Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-kv2lp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T04:57:48.765Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mutual aid and the origins of the Greek welfare state: workers’ associations and social insurance, 1890–mid-1930s

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2026

Konstantinos Doukakis Open the ORCID record for Konstantinos Doukakis [Opens in a new window]
Konstantinos Doukakis*
Affiliation:
Neapolis University Pafos
*
k.doukakis@nup.ac.cy
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the origins of the Greek welfare state through workers’ associations and mutual aid societies from the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century. Moving beyond dominant historiography, it highlights self-organized solidarity in the emergence of early social protection. Drawing on legislative records, institutional documents, and quantitative data, it shows that mutual aid associations operated as proto-insurance institutions compensating for limited state capacity. This configuration is interpreted as regulatory liberalism, whereby the state supervised collective welfare without assuming full responsibility. The Law on Associations in 1914 marked a turning point by introducing oversight while preserving associational autonomy.

Keywords

mutual aid associationssocial insurancewelfare state formationregulatory liberalisminterwar Greece

Information

Type
Article
Information
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , October 2026 , pp. 316 - 332
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham.

The origins of social insurance in Greece have attracted considerable scholarly attention, particularly in relation to the institutions that provided protection to private-sector workers.Footnote 1 Existing historiographical approaches have linked the development of the Greek social insurance system through one of three interpretive frameworks: the decisive role of international organizations and the civil service;Footnote 2 mounting pressures from organized labour alongside the structural transformations experienced by the Greek economy during the interwar period;Footnote 3 and the influence of political leaders and authoritarian regimes.Footnote 4 These interpretations correspond to explanatory factors that have also featured prominently in the wider international literature on the development of social insurance.Footnote 5 Nevertheless, the contribution of mutual aid societies to the emergence and development of social insurance in the Greek case has received comparatively limited scholarly attention. This article contends that mutual aid societies played a far more significant role in the emergence of social insurance than has generally been acknowledged, serving as important accelerators and catalysts in that process.Footnote 6

Methodologically, the study departs from comparative analysis, which constitutes the interpretive lens most commonly applied to pre-war state interventions in the social sphere and the post-war welfare state.Footnote 7 Instead, it relies primarily on institutional documents of the period, including laws, explanatory reports, parliamentary debate records, association statutes, economic and demographic data. Contemporary newspapers, which reflect public perceptions of the pressing issue of social insurance, and the relevant secondary literature are also drawn upon. The preference for institutional over comparative analysis is justified by the distinct characteristics of Greece’s interwar economy and society,Footnote 8 which differed significantly from those of central and western European states.Footnote 9

My analysis begins in the late nineteenth century, when the first associations with mutual aid functions emerged, providing coverage for certain social risks. It concludes in the early years of the 1930s with the establishment of a national social insurance institution, the Social Insurance Institute (Ίδρυμα Κοινωνικών Ασφαλίσεων, IKA) for private-sector employees and workers.

Social dynamics and social insurance in the Greek kingdom during the nineteenth century

The initial efforts of the newly formed Greek state in the second half of the nineteenth century to establish and organize the institution of social insurance resulted in the coverage of only a limited number of professional groups: civil servants, military personnel, seafarers, and bank employees.Footnote 10 This was perhaps inevitable, given the particular social, economic, and political conditions of the young state.Footnote 11 The main problem, however, lay in the absence of a coherent and systematically articulated political strategy for creating a structured insurance system with a clear orientation. Early state initiatives essentially consisted of the transposition of insurance laws from continental European states, laws which ultimately proved ill-adapted to Greek realities.Footnote 12 As a result, the newly established insurance organizations faced significant administrative and financial difficulties from the very first years of their operation.Footnote 13

These dysfunctions stemmed from a contradiction between transplanted institutional models and Greece’s endogenous social and economic structures.Footnote 14 The rapid consolidation of a significant segment of the dominant social strata around the state apparatus contributed to the development of a structural entanglement in the evolution of the entire system. Consequently, it was to be expected that the civil service would primarily seek to secure coverage for its own needs and safeguard its interests. Thus, of the first six insurance funds established, four were exclusively designed for civil servants.Footnote 15

Before 1914: mutual aid, occupational funds, and the ‘social question’

Although most scholars identify the period from 1910 to 1934, and more specifically the years 1922 to 1934, as the turning point in the development of the Greek social insurance system,Footnote 16 the perspective adopted in this study places particular analytical emphasis on the period extending from the late nineteenth century up to the adoption and implementation of the Law on Associations in 1914. This was the period during which Greek society and the economy underwent a gradual transformation, certainly not at a pace comparable to that of European countries,Footnote 17 but at a rate sufficient to bring the emerging ‘social question’ and the need to address social risks to the attention of both political figures and the wider public.Footnote 18 On 28 February 1901, Ermis, a newspaper specializing in economic, commercial, and stock market news, published a two-page article dedicated to the institution of mutual aid and its beneficial impact on addressing the social question in England and Ireland.Footnote 19 Similar articles appeared a few years later in Patris, a newspaper with political and commercial content.Footnote 20

In the political arena, a leading role was played by Fokion Negris.Footnote 21 Between 1900 and 1909, Negris submitted four bills to Parliament. The first, introduced in 1900, sought to secure insurance coverage for mine workers. The remaining three, submitted in 1902, 1906, and 1909, respectively, proposed extending insurance coverage to additional occupational groups, including miners, quarry workers, railway employees, workers in industrial enterprises with more than 25 employees, and manual labourers in public services. Of these four proposals, only the first, that of 1900, was eventually adopted, resulting in insurance coverage for mine workers and employee and employer contributions, supplemented by a social resource intended to strengthen the fund’s revenue.Footnote 22

What is particularly significant, however, is that in all the explanatory reports accompanying his bills, Negris consistently defended the broader logic of mutual aid funds, the need to rationalize existing mutual aid schemes, and the importance of sharing the insurance burden between workers and employers as the most appropriate solution to the social question. Indicative of his approach is the title of the 1902 bill: ‘Bill on the Mutual Aid and Relief of Workers’ (Νομοσχέδιο περί αλληλοβοήθειας και περιθάλψεων εργατών). Another conclusion easily drawn from the study of these explanatory reports is that Negris was influenced by developments in social insurance institutions across Europe, especially Germany, Italy, and France, and sought to adapt these models to Greek conditions.Footnote 23 Newspapers of the period also reacted positively to Negris’ proposals.Footnote 24

Despite the failure of the bills Negris submitted between 1902 and 1907, which he himself attributed to the reluctance of governments to undertake large-scale interventions in the field of social insurance,Footnote 25 the first decade of the twentieth century nonetheless witnessed certain positive developments. Retirement insurance schemes were established for railway employees and bank employees. Specifically, in 1900 the Pension Fund of the Bank of Athens Employees was created;Footnote 26 the insurance funds for railway personnel followed in 1907.Footnote 27 The explanatory report accompanying the relevant bill explicitly reflected the pressure exerted by railway workers on company administrations to establish insurance institutions.Footnote 28 Pension schemes for bank employees were introduced at this stage through resolutions passed by shareholders’ general assemblies and subsequently ratified by royal decrees. The funds established in this manner were financed exclusively through employer and employee contributions.Footnote 29

The insurance funds of railway employees, particularly in the health sector, were well organized and offered comparatively broad benefits during the interwar period. Funded solely from worker and employer contributions, they provided coverage against illness for workers and their dependents. According to Railway Review (Sidirodromiki Epitheorisi), the periodical of Greek railway employees, the Mutual Aid Fund of the Hellenic State Railways (SEK) owned its own pharmacies to ensure the availability of medicines and reduce costs. It also offered relatively advanced medical services for the time, including radiotherapy, X-rays, ultraviolet treatments, as well as care for malaria and tuberculosis.Footnote 30

Yet despite these positive aspects, the establishment of the railway insurance funds also revealed two issues that would come to characterize the subsequent development of the Greek social insurance system. The first concerned the funding structure. Alongside worker and employer contributions, whose proportions varied, a small levy on passenger fares was imposed for the pension branch, constituting what came to be known as ‘social resources’.Footnote 31 While such resources were a recognized method of financing social insurance under the conventions of the International Labour Office (ILO) and the 1944 Philadelphia Declaration, in Greece they eventually acquired an anti-social and economically distortive character due to their unequal distribution.Footnote 32

The second issue concerned the type of insurance system to be adopted. In some companies, an individual account was created for each worker, into which contributions accumulated as capital to be repaid upon retirement. In others, all contributions were pooled and pensions were allocated proportionally. The first system favoured long-serving employees, whose pensions could even exceed their active salary, while those who retired early due to accidents received significantly smaller benefits.Footnote 33

These two issues formed part of a broader debate unfolding across Europe regarding the type and extent of state intervention in addressing the risks of old age, illness, and unemployment. It was within this context that an international conference on social insurance was held in The Hague in September 1910, at which Greece was represented by R. Lehmann, Consul General of the Kingdom of Greece in the Netherlands. In a letter to Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos, Lehmann reported that discussions addressed the medical services provided by insurance funds, the extent of state contributions to pensions, benefits for widows and orphans, and unemployment insurance. According to Lehmann, the debates revealed conflicting views, particularly regarding the degree of state involvement versus contribution-based coverage.Footnote 34 The central question, in other words, was whether the coverage of social risks should constitute a universal or partial obligation of the state, or whether it should remain primarily an internal matter for each professional or social group.

Mutual aid associations and regulatory liberalism after 1914

In the Greek kingdom, the provision of mutual aid within the same occupational group constituted, for both workers and the state, the most appropriate response to the ‘social question’ during the second and third decades of the twentieth century – that is, during the period of Eleftherios Venizelos’ liberal reform and bourgeois modernization.

This development may be situated within what is here termed ‘regulatory liberalism’. The term was not employed by contemporaries; it is used here to describe a liberal pattern of governance in which the state monitored associations while leaving them organizationally intact rather than absorbing them into a single state-run welfare system. As Michael Freeden has shown, New Liberalism reformulated earlier liberal assumptions by linking liberty to welfare.Footnote 35 Regulatory liberalism differs from corporatist arrangements, which presuppose the formal and often hierarchical incorporation of organized interests into state-recognized systems of representation,Footnote 36 and from fully developed welfare-statist models characterized by compulsory and centrally administered systems of social insurance.Footnote 37 It instead denotes an intermediate configuration in which voluntary associations retain organizational autonomy and contributory logic, while the state confines itself to legal recognition, supervision, and standard-setting rather than incorporation into a corporatist order or absorption into a unified welfare bureaucracy.

Within this framework, three interrelated factors contributed cumulatively to this development. First, the cultural foundations were already in place: by the close of the nineteenth century, a culture and practice of association and mutual aid had taken root within Greek society,Footnote 38 an inheritance traceable in many respects to the institution of traditional communities.Footnote 39 Alongside this cultural background, the social character of the Goudi Movement contributed, among other things, to the incorporation of social groupings (workers’ unions, associations, societies, syndicates) as organic components of society,Footnote 40 enabling them to intervene actively in public debate on questions of economic and social policy.Footnote 41 Newspapers of the period provide useful information regarding the demands of the Athens Workers’ Centre on a series of labour issues, including the organization of professional unions and the securing of pensions for workers and farmers.Footnote 42 A leading role in these demands was played by its president, Spyros Theodoropoulos, Member of Parliament for Attica and Boeotia,Footnote 43 who also pursued significant activity in Parliament.Footnote 44

From this cultural background and the broader social ferment, we turn to the third factor: the political reality of the time, exemplified in a conflict between the MP for Laconia and a prominent member of the Sociologists’ group, Thalis Koutoupis, and Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos.Footnote 45 The substance of their disagreement falls only tangentially within the focus of this study; the episode is highlighted because Venizelos’ statements are indicative of his intentions regarding the handling of the social question and the balance he sought between political and economic priorities within the spirit of liberalism, the ideological platform of his party.Footnote 46 During the parliamentary debate of 3 March 1914, Koutoupis submitted a report concerning an ongoing strike of typographers, sparked by adverse working conditions. He noted that typographers, due to the particular nature of their profession, faced increased risks of illness and premature death. Taking the floor, Prime Minister Venizelos clearly articulated his stance:

Επιθυμώ να επαναλάβω και προς την Βουλή ότι είπα προς την επιτροπή αυτή των διαφόρων Σωματείων. Είπα δηλαδή ότι στον αγώνα αυτόν μεταξύ του εργάτη και του εργοδότου οποίος αποτελεί ένα καθολικό κοινωνικό φαινόμενο, το καθήκον και η αποστολή της πολιτείας είναι η ουδετερότητα. Δεν είναι δυνατόν να επικαλούνται εκάστοτε οι εργάτες την επέμβαση της εξουσίας είτε της νομοθετικής είτε της διοικητικής προς λύση των διαφορών οι οποίες διεξάγονται μεταξύ της εργασίας και του κεφαλαίου. Το καλύτερο όπλο για τον εργατικό κόσμο για να κατορθώσει να βελτιώσει τη τύχη του, υπέρ της οποίας δεν είναι δυνατόν παρά να ενδιαφέρεται κάθε πολιτισμένο Κράτος, είναι η οργάνωση αυτού σε Σωματεία. Όσο οργανώνονται τόσο δύνανται να προστατεύσουν τα συμφέροντά τους με τον καλύτερο τρόπο.

I wish to repeat before Parliament what I said to the delegation of various Associations. I stated that in this struggle between labour and capital, a universal social phenomenon, the duty and mission of the state is neutrality. Workers cannot invoke the intervention of the authorities, legislative or administrative, to resolve disputes between labour and capital. The best weapon for the working class to improve its condition, which every civilized state must naturally be concerned for, is its organization into Associations. The more they organize, the more effectively they can protect their interests.Footnote 47

Within this liberal perspective of limited state intervention,Footnote 48 and despite its apparent tension with broader social reform initiatives, the Liberal government continued to encourage the organization of civil society. As G. Mavrogordatos has argued, the Liberal Party ‘willingly assumed, initially, the role of midwife, pushing civil society to articulate itself through its own organizations’.Footnote 49 Within this context the Minister of National Economy, Andreas Michalakopoulos,Footnote 50 submitted a draft law ‘on associations’ to Parliament in November 1913, accompanied by an explanatory report. The report set out the fundamental principles and values of association and elaborated on its beneficial effects at individual, professional, social, and national levels.Footnote 51

Beyond these benefits, Michalakopoulos identified two major weaknesses in the practical application of associationism in the Greek kingdom prior to the adoption of the law. The first concerned the absence of effective oversight of associations, either by their own members or by the state, which had no substantial right to intervene in their functioning. As a consequence, some associations pursued objectives inconsistent with their statutory purposes. The second major weakness, of particular relevance to this study, concerned the indistinct boundaries of the dual mission of associations: on the one hand, safeguarding the professional interests of their members, and on the other, providing mutual aid among them.Footnote 52 To address this crucial issue, the new law established a distinct framework for the operation of mutual aid funds and provided for the incorporation into the legal system of both the Mutual Aid Funds of Miners and those of Railway Employees.Footnote 53

More specifically, the law stipulated that mutual aid funds were to pursue exclusively the following purposes: to provide members or their families with medical care and medication in cases of illness or injury; to grant monetary benefits in cases of illness, injury, temporary incapacity for work, childbirth, unemployment, loss of livestock, or natural disaster; to cover members’ funeral expenses; to provide lump-sum or pension-like financial assistance to members unable to work due to old age, accident, or illness, or to families of deceased members; to grant loans to members of up to 200 drachmas.Footnote 54

This suggests that, through this legislative initiative of the Liberal Party, the existing network of associations and the cultural foundations of Greek society were mobilized to establish an organized, state-coordinated system for supervising worker protection against social risks. This institutional structure was formally codified in Article 29 of the law, which defined both the terms of supervision of mutual aid associations and the corresponding supervisory authorities.Footnote 55 In a subsequent legislative initiative, also aligned with the logic of associationism and concerned primarily with agricultural cooperatives, Michalakopoulos praised the law ‘on associations’, stating that associations would henceforth contribute greatly to the organization and education of professional classes, as well as to the strengthening of their mutual aid functions.Footnote 56

The law and its implementation received considerable attention in the contemporary press. Nea Chios, in its issue of 1 December 1913, only six days after the draft law was submitted, published a front-page article highlighting the need to establish associations in Chios following the example of Syros.Footnote 57 The nationwide newspaper Aigaio, in its issue of 17 December 1914, presented the advantages for associations joining the legal framework of the law on associations,Footnote 58 as did the newspaper Simaia.Footnote 59

The philosophy characterizing the Liberal Party regarding the use of associations as mutual aid institutions was carried forward by the People’s Party. Press reports indicate that in February 1922, the Piraeus Flour Workers’ Association, one of the most dynamic unions, proceeded to establish a Pension Fund.Footnote 60 The Minister of National Economy, Ioannis Rallis, attended the inauguration, and in his remarks ‘expressed the government’s satisfaction at the organization of workers and the improvement of working conditions’ (εξέφρασε τη χαρά της κυβερνήσεως η οποία βλέπει οργανωμένους τους εργάτες και βελτιωμένη τη θέση τους).Footnote 61 He also informed those present that the ministry had prepared labour legislation that would strengthen the pension funds of associations.

Valuable information on the growth and scope of mutual aid associations in the second decade of the twentieth century can be derived from available quantitative data. According to administrative records of mutual aid associations (workers’, employers’, mixed, and mutual aid funds of workers’ unions), 140 organizations with 22,038 members were active in 1917; 176 organizations with 36,172 members in 1918; and 192 organizations with 43,024 members in 1919. Thus, between 1917 and 1919, membership increased by 95%. During the same period, the number of insured persons and pensioners in social insurance institutions grew linearly but remained significantly lower than that of mutual aid associations. Only in 1926 did the number of insured persons and pensioners reach approximately 72,000, surpassing the membership of mutual aid associations in 1919, largely as a result of the establishment of the Tobacco Workers’ Insurance Fund.Footnote 62 Therefore, in terms of population coverage, the contribution of mutual aid associations during the second decade of the twentieth century was substantial and demonstrably broader than that of the social insurance institutions. This conclusion is further supported by the observation that in 1917, among the 33,456 workers and employees in Athens and Piraeus, 13,267 – that is, 39.65% – were members of mutual aid associations.Footnote 63

Beyond their demographic significance, mutual aid associations also played a decisive role in terms of geographical coverage. Approximately half of all associations operated in Central Greece, a predictable finding given that this region included Athens and Piraeus, the major centres of urbanization and secondary production. The remaining half operated in regions with much lower levels of urbanization.Footnote 64 Nonetheless, private-sector workers and employees across the country established associations and benefited from the mutual aid functions and the existing legal and administrative framework governing the institution.

Regarding the level of benefits, the coverage offered by the social insurance organizations was unquestionably superior to that of the mutual aid associations. This was due to the fact that insurance organizations had secured revenues based on contributions from workers and employers, as well as social resources and/or income derived from the management of reserves and fixed assets.Footnote 65 The financial soundness of these organizations is readily explained by the occupational groups they served (railway employees, bank employees, employees of the electric power company), all of which occupied a strong presence in the Greek economy.Footnote 66 Mutual aid associations, by contrast, had been established by workers and employees of various specialties, with tobacco workers prominent among them, and their financial viability depended mainly on the capacity of their members to deposit the required contributions on time.Footnote 67

For the operation of mutual aid associations during the third decade of the twentieth century, the most reliable institutional source is the administrative audits of associations conducted under Law 281/1914. The Directorate of Labour and Social Welfare of the Ministry of Finance had been staffed with trained personnel who carried out audits of associations, cooperatives, and social insurance organizations.Footnote 68 At this point it should be noted that the auditors of the period 1924–33, in the introductory note to their report of 28 August 1933,Footnote 69 informed the Minister of National Economy that they had completed the administrative audits of both the social insurance organizations and the cooperatives. However, only the volume concerning the associations was published by the National Printing Office. No official explanation has been recorded for the non-publication of the administrative audit reports on social insurance organizations and cooperatives. One possible explanation is that, at the time the reports were submitted, debate over the creation of a unified national insurance body was particularly intense, and any publication of the administrative audits of the insurance organizations could have been instrumentalized by opponents of the proposed insurance reform.

During 1924–33, 59 workers’ associations were audited, several of which maintained mutual aid funds and pension funds and provided medical coverage and funeral expenses. Cases where mutual aid associations were unable to meet their obligations to their members were relatively few, though a number of administrative irregularities were recorded – some intentional, others arising from unfamiliarity with procedures and applicable legislation.Footnote 70 From the analysis of the available quantitative data, it becomes clear that the institution of mutual aid, as implemented through workers’ associations and combined with the occupational insurance funds established up to that point, constituted the primary pillar of support for the labour force against social risks during the interwar period.

It is true that, within the framework of later insurance reforms aimed at compulsory state-controlled coverage of the labour force,Footnote 71 the law on associations was criticized for its effectiveness, though not for its underlying philosophy. According to the explanatory report accompanying the draft Law on Social Insurance (5733/1932),Footnote 72 the percentage of the working class participating in mutual aid funds was very small, although the authors of the report did not substantiate this claim with quantitative data. The same report also argued that contributions were not paid on the prescribed dates, with the result that mutual aid funds were unable to provide the services stipulated by their statutes.Footnote 73 However, what appears to have escaped the attention of the drafters of these institutional documents is that mutual aid through associations emerged precisely to fill the significant institutional gap in the field of social insurance that characterized the Greek case. This gap was only gradually addressed from the late 1930s onwards, with the establishment and operation of IKA, which was formed with the decisive contribution, particularly at the level of technical expertise, of the International Labour Office (ILO).Footnote 74

The law establishing IKA (6298/1934), shaped through negotiations involving the social partners and the Greek state and drawing on the report of E. Schoenbaum, introduced principles drawn from Central European (Bismarckian) models and sought to establish a more comprehensive system of compulsory insurance. It provided for a specialized organization offering broad coverage for salaried employees, though without extending to the labour force as a whole. Yet, this institutional framework did not eliminate the structural characteristics of the system. As subsequent developments attest, the emerging model continued to be defined by occupational corporatism and clientelistic arrangements, as well as by fragmentation, complex and often conflicting legislation, and the unequal distribution of financial resources and benefits. In this sense, the transition to compulsory insurance remained incomplete, as the new institutional framework was superimposed upon pre-existing arrangements rather than replacing them, thereby leaving significant segments of the labour force effectively outside the scope of organized protection.Footnote 75

It is therefore no coincidence that, until the mid-1930s, during the period of adoption and gradual implementation of universal insurance through the founding of IKA, numerous associations continued to be established, aimed primarily at providing mutual aid and solidarity among their members. A characteristic example of these trends is the city of Aigio, where a large number of associations were formed.Footnote 76 This case merits attention for two reasons. First, Aigio displayed, by Greek standards, high rates of urbanization,Footnote 77 with a significant portion of its labour force employed in the secondary and tertiary sectors, and therefore particularly vulnerable to social risks. Second, during its first years of operation, IKA provided services only in Athens, Thessaloniki, Piraeus, Patras, Volos, Chania, Kavala, Ioannina, and Kalamata.Footnote 78

Conclusion

This article has demonstrated that mutual aid associations should not be understood as residual or merely transitional arrangements preceding the emergence of the welfare state. In the Greek case, they constituted structurally embedded mechanisms of social protection that combined solidarity, contributory logic, and risk pooling. As shown through the analysis of association statutes, parliamentary debates, and administrative records from the late nineteenth century onwards, these organizations emerged in response to concrete social risks at a time when state intervention remained limited, fragmented, and largely confined to occupational groups connected to the public sector.

It should be noted that my analysis has focused primarily on the institutional and regulatory dimensions of mutual aid associations and does not examine in depth the internal social composition of these organizations, including leadership structures, gender participation, and internal inequalities among members. These dimensions, explored in the broader historiography on labour and associational life, remain essential for a fuller understanding of the social dynamics of mutual aid and represent a valuable direction for further research.Footnote 79

The empirical evidence examined in this article indicates that, prior to the institutional consolidation of social insurance, mutual aid associations provided an extensive and accessible form of protection for large segments of the urban labour force. Quantitative data from the second decade of the twentieth century demonstrate their rapid expansion in both number and membership, often surpassing the coverage of existing insurance funds. Their geographical diffusion beyond the main urban centres further underscores their social significance. In this sense, mutual aid associations did not merely supplement state provision but effectively filled a structural gap in the Greek system of social protection.

Rather than representing an alternative destined to be displaced by state intervention, mutual aid associations actively shaped the conditions under which compulsory social insurance became feasible. The analysis of Law 281/1914 shows that the state chose not to abolish or marginalize these organizations but to recognize, regulate, and supervise them. Through this legal framework, the state incorporated existing associational practices into public policy while preserving organizational autonomy. Administrative audits conducted during the 1920s further reveal that, despite cases of mismanagement or uneven financial capacity, many associations functioned with relative stability and regularity, reinforcing norms of contribution, entitlement, and collective responsibility.

The Greek experience thus highlights a mode of welfare formation best described as regulatory liberalism. The state neither assumed full responsibility for social protection nor withdrew from the social sphere. Instead, it coordinated and normalized pre-existing forms of collective welfare through legal and administrative mechanisms. This approach is also evident in the coexistence of mutual aid associations with occupational insurance funds and, later, with the gradual implementation of compulsory social insurance during the early years of IKA. Even after the formal establishment of IKA, mutual aid associations continued to operate, particularly in regions and occupational sectors not immediately covered by the new institution, illustrating their enduring relevance.

The Greek case may therefore be situated within a wider European debate on welfare before the consolidation of the welfare state. Comparative work on Britain and continental Europe has shown that nineteenth- and early twentieth-century welfare arrangements were shaped by shifting combinations of public authorities, voluntary organizations, charity, occupational provision, and mutual aid, rather than by the state alone. In this respect, the Greek experience was not isolated; its specificity lay in the extent to which mutual aid associations became central institutional mediators between society and the state.Footnote 80

Seen in this light, the Greek case also contributes to broader discussions of welfare development in Southern Europe. By foregrounding these endogenous dynamics, this article refines comparative interpretations of Southern European welfare regimes. Greece should not be viewed simply as a delayed or incomplete variant of continental welfare models. Rather, its welfare institutions emerged through the gradual institutionalization of collective practices rooted in everyday social relations and associational culture. Mutual aid associations functioned as laboratories of social organization and social policy experimentation, contributing decisively to the social acceptance and institutional consolidation of compulsory insurance. This bottom-up trajectory underscores the importance of civil society in welfare formation and challenges linear narratives that privilege state initiative or international diffusion as the primary drivers of social policy development.

Konstantinos Doukakis is Assistant Professor of Modern and Contemporary History at Neapolis University Pafos. His research focuses on institutional, economic, and social history. He has published in internationally recognized journals, including the Journal of Balkan and Near East Studies, the Journal of European Economic History, and the Mediterranean Chronicle. He was awarded a Prize for Excellence in Teaching by the Open University of Cyprus.

Footnotes

An earlier version of this article was presented at the World Economic History Congress (2025), in the session ‘Generating Institutions of Social Economy: Comparative Insights in the Long Run – Potential Challenges for Sustainable Societies’, organized by Catherine Brégianni (Academy of Athens/Centre de Recherches Historiques–EHESS). I am grateful to Catherine Brégianni, the session discussant, and the participants for their valuable comments.

References

1 Specialized studies date the origins of the institution from the late nineteenth century up to the interwar period. See D. N. Venieris, The Development of Social Security in Greece, 1920–1940: postponed decisions (PhD diss., London School of Economics and Political Science 1994) passim; G. Tsalikis, Η θεμελίωση της κοινωνικής ασφάλισης στην Ελλάδα (1834–1934) (Athens 2008) passim.

2 A. Liakos, Εργασία και Πολιτική στην Ελλάδα του Μεσοπολέμου: το Διεθνές Γραφείο Εργασίας και η ανάδυση των Κοινωνικών Θεσμών (Athens 1993) passim.

3 K. Mavreas, ‘Κοινωνική πολιτική και ιδεολογία στην Ελλάδα του Μεσοπολέμου: επιδράσεις και εξελίξεις με αφορμή το θέμα της κοινωνικής ασφάλισης’, Θέσεις: Αναλύσεις, Κριτική, Ζητήματα της Πάλης των Τάξεων 64 (1998) 121–56 (125–7).

4 O. E. Anastasakis, Authoritarianism in twentieth-century Greece: ideology and education under the dictatorships of 1936 and 1967 (PhD diss., London School of Economics and Political Science 1992). For the role of political personalities, and especially that of P. Kanellopoulos, see S. G. Ploumidis, ‘Οι απόψεις του Παναγιώτη Κανελλόπουλου για την ελληνική κοινωνία: από την κοινωνιολογική σκέψη στην πολιτική πράξη’, in L. L. Benakis (ed.), Πρακτικά επιστημονικού συνεδρίου για τον Παναγιώτη Κανελλόπουλο (Athens 2014) 245–65 (253–5).

5 See, e.g., J. B. Williamson and J. J. Fleming, ‘Convergence theory and the social welfare sector: a cross-national analysis’, International Journal of Comparative Sociology 18 (1972) 242–53; S. A. Sarantidis, ‘Από το laissez-faire στο κοινωνικό κράτος και ο Leviathan’, Σπουδαί (July–December 1983) 189–99 (194–5); E. Papadakis, ‘Class interests, class politics and welfare state regime’, British Journal of Sociology 44.2 (1993) 249–70 (249–50); D. M. Cutler and R. Johnson, ‘The birth and growth of the social insurance state: explaining old age and medical insurance across countries’, Public Choice 120 (2004) 87–121; W. Korpi, ‘Changing class structures and the origins of the welfare states: the break-through of social insurance, 1860–1940’, paper presented at the ESPAnet Conference, Oxford, 9–11 September 2004, 1–25; D. Sideris, ‘Wagner’s law in nineteenth-century Greece: a cointegration and causality analysis’, Working Paper, Bank of Greece 64 (2007) 4–20 (5–7).

6 For the role of the social economy in the development of mutual-aid organizations, see, e.g., J. Defourny and P. Develtere, The Social Economy: the worldwide making of a third sector (Liège 1999) passim; J. L. Monzon and R. Chaves, ‘The European social economy: concept and dimensions of the third sector’, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 79 (2008) 549–77.

7 M. Ferrera, ‘The southern model of welfare in social Europe’, Journal of European Social Policy 6 (1996) 17–37; B. Deacon, Η νέα Ανατολική Ευρώπη: Το παρελθόν, το παρόν και το μέλλον της κοινωνικής πολιτικής (Greek tr., Athens 1996) 40–5; R. A. V. Voorhis, ‘Three generations of comparative welfare theory: from convergence to convergence’, European Journal of Social Work 1 (1998) 189–202; G. Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (Athens 2006) passim.

8 T. Kalafatis and E. Prontzas, Οικονομική ιστορία του Ελληνικού κράτους (Athens 2010) passim; V. Patronis, Ευρωπαϊκή οικονομική ιστορία: από τις κοινωνίες της αρχαιότητας στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση (Athens 2019) passim; V. Patronis, Θέματα ελληνικής οικονομικής ιστορίας (18ος–21ος αιώνας) (Athens 2019) passim.

9 D. H. Aldcroft, The European Economy, 1750–1914: a thematic approach (Manchester 1994) passim; I. Berend, An Economic History of Nineteenth Century Europe (Cambridge 2012) passim.

10 K. Doukakis, Η ανάπτυξη του ελληνικού συστήματος κοινωνικής ασφάλισης, 1830–2008: οράματα, προσδοκίες, ματαιώσεις (Athens 2019) 93–122.

11 G. Dertilis, Ιστορία του Ελληνικού κράτους, 1820–1930 (Heraklion 2005) passim; C. Bregianni, The Great Depression and Greece: monetary and economic perspectives in a transnational context (Athens 2023) passim.

12 For such an early initiative, see the relevant reference by member of Greek Parliament F. Negris in F. Negris, Ἔκθεσις αἰτιολογική ἐπὶ τῆς προτάσεως νόμου περὶ περιθάλψεως τῶν παθόντων ἐν τοῖς μεταλλείοις καὶ μεταλλουργείοις καὶ ἑτέροις ἐργοστασίοις, Παράρτημα τῆς Ἐφημερίδος τῆς Βουλῆς τῆς αʹ συνόδου τῆς ιεʹ βουλευτικῆς περιόδου (ἔκτακτος σύνοδος, προεδρία Ν. Tsamadou) (Athens 1899–1900) 253–8.

13 K. Tsoukalas, Κοινωνική ανάπτυξη και κράτος: η συγκρότηση του δημόσιου χώρου στην Ελλάδα (Athens 1981) 202–5.

14 The burden placed on the state budget by pensions for public servants (civil servants, military personnel, clergy), the effectiveness of the funds’ financial system, and the proper management of insurance contributions were widely discussed in the specialized economic press of the period. See, e.g., Οικονομική Ελλάς, 21 January 1904, 86–8; Οικονομική Ελλάς, 13 August 1911, 444–5; Οικονομική Ελλάς, 20 August 1911, 458–60; Οικονομική Ελλάς, 20 August 1911, 486–9.

15 D. Anogiatis and K. Doukakis, ‘Μορφές κοινωνικής μέριμνας και κρατικοί νεωτερισμοί στον ελλαδικό χώρο (18ος–19ος αιώνας)’, in S. Laiou (ed.), Μνήμη Εύης Ολυμπίτου: τοπικές κοινωνίες στον θαλάσσιο και ορεινό χώρο στα νότια Βαλκάνια, 18ος–19ος αιώνας (Corfu 2014) 355–82.

16 Ch. N. Agallopoulos, Αἱ κοινωνικαὶ ἀσφαλίσεις (Athens 1936) passim; S. G. Robolis, Κοινωνική ασφάλιση: η διαρκής κρίση και οι προοπτικές (Thessaloniki 1992) passim.

17 A. Fragkiadis, Ελληνική οικονομία, 19ος–20ός αιώνας (Athens 2007) 69–148; Ch. Hatziossif (ed.), Ιστορία της Ελλάδας του 20ού αιώνα: όψεις πολιτικής και οικονομικής ιστορίας, 1900–1940 (Athens 2009) passim.

18 Ch. Agriantoni, Οι απαρχές της εκβιομηχάνισης στην Ελλάδα του 19ου αιώνα (Athens 1986) 188–204; L. Papastefanakis, ‘Μισθωτή εργασία’, in K. Kostis and S. Petmezas (eds), Η ανάπτυξη της ελληνικής οικονομίας τον 19ο αιώνα (Athens 2006) 253–92.

19 Ερμής, 28 February 1901, 1–2.

20 Πατρίς, 31 January 1909, 2; Πατρίς, 7 February 1909, 1; Πατρίς, 10 February 1910, 1.

21 Fokion Negris was an engineer who served as director of the Lavrion mines, member of the Greek parliament, Minister of Finance, and President of the Academy of Athens: I. P. Doanidis, Ἡμερολόγιον τῆς Μεγάλης Ἑλλάδος – Φωκίων Νέγρης 8 (1929) passim.

22 G. L. Roilos, Περὶ ἐπαγγελματικοῦ κινδύνου καὶ τῆς σχετικῆς ἑλληνικῆς νομοθεσίας (Athens 1928) 20–1; N. A. S. Fotilas, Κοινωνικὴ πολιτική: ἐγχειρίδιον θεωρίας καὶ πράξεως (Athens 1937) 380–2.

23 F. Negris, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις περὶ περιθάλψεως τῶν παθόντων ἐν τοῖς μεταλλείοις καὶ μεταλλουργείοις καὶ ἑτέροις ἐργοστασίοις, 253–4; N. Triantafyllopoulos and F. Negris, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις ἐπὶ τοῦ νομοσχεδίου περὶ ἀλληλοβοηθείας καὶ περιθάλψεων ἐργατῶν, Παράρτημα τῆς Ἐφημερίδος τῆς Βουλῆς τῆς γʹ συνόδου τῆς ιεʹ βουλευτικῆς περιόδου (προεδρία Th. Retsina) (Athens 1902) 324–6; F. Negris, Ἔκθεσις αἰτιολογικὴ περὶ νοσηλείας καὶ συντάξεων τοῦ προσωπικοῦ τῶν διαφόρων βιομηχανικῶν ἐπιχειρήσεων καὶ περὶ συντάξεων τῶν δημοσίων ὑπηρετῶν ὡς καὶ τῶν σμυριδορυκτῶν, Παράρτημα τῆς Ἐφημερίδος τῆς Βουλῆς τῆς αʹ συνόδου τῆς ιηʹ βουλευτικῆς περιόδου (προεδρία N. Boufides) (Athens 1906) 325–7; F. Negris, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις ἐπὶ τῆς προτάσεως νόμου περὶ νοσηλείας καὶ συντάξεων τοῦ προσωπικοῦ τῶν μεταλλείων, ὀρυχείων καὶ λατομείων, Παράρτημα τῆς Ἐφημερίδος τῆς Βουλῆς (ἔκτακτος σύνοδος τῆς ιηʹ βουλευτικῆς περιόδου, προεδρία N. Levidis) (Athens 1907) 316–65.

24 Εμπρός, 10 June 1901, 1; Σκριπ, 10 June 1906, 2; Αιγαίον, 17 June 1906, 1.

25 F. Negris, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις περὶ νοσηλείας καὶ συντάξεων τοῦ προσωπικοῦ τῶν μεταλλείων, ὀρυχείων καὶ λατομείων, 361–2.

26 S. Vellianitis, Ἡ κοινωνικὴ ἀσφάλιση ἐν Ἑλλάδι (Athens 1951) 10.

27 Law ΓΣΚ΄, ‘Περὶ ταμείου συντάξεων τοῦ προσωπικοῦ τῆς Ἐταιρείας τῶν Σιδηροδρόμων Πειραιῶς–Ἀθηνῶν–Πελοποννήσου’ (Athens 1907); I. Zarras, Ὁ θεσμὸς τῶν κοινωνικῶν ἀσφαλίσεων (Athens 1929) 83.

28 N. P. Kalogeropoulos and A. N. Simopoulos, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις περὶ ταμείου συντάξεων τοῦ προσωπικοῦ τῆς Ἐταιρείας τῶν Σιδηροδρόμων Πειραιῶς–Ἀθηνῶν–Πελοποννήσου, Παράρτημα τῆς Ἐφημερίδος τῆς Βουλῆς τῆς ἐκτάκτου συνόδου τῆς ιηʹ βουλευτικῆς περιόδου (προεδρία N. Levidis) (Athens 1907) 288–90.

29 A. Spourgitis, ‘Ἰδιωτικὰ ταμεῖα συντάξεων’, Ἀρχεῖον Οἰκονομικῶν καὶ Κοινωνικῶν Ἐπιστημῶν 4 (1924) 418–19; Tsalikis, Η θεμελίωση της κοινωνικής ασφάλισης, 60–1.

30 Σιδηροδρομικὴ Ἐπιθεώρησις, May 1929, 8–9; Σιδηροδρομικὴ Ἐπιθεώρησις, June 1929, 10–11; Σιδηροδρομικὴ Ἐπιθεώρησις, September 1929, 10–11.

31 Liakos, Εργασία, 382–3.

32 K. Doukakis, ‘The Greek welfare state: a tale of reforms and inequalities’, Journal of European Economic History 47 (2018) 41–79.

33 Liakos, Εργασία, 383.

34 R. Lehmann, Ἔκθεσις πρὸς τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν Κυβέρνησιν γιὰ τὸ Διεθνὲς Συνέδριον τῶν Κοινωνικῶν Ἀσφαλίσεων στὴ Χάγη (Σεπτέμβριος 1910), Eleftherios Venizelos Archive, file 4, document no. 32, Benaki Museum.

35 M. Freeden, The New Liberalism: an ideology of social reform (Oxford 1978) 49–55, 175–82.

36 P. C. Schmitter, ‘Still the century of corporatism?’, The Review of Politics 36 (1974) 85–131 (93–5).

37 Esping-Andersen, Three Worlds, passim.

38 Regarding the formation of associations in the late nineteenth century, which also had a mutual-aid character, the following statutes and their mutual-aid articles were studied: Royal Decree 21 June 1883, Καταστατικὸν τοῦ σωματείου τῶν ἐν Κύμῃ καὶ τοῖς πέριξ ἐργατῶν καὶ μικροεμπόρων «Ὁ Ἐργάτης» (Athens 1883) arts 34–8; Royal Decree 190/1887, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τῆς ἐνταῦθα συσταθείσης ἑταιρίας «Ἀδελφότης τῶν ἀμαξηλατῶν»’ (Athens 1887) art. 39; Royal Decree 155/1888, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τοῦ ἐν Ἀθήναις σωματείου «Ἀλληλοβοήθεια ἐργατῶν ἀργυροχρυσοχόων»’ (Athens 1888) arts 17–22; Royal Decree 241/1888, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τῆς ἐν Ἀθήναις ἑταιρίας «Ἐργατικὸς Σύνδεσμος Ζαχαροπλαστῶν»’ (Athens 1888) arts 17–18; Royal Decree 141/1892, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τοῦ ἐν Ἀθήναις σωματείου τῶν «Ἐπιπλοποιῶν»’ (Athens 1892) art. 18; Royal Decree 211/1892, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τοῦ ἐν Ἀθήναις σωματείου ἀργυροχρυσοχόων’ (Athens 1892) arts 16–22; Royal Decree 277/1892, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τοῦ ἐν Ἀθήναις Συνδέσμου τῶν Κονιαστῶν’ (Athens 1892) arts 10–12; Royal Decree 368/1892, ‘Περὶ ἐγκρίσεως τοῦ καταστατικοῦ τῶν ἐν Πύργῳ συντεχνιῶν «Ἡ Ἀδελφότης»’ (Athens 1892) art. 26. The scope and extent of benefits varied by association. Some covered all risks (disability, old age, death, unemployment), while others covered one or more risks. A common feature was a reasonable waiting period (ranging from six months to two or three years) before members could access benefits.

39 Regarding the institution of communities, see, e.g., N. I. Pantazopoulos,‘Ο ελληνικός κοινοτισμός και η νεοελληνική κοινοτική παράδοση’, Ἐπιστημονικὴ Ἐπετηρὶς τῆς Σχολῆς Νομικῶν καὶ Οἰκονομικῶν Ἐπιστημῶν 19 (1986) 579–614 (passim).

40 E. Avdela, Ch. Exertzoglou, and Ch. Lyrintzis (eds), Μορφές δημόσιας κοινωνικότητας στην Ελλάδα του εικοστού αιώνα (Athens 2015) passim.

41 On the social character of the movement, see G. Dertilis, Κοινωνικός μετασχηματισμός και στρατιωτική επέμβαση, 1880–1909 (Athens 1985) passim; S. G. Ploumidis, ‘Τo κίνημα του 1909: συλλογικά υποκείμενα και γεγονότα’, in N. Maronitis (ed.), Το Κίνημα στο Γουδί, 1909 (Athens 2010) 62–6.

42 Ἐφημερίς τῶν Ἐργατῶν, 21 December 1910, 1; Κοινωνισμός, 17 December 1910, 4.

43 Βουλὴ τῶν Ελλήνων, Μητρώον Πληρεξουσίων, Γερουσιαστῶν καὶ Βουλευτῶν, 1822–1935 (Athens 1986) 217.

44 It may be noted, indicatively, that Theodoropoulos participated in the parliamentary committee responsible for the draft law on associations and played a leading role in the discussion on cooperatives: Ἐφημερίς τῶν Συζητήσεων τῆς Βουλῆς (ΕΦΣΒ), session of 16–26 November 1913, Period 19, Session B (Athens 1913) 256; Ἐφημερίς τῶν Συζητήσεων τῆς Βουλῆς (ΕΦΣΒ), session of 31 October–21 November 1914, Period 19, Session Γ (Athens 1914) 712–15.

45 Βουλὴ τῶν Ἑλλήνων, Μητρώον Πληρεξουσίων, Γερουσιαστῶν καὶ Βουλευτῶν, 1822–1935 232; Ὁ Νοῦμας, 6 March 1911, 147–59.

46 For a concise overview of the Greek version of liberalism, see E. Hatzivassiliou, ‘Greek liberalism in the twentieth century: dilemmas of research’, in C. Arvanitopoulos and K. E. Botsiou (eds), The Constantinos Karamanlis Institute for Democracy Yearbook 2010 (Berlin 2010) 119–29.

47 ΕΦΣΒ, Συνεδρίαση 45 – 3 Μαρτίου 1914, Περίοδος ΙΘ, Σύνοδος Β΄ (Athens 1914) 879–82.

48 G. Kyriopoulos (ed.), Δημόσια υγεία και κοινωνική πολιτική: ο Ελευθέριος Βενιζέλος και η εποχή του (Athens 2007) passim; D. Panagiotopoulos and D. P. Sotiropoulos, Η ελληνική αγροτική κοινωνία και οικονομία κατά τη βενιζελική περίοδο (Athens 2007) passim. For the economic policy of the Venizelos period, see Ch. Agriantoni, ‘Venizelos and economic policy’, in P. Kitromilides (ed.), Eleftherios Venizelos: the trials of statesmanship (Edinburgh 2006) 284–318.

49 G. Mavrogordatos, Μεταξύ πιτυοκάμπτη και Προκρούστη: οι επαγγελματικές οργανώσεις στη σημερινή Ελλάδα (Athens 1988) 23–4.

50 Andreas Michalakopoulos was the politician who, through his legislative initiatives as head of the Ministry of National Economy from 1912 to 1915, laid the foundations for modern state social policy. The law on associations, the institution of agricultural chambers, and the law on cooperatives were among his initiatives. See A. N. Klimis, Οι συνεταιρισμοί στην Ελλάδα, vol. 1: Συνεργασίες – προσυνεταιρισμοί – συνεταιρισμοί από την αρχαιότητα μέχρι και το 1922 (Athens 1985) 290–3; D. Gatopoulos, Ἀνδρέας Μιχαλακόπουλος (Athens 2000) 56–65.

51 A. Michalakopoulos, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις τοῦ σχεδίου νόμου περὶ σωματείων, Archive of Legislative Work (explanatory memoranda), Hellenic Parliament, 25 November 1913, 1–3.

52 Michalakopoulos, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις τοῦ σχεδίου νόμου περὶ σωματείων, 2.

53 Law 281/1914, ‘Περὶ σωματείων’ (Athens 1914) arts 12–18.

54 Law 281/1914, ‘Περὶ σωματείων’, art. 12.

55 Law 281/1914, ‘Περὶ σωματείων’, art. 29.

56 A. Michalakopoulos, Αἰτιολογικὴ ἔκθεσις τοῦ σχεδίου νόμου περὶ συνεταιρισμῶν, Archive of Legislative Work (explanatory memoranda), Hellenic Parliament, 30 September 1914, 25–6.

57 Νέα Χίος, 1 December 1913, 1.

58 Αιγαίοv, 17 December 1914, 2.

59 Σημαία, 26 June 1914, 8.

60 Σημαία, 21 February 1922, 1.

61 Ἐφημερὶς τοῦ Χρηματιστηρίου, 21 February 1922, 2.

62 In 1926, the first year of operation of the Tobacco Workers’ Insurance Fund, 50,593 tobacco workers were insured; see S. Vellianitis, Οἱ ἐν Ἑλλάδι ὀργανισμοὶ κοινωνικῆς ἀσφαλίσεως (Athens 1929) 33–5. For the particular social and economic conditions that led to the establishment of the Tobacco Workers’ Insurance Fund, see, among others, G. Bakalis, Χειραγώγηση καὶ ριζοσπαστικοποίηση: τὸ καπνεργατικὸ ζήτημα στὴν ἀνατολικὴ Μακεδονία, 1919–1936 (PhD diss., Thessaloniki 2014) 56–96.

63 I. Vasileiadou and S. Vellianitis, Ἐπετηρὶς ἐργατικῶν σωματείων (Athens 1924) 52–4, 123–6; Ministry of National Economy, Statistical Directorate, Στατιστικὰ ἀποτελέσματα τῆς ἀπογραφῆς τῶν ἐργατῶν Ἀθηνῶν–Πειραιῶς (Athens 1917) table 1.

64 General Statistical Service of Greece, Στατιστικὴ ἐπετηρὶς τῆς Ἑλλάδος – 1930 (Athens 1931) 78–82; Ministry of National Economy, Statistical Directorate, Στατιστικὰ ἀποτελέσματα τῆς ἀπογραφῆς τῶν ἐργατῶν Ἀθηνῶν–Πειραιῶς, table 1.

65 Vellianitis, Οἱ ἐν Ἑλλάδι ὀργανισμοὶ, 33–5.

66 Zarras, Ὁ θεσμὸς, 77–89.

67 The only exception was the case of the Actors’ Union, which operated a Mutual Aid Fund, most of whose revenues came from public performance fees: I. Vasileiadou and S. Vellianitis, Ἐκθέσεις διαχειριστικῶν ἐλέγχων κατὰ τὰ ἔτη 1924–1933, vol. 1: Σωματεῖα (Athens 1935) 197–9.

68 Legislative Decree 6/11/1926, ‘On the amendment and supplementation of the provisions concerning the composition and operation of the services of the Directorate of Labour of the Ministry of National Economy’ (Athens 1926).

69 Vasileiadou and Vellianitis, Ἐκθέσεις, introductory note.

70 Vasileiadou and Vellianitis, Ἐκθέσεις, 1, 23, 45, 51, 71, 89, 107, 147, 155, 187–224.

71 Law 5733/1932, ‘Περὶ κοινωνικῶν ἀσφαλίσεων’ (Athens 1932); Law 6298/1934, ‘Περὶ κοινωνικῶν ἀσφαλίσεων’ (Athens 1934).

72 The public debate during the 1930s regarding the establishment and creation of a unified social insurance body for private-sector employees was particularly intense. Although the drafters of the bill were critical of the Law ‘on Associations’, the proposed bill also faced sharp criticism from Notis Fotilas, Professor of Social Policy at Panteion University and Head of Department at the Ministry of Finance. Fotilas argued that ‘Summarizing the above, we direct an unreserved condemnation of the bill, because it utterly disregarded the Greek economic, social, administrative, and psychological reality’; see N. Fotilas, Ἡ κοινωνικὴ ἀσφάλισις καὶ ὁ τρόπος ἐφαρμογῆς τοῦ θεσμοῦ ἐν Ἑλλάδι (Athens 1933) 43.

73 Εἰσηγητικὴ ἔκθεσις ἐπὶ τοῦ σχεδίου νόμου 5733/1932 «Περὶ τῶν κοινωνικῶν ἀσφαλίσεων» (Athens 1932) 2–6.

74 A. Tixier to E. Venizelos, Σχέδιο νόμου τοῦ A. Tixier σχετικὰ μὲ τὶς κοινωνικὲς ἀσφαλίσεις στὴν Ἑλλάδα, 22 March 1930, Eleftherios Venizelos Archive, file 338, document no. 04, Benaki Museum; A. Tixier, Ἔκθεσις σχετικὰ μὲ τοὺς μισθοὺς καὶ τὶς συνθῆκες ἐργασίας στὴ βιομηχανία καὶ τὸ ἐμπόριο στὴν Ἑλλάδα (1932), Eleftherios Venizelos Archive, file 72, documents nos 147–8, Benaki Museum; E. Schoenbaum, Ἔκθεσις οἰκονομικὴ καὶ μαθηματικὴ ἐπὶ τοῦ σχεδίου νόμου περὶ κοινωνικῶν ἀσφαλίσεων (Athens 1931) passim.

75 K. Doukakis, Η ανάπτυξη του ελληνικού συστήματος κοινωνικής ασφάλισης, 123–94; International Labour Office, Labour Problems in Greece: Report of the Mission of the International Labour Office to Greece (Geneva 1949) 180–1; N. Ch. Stamatopoulos, Ασφαλίσεις: προς μια γενικήν κοινωνικήν ασφάλισι (Athens 1948) 16.

76 General State Archives (GAK), Aigialeia Branch, Καταστατικὸν Συνδέσμου Σταφιδοσυσκευαστριῶν Αἰγίου «Ἡ Ἀλληλοβοήθεια», approval date 2 July 1933, art. 2, Αρχείο Εργατοϋπαλληλικού Κέντρου Αιγίου, ΑΒΕ 344, Διοικητικά 26.1, φάκελος 141; GAK, Aigialeia Branch, Καταστατικὸν Συλλόγου Σημειωτῶν Λιμένος Αἰγίου, 6 June 1936, arts 2, 25, Αρχείο Εργατοϋπαλληλικού Κέντρου Αιγίου, ΑΒΕ 344, Διοικητικά 26.1, φάκελος 141; GAK, Aigialeia Branch, Καταστατικὸν Συλλόγου Ἐκδορέων, April 1937, art. 2, Αρχείο Εργατοϋπαλληλικού Κέντρου Αιγίου, ΑΒΕ 344, Διοικητικά 26.1, φάκελος 141; GAK, Aigialeia Branch, Καταστατικὸν Συνδέσμου Ἀποσκευοφόρων Σιδηροδρομικοῦ Σταθμοῦ Αἰγίου «Κανάρης», decision no. 1187/1939, art. 2.5, ΑΒΕ 255, Ιδιωτικοί Σύνδεσμοι 19.1, σειρά 1, φάκελος 1.

77 E. Lagoudaki, Γυναικείος συνδικαλισμός, εργασία και πολιτική: το σωματείο σταφιδεργατριών Αιγίου «Ἡ Αλληλοβοήθεια» (MA thesis, Panteion University, Athens 2012) 25–39.

78 Law 6298/1934, ‘Περὶ κοινωνικῶν ἀσφαλίσεων’, art. 19.

79 E. Avdela, Δημόσιοι υπάλληλοι γένους θηλυκού: καταμερισμός της εργασίας κατά φύλα στον δημόσιο τομέα, 1908–1955 (Athens 1990) passim; L. Papastefanaki, ‘Στα καπνομάγαζα, στα υφαντουργεία’, Η Καθημερινή: Επτά Ημέρες, 2 May 1999, 6; E. Avdela, ‘Οι γυναίκες κοινωνικό ζήτημα’, in Ch. Chatziosif (ed.), Ιστορία της Ελλάδας του 20ού αιώνα, vol. 2, part 1: Ο Μεσοπόλεμος 1922–1940 (Athens 2002) 337–59; L. Papastefanaki, Εργασία, τεχνολογία και φύλο στην ελληνική βιομηχανία: η κλωστοϋφαντουργία του Πειραιά (1870–1940) (Heraklion 2009) passim.

80 A. Mitchell, ‘The function and malfunction of mutual aid societies in nineteenth-century France’, in J. Barry and C. Jones (eds), Medicine and Charity before the Welfare State (New York 1991) 172–89; F. Gouda, Poverty and Political Culture: the rhetoric of social welfare in the Netherlands and France, 1815–1914 (Lanham, MD 1995) passim; D. Gladstone (ed.), Before Beveridge: welfare before the Welfare State (London 1999) passim; P. H. Lindert, ‘Poor relief before the Welfare State: Britain versus the Continent, 1780–1880’, European Review of Economic History 2 (1998) 101–40.