kathimerini.gr
Greek Construction Slowdown Follows Supreme Court Ruling on Bonuses
Following the Greek Supreme Court's December 11th ruling abolishing construction bonuses, November 2024 showed a 6.5% rise in building permits but significant decreases in building area and volume, indicating a developer wait-and-see approach.
- What immediate impact did the Supreme Court's ruling on construction bonuses have on private building activity in Greece?
- Following the Supreme Court's ruling on construction bonuses, November 2024 saw a 6.5% rise in building permits to 2,630, but a 6.3% decrease in area (589,594 sq m) and a 20% drop in volume (2.54 million cubic meters). This contrasts with October's increases of 5.2%, 31.2%, and 46.7% respectively.
- How did the anticipation of the Supreme Court's decision influence building permit applications in the months leading up to the ruling?
- The Supreme Court's decision to abolish construction bonuses caused a slowdown in building activity. While permits increased in November, the reduction in building area and volume indicates a wait-and-see approach by developers. This follows a period of high activity in September and October when many developers applied for permits before the ruling.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of the Supreme Court's decision on construction bonuses for the Greek construction sector and how might the government respond?
- The uncertainty surrounding the Supreme Court's decision on construction bonuses led to a significant dip in building activity. While Attica showed a more positive trend with a 17.1% increase in permits and a 9.2% rise in area in November, the overall impact indicates future legislative adjustments to address the ruling's implications. The market anticipates further adjustments to building regulations.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the story primarily through the lens of the court decision and its impact, emphasizing the uncertainty and subsequent slowdown in construction activity. While presenting factual data, the narrative structure reinforces the notion that the court decision is the overwhelming factor driving this change, potentially downplaying or overlooking other influences.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and factual, presenting statistical data and observations on construction activity. However, phrases such as "athroa egkri" (massive approval) and references to a "kathizi i tis oikodomikis drastiriotitas" (collapse of construction activity) carry a somewhat dramatic tone which might influence the reader's perception of the severity of the situation. More neutral phrasing could be used to maintain objectivity.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the impact of the court decision on construction permits, but omits discussion of other potential factors influencing the fluctuation in permit numbers. It doesn't explore broader economic conditions, changes in building material costs, or potential shifts in market demand that may have contributed to the observed trends. This omission limits the reader's ability to form a complete understanding of the situation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic view of the situation, focusing mainly on the immediate impact of the court decision and the anticipation of a new legislative regulation. It doesn't fully explore a range of possible responses from developers, or alternative approaches to the issue of building bonuses. The implication is that the only options are either rapid construction under the old rules or a complete halt until new regulations are established.
Sustainable Development Goals
The uncertainty surrounding building bonuses created by the court ruling caused a slowdown in construction activity. This negatively impacts sustainable urban development by potentially delaying housing projects and hindering the growth of sustainable cities.