The environment is in a state of ‘anarchy’
Nikos Petrou, president of Greece’s oldest eco-protection group, laments lack of progress on fundamental issues and rampant tourism development
We met with Nikos Petrou, the president of the first environmental organization ever to be established in Greece, the Hellenic Society for the Protection of Nature (HSPN), on a scorching-hot day in downtown Athens.
The environment champion and renowned nature photographer believes that climate change is here to prove, in the worst possible way, just how unsustainable the policies Greece is pursuing and antiquated the prevailing mentalities toward the issue are.
Petrou is disappointed by how scantily and often superficially the issue of environmental protection is treated in this country, arguing that the absence of cohesive frameworks to this end essentially facilitates unchecked exploitation. Scant environmental democracy – manifested in how public consultation on important legislation is carried out, for example – demonstrates the state’s dismissive attitude toward public participation in the decision-making process, he says, adding that prioritizing even more tourism expansion, despite its obvious consequences, points to a reluctance to challenge the short-term interests of the tourism sector.
How did an orthodontist and prosthodontist end up with such an active involvement in environmental protection?
My love of nature started as a child, when I used to join my father and uncles on hunting trips in the mountains – I didn’t hunt myself; I’d much rather observe nature. Photography came later, during my postgraduate studies in America. When I returned to Greece in 1988, I decided to combine these two passions. I started with Dadia, photographing during an excursion there, and that’s where the idea came up of doing a book on the area, which didn’t exist at the time.
After 18 books dedicated to Greece’s natural habitats, which stand out for you?
My heart is in northern Greece. In terms of nature, of areas that have been disturbed by humans the least, I would say Rodopi, the entire mountain range, from Falakro to Xanthi and to the Evros estuary. I would also say all the big deltas and lakes, from Eastern Macedonia to Thrace.
The Hellenic Society for the Protection of Nature, of which you have been president since 2009, was Greece’s first proper environmental organization. How poignant is what it represents 70 years later?
The HSPN was started in the 1940s by mountaineers, people who were in close touch with nature. It was formally established in 1951 by a group of 50 people, which included eminent figures, academics and writers. Its founding articles or announcements from that time could have been written today, verbatim. They speak of the problem of land-grabbing and the lack of protections, among many of the issues that continue to cause concern 70 years later, where the pressures are much more intense and challenging. Back then, of course, intensive exploitation of forests through logging and livestock farming was one of the biggest problems, while today the problem is the reverse, neglect of forests, which leads to choked forests and the loss of some important areas. One of the problems with Dadia before the [2022] fire was that the forest had grown so much that it covered all the openings and had a reduction in biodiversity.
‘During the three peak months of the season, we offer poor services and have to deal with the challenges of overcrowding, traffic congestion and water scarcity’
You mention Rodopi and the fact that it has not been impacted to such an extent by human activity. What is your view of how tourism has evolved in Greece today?
Unfortunately, we have a long-standing policy in this country that has not been reversed for decades. Our only goal is to increase the number of visitors, which is why we incentivize new accommodation. It’s a dead end. We’ve reached the point of degrading the tourism product itself when, during the three peak months of the season, we offer poor services and have to deal with the challenges of overcrowding, traffic congestion and water scarcity. How long will we continue to maintain such an unsustainable tourism model? Environmental organizations like ours have been sounding the alarm for years about the question of capacity, about planning for the climate crisis and about the impact on the environment and the landscape.
Management is one part of the problem. But isn’t the footprint of tourism the most serious one?
Of course. Construction is complete anarchy, there’s uncontrolled building everywhere, by everyone: swimming pools, lawns, palm trees, even on arid islets. The landscape and cultural identity is being lost, especially in smaller parts of the country.
What is your opinion of the new spatial planning and zoning framework for tourism that has been put to public consultation?
It foresees development everywhere. Even though it separates Greece into zones depending on their tourism development, it allows the further development of every zone, even uninhabited islands. It’s opening the door to bring even more people in. Look at all the capital for bolstering golf tourism and then think about the problems with drought on Rhodes and Crete – it’s insane.
But why is it happening?
Because the tourism sector is the “sacred cow.” We still regard it as the engine of the economy, without taking its impacts into account. We don’t take the climate crisis into account even though a Bank of Greece report underscored the impact a decade ago. We’re not just discovering them now.
In an earlier conversation, you suggested that the reluctance to create a clear and comprehensive framework for protected areas is deliberate.
Yes, because it facilitates things. There’s no other explanation. When the framework is vague, it allows you to favor specific interests and investments. It makes it easier for the mayor who wants to “push” a certain project, the local businessman who wants to organize quad tours on sand dunes and the contractor who wants to build. Then there’s the problem of safeguarding Natura-protected areas, which was not dealt with by the creation of the NECCA [the Natural Environment & Climate Change Agency]. And last but not least, there are the incredible delays in the public administration, an enduring phenomenon that is not limited to the current government alone, when it comes to implementing the provisions of European Union regulations for protected areas. The first set of goals for managing certain endangered species was voted on a few months ago – after Greece was condemned by the European Court – and if you look at these goals you will notice that in far too many cases they mention a lack of sufficient data – and this 30 years since the Natura network was established. Not to mention the fact that the Environment Ministry itself has come out and said, officially, that these goals stand in the way of investments. And there are the notorious “special” environmental studies that were supposed to be completed in 2020 and don’t look to be ready anytime soon. There’s another issue I would like to bring up. On the matter of licensing investments and projects in protected areas, the state gave the NECCA the authority to have a say and has then gone on to ignore its opinion. There are at least four or five major renewable energy projects in the offing that are going ahead even though the NECCA, which is the ultimate state agency responsible for such matters, opposed them. These include the wind parks in Oiti and Agrafa and the photovoltaic park in Anthofyto in Kilkis. And that’s where the paradox comes in: Environmental organizations like ours, which are in favor of renewables and the green transition, end up being the ones to take recourse to the Council of State against RES projects because the proper legal procedures have not been followed.
Does Greece suffer from a deficit of environmental democracy?
Massively. In the past few years in particular, we have seen systematic violations of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on the public’s access to environmental information. Plans running hundreds of pages long are being put to very brief public consultations, often for just a matter of days, and often in August, for example, meaning that it is impossible to understand precisely what they entail, hence preventing any meaningful participation in the consultation process. A typical example is the study on redesigning water resources management in Thessaly, which was released for public consultation in English.
