Housing Commons vs. State Spatial Policies of Refugee Camps in Athens and Thessaloniki

Abstract

Since the European Union’s agreement with Turkey on March 18, 2016, more than 70,000 refugees have been trapped in Greece. Most have been settled in state-run camps on the perimeters of Athens and Thessaloniki. However, these state-run camps do not meet international standards and are located at significant distances from urban centres, within industrial zones where residential use is not permitted. At the same time, a number of self-organized and collective refugee housing projects have been created within the urban fabric of Athens and Thessaloniki. In the context of these projects, refugees develop forms of solidarity, mutual help, and direct democracy in decision-making processes. There is a significant volume of bibliography which studies the NGOs’ activities and state migration policies. However, little attention has been given to the various ways by which refugees create self-managed and participatory structures to meet their needs. This article aims to fill the gap in the research concerning the production of housing common spaces by the refugees themselves. Based on the current discussions on the Lefebvrian ‘right to the city’ and the spatialities of ‘commons’ and ‘enclosures,’ the article aims to compare and contrast refugee housing commons with state-run refugee camps. Using qualitative methods, including ethnographic analysis and participatory observation, the main findings show that refugees attempt not only to contest state migration policies but also negotiate their multiple identities. Consequently, refugees collectively attempt to reinvent a culture of togetherness, to create housing common spaces, and to claim the right to the city.

Arrival Infrastructures: Segregation of Displaced Migrants and Processes of Urban Change in Athens

“…The recent history of urban camps in the metropolitan area of Athens goes back to 2016 when thirteen sites operated as an emergency response to decongest the Aegean islands, to offer temporary protection, and to cope with the basic needs of those trapped in the country after the closure of the Balkan corridor. Whilst the initial location of the thirteen sites included areas close to transportation infrastructures (ports, train stations), the remaining sites in operation today are located in abandoned military bases, factories, or warehouses at a considerable distance from the city centres in degraded and environmentally hazardous areas [65]. Decisions for their location did not involve a consultation process with local authorities but only ex-post negotiations to circumvent mobilizations against their establishment [65].…”

“…Whilst the initial location of the thirteen sites included areas close to transportation infrastructures (ports, train stations), the remaining sites in operation today are located in abandoned military bases, factories, or warehouses at a considerable distance from the city centres in degraded and environmentally hazardous areas [65]. Decisions for their location did not involve a consultation process with local authorities but only ex-post negotiations to circumvent mobilizations against their establishment [65].…”

The Making of Reception as a System. The Governance of Migrant Mobility and Transformations of Statecraft in Greece Since the Early 2000s

“…Furthermore, solidarity initiatives and grassroots movements in Athens and Thesaloniki criticised government plans and the operation of the UNHCR schemes as selective and contradictory. At the same time, these initiatives created a parallel infrastructure of commons through the temporary appropriation of urban spaces (Foerster, 2019;Mezzadra, 2018;Squire, 2018;Tsavdaroglou & Lalenis, 2020).…”

Bordered Trajectories: The Impact of Institutional Bordering Practices on Young Refugees’ (Re-)Engagement with Post-15 Education in Greece

“…The majority of the refugee population is on the mainland, in a somewhat better situation than those left behind in the notorious conditions of the island 'hotspots', but many are still in overcrowded camp conditions which the Ministry of Education has previously admitted are 'horrendous' (MoERR 2017, p. 14). Camps and Reception and Identification Centres (RICs)such as those outside Thessaloniki-are often in remote locations, with little infrastructure and insufficient resources (Tsavdaroglou and Lalenis 2020). As of May 2020, 28% of all registered refugee children (under 18) were accommodated in such camps; 24% in RICs; 31% in hotels and apartments for families; and the remainder in shelters, hotels or 'safe zones' for unaccompanied youth, or 'informal arrangements' (UNICEF 2020).…”