Local Environment

Vol. 10, No. 5, 487– 499, October 2005

ARTICLE

Socio-Economic Dynamics, Local

Development and Desertification in
Western Lesvos, Greece

THEODOROS IOSIFIDES & THEODOROS POLITIDIS

ABSTRACT The basic aim of this article is to briefly explore the links between socio-
economic dynamics and desertification in western Lesvos, Greece. The area is
characterised by certain socio-economic and development disadvantages, dependence
on few productive sectors (mainly on livestock breeding) and by severe problems of
land degradation and desertification. The linkages between socio-economic profile,
characteristics and development trajectory with the state of environment in the area
are identified through a series of in-depth qualitative interviews with local producers
(livestock breeders). Research findings reveal the major socio-economic driving forces
towards unsustainable productive practices, which contribute to the persistence of the
problems of land degradation and desertification.

Introduction
This article presents major findings of a qualitative study on the socio-
economic and human dimensions of land degradation and desertification in
western Lesvos, Greece. Western Lesvos combines environmental margina-
lity with socio-economic unfavorability, and can be an exemplar case for
the exploration of complex socio-environmental processes. After having
identified some of the most crucial social dimensions of desertification gene-
rally and the specific characteristics of the problem in Greece and Lesvos, we
focus on the most important findings of our study in western Lesvos. We
establish links between the characteristics of local livestock production,
socio-economic and spatial conditions, rural development policies and

Correspondence Address: Theodoros Iosifides, Department of Geography, University of the

Aegean, University Hill, 81100, Mytilini, Lesvos, Greece. Email: iwsifidis@aegean.gr
1354-9839 Print=1469-6711 Online=05=050487-13 # 2005 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080=13549830500203162
488 T. Iosifides & T. Politidis

unsustainable productive practices with the persistence and reproduction of

the problems of land degradation and desertification.

Socio-Economic Dimensions of Land Degradation and Desertification

According to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
(UNCCD, 1994, Article 1):

‘Desertification’ means land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-

humid areas resulting from various factors, including climatic variations
and human activities.

The desertification phenomenon is characterised by a great complexity and

a very strong interplay between environmental and human factors, which
generate the problem. Perez-Trejo (1994) notes that from the development
of the definitions of desertification, it is evident that the emphasis is given
on human activities and socio-economic processes as its principal causes,
possibly aggravated by natural climatic conditions (Drenge et al., 1991 in
Perez-Trejo, 1994; GCAD, 2000).
The underlying causes of the phenomenon of desertification are directly
related to human pressure on the environment and natural resources,
socio-economic and productive organisation and unsustainable ways of
producing, using of natural resources and living. Land degradation and
desertification, in a broader sense, are social phenomena mainly because
the idea and practice of appropriating and using land are socially constructed
(Blaikie & Brookfield, 1987).

Desertification in Greece and Lesvos

The major driving forces towards desertification in Mediterranean Europe
can be attributed mainly to anthropogenic and socio-economic factors
(Archer & Stokes, 2000). It is possible to identify a series of areas that face
more or less serious problems of land degradation and desertification
in Greece. These areas are mainly the eastern Peloponnesus, the continental
Greece, Thessaly, central and southern Macedonia, central and eastern
Crete and the Aegean islands (including the island of Lesvos) (GNCCD,
2000).
Within the framework of the Greek National Plan to Combat Desertifica-
tion, a series of socio-economic and institutional measures and actions are
designed to mitigate the problem (GNCCD, 2000, 2002). Six pilot areas
have been selected for the implementation of an integrated policy action
for combating desertification.1 These areas are the mountainous Thessaly,
eastern Crete, Attica, western Lesvos, the islands of eastern Aegean and the
plain of Kilkis in eastern Macedonia (GNCCD, 2001).
As mentioned earlier, western Lesvos is an exemplar case for the purposes
of our analysis since it combines environmental marginality with socio-
economic disadvantages. Regarding the severity of desertification, Lesvos
 Socio-Economic Dynamics and Desertification 489

can be divided in three relatively distinct zones. The first zone, on the western
part of the island, is semi-arid and is characterised by serious land degra-
dation and desertification problems. The second zone, the transitional area
of central Lesvos, is at risk of degradation and the third zone, on eastern
Lesvos may be affected by desertification in case of serious climatic
changes or extended land use change2 in the future (Jenkins & Wilson, 2001).

Research Design and Methods

In order to explore the links between socio-economic factors, unsustainable
productive practices and desertification in western Lesvos, we undertook a
qualitative study of the area, by conducting in-depth interviews with local
livestock producers. This study was part of a broader research program3
and lasted for about four months, from November 2002 to February 2003.
The basic aim of that study was to investigate the socio-environmental pro-
cesses in the area, local perceptions and actions related to these processes,
and to identify the role that local knowledge plays in socio-environmental
trajectory and reproduction. After contacts had been made and rapport in
the areas had been established, a series of in-depth qualitative interviews
were conducted in seven different communities of western Lesvos, and
more specifically in Eresos, Vatousa, Skalohori, Revma, Hidira, Antisa and
Mesotopos (see Figure 1). They lasted from 30 minutes to over three hours
and in total 35 local livestock producers participated in the process. The
selection of participants was based upon their broad knowledge of local

Figure 1. The research setting on the island of Lesvos, Greece

490 T. Iosifides & T. Politidis

development and environmental features and the duration of their involve-

ment in the primary sector (over 10 years).
Furthermore two interview strategies were adopted. At the beginning, a
series of individual interviews were taken, and at the end, three collective
interviews were organised. The combination of these strategies was
adopted in order:

. To capture the individual stances and interpretations along with the inter-
action of different participants on the same issue.
. To increase the validity and reliability of the research process. Views, atti-
tudes, interpretations and stances from individual interviews were put
forward as issues during the collective gatherings and extensive debates
followed. This helped verify some of the most important findings of the
research and establish the most crucial links between social processes
and environmental issues in the area viewed through the eyes of local
producers (insiders’ point of view).

The research process ended when we felt that the basic research themes
were satisfactorily addressed and when after some time, repetition of
responses increased, thus a certain degree of saturation of the process was
reached (Robson, 2002).
The basic tool for conducting the study was a thematically structured
interview schedule. The schedule was changed considerably during the
research process due to interaction with participants and was divided in
five major parts. The first part concerned the general characteristics of
primary production in the area; the second part was about local socio-
economic and spatial conditions; the third part was an enquiry about survival
and social reproduction strategies; the fourth part concerned rural develop-
ment trajectory and policies; and the last part was about productive practices
and environmental perceptions in relation to land degradation and
desertification.
Through qualitative interviews in the area, a set of extended information
and data about views, attitudes and perceptions on local socio-economic,
development and environmental processes were collected. All interviews
were recorded, transcribed and took a textual form. Then, a data analysis
was conducted during which the Maxqda software was used (Hay, 2000).

Socio-Economic Processes, Local Development Trajectory and

Desertification in Western Lesvos, Greece—Exploring the Links
Characteristics of Local Livestock Production
The dominant economic activity in western Lesvos is livestock (mainly sheep
and goat) breeding. Regarding land ownership structure, and notably
pastureland ownership, interviewees reported three forms of ownership in
the area: grazing land owned by the local livestock breeders, rented private
grazing land and rented grazing land owned by local municipalities.
 Socio-Economic Dynamics and Desertification 491

In western Lesvos some 50% of grazing land is rented by local producers

(NSSG, 2001a).
The size of production units (mostly family farms), in terms of animal
number, is relatively small. Interviewees reported a size range from 30 to
300 animals per unit. Nevertheless, animal capital in the area grew substan-
tially in recent decades. This increase is partly explained by the upward fluc-
tuation of prices of final products (mainly milk and cheese), especially during
the 1970s and partly due to the subsidised livestock breeding production
from 1981 onwards. The latter factor is largely responsible for the persistence
of high numbers of animals in the area, as the level of subsidy is directly
connected with the volume of animal capital5 (Kizos, 2002). Thus, from a
total number of animals (sheep and goats) of about 30,000 in 1971, the live-
stock grew to the present figure of about 180,000 (NSSG, 2001a; Kizos,
2002), which is about six times the estimated carrying capacity (see note 10).
The dominant type of livestock production in the area is that of family type
and the mean age of unit leaders is relatively high (almost 82% of local
producers are over 40-years of age while nearly 36% are over 65) (NSSG,
2001a). Interviewees reported two main reasons for this age structure charac-
teristic. The first reason is linked to the growing rejection of livestock employ-
ment by the young, whereas the second is related to prolonged engagement
with primary production due to increased income needs and low pensions.
Regarding labour structure, interviewees reported three main labour pools.
The first and basic labour pool is familial, whereas the second most important
is that of foreign labour in the area (mainly immigrants from Albania), which
is highly seasonal (from February to July of each year) and precarious. The
third labour pool is that of waged employment of a more permanent charac-
ter. This type of employment is very limited in the area and can be found only
in the relatively large livestock production units.

Socio-Economic Conditions
Economic and income concerns were some of the major issues emerged from
the field research. About 30% of local producers earn their income solely
from the primary sector while the rest 70% complement their farm-income
from other sources. In 2000, the median farm income in western Lesvos
was about 6000 euros,6 while the median non-farm income for the same
year reached only the level of about 6000 euros,7 due to the limited opportu-
nities for income generation at the non-farm sector. It must be noted that, for
the same year, the median income at country level was about 13,000 euros
(NSSG, 2001b). Interviewees reported that the main reason leading to low
income and serious economic problems in the area is the combination of
high production cost along with the relatively low prices of livestock
products. The causes of these trends and their implications for local rural
development, land management and productive practices are analysed in
the next parts of the paper. Income satisfaction is quite low and there is wide-
spread concern and insecurity about future income fluctuations because of
492 T. Iosifides & T. Politidis

the high dependence of present income level on various national and

European Union subsidies.
There is a certain degree of underemployment in the area due to the
seasonal character of the main activities and the limited existence of alter-
native employment opportunities. It seems that unemployment in the area
is relatively low but this feature is related to the history of out-migration
and depopulation which characterises the island. Many of the interviewees
stressed that the reason of the absence or presence of low unemployment in
western Lesvos is out-migration to the capital of the island (Mitilini), to
the major urban centers of Greece and to other countries.
The growing rejection of employment in the primary sector by young
generations combined with out-migration has resulted in a certain inflow
of immigrant labour in the area. The vast majority of immigrants are
Albanians, but there are also few Bulgarians and Romanians working in
the primary sector. The basic characteristics of immigrant labour in the
sector are seasonality, precariousness and instability. According to interview-
ees, the main reasons for the employment of foreign workers in livestock
production is the unavailability of native workers and the low cost of
immigrant labour. The emphasis that the interviewees put on the first
reason, shows that competition between natives and immigrants in the area
is relatively low. Labour cost is about 10 to 30 euros per day according to
the task and hours of work, almost half of the labour cost of natives.
Immigrant labour is evaluated positively by the interviewees and in many
cases as essential for the maintenance of the present level of livestock
production. Given the labour intensity of stock-breeding production in the
area, the employment of cheap foreign workers is absolutely necessary for
keeping intact the already low level of local income. Furthermore, the
existence and availability of foreign workers favors the prevention of land
abandonment8 which, under specific conditions, leads to further degradation
and desertification and to great difficulties for the application of sustainable
land management practices.

Rural Development and Policies

According to interviewees, there are four major factors contributing to
the negative rural development trajectory of the area, namely geographic
distance, input prices, the role of intermediaries and pastureland rents.
Geographic distance from major urban centers of the country increases
transportation costs and contributes to the overall increase of local pro-
duction cost. Apart from this more or less evident feature, the interviewees
assigned to the notion of geographic distance a somewhat different
meaning. They portrayed the area as politically and socio-economically
‘abandoned’ and as ‘peripheral’ not only in relation to the major productive
and decision-making centers of the country but in also in relation to the
capital of the island (Mytilini). There is a widespread feeling of local ‘power-
lessness’ and ‘lack of participation’, and thus their inability to influence the
development features and trajectory of the area.
 Socio-Economic Dynamics and Desertification 493

Another important factor contributing to the increased production cost is

the level of input prices, mainly those of livestock forage prices. Interviewees
connected the increased input prices to the previous factor (relatively high
transportation cost due to geographic distance), to the lack of adequate
state financial assistance9 in terms of subsidised livestock forage prices and
to the lack of local resources due to limited pastureland availability in
relation to the livestock capital in the area. It is estimated that for sheep
breeding, at country level, forage expenditure reaches almost 41% of total
expenditure. Generally, forage cost for sheep breeding in Greece, contributes
excessively to the overall production cost (as compared to permanent capital
cost and labour cost, both around 31% of total expenditure) (Papanagiotou
et al., 2002). This burden is far more difficult to be undertaken by local
producers in marginal areas such as western Lesvos and that is why the
vast majority of producers there, are highly dependent on pasturelands for
feeding their animals, contributing to excessive pressure on the already
ecologically sensitive soil resources. Thus the spiral of low land productivity,
low income, relatively high production costs and overgrazing is reinforced.
The role of intermediaries (major buyers of local livestock products such as
milk and meat) is stressed by the interviewees in a highly negative way. Inter-
viewees referred mainly to the great difference between producer and market
price of local livestock products, which is attributed to the domination of the
market by few intermediaries, the lack of competition, the formation of com-
mercial monopolies and to the gradual weakening of local cooperatives. Due
to the above reasons, for example, the average wholesale price of sheep meat
in western Lesvos for 2002 ranged from 2.50 to 3.20 euros per kilo, while the
average wholesale price of the same product in other areas of continental
Greece ranged from 4.40 to 4.99 euros per kilo. The average market price
for the same product was about 7.5 euros per kilo. Thus, there are observable
differences between the wholesale prices in western Lesvos and continental
Greece and vast differences between producers’ prices in the area and
market prices.
Last but not least, one of the most important factors affecting production
cost and local income is pastureland rents. The extended unavailability of
land property rights among the local livestock producers in relation to the
excessive demand for pastureland has resulted in relatively high land rents.
Rents are differentiated according to location, soil quality, access and size,
but a mean pastureland is rented for about three euros per 1000 sq. m. per
year.10 Local producers regulate the number of grazing animals according
to soil quality and fertility. The interviewees stated very intensively the
issue of land property rights and they associated this issue not only with
increased production cost but also with weak mobilisation for environmental
and soil conservation investments in the area.11
Within this unfavorable socio-economic milieu, interviewees pay close
attention to the existence and fluctuations of national and EU production
subsidies over time. They referred extensively to the almost total dependence
of local livestock production and current income level on subsidies, which
combined with the lack of alternative employment and income sources in
494 T. Iosifides & T. Politidis

Table 1. Basic economic features of livestock farms in western Lesvos and Greece

Western Lesvos Greece

Average levels for some
production costs
Average farm income
Average non-farm income
Wholesale prices of
sheep meat
Subsidies
20 E (labour cost per day)
3 E per 1000 sq. m. per year
0.20 E per kilo (corn forage)
6.000 E
6.000 E
2.5 – 3.2 E per kilo
About 13 E per animal
26 E (labour cost per day)
0.09 E per kilo (corn forage)
13.000 E
4.4– 4.9 E per kilo
About 13 E per animal

Sources: Interview data with local producers in western Lesvos and various sources (Papanagiotou et al.,
2002; NSSG, 2001a, b).

Note: Almost all figures and estimations are for 2002. Only labour costs are lower in western Lesvos that
those in Greece as whole. Although there are no comparable data on graze land rents, these are much lower in
continental Greece than in western Lesvos (see Note 10). On the contrary the wholesale price for one of the
basic products of western Lesvos (sheep meat) is significantly lower in the island than that in country level.
Generally the table indicates some aspects of the unfavorable socio-economic conditions in western Lesvos.

most of western Lesvos, has resulted in the continuity of socio-economic

difficulties and excessive pressure on natural resources.
Under the current reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsi-
dies are connected to various agrienvironmental provisions, namely to the
Green Certification and to the Code of Good Agricultural Practices. Due to
the absence of proper implementation mechanisms, especially in marginal
areas such as western Lesvos, these provisions are still inapplicable. For
example the Code of Good Agricultural Practices for insular areas provides
that livestock grazing has to keep pace with the grazing capacity of the
land. Given that the grazing capacity for Greek pasturelands is estimated
to be one sheep or goat per hectare, the actual grazing ratio in western
Lesvos today is about six animals per hectare (ca. 180,000 animals for
30,400 hectare of pasturelands)! (Sioliou-Kaloudopoulou & Ispikoudis,
2002). It becomes evident that the full implementation of these agrienviron-
mental provisions in western Lesvos, given the current conditions in the area
(traditional labour intensive livestock production, lack of adequate non-farm
employment and income generation opportunities), would lead to a consider-
able reduction of disposable income for local producers.
Although there is a sense of widespread socio-economic and development
‘fatalism’ among local producers, interviewees made specific proposals
aiming at the alteration of local development trajectory. The common
characteristic of these proposals is related to the demand for grater state inter-
vention and the formulation and implementation of a specific policy frame-
work for less favored areas such as western Lesvos, which would take into
account local particularities and needs. More specifically, local producers
propose that investments for the improvement of road network in the area
should be taken, incentives for the development of alternative sources of
income and employment outside of the livestock sector should be offered
 Socio-Economic Dynamics and Desertification 495

to local producers, the Sigri port should be upgraded and improved and
quality certification of local products should be enhanced.12 Interviewees’
interpretations of socio-economic and development trajectory of the area
are mainly connected with the limited participation of the local population
to decision-making processes and to the fact that central and even regional/
local institutions and agencies neither hear nor take into account the ‘voice
and views of local people’.

Productive Practices, Land Degradation and Desertification

The term ‘desertification’ (erimopiisi in Greek) was almost unknown to the
research participants, although issues related to the phenomenon have
attracted much publicity at national and local levels in recent years. Intervie-
wees were more familiar with the term and meaning of ‘land degradation’
and were aware of the gradual loss of land productivity in the area. Neverthe-
less, it seems that there is a serious problem with disseminating information
about environmental problems, natural resource use and productive
practices. Furthermore, there are no permanent structures of information
and training on the environmental dimension of natural resource use in this
ecologically sensitive place, which confirms, in much extent, the interviewees’
views of ‘abandonment’ of the area by formal policy-makers at central and
regional level. Furthermore the term ‘desertification’ was widely interpreted
by the research participants as ‘depopulation’, which reflects the relatively
long history of socio-economic deprivation of western Lesvos.
Apart from climatic factors, most of the interviewees connected the exces-
sive pressure on land and natural resources with human and productive
activities. More specifically, they related these pressures to the combination
of animal capital increase due to subsidies, excessive demand for pastureland,
lack of alternative employment opportunities in most of the area and urgent
socio-economic needs. As Arianoutsou-Faraggitaki (1985, p. 237) puts it:

The case of Lesvos island is typical of many situations in Greece. A total

of 213,000 sheep and goats graze over the total area, with 67% of the
population located on its western part, where the greatest utilisation
occurs. The grazing activities are unconstrained so that, theoretically,
an area of 3500 m2 is available to each feeding animal. The degree of
grazing pressure on the natural ecosystems is very high and gradually
causes deterioration. (Arianoutsou-Faraggitaki, 1985, p. 237)

Although there is a certain feeling that human induced overpressure on an

already environmentally sensitive type of land leads, in the long-run, to great
losses of land fertility and productivity, environmental protection and soil
conservation priorities remain low due to serious economic concerns,
financial weakness and almost total dependence on the livestock sector.
One research participant specified this situation as a ‘trap’ in which socio-
economic disadvantage and environmental sensitivity reinforce each other
in a downturn spiral. In our opinion, this term and the image associated
496 T. Iosifides & T. Politidis

with it, capture the whole web of relationships and interconnectedness

between the local development trajectory and the overall environmental
performance and problems in the area.

Conclusions
It was not our intention to present here in detail the available quantitative
data on the problem of land degradation and desertification in western
Lesvos, since there are many studies dealing with these dimensions
(Cosmas et al., 1996; Yassoglou, 1998; Imeson, 2000; Lopez-Bermudez,
2000; Papanastasis, 2000; Stroosnijder, 2000). Our intention was to identify,
in a synoptic way, the links between socio-economic and development dis-
advantages and desertification problems in western Lesvos, as viewed and
articulated by the experiences of local people. We have identified a series
of major driving forces towards unsustainable use of land resources,
notably the high degree of dependence on the livestock sector and the lack
of adequate alternative sources of income, the maintenance of low income
level due to high production cost and unsatisfactory final product prices
coupled with the high dependence of local income level on subsidies. The
dependence on subsidies leads to the continuation of the unsustainable use
of natural resources in the area. Nevertheless, a possible abolition of subsidis-
ing production would lead to rapid deterioration of local economic con-
ditions and vast depopulation. Thus, instead of abolition, the subsidising
regime needs substantial restructuring along the lines of disconnecting subsi-
dies from livestock volume, linking them with incentives for production mod-
ernisation and placing them within a framework of alternative local
development trajectory characterised by the creation of adequate income
and employment opportunities outside the livestock sector.
Research findings offer a quite different picture of the problems of land
degradation and desertification in western Lesvos, than that of the official
agencies. The crucial difference lies at understanding of desertification not
as a ‘technical-technocratic’ problem but a process deeply rooted in societal,
production and development organisation and structure (Blaikie &
Brookfield, 1987). Furthermore such research endeavors allow ‘local
voices’ and ‘local knowledge’ to emerge and, hopefully, to be taken into
account by policymakers.

Acknowledgements
We thank the two anonymous referees of this paper for their constructive
comments. We also owe many thanks to Professor Helen Briassoulis for
her overall guidance and help.

Notes
[1] The implementation of the Greek National Action Plan to Combat Desertification has started
in 2000 and so far, there are two evaluation reports of this process (years 2001 and 2002)
(Papadopoulos et al., 2002). Nevertheless, the implementation process so far proved to be relatively
 Socio-Economic Dynamics and Desertification 497
problematic as regards the comprehensive combat of desertification, mainly because of the poor
definition of the areas at risk of degradation and desertification, the generic character of the
National Action Plan and thus the lack of specialised policy frameworks focusing on local specifi-
cities and needs and the absence of separate funds allocated specifically for implementing the
Plan (MEDACTION, 2003; Politidis, 2003).
[2] Nowadays the dominant cultivation type in this area is that of olive trees.
[3] The European research program MEDACTION—Policies for Land Use to Combat Desertification
(ENVK2-CT-2000-00085), web site: http://www.icis.unimaas.nl/MEDACTION/.
[4] As ‘local development’ we mean ‘endogenous development’ that is the utilisation, in a sustainable
manner, of local advantages and resources, associated with the promotion of diversification of
local economic base and rural ‘multi-functionality’ (Barquero, 1991; Papadopoulos, 2004).
[5] Subsidies are supplied by the responsible agencies of the state (Department of Agriculture at regional
and local level). The level of subsidy per animal is fixed and counts today at about 13 euros (NSSG,
2001a).
[6] Almost half of this income (about 47.5%) is created by subsidies (Papanagiotou et al., 2002).
Subsidies are granted to local livestock producers and not to land owners.
[7] This level concerns the 70% of families which earn non-farm income.
[8] Because of the specific socio-economic conditions in western Lesvos, land abandonment would lead
to out-migration from the area and thus to depopulation. It is generally recognised that the preven-
tion of depopulation is crucial for the future implementation of an alternative local development
framework characterised by sustainable use and conservation of natural resources and multiple
sources of employment and income (GNCCD, 2001).
[9] This financial assistance would compensate the higher cost of forage (mainly transportation cost)
due to the remoteness and peripherality of the island.
[10] The median rent price of three euros per 1000 sq. m. per year seems to be quite low but in reality the
total price which local producers pay for rents yearly is a relatively high proportion of their overall
production cost. This is because local producers are obliged to rent large grazing areas due to their
low productivity in grass. The total grazing land area in western Lesvos is about 30,400 hectare
(NSSG, 2001a). Our field research in western Lesvos, showed that a rented grazing part of land
of around 60–80 ha is very common. Currently there are no official data on graze land rents in
Greece because the vast majority of leasing agreements are informal and verbal. Thus a systematic
comparison between the Lesvos case with other parts of Greece or other areas of Southern Europe is
not possible. Nevertheless studies on rural development in Greece indicate that the level of graze
land rents in the continental parts of the country is much lower than that of the Lesvos (and gener-
ally of LFA’s) cases (Safiliou & Papadopoulos, 2004).
[11] For example investments for ameliorating the soil of grazing land and investments for medium and
long term set-aside programs.
[12] These measures would lead to the development of the non-farm sector and thus to the reduction of
excessive pressure to natural resources. Furthermore they would lead to the relative modernisation
of the farm sector resulting in the decrease of dependence on grazing land.

References
Archer, S. & Stokes, C. (2000) Stress, disturbance and change in rangeland ecosystems, in: O. Arnalds &
S. Archer (Eds) Rangeland Desertification (London, Kluwer Academic Publishers).
Arianoutsou-Faraggitaki, M. (1985) Desertification by overgrazing in Greece: the case of Lesvos island,
Journal of Arid Environment, 9, pp. 237–242.
Barbier, E. B. (1998) The Economics of Land Degradation and Rural Poverty Linkages in Africa
(University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana, United Nations University).
Barbier, E. B. & Thomson, J. R. (1998) The value of water: floodplain versus large-scale irrigation benefits
in Northern Nigeria, Ambio, 27(6), pp. 430–440.
Barquero, V. A. (1991) Local Development: a strategy for employment creation (Athens, Papazisis)
(in Greek).
Blaikie, P. & Brookfield, H. (1987) Land Degradation and Society (London, Routledge).
498 T. Iosifides & T. Politidis
Cosmas, C., Yassoglou, N. J., Danalatos, N. G., Karavitis, C., Gerontidis, S. & Mizara, A. (1996)
MEDALUS III First Annual Report (Berkshire, MEDALUS Office).
Greek Committee Against Desertification (GCAD) (2000) Greek Action Pre-plan Against Desertification
(Athens, Ministry of Agriculture) (in Greek).
Greek National Committee for Combating Desertification (GNCCD) (2000) First National Report on the
Implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (Athens, Ministry of
Agriculture).
Greek National Committee for Combating Desertification (GNCCD) (2001) Greek National Plan for
Combating Desertification (Extended Summary) (Athens, Ministry of Agriculture).
Greek National Committee for Combating Desertification (GNCCD) (2002) Second National Report on
the Implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (Athens, Ministry
of Agriculture).
Hay, R., Steele, P. & Noman, O. (1994) Poverty Alleviation and Land Degradation in the Drylands
(Oxford, UNSO).
Hay, I. (2000) Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (South Melbourne, Oxford University
Press).
Imeson, A. (2000) Indicators of land degradation in the Mediterranean basin, in: G. Enne, C. Zanolla &
D. Peter (Eds) Desertification in Europe: mitigation strategies, land-use planning (Alghero, European
Commission).
Kizos, T. (2002) The dynamics of rural landscape: evaluation of spatial impact of CAP in the countryside
of Aegean Islands. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Mytilini, Department of Environmental Studies,
University of the Aegean, Greece.
Jenkins, J. & Wilson, G. (2001) National Team Reports on Policy Work Already Conducted in Research
Areas Under Previous Projects, <http://www.icis.unimaas.nl/MEDACTION> (Accessed 13 October
2004).
Lopez-Bermudez, F. (2000) How to measure desertification and degradation processes, in: G. Enne,
C. Zanolla & D. Peter (Eds) Desertification in Europe: mitigation strategies, land-use planning
(Alghero, European Commission).
MEDACTION (2003) Development of a Desertification Policy Support Framework, <http://www.icis.
unimaas.nl/MEDACTION> (Accessed 13 October 2004).
NSSG (National Statistical Service of Greece) (2001a) Census of Agriculture and Stock-Breeding Sector
1999–2000 (Athens, NSSG).
NSSG (National Statistical Service of Greece) (2001b) General Census, Greece, 2001 (Athens, NSSG).
Oodit, D. & Somonis, U. E. (1992) Poverty and sustainable development, in: F. Ditetz, U. E. Somonis &
J. van der Straaten (Eds) Sustainability and Environmental Policy (Berlin, Sigma).
Papadopoulos, A. G., Kyriazi-Alison, E. & Liarikos, K. (2002) Sustainable rural development and
desertification: towards a new management policy of rural space, in: ETAGRO (Eds) Proceedings
of the Seventh Pan-Hellenic Conference of Rural Economy (Athens, Agricultural University of
Athens) (in Greek).
Papadopoulos, A. G. (2004) The Development in a Multifunctional Rural Space (Athens, Gutenberg)
(in Greek).
Papanagiotou, E., Kitsopanidis, G. & Zioganas, C. (2002) Comparative analysis of sheep and goat breed-
ing at country level, in: ETAGRO (Eds) Proceedings of the Seventh Pan-Hellenic Conference of Rural
Economy (Athens, Agricultural University of Athens) (in Greek).
Papanastasis, V. (2000) Land degradation caused by overgrazing and wildfires and management strategies
to prevent and mitigate their effects, in: G. Enne, C. Zanolla & D. Peter (Eds) Desertification in
Europe: mitigation strategies, land-use planning (Alghero, European Commission).
Perez-Trejo, F. (1994) Desertification and Land Degradation in the European Mediterranean
(Luxembourg, European Commission).
Politidis, T. (2004) Socio-economic dimensions of desertification: the case of Lesvos, Greece. MA thesis,
Mytilini, University of the Aegean, Greece (in Greek).
 Socio-Economic Dynamics and Desertification 499
Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research (Oxford, Blackwell).
Safiliou, K. & Papadopoulos, A. G. (2004) Small Farmers in Greece (Athens, Gutenberg).
Sioliou-Kaloudopoulou, M. & Ispikoudis, I. (2002) Livestock husbandry in mountainous areas: from
European directives to local realities, in: HPRS (Eds) Proceedings of the Third Pan-Hellenic Range-
land Congress (Karpenisi, Ministry of Rural Development and Food and Hellenic Pasture and
Range Society) (in Greek).
Stroosnijder, L. (2000) Land use planning for mitigating desertification in Europe, in: G. Enne, C. Zanolla
& D. Peter (Eds) Desertification in Europe: mitigation strategies, land-use planning (Alghero,
European Commission).
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (1994) <http://www.unccd.int/convention/text/
convention.php#begin>.
United Nations Economic and Social Council (UNESC) (1995) Poverty Eradication and Sustainable
Development (Geneva, Commission on Sustainable Development).
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) (1992) World Atlas of Desertification (London, Arnold).
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) (1994) Environmental Degradation
and Social Integration (Geneva, UNRISD).
United Nations Sudano-Sahelian Office (UNSO) (1994) Poverty Alleviation and Land Degradation in the
Drylands: issues and action areas for the international convention on desertification (Oxford, UNSO).
Yassoglou, N. J. (1998) Semi-natural environments and processes. Soil: Mediterranean soil types in a
desertification context, in: P. Mairota, J. B. Thornes & N. Geeson (Eds) Atlas of Mediterranean
Environments in Europe: the desertification context (Chichester, John Wiley & Sons).