. The new
20
diagnosis is that poverty is the main unacceptable social condition, but this condition
is here to stay-for both natives and immigrants-. These discourses emphasize how this
‘new poverty’ affects not only immigrants or the poor but also a new group of native
population severely affected from the acute economic crisis. The emergence of these
new frames can be seen in the fragments of the interview of a doctor of “Doctors of
the World” in ‘Chaniotika Nea’:
the multiple health support of our medicines is open to everyone (...) we don't
ask for I.D., legislation papers (...) health care is a right for every human being
and not a privilege for the few (...) we accepted 2.450 visitors for health care
in 2011 (...) in the past we concentrated on those with no papers (...) after the
crisis the number of Greek that are poor and can not afford to go to the doctors
or buy medicines increased, so the last year we concentrated on the Greeks
(...) the right to live is independent from any kind of religion, colour or
political beliefs with absolute no distinctions
4.2.3.c. Networks and linkages
Under a community resilient framework, inter-organizational networks characterized
from reciprocal links, frequent supportive interactions and cooperative decision-
making processes constitute an important attribute of the community capacity of
social capital to cope with adverse events (Goodman et al., 1998).
The frames of the social support actions under the period under study are connected
structurally through common projects and networks of the three sectors. For example,
from participant observation and the analysis of the articles in the newspaper
‘Chaniotika Nea’, we can see frame bridging and frame extension processes between
the native movement organizations and/or the immigrant communities and the NGOs
through common campaigns and social support actions, that are often supported from
the formal institutions of local authorities and the Church. It should be noted that
most of the narrations presented in the paper capture networked social support actions
from organizing agencies that either belong to the same or to different sectors. For
instance, social support actions are co-organized from the social movement
organization of “Steki” and the formal institution of Secondary Education Teachers
Union (ELME) or networked actions between the local Church of Kydonia region and
the local administration of Chania. Numerous similar examples can be found in the
21
articles of the local press17 showing the linkages and common infrastructures that are
built among different organizations, collectives and institutions as they bond their
relations and overcome their cultural and ideological differences with the rationale to
adapt to and cope with the adverse impacts of the economic crisis.
The supportive interactions between organizing agencies of different sectors can be
traced in a newspaper article that refers to an action organized from a social
movement organization aiming to provide cooked food on Sundays substituting the
free meal of the volunteer organization of “Spanzia” which is closed on Sundays. The
call frames social support action with the social values of solidarity and mutual aid
already discussed earlier in the qualitative analysis. The call of the specific action
says:
Nowadays, words like poverty, abandonment, alienation, selfishness,
exploitation are used excessively. (….) Against these phenomena we
propose resistance, companionship and solidarity (….) ‘Steki’, an
antiracist collectivity, fighting and acting in the city of Chania the last
5 years, has decided to undertake the initiative to prepare and
distribute meals every Sunday. Doing so, is helping our destitute
fellow citizens and supplements the work of soup kitchen of ‘Splanzia’
which does not operate on Sundays.
5. Discussion
In the context of the recent global financial crisis, Greece has been severely affected
enforcing a severe austerity regime that has put an enormous strain on the Greek
society. The United Nations Independent Expert on Foreign Debt and Human Rights,
Cephas Lumina warns that the bailout conditions enforced in Greece undermine
human rights. As he advocates
The prospects of a significant number of Greeks securing an adequatestandard of living in line with international human rights standards have beencompromised by bailout conditions imposed by Greece’s internationallenders18
17 Including cooperative actions such free language lessons from voluntary teachers, social support torefugees, intercultural events, social support campaigns in schools.18 Available from:http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=13281&LangID=E
22
Undoubtedly, Greeks have experienced an unprecedented deterioration of their living
conditions echoed in wage and pension reductions, public spending cuts in health and
social security, record unemployment and poverty rates. Most importantly, an
increasing segment of the population has become unable to cover basic needs that are
considered essential for a decent standard of living; hence the Greek economic crisis
shares elements of a humanitarian crisis (Geddes, 2012; Politaki, 2013).
Under such devastating conditions, the Greek society has collectively responded
through the mobilization of formal and informal networks, NGOs, charitable
associations and the Church providing social support to socio-economically
disadvantaged individuals (Sotiropoulos & Bourikos, 2014). The present mixed
method study inspired from the theoretical framework of community resilience
explores social support actions as one of the elements of the community capacity of
social capital in Chania to adapt to and cope with the detrimental consequences of
recession.
More specifically, the quantitative part of the mixed method design uncovers the
increasing trends of social support actions as the economic crisis deepens. The
findings provide some preliminary evidence that social support actions constitute an
element of the community capacity of social capital in Chania to deal with the
impacts of the crisis towards the protection and remedy of the most affected
members; hence towards a resilient community. Moreover, the main characteristics of
the actions including the high involvement and variety of local organizing agencies,
the considerable diversity of actions’ forms and aims and the significant percentage of
actions addressing the community as a whole to participate can be interpreted as
elements of ‘citizen participation’ and ‘sense of community’ under a community
resilience framework.
Quantitative study’s findings are further elaborated with the qualitative results
enhancing the interpretations of social support actions in the Greek urban community
of Chania. The qualitative analysis complements the quantitative one, as the former
counterbalances quantitative study’s limitations to capture the full range of social
support actions during the period under study. Moreover, the qualitative analysis
based on a three-sector division, i.e. social movement organizations, formal
institutions, NGOs and volunteer organizations sheds light on the inter-organizational
social support networks developed between agencies of the same or different sectors
in Chania. These networks are characterized from supportive interactions and
23
reciprocal links in organizing common actions and campaigns indicating specific
forms of the community capacity of social capital to effectively cope with the
recession’s severe impacts (Goodman et al., 1998). During the period under study, the
dominant prognostic and motivational frame is solidarity in support actions organized
from the local social movements’ and the NGOs’ sectors. Frame extension is detected
in the narrations of solidarity in the formal institutions sector, as solidarity becomes
the corrective and motivational concept of community resilience actions. Although
the qualitative analysis identifies the important role of social participation as one of
the elements of the community capacity of social capital in the three sectors, it
underlines that the engagement in social support actions from volunteers and
beneficiaries is particularly encouraged in the local social movement sector. The
formal institutions frame their social support actions with distinctions in social
participation which primarily concerns the specialists, the professionals and the
volunteers and not the beneficiaries who have a more passive role. In the semi-
voluntary sector of NGOs and volunteering organizations social participation
concerns mostly- but not only- the professionals and the volunteers.
The present study contributes theoretically and methodologically in the exploration of
social support actions during adverse events of economic crises. With respect to the
former, the study provides some preliminary empirical evidence that under a
resilience community framework, social support actions can be interpreted as an
element of the community capacity of social capital to cope with the detrimental
consequences of the Greek acute economic crisis. Such an exploration is optimized
with the application of a parallel mixed method design with the rationale of
complementarity, where the results of the quantitative study are further elaborated
from the qualitative one enhancing the overall interpretations of social support
actions.
Despite the potential merits of the present study, the exploration of social support
actions during the Greek recession is still in a fledgling state19. It is recommended
that further mixed method research could validate and enrich the present findings by
investigating social support actions in wider Greek urban communities such as
Athens which is most affected from the current crisis.
19 Exception is the work of Sotiropoulos 2013a; Sotiropoulos 2013b ; Sotiropoulos & Bourikos 2014.
24
References
Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and Ecological Resilience: Are they Related? Progressin Human Geography, 24(3), 347-364.
Aldrich, D. P. (2012). Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Barrera, M., & Ainlay, S. (1983). The Structure of Social Support: A Conceptual andEmpirical Analysis. Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 133-143.
Bedford, R., & Snow, D. (2000). Framing Processes and Social Movements: AnOverview and Assessment. Annual Report of Sociology, 26, 611-639.
Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). Community Resilience: Toward an IntegratedApproach. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal, 26, 5-20.
Bodin, P., & Wiman, B. (2004). Resilience and other stability concepts in ecology:Notes on their origin, validity, and usefulness. ESS Bulletin, 2, 33–43.
Bonanno, G. A. (2005). Resilience in the face of potential trauma. Current Directionsin Psychological Science, 14, 135-8.
Chaskin, R.J. (2008). Resilience, Community, and Resilient Communities:Conditioning Contexts and Collective Action. Child Care in Practice, 14(1), 65-74.
Coles, E., & Buckle P. (2004). Developing Community Resilience as a Foundationfor Effective Disaster Recover. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 19, 6-15.
Community and Regional Resilience Institute (CARRI). (2013). Definitions ofcommunity resilience: an analysis. A CARRI Report. CARRI. Retrieved fromhttp://www.resilientus.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/definitions-of-community-resilience.pdf
Cutter, S.L., Burton, C.G., & Emrich, C.T. (2010). Disaster resilience indicators forbenchmarking baseline conditions. Journal of Homeland Security and EmergencyManagement 7(1), 1-22.
Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., & Webb, J.(2008). A place-based model for understanding community resilience to naturaldisasters. Global Environmental Change, 18(4), 598–606.
Doctors of the World. (2013). Greece: The Human Face of the Economic Crisis.Retrieved from http://doctorsoftheworld.org/where-we-work/europe/greece/
Earl, J., Martin, A., McCarthy, J.D., & Soule, S.A. (2004). The Use of NewspaperData in the Study of Collective Action. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 65-80.
25
FEANTSA. (2012). On the Way Home? FEANTSA Monitoring Report onHomelessness and Homeless Policies in Europe. Brussels, FEANTSA.
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecologicalsystems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16, 253–267.
Geddes, L. (2012). Greek crisis: How to prevent a humanitarian disaster. NewScientist, 2866, 6-8.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Greene, J., Caracelli, V., & Graham, W. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework formixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11,255-274.
Holling, C. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review ofEcology and Systematics, 4, 1-23.
Johnson, R., & Turner, L. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methodsresearch. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods inSocial and Behavioral Research (pp. 297-319). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Klein, R.J.T, Nicholls, R.J., & Thomalla, F. (2003). Resilience to natural hazards:How useful is this concept? Environmental Hazards, 5, 35–45.
Koopmans, R., & Rucht, D. (2002). Protest Event Analysis. In B. Klandermans & S.Staggenbord (Eds.), Methods of Social Movement Research (pp. 232-259).Minneapolis: University of Minessota Press.
Kretzmann, J. P., & McKnight, J.L. (1993). Building communities from the insideout: A path toward finding and mobilizing a community’s assets. Evanston, IL: Centerfor Urban Affairs and Policy Research, Neighbourhood Innovations Network,Northwestern University
Langford, C., Bowshe, J., Maloney, J., & Lillis, P. (1997). Social Support: AConceptual Analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25, 95-100.
Magis, K. (2010). Community Resilience: An indicator of Social Sustainability. Society& Natural Resources: An International Journal, 23(5), 401-416.
Matsaganis, M. (2004). Social solidarity and its contradictions: the role of aguaranteed minimum program in modern social policy. Athens: Kritiki.
Mayunga, J.S. (2007). Understanding and Applying the Concept of DisasterResilience: A Capital -Based Approach. Working paper for the summer academy forsocial vulnerability and resilience building. 22-28 July, Munich, Germany.
MSCI. (2013). MSCI Announces the Results of the 2013 Annual MarketClassification Review. Geneva, NYSE:MSCI. Retrieved fromhttp://www.msci.com/eqb/pressreleases/archive/2013_Mkt_Class_PR.pdf
26
Norris, F., Stevens, S., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K., & Pfefferbaum, R. (2008).Community Resilience as a Metaphor, Theory, Set of Capacities and Strategy forDisaster Readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 127-150.
OECD. (2014). Society at a Glance 2014, Highlights: GREECE, The crisis and itsaftermath. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/greece/OECD-SocietyAtaGlance2014-Highlights-Greece.pdf
Papadaki, M. (2014). Actions of solidarity and social support in the era of economiccrisis: A study in Chania of Crete. In S. Kalogeraki & M.Kousi (Eds.),Methodological practices and challenges in the study of the social impacts ofeconomic crisis. Athens: Epikentro (under press).
Pfefferbaum, B., Reissman D.B., Pfefferbaum R, Klomp R.L., & Gurwitch R.H.(2007). Building Resilience to Mass Trauma Events. In L.S.Doll et al (Eds.),Handbook of Injury and Violence Prevention. New York: Springer.
Politaki, A. (2013, February 11). Greece is facing a humanitarian crisis. TheGuardian. Retrieved fromhttp://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/11/greece-humanitarian-crisis-eu
Scheffer, M. (2009). Critical transitions in nature and society. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
Shaikh, A., & Kauppi, C. (2010). Deconstructing resilience: Myriadconceptualizations and interpretations. International Journal of Arts & Sciences,3(15), 155-176.
Sherrieb, K., Norris, F. H., & Galea, S. (2010). Measuring capacities for communityresilience. Social Indicators Research, 99(2), 227-247.
Snow, D., & Benford R. (1992). Master Frames and Cycles of Protest. In A. Morris,& C. McClurg Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in Social Movement Theory (pp. 133-155).New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sonn, C.C., & Fisher, A.T. (1998). Sense of community: Community resilientresponses to oppression and change. Journal of Community Psychology; 26(5), 457-472.
Sotiropoulos, D. (2013a). Social Effects of the Economic Crisis and Social Solidarityin Greece. Paper presented at the Joint Conference of the University of thePeloponnese (Masters’ Programme on European Social Policy) & the HellenicObservatory (LSE). University of the Peloponnese, Corinth, 17 May.
Sotiropoulos, D. (2013b). Greeks are Selfish. In, Greek Myths and Reality (pp.25-28).Athens: Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) andBrookings Institution.
27
Sotiropoulos, D., & Bourikos, D. (2014). Economic Crisis, Social Solidarity and theVoluntary Sector in Greece: Summary report of the Crisis Observatory researchproject on the social consequences of the economic crisis in Greece and the responseof civil society organizations to the crisis. Athens: Crisis Observatory. Retrieved fromhttp://crisisobs.gr/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Final-Report.pdf
Theodorikakou, O., Alamanou, A., & Katsadoros, K. (2013). “Neo-homelessness”and the Greek Crisis. European Journal of Homelessness, 7(2), 203-210.
Theodorikakou, O., Alamanou, A., Stamatogiannopoulou, E., Tourkou, A., Karydi,K., Sarantidis, D., & Katsadoros K. (2012). Homelessness in Greece – 2012: An In-depth Research on Homelessness in the Financial Crisis. Paper Presented at theEuropean Research Conference Access to Housing for Homeless People in Europe.21 September, York.
Tsatsou M. (June 21, 2012). More Greeks Use Soup Kitchens as Economy Worsens.Article published in GreekReporter.com. Available from:http://greece.greekreporter.com/2012/06/21/more-greeks-use-soup-kitchens-as-economy-worsens/
Twigg, J. (2009). Characteristics of a Disaster Resilient Community: A GuidanceNote. Version 2. London Department for International Development (DFID).
Walker, B., Sayer, J., Andrew, N. L., & Campbell, B. (2010). Should enhancedresilience be an objective of natural resource management research for developingcountries? Crop Science, 50, 10.
Wickes, R., Zahnow, R., & Mazerolle, L. (2010). Community Resilience Research:Current Approaches, Challenges and Opportunities. Ιn Μ. Priyan & A. Yates (Eds.),Recent Advances in National Security Technology and Research –Proceedings of the2010 National Security Science and Innovation Conference (pp. 62-78). Deakin:Australian Security Research Centre.