How did humanitarian nongovernmental organizations and government agencies interact in Idomeni, Greece during the refugee crisis between September 2014 and May 2016?

(1)

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND GOVERNANCE

A Master Thesis by

Ioanna Karamitrousi (11209526)

How Did Humanitarian Nongovernmental Organizations and Government

Agencies Interact in Idomeni, Greece during the refugee crisis between

September 2014 to May 2016?

(Original Photo by Antonis Repanas, Idomeni- 2016)

Supervisor: Dr. David Laws

Second Reader: Dr. Polly Pallister- Wilkins

Word Count: 26.141

(2)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my supervisor, David Laws, who has the attitude and the substance of a genius: he continually and convincingly conveyed a spirit of adventure in regard to research and an excitement in regard to teaching. Without his support, guidance and persistent help, I would not have done this wonderful project on the topic of migration and intergovernmental relationships.

I also want to thank Antonis Repanas, a journalist who helped me a lot with his reputation in order to make contacts throughout the fieldwork and Tiffany Marilyn Kefala for her appropriate comments. I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the NGOs, government agencies and all of my interviewees, that despite their continuous work, they showed a tireless dedication to the principles of humanity, impartiality, unity in order to help the refugee populations in Greece and enable them to live a life with dignity.

I want to thank my parents, Efi and Ntinos Karamitrousis for their encouragement throughout all these years, their understanding, support and their willingness to help me make my dreams come true. Of course I want to thank, Filotas Niarchos. I could have never successfully completed this past year without his valuable contribution, his proper comments, his support and understanding.

Most importantly, I want to thank John S. Latsis Public Benefit Foundation for awarding me a scholarship and helping me make my biggest dream come true. I am so thankful for this opportunity and I hope you will always support students to go a step further and achieve their goals. Latsis Foundation has an extremely high prestige and it remains one of the few Foundations that fully maintain their high standards in a period of a rapid degeneration. Last but not least, I want to thank the University of Amsterdam, which is one of the best education institutions in the world and I am honoured to be a graduate of this wonderful academic community.

(3)

List of Acronyms

ECHO European Commission’s Department for Overseas Humanitarian Aid EKEPY National Health Operations Center

EU European Union

FYROM Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia IMO International Migration Organization

KEELPNO Greece’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention MSF Medecins Sans Frontieres

NGO Nongovernmental Organization UN United Nations

UNHCR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees NPOs Non Profit Organizations

(5)

ABSTRACT

This research project is designed to examine the relationship between nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and government agencies during periods of crisis. Especially, how they interacted during the period of humanitarian and refugee crisis, of 2014 to 2016 on the projects of medical care and shelter provision in the Idomeni camp. Specifically, I am interested in the role of the NGOs in the management of the refugee crisis, in order to appreciate better which are the challenges that NGOs and government agencies had to deal with. At the same time I would like to look why the Greek state was not properly prepared to face and handle this particular crisis and what arrangements filled the vacuum.

The interaction of NGOs and the government agencies will be analyzed according to the theoretical models of Coston (1998) who defines eight types of interaction and Najam (2000) who simply says that organizations may collaborate where they have common ends and means, they may act complementary where they share similar ends but dissimilar means, one may be co-opted by the other where they have different goals but similar means and confrontation may result where they share neither ends nor means. Neither NGOs nor government are solid so relations may change and also fluctuations in various contexts (Najam, 2000). The theoretical section is closing by discussing a criticism of the role of NGOs by Mercer (2002).

The qualitative study shows that indeed the interactions between NGOs and state in Idomeni can be characterized by complementarity but not really of the kind that Najam envisions. The complementary role that the state sometimes took of enforcing rules, contributed overall to tensions with NGOs. If the state needs NGOs to provide even basic services, then it is hard for the NGOs to accept the state as a legitimate regulator of what goes on in a crisis. The state’s inability to meet basic needs seems to compromise its ability to fulfill such functions, however.

The theoretical framework of NGOs- government agencies relationship will contribute to the study of interaction between NGOs and government agencies under the scope of the refugee crisis. In addition, the empirical analysis that I provided with reports and interviews from representatives of NGOs and government agencies makes an important contribution due to the fact that it can give a vital new entry or can work as a starting point for new researches from scholars who are interested in this topic.

(6)

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The Concept and Chronology of the Greek Refugee Crisis

The refugee crisis arose around the year of 2014 with many refugees coming from Libya, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia and Iraq- all countries experiencing conflict, violence, insecurity and oppressive governments, to Europe for hope of safer tomorrow. A remarkable number of migrants and asylum seekers traveled around the Mediterranean using very risky methods. Many of them paid thousands to human traffickers to board overcrowded boats, putting their life into danger. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2,510 refugees drowned between January and May of 2016 during their attempts to cross to Europe. By mid-November more than 800,000 had arrived in Italy and Greece with small numbers arriving in Malta and Spain (UNHCR, 2016).

Several months ago significant numbers of asylum-seekers and refugees suddenly created dramatic situations in various parts of Greece. The country was not well prepared to accommodate those people and provide with even the most essential needs of food, water, health care or sufficient security. The vacuum left by the state has been filled to some extent by the humanitarian nongovernmental organizations and the international organizations as well as by the volunteers (Human Rights Watch, 2015). In this regard, what makes the case of Greece more interesting is the fact that thousands of NGOs across the world got involved for the first time ever in human history, with an EU member-state with recognized institutions to supposedly handle the above problems. Until 2014, the vast majority of these NGOs were intervening in the countries of Middle East and Africa which were incapable to deal by themselves with humanity issues, and needed help.

The situation was extremely bad for everybody, especially for people with specific needs, such as pregnant women, unaccompanied children and people with disabilities who had to face huge difficulties due to their lack of communication with the authorized personnel in this situation of chaos. Now, Greece, in this case and in this time, had to deal with two parameters; the financial crisis and the refugee crisis, both at the same time. As I am trying to analyze the relations between NGOs and the Greek government agencies during a period of humanitarian crisis, the concept of humanitarianism plays a central role. According to Reimann, NGOs have become very influential actors in world politics over the last three decades (Reimann, 2006). Various NGOs help vulnerable people having access to protection and guarantee respect of their human rights. In a world described by conflict, human rights abuse and war, the NGOs play a vital role and they are more important than ever.

(7)

As the flood of refugees grew, the world saw several images of what their suffering and relief after landing on Greek soil looked like. According to Rozakou, 2015 is the year of the great flow of people from the Middle East (especially Syria) and Africa to Europe (Rozakou, 2015).

The refugees, now and then, received assistance from multiple organizations working in a diverse and ever- changing environment which together managed this crisis. This group included the international intergovernmental humanitarian organizations such as the UNHCR and the International Migration Organization (IMO), religious organizations, native and foreign volunteers that are expected in a crisis of this kind (Rozakou, 2015). The Greek government authorities which include the police and the port, nonetheless played a vital role in supporting all actions toward the benefit of the refugees. Also, many of the world’s leading humanitarian organizations were involved in an extended interaction with the authorities of the country for contribution of the above. Of course, these governmental and non governmental agencies had to work hand in hand, sometimes cooperating and sometimes competing or colliding with each other, but never forgetting their international goal, the well-being of the nation and the refugees themselves (Rozakou, 2015).

An agreement between the European Union and Turkey altered the situation of the refugees. However, the choice of a few countries in Europe to close their borders to refugees, changed Greece’s status from an entry point for refugees to a deadlock for an expected number of 57.000 people stranded in the Greek territory and especially in the camp of Idomeni. Many people, local and refugees, were furious, in shock and in limbo, as refugees were frequently living in substandard conditions.

According to Lefteris Papagiannakis, Athens’ Deputy Mayor of Refugee Affairs, “... society is taking over if the state can’t provide for everything” (Rubin and Nieva, 2016). This sounds familiar as it reminds us of the humanitarian crisis of the island of Lesvos where “...humanitarian organizations act in areas of state’s responsibility in the camps and in the public space, often without asking permission from the official administrators. They operate infrastructure projects, build roofs and repair toilets under the tolerance or ignorance of the competent” (Rozakou, 2015: 14). The European Department for Overseas Humanitarian Aid (ECHO), was deployed on a broad scale inside a European member-state for the first time (MSF, 2017). This followed the pattern of NGOs which used to working in the Middle East and Africa where sovereignty is rarely an issue and where the state gives a clear and broad space for the NGOs to work.

In Greece, however, some features of the situation were different as sovereignty was an issue. There was a functioning government, challenged by the ongoing financial crisis, but still functioning. The government also represented Greece as a member of the European Union. State organizations retained a capacity to act and saw themselves as sharing responsibility for the crisis.

(8)

Humanitarian organizations used to being in the lead, now had to interact with a European member-state that had a recognized government, laws and institutions and had people working in member-state organizations who had legal responsibilities, possessed knowledge, and controlled resources that could help with the crisis and this made their goal more complicated. The experience in Greece gives us the chance to see how humanitarian organizations interact with state organizations that retain legal authority and a capacity to act that made them a sustained actor in the management of the crisis. From the above we can conclude that the refugee crisis of 2014 in many respects look like a common humanitarian crisis. An example that shows this, is the fact that NGOs were active and provided services or the fact that ECHO, an overseas body funded the activities that took place in the Greek region.

There are, however, other respects that give us a different point of view. The questions of sovereignty are not really an issue in the Greek case, as the state was active and intervened when needed. On the contrary, sovereignty was a matter that raised questions in the most humanitarian crises, in the past. In the case of Greece the state was active and intervened when needed. These characteristics create an opportunity to study a key feature of humanitarian crises in new circumstances.

Looking closer, the Idomeni camp provides an interesting twist on this relationship. Idomeni is a small village of a hundred (100) permanent residents which now became one of the world’s most famous places, not for its traditional streets or ancient sculptures, but for its role in the Greek refugee crisis. Refugees mainly from Syria and Middle East began to flock to Idomeni in order to cross the Greek borders and enter to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). It was the first unofficial camp in the Greek region, set up in the Greek village of Idomeni, only 500 meters from the border with the neighboring country. Due to the law forbidding the construction of a refugee settlement within thirty (30) kilometers from a national border, Greece, an EU member-state, could not break the rules and formally intervene in a refugee settlement too close to its border. At the same time, a gap developed that needed to be filled, as the majority of refugees in Idomeni refused to leave the camp. The camp was operating unofficially mainly from NGOs, under the supervision of the UNHCR and the tolerance of the Greek state and authorities, due to the emergency situation of the period September 2014 to May 2016. The case of Idomeni is even more attractive, if we consider the fact that the state’s capacity in Greece limits its capacity for intervention. By the term capacity I mean the ability of the government to administer effectively its territory. Greece, as a democratic state with recognized government, institutions, rules and regulations had to adjust to the international rule of not intervening in a refugee settlement which was close to the borders with the neighboring country but at the same time had to face and deal with

(9)

the difficult circumstances of hosting and providing facilities for the refugees who had experienced long and dangerous journeys. The physical location of the camp gave the NGOs to some degree the leading roles while the state had a supportive one.

Idomeni, clearly, provides the opportunity to study the interactions between state organizations and the humanitarian organizations in a setting where the state was more competent and had to be acknowledged. This thesis draws on the features of the case to investigate the following question: how did humanitarian NGOs and organizations from Greek state interact in providing medical care and shelter (basic needs) in Idomeni, Greece, in period September 2014 to May 2016.

Both FYROM and Serbia are out of the Schengen Area, which is the reason why refugees preferred this way. Refugee populations wanted to arrive to Germany or Sweden, so if they entered the Schengen Area from Serbia or FYROM, in case of arrest, they would be sent to Croatia or Hungary which were nearer to their favorite destinations and not to Greece. In 2015, FYROM and Serbia, decided to close their borders in order to prevent themselves from the increasing numbers of refugee populations. Greece could not stop the refugee flows with the result of more than 15,000 refugees being stuck in Idomeni, the village of supposedly only 100 inhabitants.

The Greek crisis is not only a financial or a refugee one. It is a crisis of values. Throughout the Greek refugee crisis, local authorities and government agencies realized the positive sign of solidarity and tried to include it as national and local feature. At the same time European officials express concerns about the lack of coordination. According to them, the Greek state proved to be insufficient, in meeting the humanitarian requirements of the refugee crisis. There are many questions that arise in this context. How can we make sense of this interaction? How does state’s competence get undermined by the NGOs? How do the boundaries get structured and in what extent can NGOs violate the laws, rules or authorized to participate in activities that belong to the state field even if the outcome of the actions is effective and helpful?

This thesis is about a humanitarian crisis and what we can learn from such crises more generally. Such crises often happen in the shadow of conflict and raise questions about how well governance works and how better results can be accomplished, as well as, the relationship between the sovereign state and the community of NGOs that play critical roles in these crises.

(10)

1.1.1. The Problem

In the ‘introduction’ I tried to give a brief overview of the situation in Greece the past several months until today. In this section, I am going to discuss the problem of the refugee crisis and why I think that my research is valuable as ever.

A huge number of refugees and asylum seekers have gone through Greece the previous year, escaping repression and conflict conditions to look for safety in Greece and in the wider Europe. While the Greek government has to deal with two crises at the same time (the refugee and the financial crisis), the country has been strained by the increasing migration rates. In this regard, many NGOs have joined endeavors to help and support the refugee population in every possible way. These NGOs have provided food, medical care, legal support and the most fundamental things. But why was the Greek government unable to provide social care and services to those people? In this point, we should bear in mind that Greece is struggling to face the austerity measures, a high unemployment rate and a steady requirement for financial support from creditors; factors that show the need for the Greek government to rely on the cooperation with the NGOs.

How can NGOs be strengthened in order to help the government agencies to resolve concerns and to develop government’s effectiveness? NGOs have an expansive comprehension and experience in dealing with refugees. Their interest in political discussions can create a harmony among different social groups, especially when the political spectrum in Greece is extremely polarized.

As many things are a coin with two sides, so is the interaction between NGOs and government agencies. The relation can be productive and efficient but also, if the two parties fail to cooperate, then the refugee issue as a whole can be affected in an unproductive way. So it is important that both parties set priorities and plan together their activities, instead of creating dividing lines in case of intervention.

(11)

1.2. Motivation and Research Objectives of Study Organization of

Dissertation

Government agencies and NGOs have many common aspects in addressing the issues that arise in periods of crisis. As I come from a country which faces a deep refugee crisis the past two years, I am concerned in the resolution of this crisis and especially the relations between government agencies and NGOs. Both of them are trying to improve the socioeconomic conditions of the people during the crisis period in the Greek area. No matter what the real purposes of these two are, it is true that they are planning and getting involved in many projects in order to help people in need.

The Greek case study is a great example of this research as the number of NGOs dramatically increased after the refugee crisis of 2014. Nobody can ignore the significance of NGOs in terms of effectiveness, knowledge and capability. At this point, many people would ask questions, like: How can we make sense of this interaction? Why is the state competence undermined by the involvement of NGOs? Through this thesis, I hope to provide a theoretical explanation of the NGO- government relationship. As Bantley (2006) explains, the logic of studying these relationships is to explain failed or non supportive relationships and to identify circumstances where positive ones can occur. Furthermore, I will provide some empirical evidence. In this regard, I will examine and compare two projects which took place in the Greek area and the data I will collect, will be useful in enhancing our understanding of NGOs relations with the government. My thesis has as major aim to measure the NGOs- state relationships and the impact of the interaction from a social perspective.

This study makes an important contribution to the study of migration due to the fact that it can provide a theoretical explanation of the relations between NGOs and the government agencies in the refugee crisis of 2014, which is a recent crisis and there are currently no studies that cover the relations of the above factors in the Greek area for this period. At the same time, this study can give a vital new entry or a starting point for new researches from scholars who are interested in this topic.

(12)

1.3. Chronology of the presence of Non- Governmental Organizations

in the Greek area

The development of NGOs in recent years in Greece is remarkable, especially after the outbreak of the refugee crisis. Both the number of NGOs as well as the number of support and the publicity they enjoy cannot be compared with the corresponding rates in the past years. Today Nonprofit Organizations (NPOs) and Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) are often used synonymously. According to the UN definition “...any international organization which is not established by intergovernmental agreement shall be considered as an NGO. The definition excludes political parties, religious groups per se, private hospitals and schools or sports clubs and fraternal organizations” (Ahmed and Potter, 2006).

In Greece the recognition of the importance of NGOs came slow. After the country entered as a full member in the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD in 1999, things changed and the already existing NGOs in Greece received adequate amounts of grants. After a short period of time, the International Development Cooperation Service- Hellenic Aid was established as a specialized body of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, responsible for supervising the actions and programs in developing countries which are implemented by NGOs and other civil society actors. According to the survey of Hellenic Aid which lasted for 1.5 year, they were recorded in the Greek area 31,585 NGOs, once globally the number of international NGOs touches the number of 1.000.000 (Mani, 2004). Hellenic Aid finances the certified NGOs (those with an action plan, schedule and budget).

(13)

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

The chapter examines theoretical perspectives of how to make sense of relations between NGOs and government agencies in order to provide a coherent conceptual foundation for this research. The chapter will review the notion of NGOs and the state as actors, their goals and motives, their roles and responsibilities and, finally, the interaction between them. Here it draws primarily on Najam’s (2000) theory of “Third Sector- Government Relations”. The chapter will also provide an overview of the typologies and theoretical models of state- NGO relations, focusing on Coston’s (1998) theory of “Model and Typology of Government- NGO relationships”. The conclusion will summarize the insights gleaned from this theoretical overview and describe their importance in facilitating the empirical analysis that is reported in subsequent chapters.

2.2. Role and Function of NGOs

States play a fundamental role in addressing the issues that arise in periods of crisis. According to Gilbert “...from the perspective of migration, states continue to play a predominant role with respect to setting out legislation, making decisions about admissibility, and providing (some) settlement services” (Gilbert, 2017: 8). In many humanitarian crises, however, this role is limited along with the capacity of the state. Because these crises often unfold in situations where the state is failing or significant limits on its capacity have been made clear, nongovernmental organizations are not only involved, but often adopt a leadership role. An increasing number of researchers have highlighted the vital role that these non-state actors play. In 1998, Authen stated that “the element of world society, as represented by international humanitarian non-governmental organizations, in recent years has gained strength relative to the elements of international society and the states system” (Authen, 1998: 1). Her analysis highlights the dynamic relationship that exists between states and nongovernmental actors and the opportunities and challenges this has created for the NGOs that are involved. NGOs have collaborated in various countries to promote common humanitarian assistance. Today, NGOs provide human development assistance.

(14)

Throughout this section, I will provide a definition of NGOs and a description of their function. I will also discuss their role in theory and practice in the context of the refugee crisis.

NGOs involved in humanitarian projects try to provide services to people most in need (Asad and Kay, 2014). The NGOs that are involved in humanitarian responses are diverse and broad. Their activities may be local or global. They may be small poor grassroots organizations or large, professionally staffed entities. Some work unilaterally, while others interact with state agencies, international organizations and other NGOs to achieve their goals. NGOs normally work as operators of global comprehension or pressure groups. According to Simmons “… NGOs affect national governments and national and multinational corporations in four ways: setting agendas, negotiating outcomes, conferring legitimacy and implementing solutions” (Simmons, 1998: 211).

Meanwhile, the state, depending on its willingness and capacity to be involved, can help or constrain NGO activities, and in this way, shape the outcomes of projects and its relationship with NGOs more generally. Typologies of the relations between NGOs and state help us analyze the various, complex ways, in which NGOs are connected to the state.

I will now explain in further detail the four functions that the aforementioned research by Simmons (1998) suggests NGOs can fill. Firstly, NGOs help set agendas. They play an important role in getting policy makers’ attention and ensuring that key issues are addressed, by organizing public campaigns or informative meetings. Secondly, NGOs negotiate outcomes. They can redesign multilateral agreements to make them, mutually beneficial. Third, NGOs confer legitimacy. NGOs judgments can be definitive in advancing or withholding the political and public support. NGOs can legitimize choices by broadening and enriching information for decision-making. Finally, NGOs implement solutions. They can often do what governments cannot (Simmons, 1998). In fulfilling these functions, NGOs often work in a sphere outside existing formal governmental structures to meet their aims. They set their own standards and governments and market companies usually follow, due to the influence of public opinion, and NGOs’ expertise and capacity (Simmons, 1998).

(15)

2.3. Role, Function and Capacity of States

The circumstances in Greece in 2015 and 2016 brought up many issues about the responsibilities of states hosting refugees during, and after, episodes of crisis. It raised questions about how this responsibility is connected to the principle of asylum and how policies can be humanitarian and fair (Stern, 2016). Refugee policy is affected by a number of factors such as a state’s economic situation, legal obligations, and willingness. Fisher, argues that “… although the NGO field is a heterogeneous one, the state too needs to be acknowledged as a complex, heterogeneous and often fragmented actor” (Fisher, 1998: 452). The political context, within which NGOs operate play a key role as it influences the level of the state support to a project and finally the way NGOs operate. Asad and Kay (2014) describe the role of the state in humanitarian projects using a typology of states based on two dimensions- willingness and capability, leading to the four types of states, as shown in Table 1.

Willingness / Capability

Willing Unwilling

Capable Capable and willing Capable but unwilling

Incapable

Willing but incapable Incapable and unwilling Table 1 – A typology of states

A state is willing when it effectively cultivates an environment that encourages NGOs humanitarian activity. In this case the state shows willingness to cooperate with other actors for the achievement of a mutually beneficial result and it is eager to provide a friendly environment for activities. A state is capable when it has the financial ability or different resources to support and help NGOs in their work. It further means that state agencies have both the capacity (political and institutional) as well as the ability to provide public services. In general capable states can plan and implement their polices in an effective way. As Asad and Kay (2014) highlight “… NGOs attempt to negotiate with the state in order to find overlap in their interests that allow for project implementation. In general we find correspondence between a state’s willingness and capacity and

(16)

how NGOs leverage critical resources- alliances and networks, financial and cultural resources and frames, across state and non state fields” (Asad and Kay, 2014: 4).

This explains exactly how the state’s willingness and capacity affects interaction with NGOs, and how states and NGOs can work in a complementary way if they find common ground. The case of Greece fits uneasily into the typology stated above. The financial crisis that coincided with the refugee crisis limited the state’s capacity to meet the needs of its citizens. Greece is in its eighth year of financial instability, and this has had negative consequences for the refugees who have landed on Greek territory. The influx of refugees amplified these limits. This is why the European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO) department interceded in Greece – its first ever operation in an EU member state. Before then, ECHO humanitarian funding had been directed to Africa, Asia, Middle East and Central and South America (European Commission, 2017). As Howden highlighted in his report, “...the European Commission, is by far the largest donor and has been party to all aspects of the handling of the crisis” (Howden, 2017: 1). The European Commission explained the willingness of the EU to address the refugee crisis and support Greek national efforts to improve reception capacities, integrate refugees at local and regional level as well as increase the effectiveness of return programs (European Commission, 2016). In this regard, the European Commission “awarded 352 million euros in emergency assistance since the beginning of the crisis to support the Greek authorities as well as international organizations and NGOs operating in Greece in managing the refugee and humanitarian crisis” (European Commission, 2016). However this money was also allocated according to specific targets and needs of the EU, such as control of external borders.

A well-known NGO, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), saw the pattern in Greece as fitting with work in such contexts: “...NGOs started with a different role and ended up in many cases replacing the state. They undertook or offered services from which the state had gradually withdrawn and NGOs tried to fill the gap” (MSF, 2017). In general, as I stated before, the Greek state was not prepared to address the needs of the refugees, did not have the means and the resources, due to its financial instability, or have the legitimization to set up a refugee camp close to its borders, so tolerated the NGO operations and intervened when it was necessary. So, according to MSF “...the Greek territory is very appropriate at this point”. (MSF, 2017).

The Greek state, also, fits with Asad and Kay’s (2014) definition of capability. It provided an environment that encouraged the humanitarian activity of the NGOs, as “...there was an inalienable agreement and acceptance from the state’s sides about the activities in Idomeni. The state also helped in the licensing process of the vaccinations” (MSF, 2017). According to Kotsioni’s article, “...by providing medical care, MSF constantly faced the risk that they would be perceived to be part

(17)

of the system” (Scott-Smith, 2016: 12). The article continues by saying that in that sense MSF, had to collaborate with a system it opposed but at the same time, these activities were necessary in order to help the most vulnerable people (Scott-Smith, 2016).

Here it is important to analyze the state’s capacity and how we measure it. In his article “What is Governance?” (2013), Francis Fukuyama measures state’s capacity by looking at the way governments function, and the bureaucratic processes that governments should follow in order to effectively administer their territory and autonomy, which means the freedom or protection of its region from external influences. Fukuyama divides a state’s capacity into two domains. He first talks about upstream bodies at the center of government, and he differentiates these from downstream bodies, which fund services under the policy direction of government. But what exactly are the results of the upstream and downstream bodies?

Downstream bodies can be one of three types. First, they can be services, such as medical care, shelter provision, security, transport through funding and direct provision of the state. Second, they can be other public investments, such as the management of infrastructure. Last but not least, they can take the form of regulations and rules of social and financial behavior. According to Fukuyama it is important to measure the three basic aspects of government, as the table indicates below. Regarding the provision of medical services, the Greek state took action in health management and provided the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, KEELPNO, which was responsible for the control of communicable diseases and made an important contribution to the Idomeni camp. The state also provided a mobile unit with doctors from EKEPY, the National Health Operations Center, and an ambulance, which was in Idomeni camp on a daily basis (Doctors of the World, 2017). On the contrary, regarding shelter provision, the Greek state remained totally absent, as the official position of the Ministry of Migration was that Idomeni was not an official refugee settlement, as people were only arriving in Idomeni in order to cross the borders. It became a refugee settlement when the FYROM closed its borders in violation of an EU decision, and thus, Greek authorities and government agencies had to manage it (Mantouvalos, 2017). So NGOs filled the vacuum of shelter provision in the camp of Idomeni. NGOs provided three huge tents, which could shelter 800 person each, and various small tents that covered the needs for temporary accommodation.

As for the provision of public investment and infrastructures, the refugee crisis arose all of a sudden and the state was not able and prepared to address this crisis, which furthermore coincided with the financial one. As I mentioned above, the financial crisis is a matter worth exploring in the context of the refugee crisis as it determined important aspects of the problem and the capacity of the Greek state to act in emergency conditions. As I have already discussed, what is most interesting

(18)

is the fact that ECHO, took action for the first time in history, in an EU member state, due to this state’s limited financial ability.

The third point that Francis Fukuyama states is the regulations and rules of financial and social behavior. In this context, I could define the Greek state as an active actor. I will explain my interpretation with the quote from MSF below:

“...there was an inalienable agreement and acceptance from the state’s side about the activities in Idomeni. The state also helped in the licensing process of the vaccinations” (MSF, 2017). The licensing of vaccinations is indeed an important contribution from state’s side, as it recognizes the process that takes place, supporting the refugees of Idomeni as well as the NGOs that act in the territory of Idomeni.

Providing services Public investment Regulations Medical Care State- NGOs

(KEELPNO, vaccinations, ambulances, medication and care)

ECHO (European funding, NGOs (individual funding)

State (licensing vaccinations)

Shelter NGOs (provision of tents)

ECHO (European funding), NGOs (individual funding)

(19)

-2.4. How are goals and strategies related to cooperation and

competition?

The roles and functions of NGOs and state are fundamental in order to understand how these actors react and interact when they need to work together. Here, we are going to look at the goals and strategies of these actors and how goals and strategies affect the type of interaction between NGOs and governments. Within this framework, I will briefly look at what prior researchers have said about how to make sense of NGO- state interaction. According to Ahmed and Potter (2006) “… the main goals and motives of the NGOs include relief, social and economic development and political roles” (Ahmed and Potter, 2006: 12). The goals of NGOs cover practically every area, especially in crisis conditions. The functions of NGOs are also evident in the refugee crisis of 2014 in Greece. As they implement their policies, government and nongovernmental agencies collide in terms of goals, motives, priorities, strategies and needs. Their interaction shapes their relationships in various and important domains of activities. Young (1999) has characterized the relationships in three patterns: supplementary, complementary or adversarial. Clark (1991) suggests that NGOs have three options: oppose the state, complement it, or reform it.

Najam’s theory of organizational relations between NGOs and governments follows a similar line. According to Najam, “… each institutional actor governmental or nongovernmental pursues certain ends (goals) and each has a preference for certain means (strategies)” (Najam, 2000: 383). In this regard, he supports the idea that there are four types of relationships between NGOs and governments: cooperation, confrontation, complementarity, and cooptation. Najam terms this the four-C model.

According to Najam, a cooperative approach is likely when governments and NGOs have similar policy goals and lean towards comparable strategies to achieve these goals. There is a clear convergence of preferred ends and means. According to this definition, there are many cases of dynamic government- NGO cooperation, especially in the provision of humanitarian assistance and relief. A confrontational relationship develops when NGOs and government agencies each think the others’ goals and strategies contradict their own. In this type of relationship we have total antithetical ends and means. This is a common type of relation for NGOs and government agencies, as governments have and are eager to utilize their coercive forces, while NGOs rise as forces of reaction or resistance to unfair government policies.

The third type of relationship, the complementary, occurs when government agencies and NGOs have common goals but incline towards different strategies, so when they possess similar

(20)

goals but dissimilar strategies to make them real. As Najam highlights, “...where the goals of government and NGOs are similar they are likely to gravitate toward an arrangement in which they complement each other in the achievement of a shared end, even through dissimilar means” (Najam, 2000: 387). This type of relationship is often seen in cases of service provision, where NGOs are involved in filling a gap that the government was not prepared or unwilling to fill. The fourth and last type of relationship according to Najam is the co-optive relationship, which takes place when NGOs and government agencies have similar strategies but prefer different goals. Cooptation is often used in transitory conditions and considered to be a negative situation where the actors try to change the preferences that others have about particular ends and means.

These four types emerge from an emphasis on the relationships between NGOs and state governments as shaped on the basis of ends and means, goals and strategies. They also, come from the perspective that organizations- either governmental or non governmental- are driven by reasonability, by institutional advantages and needs (Najam, 2000). Najam suggests that “...the most robust approach to studying NGOs- government interaction is to focus on the resulting relationship instead of only looking at the individual attitudes of the one party toward the other” (Najam, 2000: 390). The above quote indicates the necessity of a study, analyzing the relations between the actors who played key roles in the Greek refugee crisis. The theoretical framework that Najam introduced in this study helped me a lot to analyze and make sense of my interview data and explore the goals and strategies of the NGOs and the state in the case of Idomeni. Najam continues by saying:

“The key feature of this four-C model is that it is based on a theory of strategic institutional interests” (Najam, 2000: 390). NGOs and government relations can be defined as an issue of key institutional decision- making, and by clarifying them in terms of a variety and diversity of institutional interests, we are able to make sense of the most important and deep understanding of these relations.

Najam’s typology helps us make sense of the interaction between NGOs and state organizations in Greece in terms of complementarity. In the case of Greece, the state faced new challenges, but retained some competence. At the same time, NGOs also had to deal with a new situation: the majority of them were familiar with these problems but it was the first time that they worked in a context where the state was sovereign, capable and active, at least in part. In a complementary relationship the purpose of both actors is the supply of resources and the provision of services.

It is obvious that where the goals of a Government and NGOs are similar, they are likely to incline towards a plan in which they supplement each other in the accomplishment of a common end via different means. Where the means of the actors are also similar, complementarity can

(21)

blossom into cooperation. The idea of complementarity is common in cases of service provision, where NGOs in developing and industrialized countries fill a vacuum that is expected to be filled by the government, yet the government is unable or not prepared to do it (Douglas, 1987, Weisbrod, 1988, Najam, 2010). For example there is a complementary interaction between NGOs and the state in Kazakhstan, which has grown dramatically in recent years. In the case of Kazakhstan, the state-civil society relationship is in the early stage of development but a number of laws have been enacted to encourage the government to cooperate with NGOs. NGOs have taken on the role of delivering public services that cannot be provided by the state (Kabdiyeava and Dixon, 2014). As the state was not able and prepared to address the needs of the people, NGOs participated actively in this process. The result was a continuous complementary interaction between NGOs and government agencies, in which they tended to work independently but not antagonistically (Kabdiyeva and Dixon, 2014).

Najam’s theory of organizational relations will be used in conjunction with the theory of Coston. Najam provides a framework based on the premise that NGOs and states are not monolithic actors and in some cases, the types of interaction between them can be combined. This results in mixed types of interactions.

(22)

2.5. Why Is Coston’s Model The Most Suitable Theoretical Concept

For This Research?

After discussing Najam’s theoretical framework and the four types of state- NGO interaction, I will try to give an overview of Coston’s model, which is a more dynamic model and allows us to better understand the patterns of interaction as well as helps us understand complementarity in more detail. With a basic understanding of the theory, it is appropriate to clarify why Coston’s research and findings about complementarity is the most appropriate theory to apply to an analysis of the interaction between NGOs and government agencies during the refugee crisis in Greece. In order to do this, it is important to look into the literature because an understanding of some basic research is essential.

Back in 1987, Salamon stressed the impossibility of a positive government- NGO arrangement due to the lack of a theoretical framework, though both sides agree that a relationship is inevitable. McLoughlin (2011) supported the idea that “Many NGOs work in collaboration with government, either to improve public services or to complement them” (McLoughlin, 2011: 241). I will briefly explain the three types of NGOs and state and will further describe Coston’s research, which fits better in the Greek case. First, in the dualistic approach of Maxwell and Riddel (1998) about the strong- weak partnership, the ‘information sharing’ and the ‘policy dialogue’ appear as very important characteristics of the weak partnership arrangement. On the other hand, jointly agreed partnership programmes and multi-annual financial agreements appear to be characteristics for strong partnerships. Second, regarding the formal and informal approaches, according to Bebbington and Farrington “...for government agencies dividing tasks has been more attractive than any other sharing of power” (Bebbington and Farrington, 1993: 203). It is true that for a long time governments refused the demands of NGOs and sought to keep programs within the state’s control. Last but not least, the third category is the active- dependent relationship by Lewis (2003) who supported the opinion that “...the development of NGOs is highly dependent on events and resources in their environment, but it also gives NGOs the potential to influence that environment” (Lewis, 2003: 335).

Coston’s model provides a tool for assessing of the case study I research in this paper, the camp of Idomeni as well as providing an understanding for the relationship’s parameters and objectives. In that sense, “...NGOs should know the political and legal context of government operations and the pressures of government representatives” (Coston, 1998: 358); similarly, governments must be aware of the needs and activities of NGOs. Due to the fact that NGOs and

(23)

governments are very different there are many different models, which describe different interactions.

At the same time, Coston’s theoretical model of NGO- government relations explains in detail the degree of formalization of the interaction between them, the level of acceptance or resistance to institutional pluralism, the level of the formalization of the interaction and last but not least the power asymmetry of the relationship. According to the diagram below, the resistance or acknowledgment of institutional pluralism is clearly reverberated in a government’s approach to NGOs: It is unfavorable in cases, where governments oppose institutional pluralism, and neutral or favourable when it is acknowledged. Governments highly support NGOs that cooperate with them, in accordance with memoranda of cooperation they sign together, but they also tend to support the NGO field in general. NGO autonomy is also dependent on the level of government support. From this perspective, NGOs can gain the best level of autonomy at the extremes, according to Coston’s diagram. She highlights the term ‘institutional pluralism’, which is simply the acceptance of the idea that organizations from and beyond the state will be involved in governance. When governments acknowledge institutional pluralism, interactions between NGOs and governments are based on comparative advantages, which means that are based on the keystones of complementarity. Finally, the most important difference between complementarity and cooperation is the level of NGO autonomy.

(24)

In the figure above, Coston lists the eight types of interaction between NGOs and governments: repression, rivalry, competition, contractual type, third party, cooperation, complementarity, and collaboration. Each of these depend on different variables, such as: “...government’s resistance or acceptance of institutional pluralism, government- NGO linkages, relative power relationship, level of formality, favorability of government policy and other characteristics” (Coston, 1998: 360).

(25)

2.6 Complementarity Type of Interaction

While trying to provide a definition of the complementarity type of interaction between NGOs and government, Gronbjerg (1987) described the interaction as “symbiosis”, where the two actors coexist while trying to achieve mutual advantage or mutual exploitation. Due to the complexity and the daily challenges that the governments and the NGOs have to face, they are sometimes forced to follow this way of interaction. The notion of complementarity highlights the mutual benefit of the actors. For this reason, complementary service provision can be very positive, as it supports the idea of the provision of qualitatively different services from each of the actors, and NGOs and government agencies get specific roles for specific actions. These kind of relationships can possibly be long-term, as governments and NGOs provide different services according to their own expertise, so the one may be unwilling to provide the services of the other (Kramer, 1981).

In relation to the above perspective, Thomas (1985) formulates his idea about social learning theory, where governments hold professional expert knowledge, while NGOs usually hold the necessary social expert knowledge. Thus the mutual dependence between them can be technical as well as financial (Lipsky and Smith, 1990). These two can also complement each other geographically as NGOs can help in the provision of services in remote areas that the state has difficultly in reaching. It is also important that the top-down action of government can be completed in some way by the bottom-up action of NGOs. Governments usually work by designing or implementing policies, while NGOs work in the field and try to provide immediate help according to available policies designed by the relevant governments.

What is the difference between complementarity and collaboration? Do these terms have special characteristics? According to Coston “...the greater the linkage, the more formalized the relationship becomes” (Coston, 1998: 372). In that sense, the level of formality is the most important factor, which differentiates complementarity from collaboration. In the next section, I give a description of the linkage debate in further detail and I explain which types of linkages fit better in the domains of medical care and shelter in the Idomeni camp.

Complementarity can be more effective with some strategic moves such as stronger relationships, for example: information sharing and a specific level of trust. The next question that may arise is: how are NGOs and government agencies concerned with their advantages of cooperating with one another or the financial relations between these sectors? Information sharing is not enough to ‘push’ for a complementary relationship. Monetary resources are also important as many NGOs are increasingly supported by government funds.

(26)

Uphoff (1986) divides complementarity into three types. The first one is philanthropization. Philanthropization happens when governments enable NGOs to transfer resources, in order to work effectively at a local level. For this reason, many local foundations are represented by specific NGOs and philanthropization is regularly the groundwork for the majority of NGO actions. The second type of complementarity, according to Uphoff, is intermediation. Intermediation gives an institutionalized role to the NGOs. Under this role, NGOs perform certain governmental actions, which otherwise be done by local government institutions. In this regard, NGOs are able to push governments to take its responsibilities as well as to represent those who supported these organizations. Last but not least, the strongest type that complementarity can get is the confidence. Confidence is a good method to utilize assets, reinforce initiatives and support activities, in order to create benefits. There are many benefits of this kind of strategy, including successful utilization of constrained government resources and credibility (Uphoff, 1986).

The type of complementarity is quite specific, as it is determined according to the special needs of each sector, but all of the types have as core characteristics the legitimization and recognition of governments as well as the basic level of NGO autonomy. Consequently from the above analysis I am able to summarize how we can make sense of the type of interaction between NGOs and states. Firstly, we should look at the resistance or openness to institutional pluralism. Secondly, we should look at the level of formalization, and last but not least, the power symmetry or asymmetry (as indicated in the table above). Complementarity is open, mid- level formal and power symmetric interaction between NGOs and government agencies and may be confined to specific NGOs in special services and geographical places. It is not common for NGOs and government agencies to admit or recognize their type of relationship as complementarity for all aspects; they try to create an image of a specific level of rivalry or repetition.

This aspect was quite interesting for this thesis, as I personally observed the hesitation of the actors in defining the type of their interaction as complementarity. They used to define it as “cooperation” when they thought they interacted well or as “non-cooperation” or “absence of interaction” when they thought their interaction was bad.

Summarizing Coston’s model and trying to combine it with the Greek case, I would say that the openness to institutional pluralism was clear, as the state did not hesitate to interact with NGOs. On the contrary, many interviewees talked about the relief of the state while collaborating with NGOs and highlighted the important role that NGOs had tolerated of the state in various cases, as indicated by the quotes below:

(27)

“I would say we were lucky for the involvement of NGOs in the refugee crisis” (Papagiannakis, 2017).

“We work together (with the state) in all areas, where refugees need to access the government agencies” (Arsis, 2017).

Regarding the power relations, I can conclude that there is a power symmetry between NGOs and the state- even though NGOs’ work was acknowledged much more in comparison to the state’s work, which was characterized by negative emotions in the majority of my interviews: “NGOs are helping in the provision of services, which are useful at the time. The role of the state is to coordinate, so in many cases it is supported by the NGOs” (Tanos, 2017)

“Neither could NGOs continue working without the security of the public institutions, nor could we continue without their expertise in the field” (Politi, 2017).

“Basically, as I said before, the NGOs were responsible for basic functions that normally must be done by the Greek state” (Soupli, 2017).

Last but not least, the level of formalization can be characterized as mid-level formalization. The camp of Idomeni was an informal one and the activities that took place there from both sides were unofficial. However, in many cases, the state signed memoranda of cooperation with various NGOs that were present in Idomeni camp and the police headquarters recorded them.

“We had prepared a complete record of all the NGOs there. With the official NGOs we work together anyway” (Tanos, 2017).

“We work a lot with NGOs and we sign memoranda of cooperation in various cases” (Papagiannakis, 2017)

(28)

2.7 The Linkage Debate

Linkages between NGOs and government agencies seem important, even though these linkages can be covetable or questionable. It is worth exploring the linkages between NGOs and state, especially when the state is not able or prepared to address issues of crisis by itself, as in these cases it usually needs the help of other actors, such as NGOs, international organizations or other non-state actors. According to Cotter (1988), there are two theoretical approaches regarding linkages between NGOs and government: the functionalist approach, which is in favour of more linkages between these two actors; and the liberationist approach, which supports the idea of fewer linkages. Cotter believes that the results are determined by the quality of the linkages and not the quantity. However, as I mentioned before, Coston believes that: “...the greater the linkage, the more formalized the relationship becomes” (Coston, 1998: 372). At the same time, earlier studies prove that the links between NGOs and government are more important than the actual role they provide. These studies concluded that government linkages could have assertive results (Uphoff and Esman, 1984). The study of Salamon and Anheier (1996), which was conducted in seven countries, confirms the earlier findings that NGOs and government agencies can be simply partners and allies (Coston, 1998).

Even though the above findings are important for all NGOs that need to interact with the government in order to achieve certain goals, a lot of those NGOs are still unwilling to lose their autonomy. In their work, Esman and Uphoff (1984) introduce their five degrees of linkages between NGOs and governments. The first one is autonomy. On this level there is no involvement between them and no control from the government side. The second degree is the low level, which simply involves a little interaction between the actors. The third one is the moderate linkage, which involves some interaction, but not on a tactical level. The fourth one is the high linkage with a lot of interaction between the actors, but also reciprocity. Last but not least, the final level of interaction is the direction, where the control and the interaction by the government are strong.

We can easily conclude that interaction between NGOs and government in the Greek case, which according to the theories of Coston (1998) and Najam (2010) have a complementary relationship, can also be connected to the level three or four of the linkages I described above. So in the case of a complementary relationship between NGOs and government agencies, it is very common to have a moderate or high level of linkage. These two types of linkages explain exactly the linkages between NGOs and government in the domain of medical care. However, in the

(29)

domain of shelter provision things changed, as it is easily observed that the NGOs acted with autonomy in the provision of accommodation for the refugee population in the camp of Idomeni. In the case of medical care, a mixed type of moderate and high linkage is observed, as there was a daily interaction between the actors, but at the same time this interaction was limited and under restrictions, due to the legal obligations that the Greek state had to obey. On the contrary I observed an interesting result in the domain of shelter provision, as there was no interaction between state and NGO actors. NGOs provided tents as well as built infrastructure in the camp for temporary housing for people, with total autonomy. Both of these cases can be visible in the example of the refugee crisis in Greece according to my research and my findings, which will be explained in the section of my qualitative study results.

(30)

2.8 Criticism

It is important to acknowledge the criticisms of NGO- government interaction, in order to understand the theoretical challenges that could potentially confront this research as a contributor to the theory. The following will assess a critical theory authored by Mercer (2000) who expressed various inclinations, predispositions and assumptions that were used for the creation of a regulative unanimity regarding the political role of NGOs and its interactions with government agencies.

First of all, NGOs are considered to check a state’s power by testing its autonomy at national and local levels, pressing the state to adopt its role and responsibilities and creating new approaches. Secondly, a common notion is that NGOs speak in favour of the interests of vulnerable people in the political and social arena and thus try to affect public opinion. Finally, as autonomous actors, NGOs consider that they have to fortify the political arena, provide chances and make collusions, in order to achieve pressure on the state. According to Mercer, there is a devotion to the ideal image that civil society and NGOs are intrinsically “great things” separate from the unity of the state while acting as a ‘defense’ against it. Such arguments above are ‘risky’, not just for the ideological underpinnings but also in light of the fact that the unpredictable realities of NGOs and their relationships to the social, political and cultural arena make it extremely hard to make assumptions about the political role of NGOs (Mercer, 2000).

I will now try to analyze all of the instances I mentioned above. First, NGOs are viewed as a key instrument for breaking down ‘conventional’, ‘profoundly established’ and ‘permanent’ socio-cultural liberal identities. Making civil society work is a matter of socialization into popularity-based standards. In this regard, NGOs and civil society in general are seen as the institutional vehicles for a complete transformation to the current liberal social order. According to various authors such as Williams and Young (1994) and Hearn (1999), such an aspect has a responsibility for designing a civil society, in which NGOs are key elements in a process of transformatory improvement. Regarding my third instance, it is regularly supported that NGOs help democratization as they pluralize the political and social arenas and take actions that are considered to be bottom-up. However, it is too naive to say that the simple presence of NGOs prompted these results. This kind of approach relies on the conflation of NGOs with other civil society institutions, even though most of the time NGOs are taken as indicators of the presence of civil society in a given place.

I will now investigate two topics that highlight the different roles that NGOs can take in the social and political arenas. Specifically, I will explore NGO’s roles and impact, and how NGOs can

(31)

both strengthen or weaken the state. First, if we see the overall setting in which NGOs work there is an acceptance of the fact that the capacity of NGOs to satisfy their democratic role is progressively restricted by political institutions, such as Mercer states. “...The main issue here is, if NGOs are taking up greater roles in social welfare as more donor funding becomes available, then the legitimacy of their claims to work with and represent the interests of the poor and disenfranchised, comes under threat” (Mercer, 2000: 14). Financial aid for NGOs may undermine civil society. Indeed, according to Bebbington (1997), “the so called ‘crisis of legitimacy’ entails the loss of linkages, less transparent NGO operations, as accountability flows upwards to the donor” (Bebbington, 1997 in Mercer, 2000: 15-16). Tvedt (1998) expressed the notion that “Strengthening NGOs may actually serve to weaken civil society”.

The second topic, which is controversial, is the involvement of NGOs in states’ service provision, which is a very topical issue especially for this individual research. State-supported social funding has been utilized by NGOs in order to plan and create social development projects. Numerous governments had no choice, but to acknowledge the vital role of NGOs in social service provision. In this case NGOs do not challenge government policy but legitimize it and sometimes confirm a state’s effectiveness by achieving positive results or filling the gaps on behalf of the state, as seen in the case of Greece.

In conclusion, we can highlight from the above that the weakening of the government agencies, in combination with the strengthening of the NGOs, which are highly based on international funding, undermines the ability of the Greek state to provide alternative solutions to the refugee crisis. This can result in a plan being created by international institutions and agents that does not bear in mind the abilities and the resources of the Greek state. It also does not take into account the limits of the state’s sovereignty or the democratic processes that must be followed, as Greece is a country with recognized government and legal institutions. From the above it is clear that the political institutions and government’s democratic values are undermined.

(32)

2.9 Chapter Summary

In conclusion, the chapter has successfully ascertained the theoretical needs of this research, namely: a brief description of the chronology of the refugee crisis in Idomeni, the role and function of states and NGOs, an explanation of how goals and strategies are related to cooperation and competition, Coston’s theoretical framework and its importance in explaining the interactions between NGOs and government agencies in this particular research and the types of relationship that exist. Last but not least, this work provides an explanation of the linkage debate and the criticisms. This helps to guide the research and identify the principles that the research should hold true, in order to situate itself within the research of the interactions between NGOs and government agencies during the Greek refugee crisis at the camp of Idomeni.

I will continue by discussing the methodology I used in order to obtain data during my fieldwork in Greece, and connect and analyze this in accordance with the above theory. I will specifically focus on the aspects of the role of the state and the NGOs in this specific crisis and their type of interaction.

(33)

3. RESEARCH DESIGN- METHODS AND DATA

This section describes the research design, methods and data collection used for the completion of this dissertation. Due to the fact that I am interested in understanding how NGOs worked and built relationships within the social context of the refugee crisis which took place in Greece, I employed a qualitative research. First, I adopted a case study research design and I selected the camp of Idomeni as my main study site. I, also, selected various NGOs which actively got involved in the refugee crisis during September 2014 to March 2016 such as: Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Doctors of the World, Arsis, Agape and Vavel. I rely on in-depth, semi-structured interviews to uncover how officials from both NGOs and government agencies understand the dynamics of the state- NGO interaction.

3.1 The Operationalization

In order to describe and analyze the relations between NGOs and government agencies, I use qualitative data. During my scientific research, I tried to seek answers to my key research question and I collected as much evidence in order to support these answers and to produce findings that are not determined in advance. In order to achieve this, I got in depth interviews from representatives of well-known NGOs in Greece, which cooperated with government agencies and I collected data on perspectives and experiences, particularly regarding the sensitive topic of actors’ interaction in periods of crisis. My research is deductive and my study design is iterative, which means that data collection and questions arisen in this thesis are adjusted to the outcome of my research. Last but not least, what I found out is how NGOs experience their cooperation in specific projects with the Greek government agencies. I wanted to get information, which depicts the “human side” of the issue or contradictory behaviors, opinions and emotions. I, also, identify the intangible factors, such as the socioeconomic conditions, the vacuum that needed to be filled, whose role was transparent and whose was not. In the following, the operationalization will be explained more in depth.