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Work in progress, please do not cite or quote without authors'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: kaloge@uoc.gr, samy.alexandridis@gmail.com, papadakma@uoc.gr

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.