The Asia Minor disaster
However, there were limitations to the achievements of the RSC’s rural settlement plan. Firstly, despite the increase in agricultural production, Greece continuously failed to match its 1914 levels. As a result, Greece still had to import over half of its wheat and flour along with one third of other cereals. 20 Secondly, the abolition of the traditional system under which nomadic shepherds could make use of fallow land resulted in serious damage to Greece’s animal husbandry industry . While Greece had boasted a self-sufficient supply of livestock before the Asia Minor disaster, during the 1920s the state had to import meat and dairy products to satisfy demand. Thirdly, there were key flaws in the RSC’s land redistribution policy. As a result of the RSC’s methods, the plots distributed to farmers were often highly fragmented. This ‘ retarded economic development because profits, if any, were too meagre to allow for investment ’ . 21 Additionally, the small sizes of plots and their unsuitability for the cultivation of cereals often gave settlers no choice but to plant cash crops, such as tobacco, to generate sufficient income. The slump in tobacco prices after the 1929 world economic crisis severely threatened the livelihood of many of these refugee families, increasing poverty in Greece. Another issue was the inappropriate allocation of land. For example, refugees from the mountainous Pontus region in Anatolia were assigned plots in marshland plains, where they were inexperienced in cultivating the terrain and so produced lower yields. Finally, due to uncertainty over property rights, the allocation of plots to refugees was only temporary. Consequently, many refugees were reluctant to invest in agricultural equipment, which decreased potential harvests. These limitations meant that, as late as June 1928, over a quarter of refugees had ‘ failed to make any progress at all ’ 22 in developing their plots. On the whole, while the rural settlement of refugees did encounter many serious problems, it had a beneficial effect on the Greek economy. The Anatolian refugees became ‘ the pioneers of progress in Greece ’ , 23 driving the modernization of agricultural practices across the nation through the introduction of new technologies and farming techniques. The influx of refugees also led to the rehabilitation of depopulated rural communities and the establishment of new settlements. Furthermore , if not for the refugees’ contributions in increasing agricultural production, Greece would never have benefitted from the 1933 harvests which stimulated the nation’s economic recovery. The urban settlement of refugees had noticeably positive effects on the Greek economy, acting as a catalyst for industrialization and the emergence of new industries. The influx of people in 1922-23 acted as a cheap source of manual labour for Greek industrialists, enabling the construction of 918 new factories between 1923 and 1930. Additionally, employment in industry grew from 35,000 workers in 1917 to 421,831 in 1930 – most of this figure was made up of refugees. 24 However, ‘ the most significant contribution to the industrial progress of Greece ’ 25 was made by refugees who employed their expertise to excel in the production of textiles, carpets, and other artisanal industries. The textile industry ‘ experienced a real boom ’ 26 after the Asia Minor disaster: the number of textile factories doubled between 1923 and 1930, growing from 120 to 230, and the number of persons employed in the textile
20 Kontogiorgi op . cit .: p. 68. 21 Ibid .: p. 69. 22 Ibid .: p. 70. 23 Pentzopoulos op . cit .: p. 150. 24 Statistikí Epetirís tis Elládos 1930 / Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1930 . Athens: p. 177. 25 Pentzopoulos op . cit .: p. 162. 26 Ibid. : p. 162.
197
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker