π™∆∏ª√¡π∫∏ APPLIED ∂¶∂∆∏ƒπ¢∞ RESEARCH ∂º∞ƒª ... ·  ·...

256
∂¶π™∆∏ª√¡π∫∏ APPLIED ∂¶∂∆∏ƒπ¢∞ RESEARCH ∂º∞ƒª√™ª∂¡∏™ REVIEW ∂ƒ∂À¡∞™ ¶ÂÚÈÔ‰È΋ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ŒÎ‰ÔÛË Journal of the Technological Education ÙÔ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿ Institute of Piraeus V√L. VIII No 2 2003 ISSN - 1106 - 4110 ∞. PRIMENTAS: The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness on the spiral distortion of fabrics ......................................................................................................5 ∂. ∫IKILIA: L' évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France ............................19 ¡. ™¶π∆∞§∞™: ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓØ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘, ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ ηÙÔÈ˘ ........................................................................................................................31 P. MANOUSSOS: Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level managers of a Greek bank's branches ....................................................................................41 A. ALEXANDRAKIS, S. ALEXIADIS: Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece, 1972-2000: s or b-Convergence? ......................................................................................61 °. µ∞ƒ∂§π¢∏™: π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ- ÎÒÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ ÙÔ˘ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ÓËÛȈÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡˜. ∏ ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜ ∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ ..............................................................................................77 L. PAPACONSTANTINIDIS: Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation & the Win-Win-Win Model Case Study: "Women Cooperative Gargaliani"..................................................................89 D. FILIPPAS, N. KOKLAS: Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry ............................................................................................................................109 N. EXADAKTYLOS, D. NEDELCHEV, E. GEORGIEVA, S. PATSIKAS: Why be poor? ............................133 µ. ª√À™∞™: µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ..........................................................................................................145 µ. ∆™∞ª√Àƒ∞™: Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙˆÓ ªª∂............................................................................................165 ™. KAƒ∞°π∞¡¡∏™, ™. K∞ƒ∞´™∫√™, ¢. ª¶∞∫√§∞™, ∫. ªπÃ∂§π√À¢∞∫∏, ∫. ™√Àª∂§∏™: ∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ........................................185 ¢. ª∞°ƒπ¶§∏™: ∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË ..............205 ∂. ∫IKILIA: La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives futurs ..........................................................................................217 I. CHRISTIDIS: The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. ....233

Transcript of π™∆∏ª√¡π∫∏ APPLIED ∂¶∂∆∏ƒπ¢∞ RESEARCH ∂º∞ƒª ... ·  ·...

∂¶π™∆∏ª√¡π∫∏ APPLIED

∂¶∂∆∏ƒπ¢∞ RESEARCH

∂º∞ƒª√™ª∂¡∏™ REVIEW

∂ƒ∂À¡∞™¶ÂÚÈÔ‰È΋ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ŒÎ‰ÔÛË Journal of the Technological Education

ÙÔ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿ Institute of Piraeus

V√L. VIII No 2 2003 ISSN - 1106 - 4110

∞. PRIMENTAS: The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist livelinesson the spiral distortion of fabrics ......................................................................................................5

∂. ∫IKILIA: L' évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France ............................19

¡. ™¶π∆∞§∞™: ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓØ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘,ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ ηÙÔÈ˘........................................................................................................................31

P. MANOUSSOS: Competence-based human resource management: an application for the firstlevel managers of a Greek bank's branches....................................................................................41

A. ALEXANDRAKIS, S. ALEXIADIS: Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions ofGreece, 1972-2000: s or b-Convergence? ......................................................................................61

°. µ∞ƒ∂§π¢∏™: π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ-ÎÒÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ ÙÔ˘ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ÓËÛȈÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡˜.∏ ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜ ∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ ..............................................................................................77

L. PAPACONSTANTINIDIS: Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation & the Win-Win-Win Model Case Study: "Women Cooperative Gargaliani"..................................................................89

D. FILIPPAS, N. KOKLAS: Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile andclothing industry ............................................................................................................................109

N. EXADAKTYLOS, D. NEDELCHEV, E. GEORGIEVA, S. PATSIKAS: Why be poor? ............................133

µ. ª√À™∞™: µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ..........................................................................................................145

µ. ∆™∞ª√Àƒ∞™: Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙˆÓ ªª∂............................................................................................165

™. KAƒ∞°π∞¡¡∏™, ™. K∞ƒ∞´™∫√™, ¢. ª¶∞∫√§∞™, ∫. ªπÃ∂§π√À¢∞∫∏, ∫. ™√Àª∂§∏™: ∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ........................................185

¢. ª∞°ƒπ¶§∏™: ∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË ..............205

∂. ∫IKILIA: La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives futurs ..........................................................................................217

I. CHRISTIDIS: The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. ....233

Copyright© TEI ¶∂πƒ∞π∞ 2003

¶. ƒ¿ÏÏË Î·È £Ë‚ÒÓ 250

122 44 ∞ÈÁ¿Ïˆ

∆ËÏ.: 210.53.81.100

ISSN - 1106 - 4110

∂¶π™∆∏ª√¡π∫∏ ∂¶∂∆∏ƒπ¢∞ ∂º∞ƒª√™ª∂¡∏™ ∂ƒ∂À¡∞™

APPLIED RESEARCH REVIEW

¶ÂÚÈÔ‰È΋ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ŒÎ‰ÔÛË ÙÔ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿√‰fi˜ £Ë‚ÒÓ 250, 122 44 ∞ÈÁ¿Ïˆ

Journal of the Technological Education Institute of Piraeus250, Thivon str. 122 44 Egaleo, Greece

™À¡∆∞∫∆π∫∏ ∂¶π∆ƒ√¶∏

∫ÈΛÏÈ·˜ ¶·Ó·ÁÈÒÙ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿, ¶Úfi‰ÚÔ˜∞ÓÙˆÓ›Ô˘ ™fiÏˆÓ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿°Ô‡‰·˜ ∫ˆÓ/ÓÔ˜ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ ¶·ÙÚÒӢȷ̷ÓÙfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜ ¢ËÌ‹ÙÚ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿∂Í·Ú¯¿ÎÔ˜ £Âfi‰ˆÚÔ˜ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ ∞ıËÓÒÓ∫¿ÓÙ˙Ô˜ ∫ˆÓ/ÓÔ˜ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿∫ÔÓÙ¤Û˘ ªÈ¯·‹Ï ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿∫ÔÚˆÓ¿Î˘ ¶ÂÚÈÎÏ‹˜ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿ªÏ¤Ú˘ °ÂÒÚÁÈÔ˜ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ £ÂÛÛ·ÏÔӛ΢

°Ú·ÌÌ·Ù›·: ∫ÂÚÌÂÏ‹ ∂˘·ÁÁÂÏ›·

∂DITORIAL COMMITTEE

Kikilias Panayiotis TEI of Piraeus, PresidentAntoniou Solon TEI of PiraeusGoudas Constantine University of PatraDiamadopoulos Dimitris TEI of PiraeusExarchakos Theodoros University of AthensCantzos Constantine TEI of PiraeusKontesis Michalis TEI of PiraeusKoronakis Periclis TEI of PiraeusBleris Georgios University of Thessaloniki

Secretary: Kermeli Evangelia

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness on the spiraldistortion of fabrics

Anthony PrimentasDepartment of Textile Engineering∆.∂.π. of Piraeus

Abstract

A survey in the recent history of the knitting machinery and technology presented thatsome mechanical elements of the knitting machines and their settings might be responsiblefor the spirality effect of the single jersey knitted fabrics. The overall conclusion of variousexperimental investigations was that the machine cylinder, cam box system, gauge, pro-duction speed, and fabric tightness factor did not affect significantly the level of the fabricspirality. On the other hand, it was experimentally proved that the take-down tension ofthe knitted fabric as well the yarn twist liveliness affected significantly the spirality.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

ªÈ· ÂÈÛÎfiËÛË Ù˘ ÚfiÛÊ·Ù˘ ÈÛÙÔÚ›·˜ Ù˘ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ Ì˯·ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎÔ‡ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘ Ù˘ ÏÂÎÙÈ΋˜ ¤‰ÂÈÍ fiÙÈ ÌÂÚÈο Ì˯·ÓÈο ÛÙÔȯ›· ÙˆÓ ÏÂ-ÎÙÈÎÒÓ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ fiˆ˜ ›Û˘ ÔÈ Ú˘ıÌ›ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘˜ Èı·ÓfiÓ Ó· ‹Ù·Ó ˘Â‡ı˘Ó· ÁÈ· ÙËÛÂÈÚÔÂȉ‹ ÛÙÚ¤‚ψÛË ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓfiÏ·ÎˆÓ ÏÂÎÙÒÓ ˘Ê·ÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ. ∆Ô ÙÂÏÈÎfi Û˘Ì¤Ú·ÛÌ·ÔÈÎ›ÏˆÓ ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÚ¢ÓËÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ ‹Ù·Ó fiÙÈ Ô Î‡ÏÈÓ‰ÚÔ˜, Ë ÙÚÈÁˆÓÔÛÙÔÈ-¯›·, ÙÔ ˙ˆ˙ (·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ‚ÂÏÔÓÒÓ ·Ó¿ ÌÔÓ¿‰· Ì‹ÎÔ˘˜), Ë Ù·¯‡ÙËÙ· ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Î·È Ô Û˘-ÓÙÂÏÂÛÙ‹˜ ÎÚÔ˘ÛÙfiÙËÙ·˜ ‰ÂÓ ÂËÚ¿˙Ô˘Ó ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ÙÔ Â›Â‰Ô Ù˘ ÛÂÈÚÔÂȉԇ˜ ÛÙÚ¤-‚ψÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÏÂÎÙÒÓ ˘Ê·ÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ. ∞fi ÙËÓ ¿ÏÏË ÏÂ˘Ú¿, ·Ô‰Â›¯ıËΠfiÙÈ Ë Ù¿ÛË ÙÚ·-‚‹ÁÌ·ÙÔ˜ ÙˆÓ ÏÂÎÙÒÓ ˘Ê·ÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ fiˆ˜ Î·È Ë ˙ˆËÚfiÙËÙ· ÛÙÚ›„˘ ÙˆÓ ÓËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÂË-Ú¿˙Ô˘Ó ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ÙË ÛÂÈÚÔÂȉ‹ ÛÙÚ¤‚ψۋ ÙÔ˘˜.

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 5

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 5-17

1. Machine cylinder and cam box system

In knitting circular single bed machinery two types of machines appear in terms oftheir rotating parts: machines with revolving "cylinder cam system" (cam box) and ma-chines with rotating "cylinder needle housing" (cylinder). The rotating direction is clock-wise or vice versa.

It has been stated that the direction of rotation of these knitting parts influenced thepositioning of the loops (stitches) [Kliment, 1977]. Experiments were, therefore, carriedout to determine the actual effect of the direction of rotation on the spirality of tubularsingle jersey knitted fabrics [Buhler and Haussler, 1985]. In these experiments, a twist-free (neutral) polyester monofilament was knitted on a machine having an anticlockwiserotating cylinder. On a close examination of the fabric produced, a slight tendency of theloops to follow the running direction of the cylinder could be detected, i.e., the individualloops were found to be inclined to the right. This skewness was especially noticeable withmonofilament yarn because of its high bending rigidity. The loop shanks on the right werealso shorter than those on the left. Araujo and Smith (1989) had argued that that was a re-sult of the tension imbalance between the two "legs" of the loop during the stitch forma-tion. Moreover, Buhler and Haussler (1986) suggested that the inclination of the stitchesagainst the direction of knitting could be traced back to the fact that the following stitchshank running in the direction of the thread-feed was subjected to higher levels of tensionduring interlacing process of the stitches.

From the above statements it seemed advantageous, in terms of spirality reduction, towork with Z-twisted yarns on knitting machines with clockwise rotating cylinders. On theother hand, researchers such as Hughes (1945) and Bailey (1992) adopted the opinion thatthe total spirality was reduced when Z twisted yarns were knitted on a machine with ananticlockwise rotating cylinder. Davis et al (1934) and Tompkins (1914) consider the ef-fect of this factor as negligible.

A report by ITF (1980) concluded that the skew effect, due to the direction of the ro-tation of the knitting machine, was negligible when compared with the possible yarn ef-fects on the spirality angle and can be disregarded [Buhler and Haussler, 1985]. But, evenif invisible, it contributed slightly, to an increase or decrease of the spirality angle. Thisfactor related to the spirality should be taken into account when seeking the explanationof relative defects [CRB, 1974].

2. The effect of the knitting production speed on spirality

It could be said that there is no clear picture about how and whether the variationof knitting speed, when comparison is made between machines with the same set-

6 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

tings, processing the same yarns, affects the fabric distortion (skewness-spirality).This speed is interwoven with other factors like, for example, the rotating directionof the cylinder or the cam box, cam setting, the yarn input tension and the yarn lu-brication.

From an experiment carried out by ITF (1980) to investigate the possible effect ofspeed, it was observed that under conditions of high speed (280 revolutions per minute -rpm) the resultant fabric appeared to be slightly distorted in terms of spirality (4Æ). Whennormal speed (80 rpm) was used, no spirality could be observed. The conclusion was thatif the speed of the machine had any effect on spirality, it was not a factor of any great im-portance.

Banerjee and Alaiban (1987), Henshaw (1968) and Ghosh and Banerjee (1990) in anattempt to relate the effect of the production speed on spirality with alterations in theloop length, reached the conclusion that there was no correlation. Furthermore, Hughes(1945) expressed the opinion that the velocity affected the lopsidedness of the loops in thecase of oscillating motion of the cylinder producing an "additional spirality" due to thehigh velocity. Oinuma and Takeda (1988) had argued that that speed caused changes in theadditional spirality that was in inverse proportion to the loop length but not in the spi-rality due to the residual torque in the yarn. Those changes of the additional spirality wereattributed to "needle fling", changes in needle direction due to the inertia force on the nee-dle after the knitting point [Knapton and Munden, 1966a].

It was concluded that, since there was no clear evidence of the possible effect of theknitting speed itself on the spirality, it could be neglected.

3. Cam box setting (Tightness factor) and machine gauge

An investigation of the relationships of the course and wale spacing before and afterlaundering, in the case of relaxed fabrics, showed a linear relation, indicating that thechanges of the loop shape are similar in both tightly and loosely knit materials [Fletcherand Roberts, 1953]. On the contrary, Banerjee and Alaiban (1988) disagreed with thisstatement, indicating that the spirality of the loops was much greater when the fabric wasslacker. In other words, the tighter the knitted structure, the less developed spiral distor-tion. That was attributed to the jamming that tended to occur with tighter stitches; "thetighter the stitch, the less the neighbouring yarns in the loop can move relative to eachother" [Henshaw, 1976].

Another point worthy of mention concerns the stitch length and the yarn count.Stevens (1985) stated that a fabric produced with a shorter stitch length or relative tight-ness at which a fabric was knitted, for a given yarn count would develop less spiralitywhen compared to a fabric produced from the same yarn at a longer stitch length.

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 7

In terms of machine gauge, there are conflicting opinions. Banerjee and Alaiban(1988) have stated that the spirality increased with the coarseness of the gauge, whereasDavis and Edwards (1935) claimed that the spirality of a fabric increased with the finenessof the machine gauge, for a constant angle of yarn twist. The rate of increase appeared tovary with the type of machine used.

4. The application of the take-down tension on the produced

knitted fabrics

One of the factors contributing to a successfully completed knitting cycle is the ten-sion applied to the previously formed loop on the needle (or macroscopically, to the en-tire knitted fabric), in order to ensure reliable clearing of the knitted loops from the nee-dles. According to Kurbak (1982), three are the main objectives for the existence of this"take-down" tension:1. To keep the loop hard against the needle in order to operate the latch to close or to

open. Tension is necessary to overcome the flexural rigidity of the yarn that wouldotherwise move the yarn away from the needles.

2. To prevent the loop and the fabric from moving up and down, as the needle moves upand down. Here, tension is necessary to overcome the frictional force between theneedle and the loop.

3. To draw the loops that have just been knocked over the needles.All power-operated circular weft knitting machines are fitted with an adjustable fabric

tension arrangement, allowing the take-down tension to be varied, in order to hold thefabric in position during knitting and advance it at the rate it is produced. Usually, thismechanism consists of two to four take-down nip rollers positioned horizontally one nextto the other ensuring the avoidance of any fabric slippage. The fabric as it comes out ofthis rollers system is wound firmly on the take-up cylinder and is termed as a "batch".

It has long been recognised that by altering the take-down tension, the dimensionsof a fabric on a knitting machine can be materially affected [Munden and Tansley,1956]. In the case of increasing the tension, a marginal increase in loop length occurs[Ghosh and Banerjee, 1990] resulting in a stretcher -lengthened- fabric, with the conse-quent decrease in its width. The fabric weight per unit length decreases [Munden, 1960]as the fabric has a lower value of courses per unit length. As Oinuma and Takeda (1988)have pointed out, the main defect that commonly appears in the fabrics is due to the un-evenly distributed take-down tension and is termed "bow". Although this distortionseems to be permanent, as long the fabric remains in the dry state condition, beingstretched or not, wound on the take-up cylinder ("batch"), giving the impression that "areal change in fabric dimensions has been produced by this adjustment" [Munden,

8 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

1960], the change in take-down tension does not alter the yarn length used for the for-mation of a loop [Knapton and Munden, 1966b] so that no permanent alteration to theknitting quality or fabric dimensions has been made [Munden and Tansley, 1956]. Oinu-ma and Takeda (1988) have indicated that input tension and take-down weight affectedthe loop length. It could be stated that that occurred in cases where there was excessivetake-down tension applied to the fabric in the presence of a non-positive yarn feedingsystem. It has also been mentioned [Gan, 1967], without any experimental confirma-tion, that an excessive take-down tension influenced the take-up of yarn at the feeders,in the case of flat V-bed knitting machines.

A greater incidence of cuts and holes in the knitted fabric as well wear on the knittingelements and problems when knitting weak yarns are some of the defects associated withhigh take-down tension. Considering these statements, it is essential to knit with low yarninput tension and low fabric take-down tension, thereby preventing the tensile failure ofthe yarn [Soong, 1988].

A factor that has to be taken into account is the fact that there is no widely acceptedmethod for measuring the take-down tension. In practice, due to the lack of calibratedtake-down mechanisms, the appropriate setting of this tension relies on experience.Therefore it is doubtful how "the distortion of the fabric on the machine due to take-downtension could be predictable" [Hepworth, 1982].

It is noticeable that after knitting and during a dry or a wet relaxation period, the fab-rics, being relieved from strains (mainly due to the take-down tension) imposed on them,tend to be configured to what it is called dry or wet "relaxed physical form". This state-ment can be tested by comparing the numbers of courses and wales per unit length andwidth, measured before and after the relaxation [Charnock, 1977, Nutting, 1970].

Recent work carried out by Hepworth (1993), investigating this effect by using a the-oretical model, showed that there was a range wherein the angle of spirality increased withthe take-down tension. In the knitted structure, the contact points between yarn loopswere under considerable pressure that resulted in jamming. It was only when the fabrictension had reduced that pressure that the spirality began to decrease as the courses start-ed to become separate. The conclusion was that the relaxed fabrics showed higher spiral-ity than when subjected to take-down tension.

4.1. Experimental investigation of the effect of take-down tension

on spirality

The take-down tension is a factor that is generally taken into consideration when theproduction of the knitted fabrics is concerned. Due to some confusion as to whether take-down tension affects the spirality of knitted fabric it was decided to examine its effect bycarrying out a short scale experiment.

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 9

4.1.1. Yarn samples

From a variety of yarn samples that were produced for an experimental work [Pri-mentas, 1995], ten (10) yarn samples were chosen having different net Z twist amounts.The first five yarn samples (1-5) had a linear density of 39 tex, whereas the rest samples(6-10) had a linear density of 29 tex.

4.1.2. Production of fabric samples

A WILDT Model 5 power operated, circular one feeder (single jersey) weft knittingmachine was used for the production of the fabric samples. The cylinder with a diameterof nine inches accommodated 420 knitting latch needles. The machine had an Englishgauge 14 (needles per inch - 6 needles per centimetre). The cam box revolved in an anti-clockwise direction (viewed from above) with a speed of fifty (50) revolutions per minuteor with a linear speed of approximately 37 m.min-1. For easier assessment of the spirali-ty angle of the produced fabrics, a latch needle was removed from the cylinder. That pro-duced an apparent "needle line" along the length of the fabric samples.

All the yarn samples were used for the production of knitted fabric samples without(–) the application of any take-down tension. Moreover, a series of fabric samples wereproduced with the same yarn samples as the take-down tension mechanism provided bythe knitting machine was used (+).

The loop length was constant at 4.83 mm. The tightness factor was K1=1.115 texó.mm-1

for the yarn samples of 29 tex, and K2 = 1.293 texó.mm-1 for the yarn samples of 39 tex.

4.1.3. Washing and drying of fabric samples

The fabric samples were washed in a domestic washing machine for five normal cyclesof 25 minutes each. After the drying that took place in a domestic dryer, the fabrics wereallowed to relax for 24 hours under normal testing conditions.

4.2. Results and Discussion

The spirality angles of the knitted fabric samples were measured before (B.W.) and after(A.W.) washing with the use of a protractor. The results obtained are presented in the Table1 and in Figures 1 to 4. The negative sign (-) in the data of the spirality angle means that thespirality angle was in the opposite direction of the yarn twist direction [Primentas, 1995].

Before the washing treatment, the yarn samples of both linear densities produced fab-rics with lower spirality angles when take-down tension was applied (samples 1,2,6,7). Thepercentage reduction in spirality angle was found to be very high for the sample 1(61.8%). Also, it was found that the percentage reduction in spirality angle shown by fab-rics produced from yarn samples 6 and 7 was above the level of 40.0%.

10 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

For the fabrics produced from the yarn samples 3,4,5,8,9 and 10 without applying anytake-down tension, the washing process changed the values of the spirality angle fromnegative to positive, resulting in fabrics with negligible remaining distortion. As an over-all conclusion it could be stated that the take-down tension significantly affected the de-gree of spirality of the knitted fabrics.

Table 1

Spirality angle of fabric samples

ACTUAL SPIRALITY ANGLE (Æ)YARN

Z TWIST Take-Down (–) Take-Down (+)SAMPLES

(turns.m-1) B.W. A.W. B.W. A.W.

1 568.0 17.0 11.0 6.5 7.02 635.6 15.0 10.0 10.0 9.03 436.2 -4.0 1.0 -0.5 6.04 461.6 -4.0 0.0 0.0 -0.55 492.2 -4.0 2.5 0.0 2.06 604.4 18.0 12.5 10.0 3.57 675.4 15.0 12.0 9.0 6.58 520.8 -8.5 1.0 0.0 -3.09 551.2 -6.0 3.0 -2.0 2.010 591.4 -9.0 5.0 -0.5 -1.0

Figure 1: The effect of take-down tension on the spirality of knitted fabrics Before Washing.

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(T

)

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

436,2 461,6 492,2 568 635,6

39 tex

Tension (–)

Tension (+)

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(T

)

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

520,8 551,2 591,4 604,4 675,4

29 tex

Tension (–)

Tension (+)

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 11

Figure 2: The effect of take-down tension on the spirality of knitted fabrics After Washing.

Figure 3: The effect of washing on the spirality of knitted fabrics without take-down tension.

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(Æ)

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

436,2 461,6 492,2 568 635,6

39 tex

Before

After

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(Æ)

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

520,8 551,2 591,4 604,4 675,4

29 tex

Before

After

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(T

)

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

436,2 461,6 492,2 568 635,6

39 tex

Tension (–)

Tension (+)

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(T

)20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

520,8 551,2 591,4 604,4 675,4

29 tex

Tension (–)

Tension (+)

12 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Figure 4: The effect of washing on the spirality of fabrics knitted with take-down tension.

5. The effect of yarn twist liveliness on spirality

The general conclusion of the literature survey regarding the reason for the appear-ance of spirality on the knitted fabrics is that the main factor responsible for this defect isthe yarn twist liveliness [Primentas, 1995], a characteristic that describes the active tor-sional energy present in the yarn. Its magnitude depends primarily on the amount of twistinserted in the yarn, i.e., the twist factor. Because spirality appears commonly in fabricsproduced from singles yarns, it was decided to produce a range of singles yarn sampleshaving different twist factors in order to investigate the effect of the yarn twist and twistliveliness on spirality.

5.1. Yarn samples

Cotton singles Z-twist ring-spun yarns of nominal Tt 29 tex and 39 tex with threenominal twist factors (TF 32.0, 34.0, and 39.0 turns.cm-1.texó) were produced. After theproduction of these six (6) yarn samples, their linear densities and twist amounts weretested on the appropriate yarn testing devices. The yarn tendency to form snarls (snarli-ness) was measured with the testing apparatus "PRIANIC" [Primentas, 2001]. The meansof the above tests are presented in Table 2.

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(Æ)

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

436,2 461,6 492,2 568 635,6

39 tex

Before

After

Spir

alit

y A

ngle

(Æ)

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Actual Twist (turnsØm-1)

520,8 551,2 591,4 604,4 675,4

29 tex

Before

After

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 13

5.2. Fabric samples

The machine and its settings described above (¨ 4.1.2) without take-down tension wereused for the production of the fabric samples.

In the knitting industry the commonly used tightness factors are ranged between 1.45and 1.5. Considering that the tighter the knitted fabric the less the exhibited spirality dueto the restriction of the yarn movement in the knitted structure [Banerjee & Alaiban,1988], in this experiment the low tightness factors of K1 = 1.115 texó.mm-1 for the yarnsamples of 29 tex and K2 = 1.293 texó.mm-1 for the yarn samples of 39 tex were used tomake more distinguishable the effect of the yarn twist liveliness on the spirality of theknitted fabrics.

The spirality angle of each fabric sample was measured with a protractor in five (5)different places and the means of these readings are presented in Table 2.

Table 2

Mean values of yarn characteristics and fabric spirality

Yarn linear density (tex) 29.3 39.3

Yarn twist factor (turns.cm-1.texó) 32.4 34.9 38.6 32.3 33.4 39.5

Yarn twist amount (turns.m-1) 599.8 656.4 738.0 520.5 544.0 631.7Yarn snarliness (cm) 49.3 60.6 71.1 47.2 55.7 70.8Fabric spirality Angle (Æ) 9.5 11.0 16.0 12.5 14.5 18.5

Figure 5: Relation between yarn snarliness and fabric spirality.

20

Twist Factor (turnsØcm-1Øtexó)

Snarliness (cm* 10) - 29.3 texSpirality Angle (Æ) - 29.3 texSnarliness (cm* 10) - 39.3 texSpirality Angle (Æ) - 39.3 tex

30 32 34 36 38 40

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

14 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

5.3. Discussions and Conclusion

The increase in the twist snarliness that both yarn samples of the two linear densitiesexhibited, mainly due to the increase of their twist amount, resulted in the increase of thefabric spirality. It could be also stated that yarn snarliness and fabric spirality followed analmost linear trend. This is in agreement with the statement of the various textile tech-nologists that the spirality depends mainly on the yarn twist liveliness that in this experi-ment has been expressed in terms of the yarn snarliness. Therefore, it is necessary to de-velop a method to eliminate the yarn twist liveliness by using specific yarn processes. Thelow twist liveliness yarn will result in spirality-free garments when is knitted in a singlejersey fabric of a normal tightness factor.

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 15

References

Anon. (1980). "Complement aux etudes de vrillage des tricots", ITF Maille Bull. Scient.,Vol. 9, No 33, p. 85.

Araujo, M.D. and Smith, G.W. (1989). "Spirality of knitted fabrics. Part I: The nature ofspirality", Textile Research Journal, Vol. 59, No 5, p. 247.

Bailey, D.L. (1992). "Factors affecting the skew of 100% cotton single jersey fabrics", AirJet Spinning Conference, College of Textiles, NCSU, Charlotte, N.C., May 28.

Banerjee, ƒ.∫., Alaiban, T.S. (1987). "Mechanism of loop formation at extreme cam set-tings on a Sinker top machine. Part I: Relationship between Count, Gauge, andTightness Factor", Textile Research Journal, Vol. 57, No 9, p. 513.

Banerjee, ƒ.∫., Alaiban, T.S. (1988). "Geometry and dimensional properties of plainloops made of rotor spun cotton yarns Part III: Spirality of the wale line", Tex-tile Research Journal, Vol. 58, No 5, p. 287.

Buhler, G., Haussler, W. (1985). "Influences affecting the skew of single jersey fabrics",Knitting Technique, Vol. 7, No 6, p. 373.

Buhler, G., Haussler, W. (1986). "Influences affecting the skew of single jersey fabrics",Knitting Technique, Vol. 8, No 1, p. 41.

Centre de Recherches de la Bonneterie, (1974). "The direction of rotation of circular knit-ting machines and the spirality of knitted fabrics" Industrie Textile, p. 184.

Charnock, I.L.A. (1977). "Yarn quality for knitting", Textile Institute & Industry, Vol.15, No 5, p. 175.

Davis, W., Edwards, C.H., Stanbury, G.R. (1934). "Spirality in knitted fabrics", Journal ofthe Textile Institute, Vol. 25, No 3, p. T122.

Davis, W., Edwards, C.H. (1935). "Spirality in knitted fabrics: II Cotton", Journal of theTextile Institute, Vol. 26, No 3, p. T103.

Fletcher, H.M. & Roberts, S.H. (1953). "Distortion in knit fabrics and Its relation toshrinkage in laundering", Textile Research Journal, Vol. 23, No 1, p. 37.

Gan, L.R. (1967). "Role of the knitter in the production of dimensionally stable wool gar-ments", Hosiery Times, Dec., Vol. 40, No. 463, p. 37.

Ghosh, S., Banerjee, ƒ.∫. (1990). "Mechanics of the single jersey weft knitting process",Textile Research Journal, Vol. 60, No 4, p. 203.

Henshaw, D.E. (1968). "Cam forces in weft knitting", Textile Research Journal, Vol 38,No 6, p. 592.

16 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Henshaw, D.E. (1976). "Knitting of self-twist yarn" Textile Institute & Industry, Vol. 14,No 5, p. 157.

Hepworth, R.B. (1982). "The dimensional and mechanical properties of plain weft knits",Knitting International, Jan., Vol. 89, No. 1057, p. 33.

Hepworth, R.B. (1993). "Spirality in knitted fabrics caused by twist-likely yarns: A theo-retical investigation", Melliand Textilberichte, Vol. 74, No. 6, p. 515.

Hughes, J.W. (1945). "Distorted loops (Avoided by knitting machine adjustment)", Tex-tile World, Vol. 95, No 12, p. 123.

Kliment, L. (1977). Wirk. Strick. Tech., Vol. 27, No. 8, p. 349.Knapton, J.J.F. & Munden, D.L. (1966a). "A study of the mechanism of loop formation

on weft-knitting machinery. Part I: The effect of input tension and cam setting onloop formation", Textile Research Journal, Vol. 36, No 12, p. 1072.

Knapton, J.J.F. & Munden, D.L. (1966b). "A study of the mechanism of loop formationon weft-knitting machinery. Part II The effect of yarn friction on yarn tension inknitting and loop formation", Textile Research Journal, Vol. 36, No 12, p. 1081.

Kurbak, A. (1982). "Some effects of substituting a presser footer for take-down tensionin weft knitting", Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Leeds, Leeds, England.

Munden, D.L. (1960). "Effect of yarn colour, twist, moisture content, and package hard-ness on knitting quality", Hosiery Times, May, Vol. 33, No. 372, p. 17.

Munden, D.L., Tansley, N.J. (1956). "The control of quality of a knitted fabric, Part I: Useof the yarn speed meter on revolving cylinder knitting machines", Hatra Produc-tion Notes, March, No 8.

Nutting, T.S. (1970). "Recent progress in the geometry of weft knitted wool fabrics", HA-TRA Notes 10, December.

Oinuma, R., Takeda, H. (1988). "Spirality in plain-jersey fabrics knitted of three-ply cot-ton yarns", Journal of Textile Machinery Society of Japan (English edition), Vol.34, No 3, p. 74.

Primentas, A. (1995). "Mechanical methods for the reduction of spirality in weft knittedfabrics", Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Leeds, Leeds, England.

Primentas, A. (2001). "The determination of yarn snarliness", Applied Research ReviewTEI of Piraeus, Vol. VI, No. 1, pp 77-89.

Soong, S.S. (1988). "An investigation in to the knittability of weft knitted fabrics", Ph.D.Thesis, The University of Leeds, Leeds, England.

Stevens, J.C. (1985). "Knitting to specification", African Textiles, Dec./Jan., p. 28. Tompkins, E. (1914). "The science of knitting", John Wiley & Son Inc., New York.

The role of some knitting machine settings and the yarn twist liveliness... 17

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entrela Grèce et la France

Ekaterina P. KikiliaInstitut Technologique du Pirée

Resumé

Dans le cadre de ce projet on examine les relations franco-grecques dans leur dimen-sion économique. On démontre que la France demeure une grande puissance industrielleet qu’ elle est largement bénéficiaire de ses échanges commerciaux avec la Grèce, tandisque la Grèce montre une faiblesse qui reflète surtout son incapacité structurelle à maîtri-ser les termes de l’ échange et à dompter les mécanismes qui régissent le commerce inter-national. Bien entendu, on ne niera pas, tout au long de ce article, le fait que la formationéconomique et sociale grecque est dans l’ impossibilité, du moins pour l’ instant, de riva-liser avec la quatrième puissance économique mondiale.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

™ÙËÓ ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÂÍÂÙ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ÔÈ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈΤ˜ Û¯¤ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ∂ÏÏ¿‰·˜ Î·È Ù˘°·ÏÏ›·˜, ΢ڛˆ˜, ηٿ ÙË ‰ÂηÂÙ›· 1990-2000. ∞Ô‰ÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÙ·È fiÙÈ Ë °·ÏÏ›· ·Ú·Ì¤ÓÂÈÌÈ· ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋ ‰‡Ó·ÌË Î·È fiÙÈ ÂˆÊÂÏ‹ıËÎÂ, Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi, ·fi ÙȘ ÂÌÔ-ÚÈΤ˜ Û˘Ó·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ Ù˘ Ì ÙËÓ ∂ÏÏ¿‰·. ∞fi ÙËÓ ¿ÏÏË ÏÂ˘Ú¿, Ë ∂ÏÏ¿‰· ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÂÈ ÌÈ··‰˘Ó·Ì›·, Ë ÔÔ›· ·ÓÙÈηÙÔÙÚ›˙ÂÈ, ΢ڛˆ˜, ÙË ‰È·ÚıÚˆÙÈ΋ ·ÓÈηÓfiÙËÙ¿ Ù˘ Ó· ¯ÂÈ-ÚÈÛÙ› ÙÔ˘˜ fiÚÔ˘˜ ÙˆÓ Û˘Ó·ÏÏ·ÁÒÓ Î·È Ó· ·ÊÔÌÔÈÒÛÂÈ ÙÔ˘˜ Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÔ‡˜ Ô˘ ‰È¤Ô˘ÓÙÔ ‰ÈÂıÓ¤˜ ÂÌfiÚÈÔ. ∫·Ù·‰ÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÙ·È, ηٿ ÙË ‰È¿ÚÎÂÈ· Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ì ‡ÏËÙÔ ÙÚfi-Ô, fiÙÈ ÙÔ ÂÏÏËÓÈÎfi ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎfi Î·È ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi Á›ÁÓÂÛı·È ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È Û ı¤ÛË, ÙÔ˘Ï¿¯È-ÛÙÔÓ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ ·ÚfiÓ, Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙ› ÙËÓ Ù¤Ù·ÚÙË ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ‰‡Ó·ÌË ÛÙÔÓ ÎfiÛÌÔ.

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France 19

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 19-30

1. Introduction

Occupant une place stratégique dans les Balkans, la Grèce s’ est longtemps distinguéepar sa relative autonomie à l’ égard de l’ O∆∞¡, et paradoxalement, par une politique iso-lationniste dans sa région.

La cause hellénique s’ est toujours limitée, en Europe de l’ Ouest, à quelques sympa-thies sans pour autant dépasser le stade de cette même sympathie. C’ est pourtant avec l’arrivée de la partie socialiste au pouvoir, en 1981, qui a coïncidé avec la victoire des par-tis socialistes en France, en Espagne et au Portugal, qu’ a été entamé le processus d’ ou-verture de la Grèce vers l’ extérieur. C’ est qu’ en 1981, la Grèce consolidait sa transitiondémocratique.

La Grèce a su trouver en la France un partenaire de qualité et un allié d’ envergure. Ilest vrai que, pour la Grèce, les relations avec la France constituent un axe stratégique desa politique étrangère. Les relations entre la Grèce et la France ne datent pas d’ aujourd’hui, elles sont historiques.

2. Aspect general de la situation économique des deux pays

(France-Grèce)

2.1. L’ économie et le commerce extérieur de la Grèce

La structure économique de la Grèce a subi de profondes transformations et ce, depuisquelques décennies. Pays sociologiquement rural (près de 20% de la population active estencore employée dans l’ agriculture), la Grèce a connu dans les années 60 et 70 une trèsforte croissance.

La Grèce est un pays largement ouvert à l’ extérieur. A titre d’ exemple, les importa-tions représentent plus de 30% du P.I.B –ce qui traduit une assez forte dépendance vis-à-vis de l’ extérieur–, qui sont de 2 à 3 fois supérieures aux exportations. Ainsi donc, la ba-lance commerciale grecque est structurellement déficitaire.

La Grèce est un pays importateur des biens d’ équipement et des produits de largeconsommation. L’ économie grecque est une "économie de service". En effet, le secteurtertiaire y est très développé et emploie plus de 58% de la population active. Il existe aus-si une "économie souterraine" qui réalise, selon différentes estimations, environ 30 à 40%du P.I.B. Le taux de salarialisation très faible de la population active et le taux anorma-lement élevé (selon les normes communautaires) des actifs indépendants sont probable-ment à l’ origine de l’ essor du secteur des services.

Le secteur des services présente des points très forts comme le tourisme, l’ armementnaval, le commerce international, le transport maritime et le BTPH (Bâtiment travauxpublics et hydraulique).

20 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

La Grèce est un pays exportateur net de produits agricoles. Elle exporte essentielle-ment fruits et légumes, blé dur, huile d’ olive. Elle importe de la viande et des produitslaitiers.

Son sous-sol regorge de richesse minière: magnésite, bentonite, perlite, amiante...etc.Aussi, elle exporte ciment, marbre et pierre ponce. De plus, d’ importantes ressources enbauxite ont favorisé le développement d’ une puissante industrie de l’ aluminium.

Ces branches assurent plus de 80% des exportations grecques hors secteur des ser-vices.

Entre 1979 et 1993, les performances de l’ économie grecque étaient plutôt médioc-res. Face à ce constat, le gouvernement a présenté, en juin 1994, un programme deconvergence pour la période (1994-1999), afin de satisfaire aux critères requis pour sonadhésion à l’ Euro.

Les résultats obtenus sont jugés très encourageants: l’ inflation continue de reculer,pour atteindre en septembre 1997 5%, contre 14,4% en 1993. De plus, après un déficitbudgétaire de 13,2% du P.I.B en 1993, l’ année 1995 s’ est soldée par un recul de ce der-nier de l’ ordre de 9,1%.

En 1997, le déficit public a été ramené en dessous des 5% du P.I.B. La dette publiquea entamé sa décrue, tout en restant supérieure à 100% du P.I.B.

Le choix récent d’ Athènes pour l’ organisation des Jeux Olympiques de 2004, devraitsoutenir une activité économique et une politique volontariste de l’ emploi. Aussi, la Grè-ce, longtemps isolée de ses voisins des Balkans et de la mer Noire, possède des atouts im-portants pour jouer un rôle de premier plan dans ces marchés d’ avenir.

Le commerce extérieur de la Grèce est structurellement déficitaire. Le taux de cou-verture des importations par les exportations est sensiblement inférieur à 50%. Cette si-tuation est caractéristique d’ une économie de services qui rétablit l’ équilibre de sescomptes extérieurs grâce à d’ importantes recettes invisibles, provenant notamment de lamarine marchande et du tourisme.

La balance commerciale grecque s’ est dégradée au cours de dernières années, enraison d’ une forte demande de biens d’ équipement liée au programme de grands tra-vaux soutenu par l’ Union européenne et d’ une demande soutenue des biens deconsommation courante, traduisant l’ accroissement du pouvoir d’ achat de la popula-tion grecque.

Au cours des dernières années, le commerce extérieur de la Grèce s’ est tourné essen-tiellement vers les pays de l’ Union européenne, et plus particulièrement vers l’ Italie quiest devenu le premier fournisseur de la Grèce avec une part de marché de 16,6% contre16,4% pour l’ Allemagne et 8% pour la France.

En ce qui concerne le nombre d’ opérateurs présents dans le commerce franco-grec,les douanes françaises ont enregistré 1593 importateurs français et 6054 sociétés ayantune activité exportatrice vers la Grèce.

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France 21

2.2. Le commerce extérieur de la France

La France constitue la quatrième puissance exportatrice et le troisième importateurdans le monde. Elle occupe aussi la seconde position (après les Etats-Unis) en ce quiconcerne les exportations des services et des produits agricoles.

En 1996, la balance commerciale a marqué un excédent record de l’ ordre de 122,3milliards de francs (97,8 milliards de francs en 1995). Selon les statistiques des douanes fran-çaises, les exportations de la France ont marqué, en 1996, une croissance limitée de 3,5%(9,3% en 1995) et sont atteint à 1485,8 milliards de francs. De même, les importations –del’ ordre de 1363,5 milliards de francs– ont modestement augmenté (de 2,2% en 1996 cont-re 8,5% en 1995). La progression des exportations en volume s’ est élevée de 4,7% (6,3%en 1995), tandis que l’ augmentation des importations était de 2,5% (5,1% en 1995).

D’ après les estimations gouvernementales, l’ excédent de la balance commerciale amaintenant acquis un caractère structurel et reflète l’ amélioration de la concurrence desentreprises françaises. Les performances de ces dernières années semblent confirmer cesestimations, comparativement aux grands déficits de la balance observés au début et à lafin de la décennie dernière.

En ce qui concerne la répartition sectorielle des échanges, la structure des importa-tions françaises est marquée par l’ importance des biens de consommation courante. Cesecteur représente environ 35% du total des importations en provenance de la Grèce.

3.1. Les relations économiques et commerciales entre la Grèce et la

France en 1996

Les échanges commerciaux entre la Grèce et la France sont traditionnellement déve-loppés et se caractérisent par des déficits élevés aux dépens de la Grèce. La France cons-titue le quatrième marché, en importance, pour les produits grecs. En même temps, elleoccupe constamment la troisième place, parmi les principaux fournisseurs de la Grèce.

Le volume global des échanges bilatéraux a atteint, en 1996, le niveau de 14,6milliards de francs. Il faut noter que la Grèce représente pour la France son principalexcédent bilatéral dans l’ Union européenne, après la Grande-Bretagne et l’ Espagne,et son cinquième dans le monde. Les échanges franco-grecs se caractérisent par une re-lative concentration sectorielle et un excédent constant pour la France de l’ ordre de 7milliards de francs.

La Grèce constitue le 21ième client de la France soit 0,8 du total des exportations fran-çaises. Mais elle n’ apparaît qu’ à la 45ième place parmi les fournisseurs, soit 0,21% dutotal des importations françaises.

Selon les statistiques des douanes françaises, les exportations grecques vers la Franceont marqué une progression de 8% en 1995, dépassant de nouveau le seuil de 3 milliards

22 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

de francs. En 1996, les exportations sont restées stables avec 2978 millions de francs (ànoter une légère variation de 2,2%). Dans le même temps, les ventes françaises vers laGrèce ont marqué une nette progression de 16%, passant respectivement de 9,2 à 10,8milliards de francs entre 1994 et 1995, et touchant les 11,6 en 1996.

La conséquence de cette évolution a été l’ aggravation du déficit de la balance de laGrèce avec la France, de 11,6% (–8.639 millions de francs). Il faut retenir que les expor-tations grecques vers le marché français, après une grande décrue durant les années1992-93, ont sensiblement augmenté en 1995 (+8%) et se sont maintenues à ce même ni-veau en 1996.

En outre, les exportations françaises vers la Grèce ont connu, en 1996, un ralentisse-ment (7,7%) par rapport à 1995 (15,6%).

Aussi la structure des exportations françaises en Grèce s’ est légèrement modifiée aucours des dernières années. Les biens de consommation courante constituent désormaisle premier poste à l’ exportation avec 21%.

La France exporte vers la Grèce surtout des produits alimentaires: viande, céréales,voitures, produits pharmaceutiques et cosmétiques, produits chimiques, biens d’ équi-pement.

Les biens d’ équipement qui constituaient autrefois le premier secteur d’ exportation,ne représentent plus que 18% environ des exportations. Par contre, on constate une aug-mentation significative des ventes des produits des industries agro-alimentaires, qui tota-lisent désormais près de 20% des exportations françaises et dégagent un excédent consi-dérable dans ce secteur. Les viandes et les produits laitiers en représentent la plus grandepart. Les produits de la chimie organique et les autres demi-produits, non-métalliques, oc-cupent également une place importante.

Les exportations de la Grèce vers la France comprennent principalement des pro-duits classiques. Une partie prépondérante des produits, qui présentent un degré satis-faisant d’ "exportabilité" vers le marché français, est constituée par les produits de l’ in-dustrie textile, les boissons et les produits agro-alimentaires. Les secteurs de textile etd’ énergie constituent les deux principaux soldes positifs pour la Grèce. Les produitsénergétiques représentent environ un quart des exportations grecques. L’ autre quartdes exportations grecques vers la France est constitué de produits agricoles et agro-ali-mentaires.

Pourquoi la baisse des exportations grecques ?

Les produits exportables traditionnels susmentionnés ont présenté, pendant la derniè-re décennie, une tendance générale à la stagnation. Ce phénomène est dû tant à des rai-sons générales, qu’ à des facteurs déterminants plus spécifiques qui se rapportent à chaquecatégorie particulière des produits.

En analysant l’ évolution et les fluctuations des exportations grecques, nous consta-tons ce qui suit:

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France 23

L’ évolution des produits textiles présente un solde positif. Ils continuent d’ oc-cuper la première place dans le tableau des exportations grecques vers la France (ils re-présentent 20% environ du total des exportations grecques).

D’ ailleurs, les exportations grecques en cuir et fourrures ont rebaissé en 1996,après la baisse subie en 1995, fait qui présente de nouvelles possibilités d’ accroissementvers le marché français.

Quant aux produits pétroliers, il est très aléatoire de s’ adonner à une quelconque ana-lyse durable et ce, dans le sens où le marché mondial subit des fluctuations quasi-perma-nentes exposant tout commentaire aux humeurs de l’ actualité.

Toutefois, il a été observé, en 1996, une progression des exportations en combusti-

bles et lubrifiants en terme de valeur (527,6 millions de francs, c’ est-à-dire 1/6ième àpeu près du total des exportations grecques vers la France).

Nous observons, dans le même temps, une détérioration de la part du marché grec quiest passée de 4,15% en 1985 à moins de 1% depuis les trois dernières années.

Nous enregistrons aussi de remarquables modifications des exportations grecques

en ce qui concerne les matières premières et les minéraux. Dans ce secteur, la poli-tique des exportations ne joue pas de rôle particulier car, d’ un côté, les ventes sont in-fluencées par les évolutions au niveau international, et d’ un autre côté, les entreprisesgrecques qui exportent obtiennent la mise à disposition des produits à travers leurs par-tenaires commerciaux, et les accords avec les oligopoles mondiaux, souvent indépendantsd’ autres paramètres.

En 1996, les exportations des minéraux industriels ont marqué une montée si-gnificative, tandis que les ventes traditionnelles de ciments ont connu un faible recul, del’ ordre de 10%.

La part grecque dans le marché français d’ aluminium et ses dérivés présente aussi unevariation, surtout pendant les cinq dernières années. La faible compétitivité des exporta-tions grecques se reflète dans la différence entre l’ évolution du volume et de la valeur,qui indique l’ effort de maintenir une part importante dans le marché français, à traversla réduction du prix des produits.

La baisse générale qu’ on observe aux exportations de différents minéraux et des

articles métalliques pendant l’ année 1996, est remarquable en comparaison avec cellede l’ année 1995. Les domaines en valeur de ceux mentionnés ci-dessus sont les exporta-tions des produits d’ aluminium (121,9 millions de francs) et des tuyaux de cuivre (52millions de francs) qui ont connu respectivement des baisses de 25,95% et 19%.

D’ après les estimations des importateurs traditionnels grecs, la diminution des ex-portations du coton est due au coût d’ approvisionnement et de traitement du produit, cequi augmente sans cesse, fait qui oblige les entreprises françaises à se tourner vers lessources d’ approvisionnement concurrentes.

En revanche, les exportations de fibres synthétiques et de tissus se trouvent à desniveaux élevés et ont enregistré une nette augmentation de leurs ventes (34%) en 1996.

24 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Par ailleurs, la baisse des exportations de tabac (de 12% en 1996) est due, selon les indi-cations des opérateurs grecs, à l’ augmentation du prix de vente du tabac grec (de variété Vir-ginia); ceci a obligé les importateurs français à voir d’ autres sources d’ approvisionnement.

Au contraire, le secteur des produits agro-alimentaires et des boissons a faitpreuve d’ un dynamisme remarquable au cours de dernières années, et ce avec quelquesnuances selon les catégories de produit.

Tandis que la part des exportations grecques s’ est rétrécie pour certains produits tra-ditionnels, –les conserves de fruits et légumes, ainsi que les raisins– des perspectives par-ticulièrement encourageantes se présentent aujourd’ hui pour l’ écoulement des produitsfrais et alimentaires (kiwi, escargots, fruits de mer, huile d’ olive, jus de fruits, pulpe detomate, plats surgelés).

3.2. L’ implantation des societés françaises en Grèce

En dehors des flux commerciaux, les investissements directs jouent également un rô-le particulièrement important dans les relations économiques entre la France et la Grèce.

En terme de flux, de 1988 à 1994, la France se situe généralement à la deuxième outroisième place parmi les investisseurs étrangers.

Les investissements en Grèce connaissent, en flux, une progression constante depuis1992, avec une pointe notable en 1994. Une centaine de sociétés françaises sont implan-tées en Grèce.

L’ importance de la présence française en Grèce est liée à l’ implantation de certainsgrands groupes, tels que Pechiney, Alcatel-Alsthom, Promodès-Continent, Rhône-Pou-lenc, Air Liquide, l’ Oréal, B.S.N., Creusot-Loire, C.D.F.-Chimie.

D’ importants investissements industriels ont été réalisés, en premier lieu, dans le sec-teur de l’ aluminium où Aluminium de Grèce, du groupe Pechiney, est l’ un des premiersexportateurs du pays, mais également dans celui des engrais, des câbles d’ énergie et detélécommunications, du ciment, ainsi que des produits pharmaceutiques et cosmétiques.

Aluminium de Grèce a enregistré des bénéfices de 21 millions de dollars au premier se-mestre de 1996, contre 20 millions de dollars environ, pendant la période correspondan-te de 1995. Le chiffre d’ affaires de cette société est toutefois en baisse, atteignant 173millions de dollars au premier semestre contre 183 millions l’ an passé.

A noter également que dans les années 90, une part croissante des investissementsfrançais en Grèce concerne le secteur des services et de l’ industrie agro-alimentaire.

De même, les formes traditionnelles d’ investissement avec implantation de nouvellesunités de productions reculent –et c’ est probablement l’ effet du marché unique– au pro-fit de nouvelles formes qui se concrétisent par le rachat, l’ acquisition ou la prise de par-ticipation au capital des sociétés grecques.

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France 25

3.3. Les investissements et la coopération économique franco-grecque

La Grèce offre des conditions particulières favorables aux entreprises françaises quidésirent s’ y implanter ou développer leurs activités économiques.

Située au carrefour de trois horizons géopolitiques (Europe de l’ Ouest, Balkans, Pro-che-Orient), elle dispose des atouts d’ un centre d’ affaires international.

3.3.1. Les investissements français vers la Grèce

La France est de façon permanente le troisième investisseur étranger en Grèce avec15% du montant cumulé des investissements étrangers après les Etats-Unis et l’ Allema-gne. Ce montant était de 2.171 millions de francs en 1995.

Ces dix dernières années, les investisseurs français en Grèce s’ intéressent principale-ment au secteur agro-alimentaire et au secteur des services, par le biais de rachats ou departicipations au capital des entreprises grecques (banques, agences de voyage).

3.3.2. Les investissements grecs vers la France

Au contraire, les investissements grecs en France sont plutôt limités, sauf pour le mar-ché de l’ immobilier et pour la création de sociétés commerciales.

Un nombre limité seulement de sociétés grecques dispose d’ une filiale en France(Banque nationale de Grèce, Ciments Titan, Delta, société grecque de fabrication des pro-duits pharmaceutiques (Lavipharm), Petzetakis)

Une coopération importante se développe ces dernières années dans le secteur ter-tiaire (tourisme, transports, logiciels, business consulting, programmes communautaireset scientifiques).

3.3.3. La cooperation economique franco-grecque

Des sociétés françaises ont déjà été retenues pour des marchés de travaux publics, etce pour un budget de l’ ordre de 100 milliards de francs.

On distingue, entre autres, la société Dumez-G.T.M., responsable de la constructiondu pont qui reliera Rio à Antirrio; la société G.E.C.-Alstom, sélectionnée pour la réalisa-tion d’ une usine de gaz naturel dans la région de Lavrio; la société de construction de bâ-timents Bouygues, chargée de la réalisation du métro de Thessalonique.

Il est à signaler l’ accord passé entre la société d’ informatique Bull et le ministèregrec des Finances. La filiale locale de Bull, chef de file d’ un consortium européen, com-prenant Siemens et Olivetti, s’ est vue attribuer par le ministère grec des Finances, le20 juillet 1995, le marché de l’ équipement informatique de l’ administration fiscale(projet dit "Taxis").

26 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

4. Les raisons de la stagnation des relations economiques

entre la franco-grecques. propositions en vue de leur

amélioration.

4.1. Les raisons et les facteurs

Les échanges commerciaux et la balance des paiements constituent, en principe, le mi-roir des possibilités de production et de compétitive d’ un pays. L’ état stationnaire desexportations grecques vers le marché français durant les quinze dernières années reflète,de ce point de vue, la rigidité des structures productives de l’ économie grecque et l’ ur-gence d’ un renforcement de ses capacités productives.

La faiblesse technologique de l’ économie grecque constitue également un facteurprincipal qui entrave les exportations grecques. On peut le constater par la petite taillede la plupart des unités de production grecques, par la forte dépendance technologique etpar les faibles interconnexions sectorielles de la production. La production industriellegrecque dépend à 50% de l’ importation des inputs.

La spécialisation joue également un rôle important dans les produits standards qui pré-sentent un faible taux de rentabilité internationale. Ainsi, les produits manufacturés grecsaffrontent une forte concurrence de la part des produits similaires en provenance des paysen voie de développement. Il y a une certaine impuissance concernant la promotion deces produits dans les marchés des pays développés, et qui doivent répondre aux modèlescontemporains de consommation de masse.

Dans ce cadre-là, la structure des exportations grecques en France est restée stable du-rant les quinze dernières années. Leur capacité technologique s’ est en moyenne réduite,alors que dans certains cas il y a eu une baisse dans les exportations des produits non-tra-ditionnels au profit des branches plus traditionnelles, une intensité du travail non-qualifiéou encore dans les matières premières du pays.

En analysant les raisons de la stagnation des exportations grecques concernant surtoutles produits de large consommation, il faut d’ abord faire la différence entre les facteursobjectifs et les raisons qui sont à l’ origine des faiblesses des entreprises grecques et desagents d’ exportation.

4.1.1. Les facteurs objectifs determinants

Dans la première catégorie, on a des paramètres tels que la libéralisation du marchéeuropéen et son ouverture à des fournisseurs extracommunautaires, et à des catégoriesdes produits de plus en plus variés. Un autre facteur est la distance géographique, ainsi queles problèmes de transport et de communication qui en résultent. Il en va de même, pourle niveau relativement très faible de la coopération entre les sociétés grecques et françai-ses, ainsi que le manque de familiarisation avec la réalité des entreprises grecques.

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France 27

Comme il a été mentionné auparavant, la concurrence hors pays à coût salarial bas estde plus en plus forte. Il y a une tendance générale à la délocalisation des activités pro-ductives dans les domaines de travail intense. Le phénomène est courant dans le secteurde l’ industrie textile et des articles d’ habillement, où les entreprises françaises tendent àtransférer leur production vers les pays d’ Afrique du Nord, d’ Europe de l’ Est et duMoyen-Orient, tout en maintenant en France les activités qui ont une plus grande valeurajoutée, telles que le design, le marketing et la gestion. L’ augmentation des importationsdans les secteurs mentionnés ci-dessus, qui est enregistrée sur la balance commercialefrançaise, ne reflète pas obligatoirement une pénétration croissante des produits étran-gers dans le marché intérieur, mais résulte principalement du transfert de la productiondes entreprises françaises dans des pays en voie de développement. C’ est un fait qui d’une relativise mais d’ autre part perpétue la diminution des exportations grecques.

Enfin, la place dominante des grandes chaînes de supermarchés qui est en position d’imposer ses «règles du jeu», favorise en principe, les grandes entreprises multinationa-les et rend difficile l’ accès de petites et moyennes entreprises aux grands magasins devente au détail.

4.1.2. Les faiblesses concrètes des entreprises grecques et des agents d’

exportation

En dehors de ces facteurs objectifs, la stagnation des exportations grecques vers lemarché français, depuis les dix dernières années, est due à certaines faiblesses concrètesdes opérateurs grecs parmi lesquels on pourrait mentionner notamment:

ñ Tout d’ abord, l’ absence d’ une véritable stratégie d’ exportation ayant des buts clairset de moyens de promotion adéquats.

ñ Un manque total de promotion et de publicité des produits grecs dans le marchéfrançais.

ñ L’ image de la Grèce et de ses possibilités économiques qui paraît sous-développéepar rapport à ses véritables possibilités et réussites.

ñ On note également, le manque de prospections des marchés très spécialisés réaliséespar des bureaux de statistiques et par des sociétés de communication afin de découvrirles possibilités des certaines catégories des produits précises et les démarches à suivrepour leur promotion dans le marché français.

ñ Une autre faiblesse constitue l’ impossibilité d’ établir un label de «qualité reconnue»pour des produits de marque, et de s’ adapter aux exigences du marché mondial. Nousconstatons aussi, l’ impossibilité d’ accéder aux grandes chaînes françaises dedistribution. Cela veut dire que les produits ne répondent pas aux normesinternationales de qualité et d’ emballage et qu’ ils ne sont pas adaptés aux tendanceset besoins de consommation contemporaine.

28 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ Un autre problème qui se pose est la méconnaissance des réseaux internationaux, cequi a pour conséquence, dans la majorité des cas, la faiblesse des circuits dedistribution appropriés à la situation française.

ñ Enfin, nous observons l’ absence –sauf à de rares exceptions– d’ un établissementpermanent dans le marché français (filiale, réseau commercial, succursale).

4.2. Conclusion.

4.2.1. Les propositions d’ un certain nombre d’ operations de soutien

Afin de faire face aux points faibles exposés ci-dessus, et ainsi réussir l’ essor de l’ ex-pansion commerciale grecque, nous proposons d’ étudier un certain nombre d’ opéra-tions de soutien.

Il est très important de mettre en valeur chaque possibilité d’ amélioration de l’ ima-ge de ce pays. Il faut également mettre en lumière, tout le potentiel et les perspectives del’ économie grecque. Il est indispensable aussi, de mettre l’ accent sur le dynamisme dontfont preuve les secteurs actifs dans le marché français. Il faut organiser des missions d’ af-faires en Grèce en coopération avec les services compétents, les associations et les agentsde chaque branche, informer les Chambres de commerce; les agents publics, les organis-mes et les services qui constituent le potentiel de l’ économie grecque. Il est égalementnécessaire, de distribuer des brochures d’ information, de contacter les représentants dela presse économique ainsi que les éditions de chaque branche économique.

Ensuite, il s’ agit de développer les coopérations économiques de toute sorte entre lessociétés grecques et françaises, qui s’ adressent tant au marché français, qu’ à l’ espacevaste des Balkans, des pays de la Mer Noire, et du Moyen Orient.

Un autre point très important est l’ identification des catégories que nous désironspromouvoir dans le marché français, toujours en fonction de nos capacités de production,mais également la définition de notre orientation exportatrice d’ un produit donné.

Certains secteurs, à part ceux traditionnellement connus, révèlent un dynamisme par-ticulier, et par conséquent, des possibilités de pénétration dans le marché français. Ce sontles produits chimiques pour l’ industrie pharmaceutique et cosmétique, celui des maté-riaux de construction, des pièces détachées et des articles d’ équipement pour les voitu-res, des câbles électriques et des tuyaux conducteurs, des tuyaux de chauffage central élec-trique, des chauffe-eau solaires, et des produits logistiques.

Pour optimiser tous ces efforts, il est indispensable de charger des bureaux spécialisésdans l’ analyse et la prospection du marché français, de réaliser des prospections marke-ting qui présupposent des actions précises afin d’ obtenir la pénétration efficace des pro-duits sélectionnés dans le marché français. On aurait dû faire ceci bien avant, puisque il s’agit d’ une pratique très courante chez les pays concurrents.

Un autre moyen constitue l’ organisation de manifestations de promotion des produits

L’ évolution des relations commerciales entre la Grèce et la France 29

grecs dans les chaînes de grande distribution (Carrefour, Auchan, Casino). Il est d’ ailleursnécessaire d’ analyser le système de référencement dans le catalogue des fournisseurs deces magasins, contacter et coopérer avec des sociétés d’ importation, de grossistes, deshypermarchés et des réseaux de distribution pour repérer les causes de la difficulté desproduits grecs d’ avoir accès au marché français.

Par ailleurs, il faudra appliquer une politique d’ exportation ciblée vers le secteur del’ alimentation.

La nécessité s’ impose d’ examiner une autre question importante concernant le sec-teur alimentaire. Il s’ agit du choix des réseaux de distribution. Ainsi, plusieurs entrepri-ses grecques qui exportent, utilisent en général en France des importateurs grecs, qui sonten principe des commerçants fournisseurs des restaurants grecs ou d’ autres commer-çants. Ces gens-là, ont des possibilités très limitées, voire inexistantes pour approvision-ner les magasins de grande distribution. Afin que le rythme d’ exportations des alimentsgrecs vers le marché français soit régulier, il faut s’ approcher et coopérer avec les gran-des entreprises françaises d’ importation et avec des centrales d’ achat. Celles-ci ont plusde possibilités d’ accès et de positionnement de produits grecs à la grande distribution.

Bibliographie

C.F.C.E. (Centre français du Commerce extérieur), Rapport économique sur la Grèce,pour l’ année 1997.

Confédération panhellénique d’ exportateurs, "Le Commerce de la Grèce avec la France",Centre des recherches et des études. Février 1996.

Direction des relations économiques extérieures: "Situation économique et financière dela Grèce", "Les nouvelles brèves de la Grèce 1997", "Le commerce extérieur dela Grèce et ses principaux partenaires commerciaux", Mars 1998.

Donnés Statistiques Des Douanes Français, année 1997.O.C.D.E., Etudes économiques pour la Grèce (année 1997).Rapport annuel sur l’ économie française et les relations franco-grecques pour l’ année

1995, Paris, juin 1996.Réunion d’ informations sur l’ Europartenariat, "Intervention de M. Ch. Machairidis,

Ministre des Affaires économiques et commerciales auprès de l’ ambassade de laGrèce en France", Hellas 1997.

30 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË,‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓØ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘, ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ ηÙÔÈ˘

¡›ÎÔ˜ ™ÈÙ¿Ï·˜∆.∂.π. §¿ÚÈÛ·˜¶·Ú¿ÚÙËÌ· ∫·Ú‰›ÙÛ·˜

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∏ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË ‰È·ÁÚ¿ÊÂÈ ÌÈ· ÈÛÙÔÚ›· ÂÓfi˜ ·ÈÒÓ·, Ôχ-ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋, ÚÔ-ÛÊ˘ÁÈ΋ ·ÏÏ¿ ÌÂ Â˘Úˆ·˚Îfi ÚÔÊ›Ï Î·È ÎÔÛÌÔÔÏ›ÙÈÎË. ∏ Ù·¯Â›· ·Ó¿Ù˘Í‹ Ù˘ ›¯ÂÛ·Ó ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ· ÙËÓ È‰È¿˙Ô˘Û· ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÔ‡ ÈÛÙÔ‡ Î·È Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜.

¶·ÚfiÏÔ Ô˘ Â›Ó·È ·Ú·ÌÂıfiÚÈ· fiÏË, ÙÔ ÔÏÈÙÈÎfi Î·È ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎfi ÛÙÔÈ¯Â›Ô ÛÙËÓ‰fiÌËÛË Î·È ÂͤÏÈÍË Ù˘ fiÏ˘ Â›Ó·È ‰Â˘ÙÂÚ‡ÔÓ Û ۇÁÎÚÈÛË Ì ÙÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi, ÔÏÈÙÈ-ÛÙÈÎfi Î·È ‰ËÌÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎfi ÚÔÊ›Ï Ù˘ Ù· ÔÔ›· ÂËÚ¤·Û·Ó ηٿ ·ÚÈÔ ÏfiÁÔ ÙËÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ-΋ ÂͤÏÈÍË.

√È Û˘ÓÔÈ˘ ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙Ô˘Ó ÔÌÔÈÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ· Û ‰ÔÌÈο Î·È ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈο ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈ-ο Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜, ·ÏÏ¿ Â›Ó·È ·˘ÙfiÓÔ̘ Î·È ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈΤ˜ ÌÂٷ͇ ÙÔ˘˜.

™ÙÔ ¿ÚıÚÔ ·˘Ùfi ÂÚÈÁÚ¿ÊÂÙ·È Ë ÂͤÏÈÍË Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ÛÙȘ ÂÚÈÊÂÚÂȷΤ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ-˘ ηıÒ˜ Î·È Ô ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi˜ Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌfi˜ ÛÂ Â›Â‰Ô ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ÙÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ.

Resumé

Alexandroupolis est une ville avec histoire d’un siècle, multiculturelle, ville des réfu-giés mais avec profil européen et cosmopolite. Son développement rapide a commeconséquences la formation particulière de son réseau urbain ainsi que l’habitat.

Malgré son emplacement géographique frontalier les éléments politiques et écono-miques dans la construction sont secondaires par rapport à son profil démographique etculturel qui ont influence son développement urbain.

∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘,... 31

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 31-40

Les quartiers présentent homogénéité dans la fonctionnalité et la construction de l’-habitat mais ils sont autonomes, différents entre-eux et ils sont influencés par la person-nalité des habitants.

Dans l’article présent on donne l’évolutivité de cet habitat caractéristique des quar-tiers périphériques ainsi que le mécanisme urbain au niveau de l’espace le l’îlot.

1. ∂ÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹

ø˜ Ó¤· fiÏË, Ë ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁË̤ÓË ·fi ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ ηٿ ÙÔ Ï›-ÛÙÔÓ, Ì Ôχ-ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ·fi ÙËÓ Á¤ÓÂÛ‹ Ù˘ ¤ˆ˜ Î·È Û‹ÌÂÚ·, ·-ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÂÈ ¤Ó· ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi ÈÛÙfi ÔÚıÔÁÒÓÈÔ ÛÙÔ Î¤ÓÙÚÔ (ÚÒÙË ‰fiÌËÛË) Î·È Û‡ÓıÂÙÔÛÙËÓ ÂÚÈʤÚÂÈ·. ∏ Ù·¯Â›· ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË (ÏËı˘ÛÌȷ΋ Î·È ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋) ›¯Â Û·Ó ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂ-ÛÌ· Ó· Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈËı› ÁÚ‹ÁÔÚË Î·È ¿Ó·Ú¯Ë ‰fiÌËÛË Û ‡„Ô˜ ÛÙÔ Î¤ÓÙÚÔ Î·È Û ÂÈ-Ê¿ÓÂÈ· ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÈʤÚÂÈ·. ∏ Û¯¤ÛË ‰ÔÌË̤ÓÔ˘ Î·È ·Î¿Ï˘ÙÔ˘ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ ›¯Â ¿ÓÈÛË ÂͤÏÈÍËÎ·È Û ÌÈÎÚ‹ ¯ÚÔÓÈο ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô ‰ÔÌ‹ıËΠϋڈ˜ ÛÙÔ Î¤ÓÙÚÔ.

∏ Û¯¤ÛË Î¿ÙÔÈÎÔ˘-ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ¤¯ÂÈ ¿ÌÂÛË ·ÌÔÈ‚·›· ÂÈÚÚÔ‹ ÛÙÔ Î·ÙÔÈ΋ÛÈÌÔ ÂÚÈ-‚¿ÏÏÔÓ. √ ¿ÓıÚˆÔ˜ ÂËÚ¿˙ÂÈ ¿ÌÂÛ· ÙËÓ ÂͤÏÈÍË Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ÙÔ˘. ∞ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ·, ÂË-Ú¿˙ÂÙ·È ·fi ÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÛÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ˙ÂÈ. ªÔÚ› Ó’·ÏÏ¿ÍÂÈ ÙȘ Û˘Ó‹ıÂȤ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÁÈ· Ó·ÚÔÛ·ÚÌfiÛÂÈ ÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÙÔ˘ ÎÙÈÚ›Ô˘ ÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô Î·Ù·Û··ÛÂ Ô ›‰ÈÔ˜. ŒÙÛÈ, ÛÙËÓ ÚÒ-ÙË Î·È ‰Â‡ÙÂÚË ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô Î·Ù·Û΢‹˜, ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì¤ÚË ‹ Î·È ÙÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜Ì ÔÏ˘ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈÎÔ‡˜ ¯ÒÚÔ˘˜ ÔÈ ÔÔ›ÔÈ ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·Ù›ÛÙËηÓ, ηْ·Ú¯‹Ó ÁÈ· Ì›· ηÈÌfiÓÔ ¯Ú‹ÛË. ∞˘Ù‹ Ë ÌÔÓ·‰È΋ ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙˆÓ ¯ÒÚˆÓ Â·Ó¤Ú¯ÂÙ·È Î·Ù¿ ÙË ÙÚ›ÙË ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô,fiÙ·Ó ÂÂÎÙ›ÓÂÙ·È, Û˘ÌÏËÚÒÓÂÙ·È ‹ ·ӷηٷÛ΢¿˙ÂÙ·È Ë Î·ÙÔÈΛ·.

∏ Û¯¤ÛË ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ Û˘ÓÔÈÎÈÒÓ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈ΋ fiÙ·Ó ÛÙ·‰È·Î¿ ÎÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ë Ì›·ÌÂÙ¿ ÙËÓ ¿ÏÏË Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ› Ë ¤Ï¢ÛË ÙˆÓ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ‹ ÙˆÓÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ ÔÌ¿‰ˆÓ.

√È ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÙˆÓ Î·ÙÔ›ÎˆÓ Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ Î·È ÔÈ Û¯¤ÛÂȘ Î·È ÂȉڿÛÂȘ ÌÂ-ٷ͇ ÁÂÈÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ Î·ÙÔÈÎÈÒÓ Â›Ó·È ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈΤ˜.

¶·ÚfiÏÔ Ô˘ Ë ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË Â›Ó·È ·Ú·ÌÂıfiÚÈ· fiÏË, ÙÔ ÔÏÈÙÈÎfi Î·È ÔÈÎÔÓÔ-ÌÈÎfi ÛÙÔÈ¯Â›Ô ÛÙËÓ ‰fiÌËÛË Î·È ÂͤÏÈÍ‹ Ù˘ Â›Ó·È ‰Â˘ÙÂÚ‡ÔÓ Û ۇÁÎÚÈÛË Ì ÙÔ ÎÔÈÓˆ-ÓÈÎfi, ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈÎfi Î·È ‰ËÌÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎfi ÚÔÊ›Ï Ù˘ Ù· ÔÔ›· ÂËÚ¤·Û·Ó ηٿ ·ÚÈÔ ÏfiÁÔÙËÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ Ù˘ ÂͤÏÈÍË.

∏ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁ›· Ù˘ fiÏ˘ Â›Ó·È ·ÓÔÌÔÈÔÁÂÓ‹˜ ηٿ ÙȘ ÚÒÙ˜ ÂÚÈfi‰Ô˘˜ Î·È ÌfiÓÔÚfiÛÊ·Ù· ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÂÙ·È ÔÌÔÈÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ· Ì ÙËÓ «ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ÔÈÎÔ‰fiÌËÛË» ÛÙÔ Î¤ÓÙÚÔ Î·È «ÌÈ-ÎÚ‹ ÔÈÎÔ‰fiÌËÛË» ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÈʤÚÂÈ·.

ø˜ ÚÒÙË ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋ ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÌÂÙ·ÌfiÚʈÛË ÙÔ˘ ‰ÔÌË̤ÓÔ˘ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔ-ÓÙÔ˜ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚ›˙Ô˘Ì ·˘Ù‹Ó ·fi ÙËÓ Á¤ÓÂÛ‹ Ù˘ (·Ú¯¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ·ÈÒÓ·) ¤ˆ˜ Î·È ÙËÓ ÚÒÙˤÏ¢ÛË ÙˆÓ ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ, ÙÔ 1922.

32 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

¢Â‡ÙÂÚË ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô˜ Â›Ó·È ·˘Ù‹ ÌÂٷ͇ Ù˘ ÚÒÙ˘ ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÌ¤Ó˘ ‰fiÌËÛ˘ Î·È ·˘Ù‹˜ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙÂÚÓÈÛÌÔ‡ ÚÈÓ ÙÔ 1960. ∆Ú›ÙË ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô˜ Â›Ó·È ·˘Ù‹ Ù˘ Ï‹ÚÔ˘˜ ÌÔÓÙÂÚÓÔ-Ô›ËÛ˘ Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜. ∞˘Ù‹ ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ‰‡Ô ÛÙ¿‰È·. ¶ÚÒÙÔ, ·˘Ùfi Ù˘ Û˘ÌÏ‹Úˆ-Û˘ ‹ Î·È Ó¤·˜ ηٷÛ΢‹˜ ÌÈÎÚ‹˜ ȉȈÙÈ΋˜ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ Î·È ‰Â‡ÙÂÚÔ ·˘Ùfi Ù˘ ÔÏ˘-ηÙÔÈΛ·˜. √ ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ ÙÚfiÔ˜ ηٷÛ΢‹˜ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ÂËÚ¤·Û ¤ÓÙÔÓ· ÙËÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ-΋ Û˘ÁÎÚfiÙËÛË Ù˘ fiÏ˘.

2. ¶ÏËı˘ÛÌfi˜-∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ ¢ÔÌ‹

∏ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È ÛÙÔ ‚ÔÚÂÈÔ·Ó·ÙÔÏÈÎfi ¿ÎÚÔ Ù˘ ∂ÏÏ¿‰Ô˜, Û ·fi-ÛÙ·ÛË 50 ¯ÈÏÈÔ̤ÙÚˆÓ ·fi ÙËÓ ∆Ô˘ÚΛ· Î·È ›ÛË ·fiÛÙ·ÛË ·fi ÙËÓ µÔ˘ÏÁ·Ú›· ·ÏÏ¿ ÛÂ120 ¯ÈÏÈfiÌÂÙÚ· ·fi Û˘ÓÔÚÈ·Îfi ÛÙ·ıÌfi. ¢È·ı¤ÙÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi ÏÈÌ¿ÓÈ, ·ÂÚÔ‰ÚfiÌÈÔ Î·È‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È Â› Ù˘ ∂ÁÓ·Ù›·˜ Ô‰Ô‡. ∏ ÂͤÏÈÍË ÙÔ˘ ÏËı˘ÛÌÔ‡ Ù˘ ‹Ù·Ó Ë ÂÍ‹˜: 7.212 ο-ÙÔÈÎÔÈ ÙÔ 1920, 13.323 ηÙ. ÙÔ 1928, 17.356 ηÙ. ÙÔ 1940, 18.580 ηÙ. ÙÔ 1951, 20.912ηÙ. ÙÔ 1961, 25.136 ηÙ. ÙÔ 1971, 35.799 ηÙ. ÙÔ 1981, 45.000 ηÙ. ÙÔ 1991 Î·È 55.000οÙÔÈÎÔÈ ÙÔ 2001.

∏ fiÏË Ù˘ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏ˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ıËΠϛÁÔ ÚÈÓ ÙÔ 1900 Û ı¤ÛË Î·Ù·Ê˘Á›-Ô˘ „·Ú¿‰ˆÓ. ™ÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ ÛËÌ›Ô, ηٿ ÙË ‰È¿ÚÎÂÈ· ÙÔ˘ ÚˆÛÔÙÔ˘ÚÎÈÎÔ‡ ÔϤÌÔ˘, ÛÙ‹ıË-Πηٷ˘ÏÈÛÌfi˜-ÛÙÚ·ÙfiÂ‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÚˆÛÈÎÒÓ ÛÙÚ·ÙÂ˘Ì¿ÙˆÓ ÁÈ· ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô Ù˘ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ ÙÔÔıÂÛ›·˜ (ÔÓfiÌ·ÙÈ dedeagats) Ì ÔÚıÔÁÒÓÈ· ¯¿Ú·ÍË ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ‰È¢ÎfiÏ˘ÓÛËÙ˘ ΢ÎÏÔÊÔÚ›·˜.

∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜ ‹ ·̷ٷ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ¤Êı·Û·Ó ÛÙ·‰È·Î¿ ·fi ÙÔ 1922 ¤ˆ˜ ηÈÛ‹ÌÂÚ·. ¢ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ıËÎ·Ó ¤ÙÛÈ ÁÂÈÙÔÓȤ˜ ÚÔÛÊ˘ÁÈΤ˜ ‹ Î·È ¿ÏϘ ÔÌÔÈÔÁÂÓ›˜ ·fiÚfiÛÊ˘Á˜ Ù˘ ∞›ÓÔ˘, Ù˘ ∞ÔÏψӛ·˜, Ù˘ ÃËÏ‹˜, Ù˘ ∫··‰ÔΛ·˜, ÙÔ˘ ¶fiÓÙÔ˘,Ù˘ ∞‰ÚÈ·ÓÔ‡ÔÏ˘, Ù˘ ∞Ó·ÙÔÏÈ΋˜ ƒˆÌ˘Ï›·˜, ¢˘ÙÈ΋˜ £Ú¿Î˘, ªÈÎÚ¿˜ ∞Û›·˜.

∫·Ù¿ ·̷ٷ, ›Û˘, ‹Ïı·Ó Î·È ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ıËÎ·Ó ∞Ṳ́ÓÈÔÈ, ∂‚Ú·›ÔÈ, ºÚ·ÁÎÔÏ‚·-ÓÙ›ÓÔÈ (ºÚ¿ÁÎÔÈ, πÙ·ÏÔ›), °¿ÏÏÔÈ, ∞˘ÛÙÚÈ·ÎÔ›, °ÂÚÌ·ÓÔ›.

∞˘Ù¤˜ ÔÈ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜ ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ıËÎ·Ó Û ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÌ¤Ó˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ›‰ÈÔ˘˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘ ηȉËÌÈÔ‡ÚÁËÛ·Ó ÙÔÓ ‰ÈÎfi ÙÔ˘˜ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi ÈÛÙfi, ÙËÓ ‰ÈÎÈ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ Ê˘ÛÈÔÁӈ̛·.

∂ÙÛÈ ¿Ú¯ÈÛÂ Â‰Ò Ô ÌÂÙ·Û¯ËÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ Ù˘ ·ÛÙÈ΋˜ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘. ªÂÙ¿ ÙÔ1970, ÔÈ ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ ·fi ÙȘ ¯ÒÚ˜ Ù˘ ¢˘ÙÈ΋˜ ∂˘ÚÒ˘ Î·È ÚÒËÓ Î¿ÙÔÈÎÔÈ Ù˘ £Ú¿-΢-¡ÔÌÔ‡ Œ‚ÚÔ˘ ÂÈÛÙÚ¤ÊÔ˘Ó ÛÙËÓ ∂ÏÏ¿‰· Î·È ÂÁηı›ÛÙ·ÓÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡Ô-ÏË Ì ÙË ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ‚ÈÔÙÈÎÔ‡ ÙÔ˘˜ ÂȤ‰Ô˘. ¶ÔÏÏÔ›, οÙÔÈÎÔÈ Ù˘ ÂÚÈʤÚÂÈ·˜ ¤Ú-¯ÔÓÙ·È ÁÈ· ηÙÔ›ÎËÛË ÛÙËÓ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË. ∞ÚÁfiÙÂÚ·, ÙË ‰ÂηÂÙ›· ÙÔ˘ 1980 Î·È ÌÂ-Ù¤ÂÈÙ·, ÂÁηı›ÛÙ·ÓÙ·È ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜ ·fi ÎÚ¿ÙË Ù˘ ÚÒËÓ ™Ô‚ÈÂÙÈ΋˜ ∂ÓˆÛ˘.¶·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ·, ÛÙËÓ Ôχ-ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ·˘Ù‹ Ù·˘ÙfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛÙ›ıÂÓÙ·È Î·È ÔÈÊÔÈÙËÙ¤˜ ÙÂÛÛ¿ÚˆÓ ·ÓÂÈÛÙËÌÈ·ÎÒÓ ÙÌËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ú¿ÁÌ· Ô˘ ¤ÙÂÈÓ ÙËÓ ·Ó¿ÁÎË ·Ó¿-Ù˘Í˘ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈÎÔ‡ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ Ù˘ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏ˘.

∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘,... 33

3. ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈο-¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈο ÷ڷÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο

∂ˆ˜ ÙȘ ·Ú¯¤˜ ÙÔ˘ 20Ô˘ ·ÈÒÓ· Ë ·Ú·‰ÔÛȷ΋ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ ÂÈÎÚ¿ÙËÛÂ Î·È Ù· ÙÔ-Èο ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ·Ó ·fi ÙËÓ ·ÁÚÔÙÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹.

ªÂÙ¿ ÙȘ ·Ú¯¤˜ ÙÔ˘ 20Ô˘ ·ÈÒÓ·, Ë ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ ÂËÚ·Ṳ̂ÓË ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÓıÚÒ-Ô˘˜ ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÌÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ ·ÎÔÏÔ‡ıËÛ ÙÔ ÙÔÈÎfi Ï·ÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎfi ‡ÊÔ˜, ÂÓÒ Ë˘fiÏÔÈË ∂˘ÚÒË ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ıÔ‡Û ÙÔÓ ÎÏ·ÛÈÎÈÛÌfi.

∏ ∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, fi¯È ÙfiÛÔ ÏfiÁˆ Ù˘ ·ÔÌ¿ÎÚ˘ÓÛ˘ ·ÏÏ¿ ÏfiÁˆ ÙˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒӉ‰ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÂÈ ÙËÓ ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô ·˘Ù‹ ÛÙ·ıÂÚ¿ «Â·Ú¯È·Î¿» ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÌÂÌÔÓÔηÙÔÈ˘ Û ÚÔÛÊ˘ÁÈ΋-ÔÌ·‰È΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ‹ Û ÌÂÛÔ·ÛÙÈο Û›ÙÈ· Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ÂÈ-Ê¿ÓÂÈ· Î·È fiÚÔÊÔ ‰›¯ˆ˜ ÏÔ‡ÛÈ· ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈο ÛÙÔȯ›·. ∞˘Ù¿ ‚Ú›ÛÎÔÓÙ·È ÛÙÔ Î¤-ÓÙÚÔ ‹ ÛÙ· ‰˘ÙÈο Ù˘ fiÏ˘.

™ÙËÓ ÚÒÙË Î·ÙËÁÔÚ›· ‰È·ÎÚ›ÓÔÓÙ·È ÔÈ ÂÍ‹˜ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜-ÁÂÈÙÔÓȤ˜:

-∆ÛÈÌÂÓÙ¤ÓÈ·

-∫·Ú·Á·ÙÛÈ·Ó¿

-∞Ï›ÌÂË-Gare Militaire

-∞ÔÏψÓÈ¿‰·

-∂ÍÒÔÏË

-∂ÚÁ·ÙÈο

-¶·Ï·Èfi˜ ™Ù·ıÌfi˜∆· ∆ÛÈÌÂÓÙ¤ÓÈ· Â›Ó·È ‰˘ÙÈ΋ ÁÂÈÙÔÓÈ¿ Ë ÔÔ›· ÎÙ›ÛıËΠ̠ۯ¤‰ÈÔ Û ÔÚıÔÁˆÓÈṲ̂-

ÓÔ ÈÛÙfi ·fi ·ÚÔ¯‹ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÚfiÛÊ˘Á˜. ∆Ô 1932 ÌÔÈÚ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È Ù· ÔÈÎfi‰· ·fi 110 ¤ˆ˜140 ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈÎÒÓ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ·fi ÎÚ·ÙÈο ‰¿ÊË. ∂ίˆÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÛÙÔ˘˜ ȉÈÒÙ˜ ·fi ÙÔ ¢Ë-ÌfiÛÈÔ ·ÓÙ› 500-3.000 ‰Ú·¯ÌÒÓ. ™Ù· ÔÈÎfi‰· ¤ÁÈÓ·Ó ·Ú·¯ˆÚËÙ‹ÚÈ· ·fi ÙÔ ÀÔ˘Ú-ÁÂ›Ô √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ ÂÚ› ÙÔ 1927 Î·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ·fi ÙÔ ÀÔ˘ÚÁÂ›Ô °ÂˆÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ÙËÓ¶ÚfiÓÔÈ·. ∆Ô ·ÓÙ›ÙÈÌÔ ÏËÚÒÓÂÙ·È Û ‰¤Î· ‰fiÛÂȘ Î·È ÔÏϤ˜ ÊÔÚ¤˜ ¯·Ú›˙ÂÙ·È ÙÔ ¯Ú¤-Ô˜ ÛÙÔ˘˜ Ôχ Ùˆ¯Ô‡˜. ∞ÚÁfiÙÂÚ·, ÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ ÔÈÎfiÂ‰Ô ˆÏÂ›Ù·È ÚÔ˜ 60-100.000 ‰Ú·¯-̤˜. ∆Ô Ó¤Ô ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ ˘ÏÈÎfi (ÙÛÈ̤ÓÙÔ) ‰›ÓÂÈ ÙÔ fiÓÔÌ· ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÈÔ¯‹. √È Î·-ÙÔÈ˘ Â›Ó·È fiϘ ·ÓÔÌÔÈfiÙ˘Â˜. Œ¯Ô˘Ó ˘ÂÚ˘„ˆÌ¤ÓÔ ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ ÁÈ· ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· ·fiÙȘ ÏËÌ̇Ú˜ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ‰ÈfiÙÈ ÙÔ ÂӉ¯fiÌÂÓÔ ˘fiÁÂÈÔ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÌÔÓˆÙÈÎfi ¯ÒÚÔ ÚÔ-ÛٷهÔÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ Î·ÙÔÈΛ· ·fi ÙËÓ ˘ÁÚ·Û›·.

§›Á˜ ηÙÔÈ˘ ÏËÛȤÛÙÂÚ· ηٷÛ΢¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ·fi ¤ÙÚ· ÛÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ ÛÙ˘Ï Î·È ÔÓÔ-Ì¿˙ÔÓÙ·È «¤ÙÚÈÓ·».

∆Ô ÔÈÎfiÂ‰Ô (›ÌËΘ ·Ú·ÏÏËÏfiÁÚ·ÌÌÔ) ÂÚ›Ô˘ 6�20 ̤ÙÚ·, ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ÙËÓ΢ڛˆ˜ ηÙÔÈΛ· Î·È ÂӉ¯Ô̤ӈ˜ ¿ÏÏ· ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· (·Ôı‹Î˜, ¯ÒÚÔ ÁÈ· χÛÈÌÔ, ÙÔ˘-·Ï¤Ù·, Ì¿ÓÈÔ). ∆· ÚfiÛıÂÙ· ÎÙ›ÚÈ· ηٷÛ΢¿ÛıËÎ·Ó ·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ·, fiÙ·Ó ˘‹Ú¯Â ÔÈÎÔ-ÓÔÌÈ΋ ¿ÓÂÛË ÙˆÓ ÓÔÈÎÔ΢ÚÈÒÓ Î·È Ë ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ· ÌÂÁ¿ÏˆÓÂ. µÚ›ÛÎÔÓÙ·È ÛÙÔ ‚¿ıÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ÔÈÎÔ¤‰Ô˘ ‹ ‰›Ï· ÛÙÔ Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ Ô›ÎËÌ· ÙÔ˘ ÔÔ›Ô˘ Ë ÚfiÛÔ„Ë Â˘ı˘ÁÚ·ÌÌ›˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙËÓÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋ ÁÚ·ÌÌ‹ ÛÙÔ Â͈ÙÂÚÈÎfi ̤ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÔ¤‰Ô˘ ÌÚÔÛÙ¿ ÛÙÔ ‰ÚfiÌÔ. ¶Â˙Ô-

34 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

‰ÚfiÌÈÔ ÚÔÛÙ¤ıËΠÔχ ·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ· Ì ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ· Ó· ÌÈÎÚ·›ÓÂÈ ÙÔ Ï¿ÙÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘.∆Ô Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ Ô›ÎËÌ· Â›Ó·È ÂÚ›Ô˘ 30-40 ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈο ̤ÙÚ· Î·È ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ Â›ÛÔ-

‰Ô-¯ˆÏ Ë ÔÔ›· Û˘¯Ó¿ Â›Ó·È ÌÂÁ¿ÏË Î·È ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È ˆ˜ ηıÈÛÙÈÎfi-ÙÚ·Â˙·Ú›·.∂Ó·˜ ¿ÏÏÔ˜ ¯ÒÚÔ˜ ÛÙËÓ ÚfiÛÔ„Ë ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È ÁÈ· ηıÈÛÙÈÎfi Ì ÎÚ‚¿ÙÈ ÁÈ· ‡ÓÔÂÓfi˜ ·ÙfiÌÔ˘ ‹ Î·È ÌfiÓÔ ÁÈ· ˘ÓÔ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈÔ fiÙ·Ó Ë ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ· Â›Ó·È ÌÂÁ¿ÏË. ∂›Û˘,˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ¤Ó· ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈÔ ›Ûˆ ·fi ÙÔ ÚÒÙÔ Î·È, ‰›Ï· ›Ûˆ, ÎÔ˘˙›Ó· Ì ÂÓۈ̷و̤ÓÔÊÔ‡ÚÓÔ. ∏ ÙÔ˘·Ï¤Ù· ηٷÛ΢¿˙ÂÙ·È Â› ϤÔÓ ¤Íˆ Î·È ‰›Ï· ÛÙË ÎÔ˘˙›Ó·. ∆· ¿ÏÏ·ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· ÚÔÛÙ›ıÂÓÙ·È ÁÈ· ‰È¢ÎfiÏ˘ÓÛË ÛÙÔ ‚¿ıÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ΋Ԣ-·˘Ï‹˜. À¿Ú¯ÂÈ ‰È¿-‰ÚÔÌÔ˜ ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ Ì ÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹. ∂Λ, ÛÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹, ÌÔÚ› Ó· ηÏÏÈÂÚ-ÁÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ï·¯·ÓÈο Î·È Ê˘Ù‡ÔÓÙ·È ÔˆÚÔÊfiÚ· ‰¤Ó‰Ú·. ªÂÚÈΤ˜ ÊÔÚ¤˜ ηٷÛ΢¿˙Ô-ÓÙ·È ¯ÒÚÔÈ ÁÈ· ηÙÔÈΛ‰È· ˙Ò·. ™ÙËÓ Î·ÙÔÈΛ· Ì·›ÓÔ˘Ì ¢ı¤ˆ˜ ·fi ÙÔ ‰ÚfiÌÔ Ì 3-4 ÛηÏÔ¿ÙÈ· ·fi ÙËÓ Â›ÛÔ‰Ô. ª›· ‰Â˘ÙÂÚÂ‡Ô˘Û· ›ÛÔ‰Ô˜ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ·fi ÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹.

∏ οÙÔ„Ë ÛÙ· ÔÈ΋̷ٷ ‰‡Ô-‰‡Ô Â›Ó·È ·ÓÂÛÙÚ·Ì̤ÓË Î·È ÎÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È "ηٿ Ù¤Ú˘-Á˜". ™˘Ó‹ıˆ˜, ·Ó‹ÎÔ˘Ó ÛÂ Û˘ÁÁÂÓÈΤ˜ ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂȘ. ∏ ÚfiÛÔ„Ë Â›Ó·È ·Ï‹ Ì ‰‡Ô·ÓÔ›ÁÌ·Ù· (fiÚÙ·, ·Ú¿ı˘ÚÔ). ªfiÓÔ ÙÔ ˘ÂÚ˘„ˆÌ¤ÓÔ ÙÌ‹Ì· Î·È Ù· ÛηÏÔ¿ÙÈ· ÂÌ-Ê·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈ΋ ȉȷÈÙÂÚfiÙËÙ·. ∞ÚÁfiÙÂÚ·, fiÔ˘ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ÚÔÛÙ›ıÂ-ÓÙ·È Î¿ÁÎÂÏ· ‹ ¤Ó· ·Ïfi ‰È·ÎÔÛÌËÙÈÎfi. ∏ ÙÂÙÚ¿ÚȯÙË ÛÙ¤ÁË ÛÙËÚ›˙ÂÙ·È Û ͇ÏÈÓÔ ÛÎÂ-ÏÂÙfi Î·È Î·Ï‡ÙÂÙ·È ·fi ÎÂÚ·Ì›‰È·.

∆· ∫·Ú·Á·ÙÛÈ·Ó¿ Â›Ó·È Ë ÈÔ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈ΋ ÂÚÈÔ¯‹ Ì ÌÈ· ÌÔÓ·‰ÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÛÙ··Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈο ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ: ∫Ù›ÛıËΠ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ›‰ÈÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ηÙÔ›ÎÔ˘˜ ÔÈ ÔÔ›ÔÈ ‹Ù·ÓÚfiÛÊ˘Á˜ ·fi ÙÔ ∫¿Ú·Á·Ù˜ Ù˘ ∞‰ÚÈ·ÓÔ‡ÔÏ˘ Î·È ÛÙËÓ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙÔ˘˜ ‹Ù·Ó˘¿ÏÏËÏÔÈ Ù˘ °·ÏÏÔÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ∂Ù·ÈÚ›·˜ ™È‰ËÚÔ‰ÚfiÌˆÓ (ÛȉËÚÔ‰ÚÔÌÈÎÔ›) Î·È ÂÚÈÛ-ÛfiÙÂÚÔ Â‡ÔÚÔÈ ˆ˜ ÌfiÓÈÌÔÈ Î·È ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓÔÈ.

∞˘ÙÔ›, ηٿ ÙËÓ ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙÂ˘Û‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ÌÂÙ¤ÊÂÚ·Ó Ì·˙› ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ¤ÙÔÈÌ· ÙÌ‹Ì·Ù· ηٷ-Û΢ÒÓ Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ›Û˘ ›¯·Ó ÎÙ›ÛÂÈ ÔÈ ›‰ÈÔÈ ‹ Î·È Ì ÙË ‚Ô‹ıÂÈ·Ì·ÛÙfiÚˆÓ. ∂ÙÛÈ, ÌÂÙ¤ÊÂÚ·Ó Û ‚·ÁfiÓÈ·-ηÚfiÙÛ˜ ‰ÔοÚÈ·, ÛÙËÚ›ÁÌ·Ù· Û΋˜, ÛηÏÔ-¿ÙÈ·, fiÚÙ˜, ·Ú¿ı˘Ú·, ÎÔ˘ÊÒÌ·Ù·, Î·È ¿ÏÏ· ˘ÏÈο ΢ڛˆ˜ ·fi ͇ÏÔ. ™ÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ·,fiÙ·Ó ÂÚfiÎÂÈÙÔ Ó· ηٷÛ΢¿ÛÔ˘Ó ÙË Ó¤· ÙÔ˘˜ ηÙÔÈΛ·, ηٷÛ··Û·Ó ÙÔ˘˜ ¯ÒÚÔ˘˜Î·È ÙÔ fiÏÔ ÎÙ›ÛÌ· Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ٷ ˘ÏÈο Ô˘ ›¯·Ó ÌÂٷʤÚÂÈ Î·È ÚÔÛ¿ıËÛ·Ó ¤ÙÛÈ Ó·ÚÔÛ·ÚÌfiÛÔ˘Ó ÙÔ Ó¤Ô ÎÙ›ÛÌ· ÛÙËÓ Ù˘ÔÏÔÁ›· ÙÔ˘ ·Ï·ÈÔ‡. ∆· ÌÂÁ¤ıË ÙˆÓ ·ÓÔÈÁÌ¿ÙˆÓÁ›ÓÔÓÙ·È Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ٷ ÌÂÁ¤ıË ·˘ÙÒÓ Ô˘ ÌÂÙ¤ÊÂÚ·Ó ·fi ÙȘ ·ÙÚ›‰Â˜ ÙÔ˘˜.

ŸÏ˜ ۯ‰fiÓ ÔÈ Î·ÙÔÈ˘ ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÔÓÙ·È ÁÚ·ÌÌÈο Î·È ÎÔÓÙ¿ ÛÙËÓ ÛȉËÚÔ‰ÚÔÌÈ΋ÁÚ·ÌÌ‹ Î·È ÛÙÔÓ Á·ÏÏÈÎfi ÛÙ·ıÌfi (·Ó·ÙÔÏÈο). ™Ù· ÔÈÎfi‰· ¤ÁÈÓ·Ó ·Ú·¯ˆÚËÙ‹ÚÈ··fi ÙÔ ÀÔ˘ÚÁÂ›Ô °ÂˆÚÁ›·˜ ÂÚ› ÙÔ 1932.

™Ù· Ï·›ÛÈ· ·ÔηٿÛÙ·Û˘ ÙˆÓ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ, ¤ÙÛÈ, ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÛÙ·‰È·Î¿ ·ÌÈ-Á›˜ Ï·ÈΤ˜ Î·È ÂÚÁ·ÙÈΤ˜ ÂÚÈÔ¯¤˜.

∆· ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· (ηÙÔÈ˘) Â›Ó·È ÌÂÁ¿Ï· Î·È Â˘¿ÂÚ·. ∫·Ù·Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó Û¯Â‰fiÓ ÙÔ ÌÈÛfiÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÔ¤‰Ô˘ (150-160 ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈο ̤ÙÚ·) Î·È ¤¯Ô˘Ó ΢ڛ·Ú¯Ô ÛÙÔÈ¯Â›Ô ÙÔ Í‡ÏÔ. ∏ÙÔÔı¤ÙËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙÔ ÔÈÎfiÂ‰Ô Â›Ó·È ›‰È· Ì ÙËÓ ÚÔËÁÔ‡ÌÂÓË, ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÛÙÔ fiÚÈÔ ÙÔ˘‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ Ì ¤Ó· ¤Ú·ÛÌ· ÛÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹. ™˘Ó‹ıˆ˜ Â›Ó·È Û ‰‡Ô ›‰·. ∆Ô ¤Ó· Û ‡„Ô˜ 1-

∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘,... 35

1.20 ̤ÙÚ· Î·È ÙÔ ¿ÏÏÔ Û ËÌÈ-˘fiÁÂÈÔ. ∆Ô Î¿ıÂ Â›Â‰Ô ¤¯ÂÈ ÂÈÊ¿ÓÂÈ· 60-70 ÙÂÙÚ·-ÁˆÓÈο ̤ÙÚ·. ∆· ÛηÏÔ¿ÙÈ· ÍÂÎÈÓÔ‡Ó ·fi ÙÔ ‰ÚfiÌÔ (·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ· Â˙Ô‰ÚfiÌÈÔ) Î·È ·ÓÂ-‚·›ÓÔ˘Ó Û ̛· ÛηṲ̂ÓË Â͈ÙÂÚÈ΋ ›ÛÔ‰Ô Ë ÔÔ›· Ô‰ËÁ› ÛÙËÓ Î˘Ú›· ›ÛÔ‰Ô ÚÔÙÔ˘ ¯ˆÏ-‰È·‰ÚfiÌÔ˘. ∞˘Ùfi˜ ‰È·ÈÚ› ÙËÓ Î·ÙÔÈΛ· Û ‰‡Ô ̤ÚË Ì ‰‡Ô ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈ· ÛÙÔ Î¿-ı ̤ÚÔ˜. ¶›Ûˆ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ‰‡Ô ˘ÓÔ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈ· Î·È ÌÚÔÛÙ¿ ¤Ó· ˘ÓÔ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈÔ Î·È ¤Ó·Û·ÏfiÓÈ-‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈÔ. ™ÙÔ ËÌÈ-˘fiÁÂÈÔ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ÌÚÔÛÙ¿ ¤Ó· ηıÈÛÙÈÎfi Î·È ¤Ó·˜ ¯ÒÚÔ˜·Ôı‹Î¢Û˘ ‹ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ ¯Ú‹ÛÂˆÓ Î·È ›Ûˆ Ë ÎÔ˘˙›Ó· Î·È ÙÔ˘·Ï¤Ù·-Ì¿ÓÈÔ. ™Î·ÏÔ-¿ÙÈ· Ô‰ËÁÔ‡Ó ¤Íˆ, ÛÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹, ›Ûˆ. ª›· ‰Â˘ÙÂÚÂ‡Ô˘Û· ›ÛÔ‰Ô˜ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ Â›Û˘ ÛÙÔ·ÓÒÁÂÈÔ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹.

∏ Û΋ Â›Ó·È Í‡ÏÈÓË ÂÈÎÏÈÓ‹˜ Ì ÎÂÚ·Ì›‰È·. ∏ ÚfiÛÔ„Ë ‰È·ÎÔÛÌÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÔÚÈ˙fi-ÓÙÈ· ͇Ϸ-Û·Ó›‰Â˜ Ù· ÔÔ›· ÚÔÛÙ·ÙÂ‡Ô˘Ó Î·È ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ÂÈϤÔÓ ÌÔÓˆÙÈÎfi Î·È ·ÓÙÈ-ÛÂÈÛÌÈÎfi ˘ÏÈÎfi. ŒÓ· ›‰Ô˜ ·ÂÙÒÌ·ÙÔ˜ Û¯ËÌ·Ù›˙ÂÈ Ë Â›ÛÔ‰Ô˜ Ì ÙËÓ ÔÚÔÊ‹. ÕÏÏ· ÔÚÈ˙fi-ÓÙÈ· ‰È·ÎÔÛÌËÙÈο ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ÛÙÔ Á›ÛÔ Ù˘ Û΋˜. ¶·ÓÙ˙Ô‡ÚÈ· ͇ÏÈÓ· (ÂÚÛ›‰Â˜) ÚÔ-ÛÙ·ÙÂ‡Ô˘Ó ·fi ÙÔÓ ‹ÏÈÔ-‚ÚÔ¯‹ Î·È ·ÔÌÔÓÒÓÔ˘Ó ÙÔ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎfi Ì ÙÔ Â͈ÙÂÚÈÎfi.

∂Ï¿¯ÈÛÙ˜ ·fi ·˘Ù¤˜ ÙȘ ηÙÔÈ˘ ‰È·ÙËÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È ‰˘ÛÙ˘¯Ò˜ Û‹ÌÂÚ·.∏ ÁÂÈÙÔÓÈ¿ ∞Ï‹-ª¤Ë ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È ÛÙ· ‚ÔÚÂÈÔ·Ó·ÙÔÏÈο Ù˘ fiÏ˘ ÎÔÓÙ¿ ÛÙËÓ ÛÙÚ·-

ÙȈÙÈ΋ ÛÙ¿ÛË ÂÍ’·˘ÙÔ‡ Î·È ÙÔ Û˘ÌÏËڈ̷ÙÈÎfi fiÓÔÌ· Gare Militaire (ÁηÚ-ÌÈÏÈÙ¤Ú). ∞˘Ù‹ Ë ÂÚÈÔ¯‹ ‰ÂÓ ıˆڋıËΠˆ˜ ÂÎÙfi˜ fiψ˜ ‰ÈfiÙÈ ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È Á‡Úˆ ·fi ÙËÓ ÛÈ-

‰ËÚÔ‰ÚÔÌÈ΋ ÁÚ·ÌÌ‹ Î·È Ô ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi˜ ÈÛÙfi˜ ÂÚÈÎÏ›ÂÈ ÙÔ ÛȉËÚÔ‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi ‰›ÎÙ˘Ôˆ˜ ΢ڛ·Ú¯Ô ÛÙÔÈ¯Â›Ô ÛÙËÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋ Ù˘ ÂͤÏÈÍË. ∂‰Ò, ηıÒ˜ ‹Ù·Ó ÙÔ ÚÒÙÔ ÎÔÌ-Ì¿ÙÈ Ù˘ fiÏ˘ -ÌÂÙ¿ ÙÔ Î¤ÓÙÚÔ- Î·È Ù· ‰‡Ô ÚÔËÁÔ‡ÌÂÓ·, ¤ÌÂÈÓ ÔÚıÔÁˆÓÈṲ̂ÓÔ Î·ÈÌ ÌÈÎÚ¿ Û¯ÂÙÈο ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈο ÙÂÙÚ¿ÁˆÓ· Î·È ÔÈÎfi‰·. ¶·Ú·¯ˆÚ‹ıËÎ·Ó Û ÚfiÛÊ˘-Á˜ ·fi ∞Ó·ÙÔÏÈ΋ ƒˆÌ˘Ï›· Î·È ªÈÎÚ¿ ∞Û›·. ∆· ÔÈÎfi‰· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ̤ÁÂıÔ˜ ·fi 110 ¤ˆ˜Î·È 150 ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈο ̤ÙÚ· Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ÙÔ Ì¤ÁÂıÔ˜ Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ·˜. ∆Ô ÎÙ›ÛÌ· ηχ-ÙÂÈ Û¯Â‰fiÓ ÙÔ ÌÈÛfi ÔÈÎfi‰Ô. ∆· ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· Â›Ó·È Â›Û˘ ÎÔÏÏËÙ¿ Î·È ·ÓÙ›ıÂÙ·. ™Â ο-ı ηÙÔÈΛ· ˙Ô˘Ó ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂȘ Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ô‡‰Â˜ ÛÙËÓ ·Ú¯‹ Î·È Ì ٷ ·È‰È¿ Î·È ÂÁÁfi-ÓÈ· ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ·. ™˘ÌÏËڈ̷ÙÈο ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙËÓ ·‡ÍËÛË Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ·˜‹ Î·È Ì ÙËÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ¿ÓÂÛË. ∏ ·˘Ï‹ ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ› Ì ÙÔÓ ‰ËÌfiÛÈÔ ¯ÒÚÔ Ì¤Ûˆ Â͈ÙÂ-ÚÈÎÔ‡ ‰È·‰ÚfiÌÔ˘. ∆Ô ÎÙ›ÛÌ· Â›Ó·È Û¯Â‰fiÓ ÙÂÙÚ¿ÁˆÓÔ (ÂÚ›Ô˘ 15�15 ̤ÙÚ·). À¿Ú-¯ÂÈ Î˘Ú›· ›ÛÔ‰Ô˜ ·fi ÙÔ ‰ÚfiÌÔ ·’¢ı›·˜ ·ÏÏ¿ ·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ· ηٷÚÁÂ›Ù·È Î·È Á›ÓÂÙ·ÈÏ·Á›ˆ˜ ‹ ̤ÓÂÈ ÌfiÓÔ ·˘Ù‹ Ù˘ ·˘Ï‹˜ Î·È ¤ÙÛÈ ÂÍÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÂ›Ù·È ¯ÒÚÔ˜ ÛÙÔ Â› Ù˘ fi„˘‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈÔ. ∆· ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈ· fiˆ˜ Î·È ÛÙȘ ¿ÏϘ ÁÂÈÙÔÓȤ˜ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÔÏϤ˜ ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ. ªÚÔÛÙ¿¤¯Ô˘Ì ٷ ˘ÓÔ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈ· Î·È ÙÔ Î·ıÈÛÙÈÎfi Î·È ›Ûˆ ÎÔ˘˙›Ó·, ˘ÓÔ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈÔ ‹ Î·È Û·-ÏfiÓÈ Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ÙȘ ÚÔÛˆÈΤ˜ ÂÎÊÚ¿ÛÂȘ Î·È ÙȘ ÔÈÎÔÁÂÓÂȷΤ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ. ∆Ô ÎÙ›ÛÌ··Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÂÙ·È Û ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ Ì ¤Ó·, ‰‡Ô ‹ Î·È ÙÚ›· ÛηÏÔ¿ÙÈ·. ∏ Û΋ Â›Ó·È ÂÈÎÏÈÓ‹˜Ì ÛÙ¤ÁË Î·È ÎÂÚ·Ì›‰È·. ∏ ηٷÛ΢‹ Â›Ó·È Ï›ÓıÈÓË Ì ͇ÏÈÓ· ÛÙËÚ›ÁÌ·Ù·. ∞ÚÁfiÙÂÚ·ÚÔÛÙ›ıÂÓÙ·È ÙÛÈÌÂÓÙ¤ÓÈ· ‹ ·fi ÙÔ‡‚ÏÔ ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· ÛÙËÓ ·˘Ï‹ ÁÈ· ·Ôı‹ÎË, Ï˘ÛÙ·ÚÈfi‹ ÙÔ˘·Ï¤Ù˜. ™˘¯Ó¿, ·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ·, ·˘Ù‹ Ë ·˘Ï‹ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ÙÛÈÌÂÓÙ¤ÓÈ· Î·È Î·Ù·ÚÁÂ›Ù·È ÙÔ¯ÒÌ· ÁÈ· ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ ηı·ÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ‰ÈfiÙÈ Ë ‚ÈÔÙÈ΋ ηٿÛÙ·ÛË Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ· Á›-ÓÂÙ·È Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚË Î·È ‰ÂÓ ¤¯ÂÈ ·Ó¿ÁÎË Î·ÏÏȤÚÁÂÈ·˜ ÔˆÚÒÓ ‹ ˙ÒˆÓ (ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ‹ ÙËÓÒÓ)

36 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

·ÏÏ¿ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ¯ÒÚÔ Î·ıÈÛÙÈÎfi ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó·„˘¯‹ Û ȉȈÙÈÎfi ¯ÒÚÔ (·˘Ï‹) Ì ÙÔ˘˜Û˘ÁÁÂÓ›˜. ∏ ˙ˆ‹ ·Ú¯›˙ÂÈ Ó· Á›ÓÂÙ·È ÈÔ È‰ÈˆÙÈ΋. ¶ÔÏϤ˜ ÊÔÚ¤˜ ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÔÓÙ·È Î·È¿ÏÏÔÈ ¯ÒÚÔÈ Á‡Úˆ ·fi ÙÔ ÎÙ›ÛÌ· Ì ÙÛÈ̤ÓÙÔ.

™ÙȘ ¿ÏϘ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘ Î·È ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈο ÙÂÙÚ¿ÁˆÓ· Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÌÂÙ¿ ÙÔӉ‡ÙÂÚÔ ·ÁÎfiÛÌÈÔ fiÏÂÌÔ ·fi ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜-ÚfiÛÊ˘Á˜ ·Ú·ÙËÚԇ̠¤Ó·Ó ÓˆÙÂÚÈ-ÛÌfi: ∆Ô ÎÙ›ÛÌ· ‰ÂÓ ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È Ï¤ÔÓ ÛÙËÓ Â˘ı›· ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ ·ÏÏ¿ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈο, ·Ê‹ÓÔ-ÓÙ·˜ ÌÈ· ÌÈÎÚ‹ ·˘Ï‹ ÌÚÔÛÙ¿ ÛÙËÓ Î·ÙÔÈΛ·. ™ÙËÓ ∂ÍÒÔÏË (‚fiÚÂÈÔ-‰˘ÙÈÎfi ÚÔ¿-ÛÙÂÈÔ) Î·È ÙËÓ AÔÏψÓÈ¿‰· (‰˘ÙÈÎfi ÚÔ¿ÛÙÂÈÔ) ‚Ú›ÛÎÔ˘Ì ·ÎfiÌË ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈṲ̂ӷ ÔÈ-Îfi‰· Ì ·˘Ï‹ ÌfiÓÔ. ™ÙËÓ ÁÂÈÙÔÓÈ¿ ¶·Ï·ÈÔ‡ ™Ù·ıÌÔ‡ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ηÙÔÈ˘ ·˘Ù‹˜ ÙË˜Ù˘ÔÏÔÁ›·˜ Ì ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈο ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÂËÚ·Ṳ̂ӷ ·fi ÙÔÓ ÓÂÔÎÏ·ÛÈÎÈÛÌfi.¶ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÁÈ· ·Ú¯ÔÓÙÈο Ì ‰‡Ô ›‰·, Ì ‰ÈÏ‹ Â͈ÙÂÚÈ΋ ÛοϷ. ªÂÙ·ÏÏÈÎfi ÎÈ-ÁÎÏ›‰ˆÌ· Î·È fiÚÙ· ¯ˆÚ›˙ÂÈ ÙÔ ÔÈÎfiÂ‰Ô ·fi ÙÔÓ ‰ËÌfiÛÈÔ ¯ÒÚÔ (‰ÚfiÌÔ).

∞fi ÙÔ 1950 Î·È ÌÂÙ¤ÂÈÙ· ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ıËÎ·Ó Û ٤ÛÛÂÚȘ Ê¿ÛÂȘ Û˘ÁÎÚÔÙ‹Ì·Ù· ÂÚ-

Á·ÙÈÎÒÓ Î·ÙÔÈÎÈÒÓ ‰˘ÙÈο Î·È ‚fiÚÂÈ· Ù˘ fiÏ˘. ∆Ô ÚÒÙÔ, ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ ·fi 42 ͇-ÏÈÓ˜ ηÙÔÈ˘ Û ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ, ÛÙÂÚÔ‡ÌÂÓ˜ ÛÎÂÏÂÙfi 45-50 ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈÎÒÓ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Î·Ù·-Û΢¿˙ÔÓÙ·È Û ÔÈÎfiÂ‰Ô 90-100 ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈÎÒÓ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ. ∆Ô ÎÙ›ÛÌ· ÙÔÔıÂÙÂ›Ù·È ÚÔ˜ÙÔ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎfi ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÔ¤‰Ô˘ ·Ê‹ÓÔÓÙ·˜ ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ·˘Ï‹ ÛÙÔÓ ÂÌÚfiÛıÈÔ ·Î¿Ï˘ÙÔ. ∆Ô›Ûˆ ̤ÚÔ˜ Ù˘ ·˘Ï‹˜ ηχÙÂÙ·È ÔÏfiÎÏËÚÔ ÌÂ Û˘ÌÏËڈ̷ÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ¯ÒÚÔ˘˜ (ÙÔ˘·Ï¤-Ù·, Ì¿ÓÈÔ, ·Ôı‹Î˜, ÎÙÏ) ‹ Î·È ·‡ÍËÛË ÙˆÓ Î˘Ú›ˆÓ ¯ÒÚˆÓ. ∏ ÎÔ˘˙›Ó· ·›˙ÂÈ Î˘-Ú›·Ú¯Ô ÚfiÏÔ Î·È Â›Ó·È Ô ÚÒÙÔ˜ ¯ÒÚÔ˜ Ô˘ ÌÂÁÂı‡ÓÂÙ·È ‰ÈfiÙÈ ÙÔ ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ Ì¤ÚÔ˜ Ù˘Ë̤ڷ˜ ÙÔ ‰È·Ó‡ÂÈ ÂΛ Ë ÔÈÎÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ·.

∏ ‰Â‡ÙÂÚË ÔÌ¿‰· ηÙÔÈÎÈÒÓ (ÂÚ›Ô˘ 60) ηٷÛ΢¿˙ÂÙ·È ÂÚ› ÙÔ 1968, ÎÔÓÙ¿ÛÙËÓ ÚÒÙË, Û ÙÂÏ›ˆ˜ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfi ‡ÊÔ˜, ˘ÈÔıÂÙÒÓÙ·˜ ÙÔÓ ÔÌ·‰ÈÎfi Ù‡Ô Ì ‰ÈÒÚÔ-Ê· ÂÈÌ‹ÎË ÎÙ›ÛÌ·Ù· ÔÌ·‰ÔÔÈË̤ӷ Û ηÙÔÈ˘ ·Ó¿ ‰‡Ô, Ù¤ÛÛÂÚ·, ¤ÍÈ. ™ÙÔ ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÔÓÙ·È ÔÈ ¯ÒÚÔÈ «Ë̤ڷ˜» Û·ÏfiÓÈ, ÙÚ·Â˙·Ú›· Î·È ÔÈ «˘ÁÚÔ›» ¯ÒÚÔÈ (ÎÔ˘˙›-Ó·, ÏÔ˘ÙÚfi) ÂÓÒ ÛÙÔÓ fiÚÔÊÔ Ù· ‰ˆÌ¿ÙÈ·. ∏ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ·˘Ù‹ ηٷÛ΢‹ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌfi-˙ÂÙ·È Î·È ÛÙËÓ Ó¤· ÌÔÚÊ‹ Ù˘ fiÏ˘. ∞ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ·˘ÙfiÓÔÌÔ Û˘ÁÎÚfiÙËÌ· Ì ˘ÔÙ˘Ò-‰Ë ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi ÈÛÙfi. ªÈ· ‰Â‡ÙÂÚË ·ÚfiÌÔÈ· ÔÌ¿‰· ηٷÛ΢¿˙ÂÙ·È ÂÚ› ÙÔ 1984,ÛÙËÓ ›‰È· ÂÚÈÔ¯‹, Ì ‰È·ÌÂÚ›ÛÌ·Ù· ÛÙÔ ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ Î·È ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÔÚfiÊÔ˘˜, Ì ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ˜ ÂÈ-Ûfi‰Ô˘˜ ÙÔ Î·ı¤Ó·.

¶ÚfiÛÊ·Ù· ηٷÛ΢¿ÛÙËÎ·Ó Û˘ÁÎÚÔÙ‹Ì·Ù· ÂÚÁ·ÙÈ΋˜ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ÛÙ· ‚fiÚÂÈ· ηȷÚÁfiÙÂÚ· ‰˘ÙÈο Ù˘ fiÏ˘ Û ‰‡Ô-ÙÚÂȘ ÔÚfiÊÔ˘˜, Ì ·ÚÎÂÙ¤˜ ·Ó¤ÛÂȘ, ‰·ÊÔ΢ÚÈ·Ú-¯›· ¯ÒÚˆÓ Î·È Ì¤ÁÂıÔ˜.

√È ¿ÏϘ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ıËÎ·Ó ·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ· Î·È Ê¤ÚÔ˘Ó ÔÓfiÌ·Ù· ∆ÔÔÓ˘ÌÈÒÓ,÷ڷÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ∫ÙÈÚ›ˆÓ, ™¯ÔÏ›ˆÓ, √ÓfiÌ·Ù· ™ÙÚ·ÙÔ¤‰ˆÓ, √ÓfiÌ·Ù· ∂ÎÎÏËÛÈÒÓ¡ÔÛÔÎÔÌ›ˆÓ (¶·Ï·ÈÔ‡ – ¡¤Ô˘), ÎÙÏ. ªÈÎÚfiÙÂÚ· ‹ ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚ· ÙÌ‹Ì·Ù· Ù˘ fiÏ˘ ‹-Ú·Ó ÙÔ fiÓÔÌ· ·fi ÙÔfiÛËÌ· (¢ÂÍ·ÌÂÓ‹, ¶¿ÚÎÔ, ¶·Ú·Ï›·, ∫·ÏÏÈı¤·, ÎÙÏ). ∂›Û˘,˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ÙÔ˘ÚÎÈ΋ Û˘ÓÔÈΛ·.

∆Ô Î¤ÓÙÚÔ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ȉȷ›ÙÂÚÔ ÙÌ‹Ì· ÌÂϤÙ˘ ˆ˜ ÔÏÔÎÏËڈ̤ÓË ·ÔÙ‡ˆÛË Ù˘ ÈÛÙÔ-ÚÈ΋˜ ÂͤÏÈ͢ Ù˘ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌ›·˜ Ù˘ fiÏ˘. ªÂÙ·ÌÔÚÊÒıËΠÛÙ·‰È·Î¿ Ì ÔÏÏÔ‡˜ ÙÚfi-

∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘,... 37

Ô˘˜, ÛÙ˘Ï Î·È ÂËÚ¿ÛÙËΠ·fi ÔÏÏÔ‡˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜. √ Û˘ÓÙÂÏÂÛÙ‹˜ ‰fiÌËÛ˘ ˘ÂÚ-‚·›ÓÂÈ ÙÔ 3, Ë ˘ÎÓfiÙËÙ· ÙÔ˘ ÏËı˘ÛÌÔ‡ ·Ó¤Ú¯ÂÙ·È Û 500 ηÙÔ›ÎÔ˘˜/ÂÎÙ¿ÚÈÔ Î·ıÈÛÙÒ-ÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ ¤Ó· ΤÓÙÚÔ ¯ˆÚ›˜ ÙËÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ Î·È ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ ·ÛÙ¿ıÂÈ· ÙÔ˘ ·ÚÂÏıfiÓÙÔ˜.

§¤ÍÂȘ-∫ÏÂȉȿ

¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi˜ πÛÙfi˜, ™˘ÓÔÈΛ·, ¡ÂÔÎÏ·ÛÛÈÎÈÛÌfi˜, ∆ÔfiÛËÌ·, ∂‰·ÊÔ΢ÚÈ·Ú¯›·.

38 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·

•ÂÓfiÁψÛÛË

Anonyme, 1966, Premiers Plans des Edifices et Villes Grecs de la Periode de la Libera-tion, in Premiers Ingenieurs, TEE, Athenes.

Bauer G., 1979, Un urbanisme pour les maisons, Union Generale d’Editions, 10/18, No1293, Paris.

Bertrand G., 1969, Ecologie de l’espace geographique; recherches pour une science dupaysage, C.R.Soc. de Biogeographie.

Burgel G., 1981, Athenes: Etude de la Croissance d’une Ville Mediterraneenne, Lilli-Paris.Castex, Depaule, Panerai, 1977, Formes Urbaines : De l’Ilot a la Barre, Aspects de l’Ur-

banisme, Dunod, Paris.Ching, F.D.K. 1979, Architecture: Form, Space and Order. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New

York.Cros Z., Dauverge P., J.P. Saurin, S. Zarmati, 1976, L’intervention paysagere, CNERP,

Paysage et amenagement, Trappes.Direction de L’Urbanisme et du Paysage, 1980, Espaces collectifs:Rues et Places, Minis-

tere de l’Environnement et du Cadre de Vie, Paris.Hackett B.,"Landscape Planning, an introduction to theory and practice", Oriel Press,

Newcastle, 1971.Session de formation sur le paysage, La production du paysage rural, 1978-79, CNERP,

Trappes.IAPS, 12e International Conference, 1992, Socio-Environmental Metamorphoses : Bilts-

cape, Landscape, Ethnoscape, Euroscape, ™˘Ó¤‰ÚÈÔ-÷ÏÎȉÈ΋.Mission Interministerielle de Coordination des Grandes Operations d’Architecture et

d’urbanisme, 1986, Les grands Projets d’Architecture de Paris.Soulier L., 1968, Espaces Verts et Urbanisme, C.R.U. (Centre de Recherche et d’Urbanis-

me), Paris.Spitalas N., 1978, Developpement economique d’une region frontaliere: Evros, Paris.Spitalas N., 1980, Le P.O.S. d’Alexandroupolis, Paris.Spitalas N., 1985, Evolutivite de l’espace urbain d’une ville frontaliere: Alexandroupolis

et ses environs, Paris.Tricart-Rochefort-Rimbert, 1972, Initiation aux travaux pratiques de geographie, SE-

DEX, Paris.

∞ÏÂÍ·Ó‰ÚÔ‡ÔÏË, ‰ÔÌ‹ ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ fiÏ˘ ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ Û˘ÓÔÈ˘,... 39

∂ÏÏËÓfiÁψÛÛË

∞Ó·ÓÈ¿‰Ô˘ ª., 1977, ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ ∆Ô›Ô˘-™¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi˜ ∞ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÃÒÚˆÓ, ∑‹ÙË, £ÂÛ-Û·ÏÔÓ›ÎË.

µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜ °., 2003, ¶ÚÔÙÂÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ ·Ú¤Ì‚·Û˘ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó·‚¿ıÌÈÛË ÙˆÓ Â-ÚÈ·ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ·˘ı·ÈÚ¤ÙˆÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓ. £ÂÛÌÈΤ˜ Î·È ÂȯÂÈÚËÛȷΤ˜ Û˘ÓÈÛÙÒÛ˜,∆fiÔ˜-∂ÈıÂÒÚËÛË ¯ˆÚÈ΋˜ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘, ۯ‰ȷÛÌÔ‡ Î·È ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜, ∞ı‹-Ó·.

µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜ °., 2003, ∏ ÌÔÚÊ‹ Ù˘ ·ÛÙÈ΋˜ ·Ó·Ó¤ˆÛ˘ ˆ˜ ·fiÚÚÔÈ· ÎÔÈÓˆÓÔÈÎÔ-ÔÈÎÔ-ÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎÒÓ ÌÂÙ·Û¯ËÌ·ÙÈÛÌÒÓ. ∂ÚÌËÓ¢ÙÈ΋ ÚfiÙ·ÛË, ∂ÈÛÙË-ÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌ. ∂Ú¢ӷ˜ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿, vol. VIII, No 1.

µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜ °., 2002, ∫ÚÈÙÈ΋ ÙˆÓ ·Ó·ÚÎÂÈÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ¡¤Ô˘ √ÈÎÈÛÙÈÎÔ‡ ¡fiÌÔ˘ (2508/97)ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ Ù˘ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ·˜ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ·Ó·Ï¿ÛˆÓ,∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌ. ∂Ú¢ӷ˜ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿, vol. VII, No 1.

¢ÈÌ·ÎfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜ π., 1981, ∞ÓıÔÏÔÁ›· Ù˘ ∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋˜: ∏ ηÙÔÈΛ· ÛÙËÓ∂ÏÏ¿‰· ·fi ÙÔÓ 15Ô ¤ˆ˜ ÙÔÓ 20Ô ∞ÈÒÓ·, ÀÔ˘ÚÁÂ›Ô ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡, ∞ı‹Ó·.

∫fiÎÎÔ˘ ∞., ∆Ú·˘Ïfi˜ π., 1977, ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌ›· Î·È ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋, in πÛÙÔڛ˜ ÙÔ˘ ∂ÏÏËÓÈ-ÎÔ‡ ∂ıÓÔ˘˜, vol. XIII, ∂ΉÔÙÈ΋ ∞ıËÓÒÓ, ∞ı‹Ó·.

§ÂÔÓÙ›‰Ô˘ §., 1989, ¶fiÏÂȘ Ù˘ ÛȈ‹˜, ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈÎfi ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎfi π‰Ú˘Ì· ∂∆µ∞.√ÈÎÔÓfiÌÔ˘ ∫., 1970, ™ÙÔȯ›· Ù˘ ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ ¡ÔÌÔıÂÛ›·˜, ∆∂∂, ∞ı‹Ó·.™ÈÙ¿Ï·˜ ¡., 1996, ∆¯ÓÈÎfi ™¯¤‰ÈÔ π-π, ÀËÚ. ¢ËÌÔÛ. ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ. πˆ·ÓÓ›ÓˆÓ.™ÈÙ¿Ï·˜ ¡.,1978, ÈÚÔÙ·ÍÈ΋ ÌÂϤÙË ¡ÔÌÔ‡ ∂‚ÚÔ˘-¶ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ Î·È ∞Ó¿Ù˘ÍË, ¶·-

Ú›ÛÈ.™ÈÙ¿Ï·˜ ¡., 1985, √ÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ ÂͤÏÈÍË ÌÈ·˜ ·Ú·ÌÂıfiÚÈ·˜ fiÏ˘: ∂ӉȿÌÂÛÔÈ ÂχıÂ-

ÚÔÈ ¯ÒÚÔÈ, ¶·Ú›ÛÈ.™ÈÙ¿Ï·˜ ¡., 2000, ∆¯ÓÈÎfi ™¯¤‰ÈÔ ÁÈ· °ÂˆÙ¤¯Ó˜ Î·È ªË¯·ÓÈÎÔ‡˜, °È·¯Ô‡‰Ë-°È·Ô‡-

ÏË, £ÂÛÛ·ÏÔÓ›ÎË.º·ÙÔ‡ÚÔ˜ ¢., 1961, ¶·Ú·ÙËÚ‹ÛÂȘ ¿ӈ ÛÙËÓ ∞ÓÒÓ˘ÌË ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋, ∞ı‹Ó·.ºÈÏÈ›‰Ë˜, 1984, ¡ÂÔÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋, ∞ı‹Ó·.÷Ù˙ËÛÙ¿ı˘ ∞., πÛÈÎÔ‡‰Ë˜ π., 2000, ¶ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· Ù˘ ʇÛ˘ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ ÙÔ˘

∆Ô›Ô˘, °È·¯Ô‡‰Ë˜-°È·Ô‡Ï˘, £ÂÛÛ·ÏÔÓ›ÎË.

40 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Competence-based human resource management:an application for the first level managers of aGreek bank's branches

Panagiotis Manoussos

Abstract

This paper studies the application of the notion of "competence" in Human ResourceManagement.

It presents and examines the definitions and the conceptual frameworks of the varioustheorists who are involved with the explanation of the notion. It concludes that the "com-petences" are a mix of characteristics that are determined and adopted by every organi-zation, as the capabilities and skills needed for the successful performance of every taskof the job, according to the organization’s strategic plans.

They include "innate" and "learnable" characteristics and it must be mainly consideredthat competences are ‘organization dependent’ and not ‘universal’.

Finally, specific competences were defined through our research as those that areneeded for a successful job performance for the first level managers of a Greek bank’sbranches and for that reason they can be determined as the occupational standards for thespecific job.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∆Ô ·ÚfiÓ ¿ÚıÚÔ ÌÂÏÂÙ¿ ÙËÓ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ Ù˘ ¤ÓÓÔÈ·˜ ÙÔ˘ "competence" ÛÙË ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛËÙˆÓ ∞ÓıÚÒÈÓˆÓ ¶fiÚˆÓ.

¶·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÂÈ Î·È ·Ó·Ï‡ÂÈ ÙÔ˘˜ ÔÚÈÛÌÔ‡˜ Î·È Ù· ÂÓÓÔÈÔÏÔÁÈο Ï·›ÛÈ· ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓıˆÚËÙÈÎÒÓ Ô˘ ·Û¯ÔÏ‹ıËÎ·Ó Ì ÙËÓ ÂÚÌËÓ›· Ù˘ ¤ÓÓÔÈ·˜. ∫·Ù·Ï‹ÁÂÈ ÛÙÔ Û˘Ì¤Ú·ÛÌ·fiÙÈ Ù· competences Â›Ó·È ¤Ó· Ì›ÁÌ· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ Ù· ÔÔ›· ÔÚÈÔıÂÙ› Î·È ˘ÈÔıÂÙ›οı Âȯ›ÚËÛË ˆ˜ ÙȘ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜-ÂȉÂÍÈfiÙËÙ˜ ÂΛӘ Ô˘ ··ÈÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÂÈ-Ù˘¯‹ ÂÎÙ¤ÏÂÛË ÙÔ˘ οı ÙÔ̤· Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘˜ Ô˘ ¤¯ÂÈ ı¤ÛÂÈ.

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 41

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 41-59

¶ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο "¤ÌÊ˘Ù·" Î·È "›ÎÙËÙ·" Î·È Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ıˆÚ›ٷÈfiÙÈ Î·Ù¿ ‚¿ÛË Ù· competences "ÂÍ·ÚÙÒÓÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË" Î·È ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È "ÎÔÈÓ¿ÁÈ· fiϘ ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ".

∆¤ÏÔ˜, Ì ¤Ú¢ӷ Ô˘ ‰ÈÂÍ‹Á·Ì ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÙËÎ·Ó Ù· competences ÂΛӷ Ô˘ ›ӷȷ·Ú·›ÙËÙ· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÂÈÙ˘¯‹ ÂÎÙ¤ÏÂÛË Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÙˆÓ ÚÔ˚ÛÙ·Ì¤ÓˆÓ ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·ÛÙË-Ì¿ÙˆÓ Ì›·˜ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ÙÚ¿Â˙·˜ Î·È Ù· ÔÔ›· ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ηıÔÚÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ˆ˜ Ù· ·Á-ÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈο ÚfiÙ˘· ÂÎÙ¤ÏÂÛ˘ Ù˘ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜.

1. Introduction

Competence-based human resource management is about enabling an organization toobtain, manage, develop and reward people who have the capabilities required to maxi-mize their contributions to achieving its goals.

The language of «competence» has dominated much of personnel thinking and prac-tice for several years recently. Competence has become a unifying concept which influ-ences in an integrating manner human resource management processes in the key areasof recruitment and selection, development and rewarding the valuable human assets.

The concept of competence has achieved this degree of prominence because it is es-sentially about performance. It is directly concerned with the factors contributing to highlevels of individual contribution and therefore, increasing organizational effectiveness.

This paper studies the notion of "competence" in the context of Human ResourceManagement. It presents and examines the definitions and the conceptual frameworks ofthe various theorists. Furthermore, it presents the competences that are needed for a suc-cessful job performance referring to a specific Greek bank, which were defined throughour research.

The president of that bank in his letter to the shareholders, among the others, has men-tioned recently: "determinative element for the bank’s development inside a continuous-ly changing and competitive environment, is not only the progress in its financial vari-ables. Particular importance have ‘intangible’ factors, such as flexibility, specialization,quality of specialization, characteristics, which are all related directly with the quality ofthe Human Resource".

In addition, that bank’s administration has characterized the first level branch man-agers as the most important instrument that brings a competitive advantage against thecompetition.

Regarding to the above, the main objective of our research has been to define the com-petences which are needed for a successful job performance for the first level managers ofthat bank’s branches. Therefore, these competences can be determined as the "occupa-tional standards" for the performance of the specific job.

42 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

2. Substantiating the meaning of the notion of "competence"

2.1. Definitions

The textbooks usually present Boyatzis who was the first to popularize the term "com-petence". He defines competence as the capacity, which exists in a person and leads to be-havior, which brings out desired results. This behavior is needed by the job demands with-in the parameters of the organizational environment.

The British Train Agency (Armstrong, 1998) attempts to break down a notion of"competence" and to reveal its constituent parts. According to them competence is awide concept, which embodies the ability to transfer skills and knowledge to new situa-tions within the occupational area. It encompasses organization and planning of work,innovation and copping with non-routine activities. It includes those qualities of per-sonal effectiveness that are required in the workplace to deal with co-workers, managersand customers.

Through the definition one can notice two interesting elements. The first is the corre-lation of competence with the ability to cope with the new and the second is the inclusionof knowledge and skills within the concept of competence.

The British Management Charter Initiative (MCI) defines "competence" as the abili-ty to perform the activities within an occupational area to the level of performance ex-pected in management (Woodall, 1997).

Theorists like Iles Î·È Salaman (1996) consider competence as minefield or in anycase a non-clear concept, and they underline that competence in some cases refers tobehaviors and actions, and in other cases to abilities or aspects, or refers to the resultsof the actions.

Likewise, Hendry (1998) believes that there is existing difficulty in agreeing on whatis meant by competence because the term is inherently inaccurate. He considers thatcompetence resembles other discredited labels psychologists have invented to describebehavior.

One can also discover a number of very general definitions like those given by Bur-goyne, Murphy (Armstrong, 1998) and Tyson & York (1999), which are similar, and de-scribing "competence" as the abilities and capabilities of the personnel, that are neededfor the successful job performance.

Spencer et al. (Armstrong, 1998), choose an interesting viewpoint. They consider"competence" as an individual characteristic but on the other hand they demand ways ofreliable measurement or quantification of this in any way. So, they define competence asany individual characteristic that can be measured or counted reliably and that can beshown to differentiate significantly between effective and ineffective performance.

Woodall (1997) additionally presents the meaning of "competency", and she under-lines that competence and competency refer to two different things. Generally speaking,

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 43

the former tends to be used more with respect to middle and senior-level management asperformance criterion, while the latter is used as a means to encourage entry into juniormanagement.

There was a great deal of interest in "competence" approach in the UK, and somelarge companies such as Cadbury Schweppes, National Westminster Bank and British Gasadopted a similar approach, and drew up lists of competencies that employees should aimin their jobs.

Meanwhile, the strong interest in UK government in raising the standards of job-related training, and management skills led to an entirely different approach that re-lated competence to job performance in specific functions, and tied these with aladder of vocational qualifications. These are the principles behind both NationalVocational Qualifications (NVQ) and Management Charter Initiative Standards(MCI).

2.2. The conceptual framework of the key term "competence"

2.2.1. John Burgoyne’s framework

John Burgoyne (Armstrong, 1998) draws the distinction between "being competent"and "having competence". He supports that one employee or manager within the organ-ization is considered competent when his or her function is considered successful accord-ing to the strategic plans of the organization. This is without taking under considerationthe specific characteristics which lead to good job performance.

The same theorist supports that an employee may have competences (abilities), whichare not used.

The interesting element that is introduced in Burgoyne’s framework is related to thewillingness to perform the task. That can be associated directly with matters of the orga-nizational culture and power structures.

Under this interpretation it appears that the competent employee is one who has theabilities that can flourish in a suitable environment.

2.2.2. Adrian Furnham’s framework

Adrian Furnham (Armstrong, 1998) states the question of whether competence ischaracterized by continuum or it is an all-or-nothing characteristic. His point of view isclose to the latter assertion, due to it being compatible with his definition of "compe-tence". He considers that competence is the fundamental abilities and capabilities neededto do the job well.

This standpoint has great implications in the case when organizations are trying to linkperformance and reward.

44 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Finally, he defines "incompetence" as the situation where an individual knows how todo a job and doing it badly. Furthermore, he defines "no competence" as the situationwhere an individual does not know how to do a job.

2.2.3. Charles Woodruffe’s framework

Charles Woodruffe (1991) stating that competence is identical to the behavioural; di-mensions that affect job performance. He points out that it has been employed in twosenses. First to describe the ability of a person to perform a job competently and secondas a set of behaviors that a person must display in order to perform tasks and functionsin an efficient way.

In order to clear out the situation he proposes the differentiation of the term "com-petency" as follows:ñ "Areas of competence" – these refer to functions or jobs at which an individual per-

forms well.ñ "Competency" – the term has mainly to do with behavioural dimensions lying behind

successful job performance.Additionally he believes that a competent manager is competent in any context and in

any culture.It is interesting to notice that his view does not include knowledge and skills.

2.2.4. Len Holmes’s framework

Len Holmes (Armstrong, 1998) believes that competence should be regarded not as athing but as a concept, which can indicate a perceived relationship between expected per-formance and required performance based on information about previous or current per-formance.

It is clear that Holmes formulates his framework closely to the Expectation theory.According to his view, an individual is competent when s/he has performed well in the

past or performs well presently so that one is led to the expectation that this person willperform well in the future.

2.2.5. Coombe’s framework

Coombe (Armstrong, 1998) describes competences as a system that has an "input", a"process" and an "output".

In his model the "input" is the capacity of an individual to perform a task successfully.The "output" model is based on the view that the notion of competence is important

even when it can be proved that competences had been used efficiently. Finally, the "process" model describes competences as the function that links inputs

with outputs-results.

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 45

Coombe’s framework would be better if he had introduced a feedback loop in his mod-el. This could only result in the unnecessary increase of knowledge, which alone (if the "in-nate" characteristics are not present) can not lead to competent "input".

2.3. Conclusions – Classification of the definitions of the notion of

"Competence"

From the analysis presented one can conclude that a number of theorists support thatcompetence includes only individual behaviors, that are mainly psychological compo-nents. Others support that the notion includes knowledge and skill and others are set toboth sides.

Finally, other theorists (Iles & Salaman/1996, Hendry/1998) consider competence asa non-clear concept.

By looking through the definitions and the conceptual frameworks given by the vari-ous management theorists in competence one can notice a number of terms that refer tothe competent employee or manager.

Such terms include:

ñ "Capacity that leads to behavior" (Boyatzis).

ñ "Ability and willingness" (Burgoyne).

ñ "Behavioural dimensions" (Woodruff).

ñ "Measurable individual characteristics" (Spencer et al.).

ñ "Fundamental abilities" (Furnham).

ñ "Personal trait, characteristic or skill" (Murphy, Tyson & York).

ñ "Skills, knowledge and innate characteristics" (Coombe).

ñ "Ability to perform the activities to the level expected in management" (MCI)

In addition to the above, the research conducted by Greatorex and Phillips (1989) inµƒ revealed that the company had problems in transferring the Anglo-American under-standing of the term competence across the variety of national cultures. This establishesthe fact that the organizational cultures in connection with different environments gaverise to different concepts of competence.

In conclusion, it would be most useful to have a classification and/or a positioning ofthe considerations as to demonstrate the width of the existing views.

For that reason we must clarify further the "dimensions" upon which the content of thevarious aforementioned definitions are moving.

Characteristics that are "innate" and ones that are "learnable" were mentioned. Thismeans that the notion of the term "competence" has, at first, two dimensions:

46 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ an innate or

ñ a learnable

One can consider that Woodruffe and Furnham are closer to an innate end. Murphy,Tyson & York and Burgoyne are closer to a learnable end, and finally Train Agency,Coombe and MCI are found somewhere in the middle.

The second point of concern, which came out from the analysis of the definitions andthe conceptual frameworks for competence, concerns the degree to which they are "uni-versal" or "organization dependent".

Woodruffe believes that competences are alike for all organizations and cultures. Theopposite came out from the BP example and criticisms of Hendry and Iles and Salamanthat are presented above.

That means competences have two more dimensions:ñ universal or

ñ organization dependent

We can set all theorists’ definitions to a cruciform system of axes, with those axes ascoordinates (figure 1). The first has as one dimension the "learnable" competences and asthe other the "innate" ones. The second has as one dimension the "universal" competencesand as the other the "organization dependent".

The cloud of points that is created sets the theorist’s views and stamps and exposes si-multaneously the size of their disagreement.

Figure 1: Dimensions of Competence.

Our point of view is that the competences are a mix of characteristics that are de-termined and adopted by every organization, as the capabilities and skills needed for thesuccessful performance of every task of the job, according to the organization’s strate-gic plans.

Competences include "innate" and "learnable" characteristics with some of them com-mon for any organization’s strategic plan.

Finally, it must be mainly considered that competences are "organization dependent"and not "universal".

Universal

Organization dependent

Innate Learnable

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 47

3. Applications of the notion of "competence" in human

resource management

According to Armstrong (1998) "Competence-based personnel management" allowsthe organization to obtain, develop and reward highly competent people who will readi-ly achieve their objectives and thus maximize their contribution to the attainment of itsstrategic plans.

The existence of a competence framework can provide an invaluable approach to thepersonnel management.

In the figure below Armstrong presents the integrated elements of personnel manage-ment around the competence framework.

Figure 2: Competence-based integrated personnel management.

In practice it is anticipated that the organization, which decides to apply the abovemap, must first of all clarify the meaning attributed to the term competence and deter-mine those competences that are considered necessary for the successful job performance.

3.1. Identifying and assessing competences

There are several approaches in identifying and assessing competences, which shouldbe applied in combination with one or another rather than using one alone. For identify-ing and assessing competences Pearn and Kandola (1993) and Armstrong (1998), con-verging in their points of view, have suggested the following methods: ñ Expert opinion is considered as the basic, crudest and least satisfactory method for

an "expert" member of the personnel department to draw up a list from his own un-derstanding of "what counts".

ñ Systematic observation provides information on the general job context, profes-sional tasks or areas of difficulty. It should observe differences in behavior betweengood and less good performers.

Recruitment andSelection

RewardManagement

Human resourceDevelopment

PerformanceManagement

CompetenceFramework

48 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ Structured interview begins with a list of competences drawn up by "experts" andproceeds by subjecting a number of jobholders to a structured interview.

ñ Workshops bring a group of people together, who have ‘expert’ knowledge or expe-rience of the job with a facilitator, usually but not necessarily, member of the person-nel department or an outside consultant.

ñ Critical-incident technique relies on groups of jobholders and/or their managers orother ‘expert’ who is able to generate account of observed behavior or activity whichcan be critical to either effective or less effective performance in a job.

ñ Repertory grid analysis. Like the previous technique, the repertory grid can beused to identify the dimensions which distinguish good from poor standards of per-formance.

ñ Functional analysis focus on the outcomes of activities in order to establish ex-pectations of job performance as the information required to define standards ofcompetence.Approaches like "critical-incident technique" and "repertory grid analysis" can be used

effectively but they are time-consuming and they need experience to be applied effectively.The "workshop" approach needs less time but it requires a lot of money in order to

enlist the support of an external consultant who has the relevant experience."Functional analysis" is used when the main objective is to develop occupational

standards.

4. Empirical research – models based on the notion of

"competence"

4.1. Conclusions of various researchers

From time to time various researchers have tried to define the competences, which arenecessary for the successful job performance, determining them as occupational standardsin specific situations.

Dunnette (Chitiris, 1996), with his research defined and classified in three categoriesthe most important characteristics needed to job effort. These are: Spiritual, Kinetic andNatural.

Cockerill (1989) performed an empirical research in the financial sector services(which are meant to be operating in turbulent environment) and he concluded that suchcompetences could be assessed by behavioural observations in Assessment Center con-ditions.

Davidson (1999) introduces the results of the "Official End-of the-Millennium State-of-HR Survey", with which were defined the following competences that HR profession-als believe they will be the most necessary in the next few years.

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 49

These are:

Communication Skills Technology

Problem Solving Forecasting

Leadership Compensation Design

Recruiting/Staffing Benefits Design/Administration

Employment Law Accounting/Finance

Training and Development Record Keeping

4.2. M.C.I. Standards

The M.C.I. standards (Woodall, 1997) are forming a list of competences that refer tojunior (first level) managers; in order to achieve the organization’s objectives and con-tinuously improve its performance.

It includes "units", a list of competence activities, which must be performed in a job,and "elements" which are associated with every activity and they can be determined as theobjectives of these activities.

The analytical list has as follows:

1. Maintain and improve service and product operations

1.1. Maintain operations to meet quality standards1.2. Create and maintain the necessary conditions for productive work

2. Contribute to the implementation of change services, products and systems

2.1. Contribute to the evaluation of proposed changes to services, products and systems2.2. Implement and evaluate changes to services, products and systems

3. Recommend, monitor and control the use of resources

3.1. Make recommendations for expenditures3.2. Monitor and control the use of resources

4. Contribute to the recruitment and selection of personnel

4.1. Define future personnel requirements4.2. Contribute to the assessment and selection of candidates against team and orga-

nizational requirements

5. Develop teams, individuals and self to enhance performance

5.1. Develop and improve teams through planning and activities5.2. Identify, review and improve development activities for individuals5.3. Develop oneself within the job role

6. Plan, allocate and evaluate work carried out by terms, individuals and self

6.1. Set and update work objectives for teams and individuals6.2. Plan activities and determine work methods to achieve objectives

50 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

6.3. Allocate work and evaluate teams, individuals and self against objectives6.4. Provide feedback to teams and individuals on their performance

7. Create, maintain and enhance effective working relationships

7.1. Establish and maintain the trust and support of one’s subordinates7.2. Establish and maintain the trust and support of one’s immediate manager7.3. Establish and maintain relationships with colleagues7.4. Identify and minimize interpersonal conflicts7.5. Implement disciplinary and grievance procedures7.6. Counseling staff

8. Seek, evaluate and organize information for action

8.1. Obtain and evaluate information to aid decision making8.2. Record and store information

9. Exchange information to solve problems and make decisions

9.1. Lead meetings and group discussions to solve problems and make decisions9.2. Contribute to discussions to solve problems and make decisions9.3. Advise and inform others

4.3. Competing Values Framework

Cameron & Quinn (1999) clustered the competences that emerged from multiple stud-ies into a set of competency categories.

Their framework is based to the four types of organizational culture, which can beadopted by an organization.

These are the following:

ñ Clan culture

ñ Hierarchy culture

ñ Adhocracy culture

ñ Market culture

In every one of the above organizational cultures types Cameron & Quinn associateda set of competences, which are necessary for the organization effectiveness, under theview of the four criteria-dimensions.

The figure that follows below presents the 12 competency categories per culture type.

The four directions of the axis illustrate the four criteria-dimensions of the organiza-tion effectiveness.

According to Cameron & Quinn (1999) the competences that are included in eachquadrant of the model are applicable mainly to mid-level and upper-level managers.

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 51

FLEXIBILITYINDIVIDUALITY

Culture Type: CLAN Culture Type: ADHOCRACY

Managing Teams Managing InnovationManaging Interpersonal Relations Managing the FutureManaging the Development of Others Managing Continuous Improvement

INTERNALEXTERNAL

MAINTENANCEENVIRONMENTAL

POSITIONING

Culture Type: HIERARCHY Culture Type: MARKET

Managing Coordination Managing CompetitivenessManaging the Control System Managing EmployeesManaging Acculturation Managing Customer Service

CONTROLSTABILITY

Figure 3: A Model of Critical Managerial Competencies.

5. Our research methodology

During the first six months of 2001 we performed a research in order to define thecompetences needed for a successful job performance of the first level managers of thebank’s branches.

5.1. Sampling Technique – Method of primary data collection

From the available different sampling techniques, which are mentioned in the bibliog-raphy, the "Simple Random Sampling" and specifically the "Proportionate Stratified Sam-pling» technique (Evans et al., 1997) was chosen to be used in our research.

The "Simple Random Sampling" is the most straightforward sampling technique be-cause every member of the population has an equal probability of selection.

The "Proportionate Stratified Sampling" technique has been employed in order to en-sure proportional representation from all the branches of the bank.

The existing data were the following:

ñ Number of bank’s branches: 92

ñ Total number of examining population: 340

ñ Number of geographical areas: 4

52 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ Distribution of fist line managers per geographical area:- Geographical Area ∞ (Attica and Eastern Greece): 133

- Geographical Area B (Macedonia and Thrace): 95

- Geographical Area C (Peloponnese and Western Greece): 62

- Geographical Area D (Piraeus and Islands): 50

From the experience is considered that the representative sample must be the 25% ofthe total population and particularly the percentage rate must be steadily proportionate,according to its distribution.

The table below defines the stratified proportionate sample, in rounded values.

Table 1. The sample of the survey

The members per geographical area came up with the use of a "random number gen-erator", with which a sequence of random numbers was created.

According to available methods of primary data collection the "Postal Survey" andspecifically the "Simple Postal Survey" method (Evans et al., 1997) was selected. The ques-tionnaire was sent to all members of the sample through the internal bank’s postal service.

Through our covering letter we pointed out to the respondents the significance of thesurvey and also the significance of their participation to its success.

5.2. The model of the research

It was not possible to adopt one of the methods in identifying and assessing compe-tences (¨ 3.1), due to insufficient resources. For that reason our research was based on theMCI’s list of occupational standards. The specific list (model) was chosen as the mostproper, due to the fact that refers precisely to the first level managers.

The MCI’s list of competences adjusted properly, according to the bank’s needs. Thefinal list has been used as the "instrument" to perform our research.

The analytical steps taken were the following:

ñ The MCI’s list adjusted properly according to the bank’s needs, after two personal in-terviews with two managers, who had the needed experience.

ñ With the use of an ad hoc survey the sample was asked if the competences of the finallist were important or not for the successful performance.

Geographical Area Population Sample %

∞ 133 34 39,12 %

µ 95 24 27,94 %

C 62 16 18,24 %

D 50 13 14,70 %

TOTAL 340 87 100

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 53

The final list which was given to the members of the sample for valuation, was thefollowing:

1. I perform and improve the services and the functions which are provided by my

department

ñ I perform the functions according to the Bank’s regulations and instructionsñ I create and maintain the necessary conditions for productive work

2. I contribute to the application of new services, products and functioning systems

ñ I make recommendations for new services, products and functioning systemsñ I directly apply and perform new services, products and functioning systems which

are decided

3. I make recommendations, monitor and control the use of the recourses

ñ I make recommendations for expensesñ I manage and control the use of the resources

4. I contribute to my department’s staff

ñ I detect my department’s future staff needs ñ I make propositions for my department’s staff, according to its needs

5. I care for self-improvement and my department staff’s improvement in order

to increase productivity

ñ I develop and improve my department staff under planning and activationñ I locate, examine and improve my department staff development actions ñ I improve myself under the view of the work function

6. I plan, allocate and evaluate work carried out by the staff of my department

and self

ñ I set and update work objectives of my department staffñ I plan the activities and I determine work methods to achieve objectives ñ I allocate work and evaluate my department staff and myself against objectivesñ I provide feedback to my department staff on their performance

7. I try to create, maintain and enhance effective working relations with the per-

sons I collaborate

ñ I create and maintain the trust and support of my subordinates ñ I create and maintain the trust and support of my direct supervisorñ I create and maintain good working relationship with my colleaguesñ I try to minimize interpersonal conflictsñ I apply and implement disciplinary and grievance proceduresñ I provide the necessary counsels to the staff

8. I seek, obtain and organize the necessary information which are needed for

my work

ñ I get and evaluate the needed information to aid decision making ñ I record and store information for future use

54 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

9. I have the willingness to conform to the contemporary technology which sup-

ports my work

ñ I familiarize with the use of personal computersñ I, easily, conform with the changes of technology

10.I manage to perform my work and make decisions under pressure

ñ I perform my duties under big work load and stressñ I make decisions under pressure and big work load

11.I possess efficient business knowledge on my department’s activities

ñ I have good knowledge on my department’s proceduresñ I have enough experience acquired from my work

12.I attend to my department’s satisfying customer service

ñ I organize the procedures for the proper and fast customer service.ñ I indicate customers’ needsñ I recognize and make customers’ complaints known and I contribute to their

satisfactionñ I establish good relations with the customers

The responders had to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement, for eachcompetence "unit" (1-12) with the use of a five-step-scaling method from "not importantat all" to "extremely important".

Beside the above list, the questionnaire of our research included "demographic char-acteristics" and data of "previous service".

"Open question" was presented in order to define any other competences that werenot in the list and they were considered important for the performance of the job.

6. Analysis results

The main object of the survey was the measurement of the degree of importance of acompetence list for a successful performance, according to the personal opinions of thepeople who perform the specific job.

The analysis of the collected data was accomplished with the use of both DescriptiveStatistical methods and Multivariable methods in order the common characteristics to bedemonstrated.

All parametrical statistics tests were performed under the level of significance 5%,with the help of a Statistical Application (SPSS 10.0).

The answers, which were given by the responders to the 12 units of competence of theresearch, are presented below in Factorial graph, according to the related theory(Behrakis, 1999).

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 55

Graph 1. Multiple Correspondence Analysis of the respondents.(The answers had been coded as following: 1=Not important at all,

2=low important, 3=important, 4=very important, 5=extremely important).

The "Multiple Correspondence Analysis" of data (Behrakis, 1999) formed five impor-tant "principal components", which are presented in the next graph.

Graph 2. Answers correlation per principal component.

C12

C14

7THIRD

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

1

0

0

-1

-1

-2

-2

-3

-3

-4

-4

-5

-5

-6

-6-7

-7

5,00

4,00

3,00

2,00 1,00 5,00 4,00

3,00

2,00 1,00

C10

C8

C5

7SECOND

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

1

0

0

-1

-1

-2

-2

-3

-3

-4

-4

-5

-5

-6

-6-7

-7

5,00

4,00

3,00 2,00

1,00

5,00

4,00

3,00 2,00 1,00 5,00 4,00 3,00 2,00 1,00

C7

C6

C4

C3

C2

7FIRST

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

1

0

0

-1

-1

-2

-2

-3

-3

-4

-4

-5

-5

-6

-6-7

-7

5,00 4,00

3,00

2,00 1,00 5,00

4,00

3,00

2,00 1,00 5,00 4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00 5,00 4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00 5,00

4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00

3

2

1

0

-1

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5-2

Units ofCompetence

C12

C11

C10

C9

C8

C7

C6

C5

C4

C3

C2

C1

5 .00

4 .00 3 .00

2 .00 1 .00 5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00 1 .00

5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00

1 .00

5 .00

4 .00 3 .00

2 .00 1 .00

5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00 1 .00 5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00 1 .00

5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00

1 .00

5 .00

4 .00

3 .00 2 .00 1 .00

5 .00

4 .00 3 .00

2 .00

1 .00

5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00

1 .00

5 .00

4 .00 3 .00

2 .00

1 .00

5 .00

4 .00

3 .00

2 .00 1 .00

56 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

From the above analysis’ results we concluded that the rest two principal componentshave no significant statistical interest, that is why they are not presented.

The list of the research was judged by those questioned that includes all the compe-tences needed for a successful performance of their job. In combination with the fact thatthe bank’s administration had agreed with the specific list, we conclude that the list can bedetermined as the list of the occupational standards for the first level managers of itsbranches.

The "Multiple Correspondence Analysis" of data formed five important "principalcomponents", which established the following "groups" of occupational standards in termsof their common underlying dimensions.

ñ 1st group

Into the first and most important statistical "group" are classified the following occu-pational standards, in order of importance. 1. I contribute to the application of new services, products and functioning systems 2. I try to create, maintain and enhance effective working relations with the persons I

collaborate 3. I plan, allocate and evaluate work carried out by the staff of my department and self 4. I contribute to my department’s staff5. I make recommendations, monitor and control the use of the resources

According to the management theorists the above are mainly competences that can beclassified as "knowledge and skills", which are learnable characteristics.

Another important element that distinguishes them is the characteristic of the com-plete active position of the manager: to dare the new, to plan and to make propositions(innovator).

This first group includes competences that must be considered as the list of the fun-

damental occupational standards for the successful job performance.

ñ 2nd group

Into the next most important "group" the following occupational standards are classi-fied, in order of importance. 1. I seek, obtain and organize the necessary information which are needed for my work 2. I manage to perform my work and make decisions under pressure.3. I care for self-improvement and my department staff’s improvement in order to in-

crease productivityAccording to the management theorists the above are mainly competences that can be

classified as "behavioural" which are mainly innate characteristics.This second group includes competences that must be considered as a non-detach-

able part of the occupational standards of the first group, which ensure the successful jobperformance.

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 57

ñ The remaining groups

Into the third "group" is classified the occupational standard: "I attend to my depart-ment’s satisfying customer service" and finally into the two last groups are classified theoccupational standards with the list of statistical interpretation.

These are the following:

ñ I perform and improve the services and the functions which are provided by my de-partment

ñ I have the willingness to conform to the contemporary technology which supports mywork

ñ I possess efficient business knowledge on my department’s activities

The above are occupational standards that must be considered as prerequisites in or-der to entrust someone the specific job.

7. Conclusion

The above "groups" of occupational standards indicated the theorist’s views about thenotion of competence and verified our point of view.

The two first most important "groups" represent the two of the four dimensions of thenotion of competence. They clearly showed that the manager’s successful job perform-ance demands competences that extend two-dimensionally. Both "innate" and "learn-

able" characteristics. According to Armstrong (1998), the results of a research can be credible in order to

establish the occupational standards of a specific job, even when the research is performedto specific job sectors and not to the whole organization. For that reason it is clearly nec-essary that our research must be extended to cover all the employees of the bank, in or-der to determine the occupational standards for every job sector or workstation of thebank.

Finally, according to the rest two dimensions of the notion of competence "univer-

sal" and "organization dependent", our research cannot produce any conclusions. We believe that this is the object of another research the results of which will put the

finish touch to our conclusions.

58 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Mr P. Manoussos is currently manager in the General Bank of Greece S.A. where he is also a

regular instructor in its seminars

References

Armstrong, M. (1998) A Handbook of Personnel Management Practice, Kogan Page,London.

Behrakis T. (1999) Multidimensional Data Analysis, Nea Synora – ∞.∞. Livani Publica-tions, Athens

Boyatzis, R. (1982) The Competent Manager, Wiley, New York. Cameron K.S. & Quinn R.E. (1999) Diagnosing Changing Organizational Culture, Addi-

son-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.Chitiris, L. (1996) Organizational Behaviour, Interbooks Publications, AthensCockerill, A.C. (1989) "The Kind of Sparrow and Boam (1992) for rapid change", Per-

sonnel Management, 21, 9, September.Davidson, L. (1999) "Top 12 Future Competencies", Workforce Magazine, August, 78, 2,

pp.73.Evans, R., East, R., Gourlay, S., Kalafatis, S., Robertson, S., Rolls-Willson,G., Sheppard,

J. (1997) Project Methodology, Kingston University.Greatorex, J. and Phillips, P. (1989) "Oiling the wheels of competence", Personnel Man-

agement, August, pp.36-39.Hendry, C. (1998) Human Resource Management – a Strategic Approach to Employ-

ment, Butterworth Henemann, Bath.Iles, P. and Salaman G. (1996) Recruitment, Selection and Assessment, in Storey, J. (ed),

Human Resource Management - a Critical Text, International Thomson BusinessPress, London.

Pearn, K. and Kandola, R. (1993) Job Analysis, Institute of Personnel Management, Lon-don.

Tyson, S. and York, A. (1999) Human Resource Management, Butterworth Henemann,Oxford.

Woodall, J. (1997) Managing Human Resources, Kingston University, London.Woodruffe, C. (1991) "Competent by any other name", Personnel Management, Septem-

ber, pp.30-33.

Competence-based human resource management: an application for the first level... 59

Tendencies towards Convergence across theregions of Greece, 1970-2000: s or b-Convergence?

Alexandrakis, A.Technological EducationalInstitute of Serres

Alexiadis, S.Technological EducationalInstitute of Serres

Abstract

This paper explicitly seeks to confront theory with fact regarding regional conver-gence taking the regions of Greece as a case study. The main question to be tackled in thispaper is whether regions of Greece converge under conditions of s or b-convergence. Theempirical assessment is carried out for the period 1970 to 2000. Empirical results rejectthe hypothesis of b-convergence, while provide support to s-convergence.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∏ ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›· ·ÔÙÂÏ› Ì›· ·ÓÙÈ·Ú¿ıÂÛË Ù˘ ıˆÚËÙÈ΋˜ ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛ˘ ÌÂÙËÓ ÂÌÂÈÚÈ΋ ÙÂÎÌËÚ›ˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ı¤Ì·ÙÔ˜ Ù˘ ÂÚÈÊÂÚÂȷ΋˜ Û‡ÁÎÏÈÛ˘ ÛÙËÓ ∂ÏÏ¿‰·.™˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ, Ù›ıÂÙ·È ÙÔ ÂÚÒÙËÌ· Â¿Ó ÔÈ ∂ÏÏËÓÈΤ˜ ÂÚÈʤÚÂȘ Û˘ÁÎÏ›ÓÔ˘Ó Û‡ÌʈӷÌ ÙȘ Û˘Óı‹Î˜ Ù˘ (·ÔχÙÔ˘) ‚-Û‡ÁÎÏÈÛ˘ ‹ ·˘ÙÒÓ Ù˘ Û-Û‡ÁÎÏÈÛ˘. ∏ ÂÌÂÈÚÈ΋ÙÂÎÌËÚ›ˆÛË Î·Ï‡ÙÂÈ ÙËÓ ¯ÚÔÓÈ΋ ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô 1970-2000. ∆· ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· Ù˘ ÂÌÂÈÚÈ-΋˜ ÌÂϤÙ˘ ·ÔÚÚ›ÙÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ˘fiıÂÛË Ù˘ (·ÔχÙÔ˘) ‚-Û‡ÁÎÏÈÛ˘ ÛÙȘ ∂ÏÏËÓÈΤ˜ Â-ÚÈʤÚÂȘ, ÂÓÒ ·Ô‰ÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÙ·È Ë ÈÛ¯‹ Ù˘ ˘Ôı¤Ûˆ˜ Û¯ÂÙÈο Ì ÙËÓ Û-Û‡ÁÎÏÈÛË.

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 61

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 61-76

1. Introduction

The last 20 years have seen an increasing interest in the theory of economic growth.In the words of Solow (1994) there has been a ‘wildfire revival’ of interest in economicgrowth. Indeed, there has been a proliferation of studies investigating the issue of whetherthe process of economic development is fundamentally convergent or divergent in nature.Convergence might be thought as a decline in inequalities across economies in levels ofper capita output or income through time. The issue of convergence is highly empirical innature. Early empirical studies include the work of Kuznets (1955, 1964), Williamson(1965), and Gomulka (1971) among others. The ‘convergence’ issue, from an interna-tional perspective, has been put forward by early economic historians, such as Ger-schenkron (1962) and, more recently, by Abramovitz (1986). Their fundamental proposi-tion seems to be that under certain circumstances, backward countries would tend to growfaster than rich countries, in order to close the gap between these two groups. Neverthe-less, the convergence question has (re) emerged during the 1980s. A crucial reference inthis regard is provided by the work of Baumol (1986), and subsequently by Baumol andWolff (1988), who address questions concerning long-run growth and welfare amongeconomies. In his seminal paper Baumol (1986) following the ideas of Abramovitz (1986),suggests that convergence occurs when poor economies tend to grow faster than richeconomies, such that the poor economies catch up to the rich ones in terms of the levelof per capita output/income through time.

The objective of this paper is an extension of the empirically validated knowledge onregional convergence. It does so with reference to the 13 administrative regions of Greeceduring the period 1970-2000. The rest of this paper is organised in the following manner.Section 2 outlines two alternative concepts of convergence, s and b convergence while therelation between these two concepts is analysed in section 3. The data used in the empir-ical application are discussed in section 4. Section 5 is devoted to the empirical assessmentof s and b convergence. Finally, section 6 concludes and offers a possible explanation forthe econometric results.

2. Alternative measures of convergence

Empirical work on convergence has focused on two alternative concepts or measuresof convergence, namely s-convergence and b-convergence. This section provides a briefoutline those measures.

It might be argued that of particular concern in the ‘convergence debate’ is the effi-ciency of economic growth in improving the distribution of income or the assessment oftendencies in increasing or decreasing inequality among economies. The term ‘inequali-

62 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ty’ is used in terms of differences in the distribution of incomes or levels of labour pro-ductivity (per capita output) among the agents in an economy (countries or regions). Fol-lowing Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1992), s-convergence considers the cross-sectional dis-persion in per capita incomes and occurs if it declines through time. It is argued that a setof economies exhibit s-convergence if the dispersion of per capita income (or any othervariable) across regions display a tendency to decline through time. This notion of con-vergence is, typically, measured by calculating two statistical indices of the relevant vari-able, namely the coefficient of variation and the standard deviation of the variable.

The coefficient of variation (C) of a variable (y) across a group of i = 1,...,n observa-tional units at any time t can be obtained by using the following formula (Dalgaard andVastrup, 2001):

s = ���n

i=1����

2� where �n

i=1yi (2.1)

Dispersion may be measured by using a slightly different approach; that of the standarddeviation. The standard deviation is the typical deviation lying between the smallest and thelargest deviation within a data set. This is given by the square root of the variance and it usedextensively in empirical studies. Hence, the standard deviation (s) is computed as follows:

s = ���n

i=1���log ���

2

where �n

i=1logyi (2.2)

In order for s-convergence to hold, the standard deviation of any initial time (t) mustexceed that of the terminal time (T) is required. Hence, the following condition must befulfilled (Sala-i-Martin 1996, p.1020):

syt+T < syt (2.2.1)1

Broadly speaking, the above two measures indicate tendencies in increasing or de-creasing of inequality patterns across observational units. Nevertheless, there is anothermeasure, which provides a clearer picture of tendencies in inequalities, the Herfindahl ra-tio. This ratio is calculated as follows (Cowell, 1995):

h = (2.3)

The notion of s-convergence is one of the earliest measurements used in the empiri-cal assessment of regional convergence2. It is a quite useful measure for regional conver-gence in the sense that provides a first approximation to the tendencies of inequalitiesacross regions. Nevertheless, reliance on a simple assessment of the s-convergence is notappropriate enough. To be more precise, s-convergence is completely silent about the rel-ative growth performance of the regions. In other words, the possibility of initially poor

(c2+1)�

n

1�n

yi�y*

1�n

1�n

yi – y�

y1�n

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 63

regions to grow faster or slower than initially rich regions are masked by the concept ofs-convergence. Such possibilities are revealed in a more appropriate way by the conceptof b-convergence.

The concept of b-convergence reflects the neo-classical argument by implying that apoor region, but with higher marginal product of capital, should grow faster than a richregion, in which capital exhibiting diminishing productivity. This difference in the growthrates allows poor regions to catch up with rich regions. However, before any progress canbe made is essential to outline the main features of the neo-classical model. The key to theunderstanding of b convergence lies in a thorough understanding of the nature of the neo-classical growth theory.

According to the neo-classical growth theory, market forces will lead to a general con-vergence of per capita income or output across economies over time. Using a generalequilibrium framework this model predicts that disparities across economies are unlikelyto occur or, at least, to be persistent. Barro (1997) offers a lucid explanation of the neo-classical property of convergence:

"The convergence property derives in the neo-classical model fromdiminishing returns to capital. Economies that have less capital perworker (relative to their long-run capital per worker) tend to havehigher rates of return and higher growth rates." (p. 2)

Maintaining the neo-classical framework as the basic vehicle of analysis, a criticalquestion arises. ‘Is convergence an inevitable outcome?’ In a critical appraisal Romer(1996) identifies three possible reasons for expecting poor economies to grow faster thatrich economies using the neo-classical model as a framework for testing convergence.First, in the standard neo-classical model the prediction that economies converge to theirbalanced growth paths is rooted in its structure. Therefore, to the extent that differencesin output per worker arise from economies being at different stages relative to their bal-ances growth paths, one would expect the poorer economies to catch up to the richer.Second, the structure of the neo-classical model implies that the rate of return on capitalis lower in economies with more capital per worker. In those economies additional capi-tal investment will not be profitable, due to diminishing returns to capital. This providesan ‘incentive’ for capital to ‘flow’ from rich to poor economies3. This will generate ten-dencies to convergence. Third, if exist lags in the diffusion of knowledge, differences in in-come might emerge due to the fact that some economies are not yet employing the bestavailable technologies. As poor economies obtain access to new technologies, incomegaps between poor and rich economies tend to narrow.

Moving away from these abstract considerations, so as to get closer to the implica-tions of the real situation, account has to be taken of the statistical specification of b-con-vergence. In his seminal paper Baumol (1986) examines the hypothesis of b-convergence,expressed in terms of a regression equation as follows:

64 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

yi,r – yi,0 = ·+byi,0+ui,T (2.4)

where yi,T and yi,0 are the natural logarithms of output per worker during the terminaland initial time, respectively. The terms · and u stand for the constant and the error termof the regression while the subscript i indexes the economies included in the regression.

This linear specification imposes the restriction that there are no differences in pref-erences, technology and steady states across regions. Of particular importance is the co-efficient of the initial level of output per worker. The value of the b coefficient derivedfrom regressing equation (2.4) indicates whether economies converge or not. Since theleft-hand side of equation (2.4) measures, in essence, the growth rate during the time in-terval T and 0, if economies with higher initial levels of per capita output grow slowly,then this implies a negative value of b and vice versa.

As Romer (1996) notes, a value for b of -1 corresponds to perfect convergence: high-er initial income on average lowers subsequent growth one-for-one, and so output perperson in the terminal year is uncorrelated with its value in the initial year. If the value ofthe convergence coefficient turns out to be zero, then this is an indication that the con-vergence hypothesis does not hold. Growth is, thus, uncorrelated with initial income andeconomies included in the data set may even exhibit divergence. In this context the term‘divergence’ is used in the sense that the gap between rich and poor economies has in-crease during the period under question.

Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1992) argue that the convergence coefficient b is ex-pressed as follows:

b = – (1 – e-‚) (2.4.1)

where the term ‚ indicates the speed at which economies approach their steady-statevalue of output per worker4. The condition expressed by equation (2.4.1) implies that theconvergence coefficient is bounded to the sign of the parameter b. Since b < 0 impliesconvergence then the parameter b should be positive. In other words, if ‚ > 0 then this isan indication of convergence and vice versa.

In his path breaking paper Baumol (1986), using equation (2.4) tests empirically thehypothesis of convergence at the international level. In particular, exploiting data pro-vided by Maddison (1982), examines the possibilities of convergence among the 16 in-dustrialised countries for a period of hundred years, i.e. the time period extends from 1870to 1979. His results are the following:

yi,1979 – yi,1980 = 8.457 – 0.995yi,1870

According to the results, the estimate of b is almost exactly equal to -1 indicating thatthe regression results suggest almost perfect convergence. Therefore, the hypothesis ofconvergence for the countries included in Baumol’s sample level receives considerablesupport over the period from 1870 to 19795. However, Baumol’s work is subject to a se-

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 65

rious criticism. De Long (1988) criticises Baumol on the grounds that his findings arelargely spurious. To be more precise, he identifies two major problems associated withBaumol’s results.

The first problem refers to the sample selection. Since historical data are constructedretrospectively, the countries that have long data series are generally those, which are themost, industrialised at the present time. Hence, countries that were not rich a hundredyears ago are typically in the sample only if they grew rapidly over the next hundredyears. In contrast, countries that were rich a hundred years ago are generally includedeven if their subsequent growth was only moderate. The second problem identified by DeLong relates to the measurement error, since estimates of output per worker in 1870 areimprecise. It might be argued that errors in measurement of the variables generate a biastowards accepting the convergence hypothesis. When 1870 income is overstated, growthover the period 1870 - 1979 is understated by an equal amount while when 1870 incomeis understated, the reverse occurs. Thus, measured growth tends to be lower in countrieswith higher measured initial income even if there is no relation between actual growth andactual initial income.

The empirical literature on the topic of regional convergence is extensive, so we shallbe forced to be selective. Table 1 reports the main findings on absolute regional conver-gence for a variety of countries covering data from regional sets over different time pe-riods. In this table the estimated value of the ‚ coefficient is reported for a panel of se-lected empirical studies, which are considered to be indicative.

Table 1: Empirical findings on b-convergence across regions

Country Time periodEstimated

Studyvalue of ‚

USA 1880-1990 0.017 Sala-i-Martin (1996)EU1 1950-1990 0.015 Sala-i-Martin (1996)EU1 1950-1960 0.016 Armstrong (1995)EU2 1950-1990 0.019 Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1991)EU2 1975-1992 0.009 Armstrong (1995a)EU2 1975-1985 0.010 Button and Pentecost (1999)EU3 1975-1998 0.007 Martin (2001)UK 1950-1990 0.030 Sala-i-Martin (1996)France 1950-1990 0.016 Sala-i-Martin (1996) Italy 1950-1990 0.010 Sala-i-Martin (1996) Japan 1930-1987 0.034 Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1992a)Japan 1955-1990 0.019 Sala-i-Martin (1996)Canada 1961-1991 0.024 Coulombe and Lee (1995)Sweden 1911-1993 0.023 Persson (1997)Sweden 1945-1970 0.030 Bergström (1998)Germany 1970-1994 0.006 Funke and Strulik (1999)

66 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Austria 1961-1986 0.010 Hofer and Wörgötter (1997)Australasia 1861-1991 0.029 Cashin (1995)Finland 1934-1993 0.020 Kangasharju (1999)Greece 1971-1996 0.006 Siriopoulos and Asteriou (1998)Spain 1981-1991 0.024 Mila and Marimon (1999)India 1961-1991 0.003 Abler and Das (1998)Mexico 1970-1980 0.006 Mallick and Carayannis (1994)

Notes:1 At the NUTS 1 Level 2 At the NUTS 2 Level 3 E-16 (Regions of 15 European countries plus Norway)

3. b and s-convergence: two identical concepts?

The notion of s-convergence reveals that the distribution of income tends towardsequalisation or not across economies during a given time period. The particular aspectthat b-convergence indicates involves the capturing of the movements of economies to-wards a new distribution of income. In this respect, it might be argued that b-convergenceappears to be a more dynamic concept, compare to that of s-convergence.

However, as Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1992) argue, even if absolute b-convergenceholds, the dispersion of per capita income does not necessarily tend to decline over time.It follows, then, that b-convergence can occur simultaneously with absence of s-conver-gence. In this respect s-convergence is a stricter criterion than b-convergence. This canbe demonstrated as follows.

Consider the conventional expression for testing for convergence:

yi,t – yi,t-1 = ·+byi,t-1+ui,t (3.1)

This can be written as follows:

yi,t – yi,t-1 = ·+(1+b)yi,t-1+ui,t (3.2)

The disturbance term, ui,t , of the regression is assumed to be a random variable withzero mean, with constant variance over time6 and the condition that the covariance be-tween ui,t and yi,t-1 is zero holds. These assumptions are in accordance with the classicalregression model and imply absence of autocorrelation and heteroscedasticity. More for-mally, the disturbance term has a variance s2

ut and it is distributed independently of yi,t-1 ,ui,t for j ≠ i , and lagged disturbances. The variance of the data set is given as follows:

s2y,t = (1+b)2 s2

y,t-1 + s2u,t (3.3)

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 67

Equation (3.3) is a first order difference equation in s 2y , describes the evolution of s2

y,t .The concept of s-convergence requires that the sample variance of per capita output de-creases through time, which means that the standard deviation (sy) declines as well. It fol-lows, therefore, that s-convergence also implies that b < 0 (i.e. b-convergence). In this light,a necessary but not sufficient condition for the existence of s-convergence is the existenceof b-convergence7. Sala-i-Martin (1996a) has succinctly put the argument as follows:

"Moreover, it is natural to think that when an initially poor econo-my grows faster than a rich one, then the levels of GDP per capita ofthe two economies will become more similar over time. In otherwords, the existence of b-convergence will tend to generate s-con-vergence." (p. 1021) [Emphasis in the original]

Nevertheless, at this point it is worth mentioning that, the condition -1< b excludes thepossibility of the leapfrogging or overshooting effect. This term is used to describe a sit-uation by which poor regions not only catch up rich ones, but also exceed or surpass thegrowth rate of rich regions. Such a situation is excluded a priori in the neo-classical mod-el, from which the concept of b-convergence is determined8. More formally, the exclusionof the leapfrogging effect in terms of the equation (3.2) requires that, given any pair ofregions i and j for which the inequality yi,0 � yj,0 holds, the mathematical expectationssatisfy the following condition:

E(yi,t ) � E(yj,t )� t > 0 (3.4)

While the existence of b-convergence is a necessary condition for the existence of s-convergence, nevertheless b-convergence is not a sufficient condition for the presence ofs-convergence. The argument runs as follows (Barro and Sala-i-Martin 1992 and 1999).

It is possible to rewrite equation (3.3) in the following form:

s2y,t = e-2‚ s2

y,t-1 + s2u,t (3.5)9

Since the variance of the disturbance is time invariant, the solution of the first orderdifference equation (3.4) is given by the following equation:

s2i,t = + �s 2

i,0 – � e-2‚t (3.6)

where s2i,0 stands for the variance of the initial level of per capita output of region i. The

solution expressed in equation (3.6) implies that s2i,t approaches its steady state value

s2= monotonically, which increases with the variance of the disturbance term but

decreases with the convergence coefficient. If the initial value of the variance of the ini-tial per capita output is less (greater) than the steady state value, then s2

i,t increases (de-creases). Hence, a positive convergence coefficient b does not imply a decline in s2

i,t . Putit differently, as a consequence b-convergence does not inevitably imply s-convergence.

s2u�

1– e-2‚

s2u�

1– e-2‚

s2u�

1– e-2‚

68 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

4. The data

Following the spirit of the literature, in this paper we seek to address the question ofwhether, the regions of Greece exhibited tendency to converge, at least in respect of theirper capita incomes. However, the National Statistical Agency of Greece does not reportany regionally dissagregated estimates on per capita or personal disposable income. In thispaper income per capita is approximated by gross value added per worker10. The choiceof GVA was made considering one critical advantage attached to this measure. GVA perworker is a useful proxy for regional productivity. Moreover, as Martin (2001) notes, itcan be considered a direct outcome of the various factors that determine regional ‘com-petitiveness’. Data availability constrains the analysis to given sub periods from 1970 to2000 for which data were available11. The regional groupings used are those delineated bythe Greek statistical Agency, which correspond to the 13 administrative regions of Greece.The data were deflated at 1970 current prices using deflators providing by the officialsource of National Statistical Agency of Greece. Ideally, the data should be deflated usingregional price deflators. However, regional price indexes are not available from any offi-cial source and we simply use national deflators. Several authors (e.g. Persson 1997) deflateregional data using indexes reflecting regional differences in cost of living. Nevertheless,such approach serves no purpose in the aims of this paper, given that the primary concernrefers to the productive and not the welfare aspect of the regional economies.

5. Empirical application

As already mentioned, the issue of regional convergence can be approached empiri-cally using two alternative concepts, namely s and b-convergence. This section reportsthe empirical assessment of these two concepts of convergence using the data set dis-cussed in section 4.

s-convergence

The measures of standard deviation and the coefficient of variation approximate em-pirically this concept of convergence. Standard deviation was calculated using equation(2.2) for the period 1970-2000. Figure 1 plots the obtained results.

Figure 1 clearly shows that, during 1970-2000 the standard deviation generally fol-lows a decreasing tendency. This can be considered as evidence in favour of acceptingthe hypothesis of s-convergence across the regions of Greece. Tendencies towards de-creasing inequalities across the regions of Greece are evident from the year 1975 and on-wards. Nevertheless, the most impressive decline in regional inequalities occurred after1980. The period after 1980 is characterised by continuing decreasing tendencies in stan-dard deviation.

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 69

Figure 1: Standard Deviation of GVA (13 Greek Regions 1970-2000).

Figure 2: Coefficient of Variation of GVA (13 Greek Regions 1970-2000).

Figure 3: Herfindahl Ratio (13 Greek Regions 1970-2000).

Apart from the standard deviation, s-convergence can be measured by the coefficientof variation. Coefficient of variation is a better measure since it is the standard deviationdivided by the mean. Figure 2 shows the evolution of this measure.

The evolution of the coefficient of variation throughout the period 1970-2000 seemsto provide considerable support to the hypothesis of s-convergence across the regionsof Greece. Figure 2 indicates that the coefficient of variation starts to decline after 1973

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

0.0769

0.0770

0.0771

0.0772

0.0773

0.0774

0.0775

0.0776

0.0777

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

1970197

1197

2197

3197

4197

5197

6197

7197

8197

9198

0198

1198

2198

3198

4198

5198

6198

7198

8198

9199

0199

1199

2199

3199

4199

5199

6199

7199

8199

9200

0

0.78

0.80

0.82

0.84

0.86

0.88

0.90

0.92

0.94

1970197

1197

2197

3197

4197

5197

6197

7197

8197

9198

0198

1198

2198

3198

4198

5198

6198

7198

8198

9199

0199

1199

2199

3199

4199

5199

6199

7199

8199

9200

0

70 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

while after 1980 reaches its lowest levels and follows a constant declining tendency. Thistendency can be consider as being in accordance with the conditions for s-convergence.

Finally, the hypothesis of s-convergence is also confirmed by using the Herfindahlratio.

As it can be seen from figure 3, the Herfindahl Ratio follows a pattern similar to thatof CV. In particular, it starts to decline after 1973 and after 1980 begins an impressive de-clining tendency, which signifies a reduction in inequalities across the regions of Greece.Once again this reinforces the validity of s-convergence across the regions of Greece.

From this simple presentation of these three statistical measures one conclusion canbe drawn. During the period 1970-2000 Greek regions were following a pattern towardsconvergence, which is in accordance with the conditions required for s-convergence.

b-convergence

In order to test for the hypothesis of absolute b-convergence, the linear specificationgiven by equation (2.4) is employed, following Baumol’s original paper (1986). Equation(2.4) is estimated for the overall time span, i.e. 1970-2000 and for selected time periods.In particular, the entire period was divided into certain sub period covering 10 and 5 yearseach. The obtained derived results are presented in table 2.

The estimates given on table 2 must, naturally, be interpreted with some care. For thesample period as a whole there is little evidence of absolute convergence. Albeit both thecoefficient of the initial income and the ‚ coefficient are correctly signed, they are statis-tically insignificant. Moreover, the low value of R2 in conjunction with the various diag-nostic tests does not confirm the hypothesis of b convergence. For the various sub peri-ods the results indicate convergence with the exemption of the periods 1970-1975, 1970-1980, 1990-2000 and 1995-2000. During these periods, as the sign attached to the b and ‚coefficients indicate, regions of Greece were diverging. Nevertheless, such conclusions aredifficult to be accepted given the statistical insignificance of critical coefficients and thepoor performance of the various econometric tests.

This poor performance of Baumol’s specification in the case of Greek regions can beattributed into two factors. A first factor is related to the small number of observations,(13 for 13 regions). Small number of observations in cross-sectional models constrainssubstantially their ability to offer plausible conclusions. Second, as the results reported ontable2 suggest that factors other than the initial level of GVA per worker also account forcross-region differences in economic growth. Moreover, it should be noted that Baumol’stechnique has a number of limitations. To be more precise, it cannot be used to addressthe question of how, and if, a shock to a specific region’s relative income dissipates overtime. This may be an important factor given that national and region-specific shocks mayaffect different regions in different ways. In addition, a cross-sectional regression assumesthat all regions have an identical rate of convergence, an assumption that casts seriousdoubts about the ability of the technique to account for interregional differences.

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 71

Table 2: Estimates of equation (2.4) and the speed of convergence

Dependent Variable: yi,T

– yi,0

Sample: 13 Greek Regions

Time period a bImplied

R2 F SC FF N H‚

1970-2000 5.2651 -0.06578 0.06804 0.064622 0.7599 0.5412 0.60188 0.3636 0.7935(7.4261) (-0.8717) (0.8424) [0.24362] [0.402] [0.462] [0.438] [0.834] [0.373]

1970-1980 0.465986 0.005196 -0.00518 0.002085 0.0229 4.4404 2.3739 2.3739 0.8940(1.4280) (0.1516) (-0.1520) [0.11035] [0.882] [0.035] [0.305] [0.305] [0.344]

1980-1990 1.1868 -0.08400 0.087748 0.21703 3.0490 0.1688 0.04053 1.8472 0.2262(2.2029) (-1.7461) (1.6707) [0.15714] [0.109] [0.681] [0.840] [0.397] [0.634]

1990-2000 0.65780 0.02236 -0.02212 0.035591 0.4059 1.1966 0.00365 0.6923 3.0771(1.4325) (0.6371) (-0.6442) [0.10653] [0.537] [0.274] [0.952] [0.707] [0.079]

1970-1975 0.61028 0.022891 -0.02263 0.087179 1.0506 1.3853 2.0169 4.2387 1.6052(2.9083) (1.0250) (-1.0366) [0.07210] [0.327] [0.239] [0.156] [0.120] [0.205]

1975-1980 1.1425 -0.01557 0.015696 0.056795 0.6623 4.5377 4.6313 0.7093 0.00123(5.8427) (-0.8138) (0.8074) [0.06335] [0.433] [0.033] [0.031] [0.701] [0.972]

1980-1985 1.4850 -0.03981 0.040632 0.14766 1.9056 0.4423 0.47222 3.7562 0.03711(4.5976) (-1.3804) (1.3526) [0.09421] [0.195] [0.506] [0.492] [0.153] [0.847]

1985-1990 1.3509 -0.04096 0.041827 0.18749 2.5382 0.0154 0.00870 1.3259 0.9197(4.2949) (-1.5932) (1.5601) [0.08103] [0.139] [0.901] [0.926] [0.515] [0.338]

1990-1995 0.30921 -0.01372 0.013819 0.074622 0.8870 0.0328 2.2574 0.2072 1.3843(1.6223) (-0.9418) (0.9353) [0.04421] [0.367] [0.856] [0.133] [0.902] [0.239]

1995-2000 -0.26148 0.036836 -0.03617 0.094961 1.1542 2.0201 0.3483 0.1417 2.3547(-0.5533) (1.0743) (-1.0939) [0.10264] [0.306] [0.155] [0.555] [0.932] [0.125]

Notes: Figures in brackets are the t-ratios. [ser] denotes the standard error of the regression.Column F gives the F-Statistic and the probability [prob] for the overall significance ofthe regression while columns SC, FF, N and H report the chi-squared value and the prob-ability [prob] associated with the diagnostic tests for Serial Correlation, FunctionalForm, Normality and Heteroscedasticity, respectively.

6. Conclusions

In this section we assess the implications of the results for the debate concerning theregional convergence in Greece. Numerous studies have tested the convergence hypoth-esis but very little is known about the complex phenomenon of convergence. The resultsthat reported on section 5 seem to be quite contradictory. To be more specific, the evo-lution of the standard deviation, the coefficient of variation and the Herfindahl ratio clear-ly indicates that regions of Greece were converging during the period 1970-2000 while the

72 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

poor econometric performance of Baumol’s model rejects this conclusion. Does thismean the absence of convergence across the regions of Greece? The results obtained us-ing Baumol’s technique simply indicate that low-income regions of Greece do not growfaster than high-income regions. The notion of b-convergence focuses on the mobility, orthe change in position, of individual regions within the distribution and is used to answerthe question of whether poor regions are catching up to richer regions.

Many economists believe that mobility is more important than a reduction in disper-sion, as the notion of s-convergence requires. This means that the size of differences inincomes at any particular point in time is less important than the ability of poor regionsto catch up to rich regions. Low mobility means it will take a long time to reduce the gapbetween the poorest and the richest regions, whereas high mobility means that individualregions quickly move up (and down) within the income distribution. However, as arguedin section 3, b-convergence does not necessarily imply s-convergence. As the results im-ply albeit regional inequalities have decreased from 1970 to 2000, there is long way aheadfor the poorer regions of Greece to catch up with the richest.

Notes

1. The same condition holds for assessing convergence using the coefficient of variation.The measures of standard deviation and the coefficient of variation have been used inthe relevant literature interchangeably, since they are, to a certain extent, equivalent.

2. See for example Easterlin (1958), Borts and Stein (1964), Williamson (1965) interalia.

3. Labour will flow to an adverse direction, i.e. from poor to rich economies.

4. According to Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1992, 1999) the condition in equation (2.4.1)

implies that the growth rate of per capita income can be approximated in terms of the

following equation: Î^y –‚ �log� �� where y* is the steady-state level of per

capita income and ‚ is the convergence coefficient.

This is a differential equation with the solution: log(yi,t)=(1–e-‚t)log(y*)+e-‚t log(yi,0 ).

The time t for which per capita income in any region is halfway between the value

yi�y*

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 73

during the initial year and the steady state satisfies the condition e-‚t= .

5. In particular, the countries included in the sample are: United Kingdom, Australia,Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, Denmark, United States, France, Canada,Austria, Germany, Norway, Swede, Finland, and Japan.

6. This condition implies that s2u = s2

u,t � t .

7. Lichtenberg (1994) who argues that convergence is an equivalent approximation to adecrease over time in the variance of labour productivity across economies providesthe same conclusion.

8. While the leapfrogging effect is excluded by definition in the standard neo-classicalmodel, some authors, notably Brezis et al. (1993), argue that it is possible for pooreconomies have possibilities for both convergence and suppressing with the richeconomies. Nevertheless, their argument is developed in the context of the interna-tional economy for countries where the benefits from backwardness are strongenough. Such an effect may be possible at the regional level.

9. Recall that since b = (1 – e-‚) hence (1+b)2 = e-2‚ .

10. Hereafter GVA.

11. Data prior to the year 1970 can be found is some studies. However, these data are notentirely reliable since they are not published from any official source. Moreover, theyrefer to regional divisions other than those that used by the statistical agency ofGreece.

References

Abler, D and Das J. (1998) ‘The Determinants of the Speed of Convergence: the Case ofIndia’, Applied Economics, Vol. 30, pp. 1595-1602.

Abramovitz, M. (1986) ‘Catching Up, Forging ahead and falling Behind’, Journal of Eco-nomic History, Vol. 46, pp. 385-406.

Abramovitz, M. (1993) ‘The Search for the Sources of Growth: Areas of Ignorance, Oldand New’, Journal of Economic History, Vol. 53, pp. 217-243.

Adams, J. and Pigliaru, F. (Eds.) (1999) Economic Growth and Change: National and Re-gional Patterns of Convergence and Divergence, Edward Elgar.

1�2

74 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Armstrong, H. (1995) ‘Trends and Disparities in Regional GDP per Capita in the Euro-pean Union, United States and Australia, European Commission Report94/00/74/017, Brussels.

Armstrong, H. (1995a) ‘An Appraisal of the Evidence from Cross-Sectional Analysis ofthe Regional Growth Process within the European Union’ in Armstrong H. andVickerman, R (Eds.) (1995) Convergence and Divergence among European Re-gions, London: Pion.

Armstrong, H. and Vickerman, R (Eds.) (1995) Convergence and Divergence among Eu-ropean Regions, London: Pion.

Barro, R. (1997) Determinants of Economic Growth, MIT Press Barro, R. and Sala-i-Martin, X. (1991) ‘Convergence across States and Regions’ Brook-

ing Papers on Economic Activity, Vol.1 pp. 107-158. Barro, R. and Sala-i-Martin, X. (1992) ‘Convergence’, Journal of Political Economy, vol.

100, pp. 223-251. Barro, R. and Sala-i-Martin, X. (1999) Economic Growth, 2nd edition MIT Press.Baumol, W.J. (1986) ‘Productivity Growth. Convergence and Welfare: What the Long-

Run Data show’, American Economic Review, vol. 76, pp.1072-1085. Baumol, W.J. and Wolff E. N. (1988) ‘Productivity Growth. Convergence and Welfare: A

reply’ American Economic Review, vol. 78, pp. 155-159. Bergström, F. (1998) ‘Regional Policy and Convergence of Real per Capita Income

among Swedish Counties’ SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Fi-nance No 284.

Borts, G.H. and Stein J.L. (1964) Economic Growth in a Free Market, New York, Co-lumbia University Press.

Brezis, E., Krugman, P. and Tsiddon, D. (1993) ‘Leapfrogging and International Compe-tition: A Theory of Cycles in National Technological Leadership’ American Eco-nomic Review, Vol. 85, pp. 1211-1219.

Button, K. and Pentecost, E. (1995) ‘Testing for Convergence of the EU RegionalEconomies’, Economic Inquiry, Vol. 33, pp. 664-671.

Cashin, P. (1995) ‘Testing for Convergence Across the Seven Colonies of Australasia:1861-1991’, Economic Record, Vol. 71, pp. 132-144.

Coulombe, S. and Lee, F. (1995) ‘Convergence Across Canadian Provinces, 1961 to 1991’Canadian Journal of Economics, Vol.28, pp. 886-898.

Cowell, F. (1995) Measuring Inequality, London: London School of Economics.Dalgaard, C. and Vastrup, J. (2001) ‘On the measurement of s-convergence’ Economics

Letters, Vol. 70, pp. 283-287.De Long (1988) ‘Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: Comment’ American

Economic Review, Vol. 78, pp. 1138-1154.

Tendencies towards Convergence across the regions of Greece,... 75

Easterlin, R. (1958) ‘Long Term Potential Income Changes: Some Suggested Factors’ Pa-pers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association, Vol. 2, pp.313-325.

Funke, M. and Strulik, H. (1999) ‘Regional Growth in West Germany: Convergence orDivergence’ Economic Modelling, Vol. 16, pp. 489-502.

Gerschenkron, A. (1962) Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, BelknapPress, Cambridge, MA.

Gomulka, S. (1971) ‘Inventive Activity, Diffusion and the Stages of Economic Growth’,Monograph, Institute of Economics, Aarhus, Denmark.

Hofer, H. and Wörgötter, A. (1997) ‘Regional Per Capita Income Convergence in Aus-tria’ Regional Studies, Vol.31, pp. 1-12.

Kangasharju, A. (1998) ‘b convergence in Finland: Regional Differences in the Speed ofConvergence’ Applied Economics, Vol.30, pp. 679-687.

Kuznets, S. (1955) ‘Economic Growth and Income Inequality’, American Economic Re-view, Vol. 45, pp. 1-28.

Kuznets, S. (1964) Modern Economic Growth, Yale University. Lichtenberg, F. (1994) ‘Testing the Convergence Hypothesis’ The Review of Economics

and Statistics, Vol. 76, pp. 576-579. Maddison, A. (1982) Phases of Capitalist Development, New York, Oxford University

Press. Mallick, R. and Carayannis, E. (1994) ‘Regional Economic Convergence in Mexico: an

Analysis by Industry’ Growth and Change, vol. 25, pp. 325-334. Martin, R. (2001) ‘EMU versus the Regions? Regional Convergence and Divergence in

Euroland’ Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 1, pp. 51-80. Mila, T. and Marimon, R. (1999) ‘Regional Integration and Public Investment in Spain’

in Adams, J. and Pigliaru, F. (1999) Economic Growth and Change: National andRegional Patterns of Convergence and Divergence, Edward Elgar.

Persson, J. (1997) ‘Convergence across the Swedish Counties, 1911-1993’ European Eco-nomic Review, Vol. 41, pp. 1835-1852.

Romer, D. (1996) Advanced Macroeconomics, McGraw - Hill. Sala-i-Martin, X. (1996) ‘Regional Cohesion: Evidence and Theories of Regional Growth

and Convergence’, European Economic Review, vol. 40, pp. 1325-1352. Sala-i-Martin, X. (1996a) ‘The Classical Approach to Convergence Analysis’, The Eco-

nomic Journal, Vol. 106, pp. 1019-1036. Siriopoulos C. and Asteriou, D. (1998) ‘Testing for Convergence Across the Greek Re-

gions’, Regional Studies, Vol.32, pp. 537-546.Solow, R. M. (1994) ‘Perspective on Growth Theory’ Journal of Economic Perspectives,

Vol. 8, pp. 50-85. Williamson, J.G. (1965) ‘Regional Inequalities and the Process of National Development’

Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 13, pp. 3-45.

76 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ ÙÔ˘ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ÓËÛȈÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡˜. ∏ ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜ ∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ.

°ÈÒÚÁÔ˜ ∫. µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜∆Ì‹Ì· ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÎÒÓ ¢ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ŒÚÁˆÓ∆.∂.π. ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∆Ô ·ÚfiÓ ¿ÚıÚÔ ÂÛÙÈ¿˙ÂÈ ÛÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË Î·È ÎÚÈÙÈ΋ ÔÚÈÛÌ¤ÓˆÓ ÎÚ›ÛÈÌˆÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂ-ÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ ÚԂϤ„ÂˆÓ Î·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Ú˘ı̛ۈÓ, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ Â›Ó·È ÂÓ‰ÂÈÎÙÈΤ˜ Ù˘ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›·˜ Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋˜ ¤ÎÊÚ·Û˘ ÙˆÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ ÙÔ˘ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ÓË-ÛȈÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡˜. ∂ÚÂ˘Ó¿Ù·È ÂȉÈÎÒ˜ Ë ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜ ∫˘-ı‹ÚˆÓ, fiÔ˘ Ë ·Û¿ÊÂÈ· ‰È·Ù‡ˆÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂˆÓ Â›Ó·È ÂÌÊ·Ó‹˜ Î·È ·ÚÎÂÙ¤˜ Ú˘ıÌ›-ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ Á˘ Â›Ó·È ÌË ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛÈ̘. ¢È·Ê·›ÓÔÓÙ·È Â›Û˘ ΛӉ˘ÓÔÈ ÁÈ· ÙËÓÚÔÛÙ·Û›· ÙˆÓ È‰È·›ÙÂÚˆÓ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ÂÓÔًوÓ, fi¯È ÌfiÓÔÁÈ·Ù› ÙÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ÙÔ˘ ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡ Ï·ÈÛ›Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ˘ÔÛÙËÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ·fi Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÔ‡˜ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘Ù˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ ÙÔ˘ ‹ ·fi Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ ΛÓËÙÚ· ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÂÂȉ‹ ÔÚÈṲ̂Ó˜ ‚·ÛÈΤ˜‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ Ù›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛÙÔ Ó· ·ÏÏÔÈÒÛÔ˘Ó –·ÓÙ› Ó· ÚÔÛٷهÛÔ˘Ó– ÙËÓ ÚÔ¸¿Ú¯Ô˘Û·ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ ‰È¿ÚıÚˆÛË.

Abstract

The present article focuses on the architectural and urban planning regulations that areindicative of the ideology and the institutional expression of the Ministry’s (Ministry of

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ... 77

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 77-88

Environment and Constructions) prescriptions for the traditional settlements of Greek is-lands. In particular, the case of the old capital of Kythira is analyzed, where many specialregulations are contradictive and unclear and several arrangements for the land uses arenot applicable. It seems also, that potential dangers arise for the protection of the settle-ment’s special characteristics, not only because the overall institutional frame is not sup-ported by a system of operational control or by specific motives but also because sever-al critical provisions tend to alter –instead of protecting– the settlement’s former archi-tectural and urban structure.

1. µ·ÛÈΤ˜ ¤ÓÓÔȘ Î·È ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù· Ù˘ ıÂÛÌÈ΋˜ ÚÔÛÙ·Û›·˜

ÙˆÓ ÂÁ¯ÒÚÈˆÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓ

∆Ô ˙‹ÙËÌ· Ù˘ ÚÔÛÙ·Û›·˜ ÙˆÓ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÌ¤ÓˆÓ ˆ˜ «·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ» ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓÙÔ˘ ÂÏÏ·‰ÈÎÔ‡ ÓËÛȈÙÈÎÔ‡ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ ··Û¯ÔÏ› –Û ıˆÚËÙÈÎfi Î·È ÌÂÏÂÙËÙÈÎfi ›‰ԖÙËÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ ÛΤ„Ë ‹‰Ë ÌÂÚÈΤ˜ ‰ÂηÂٛ˜ Î·È Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ·fi ÙfiÙ Ԣ ‰È·Ê¿ÓËηÓÔÈ ÚÒÙ˜ ÂӉ›ÍÂȘ Ù˘ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈ΋˜ Î·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÏÏÔ›ˆÛ˘, ÏfiÁˆ Ù˘ÂÂÚ¯fiÌÂÓ˘ ÙÔ˘ÚÈÛÙÈ΋˜ Î·È ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘ (ÂÚ›Ô˘ ·fi ÙË ‰ÂηÂÙ›·ÙÔ˘ ’60). ¶·ÚfiÏ· ·˘Ù¿, Ë ıÂÛÌÈ΋ Î·È ÂȯÂÈÚËÛȷ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ·˘ÙÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡Î·È ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈÎÔ‡ ·ÈÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó¿‰ÂÈÍË Î·È ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ô‰Â›¯ıËΠηȷԉÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÙ·È Î·ıËÌÂÚÈÓ¿ ·Ó·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈ΋, ηı˘ÛÙ¤ÚËÛ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο Ó· ÂÌÊ·ÓÈÛÙÂ›Î·È Ì¤¯ÚÈ Û‹ÌÂÚ· Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· ¤ÂÙ·È –ˆ˜ › ÙÔ Ï›ÛÙÔÓ– ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂˆÓ Î·ÈÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈÎÒÓ ·ÏÏÔÈÒÛÂˆÓ ÌË ·Ó·ÛÙÚ¤„ÈÌˆÓ ÂÓÒ ·ÓÙ›ıÂÙ· ı· ¤Ú ӷ ÚÔËÁ›ٷȷ˘ÙÒÓ ÙˆÓ ÙÂÙÂÏÂÛÌ¤ÓˆÓ Î·Ù·ÛÙ¿ÛˆÓ. √È ÏfiÁÔÈ Â›Ó·È ÔÏÏÔ› Î·È ‰ÂÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ÛÙfi-¯Ô Ô‡ÙÂ Â›Ó·È ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ Ó· ·Ó·Ï˘ıÔ‡Ó ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· ÙÔ˘ ·ÚfiÓÙÔ˜ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘. £· Ú¤ÂȈÛÙfiÛÔ Ó· ÂÈÛËÌ·ÓıÔ‡Ó ÔÚÈṲ̂ÓÔÈ ‚·ÛÈÎÔ› ·fi ·˘ÙÔ‡˜:

∞. ∞ÓÙ›ıÂÙ· Ì ÙÔ ˙‹ÙËÌ· Ù˘ ‰È¿ÛˆÛ˘ ÂÓfi˜ ÌÂÌÔӈ̤ÓÔ˘ ·Î›ÓËÙÔ˘ ÌÓËÌ›Ԣ ‹ÂÓfi˜ ÌÓËÌÂÈ·ÎÔ‡ Û˘ÓfiÏÔ˘ (À¶¶√, 2001: 11-15), fiÔ˘ Ë ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· ·Ó¿ÁÂÙ·È Û Úfi-‚ÏËÌ· ÌÈ·˜ ÌÔ˘ÛÂÈ·ÎÔ‡ ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· ‰È·Ù‹ÚËÛ˘, ·ÔηٿÛÙ·Û˘ Î·È ¯Ú‹Û˘ ÂÓfi˜ ‰Â-‰Ô̤ÓÔ˘ ÎÙÈÚÈ·ÎÔ‡ ÎÂχÊÔ˘˜, Ô ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌfi˜ ˘fiÎÂÈÙ·È ÛÙȘ Û˘Ó¯›˜ ÎÔ-ÓˆÓÈÎÔÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ ÌÂÙÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂȘ ÌÈ·˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋˜ ÔÓÙfiÙËÙ·˜ Ô˘ Â›Ó·È Î·È ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó··Ú·Ì›ÓÂÈ ˙ˆÓÙ·Ó‹ (ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈο, ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο, ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈο, ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈο Î.Ï.). °È··˘ÙfiÓ ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ, ÙÔ ÔÔÈÔ‰‹ÔÙ ηÓÔÓÈÛÙÈÎfi Ï·›ÛÈÔ ÁÈ· ÙË Ú‡ıÌÈÛË ÙÔ˘ ¯Ò-ÚÔ˘ ÌÔÚ› Î·È Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Â›Ó·È ÂÚÈÔÚÈÛÙÈÎfi ÌfiÓÔ ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË ÙˆÓ ‚·ÛÈ-ÎÒÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ Î·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ÔÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡ ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ó· ÚÔÛÎÚÔ‡-ÂÈ Û ıÂÌÂÏÈÒ‰Ë ¤ÓÓÔÌ· Î·È Û˘ÓÙ·ÁÌ·ÙÈο ‰ÈηÈÒÌ·Ù· Î·È Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ó· ÂÚÈÔÚ›˙ÂÈÙË ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡ Ó· Â›Ó·È ‚ÈÒÛÈÌÔ˜ Î·È ÂÍÂÏÈÛÛfiÌÂÓÔ˜ ̤۷ ¿ÓÙ· ÛÙ·ÚÔηıÔÚÈṲ̂ӷ ÂÈı˘ÌËÙ¿ Ï·›ÛÈ·. ∂›Ó·È ÏÔÈfiÓ Î·Ù·ÓÔËÙfi, fiÙÈ ÁÈ· Ó· ÂÈÙ¢¯ı›

78 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

·˘Ù‹ Ë ÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈο ¢·›ÛıËÙË ÈÛÔÚÚÔ›· ··ÈÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó· ıÂÛÌÈο ΛÌÂÓ· ÌÂÏÂÙÔÌÂÚ›˜, Û·Ê›˜ Î·È ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛÈ̘ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈΤ˜, Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜, ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ Î·È ÓÔÌÈ-Τ˜ Ú˘ıÌ›ÛÂȘ, ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˜ ÛÙËÓ Î¿ı ÂÚÈÔ¯‹ Î·È ÛÙȘ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘.∞·ÈÙÂ›Ù·È ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÌÈ· Ôχ ÚÔÛÂÎÙÈ΋ ÓÔÌÔÙ¯ÓÈ΋ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›· ÛÂ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌfi Ì¿ÚÈÛÙË ÁÓÒÛË Î·È ÌÂϤÙË ÙˆÓ ÂοÛÙÔÙ ÙÔÈÎÒÓ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ.

∂›Ó·È Û˘ÓÂÒ˜ ÚÔÊ·Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ ÔÈ ·˘ÍË̤Ó˜ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ·˘ÙÒÓ ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ıÂÛÌÈ-ÎÒÓ ÎÂÈÌ¤ÓˆÓ Â›Ó·È ‰‡ÛÎÔÏÔ Ó· ÈηÓÔÔÈËıÔ‡Ó ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· ÌÈ·˜ ·Ó·ÚÎÔ‡˜ ηȷÓÙÈ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜ ‰ËÌfiÛÈ·˜ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘, ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ΢ڛˆ˜ ÛÙÔ ÁÚ·ÊÂÈÔÎÚ·ÙÈÎfiÛÙÂÚÂfiÙ˘Ô Ù˘ ÂÏÂÁÎÙÈ΋˜ Ù˘ ‰Ú¿Û˘ (¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô˜ ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ÂÁÁڿʈÓ), ÌÂÙ·Ï-Ï·ÛÛfiÌÂÓ˘ ·Ó¿ÏÔÁ· Ì ÙÔÓ ÂοÛÙÔÙ ÔÏÈÙÈÎfi ‹ ˘ËÚÂÛÈ·Îfi ÚÔ˚ÛÙ¿ÌÂÓÔ Î·È ÔÏÈ-ÙÈο ÚÔÛ·Ó·ÙÔÏÈṲ̂Ó˘ Û ÚԂ‚ÏË̤ӷ «Î·ÈÓÔÙfiÌ·» ÓÔÌÔıÂÙ‹Ì·Ù· ¢Ú›·˜ ηȿÌÂÛ˘ ÂÏ·ÙÂȷ΋˜ ηٷӿψÛ˘. ∂¿Ó Û fiÛ· ÚԷӷʤÚıËÎ·Ó ÚÔÛÙÂı› Î·È ÙÔ ÁÂ-ÓÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈÎfi ¤ÏÏÂÈÌÌ· ›Ù ÛÂ Â›Â‰Ô ÌÂÏÂÙËÙÈÎfi ›Ù ÛÂ Â›Â‰Ô ÛÙÂϤ¯ˆ-Û˘ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ, ÔÏÔÎÏËÚÒÓÂÙ·È ÌÈ· ÚÒÙË ÂÈÎfiÓ· ÙÔ˘ ÁÈ·Ù› ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈ΋ ηı˘-ÛÙ¤ÚËÛË ÛÙË Û‡ÓÙ·ÍË Î·È ¤Î‰ÔÛË ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÚÔ‰ÚÈÎÒÓ ‰È·Ù·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÁÈ· Ù· ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ·˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù· Ù˘ ÚÔÛÙ·Û›·˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓ.

∞˜ ÛËÌÂȈı› Ù¤ÏÔ˜, fiÙÈ Ë ˘ÛÙ¤ÚËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡ Ï·ÈÛ›Ô˘ Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ÙȘ‰È·Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓ˜ ‹ ‰È·ÌÔÚʈ̤Ó˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈΤ˜ ÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂȘ Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁÔ‡Ó ÙÂÙÂÏÂṲ̂Ó˜ηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ˘Ô‚¿ıÌÈÛ˘, Â›Ó·È ¤Ó· ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ, Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚ›˙ÂÈ Û¯Â‰fiÓfiÏÔ ÙÔ Ê¿ÛÌ· Ù˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋˜ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ ÓÔÌÔıÂÛ›·˜, ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙ· ·fi ÙÔ ÂÍÂÙ·˙fi-ÌÂÓÔ ˙‹ÙËÌ· ÙˆÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓ (¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎfi ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ· ÔÈ ÓÔÌÔıÂۛ˜ÁÈ· Ù· ·˘ı·›ÚÂÙ· Î·È ÙÔ˘˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡˜ ·˘ı·ÈÚ¤ÙˆÓ) (µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜, 1999: 429).

µ. ∂Âȉ‹ ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ Ë ¤ÓÓÔÈ· Ù˘ ÚÔÛÙ·Û›·˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ Û˘ÓfiÏˆÓ ‰È¤ÂÙ·È·fi ÙË ÏÔÁÈ΋ Ù˘ Ú‡ıÌÈÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘ ÙÔ˘ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ Î·È ÂÌÂÚȤ¯ÂÈ ÙËÓ·ÚÌÔÓÈ΋ Û˘Ó‡·ÚÍË Î·È Û‡ÓıÂÛË ÙÔ˘ ·ÏÈÔ‡ Ì ÙÔ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ (ICOMOS, 1990), ··È-Ù› ÙËÓ ·Ú¿ÏÏËÏË ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÒÓ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ ÙfiÛÔ Ù˘ ‰fiÌË-Û˘ Î·È ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓ fiÛÔ Î·È ÙˆÓ ˘fiÏÔÈˆÓ Ú˘ıÌÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÚԂϤ„ÂˆÓ (.¯. ÁÈ·ÙȘ ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ Á˘) Î·È fi¯È ÌfiÓÔ Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÒÓ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ Ù˘ › ÙˆÓ Û¯Â‰›ˆÓ ÎÙÈÚÈÔÏÔÁÈ΋˜·ÂÈÎfiÓÈÛ˘ ‹ ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÊÂÈÔÎÚ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ. ∂Âȉ‹ Ù¤ÙÔÈÔÈ Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÔ› ‰ÂÓ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó, Ô ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô˜ ÂÓ·fiÎÂÈÙ·È ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÙÈο ÛÙÔ Ï‹ıÔ˜ ÙˆÓ ÂÔ˘ÛȈ‰ÒÓ Î·Ù·Á-ÁÂÏÈÒÓ ÌÂٷ͇ ÁÂÈÙfiÓˆÓ Î·È Î·ÙÔ›ÎˆÓ ÙÔ˘ οı ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡. ∞ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ· ·˘ÙÔ‡ ›ӷÈ, fiÙÈË ‰fiÌËÛË Î·È Ë ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· ÙˆÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓ ˘·ÎÔ‡Ô˘Ó fi¯È Û οÔÈÔ ıÂÛÌÈο ÚÔ‚ÏÂ-fiÌÂÓÔ Î·È ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÌ¤ÓÔ ÂȯÂÈÚËÛÈ·Îfi ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô (ÎÚ·ÙÈÎfi ‹ Ù˘ ∆.∞.) ·ÏÏ¿ ÛÙÔÓ ÎÔÈÓˆ-ÓÈÎfi ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô (‹ ÛÙËÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ Û˘ÓÂÓÔ¯‹) Ù˘ οı ÙÔÈ΋˜ ÌÈÎÚÔÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ ‹ ÛÙÔÓ ÂÍ·-ÙÔÌÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓÔ ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô ÙÔ˘ οı ηٷÁÁ¤ÏÔÓÙÔ˜ ÔÏ›ÙË. ¶¤Ú· ·fi ÙȘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ ÂÓÙ¿-ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ› Ë fiÏË Î·Ù¿ÛÙ·ÛË, ηıÈÛÙ¿ ÛÙËÓ Ú¿ÍË ·ÓÂÓÂÚÁ¤˜ –ÂÏÏ›„ÂÈ Ì˯·-ÓÈÛÌÒÓ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘– ÔÏϤ˜ ·fi ÙȘ ıÂÛÌÈΤ˜ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÙˆÓ fiÔÈˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÚÔ‰ÚÈ-ÎÒÓ ‰È·Ù·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È Ô‰ËÁ› Ù· ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ· ·Ú·‰ÔÛȷο Û‡ÓÔÏ· ÚÔ˜ ÌÈ· ÌË ÂÏÂÁ-¯fiÌÂÓË ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ ˘Ô‚¿ıÌÈÛË. ∞˜ ÛËÌÂȈı› ‚¤‚·È·, fiÙÈ Ë ·Ô˘Û›· ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ... 79

ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÁÈ· Ôχ ¢ڇÙÂÚÔ Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ, Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚ›˙ÂÈ ÙÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ÙÔ˘ ÙÔ̤· ÙˆÓȉȈÙÈÎÒÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓ (µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜, 1999: 428-430).

∂ÈϤÔÓ, Ë Û¯Â‰fiÓ Ï‹Ú˘ ·Ô˘Û›· ÎÈÓ‹ÙÚˆÓ, Ô˘ ı· ÂÓı¿ÚÚ˘Ó·Ó ÙËÓ Ù‹ÚËÛË ÔÚÈ-ÛÌ¤ÓˆÓ ‰ÂÛÌ¢ÙÈÎÒÓ Î·Ù·Û΢·ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ‹ ¿ÏÏˆÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ, ˘ÔÓÔ̇ÂÈ ·ÎfiÌ·ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘˜ ÙÔ˘ οı ÓÔÌÔıÂÙÈÎÔ‡ Ï·ÈÛ›Ô˘ –ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· fiÙ·Ó·˘Ùfi Û˘Ó‰˘¿˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙËÓ ÚÔ·Ó·ÊÂÚı›۷ ·Ô˘Û›· Ô˘ÛÈ·ÛÙÈÎÔ‡ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜.

°. ŒÓ· ¿ÏÏÔ ÚfiÛıÂÙÔ ˙‹ÙËÌ·, Ô˘ Û˘Ó‰¤ÂÙ·È ¿ÌÂÛ· Ì ÙÔ Ò˜ Î·È Â¿Ó ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙Â-Ù·È ¤Ó· ıÂÛÌÔıÂÙË̤ÓÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ, Â›Ó·È ÙÔ ‰ÈÙÙfi Î·È ·Ï-ÏËϤӉÂÙÔ Úfi‚ÏËÌ· Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋˜ ¢·ÈÛıËÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ Î·È ·È‰Â›·˜ ÛÂ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌfi ÌÂÙËÓ ÚÔÛÊÂÚfiÌÂÓË ÌfiÚʈÛË Î·È Âη›‰Â˘ÛË ÛÂ Â›Â‰Ô ·Î·‰ËÌ·˚ÎÒÓ ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ¿ÓˆÛÙ· ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·.

∏ Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ ÙˆÓ ÂÎÙÂÙ·Ì¤ÓˆÓ ·ÏÏÔÈÒÛÂˆÓ Î·È Ù˘ Û˘Ó¯ԇ˜ ˘Ô‚¿ıÌÈÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·-Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÒÓ ·Ô‰ÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÈ ¤ÌÌÂÛ· fiÙÈ Ë ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ ¢·ÈÛıËÙÔÔ›ËÛË –ÏËÓÂÏ·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ÂÍ·ÈÚ¤ÛˆӖ Â›Ó·È ·ÎfiÌ· Ôχ Ï›ÁÔ ·ÓÂÙ˘Á̤ÓË (ÂȉÈο ÛÙȘ ÂÚÈÊÂÚÂÈ·-Τ˜ ÙÔÈΤ˜ ÎÔÈӈӛ˜) ÂÓÒ ÙÔ ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓÔ, ÙÔ ÂÚȯfiÌÂÓÔ Î·È Ù· ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·Ù· ÛÔ˘-‰ÒÓ ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ Û¯ÂÙÈÎÒÓ Ì ÙËÓ Î·Ù·Û΢‹ ·Î·‰ËÌ·˚ÎÒÓ Û¯ÔÏÒÓ ·Ô‰ÂÈÎÓ‡Ô˘Ó,fiÙÈ, ̤¯ÚÈ ÂÚ›Ô˘ ÙȘ ·Ú¯¤˜ Ù˘ ‰ÂηÂÙ›·˜ ÙÔ˘ ’90, Ë Û˘ÓÙÚÈÙÈ΋ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙˆÓ ÌË-¯·ÓÈÎÒÓ Î¿ı ۯÂÙÈ΋˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ηٷÚÙÈ˙fiÙ·Ó Î·Ï¿ ÛÙȘ ηٷÛ΢¤˜ ·fi ÔÏÈṲ̂-ÓÔ Û΢Úfi‰ÂÌ· Î·È ·ÁÓÔÔ‡Û ۯ‰fiÓ ÔÏÔÎÏËÚˆÙÈο ÙËÓ ·ıÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·ÙˆÓ ÚÔÁÂÓ¤ÛÙÂÚˆÓ ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ. ™˘ÓÂÒ˜, ·ÁÓÔÔ‡ÛÂ Î·È ÙÔ Ô˘ÛȈ‰¤ÛÙ·ÙÔ ÁÂÁÔ-Ófi˜ fiÙÈ Ë ·Ú·‰ÔÛȷ΋ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ¤Ó· Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ·ÈÛıËÙÈ-ÎÒÓ ÚÔÙ‡ˆÓ Î·È Î·ÓfiÓˆÓ Ô˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛıËÎ·Ó ·fi οÔÈÔ˘˜ ηϷ›ÛıËÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔÁfi-ÓÔ˘˜ ·ÏÏ¿ Ë ¿ÚÚËÎÙË ‰È·Û‡Ó‰ÂÛË Î·È Ë ÙÂÏÈ΋ ¯ˆÚÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ, ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜, ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ Ù˘ ηٷÛ΢‹˜, ÎÏÈÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁÈÎÒÓ Û˘ÓıËÎÒÓ, ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋˜‰È¿ÚıÚˆÛ˘ Î·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ Û˘ÁÎÚfiÙËÛ˘ Ì ÛÙfi¯Ô ÙË ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÂÓfi˜ ÎÂχÊÔ˘˜Ô˘ Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÔÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ÛÂ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ (π·Îˆ‚›‰Ë˜, 1978: 7-12)*.

¢. ∆¤ÏÔ˜, Ë Û‡ÓÙ·ÍË Ù· ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›· ¯ÚfiÓÈ· ·ÚÎÂÙÒÓ ÚÔ‰ÚÈÎÒÓ ‰È·Ù·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÁÈ· ÓË-ÛȈÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· ·Ó·‰ÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÈ Î·È ¤Ó· ÂÈϤÔÓ Úfi-‚ÏËÌ· ÛÙÔ ‹‰Ë Û‡ÓıÂÙÔ ˙‹ÙËÌ· Ù˘ ÚÔÛÙ·Û›·˜ ÙÔ˘˜. ™Ù· ›‰È· ‰ËÏ·‰‹ Ù· ıÂÛÌÈο Λ-ÌÂÓ· ·Ú¯›˙ÂÈ Ó· ‰È·Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È ÌÈ· ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›·, ÌÈ· Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ Ú‡ıÌÈÛ˘ ÙÔ˘ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ Î·È ÌÈ·Ù¤ÙÔÈ· ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ‰È·Ù‡ˆÛË, Ô˘ ÂÎÙÈÌ¿Ù·È fiÙÈ ı· ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÂÈ ÛÔ‚·Ú¿ Î·È ÔÈΛϷ·‰È¤ÍÔ‰·. °È· ·˘Ùfi ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ, ÂÍÂÙ¿˙ÂÙ·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ˆ˜ ÂÓ‰ÂÈÎÙÈÎfi ·Ú¿-‰ÂÈÁÌ· ÙÔ ÚfiÛÊ·ÙÔ (18-11-2002) ÚÔ‰ÚÈÎfi ‰È¿Ù·ÁÌ· ÙÔ˘ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ÁÈ· ÙË ÃÒ-Ú· ∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ.

80 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

* ™ÙÔ ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ ÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈÎfi fiÛÔ Î·È Û¿ÓÈÔ Û‡ÁÁÚ·ÌÌ· Ô ·Ú¯ÈÙ¤ÎÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜ ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔ-

Ú›˙ÂÈ Ì ÌÔÓ·‰È΋ ¢ÛÙÔ¯›· Î·È ‰È·‡ÁÂÈ· ÙËÓ ¤ÓÓÔÈ· Ù˘ ·Ú·‰ÔÛȷ΋˜ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋˜ ηÈ

ÙˆÓ ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í‹˜ Ù˘.

2. ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈΤ˜ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ Î·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ Ú˘ıÌ›ÛÂȘ

¶ÔÏÏ¿ ·’ fiÛ· ÚԂϤÂÈ ÙÔ ‰È¿Ù·ÁÌ· ÙÔ Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi Ì ÙËÓ «¤ÁÎÚÈÛË ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ÌÂϤÙ˘ Ù˘ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ ÂÓfiÙËÙ·˜ ÃÒÚ·-∫·„¿ÏÈ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡ ∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ, ¢‹ÌÔ˘∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ Î·È ·Ó·ıÂÒÚËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Ú˘ÌÔÙÔÌÈÎÔ‡ ۯ‰›Ô˘ ÛÙËÓ ›‰È· ÂÚÈÔ¯‹»(º∂∫ 1009/18-11-2002) Û˘Ó‰¤ÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙȘ ¢·ÈÛıËۛ˜ ÁÈ· ‰È·Ù‹ÚËÛË Î·È ·Ó¿‰ÂÈÍË Ù˘·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋˜ Ê˘ÛÈÔÁӈ̛·˜ Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜ (ÌfiÓÔ ÛÙË ÃÒÚ· ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È ÙÔ ‰È¿Ù·ÁÌ·)Î·È ÂȯÂÈÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ı¤ÛÔ˘Ó ˘fi ıÂÛÌÈÎfi ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô ÔÚÈṲ̂Ó˜ ‰È·‰Â‰Ô̤Ó˜ Ú·ÎÙÈΤ˜ Û˘-ÛÙËÌ·ÙÈ΋˜ ·ÈÛıËÙÈ΋˜ ˘Ô‚¿ıÌÈÛ˘, Ô˘ ηıÈ¤ÚˆÛ·Ó ÙËÓ ·ÚfiÛÎÔÙË ı¤·ÛË ËÏÈ·ÎÒÓıÂÚÌÔÛÈÊÒÓˆÓ, Ï·ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÙÂfi˙ÈÙˆÓ ‡‰Ú¢Û˘, ÎÂÚ·ÈÒÓ ÙËÏÂfiÚ·Û˘, Ì·ÚÎÈ˙ÒÓ, ÛÙË-ı·›ˆÓ Ì ÙÛÈÌÂÓÙfiÏÈıÔ˘˜, kitch ÂÈÁÚ·ÊÒÓ Î·È ÔÏÏÒÓ ¿ÏÏˆÓ Ì ÊfiÓÙÔ ÙÔ ÂÌ‚ÏËÌ·ÙÈ-Îfi ÌÓËÌÂÈ·Îfi Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ÙÔ˘ ÂÓÂÙÈÎÔ‡ οÛÙÚÔ˘ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ÌÂ۷ȈÓÈÎÔ‡ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ ª¤Û·µÔ‡ÚÁÔ˘ (°ÚËÁÔÚ¿Î˘ Î.¿., 1983).

¶¤Ú· fï˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ıÂÌÈÙÔ‡˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘˜ Ô˘ ÂÎÊÚ¿˙Ô˘Ó ÔÈ ÔÏϤ˜ Î·È ÏÂÙÔÌÂÚ›˜ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ‰È·Ù¿ÁÌ·ÙÔ˜, Ù›ıÂÓÙ·È Ù·˘ÙÔ¯ÚfiÓˆ˜ (fiˆ˜ Î·È Û οı ¿ÏÏÔ ıÂÛÌÈÎfiΛÌÂÓÔ) ÔÏÏ¿ ÂÈ̤ÚÔ˘˜ ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù· Ô˘ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÎÚÈıÔ‡Ó ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ Ò˜ Î·È Â¿ÓÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È Î·È ÔȘ Â›Ó·È ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ· ÔÈ ÂӉ¯fiÌÂÓ˜ ÂÈÙÒÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘˜.

∂ÍÂÙ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· Ôχ Û˘ÓÔÙÈο ÌfiÓÔÓ ÔÈ Ï›Á˜ ·ÏÏ¿ ÎÚ›ÛÈ̘ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂÈ˜Ô˘ ÂÎÙÈÌÒÓÙ·È ˆ˜ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· ÚÔ‚ÏËÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ ηıÒ˜ Î·È Ë ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚË ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊ›· ÙÔ˘ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘:

1. π‰È·›ÙÂÚÔ ÂӉȷʤÚÔÓ ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÂÈ ÔÏfiÎÏËÚÔ ÙÔ ¿ÚıÚÔ 6, ÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ÂȉÈÎÔ‡˜ fiÚÔ˘˜ Î·È ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈÎÔ‡˜ ÂÚÈÔÚÈÛÌÔ‡˜ Ô˘ ‰È¤Ô˘Ó ÙÔ Û¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ÎÙÈ-Ú›ˆÓ. °ÂÓÈÎfi˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˜ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘ Â›Ó·È Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÂÈ ¤Ó· ÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈο «ÎÏÂÈÛÙfi»Ï·›ÛÈÔ ÏÂÙÔÌÂÚÒÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ, ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Ó· ‰È·ÙËÚËı› ÙÔÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈÎfi ‡ÊÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡.

ªÈ· ÚÒÙË ·Ú·Ù‹ÚËÛË Â› ÙÔ˘ Û˘ÓfiÏÔ˘ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘ ›ӷÈ, fiÙÈ Ë ÏÂÈÔÓfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓÚԂϤ„ÂÒÓ ÙÔ˘ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· Û˘ÓÈÛÙÔ‡Ó Ì¿ÏÏÔÓ ¤Ó· ÂÁ¯ÂÈÚ›‰ÈÔ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ Ô‰Ë-ÁÈÒÓ ÚÔ˜ ÙËÓ ·ÚÌfi‰È· ∂¶∞∂ (∂ÈÙÚÔ‹ ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÔ‡ ∂ϤÁ-¯Ô˘) ·Ú¿ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ ÌÂÏÂÙËÙ‹. ¶ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÁÈ· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·, Ô˘ ‰Â ¯ÚÂÈ¿˙ÔÓÙ·Ó ÂÈ-‰È΋ ÓÔÌÔıÂÙÈ΋ Ú‡ıÌÈÛË ·ÊÔ‡ –Ô‡Ùˆ˜ ‹ ¿Ïψ˜– ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Û·Ó ·Ó¤Î·ıÂÓ ÙÔ Î·Ù’ ÂÍÔ-¯‹Ó Ï·›ÛÈÔ ·ÚÌÔ‰ÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ù˘ ∂¶∞∂ (ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÎÙÈÚ›Ô˘ ÛÙ· ·Ú·‰ÔÛȷοÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈο ÚfiÙ˘· ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡, ÛÙÔ ·Ó¿ÁÏ˘ÊÔ ÙÔ˘ ‰¿ÊÔ˘˜ Î.Ï.). ∂›Ó·È ÚÔÊ·-Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ Ô Û˘ÓÙ¿ÎÙ˘ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘ –ÂÌ̤ۈ˜ ÏËÓ Û·ÊÒ˜– ·Ó·ÁÓˆÚ›˙ÂÈ Èı·Ó¤˜ ·ÓÂ-¿ÚÎÂȘ Ù˘ ∂¶∞∂ Î·È ÚÔÛ·ı› ÌÂ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˜ Ô‰ËÁ›Â˜ Ó· Ù˘ ˘Ô‰Â›ÍÂÈ ÙÔÓ ÙÚfi-Ô ¿ÛÎËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÚÔ ÔÏÏÔ‡ ÓÔÌÔıÂÙËÌ¤ÓˆÓ Î·ıËÎfiÓÙˆÓ Ù˘.

ªÈ· ‰Â‡ÙÂÚË ·Ú·Ù‹ÚËÛË Â›Ó·È, fiÙÈ ·˘Ù‹ ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ Ë ÁÓˆÛÈÔÏÔÁÈο ÂÏÏÈ‹˜ ∂¶∞∂ηÏÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÙÔ ÓÔÌÔı¤ÙË Ó· ÂÚÌËÓ‡ÛÂÈ Î·È Ó· ·ÔÊ·Û›ÛÂÈ Â› ÏËıÒÚ·˜ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ‹·fiÚÈÛÙˆÓ ıÂÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ì ΛӉ˘ÓÔ Â›Ù ӷ ·ÚÂÚÌËÓ‡ÛÂÈ, ›Ù ӷ ·Û΋ÛÂÈ Î·Ù·¯ÚËÛÙÈοÙȘ ÂÎ ÙÔ˘ ÓfiÌÔ˘ ·ÚÌÔ‰ÈfiÙËÙ¤˜ Ù˘.

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ... 81

ŒÓ· ÙÚ›ÙÔ Î·È ÎÚÈÛÈÌfiÙÂÚÔ ˙‹ÙËÌ· ›ӷÈ, fiÙÈ, ·Ú¿ ÙË ÏÂÙÔÌÂÚ‹ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›· ÙÔ˘Ï‹ıÔ˘˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋˜ ʇÛˆ˜ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘, ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó Ù·˘ÙÔ¯ÚfiÓˆ˜ÔÚÈṲ̂Ó˜ Ô˘ÛÈÒ‰ÂȘ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ Ô˘ ˘ÔÓÔÌÂ‡Ô˘Ó ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘˜ ÙÔ˘, Â›Ó·È ·ÓÙÈÊ·ÙÈΤ˜‹ ·Û·Ê›˜ Î·È ÂÓ›ÔÙ ÎÈÓÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÛÙ· fiÚÈ· Ù˘ Û˘ÓÙ·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ‹ ‰È¤ÔÓÙ·È ·fi ¤Ó·Ó˘¤ÚÌÂÙÚÔ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈÎfi ·˘Ù·Ú¯ÈÛÌfi.

√È Â›Ì·¯Â˜ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘ 6 Â›Ó·È ÔÈ ·ÎfiÏÔ˘ı˜:

∞. ™ÙËÓ ·Ú¿ÁÚ·ÊÔ 3 ÚԂϤÂÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙȘ ηÙÔÈ˘ Ë ˘Ô¯ÚˆÙÈ΋ ηٷÛ΢‹Ì·Ó‰ÚfiÙÔÈ¯Ô˘ ‡„Ô˘˜ ÙÔ˘Ï¿¯ÈÛÙÔÓ 1,80 ̤ÙÚˆÓ «Û ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ô˘ ÙÔ ÎÙ›ÚÈÔ ÙÔÔıÂ-ÙÂ›Ù·È ÂÛÒÙÂÚÔÓ ÙÔ˘ ÔÚ›Ô˘ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÔ¤‰Ô˘, ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Ó· ÂÍ·ÛÊ·ÏÈÛı› Ë Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ·ÙÔ˘ ÌÂÙÒÔ˘ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘» Ì ÂÍ·›ÚÂÛË ÌÈ· ÂÚÈÔÚÈṲ̂ÓË ÂÚÈÔ¯‹ ηٿ Ì‹ÎÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ·-ÚÈÔ˘ ÂÚÈÊÂÚÂÈ·ÎÔ‡ Ô‰ÈÎÔ‡ ¿ÍÔÓ· Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜. ™Â ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ¯Ú‹Û˘ ‰È¿ÊÔÚ˘ Ù˘ η-ÙÔÈΛ·˜ ÌÔÚ› ÌÂÙ¿ ·fi ¤ÁÎÚÈÛË Ù˘ ∂¶∞∂ Ó· ÌËÓ Î·Ù·Û΢·Ûı› Ô ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ Ì·Ó‰Úfi-ÙÔȯԘ. ∞˜ ÛËÌÂȈı›, fiÙÈ Ë ‰È¿Ù·ÍË ·ÊÔÚ¿ fiϘ ÙȘ Ӥ˜ ηÙÔÈ˘ Ô˘ ·ÓÂÁ›ÚÔÓٷț٠۠ÎÂÓfi ÔÈÎfiÂ‰Ô Â›Ù Û ÚÔÛı‹ÎË, ‰Â‰Ô̤ÓÔ˘ fiÙÈ, ÏfiÁˆ ÂÈ‚ÔÏ‹˜ ÚÔÎË›ˆÓ ·fi3 ¤ˆ˜ 13 ̤ÙÚ· (·Úı. 3) fiÏ· Ù· Ó¤· ÎÙ›ÚÈ· ÙÔÔıÂÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È «ÂÛÒÙÂÚÔÓ ÙÔ˘ ÔÚ›Ô˘ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈ-ÎÔ¤‰Ô˘».

ªÈ· ÚÒÙË ·Ú·Ù‹ÚËÛË ÂÓ ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ӈ ›ӷÈ, fiÙÈ, ÂÓÒ ÛÙËÓ ·Ú. 2 Ô ÓÔÌÔı¤Ù˘ʷ›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· ÂӉȷʤÚÂÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· Ù˘ ¤ÓÓÔÈ·˜ «ı¤·» ̤۷ ÛÙÔ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ-Îfi ϤÁÌ· ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡, ÛÙËÓ ·Ì¤Ûˆ˜ ÂfiÌÂÓË ·Ú. 3 ·ÔÊ·Û›˙ÂÈ Ó· ÙËÓ Î·Ù·ÚÁ‹ÛÂÈÎ·È Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· ÁÈ· ·˘ÙÔ‡˜ Ô˘ ‰ÈηÈÔ‡ÓÙ·È È‰È·ÈÙ¤Úˆ˜ Ó· ÙËÓ ·ÔÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó, ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÁÈ·ÙÔ˘˜ ÌfiÓÈÌÔ˘˜ ‹ ÂÚÈÛÙ·ÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ¯Ú‹ÛÙ˜ ÈÛÔÁ›ˆÓ ηÙÔÈÎÈÒÓ, ÂÁÎψ‚›˙ÔÓÙ¿˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ›-Ûˆ ·fi Ì·Ó‰ÚfiÙÔÈ¯Ô ‡„Ô˘˜ ÙÔ˘Ï¿¯ÈÛÙÔÓ 1,80 ̤ÙÚˆÓ.

ŒÓ· ‰Â‡ÙÂÚÔ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi ˙‹ÙËÌ· Ô˘ ·Ó·Î‡ÙÂÈ Â›Ó·È, fiÙÈ ÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ ıÂÛÌÈÎfi ΛÌÂÓÔÔ˘ ÂȯÂÈÚ› Ó· «ÂÍ·ÛÊ·ÏÈÛı› Ë Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÙÔ˘ ÌÂÙÒÔ˘ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘» ¤¯ÂÈ ı¤ÛÂÈ Ì ۇ-ÛÙËÌ· Î·È ÂÈ̤ÏÂÈ· ÙȘ ‚¿ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Ï‹ÚË ·Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ·˘ÙÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ ÌÂÙÒÔ˘, ÂÈ‚¿Ï-ÏÔÓÙ·˜ ÚÔ΋ȷ ÚÔ·ÛÙÂÈ·ÎÔ‡ Ù‡Ô˘ (3, 4, 6 Î·È 13 ̤ÙÚˆÓ). ∆Ô fiÏÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ Â›Ó·ÈÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈο ·ÓÙÈÊ·ÙÈÎfi. ∞ÊÔ‡ ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÙÔ ÎÙ›ÚÈÔ ˘Ô¯Úˆı› Ó· ÔÈÛıÔ¯ˆÚ‹ÛÂÈ Î·È Ó··ÔÌ·ÎÚ˘Óı› ·fi ÙÔ Ì¤ÙˆÔ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ (·Úı. 3), ‰È·ÈÛÙÒÓÂÙ·È Û ÂfiÌÂÓÔ ¿ÚıÚÔÙÔ˘ ›‰ÈÔ˘ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ (·Úı. 6) fiÙÈ ·˘Ù‹ Ë ·ÔÌ¿ÎÚ˘ÓÛË Â›Ó·È Ì¿ÏÏÔÓ ·ÓÂÈı‡ÌËÙË, ÁȷٛηıÈÛÙ¿ ·Û˘Ó¯¤˜ ÙÔ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÁÌ· ÙÔ˘ ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ ÌÂÙÒÔ˘. ŒÙÛÈ, ·Ó·Ê‡ÂÙ·È ˆ˜ χÛË ËÛÎËÓÈ΋ „¢‰ÔÛ˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÂÓfi˜ ıÂÛÌÈο ÂȂ‚ÏË̤ÓÔ˘ ÊÚ¿ÁÌ·ÙÔ˜–ÔÚ›Ô˘ (‡„Ô˘˜ ÙÔ˘Ï¿-¯ÈÛÙÔÓ 1,80 Ì.), ÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ·ÔÌ·ÎÚ‡ÓÂÈ Î·È ·ÔÎfiÙÂÈ ·ÎfiÌ· ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ÙÔ ÎÙ›ÚÈÔ·fi ÙÔ Ê˘ÛÈÎfi ‰ËÌfiÛÈÔ ¯ÒÚÔ ÙÔ˘ ÙÔ ‰ÚfiÌÔ (·ÔÌ¿ÎÚ˘ÓÛË ·ÓÙÈÏËÙÈ΋, ·ÈÛıËÙÈ΋ ηÈÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋).

∏ fiÏË ·ÓÙÈÌÂÙÒÈÛË ÛËÌ·ÙÔ‰ÔÙ› ÌÈ· ÌÔÓfiÏ¢ÚË ÌÔÚÊÔÎÚ·ÙÈ΋ ·ÓÙ›ÏË„Ë ÁÈ· ÙÔ¯ÒÚÔ, Ë ÔÔ›· ‰ÂÓ Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ˘fi„ÈÓ ÙȘ Û‡ÓıÂÙ˜ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ Î·È ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ Û˘ÓÈ-ÛÙÒÛ˜ Ô˘ ˘ÂÈÛ¤Ú¯ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ÙÔ˘ ‰ÔÌË̤ÓÔ˘ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜. ∆Ô ÂÓÈ·›ÔÌ¤ÙˆÔ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ –ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· Û ¤Ó·Ó ˘ÎÓÔ‰ÔÌË̤ÓÔ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi ÔÈÎÈÛÌfi– ¤¯ÂÈÙ·˘ÙÈÛÙ› ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈο, ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈο Î·È ·ÓÙÈÏËÙÈο Ì ÙËÓ ·ÌÂÛfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ Û¯¤Û˘ ÙÔ˘

82 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ÎÙÈÚ›Ô˘ (ˆ˜ Î¤Ï˘ÊÔ˜ Î·È ˆ˜ ¯Ú‹ÛË) Ì ÙÔÓ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙ· ‰ËÌfiÛÈÔ ¯ÒÚÔ ÙÔ˘ (‰ÚfiÌÔ,Ï·Ù›·). ∞˘Ù‹ ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ Ë Û¯¤ÛË Î·Ù·ÚÁÂ›Ù·È Ì ٷ ÚÔ΋ȷ Î·È ÙȘ „ËϤ˜ Ì¿ÓÙÚ˜ ÌÂÛ˘Ó¤ÂÈ· ÙËÓ ·ÔÌfiÓˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ÎÙÈÚ›Ô˘, Ù˘ ÚfiÛÔ„‹˜ ÙÔ˘, Ù˘ ¯Ú‹Û˘ ÙÔ˘ Î·È ÙˆÓ Î·-ÙÔ›ÎˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ·fi ·˘Ùfi ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ Ì ÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ı· ¤Ú ӷ Û˘Ó‰È·Ï¤ÁÔÓÙ·È.

∆Ô ˙ËÙÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ ‰ËÏ·‰‹ Û ¤Ó· ÓËÛȈÙÈÎfi ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi ÔÈÎÈÛÌfi ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È Ô ÙÔÓÈÛÌfi˜

ÙÔ˘ ÔÚ›Ô˘ ‹ Ù˘ ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘, fiˆ˜ ÂȉÈÒÎÂÈ ÙÔ ‰È¿Ù·ÁÌ· ÙÔ˘

À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂., ·ÏÏ¿ Ë ·Ó¿‰ÂÈÍË ÂÓfi˜ ˙ˆÓÙ·ÓÔ‡ ÛÎËÓÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎÔ‡ ÌÂÙÒÔ˘ ÂÓ·ÏÏ·ÛÛfi-

ÌÂÓˆÓ fi„ÂˆÓ Î·È Ë ‰È·ÏÂÎÙÈ΋ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈ΋ Û¯¤ÛË ÙÔ˘ ÎÙÈÚ›Ô˘ Ì ÙÔ ‰ËÌfiÛÈÔ ÂÚÈ-

‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÙÔ˘.

Àfi ·˘Ù‹Ó ÙËÓ ¤ÓÓÔÈ· Â›Ó·È ÚÔÊ·Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ ÔÈ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ ÂÚ› ÚÔÎË›ˆÓ (·Úı. 3)Î·È Ì·Ó‰ÚÒÓ (·Úı. 6 ·Ú. 3) ˘ÔÓÔÌÂ‡Ô˘Ó Û˘ÛÙËÌ·ÙÈο ÙÔÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ-Îfi Î·È ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡ Ù˘ ÃÒÚ·˜.

∂›Ó·È ›Û˘ ÚÔÊ·Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ Ë ‰È¿Ù·ÍË ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ Ì·Ó‰ÚfiÙÔÈ¯Ô˘˜ Â›Ó·È Ôχ ‡ÎÔÏÔÓ· ÌËÓ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÛı› ÛÙËÓ Ú¿ÍË (·Ú¿ ÌfiÓÔÓ ·fi ÂΛÓÔ˘˜ Ô˘ ı· ÙÔ ıÂÏ‹ÛÔ˘Ó), ‰Â‰Ô-̤ÓÔ˘ fiÙÈ ‰ÂÓ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÔ› ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ ÂÓÒ Â›Û˘ Ô ÂӉ¯fiÌÂÓÔ˜ ¯·ÌËÏfiÙÂÚÔ˜ÙÔ˘ 1,80 Ì. Ì·Ó‰ÚfiÙÔȯԘ ‰ÂÓ Û˘ÓÈÛÙ¿ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚË ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋ ·Ú¿‚·ÛË ‹ ÌÔÚ› Ó·ıˆÚËı› ·ÏÒ˜ ˆ˜ ËÌÈÙÂÏ‹˜ Ô˘ ÛÙÔ Ì¤ÏÏÔÓ ı· ¿ÚÂÈ ÙÔ ÓfiÌÈÌÔ ‡„Ô˜ ÙÔ˘.

µ. ™ÙËÓ ÂfiÌÂÓË ·Ú. 4 ÙÔ˘ ›‰ÈÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘ (¿Úı. 6) ÚԂϤÂÙ·È Ë ··ÁfiÚ¢ÛË Î·-Ù·Û΢‹˜ ÎÙÈÚ›ˆÓ Û ˘ÏˆÙ‹. ∏ Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë ·˘Ù‹ Â›Ó·È ÔÚı‹ Î·È ·˘ÙÔÓfiËÙË fi¯È ÌfiÓÔ ÁÈ·ÙË Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓË ÃÒÚ· ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÁÈ· ÔÔÈÔ‰‹ÔÙ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi ÔÈÎÈÛÌfi ÙÔ˘ ÂÏÏ·‰È-ÎÔ‡ ¯ÒÚÔ˘. µÂ‚·›ˆ˜, ‰ÂÓ ¯ÚÂÈ·˙fiÙ·Ó Ë ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ‰È·Ù‡ˆÛ‹ Ù˘, fiˆ˜ ¿ÏψÛÙÂ Î·È ÙˆÓÂÚÈÛÛÔÙ¤ÚˆÓ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ·Úı. 6, ‰Â‰Ô̤ÓÔ˘ fiÙÈ ˆ˜ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈÎfi˜ ÂÚÈÔÚÈÛÌfi˜ÂÓ¤ÈÙ ÛÙȘ ηٿ ÓfiÌÔ ·ÚÌÔ‰ÈfiÙËÙ˜ Ù˘ ∂¶∞∂ ·fi ÙfiÙ Ԣ ·˘Ù¤˜ Û˘ÛÙ¿ıËηÓ(ÚÈÓ ÌÂÚÈΤ˜ ‰ÂηÂٛ˜). ∂¿Ó Ô ÓÔÌÔı¤Ù˘, ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÙÔ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂., ÂÎÙÈÌ¿ ·fi ÙËÓ¤ˆ˜ Û‹ÌÂÚ· ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÙˆÓ ∂¶∞∂, fiÙÈ ‰ÂÓ ‹Ù·Ó Û ı¤ÛË Ó· ‰È·ÛÊ·Ï›ÛÔ˘Ó Ô‡Ù ÌÈ· Ùfi-ÛÔ ÛÙÔȯÂÈÒ‰Ë ·ÈÛıËÙÈ΋ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÛÙ· ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈο ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ ÙÔ˘ οı ÙfiÔ˘ Ùfi-ÙÂ Â›Ó·È Ì¿ÏÏÔÓ Ì¿Ù·ÈÔ Ó· ÂÓ·Ôı¤ÙÂÈ Û ·˘Ùfi ÙÔ fiÚÁ·ÓÔ ÙËÓ ÂÚÌËÓ›· Î·È ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹fiÏˆÓ ·˘ÙÒÓ ÙˆÓ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎÒÓ Ô‰ËÁÈÒÓ Î·È ‰È·Ù¿ÍˆÓ. ∫·Ù¿ ÙËÓ ÁÓÒÌË Ì·˜, fiÛÔ Î·È·Ó ÔÈ ∂¶∞∂ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó, ÔÏϤ˜ ÊÔÚ¤˜, ÌÈ· ÁÓˆÛÈÔÏÔÁÈο ÂÏÏÈ‹ ÛÙÂϤ¯ˆÛË, Â›Ó·È ÛÂı¤ÛË Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÔÎÚÈıÔ‡Ó Û οÔȘ ÛÙÔȯÂÈÒ‰ÂȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡ ÚfiÏÔ˘ ÙÔ˘˜Î·È ‰È·ı¤ÙÔ˘Ó ¤Ó· minimum ·ÈÛıËÙÈ΋˜ ·È‰Â›·˜ Ô˘ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÎÔÈÓfi ÛËÌÂ›Ô ÁÈ· οı¤ÏÏËÓ· ·Ú¯ÈÙ¤ÎÙÔÓ· Ì˯·ÓÈÎfi. ™Â ÙÂÏÈ΋ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË, Â¿Ó ÙÔ À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ı¤ÏÂÈ Ó· ‚ÂÏ-ÙÈÒÛÂÈ ÙËÓ ÔÈfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ ÌÂÏÂÙÒÓ Ô˘ ηٷϋÁÔ˘Ó –̤ۈ ∂¶∞∂– Û ¿‰ÂȘ, ı· ‹Ù·ÓÚÔÙÈÌfiÙÂÚÔ Ó· ÂÛÙÈ¿ÛÂÈ ÛÙË ÛÙÂϤ¯ˆÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ÛÙËÓ ÂÈÌfiÚʈÛË ÙˆÓ ÌÂÏÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜·Ú¿ ÛÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎÒÓ fiÛÔ Î·È ÚÔ‚ÏËÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ Î·ÓfiÓˆÓ̤۷ ·fi ÚÔ‰ÚÈο ‰È·Ù¿ÁÌ·Ù·.

™ÙËÓ ›‰È· ·Ú. 4 ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È fï˜ οÙÈ Ôχ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ ·fi ÙËÓ ·˘ÙÔÓfiËÙË··ÁfiÚ¢ÛË Ù˘ ˘ÏˆÙ‹˜. ™Â ÌÈ· ÚÔÛ¿ıÂÈ· ÙÔ˘ ÓÔÌÔı¤ÙË Ó· ··ÏÂÈÊı› Ë ÂÈÎfiÓ·ÂÓfi˜ ËÌÈÙÂÏÔ‡˜ ÈÛÔÁ›Ԣ (Ô˘ ı˘Ì›˙ÂÈ ›Ûˆ˜ ˘ÏˆÙ‹;) Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ¤Ó·Ó ÔÏÔÎÏËڈ̤ÓÔ

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ... 83

˘ÂÚΛÌÂÓÔ fiÚÔÊÔ «··ÁÔÚ‡ÂÙ·È Ë ÔÏÔÎÏ‹ÚˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ ÛÙÔÓfiÚÔÊÔ ÚÈÓ ÙËÓ ÔÏÔÎÏ‹ÚˆÛË ÙˆÓ Â͈ÙÂÚÈÎÒÓ ÂȯÚÈÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ (ÛÔ‚·Ù›ÛÌ·Ù·) Î·È ÙËÓ ÙÔ-Ôı¤ÙËÛË ÎÔ˘ÊˆÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÛÙÔ ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ».

√ ÓÔÌÔı¤Ù˘ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· ·ÁÓÔ› ÂÓ ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ӈ ÙË Û˘Ó‡·ÚÍË ‰‡Ô ‹ ÂÚÈÛÛÔÙ¤ÚˆÓÌÔÓ¿‰ˆÓ ÔÚÈ˙fiÓÙÈ·˜ ȉÈÔÎÙËÛ›·˜, ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÙÔ ·ÏÔ‡ÛÙ·ÙÔ fiÛÔ Î·È Û˘ÓËıÈṲ̂ÓÔ ÁÂÁÔ-Ófi˜ ÙÔ˘ Ó· ‰È·Ê¤ÚÂÈ Ô È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹Ù˘ ÙÔ˘ ÈÛÔÁ›Ԣ ·fi ·˘ÙfiÓ ÙÔ˘ ·ãÔÚfiÊÔ˘. ™ÙËÓ ÂÚ›-ÙˆÛË ·˘Ù‹, Ë ÚÔ·Ó·ÊÂÚı›۷ ··ÁfiÚ¢ÛË ı· ÂÈʤÚÂÈ ÌÈ· ÛÂÈÚ¿ ÔÍ‡ÌˆÚˆÓ Î·Ù·-ÛÙ¿ÛˆÓ. °È· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·, fiÙ·Ó Ô È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹Ù˘ ÙÔ˘ ÈÛÔÁ›Ԣ ÁÈ· ‰È¿ÊÔÚÔ˘˜ ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ (ÔÈ-ÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ‡˜, ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡˜ Î.Ï.) ‰ÂÓ ı¤ÏÂÈ ‹ ‰ÂÓ ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÔÏÔÎÏËÚÒÛÂÈ ÙȘ ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÈ-Τ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ Ô˘ ÙÔÓ ·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó, ÙfiÙÂ Ô È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹Ù˘ ÙÔ˘ ·ãÔÚfiÊÔ˘ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÚÈ̤-ÓÂÈ ˘ÔÌÔÓÂÙÈο (Ì‹Ó˜, ¯ÚfiÓÈ· ‹ ‰ÂηÂٛ˜) ÙÔÓ È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹ÙË ÙÔ˘ ÈÛÔÁ›Ԣ ̤¯ÚÈ Ó· ·Ï-Ï¿ÍÂÈ Ë ‰È¿ıÂÛ‹ ÙÔ˘ ‹ ̤¯ÚÈ Ó· ‚ÂÏÙȈı› Ë ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ÙÔ˘ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ·, ¤ÙÛÈ ÒÛÙ–·ÊÔ‡ ÂÚ¿ÛÔ˘Ó ÌÂÚÈο ¯ÚfiÓÈ·– Ó· ÔÏÔÎÏËÚÒÛÂÈ ÙÔ ÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ ‰È·Ì¤ÚÈÛÌ¿ ÙÔ˘. ∞ÊÔ‡ ÙÔÈÛfiÁÂÈÔ ÔÏÔÎÏËÚˆı› ÙfiÙÂ Î·È ÌfiÓÔÓ ı· ÌÔÚ¤ÛÂÈ Ó· ÔÏÔÎÏËÚÒÛÂÈ Î·È ÙÔ ‰ÈÎfi ÙÔ˘ ‰È·-̤ÚÈÛÌ· Ô ÓÔÌÈÌfiÊÚˆÓ È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹Ù˘ ÙÔ˘ ·ãÔÚfiÊÔ˘. ∂›Û˘, ¤Ó· ¿ÏÏÔ Û‡ÓËı˜ ÂӉ¯fi-ÌÂÓÔ ı· Â›Ó·È ÙÔ Ó· ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È Ô È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹Ù˘ ÙÔ˘ ·ãÔÚfiÊÔ˘ ·fi ÙË Û˘Ó¤ÂÈ· Ô˘ ı· ÂÈ-‰Â›ÍÂÈ ÙÔ Û˘ÓÂÚÁÂ›Ô ÙˆÓ ÂȯÚÈÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ ‹ ÙˆÓ ÎÔ˘ÊˆÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ÈÛÔÁ›Ԣ.

¶¤Ú·Ó fiÏˆÓ ·˘ÙÒÓ Â›Ó·È ÚÔÊ·Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ Ô È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹Ù˘ ÙÔ˘ ÈÛÔÁ›Ԣ, fiÙ·Ó ·ÓÙÈÏËÊı›ÙËÓ ¤ÌÌÂÛË fiÛÔ Î·È ·Ú¿ÏÔÁË ÂÍÔ˘Û›· Ô˘ ÙÔ˘ ·Ú¤¯ÂÈ Ô ÓÔÌÔı¤Ù˘ ¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÙÔ˘ ȉÈÔ-ÎÙ‹ÙË ÙÔ˘ ˘ÂÚΛÌÂÓÔ˘ ÔÚfiÊÔ˘, Â›Ó·È Èı·ÓfiÓ Ó· ·Û΋ÛÂÈ ·˘Ù‹Ó ÙËÓ ÂÍÔ˘Û›· ˆ˜ ̤-ÛÔÓ Â΂ȷÛÌÔ‡ Î·È Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· ıÂÛÌÈο ˘Ô‚ÔËıÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ˘. ∆Ô ·ÙÂÏ›ˆÙÔ ÈÛÙÔÚÈÎfi ηٷÁ-ÁÂÏÈÒÓ Î·È ‰ÈÂÓ¤ÍÂˆÓ ÌÂٷ͇ ÁÂÈÙfiÓˆÓ ‹ Û˘ÁÁÂÓÒÓ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ¿ÏψÛÙ ¤Ó· ÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈο·ÓıËÚfi Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ Ù˘ ÌÈÎÚÔÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋˜ ‰È¿ÚıÚˆÛ˘ οı ÙÔÈ΋˜ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ Î·È ËÛ˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓË ‰È¿Ù·ÍË ·Ú¤¯ÂÈ fiÏ· Ù· ¯¤ÁÁ˘· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÂÚ·ÈÙ¤Úˆ ÎÏÈ̿ΈÛË ·˘ÙÔ‡ÙÔ˘ Ê·ÈÓÔ̤ÓÔ˘ Ì ¤Ó· ÂÈϤÔÓ ıÂÛÌÈÎfi ̤ÛÔÓ Â΂ȷÛÌÔ‡.

∆¤ÏÔ˜, ·fi ÙÔ fiÏÔ ÛÎÂÙÈÎfi Ô˘ ·Ó·Ù‡¯ıËΠÚÔ·ÙÂÈ Â‡ÏÔÁ· ÙÔ Û˘Ì¤Ú·ÛÌ·,fiÙÈ Ë ‰È¿Ù·ÍË ·˘Ù‹ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·ÓÂÏÂÁ¯ı› ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙË Û˘ÓÙ·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ¿ Ù˘, ‰Â-‰Ô̤ÓÔ˘ fiÙÈ Ô ÙÚfiÔ˜ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ Ù˘ ÂÎÙÈÌ¿Ù·È fiÙÈ Û˘ÓÈÛÙ¿ ˘¤ÚÌÂÙÚÔ ÂÚÈÔÚÈÛÌfi Ù˘ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋˜ ÂÏ¢ıÂÚ›·˜, Ë ÔÔ›· ηÙÔ¯˘ÚÒÓÂÙ·È ·fi ÙÔ ™‡ÓÙ·ÁÌ·.

2. ™ÙÔ ¿ÚıÚÔ 4, ÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È ÛÙȘ ÂÈÙÚÂfiÌÂÓ˜ ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ, ÚԂϤÂÙ·È –ÌÂ-ٷ͇ ¿ÏψӖ Ë ··ÁfiÚ¢ÛË «ÔÔÈ·Û‰‹ÔÙ ¯Ú‹Û˘ ηٷÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ‹ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ÂÚÁ·ÛÙËÚ›Ô˘ Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ› fi¯ÏËÛË ÛÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡» Î·È «ÙÔ ˘Ô‚·ı-Ì›˙ÂÈ». ¢È¢ÎÚÈÓ›˙ÂÙ·È Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ·, fiÙÈ Ë ›‰È· ··ÁfiÚ¢ÛË «ÂÈ‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È Û ÂÚ›ÙˆÛËÔÔÈ·Û‰‹ÔÙ fi¯ÏËÛ˘ Ù˘ ηÙÔÈΛ·˜ ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙ· ·Ó ·˘Ù‹ ÚÔηÏÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÙȘ ÂÁη-Ù·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ¯ÒÚˆÓ ‹ ÙÔ ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi ‹ ÙËÓ ÂÏ·Ù›· (ÌÂÁ¿ÊˆÓ·, ÌÔ˘ÛÈ΋, ÚÔۤϢ-ÛË ‹ ·Ô¯ÒÚËÛË ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ, ΢ÎÏÔÊÔÚȷο ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù·, ÛÎÔ˘›‰È·)….».

ªÈ· ÚÒÙË ÂÈÛ‹Ì·ÓÛË Â›Ó·È, fiÙÈ Ë ¤ÓÓÔÈ· «Î·Ù¿ÛÙËÌ· ‹ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎfi ÂÚÁ·ÛÙ‹-ÚÈÔ Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ› fi¯ÏËÛË ÛÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ» ‰ÂÓ ·ÓÙÈÛÙÔȯ› Û οÔÈ· ·fi ÙȘ ÓÔÌÔ-ıÂÙË̤Ó˜ ηÙËÁÔڛ˜ ¯Ú‹ÛÂˆÓ Ô˘ ÚԂϤÔÓÙ·È, ›Ù ÛÙÔÓ ∫ÙÈÚÈÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi ∫·ÓÔÓÈÛÌfi

84 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

›Ù ÛÙȘ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ¢ڇÙÂÚÔ˘ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÔ‡ ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡ Ï·ÈÛ›Ô˘.ŒÓ· ‰Â‡ÙÂÚÔ Úfi‚ÏËÌ· ›ӷÈ, fiÙÈ Ë ¤ÓÓÔÈ· Ù˘ fi¯ÏËÛ˘ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈÌÂÓÈο

ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÈÌË, ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· fiÙ·Ó Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈο ·fiÚÈÛÙ· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·,fiˆ˜ «ÚÔۤϢÛË ‹ ·Ô¯ÒÚËÛË ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ», «Î˘ÎÏÔÊÔÚȷο ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù·», «ÛÎÔ˘›-‰È·» Î.Ï.

ŒÓ· ÙÚ›ÙÔ ı¤Ì·, Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÂÈ ·fi Ù· ÚÔ·Ó·ÊÂÚı¤ÓÙ· Î·È ÂÚÈϤÎÂÈ ·ÎfiÌ· Â-ÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ÙËÓ Î·Ù¿ÛÙ·ÛË, Â›Ó·È ÔÈÔ˜ ÎÚ›ÓÂÈ ÙÈ ı· ÂÈ «fi¯ÏËÛË Î·ÙÔÈΛ·˜» (ηٿ ÙËÓÎÚ›ÛË ÙÔ˘ Ô¯ÏÔ˘Ì¤ÓÔ˘;), ÔÈÔ˜ ÎÚ›ÓÂÈ ÙÈ ˘Ô‚·ıÌ›˙ÂÈ ÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ Î·È ÙÈ fi¯È Î·È ÌÂÔÈ· ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈÌÂÓÈο ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ı· Á›ÓÔ˘Ó ·˘Ù¤˜ ÔÈ Î·Ù’ ÂÍÔ¯‹Ó ˘ÔÎÂÈÌÂÓÈΤ˜ ÎÚ›ÛÂȘ. «∏·ÚÌfi‰È· ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋ ÀËÚÂÛ›·», ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ·Ú·¤ÌÔÓÙ·È fiÏ· ·˘Ù¿ Ù· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·«Û ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ô˘ ˘Ô¤ÛÂÈ ÛÙËÓ ·ÓÙ›ÏË„‹ Ù˘ fi¯ÏËÛË…» (‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÌÂÙ¿ ·fi ηٷÁ-ÁÂÏ›· οÔÈÔ˘ Ô¯ÏÔ˘Ì¤ÓÔ˘ Á›ÙÔÓ·), ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È Û ı¤ÛË Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÂÈ Ì ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈÌÂ-ÓÈο ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ÙËÓ «fi¯ÏËÛË», ‰Â‰Ô̤ÓÔ˘ fiÙÈ Ù¤ÙÔÈ· ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈÌÂÓÈο ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ›Ù ‰ÂÓ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó Î·È Â›Ó·È ·‰‡Ó·ÙÔ Ó· ˘¿ÚÍÔ˘Ó, fiˆ˜ ÚԷӷʤÚıËÎÂ, ›Ù ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ÓÔÌÔ-ıÂÙË̤ӷ ÂÂȉ‹ ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÈÌ·, ›Ù ÙÔ ·ÚÌfi‰ÈÔ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi ÁÚ·-Ê›Ô, Ô˘ ÂÓ ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ӈ ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿, ηıÒ˜ Î·È Ë ∆ÔÈ΋ ∞ÛÙ˘ÓÔÌ›· ‰ÂÓ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÈ΋ Î·È ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· Ó· ÚÔ‚Ô‡Ó Û ÔÔÈÔ‰‹ÔÙ ¤ÏÂÁ¯ÔÔ˘Û›·˜ Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ÙËÓ Ë¯ËÙÈ΋ –Î·È ÌfiÓÔÓ– fi¯ÏËÛË (ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ÔÚÈṲ̂-Ó˜ ÔÛÔÙÈΤ˜ ÚԉȷÁڷʤ˜ Î·È ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ˜ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˜ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ).

°È· ·˘ÙÔ‡˜ ¿ÏψÛÙ ÙÔ˘˜ ÏfiÁÔ˘˜, Ù· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù· –ÁÈ· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·– Ù˘ ηı·ÚÈfiÙË-Ù·˜ («ÛÎÔ˘›‰È·») Ú˘ıÌ›˙ÔÓÙ·È ·fi Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˜ ˘ÁÂÈÔÓÔÌÈΤ˜ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ Î·È ÂϤÁ¯Ô-ÓÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ ·ÚÌfi‰È· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Ù‹ÚËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ˘ËÚÂÛ›· Î·È fi¯È ·fi ·Ó·ÚÌfi‰È· ÔÏÂÔ‰Ô-ÌÈο ÁÚ·Ê›·.

∂›Û˘, «Ù· ΢ÎÏÔÊÔÚȷο ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù·» –¤ÓÓÔÈ· ıÂÛÌÈο ·fiÚÈÛÙË– ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·ÈÛ ‰‡Ô Èı·Ó¤˜ ÂΉԯ¤˜: 1. ¶ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù· Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙË ÓÔÌÈÌfiÙËÙ· ΛÓËÛ˘, ÛÙ¿Û˘, ÛÙ¿ıÌ¢Û˘ ηÈ

·ÓÂÊԉȷÛÌÔ‡ ÙˆÓ Ô¯ËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ô˘ Â͢ËÚÂÙÔ‡Ó ÙË ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· Ù˘ οı ¯Ú‹Û˘ ηÈÂϤÁ¯ÔÓÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ ·ÛÙ˘ÓÔÌ›·, Ë ÔÔ›· ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÂÓËÌÂÚÒÛÂÈ ÙÔ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi, ‰›-ÓÔÓÙ¿˜ ÙÔ˘ ¤Ó· ·Û·Ê¤˜ ÛÙÔÈ¯Â›Ô ÌÈ·˜ Èı·Ó‹˜ fi¯ÏËÛ˘.

2. ¶ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù· Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙËÓ Î·ı’ fiÏ· ÓfiÌÈÌË ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚË-Û˘ Î·È ÙˆÓ Ô¯ËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ù˘, ·ÏÏ¿ ÂÍ·ÚÙÒÓÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ ÂӉ¯fiÌÂÓË ÓfiÌÈÌË ‹ ·Ú¿-ÓÔÌË Î›ÓËÛË, ÛÙ¿ÛË Î·È ÛÙ¿ıÌ¢ÛË ÙˆÓ Ô¯ËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ, ÙˆÓ Ô¯ËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ‰ÈÂÚ¯ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ (ÔÈ ÔÔ›ÔÈ ÌÔÚ› .¯. Ó· Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈÔ‡Ó ÌÈ· ÛÙ¿ÛË Â› ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Ó· Û˘ÓÔÌÈÏ‹ÛÔ˘Ó Ì ¤Ó·Ó ÂÏ¿ÙË Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘) ‹ ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù· Ô˘ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ·fi ÙËÓ Î›ÓËÛË Î·È ÛÙ¿ÛË Â› ÙÔ˘ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˘ Â˙ÒÓ, ›Ù ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ Â›Ù‰ÈÂÚ¯ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Ô˘ Û˘ÓÔÌÈÏÔ‡Ó Ì ÂÏ¿Ù˜ –ηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ‰ËÏ·‰‹ Û˘ÓËı¤Ûٷ٘ ÛÂfiÏ· Ù· ÂÏÏËÓÈο ı¤ÚÂÙÚ·. ™Â ·˘Ù‹ ÙË ‰Â‡ÙÂÚË ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË, Ë ·fiÚÈÛÙË ‰È·›ÛÙˆÛË ÂÎ̤ÚÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘ ¢‹ÌÔ˘ ‹ Ù˘ ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ ÀËÚÂÛ›·˜ οÔÈˆÓ «Î˘ÎÏÔÊÔÚÈ·ÎÒÓ ÚÔ-‚ÏËÌ¿ÙˆÓ» Û˘Ó¿ÁÂÙ·È ÙËÓ ÙÈ̈ڛ· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ (ÎÏ›ÛÈÌÔ), ÏfiÁˆ η΋˜ ΢-ÎÏÔÊÔÚȷ΋˜ ·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË ‹ ÙÔ˘ ‰ÈÂÚ¯fiÌÂÓÔ˘.

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ... 85

∂›Ó·È ÂÌÊ·Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ Ë Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë ·˘Ù‹ ·ÓÙ›ÎÂÈÙ·È Û οı ·Ú¯‹ ‰Èη›Ô˘. ∂ÈϤÔÓ, ÔÈÂÓÙ¿ÛÂȘ (΢ÎÏÔÊÔÚȷΤ˜, fi¯ÏËÛ˘ Î.Ï.), Ô˘ ÂÓ‰¤¯ÂÙ·È Ó· ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁËıÔ‡Ó ÛÙÔ ÔÈÎÈ-ÛÙÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ·fi ÌÈ· ÔÔÈ·‰‹ÔÙ ¯Ú‹ÛË, Â›Ó·È ¤Ó· ÛÙÔÈ¯Â›Ô Ô˘ ÂÎÙÈÌ¿Ù·È ÂÎÙˆÓ ÚÔÙ¤ÚˆÓ Û ¤Ó· ‰È¿Ù·ÁÌ· ¯Ú‹ÛÂˆÓ Á˘ Î·È ·Ó·ÏfiÁˆ˜ ÔÚ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì ۷ʋÓÂÈ· ÔÈÂÈÙÚÂfiÌÂÓ˜ ‹ ÌË ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ. ∂¿Ó ‰ËÏ·‰‹ Ë ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙÔ˘ ·Ó·„˘ÎÙËÚ›Ô˘ Â›Ó·È ·ÓÂÈı‡ÌË-ÙË ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÔÔÈ·‰‹ÔÙ ÓËÛȈÙÈ΋ ÃÒÚ·, ÙfiÙ ڤÂÈ Û·ÊÒ˜ Ó· ÚÔ‚ÏÂÊı› Ë ··Áfi-ÚÂ˘Û‹ Ù˘ Î·È fi¯È –ÁÈ· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·– Ó· ÂÈÙÚ¤ÂÙ·È Î·Ù’ ·Ú¯‹Ó Ë ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÌÂÚÈÎÒÓ·Ó·„˘ÎÙËÚ›ˆÓ Î·È ÂÓ Û˘Ó¯›· Ó· ·ÚÂÌ‚·›ÓÂÈ Ô ¢‹ÌÔ˜ Î·È ÙÔ ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎfi, ÚÔÎÂÈ-̤ÓÔ˘ Ó· ÎÏ›ÛÂÈ ÙȘ ÂÈÙ˘¯¤ÛÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ Û˘ÁΤÓÙÚˆÓ·Ó ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂ-ÚÔ˘˜ ÂÏ¿Ù˜ Î·È Û˘ÓÂÒ˜ ÙȘ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ Èı·ÓfiÙËÙ˜ ÂÌÊ¿ÓÈÛ˘ «Î˘ÎÏÔÊÔÚÈ·ÎÒÓÚÔ‚ÏËÌ¿ÙˆÓ».

∆· ›‰È· ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ ÈÛ¯‡Ô˘Ó Î·È ÁÈ· ÙËÓ fi¯ÏËÛË Ô˘ ÂӉ¯Ô̤ӈ˜ ÚÔηÏÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÙËÓ«ÚÔۤϢÛË Î·È ·Ô¯ÒÚËÛË ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ». ¢ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ‰˘Ó·Ùfi ‰ËÏ·‰‹ Ó· ÙÈ̈ÚÂ›Ù·È Ë ÂÈ-¯Â›ÚËÛË ÂÂȉ‹ Ô ÂÏ¿Ù˘ ›Ûˆ˜ οÓÂÈ ıfiÚ˘‚Ô fiÙ·Ó ¤Ú¯ÂÙ·È ‹ fiÙ·Ó Ê‡ÁÂÈ (ÌÈÏ¿ÂÈ ‰˘Ó·-Ù¿, ·Ú¿ÁÂÈ ıfiÚ˘‚Ô ÙÔ ‰›Î˘ÎÏÔ ‹ ÙÔ ·˘ÙÔΛÓËÙfi ÙÔ˘ Î.Ï.). ∞˘Ù¿ Â›Ó·È ı¤Ì·Ù· Ô˘ Û¯Â-Ù›˙ÔÓÙ·È ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÙÈο Ì ÙÔÓ ÂÏ¿ÙË Î·È ÙÔ Û‡ÓÓÔÌÔ ‹ ÌË Ù˘ Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔÚ¿˜ ÙÔ˘ ηÈÂϤÁ¯ÔÓÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ ∞ÛÙ˘ÓÔÌ›· Î·È fi¯È ·fi ÙËÓ Î¿ı Âȯ›ÚËÛË.

∂›Û˘ ηı›ÛÙ·Ù·È Û·Ê¤˜, fiÙÈ Â¿Ó ‰È·ÈÛÙˆı› ·fi ÙËÓ ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋ ÀËÚÂÛ›· ÌÈ·Ù¤ÙÔÈÔ˘ Ù‡Ô˘ «fi¯ÏËÛË» Â›Ó·È ÙÂÏ›ˆ˜ ·‰‡Ó·ÙÔ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË Ó· Û˘ÌÌÔÚʈı› ÌÂÙÔ˘˜ ÔÔÈÔ˘Û‰‹ÔÙ «fiÚÔ˘˜ ÁÈ· ÙË ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË Ù˘ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ÙËÓ ¿ÚÛË Ù˘ fi¯ÏË-Û˘ ·˘Ù‹˜» (‰¿ÊÈÔ ‰), ‰Â‰Ô̤ÓÔ˘ fiÙÈ Î¿ÙÈ Ù¤ÙÔÈÔ ı· Û‹Ì·ÈÓ ›Ù fiÙÈ ı· ‰ÈÒ¯ÓÂÈ Â-Ï¿Ù˜ ›Ù fiÙÈ ı· ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛÂÈ ·Ôχو˜ ·Ú¿ÓÔ̘ Ú·ÎÙÈΤ˜ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ Ù˘ Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔ-Ú¿˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ›‰Ô˘˜ ÙˆÓ ‰ÈÂÚ¯ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ ‹ ÌË ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ Î·ıÒ˜ Î·È ·Ú¿ÓÔ̘ ÂÌÂÈÚÈΤ˜Ú·ÎÙÈΤ˜ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È¢ı¤ÙËÛË Ù˘ ΢ÎÏÔÊÔÚ›·˜ Î·È Ù˘ ÛÙ¿ıÌ¢Û˘.

∆¤ÏÔ˜, ·fi fiÛ· Û˘ÓÔÙÈο ÂÚÈÁÚ¿ÊËÎ·Ó Â›Ó·È ÚÔÊ·Ó¤˜, fiÙÈ ÔÈ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙȘ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ ı· ‰È¢ڇÓÔ˘Ó ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ÙÔ Â‰›Ô Û˘Ó·ÏÏ·Á‹˜ Î·È ·ÓÙÈ·Ú¿ıÂÛ˘ ÌÂٷ͇ԯÏÔ˘Ì¤ÓˆÓ ‹ ÌË Î·ÙԛΈÓ, ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÒÓ, ¢‹ÌÔ˘, ¶ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ÀËÚÂÛÈÒÓ Î·È∞ÛÙ˘ÓÔÌ›·˜.

3. ™˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù·

∞fi ÙËÓ ÂͤٷÛË ÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈÌ¤ÓˆÓ È‰È·›ÙÂÚ· ÎÚ›ÛÈÌˆÓ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ¶.¢. ÁÈ·ÙË ÃÒÚ· ∫˘ı‹ÚˆÓ ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ÂÈÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈο Ù· ·ÎfiÏÔ˘ı· Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù·:

·. ∆Ô Î›ÌÂÓÔ ‰È·Ó¤ÂÙ·È ·fi ¤Ó·Ó ȉÈfiÙ˘Ô ÌÔÚÊÔÎÚ·ÙÈÎfi ·˘Ù·Ú¯ÈÛÌfi Î·È Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó··ÁÓÔ› ÙȘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ Î·È ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚÔ˘˜ Ô˘ Û˘ÌÌÂÙ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·fi ÎÔÈÓÔ‡ÛÙËÓ ÙÂÏÈ΋ ‰È·ÌfiÚʈÛË Ù˘ Û¯¤Û˘ ÌÂٷ͇ ‰ËÌfiÛÈÔ˘ Î·È È‰ÈˆÙÈÎÔ‡ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ ÛÙÔ Â-‰›Ô ÂÓfi˜ ÔÔÈÔ˘‰‹ÔÙ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡ ÔÈÎÈÛÌÔ‡. ∫·Ù·Ï‹ÁÂÈ ¤ÙÛÈ Û ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ Ô˘·ÏÏÔÈÒÓÔ˘Ó ·ÓÙ› Ó· ÚÔÛÙ·ÙÂ‡Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Û· ÔÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ ‰È¿ÚıÚˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ¯ÒÚÔ˘.

86 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

‚. ∂Á›ÚÂÙ·È ÙÔ Â‡ÏÔÁÔ ÂÚÒÙËÌ· ÙÔ˘ ÁÈ·Ù› ‰È·Ù˘ÒÓÂÙ·È Ì ÙfiÛÔ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ÙÚfiÔ ÌÈ·ÏËıÒÚ· ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ ÚԉȷÁÚ·ÊÒÓ ˘fi ÌÔÚÊ‹ ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘, ·ÊÔ‡ Ô¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô˜ Î·È Ë ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË ·˘ÙÒÓ ·ÎÚÈ‚Ò˜ ÙˆÓ ÔÈÎ›ÏˆÓ ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁÈÎÒÓ ıÂÌ¿ÙˆÓ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ÙÔ Î·Ù’ ÂÍÔ¯‹Ó ‰›Ô ·ÚÌÔ‰ÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙˆÓ ∂¶∞∂ Â‰Ò Î·È ‰ÂηÂٛ˜. £·‹Ù·Ó Û·ÊÒ˜ ÚÔÙÈÌfiÙÂÚÔ (Î·È ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ) ¤Ó· Ù¤ÙÔÈÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ Ó· ÌËÓ «Î·-ÏÔ˘ÒÓÂÈ» ÙËÓ ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋ Û‡ÓıÂÛË Û ¤Ó· ·ÌÊÈÏÂÁfiÌÂÓÔ Î·È ·ÚÂÚÌËÓ‡ÛÈÌÔÓÔÌÈÎfi Û¯‹Ì· ·ÏÏ¿ Ó· ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÌÈ· ˘Ô‚ÔËıËÙÈ΋ ÂÓ‰Ô¸ËÚÂÛȷ΋ ÂÓË̤ڈÛË ÙÔ˘À.¶∂.Ãø.¢.∂. ÚÔ˜ ÙȘ ∂¶∞∂. ¶·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ·, ı· ÌÔÚÔ‡Û ӷ ÙÂıÔ‡Ó Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ÂÈÏÔÁ‹˜ ÙˆÓ ÌÂÏÒÓ ∂¶∞∂ Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙËÓ Î·Ù¿ÚÙÈÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ηıÒ˜ Î·È Ó·˘¿ÚÍÂÈ ÌÈ· ‰È·‰Èηۛ· ÂÈÌfiÚʈۋ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ¿Óˆ ÛÙ· ÂȉÈÎfiÙÂÚ· ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ· ˙ËÙ‹-Ì·Ù· (·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡ ÂÚȯÔ̤ÓÔ˘).

Á. ¶·Ú·ÙËÚÂ›Ù·È ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚ· ÌÈ· Úfi¯ÂÈÚË Î·È ·Û·Ê‹˜ ‰È·Ù‡ˆÛË ˘fi ÌÔÚÊ‹ Ù¯ÓÈ΋˜¤ÎıÂÛ˘ Î·È fi¯È Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙȘ ÂȉÈΤ˜ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÂÓfi˜ ÓÔÌÈÎÔ‡ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘. ∂›Ó·È ÂÌÊ·-Ó‹˜ Ë ÂÏÏȤÛÙ·ÙË ÓÔÌÈ΋ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›· Î·È ÔÚÈṲ̂Ó˜ ‰È·Ù¿ÍÂȘ ÂϤÁ¯ÔÓÙ·È ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ÙË Û˘ÓÙ·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜.

‰. √È Ú˘ıÌ›ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ¯Ú‹ÛÂȘ Á˘ Â›Ó·È ÌË ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛÈ̘, Â›Ó·È ·ÓÔȯ٤˜ Û ÂÚÌËÓÂ›Â˜Î·È ·ÚÂÚÌËÓ›˜ Ù˘ ·Ó·ÚÌfi‰È·˜ Ó· ÂÚÌËÓ‡ÛÂÈ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈ΋˜ ˘ËÚÂÛ›·˜, ÂÌÂ-ÚȤ¯Ô˘Ó ηÈÓÔÊ·Ó›˜ ıÂÛÌÈΤ˜ ¤ÓÓÔȘ ·Ó·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ˜ Ì ٷ ̤¯ÚÈ ÙÒÚ· ÈÛ¯‡ÔÓÙ·Î·È Î·ıÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ÂÓ Ù¤ÏÂÈ ÙË ‰È·‰Èηۛ· ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ ÙÔ˘˜ ‰È·‚ÏËÙ‹ Î·È ·Ó·ÍÈfiÈÛÙË.

Â. ∆Ô fiÏÔ ıÂÛÌÈÎfi Ï·›ÛÈÔ ‰ÂÓ ˘ÔÛÙËÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ·fi Ì˯·ÓÈÛÌÔ‡˜ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ Ù˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔ-Á‹˜ ÙÔ˘ ηıÒ˜ Î·È ·fi Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο ‹ ¿ÏÏ· ΛÓËÙÚ·.

§¤ÍÂȘ-ÎÏÂȉȿ

∂¶∞∂, ÚÔ΋ÈÔ, Û˘ÓÙ·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·, ÌÔÚÊÔÏÔÁ›·, ·ÏÏÔ›ˆÛË, ÚÔÛÙ·Û›·, ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔ-Á‹, ̤وÔ, ·Ó¿Ù˘ÁÌ·, ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·, fi¯ÏËÛË.

π‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È ıÂÛÌÈ΋ ¤ÎÊÚ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÒÓ ÔÏÂÔ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈÎÒÓ... 87

µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·

µ·ÚÂÏ›‰Ë˜ °. (1999) ¶ÚÔÙÂÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ ¶Ï·›ÛÈÔ √ÈÎÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ∞Ó·Ï¿ÛÂˆÓ ÛÙÔÓ ∞ÛÙÈÎfi ηȶÂÚÈ·ÛÙÈÎfi ∂ÏÏ·‰ÈÎfi ÃÒÚÔ. ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜, £ÂÛÌÈΤ˜, ∂ȯÂÈÚËÛȷΤ˜, ¶ÔÏÂÔ-‰ÔÌÈΤ˜ ™˘ÓÈÛÙÒÛ˜, Û. 428-430, ∂ª¶ / ∆ÔÌ. ∞∫∂¢ (¢È‰. ¢È·ÙÚ.), ∞ı‹Ó·.

°ÚËÁÔÚ¿Î˘ ¶., ª·ÎÚ‹ ∂., ªÈÁ¿‰Ë ™., ¡ÙÂÏÏ¿˜ °., ™ËÏȈÙÔÔ‡ÏÔ˘ §., ÷ڷϿÌÔ˘˜¢. (1983) ∫‡ıËÚ·, ª¤ÏÈÛÛ·, ∞ı‹Ó·.

π·Îˆ‚›‰Ë˜ ¢. ÃÚ. (1978) ÃÒÚ· ¶¿ÙÌÔ˘, Û. 7-12, ∞ı‹Ó·. ICOMOS (1990) ¢ÈÂıÓ‹˜ ÿÚÙ· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ¶ÚÔÛÙ·Û›· ÙˆÓ πÛÙÔÚÈÎÒÓ ¶fiψÓ, (ÌÂÙ¿ÊÚ,

·fi ICOMOS INFORMATION, Ù¢¯. 2/1987), ∞ı‹Ó·. ∞fiÊ·ÛË 76/28 ÙÔ˘ ™˘Ì-‚Ô˘Ï›Ô˘ Ù˘ ∂˘ÚÒ˘ – ∂ÈÙÚÔ‹ ÀÔ˘ÚÁÒÓ.

À¶¶√ ¢È‡ı˘ÓÛË µ˘˙·ÓÙÈÓÒÓ Î·È ªÂÙ·‚˘˙·ÓÙÈÓÒÓ ªÓËÌ›ˆÓ (2001) ∂ÓÂÙÔ› Î·È πˆ-·ÓÓ›Ù˜ πfiÙ˜. ¢›ÎÙ˘· √¯˘ÚˆÌ·ÙÈ΋˜ ∞Ú¯ÈÙÂÎÙÔÓÈ΋˜, ÂÈÌ. ¤Î‰. ∆ÛÈÙÔ‡ÚË∞Ì. Î·È ∆Ú˘ÔÛÎÔ‡ÊË ∞., ∞ı‹Ó·.

º∂∫ 1009/18-11-2002, Ù¢¯. 4Ô.

88 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation& the Win-Win-Win Model Case Study:"Women Cooperative Gargaliani"

Leonidas A. PapakonstantinidisLocal Government Administration DepartmentTechnological Educational Institute-Kalamata

Abstract

The paper deals with knowledge transfer and knowledge creation, applied on Nashnon-cooperative game theory as a creative approach to conflict resolution.

In particular, it focuses on "sensitization" process –a form of knowledge creation– asthe reaction to a given information influenced socioeconomic behavior and therefore,pure individual strategies in the bargain, leading them to converge.

It may be concerned as an extension to Nash "win-win model" (according to whichboth parties involved in a negotiation may formulate winning strategies): Community in-volvement may be seen as a three-way negotiation.

Taking part in such a negotiation each member of the community should ask him/herself three questions: what is the best for me? what is the best for me and for the others?and what is the best for me, for the others and for the community? Thus, "converging in-dividual strategies" may be created, forming a solid basis for cooperation between com-munity members, thus maximizing the socioeconomic profit for all the involved partiesin a negotiation (win-win-win).

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 89

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 89-108

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∆Ô ¿ÚıÚÔ ‰È·Ú·ÁÌ·Ù‡ÂÙ·È ÙÔ ı¤Ì· Ù˘ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ·˜ Û˘ÌÌÂÙÔ¯È΋˜ ‰È·‰Èηۛ·˜ÛÙÔÓ Û¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi Ù˘ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘ (·ÁÚÔÙÈ΋˜-ÙÔÈ΋˜) ‚·ÛÈ˙fiÌÂÓË ÛÙËÓ ÂÓ‰ÔÁÂÓ‹, ÂÎ ÙˆÓοو ÚÔ˜ Ù· ¿Óˆ ‰ÈÂÚÁ·Û›·, ̤ۈ Ù˘ «Â˘·ÈÛıËÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘» ÙÔ˘ ÙÔÈÎÔ‡ ÏËı˘ÛÌÔ‡,Ë ÔÔ›· ÌÔÚ› Ó· ıˆÚËı›, ˆ˜ «ÔÏÔÎÏËڈ̤ÓË ÏËÚÔÊÔÚ›·» Ô˘ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›, ›Ù ÌÂ-ٷʤÚÂÈ ÁÓÒÛË (‰‡Ó·ÌË-ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·).

∏ «ÏËÚÔÊÔÚ›·», Ë ÔÔ›· ‰È¢ÎÔχÓÂÈ ÙË ÌÂÙ·ÊÔÚ¿ Ù˘ «ÛȈËÏ‹˜» ÁÓÒÛ˘ Û «Îˆ‰È-ÎÔÔÈË̤ÓË», ·Ó·‰Â›¯ÓÂÙ·È ¤ÙÛÈ, Û ϤÍË-ÎÏÂȉ›. ŸÌˆ˜ ·˘Ùfi ‰ÂÓ ·ÚΛ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍËÙ˘ ÙÔÈ΋˜ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ ÓÔÔ‡ÌÂÓ˘ ˆ˜ ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÌ¤ÓÔ «Û‡ÛÙËÌ·» Ô˘ ‰È·ı¤ÙÂÈ «¢È‡ı˘ÓÛË»(‰ËÏ·‰‹ ÛÙfi¯Ô) Î·È «∂ÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·»(·ÌÊ›‰ÚÔÌË ÏËÚÔÊfiÚËÛË) ∏ ÏËÚÔÊÔÚ›· ·ÔÎÙ¿ÓfiËÌ· ÌfiÓÔÓ fiÙ·Ó ·ÍÈÔÔÈËı› ÛÙËÓ «¢È·Ú·ÁÌ¿Ù¢ÛË», ÓÔÔ‡ÌÂÓË Ì¤Û· ·fi ÙËÓ ‰È·ÛÙ·Ï-ÙÈ΋ Ù˘ ÂÚÌËÓ›· ÁÈ· Ó· ηχ„ÂÈ Î·È ÙËÓ ‰ÈÂÚÁ·Û›· Ù˘ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘. ÕÏψ˜, Ë ÏËÚÔÊÔÚ›··Ú·Ì¤ÓÂÈ ˆ˜ «·ÓÂÎÏ‹ÚˆÙË ÁÓÒÛË» ∞ÓÙÏÒÓÙ·˜ ÂÚÂı›ÛÌ·Ù· ·fi ÙËÓ «£ÂˆÚ›· ÙˆÓ ¶·È-ÁÓ›ˆÓ» Ô˘ ·Ó¤Ï˘Û·Ó ÙËÓ ‰È·Ú·ÁÌ¿Ù¢ÛË, ˆ˜ ·È¯Ó›‰È «Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔÚ¿˜ Î·È ·ÓÙȉڿÛÂ-ˆÓ», ‰È·ÈÛÙÒÓÂÙ·È fiÙÈ ÌÈ· ÈÔ Î·Ï‹ (2-ÚfiÛˆË) ÏËÚÔÊÔÚ›· Û˘ÓÈÛÙ¿ «‰‡Ó·ÌË» ÛÙÔ ‰È·-Ú·ÁÌ·Ù¢ÙÈÎfi ·È¯Ó›‰È Ô˘ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Ô‰ËÁ‹ÛÂÈ Â›Ù Û «Î·ı·Ú¤˜ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈΤ˜ ӛ΢» ·¤-Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙÔÓ ÏÈÁfiÙÂÚÔ ÏËÚÔÊÔÚË̤ÓÔ, ›Ù (Nash) Û ™ÙÈÁÌÈ·›· «∞Ó·ÎÏ·ÛÙÈο ™˘ÓÂÚÁ·-Û›·˜» (·Ó ·˘Ùfi ÂÈ‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓË ÂÚ›ÛÙ·ÛË) ÒÛÙ ӷ ÎÂÚ‰›˙Ô˘Ó (Ó· ˆÊÂ-ÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È) Î·È Ù· ‰‡Ô ̤ÚË Ù˘ ¢È·Ú·ÁÌ¿Ù¢Û˘.(win-win) ªÈ· ·ÎfiÌ· ÙÂÏÂÈfiÙÂÚË Î·È ÈÔÔÏÔÎÏËڈ̤ÓË ÏËÚÔÊÔÚ›·, fï˜ Ô˘ ı· Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ˘fi„Ë ÙÔ ·ÙÔÌÈÎfi fiÊÂÏÔ˜ Û ۯ¤ÛË ÌÂÙÔ fiÊÂÏÔ˜ Ù˘ ¿ÏÏ˘ ÏÂ˘Ú¿˜ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÙÔ fiÊÂÏÔ˜ Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓfiÙËÙ·˜ (Û·Ó Ó· ‹Ù·Ó ÙÔ ÙÚ›ÙÔ«·fiÚ·ÙÔ» ̤ÚÔ˜ Ù˘ ¢È·Ú·ÁÌ¿Ù¢Û˘) ·Ú¤¯ÂÈ –¤ÛÙˆ Î·È ıˆÚËÙÈο, ÛÙÔ fiÚÈfi Ù˘– ÙË ‰˘-Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈÎÒÓ Ó›Î˘ Ô˘ ı· ÌÂÁÈÛÙÔÔÈÔ‡Ó ÙÔ ·ÙÔÌÈÎfi fiÊÂÏÔ˜, ÙÔfiÊÂÏÔ˜ Ù˘ ¿ÏÏ˘ ÏÂ˘Ú¿˜ Î·È ·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ· ÙÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi fiÊÂÏÔ˜, ‹ ¿Ïψ˜ ÙÔ fiÊÂÏÔ˜ ÔÏfi-ÎÏËÚ˘ Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ (win-win-win). ∏ ‚ÂÏÙÈÛÙÔÔÈË̤ÓË ·˘Ù‹ (ȉ·ÓÈ΋) ηٿÛÙ·ÛË ˘Ô-‰Â›¯ÓÂÈ ÙËÓ «Î·ı·Ú‹ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·» ·Ó¿ÌÂÛ· Û ·ÓıÚÒÔ˘˜ Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÚÔÛ˘ÌʈӋÛÂÈοÔÈ· «Û˘ÌÌ·¯›·». ∞Ï¿ ÂÓÂÚÁÒÓÙ·˜ Ô Î·ı¤Ó·˜ ÁÈ· ÏÔÁ·ÚÈ·ÛÌfi ÙÔ˘, ‰È·ı¤ÙÔÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ«Ù¤ÏÂÈ·» ÏËÚÔÊfiÚËÛË Î·Ù·Ï‹ÁÔ˘Ó Û ·˘Ùfi ÙÔ ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ·, Û ÌÈ· ÔÚȷ΋ ηٿÛÙ·ÛË ÏÂÈ-ÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ ÙˆÓ «™ÙÈÁÌÈ·›ˆÓ ∞Ó·ÎÏ·ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ™˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·˜». ∏ ÌÂϤÙË ÂÚ›ÙˆÛ˘ Ô˘ ·-Ú·Ù›ıÂÙ·È ÂÓÈÛ¯‡ÂÈ ÙËÓ ÚÔÙÂÈÓfiÌÂÓË ı¤ÛË, ÙÂÎÌËÚÈÒÓÔÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ ¿Ô„Ë ˆ˜ Ô Û˘ÏÏÔÁÈÛÌfi˜·˘Ùfi˜ ÌÔÚ› Ó· ¤¯ÂÈ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÛÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ÙˆÓ ·ÁÚÔÙÈÎÒÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ.

Key-words

Social process, Socialization, Sensitization, Information, integrated information, learn-ing, knowledge creation, tacit knowledge, codified knowledge sympathized knowledge, con-ceptual knowledge, systemic knowledge, neural and spatial interaction, bargaining problem,non-cooperative game, pure personal strategies, innovation, technological changes.

90 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

1.1. Introduction

The paper deals with "sensitization", as a form of integrated information (knowledgecreation and knowledge transfer), based on a 3-person pure individual strategies’ interac-tion (decision making). It could be concerned as an extension to Nash "non-cooperativegame" theory.

It concerns the field of social sciences, especially, social behavior and socializationprocess, introducing a new methodological tool in planning regional and local develop-ment: Based on "links" between "tacit" knowledge and "codified" knowledge, as well asbetween the "sympathized", "conceptual" and "systemic" knowledge, in the framework ofneural, regional (and local) networks, it could be proved to be a useful methodologicaltool for policy and decision makers, in planning and achieving the development process.It has been applied by the author more than 39 times –at empirical level– in promoting a"team psychology" for establishing rural women cooperatives, in different Greek rural ar-eas (a case-study is referred).

Scientific knowledge (even the most recent, 2002) in this field has been used by the au-thor in a synthesis, on which, personal scientific contribution has been based.

The specific "field" is mainly covered by the following scientific approaches (from dif-ferent directions):

1. "Learning in neural spatial interaction models: A statistical Perspective" (Fischer M.M., 2002).

2. "The essential John Nash" (Kuhn W.H. and Nasar S., 2001).

3. "Cybernetique et Materialisme Dialectique" (Guillaumaud J., trnsl,1963).

4. "The Sensitized Community" (Papakonstantinidis, trnsl, 2002).

1.2. Reference to literature connecting to the suggested "idea"

During the first post-war period, N. Wienner (1948) highlighted the art of "cybernet-ic" suggested by Platonas (427-347 b.C). [J. Guillaumaud,1963, p. 17], according to whichany system incorporates direction and communication. Wienner (1948, p18) had also sug-gested that information –as a form of energy– should to be the crucial "link" between di-rection and communication, or, the feed-back effect (J. Guillaumaud, 1963) coming upfrom communication ("reroaction" - Brillouin L., 1955,p.33).Alternately, "information"facilitates "tacit" knowledge’s externalization: It transfers "tacit" knowledge to "codified"knowledge and then, to the "systemic" knowledge (Fischer M. M., 2002, p 10) throughneural networks. Neural spatial interaction modeling (Fischer M.M., 2002, pp 12-14) in-troduces the organizational knowledge, as a complex interactive process, characterizedby a continuous and dynamic interaction between the two forms of knowledge: tacit andcodified. Human relations are based on the above knowledge division.

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 91

From the other hand, socioeconomic relations –as a part of human relations– includethe bargaining problem Despite the rise of the marketplace with millions of buyers andsellers, who never interact directly, one-one deal between individuals, corporations, gov-ernments or unions, economists assumed (Kuhn W. H. - Nasar S, 2001) that the outcomeof a two-way bargaining was determined by psychology and was therefore outside therealm of economics [zero-sum, two players game –win-lose]. They had no formal frame-work, for thinking about how parties to a bargain would interact. Each participant in anegotiation was expected to benefit more by cooperation, than acting alone. Nash J.F(1951-introduction) visualized a deal as the outcome of either a process of negotiations,or else independent strategizing by individuals, each pursuing his own interest (win-win).

From a different point of view, "sensitization" is a continuous process, through whicha community becomes aware of the capacities and talents of its members as well as thepotential of the resources that are available to it and sets a target for local development,and it is the key-point of public involvement. That could be achieved through a "team psy-chology" local population’s spirit round a "flag theme" at local level, providing it with thecollective choice and a new value system at local level, or, a step towards public partici-pation (Papakonstantinidis L.A, 2002).

As a methodological tool, Sensitization" may be concerned as a form of knowledgecreation leading to "integrated information", It facilitates tacit knowledge from one per-son to be transferred to another person, as a "codified message", thus to be incorporated,as a conceptual knowledge, in a cross-road neural, regional, or local network proce-dure(Fischer M.M, 2002) Conceptual knowledge influences –through the sensitizationprocedure– individual behavior towards socialization, thus, leading pure individual strate-gies and the community (as the third "invisible" part in the bargain) towards convergingand therefore, developing sensitized strategies, so each of the three parts to win (win-win-win). That is the paper contribution.

1.3. The concept

Following the previous approach, the suggested form of "integrated information" letspeople plan pure individual strategies in the bargain, each of them taking into account:

ñ what is the best for me, personally

ñ what is the best for me and for the others (as it maximizes my personal profit)

ñ what is the best for me, for the others and for the community as the "third" part:

The last one, suggested in this paper –based on "sensitization"– may be proved to bestronger than the previous ones, as it incorporates pure individual sensitized strategies,based on the "integrated information" (market, real personal needs, social needs, com-munity needs, environmental priorities etc). It is the result of a soft compromise between

92 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

individual pursuit and social welfare, as the outcome of a better conceptual knowledge.The three forms of individual pure strategies are corresponded [1-1], to the followingforms of the bargaining problem:

ñ zero sum, two players game (von Neuman and Morgenstern, 1947) –win-lose

ñ non-cooperative game/pure individual strategies (J.F.Nash, 1951) – win-win

ñ non-cooperative game/pure individual strategies + sensitization: win-win-win

The last one is based on a "3-person integrated information" which may lead the com-munity members to a pure cooperation. The suggested "idea" could be applied in plan-ning, as well as in decision making, during the development procedure.

(It has already been applied by the author in creating a team psychology, towards es-tablishing women rural tourism cooperatives in Greece, during 1983-2002).

The conclusions of the paper are based on the suggested "integrated information",including "sensitization", through knowledge creation and knowledge transfer, leadingto successive coalitions, until the "pure cooperation" situation, as the limit of theprocess, through the successive converging of "pure individual strategies" due to "sen-sitization".

A case study (Women Cooperative –Gargaliani), from a very recent (2002) experi-ence is referred in the paper, in order to be proved that "sensitization" (in the mean of aform of a 3-person integrated information) could lead to a pure cooperation, between lo-cal people, in a small, less developed and isolated (rural) community.

2. Analysis

2.1. The framework: Direction and Communication-Principles of

Cybernetics

"Cybernetic" has been used first by PLATONAS (Greece, 427-347 b.C), as the art ofleading or governing (a ship, or an animal).and highlighted, early in the post-war period,as a "systems theory" (Wienner N, 1948):

"Any animal or human being or machine operation incorporates two important vari-ables, "direction" and "communication". "Governor" is the provider of that direction onanother person, or animal or machine. The action of giving "direction" takes the form of"information transfer" even if it is, in fact, an order, including the feed-back effect(check-ing) which "closes the system" "Feed-back" has been proved to be an automatic opera-tion" (Guillaumaud, 1963). From this point of view, "cybernetics" introduces the "infor-mation" as a "codified message", which includes both, order and checking the orderachievement (feed-back).

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 93

2.2. The problem

Rural Communities are experienced by underdevelopment, due to the lack of infor-mation flow, low level of labor specification, low productivity of labor, low level of in-vested capital, low population income etc People suffer of a low level of income and liv-ing quality. The result may be isolation, coming from the accumulated disappointment ofthose people, whose choices are exclusively depended on the metropolitan decision mak-ing center.(Cinneide M.O’, 1991) "Who holds the center, governs with the benefits of oc-cupying the information flow" (Wilkinson K. 1991).

Taking into account all the parameters of the "poor cycle", it’s rather impossible, forthose people to succeed a standard of living quality, or even of surviving level through themarket mechanisms and world competition forces (Gannon A, 1990).

In that case, rural community has to try to succeed the suitable "economic size" forthose free market competitiveness reasons, making valuable, its own (natural, environ-mental, architectural and historical) resources and advantages, therefore, promoting its"local identity"(Gannon A, 1990). The key-point in the development procedure is, there-fore, the "community decision" as the first step towards social capital accumulation and"social stabilization" (Wilkinson K., 1991) But how?

How Less Developed Area’s economies, could be able to break the "poor cycle" inwhich they should had been trapped?

The answer should be:Improving the information flow, through regional and local networks, promoting the

spatial diversification(Wilkinson K, 1991) through local innovative applications. ModernInnovation Theory introduces the "knowledge creation and dissemination" at the verycenter of focus.

This theory emphasizes the interactive and the dynamic nature of innovation andknowledge creation system (Fischer M.M 2002).

Intellectually, "bargaining theory" emphasizes "the interactive and the dynamic natureof human relations in an organized community" (The bargaining theory - Nash J.F, 1951)

Therefore, the analysis of this concept is mainly based on these parallel and concrete"systems", "innovations", with knowledge-creation and "human relations" These "sys-tems" are valuable in explaining the new trends in regional development.

It is therefore, necessary, to start with the new trends in regional development policy.

2.3. Knowledge-creation, Technological change: New trends in

Regional Policy

Regional Science is a rich discipline at the cross-roads of economics and geographythat deals with:

94 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ urban and regional economics problemsñ transportation and spatial interaction problemsñ natural resources problems

The progress made in these three major fields could be summarized in:ñ spatial analysisñ regional economic modeling, in particular, spatial interaction modeling andñ regional development and policy analysis

Research on Regional Development and Regional Development Policy has been de-veloped by two major "Schools of thought" that have participated in the debate on inno-vation, knowledge/information and regional development (Fischer M.M, 2001):ñ those, which concentrate on institutions and industrial organizations andñ those concerned with technological change and learning

The first one has been already surpassed by the evolution and the technologicalchange: "Industrial organizations theory" had been a useful methodological "tool" in ex-plaining the development procedure, during the industrial period and the industrialization/urbanization procedure (Poles Theory, Stages of Growth, Balanced and Unbalanced De-velopment e.t.c.)

It is estimated, that during the post-industrial period, research on regional develop-ment, should be better expressed by the second "School of Thought" concerned with tech-nological change and learning, introduced by the Modern Innovation Theory, in terms of:

ñ Knowledge creation and dissemination at the very center of focus. This Modern In-novation Theory emphasizes (as the above referred) the interactive and dynamic na-ture of innovation (Fischer M.M, 2002)

ñ Innovation is viewed as an institutional and localized –not placeless– social process(Fischer M.M, 2002)

ñ Following the previous approaches, based on literature, it is concluded that consider-able advance over the network school of innovation has been made by a decisive shiftin focus from firm to territory, from knowledge –creating firm to knowledge– creat-ing territory, (on which the win-win-win suggested approach has mainly been based).

2.3.1. Innovation and knowledge-creating, as an Interactive Process-Infor-

mation

A system of "innovation" is "a set of actors or entities such as firms, other organiza-tions and institutions that interact in the generation use and diffusion of new –and eco-nomically useful– knowledge in the production process" (Fischer M.M, 2002) There is nogeneral agreement about the specification of the sets of actors and specifications.

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 95

Following the above mentioned, let us see, now, the "innovation" as an interactiveprocess:

Research is interacted with the general scientific and technological knowledge "pool",based on the "logic" of the firm-specific knowledge.

This "knowledge pool" is interacted with a number of firm-specific knowledge base in-teractive systems, i.e potential market, invent and analytic design, redesign and produce,distribute and market (Fischer M.M, 2001).

From the other hand, "knowledge" is the most strategic resource and knowledge cre-ation becomes the key for firms to stay abreast of product and process innovation.

At this point, it is necessary to introduce the term of the "organizational knowledge"as a complex interactive process characterized by a continuous and dynamic interactionbetween two forms of knowledge: "tacit" and "codified". From this point of view, "knowl-edge conversion" –through "information" channels– are both valuable, for innovation dif-fusion and human relation progress. (Papakonstantinidis L. A, 2003).

Literature (Reinsmann, Fischer, Nonaka, Takeuchi and others) introduced variousprocesses of "knowledge conversion" based on the proved and "build" information sys-tems incorporated in an organization (see bellow, 2.2.3).

Possible cases/orders, between "tacit" and "codified" knowledge produce the four (4)major processes of knowledge conversion:ñ Tacit knowledge to tacit knowledge produces the sympathized knowledge (social-

ization).ñ Tacit knowledge to codified knowledge produces the conceptual knowledge (external-

ization).ñ Codified knowledge to tacit knowledge produces the procedural knowledge (internal-

ization).ñ Codified knowledge to codified knowledge produces the systemic knowledge (combi-

nation).

Each of these processes of "knowledge conversion" corresponds [1-1] to a specifictype of information (as a form of human energy) (Papakonstantinidis L. A, 2003), par-ticularly:ñ Social Information-Sensitizationñ External Information-Participationñ Internal Information-Involvementñ Combined Information-Networking

In the case of a mathematical problem, able to accept more than one possible solu-tions, we need more information, so that the number of possible solutions be decreased,until the limit of the "only one solution" (full information).

Concluding, "information" –as a math term– is a function (probability "P") of possiblesolutions before-Po and after-P the information has been taken. (Guillaumaud, 1963) In

96 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

the case of a "full information system", we have Po*P-1 =1 [as the number of possible so-lutions before (Po) the information has been taken is equal to that, after the informationtaken (P)] A set (sum) of more than one information, corresponds to a unique multipli-cation of relations, and teherefore is illustrated in a logarithm function, as it transfers asum to multiplication.

2.3.2. Socioeconomic Relations, as an Interactive Process: Bargaining

Problem

By its turn, each of the specific types of information –corresponded 1-1 to knowledgeconversion processes– may lead individuals in four different types (1-1) of human (socialand economic) behavior, according to "direction" and "communication":ñ Socializationñ Participationñ Public Involvementñ Creating coalitions, or networks

Particularly, information as the tool of knowledge conversion process influences theeconomic behavior of individuals leading them in planning their own pure individualstrategies, in the bargain.

Bargaining is an old problem in socioeconomic theory based on "Utility Theory" Atwo-person bargaining situation involves two individuals who have the opportunity, ei-ther to be competitors each-other (win-lose) [see "games theory", below], or to collabo-rate for mutual benefit in more than one way. In the simple case, no action taken by oneof the individuals without the consent of the other can affect the well-being of the otherone. In fact there is only one decision Economists (particularly, von Neuman and Mor-gentern, 1947) assumed that the outcome of a two-way bargaining was determined by psy-chology and was therefore outside the realm of economics [zero-sum, two players game.Each participant in a negotiation had expected –according to the bargain theory, before1951– to benefit more by cooperation, than acting alone Equally, according that dogma,the terms of deal had depended on the bargaining power of each. No one had discoveredprinciples, by which to winnow unique predictions from a large number of potential out-comes, under the dogma "contract without competition is indeterminate".

3. Review in the Games Theory and the Non Cooperative

Games Theory

This is illustrated in the "Games Theory",(von Neuman and Morgenstern, 1947), ex-plaining the strategies which are developed by individuals who have different needs, in-

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 97

terests and expectations in a "bargain" and try to maximize individual profits (and, cor-responding, to minimize individual costs).

Games Theory may be concerned as the base of strategic plans (good strategies) be-tween two players in its pure version. It is a theory of explaining "reactions" in termsof strategies If the result for the one player is "good", then it should be "not good" forthe other. If one player is the winner, then the other shoud be the looser.(Filinis C,1973). Von Neumann and Morgenstern have developed a very fruitful theory of two-person zero-sum games. "...Their book also contains a theory of n-person games of atype which would call "cooperative". This theory is based on an analysis of the interre-lationships of the various coalitions which can be formed by the players of thegame...Our theory on contradistinction is based on the absence of coalitions In that itis assumed that each participant acts independently, without collaboration of commu-nication with any of the others...The notion of an equilibrium point is the basic ingre-dient for the N.C games theory. This notion yields a generalization of the concept of thesolution of a two-person zero-sum game.....

It turns out that the set of equilibrium points of a two-person zero-sum game is sim-ply the set of all pairs of opposing "good strategies"......" (Nash, 1951)

From this point of view, the resulting sum should be zero, (zero-sum, two playersgame), but community as an entity derives a zero sum outcome. In other words, thefundamental problem in nowadays is "what is the bargaining social vision, from a ze-ro-sum game?".

Nowadays, it is estimated (new-marxian theories) that the bargaining process, in itssocial vision has not been finished.

Bargaining process has been promoted by the N.C.G Theory: Indeed, the N.C.G The-ory introduced a concept of "coalitions" or "trusts" in the bargaining problem: Nash J.F(Nobel Prize, 1994) visualized a deal as the outcome of either a process of negotiations,or else independent strategizing by individuals, each pursuing his own interest.

Following the literature (Kuhn W.H. –Nasar S,2001) the n-persons games should havevalues. A two-person anticipation should be defined as a combination of two one –personanticipations The one-person utility functions may be regarded as applicable to the twopersons anticipations, each giving the result it would give if applied to the correspondingone-person anticipation which is a component of the two-person anticipation. A proba-bility combination of two two-person anticipations is defined by making the correspon-ding combinations for their components. Instead of define a solution directly, Nash askedwhat reasonable conditions any division of gains from a bargain would then to satisfy. Hethen using, under conditions, an ingenious mathematical argument ["An n-person game isa set of n players or positions each with an associate finite set of pure strategies and cor-responding to each player i a payoff function pi which maps the set of all n-tuples of purestrategies into the real numbers" (Nash J.F, 1951)] showed that, a unique solution existsthat maximizes the product of the participants utilities.

98 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

In particular:

A) In the utility theory of the individual, the "concept of anticipation" is the mostimportant. Lets, "A" and "B" two anticipations. Then, if "p" is the property of antici-pations, or the probability and 0 � p � 1, then, there is an anticipation, which werepresent by p(A) + (1 – p)B, which is a combination of the two anticipations. Thereis a probability "p" for the "A" anticipation and a probability "1 – p" for the "B" an-ticipation. Thus assumptions suffice to show the existence of satisfactory utility

function "u", (not unique function) assigning a real number to each anticipation

of an individual.

B) If "A" and "B" represent two individual alternative anticipations and small letters rep-resent real numbers, then a utility function will satisfy the following properties:ñ u(A) > u(B) is equivalent to A is more desirable than B.ñ If 0 � p � 1, then u[pA + (1 – p) B] = puA + (1 – p) u B

C) In the Two person utility Theory there are two individuals in bargaining, or "dealingwith" situation who have the opportunity to collaborate for mutual benefit in morethan one way (In the simple case, no action, taken by the one of individuals withoutthe consent of the other can affect the well-being of the other one. In fact, there is on-ly ONE decision.

D) In n-person-games J. F Nash proved that these games have "values" that is to de-termine what is worth to each player to have the opportunity to engage the game (ex-cept the case of two-person zero-sum games.

E) We may regard the one person utility functions as applicable to the two persons an-ticipations, each giving the result it would give if applied to the corresponding one-person anticipation, which is a component of the two-person anticipation.

F) A probability combination of two two-person anticipations is defined by making thecorresponding combinations for their components Thus, if [A,B] is a two-person an-ticipation and 0 � p � 1 then p [A,B] + (1 – p) [C,D] will be defined as [pA + (1 – p)C + pB + (1 – p)D. The one-person utility function will have the same linearity prop-erty here as the one-person case. From this point of view onwards –when the term an-ticipation is used– it shall mean two-person anticipation (a transportation problemfrom "manifolds" to two-distance problem). In the bargaining situation one anticipa-tion is especially distinguished, the anticipation of no cooperation between bargainers(zero-sum).

G) If u1, u2 are utility functions for two individuals and c(S) represent the "Solution

point in a set "S" which is compact and convex, then, if "a" is a point of "S" and "b"another point of "S" so that u1(b)>u2(a) and u2(b)>u2(a) ⇒ a#c(S).

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 99

For Nash an n-person game is a set of n-players or positions each with an associate fi-nite set of pure strategies and corresponding to each player i a payoff function pi

which maps the set of all n-tuples of pure strategies into the real numbers ("n-tuples"means a set of n items, with each item associated with a different player. From the other,a mixed-strategy (si) are in 1-1 correspondence with each player pure strategies: (si) =

™ a ci a i a, ci a ≥ 0 and ™ a ci a = 1 The payoff function pi has a unique extension ton-tuples of mixed strategies which are linear to the mixed strategy of each player [n-lin-ear] the extension is marked by pi pi(s1, s2,…sn), where &= s1, s2,…, sn. An n-tuplehas an equilibrium point if and only if for every player i, Pi (&) = max [pi (&, ri,], (ri=the each player desirable outcome).

Concluding, at any moment –according to the "N. C. G Theory"– there is only one"equilibrium point" that any individual makes –at any moment– the best choices for him-self, in relation with the other persons’ best choices. So there are more than one equilib-rium points of "best choices", introducing the "dynamic" view in the bargaining problem.

4. Conclusions-Synthesis

ñ "Nature" is a field of conflicts and cooperation.ñ "Nature" incorporates "direction" and "communication" (feed-back effect).ñ Nature as the complete system incorporates an objective (direction) and an integrat-

ed information system (communication), as well as the "bargain".ñ Information –as a form of energy– facilitates knowledge (tacit and codified) diffusion,

leading to innovation, technological change, human relations change.In particular:ñ Tacit knowledge to tacit knowledge produces the sympathized knowledge.ñ Tacit knowledge to codified knowledge produces the conceptual knowledge.ñ Codified knowledge to tacit knowledge produces the procedural knowledge.ñ Codified knowledge to codified knowledge produces the combined knowledge.

ñ Human relations, as a part of natural relations follow themñ In particular, the socio-economic relations –as a part of human relations– produce

–according to the four types of knowledge transferred procedure– special forms of thesocio-economic behavior, i. e socialization, externalization, internalization, network-ing, under the constraints defined bellow:ñ Self-love and power are survival conditions.ñ Information is a form of energy, equivalent to "power".ñ Information –as a form of power– is used by owners, for dominating.

By its turn: ñ Individuals, are rationally thinking –at any moment– for personal profit.ñ Any person makes –at any moment– the best choices, for himself.ñ Individuals try –at any moment– to maximize personal profit.

100 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ Bargaining is the essential of a free market "game".ñ This game seems to illustrate the world "deficiencies" in a "new econ-

omy" framework: Development in one place, based on the "extensionprocedure", produces under-development in another place and thequestion is: "How the world resources could be managed, by the "neweconomy" so that to succeed a mutual profit for all the members of the"planet community"?

In particular, the bargaining problem has been explained by the "Games Theory":1. Games theory introduced the concept of a "definite game".2. Games theory is a theory of "conflicts" and "cooperation" –two-person zero-sum.3. According to (1) and (2) "game" has an "end" (Rule of definition).4. According to (1), (2), (3) a game has at the end a winner and a loser.

➤ Nash proved in his "Non Cooperative Games", (1951) that all the players could get towin if they had pure good personal strategies even non-cooperative, emphasizing in-dividual strategies, or the side of individuals.

➤ Nash has also proved the axioms that "in any play of game, one player or the othermust win, but never both" and "since the game is finite with only two possible out-comes and since the players move alternately, with complete information, one of thetwo players must have a winning strategy".

➤ Neuman-Morgenstern have defined the Economic Behavior in Bargaining, throughthe "Game Theory" (two-person zero-sum game): Any form of cooperation is trans-ferred to "two-person zero-sum" game, (A) strategy.

➤ Nash, introduced the idea that a deal is the outcome of either a process of negotiations,or else independent strategizing by individuals, each pursuing his own interest (B)

strategy.

➤ There is an open question coming from the above mentioned theories:If "Nature" is symmetric then, Nash finished the process ?

Let’s see this question in a "linear graphic scheme":

Non-cooperativegame, (Nash)Either cooper.or individual strg

Two-personzero-sum gameNeuman-Morgenstern

Cooperativegame, onlyIt should betransferred toindividual strg

BA?

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 101

Nash "game" has been defined a priori, by strict rules of an "end", as a "competitive

game" based on players instant reaction (individual strategies, formulated through giveninformation).

Following the same "idea", a competitive game should be concerned as a "team win-win-win strategies" based on instant players reaction, after the given integrated infor-mation, let them create the BEST codified knowledge –each for him/her self.

In such a situation, "pure personal strategies" should be the exemption in the bargain,as each of the "parts" –concluding the community, as the third "invisible part" in negoti-ations– should formulate the best knowledge, through the given integrated informa-tion(equal to bargaining power for each of them). But "integrated information" is giventhrough "Sensitization" From this point of view, pure cooperation should be proved tobe the result of the "competitive game", in its limit.

Life, itself is a marvelous cooperation of about two million "competitive" micro-ele-ments "chromosomes".

In that situation we have the "only ONE" equilibrium point, which is the "cooperationpoint", in a non-cooperative bargaining game.

Indeed, a mixed strategy (si) is a collection of non-negative numbers, which have theunit sum and are 1-1 corresponded, with pure strategies of all the involved parts in thebargaining game.

The payoff functions Pi(for the one part), Qi (for the other part), Ri (for the commu-nity) have unique extensions to the n-tuples of mixed strategies(si) which are linear to themixed strategies of all the parts These extensions are marked by "pi", "qi" and "ri" for athree-person game, where, pi=s1,s2,…sn, qi=s1,s2..sn, ri=s1,s2..sn.

An n-tuple system "&" is an equilibrium point, if and only if, for every "i"

lim Pi(&)Qi(&)Ri(&) = max PiQiRi

Information → ∞

5. Proposals

1. A 3-person non cooperative bargaining game in its limit may be a form of COOPER-ATION among the involved parts, in its super-dynamic version, as integrated infor-mation let them create a 3-band codified knowledge, at the same time i.eñ What is best for me, in a specific momentñ What is the best for me in relation with the best for the others, at that momentñ What is the best for me, in relation with the best for the others, as well as, in re-

lation with the best for the community, as an entity, at that moment.

2. If it should be acceptable, then: Each person should make the best choices –at anytime– in relation with the other persons’ best choices, from the one hand, and the

102 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

"community" from the other hand, as the third, invisible part of the negotiations" Thewin-win-win game"

3. Rural community is the "weak partner" in the bargaining game, in terms of the «col-lective choice». In the opposite, rural community may be concerned as a good part-ner in producing and consummating products. This operation is necessary for the sys-tem’s survival and its extension From this point of view, each "person" –included theCommunity– may be "a possible consumer" thus depended on choices = power in theirown possession, in a "reaction system"

4. "Rural Community position", in the bargain must, then be strengthened and, also, en-couraged by the people’s "collective choice", at local level as the result of the Sensiti-zation procedure (at local level)

5. "Sensitization" may be concerned as a form of "transferred knowledge" –a kind of in-formation flow– let people transform their own "tacit knowledge" to "codified knowl-edge" thus to complete their "socialization" procedure, at local level, so each of themto incorporate (the mainstreaming Principle) that his "winning strategy" at any mo-ment, passes through the "Community profit", in terms of environmental protection,social cohesion, community identity, cultural identity, mutual supporting, solidarity.

6. Thus, "Sensitization" –in the form of knowledge creation and knowledge transferred–may be proved to be a useful (rural and local) panning tool, as in most of rural areas,people are going to get an "urban behavior in a rural bias"(Papakonstantinidis, 2002).

7. That presupposes a mutual respect and recognition, among the members of the rural,community In that case, what is need is a "local people sensitization" in order to cre-ate a "team psychology", at local level, as well as an integrated local developmentplan, coming from the base (bottom-up approach)

8. The only one "solution" (the equilibrium point, as above mentioned) should be the"pure cooperation, among the parties, at local level" in order to create a strong bar-gaining "pole", as the result of an "instant reaction" due to given information (trans-ferred knowledge).

9. From the other hand, an "a priori" cooperation, between the negotiators under a legalform, should be concerned a non realistic situation, under the "new economy condi-tions" A form of a non-cooperative operation, is a more realistic version, under thecondition of a non-formal, innate agreement, at local level.

The limit of a non-cooperative bargaining game is a pure cooperation among all theinvolved parts, as it is proved by mathematics, in chapter 4 of this paper.

➤ But, local people have the common sense to understand –according to their informa-tion– that each of them, acting alone has a little power in planning and achieving suc-cessfully individual "winning strategies" in dealing with tour operators or clients in anopen competitive market.

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 103

➤ If individuals, living in a rural community, have an equal information, then, it couldbe possible to understand that, trying to maximize their own profits, during a time pe-riod there is a unique moment in which, the "objective function" of each of these indi-viduals, is going to be maximum, if and only if, they decide to transfer the bargainingproblem, from a non-cooperative form, to another form, which is the absolute coop-eration (in real terms).

➤ The "Sensitized Harmonic Integrated Endogenous Local Development-SHIELD" is arealistic rural development approach, combining "direction" (integrated local devel-opment) with "communication" (sensitized, harmonic, endogenous), according to theS.H.I.E.L.D Model (Papakonstantinidis, 1997).

➤ Rural Development is a much more complicated development procedure in the frame-work of the new economy system, as it is necessary to reverse the poor cycle eco-nomic situation, due to rural community’s small sizes. "Production diversification"and "actively participation" by sensitized local people, is the paper proposal.

➤ Bargaining problem is the main problem under the new economy conditions. Espe-cially, this problem is impeded the rural development procedure, due to rural commu-nity’s small sizes and, in its extension, to "little bargaining power" What is needed maybe proved to be the "information flow" or, "information diffusion", as informationcould be concerned as a "form of energy" equivalent to "power", which is useful in thebargaining "game".

➤ "Information" should be concerned as a complicated term which means, at the sametime, "know-how" and "action", making the know-how valuable. In a non-cooperativeworld, under the new economy conditions, a full information version should be –ac-cording to the above analysis– a "3-person" (manifolds) thinking: "what is the bestfor me, for the others and for the community in a special moment, under special mo-ment circumstances" The only ONE full answer to that question, should be the inte-grated "3-person" information (Po = 1) at the same person.

➤ Rural development is fully depended on this information: Individuals in rural areasmake their own pure strategies, based on a percentage of information, under the non-cooperative "Nash" conditions, with the result of fail and disappointment, as the rulesof the new economy are very strict. Indeed, "who holds the information flow, has thepower" In a competitive open market, who has the "power" is able to make the "win-ning strategies". So "power accumulation" leads to "winning strategies" in the bar-gaining, succeeding more and more "power". Rural community has the only possibili-ty to succeed through local people cooperation "in the limit", in real terms (not in le-gal). That means "if someone could decide, in a moment, a personal pure strategy, on-ly answering to the question "what is best for me", he should make, perhaps, a winningstrategy, but only for one moment, as the next one, under circumstances, he could notmake winning strategies, while cut the communication feed-back effect" Thus, Rural

104 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Development is based on rural community people, participating in a non-cooperativebargaining, through given information, at a special moment. If they had an integratedinformation, then it could be proved that the information sum, probably could leadthem to the absolute cooperation, even if each of them had its own pure strategy (thenon-cooperative game-Nash)

➤ Integrated Endogenous Local Development in Rural Areas must be based –accordingto our proposals– on Local People "Integrated Information", under its double mean("tacit" and "codified" knowledge and action, motivating the knowledge, thus, leadingto "socialization") It must have a "direction" (local population welfare) and "commu-nication" (feed-back information)

➤ Integrated information must be given to local people living in rural areas, through the"sensitization" methodological procedure, at local level. "Sensitization" is the firstand crucial "step", towards integrated endogenous local development, based on localpeople’s "innate inclinations" which lead to " given roles" in the community develop-ment procedure (active "members" of the community, or "active citizens", instead of"individuals", lived in this rural community).

➤ Rural Community, as an entity –with the characteristic of "small economic sizes"– isexperienced by "bargaining problems" in an open market. So, it is necessary for a Rur-al Community to formulate its "social capital at local level", through a cohesive bar-gaining policy, as the outcome of a "minimum convergence" of more than one indi-vidual pure strategies, in a non-cooperative world environment (Papakonstantinidis,2000).

➤ Sensitization as a methodological tool, should be able to create a "team psychology"among local people, thus succeeding, a base of individuals pure strategies’ conver-gence.

➤ Sensitized local people, having accepted and adopted a "3-person" integrated infor-mation, have, now, more possibilities to lead the rural development procedure to theonly ONE winning "sustainable development" strategy, converging individual purestrategies of a non-cooperative "game" (bargaining), to a common development ob-jective. Under the above conditions, convergence procedure of non-cooperative purewinning strategies has in its limit the "absolute cooperation".

Case study: Women Cooperative –Gargaliani

Gargaliani is a small town (typical case of a Greek traditional place) in the South-West Peloponnesos, It is the "capital" of Trifilia District (Nomos Messinias) of about5.500 (2001) habitants [5.953, 1971, 5.430, 1981]

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 105

It is located in a plain, near Marathos, a popular destination for both Greek and for-eign tourists, but, until 2002 local people were employed, basically in the agricultural sec-tor (oil olives, raisin, vegetables etc), fishing and tourism activities, during the summer,with a very low average annual income, between 1,500 and 1,800 euro.

In November of 2002 the E.U Commission "Local Integrated Program" project or-ganized a 3-months training course for local women related to the challenges and oppor-tunities of rural tourism development.

Fifty (50) women took part and this led to the formation of the "Gargaliani Women’sRural Tourism Cooperative, which started with 35 members. The aim of the cooperativewas to support the local economy; to provide a supplementary income to women in thearea; and to improve the social status and cultural level of women villagers.

During the 3-months training course, the "tacit" knowledge was transferred by the EUexperts, to these women, in the form of conceptual and then to "codified" knowledge,through the "collective choice game". Coming from different places (sea coast, plain,mountain places) the 50 women had different interests, as well as, different thoughts aboutthe "form" and the kind of cooperative creation. During the course little by little, somekind of training women’s coalitions, were being formed, as a "team psychology" betweenthem, was being created. E.U experts encouraged them to develop their converging ef-forts in this "team", by sensitizing and involving them to the "community" procedure.

One and half month after starting the training course, women had already decided onwhat they had to do through the collective choice psychological approach:

To create a cooperative mainly engaged in the production of traditional sweets, foodand drinks with traditional recipes and pure material to provide authentic and uniquetastes.

The cooperative started in the very early of 2003, supported by the new mayor (thedentist, Stavros Kalofolias)

Among the delicacies they produce, are sweets, "pate" jams and conserves made ofseasonal fruit; pastries and other traditional food, cheese pies The cooperative also pro-motes traditional local customs through organizing weddings, christenings and other pub-lic celebrations, planned in a way that marks the area’s cultural identity They providecatering services to conferences in and outside the area of municipality (with its local de-partments) Over the time, the women succeeded in building a team spirit encouraged bya small group of younger inhabitants, who acted as an "animator team" under the super-vision of an outside expert (in particular, the author)

Through the game of "collective choice" they found their "flag theme" (Papakonstan-tinidis, 2002, p. 322-"the magic way" & 2003, p.359) namely, the home-made sweets topromote the local identity and "family games" in preparing meals and sweets which areoffered during the first days of August as a cultural activity for tourists. Awareness of lo-cal problems needs and resources was raised among the local community. People got in-volved in the decision making process regarding future development of their area through

106 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

a "business plan" composed in the context of the "Urban Development" E.U Program/Ini-tiative, formed a Local Action Group and started to ask for financial resources.

Now the women cooperative has 35 women and the average annual income per fam-ily gas increased by 2.200 Euro Moreover, young people have begun to return to Gar-galiani and the only primary school in the small town which was planned to close, due tolack of children has stayed open.

Sensitization as a form of knowledge creation &the Win-Win-Win Model... 107

References

Brillouin L.(1955) "Science and Information Theory" Academic Press N.Y -trnsl, pp 33-38Cinneide M.O’ (1991), "Points on what Rural Areas are" special issue Center for Devel-

opment Studies, University College Galway (U.C.G) IRL, special issue, pp 8-12Filinis C. (1973) "Games Theory", KEIMENA Ed, pp. 31, 58-62Fischer M.M (2001) "Spatial Analysis in geography, in Smelser, N.J and Baltes P.B" In-

ternational Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol 22, ElsevierOxford pp 14752-8

Fischer M.M (2002) "Learning in neural spatial interaction models: A statistical perspec-tive" Journal of Geographical Systems 4(3) pp 10, 12-14, 22-28, 33-38

Gannon A(1990) "Rural Development-Strategic Objectives" F.A.O Ed, Vienna, p.74Guillaumaud J 1963, "Cybernetique et Materialism Dialectique" trnsl HRIDANOS Ed,

p.p 17-25, 156-158, 163Kuhn H.W and Nasar S. (2001) "The essential John Nash" Princeton University Press, pp.

31, 43, 56, 85-89, 99-103Nash J. F(1951), "Non Co-operative Game" (Facsimile of Ph.D Thesis) Princeton Univer-

sity Ed. p. 1-13Neuman and Morgenstern:(1947) "Game Theory and Economic Behavior" Princeton

University Press. p.p 135-140Papakonstantinidis L.A (1996), "The Strategy of Development", MAREL-NIKAS Ed,

Vol II, trsl. pp 166-170, 198, 204-210Papakonstantinidis L.A (2002) "The Sensitized Community" Typothito-Dardanos Edi-

tion, trnsl, pp 117-130Papakonstantinidis L.A (2003, March), "The Strategy of Economic and Regional Devel-

opment", Typothito-Dardanos Edition, trnsl, chapter 1, p.p 22-48Papakonstantinidis L.A The S.H.I.E.L.D Model, I.S.A Special Issue (R.C 26), 1997Papakonstantinidis L.A "Sensitization and Involvement the Community", Review of Eco-

nomic Sciences 2003 (in press)Wiener N. 1948, "Cybernetics" John Wiley and Sons Ed, N.Y, pp 14-16Wiener N.1949, "The Human Use of Human Beings" University Press Cambridge, Mass-

achussets, p.p 12-15Wilkinson K. "Social Stabilization: The Role of Rural Society" International Center for

Development Studies U.C.G-IRL, special issue, 1991

108 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Supply Chain Management: Current trends forthe global textile and clothing industry

D. FilippasDept. of TextilesTEI of Peiraeus

N. KoklasDept. of TextilesTEI of Peiraeus

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to examine the developments in the management ofsupply chain relationships, particularly in textile and clothing industry. Such develop-ments have been supported by empirical evidence as they relate to the concept of supplychain management.

Keywords: Supply Chain, Management, Logistics, Inventory, Purchasing, Distribu-tion, Warehousing, Customer Service.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∞Ú¯Èο, Ë ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÌÂϤÙË ‰È·Ù˘ÒÓÂÈ ÌÈ· ·Ó·ÛÎfiËÛË Û fiÙÈ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙËÓ ‰ÔÌ‹ ηÈÙÔ ÂÚȯfiÌÂÓÔ Ù˘ ·Ï˘Û›‰·˜ ÂÊԉȷÛÌÔ‡ fiˆ˜ ·˘Ùfi ¤¯ÂÈ ‰È·ÌÔÚʈı› ÙȘ ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›Â˜‰ÂηÂٛ˜. ∆·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ·, ÔÈ ÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂȘ ·˘Ù¤˜ ˘ÔÛÙËÚ›˙ÔÓÙ·È ·fi ÌÈ· ¤Ú¢ӷ Ô˘ Ú·Á-Ì·ÙÔÔÈ‹ıËΠ۠·ÁÎfiÛÌÈÔ Â›Â‰Ô Î·È Ë ÔÔ›· ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÂÈ ÙȘ ·ÚÔ‡Û˜ Ù¿ÛÂȘ ÛÂÔÙÈ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙȘ ·Ï˘Û›‰Â˜ ÂÊԉȷÛÌÔ‡.

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 109

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 109-131

1. What is Supply Chain Management?

According to our research, this paper has concluded in the following definition in theform provided bellow: "The rationalisation of the progress of materials through the var-ious stages of processing and distribution with the related exchange of information nec-essary for the efficient satisfaction of consumer demand". This definition highlights thekey features of the supply chain which covers the movement and storage of materials,the flow of the information and the conversion of the raw material to the final finishedproduct. The scope of supply chain management includes the route of raw materialsfrom the origin to the final point including the manner by which these products arewarehoused and distributed. The objectives are to maximise supply chain responsive-ness and flexibility to customers, and to minimise total supply chain cycle time, costs,and inventory.

2. Basic Parts of the Supply Chain Management Concept

The structure of a supply chain concerns the physical flow of goods, the managementof information, and organisational structures (Taylor, 1997). Fig.A.1 illustrates such sup-ply chain linkages.

2.1. The Physical flow of goods

The flow of goods through the supply chain is dependent on the logistical administra-tion. It is the most obvious aspect of the supply chain, the features of which are dividedinto two categories: a) fixed points in the chain and b) movement patterns along the chain(Taylor, et. al 1997).

2.1.1. Fixed points in the chain

The fixed points in the chain include functions such as purchasing management, man-ufacturing processes, stock and warehousing management, customer service manage-ment, wholesaling and retailing (Taylor, et. al 1997).

Purchasing Management. In textiles, some materials and services are purchasedfrom sources outside companies’ boundaries. Purchasing management is "the daily man-agement of material flow with the related exchange of information" (Monczka, Trent,Handfield, 1998). The main objective is to obtain the correct equipment, materials, sup-plies and services at the right time, quantity, quality and cost in order to ensure process-es to be efficient and effective (Muhlemann, Oakland, Lockyer, 1992).

110 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Manufacturing Management. Manufacturing represents a complex which need tobe co-ordinated in order to achieve an efficient processing flow (Hill, 1993). The textileand clothing industry is characterised by a high degree of complexity due to the fact thatfew raw materials can be transformed into a wide variety of finished products. Fig.A.2 de-scribes the manufacturing chain.

Inventory Management. Inventory is frequently stored in form of raw material,partly finished or finished products. High levels of inventory will lead to high inventoryholding costs with result to reduce profit and competitiveness. Furthermore, high inven-tory levels lead to some other problems concerning quality, inaccurate demand forecast-ing, unreliable supplier delivery and other operating inefficiencies.

Customer Service Management. The definition of customer service is the "processfor providing significant value added to the supply chain in a cost effective way" (LaLonde,J. B. and Zinszer, HP. 1976). This definition illustrates the trend to think of customer serv-ice as a process-focused orientation as normal part of the supply chain.

2.1.2. Movement patterns along the chain

The second step is to describe the fixed locations in the supply chain and the move-ment patterns linking them. This section describes the logistics management concerningdistribution and warehouse, each of which requires to be managed appropriately (Taylor,et. al. 1997).

Distribution Management. Distribution is "the conduit of supply for delivery prod-ucts to customers, completing the demand cycle" (Schary, 1995). It is the combination ofactivities associated with advertising, sale, physical transfer of goods and services (Copa-cino, 1997). The critical task for successful distribution is demand management concern-ing market, customers, consumption, production, inventory and marketing. Distributionis the integral part of the supply chain influencing both customer loyalty and the chainperformance itself (Waters, 1999).

Warehouse Management. A warehouse tends to be viewed as a place to store goodsand it was served as a static unit in the material and product pipeline matching stockproducts with consumer needs (Bowersox & Closs, 1996). Textile and clothing firmssought to operate effectively between points of procurement, manufacturing and con-sumption as well as storage and handling effectiveness.

2.2. Information Management

Information management is defined as a means by which companies improve the useand the context of information, for the purpose to enhance performance and co-ordina-tion of activities across functional and business units (Peppard, 1993).

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 111

Fig.A.3 illustrates that the flow of the information starts from the consumer and movesupstream within the supply chain (Section 2). This information is splited in the other twosections (Sections 1 and 3). In Section 1, a chain of activities is associated with productdevelopment while in Section 3, a chain of activities generate the reordering of orders. In-formation management is critical to effective supply chain operations such as order man-agement and processing, demand forecasting, efficiency monitoring and systems control(Oakland, 1999).

2.3. Organisational Structure

The structure of an organisation can be determined by its size, by the technologywhich it involves, as well as by its internal and external environment in which it operates.Additionally, the complexity of the functions, the formalisation of the processes and thecentralisation of the decision-making process represent the dimensions of the organisa-tional structure (Filippas, 1997). Every company within a supply chain should know allthe elements that compose its organisational structure in order to be matched with simi-lar functions with a partner company (Copacino, 1997).

3. New Model Relationships within the Supply Chain

In this part, the paper will propose a new model describing relationships within anygiven supply chain, and present the empirical evidence which underpins this model.

The new developments of Information Technology (IT) offer new challenges. Alreadythis form of communication has begun to provide different levels of media by which com-panies may advertise and sell their products. It is now possible for the Internet itself to beexploited for the exchange and transfer of information, orders, data and purchases be-tween supply chains. In consequence, it seems that future supply chains will be modifiedinto a set of logics such as those suggested by Fig.A.4.

This model describes new forms of supply chain relationships and puts the consumerin the driving seat of demand, thereby replacing the retailer’s function in satisfying con-sumer demand. It assumes that Internet and digital television becomes a fundamental toolfor buying and selling. Meanwhile, the processing of goods takes place through the vari-ous stages of manufacturing up to the final product. Distributors may all combine ware-housing, packaging, ticketing and dispatching to replace and absorb retailers to the extentof delivering products direct to the consumer’s home.

Under such a model, consumers are indeed able to purchase articles through placingsubsequent orders on the Internet or by other similar electronic media. The Internet es-pecially offers a valuable form of direct selling/purchasing, since it can inform suppliers,manufacturers and distributors about the order information. Such suppliers, manufactur-

112 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ers and distributors should be able to form an integrated network of activities capable ofsupporting such supply chain relationships. Furthermore, there is no reason, other thandistributor efficiency to integrate into retailing activities, and to achieve the delivery ofthe product to the consumer’s home within 24 to 48 hours. In conclusion, the model inFig.A.4 illustrates new form of relationships between suppliers, manufactures and distrib-utors involved in a supply chain.

4. Empirical Evidence

The main purpose of this research has been to identify and discuss the current marketand industrial trends particularly as they relate to the concept of supply chain manage-ment. This research has been structured and completed in co-operation with JBA Inter-national1, and took place between January and June of 2000. It was agreed that such em-pirical evidence should be completed in the form of a questionnaire through telephone in-terviews for two reasons. First, it has been much easier, cheaper and quicker to use suchtool in comparison with personal contact or through another medium. Second, each tele-phone interview has been completed within the period of fifteen to twenty minutes.Therefore, it can be claimed that the answers received encompassed a high degree of reli-ability, since the marketing managers’ of all the questioned companies were allowed on-ly the same limits of time to provide to researchers their first reactions to questions andin accordance with the researchers’ requirements. Additionally, such empirical evidenceintends to provide information capable of supporting the model proposed earlier in thispaper. Therefore, such research provides a tremendous usefulness to the provision of ma-terial capable to support the new model of supply chain relationships.

This questionnaire that contained both open and closed questions referred to 379 tex-tile and clothing companies each with an annual turnover greater than $15m from all overthe world and includes businesses within UK, France, Italy, Germany, USA, Spain, theNordic countries and Australia. Additionally, this questionnaire has been categorised allthe responding companies into two groups. The first group involves all the respondingcompanies according to their area of business in which 69% were engaged in clothing,11% in textiles and the remaining 20% in footwear. The second group involves the sameresponding companies, but they have been categorised according to their activity and rep-resent, 74% manufacturers, 19% distributors, and 7% retailers. Both of these groups areappearing in the following charts in order to give a clearer view of how they positionthemselves towards the new supply chain management trends.

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 113

1 JBA was a leading supplier of integrated IT solutions to the Apparel, Footwear & Textile in-dustries. JBA employs 3000 people, supporting 4400 customers in 53 countries. In 1998, therevenue turnover reached $470 million. In 2001, JBA International has been taken over byGEAC Computer Corporated Ltd.

4.1. Method of Growth

According to Chart B.1, the main method of growth from all responding companies isthrough an increased awareness of demand. It is arguable, therefore, that this factor will beof an increasingly fundamental importance as a strategy by which companies eavesdropand acquire early information of the continuing changing demand in a continuous process.

The evidence indicates that the second most important means of achieving growth isthrough responding to market share within their existing market or through entering intonew markets. At this point, it is interesting that the highest rate of growth demonstratedby the distribution companies (34%). It means that this sector is expanding their businessfaster than the others. Chart B.1 also indicates that the responding companies favour threemain directions which they believe offer the best opportunity for growth. That is throughacquisition, product diversification and globalisation.

4.2. Support Business Growth

According to the questionnaire, they are planning to support growth in their businesswith three ways. First, by buying-in finished product, second by buying-in capacity fromother companies and third by increasing in-house capacity. From the results provided byChart B.2, it appears that all companies are mainly focused on increasing their in-housecapacity. The manufacturing area expects to increase the home production facilities con-siderably more than other sectors, while the distribution and retailing areas expect to ex-pand their distribution and retailing business in the home market. Additionally, the textilecompanies in general, have placed a high value of 62% to any effort which supports theirgrowth by increasing their own in-house capacity. It is also of particular interest that re-tailers are focus by 58% on increasing their purchasing of finished products.

Own In-house Operations.

Chart B.2 indicates that all responding companies are focused on developing their ownin-house capacity where investment will bring a high capability of quick response. Thereasons for in-house growth could be attributed to the association of quick response strat-egy which encompasses special skills and cost reduction as Chart B.3 shows.

The retailers at 67% and the clothing companies at 47% are focusing mainly on thequick response strategy as the main medium by which to maintain their own in-house op-erations. Manufacturers at 44% and distributors at 40% are focused on the same factor.However, it is interesting that the textile companies are mainly focused on the recruit-ment of specialised skills in order to maintain their own increasingly sophisticated manu-facturing in-house. Nowadays, textile firms are heavily using high-computerised and au-tomated machinery in order to keep their costs low and achieve higher quality productsand greater economies of scale. Due to this fact, means that textile companies need more

114 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

educated personnel and skilled workforce. "The specialisation of a skilled workforce andpersonnel makes it easier to use automated machinery. Supervisors must be able to planaccurately the work for their particular production line based on the time consumed(Glock & Kunz 1995)".

Although in the 1980’s costs has represented the main strategic focus of all companiesoperating in textiles and clothing, Chart B.3 indicates that the cost factor is no longer thesole fundamental strategic tool allowing companies to keep their own in-house operationsrunning. Only the distribution companies believe that costs represent the major rationaleunderlying their business. The shorter the distances, the lower the delivery and the trans-portation costs. Therefore distribution companies will be able to compete better withinthe next coming years.

Under Chart B.3, it is seen that Quick Response and special skills represented the mainreasons supporting the argument for companies to maintain their in-house operational fa-cilities. These factors enable companies to improve the quality of their operations and toprovide better service for consumers. This means that companies operating in the newcentury are focused on quality aspects rather than on costs in contrast with the 1980’swhich costs were regarded as crucially significant.

Buying-in Capacity.

According to Chart B.2, an average of 25% of all responding companies are interest-ing in increasing their buying-in capacity in order to expand their business outside thecounty’s boundaries. This may be achieved through the acquisition of shares in anothercompany operating in a foreign market. Such a trend started in the 1980’s in which themain interest was counted on the reduction of costs. "One of the most important phe-nomena of the 20th century has been the international expansion of the industry. Today,all firms have a significant and growing presence in business outside their country of ori-gin (Leontiades 1998)".

Additionally, according to Chart B.4, an average of 70% of the responding companieswould still expand their business to reduce cost. Nevertheless, it is interesting the per-centage of 63% given by the distribution companies as a means to expand their distribu-tion facilities on unfinished products to foreign markets. "The growth of internationaltrade boosted logistics companies to expand into foreign markets. Nowadays, under theconcept of globalisation where production facilities are occurring in all over the place, lo-gistics firms are seeking new opportunities for expansion and growth while decreasingtheir costs (Waters, 1999)".

It has also been assumed that companies’ expansion into foreign markets would assistthem to form an international network by which they will able to transfer unfinishedproducts easier. "Under the aspics of globalisation, the objective is to co-ordinate pro-duction planning among multiple plans in many countries in order to respond quickly tochanging market conditions (Waters, 1999)".

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 115

In conclusion, an average of 25% of the responding companies are keen on buying-inmanufacturing capacity from foreign markets and 70% of them would do that for reduc-tion on costs. However, all of them are seeking new reasons for expansion and growth,while one of their main objectives is to decrease their costs.

Buying-in finished products.

In Chart B.2, an average of 35% of all responding companies are interested in in-creasing their purchases on finished goods. However, it is interesting that retailers havegiven the highest value of 58% for purchasing finished products from other countries. Notsurprisingly, clothing companies also value a sourcing strategy. Distributors also indicateoutstanding distribution opportunities to the context of products which the initial pro-duction source is standing outside the main market. All therefore responses track the cur-rent industrial trend, indicating how companies are now moving from a manufacturingstrategy into a more service oriented strategy. "In order for companies to meet the chal-lenges of the new competition, they are focusing on "core activities" in-house and theyare outsourcing all the other "non-core" activities. This means that they usually outsourcethe production facilities while they are maintaining the service sector which has becomethe fundamental factor for competitive advantage (Dyer 1998)".

In Chart B.5, an average of 72% of all responding companies will continue to buy-infinished goods for cost reasons. However, the textile companies have given a lower pro-file of 36% for buying-in finished products. This could be explained by the fact that thetextile industry is capital and machine intensive and given the ability to automate, it there-fore does not necessarily make substantial difference whether the textile operations arebased in the main market or in a foreign country.

However, many companies are facing three fundamental obstacles which may restrictthe advantages they expect from a low cost strategy as Chart B.6 indicates. First, they arefacing the problem of control over operations that take place in far-off locations. Manu-facturers (45%), textile companies (42%) and clothing companies (33%) have all faced se-rious problems of controlling far-off operations. Second, companies also face the prob-lems associated with distance in regard to the delivery and transportation of finished prod-ucts to the main market. Distribution companies (32%) and retailers (16%) tend to expe-rience the most problems. Third, companies also experience problems of quality in termsof product structure and in other specifications of significance. "The Limited" relocatedits sourcing strategy in South Carolina rather than the Asian region. "We are going tohave better control of our business and we are going to receive the finished products fasterso we would be able to provide them faster. Most importantly, we are going to decreaseor even to annihilate quality problems (Dietzel 1987)".

In conclusion, the most significant outcome of this part of the questionnaire appearsto include indications that companies are intending to increase their domestic manufac-turing capacity, while retaining those offshore sites in locations which do not expose com-

116 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

panies to the main disadvantages of outsourcing strategies. Therefore, it is logical to as-sume that companies will try to operate in offshore locations which are relatively close tothe main markets. Manufacturers at the rate of 28% prefer to use relatively close to themain markets locations in comparison with the rate of 15% which represents locationsfrom Asia. In such a manner, low production costs will be achievable with the additionalopportunity for greater control, with a consequential reduction of distance difficulties andallowing quicker intervention in problems of quality. Chart B.7 indicates these issues.

4.3. Formal IT Strategy

An average of 63% of the responding companies have established a formal IT strate-gy. "IT can be used as a strategic weapon in many different ways. First, to understand theneeds, values and requirements of customers, suppliers, and competition. Second, to addvalue by promoting better products or services. Third, to share the benefits with cus-tomers and suppliers. Fourth, to exploit information for developing new business oppor-tunities (Peppard 1993)".

Chart B.8 indicates that the majority of the responding companies would adopt an ITstrategy in order to achieve a global business which can be controlled, and reduction ofadministrative costs. However, another group of companies would adopt an IT strategyfor justifying their business process reengineering (BPR) structure and their relationshipswith their customers and suppliers.

Manufacturing companies have given the highest rating to global business control fol-lowed closely by the clothing companies. However, the most impressive results are foundfrom the distribution companies. They are appearing lead they way in their efforts to re-duce the administrative costs and to set up appropriate forms with customers and suppli-ers and reengineer their business processes. It appears that a new emerging role for dis-tribution companies is to act as the key link between the manufacturing functions and theconsumer, and that it has been identified as the result of their systematic approach to busi-ness process reengineering. "Utilising BPR disciplines, companies are trying to reassesstheir business strategy and organisational structures in an integrated form in order toachieve better service to the consumer as well as to improve their profits and to decreasetheir costs (Bowersox & Closs 1996)".

Additionally, Chart B.9 indicates that the responding companies invest in software forpurposes of scheduling, for labour cost control, for raw materials inspection and for prod-uct data management. Retailers (61%) are using the correspondent software for organis-ing and placing orders to their suppliers. Distribution companies (55%) are also usingsoftware to schedule the delivery of products to retailers in accordance with their orders.In general, textile and clothing companies are using software for better scheduling andmanagement of their customers’ orders.

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 117

However, an average of 53% of the responding companies uses some software to con-trol their labour in relation to their individual productivity. Textile and clothing compa-nies have each responded to a similar degree, despite the difference in employment levelsbetween the two sectors. An average of 45% of the responding companies are using soft-ware for inspecting the raw materials received from suppliers. Manufacturing companies(52%) have given the highest value on this response.

Lastly, an average of 53% of the responding companies are using software for prod-uct management. "Product management can cut time to market for new products, accel-erate engineering changes and cut costs in processes. In addition, product managementsystems provide a structured repository of all the data relating to products and their com-ponent parts, which can potentially be made available to anyone in the supply chain whoneeds it (Baker 1999)". According to this comment, not surprisingly, the manufacturingcompanies have given the highest value of 60%.

In conclusion, the high levels of IT within the supply chain appears to indicate the cru-cial importance of this form of technology which is able to achieve a reasonable level ofcontrol internationally and assisting in reducing costs. It allows companies the facility torespond accurately to challenges within a multinational organisation.

4.4. E-commerce Strategy

In Chart B.10, an average of 41% of companies indicated an established E-commercestrategy mainly rely on links with Internet in contrast with other tools such as EDI, e-mail, Intranet and Extranet.

Chart B.11 illustrates some common reasons for firms adopting an e-commerce strat-egy. First, 78% of companies are exploiting the Internet as a tool to trace general infor-mation and news on a daily basis. Additionally, at the rate of 27% companies are search-ing information about their suppliers and 23% about their competitors.

An average of 80% of companies is using e-mail as a medium to establish an e-commercestrategy. Additionally, 86% of companies are extensively using the Internet in comparisonwith 73% of them which are using EDI for the same purposes. "EDI initially was adopted toprovide efficient information exchange between trading partners. Though it proved success-ful in some industries, lack of clear standards hampered widespread adoption. EDI architec-tures employ large "hub-and-spoke" configurations to serve hundreds of trading partnerswhose needs were thus dictated by the hub. Internet commerce empowers its users and, as aresult, is rendering obsolete EDI architecture. Of greater significance is that companies willlook to Internet commerce to enable inexpensive information exchange that allows for thereengineering of business processes involving external partners (Mann 1996)".

Additionally, an average of 16% of responding companies’ actual sales is transactedelectronically. A good example is derived from M&S which has set up a close relationship

118 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

with the distributor "Lynx Express" for delivering clothes straight at consumers home (Tay-lor, 2000). JC Penny offers another example since it has established a partner relationshipwith the distributor "Tibbett & Britten Group" for delivering their products at consumershome (JC Penny 2000). These results are very impressive since the Internet is only fewyears old and it is even more remarkable that sales of clothes are now being conducted suc-cessfully over this medium despite consumers’ needs to feel and fit prior to purchase.

Additionally, Chart B.12 traces the benefits that the responding companies are ex-pecting to get from applying an e-commerce strategy. Therefore, companies are expect-ing to improve communications with their customers at the rate of 31% and to achievegreater cost efficiency at 28%. Reductions in operating times around 25% and improvedcommunications with their suppliers at 23% are also companies’ priorities.

In conclusion, it seems obvious that companies are focusing to adopt formal e-com-merce strategy as a means to improve their communication with their trading partners aswell as to speed up the reengineering processes for more quality and service towards thefinal consumer. It also seems that Internet and e-mail tools represent their highest prior-ity in order to achieve these targets.

4.5. Greatest challenges

Undoubtedly, all the companies around the world are facing significant challenges forsurvival and growth. However, "during the 1990’s, the companies’ challenges were amongto provide better quality products, with more fashionable content and offer high and con-sistent levels of customer service (Blackwell 1997)". Indeed, the evidence from this re-search provided in Chart B.13 indicates that 26% of the companies have set as the mostimportant challenge the improvement of customer service levels. Additionally, compa-nies at the rate of 20% have set as a second major challenge the effort to improve theirprofits. Thirdly, 12% of companies are facing the challenge of expansion while another10% of them are facing the challenge to manage their supply chain. Finally, 8% of themare facing the challenge of survival.

For the first time, companies face the challenge of improving their customer serviceas a tool for survival and expansion within the global marketplace. It is seen as the onlyway to respond to growing imports. "Good services and relationships is a way for com-panies to differentiate their offerings in the market and learn about their customers andconsumers. It also makes it difficult for the customers to switch to another competitor(Levi & Kaminsky 2000)".

In conclusion, it is becoming apparent the fact that companies are facing significantchallenges due to the fact that consumers will demand better service and quality productsbut most important individuality. Mass customisation may therefore offer the next greatchallenge for those companies operating within the next millennium (ITMA, 2003).

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 119

4.6. Supply Chain Network

Chart B.14, indicates that future supply chain networks will represent the focus ofcompetition and will involve closer communication, better management and joint inven-tory controls. In detail, 60% of responding companies are involved to manage customerranges. Additionally, 65% of companies have given more responsibility for customer’s in-ventory levels while 56% of them have passed more responsibility for inventory to theirsuppliers. This high degree of involvement will lead into efficient and effective supplychain networks. Chart B.14 also indicates that 18% of companies’ turnover tends to betransacted electronically. This will undoubtedly speed up communication and the actualproduction conversion processes to allow faster delivery of products (ITMA, 2003).

In summary, it is seen that today’s business organisations are indeed willing to set upa business network with their supply chain partners. It is recognised that this network willachieve better inventory management and customer ranges as well as being in a positionto satisfy better the final consumer in terms of quality, service, delivery and individuality(ITMA, 2003).

5. Conclusions

First, the research has indicated that all the companies are becoming much more se-lective in the choice of geographic regions for their offshore strategy.

Second, the questionnaire has succeeded in finding evidence to show that the textileand clothing supply chain is becoming increasingly integrated, forming a network of ac-tivities shared among the involved partners. IT and e-commerce strategies supports theserelationships. It is remarkable nevertheless that already 16% of actual orders are trans-acted through the Internet as Chart B.14 indicated.

A third conclusion concerns the distribution companies. These companies are mainlyexploring IT strategy to re-engineer their business processes (ITMA, 2003). Thus, to-gether with the evidence that their sales via Internet represented the highest percentage,indicates that they appear to be trying to restructure the whole business, and to ensurethat products may be delivered direct to a consumer’s home.

Supply chain management has become a fashionable concept in recent years becauseof concurrent developments in IT. Through its exploitation, it has been possible for thecontrol of consumer demand to pass to consumers. Meanwhile, it offers the opportunityfor the control of retail to pass to manufacturers, whose traditional function has been sup-ply. In addition, the new emerging model (Fig.A.4) implies that companies will have theopportunity to achieve greater co-ordination between partners, greater profitability, val-ue-added service, and yet be in a position to achieve savings in terms of costs. In such cir-cumstances, it will be possible to offer consumers cheaper product prices.

120 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

APPENDIX A

Figure A.1: The structural parts of the supply chain management.

Figure A.2: The textile and clothing manufacturing chain.

Wood , Oil,

Natural gas

Chemical

Fibres

Natural

Fibres

Chemical plants

and petrochemical

refineries

Production of

Man-Made Fibres

Cellulosics

Synthetics

Fibre Preparation

Raw cotton,

wool, silk etc.

Textile Industry

Fabric Manufacture

Weaving-Knitting-

Dyeing-Finishing

Industrial Goods

Belting, upholstery

for auto industry etc.

Household Goods

Furnishings,

Carpets etc.

Yarn Preparation

Spinning

Textile Industry

Garment Manufacture

Design, Cutting, Sewing, Packing

Mass-produced garments

Fashion garments

Purchasing

Management

Distribution

Management

Manufacturing

Flows

Own warehouse

or Wholesalers

Primary

manufacturer

Raw material or

Component SuppliersRetailers End Users

Transport Transport Transport Transport

Fragmented control

Single firm control

Partnerships

3

Management and

control of the

supply chain

Order processing systems

Management information for demand forecasting

Management information to monitor efficiency

Computer systems for control

2Information

Management

Stock and

warehouse

management

Work in

progress1

The physical

flow of goods

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 121

Figure A.3: Framework for integrated Supply-Demand chain management.

Figure A.4: The new model relationships in the supply chain.

Supplier 1 Supplier 2 Supplier 3

Manufacturer 1 Manufacturer 2

Distribution

Retailer 1 Retailer 2 Retailer 3 Retailer 4

Home 1 Home 2 Home 3 Home 4

Internet

Warehousing

& Distribution

BuyingManufacturing

Store

OperationsPurchasing

Value-added

Distribution

Trade Marketing

& Selling

Category

Mnagement

Store

Marketing

Product

Development

Suppliers Manufacturing Distribution Retailing Consumers

1

3

2

122 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

APPENDIX B

Chart B.1: Growth Method.

Chart B.2: Production and Sourcing Capacity.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Buying-in finished products Buying-in manufacturing from other companies Increase own capacity In-house

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Awareness of demand Taking market share Acquisition Diversification Globalisation

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 123

Chart B.3: Own In-House Operations.

Chart B.4: Buying-in Capacity.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

For Cost Reasons

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

For Cost Reasons For Special Skills For Quick Response

124 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Chart B.5: Buying-in Finished Products.

Chart B.6: Against Outsourcing.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Less Control Distance difficulties Quality

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

For Cost Reasons

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 125

Chart B.7: Offshore vs. In-house Operations.

Chart B.8: IT Strategy.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Formal IT Strategy

For reduction in administrative costs

For close supplier-customer relationships

For global business control

For business process reengineering (BPR)

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% of Finished products manufactured in house

% of Finished products brought in from Asia

% of Finished products brought in from local countries

126 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Chart B.9: Use of Software.

Chart B.10: E-commerce Strategy.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Internet

Intranet

EDIE-mail

Extranet

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Scheduling

Labour cost control

Raw materials inspection

Product data management

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 127

Chart B.11: The use of the Internet.

Chart B.12: Benefits from the E-commerce Strategy.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Better communication with customers

Time efficiency

Better communication with suppliers

Cost efficiency

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Daily visits on the Internet

For supplier's information

For competitor's informationFor sale's information

For general news

128 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Chart B.13: Greatest Challenges.

Chart B.14: Supply Chain Network.

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Turnover transacted electronically

Give more responsibility for customer's inventory levels

Involved more to manage customer ranges

Pass more responsibility for inventory to their suppliers

Part

s of

the

Su

pp

ly C

hain

(%)

Retailers

Distributors

Manu/rers

Textiles

Clothing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

To improve customer service

To manage their supply chain

To improve their profile

Survival

Expand

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 129

References

1. Baker, P. (1999) "PDM-What do you need to know?" Works Management HortonKirby; Vol. 52, Issue 5, pp.: 25-28.

2. Blackwell, R. (1997) "From mind to market: Reinventing the retail supply chain" pp.:27-52, Harper Business.

3. Bowersox, J. D. & Closs, J. D. (1996) "Logistical management: The integrated supplychain process", pp.: 389-416, McGraw-Hill.

4. Bowersox, J. D. & Closs, J. D. (1996) "Logistical management: The integrated supplychain process", pp.: 458, McGraw-Hill.

5. Copacino W.C (1997) "Supply Chain Management: The basics and beyond", p.: 5, St.Lucie Press.

6. Copacino W.C (1997) "Supply Chain Management: The basics and beyond", pp.: 105-123, St. Lucie Press.

7. Dupont’s Business forum (1987) "Retailers move into the QR driver’s seat" TextileWorld, November, pp.: 57-62.

8. Dyer, J. H. (1998) "Strategic supplier segmentation: The next "best practice" in supplychain management" California Management Review; Berkeley; Winter 1998;Vol. 40, Issue 2, pp.: 57-77.

9. Filippas, D. (1997) "Organisational design with specific reference to examples from thetextile and clothing industry" pp.: 36-43, M.Sc. Dissertation, University of Leeds,Department of Textile Industries.

10. Glock, R & Kunz, G (1995) "Apparel manufacturing: Sewn product analysis", p.: 313,Merrill Prentice Hall.

11. Hill, T. (1993) "Manufacturing strategy: The strategic management of the manufac-turing function" pp.: 156-182, 2ND Edition MacMillan.

12. www.itma.com/forum "ITMA Forum 2003: Supply Chain Management Topics."13. www.jcpenny.com., 1/03/2000.14. LaLonde, J. B. and Zinszer, HP. (1976) "Customer service: Meaning and measure-

ments" Chicago, The council of Logistics management.15. Leontiades, J. E. (1998) "Multinational business strategy" DC Hearth & Co, Lexing-

ton, Mass p. 293.16. Levi, D & Kaminsky, P. (2000) "Designing and Managing the Supply Chain", Irwin

McGraw-Hill, p.: 213.

130 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

17. Mann, S. (1996) "Good-bye EDI, hello Internet" Manufacturing Systems, Wheaton,June p.: 16A.

18. Monczka, R., Trent, R., Handfield, R. (1998) "Purchasing and Supply Chain Manage-ment", p. 4, South Western.

19. Muhlemann, A., Oakland, J., & Lockyer, K., (1992) "Production and Operations plan-ning", pp.: 441-451, Pitman publishing.

20. Oakland, J. (1999) "Total Quality Management" pp.: 245-247, Pitman Publish.21. Peppard, J. (1993) "IT strategy for business", p. 10 Pitman Publishing.22. Peppard, J. (1993) "IT strategy for business", p. 1,15, Pitman Publishing.23. Schary, B. P. (1995) "Managing the global supply chain" pp.: 191-232, Handelsho-

jskolens Forlag.24. Taylor, k. Marks & Spencer Direct, Interview through e-mail, 1/03/2000.25. Taylor D. (1997) "Global cases in logistics and supply chain management", pp.: 4-11,

International Tomson Business Press.26. Waters, D. (1999) "Global Logistics and distribution planning" p.: 87, Kogan Page.27. Waters, D. (1999) "Global Logistics and distribution planning" pp.: 32-33, Kogan Page.

Supply Chain Management: Current trends for the global textile and clothing industry 131

Why be poor?Nikolaos Exadaktylosªarketing DepartmentT.E.I. Thessalonikis

Dencho NedelchevUniversity of EconomicsVarna, Bulgaria

Elena GeorgievaUniversity of EconomicsVarna, Bulgaria

Stelios PatsikasT.E.I. Piraeus

Abstract

The question is divided into five subquestions: Is it bad to be poor? How poorer hadthe majority of Bulgarians become since the beginning of transition to market economy?What had been the main demographic effects of the changes in the aggregate ability ofhouseholds to buy basic eatables? What are the main internally controllable factors whichaffect the consumption power and the aggregate ability of households to buy basic eata-bles? What could households, businessmen and politicians in Bulgaria (and in countrieslike Bulgaria) do to improve the situation themselves, without delaying and without bur-dening the international community more than necessary? The answers to these questionsform the content of the article.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∆Ô ‚·ÛÈÎfi ÂÚÒÙËÌ· ›ӷÈ: °È·Ù› ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ë ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙˆÓ ÓÔÈÎÔ΢ÚÈÒÓ Ù˘µÔ˘ÏÁ·Ú›·˜ (ηıÒ˜ Î·È ÙˆÓ ¯ˆÚÒÓ Ô˘ ‚Ú›ÛÎÔÓÙ·È Û ÌÂÙ·‚·ÙÈÎfi ÛÙ¿‰ÈÔ fiˆ˜ ˵ԢÏÁ·Ú›·) Ó· Â›Ó·È ÊÙˆ¯¿; ∆Ô ÂÚÒÙËÌ· ‰È·ÈÚÂ›Ù·È Û ¤ÓÙ ˘ÔÂÚˆÙ‹Ì·Ù·: "∂›Ó·È

Why be poor? 133

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 133-144

ηÎfi Ó· Â›Ó·È ÊÙˆ¯¿;", "¶fiÛÔ ÊÙˆ¯fiÙÂÚË Â›Ó·È Ë ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙˆÓ µÔ‡ÏÁ·ÚˆÓ ÌÂÙ·ÙËÓ ÌÂÙ¿‚·ÛË ÛÙËÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›· ·ÁÔÚ¿˜;", "¶ÔȘ ‹Ù·Ó ÔÈ ‚·ÛÈΤ˜ ‰ËÌÔÁÚ·ÊÈΤ˜ ÂÈ-ÙÒÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ·ÏÏ·ÁÒÓ ÛÙËÓ Û˘ÓÔÏÈ΋ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ‚·ÛÈÎÒÓ ·Á·ıÒÓ;", "¶ÔÈÔÈ Â›-Ó·È ÔÈ ‚·ÛÈÎÔ› ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎÔ› ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜ Ô˘ ÂËÚ¿˙Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ Î·Ù·Ó·ÏˆÙÈ΋ ‰‡Ó·ÌË Î·-ıÒ˜ Î·È ÙËÓ Û˘ÓÔÏÈ΋ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ‚·ÛÈÎÒÓ ·Á·ıÒÓ;", "∆È ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· οÓÔ˘ÓÙ· ÓÔÈÎÔ΢ÚÈ¿, ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚË̷ٛ˜ Î·È ÔÈ ÔÏÈÙÈÎÔ› ÛÙËÓ µÔ˘ÏÁ·Ú›· (ηıÒ˜ Î·È Û ·-ÚfiÌÔȘ ¯ÒÚ˜) ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË Ù˘ ηٿÛÙ·Û˘ ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ó· ηı˘ÛÙÂÚ‹ÛÔ˘Ó Î·È Ó· ÂÈ-‚·Ú‡ÓÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ¢ÈÂıÓ‹ ÎÔÈÓfiÙËÙ· ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ·fi ÙÔ ··ÈÙÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ;". √È ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘÛÙ· ÂÚˆÙ‹Ì·Ù· ·˘Ù¿ ‰È·ÌÔÚÊÒÓÔ˘Ó ÙÔ ÂÚȯfiÌÂÓÔ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘.

Keywords:

Poor, Households, Consumption, power, Bulgaria, eatables.

1. Is it bad to be poor?

This question may have different answers from theological, philosophical, sociologi-cal, psychological, economic and other perspectives. Without denying or underestimatingthe importance of extensive research of this issue, we may simply look in the mainsources of European culture and see a diversity of answers. One has become materiallypoor to give chance of others to become spiritually alive and rich. Others have consideredall material riches rubbish in comparison with the real spiritual treasure. Still others haveaffirmed that having the right attitude and behavior either removes the spiritual reasonsfor poverty or makes it work for the good of the one who suffers material misery for spir-itual reasons (Kotler, 1986).

One may well believe that being poor is necessary for us - if we are to blame ourselvesfor what we suffer now, and need poverty to become conscientious of our sins.

Perhaps it is not bad to be poor until the poor persons who might wish to be honestwith themselves, discover the spiritual roots of their poverty. But for those, who have al-ready discovered how poor in spirit they had been - is it obligatory to stay "poor in body"ever after for whatever reason? We hope not to be mistaken if we answer negatively tothe last question. Becoming alive and active in spirit may have as one of its results be-coming "active in body". Beginning to be active in body might mean opening our eyes tosome important dimensions of our material poverty and to some of its major demo-graphic consequences. It might also mean searching for some important and controllableby us factors which affect our poverty, and also - for effective ways to control those fac-tors. Thus we reach to the next question.

134 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

2. How poorer had the majority of Bulgarian households become

since the beginning of transition to market economy?

One way to answer this question is to look at the changes in the consumption powerduring the period of transition 1989-2000. The differences between the consumption pow-er of households at the beginning and at the end of the period are presented in Table 5.The analysis of the data reveals the following.

At the end of the reviewed period of transition, the ability of households to buy ap-ples, yoghourt, and coal had decreased by more than 70% ( by 70.73%, 72.06% and78.34% correspondingly).

By 54.20% - 67.14% had decreased the ability of households to buy white bread, yel-low cheese, beans, potatoes, grapes, fresh milk and children’s shoes (by 54.20%, 55.46%,58.42%, 62.62%, 54.00%, 67.14% and 65.00% correspondingly).

By 37.30% - 47.93% had decreased the ability of households to buy rice, cheese, durablesausages, eggs, butter, peppers, pork, poultry meat and men’s shoes (by 47.16%, 46.26%,37.30%, 47.93%, 45.05%, 47.34%, 38.41%, 38.65% and 40.91%, correspondingly).

By 21.05% - 33.33% had decreased the ability of households to buy lady’s suits, toma-toes, short lasting sausages, lady’s shoes and men’s suits (by 21.05%, 26.93%, 28.31%,33.33% and 33.33% correspondingly)

By 9.49% and by 16.94% had decreased the ability of households to buy sugar andcucumbers.

So, at the end of the reviewed period of transition in Bulgaria, with the total annualincome per capita could be bought more TV-sets and less from all the other major con-sumer goods.

We may guess that so drastic decrease in the consumption power, and especially in thepower to buy basic eatables, might have had negative demographic effects.

3. What had been the main demographic effects of the changes

in the aggregate ability of households to buy basic eatables?

It would have been fine if we could study the correlation between the changes in theconsumption power, and the changes in important demographic indicators. But the limi-tations of the concept of "consumption power" do not allow to do so. The "consumptionpower of households" is being defined as the quantity of commodities to be obtained forthe total annual or for the money annual income per capita during the referent year, hav-ing in mind that the total income is the sum of the money income of the household + themoney equivalent of the products produced by the household for own consumption

Why be poor? 135

("Average prices and Quantities..", 2000; "Statistical Yearbook", 1999). The concept of"consumption power" makes it possible to reveal the ability of households to buy sepa-

rately each one of the 20 eatable goods which are under statistic surveillance.By using the concept of "consumption power" we can see what quantity of white

bread, or what quantity of rice, or what quantity of some of the other major foodstuffs,could be bought if the total or the money annual income per capita were spent entirelyfor buying only white bread, or only rice or only another one of the other foodstuffs fromthe list of the 20 major eatables under statistic surveillance. The changes in the ability ofhouseholds to buy one of these goods differs from the ability to buy the other 19 goods.The differences are not only in the magnitude of changes but also in their direction. Thisdiversity makes it impossible to study the major demographic consequences of thechanges in the consumption power of households, if it is measured by their ability to buyseparately each one of the 20 major eatable consumer goods.

A partial solution to this problem is to aggregate the figures in a way which allows toshow the ability of households to buy with their average total annual income all the 20major eatable goods.

The proposed aggregation is based on the following logic. When the households buythe 20 major foodstuffs, they buy something common for all of these different foodstuffs–they buy the calories contained in these foodstuffs. When we know how many caloriescontains one liter, or one kilogram, or one piece of each of the 20 statistically observedeatables, and what quantities of foodstuffs could be bought with the total annual incomeper capita - it becomes possible to calculate the total quantity of calories contained inthe quantities of all the 20 major eatables that could be bought with the total annual in-come per capita. We may name this quantity "aggregate ability of households to buy

major eatables" (keeping in mind, of course, that the ability to buy calories is quite arude approximation to the ability to buy foodstuffs).

The aggregate ability of households to buy eatable goods can be estimated by twomethods. The first method includes two calculations:

ñ calculating the sum of the calories contained in the kilograms and liters and pieces ofthe 20 above mentioned goods, which could be bought with the total annual incomeper capita, if the latter were spent entirely for buying each one of the twenty eatables;

ñ dividing the sum to 20, in order to find how many calories could be bought with thetotal annual income per capita.

In Table 2 is presented the estimated by this method aggregate ability of households tobuy the 20 major statistically monitored eatables for the period 1989 - 2000.

The accuracy of estimating of the aggregate ability will be sufficient for the purposesof our study if the changes in this ability, coincide in general with the changes in the indi-cator "calories contained in the quantities of major eatables bought by the households percapita per day" ("Budgets of the Households in Republic of Bulgaria", 1992).

136 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

The data reveal that the changes in the aggregated ability and in the above mentionedcoincide in general. Therefore the simple method for estimating the aggregate ability tobuy major eatables has sufficient for the purpose of our study accuracy. So it is not nec-essary to describe and use the second, more complicated method for estimating the ag-gregate ability of households to buy major eatables.

By applying the concept of the aggregate ability, instead of having 20 different

dimensions of the consumption power, we have 1 dimension of the aggregate ability ofhouseholds to buy 20 major eatables. This makes it possible to study the correlation be-tween the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables (the independent variablein this case) , and such important demographic indicators like "crude marriage rate", "chil-dren birth rate" and "crude death rate" ( the dependent variables). The changes in the de-pendent variables are presented in (table 2, 3, 4, 6).

By using the method for estimating the single Pirson-Brave coefficients for correlation(Sujkova and Tshakalov, 1977), we found out the following: the coefficient of correlationbetween the changes in the "aggregated ability of households to buy major eatables" and thechanges in the demographic indicator "crude marriage rate" is +0.90; the coefficient of cor-relation between the changes in the "aggregated ability of households to buy major eatables"and the changes in the demographic indicator "children birth rate" is also +0.90; the coeffi-cient of correlation between the changes in the "aggregated ability of households to buy ma-jor eatables" and the changes in the demographic indicator "crude death rate" is - 0.87.

This means that, in the conditions of Bulgaria during the transition period 1989-2000,the big negative changes in the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables hashad strong negative impact upon the desire and the ability of people to marry and to givebirth to children. Also, the decrease in the aggregate ability to buy major eatables hadbeen followed by decrease in the average life expectancy.

What is within our reach to do in order to stop and prevent negative changes in theconsumption power, in the aggregate ability of households to buy basic eatables, and inthe major demographic indicators? This brings us to the next question.

4. What are the main internally controllable factors which

affect the consumption power and the aggregate ability

of households to buy basic eatables?

One may argue that the main internally controllable factor is to stop being evil and tobecome good. Without denying or underestimating the validity of this argument, we shalldraw the attention to three other internally controllable factors:

ñ production of products by the households for own consumption in own farms, gardens,etc. (prosumerism);

Why be poor? 137

ñ buying of eatables at lower prices by stopping to buy them from retailers and startingto buy them from wholesalers and directly from producers;

ñ choosing at the elections one political force or another and then exerting of legitimatecontrol.The three above mentioned factors are controllable directly by the households. At the

same time, they are indirectly controllable by businessmen and politicians who could cre-ate favorable or unfavorable environment for the manifestation of these factors.

The influence of the first factor - "prosumerism", could be measured by makingcomparison between the annual money income per capita, and the annual total incomeper capita (remembering that the annual total income per capita is equal to the annualmoney income + the money equivalent of the annual income from production for ownconsumption in family farms, gardens, etc., and having in mind that the money income isthe sum of incomes from: salary; compensations for work done in other enterprises andorganizations; entrepreneurship; using of own property; financial aid for unemployment;pensions; family allowance; social assistance; selling of property; other sources ("Budgetsof households...", 2000). By making the above mentioned comparison for each year of theperiod 1989-2000, we find out that the consumption power of households whose membershad searched and had used the opportunities to produce products for own consumption,had been by 14.17% - 45% higher than the consumption power of households, whosemembers had not used such opportunities (Table 1). As a result of the accomplished resti-tution, the majority of households in Bulgaria became landowners. But nothing had beendone to research and meet the specific needs and wishes of the concrete individual house-holds to cultivate part or all of the restored arable land. One of the results had been thatduring the last year of the reviewed period of transition 40% of the arable land in Bulgariahad not been cultivated (Karakov, 2000). This should prompt us something about the po-tential of consumerism in Bulgaria and in countries like Bulgaria.

The influence of the second factor could be measured by estimating and comparingthe magnitudes of the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables at three pricelevels: at retail prices; at wholesale prices; at "producer’s prices" (in this case by saying"producer’s prices" we mean the prices at which the wholesalers buy eatables directlyfrom producers in Bulgaria or from importers, or from other distributors). Figures arepresented in Table 2 which show the difference between the aggregate power of house-holds which had made and which had not made use of the opportunities to buy major eat-ables not at higher prices (retailer’s prices), but at lower prices (wholesaler’s and produc-er’s prices). The differences for the year 2000 are as follows:

ñ the aggregate ability of households which had made use of the opportunities to buymajor eatables from plant origin at lower prices (at wholesaler’s and at producer’sprices), had been by 24.68% and correspondingly by 31.01% higher than that ofhouseholds, which had not made use of such opportunities;

138 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ the aggregate ability of households which had made use of the opportunities to buymajor eatables from animal origin at wholesaler’s and producer’s prices, had been by22,17% and by 34.30% higher than that of households, which had not made use of suchopportunities;

ñ the aggregate ability of households which had made use of the opportunities to buymajor eatables both from plant and from animal origin at wholesaler’s and atproducer’s prices, had been by 23.86% and by 32.09% higher than that of households,which had not made use of such opportunities.

The influence of the third factor could be measured by estimating and comparing theaggregate ability of households to buy major eatables during the periods and sub-periodsin which different political forces have governed the country. The results of such estima-tions and comparisons are presented in Tables 3 and 7. These Tables show what changesin the aggregate ability to buy major eatables had taken place during the periods and sub-periods of government of different political forces in Bulgaria.

5. What can households, businessmen and politicians in Bulgaria

(and in countries like Bulgaria) do to improve the situation

themselves, without delaying and without burdening the

international community more than necessary?

One way for households, businessmen and politicians to control the above mentionedfactors, is to continue to do what they had been doing until now.

The other way is to initiate the offering and marketing of special services and goodsdesigned for:

ñ households who might get interested in the opportunities to start (or enlarge)production of eatables for own consumption, and to switch from buying at retailer’sprices, to buying at wholesaler’s and producer’s prices;

ñ political candidates who need professional assistance for developing and implementingprograms for political, legal and governmental support for households interested infinding and utilizing the above mentioned opportunities.Here are some suggestions about the offering and marketing of such services and goods.

Why be poor? 139

6. Conclusions

For those households in Bulgaria and in countries like Bulgaria, whose members havealready acquired the right attitude and behavior, becomes useful and possible to put to endtheir material misery. They could do this without burdening more than necessary the in-ternational community - through starting actively and ethically to control the internal

factors which strongly influence the consumption power and the aggregate ability to buymajor eatable consumer goods. By overcoming in this way their poverty, such householdsmight improve the material conditions for marrying, giving birth to children and pro-longing the physical lives of their members.

APPENDIX

Table 1. Comparison between the annual average total income and the average annual

money income for the referent year during the period 1989-2000

Year 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Annualaverage

2591 3102 8311 16042 23831 39565 58553 89457 900340 1432325 1502 1574totalincome leva

Annualaverage

2261 2717 6420 12224 18304 27777 40372 67849 639830 1074100 1193 1274moneyincome

%* 2261= 114. 129. 131. 130. 142. 145% 131. 140. 133. 125. 123.100;%

2591= 17% 46% 23% 20% 44% 85% 72% 35% 90% 55%114.59%

%*: by what % the annual average total income is higher than the average annual money income

for the referent year. Sources: "Average Prices...", 2000, 2001.

140 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Table 2. Results from calculating by what % the aggregate ability to buy major eatables

from plant and from animal origin is higher when the households utilize the

opportunities to switch from buying at retailer’s prices to buying at

wholesaler’s and at producer’s prices

Aggregate ability Ability to buy Ability to buy Ability to buyto buy major major foodstuffs major foodstuffs major foodstuffsfoodstuffs at average retail at average wholesale at average "producer’s"

prices=100% prices, presented as prices, presented% of the average as % of the averageretail prices retail prices

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatables 100% 124.68% 131.01%from plant origin

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatables 100% 122.17% 134.30%from animal origin

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatablesfrom plant +

100% 123.86% 132.09%

from animal origin

Source: A conducted in 2000 by the author research of the retailer’s, wholesaler’s and producer’s

prices of the major eatables.

Table 3. Changes in the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables for the

period 1989-1991, base of estimation 1989=100%

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatables

1989=100% 1991%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant origin

100% 51.01

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from animal origin

100 55.69

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatables 100 52.60from plant and from animal origin

Source: "Average Prices...", 2000.

Why be poor? 141

Table 4. Changes in the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables for the

period 1991-1992, base of estimation 1991=100%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables

1991= 100% 1992%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant origin

100% 132.30%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from animal origin

100 114.54

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant 100 125.90and from animal origin

Source: Statistical Yearbook, 1991, 1998.

Table 5. Changes in the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables for the

period 1992-1997, base of estimation 1992=100%

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatables

1992= 100% 1997%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant origin

100% 51.74%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from animal origin

100 51

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant 100 51.49and from animal origin

Source: The same as the source for Table 3 from this Appendix.

Table 6. Changes in the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables for the

period 1997-1999, base of estimation 1997=100%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables Goods

1997=100% 1999%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant origin

100% 161.69%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from animal origin

100 152.80

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant 100 158.81and from animal origin

Source: The same as the source for Table 3 from this Appendix.

142 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Table 7. Changes in the aggregate ability of households to buy major eatables for the

period 1999-2000, base of estimation 1999=100%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables Goods

1999=100% 2000%

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from plant origin

100 89.17

Aggregate ability to buymajor eatables from animal origin

100 95.55

Aggregate abilityto buy major eatables 100 91.17from plant and from animal origin

Sources: "Average Prices and Quantities", 2001; "Statistical Reference Book", 2000, 2001.

Why be poor? 143

Bibliography

"Average Prices and Quantities of Major Eatable and Non-eatable Consumer GoodsBought by the Households During the Period 1989-1999 and by Months for1999", National Statistical Institute, Department of Household Statistics, Sofia,2000, p. 9.

"Average Prices and Quantities of Major Eatable and Non-eatable Consumer GoodsBought by the Households During the Period 1989-2000 and by Months for2000"; National Statistical Institute, Department of Household Statistics, Sofia,2001, disk, pp. 11-12.

"Budgets of the Households in Republic of Bulgaria ", NSI, Sofia, 2000, p. 12. "Budgets of the Households in Republic of Bulgaria ", NSI, Sofia, 1992, p. 45.Asc.Prof. d-r Kazakov, Nikolaj. "40% of the Arable Land in Bulgaria Stays Unutilized",

article in the newspaper "Standard", 23.05.2000, p. 12.Kotler, Philip."The Prosumer Movement: A New Challenge For Marketers" in "Advances

in Consumer Research", Ed. Richard J. Lutz,vol.XIII, Provo, UT, USA, Associa-tion For Consumer Research, 1986, p. 125.

"Statistical Reference Book", National Statistical Institute, Sofia, 2000, pp. 64-65."Statistical Reference Book", National Statistical Institute, Sofia, 2001, pp. 75-76."Statistical Yearbook", National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria, 1991, pp. 98-99."Statistical Yearbook", National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria, 1998, pp. 73-74."Statistical Yearbook", National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria, 1999, p. 108.Sujkova, Iv., Tshakalov,B. "Methodology and Methods of Empirical Social Research",

Sofia, Publ. "Science and Art", 1977, pp. 164-174.

144 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ

µ·Û›ÏÂÈÔ˜ Ã. ªÔ‡Û·˜™.∆.∂º.∆.∂.π. ∞ı‹Ó·˜

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

™ÙËÓ ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÚÔÙ›ÓÔÓÙ·È Î·È Û˘ÁÎÚ›ÓÔÓÙ·È Ì¤ıÔ‰ÔÈ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·ÎÚÈ‚¤ÛÙÂ-ÚË Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë ÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜ Î·È Î·Ï‹˜ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ ÂÓfi˜ ÂÍ·ÚÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Ô˘ ηٷÔ-Ó›ٷÈ. ∏ ÂͤÏÈÍË ÙˆÓ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ Ì¤Û· ÛÙÔ ˘ÏÈÎfi ̤¯ÚÈ ÙË ıÚ·‡ÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÚÈÁÚ¿ÊÂÙ·È ÌÂËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÔ‡˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ Ù˘ ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋ ÂÏ·ÛÙÈ΋˜ ıÚ·˘ÛÙÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋˜,Î·È Û˘Ó‹ıˆ˜ ÂÍÂÙ¿˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙË ‚Ô‹ıÂÈ· ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ÂÏ·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ÙÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ. ∏ ÚÔ-ÙÂÈÓfiÌÂÓË ‰È·Ù‡ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÓfiÌˆÓ Û ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈ΋ Î·È Û ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘Ú-Á› ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ηٿÏÏËÏ· ÁÈ· ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜. √ ‚·ÛÈÎfi˜ ·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔ˜ ÙÔ˘Marquardt Î·È Ô ∂ÂÎٷ̤ÓÔ˜ ∞ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔ˜ Kalman ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙË Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛËÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ Î·È ÙËÓ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË Ù˘ ηٿÛÙ·Û˘. √È Ì¤ıÔ‰ÔÈ ‰ÔÎÈÌ¿-ÛÙËÎ·Ó Ì ڷÁÌ·ÙÈο ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈο ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ Î·È Ì ÙÔ˘˜ Û˘ÓËı¤ÛÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈ-ÎÔ‡˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜. √È ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ‰›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂ-ÚÔ ÛÊ¿ÏÌ· ηٿ ÙËÓ ·Ó·‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÙˆÓ ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈÎÒÓ ‰Â‰ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Î·È ÔÈ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘÙ˘ ÙÂÏÈ΋˜ ıÚ·‡Û˘ Â›Ó·È ÈÔ ·ÎÚȂ›˜ Î·È Ì ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚË ‰È·ÛÔÚ¿. H ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙˆÓ ÚÔ-ÙÂÈÓfiÌÂÓˆÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ ‰›ÓÂÈ ÂÈϤÔÓ ÙË ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ¢Ú›·˜ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ Û ӤԢ˜ «·ÓÔÚ-ıfi‰ÔÍÔ˘˜» ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÔ‡˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜, ÔÈ ÔÔ›ÔÈ ‰ÂÓ Î·Ï‡ÙÔÓÙ·È ·fi ÙË ÎÏ·ÛÈ΋ Ù˘Ô-ÔÈË̤ÓË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô ‰ÈfiÙÈ ·Ú·Ì¤ÓÔ˘Ó ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ› fiÙ·Ó ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈÛÙÔ‡Ó.

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 145

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 145-163

Abstract

This article presents and compares two non-linear methods for improved predictionof a component’s life-time. Fatigue crack growth is usually described by semi-empiricallaws with a linear logarithmic form that is solved using linear least squares (LLS). Thiswork proposes first a recursive form for the FCG laws that will make them suitable forthe more general non-linear least squares (NLLS) algorithm. Unlike LLS, the NLLS allowsfor any proposed FCG law to be applied without restrictions to linearity or the numberof unknown parameters. A stochastic state-space model is then derived for the more ad-vanced extended Kalman filter (EKF). The model uses also an augmented state vector inorder to perform state estimation and parameter identification. The models were basedon known FCG laws such as Shanley, Paris or Larsen-Yang equations. Both non-linearmethods were tested against the standard LLS using real data from FCG experiments. Re-sults show that the parameters estimated by the non-linear methods recreate the experi-ments with, up to an order of magnitude, less error than those from LLS. Moreover, thepredictions of final crack and residual life-time are more accurate and more confident.The many advantages of EKF and its straight forward collaboration with NDT/NDEmethods, overcome easily the increased computational complexity and the tuning re-quired for its implementation.

1. ∂ÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹

∏ ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·, Î·È Ë ‰È¿ÚÎÂÈ· ˙ˆ‹˜ ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓ, ÂËÚ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ¿ÌÂÛ· ·fi ÙˉËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· Î·È ÙËÓ ÂͤÏÈÍË ÚˆÁÌÒÓ Ì¤Û· ÛÙÔ ˘ÏÈÎfi ÙÔ˘˜, fiÙ·Ó ˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙ·È Û ‰˘-Ó·ÌÈΤ˜ ηٷÔÓ‹ÛÂȘ. ∂Èı˘Ì›· οı ۯ‰ȷÛÙ‹ Â›Ó·È Ó· ÚԂϤ„ÂÈ fiÛÔ Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ· Á›-ÓÂÙ·È ÙËÓ ÂͤÏÈÍË ÙˆÓ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ÏfiÁˆ Ù˘ ÎfiˆÛ˘ (FCG, Fatigue Crack Growth), Î·È Ó·˘ÔÏÔÁ›ÛÂÈ Ì ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ÙÔÓ ÂÓ·ÔÌ›ӷÓÙ· ¯ÚfiÓÔ Î·Ï‹˜ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Ù˘ ηٷÛ΢‹˜,ÒÛÙ ԇÙ ӷ ÚÔÎÏËı› ıÚ·‡ÛË Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙÚÔÊ‹, Ô‡Ù ӷ ·ÓÙÈηٷÛÙ·ı› ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ó·˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ·Ó¿ÁÎË. √È Ï‡ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙË ÌÂϤÙË ÙˆÓ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ÏfiÁˆ Îfiˆ-Û˘ οÓÔ˘Ó ¯Ú‹ÛË Ù˘ °Ú·ÌÌÈ΋˜ ∂Ï·ÛÙÈ΋˜ £Ú·˘ÛÙÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋˜ (LEFM) Î·È ‚·Û›˙Ô-ÓÙ·È Û ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ Á‹Ú·ÓÛ˘ ÙÔ˘ ˘ÏÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ÚÔfi‰Ô˘ ÙˆÓ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ(Baumeister et al., 1978). ø˜ › ÙÔ Ï›ÛÙÔÓ, ÔÈ Ï‡ÛÂȘ ·˘Ù¤˜ ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÔ‡Ó ÙË Ì¤ıÔ-‰Ô ÙˆÓ °Ú·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ∂Ï¿¯›ÛÙˆÓ ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ (°∂∆) ÁÈ· Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÔ˘Ó ÙȘ ·Ú·Ì¤-ÙÚÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘ ˘ÏÈÎÔ‡ ̤ۈ ÂÈÚ·Ì¿ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·fiÓËÛ˘ Û ÂȉÈο ‰ÔΛÌÈ· (CT & CC). °È·ÎÔÈÓ¤˜ Î·È ÊıËÓ¤˜ ηٷÛ΢¤˜ (.¯. ·˘ÙÔΛÓËÙ·) Â›Ó·È Â‡ÎÔÏÔ Ó· ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈÛÙ› ηÓ›˜Ì ¤Ó· ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ·ÚÈıÌfi ‰ÂÈÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÂÍ·ÚÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È Ó· ηٷϋÍÂÈ Û ·ÛÊ·Ï‹ ÛÙ·ÙÈ-ÛÙÈο Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù· (Fuchs and Stephens, 1980). ∞ÓÙ›ıÂÙ·, ÛÙË ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Û¿ÓȈÓ,

146 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

·ÎÚÈ‚ÒÓ ‹ ˘„ËÏÔ‡ Ú›ÛÎÔ˘ ηٷÛ΢ÒÓ (.¯. ·ÂÚÔÛοÊË, ˘ÚËÓÈÎÔ› & ¯ËÌÈÎÔ› ·ÓÙÈ-‰Ú·ÛÙ‹Ú˜, ‰È·ÛÙËÌÈο Ô¯‹Ì·Ù· Î·È ÛÙ·ıÌÔ›, ·Ú¿ÎÙȘ Ï·ÙÊfiÚ̘ ÂÙÚÂÏ·›Ô˘, Î.¿.)‰ÂÓ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ÁÈ· Ì·˙Èο ÂÈÚ¿Ì·Ù· Î·È ·ÎÚÈ‚‹ a-priori ÁÓÒÛË. ™ÙË ÂÚ›-ÙˆÛË ·˘Ù‹ ÔÈ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È ÈÔ ·‚¤‚·È˜ Î·È ¯ÚÂÈ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È Û˘¯Ó‹ ·Ó·Ó¤ˆÛË ‹ÂȂ‚·›ˆÛË Î·Ù¿ ÙË ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· Ù˘ ηٷÛ΢‹˜ (.¯. Û˘Ó¯›˜ ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÂȘ Û ·ÂÚÔÛο-ÊË ÂÓÒ ÂÎÙÂÏÔ‡Ó Ù· ‰ÚÔÌÔÏfiÁÈ¿ ÙÔ˘˜). ŒÙÛÈ, Ë Û˘Ó¯‹˜ ·Ú·ÎÔÏÔ‡ıËÛË Ù˘ ηٿÛÙ·-Û˘ Ì ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜ ÌË-ηٷÛÙÚÂÙÈÎÔ‡ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘ (NDT/NDE), Ô‰ËÁ› ÛÙ·‰È·Î¿ ÛÙËÓ ·Ó·-Ó¤ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂˆÓ Î·È ÛÙËÓ ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÚԂϤ„ÂˆÓ ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ ¯ÚfiÓÔ ˙ˆ‹˜, ÒÛÙÂÓ· ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÂÙ·È ÙÂÏÈο Ë Û˘ÓÔÏÈ΋ ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›· Ù˘ ηٷÛ΢‹˜. ∏ ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ÙˆÓ ·Ú·-¿Óˆ χÛÂˆÓ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi ÙË ÛˆÛÙ‹ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Î·È ·fi ÙË ÈÛÙfiÙË-Ù· ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ FCG (Schutz, 1979).

√È ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜ Î·È Ë ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›· ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙË ¯Ú‹ÛË Î·Ï‡-ÙÂÚˆÓ, fiÛÔ Â›Ó·È ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ, ÌÔÓ٤ψÓ, ÛˆÛÙÒÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ, ηχÙÂÚˆÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ ÂÎÙ›-ÌËÛ˘, Î·È Ê˘ÛÈο ·ÍÈfiÈÛÙˆÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ ·Ú·Ù‹ÚËÛ˘. ŒÓ·˜ ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ˜ ·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ÌÂıfi-‰ˆÓ Î·È ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÒÓ ÓÙÂÙÂÚÌÈÓÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ ¤¯ÂÈ ÚÔÙ·ı› ηٿ ÙË ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›·50ÂÙ›· (Hoeppner and Krupp, 1974). ∆· Û˘ÓËı¤ÛÙÂÚ· ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ Ô˘ ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È ÛÙË ‚È-‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›· ‚·Û›˙ÔÓÙ·È Û ÙÚÔÔÔÈ‹ÛÂȘ Î·È ÂÂÎÙ¿ÛÂȘ Ù˘ Â͛ۈÛ˘ Paris (ÂÍ. 1-·)(Paris and Erdogan, 1963).

·) =C�(¢K)n ⇒ ‚) log � �=logC+n�log(¢K) (1)

∏ Ù˘ÔÔÈË̤ÓË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ‚·Û›˙ÂÙ·È ÛÙȘ ÏÔÁ·-ÚÈıÌÈΤ˜ ÌÔÚʤ˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÌÔÓ٤ψÓ, ÁÈ·Ù› ηٷϋÁÔ˘Ó Û ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ Û¯¤ÛÂȘ (ÂÍ.1-‚) Ô˘ ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È Â‡ÎÔÏ· ÛÙ· ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈο ÛËÌ›·, fiÙ·Ó ·˘Ù¿ Â›Ó·È Û¯ÂÙÈο ¢-ı˘ÁÚ·ÌÌÈṲ̂ӷ (°∂∆). ∆Ô ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ ÚÔÛfiÓ Ù˘ Ù˘ÔÔÈË̤Ó˘ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘ Â›Ó·È Ô ÌË-‰·ÌÈÓfi˜ ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÈÎfi˜ ÊfiÚÙÔ˜, Ô ÔÔ›Ô˜ Î·È ÙËÓ ¤Î·Ó ÚÔÛÈÙ‹ Â‰Ò Î·È ‰ÂηÂٛ˜. ∆·‚·ÛÈο ÌÂÈÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù· Â›Ó·È ÚÒÙÔÓ fiÙÈ ÚÔ¸Ôı¤ÙÂÈ ˆ˜ Ù· ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈṲ̂ӷ ‰Â‰Ô̤-Ó· ı· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ (Ô˘ ÛÙË Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· Û˘Ì‚·›ÓÂÈ ÌfiÓÔ ÙÌËÌ·ÙÈο),Î·È ‰Â‡ÙÂÚÔÓ, ‰ÂÛ̇ÂÙ·È fiÙÈ Ë ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈṲ̂ÓË Â͛ۈÛË ı· Â›Ó·È ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋, ·ÔÎÏ›Ô-ÓÙ·˜ ¤ÙÛÈ ·fi ÙËÓ Â˘Ú‡ÙÂÚË ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ¤Ó· ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ Ô˘ı· ÌÔÚÔ‡Û·Ó Ó· ÚԂϤ„Ô˘Ó ·ÎÚÈ‚¤ÛÙÂÚ· ÙÔ Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ. ™ÙË ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›·ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ Î·È ÛÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈΤ˜ ̤ıÔ‰ÔÈ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛ˘ Î·È Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÔÈÔԛ˜ ‰¤¯ÔÓÙ·È ÔχÏÔη ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ, Ì ÛÎÔfi Ó· ‚ÂÏÙȈı› Ë Úfi‚Ï„ËÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜ Î·È Ë ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›· ÙˆÓ ÂÍ·ÚÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ. °È· ÙËÓ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ··È-ÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ‰È·Ù˘ˆÌ¤Ó· Û ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈ΋ ‹ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈ΋ÌÔÚÊ‹. °È· ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ ·˘Ùfi ÚÔÙ›ÓÂÙ·È Î·È ¤Ó·˜ ÁÂÓÈÎfi˜ ÙÚfiÔ˜ ˘ÏÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈ-ÎÒÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ ·fi ˘¿Ú¯ÔÓÙ· ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈο, Ô˘ Ó· Â›Ó·È Î·Ù¿ÏÏËÏ· Î·È ÁÈ· ÂÎÙ›ÌË-ÛË Î·Ù¿ÛÙ·Û˘ Î·È ÁÈ· Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛË ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ.

da�dN

da�dN

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 147

2. ªË °Ú·ÌÌÈÎÔ› ∞ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ ∂ÎÙ›ÌËÛ˘

™Â ·ÓÙ›ıÂÛË Ì ÙË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô °Ú·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ∂Ï·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ (°∂∆), Ë Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ÙˆÓ ªË-°Ú·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ∂Ï·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ (ª°∂∆) ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂÈ ÙȘ ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚÔ˘˜ ÔÔÈ·Û‰‹ÔÙÂ Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛ˘ y = f(x). √ ·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔ˜ Ô˘ ¯ÚËÛÈ-ÌÔÔÈ› (Marquardt, 1963), Û˘Ó‰˘¿˙ÂÈ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜ Ô˘ ‚·Û›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙË ·Ú·ÁÒÁÈÛË ÙË˜Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛ˘ f(x) Î·È ÛÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘Í‹ Ù˘ Û ÛÂÈÚ¤˜ Taylor. √È ··Ú·›ÙËÙ˜ ÚÔ˘Ù›Ó˜ ˘ÏÔ-Ô›ËÛ˘ Ù˘ ª°∂∆ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ‚ÚÂıÔ‡Ó Û οı ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ‚È‚ÏÈÔı‹ÎË ÚÔÁÚ·Ì-Ì¿ÙˆÓ (fiˆ˜ IMSL, NAG, SAS, MatLab, ÎÏ.), ¿ÓÙ· fï˜ ··ÈÙÂ›Ù·È ÛˆÛÙ‹ Ú‡ıÌÈ-ÛË Ù˘ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘ (‚‹Ì·, ·ӷϋ„ÂȘ, ÎÏ.) ÛÙȘ ȉȷÈÙÂÚfiÙËÙ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Ô˘·ÓÙÈÌÂÙˆ›˙ÂÈ. ∞ÎfiÌË ÈÔ ÚÔËÁ̤ÓÔÈ ·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ (‹ Ê›ÏÙÚ·) ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÚÔÙ·ı› Â‰Ò Î·ÈÔÏÏ¿ ¯ÚfiÓÈ·, ·ÏÏ¿ Ë Â˘Ú‡ÙÂÚË ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ηı˘ÛÙÂÚÔ‡Û ÏfiÁˆ Ù˘ ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÈ΋˜ÔÏ˘ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘˜. √È ÛËÌÂÚÈÓ¤˜ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ ∏/À οÓÔ˘Ó ÂÊÈÎÙ‹ ÙËÓ ¯Ú‹ÛËÙÔ˘˜ Û ڷÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ¯ÚfiÓÔ Î·È ÔÈ ·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ ·˘ÙÔ› (Kalman Filter, Extended KalmanFilter, Adaptive Lainiotis Filter, Î.¿.), Â›Ó·È Ï¤ÔÓ È‰·ÓÈÎÔ› ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË Î·È ÙË Ù·˘-ÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÂÓfi˜ Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ (Lainiotis and Moussas, 1987). ™˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ, ÔÈ ∂ÂÎٷ̤-ÓÔÈ ∞ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ Kalman (EAK) ÚÔ¤Ú¯ÔÓÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙÔ˘ ÁÚ·Ì-ÌÈÎÔ‡ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘ Kalman Û ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ (Jazwinski, 1970; Anderson andMoore, 1979). ∆Ô ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÂÓfi˜ ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡ Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ÂÚÈÁÚ¿ÊÂÙ·È ·fi ÙȘ ·-ڷοو ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈΤ˜ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ:

x(k+1) = f[k,x(k)] + g[k,x(k)]w(k) (2)

z(k) = h[k,x(k)] + v(k) (3)

fiÔ˘ ÔÈ Û˘Ó·ÚÙ‹ÛÂȘ f(.), g(.) Î·È h(.), Â›Ó·È ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ Û˘Ó·ÚÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ÌÂÙ·-‚ÏËÙ‹˜ ηٿÛÙ·Û˘ x(k), ηÈ, ÂÊfiÛÔÓ Â›Ó·È Ô̷Ϥ˜ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ·Ó·Ù˘¯ıÔ‡Ó Û ÛÂÈÚ¤˜Taylor Á‡Úˆ ·fi ÙËÓ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË x(k/k) Î·È ÙËÓ Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë x(k/k-1). ∞ÁÓÔÒÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘˜fiÚÔ˘˜ ˘„ËÏfiÙÂÚ˘ Ù¿Í˘, ÌÔÚԇ̠ӷ ÚÔÛÂÁÁ›ÛÔ˘Ì ÙÔ ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ Ì ÙԷڷοو :

x(k+1) = F(k)�x(k) + G(k)�w(k) + a(k) (4)

z(k) = H(k)�x(k) + v(k) + b(k) (5)

fiÔ˘, a(k) = f[k,x(k/k)]–F(k)x(k/k) & b(k) = h[k,x(k/k-1)]–H(k)x(k/k–1)

√ ∂∞∫ ÚÒÙ˘ Ù¿Í˘ ÁÈ· ÙÔ ÚÔÛÂÁÁÈÛÙÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ (ÂÍ. 4 & 5) Â›Ó·È Ì›· ·Ú·Ï-Ï·Á‹ ÙÔ˘ ‚·ÛÈÎÔ‡ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘ Kalman Î·È ‰›ÓÂÙ·È ·fi ÙȘ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ:

P(k/k–1) = F(k)�P(k–1/k–1)�FT(k) + G(k)�Q(k)�GT(k) (6)

K(k) = P(k/k–1)�HT(k)�[H(k)�P(k/k–1)�HT(k)+R(k)]–1 (7)

P(k/k) = [I–K(k)�H(k)]�P(k/k–1) (8)

148 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

x(k/k–1) = f[k–1,x(k–1/k–1)] (9)

~z(k/k–1) = z(k) – h[k,x(k/k–1)] (10)

x(k/k) = x(k/k–1) + K(k)�~z(k/k-1) (11)

∆Ô Ê›ÏÙÚÔ (·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔ˜) ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È Ï¤ÔÓ ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfi Ô‡Ù ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙÔ fiÛÔÓ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙÔ ·Ú-¯ÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ, Î·È ÔÈ ÔÛfiÙËÙ˜ x(k/k–1) Î·È P(k/k–1) Â›Ó·È ¯·Ï·Ú¤˜ Î·È ‰ËÏÒÓÔ˘Ó ÚÔ-ÛÂÁÁ›ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ˘fi Û˘Óı‹ÎË Ì¤ÛˆÓ ÙÈÌÒÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÛÔÚÒÓ ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ·. ¶·Ú’ fiÏ· ·˘-Ù¿ Ô ∂∞∫ ‰È·ı¤ÙÂÈ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ˜ Ô˘ ÏÂ›Ô˘Ó ·fi ÙÔ ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfi ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙÔ Ê›ÏÙÚÔKalman, Ì ΢ÚÈfiÙÂÚË ÙË Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛË ·ÁÓÒÛÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Ì ÙÔ Ó· ÂÓÙ·¯ıÔ‡Ó Ì¤-Û· ÛÙÔ ‰È¿Ó˘ÛÌ· ηٿÛÙ·Û˘ Î·È Ó· ÂÎÙÈÌËıÔ‡Ó Ì·˙› Ì ·˘Ùfi.

3. ∞Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈο & ∫·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ªÔÓ٤Ϸ ¢È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ƒˆÁÌÒÓ

™ÙË ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ, Ë ‰˘Ó·ÌÈ΋ Ù˘ ÎfiˆÛ˘ ÂÎÊÚ¿-˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙË ·Ú¿ÁˆÁÔ ÙÔ˘ Ì‹ÎÔ˘˜ Ù˘ ÚˆÁÌ‹˜ · ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔÓ ·ÚÈıÌfi ÙˆÓ Î‡ÎÏˆÓ Îfi-ˆÛ˘ ¡(d·/d¡), Î·È Â›Ó·È Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛË ÙÔ˘ Û˘ÓÙÂÏÂÛÙ‹ ∫ Î·È ÈÔ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ Ù˘ ÌÂ-Ù·‚ÔÏ‹˜ ÙÔ˘, ¢∫, Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÂÈ ·fi ÙÔ Â‡ÚÔ˜ Ù˘ Ù¿Û˘ ÊfiÚÙÈÛ˘ ¢S(Smax– Smin) ηÈÙÔ Ì‹ÎÔ˜ Ù˘ ÚˆÁÌ‹˜ ·. ∏ ÌÔÚÊ‹ Ù˘ Â͛ۈÛ˘ ÔÈΛÏÂÈ, Ì ϤÔÓ Û˘¯Ó¤˜ ÙȘ ·Ú·Î¿-Ùˆ ‰È·Ù˘ÒÛÂȘ (ÂÍ. 12):

·) d·/dN = C1�·n ‚) d·/dN = C2�¢S�·n Á) d·/dN = C3�f(¢K) (12)

fiÔ˘, Ù· C1, C2, C3 & n Â›Ó·È ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈΤ˜ ÛÙ·ıÂÚ¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ˘ÏÈÎÔ‡, ¢S Ë ÌÂÙ·‚ÔÏ‹ ÙË˜Î˘ÎÏÈ΋˜ Ù¿Û˘, ηÈ, ¢K Ë ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔÈ¯Ë ÌÂÙ·‚ÔÏ‹ ÙÔ˘ Û˘ÓÙÂÏÂÛÙ‹ Û˘ÛÛÒÚ¢Û˘ Ù¿ÛˆÓ.

∏ ‰ÈÂÍ·ÁˆÁ‹ ÔÏÏÒÓ Î·È ·˘ÛÙËÚ¿ ÂÏÂÁ¯fiÌÂÓˆÓ ÂÈÚ·Ì¿ÙˆÓ (¯, Virkler et al.,1979; Ghonem and Dore, 1987) ¤‰ÂÈÍ fiÙÈ, Ë ‰È¿‰ÔÛË ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ÏfiÁˆ ÎfiˆÛ˘ Â›Ó·È ÌÈ·‰È·‰Èηۛ· ÌÂ Ù˘¯·›Â˜ ȉÈfiÙËÙ˜ ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ ÔÈΛÏÔ˘Ó, Î·È ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ‰ÂÈÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ, ·ÏÏ¿Î·È Î·Ù¿ ÙË ‰È¿ÚÎÂÈ· Ù˘ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ οı ڈÁÌ‹˜. ŒÓ·˜ ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ˜ ·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ÛÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈÎÒÓÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ ¤¯ÂÈ ÚÔÙ·ı› ÁÈ· ÙË ÂÚÈÁÚ·Ê‹ Ù˘ Ù˘¯·›·˜ ·˘Ù‹˜ Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔÚ¿˜, ΢ڛˆ˜‚¿ÛÂÈ Ù˘¯·ÈÔÔÈËÌ¤ÓˆÓ ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÒÓ ÓfïÓ, ‹ Î·È ¿ÏÏˆÓ ÛÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ(Bogdanoff and Kozin, 1980; Yang et al., 1983; Lucia, 1985; Solomos and Moussas, 1991;Ray and Tangirala, 1997; Patankar and Ray, 2000; Kaminski, 2002). ∆· ÛÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈο ËÌÈÂ-ÌÂÈÚÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ˘Ôı¤ÙÔ˘Ó fiÙÈ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ·‚‚·ÈfiÙËÙ· Û ÌÈ· ‹ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ·Ú·Ì¤-ÙÚÔ˘˜ ( C, n, ÎÏ.), ÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ÌÔÓÙÂÏÔÔÈÔ‡ÌÂ Û·Ó Ù˘¯·›Â˜ ÌÂÙ·‚ÏËÙ¤˜. Œ¯ÂÈ ‰Âȯı››Û˘ (Kozin and Bogdanoff, 1981; Ostergaard and Hillberry, 1983), fiÙÈ Ë ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË ÙˆÓ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Á›ÓÂÙ·È ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ Û·Ó ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙË ÌÂÙ·‚ÏËÙ‹ ÙÔ Ì‹-ÎÔ˜ Ù˘ ÚˆÁÌ‹˜ ·, ·ÓÙ› ÙˆÓ Î‡ÎÏˆÓ ÎfiˆÛ˘ ¡.

ŒÓ·˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ÈÔ ‚·ÛÈÎÔ‡˜ Î·È ·ÏÔ‡˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜ Â›Ó·È Ë Â͛ۈÛË Shanley (ÂÍ. 13).∆· ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ· ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ Ô˘ ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È ÛÙË ‚È‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›· ‚·Û›˙ÔÓÙ·È Û ÙÚÔÔÔÈ-

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 149

‹ÛÂȘ Î·È ÂÂÎÙ¿ÛÂȘ Ù˘ Â͛ۈÛ˘ Paris (ÂÍ. 14). ¢Â ÏÂ›Ô˘Ó fï˜ Î·È ÈÔ ÔχÏÔÎÂ˜Î·È ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ fiˆ˜ ÙˆÓ Larsen-Yang (ÂÍ. 15):

= C�(a)n (13)

= C�(¢∫)n = C��¢S �a� � Y�n

(14)

= 10C1sinh(C2log(¢K)+C3)+C4 (15)

fiÔ˘, Ë À Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙË ÁˆÌÂÙÚ›· ÙÔ˘ ‰ÔÎÈÌ›Ô˘ Î·È Â›Ó·È ÛÙ·ıÂÚ¿ ÁÈ· ÌÂÁ¿Ï˜ ÂÈ-Ê¿ÓÂȘ, ‹ Â›Ó·È Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛË ÙÔ˘ · fiÙ·Ó ÔÈ ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ‰ÔÎÈÌ›Ô˘ Î·È ÚˆÁÌ‹˜ Â›Ó·È Û˘-ÁÎÚ›ÛÈ̘. √È Ï‡ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ÔÏÔÎÏËÚÒÓÔÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜ .¯. Paris &

Shanley, Ì ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙË ÌÂÙ·‚ÏËÙ‹ ÙÔ ·, Î·È ÛÙ·ıÂÚfi À�YC = ���À�, ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÙË ÌÔÚÊ‹:

¡ = (16)

& ¡ = (17)

ŸÙ·Ó Î·È ÙÔ ¢S Â›Ó·È ÛÙ·ıÂÚfi, ÔÈ ÓfiÌÔÈ Â›Ó·È ÈÛÔ‰‡Ó·ÌÔÈ (·ÓÙÈηıÈÛÙÒÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ n/2Ì n Î·È ÂÓۈ̷ÙÒÓÔÓÙ·˜ fiϘ ÙȘ ÛÙ·ıÂÚ¤˜ ÛÙÔ C). √È ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎÔ› Ù‡ÔÈ Ô˘ ÚÔ·-ÙÔ˘Ó, Î·È ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó··Ú¿ÛÙ·ÛË ‹ ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË ÙÔ˘ Ê·ÈÓÔ̤ÓÔ˘ ›ӷÈ:

¡k+1 = Nk + & ¡k+1 = Nk + (18)

·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ·, fiÔ˘ ·Î+1=·Î+¢·. ø˜ › ÙÔ Ï›ÛÙÔÓ, fï˜, ÙÔ À ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ÛÙ·ıÂÚ¿ ·Ï-Ï¿ Â›Ó·È ÌÈ· ÔχÏÔÎË Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛË ÙÔ˘ · Î·È ÁÈ’ ·˘Ùfi ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ¿ÓÙ· ÂÊÈÎÙ‹ Ì›· ÙÂ-ÏÈ΋ χÛË ÛÙÔ ÔÏÔÎϋڈ̷. ∆fiÙ ÌÔÚԇ̠ӷ ˘ÔÏÔÁ›ÛÔ˘Ì ÙÔ ¡ ÚÔÛÂÁÁÈÛÙÈο, ı¤-ÙÔÓÙ·˜ fiÔ˘ d·/d¡ ÙÔ ¢·/¢¡, ÁÈ· ·ÚÎÂÙ¿ ÌÈÎÚfi ‰È¿ÛÙËÌ· ¢·, ÔfiÙ ¤¯Ô˘Ì :

= = f (¢K(ak)) ⇒ ¡k+1 = Nk + (19)

ÔfiÙÂ Î·È ÔÈ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ .¯. Paris & Larsen-Yang, ÁÈ· ϤÔÓ Û‡ÓıÂÙ· Y(·) Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ·:

¡k+1 = Nk + & ¡k+1 = Nk + (20)ak+1– ak���

10C1sinh(C2log(¢K(ak))+C3)+C4

ak+1– ak��C�(¢K(ak))n

ak+1–ak��f (¢K(ak))

ak+1– ak�Nk+1–Nk

¢a�¢N

a1– nk+1 – a1–n

k ��C(1–n)

a1– n/2k+1 – a1–n/2

k ���C(¢S�YC)n(1–n/2)

a1– nf – a1–n

i ��C(1–n)

a1– n/2f – a1–n/2

i ��C(¢S�YC)n(1–n/2)

da�dN

da�dN

da�dN

150 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

√È ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈΤ˜ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ (ÂÍ. 18 & 20) Â›Ó·È Ë ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÙÂÚË ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤-ÏˆÓ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ÁÈ·Ù› ·˘Ù‹ ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó·‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÙˆÓ ‰Â‰Ô-Ì¤ÓˆÓ Î·È ÁÈ· ÙË Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë Ù˘ ÂͤÏÈ͢ Ù˘ ÚˆÁÌ‹˜, fiÙ·Ó ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÂÎÙÈÌËı› ÔÈ ÙÈ̤˜ وӷڷ̤ÙÚˆÓ. ŸÌˆ˜, ÔÈ ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Û˘Ó‹ıˆ˜ ÂÎÙÈÌËı› ·fi ÙË ÏÔÁ·-ÚÈıÌÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓ٤ψÓ, fiˆ˜ ·˘Ù‹ Ù˘ Â͛ۈÛ˘ (1-‚), Î·È Ì ÙË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋ ̤-ıÔ‰Ô ÂÏ·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ÙÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ. ∆Ô ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›Ô Û˘Ó¿ÁÂÙ·È ÌÈ· ‰È·ÊÔÚ¿ ÛÙȘ ÂÎÙÈÌË̤Ó˜ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ·fi ·˘Ù¤˜ Ô˘ ı· ‹Ù·Ó ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙ˜ ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi Ù‡Ô. ∏·fiÎÏÈÛË ·˘Ù‹ ·fi ÙȘ ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙ˜ ÙÈ̤˜ ·ÔʇÁÂÙ·È (Moussas et al., 1994) ·Ó ·ÓÙ› ÙÔ˘ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈÎÔ‡ (ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡) Ù‡Ô˘ Î·È Ù˘ ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋˜ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘ ÂÏ·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ÙÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ(°∂∆), ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈËıÔ‡Ó, Ô ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi˜ (ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfi˜) Ù‡Ô˜ Î·È Ë Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ÙˆÓ ªË°Ú·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ∂Ï·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ (ª°∂∆) ‹ ÔÈ ∂ÂÎٷ̤ÓÔÈ ∞ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ Kalman(∂∞∫) Ô˘ ›‰·Ì ÈÔ ¿Óˆ.

™ÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÂÙ·È Ë ÁÂÓÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÂÓfi˜ ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ڈÁÌÒÓ, Ô˘ Ó· Â›Ó·È Î·Ù¿ÏÏËÏË ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ∂∞∫, ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È Ó· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È ·fi fiÛÔÙÔ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÔ‡˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜ Î·È ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙ· ·fi ÙËÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜. ∆Ô ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ·˘Ùfi ˘ÔÏÔÁ›˙ÂÈ ÙÔÓ ¯ÚfiÓÔ-˙ˆ‹˜ (‹ ·ÏÏÈÒ˜ ÙÔ Ï‹ıԘ·ÎÏˆÓ Î·Ù·fiÓËÛ˘) ÂÓfi˜ ˘ÏÈÎÔ‡ ̤¯ÚȘ fiÙÔ˘ ¤ÏıÂÈ Î·Ù·ÛÙÚÔÊÈ΋ ıÚ·‡ÛË (‰ËÏ. ÙÔ̤ÁÂıÔ˜ Ù˘ ÚˆÁÌ‹˜ Ó· ÍÂÂÚ¿ÛÂÈ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ fiÚÈ·). ∆Ô ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ Â›Ó·È Î·Ù¿ÏÏËÏÔ ÁÈ·ÙȘ ÂÚÈÙÒÛÂȘ ‰ÔÎÈÌ›ˆÓ fiÔ˘ ÂϤÁ¯ÔÓÙ·È Î·È ·Ú·ÙËÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È ¤ÌÌÂÛ· ‹ ¿ÌÂÛ· Î·È Ôȉ‡Ô ÔÛfiÙËÙ˜ · & ¡. √È ÁÂÓÈΤ˜ ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈΤ˜ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛ˘ ›ӷÈ:

N N+f(a,¢a) wNxk+1 = fn(xk) + wk : a = a+¢a + wa (21)� ¢a �

k+1� ¢a �

k� w¢a

�k

N = 1 0 0N

vNzk = H � xk + vk :a k = 0 1 0

� a +va k

(22)� � � � � ¢a �k

� �fiÔ˘, Ë ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋ Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛË fn ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi ÙÔÓ ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎfi ÓfiÌÔ Ì ÙÔÓ ÔÔ›Ôı· ˘ÏÔÔÈËı› ÙÔ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ, ‰ËÏ. Ë f (·, ¢·). °È· ÙËÓ ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ÓfiÌÔ˘ ÙÔ˘ Shanley,(ÂÍ. 18), Ô˘ Â›Ó·È ÈÛÔ‰‡Ó·ÌÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÓfiÌÔ˘ Paris ÁÈ· ¿ÂÈÚË ÂÈÊ¿ÓÂÈ· (Infinite Plate) ı·¤¯Ô˘ÌÂ:

¡k+1 = Nk +,

⇒ f(a, ¢a) = (23)

°È· Ó· ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ÂÎÙÈÌËıÔ‡Ó Î·È ÔÈ ·Ú¿ÌÂÙÚÔÈ ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘, ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁԇ̠¤Ó·Â·˘ÍË̤ÓÔ ‰È¿Ó˘ÛÌ· ηٿÛÙ·Û˘ Ô˘ ÂÚȤ¯ÂÈ ÙȘ ¿ÁÓˆÛÙ˜ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚÔ˘˜, fiˆ˜ .¯. ›-Ó·È ÔÈ C & n, ÔfiÙ ÙÔ ·Ú·ÌÂÙÚÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ (Ô˘ ÂÌÂÚȤ¯ÂÈ Î·È ÙÔ ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎfi) Á›ÓÂÙ·È:

(ak+¢ak)1– n – a1– nk ��

C�(1–n)

(ak+¢ak)1– n – a1– nk ��

C�(1–n)

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 151

N N+f(a, ¢a, C, n) wNa a+¢a wa

xk+1 = fn(xk) + wk : ¢a = ¢a + w¢a (24)C C wC�n

�k+1

�n

�k

�wn

�k

Na

zk = H � xk + vk :N

=1 0 0 0 0

� ¢a +vN (25)� a �

k � 0 1 0 0 0 �C

� va�

k�n

�k

∆· ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ·˘Ù¿ Â›Ó·È ÛÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈο Î·È ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÔ‡Ó Ù˘¯·›Â˜ ÌÂÙ·‚ÏËÙ¤˜. ∏ Ù˘-¯·ÈfiÙËÙ· Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚ›˙ÂÈ ÙË ‰È¿‰ÔÛË ÙˆÓ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ·Ó··Ú›ÛÙ·Ù·È Ì ÙȘ ·Ú¯ÈΤ˜ ÙÈ-̤˜ Î·È ÙȘ ‰È·ÛÔÚ¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘:

N0 pN 0 0 0 0 qN 0 0 0 0a0 0 pa 0 0 0 0 qa 0 0 0

x0 = ¢a0 , p0 = 0 0 p¢a 0 0 , Q = 0 0 q¢a 0 0 , R =RN 0

C0 0 0 0 pC pnC 0 0 0 qC 0� 0 Ra

��n0

� �0 0 0 pnC pC

� �0 0 0 0 qn

�∆¤ÏÔ˜, ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘ ∂∞∫, Ô ›Ó·Î·˜ Fn Ô˘ ÂÚȤ¯ÂÈ ÙȘ ÌÂ-

ÚÈΤ˜ ·Ú·ÁÒÁÔ˘˜ ÁÈ· ÙÔ ·Ú·ÌÂÙÚÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ı· Â›Ó·È :

1

0 1 1 0 0Fn =

0 0 1 0 0Î·È ÁÈ· Shanley Á›ÓÂÙ·È:

0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 1

1

0 1 1 0 0Fn =

0 0 1 0 0 (26)

0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 1

fiÔ˘, = – (a+¢a)1– n Log(a+¢a)– a1– nLog(a)����

C(1–n)(a+¢a)1– n – a1– n��

C(1–n)2∂f�∂n

∂f�∂n

(a+¢a)1– n – a1– n��

C2(1–n)(a+¢a)– n�

C(a+¢a)– n – a– n��

C

∂f�∂n

∂f�∂C

∂f�∂¢a

∂f�∂a

152 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

� �� �

4. ∞ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· ·fi ¶ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈο ¢Â‰Ô̤ӷ

∆· ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈο ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ Ì ٷ ÔÔ›· ‰ÔÎÈÌ¿ÛÙËÎ·Ó Ù· ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ & ·Ï-ÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ, ÚÔ¤Ú¯ÔÓÙ·È ·fi Ù· ÂÈÚ¿Ì·Ù· ÙˆÓ Virkler, Hillberry & Goel, Î·È Ù· ·Ú›-¯Â ¢ÁÂÓÒ˜ Ô Î·ıËÁËÙ‹˜ Hillberry ÙÔ˘ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙËÌ›Ô˘ Purdue. ™Ù· ÂÈÚ¿Ì·Ù· ¯ÚËÛÈ-ÌÔÔÈ‹ıËÎ·Ó ‰ÔΛÌÈ· Ì ÎÂÓÙÚÈ΋ ÚˆÁÌ‹ (Center Cracked), Ì ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ558.8�152.4�2.54 mm (L�W�B), Ë ‰Â ÔÛfiÙËÙ· À Ô˘ ·ÓÙÈÛÙÔȯ› ÛÙË ÁˆÌÂÙÚ›·ÙˆÓ ‰ÔÎÈÌ›ˆÓ Â›Ó·È Û˘Ó¿ÚÙËÛË ÙÔ˘ Ì‹ÎÔ˘˜ · Ù˘ ÚˆÁÌ‹˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ Ï¿ÙÔ˘˜ w ÙÔ˘ ‰ÔÎÈ-Ì›Ô˘, Y(a)=�/cos(�a/w)�. ∏ ·Ú¯È΋ ÚˆÁÌ‹ a0=9.00 mm, Î·È ÙÔ ‚‹Ì· ·‡ÍËÛ‹˜ Ù˘¢a=0.20 mm ÛÙËÓ ·Ú¯‹ Î·È ·ÚÁfiÙÂÚ· ·˘Í¿ÓÂÙ·È Û 0.40 Î·È 0.80 mm, ̤¯ÚÈ ÙÔ ÙÂÏÈÎfiÌ‹ÎÔ˜ 49.8 mm. ∏ ηٷfiÓËÛË ¤ÁÈÓ Û ıÂÚÌÔÎÚ·Û›· ‰ˆÌ·Ù›Ô˘ Ì ¢P=4.20 kip Î·È Û˘-ÓÂÒ˜ ¢S = (¢P/wB ) = 48.633 MPa.

™¯‹Ì· 1. ∆· ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· ·fi Ù· 68 ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈο ‰ÔΛÌÈ·.

™¯‹Ì· 2. ∆· ›‰È· ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈṲ̂ӷ.

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 153

∆· ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ ÙˆÓ 68 ÂÈÚ·Ì¿ÙˆÓ (™¯. 1 & 2) ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÁÈ· ÙË Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›Ë-ÛË ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ. ™˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ, Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÏÁÔ-Ú›ıÌÔ˘˜ °∂∆, ª°∂∆ Î·È ∂∞∫, Ù·˘ÙÔÔÈ‹ıËÎ·Ó ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ· Ë ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈ΋, ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈ-΋ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙˆÓ ËÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÒÓ ÓfïÓ. ∞ÎÔÏÔ‡ıˆ˜, ÔÈ ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·-ڷ̤ÙÚˆÓ ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈ‹ıËηÓ, ·fi ÙËÓ ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘, ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó·-‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· (ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË) ÙˆÓ 68 ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈÎÒÓ Î·Ì˘ÏÒÓ, Î·È ÙË Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë ÙÔ˘¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜. ™˘ÁÎÚ›ÓÔÓÙ·˜ Ù· ÚÔÛÔÌÔȈ̤ӷ Ì ٷ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈο ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· Î·È˘ÔÏÔÁ›˙ÔÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ Ì¤ÛÔ ÙÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈÎfi ÛÊ¿ÏÌ· (ª∆™), ¤¯Ô˘Ì ¤Ó· ̤ÙÚÔ Û‡ÁÎÚÈÛ˘ Ù˘ÈÛÙfiÙËÙ·˜ Ì ÙËÓ ÔÔ›·, οıÂ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌfi˜ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘-ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘ ·Ó··ÚÈÛÙ¿ a-priori ÙÔÊ·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ Î·È ÚԂϤÂÈ ÙÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ ˙ˆ‹˜. ™ÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÂÈϤ¯ıËÎ·Ó Î·È ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙Ô-ÓÙ·È Ù· ÈÔ ·ÓÙÈÚÔÛˆÂ˘ÙÈο ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù·, ·fi ¤Ó· Ï‹ıÔ˜ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌÒÓ ÓfïÓ-ÌÂ-ıfi‰ˆÓ Ô˘ ÌÂÏÂÙ‹ıËÎ·Ó (Moussas, 2002), Î·È ‰ÔÎÈÌ¿ÛÙËÎ·Ó ÛÙ· ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ ÙÔ˘ Virkler.

∏ Ù˘ÔÔÈË̤ÓË °Ú·ÌÌÈ΋ ª¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ (§ÔÁ-°∂∆) ··ÈÙ› ÙÔÓ ÌÂÙ·Û¯ËÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi وӉ‰ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ ·-¡ Û ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ (™¯. 2). ∫·Ù' ·Ú¯¿˜ ıˆÚ› Ù· ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ Û·Ó ¤Ó·Ó¤ÊÔ˜ (~11000) ÛËÌ›ˆÓ Î·È ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÂÈ ¤Ó· ˙¢Á¿ÚÈ ÙÈÌÒÓ (n, LogC) Ô˘ ÔÚ›˙ÂÈ Î·ÈÙËÓ Â˘ı›· ÙˆÓ ∂Ï·¯›ÛÙˆÓ ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁÒÓˆÓ. ™ÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ·, ‰È·ÙËÚÒÓÙ·˜ ÛÙ·ıÂÚfi ÙÔ n ˘Ô-ÏÔÁ›˙ÂÈ Í·Ó¿ ÙÔ LogC ÁÈ· οı ¤Ó· ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈÎfi ÛËÌ›Ô. ŒÙÛÈ, ηٷϋÁÂÈ Û ¤Ó· ˙¢Á¿-ÚÈ Ì¤ÛˆÓ ÙÈÌÒÓ ÁÈ· Ù· n & C Î·È Û ̛· ηٷÓÔÌ‹ ÁÈ· ÙÔ C (¶›Ó. 1). ∏ ·Ú¿ÌÂÙÚÔ˜ nıˆÚÂ›Ù·È ÛÙ·ıÂÚ¿, Ë ‰Â ηٷÓÔÌ‹ ÁÈ· ÙÔ C ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ·, Î·È ÙȘ ȉȷÈÙÂ-ÚfiÙËÙ˜ ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ÂÈÚ·Ì¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÙȘ Ù˘¯fiÓ ÌÂÙ·‚ÔϤ˜ ̤۷ ÛÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ Â›Ú·Ì·. ∆¤-ÏÔ˜ ÔÈ ÚÔÛÔÌÔÈÒÛÂȘ Î·È ÔÈ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ‰ÂÓ Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙË ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈ΋ ·ÏÏ¿ Ì ÙËÓ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ Ô˘ ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈ› Ë ÁÂÓÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜. ∏ ̤ıÔ‰Ô˜§ÔÁ-°∂∆ ÏfiÁˆ Ù˘ ·ÏfiÙËÙ¿˜ Ù˘ Â›Ó·È È‰·ÓÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ·Ú¯ÈÎÒÓ ÙÈ-ÌÒÓ ÙˆÓ Â·Ó·ÏËÙÈÎÒÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ Ô˘ ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ıÔ‡Ó.

∏ ÁÂÓÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓË ªË-°Ú·ÌÌÈ΋ ª¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ (∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆) ‰ÂÓ ··ÈÙ› ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌ›ÛÂÈ˜Î·È ÌÂÙ·ÙÚÔ¤˜ ÙˆÓ ‰Â‰Ô̤ӈÓ. ∂ÎÙÈÌ¿ Î·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈ› ÙȘ ÙÈ̤˜ وӷڷ̤ÙÚˆÓ ÁÈ· Úfi‚Ï„Ë, Ì ÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ, Î·È ÙÔ Î˘ÚÈfiÙÂÚÔ, ÂÈÙÚ¤ÂÈ ÙËÓ ¯Ú‹ÛËÔÔÈÔ˘‰‹ÔÙ ÓfiÌÔ˘ FCG. ∏ ̤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÂÙ·È Î·Ù’ ·Ú¯‹Ó ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfifiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ (n & C) ÁÈ· οı ÌÈ· ·fi ÙȘ 68 ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈΤ˜ η̇Ϙ, ηÈÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ Â·Ó·ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi ÙȘ ÌÈ·˜ ·fi ·˘Ù¤˜ (C), ıˆÚÒÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ ¿Ï-ÏË (‹ ÙȘ ¿ÏϘ) ÛÙ·ıÂÚ‹ (n) (¶›Ó. 1). ∏ ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË Î·È Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È Â›Û˘ ÌÂÙËÓ ›‰È· ÌÔÚÊ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘.

™ÙÔÓ ¶›Ó·Î· 1 ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È, ÂÎÙfi˜ ·fi ÙȘ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ, Ù··ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· Ù˘ ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ Î·È Ù˘ ·Ó·‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ ÙˆÓ ÂÈÚ·-Ì·ÙÈÎÒÓ ‰Â‰Ô̤ӈÓ. ™˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ ÁÈ· οı ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘-ªÂıfi‰Ô˘ ¤ÁÈÓ·Ó:∞) ¶ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË Ù˘ ̤Û˘ η̇Ï˘ Ì ÙȘ ̤Û˜ ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Ô˘ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹-ıËηÓ, Û‡ÁÎÚÈÛË ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛÔÌÔȈ̤ÓÔ˘ ̤ÛÔ˘ fiÚÔ˘ Ì ÙÔ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ̤ÛÔ fiÚÔ ÙˆÓ 68ÂÈÚ·Ì¿ÙˆÓ, ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÌfi˜ ÙÔ˘ ª¤ÛÔ˘ ∞fiÏ˘ÙÔ˘ ™Ê¿ÏÌ·ÙÔ˜ (ª∞™), Î·È µ) ¶ÚÔÛÔ-ÌÔ›ˆÛË Î·È ÙˆÓ 68 Î·Ì˘ÏÒÓ ·fi ÙȘ 68 ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ˜ ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Ô˘ ÂÎÙÈ-Ì‹ıËηÓ, Û‡ÁÎÚÈÛË Î¿ı η̇Ï˘ Ì ÙËÓ ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔÈ¯Ë Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈ΋ ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈ΋ η̇-

154 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ÏË, ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÌfi˜ ÙÔ˘ ª¤ÛÔ˘ ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ™Ê¿ÏÌ·ÙÔ˜ (ª∆™) Î·È ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÌfi˜ ÙÔ˘Ì¤ÛÔ˘ fiÚÔ˘ ÙˆÓ ª∆™ fiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ 68 Î·Ì˘ÏÒÓ. Ÿˆ˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Î·È ÛÙÔÓ ¶›Ó·Î· 1, ˯ڋÛË ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎÔ‡ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ Ì ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜ ·’ ¢ı›·˜ ÛÙ· ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈο‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ ·-¡, ÌÂÈÒÓÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο Ù· ÛÊ¿ÏÌ·Ù· ηٿ ÙË ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË Î·È ·Ó·‰ËÌÈ-Ô˘ÚÁ›· ÙˆÓ ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈÎÒÓ Î·Ì˘ÏÒÓ, Î·È Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ ÌÂÈÒÓÂÈ Î·Ù¿ 1-2 Ù¿ÍÂȘ ÌÂÁ¤-ıÔ˘˜ ÙÔ ª∆™ ÁÈ· οı η̇ÏË Î·È Î·Ù¿ 70% ÙÔ ª∞™ ÁÈ· ÙÔ Ì¤ÛÔ fiÚÔ fiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÂÈ-Ú·Ì·ÙÈÎÒÓ Î·Ì˘ÏÒÓ.

™ÙË ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›· fiϘ ÔÈ Ì¤ıÔ‰ÔÈ ˘ÏÔÔÈÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ì ÙÔ ÓfiÌÔ Shanley (Paris-IP)ÁÈ· ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ Û˘ÁÎÚÈÙÈ΋˜ ·Ú¿ıÂÛ˘. ŸÌˆ˜, Ë Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ª°∂∆ ÂÈÙÚ¤ÂÈ ÂÈϤÔÓ Î·È Ù˯ڋÛË ¿ÏÏˆÓ ÓfiÌˆÓ Ô˘ ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÔ˘Ó ·ÎfiÌ· ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ÙËÓ ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· Ù˘. °È· ·Ú¿-‰ÂÈÁÌ·, Ì ÙÔ ÓfiÌÔ ÙˆÓ Larsen-Yang (ÂÍ. 15) fiˆ˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È ÛÙÔ ¶›Ó·Î· 2, Ù· ÛÊ¿Ï-Ì·Ù· ÌÂÈÒÓÔÓÙ·È ·ÎfiÌË ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ, ηٿ ¿ÏÏ· 60% ÙÔ˘Ï¿¯ÈÛÙÔÓ.

¶›Ó·Î·˜ 1. ∞ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· ÙˆÓ ªÂıfi‰ˆÓ §ÔÁ-°∂∆ & ∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆ (ÓfiÌÔ˜ Shanley)

ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ - ¶ÂÈÚ·- ∂ÎÙÈÌÔ‡- ¶Ï‹ıÔ˜ ª¤ÛÔ˜ ¢È·- ª∞™ ª∆™

ª¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ Ì·ÙÈο ÌÂÓÔÈ ∆ÈÌÒÓ ŸÚÔ˜ ÛÔÚ¿ ÙÔ˘ Î·È ÙˆÓ

¢Â‰Ô- ¶·Ú¿ ¶·Ú·- ¶·Ú·- ª¤ÛÔ˘ 68 ∫·-

̤ӷ ÌÂÙÚÔÈ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ŸÚÔ˘ Ì˘ÏÒÓ

n 1 1.86009 0§ÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈÎfi ~11,000 C (·fi

1 0.000204618 0 4297.58 –LogC)

°∂∆ ™ËÌ›· (n = ÛÙ·ı.) 1 1.86009 0C (·fi

~11,000 0.000211324 3.29015e-9 – –LogC)

n 68 1.8601 1.1247e-002§ÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈÎfi 68 C (·fi

68 0.000223536 7.9028e-009 3849.13 4.24965e+007LogC)

°∂∆ ∫·Ì‡Ï˜ (n = ÛÙ·ı.) 1 1.8601 0C (·fi

68 0.000205201 2.32896e-10 3781.54 1.14708e+008LogC)

n 68 1.8091 1.3165e-002∞Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi 68 C 68 1.8194e-004 1.1324e-008 1194.4 5.68101e+006

ª°∂∆ ∫·Ì‡Ï˜ (n = ÛÙ·ı.) 1 1.8091 0C 68 1.6176e-004 1.1644e-010 1213.51 1.16438e+007

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 155

¶›Ó·Î·˜ 2. ∞ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· Ù˘ ªÂıfi‰Ô˘ ∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆ (ÓfiÌÔ˜ Larsen-Yang)

ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ - ¶ÂÈÚ·- ∂ÎÙÈÌÔ‡- ¶Ï‹ıÔ˜ ª¤ÛÔ˜ ¢È·- ª∞™ ª∆™

ª¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ Ì·ÙÈο ÌÂÓÔÈ ∆ÈÌÒÓ ŸÚÔ˜ ÛÔÚ¿ ÙÔ˘ Î·È ÙˆÓ

¢Â‰Ô- ¶·Ú¿ ¶·Ú·- ¶·Ú·- ª¤ÛÔ˘ 68 ∫·-

̤ӷ ÌÂÙÚÔÈ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ŸÚÔ˘ Ì˘ÏÒÓ

C1 68 0.3595 0.0015∞Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi 68 C2 68 8.2338 0.2526

ª°∂∆ ∫·Ì‡Ï˜ C3 68 -8.8900 0.3662C4 68 -6.8711 0.0051 407.61 2.04842e+006

™ÙÔ ™¯‹Ì· 3 Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ë ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË ÌÈ·˜ η̇Ï˘ (15Ë) Ô˘ Â›Ó·È Ì·ÎÚÈ¿ ·fiÙÔ Ì¤ÛÔ fiÚÔ, Î·È Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· Ë Û˘ÓÙÔÌfiÙÂÚË ·fi ÙȘ 68. ∏ ‰È·ÛÔÚ¿ ÙˆÓ ÙÈÌÒÓ ÙˆÓ ·-ڷ̤ÙÚˆÓ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ› ¤Ó· ¿Óˆ Î·È Î¿Ùˆ fiÚÈÔ Ì¤Û· ÛÙ· ÔÔ›· ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·ÈË Úfi‚Ï„Ë, ÂÊfiÛÔÓ ÔÈ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È ÛˆÛÙ¤˜. √È ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ Ù˘ ÙÂÏÈ΋˜ ÙÈÌ‹˜ (¯Úfi-ÓÔ˜ ˙ˆ‹˜), a-priori Î·È ÌÂÙ¿ ·fi ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘˜ ÛÙÔ 9Ô, 36Ô & 80Ô ÛËÌ›Ô, ‰Â›¯ÓÔ˘Ó ÌÈ· ‰È·-‰Ô¯È΋ ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛË ÚÔ˜ ÙË ÛˆÛÙ‹ ÙÈÌ‹ Î·È Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· ÌÈ· Ì›ˆÛË Ù˘ ·ÌÊÈ‚ÔÏ›·˜.ŸÌˆ˜ Ë ¤ÏÏÂÈ„Ë Â·ÓÂÎÙ›ÌËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Û ڷÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ¯ÚfiÓÔ ‰ÂÓ ÂÈÙÚ¤ÂÈÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚË ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ÛÙȘ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜. ∆Ë ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ·˘Ù‹ ¤¯ÂÈ ÂÓ-ۈ̷و̤ÓË Ë ÈÔ ÂÍÂÏÈÁ̤ÓË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ Ô˘ ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ı›.

∏ ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ Ì ÙË ÚÔËÁ̤ÓË ªË-°Ú·ÌÌÈ΋ ª¤ıÔ‰Ô (∫·-Ù·ÛÙ-∂∞∫) ‰ÂÓ ··ÈÙ› ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌ›ÛÂȘ Î·È ÌÂÙ·ÙÚÔ‹ ÙˆÓ ‰Â‰ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Î·È ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈ-› ÙÔ ›‰ÈÔ Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÁÈ· ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË Î·È Úfi‚Ï„Ë. ∂ÈÙÚ¤ÂÈ Î·È ·˘Ù‹ ÙËÓ¯Ú‹ÛË ÔÔÈÔ˘‰‹ÔÙ ÓfiÌÔ˘ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ, ÙÔ ‰Â ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈÎfi ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÚÔ-·ÙÂÈ ·’ ¢ı›·˜ ·fi ÙÔ ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi. ∏ ̤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ÂÊ·ÚÌfi˙ÂÙ·È, fiˆ˜ Î·È ÔÈ ÚÔË-ÁÔ‡ÌÂÓ˜, ηْ ·Ú¯‹Ó ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi fiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ (n & C) ÁÈ· οıÂÌÈ· ·fi ÙȘ 68 ÂÈÚ·Ì·ÙÈΤ˜ η̇Ϙ, Î·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ Â·Ó·ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfiÙȘ ÌÈ·˜ ·fi ·˘Ù¤˜ (C), ıˆÚÒÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ ¿ÏÏË (‹ ÙȘ ¿ÏϘ) ÛÙ·ıÂÚ‹ (n). ∏ ̤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ∫·-Ù·ÛÙ-∂∞∫ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÂͤÏÈÍË ÙˆÓ °∂∆ & ª°∂∆ Î·È ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÂÎÙÈÌ¿ Î·È Ó· ‰ÈÔÚıÒÓÂÈÛ˘Ó¯Ҙ (on-line) ÙȘ ÙÈ̤˜ Î·È ÙȘ ‰È·ÛÔÚ¤˜ ÙˆÓ ·ÁÓÒÛÙˆÓ ‹ ÌÂÙ·‚·ÏÏfiÌÂÓˆÓ ·Ú·-̤ÙÚˆÓ, ÒÛÙ ӷ ·Ú¤¯ÂÈ Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ˜ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ ˙ˆ‹˜ Î·È Ì ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚË·ÌÊÈ‚ÔÏ›· (‰È·ÛÔÚ¿). ÃÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÙˆÓ ÂÍ. (21)-(22) Î·È ÙȘ ̤Û˜ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ n, C ·fi ÙȘ ÚÔËÁÔ‡ÌÂÓ˜ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜ οÓÔ˘Ì ·Ï‹ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË Ì Úfi‚Ï„ËÙ˘ ÙÂÏÈ΋˜ ÙÈÌ‹˜ ·fi οı ÛËÌÂ›Ô (™¯. 4).

156 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

™¯‹Ì· 3. ¶ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË ÂÓfi˜ ·fi Ù· ÂÈÚ¿Ì·Ù· (15Ô) Î·È Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë Ù˘ ÙÂÏÈ΋˜ ÙÈÌ‹˜·fi 4 ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈο ÛËÌ›·: A-priori, ·fi ÙÔ 9Ô, ÙÔ 36Ô Î·È ÙÔ 80Ô ÛËÌ›Ô.

™¯‹Ì· 4. ∂ÎÙ›ÌËÛË Î·È Û˘Ó¯‹˜ Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë ÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜ ÙˆÓ 2 ÈÔ ·ÎÚ·›ˆÓ ÂÚÈÙÒÛˆÓ. √È Î¿ıÂÙ˜ ÁÚ·Ì̤˜ ‰Â›¯ÓÔ˘Ó ÙȘ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ

·fi ÙÔ 9Ô, ÙÔ 36Ô Î·È ÙÔ 80Ô ÛËÌ›Ô.

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 157

™¯‹Ì· 5. ∆·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛË Ù˘ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚÔ˘ C Î·È ‚ÂÏÙȈ̤ÓË Úfi‚ÏÂ„Ë ÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜ÙˆÓ 2 ÈÔ ·ÎÚ·›ˆÓ ÂÚÈÙÒÛˆÓ. √È Î¿ıÂÙ˜ ÁÚ·Ì̤˜ ‰Â›¯ÓÔ˘Ó

ÙȘ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ·fi ÙÔ 9Ô, ÙÔ 36Ô Î·È ÙÔ 80Ô ÛËÌ›Ô.

√È ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ Â›Ó·È Û˘ÁÎÏ›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛÙË ÛˆÛÙ‹ ÙÂÏÈ΋ ÙÈÌ‹, Ë ÔÔ›· ÂÚȤ¯ÂÙ·È ¿Óٷ̤۷ ÛÙÔ ‰È¿ÛÙËÌ· Ô˘ ‰›ÓÂÈ Ë ÙÂÏÈ΋ ‰È·ÛÔÚ¿. ∆Ô Î˘ÚÈfiÙÂÚÔ ÚÔÙ¤ÚËÌ· Ù˘ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘Â›Ó·È Ë ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ. ªÂ ÙÔ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÙˆÓ ÂÍ. (24)-(25)Ù·˘ÙÔÔÈԇ̠ÙË ·Ú¿ÌÂÙÚÔ C (™¯. 5) Î·È ·Ú·ÙËÚԇ̠ηıÒ˜ ·˘Ù‹ Û˘ÁÎÏ›ÓÂÈ ÛÙË Ûˆ-ÛÙ‹ ÙÈÌ‹, ÙË ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÙÂÏÈÎÒÓ ÚԂϤ„ˆÓ.

∆· ÙÂÏÈο ˙‡ÁË ÙÈÌÒÓ (n,C) Ô˘ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ıËÎ·Ó ·fi ÙÔ ∫·Ù·ÛÙ-∂∞∫ ÁÈ· ÙȘ 68 ÂÈ-Ú·Ì·ÙÈΤ˜ η̇Ϙ ·Ó··Ú›ÛÙ·ÓÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ n-C ¯ÒÚÔ ·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ· Ì ÙȘ ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ˜ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆ ÛÙËÓ ™¯. 6. ¶·Ú·ÙËÚԇ̠fiÙÈ ÔÈ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂȘ Ì ∂∞∫ ¤¯Ô˘ÓÏ›ÁÔ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚË ‰È·ÛÔÚ¿ ÛÙÔ ¯ÒÚÔ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ.

∏ Û‡ÁÎÏÈÛË ÚÔ˜ ÙȘ ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙ˜ ÙÈ̤˜ ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÂÙ·È ÌÂÙ¿ ·fi ·ӿÏË„Ë Ù˘ ‰È·‰È-ηۛ·˜, Ì ·Ú¯ÈΤ˜ ÙÈ̤˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ ÙȘ ÚÔËÁÔ‡ÌÂÓ˜ ÙÂÏÈΤ˜ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛÂȘ. ∏ Ï›-·ÓÛË ·˘Ù‹ ‚ÔËı¿ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· ÛÙË ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ÔÏÏÒÓ ·ÁÓÒÛÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ, ·ÏÏ¿ ηÈÁÈ· ÙË ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ÙˆÓ (n,C) ·ÚÎÔ‡Ó 9 ·ӷϋ„ÂȘ ÁÈ· Ó· ÚԂϤÂÙ·È Ì ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· Ô¯ÚfiÓÔ˜ ˙ˆ‹˜ ·fi ÙÔ 36Ô ÌfiÏȘ ÛËÌÂ›Ô ÙˆÓ ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ (™¯. 7).

∏ ̤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ∫·Ù·ÛÙ-∂∞∫ ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛÙËΠÁÈ· ÙË Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ Î¿ÓÔ-ÓÙ·˜ ̤¯ÚÈ Î·È 20 ·ӷϋ„ÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛˆÓ. ™Â οı ·ӿÏË„Ë ˘ÔÏÔÁ›˙Ô˘Ì ÙÔª∆™ fiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ Î·Ì˘ÏÒÓ Î·È ‚Ú›ÛÎÔ˘Ì ÙÔ Ì¤ÛÔ fiÚÔ ÙÔ˘. Ÿˆ˜ ‚Ï¤Ô˘Ì ÛÙËÓ ™¯.8, ÙÔ ª∆™ ‰ÂÓ ÌÂÈÒÓÂÙ·È ·ÈÛıËÙ¿ ÌÂÙ¿ ÙË 15Ë Â·Ó¿ÏË„Ë, ·ÏÏ¿ ‹‰Ë ·fi ÙË 8Ë Â·Ó¿-ÏË„Ë ¤¯ÂÈ Á›ÓÂÈ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚÔ ÙÔ˘ ÛÊ¿ÏÌ·ÙÔ˜ Ù˘ ∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆ ÙÔ˘ ¶›Ó·Î· 1.

158 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

™¯‹Ì· 6. ∆· 68 ˙‡ÁË ÙˆÓ ÂÎÙÈÌËı¤ÓÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ: ·) Ì ∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆, ‚) Ì ∫·Ù·ÛÙ-∂∞∫.

™¯‹Ì· 7. ™‡ÁÎÏÈÛË Ù˘ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ C & n ÚÔ˜ ÙȘ ÛˆÛÙ¤˜ ÙÈ̤˜ (9 ·ӷϋ„ÂȘ), Î·È ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈ΋ ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÚԂϤ„ÂˆÓ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜.

∫·Ù·Ï‹ÁÔÓÙ·˜, Û˘ÓÔ„›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙÔ ¶›Ó·Î· 3 Ù· ΢ÚÈfiÙÂÚ· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÙˆÓÙÚÈÒÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ Ô˘ ÌÂÏÂÙ‹ıËηÓ. ∂›Ó·È Ê·ÓÂÚfi fiÙÈ Ë Ù˘ÔÔÈË̤ÓË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ ˘ÛÙÂÚ›Û fiÏ· ÂÎÙfi˜ Ù˘ ÔÏ˘ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ÂÓÒ Ô ∂∞∫, Û ‚¿ÚÔ˜ Ù˘, ÌÔÚ› Î·È ¯ÂÈÚ›˙ÂÙ·ÈÛÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈο Î·È ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ Û ڷÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ¯ÚfiÓÔ.

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 159

™¯‹Ì· 8. ªÂ›ˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ª¤ÛÔ˘ ∆ÂÙÚ. ™Ê¿ÏÌ·ÙÔ˜ (ª∆™) ÌÂÙ¿ ·fi 20 ·ӷϋ„ÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÂÎÙÈÌ‹ÛˆÓ.

¶›Ó·Î·˜ 3. ™‡ÁÎÚÈÛË ÙˆÓ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÙˆÓ ˘fi ÌÂϤÙË ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ

ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ-ª¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ §ÔÁ-°∂∆ ∞Ó·‰Ú-ª°∂∆ ∫·Ù·ÛÙ-∂∞∫

∏ÌÈÂÌÂÈÚÈÎÔ› ∆‡Ô˘ Shanley,¡fiÌÔÈ Paris, …

ŸÏÔÈ ŸÏÔÈ

ªÂÙ·ÙÚÔ‹¢Â‰Ô̤ӈÓ

¡·È, Û Log(...) Ÿ¯È Ÿ¯È

ª¤ıÔ‰Ô˜ °Ú·ÌÌ. ªË °Ú·ÌÌ. ∂ÂÎÙ. ∞ÏÁÔÚ. ∆·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ∂Ï·¯. ∆ÂÙÚ. ∂Ï·¯. ∆ÂÙÚ. Kalman

™Â ¶Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ÃÚfiÓÔ Ÿ¯È Ÿ¯È ¡·È

¶Ï‹ıÔ˜¶·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ

2 (y=ax+b) ŸÏ˜ (ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌ.) ŸÏ˜ (ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌ.)

™ÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈο ªÔÓ٤Ϸ Ÿ¯È Ÿ¯È ¡·È

ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÕÏÏÔ¶ÚÔÛÔÌo›ˆÛ˘ (ÙÔ ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎfi)

∆Ô ›‰ÈÔ ∆Ô ›‰ÈÔ

™Ê¿ÏÌ· °∂∆ (∞Ó·ÊÔÚ¿˜) ~ 30%-90% (°∂∆) ~ ª°∂∆

¶ÔÏ˘ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ·2:ƒ‡ıÌÈÛË ∂∞∫

ÛÙËÓ ÀÏÔÔ›ËÛË0:η̛· 1:ƒ‡ıÌÈÛË ª°∂∆ & ¢È·ÛÔÚÒÓ

ÙÔ˘ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘

2:¶Ï‹ıÔ˜ÀÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÈ΋

0:η̛·1:¶Ï‹ıÔ˜ ·ӷϋ„ˆÓ

¶ÔÏ˘ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ· ·ӷϋ„ÂˆÓ & ∞Ôı‹Î¢Û˶ÈӿΈÓ

160 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

5. ™˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù·

Ÿˆ˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È ·fi Ù· ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· Ë ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈÎÒÓÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ Ì ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈΤ˜ ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜ ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ÙËÓ ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ÙˆÓ ÚԂϤ-„ÂˆÓ ÙÔ˘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ˙ˆ‹˜ ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓ Ô˘ ˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙ·È Û ÎfiˆÛË. ∏ ·ÔÊ˘Á‹ ÌÂ-Ù·ÙÚÔÒÓ ÛÙ· ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ Ì ÙË ¯Ú‹ÛË ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È ·Ó·‰ÚÔÌÈÎÒÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏˆÓ Î·ÈÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ, Î·È Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ÙÔ˘ ·˘ÙÔ‡ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ ÁÈ· Ù·˘ÙÔÔ›ËÛË Î·È ÚÔÛÔÌÔ›ˆÛË, ‚ÂÏÙÈÒ-ÓÔ˘Ó ·fiÏ˘Ù· ÙËÓ ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ÙˆÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ Î·È ÌÂÈÒÓÔ˘Ó Ù· ª¤Û· ∆ÂÙÚ·ÁˆÓÈο ™Ê¿Ï-Ì·Ù· ¤ˆ˜ Î·È Ì›· Ù¿ÍË ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜. ∏ Ù˘ÔÔÈË̤ÓË ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙˆÓ ª°∂∆ Î·È ÙˆÓ ·Ó·‰ÚÔ-ÌÈÎÒÓ ÌÔÓ٤ψÓ, ÂÎÙfi˜ Ù˘ ·ÎÚÈ‚¤ÛÙÂÚ˘ ÂÚÈÁÚ·Ê‹˜ ÙÔ˘ Ê·ÈÓÔ̤ÓÔ˘, ·ÓÔ›ÁÂÈ ÙÔ ‰Úfi-ÌÔ Î·È Û ‰Âο‰Â˜ ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ Î·È ÓfiÌÔ˘˜ FCG Ô˘, ·Ó Î·È ÙÔ ÂÚÈÁÚ¿ÊÔ˘Ó Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ·, ‰ÂÓ›¯·Ó ÁÚ·ÌÌÈ΋ ÏÔÁ·ÚÈıÌÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹ Î·È ‰ÂÓ Ù‡¯·ÈÓ·Ó Â˘Ú‡ÙÂÚ˘ ¯Ú‹Û˘. ∆¤ÏÔ˜, ÔÈÚÔËÁ̤ÓÔÈ ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ› ·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ ∂∞∫ Ì ٷ ·Ú·ÌÂÙÚÈο ηٷÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ,·ÓÂÎÙÈÌÔ‡Ó ÙȘ ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚÔ˘˜ ηıÒ˜ ‰¤¯ÔÓÙ·È Ó¤Â˜ ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÂȘ, Ì ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ· Ó· Û˘-ÁÎÏ›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛÙȘ ÛˆÛÙ¤˜ ÙÈ̤˜ Î·È Ó· ÚÔ‚Ï¤Ô˘Ó Ì ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ÙÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ ˙ˆ‹˜, ·ÎfiÌË Î·È·fi ÙÔ ÚÒÙÔ 20% ÙˆÓ ‰Â‰Ô̤ӈÓ. ∞˘Ùfi ÙÔ˘˜ ηıÈÛÙ¿ ȉ·ÓÈÎÔ‡˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ¤ÁηÈÚË Úfi-‚ÏÂ„Ë ÙÔ˘ Ê·ÈÓÔ̤ÓÔ˘ Û ڷÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ¯ÚfiÓÔ Î·È ÁÈ· ·ÍÈfiÈÛÙË ÌÔÓÙÂÏÔÔ›ËÛË Î·ÈÚfi‚Ï„Ë, Ì ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚÔ ·ÚÈıÌfi ÂÈÚ·Ì¿ÙˆÓ Î·È Ì ٷ ·ÏÔ‡ÛÙÂÚ· ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ FCG. ∆··Ú·¿Óˆ ÚÔÙÂÚ‹Ì·Ù· ·ÓÙÈÛÙ·ıÌ›˙Ô˘Ó Â‡ÎÔÏ· ÙËÓ ·˘ÍË̤ÓË ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÈ΋ ÔÏ˘-ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ ÌË ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÒÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ, Î·È Ù˘¯fiÓ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ú‡ıÌÈÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ı-̈Ó. ∏ ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÛÙÔ ı¤Ì· ·˘Ùfi Û˘Ó¯›˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÚÔËÁ̤ÓÔ˘˜ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÛÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔ-Ú›ıÌÔ˘˜, Ì ÛÎÔfi ÙËÓ ·˘ÙfiÌ·ÙË ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙÔ˘ ÓfiÌÔ˘ ‰È¿‰ÔÛ˘ ÚˆÁÌÒÓ ÌÂfiÛÔ ÙÔ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ ÏÈÁfiÙÂÚ· ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ. ŸÙ·Ó Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· ÔÈ ·ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÙÔ‡Ó Ì·ÍÈfiÈÛÙ· ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ ÌË Î·Ù·ÛÙÚÔÊÈÎÔ‡ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘, Â›Ó·È ‰˘Ó·Ù‹ Ë Â˘Ú‡ÙÂÚËÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ Û ηٷÛ΢¤˜ Î·È ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ˘„ËÏÔ‡ Ú›ÛÎÔ˘.

§¤ÍÂȘ ∫ÏÂȉȿ

∂ÂÎٷ̤ÓÔÈ ∞ÏÁfiÚÈıÌÔÈ Kalman, ™ÙÔ¯·ÛÙÈο ªÔÓ٤Ϸ, ∫fiˆÛË, £Ú·˘ÛÙÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋.

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 161

µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·

1. Anderson B. D. O. and Moore J. B. (1979), "Optimal Filtering", Prentice-Hall.2. Baumeister T., Avallone E. and Baumeister T. III (1978), "Marks' Standard Handbook

for Mechanical Engineers", McGraw Hill.3. Bogdanoff J. L. and Kozin F. (1980), "A new cumulative damage model, Part 4", J. Ap-

pl. Mech., Trans. ASME 47, pp. 40-44.4. Fuchs H. O. and Stephens R. I. (1980), "Metal Fatigue in Engineering", John Wiley &

Sons, Inc.5. Ghonem H. and Dore S. (1987), "Experimental Study of the Constant-Probability

Crack Growth Curves under Constant Amplitude Loading", Engng FractureMech., Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 1-25.

6. Hoeppner D. W. and Krupp W. E. (1974), "Prediction of component life by ap-plication of fatigue crack growth knowledge", Eng. Fract. Mech., Vol. 6, pp.47-70.

7. Jaszwinski A.H. (1970) "Stochastic processes and filtering theory". Academic PressNew York.

8. Kaminski M. (2002) "On probabilistic fatigue models for composite materials" Int. J.of Fatigue 24 pp. 477-495.

9. Kozin F. and Bogdanoff J. L. (1981), "A critical analysis of some probabilistic modelsof fatigue crack growth", Eng. Fract. Mech., 14, pp. 59-89.

10. Lainiotis D. G. and Moussas V. C. (1987), "Theory and Application of Partitioning Fil-ters for Identification", in Advances in Structural Reliability: Proceedings of theAdvanced Seminar on Structural Reliability, held at the Joint Research Centre(JRC), Ispra, Italy, A.C. Lucia (Editor), D. Reidel Pub Co, Dordrecht.

11. Lucia A. C. (1985), "Probabilistic Structural Reliability of PWR pressure vessels", Nu-cl. Eng. Design 87, pp. 35-49.

12. Marquardt, D. W. (1963), "An algorithm for least-squares estimation of non-linear pa-rameters", J. Soc. ind. appl. math. 11:431-441.

13. Moussas V. C., Solomos G. P. and Lucia A. C. (1994), "A General Method for RawFatigue Crack Growth Data Processing and Structural Reliability Assessment", InComputational Stochastic Mechanics: Proceedings of the 2nd International Con-ference on Computational Stochastic Mechanics, P.D. Spanos (editor), Athens,Greece, June 12-15.

162 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

14. Moussas V. C. (2002), "Non Linear Estimation Algorithms for Life-Time Predictionand Reliability Improvement", Ph.D. dissertation, Computer Engineering & In-formatics Department, University of Patras (GR).

15. Ostergaard, D. F. and Hillberry B. M. (1983), "Characterization of the Variability inFatigue Crack Propagation Data," Probabilistic Methods for Design and Mainte-nance of Structures, ASTM STP 798.

16. Paris P. C. and Erdogan F. (1963), "A Critical Analysis of Crack Propagation Laws",Trans. ASME, J. Basic Eng., Vol. 85, No. 4, p. 528.

17. Patankar R. and Ray A. (2000), "State Space modeling of fatigue crack growth in duc-tile alloys", Eng. Fract. Mech., 66, pp. 129-151.

18. Ray A. and Tangirala S. (1997), "A nonlinear stochastic model of fatigue crack dy-namics", Prob. Engng Mech. Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 33-40.

19. Schutz W. (1979), "The Prediction of Fatigue Life in the Crack Initiation and Propaga-tion Stages - A State of the Art Survey", Eng. Fract. Mech., Vol. 11, pp. 405-421.

20. Solomos G. P. and Moussas V. C. (1991), "A Time Series Approach to Fatigue CrackPropagation", Structural Safety, 9, pp. 211-226.

21. Virkler D. A., Hillberry B. M. and Goel P. K. (1979), "The Statistical Nature of Fa-tigue Crack Propagation", Transactions of ASME, J. Engng Mater. Technol.,Vol. 101, p. 148-153, APR. 1979

22. Yang J. N., Salivar G. C. and Annis C. G. Jr. (1983), "Statistical modelling of fatigue-crack growth in a Nickel-base super-alloy", Eng. Fract. Mech., Vol. 18, pp. 257-270.

µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Ì ÌË-ÁÚ·ÌÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÏÁÔÚ›ıÌÔ˘˜ Î·È Î·Ù·ÛÙ·ÙÈο ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ... 163

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙˆÓ ªª∂

µ·Û›Ï˘ ∆Û·ÌÔ˘Ú¿˜∆Ì‹Ì· ∫ψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜∆.∂.π. ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

√È ÂÈÛً̘ Ù˘ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ∂ȯÂÈÚËÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜(Operations & Logistics Management) ·Ú¯Èο ·Ó·Ù‡¯ıËÎ·Ó ÁÈ· ÙË ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË Ù˘ ÎÂÚ-‰ÔÊÔÚ›·˜ ÙˆÓ ÌÂÁ¿ÏˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ, ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎÔ‡ ΢ڛˆ˜ ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú·. ∏ ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ÂÈ-Ù˘¯›· fï˜ Ô˘ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛÂ Ë ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘˜, ÔÈ ÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂȘ Ù˘ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜, ·ÏÏ¿ ηÈÔÈ ÚˆÙÔÊ·Ó›˜ ȤÛÂȘ Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜, η٤ÛÙËÛ·Ó ÙȘ ·Ú¯¤˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ··Ú·›ÙËÙ˜ ÁÈ· fiϘÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ, ·ÓÂÍ·Úًو˜ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜ Î·È ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘. ∏ ÌÂϤÙË Î·È Ë ·ÔÙÂÏÂ-ÛÌ·ÙÈ΋ ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË ÙˆÓ ıÂÌ¿ÙˆÓ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜, ÚÔÛʤÚÂÈ ÙÒÚ· Ì›·ÌÔÓ·‰È΋ ¢ηÈÚ›· ÛÙȘ ªª∂ Ó· ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈο ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù· ηÈÓ· ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÔ‡Ó ÈÛfiÙÈÌ· ·Ó¿ÌÂÛ· Û ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚ˜ Û ̤ÁÂıÔ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ.

Abstract

Operations and Logistics Management theory was initially developed to improveprofitability of large, mainly industrial organisations. The strategic design and planning ofOperations and Logistics showed a strong impact in the overall profitability and successof an organisation. Moreover, the rapid development of new technologies and the com-petitive forces of the new era, necessitate Operations and Logistics strategy for all or-ganisations regardless their size and activities. SMEs are thus capable to enhance theircompetitiveness and operate in equal terms with larger organisations.

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 165

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 165-184

1. ∂ÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹

√ ıÂÛÌfi˜ Ù˘ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋˜ ˘ÂÚÁÔÏ·‚›·˜ ‰›ÓÂÈ ˙ˆ‹ Û ¤Ó· ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ·ÚÈıÌfi ªª∂ÛÙËÓ ∂ÏÏ¿‰·. ¶·Ú’ fiÏ’ ·˘Ù¿, Ô ·˘ÍË̤ÓÔ˜ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌfi˜ ·fi ¯ÒÚ˜ Ì Ôχ ¯·ÌËÏfi-ÙÂÚÔ ÂÚÁ·ÙÈÎfi ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈ΋ ·ÂÈÏ‹ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ªª∂ ÛÙËÓ ∂˘ÚÒË. ∏ ·ÂÈ-Ï‹ ϤÔÓ ‰ÂÓ ÂÚÈÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ÌfiÓÔ ÛÙȘ ∞ÛÈ·ÙÈΤ˜ ¯ÒÚ˜, ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÛÙȘ Ӥ˜ ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙ˜ÔÏÈÙ›˜ Ù˘ ÚÒËÓ ∂™™¢ Î·È ÙȘ ¯ÒÚ˜ Ù˘ ¡ÔÙÈÔ·Ó·ÙÔÏÈ΋˜ ∂˘ÚÒ˘. ∂ÈϤÔÓ,ÔÈ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·, ÙȘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈΤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜, Ù· ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈο Î·È ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈοÚfiÙ˘·, ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ÚÔηϤÛÔ˘Ó ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ˜ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙË ÌÔÚÊ‹ Ù˘ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘, ÛÙȘÔԛ˜ ÔÈ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Û˘¯Ó¿ ·‰˘Ó·ÙÔ‡Ó Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÔÎÚÈıÔ‡Ó. √È ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜·˘Ù¤˜ ·ÊÂÓfi˜ ·ÓÔ›ÁÔ˘Ó Ó¤Â˜ ·ÁÔÚ¤˜, ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó ˆÛÙfiÛÔ Î·È Ó· ·ÂÈÏ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ, Â¿Ó ·˘Ù¤˜ ‰ÂÓ ·Ó·‰ÔÌ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ÂȯÂÈÚËÛȷ΋ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ (Hill, C.& Jones, G., 1998).

2. √È Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ô˘ ÔÊ›ÏÔ˘Ó Ó· ÈηÓÔÔÈ‹ÛÔ˘Ó

ÔÈ ∂˘Úˆ·˚Τ˜ ªª∂

√È ÂÓ·Ô̤ÓÔ˘Û˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ϤÔÓ ÂÍ·ÚÙÒÓÙ·È Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi ·fi ÙË Ó¤· ÙÂ-¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· Î·È Ù· Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ· Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·Ù· ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛ˘. √È ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ Ó¤Ô˘ ‰ÈÂıÓÔ‡˜·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ ÂÈ‚¿ÏÏÔ˘Ó Û˘ÓÙÔÌfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘˜ ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘, ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›· ÛÙȘ ·-Ú·‰fiÛÂȘ, ηÈÓÔÙƠ̂˜ ÙfiÛÔ Û ÚÔ˚fiÓÙ· fiÛÔ Î·È Û ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜, ¢ÂÏÈÍ›· Û ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ Ù˘˙‹ÙËÛ˘, ηıÒ˜ ›Û˘ ·˘ÍË̤ÓË Â͢ËÚ¤ÙËÛË Î·È ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË (Lockamy,A. & Cox, J., 1995). ∂ȉÈÎfiÙÂÚ·, Ë ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ÌÂÙ·Ô›ËÛ˘ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi ·fi ÙË Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔÚ¿ Ù˘ ·ÓÒÙ·Ù˘ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÙˆÓıÂÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ù˘ ¶·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ (Manufacturing). ∂ÈÙ˘¯Ë̤ÓË ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ¶·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ıˆ-ÚÂ›Ù·È ·˘Ù‹ Ô˘ ı· ʤÚÂÈ ÎÔÓÙ¿ Ì˯·ÓÈÎÔ‡˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Î·È ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘, ¤ÙÛÈÒÛÙ ӷ ηıÔÚ›ÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ÂÓÈ·›· ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË (Gilgeous, V., 2001).

™ÙȘ ̤Ú˜ Ì·˜, ÔÈ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈΤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÂÌϤÎÔÓÙ·È Û ̛· ÂÎÙÂٷ̤ÓË ÂÊÔ-‰È·ÛÙÈ΋ ·Ï˘Û›‰· Ë ÔÔ›· ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ¤Ó· Û‡ÓıÂÙÔ Û‡ÛÙËÌ· ·fi ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜, ·ÁÔ-Ú·ÛÙ¤˜, ˘ÔηٷÛ΢·ÛÙ¤˜ Î·È ÙÂÏÈÎÔ‡˜ ηٷӷψ٤˜, ÔÈ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÔÔ›Ô˘Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÔÚÁ·ÓˆıÔ‡Ó Û˘ÓÔÏÈο, Ì ·ÒÙÂÚÔ ÛÙfi¯Ô ÙËÓ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË. ∞˘-ÍË̤ÓË ÔÈÎÈÏ›· ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ, ˘„ËÏfiÙÂÚË ÔÈfiÙËÙ· Î·È Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›·, ¿ÌÂÛË ·ÓÙ·fiÎÚÈÛËÎ·È Û¯ÂÙÈο ÏÔÁÈ΋ ÙÈÌ‹, Â›Ó·È ÌÂÚÈÎÔ› ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜ Ô˘ ‰›ÓÔ˘Ó ÙÔ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈ-ÛÙÈÎfi ÏÂÔÓ¤ÎÙËÌ· ÛÙȘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈΤ˜ ·Ï˘Û›‰Â˜ ÙˆÓ ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›ˆÓ ¯ÚfiÓˆÓ (Andries, B. &Gelders, L., 1995). ∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ·ÓÙ›ÏË„Ë ··ÈÙ› ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ Î·ıÂÙÔÔÈË̤Ó˜ ÂÊÔ-‰È·ÛÙÈΤ˜ ·Ï˘Û›‰Â˜, ·Ú¿ ·˘ÙfiÓÔ̘ οıÂÙ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ (Harland, Lamming &Cousins, 1999).

166 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

3. ¶ˆ˜ ÌÔÚ› Ë ÂÈÛÙ‹ÌË Ù˘ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈÎÒÓ ·Ï˘Û›‰ˆÓ

Ó· ˆÊÂÏ‹ÛÂÈ ÙȘ ªª∂

√È ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂȘ ÛÙËÓ ∂˘Úˆ·˚΋ ·ÁÔÚ¿ Î·È ÔÈ Û˘Ó·ÎfiÏÔ˘ı˜ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙȘ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ ÂÈÙ¿ÛÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙÂÚË ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÊÔ-‰È·ÛÙÈÎÒÓ ·Ï˘Û›‰ˆÓ. √È ÂÈÛً̘ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ∂ȯÂÈÚËÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂Êԉȷ-ÛÙÈ΋˜ (Operations & Logistics) ·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂȘ Î·È ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›Â˜ fiˆ˜: ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÌfiÎ·È ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ, ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜, ·‡ÍËÛË ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ·Ú·Áˆ-ÁÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ηıÒ˜ Î·È ‰È¢ı¤ÙËÛË ıÂÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÔÚÁ¿ÓˆÛ˘ Î·È ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ·ÓıÚˆ›ÓˆÓ fiÚˆÓ,̤۷ ·fi Ì›· ηıÔÏÈ΋ ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË Ù˘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ ·Ï˘Û›‰·˜. √ ÛÎÔfi˜ Â›Ó·È Ë ·Ô‰Ô-ÙÈ΋, ·ÏÏ¿ Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· Î·È ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈ΋ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ Ù· ÔÔ›· ı· ÌÔÚÔ‡ÓÓ· ·Ú·Ì›ÓÔ˘Ó ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈο ÛÙȘ Û˘Ó¯Ҙ ÌÂÙ·‚·ÏÏfiÌÂÓ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜.

¶ÔÏÏÔ› ÈÛÙÂ‡Ô˘Ó ˆ˜ ÔÈ ·Ú¯¤˜ Ù˘ ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÛÙÔ‡Ó ÈÔ‡ÎÔÏ· Û ÌÂÁ¿Ï˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ. ∞˘Ùfi ÛÙËÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ÛÙÔ ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ fiÙÈ ÔÈ ÌÂÁ¿Ï˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹-ÛÂȘ ‰È·ı¤ÙÔ˘Ó ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ ·ÔıÂÌ·ÙÈÎfi Î·È Â›Ó·È ÈηӤ˜ Ó· ·Ó·Ï¿‚Ô˘Ó ÙÔÓ ÂȯÂÈÚË-Ì·ÙÈÎfi ΛӉ˘ÓÔ Ô˘ ÂÁ΢ÌÔÓ› ·fi ÙÈ Ó¤Â˜ ȉ¤Â˜ (Ahmed, Montagno & Firenze, 1996).¶·Ú’ fiÏ’ ·˘Ù¿, ηıÒ˜ Ù· ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈο Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·Ù· Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È fiÏÔ Î·È ÊıËÓfiÙÂÚ·, ÔȪª∂ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÙË ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÔ‡Ó Â› ›ÛÔȘ fiÚÔȘ ÙÔ˘˜ ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ÔÚ-Á·ÓÈÛÌÔ‡˜. √È ·Ú¯¤˜ Ù˘ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜, ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ··ÁÔ-Ú¢ÙÈΤ˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ˘ÈÔı¤ÙËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ·fi ÌÈÎÚ¤˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ. µ·Û›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔÛÙÔÓ Â·Ó·ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi Î·È ·Ó·‰È¿ÚıÚˆÛË Ì›·˜ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘, ·Ú¿ Û ‰˘Û‚¿ÛÙ·¯Ù˜ÂÂÓ‰‡ÛÂȘ Û Ӥ˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜. ∏ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ Â›Ó·È ··-Ú·›ÙËÙË ÁÈ· fiϘ ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ, ·ÓÂÍ·Úًو˜ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜ Î·È ÚÔÛʤÚÂÈ Ì›· ÌÔÓ·‰È΋¢ηÈÚ›· ÛÙȘ ªª∂ Ó· ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈο ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù·.

4. ∏ ÛËÌ·Û›· Ù˘ ¯¿Ú·Í˘ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ ÛÙË Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË Âȯ›ÚËÛË

ø˜ ÂÎ ÙÔ‡ÙÔ˘, Ë ¯¿Ú·ÍË ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ ÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ··-Ú·›ÙËÙË ·ÎfiÌ· Î·È ÁÈ· ÙȘ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ. ∏ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ Â›Ó·È Ô‡Ùˆ˜ ‹ ¿Ïψ˜¤Ó· ÛËÌÂ›Ô Ô˘ ˘ÛÙÂÚÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ÌÈÎÚ¤˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ, ȉ›ˆ˜ ÛÙËÓ ∂ÏÏ¿‰·. ∂¿Ó ·˘Ù‹ ˘¿Ú-¯ÂÈ, ηıÔ‰ËÁÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÙÔÓ È‰ÈÔÎÙ‹ÙË Î·È ÁÂÓÈÎfi ‰È¢ı˘ÓÙ‹ Ù˘ ÂÙ·ÈÚ›·˜. ™ÙËÓ Ú·ÁÌ·-ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· ¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ‰È¿ÊÔÚ· ›‰· ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ (¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 1) (Tsamouras, V., 2001).

∆· ·ÓÒÙÂÚ· ›‰· ·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó ÙË ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚË Î·Ù‡ı˘ÓÛË Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘, ÂÓÒ Ù·Î·ÙÒÙÂÚ· ·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó ‰È·‰ÈηÛÙÈο ı¤Ì·Ù·. ™Â Ì›· ÌÈÎÚ‹ Âȯ›ÚËÛË fï˜, ÔÈ ¤ÓÓÔȘ Ù˘ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ ÂÚÈÔÚ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Û˘Ó‹ıˆ˜ ÛÙ· ηÙÒÙÂÚ· ÛÙÚÒÌ·Ù· (ÚÔÙÈÌÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÔÈ ÂÓ¤Ú-ÁÂȘ Ì ‚Ú·¯˘ÚfiıÂÛÌ· ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù·). ¶·Ú’ fiÏ’ ·˘Ù¿, Ë ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÙˆÓ ·ÓˆÙ¤ÚˆÓ ÂÈ-¤‰ˆÓ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ Â›Ó·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙË ÁÈ· Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÂÈ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘˜ ÙˆÓ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘Ú-ÁÈÎÒÓ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈÎÒÓ.

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 167

¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 1: ∆· ›‰· ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ Û ̛· Âȯ›ÚËÛË (Tsamouras, V., 2001).

5. ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ ·ÍÈÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜

ÙȘ ·Ú¯¤˜ Ù˘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜

∆Ô ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ Ô˘ ÚÔÙ›ÓÂÙ·È (¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 2) ÛÙԯ‡ÂÈ ÛÙË ‰È¢ÎfiÏ˘ÓÛË ÙˆÓ ªª∂Ó· ¯·Ú¿ÍÔ˘Ó ÂȯÂÈÚËÛȷ΋ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋, Ó· ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜Î·È Ó· ÂÍ·ÛÊ·Ï›ÛÔ˘Ó ÙË Ì·ÎÚÔ‚ÈfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ ̤۷ ·fi Ì›· ÌÂıÔ‰ÔÏÔÁ›· Ë ÔÔ›· ÂÎÌÂ-Ù·ÏχÂÙ·È ·Ú¯¤˜ Ù˘ ÂÈÛÙ‹Ì˘ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ∂ȯÂÈÚËÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂Êԉȷ-ÛÙÈ΋˜ (Tsamouras, V., 2001).

5.1. ∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÛÙfi¯ˆÓ

5.1.1. ∂ȉÈÒÍÂȘ Î·È ÊÈÏÔ‰Ô͛˜

∫¿ı Âȯ›ÚËÛË ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó· ¤¯ÂÈ Û˘ÓÙ¿ÍÂÈ Ì›· ÁÂÓÈ΋ ÁÚ·Ù‹ ‰‹ÏˆÛË Ë ÔÔ›· Ó·ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÂÈ ÙÔ ÛÎÔfi ‡·ÚÍ‹˜ Ù˘ Î·È Ó· ηıÔ‰ËÁ› ÙȘ ·ÔÊ¿ÛÂȘ Ù˘ (Wit, B. &Meyer, R., 1998). ∆· ÔÚ¿Ì·Ù· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Â›Ó·È Â·ÚÎÒ˜ Ú·ÏÈÛÙÈο ÁÈ·Ó· Á›ÓÔ˘Ó ·ÏËıÈÓ¿ Î·È Ó· ‰È¢ÎÚÈÓ›˙Ô˘Ó ÍÂοı·Ú· ÙȘ ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈΤ˜ ÎÈÓ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘.

5.1.2. √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ› ÛÙfi¯ÔÈ

∏ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ÂÍ¿ÚÙËÛË ÙˆÓ ªª∂ ·fi ¯ÚËÌ·ÙÔÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ÊÔÚ›˜ Î·È ÌÂÙfi¯Ô˘˜Â›Ó·È ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· ÌÂÁ¿ÏË. °È· ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ ·˘Ùfi, ÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙÔ Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÙ› ·ÎÚÈ-‚Ò˜ ÔÈÔÈ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ› ÛÙfi¯ÔÈ ı· ÈηÓÔÔÈ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÂÓ‰˘Ù¤˜ ÒÛÙ ӷ Û˘Ó¯ÈÛÙ› ËÛ˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›· ÙÔ˘˜ Ì ÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË (.¯. ∞ÔÛ‚¤ÛÂȘ, ∫¤Ú‰Ë, ƒÂ˘ÛÙfiÙËÙ·).

¢Èr‰ÈÎrÛÈÒÓEÊÔ‰ÈrÛÙÈ΋M¿ÚÎÂÙÈÓÁÎ...

§ÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈΤ ™ÙÚrÙËÁÈΤ

EÈuÂÈÚËÛÈr΋ ™ÙÚrÙËÁÈ΋

EÙrÈÚÈ΋ ™ÙÚrÙËÁÈ΋

ŸÚrÌr ÎrÈ AÔÛÙÔÏ‹

168 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 2: ªÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ Û ªª∂ ·ÍÈÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ ·Ú¯¤˜ Ù˘ ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ (Tsamouras, V., 2001).

ñ ∂ȉÈÒÍÂÈ & ÊÈÏÔ‰ÔÍ›Âñ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ› ÛÙfiuÔÈ

∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ™Ùfi6ˆÓ

ñ ¶ÔÏÈÙÈο urÚrÎÙËÚ.ñ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο urÚrÎÙËÚ.ñ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈο urÚrÎÙËÚ.ñ ∆ÂuÓÔÏÔÁÈο urÚrÎÙËÚ.

∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ¶ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ

ñ ∞ÓÙrÁˆÓÈÛÙ¤ñ ∞ÁÔÚrÛÙ¤ñ ¶ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤ñ ¡¤ÔÈ rÓÙrÁˆÓÈÛÙ¤ñ ÀÔÎrÙ¿ÛÙrÙr

∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ∞ÁÔÚ¿

ñ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈΤñ ÀÏÈΤñ Õ˘ÏÂ

∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË πÎ:ÓÔًوÓ

ñ ¡¤Â ¢ÎrÈÚ›Âñ ∞ÂÈϤ

∂˘Î:ÈÚ›Â-∫›Ó‰˘ÓÔÈ

ñ ∆ÔÔı¤ÙËÛË ÛÙËÓ rÁÔÚ¿ñ ∞ÓÙrÁˆÓ. ‰ÂÛ̇ÛÂÈñ ∞ÔÌ›ÌËÛË ‹ ÎrÈÓÔÙÔÌ›rñ ªÂÁ¤ıË rÚrÁˆÁ‹

Ã:Ú:ÎÙ/ο ¶ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ

ñ ∂›‰Ô rÚrÁˆÁ‹ñ ∂›‰Ô ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡ñ ™u‰ÈrÛÌfi ÂÚÁrÛ›r

ª¤ıÔ‰ÔÈ

ñ ∫¿ıÂÙË ÔÏÔÎÏ‹ÚˆÛËñ ¢Èru›ÚÈÛË ÚÔÌËı¢ÙÒÓñ ¢ÈrÓÔÌ‹

¢ÔÌ‹ ∞Ï˘Û›‰:

∂ÊÔ‰È:ÛÌÔ‡

ñ ¢Èru›ÚÈÛË ˘ÏÈÎÒÓñ ¢Èru›ÚÈÛË rÚrÁ. ÈÎrÓfiÙËÙrñ ¶ÚÔÁÚrÌÌrÙÈÛÌfi rÚrÁˆÁ‹

¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ∂ÊÔ‰È:ÛÙÈ΋

ñ ∂ÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔÔıÂÛ›rñ ¢È¿ÙrÍË rÚrÁˆÁ‹

∂ÁÎ:Ù:ÛÙ¿ÛÂÈ

ñ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ∞ÓıÚˆ›ÓˆÓ ¶fiÚˆÓñ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ¶ÔÈfiÙËÙrñ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ∆ÂuÓ. ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋

µÔËıËÙÈΤ ÀËÚÂÛ›Â

∫Ú›ÛÈÌÔÈ

¶:Ú¿ÁÔÓÙÂ

∂ÈÙ˘6›:

∞Ó:ıÂÒÚËÛË

& µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË

È6ÂÈ

ÚË

ÛÈ:

Îfi

Â

›Â‰

Ô§

ÂÈÙÔ

˘Ú

ÁÈÎ

fi Â

‰Ô

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 169

5.2. ∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÂȯÂÈÚËÌ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜

√È ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È Ôχ ÌÈÎÚ¤˜ ÁÈ· Ó· ·ÏÏ¿ÍÔ˘Ó ÙÔ ÂȯÂÈÚËÌ·ÙÈ-Îfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÚÔ˜ fiÊÂÏfi˜ ÙÔ˘˜, ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ ÂÈ‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È Ë Û˘Ó¯‹˜ ·Ú·Ù‹ÚËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘ÒÛÙ ӷ ‚Ú›ÛÎÔÓÙ·È Û ‰È·Ú΋ ÂÙÔÈÌfiÙËÙ·. ª›· ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË Û ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÎfi-√ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎfi-∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi-∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎfi (PEST) Â›Â‰Ô ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÂÈ ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙÂ˜Ô˘ ı· ÂËÚ¿ÛÔ˘Ó ÙË ‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›· Î·È ÙÔÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌfi (Johnson, G. & Scholes, K.,1997) Î·È Ó· ÂÈÙÚ¤„ÂÈ ÛÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË Ó· ·ÓÙȉڿÛÂÈ ¿ÌÂÛ·:ñ ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÎÔ› ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜: ¶ÔÏÈÙÈ΋ ÛÙ·ıÂÚfiÙËÙ·, ÌÔÓÔˆÏÈ·ÎÔ› ¤ÏÂÁ¯ÔÈ, ÓÔÌÔıÂۛ˜,

ÎÔÈÓÔÙÈΤ˜ Î·È ‰ÈÂıÓ›˜ Ô‰ËÁ›Â˜.ñ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ› ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜: ∂ıÓÈ΋ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·, Û˘Ó·ÏÏ·ÁÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ ÈÛÔÙÈ̛˜, ÓÔÌÈÛÌ·-

ÙÈ΋ ¤ÓˆÛË, ÂÈÙfiÎÈ·, ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË, ÏËıˆÚÈÛÌfi˜, ÔÛÔÛÙ¿ ·ÓÂÚÁ›·˜, ηıÂÛÙÒ˜ ÊÔÚÔ-ÏÔÁ›·˜, ÙÔÈÎÔ› ηÓfiÓ˜ ÂÌÔÚ›Ô˘, ηٷÓÔÌ‹ ÂÈÛÔ‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Î·È ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙÈ΋ ‰‡Ó·ÌË.

ñ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ› ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜: ¢ËÌÔÁÚ·ÊÈΤ˜ Ù¿ÛÂȘ, Ìfi‰Â˜, ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙȘ Û˘Ó‹ıÂȘ ˙ˆ-‹˜, ‰Â›ÎÙ˜ ÂÁÎÏËÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ·È‰Â›·, Û˘ÓÂÈÛÊÔÚ¿ Û ÌË-ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈΤ˜ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfi-ÙËÙ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙËÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›· Î·È ÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ.

ñ ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎÔ› ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜: ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈο ÂÈÙ‡ÁÌ·Ù·, ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋, Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ· ÙË-ÏÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓȷο Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·Ù·, ¤Ú¢ӷ, ηÈÓÔÙÔÌ›·, ÔÈfiÙËÙ· ˘Ô‰ÔÌÒÓ, ÌÂÙ·ÊÔÚ¤˜,ÙËÏÂÈÎÔÈӈӛ˜ Î·È ¿ÏϘ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜.

5.3. ∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ Î·È ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡

∏ ‚·ı‡ÙÂÚË ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÙˆÓ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ Î·È Ù˘ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›·˜ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ÎÈÓÂ›Ù·È Ì›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË Â›Ó·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙË, ÒÛÙ ӷ ÚÔ‚ÏÂÊıÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ÂÓ‰Â-¯fiÌÂÓ˜ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ Î·È Ó· ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ÂfiÌÂÓ˜ ÎÈÓ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ÔÚÁ·ÓÈÛÌÔ‡. ∏·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ·˘Ù‹ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Á›ÓÂÈ ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÙˆÓ «5 ‰˘Ó¿ÌÂˆÓ ›ÂÛ˘·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ Porter» (Porter, M., 1980) (¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 3).

¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 3: ∆Ô ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ «5 ‰˘Ó¿ÌÂˆÓ ›ÂÛ˘ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ Porter» (Porter, M., 1980).

¶ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤

¢‡ÓrÌË ›ÂÛË ÚÔÌËı¢ÙÒÓ

AÁÔÚ:ÛÙ¤

¢‡ÓrÌË ›ÂÛË rÁÔÚrÛÙÒÓ

∞ÓÙ:ÁˆÓÈÛÙ¤

∞ÓÙrÁˆÓÈÛÌfi ÌÂÙr͇˘¿ÚuÔ˘ÛˆÓ ÂÙrÈÚÈÒÓ

YÔÎ:Ù¿ÛÙ:Ù:

AÂÈÏ‹ ˘ÔÎrÙ¿ÛÙrÛÙˆÓ

N¤ÔÈ

AÂÈÏ‹ Ó¤ˆÓ rÓÙrÁˆÓÈÛÙÒÓ

170 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

5.4. ∞Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÈηÓÔًوÓ

∏ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜ Ô˘ ·Ó·Ù‡¯ıËΠÛÙËÓ ¨5.2 ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂ-ÚÔ Û fiÏË ÙË ‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›· ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ÎÈÓÂ›Ù·È Ì›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË, ·Ú¿ ÛÙËÓ ›‰È· ÙËÓ ÂÈ-¯Â›ÚËÛË (Zack, M., 1999). °È· Ó· ‚ÂÏÙȈı› Ë ÎÂÚ‰ÔÊÔÚ›· Ù˘ ›‰È·˜ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ ÂÈ-‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È Ë ÌÂϤÙË ÙˆÓ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎÒÓ Ù˘ ÈηÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ (Prahalad, C. & Hamel, G., 1990),ÒÛÙ ӷ ÂÎÙÈÌËı› Â¿Ó ·˘Ù¤˜ Â›Ó·È Â·ÚΛ˜. ∏ ¿ÚÎÂÈ· ‰ÂÓ ÌÂÙÚÈ¤Ù·È ¿ÓÙ· Û ·fi-Ï˘ÙÔ ÓÔ‡ÌÂÚÔ, ·ÏÏ¿ Û˘ÁÎÚÈÙÈο Ì ÙËÓ Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚË Â›‰ÔÛË Ù˘ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›·˜ ÛÙÔ ÙÔ̤·Ô˘ ÂÍÂÙ¿˙ÂÙ·È (benchmarking) (Corbett, L., 1998, Hill, T., 2000). √È ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜ Ì›·˜Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ ı· ÌÔÚÔ‡Û·Ó Ó· ¯ˆÚÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ÛÙȘ ·Ú·Î¿Ùˆ ÙÚÂȘ ηÙËÁÔڛ˜.ñ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈΤ˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜: √È ªª∂ ‰ÂÓ ‰È·ı¤ÙÔ˘Ó ·ÂÚÈfiÚÈÛÙ˜ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈΤ˜ ‰˘Ó·-

ÙfiÙËÙ˜, ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ ÔÈ fiÚÔÈ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Û ȉ›· ÎÂÊ¿Ï·È·, ÈÛÙÒÛÂȘ Î·È ‰·-ÓÂÈÛÌÔ‡˜ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ÒÛÙ ӷ ·ÔÊ·ÛÈÛÙ› Ë ¤ÎÙ·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÈΛÌÂ-ÓˆÓ ÂÂÓ‰‡ÛˆÓ.

ñ ÀÏÈΤ˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜: √È ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜ Û ˘ÏÈÎÔ‡˜ fiÚÔ˘˜, fiˆ˜ ÂÚÁÔÛÙ¿ÛÈ·, ÁË Î·ÈÂÍÔÏÈÛÌfi˜, Â›Ó·È ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈΤ˜ ÁÈ· Ì›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË. ∏ ¢ÂÏÈÍ›· Î·È Ë ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfiÙËÙ¿Ù˘ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi ÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· Ô˘ η٤¯ÂÈ. ∫¿ÔȘ ÊÔÚ¤˜ Ë Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· ›ӷÈÌÔÓ·‰È΋ Î·È ÚÔÛ‰›‰ÂÈ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfi ÏÂÔÓ¤ÎÙËÌ·, ÂÓÒ Û˘¯Ó¿ Ë Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· ÍÂ-ÂÚÓÈ¤Ù·È Î·È ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÂÌfi‰ÈÔ ÛÙËÓ ÂͤÏÈÍË Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘.

ñ Õ˘Ï˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜: ª›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË ‰ÂÓ Î·Ù¤¯ÂÈ ÌfiÓÔ ˘ÏÈ΋ ÂÚÈÔ˘Û›· ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ¿˘-ÏË, Ë ÔÔ›· Â›Ó·È ÂÍ›ÛÔ˘ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈ΋, ·Ó fi¯È ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÙÂÚË. ∞˘Ù‹ ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÂÚÈ-Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ·Í›Â˜ fiˆ˜: ÙȘ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ ÛÙÂϯÒÓ Ù˘, ÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÁÓˆÛ›· ηÈÂÌÂÈÚ›· ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡ Ù˘, ÙËÓ ‡·ÚÍË Îϛ̷ÙÔ˜ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ÙȘ ÂȉfiÛÂȘÛÙËÓ Î·ÈÓÔÙÔÌ›·, ÙËÓ ÔÈfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ Ì ÂÏ¿Ù˜ Î·È Û˘ÓÂÚÁ¿Ù˜, Ù· η-Ù·¯ˆÚË̤ӷ ÂÌÔÚÈο Û‹Ì·Ù·, ÙË ‰ËÌÔÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÙȘ ÏÔȤ˜ ‰È·ÎÚ›ÛÂȘ.

5.5. ¶ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi˜ ¢ηÈÚÈÒÓ Î·È ÂȯÂÈÚËÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÎÈÓ‰‡ÓˆÓ

∏ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜, ÙÔ˘ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ Î·È ÙˆÓ ÈηÓÔًوÓ, ·Ó·‰ÂÈÎÓ‡ÂÈ Ù· ÛË-Ì·ÓÙÈÎfiÙÂÚ· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÙÔ˘ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎÔ‡ Î·È Â͈ÙÂÚÈÎÔ‡ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜ Ì›·˜ ÂÈ-¯Â›ÚËÛ˘. ∆· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ·˘Ù¿ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· Û˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚˆıÔ‡Ó Û ¤Ó·Ó ›Ó·Î· ÁÈ· Ó·Á›ÓÂÈ Â˘ÎÔÏfiÙÂÚË Ë ·Ó¿Ï˘Û‹ ÙÔ˘˜. √ ›Ó·Î·˜ ¶ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ-∞‰˘Ó·ÌÈÒÓ-∂˘Î·È-ÚÈÒÓ-∞ÂÈÏÒÓ (SWOT), ¯ÚËÛÈ̇ÂÈ ÛÙÔ Ó· Û¯ËÌ·ÙÈÛı› Ì›· Ï‹Ú˘ ÂÈÎfiÓ· ÙˆÓ ÂÛˆÙÂ-ÚÈÎÒÓ ‰˘Ó·ÙÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ (¶ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù·-∞‰˘Ó·Ì›Â˜) Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ÙÔ ÂÚÈ-‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÙÔ˘ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡ (∂˘Î·Èڛ˜-∞ÂÈϤ˜) (Johnson, G. & Scholes, K., 1997).

5.6. ∫Ú›ÛÈÌÔÈ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜ ÂÈÙ˘¯›·˜ (∫¶∂)

∏ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ÙˆÓ ∫Ú›ÛÈÌˆÓ ¶·Ú·ÁfiÓÙˆÓ ∂ÈÙ˘¯›·˜ (∫¶∂) ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ÙÔÓ ÚÔÛ-‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ‚·ÛÈÎÒÓ ÈηÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ ÎÚ›ÓÔÓÙ·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙ˜

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 171

ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÔÛÙ‹ÚÈÍË Ì›·˜ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˘ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜. ™¯ÂÙ›˙ÂÙ·È ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ Ì ·˘Ù¤˜ ÙÈ˜Û˘ÓÈÛÙÒÛ˜ Ì›·˜ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜, ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ Ë Âȯ›ÚËÛË Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ‰È·ÎÚÈı› ÒÛÙ ӷÍÂÂÚ¿ÛÂÈ ÙÔÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌfi (Johnson, G. & Scholes, K., 1997). ™ËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi fï˜ ›ӷÈÓ· ÔÚÈÛıÔ‡Ó ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÈ̘ ·Ú¿ÌÂÙÚÔÈ Â›‰ÔÛ˘ ÁÈ· οı ∫¶∂.

5.7. ÷ڷÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ Î·È ÛÙfi¯ÔÈ Â›‰ÔÛ˘

5.7.1. ∆ÔÔı¤ÙËÛË ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿

∏ ÙÔÔı¤ÙËÛË Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Á›ÓÂÈ Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙÔ «ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÙÔ˘Puttick» (¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 4), ÛÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÔÓÙ·È ·Ó¿ÏÔÁ· Ì ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô, ÔÈ ÎÚ›ÛÈ-̘ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜ Î·È ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ‰È¿ÎÚÈÛË ÛÙÔÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌfi (Puttick, J., 1998). √‰È·¯ˆÚÈÛÌfi˜ Á›ÓÂÙ·È Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙËÓ ÔÏ˘ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ· ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ ÛÙËÓ Î·Ù·Û΢‹ ÙÔ˘Î·È ÙÔ ‚·ıÌfi ·‚‚·ÈfiÙËÙ·˜ Ù˘ ÔÚ›·˜ ÙÔ˘ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿.

¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 4: ∆Ô «ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ ÙÔ˘ Puttick» ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÙÔÔı¤ÙËÛË ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ (Puttick, J., 1998).

5.7.2. ∞ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈΤ˜ ‰ÂÛ̇ÛÂȘ

∆· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÂÓfi˜ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ Î·È Ô ‚·ıÌfi˜ Ù˘ ˘ÔÛÙ‹ÚÈ͢ Ô˘ ı· Ú¤ÂÈÓ· ¤¯ÂÈ ·fi ÙËÓ ÂÙ·ÈÚ›·, ηıÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ÙfiÛÔ ·fi ÙȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ›‰ÈˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·ÁÔÚ·-ÛÙÒÓ, fiÛÔ Î·È ·fi ÙȘ Ú·ÎÙÈΤ˜ ÙˆÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÒÓ. ∞˘Ù¿ Ù· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο, fiˆ˜.¯. ÙÔ Î·Ù¿ÏÏËÏÔ Â›Â‰Ô ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜, Ë ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈ΋ ÙÈÌ‹ Î·È Ù· ··Ú·›ÙËÙ· Ê˘ÛÈ-

¢È¿ÎÚÈÛË: ∫rÙrÏÏËÏfiÙËÙr uÚ‹ÛË.∞rÚr›ÙËÙr: ŒÚ¢Ór & ∞Ó¿Ù˘ÍË, ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈο Û˘ÛÙ‹ÌrÙr.√ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο: À„ËÏfi ÂÚÈıÒÚÈÔ Î¤Ú‰Ô˘, ÃrÌËÏfi ÛÙrıÂÚfi ÎÂÊ¿ÏrÈÔ.

À„ËÏ‹

À„ËÏ‹

¶ÔÏ˘ÏÔÎfiÙËÙ: ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ ÃrÌËÏ‹

ÃrÌËÏ‹

∞‚‚:

ÈfiÙË

Ù:

Â

¤Ó‰

˘Û

Ë

∞Á:ı¿ ˘ÂÚ:Í›: ∞Á:ı¿ :ÚÔ‰È΋ ΢ÎÏÔÊÔÚ›:

¢È¿ÎÚÈÛË: ∞Í›r ÁÈr Ùr uÚ‹ÌrÙr.∞rÚr›ÙËÙr: §rÓÛ¿ÚÈÛÌr ÙËÓ ÎrÙ¿ÏÏËÏË ÛÙÈÁÌ‹, ∂˘¤ÏÈÎÙË rÚrÁˆÁ‹, ÂÚÁrÛ›r Û ÔÌ¿‰Â.√ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο: ª¤ÙÚÈÔ ÂÚÈıÒÚÈÔ Î¤Ú‰Ô˘, ª¤ÙÚÈÔ ÛÙrıÂÚfi ÎÂÊ¿ÏrÈÔ.

∫:Ù:Ó:ψÙÈο :Á:ı¿ :Í›: ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ‰È:ÚΛ: ∞Á:ı¿ Ì:˙È΋ :Ú:ÁˆÁ‹

¢È¿ÎÚÈÛË: ∂ÌÊ¿ÓÈÛË, ªfi‰r.∞rÚr›ÙËÙr: ¢ÈÔÚrÙÈÎfiÙËÙr, §rÓÛ¿ÚÈÛÌr ÙËÓ ÎrÙ¿ÏÏËÏË ÛÙÈÁÌ‹, Marketing, Logistics.√ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο: À„ËÏfi ÂÚÈıÒÚÈÔ Î¤Ú‰Ô˘, ÃrÌËÏfi ÛÙrıÂÚfi ÎÂÊ¿ÏrÈÔ.

¢È¿ÎÚÈÛË: ∆ÈÌ‹.∞rÚr›ÙËÙr: ¶rÚrÁˆÁÈÎfiÙËÙr, Logistics, ŒÏÂÁuÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˘.√ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο: ÃrÌËÏfi ÂÚÈıÒÚÈÔ Î¤Ú‰Ô˘, À„ËÏfi ÛÙrıÂÚfi ÎÂÊ¿ÏrÈÔ.

172 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ο ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜, ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi ηٿ ÙËÓ ·Ó¿-Ï˘ÛË ÙˆÓ ∫¶∂ (¨5.6). ∞˘Ù¿ Ù· ÛÙÔȯ›· fï˜ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ·ÚÎÂÙ¿ ÛÙÔ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ, ˘„ËÏ¿·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ú¤ÂÈ Ï¤ÔÓ Ó· ÚÔÛʤÚÔ˘Ó ·˘ÍË̤Ó˜ÂȉfiÛÂȘ Û ÛËÌ›· fiˆ˜: ÔÈfiÙËÙ· ·ÚÔ¯‹˜ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ, Â͢ËÚ¤ÙËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË, Ù·-¯‡ÙËÙ· Î·È ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘.

∆· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο Ô˘ Û˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚÒÓÔÓÙ·È ÁÈ· οı ÚÔ˚fiÓ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ¯ˆÚÈÛÙÔ‡ÓÛ ÂÍ·ÈÚÂÙÈο ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο, Û ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο Î·È Û ÏÈÁfiÙÂÚÔ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο, Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙËÓ ·‹-¯ËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙ¤˜. ªÂ ·˘Ùfi ÙÔÓ ÙÚfiÔ ¤¯Ô˘Ì ηχÙÂÚË ÂÈÎfiÓ· ÁÈ· ÙÔ ÔÈ·‰›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË ÙÔ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfi ÏÂÔÓ¤ÎÙËÌ·. ∏ Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓË ·ÂÈÎfiÓÈÛËÙˆÓ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ Î·È ÙˆÓ ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯˆÓ ÂȉfiÛÂˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈ-ÛÙÒÓ Û ¤Ó· ›Ó·Î· ™Ô˘‰·ÈfiÙËÙ·˜-∂›‰ÔÛ˘, ı· ÚÔÛʤÚÂÈ Ì›· ÔχÙÈÌË ¤Ó‰ÂÈÍË ÁÈ·ÙËÓ ı¤ÛË Ô˘ η٤¯ÂÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌfi (Slack, Chambers & Johnston, 2001).

5.7.3. ∞ÔÌ›ÌËÛË ‹ ηÈÓÔÙÔÌ›·

ª›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË ı· ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÂÈ ‰Èο Ù˘ ÚˆÙÔÔÚȷο ÚÔ˚fiÓÙ· ‹ ı· ·ÎÔÏÔ˘-ı› ·Ï¿ ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙ¤˜ Ù˘; ∂¿Ó ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎÒ˜ ÔÈ Î·Ù¿ÏÏËϘ ÈηÓfiÙË-Ù˜ Î·È Ë ··Ú·›ÙËÙË ÂÊ¢ÚÂÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·, Ë Î·ÈÓÔÙÔÌ›· Ì ÌÔÓ·‰Èο ÚÔ˚fiÓÙ· ı· ‰ÒÛÂÈÛÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË ÙÔ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfi ÏÂÔÓ¤ÎÙËÌ· Ó· ‰È·Ê¤ÚÂÈ ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÓÙ·Áˆ-ÓÈÛÙ¤˜ Ù˘. ™ÙÔ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ, ¤ÓÙÔÓ· ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ, ÔÈ ˘„ËϤ˜ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘÁÈ· ÔÈfiÙËÙ·, Â͢ËÚ¤ÙËÛË, ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈÎfiÙËÙ·, ÂÌÔÚÈÎfi Û‹Ì·, ηϋ Ê‹ÌË Î·È Û¯¤‰ÈÔÂ›Ó·È Î·ıÔÚÈÛÙÈο ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ÂÈÏÔÁ‹˜ ÂÓfi˜ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙ¤˜. ∆· Ó¤·ÚÔ˚fiÓÙ· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÍÂÙ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙËÓ Èı·Ó‹ ÂÈÙ˘¯›· ÙÔ˘˜ ÙfiÛÔ ·fi ÔÈÎÔ-ÓÔÌÈ΋˜ fiÛÔ Î·È ·fi Ù¯ÓÈ΋˜ ¿Ô„˘. °È· ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ ·˘Ùfi, Â›Ó·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙË Ë Ù·˘Ùfi-¯ÚÔÓË Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›· ÛÙÔ Û¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi Ó¤ˆÓ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÛÙÂϯÒÓ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘,marketing Î·È ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜.

5.7.4. ªÂÁ¤ıË ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Î·È ÔÈÎÈÏÔÌÔÚÊ›·

∆· ÌÂÁ¤ıË ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Î·È Ô ‚·ıÌfi˜ Ù˘ ÔÈÎÈÏÔÌÔÚÊ›·˜ ÙˆÓ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ Î·ıÔÚ›-˙ÂÙ·È ·fi ÙȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ÛÙԯ‡ÂÈ Ì›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË. ∞Ó·ÏfiÁˆ˜ÂÈϤÁÂÙ·È Ô ‚·ıÌfi˜ Ù˘ÔÔ›ËÛ˘ Ù˘ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜. ∞˘Ùfi˜ ÂÓ‰¤¯ÂÙ·È Ó·‰È·Ê¤ÚÂÈ ·fi ηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ·fiÏ˘Ù˘ Ù˘ÔÔ›ËÛ˘ (¯ˆÚ›˜ ÂÈÏÔÁ¤˜ ÁÈ· ÙˆÓ ÂÏ¿ÙË),ÂӉȿÌÂÛ˜ ÂÚÈÙÒÛÂȘ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ Ù˘ÔÔ›ËÛ˘ (ÂÏ·ÊÚ¿ ÙÚÔÔÔÈË̤ÓË ·-Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ Ì ‚¿ÛË ÂÈÏÔÁ¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË) ¤ˆ˜ ηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ Ï‹ÚÔ˘˜ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ ÛÙȘ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË (·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙȘ Ô‰ËÁ›Â˜ ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË) (Lampel, J. &Mintzberg, H., 1996).

∏ Ï‹Ú˘ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÛÙȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË Â›Ó·È È‰È·›ÙÂÚ· ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈ΋ ÁÈ·ÙȘ ªª∂ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋˜ ˘ÂÚÁÔÏ·‚›·˜. ™Â ·˘Ù¤˜ ÙȘ ÂÚÈÙÒÛÂȘ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ‰Ôı›ÚÔÛÔ¯‹ ÛÙ· ·Ú·Î¿Ùˆ ÛËÌ›· (Spring, M. & Dalrymple, J., 2000):

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 173

ñ ∫·Ù·ÓfiËÛË ÙˆÓ È‰È·›ÙÂÚˆÓ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂˆÓ Ù˘ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜, ÁÈ· Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓÔ˘˜ Â-Ï¿Ù˜ ‹ ηÙËÁÔڛ˜ ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ.

ñ ∫·ıÔÚÈÛÌfi˜ ÎÚÈÙËÚ›ˆÓ Ì ‚¿ÛË Ù· ÔÔ›· ı· ÂÈϤÁÔÓÙ·È ÔÈ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ ÁÈ· ·Ó¿ÏË„Ëñ ∫·ıÔÚÈÛÌfi˜ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ ÎÔÛÙÔÏfiÁËÛ˘ Ù˘ ·ÓÂÈÏËÌ̤Ó˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜.ñ ÃÚ‹ÛË Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓˆÓ Û˘ÛÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜.

5.8. ª¤ıÔ‰ÔÈ Î·È Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·

∏ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙˆÓ ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ Î·È Ù˘ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi Ù· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈοÙÔ˘ ·Ú·ÁfiÌÂÓÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ Î·È ÙÔ Û‡ÛÙËÌ· ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ۯ‰ȿ˙ÂÙ·È ¤ÙÛÈ ÒÛÙ ӷÈηÓÔÔÈ› ÙȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙÒÓ. ∫¿ı ۇÛÙËÌ· ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó· ÌÂÁÈÛÙÔÔÈ›ÙËÓ ÚÔÛÙÈı¤ÌÂÓË ·Í›· ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜, ÌÂÈÒÓÔÓÙ·˜ ÛÙÔ ÂÏ¿¯ÈÛÙÔ ÙÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ Î·È ÙÔ Îfi-ÛÙÔ˜ ÙˆÓ ‰ÈÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ (McGuffog, T. & Wadsley, N., 1999). √ ÛÙfi¯Ô˜ ·˘Ùfi˜ ÌÔÚ› Ó·ÂÈÙ¢¯ı› Ì ÙËÓ ÚÔÛÂÎÙÈ΋ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË Ù˘ «·Ï˘Û›‰·˜ ·Í›·˜» Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘(Walters, D. & Lancaster, G., 2000). √ ۯ‰ȷÛÌfi˜ Ù˘ ·Ï˘Û›‰·˜ ·Í›·˜ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ›-Ó·È Ù¤ÙÔÈÔ˜ ÒÛÙ ӷ ÈηÓÔÔÈ› ÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÙÔ˘ ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙ‹ ‰È·Ì¤ÛÔ˘ Ù˘ ·Ô‰ÔÙÈ΋˜‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜, ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ÂÊԉȷÛÌÔ‡. √È ‰ÈÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ÚÔÛı¤ÙÔ˘Ó·Í›· Î·È ÔÈ ¿ÛÎÔ˜ ۷ٿϘ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ·ÔÌ·ÎÚ‡ÓÔÓÙ·È, Ë ‰È¿Ù·ÍË Ù˘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜Â›Ó·È ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙÂÚË Î·È Ë Âȯ›ÚËÛË ÂÈÙ˘Á¯¿ÓÂÈ Ù·¯‡ÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘˜ ·Ú¿-‰ÔÛ˘ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿.

5.8.1. ∂›‰Ô˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜

∏ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ›‰Ô˘˜ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜, .¯. ÂÚÁ·ÛÙËÚ›Ô˘, ·ÚÙ›‰ˆÓ ‹ Ì·-˙È΋ (job, batch, mass), ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi ÙË Û¯¤ÛË ÙˆÓ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂˆÓ fiÁÎÔ˘ Î·È ÔÈÎÈÏÔ-ÌÔÚÊ›·˜ ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜. ™˘Ó‹ıˆ˜ ÔÈ ªª∂ ·Ú¿ÁÔ˘Ó ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ÔÈÎÈÏ›· ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ ÛÂÌÈÎÚ¤˜ ÔÛfiÙËÙ˜, ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ Ù· ÈÔ ÎÔÈÓ¿ ›‰Ë Â›Ó·È ÂÚÁ·ÛÙËÚ›Ô˘ ‹ ·ÚÙ›‰ˆÓ. ™Â ·˘-Ùfi ÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ Â›Ó·È ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ Â˘¤ÏÈÎÙ˜ ÛÙȘ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜, fï˜ Ô fiÁÎÔ˜Ô˘ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ·Ú¿ÁÔ˘Ó Â›Ó·È ÂÚÈÔÚÈṲ̂ÓÔ˜. ∞ÓÙ›ıÂÙ·, ÔÈ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›Â˜ Ì·˙È΋˜ ·-Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Â›Ó·È ÏÈÁfiÙÂÚÔ Â˘¤ÏÈÎÙ˜ ·ÏÏ¿ ÂÈÙ˘Á¯¿ÓÔ˘Ó Ì›ˆÛË ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜ ·fi ÙȘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔ-̛˜ Îϛ̷η˜.

√ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌfi˜ ÙˆÓ ÚÔÙÂÚËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ‰‡Ô ·ÎÚ·›ˆÓ Û˘ÛÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ (jobÎ·È mass) ÂÈÙ˘Á¯¿ÓÂÙ·È Ì ÙÔ Û¯ÂÙÈο ÚfiÛÊ·ÙÔ Û‡ÛÙËÌ· ΢„ÂÏÔÂȉԇ˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜(cellular). ∏ ΢„ÂÏÔÂȉ‹˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ ·Ó·ı¤ÙÂÈ ÙÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ‹ ÙÌ‹Ì· ÂÓfi˜ ¤ÚÁÔ˘ Û ̛·ÔÌ¿‰· ·ÙfiÌˆÓ Ô˘ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ› Û ¤Ó· ÂȉÈο ۯ‰ȷṲ̂ÓÔ, ·˘ÙfiÓÔÌÔ ‰È·Ì¤ÚÈÛÌ· (΢-„¤ÏË) (¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 5). ∆Ô Û‡ÛÙËÌ· ·˘Ùfi ·ÚÔÌÔÈ¿˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÔÏÏ¿ ÌÈÎÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·ÛÙ‹ÚÈ·Ô˘ ÂÚÁ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙËÙ· Û ¤Ó·Ó ÎÔÈÓfi ¯ÒÚÔ. ∏ ÌÂÁ¿ÏË Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›· ÙˆÓ ÌÈÎÚÒÓ ÂÚÁ·-ÛÙËÚ›ˆÓ Û˘Ó‰˘¿˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙȘ ˘„ËϤ˜ Ù·¯‡ÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ ÌÂÁ¿ÏˆÓ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÒÓ, ÂÈÙ˘Á¯¿ÓÔ-ÓÙ·˜ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜.

174 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

¢È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ· 5: ∫˘„ÂÏÔÂȉ‹˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹.

5.8.2. ∂›‰Ô˜ ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡

∏ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ Ù‡Ô˘ ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡, Ô ‚·ıÌfi˜ ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡ Î·È Ë Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· ··È-ÙÔ‡Ó ˘„ËϤ˜ ÂÂÓ‰‡ÛÂȘ, Û˘¯Ó¿ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· ÎÚ›ÛÈ̘ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ªª∂. ∏ ¯Ú‹ÛË ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÔ-ÔÈËÌ¤ÓˆÓ Û˘ÛÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Á›ÓÂÈ Û ÂÈÏÂÁ̤ӷ, ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈÎÔ‡ ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· ÛÙ¿-‰È· Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜, ÚÔÛʤÚÔÓÙ·˜ ÌÂȈ̤ÓÔ˘˜ ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘˜ Î·È ·˘ÍË̤ÓË ÂÎÌÂÙ¿ÏÏ¢ÛËÙˆÓ fiÚˆÓ. ªÂÚÈο ·fi Ù· ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù· ÙˆÓ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÚÓˆÓ Û˘ÛÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿-ÓÔ˘Ó (Tsamouras, V., 2001):ñ ªÂȈ̤ÓÔ ÂÚÁ·ÙÈÎfi ÎfiÛÙÔ˜.ñ ∞˘ÍË̤ÓË ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈÎfiÙËÙ·.ñ ªÂȈ̤ÓÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ.ñ ªÂȈ̤ÓÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜.ñ ¢˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘ Ó¤Ô˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜.ñ ∞˘ÍË̤ÓË Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›·.

5.8.3. ™¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜

√ ۯ‰ȷÛÌfi˜ Î·È Ë Î·Ù·ÓÔÌ‹ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·˘Í¿ÓÂÈ ÙËÓ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ÂÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓÔ˘. ∆Ô ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ ·˘Ùfi ÂÏ·ÙÙÒÓÂÈ Ù· Ï¿ıË Î·È ÙȘ ·Ô˘Û›Â˜, ÂÓÒ ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ·‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÂÈ ÙËÓ ÔÈfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÙȘ ÂȉfiÛÂȘ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘. ªÂÚÈο ·fi Ù· ÛÙÔȯ›· Ô˘·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó ÙÔ Û¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Â›Ó·È (Slack, Chambers & Johnston, 2001): ñ ∫·Ù·ÓÔÌ‹ ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ: ŸÙ·Ó οı ¿ÙÔÌÔ ÂÎÙÂÏ› Ì›· ÌÔÓ·‰È΋ ÂÚÁ·Û›·, Ë ·Ô‰ÔÙÈÎfi-

ÙËÙ· ·˘Í¿ÓÂÙ·È. ∞ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ· fï˜ ·˘Í¿ÓÂÙ·È Î·È Ë ÌÔÓÔÙÔÓ›· ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÂÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓÔ˘˜.ñ ∞ÎÔÏÔ˘ı›· Î·È ÙÔÔı¤ÙËÛË ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ: ∆Ș ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ÊÔÚ¤˜ Ë ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ı›· ÔÚ›˙Â-

Ù·È ·fi ÙË Ê‡ÛË ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ Î·È Ë ÙÔÔı¤ÙËÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ Á›ÓÂÙ·È Ì ·ÓÙ›-ÛÙÔÈ¯Ë ÛÂÈÚ¿.

A' Y§E™

KYæE§H 3

ETOIMA¶PO´ONTAKYæE§H 2BKYæE§H 2A

KYæE§H 1

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 175

ñ ¶ÂÚÈ‚·ÏÏÔÓÙÈΤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜: √È Û˘Óı‹Î˜ ÙÔ˘ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Â›Ó·È ÛËÌ·-ÓÙÈÎfi˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ·˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË Î·È ÙËÓ ·fi‰ÔÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·˙Ô̤ӈÓ. ™˘¯Ó¿‰Â, Â›Ó·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙ˜ ÂȉÈΤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Ù¤ÏÂÛË Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈÌ¤ÓˆÓ ‰ÈÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ.

ñ ∂ÚÁÔÓÔÌ›·: ∂˘¯¿ÚÈÛÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ··ÏÏ·Á̤ÓÔ ·fi Ì˘Úˆ‰È¤˜, ·ÎÚ·›Â˜ ıÂÚÌÔ-Îڷۛ˜, ·Î·Ù¿ÏÏËÏÔ ÊˆÙÈÛÌfi, ηıÒ˜ Î·È ÂȉÈΤ˜ ÚԂϤ„ÂȘ ÁÈ· ·ÙÔÌÈ΋ ÚÔÛÙ·-Û›·, ¿ÚÛË ‚·ÚÒÓ ÎÏ.

ñ ∂˘ÂÏÈÍ›·: ∏ ΢ÎÏÈ΋ ÂÓ·ÏÏ·Á‹ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÂÈ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜ Û fiÏÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘˜˘·ÏÏ‹ÏÔ˘˜, ÌÂÈÒÓÂÈ ÙË ÌÔÓÔÙÔÓ›· Î·È ·˘Í¿ÓÂÈ ÙËÓ Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘.

5.9. ¢ÔÌ‹ ·Ï˘Û›‰·˜ ÂÊԉȷÛÌÔ‡

5.9.1. ∫¿ıÂÙË ÔÏÔÎÏ‹ÚˆÛË

√È ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ‰ÂÓ Î·Ù¤¯Ô˘Ó fiÏÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ··Ú·›ÙËÙÔ˘˜ fiÚÔ˘˜ ÁÈ·Ó· Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ÛÔ˘Ó fiϘ ÙȘ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈο. °È· ·˘Ùfi ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ, ÔÏϤ˜ ·fi ÙȘ‰ÈÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ ·Ó·ı¤ÙÔÓÙ·È Û ˘ÔηٷÛ΢·ÛÙ¤˜. √È ‚·ÛÈΤ˜ ‰ÈÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜, ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ Ì›·Âȯ›ÚËÛË ÂȉÈ·ÂÙ·È, Ú¤ÂÈ ¿ÓÙ· Ó· ÂÎÙÂÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈο. ∞ÓÙ›ıÂÙ·, Ë ·ÓÙ·Áˆ-ÓÈÛÙÈ΋ ı¤ÛË Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ ÂÓ‰¤¯ÂÙ·È Ó· ÎÈÓ‰˘Ó¤„ÂÈ, Â¿Ó ‰Ôı› Û ˘ÂÚÁÔÏ¿‚Ô ‚·ÛÈ-΋ ÂÚÁ·Û›·. ªÂٷʤÚÔÓÙ·˜ οÔȘ ÂÚÈÊÂÚÂȷΤ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ Û ÙÚ›ÙÔ˘˜, ÂÈÙÚ¤ÂÙ·È ÛÂÌ›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË Ó· ÂÛÙÈ¿ÛÂÈ Û ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ (Dekkers, R., 2000). ªÂ-ÚÈο ·fi Ù· ÔʤÏË Ù˘ ·Ó¿ıÂÛ˘ Û ˘ÔηٷÛ΢·ÛÙ¤˜ ›ӷÈ:ñ ªÂÙÚ›·ÛË ÂȯÂÈÚËÌ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÎÈÓ‰‡ÓÔ˘.ñ ªÂ›ˆÛË ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜.ñ µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›·˜.ñ ∂˘ÎÔÏfiÙÂÚË ¤ÍÔ‰Ô˜ ·fi ÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿.ñ µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜ (ÂÈϤÁÔÓÙ·˜ ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓÔ˘˜ ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜ ÁÈ· οı ›‰Ô˜).ñ ∞‡ÍËÛË ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ·fi ÙËÓ ÂÏ¢ı¤ÚˆÛË ¯ÒÚÔ˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜.ñ ÃÚËÛÈÌÔÔ›ËÛË ‰È·Ûˆı¤ÓÙˆÓ ÚËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÁÈ· ÚËÌ·ÙÔ‰fiÙËÛË ¤Ú¢ӷ˜ Î·È ·Ó¿Ù˘Í˘.

5.9.2. ¢È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË ÚÔÌËı¢ÙÒÓ

√È ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÎÙÈÌÒÓÙ·È Î·È Ó· ÂÈϤÁÔÓÙ·È Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙË ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ¿ÙÔ˘˜ Ó· ÈηÓÔÔÈÔ‡Ó ÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘. ∏ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË ÙˆÓ ÚÔÌËı¢ÙÒÓ Â›Ó·È··Ú·›ÙËÙË ÛÙȘ ÚÔÌ‹ıÂȘ ÎÚ›ÛÈÌˆÓ ·’ ˘ÏÒÓ, fiÔ˘ Ë ‰È·ÊÔÚÔÔ›ËÛË ·fi ÚÔÌË-ıÂ˘Ù‹ Û ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù‹ Â›Ó·È ÌÂÁ¿ÏË. ¶·Ú·‰Â›ÁÌ·Ù· ÎÚÈÙËÚ›ˆÓ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹˜ ÚÔÌËı¢ÙÒÓ,Ì ÙȘ ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔȯ˜ ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÈ̘ ÌÂÙ·‚ÏËÙ¤˜ ÙÔ˘˜ Â›Ó·È (Lonsdale, C., 1999):ñ ÃÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÔ‡ÌÂÓË ‹ ‰È·ÙÂı›۷ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·: ‚·ıÌfi˜ ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡, ·Í›· ÂÂÓ‰‡-

ÛÂˆÓ ÛÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·.ñ ¶·Ú¯fiÌÂÓË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·: ·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ÂÏ·ÙÙˆÌ¿ÙˆÓ ·Ó¿ ÌÔÓ¿‰·, ·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ÂÏ·Ùو̷ÙÈ-

ÎÒÓ ·Ó¿ ·ÚÙ›‰·, ηÙÔ¯‹ ÈÛÙÔÔÈËÙÈÎÔ‡ Ù˘ ÛÂÈÚ¿˜ ISO 9000.

176 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ ∞ÓÙ·fiÎÚÈÛË ÛÙȘ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜: Áο̷ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ, ¯ÚfiÓÔ˜ ·ÏÏ·Á‹˜ Û ӤÔÚÔ˚fiÓ, ̤ÛÔ Ì¤ÁÂıÔ˜ ·ÚÙ›‰·˜.

ñ ∞ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›· ÛÙȘ ·Ú·‰fiÛÂȘ: ·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ηı˘ÛÙÂÚËÌ¤ÓˆÓ ·Ú·‰fiÛˆÓ, ¯ÚfiÓÔÈ ·Ú¿-‰ÔÛ˘, ̤ÛË ·fiÎÏÈÛË ·fi ÙËÓ ˘ÔÛ¯Âı›۷ ËÌÂÚÔÌËÓ›·.

ñ ∂˘·ÈÛıËÛ›· ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ: ¯Ú‹ÛË ·Ó·Î˘ÎÏˆÌ¤ÓˆÓ ‹ ·Ó·Î˘ÎÏÒÛÈÌˆÓ Û˘-Û΢·ÛÈÒÓ, ηٷӿψÛË ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·˜, ηÙÔ¯‹ ÈÛÙÔÔÈËÙÈÎÔ‡ Ù˘ ÛÂÈÚ¿˜ ISO 14000

ñ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ηٿÛÙ·ÛË ÂÙ·ÈÚ›·˜ ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù‹: ·Í›· ÈÛÙÒÛˆÓ.

5.9.3. ¢È·ÓÔÌ‹

∏ ‰È·ÓÔÌ‹ ÙˆÓ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Á›ÓÂÈ ‰È·Ì¤ÛÔ˘ ‰È·ÓÔ̤ˆÓ, ¯ÔÓ‰ÚÂÌfiÚˆÓ ‹·Â˘ı›·˜ ÛÙÔÓ ÂÏ¿ÙË. ∂Âȉ‹ Ë ‰È·ÓÔÌ‹ ··ÈÙ› ÌÂÁ¿ÏË Ê˘ÛÈ΋ ÂÚÈÔ˘Û›· (ÛÙfiÏÔÊÔÚÙËÁÒÓ Î·È ·Ôı‹Î˜) ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ (ÂÈÛ΢¤˜ ÊÔÚÙËÁÒÓ, η‡ÛÈÌ·, ÂÚÁ·ÙÈο,‰È·¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙÈο ¤ÍÔ‰·), ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ¿ÓÙ· ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ Û˘ÌʤÚÔÓ Ì›·˜ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Ó· ‰È·ÙË-ÚÂ›Ù·È ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈο. √È ªª∂ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ÂÍÂÙ¿ÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ·Ó¿ıÂÛË Ù˘ ‰È·ÓÔÌ‹˜ Û ÙÚ›-ÙÔ˘˜ ÌÂÙ·ÊÔÚ›˜ (3PL). ªÂ ·˘Ù‹ ÙËÓ Î›ÓËÛË, ¤Ó· ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ Ì¤ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÁÈÔ˘ ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜ ÌÂ-Ù·ÙÚ¤ÂÙ·È Û ÌÂÙ·‚ÏËÙfi (Û˘¯Ó¿ ÌÂÈÒÓÂÙ·È) (Le, T., 1995), Ë ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ·˘Í¿ÓÂÙ·È Î·È Ë Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÂÙ·È.

√È 3PL ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ï¤ÔÓ Ó· ‰È·Ó¤ÌÔ˘Ó ÚÔ˚fiÓÙ· ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ Ì ۯÂÙÈο ¯·ÌËÏfiÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ ÙȘ ˆÊ¤ÏÂȘ Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ Îϛ̷η˜. À¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ‰È¿ÊÔÚ· ›-‰· Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Ì›·˜ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Ì ÙÚ›ÙÔ˘˜ ÌÂÙ·ÊÔÚ›˜ (Skjoett-Larsen, T., 2000)Î·È Ë ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ‚·ıÌÔ‡ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi Ù· ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˚fi-ÓÙÔ˜ Î·È ÙȘ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÙ·ÈÚ›·˜.

5.10. ∂ÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ

√ ۯ‰ȷÛÌfi˜ ÙˆÓ ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÎÚ›ÛÈÌË ·fiÊ·ÛË ÁÈ· Ì›· Âȯ›ÚËÛË·ÊÔ‡ ·fi ÙËÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ÙÔ ‡„Ô˜ ÙÔ˘ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÈÎÔ‡ ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜Î·È Ô ‚·ıÌfi˜ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ·Ó·ÁÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË.

5.10.1. ∂ÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔÔıÂÛ›·˜

∏ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ Ù˘ ÙÔÔıÂÛ›·˜ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È ·fi ¤Ó· Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ·Ú·ÁfiÓÙˆÓ ÔÈ ÔÔ›ÔÈ Ú¤-ÂÈ Ó· ÏËÊıÔ‡Ó ˘fi„Ë (Badri, Davis & Davis, 1995):ñ ∂͢ËÚ¤ÙËÛË ·fi ÌÂÙ·ÊÔÚÈο ̤۷.ñ ⁄·ÚÍË ÂÚÁ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎÔ‡.ñ ¢È¿ıÂÛË ·' ˘ÏÒÓ.ñ ¶ÚfiÛ‚·ÛË ÛÙËÓ ÛÙÔ¯Â˘fiÌÂÓË ·ÁÔÚ¿.ñ µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈ΋ ÂÚÈÔ¯‹.ñ ¶·ÚÔ¯¤˜ ÎÔÈÓ‹˜ ˆÊÂÏ›·˜.

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 177

ñ ∫˘‚ÂÚÓËÙÈ΋ ÛÙ¿ÛË.ñ ºÔÚÔÏÔÁÈ΋ ÔÏÈÙÈ΋.ñ ∫ÏÈÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁÈΤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜.ñ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈο ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο.

∞ÊÔ‡ Û˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚˆıÔ‡Ó Î·È ·Ó·Ï˘ıÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ‰È¿ÊÔÚÔÈ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜ Ô˘ ·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó Ì›·Âȯ›ÚËÛË, Ù·ÍÈÓÔÌÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙÔ ‚·ıÌfi ÛÔ˘‰·ÈfiÙËÙ·˜. √È ˘Ô„‹ÊȘ ÙÔÔıÂ-ۛ˜ ‚·ıÌÔÏÔÁÔ‡ÓÙ·È ·Ó¿ÏÔÁ· Ì ÙȘ ÂȉfiÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘˜ Û ·˘ÙÔ‡˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜, ÒÛÙÂÓ· ·Ó·‰ÂȯÙ› Ë ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙË ÙÔÔıÂÛ›·.

5.10.2. ¢È¿Ù·ÍË ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜

√ ۯ‰ȷÛÌfi˜ ÙÔ˘ ¯ÒÚÔ˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Î·È Ë ‰È¿Ù·ÍË ÙÔ˘ ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ›ӷÈÛ‡ÌʈÓÔÈ Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ú·Î¿Ùˆ ‚·ÛÈÎÔ‡˜ ηÓfiÓ˜ (Slack, Chambers & Johnston, 2001):ñ ™‡ÓÙÔÌÔ Ì‹ÎÔ˜ ÚÔ‹˜: Ì›ˆÛË Ù˘ ·fiÛÙ·Û˘ ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ˘fi ÌÔÚÊÔÔ›ËÛË fiÚˆÓ.ñ ∫·ı·ÚÈfiÙËÙ· ÚÔ‹˜: ·ÚfiÛÎÔÙË ÌÂٷΛÓËÛË ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ Î·È Ù·ÎÙÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ.ñ ÕÓÂÛË Î·È ·ÛÊ¿ÏÂÈ· ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡: ¢¯¿ÚÈÛÙÔ Î·È ·ÛʷϤ˜ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜.ñ ∞ÍÈÔÔ›ËÛË ¯ÒÚÔ˘: ηٿÏÏËÏË ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙÔ˘ Û˘ÓÔÏÈÎÔ‡ ‰È·ı¤ÛÈÌÔ˘ ¯ÒÚÔ˘, Û˘ÌÂÚÈ-

Ï·Ì‚·ÓÔ̤ÓÔ˘ ÙÔ˘ ‡„Ô˘˜.

5.11. ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜

∏ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ÙÔÓ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi Ù˘ ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙ˘ ÈÛÔÚÚÔ-›·˜ ÌÂٷ͇ ·Ôı‹Î˘ ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ, ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡ ·Ú·-ÁˆÁ‹˜. √ Û˘ÓÙÔÓÈÛÌfi˜ ·˘Ùfi˜ ÌÂٷ͇ Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ Î·È Ù˘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ ·Ï˘Û›‰·˜ ›-Ó·È Ì›· ‰‡ÛÎÔÏË ˘fiıÂÛË, ·ÊÔ‡ Ë ˙‹ÙËÛË ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ÔÙ¤ ÛÙ·ıÂÚ‹ ‹ ÚԂϤ„ÈÌË.

5.11.1. ¢È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ

√È ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ·Ó·Áο˙ÔÓÙ·È Ó· ‰È·ÙËÚÔ‡Ó ·fiıÂÌ· ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ ÒÛÙÂÓ· ÚÔÏ·‚·›ÓÔ˘Ó ÙȘ ËÌÂÚÔÌËӛ˜ ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ Û˘¯Ó¿ Â›Ó·È Û˘ÓÙÔÌfiÙÂÚ˜ ÙÔ˘¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜. °È· ÙÔ ÏfiÁÔ ·˘Ùfi, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·ÔÊ·ÛÈÛÙ› ÔÈ·, Ô˘ Î·È fiÛ· ÙÂ-Ì¿¯È· ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·ÔıË·ÔÓÙ·È ÚÔÛˆÚÈÓ¿ ÁÈ· ÂÚÈfi‰Ô˘˜ ¤ÓÙÔÓ˘ ˙‹ÙË-Û˘. ∂¿Ó Ë ‰È·Ù‹ÚËÛË ·Ôı‹Î˘ Â›Ó·È ··Ú·›ÙËÙË, ηχÙÂÚÔ Â›Ó·È Ó· Á›ÓÂÙ·È Û ¤Ó· ÂÓ-‰È¿ÌÂÛÔ ÛËÌÂ›Ô Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜ ‰È·‰Èηۛ·˜. ∆Ô ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·Ù‹ÚËÛË ·Ôı‹Î˘ËÌÈÂÙÔ›ÌˆÓ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ Â›Ó·È Û˘Ó‹ıˆ˜ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚÔ ·fi ·˘Ùfi ÙˆÓ ÂÙÔ›ÌˆÓ (Andries, B. &Gelders, L., 1995). ∂ÈϤÔÓ, Ë ÚÔÛÙÈı¤ÌÂÓË ·Í›· Â›Ó·È Ôχ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚË ÛÙ· ·Ú¯ÈοÛÙ¿‰È· ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜. ªÂÚÈο ·fi Ù· ÛËÌ›· Ù· ÔÔ›· ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· Û˘Ì‚¿ÏÔ˘Ó ÛÙÔ ÂÏ¿-¯ÈÛÙÔ ‰˘Ó·Ùfi ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ·Ôı‹Î¢Û˘ ›ӷÈ:ñ ¢È·Ù‹ÚËÛË ÂÈϤÔÓ ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ Û Ì˯·Ó‹Ì·Ù· Î·È ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi, ·Ú¿ Û ·Ô-

ıËÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó· ˘ÏÈο.

178 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ ªÂ›ˆÛË ¯ÚfiÓÔ˘ Ú‡ıÌÈÛ˘ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ Ì ÙË ¯Ú‹ÛË ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ Â˘¤ÏÈÎÙÔ˘ ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡.ñ ªÂ›ˆÛË ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜ ·ÚÙ›‰·˜.ñ πÛ¯˘ÚfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ‰ÂÛÌÔ‡˜ Ì ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜ ÒÛÙ ӷ ‰¤¯ÔÓÙ·È ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚ˜ ·Ú·ÁÁÂϛ˜.ñ πÛ¯˘ÚfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ‰ÂÛÌÔ‡˜ Ì ·ÍÈfiÈÛÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜.ñ µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË Úfi‚Ï„˘ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘ ‰È·Ì¤ÛÔ˘ ÈÛ¯˘ÚfiÙÂÚˆÓ ‰ÂÛÌÒÓ Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙ¤˜.ñ ∫·ÙËÁÔÚÈÔÔ›ËÛË ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ ·Ôı‹Î˘ ·Ó¿ÏÔÁ· Ì ÙË Û˘¯ÓfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ ΛÓËÛ‹˜ ÙÔ˘˜,

ÒÛÙ ӷ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È Ë ÔÛfiÙËÙ· Ô˘ ··ÈÙÂ›Ù·È ÁÈ· οı ›‰Ô˜.

∆· Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·Ù· ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈ΋˜ ÔÏÔÎÏ‹ÚˆÛ˘ Û˘ÓÂÈÛʤÚÔ˘Ó ÛÙËÓ Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚË ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈ-ÛË ÙˆÓ ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ. ∏ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÙÔ˘˜ ‚·Û›˙ÂÙ·È ÛÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î·È ˘Ô-ÏÔÁÈÛÙÒÓ (.¯. bar-coding) Î·È ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ·Ú¤¯Ô˘Ó ¯Ú‹ÛÈ̘ ÏËÚÔÊÔڛ˜ Î·È ÏË-Ú¤ÛÙÂÚÔ ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô ÙˆÓ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ù˘ ·Ôı‹Î˘.

5.11.2. ¢È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ·˜

∏ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ÌÔÚ› Ó· Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi, Ì˯·Ó‹Ì·Ù·, ‹ ηÈÙ· ‰‡Ô. °È· Ó· ÈηÓÔÔÈËı› Ë ˙‹ÙËÛË Ì ÙÚfiÔ ÒÛÙ ӷ ÌÂÁÈÛÙÔÔÈËı› Ë ÎÂÚ‰ÔÊÔÚ›·,Ë ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ·˜ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Á›ÓÂÈ Ì ÙË Ì¤ıÔ‰Ô ÙÔ˘ Û˘Ó·-ıÚÔÈÛÙÈÎÔ‡ ۯ‰ȷÛÌÔ‡, Ë ÔÔ›· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÂÈ ÙÔ ‚¤ÏÙÈÛÙÔ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ·Ú·Î¿Ùˆ·Ú·Ì¤ÙÚˆÓ:

ñ ÃÚfiÓÔ˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜: ηÓÔÓÈÎfi˜, ˘ÂÚˆÚÈ·Îfi˜ ‹ ˘ÂÚÁÔÏ·‚ÈÎfi˜.ñ ¢˘Ó·ÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡: ·‡ÍËÛË ‹ Ì›ˆÛË.ñ ∂ÚÁ·ÙÈÎfi ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfi: ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ‹ ·fiÏ˘ÛË.ñ ¶ÔÛfiÙËÙ· ·ÔıËÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓˆÓ ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ: ·fiıÂÌ· ‹ ¤ÏÏÂÈ„Ë.

5.11.3. ¶ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜

√ ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙËÓ ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ı›· ÙˆÓ ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ڤÂÈ ÂÎÙÂÏÂÛÙÔ‡Ó ÛÂ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ, ÒÛÙ ӷ ÈηÓÔÔÈËıÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ·Ú·ÁÁÂϛ˜.™ÙȘ ªª∂, fiÔ˘ Û˘ÓËı›˙ÔÓÙ·È ·Ú·ÁˆÁ¤˜ ·ÚÙ›‰ˆÓ, Ô ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·-ÛÈÒÓ ÍÂÎÈÓ¿ ·fi ÙËÓ ËÌÂÚÔÌËÓ›· ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘ Î·È ˘ÔÏÔÁ›˙ÂÙ·È ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÚÔÊ· ÒÛÙ ӷÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÙ› Ë ËÌÂÚÔÌËÓ›· ¤Ó·Ú͢. ¶·ÚfiÌÔÈ· Ù¯ÓÈ΋ ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È Î·È ·fi Ù·ÂȉÈο ÏÔÁÈÛÌÈο MRPII ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ÛÙȘ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈΤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹-ÛÂȘ. √ ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ·ÎÚÈ‚¤ÛÙÂÚÔ˜ Â¿Ó ÂÓÙÔÈÛÙÔ‡Ó Î·È ‰È¢ıÂÙËıÔ‡Ó Î·-Ù¿ÏÏËÏ· Ù· ÛËÌ›· ηı˘ÛÙ¤ÚËÛ˘ ÛÙËÓ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋ ‰È·‰Èηۛ· (bottlenecks) Î·È ¤¯ÂÈÚÔ‚ÏÂÊÙ› Ë ˙‹ÙËÛË Ì ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ·. ¶ÔÏϤ˜ ªª∂ ‰ÂÓ ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·Ù›˙Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ-΋ ÙÔ˘˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ÂÎ ÙˆÓ ÚÔÙ¤ÚˆÓ, ·ÏÏ¿ ÙË Ú˘ıÌ›˙Ô˘Ó Î·ı˘ÛÙÂÚË̤ӷ Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙȘ·Ú·ÁÁÂϛ˜ ÙˆÓ ÂÏ·ÙÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜. ∏ Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ ·˘Ù‹ fï˜ ·Ô‰›‰ÂÈ ÌfiÓÔ ÛÙȘ ÂÚÈÙÒ-ÛÂȘ fiÔ˘ Ë ˙‹ÙËÛË Â›Ó·È Ôχ ÌÈÎÚfiÙÂÚË Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ·˜. ™Â ÂÚÈfi‰Ô˘˜¤Í·ÚÛ˘ fï˜, Ë ˙‹ÙËÛË Â›Ó·È ·‰‡Ó·ÙÔ Ó· ÈηÓÔÔÈËı›.

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 179

5.12. µÔËıËÙÈΤ˜ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜

5.12.1. ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ∞ÓıÚˆ›ÓˆÓ ¶fiÚˆÓ Î·È √ÚÁ·ÓˆÙÈ΋ ¢ÔÌ‹

∞ÎfiÌ· Î·È Ë Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ· ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÌ¤ÓË Âȯ›ÚËÛË Â›Ó·È ·‰‡Ó·ÙÔ Ó· ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÂÈÈηÓÔÔÈËÙÈο Â¿Ó ‰ÂÓ ·ÚÔÙÚ˘ÓıÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ¿ÓıÚˆÔÈ Ô˘ ÙËÓ Û˘Óı¤ÙÔ˘Ó. √È ÂȉfiÛÂȘÌÈ·˜ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ ÂÍ·ÚÙÒÓÙ·È ¿ÌÂÛ· ·fi ÙÔ ·›ÛıËÌ· ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÙÔ˘ ¤Ì„˘¯Ô˘ ˘ÏÈ-ÎÔ‡ Ô˘ ÙËÓ ·ÔÙÂÏ› (Miller, D. & Lee, J., 2001). ∏ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ÙˆÓ ·ÓıÚÒÈÓˆÓ fi-ÚˆÓ Â›Ó·È ÙÔ Ì¤ÛÔ ÁÈ· ÙȘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ó· ÂÓÈÛ¯‡ÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈ-ÎfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È Ó· ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÛÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ·fi‰ÔÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ (Huang, T., 2001). ∂ÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓÔÈ Ì·˘ÍË̤ÓË ·›ÛıËÛË ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÙÔ˘˜, ÂÈÙ˘Á¯¿ÓÔ˘Ó ˘„ËϤ˜ ·Ô‰fi-ÛÂȘ Û ÔÈfiÙËÙ·, ÔÛfiÙËÙ· Î·È Û˘ÓÂÒ˜ ÎÂÚ‰ÔÊÔÚ›· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË (Cummings,T. & Worley, C., 1993).

¶ÔÏϤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ·¤Ù˘¯·Ó ÂÂȉ‹ ˘¤ÊÂÚ·Ó ·fi ¤Ó·Ó «·fiÏ˘ÙÔ» ‰È¢ı˘ÓÙ‹, ÔÔÔ›Ô˜ ÚÔÛ¿ıËÛ ӷ Ù· οÓÂÈ fiÏ·. ªË Èηӿ ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë, ·Ó·Ú΋˜ ÂÌÂÈÚ›·, ¤ÏÏÂÈ„ËÂÍÂȉ›Î¢Û˘ Î·È ÌË ÈÛÔÚÚÔË̤ÓË Û‡ÓıÂÛË ÔÌ¿‰ˆÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ .¯. ÔÏÏÔ› Ì˯·ÓÈÎÔ›ÛÙÔ management ‹ ÙÔ ·ÓÙ›ıÂÙÔ, Â›Ó·È Ï›Á˜ ·fi ÙȘ ·Èٛ˜ ·ÔÙ˘¯›·˜ (Hill, C. & Jones,G., 1998). √È ËÁÂÙÈΤ˜, ‰ÈÔÈÎËÙÈΤ˜ Î·È Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ ÛÙÂϯÒÓ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘,ηıÒ˜ Î·È Ë ÂȉÔÔÈË̤ÓË ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÙÈ΋ ‰ÔÌ‹, Â›Ó·È ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ ··Ú·›ÙËÙ· ÛÙÔȯ›·ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÂÈÙ˘¯›· ÙˆÓ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ.

5.12.2. ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ¶ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜

∏ ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ÙˆÓ ··ÈÙÔ‡ÌÂÓˆÓ ÂÓÂÚÁÂÈÒÓ Ì›·˜ Âȯ›-ÚËÛ˘ ÒÛÙ ӷ ÂÍ·ÛÊ·Ï›ÛÂÈ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜ ··ÏÏ·Á̤Ó˜ ·fi Ï¿ıË, ˘„ËÏ¿ ›‰· ÔÈfi-ÙËÙ·˜ Î·È Î·Ù¿ ¤ÎÙ·ÛË ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË. ∏ ›Ù¢ÍË ÙÔ˘ ÂÈı˘ÌËÙÔ‡ ÂȤ-‰Ô˘ ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ··ÈÙ› ÙË Û˘ÓÂÈÛÊÔÚ¿ fiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·˙ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘. ∫·ı¤-Ó·˜ ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó· ·ÓÙÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÙ·È ÙËÓ Ô˘Û›· ÙÔ˘ Ó· ·ÔʇÁÔÓÙ·È Ù· Ï¿ıË, Ó· ÂÈÓÔ› ÌÂ-ıfi‰Ô˘˜ Ô˘ ÂÍ·ÛÊ·Ï›˙Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË Î·È Ó· Û˘ÓÂÚÁ¿˙ÂÙ·È Ì ÙÔ˘˜Û˘Ó·‰¤ÏÊÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔ˜ ·˘Ù‹ ÙËÓ Î·Ù‡ı˘ÓÛË. ŒÓ· ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfi Û‡ÛÙËÌ· ÔÈfiÙË-Ù·˜ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÚÔÛʤÚÂÈ ÈηӋ ÂÌÈÛÙÔÛ‡ÓË fiÙÈ ÙÔ ÚÔ˚fiÓ ‹ Ë ˘ËÚÂÛ›· ÈηÓÔÔÈ›¿ÓÙ· ÙȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÙÔ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ ÙÔ˘ ·ÎÏÔ˘ ÙÔ˘˜ (marketing, ۯ‰ȷÛÌfi˜, ÚÔÌ‹ıÂÈ-˜, ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜, ·Ôı‹Î¢ÛË, ·Ú¿‰ÔÛË, Ù¯ÓÈ΋ ˘ÔÛÙ‹ÚÈÍË, after-sales service).

5.12.3. ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜

√È ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ¤˜ Ù˘ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ ıˆÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È ·Ó·Áη›Ô ηÎfi ÁÈ· ÙȘÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ, ÂÓÒ Ï›Á˜ Â›Ó·È ·˘Ù¤˜ Ô˘ ÙȘ ‚Ï¤Ô˘Ó ˆ˜ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈÎfi fiÏÔ.∏ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î·È ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÒÓ, fiÙ·Ó ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È Î·Ù¿ÏÏËÏ·, ÌÔ-Ú› Ó· ‰ÒÛÂÈ ÔÏÏ¿ ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù· Û ̛· Âȯ›ÚËÛË, fiˆ˜: ·ÏÔ‡ÛÙÂÚ˜, ÁÚËÁÔÚfi-ÙÂÚ˜, ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ ·ÍÈfiÈÛÙ˜ Î·È Â˘¤ÏÈÎÙ˜ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜ (Chopra, S. & Meindl, P., 2001).

180 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ªÔÚ› Ó· ·Ó·Ù‡ÍÂÈ Û¯¤ÛÂȘ ‚·ÛÈṲ̂Ó˜ ÛÙËÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· Ì ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜ ‹ ·ÁÔÚ·ÛÙ¤˜, ‚ÂÏÙÈÒÓÔÓÙ·˜ ÙËÓ ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›· Î·È ÙËÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙË-Ù· Ù˘ ÂÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋˜ ·Ï˘Û›‰·˜. ∆· ¿ÌÂÛ· Î·È ¤ÌÌÂÛ· ÔʤÏË Ù˘ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ ÙˆÓ ˘Ô-ÏÔÁÈÛÙÒÓ ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó:ñ ∞˘ÍË̤ÓË ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÏ¿ÙË.ñ µÂÏÙȈ̤ÓË ·ÎÚ›‚ÂÈ· ·Ú·ÁÁÂÏÈÒÓ Î·È Û˘ÓÙÔÌfiÙÂÚÔÈ ¯ÚfiÓÔÈ ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘.ñ ªÂȈ̤ÓÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜.ñ ∫·Ï‡ÙÂÚË ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛË ˘·Ú¯fiÓÙˆÓ Î·È Ó¤ˆÓ ·ÁÔÚÒÓ.ñ ∞˘ÍË̤ÓÔ ÂӉȷʤÚÔÓ Î·È ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ ˘·ÏϋψÓ.

√È ªª∂ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Ì›· ÛÔ˘‰·›· ¢ηÈÚ›· Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ÈÛfiÙÈÌ· ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚ˜ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Î·È Ó· ÂÈÙ‡¯Ô˘Ó Û ¢ڇÙÂÚ˜ ·ÁÔÚ¤˜, ¯ˆÚ›˜ ··Ú·›ÙËÙ· Ó· ·˘Í‹ÛÔ˘Ó ÙÔ̤ÁÂıfi˜ ÙÔ˘˜, ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÔÓÙ·˜ ‰ÂÛÌÔ‡˜ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Ì ¿ÏϘ ÂÙ·Èڛ˜, ÂÎÌÂÙ·ÏÏ¢fi-ÌÂÓ˜ ÙȘ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ˜ Ù˘ Ó¤·˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ (Tetteh, E. & Burn, J., 2001).

5.12.4. ∞Ó·ıÂÒÚËÛË Î·È µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË

∆Ô ÈÔ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi ÛÙ¿‰ÈÔ Ù˘ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜ Â›Ó·È Ë Ì¤ÙÚËÛË, ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË Î·È ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛËÙÔ˘ ·Ú¯ÈÎÔ‡ ۯ‰›Ô˘ ‰Ú¿Û˘. √ ‚·ı‡ÙÂÚÔ˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˜ οı Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Â›Ó·È Ë Ì¤ÙÚËÛËÙ˘ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓˆÓ Ì ·˘Ù‹Ó ÚÔÛÒˆÓ (Ahmed, Montagno &Firenze, 1996, Slack, Chambers & Johnston, 2001):

ñ ¶ÂÏ¿Ù˜: .¯. ηٿÏÏËÏË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·, ¿ÌÂÛË ·Ú¿‰ÔÛË, ·ÍÈfiÈÛÙË ·Ú¿‰ÔÛË, ¢ÂÏÈ-Í›· ÛÙȘ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ Ù˘ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘, ÙÈÌ‹.

ñ ¶ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù¤˜: .¯. ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋ ÛÙ·ıÂÚfiÙËÙ·, ÛÙ·ıÂÚ‹ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·, ›ÛÙË, ÂÌÈÛÙÔ-Û‡ÓË, ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ÚÔÌËıÂ˘Ù‹.

ñ ¶ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi: .¯. ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÈηÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Î·È Â˘ÂÏÈÍ›·˜, ÛÙ·ıÂÚfiÙËÙ· ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜,·ÛÊ¿ÏÂÈ· ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ·ÍÈÔÎÚ·ÙÈÎfi ÌÈÛıÔÏÔÁÈÎfi Û‡ÛÙËÌ·, ηϤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜,·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡.

ñ ª¤ÙÔ¯ÔÈ: .¯. ΤډË, ÎÂÚ‰ÔÊÔÚ›·, ·fi‰ÔÛË.

ñ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·: .¯. ηٷӿψÛË ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·˜, ·Ó·Î‡ÎψÛË Û˘Û΢·ÛÈÒÓ.

∂ÎÙfi˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ·Ú·¿Óˆ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜, ÔÈ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈΤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ··ÈÙÔ‡ÓÂÈϤÔÓ ·˘ÛÙËÚ¿ ηıÔÚÈṲ̂ÓÔ˘˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘˜ ›‰ÔÛ˘ fiˆ˜ (Toni, A. & Tonchia, S.,2001_ Rolstadas, A., 1998):

ñ ¶ÔÈfiÙËÙ·: ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈ΋ ·ÓÙ›ÏË„Ë ÂÚ› ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜, ·Ú·ÁfiÌÂÓË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·, ·ÓÙÈÏ·Ì‚·-ÓfiÌÂÓË ÔÈfiÙËÙ· ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÏ¿Ù˜, after-sales service, ÔÈfiÙËÙ· ÚÔÌËı¢ÙÒÓ, Îfi-ÛÙÔ˜ ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜.

ñ ∫fiÛÙÔ˜: ·fi ÏÂ˘Ú¿˜ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡, ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ Î·È ˘ÏÈÎÒÓ, ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈÎfiÙËÙ·,¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô˜ ÎÂÊ·Ï·›Ô˘ ΛÓËÛ˘.

ñ ∂˘ÂÏÈÍ›·: ·fi ÏÂ˘Ú¿˜ fiÁÎÔ˘ Î·È ÔÈÎÈÏ›·˜ ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ, ¢ÂÏÈÍ›· Û ÙÚÔÔÔÈ‹ÛÂȘÚÔ˚fiÓÙÔ˜ ‹ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ.

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 181

ñ ∆·¯‡ÙËÙ· (Â͈ÙÂÚÈ΋): Ù·¯‡ÙËÙ· ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘ Î·È ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·, ¯ÚfiÓÔÈ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ·Ú·Á-ÁÂϛ˜, ÙËÓ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ Î·È ÙË ‰È·ÓÔÌ‹.

ñ ∆·¯‡ÙËÙ· (ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈ΋): ¯ÚfiÓÔÈ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ, ¯ÚfiÓÔÈ ·Ó·ÌÔÓ‹˜ Î·È ÌÂٷΛÓËÛ˘.

ñ ∞ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·: ·Ú¿‰ÔÛË ÛÙÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ Î·È Ì ÙȘ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ Û˘ÌʈӋıËηÓ.

∏ Û˘Ó¯‹˜ ÂÎÙ›ÌËÛË ÙˆÓ ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÈÌˆÓ ÌÂÁÂıÒÓ, ÛÂ Û˘Ó‰˘·ÛÌfi Ì ÙËÓ ·Ó¿‰Ú·ÛË Î·ÈÙȘ ·Ú·ÙËÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ·ÓıÚÒˆÓ Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜, Â›Ó·È ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ‰Â‰Ô̤ӷ ÁÈ· ÙË‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË Ù˘ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜. ∞ÎfiÌË Î·È ·Ó Ë ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·ÙÔ˜ √ÏÈ΋˜ ¶ÔÈfiÙË-Ù·˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ô˘ÙÔÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ªª∂, ı· ‹Ù·Ó ·ÚÎÂÙ¿ ÂӉȷʤÚÔÓ Ó· ‰·ÓÂÈÛÙԇ̠ο-ÔÈ· ÛËÌ›· Ù˘ ·fi ÙË ıˆڛ· Û˘Ó¯ԇ˜ ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛ˘. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ·ÓÙÈÏ·Ì‚¿-ÓÔÓÙ·È fiÙÈ Ù· ¿ÓÙ· ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· Á›ÓÔ˘Ó Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ·, Â›Ó·È Èı·ÓfiÙÂÚÔ Ó· ÂÈ‚ÈÒÛÔ˘ÓÎ·È Ó· ÂÂÎÙ·ıÔ‡Ó ÛÙÔ ¤ÓÙÔÓ· ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ Ô˘ ¤¯ÂÈ Û¯ËÌ·ÙÈÛı›.

∆Ô Â‰›Ô ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ Ù˘ ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ ∂ȯÂÈÚËÛÈ·ÎÒÓ ¢È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ-΋˜ ÚÔÛʤÚÂÈ ¤Ó· ȉ·ÓÈÎfi Ï·›ÛÈÔ ÁÈ· ÙȘ ªª∂, Û fi,ÙÈ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ÙÔÓ ÂÓÙÔÈÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ÛË-Ì›ˆÓ Ô˘ ¯Ú‹˙Ô˘Ó ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛ˘ Î·È ÙË ¯¿Ú·ÍË Ó¤·˜ ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋˜. ∫·È Ë Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ· Û¯Â-‰È·Ṳ̂ÓË ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ fï˜ ¯ÚÂÈ¿˙ÂÙ·È ‰È·Ú΋ ·Ó·ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Ó· ‰È·-ÛÊ·ÏÈÛÙ› Ë ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘, ·ÊÔ‡ ÙfiÛÔ ÔÈ ÂÛˆ-ÙÂÚÈÎÔ› fiÛÔ Î·È ÔÈ Â͈ÙÂÚÈÎÔ› ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜ ·ÏÏ¿˙Ô˘Ó Û˘Ó¯Ҙ. √È ÂȯÂÈÚËÛȷΤ˜ ÛÙÚ·-ÙËÁÈΤ˜ ÛÙÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÙˆÓ Ù·¯¤ˆÓ Î·È ¤ÓÙÔÓˆÓ ÂÍÂÏ›ÍÂˆÓ Ô˘ ˙ԇ̠ÛÙȘ ̤Ú˜ Ì·˜,ÔÊ›ÏÔ˘Ó Ó· ·Ó·ıˆÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È fiÛÔ Û˘¯Ó¿ ··ÈÙ›ٷÈ, ÒÛÙÂ Ë Âȯ›ÚËÛË Ó· ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È¿ÓÙ· Û ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈ΋ ı¤ÛË.

§¤ÍÂȘ ∫ÏÂȉȿ:

™ÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋, µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈΤ˜ ¢È·‰Èηۛ˜ Î·È ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋, ªª∂, ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË µÈÔÌË-¯·Ó›·˜, ∂ÊԉȷÛÙÈ΋ ∞Ï˘Û›‰·, ∞ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·, ™˘Ó¯‹˜ µÂÏÙ›ˆÛË.

182 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·

Ahmed N., Montagno R. & Firenze R. (1996) «Operations strategy and organizationalperformance: an empirical study», International Journal of Operations & Pro-duction Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 16 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 5: ÛÂÏ. 41-53.

Andries, B. & Gelders, L. (1995) «Time-based manufacturing logistics», Logistics Infor-mation Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 8 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 3: ÛÂÏ. 30-36.

Badri, M., Davis, D. & Davis, D. (1995) «Decision support models for the location offirms in industrial sites», International Journal of Operations & Production Man-agement, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 15 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 1: ÛÂÏ. 50-62.

Chopra, S. & Meindl, P. (2001) «Supply Chain Management: Strategy, planning and op-eration», Prentice-Hall, ÛÂÏ. 335-338.

Corbett, L. (1998) «Benchmarking manufacturing performance in Australia and NewZealand», Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 5∆‡¯Ô˜ 4: ÛÂÏ. 271-282.

Cummings, T. & Worley, C. (1993) «Organisation Development and Change», Fifth Edi-tion, West Publishing, ÛÂÏ. 305-310.

Dekkers, R. (2000) «Decision models for outsourcing and core competencies in manu-facturing», International Journal of Production Research, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 38 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 17:ÛÂÏ. 4085-4096.

Gilgeous, V. (2001) «The strategic role of manufacturing», International Journal of Pro-duction Research, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 39 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 6: ÛÂÏ. 1257-1287.

Harland, C., Lamming, R. & Cousins, P. (1999) «Developing the concept of supply strat-egy», International Journal of Operations & Production Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 19∆‡¯Ô˜ 7: ÛÂÏ. 650-673.

Hill, C. & Jones, G. (1998) «Strategic Management», Fourth Edition, Houghton Mifflin,ÛÂÏ. 315-316, 337-339.

Hill, T. (2000) «Manufacturing Strategy: Text and cases», Second Edition, Palgrave, ÛÂÏ.78-82.

Johnson, G. & Scholes, K. (1997) «Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and Cases»,Fourth Edition, Prentice Hall, ÛÂÏ. 93-99, 173-176.

Joseph, A. (1999) «Formulation of Manufacturing Strategy», International Journal of Ad-vanced Manufacturing Technology, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 15: ÛÂÏ. 522-535.

Lampel, J. & Mintzberg, H. (1996) «Customizing Customisation», MIT Sloan Manage-ment Review, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 38 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 1: ÛÂÏ. 21-30.

Operations & Logistics: ÛÙÚ·ÙËÁÈ΋ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ‚ȈÛÈÌfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ... 183

Le, T. (1995) «Logistics Strategies and Competitive Advantage», Journal of Business andManagement, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 3 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 1: ÛÂÏ. 53-78.

Lockamy, A. & Cox, J. (1995) «An empirical study of division and plant performancemeasurement systems in selected world class manufacturing firms», Internation-al Journal of Production Research, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 33 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 1: ÛÂÏ.221-236.

Lonsdale, C. (1999) «Effectively managing vertical supply relationships», Supply ChainManagement: An International Journal, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 4 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 4: ÛÂÏ. 176-183.

McGuffog, T. & Wadsley, N. (1999) «Insight from industry: The general principles of val-ue chain management», Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,∆fiÌÔ˜ 4 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 5: ÛÂÏ. 218-225.

Miller, D. & Lee, J. (2001) «The people make the process: commitment to employees, deci-sion making, and performance», Journal of Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 27: ÛÂÏ. 163–189.

Porter, M. (1980) «Competitive Strategy», The Free Press, Macmillan, ÛÂÏ. 4.Porter, M. (1985) «Competitive Advantage», The Free Press, Macmillan, ÛÂÏ. 11-15.Prahalad C. & Hamel G. (1990) «The Core Competence of the Corporation», Harvard

Business Review: ÛÂÏ. 79-91.Puttick, J. (1998) «Factory for the future: Final report synopsis», Warwick Manufactur-

ing Group, Eureka Project.Rolstadas, A. (1998) «Enterprise performance measurement», International Journal of

Operations & Production Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 18 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 9/10: ÛÂÏ. 989-999.Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2000) «Third party logistics - from an interorganizational point of

view», International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,∆fiÌÔ˜ 30 ∆‡¯Ô˜: ÛÂÏ. 112-127.

Slack, N., Chambers, S. & Johnston, R. (2001) «Operations Management», Third Edition, Fi-nancial Times-Prentice Hall, Pearson Education, ÛÂÏ. 43-57, 201-202, 266-271, 608.

Spring, M. & Dalrymple, J. (2000) «Product customisation and manufacturing strategy»,International Journal of Operations & Production Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 20∆‡¯Ô˜ 4: ÛÂÏ. 441-467.

Tetteh, E. & Burn, J. (2001) «Global strategies for SMe-business: applying the SMALL frame-work», Logistics Information Management, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 14 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 1/2: ÛÂÏ. 171-180.

Toni, A. & Tonchia, S. (2001) «Performance measurement systems: Models, characteris-tics and measures», International Journal of Operations & Production Manage-ment, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 21 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 1/2: ÛÂÏ. 46-70.

Tsamouras, V., (2001) «Operations and Logistics Strategy formulation for SMEs», MScThesis, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK, ÛÂÏ. 22, 34, 49-50.

Walters, D. & Lancaster, G. (2000) «Implementing value strategy through the valuechain», Management Decision, ∆fiÌÔ˜ 38 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 3: ÛÂÏ. 160-178.

Wit, B. & Meyer, R. (1998) «Strategy: Process, Content, Context», Second Edition,Thomson, ÛÂÏ. 812.

Zack, M., (1999) «Developing a Knowledge Strategy», California Management Review,∆fiÌÔ˜ 41 ∆‡¯Ô˜ 3: ÛÂÏ. 125-145.

184 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÛÂÙ¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù·

™Ù. ∫·Ú·ÁÈ¿ÓÓ˘ÃÚ. ∫·Ú·˝ÛÎÔ˜¢. ª·ÎfiÏ·˜∫. ªÈ¯ÂÏÈÔ˘‰¿ÎË∫. ™Ô˘Ì¤Ï˘∆.∂.π. ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∏ ·ÚÔ‡Û· ¤Ú¢ӷ ˘ÏÔÔÈ‹ıËΠÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· ¤ÚÁÔ˘ Ù˘ ∫ÔÈÓÔÙÈ΋˜ ¶ÚˆÙÔ‚Ô˘Ï›·˜EQUAL ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚË ¤ÓÙ·ÍË ÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ, ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ Î·È ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓÛÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜. ¶·Ú¿ ÙÔ ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ fiÙÈ ·ÚÎÂÙÔ› ÎÏ¿‰ÔÈ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ÔÈ-ÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó Êı›ÓÔ˘Û· ÔÚ›·, ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ÔÏϤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜/·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÌÂηϤ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ Î·È ·ÔÚÚfiÊËÛ˘ ·fi ÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿. À¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ·Ó¿ÁÎ˜Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÙfiÛÔ Û ÎÏ·ÛÛÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ fiÛÔ Î·È Û ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Ó¤ˆÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÒÓ ÌÂÚÔÂÍ¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ ÙȘ Û¯ÂÙÈΤ˜ Ì ÙËÓ ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ·¤-Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙËÓ Î·Ù¿ÚÙÈÛË ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜ Û Ӥ· Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· ·ÏÏ¿ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó˘ÏÔÔÈ‹ÛÂÈ Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi Ù¤ÙÔÈ· ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·Ù· ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘. ™ÙÔȯ›· Ô˘ Ï·Ì‚¿-ÓÔ˘Ó ˘’ fi„Ë ÙÔ˘˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ÂÓfi˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡ Â›Ó·È Ë ÂÌÂÈÚ›·/ÚÔ¸ËÚÂÛ›·, ËÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ·fiÎÙËÛ˘ Ó¤ˆÓ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ/‰ÂÍÈÔًوÓ, Ë ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÛÂ Ó¤Ô Ù¯ÓÈ-Îfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ, ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È Ë ÁÓÒÛË Í¤Ó˘ ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜ (΢ڛˆ˜ Ù˘ ·ÁÁÏÈ΋˜). ∂›Û˘, oÈÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ·¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜, ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Î·È ÚfiÛÊ˘-Á˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó Û ÔÈÎÈÏ›· ÎÏ¿‰ˆÓ Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜. ŸÌˆ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó΢ڛˆ˜ ˆ˜ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔ ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi ¯·ÌËÏÒÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ ··ÈÙ‹ÛˆÓ. ∆¤ÏÔ˜, Ë ‰ËÌÈ-Ô˘ÚÁ›· ÂÓfi˜ ∂ıÓÈÎÔ‡ ™˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ¶ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÁÓÒÛÂˆÓ Î·È ‰ÂÍÈÔ-Ù‹ÙˆÓ ı· ¤¯ÂÈ ıÂÙÈο ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· ÙfiÛÔ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ fiÛÔ Î·È ÛÙÔ˘˜ ·ÏÈÓ-ÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜, ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Î·È ÚfiÛÊ˘Á˜ ÁÈ·Ù› ı· ·˘Í‹ÛÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ÙȘ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ ÂÓ-ۈ̿وۋ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·.

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 185

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 185-204

Abstract

This research was conducted in the framework of a project of the European Commu-nity Initiative EQUAL, aiming at the better job placement of the repatriates-immigrants-refugees in the Greek job market. Even though many sectors of the Greek economy ap-pear to be on a declining course, there are many specialties/professions with encouragingprospects for employment and worker absorption into the job market. There are needsin the classic specialties as well as in the new technologies especially those related to In-formation Technology. The enterprises have a positive attitude towards the training oftheir technicians in new modern areas, even though they have not implemented thesetraining programs to a large extent. Elements that are taken into account for the hiringof a technician are his/her previous work-related experience (considered of great impor-tance), their capability to acquire new knowledge skills, the adaptability to a new techni-cal environment, and also the knowledge of a foreign language (mainly English). The en-terprises have also a positive attitude towards repatriates-immigrants-refugees and em-ploy them in a variety of sectors of the economy. However, businesses mainly employthis group as unskilled personnel with low wage earnings. The creation of a National Sys-tem of Certification will have a positive affect on the job market as well as for the repa-triates-immigrants-refugees because it will considerably increase their prospects of inte-gration into the Greek economy.

1. ∂ÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹

™ÙËÓ ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›· ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È Ù· Â˘Ú‹Ì·Ù· ÂÚ¢ÓÒÓ Î·È Ù· Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·-Ù· Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ·’ ·˘Ù¤˜ Û¯ÂÙÈο Ì ÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ··ÈÙÔ‡Ó ÙËÓ Î·ÙÔ¯‹ Ù˘¯›Ô˘ ÙÚÈÙÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ Âη›-‰Â˘Û˘ (∞∂π-∆∂π). ¶Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ıËηÓ: (·) µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·ÊÈ΋ ¤Ú¢ӷ (Û˘ÁΤÓÙÚˆÛË Î·ÈÌÂϤÙË ¿ÏÏˆÓ ÂÚ¢ÓÒÓ Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙÔ ı¤Ì·), (‚) ŒÚ¢ӷ ‰›Ô˘ (‰È·ÓÔÌ‹ ηÈÛ˘ÌÏ‹ÚˆÛË ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁ›ˆÓ) Û ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ¡. πˆÓ›·˜ ∞ÙÙÈ΋˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ¡ÔÌÔ‡•¿Óı˘ Î·È (Á) ŒÚ¢ӷ ÛÂ Û˘ÏÏÔÁÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ÊÔÚ›˜ ÙÔ˘ ¡ÔÌÔ‡ ∞ÙÙÈ΋˜.™ÙÔ Ù¤ÏÔ˜ Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Á›ÓÂÙ·È Û‡ÓıÂÛË ÙˆÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ ·˘ÙÒÓ ÙˆÓ ÂÚ¢ÓÒÓ Î·ÈÂÍ·ÁˆÁ‹ ÔÚÈÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ.

√È ÚÔ·Ó·ÊÂÚı›Û˜ ¤Ú¢Ó˜ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· ¤ÚÁÔ˘ Ù˘ ∫ÔÈÓÔÙÈ-΋˜ ¶ÚˆÙÔ‚Ô˘Ï›·˜ EQUAL ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ·ÓÙÈÌÂÙÒÈÛË ÙÔ˘ Ú·ÙÛÈÛÌÔ‡ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜Î·ıÒ˜ Î·È ÙËÓ Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚË ¤ÓÙ·ÍË ÙˆÓ ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ, ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Î·È ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ Û’·˘Ù‹Ó, ̤ۈ Ù˘ ·Ó·ÁÓÒÚÈÛ˘ ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ Î·È ‰ÂÍÈÔًوÓ. °È· ÙÔÏfiÁÔ ·˘Ùfi, Ë ·ÚÔ‡Û· ÂÚÁ·Û›· ·Û¯ÔÏÂ›Ù·È Î·È ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi Ì ÙȘ ‰˘-Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ˜ Î¿Ï˘„˘ ÙˆÓ ·Ó·ÁÎÒÓ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfi-ÙËÙ˜ ·fi ̤ÏË ÙˆÓ Î·ÙËÁÔÚÈÒÓ Ô˘ ÚԷӷʤڷÌ (ÔÌ¿‰· ÛÙfi¯Ô˘).

186 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

2. ŒÚ¢ӷ ÁÚ·Ê›Ԣ

™Ù· Ï·›ÛÈ· Ù˘ ¤Ú¢ӷ˜ ÁÚ·Ê›Ԣ, ÌÂÏÂÙ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÌÈ· ÛÂÈÚ¿ ·fi ËÁ¤˜, ‹ÙÔÈ ÌÈ· ÌÔ-ÓÔÁÚ·Ê›· Î·È ¤ÓÙ ÌÂϤÙ˜-¤Ú¢Ó˜ Ô˘ ¤ÁÈÓ·Ó ÁÈ· ÏÔÁ·ÚÈ·ÛÌfi ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ ÊÔÚ¤ˆÓ ηÈηχÙÔ˘Ó ÙÔ ı¤Ì·, ηıÒ˜ Î·È Ë ¤Ú¢ӷ «√È ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Ù˘ ∞Ó·ÙÔÏ‹˜ ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙÔ˘˘Ô‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜» Ô˘ ¤ÁÈÓ ·fi ÙÔ ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎfi ∫¤ÓÙÚÔ ÀÔ‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Ù˘ ¶ÔÚÙÔÁ·Ï›·˜.∂Ó Û˘ÓÙÔÌ›·, Ù· Â˘Ú‹Ì·Ù· ÙˆÓ ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÌÂÏÂÙÒÓ ÂÚÈÁÚ¿ÊÔÓÙ·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ·.

1) ™ÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›· «∂·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÙÔ˘ ̤ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ·ÚÂÏıfiÓÙÔ˜» ÙÔ˘ ηıËÁË-Ù‹ £. ∫·ÙÛ·Ó¤‚·, ‰ÈÂÚÂ˘Ó¿Ù·È Ë ‰È·¯ÚÔÓÈ΋ ÂͤÏÈÍË ÙˆÓ Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ¿ÙˆÓ, ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘Ó· ÂÈÛËÌ·ÓıÔ‡Ó Ù· ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· Ô˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜, Ì ÛÎÔfi ·ÊÂÓfi˜ ÙËÓ˘Ô‚Ô‹ıËÛË ÙˆÓ Ó¤ˆÓ ÛÙËÓ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÙÔ˘ ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ùfi˜ ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ·ÊÂÙ¤ÚÔ˘ ÙËÓ ·ÔÙÂ-ÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙÂÚË ·fi‰ÔÛË ÙÔ˘ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÛ·Ó·ÙÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡. ∏ ·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË Ô˘ οÓÂÈÔ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜ ηٷϋÁÂÈ ÛÙÔ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÌfi ÙˆÓ Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÛÂ: (·) ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÌÂÔχ ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜, (‚) ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· Ì ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ Î·È (Á) ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù·Ì ÂÚÈÔÚÈṲ̂Ó˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜.

¶Ôχ ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Ù· ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù·: ˘‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎfi˜, „˘ÎÙÈÎfi˜, ËÏÂÎÙÚÔ-ÏfiÁÔ˜, ıÂÚÌÔ¸‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎfi˜, ÛˆÏËÓÔ˘ÚÁfi˜, Ù¯ÓÈÎfi˜ Ì˯·ÓËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ¤ÚÁÔ˘, ÛÔ‚·Ù˙‹˜, Â-ÙÚÔÌ¿ÛÙÔÚ·˜, Ì·ÚÌ·ÚÔÙ¯ӛÙ˘, ÂÚÁÔ‰ËÁfi˜ ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÒÓ, ͢ÏÔ˘ÚÁfi˜, ÂÈÏÔÔÈfi˜, ÂÏ·-ÛÌ·ÙÔ˘ÚÁfi˜, Û˘ÁÎÔÏÏËÙ‹˜, ۯ‰ȷÛÙ‹˜ ›ψÓ, Ù¯ÓÈÎfi˜ ·ÓÂÏ΢ÛÙ‹ÚˆÓ, Ù¯ÓÈÎfi˜ ÂÚ-Á·ÏÂÈÔÌ˯·ÓÒÓ, Ù¯ÓÈÎfi˜ Ô¯ËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î.Ï. √È ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Û¯ÂÙÈΤ˜ Ì ÙËÓ ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋(ÔÏ˘Ì¤Û·, ‰›ÎÙ˘· Î·È ‰È·‰›ÎÙ˘Ô, ‚¿ÛÂȘ ‰Â‰Ô̤ӈÓ, ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛË ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈÒÓ, ÚÔÌÔ-ÙÈ΋, ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎfi ÏÔÁÈÛÌÈÎfi, Ù¯ӛÙ˘ ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÒÓ Î.Ï.) ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó fiϘ Ôχ ıÂÙÈ-Τ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜. ∆Ô ›‰ÈÔ Î·È ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Ô˘ Û˘Ó‰˘¿˙Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋ ‹ ÙË ÌË-¯·ÓÈ΋ (engineering) Ì ¿ÏϘ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ (ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÔ‰ÈÔÈÎËÙÈÎfi˜-ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈÎfi˜, ÔÈÎÔ-ÓÔÌÔÏfiÁÔ˜ ‰È·¯Â›ÚÈÛ˘ ¤ÚÁˆÓ, Ì˯·ÓÈÎfi˜ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ Î·È ‰ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘ Î.Ï.).

2) ™ÙËÓ ¤Ú¢ӷ «™‡Ó‰ÂÛË ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˘ Û˘Ó¯È˙fiÌÂÓ˘ ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘ ·Ó¤ÚÁˆÓ Ì ÙȘ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹Ûˆӻ, Ô˘ ¤ÁÈÓ ·fi ÙËÓ ÂÙ·ÈÚ›· Metron Analysis, ‚·ÛÈÎfi˜ ÛÙfi-¯Ô˜ ‹Ù·Ó Ô ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi˜ ÙˆÓ ·Ó·ÁÎÒÓ ÁÈ· ı¤ÛÂȘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÛÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Î·È Ô‚·ıÌfi˜ Î¿Ï˘„˘ ·˘ÙÒÓ. ∏ ‰È·ÈÛÙˆı›۷ ˙‹ÙËÛË ·Ó·Ï‡ıËΠ۠ۯ¤ÛË Ì ‰È¿ÊÔÚ· ¯·-Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο, fiˆ˜ Ù‡Ô ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ʇÏÔ Î·È ËÏÈΛ·, Â›Â‰Ô Âη›‰Â˘Û˘, ÚÔ¸ËÚÂ-Û›·, Î.Ï. ∆· ‚·ÛÈο Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù· ›ӷÈ: ∏ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯ÂÈÚÔÙ›ÌËÛË ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ Ê‡ÏÔ ÙˆÓ ˘fi ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ÂÚÁ·˙Ô̤ӈÓ. ªÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ ÔÛÔÛÙfiÙ˘ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘ ı· Î·Ï˘Êı› ·fi ·ÔÊÔ›ÙÔ˘˜ §˘Î›Ԣ. ∏ ÚÔ¸ËÚÂÛ›· Â›Ó·È ·ÚÎÂÙ¿ ÈÛ¯˘-Úfi ÚÔÙ¤ÚËÌ·, fiˆ˜ Î·È Ë ÁÓÒÛË Í¤ÓˆÓ ÁψÛÛÒÓ. °È· ÙË ÁÓÒÛË ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÒÓ ÔÈ ÚÔ-ÙÈÌ‹ÛÂȘ ÌÔÈÚ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È. ∆¤ÏÔ˜, ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È Â˘ÓÔ˚Τ˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ·ÏÈÓ-ÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ, ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ Î·È ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ. ª¤Û· ÛÙȘ ‰¤Î· ÚÒÙ˜ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ¿-ÙˆÓ, ·fi ÏÂ˘Ú¿˜ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘, ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÔÓÙ·È ÔÈ ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ Ù‡ˆÓ, ÔÈÙ¯ÓÈÎÔ› ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ¤ÚÁˆÓ, ÔÈ ·Ó·Ï˘Ù¤˜/ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÙ¤˜, ÔÈ ˆÏËÙ¤˜, ÔÈ ·ËıËοÚÈÔÈ, ÔÈÔ‰ËÁÔ› ÊÔÚÙËÁÒÓ Î·È ÏˆÊÔÚ›ˆÓ Î·È ÔÈ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔÈ ÂÚÁ¿Ù˜ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›·˜.

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 187

3) ∏ «ŒÚ¢ӷ ‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Î·È ÌÂϤÙË ·ÓÙÈÛÙÔ›¯ÈÛ˘ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Ì ÙË ˙‹ÙËÛË ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜» ¤ÁÈÓ ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓÔÙÈ΋˜ÚˆÙÔ‚Ô˘Ï›·˜ «∞·Û¯fiÏËÛË». ™Ù· Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù· Ù˘ ¤Ú¢ӷ˜ ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÔÓÙ·ÈÎ·È Ù· ·ÎfiÏÔ˘ı·: (·) ∏ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ÂÎÊÚ¿˙ÂÈ ıÂÙÈ΋ ÚfiıÂÛË ÁÈ·ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ. ™ÙÔ˘˜ ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ ÁÈ· ÌË ÂӉ¯fiÌÂÓË ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔ-ÓÙ·È Ë ÌË ÁÓÒÛË Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜, Ë ÌË ÁÓÒÛË Ù˘ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜, ÔÈ ‰˘ÛÎÔϛ˜ ÚÔ-Û·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ ÛÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·, Ë ¿ÏÏË ÓÔÔÙÚÔ›· Î·È Ë ÌË ÁÓÒÛË ÙˆÓ Ó¤-ˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ fiˆ˜ ∏/À– Internet, Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ marketing, ‰ËÌfiÛȘ Û¯¤ÛÂȘ, logistics,Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ management, Ӥ˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ Î.Ï. (‚) ªÈ· ÚÔÛ¿ıÂÈ· ·ÓÙÈÛÙÔ›¯ÈÛ˘ ÙˆÓ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Ì ÙË ˙‹ÙËÛË ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÛÙË¢˘ÙÈ΋ ∞ı‹Ó· ¤‰ÂÈÍ fiÙÈ Î·Ù¿ ̤ÛÔ fiÚÔ ÌfiÓÔ ÙÔ 10% ÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ ··Û¯Ô-ÏÂ›Ù·È Û ı¤ÛÂȘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ›‰È˜ ‹ ·ÚÂÌÊÂÚ›˜ ÚÔ˜ Ù· ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈο ÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔÛfiÓÙ·.(Á) ªÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚË ˙‹ÙËÛË ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙Ô˘Ó ÔÈ Ó¤Â˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÌÂ: ∏ÏÂ-ÎÙÚÔÓÈÎÔ‡˜ ÀÔÏÔÁÈÛÙ¤˜–Internet, ¢ËÌfiÛȘ Û¯¤ÛÂȘ–∂ÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·, √ÚÁ¿ÓˆÛË ·Ôı‹-΢–¢È·Î›ÓËÛË ÂÌÔÚÂ˘Ì¿ÙˆÓ, Management, ¶ˆÏ‹ÛÂȘ–Marketing, ∞˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÔÔÈË̤-Ó· Ì˯·Ó‹Ì·Ù·, ¡¤Â˜ È·ÙÚÈΤ˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜, ¡¤Â˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ ÛÙȘ °Ú·ÊÈΤ˜ ∆¤¯Ó˜-¶ÔÏ˘Ì¤Û· Î·È ŒÏÂÁ¯Ô ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜.

4) ∏ ¤Ú¢ӷ ÙÔ˘ ™˘Ó‰¤ÛÌÔ˘ ∂ÏÏËÓÈÎÒÓ µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÒÓ «∞Ó¿ÁΘ ÙˆÓ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎÒÓÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ Û ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ·È¯Ì‹˜» ¤‰ÂÈÍ fiÙÈ ÛÂ Â›Â‰Ô ÚÔ-ÙÚÈÙÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ Âη›-‰Â˘Û˘ ΢Úȷگ› Ë ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÙÒÓ ªË¯·ÓÔÏfiÁˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙÒÓ Ì˯·-ÓÒÓ. ∞ÎÔÏÔ˘ıÔ‡Ó, Ì ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ‰È·ÊÔÚ¿, ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜: ¶ˆÏ‹ÛÂˆÓ Î·È Marketing, ∞˘-ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÒÓ, ¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛ˘, ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î·È ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÒÓ ∂ÈÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ Î·È Ù¯ÓÈÙÒÓ∏ÏÂÎÙÚÔÏfiÁˆÓ.

5) ∏ ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ì ٛÙÏÔ «∞˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ›» ‚·Û›ÛÙËΠ۠¤Ú¢Ó˜ ‰›Ô˘ Ô˘ ‰ÈÂÍ‹Á·-Á·Ó Ë ICAP, ÙÔ πÓÛÙÈÙÔ‡ÙÔ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎÒÓ ∂Ú¢ÓÒÓ Î·È Ô ™‡Ó‰ÂÛÌÔ˜∂ÏÏËÓÈÎÒÓ µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÒÓ. ¶ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÁÈ· ÌÈ· ÚÔÛ¿ıÂÈ· ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÌÔ‡ ÙˆÓ ·Ó·ÁÎÒÓÛ ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓÔ ·ÓıÚÒÈÓÔ ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfi Û ı¤Ì·Ù· ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡ Û ¤Ó·Ó ·ÚÈıÌfi ‚ÈÔ-Ì˯·ÓÈÒÓ fiÔ˘ ÔÈ ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ› ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ‚·ÛÈ΋ ÙÔ˘˜ ‰ÈÂÚÁ·Û›·. ¶ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÁÈ·: (·)‚ÈÔÌ˯·Ó›Â˜ Î·È ‚ÈÔÙ¯ӛ˜ Ì ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÔÔÈË̤ÓË ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ Î·È (‚) ηٷÛ΢·ÛÙÈΤ˜,ÂÌÔÚÈΤ˜ ‹ ÂÙ·Èڛ˜ ·ÚÔ¯‹˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ ÚÔÌËı‡ԢÓ, ηٷ-Û΢¿˙Ô˘Ó, ÂÁηıÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ‹ Û˘ÓÙËÚÔ‡Ó ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡.

∞fi ÙȘ ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ ¤Ú¢Ó˜ ÚԤ΢„·Ó ›Û˘ Ù· ·Ú·Î¿Ùˆ:

ñ ∆Ô 70% ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ Û¯Â‰È¿˙Ô˘Ó Ó· οÓÔ˘Ó ÚÔÛÏ‹„ÂȘ ÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓˆÓ ÛÙȘ Ó¤-˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ ÂÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓˆÓ ÚÔ-ÙÚÈÙÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ ÙËÓ ÂfiÌÂÓË ÂÓÙ·ÂÙ›·.

ñ ∆Ô 53% ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ‰ËÏÒÓÔ˘Ó fiÙÈ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· Âηȉ‡ÛÔ˘Ó ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë ÚÔ-ÙÚÈÙÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ Û ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ·È¯Ì‹˜.

ñ ∆Ô 46% ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ‰ËÏÒÓÂÈ fiÙÈ ‰ÂÓ ‚Ú›ÛÎÔÓÙ·È ‹ Û·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë Ì ÚÔ-ÙÚÈÙÔ‚¿ıÌÈ· Âη›‰Â˘ÛË Û ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ·È¯Ì‹˜.

188 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

√È Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Ù˘ ÚÔ-ÙÚÈÙÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ Ô-ÛÔÛÙfi ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ‰˘ÛÎÔχÂÙ·È ‹ ·‰˘Ó·Ù› Ó· ‚ÚÂÈ ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë ›ӷÈ: ∆¯ӛÙ˜ ªË¯·-ÓÔÏfiÁÔÈ, ÃÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ ªË¯·ÓÒÓ, ∞˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ› Î·È ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î·È ∂È-ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ. ∏ ··Û¯fiÏËÛË ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô £¤ÚÌ·ÓÛ˘-æ‡Í˘-∫ÏÈÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡ ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂٷȈ˜ Ë ·ÓÂÚ¯fiÌÂÓË Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈ΋ ‰‡Ó·ÌË.

6) ∏ ¤Ú¢ӷ ÙÔ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿ «∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÛÂ Ù˘¯ÈÔ‡¯Ô˘˜ ∞˘-ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡» ¤¯ÂÈ Î·Ù·Ï‹ÍÂÈ Û ÌÈ· ÔÈÎÈÏ›· Û˘ÌÂÚ·ÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ. ∞’ ·˘Ù¿, ÂΛӷ Ô˘ÂӉȷʤÚÔ˘Ó ÙËÓ ·ÚÔ‡Û· ¤Ú¢ӷ ›ӷÈ: (·) √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÂÊ·ÚÌfiÛÂÈ ÛÂÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi Ӥ˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜. (‚) √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÚfiıÂÛË ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ Ó¤ˆÓ ÙÂ-¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÒÓ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ÙËÓ ÚÔÛ¯‹ ÂÓÙ·ÂÙ›·. (Á) ªÂÁ¿ÏË ÛËÌ·Û›· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÚfiÛÏË„ËÙ¯ÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡ ‰›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛÙ· ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ·: ¶Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ, ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·-ÙÈ΋ ¢ÂÏÈÍ›·/‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÁ‹˜ Û Ӥ˜ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ˜, ÁÓÒÛË ¯Ú‹Û˘ Ù˘ ÙÂ-¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜ ∏/À Î·È ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î·È ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈΤ˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜.

7) ∏ ¤Ú¢ӷ «√È ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Ù˘ ∞Ó·ÙÔÏ‹˜ ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙÔ˘ ˘Ô‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜» ¤ÁÈÓ ·fiÙÔ ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎfi ∫¤ÓÙÚÔ ÀÔ‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Ù˘ ¶ÔÚÙÔÁ·Ï›·˜. ™’ ·˘Ù‹Ó ‚Ï¤Ô˘Ì fiÙÈ:

∏ ¶ÔÚÙÔÁ·Ï›·, fiˆ˜ Î·È Ë ∂ÏÏ¿‰·, ·fi › ÛÂÈÚ¿ ÂÙÒÓ ¯ÒÚ· ÂÍ·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ÌÂÙ·Ó·-ÛÙÒÓ ·ÔÙÂÏ› Û‹ÌÂÚ· ¯ÒÚ· ÂÈÛÚÔ‹˜ ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ. ∆Ô ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙ¢ÙÈÎfi Ú‡̷, ηٿ ·-ÚÈÔ ÏfiÁÔ, ÚÔ¤Ú¯ÂÙ·È ·fi ÙȘ ¯ÒÚ˜ Ù˘ ∞Ó·ÙÔÏÈ΋˜ ∂˘ÚÒ˘. √È ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ ›ӷÈÛÙËÓ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙÔ˘˜ ¿Ó‰Ú˜ 19-50 ÂÙÒÓ, ̤Û˘ ‹ ·ÓÒÙÂÚ˘ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ Î·È ÂÚÁ¿˙Ô-ÓÙ·È Î·Ù¿ ÙÔ ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ ÔÛÔÛÙfi ÛÙËÓ ÔÈÎÔ‰fiÌËÛË, ÛÙȘ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜ ÍÂÓԉԯ›ˆÓ ηÈÛÙȘ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜ ÂÛÙÈ·ÙÔÚ›ˆÓ.

À¿Ú¯ÂÈ Î¿ÔÈ· ‰˘ÛÎÔÏ›· Â͇ÚÂÛ˘ ÂÚÁ·ÙÈÎÔ‡ ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎÔ‡ ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙÔ˘ ˘Ô‰‹-Ì·ÙÔ˜. ∞˘Ùfi ¢ÓÔ› ÙËÓ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ ·fi ÙËÓ ∞Ó·ÙÔÏ‹. √ ÏËı˘ÛÌfi˜ ·˘Ùfi˜·ÔÙÂÏ›ٷÈ, ηٿ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›·, ·fi Ó·ڿ ¿ÙÔÌ· Ô˘, ·ÚfiÙÈ ¤¯Ô˘Ó οÔȘ Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ÁÓÒÛÂȘ, ‰ÂÓ ·Ó·Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó ·Ó¿ÏÔÁ· ηı‹ÎÔÓÙ· ÛÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË. √È ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ Ô˘ÂÎÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ··ÈÙÔ‡Ó ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜ Ôχ ηÙÒÙÂÚ˜ ·’ ·˘Ù¤˜ Ô˘ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈο ¤¯Ô˘Ó. ™˘-ÓÂÒ˜ ·˘Ùfi ·ÔÙÂÏ› ¤Ó·Ó ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ‚·ÛÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ˜ ‰˘Û·Ú¤ÛÎÂÈ¿˜ ÙÔ˘˜ Û¯Â-ÙÈο Ì ÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÙÔ˘˜. ∏ ÈηÓÔÔ›ËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ·fi ·˘Ù‹Ó ‚·Û›˙ÂÙ·È Ï¤ÔÓ Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ÛÙËÛÙ·ıÂÚfiÙËÙ· Ô˘ ÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔÛʤÚÂÈ.

∏ ‰˘ÛÎÔÏ›· ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ Û˘ÓÈÛÙ¿ ¤Ó· ·fi Ù· ÂÌfi‰È· ÛÙËÓ Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈ΋ ÂͤÏÈ-ÍË ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·˙Ô̤ӈÓ. ∏ ÂÎÌ¿ıËÛË Ù˘ ¶ÔÚÙÔÁ·ÏÈ΋˜ ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· Â›Ó·È Úˆ-Ù·Ú¯ÈÎfi˜ ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ·˜ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Ï‹ÚË ÂÓۈ̿وۋ ÙÔ˘˜. ¶¤Ú· ·fi ·˘Ùfi, ·Ú·ÙËÚ›ٷÈÌÈ· ·Ó·Ú΋˜ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË (ÁÓÒÛË) ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÙÔÌ›˜ Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜.

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 189

3. ŒÚ¢ӷ ‰›Ô˘

·) ªÂıÔ‰ÔÏÔÁ›·

∏ ¤Ú¢ӷ ‰›Ô˘ ‹Ù·Ó ÂÍ ·Ú¯‹˜ ۯ‰ȷṲ̂ÓË Ó· ÂÚÈÔÚÈÛÙ› ÛÙË ¡. πˆÓ›· ∞ÙÙÈ΋˜ ηÈÛÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘. ŒÁÈÓ ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ Û ÙÚfiÔ ÒÛÙ ·˘Ù¤˜ Ó· ηχÙÔ˘Ó Î˘Ú›ˆ˜‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ˜ Û¯ÂÙÈΤ˜ Ì Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· Î·È Ó· ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ‰È·ÛÙڈ̿وÛË ÌÂ-Á¤ıÔ˘˜. ™ÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ·, Û˘ÓÙ¿¯ÙËΠÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏfiÁÈÔ Ô˘ ‰È·ÓÂÌ‹ıËΠÛÙȘ ÂÈÏÂÁ›Û˜ ÂÈ-¯ÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· Û˘ÌÏ‹ÚˆÛË. ∏ ‰È·ÓÔÌ‹ Î·È Û˘ÏÏÔÁ‹ ÙˆÓ ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁ›ˆÓ ¤ÁÈÓ ÙÔ ‰È¿-ÛÙËÌ· πÔ˘Ó›Ô˘-√ÎÙˆ‚Ú›Ô˘ 2002. ™˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚÒıËÎ·Ó 95 Û˘ÌÏËڈ̤ӷ ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏfiÁÈ·.

∆· ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏfiÁÈ· ·˘Ù¿ ηٷٿ¯ÙËÎ·Ó Û ¤ÓÙ ηÙËÁÔڛ˜ ÔÌÔÂȉÒÓ ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈ̤-ÓˆÓ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜. °È· οı ÔÌ¿‰· ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ Û˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚÒıËÎ·Ó Î·È ÂÂÍÂÚÁ¿-ÛÙËÎ·Ó ÔÈ ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘ. ∞ÎÔÏÔ‡ıËÛ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›· ÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚˆÙÈÎÒÓ ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂˆÓ ÁÈ·ÙËÓ ÂÍ·ÁˆÁ‹ ÙˆÓ ÁÂÓÈÎÒÓ Û˘ÌÂÚ·ÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ.

√È ¤ÓÙ ηÙËÁÔڛ˜ ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ÔÌ·‰ÔÔÈ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ›ӷÈ:(·) ∫·Ù·Û΢·ÛÙÈÎfi˜ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˜: ∞ÔÙÂÏÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ˆ˜ ·ÓÙÈ-

ΛÌÂÓÔ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ηٷÛ΢¤˜ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ Ù‡ˆÓ. ¶ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ 14 ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ·fi ÙË ¡. πˆÓ›· Î·È 20 ·fi ÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘. (‚) ∫Ï¿‰Ô˜ ÎψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ¤Ó-‰˘Û˘: ¶ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ 22 ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ·fi ÙË ¡. πˆÓ›· Î·È 5 ·fi ÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘. (Á)∫Ï¿‰Ô˜ ÂȉÒÓ ‰È·ÙÚÔÊ‹˜: ¶ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ 4 ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ·fi ÙË ¡. πˆÓ›· Î·È 10 ·fi ÙÔ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘. (‰) ∫Ï¿‰Ô˜ ÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂΉfiÛˆÓ: ¶ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ 9 ÂȯÂÈÚ‹-ÛÂȘ ·fi ÙË ¡. πˆÓ›·. (Â) ∫Ï¿‰Ô˜ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ Î·È ÏÔÈÒÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ: ¶ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ11 ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ·fi ÙË ¡. πˆÓ›·, ÙˆÓ ÔÔ›ˆÓ fï˜ Ù· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ‰ÂÓÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ÂÓÙ·¯ıÔ‡Ó Û’ ¤Ó· ÎÔÈÓfi Ï·›ÛÈÔ.

§fiÁˆ ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊÔÚÒÓ ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ¤ÓÙ ηÙËÁÔÚÈÒÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ, ‰ÂÓ ‹Ù·Ó ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ· ‚ÁÔ˘Ó ÂÓÈ·›· Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù· ÁÈ· fiÏ· Ù· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·. ªfiÓÔ fiÔ˘ ‹Ù·Ó ÂÊÈÎÙ‹ Ô ÔÌ·-‰ÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ Â˘ÚËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÔÌ¿‰ˆÓ ¤ÁÈÓ ٤ÙÔÈ· ÔÌ·‰ÔÔ›ËÛË. ∞fi ÙÔ ¿ÏÏÔ Ì¤ÚÔ˜,ÏfiÁˆ ÙÔ˘ ÌÈÎÚÔ‡ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘ ‰Â›ÁÌ·ÙÔ˜ ·fi οı ÎÏ¿‰Ô, Ù· Â˘Ú‹Ì·Ù· Î·È Ù· Û˘ÌÂ-Ú¿ÛÌ·Ù· Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ÁÈ· οı ÎÏ¿‰Ô ¯ˆÚÈÛÙ¿ ‰ÂÓ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ı-Ìfi ·ÍÈÔÈÛÙ›·˜ Î·È ÌfiÓÔÓ ˆ˜ ÂÓ‰ÂÈÎÙÈο ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈËıÔ‡Ó.

‚) ¢ÔÌ‹ ÙˆÓ ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁ›ˆÓ

∆· ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏfiÁÈ· ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ·fi ¤ÓÙ ÂÓfiÙËÙ˜:™ÙËÓ ÚÒÙË ÂÓfiÙËÙ· ˙ËÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÌÂÚÈο ÛÙÔȯ›· Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Ô˘ ··ÓÙ¿. ∞˘Ù¿

·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó ÛÙÔ ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓÔ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜, ÛÙÔ Ì¤ÁÂıÔ˜ Ù˘ Âȯ›ÚËÛ˘ Û ·ÚÈıÌfi··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÌÂÓˆÓ ·ÙfiÌˆÓ Î·È ÛÙÔ Ï‹ıÔ˜ ÙˆÓ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÌÂÓˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ‰Â˘ÙÂÚÔ-‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ ‹ ÌÂÙ·Ï˘ÎÂȷ΋˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘. ∂›Û˘, ˙ËÙÂ›Ù·È Ë ·Ó·ÏÔÁ›· ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÌÂÓˆÓÌÂÏÒÓ Ù˘ ÔÌ¿‰·˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘ ÛÙÔ Û˘ÓÔÏÈÎfi ·ÚÈıÌfi ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÌÂÓˆÓ ÛÙËÓ Âȯ›ÚËÛË.

∏ ‰Â‡ÙÂÚË ÂÓfiÙËÙ· ·ÊÔÚ¿ ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÙÈο Û ÛÙÔȯ›· ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ Ô˘¤¯Ô˘Ó Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ÛÂÈ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜. ∑ËÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡-ÌÂÓˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ Î·È ÔÈ Û¯ÔϤ˜ ·ÔÊÔ›ÙËÛ‹˜ ÙÔ˘˜, ·Ó ¤ÁÈÓ ηٿÚÙÈÛË ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ Î·È

190 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Ù· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘, ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Î·È ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· Ô˘ ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ı· ‹ıÂÏ·ÓÔÈ ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈÎÔ› Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ÙÔ˘˜ Ó· Â›Ó·È Î·Ù·ÚÙÈṲ̂ÓÔÈ, ÔȘ ·fi ÙȘ ÁÂÓÈΤ˜ ÁÓÒÛÂȘ/‰Â-ÍÈfiÙËÙ˜ ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÎÚ›ÓÔ˘Ó ··Ú·›ÙËÙ˜ Ó· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÔÈ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ÙÔ˘˜, fiÛÔ ··-Ú·›ÙËÙË ÎÚ›ÓÔ˘Ó ÙË ÁÓÒÛË Í¤Ó˘ ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜ Î.Ï.

∏ ÙÚ›ÙË ÂÓfiÙËÙ· Â›Ó·È ·ÊÈÂڈ̤ÓË ÛÙÔ˘˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡˜ Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹-ÛÂÈ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜ ·ÏÏ¿ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·ÔÎÙ‹ÛÂÈ ÙËÓ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ ·fi ÂÌÂÈÚ›·. ∑ËÙÔ‡-ÓÙ·È ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ-‹ÛÂÈ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜, Ù· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· ÛÙ· ÔÔ›· ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÈÛÙÂ‡Ô˘Ó fiÙÈ Ú¤ÂÈÓ· ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÔ‡Ó ÔÈ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ÛÂÈ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜, ÙËÓÚfiıÂÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ ÁÈ· Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›· Ì ÙÔÓ √ÚÁ·ÓÈÛÌfi ∂·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈ΋˜ ∂η›‰Â˘Û˘ ηÈ∫·Ù¿ÚÙÈÛ˘ (√∂∂∫) Û ı¤Ì·Ù· ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ/‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Î.Ï.

∞ÎÔÏÔ˘ı› Ë Ù¤Ù·ÚÙË ÂÓfiÙËÙ· Ô˘ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÙÈο ÛÙËÓ ··Û¯fiÏËÛË ·ÏÈÓÓÔ-

ÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ, ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ Î·È ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ, ÙȘ ÚÔı¤ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ Ó· ÚÔÛÏ¿-‚Ô˘Ó ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi ·’ ·˘Ù‹Ó ÙËÓ ÔÌ¿‰· Î.Ï.

°È· ÙȘ ÚÔı¤ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ÁÈ· ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈ΋ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÛˆÈ-ÎÔ‡ ¤¯ÂÈ ·ÊÈÂÚˆı› Ë ¤ÌÙË Î·È ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›· ÂÓfiÙËÙ· ÙÔ˘ ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁ›Ô˘. ∑ËÙÔ‡ÓÙ·ÈÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· ÚÔÛÏ¿‚Ô˘Ó Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆ-ÈÎfi, ÔÈ ‰˘ÛÎÔϛ˜ Ô˘ Û˘Ó¿ÓÙËÛ·Ó Ì¤¯ÚÈ ÙÒÚ· ÛÙË ÛÙÂϤ¯ˆÛ‹ ÙÔ˘˜ Ì Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔ-ÛˆÈÎfi, Ù· ÛÙÔȯ›· ÂÓfi˜ ˘Ô„ËÊ›Ô˘ ÛÙ· ÔÔ›· ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ‰›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛËÌ·Û›· ηٿÙË ‰È·‰Èηۛ· ÂÈÏÔÁ‹˜ Î.·.

∏ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË ÙˆÓ Â˘ÚËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ù˘ ¤Ú¢ӷ˜ ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ı› ÙË ‰ÔÌ‹ ÙˆÓ ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏÔ-Á›ˆÓ. ™ÙÔ Ù¤ÏÔ˜ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·Ú·ÙÂı›, Û ÌÔÚÊ‹ ‰È·ÁÚ·ÌÌ¿ÙˆÓ, Ù· ÛÔ˘‰·ÈfiÙÂÚ· ÛÙÔȯ›·Ù˘ ¤Ú¢ӷ˜. ™ÙËÓ ÏÂÈÔÓfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜, Ù· ÛÙÔȯ›· ·ÚÔ˘ÛÈ¿˙ÔÓÙ·È ·ıÚÔÈÛÙÈο ÁÈ· ÙË ¡.πˆÓ›· Î·È ÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘. ŸÔ˘ ¯ÚÂÈ¿˙ÂÙ·È, ·˘Ù¿ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È ¯ˆÚÈÛÙ¿.

Á) ∆·˘ÙfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ

∞¿ÓÙËÛ·Ó Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÌÈÎÚÔ‡ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜. ∂›¯·ÌÂ, fï˜, ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘ ηȷfi ÌÂÚÈΤ˜ ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ˘ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜ ÎψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁÈΤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿ÓıË˜Î·È ·fi ÌÂÚÈΤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÂȉÒÓ ‰È·ÙÚÔÊ‹˜ ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ˘ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ, η-Ù¿ ηÓfiÓ·, ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó Ï›ÁÔ˘˜ ·ÔÊÔ›ÙÔ˘˜ Ù¯ÓÈ΋˜ ‰Â˘ÙÂÚÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ ‹ ÌÂÙ·Ï˘ÎÂȷ΋˜Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ Û ۇÁÎÚÈÛË Ì ÙÔ Û˘ÓÔÏÈÎfi ·ÚÈıÌfi ÂÚÁ·˙ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Û’ ·˘Ù¤˜ (fi¯È ¿Óˆ ·fi10-20 ·ÔÊÔ›ÙÔ˘˜). ªfiÓÔ Ï›Á˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó ·fi 20 ¤ˆ˜ 50 ·ÔÊÔ›ÙÔ˘˜Ù¯ÓÈ΋˜ ‰Â˘ÙÂÚÔ‚¿ıÌÈ·˜ ‹ ÌÂÙ·Ï˘ÎÂȷ΋˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘. (µÏ. Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi ‰È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ·).

∂ȉÈÒ¯ıËΠӷ ‰È·ÈÛÙˆı› Ë Û¯¤ÛË ÙÔ˘ ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡ ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·˙ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ ÛÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹-ÛÂȘ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔÓ ·ÚÈıÌfi ÙˆÓ ·ÏÏÔ‰·ÒÓ (ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ Î·È ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ).∫·Ù¿ ̤ÛÔ fiÚÔ, ÛÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ¡. πˆÓ›·˜ Ë ·Ó·ÏÔÁ›· ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ ÚÔ˜ ·Ï-ÏÔ‰·Ô‡˜ ÂÚÁ·˙Ô̤ÓÔ˘˜ Â›Ó·È 1:6. ∞ÓÙ›ıÂÙ·, ÛÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘ Ë ·Ó·ÏÔÁ›· ·˘Ù‹ ›ӷÈηٿ ̤ÛÔ fiÚÔ 10:1. ™ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ¡. πˆÓ›·˜, ÙÔ ÔÛÔÛÙfi ÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓÎ·È ·ÏÏÔ‰·ÒÓ Ì·˙› Â›Ó·È Î·Ù¿ ̤ÛÔ fiÚÔ ›ÛÔ Ì ÙÔ 20% ÙÔ˘ Û˘ÓÔÏÈÎÔ‡ ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡ ÙˆÓ ÂÚ-Á·˙ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Ûã ·˘Ù¤˜. ∆Ô ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔÈ¯Ô ÔÛÔÛÙfi ÁÈ· ÙÔ ¡ÔÌfi •¿Óı˘ Â›Ó·È 15%.

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 191

‰) ∂˘Ú‹Ì·Ù· Ù˘ ¤Ú¢ӷ˜

∞. ∫Ï·ÛÛÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜, fiˆ˜ Â›Ó·È ·˘Ù¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ªË¯·ÓÔÏfiÁÔ˘, ÙÔ˘ ∏ÏÂÎÙÚÔÏfiÁÔ˘,ÙÔ˘ ÃÂÈÚÈÛÙ‹ ªË¯·ÓÒÓ Î·È ∂ÚÁ·Ï›ˆÓ, ÙÔ˘ ™˘ÓÙËÚËÙ‹ ªË¯·ÓÒÓ Î·È ∂ÁηٷÛÙ¿-ÛˆÓ, ÙÔ˘ √ÈÎÔ‰fiÌÔ˘, ÙÔ˘ æ˘ÎÙÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ÙÔ˘ £ÂÚÌÔ¸‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎÔ‡, ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ó·¤¯Ô˘Ó ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi ‚·ıÌfi ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ Û ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘ ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓÎ·È ÙÔ˘ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘ ÂȉÒÓ ‰È·ÙÚÔÊ‹˜. ¶Ï¤ÎÙ˜, ۯ‰ȷÛÙ¤˜, Û˘Û΢·ÛÙ¤˜ Î·È ˆÏËÙ¤˜Â›Ó·È ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ô˘ ··Û¯ÔÏ› Ô ÎÏ¿‰Ô˜ Ù˘ ÎψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜Î·È Ù˘ ¤Ó‰˘Û˘ Î·È ÛÊ·Á›˜ Î·È ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÙ¤˜ ÎÚ¤·ÙÔ˜ ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ÂȉÈÎÔًوÓÔ˘ ··Û¯ÔÏ› Ô ÎÏ¿‰Ô˜ ÙˆÓ ÂȉÒÓ ‰È·ÙÚÔÊ‹˜. °Ú·Ê›ÛÙ˜ Î·È Ù˘ÔÁÚ¿ÊÔ˘˜ ··-Û¯ÔÏ› Ô ÎÏ¿‰Ô˜ ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂΉfiÛˆÓ, ÂÓÒ ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙË-Ù˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ Î·È ÔÈ ÏÔȤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÂÍÂ-Ù¿ÛÙËηÓ.∫·Ù¿ÚÙÈÛË ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜ ¤Î·Ó·Ó ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Û Ôχ ÌÈÎÚfi ‚·ıÌfi. ∞ÓÙÈ-ΛÌÂÓ· ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘ ‹Ù·Ó Ë ·ÛÊ¿ÏÂÈ· ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ë ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜, Ô ¯ÂÈÚÈ-ÛÌfi˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ, ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÈÔ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ·, fiˆ˜ Â›Ó·È Ë ¯Ú‹ÛË ∏/À, Ë Û¯Â-‰›·ÛË Ì ∏/À, Ù· ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó· ·Î¤Ù· ÏÔÁÈÛÌÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ÔÈ Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ ˆÏ‹ÛˆÓ. ¶·ÚfiÌÔȘ Â›Ó·È ÔÈ ÁÓÒÛÂȘ/‰ÂÍÈfiÙËÙ˜ Î·È Ù· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· ÛÙ· ÔÔ›· ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹-ÛÂȘ ÂÈı˘ÌÔ‡Ó ÔÈ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› Ô˘ ı· ÚÔÛÏ¿‚Ô˘Ó Ó· Â›Ó·È ÈηÓÔÔÈËÙÈο ηٷÚÙÈ-Ṳ̂ÓÔÈ: ∞ÛÊ¿ÏÂÈ· ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜, Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›· ÂÍÔÈÎÔÓfiÌËÛ˘ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·˜, ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó· ·Î¤Ù· ÏÔÁÈÛÌÈÎÔ‡, ۯ‰›·ÛË Ì ∏/À, ¯Ú‹ÛË Ó¤ˆÓ Ì˯·-ÓÒÓ Î·È ¯Ú‹ÛË Î·È ‰›ÎÙ˘· ∏/À (µÏ. Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi ‰È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ·).∏ ÁÓÒÛË Í¤Ó˘ ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜ Â›Ó·È ÂÈı˘ÌËÙ‹ Û ̤ÙÚÈÔ ‚·ıÌfi. ¶¿ÓÙˆ˜, ·fi ÙȘ ͤÓ˜ÁÏÒÛÛ˜ ÚÔËÁÂ›Ù·È Ì ÌÂÁ¿ÏË ‰È·ÊÔÚ¿ Ë ·ÁÁÏÈ΋. ∞Ó·ÊÔÚÈο Ì ÙȘ ˘fiÏÔȘÁÏÒÛÛ˜, ‰ÂÓ ·Ú·ÙËÚÂ›Ù·È Î¿ÔÈ· ȉȷ›ÙÂÚË ÚÔÙ›ÌËÛË.

µ. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó Î·È Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯ÂÈ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ-‹ÛÂÈ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜ ·ÏÏ¿ ¤¯ÂÈ ·ÔÎÙ‹ÛÂÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ· ·fi ÂÌÂÈÚ›·. √È ÂȉÈÎfiÙË-Ù˜ ·˘ÙÒÓ Â›Ó·È Û ·ÚÎÂÙ‹ ¤ÎÙ·ÛË ›‰È˜ ‹ ·ÚfiÌÔȘ Ì ÙȘ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈ-ÎÒÓ Ô˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ÛÂÈ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜. ∞˘Ùfi Û˘Ì‚·›ÓÂÈ Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ÛÂÚ·ÎÙÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜, ÙˆÓ ÔÔ›ˆÓ ÔÈ ÁÓÒÛÂȘ/‰ÂÍÈfiÙËÙ˜ ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ·ÔÎÙË-ıÔ‡Ó ·fi ÂÌÂÈÚ›·. ™˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ӷ, ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘-‰¤˜ ÔÈÎÔ‰fiÌÔÈ, ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ, ÛȉËÚÔ˘ÚÁÔ› Î·È Ù¯ӛÙ˜ ·ÏÔ˘ÌÈÓ›Ô˘, Ì·Ú·ÁÎÔ›,Û˘Ó·ÚÌÔÏÔÁËÙ¤˜ Î.Ï. ™ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô Ù˘ ÎψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ¤Ó‰˘Û˘ ··Û¯Ô-ÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Á·˙ˆÙ¤˜, ÎfiÙ˜, Û˘Û΢·ÛÙ¤˜, ˘Ê·ÓÙ¤˜, ϤÎÙ˜, Û˘ÓÙËÚËÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓÎ.Ï. ™ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÂȉÒÓ ‰È·ÙÚÔÊ‹˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÙ¤˜ Î·È Ù˘ÔÔÈ-ËÙ¤˜ ÎÚ¤·ÙÔ˜, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ηÓÔ‡, ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ, ÂÎÙÚÔÊ›˜ ˙ÒˆÓ Î.Ï. ™ÙÔÓÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ù˘ÔÁÚ¿ÊÔÈ, ‚È‚ÏÈÔ‰¤Ù˜, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ›ÂÎÙ˘ÒÛÂˆÓ Î.Ï. ∆¤ÏÔ˜, ÛÙȘ ÏÔȤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÂÍÂÙ¿ÛÙËÎ·Ó ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡-ÓÙ·È ‚ÔËıÔ› ÎÔÌ̈٤˜, ·ÚÁ˘ÚÔ¯Ú˘ÛÔ¯fiÔÈ, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ÔÙÈÎÒÓ Î.Ï.°È· ÙȘ ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ¿ÏϘ › ϤÔÓ, fiˆ˜ Â›Ó·È ÙÔ˘ ËÏÂÎÙÚÔ-ÏfiÁÔ˘, ÙÔ˘ Ì˯·ÓÔÏfiÁÔ˘, ÙÔ˘ ·ÔıËοÚÈÔ˘, ÙÔ˘ ‚ÔËıÔ‡ ÏÔÁÈÛÙ‹, ÙÔ˘ ˆÏËÙ‹, ÙÔ˘

192 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

Û˘ÓÙËÚËÙ‹ ıÂÚÌÔ¸‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎÒÓ ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛˆÓ, ·ÎfiÌ· Î·È ÙÔ˘ ÁÚ·Ê›ÛÙ· Î·È ÙÔ˘ ¯ÂÈ-ÚÈÛÙ‹ ∏/À Î·È ‰È·‰ÈÎÙ‡Ô˘, ÙÔ˘ ÔÙÈÎÔ‡ Î.Ï. ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ı· ÚÔÛÏ¿Ì‚·Ó·Ó ¢-ÎÔÏfiÙÂÚ· ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜, ·Ó ‰È¤ıÂÙ ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛË Ù˘ ·ÔÎÙË-ı›۷˜ ·fi ηٿÚÙÈÛË ‹ ÂÌÂÈÚ›· ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ·fi ÙÔÓ √∂∂∫ ‹ ¿ÏÏÔÓ Â›ÛËÌÔ√ÚÁ·ÓÈÛÌfi. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÙËÓ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙÔ˘˜ ÂӉȷʤÚÔÓÙ·È Ó· Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·-ÛÙÔ‡Ó Ì ÙÔÓ √∂∂∫ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·-ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ·ÏÏÔ‰·ÒÓ.√È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÈÛÙÂ‡Ô˘Ó fiÙÈ ¿ÙÔÌ· ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÎ·È‰Â˘-ÙÔ‡Ó Û ÔÚÈṲ̂ӷ Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· fiˆ˜ Â›Ó·È Ë ÂÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹ ÛÙË Ì˯·ÓÔÏÔÁ›·, ËÂÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹ ÛÙËÓ ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÏÔÁ›·, Ë ¯Ú‹ÛË ∏/À, Ë Ù¯ÓÈ΋ ۯ‰›·ÛË, Ë ¯Ú‹ÛË ‰È·‰ÈÎÙ‡-Ô˘, Î.Ï. (µÏ. Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi ‰È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ·).

°. ¶·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜ Î·È ·ÏÏÔ‰·Ô› ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÛÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ›Ù ˆ˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ›ÌÂ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜, ›Ù ˆ˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ù˘ÈΤ˜ ÛÔ˘‰¤˜ ›Ù ˆ˜ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔÚÔÛˆÈÎfi. ∏ ·ÚÈıÌËÙÈ΋ Û¯¤ÛË (·Ó·ÏÔÁ›·) ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡ Ù˘ ÚÒÙ˘ ηÙËÁÔ-Ú›·˜ Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ÙȘ ¿ÏϘ ‰‡Ô ηÙËÁÔڛ˜ Â›Ó·È Ôχ ÌÈÎÚ‹. ™ÙËÓ ÏÂÈÔÓfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ÔÈ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜ Î·È ÔÈ ·ÏÏÔ‰·Ô› ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ˆ˜ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔ ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi.∏ ·Ó·ÏÔÁ›· ·˘ÙÒÓ Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ˘˜ ˆ˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi ÌÂÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ· Ô˘ ·ÔÎÙ‹ıËΠ·fi ÂÌÂÈÚ›· Â›Ó·È ÂÚ›Ô˘ 1:1 ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ Î¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·-ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂΉfiÛÂˆÓ Î·È 2:1 ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ¿ÏÏÔ˘˜ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘˜. √È ÚÔı¤ÛÂȘ ÚfiÛÏ˄˘ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡ ·fi ·ÏÏÔ‰·Ô‡˜ Î·È ·ÏÈÓÓÔ-ÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜ Â›Ó·È Â˘ÓÔ˚Τ˜ ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ Î·Ù·Û΢·ÛÙÈÎfi ÎÏ¿‰Ô, ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÂȉÒÓ ‰È·-ÙÚÔÊ‹˜ Î·È ÙÔ ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ Ì¤ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘ Ù˘ ÎψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ¤Ó‰˘Û˘Ù˘ ¡. πˆÓ›·˜. °È· ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂΉfiÛÂˆÓ Â›Ó·È Ô˘‰¤ÙÂÚÂ˜Î·È ÁÈ· ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ Î·È ÙȘ ÏÔȤ˜ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÂÍÂÙ¿ÛÙËÎ·Ó Â›-Ó·È ÌË Â˘ÓÔ˚Τ˜. (µÏ. Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi ‰È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ·).

¢. √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· ÚÔÛÏ¿‚Ô˘Ó ÛÙÔ Ì¤ÏÏÔÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi. √È ÂÈ-‰ÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ Ô˘ ı· ˙ËÙ‹ÛÔ˘Ó Â›Ó·È ÛÙËÓ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›· ÙÔ˘˜ ·˘Ù¤˜ Ô˘‹‰Ë ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó ‹ Â›Ó·È Û¯ÂÙÈΤ˜ Ì ٷ ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ· ÛÙ· ÔÔ›· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ‰ËÏÒÛÂÈ fiÙÈı¤ÏÔ˘Ó ÔÈ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ÙÔ˘˜ Ó· Â›Ó·È ÈηÓÔÔÈËÙÈο ηٷÚÙÈṲ̂ÓÔÈ.™ÙÔÓ Î·Ù·Û΢·ÛÙÈÎfi ÎÏ¿‰Ô, ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· ÚÔÛÏ¿‚Ô˘Ó ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈ-ο, ηٿ ÛÂÈÚ¿ ÚÔÙ›ÌËÛ˘, ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ Î·È Û˘ÓÙËÚËÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ, Û˘ÁÎÔÏÏËÙ¤˜, ÌË-¯·ÓÔÏfiÁÔ˘˜, ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÙ¯ӛÙ˜, ÂÈÏÔÔÈÔ‡˜ – ͢ÏÔ˘ÚÁÔ‡˜, ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈÎÔ‡˜ Î.Ï.™ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô Ù˘ ÎψÛÙԸʷÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ¤Ó‰˘Û˘, ÔÈ ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÛÏ‹„ÂȘÚÔÛ·Ó·ÙÔÏ›˙ÔÓÙ·È, ηٿ ÛÂÈÚ¿, ÚÔ˜ Á·˙ˆÙ¤˜, ˘Ê·ÓÙ¤˜, ϤÎÙ˜ Î·È ‚ÔËıÔ‡˜ Ϥ-ÎÙË, ÎfiÙ˜, Û˘ÓÙËÚËÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓËÌ¿ÙˆÓ, ˆÏËÙ¤˜ Î·È ÏÔÁÈÛÙ¤˜. ™ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÂÈ-‰ÒÓ ‰È·ÙÚÔÊ‹˜, ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ı· ÛÙÚ·ÊÔ‡Ó ÚÔ˜ „˘ÎÙÈÎÔ‡˜, ıÂÚÌÔ¸‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎÔ‡˜,¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ ∏/À, Ù¯ÓÔÏfiÁÔ˘˜ ÙÚÔʛ̈Ó, ·ÏÏ·ÓÙÔÔÈÔ‡˜, ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÙ¤˜ ÎÚ¤·ÙÔ˜,ÛÊ·Á›˜ Î·È ˆÏËÙ¤˜. ™ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂΉfiÛˆÓ, ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ÔÈ ÂÈ-¯ÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· ÚÔÛÏ¿‚Ô˘Ó ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈο Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi Â›Ó·È Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ›ÂÎÙ˘ÒÛˆÓ, ۯ‰ȷÛÙ¤˜ ÈÛÙÔÛÂÏ›‰ˆÓ, ‰È·ÊËÌÈÛÙ¤˜, ÁÚ·Ê›ÛÙ˜, Ù¯ӛÙ˜ Ê·ÎÂÏÔ-

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 193

ÔÈ˚·˜ Î·È ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ ∏/À. ∆¤ÏÔ˜, ÁÈ· ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ˘ËÚÂÛÈÒÓ Î·È ÙȘ ÏÔȤ˜ ÂÈ-¯ÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÂÍÂÙ¿ÛÙËηÓ, ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ·˘Ù¤˜ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· ÚÔÛÏ¿-‚Ô˘Ó ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈο Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi Â›Ó·È Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ÔÙÈÎÒÓ, ۯ‰ȷÛÙ¤˜ ÎÔÛÌËÌ¿ÙˆÓ,Ù¯ӛÙ˜ ÎÔÛÌËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ‚ÔËıÔ›, ˆÏËÙ¤˜ ·fi ÙËϤʈÓÔ, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› È·ÙÚÈÎÒÓ Î·È ‚ÈÔ-ÏÔÁÈÎÒÓ ÂÚÁ·ÛÙËÚ›ˆÓ, ηٷÛ΢·ÛÙ¤˜ ηÏÔ˘ÈÒÓ ¯Ú˘ÛÔ¯Ô˝·˜, ÎÔÌ̈٤˜ Î·È ‚ÔËıÔ›.°ÂÓÈο, ÔÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜, ÛÙȘ Ôԛ˜ ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÎÔÂ‡Ô˘Ó Ó· ÚÔ‚Ô‡Ó Û ÚÔ-ÛÏ‹„ÂȘ, ηχÙÔ˘Ó ¤Ó· ·ÚÎÂÙ¿ ¢ڇ Ê¿ÛÌ· ÂȉÈÎÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ·Ó¿ ÎÏ¿‰Ô.

™ÙË ‰È·‰Èηۛ· ÚfiÛÏ˄˘ ÔÈ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó ˘’ fi„Ë ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ÌÂÚÈοÁÂÓÈο ÛÙÔȯ›· ÙÔ˘ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡. ∆· ΢ÚÈfiÙÂÚ· ·’ ·˘Ù¿ ›ӷÈ, Û ÛÂÈÚ¿ÚÔÙÂÚ·ÈfiÙËÙ·˜, Ë ÂÌÂÈÚ›· ÛÙÔ ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓÔ (Ì·ÎÚ¿Ó ÙˆÓ ¿ÏψÓ), Ë ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ·fi-ÎÙËÛ˘ Ó¤ˆÓ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ/‰ÂÍÈÔًوÓ, Ë ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÛÂ Ó¤Ô Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ,Ë ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ˆ˜ ̤ÏÔ˜ ÔÌ¿‰·˜ Î·È Ë ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜. (µÏ. Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi‰È¿ÁÚ·ÌÌ·).

4. ŒÚ¢ӷ ÛÙÔ˘˜ Û˘ÏÏÔÁÈÎÔ‡˜ ÊÔÚ›˜*

∏ ¤Ú¢ӷ ·˘Ù‹ ›¯Â ÔÈÔÙÈÎfi ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· Î·È ¤ÁÈÓ Ì ϋ„Ë Û˘ÓÂÓÙ‡ÍÂˆÓ ·fi ÂÍÂÈ-‰ÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó· ·ÓÒÙÂÚ· ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë Î·È Ì¤ÏË ÙˆÓ ¢ÈÔÈÎËÙÈÎÒÓ ™˘Ì‚Ô˘Ï›ˆÓ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ ÂÚÁÔ‰Ô-ÙÈÎÒÓ Î·È Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÊÔÚ¤ˆÓ Ì ¯Ú‹ÛË ÂÚˆÙËÌ·ÙÔÏÔÁ›Ô˘. ∂›Û˘, Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔ-ÔÈ‹ıËÎ·Ó Û˘ÓÂÓÙ‡ÍÂȘ Ì ÛÙÂϤ¯Ë ÙÔ˘ √∂∂∫. ∆Ô ‰Â›ÁÌ· ÙˆÓ ÊÔÚ¤ˆÓ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÔÔ›Ô˘˜¤ÁÈÓÂ Ë ¤Ú¢ӷ ·ÔÙÂÏÂ›Ù·È ·fi 4 ∂ÈÌÂÏËÙ‹ÚÈ·, 5 ∂ÚÁÔ‰ÔÙÈΤ˜ √ÚÁ·ÓÒÛÂȘ ÛÙË µÈÔ-Ì˯·Ó›· Î·È ÙÔÓ ∫·Ù·Û΢·ÛÙÈÎfi ∫Ï¿‰Ô Î·È 7 ∂·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ √ÚÁ·ÓÒÛÂȘ ÛÙÔ∂ÌfiÚÈÔ Î·È ÙË ªÂÙ·Ô›ËÛË.

∆Ô ÚÒÙÔ ‚·ÛÈÎfi Û˘Ì¤Ú·ÛÌ· Ù˘ ¤Ú¢ӷ˜ Â›Ó·È fiÙÈ Ù· ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù· ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘, ÂÎ-·›‰Â˘Û˘ Î·È Î·Ù¿ÚÙÈÛ˘ ÙÔ˘ ·ÓıÚÒÈÓÔ˘ ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎÔ‡ ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ı¤Ì·Ù· ‰Â˘ÙÂÚ‡Ԣ-Û·˜ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ ÁÈ· ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ıÂÛÌÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÔ‡˜ Î·È ÂÚÁÔ‰ÔÙÈÎÔ‡˜ÊÔÚ›˜ Î·È ‰ÂÓ ‰›ÓÔ˘Ó È‰È·›ÙÂÚË ÚÔÛÔ¯‹ Û’ ·˘Ù¿. ¢ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ˘ÏÔÔÈËı› ηٿÏÏËÏÔÈÌ˯·ÓÈÛÌÔ› Ô˘ Ó· ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁÔ‡Ó ÈηÓÔÔÈËÙÈο ÛÙ· ·Ú·¿Óˆ ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·. √ÚÈṲ̂ÓÔÈÊÔÚ›˜ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Âȉ›ÍÂÈ Î¿ÔÈ· ·˘ÙÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ· Û’ ·˘Ù¿ ·ÏÏ¿ ¯ˆÚ›˜ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚË ÛËÌ·Û›·.

™¯ÂÙÈο Ì ÙÔ Î·Ù¿ fiÛÔÓ ÔÈ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ηχÙÔÓÙ·È·fi ηÙËÁÔڛ˜ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ-ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ-ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÚÔ·„ÂÈ ‰‡Ô ‚·ÛÈ-ο Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù·:∞) ∏ ··Û¯fiÏËÛË ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ–·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ–ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ·ÊÔÚ¿ ΢ڛˆ˜ ÛÙËÓ

ÂÎÙ¤ÏÂÛË ·ÓÂȉ›ÎÂ˘ÙˆÓ ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ ¯·ÌËÏÔ‡ ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÙÔ‚·ÛÈÎfi Û˘ÁÎÚÈÙÈÎfi ÏÂÔÓ¤ÎÙËÌ· Î·È ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈÔ ¤ÓÙ·Í‹˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙËÓ ··Û¯fiÏËÛË Î·È

194 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

* ∏ ¤Ú¢ӷ ·˘Ù‹ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ‹ıËΠ·fi ÙËÓ European Profiles ∞∂ (§. ∫Ú¤ÙÛÔ˜ Î·È ª. £ÂÔ-

‰ˆÚÔ˘Ï¿Î˘)

µ) √È ÂÓÂÚÁËÙÈΤ˜ ÔÏÈÙÈΤ˜ ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ–·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ ·Ô˘ÛÈ¿-˙Ô˘Ó ·fi ÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ·Ú¿ ÙËÓ ‡·ÚÍË Û¯ÂÙÈ΋˜ ÓÔÌÔıÂÛ›·˜ Ô˘ÙȘ ÂÓı·ÚÚ‡ÓÂÈ.

√È ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜-ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜-ÚfiÛÊ˘Á˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Û fiÏÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÎÏ¿-‰Ô˘˜ Ù˘ ÌÂÙ·Ô›ËÛ˘ Î·È ÛÙÔ ÂÌfiÚÈÔ Î·È Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ÛÙȘ ∫·Ù·Û΢¤˜, ÙËÓ ∫ψÛÙÔ¸-Ê·ÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·, ÙË µÈÔÌ˯·Ó›· ∆ÚÔÊ›ÌˆÓ Î·È ÙȘ ˘ËÚÂۛ˜ ∂ÈÛÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡-∆Ô˘ÚÈÛÌÔ‡,ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ∫·Ù·Û΢‹˜ ªË¯·ÓËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÚÔ˚fiÓÙˆÓ ªÂÙ¿ÏÏÔ˘, ÂÓÒ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÔÛÔÛÙfi ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ Û˘ÁÎÂÓÙÚÒÓÔÓÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ ·ÁÚÔÙÈÎfi ÙÔ̤· ˆ˜ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔÈ·ÁÚÂÚÁ¿Ù˜. ∞‰È¿„¢ÛÙÔ ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ Ô˘ ÂÍ¿ÁÂÙ·È ·fi ÙȘ ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÊÔÚ¤ˆÓ ÙÔ˘‰Â›ÁÌ·ÙÔ˜, Â›Ó·È Ë Û˘ÁΤÓÙÚˆÛË ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ–ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ–ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ Û Êı›-ÓÔÓÙ˜ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘˜ ¯·ÌËÏ‹˜ ·Ú·ÁˆÁÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ Î·-Ù·Û΢ÒÓ.

™Â ÁÂÓÈΤ˜ ÁÚ·Ì̤˜, ÔÈ ÊÔÚ›˜ ıˆÚÔ‡Ó fiÙÈ ÔÈ Î·ÙËÁÔڛ˜ ÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ–ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ–ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Û ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘˜ Î·È Â·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÂÓÙ¿Ûˆ˜ ÂÚ-Á·Û›·˜, ΢ڛˆ˜ ˆ˜ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔÈ ÂÚÁ¿Ù˜.

∆· Û˘ÁÎÚÈÙÈο ÏÂÔÓÂÎÙ‹Ì·Ù· ··Û¯fiÏËÛ‹˜ ÙÔ˘˜ Â›Ó·È fiÙÈ:

1. ∏ ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÙÔ˘˜ Â›Ó·È ¯·ÌËÏÔ‡ ÎfiÛÙÔ˘˜2. ¶·Ú·ÙËÚÂ›Ù·È ¤ÏÏÂÈ„Ë ÚÔÛÊÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ·fi ÏÂ˘Ú¿˜ ÂÁ¯ÒÚÈÔ˘ ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎÔ‡3. ∂›Ó·È ÈÔ ÂÚÁ·ÙÈÎÔ› ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ŒÏÏËÓ˜4. Œ¯Ô˘Ó Ê˘ÛÈΤ˜/ۈ̷ÙÈΤ˜ ÈηÓfiÙËÙ˜5. °ÓˆÚ›˙Ô˘Ó Î·Ï¿ ÙË ‰Ô˘ÏÂÈ¿ Î·È 6. ¶ÚÔÛ·ÚÌfi˙ÔÓÙ·È ÁÚ‹ÁÔÚ· ÛÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ‰Ô˘ÏÂÈ¿˜.

∞Ó·ÊÔÚÈο Ì ٷ ‚·ÛÈο ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ÚfiÛÏ˄˘ ·fi ÙȘ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜ ·˘Ù¤˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘˜ ÙÚfi-Ô˘˜ ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÈηÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙÔ˘˜ ·fi ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ-̤ÏË ÙˆÓ ÊÔÚ¤ˆÓ ÙÔ˘‰Â›ÁÌ·ÙÔ˜, ÔÈ ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ‰fiıËÎ·Ó Î·Ù¿ ‚·ıÌfi Û˘¯ÓfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È ÈÂÚ·Ú¯›·˜ ‹Ù·Ó:

1. ÷ÌËÏ‹ ·ÌÔÈ‚‹ – ªÂȈ̤Ó˜ ·ÛÊ·ÏÈÛÙÈΤ˜ ÂÈÛÊÔÚ¤˜2. ¡· ͤÚÔ˘Ó ÙË ‰Ô˘ÏÂÈ¿3. ¡· Â›Ó·È ÈηÓÔ› Ó· ‰Ô˘Ï¤„Ô˘Ó ÔÏϤ˜ ÒÚ˜4. ¡· ¤¯Ô˘Ó Û˘ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ5. ¡· ͤÚÔ˘Ó Î·Ï¿ ÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ ÁÏÒÛÛ·6. ¡· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÚÔ¸ËÚÂÛ›· – ÈÛÙÔÔÈËÙÈÎfi ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ‹ ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘.

√ ÈÔ Û˘ÓËıÈṲ̂ÓÔ˜ ÙÚfiÔ˜ ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÈηÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙÔ˘˜ Â›Ó·È Ë ‡·ÚÍË Û˘-ÛÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ ·fi Ê›ÏÔ˘˜ Î·È ¿ÏÏÔ˘˜ ÂÚÁÔ‰fiÙ˜ Î·È ‰Â˘ÙÂÚ¢fiÓÙˆ˜ Ë ‡·ÚÍË Ù›ÙÏˆÓ ÛÔ˘-‰ÒÓ. ∆Ô ¯·ÌËÏfi ¿ÌÂÛÔ Î·È ¤ÌÌÂÛÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Î·È Ë ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ ›‰ÈˆÓ ÙˆÓ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ–ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ–ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ Ó· ¤¯Ô˘Ó οÔÈ· ÌË ÈÛÙÔÔÈË̤ÓË ÁÓÒ-ÛË ÙÔ˘ ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ‹ Ó· ÂȉÂÈÎÓ‡Ô˘Ó ˘„ËÏfi ‚·ıÌfi ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ÛÙÔ ˆÚ¿ÚÈÔ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È fiÙÈ ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó Ù· ÈÔ ÈÛ¯˘Ú¿ ıÂÙÈο «Û‹Ì·Ù· ÚfiÛÏË-„˘» ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÚÁÔ‰fiÙ˜.

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 195

ŸÏÔÈ ÔÈ ÊÔÚ›˜ ‰È·Ù‡ˆÛ·Ó ÙËÓ ¿Ô„Ë fiÙÈ Ë ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ Ì¤Ûˆ Ù›ÙψÓÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ÂӉȷʤÚÂÈ ÙȘ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÌfiÓÔ ÁÈ· ÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˜ ı¤ÛÂȘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜··ÈÙÔ‡Ó ·˘ÍË̤ÓÔ ÎfiÛÙÔ˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ Î·È ÂÌÂÚȤ¯Ô˘Ó ÌÂÁ·Ï‡ÙÂÚÔ Â‡ÚÔ˜ ηıËÎfi-ÓÙˆÓ Î·È ·ÔÎÙËÌ¤ÓˆÓ ‰ÂÍÈÔًوÓ.

∞Ó·ÊÔÚÈο Ì ÙȘ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ ˙‹ÙËÛ˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· Î·È ÂÚÁ·-ÙÈÎfi ‰˘Ó·ÌÈÎfi Ù¯ÓÈ΋˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘, ÔÈ ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ‰fiıËÎ·Ó ÂÈÛËÌ·›ÓÔ˘Ó fiÙÈ ËÚÔÔÙÈ΋ ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘˜ Î·È Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÂÌ-Ê·Ó›˙ÂÙ·È Êı›ÓÔ˘Û·, ·Ó Î·È ‰È·ÈÛÙÒÓÔÓÙ·È ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÁÈ· ÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓÔ Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÚÔÛˆ-ÈÎfi Û Ӥ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜. ŸÌˆ˜ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·Ó·‰Âȯı› ÌÈ· ÛÂÈÚ¿ ·fi ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Î·È Â·Á-Á¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÛÙ· ÔÔ›· ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÂÙ·È ¤ÏÏÂÈ„Ë Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡. ªÂÚÈΤ˜ ÂÓ‰ÂÈÎÙÈΤ˜Î·ÙËÁÔڛ˜ ›ӷÈ:– ∆¯ÓÔÏfiÁÔÈ (ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÏfiÁÔÈ, Ì˯·ÓÔÏfiÁÔÈ, ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈÎÔ›, ÙËÏÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ, ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ

¤ÚÁˆÓ, ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î.Ï.)– ∆¯ӛÙ˜ (ÎÙ›ÛÙ˜, ͢ÏÔ˘ÚÁÔ›, ˘‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎÔ›, ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÏfiÁÔÈ, ÌÂÙ·ÏÏÔ¯‡Ù˜, Ì˯·ÓÈÎÔ›

ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÛÙ¤˜ Î·È Û˘ÓÙËÚËÙ¤˜ ÔÈÎÈÏ›·˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡, ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÙ¤˜ ÎÚ¤-·ÙÔ˜ Î·È ¿ÏÏÔÈ Ù¯ӛÙ˜ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÙÚÔʛ̈Ó, ˘Ê·ÓÙ¤˜, ϤÎÙ˜, ηٷÛ΢·ÛÙ¤˜ÚÔÙ‡ˆÓ, ˘Ô‰ËÌ·ÙÔÔÈÔ› Î.Ï.).

– ÃÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ ÌÂÁ¿Ï˘ ÔÈÎÈÏ›·˜ ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ Î·È ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡ (ÌÂÙ·ÏÏÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜, ͇-ÏÔ˘, ¯·ÚÙÔÔÈ˚·˜, ¯ËÌÈ΋˜ ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ÂÁηٷÛÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜ ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·˜, ÌË-¯·ÓÒÓ ˘Ô‰ËÌ·ÙÔÔÈ˚·˜, Ì˯·ÓÒÓ ˘Ê·ÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜, Ì˯·ÓËÌ¿ÙˆÓ ‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ¤ÚÁˆÓ,Û˘Ó·ÚÌÔÏÔÁËÙ¤˜-ÂÊ·ÚÌÔÛÙ¤˜ ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÏÔÁÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈÎÔ‡ ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌÔ‡ Î.Ï.).

– ∞ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔÈ ÂÚÁ¿Ù˜ Ô‰ÔÔÈ˚·˜ Î·È ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÒÓ.√È Î·ÙËÁÔڛ˜ ÙˆÓ ·ÓÂȉ›ÎÂ˘ÙˆÓ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ˙‹ÙËÛË Ô˘ ÂÚÈÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô

ÙˆÓ Î·Ù·Û΢ÒÓ, Ô ÔÔ›Ô˜ ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÙ·È Û ÙÚԯȿ ·Ófi‰Ô˘ Ù· ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›· ¯ÚfiÓÈ·. ¶·Ú¿Ï-ÏËÏ·, ‰È·ÈÛÙÒÓÔÓÙ·È ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈΤ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ Û ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ÈηÓÔÔÈËıÔ‡Ó Ì ÈÔ ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó· ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·Ù· ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘, ·ÏÏ¿ ηȷӿÁΘ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ Û Ӥ˜ Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜, ÔÈ Ôԛ˜ ÂӉ¯Ô̤ӈ˜ ‰ÂÓ Î·Ï‡-ÙÔÓÙ·È ·fi ÙȘ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈΤ˜ ‰Ô̤˜.

™Â ÁÂÓÈΤ˜ ÁÚ·Ì̤˜, ÙÔ ‰Â›ÁÌ· ÙˆÓ ÂÍÂÙ·˙fiÌÂÓˆÓ ÊÔÚ¤ˆÓ ‰ÂÓ ÚԂϤÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi·ÚÈıÌfi ·ÔÚÚfiÊËÛ˘ ÓÂÔÂÈÛÂÚ¯fiÌÂÓˆÓ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ηıÒ˜ ÔÈ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔÈÎÏ¿‰ÔÈ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋˜ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ Ê·›ÓÂÙ·È Ó· ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ‰È·¯ÚÔÓÈο Êı›ÓÔ˘Û·ÔÚ›·. √È Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓÔÈ ÊÔÚ›˜ ˆÛÙfiÛÔ ıˆÚÔ‡Ó fiÙÈ ··ÈÙÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ó¤Â˜ Ù¯ÓÈΤ˜ ‰Â-ÍÈfiÙËÙ˜ ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˜ ÛÙȘ Ӥ˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ Ô˘ ÂÓۈ̷ÙÒÓÔÓÙ·È ÛÙ· Ì˯·Ó‹Ì·-Ù· Î·È ÙÔÓ ÂÍÔÏÈÛÌfi. ∂Ô̤ӈ˜ ÔÈ ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÛÏ‹„ÂȘ ÂÓ‰¤¯ÂÙ·È Ó· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÈÔ··ÈÙËÙÈÎfi ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· ·Ó·ÊÔÚÈο Ì ÙȘ ··ÈÙÔ‡ÌÂÓ˜ ‰ÂÍÈfiÙËÙ˜.

∏ ·Ó·ÁÓÒÚÈÛË ÙˆÓ Â·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ Î·È ‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ–·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ–ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÚˆÙ·Ú¯ÈÎfi ‚‹Ì· ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ¿ÚÛË Ù˘ ÌÂÈÔÓÂ-ÎÙÈ΋˜ ı¤Û˘ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜. ª’ ·˘ÙfiÓ ÙÔÓ ÙÚfiÔ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÔÔÈ-Â›Ù·È Ë ¤ÓÙ·ÍË Ù˘ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˘ ÔÌ¿‰·˜ ÛÙfi¯Ô˘ Ì ÈÛfiÙÈÌÔ˘˜ fiÚÔ˘˜ ÛÙËÓ ··Û¯fiÏË-ÛË, ηıÒ˜ Û˘ÓÈÛÙ¿ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi ‚‹Ì· ··ÁΛÛÙÚˆÛ˘ ÙÔ˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ηٷÌÂÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ÂÚ-Á·Û›·˜ ·fi ·ÚÓËÙÈο ÛÙÂÚÂfiÙ˘· Î·È ÚÔηٷϋ„ÂȘ.

196 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ŸÌˆ˜, Ë fiÔÈ· ‰È·‰Èηۛ· ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ fi¯È ·ÏÒ˜ ‰ÂÓ ˘Ê›ÛÙ·Ù·È ·ÏÏ¿ Ô‡Ù ¤¯ÂÈۯ‰ȷÛÙ› Î·È ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÙ›, ·ÚfiÏÔ Ô˘ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ‰È¿¯˘ÙË Ë ı¤ÏËÛË Û ‰È¿ÊÔÚÔ˘˜ÊÔÚ›˜ Ó· ÂÌÏ·ÎÔ‡Ó Î·È Ó· ÙËÓ ·Ó·Ï¿‚Ô˘Ó. √ √∂∂∫ ¤¯ÂÈ ÂÎÊÚ¿ÛÂÈ ÙË ı¤ÏËÛË Ó· ÂÈ-ÊÔÚÙÈÛı› Î·È Ì ÙË ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· Î·È ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ¿Ù˘ˆÓ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ. £ÂˆÚÒÓÙ·˜ ÙË ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÂÓfi˜ ∂ıÓÈÎÔ‡ ™˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ¶È-ÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ˆ˜ ÌÈ· ·fi Ù˘ ‚·ÛÈΤ˜ ÂÓÂÚÁËÙÈΤ˜ ÔÏÈÙÈΤ˜ ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ Î·È Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÔ-ÓÙ·˜ ˘fi„Ë Ù· ıÂÙÈο ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· Ô˘ ı· ¤¯ÂÈ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ô Û¯Â‰È·ÛÌfi˜Î·È Ë ·Ó¿Ù˘Í‹ ÙÔ˘ ÛÙË ¯ÒÚ· Ì·˜ ÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ·Ó·Áη›Ô˜.

5. ™‡ÓÔ„Ë-™˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù·

∞Ó Î·È ·ÚÎÂÙÔ› ÎÏ¿‰ÔÈ Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó Êı›ÓÔ˘Û· ÔÚ›·, ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘ÓÔÏϤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜/·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· Ì ηϤ˜ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ ··Û¯fiÏËÛ˘ Î·È ·ÔÚÚfiÊËÛ˘·fi ÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿. √È ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ·˘Ù¤˜ Â›Ó·È Î·Ù·ÓÂÌË̤Ó˜ Û ÔÈÎÈÏ›· ÎÏ¿‰ˆÓ Ù˘ ÔÈ-ÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ Î·È Ù˘ ·Ú·ÁˆÁ‹˜.

ñ À¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÙfiÛÔ Û ÎÏ·ÛÈΤ˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜/·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· fiÛÔ Î·È Û ÂȉÈÎfi-ÙËÙ˜ Ó¤ˆÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÒÓ. ™ÙÔÓ Î·Ù·Û΢·ÛÙÈÎfi ÎÏ¿‰Ô ·˘ÍË̤ÓË ˙‹ÙËÛË ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘ÓÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ fiˆ˜: ∆¯ӛÙ˜ Ì˯·ÓÔÏfiÁÔÈ, ¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ¤˜ Ì˯·ÓÒÓ ÁÂÓÈο, Û˘ÓÙËÚËÙ¤˜Ì˯·ÓÒÓ ÁÂÓÈο, ˘‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎÔ›, „˘ÎÙÈÎÔ›, ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÏfiÁÔÈ, ıÂÚÌÔ¸‰Ú·˘ÏÈÎÔ›, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ›‰ÔÌÈÎÒÓ ¤ÚÁˆÓ, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ·˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÒÓ ÁÂÓÈο, Î.Ï. ™ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô Ù˘ ÎψÛÙԸʷ-ÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›·˜ Î·È ¤Ó‰˘Û˘ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ›Û˘ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Ô˘ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ˙‹ÙËÛË (Û¯Â-‰È·ÛÙ¤˜ ÚÔÙ‡ˆÓ, ˘Ê·ÓÙ¤˜, ÎfiÙ˜, ϤÎÙ˜ Î.Ï.), fiˆ˜ Î·È ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÂÂÍÂÚ-Á·Û›·˜ ÙÚÔÊ›ÌˆÓ (ÂÂÍÂÚÁ·ÛÙ¤˜ ÎÚ¤·ÙÔ˜, Û˘Û΢·ÛÙ¤˜ Î.Ï.), ÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·-ÊÈÎÒÓ Ù¯ÓÒÓ Î·È ÂΉfiÛÂˆÓ Î·È ¿ÏÏÔ˘˜ ÎÏ¿‰Ô˘˜. ∞˘ÍË̤ÓË ˙‹ÙËÛË ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó Î·È ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì Ӥ˜ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜,Ì ÚÔÂÍ¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ ÙȘ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ Ù˘ ¶ÏËÚÔÊÔÚÈ΋˜ Î·È ∂ÈÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ (ÔÏ˘Ì¤-Û·, ‰›ÎÙ˘·, Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ˘ÔÏÔÁÈÛÙÒÓ, ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎfi ÏÔÁÈÛÌÈÎfi, ÂÈÎÔÈӈӛ˜, ·Ó·Ï˘-Ù¤˜/ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ·ÙÈÛÙ¤˜ Î.Ï.).

ñ √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ·¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙËÓ Î·Ù¿ÚÙÈÛË ÙˆÓ Ù¯ÓÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜ Û Ӥ·Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ· ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ·, ·Ó Î·È ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ˘ÏÔÔÈ‹ÛÂÈ Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi Ù¤ÙÔÈ· ÚÔ-ÁÚ¿ÌÌ·Ù· ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘.

ñ ∏ ·ÛÊ¿ÏÂÈ· ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ë ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜, Ë ¯Ú‹ÛË ∏/À, Ë Û¯Â‰›·ÛË Ì ∏/À,Ù· Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·Ù· ÂÍÔÈÎÔÓfiÌËÛ˘ ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·˜ Î.Ï. Â›Ó·È ÁÓÒÛÂȘ/‰ÂÍÈfiÙËÙ˜ Ô˘ ÔÈ ÂÈ-¯ÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÂÈı˘ÌÔ‡Ó Ó· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÔÈ ˘fi ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ÂÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓÔÈ.

ñ ™ÙÔȯ›· Ô˘ Ï·Ì‚¿ÓÔÓÙ·È ˘’ fi„Ë ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ÂÓfi˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡ Â›Ó·È Ë ÂÌÂÈ-Ú›·/ÚÔ¸ËÚÂÛ›· (Û ÌÂÁ¿ÏÔ ‚·ıÌfi), Ë ÈηÓfiÙËÙ· ·fiÎÙËÛ˘ Ó¤ˆÓ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ/‰ÂÍÈÔ-ًوÓ, Ë ÚÔÛ·ÚÌÔÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÛÂ Ó¤Ô Ù¯ÓÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ, ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È Ë ÁÓÒÛË Í¤Ó˘ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜ (΢ڛˆ˜ Ù˘ ·ÁÁÏÈ΋˜).

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 197

ñ √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó Î·È ÚÔÛÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó Î·È Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡˜ Ô˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·Ô-ÎÙ‹ÛÂÈ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ· ·fi ÂÌÂÈÚ›·/ÚÔ¸ËÚÂÛ›·, ¯ˆÚ›˜ Ó· ‰È·ı¤ÙÔ˘Ó Û¯ÂÙÈÎÔ‡˜ Ù›Ù-ÏÔ˘˜ ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ. ∆¤ÙÔÈÔÈ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ› ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙Ô˘Ó ˙‹ÙËÛË ·Ó¿ÏÔÁË Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔ·Ó·ÊÂÚ-ı¤ÓÙ˜ Ù¯ÓÈÎÔ‡˜.

ñ √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È ıÂÙÈΤ˜ ·¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜, ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Î·È Úfi-ÛÊ˘Á˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘˜ ··Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó Û ÔÈÎÈÏ›· ÎÏ¿‰ˆÓ Ù˘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜. ŸÌˆ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ··-Û¯ÔÏÔ‡Ó Î˘Ú›ˆ˜ ˆ˜ ·ÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔ ÚÔÛˆÈÎfi ¯·ÌËÏÒÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ ··ÈÙ‹ÛˆÓ.

ñ √È ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂȘ Â›Ó·È Â˘ÓÔ˚Τ˜ ·¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙËÓ ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ ÁÓÒÛÂˆÓ Î·È ‰Â-ÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ, ÌÂÙ·Ó·ÛÙÒÓ Î·È ÚÔÛʇÁˆÓ, ›Ù ·˘Ù¤˜ ·ÔÎÙ‹-ıËÎ·Ó Ì ÛÔ˘‰¤˜ ›Ù ·fi ÂÌÂÈÚ›·/ÚÔ¸ËÚÂÛ›·.

ñ ∏ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÂÓfi˜ ∂ıÓÈÎÔ‡ ™˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ¶ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛ˘ ı· ¤¯ÂÈ ıÂÙÈο ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·-Ù· ÙfiÛÔ ÛÙËÓ ·ÁÔÚ¿ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ fiÛÔ Î·È ÛÙÔ˘˜ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜, ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Î·È Úfi-ÛÊ˘Á˜ ÁÈ·Ù› ı· ·˘Í‹ÛÂÈ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈο ÙȘ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ ÂÓۈ̿وۋ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙËÓ ÂÏÏËÓÈ-΋ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›· Û ı¤ÛÂȘ ·Ó¿ÏÔÁ˜ ÙˆÓ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ, ‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Î·È ÈηÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙÔ˘˜.

§¤ÍÂȘ ∫ÏÂȉȿ:

¡¤Â˜ ÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜, ÈÛÙÔÔ›ËÛË ‰ÂÍÈÔًوÓ, ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙ˜, ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜.

Keywords:

New specialties, certification of skills, repatriates, immigrants.

198 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

¶∞ƒ∞ƒ∆∏ª∞

(¢π∞°ƒ∞ªª∞∆∞)

∫QÙQÓÔÌ‹ ÙˆÓ ÂÈRÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ

QÓ¿ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ‰ÚQÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙQ

36%

28%

15%

9%12%

∫}Ù}Û΢¤ 36 %

∫ψÛÙÔ¸Ê}ÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›} Î}È ŒÓ‰˘ÛË 28%

∂ȉÒÓ ¢È}ÙÚÔÊ‹ 15%

°Ú}ÊÈΤ ∆¤�Ó & ∂ΉfiÛÂÈ 9%

ÀËÚÂۛ Î}È ÏÔȤ ÂÈ�ÂÈÚ‹ÛÂÈ 12%

∫QÙQÓÔÌ‹ ÙˆÓ ÂÈRÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ

QÓ¿ÏÔÁQ ÌÂ ÙÔÓ QÚÈıÌfi ÙˆÓ ÙÂRÓÈÎÒÓ QÔÊÔ›ÙˆÓ

¢Â˘ÙÂÚÔ‚¿ıÌÈQ ‹ MÂÙQÏ˘ÎÂÈQ΋ EÎQ›‰Â˘ÛË Ô˘ QQÛRÔÏÔ‡Ó

AÚÈ

ıÌfi

Â

È�ÂÈ

Ú‹ÛÂ

ˆÓ

¤ˆ 5

6 ¤ˆ 1

0

11 ¤ˆ

20

21 ¤ˆ

50

51 ¤ˆ

100

101 ¤

ˆ 200

¿Óˆ }fi 20

0

41

10 12 11

52 1

05

1015202530354045

∞ÚÈıÌfi }}Û�ÔÏÔ‡ÌÂÓˆÓ

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 199

0 20 40 60

§ÔÈ¿ ∞ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ}

√ÈÎÔÓÔÌ›}/¢ÈÔ›ÎËÛË

XÚ‹ÛË ¢È}‰ÈÎÙ‡Ô˘

°ÓÒÛË∂ÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤ÓˆÓ

¶}ΤوӧÔÁÈÛÌÈÎÔ‡

ÃÚ‹ÛË ∏/À

∆Â�ÓÔÏÔÁ›}∂ÍÔÈÎÔÓfiÌËÛË

∂Ó¤ÚÁÂÈ}

¢È}ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛ˶ÔÈfiÙËÙ}

¶Ôχ ªÂÁ¿ÏÔ µ}ıÌfi

ª¤ÙÚÈÔ µ}ıÌfi

K}ıfiÏÔ˘

°ÓÒ

ÛÂÈ/¢ÂÍÈfiÙËÙÂ

AÚÈıÌfi EÈ�ÂÈÚ‹ÛˆÓ

BQıÌfi ÛÙÔÓ ÔÔ›Ô ÔÈ ÂÈRÂÈÚ‹ÛÂÈ ÎÚ›ÓÔ˘Ó fiÙÈ Â›ÓQÈ QQÚQ›ÙËÙÂ

ÔÈ °ÓÒÛÂÈ/¢ÂÍÈfiÙËÙ ÁÈQ ÙÔ˘ ÙÂRÓÈÎÔ‡ ÙÔ˘

200 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

0 10 20 30 40

AÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ}

AÓÙÈΛÌÂÓQ ÛÙQ ÔÔ›Q ÔÈ ÙÂRÓÈÎÔ› RˆÚ› Ù˘ÈΤ ÛÔ˘‰¤, QÏÏ¿ ÌÂ

ÂQÁÁÂÏÌQÙÈ΋ ÂÌÂÈÚ›Q, Ú¤ÂÈ ÓQ ÂÎQÈ‰Â˘ÙÔ‡Ó. EÓ‰ÂÈÎÙÈÎÔ› ‚QıÌÔ› ÚÔÙ›ÌËÛË

XÚ‹ÛË ¢È}‰ÈÎÙ‡Ô˘(Internet)

ÃÚ‹ÛË ∏/À

§ÔÈ¿ ∞ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓ}

∂ÈÛ}ÁˆÁ‹ ÛÙËÓ∫ψÛÙÔ¸Ê}ÓÙÔ˘ÚÁ›}

TÂ�ÓÈ΋ ™�‰›}ÛË

∏ÏÂÎÙÚÈΤ ªË�}Ó¤

¢ÔÌÈο YÏÈο

∂ÈÛ}ÁˆÁ‹ ÛÙËÓ∏ÏÂÎÙÚÔÏÔÁ›}

∂ÈÛ}ÁˆÁ‹ ÛÙ} Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì}Ù}„‡ÍË/ı¤ÚÌ}ÓÛË

∏ÏÂÎÙÚÔÏÔÁÈÎfi Î}ÈHÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈÎfi YÏÈÎfi

∂ÈÛ}ÁˆÁ‹ ÛÙËMË�}ÓÔÏÔÁ›}

ÃÚ‹ÛË ÂÚÁ}ÏÂÈÔÌË�}ÓÒÓCNC

¶ÔÏ˘Ì¤Û}

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 201

∞ÓQÏÔÁ›Q ıÂÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔ QÚÓËÙÈΤ ÚÔı¤ÛÂÈ

ÁÈQ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë QÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡ Qfi QÏÏÔ‰QÔ‡

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

K}Ù}

Û΢

¤

Kψ

ÛÙÔ¸

Ê}ÓÙÔ˘

ÚÁ›}

Î}È Œ

Ó‰˘Û

Ë

E›‰Ë ¢

È}ÙÚ

ÔÊ‹

°Ú}ÊÈÎ

¤ T

¤�ÓÂ

EΉfiÛ

ÂÈ

YËÚ

ÂÛ›Â

Î}È

ÏÔÈ

¤ ÂÈ

‰ÈÎfi

ÙËÙÂ

∫Ï¿‰ÔÈ

£ÂÙÈΤ ∞ÚÓËÙÈΤ

∞ÓQÏÔÁ›Q ıÂÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔ QÚÓËÙÈΤ ÚÔı¤ÛÂÈ

ÁÈQ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë QÓÂȉ›Î¢ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡ Qfi QÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙÂ

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

K}Ù}

Û΢

¤

Kψ

ÛÙÔ¸

Ê}ÓÙÔ˘

ÚÁ›}

Î}È Œ

Ó‰˘Û

Ë

E›‰Ë ¢

È}ÙÚ

ÔÊ‹

°Ú}ÊÈÎ

¤ T

¤�ÓÂ

EΉfiÛ

ÂÈ

YËÚ

ÂÛ›Â

Î}È

ÏÔÈ

¤ ÂÈ

‰ÈÎfi

ÙËÙÂ

∫Ï¿‰ÔÈ

£ÂÙÈΤ ∞ÚÓËÙÈΤ

202 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

™RÂÙÈ΋ ‚QÚ‡ÙËÙQ ÙˆÓ ÛÙÔÈR›ˆÓ, ÙQ ÔÔ›Q ÔÈ ÂÈRÂÈÚ‹ÛÂÈ ÏQÌ‚¿ÓÔ˘Ó ˘fi„Ë

ÁÈQ ÌÂÏÏÔÓÙÈ΋ ÚfiÛÏË„Ë ÙÂRÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÛˆÈÎÔ‡

∏ÏÈΛ}

0 20 40 60 80

ÕÏÏ} ÛÙÔÈ�›}

πÎ}ÓfiÙËÙ}∂ÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›}

πÎ}ÓfiÙËÙ} }fiÎÙËÛËÓ¤ˆÓ ÁÓÒÛˆÓ/

‰ÂÍÈÔًوÓ

ποÓfiÙËÙ} ÂÚÁ}Û›}ˆ ̤ÏÔ ÔÌ¿‰}

¶ÚÔÛ}ÚÌÔÛÙÈÎfiÙËÙ}ÛÂ Ó¤Ô ÙÂ�ÓÈÎfi

ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ

µ}ıÌfi Ù˘�›Ô˘/‰ÈÏÒÌ}ÙÔ/}ÔÏ˘ÙËÚ›Ô˘

∂ÌÂÈÚ›} ÛÙÔ}ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓÔ

™�ÔÏ‹ }ÔÊÔ›ÙËÛË

ŒÙÔ }ÔÊÔ›ÙËÛË

∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Û Ù¯ÓÈο ·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· 203

µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·

[1] £. ∫·ÙÛ·Ó¤‚·˜, «∂·ÁÁ¤ÏÌ·Ù· ÙÔ˘ ̤ÏÏÔÓÙÔ˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ·ÚÂÏıfiÓÙÔ˜», ÂΉfiÛÂȘ ¶·-Ù¿ÎË, 2002.

[2] Metron Analysis, «™‡Ó‰ÂÛË ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˘ Û˘Ó¯È˙fiÌÂÓ˘ ηٿÚÙÈÛ˘ ·Ó¤ÚÁˆÓ ÌÂÙȘ ·Ó¿ÁΘ ÙˆÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹Ûˆӻ, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001.

[3] ∫ÔÈÓÔÙÈ΋ ÚˆÙÔ‚Ô˘Ï›· «∞·Û¯fiÏËÛË», «ŒÚ¢ӷ ‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Î·È ÌÂϤÙË ·ÓÙÈ-ÛÙÔ›¯ÈÛ˘ ·ÁÁÂÏÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÚÔÛfiÓÙˆÓ ·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Ì ÙË ˙‹ÙËÛË ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜», ∞ı‹Ó· 2000.

[4] ™‡Ó‰¤ÛÌÔ˜ ∂ÏÏËÓÈÎÒÓ µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÒÓ, «∞Ó¿ÁΘ ÙˆÓ ‚ÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎÒÓ ÂȯÂÈÚ‹ÛÂˆÓ ÛÂÂȉÈÎfiÙËÙ˜ ·È¯Ì‹˜», ∞ı‹Ó· 2001.

[5] ICAP, πÓÛÙÈÙÔ‡ÙÔ √ÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ Î·È µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÎÒÓ ∂Ú¢ÓÒÓ Î·È ™‡Ó‰ÂÛÌÔ˜ ∂ÏÏË-ÓÈÎÒÓ µÈÔÌ˯·ÓÈÒÓ, ŒÚ¢ӷ «∞˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ›», KÏ·‰ÈΤ˜ MÂϤÙ˜, ∞ı‹Ó·2000, 2001.

[6] ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿, «∞Ó¿ÁΘ Ù˘ ÂÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ·ÁÔÚ¿˜ ÛÂ Ù˘¯ÈÔ‡¯Ô˘˜ ∞˘ÙÔÌ·ÙÈÛÌÔ‡»,∞ı‹Ó· 1999.

[7] ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÎfi ∫¤ÓÙÚÔ ÀÔ‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Ù˘ ¶ÔÚÙÔÁ·Ï›·˜, «√È ÌÂÙ·Ó¿ÛÙ˜ Ù˘ ∞Ó·ÙÔÏ‹˜ÛÙÔÓ ÎÏ¿‰Ô ÙÔ˘ ˘Ô‰‹Ì·ÙÔ˜», 2002.

204 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË

¢. °. ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜ÙÌ‹Ì· ¢.ª.À.¶.∆.∂.π. ∫·Ï·Ì¿Ù·˜

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

¶·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË Î·È ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ‰‡Ô ¤ÓÓÔȘ Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙË-Ú›˙Ô˘Ó ÙÔÓ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ ‰˘ÙÈÎfi ÎfiÛÌÔ. ™Â ·˘Ùfi ÙÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ Î·ÏÂ›Ù·È Ó· ÚÔ-Û·ÚÌÔÛÙ› Î·È Ó· ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÂÈ ÙÔ fiÔÈÔ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ÚfiÁÚ·ÌÌ· ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÁÂ-ÓÈÎfiÙÂÚ· Ë ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈ΋ ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊ›· Î·È Ú·ÎÙÈ΋. ∆Ô ˙ËÙÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ Â›Ó·È ÌÈ· Âη›‰Â˘ÛËÔ˘ ı· Â›Ó·È ÎÔÈÓ‹ ÁÈ· fiÏÔ˘˜ Î·È Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· ı· ·ÓÙ·ÔÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈ΋ ÔÏ-Ï·ÏfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÛÙËÓ ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ÂÙÂÚfiÙËÙ·˜. Àfi ÙÔ Êˆ˜ ÙˆÓ Ó¤ˆÓÛ˘ÓıËÎÒÓ ‰Â›¯ÓÂÈ Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÔÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË, Ë ÔÔ›· Â›Ó·È Èη-Ó‹ Ó· ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÂÈ ÙȘ ··Ú·›ÙËÙ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜ ÒÛÙ ·ÌÔÈ‚·›· ‚‹Ì·Ù· ÚÔfi‰Ô˘ ÙfiÛÔ Ù˘ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ ˆ˜ Û‡ÓÔÏÔ fiÛÔ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ˘ÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘, Ô‰ËÁ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ÛÙËÓ ··ÏÔÈÊ‹ÙÔ˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÌÔ‡ Î·È Û ÌÈ· fiÓÙˆ˜ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·.

Abstract

Globalization and multiculturalism constitute two concepts that characterize modernwestern world. In such a social environment, a comprehensive programme of studies, andgenerally any educational philosophy and practice, is called to adjust and function. The is-sue question is an educational system that will be shared by everyone and, at the sametime, that will meet the expectations of cultural multiplicity and ensure cultural diversity.Intercultural education seems to meet the expectations of the new environment while be-ing capable of creating the necessary conditions so that the mutual progressive steps ofsociety, as a whole as well as individually, to result in expunging social exclusion and in atruly multicultural society.

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË. 205

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 205-215

∏ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË ˆ˜ ÎÔÈÓ‹ ·Ú·‰Ô¯‹ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ¤Ó·Ó ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ÊÔÚ›˜ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔÔ›ËÛ˘ Î·È ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ÂϤÁ¯Ô˘. Ÿˆ˜ ¤¯ÂÈ ·Ú·ÙËÚ‹ÛÂÈ Ô Durkheim1 Ë ÂÎ-·›‰Â˘ÛË ÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ˆ˜ «Ë ÂÈÚÚÔ‹ Ô˘ ·ÛÎÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÙȘ ÁÂÓȤ˜ ÙˆÓ ÂÓËÏ›ÎˆÓ Û ÂΛ-ÓÔ˘˜ Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ·ÎfiÌË ÒÚÈÌÔÈ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ ˙ˆ‹». ¶ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ ÂÚ›ÌÈ·˜ ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋˜ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ Ô˘ ·ÔÛÎÔ› Ó· ηٷÛ΢¿ÛÂÈ Ìȷȉ·ÓÈ΋ ÂÈÎfiÓ· ÙÔ˘ ·ÓıÚÒÔ˘, ÁÈ· ÙÔ Ò˜ ı· ¤Ú ӷ ›ӷÈ, ÙfiÛÔ ·fi ۈ̷ÙÈ΋ fiÛÔÎ·È ·fi ‰È·ÓÔËÙÈ΋ Î·È ËıÈ΋ ¿Ô„Ë2. ∂›Û˘ οı ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·, ÁÈ· Ó· Û˘Ó¯›ÛÂÈ Ó·˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ, ··ÈÙ› ¤Ó· ‚·ÛÈÎfi ‰›Ô ÎÔÈÓÒÓ ·Ú·‰Ô¯ÒÓ, ·ÍÈÒÓ Î·È Î·ÓfiÓˆÓ ·Ó¿ÌÂÛ·ÛÙ· ̤ÏË Ù˘, fiˆ˜ Î·È Î¿ÔÈ· ÂÍÂȉ›Î¢ÛË, ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· ÙÔ˘ ··Ú·›ÙËÙÔ˘ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ‰È·-Ù‹ÚËÛ‹ Ù˘ ηٷÌÂÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜. ∏ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË ¤Ú¯ÂÙ·È Ó· ηχ„ÂÈ ÙȘ ·Ú·¿ÓˆÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ ·Ó¿ÁΘ, ÈηÓÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ ÙȘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ Î·È ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁÒÓÙ·˜ ÙȘÚÔ¸Ôı¤ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ‰È·ÈÒÓÈÛË Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜. ªÂ ·˘Ù‹ ÙËÓ ¤ÓÓÔÈ· ‚·ÛÈ΋ ÏÂÈÙÔ˘Ú-Á›· Ù˘ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ Â›Ó·È Ë Û˘ÓÙ‹ÚËÛË Î·È Ë ÂͤÏÈÍË Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜3. µÂ‚·›ˆ˜ Ë ÎÔÈ-ÓˆÓÈ΋ ÂͤÏÈÍË Ì ÙËÓ ÛÂÈÚ¿ Ù˘ Û˘Ì·Ú·Û‡ÚÂÈ ÛÙÔÓ ÂÎÛ˘Á¯ÚÔÓÈÛÌfi ÙÔ˘˜ ıÂÛÌÔ‡˜ ÌÈ·Î·È ÙÔ ÂÚȯfiÌÂÓfi ÙÔ˘˜ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È ·fi ÙËÓ ‰ÔÌ‹ Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›·˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó, ·ÊÔ‡ ˆ˜ Û‡ÛÙËÌ· ÚfiÏˆÓ Î·È ÚÔÛ‰ÔÎÈÒÓ ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È Û ¤Ó·Ó ÔÚÈṲ̂ÓÔÎ·È ÚÔÛÙ·ÎÙÈÎÔ‡ ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· ÙÚfiÔ ‰Ú¿Û˘ Î·È ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂÈ·˜ ÌÂٷ͇ ÙˆÓ ÌÂÏÒÓ ÌÈ·˜ ÎÔÈ-ÓˆÓÈ΋˜ ÔÌ¿‰·˜4. √È ıÂÛÌÔ› ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ (fiˆ˜ .¯. Ë Âη›‰Â˘ÛË), Â›Ó·È ÙÚfiÔÈ ÎÔÈÓˆ-ÓÈ΋˜ ‰Ú·ÛÙËÚÈfiÙËÙ·˜ Ô˘ ·Ó··Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ·È ÛÙÔ ¯ÚfiÓÔ Î·È ÙÔÓ ¯ÒÚÔ, ˘fi ÙÔ Ú›ÛÌ· fiÙÈÔÈ ¿ÓıÚˆÔÈ ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁÔ‡Ó ÙËÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›· ·ÏÏ¿ Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· Â›Ó·È Î·È ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ‹Ì·Ù¿Ù˘5. ∆Ô ÚÒÙÔ Ì¤ÏËÌ· ÏÔÈfiÓ Ô˘ ÁÂÓÓ¿Ù·È, ÛÙËÓ ˘fi Û˘˙‹ÙËÛË ıÂÌ·ÙÈ΋ Ì·˜, ›ӷÈÓ· ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚ›ÛÔ˘Ì ÙÔ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ ÛÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô Î·ÏÂ›Ù·È Ó· ÚÔ-Û·ÚÌÔÛÙ› ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È Ó· ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ‹ÛÂÈ ÙÔ fiÔÈÔ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ÚfiÁÚ·ÌÌ· ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ.

∂›Ó·È ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ fiÙÈ, ÌÂÙ¿ ÙÔ 1989, ÛÂ Â›Â‰Ô ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌ›·˜ Î·È ÔÏÈÙÈ΋˜, Ë Î·ÈÙ·ÏÈ-ÛÙÈ΋ ‰ËÌÔÎÚ·Ù›· Î·È Ô ÊÈÏÂÏ¢ıÂÚÈÛÌfi˜ ÂÈ‚Ï‹ıËÎ·Ó Î·È ÂÈ‚›ˆÛ·Ó ÙˆÓ ·ÓÙ›·ÏˆÓȉÂÔÏÔÁÈÒÓ Î·È Û˘ÛÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ. ¢‡Ô ¤ÓÓÔȘ ÛËÌ·ÙÔ‰ÔÙÔ‡Ó Î·›ÚÈ· ÙȘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ˜ ÎÔÈÓˆ-ÓÈΤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜. ∏ ·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË Î·È Ë ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·.

ø˜ fiÚÔ˜ Ë ·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË ÚÔÛÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÙ·È Ï¤ÔÓ Û·Ó Î¿ÙÈ ·˘ÙÔÓfiËÙÔ ÛÙÔ ÎÔÈ-Ófi Ï·›ÛÈÔ ‰È·Ú·ÁÌ¿Ù¢Û˘ ÙˆÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ ‰Â‰Ô̤ӈÓ, ˘ÔÓÔÒÓÙ·˜ ÂχıÂÚË ·ÁÔ-Ú¿, ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌfi, Ì›ˆÛË Ù˘ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ ÙˆÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÒÓ Û˘ÓfiÚˆÓ Î·È Î·Ù’ ¤ÎÙ·ÛÈÓÙ˘ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ ÙÔ˘ ¤ıÓÔ˘˜-ÎÚ¿ÙÔ˘˜, ÂχıÂÚË Î·È ·ÓÂÌfi‰ÈÛÙË Î˘ÎÏÔÊÔÚ›· ÙÔ˘ ÎÂÊ·-Ï·›Ô˘, ¯Ú‹ÛË ÙˆÓ Ó¤ˆÓ Ù¯ÓÔÏÔÁÈÒÓ Î·È ¿Ú· Ù·¯‡Ù·ÙË ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›· Î·È ÏËÚÔÊfiÚË-ÛË6. ¶ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÁÈ· ¤Ó·Ó ηı·Ú¿ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎfi fiÚÔ Ô˘ ‰ËÏÒÓÂÈ ÙË ÌÂÙ·ÏÏ·Á‹ ÙÔ˘ ·-ÁÎfiÛÌÈÔ˘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ‡ Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ Î·È ÙËÓ Î˘ÚÈ·Ú¯›· ÙÔ˘ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎÔ‡ ÊÈÏÂÏ¢ıÂÚÈ-ÛÌÔ‡, ·ÊÔ‡ ÂÎÙfi˜ ·fi οÔȘ ·ÔÌÔӈ̤Ó˜ ‹ ÌÂÌÔӈ̤Ó˜ ηÈ, ¿Ú· ÂÓ ‰˘Ó¿ÌÂÈ ÌÂÈ-ÔÓÔÙÈΤ˜, ÎÏÂÈÛÙ¤˜ ÎÔÈӈӛ˜, Ô˘ ›Ûˆ˜ ·ÎfiÌË ·ÓÙÈÛÙ¤ÎÔÓÙ·È, ÔÈ ÎÔÈӈӛ˜ ÙÔ˘ ˘fi-ÏÔÈÔ˘ Ï·Ó‹ÙË ·fi ÙËÓ ∆Ô˘ÚΛ· ¤ˆ˜ ÙËÓ ƒˆÛ›· Î·È ·fi ÙËÓ ∞ÚÁÂÓÙÈÓ‹ ¤ˆ˜ ÙËÓ ¡¤·∫·ÏˉÔÓ›·, ·Ó·˙ËÙÔ‡Ó ÙË ı¤ÛË ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙË ‰È·‰ÈÎÙ‡ˆÛË Ù˘ Ó¤·˜ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋˜ Ú·ÁÌ·-ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜7. ∏ Û˘ÌÌÂÙÔ¯‹ fï˜ Û ·˘Ù‹ ÙËÓ Ó¤· Ù¿ÍË Ú·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ, fiˆ˜ ÛËÌÂÈÒÓÂÈ Î·ÈÔ ∞. °Î›ÓÙÂÓ˜, ÚÔ¸Ôı¤ÙÂÈ ÙË Û˘ÌÏ‹ÚˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌÔ‡ Ù˘ ¤ÓÓÔÈ·˜ «·ÁÎÔ-

206 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË», ¯ˆÚ›˜ ÙËÓ ·Ó·›ÚÂÛË Ù˘ ηٿ ‚¿ÛÈÓ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈ΋˜ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜ Ù˘ ·ÏÏ¿ ηÈÌ ÙÚÔÔÔÈ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÙËÓ ÔÚÁ¿ÓˆÛË, ÙË ÏÂÈÙÔ˘ÚÁ›· Î·È ÙȘ ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜ οı ۇÁ¯ÚÔÓ˘ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ Ô˘ ÛËÌ·›ÓÂÈ ·‚‚·ÈfiÙËÙ·, ÂÎ Ó¤Ô˘ ÔÚÈÔı¤ÙËÛË Ù˘ ·Ú¿‰ÔÛ˘ Î·È ·Ó·ÚÔ-Û·ÚÌÔÁ‹ ÙˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ ıÂÛÌÒÓ8. ∆Ô ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi ˘ÔΛÌÂÓÔ ·ÔÛ¿Ù·È ·fi ÛÙÂÓÔ‡˜·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·ÎÔ‡˜ ‰ÂÛÌÔ‡˜ Î·È Î·ÏÂ›Ù·È Ó· ÂÓۈ̷وı› Û Ӥ· ‰ÈÂ˘Ú˘Ì¤Ó· Û‡ÓÔÏ· ηÈϤÁÌ·Ù· ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ Û¯¤ÛˆÓ, fiÔ˘ Ë ÂıÓÈ΋ Ù·˘ÙfiÙËÙ·, Ë ıÚËÛΛ· Î·È ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚ·ÔÈ ıÂÛÌÔ› ηÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ó· ·ӷÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÙÔ‡Ó ÒÛÙ ӷ ÌËÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ÂÌfi‰È· ·ÏÏ¿ÚÔ¸Ôı¤ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ÙËÓ Â‰Ú·›ˆÛË Ù˘ ‰ËÌÔÎÚ·Ù›·˜, Û ¤Ó· ·ÁÎfiÛÌÈÔ ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ, Ô-ÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο ÂÙÂÚfiÎÏËÙˆÓ, ·ÓıÚÒÈÓˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ ‹ ÔÌ¿‰ˆÓ.

∏ ‡·ÚÍË ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο ÂÙÂÚfiÎÏËÙˆÓ, ·ÓıÚÒÈÓˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ Î·È ÔÌ¿‰ˆÓ ÛËÌ·ÙÔ-‰ÔÙ› ÂÚÈÁÚ·ÊÈο ÙÔÓ fiÚÔ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ·9. µÂ‚·›ˆ˜ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈΤ˜ ÎÔÈÓˆ-ӛ˜ ‹ ·ÎÚÈ‚¤ÛÙÂÚ· ÔÏ˘ÂıÓÈΤ˜ ·˘ÙÔÎÚ·ÙÔڛ˜ (.¯. µ˘˙¿ÓÙÈÔ, √ıˆÌ·ÓÈ΋ ·˘ÙÔÎÚ·-ÙÔÚ›·, Î.¿.), ˘‹ÚÍ·Ó ÛÙÔÓ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi ÎfiÛÌÔ Î·È Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· ¤‰ˆÛ·Ó ÙȘ ‰ÈΤ˜ ÙÔ˘˜··ÓÙ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÙ· ‰ÈηÈÔÔÏÈÙÈο Î·È Ú·ÎÙÈο ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·Ù· Ô˘ ÚÔ¤Î˘Ù·Ó ·fi ÙËÓÛ˘Ó‡·ÚÍË ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎÒÓ ÔÌ¿‰ˆÓ. √ fiÚÔ˜ fï˜ Â‰Ò ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈ›ٷÈÌ ÙËÓ ÊÈÏÂχıÂÚË ÂΉԯ‹ ÙÔ˘, fiˆ˜ ÔÚ›˙ÂÙ·È Î·È ÔÚ›˙ÂÈ ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· Ù˘ ÓˆÙÂÚÈÎfi-ÙËÙ·˜ ÙȘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ˜ ‰˘ÙÈΤ˜ ÎÔÈӈӛ˜. ø˜ ¤Ó· Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfi ‰Â‰Ô̤ÓÔ ÏÔÈfiÓÂΉËÏÒÓÂÙ·È ÛÙÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ ÂÓfi˜ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ·˘ÙÔ‡ ÎÚ¿ÙÔ˘˜ ‹ ÛÙÔ Ï·›ÛÈÔ ÂÓfi˜ ÔÚÁ·ÓˆÙÈοÂÓÈ·›Ô˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÎÔ‡ ÌÔÚÊÒÌ·ÙÔ˜. ŸÛÔ fï˜ Î·È ·Ó Â›Ó·È ˆ˜ ·Á·ıfi, Ë ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ-ÎfiÙËÙ·, ¿ÍÈÔ Û˘ÓÙ‹ÚËÛ˘ Î·È ÚÔ·ÁˆÁ‹˜, ÙfiÛÔ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ¤Ó· Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ Úfi‚ÏËÌ· ˘fiÙËÓ ¤ÓÓÔÈ· fiÙÈ Û οı ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋˜ Û˘Ûۈ̿وÛ˘ «ÙÔ ÚÔÓfiÌÈÔ ÙÔ˘ η-Ù·Ó·ÁηÛÌÔ‡ ·ÛÎÂ›Ù·È ·fi ÌÈ· ÔÌ¿‰· Ô˘ ÂÎÊÚ¿˙ÂÈ Ì›· Î·È ÌfiÓË ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÂΉԯ‹,Û˘Ó‹ıˆ˜, ˘fi ‰ËÌÔÎÚ·ÙÈΤ˜ Û˘Óı‹Î˜, ÙËÓ ÂΉԯ‹ Ù˘ ÏÂÈÔ„ËÊ›·˜»10.

¶·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË Î·È ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ ‰‡Ô ‰Â‰ÔÌ¤Ó·Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚ›˙Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ ‰ËÌfiÛÈ· ˙ˆ‹ ÙÔ˘Ï¿¯ÈÛÙÔÓ ÛÙ· Ï·›ÛÈ· ÙÔ˘ ¢˘ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÎfiÛÌÔ˘.∂›Ó·È fï˜ ÌÂÁ¤ıË ¿ÏÏÔÙÂ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·˙fiÌÂÓ· ÎÈ ¿ÏÏÔÙ ·ÓÙÈÎÚÔ˘fiÌÂÓ·, fiÙ·Ó Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· ÔÊÈÏÂÏ¢ıÂÚÈÛÌfi˜ ‰È·ÎÈÓ› ÎÈ Ô ›‰ÈÔ˜ ÌÈ· Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓË È‰ÂÔÏÔÁ›·, ·ÔÙÂÏÒÓÙ·˜ ÎÈ ·˘-Ùfi˜, fiˆ˜ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο ÛËÌÂÈÒÓÂÙ·È, «ÌÈ· Ì·¯fiÌÂÓË ›ÛÙË» (a fighting creed)11. ∏¿Ô„Ë ·˘Ù‹ ‰ÂÓ ·Ó·ÈÚ› ı¤ÛÂȘ fiˆ˜ ÙÔ «fiÙÈ ÔÈ ÊÈÏÂχıÂÚ˜ ‰ÈηÈÔÔÏÈÙÈΤ˜ Î·È ÊÈ-ÏÔÛÔÊÈΤ˜ ·Ú·‰Ô¯¤˜ ·ÚÌfi˙Ô˘Ó Î·Ï‡ÙÂÚ· ÛÙËÓ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· ÙˆÓ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓˆÓ Ô-Ï˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎÒÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÒÓ»12, (¯ˆÚ›˜ Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· Ó· ··ÍÈ› Î·È Î¿ÔȘ ÛÔÛȷωË-ÌÔÎÚ·ÙÈΤ˜ ÚÔÙ¿ÛÂȘ13), ·ÏÏ¿ Ô‰ËÁ› ÛÙËÓ Û˘ÓÂȉËÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ ÔÚ›ˆÓ Ù˘ ÊÈÏÂχ-ıÂÚ˘ ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛ˘ Î·È ÛÙËÓ ÂÓ·ÁÒÓÈ· ·›ÛıËÛË fiÙÈ ÛÙËÓ ÔÚ›· ÙÔ˘ ÚÔ˜ ÙËÓ ·ÁÎÔ-ÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË, Ô ÊÈÏÂÏ¢ıÂÚÈÛÌfi˜ ˆ˜ ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›·, ÌÂÙÂÍÂÏ›ÛÛÂÙ·È Û ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌfi. «ø˜ Ù¤-ÙÔÈÔ˜ ·Ó·fiÊ¢ÎÙ· ı· Û˘ÓıÏ›„ÂÈ, ı· ÂÓۈ̷ÙÒÛÂÈ ‹ ı· ÂÚÈıˆÚÈÔÔÈ‹ÛÂÈ ¿ÏÏ· Ô-ÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο ÚfiÙ˘·»14. ∫ÂÓÙÚÈÎfi˜ ¿ÍÔÓ·˜ ‹ ·Û›‰· ÚÔ˜ ÌÈ· Ù¤ÙÔÈ· ÚÔÔÙÈ΋ ›ӷÈË Âη›‰Â˘ÛË.

∂›Ó·È ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ fiÙÈ Ë ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈ΋ ÔÏÈÙÈ΋ Ô˘ ΢ÚÈ¿Ú¯ËÛ ·ÎfiÌË Î·È Û ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›Â˜Ô˘ Û˘ÁÎÚÔÙ‹ıËÎ·Ó ÂÍ ·Ú¯‹˜ ˆ˜ ÎÔÈӈӛ˜ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈΤ˜, fiˆ˜ .¯. ÔÈ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›Â˜ÙˆÓ ∏¶∞, Ù˘ ∞˘ÛÙÚ·Ï›·˜ Î.¿., ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÛÙȘ ¯ÒÚ˜ Ù˘ ¢. ∂˘ÚÒ˘ ·fi ÙÔÓ µ’ ¶·-

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË. 207

ÁÎfiÛÌÈÔ fiÏÂÌÔ Î·È ÌÂÙ¿15, ÌÔÚ› Û˘ÓÔÙÈο Ó· ÛÎÈ·ÁÚ·ÊËı› ̤ۈ ‰‡Ô ΢ڛˆ˜ ÚÔ-ÛÂÁÁ›ÛˆÓ-ÌÔÓ٤ψÓ: ÙÔ˘ ¯ˆÓ¢ÙËÚ›Ô˘ (melting pot) Î·È Ù˘ ·ÊÔÌÔ›ˆÛ˘16. ™ÙȘ ÂÎ-·È‰Â˘ÙÈΤ˜ Ú·ÎÙÈΤ˜ Ô˘ ‰È¤ÔÓÙ·È ·fi Ù· ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÌÔÓ٤Ϸ Ë ¤ÓÓÔÈ· ÙÔ˘ ÔÏÈÙÈ-ÛÌÔ‡ Ô˘ ÚÔ¿ÁÂÙ·È Â›Ó·È ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÙÈο ÂΛÓË ÙÔ˘ ΢ڛ·Ú¯Ô˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡17. ¶ÚfiÎÂÈ-Ù·È ÂÔ̤ӈ˜ ÁÈ· ÌÈ· ‰È·‰Èηۛ· Û˘ÌÌfiÚʈÛ˘ Î·È ˘ÔÙ·Á‹˜ ÙÔ˘ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎÔ‡ Û ¤Ó·ÌÔÓÔÁψÛÛÈÎfi-ÌÔÓÔÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ. ŸÔÈÔ˜ ·ÚÓÂ›Ù·È ‹ ·‰˘Ó·Ù› Ó· ·ÊÔÌÔÈ-ÒÛÂÈ ÙËÓ ·ÓÙÈηٿÛÙ·ÛË ÙˆÓ È‰È·›ÙÂÚˆÓ Î·È Í¯ˆÚÈÛÙÒÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙË-ÚÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ·fi ·˘Ù¿ Ù˘ ΢ڛ·Ú¯Ë˜ ÎÔ˘ÏÙÔ‡Ú·˜, ·Ú·Ì¤ÓÂÈ ¿ÌÂÛ· ‹ ¤ÌÌÂÛ· ··ÍȈ̤-ÓÔ˜, ÂÚÈıˆÚÈÔÔÈË̤ÓÔ˜ Î·È Ô˘ÛÈ·ÛÙÈο ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈο ÛÙÈÁÌ·ÙÈṲ̂ÓÔ˜, Ì fi,ÙÈ Û˘Ó¿-ÁÂÙ·È Ô ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›Ô˜ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÌfi˜18. ŒÙÛÈ fiÛÔ ÎÈ ·Ó ÔÈ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤Ó˜ ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈΤ˜‰È·‰Èηۛ˜ ˘‹ÚÍ·Ó ‹ ÂÌÊ·Ó›ÛÙËÎ·Ó ˆ˜ ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ Û ÔÚÈṲ̂Ó˜ ÈÛÙÔÚÈΤ˜ Û˘-ÁÎ˘Ú›Â˜, ‰ÂÓ Î·Ù¿ÊÂÚ·Ó Ó· ÂÍ·ÛÊ·Ï›ÛÔ˘Ó ÌÈ· ·ÚÌÔÓÈ΋ Î·È ÂÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌËÙÈ΋ Û˘ÌÌÂÙÔ-¯‹ ÙˆÓ ·ÙfiÌˆÓ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈ΋˜ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜, ÂıÓÈ΋˜, ‹ ÁψÛÛÈ΋˜ ηٷÁˆÁ‹˜ Û ¤Ó·ÎÔÈÓfi ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfi Û‡ÛÙËÌ·. ∞ÓÙÈı¤Ùˆ˜ Ô‰‹ÁËÛ·Ó Û ÂÚ·ÈÙ¤Úˆ ·ÔÌfiÓˆÛË Î·È ÂÚÈ-ıˆÚÈÔÔ›ËÛË ÙÔ˘ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎÔ‡, Û ·ÌÊÈÛ‚‹ÙËÛË, ·ÓÙÈÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ Î·È ·ÓÙÈ·ÏfiÙËÙ· ·¤-Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙÔÓ Î˘Ú›·Ú¯Ô ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌfi, ÛÙËÓ fi͢ÓÛË ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÎÚ›ÛÂˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊÔÚÒÓ, ÛÙËÓ‰ÈfiÁΈÛË ÙˆÓ ÚÔηٷϋ„ÂˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ÛÙÂÚÂÔÙ‡ˆÓ19. ∂›Ó·È ÂfiÌÂÓÔ ÏÔÈfiÓ ÙȘ ÙÂ-ÏÂ˘Ù·›Â˜ ‰‡Ô ‰ÂηÂٛ˜ Ó· ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ÌÈ· ¤ÓÙÔÓË ·ÌÊÈÛ‚‹ÙËÛË ÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈÌ¤ÓˆÓ ·fi-„ÂˆÓ Î·È Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· Ë ·Ó¿ÁÎË ·Ó·˙‹ÙËÛ˘ ÂÓfi˜ ıˆÚËÙÈÎÔ‡ Î·È Ú·ÎÙÈÎÔ‡ ÂηÈ-‰Â˘ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ˘ Û‡ÌʈÓÔ˘ Ì ÙȘ ·Ú¯¤˜ Î·È ÙËÓ ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊ›· Ô˘ ‰È¤ÂÈ ÙȘ ‰ÈÂıÓ›˜Û˘Ì‚¿ÛÂȘ Î·È ıÂÌÂÏÈÒÓÂÙ·È ÛÙ· ‰ËÌÔÎÚ·ÙÈο ȉÂÒ‰Ë Ù˘ ÂÏ¢ıÂÚ›·˜, Ù˘ ‰ÈηÈÔÛ‡ÓË˜Î·È Ù˘ ÈÛfiÙËÙ·˜.

∆Ô ˙ËÙÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ Â›Ó·È ÌÈ· Âη›‰Â˘ÛË Ô˘ ı· Â›Ó·È ÎÔÈÓ‹ ÁÈ· fiÏÔ˘˜ Î·È Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· ı··ÓÙ·ÔÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÔÏÏ·ÏfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÛÙËÓ ‰È·ÛÊ¿ÏÈÛË Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ-΋˜ ÂÙÂÚfiÙËÙ·˜20. ™ÎÔfi˜ Â›Ó·È ÂÎı¤ÙÔÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘˜ Ì·ıËÙ¤˜ ÛÙË ÁÓÒÛË ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ-΋ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfiÙËÙ· Ó· Ô‰ËÁÔ‡ÓÙ·È Û ÌÈ· ıÂÙÈ΋ ÛÙ¿ÛË ·¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎÔ‡˜, ÛÙËÓ Ì›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ Ú·ÙÛÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÎÊÚ¿ÛÂˆÓ Î·È Ú¿ÍÂˆÓ Î·È ÁÂÓÈο ÙˆÓÛÙÂÚÂÔÙ‡ˆÓ Î·È Ù·˘Ùfi¯ÚÔÓ· ÛÙËÓ Î·ÏÏȤÚÁÂÈ· Ù˘ Û˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ù˘ ·ÏÏËÏÂÁÁ‡Ë˜ ηÈÙÔ˘ Û‚·ÛÌÔ‡ ·Ó¿ÌÂÛ· ÛÙȘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈΤ˜ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜21. ∫·È ÛÙ· ‰‡Ô ·Ú·¿Óˆ (˙ËÙÔ‡ÌÂ-ÓÔ-ÛÎÔfi˜), ¤Ú¯ÂÙ·È Ó· ··ÓÙ‹ÛÂÈ ÙÔ ÌÔÓÙ¤ÏÔ Ù˘ ¢È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ∂η›‰Â˘Û˘. Œ¯Ô-ÓÙ·˜ Û·Ó ıÂÌÂÏÈÒ‰Ë ·Ú·‰Ô¯‹ Ù˘ ÙËÓ ÚËÙ‹ ·Ó·ÁÓÒÚÈÛË Ù˘ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È Ù˘ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ Û‡ÓıÂÛ˘ Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ (Î·È ÙÔ˘ Ì·ıËÙÈÎÔ‡ ÏËı˘ÛÌÔ‡), ·ÛΛ ÌÈ·ÚÈ˙È΋ ÎÚÈÙÈ΋ ÛÙÔ ˘¿Ú¯ÔÓ ∞Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ¶ÚfiÁÚ·ÌÌ·, ÚÔÙ›ÓÔÓÙ·˜ ÌÈ· ÛÂÈÚ¿ ·fi ÚÔ-Ûı‹Î˜ Î·È ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙÔ ÂÚȯfiÌÂÓÔ Ù˘ Û¯ÔÏÈ΋˜ ÁÓÒÛ˘, Ì ÛÎÔfi ÙËÓ ÂÍ¿ÏÂÈ„Ë ÙÔ˘ÂıÓÔÎÂÓÙÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ˆ˜ ·ÚÈÔ˘ ÙÚfiÔ˘ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·Û˘ ÙˆÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÒÓ, ıÚËÛÎÂÈÒÓ, Ê˘ÏÒÓ,ÂıÓÔًوÓ, Î.¿.22 ¶ÚÔ¿ÁÂÈ ÙËÓ ÔÈÎÔ‰fiÌËÛË Ù˘ ηٷÓfiËÛ˘ ·¤Ó·ÓÙÈ ÛÙË ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfi-ÙËÙ· Î·È ·Ô‚ϤÂÈ ÛÙË Ì›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÚÔηٷϋ„ÂˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÎÚ›ÛˆÓ, fiˆ˜ ηÈÛÙËÓ ÂÍ¿ÏÂÈ„Ë ÙˆÓ ÂÓÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÎÚÔ‡ÛˆÓ23. ÀÈÔıÂÙ› ÌÈ· Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤ÓË Î·-Ù‡ı˘ÓÛË ÛÙËÓ ·È‰·ÁˆÁÈ΋ Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ Ì ÛÎÔfi ÙËÓ ··ÏÔÈÊ‹ Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ‚¿Û˘

208 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ˆ˜ ·ÈÙ›·˜ ·ÓÈÛfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙˆÓ Â˘Î·ÈÚÈÒÓ24. ∞Ó Î·È Û·Ó fiÚÔ˜ Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛËηχÙÂÈ ¤Ó· ¢ڇ Ê¿ÛÌ· ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÈÏÔÁÒÓ Î·È ·È‰·ÁˆÁÈÎÒÓ Ú·ÎÙÈÎÒÓ, fi¯È··Ú·›ÙËÙ· ÔÌÔÈÔÁÂÓÒÓ, fiϘ ·Ô‚Ï¤Ô˘Ó Û ¤Ó· ÎÔÈÓfi ÛÙfi¯Ô. ™ÙÔ Ó· ‚ÔËı‹ÛÔ˘Ó ÙÔÓÌ·ıËÙ‹ Ó· ηٷÓÔ‹ÛÂÈ ÙËÓ Ê‡ÛË Î·È ÙËÓ ¤ÓÓÔÈ· ÙÔ˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡ ˘fi ÙÔ Ú›ÛÌ· ÙˆÓ Ô-ÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎÒÓ ·ÏÏËÏÂȉڿÛÂˆÓ Î·È ··ÏÏ·Á̤ÓÔ ·fi οı ÂıÓÔÎÂÓÙÚÈ΋ ÏÔÁÈ΋, ÒÛÙ ӷÌÔÚ¤ÛÂÈ Ó· ·›ÍÂÈ ¤Ó· ÈÛ¯˘Úfi ÚfiÏÔ ÛÙËÓ ÚÔÒıËÛË ÙÔ˘ «ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡ Ù˘ ÂÈÚ‹Ó˘», Û˘-ÓÂÈÛʤÚÔÓÙ·˜ ÛÙÔÓ ¤ÏÂÁ¯Ô Î·È ÙËÓ Ì›ˆÛË Ù˘ ‚›·˜, ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÎÚ›ÛÂˆÓ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÙˆÓ Û˘-ÁÎÚÔ‡ÛÂˆÓ (ıÚËÛ΢ÙÈÎÒÓ, Ê˘ÏÂÙÈÎÒÓ, Î.¿.), Ô˘ Û˘Ì‚·›ÓÔ˘Ó ÛÙȘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓ˜ ÔÏ˘Ô-ÏÈÙÈÛÌÈΤ˜ ÎÔÈӈӛ˜25. ÕÚ· ÙÔ ˙ËÙÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ Â›Ó·È Ò˜ Ô «¿ÏÏÔ˜», Ô ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfi˜ ı· ÌÔ-Ú¤ÛÂÈ Ó· ‰È·ÙËÚ‹ÛÂÈ ÙËÓ Ù·˘ÙfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘, ÂÓÒ ·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ· Ó· Û˘ÌÌÂÙ¿Û¯ÂÈ ·ÚÌÔÓÈο ηÈÂÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌËÙÈο Û ¤Ó· ÎÔÈÓfi ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfi Û‡ÛÙËÌ·.

ªÈ· ÛÂÈÚ¿ ·fi ηÈÓÔÙƠ̂˜, ‚·ÛÈṲ̂Ó˜ ÛÙËÓ ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊ›· Ù˘ ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ÂÎ-·›‰Â˘Û˘ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÈÛ¯ˆÚ‹ÛÔ˘Ó Û fiÏÔ ÙÔ Ê¿ÛÌ· ÙÔ˘ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·-ÙÔ˜. π‰È·›ÙÂÚ· Ù· Ì·ı‹Ì·Ù· ÎÔÚÌÔ‡ ÙˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ Î·È Ù˘ ÁÏÒÛÛ·˜, Ì ‚¿-ÛË ÙÔ ÁÂÁÔÓfi˜ fiÙÈ Ë ‰È‰·Ûηϛ· ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÈÎÂÓÙÚÒÓÂÙ·È ÛÙËÓ Î·ÏÏȤÚÁÂÈ· Î·È ÙËÓ ·Ó··-Ú·ÁˆÁ‹ Ù˘ ÂıÓÈ΋˜ Ù·˘ÙfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈ΋˜ ÔÌÔÈÔÁ¤ÓÂÈ·˜ ÙÔ˘ ¤ıÓÔ˘˜, ı· ÌÔ-ÚÔ‡Û·Ó Ó· ÂÌÏÔ˘ÙÈÛÙÔ‡Ó Ì ÂÚȯfiÌÂÓÔ Ô˘ Ó· ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È Û fiϘ ÙȘ ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂÈ˜Î·È ÂÎÊ¿ÓÛÂȘ Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚ›˙ÂÈ Î¿ı ۇÁ¯ÚÔÓËÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·26. ∏ ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ ÚÔÁÚ·ÌÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ÌÔÚ› Ó· ÂÈÙ¢¯ı›Ì ÙÔÓ ÂÌÏÔ˘ÙÈÛÌfi ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÙËÓ ÙÚÔÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ Û¯ÔÏÈÎÒÓ ÂÁ¯ÂÈÚȉ›ˆÓ, Ì ÎÂÓÙÚÈ-Îfi ¿ÍÔÓ· ÙËÓ ıÂÒÚËÛË ÙˆÓ ÌÔÚʈÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÚȯÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ ·fi ÔÏϤ˜ ÔÙÈΤ˜ ÁˆÓ›Â˜,ÒÛÙ ӷ ʈٷÁˆÁÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÛÙÔȯ›· ·fi Ù· ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο Û˘ÛÙ‹Ì·Ù· ÙˆÓ ÌÂÈÔÓÔًوÓ,·ÏÏ¿ Î·È Ó· ηٷ‰Â›¯ÓÂÙ·È Ë ‰È·ÏÔ΋ Î·È Ë ·ÏÏËÏÔ›‰Ú·ÛË ÙˆÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÒÓ. ªÂ ÙËÓÂÍ¿ÏÂÈ„Ë ÙÔ˘ ÂıÓÔÎÂÓÙÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ÛÙÔ ·Ú·‰ÔÛÈ·Îfi ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ÚfiÁÚ·ÌÌ· ÔÈÎÔ‰ÔÌÂ›Ù·È ËηٷÓfiËÛË ·Ó¿ÌÂÛ· ÛÙȘ ‰È¿ÊÔÚ˜ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈΤ˜ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜, ÙÔÓ›˙ÂÙ·È Ë ÈÛÙÔÚÈ΋ Û˘ÓÂÈ-ÛÊÔÚ¿ Ù˘ ηıÂÌ›·˜ ÛÙ· fiÚÈ· Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ÔÈÎÈÏÔÌÔÚÊ›·˜ ÙÔ˘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ˘ Îfi-ÛÌÔ˘ Î·È ··ÍÈÒÓÔÓÙ·È ıˆÚËÙÈο ÔÈ Ù˘¯fiÓ ÂÓÙ¿ÛÂȘ Î·È Û˘ÁÎÚÔ‡ÛÂȘ ÛÙÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfiÁ›ÁÓÂÛı·È27. ∞˘Ù¤˜ ÔÈ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙÔ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ÚfiÁÚ·ÌÌ· ı· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ıÂÙÈΤ˜ Û˘Ó¤ÂȘÙfiÛÔ ÛÙÔÓ ÙÚfiÔ Û‡ÏÏ˄˘ Ù˘ ÁÓÒÛ˘ fiÛÔ Î·È ÛÙËÓ ·È‰·ÁˆÁÈ΋ Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ Î·È ·ÍÈÔ-ÏfiÁËÛË. ∏ ÁÓÒÛË ‰ÂÓ ÂÓÓÔÂ›Ù·È ˆ˜ ¤Ó· ·ÓÙÈÎÂÈÌÂÓÈÎfi ‰Â‰Ô̤ÓÔ ·ÏÏ¿ ·ÓÙÈÌÂÙˆ›˙ÂٷȈ˜ ÌÈ· ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ Î·È ÈÛÙÔÚÈ΋ ηٷÛ΢‹, ‰ËÏ·‰‹ ¯ˆÚÔ¯ÚÔÓÈο ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈṲ̂ÓË, Ô˘·ÓÙ·Ó·ÎÏ¿ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ· Û˘ÌʤÚÔÓÙ· Î·È ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ı› Û¯¤ÛÂȘ ÂÍÔ˘Û›·˜, ΢ÚÈ·Ú¯›·˜ Î·È˘ÔÙ·Á‹˜28. ªÂ ‚¿ÛË ÙËÓ ·Ú·¿Óˆ ÏÔÁÈ΋ ı· ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ÛÔ‚·Ú¤˜ ÙÚÔÔÔÈ‹ÛÂȘ ÛÙËÓ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË ÙˆÓ ÎÂÈÌ¤ÓˆÓ (ÙÔ˘ ÏfiÁÔ˘ Î·È Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜) ÙˆÓ Ì·ıËÙÒÓ ·ÊÔ‡ οı ÛË-Ì·ÙÔ‰fiÙËÛË ÙÔ˘ ÎfiÛÌÔ˘ Â›Ó·È ıÂÌÈÙ‹ Î·È ÂÎ ÚÔÔÈÌ›Ô˘ ÌË ·ÔÚÚÈÙ¤·. ∏ fiÔÈ· ··›-ÙËÛË ‰ÂÓ ı· Á›ÓÂÙ·È Ì ‚¿ÛË ÙˆÓ Î˘Ú›·Ú¯Ô ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌfi ·ÏÏ¿ Ì ÎÚÈÙ‹ÚÈ· ÙËÓ ·ÈÙÈÔÏfiÁË-ÛË, ÙÂÎÌËÚ›ˆÛË Î·È ıÂÌÂÏ›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎÒÓ ÔÚıÔÏÔÁÈÎÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊfiÚˆÓÓÔËÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ Û˘ÛÙËÌ¿ÙˆÓ. Ÿˆ˜ ¤¯ÂÈ ÛËÌÂȈı›, ÌÈ· Ù¤ÙÔÈ· ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛË ı· ÂÈÎÂÓÙÚˆ-ÓfiÙ·Ó ÛÙË Û˘ÁÎÚfiÙËÛË ‰ÂÍÈÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì ÙËÓ ·Ó·˙‹ÙËÛË Î·È Û˘ÁÎÚÈÙÈ΋

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË. 209

·Ó¿Ï˘ÛË ‰Â‰ÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Î·È ÙÂÎÌËÚ›ˆÓ, Ì ÌÂıfi‰Ô˘˜ Û‡ÌʈÓ˜ Ôχ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚÔ Ì ÙËÓÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ ·Ú¿ Ì ÙËÓ ÚÔۋψÛË ÛÙË Ì›· ∞Ï‹ıÂÈ·29. ∂ÈÛÙ‹ÌË Î·È È‰Â-ÔÏÔÁ›· ¿ÏψÛÙ ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó ‰‡Ô ¤ÓÓÔȘ Ô˘ Û˘ÁÎÚÔ‡ÛÙËÎ·Ó Î·È Û˘ÁÎÚÔ‡ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙ·Ï·›ÛÈ· Ù˘ ÂÚÌËÓ›·˜ ‹ Ù˘ ·Ó¿Ï˘Û˘ ÙÔ˘ ÈÛÙÔÚÈÎÔ‡ Á›ÁÓÂÛı·È. °È’ ·˘Ùfi Î·È ÔÈ ··È-Ù‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ Âη›‰Â˘Û˘ ··ÈÙÔ‡Ó ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈÎÔ‡˜ Ô˘ ·›ÚÓÔ˘Ó ı¤ÛËÎ·È ‰ÚÔ˘Ó ‰˘Ó·ÌÈο ̤۷ ÛÙËÓ ·È‰·ÁˆÁÈ΋ ÂÈÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·, ˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ·˘ÙÔ‡˜ÙÔ˘˜ Û ÌÈ· ‰È·Ú΋ ·ÌÊÈÛ‚‹ÙËÛË ÙˆÓ È‰ÂÔÏÔÁÈÎÒÓ ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÈÏÔÁÒÓ, ÙˆÓ ‚‚·ÈÔًوÓÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ÙˆÓ ÛÙÂÚÂÔÙ‡ˆÓ ÙˆÓ ÔÔ›ˆÓ Â›Ó·È ÊÔÚ›˜30. ™Â ·˘Ùfi ‚‚·›ˆ˜ ı· ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·Úˆ-Áfi ÙÔ˘˜ ÙÔ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ Û¯ÔÏÈÎfi ÂÁ¯ÂÈÚ›‰ÈÔ Ô˘ ¿ÏψÛÙ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÚÔ˚fiÓ Î·È ·Ú¿ÁÔÓÙ·ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ ‰È·‰ÈηÛÈÒÓ. °ÂÓÈο ÙÔ Û¯ÔÏÈÎfi ‚È‚Ï›Ô ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔÔÈ›, ‰È·ÌÔÚÊÒÓÔÓÙ·˜ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ Î·È Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔÚ¤˜, ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›Â˜ Î·È ·ÓÙÈÏ‹„ÂȘ31. ∂ȉȈÎfiÌÂÓË ÏÔÈfiÓ Â›Ó·È Ë·Ó·‰È¿ÚıÚˆÛË ÙˆÓ Û¯ÔÏÈÎÒÓ ÂÁ¯ÂÈÚȉ›ˆÓ fiˆ˜ Î·È ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚ· Ù˘ ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈ΋˜ ÊÈ-ÏÔÛÔÊ›·˜ Î·È Ú·ÎÙÈ΋˜, Ô˘ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ‚·Û›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ·Ú¯‹ Ù˘ ÈÛÔÙÈÌ›·˜ ÙˆÓÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÒÓ Î·È ÛÙËÓ ÏÔÁÈ΋ fiÙÈ, Ë ÔÏÈÙÈ΋ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔÔ›ËÛË ÙˆÓ Ì·ıËÙÒÓ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó·Á›ÓÂÙ·È Û ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¿ Ì ÙËÓ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÙÔ˘˜ ÔÓÙfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÙÔÓ ·Ú¿ÏÏËÏÔ Û‚·ÛÌfi Ù˘‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÏÏÔ˘32. ∂ÈϤÔÓ ‰Â, ··ÈÙÂ›Ù·È Î·È Ô ÙÔÓÈÛÌfi˜ Ù˘ ÛËÌ·Û›·˜Ù˘ ‡·Ú͢ fiÏˆÓ ÙˆÓ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈÎÔًوÓ, fiˆ˜ Ù˘ ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ Î·È Ù˘ ÙÂÏ¢-Ù·›·˜ „ËÊ›‰·˜ Û ¤Ó· ·ÁÎfiÛÌÈÔ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈÎfi „ËÊȉˆÙfi. ∏ ÔÔÈ·‰‹ÔÙ ·ÒÏÂÈ· ο-ÔÈ·˜ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈ΋˜ ÔÓÙfiÙËÙ·˜ Ô‰ËÁ› ÌÔÈÚ·›· ÛÙËÓ ·ÒÏÂÈ· ̤ÚÔ˘˜ Ù˘ ·ÁÎfiÛÌÈ·˜ÔÏÈÙÈÛÙÈ΋˜ ÎÏËÚÔÓÔÌÈ¿˜. ∞˘Ùfi ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È ÂÈı˘ÌËÙfi ÂÎÙfi˜ ‚¤‚·È· Î·È ·Ó ·ÔÙÂÏ›ÂÈÏÔÁ‹ Ù˘ ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ÎÔÈÓfiÙËÙ·˜, ˆ˜ ·fiÚÚÔÈ· ÌÈ·˜ ÈÛÙÔÚÈ΋˜ ÂÍÂÏÈ-ÎÙÈ΋˜ ‰È·‰Èηۛ·˜. ªÂ ‚¿ÛË fiÏ· Ù· ·Ú·¿Óˆ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·ÓÙ·ÔÎÚÈıԇ̠ÛÙȘ··ÈÙ‹ÛÂȘ Ù˘ Ó¤·˜ ·ÁÎfiÛÌÈ·˜ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ÚÔ·Û›˙ÔÓÙ·˜·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ· ÙÔ ÔÏ˘Âȉ¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú· Ù˘ ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È ÙÔ ‰Èη›ˆÌ· Ù˘ ÈÛfiÙÈÌ˘ ‡·Ú-͢ ÙÔ˘ «¿ÏÏÔ˘» ·Ó¿ÌÂÛ¿ Ì·˜.

¢ÂÓ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ͯӿÌ fï˜ fiÙÈ, η̛· ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈ΋ ηÈÓÔÙÔÌ›·, fiˆ˜ Î·È Ë ‰È·-ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË, ‰ÂÓ ÌÔÚ› Ó· Ô‰ËÁ‹ÛÂÈ Û ıÂÙÈο ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù· ·Ó ‰ÂÓ Û˘-Óԉ‡ÂÙ·È Ì ÚÈ˙ÔÛ·ÛÙÈΤ˜ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ÛÙÔ Â˘Ú‡ÙÂÚÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi ÂÚÈ‚¿ÏÏÔÓ33. ÕÏψÛÙÂÁÂÓÈο Ô ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi˜ ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÌfi˜ Û˘Ó‰¤ÂÙ·È ÛÙÂÓ¿ Ì ÙÔ ÁÂÓÈÎfiÙÂÚÔ ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈÎfi, ÎÔÈ-ÓˆÓÈÎfi Î·È ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfi Û‡ÛÙËÌ·. ∞Ó ‰Â¯ıԇ̠ˆÛÙfiÛÔ ÙËÓ ÈÛfiÚÚÔË Û˘ÌÌÂÙÔ¯‹ ÙÔ˘˘ÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Î·È ÙˆÓ ÎÚ·ÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ ÛÙÔ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi Á›ÁÓÂÛı·È, ÙfiÙ ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Á›ÓÔ˘Ó·ÌÔÈ‚·›· ‚‹Ì·Ù· ÚÔfi‰Ô˘, ÒÛÙÂ Ô ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi˜ ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÌfi˜ Ó· ‰ÒÛÂÈ ÙË ı¤ÛË ÙÔ˘ ÛÂÌÈ· fiÓÙˆ˜ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·34. ÕÏψÛÙ fiˆ˜ ‰È·Ù›ÓÂÙ·È Ë Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË È‰ÂÔ-ÏÔÁ›·, Ô ÌfiÓÔ˜ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ˜ ÁÈ· ÙË ‰È·ÌfiÚʈÛË Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋˜ Ú·ÁÌ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜ ›ӷÈÔ ¿ÓıÚˆÔ˜ Î·È ÁÈ· Ó· ·ÏÏ¿ÍÂÈ Ë ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›· ÚÔ˜ ÙȘ ÂÈÙ·Á¤˜ Ù˘ ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›·˜, Ú¤ÂÈÓ· ·ÏÏ¿ÍÂÈ Ô ÙÚfiÔ˜ Ì ÙÔÓ ÔÔ›Ô ÛΤÙÔÓÙ·È Ù· ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈο ˘ÔΛÌÂÓ· Ô˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÙËÓÙ‡¯Ë Ù˘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜ ÛÙ· ¯¤ÚÈ· ÙÔ˘˜35. ∞˘Ùfi ‰ÂÓ ·Ó·ÈÚ› ÙËÓ Â˘ı‡ÓË ÙˆÓ ÎÚ·ÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ·ÏÏ¿ ı¤ÙÂÈ ÙÔ ÂÚÒÙËÌ· ÙÔ˘ ¿ÏÏÔ˘ Û ÌÈ· ‰ÈÙÙ‹, ËıÈ΋ Î·È ÔÏÈÙÈ΋ ˘Ê‹ Ô˘ ‰‡ÛÎÔÏ·ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· Ù·˘ÙÈÛÙÔ‡Ó. Ÿˆ˜ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÂÓÙÔ›ÛÂÈ Ô S. Kierkergaard Î·È Ô M. Weber: Ìfi-ÓÔ Ë ¿ÏÏË ËıÈ΋, Ë ËıÈ΋ Ù˘ ·Á¿Ë˜ ¤Ú·Ó ÙÔ˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÎÔ‡, ÌÔÚ› Ó· ‰ڷÈÒÛÂÈ Î·È ÌÈ·

210 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ËıÈ΋ ÙÔ˘ ÔÏ›ÙË36. ∫·È fiˆ˜ οı ËıÈ΋, ‰È‰¿ÛÎÂÙ·È ‹ ¤ÛÙˆ ÂÓÙÔ›˙ÂÙ·È ‰È· Ù˘ ÂÎ-·›‰Â˘Û˘. ∞˘Ù‹ Ë ËıÈ΋ Ì¿ÏÈÛÙ· ›Ûˆ˜ Ó· Â›Ó·È Î·È Ë ÌfiÓË ÈηӋ ÁÈ· Ó· ÂÚÈÊÚÔ˘Ú‹-ÛÂÈ ÙË ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÙËÙ·, Ù· ¿ÙÔÌ· Ù˘ ÔÈ·Û‰‹ÔÙ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ȉȷÈÙÂÚfiÙËÙ·˜, ÂÊfiÛÔÓ ÙÔÂÈı˘ÌÔ‡Ó, Ó· ‰È·ÙËÚÔ‡Ó ÙËÓ Ù·˘ÙfiÙËÙ¿ ÙÔ˘˜ Û˘ÌÌÂÙ¤¯ÔÓÙ·˜ ·Ú¿ÏÏËÏ·, ÂÍ›ÛÔ˘ ·Ú-ÌÔÓÈο Î·È ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁÈο, Û ¤Ó· ÎÔÈÓfi ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfi Û‡ÛÙËÌ·. ∫·È ÙÔ‡ÙÔ Â›Ó·È ÙÔ ˙Ë-ÙÔ‡ÌÂÓÔ Û ÌÈ· Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÎÔÈÓˆÓ›·.

ÀÔÛËÌÂÈÒÛÂȘ

1. E. Durkheim, Education and Sociology, Free Press, New York, 1956, p. 71.

2. fi.., Û. 70.

3. D. Blackledge-B. Hunt, ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÔÏÔÁ›· Ù˘ ∂η›‰Â˘Û˘, ŒÎÊÚ·ÛË, ∞ı‹Ó· 1995,Û. 28.

4. ¢. °. ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜, ™¯¤ÛÂȘ ÎÚ¿ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ÂÎÎÏËÛ›·˜: ªÈ· ÎÚÈÙÈ΋ ÂÈÛÎfiËÛË ·fi ÙÔµ˘˙¿ÓÙÈÔ ¤ˆ˜ Û‹ÌÂÚ·, µ˘˙·ÓÙÈÓfi˜ ¢fiÌÔ˜, ÙÔÌ. 12Ô˜, ∏Úfi‰ÔÙÔ˜, 2001, Û. 87.

5. fi.., Û. 87-8.

6. ÁÈ· ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ·, fiˆ˜ Î·È ÙËÓ Â›‰Ú·ÛË ÙˆÓ Ó¤ˆÓ Û˘ÓıËÎÒÓ Â¿Óˆ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ıÂ-ÛÌÔ‡˜ ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: ¢. °. ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜, ∏ ıÚËÛΛ· ˘fi ÙÔ Êˆ˜ ÙˆÓ Ó¤ˆÓ Û˘ÓıËÎÒÓ, ¡¤·∂ÛÙ›·, Ù¯. 1736, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001, ÛÛ. 176-184.

7. Û ·˘Ùfi ÙÔ ÛÙ¿‰ÈÔ Ù˘ ·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛ˘, ÂÔ̤ӈ˜, Û˘ÌÌÂÙ¤¯Ô˘Ó fiÏÔÈ ·ÓÂÍ¿ÚÙË-Ù· ÙÔ˘ ‡ÊÔ˘˜ ‹ ÙÔ˘ ›‰Ô˘˜ Ù˘ ‰ËÌÔÎÚ·Ù›·˜ Ô˘ ΢‚ÂÚÓ¿, ÂÎÙfi˜ Î·È ·Ó ¤¯Ô˘Ó ·Ô-‚ÏËı› ·fi ÙËÓ ‰ÈÂıÓ‹ ÎÔÈÓfiÙËÙ· ÏfiÁˆ ·Ó¿ÚÌÔÛÙ˘ Û˘ÌÂÚÈÊÔÚ¿˜. µÏ¤Â ∞ÊÁ·-ÓÈÛÙ¿Ó, πÚ¿Î, °ÈÔ˘ÁÎÔÛÏ·‚›· Î.¿. ÷ڷÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο Ô ∏. ∫·ÛÙ·Ó¿˜ (¶·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔ-Ô›ËÛË Ù˘ ‰ÈηÈÔÛ‡Ó˘ Î·È ·ÓıÚÒÈÓ· ‰ÈηÈÒÌ·Ù·, ∂ÈÛÙ‹ÌË Î·È ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·, Ù¯.2-3 (1999), Û. 236-237), ı¤ÙÂÈ ÙÔ ÂÚÒÙËÌ·: «µÚÈÛÎfiÌ·ÛÙ ¿Ú·Á ÌÚÔÛÙ¿ Û ÌÈ· Ó¤·Ù¿ÍË Ú·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ, fiÔ˘ Ë ‰ÈÂıÓ‹˜ ÎÔÈÓfiÙËÙ· ÌÂÙ·ÙÚ¤ÂÙ·È Û ÎÔÈÓfiÙËÙ· ‰Èη›Ô˘,‰ÔÌË̤ÓË ÛÙË ‚¿ÛË Î·ıÔÏÈο ·Ó·ÁÓˆÚÈÛÌ¤ÓˆÓ ·ÍÈÒÓ, ÙÔ Û‚·ÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ÔÔ›ˆÓ ÂÈ-ÙËÚ› ÌÈ· ·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔÈË̤ÓË ‰ÈηÈÔÛ‡ÓË, ‹ Ì‹ˆ˜ Ì·›ÓÔ˘Ì Û ηıÂÛÙÒ˜ ·-ÁÎfiÛÌÈ·˜ ·ÓÔÌ›·˜ fiÔ˘ ·˘ÙfiÎÏËÙÔÈ ˘ÂÚ·ÛÈÛÙ¤˜ ÙÔ˘ ‰Èη›Ô˘ ÂÈ‚¿ÏÏÔ˘Ó, ÂÈÏÂ-ÎÙÈο Î·È Î·Ù¿ ‚Ô‡ÏËÛË, ÙÔ ÓfiÌÔ ÙÔ˘ ÈÛ¯˘ÚÔÙ¤ÚÔ˘» / ªÈ· ÂÚÈÁÚ·Ê‹ Ù˘ Ó¤·˜ ‰ÈÂ-ıÓÔ‡˜ Ù¿Í˘ Ú·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÓ ‚Ï. ÛÙÔ µ' ̤ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ 3Ô˘ ÎÂÊ·Ï·›Ô˘ ÙÔ˘ ‚È‚Ï›Ô˘: µ. °. ¶·-Ó¿ÁÔ˘, ∫. ™. ∆ÛÔ‡ÓÙ·, ¢È·ÎÚ·ÙÈ΋ Î·È ÀÂÚÂıÓÈ΋ ™˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·. ∆Ô ÔÈÎÔ˘ÌÂÓÈÎfiÎ·È ÙÔ Â˘Úˆ·˚Îfi Ï·›ÛÈÔ, ¶··˙‹Û˘, ∞ı‹Ó· 2002.

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË. 211

8. A. Giddens, ¶¤Ú·Ó Ù˘ ·ÚÈÛÙÂÚ¿˜ Î·È Ù˘ ‰ÂÍÈ¿˜. ∆Ô Ì¤ÏÏÔÓ Ù˘ ÚÈ˙ÔÛ·ÛÙÈ΋˜ Ô-ÏÈÙÈ΋˜, ¶fiÏȘ, ∞ı‹Ó· 1999, Û. 14-19 / ÙÔ˘ ȉ›Ô˘, √ ÙÚ›ÙÔ˜ ‰ÚfiÌÔ˜. ∏ ·Ó·Ó¤ˆÛË Ù˘ÛÔÛȷωËÌÔÎÚ·Ù›·˜, ¶fiÏȘ, ∞ı‹Ó· 1998, Û. 47-54.

9. ÁÈ· ÙȘ ‰È¿ÊÔÚ˜ ÛË̷ۛ˜ Ì ÙȘ Ôԛ˜ Â›Ó·È ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ Ó· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È Ô fiÚÔ˜ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: J. Horton (ÂÈÌ.), Liberalism Multiculturalism andToleration, Macmillan, London 1993.

10. •. ¶··ÚÚËÁfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜, ∏ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· ˆ˜ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ Úfi‚ÏËÌ·, ∂ÈÛÙ‹ÌËÎ·È ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·, Ù¯. 2-3, ™¿ÎÎÔ˘Ï·˜, 1999, Û. 2.

11. C. Taylor, "The Politics of Recognition", ÛÙÔ A. Gutmann (ÂÈÌ.), Multiculturalism,Princeton, University Press, 1994, p. 25-74 Âȉ. 60

12. •. ¶··ÚÚËÁfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜, fi.., Û. 20

13. ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: B. Deacon (Î.¿.), Global Social Policy, Sage, London 1997 / P. Van Parijs,Freedom for All: What (if anything) Can Justify Capitalism? Oxford, Clarendon Press,1995 / £. ™·ÎÂÏÏ·ÚfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜, ÀÂÚÂıÓÈΤ˜ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ ÔÏÈÙÈΤ˜ ÙËÓ ÂÔ¯‹ Ù˘ ·-ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛ˘, ∫ÚÈÙÈ΋, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001, Û.108-111.

14. fi.., Û. 21.

15. Î·È Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙ›˙ÂÙ·È ¿ÌÂÛ· Ì ÙȘ Ì·˙ÈΤ˜ ÏËı˘ÛÌȷΤ˜ ÌÂÙ·ÎÈÓ‹ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹-ÚÈÛ·Ó ÂΛÓË ÙËÓ ÂÚ›Ô‰Ô.

16. ÁÈ· ÌÈ· ÁÂÓÈ΋ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË ‚Ï.: °. ª¿ÚÎÔ˘. (1996) ∏ ¶ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Ù˘∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜. ∏ ¢È·‰Èηۛ· ¢ÈÂıÓÔÔ›ËÛ˘ Î·È Ë ∞Ó·ÁηÈfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ ¢È·-ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ∂η›‰Â˘Û˘.

17. π. ™ÔÏÔÌÒÓ, ¢. ª·ÎÚ˘ÓÈÒÙË, ¶ÚfiÙ˘· Î·È "ÃÚ‹ÛÂȘ" ÙÔ˘ ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡ ÛÙËÓ ∂η›-‰Â˘ÛË: ¶ÚÔ˜ ÌÈ· ¶·È‰·ÁˆÁÈ΋ Ù˘ ¢È·ÊÔÚ¿˜;, ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›· ÙˆÓ 2/3-¢È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ˘ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·ÙÔ˜, ¶¿ÓÙÂÈÔ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001, Û. 598.

18. ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: ¢. °. ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜, ∆Ô ÛÙ›ÁÌ· Î·È Ô ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi˜ ÛÙÈÁÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ ·fi ÙËÓ ·Ú-¯·ÈfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÙÔ µ˘˙¿ÓÙÈÔ ¤ˆ˜ Û‹ÌÂÚ·, ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ ∂ÚÁ·Û›· – ∂ÈıÂÒÚËÛË ∫ÔÈÓˆ-ÓÈÎÒÓ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÒÓ, Ù¯. 59, ∞ı‹Ó· 2000, ÛÛ. 197-213.

19. π. ™ÔÏÔÌÒÓ, ¢. ª·ÎÚ˘ÓÈÒÙË, fi.. / ÂÈϤÔÓ ·ÓÙ› ÌÈ·˜ ÂÍ·ÙÔÌÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˘ ·ÊÔÌÔȈ-ÙÈ΋˜ ÂÓۈ̿وÛ˘ Û ¤Ó· ÂÓÈ·›Ô fiÏÔÓ, ÂÓÈÛ¯‡ıËÎÂ Ë ·›ÛıËÛË Î·È Ë ›ÛÙË ÙÔ˘ ·Ó‹-ÎÂÈÓ Û ȉȷ›ÙÂÚ˜ ÔÌ¿‰Â˜ Ì ‚¿ÛË ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈο ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈο ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈÛÙÈο, ‚Ï.ÂÓ‰.: B. Bernstein, Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity – Theory, Research,Critique, Taylor and Francis, 1996, p.11

20. ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: ª. ¢·Ì·Ó¿Î˘, ∏ ∂η›‰Â˘ÛË ÙˆÓ ¶·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Î·È ∞ÏÏÔ‰·ÒÓª·ıËÙÒÓ ÛÙËÓ ∂ÏÏ¿‰·. ¢È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ¶ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛË, Gutenberg, ∞ı‹Ó· 1997.

21. M. Webb, Multicultural Education in Elementary and Secondary Schools, ERICDigest Number 67, 1990.

212 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

22. ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: A. ºÚ·ÁÎÔ˘‰¿ÎË, £. ¢Ú·ÁÒÓ· (ÂÈÌ.), "∆È ÂÈÓ’ Ë ¶·ÙÚ›‰· Ì·˜;": ∂ıÓÔ-ÎÂÓÙÚÈÛÌfi˜ ÛÙËÓ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË, ∞ÏÂÍ¿Ó‰ÚÂÈ·, 1997 / D. Coulby & Cr. Jones, Post-modernity and European Education Systems, Trentham Books, 1995

23. P. Batelaan, L. van Dijk, C. van Hoof, M. Mastelaar and van der Rol Ruud, " SocialDiversity and Discrimination in the Common Curriculum – A Reflection by the Or-ganizing Committee", European Journal of Intercultural Studies vol. 4, no 1, 1993.

24. Th. van Boven, "The European context for Intercultural Education", European Jour-nal of Intercultural Studies, vol. 4, no 1, 1993, p. 10-12.

25. L. Dubbeldam, "Development, culture and education", ™ÙÔ L. Dubbleldam Î.¿.(ÂÈÌ.), International Yearbook of Education, Vol. XLIV, Paris: UNESCO, 1994.

26. ¡. ∫ˆÛÙԇϷ-ª·ÎÚ¿ÎË, «∞ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË Ù˘ ÂÓۈ̿وÛ˘ Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ‰È·ÊÔ-ÚÂÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ÛÙ· ÂÁ¯ÂÈÚ›‰È· ÙˆÓ ÁψÛÛÈÎÒÓ Ì·ıËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ‰ËÌÔÙÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ÙÔ˘ Á˘ÌÓ·Û›Ô˘», ÛÙÔ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›· ÙˆÓ 2/3 – ¢È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘÙÔ˘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ˘ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·ÙÔ˜, ¶¿ÓÙÂÈÔ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001, Û.613.

27. Ú‚Ï.: ª. ¢·Ì·Ó¿Î˘, fi.., 1997 Î·È M. Webb, fi.., 1990.

28. N. Carrim, "Working With and Through Difference in Antiracist Pedagogies" Inter-national Studies in Sociology of Education, vol. 5, no 1,1995, p. 29.

29. π. ™ÔÏÔÌÒÓ, ¢. ª·ÎÚ˘ÓÈÒÙË, fi.., Û. 608.

30. D. Epstein, Changing Classroom Cultures – Antiracism, Politics and Schools, Tren-tham Books, 1993, p. 144-5.

31. ‚Ï. ÂÓ‰.: °. ºÏÔ˘Ú‹˜, ∞Ó·ÓÙÈÛÙÔȯ›· ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈÎÒÓ ÛÎÔÒÓ, ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔ-ÁÚ¿ÌÌ·ÙÔ˜ Î·È ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈÎÒÓ Ì¤ÛˆÓ: ªÂÚÈΤ˜ fi„ÂȘ Ù˘ ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈ΋˜ ·ÓÙÈÊ·ÙÈ-ÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ÛÙÔ ∞. ∫·˙·Ì›·˜ & ª. ∫·ÛÛˆÙ¿Î˘ (ÂÈÌ.), ∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋ ∂η›‰Â˘ÛË: ¶ÚÔ-ÔÙÈΤ˜ ∞Ó·Û˘ÁÎÚfiÙËÛ˘ Î·È ∂ÎÛ˘Á¯ÚÔÓÈÛÌÔ‡, ™Â›ÚÈÔ˜, ∞ı‹Ó·, 1995.

32. ... fiÙ·Ó ‰ÂÓ Û˘ÁÎÚÔ‡ÂÙ·È Ì ÙȘ ·Ó·ÓıÚÒÈÓ˜ ·Í›Â˜: ¡. ∫ˆÛÙԇϷ-ª·ÎÚ¿ÎË,fi.., Û. 614 fiÔ˘ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¿ Î·È Û οÔȘ ·ÚȘ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÔÏÔÁÈΤ˜ ·fi„ÂȘÛ ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¿ Ì ÙÔ ·Ó ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ‹ fi¯È ηıÔÏÈΤ˜ ËıÈΤ˜ ·Í›Â˜.

33. fi.., Û. 612.

34. ¢. °. ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜, fi.., 2000, Û. 211-3.

35. ¶. §¤Îη˜, ∏ ÂıÓÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›· – ¤ÓÙ ˘Ôı¤ÛÂȘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÛÙËÓ ÈÛÙÔÚÈ΋ ÎÔÈ-ÓˆÓÈÔÏÔÁ›·, ªÓ‹ÌˆÓ 1992,Û. 62.

36. £. §›Ô‚·Ù˜, √ Ú·ÙÛÈÛÌfi˜: ÙÔ ¿Á¯Ô˜ ÂÌÚfi˜ ÛÙÔ ÌË-Ù·˘ÙfiÓ, ÛÙÔ Ë ∂˘ÚÒË ·ÓÙÈ-Ì¤ÙˆË Ì ÙÔ Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ ÙÔ˘ Ú·ÙÛÈÛÌÔ‡, ¶·Ú·Û΋ÓÈÔ, ∞ı‹Ó· 1995,Û. 111.

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË. 213

µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·

•ÂÓfiÁψÛÛË

Batelaan P.-Dijk Van L.-Hoof Van C.-Mastelaar M. and Van der Rol Ruud, "Social Diversity and Discrimination in the Common Curriculum-A Reflection by the Organizing

Committee", European Journal of Intercultural Studies vol. 4, no 1, 1993.Bernstein B., Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity-Theory, Research, Critique, Tay-

lor and Francis, 1996.Boven Van Th., "The European context for Intercultural Education", European Journal

of Intercultural Studies vol. 4, no 1, 1993.Carrim N., "Working With and Through Difference in Antiracist Pedagogies", Interna-

tional Studies in Sociology of Education, vol. 5, no 1, 1995. Coulby D.-Jones Cr., Postmodernity and European Education Systems, Trentham Books,

1995. Deacon B. (Î.¿.), Global Social Policy, Sage, London 1997. Dubbeldam L., "Development, culture and education", ÛÙÔ L. Dubbleldam (ÂÈÌ.), Inter-

national Yearbook of Education, Vol. XLIV, Paris: UNESCO, 1994. Durkheim E., Education and Sociology, Free Press, New York, 1956.Epstein D., Changing Classroom Cultures-Antiracism, Politics and Schools, Trentham

Books, 1993. Horton J. (ÂÈÌ.), Liberalism Multiculturalism and Toleration, Macmillan, London 1993.Parijs Van P., Freedom for All: What (if anything) Can Justify Capitalism?, Oxford,

Clarendon Press, 1995.Taylor C., The politics of Recognition, ÛÙÔ A. Gutmann (ÂÈÌ.), Multiculturalism, Prince-

ton, University Press, 1994.Webb M., Multicultural Education in Elementary and Secondary Schools, ERIC Digest

Number 67, 1990.

∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋

Blackledge D.-Hunt B., ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÔÏÔÁ›· Ù˘ ∂η›‰Â˘Û˘, ŒÎÊÚ·ÛË, ∞ı‹Ó· 1995.¢·Ì·Ó¿Î˘ ª., ∏ ∂η›‰Â˘ÛË ÙˆÓ ¶·ÏÈÓÓÔÛÙÔ‡ÓÙˆÓ Î·È ∞ÏÏÔ‰·ÒÓ ª·ıËÙÒÓ ÛÙËÓ

∂ÏÏ¿‰·. ¢È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ ÚÔÛ¤ÁÁÈÛË, Gutenberg, ∞ı‹Ó· 1997. Giddens A., ¶¤Ú·Ó Ù˘ ·ÚÈÛÙÂÚ¿˜ Î·È Ù˘ ‰ÂÍÈ¿˜. ∆Ô Ì¤ÏÏÔÓ Ù˘ ÚÈ˙ÔÛ·ÛÙÈ΋˜ ÔÏÈÙÈ-

΋˜, ¶fiÏȘ, ∞ı‹Ó· 1999.

214 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

∫·ÛÙ·Ó¿˜ ∏., ¶·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔÔ›ËÛË Ù˘ ‰ÈηÈÔÛ‡Ó˘ Î·È ·ÓıÚÒÈÓ· ‰ÈηÈÒÌ·Ù·, ∂È-ÛÙ‹ÌË Î·È ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·, Ù¯. 2-3, 1999.

∫ˆÛÙԇϷ-ª·ÎÚ¿ÎË ¡., «∞ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË Ù˘ ÂÓۈ̿وÛ˘ Ù˘ ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈ-ÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ÛÙ· ÂÁ¯ÂÈÚ›‰È· ÙˆÓ ÁψÛÛÈÎÒÓ Ì·ıËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÙˆÓ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓÛÔ˘‰ÒÓ ÙÔ˘ ‰ËÌÔÙÈÎÔ‡ Î·È ÙÔ˘ Á˘ÌÓ·Û›Ô˘», ÛÙÔ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›· ÙˆÓ 2/3-¢È·ÛÙ¿-ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ˘ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ¶ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·ÙÔ˜, ¶¿ÓÙÂÈÔ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ, ∞ı‹-Ó· 2001.

§¤Îη˜ ¶., ∏ ÂıÓÈÎÈÛÙÈ΋ ȉÂÔÏÔÁ›· – ¤ÓÙ ˘Ôı¤ÛÂȘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÛÙËÓ ÈÛÙÔÚÈ΋ ÎÔÈÓˆ-ÓÈÔÏÔÁ›·, ªÓ‹ÌˆÓ 1992.

§›Ô‚·Ù˜ £., √ Ú·ÙÛÈÛÌfi˜: ÙÔ ¿Á¯Ô˜ ÂÌÚfi˜ ÛÙÔ ÌË-Ù·˘ÙfiÓ, ÛÙÔ ∏ ∂˘ÚÒË ·ÓÙÈ̤و-Ë Ì ÙÔ Ê·ÈÓfiÌÂÓÔ ÙÔ˘ Ú·ÙÛÈÛÌÔ‡, ¶·Ú·Û΋ÓÈÔ, ∞ı‹Ó· 1995.

ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜ ¢., ™¯¤ÛÂȘ ÎÚ¿ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È ÂÎÎÏËÛ›·˜: ªÈ· ÎÚÈÙÈ΋ ÂÈÛÎfiËÛË ·fi ÙÔ µ˘-˙¿ÓÙÈÔ ¤ˆ˜ Û‹ÌÂÚ·, µ˘˙·ÓÙÈÓfi˜ ¢fiÌÔ˜, ÙÔÌ. 12Ô˜, ∏Úfi‰ÔÙÔ˜ 2001.

ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜ ¢., ∏ ıÚËÛΛ· ˘fi ÙÔ Êˆ˜ ÙˆÓ Ó¤ˆÓ Û˘ÓıËÎÒÓ, ¡¤· ∂ÛÙ›·, Ù¯. 1736, ∞ı‹-Ó· 2001.

ª·ÁÚÈÏ‹˜ ¢., ∆Ô ÛÙ›ÁÌ· Î·È Ô ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈÎfi˜ ÛÙÈÁÌ·ÙÈÛÌfi˜ ·fi ÙËÓ ·Ú¯·ÈfiÙËÙ· Î·È ÙÔµ˘˙¿ÓÙÈÔ ¤ˆ˜ Û‹ÌÂÚ·, ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈ΋ ∂ÚÁ·Û›· – ∂ÈıÂÒÚËÛË ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ ∂È-ÛÙËÌÒÓ, Ù¯. 59, ∞ı‹Ó· 2000.

ª¿ÚÎÔ˘ °., ∏ ¶ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ ∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋˜ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·˜. ∏ ¢È·‰Èηۛ· ¢ÈÂ-ıÓÔÔ›ËÛ˘ Î·È Ë ∞Ó·ÁηÈfiÙËÙ· Ù˘ ¢È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋˜ ∂η›‰Â˘Û˘, 1996.

¶·Ó¿ÁÔ˘ µ.-∆ÛÔ‡ÓÙ· ∫., «¢È·ÎÚ·ÙÈ΋ Î·È ÀÂÚÂıÓÈ΋ ™˘ÓÂÚÁ·Û›·. ∆Ô ÔÈÎÔ˘ÌÂÓÈÎfiÎ·È ÙÔ ∂˘Úˆ·˚Îfi Ï·›ÛÈÔ», ¶··˙‹Û˘, ∞ı‹Ó· 2002.

¶··ÚÚËÁfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜ •., ∏ ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· ˆ˜ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ Úfi‚ÏËÌ·, ∂ÈÛÙ‹ÌË Î·È∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›·, Ù¯. 2-3, ™¿ÎÎÔ˘Ï·˜, 1999.

™·ÎÂÏÏ·ÚfiÔ˘ÏÔ˜ £., ÀÂÚÂıÓÈΤ˜ ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈΤ˜ ÔÏÈÙÈΤ˜ ÛÙËÓ ÂÔ¯‹ Ù˘ ·ÁÎÔÛÌÈÔ-Ô›ËÛ˘, ∫ÚÈÙÈ΋, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001.

™ÔÏÔÌÒÓ π.-ª·ÎÚ˘ÓÈÒÙË ¢., ¶ÚfiÙ˘· Î·È ÃÚ‹ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ¶ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÔ‡ ÛÙËÓ ∂η›‰Â˘ÛË:¶ÚÔ˜ ÌÈ· ¶·È‰·ÁˆÁÈ΋ Ù˘ ¢È·ÊÔÚ¿˜;, ∫ÔÈÓˆÓ›· ÙˆÓ 2/3 – ¢È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓÔ˘ ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔ‚Ï‹Ì·ÙÔ˜, ¶¿ÓÙÂÈÔ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ, ∞ı‹Ó· 2001.

ºÏÔ˘Ú‹˜ °., ∞Ó·ÓÙÈÛÙÔȯ›· ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈÎÒÓ ÛÎÔÒÓ, ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎÔ‡ ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·ÙÔ˜ ηÈÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈÎÒÓ Ì¤ÛˆÓ: ªÂÚÈΤ˜ fi„ÂȘ Ù˘ ÂÎ·È‰Â˘ÙÈ΋˜ ·ÓÙÈÊ·ÙÈÎfiÙËÙ·˜, ÛÙÔ∞. ∫·˙·Ì›·˜ Î·È ª. ∫·ÛÛˆÙ¿Î˘ (ÂÈÌ.), ∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋ ∂η›‰Â˘ÛË: ¶ÚÔÔÙÈΤ˜∞Ó·Û˘ÁÎÚfiÙËÛ˘ Î·È ∂ÎÛ˘Á¯ÚÔÓÈÛÌÔ‡, ™Â›ÚÈÔ˜, ∞ı‹Ó· 1995.

ºÚ·ÁÎÔ˘‰¿ÎË ∞.-¢Ú·ÁÒÓ· £.(ÂÈÌ.), «∆È ÂÈÓ’ Ë ¶·ÙÚ›‰· Ì·˜;»:∂ıÓÔÎÂÓÙÚÈÛÌfi˜ ÛÙËÓÂη›‰Â˘ÛË, ∞ÏÂÍ¿Ó‰ÚÂÈ·, 1997.

∏ Û‡Á¯ÚÔÓË ÔÏ˘ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈÎfiÙËÙ· Î·È Ë ‰È·ÔÏÈÙÈÛÌÈ΋ Âη›‰Â˘ÛË. 215

La structure et le pouvoir des institutionseuropéennes.Origines, statut et perspectives futurs.

Ekaterina P. KikiliaInstitut Technologique du Pirée

Resumé

Les états-membres de l’ Union Européenne ont établie des organes speciaux, quijouent un rôle significatif à la prise des décisions de la Communauté. Les institutions com-munautaires les plus importantes sont: le parlement, institution à caractère démocratique;le conseil, qui représente les états-membres; la commission, qui est la gardienne des trai-tés et propose la législation, les politiques et les programmes d’ action; et, enfin, les in-stitutions consultatives, qui s’ occupent des sujets économiques, sociaux et régionaux.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

∆· ÎÚ¿ÙË Ì¤ÏË Ù˘ ∂˘Úˆ·˚΋˜ ŒÓˆÛ˘ ›‰Ú˘Û·Ó ÂȉÈο ıÂÛÌÈο fiÚÁ·Ó·, Ù· ÔÔ›·‰È·‰Ú·Ì·Ù›˙Ô˘Ó ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfi ÚfiÏÔ ÛÙȘ ·ÔÊ¿ÛÂȘ Ù˘ ∫ÔÈÓfiÙËÙ·˜. ∆· ÛËÌ·ÓÙÈÎfiÙÂÚ·ıÂÛÌÈο fiÚÁ·Ó· Ù˘ ∂˘Úˆ·˚΋˜ ŒÓˆÛ˘ ›ӷÈ: ÙÔ ‰ËÌÔÎÚ·ÙÈο ÂÎÏÂÁ̤ÓÔ ∫ÔÈÓÔ-‚Ô‡ÏÈÔ, ÙÔ ™˘Ì‚Ô‡ÏÈÔ, Ô˘ ·ÓÙÈÚÔۈ‡ÂÈ Ù· ÎÚ¿ÙË Ì¤ÏË ÛÙÔ Î˘‚ÂÚÓËÙÈÎfi ›‰Ô, Ë∂ÈÙÚÔ‹, Ë ÔÔ›· Â›Ó·È Ô Ê‡Ï·Î·˜ ÙˆÓ Û˘ÓıËÎÒÓ, Ì ·ÚÌÔ‰ÈfiÙËÙ· Ó· ÂÈÛ¿ÁÂÈ Î·È Ó·ÂÎÙÂÏ› ÙÔ˘˜ ÎÔÈÓÔÙÈÎÔ‡˜ ÓfiÌÔ˘˜, ÙÔ ∂˘Úˆ·˚Îfi ¢ÈηÛÙ‹ÚÈÔ, ˆ˜ ‰È·¯ÂÈÚÈÛÙ‹˜ ÙˆÓ ÓÔ-ÌÈÎÒÓ ıÂÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È Ù¤ÏÔ˜, Ù· ™˘Ì‚Ô˘Ï¢ÙÈο ™ÒÌ·Ù· Ô˘ ·Û¯ÔÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È Ì ٷ ÔÈÎÔÓÔ-ÌÈο, ÎÔÈÓˆÓÈο Î·È ÂÚÈÊÂÚÂȷο ˙ËÙ‹Ì·Ù·.

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 217

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 217-231

1. Introduction

Les institutions sont les organes qui ont la responsabilité de la construction commu-nautaire et la gestion de ses affaires.

Le traité parle de quatre institutions: - la Commission, - le Conseil,- le Parlement et - la Cour de justice.

Ces institutions sont les organes les plus importants et les plus nobles de l’ Europe. Cesont des institutions dynamiques et de base, qui définissent les politiques et arrêtent lesactes législatifs (directives, règlements et décisions) qui s’ appliquent dans toute l’ UnionEuropéenne. En principe, il appartient à la Commission de proposer de nouveaux acteslégislatifs européens, mais au Parlement et au Conseil de les adopter. Pourtant, la liste estincomplète pour plusieurs raisons. Premièrement, dans les institutions du droit commu-nautaire on doit inclure le Conseil Européen. Même si cela n’ est pas qualifié d’ institu-tion, il est une institution vraiment significative. En plus, les institutions financièresjouent un rôle considérable. La Cours des Comptes, une institution à caractère financier,joue un rôle aussi important de contrôle financier. Le Conseil Economique et Social Eu-ropéen, sans avoir des pouvoirs décisionnaires, est un organe important de la Commu-nauté Européenne. Enfin, dans le cadre de l’ Union Européenne, depuis 1992, on a eu lamise en place de l’ Union Economique et Monétaire et ensuite la mise en place des or-ganes de caractère financier, comme la Banque Central Européenne, la Banque Euro-péenne d’ Investissements et le Conseil Européen. A part les organes financiers, ils exis-tent aussi des organes consultatifs, comme le Comité des Régions, qui représente les auto-rités régionales et locales, des organes interinstitutionnels, comme l’ Office des Publica-tions Officielles des Communautés européennes, qui publie, imprime et distribue des in-formations sur l’ UE et ses activités et l’ Office Européen de Sélection du Personnel, quirecrute le personnel des institutions et autres organes de l’ UE, ainsi que des organismesdécentralisés (Europol, Eurojust, Institut d’ études de sécurité de l’ UE, etc). Ces organessont très signifiants, mais ne sont pas qualifiés d’ institutions.

En matière budgétaire, jusqu’ en 1970, tous les organes de la Communauté Euro-péenne vivaient grâce aux contributions des Etats. Le Traité du 22 avril 1970 donne despropres ressources aux communautés sous la forme des droits de douane. Ainsi, l’ argentdes prélèvements agricoles, d’ une fraction de la TVA, perçue dans des actions internes etd’ une fraction du PIB des États-membres.

218 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

2. Les institutions a caractère interétatique

Le Conseil et le Conseil Européen

2.1. Le Conseil

Le Conseil est un organe législatif extrêmement important. Toutes les décisions de l’Union européenne, au sense large du terme, passent par le Conseil. C’ est, en fait, le mêmeorgane qui fait office du Gouvernement et du Parlement. Le Conseil constitue une institu-tion de l’ Union Européenne depuis son origine, il a été crée par les traités fondateurs dansles années 1950. Il représente la légitimité interétatique, ce qui explique sa composition.

2.1.1. La composition

La composition du Conseil est très intéressante. Elle traduit le caractère interétatiquedu Conseil et la complexité des affaires communautaires. Un ministre issu de chaque gou-vernement national participe à ses réunions. L’ identité du ministre qui assiste aux ré-unions dépend des sujets inscrits à l’ ordre du jour. La formation de base se forme duConseil des Affaires, composé de ministres des Affaires Etrangères qui siègent au sein dece Conseil. Il suit toutes les affaires de la Communauté Européenne.

Il y a d’ autres formations techniques en fonction de l’ ordre du jour. Dans le lot émer-ge une formation particulière: le Conseil Ecofin (formation Ecofiancière), qui est com-posé de Ministres des Finances. Entre ces Conseils il existe des contactes.

Enfin, il y a les Conseils "Jumbo", qui sont des Conseils Mixtes, c’ est-à-dire que sesmembres peuvent être des Ministres de différents domaines, comme ceux de l’ Agricultureet des Affaires Etrangères. Il se peut que les ministres qui participent aux Conseils ne soientpas de ministres au sense juridique du terme. Il fut juste qu’ ils y aient un rang de ministre.

La question de la présidence

La présidence du Conseil change tous les six mois. Le Conseil est présidé par chacundes États –membres pendant un semestre, par ordre alphabétique. Pourtant, avec les élar-gissements, les grands États ont aperçu qu’ ils ont exercé rarement la présidence et quela plupart de temps s’ étaient les petits États qui présidaient. Ils ont donc imaginé un au-tre système d’ échange de présidence par ordre alphabétique, deux États à la fois. Ce se-rait un grand État et un petit qui auraient en même temps la présidence. Ce système d’échange entre grands et petits États s’ est appelé TROICA Communautaire. De cette fa-çon il y aurait toujours un représentant de grands pays.

Le rôle du président du Conseil est très important. C’ est lui qui doit rechercher chaquefois le compromis entre les différents parts. Il essaye d’ être couronné de succès, mais, enmême temps, il représente le pays qui veut se défendre. La délégation, alors, exercée parla présidence est double (voir tableaux 1 et 2).

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 219

2.1.2. Le fonctionnement

Le Conseil n’ est pas un organe permanent. Ses membres sont des personnes qui tra-vaillent dans leurs pays. Ils ne se rencontrent que ponctuellement, une fois par mois, sou-vent à Bruxelles ou à Luxembourg. Le Conseil Ecofin et ce de l’ Agriculture se réunissentune fois par mois, le Conseil du Tourisme et ce de l’ Education tous les six mois. Les ré-unions sont officielles.

Cependant, chaque État dispose à Bruxelles d’ une équipe permanente qui le repré-sente et défend ses intérêts nationaux sur la scène européenne, car, maternellement, il n’y a pas de temps de préparer les réunions et la plupart des fois les problèmes sont réso-lus à un niveau inférieur.

Le chef de la représentation est, de fait, l’ ambassadeur de son pays auprès de l’ Uni-on Européenne. Ces ambassadeurs tiennent des réunions hebdomadaires au Comité desreprésentants permanents. A part les ambassadeurs qui participent aux réunions, il y aaussi le Coreper, qui est le représentant permanent de l’ Union.

Le Coreper a une formation double: il joue le rôle du représentant adjoint, mais il estaussi représentant de premier titre. Les Corepers sont assistés des comités, qui sont as-sistés des groupes de travail. L’ initiative ne leur appartient pas, ils le soumettent à desgroupes d’ experts. Ensuite, il y a un dialogue entre les groupes et la Commission, avantque les Comités interviennent, pour prendre la décision. A la fin, la décision arrive au ni-veau du Coreper. D’ ordre du jours, il y a toujours deux partis qui arrivent à deux pointscontreversés: soit que la solution est trouvée soit qu’ il n’ y a pas de solution à la ques-tion.

Les États sont toujours présents dans tous les stades et contrôlent tout. De cette façonon évite la bureaucratie. Pourtant, ce cheminement pour chaque projet peut prendrebeaucoup d’ années. Par exemple, le problème de la société européenne se discute depuisles années 1960.

Le projet de texte arrive au niveau du Conseil et la décision est soumise à plusieursmodalités de vote. Ensuite, pour arriver à la pratique, il faut faire une construction inté-grée afin de protéger tous les États d’ une décision qu’ ils ne veulent pas. Les négocia-tions durent longtemps. A la fin, les décisions, contrairement à l’ esprit communautaire,sont prises à la majorité qualifiée. Toutefois, dans certains domaines particulièrementsensibles, comme la fiscalité, l’ asile et l’ immigration, le Conseil doit se prononcer à l’unanimité. Généralement, du départ il était prévu que pendant les premiers sept ans lesdécisions se prendraient à l’ unanimité et à l’ huitième année, à la majorité. Quand un Étatestime qu’ une décision ne porte pas à intérêt prioritaire, il peut demander à défaire le vo-te et prolonger la négociation.

Tout le monde n’ a pas le même nombre de voix. Le maximum de voix est dix et leminimum deux (Luxembourg). Pour avoir une majorité qualifiée, il faut réunir soixantedeux voix sur quatre-vingt sept. Le système a été imaginé de telle façon afin de protéger

220 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

les petits États. On a voulu permettre à ces États de pouvoir bloquer les décisions. Si lesÉtats, avant le vote, disent qu’ ils vont s’ opposer au projet, alors qu’ ils n’ atteignentpas la minorité de blocage, le Conseil va accepter de négocier pour donner satisfactionaux parties minoritaires. Il existe aussi un cas très rare, où le Conseil décide de sa prop-re initiative.

2.1.3 Les Compétences

Le Conseil a des responsabilités fondamentales:ñ Il adopte la législation européenne.ñ Il coordonne les grandes orientations des politiques économiques des États membres.ñ Il conclut des accords internationaux entre l’ Union Européenne et un ou plusieurs

pays ou organisations internationales.ñ Il approuve le budget de l’ Union Européenne en coopération avec le Parlement

Européen.ñ Il définit la politique étrangère de sécurité commune de l’ Union Européenne.

La plupart de ces responsabilités ont trait au domaine «communautaire», autrementdit, à des champs d’ action dans lesquels les États membres ont décidé d’ exercer leursouveraineté en commun et de déléguer des pouvoirs de décision aux institutions euro-péennes. Ce domaine constitue le «premier pilier» de l’ Union Européenne.

2.2. Le Conseil Européen

Le Conseil Européen est l’ organe moteur qui fait de grands arbitrages au sein de laCommunauté Européenne. C’ est une institution aux trois piliers, de caractère politiqueet interétatique. C’ est une institution imposée par la pratique. Le Conseil Européen don-ne les impulsions et définit les orientations politiques générales.

Les membres du Conseil se réunissent une seule fois par semestre.

2.2.1. La naissance du Conseil Européen

Pendant les années 1960, Général de Gaulle a voulu donner une touche plus interéta-tique à l’ Union Européenne. Dès le début des années 1960, la France propose deux plans.Le premier envisageait un organe interétatique, composé des chefs d’ États pour obtenirla coopération entre les États-membres. L’ idée a été refusée, car se serait extrêmementdifficile de résister au sein de cet organe.

En 1974, on a créé le Conseil Européen afin de résoudre le besoin d’ un Royau-me universel. A l’ époque, le Conseil se réunissait trois fois par an pour discuter lesproblèmes politiques et ceux qui ne pouvaient pas être résolus au sein du ConseilEuropéen.

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 221

2.2.2. La composition

Le Conseil Européen est composé par les Chefs des États-membres, les Chefs desGouvernements et les Ministres des Affaires Etrangères. En plus, y siègent le Présidentde la Commission et un membre de la Commission. A cause du grand nombre des mem-bres, les conférences se réalisent dans deux salles différentes. L’ une accueille les Premiersministres et les Chefs d’ États et la deuxième les ambassadeurs et les hauts fonctionnaires.Les ministres siègent avant.

2.2.3. Le fonctionnement

Les membres du Conseil Européen ne votent pas. Les décisions sont prises par le pro-cès d’ unanimité au niveau des discussions et des négociations. Le Conseil Européen neprend pas de décisions au sens juridique du terme. Il donne des orientations dans le do-maine communautaire et demande à la Commission ou au Conseil de les formuler.

Les réunions durent deux jours, pendant lesquels sont jugées les questions les pluscomplexes. Le communiqué de la conclusion repose à la présidence où les grandes lignes,arrêtées par le Conseil, vont être récapitulées. Ce travail repose au pays qui a la Prési-dence. Le travail dure, alors que les conclusions vont être rédigées pendant la nuit. Aucours de la deuxième journée, les décisions sont publiées. Par ailleurs, tout homme poli-tique donne sa conférence de presse.

2.2.4. Les compétences

Le Conseil Européen et le Conseil exercent des fonctions politiques dans leurspays propres. Leur rôle est d’ animer et de défendre la meilleure décision pour leurpays respectif.

3. La Commission

La Commission de l’ Union Européenne veille aux intérêts de la Communauté Euro-péenne dans son ensemble. Elle est le moteur du système institutionnel européen, car el-le propose la législation, les politiques et les programmes d’ action et elle est responsablede la mise en œuvre des décisions du Parlement et du Conseil.

3.1. La composition

La Commission a mis une logique qui va subir des conséquences au niveau de sa com-position. Elle est composée de vingt membres, commissaires, désignés par les États-mem-

222 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

bres et le Parlement. Les États n’ interviennent pas au fonctionnement de la Commission.Ses commissaires sont des personnalités indépendantes et importantes. Tous les membresde la Commission ont occupé une position politique, soit ministres soit Premiers minist-res, dans leur pays respectif.

D’ un côté, on essaye de garantir l’ indépendance des Commissaires, tandis que de l’autre côté on doit les nommer. Ce sont les États qui nomment les membres de la Com-mission d’ un accord commun. La procédure est la suivante: chaque État nomme une oudeux personnes et les autres les acceptent. Une fois nommées ces personnes se montrentindépendantes.

Depuis 1992, la Commission est nommée après l’ approbation du Parlement Euro-péen. Elle est nommée en deux temps. Le Conseil nomme le Président et ensuite il formela Commission en demandant l’ avis du Président. Quand la liste est complète, on pré-sente le Président et les commissaires. A la fin, le Parlement se présente "pour ou cont-re la Commission (jusqu’ à maintenant le Parlement n’ a jamais été contre).

Une nouvelle Commission est désignée tous les cinq ans dans les six mois qui suiventles élections du Parlement européen.

3.2. Le fonctionnement

Le rôle du Président de la Commission

Le traité d’ Amsterdam a donné un grand poids au Président de la Commission.La tendance actuelle est de considérer le Président comme le Premier ministre. Enfait, la Commission est un gouvernement, en quelque sorte, qui n’ a pas de pouvoirde décision. Le Président a des prérogatives importantes. Sa nomination est faite parl’ intermédiaire du Parlement. Son rôle international est très important. Il est consi-déré comme un grand personnage de la Communauté Européenne et il siège parmile Conseil.

Le rôle des Commissaires

Chaque État doit présenter au moins un commissaire et au maximum deux. C’ estpourquoi on nomme vingt commissaires, alors que les États sont quinze. Il y a cinqÉtats qui ont deux commissaires: la France, l’ Allemagne, l’ Italie, le Royaume Uniet l’ Espagne. Lorsque la Communauté passerait à vingt membres ce système, quiétait décidé par le protocole du traité d’ Amsterdam, doit être révisé. Il faudra aug-menter le nombre d’ États sans augmenter le nombre des commissaires. Deux solu-tions apparaissent: soit certains États n’ auront pas de représentant dans la Com-mission soit les grands États passeront de deux à un seul commissaire. Cependant,on aura ainsi un pouvoir de blocage de la part de petits États beaucoup plus grand.Il faut donc revoir carrément le système et se conduire à une reforme ou à un systè-me de double majorité.

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 223

L’ administration

La Commission a une administration très importante. Elle est composée de 22.000personnes, fonctionnaires communautaires, qui sont payés par la Commission. Ils sontorganisés en sorte des ministères, appelés direction générale. Il y en a vingt quatre qui re-présentent de différents secteurs. La première direction générale s’ occupe des relationsextérieures, la deuxième des affaires économiques et monétaires e.t.c. A la tête de chaquedirection il y a un commissaire. Les commissaires se réunissent tous les mercredis et pren-nent leurs décisions à la majorité simple. Il peut y avoir des décisions de routine ou destextes plus importants.

La Commission est un rouage clé. Elle prépare les décisions et dans beaucoup dedomaines elle a le monopole législatif. Elle gère la concurrence entre les États, lesfonds structurels et les crédits alloués aux régions. Enfin, la Commission est la gar-dienne des lois.

3.3. Les compétences

Les essentielles fonctions de la Commission européenne sont les suivantes:ñ Elle soumet des propositions au Parlement et au Conseil,ñ Elle gère et applique les politiques et le budget de l’ Union Européenne,ñ Elle applique le droit européen,ñ Elle représente l’ Union Européenne sur la scène internationale.

4. L’ Institution à caractère démocratique: Le Parlement

Il est rare de trouver un organe international avec une structure démocratique. LeParlement, qui s’ appelait avant Assemblée parlementaire, est une institution européen-ne démocratique qui défend les intérêts du peuple européen. Au début le Parlement étaitélu au deuxième degré. En 1976 on a décidé que les membres du Parlement seront élus di-rectement par les habitants de l’ Europe, au suffrage universel direct. La grande idée desa création était que le Parlement devait être traité comme un véritable parlement. Il de-vait ressembler à un parlement national, avoir les mêmes attributions et fonctionner dela même façon. Afin d’ avoir les mêmes attributions que les parlements nationaux, il fau-drait que le Parlement européen fonctionne et soit composé de la même manière. Le trai-té de Maastricht et ce d’ Amsterdam ont monté la puissance du Parlement que cela soiten parité avec le Conseil.

224 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

4.1. La composition

Au début le Parlement était composé des parlementaires nationaux élus par leurs par-lement. En 1976, on a pris la décision d’ élire le Parlement européen de la même façonque les parlements nationaux. Cependant, beaucoup de problèmes se sont apparus. Lapremière question concernait la manière avec laquelle seraient élus ses membres, commeil n’ y avait pas de procédure électorale uniforme. Le scrutin adopté à la plupart d’ Étatsétait à la proportionnelle. Le nombre des parlementaires élus par chaque État devrait êt-re en fonction de sa population. Ainsi, le nombre actuel des parlementaires est de 626membres, dont les 99 sont représentants de l’ Allemagne, 87 des autres grands États-membres, 64 de l’ Espagne et 6 de Luxembourg. Il faut noter que le nombre change aprèschaque élargissement de la Communauté. Pourtant, on a pris la décision de ne pas dépas-ser le nombre de 700 membres.

La procédure électorale est pareille à la procédure électorale nationale. Tous ceux quiont le droit de voter ou d’ être candidat dans le pays où ils résident peuvent voter et êt-re candidats pour le Parlement Européen. (voir tableau 3)

4.2. Le Fonctionnement

En ce domaine le Parlement est inspiré au niveau parlementaire national. Première-ment, on doit faire la distinction entre les commissions permanentes et les commissionsponctuelles. Les commissions permanentes s’ occupent de la préparation du travail légis-latif du Parlement. Les commissions ponctuelles travaillent sur des sujets de l’ actualité.

Les parlementaires ne se regroupent pas par État mais ils travaillent en groupes (po-litiques), sur la base de l’ affinité politique. (voir tableau 4) Ils ont le droit à des indem-nités et au privilège d’ immunité, c’ est-à-dire, ils ont la protection légale de dire ce qu’ils ont envie de dire.

Le Parlement Européen est en session pendant la durée de l’ année. L’ immunité desparlementaires dure pour cinq ans.

4.3. Les Compétences

Au début le Parlement n’ avait pas de prérogatives. Il était juste un organe consul-tatif. L’ évolution a conduit à une plus grande implication du Parlement vers un pro-cessus décisionnel. Le traité de Maastricht a établi le processus de co-décision entre leParlement et le Conseil. Le Parlement est le co-législateur de la Communauté Euro-péenne, l’ autre est le Conseil.

En plus, il exerce une surveillance démocratique sur toutes les institutions européen-nes, et notamment la Commission. Et, enfin, il partage l’ autorité budgétaire avec leConseil, pouvant ainsi influencer les dépenses de l’ Union Européenne.

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 225

5. Les Institutions judiciaires

Les institutions judiciaires de la Communauté Européenne sont: ñ la Cour de Justice etñ le Tribunal de Première Instance (1988).

La Cour de justice a été créée en 1952 par le traité de Paris et le Tribunal de Premiè-re Instance en 1989.

5.1. La composition

La Cour de Justice est composée de quinze juges et neuf avocats généraux. Il y a unjuge représentant chaque pays, qui ne doit pas être nécessairement magistrat dans sonpays. En ce qui concerne les avocats généraux, ils ont pour mission de présenter l’ affai-re et proposer la meilleure solution. Ils ont le même travail que les Commissaires desGouvernements dans les juridictions administratives.

Le Tribunal de Première Instance se compose de quinze juges qui, parfois, remplissentaussi le rôle des avocats généraux.

5.2. Le Fonctionnement

La Cour de Justice et le Tribunal de Première Instance siègent à Luxembourg. Ce sontdes institutions totalement indépendantes. Elles veillent à l’ application des lois commu-nautaires. En arrière, il y a toute une administration qui est représentée par le greffe, dontla mission est de suivre les sujets administratifs.

La Cour rend des arrêts sur les affaires qui lui sont soumises. Les affaires sont présen-tées au greffe et un juge, ainsi qu’ un avocat général, qui est désigné pour chacune d’ el-les. Les types d’ affaire les plus courants sont: le recours en annulation, qui est le pouvoirde contester la légalité d’ un acte communautaire, le recours en carence, qui sert à sanc-tionner l’ inaction d’ une institution, le recours en manquement, qui sert à sanctionner lamauvaise exécution du droit communautaire et le renvois préjudiciel en interprétation,qui interroge la Cour de Justice de la Communauté Européenne pour demander cetteinterprétation. Le but de ce recours est d’ assurer l’ application du droit communautairede la même façon partout. Il existe aussi le recours préjudiciel de validité qui sert àconfirmer la validité d’ un acte et assure l’ exception d’ illégalité. Enfin, le recours enresponsabilité extracontractuelle concerne toutes les fautes commises par la Communau-té Européenne qui peuvent lui être reprochées, à condition qu’ elles ne se rattachent pasà des fautes des contrats.

226 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

6. Les Institutions Financières

Les Institutions financières sont des institutions propres à l’ Union Economique etMonétaire. Ces institutions sont très importantes, surtout après le traité de Maastricht.

6.1. La Cour des Comptes

La Cour des Comptes et qualifiée d’ institution depuis le traité de Maastricht, mais el-le garde le même pouvoir depuis le traité du 22 Juillet 1975.

6.1.1. La Composition

Elle est composée de quinze membres, un membre par État de l’ Union Européenne.Ses membres sont désignés par le Conseil pour un mandat de six ans renouvelable. Ils sontsélectionnés pour leurs compétences et leur indépendance et travaillent à temps pleinpour la Cour.

La Cour dispose aussi d’ environ 550 collaborateurs, dont quelque 250 contrôleurs.Les contrôleurs effectuent fréquement des visites d’ inspection auprès des autres institu-tions européennes, des États membres et des pays qui bénéficient d’ une aide de l’ UnionEuropéenne.

6.1.2. Les Compétences

Le rôle de la Cour des Comptes est de vérifier la régularité des comptes. Elle exami-ne les documents de toute organisation gérant des recettes ou des dépenses de l’ UnionEuropéenne. Elle publie un rapport annuel, au vu du quel le Parlement Européen va ju-ger la manière dont la Commission s’ est acquittée (quitus). Elle peut être consultée parles autres institutions. Enfin, la Cour des Comptes exprime un avis avant l’ adoption desrèglements financiers de l’ Union Européenne.

6.2. La Banque Européenne d’ Investissement

La Banque Européenne d’ Investissement a été créée en 1958, par le Traité de Ro-me et n’ est pas vraiment une institution. Sa mission est essentielle. Elle investit dansdes projets qui servent les objectifs de l’ Union Européenne. Elle gère le financementdes projets de développement de différentes régions. Les pays méditerranéens, ainsi queceux de l’ Europe centrale et orientale, bénéficient aussi de l’ aide de la Banque d’ In-vestissements. Son financement dérive des emprunts levés sur les marchés financiers etpar ses actionnaires.

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 227

6.3. La Banque Centrale Européenne

La Banque Centrale Européenne est fondée en 1998, conformément au traité sur l’Union Européenne, pour introduire et gérer la nouvelle monnaie (l’ euro).

6.3.1. Les Compétences

Elle exécute les opérations d’ échange et assure le fonctionnement sans heurte des sys-tèmes de paiement. Elle est également chargée de définir et de mettre en œuvre la poli-tique économique et monétaire de l’ Union Européenne.

6.3.2. La Composition

La Banque Centrale Européenne se compose de trois organes: ñ le Directoire,ñ le Conseil des Gouverneurs etñ le Conseil Général

Le Directoire comprend six membres (dont le président et le vice-président de laBCE) désignés pour un mandat de huit ans non renouvelable. Il a un très grand pouvoir,reconnu de la Banque Centrale Européenne. Son rôle est de rééquilibrer les membrespour un «gouvernement écoque».

Le Conseil des Gouverneurs est composé se six personnes. Il est un conseil informel,qui est, pourtant, l’ organe de décision suprême de la Banque Centrale. Il siège en re-groupant que les pays qui participent à l’ euro.

Le Conseil Général est composé du président et du vice-président de la BCE, ainsi quedes gouverneurs des banques centrales nationales des quinze États membres de l’ UnionEuropéenne. Il contribue aux travaux de consultation et de coordination de la BCE.

7. Conclusion

Les États membres de l’ Union Européenne délèguent une partie de leurs pouvoirs dedécision aux institutions communes qu’ ils ont mises en place, de sorte que les décisions surcertains thèmes d’ intérêt commun peuvent être arrêtées par un processus démocratique auniveau européen. Ces institutions définissent les politiques et arrêtent les actes législatifs quis’ appliquent dans toute l’ Union Européenne. Elles ont été crées par les traités et jouentun rôle très important au fonctionnement de la Communauté. Depuis la construction de l’Union Européenne et pendant son élargissement, les institutions ont subi beaucoup dechangements et on s’ attend encore plus à l’ avenir. Avec les élargissements et lorsque laCommunauté passerait à vingt membres et plus, le système de fonctionnement des institu-tions européennes doit être carrément révisé et se conduire à une reforme. Une analyseétendue concernant ces réformes et révisions sera réalisée dans un prochain travail.

228 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ANNEXE

TABLEAU 1

Jusqu’ au 1er mai 2004, chaque pays membre dispose du nombre de voix suivant:

Allemagne, France, Italie et Royaume-Uni 10Espagne 8Belgique, Grèce, Pays-Bas et Portugal 5Autriche et Suède 4Danemark, Irlande et Finlande 3Luxembourg 2TOTAL 87

TABLEAU 2

A partir du 1er novembre 2004, les pays membres (y compris les nouveaux États

membres) disposeront respectivement du nombre de voix suivant:

Allemagne, France, Italie et Royaume-Uni 29Espagne et Pologne 27Pays-Bas 13Belgique, République tchèque, Grèce, Hongrie et Portugal 12Autriche et Suède 10Danemark, Irlande, Lituanie, Slovaquie et Finlande 7Chypre, Estonie, Lettonie, Luxembourg et Slovénie 4Malte 3TOTAL 321

TABLEAU 3

nombre de sièges par groupe politique au 1er avril 2003

Groupe politique Abréviation Sièges

Parti populaire européen (démocrates-chrétiens) et démocrates européens PPE-DE 232

Parti des socialistes européens PSE 175

Parti européen des libéraux, démocrates et réformateurs ELDR 52

Gauche unitaire européenne / Gauche verte nordique GUE / NGL 49

Verts/Alliance libre européenne V/ALE 44

Union pour l’ Europe des Nations UEN 23

Europe des démocraties et des différences EDD 18

Non inscrits NI 31

TOTAL 624

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 229

TABLEAU 4

Nombre de sièges par pays

(par ordre alphabétique selon le nom de chaque pays dans sa langue respective)

1999-2004 2004-2007 2007-2009

Belgique 25 24 24Bulgarie – – 18Chypre – 6 6République tchèque – 24 24Danemark 16 14 14Allemagne 99 99 99Grèce 25 24 24Espagne 64 54 54Estonie – 6 6France 87 78 78Hongrie – 24 24Irlande 15 13 13Italie 87 78 78Lettonie – 9 9Lituanie – 13 13Luxembourg 6 6 6Malte – 5 5Pays-Bas 31 27 27Autriche 21 18 18Pologne – 54 54Portugal 25 24 24Roumanie – – 36Slovaquie – 14 14Slovénie – 7 7Finlande 16 14 14Suède 22 19 19Royaume-Uni 87 78 78TOTAL (MAX) 626 732 786

230 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

References

Blin Olivier: Les Institutions Communautaires, ed. Ellipses Marketing, collection MiseAu Point, Novembre 2001.

Cadart J.: Institutions politiques et droit constitutionnel, Paris, 1987.Cohen-Joathan G.: Le Parlement Européen, ÂΉ.µÔ˘Ï‹˜ ÙˆÓ ∂ÏÏ‹ÓˆÓ, 1978, Commis-

sion des Communautés Européennes, Secrétariat général, Présentation du traitésur l’ Union européenne, Bruxelles, 21.2.1992.

Constantinesco V.: Compétences et pouvoirs dans les Communautés Européennes, Paris,1974.

Delcros Xavier: Droit Européen: les institutions, ed. Ellipses Marketing, Juillet 2002Denys Simon: Le système juridique communautaire, ed. Puf, collection Droit Fondamen-

tal, Novembre 2001.Denys Simon: Droit Communautaire Général. Le système juridique, Presse Universitaire

de France, Janvier 1998.Dony Marianne: Droit de la Communauté et de l’ Union Européenne, ed. Université De

Bruxelles, collection Etudes Européennes, Octobre 2001.Doutriox Lequie: Les Institutions des Unions Européennes, Documentation Française.

Coll. Réflexe Européen, 1998.Geneveve Bertrand: La prise des décisions dans l’ Union Européenne, Documentation

Française, Coll. Réflexe Européen, 1998.Jigouzo Yves: Droit constitutionnel et institutions politiques, ed. Dalloz-sirey, collection

Annales Du Droit.Lindley Robert: Les relations sociales en Europe. Institutions et économie,ed. Harmattan

(éditions L’ ), Septembre 1998.Moreau Defarges Philippe: Les institutions Européennes, ed. Dalloz-Sirey, collection

compact, août 2002.Prelot M., Boulois J.: Institutions politiques et droit constitutionnel, Paris, 1987.Renout Harald-W: Institutions Européennes, édition 2003-2004, ed. Centre De Publica-

tion Univers, collection Manuel, Septembre 2003.Textes Comparés Collectifs: Les Traités de Rome, Maastricht, Amsterdam et Nice. Le

Traité sur l’ Union Européenne et le Traité instituant la Communauté Européennemodifiés par le Traité de Nice, ed. Doc Franc Insee Jo Cereq Certu, Mars 2002.

Wymeersch Eddy: La société européenne. Organisation juridique et fiscale, intérêts, per-spectives, ed. Dalloz-Sirey, collection Thèmes Et Commentaires, Mai 2003.

La structure et le pouvoir des institutions européennes. Origines, statut et perspectives... 231

The impact of inflation on bond rates.An empirical analysis within Eurozone.

Ioannis ChristidisDepartment of Business AdministrationTechnoligical Educational Institute(TEI) of Patras

Abstract

∆he aim of this article is to measure the impact of inflation on bond rates and indi-rectly define the trend in the banking interest rates. In times of a strong internationalbanking competition, the profitability of a bank depends highly on pricing policy. Coun-tries with a rather high level of inflation impede the decline of bond rates and conse-quently delay the creation of competitive baking interest rates. In this paper eurozonearea shall be regarded as a single country, although a lot of work should be done to reachthis point. A relation between inflation and bond rate will be derived. This relation will bea guideline for the level of banking interest rates.

¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë

√ ÛÎÔfi˜ ·˘ÙÔ‡ ÙÔ˘ ¿ÚıÚÔ˘ Â›Ó·È Ó· ÌÂÙÚ‹ÛÂÈ ÙËÓ Â›‰Ú·ÛË ÙÔ˘ ÏËıˆÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ¿-Óˆ ÛÙ· ÂÈÙfiÎÈ· ÙˆÓ ÎÚ·ÙÈÎÒÓ Ù›ÙÏˆÓ Î·È ¤ÌÌÂÛ· Ó· ÔÚ›ÛÂÈ ÙËÓ Ù¿ÛË ÙˆÓ ÙÚ·Â˙ÈÎÒÓÂÈÙÔΛˆÓ. ™Â ÂÔ¯¤˜ ÈÛ¯˘ÚÔ‡ ‰ÈÂıÓÔ‡˜ ÙÚ·Â˙ÈÎÔ‡ ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÌÔ‡, Ë ÎÂÚ‰ÔÊÔÚ›· ÙˆÓÙÚ·Â˙ÒÓ ÂÍ·ÚÙ¿Ù·È Û ˘„ËÏfi ‚·ıÌfi ·fi ÙËÓ ÙÈÌÔÏÔÁȷ΋ ÙÔ˘˜ ÔÏÈÙÈ΋. ÃÒÚ˜ ÌÂ̤ÏÏÔÓ ˘„ËÏfi Â›Â‰Ô ÏËıˆÚÈÛÌÔ‡ ÂÌÔ‰›˙Ô˘Ó ÙËÓ ÙÒÛË ÙˆÓ ÂÈÙÔΛˆÓ ÎÚ·ÙÈÎÒÓÙ›ÙÏˆÓ ÌÂ Û˘Ó¤ÂÈ· Ó· ηı˘ÛÙÂÚ‹ÛÔ˘Ó ÙË ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ·ÓÙ·ÁˆÓÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ÙÚ·Â˙ÈÎÒÓÂÈÙÔΛˆÓ. ™ÙÔ ·ÚfiÓ ¿ÚıÚÔ Ë Â˘Úˆ˙ÒÓË ı· ıˆÚËı› ˆ˜ Ì›· ÌÔÓ·‰È΋ ¯ÒÚ·, ·ÚfiÏÔÔ˘ ¯ÚÂÈ¿˙ÂÙ·È ÔÏÏ‹ ‰Ô˘ÏÂÈ¿ ÁÈ· Ó· ÂÈÙ¢¯ı› ·˘Ùfi. £· ÂÎÙÈÌËı› Ì›· Û¯¤ÛË ·Ó¿ÌÂ-Û· ÛÙÔÓ ÏËıˆÚÈÛÌfi Î·È ÙÔ ÂÈÙfiÎÈÔ ÎÚ·ÙÈÎÒÓ Ù›ÙψÓ. ∞˘Ù‹ Ë Û¯¤ÛË ı· ¯ÚËÛÈ̇ÛÂȈ˜ Ô‰ËÁfi˜ ÁÈ· ÙÔÓ ÚÔÛ‰ÈÔÚÈÛÌfi ÙˆÓ ÙÚ·Â˙ÈÎÒÓ ÂÈÙÔΛˆÓ.

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 233

∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜

Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003, pp. 233-248

1. Introduction

In this paper we will try to will examine the reasons of inflation and later we will re-fer to the results of inflation. Especially, the bond rates will follow the inflation trend andwill yield higher interest rates. This will depend on the elasticities of demand. Banks arebound to follow the trend of bond rates. Countries will different bond rates will have dif-ferent interest rate levels. In this paper we will try to measure the infect of inflation onbond rates for all eurozone countries regarded as a single country. This econometric mod-el will be used as a guideline for bankers.

2. Theory

The reasons of inflation

Inflationary pressures are attributed either to demand pull (Trevithick J., Mulvey C.,1975), cost-push or to imported inflation (Prest A., Coppock D., 1976).

The results of inflation

Inflation increases uncertainty and is off-putting for investment decisions. Hence, thevolume of banking credit is reduced, leading to a lower banking profit and / or leading tomore bad loans. Furthermore the prices of exported goods become higher which in turnreduces trade balance, distorts relative prices, curtailing consumption level, and causingpessimistic expectations (Mundell R., 1963 and Parkin J, 1974). Apart from the above, in-flation has an efficiency cost and has a negative impact on growth. It is estimated thatthere is a statistically significant negative relationship between inflation and growth in arecent cross section analysis between various countries (Fisher S., 1993), Barro R., 1995,Sarel M., 1996).

But the bond rate increases due to inflation and fiscal deficit too. Bond rate, orthe equivalent (like treasury bill rate), are determined by the government policy to reducefiscal deficit. In their work concerning inflation and interest rates as a result of fiscaldeficit Bruno Michael and Fisher Stanley (1990) pointed out that the level of interest ratedepends on inflation. In their work about inflation and interest rates as a result of a fiscaldeficit Bruno Michael and Fisher Stanley (1990) claimed that government is able to fi-nance fiscal deficit either by printing money or [and] by selling bonds to the public. In thisarticle it is proved that nominal interest rate depends on inflation, on growth of moneysupply, on the share of money in the gross domestic product, on the growth rate of theshare of stock indexed bonds in the gross domestic product, and on the share of stock in-dexed bonds in the gross domestic product. In addition, it is indirectly proved that whenthe European monetary union is completed, then any country’s interest rate differentia-tion from the interest rates of other countries will be independent from the own country’s

234 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

[internal] inflation rate. It will depend however on the above mentioned factors. Using thearticle’s jargon the constraint about budget deficit is expressed as follows:

[‘H / P] + ‘B - rB = G - T = dY

where: ‘H The growth rate in the demand for moneyP Inflation rate

‘B The growth rate in the stock of indexed bondsr Deflated interest rate

B Stock of indexed bondsG Government purchasesT Taxationd Percentage in gross domestic product

À Gross domestic product

The constraint on wealth is expressed by the next equation:

v = b + hwhere: v [µ + ∏] / À

b µ / Àh ∏ / À

Further, according to this article, the demand for real balances is as follows:

h = v* exp [– a (e + r) ]where: e = expected inflation rate.

In this article there is the strict assumption that no investment is made, so the equi-librium in the gross domestic product is as follows1:

À = c(r, V) - c1T + G

The consumption c(r, V) is assumed to have a positive partial derivative with respectto wealth, and a negative partial derivative with respect to deflated interest rate. Thus, theconstraint of fiscal deficit can be expressed as:

ı h + ‘b + n b = d + r b

Bond rate is a competitor to the bank interest rate, and as a consequence an in-crease in bond rate will certainly bring about a higher bank interest rate (Goodhart C,1975). Svensson (1997) in his article pointed out theoretically that there is a positive re-lation between bank interest rate and bond rate. In order to restrict inflation, monetarypolicy is not the only way to do it, but it depends on other factors too. Suppose accord-ing to this article that the Central Bank sets a target * regarding inflation rate (say 2%per year) and suppose that it aims to minimize the expected sum of discounted future de-viations of the real inflation from the target inflation. That is:

min Et{™∆=t ‰∆=t* ó ( – *)2}where: Et Expectations

‰ discount factor, 0 � ‰ � 1

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 235

In practice, since repo rate affects inflation rate, in this article repo is regarded as aforward inflation rate.

The extent of the increase in banking interest rates will depend on the distri-

bution of elasticities of the demand for banking services among the bank market

segments. The structure of demand is important for bank profitability. For instance,MasterCard is in a position to know the demand structure of its clientele according to var-ious classification criteria such as: the income level of customers, the age level of cus-tomers, the education of them, the time zone in which operations are made, and so forth(Bank Marketing International 1997). After being able to have statistical data of theabove-mentioned classification type, the bank will be in a position to create [and estimateeconometrically2] its consumer profile (Georgiou ¡. ª., 1998). This profile will enablethe bank not only to know at any point of time the market segmentation, but also, andperhaps the most important, to be able to predict demand changes, and therefore, to beready to adjust accordingly and profitably3. If a market segment is more profitable thanthe others are, then a bank will re-organise its policy accordingly. As an example, Amer-ican Express Bank disclosed that its sector dealing with the market segment of travelservices, [including travel cards] showed in the period July – September 1999 profits of413 million US$. These profits had an increase of 14 -15% in relation to the previous timespan of the year 1998. In other words, this market segment yields very high growth ratesconcerning market share as well as profitability.

Environmental changes make banks change too. It is well known that banks are fi-nancial intermediaries between investment and savings. Since demand change, then bankschange their role in the society. In fact society changes and labour conditions change. Tobe clear, the use of internet and the phone banking can cause radical changes in workingsystem as well as labour law. Work can also be done from home even far away from thetraditional working place [the bank]. Labour law examining working conditions, overtimepay and the like should be therefore adjusted accordingly. Further, a bank is not today thetraditional credit supplier exclusively to the manufacturing sector. In our time, there arenew emerging market segments with very good prospects [like retail, treasury, etc]. To-day, the banks should have a personal and friendly contact with the client. This is impor-tant, since with the use of internet clients can conduct a lot of their banking transactionsfrom home, without visiting the bank. In addition, with the use of internet the informa-tion spreads rapidly, and in a matter of seconds a client can change the bank is dealingwith. So, banks can easily loose customers now. This risk [of loosing customers] can beovercome by having a good picture of the bank market segmentation. The good knowl-edge of market segments enables the banks to offer at each market segment a tailor madeproduct [service]. Hence, banks will be in a position to increase market share, and prof-its. Further, banks by investing in peak technology, are able to offer more competitiveprices, and attract more customers. To reach customers banks use many systems like "instore banking", "kiosk banking", "smart card", "cross selling", etc. Finally, market seg-

236 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

mentation can be improved by the use of "complaints unit". In this banking unit all cus-tomer complaints are solved, and finally bank gets a very good information of these de-mand segments that are not completely satisfied. Hence, bank adjusts the supply side ac-cordingly. (Bank Marketing International, 1997).

Bank interest rates as policy instruments (Lipsey R.,1971) are affected by bondrates, which in turn are determined by open market operations in the attempt to reducebudget deficit. Hence, there is a conflict between the policy of reducing budget deficit andthe policy of controlling inflation (Lipsey R., 1971). Consequently, fiscal deficit impedesbanking interest rates reduction.

3. The aim of this paper

This paper will focus on the measurement of the effect of inflation rate on the bondrate for all eurozone members. This is important even in an environment like the euro-zone area where inflation and interest rates are kept at low levels, and where there arenot rapid price fluctuations and abrupt risks (Kyriazis ¡., 1998). Apart from the above,since bank interest rates are closely related to bond raters, the present model becomesuseful from the banker’s point of view. European banks face a strong international com-petition and they lack behind the United States ones in terms of effficiency for: a) in Eu-rope there are too many banks b) in some countries (like France, Italy, Belgium, Hollandand Austria) banks are overstaffed in relation to the United States ones c) european banksoffer services at non-competitive prices d) since they are not internationally competitive,when they reduce their prices [interest rates] this makes their profit margin lower e) theyhave bad loans f) they seem unable to reduce their cost (Garry Schinasi, 1997). Thus, Eu-ropean banks should take all appropriate measures to survive in the international bank-ing competition (Georgiou ª, 1997), bankers are now more concerned about their pricepolicy than before. Competitive bank product prices are related to bank profitability. Itmust be noted that competitive bank prices do not only rely on the competitive cost ofcapital [in other words the bank interest rate we examine] but also on the price of labour.Hence, all banks are aware of this cost and by means of investment in peak technologythey try to replace labour by capital4 (Loukas Gr., 1997, Kanellopoulos K., Tsatiris G.,Mitrakos Th. 1998, Georgiou ¡. ª., 1998, Vliamos S. and Kyriazis ¡., 1993).

As a result, will the policy maker5 be able to determine the levels in which the bankinterest rates are to be [since they follow bond rates]. Further, this model becomes useful,for it can also point out the competitive advantage of each country regarding interest ratepolicy.6

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 237

4. Estimation

The economic model is:

Ln[bond rate]=a+b[cpi] (1)where cpi = consumer price index

That is equivalent to[bond rate]=e(a+b[cpi])

The model (1) estimation

The correlation is removed according to the method of (Hildreth G and Lu J Y,(1960)). Hence, there is no autocorrelaion in the residuals for Ú=0,4. In other words theinitial variables are transformed as follows:

À*= ‚1(1–Ú)+‚2 Ã2* + … ‚Ó ÃÓ

*

And each variable is transformed as:

Yt* = Yt–ÚYt-1

Xt* = Xt–ÚXt-1

And after this transformation, the correlation is removed and the model results are:

All coefficients are statistically significant and the coefficient of inflation is positiveand larger than number one. That means that the higher the level of inflation the high-er the bond rate. This model is reliable because there is no heteroscedasticity. The het-eroscedasticity test is based on the method of Goldfeld S. M. and Quandt R. E., (1965).We set in increasing order the independent variable [inflation]. Then we omit 11 ob-servations in the middle of the sample. Hence we create two equal sample sizes ofN=(241–11)/2=230/2=115 each. Then we use F distribution with degrees of freedom(115–2)=113. The critical value of F is F(113, 113).

The test is

Since F < Fcritical there is no heteroscedasticity.

Fcritical (113,113) 3,900

ESS

ESS2 [error sum of squares of high subsample] 3,547

ESS1 [error sum of squares of low subsample] 12,002

F = ESS2/ESS1 0,295

Ln[bond rate]= –1,698 + 6,296 [cpi](–62,59) (12,055)

R2 = 0,3755 N = 241

238 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

5. Conclusions

1. Inflation has a positive impact on bond rates, as a result on bank interest rates. Bankscannot reduce their interest rates and be more competitive price-wise if inflation pres-sures persist. In other words macroeconomic environment [the case of inflation] hasa negative impact on microeconomy [the case of bank competitive prices]. Hence,even privately owned banks depend on the macroeconomic conditions of the countryin which they operate.

2. This model, that regards eurozone as a single country, can also be useful for predictionpurposes. The determination coefficient however is not too high for this, for the sam-ple is not homogeneous. But if this model is applied separately on each country, thenthe sample becomes homogeneous and prediction is expected to be reliable.

3. Apart from the analysis within the individual members of eurozone, this model can al-so be examined from another point of view, that of the three economic poles (Kyri-azis ¡. 1998). In other words, if we apply this model separately in each economic polei.e. of eurozone, of United States and of Japan, we will be able to have important con-clusions about the international bond rate levels, as well as the international bankcompetition in terms of bank interest rates.

4. The above two topics 2 and 3 are triggering a thorough research but they go beyondthe limits of the present article.

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 239

STATISTICAL APPENDIX

The results of the regression

Multiple R 0,614925908

R2 0,378133873

Adjusted R2 0,375531922

Sample size 241

Analysis of variance

Degrees offreedom SS F

regression 1 12,1413402 145,3270915

residual 239 19,96723583

sum 240 32,10857603

coefficients st. deviation t

Constant term –1,698195827 0,02712944 –62,59605245

[cpi] 6,296351432 0,522294761 12,05516866

240 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

DATA APPENDIX*

country year inflation bond

rate rate

danmark 1980 12,30% 17,66%

danmark 1981 11,70% 18,92%

danmark 1982 10,10% 20,39%

danmark 1983 6,90% 14,46%

danmark 1984 6,30% 13,96%

danmark 1985 4,70% 11,31%

danmark 1986 3,70% 9,91%

danmark 1987 4,00% 11,06%

danmark 1988 4,60% 9,78%

danmark 1989 4,80% 9,75%

danmark 1990 2,60% 10,74%

danmark 1991 2,40% 9,59%

danmark 1992 2,10% 9,47%

danmark 1993 1,30% 7,08%

danmark 1994 2,00% 7,41%

danmark 1995 2,15% 7,58%

danmark 1996 2,10% 6,04%

danmark 1997 2,25% 5,08%

danmark 1998 1,82% 4,59%

danmark 1999 2,45% 4,30%

danmark 2000 2,94% 5,54%

danmark 2001 2,32% 7,16%

country year inflation bond

rate rate

belgium 1980 6,70% 13,90%

belgium 1981 7,60% 14,88%

belgium 1982 8,70% 13,96%

belgium 1983 7,70% 10,38%

belgium 1984 6,30% 11,60%

belgium 1985 4,90% 9,44%

belgium 1986 1,30% 8,09%

belgium 1987 1,60% 7,00%

belgium 1988 1,20% 6,61%

belgium 1989 3,10% 8,45%

belgium 1990 3,50% 9,62%

belgium 1991 3,20% 9,23%

belgium 1992 2,40% 9,36%

belgium 1993 2,80% 8,52%

belgium 1994 2,40% 5,57%

belgium 1995 1,42% 4,67%

belgium 1996 2,10% 3,19%

belgium 1997 1,57% 3,38%

belgium 1998 0,96% 3,51%

belgium 1999 1,15% 2,72%

belgium 2000 2,55% 4,02%

belgium 2001 2,49% 4,16%

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 241

* These data are taken from IMF, International Financial Statistics, various editions.

country year inflation bond

rate rate

germany 1980 5,40% 7,85%

germany 1981 6,30% 10,37%

germany 1982 5,30% 8,31%

germany 1983 3,30% 5,63%

germany 1984 2,40% 5,66%

germany 1985 2,20% 5,04%

germany 1986 -0,10% 3,86%

germany 1987 0,20% 3,28%

germany 1988 1,28% 3,62%

germany 1989 2,74% 6,28%

germany 1990 2,67% 8,13%

germany 1991 3,63% 8,27%

germany 1992 5,10% 8,32%

germany 1993 4,38% 6,22%

germany 1994 2,73% 5,05%

germany 1995 1,86% 4,40%

germany 1996 1,48% 3,30%

germany 1997 1,97% 3,32%

germany 1998 0,97% 3,42%

germany 1999 0,57% 2,88%

germany 2000 2,00% 4,32%

germany 2001 2,43% 3,66%

country year inflation bond

rate rate

france 1980 13,30% 13,03%

france 1981 13,40% 15,79%

france 1982 11,80% 15,69%

france 1983 9,60% 13,63%

france 1984 7,40% 12,54%

france 1985 5,80% 10,94%

france 1986 2,50% 8,62%

france 1987 3,30% 9,43%

france 1988 2,75% 9,06%

france 1989 3,42% 8,79%

france 1990 3,41% 9,96%

france 1991 3,20% 9,05%

france 1992 2,42% 8,60%

france 1993 2,08% 6,91%

france 1994 1,67% 7,35%

france 1995 1,73% 7,59%

france 1996 2,06% 6,39%

france 1997 1,18% 5,63%

france 1998 0,68% 4,49%

france 1999 0,58% 4,69%

france 2000 1,72% 5,45%

france 2001 1,60% 4,26%

242 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

country year inflation bond

rate rate

holland 1980 6,50% 10,21%

holland 1981 6,70% 11,55%

holland 1982 5,90% 10,10%

holland 1983 2,80% 8,61%

holland 1984 3,30% 8,33%

holland 1985 2,20% 7,34%

holland 1986 0,10% 6,32%

holland 1987 -0,70% 6,40%

holland 1988 0,70% 6,42%

holland 1989 1,10% 7,22%

holland 1990 2,50% 8,92%

holland 1991 3,10% 8,74%

holland 1992 3,20% 8,10%

holland 1993 2,60% 6,51%

holland 1994 2,80% 7,20%

holland 1995 1,94% 7,20%

holland 1996 2,00% 6,49%

holland 1997 2,16% 5,81%

holland 1998 2,02% 4,87%

holland 1999 2,16% 4,92%

holland 2000 2,58% 5,51%

holland 2001 4,49% 5,17%

country year inflation bond

rate rate

greece 1980 24,82% 16,59%

greece 1981 24,43% 16,79%

greece 1982 20,55% 18,08%

greece 1983 20,45% 18,09%

greece 1984 18,55% 18,22%

greece 1985 19,10% 18,22%

greece 1986 23,16% 17,00%

greece 1987 16,27% 17,30%

greece 1988 13,53% 16,30%

greece 1989 13,84% 16,50%

greece 1990 20,33% 18,50%

greece 1991 19,50% 18,80%

greece 1992 15,82% 17,70%

greece 1993 14,45% 18,20%

greece 1994 10,92% 16,00%

greece 1995 8,90% 14,00%

greece 1996 7,90% 11,90%

greece 1997 5,54% 11,40%

greece 1998 4,73% 10,30%

greece 1999 2,67% 8,30%

greece 2000 3,09% 6,20%

greece 2001 3,40% 4,08%

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 243

country year inflation bond

rate rate

italy 1980 21,30% 15,92%

italy 1981 19,59% 19,70%

italy 1982 16,38% 19,44%

italy 1983 14,63% 17,90%

italy 1984 10,85% 15,37%

italy 1985 9,21% 13,71%

italy 1986 5,80% 11,40%

italy 1987 4,73% 10,73%

italy 1988 5,11% 11,13%

italy 1989 6,22% 12,58%

italy 1990 6,50% 12,38%

italy 1991 6,30% 12,54%

italy 1992 5,08% 14,32%

italy 1993 4,48% 10,58%

italy 1994 4,03% 9,17%

italy 1995 5,27% 10,85%

italy 1996 3,91% 8,46%

italy 1997 2,02% 6,33%

italy 1998 1,98% 4,59%

italy 1999 1,66% 3,01%

italy 2000 2,55% 4,53%

italy 2001 2,75% 4,05%

country year inflation bond

rate rate

ireland 1980 18,20% 15,13%

ireland 1981 20,40% 15,20%

ireland 1982 17,10% 16,33%

ireland 1983 10,50% 13,26%

ireland 1984 8,60% 13,13%

ireland 1985 5,40% 11,78%

ireland 1986 3,80% 11,85%

ireland 1987 3,10% 10,70%

ireland 1988 2,20% 7,81%

ireland 1989 4,10% 9,70%

ireland 1990 3,30% 10,90%

ireland 1991 3,20% 10,12%

ireland 1992 3,10% 9,50%

ireland 1993 1,41% 9,06%

ireland 1994 2,32% 5,87%

ireland 1995 2,54% 6,19%

ireland 1996 1,68% 5,36%

ireland 1997 1,47% 6,03%

ireland 1998 2,24% 5,37%

ireland 1999 1,61% 6,66%

ireland 2000 5,58% 11,82%

ireland 2001 4,85% 11,12%

244 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

country year inflation bond

rate rate

spain 1980 15,60% 15,70%

spain 1981 14,60% 15,80%

spain 1982 14,40% 15,70%

spain 1983 12,20% 19,80%

spain 1984 11,30% 13,43%

spain 1985 8,80% 10,90%

spain 1986 8,80% 8,63%

spain 1987 5,20% 8,03%

spain 1988 4,78% 10,79%

spain 1989 6,84% 13,57%

spain 1990 6,72% 14,17%

spain 1991 5,90% 12,45%

spain 1992 5,95% 12,44%

spain 1993 4,55% 10,53%

spain 1994 4,77% 8,11%

spain 1995 4,64% 9,79%

spain 1996 3,58% 7,23%

spain 1997 1,93% 5,02%

spain 1998 1,80% 3,79%

spain 1999 2,32% 3,01%

spain 2000 3,45% 4,61%

spain 2001 3,60% 3,92%

country year inflation bond

rate rate

portugal 1980 16,60% 12,37%

portugal 1981 20,00% 13,48%

portugal 1982 22,70% 14,37%

portugal 1983 25,10% 18,14%

portugal 1984 29,30% 21,15%

portugal 1985 19,30% 20,90%

portugal 1986 11,70% 15,96%

portugal 1987 9,40% 13,89%

portugal 1988 9,60% 12,97%

portugal 1989 12,60% 13,00%

portugal 1990 13,40% 13,52%

portugal 1991 11,40% 14,19%

portugal 1992 8,90% 12,88%

portugal 1993 6,80% 12,00%

portugal 1994 4,90% 9,50%

portugal 1995 4,17% 7,75%

portugal 1996 3,10% 5,75%

portugal 1997 2,13% 4,43%

portugal 1998 2,84% 5,82%

portugal 1999 2,31% 4,83%

portugal 2000 2,89% 5,91%

portugal 2001 4,85% 8,98%

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 245

Keywords

Bond rate, interest rate, inflation, bank.

Notes

1. Interests are excluded.

2. These type of data are confidential, but all banks should learn how to examine thor-oughly their huge source of information.

3. Thus minimizing market risk exposure.

4. Although this faces labour law rigidities.

5. Or the chairman of the bank.

6. Regarding competitive prices in banking services.

country year inflation bond

rate rate

uk 1991 5,90% 10,96%

uk 1992 3,70% 8,94%

uk 1993 1,60% 5,18%

uk 1994 2,50% 5,21%

uk 1995 3,40% 6,33%

uk 1996 2,41% 5,77%

uk 1997 3,22% 6,48%

uk 1998 3,41% 6,82%

uk 1999 1,56% 5,04%

uk 2000 2,89% 5,80%

uk 2001 1,84% 4,77%

country year inflation bond

rate rate

uk 1980 18,00% 15,16%

uk 1981 11,90% 13,03%

uk 1982 8,60% 11,47%

uk 1983 4,60% 9,59%

uk 1984 5,00% 9,30%

uk 1985 6,10% 11,56%

uk 1986 3,40% 10,37%

uk 1987 4,10% 9,25%

uk 1988 4,90% 9,78%

uk 1989 7,80% 13,05%

uk 1990 9,50% 14,08%

246 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

References

1. Bank Marketing International, 1997, "Segmentation, An Integrated and Flexible Ap-proach", Lafferty Publications, Dublin, April.

2. Barro R., 1995, "Inflation and Economic Growth", Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin,London, Bank of England, May.

3. Bruno Michael, Fisher Stanley,1990, "Seigniorage, Operating Rules, and the High In-flation Trap", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, p.p. 353-374.

4. Fisher S., 1993, "The role of Macroeconomic Factors in Growth", Journal of MonetaryEconomics, Vol.32, December.

5. Garry J, Schinasi, 1997, "European Monetary Union and International Capital Mar-kets: Structural Implications and Risks", Seminar on EMU and the internationalmoney system, Fondation Cammille Gutt, International Monetary Fund, Wash-ington, DC, March, p.p. 17-18.

6. Georgiou N. ª., 1997, "The Determinant Factors of Spread", Hellenic Bank Associa-tion, 4th quarter, page 100 [in greek].

7. Georgiou N. M, 1998, "Spread and Banking Profitability in Euro Period", Bulletin ofthe Commercial Bank of Greece no. 15 [in greek].

8. Goldfeld S. M., Quandt R. E., 1965, "Some Tests for Homoscedasticity", Journal ofAmerican Statistical Society, vol.60, pp. 539-545.

9. Goodhart C.A.E., 1975, Money Information and Uncertainty, Macmillan.10. Hildreth G. and Lu J. Y., 1960, "Demand Relations with Auto correlated Distur-

bances", Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station TechnicalBulletin 276, November

11. IMF, International Financial Statistics, various editions12. Kanellopoulos K., Tsatiris G., Mitrakos Th. (1998), "Structural Changes and Employ-

ment in Banks", Hellenic Bank Association, (Sakoula Ed.), chapter 6.3 [in greek]13. Kyriazis ¡., (1998), "A Proposal for a Tripolar International Exchange Rate System",

Bulletin of the National Bank of Greece, October, No10, page 2614. Lars E.O. Svensson,1997, "Inflation Forecast Targeting: Implementing and Monitor-

ing Inflation Targets", European Economic Review, 41, pp.1111 - 114615. Lipsey R., 1971, Positive Economics, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, p. 689.16. Loukas Gr., (1997), "Banks and Technology, Trends and the Period of Information", Bul-

letin of the Commercial Bank of Greece, No 11, July - September, page 14 [in greek].

The impact of inflation on bond rates. An empirical analysis within Eurozone. 247

17. Mundell R., 1963, "Inflation and Real Interest", Journal of Political Economy, June.18. Parkin J., 1974, "The Causes of Inflation: Recent Contribution and Current Contro-

versies", University of Manchester Inflation Workshop Discussion Paper 7405.19. Prest A., Coppock D., 1976, (editors), The UK Economy, A Manual of Applied Eco-

nomics, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, p. 3920. Sarel M., 1996, "Non-linear Effects of Inflation on Economic Growth", IMF Staff Pa-

pers, Vol.43, No1, March.21. Trevithick J., Mulvey C., 1975, The Economics of Inflation, Martin Robertson, Lon-

don.22. Vliamos S. and Kyriazis ¡, (1993), "Deregulation of National Banking Systems. The

case of Greece", Nagoya University Press.

248 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

™ÎÔfi˜ Î·È ™Ùfi¯ÔÈ Ù˘ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰·˜

∏ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ∂Ê·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜ (∂∂∂∂), ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÙËÓ Â›ÛËÌË ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ-΋ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰· ÙÔ˘ ∆∂π ¶ÂÈÚ·È¿ ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· ÌÔÚÔ‡Ó Ó· ‰ËÌÔÛȇÔÓÙ·È ÚˆÙfiÙ˘Â˜ ÂÚ¢ÓËÙÈΤ˜ ÂÚ-Á·Û›Â˜ ÌÂÙ¿ ·fi ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË (Û˘Ó‹ıˆ˜, 2 ÎÚÈÙÒÓ) Ì ıÂÌ·ÙÈÎfi ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓÔ Û ÌÈ· ·fi ÙȘ ÂÚÈÔ¯¤˜ÙˆÓ ªË¯·ÓÈÎÒÓ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÒÓ Î·È ∆¯ÓÔÏÔÁ›·˜, Ù˘ º˘ÛÈ΋˜, ÙˆÓ ª·ıËÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ, ÙˆÓ ∆¯ÓÒÓ, ÙˆÓ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈÎÒÓ Î·È ∞ÓıÚˆÈÛÙÈÎÒÓ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÒÓ (πÛÙÔÚÈο, ∫ÔÈÓˆÓÈο, ¡ÔÌÈο, ¢ÈÔÈÎËÙÈο Î·È ¶ÔÏÈÙÈ-ο ı¤Ì·Ù·). ™Ùfi¯ÔÈ Ù˘ ∂∂∂∂ ›ӷÈ, ·ÊÂÓfi˜ Ë ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË Ó¤ˆÓ ÂÚ¢ÓËÙÈÎÒÓ ·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ, ÌÂıfi-‰ˆÓ, ‹ (ηÈ) ·Ó·Ï‡ÛˆÓ, ·ÊÂÙ¤ÚÔ˘ ‰Â Ë ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁ›· ÌÈ·˜ Ó¤·˜ ËÁ‹˜ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ÏËÚÔÊfiÚËÛ˘¯Ú‹ÛÈÌ˘ ÛÙËÓ ÂÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂ÓË, ΢ڛˆ˜, ¤Ú¢ӷ.

√‰ËÁ›Â˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ™˘ÁÁÚ·Ê›˜

∏ ∂∂∂∂ ‰¤¯ÂÙ·È ÚÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË ÁÈ· ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË ÚˆÙfiÙ˘Â˜ ÂÚ¢ÓËÙÈΤ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ ÁÚ·Ì̤Ó˜ÛÙËÓ ∂ÏÏËÓÈ΋, ‹ ÛÙËÓ ∞ÁÁÏÈ΋, Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ‰ËÌÔÛÈ¢ı› Ô‡Ù ‚Ú›ÛÎÔÓÙ·È ˘fi ÎÚ›ÛË Û ¿ÏÏÔ Ì¤ÛÔ.ªÈ· ÚˆÙfiÙ˘Ë ÂÚÁ·Û›· Â›Ó·È ‰ËÌÔÛȇÛÈÌË ÛÙËÓ ∂∂∂∂ ÂÊfiÛÔÓ ÚfiÎÂÈÙ·È ÁÈ· ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ô˘ ·Ô-‰ÂÈÁ̤ӷ ÚÔÛı¤ÙÂÈ ÛÙËÓ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ÁÓÒÛË. °È· ÙÔÓ ÏfiÁÔ ·˘Ùfi Ë ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó· ·Ó·Ù‡ÛÛÂÈ ÌÂÏËÚfiÙËÙ· ÙËÓ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ÛΤ„Ë Î·È ÂͤÏÈÍË ÙÔ˘ ÂÍÂÙ·˙fiÌÂÓÔ˘ ı¤Ì·ÙÔ˜, ·Ó·ÊÂÚfiÌÂÓË ÂÈÛ·ÁˆÁÈοÛÙËÓ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Û· (ηٿ ·ÚÈÔ ÏfiÁÔ ÚfiÛÊ·ÙË) ‚È‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·, ·ÏÏ¿ Î·È Û ¿ÏÏ· ·Ô‰ÂÈÎÙÈο ÛÙÔȯ›·.

∏ ˘Ô‚ÔÏ‹ ÚˆÙfiÙ˘ˆÓ ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ ÚÔ˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË ÛÙËÓ ∂∂∂∂ Á›ÓÂÙ·È Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÍ‹˜ÁÂÓÈÎÔ‡˜ ηÓfiÓ˜. ∫¿ı ÂÚÁ·Û›· ˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È ÚÔ˜ ÎÚ›ÛË ÛÙË °Ú·ÌÌ·Ù›· Ù˘ ∂∂∂∂ (£Ë‚ÒÓ 250 &¶. ƒ¿ÏÏË, 12244 ∞ÈÁ¿Ïˆ) Û ÙÚ›· (3) ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·Ê·. ªÂÙ¿ ÙËÓ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË ÙˆÓ ÎÚÈÙÒÓ, Ë ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ô˘ÎÚ›ÓÂÙ·È ‰ËÌÔÛȇÛÈÌË ÂÈÛÙÚ¤ÊÂÙ·È Ì·˙› Ì ÙȘ ÂÎı¤ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÎÚÈÙÒÓ ÛÙÔÓ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ· ÔÔÔ›Ô˜, ·ÊÔ‡ ÚԂ› ÛÙȘ ˘Ô‰ÂÈÎÓ˘fiÌÂÓ˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ÎÚÈÙ¤˜ Û¯ÂÙÈΤ˜ ‰ÈÔÚıÒÛÂȘ ‹ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜, ˘Ô‚¿Ï-ÏÂÈ Ì¤Û· Û ¯ÚÔÓÈÎfi ‰È¿ÛÙËÌ· ÙÚÈÒÓ (3) ÌËÓÒÓ ·fi ÙË ÁÓˆÛÙÔÔ›ËÛË ÚÔ˜ ·˘ÙfiÓ ÙˆÓ ÂÎı¤ÛÂˆÓ ÙˆÓÎÚÈÙÒÓ, Í·Ó¿ ÛÙË °Ú·ÌÌ·Ù›· Ù˘ ∂∂∂∂ ÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÛÙËÓ ÙÂÏÈ΋ Ù˘ ÌÔÚÊ‹, ¿ÏÈ Û ÙÚ›· (3) ·ÓÙ›-

ÁÚ·Ê·, Úfi˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË. ™ÙËÓ ÙÂÏÈ΋ ·˘Ù‹ Ê¿ÛË Ô Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜ ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó· ·Ú·‰ÒÛÂÈ Ì·˙› Ì ٷ 3·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·Ê· fiÏ˘ Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÙÔ˘ (οı ¤Ó· ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·ÊÔ ÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÈ ∫›ÌÂÓÔ, ¶›Ó·Î˜, °Ú·ÊÈΤ˜¶·Ú·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ, ºˆÙÔÁڷʛ˜, §Â˙¿ÓÙ˜ ¶ÈӿΈÓ, §Â˙¿ÓÙ˜ °Ú·ÊÈÎÒÓ ¶·Ú·ÛÙ¿ÛˆÓ, §Â˙¿ÓÙ˜ ºˆ-ÙÔÁÚ·ÊÈÒÓ) Î·È ¤Ó· floppy disk, ‹ CD-ROM, Ô˘ ÂÚȤ¯ÂÈ ¤Ó· ·ÎÚÈ‚¤˜ ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·ÊÔ Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÙÔ˘(Û ·Ú¯Â›o Word97, ‹ ÓÂÒÙÂÚÔ) ηıÒ˜ Î·È fiÏ· Ù· ˘fiÏÔÈ· ·Ú¯Â›· ¯ˆÚÈÛÙ¿ Û ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈ΋ ÌÔÚÊ‹(ÔÈ Ù‡ÔÈ ·Ú¯Â›ˆÓ ‰›ÓÔÓÙ·È Û ۯÂÙÈ΋ ·Ú¿ÁÚ·ÊÔ ·Ú·Î¿Ùˆ).

ÀÔ¯ÚˆÙÈο, οı ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ô˘ ˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ∂∂∂∂ ÚÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Û˘Óԉ‡-ÂÙ·È Ì ÂÈÛÙÔÏ‹ ˘ÔÁÂÁÚ·Ì̤ÓË ·fi ÙÔÓ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ· Ô˘ ‰ËÏÒÓÂÈ, fiÙÈ Ë ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ì ٛÙÏÔ

«...», ηٿ ÙÔ ·ÚÂÏıfiÓ, ‰ÂÓ ¤¯ÂÈ ‰ËÌÔÛÈ¢ı› Ô‡Ù ¤¯ÂÈ ˘Ô‚ÏËı› ÚÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË Û ¿ÏÏÔ Ì¤ÛÔ.∞Ô˘Û›· Û¯ÂÙÈ΋˜ ÂÈÛÙÔÏ‹˜ ¤¯ÂÈ Û·Ó ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ· ÙË ÌË ÚÔÒıËÛË ÁÈ· ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË Ù˘ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ̤-Ó˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜.

™ËÌÂȈ٤ÔÓ, fiÙÈ Î¿ı ˘Ô‚ÏËı›۷ ÚÔ˜ ÎÚ›ÛË ÂÚÁ·Û›· ‰ÂÓ ÂÈÛÙÚ¤ÊÂÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ Û˘ÁÁÚ·-ʤ·, ÏËÓ Ù˘ ÂÚÈÙÒÛˆ˜ Ô˘ Û¯ÂÙÈ΋ ·›ÙËÛË ¤¯ÂÈ Î·Ù·ÙÂı› ÛÙË °Ú·ÌÌ·Ù›· ηٿ ÙËÓ ·Ú¯È΋ ˘Ô-‚ÔÏ‹. ∂›Û˘, ÁÈ· ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ ·Ú¯ÂÈÔı¤ÙËÛ˘, ηÏÔ‡ÓÙ·È ÔÈ Û˘ÁÁÚ·Ê›˜ fiˆ˜ Û˘Ó˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÔ˘Ó Ì ÙËÓ Î·-Ù¿ıÂÛË ÚÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÙÔ˘˜ Î·È Û‡ÓÙÔÌÔ µÈÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎfi ™ËÌ›ˆÌ·.

™ÎÔfi˜ Î·È ™Ùfi¯ÔÈ Ù˘ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰·˜ 249

¢È·ÌfiÚʈÛË ÂÚȯÔ̤ÓÔ˘ ˘Ô‚·ÏÏfiÌÂÓ˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜

ñ ¢ÔÌ‹ ∫ÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘. ∆Ô Î›ÌÂÓÔ Ó· Â›Ó·È ÁÚ·Ì̤ÓÔ, ۠ϢÎfi ¯·ÚÙ› ∞4 (ÛÙË Ì›· ÏÂ˘Ú¿), ‰ÈÏfi ‰È¿ÛÙÈ-¯Ô, ÌÔÓfiÛÙËÏÔ, ·Ê‹ÓÔÓÙ·˜ ·ÚÎÂÙfi Ï¢ÚÈÎfi ¯ÒÚÔ ‰ÂÍÈ¿ Î·È ·ÚÈÛÙÂÚ¿ Ù˘ ÛÂÏ›‰·˜ ÁÈ· ˘Ô‰Â›ÍÂȘ ·fiÙÔ˘˜ ÎÚÈÙ¤˜, ηٿ ÚÔÙ›ÌËÛË, Ì ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú˜ Times New Roman 12 pts. (ÏËÓ ÙÔ˘ Ù›ÙÏÔ˘, ÙˆÓ ÔÓÔÌ¿-ÙˆÓ Î·È ‰È¢ı‡ÓÛÂˆÓ ÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÁڷʤˆÓ, Ù˘ ÂÚ›Ï˄˘ Î·È Ù¤ÏÔ˜ ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÌÌ¿ÙˆÓ ÛÙȘ ϤÍÂȘ ÎÏÂÈ‰È¿Î·È ÛÙȘ ÏÂ˙¿ÓÙ˜). ∫·Ù¿ ÙËÓ Û˘ÁÁÚ·Ê‹ Ó· ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ıÂ›Ù·È Ë ÂÍ‹˜ ÛÂÈÚ¿ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·Û˘ ÙˆÓ ÂÓÔÙ‹ÙˆÓ Ù˘ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜: ∆›ÙÏÔ˜, ™˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜, ¢È‡ı˘ÓÛË Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·, ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë, §¤ÍÂȘ ÎÏÂȉȿ, ∫‡ÚÈÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ ÂÚ-Á·Û›·˜, ∂˘¯·ÚÈÛٛ˜ (.¯. ÚÔ˜ ¯ÔÚËÁÔ‡˜), ¶·Ú·ÚÙ‹Ì·Ù·, µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·, ∂ÎÙÂÓ‹˜ ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë ÛÙ·∞ÁÁÏÈο, ¢È·ÁÚ¿ÌÌ·Ù·-∂ÈÎfiÓ˜ Î·È ¶›Ó·Î˜, §Â˙¿ÓÙ˜ ¢È·ÁÚ·ÌÌ¿ÙˆÓ-∂ÈÎfiÓˆÓ Î·È ¶ÈӿΈÓ.

ñ ™‡ÛÙËÌ· ªÔÓ¿‰ˆÓ, ª·ıËÌ·ÙÈο ™‡Ì‚ÔÏ· Î·È Ù‡ÔÈ. ∫·Ù¿ ÙËÓ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË ÌÂÁÂıÒÓ Ô˘ ÂÎÊÚ¿-˙ÔÓÙ·È Ì ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ Î·È ÁÂÓÈο Û Ù¯ÓÈο ı¤Ì·Ù· ÔÈ Û˘ÁÁÚ·Ê›˜ ÔÊ›ÏÔ˘Ó Ó· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÔ‡Ó ÙÔ ¢ÈÂ-

ıÓ¤˜ ™‡ÛÙËÌ· ªÔÓ¿‰ˆÓ (S.I.).

∂›Ó·È fï˜ ‰˘Ó·ÙfiÓ, ÂÊfiÛÔÓ ¤¯ÂÈ ÂÈÎÚ·Ù‹ÛÂÈ ‹ Û˘ÓËı›˙ÂÙ·È ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈο, Ó· ·Ú·ı¤ÙÔÓÙ·È ÂÈÚÔ-Ûı¤Ùˆ˜, ̤۷ Û ·ÚÂÓı¤ÛÂȘ, ÔÈ ÙÈ̤˜ ÌÂÁÂıÒÓ ÂÎÊÚ·Ṳ̂Ó˜ Û ÌÔÓ¿‰Â˜ ¿ÏÏÔ˘ ™˘ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ªÔÓ¿-‰ˆÓ. ∫Ï·ÛÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ ·Ú·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·Ô‰›‰ÔÓÙ·È ¯ˆÚ›˜ ÙË ÁÚ·ÌÌ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÎÏ¿ÛÌ·ÙÔ˜, ·ÏÏ¿ Ì ÙÔÓ·ÚÈıÌËÙ‹, ÌÂÙ¿ ‰È¿ÛÙËÌ· Î·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÙÔÓ ·Ú·ÓÔÌ·ÛÙ‹ ˘„ˆÌ¤ÓÔ ÛÙËÓ (�1) ‰‡Ó·ÌË). ŒÙÛÈ ÁÚ¿-ÊÂÙ·È: m s�1 Î·È fi¯È m/s, ‹ ms�1. ƒ›˙˜ ·Ú·ÛÙ¿ÛÂˆÓ ‹ ·ÚÈıÌÒÓ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·Ô‰›‰ÔÓÙ·È ˆ˜ ÂÍ‹˜:∫Ï›ÓÂÙ·È Ë ·Ú¿ÛÙ·ÛË Ì¤Û· Û ·ÚÂÓı¤ÛÂȘ Î·È ÛÙËÓ Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ˘„ÒÓÂÙ·È ÛÙË (ıÂÙÈ΋ ‹ ·ÚÓËÙÈ΋,ÌÔÚÊ‹˜ ‰Âη‰ÈÎÔ‡ ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡) ‰‡Ó·ÌË Ô˘ ·Ô‰›‰ÂÈ ÙË Ú›˙·. ¶ÚÔÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ ÁÈ· Ú›˙˜ ·ÚÈıÌÒÓ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È˘Ô¯ÚˆÙÈÎfi Ó· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈËıÔ‡Ó ·ÚÂÓı¤ÛÂȘ. ŸÏÔÈ ÔÈ Ì·ıËÌ·ÙÈÎÔ› ¯·Ú·ÎÙ‹Ú˜ ‹ ۇ̂ÔÏ· Ô˘¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÔ‡ÓÙ·È Û ÌÈ· ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÚÌËÓ‡ÔÓÙ·È Ì¤Û· ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ ˘Ô¯ÚˆÙÈο. ŸÏ· Ù·¤¯ÔÓÙ· ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ÌÂÁ¤ıË Ô˘ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È Û ̷ıËÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ ÂÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ, ‹ ͤ¯ˆÚ·, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·Ô‰›-‰ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙȘ ÛˆÛÙ¤˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ.

ñ ∆›ÙÏÔ˜ ∂ÚÁ·Û›·˜, ŸÓÔÌ·, £¤ÛË Î·È ¢È‡ı˘ÓÛË Î¿ı ™˘ÁÁڷʤ·. √ Ù›ÙÏÔ˜ Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó·Â›Ó·È ‚Ú·¯‡˜ Î·È ÂÓÓÔÈÔÏÔÁÈο Ó· ·Ô‰›‰ÂÈ ÈÛÙ¿ ÙÔ ı¤Ì· Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜. ÃËÌÈΤ˜ ÂÓÒÛÂȘ, ‹ Ì·ıËÌ·-ÙÈÎÔ› Ù‡ÔÈ ‰ÂÓ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙÔÓ Ù›ÙÏÔ. ™ÙËÓ ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ô˘ Ë ÂÚÁ·Û›· ·ÊÔÚ¿ Û˘ÁÎÂÎÚÈ-̤ÓË ÁˆÁÚ·ÊÈ΋ ÂÚÈÔ¯‹, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·Ó·ÁÚ¿ÊÂÙ·È (ÛÙÔÓ Ù›ÙÏÔ) ÙÔ fiÓÔÌ· Ù˘ ÂÚÈÔ¯‹˜. ∂ÎÙfi˜ ÙÔ˘ÔÓfiÌ·ÙÔ˜, Ù˘ ı¤Û˘ Î·È Ù˘ ‰È‡ı˘ÓÛ˘, ÛÙÔȯ›· Ô˘ ·ÊÔÚÔ‡Ó Î¿ı ̤ÏÔ˜ Ù˘ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ÔÌ¿-‰·˜, ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·Ó·ÁÚ¿ÊÂÙ·È, ˘Ô¯ÚˆÙÈο, Ë ÙËÏÂʈÓÈ΋ Î·È ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈ΋ ‰È‡ı˘ÓÛË ÙÔ˘ ˘Â‡ı˘-ÓÔ˘ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ· (ÙÔ ¿ÙÔÌÔ Ô˘ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÂÙ·È Ó· ÂÎÚÔۈ› ÙËÓ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ ÔÌ¿‰·), ·Ó ‚¤‚·È· ‰È·-ı¤ÙÂÈ fax Î·È e-mail. ∆· ÔÓfiÌ·Ù· ÙˆÓ ÌÂÏÒÓ ÌÈ·˜ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ÔÌ¿‰·˜ ·Ú·ı¤ÙÔÓÙ·È ·ÚÈıÌË̤ӷ ÌÂÙË ÛÂÈÚ¿ Ô˘ ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›·, Ì ‰È·‰Ô¯ÈÎÔ‡˜ ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡˜ ÛÙÔ Ù¤ÏÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ˆӇÌÔ˘. °È· ·-Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·, Jones(1) K.L., Petridis(2), P.R. ∂ÈϤÔÓ, ÁÈ· Ó· ͯˆÚ›˙ÂÈ, ÙÔ ÂÒÓ˘ÌÔ ÙÔ˘ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ˘ Û˘Á-Áڷʤ· ʤÚÂÈ ˘ÔÁÚ¿ÌÌÈÛË.

ñ ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë. ∏ ‡·ÚÍË ¶ÂÚ›Ï˄˘ ÛÙËÓ ·Ú¯‹ οı ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ Â›Ó·È ˘Ô¯ÚˆÙÈ΋. ∏ ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë, Ô˘ ‰ÂÓÚ¤ÂÈ Ó· ÍÂÂÚÓ¿ ÙȘ 250 ϤÍÂȘ, Â›Ó·È ÌÈ· Û‡ÓÙÔÌË ·ÏÏ¿ Ï‹Ú˘ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË ÙˆÓ ‚·ÛÈÎÒÓ ÛËÌ›-ˆÓ/ÌÂıfi‰ˆÓ/·ÔÙÂÏÂÛÌ¿ÙˆÓ Ô˘ ÚÔ·ÙÔ˘Ó ‹ ·Ô‰›‰Ô˘Ó οı ÂÚÁ·Û›·. ™ÙËÓ ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë ‰ÂÓ Ú¤ÂÈÓ· ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ‚È‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·ÊÈΤ˜ ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¤˜, ‹ ·ӿÏË„Ë ÙÔ˘ Ù›ÙÏÔ˘. ∫¿ı ÂÚÁ·Û›· ÁÚ·Ì̤ÓË ÛÙ· ∂ÏÏË-ÓÈο, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Û˘Óԉ‡ÂÙ·È ·fi ÌÈ· ∂ÎÙÂÓ‹ ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë 1000-1500 Ϥ͈Ó, ÁÚ·Ì̤ÓË ÛÙ· ∞ÁÁÏÈο,ÂÈϤÔÓ Ù˘ ηÓÔÓÈ΋˜ ¶ÂÚ›Ï˄˘ ÛÙ· ∂ÏÏËÓÈο. ∏ ∂ÎÙÂÓ‹˜ ·˘Ù‹ ¶ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë ÙÔÔıÂÙÂ›Ù·È ·Ì¤Ûˆ˜ÌÂÙ¿ ÙË µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·.

ñ §¤ÍÂȘ ∫ÏÂȉȿ. ∂ÈϤÍÙ 5-6 ϤÍÂȘ Ô˘ ÛÙÔȯÂÈÔıÂÙÔ‡Ó, ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È, ‹ Î·È ÂÎÊÚ¿˙Ô˘Ó ÂÓÓÔÈÔÏÔ-ÁÈο ÙÌ‹Ì·Ù· Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ÂÍ·ÈÚÔ˘Ì¤ÓˆÓ ·˘ÙÒÓ ÙÔ˘ Ù›ÙÏÔ˘.

250 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ ∫›ÌÂÓÔ. ∆Ô Î›ÌÂÓÔ (ÁÚ·Ì̤ÓÔ Ì Word97, ‹ ÓÂÒÙÂÚË ¤Î‰ÔÛË) οı ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ¯ˆÚ›˙ÂÙ·È Û ÂÓfiÙË-Ù˜ Î·È Î¿ı ÂÓfiÙËÙ· Û ˘Ô-ÂÓfiÙËÙ˜, fiϘ Ì ¤ÓÙÔÓÔ˘˜ Ù›ÙÏÔ˘˜ ·ÚÈıÌË̤ÓÔ˘˜ ‰È·‰Ô¯Èο Î·È ÊÂÚfi-ÌÂÓÔ˘˜ Û ÌÈ· ÁÚ·ÌÌ‹, Ô˘ ¯ˆÚ›˙ÂÙ·È Ì ‰È¿ÛÙËÌ· ·fi ÙËÓ ·Ì¤Ûˆ˜ ÂfiÌÂÓË ·Ú¿ÁÚ·ÊÔ. ∏ ∂ÈÛ·Áˆ-Á‹ ·ÔÙÂÏ› ÙËÓ ÚÒÙË ÂÓfiÙËÙ· ÙÔ˘ ΢ڛˆ˜ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘, ¤ÙÛÈ, ÛËÌÂÈÒÓÂÙ·È: 1. ∂ÈÛ·ÁˆÁ‹. ™ÙËÓ ∂ÈÛ·Áˆ-Á‹ ·Ú·ı¤ÙÔÓÙ·È: (·) ∞Ó·ÊÔÚ¤˜ ÛÙË (ÚfiÛÊ·ÙË Î˘Ú›ˆ˜) ‚È‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·, Ô˘ ηχÙÔ˘Ó Ï‹Úˆ˜ ÙÔ˘¿Ú¯ÔÓ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈÎfi ˘fi‚·ıÚÔ ÙÔ Û¯ÂÙÈ˙fiÌÂÓÔ Ì ÙÔ ÁÓˆÛÙÈÎfi ·ÓÙÈΛÌÂÓÔ Ù˘ ÚÔ˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛËÂÚÁ·Û›·˜. (‚) √È ÏfiÁÔÈ Ô˘ ˘ÔÛÙËÚ›˙Ô˘Ó Î·È ·Ó·‰ÂÈÎÓ‡Ô˘Ó ÙÔ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈο «¯Ú‹ÛÈÌÔ», «ÚˆÙfiÙ˘-Ô», ‹ «Î·ÈÓÔÙfiÌÔ» Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ¿ÓÙÔÙ Û ۯ¤ÛË Ì ÙȘ ÚÔËÁÔ‡ÌÂÓ˜ ÚÔÛ¿ıÂȘ. √È ˘Ô-ÂÓfi-ÙËÙ˜, ÂÊfiÛÔÓ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó, ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡ÓÙ·È ‰È·‰Ô¯Èο Ì ÚÒÙÔ ÙÔÓ ·ÚÈıÌfi Ù˘ ÂÓfiÙËÙ·˜, ÙÂÏ›· Î·È ÛÙËÛ˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ÙÔÓ ·ÚÈıÌfi Ù˘ ˘Ô-ÂÓfiÙËÙ·˜. ™Â οı ÂÚÁ·Û›·, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Û˘ÌÂÚÈÏ·Ì‚¿ÓÂÙ·È ÌÈ· ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›·ÂÓfiÙËÙ· ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· Ó· ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È Ù· Û˘ÌÂÚ¿ÛÌ·Ù· ·fi Ù· ÚÔ·ÙÔÓÙ· ·ÔÙÂϤÛÌ·Ù·, ηıÒ˜Î·È ÚÔÙ¿ÛÂȘ ÁÈ· ÂÚ·ÈÙ¤Úˆ ¤Ú¢ӷ Î·È ·Ó¿Ù˘ÍË Ì ÛÙfi¯Ô ÙË ‚ÂÏÙ›ˆÛË ÙˆÓ ÌÂÁÂıÒÓ. √fiÙ ÛÙÔ Î›-ÌÂÓÔ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË Ì·ıËÌ·ÙÈÎÒÓ ÂÍÈÛÒÛˆÓ, ‹ Ù‡ˆÓ, ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈÂ›Ù·È Ô ªSEquation Editor (‰È·ı¤ÛÈÌÔ˜ Û fiϘ ÙȘ ÂΉfiÛÂȘ ÙÔ˘ ÚÔÁÚ¿ÌÌ·ÙÔ˜ ÁÚ·Ê‹˜ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Word).

ñ ∂˘¯·ÚÈÛٛ˜. ™ÙË ı¤ÛË ·˘Ù‹ ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È fiÛÔÈ Û˘ÓÂÈÛ¤ÊÂÚ·Ó, ÔÈÎÔÓÔÌÈο ‹ ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈο, ÛÙËÓÚ·ÁÌ¿ÙˆÛË ÙÔ˘ ÂÚ¢ÓËÙÈÎÔ‡ ¤ÚÁÔ˘ ·ÔÙ¤ÏÂÛÌ· ÙÔ˘ ÔÔ›Ô˘ Â›Ó·È Ë ÚÔ˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË ÂÚÁ·Û›·.

ñ ¶·Ú·ÚÙ‹Ì·Ù·. ª·ÎÚÔÛÎÂÏ›˜ Ì·ıËÌ·ÙÈΤ˜ ·Ô‰Â›ÍÂȘ, ·Ó·Ï‡ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÂӉȷʤÚÔ˘Ó ·ÔÎÏÂÈÛÙÈοÙÔ˘˜ ϤÔÓ ÂȉÈÎÔ‡˜, ‹ ·Ó·Ï˘ÙÈÎfi ˘ÏÈÎfi ˘ÔÛÙ‹ÚÈ͢ ı¤ÛÂˆÓ ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ Î¿ı ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó·ÙÔÔıÂÙÂ›Ù·È Ì ÙË ÌÔÚÊ‹ ¶·Ú·ÚÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜, ÂÓfi˜ ‹ Î·È ÂÚÈÛÛÔÙ¤ÚˆÓ, Ì ‰È·‰Ô¯È΋ ÔÓÔÌ·Û›·, .¯. ¶·-Ú¿ÚÙËÌ· ∞, ¶·Ú¿ÚÙËÌ· µ, ÎÔÎ. ∂ÍÈÛÒÛÂȘ, ÂÈÎfiÓ˜, ÁÚ·Ê‹Ì·Ù·, ›Ó·Î˜ ÎÏ ÛÙÔȯ›· ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡Óٷȉȷ‰Ô¯Èο ʤÚÔÓÙ·˜ ÙÔ ÁÚ¿ÌÌ· ÙÔ˘ ·Ú·ÚÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ÛÙÔ ÔÔ›Ô ¤¯Ô˘Ó ÂÓۈ̷وı›. ¶›Ó·Î·˜ ∞.1, ¶›-ӷη˜ ∞.2, ∂ÈÎfiÓ· µ.1, ÎÔÎ.

ñ µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·, ‹ ∫·Ù¿ÏÔÁÔ˜ µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ ∞Ó·ÊÔÚÒÓ. ŸÏ˜ ÔÈ ‚È‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·ÊÈΤ˜ ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¤˜ Î·È Ìfi-ÓÔÓ ·˘Ù¤˜, Ô˘ ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ Î¿ı ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ηٷ¯ˆÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È ·ÏÊ·‚ËÙÈο Ì ‚¿ÛËÙÔ ÂÒÓ˘ÌÔ ÙÔ˘ ÚÒÙÔ˘ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ· Û ηٿÏÔÁÔ ˘fi ÙÔÓ Ù›ÙÏÔ µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·, Ô˘ ηٷ¯ˆÚÂ›Ù·È ÌÂ-Ù¿ Ù· ¶·Ú·ÚÙ‹Ì·Ù· ·Ó ˘¿Ú¯Ô˘Ó, ‰È·ÊÔÚÂÙÈο ·Ì¤Ûˆ˜ ÌÂÙ¿ ÙËÓ ÙÂÏÂ˘Ù·›· ÂÓfiÙËÙ· ÙÔ˘ ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘.¶ÚÈÓ ÙËÓ ˘Ô‚ÔÏ‹ ÚÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË, οı ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÂϤÁ¯ÂÙ·È ÁÈ· ÙËÓ ÔÚıfiÙËÙ· ÂÌÊ¿ÓÈÛ˘Ù˘ οı ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¿˜, ÙfiÛÔ ˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ Ù· ÔÓfiÌ·Ù· ÙˆÓ Û˘ÁÁڷʤˆÓ Î·È ÙÔ˘ ¤ÙÔ˘˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘Û˘, fiÛÔ Î·Èˆ˜ ÚÔ˜ ÙËÓ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·ÛË ÛÙËÓ µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·. °È· ÙËÓ ÔÚı‹ ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¿ Ì ۇÓÙÌËÛË ÙÔ˘ Ù›ÙÏÔ˘ ÚÔ-ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ ÂÚ› ‰ÈÂıÓÒÓ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈÎÒÓ ÂÚÈÔ‰ÈÎÒÓ, ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ Û¯ÂÙÈÎfi˜ ›Ó·Î·˜ Ì ٷ ÔÓfiÌ·Ù· ÙˆÓ Â-ÚÈÔ‰ÈÎÒÓ ÛÙÔ World List of Scientific Periodicals, 4th Edition. ŸÏ˜ ÔÈ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ Ô˘ ˘Ô‚¿ÏÏÔÓÙ·ÈÚÔ˜ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË ÛÙËÓ ∂∂∂∂ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·ÎÔÏÔ˘ıÔ‡Ó ÙÔ˘˜ ÂÍ‹˜ ηÓfiÓ˜ Û˘ÁÁÚ·Ê‹˜ ÁÈ· ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¤˜ ÛÙË‚È‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·:¶·Ú·‰Â›ÁÌ·Ù· ÂÚÈÙÒÛÂˆÓ ·Ó·ÊÔÚÒÓ ÁÂÓÔÌ¤ÓˆÓ Ì¤Û· ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ

– Thompson (1990), or (Thompson, 1990), ·Ó Â›Ó·È ¤Ó·˜ ÌfiÓÔ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜.– Thompson and Clog (1996), or (Thompson and Clog, 1996), ·Ó Â›Ó·È ‰‡Ô ÔÈ Û˘ÁÁÚ·Ê›˜.– Thompson et al. (1997), or (Thompson et al., 1997), ·Ó Â›Ó·È ¿Óˆ ·fi ‰‡Ô ÔÈ Û˘ÁÁÚ·Ê›˜.– Thompson, 1990; Thompson and Clog, 1996; Thompson et al., 1997), ·Ó Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È ·Ó·ÊÔÚ¤˜ Û ¿-

Óˆ ·fi ‰‡Ô ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜.– (Thompson, 1990a; 1990b), ·Ó ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È ‰‡Ô ‹ ÂÚÈÛÛfiÙÂÚ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›Â˜ ÙÔ˘ ȉ›Ô˘ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·.¶·Ú·‰Â›ÁÌ·Ù· ‰ÔÌ‹˜ ·ÚÔ˘Û›·Û˘ ηٷ¯ˆÚËÌ¤ÓˆÓ ÛÙÔ µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·ÊÈÎfi ∫·Ù¿ÏÔÁÔ ·Ó·ÊÔÚÒÓ.

– ¢ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË Û ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈÎfi ¶ÂÚÈÔ‰ÈÎfi. ∂ÒÓ˘ÌÔ, Î·È ·Ú¯Èο οıÂ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·, (¤ÙÔ˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘-Û˘), Ù›ÙÏÔ˜ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ¶Ï‹Ú˘ Ù›ÙÏÔ˜ ÙÔ˘ ÂÚÈÔ‰ÈÎÔ‡, ·ÚÈıÌfi˜ ÙfiÌÔ˘/·ÚÈıÌfi˜ Ù‡¯Ô˘˜, ÛÂÏ›‰Â˜(·fi-̤¯ÚÈ) ÛÙÔ Ù‡¯Ô˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘Û˘.

™ÎÔfi˜ Î·È ™Ùfi¯ÔÈ Ù˘ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰·˜ 251

°È· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·:Thompson D.C., Clog R., and Batman A.Q. (1997). Global and diffuse solar irradiance models. SolarEnergy, 23/5, 208-216.

– ∞fi ÛÂÏ›‰Â˜ ‚È‚Ï›Ô˘. ∂ÒÓ˘ÌÔ, Î·È ·Ú¯Èο οıÂ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·, (¤ÙÔ˜ ¤Î‰ÔÛ˘), ∆›ÙÏÔ˜ ‚È‚Ï›Ô˘, ÛÂÏ›-‰Â˜ ÛÙÔ ‚È‚Ï›Ô (·fi-̤¯ÚÈ), ∞ÚÈıÌfi˜ ŒÎ‰ÔÛ˘, ŸÓÔÌ· Î·È fiÏË ÂΉÔÙÈÎÔ‡ Ô›ÎÔ˘.°È· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·:Duffie J.A., and Beckman W.A. (1991), Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, pp. 68-83, 2nd

Edition, Wiley Interscience, N.Y.– ∞Ó·ÎÔ›ÓˆÛË Û ™˘Ó¤‰ÚÈÔ. ŸÓÔÌ·, Î·È ·Ú¯Èο οıÂ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·, (¤ÙÔ˜ ™˘Ó‰ڛԢ), ∆›ÙÏÔ˜ ·Ó·ÎÔ›-

ÓˆÛ˘, ∆›ÙÏÔ˜ ÙfiÌÔ˘ ¶Ú·ÎÙÈÎÒÓ, ŸÓÔÌ· ·˘ÙÔ‡ (-ÒÓ) Ô˘ ›¯Â ÙËÓ ÂÈ̤ÏÂÈ· Ù˘ ¤Î‰ÔÛ˘ ÙÔ˘ Ùfi-ÌÔ˘ ÙˆÓ ¶Ú·ÎÙÈÎÒÓ (·fi-̤¯ÚÈ), ̤ÚÔ˜ Ô˘ ¤Ï·‚ ¯ÒÚ· ÙÔ ™˘Ó¤‰ÚÈÔ.°È· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·:Marble D.G. (1987). UV-B induced human tissue disorders. |n Proceedings of Solar Energy WorldCongress, Homested H. and Elbow K. (Eds), pp. 1256-1265, Ithaki, Greece.

ñ EÈÎfiÓ˜, °Ú·Ê‹Ì·Ù·, ¶›Ó·Î˜. ∫¿ı ÂÈÎfiÓ·, ÁÚ¿ÊËÌ· ‹ ›Ó·Î·˜ Ô˘ ˘¿Ú¯ÂÈ ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›· Ú¤ÂÈ,˘Ô¯ÚˆÙÈο, Ó· ·Ó·Ê¤ÚÂÙ·È Î·È Ì¤Û· ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ. √È ÂÈÎfiÓ˜, Ù· ÁÚ·Ê‹Ì·Ù· Î·È ÔÈ ›Ó·Î˜ Ô˘·Ó·Ê¤ÚÔÓÙ·È ÛÙËÓ ÂÚÁ·Û›· ·Ú·‰›‰ÔÓÙ·È Î·Ù¿ ÙÔ ÛÙ¿‰ÈÔ Ù˘ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛ˘ Û ‰‡Ô ÌÔÚʤ˜:(·) ∂ÎÙ˘ˆÌ¤Ó· Û ·Ó¿ÏÔÁÔ ¿ÚÈÛÙ˘ ÔÈfiÙËÙ·˜ ¯·ÚÙ› (οı ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Û Í¯ˆÚÈÛÙ‹ ÛÂÏ›‰·, Ì ÙË

ÏÂ˙¿ÓÙ· ÛÙÔ Î¿Ùˆ ̤ÚÔ˜ Ù˘ ÛÂÏ›‰·˜) Î·È ÙÔÔıÂÙÔ‡ÌÂÓ· Û οı ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·ÊÔ Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ‰È·-‰Ô¯Èο, ·Ì¤Ûˆ˜ ÌÂÙ¿ ÙË µÈ‚ÏÈÔÁÚ·Ê›·.

(‚) ™Â ÌÔÚÊ‹ ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈÎÒÓ ·Ú¯Â›ˆÓ, ¤Ó· ·Ú¯Â›Ô ÁÈ· οı ÁÚ¿ÊËÌ·, ÂÈÎfiÓ· ‹ ›Ó·Î· (ÌfiÓÔÓ ·Ú¯Â›·

pcx, jpg, cif, xls, tif, org, cdr Á›ÓÔÓÙ·È ‰ÂÎÙ¿).∆Ô Ì¤ÁÂıÔ˜ Î·È ÔÈ Ê˘ÛÈΤ˜ ‰È·ÛÙ¿ÛÂȘ ÙˆÓ ÂÈÎfiÓˆÓ, ÁÚ·ÊËÌ¿ÙˆÓ Î·È ÈÓ¿ÎˆÓ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Â›Ó·È Î·-Ù¿ÏÏËÏÔ Î·È ·Ó¿ÏÔÁÔ ÙÔ˘ ÌÂÁ¤ıÔ˘˜ ÙˆÓ ÁÚ·ÌÌ¿ÙˆÓ/·ÚÈıÌÒÓ Ô˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó ¯ÚËÛÈÌÔÔÈËı› Û’ ·˘Ù¿.∂ÈϤÔÓ, ÔÊ›ÏÔ˘Ó Ó· Â›Ó·È Â˘·Ó¿ÁÓˆÛÙ· Î·È ÌÂÙ¿ ÙËÓ ÛÌ›ÎÚ˘ÓÛË (ÂÚ›Ô˘ 50%) Ô˘ ı· ˘ÔÛÙÔ‡Óηٿ ÙËÓ ÂÎÙ‡ˆÛË ÛÙËÓ ∂∂∂∂. ŸÏ· Ù· ÁÚ·Ê‹Ì·Ù·, ÎÏ. Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ·ÚÈıÌÔ‡ÓÙ·È Î·Ù¿ ηÙËÁÔÚ›·, ÌÂÙË ÛÂÈÚ¿ ÂÌÊ¿ÓÈÛ˘ Î·È ·ÚÔ˘Û›·Û˘ ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ, Û˘Óԉ¢fiÌÂÓ· ·fi ÙË Û¯ÂÙÈ΋ ÏÂ˙¿ÓÙ·.

ñ §Â˙¿ÓÙ˜. ∫¿ı ÁÚ¿ÊËÌ·, ÂÈÎfiÓ·, ›Ó·Î·˜ Û˘Óԉ‡ÂÙ·È ·fi ÌÈ· ÂÂÍËÁËÌ·ÙÈ΋ ÏÂ˙¿ÓÙ·, Ô˘ Û˘ÓÔ-‰Â‡ÂÈ ÙÔ ÂÎÙ˘ˆÌ¤ÓÔ ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·ÊÔ ÙÔ˘ ÁÚ·Ê‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ÎÏ. ÙÔÔıÂÙÔ‡ÌÂÓË ÛÙÔ Î¿Ùˆ ̤ÚÔ˜ Ù˘ ÛÂÏ›‰·˜.∂ÈÚÔÛı¤Ùˆ˜, ·Ú·‰›‰ÂÙ·È ¤Ó· floppy disk, ‹ CD-ROM Ì fiϘ ÙȘ ÏÂ˙¿ÓÙ˜ ·ÚÈıÌË̤Ó˜ ηٿ ÛÂÈ-Ú¿ ÂÌÊ¿ÓÈÛ˘ ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ ÁÈ· οı ηÙËÁÔÚ›· ͯˆÚÈÛÙ¿ (.¯. ηÙËÁÔÚ›· ÂÈÎfiÓ˜, ηÙËÁÔÚ›· ÁÚ·Ê‹-Ì·Ù·, ηÙËÁÔÚ›· ›Ó·Î˜), Û ÌÔÚÊ‹ ËÏÂÎÙÚÔÓÈÎÔ‡ ·Ú¯Â›Ô˘ *.doc (Word97 ‹ ÓÂÒÙÂÚÔ). ŒÙÛÈ, Û ο-ı ÂÚ›ÙˆÛË ÂÌÊ·Ó›˙ÔÓÙ·È: ™‡ÓÙÌËÛË ÔÓÔÌ·Û›·˜ ηÙËÁÔÚ›·˜, ÙÂÏ›·, ·ÚÈıÌfi˜, ÙÂÏ›· Î·È ÛÙË Û˘Ó¤-¯ÂÈ· Ë ·ÓÙ›ÛÙÔÈ¯Ë ÏÂ˙¿ÓÙ·. °È· ·Ú¿‰ÂÈÁÌ·: Fig. 1. Model simulation results vs. measurements of dailydiffuse solar irradiance. ¶›Ó·Î·˜ 1. ŒÓÙ·ÛË ‰È¿¯˘Ù˘ ËÏȷ΋˜ ·ÎÙÈÓÔ‚ÔÏ›·˜ ÁÈ· οı ÒÚ· Î·È Ë̤ڷηٿ ÙÔ Ì‹Ó· πÔ‡ÏÈÔ 1999, Û W m�2.

ñ §ÔÈ¿ ™˘Óԉ¢ÙÈο ™ÙÔȯ›· ÀÔÛÙ‹ÚÈ͢. ∂ÚÁ·Û›Â˜ Ô˘ Ú·ÁÌ·Ù‡ÔÓÙ·È ÂÍÂȉÈÎÂ˘Ì¤Ó˜ ÂÚÈ-ÙÒÛÂȘ, ‹ ÌÂÁ¿Ï˘ ¤ÎÙ·Û˘ ·Ó·Ï‡ÛÂȘ Ô˘ ·ÔÙÂÏÔ‡Ó Û˘Ó¤¯ÂÈ· ¿ÏψÓ, ı· Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· Û˘Óԉ‡ÔÓÙ·È,ηٿ ÙÔ ÚÒÙÔ ÛÙ¿‰ÈÔ Ù˘ ˘Ô‚ÔÏ‹˜ ÙÔ˘˜ ÛÙËÓ ∂∂∂∂, Ì ηٿÏÏËÏÔ˘ ÂÚȯÔ̤ÓÔ˘ ˘ÏÈÎfi ˘ÔÛÙ‹-ÚÈ͢ (.¯. ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·Ê· ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎÒÓ ‰ËÌÔÛȇۈÓ, ·Ó·ÊÔÚÒÓ, ÂÚÁ·ÛÈÒÓ, ¿ÚıÚˆÓ ˘fi ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË,ÎÏ.) Ô˘ ‰ÂÓ Â›Ó·È Â‡ÎÔÏ· ‰È·ı¤ÛÈÌÔ ÛÙÔÓ Â˘Ú‡ÙÂÚÔ ÂÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈÎfi ¯ÒÚÔ. ∆Ô ˘ÏÈÎfi ·˘Ùfi ı· ‚ÔËı‹ÛÂÈÙÔ˘˜ ·ÍÈÔÏÔÁËÙ¤˜ ÛÙËÓ ÎÚ›ÛË Ù˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜.

252 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ ¢È·‰Èηۛ· ÀÔ‚ÔÏ‹˜ £ÂÙÈο ∞ÍÈÔÏÔÁË̤Ó˘ ∂ÚÁ·Û›·˜ (ÙÂÏÈ΋ Ê¿ÛË). ª¤Û· Û ¯ÚÔÓÈÎfi ‰È¿ÛÙËÌ·ÙÚÈÒÓ (3) ÌËÓÒÓ ·fi ÙËÓ ·Ú·Ï·‚‹ Ù˘ ¤ÎıÂÛ˘ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÎÚÈÙÒÓ, Ô ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ˜ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜,·ÊÔ‡ ÚԂ› ÛÙȘ Û¯ÂÙÈΤ˜ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜ ‹ Î·È ·Ó·ıˆڋÛÂȘ Ô˘ ÚÔÙ›ÓÔÓÙ·È (·Ó ÚÔÙ›ÓÔÓÙ·È) ·fiÙÔ˘˜ ÎÚÈÙ¤˜, ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ Ó· ·Ú·‰ÒÛÂÈ, ‹ Ó· ÛÙ›ÏÂÈ Â› ·Ô‰Â›ÍÂÈ, ÛÙËÓ °Ú·ÌÌ·Ù›· Ù˘ ∂∂∂∂ Ù· ÂÍ‹˜:

1. ∆Ú›· (3) Ï‹ÚË ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·Ê· Ù˘ ·Ó·ıˆÚË̤Ó˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ¿ÓÙ· Û‡Ìʈӷ Ì ÙȘ ˘Ô‰Â›ÍÂÈ˜ÙˆÓ ÎÚÈÙÒÓ. ŸÏ˜ ÔÈ ·ÏÏ·Á¤˜, ‹ Î·È ·Ó·ıˆڋÛÂȘ, Ú¤ÂÈ Ó· ÛËÌÂÈÒÓÔÓÙ·È Î·È Ó· ˘Ô‰ÂÈ-ÎÓ‡ÔÓÙ·È Ì¤Û· ÛÙÔ Î›ÌÂÓÔ, fiÔ˘ ¤¯Ô˘Ó Á›ÓÂÈ, Û fiÏ· Ù· ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·Ê·. ∫¿ı ·ÓÙ›ÁÚ·ÊÔ Ú¤ÂÈ Ó·Û˘Óԉ‡ÂÙ·È Î·È ·fi Ì›· ÂÎÙÂÓ‹ ÂÚ›ÏË„Ë 1000-1500 ϤÍÂˆÓ ÛÙ· ∞ÁÁÏÈο.

2. ŒÓ· (1) floppy disk, ‹ CD-ROM Ì fiÏ· Ù· Û¯ÂÙÈο ·Ú¯Â›· (ÎÂÈ̤ÓÔ˘ Î·È ÁÚ·ÊÈÎÒÓ), Û‡Ìʈ-Ó· Ì ÙȘ Ô‰ËÁ›Â˜ Û˘ÁÁÁÚ·Ê‹˜.

3. ÀÔÁÂÁÚ·Ì̤ÓË (·fi ÙÔÓ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·) ∂ÈÛÙÔÏ‹, ÛÙËÓ ÔÔ›· Ó· ‰ËÏÒÓÂÙ·È Ë ·Ô‰Ô-¯‹ Ù˘ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛ˘ ÙˆÓ ÎÚÈÙÒÓ, ηıÒ˜ Î·È fiÙÈ Ë ÙÂÏÈ΋ ·Ó·ÌfiÚʈÛË Ù˘ ˘Ô‚·ÏÏfiÌÂÓ˘ ·Ó·-ıˆÚË̤Ó˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ¤ÁÈÓ ۇÌʈӷ ÚÔ˜ fiϘ ÙȘ ÁÂÓfiÌÂÓ˜ ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ÎÚÈÙ¤˜ ˘Ô‰Â›ÍÂȘ. ™ÂÂÚ›ÙˆÛË Ô˘ Ë ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛË ÎÚÈÙ‹ ‰ÂÓ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ·Ô‰ÂÎÙ‹ ·fi ÙÔÓ ˘Â‡ı˘ÓÔ Û˘ÁÁڷʤ· ÎÚÈÓfi-ÌÂÓ˘ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜, ·˘Ùfi˜ (Ô Û˘ÁÁڷʤ·˜) ÔÊ›ÏÂÈ fiˆ˜ ÚÔÛÎÔÌ›ÛÂÈ (ÂÓÙfi˜ ÚÔ‚ÏÂÔ̤ÓÔ˘ ‰È·-ÛÙ‹Ì·ÙÔ˜ ÙˆÓ ÙÚÈÒÓ ÌËÓÒÓ ·fi ÙËÓ ÎÔÈÓÔÔ›ËÛË Ù˘ Û¯ÂÙÈ΋˜ ¤ÎıÂÛ˘) ηٿÏÏËÏ· Î·È ·Ó·-ÁÓˆÚÈṲ̂ÓÔ˘ ·ÚÔ˘˜ ·Ô‰ÂÈÎÙÈο ÛÙÔȯ›·, Ì ٷ ÔÔ›· Ô˘ÛÈ·ÛÙÈο ·Ó·ÈÚÔ‡ÓÙ·È, ‹ ·ÓÙÈÎÚÔ‡-ÔÓÙ·È ˆ˜ ·‚¿ÛÈ̘, ÔÈ ˘Ô‰ÂÈÎÓ˘fiÌÂÓ˜ ÛÙËÓ ·ÍÈÔÏfiÁËÛ‹ ÙÔ˘ ÎÚÈÙ‹ ÂÓ¤ÚÁÂȘ.

ÀÔ‚ÔÏ‹ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÂÎÙfi˜ Ù˘ ·ÓˆÙ¤Úˆ ‰È·‰Èηۛ·˜ ‰ÂÓ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ‰ÂÎÙ‹, ÂÓÒ ·˘ÙÔÌ¿Ùˆ˜ ·‡ÂÈ Ë ÚÔÒ-ıËÛË Ù˘ ÂÓ ÏfiÁˆ ÂÚÁ·Û›·˜ ÚÔ˜ ‰ËÌÔÛ›Â˘ÛË.

™ÎÔfi˜ Î·È ™Ùfi¯ÔÈ Ù˘ ∂ÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋˜ ∂ÂÙËÚ›‰·˜ 253

Aims and Scope of the Scientific Journal

Journal of Applied Research Review (JARR), the official journal of the Technological Education In-stitute of Piraeus, is devoted to the presentation of properly judged (two referees, usually) original pa-pers. Papers in the areas of Engineering, Physics, Mathematics, Arts, Social Sciences and Humanitieshanding in any way administrative, economic, historical, and political aspects are welcome. Main aimsof JARR are to provide a scientific understanding of novel results or analysis, and to serve as a source ofinformation on research and development in these fields.

Instructions for Authors

JARR welcomes manuscripts, not preniously published in any other journal, written in Greek, orEnglish (authors of articles written in English whose native tongue is not English are advised to have theirmanuscripts edited by someone skilled in English prior to submission). An acceptable manuscript mustreflect a thorough knowledge and review of the relevant literature indicated by references to prior pub-lications, or presentations.

Manuscripts must be submitted in the format outlined below. Originally, Three (3) copies must be

delivered to the Editorial Office (Journal of Applied Research, TEI of Piraeus, 250 Thinon & P. Ral-li Avenue, 12244 Aegaleo, Greece). After approval and within a 3month period from official notifica-tion of acceptance, three (3) revised copies are delivered to the Editorial Office accompanied by adiskette (or CD-ROM) containing an identical copy of the manuscript (Word97 or later), as well as ollillustration and caption files. Note that unless requested at submission, the Editorial Office will not re-turn the original manuscripts, or disks to the authors at any stage of the process. Every submitted man-uscript must be accompanied by a covering letter stating that the manuscript neither has been publishedin nor submitted to a journal preniously. In addition, a short C.V. of the authors involved is welcome atsubmission.

Manuscript Format

ñ Manuscript Layout. All copies of the manuscript must be double-spaced, single-column, on one side ofA4 white sheets of paper, leaving ample left and right margins, preferably using 12 pts Times New Romancharacters on main text (smaller size for Affiliation, Abstract, key words and captions, accordingly).Maximum manuscript lenght should be kept at less than 20 pages (all pages numbered consecutively) in-cluding diagrams, references and tables, with text not exceeding 6500 words. Follow this order when typ-ing manuscripts: Title, Authors (s), Affiliations, Abstract, Key words, Text, Acknowledgements, Appen-dix, References, Illustrations, Captions.

ñ Units of Measure, Mathematical symbols and Formulae. Authors of technical papers are stronglyadvised to use S.I. units throughout their work, providing alternate units in parentheses for convenience,when necessary. When writing fractions, pleace use negative exponents rather than the fraction sign/ andleave space between symbols, e.g. m s�1, not ms�1 or m/s. Where showing roots, the radical sign shouldbe avoided. To indicate roots, use positive (or negative) exponents, accordingly. Formulae should becomposed carefully and with the utmost economy. Numbers that identify equations should be placed atthe right-hand margin in parentheses. All symbols used (mathematical, or otherwise) are to be explainedin the text. In equations, all (dimensional) figures are to be given with units.

254 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003

ñ Title, Author’s names and Affiliation. Title should be informative, short and precise in describingthe full article. Avoid chemical formulae in title. If the paper covers a specific location, this should usu-ally be mentioned in the title. The affiliation should be as concise as possible, including complete mailingaddress, corresponding author’s telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address (if available). When morethan one affiliation (co-authors), please use superscript (1), (2), etc after each co-author’s name. In addi-tion, the corresponding author’s name is to be identified by underlining the surname.

ñ Abstract. An abstract not exceeding 250 words is required at the beginning of each paper. Abstractsshould be complete in themselves giving all main points of the paper, without repeating title, or makingreference citations, but summarizing conclusions/ results obtained, or method(s) used.

ñ Key words. Include five or six key words (avoid words used in the title) illustrating substantial pointsor features in the work.

ñ Text. Text in the manuscript is to be divided into sections, each section with a separate heading bold

typed on a line of its own, numbered consecutively. The first section should be an Introduction. Intro-

duction offers a scientific background by going throught the literature review, and indicating the rea-sons for making the paper by explaining and (or) defending how the particular work is an advance onprevious effocts. Subsections, when needed, should bear the section number followed by the consecutivesubsection number, the two separated by a dot. A final section title Conclusions (or Concluding Re-

marks) must be included at the end of the text. When writing in electronic form, only Word97 files (orlater versions) are acceptable. Mathematical equations, in the proper character size and appearance,should be written using the MS Equation Editor (available to all Word versions).

ñ Acknowledgements. Any provisional funding, and or help granted, if there are any, should be men-tioned in this separate paragraph placed right after the main text.

ñ Appendix. Lengthy mathematical analyses, items of interest only to specialists, model formulations, orother material that are subordinate to the main theme of the article should normally be put into one ormore appendices titled accordingly A, B, etc. Equations, Figures, and Tables in the appendix A are la-beted and numbered consecutively, (i. e. Eqt. (A4), Fig. A1, Table A, etc.).

ñ References. All articles cited in the text should be presented in a list of references following the Ap-

pendix (if there is one), or otherwise right after the main text of the manuscript. References shown inthe References List should be arranged alphabetically by author’s last name. Before submitting theirmanuscript, authors should compare text citations with bibliographic listings shown under the “Refer-ences List” section to ensure completeness. Also, manuscript should be carefully checked to ensure thatthe spelling of author’s names and dates are correct and in agreement in the text as well as in the Refer-ences List. Journal title abbreviations given in the References List must follow those given in the WorldList of Scintific Periodicals, 4th Edition. In general, references should be given in the following form:

Where cited in the text

– Thompson (1990), or (Thompson, 1990), if only one author.– Thompson and Clog (1996), or (Thompson and Clog, 1996), if two authors.– Thompson et al. (1997), or (Thompson et al., 1997), if more than two authors.– Thompson, 1990; Thompson and Clog, 1996; Thompson et al., 1997), if two or more references are

cited together.– (Thompson, 1990a; 1990b), if two (or more) same author articles published the same year are cited

together.

Aims and Scope of the Scientific Journal 255

Where Iisted in the References List

1. Journal article. Author’s name(s), initials, (year of publication), title, full periodical title name, vol-

ume number/issue number, and inclusive page numbers. For example:∆hompson D.C., Clog R., and Batman A.Q., (1997). Global and diffuse solar irradiance models. SolarEnergy, 23/5, 208-216.

2. Book. Author’s name(s), initials, (year of publication), Title, inclusive page numbers, Edition, pub-lisher’s name and location. For example:Duffie J.A., and Beckman W.A. (1991), Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, pp. 68-83, 2nd Edi-tion, Wiley Interscience, N.Y.

3. Conference article. Author’s name(s), initials, (year of Conference), title, volume of Proceedings,Editor(s), inclusive page numbers, location. For example:Marble D.G. (1987). U.V.-B induced human tissue disorders. In Proceedings of Solar Energy WorldCongress, Homested H. and Elbow K. (Eds), pp. 1256-125, Ithaki, Greece.

ñ Illustrations (Tables, Pictures, Figures, Drawings). All illustrations shown must be referred to inthe text. They are included in the text following the References List. Each illustration should be provid-ed as a separate electronic file (in a floppy, or CD-ROM), and as a good quality print out hardcopy(one illustration per page A4) placed right after the References List. Only PCX, JPG, CIF, XLS, TIF,ORG, CDR electronic files for drawings, charts, or pictures can be accepted. Make sure that the physicaldimensions of each illustration provided are appropriate for the dimensions of the JARR page. Illustra-tions should be numbered according to their sequence in the text using appropriate naming conventionand must be accompanied by a suitable caption, e.g. Fig. 1. Model simulation results vs. measurementsof daily diffuse solar irradiance.

ñ Captions. Illustrations and Tables must have a caption. Captions are numbered consecutively for eachcategory and they are placed in the manuscript following Illustrations. In addition, they are provided inelectronic form in floppy disk, or a CD-ROM as separate (Word97 or later) files.

ñ Initial Manuscript Submission Supporting Material. Manuscripts presenting particular and (or)lengthy modeling studies should be accompanied at the refereeing stage (initial submission) by copies ofrelevant supporting material e.g. internal reports, items in press, etc.

ñ Revised Manuscript Submission Procedure. Within a period of three (3) months after receivingreferee notes regarding the submitted paper, followed by the necessary interventions (additions, cuts, al-terations, corrections), authors are to turn in three (3) copies of the revised manuscript, plus a floppydisk (or CD-ROM) with all files. Highlight and indicate all interventions performed on the 3 submitted

manuscripts. Please, make sure that a brief letter/note is included and delivered with the rest of thepackage expressing corresponding author’s response/conformation to the referee’s comments.

256 EÈÛÙËÌÔÓÈ΋ EÂÙËÚ›‰· EÊ·ÚÌÔṲ̂Ó˘ ŒÚ¢ӷ˜, Vol. VIII, No 2, 2003