Greek post-war II emigration forms part of population movement from the agricultural economies of the Mediterranean to transoceanic and European countries with a strong secondary sector. Migration to Western Europe was intended to be a temporary import of cheap labour and was subject to a policy of organised labour importation drafted by the host country governments and employers. Extensive unemployment and underemployment as well as unequal distribution of income are considered to be the main push factors of the Greek massive post-war II emigration. As a result, the population in the poorer rural areas declined severely, especially in the smaller islands and in the mountainous areas where the local economies collapsed causing more outmigration and desolation. The cities of Athens and Thessaloniki and the receiving countries in Europe and overseas were the main migration gain areas, the former often operating as buffer zones before the final movement of rural population abroad. The number of Greek emigrants between 1946 and 1977 reached approximately 1,300,000. Of the estimated 638.000 emigrants to European countries, the largest percentage - 83% - moved to West Germany. Most of them were young and of working age. As a result in the 1960s, the economically active age group of the Greek population declined by 11%. By the mid-1960s acute seasonal shortages of labour were apparent, and agricultural wages rose. Scarcity of skilled workforce was evident in the growing manufacturing industry. Greek post war II emigration had a positive impact in reducing unemployment and in increasing capital transfers in the form of remittances. Yet, Greek governments failed to offer the incentives essential for channeling remittance capital towards productive sectors and activities. After the oil crisis of 1973, restrictive migration of Western Europe contributed to repatriation. This fact, along with the fall of dictatorship (1974) and the rising economic prospects in Greece have been more effective determinants of repatriation than the measures adopted by the Greek state for encouraging it. Between 1968 and 1980, the number of returnees had reached 390,000. Returnees did not contribute substantially towards economic development, neither through the utilization of their savings nor through the utilization of their skills. The most pronounced impact of repatriation was in agricultural mechanization, housing the proliferation of small service establishments, and the growth of tourist infrastructure. The Greek state's policies towards returnees remained ineffective and devoid of long-term strategy. The main exception was the establishment of a General Secretariat for Greeks Abroad (GSGA) in 1982. One of the priorities of the GSGA was to create bodies, in which the expatriates would be represented, and which would advise the state on relevant issues. Particular emphasis was also given to Greek language education for the children of emigrant families. During the emigration period, the Greek governments signed labour migration agreements with most host countries. After the accession of Greece to the EEC, returnees from countries of the EEC had their social security and pension benefits secured by the relevant regulations of the EEC. The returnees coming from non EU member states were covered by the National Security Agency (IKA). Information on the impact of emigration on women, children and the elderly, is limited. Data reveal that there were serious difficulties in the social, professional and educational re-integration of returnees. In general, the Greek welfare system lacked a universal approach and was characterised by a limited capacity in providing social protection and care services for the vulnerable population groups. The target for the settlement of returnees in rural areas from 1982 onwards was not met with success despite the provision of incentives. On the contrary, their number in urban areas increased. State interventions offered incentives for farm households, while other vulnerable groups were barely benefited. It is thus evident that a holistic approach to regional development is needed, an important component of which should be a comprehensive and pro-active migration strategy. Monitoring and evaluation of state policies, and the establishment of appropriate links with regional and local level administration should be effected by a state agency, which will ensure time effective horizontal administrative and institutional arrangements at both national and local level and the integration of the efforts of all actors at the point of delivery. The worki presented here is part of a larger European research project covering the 25 countries of Eastern and Central Europe, Greece and Turkey.
